How is sharia to be implemented, in Muslim countries?

[Mustafa16]

when a muslim country either bans sharia entirely, or is founded upon democracy and I know from personal experience that democracy and Islamism don't mix....
jihad? dawah? democratic elections? what ate the guidelines of the implementation of sharia?

[Huzaifah ibn Adam]

Sharee`ah is only ever implemented through Jihaad. Democracy is Kufr and opposes Islaam. It's a religion on its own. And Da`wah - even generations of it - will not cause the Kaafir countries to give up their man-made laws and replace it with Sharee`ah. That's not going to happen. The only thing that has ever brought Sharee`ah rule to any land has always only been Jihaad.

والسلام

[M.I.A.]

you have to define jihaad..

you know the world has changed, its a lot smaller now..

many nations hold standing armies of tens of thousands but they wage war differently..

it is the rules of the game..

and its no game.

within our lifetimes we will see countless generations exit the education system..

and there is no infrastructure for them to join..

the sharia they implement will lead to foundations, infrastructure and pathways tried and new..

as long as they dont transgress.

..

and its not for non muslims to worry about.

i could be wrong..

but i have to ask.. in muslim countries?

[talibilm]

Sharee`ah is only ever implemented through Jihaad. Democracy is Kufr and opposes Islaam. It's a religion on its own. And Da`wah - even generations of it - will not cause the Kaafir countries to give up their man-made laws and replace it with Sharee`ah. That's not going to happen. The only thing that has ever brought Sharee`ah rule to any land has always only been Jihaad.

والسلام

:sl: bro

As Bro MIA says we have to define jehad first, but many have said its 'STRIVING ''

Saudi is the only country widely quoted as Sharia law following country. When it has allowed riba based banks to operate and also supports and kills Muslim , what sharia is it following ? its also destroying Islamic artifacts but guarding jewish artifacts and acting as their puppets !!

Or do you have any better example of Sharia following country. ?

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

[azc]

A country can not be ruled according to shariah in wholesale until the rulers ,first, implement Islamic laws upon ruling class

[azc]

:sl: broAs Bro MIA says we have to define jehad first, but many have said its 'STRIVING ''Saudi is the only country widely quoted as Sharia law following country. When it has allowed riba based banks to operate and also supports and kills Muslim , what sharia is it following ? its also destroying Islamic artifacts but guarding jewish artifacts and acting as their puppets !!Or do you have any better example of Sharia following country. ?

Hating democracy is the root of dictatorship and kingship in Muslim countries. This issue is displayed as untacoutacble by well planned conspiracy.... I think islamization of democracy is possible but the rulers will not allow this as they don't like to be deprived of their ''powerful status'', and reservation for their family/clan.

[azc]

when a muslim country either bans sharia entirely, or is founded upon democracy and I know from personal experience that democracy and Islamism don't mix....jihad? dawah? democratic elections? what ate the guidelines of the implementation of sharia?

first, people should be given the rights to elect the ruling class and then Islamic laws should be implemented in the state (including ruling class)

[Huzaifah ibn Adam]

:sl: bro

As Bro MIA says we have to define jehad first, but many have said its 'STRIVING ''

Saudi is the only country widely quoted as Sharia law following country. When it has allowed riba based banks to operate and also supports and kills Muslim , what sharia is it following ? its also destroying Islamic artifacts but guarding jewish artifacts and acting as their puppets !!

Or do you have any better example of Sharia following country. ?

We don't have to define Jihaad - the Qur'aan has already done so. I have explained the meaning of Jihaad in quite a few posts in the past. The linguistic meaning of Jihaad is to strive hard for something; however, the Shar`i meaning is Qitaal, meaning to fight. The rule is that the moment the Shari` meaning was revealed for a word, the linguistic meaning gets dropped. The linguistic meaning of Salaah is to make Du`aa. However, the Shar`i meaning is the `Ibaadah we perform five times a day. The moment that Shar`i meaning of Salaah was revealed, the linguistic meaning was dropped.

Sahaabah fought in Jihaad, Qitaal, in order to make all lands ruled by the Sharee`ah of Allaah Ta`aalaa. This is the fact of the matter. This is history. This is what happened. Read Futooh ash-Shaam, Futooh Misr, Futooh al-Iraq. Read up on the lives of the Sahaabah. They fought Rome, they fought Persia, and they defeated both of them.

Was-Salaam.

[Huzaifah ibn Adam]

Hating democracy is the root of dictatorship and kingship in Muslim countries. This issue is displayed as untacoutacble by well planned conspiracy.... I think islamization of democracy is possible but the rulers will not allow this as they don't like to be deprived of their ''powerful status'', and reservation for their family/clan.

Democracy is Kufr. You cannot make democracy Islaamic; the two are complete opposites. It's like saying a switch can be on and off at the same time.

Democracy is rule for the people by the people. Majority rules. Or at least, that is what they claim, but the reality is, that never happens. In a Democratic state, if everybody feels that necrophilia is something good, it can be legalised. Whatever the people want, whatever they want the rules to be, that is what the rules will be. Dēmokratía: "the rule of the commoners". So, if Allaah Ta`aalaa says that something is Haraam, but the people feel it is something good, then they will ignore the Prohibition of Allaah Ta`aalaa and legalise that thing. Democracy is absolute Kufr. Whoever believes in democracy and believes it to be better than the Sharee`ah, becomes a Kaafir. This is from the Nawaaqidh (Nullifiers) of Imaan. Democracy falls under at-Tahaakum bi-Ghayri maa Anzalallaah (Ruling by other than what Allaah has revealed). Any person who has studied Tawheed knows that democracy is Shirk. It is giving the power of legislation to other than Allaah Ta`aalaa. However, in Islaam, legislation belongs to Allaah Ta`aalaa Alone. No one else has the right to make rules. In a democratic state, the Sharee`ah doesn't exist. If the Sharee`ah says something, then that has to be implemented even if the whole world doesn't like it. That can't happen in democracy. Democracy necessitates that if the majority are unhappy with that thing they can rule against it. They can - wal-`Iyaadhu Billaah - oppose Allaah Ta`aalaa and make the rules for themselves.

To any person of sound Imaan, he can see the glaring Kufr and Shirk of democracy. There is no "Islaamic Democracy". Such a thing doesn't exist. There is either Sharee`ah rule, or there isn't. And, when ruling by Sharee`ah, it is to be done in the manner that Rasoolullaah صلى الله عليه وسلم had done so, and the Sahaabah. Do not use Saudi Arabia as an example of a country ruling by the Sharee`ah, because they aren't. Saudi Arabia has become a puppet regime of America. They do what America wants, not what Allaah Ta`aalaa wants. Sharee`ah applies to everyone in society equally: both the rich and the poor, the leaders and the "nobodies".

Was-Salaam.

[azc]

Democracy is Kufr. You cannot make democracy Islaamic; the two are complete opposites. It's like saying a switch can be on and off at the same time. Democracy is rule for the people by the people. Majority rules. Or at least, that is what they claim, but the reality is, that never happens. In a Democratic state, if everybody feels that necrophilia is something good, it can be legalised. Whatever the people want, whatever they want the rules to be, that is what the rules will be. Dēmokratía: "the rule of the commoners". So, if Allaah Ta`aalaa says that something is Haraam, but the people feel it is something good, then they will ignore the Prohibition of Allaah Ta`aalaa and legalise that thing. Democracy is absolute Kufr. Whoever believes in democracy and believes it to be better than the Sharee`ah, becomes a Kaafir. This is from the Nawaaqidh (Nullifiers) of Imaan. Democracy falls under at-Tahaakum bi-Ghayri maa Anzalallaah (Ruling by other than what Allaah has revealed). Any person who has studied Tawheed knows that democracy is Shirk. It is giving the power of legislation to other than Allaah Ta`aalaa. However, in Islaam, legislation belongs to Allaah Ta`aalaa Alone. No one else has the right to make rules. In a democratic state, the Sharee`ah doesn't exist. If the Sharee`ah says something, then that has to be implemented even if the whole world doesn't like it. That can't happen in democracy. Democracy necessitates that if the majority are unhappy with that thing they can rule against it. They can - wal-`Iyaadhu Billaah - oppose Allaah Ta`aalaa and make the rules for themselves.To any person of sound Imaan, he can see the glaring Kufr and Shirk of democracy. There is no "Islaamic Democracy". Such a thing doesn't exist. There is either Sharee`ah rule, or there isn't. And, when ruling by Sharee`ah, it is to be done in the manner that Rasoolullaah صلى الله عليه وسلم had done so, and the Sahaabah. Do not use Saudi Arabia as an example of a country ruling by the Sharee`ah, because they aren't. Saudi Arabia has become a puppet regime of America. They do what America wants, not what Allaah Ta`aalaa wants. Sharee`ah applies to everyone in society equally: both the rich and the poor, the leaders and the "nobodies". Was-Salaam.

people should be given fundamental right of electing the ruling class and the ruling class should implement the Islamic laws...

[talibilm]

Bro @Huzaifah ibn Adam

Rule by a Muslim ruler on his muslim subjects by any law other than Allah 's law is kufr. agreed. If the subjects are non Muslims they pay jizya (in lieu of Islamic state protection) but no compulsion to accept Islam and people of Book were given the right to judge by their own books proves this.

But Democracy imo is the roots of establishment of an PEOPLE ELECTED ruler which is nearer to Islam than Kingdom ship which makes the subjects fear like a slave to the King ( Instead of fearing Allah ) in democracy people normally have the choice and more freedom to follow their religion which is more nearer to Islam than Kingdomship which puts people more nearer to Shirk than democracy sine now they fear the King more than Allah and are afraid to speak out if it goes against the King UNLIKE DEMOCRACY where people raise voice if the country does force kufr on them or remove Islamic personal law by PM Modi, as seen in India where the Court REJECTED that pointing out its not democracy


Muslims did not fight to force Islam and that's proved by the statement of Umar RA which said something like he wished that there could be a wall between us and the Romans (or Persians - i do not remember)

When Prophet wrote a letter to Heraclius of Byzantine he invited to Islam but ended with a Common Terms note of believing in One God. Prophet :saws: did not threat if you do not accept Islam we are going to attack and capture you.

But all the islamic conquests by the rightly guided caliphs were in self defence which some took shape of pre emptive strikes (when enemy plans to attack us is proved 100 % ) or was invited by some of them who begged muslims help to free public from oppression.
But confusing BASIS of Democracy ( I do not mean the law of guidance ) with kufr could be a diplomacy played by dictators or self interested politicians as bro AZC has said in his post

Some claim Najjashi did not rule by Sharia for whom Prophet :saws: prayed funeral but I do not see any error since The most majority (may be 90% ) of his subjects were Christians so he did not do that is the answer and Allah likes the ruler who is just and Islam is Just 2:256 ( http://legacy.quran.com/2/256 )

[Huzaifah ibn Adam]

The battles fought by the Khulafaa-e-Raashideen - by the consensus of not only the `Ulamaa of Islaam, but even the historians - were Offensive battles aimed at conquering land for Islaam. That is why the historians boast that during the Khilaafah of Hadhrat `Umar رضي الله عنه, approximately 4,050 cities were conquered by the Muslims. These lands were then ruled by the Sharee`ah.

In fact, a person can even put history and historical facts aside for a moment and look at it logically:

Who do all the lands on earth belong to?

The simple answer which every Muslim will give is: Allaah. Allaah Ta`aaala is the Creator, and thus everything He has created belongs to Him Alone. This entire earth belongs solely and only to Him.

Then, since Allaah Ta`aalaa is the Creator of all the lands on earth, and thus all the lands on earth belong to Him Alone, how should those lands be governed? Whose rule should preside over those lands? The man-made laws of Kaafirs, to whom the land does not truly belong, or the Divine Laws of Allaah Ta`aalaa, the Creator and Owner of those lands?

The simple and straightforward answer is: The Divine Laws of Allaah Ta`aalaa.

The Kutub of Fiqh written by the `Ulamaa of the four Madhaahib of Islaam are unanimous that if there is a Khaleefah, it is the duty upon that Khaleefah to wage offensive Jihaad to conquer lands for Islaam. Even if all the Muslim lands are safe, the ruling is that Jihaad still remains Fardh `alal Kifaayah (Obligatory upon a group of the Muslims, and if they undertake it, the obligation falls off the rest of people). Even in that situation, Jihaad is Fardh `alal Kifaayah, so what about the world as it is today, when Muslims are being massacred everywhere, and millions of Muslims are imprisoned, and Islaam is being attacked on a daily basis? To speak now about things like, "I wish there was a wall between me and x, y, z" is illogical, because it's not going happen. The Kuffaar really don't care what walls any Muslim wishes exists; they will continue their attack against Islaam and the Muslims, and bombing their lands on a daily basis. The Kuffaar would never allow there to be a country ruled by Islaam, Even If the inhabitants were all Muslims and they had "democratic elections" to choose Muslim rulers who would rule by the Sharee`ah. America would attack that place, on the pretext of "liberating it", which translates to: "Worshipping Shaytaan and obeying him by trying to destroy the Laws of Allaah Ta`aalaa and replace them with satanism". Any Muslim group in the world that ever wants there to be a land governed by the Divine Laws of Allaah Ta`aalaa, by the Sharee`ah, would have no choice but to fight for it and fight to protect it. That's the reality of this Dunyaa. There will always be Jihaad until there are no Muslims left on this earth.

Was-Salaam.

[Huzaifah ibn Adam]

Download this book:

https://ia600307.us.archive.org/21/i...ialEdition.pdf

The answer to the allegation that Najaashi did not rule according to Sharee`ah can be found from page 59 until page 66.

[talibilm]

We Muslims are praying the price for not following the Noble Quran and sunnah as it had to be followed so we are paying a heavy price .

Noble Quran 8:60 '' And make ready against them all you can of power, including steeds of war (tanks, planes, missiles, artillery, etc.) to threaten the enemy of Allah and your enemy, and others besides whom, you may not know but whom Allah does know. And whatever you shall spend in the Cause of Allah shall be repaid unto you, and you shall not be treated unjustly.''

Muslim :: Book 20 : Hadith 4711
It has been narrated on the authority of Ibn Amir who said: I heard the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) say-and he was delivering a sermon from the pulpit: Prepare to meet them with as much strength as you can afford. Beware, strength consists in archery. Beware, strength consists in archery. Beware, strength consists in archery.


Dawud :: Book 14 : Hadith 2507
Narrated Uqbah ibn Amir:

I heard the Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) say: Allah, Most High, will cause three persons to enter Paradise for one arrow: the maker when he has a good motive in making it, the one who shoots it, and the one who hands it; so shoot and ride, but your shooting is dearer to me than your riding. Everything with which a man amuses himself is vain except three (things): a man's training of his horse, his playing with his wife, and his shooting with his bow and arrow. If anyone abandons archery after becoming an adept through distaste for it, it is a blessing he has abandoned; or he said: for which he has been ungrateful.

For info from post # 79 from this thread

http://www.ummah.com/forum/showthread.php?483593-Muslim-joining-the-army/page2

wassalam

[M.I.A.]

...that settles it then, sharia is to be implemented by the arrow..

who said tv was bad for you?

but seriously,

most people will just struggle through until the finger gets pointed at them.


if you are three then he is a forth.. although i thought i remembered it as.. if you are two then he is a third.

[talibilm]

...that settles it then, sharia is to be implemented by the arrow..

You mean like Isis is doing ;D

Bro @huzaifa ibn Adam

who said tv was bad for you?

but seriously,

Anything DOUBTFUL is bad for a muhmin , he is supposed to avoid it . But such things cant be forced on All. Like in Thailand every muslim eats here CP Halal chicken but the very pious look out for culled only My Muslim companies

most people will just struggle through until the finger gets pointed at them.


if you are three then he is a forth.. although i thought i remembered it as.. if you are two then he is a third.

I did not get this.

And I do not accept Bro Huzaifas argument as well and I do not want to indulge in a lengthy argument .Nor i believe in his DOUBLE STANDARDS that the noble Quran Linguistic & Shari was different. Allah made the Noble Quran clear as Allah says . He similarly blabbered about definition of Talib ilm .lol . and In Fact Umar R.A gave back a city back to Syrian Christians together with the Jizya money he had collected from them saying we are going to face the largest army of the Romans and you should protect yourselves.


See Umar RA did not even pray at a Church not because of Jesus 's statue was there but he feared muslims will confisticate it see this video

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r3JRs9_jvB8

Those who has gone to extrems since they think ONLY they know Islam , let them be answerable to Allah and I shall leave this topic with a Hadith from Secret keeper of Prophet :saws: Hudhaifa RA.

from post # 101
http://www.ummah.com/forum/showthrea...r-Wisdom/page3



PROPHECIES OF NABI

TO BE CAREFUL IN OUR DAYS OR LATER

Bukhari :: Book 9 :: Volume 88 :: Hadith 206
Narrated Hudhaifa bin Al-Yaman:

The people used to ask Allah's Apostle about the good but I used to ask him about the evil lest I should be overtaken by them. So I said, "O Allah's Apostle! We were living in ignorance and in an (extremely) worst atmosphere, then Allah brought to us this good (i.e., Islam); will there be any evil after this good?" He said, "Yes." I said, 'Will there be any good after that evil?" He replied, "Yes, but it will be tainted (not pure.)'' I asked, "What will be its taint?" He replied, "(There will be) some people who will guide others not according to my tradition? You will approve of some of their deeds and disapprove of some others." I asked, "Will there be any evil after that good?" He replied, "Yes, (there will be) some people calling at the gates of the (Hell) Fire, and whoever will respond to their call, will be thrown by them into the (Hell) Fire." I said, "O Allah s Apostle! Will you describe them to us?" He said, "They will be from our own people and will speak our language." I said, "What do you order me to do if such a state should take place in my life?" He said, "Stick to the group of Muslims and their Imam (ruler)." I said, "If there is neither a group of Muslims nor an Imam (ruler)?" He said, "Then turn away from all those sects even if you were to bite (eat) the roots of a tree till death overtakes you while you are in that state."


Muslim :: Book 5 : Hadith 2322
Abu Salama and 'Ata' b. Yasar came to Abu Sa'id al-Khudri and asked him about Haruriya, saying: Did you hear the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) making a mention of them? He (Abu Sai'd al-Khudri) said: I don't know who the Haruriya are, but I heard the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) as saying: There would arise in this nation (and he did not say" out of them" ) a people and you would hold insignificant your prayers as compared with their prayers. And they would recite the Qur'an which would not go beyond their throats and would swerve through the religion (as blank) just as a (swift) arrow passes through the prey. The archer looks at his arrow, at its iron head and glances at its end (which he held) in the tip of his fingers to see whether it had any stain of blood.


Muslim :: Book 5 : Hadith 2318
Abu Said Khudri reported that 'Ali (Allah be pleased with him) sent some gold alloyed with dust to the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him), and the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) distributed that among four men, al-Aqra b. Habis Hanzali and Uyaina b. Badr al-Fazari and 'Alqama b. 'Ulatha al-'Amiri, then to one person of the tribe of Kilab and to Zaid al-Khair al-Ta'l, and then to one person of the tribe of Nabhan. Upon this the people of Quraish felt angry and said: He (the Holy Prophet) gave to the chiefs of Najd and ignored us. Upon this the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) said: I have done it with a view to con- cillating them. Then there came a person with thick beard, prominent cheeks, deep sunken eyes and protruding forehead and shaven head. He said: Muhammad, fear Allah. Upon this the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) said: If I disobey Allah, who would then obey Him? Have I not been (sent as the) most trustworthy among the people of the-world? -but you do not repose trust in me. That person then went back. A person among the people then sought permission (from the Holy Prophet) for his murder. According to some, it was Khalid b. Walid who sought the permission. Upon this the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him), said: From this very person's posterity there would arise people who would recite the Qur'an, but it would not go beyond their throat; they would kill the followers of Islam and would spare the idol-worshippers. They would glance through the teachings of Islam so hurriedly just as the arrow passes through the pray. If I were to ever find them I would kill them like 'Ad.



BUKHARI,Volume 4, Book 56, Number 808 :
Narrated by 'Ali I relate the traditions of Allah's Apostle to you for I would rather fall from the sky than attribute something to him falsely. But when I tell you a thing which is between you and me, then no doubt, war is guile. I heard Allah's Apostle saying, "In the last days of this world there will appear some young foolish people who will use (in their claim) the best speech of all people (i.e. the Qur'an) and they will abandon Islam as an arrow going through the game. Their belief will not go beyond their throats (i.e. they will have practically no belief), so wherever you meet them, kill them, for he who kills them shall get a reward on the Day of Resurrection."


Note : Some claim to protect Islam but they really never understood the Noble Quran or hadith ie Islam and betray muslims and destroy Islam and downfall of the ummah instead. Allah termed the loss of face at Hudaibya as VICTORY for Muslims in sura Al Fath when most sahabas were unhappy . Allah, The ALL WISE is true as always.
Another Incident which clearly proves that Allah and his Prophet

endorsed Peace more than confrontation even if we were able to fight was this incident of treaty of Hudaibiya which even the greater Sahabas considered as loosing face of Muslims but Allah , Al Hakim called it as a Victory - Sura Al Fath and Allah Proved it true when islam grew at a very slow pace (about 1500 Sahabas in the first 16 years of preaching) untill after Treaty of Hudaibiya in just couple of years Muslims swelled many times into about 10,000 Sahabas leading into peaceful conquest of Mecca and the below Hadith describes it too


Bukhari :: Book 4 :: Volume 53 :: Hadith 406

Narrated Abu Wail:
We were in Siffin and Sahl bin Hunaif got up and said, "O people! Blame yourselves! We were with the Prophet on the day of Hudaibiya, and if we had been called to fight, we would have fought. But 'Umar bin Al Khatab came and said, 'O Allah's Apostle! Aren't we in the right and our opponents in the wrongs' Allah's Apostle said, 'Yes.' 'Umar said, 'Aren't our killed persons in Paradise and their's in Hell?' He said, 'Yes.' 'Umar said, 'Then why should we accept hard terms in matters concerning our religion? Shall we return before Allah judges between us and them?' Allah's Apostle said, 'O Ibn Al-Khattab! I am the Apostle of Allah and Allah will never degrade me. Then 'Umar went to Abu Bakr and told him the same as he had told the Prophet.On that Abu Bakr said (to 'Umar). 'He is the Apostle of Allah and Allah will never degrade him.' Then Surat-al-Fath (i.e. Victory) was revealed and Allah's Apostle recited it to the end in front of 'Umar. On that 'Umar asked, 'O Allah's Apostle! Was it (i.e. the Hudaibiya Treaty) a victory?' Allah's Apostle said, "Yes"


Dawud :: Book 14 : Hadith 2498
Narrated Anas ibn Malik: The Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) said: Use your property, your persons any your tongues in striving against the polytheists.

Note: But nothing can be compared with those Muslim Who fights against who evicted muslims out of their homes which is clear cut in Israel 's case .

[Scimitar]

At least Four nations already have shariah as their law.

Why not look to their examples to see how they tackled the implementation of it?

The constitutions of the UAE, the State of Qatar, the Kingdom of Bahrain and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, as well as in many other muslim countries declare that Islamic canon (sharia) is the basis of all legislation and law.

The Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) member states follow only Sunni sects for issues not related to personal status. However, Islamic canon does not specifically mention issues related to maritime or information technology law. Hence, legislators attempt to turn to international standards and then modify them to meet the Islamic standard, if necessary.

The Personal Status Law (UAE) 2005 is based on Sunni Islamic jurisprudence, so it allows that the court uses foreign laws to decide cases involving non-citizens, if the citizens agree. Emirati citizens do not have this option. If one or more of the parties is from Iran, then the matter can be decided in accordance with Iranian law, which is based on Shia Islamic jurisprudence. If one or more of the parties was a legal resident of California, then they can choose to have their dispute resolved in accordance with California law. Note that personal status includes: inheritance, child custody, paternity and birth certificates, guardianship of those of limited capacity, marriage and divorce.

The Kingdom of Bahrain has three separate branches of the court for personal status issues: Shia, Sunni and all other non-Shia sects, and non-Muslims.

Hope this helps.

Scimi

[M.I.A.]

lol no not like isis.

you know i live in metaphores..

i know if i lived in the physical world.. its arrow never misses the mark.. and mine probably would.

you cant ever pretend to be a thing.



i live on near misses.. i cant figure out why..


maybe life is about risk.


all praise is due to allah swt, although people draw there own inspiration from there own perception of the world..

i have no idea what taqwa actually is.


i couldnt really go around chopping peoples heads off though.

...thats for sure.

but they have different compulsions...


but yeah even comic forums have reached an end game..

if batman killed the joker, how many lives would he have saved?

strange.. its just a story bro! doesnt look like anything to me.

you know i dont know what sort of righteousness you hope to establish?

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/tsmuf...roid-orange-gb

awesome, random google has reference to taqwa!

chalk that one up to the guy always getting his ass kicked.

..if we achieve anything for ourselves it is through struggle.

https://www.google.co.uk/search?ie=U...As_W8geoubKIBw

[azc]

@ Huzaifa ibn Adam : You've depicted extremely negative picture of Islam that Islam isn't a religion of peace and Muslims are bellicose...

[M.I.A.]

@ Huzaifa ibn Adam : You've depicted extremely negative picture of Islam that Islam isn't a religion of peace and Muslims are bellicose...

lets be honest the world has no place for idealists..

it has always lived with violence.

..thats why the world still has armies.

im not nieve enough to think that they would treat you or i any different..

although it may be orientalism..

you wanna go give it a try?


but most of the time, battles are won and lost long before any battlefield is reached.


....probably.


hope to god you never throw your lot in with the wrong people..

and have to answer for someone elses mistakes.

[azc]

lets be honest the world has no place for idealists..it has always lived with violence. ..thats why the world still has armies.im not nieve enough to think that they would treat you or i any different..although it may be orientalism..you wanna go give it a try?but most of the time, battles are won and lost long before any battlefield is reached.....probably.hope to god you never throw your lot in with the wrong people..and have to answer for someone elses mistakes.

Do you think if Islam is a religion of peace...?

[Scimitar]

Lol this is where I get the popcorn out

[M.I.A.]

iv seen some of the best people say some of the worst things..

yes, islam is a religion of peace.

..
although some people would not agree..


its a learning experience.

dead men dont lie.

honestly mate..

you go to the wrong place you would have to watch your back, the windows and the corners.

you know i think thats really enough for today. lol.

[azc]

iv seen some of the best people say some of the worst things..yes, islam is a religion of peace...although some people would not agree.. its a learning experience.dead men dont lie.honestly mate..you go to the wrong place you would have to watch your back, the windows and the corners.

if a non Muslim reads the posts of bro huzaifa what he will say about Islam....?

[M.I.A.]

? i dont know..

they will write whatever they are willing to write..

if they write it accidentally.. that takes a lot of effort on their own part..

i dont know what can be said about his posts.

every comedian needs a straight-man.
..
who is the arrow maker?


(you know i dont know what right i have to post on the matter? i sell cakes and icecream for a living!)

[Scimitar]

For the "historical" record, guys, Islam did not spread by the sword.

I have a thread on this somewhere on this forum, where I have quoted non Muslim historians presenting the case for the spread of Islam - they attributed the spread of Islam down to the power of ideas, especially in how acceptable and natural our theology is - also they mentioned trade and commerce, and cementing foreign relations with other nations.

As for the case of Persia - If the Muslims had not stepped in, Rome and Persia would have mutually destroyed each other.

Both nations were already weak beyond repair and engaged in battles which would have seen them both wiped out.

If it wasn't for the Muslims taking Persia at the request of the Persians who were unhappy with their King, the Muslims would have left them alone. But can a Muslim deny help to one who asks for it? NO. And if in helping, an opoportunity presents itself to preach Islam in the process, then that is not conquest - more "re-quest".

This also facilitated the first peace treaty between Ar Rum and the Muslims. King Herod presented a treaty to the Muslims and his Coptic Christians of Egypt which he, King Herod broke, the copts therefore despised their King Herod and kept the treaty anyeay - this facilitated the entry into Egypt for the Muslims and this is how North Africa was educated on Islam.

No conquest. Just opportunity.

Scimi

[Scimitar]

Want me to move onto Syria? Iraq? India?

Scimi

[Scimitar]

I wonder, how many of you have actually studied the spread of Islam properly.

And not just from what is written in the Arab books.

Comparatively, there is a lot more to be learnt.

Scimi

[Scimitar]

Sharee`ah is only ever implemented through Jihaad.

If you mean struggle, then yes - not by the sword.

Democracy is Kufr and opposes Islaam. It's a religion on its own.

So the process by which the first Khaliphs were selected was not democratic?

I believe the purest form of democracy is that which the Salaf came up with after the demise of our prophet pbuh.

They had to choose a leader from themselves, the process was up for vote among the learnt. The chose Abu Bakr as Siddique RA and he did not even seek the position of Khaliph - that is a sign of a true leader.

Contrast to today and we find inversions of this Democratic process in play today. TO call it a religion is silly, as democracy does not have any theology to promote or believe in. Nor is it a judicial system, but a system pf election for leadership, and vote.

And Da`wah - even generations of it - will not cause the Kaafir countries to give up their man-made laws and replace it with Sharee`ah. That's not going to happen. The only thing that has ever brought Sharee`ah rule to any land has always only been Jihaad.

والسلام

Define it.

I'd rather claim that Islam came to foreign nations thru opportunity which Allah manifested in the favour of the Muslimeen.

To call it a struggle would be far fetched, in most cases, Islam spread effortlessly and easily, while the Muslims were outnumbered in foreign lands. Allah aided the Muslims.

Surely you have heard of the town with walls who had a camp of Muslims outside trading, causing controversy and intrigue among the towns inhabitants - their curiosity was halved when they saw how a shirt which was gifted had passed around each Muslim until ending up with the first again, seeing the love among the Muslim brothers, inspired the town folk to go speak to the Muslims about their beliefs and this was their invitation to Islam, and not a sword in sight.

There are many stories like this.

Scimi

[Huzaifah ibn Adam]

I don't have too much time at the moment, so I'll only say a few words right now:

1) @brother azc: That is a baseless accusation. I have said exactly what Islaam has to say about the matter. You say that Islaam is a religion of peace. I would ask you to explain that. If you mean Islaam is a religion of Gandhism, of pacifism, then I must tell you that it most certainly is not. Islaam believes 100% in Jihaad; both defensive Jihaad and offensive Jihaad. It's part of the Qur'aan itself. Anyone who thinks that he can deny it in order to make the Kuffaar happy is fooling himself. Let those Kuffaar open up the Qur'aan and read it, and they will tell him, "You're not fooling any of us. You're not even fooling your grandmother. The Qur'aan is filled with verses of Jihaad." Then you move on to the Ahaadeeth, and there are hundreds of Ahaadeeth pertaining to Jihaad and to the virtues of Jihaad, the Mujaahideen, Shahaadah and the Shuhadaa. Even if a person takes history and throws it against the wall, you can prove Jihaad just from the Qur'aan and Sunnah alone. In fact, the 47th Soorah of the Qur'aan, Soorah Muhammad, also has another name: "Soorah al-Qitaal" (The Soorah of Fighting). Did you hear that name before? Perhaps you will say I am presenting a violent image of Islaam by telling you what the name of the Soorah is? And then the very beginning Aayaat of that Soorah, where Allaah Ta`aalaa says, "Fa-Dharbar Riqaab" (Then strike at their necks). Then according to you, brother, the Qur'aan is giving a violent image of Islaam? Is that now a "violent image"? "Strike their necks"? I wish you were able to understand Arabic, brother, so I can show you all of what the Mufassireen have said regarding that Aayah. You'd be surprised.

2) Even a brief study of the Kutub of Fiqh of all four Madhaahib of Islaam will enlighten the reader with regards to Islaam's ruling regarding offensive Jihaad, which is that it is a must, first of all, and that conquering lands for Islaam is the duty of the Muslim ruler of the time, and that if a group among the Ummah do not stand up to undertake that task, the entire Ummah would become sinful. These are not rulings I've invented last week. This is what the A'immah of Islaam have written over 1,000 years ago. The Mashroo`iyyah of Jihaad-ut-Talab has been undisputed among the A'immah of Islaam for 1,400 years.

Was-Salaam.

[Scimitar]

Offensive Jihaad - I have a massive problem with that term.

Can you define in clear terms what you mean? (when you have time in sha Allah)

Scimi

[Huzaifah ibn Adam]

If you mean struggle, then yes - not by the sword.

There is the world of fairytales, and then there is the real world. The idea that Muslims would ever come to a country like America, for example, and throw out the man-made law and replace it with Sharee`ah law, without fighting, is laughable. No amount of "struggling" would ever - even if they did it for another 1,400 years - cause the American government, and the current president, Donald Trump, to say, "Okay, you win. We appreciate all the struggle you Mozlems have been making, so we're now going to step down and live under Sharee`ah law. We're going to throw out democracy, we're going to throw out all man-made laws and governments, we're going to let you Mozlems appoint a Caliph, and we're going to let you rule America according to the Koran."

That's not going to happen. Whoever wants to can go to sleep at night and dream about that, dream about a world where something like that would happen, but that's not the real world.

No Kaafir country in the world today would ever willingly give up their government and have the country be ruled according to the Sharee`ah instead. Let alone something like that, they don't even want Muslims to live in their countries any more. Let alone implement the Sharee`ah. What a joke.

[Scimitar]

There is the world of fairytales, and then there is the real world. The idea that Muslims would ever come to a country like America, for example, and throw out the man-made law and replace it with Sharee`ah law, without fighting, is laughable. No amount of "struggling" would ever - even if they did it for another 1,400 years - cause the American government, and the current president, Donald Trump, to say, "Okay, you win. We appreciate all the struggle you Mozlems have been making, so we're now going to step down and live under Sharee`ah law. We're going to throw out democracy, we're going to throw out all man-made laws and governments, we're going to let you Mozlems appoint a Caliph, and we're let you rule America according to the Koran."

That's not going to happen. Whoever wants to can go to sleep at night and dream about that, dream about a world where something like that would happen, but that's not the real world.

No Kaafir country in the world today would ever willingly give up their government and have the country be ruled according to the Sharee`ah instead. Let alone something like that, they don't even want Muslims to live in their countries any more. Let alone implement the Sharee`ah. What a joke.

Ya know bro Huzaifah, to assume we could or would is hubris in itself.

We are guests in these foreign nations, not bloody conquest hungry fanatics.

We are advised to live according to the laws of the lands we inhabit, unless they make our practice of Islam impossible - in which case we are advised to do what? Not Jihad with sword - NOOOOO - we are advised to migrate to places where we can practice our religion safely.

You know this, maaaan. What's with this "jihad offensive raa raa" bro?

I wonder sometimes at the narratives Muslims often present on the web without actually getting into any specific details. For the record, I was not mentioning any "fairy tales" in any of my examples. I gave you just three very different examples for you to see, a sword was not a part of three great nations receiving Islam - North Africa, when Herod broke the treaty - the Christian Copts kept that treaty anyway because they were an honourable people unlike King Herod. The town which allowed the Muslims in and give dawah, the town with walls was none other than Jerusalem and this story is from their records. Their version. There's more as well. The reason for Persia falling to Muslims - defensive, going to the aid of the Persians who were fearful that their tyrant King would destroy thier nation thru war with the Greco-Romans. Opportunity in defense of another people, facilitated an easy win for Islam. To call it conquest is sooo out of context, it's just wrong. Muslims were not barbarians. This rhetoric has to stop.

Scimi

[Huzaifah ibn Adam]

Short excerpt from some books of Fiqh on the issue:

النوع الأول: جهاد طلب وابتداء

وهو أن تطلب الكفار في عقر دارهم ودعوتهم إلى الإسلام وقتالهم إذا لم يقبلوا الخضوع لحكم الإسلام.
حكمه: حكم هذا النوع فرض على مجموع المسلمين.

"The first type: Jihaad of Talab (seeking) and Ibtidaa (commencement):

It is that you seek the Kuffaar "fee `Uqri Daarihim" (literally, in the bellies of their homes). You give them the Da`wah to Islaam, and you fight them if they refuse to submit to the Law of Islaam (i.e. to Sharee`ah rule).

Its ruling: This type of Jihaad is Fardh (obligatory) upon the community of the Muslims."

Now, when you go further, it is explained that it is the duty of a Khaleefah to appoint an army who will do this kind of Jihaad-ut-Talab at least once or twice a year, and if this army of Mujaahideen undertake this task, then the duty falls off the rest of the Muslim Ummah. So, they go to a certain Kaafir land, and they call them to one of three things: 1) they accept Islaam, or 2) they keep their religions and they live under Sharee`ah rule while paying Jizyah, or 3) they fight.

So let's say they went to America, for example. Would America accept Islaam? No. Would America opt for option two, i.e. surrender and have the Muslims rule the land according to the Sharee`ah? No, they would not. So that leaves only the last option.

The fight.

The fighting will always be there, whether people like it or not. It's part of this Dunyaa. It's inevitable. There has always been fighting. There always will be. In our times, there is even more fighting and killing than there was in the previous times. It's something that will not simply go away just because a few people dislike it. No amount of dislike will ever change realities.

Was-Salaam.

[Scimitar]

Short excerpt from some books of Fiqh on the issue:

النوع الأول: جهاد طلب وابتداء

وهو أن تطلب الكفار في عقر دارهم ودعوتهم إلى الإسلام وقتالهم إذا لم يقبلوا الخضوع لحكم الإسلام.
حكمه: حكم هذا النوع فرض على مجموع المسلمين.

"The first type: Jihaad of Talab (seeking) and Ibtidaa (commencement):

It is that you seek the Kuffaar "fee `Uqri Daarihim" (literally, in the bellies of their homes). You give them the Da`wah to Islaam, and you fight them if they refuse to submit to the Law of Islaam (i.e. to Sharee`ah rule).

Its ruling: This type of Jihaad is Fardh (obligatory) upon the community of the Muslims."

Now, when you go further, it is explained that it is the duty of a Khaleefah to appoint an army who will do this kind of Jihaad-ut-Talab at least once or twice a year, and if this army of Mujaahideen undertake this task, then the duty falls off the rest of the Muslim Ummah. So, they go to a certain Kaafir land, and they call them to one of three things: 1) they accept Islaam, or 2) they keep their religions and they live under Sharee`ah rule while paying Jizyah, or 3) they fight.

So let's say they went to America, for example. Would America accept Islaam? No. Would America opt for option two, i.e. surrender and have the Muslims rule the land according to the Sharee`ah? No, they would not. So that leaves only the last option.

The fight.

The fighting will always be there, whether people like it or not. It's part of this Dunyaa. It's inevitable. There has always been fighting. There always will be. In our times, there is even more fighting and killing than there was in the previous times. It's something that will not simply go away just because a few people dislike it. No amount of dislike will ever change realities.

Was-Salaam.

Was-salaam

Blood, listen to me - We'd need a bloody miracle coz America got weps you can't imagine.

We don't live in those times bro. lol.

We can't apply that kinda old world fatigue to modern day lol.

What you have posted also directly contradicts the well known understanding that Muslims in foreign lands are guests who live by the laws of inhabited lands - unless those lands make the practice of Islam impossible, in which case the Muslim is advised to move to a land where he may practice his religion safely
.

I'm not sure your case is convincing me. It's just reminding me of ISIS.

Also, I can't imagine myself going to my neighbours house with a sword in my hand and a big smile on my face saying "can I teach you about Islam?", show me a video of how that is done, I'd like a tutorial lol. (sarcasm)

Scimi

[M.I.A.]

as he said...

strike at the necks..


civil conversations are all the rage.


and also probably where the least armour is o_0

unfortunately.. irl i am not much of a conversationist.. mind just goes blank.


i believe...scientologists call it auditing.


the last samurai i aint.

[Serinity]

:salam:


Idk, but I think we need to explain Shariah in a fool-proof way. I.e.

Explain, explain deeper, and explain that too.

But how can we establish Shariah when we just sit around? America wont just go and say "here, we will live under Shariah". So how?

Islam is a religion of Justice. And peace. But we have to define, what shari' meaning does "peace" and "justice" have?? Justice aint static afaik, nor is peace.

By peace i dont mean completely pacifist-like.

Tho id like a world ruled completely by Shariah.

For everyone to be at peace with Shariah. That isnt realistic, or is it? Shariah should respond to the fitrah, it did with me. People prob just aint in touch with it.

Astaghfirullah

Allahu alam

[M.I.A.]

astaghfirullah

astaghfirullah

edit..
break out the tin foil hats... im quitting while im behind.

(part of me thinks everyone knows deep down, in one form or other, in one understanding or other.. because the world turns for all of us.. just like it always has..its not what you know that counts, its what you do with it.)

[anatolian]

The only thing that has ever brought Sharee`ah rule to any land has always only been Jihaad.

والسلام

Salam. Not all. If you mean "struggle" with jihad as in the original sense of word yes but if you mean "fight" no. Majority of Turkic people accepted Islam and implemented Shariah themselves long after the Umayyad and Abbasid conquests. Also we have the story of the Islamization of Malaysia and Indonesia. These are examples for that people can accept Islam and implement Shariah themselves.

[Scimitar]

Also, in the next town down from where I live - we have a shariah court. In London England.

Yeah. :)

It's for births, deaths and marriage related issues and advice.

Traditionally, even in the time of the Prophet pbuh, when Jews were found guilty of crimes, they wanted to be judged by shariah law - but the Prophet pbuh ruled according to their own Mosaic Law of Judaism... this proves to me that each law system is for its people.

For Muslims, it's shariah.

You can't have shariah for the Americans because that is not a Muslim nation - it's just a nation with Muslims in it. The Muslims of America can lobby for a shariah court for their own very Muslim related issues, though. Just like we did here in England. UK.

Gosh.

I keep thinking of examples - but I'm gonna stop.

Scimi

[anatolian]

UK is a bit different. It is a theocratic christian kingdom more than a secular democracy ynlike the majority of west. Theocratic countries are more open to other religions' theocratic laws. You cant do that in France or US, I guess

[Huzaifah ibn Adam]

We could post a number of Aayaat, Ahaadeeth, Fiqh rulings, etc. pertaining to Jihaad at-Talab, or "offensive Jihaad", but at this point in time it wouldn't be worth it because currently, there is only Jihaad ad-Dafa` (Defensive Jihaad) taking place, like in Syria, etc. So, now is not the time to be debating about Jihaad at-Talab. We take things one step at a time, and focus on what's important at the moment. At the moment, Muslims are being massacred globally, their lands are being destroyed, bombed, others are languishing in prisons around the world, some in prisons the rest of the people don't even know exist. So, the pressing issue for the Muslim Ummah right now is defence. Defence of the Deen, defence of the Muslim Ummah, defence of the Muslim lands. How to put a stop to what is happening to Muslims around the world, what is happening to them right now, as we speak. As we are writing these messages, Muslims in some part of the world are being killed. As we are writing these messages, bombs are dropping in Syria and Iraq.

The primary concern at the moment is the defence of the Muslims.

[M.I.A.]

iv said it before but its the cost of war...

you cant start things if you actually care for the things your fighting for.. the family, the people, the workplace, the land.

all those have to be considered.

and as it looks now they were not..

all those people had all those things to start with..

who messed it up?

to implement change in government?

when you have all those things to begin with?


understand.


i know it does not work that way.. its a very harsh world if you allow yourself to be taken by it.

but maybe they should have put it in another order..

the family, the workplace, the people, the land..

and at all stages who would the government be?


let us not become tyrants.. although people would say its the job description.

your simply caretakers of the things allah swt has entrusted you with.

people tell me i will never be successful.. so take the above with a pinch of salt.

all praise is due to allah swt.

honestly i would not persue the world.

but if you did.. use your common sense.

[talibilm]

Salam. Not all. If you mean "struggle" with jihad as in the original sense of word yes but if you mean "fight" no. Majority of Turkic people accepted Islam and implemented Shariah themselves long after the Umayyad and Abbasid conquests. Also we have the story of the Islamization of Malaysia and Indonesia. These are examples for that people can accept Islam and implement Shariah themselves.

:salam:

Not to forget Yemen and even Yatrib , where was the jihad on Medinites ?? or on Yemen ?? Even Egypt at start When its ruler who did not accept Islam but sent Gifts to Prophet :saws:

But we understand the concern of our PIOUS BRETHREN HERE about our brethren being slaughtered some where else which hurts us all too, but i say its the returns for our deeds for not Listening to Allah and his prophet :saws: and becoming Khwarism Shahs as in my post #14 here . Read the link well particularly all of my 5-6 posts there to know the ROOT CAUSE , Allahu aalam.

[azc]

Short excerpt from some books of Fiqh on the issue:النوع الأول: جهاد طلب وابتداءوهو أن تطلب الكفار في عقر دارهم ودعوتهم إلى الإسلام وقتالهم إذا لم يقبلوا الخضوع لحكم الإسلام.حكمه: حكم هذا النوع فرض على مجموع المسلمين."The first type: Jihaad of Talab (seeking) and Ibtidaa (commencement):It is that you seek the Kuffaar "fee `Uqri Daarihim" (literally, in the bellies of their homes). You give them the Da`wah to Islaam, and you fight them if they refuse to submit to the Law of Islaam (i.e. to Sharee`ah rule). Its ruling: This type of Jihaad is Fardh (obligatory) upon the community of the Muslims."Now, when you go further, it is explained that it is the duty of a Khaleefah to appoint an army who will do this kind of Jihaad-ut-Talab at least once or twice a year, and if this army of Mujaahideen undertake this task, then the duty falls off the rest of the Muslim Ummah. So, they go to a certain Kaafir land, and they call them to one of three things: 1) they accept Islaam, or 2) they keep their religions and they live under Sharee`ah rule while paying Jizyah, or 3) they fight.So let's say they went to America, for example. Would America accept Islaam? No. Would America opt for option two, i.e. surrender and have the Muslims rule the land according to the Sharee`ah? No, they would not. So that leaves only the last option. The fight.The fighting will always be there, whether people like it or not. It's part of this Dunyaa. It's inevitable. There has always been fighting. There always will be. In our times, there is even more fighting and killing than there was in the previous times. It's something that will not simply go away just because a few people dislike it. No amount of dislike will ever change realities.Was-Salaam.

if Muslims are ordered by your south African government to give tax for staying in ''their'' country or face the army, then what you will do Man...?

[azc]

Those Muslims who live in a non Muslims populous country shouldn't pay attention to extremists and fanatics. follow the laws of the land until the laws go against the shariah. Live happily and let others live

[azc]

Fatwa of darul uloom deoband: http://www.darulifta-deoband.com/hom...Relations/5024

[talibilm]

Those Muslims who live in a non Muslims populous country shouldn't pay attention to extremists and fanatics. follow the laws of the land until the laws go against the shariah. Live happily and others live

Yes Right, I do not think Sayadina Jafar :RA: when we muslims emigrated to Abbysinia demanded Najjashi to bring Sharia law immediately . I do not know How some make Islam which represents peace as not a peace full religion and WHY bring rules from fiqh when the Noble Quran is clear cut on this '' When they drive away from your homes and try to kill the Prophet etc etc '' is mentioned in more than one verse of the Noble Quran. We need Fiqh only when something is not clear, confusing or an example is not found in Prophet :saws: or Sahabas

But mostly who claim such matters do not ponder on the ayah which said something Like Allah hates those people who preach others but do not practise themselves.

Another nice example of Prophet :saws: inclination towards peace at Hudaibiya is the incident of a Sahabi who escaped from Mecca and had come to Medina after much torments from kuffar and who was returned back to Meccan kuffar soldiers as per the treaty. But he escaped their hands and came again (from the back - forgot ) and told that Prophet has full filled his treaty by sending him back to the kuffar soldiers but now he has come back at which Prophet :saws: FROWNED at him calling him something like '' You PROVOCATEUR " and told him to leave for peace but with sadness from all on his plight.

[anatolian]

:salam:

Not to forget Yemen and even Yatrib , where was the jihad on Medinites ?? or on Yemen ?? Even Egypt at start When its ruler who did not accept Islam but sent Gifts to Prophet :saws:

Yes the very first Islamic state of Ythrib was established by immigration

[talibilm]

Yes the very first Islamic state of Ythrib was established by immigration

Yes, because they could not practise their Deen in Mecca and had immense difficulties imposed on them for 13 years. At Last Allah gave permission to do Hijrah for his Prophet and all Muslims.

Even In Medina Allah, Ar Rahman The All Wise, did not LEVY ALL THE SHARIA LAW at one time like the rule of wine -intoxication, it came in three gradual steps in the form of Abrogation to ease the believer who were addicted to wine thus making them NOT TO SIN by transgressing the law of Allah , All of a sudden with a strict law .. imho.

[Simple_Person]

I have read all the comments and some brothers depict a very grim and harsh picture of how Islam should be. While other brothers show the exact picture as how i believe it.

My argument always follows the logical path. If this path being illogical goes against the fitrah, i reject it. What do i mean by this? To take Indonesia as an example. Indonesia to my knowledge was NEVER conquered through offensive war. It was conquered through the fight of the heart. When i see a kid being all sad because his ball is up in a tree and i help him to get it down. This kid will thank me and respect me. This is the basic principle of the fitrah. When we follow this fitrah, 4 types of people will remain.

Type 1: Ignorant (misinformation), but honest
Type 2: Ignorant (misinformation), but dishonest
Type 3: Knowledgeable, but dishonest (as example Jews of Medina back then)
Type 4: Knowledgeable, honest (Muslims)

Type 1 and Type 2, i believe Allah(swt) already has addressed those.

"And the servants of the Most Merciful are those who walk upon the earth easily, and when the ignorant address them [harshly], they say [words of] peace," Qur'an 25:63

When type 1 sees the reaction of the Muslim, he will find it strange, that people claim these "MAHSLIMS are terrorists, however they act very respectful, while i just offended them". These people will in the end in'sha'Allah end up as Type 4 (Muslims).

When type 2 sees the reaction of the Muslims, he will not believe it and still think they are hiding something. These people are FAR FAR FAR away from the fitrah. These people will end up being used by the type 3 and will fight the Muslims. The biggest problem of these type of people is the battle they are waging with their own heart.. There is NO battle of the heart for them. They do not think..just follow their desires and that is why they lust for women and if a religion says cover yourself to the women this prevents them to fulfill their filthy desires of looking and thus becoming the enemy.

Type 3: Well these guys KNOW Islam is the truth, but because of pride or arrogance they do not want to embrace it. Copycats of iblis one could say.

Although another type exists (The hypocrites, but you all know this not necessary to talk about it).

Islam as far as i have read and tried to ponder about it and understand it, i CONTINUOUSLY came to the conclusion of conquering the heart of people. I have looked from all kind of perspectives, but offensive war like ISIS i couldn't place being compatible with the fitrah. If somebody comes to MY house and says i MUST do this or that, i will fight with ALL my strength doesn't matter if he was planning to bring some good things. If my heart is conquered, i will invite them in to my house.

I mean even looking at the whole argument of "free will" that we human beings have. Free will is based on choice. Choice is based on the mind and the heart. How can somebody forcefully be "converted". While the heart and the mind have not been conquered. What you then get is hypocrisy. This is the BIGGEST enemy of Islam and Muslims, as these people are nothing but spies for the enemy. They will try to do everything to divide the Muslims.

About sharee'a law countries. Simple and very LOGICAL argument. WHICH country on earth right now, has currency that is according to Islamic principles? What is this currency? Gold, Silver and certain times of goods. NONE. they indeed have SOME times of laws implemented, but that doesn't mean it is 100%. Even secular law contains sharee'a law you could say. As people are allowed to worship Allah(swt) or halal slaughtering. Till now i have seen 2 things done the Islamic way so to say with ISIS.

- Removing borders (Sykes-Picot Agreement)
- Introduction of Gold and silver as legit currency.

Those are the ONLY things i have found Islamic about their rule of Law nothing else. While everything else BEGAN Islamic but like an arrow bypassed it's target very fast.

[Huzaifah ibn Adam]

1) At the time of the emigration to Abyssinia, the laws pertaining to Sharee`ah hadn't even been revealed yet. There was no "Sharee`ah law" yet at that time, no laws on Jihaad, nothing of the sort. So, trying to use that incident as a Daleel is a fallacy. Have you studied the laws of Naasikh wal-Mansookh? Abrogation in the Qur'aan and abrogation in the Sunnah. Some Aayaat abrogated previous Aayaat, and some Ahaadeeth abrogated previous ones. At one point in time, drinking wine was permissible. The Kutub of Fiqh are quoted because the A'immah of Islaam studied the Deen in-depth and knew which Aayaat and which Ahkaam abrogated previous ones. It is not for every Jaahil to open the Qur'aan and invent his own rulings based on what he feels, when in the first place, he isn't even reading the Qur'aan in Arabic and understanding it, he's relying on an English translation.

2) Once the Sharee`ah had been revealed and the Wahi had stopped and the Deen had been completed, there was no "going back" and "starting over". What you are trying to do is say that the Deen must go back to the 13 years and start over from there, which is a Baatil, ridiculous concept. After the Aayah about Ikmaal-ud-Deen was revealed, that is how everything stayed. The Deen does not retrogress. You cannot say that, let's go back to the 13 years, when Salaah hadn't been revealed yet, or Zakaat, and wine was permissible, etc. That is a Baatil and Kufr approach which opposes the Deen. It is not for people to make up their own rulings. The Fuqahaa and Mujtahideen have expounded upon the Qur'aan and the Ahaadeeth and codified the Deen, and explained the Deen, and Muslims have followed that path for 1,438 years. The Deen wasn't revealed yesterday. The Deen is not based on the whims and fancies of people, and what they like or dislike.

So far, all that I've seen are emotionally charged comments devoid of actual evidence. The Aayaat of Qur'aan are very clear when it comes to Jihaad. Yet, whenever those Aayaat are quoted, all the members are saying is, "I feel like this is giving a negative image to Islaam." You cannot counter a fact with a "feeling". If someone says that 1+1=2, you can't say: "That makes me uncomfortable, so I refuse to believe it." What has your being uncomfortable have to do with facts? Emotions and feelings play no part in coming to a Shar`i ruling: It's based on Qur'aan and Sunnah according to the understanding of the Salaf-us-Saaliheen.

Was-Salaam.

[Huzaifah ibn Adam]

Once the third Aayah of Soorah al-Maa'idah was revealed (Soorah 5:3), the Deen became fixed and immutable. There is no place for additions, subtractions or alterations. There is no "going back to the 13 years of Makkah". The 13 years of Makkah is over and past and will never come back. Once the Deen was completed and perfected, that is how it would remain till the Day of Qiyaamah, never changing.

[Huzaifah ibn Adam]

if Muslims are ordered by your south African government to give tax for staying in ''their'' country or face the army, then what you will do Man...?

News flash:

Everyone in South Africa pays tax. Heavy taxes. Much more than Kuffaar would pay under an Islaamic government ruled by Sharee`ah. Their Jizyah that they would pay is significantly less than the taxes people pay who live in the Kaafir lands. So, such an argument is fallacious. Muslims live under a Kaafir government and pay taxes. If the Kuffaar are living under an Islaamic government, they will pay the Jizyah, which is much less than taxes.

[azc]

News flash:Everyone in South Africa pays tax. Heavy taxes. Much more than Kuffaar would pay under an Islaamic government ruled by Sharee`ah. Their Jizyah that they would pay is significantly less than the taxes people pay who live in the Kaafir lands. So, such an argument is fallacious. Muslims live under a Kaafir government and pay taxes. If the Kuffaar are living under an Islaamic government, they will pay the Jizyah, which is much less than taxes.

By which article or law of constitution the special tax for being Muslims is levied ONLY on Muslim community.......

[azc]

Once the third Aayah of Soorah al-Maa'idah was revealed (Soorah 5:3), the Deen became fixed and immutable. There is no place for additions, subtractions or alterations. There is no "going back to the 13 years of Makkah". The 13 years of Makkah is over and past and will never come back. Once the Deen was completed and perfected, that is how it would remain till the Day of Qiyaamah, never changing.

I'm in touch with knowledgeable ulama

[azc]

1) At the time of the emigration to Abyssinia, the laws pertaining to Sharee`ah hadn't even been revealed yet. There was no "Sharee`ah law" yet at that time, no laws on Jihaad, nothing of the sort. So, trying to use that incident as a Daleel is a fallacy. Have you studied the laws of Naasikh wal-Mansookh? Abrogation in the Qur'aan and abrogation in the Sunnah. Some Aayaat abrogated previous Aayaat, and some Ahaadeeth abrogated previous ones. At one point in time, drinking wine was permissible. The Kutub of Fiqh are quoted because the A'immah of Islaam studied the Deen in-depth and knew which Aayaat and which Ahkaam abrogated previous ones. It is not for every Jaahil to open the Qur'aan and invent his own rulings based on what he feels, when in the first place, he isn't even reading the Qur'aan in Arabic and understanding it, he's relying on an English translation.2) Once the Sharee`ah had been revealed and the Wahi had stopped and the Deen had been completed, there was no "going back" and "starting over". What you are trying to do is say that the Deen must go back to the 13 years and start over from there, which is a Baatil, ridiculous concept. After the Aayah about Ikmaal-ud-Deen was revealed, that is how everything stayed. The Deen does not retrogress. You cannot say that, let's go back to the 13 years, when Salaah hadn't been revealed yet, or Zakaat, and wine was permissible, etc. That is a Baatil and Kufr approach which opposes the Deen. It is not for people to make up their own rulings. The Fuqahaa and Mujtahideen have expounded upon the Qur'aan and the Ahaadeeth and codified the Deen, and explained the Deen, and Muslims have followed that path for 1,438 years. The Deen wasn't revealed yesterday. The Deen is not based on the whims and fancies of people, and what they like or dislike.So far, all that I've seen are emotionally charged comments devoid of actual evidence. The Aayaat of Qur'aan are very clear when it comes to Jihaad. Yet, whenever those Aayaat are quoted, all the members are saying is, "I feel like this is giving a negative image to Islaam." You cannot counter a fact with a "feeling". If someone says that 1+1=2, you can't say: "That makes me uncomfortable, so I refuse to believe it." What has your being uncomfortable have to do with facts? Emotions and feelings play no part in coming to a Shar`i ruling: It's based on Qur'aan and Sunnah according to the understanding of the Salaf-us-Saaliheen.Was-Salaam.

you failed to prove you point.......

[Simple_Person]

1) At the time of the emigration to Abyssinia, the laws pertaining to Sharee`ah hadn't even been revealed yet. There was no "Sharee`ah law" yet at that time, no laws on Jihaad, nothing of the sort. So, trying to use that incident as a Daleel is a fallacy. Have you studied the laws of Naasikh wal-Mansookh? Abrogation in the Qur'aan and abrogation in the Sunnah. Some Aayaat abrogated previous Aayaat, and some Ahaadeeth abrogated previous ones. At one point in time, drinking wine was permissible. The Kutub of Fiqh are quoted because the A'immah of Islaam studied the Deen in-depth and knew which Aayaat and which Ahkaam abrogated previous ones. It is not for every Jaahil to open the Qur'aan and invent his own rulings based on what he feels, when in the first place, he isn't even reading the Qur'aan in Arabic and understanding it, he's relying on an English translation.

2) Once the Sharee`ah had been revealed and the Wahi had stopped and the Deen had been completed, there was no "going back" and "starting over". What you are trying to do is say that the Deen must go back to the 13 years and start over from there, which is a Baatil, ridiculous concept. After the Aayah about Ikmaal-ud-Deen was revealed, that is how everything stayed. The Deen does not retrogress. You cannot say that, let's go back to the 13 years, when Salaah hadn't been revealed yet, or Zakaat, and wine was permissible, etc. That is a Baatil and Kufr approach which opposes the Deen. It is not for people to make up their own rulings. The Fuqahaa and Mujtahideen have expounded upon the Qur'aan and the Ahaadeeth and codified the Deen, and explained the Deen, and Muslims have followed that path for 1,438 years. The Deen wasn't revealed yesterday. The Deen is not based on the whims and fancies of people, and what they like or dislike.

So far, all that I've seen are emotionally charged comments devoid of actual evidence. The Aayaat of Qur'aan are very clear when it comes to Jihaad. Yet, whenever those Aayaat are quoted, all the members are saying is, "I feel like this is giving a negative image to Islaam." You cannot counter a fact with a "feeling". If someone says that 1+1=2, you can't say: "That makes me uncomfortable, so I refuse to believe it." What has your being uncomfortable have to do with facts? Emotions and feelings play no part in coming to a Shar`i ruling: It's based on Qur'aan and Sunnah according to the understanding of the Salaf-us-Saaliheen.

Was-Salaam.

A couple days ago, a Christian contacted me through Private Messages under the pretext that he was confused about Islam but acknowledged Islam was the truth (afterwards it appeared that he was lying to me of acknowledging Islam to be the truth, just was here to say that Jesus was sacrificed lamb..etc. etc.). He told me, how can Allah show justice, yet be all the Merciful. This is indeed contradictory. However i assume that you also have heard of this hadith.

"Abu Huraira reported: The Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, said, “When Allah decreed the creation, he wrote in his book with him on his throne: My mercy prevails over my wrath.”

Sahih al-Bukhari 3022, Sahih Muslim 2751

Source used: http://dailyhadith.abuaminaelias.com/2012/03/08/hadith-on-mercy-allahs-mercy-prevails-over-his-wrath/

You're path is following exactly everything to the letter without any rational thinking. What i mean by rational thinking is, Islam is not solely based on the mind and justice is it and this world belongs to Allah(swt) and thus everything needs to be taken by force. The heart is also included with judgement as mercy with us human beings comes from the heart not from the mind. If your approach is the right approach, Allah(swt) wouldn't even have fed the unbelievers one could say.

Islam is BOUND to conquer the world, based on defensive way of conquering. As one does da'wah, people in foreign nations become Muslim. When those Muslims are in danger or are oppressed, Jihad will be applied. However your way is, go to a country ..Nobody Muslim? Well we are going to conquer it anyway and we are going to shove down their throats.

We know from signs of end of times, that indeed Sharee'a will be applied worldwide even if the unbelievers don't like it. However, one must analyze and ponder about what has happened before this event takes place. For example, A LOT of injustice is happening right now and it is even increasing. Majority of humanity is aware of this. However there are people who are fine with it. They want things to stay as they are, as they themselves enjoy "the good life (following their lust, greed, materialism, lying, cheating...). This is their state of mind and don't want anything to change. For these kind of people you and me and many other people of other faiths alike, don't care what these people's opinion is, as they just want injustice and corruption to prevail.

So do not look only through one kind of perspective. I mean we all know about Umar ibn Khatab hearing a Christian man complaining ..being poor and paying taxes. After that Umar ibn Khatab even made it so that poor people of other faiths also could receive money. While your approach would be..NO..he is not a Muslim, so he cannot receive zakaat. You get what i am trying to say?

[Huzaifah ibn Adam]

By which article or law of constitution the special tax for being Muslims is levied ONLY on Muslim community.......

That's not the point. The point is this: Everyone in the world pays taxes. When Muslims live in a Kaafir country, they pay their taxes just like everyone else does. When it is an Islaamic government, the Kuffaar will pay Jizyah, and the Muslims pay Zakaah, and the Zakaah paid by the Muslims is much, Much more than the Jizyah paid by the Kuffaar. People need to understand this. The Jizyah paid by them is not as much as the taxes that we pay currently, and not only that, but the Jizyah which they pay is not as much as the Zakaah paid by the Muslims. The Muslims actually end up paying more than them in any case.

Read this:

https://islamqa.info/en/214074

[azc]

That's not the point. The point is this: Everyone in the world pays taxes. When Muslims live in a Kaafir country, they pay their taxes just like everyone else does. When it is an Islaamic government, the Kuffaar will pay Jizyah, and the Muslims pay Zakaah, and the Zakaah paid by the Muslims is much, Much more than the Jizyah paid by the Kuffaar. People need to understand this. The Jizyah paid by them is not as much as the taxes that we pay currently, and not only that, but the Jizyah which they pay is not as much as the Zakaah paid by the Muslims. The Muslims actually end up paying more than them in any case.Read this:https://islamqa.info/en/214074

And i want to drill into your mind that your country doesn't levy any taxes on you for being Muslim. And you are free to follow your religion and you are not forced to follow the religion of majority and despite all these fundamental rights you are of this mentality that all non Muslim countries should follow the Islamic laws and all non Muslims should follow Islam. What picture of Islam you are depicting..? You are proving that Muslims don't believe in concept of co existence. They can't tolerate non Muslims and non Muslim countries on this planet, they are to be forced to follow Islam....? But this fact that Islamic shariah isn't applied on non Muslims, perhaps you are unaware of.

[azc]

@huzaifa ibn Adam : The treaty of peace said: '''From the servant of Allah and the Commander of the Faithful, Omar (RA): The inhabitants of Jerusalem are granted security of life and property. Their churches and crosses shall be secure. This treaty applies to all people of the city. Their places of worship shall remain intact. These shall neither be taken over nor pulled down. People shall be quite free to follow their religion. They shall not be put to any trouble.''http://www.islamicbulletin.org/newsl...0/sahabah.aspx

[M.I.A.]

Also, in the next town down from where I live - we have a shariah court. In London England.

Yeah. :)

It's for births, deaths and marriage related issues and advice.

Traditionally, even in the time of the Prophet pbuh, when Jews were found guilty of crimes, they wanted to be judged by shariah law - but the Prophet pbuh ruled according to their own Mosaic Law of Judaism... this proves to me that each law system is for its people.

For Muslims, it's shariah.

You can't have shariah for the Americans because that is not a Muslim nation - it's just a nation with Muslims in it. The Muslims of America can lobby for a shariah court for their own very Muslim related issues, though. Just like we did here in England. UK.

Gosh.

I keep thinking of examples - but I'm gonna stop.

Scimi

...relevant to the subject of cohabitation, coexistence and civil/criminal law?

[Huzaifah ibn Adam]

1) Brother, is your brain working right? Why are you not able to understand this simple point: Regardless of the reason why, Muslims pay taxes in the country that they live in. That is how the world works. So when the Muslims are the ruling party, the Kuffaar pay Jizyah. Why can't you understand this? Also, you are unable to understand that the "tax" which the Kuffaar pays is lower than the Zakaah paid by the Muslims.

2) The Kuffaar living under Muslims in an Islaamic government are free to follow their own religion; they are not forced to change it.

3) There is no such thing as a "non-Muslim country". All the countries on earth belong to Allaah Ta`aalaa and must necessarily be governed by the Divine Laws of Allaah Ta`aalaa, NOT the laws of people. This is another thing which, for some reason, you are unable to comprehend. Do you or do you not accept and believe that Allaah Ta`aalaa Alone is the Creator and that every land on earth belongs only to Him? The lands belong to Allaah, not to people.

4) Nowhere have I said that all Kaafirs will be forced to accept Islaam. I said that every country must be ruled by the Sharee`ah; the inhabitants of those countries, if they are Kuffaar, are free to keep their religions and follow them. But the laws of the country must be the Divine Laws, not man-made laws.

5) The "picture" of Islaam which I am depicting is the picture which the Qur'aan and Sunnah depicts. There is no other "picture". There is only the true and original Islaam, the Islaam which is pure and undiluted. Your wish is for the `Ulamaa to water down Islaam to some diluted, Baatil form which the Kuffaar may become pleased with, and that they reject the Aayaat of Qur'aan and Ahaadeeth in the process, those Aayaat and Ahaadeeth which are displeasing to the Kuffaar. This will never ever happen. There will always be a group of `Ulamaa who are on the Haqq - separate to the Ulamaa-e-Soo who are agents of the Kuffaar - who will propagate the Haqq without fearing anyone besides Allaah and without fearing the blame of any blamer, or the criticism of any critic.

6) What is your definition of "co-existence"? According to Islaam, the countries are to be ruled by the Sharee`ah, and be under a Khilaafah. The Kuffaar living there are free to keep their religions, their churches, their synagogues, etc.

7) Again, deliberate altering of what I have said, because your Nafs and Shaytaan are deceiving you and causing you to reject the truth because you find it "bitter". Let me tell you, the truth is generally bitter. You deliberately altered what I said. I said that all countries are to be ruled by Islaam, I did not say - ANYWHERE in my messages - that all or even Any of the Kuffaar would be forced to change their religions. If they do not accept Islaam as their religion, they don't have to. They are free to keep their religions. I am speaking about the ruling power. I am speaking about the laws governing the country. I am saying that the laws governing any country can never ever be man-made laws, because this entire issue of legislation is directly linked to Tawheed. Perhaps if you had studied Tawheed and attended classes on Tawheed, you would have understood. The issue of Tawheed Haakimiyyah (Oneness of the right to legislation). The right to legislate belongs only to Allaah Ta`aalaa. Allaah Ta`aalaa says:

ومن لم يحكم بما أنزل الله فأولئك هم الكافرون

{"And whosoever does not rule by what Allaah has revealed, they it is who are the Kaafiroon."}

Imaam ibn Taymiyyah said:

"And it is known by necessity from the Deen [Religion] of the Muslims, and the agreement of all the Muslims, that whoever permits the following of a Deen other than Islaam or following a Sharee`ah other than the Sharee`ah of Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم, then he is a Kaafir, and it is like the Kufr of one who believes in part of the Qur'aan and disbelieves in part of the Qur'aan, as Allaah said [The meaning of which is]:


"Indeed those who disbelieve in Allaah and His Messengers, and wish to distinguish between Allaah and His Messengers, and say we believe in some and disbelieve in some, and wish to take a way between that, all those are truly the Kaafireen, and We have prepared for the Kaafireen a humiliating punishment."

Allaah Ta`aalaa says in the Qur'aan:

وَلَا يُشْرِكُ فِي حُكْمِهِ أَحَدًا

{"And He does not allow for anyone a partnership in His Rulership."}

Allaahu Akbar. Have you read the Qur'aan? What Aayah is clearer than this on this issue? The very word used in this Aayah, "Laa Yushriku", is from "Shirk", so it is derived from this that those who permit the rule of other than Allaah's Rule have committed Shirk. Shirk in what? Shirk in the Haakimiyyah (Rulership) of Allaah Ta`aalaa, because according to the QUR'AAN, only Allaah Ta`aalaa may rule. You are denying something which is from the Fundamentals of Tawheed! From the very foundations of Tawheed!

Legislation is from the Huqooq (Rights) of Allaah Ta`aalaa, not the Huqooq of people.

Read this:

https://islamissunnah.wordpress.com/...l-haakimiyyah/

Do you understand the meaning of the word Taaghoot? Brother, you are speaking from Hawaa (desires). Taaghoot is anything which is worshipped besides Allaah, or obeyed besides Allaah. So when a person appoints himself as a ruler, and gives rulings which are in contravention to the Sharee`ah of Islaam, then he has become a Taaghoot, and when you obey that Taaghoot, thereby going against the Sharee`ah of Allaah, then this falls under "worshipping Taaghoot".

These are from the fundamental aspects of Tawheed which need to be taught to the people.

[Huzaifah ibn Adam]

https://salafmanhaj.wordpress.com/20...ufr-and-shirk/

[Serinity]

Rulership, Divinity, etc, Attributes, worship and lordship.

All are the exclusive Rights of Allah, whom He does not share with anyone. So no one is allowed to rule by anything except Shariah Law. These are fundaments of Tawheed.

They apply to Muslims, but what about Dhimmis who live under IS (Islamic State - abbreviation)?

The jist of it all is:

A) convert to Islam,
B) pay Jizyah
C) Fight.

If they pay the Jizyah, they can live under Islamic State, and have their own religion. They are not forced to change it. Afaik.

It is not a "Convert or Die" tactic. Forceful conversion will just breed hypocrisy - one of the greatest enemy of Islam.

Allahu alam.

[azc]

@huzaifa ibn Adam : Brother, I've no personal issues with you. Now you've retracted from your stand so I wish to give rest to this topic. You are advised to Depict the real picture of Islam-- as a religion of peace, not a religion of violence.... You need to improve your manners and etiquette. Calling others jahil doesn't make anyone knowledgeable, rather proves him arrogant ignorant. Every member of the forum is knowledgeable and respectable.... We are brothers in Islam, so we should represent Islam as a better Muslim as non Muslims take our opinions as evidence. :sl:

[Serinity]

Does Shariah Law apply to Kuffaar? If so, what does?

[Scimitar]

...relevant to the subject of cohabitation, coexistence and civil/criminal law?

These are not issues we can contend with in the judiciary systems of the foreign lands which are non muslim governed. We live according to the law of the land unless it prohibits us from practicing our religion - in the west, I can practice freely.

For a Muslim army to reach the UK and demand the citizens become muslim or pay jizya or else, is an act of aggression. And will be met with aggression.

Kiss goodbye to the jizya dream lol.

The Muslims couldn't even band together to defeat the occupiers of Palestine less than a century ago - to dream of this kinda crap is nonsensical, we do not live in draconian times anymore - the world now has real weapons of MASS DESTRUCTION and trigger happy politicians just looking for an excuse to bomb yet more, Muslims in their homes.

Does Shariah Law apply to Kuffaar? If so, what does?

It never has.

Scimi

[M.I.A.]

well its almost a non issue..

the western idea of taxation... here anyway.. is income based.

which allows for taxation based on income...

which means that the poor pay less tax than the rich.

which means discrimination based on faith is a non issue..

which seems pretty fair.

maybe we have issue with how taxation is spent? (i dont..maybe you do)

but the ideals of it make logical sense. upkeep of communal areas and roads and government... and healthcare.. and subsidised living..

the only difference is that muslims pay tax to the government rather than zakat to where ever they choose..


the irony is that most families... or those capable of paying zakat still follow that islamic principle..

which is great really.

never seen a more generous lot.


we have little to complain about.. seems like a system that accomplised what zakat and jizya set out to do..

although in a different setting.


in my own experiences.. its usually big business and outside immigrants that most dislike the system.

both seem to miss the obvious point.


the next version of the matrix should include competent get back to work schemes.

these are just observations.


you know its unfathomable how things are brought to life of their own accord..

i dont think we put "in god we trust" on the money but it applies to everything..

anything you pick up.

there is no denying it.. just pray for the time to understand.

and forgiveness of our nature.


the alternative to countless blessings is in the lesson of countless generations destroyed.

...it is not a viable alternative.


it does not bear thinking about.

i may be wrong though lol, im sure you will prove it to me at some time or later.

[Huzaifah ibn Adam]

With regards to the question: "Does Sharee`ah law apply to the Kuffaar?"

The answer is that the Sharee`ah law applies to the land in which they (the Kuffaar) are living in but they (the Kuffaar) are not bound to follow what the Sharee`ah has made obligatory upon Muslims or what it has made Haraam upon Muslims. So obviously, things like making Salaah, paying Zakaah, going for Hajj, fasting, Jihaad, etc. does not apply to the Kuffaar. So, this is a matter which people need to understand properly. When we say that the land must be ruled by the Sharee`ah, it does not mean that a) the Kuffaar inhabitants are forced to change their religions, or b) that their places of worship are destroyed, or c) That any of them get harmed if they agree to pay the Jizyah; rather, they are protected by the Muslim government, or that d) they are ordered to carry out the duties which have been enjoined upon the Muslims, such as performance of the Faraa'idh, Salaah, Zakaah, Sawm, Hajj, Jihaad, etc.

So once again, what we are saying is that all lands belong to Allaah Ta`aalaa and thus it is only right that the lands of Allaah Ta`aalaa be ruled according to His Laws, for this is from the Rights of Allaah which no one from His creation has any part in. No person has the right to legislate. Legislation belongs to Allaah Ta`aalaa Alone.

In fact, what I am saying here, even Christians and Jews who are honest and true to their religions will agree with whole-heartedly. If a Christian or Jew who really believes in his religion were to be asked, "What do you prefer the world be ruled by: The Divine Laws of God, or the laws of man?" Then any Christian or Jew that really believes in his religion will undoubtedly say, "The Divine Laws of God."

When a person says that it is fine for a land to be ruled by Kaafir law, that person needs to analyze what he is saying. Allaah Ta`aalaa has, for example, made drinking alcohol, and committing adultery and fornication, and homosexuality, and sodomy, and Ribaa, etc. Haraam. What this person is then saying is that it's okay for a Kaafir to say, "I am making it permissible." They are saying that it's okay for this Kaafir to oppose Allaah Ta`aalaa and make Halaal what He has made Haraam, or make Haraam what He has made Halaal. This is a very dangerous matter. In Islaam, Tahaakum (rulership) is connected to Uloohiyyah (Godhood). It is part of the Divine Rights of Allaah Ta`aalaa which no human being has a part in. Only Allaah Ta`aalaa can legislate. This is known as Tawheed Haakimiyyah, and some of the `Ulamaa have put it under the category of Tawheed Uloohiyyah, whereas others have put it as a fourth and independent category of Tawheed.

So once again, in summary, what we are saying is that the lands are meant to be ruled - all of them - by the Divine Laws of Allaah Ta`aalaa. "The Divine Laws of God", and not "man-made laws and constitutions".

Also, why would a person want man-made law instead of Sharee`ah? Any Muslim, I mean. If you are looking for merciful laws, than the laws of the Sharee`ah are the most merciful. If you are looking for justice, then the laws of the Sharee`ah are the most just. If you are looking for what is best for humanity as a whole, then Allaah Ta`aalaa is the Creator of human beings and He knows what is best for them, and thus the Laws which He has laid down will bring them the best of this Dunyaa and the best of the Aakhirah, and the most happiness in both worlds, and will ward off harm from them which would come to them as a result of following laws made by a man with his deficient and limited intellect, his near sightedness, influenced by his lowly, bestial desires, his greed and his corrupted heart. There is no corruption in the Laws of Allaah Ta`aalaa. But in the laws of man, there will always be corruption and evil, because evil is part of their nature. Greed, Nafsaaniyat, selfishness, all of this is part of their nature. So the rules made by them will be influenced by this.

Was-Salaam.

[Huzaifah ibn Adam]

The following is a very important and beneficial article written by Shaykh Muhammad ibn Saalih al-Munajjid, and I advise the brothers to read it, In Shaa Allaah:

https://islamqa.info/en/118135

Some excerpts from the article:

----------------

Al-‘Allaamah Muhammad al-Ameen al-Shanqeeti (may Allah have mercy on him) said: From verses such as that in which Allah says (interpretation of the meaning) “and He makes none to share in His Decision and His Rule” [al-Kahf 18:26], it may be understood that the followers of those who promulgate laws other than those which Allah has ordained are associating others with Allah (shirk). This understanding is explained clearly in other verses, such as the verse which speaks of those who follow the laws of the Shaytaan in permitting dead meat, claiming that it has been killed by Allah [and thus should be permitted]:“Eat not (O believers) of that (meat) on which Allaah’s Name has not been pronounced (at the time of the slaughtering of the animal), for sure it is Fisq (a sin and disobedience of Allaah). And certainly, the Shayaateen (devils) do inspire their friends (from mankind) to dispute with you, and if you obey them [by making Al‑Maytah (a dead animal) legal by eating it], then you would indeed be Mushrikoon (polytheists)”[al-An‘aam 6:121]. Here Allah clearly states that they would be mushrikoon by obeying them. This is associating others with Allah in terms of obedience and following laws that are contrary to that which Allah has ordained -- which is what is meant by worshipping the Shaytaan in the verse in which Allah says (interpretation of the meaning):“Did I not command you, O Children of Adam, that you should not worship Shaytaan (Satan). Verily, he is a plain enemy to you.61. And that you should worship Me [Alone Islamic Monotheism, and set up not rivals, associate‑gods with Me]. That is the Straight Path”[Ya-Seen 36:60-61].

--

As for the legal system that is contrary to the laws prescribed by the Creator of heaven and earth, ruling according to it constitutes disbelief in the Creator of heaven and earth, such as the claim that giving precedence to the male over the female in inheritance is not fair and it is necessary to make them equal in inheritance, and the claim that plural marriage is unjust, or that divorce is unfair to the woman, and that stoning, cutting off the hand and so on are barbaric acts that should not be done to people, and so on. Making this kind of system rule the lives of people in society and their wealth, honour, lineage, reason and religion, is disbelief in the Creator of heaven and earth and a transgression against the divine system prescribed by the One Who created all things and Who knows best what is in their best interests; may He be glorified and exalted far above having any lawgiver besides Him.“Or have they partners with Allaah (false gods) who have instituted for them a religion which Allaah has not ordained?”[al-Shoora 42:21]“Say (O Muhammad to these polytheists): ‘Tell me, what provision Allaah has sent down to you! And you have made of it lawful and unlawful.’ Say (O Muhammad): ‘Has Allaah permitted you (to do so), or do you invent a lie against Allaah?’”[Yoonus 10:59]“Say: ‘Verily, those who invent a lie against Allaah will never be successful’”[Yoonus 10:69]. End quote from Adwa’ al-Bayaan, commentary on the verse (interpretation of the meaning): “and He makes none to share in His Decision and His Rule” [al-Kahf 18:26].

---

Among the things that he (may Allah have mercy on him) said concerning this matter is what appears in Sharh al-Usool al-Thalaathah, where he said: Whoever does not rule in accordance with that which Allah has revealed because he thinks little of it or looks down on it or believes that something else is better than it and more beneficial to people or is equal to it, is a kaafir whose kufr puts him beyond the pale of Islam. That includes those who promulgate laws for people that are contrary to Islamic laws, to be a system that the people follow. They only promulgate those laws that are contrary to Islamic laws because they believe that they are better and more beneficial for people, because it is known on the basis of reason and sound human nature that no one turns away from one path to a different path unless he believes that what he has turned to is better and what he has turned away from is lacking.

[Scimitar]

So, the UK is shariah compliant then :)

Whats the big deal? :D

This is what i been saying all along, just with less TLDR.

Scimi

[Huzaifah ibn Adam]

https://islamqa.info/en/111836

[Scimitar]

I wonder if you are alluding to the idea that we must follow ISIS?

Because the narrative of "by force" (from the IslamQA link) is exactly what the ISIS retards have done.

What do you say to that?

Scimi

[Huzaifah ibn Adam]

There's no alluding in my posts. They're completely clear and unambiguous.

['abd al-hakeem]

Retracted voluntarily based on ignorance

[Serinity]

Forgive my ignorance but can you explain:

By means of force and prevailing over others. When a man becomes caliph by prevailing over the people by the sword, and he establishes his authority and takes full control, then it becomes obligatory to obey him and he becomes the leader of the Muslims. Examples of that include some of the Umayyad and ‘Abbasid caliphs, and those who came after them. This method is contrary to sharee’ah, because it is seized by force. But because great interests are served by having a ruler who rules the ummah, and because a great deal of mischief may result from chaos and loss of security in the land, the one who seizes authority by means of the sword should be obeyed if he seizes power by force but he rules in accordance with the laws of Allaah.

Read the whole thing, In shaa' Allah.

Allahu alam

[M.I.A.]

agreed... with retracted post lol.

you know from a completely logical and purely physical standpoint...

lets take alcohol for example..

its a destructive thing thats open to abuse.

it destroys lives.. physically and mentally.

so what do you do? no alcohol or else.

what you meant to say is that alcohol is open to abuse..

it destroys lives physically and mentally.

long term it does not benifit ones personal life.

and if a land cant prohibit it.. lookin at you murika..

then you tax it heavily..

because associated healthcare risks.

..or just start blowing stuff up?


so you associate alcohol with the west but in reality its frowned upon because it really does affect a persons involvement in real life.

and as things go by that view is also likely to change.

so who are you going to preach to?

personal choice does still exist but you have to ask yourself..

what the benefits of abstinence are?

physically, mentally and your role in society.

although things are a little more complicated than the appearance of things.


..or not.

i mean if they are better than you drunk then thats not even funny.

if they do worse for themselves then thats something different.


..im shocked to say that i dont think... i dont believe.. you could find a country where alcohol does not exist in some nook or cranny.


...the last time i ran my mouth so much i ended up failing.

[Scimitar]

There's no alluding in my posts. They're completely clear and unambiguous.

except the one I was referring to was you pushing a link, from IslamQA - the same Serenity has raised in question as I have.

It's neither clear nor ambiguous - but confusing - as I mentioned, it seems the scholars should all be for ISIS by that definition and I quote:

This method is contrary to sharee’ah, because it is seized by force. But because great interests are served by having a ruler who rules the ummah, and because a great deal of mischief may result from chaos and loss of security in the land, the one who seizes authority by means of the sword should be obeyed if he seizes power by force but he rules in accordance with the laws of Allaah.

Which is basically what ISIS have claimed they have done. So why not go join them if this is the narrative the scholars are pushing?

explain to me and others please - how the view copy pasted from IslamQA is not reflective of ISIS propaganda?

Scimi

[Born_Believer]

Everyone is getting so far ahead of themselves but before shariah can eve be implemented, we any by that I mean Muslims living in Muslim countries, have to start electing morally correct, religious upstanding and politically strong leaders.

[M.I.A.]

http://corpus.quran.com/translation....er=2&verse=251

...im not so sure.

wrt siezed power.


you know it is what you make it.

i am sorry for pushing any sort of agenda really..

i should know better, when it happens very rarely does anyone have a chance to think about things.

[Serinity]

I mean, what if an evil person who claims, in fitna to be caliph, and uses Islam for their own interests, claiming to follow Islam, etc. But actually doesnt?

I mean, obv. Ruling by Shariah, is good. But what if some evil person with ill intentions by force took over?? Are we to obey? I know Islamic shariah is only good. But man is not. :-/

Astaghfirullah if I said anything kufr.

[Huzaifah ibn Adam]

except the one I was referring to was you pushing a link, from IslamQA - the same Serenity has raised in question as I have.

It's neither clear nor ambiguous - but confusing - as I mentioned, it seems the scholars should all be for ISIS by that definition and I quote:

This method is contrary to sharee’ah, because it is seized by force. But because great interests are served by having a ruler who rules the ummah, and because a great deal of mischief may result from chaos and loss of security in the land, the one who seizes authority by means of the sword should be obeyed if he seizes power by force but he rules in accordance with the laws of Allaah.

Which is basically what ISIS have claimed they have done. So why not go join them if this is the narrative the scholars are pushing?

explain to me and others please - how the view copy pasted from IslamQA is not reflective of ISIS propaganda?

Scimi

That question should be addressed to the scholar who said it, and you can do that from here:

https://islamqa.info/en/

Click the "Send A Question" button.

You can write the question in English; he's got a team of translators who translate all of the questions (from any language) into Arabic. Takes a few days to get a response (due to the large amount of questions daily), so be patient.

Was-Salaam.

[Huzaifah ibn Adam]

I mean, what if an evil person who claims, in fitna to be caliph, and uses Islam for their own interests, claiming to follow Islam, etc. But actually doesnt?

I mean, obv. Ruling by Shariah, is good. But what if some evil person with ill intentions by force took over?? Are we to obey? I know Islamic shariah is only good. But man is not. :-/

Astaghfirullah if I said anything kufr.

There are two scenarios:

1) A good person seizes power by force, in order to implement the Sharee`ah and rule in accordance with the Qur'aan and the Sunnah, and bring justice to the lands and to the inhabitants. A person who rules in accordance to how Rasoolullaah صلى الله عليه وسلم and the Khulafaa-e-Raashideen had done. A person who is devoid of any kind of tyranny or injustice; rather, his Akhlaaq is based on that of Rasoolullaah صلى الله عليه وسلم.

2) An evil person seizes power by force; however, he is a tyrant, a Zhaalim, he oppresses people, he spreads Fitnah in the land, he murders people, he ill-treats everyone under him.

With regards to scenario #2, there are two views among the A'immah:

1) The view of the Shaafi`i, Hanbali and Maaliki Madhaahib, which is that as long as he has not committed Kufr, it's not permissible to revolt against him.

2) The view of the Hanafi Madh-hab, which is that people Should revolt against him, kick him out and a proper ruler should be brought in. The view of the Ahnaaf is based on the Aayah:

لا ينال عهدي الظالمين

{"My Covenant does not include the Zhaalimeen."}

If you look at the context of that Aayah, it is about a conversation that took place between Nabi Ibraaheem عليه السلام and Allaah Ta`aalaa. Allaah Ta`aalaa tells Nabi Ibraaheem عليه السلام that, "I am going to make you an Imaam (leader) for the people." He asks Allaah: "And from my progeny?" Allaah Ta`aalaa responds: "My Covenant does not include the Zhaalimeen (the wrong-doers; oppressors; tyrants)." Meaning, Allaah Ta`aalaa would make Imaams (leaders) from the progeny of Nabi Ibraaheem عليه السلام, except those of them who are Zhaalimeen. So based on this Aayah, the Ahnaaf say (and there is Nass from Imaam Abu Haneefah himself on this matter) that if a ruler becomes evil and corrupt, and tyrannical and oppressive, then he is no longer the ruler, according to this Aayah, and thus he should be fought and removed, and a proper ruler must take his place.

So, the four Madhaahib are unanimous that if a Muslim ruler forcefully installs himself as the Khaleefah, he must be obeyed, provided he thereafter rules in accordance with the Sharee`ah, with the Qur'aan and the Sunnah. Where they disagree is with regards to how he acts After becoming the ruler. Like we mentioned above, the Maaliki, Shaafi`i and Hanbali Madhaahib say that rebellion against him is not allowed unless he commits an act of clear-cut Kufr, whereas the Hanafi Madh-hab says that if he is a Zhaalim, rebellion against him is not just allowed, it's the right thing to do.

والله تعالى أعلم

والسلام

[Scimitar]

Well there you have it mustafa16 :) shariah is as flexible as bamboo, and as diverse as it too.

That question should be addressed to the scholar who said it,

I was under the impression we were having a conversation, you just deflected after your claim to authority. You clearly sponsor the same opinion, you should be able to answer it.

I ask again.

What of ISIS? Do they not fit in the descriptions given under these examples the Ulema have categorised. They took the land by force, while it had no proper governance, and installed Shariah, by force, according to their own naratives - where do they fit in this whole kerfuffle?

Scimi

[Serinity]

Can anyone just claim Khalifah?? That sounds very unlikely.. tbh.

What is to prevent 2-4 people going out and claiming Khalifah?? I mean there must be a system.. Just claiming Khalifah and BAM you are.. Even a hypocrite could do that.

Has there ever been a case where an evil one took Khalifah position?

I'd have no objections against someone who is founded on The Prophet's :saws: Akhlaqq, etc. But an evil tyrant, ignorant or hypocrite (i.e. a kafir), I do.

So if Khawariji went out and claimed Khalifah status, would we obey them? Or does the ruling that killing them is best, override that?

Correct me if I am wrong, but to be a Khalifah, isn't one supposed to know Shariah Law, AND have Islamic Character?

[Huzaifah ibn Adam]

Well there you have it mustafa16 :) shariah is as flexible as bamboo, and as diverse as it too.



I was under the impression we were having a conversation, you just deflected after your claim to authority. You clearly sponsor the same opinion, you should be able to answer it.

I ask again.

What of ISIS? Do they not fit in the descriptions given under these examples the Ulema have categorised. They took the land by force, while it had no proper governance, and installed Shariah, by force, according to their own naratives - where do they fit in this whole kerfuffle?

Scimi

The rules of this forum does not allow discussions regarding Jihaad groups; it results in deletion of the thread and banning of the member(s) involved, and that decision made by the staff is done due to the security risks involved (as was witnessed in the past on forums like Islamic Awakening, when numerous members ended up getting arrested). So, questions pertaining to such matters will not be answered. In fact, political questions in general. People who want to know about those things can do their own research. After all, those are contemporary issues.

What we post is simply the rulings from the Qur'aan and the Sunnah. We do not discuss or comment on modern day groups and movements.

Research, ask people on the ground, people involved.

Was-Salaam.

[keiv]

Can anyone just claim Khalifah?? That sounds very unlikely.. tbh.

What is to prevent 2-4 people going out and claiming Khalifah?? I mean there must be a system.. Just claiming Khalifah and BAM you are.. Even a hypocrite could do that.

Has there ever been a case where an evil one took Khalifah position?

I'd have no objections against someone who is founded on The Prophet's :saws: Akhlaqq, etc. But an evil tyrant, ignorant or hypocrite (i.e. a kafir), I do.

So if Khawariji went out and claimed Khalifah status, would we obey them? Or does the ruling that killing them is best, override that?

Correct me if I am wrong, but to be a Khalifah, isn't one supposed to know Shariah Law, AND have Islamic Character?

To be a Khalifah in today's world, you have to have the support of the west as well as a lot of weapons to cause chaos and destruction to your own people. It's also important to hire Hollywood rated production companies to produce all your kill videos to distribute them all over the internet.

I mean, that has Islam written all over it! Cmon guys!

[Serinity]

To be a Khalifah in today's world, you have to have the support of the west as well as a lot of weapons to cause chaos and destruction to your own people.

True. Allah protect us and forgive us. Ameen.

[anatolian]

@huzaifa h ibn Adam Does Quran and Hadith teach for a world conquest?

[Huzaifah ibn Adam]

Can anyone just claim Khalifah?? That sounds very unlikely.. tbh.

No. The Fuqahaa of the different Madhaahib have laid down certain Shuroot (conditions) in order for a person to become a Khaleefah. One of the conditions which the Maaliki, Shaafi`i, and Hanbali Madhaahib have is that the person must be from the tribe of Quraysh.

So no, not just anyone can become a Khaleefah. Some other conditions are being Baaligh, sane, having sufficient `Ilm of Deen, being just, being capable of fulfilling the role of Khaleefah (both physical and mental capability), etc.

What is to prevent 2-4 people going out and claiming Khalifah?? I mean there must be a system.. Just claiming Khalifah and BAM you are.. Even a hypocrite could do that.

There are three ways of becoming a Khaleefah:

1. Being chosen by the Ahl-ul-Halli wal-`Aqd (the people of authority).
2. Being chosen by the previous Khaleefah.
3. Taking power by force.

In the case of Hadhrat Abu Bakr رضي الله عنه, he became Khaleefah through being selected by the Ahl-ul-Halli wal-`Aqd. In the case of Hadhrat `Umar ibn al-Khattaab رضي الله عنه, he became Khaleefah through being chosen by Hadhrat Abu Bakr رضي الله عنه. In the cases of Hadhrat `Uthmaan ibn `Affaan and Hadhrat `Ali ibn Abi Taalib رضي الله عنهما, they became Khaleefah through being selected by the Ahl-ul-Halli wal-`Aqd.

Has there ever been a case where an evil one took Khalifah position?

Yes. Many of the Abbasid rulers were evil. Some from the Umayyads as well.

I'd have no objections against someone who is founded on The Prophet's :saws: Akhlaqq, etc. But an evil tyrant, ignorant or hypocrite (i.e. a kafir), I do.

According to the view of Imaam Abu Haneefah, which is the relied upon view of the Hanafi Madh-hab according to Imaam Abu Bakr al-Jassaas as explained in his "Ahkaam al-Qur'aan", in the case of a tyrant who oppresses the Muslims, he will be fought and a proper Khaleefah will take his place.

So if Khawariji went out and claimed Khalifah status, would we obey them? Or does the ruling that killing them is best, override that?

The Khawaarij - according to some `Ulamaa - are Kaafir, and thus they cannot become the Khaleefah.

Correct me if I am wrong, but to be a Khalifah, isn't one supposed to know Shariah Law, AND have Islamic Character?

That is correct. A person has to have a certain level of `Ilm in order to be the Khaleefah.

والله تعالى أعلم

والسلام

[M.I.A.]

The rules of this forum does not allow discussions regarding Jihaad groups; it results in deletion of the thread and banning of the member(s) involved, and that decision made by the staff is done due to the security risks involved (as was witnessed in the past on forums like Islamic Awakening, when numerous members ended up getting arrested). So, questions pertaining to such matters will not be answered. In fact, political questions in general. People who want to know about those things can do their own research. After all, those are contemporary issues.

What we post is simply the rulings from the Qur'aan and the Sunnah. We do not discuss or comment on modern day groups and movements.

Research, ask people on the ground, people involved.

Was-Salaam.

wow thats amazing..

inadvertently stopping terrorism or the threat of it..

is pretty good.

good job?

thats like 4 lions territory right there.

and im only slightly being funny.


...infact o_0

[Indefinable]

Interesting.

[TDWT]

That question should be addressed to the scholar who said it, and you can do that from here:

https://islamqa.info/en/

Click the "Send A Question" button.

You can write the question in English; he's got a team of translators who translate all of the questions (from any language) into Arabic. Takes a few days to get a response (due to the large amount of questions daily), so be patient.

Was-Salaam.

On the point of a kalifa, I was wondering, so let's say, there's a muslim caliphate right? There's no other war and muslim nations are at peace and there are non muslim states. Is the caliphate supposed to go and start a war with the non muslim states or something?

[Mustafa16]

I'm so glad I'm surrounded by Gulenists and don't have to worry about this extremism, Islamism, and "restoration of the caliphate" nonsense....as well as my scholars, as brother Huzaifah ibn Adam just did, advocating for ISIS, one of the most barbaric organizations in history. Yet I still have to be associated with this extremist nonsense, and get labeled because of my islam

[Simple_Person]

I'm so glad I'm surrounded by Gulenists and don't have to worry about this extremism, Islamism, and "restoration of the caliphate" nonsense....as well as my scholars, as brother Huzaifah ibn Adam just did, advocating for ISIS, one of the most barbaric organizations in history. Yet I still have to be associated with this extremist nonsense, and get labeled because of my islam

Gulenists or Erdogan supporters both the same. As both give the mask of Islam but the body of nationalism as well as the clear Kemalists. The modern day Turkey and the Turkey of the last 90 years was and to this day ..all in the interest of the west.

From NATO to Bilderberg involvement to the philosophy of nationalism which came from the west and still is their philosophy. By dividing land in to countries of the Middle East as how it is right now you create disunity among people. This simple concept and hidden agenda of the west many Turks sadly don't understand and refuse to understand if they themselves are not aware of.

[Huzaifah ibn Adam]

"Islamism"? You mean, "Islaam"? You don't have to worry about Islaam? Because in Turkey, those groups ensure that the true Islaam never takes root and that they put this spineless, homosexual, watered down religion they have invented in its place, this religion that orders them to worship America and lick their boots.

They use "extremism" to mean "The original Islaam which Rasoolullaah صلى الله عليه وسلم" brought. "The Qur'aan and the Sunnah". This, according to them, is extremism. The Sharee`ah of Islaam is "extremism". Anything other than bowing down to America and its allies is "extremism". They are a joke.

[Huzaifah ibn Adam]

On the point of a kalifa, I was wondering, so let's say, there's a muslim caliphate right? There's no other war and muslim nations are at peace and there are non muslim states. Is the caliphate supposed to go and start a war with the non muslim states or something?

His duty as the Khaleefah is to despatch an army of Mujaahideen who will go to the Kaafir nation and present them with three options: 1) Accept Islaam, or 2) Surrender, pay Jizyah, keep your religions, but this land will be ruled by the Sharee`ah of Islaam, or 3) Get ready to fight.

According to the books of Fiqh, he should do it at least once or twice a year. The Maqsad is to have the Divine Laws of Allaah Ta`aalaa rule every land on earth; because those lands belong to Allaah, not to people, so it is only right that His Laws be implemented, not man-made laws.

[M.I.A.]

but first he..they..would have to unite their own country.

whats civil war like?

...maybe ask the saudis?

if hitler never existed, he probably would have got further.


weeell...pretty sure i didnt mean to say that lol..

as far as analogies go thats a bad one.

some people would eat you alive if you said the wrong thing..

to what end i dont know.


....what are we doing today brain?

....same thing we do every day pinky.



...

with respect to the above post, the letters of the prophet pbuh thread is amazing..

might go some way to shedding light on mannerisms.


...honestly, most of these voices bear no resemblance to my god.

[Mustafa16]

"Islamism"? You mean, "Islaam"? You don't have to worry about Islaam? Because in Turkey, those groups ensure that the true Islaam never takes root and that they put this spineless, homosexual, watered down religion they have invented in its place, this religion that orders them to worship America and lick their boots.

They use "extremism" to mean "The original Islaam which Rasoolullaah صلى الله عليه وسلم" brought. "The Qur'aan and the Sunnah". This, according to them, is extremism. The Sharee`ah of Islaam is "extremism". Anything other than bowing down to America and its allies is "extremism". They are a joke.

what have salafi islamist contributed to this world, other than regressing the ummah economically, scientifically, intellectually, and militarily, and bringing death, chaos, instability, turmoil, violence, and destruction of history, nations, and unity of this ummah? they have refused to unite with the "rafidah" leading to the Iran-Saudi Arabia proxy conflict which has claimed hundreds of thousands of lives, and the failure to cooperate for good, and protection, they have refused to cooperate with sufis, and label anyone who disagrees with them as heretics, they say everything is haram, they bring nothing but disorder, while the people of the Gulen movement have educated millions of people to become elites, professors, etc. and sufis like Hamza Yusuf have educated people on modern day issues, and promoted unity and strength

[Simple_Person]

what have salafi islamist contributed to this world, other than regressing the ummah economically, scientifically, intellectually, and militarily, and bringing death, chaos, instability, turmoil, violence, and destruction of history, nations, and unity of this ummah? they have refused to unite with the "rafidah" leading to the Iran-Saudi Arabia proxy conflict which has claimed hundreds of thousands of lives, and the failure to cooperate for good, and protection, they have refused to cooperate with sufis, and label anyone who disagrees with them as heretics, they say everything is haram, they bring nothing but disorder, while the people of the Gulen movement have educated millions of people to become elites, professors, etc. and sufis like Hamza Yusuf have educated people on modern day issues, and promoted unity and strength

I am not sure if you are saying what you should be saying. What does "Salafi" mean according to you?

btw, as far as i know, Hamza Yusuf started with Sufism, but no longer associates himself with Sufism.

[azc]

what have salafi islamist contributed to this world, other than regressing the ummah economically, scientifically, intellectually, and militarily, and bringing death, chaos, instability, turmoil, violence, and destruction of history, nations, and unity of this ummah? they have refused to unite with the "rafidah" leading to the Iran-Saudi Arabia proxy conflict which has claimed hundreds of thousands of lives, and the failure to cooperate for good, and protection, they have refused to cooperate with sufis, and label anyone who disagrees with them as heretics, they say everything is haram, they bring nothing but disorder, while the people of the Gulen movement have educated millions of people to become elites, professors, etc. and sufis like Hamza Yusuf have educated people on modern day issues, and promoted unity and strength

unity is a dream bro......I've never heard sh hamza yusuf

[Mustafa16]

I am not sure if you are saying what you should be saying. What does "Salafi" mean according to you?

btw, as far as i know, Hamza Yusuf started with Sufism, but no longer associates himself with Sufism.

salafis follow a literalist interpretation of the Qur'an and the Sunnah, and follow the "exoteric" meaning of texts. They look to the first 3 generations of Muslims as the primary source of guidance, and they have a harsh and loose interpretation of what constitutes bidah and shirk.

[MuslimInshallah]

I am not sure if you are saying what you should be saying. What does "Salafi" mean according to you?

btw, as far as i know, Hamza Yusuf started with Sufism, but no longer associates himself with Sufism.

Assalaamu alaikum,

(mildly) I do not know much about Hamza Yusuf, but from what I have observed, it seems to me that it would depend on what you mean by "Sufism". (smile) If you mean, does he believe in the spiritual dimensions of Islam, I would say yes. If you mean does he agree with everything that some people colouring themselves as on a spiritual path and calling themselves Sufi are doing, I would say no.

(sigh) It is hard to know, sometimes, how to talk about things. It seems to me that language has become distorted. (smile) But let us continue to talk with one another in respect and kindness, and perhaps we can deepen our understandings.


May God, the One, Bless all those who sincerely strive to Please Him.

[Simple_Person]

salafis follow a literalist interpretation of the Qur'an and the Sunnah, and follow the "exoteric" meaning of texts. They look to the first 3 generations of Muslims as the primary source of guidance, and they have a harsh and loose interpretation of what constitutes bidah and shirk.

I don't get it, as what you are saying is contradictory.

First you say (Part 1) "salafis follow a literalist interpretation of the Qur'an and the Sunnah, and follow the "exoteric" meaning of texts"

THEN you say (Part 2) "They look to the first 3 generations of Muslims as the primary source of guidance," AND THEN YOU SAY (Part 3) "and they have a harsh and loose interpretation of what constitutes bidah and shirk."

Isn't a salafi a person who is following part 2 by default. If somebody says he is a salafi, but does part 1 and part 3 and claims he is of part 2, that does NOT make him of part 2 as part 2 does not do part 1 and part 3 and thus contradictory of what you are saying.

However on top of that, it looks like you are saying that if person X looks at the first 3 generation of Muslims for guidance etc (part 2), becomes a litteralist of the Qur'an and is harsh and loose interpretation of what constitutes bidah and shirk.

Please explain this contradictory as it is very confusing to me.

Also could you please explain to me why being a follower of the first 3 generation is a good thing or why is it a bad thing?

[Simple_Person]

Assalaamu alaikum,

(mildly) I do not know much about Hamza Yusuf, but from what I have observed, it seems to me that it would depend on what you mean by "Sufism". (smile) If you mean, does he believe in the spiritual dimensions of Islam, I would say yes. If you mean does he agree with everything that some people colouring themselves as on a spiritual path and calling themselves Sufi are doing, I would say no.

(sigh) It is hard to know, sometimes, how to talk about things. It seems to me that language has become distorted. (smile) But let us continue to talk with one another in respect and kindness, and perhaps we can deepen our understandings.


May God, the One, Bless all those who sincerely strive to Please Him.

wa alaikum salam wa rahmatullah,

well till now based on what he has said or the things that i have heard, nothing deviates other than basic principles of Islam. So if he still is part of the "yes" part of what you referred to, i have found no sign of him advocating for it. Many things that he is speaking of or advocating for what i till now have heard is what every self reflecting person would say.

So i am not here to defend him or am pro-Hamza Yusuf. I take the beneficial knowledge even if it comes from the most anti-Islamic figure on this planet. Funny thing is, i say this, but this sub'han'Allah just thought about it, has also occurred.

Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) ordered me to guard the Zakat revenue of Ramadan. Then somebody came to me and started stealing from the foodstuff. I caught him and said, "I will take you to Allah's Messenger (ﷺ)!" Then Abu Huraira described the whole narration and said: That person said (to me), "(Please don't take me to Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) and I will tell you a few words by which Allah will benefit you.) When you go to your bed, recite Ayat-al-Kursi, (2.255) for then there will be a guard from Allah who will protect you all night long, and Satan will not be able to come near you till dawn." (When the Prophet (ﷺ) heard the story) he said (to me), "He (who came to you at night) told you the truth although he is a liar; and it was Satan."

Source used: https://sunnah.com/bukhari/66/32

(smile) ;)

[Huzaifah ibn Adam]

The posts of the young brother, Mustafa16, make me laugh a little. Please excuse me, but I'm not going to take out time to answer those posts (to summarise: everything in the post is wrong. Will take too long to answer, because there are too many mistakes. Normally, an article is mainly right with a few things wrong, but those are mainly wrong with a few things right). The brothers and sisters who have time on their hands can do that, In Shaa Allaah.

Was-Salaam.

[Simple_Person]

The posts of the young brother, Mustafa16, make me laugh a little. Please excuse me, but I'm not going to take out time to answer those posts (to summarise: everything in the post is wrong. Will take too long to answer, because there are too many mistakes. Normally, an article is mainly right with a few things wrong, but those are mainly wrong with a few things right). The brothers and sisters who have time on their hands can do that, In Shaa Allaah.

Was-Salaam.

Brother, there is difference in the people we speak to. Some people say no X is like this and that's that. They will not change their opinion no matter what mountains of evidence you bring and show them how contradictory their opinion is. I am till now not sure if this is the case with this brother. If that is in the end indeed the case, i will leave it like that and we can say..leave him be. If that is NOT the case, a few words make him better understand certain things. Knowledge does not belong to us. Allah(swt) gives knowledge to whom He wants, but if we have certain knowledge it is obligatory to spread it to people who are open to receiving knowledge. So nobody is "not worth our time" if they might want to listen. It is a very dangerous path if we see people not worth our time, if they just don't know something or are misinformed but willing to learn/adjust their opinion.

Many people are Muslims, but know and understand very little of all of it. Like my own uncle. He doesn't consider himself a Muslim but says i believe in God, but acts as if he is a scholar of Islam. Sees Rasullah(saws) as a tyrant and the salifs as murders =_=!. Very stubborn and ignorant people like that just leave them in their ignorance and they will in the end drown in their own ignorance as not willing to listen what somebody else has to say.

[Born_Believer]

His duty as the Khaleefah is to despatch an army of Mujaahideen who will go to the Kaafir nation and present them with three options: 1) Accept Islaam, or 2) Surrender, pay Jizyah, keep your religions, but this land will be ruled by the Sharee`ah of Islaam, or 3) Get ready to fight.

According to the books of Fiqh, he should do it at least once or twice a year. The Maqsad is to have the Divine Laws of Allaah Ta`aalaa rule every land on earth; because those lands belong to Allaah, not to people, so it is only right that His Laws be implemented, not man-made laws.

Can you provide evidence for this? Hadith? Quran?

[MuslimInshallah]

wa alaikum salam wa rahmatullah,

well till now based on what he has said or the things that i have heard, nothing deviates other than basic principles of Islam. So if he still is part of the "yes" part of what you referred to, i have found no sign of him advocating for it. Many things that he is speaking of or advocating for what i till now have heard is what every self reflecting person would say.

So i am not here to defend him or am pro-Hamza Yusuf. I take the beneficial knowledge even if it comes from the most anti-Islamic figure on this planet. Funny thing is, i say this, but this sub'han'Allah just thought about it, has also occurred.

Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) ordered me to guard the Zakat revenue of Ramadan. Then somebody came to me and started stealing from the foodstuff. I caught him and said, "I will take you to Allah's Messenger (ﷺ)!" Then Abu Huraira described the whole narration and said: That person said (to me), "(Please don't take me to Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) and I will tell you a few words by which Allah will benefit you.) When you go to your bed, recite Ayat-al-Kursi, (2.255) for then there will be a guard from Allah who will protect you all night long, and Satan will not be able to come near you till dawn." (When the Prophet (ﷺ) heard the story) he said (to me), "He (who came to you at night) told you the truth although he is a liar; and it was Satan."

Source used: https://sunnah.com/bukhari/66/32

(smile) ;)

(smile) Wa alaikum assalaam wa rahmatullahi wa barakaatuhu my dear,

I do not know what you have heard... but I have in my hands a book I recently found by Hamza Yusuf. It is a translation, with commentary, of Imam al-Mawlud's Matharat al-Quluub, and is titled Purification of the heart: signs, symptoms and cures of the spiritual diseases of the heart. I have not yet had the pleasure of reading this book, but it seems to me to indicate that Hamza Yusuf has some interest in the spiritual aspects of Islamic thought. (mildly) It is perhaps what you mean by that understanding which is what any self-reflecting person would say? (mildly) I'm afraid that I do not know exactly what you mean, as I have not had the pleasure of reading much of your thought.

I hope that this may add some clarity on Hamza Yusuf's thought. (smile) And if you have further questions, I would suggest you try reading his writings and listening to his lectures (there is a rather wonderful resource called DeenStream, where you can find some of his lectures). Hearing from him directly is a more reliable way of knowing him, it seems to me.


May Allah, the Kind, Strengthen our understandings in ways pleasing to Him.

[Scimitar]

(Smile) I am not patronising anyone (mildly) but I do wish you would (smile) take a minute to (smile) chew some paan leaf (smile)

Honestly text like that does come across patronising - fix up sis

[M.I.A.]

o_0

"/

...


o_o

and then i was like.. ô_o

smiling is charity!

but i sometimes forget to brush my teeths.

awesome. only on ib..


so great isis aint here yet... lets take time to appreciate our differences.

[Huzaifah ibn Adam]

Can you provide evidence for this? Hadith? Quran?

You'll find it in the Kutub of Fiqh of all four Madhaahib: Hanafi, Maaliki, Shaafi`i, Hanbali. Kitaab-ul-Jihaad / Kitaab-us-Siyar / Kitaab-ul-Maghaazi.

If I get the time, In Shaa Allaah, I'll post excerpts from the Kutub of Fiqh regarding that issue.

It's difficult to find time these days; there's so little of it.

[M.I.A.]

:|

...find time.


its the answer i get to most of my excuses :p

also time is relative..

busy men have little time.

idle men do time.

●_●

btw ...those are glasses not black eyez.


i have to ask.. can mods delete posts and accounts?

i feel i am rapidly approaching some imaginary line.

maybe better to be erased.

[Indefinable]

what have salafi islamist contributed to this world, other than regressing the ummah economically, scientifically, intellectually, and militarily, and bringing death, chaos, instability, turmoil, violence, and destruction of history, nations, and unity of this ummah? they have refused to unite with the "rafidah" leading to the Iran-Saudi Arabia proxy conflict which has claimed hundreds of thousands of lives, and the failure to cooperate for good, and protection, they have refused to cooperate with sufis, and label anyone who disagrees with them as heretics, they say everything is haram, they bring nothing but disorder, while the people of the Gulen movement have educated millions of people to become elites, professors, etc. and sufis like Hamza Yusuf have educated people on modern day issues, and promoted unity and strength

I know you're young, and autistic, but that doesn't mean you can use that as an excuse to slander your Muslim brothers and sisters whom are striving to implement the deen of Allaah subhanahu wa ta'ala on Earth.

The Salafi movement isn't the cause of all the current day political turmoil.

[Simple_Person]

(smile) Wa alaikum assalaam wa rahmatullahi wa barakaatuhu my dear,

I do not know what you have heard... but I have in my hands a book I recently found by Hamza Yusuf. It is a translation, with commentary, of Imam al-Mawlud's Matharat al-Quluub, and is titled Purification of the heart: signs, symptoms and cures of the spiritual diseases of the heart. I have not yet had the pleasure of reading this book, but it seems to me to indicate that Hamza Yusuf has some interest in the spiritual aspects of Islamic thought. (mildly) It is perhaps what you mean by that understanding which is what any self-reflecting person would say? (mildly) I'm afraid that I do not know exactly what you mean, as I have not had the pleasure of reading much of your thought.

I hope that this may add some clarity on Hamza Yusuf's thought. (smile) And if you have further questions, I would suggest you try reading his writings and listening to his lectures (there is a rather wonderful resource called DeenStream, where you can find some of his lectures). Hearing from him directly is a more reliable way of knowing him, it seems to me.


May Allah, the Kind, Strengthen our understandings in ways pleasing to Him.

Well thinking about this comment of yours, does indeed bring up some of the things that he indeed loves to refer to ..as to imam al-Ghazzaali.

Although every time that i have heard him refer certain things to him, was always about the philosophical aspect. However, that was so far. Jazakallahu khairan for the references, i will in'sha'Allah follow them up.

[azc]

I know you're young, and autistic, but that doesn't mean you can use that as an excuse to slander your Muslim brothers and sisters whom are striving to implement the deen of Allaah subhanahu wa ta'ala on Earth. The Salafi movement isn't the cause of all the current day political turmoil.

there are different factors which cause this turmoil; and fanaticism is one of them irrespective of particular sect or community

[Huzaifah ibn Adam]

:|

...find time.


its the answer i get to most of my excuses :p

also time is relative..

busy men have little time.

idle men do time.

That's true, but when you have a number of things on a "to-do list" that you have to find time for, then which do you choose to find time for? Can't always find time for everything. So then, you have to prioritise. Most important things get done first, find time for the important stuff first, less important stuff afterwards. That's the solution. So that, if you didn't get the chance to do those things, it's not as bad as if you hadn't found the time to do the really important things.

"Find time." It's not about finding time; it's about allocating time. Now, what deserves to have time allocated for it and what doesn't?

Was-Salaam.

[OmAbdullah]

Assalaamo alaikum wa rahmatullahi wa barakaatuh


We see that Abu Bakar Siddeeq and Umar rAa were elected by people that is by those Muslims who lived in that society. For Abu Bakar's election, the Muslims in Madeenah said that as Muhammad salla Allah alaihi wa sallam had chosen Abu Bakar Siddeeq rAa to be imaam in prayer ( when He salla Allaho alaihi wa sallam was very ill in His last days), therefore, he (Abu Bakar rAa) was good to become Khalifah after the passing away of Muhammad salla Allaho alaihi wa sallam. Similarly, every khalifah was elected by the people (according to my knowledge and Allah knows the best). Also it is proved from a hadeeth shareef in which the Prophet salla Allaho alaihi wa sallam informed us that "the one who is made ruler, is slaughtered by the blunt side of a knife".


That means that to become ruler is a very heavy responsibility as the ruler will be questioned about the whole nation that he ruled. Due to that none of the sahaabi would like to become a ruler. But when the people chose him then he could not refuse to rule.


Again another Hadeeth of the Prophet salla Allaho alaihi wa sallam informed us that" in case people choose more than one man then you compare them in the knowledge of the Holy Quraan. If they are of equal level, then compare them in the knowledge of Sunnah /hadeeth. If they are of the same level then choose from them the most aged one". (And Allah knows the best what HIS Massenger salla Allaho alaihi wa sallam said).


But that election was not like that of democracy. Also the words of brother Huzaifah ibn Adam are true that the rule will be that of Islam and no people have the right to oppose Islamic Law in a truly Muslim country.


The people of the Book were allowed to judge by their Books in the early stage of Islam in Madeenah that is just after the hijrah. This was not the case afterwards. And Allah knows best.


Jihaad and Qitaal the same ???

I think, if they were the same then how can we explain the hadeeth, "Jihaad against one's own nafs (self) is the jihadi-Akbar?" We can struggle against our lust desires but that struggle/fighting is not qitaal!!!

[Huzaifah ibn Adam]

With regards to this narration often quoted by people: "We have returned from the lesser Jihaad to the greater Jihaad", see the following:

http://en.islamtoday.net/node/1176

And also:

--------------

Q. Which is the greater jihad, jihad with one's nafs or jihad in the battlefield ?


A. Praise be to Allaah.

It was narrated that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), said to his companions when they returned from a military campaign, “We have come back from the lesser jihaad to the greater jihaad.” They said, “Is there any greater jihaad than jihaad against the kuffaar?” he said, “Yes, jihaad al-nafs (jihaad against the self).”

This hadeeth is not saheeh.

Undoubtedly jihaad against the self comes before jihaad against the kuffaar, because one cannot strive against the kuffaar until after one has striven against one’s own self, because fighting is something which the self dislikes. Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“Jihaad (holy fighting in Allaah’s Cause) is ordained for you (Muslims) though you dislike it, and it may be that you dislike a thing which is good for you and that you like a thing which is bad for you. Allaah knows but you do not know”[al-Baqarah 2:216]

The point is that jihaad against the enemy cannot take place until one strives and forces oneself to do it, until one’s self submits and accepts that.

Fataawa Manaar al-Islam by Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymeen (may Allaah have mercy on him), 2/421

Ibn al-Qayyim said: “Jihaad is of four stages: jihaad al-nafs (striving against the self), jihaad al-shayaateen (striving against the shayaateen or devils), jihaad al-kuffaar (striving against the disbelievers) and jihaad al-munaafiqeen (striving against the hypocrites).

Jihaad al-nafs means striving to make oneself learn true guidance, and to follow it after coming to know it, calling others to it, and bearing with patience the difficulties of calling others to Allaah. Jihaad al-Shaytaan means striving against him and warding off the doubts and desires that he throws at a person, and the doubts that undermine faith, and striving against the corrupt desires that he tries to inspire in a person. Jihaad against the kuffaar and munaafiqeen is done in the heart and on the tongue, with one’s wealth and oneself. Jihaad against the kuffaar mostly takes the form of physical action, and jihaad against the munaafiqeen mostly takes the form of words… The most perfect of people are those who have completed all the stages of jihaad. People vary in their status before Allaah according to their status in jihaad.”(Zaad al-Ma’aad 3/9-12)

And Allaah knows best.


Islam Q&A
Sheikh Muhammed Salih Al-Munajjid

-------------

So, to summarise: That narration may not be quoted, because Muhadditheen have said that it is not authentically reported from Rasoolullaah صلى الله عليه وسلم.

والله تعالى أعلم

والسلام

[M.I.A.]

That's true, but when you have a number of things on a "to-do list" that you have to find time for, then which do you choose to find time for? Can't always find time for everything. So then, you have to prioritise. Most important things get done first, find time for the important stuff first, less important stuff afterwards. That's the solution. So that, if you didn't get the chance to do those things, it's not as bad as if you hadn't found the time to do the really important things.

"Find time." It's not about finding time; it's about allocating time. Now, what deserves to have time allocated for it and what doesn't?

Was-Salaam.

...and if you do enough important things..

you get to go home? "/

[Indefinable]

there are different factors which cause this turmoil; and fanaticism is one of them irrespective of particular sect or community

Of course.

But one should look at the deeper, underlying principles of what causes 'fanaticism'?

[azc]

Of course.But one should look at the deeper, underlying principles of what causes 'fanaticism'?

nevertheless, fanaticism isn't praiseworthy

[Indefinable]

nevertheless, fanaticism isn't praiseworthy

No, it isn't.

But remember: one person's freedom fighter, is another person's terrorist.

[OmAbdullah]

With regards to this narration often quoted by people: "We have returned from the lesser Jihaad to the greater Jihaad", see the following:

http://en.islamtoday.net/node/1176

And also:

--------------

Q. Which is the greater jihad, jihad with one's nafs or jihad in the battlefield ?


A. Praise be to Allaah.

It was narrated that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), said to his companions when they returned from a military campaign, “We have come back from the lesser jihaad to the greater jihaad.” They said, “Is there any greater jihaad than jihaad against the kuffaar?” he said, “Yes, jihaad al-nafs (jihaad against the self).”

This hadeeth is not saheeh.

Undoubtedly jihaad against the self comes before jihaad against the kuffaar, because one cannot strive against the kuffaar until after one has striven against one’s own self, because fighting is something which the self dislikes. Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“Jihaad (holy fighting in Allaah’s Cause) is ordained for you (Muslims) though you dislike it, and it may be that you dislike a thing which is good for you and that you like a thing which is bad for you. Allaah knows but you do not know”[al-Baqarah 2:216]


The point is that jihaad against the enemy cannot take place until one strives and forces oneself to do it, until one’s self submits and accepts that.

Fataawa Manaar al-Islam by Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymeen (may Allaah have mercy on him), 2/421

Ibn al-Qayyim said: “Jihaad is of four stages: jihaad al-nafs (striving against the self), jihaad al-shayaateen (striving against the shayaateen or devils), jihaad al-kuffaar (striving against the disbelievers) and jihaad al-munaafiqeen (striving against the hypocrites).

Jihaad al-nafs means striving to make oneself learn true guidance, and to follow it after coming to know it, calling others to it, and bearing with patience the difficulties of calling others to Allaah. Jihaad al-Shaytaan means striving against him and warding off the doubts and desires that he throws at a person, and the doubts that undermine faith, and striving against the corrupt desires that he tries to inspire in a person. Jihaad against the kuffaar and munaafiqeen is done in the heart and on the tongue, with one’s wealth and oneself. Jihaad against the kuffaar mostly takes the form of physical action, and jihaad against the munaafiqeen mostly takes the form of words… The most perfect of people are those who have completed all the stages of jihaad. People vary in their status before Allaah according to their status in jihaad.”(Zaad al-Ma’aad 3/9-12)

And Allaah knows best.


Islam Q&A
Sheikh Muhammed Salih Al-Munajjid

-------------

So, to summarise: That narration may not be quoted, because Muhadditheen have said that it is not authentically reported from Rasoolullaah صلى الله عليه وسلم.

والله تعالى أعلم

والسلام

Assalamo alaikum wa rahmatullahi wa barakaatuh


We must see the matan (contents) of a Hadeeth in the light of the Holy Quraan and also use wisdom for it. We cannot follow such statements of the Muhadditheen or others blindly. We must always keep in mind that every thing can be changed by the mischief-makers except the Holy Quraan which is preserved by Allah Azza wa Jall.


Now let us see this hadeeth in the light of the Holy Quraan.

Al-Furqaan 43:
43. Have you seen the one who takes as his god his own desire? Then would you be responsible for him?

Another translation of the same verse with the exp. note:



(25:43) Have you ever considered the case of him who has taken his carnal desire for his god?⁵⁶ Can you take responsibility for guiding him to the Right Way?



Exp. note 56:


56. “The person who makes his desire as his god” is the one who becomes the slave of his lusts and desires. As he serves his lust like the one who warships his deity. He becomes as much guilty of shirk as the one who worships an idol. According to a tradition, related by Abu Hurairah, the Prophet (peace be upon him) said: Of all the false gods being worshipped and served instead of Allah, the worst in the sight of Allah is one’s own lust. (Tabarani). For further explanation, see (E.N. 50 of Surah Al-Kahf).


The man who keeps his desires under control, and uses his common sense to make decisions, can be expected to come to the right path by making an appeal to his reason even though he might have been involved in shirk or disbelief. For if he decides to follow the right way, he will remain firm and steadfast on it. On the other hand, the man who is the slave of his own lust, is like a ship without an anchor, who wanders about on any path where his lust leads him to. He is least bothered about the distinction between the right and the wrong, the true and the false, and has no desire to choose one against the other. And, if at all, such a person is persuaded to accept the message of guidance, no one can take the responsibility that he will observe any moral laws.


************************************************** *********************************************


Then we must also think about the nafs Amaarah's action. Most of the people are troublesome due this nafs. The worst of the murderers and killers are the slaves of their lust. All Fir'ons were the followers of their lust. So jahaad against nafs is truly the greatest jihaad both in the light of Quraan, other hadeeth and our own wisdom and experience.



The verse 216 of surah Al-Baqarah has the word qitaal and not jihaad, so it should not be changed to from qitaal to jihaad. Remember that Quraan is the Book of Allah, so becareful. Here is the Verse 216 of surah Al-Baqarah:




كُتِبَ عَلَيۡکُمُ الۡقِتَالُ وَهُوَ كُرۡهٌ لَّـكُمۡ​ۚ وَعَسٰۤى اَنۡ تَكۡرَهُوۡا شَيۡـــًٔا وَّهُوَ خَيۡرٌ لَّـکُمۡ​ۚ وَعَسٰۤى اَنۡ تُحِبُّوۡا شَيۡـــًٔا وَّهُوَ شَرٌّ لَّـكُمۡؕ وَاللّٰهُ يَعۡلَمُ وَاَنۡـتُمۡ لَا تَعۡلَمُوۡنَ‏ 

[talibilm]

you failed to prove you point.......

Bro @Huzaifah ibn Adam

1) At the time of the emigration to Abyssinia, the laws pertaining to Sharee`ah hadn't even been revealed yet. There was no "Sharee`ah law" yet at that time, no laws on Jihaad, nothing of the sort. So, trying to use that incident as a Daleel is a fallacy. Have you studied the laws of Naasikh wal-Mansookh? Abrogation in the Qur'aan and abrogation in the Sunnah. Some Aayaat abrogated previous Aayaat, and some Ahaadeeth abrogated previous ones. At one point in time, drinking wine was permissible. The Kutub of Fiqh are quoted because the A'immah of Islaam studied the Deen in-depth and knew which Aayaat and which Ahkaam abrogated previous ones. It is not for every Jaahil to open the Qur'aan and invent his own rulings based on what he feels, when in the first place, he isn't even reading the Qur'aan in Arabic and understanding it, he's relying on an English translation.

2) Once the Sharee`ah had been revealed and the Wahi had stopped and the Deen had been completed, there was no "going back" and "starting over". What you are trying to do is say that the Deen must go back to the 13 years and start over from there, which is a Baatil, ridiculous concept. After the Aayah about Ikmaal-ud-Deen was revealed, that is how everything stayed. The Deen does not retrogress. You cannot say that, let's go back to the 13 years, when Salaah hadn't been revealed yet, or Zakaat, and wine was permissible, etc. That is a Baatil and Kufr approach which opposes the Deen. It is not for people to make up their own rulings. The Fuqahaa and Mujtahideen have expounded upon the Qur'aan and the Ahaadeeth and codified the Deen, and explained the Deen, and Muslims have followed that path for 1,438 years. The Deen wasn't revealed yesterday. The Deen is not based on the whims and fancies of people, and what they like or dislike.

So far, all that I've seen are emotionally charged comments devoid of actual evidence. The Aayaat of Qur'aan are very clear when it comes to Jihaad. Yet, whenever those Aayaat are quoted, all the members are saying is, "I feel like this is giving a negative image to Islaam." You cannot counter a fact with a "feeling". If someone says that 1+1=2, you can't say: "That makes me uncomfortable, so I refuse to believe it." What has your being uncomfortable have to do with facts? Emotions and feelings play no part in coming to a Shar`i ruling: It's based on Qur'aan and Sunnah according to the understanding of the Salaf-us-Saaliheen.

Was-Salaam.

:sl:

Najjashi died in 630 AD while Prophet :saws: demise was 2 years later . By that time even the last OF THE ABROGATED VERSES OF WINES (3 sets of verses on intoxication, Taf Ibn Kathir) were already revealed . Facts like these is just a basic logic and fact which does not need you to be a Scholar or a Master of arabic,lol. But why this is made a big issue ? ^o)

So as I have posted many times you cant call anyone jahil simply because he does not Know Arabic and will you call Aalim since Sam Shamoun and Anees Sharosh know fluent Arabic ? ? ( Arab Christians)? and they read the the Noble Quran too. But as a matter a fact a hadith said that those who will destroy islam will be the Arab speaking people. here's the Hadith


BUKHARI Volume 4, Book 56, Number 803 :
Narrated by Hudhaifa bin Al-YamanThe people used to ask Allah's Apostle about good, but I used to ask him about evil for fear that it might overtake me. Once I said, "O Allah's Apostle! We were in ignorance and in evil and Allah has bestowed upon us the present good; will there by any evil after this good?" He said, "Yes." I asked, "Will there be good after that evil?" He said, "Yes, but it would be tained with Dakhan (i.e. Little evil)." I asked, "What will its Dakhan be?" He said, "There will be some people who will lead (people) according to principles other than my tradition. You will see their actions and disapprove of them." I said, "Will there by any evil after that good?" He said, "Yes, there will be some people who will invite others to the doors of Hell, and whoever accepts their invitation to it will be thrown in it (by them)." I said, "O Allah's Apostle! Describe those people to us." He said, "They will belong to us and speak our language" I asked, "What do you order me to do if such a thing should take place in my life?" He said, "Adhere to the group of Muslims and their Chief." I asked, "If there is neither a group (of Muslims) nor a chief (what shall I do)?" He said, "Keep away from all those different sects, even if you had to bite (i.e. eat) the root of a tree, till you meet Allah while you are still in that state."

and are more hadith where such people are referred as foolish youngsters who will use the Noble Quran to defend their actions but they did not understand Islam at all




But its the guidance to whom Allah gives as per The Muhmin's or a Muslims's fiqr about deen and its prosperity and understanding of Deen is seen from our Noble Quran & hadiths.

We should never twist the facts just to support our views & understanding the Deen , but there could be difference of opinions each one having his own daleel and we are obliged to give our DALEEL without TWISTING or Lying in them ONLY WITH IKLASS or such twistings will be a greatest sin.

[talibilm]

Well there you have it mustafa16 :) shariah is as flexible as bamboo, and as diverse as it too.



I was under the impression we were having a conversation, you just deflected after your claim to authority. You clearly sponsor the same opinion, you should be able to answer it.

I ask again.

What of ISIS? Do they not fit in the descriptions given under these examples the Ulema have categorised. They took the land by force, while it had no proper governance, and installed Shariah, by force, according to their own naratives - where do they fit in this whole kerfuffle?

Scimi

:sl:

Bro you had asked the most IMPORTANT Q in this thread but its appears to me he rather evades to reply giving out some rules etc when he openly supports jihad in many posts . which rather shows he falls in his own trap.

Does he have to think thrice for those foolish people who bite women's hands for not covering her hands as wrong ?? and think to flatten the Kaaba because people are worshipping it ?? Is this the way to establish Islam ? and does not fight thiose who have seized muslims lands and driven them out of their homes but go and kill other Muslims who differed in their opinion ?

Ajeeb ^o)

[azc]

:sl:Bro you had asked the most IMPORTANT Q in this thread but its appears to me he rather evades to reply giving out some rules etc when he openly supports jihad in many posts . which rather shows he falls in his own trap. Does he have to think thrice for those foolish people who bite women's hands for not covering her hands as wrong ?? and think to flatten the Kaaba because people are worshipping it ?? Is this the way to establish Islam ? and does not fight thiose who have seized muslims lands and driven them out of their homes but go and kill other Muslims who differed in their opinion ?Ajeeb ^o)

and he even doesn't realize that what he writes on the board is an evidence in the court

[M.I.A.]

http://www.boredpanda.com/before-aft...-aleppo-syria/

...flatten the kaaba you say?

seems to me that you should not give people excuses to do so.

...especially if they extend their own hands inviting you to do so..

"Yes, there will be some people who will invite others to the doors of Hell, and whoever accepts their invitation to it will be thrown in it (by them).

your so not ready because knowledge is not power, application of knowledge is power.

how hard is it to say no?
..
....
ever played the yes/no game?

i would think learning please and thankyou would be more beneficial.

[Simple_Person]

:sl:

Bro you had asked the most IMPORTANT Q in this thread but its appears to me he rather evades to reply giving out some rules etc when he openly supports jihad in many posts . which rather shows he falls in his own trap.

Does he have to think thrice for those foolish people who bite women's hands for not covering her hands as wrong ?? and think to flatten the Kaaba because people are worshipping it ?? Is this the way to establish Islam ? and does not fight thiose who have seized muslims lands and driven them out of their homes but go and kill other Muslims who differed in their opinion ?

Ajeeb ^o)

Wait..what?? Have those ISIS guys seriously said that they want to flatten the Ka'baa because they see it as "shirk"?

[Huzaifah ibn Adam]

Bro @Huzaifah ibn Adam



:sl:

Najjashi died in 630 AD while Prophet :saws: demise was 2 years later . By that time even the last OF THE ABROGATED VERSES OF WINES (3 sets of verses on intoxication, Taf Ibn Kathir) were already revealed . Facts like these is just a basic logic and fact which does not need you to be a Scholar or a Master of arabic,lol. ver twist the facts just to support our views & understanding the Deen , but there could be difference of opinions each one having his own daleel and we are obliged to give our DALEEL without TWISTING or Lying in them ONLY WITH IKLASS or such twistings will be a greatest sin.

You know, people really need to Read before they reply. Did you read what I said? I am telling you that you did not. Either you did not read it, or you did not understand it.

Let me say it over again, it capital letters, bold, italic, underlined, red text:

At the time of the emigration to Abyssinia, the laws pertaining to Sharee`ah hadn't even been revealed yet

Are you able to read this? Can you understand it? Read it over and over and over. AT THE TIME OF THE EMIGRATION TO ABYSSINIA, WHICH TOOK PLACE DURING EARLY ISLAAM WHEN SAHAABAH STILL LIVED IN MAKKAH, YEARS BEFORE THE EMIGRATION TO MADEENAH.

Have you understood it a bit better now? Why are you telling me about when Najaashi died? Did I tell you that the laws of Sharee`ah hadn't yet been revealed when Najaashi died? I told you that when Hadhrat Ja`far رضي الله عنه and other Sahaabah travelled there, during the FIRST HIJRAH, when Sahaabah were still being tortured in Makkah, when Abu Jahl and the others chiefs of Quraysh were still alive, the laws of Sharee`ah hadn't been revealed yet. This was approximately nine years before Hijrah to Madeenah.

Read and understand properly before replying, please.

Was-Salaam.

[Huzaifah ibn Adam]

and think to flatten the Kaaba because people are worshipping it ??

Do you know what the punishment is for Buhtaan (slander)?

That, what you did right there, was slander. Who in the world told you that any group is planning on flattening the Ka`bah? Perhaps Shaytaan told that to you yesterday afternoon, but if so, let me tell you: He was lying to you. This is like the foolish Barelvis who say that "the Wahhaabis want to destroy Masjid Nabawi and destroy the Ka`bah"; well, those Wahhaabis are presently in control of "Saudi Arabia", and they have neither destroyed Masjid an-Nabawi صلى الله عليه وسلم nor have they destroyed the Ka`bah. Stupid lies invented by people who are fond of worshipping graves and smoking dagga.

[Huzaifah ibn Adam]

Hearing anything about Jihaad always makes the Munaafiqeen crawl out of their holes and scream like prostitutes on a street corner, because they hate Allaah Ta`aalaa and hate the fact that He revealed so many Aayaat of Jihaad in His Qur'aan. They wish that He had revealed Gandhism instead, but it didn't happen, and that makes them very upset. They hate the fact that Rasoolullaah صلى الله عليه وسلم and the Sahaabah fought in battles, and so they try every trick in the book to pretend that all those fights didn't happen, that everyone walked around dressed as Gandhi, wearing those round glasses and everything, asking to be beaten up because you're showing some kind of "pacifism". That's not how the Sahaabah were, and no matter how hard anyone tries to deny that, they can't. The truth will keep coming out.

Imaam Junayd al-Baghdaadi رحمة الله عليه used to say:

"Whoever seeks honour through Baatil, Allaah Ta`aalaa will disgrace him with the Haqq."

Was-Salaam.

[Simple_Person]

Do you know what the punishment is for Buhtaan (slander)?

That, what you did right there, was slander. Who in the world told you that any group is planning on flattening the Ka`bah? Perhaps Shaytaan told that to you yesterday afternoon, but if so, let me tell you: He was lying to you. This is like the foolish Barelvis who say that "the Wahhaabis want to destroy Masjid Nabawi and destroy the Ka`bah"; well, those Wahhaabis are presently in control of "Saudi Arabia", and they have neither destroyed Masjid an-Nabawi صلى الله عليه وسلم nor have they destroyed the Ka`bah. Stupid lies invented by people who are fond of worshipping graves and smoking dagga.

To be HONEST, it would not even surprise me if they would indeed have said such a thing. The things they have done and i also have had the opportunity to talk to one of them for sure. Sub'han'Allah......:O. I asked that ISIS-guy, what does Islamic Law say, if i kill your son? He replied, then i can kill your son. (eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth). I said, DUDE..i would have killed an innocent soul, what has my son to do with MY criminal act? he said, no i have studied sharia law, it is like this.

[M.I.A.]

...and so..

prophet abraham pbuh won the war of the 3d chess.

...wait wait..

one more,

and the prophet pbuh said..

there were twice as many of them as their were of us!

o_0

..seriously i dont even play call of duty anymore, the kill to death ratio started to catch up rapidly.
..
their losses will be comparable to yours.
..

god knows how you win twice in a row?
..

dont covet your own soul.




...i have played CoD extensively.

its a paradox.. not a contridiction.


honestly i have to ask... why would you ask such a question in the first place?
...
maybe you should have mentioned lut pbuh and how he gave his daughters.

hhmm.. maybe he would not have let you get that far.


shiek google.. would like to add some perspective..

https://www.google.co.uk/search?ie=U...EMjv8AfiuoeQAw

[Serinity]

Islam is not ghandism, none will disagree on that.

Rather it is a religion of Justice and rationality not based on desires and opinions, but facts.

Islam is the middle way - the balance. Do not deviate from the Straight Path. Islam is a religion of Peace- but what peace? Peace according to Qur'aan.

Guys, offensive Jihad, do you even know what that means? "Offensive"?

[M.I.A.]

it means trying not to put it in your own net when you finally get the ball..

what ball?

but the kicker is..

the larger the group.. the lesser the freedom of choice.

and some people know what they came to see.

[talibilm]

:sl:

Shocked to see my claims have never been heard or known to you brothers , which I have replied and were famous in ummah with links on it. Though we give due respect to the knowledgeable here who know more than us but remember still you can make mistakes and accepting them does not reduce your respect in any way . I will request any one not to evade, delude and act as unknowing when we discuss things about deen, When you know what i mean by my posts or refutation. I do not want drag the so called knowledgeable into un necessary arguments just to win or reply any thing BUT NOT to the CONTEXT just to win so wasting your precious time better to be used fruitful for your deen and yourselves than arguing which the hadith discourages us too.. It will take more time but I shall try to search the flatten kaaba claims of Isis soldier and post them here but its nothing hard just google it and try a little you will find them inshallah

Am leaving for my fajar inshallah and kindly remember this hadith please so that WE would not sin inshallah


DO NOT SCOLD OTHERS RECKLESSLY IT MIGHT RETURN TO YOU

Bukhari :: Book 8 :: Volume 73 :: Hadith 71

Narrated Abu Dhar: That he heard the Prophet saying, "If somebody accuses another of Fusuq (by calling him 'Fasiq' i.e. a wicked person) or accuses him of Kufr, such an accusation will revert to him (i.e. the accuser) if his companion (the accused) is innocent."

Bukhari :: Book 8 :: Volume 73 :: Hadith 73
Narrated Thabit bin Ad-Dahhak: And if somebody curses a believer, then his sin will be as if he murdered him; And whoever accuses a believer of Kufr (disbelief), then it is as if he killed him






“…Whosoever accuses a believer of kufr (apostasy), it is as if he killed him.” (Saheeh al-Bukhaari, Kitaab ul-Aadaab, Chapter 73,
Hadeeth no. 6105)


1)The Book of Jihad and Expedition (Kitab Al-Jihad wa'l-Siyar)
Muslim :: Book 19 : Hadith 4297 It has been narrated on the authority of Abu Masa that when the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) deputed any of his Companions on a mission, he would say: Give tidings (to the people) ; do not create (in their minds) aversion (towards religion) ; show them leniency and do not be hard upon them.

[keiv]

To say: Locking people in a cage and setting them on fire is jihad, locking people in a cage and drowning them is jihad, locking people in a car and blowing it up is jihad, strapping an explosive device to someone's neck is jihad, blowing up night clubs is jihad, shooting people at your job is jihad, running people over with a semi is jihad, etc., would be an insult to the prophet and his companions (pbut) who fought through the real battles. Even when they fought these battles, they did it with honor.

[talibilm]

Wait..what?? Have those ISIS guys seriously said that they want to flatten the Ka'baa because they see it as "shirk"?

here is the link

http://www.barenakedislam.com/2014/0...-saudi-arabia/

but I saw another link even with Photo of the so claimer with a very lengthy beard .


But I am not here to win arguments with those extreme thinkers who are adamant on kill,kill kill , but to find the haq as Allah and his Nabi :saws: likes it and not following our own whims and fancies and twist facts and quote Fiqh when the Noble Quran and hadith and actions of Prophet :saws: and his sahabas are clear about it .

Just let me quote a fine example which inshallah should guide the extremists

Bukhari :: Book 5 :: Volume 59 :: Hadith 628

Narrated Salim's father:
The Prophet sent Khalid bin Al-Walid to the tribe of Jadhima and d Khalid invited them to Islam but they could not express themselves by saying, "Aslamna (i.e. we have embraced Islam)," but they started saying "Saba'na! Saba'na (i.e. we have come out of one religion to another)." khalid kept on killing (some of) them and taking (some of) them as captives and gave every one of us his Captive. When there came the day then Khalid ordered that each man (i.e. Muslim soldier) should kill his captive, I said, "By Allah, I will not kill my captive, and none of my companions will kill his captive." When we reached the Prophet, we mentioned to him the whole story. On that, the Prophet raised both his hands and said twice, "O Allah! I am free from what Khalid has done ''


Note: what are those who support extremism are going to answer for this hadith? who are want kill even their Muslim Brethren because he will not accept his views ???

[azc]

@talibilm : thanks for the link. Really ISIS is the worst terrorist group which intends to destroy even Ka'ba...

[azc]

when a muslim country either bans sharia entirely, or is founded upon democracy and I know from personal experience that democracy and Islamism don't mix....jihad? dawah? democratic elections? what ate the guidelines of the implementation of sharia?

practically it is difficult

[Serinity]

Good way would be for all of us Muslims to Unite under Shariah and Tawheed.

Especially Tawheed. Once we are all upon Tawheed, we can work as 1 body.

[Huzaifah ibn Adam]

here is the link

http://www.barenakedislam.com/2014/0...-saudi-arabia/

but I saw another link even with Photo of the so claimer with a very lengthy beard .

Are you aware that you are quoting one of the most anti-Islaam websites on the entire internet? How in the world can you POSSIBLY believe anything that they say, when these vile Kaafirs lie and insult Rasoolullaah صلى الله عليه سلم? Do you know what this site is? Do you know what it's about? Hadhrat, you need to open your eyes! That entire website of theirs is based on DESTROYING Islaam in whichever way they can! That website is run by the kind of brain-dead, incestual freaks that make up the supporters of Donald Trump. The retards who can't speak coherently, can't spell, can't count, can only scream brain-dead racist comments and imbecilic remarks and are regarded as a disgrace and a scourge even by the rest of those living in America. Those are the kind of vermin that are running that website. How on earth can any Muslim EVER quote from it? Worse, how can any Muslim EVER believe even a single word written on that website?!

First of all, there's no such name as "al-Mugaddasi", so that alone already throws out the whole stupid article. That shows it was written by a brain-dead scrubber of pigs, someone who married his sister because he couldn't find any woman willing to marry him, and so he spends his miserable life vomiting out excreta on their pathetic website. No Arab in the world would be as retarded as to write "al-Mugaddasi". Only a person whose brains have become "vermiculated" on account of incest would be as retarded as to write "al-Mugaddasi". An American supporter of Trump wrote it, because they don't know the first thing about Arabic or what all the "al so-and-so" means. If it was an Arab, they would have written "al-Maqdisee". Why? Because that "al so-and-so" is to denote connection to a certain Place, like "al-Baghdaadi" (the one from Baghdad), "al-Libbi" (the one from Libya), "al-Baakistaani" (the one from Pakistan), "al-Afriki" (the one from Africa), etc. "Al-Maqdisee" means (The one from Baytul Maqdis). There is no place in the world called "MUGADDAS". Such a place exists only in the mind of the retard who wrote that article. Probably his sister's name is "MUGADDAS", that's why he chose that. He only succeeded in making a fool of himself and exposing how much of a retard he and the rest of the Trump supporters are. Collectively they can't spell their name, even if all of them helped one another to try and do so.

The stupidest people of all, however, are those who believe them. Just because something is written on the internet, you will believe it? When anyone in the world can write anything they want on the internet? Believe this then:

"Representatives of the White House have exposed Donald Trump's incestual relationship with his daughter, Ivanka Trump. They have also exposed his homosexual relationship with Russian President Vladimir Putin, who is the "husband" in their relationship. Donald Trump has a reputation of being sodomized. He has stated that he's only doing what his husband, Vladimir Putin has asked him to do, and that the orders being given are not coming from him."

Why won't you believe it? It's written on the internet. If you'll believe the trash that some brain-dead Trump supporter writes on his trashy website, why won't you believe the above?

When people desire Baatil, they will drag out the most ridiculous "proofs" to try and support their claims.

[azc]

@huzaifa ibn Adam : bro, Is it true that IS wants to demolish the kaba...?

[M.I.A.]

..im still kinda shocked that they label people due to nationality "/

thats not very nice is it?


...
....bepsi.


...visit american political site..

can confirm some parts of the demographic live to spew hatred and will settle for gore while they wait for nukes.

not my sort of thing.

[Huzaifah ibn Adam]

@huzaifa ibn Adam : bro, Is it true that IS wants to demolish the kaba...?

I don't believe any group in the world wants to demolish the Ka`bah other than the supporters of Donald Trump. The only people in the world that want to demolish the Ka`bah are the type that wrote that article on their website. I mean, just look at the name of the website alone and it will tell you everything.

The Ka`bah is from the major Sha`aa'ir of Allaah. It is the Baytullaah. Only a Kaafir would want to demolish it. Only someone who worships Shaytaan.

[azc]

I don't believe any group in the world wants to demolish the Ka`bah other than the supporters of Donald Trump. The only people in the world that want to demolish the Ka`bah are the type that wrote that article on their website. I mean, just look at the name of the website alone and it will tell you everything. The Ka`bah is from the major Sha`aa'ir of Allaah. It is the Baytullaah. Only a Kaafir would want to demolish it. Only someone who worships Shaytaan.

thanks for this clarification. Btw, have seen their site whether or not this intention of theirs is obvious wherein

[azc]

@talibilm : Have you seen any other site whereby their intention to demolish the ka'ba can be confirmed..?

[Huzaifah ibn Adam]

If you read the comments section on that place, you will see the following comment by the admins:

BareNakedIslam
MARCH 25, 2016 @ 1:05 PM
We support ISIS in its desire to bomb it.

---------

They are not "supporting" anyone except themselves. They are the ones who want to bomb the Ka`bah. Well, another person (not a Muslim) told them:


ustHere
JULY 4, 2016 @ 7:28 PM
Sorry, but oking back at this article, in my life, I have not seen somebody as ignorant and stupid as you. I’ve seen your comments and replies and I simply lose faith in humanity from them.

----------------

Read the comments section of that article to see the mentality of the kind of people who go there.

[azc]

If you read the comments section on that place, you will see the following comment by the admins:BareNakedIslamMARCH 25, 2016 @ 1:05 PMWe support ISIS in its desire to bomb it.---------They are not "supporting" anyone except themselves. They are the ones who want to bomb the Ka`bah. Well, another person (not a Muslim) told them:ustHereJULY 4, 2016 @ 7:28 PMSorry, but oking back at this article, in my life, I have not seen somebody as ignorant and stupid as you. I’ve seen your comments and replies and I simply lose faith in humanity from them.----------------Read the comments section of that article to see the mentality of the kind of people who go there.

yes, you are right.......

[Indefinable]

It's better to verify claims/statements before spreading them Insha'Allaah.

[Serinity]

Yeah, especially when it comes from Enemies of Allah. Or anyone whom you don't know.

Especially from that twisted website. Pure hatred for Muslims and Islam.

[Zeal]

How some people can believe some of this propaganda is absolutely beyond me

[Zeal]

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/wo...-a7348371.html

US government spent over $500m on fake Al-Qaeda propaganda videos that tracked location of viewers

This is why you really ought to look into any claims concerning muslims, especially muslim because you don't want to be held responsible infront of Allah as those who spread lies.

[Akeyi]

Democracy is how 4 khalif is elected. Sharia can exist with Democracy. I suggest reading this book here, it explains roots: http://www.erisale.com/?locale=en&bo...tent.en.201.15

[Serinity]

Makes you think of ad-dajjal and his lies. his propaganda.. he will be better than any kafir right on earth now.

Astaghfirullah, Idk completely, so won't say much. But is it true that Allah will grant some abilities to Ad-dajjal??

[M.I.A.]

agent smith?

or neo?

...or superman?

basically hollywood but he also brings rain to Africa o_0

because why make things simple?


also something to do with syria... so its time to dust off the tinfoil hats again.


to be fair whatever it is will pass the masses by.


...you forgot gog n magog!

..im joking.

but dont worry it goes full circle when jesus pbuh turns up and sorts everything out..

the end.

guest starring imam mahdi and the split into two and put together again laughing guy.

those isis vids look real though.

[Huzaifah ibn Adam]

is it true that Allah will grant some abilities to Ad-dajjal??

Yes. Allaah Ta`aalaa will grant certain abilities to Dajjaal, and this will be part of the Fitnah (test). He will order the sky to rain, and it will rain. He will order the plants to grow, and they will grow. Those who oppose him, he will order the earth to be barren in the areas wherein they live. He will bring a person back to life.

Hearing all of this, a person might ask: "How is it possible he will be able to do all of this? Only Allaah Ta`aalaa can do this."

And the answer is very simple: "It's because it is Allaah Ta`aalaa Who will cause it to happen, not Dajjaal. Dajjaal can do nothing. He is powerless. As part of the Fitnah, when Dajjaal will order the sky to rain, Allaah Ta`aalaa will cause it to rain, and thus those in whose hearts is a sickness will fall prey to the temptations of Dajjaal. So it is not that Dajjaal in and of himself has the power to do these things; it is in fact Allaah Ta`aalaa Who causes it to happen."

والله تعالى أعلم

والسلام

[talibilm]

Are you aware that you are quoting one of the most anti-Islaam websites on the entire internet? How in the world can you POSSIBLY believe anything that they say, when these vile Kaafirs lie and insult Rasoolullaah صلى الله عليه سلم? Do you know what this site is? Do you know what it's about? Hadhrat, you need to open your eyes! That entire website of theirs is based on DESTROYING Islaam in whichever way they can! That website is run by the kind of brain-dead, incestual freaks that make up the supporters of Donald Trump. The retards who can't speak coherently, can't spell, can't count, can only scream brain-dead racist comments and imbecilic remarks and are regarded as a disgrace and a scourge even by the rest of those living in America. Those are the kind of vermin that are running that website. How on earth can any Muslim EVER quote from it? Worse, how can any Muslim EVER believe even a single word written on that website?!

First of all, there's no such name as "al-Mugaddasi", so that alone already throws out the whole stupid article. That shows it was written by a brain-dead scrubber of pigs, someone who married his sister because he couldn't find any woman willing to marry him, and so he spends his miserable life vomiting out excreta on their pathetic website. No Arab in the world would be as retarded as to write "al-Mugaddasi". Only a person whose brains have become "vermiculated" on account of incest would be as retarded as to write "al-Mugaddasi". An American supporter of Trump wrote it, because they don't know the first thing about Arabic or what all the "al so-and-so" means. If it was an Arab, they would have written "al-Maqdisee". Why? Because that "al so-and-so" is to denote connection to a certain Place, like "al-Baghdaadi" (the one from Baghdad), "al-Libbi" (the one from Libya), "al-Baakistaani" (the one from Pakistan), "al-Afriki" (the one from Africa), etc. "Al-Maqdisee" means (The one from Baytul Maqdis). There is no place in the world called "MUGADDAS". Such a place exists only in the mind of the retard who wrote that article. Probably his sister's name is "MUGADDAS", that's why he chose that. He only succeeded in making a fool of himself and exposing how much of a retard he and the rest of the Trump supporters are. Collectively they can't spell their name, even if all of them helped one another to try and do so.

The stupidest people of all, however, are those who believe them. Just because something is written on the internet, you will believe it? When anyone in the world can write anything they want on the internet? Believe this then:

"Representatives of the White House have exposed Donald Trump's incestual relationship with his daughter, Ivanka Trump. They have also exposed his homosexual relationship with Russian President Vladimir Putin, who is the "husband" in their relationship. Donald Trump has a reputation of being sodomized. He has stated that he's only doing what his husband, Vladimir Putin has asked him to do, and that the orders being given are not coming from him."

Why won't you believe it? It's written on the internet. If you'll believe the trash that some brain-dead Trump supporter writes on his trashy website, why won't you believe the above?

When people desire Baatil, they will drag out the most ridiculous "proofs" to try and support their claims.

:sl:

When this matter was discussed a couple of years before on ummah there were different links being quoted ( this was the one i found it now) But what ever the truth has been though we had once supported isis at at the start, but the way the had killed the dhimmis and killed muslims who differ in opinions , any one a little knowledgeable muslim will not support their actions . They haven't fired a single missile towards Israel will be the best proof of who they are are how misguided they are and also their supporters.

You may claim the media has twisted it , and possibly some matters of them could be so and I cant CONFIRM anything which i do not see with my own eyes . For the ilm Allah has given me I will never support any DOUBTFUL matters which has been my criteria for my deen .

We have the Noble Quran and hadith and actions of rightly guided Caliphas for us and if you want to give importance to fiqh when the Imams have themselves told not to obey their fiqh if it goes against a authentic hadith which are used to INVENT extreme ideas its upto you and be answerable to Allah . We should also remember this ayah '' They took their Monks and priests as their Rab .............

Nothing as guarded as the Noble Quran and next comes our sahih hadith . Islam by its name itself and fitra is peace. But misguided muslims advocate something EXACTLY against it and call others by what they should not call (like kafir , hypocrite) which shows who they really are ? since the hadith states any one of them is so and I believe Hadith can never be wrong if i had understood them correctly. So if someone has mistaken doing that by over zeal, hope they do true taubatun Nasuha and those who are offended should try to forgive them since this world is nothing but a test who are the slaves of Allah or who are the slaves of Taughut ? . so you chose to be any one of them.

May Allah guide us all .

Ameen,

wasslam.

[talibilm]

@talibilm : Have you seen any other site whereby their intention to demolish the ka'ba can be confirmed..?

:sl:

this is an old matter so we have to find the older links and the link i quoted it just which I found now. My concern is already posted in the last post of Bro Huzaifa.

[M.I.A.]

Yes. Allaah Ta`aalaa will grant certain abilities to Dajjaal, and this will be part of the Fitnah (test). He will order the sky to rain, and it will rain. He will order the plants to grow, and they will grow. Those who oppose him, he will order the earth to be barren in the areas wherein they live. He will bring a person back to life.

Hearing all of this, a person might ask: "How is it possible he will be able to do all of this? Only Allaah Ta`aalaa can do this."

And the answer is very simple: "It's because it is Allaah Ta`aalaa Who will cause it to happen, not Dajjaal. Dajjaal can do nothing. He is powerless. As part of the Fitnah, when Dajjaal will order the sky to rain, Allaah Ta`aalaa will cause it to rain, and thus those in whose hearts is a sickness will fall prey to the temptations of Dajjaal. So it is not that Dajjaal in and of himself has the power to do these things; it is in fact Allaah Ta`aalaa Who causes it to happen."

والله تعالى أعلم

والسلام

its a straight understanding of it.. the truth if you will.

may allah swt give you good character.


...but most things will just be a slap in the face and a whisper in the ear.

for some.. lol.

[Serinity]

@talibilm

Look, I don't support ISIS as they are.

At first, I did support them, but then the more I heard about their ways, the more I didn't.

They should attack Israel, and free Palestine.

Tho, I think while some have portrayed Islam in quite a harsh light - if you dig deeper - and go to the roots - it is not harsh at all.

From my understanding, and please correct me if I am wrong, the State of a country should have Shariah. But every Dhimmi, as long as they pay their Jizyah, can have their religion,I they are not forced to Islam. They can rule in their own matters by whatever they believe in.


The State's religion should be Islam, and Shariah Law.

Astaghfirullah if I said anything wrong.

And Allah :swt: knows best.

[Huzaifah ibn Adam]

We have the Noble Quran and hadith and actions of rightly guided Caliphas for us and if you want to give importance to fiqh when the Imams have themselves told not to obey their fiqh if it goes against a authentic hadith which are used to INVENT extreme ideas its upto you and be answerable to Allah . We should also remember this ayah '' They took their Monks and priests as their Rab .............

Nothing as guarded as the Noble Quran and next comes our sahih hadith .

This isn't the first time, brother, that I've seen you say that Fiqh is unimportant. Do you know what Fiqh is? Fiqh is simply the understanding of Qur'aan and Sunnah. Fiqh is not separate from Qur'aan and Sunnah. The word "Fiqh" itself comes from the verb فقه يفقه which means "to understand". When you take an Aayah of the Qur'aan, or a Hadeeth, and you try to derive a ruling from it, you have to understand it first. What is that understanding called? "Fiqh". It is impossible to escape from Fiqh. Anyone who understands what Fiqh actually is knows this. So now, you can either use the "Fiqh" of the A'immah of Islaam, of the four Madhaahib, who lived 1,000+ years ago, and some met the Sahaabah, OR you can choose - like the Fiqh-rejecters do - to use your own "Fiqh". But whose Fiqh should a person have more confidence in? The Fiqh of a person who was born yesterday, or the Fiqh of one of the A'immah of the past who lived in the time of Sahaabah and just after the time of Rasoolullaah صلى الله عليه وسلم? Who do you think understood Islaam better?

EVERYTHING in the books of Fiqh is simply rulings extracted FROM Qur'aan and Sunnah. That is what Fiqh is about. Fiqh is the "Understanding" of Qur'aan and Sunnah according to the way the Salaf of this Ummah understood it, because yes, that's of utmost importance as well. It's not just about understanding Qur'aan and Sunnah; you must understand it the way Sahaabah-e-Kiraam had understood it. The way the Salaf-us-Saaliheen had understood it. Not the way modernists living in 2017 think they understand it.

You want to reject Fiqh? Reject what the Mufassireen have said, what the Muhadditheen have said, what the Fuqahaa have said? Just take rulings directly from "The Noble Qur'aan", like you said, without looking at Tafseer and without looking at what any of the Fuqahaa have said about it? Perfect. Let's do exactly that:

Don't back out now. Stick to what you've said. Let's derive the rulings DIRECTLY from the Qur'aan WITHOUT looking at Fiqh, or Tafseer, or anything else:

-------------------------

Quran (2:191-193) – “And slay them wherever ye find them, and drive them out of the places whence they drove you out, for persecution [of Muslims] is worse than slaughter [of non-believers]… but if they desist, then lo! Allah is forgiving and merciful. And fight them until persecution is no more, and religion is for Allah.”

Quran (2:216) - "Fighting is prescribed for you, and ye dislike it. But it is possible that ye dislike a thing which is good for you, and that ye love a thing which is bad for you. But Allah knoweth, and ye know not."

Quran (2:191-193) - "And kill them wherever you find them, and turn them out from where they have turned you out. And Al-Fitnah [disbelief or unrest] is worse than killing... but if they desist, then lo! Allah is forgiving and merciful. And fight them until there is no more Fitnah [disbelief and worshipping of others along with Allah] and worship is for Allah alone. But if they cease, let there be no transgression except against Az-Zalimun(the polytheists, and wrong-doers, etc.)"

Quran (3:151) – “Soon shall We cast terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers, for that they joined companions with Allah, for which He had sent no authority”.

Quran (4:74) – “Let those fight in the way of Allah who sell the life of this world for the other. Whoso fighteth in the way of Allah, be he slain or be he victorious, on him We shall bestow a vast reward.”

Quran (4:76) – “Those who believe fight in the cause of Allah…”

Quran (4:89) – “They but wish that ye should reject Faith, as they do, and thus be on the same footing (as they): But take not friends from their ranks until they flee in the way of Allah (From what is forbidden). But if they turn renegades, seize them and slay them wherever ye find them; and (in any case) take no friends or helpers from their ranks.”

Quran (4:104) – “And be not weak hearted in pursuit of the enemy; if you suffer pain, then surely they (too) suffer pain as you suffer pain…”

Quran (5:33) - "The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His messenger and strive to make mischief in the land is only this, that they should be killed or crucified or their hands and their feet should be cut off on opposite sides or they should be imprisoned; this shall be as a disgrace for them in this world, and in the hereafter they shall have a grievous chastisement"

Quran (8:12) - "I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them"

Quran (8:15) - "O ye who believe! When ye meet those who disbelieve in battle, turn not your backs to them. (16)Whoso on that day turneth his back to them, unless maneuvering for battle or intent to join a company, he truly hath incurred wrath from Allah, and his habitation will be hell, a hapless journey's end."

Quran (8:39) - "And fight with them until there is no more fitna (disorder, unbelief) and religion is all for Allah"

Quran (8:57) - "If thou comest on them in the war, deal with them so as to strike fear in those who are behind them, that haply they may remember."

Quran (8:67) - "It is not for a Nabi that he should have prisoners of war until he had made a great slaughter in the land..."

Quran (8:59-60) - "And let not those who disbelieve suppose that they can outstrip (Allah's Purpose). Lo! they cannot escape. Make ready for them all that you can of power and of the steeds of war, that you may terrorise the enemy of Allaah and your enemy."

Quran (9:5) - "So when the sacred months have passed away, then slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them captive and besiege them and lie in wait for them in every ambush, then if they repent and keep up prayer and pay the poor-rate, leave their way free to them."

Quran (9:14) - "Fight against them so that Allaah will punish them by your hands and disgrace them and give you victory over them and heal the breasts of a believing people."

Quran (9:29) - "Fight those who believe not in Allaah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allaah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, from of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued."

Quran (9:123) - "O you who believe! fight those of the unbelievers who are near to you and let them find in you hardness."

Quran (33:60-62) - "If the hypocrites, and those in whose hearts is a disease, and the alarmists in the city do not cease, We verily shall urge thee on against them, then they will be your neighbors in it but a little while. Accursed, they will be seized wherever found and slain with a (fierce) slaughter."

Quran (47:3-4) - "Those who disbelieve follow falsehood, while those who believe follow the truth from their Lord... So, when you meet (in fight Jihad in Allah's Cause), those who disbelieve smite at their necks till when you have killed and wounded many of them, then bind a bond firmly (on them, i.e. take them as captives)... If it had been Allah's Will, He Himself could certainly have punished them (without you). But (He lets you fight), in order to test you, some with others. But those who are killed in the Way of Allah, He will never let their deeds be lost."

Quran (48:29) - "Muhammad is the Messenger of Allaah. And those with him are hard against the disbelievers and merciful among themselves"

"He it is who has sent His Messenger (Mohammed) with guidance and the religion of truth (Islam) to make it victorious over all religions even though the Kaafiroon may despise it."

-----------------------

Now, since you have said that Fiqh must not be quoted, and we shouldn't then let look at Tafseer either, and also, you said: " We should also remember this ayah '' They took their Monks and priests as their Rab ............." meaning `Ulamaa shouldn't be quoted either, so now, let us derive rulings directly from the Aayaat above.

And in advance, let met say this: You cannot reply to this post of mine by quoting ANY scholar, or book of Fiqh, or Tafseer, or Mufassir, or anything else, since you have made it clear that according to you, we should do away with all of that, since, and again I will quote your words from your post on page #7, post #140: "quote Fiqh when the Noble Quran and hadith and actions of Prophet :saws: and his sahabas are clear about it ." And your post from earlier on this page: "We have the Noble Quran and hadith and actions of rightly guided Caliphas for us and if you want to give importance to fiqh when the Imams have themselves told not to obey their fiqh if it goes against a authentic hadith" And again, your statement: "Nothing as guarded as the Noble Quran and next comes our sahih hadith"

So, brother, you have put yourself into a corner now. You cannot reply by quoting ANY scholar, past or present, because if you do that, you will be contradicting your statement about not "taking their Monks and priests as their Rab". So, do not take any Monk or Priest as your Rab, by quoting him in contradiction of "Clear Verses of the Noble Qur'aan". It is clear, like you said, isn't it? So, no quoting any scholar in your reply, or any book of Fiqh of ANY Madh-hab, or quoting books of Tafseer (because they are written by "Monks and Priests", i.e. scholars).

So, I'm waiting for your reply.

Was-Salaam.

[Simple_Person]

Fiqh indeed is to understand, however often we see especially in this day and age, that fiqh (understanding/interpretation) of a scholar in the past has been held in such a regard if you do not agree with it, you somehow are being branded is a "kafir" by the Muslims of today. Which is not true. As there are multiple mathabs and they don't agree on small things with each other, but yet nobody can brand a follower of another mathab as misguided. They don't agree with each other, yet they are all right in their interpretation.

I am of opinion, that one first has to learn what already exist of understanding of previous scholars. They may contain some understanding which in the light of the modern day can be seen differently and thus disagree with them and give their own fiqh off course with a bit of knowledge..not like..the ignorance of us Muslims of today. Upon existing fiqh that is even valid in the light of the modern day, but rather general understanding, one can off course go a little bit in more detail because of more scientific discovery has been made.

Without fiqh..i think we then talk about ISIS type of guys. Among them are many who are VERY VERY knowledgeable about the Qur'an and Sunnah, yet they don't understand it.

Knowing something, doesn't mean you understand it. As support to this claim.


"Indeed, Allah is not timid to present an example - that of a mosquito or what is smaller than it. And those who have believed know that it is the truth from their Lord. But as for those who disbelieve, they say, "What did Allah intend by this as an example?" He misleads many thereby and guides many thereby. And He misleads not except the defiantly disobedient," Qur'an 2:26

Looking from a logical point of view we see that both the guided and the misguided have obtained the SAME KNOWLEDGE, yet one understands it and the other doesn't. So knowledge is not the same as understanding.

This i think is also a bit of a problem of the current generation of us Muslims. We read the Qur'an but we do not ponder about what Allah(swt) might be trying to tell us. I am also of opinion that ones state of the heart really is crucial to understanding it. When we look at a misguided person, he can't understand it, no matter how many hours or years of his life he spends on it. The diseases of the heart or not even willing to spend time on it to ponder about it. It amazes me time and time again that majority of us Muslims of the current day blindly follow Islam.

There is i believe a hadith ( you guys are way better with knowledge than me and maybe confirm or correct me), that whoever ponders about the meaning of an aya and his conclusion is wrong, he gets 1 reward and the one who gets the right meaning he will get 2 rewards.

Yet, even my own family who have been Muslims their whole life, see pondering about Qur'an as if it is something dangerous. While there is a clear difference between saying..yes i understand it and it is like this and nothing else..or saying i THINK i understand this and correct me if i am wrong (willing to learn). In the mean time read the fiqh of scholars and learn one or two new things with it. While often, no pondering is done only what fuqaha has said is being adopted.

[Serinity]

:salam:

Correct me if I am wrong but, the ayah talking about "not taking the priests, Imaams, Scholaars, etc. As your Rabbs".. The understanding I have of that, is, do not prefer your scholar, etc. over Allah, if Allah says alcohol is haram, and a scholar says it is halal, that scholar should be ignored and exposed.

If say a group of people who are deviants come and say "Zinaa is halal" (may Allah protect us) or "This ayat, says this and this" while the interpretation is incorrect and false. For example, "This ayat says **haraam** is OK" / legalises haram. Audhu billah.

That scholar should be exposed. Prefering the False legislation of People contrary to Islam. That is taking them as Rabbs. Correct?

The moment you prefer a law contray to Islam, or a ruling other than that of Islam's, you have taken them as your Rabb.

Allahu alam.

[Huzaifah ibn Adam]

:salam:

Correct me if I am wrong but, the ayah talking about "not taking the priests, Imaams, Scholaars, etc. As your Rabbs".. The understanding I have of that, is, do not prefer your scholar, etc. over Allah, if Allah says alcohol is haram, and a scholar says it is halal, that scholar should be ignored and exposed.

If say a group of people who are deviants come and say "Zinaa is halal" (may Allah protect us) or "This ayat, says this and this" while the interpretation is incorrect and false. For example, "This ayat says **haraam** is OK" / legalises haram. Audhu billah.

That scholar should be exposed. Prefering the False legislation of People contrary to Islam. That is taking them as Rabbs. Correct?

The moment you prefer a law contray to Islam, or a ruling other than that of Islam's, you have taken them as your Rabb.

Allahu alam.

100% correct.

With Fiqh, we do not do that. With Fiqh, we understand what Allaah Ta`aalaa wants from us. The Fuqahaa and Mujtahideen analyse the Aayaat of the Qur'aan as well as the Ahaadeeth, and with the `Ilm Allaah Ta`aalaa has granted them, they derive thousands of Masaa'il (rulings) from those Aayaat and Ahaadeeth. Without Fiqh, a person would not know what the Shar`i ruling is in their daily life. I mean, this is common sense. For example: A woman wants to know if her Wudhoo is valid if she made it while having nail-polish on her fingers.

Now, how will you find the answer to this? You're not going to find an Aayah of the Qur'aan or a Hadeeth speaking about making Wudhoo while wearing nail-polish, because the nail-polish in vogue these days didn't exist during that time. So that is why you have Fiqh, and Ijtihaad, and `Ulamaa, Fuqahaa, Mujtahideen, people who spend their entire lives studying Islaam in-depth, and who have studied the Principles of Islaamic Jurisprudence (Usool-ul-Fiqh), Qawaa`id-ul-Fiqh, Maqaasid ash-Sharee`ah (The Objectives of the Sharee`ah), etc. and thus they are able to determine what the ruling of the Sharee`ah would be concerning this issue.

Another example:

Is smoking Halaal or Haraam?

You will not find any Aayah or Hadeeth speaking about smoking. It didn't exist back then. So now what? Well, this is where Fiqh comes in. Understanding of the Aayaat. The `Ulamaa look at the Aayah of the Qur'aan wherein Allaah Ta`aalaa says:

ولا تقتلوا أنفسكم

"And do not kill yourselves."

From this Aayah, they derive the ruling that smoking is not permissible, because smoking severely damages the health of the smoker and eventually leads to his death.

If a person rejects Fiqh, however, they can say: "Why is smoking Haraam? There is no Aayah or Hadeeth that explicitly states that smoking is Haraam."

You have Principles of Fiqh which is derived from the Qur'aan and Sunnah, and those are utilised when determining what the ruling of Sharee`ah is with regards to contemporary issues.

If a person rejects Fiqh, we can ask that person - right now - 500 different questions and ask him to answer them and provide the Shar`i ruling just from the Aayaat and Ahaadeeth alone.

"Is Forex trading permissible?"

"What is the ruling with regards to cloning?"

"Is DNA testing valid in Sharee`ah? Can it be used to establish parentage of a child?"

"Is organ transplant permissible?"

"Is it permissible to donate blood?"

"With all these electronic devices, is it permissible to touch the screen, upon which ayaat are visible/displayed , without Wudhu?"

"Is it permissible to take insulin injections while fasting? Will it affect the validity of the fasts?"

"What is the ruling of the person who hasn't performed haj but goes for umrah during the months of haj viz in this case Shawaal.. Is it incumbent upon this person to perform haj before returning or will the lack of a haj visa count as him not having the means?"

"Can a girl chat with a boy (privately) using an instant messaging app like WhatsApp?"


For a person who rejects Fiqh, we say to him: "Answer the above questions without using Fiqh. Answer them with a clear Aayah of the Qur'aan or a Hadeeth. Nothing else. Do not quote any books of Fiqh. Do not quote `Ulamaa. Do not use Usool-ul-Fiqh, or Qawaa`id-ul-Fiqh, or Maqaasid-ush-Sharee`ah, etc. Just a clear-cut Aayah of the Qur'aan or a Hadeeth for each question, please."

We are waiting.

[talibilm]

This isn't the first time, brother, that I've seen you say that Fiqh is unimportant. Do you know what Fiqh is? Fiqh is simply the understanding of Qur'aan and Sunnah. Fiqh is not separate from Qur'aan and Sunnah. The word "Fiqh" itself comes from the verb فقه يفقه which means "to understand". When you take an Aayah of the Qur'aan, or a Hadeeth, and you try to derive a ruling from it, you have to understand it first. What is that understanding called? "Fiqh". It is impossible to escape from Fiqh. Anyone who understands what Fiqh actually is knows this. So now, you can either use the "Fiqh" of the A'immah of Islaam, of the four Madhaahib, who lived 1,000+ years ago, and some met the Sahaabah, OR you can choose - like the Fiqh-rejecters do - to use your own "Fiqh". But whose Fiqh should a person have more confidence in? The Fiqh of a person who was born yesterday, or the Fiqh of one of the A'immah of the past who lived in the time of Sahaabah and just after the time of Rasoolullaah صلى الله عليه وسلم? Who do you think understood Islaam better?

EVERYTHING in the books of Fiqh is simply rulings extracted FROM Qur'aan and Sunnah. That is what Fiqh is about. Fiqh is the "Understanding" of Qur'aan and Sunnah according to the way the Salaf of this Ummah understood it, because yes, that's of utmost importance as well. It's not just about understanding Qur'aan and Sunnah; you must understand it the way Sahaabah-e-Kiraam had understood it. The way the Salaf-us-Saaliheen had understood it. Not the way modernists living in 2017 think they understand it.

You want to reject Fiqh? Reject what the Mufassireen have said, what the Muhadditheen have said, what the Fuqahaa have said? Just take rulings directly from "The Noble Qur'aan", like you said, without looking at Tafseer and without looking at what any of the Fuqahaa have said about it? Perfect. Let's do exactly that:

Don't back out now. Stick to what you've said. Let's derive the rulings DIRECTLY from the Qur'aan WITHOUT looking at Fiqh, or Tafseer, or anything else:
-------------------------

Quran (2:191-193) – “And slay them wherever ye find them, and drive them out of the places whence they drove you out, for persecution [of Muslims] is worse than slaughter [of non-believers]… but if they desist, then lo! Allah is forgiving and merciful. And fight them until persecution is no more, and religion is for Allah.”

Quran (2:216) - "Fighting is prescribed for you, and ye dislike it. But it is possible that ye dislike a thing which is good for you, and that ye love a thing which is bad for you. But Allah knoweth, and ye know not."

Quran (2:191-193) - "And kill them wherever you find them, and turn them out from where they have turned you out. And Al-Fitnah [disbelief or unrest] is worse than killing... but if they desist, then lo! Allah is forgiving and merciful. And fight them until there is no more Fitnah [disbelief and worshipping of others along with Allah] and worship is for Allah alone. But if they cease, let there be no transgression except against Az-Zalimun(the polytheists, and wrong-doers, etc.)"

Quran (3:151) – “Soon shall We cast terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers, for that they joined companions with Allah, for which He had sent no authority”.

Quran (4:74) – “Let those fight in the way of Allah who sell the life of this world for the other. Whoso fighteth in the way of Allah, be he slain or be he victorious, on him We shall bestow a vast reward.”

Quran (4:76) – “Those who believe fight in the cause of Allah…”

Quran (4:89) – “They but wish that ye should reject Faith, as they do, and thus be on the same footing (as they): But take not friends from their ranks until they flee in the way of Allah (From what is forbidden). But if they turn renegades, seize them and slay them wherever ye find them; and (in any case) take no friends or helpers from their ranks.”

Quran (4:104) – “And be not weak hearted in pursuit of the enemy; if you suffer pain, then surely they (too) suffer pain as you suffer pain…”

Quran (5:33) - "The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His messenger and strive to make mischief in the land is only this, that they should be killed or crucified or their hands and their feet should be cut off on opposite sides or they should be imprisoned; this shall be as a disgrace for them in this world, and in the hereafter they shall have a grievous chastisement"

Quran (8:12) - "I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them"

Quran (8:15) - "O ye who believe! When ye meet those who disbelieve in battle, turn not your backs to them. (16)Whoso on that day turneth his back to them, unless maneuvering for battle or intent to join a company, he truly hath incurred wrath from Allah, and his habitation will be hell, a hapless journey's end."

Quran (8:39) - "And fight with them until there is no more fitna (disorder, unbelief) and religion is all for Allah"

Quran (8:57) - "If thou comest on them in the war, deal with them so as to strike fear in those who are behind them, that haply they may remember."

Quran (8:67) - "It is not for a Nabi that he should have prisoners of war until he had made a great slaughter in the land..."

Quran (8:59-60) - "And let not those who disbelieve suppose that they can outstrip (Allah's Purpose). Lo! they cannot escape. Make ready for them all that you can of power and of the steeds of war, that you may terrorise the enemy of Allaah and your enemy."

Quran (9:5) - "So when the sacred months have passed away, then slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them captive and besiege them and lie in wait for them in every ambush, then if they repent and keep up prayer and pay the poor-rate, leave their way free to them."

Quran (9:14) - "Fight against them so that Allaah will punish them by your hands and disgrace them and give you victory over them and heal the breasts of a believing people."

Quran (9:29) - "Fight those who believe not in Allaah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allaah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, from of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued."

Quran (9:123) - "O you who believe! fight those of the unbelievers who are near to you and let them find in you hardness."

Quran (33:60-62) - "If the hypocrites, and those in whose hearts is a disease, and the alarmists in the city do not cease, We verily shall urge thee on against them, then they will be your neighbors in it but a little while. Accursed, they will be seized wherever found and slain with a (fierce) slaughter."

Quran (47:3-4) - "Those who disbelieve follow falsehood, while those who believe follow the truth from their Lord... So, when you meet (in fight Jihad in Allah's Cause), those who disbelieve smite at their necks till when you have killed and wounded many of them, then bind a bond firmly (on them, i.e. take them as captives)... If it had been Allah's Will, He Himself could certainly have punished them (without you). But (He lets you fight), in order to test you, some with others. But those who are killed in the Way of Allah, He will never let their deeds be lost."

Quran (48:29) - "Muhammad is the Messenger of Allaah. And those with him are hard against the disbelievers and merciful among themselves"

"He it is who has sent His Messenger (Mohammed) with guidance and the religion of truth (Islam) to make it victorious over all religions even though the Kaafiroon may despise it."

-----------------------

Now, since you have said that Fiqh must not be quoted, and we shouldn't then let look at Tafseer either, and also, you said: " We should also remember this ayah '' They took their Monks and priests as their Rab ............." meaning `Ulamaa shouldn't be quoted either, so now, let us derive rulings directly from the Aayaat above.

And in advance, let met say this: You cannot reply to this post of mine by quoting ANY scholar, or book of Fiqh, or Tafseer, or Mufassir, or anything else, since you have made it clear that according to you, we should do away with all of that, since, and again I will quote your words from your post on page #7, post #140: "quote Fiqh when the Noble Quran and hadith and actions of Prophet :saws: and his sahabas are clear about it ." And your post from earlier on this page: "We have the Noble Quran and hadith and actions of rightly guided Caliphas for us and if you want to give importance to fiqh when the Imams have themselves told not to obey their fiqh if it goes against a authentic hadith" And again, your statement: "Nothing as guarded as the Noble Quran and next comes our sahih hadith"

So, brother, you have put yourself into a corner now. You cannot reply by quoting ANY scholar, past or present, because if you do that, you will be contradicting your statement about not "taking their Monks and priests as their Rab". So, do not take any Monk or Priest as your Rab, by quoting him in contradiction of "Clear Verses of the Noble Qur'aan". It is clear, like you said, isn't it? So, no quoting any scholar in your reply, or any book of Fiqh of ANY Madh-hab, or quoting books of Tafseer (because they are written by "Monks and Priests", i.e. scholars).

So, I'm waiting for your reply.

Was-Salaam.

Its useless to debate or argue in some matters like these and what akhi game should i play with a twister when You claimed about Najashi is enough proof against you. and now you quote noble Quran verses without taking the context and tafsir including those verse of Military vigilance which i usually quote since i saw none quotes them. I can quote pro peace verses of Noble Quran much more than them by many times

The above bolded you claim are misconceptions or slander about me WHEN I ALWAYS KEEP SAYING TO FOLLOW SAHABAS TOO and their actions & implementation is the endorsement of our deen...So misquoters and mischief makers we cant talk or agree with them anything . Sorry, Lakum deenukum waliya deen will be our paths.

I follow that hadith which are more than 10 from different collectors which AFFIRM WHO ARE THE BEST OF THE UMMAH (the three generations) , more than anything else and the Madhab Imams statement to leave their fatwa if they go against any authentic hadith. We take fiqh ONLY when the matters are confusing or not clear.

THIS IS A REMINDER FOR THOSE WHO THINK NONE UNDERSTANDS ISLAM EXCEPT THEM

DIFFERENCE OF OPNION AMONG SAHABAS
Muslim :: Book 19 : Hadith 4374
It has been narrated on the authority of Abdullah who said: On the day he returned from the Battle of Ahzab, the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) made for us an announcement that nobody would say his Zuhr prayer but in the quarters of Banu Quraiza (Some) people, being afraid that the time for prayer would expire, said their prayers before reaching the street of Banu Quraiza. The others said: We will not say our prayer except where the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) has ordered us to say it even if the time expires. (When he learned of the difference in the view of the two groups of the people, the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) did not blame anyone from the two groups.

asalam alaikum

[talibilm]

Bukhari :: Book 1 :: Volume 3 :: Hadith 98

Narrated Abu Huraira:
I said: "O Allah's Apostle! Who will be the luckiest person, who will gain your intercession on the Day of Resurrection?" Allah's Apostle said: O Abu Huraira! "I have thought that none will ask me about it before you as I know your longing for the (learning of) Hadiths. The luckiest person who will have my intercession on the Day of Resurrection will be the one who said sincerely from the bottom of his heart "None has the right to be worshipped but Allah."And 'Umar bin 'Abdul 'Aziz wrote to Abu Bakr bin Hazm, "Look for the knowledge of Hadith and get it written, as I am afraid that religious knowledge will vanish and the religious learned men will pass away (die). Do not accept anything save the Hadiths of the Prophet. Circulate knowledge and teach the ignorant, for knowledge does not vanish except when it is kept secretly (to oneself)."



UPDATING HADITHS & Noble Quran verses FOR EXTREME THINKERS SINCE WE SHOULD FOLLOW SAHABA AND UNDERSTAND LIKE THEY UNDERSTOOD


Muslim :: Book 32 : Hadith 6330
'Urwa b. Zubair reported that Hisham b. Hakim found a person (the ruler of Hims) who had been detaining some Nabateans in connection with the dues of Jizya. He said: What is this? I heard Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: Allah would torment those persons who torment people in the world.

Muslim :: Book 32 : Hadith 6328
Hisham reported on the authority of his father that Hisham b. Hakim b. Hizam happened to pass by people, the farmers of Syria, who had been made to stand in the sun. He said: What is the matter with them? They said: They have been detained for Jizya. Thereupon Hisham said: I bear testimony to the fact that I heard Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: Allah would torment those who torment people in the world.


Muslim :: Book 32 : Hadith 6329
This hadith has been narrated on the authority of Hisham with the same chain of transmitters and he made this addition of Jarir that (Hisham b. Hakim) went to Umair b. Sa'd who was then ruler in Palestine and he narrated to him this hadith and he (submitting before the words of the Prophet) commanded that they should be let off and so they were let off.


NOTE : during the Khilafah of Umar Ibn Al Khattab Radhi-yallaahu 'anhu, when he saw an old Jewish man begging, so he ordered he be provided for from the treasury of the Muslims. THIS HOW SAHABAS DEALT even WITH A JEW .



Bukhari :: Book 9 :: Volume 88 :: Hadith 184
Narrated 'Abdullah and Abu Musa: The Prophet said, "Near the establishment of the Hour there will be days during which Religious ignorance will spread, knowledge will be taken away (vanish) and there will be much Al-Harj, and Al-Harj means killing."


PROTECT DHIMMIS
Bukhari :: Book 4 :: Volume 53 :: Hadith 391
Narrated 'Abdullah bin 'Amr: The Prophet said, "Whoever killed a person having a treaty with the Muslims, shall not smell the smell of Paradise though its smell is perceived from a distance of forty years."



PEACE TREATY AS EASY AS THIS


Bukhari :: Book 4 :: Volume 53 :: Hadith 387
NArrated Abu Humaid As-Saidi: We accompanied the Prophet in the Ghazwa of Tabuk and the king of 'Aila presented a white mule and a cloak as a gift to the Prophet. And the Prophet wrote to him a peace treaty allowing him to keep authority over his country.

[talibilm]

PROPHET GUARANTEED ONLY UNTILL TABE'IEN.


Sayyidina lmran ibn Husayn (RA) reported that Allah’s Messenger said, The best of my ummah is the generation to which 1 have been sent, then they who will follow them.’ The narrator said, ‘And I do not remember if he mentioned the third (generation) or not, “After that’, the Prophet (SAW) said, “A people will come who will voluntarily give testimony, they will commit treachery and will not be trustworthy. They will be corpulent, generally. [Bukhari 2651]


Bukhari :: Book 5 :: Volume 57 :: Hadith 3
Narrated Abdullah: The Prophet said, "The best people are those living in my generation, and then those who will follow them, and then those who will follow the latter. Then there will come some people who will bear witness before taking oaths, and take oaths before bearing witness." (Ibrahim, a sub-narrator said, "They used to beat us for witnesses and covenants when we were still children.")


Muslim :: Book 31 : Hadith 6159
'A'isha reported that a person asked Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) as to who amongst the people were the best. He said: Of the generation to which I belong, then of the second generation (generation adjacent to my generation), then of the third generation (generation adjacent to the second generation).


Bukhari :: Book 5 :: Volume 57 :: Hadith 2
Narrated Imran bin Husain: "Allah's Apostle said, 'The best of my followers are those living in my generation (i.e. my contemporaries). and then those who will follow the latter" 'Imran added, "I do not remember whether he mentioned two or three generations after his generation, then the Prophet added, 'There will come after you, people who will bear witness without being asked to do so, and will be treacherous and untrustworthy, and they will vow and never fulfill their vows, and fatness will appear among them."


Muslim :: Book 31 : Hadith 6150
Abdullah reported Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: The best of my Umma would be those of the generation nearest to mine. Then those nearest to them, then those nearest to them, then people would come whose witness would precede the oath and the oath will precede the witness. Hannad has not made the mention of Qarn in his narration. Qutaiba said that, instead of the word Qaum, the word Aqwam has been used.


Muslim :: Book 31 : Hadith 6154
Abu Huraira reported Allah's Messenger (may, peace be upon him) as saying: The best age of my Umma is one in which I was sent (by Allah as an Apostle), then the one next to that. (The narrator said): And Allah knows best whether he stated this third (time) or not. Then there would come people who would love (to look) bulky and they would hasten to the witness box before they are asked to bear witness.


Muslim :: Book 31 : Hadith 6153
'Abdullah (b. Mas'ud) reported Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) as saying: The best among people are of my generation, then those next to them. (The narrator said): I do not know whether (he said) it three times or four times. Then there would fellow after them such persons whose evidence would precede the oath, and in case of some others, the oath (would precede) the evidence.

And the above hadith there are more than 10 even from many other collectors other the four top ones shows the authenticity so take your deen from them as much as possible and if you cant find in them THEN go to fiqh and ulamas and even a fatwa of a ulama disturbs your heart you can avoid it.

PROOF HERE

Rasul Allah (sal Allahu alaihi wasallam) said: “Ask yourself for a decision, ask your heart for a decision (saying it three times.) Righteousness is that with which the soul is tranquil and the heart is tranquil, but sin is that which rouses suspicion in the soul and is perplexing in the breast, even if people give you a decision in its favour.” [Mishkat]


Rasul Allah (sal Allahu alaihi wasallam) said: “Leave that which causes you doubt for that which does not cause you doubt.” [Tirmidhi]




NOTE: Everybody has within them the sense to distinguish right from wrong. And each person will be held accountable for using this sense. It is possible to twist facts and get people to give the decision that you want to hear, but if your heart is not at peace with the decision then know that it is most likely sinful for you to act on it EVEN IF SUCH STRANGE FATWA CAME FROM A MUFTI . Unfortunately, if a person sins enough then the heart becomes dead and the ability to feel disquiet dies.


Rasul Allah (sal Allahu alaihi wasallam) said: “Leave that which causes you doubt for that which does not cause you doubt.” [Tirmidhi]


This hadith is one of the ahadith around which the whole religion revolves: it is the foundation of scrupulousness (wara) around which revolves certainty; and it brings relief from the dark oppressiveness of doubts and speculation.

[Serinity]

Bro @talibilm, I understand you bro.

But I also understand Bro Huzaifah.

The ayahs Huzaifah quoted, should also be understood in context. Not just read up-front. Islam came as a Mercy to Mankind. and the Prophet Muhammad :saws: did not come to curse, but as a Mercy.

he wanted to demonstrate how interpretation of Ayaats require understanding of Deen, and knowledge of context wherein it was revealed. Qur'aan and Sunnah is all we need. But we also need Fiqh, and tafsirs, so that the Muslims who are not scholars can understand. (I know you agree on that, :-) )

Islam is not a Pacifistic Religion, but a religion of Truth and Reality. If someone stormed your house and wanted you killed, you'd defend yourself, be it by force, right?

And this whole Offensive Jihad, should be understood in context.

When you think of Offensive Jihad, you probably think of barbarians who invade countries, say "convert" if no, then slaughter, rince and repeat. Right? That isn't how it goes.

Muslims weren't barbarians, but they werent pacifists either. BUT, they wanted peace. They were not warmongers - they didn't do war just for the sake of it.

Remember when Umar R.a. stopped himself from killing a Mushrik, because he went to Jihad for the SAKE of Allah, not to pleasure himself, or to avenge in his anger? When a Mushrik spat on him R.A. he got angry, and wanted to kill him, but didn't???

In Jihad, we do it for Allah, none else. Not for ourselves.
Tafsir and Fiqh IS important.

Please correct me if I said anything wrong.

And Allah :swt: knows best.

[Huzaifah ibn Adam]

Those posts of brother talibilm above are very long but aren't exactly saying anything definitive, are they. I thlnk we need to do this in a point-by-point process:

Point #1:

Brother talibilm, do you believe that laymen do not need to follow a Madh-hab of Fiqh, and that they can open up an English translation of the Qur'aan and an English translation of a Hadeeth Kitaab and take out rulings from there?

This is the first point that needs to be addressed, before coming to anything else.

[Serinity]

Those posts of brother talibilm above are very long but aren't exactly saying anything definitive, are they. I thlnk we need to do this in a point-by-point process:

Point #1:

Brother talibilm, do you believe that laymen do not need to follow a Madh-hab of Fiqh, and that they can open up an English translation of the Qur'aan and an English translation of a Hadeeth Kitaab and take out rulings from there?

This is the first point that needs to be addressed, before coming to anything else.

Lets do this for the subject on Offensive / Defensive Jihad too. :-)

I think this is a good approach, since it will be easier for the one's in the future reading it.

I know Talibilm, he is a very good brother. And I don't disagree with him. Tbh, I think this whole thing is a huge misunderstanding.

No offense, I love both of you for the sake of Allah. Lets make this easier for all of us, for The sake of Allah. As brothers in Islam. Okay?

may Allah help all of us. Ameen.

[talibilm]

Fiqh indeed is to understand, however often we see especially in this day and age, that fiqh (understanding/interpretation) of a scholar in the past has been held in such a regard if you do not agree with it, you somehow are being branded is a "kafir" by the Muslims of today. Which is not true. As there are multiple mathabs and they don't agree on small things with each other, but yet nobody can brand a follower of another mathab as misguided. They don't agree with each other, yet they are all right in their interpretation.

I am of opinion, that one first has to learn what already exist of understanding of previous scholars. They may contain some understanding which in the light of the modern day can be seen differently and thus disagree with them and give their own fiqh off course with a bit of knowledge..not like..the ignorance of us Muslims of today. Upon existing fiqh that is even valid in the light of the modern day, but rather general understanding, one can off course go a little bit in more detail because of more scientific discovery has been made.

Without fiqh..i think we then talk about ISIS type of guys. Among them are many who are VERY VERY knowledgeable about the Qur'an and Sunnah, yet they don't understand it.

Knowing something, doesn't mean you understand it. As support to this claim.


"Indeed, Allah is not timid to present an example - that of a mosquito or what is smaller than it. And those who have believed know that it is the truth from their Lord. But as for those who disbelieve, they say, "What did Allah intend by this as an example?" He misleads many thereby and guides many thereby. And He misleads not except the defiantly disobedient," Qur'an 2:26

Looking from a logical point of view we see that both the guided and the misguided have obtained the SAME KNOWLEDGE, yet one understands it and the other doesn't. So knowledge is not the same as understanding.

This i think is also a bit of a problem of the current generation of us Muslims. We read the Qur'an but we do not ponder about what Allah(swt) might be trying to tell us. I am also of opinion that ones state of the heart really is crucial to understanding it. When we look at a misguided person, he can't understand it, no matter how many hours or years of his life he spends on it. The diseases of the heart or not even willing to spend time on it to ponder about it. It amazes me time and time again that majority of us Muslims of the current day blindly follow Islam.

There is i believe a hadith ( you guys are way better with knowledge than me and maybe confirm or correct me), that whoever ponders about the meaning of an aya and his conclusion is wrong, he gets 1 reward and the one who gets the right meaning he will get 2 rewards.

Yet, even my own family who have been Muslims their whole life, see pondering about Qur'an as if it is something dangerous. While there is a clear difference between saying..yes i understand it and it is like this and nothing else..or saying i THINK i understand this and correct me if i am wrong (willing to learn). In the mean time read the fiqh of scholars and learn one or two new things with it. While often, no pondering is done only what fuqaha has said is being adopted.

Its agreed Fiqh basically means is to understand but the practical thing the ummah grasps or understand its as the deriving of rules by different madhabi Imaams.

Those imaams differ but when those esteemed imams have told us to leave their fatwa when it goes against any authentic hadith WE MUST FOLLOW their order particularly in these sensitive matters of Jihad etc which could cause confusion and chaos and fitna is worse than killing.

When we see the later imaam like Shafi who had studied from Maliki and Imam Malik studied from Imaam Hanifa JUST IMPLIES the difference of opinions occur when the later imaams like Sha fi imaam found different authentic hadith. And we cant expect all Imaams to have found all hadiths at the same time , that is proved here by difference in salah method by various Imaams.

We can bring Sharia Law only in muslim majority country and gradually and not in a day at once. To start Sharia We need such maturity ( like in the case oF Iran where Piety lovers were in majority but fitna Shah lovers were doing fitna. the Zeal with Shias are lacking in sunnis was Dr Israar's statement ). but I its absurd to talk of a world Muslim invasion and ask for Jizzya while we ourselves ( The Muslim countries ) are not on Islam and we have become cowards and laggards in Military . lol that irritates me, as some claim

[Simple_Person]

I think both of you are saying the same, but not understanding one another. As if person X is saying stay on the straight path for guidance, while person Y says do not deviate from the straight road. The difference is minimal, but but it is saying exactly the same thing, but from another perspective.

[Huzaifah ibn Adam]

I know Talibilm, he is a very good brother.

I'm sure that he is. I don't doubt that. He is writing to defend what he believes to be the Haqq, as am I. When there are two parties that each are certain that their view is the correct one, then a Mujaadalah bil-Ihsaan (debate on good terms) is done to determine which group is correct.

But in order to do that, each group must first understand what is the standpoint of the other group. What is the premise of their argument. Right now, this first point deals with the issue of following a Madh-hab, and whether or not a layman can derive rulings on his own without referring to the `Ulamaa.

My standpoint is that following one of the four Madhaahib, namely, Hanafi, Maaliki, Shaafi`i, or Hanbali, is necessary for the layman. Even Salafis like al-Munajjid hold this same view.

Now, I need the brother, talibilm, to answer the question I asked above. I need to know what exactly his standpoint is with regards to the issue of Madhaahib.

No offense, I love both of you for the sake of Allah. Lets make this easier for all of us, for The sake of Allah. As brothers in Islam. Okay?

may Allah help all of us. Ameen.

آمين يا رب العالمين

[Huzaifah ibn Adam]

In case the post was lost:

------------

Point #1:

"Brother talibilm, do you believe that laymen do not need to follow a Madh-hab of Fiqh, and that they can open up an English translation of the Qur'aan and an English translation of a Hadeeth Kitaab and take out rulings from there?"

[talibilm]

Its agreed Fiqh basically means is to understand but the practical thing the ummah grasps or understand its as the deriving of rules by different madhabi Imaams.

Those imaams differ but when those esteemed imams have told us to leave their fatwa when it goes against any authentic hadith WE MUST FOLLOW their order particularly in these sensitive matters of Jihad etc which could cause confusion and chaos and fitna is worse than killing.

When we see the later imaam like Shafi who had studied from Maliki and Imam Malik studied from Imaam Hanifa JUST IMPLIES the difference of opinions occur when the later imaams like Sha fi imaam found different authentic hadith. And we cant expect all Imaams to have found all hadiths at the same time , that is proved here by difference in salah method by various Imaams.

We can bring Sharia Law only in muslim majority country and gradually and not in a day at once. To start Sharia We need such maturity ( like in the case oF Iran where Piety lovers were in majority but fitna Shah lovers were doing fitna. the Zeal with Shias are lacking in sunnis was Dr Israar's statement ). but I its absurd to talk of a world Muslim invasion and ask for Jizzya while we ourselves ( The Muslim countries ) are not on Islam and we have become cowards and laggards in Military . lol that irritates me, as some claim

Its too late to bed for me, and so to answer further but the above post should help and May Allah guide us all ameen , wasalam.

[Simple_Person]

In case the post was lost:

------------

Point #1:

"Brother talibilm, do you believe that laymen do not need to follow a Madh-hab of Fiqh, and that they can open up an English translation of the Qur'aan and an English translation of a Hadeeth Kitaab and take out rulings from there?"

Brother, read the comment of brother talibilm, careful. He has NOT claimed such a thing. His argument is, we must follow Qur'an and Sunnah and if there is no clear ruling or understanding of something we resort to the fiqh of the scholars. Which is indeed how it is. While you it looks like seem to understand that brother talibilm is saying..no fiqh is needed whatsoever, while he is not saying that. Laymen such as me, i often try to understand something first then i resort to what scholars have said about it. Often my own general understanding is close, but after reading what scholars have said about it i even obtain more understanding of it. My BASIC principle is ISLAM = Peace. So if my understanding would say..go kill people out of nowhere without any context or whatsoever, that means it is being contradictory to the BASIC principle of Islam = peace even to the fitrah of the human being is being contradictory.

[Serinity]

Brother, read the comment of brother talibilm, careful. He has NOT claimed such a thing. His argument is, we must follow Qur'an and Sunnah and if there is no clear ruling or understanding of something we resort to the fiqh of the scholars. Which is indeed how it is. While you it looks like seem to understand that brother talibilm is saying..no fiqh is needed whatsoever, while he is not saying that. Laymen such as me, i often try to understand something first then i resort to what scholars have said about it. Often my own general understanding is close, but after reading what scholars have said about it i even obtain more understanding of it. My BASIC principle is ISLAM = Peace. So if my understanding would say..go kill people out of nowhere without any context or whatsoever, that means it is being contradictory to the BASIC principle of Islam = peace even to the fitrah of the human being is being contradictory.

And Islam does not say to go and kill people out of nowhere, even if they are kafirs. That is prohibited.

I have chatted with ISIS people, and they said that killing innocents was OK, and that killing civilians, be it your neighbours, etc. or to steal from kuffar from America, etc. Is ok.

Obviously it is not. They think since America bombs muslims, that whole America is free pass to being murdered. That all civilians are equally responsible.

They think killing civilians is ok cuz America kills Muslims. 2 wrongs doesn't make a right. And this mindset of "you kill my child, I kill your child" is contrary to Islam, and has its roots back in Jahiliyaah.

They quote the "Eye for Eye" ayaat as justification, with no understanding of it. In translation they are saying "It is ok to kill a the child of a murderer"

It is like "If I kill your child, can you kill my child?" the answer to that, is no. you can kill me. But, being vigilant is not allowed. So even if I did, you can not kill me without court, etc.

I understand you. Killing people out of nowhere, brings no peace. It is contrary to Islam. I can not fight without reason, either.

Astaghfirullah if I said anything wrong. Please correct me if I said anything wrong.

And Allah :swt: knows best.

[azc]

@huzaifa bin Adam : brother, will you write the views of 4 imams on this issue..?

[M.I.A.]

Bro @talibilm, I understand you bro.

But I also understand Bro Huzaifah.

The ayahs Huzaifah quoted, should also be understood in context. Not just read up-front. Islam came as a Mercy to Mankind. and the Prophet Muhammad :saws: did not come to curse, but as a Mercy.

he wanted to demonstrate how interpretation of Ayaats require understanding of Deen, and knowledge of context wherein it was revealed. Qur'aan and Sunnah is all we need. But we also need Fiqh, and tafsirs, so that the Muslims who are not scholars can understand. (I know you agree on that, :-) )

Islam is not a Pacifistic Religion, but a religion of Truth and Reality. If someone stormed your house and wanted you killed, you'd defend yourself, be it by force, right?

And this whole Offensive Jihad, should be understood in context.

When you think of Offensive Jihad, you probably think of barbarians who invade countries, say "convert" if no, then slaughter, rince and repeat. Right? That isn't how it goes.

Muslims weren't barbarians, but they werent pacifists either. BUT, they wanted peace. They were not warmongers - they didn't do war just for the sake of it.

Remember when Umar R.a. stopped himself from killing a Mushrik, because he went to Jihad for the SAKE of Allah, not to pleasure himself, or to avenge in his anger? When a Mushrik spat on him R.A. he got angry, and wanted to kill him, but didn't???

In Jihad, we do it for Allah, none else. Not for ourselves.
Tafsir and Fiqh IS important.

Please correct me if I said anything wrong.

And Allah :swt: knows best.

what you talking about? within the last week ib has had...

what do you do if someone extends their hands to kill you within your own home?

....not quite a black and white answer..

probably.

..you can you even stand by that viewpoint?

the only answer is...

try it and let us know..

most people would miss and end up hitting everything else in the room.


you cant ever really pretend to be a thing.


...you know, ignorance is dangerous..

but made use of.


have fun.


i wouldnt really know these people if it were not for this bloody room.

..honestly..

even their charity seems a little..mm.. off.

you may be worried about the one eyed man but most of these people seem to work on 3.

...causes me nausia sometimes.

so il take your word for it.

tomorrow... if i get to complain..

yesterday if i got to complain!!

[Akeyi]

guys you know nothing i did not read what anyone wrote but i m probably right

now you can ask me 2 questions from what i wrote (not from why i am here)

first questions why did i said you that you guys know nothing ?

second question is why didn't i read what you guys wrote ?

answering these 2 question will prove that you guys know nothing and i am right and i know more than you

ANSWER: answer to the queston how to implement sharia was short. But you guys wrote long things. And that is also the answer why i didn't read what you guys wrote.

So this takes us to the third question ?

Third question is the question in the post. How to implement sharia.

So easy. Be a praesident. President is just a word. We now describe to descbribe a man who rules our country. If we can be a president we can implement sharia. But we dont have to be a president. We can be prime minister sultan padişah könig king it can be in various names. What i mean is we can be someone who rules a country to implement sharia in the country. This is the key sentence i will come back here.

Now there is probably only one question in your head. And it is why did i wrote KÖNİG ? up there.

First to prove that ich kann perfectly well deutsch.
Second is To not write Königin. Why to not write KÖNİGİN YOU MAY ASK. Because womens can't rule countries but that is another subject.

Now back to the part i said important part.

We need to be a man who rules a country to implement sharia. How to achieve that hard. But there is another way. Not coups or anything.

We can be someone who has a power in deciding how to being ruled. This is the key sentence. If you can understand it you can say that i understood it. But be aware there is no grammatical error in sentence. If you didnot understand correctly read again. It is a very important key sentence.

Now In the second way like i said. We need to have a power in deciding how to be ruled.

This gives us 2 questions.

How to have this power.
2 is democracy this ?
3 is demoracy aganist islam ?
Or what ?

Answer to first question is IT DOES NOT MATTER.

IT DOES NOT MATTER WHICH WAY OF RULING IS. BECAUSE WE WILL BE RULED LIKE WE ARE. SO WE BE LIKE WANT TO BE RULED WE WILL BE RULED LIKE WE WANTED TO BE RULED. SIMPLE AS THAT. It it is is a hadith*hadis

Now back to the where we were. Is demoracy aganist islam ? to answer to this question we need to at least you guys need to read my last question. I wrote there that it doesn't matter. I DONT MEAN IT DOESNOT MATTER IF IT IS AGANIST ISLAM. It doesn't matter if we are using demoracy. We can use any way of ruling we want. But even if we have a king who have ABSOLUTISMUS. Or even if we have a padişah. We still have real demoracy. Which is guaranteed by the hadith i mentioned.

First about gaddafi Gaddafi was a communist as far as i know. But his way of seeing democracy was more democratic than anyother state in the world .

Democracy should not give everyone a right to vote. IT IS CHAOS.

But because of i want to keep it short . And because of i want to do what i want to do. ı will keep this short.* In german will already means WANT. It is ironic.

And to answer last question WHAT IS FREEDOM

FREEDOM IS NOT

I CAN DO WHATEVER I WANT AS LONG AS I DONT HARM ANYONE.

THIS IS SLAVERY OF ŞEYTAN

FREEDOM IS

I CAN DO WHAT EVER I WANT AS LONG AS I DONT HURT ANYONE INCLUDING ME.

THAT IS THE REAL FREEDOM.

So we will be ruled as we are. Simple as that but to understand it i recommend reading this book like i recommended before but then i didnot know X

I wont explain X But that is another subject.

To implement Sharia . You can find it in book too.

And WHY IT SHOULD BE THE WAY I TEACHED. answer to this is also in this book. It is very big book but you guys should read what is your job ? read http://www.erisale.com/index.jsp?locale=en

[Serinity]

what you talking about? within the last week we have had...

what do you do if someone extends their hands to kill you within your own home?

....not quite a black and white answer..

probably.

..you can you even stand by that viewpoint?

the only answer is...

try it and let us know.


you cant ever really pretend to be a thing.


...you know, ignorance is dangerous..

but made use of.


have fun.


i wouldnt really know these people if it were not for this bloody room.

I'd try to stop him, call police, etc. :/

[Simple_Person]

And Islam does not say to go and kill people out of nowhere, even if they are kafirs. That is prohibited.

I have chatted with ISIS people, and they said that killing innocents was OK, and that killing civilians, be it your neighbours, etc. or to steal from kuffar from America, etc. Is ok.

Obviously it is not. They think since America bombs muslims, that whole America is free pass to being murdered. That all civilians are equally responsible.

They think killing civilians is ok cuz America kills Muslims. 2 wrongs doesn't make a right. And this mindset of "you kill my child, I kill your child" is contrary to Islam, and has its roots back in Jahiliyaah.

They quote the "Eye for Eye" ayaat as justification, with no understanding of it. In translation they are saying "It is ok to kill a the child of a murderer"

It is like "If I kill your child, can you kill my child?" the answer to that, is no. you can kill me. But, being vigilant is not allowed. So even if I did, you can not kill me without court, etc.

I understand you. Killing people out of nowhere, brings no peace. It is contrary to Islam. I can not fight without reason, either.

Astaghfirullah if I said anything wrong. Please correct me if I said anything wrong.

And Allah :swt: knows best.

Like i said in a different comment of mine. The state of the heart is very important. For example, when somebody is cynical, whatever you say to him he will see it as something negative. If you say to somebody who is cynical "how are you?" he will think something like this.."ooh he is asking me how i am, must be to get money from me or profit from me". This is same with hatred, if hatred has filled your heart, you are capable of everything. I have experienced hatred in my life and i took me 13 years to get rid of it and to forgive the person, even though that person is even worse kind of person than 13 years back. However i truly have forgiven that person and it is now what that person is doing between that person and Allah(swt). I know very clearly, how sick hateful feelings i had. To want to torture that person, but not let death come to that person. Rather let that person heal and again torture it. Every nail slowly pulling it out. Make that person beg for death, but do not give them that pleasure of death.

Alhamdulillah it always just stayed as something i "wished/harbored in my heart and mind" and it never took root in reality. Now ALHAMDULILLAH completely removed from my heart and mind.

So you see, if your heart has reached such a stage of PURE hatred, there are no boundaries anymore. A person will go through mountains to fulfill this hatred. For me knowing and truly having felt and understood this feeling, i understand how ISIS mentality is. They want somebody to pay for their misery and try to find ayaat and take them such out of context to fulfill their hatred. Everything is justifiable if the heart longs for it.

However, alhamdulillah knowing what forgiveness is, i also realized that this is NOT some small thing that can be achieved in ones life. Some people will remain with their hatred for the rest of their life committing even shirk because of it. The moment you know what forgiveness is, apologizing and forgiven people despite what they have done to you or you have done to them in the future becomes so easy and always a relieve of the heart.

However even saying this, not many people will understand this comment. As this i THINK is a very unique experience especially in the world of today where "being humble" is seen as a "weakness" and for "fools".

[M.I.A.]

I'd try to stop him, call police, etc. :/

excellent idea..

im just not going to work for him again.


....just have to...

get out of this room without losing.

[Serinity]

Like i said in a different comment of mine. The state of the heart is very important. For example, when somebody is cynical, whatever you say to him he will see it as something negative. If you say to somebody who is cynical "how are you?" he will think something like this.."ooh he is asking me how i am, must be to get money from me or profit from me". This is same with hatred, if hatred has filled your heart, you are capable of everything. I have experienced hatred in my life and i took me 13 years to get rid of it and to forgive the person, even though that person is even worse kind of person than 13 years back. However i truly have forgiven that person and it is now what that person is doing between that person and Allah(swt). I know very clearly, how sick hateful feelings i had. To want to torture that person, but not let death come to that person. Rather let that person heal and again torture it. Every nail slowly pulling it out. Make that person beg for death, but do not give them that pleasure of death.

Alhamdulillah it always just stayed as something i "wished/harbored in my heart and mind" and it never took root in reality. Now ALHAMDULILLAH completely removed from my heart and mind.

So you see, if your heart has reached such a stage of PURE hatred, there are no boundaries anymore. A person will go through mountains to fulfill this hatred. For me knowing and truly having felt and understood this feeling, i understand how ISIS mentality is. They want somebody to pay for their misery and try to find ayaat and take them such out of context to fulfill their hatred. Everything is justifiable if the heart longs for it.

However, alhamdulillah knowing what forgiveness is, i also realized that this is NOT some small thing that can be achieved in ones life. Some people will remain with their hatred for the rest of their life committing even shirk because of it. The moment you know what forgiveness is, apologizing and forgiven people despite what they have done to you or you have done to them in the future becomes so easy and always a relieve of the heart.

However even saying this, not many people will understand this comment. As this i THINK is a very unique experience especially in the world of today where "being humble" is seen as a "weakness" and for "fools".

Exactly!!

Say, a heart, who is filled with hate and anger. he will see the world through "that". he will read the Quran through that.

A Islam hater, who hates Islam, will read the Quraan and not believe in it. A hateful person will read the Quraan and justify his wrongdoing by it.

Allah guides whom He wills, and knows our hearts. So if one seeks misguidance, he will get that.

you remind me SOO much of "Hate Racism". :-) A guy who said the exact same thing you just said.

If someone is full of hatred, no matter what you say to him. he will still be full of hatred.

So it is not the minds there is something wrong with - but the hearts.

Like a person who sees all the signs of Truth (Haqq- Islam) and etc. But the moment some falsehood is shown to him, he adopts it as a way. But when truth is shown to him. he stands confused (can't see) There is an ayat that speaks of this.

However, here is an ayaat:

I will turn away from My signs those who are arrogant upon the earth without right; and if they should see every sign, they will not believe in it. And if they see the way of consciousness, they will not adopt it as a way; but if they see the way of error, they will adopt it as a way. That is because they have denied Our signs and they were heedless of them.

https://quran.com/7/146

I don't COMPLETELY know if this ayat speaks of this, but I wanted to share it. :-)

[Huzaifah ibn Adam]

Brother, read the comment of brother talibilm, careful. He has NOT claimed such a thing. His argument is, we must follow Qur'an and Sunnah and if there is no clear ruling or understanding of something we resort to the fiqh of the scholars. Which is indeed how it is. While you it looks like seem to understand that brother talibilm is saying..no fiqh is needed whatsoever, while he is not saying that. Laymen such as me, i often try to understand something first then i resort to what scholars have said about it. Often my own general understanding is close, but after reading what scholars have said about it i even obtain more understanding of it. My BASIC principle is ISLAM = Peace. So if my understanding would say..go kill people out of nowhere without any context or whatsoever, that means it is being contradictory to the BASIC principle of Islam = peace even to the fitrah of the human being is being contradictory.

I want him to reply, to clearly state what exactly his viewpoint is. Does he believe that a layman should follow a Madh-hab or does he believe that for a layman to follow a Madh-hab is unnecessary, or possibly even impermissible.

One point at a time.

[Simple_Person]

Exactly!!

Say, a heart, who is filled with hate and anger. he will see the world through "that". he will read the Quran through that.

A Islam hater, who hates Islam, will read the Quraan and not believe in it. A hateful person will read the Quraan and justify his wrongdoing by it.

Allah guides whom He wills, and knows our hearts. So if one seeks misguidance, he will get that.

you remind me SOO much of "Hate Racism". :-) A guy who said the exact same thing you just said.

If someone is full of hatred, no matter what you say to him. he will still be full of hatred.

So it is not the minds there is something wrong with - but the hearts.

Like a person who sees all the signs of Truth (Haqq- Islam) and etc. But the moment some falsehood is shown to him, he adopts it as a way. But when truth is shown to him. he stands confused (can't see) There is an ayat that speaks of this.

However, here is an ayaat:

I will turn away from My signs those who are arrogant upon the earth without right; and if they should see every sign, they will not believe in it. And if they see the way of consciousness, they will not adopt it as a way; but if they see the way of error, they will adopt it as a way. That is because they have denied Our signs and they were heedless of them.

https://quran.com/7/146

I don't COMPLETELY know if this ayat speaks of this, but I wanted to share it. :-)

Jazakallahu khairan for sharing that aya. When i embraced Islam in the beginning, i understood very little of many things. And laughing about it now, but the aya that you are referring to is what i mean. At first you know the people who have come back to Islam and now truly have their eyes opened. You as such a person try to show other people that exact same thing, yet they don't see it. You become all frustrated hahaha of how in the world can't they see it. It is like a situation with a child you try to keep him walking straight forward, but every time he deviates from that path going left and right. In case of the misguided when they even LISTEN very careful and try to understand you and what you are saying, something prevents them from understanding what you are trying to say.

If i for some kind of purpose use example as this ..a house has four walls to support the roof having balbalbl and then finishing my example, the reply is often something like this "But what about the windows?..A house should have windows right?" And you think this guy is screwing with me, but they seriously are genuinely asking for that. Which reminds me of this aya.

They will say there were three, the fourth of them being their dog; and they will say there were five, the sixth of them being their dog - guessing at the unseen; and they will say there were seven, and the eighth of them was their dog. Say, [O Muhammad], "My Lord is most knowing of their number. None knows them except a few. So do not argue about them except with an obvious argument and do not inquire about them among [the speculators] from anyone." Qur'an 18:22

They are so preoccupied with the most UNIMPORTANT thing of the whole example and because of that COMPLETELY miss the point you are trying to make. This was at first very frustrating for me to be honest but later on it became rather a relieve for me as my understanding of the deen became better. As when you encounter such people, you very QUICKLY wrap it up. Which remind me of this aya.

"Indeed, Allah is not timid to present an example - that of a mosquito or what is smaller than it. And those who have believed know that it is the truth from their Lord. But as for those who disbelieve, they say, "What did Allah intend by this as an example?" He misleads many thereby and guides many thereby. And He misleads not except the defiantly disobedient," Qur'an 2:26

Which is a indication that the person you are trying to have da'wah with is a very dishonest person when it comes to truth. So wrap it up and don't make it too long. The honest people but not Muslims will be able to follow your reasoning much better, with those you can have a honest discussion without beating around the bush. These honest people you also have very respectful discussions despite them for example being anti-Islam because of misconceptions.

[Serinity]

Yeah, these ayats HELPED me a ton, in lessening my burdens of "WHY DON'T PEOPLE SEE?"

These ayaats answers it all. Before that I was like: "How can't people see how they, themselves, are a miracle? speaking of intelligent design, won't you say, you, yourself, are an intelligent being? How can Ignorance bring about intelligence? it can not. Therefore, the only one, who could create us, is an All-knowing one, Allah."

To create the universe, requires intelligence, and consciousness. It now makes sense that there are people who don't even acknowledge the most obvious of signs.

Islam doesn't just teach us how to think, but how to ask the RIGHT questions at the right time. Like, if we have math, to ask "With what kind of force are you pushing the pen against the whiteboard? What is the density of your body?" lol. completely silly.

Going back to what I said. Take the eye, By Allah, not in a million years, could our eyes have come by chance. Yet people somehow think it came by chance. I can not understand that.

[Scimitar]

To be HONEST, it would not even surprise me if they would indeed have said such a thing. The things they have done and i also have had the opportunity to talk to one of them for sure. Sub'han'Allah......:O. I asked that ISIS-guy, what does Islamic Law say, if i kill your son? He replied, then i can kill your son. (eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth). I said, DUDE..i would have killed an innocent soul, what has my son to do with MY criminal act? he said, no i have studied sharia law, it is like this.

I fell off my chair :D Too funny.

He's studied a shariah - but it looks like Christian shariah :D

Scimi

[talibilm]

Brother, read the comment of brother talibilm, careful. He has NOT claimed such a thing. His argument is, we must follow Qur'an and Sunnah and if there is no clear ruling or understanding of something we resort to the fiqh of the scholars. Which is indeed how it is. While you it looks like seem to understand that brother talibilm is saying..no fiqh is needed whatsoever, while he is not saying that. Laymen such as me, i often try to understand something first then i resort to what scholars have said about it. Often my own general understanding is close, but after reading what scholars have said about it i even obtain more understanding of it. My BASIC principle is ISLAM = Peace. So if my understanding would say..go kill people out of nowhere without any context or whatsoever, that means it is being contradictory to the BASIC principle of Islam = peace even to the fitrah of the human being is being contradictory.

:sl: Wr wb

Jazkallah for your right understanding , how could we completely ignore those esteemed pious Imaams when I myself mostly follow the hanafi fiqh . At the same time following them also means avoiding what they urged us to avoid like say leaving their fatwa if goes against any Authentic hadith . We see many boast to follow Imaam Hanifa but how many hanafis follow him exactly ? when Hanafi Imaam has told us not to call Allah except by Allah himself alone !!!


But Allah has blessed us with all hadiths at our finger tips UNLIKE those imaams who should have worked Much Much harder from handwritten books to find them on various subjects and still could not have found them all imho.

[Scimitar]

Implementing shariah in Muslim nations :D

How to do this?

Gradually :D

Scimi

[Huzaifah ibn Adam]

In reply to brother talibilm:

Okay. So, you follow the Hanafi Madh-hab for the most part, but when you come across a Hadeeth which you feel is in conflict with the Hanafi Madh-hab, you follow that Hadeeth. Correct? Then, my question is:

Do you think that, in any issue of Deen, there is only one Hadeeth? Let me explain that:

The Hanafi Madh-hab says that the Musalli should fold his hands below his navel. Right? Now, you opened an English translation of Saheeh al-Bukhaari, and there, you perhaps came across a Hadeeth which mentions folding the hands on the chest, so now you say: "I'm going to follow the Hadeeth and reject the Hanafi Madh-hab's view on this issue."

Meanwhile, you are unaware that the view of the Hanafi Madh-hab on where to fold the hands is based on a different Hadeeth which says that the hands should be folded below the navel. This is something many people don't understand: "Why follow Imaam Abu Haneefah/Maalik/Shaafi`i/Ahmad when there is a Hadeeth which says X?" Well, that's because there's also another Hadeeth that says A, another that says B, another that says C, another that says Y and another that says Z. So which Hadeeth are you going to follow? The Ahaadeeth in Saheeh al-Bukhaari are not the only Hadeeth. Imaam al-Bukhaari himself mentioned, when compiling that Kitaab, that the Saheeh Ahaadeeth which he left out are MUCH more than those which he put in. Imaam Ahmad ibn Hanbal memorised one million Ahaadeeth. Saheeh al-Bukhaari contains roughly 7,000. So, it is an erroneous belief in the minds of many people that, the Ahaadeeth in Bukhaari are all the Ahaadeeth which exists. That is not the case.

So, coming back to the point:

Now, for example, you have a Hadeeth which says fold the hands below the navel, another that says above the navel, another that says on the chest, etc. How do you know which one to follow? You are not a Muhaddith, and thus you cannot grade which Hadeeth is stronger than which. In Usool-ul-Fiqh, there is what you could call a "legal maxim", which is: Talaqqi bil-Qabool of the Fuqahaa. To put it in plain English, it means that the grading of a Faqeeh (like Imaams Abu Haneefah, Maalik, ash-Shaafi`ee, Ahmad) overrides the grading of the later Muhadditheen like Imaams al-Bukhaari, Muslim, Abu Daawud, at-Tirmidhee, an-Nasaa'i, ibn Maajah, at-Tabaraani, ibn Hajr al-`Asqalaani, az-Zayla`i, etc.

So, there is a Hadeeth in Bukhaari which says that the hands should be folded on the chest, but Imaam Abu Haneefah (who lived during the time when 17 Sahaabah were still alive) had a Hadeeth which said that the hands should be folded below the navel, and he graded this Hadeeth as being authentic. Why, then, should a person follow the Hadeeth Imaam al-Bukhaari quotes and grades as authentic over the Hadeeth Imaam Abu Haneefah quotes and grades as authentic? Remember the legal maxim: "Talaqqi bil-Qabool". Imaam Abu Haneefah (born 80 A.H.) , being a Faqeeh, overrides Imaam al-Bukhaari (born 194 A.H.).

When Imaam al-Bukhaari narrates a Hadeeth, he might have 6-7 people in that chain before reaching Rasoolullaah صلى الله عليه وسلم. On the other hand, Imaam Abu Haneefah met some of the Sahaabah, like Hadhrat Anas ibn Maalik رضي الله عنه, for example. So, just look at this logically:

Imaam Abu Haneefah narrates a Hadeeth from Hadhrat Anas رضي الله عنه. So it's: "Abu Haneefah, from Anas ibn Maalik, from Rasoolullaah صلى الله عليه وسلم."

See how short that chain is? Now compare that to a chain Imaam al-Bukhaari quotes:

"Yahyaa ibn Bukayr narrated to us, saying: al-Layth narrated to us, from `Uqayl, from ibn Shihaab, from `Urwah ibn az-Zubayr, from `Aa'ishah, Umm-ul-Mu'mineen, that she said:"

That's one example of a Sanad of Imaam al-Bukhaari. So, Imaam al-Bukhaari for example has 4-5 people between him and the Sahaabi, whereas in some cases, Imaam Abu Haneefah heard directly from a Sahaabi, who heard from Rasoolullaah صلى الله عليه وسلم. Can you see the difference? Now whose Hadeeth should be followed, do you think, if both quote a Hadeeth on a certain topic?

Secondly:

The statement of the A'immah that if the Hadeeth is authentic, follow the Hadeeth and throw their Madh-hab against the wall, was directed at their students, who were Mujtahideen themselves. It was not directed at people who cannot even speak Arabic. If a person cannot speak Arabic, then he cannot understand the Qur'aan; instead, he has to rely on some human being's interpretation of an Aayah, which he puts into an "English Translation", and this person then has to read that and try to learn from there.

Read this thread to see what are the requirements of being an `Aalim:

https://www.islamicboard.com/-ilm-kn...ib-ul-ilm.html

If someone like Einstein were to have said that, if anyone can come across an error in his works, they should correct it, then he is directing that statement towards people who are specialists in the fields he was. He is not directing that statement at a child who has not yet learnt how to count, who has not yet learnt that 1+1=2. If this child were to think that he can correct Einstein based on his being unable to understand something Einstein mentioned, and so he thinks he's found a "mistake", would you take him seriously? Similarly, a person who has not studied the ABCs of `Ilm, who doesn't have the most basic requisite, which is fluency in Arabic, thinking he can "correct" the A'immah of the past - who were giants in the Deen - is exactly the same.

May Allaah Ta`aalaa grant all of us the correct understanding, Aameen.

والسلام

[talibilm]

:sl:

Inshallah will try to address to all the points (as soon as am free inshallah) raised here some of which I deem as reasonable and some not and there is a way out in Deen which Allah has planned it untill the last days of the world .

Deen , The way of Life IF could not be practically implemented with ease ( Allah says that he want ease the deen for us in the noble Quran) in NO DEEN AT ALL. Allah the All wise in his Noble Quran and his Prophet : saws: have left reminders, tips that would guide whoever in the Muslim ummah who ever STRIVES ( fikr, jihad ) for it . Do not make islam so Rigid and a make a MONOPOLY that NONE except a Scholar can follow it or else the target of Islam to be a Deen of the world will be lost.

SOME OF UMMAH WILL STAY IN RIGHT PATH [Muslim 1920]
Sayyidina Thawban (RA) reported that Allah’s Messenger (SAW) said, “I fear for the misled rulers over my ummah.’ He also said, “A section of my ummah will never cease to be on the right. They will prevail and they will not be harmed by those who desert them till the command of Allah comes.”

Note : But imho these will be those who never associate to any Sect but called themselves as just a Muslim as in signature in Ummah, INSHALLAH

[Huzaifah ibn Adam]

Definitely a person should not attribute himself to any "sect". However, the four Madhaahib are not "sects". That is a major misconception a lot of people have. They are four "schools of thoughts". Four "understandings" of Qur'aan and Sunnah. Do you know what "Madh-hab" means? It's derived from the verb ذهب يذهب, which means "to go". "Madh-hab" is Ism Zharf, and literally means "a place of going", or, to put it in plain English: "A go-to place." So what does "a go-to place" mean in this context? It means that, when you look at an Aayah of the Qur'aan or a Hadeeth of Rasoolullaah صلى الله عليه وسلم, you will need to properly understand that Aayah or that Hadeeth. You cannot rely on your own understanding, because our understanding and intellect is limited. Instead, we rely on the understanding of the Salaf as-Saaliheen of this Ummah. So, we then "go-to" the Madh-hab in order to obtain the correct understanding of this Aayah or this Hadeeth. Thus, the Madh-hab is the "go-to place". The Madh-hab is not a religion, or a cult, or a sect, or a different version of Islaam. It is simply an understanding of the Qur'aan and the Sunnah.

والسلام

[talibilm]

:sl:

If I am so ignorant to know difference between Madhab and sect than I have no reason or right to touch on this subject , kindly refer to my post about Madhab or i shall paste it if i could locate it here or in ummah Inshallah.

Let me free myselves from my commitments to my family inshallah which is also an ibadah and shall reply whatever i know as taking part like a Mashoora for Deen. Let all the knowledgeables take part towards this issue Let Be bro @Scimitar or @simple person be the amir or whoever sincere .

[talibilm]

Its found here in post # 31 inshallah

https://www.islamicboard.com/aqeedah...-follow-7.html

[Scimitar]

That thread died bro, Alhamdulillah.

The hadeeth "islam began as something strange..." kinda killed that whole thread due to this post presenting a curve ball. It was answered here. And ended here. And that was the end of that thread :)

Scimi

[talibilm]

In reply to brother talibilm:

Okay. So, you follow the Hanafi Madh-hab for the most part, but when you come across a Hadeeth which you feel is in conflict with the Hanafi Madh-hab, you follow that Hadeeth. Correct? Then, my question is:

Do you think that, in any issue of Deen, there is only one Hadeeth? Let me explain that:

The Hanafi Madh-hab says that the Musalli should fold his hands below his navel. Right? Now, you opened an English translation of Saheeh al-Bukhaari, and there, you perhaps came across a Hadeeth which mentions folding the hands on the chest, so now you say: "I'm going to follow the Hadeeth and reject the Hanafi Madh-hab's view on this issue."

Meanwhile, you are unaware that the view of the Hanafi Madh-hab on where to fold the hands is based on a different Hadeeth which says that the hands should be folded below the navel. This is something many people don't understand: "Why follow Imaam Abu Haneefah/Maalik/Shaafi`i/Ahmad when there is a Hadeeth which says X?" Well, that's because there's also another Hadeeth that says A, another that says B, another that says C, another that says Y and another that says Z. So which Hadeeth are you going to follow? The Ahaadeeth in Saheeh al-Bukhaari are not the only Hadeeth. Imaam al-Bukhaari himself mentioned, when compiling that Kitaab, that the Saheeh Ahaadeeth which he left out are MUCH more than those which he put in. Imaam Ahmad ibn Hanbal memorised one million Ahaadeeth. Saheeh al-Bukhaari contains roughly 7,000. So, it is an erroneous belief in the minds of many people that, the Ahaadeeth in Bukhaari are all the Ahaadeeth which exists. That is not the case.

So, coming back to the point:

Now, for example, you have a Hadeeth which says fold the hands below the navel, another that says above the navel, another that says on the chest, etc. How do you know which one to follow? You are not a Muhaddith, and thus you cannot grade which Hadeeth is stronger than which. In Usool-ul-Fiqh, there is what you could call a "legal maxim", which is: Talaqqi bil-Qabool of the Fuqahaa. To put it in plain English, it means that the grading of a Faqeeh (like Imaams Abu Haneefah, Maalik, ash-Shaafi`ee, Ahmad) overrides the grading of the later Muhadditheen like Imaams al-Bukhaari, Muslim, Abu Daawud, at-Tirmidhee, an-Nasaa'i, ibn Maajah, at-Tabaraani, ibn Hajr al-`Asqalaani, az-Zayla`i, etc.

So, there is a Hadeeth in Bukhaari which says that the hands should be folded on the chest, but Imaam Abu Haneefah (who lived during the time when 17 Sahaabah were still alive) had a Hadeeth which said that the hands should be folded below the navel, and he graded this Hadeeth as being authentic. Why, then, should a person follow the Hadeeth Imaam al-Bukhaari quotes and grades as authentic over the Hadeeth Imaam Abu Haneefah quotes and grades as authentic? Remember the legal maxim: "Talaqqi bil-Qabool". Imaam Abu Haneefah (born 80 A.H.) , being a Faqeeh, overrides Imaam al-Bukhaari (born 194 A.H.).

:sl:

Though we are moving away from the Topic of this thread but let this doubt be discussed

The Point or gist made here is iow Can we be a ghair Muqqalidh ? right ?

ITS TRUE finding which hadith is the stronger will be debateable BUT not the Priority of a hukm is it about a Fard, a wajib,a sunnah muakkadha, sunna ghair Muakkadha, a Musthahab, a nafl etc which will be quite easier .

But as i have posted in post here in post # 31 Which Maddhab do you follow? we can follow any Imaam of a different Madhab and pray our Salah because THE DIFFERENCES are MOSTLY not in the matter of fard acts leaving which invalidates a salah but in the lesser ones so which will not invaildate our prayer. Then your question of where keep to your hands as in hanafi or as in shafi over the chest or even maliki (or hambal) they never even fold their hands or keep any where at all. but keep them hanging straight (as in the attention pose of a soldier) for me is not a matter to be wrestled about since Prophet :saws: did by all those methods but I have followed even them (maliki)and prayed as a follower (Muqtadi in salah) since there is no dispute on the fard acts of salah even between us.

So this question of fiqh (understanding) should never be an issue and so called Ghair Muqqalidh should never be seen as Ghair muslim by Muqqalids ( some jahils do that ) But even learned muslims wrestle in such matters of secondary importance as these and rafaydain etc which exhausts our stamina arguing and there is no stamina left to talk about Haram or Halal or other important issues.

When Imaam al-Bukhaari narrates a Hadeeth, he might have 6-7 people in that chain before reaching Rasoolullaah صلى الله عليه وسلم. On the other hand, Imaam Abu Haneefah met some of the Sahaabah, like Hadhrat Anas ibn Maalik رضي الله عنه, for example. So, just look at this logically:

Imaam Abu Haneefah narrates a Hadeeth from Hadhrat Anas رضي الله عنه. So it's: "Abu Haneefah, from Anas ibn Maalik, from Rasoolullaah صلى الله عليه وسلم."

See how short that chain is? Now compare that to a chain Imaam al-Bukhaari quotes:

"Yahyaa ibn Bukayr narrated to us, saying: al-Layth narrated to us, from `Uqayl, from ibn Shihaab, from `Urwah ibn az-Zubayr, from `Aa'ishah, Umm-ul-Mu'mineen, that she said:"

That's one example of a Sanad of Imaam al-Bukhaari. So, Imaam al-Bukhaari for example has 4-5 people between him and the Sahaabi, whereas in some cases, Imaam Abu Haneefah heard directly from a Sahaabi, who heard from Rasoolullaah صلى الله عليه وسلم. Can you see the difference? Now whose Hadeeth should be followed, do you think, if both quote a Hadeeth on a certain topic?

Again I reiterate such issues will be in less than secondary matters if any such thing in fard actions kindly point it out with which hadiths and its sanad .

Even if there such matter of Fards with such differences ( which to my knowledge is not there ) except a very few things than we try to follow the safer one without doubts will be our Criterian.

Except in a very few matters of invalidation of wudu like in my own example myself being a hanafi but my wife being Shafi in the matter of touching each other which invalidates the wudu in shafi even i try to follow that as much as possible but if i forget i do not do my wudu again since we see authentic hadith Prophet :saws: touching Aisha RA and the Noble Quran is clear cut too on touching .

Secondly:

The statement of the A'immah that if the Hadeeth is authentic, follow the Hadeeth and throw their Madh-hab against the wall, was directed at their students, who were Mujtahideen themselves. It was not directed at people who cannot even speak Arabic. If a person cannot speak Arabic, then he cannot understand the Qur'aan; instead, he has to rely on some human being's interpretation of an Aayah, which he puts into an "English Translation", and this person then has to read that and try to learn from there.

Read this thread to see what are the requirements of being an `Aalim:

https://www.islamicboard.com/-ilm-kn...ib-ul-ilm.html

Bro I follow ONLY imaam Hanifa because of his takwa and being tabieen so that's why his statement will be applicable to all his followers . Where did Imam Hanifa say this is only for my students who are alive now ? (90 AH) We are also his students when we are trying to follow his fiqh so its directed to us all . If we cannot throw his fatwa OUT when it CLEARLY contradicts the Noble Quran and hadith then we succumb to the verse ''They took their priests & monks as rab ......''

So following it practically what I claimed, i tried much to find did Imam Hanifa declared Crab as Haram ? or was it from his students ?? (can you reply please bro Huzaifa)

So when seafood is pure as per hadith and the noble quran I did voluntarily ate THE SEA CRAB (not the land ones) since i do not want to obey any Haram or halal commandments except from Allah and through his Nabi :saws: though some say its because of Crab's Fangs but the basic criteria of sea from the Noble quran comes first. We know even Habibullah Prophet :saws: was admonished for his personal likes,dislikes and calling them a haram in the noble quran

If someone like Einstein were to have said that, if anyone can come across an error in his works, they should correct it, then he is directing that statement towards people who are specialists in the fields he was. He is not directing that statement at a child who has not yet learnt how to count, who has not yet learnt that 1+1=2. If this child were to think that he can correct Einstein based on his being unable to understand something Einstein mentioned, and so he thinks he's found a "mistake", would you take him seriously? Similarly, a person who has not studied the ABCs of `Ilm, who doesn't have the most basic requisite, which is fluency in Arabic, thinking he can "correct" the A'immah of the past - who were giants in the Deen - is exactly the same.

May Allaah Ta`aalaa grant all of us the correct understanding, Aameen.

والسلام

Your statement bolded above CONTRADICTS the last sermon of Prophet :saws: which i believe the STRONGEST among hadith with 10,000's of witnesses

'' All those who listen to me shall pass on my words to others and those to others again; and may the last ones understand my words better than those who listened to me directly. Be my witness, O Allah, that I have conveyed your message to your people

Note : But I do not know for sure are we the last ones ?? since Allah has given us ONLINE hadiths at finger tips to search a few or & find just 10's or 100's of hadith about a single topic from more than about 30,000 hadiths which would have been hard for our predecessors. similarly the Quran Corpus - word to word translation are better from some translations of certain translators in certain different verses is what i found in experience. allahu aalam.

[azc]

@talibilm : I respect your views though but bro huzaifa's views are more logical. Most important aspect of deen is hidden from your eyes that all the Islamic ilm ( of hadith, fiqh, tafseer, qirat etc) utterly depends on personalities that are to be trusted without any specific dalil despite they are fallible. Only prophet s.a.w is infallible.

[azc]

@huzaifa ibn Adam : brother, would you write views of 4 imams about the topic of the thread

[Huzaifah ibn Adam]

Note : But I do not know for sure are we the last ones ?? since Allah has given us ONLINE hadiths at finger tips to search a few or & find just 10's or 100's of hadith about a single topic from more than about 30,000 hadiths which would have been hard for our predecessors. similarly the Quran Corpus - word to word translation are better from some translations of certain translators in certain different verses is what i found in experience. allahu aalam.

Just going to reply to this part of the post right now (bit busy):

1) Imaam Ahmad ibn Hanbal رحمة الله عليه memorised one million Ahaadeeth. They were in his mind 24/7. In addition to that, he told his students that there is not a single Hadeeth that he ever learnt except that he acted upon it. Every single one of those one million Ahaadeeth.

Now, brother, what were you saying about searching 2, 3, 5, 10 Ahaadeeth from "30,000 Ahaadeeth"?

2) Allaah Ta`aalaa said in the Qur'aan:

إنا أنزلناه قرآناً عربياً

{"We have sent it down as an Arabic Qur'aan."}

The Qur'aan is in Arabic. It has to be understood in Arabic. It cannot be properly understood through translations. See, a translation is not the words of Allaah Ta`aalaa. When you are reading the Arabic, you are reading the exact Words of Allaah Ta`aalaa, whereas when you're reading an English translation, you're reading the words of Yusuf Ali, or Marmaduke Pickthall, or Muhsin Khan, or Taqi-ud-Deen al-Hilali, etc. See the difference? So, you cannot make Qiyaas and Ijtihaad on English words written by human beings. Ijtihaad and Qiyaas can only be done on the actual Words of the Qur'aan, and those are in Arabic. So, a translation doesn't cut it. Even when a person wants to go into the field of debating with the Jews and the Christians, many debaters study the Hebrew language in order to read the Tawrah, for example, in its original language of Hebrew so as to understand it better. And, when you read the actual Hebrew, you see the huge differences between it and the translation. Just take one example: the occurrence of the name of Rasoolullaah صلى الله عليه وسلم in the Hebrew version of the Psalms. In the English, it's been translated to something completely different. In order to understand any of the Kutub Munazzalah (Revealed Books), you must understand them in their original languages. This is common sense.

May Allaah Ta`aalaa grant us the understanding.

Was-Salaam.

[talibilm]

:sl:

am sorry to say (its not kuffar or shirk) i do not know whether He Imaam hambal said he remembered a million hadith because i could hardly believe it, similarly that Imam abu Hanifa prayed 40 years with wudu of Isha to wudu of Subuh. I believe them as exaggerations as was also said about by someone who is also knowledgeable . So I stick to the hadith ''THE BEST OF THE UMMAH 3 genearations the maximum. I do respect the other Scholars after that I said the PRIORITY of Fard untill naffl or Kufr, shrik ,all types and classification of Shirk , Haram, Makruh tahrim , Makruh etc decides whom I should follow.

Normally when i ponder on the noble Quran i used to take many translations and tafsirs and still compare with the Quran corpus which also uses Grammar of arabic to say on it.

Only this much we could do and Allah ar rahman is my wakeel and I after trying with the sunnah , the practise of Sahabas and the asking my heart 3 times as the hadith says to ask i follow the commandments of Allah.

For example the Zakat decision as per the Aaalim nd hafiz sahab who with whom i was close ans ask doubts with when i was in my teens clearly said there is no zakat for land but the Mufti ,,,

continue inshallah later

[azc]

@huzaifa ibn Adam : These are simply stories about muhaddisin of getting learnt 1 or 2 or 3 or 600000 ahadith.... Knowledge of Arabic isn't essential to understand this deen, however, delving into the treasures of Quran and ahadith concerning deduction and inference the rulings is the uncanny acumen of fuqha, or every layman of Arab land would be a mujtahid. Indeed, none of us is so fluent in Arabic as you but it doesn't mean that everyone is too ignorant to comprehend scriptures.

[Serinity]

:salam:

The Qur'aan is in Arabic. Therefore must be best understood in Arabic.

English translations are an understanding of the Ayaah.

This is logical tbh.

Allahu alam

[Simple_Person]

:sl:

am sorry to say (its not kuffar or shirk) i do not know whether He Imaam hambal said he remembered a million hadith because i could hardly believe it, similarly that Imam abu Hanifa prayed 40 years with wudu of Isha to wudu of Subuh. I believe them as exaggerations as was also said about by someone who is also knowledgeable . So I stick to the hadith ''THE BEST OF THE UMMAH 3 genearations the maximum. I do respect the other Scholars after that I said the PRIORITY of Fard untill naffl or Kufr, shrik ,all types and classification of Shirk , Haram, Makruh tahrim , Makruh etc decides whom I should follow.

Normally when i ponder on the noble Quran i used to take many translations and tafsirs and still compare with the Quran corpus which also uses Grammar of arabic to say on it.

Only this much we could do and Allah ar rahman is my wakeel and I after trying with the sunnah , the practise of Sahabas and the asking my heart 3 times as the hadith says to ask i follow the commandments of Allah.

For example the Zakat decision as per the Aaalim nd hafiz sahab who with whom i was close ans ask doubts with when i was in my teens clearly said there is no zakat for land but the Mufti ,,,

continue inshallah later

That you believe or not if he indeed remembered that amount, is not of importance, even IF he remembered really that amount. Knowledge doesn't equal to understanding. I very often see as a layman myself that some Muslims are very knowledge..and what i mean by that is..THEY SERIOUSLY ARE VERY KNOWLEDGEABLE. They know A LOT more than me. Like a machine being able to store A LOT of data without any errors being able to retrieve it (while we human beings tend to forget pieces). But it amazes me that they lack very often the understanding.

When i alhamdulillah became Muslim again, i had a discussion with a family member. He was convinced that during fasting you should not rinse your mouth when doing wudu and he also did not rinse his mouth but just put some water on his upper lip and down the chin while his mouth was closed. The whole argument began because i after the sun came up, brushed my teeth and he was convinced that that would stop my fasting. I said in the Qur'an Allah(swt) says Islam is not a burden and looking from that logical point not brushing your teeth becomes a burden as your teeth are still dirty..with also the INTENTION of really brushing your teeth not slowing water. Allah(swt) is aware of your intention and if indeed you swallowed some water. He was older than me and his whole life longer Muslims and more knowledgeable about Islam, but it was bizarre to not have any logical, rational and reasonable argument of why not brushing your teeth or rinsing your mouth doing wudu. I said when you rinse your mouth you do not swallow, rather you spit out what was in your mouth.

Another family member of mine she did not sniff water up her nose just in general when doing wudu. She said..she can't do it. But as far as i know i am not aware of any medical complications. Later on she even said that i do my wudu "too long" 3-6 minutes too long??...o_O!!?? These things really create doubt in your heart. About rinsing of the mouth i could confirm i was doing good also with brushing teeth, also the time spent on wudu. As i read a hadith about a sahabi seeing Rasullah(saws) doing wudu slowly and carefully.

Another day i asked a simple question to the female member of mine if she ever cried when doing salah, she said no. While in the car with that other male family member of mine i looked away when i saw a woman on the street he thought as if i was acting to be better then him. He said "well i do look at women(non-mahram)"..as if it is something to be proud of to look at non-mahram women. I suspect just like me back when i was a culture-Muslim (that is how i see how i was back then) they also are convinced of Islam, but never really tasted imaan. Allah knows best off course.

So these people often they know MUCH, but they do not have a logical and rational explanation why this or why that. Thus they become extreme. The sahabah were simple people, but we have made things very complicated. Often when following logic, rationality and reason you can come to a conclusion that is the same in general what scholars say or Islam in general says.

The only things that i follow blindly so to say are the things like saying bismillah when eating or doing something or pouring water or doing the dua when going to the bathroom or undressing..later on i also have understood why doing these things for protection from evil jin and many other little Islamic habits.

[Serinity]

:salam:

I take roughly 4-6 minutes to do wudhu.

Sadly, I rarely cry in Salaah. Not that I don't want to. It is just that I find myself focusing too much on blocking out shaytaan.

Allahu alam.

[Simple_Person]

:salam:

I take roughly 4-6 minutes to do wudhu.

Sadly, I rarely cry in Salaah. Not that I don't want to. It is just that I find myself focusing too much on blocking out shaytaan.

Allahu alam.

My question to that female family member of mine was not if she cried sometimes in salah, but if she EVER has cried in salah. Her answer was no.

BTW, i have noticed that doing salah to achieve this, try to seclude yourself from other people when doing prayer (when doing alone). Go to a room where nobody is there. When you have achieved this (crying in salah) even when you go to masjid with people standing right next to you, you can't hold your tears back. Off course imaan goes up and down. But keeping these kind of things in mind, to repeat it and making your imaan once again go up is a good start.

About sheytan, there are certain approaches. Instead of focusing on sheytan and trying to block him..focus for example on Allah(swt). You will forget sheytan instantly. As i for example when focusing on Allah(swt) ..wanting to see His face in paradise and wanting paradise..your focus on sheytan and this dunya fades away because it becomes worthless in comparison with seeing Allah(swt) and being in paradise.

[Serinity]

It is just that the doubts I know the answers to, yet they still persist.

I just don't want to die like this man. I think increasing my love for Allah will do.

[azc]

It is just that the doubts I know the answers to, yet they still persist. I just don't want to die like this man. I think increasing my love for Allah will do.

durud/salam on prophet s.a.wSoften the heart at, so least 100 times daily, you send durud/salam and see the result

[Simple_Person]

removed

[Huzaifah ibn Adam]

@huzaifa ibn Adam : These are simply stories about muhaddisin of getting learnt 1 or 2 or 3 or 600000 ahadith.... Knowledge of Arabic isn't essential to understand this deen, however, delving into the treasures of Quran and ahadith concerning deduction and inference the rulings is the uncanny acumen of fuqha, or every layman of Arab land would be a mujtahid. Indeed, none of us is so fluent in Arabic as you but it doesn't mean that everyone is too ignorant to comprehend scriptures.

Of course, knowledge of Arabic alone is not enough. That is why, in this thread about being a Taalib-ul-`Ilm, I explained some of the required Islaamic sciences one is required to have mastered before they can even attempt to be deriving rulings from Qur'aan and Sunnah.

Also, that Imaam Ahmad memorised one million Ahaadeeth is no exaggeration. The A'immah of the past, especially the Arabs, had extremely powerful memories. Even in these days, when the memories of people have become so weak on account of the luxury of having computers and smartphones, there are still people with powerful memories. Even myself, Alhamdulillaah, I am able to read a Hadeeth just once and memorise it. During the period when I did Hifz, I used to do 10 pages of Sabaq a day. That's memorising 10 pages a day, and I was able to do it within an hour or so, Alhamdulillaah. I did the entire 26th Juz/Para as Sabaq in one day. When it came to Soorah an-Noor, I memorised the entire Soorah within one night. The Arabs of today still have very good memories, Alhamdulillaah.

So, for Imaam Ahmad ibn Hanbal, who lived over 1,000 years ago, to memorise one million Ahaadeeth is not at all difficult to believe. He was not the only Imaam who did this. Imaam Abu Zur`ah ar-Raazi memorised 700,000. Imaam al-Bukhaari memorised 300,000. When Imaam Ahmad was asked how many Ahaadeeth one must have memorised in order to be a Mujtahid, he hinted at 400,000 "perhaps" being enough. These are historical facts narrated in the books of history. You cannot just reject historical facts because they seem impossible to you. If you can reject these historical facts, what's to stop another person from coming along and saying that he denies that the Ambiyaa ever existed? He denies that Nabi Moosaa عليه السلام existed, or Nabi `Eesaa عليه السلام, or any of the other Ambiyaa? Or, another person can come along and say that he denies Adolf Hitler ever existed, or Stalin, or Marx, or Benjamin Franklin, or Abraham Lincoln; he denies that World War I and World War II ever took place, he doesn't believe that the Native Americans, Wild Indians, ever existed, etc. Using that logic, anyone could just reject anything and everything because he "feels like it". Maybe it "seems impossible" to him that World War I took place, so he rejects it. He can also say it's "not Kufr or Shirk" to reject it. Yes it's not Kufr or Shirk: it's simply Jahaalat (ignorance). There were historians who specialised in history. They made it their life's goal to just record historical events. Especially when it comes to Islaamic history, the Muslim historians spent a great deal of effort providing evidence for each of the facts they wrote down, and so they would have Asaaneed (chains of narrators) for each of the historical events, and there was the science of narrator criticism to determine the honesty and trustworthiness of each narrator in the chain, etc.

So, long story short: Imaam Ahmad ibn Hanbal memorised one million Ahaadeeth. What's hard to believe about that? We, as people who did Hifz, memorised the Qur'aan, 848 pages long. 848 pages! And there are thousands of Huffaaz around the world - especially in the Indo-Pak subcontinent - able to recite the entire Qur'aan from memory in one day. Many of them do that during Ramadhaan, Taraaweeh. Reciting the entire Qur'aan from memory in a single night.

Was-Salaam.

[ardianto]

Removed

[Simple_Person]

Brother, please, be careful with your advice.

What mentioned in your advice actually is act of seek guidance. And we should not seek guidance from shaytan.

No you didn't understand what i mean. What i mean is asking him good questions. For example, sheytan says there is no God. But logic, rationality and reason says there is a God. If you for example would ask sheytan that ..what would be his argument against it? There is NO logical, rational and reasonable argument that can refute a the existence of a Creator. There are people who do not follow logic, rationality and reason indeed, so they are easily convinced of their own emotions.

So for example, as a single male myself..i FEEL about wanting to marry. But then i bring in the argument to assess my current situation acknowledging that i would do my wife more harm than good. This being not beneficial for me on the Day of Judgement. So sheytan wants you to follow the path you do most harm to yourself. But asking him the questions that he can't answer, you can easily in the future say "dude, i asked you already and you could not answer it..so get lost".

"Those who believe fight in the cause of Allah , and those who disbelieve fight in the cause of Taghut. So fight against the allies of Satan. Indeed, the plot of Satan has ever been weak." Qur'an 4:76

[ardianto]

No you didn't understand what i mean. What i mean is asking him good questions. For example, sheytan says there is no God. But logic, rationality and reason says there is a God. If you for example would ask sheytan that ..what would be his argument against it? There is NO logical, rational and reasonable argument that can refute a the existence of a Creator. There are people who do not follow logic, rationality and reason indeed, so they are easily convinced of their own emotions.

So for example, as a single male myself..i FEEL about wanting to marry. But then i bring in the argument to assess my current situation acknowledging that i would do my wife more harm than good. This being not beneficial for me on the Day of Judgement. So sheytan wants you to follow the path you do most harm to yourself. But asking him the questions that he can't answer, you can easily in the future say "dude, i asked you already and you could not answer it..so get lost".

"Those who believe fight in the cause of Allah , and those who disbelieve fight in the cause of Taghut. So fight against the allies of Satan. Indeed, the plot of Satan has ever been weak." Qur'an 4:76

I understand what you mean. But unfortunately you don't understand how dangerous the trying to communicate with, or asking question to shaytan, even if with intention to challenge. It will lead to astray.

Shaytan are not dumb, bro, they are smart. So be careful with shaytan. Don't play with them.

[Serinity]

Iblees is smart bro. he knows Islam. he believes in Allah, etc.

Someone like Iblees will only toy with you.

[Simple_Person]

I understand what you mean. But unfortunately you don't understand how dangerous the trying to communicate with, or asking question to shaytan, even if with intention to challenge. It will lead to astray.

Shaytan are not dumb, bro, they are smart. So be careful with shaytan. Don't play with them.

When doing the dishes i was thinking about this and i remembered this aya.

"He said, "Did you see when we retired to the rock? Indeed, I forgot [there] the fish. And none made me forget it except Satan - that I should mention it. And it took its course into the sea amazingly" Qur'an 18:63

Which means he can also make you even forget your argument and thus deceive you.

Jazakallahu khairan for the reminder.

[azc]

Of course, knowledge of Arabic alone is not enough. That is why, in this thread about being a Taalib-ul-`Ilm, I explained some of the required Islaamic sciences one is required to have mastered before they can even attempt to be deriving rulings from Qur'aan and Sunnah.Also, that Imaam Ahmad memorised one million Ahaadeeth is no exaggeration. The A'immah of the past, especially the Arabs, had extremely powerful memories. Even in these days, when the memories of people have become so weak on account of the luxury of having computers and smartphones, there are still people with powerful memories. Even myself, Alhamdulillaah, I am able to read a Hadeeth just once and memorise it. During the period when I did Hifz, I used to do 10 pages of Sabaq a day. That's memorising 10 pages a day, and I was able to do it within an hour or so, Alhamdulillaah. I did the entire 26th Juz/Para as Sabaq in one day. When it came to Soorah an-Noor, I memorised the entire Soorah within one night. The Arabs of today still have very good memories, Alhamdulillaah.So, for Imaam Ahmad ibn Hanbal, who lived over 1,000 years ago, to memorise one million Ahaadeeth is not at all difficult to believe. He was not the only Imaam who did this. Imaam Abu Zur`ah ar-Raazi memorised 700,000. Imaam al-Bukhaari memorised 300,000. When Imaam Ahmad was asked how many Ahaadeeth one must have memorised in order to be a Mujtahid, he hinted at 400,000 "perhaps" being enough. These are historical facts narrated in the books of history. You cannot just reject historical facts because they seem impossible to you. If you can reject these historical facts, what's to stop another person from coming along and saying that he denies that the Ambiyaa ever existed? He denies that Nabi Moosaa عليه السلام existed, or Nabi `Eesaa عليه السلام, or any of the other Ambiyaa? Or, another person can come along and say that he denies Adolf Hitler ever existed, or Stalin, or Marx, or Benjamin Franklin, or Abraham Lincoln; he denies that World War I and World War II ever took place, he doesn't believe that the Native Americans, Wild Indians, ever existed, etc. Using that logic, anyone could just reject anything and everything because he "feels like it". Maybe it "seems impossible" to him that World War I took place, so he rejects it. He can also say it's "not Kufr or Shirk" to reject it. Yes it's not Kufr or Shirk: it's simply Jahaalat (ignorance). There were historians who specialised in history. They made it their life's goal to just record historical events. Especially when it comes to Islaamic history, the Muslim historians spent a great deal of effort providing evidence for each of the facts they wrote down, and so they would have Asaaneed (chains of narrators) for each of the historical events, and there was the science of narrator criticism to determine the honesty and trustworthiness of each narrator in the chain, etc.So, long story short: Imaam Ahmad ibn Hanbal memorised one million Ahaadeeth. What's hard to believe about that? We, as people who did Hifz, memorised the Qur'aan, 848 pages long. 848 pages! And there are thousands of Huffaaz around the world - especially in the Indo-Pak subcontinent - able to recite the entire Qur'aan from memory in one day. Many of them do that during Ramadhaan, Taraaweeh. Reciting the entire Qur'aan from memory in a single night.Was-Salaam.

Glad to know of your excellent memory. ...I've no doubt about the memory of muhaddisin, actually I don't believe that so many ahadith were ever narrated. You said imam Razi rh (d 264) memorized 7 lac ahadith..... Will you tell me where these ahadith are..?????....

[Huzaifah ibn Adam]

Glad to know of your excellent memory. ...I've no doubt about the memory of muhaddisin, actually I don't believe that so many ahadith were ever narrated. You said imam Razi rh (d 264) memorized 7 lac ahadith..... Will you tell me where these ahadith are..?????....

The short answer is that many times, a single Hadeeth can have multiple (more than 10) different Asaaneed (chains of narrators), and this is counted by the Muhadditheen as being 10 different Ahaadeeh. So, the Matn (text) might be the same but the chain of narrators in each one is different.

See these two links:

http://sunnahonline.com/library/biog...mad-ibn-hanbal

https://theauthenticbase.wordpress.c...ad-ibn-hanbal/

-------------

'Abdullah ibn Ahmad, his son, said: "I heard Ar-Razi say: 'Your father memorised a million hadith, which I rehearsed with him according to the topic.' "
1 – Abu Zur’ah said:
“Ahmad bin Hambal had memorized one million ahadith.”
[”Uluww al-Himmah’; p. 183]

[Huzaifah ibn Adam]

Also, keep in mind that when the `Ulamaa of the past spoke about "Hadeeth", they included the Aqwaal (sayings) of the Sahaabah and of the Taabi`een as well.

والله تعالى أعلم

والسلام

[talibilm]

That you believe or not if he indeed remembered that amount, is not of importance, even IF he remembered really that amount. Knowledge doesn't equal to understanding................

:sl:

its should not be understood that i am degrading those great people but I mean to say even if they were not true (imo Imaam Abu Hanifa did not go to toilet or even vomit or even passed air even ONCE -one night in 40 years etc ) it does not reduce my respect towards those great leaders of Ummah a little bit .The stories of the Imaam Abu Hanifa of his Piety are plenty like the Jumping oh his Queue from the shadow of a Person's house SHOWS how minute & precise he was in the orders of Allah and his Prophet and similarly Imaam Ahmad Ibn Hambal taking lashes shows his piety are enough for us but in contrast The Second best Person of our Ummah & closest companion of Prophet :saws: Abu bakr as siddique narrated only few hadith and he also burnt 500 of them because of his takwa too but still his grade is incomparable from those who remembered much hadith

@talibilm : I respect your views though but bro huzaifa's views are more logical. Most important aspect of deen is hidden from your eyes that all the Islamic ilm ( of hadith, fiqh, tafseer, qirat etc) utterly depends on personalities that are to be trusted without any specific dalil despite they are fallible. Only prophet s.a.w is infallible.

Jazakallah for your advice bro , I do respect Bro Huzaifa's knowledge but when there is Difference of opinions it has to be discussed for THE SAKE OF ISLAM . But we should learn to agree to disagree as was during sahabas themselves by opinions but not in muslim brotherhood .

I had even posted Bro Huzifa's comment about aqeedah on the ummah with his name on it shows the importance i give to the knowledgeable including you & others here BUT that's why am here to know & to express our doubts and concern to find the opinions and solutions, May Allah lead us to the right path

[talibilm]

:salam:

The Qur'aan is in Arabic. Therefore must be best understood in Arabic.

English translations are an understanding of the Ayaah.

This is logical tbh.

Allahu alam

:sl:

You are correct but that does not mean a person cannot be on a right path because he does not know arabic & also a Person only knowing Arabic will be on the right path is untrue too. But in fact a hadith says that DURING a period THE great misguiders will be from the Arab speaking people.

[Simple_Person]

:sl:

its should not be understood that i am degrading those great people but I mean to say even if they were not true (imo Imaam Abu Hanifa did not go to toilet or even vomit or even passed air even ONCE -one night in 40 years etc ) it does not reduce my respect towards those great leaders of Ummah a little bit .The stories of the Imaam Abu Hanifa of his Piety are plenty like the Jumping oh his Queue from the shadow of a Person's house SHOWS how minute & precise he was in the orders of Allah and his Prophet and similarly Imaam Ahmad Ibn Hambal taking lashes shows his piety are enough for us but in contrast The Second best Person of our Ummah & closest companion of Prophet :saws: Abu bakr as siddique narrated only few hadith and he also burnt 500 of them because of his takwa too but still his grade is incomparable from those who remembered much hadith

Brother, you have understood my comment in the wrong perspective. I agreed with you. Often you see people hold some scholar or imaam as if whatever he says comes directly from Allah(swt) by the amount of knowledge he has. That is why i said, knowledge doesn't equals understanding. Doesn't mean like you said we should treat those scholars without respect, absolutely not. But these people come second when we talk about the first generation. We Muslims by majority have become sheep who follow blindly as if asking questions or being critical of certain approach that we now a days have is wrong.

The argument of Imaam Abu Hanifa being 40 years long with wudu doesn't add value to the argument. You look at his work and what he had to say. That is what you judge a person by, not because he achieved something..in his personal life. This for example is EXACTLY what people now a days look for. You see Donald Trump being a billionaire and a good business man (big achievements) and suddenly people admire him. While looking at his actions and his mentality, you despise him. While in case of Imaam Abu Hanifa, looking at his work etc, you admire him and are willing to listen what he more has to say as to gain more understanding.

[azc]

@huzaifa ibn Adam : I asked you where are those 7 lac ahadith imam Razi rh memorized...? Are you sure that imam ahmad b hambal rh had 1 million ahadith...? Then why we have only 4% ahadith in musnad ahmad...? What about the rest of 96%. Were they really narrated by different chains... If yes where are they..? I give another example: it's said imam bukhari rh memorized 3 or 6 lac ahadith; but as a matter of fact he couldn't get even 1 hadith as per his conditions (liqa and sima) which could bear the 'words' of azan.?.. Why he could get only 2602 (ahadith without repeating) Why he couldn't get the authentic ahadith as per his conditions so that he should have not repeated the same ahadith..? the same can be seen about other muhaddisin of sihah sitta as well... Why they could collect 4980 sahih ahadith (0.20%) out of 23 lacc ahadith...? How different chains can be proven..? Simply muhaddisin said this, so accept it without saying ifs and buts...?

[ardianto]

When doing the dishes i was thinking about this and i remembered this aya.

"He said, "Did you see when we retired to the rock? Indeed, I forgot [there] the fish. And none made me forget it except Satan - that I should mention it. And it took its course into the sea amazingly" Qur'an 18:63

Which means he can also make you even forget your argument and thus deceive you.

Jazakallahu khairan for the reminder.

We cannot communicate with shaytan in the way like we communicate with other human. If you ask question to your friend, then your friend would answer in human way such as by talk to you, by comment in social media, post in forum, etc. However, if you ask question to shaytan, then saytan would not answer through whisper or voice in your head, but would manipulate your mind that make you doubt and asking more and more questions without ever get an answer. Finally your heart would full of doubt, and start to lose your iman.

Alhamdulillah if you have understood. Wa Iyyaki, brother.

By the way, I have removed my first reply. :)

[talibilm]

:sl:

am sorry to say (its not kuffar or shirk) i do not know whether He Imaam hambal said he remembered a million hadith because i could hardly believe it, similarly that Imam abu Hanifa prayed 40 years with wudu of Isha to wudu of Subuh. I believe them as exaggerations as was also said about by someone who is also knowledgeable . So I stick to the hadith ''THE BEST OF THE UMMAH 3 genearations the maximum. I do respect the other Scholars after that I said the PRIORITY of Fard untill naffl or Kufr, shrik ,all types and classification of Shirk , Haram, Makruh tahrim , Makruh etc decides whom I should follow.

Normally when i ponder on the noble Quran i used to take many translations and tafsirs and still compare with the Quran corpus which also uses Grammar of arabic to say on it.

Only this much we could do and Allah ar rahman is my wakeel and I after trying with the sunnah , the practise of Sahabas and the asking my heart 3 times as the hadith says to ask i follow the commandments of Allah.

For example the Zakat decision as per the Aaalim nd hafiz sahab who with whom i was close ans ask doubts with when i was in my teens clearly said there is no zakat for land but the Mufti ,,,

continue inshallah later

So continued here

But since a Mufti is deemed to have studied more than a aalim i gave more preference to him who said Its a Must to give zakat on land (at cost) which was bought for business & treat as goods in stock (though my heart did not accept it ) So i followed him which put me in much difficulty landing me in debts for my kids studies untill i found the right hadith its here #76
http://www.ummah.com/forum/showthread.php?426285-Mostly-Overlooked-Hadiths-amp-Verses-and-their-Wisdom/page2


the REASON for such mistakes is missing of certain hadith regarding an issue and also we know Prophet :saws: or the rightly guided caliphas were practically ON THE FIELD before giving a fatwa. they did not stay ONLY in the Masjid or Madrasa but were on the worldy matters too in the battle field, in the trade market etc. So imho to become a good mufti they must also be academically knowledgeable to a little extent so that their fatwas will be practical and beneficial since Allah wishes ease for his slaves. Allah tested his sahabas firstly with the demise of Prophet :saws: and also in the complilation of the Noble Quran . Of course Prophet :saws: who is the most wise among humansdid not do untill Allah ordered it in such important things like the Hijra to Medina , treaty of Hudaibiya, compilation of Noble Quran etc ( though Prophet most probably knew such matters were of atmost importance to his ummah) because Allah swt put Prophet :saws: INTO TEST & so were SAHABAS PUT TO TEST & so Allah puts us into test with various opinions & sects to show how we manage our affairs with iqlaas or our Ego etc etc . sura
http://legacy.quran.com/67/2 this is what for Allah made the universe for

May Allah guide us all.

wassalam

[Huzaifah ibn Adam]

@huzaifa ibn Adam : I asked you where are those 7 lac ahadith imam Razi rh memorized...? Are you sure that imam ahmad b hambal rh had 1 million ahadith...? Then why we have only 4% ahadith in musnad ahmad...? What about the rest of 96%. Were they really narrated by different chains... If yes where are they..? I give another example: it's said imam bukhari rh memorized 3 or 6 lac ahadith; but as a matter of fact he couldn't get even 1 hadith as per his conditions (liqa and sima) which could bear the 'words' of azan.?.. Why he could get only 2602 (ahadith without repeating) Why he couldn't get the authentic ahadith as per his conditions so that he should have not repeated the same ahadith..? the same can be seen about other muhaddisin of sihah sitta as well... Why they could collect 4980 sahih ahadith (0.20%) out of 23 lacc ahadith...? How different chains can be proven..? Simply muhaddisin said this, so accept it without saying ifs and buts...?

Brother, do you know how many books of Hadeeth there are?? You know, just on this program, "Maktabah Shamela" alone, there are Hundreds of books of Hadeeth, and these are only the ones that have been typed out on computer! There are hundreds more. Imaam al-Bukhaari mentioned that the number of authentic Ahaadeeth he LEFT OUT from Saheeh al-Bukhaari are much more than the amount he had put in.

I understand why you would ask this question, brother. These days, there is this idea going around that there are only six books of Hadeeth, and those are Bukhaari, Muslim, Abu Daawud, Tirmidhee, Nasaa'i, ibn Maajah. This is a completely wrong idea. There are HUNDREDS of books of Hadeeth out there, if not thousands. Some have not even been printed yet. An `Aalim was telling me that currently, in the library at Darul Uloom Deoband, there are hundreds of manuscripts that have not been printed yet. Let alone being available online, they aren't even available yet in book form. There are a lot more Ahaadeeth than the ones people know about.

Also, as I mentioned earlier, when the `Ulamaa said Hadeeth, they mean the sayings of the 124,000 Sahaabah as well as of the Taabi`een. And, a single Hadeeth can have up to 100 different chains of narrators, and thus the Muhadditheen would count this as 100 different Ahaadeeth.

Was-Salaam.

[azc]

Brother, do you know how many books of Hadeeth there are?? You know, just on this program, "Maktabah Shamela" alone, there are Hundreds of books of Hadeeth, and these are only the ones that have been typed out on computer! There are hundreds more. Imaam al-Bukhaari mentioned that the number of authentic Ahaadeeth he LEFT OUT from Saheeh al-Bukhaari are much more than the amount he had put in. I understand why you would ask this question, brother. These days, there is this idea going around that there are only six books of Hadeeth, and those are Bukhaari, Muslim, Abu Daawud, Tirmidhee, Nasaa'i, ibn Maajah. This is a completely wrong idea. There are HUNDREDS of books of Hadeeth out there, if not thousands. Some have not even been printed yet. An `Aalim was telling me that currently, in the library at Darul Uloom Deoband, there are hundreds of manuscripts that have not been printed yet. Let alone being available online, they aren't even available yet in book form. There are a lot more Ahaadeeth than the ones people know about.Also, as I mentioned earlier, when the `Ulamaa said Hadeeth, they mean the sayings of the 124,000 Sahaabah as well as of the Taabi`een. And, a single Hadeeth can have up to 100 different chains of narrators, and thus the Muhadditheen would count this as 100 different Ahaadeeth.Was-Salaam.

I've read a bit of this topic bro... Millions of ahadith aren't found in all the books of ahadith... How exaggeration can be denied regarding muhaddisin were reported to have e.g. Your post displays that imam ahmad b hambal rh memorized 1 lac ahadith, the same post reveals the number of ahadith was 1 million... And only one statement may true either 1 lac or 1 million..?

[Huzaifah ibn Adam]

I've read a bit of this topic bro... Millions of ahadith aren't found in all the books of ahadith... How exaggeration can be denied regarding muhaddisin were reported to have e.g. Your post displays that imam ahmad b hambal rh memorized 1 lac ahadith, the same post reveals the number of ahadith was 1 million... And only one statement may true either 1 lac or 1 million..?

Brother, I mentioned to you that there are Hundreds of Kitaabs of Hadeeth, all of them in Arabic. How many Kitaabs of Hadeeth have you read, to know that one million Ahaadeeth do not exist? Of those Hundreds of Kitaabs of Hadeeth, perhaps ten have been translated into English, if so many.

Are you aware that Imaam Abu Haneefah has his own Musnad (Hadeeth compilation)? That's just one Hadeeth Kitaab right there which many people aren't even aware of. And there are many more.

[Huzaifah ibn Adam]

Just the Musnad of Imaam Ahmad alone (the complete one, in Arabic) contains approximately 30,000 Ahaadeeth.

[Huzaifah ibn Adam]

Musannaf ibn Abi Shaybah contains 35,000 Ahaadeeth.

[Huzaifah ibn Adam]

Imaam Abu Zur`ah ar-Raazi himself narrated 50,000 Ahaadeeth from one man, the Muhaddith, Ibraaheem ibn Moosaa as-Sagheer, one of Imaam al-Bukhaari's Asaatidhah.

[Huzaifah ibn Adam]

On Ummah Forum, some members had compiled a small list of some books of Hadeeth:

http://www.ummah.com/forum/showthrea...ections-in-all

Those are only a small number from the many, many books of Hadeeth which exist.

[Huzaifah ibn Adam]

I had even posted Bro Huzifa's comment about aqeedah on the ummah with his name on

Can you give me a link to that thread, akhi?

[azc]

Brother, I mentioned to you that there are Hundreds of Kitaabs of Hadeeth, all of them in Arabic. How many Kitaabs of Hadeeth have you read, to know that one million Ahaadeeth do not exist? Of those Hundreds of Kitaabs of Hadeeth, perhaps ten have been translated into English, if so many.Are you aware that Imaam Abu Haneefah has his own Musnad (Hadeeth compilation)? That's just one Hadeeth Kitaab right there which many people aren't even aware of. And there are many more.

my Q was different... Anyways,... yes, I've read musnad imam azam and kitab ul athar as well. Besides sihah sitta I've darmi, ibn khuzema, hakim, 3 muwatta, tahawi and a few others (all are printed books -Arabic text with Urdu translation)

[Huzaifah ibn Adam]

I hope this will answer your question, In Shaa Allaah:

قال الذهبي في ترجمة أحمد بن حنبل:
قال عبد الله بن أحمد: قال لي أبو زرعة: أبوك يحفظ ألف ألف حديث، فقيل له: وما يدريك؟
قال: ذاكرته فأخذت عليه الأبواب.
قال الذهبي: فهذه حكاية صحيحة في سعة علم أبي عبد الله، وكانوا يعدون في ذلك المكرر، والأثر، وفتوى التابعي، وما فسر، ونحو ذلك، وإلا فالمتون المرفوعة القوية لا تبلغ عشر معشار ذلك

Imaam adh-Dhahabi writes in "Siyar A`laam an-Nubalaa", under the biography of Imaam Ahmad ibn Hanbal:

"`Abdullaah ibn Ahmad said: Abu Zur`ah said to me, "Your father memorised one million Ahaadeeth." He was asked, "How do you know this?" He said, "I revised it with him and took from him the chapters."

Adh-Dhahabi said: "This is an authentic story showing the vastness of the `Ilm of Abu `Abdillaah (i.e. Imaam Ahmad). In those days, they used to count (as Hadeeth) those which are repeated, and the Athar (narrations from the Sahaabah and Taabi`een), and the Fataawaa of the Taabi`een, and that which is spoken as Tafseer, and the likes of that. Otherwise, the strong (i.e. authentic) and known Mutoon (texts) do not reach one tenth of that."

So, Imaam adh-Dhahabi is saying that the number of Ahaadeeth from Rasoolullaah صلى الله عليه وسلم himself are less than one tenth of a million. However, when you add to that the Ahaadeeth repeated with many different chains, and all of the statements and narrations of the Sahaabah, and the statements and narrations of the Taabi`een, and the Fataawaa given by the Taabi`een, and the Tafseer given by the Taabi`een and by the Sahaabah, and then those statements, Fataawaa, etc. themselves are narrated with various different chains thus counting as additional narrations, all add up to make up this number of one million Ahaadeeth.

Now, whether we have this many in our possession right now or not does not affect the fact that Imaam Ahmad ibn Hanbal had memorised one million. You have the statement here of an Imaam of the calibre of Imaam adh-Dhahabi himself, one of the greatest `Ulamaa who ever lived, saying that this particular story is true. Just because a person in 2017 doesn't have one million Ahaadeeth in his possession, or one million Ahaadeeth aren't available online, does not mean that in the time of Imaam Ahmad, he did not have one million Ahaadeeth in his possession. Remember that during the time of the Tartar invasion, when they attacked the Muslim lands, they burned out thousands of Kitaabs and threw thousands upon thousands of Kitaabs into the sea. However, the Ahaadeeth of Rasoolullaah صلى الله عليه وسلم himself have been meticulously recorded and preserved until the present time, for those are the Ahaadeeth that are important for the derivation of Ahkaam (rulings).

I hope with this explanation the matter is now clear, In Shaa Allaah.

Was-Salaam.

[talibilm]

Can you give me a link to that thread, akhi?

:sl:

am trying to open ummah but i cant, Akhi.

Just click my name which you will find many threads in comparative religion sec and see my posts a few days before . I remember like it was in the Lounge on some aqeedah matter

[Huzaifah ibn Adam]

I'm not a member of that forum so I can't do a search, neither am I able to open any member's profile.

[azc]

@huzaifa ibn Adam

Adh-Dhahabi said: "This is an authentic story showing the vastness of the `Ilm of Abu `Abdillaah (i.e. Imaam Ahmad). In those days, they used to count (as Hadeeth) those which are repeated, and the Athar (narrations from the Sahaabah and Taabi`een), and the Fataawaa of the Taabi`een, and that which is spoken as Tafseer, and the likes of that. Otherwise, the strong (i.e. authentic) and known Mutoon (texts) do not reach one tenth of that."

thanks for this clarification... If the same criterion (of one tenth) is applied on other muhaddisin...then...... Imam bukhari rh and imam Muslim rh. had 30 thousands each, imam abu dawud rh 50 thousands, imam ibn maja rh 40 thousands and imam nasai rh had 20 thousands narrations.

[talibilm]

Can you give me a link to that thread, akhi?

Akhi, here it is post #61

http://www.ummah.com/forum/showthrea...-aqeedah/page2

[talibilm]

@talibilm : I respect your views though but bro huzaifa's views are more logical. Most important aspect of deen is hidden from your eyes that all the Islamic ilm ( of hadith, fiqh, tafseer, qirat etc) utterly depends on personalities that are to be trusted without any specific dalil despite they are fallible. Only prophet s.a.w is infallible.

:sl:

I accept your views bro but only Allah is infallible as we see from the Noble Quran where Allah admonishes even his Habib Muhammad :saws: in a few verses of the Noble Quran.

[Huzaifah ibn Adam]

Yaa akhi, I have a question. Just a general question, aimed at everyone who believes that a person doesn't have to be an `Aalim to derive rulings and doesn't have to follow a Madh-hab, etc., etc.

My question is this:

Let's say there is a person who's never been to university, never been to high school, never even been to kindergarten. He did not study medicine in university, he did not study under any doctors. Instead, what he did is, he has tried to teach himself medicine using Google. So, everyday, he goes on Google, reads up about medical things, joins a Whatsapp group for doctors and pharmacists, posts there now and then, etc. Now, this person decides that, "You know what? There's no need for doctors, pharmacists, nurses, etc. Anyone can do it. So, I'm going to open up my own surgery. I'll diagnose patients using Google and some medical apps on my phone, and, if any surgery needs to be done, like a kidney transplant for example, I'll watch a five minute video on YouTube about kidney transplants and then I'll do it myself. I'll also write out prescriptions for these patients of mine, telling them what medication to take."

Do you agree with ^ this person? Is it right, what he's doing? What will happen if he does that? Also, what will the legal ramifications be?

May Allaah Ta`aalaa grant us the understanding, Aameen.

[Scimitar]

It is just that the doubts I know the answers to, yet they still persist.

I just don't want to die like this man. I think increasing my love for Allah will do.

chin up bro, smiling all the way :)

Scimi

[Scimitar]

Yaa akhi, I have a question. Just a general question, aimed at everyone who believes that a person doesn't have to be an `Aalim to derive rulings and doesn't have to follow a Madh-hab, etc., etc.

My question is this:

Let's say there is a person who's never been to university, never been to high school, never even been to kindergarten. He did not study medicine in university, he did not study under any doctors. Instead, what he did is, he has tried to teach himself medicine using Google. So, everyday, he goes on Google, reads up about medical things, joins a Whatsapp group for doctors and pharmacists, posts there now and then, etc. Now, this person decides that, "You know what? There's no need for doctors, pharmacists, nurses, etc. Anyone can do it. So, I'm going to open up my own surgery. I'll diagnose patients using Google and some medical apps on my phone, and, if any surgery needs to be done, like a kidney transplant for example, I'll watch a five minute video on YouTube about kidney transplants and then I'll do it myself. I'll also write out prescriptions for these patients of mine, telling them what medication to take."

Do you agree with ^ this person? Is it right, what he's doing? What will happen if he does that? Also, what will the legal ramifications be?

May Allaah Ta`aalaa grant us the understanding, Aameen.

Education missing: Lincoln didn't have one I believe, though he claimed to have 1 year! Andrew Johnson had none and was taught to read by his wife! Zachary Taylor had little and Warren Harding's was limited!

They still achieved. How? if not by the will of Allah?

Just like our Nabi, pbuh, who had no education yet, came to become a leader of worlds.

I'm not in disagreement with you, in principle. I agree with what you intend to relay. However, in some rare cases there are exceptions to the rule - as is evident throughout the course of history.

Scimi

[Serinity]

:salam:

There are people who were thought to know little, but were the big revolutionizers. They could not have done it except by the will of Allah.

Sometimes the "lower class" those coming from the poor families, become the big inventors. While the rich relax on their wealth. But these are exceptions, right? Doesn't Islam legislate for the majority? so if the majority fall into fitnah of Zina, it is banned, even though there might be a minority whom it does not affect?

Allahu alam.

['Abd-al Latif]

when a muslim country either bans sharia entirely, or is founded upon democracy and I know from personal experience that democracy and Islamism don't mix....
jihad? dawah? democratic elections? what ate the guidelines of the implementation of sharia?

This is an extremely vast topic to answer and I can be here all day discussing the ins and outs of it. In a summary the Qur'an and Sunnah dictate aspect of our lives as these dictations are from the Divine. To believe Islam and democracy don't exist is ignoring the fundamental concept of of 'ijma. 'ijma isn't democracy per say but it is the unanimous consensus of scholars with regards to several aspects of Islam.

Democratic elections don't really exist in the same sense as the western world. A caliph is elected upon the votes of Muslim governors who, once elected, rules over the Muslim world. There isn't a need for the entire ummah to vote on a caliph because all caliphs have the same role, which is to ensure the laws of Allah are being implemented and that all the appointed governors in the different Muslim areas are doing their job to serve the ummah properly. What Muslims the masses can have a say in are the governors that rule their area.

Again this is just a summary because the questions you're asking is the same as asking about all the ins and outs of western politics. The topics are detailed, intricate and so in depth that they cannot all be understood on a forum.

[Scimitar]

:salam:

There are people who were thought to know little, but were the big revolutionizers. They could not have done it except by the will of Allah.

Indeed,

And Allah only helps those who help themselves. :)

Scimi

[Huzaifah ibn Adam]

Education missing: Lincoln didn't have one I believe, though he claimed to have 1 year! Andrew Johnson had none and was taught to read by his wife! Zachary Taylor had little and Warren Harding's was limited!

They still achieved. How? if not by the will of Allah?

Just like our Nabi, pbuh, who had no education yet, came to become a leader of worlds.

I'm not in disagreement with you, in principle. I agree with what you intend to relay. However, in some rare cases there are exceptions to the rule - as is evident throughout the course of history.

Scimi

You're right, akhi, that they had lacked adequate education: but, in their cases, they became the president and that was quite a long time ago, and in those days, school education wasn't necessary in order to lead a nation forward. In fact, in SA, the president is unable to read fluently and can't do maths either (let alone do maths, can't read strings of digits), but yet he's the president. But there are others helping him and doing the actual running of the country. He's just given a page with a written-out speech on and he struggles his way through it, laughing at his mistakes and inability to read.

With medicine, though, it's different. No one would knowingly take their child to a quack. When it comes to matters of life and death, people take things Very seriously. If their child is sick and needs an operation, they look for the best, most qualified doctor. They're not going to take the child to some guy who's never studied medicine, can't spell, never learnt science, biology, maths, anything like that. People would consider it suicidal to go to a "doctor" like that.

So, when it comes to matters of Imaan and Kufr, people should be much more careful. There is a saying, in Farsi:

Neem Hakeem Khatra Jaan, Neem Aleem Khatra Imaan.

"Half a doctor is a danger to your life, but half a scholar is a danger to your Imaan."

There are skills a person can learn by himself, entirely self-taught, like plumbing, welding, IT, sewing, cooking, baking, etc. He can teach it to himself, and people will even trust him enough to hire him in those fields. Because those things are not matters of life and death. When it comes to matters of life and death, they want people who are professionals, who really know what they're doing. People who aren't chance-takers. People who've studied the medical field properly, thoroughly, under experienced medical professionals and graduated as doctors. Only then would they trust him enough to perform a surgery. No one wants a surgery performed by a guy who doesn't exactly know what he's doing, he's just watched a couple of YouTube videos.

The Deen is much more important than the life of a person, and so people should have much more concern when it comes to the Deen. Rulings are derived by `Ulamaa who have studied the Deen for their entire lives, devoted their lives to it, studied it under experienced `Ulamaa who have been granted `Ilm and Hikmah (Wisdom) by Allaah Ta`aalaa.

`Ilm isn't just "knowledge" or "information". Ma`loomaat is "information". The best explanation for `Ilm has been given by Imaam Maalik رحمة الله عليه. He said:

ليس العلم بكثرة الرواية, إنما هو نور يضعه الله في القلب

"`Ilm is not excessive narrating; rather, `Ilm is a Noor (celestial light) which Allaah places in one's heart, and through which he becomes able to differentiate between Haqq and Baatil."

This `Ilm cannot come simply through reading books or checking things up on Google. People spend time in the Suhbat (company) of the `Ulamaa, learning at their feet, taking from their knowledge and their wisdom. There is Barakah in that which cannot be comprehended. The Deen cannot be treated like a mundane science; it's not an academic subject that can be learnt with a heedless heart, treating it like some curious remnant of the past, a relic, to be relegated to the bookshelves of history. It is a Noor, and this Noor must be acquired in the proper way. Once the person has acquired this Noor, and acts according to it, and has the Taqwa and Khashyah of Allaah, he now becomes worthy of that title of "`Aalim", and Allaah Ta`aalaa now uses him to guide people.

It's not about having book knowledge; if it was, Shaytaan would be the greatest `Aalim in the world. He's been around since thousands of years before even Nabi Aadam عليه السلام was created. He's still around now. Imagine how much "book knowledge" he's acquired in that time? Doesn't make him an `Aalim. Despite all the knowledge he may have, he is filled with Zhulmat (darkness). He can never guide anyone. He can only misguide and lead people to Jahannam.

In like manner, there may be many people in the world, scholars, who have "book knowledge", but they lack `Ilm. It's not the same thing at all.

May Allaah Ta`aalaa grant us the understanding, Aameen.

والله تعالى أعلم

[Scimitar]

A brilliant explanation bro Huazaifah, JazakAllahu khairan for sharing it here :)

Scimi