first of all: the verse you mentioned is talking about the people who change the Words of Allah, and you are compairing the words of Allah with a title some people gave them selfs wich 'ulama' are you talking about horta? could you name them?

^^^Allahu mustacaan, aayada tafsiirkeeda horta maad aqriday weligaa?? 'al kalima' waxa laga wado maad fahantay horta?? I m sure u dont hadii kale waxan aad ku hadliso kumaad hadasheen Salaf waa Salaf al saalix,,, Talaf waa mushrikinntan maanta Salaf isku sheega ee diinta Islaamka la dagaalamaya and yes I know the hadith and look how Mercifull Allah is for the moslims.. lakiin there is no shafaacah for the so called 'moslims' and moslims only by name ur last qeustion ma fahmin

lol;)

what do you mean by 'fights these doubts' ?? wich doubts? could you be more specific plzz

Manahel.fatima;765307 wrote: Our forefather know what is life, what is better and important foe a Muslim or what is not. they give priority to Islam and then they think for any thing else. but now a days. we are just muslim by name not by our actions . moslim by name wax la dhaho majiro... Iman in heart and actions waa ineey isla socdaan and not like the talafi's say: 'one can be a moslim in his heart but his actions can contain kufr or shirk' AcudubiLaah Allah yarxam Sayyid Qutb amiiiin

kuwan bisadaha cuni lahaa waxaa ka daran Ciidamada Dowlada oo wax kale inteey qabtaan eey waayeen beey bisado raacdees galeen ahahah what a joke

waa diintee toloow tan saas looga labisto??? NIqab is the only right way for women to dress

@unknown01: what has ur question have to do with the topic here?

Allahu mustacaan maxaa atheists kabuuxa meeshan Manahael: what you need to start with is learning about Tawheed, that is the best thing you can do for your Dunya and Specially your Akhira

waxaa keenay diinta Alleh oo laga tegay oo aduun iyo waxaan la aqoon la ga doortay diinta Alleh Allahu mustacaan

You can’t be Muslim without making Takfir on every Din except on al-Islam Making Takfir on every Din except al-Islam means that you are firmly convinced that every other Din is clear Kufr. Al-Islam is the message of all Prophets and everything else surely isn’t from Allah. Every Muslim – without any exception – knows that only Islam is the Din that came from Allah. وَمَن يَبْتَغِ غَيْرَ الْإِسْلَامِ دِينًا فَلَن يُقْبَلَ مِنْهُ وَهُوَ فِي الْآخِرَةِ مِنَ الْخَاسِرِينَ (آل* عمران:85) „And whoever seeks a Din other than al-Islam, (it) won’t be accepted of him, and in the Hereafter he will be of the losers” (Al ‘Imran 3:85) If someone isn’t sure that every other Din except Islam is false then he isn’t a Muslim. So what about the one who says, “Hinduism is false but I don’t make Takfir on the Hindus in India who are worshipping innumerable idols?” Would he be Muslim because he “doesn’t say that Hinduism is correct but that some Hindus might have submitted fully to Allah”? Or would he rather be a Kafir because every single Hindu stands for the Din of the Hindus and because the Shirk of the Hindus wouldn’t exist if there weren’t Hindus who would be committing it? To discern the truth in this question isn’t difficult at all. It has already been proven that every Din that isn’t established on at-Tawhid and on omitting Shirk truly isn’t a Din with which Allah is pleased. But rather he is only pleased with al-Islam. If somebody knows at-Tawhid and becomes a Muslim his Din is al-Islam. And al-Islam is binding to making Takfir on every other Din. And no one can be Muslim if he calls those who follow another Din Muslims. Either he wouldn’t know that every other Din than Islam is Kufr – under this condition he could never have embraced Islam, or he knows it but denies this fact intentionally and says that the Kuffar have truly submitted to Allah, too. In this case he can’t be a Muslim as well. He also can’t make excuses for himself through sayings like, “I don’t have enough knowledge to make Takfir” - because this statement surely also means, “I don’t even have enough knowledge to be a Muslim.” Ibnu Hazm said in al-Muhalla (1/2): أَوَّلُ مَا يَلْزَمُ كُلَّ أَحَدٍ, وَلاَ يَصِحُّ الإِسْلاَمُ إلاَّ بِهِ أَنْ يَعْلَمَ الْمَرْءُ بِقَلْبِهِ عِلْمَ يَقِينٍ وَإِخْلاَصٍ لاَ يَكُونُ لِشَيْءٍ مِنْ الشَّكِّ فِيهِ أَثَرٌ وَيَنْطِقَ بِلِسَانِهِ, وَلاَ بُدَّ بِأَنْ لاَ إلَهَ إلاَّ اللَّهُ, وَأَنَّ مُحَمَّدًا رَسُولُ اللَّهِ The first thing which is necessary for everyone and without which al-Islam (of the single person) is never valid is: That the person knows with his heart through knowledge of Yaqin (certainty) and Ikhlas (sincerity) - without having a single trace of doubt - and says (it) with his tongue: That there is no Ilah (deity) except Allah, and that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah” If he knows at-Tawhid he also knows that every other Din is false. And because of this he has to make Takfir on everyone who calls himself Muslim but who instead of practicing Tawhid commits Shirk. If he should say, “I only make Takfir on their false Din but not on the people themselves” – then he would also have to say, “I don’t make Takfir on the Jews or Hindus but only on their Din. But I consider them to be Muslims because they are committing Shirk unknowingly. So I make Takfir on their Din but not on every single person among them, rather they are excused because of their ignorance.” And if someone would claim that there exists a difference between the Kuffar who call themselves Muslims and between the Jews and Hindus then he is actually in doubt about something which he mustn’t doubt. Because he says, “If you don’t follow Islam as your Din you aren’t always Kafir.” But rather you would be a Kafir if you firstly wouldn’t follow the correct Din and secondly also wouldn’t say ‘La ilaha illa Allah, Muhammadun Rasulullah.’ Ibnu Taymiyyah said in Majmu’ ul-Fatawa (3/93) that, فَأَمَرَنَا أَنْ نَقُولَ : آمَنَّا بِهَذَا كُلِّهِ وَنَحْنُ لَهُ مُسْلِمُونَ فَمَنْ بَلَغَتْهُ رِسَالَةُ مُحَمَّدٍ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ فَلَمْ يُقِرَّ بِمَا جَاءَ بِهِ لَمْ يَكُنْ مُسْلِمًا وَلَا مُؤْمِنًا ؛ بَلْ يَكُونُ كَافِرًا وَإِنْ زَعْم أَنَّهُ مُسْلِمٌ أَوْ مُؤْمِنٌ So He has ordered us to say, “We have Iman in all of this (in all books and Prophets) and we are Muslims for Him. So whomever reached the message of Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم and doesn’t confirm that with which he came - he is neither a Muslim nor a Mu’min (believer). Rather he is a Kafir even if he claims that he is Muslim or Mu’min (believer). The meaning of al-Islam It is written in ad-Durar us-Saniyyah (1/117) about the meaning of al-Islam, وهو الاستسلام لله بالتوحيد، والانقياد له بالطاعة، والبراءة من الشرك وأهله And it (al-Islam) is that you submit to Allah through Tawhid and also submit to Him through obedience and the renouncement of ash-Shirk and its people. La ilaha illa Allah has seven known conditions (according to another definition they are eight but the result stays the same). Does a Munafiq, a hypocrite, fulfill all these conditions? Surely he doesn’t … because he isn’t honest and doesn’t have Ikhlas (sincerity). Ibnu Taymiyyah said in Majmu’ ul-Fatawa (14/284), فَكُلُّ مَنْ لَمْ يَعْبُدْ اللَّهَ مُخْلِصًا لَهُ الدِّينَ ، فَلَا بُدَّ أَنْ يَكُونَ مُشْرِكًا عَابِدًا لِغَيْرِ اللَّهِ So whoever doesn’t worship Allah with Ikhlas (sincerity) towards Him in the Din – it is inevitable that he’s a Mushrik who is a worshipper of someone else than Allah. A Munafiq is hiding his Kufr, but every Muslim has to know: Whoever is a hypocrite in his heart isn’t a Muslim. The Muslim doesn’t know the hidden Nifaq (hypocrisy) of the people but he knows: Allah will never let a Munafiq enter Paradise, no matter who he is. As long as they don’t repent sincerely from everything before their death they’ll enter Hellfire. Here, while talking about Nifaq, no one would even dream about talking of preventive factors for Takfir like, “Someone is Munafiq but doesn’t know that Nifaq is Kufr so he is Muslim with Allah.” And a Mushrik doesn’t have Ikhlas as well, so we can see another time: Whoever doesn’t worship Allah alone and doesn’t have Ikhlas toward Him and doesn’t commit any Shirk – can never be a Muslim. An ignorant Mushrik is also someone who commits Shirk, and everyone who commits Shirk is called a Mushrik. Just as everyone who practices Islam is a Muslim. So whoever knows that everyone who practices Islam is also a Muslim has to know as well that everyone who commits Shirk is a Mushrik. There are obstacles that prevent someone from becoming a Muslim. Part of them are arrogance, pride and that you love the Dunya (the worldly life) more than anything else and ignorance about Tawhid!

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم Learn At-Tawhid Before Your Time in This Dunya is Over At-Tawhid Allahu ta’ala said, فَاعْلَمْ أَنَّهُ لَا إِلَهٌ إِلَّا اللَّهُ (محمد:19) „So know that there is no Ilah except Allah (nobody deserves worship except Him).” (Muhammad 47:19) And He ta’ala said, إِنَّ الدِّينَ عِنْدَ اللَّهِ الْإِسْلَامُ (آل عمران:19) „Truly, the Din with Allah is al-Islam.” (Al ‘Imran 3:19) Ibnu Kathir said in his Tafsir (2/25), إخبار من الله تعالى بأنه لا دين عنده يقبله من أحد سوى الإسلام، وهو اتباع الرسل فيما بعثهم الله به في كل حين, حتى ختموا بمحمد صلى الله عليه وسلم “(This is) a notification from Allahu ta’ala that there is no Din with Him that He would accept from anyone except al-Islam. And it (al-Islam) is to follow the Messengers in that which He has always sent them with until they were completed by Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم.” In order to be Muslim – may Allah guide you and let you be of the successful ones – you have to know how to worship Allah alone. Whoever worships Allah alone is a Muslim and a Muwahhid (someone who worships Allah alone through Tawhid) but whoever doesn’t do that isn’t a Muslim. All Muslims agree that without Tawhid (!) you can’t be a Muslim. But whoever commits Shirk doesn’t have Tawhid. It is written in Majmu’ ul-Fatawa from Ibnu Taymiyyah (14/282) that, وَلِهَذَا كَانَ كُلُّ مَنْ لَمْ يَعْبُدْ اللَّهَ وَحْدَهُ ، فَلَا بُدَّ أَنْ يَكُونَ عَابِدًا لِغَيْرِهِ . يَعْبُدُ غَيْرَهُ فَيَكُونُ مُشْرِكًا . وَلَيْسَ فِي بَنِي آدَمَ قِسْمٌ ثَالِثٌ . بَلْ إمَّا مُوَحِّدٌ ، أَوْ مُشْرِكٌ “And because of this is everyone who doesn’t worship Allah alone a worshipper of something else. He worships something other than Him so he is a Mushrik. And there is no third party among the sons of Adam but either he is Muwahhid (someone who worships Allah alone) or he is Mushrik.” To be a Muslim you need knowledge and you have to practice it Whoever wants to worship Allahu ta’ala needs to know how to do this. Not everyone who wants to be Muslim is one. It is reported in the Qur’an that Yusuf عليه السلام said, إِنِ الْحُكْمُ إِلَّا لِلَّهِ أَمَرَ أَلَّا تَعْبُدُوا إِلَّا إِيَّاهُ ذَلِكَ الدِّينُ الْقَيِّمُ وَلَكِنَّ أَكْثَرَ النَّاسِ لَا يَعْلَمُونَ (يوسف:40) “The Hukm (the judgment) is for none but Allah. He has commanded that you worship none but Him; that is the straight Din, but most men know not.” (Yusuf 12:40) This Ayah proofs that the straight Din is to worship Allah alone. But whoever commits Shirk follows a different Din than this one, and doesn’t follow the Prophets. In the Tafsir of Ibnu Kathir (4/390) it says, ثم قال: ذلك الدين القيم أي: هذا الذي أدعوكم إليه من توحيد الله، وإخلاص العمل له، هو الدين المستقيم، الذي أمر الله به وأنزل به الحجة والبرهان الذي يحبه ويرضاه. { وَلَكِنَّ أَكْثَرَ النَّاسِ لا يَعْلَمُونَ } أي: فلهذا كان أكثرهم مشركين. { وَمَا أَكْثَرُ النَّاسِ وَلَوْ حَرَصْتَ بِمُؤْمِنِينَ } يوسف: 103 Then he said: That is the straight Din, that means: That to which I call you of Tawhid towards Allah and Ikhlas (sincerity) in the deeds (performed) for Him is the straight Din which Allah has made obligatory upon us and for which He has sent down the criterion and the clear proof, (the Din) which He loves and is pleased with. “But most men know not.” That means: Because of this most of them are Mushrikin. “And most of mankind are not – even if you desire (it eagerly) – Mu’minin (believers).” (Yusuf 12:103) Can you be Muslim without submitting to Allah? Here appears an important question: Can you be Muslim without submitting to Allah (= practicing Tawhid)? The answer is not difficult because no Muslim can answer this question with ‘yes’. But what exactly is Islam? The answer can be found in a Hadith from the Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم which has been narrated by Abu Hurayrah رضي الله عنه. In this Hadith Jibril عليه السلام is asking a question and receives the following answer, قَالَ مَا الْإِسْلَامُ قَالَ الْإِسْلَامُ أَنْ تَعْبُدَ اللَّهَ وَلَا تُشْرِكَ بِهِ شَيْئًا (صحيح البخاري, كتاب الإيمان) He (Jibrli عليه السلام) said, „What is al-Islam?“ He (Rasulullah صلى الله عليه وسلم) said, „Al-Islam is that you worship Allah and don’t commit any Shirk against Him.“ (Sahih ul-Bukhariyy, Kitab ul-Iman) Thereby it is clear what the meaning of Islam is. So let’s change the above mentioned question a bit: Can you be Muslim without worshipping Allah and without committing any Shirk? The meaning of the question didn’t even change in the least, so the answer still has to be ‘no’. If someone accepts that you can’t be Muslim without practicing Islam then he is accepting at the same time that nobody can be a Muslim if he commits Shirk. Because Islam is that you worship Allah and don’t commit any Shirk. وَمَن يَبْتَغِ غَيْرَ الْإِسْلَامِ دِينًا فَلَن يُقْبَلَ مِنْهُ وَهُوَ فِي الْآخِرَةِ مِنَ الْخَاسِرِينَ (آل* عمران:85) „And whoever seeks a Din other than al-Islam, (it) won’t be accepted of him, and in the Hereafter he will be of the losers” (Al ‘Imran 3:85) So if someone would say, “You can be Muslim whilst committing Shirk”, then he is contradicting the mentioned statement of Rasulullah صلى الله عليه وسلم. He said, “Al-Islam is that you worship Allah and don’t commit any Shirk against Him.” But someone else says, “Al-Islam is that you worship Allah even whilst committing Shirk. If you worship Allah but are committing Shirk you can be Muslim.” Additionally: As long as someone doesn’t know that you can never be a Muslim if you don’t worship Allah alone, he can’t be Muslim as well - no matter if he has already heard about the Hadith, or not. Of course it is correct that you’re not allowed to say something about al-Islam without knowledge. But it is also a part of talking without knowledge if you say, “Not everyone who commits Shirk is also a Muskrik. But rather many of them are Shirk-committing Muslims - that means, they commit Shirk but have fully submitted to Allah.” This is a contradiction in itself. Who says that he never makes Takfir on those who call themselves Muslims but who are committing Shirk is saying through this that he is on the same Din as they are. Whoever doesn’t make Takfir on them (=doesn’t attribute Kufr to them) wouldn’t be following at-Tawhid himself. There are just Muslims and Mushrikun/Kuffar. So if someone doesn’t call a person a Mushrik/Kafir he is automatically calling him a Muslim. Whoever says, “I’m Muslim but those who commit Shirk are Muslims, too, as long as they are professing Islam” – actually says that you can be Muslim if you don’t commit Shirk as well as if you commit Shirk. In fact he is talking about a new Din. In al-Islam no one can commit Shirk without leaving the Din, وَلَقَدْ أُوحِيَ إِلَيْكَ وَإِلَى الَّذِينَ مِن قَبْلِكَ لَئِنْ أَشْرَكْتَ لَيَحْبَطَنَّ عَمَلُكَ وَلَتَكُونَنَّ مِنَ الْخَاسِرِينَ (الزمر:65) „And it has already been revealed to you and to those before you: ‘If you commit Shirk, (then) surely, (all) your deeds will be in vain, and you will certainly be among the losers.” (az-Zumar 39:65) But in his Din it isn’t a condition to omit committing Shirk. But rather he is saying, “Whoever commits in my Din (which he wrongfully calls Islam) Shirk doesn’t become a Mushrik because of this. But just if he knows that it is Shirk - then he would be leaving the Din.” But how come? He leaves al-Islam although you can only become Muslim if you know the difference between Tawhid and Shirk?! Since when can you avoid something intentionally whilst being unaware of its nature? That means that you can avoid Shirk without knowing its real meaning?! Whoever doesn’t know the difference between Islam and Shirk doesn’t know al-Islam itself. And who doesn’t know al-Islam can’t enter into it, as long as he doesn’t learn its foundation – at-Tawhid. This is also clarified by this Hadith: عَنْ عُثْمَانَ قَالَ قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ مَنْ مَاتَ وَهُوَ يَعْلَمُ أَنَّهُ لَا إِلَهَ إِلَّا اللَّهُ دَخَلَ الْجَنَّةَ (صحيح مسلم, كتاب الإيمان) It is narrated from ‘Uthmanرضي الله عنه that he said, “The Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم said, ‘Who dies while he knows that there is no Ilah (deity) except Allah will enter Paradise.’” (Sahihu Muslim, Kitab ul-Iman) But whoever dies without knowing this won’t enter Paradise. First of all you have to know Allah then you have to know that there is no Ilah (deity) except Him and finally you also have to submit to Him. And who doesn’t fulfill all of these points can’t be a Muslim.

jawaab hawadaada janciso raadis baad tahay ee adigu maad isu jawaabtid?

ilaahayoow hana indho tirin AMIIN

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم Whoever Dresses The Garment Of Kufr Has Already Left Al-Islam Whoever dresses the garment of Kufr is confessing himself to another Din (religion, lifestyle, ideology) than al-Islam. If someone wears a garment with a cross, the lettering “There is no God”, or “I love democracy” on it he cannot be Muslim. The cross is a symbol of the Kuffar and an idol. It stands for a Din which is nothing but Shirk and Kufr. Whoever shows by his statements or deeds that he doesn't disassociate himself from it doesn't have to do anything with Islam and Tawhid. Allahu ta’ala said, وَمَنْ يَعْصِ اللَّهَ وَرَسُولَهُ فَإِنَّ لَهُ نَارَ جَهَنَّمَ خَالِدِينَ فِيهَا أَبَدًا And whoever opposes Allah and His Messenger then for him will be the fire of Jahannam to stay therein forever. (al-Jinn: 23) Al-Mawardiyy said in al-Hawi fi Fiqh ash-Shafi’iyy (7/220), أَمَّا الصَّلِيبُ فَمَوْضُوعٌ عَلَى مَعْصِيَةٍ لِزَعْمِهِمْ أَنَّ عِيسَى ابْنَ مَرْيَمَ عَلَيْهِ السَّلَامُ قُتِلَ وَصُلِبَ - ثم قال - وَقَدْ أَخْبَرَ اللَّهُ تَعَالَى بِتَكْذِيبِهِمْ فِيهِ وَمَعْصِيَتِهِمْ بِهِ فَقَالَ سُبْحَانَهُ : وَمَا قَتَلُوهُ وَمَا صَلَبُوهُ The cross is being used to oppose (Allah), because of their claim that ’Isa Ibnu Maryam عليه السلام had been killed and crucified. Then he said: And Allahu ta’ala has already declared that He accuses them of a lie therein, and that they are opposing Him by that. So He subhanahu [wa ta’ala] said, وَمَا قَتَلُوهُ وَمَا صَلَبُوهُ And they neither killed him, nor did they crucify him. [an-Nisa': 157] In Tabyin ul-Haqa'iq by Fakhrud-Din ’Uthman Ibnu ’Aliyy (10/53) it is written, ( قَوْلُهُ وَإِنْ كَانَ عَلَيْهِ زِيُّ الْكَفَرَةِ نَحْوُ الصَّلِيبِ وَالزُّنَّارِ فَهُوَ كَافِرٌ ) أَيْ كَمَا إذَا اخْتَلَطَ مَوْتَانَا بِمَوْتَى الْكُفَّارِ يُعْتَبَرُ الزِّيُّ وَالْعَلَامَةُ لِلْفَصْلِ He [i.e. the one on whose book he is commenting] said: “And if he wears clothes of the Kafarah (=Kuffar) like the cross or the Zunnar (a special belt of the Kuffar) then he is a Kafir.” That means, it is just as if our deceased were mixed with the deceased of the Kuffar; the garment and the sign are regarded as the differenciation (between Muslims and Kuffar). It is mentioned in al-Muhit al-Burhaniyy (2/619) by Burhanud-Din Mahmud Ibnu Ahmad about what should be done if someone found a (buried) treasure: وإن كان فيه علامات الشرك نحو الصنم والصليب وما أشبهها، ففيه الخمس، وأربعة الأخماس للواجد And if there were in it signs of ash-Shirk like the idol or the cross and the like of that then it is divided into five parts, and four fifths are for the finder. Something similar to this can also be found in al-Mabsut (3/360) from as-Sarakhsiyy, أَوْ يَكُونُ فِيهِ شَيْءٌ مِنْ عَلَامَاتِ الشِّرْكِ كَالصَّنَمِ وَالصَّلِيبِ فَحِينَئِذٍ فِيهِ الْخُمُسُ 2 Or there is something of the signs of Shirk inside it (the treasure) like the idol and the cross, so then it is divided into five parts. These two quotes are about the cross being referred to as what it actually is – a symbol of Shirk. So it is something that clearly stands for the Din of the Kuffar an Mushrikun. Just as the lettering “There is no God” is an unambiguous sign of the Kuffar. Every single symbol of a Din of the Kuffar is a sign for it, and whoever wears it on his garment shows by that that he doesn't disassociate himself from it. There is a reminder in the book Sharh al-Kawkab al-Munir from Taqiyyud-Din Ibnu Ahmad Ibni ’Abdil-’Aziz about what is major Kufr and what makes one a Kafir. It is the explanation of another book al-Kawkab al-Munir. So the original text is being quoted therein (with quotation marks) which is explained more detailed afterwards. He said in Sharh al-Kawkab al-Munir (4/485), "وَمَنْ جَهِلَ وُجُودَهُ تَعَالَى" جَلَّ وَعَزَّ "أَوْ عَلِمَهُ، وَفَعَلَ" مَا لا يَصْدُرُ إلاَّ مِنْ كَافِرٍ "أَوْ قَالَ مَا لا يَصْدُرُ إلاَّ مِنْ كَافِرٍ إجْمَاعًا فَـ" هُوَ "كَافِرٌ" وَلَوْ كَانَ مُقِرًّا بِالإِسْلامِ قَالَ ابْنُ مُفْلِحٍ: تَبَعًا لِـ " مُسَوَّدَةِ " بَنِي تَيْمِيَّةَ: مَنْ جَهِلَ وُجُودَ الرَّبِّ، أَوْ عَلِمَهُ وَفَعَلَ أَوْ قَالَ مَا أَجْمَعَتْ الأُمَّةُ أَنَّهُ لا يَصْدُرُ إلاَّ مِنْ كَافِرٍ فَكَافِرٌ. انْتَهَى. قَالَ الْقَاضِي عِيَاضٌ فِي آخِرِ " الشِّفَاءِ ": وَكَذَا يَكْفُرُ بِكُلِّ فِعْلٍ أَجْمَعَ الْمُسْلِمُونَ أَنَّهُ لا يَصْدُرُ إلاَّ مِنْ كَافِرٍ، وَإِنْ كَانَ صَاحِبُهُ مُصَرِّحًا بِالإِسْلامِ، مَعَ فِعْلِهِ ذَلِكَ الْفِعْلَ، كَالسُّجُودِ لِلصَّنَمِ أَوْ لِلشَّمْسِ وَالْقَمَرِ وَالصَّلِيبِ وَالنَّارِ وَالسَّعْيِ إلَى الْكَنَائِسِ، وَالْبِيَعِ مَعَ أَهْلِهَا، [وَالتَّزَيِّي] بِزِيِّهِمْ مِنْ شَدِّ الزُّنَّارِ وَنَحْوِهِ- فَقَدْ أَجْمَعَ الْمُسْلِمُونَ أَنَّ هَذَا لا يُوجَدُ إلاَّ مِنْ كَافِرٍ وَأَنَّ هَذِهِ الأَفْعَالَ عَلامَةٌ عَلَى الْكُفْرِ، وَإِنْ صَرَّحَ فَاعِلُهَا بِالإِسْلامِ. انْتَهَى. “And whosoever is ignorant about the Existence of Him (Allah) ta’ala” – jalla wa ’azza – "or about His Knowledge [i.e. he doesn't have Iman in the Knowledge of Allah], or does” what none except a Kafir does “or says what none except a Kafir says with Ijma’ (consensis), so” he is “a Kafir” even if he confirms al-Islam. Ibnu Muflih said while following the “Musawwadah” of the sons of Taymiyyah (i.e. their book): Whoever is ignorant about the Existence of the Lord, or His Knowledge [i.e. he doesn't have Iman in the Knowledge of Allah], and does or says something which the Ummah has Ijma’ about that none does that except a Kafir so he is Kafir. End (of the statement of Ibnu Muflih) Al-Qadi ’Iyad said at the end of his book “ash-Shifa”, "And so does he (the human being) commit Kufr by every deed which the Muslims have Ijma’ about that only a Kafir does them. Even if the doer of them clearly says that is “a Muslim”, although he is doing that deed. Like the prostration before an idol, or the sun, the moon, the cross, and the fire. And (like) the hastening to the churches and places of prayer together with their people, and [to wear] their clothes – like fastening the Zunnar (a special belt of the Kuffar), or something similar to that. So the Muslims have Ijma’ that this exists only with a Kafir, and that these deeds are signs of Kufr, even if the one who does them clearly states that he is “a Muslim”. End (of the statement of al-Qadi 'Iyad)

arinta waa cadahay marka adiga culumada aad caabudaa anigana Ilaahay(swt) kilmadii Ilaahay baad tii culumo dadka naarka ugu yeedhisa ka dooratay Allahu mustacaan iLaahay hakusoo hadeeyo AMIIN teeda kale: kelmada takfiiri baad tahay, caay baad mooday miyaa waa shardi ka mid ah LAA ILAHA ILA LAAH inuu qofka muslimka ah takfiir ku sameeyo gaalada iyo mushrikiinta anyway may Allah guide u.... amiin

aayada iyo su'aasha aad iweeydiisay wax weey iska galeen oo ah 'inal xukma li Laah' ninkii tan aan aaminsaneen oo meelo kale xukmi u doonta waa mushrik wax kasto oo wax lagu xukmiyo oo aan xukmiga Eebe aheen waa shirk marka saad u jeedo wax waa iska galeen: ina fitna ashadun mina al qatl' hadeey noqoto inaan kala doorto: markhaati fur xukmiga gaalka iyo iska aamus,,, waan iska aamusayaa saan hadalkaaga ka fahmana waxeey iila eegtahay inaadan akhrin waxa meesha ku qoran

marhore ayaan kuu jawaabay oo ku dhahay jawaabta su'aashaada xagan ka aqriso inshaAllah http://www.somaliaonline.com/community/showthread.php/54223-Sport-Games-amp-the-Arbitrators tan kale ee ah: adoo marqaati ka ah nin gaal ah oo 10 nin oo muslim ah dilay, maku marqaati furi laheed mise dulmiga baad udeen laheed, jwaabteedo waa tanaa; wa al fitnatu ashadun mina al qatli {والفتنة أشد من القتل} plz aayadan tafsiikeeda raadso haad xaq doon tahay

Nabad_dadaye;704983 wrote: hadaad ogolaatay iney kubadu xaaraam ahayn waa hagaag , diinta wax kasto oo qofka muslimka xoojinayo jirkiisana dhisayo wey baneysay , hadii munkar kale lagu darin sida ,raga iyo dumarka oo isku qasma , dagaal iyo naceeb dadka muslimiinta dhaxdooda ah . arinta xakamka ,wax walaa ama baraa oo soogalayo maba jiran sababtoo ah walaagu waa inaad qofka jeclaato aad ku raacdo fikirkiisa lakin ref ka wixii qalad ayuu dhigayaa ee hab ciyaareedka kubada qilaafsan waana wax laysku raacay oo cibaado ku dhisneyn danbina ma ahan, ciyaar kastana nidaam ayeey leedahay refkuna qofkii nidaamka ciyaarta jibiyo ayuu qaladkiisa ku qaadaa , wexey lamid tahay adiga iyo qof walaalkaa ah oo baratamaya qof xakamna suubsada si uu sheego kiina badayey ,hadaba inta la baratamayo haduu midkiin kii kale lugta udhigo ,dhaxdhaxaadiyuhu waa inuu sheegaa qaladka , kubaduna waa saas http://www.somaliaonline.com/community/showthread.php/54223-Sport-Games-amp-the-Arbitrators xagan ka fiiri jawabaata inshaAllah

Polanyi;704743 wrote: Then, in that case, if you live in a non muslim land or even secular muslim states( there is a lot of of them round, hey), you have commited taxakum almost hundreds of times and hence you a gaal -using your logic. The only way you can escape commiting taxakum( according to your erroneous diy itjihad) is: 1. if all muslims living in areas not ruled by shariah courts lock themselves in a box or: b. you somehow create alternative legislative and judicial systems whereby one can escape from all kinds of potential taxakum issues which render almost 99 percent of muslims non muslims( according to your opinion again). what is the islamic definition of darul islam? with daliil plz

Tahkim meaning to appoint an arbitrator (referee) is an action which is permissible in deen according to the Qur’an, sunnah and ijmaa-i ummah. There has not been any opposing view other than a group of khawarij. The evidence of its legitimacy is the following ayahs of Allah (swt): “If ye fear a breach between them twain, appoint (two) arbiters, one from his family, and the other from hers; if they wish for peace, Allah will cause their reconciliation: For Allah hath full knowledge, and is acquainted with all things.” (Surah An Nisa 4; 35) “O ye who believe! Kill not game while in the sacred precincts or in pilgrim garb. If any of you doth so intentionally, the compensation is an offering, brought to the Ka'ba, of a domestic animal equivalent to the one he killed, as adjudged by two just men among you; or by way of atonement, the feeding of the indigent; or its equivalent in fasts: that he may taste of the penalty of his deed. Allah forgives what is past: for repetition Allah will exact from him the penalty. For Allah is Exalted, and Lord of Retribution.” (Surah Al Maeda 5; 95) With the restrictions of being Muslim, arriving at a decision appropriate to the will of Allah and to carry out the conditions laid down in the books of fiqh it is permissible to appoint an arbitrator. However a kafir can not be appointed as an arbitrator to the Muslim even if he gives hukm according to the ayah of Allah and even if it is regarding a matter given permission by Allah. In summary in games of sport it is permissible to appoint only a Muslim as arbitrator. Tahkim and qada do not only regard the matter of giving hukm with that which Allah has sent. This matter is also closely in relation with walayah. Views opposing this and similar statements such as, games of sport have no connection with deen nor does it oppose the deen, there is no difference between a Muslim arbitrator and a kafir arbitrator; are invalid and baatil statements. It is kufr for a Muslim to appoint a kafir arbitrator while he himself is one of the parties. This would also be giving walayah to a kafir. It does not make a difference if this kafir is to judge according to deen or not. Likewise this appointment of an arbitrator is similar to applying to a kafir to attain a marriage certificate just for procedure sake or allowing a traffic police to write a report of an accident because an individual is obliged to do so. These actions made out of desperation do not change anything. The hukm does not change if these actions of appointing kafir arbitrators in soccer, wrestling or any other sport are done for the sake of having fun or even for only silliness. Giving the kuffar or the mushrik the right of authority over a Muslim and allowing him to interfere or in otherwords appointing him as an arbitrator is not permissible. In conclusion; when a Muslim is playing a game with rules, the authority to give hukm over the Muslim must be a Muslim. For example if a Muslim is to wrestle with a kafir the arbitrator (referee) meaning the person to judge the winner and the loser cannot be from the kuffar. The position of an arbitrator itself is not kufr. The important factor here is the religion of the arbitrator. If the arbitrator is Muslim in this case there would be no problem. However if he is kafir then this would be taking on a kafir as a wali and will become a matter of walayah. It is most definitely restricted to appoint a kafir as a wali. Matters as such are not matters to take lightly or to be careless of. Individuals who have done a little research will see that those matters which many individuals see as being simple are not matters of making concession. For example, it may seem silly that for the sake of differentiating from the kuffar, RasulAllah (saw) had suggested to comb ones hair differently or to perform salah with shoes on. This is because this individual is not thinking according to bayan (nakl) he is thinking according to his own mind (aql). However the owners of aql, would be aware of the outcome of the imitation of the kuffar and will understand the purpose of the hukm of opposing the kuffar by the sovereign.

Nabad_dadaye;704574 wrote: wax yaalaha lagu gaaloobo eey diinta cadeysay maku jirtaa daawashada kubada cagta? hade aad aragto 10 qof oo muslim ah oo nin uu dilayo dhul gaalana aad joogto hadii ninkaas lasoo qabto maxkamada maka cedeyneysaa inuu ahaa ninkii dilay dadkaas ( maxkamada waa mid gaalo) mise waad iska joogeysaa oo waad qarineysaa dilkaas? 22 dhalin yaro muslim ah ayaa kala baxay si eey kubad ugu jimicsadaan wiil gaal ah od daristihiin idinna soo raacay ayaa banaanka joogo xakamkii ayaad u dhiibateen ,daqiiqadaas kuli 22 qof miyeey gaaloobayaan ? culimada waweyn sida ibnu katir ,qurdhubi , sh cumar faruq madhageysatay /aqrisay ayadaas wexey ku fasireen?......... by the way i didnt say kubada gacta waa lagu gaalooba i just said: markuu dhex dhexaadiyaha gaal yahay then its kufr because of giving a kafir the Walaya

Polanyi;703987 wrote: Ya Tahay, if you go to a discplinary panel @ work or you go to panel to unfair dismissal, isn't this all taxakum? I want you to be consisent here since you said two players going to a referee makes them kuffar. What about if you get into a fight with someone, but you haven't started it and the police arrive to sort it out, that is again kufr according to you, isn't it? first example: haa waa taxaakum second example: askariga haduu dhexgalo to stop it, then there is no tahakum, lakiin haduu xukmiyo any penalty then thats tahakum maxeey tahay dhibka ku jira to understand what tahakum is?

Nabad_dadaye;704574 wrote: wax yaalaha lagu gaaloobo eey diinta cadeysay maku jirtaa daawashada kubada cagta? hade aad aragto 10 qof oo muslim ah oo nin uu dilayo dhul gaalana aad joogto hadii ninkaas lasoo qabto maxkamada maka cedeyneysaa inuu ahaa ninkii dilay dadkaas ( maxkamada waa mid gaalo) mise waad iska joogeysaa oo waad qarineysaa dilkaas? 22 dhalin yaro muslim ah ayaa kala baxay si eey kubad ugu jimicsadaan wiil gaal ah od daristihiin idinna soo raacay ayaa banaanka joogo xakamkii ayaad u dhiibateen ,daqiiqadaas kuli 22 qof miyeey gaaloobayaan ? culimada waweyn sida ibnu katir ,qurdhubi , sh cumar faruq madhageysatay /aqrisay ayadaas wexey ku fasireen?......... did u ever hear of the conpcept called 'walaa wal baraa'??? giving a kafir the right to judge between two moslims is givng him Walaaya teeda kale iisheeg adoo raali ah bal culmada waxa eey ku fasireen aayada... cumar faaruuqna kareeb plz, ibn katir iyo qurdhubi ii sheeg tafsiirkooda

*Blessed;704243 wrote: I'm asking you for sources because clearly this isn'y your own writing and clearly you lack insight into the various view points on the subject matter. Takfeer is an issue which the great Scholars shied away from, so I find it curious that you're so eager to post and repost vague articles on issues whichare under debate. Those are mere interpretations of Quarn and sunnah btw. waakanaa source: http://iman-in-allah.blogspot.com/ hope ur happy now