Salafi_Online
-
Content Count
676 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Salafi_Online
-
-
Sister baarakallahu feekee,
Few questions inshallah if i may
who is the author?
Allah's messenger said khalifaship(if thats even a word) would end, the rule of Kingship would begin, and then after that Oppressive kingship and then back Khalifah upon the way of the prophethood and this also will end!
can an islamic state be establish without a Khalifah, but rather with amirs, Or (waliyul Amr)?
so lets say, i lived during the first Kingship phase! and i know oppressive kingship is on its way ,what then shall i do? shall i still work on establish a khalifah? wouldnt this task be pointless?
also, who can be Khalifah< can anyone be a khalifah accordign to our manhaj? or is it only exclusive to the Quraysh?
what is he talking about here
When Fatima was alive, the people used to respect 'Ali much, but after her death, 'Ali noticed a change in the people's attitude towards him. So Ali sought reconciliation with Abu Bakr and gave him an oath of allegiance. 'Ali had not given the oath of allegiance during those months (i.e. the period between the Prophet's death and Fatima's death).JZKALLAH
-
Ibn al-Qayyim (Rahimahullaah) said, “This is a great topic, containing much benefit
and due to ignorance of this topic a great mistake has fallen upon the Sharee’ah...†up
until he said, after mentioning that the basis of the Sharee’ah is built upon the welfare
and benefits of the servants, “... The Prophet (swallallahu alaihi wasallam) legislated
for his ummah, the obligation of rejecting the evil so that by its rejection, the goodness
that Allaah and His Messenger love is obtained. And when rejecting the evil leads to
what is more evil and more hated by Allah and His Messenger then it is not allowed to
reject it— even if Allaah hates it and detests those who perform it (the evil). And this is
like rejection (inkaar) against the kings, and the ones in authority by coming out
against them (with arms etc., to fight them), for verily, that is the basis and foundation
of every evil and every tribulation till the end of time. And the Companions asked
permission from the Messenger of Allaah (swallallahu alaihi wasallam) for killing the
leaders (Umaraa’) who delay the prayer from its proper time, saying, ‘Shall we not kill
them.’ So he said, “No, so long as they establish the prayer,†and he also said,
“Whoever sees something from his leader (ameer) something that he dislikes then let
him be patient and let him not raise his hand (away) from the leader’s obedience.†And
whoever reflects upon the greatest and smallest trials that have befallen Islaam, then
he will see that they are due to the negligence and wastage of this principle and the
lack of patience upon (witnessing) evil. So he seeks to bring about its end and as a
result of this, a greater evil is brought about. And the Messenger (swallallahu alaihi
wasallam) saw the greatest of evils in Makkah and he was not able to change them. In
fact even when Allaah opened up Makkah for the Muslims (i.e., gave the Muslims
victory over it) and when it became Daarul-Islaam he was resolved to changing the
Ka’bah and returning it to the foundations that ibraaheem (alaihi as-alaam) had built
it upon, but even though he had the capacity to do that, he was prevented from it by the
fear that something greater would occur due to the lack of tolerance of the Quraish,
since they were new to Islaam and had recently left disbelief — and for this reason he
did not grant permission for rebelling against the leaders (Umaraa’) with the use of
one’s hand (i.e., with force) due to the greatness of what results afterwards on account
of it ...“ [‘I’laamul-Muwaqqi‘een ‘an Rabbil-’Aabaineen]
-
Shaykh Abdul-Azeez Aal ash-Shaykh: "Don’t Abuse the Concept of Jihaad"
Source: http://www.fatwa-online.com/news/0030822.htm
RIYADH, 22 August 2003 — Saudi Arabia’s highest religious authority urged Muslims yesterday to shun extremism and avoid waging unjustified jihaad as the Kingdom cracks down on militants.
In a lengthy statement, Grand Mufti Sheikh Abdul Aziz Al-Sheikh told Saudis to listen to their religious authorities and ignore fanatical interpretations of Islaam.
“One of the fallouts from extremism in understanding Islaam is that some people call for jihaad for the sake of God without justification,†Sheikh Abdul Aziz said.
“These people raise the banner of jihaad to draw the young into their ranks and not to fight for God,†he added.
Militants like Al-Qaeda leader Osama Bin Laden have often called for jihaad against countries they consider “infidel†such as the United States, urging his followers to target Western interests in Saudi Arabia and abroad.
Other militants have also used Islaam as a rallying cry, justifying attacks by saying they are doing God’s will.
“Young Muslims must try and better themselves and their country but not through violence, because Islaam is not a violent religion, it is a merciful religion,†he said.
“A Muslim must understand his religion. It is the duty of the young and the whole Muslim world to know that violence is not a way to achieve reform,†Al-Sheikh said.
The grand mufti emphasized that the struggle against a perceived evil should not lead to a greater evil.
“The Prophet (peace be upon him) told us to combat evil. But there is a general rule to look at both advantages and disadvantages. And if fighting an evil leads to a greater one, then that fight is forbidden,†he said.
The grand mufti said one of the reasons some people attacked and frightened others was ignorance.
“Ignorance is a killer disease because a person thinks that he is right when he is wrong,†he said and stressed the importance of right guidance. “One of the reasons also is mistrust of our scholars. It is people’s duty to trust their scholars and leaders,†he said.
Last week, the Kingdom’s highest Islaamic authority denounced terror attacks in the Kingdom, describing them as “serious criminal acts,†and pledged its full support for the government.
“Acts of sabotage such as bombings, murder and destruction of property are serious criminal acts and an aggression against innocent people... which warrant severe and deterrent punishment,†the Council of Senior Islaamic Scholars said in a statement.
The 17-member council, headed by the grand mufti, declared its support for the actions being taken by the state to track down terrorists in an effort to shield the country from their actions.
The Islaamic body had called on the Saudi people to “stand behind the country’s leadership and their scholars,†at these difficult times in the fight against “evildoers.â€
The statement dubbed “misguided and ignorant†those who claim that terrorism was part of jihaad, or holy war. It said people who provide shelter to suspected militants were committing a “grave sin.â€
-
This might help inshallah
By Shaykh Fawzan via fatwaonline.com
AT-TAFJEERAAT WA TAHLEELAAT AL-MUNAAFIQEEN
All praise is due to Allaah, the Lord of all the Worlds, and salaat and salaam be upon the trustworthy Prophet, our Prophet Muhammad, upon his family, his companions and [all] those following them in goodness, until the Day of Judgement. To proceed:
Verily, when the shocking event occurred, the event of the bombings in the city of Riyaadh undertaken by the violent and barbarious (savage) hands, in the capital of the land of tawheed, they turned upon the religion, and upon humanity (by way of this act of theirs), and the Kuffaar have taken them as riding animal in order to attack Islaam and the Muslims. And this action of their was a result of their ignorance, their being deceived and their evil nurturing, and their breaking off from the society and their turning away from learning the beneficial knowledge, and taking it from those who (truly) possess it, and also restricting themselves to their own faulty understandings and their stagnant views.
And their affair in this matter, is the affair of the Khawaarij Renegades, those who killed the two Rightly Guided Caliphs, Uthmaan and Alee (radhi-yallaahu 'anhumaa), and also their concern with killing Mu`aawiyah and `Amr bin al-Aas (radhi-yallaahu 'anhumaa), and killing others from the leaders of the Muslims.
I say that when this repugnant action occurred in these days of ours, the Hypocrites took a deep breath and made a sigh, and they carried the responsibility of this action upon the religion, and that it (i.e. Islaam) was the reason for their transgression (i.e. that of the Khawaarij), upon the Muslims and upon humanity as a whole. And they said, may Allaah make them ugly, that this action of theirs (i.e. of those Khawaarij) was due to their embracement of the views of Shaykh ul-Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah and Shaykh ul-Islaam Muhammad bin Abdul-Wahhaab, and other than them both from amongst the Scholars of Islaam.
This is how they lie in wait with pessimism and ascription of evil to Islaam and for the Scholars of Islaam, just like Aal Fir`awn, those about whom Allaah said:
{And if evil afflicted them, they ascribed it to evil omens connected with Mûsa (Moses) and those with him} (Soorah Al-A'raf, Aayah 131).
And just like the Mushriks, they also ascribed the occurrence of evil to Muhammad (sal-Allaahu `alayhe wa sallam), just as Allaah said about them:
{...But if some evil befalls them, they say, “This is from youâ€} (Soorah An-Nisa, Aayah 78)
...and just as the Hypocrites said in the expedition of the confederates (al-ahzaab), when the Muslims were afflicted with whatever afflicted them of hardship and severity, just as Allaah said about them:
{And when the hypocrites and those in whose hearts is a disease (of doubts) said: “Allaah and His Messenger promised us nothing but delusions!} (Soorah Al-Ahzab, Aayah 12)
...and just as they said on the day of (the battle of) al-Badr, concerning the Muslims:
{These people (Muslims) are deceived by their religion} (Soorah Al-Anfal, Aayah 49)
...and they also said, on the day of Uhud:
{If we had anything to do with the affair, none of us would have been killed here} (Soorah Aali Imran, Aayah 154).
So the saying of these Hypocrites (in our times) concerning these events is nothing but the statement of their predecessors in the events that occurred previously, and every nation has an inheritor.
Certainly, the religion of Islaam prohibits transgression in all of its types and its manifestations, Allaah, (Subhaanahu wa Ta'aala) said:
{And transgress not. Verily, Allaah does not like the transgressor} (Soorah Al-Ma'idah, Aayah 87)
...and He said:
{And let not the enmity and hatred of others make you avoid justice. Be just: that is nearer to piety, and fear Allaah} (Soorah Al-Ma'idah, Aayah 8).
And those subverters, vandals, they took their destructive ideology from the ideology of the Khawaarij Renegades before them who unleashed it upon Islaam, and they took it from the callers of misguidance, those whom the Messenger (sal-Allaahu `alayhe wa sallam) described as
((Callers at the gates of Hellfire, whoever obeys them, they will throw him into it)), so it is was said, ((Describe them to us O Messenger of Allaah)), he said:
((They are a people of our skin (i.e. lineage) and they will speak with our tongue...)).
And these Hypocrites have requested the abolition of the necessary allegiance (al-walaa) and enmity, disavowal (al-baraa), both of which are from the strongest handholds of Islaam, and they requested the abolition of the commandment to good and forbiddence of evil, both of which comprise the guarantee of the maintanenance and lasting of the Islamic society, and they also requested the abolition of jihaad in the path of Allaah, which is the peak of the matter of Islaam, and they also requested that the methodologies (of Islaam) be purified from any resemblances of loving necessitated by the Sharee'ah, and they called to allegiance (i.e. loving) of the Disbelievers and the Pagans, and to the absence of differentiating between them and the Muslims. So what means of deliverance then have they left for the Muslims?
Indeed, they did not say these repugnant sayings except because they are restricted and confined by Islaam and its people, and when the chance became available to them, they began to reveal the enmity and jealousy they had towards Islaam and the Muslims, just as Allaah said concerning them:
{But surely, you will know them by the tone of their speech! And Allaah knows all your deeds} (Soorah Muhammad, Aayah 30).
However, their affair will be just like the affair of their predecessors, that of humiliation, lowliness, and they do not harm except themselves:
{Say: “perish in your rage. Certainly, Allaah knows what is in the breasts (all the secrets)} (Soorah Aali Imran, Aayah 119).
And certainly, the severe hardships and afflictions do not increase the Muslims except in steadfastness in their religion, and following their Prophet and their Scholars, the Imaams of Guidance, and the Illuminators of the darkness, such as Shaykh ul-Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah and Shaykh ul-Islaam Muhammad bin Abdul-Wahhaab, both whom those Hypocrites have made as examples of extremism and exaggeration, and in such a way because of their blindness, they considered the sources of good and guidance to be sources of evil and beguilement, just like their predecessors were pessimistic towards the Prophets (ascribing evil outcomes to them), and to their followers.
And say [those of] sore eyes,
the sun has eyes also,
you see them when it disappears and when it rises
And pardon those eyes whose light Allaah has taken away
So they do not contract and they do not comprehend…
And indeed, it is from the blindness of insight (i.e. intellect and understanding) that person believe falsehood to be truth and truth to be falsehood, and we invite these people to repent and return to their guidance and to withhold their tongues, otherwise they will not be harming except themselves, and Islaam has a Lord that will protect it and the Scholars have a Lord that will aid them:
{They had nothing against them, except that they believed in Allaah, the All-Mighty, Worthy of all Praise! Who, to Whom belongs the dominion of the heavens and the earth! And Allaah is Witness over everything} (Soorah Al-Buruj, Aayaat 8- 9).
And it is not a departure – O noble reader – that there should be found some coarseness in my speech, for verily the speech of those people is more coarse, and the author (of those words) is more unjust, and Allaah is sufficient for us, and how excellent a one is He to place trust in.
And indeed from that which expands the chest and gives satisfaction and rest to the heart is the answer given by the esteemed Ministor of the Interior (Hafitha-hullaah) to one of these people, when this person suggested that the Committee for the enjoinment of good and forbiddence of evil be abolished, so he (Hafitha-hullaah) replied that commanding of the good and forbiddence of the evil shall remain in his land as long as Islaam remains, and he (Hafitha-hullaah) gave an upright, straight answer and was correct and successful in this definitive answer. For verily this state was built upon Islaam and its foundations, and amongst them is the commanding of good and forbiddence of evil, and there is no continuance for this state except with thecontinuance of its foundations that it is built upon.
O Allaah protect for us our religion and our security, and our firm establishment in our lands, and do not empower over us due to our sins those who do not fear you and who will not show mercy to us, and save us from the evil of the tribulations, those which are apparent and those that are hidden, and protect those in authority over us, and grant them success in that in which their rectitude lies, and the rectitude of Islaam and the Muslims. O Allaah, whoever intends evil for us, and for Islaam and for the Muslims, then occupy him with his own self and throw his plot back at him, indeed you are powerful over everything, and salaat and salaam be upon our Prophet Muhammad, his family and companions.
Written by Saalih bin Fowzaan al-Fowzaan
This was published in al-Madinah newspaper (of Al-Madinah an-Nabawiyyah) on its online website.
-
I went on a little frenzy
Everyone Except Rahima, i would only go to the last post! its the juice of my understanding of this deen via way of the Salaf!
hope you like reading the works of the real scholars of islam! Ahlul Ilm!
this is my favourite quote
Zaa’idah ibn Qudaamah who said, “I said to Mansoor ibn ah-Mu’tamir,
When I am fasting can I revile the Ruler (Sultaan)?’ He said, ‘No.’ I then said, ‘Then
can I revile the People of Desires (i.e. Innovators)?’ He said, ‘Yes.†[Al-Hilyah of Aboo
Nu’aym, 5/41-42 and As-Samt wa Aadaabil-Lisaan of Ibn Abee Dunyaa, p. 145]
Rahima dont you just love the Salaf
im sure one of these days you will be true to your words and start quoting them!
Music to my ears!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Are you saying that regardless of what the leader of Muslims does (be it commit massacres or steal the wealth of the Muslims) he needs to be kept in place even if there is no fear of a greater fitna if he is deposed?Bismillah alhamdulillah;
I believe there will be a time when we will have oppressive rulers! perhaps this is the time! but i shall stick to the hadith of the messenger of Allah and obey them, even if they beat my back or steal my wealth! Others on the hand wish to contradict the messenger(saw)! their account is with Allah!
Are you saying that regardless of what the leader of Muslims does (be it commit massacres or steal the wealth of the Muslims) he needs to be kept in place even if there is no fear of a greater fitna if he is deposed?What do u mean? If a ruler has the power to commit massacre and steal, the only way to depose is through combat! So lets assume he has greater manpower, it will inevitably generate greater fitnah! However if your manpower is equal or greater then his, in such case he wouldn’t dare commit massacres or steal your wealth, that’s simply rubbish and illogical!
what kind of question is this, after all we went through? I posted what Shaykh Fawzan said about the gov of Saudiyah also Muqbil and Alanjari! Do you think they’re lying or being deceptive? If you know something we dont, please share!
‘There will be, after me, leaders that will not seek guidance from my
guidance, nor will they follow my Sunnah. There will be among them men with hearts
of devils in the bodies of people. ‘
I said, ‘What should I do, oh Messenger of Allaah, if I reach that time?’
He said: ‘Listen to and obey your leader even if he beats your back and your wealth is
taken – listen and obey.’†[Reported by Bukhaaree, Muslim, Ibn Majah, al-Bayhaaqee]
The Prophet said: ‘‘The person must obey in whatever he loves, and in whatever he hates, in ease and in hardship, in willingness and un-willingness; except if he is commanded to disobey Allaah. So if he is commanded to disobey Allaah, then he should not listen, not should he obey.’’ Related by al-Bukhaaree (4/203)
Rahima Please read the following carefully!
The Shaykh and Imaam, ’Abdul-Lateef Ibn ’Abdur-Rahmaan Ibn Hasan aalush-Shaykh - may Allaah have mercy upon them all - said,
in powerful words that uncover the confusing doubts in this topic and that refute the one who spreads them from amongst the ignoramuses: "… And those people - those who are under trial - do not know that with the exception of ’Umar Ibn ’Abdul-’Azeez and whoever Allaah willed from among the Banee Umayyah - great mishaps, insolence, taking up arms [against the people] and corruption occurred from most of those in charge [wullaat] of the people of Islaam from the time of Yazeed Ibn Mu’aawiyah [till the present]. But along with that, the manner and behaviour of the notable scholars and mighty leaders with the rulers is well-known and renowned - they do not raise a hand against giving obedience in that which Allaah and His Messenger have commanded from among the legislated actions and obligatory duties of Islaam.
And I will give you an example - that of al-Hajjaaj Ibn Yoosuf ath-Thaqafee, and his affair is well known in the ummah - that of oppression, repression, excessiveness in spilling the blood [of the Muslims], desecration of the Sanctities of Allaah, the killing of whomever he killed amongst the notables of the ummah such as Sa’eed bin Jubair, the besieging of Ibn az-Zubair even though he had sought refuge in the Haram, and making lawful the sacred and sanctified, the killing of Ibn az-Zubair - even though Ibn az-Zubair had given obedience to him and the people of Makkah, Madeenah, Yemen, and most of 'Iraaq had given the pledge of allegiance to him [ibn az-Zubair] and al-Hajjaaj was only a deputy of Marwaan, and then of his son 'Abdul-Maalik and none of the khulafaa’ (successors) had given Marwaan a pledge and none of the influential people, those with power had given the pledge of allegiance to him. And along with all of this none of the People of Knowledge hesitated in obeying him and complying with him in that in which obedience is permissible from amongst the pillars of Islaam and its obligations.
And Ibn ‘Umar and whoever met al-Hajjaaj were from amongst the Companions of Allaah’s Messenger , and they never contested with him and nor did they prevent obedience to him in that by which Islaam is established and by which eemaan (faith) is perfected. And it is likewise for those who were also in the era of al-Hajjaaj from among the taab’ieen such as Ibn al-Musayyib, al-Hasan al-Basree, Ibn Seereen, Ibraaheem at-Taymee and those like them from among the leaders of the ummah.
And the affair continued like this between the leading scholars of the ummah - they would enjoin obedience to Allaah and His Messenger and making jihaad in His path along with every leader [imaam] whether righteous or sinful, as is well known in the books of the fundamental principles and beliefs of the religion.
And similarly, Banoo al-‘Abbaas, they conquered the lands of the Muslims forcefully, with the sword - and not one of the People of Knowledge and Religion aided them in that - and they killed hordes of people and many of the creation from among the Banoo 'Umayyah, their leaders and their deputies. And they killed Ibn Hubayrah, the ameer of 'Iraaq and they also killed Marwaan, the khaleefah - and it was reported that the murderers killed around eighty people from the Banoo 'Umayyah in a single day - and then they placed their blankets above the corpses, sat upon them and then called for food and drink.
So along with all of that the conduct of the leading scholars - such as al-‘Awzaa’ee, Maalik, al-Layth ibn Sa’d, ‘Ataa Ibn Abee Rabaah - with those kings is not hidden from the one who has a share in knowledge and realization. And then next generation of the People of Knowledge such as Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, Muhammad Ibn Ismaa’eel, Muhammad Ibn Idrees, Ahmad Ibn Nooh, Ishaaq Ibn Rahawayh and their brothers … their occurred in their time what occurred from the kings of the great innovations and the denial of the Sifaat (Attributes of Allaah) and they were called to [affirm] these things and were put to trial by them] and whoever was killed, was killed such as Ahmad Ibn Nasr. But along with all of this it is not known that a single one of them raised his hand against obedience [to those kings] and that he saw fit to attack them…"
Therefore, in light of the above it is necessary to give obedience to whomever is appointed over the Muslims!, whether this occurs by their agreement or otherwise, in all the various lands. However this obedience is conditional in that it should be upon the ma’roof, (good) since there is no obedience to the creation in disobedience to the creation. This is the companions of the earliest times!
Rahima are we to contradict the Companions, and the righteous Scholars, could it be that we understand the religion better then them?
Also, what do you make of the acceptance speech of Abu bakr when he was chosen as the prophet’s successor?
I remember reading his speech, but I do not have it with me, if memory serves me right, it had to do with fighting him if he disobeys Allah and his messenger(I understand this as not ruling by the laws of islam)! But it would be best if you’d post!
Finally, is it appropriate that we go to seek the opinion of a scholar regarding for example the mechanics of an automobile or rather an engineer? We can ask the scholar for example what is the islamic ruling regarding a leader who aids the non-Muslims, but it it appropriate we ask him whether or not that leader is in fact aiding the non-Muslims. It is not clear from recent world events the stance of the royal family? Even to use the aid of the kuffar to find Usama, does this not constitute as using the help of the non-Muslims against a fellow Muslims (considering we have established that irrespective of his sins he is still a Muslim)?Im not sure I know what you mean, but why wouldnt you ask a scholar whether a leader is aiding the non muslims or not! im sure if its obvious to the people,why not him?
Osama is upon the ideology of the khawarij, the people of knowledge have differed about their status! some of the Ahlul Ilm Consider them kufar, whereas others take them as fasiqqoon, the former label carries more weight! Osama ibn laden and his cronies have waged a war on government establishments and the muslims in general! They are radicals who find no bound in fundamentalism! Thus they have become the enemies of ahlul sunnah! I remember reading the seerah of the messenger of Allah(saw) the first treaty he took with the Kufar; when something like this†we fight along side each other; and if any of our adversary fight one of us we fight them togetherâ€
PLUS WHERE WERE YOU WHEN OSAMA WAS BED BUDDIES WITH THE USA ADM!
I gather you reside in a kafir land! So what you understand of current and past event depends on what see and read from the kufar, you do not have first hand experience like Fawzan and other scholar who reside in the saudiyah and mid-east!
I do not understand why we keep going over the condition and affairs of the royal family (it’s really really tedious)! I was positive you took from the scholar, the people with knowledge! Didn’t I not illustrated their position! Do u know something they dont?
Few fatwah for you to consider!
Hijacking planes and kidnapping
*reference : www.fatwa-online.com,)
From that which is known to everyone who has the slightest bit of common sense is that hijacking airplanes and kidnapping children and the like are extremely great crimes, the world over. Their evil effects are far and wide, as is the great harm and inconvenience caused to the innocent; the total effect of which none can comprehend except Allaah.
Likewise, from that which is known is that these crimes are not specific to any particular country over and above another country, nor any specific group over and above another group, rather it encompasses the whole world.
There is no doubt about the effect of these crimes; so it is obligatory upon the governments and those responsible from amongst the scholars and other than them to afford these issues great concern, and to exert themselves as much as possible in ending this evil .
Shaykh Ibn Baaz
Kayfa Nu'aalij Waaqi'unaa al-Aleem - Page 108-109
Question and Answer by Bin Baaz Via Fatwaonline.com
Question: Is it permissible to build upon the peace treaty with the Jewish enemy by allowing them what is termed normalization of relations; and allowing them to take economic benefit from the Islaamic lands and other spheres which will give them great benefit and increase their strength and establish them further upon the Islaamic lands which they have misappropriated; and the Muslims can open their markets for them to sell their goods, and that they must open economic foundations - such as banks and businesses in which the Jews have a share along with the Muslims, and that they must likewise share the water sources such as the Nile and the Euphrates - even though they do not flow through Palestine?
Response: The peace between the Palestinian Liberation Organization and the Jews does not necessitate what the questioner mentioned with regards to the rest of the countries. Rather, each country sees what is beneficial So if it sees that it is beneficial for the Muslims in its land to have peace with the Jews and to exchange ambassadors and to engage in trade and other dealings which are considered lawful by the pure Sharee'ah of Allaah, then this is alright.
However, if it sees that the benefit for it and its people lies in cutting-off from the Jews, then it should act as the Sharee'ah requires and benefit necessitates Likewise, with regard to all the rest of the kaafir lands - their ruling being the same as the Jews in this matter.
So what is obligatory upon everyone who is in charge of the affairs of the Muslims -whether he is a king, and Ameer or a President of a Republic: - is that he takes care of what is beneficial to his people and allows what will be beneficial to them, from those matters which Allaah has not forbidden in His pure Sharee'ah, and that he prevents other than that with any kaafir state, acting upon the saying of Allaah - the Mighty and Majestic:
{Indeed, Allaah does command you to render back the trusts to those to whom they are due}, [soorah al-Maa.idah, Aayah 58]
{So if they incline to peace, then you too incline to peace}, [soorah al-Anfaal, Aayah 61]
And following also the example of the (sal-Allaahu `alayhe wa sallam) in the peace treaties he made with the people of Makkah, and the Jews in Madeenah and in Khaybar. And he (sal-Allaahu `alayhe wa sallam) said in an authentic hadeeth:
((Each one of you is a responsible guardian and each one of you will be asked about those he is responsible for. So the ruler over the people is a responsible guardian and will be questioned concerning those he is responsible for; and the man is the responsible guardian over the people of his house and will be questioned about those he is responsible for, and the woman is the responsible guardian in the house of her husband and will be questioned about those she is responsible for; and the slave is a responsible guardian over the wealth of his owner and will be questioned about his responsibility. Indeed, each of you is a responsible guardian and will be questioned about what he is responsible for)), [al-Bukhaaree (13/100) and Muslim (no.1829]]
-
^^^ As Salamu alaykum wa rahmatullahi wa baarakatu
Please point out to me where the difference of opinions lies!
Sahih Muslim: the Book of marriage, No. 3265
This hadeeth comes under the following chapter:
TEMPORARY MARRIAGE AND ITS PROHIBITION FOR ALL TIMES TO COME
Muhammad b. 'Ali narrated on the authority of his father 'Ali that Allaah's Prophet (sallAllaahu alayhi wa sallam) on the Day of Khaibar prohibited for ever the contracting of temporary marriage and eating of the flesh of the domestic asses.
No. 3266
'Ali (Allaah be pleased with him) heard that Ibn Abbas (Allaah be pleased with them) gave some relaxation in connection with the contracting of temporary marriage, whereupon he said: Don't be hasty (in your religious verdict), Ibn 'Abbas, for Allaah's Messenger (sallAllaahu alayhi wa sallam) on the Day of Khaibar prohibited for ever the doing of it-And eating of the flesh of domestic asses.
No. 3262
Sabra al-Juhanni reported on the authority of his father: Allaah's Messenger (sallAllaahu alayhi wa sallam) prohibited the contracting of temporary marriage and said: Behold, it is forbidden from this very day of yours to the Day of Resurrection, and he who has given something (as a dower) should not take it back .
ALL SOUND AND SAHIH HADITH!
-
How do you function in the real world, nin yahow??Lazy U DO NOT WANT TO KNOW, TRUST ME
willo did u see that 19 runs debacle? and their main starting weeping! how sad!
where is mr T when you need him
( i Pity the fool, i pity the fool who faces the YAnkees)
-
And anyway, ease it up will you. I can be sensitive; I am a woman after all . But really, what is your excuse ?looool
-
Ngonge you have indeed mastered the art of sarcasm! (lol) are you that bored at work?
-
The Limit of how many woman one can have for Mutcah , shia scholars differ, but it is around 100 women max if one has the stamina.!!!!!!they're like porn stars
the only well-autheicated wheich agree upon is that the mutah was lawfull when prophet pass away. and it was also lawful when abu bakar was the khalifa, it was then prohibited by omar.i could swear our noble brother; NUr, gave a clear explanation concering this misconception ! the least you guys could do is refute his points instead of this same old rhetoric ! Umar did it , Umar did it!
-
-
^^^ Brother Jamal may Allah bless you !
inshallah this helps
Salafi_Online:
shaykh a brother asked me this question, "I'm a political student whose ambitions include being a member of parliament in a Muslim country in the near future, what then, what is yours groups standpoint? Is it permissable for me to join a parliament?"
fairness-1: there is a # of opinion amonsgt the scholars..some say if there is no fitnah on him and there are anticipated benefits then he may
fairness-1: others say no
Salafi_Online: shaykh can u give me the names who may have say no
Salafi_Online: so that i have a general understanding
fairness-1: there is fitnah..because of the nature of these places
fairness-1: and that experience had shown that minimal benfit exists
fairness-1: and there could be a comprize on Tawheed
Salafi_Online: shaykh what about the hadith that urges the people not to run for leadership or a position of leadership
Salafi_Online: would this hadiht not apply in this situation?
fairness-1: but he may not intend that if he is capapble and anticipated benefits..as in the case of Prophet Yusuf ('alehi as-salaam)..again
fairness-1: it seems that experience had proven that it is-if all things are safe-is of little effect, especially when the ruler can "dissolve" these settings by one word
Salafi_Online: akhe i read this from the noble shaykh Albani(Rahimullah) "That anybody who enters into the parliamentary system will surely deviate from Islaam, little by little.†from his cassette
Salafi_Online: in a cassette recorded by Silsilatul-Hudaa wan-Noor (no. 1/440), a long discussion took place between Shaykh al-Albaanee and some youth of the Algerian Islaamic Salvation Front
fairness-1: yes
fairness-1: very good discussion'
Salafi_Online: tayyib inshallah akhee baarakallahu feek again wa salamu alaykum wa rahmatullah and ramaadan karim onces more
fairness-1: wa'iyyaakum
fairness-1: I go w the opinion of sh. Naasir
fairness-1: on this
Jamal you can read the article here:
By the Scholar of Hadeeth, Shaykh Muhammad Naasirud-Deen al-Albaanee and ’Abdul-Maalik Ramadaanee al-Jazaa‘iree Translated by Abu Ibraaheem al-Kanadee [1]
THE FORESIGHT OF THE SCHOLARS AND THE IMPATIENCE OF THE YOUTH:
“And in a cassette recorded by Silsilatul-Hudaa wan-Noor (no. 1/440), a long discussion took place between Shaykh al-Albaanee and some youth of the Algerian Islaamic Salvation Front in which they alleged in a most astoundingly exaggerated way that the Front had been responsible for the closure of many bars and houses of ill repute, for which the Shaykh only responded by prohibiting the entry into parliament, not concerning himself with the results of their partisanship. Mentioning his reason for the prohibition, he said:
“Firstly: That it is contrary to the guidance of the Prophet (sallallaahu ’alayhi wa sallam), since he never entered into such a thing with the disbelievers.
Secondly: That anybody who enters into the parliamentary system will surely deviate from Islaam, little by little.â€
-
^^^ Saxib Jazakallahu khayr for your clearification,
i posted the words of the most High without comments, if the meaning of HIS words are abrasive saxib, then you and i need to speak asap!
silent sumed it best for me!
"I have noticed that within the Somali community when we tend to exchange knowledge, our people see it as a threat rather then a warning. We are suppose to be freightened to the point where we should constantly watch our actions"
May Allah bless our hearts!
-
Ukhtil Kaarim
agreed “Shaykh†carries two meanings! However my sister you and I may not believe Osama is scholar, but I assure you there are people who do, if not at least a student of knowledge! Osama issues out fatwah at will in his public address! His enthusiasts and the gang as MC take religion verdict from him, calling him a Imam, a Mujahid and their beloved Sheikh! So it’s not as irrelevant as you may think!
Allow me to just clarify a point, are you saying that under no circumstances (except for the case of kufr which takes one out of the fold of Islam) is a leader to be deposed from his position?This is my understanding! Feel free to correct me!not everyone who commits kufr is a kafir! I have no knowledge of whether the Saudi regime commits an act of kufr! but the Scholars like Shaykh Fawzan, Anjaree and Muqbil praise the rulers in the Kingdom and called them muslims who legislate with the laws of Allah, but like any human they too have their flaws!May Allah rectify their shortcomings!
And lastly, do you consider the aiding of the kuffar against the Muslim to be an act of kufr? If in the affirmative, would you consider this to be a legitimate reason to depose them had there not being the fear of a greater fitnah (which is the exact reason why the scholars deem that they be kept there)?This is an act of kufr! But this does not necessarily mean the person who is doing this kufr is a kafir! Prior to ousting the one in authority, you must apply the conditions of takfir! And once they are labelled a kafir by the people of knowledge, deposing them would become permissible! (as long as the good outweighs the evil of course!)
-
SalafiWhatever you say does not change the fact that most of these so-called leaders came to power by force or their forefathers did, and are not in moral position to declare “Sunnah Immunityâ€.Why are you so quick to point out the BID’A in everyone except the ‘royal families', and when will the Salafis start publishing and preaching Hadiths like the ones below? Maybe things will get better if you guys told a few home truths to the monarchs.brother Ayub, inshallah I hope your first day of Ramaadan went well, May Allah accepts it from the both of us Ameen!
as for your first doubt, the great imam Ibn Hajr clarifies it!
Al-Haafidh Ibn Hajar said in ‘al-Fath’: "The Fuqahaa (Jurists) are in agreement concerning the obligation to give obedience to the Sultaan who took over them by force and also to perform Jihaad along with him. [And that] obeying him is better than rebelling against him due to what this would contain of the shedding of blood and subduing of the common masses."
And as for your second shuboohat, the royal family are not da’ee(callers to islam), They do not author fatawah based on their hawa(desires), nor do they publish books based on innovation and rethorics! So what would we be warning the common folks about? oppression and bi’ah fee deen are not synonymous my good brother!
"There will be unjust rulers who cause hardship to their people. Whoever went along with their lies and helped them with their injustice, he is not from me nor am I from him, and he will not drink from Al-Hawd (the pond)" (Ahmad, An-Nisaa'i, At-Tirmidhi, and Al-Bazzar).Do you know of any salafi “who aid the rulers in their oppression�
“The best Jihad is the word of truth against the unjust ruler.â€â€True, he said that and I do not reject this! however this hadith has conditions as seen below!
"The Messenger of Allaah Muhammad (salallaahu'alayheewasallam) said, "Whoever desires to advise the one with authority then he should not do so openly, rather he should take him by the hand and take him into seclusion (and then advise him). And if he accepts (the advice) from him then (he has achieved his objective) and if not, then he has fulfilled that which was a duty upon him." (Reported by Ahmad (3/403) and Ibn Abee 'Aasim (2/521) with a Saheeh isnaad.)
When changing the evil of the rulers, then this should be done by the scholars and not openly as is mentioned by a clear Ahaadeeth of the Prophet (salallaahu'alayheewasallam),
"When you wish to correct the sultan then take him by the hand in secret and advise him." [Aqeedah at Tahawiyah]
I heard the Messenger say: “Whosoever holds contempt for the ruler of Allaah upon the earth, then Allaah will hold contempt for him.†This is an authentic hadeeth related by at-Tirmidhee (no. 1812). Imaam adh-Dhahabee says in Siyar A’laamun-Nubalaa (14/508):
Nay, by Allah, you have to enjoin the Maroof and forbid the Munkar, and deal with the unjust ruler severely, and force him to the truth, otherwise Allah will strike your hearts against each other.â€-Ibn Masud“Whoever sees an unjust ruler breaking the prohibition of Allah, breaking His covenant, disagreeing with the Sunnah of the Prophet, committing sins and creating animosity against the servants of Allah, and he does not say or do anything against it, then it is the right of Allah to let him enter with him (the unjust ruler) i.e. in hell).†- At Tabbai in At-Tarikh and Ibn Al-Atheer in AI-Kamel and others.I can’t find a reference for the first hadith! I went to Google and I ran into some Hizbu Tahreer websites with no reference except that its attribute to Ibn Masud!
Akhee do u know who At Tabbai is? Does he/she even exist?
As for Ibn Al-athee; he lived around the end of the 8th century! He was not from Ahlul Hadith(did not collect hadith) what is the soundness of this hadith? who collected it?
Brother I wish you would follow the salaf and shun your opinions! Allah order this ummah to follow the Salaf, The messenger ordered this ummah to follows and adher to the methodology of the salaf!
akhee Raamadan karim, the month of the quran!
pray for me inshallah that Allah accepts my deeds!
-
Ramaadan Karim رمضان كريم
[From
Ibn al-Qayyim (r.a.) - Al-Waabilus-Sayyib minal-Kalimit-Tayyib ( p. 15)
One of the Salaf (Pious Predecessors) said: "Indeed a servant commits a sin by which he enters Paradise; and another does a good deed by which he enters the Fire." It was asked: How is that? So he replied: "The one who committed the sin, constantly thinks about it; which causes him to fear it, regret it, weep over it and feel ashamed in front of his Lord - the Most High - due to it. He stands before Allaah, broken-hearted and with his head lowered in humility. So this sin is more beneficial to him than doing many acts of obedience, since it caused him to have humility and humbleness - which leads to the servant's happiness and success - to the extent that this sin becomes the cause for him entering Paradise. As for the doer of good, then he does not consider this good a favour from his Lord Upon him. Rather, he becomes arrogant and amazed with himself, saying: I have achieved such and such, and such and such . So this further increases him in self adulation, pride and arrogance - such that this becomes the cause for his destruction."
Do you not fear the moment when you will stand before your Lord? There will be no screen between Him and you, nor an interpreter to translate for you. And your Creator will question you. You will find nothing to your left or to your right but the blazing Fire of Hell. Do what the Prophet of Allah advised you, if you truly fear Allah:
"… So let each of you protect himself against Hell-Fire, be it even with half a date- and if he finds it not, then with a kind word."
-
sister 7 of 9.. maybe once in a while u could delayedQAC qAC lets say duhr starts at 1 and ends at 3:30, at that time asr would start! are you implying one can pray duhur at 3:35 ? please clarification with evidents of course!
-
"So woe unto those performers of Salât
Who delay their Salât (prayer) from their stated fixed times"107:(4-5)
-
Brother Ayub you wrote
I find it hypocritical for the supporters 'royal families' who all came to power by force - most with the help of non-Muslims - to start preaching how its against the Sunnah to get rid of them by force. Some of them came to power by overthrowing their own fathers and uncles!Waalal what part of this hadith did not make sense?
The Prophet said: ‘‘The person must obey in whatever he loves, and in whatever he hates, in ease and in hardship, in willingness and un-willingness; except if he is commanded to disobey Allaah. So if he is commanded to disobey Allaah, then he should not listen, not should he obey.’’ Related by al-Bukhaaree (4/203)
Because someone defies the commandment of Allah’s messenger does not mean it has all of a sudden became lawful!
let me give you an example
Allah and his messenger have forbidden the killing of other Muslims! Yet in Somalia Muslims are killed by other muslims every single day! Its haram and these people know its haram, yet they chose to Disobey Allah! So if I was to use your logic, because people decided to start killing other muslim, shall we all start killing now, because Julan Julan did it! Of course you'd agree its absurd, likewise just because a man defied Allah and came into power by force with the help of non muslims does not mean we should also defy Allah in order to remove him!
I hope this make sense brother Ayub, inshallah, Ramaadan karim!
-
i have friend from burco, Mashallah i think he could kill a lion with his bare hands!
-
and Kalam a rest in the month of Ramadan if not permanently.Mutakalim, is that posible? A mutakalim giving up Kaalam?
-
Xoogsade you write;
Bro NGONGE, That is funny saxib Some of the things are obvious though and need no more clarification. I have no business supporting a Saudi ruler. Let those who reside there deal with that problem. I think these fatwas bro Salafi-Oline is quoting were given in the best interest of the Saudi people, for the sake of peace and to avoid anarchy and mayhem that can result from people picking up arms against strongly established and ruthless rulers who treat the country as a piece of land they own.Its interesting how you construe the Mayshaykh Fatwah as a means of supporting their rulers for the sake of their own people only! What if I said they give the fatwah because its the commandant from Allah and his messenger!NOw My question to you my dead brother is, doesn’t the following HAdith apply to every single muslim or is it just the Saudis and their scholars? or do we take from islam what agrees with our wishes and leave out that which is not in accordance with it?!?
The Prophet said: ‘‘The person must obey in whatever he loves, and in whatever he hates, in ease and in hardship, in willingness and un-willingness; except if he is commanded to disobey Allaah. So if he is commanded to disobey Allaah, then he should not listen, not should he obey.’’ Related by al-Bukhaaree (4/203)
You write
On the other hand, It is unwise for anyone to attack some sheekh because another Sheekh happened to have a difference with him. They usually tell you to compare the knowledge of the two disputing sheekhs and thus you must take sides. My answer would be No-side-taking and I don't care since none of the sheekhs is taking me to heaven. I am facing my deeds on my account not on anyone else's. I need to mind my own business and not slander someone I can not personally attest to their unfaithfulness to God. The approach as you wisely indicated should be neutral and not take sides. It is silly to support one sheekh over the other and slander his opponent for no reason other than your sheekh happens to dislike him. Is that part of islam?The Scholars are our guide, would you not agree? The messenger of Allah(saw) is the guide of Mankind, when he died, the scholars inherited his knowledge, and became our guide? Thus if you neglected the scholars who will guide you! In addition we worship Allah with knowledge this is a prerequisite, this knowledge can only be found with the scholars, by listening to their tapes, reading their books and what not! So in reality knowledge Of Allah gets you closer to Allah and protects you from being misguided! The fact that someone takes the shahada does not make them guided! An example of this is ( the nation of islam) they are not muslims, but they do take the shahada! And they have their own scholars! Knowledge is your shield therefore this can not happen without a Scholar since we would be in a state of confusion and misguidance!
Your write
It is silly to support one sheekh over the other and slander his opponent for no reason other than your sheekh happens to dislike him. Is that part of islam?As far as a scholar speaking ill of another person who the people perceive as "scholar" then this is correct provide that they have a legitamate reason "refutation" is from islam! A scholar does not have enmity towards another Muslim unless they are violating the teachings of islam and calling to other then correct aqeeda(creed)! Allah said the people who fear Allah the most are the scholars! If the scholar remain silent who will teach and warn the people about these people’s errors! In addition the scholars do not speak about someone without prove, without analyzing his speech and his books, and then finally sitting with the individual in person(provided that the person is alive) advising him of his errors! After all these necessary steps, A scholar criticizes and warns about the individual, this being the last resort!
IF you were to take from ever every Dick, john and Harry who spoke about Islam, Xoogsade you would literately be in a state of confusion! Because everyone beliefs something different when it comes to islam, and many if not the mijority say About Allah his messenger and the religion of islam that which was never utter by Allah or his messenger or the companions! A proof is the hadith about the 72 sects of islam, they all differ on Belief(creed)! Imagine Xoogsade; u took from every scholar and peron among the 73 sects, you would have multiple creeds(belief) im sure you wouldn’t for the simple reason that you know or are aware that these people are heading to the fire due to their beliefs and not sins, and you would not like to end up like them! So refuting and criticizing the errors of others after they have been advised(imaging they refuse the advice that is) is a must and one of the greatest obligation! let me give you an example!
Shaikh ul-Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah (Rahimahullaah) said, "It is obligatory to punish
everyone who ascribes himself to them – the people of innovation – or who defends
them, or who praises them, or who reveres their books, or who detests that they should
be talked about, or who begins to make excuses for them by saying he does not understand what these words mean or by saying that this person also authored another book and what is similar to these types of excuses, which are not made except by an ignoramus or a hypocrite. Rather, it is obligatory to punish everyone who knows of
their condition and did not assist in repelling their evil, for repelling their evil is one of
the greatest of obligations." [Majmoo’ ul-Fataawaa (2/132]
You stated
Why should one get involved in Saudi Politics in the first place if they were Somalis? No One wants to put his house on fire, and to some sheekhs, welcoming opposition just means that. Add to the equation the go-betweeners who take a rumour to a sheekh and tell him that such and shuch were being said about you or about the rulers. You can imagine some sick people have worked hard to create animosity between Sheekhs, the biggest of the culprits being the Saudi Rulers themselves. They thrive on the devision of the Muslim Scholars. And some brothers don't even realize what message they are carryingIs politics separate from islam? I do not think so! Politics is part of islam, and no one was discussing Saudi politics(if there is such a thing), we were discussion islam! Second a Shaykh is not to stup*d to take the words of a person without evidence(if he is following the manhaj of the salaf that is), “ he said she said†speech is really not something the scholars indulge in! in addition if the Saudi rulers are the biggest culprit im sure you read this somewhere, so do u mind pasting this so we can all have a read! But im sure you merely threw in here to spice up your post!
PS: Anyone thought Abdullahi Yusuf, Our New president can utilize some of the fatwas if he was smart? Honestly, Rulers nowadays don't even need to fight insurgents, just utilize islam to their own end and line-up support by threatening others with unfaithfulness. It can't get any simpler than that. I recall Somaliland government being legitimate and very islamic according to our Salafi Brother. Now we have something to talk about so let us continue the debate lol.I do not remember saying the Gov of Somaliland was very Islamic! Im sure you ment well when you wrote that! If memory serves me right, I said I can not comment on wheter they are Islamic or not, because I do not have knowledge of what the Shariyah entails, its conditions and what not..ect!
Abdullah Yusef is now a ruler, and all the conditions that apply to the saudis also apply to him, until he shows clear kufr(disbelieve)! obeying and hearing him is obligatory since its foundation of islam! Backbitting Abdullah Yusef and speaking ill of him him not being present is haram, its similar to eating his dead flesh! if you have nothing good to say about the man, i suggest everyone to remain silent about is faults, unless he is an innovator or a kafir! and neither of these titles apply to him as far as i know!
-
ملسم عليكم و رمةمللة و بركة
inshallah i invite everyone to read this book specially in the month of Ramadan( the month of forgiveness)! inshallah i hope that by the end you have learned some valuable knowledge that would bring you closer to Allah Tabarakallahu Wa ta'ala and distant you from your sins!
THE MOST EXCELLENT MANNER OF
SEEKING FORGIVINESS
A Lecture delivered by
Shaikh Abdur-Razzaaq ibn Abdul-Muhsin al-Abbaad
My noble brothers and sisters, this lecture, upon the topic of seeking al- Istigfaar - asking for forgiveness for ones sins - deals with one of the most important topics to which the Muslim should give attention in his life and for which he should have the utmost concern. Included in it is the explanation of a tremendous way of seeking forgiveness, from amongst the various forms of seeking forgiveness that occur in
the sunnah of the Prophet !. We ask Allaah that it should be beneficial to us and a blessing for us. There are many texts to be found in the Book of Allaah, the Majestic and Most High, and in the sunnah of His Messenger ! that encourage one to seek forgiveness: texts commanding it, showing its excellence, showing the excellence of its people and of those who are constant in it. In fact, there are so many of these texts
that it would be very difficult to enumerate them. From them is the saying of Allaah, the Perfect and Most High:
“Say, ‘O My servants who have transgressed greatly against themselves through sins! Do not despair of the Mercy of Allaah. Indeed Allaah forgives all sins to those who repent. Indeed He is the Oft-Forgiving, the Most Merciful." Soorah
az-Zumar (39):54
-
^^^ very cute
but i do not defend anyone unless my religion sanctions it! do not blind follow anyone! but the hadith are Clear and the salaf are clear! if you have some thing better for me! by All means im willilng to listen! but sister and this goes out to everyone else, if u find something objectable my post, do not merely rant and rave about how im wrong, but give me an alternative!
The Yankees The Red Soxs!
in General
Posted
^^^GRRRRRRRRR it was fixed!im telling you it was fix! dam right Fraud,fire all the pitchers
Who wouldnt have thought this outcome! La Xawla wala Quwata ila Billah!
I just Hope the Bo-Sox get demolished in the world series!