Fiqikhayre Posted January 23, 2007 First of all Khalaf I'm not reer mudug! Secondly I never said the TFG was kaafir brother, the same TFG never said that the Shariicah was out of date or not applicable because no sane muslim would say that, you know! So don't get things consfused up brother! Ruling without the law of Allaah does not make anyone kaafir but to say that the Shariicah is irrelevant or not modern enough for this era is! TFG never said that and they will never do it either akhi, so what is your point! Ruling without the law of Allaah is a kufr of a different kind but you wouldn't know it because you're remember still a student of knowledge and I should try to educate you brother, remember the deal of ours, that as a seeker of knowledge you should not say things without considering it first! Besides that who or which country know in the world rules with the Kitaab of Allaah? If you give me two countries that do, then I shall give you something to play with! How about a 'football' or as you live in America 'how about an oval ball to play Rugby football'? So are all those muslim nations kaafir? In the Transitional Federal Charter it says that Islamic law is the base for all the laws in the country, surely you don't want me to quote it for you? Brother I make sense whilst most of you don't so what gives? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Faarax-Brawn Posted January 23, 2007 Originally posted by MKA Yoonis: Another mistake by yours Brownie! This is a new brand called 'Brand Yoonis Wise' or in short BY's! BYS actuallty means Broad Yawning Syndrome OK every1,He is a certified Lunatic,Back off! LOL Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Faarax-Brawn Posted January 23, 2007 Originally posted by Pi: ^^ MKA Yonis is neither a friend nor a foe anymore than you are. Dude, don't make it seem like I'm defending a "friend". That's childish. I'm sure you agree. Maashallaah! Al-Hamdulilaah, for seeing my fan base coming out in support! Thank you for coming out of your closet LoooooL. Meeshan either someone is "ironing" himself on someone or someone is distancing himself from the other one. Classic Dameer & his two ears sheeko baan ku idhi Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Fiqikhayre Posted January 23, 2007 If sanity means accepting the Raafidis the Shiicah as brothers and the Hiz-ut-Tahriir, I kindly accepted the tag of Lunacy! For as Xiin and the rest cannot debate with me on those issues because they have lost the debate long time ago but still they will not come to their senses! I say B-Y's, B-Yoonis wise! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Khalaf Posted January 23, 2007 ^^C what I mean.......war I salute u man cadi ma tihid! u said: believing shariah is irelevant/insignificant in modern age wa kafir right? TFG is a secular entity? Sxb let me refresh your mind it means the law of islam is insignificant takes a back seat say to the law uncle sam gives the TFG. hold up u not telling me the TFG can rule freely are u? and da TFG is on record saying they will rule by democracy, secularism, ect. About their charter being islam based: what should they say base it on the bible? Its only lip service not reality.....on muslim countries today muslim ma jiiro man.........but u shouldnt justify corruption ie TFG ^^^I know i know u taught me well man.......what is the alternative right? no utopia .. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Pi Posted January 23, 2007 Brown, ppl are discussing a serious matter: Islam. What takes a person out of its folds. What scholars have said about sects. What the nature of Nifaq is. The proofs from the quran and sunnah for this. When takfir can be done etc. Other than quoting a personal comment directed at Paragon, do you have anything of substance to add? Dude, it's easy, just learn your deen, this way you wont feel left out of religious discussions. What do you know about takfir? What proofs do you have? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Fiqikhayre Posted January 23, 2007 Khalaf do you know the meaning of the aayah saying that 'Who ever rules other by what Allaah has send down, they're indeed kaafiruun, faasiquun and dhaalimuuun? Have you ever read Ibnu Cabbas commentary? No, you haven't! Answer me as a good student of knowledge, who rules by what Allaah has send down the shariicah today? What country? You see brother that you don't have answers to those questions, takfiir comes in when ones intention is clearly displayed like when saying that Shariicah is not up to date No one has said that because everyone knows that they would fall out of the fold of Islaam! But what about the case when one rules partially or at whole with western rules based on democracy that that person/ruler become kaafir? Because if that was the case the whole muslim rulers and their nations would be kaafir! You cannot take someone out of the fold of Islaam by simply poinint out that he doesn't rule with the Shariicah because that is a different kind of kufr! Abdullahi Yusuf never said the Shariicah was irrelevant but you taking out he's done that becaus he didn't took shariicah rule, no? Brother we have to put things into perspective and anlysie thins case to case, the president is simply continuing a trend that is widespread in muslim nations! They say their ruling is based on the Shariicah but we all know that it is only a claim even Saudi doesn't rule properly according to the Quraan so what gives akhi? Educate yourself and I shall help you with your questions brother! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ElPunto Posted January 23, 2007 ^MKA - the point being made here is not difficult. Avoid the labelling of Muslims and the predicting of those going to hellfire. And others should also do the same. What a civilized and proper discussion in the mold of our religion we could then have! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Faarax-Brawn Posted January 23, 2007 Originally posted by Pi: do you have anything of substance to add? This is a discussion board. Anyone and everyone can freely comment on ANYTHING of their liking. I chose to comment on two messages from two people who share same religious and political views. It perfectly fits into the discussion. You don’t tell me[Or anyone for that matter] what to reply to what not to reply to. If you don’t like the comment, simply I.G.N.O.R.E it adeer. I tend to tune you out 98% of you boring babbles, I suggest you do the same instead of telling people what they should or not discuss. Above all tho',I would like for you to remember that the behavior and mannerism of the individual discussing an issue is of a major substance in any discussion. Questioning an author's mental state is likewise a matter of substance sxb. I know my religion quite well that i do not issue keyboard decrees on who goes to hell or not[Or supporting such a decree in your case]. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Fiqikhayre Posted January 23, 2007 Pi your approach is wrong brother because you come across that nobody can actually leave the fold of Islaam, whatever aqaaid they believe in! If a new sect comes up and say's we don't eat the meat of the cows because cow's are sacred and divine, doesn't it take the sect out of the fold of Islaam! Drop that attitude brother because groups and even individuals can get out of the fold of Islaam! It isn't once you're muslim you will never become a kaafir! What we're against is the takfiir on sins i.e. you consuming khamr and being labelled a kaafir is wrong but if you say it's lawful then it is right if you are called a kaafir! Takfiir brother has shuroods and they must be accepted here's Sheikh Albani's quote one those matters: When can takfiir be performed: Introduction The following is a clarification by Shaikh Alee Hasan on his position (and that of Imaam al-Albani) on the issue of Kufr that expels from the religion and Istihlaal. In recent years, many misconceptions have arisen with respect to the noble Imaam al-Albani and his position on the issues of Imaan and Kufr. In particular, that he only performs takfir by Istihlaal of the heart. The reason for this being that some of his statements and phrases have been taken in an absolute manner and understood in a way the Imaam did not intend to be understood. And based upon this, as well as a number of other factors, some have accused the Noble Imaam of Irjaa – the while he is free from it, since Imaam al-Albani considers that amongst the actions are those which expel from the religion and he likened these acts to being just like when a person actually expresses disbelief on his tongue. Inshaa'allaah, in a future discourse, shortly, we will present "The Creed of Imaam al-Albani" on the issue of reviling the religion and apostasy - so that the doubts can be removed, and so that the "Ruwaibidah" who accused Imaam al-Albani of having the Irjaa of Jahm Ibn Safwaan, the likes of Abu Zubair al-Azzami and his Qutubi teachers from the US, may have the opportunity to repent, and to abandon "the evil that they are upon, the [evil] of ignorance, misguidance and scum", as Imaam al-Albani himself described it. The Text "All praise is for Allaah, and may Allaah extol and send blessings of peace upon Allaah’s Messenger, and upon his true followers, his Companions, and those who have love and allegiance to him. To proceed: Then my brother Ismaa’eel al-’Umaree, may Allaah grant him correctness, showed me the text of some answers I had given to some questions relating to knowledge and ’aqeedah which a brother asked me. Then just for clarification I would like to mention that I did not previously know al-Muwahhid who asked the questions. Rather one of the brothers having love for us connected me to him via the telephone (from his house) in Makkah al-Mukarramah, may Allaah grant him increase from His Bounty. Then I was surprised to see the questions and the answers, in abridged form, on the Internet, carrying the name, ‘al-Muwahhid.’ However I was pleased from another angle because I, ‘am also his brother ‘al-Muwahhid.’ This along with the fact that the aforementioned brother, may Allaah grant him increase in attainment of what is correct, had sought permission from me to put the answers on the Internet, even though he did not mention that title, and I did not ask him about it!! So when I saw the abridgement of my answers I found that it was generally a good abridgement, so may Allaah reward the questioner with good! However, it appeared to me that I should add a note to a word occurring in some of his questions, and it is his saying, "Why do we not say that a saying or an action is Kufr because of the fact that the authentic texts indicate that it is Kufr?" So I say here: because the Kufr that is a negation of eemaan from every angle includes the addition of a further clarification that requires awareness of the true reality of the text with regard to its clear indication of its being [either] this type of Kufr [which expels from Islaam] or that type [which does not expel from Islaam] … Whereas if we were to say, ‘This is Kufr because of the fact that the authentic texts indicate that it is Kufr’, then this (statement) will include different kinds and types of Kufr: the Kufr of action and of speech which does not take a person outside the Religion and that about whose verdict the Imaams of the Sunnah differ, such as swearing by other that Allaah, fighting against a Muslim, going to soothsayers …, and so on, which are to be distinguished from that which is established to be Kufr, because of the fact that the authentic texts indicate that it is Kufr. So these affairs, even though they are Kufr, yet they are not from, ‘the Kufr that is a negation of Eemaan from every single angle’, which is in itself Major Kufr (al-Kufr al-Akbar). As for the brother’s question, afterwards, concerning these matters which cause a person to become an Unbeliever (those matters which negate Eemaan from every angle), ‘Is it a condition for the person’s becoming an Unbeliever that he holds these things to be permissible (al-Istihlaal)?’ Then the reply is: the presence of the pre-conditions (wujood ash-shuroot) and absence of the preventing factors (intifaa al-mawaani') with regard to those type of things that cause a person to become an Unbeliever is itself sufficient for istihlaal (the person’s holding them to be permissible) not being taken into consideration as a condition for declaring the one who is guilty of them to be an Unbeliever, conclusively. This is because of their particular and distinguishing characteristics of being Kufr that negates Eemaan from every aspect … Whereas, holding prohibited things to be permissible (al-Istihlaal), wilful rejection (al-Juhood), outright denial (al-Inkaar), repudiation (at-Takdheeb) and other types of Kufr are a necessary condition for takfeer (declaration of the persons being an Unbeliever) of one who commits Kufr of speech or action, which is not counted as being a negation of Eemaan from every angle. So this is the way in which the affair is to be determined, with the speech of the Imaams of knowledge, not with the deficient wordings with which people upon their deluded whims err, and which lead people off on flights of fancy … I say all of this, yet again, emphasising the fact that this is what we have held as our belief for many years, and it is exactly what we took from our Shaikh, rahimahullaah, and from his brothers – the scholars. So whoever has understood something about us, different to this, then let him accuse himself before accusing us, and let him check his own understanding before slandering us, and in particular those who, ‘are unable to ask pertinent questions and who do not understand the words’. And Allaah is the one who grants success to what is correct and straight. 27th April 2000 Shaikh Alee Hasan and Imaam al-Albani on Kufr Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Fiqikhayre Posted January 23, 2007 The Point Hizb ut-Tahriir are deniers of the Punishment of the grave and the deniers of the emergence of the Dajjal, Mahdi and the return of the Prophet Ciisa calayhi salaam, surely those folks are misguided and kaafirs, undoubtedly in my opinion! Xiin committed a great sin when he doubted the raafidids or the Shiicah of Ithna Cashariyyah being kaafirs because remember the words of Ibnu Taymiyah: Who ever doubts the Raafidis Ash-Shiicah Ithna Cashariyyah being kaafir has truely himself disbeliefed! So be warned akhi, be warned! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Legend of Zu Posted January 23, 2007 Sorry folks - I do not see where this debate [if yuo can call it that and i have my reservations] is going therefore I shall close it. Cheers Go Home Folks! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
