Who are the Muslim Moderates (Neo-Mods) ?

[sahal]

I might be wrong, saaxib. But, the way I understood their argument was in the style of “ The king is dead, long live the king†et cetera.

Sxb. this debate is not about long live the king , it's about religion.

 

as you may have seen this guy and his group are attacking our noble Uluma including Imam NWAWI and IBN HAJAR (the authors of SAHIH BUKHARI & SAHIH MUSLIM and many other very usefull books like RIYAADUL SALIHIIN) as well as many contemporay scholars like Sayid Qutub, Qaradawi, Salman al-awda, Safar al-xawali and many others while they, on the other hand, defending the corrubted, oppresive and american backed regimes in the Muslim countries like Fahad, Mubarak and their alikes. All these in the name of ISLAM.

 

You've just seen his controversial proofs to attack the ULUMAS or as he called INNOVATORS (as the innovators are only those who disobbey FAHAD and his alike)and to defend the oppresive rulers or as he called the Leaders or Wulaatul ummuur as they always call.

All what i'm doing here is to dismiss all his claims that our beloved religion orders us to defend oppressive rulers and to attck our noble Ulumas.

 

Therefore the question here is weather you agree with Salafi-on-line or not?

 

I don't mind weather you agree with him or not but you never made clear your position as everybody else did.

[NGONGE]

Read my words again, saaxib.

 

I don’t agree with him nor do I agree with you. Neither of you is willing to address the other side of the argument. You say that his “cult†attacks the scholars but you go on and attack them too. What if they’re right? They’ve endeavoured to give their opinions on the scholars you mention, rightly or wrongly, they’ve concluded that those scholars are in the wrong. It was an Ijtihad on their part. THEY COULD BE WRONG. If you disagree and have the knowledge then go ahead and ADVICE them, saaxib! But, if you disagree and don’t have the knowledge, then pray that they see the light and halt your condemnations.

 

He on the other hand, continues to indulge you in such a pointless argument, an argument of no benefit to either of you or your readers. It only serves to confuse and mislead.

 

Let us assume that there is a revolution in KSA tomorrow. Lets say that the Royal family is killed or exiled and that a new government is formed. Are these Salafi scholars going to refuse to cooperate with them? Like I said, the king is dead, long live the king.

 

As for attacking the Scholars, have you read anything I wrote in this thread at all? AT ALL? If my position has not been clear there I doubt it will ever be clear.

[sahal]

So, do you want me to keep queit and let Salafi-on-line to insult and backbite those noble uluma nd to defend Al-saud regime?

 

You say that his “cult†attacks the scholars but you go on and attack them too. What if they’re right?

can you show where I attcked to any Scholar?

 

I agree with them when they were defending their counterpartors like what he called "the old fataws" and disagree with them when they let this Cult to attack them.

 

is the disagreement same as attacking?

 

I can disagree for example one fatwa from sheikh without insulting him, but dose salafi-on-line follow same path or he called them INNOVATORS or similar names?

[Paragon]

"is the disagreement same as attacking?"

 

This problem does exist Sahal. Equating disagreement and critique to "attacks" by 'some' of us. In this case, I guess NGONGE's words were just a figure of speech, no?

[NGONGE]

Saaxib. I don’t want to get into an argument with you over this. I just think it is counterproductive to go on and on about it. I don’t need to show you where you attacked any scholar; you attacked them all by referring to them as cults etc, saaxib. You’ve got a whole thread talking about them. What is that if not exactly what you’re accusing them of doing?

 

I’ve already stated that I do not agree with attacks on the scholars of Islam (regardless of what madhab they follow). However, when they have disagreements amongst themselves, I leave them to it and follow those that make the most sense to me, in the hope that I made the right decision. Be proud of your deen, brother. Defend it as much as you can and don’t accept attacks on the scholars from every upstart who thinks he knows what he’s talking about. However, when other scholars make the comments, I’d advice caution. None of them are prophets. They’re fallible humans like you and I. They DO make mistakes, but since neither of us is on their level of knowledge we’re left with no choice but to lament this crisis and pray that Allah shows them (and us) the right path. To jump with your own defensive declarations and condemnations only goes to muddy the already muddied water even more.

 

Salafi does not use his own words, he cuts and pastes fatwas, and this is why I don’t condemn him. It has nothing to do with me agreeing or disagreeing with him.

 

 

This is the way I see and treat such issues. Some might regard it as a form of fence sitting, however, if trying to avoid falling into sinful arguments over things I know nothing about is fence sitting then may I never get up.

[- Femme -]

This is the way I see and treat such issues. Some might regard it as a form of fence sitting, however, if trying to avoid falling into sinful arguments over things I know nothing about is fence sitting then may I never get up.

That makes sense

[Salafi_Online]

Salafi_Online,

This is the most spectacular and amazing defence I have ever seen of tyranny. What you are saying is that a ruler can do as he wishes with his people as long as he is not a "kufr"? This goes against my logic, and I am not the only one who feels that way. I wonder how much of these stem from the Ummayyads, that was the only way they could hold on to power, by claiming that it is a sin to depose them. May Allah SWT guide us.

Viking,

my logics does not take Precedence over the text!

Its a matter of submitting to the Speech of the Messenger of Allah(salalhu alayhi wa salam)without asking why or how!

 

My brother, i did not say they can do anything! there is a limit, they can do anything as long their orders/commands does not result in disobeying Allah tabaraka Wa Ta'aal! there is no obedience to the creature when there is Disobedience to the creature!

 

Viking if you do not mind, i would like yo ask you this! i must of posted over 5 hadith about the Messenger of Allah(saw) concerning the oppressive rulers engulfed in sin!

 

you said this goes against your logics! so my brother my qustion to you is do u think its permissable to contradict the messenger of Allah(sas) and his companions in order to establish a revelotion to overthrow these tyranns?

 

because if you have something better then I , im willing to listen so that inshallah i see the light!

 

Salafi does not use his own words, he cuts and pastes fatwas, and this is why I don’t condemn him. It has nothing to do with me agreeing or disagreeing with him.

i couldnt agree more, so in reality he is not attacking me, but he is attacking the scholars, indirectly calling them sick, deseased...and all those lovely words he used! because the truth of the matter is, i do not write my post, I mere copy and past from the scholars!

[OG_Girl]

I am just wondering how much do the Saudi government pay our brother Salaafi!? He is here 24/7 defending them and willing to take anything for them.

 

He keeps producing copy and paste of Fatwas or religious justification from Sheikhs whose opinions could hardly be deemed objective. At least we could all understand where those Sheikhs are coming from but what about him!

 

I have a feeling and this is a feeling only, he is either paid by the Saudis or he is one of them pretending to be Somali! Any ideas nomads or am I am just barking at the wrong tree here. I doubt that very much with all these efforts! But I do admire his hard work though it has to be said even if I might not agree with him.

 

Just words on the screen, words on the screen

 

 

Salam

[Salafi_Online]

^^^ 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!

[OG_Girl]

No thanks, I aint too nice to help you. Go read and search. and I don't like sold out people too

 

Thanks for compliment...People say I am cute , this is only line you made sense

 

Salam

[sahal]

This is the way I see and treat such issues. Some might regard it as a form of fence sitting, however, if trying to avoid falling into sinful arguments over things I know nothing about is fence sitting then may I never get up.

When the things are disbuteable FIQH matters you can treat such way but when it comes defending Fahad and his alikes and attacking Sayid Qutub and his alikes or issuing this FATWA on Iraq

http://www.salafipublications.com

 

It is Black and White.

[NGONGE]

^^^^ I can’t access that site from work, brother. I have no idea what you’re talking about. If things are as “black and white†as you say then may Allah forgive them.

 

As I’ve already given you my stand on this issue, I can only end with the words of Imam Al Shaafci in the hope that you get the hint:

 

 

اذا رمت ان تحيا سليما من الردي

ودينك موÙور وعرضك صين

Ùلا ينطقن منك اللسان بسواة

Ùكلك سوؤات وللناس السن

وعيناك ان ابدت اليك معايبا

Ùدعها وقل يا عين للناس اعين

وعاشر بمعرو٠وسامح من اعتدي

وداÙع ولكن بالتي هي احسن

[sahal]

I have no idea what you’re talking about.

Ngone, Sxb what I am talking about is there are two group of people

 

First group are: IMAM NAWAW, IBN XAJAR CASQALANI, SAYID QUTUB, QARADADAWI, SALMAN AL-AWDA, SAFAR AL-XAWALI and many other ULUMAS

 

Second group are; FAHAD, MUSHARRAF, HUSNI MUBARAK, AYAD ALLAWI, KARAZAI etc.

 

 

Who should we defend and who should we attack, if I ask you?

[NGONGE]

If things were as simple as you just explained them, then I’d say defend the first group and criticise the second. But, we both know that this argument is not as simple as you just summarised it. I don’t want to get dragged into this dispute. Carry on with it if you like and lets hope your passion doesn’t blind your reason.

[Xoogsade]

Originally posted by NGONGE:

quote:Originally posted by Xoogsade:

I find this Notion of subservience to be disgusting. I am not Obeying anyone. So is my islam valid or Not?

 

Just wonder

This is a trick question, right? Lucky that Salafi didn’t fall for that meagre bait you’ve dangled in front of him, saaxib.

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. I wholeheartedly agree with that approach given our situation. We are a good example of a nation gone Mad. May be the whole effort on the part of the sheikhs as I can surmise from what I read in Some Websites, is to choose the lesser of two evils. Violence that can result in too many deaths and mayhem, or Carrying on under these rulers the message of islam through teaching and patience untill some other time when it is possible to bring about change comes.

 

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?

 

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 carrying.

 

I say to Somali brothers, learn what is beneficial and stop being a carrier of a message you have no clue about. May be you are too faithful and eager to please God, however, getting busy with the differences of some Sheekhs isn't the way.

 

How About talking and disecting our own problems? A country Needs us

 

My two cents.

 

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.