OG_Girl Posted October 14, 2004 NGONGE, merci beaucoup :cool: Xoogsade, dear, AYOUB, was just teasing you. Don't take every thing said here seriously. Take me as an example, never been in somalia soil my father never been in somalia and I have nerve to bla bla....looooooooool Is just words on the screen dear.. get to the system. Why i am explaining even behalf of others!!!! Salam Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JustCause Posted October 14, 2004 OG I wonder why .. are you bored my little darling!? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Xoogsade Posted October 15, 2004 Oki OG-GIRL, Thanks Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Salafi_Online Posted October 15, 2004 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! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sahal Posted October 15, 2004 Og Girl could you please make WASTA to ask Salafi-on-line to answer my last question. If i repeat my last question was: His groups stand on joining to oppresssive/corrupt rulers parliaments? It seems Ngone is busy Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sahal Posted October 15, 2004 J11 You too, otherwise I will tell their astonishing stand , since I know more his groups methodology than him. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AYOUB Posted October 15, 2004 Salafi Whatever 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. Muhammad (saw) said: "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). “The best Jihad is the word of truth against the unjust ruler.†“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.†-Ibn Masud Last but not least what gives the Saud royals and their cronies the right to declare or support others to overthow other leaders? Xoogsade I hear you loud and clear. OG Girl Feel free to speak on my behalf anytime( the real McCoy not the fake one that is) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Salafi_Online Posted October 16, 2004 Salafi Whatever 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 oppressionâ€? “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.†-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! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rahima Posted October 16, 2004 Brother Salafi, Shaykh is a title with two basic meanings, an old man or as a title of respect for a scholar. We know that Usama is not a scholar of Islam but we do know that he is older, therefore that point is irrelevant. The point akhi to the article was the legitimacy of jihad on the discussion that can one wage a defensive jihad on the kuffaar without the say so of a khalif. The answer was a simple yes! Unless of course you disagree. Secondly, I did not state that the salafi scholars considered suicide bombing to be xalaal (you misunderstood). What I said was that although they do not consider it to be a legitimate form of combat, they still pray for the Muslims who use this form and pray that they forgiven and are admitted into jannah. 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? Also, can a Muslim commit kufr and not leave the fold of Islam? If so, do you believe that the Saudi Regime commits acts of Kufr? 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)? Please do clarify these points, I wouldn’t want to make assumptions based on that which is not clear. N.B. As for the fatwa of Ibn Baz, inshallah I shall write down the reference for you, since the book is in Arabic and not available on the net. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Salafi_Online Posted October 16, 2004 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!) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Qac Qaac Posted October 16, 2004 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! Salafi online.. r u kidding me?... u have no idea.. do u have your eyes shut man.. the scholars could say that coz they live in Saudi arabia, u have to be yes man for the kingdom or else your head is cutten.. come salafi bro.. u don't see saudi helping U.S. too right.. besides any scholar that gets money from the ruling power is iffey for me.. sorry.. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sahal Posted October 16, 2004 I really don't know what Al-saud gave this cult untill they become blind to their crimes while they see the little faults of our noble ULUMA both SALAF & KHALAF. What do you think guys is that money, liquid, gas or what? I'm really confused about the fact that one can't see the crimes of Al-saud and can see the very little faults of IMAM NAWAWI and IBN XAJAR AL-CASQALANI & anyone who opposes Al-saud or Jamal Abdul-nasir enz. I'm serious guys tell me if you know more about this cult. I was observing this cult during past 10 years and I realised that beside the funding there is something else :rolleyes: so could anyone give me any clue? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Paragon Posted October 16, 2004 Salafi brother, the question about the joining of parliament asked by brother sahal is one that concerns me too. Say: I'm a political student whose ambitions include being a member of parliament in a Muslim country in the near future, what then, is your group's standpoint on this issue? Is it permissable for me to join a parliament? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Salafi_Online Posted October 16, 2004 ^^^ 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: http://www.troid.org/articles/manhaj/innovation/groupsandpartisanship/thedestructivenessofpartisanship.htm 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.†Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sahal Posted October 16, 2004 J11 Thank you very much sxb. I knew the answer but i wanted to come from his mouth. Have you ever seen contradiction like these? “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.†compare the above quotes from salafi-on-line to these below. the Saudi government are not doing Shirk, they are not Kufar but Muslims , and its not permissible to overthrow them, even if they are Unjust! The fact that they seem oppressive does not give the youth or other then them the license to overthrow them or even speak ill of them,( backbiting is Haram and Allah did not sanction these such actions) Unless you have dalil of course! 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! on one hand they're disbelievers and other hand they're not kufar but muslims and it's haram to overthrow them and even to criticise them. :rolleyes: Funny in'it? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
