Global Effort Towards Khilafah

Abu-Talha

Brother in Deen
salam,

Brothers, I think its dangerous when a group of people tell me to avoid pioneers like Khalid Yasin, Ahmad Deedat, Zakir Naik, Yasir Qadhi etc. (May Allah preserve them). I am yet to see any of them make any errors in their da'wahs. Yet there are people out their (mainly wahabis)who are working hard to destroy their reputation.

khalid, zakir, yasir etc are good dais-callers to islam, i never heard them using word wahabi !!!

i heard nonmuslim using this word, and sufis, but thos wich you mention never used that word, and thos people follow Quran and sunnah as sahaba did and they declared that openly
 

Abd_Al_Hadi

لبيك يا الله
Global effort?, how about we start in our own homes first?.

What came first: the school or the students? You telling us to fix ourselves first is similar to telling children to "study first and then we'll build you a school." That's not how it works. You must establish an Ummah with sharia law, and then Muslims will begin to approach their faith. Those who convinced us in the past to "better ourselves first..." weren't really looking out for us. They wanted to divide us each to our own little corners, so they can conquer us. And it worked for many years and kings and princes ate while the rest of us starved--til this day, unfortunately. But you see, as society advances, the human mind blooms. Alhumdillah it's inevitable. Of course, some go left and others go right. But those who went left eventually wisen up and start moving right. A *!*!*!*!star converts to Islam!! This would never have happened in the 80's!
The question is, what drives people to go left or right? Obviously, it's because they feel they fit in this group or that group--and ONLY because they're exposed to such groups. One who hates Islam eventually becomes a Muslim. Why? Because his hate drove him to "hmmm, let me research on these strange people." Then after doing proper research, he realized "hey! These practices are not what they show me on tv. These ideas I can definitely agree with." And before you know it, he become a proactive brother in Islam.

I know I drifted with these scenarios, but my point is we have to force ourselves and each other unite. Sometimes, I have to force some brothers in school to join me for Durh prayer. Eventually, they're grateful...but if I wasn't there, they might have missed it.

The power of unity, brothers and sisters. Its a beautiful phenomenon Sub7anAllah, Allah made this phenomenon a natural law. Every blessed creature needs a systemic network with laws and roles. Imagine if Allah had not inspired the bee?! There will be no bee community, no hives. To each bee his own....and no honey for us. :)
 

Idris16

Junior Member
Name me one ruler who takes NOT the Jews or the Christians as friends?
Mullah Omar.

To say that there is one established khalifah in this world at the moment, then that's not true. To answer your question, there is none, as far as I know. However, so long that the ruler is still a Muslim, still pray to Allaah then we are not to go against them.
They are not Muslims and they do not pray Salaat, perhaps only Salat al-Eid. The Muslim belief is that we do not rebel against the ruler unless he apostates, even if he is an oppressor. We do not deem the Muslim to be Kafir due to major sins as the khawarij, nor do we agree with the beliefs of the Murji'ah.
 

John Smith

Junior Member
What came first: the school or the students?
Sorry just to pick this bit, but the answer to it is the 'Teacher' would come first,when the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) came with the message it was about Tawheed & not establishing a state,get the basics right right and the state will come about itself.

We have no leaders to look towards at present but given time they will come,as will the state.
 

Idris16

Junior Member
Assalamua`alaykum wa rahmatullahi wa barakaatuh,

Read the biography of Imaam Ahmad. The Imaams of the Salaf who were imprisoned, tortured, killed but they did not rebel against a ruler so long that he is still considered a Muslim.

[Let's not turn this thread into another debate but rather an educational one]

:wasalam:
Wa alaykom salam warahmatullah wabarakatuh

That was at the time of Imam Ahmad, of course he wouldn't rebel against the Muslim ruler, but today, most of the rulers are not Muslims because they make the halal as haram, and haram as halal which is kufr. They do not uphold the Tawhid in their land which is kufr too. Many of the rulers are secularists and secularism is kufr. The rulers ally with the disbelievers against Muslims and this is also kufr. It won't help speaking about Imam Ahmad and the rulers at his time and compare it with the rulers of today, this is jaahiliyyah.

I know what the claimants of the Sunnah (Salafiyyah i.e NEO-Salafis) say concerning the rulers of today and how they "prove the iman" of todays rulers. I know what shubhah (doubts) they bring forth. If anyone is sincere, I can easily destroy their doubts and tell you how.

I will bear in mind that this is educational one and not about debates!
 

Abu-Talha

Brother in Deen
Mullah Omar.

islamic state of taliban had agrement with UN, to be part of UN, is that ok ?

olso when muslims fight against rusians, they had agrement with nonmuslims from west for help, is that ok ?

wich type of relations are there with nonmuslims according to islam ?
 

Idris16

Junior Member
islamic state of taliban had agrement with UN, to be part of UN, is that ok ?

olso when muslims fight against rusians, they had agrement with nonmuslims from west for help, is that ok ?

wich type of relations are there with nonmuslims according to islam ?
Who said it is wrong to seek help from mushrikeen against other mushrikeen? So if they did that, I have no choice but to agree with them. If you want to consider Mullah Omar a Kafir then that's your problem and not mine. It depends on what kind of agreement. Was it kufr agreement?
 

Abu-Talha

Brother in Deen
Who said it is wrong to seek help from mushrikeen against other mushrikeen? So if they did that, I have no choice but to agree with them. If you want to consider Mullah Omar a Kafir then that's your problem and not mine. It depends on what kind of agreement. Was it kufr agreement?

i didnt consider him kafir, audhobilah, its not good dialog when people assume or they think that person thinks that way or this way, this is wrong

islamic state of afganistan was under UN as member, is that ok ?

as for the help to seek from nonbelievers against nonbelievers, there are more explanation, even so some scholar alowed it

the last question was not answerd, we need to know many things in detail before we say something, olso we should not forget that scholars differ in issue of takfir, some say that obstacles are not lifted yet to make takfir in one person, some said this thing is wajib to consider that obstacle are lifted, some say its not wajib, so its not black and white when it comes to the mistake of the rulers, depens who is he, what he believes and what he calls into it etc

but in general the one that alowes to be jugdge by something that islami law, that is big kufr, if he judges becasue of nafs or becasue he is dhalimun-that is small kufr, this is in general, not particullar

khayr inshaAllah, big topic, wich always brings misconseption and makes muslims separated in two sides, wich is not good
 

Seeker-of-truth

Junior Member
Assalaamu alaikum wa Rahmatullahi wa Barakaatuhu

Brothers and sisters, I think we should have abd al Hadi banned from these forums,

He is not here to learn, rather to see how much attention he can attract with rubbish.

He misinterprets Ayaat of Allah to suit himself.

If you look through his posts, you will see that his views are not the same as ours which is fine.

Furthermore, he is trying to call people to misguidance and falsehood.

This is not the first of his posts that seemed to be troublesome.

It is nice to have some level of debate in the forums but this foul person holds the views of an uneducated caveman.

There was one occasion in the past where he said that Bangladesh would have been better off as part of Pakistan.

That 1 really disgusted me.

We should fear Allah, and not let the likes of him stir trouble amongst us.

Hizb ut Tahrir is evil, they do not regard the Sunnah as highly as is due.

They are troublesome, aggressive and lie to push their agenda.

They mock our Ulema and students of knowledge.

They also issue illegitimate fatawa.
 

Seeker-of-truth

Junior Member
If you entertain his ideology, he will only cause us to break up among ourselves.

It would probably be best if you didn't answer him, or reply to any of his accusations.

And Allah knows best.
 

Abd_Al_Hadi

لبيك يا الله
What came first: the school or the students?
Sorry just to pick this bit, but the answer to it is the 'Teacher' would come first,when the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) came with the message it was about Tawheed & not establishing a state,get the basics right right and the state will come about itself.

We have no leaders to look towards at present but given time they will come,as will the state.


There are "teachers" waiting to contribute. There are far more scholars in the Muslim World that are being suppressed.



As for Seeker-of-Truth......You want to ban someone for calling out to unite the Muslims?? WOW.

First of all, brother, as for the ignorant comment I made about Pakistan should control Bangladesh, I admit it was out of anger. Bangladeshi government denied access for the Muslim Burma victim who are still being slaughtered today. It makes me very angry when I see innocent people being killed. I'm not perfect to control my anger like our Prophet (saaw) can. BUT I did however do research on the Bangladeshi Liberation and realized many how tragic the era was. and I did repent.


Second of all, look at you post. Olympics? Are you serious? This is the time where Muslims can regain the dignity Allah once blessed us with, and instead of posting useful things, you chose to talk about the Olympics.

Now brothers, with all honesty, who is a threat to your deen: A brother who gets on his knees and begs you to unite, or a brother who talks about the Olympics?


Seeker-of-Truth, why decide to ban me now? Why didn't you suggest this before? Is it because I'm Sunni and not Salafi?

And dear brother, just for the record, the Olympics was an ancient polytheistic event.
"According to historical records, the first ancient Olympic Games can be traced back to 776 BC. They were dedicated to the Olympian gods and were staged on the ancient plains of Olympia."

This is a website that worships Allah, not Zeus.
 

Seeker-of-truth

Junior Member
What are you talking about?

What does the Olympics have to do with anything?

Why are you trying to change the subject

and the 1 who is calling for unity is one who is asking for compromise between parties and therefore far more dangerous than someone that speaks about the Olympics.

I do not remember writing about the olympics but it could have been possible, im sure you have looked into my history and found it somewhere.

When someone talks about the olympics, it is only a devious mind like yours that would stretch it to the idea of worshipping zeus.

Normally when someone mentions the olympics, zeus is not the first thing that comes to mind, but you seem hell-bent on a comeback and this is what you have come up with, Ma Shaa Allah

May Allah guide You and Me and everyone else who comes to this forum with sincere intentions.

Kindest regards,

Seeker-Of-Truth
 

Abd_Al_Hadi

لبيك يا الله
Dude, I'm not trying to attack you. I'm just trying to help you. Of course I saw your history, just as you saw mine. Is it wrong to tell a brother the Olympics was originally based on polytheism? I'm not saying you're a kaffir. You mentioned that you're here to learn and I offered a piece of fact. You're welcome.




I'm not here to fight, brother. You need to admit that its wrong to go around suggest to ban people just because you don't agree with their thoughts. Thats something the Catholic church used to do back in the medieval times. Thats something the Pharisees did to Isa (as) 2,000 years ago.
 

Seeker-of-truth

Junior Member
First things first,

I did not search your history, its just that I remembered that comment about Bangladesh and it upset me that someone could actually think like that.

Next,

Hizb ut Tahrir is rooted in evil, their very core is falsehood, we will never 'unite' under their banner.

When men come forward and say that our leaders are tawagheet they think they are showing bravery and that the masses are too scared to show something similar.

What they think they are offering is a way to criticise our leaders whilst being part of a jamaa'ah.

But the reality is, they hold gatherings in which they curse our Ulema calling them hypocrites and liars.

They let their emotions get the better of them.

They are also hypocritical themselves, it was noted that they once ran for presidential elections in Jordan but today they curse the governing methodologies of the world.

They call for unity but what they are actually trying to say is compromise.

They want people of innovation and people of the Sunnah to compromise their beliefs and 'unite'

We do not unite unless it is necessary i.e Shaikh al Islaam against the Mongols.

What they want is for people to be disobedient to their leaders and cause havoc in their countries.

Now tell me, these people are asking that we compromise our beliefs and join those who believee in something different from us.

Furthermore, they ask us to 'uprise' and cause the leaders to fall.

After we compromise our beliefs, join sides with the people of innovation, dispose of our leaders and put Hizb ut Tahrir incharge of the Islamic World, would that really help us at all?

You also claim to be Sunni and not Salafi.

That statement in itself is contradictory.

If you don't like the salaf you are not a Muslim.

If you do like the Salaf, you would hope to adhere to their works, methodologies and actions which would make you Salafi.
 

Abd_Al_Hadi

لبيك يا الله
I love the Salaf. Umar ibn Khattab (ra) is my favorite of them.

Please read:

1.7.4. Freedom of opinion

Islam fully guarantees the individual the freedom of opinion, and this right was guaranteed and protected during the time of the Rightly-Guided Caliphs. 'Umar used to leave the people to express their opinions and he gave the opportunity to reach their own conclusions in matters concerning which there was no text.

It was narrated that 'Umar met a man and said: "What did you do?' He said, " 'Ali and Zayd passed such and such a judgement." He said, "If it were me, I would have ruled in such and such a manner. " He said, "What kept you from doing that when you are the ruler?" He said, "If there was clear evidence concerning your issue in the Book of Allah or in the Sunnah of His Prophet (saaw), I Would have overridden their judgement, but my judgement is based on my personal opinion, and everyone has the right to express his own opinion."

Similarly, 'Umar let the Sahabah express their own opinions concerning matters that are subject to ijtihad, and he did not prevent them from reaching their own conclusions or force them to follow a specific view. Criticizing and advising the ruler, at the time of 'Umar and the Rightly-Guided Caliphs, was something that was open to all.

'Umar stood up and delivered a speech in which he said: "O' people, whoever among you sees any crookedness in me, let him straighten it." A man stood up and said: "By Allah, if we see any crookedness in you, we will straighten it with our swords." 'Umar said: "Praise be to Allah Who has put in this ummah people who will straighten the crookedness of 'Umar with their swords."

It is narrated that 'Umar said, in the speech he gave when he assumed the position of caliph: "Help me against (the evil of) myself by enjoining what is good and forbidding what is evil, and by offering me advice."

'Umar regarded the practice of constructive political freedom (sincere advice) as obligatory upon the people, and as a right to which the ruler was entitled, as he said: "O' people, we have rights over you: sincerity towards us in our absence and help in doing good."

And he believed that any individual member of the ummah had the right to watch him and straighten any crookedness, even if it that was done by the sword, if he deviated from the right path. He said: "O' people, whoever among you sees any crookedness in me,let him straighten it" And he used to say: "The most beloved of people to me is the one who points out my faults."

And he said: "I fear that I may make a mistake and no one among you will correct me out of respect for me."

One day a man came to him and said to him — in the presence of witnesses — "Fear Allah, O' 'Umar!" Some of those present became aagry and wanted to silence him, but 'Umar said to them: "There is no goodness in you if you do not say it and there is no goodness in us if we do not listen."

One day he stood and addressed the people, and hardly had he said: "O' people, listen and obey," but one of them interrupted him and said, "We will not listen and obey, O' 'Umar." 'Umar calmly asked, "Why not, O' slave of Allah?" He said,"Because each one of us has been given a single shirt from the fabric to cover his 'awrah." 'Umar said to him, "Wait a minute." Then he called his son'Abdullah ibn 'Umar, and 'Abdullah explained to him that he had given his father his own share of the fabric to make his garment complete, and the Sahabah were convinced by that. A man said, with humility and respect: "Now we will listen and obey, O' Ameer al-Mu'mineen."
http://www.faithinallah.org/faithinallah/wp-content/Umar Ibn Al-Khattab Volume 1.pdf

How can you tell us to bow down to rulers, when one of Islam's most prominent and dearest ruler urged the Muslims to correct his mistakes EVEN if they have to use the sword!
 

Aisya al-Humaira

الحمدلله على كل حال
SubhanaAllaah wa bi hamdih. I did had the feelings how this thread will turn out. *sigh*.

We can't really avoid such immature talks and debate yet we are urging the Ummah to unite? Wow, let us look at ourselves first before jumping into making a difference to the whole nation. Let us change ourselves first before asking others to change, inshaa Allaah.

Few points I'd like to address.

Brother Seeker-of-truth: Perhaps next time you should address your points in a calmer and polite way, inshaa Allaah? I don't think it's the rights of any members but only the admins and mods to ban a member. That being said, it's not nice to say like that to Brother Abd Al Hadi despite of how we disagree on so many things and I can relate to what you're saying. And I very much agree to you about Hizb Ut-Tahrir because they are pretty much the same with Ikhwan al-Muslimeen. I left the Ikhwan because of what you mentioned. Basically all political movements out there are just passionately calling for a Khilafah, yet they abandon the Qur`an and Sunnah.

Brother Abd Al Hadi: Daleel and reasons of why we shouldn't be engaging in such movements have been presented. But sadly, you chose to be with your own stand despite of what has been brought up. I also see some flaws on how you understand some matters. You are a Sunni, but not a Salafi. Please know that Salafi is not a certain group or movement whatsoever but it is to understand, adhere and stick to how we understand the Qur`an and Sunnah with the understandings of the Salaf and live by it. That being said, live by how they respond to issues. Including on how to responds to a dholim ruler. Not just voicing out loud that we are following the Salaf but not having even a single of their attributes.

Also you should know that this website is based upon the understanding of the Salaf us-Saleeh and we don't compromise with new ideologies i.e: political movements like you posted. Brother Mabsoot once stated [and I found that very quote yesterday] that this website is a salafi site.

To both of the brothers, try not to attack one another by attacking the personalities/characters, shall we? Instead, point out the mistakes and present the truth WITH evidences and daleel, inshaa Allaah.

Brother Idris: I was very much like you in the beginning. I was hating the evils done by the Muslims countries and leaders and yet they couldn't help the Palestinians, the Syrians etc. I was questioning why can't we stand against a ruler i.e The Saudi like the one you're continuously making threads about from time to time.

The more I learn, the more I understood why. So I have changed my views about that.

Present to me daleel that the Salaf and all the scholars of Sunnah are upon consensus that it is OK to rebel against a Muslim ruler. So far, what you have shared to me is not convincing enough. And who is Mullah Omar? Are you a big fan of the Taliban leader?

Also when you wrote that it was during the time of Imaam Ahmad, that of course he wouldn't rebel and that it couldn't be applied today, it's like you're saying what the Salaf did is not to be followed in todays' world. Because of the waqi`, is it? Well that is a weak evidence. If it's up to the waqi`, then many rulings would be change as of today. And that's what the contemporary scholars are extracting their rulings based on the waqi` like Yusuf al-Qardhawi.

I do not wish to respond on this thread anymore if it wont bring any good to me in terms of knowledge and also in preserving my heart from becoming harden due to the debates.

I wish everyone well.

Wa`alaykum as-salaam wa rahmatullahi wa barakaatuh.
 

Idris16

Junior Member
Brother Idris: I was very much like you in the beginning. I was hating the evils done by the Muslims countries and leaders and yet they couldn't help the Palestinians, the Syrians etc. I was questioning why can't we stand against a ruler i.e The Saudi like the one you're continuously making threads about from time to time.

The more I learn, the more I understood why. So I have changed my views about that.

Present to me daleel that the Salaf and all the scholars of Sunnah are upon consensus that it is OK to rebel against a Muslim ruler. So far, what you have shared to me is not convincing enough. And who is Mullah Omar? Are you a big fan of the Taliban leader?

Also when you wrote that it was during the time of Imaam Ahmad, that of course he wouldn't rebel and that it couldn't be applied today, it's like you're saying what the Salaf did is not to be followed in todays' world. Because of the waqi`, is it? Well that is a weak evidence. If it's up to the waqi`, then many rulings would be change as of today. And that's what the contemporary scholars are extracting their rulings based on the waqi` like Yusuf al-Qardhawi.

I do not wish to respond on this thread anymore if it wont bring any good to me in terms of knowledge and also in preserving my heart from becoming harden due to the debates.

I wish everyone well.

Wa`alaykum as-salaam wa rahmatullahi wa barakaatuh.
You are mistaken, I didn't speak against a Muslim ruler, I spoke out against the apostate rulers. An Apostate is not equal to a Muslim. I don't make threads about Saudi king, I made posts about him. Mullah Omar is the Muslim ruler, so this proves to you that I am not against Muslim rulers. Imam Ahmad lived at the time of an oppressive Muslim ruler and not apostate one. You didn't explain the kufr of todays rulers. Maybe I shouldn't reply to this thread again, it's obvious you don't speak about the real issue. They do not pray Salat as I told you so there's no need to bring the issue of Imam Ahmad into this, this is what I am saying. I feel sick calling people such as Zine al-Abidine bin Ali a Muslim, the man who forbade the hijab in Tunisia and is now being protected by the "Land of Tawheed"!
 

John Smith

Junior Member
So, how do we start an islamic state when we cant even agree with ourselves?.

Pure comedy.

Charity starts at home,establish Tawheed first and the rest will follow.
 

Abd_Al_Hadi

لبيك يا الله
Lets focus on Umar.

Is he wrong?

And Brother Yahya (John), what do you mean by can't agree with ourselves? We all agree on this matter. He of us that does not agree is the one who is willing to take orders from apostate rulers. And believe it or not, just as brother Idris addressed, we already have an established ruler: Mullah Omar. You and me and every righteous Muslim agrees with Mullah Omar, but we're cowards. We can't transfer that agreement from our hearts to our tongues, because we're afraid the SIS and the MI6 will visit us. Aint that so? JAk brother Idris for having the courage to mention Mullah Omar. Two years ago, I would have refrained because I was a coward, but now I agree with my tongue 100%


Also, we ALL heard that same lame excuse: establish yourselves first. That's the lazy man's excuse. Then these people have the audacity to say "oh those people in Palestine and Burma and Afghanistan and Syria are suffering because Allah wants them to suffer."

Seriously? Palestinians have been suffering the longest. For over 60 years. And you're reasoning is because they weren't true to Allah??? They're continuing the legacy of Salah a-Deen as far as we all know. But we're too damned lazy to offer at least an admittance of truth. Shame on us all.
 

John Smith

Junior Member
Without upsetting some.

Are we discussing the same Mullah Omar leader of the Taliban that were backed by the west?.
 
Top