Al-Qaeda & Al-Khwaarij - Two Names - One Ideology
- Thread starter Salem9022
- Start date
- Status
As-salaamu `alaykum.
I listened to this some years ago. Maa shaa Allaah, the way Hasan As-Somaalee brings the comparisons from Ibn Katheer's book is excellent. Anyone know which books of the scholars he based this talk on (I'm not asking about Al-Bidaayah)?
I listened to this some years ago. Maa shaa Allaah, the way Hasan As-Somaalee brings the comparisons from Ibn Katheer's book is excellent. Anyone know which books of the scholars he based this talk on (I'm not asking about Al-Bidaayah)?
xSharingan01x
TraVeLer
:salam2:
Brother Saleem would have us be passive Muslims dancing around and doing takbir like the Sufis. How peaceful they are! Sorry just had to say that.
In fact, a Washington think tank is trying to do exactly that. They want to spread 'sufism' amongst Muslims so we could be more 'peace loving'.
Yes I'm well aware that you're not Sufi nor do you view them favorably .
By no means, those who claim to follow "way of
the Salaafs" are a united group. There are many factions amongst the "saalafis", some sympathize with the "Jihadi" causes other condemn them and other support them.
Isn't it quite ironic that the group of Muslims who condemn different Islamic groups that are associated with violent struggles as "khwarriites s, and takferris" while they themselves have the tendency of the "khwarijites" to denounce any and all Muslims who oppose them. Especially a faction of the saalafis, my goodness, they cannot utter a order without condemning fellow Muslims.
Think about it for a second. Every single group that is associated with violence cannot be condemned as 'khawarij'. Why not condemn the late PLO, Hamas, or even Fatah when they were active? They know you cannot, because of the popularity these group enjoy amongst the Muslims. Why not condemn the Mujaheddin in Algeria who fought against the French?
The Algerian Muslims fought to kick out Kuffars from Muslim land present day people in Afghanistan and Iraq are fighting to kick out kuffars from Muslim land. This happened way before there was any Ikhawan Muslimeen or Al Qaeda.
Argghhh Parrot Muslims.
Brother Saleem would have us be passive Muslims dancing around and doing takbir like the Sufis. How peaceful they are! Sorry just had to say that.
In fact, a Washington think tank is trying to do exactly that. They want to spread 'sufism' amongst Muslims so we could be more 'peace loving'.
Yes I'm well aware that you're not Sufi nor do you view them favorably .
By no means, those who claim to follow "way of
the Salaafs" are a united group. There are many factions amongst the "saalafis", some sympathize with the "Jihadi" causes other condemn them and other support them.
Isn't it quite ironic that the group of Muslims who condemn different Islamic groups that are associated with violent struggles as "khwarriites s, and takferris" while they themselves have the tendency of the "khwarijites" to denounce any and all Muslims who oppose them. Especially a faction of the saalafis, my goodness, they cannot utter a order without condemning fellow Muslims.
Think about it for a second. Every single group that is associated with violence cannot be condemned as 'khawarij'. Why not condemn the late PLO, Hamas, or even Fatah when they were active? They know you cannot, because of the popularity these group enjoy amongst the Muslims. Why not condemn the Mujaheddin in Algeria who fought against the French?
The Algerian Muslims fought to kick out Kuffars from Muslim land present day people in Afghanistan and Iraq are fighting to kick out kuffars from Muslim land. This happened way before there was any Ikhawan Muslimeen or Al Qaeda.
Argghhh Parrot Muslims.
:salam2:
Brother Saleem would have us be passive Muslims dancing around and doing takbir like the Sufis. How peaceful they are! Sorry just had to say that.
In fact, a Washington think tank is trying to do exactly that. They want to spread 'sufism' amongst Muslims so we could be more 'peace loving'.
Yes I'm well aware that you're not Sufi nor do you view them favorably .
By no means, those who claim to follow "way of
the Salaafs" are a united group. There are many factions amongst the "saalafis", some sympathize with the "Jihadi" causes other condemn them and other support them.
Isn't it quite ironic that the group of Muslims who condemn different Islamic groups that are associated with violent struggles as "khwarriites s, and takferris" while they themselves have the tendency of the "khwarijites" to denounce any and all Muslims who oppose them. Especially a faction of the saalafis, my goodness, they cannot utter a order without condemning fellow Muslims.
Think about it for a second. Every single group that is associated with violence cannot be condemned as 'khawarij'. Why not condemn the late PLO, Hamas, or even Fatah when they were active? They know you cannot, because of the popularity these group enjoy amongst the Muslims. Why not condemn the Mujaheddin in Algeria who fought against the French?
The Algerian Muslims fought to kick out Kuffars from Muslim land present day people in Afghanistan and Iraq are fighting to kick out kuffars from Muslim land. This happened way before there was any Ikhawan Muslimeen or Al Qaeda.
Argghhh Parrot Muslims.
I posted a video on this thread to listen to not to argue about.
Also the western leaders and the Kuffars and also many muslims are spreading sufism and deviant beliefs amoung muslims, one of those deviant beliefs happens to be the Jihaadi and revolutionary creed Because it serves their purpose. They need a Boogie man who is a Muslim like Bin Laden to invade Muslim countries and talk bad about Islam. and many times this group happens to kill more muslims then anyone else.
Its like how Hitler did against the Jews when they accused them of violence. They need something like that for the muslims. and suban'Allah because of these "Jihaadi" and Kharajite groups the dawah of Islam is so weak in the world.
Also the kuffar and many muslims arnt supporting "passive" muslims. its the opposite. Thats why they call anyone who supports the Salafi Dawah as a "Wahabi" this is even common amoung muslims who dont know anything about the Salafi Dawah because it is the truth and they expose their lies and deviancies.
and no Salafi supports "Jihaadi" groups since they dont have the right to speak of things which they have no idea. That is left for the Ullema and the leaders of the Muslims.
xSharingan01x
TraVeLer
:salam2:
Please enlighten me brother, what are we suppose to do when imperial powers invade our lands? Do the same as the Arabs did earlier in the century? If you can't beat them join them. Wave the white flag of surrender and take them as our masters? So imperialist can set up puppet government?
I mean come on, have you ever asked yourself why on Earth the British would appoint king Faisal over Iraq? This is just a simple example but there are numerous example like it. Every time we appeased to the Westerners we brought humiliation upon ourselves.
Who gives them the right to rule and why should the Muslim masses follow such ruler?
Take the Crusaders for example, they were in Palestine for 90 years and you had some Muslim leaders making 'peace treaty with them' and people who wanted to fight them weren't popular in the beginning.
Those who wanted to fight them weren't helped. The caliphate in Baghdad did absolutely nothing aside from giving nice 'khutbahs' about Jihad, which is merely words. Somtimes those with the least popular position tend to have the correct one. Allahu Alam,
If all we did was make peace treaties the crusaders would still be in Palestine.
Actually that's exactly what happened, the Jews were able to return precisely because we made 'peace treaties' with the colonialist and they made 'sikes picott agreement' as a thank you gift.
Is it a huge coincidence that virtually every Muslim country has western form of laws rather than Islamic ones?
This whole passiveness got us into this mess in the first place. Are we to appease to Western pressures? This is ridiculous! Appeasement lead us nowhere, except toward humiliation and defeat. We are still struggling to overcome the consequences of appeasement to this day.
Allah The Most High says "Jihad is ordained for you, even though you hate it"
I don't understand the logic of the people who says listen to our rulers even when he is a munafiq. Even when the ruler is in plain error and harming the Muslims? Think about it for a second, why would any fasiq ruler fight for the benefit of the Muslims when he is benefiting from the 'status que'? Those who benefit from the status que would never change it! Sure we can have patience, but for how long? If you give them 100 years they will spread corruption and mischief on earth for 100 years. This is illogical and foolish.
Allah says: "Do not spread mischief and corruption in the land"
Yes, I'm well aware of the hadeeth that restraints rebellion against ruler, and I'm not denouncing the hadeeth rather I take the opposing view point which can be concluded from analyzing many different hadeeth and placing them in their proper context.
You know, I've read somwhere by Sheikh Albani or Uthaymeen, that we have tyrants and Fasiq leaders ruling over us, because of our sins.
Perhaps one of our greatest sin was to appease to foreigners and unfit rulers. Yes, I do agree that we have tyrants and munafiqs ruling over us because we allowed them to do so, or because of the state of being. So yes the previous generations who let these conditions take place sinned. That is more the reason why we shouldn't follow in their footsteps.
That is why I think this Jihad (to establish law based on the book of Allah and Sunnah of his Rasul salelaelahi wasalam) should have been fought long time ago. I'm sure you're well aware of the virtue of Jihad and the consequences that arises when the Muslims abandon Jihad. In my humble opinion I think we are in this humiliating condition precisely because we left Jihad and we failed to establish the law of Allah.
I'm of the opinion that Muslims reserve the right to fight every and all opposing kuffar forces in the Muslim world. Since Muslim government cannot do so, those who are willing has the absolute right to oppose them.
Here is something to ponder over. Since you will not accept anything from other than those whom you consider 'saalafs'
Sheikh Ibn Tayima (may Allah bestow His mercy and peace upon him), said
"Any ruler who does not rule according to the Book of Allah and the Sunnah of the Prophet (may Allah's peace be upon him), has left the fold of Islam"
If you read his opinion concerning rulers, and many of the political issues affecting Muslmis, SubhanAllah he sounds nothing like you or the things you post here all the time.
I've asked you this once before, where were people like you when Muslims in Afghanistan fought against the Soviet? How were they different? Why weren't people calling them "khawrij and takferris"?
Please enlighten me.
Islamic history testifies to the fact, that when the Ummah fought Jihad they were prosperous and wealthy, and when they abandon Jihad they were humiliated.
I did not intend to make this another 'western this, imperial that' type of post, since the topic is Jihad it was inevitable.
Thank You for your honest opinion, but I choose not to follow the way of the Ulama of Sultan or the Munafiq leaders.
Yes Ulama have credibility, but I think their credibility is compromised when a Fasiq ruler who having the power to establish Sharia chooses not to and appoints Ulamas. There is something shady about that. Come on, Hosni Mubarak appointing the head of Al-Azhar? The fact that Fasiq rulers are given authority to rule over us, raises a million questions. What is the purpose of having leaders? What is their duty toward their subjects? Ibn Khaldun says "God gave authority to the ruler so they establish the rule of law based on his book and serve a restraining influence over the pople, and also look after the best interest of the Muslims"
I'm just paraphrasing his words.
There is no such thing as Muslim Leader presently, your whole statement is a joke.
The issue is not for Muslim leaders to speak about, since they are Fasiq to begin with (I'm talking about the political leadership), the issue is for Ulama to clarify. So that is what I understood from the Quran, 'the role of the scholar is to clarify the issues'.
Where we differ is which Ulama do we listen to, that's all.
This is not an issue of Aqeedah either, yet I hear alot of people denouncing different group of Muslims left and right.
I think we should we restraint our jdgement and avoid the habit of generalising.
p.s. This Sheikh from one of my local Masjid made this joke. "When Iblis saw Hosni Mubarak, he cried "I seek refuge from Satan, the accursed one"
Political Leaderships in the Muslim world care little about Islam or implementing Islamic laws and institutions. That is a fact! If the political leadership adapts such attitude, the masses of the Muslim are left alone to acquire knowledge by themselves without having proper instutions to guide them. Generations after generation grows up in the same corrupt envrionment and drifts further away from the deen. Things like allowing of alcohol nightclubs are small examples, but if young generations grow up in these envrionment how far will their offsprings will be from the deen? Muslims don't even have basic instituions. In most countries you have to go to a secular court. The political leadership would want us to believe 'religion is an individual thing that you practice at the comfort of your home.
SubhanAllah that is what people of Prophet Shoaib said. "What religion has got to do with business?" Islam encompasses everything.
Islam is an organized religion, it needs insutitions, leadership and great amount of organization. We are prevented from doing that. When a group of Muslim attempt to organize in some fashion they are looked with suspicion by the government.
Subhanallah, Sisters in Tunisia and Turkey can't even wear Hijab in public instituions. This is where the political leadership will take us. Realize this before it's too late. If we do nothing and keep appeasing to these stupid leaderships things are just going to get worst. The more we have patience and compromise the weaker we will get.
I think this is the most important challenge facing us, implementing Sharia.
I've typed too much.
:salam2:
Please enlighten me brother, what are we suppose to do when imperial powers invade our lands? Do the same as the Arabs did earlier in the century? If you can't beat them join them. Wave the white flag of surrender and take them as our masters? So imperialist can set up puppet government?
I mean come on, have you ever asked yourself why on Earth the British would appoint king Faisal over Iraq? This is just a simple example but there are numerous example like it. Every time we appeased to the Westerners we brought humiliation upon ourselves.
Who gives them the right to rule and why should the Muslim masses follow such ruler?
Take the Crusaders for example, they were in Palestine for 90 years and you had some Muslim leaders making 'peace treaty with them' and people who wanted to fight them weren't popular in the beginning.
Those who wanted to fight them weren't helped. The caliphate in Baghdad did absolutely nothing aside from giving nice 'khutbahs' about Jihad, which is merely words. Somtimes those with the least popular position tend to have the correct one. Allahu Alam,
If all we did was make peace treaties the crusaders would still be in Palestine.
Actually that's exactly what happened, the Jews were able to return precisely because we made 'peace treaties' with the colonialist and they made 'sikes picott agreement' as a thank you gift.
Is it a huge coincidence that virtually every Muslim country has western form of laws rather than Islamic ones?
This whole passiveness got us into this mess in the first place. Are we to appease to Western pressures? This is ridiculous! Appeasement lead us nowhere, except toward humiliation and defeat. We are still struggling to overcome the consequences of appeasement to this day.
Allah The Most High says "Jihad is ordained for you, even though you hate it"
I don't understand the logic of the people who says listen to our rulers even when he is a munafiq. Even when the ruler is in plain error and harming the Muslims? Think about it for a second, why would any fasiq ruler fight for the benefit of the Muslims when he is benefiting from the 'status que'? Those who benefit from the status que would never change it! Sure we can have patience, but for how long? If you give them 100 years they will spread corruption and mischief on earth for 100 years. This is illogical and foolish.
Allah says: "Do not spread mischief and corruption in the land"
Yes, I'm well aware of the hadeeth that restraints rebellion against ruler, and I'm not denouncing the hadeeth rather I take the opposing view point which can be concluded from analyzing many different hadeeth and placing them in their proper context.
You know, I've read somwhere by Sheikh Albani or Uthaymeen, that we have tyrants and Fasiq leaders ruling over us, because of our sins.
Perhaps one of our greatest sin was to appease to foreigners and unfit rulers. Yes, I do agree that we have tyrants and munafiqs ruling over us because we allowed them to do so, or because of the state of being. So yes the previous generations who let these conditions take place sinned. That is more the reason why we shouldn't follow in their footsteps.
That is why I think this Jihad (to establish law based on the book of Allah and Sunnah of his Rasul salelaelahi wasalam) should have been fought long time ago. I'm sure you're well aware of the virtue of Jihad and the consequences that arises when the Muslims abandon Jihad. In my humble opinion I think we are in this humiliating condition precisely because we left Jihad and we failed to establish the law of Allah.
I'm of the opinion that Muslims reserve the right to fight every and all opposing kuffar forces in the Muslim world. Since Muslim government cannot do so, those who are willing has the absolute right to oppose them.
Here is something to ponder over. Since you will not accept anything from other than those whom you consider 'saalafs'
Sheikh Ibn Tayima (may Allah bestow His mercy and peace upon him), said
"Any ruler who does not rule according to the Book of Allah and the Sunnah of the Prophet (may Allah's peace be upon him), has left the fold of Islam"
If you read his opinion concerning rulers, and many of the political issues affecting Muslmis, SubhanAllah he sounds nothing like you or the things you post here all the time.
I've asked you this once before, where were people like you when Muslims in Afghanistan fought against the Soviet? How were they different? Why weren't people calling them "khawrij and takferris"?
Please enlighten me.
Islamic history testifies to the fact, that when the Ummah fought Jihad they were prosperous and wealthy, and when they abandon Jihad they were humiliated.
I did not intend to make this another 'western this, imperial that' type of post, since the topic is Jihad it was inevitable.
Thank You for your honest opinion, but I choose not to follow the way of the Ulama of Sultan or the Munafiq leaders.
Yes Ulama have credibility, but I think their credibility is compromised when a Fasiq ruler who having the power to establish Sharia chooses not to and appoints Ulamas. There is something shady about that. Come on, Hosni Mubarak appointing the head of Al-Azhar? The fact that Fasiq rulers are given authority to rule over us, raises a million questions. What is the purpose of having leaders? What is their duty toward their subjects? Ibn Khaldun says "God gave authority to the ruler so they establish the rule of law based on his book and serve a restraining influence over the pople, and also look after the best interest of the Muslims"
I'm just paraphrasing his words.
There is no such thing as Muslim Leader presently, your whole statement is a joke.
The issue is not for Muslim leaders to speak about, since they are Fasiq to begin with (I'm talking about the political leadership), the issue is for Ulama to clarify. So that is what I understood from the Quran, 'the role of the scholar is to clarify the issues'.
Where we differ is which Ulama do we listen to, that's all.
This is not an issue of Aqeedah either, yet I hear alot of people denouncing different group of Muslims left and right.
I think we should we restraint our jdgement and avoid the habit of generalising.
p.s. This Sheikh from one of my local Masjid made this joke. "When Iblis saw Hosni Mubarak, he cried "I seek refuge from Satan, the accursed one"
Political Leaderships in the Muslim world care little about Islam or implementing Islamic laws and institutions. That is a fact! If the political leadership adapts such attitude, the masses of the Muslim are left alone to acquire knowledge by themselves without having proper instutions to guide them. Generations after generation grows up in the same corrupt envrionment and drifts further away from the deen. Things like allowing of alcohol nightclubs are small examples, but if young generations grow up in these envrionment how far will their offsprings will be from the deen? Muslims don't even have basic instituions. In most countries you have to go to a secular court. The political leadership would want us to believe 'religion is an individual thing that you practice at the comfort of your home.
SubhanAllah that is what people of Prophet Shoaib said. "What religion has got to do with business?" Islam encompasses everything.
Islam is an organized religion, it needs insutitions, leadership and great amount of organization. We are prevented from doing that. When a group of Muslim attempt to organize in some fashion they are looked with suspicion by the government.
Subhanallah, Sisters in Tunisia and Turkey can't even wear Hijab in public instituions. This is where the political leadership will take us. Realize this before it's too late. If we do nothing and keep appeasing to these stupid leaderships things are just going to get worst. The more we have patience and compromise the weaker we will get.
I think this is the most important challenge facing us, implementing Sharia.
I've typed too much.
1.) I told you before I made this thread to watch the videos not to argue about it.
2.) You ask who gives The Kuffar the authority to rule over the Muslims? I say Allah gave the authority for the Kuffar to rule over the Muslims. Do you know anyone else who can give authority for someone to rule anything besides Allah Aza'Wajaal?
3.) Also this is not about being Passive. No One is Passive especially not me. But what you are trying to do here is tell every Tom, Harry, Dick and Joe down the street to form little gangs and cells and go make little Jihads here and little Jihad there etc. Now what kind of Jihad is this? never mind the suicide bombings and terrorist attacks but what Kind of Jihad you are talking about?
4.) You ask why we should listen to our rulers. Well this is what the Prophet of Allah told me to do:
Sahih Bukhari:
257
Narrated Ibn 'Abbas: The Prophet said, "If somebody sees his Muslim ruler doing something he disapproves of, he should be patient, for whoever becomes separate from the Muslim group even for a span and then dies, he will die as those who died in the Pre-lslamic period of ignorance (as rebellious sinners). (See Hadith No. 176 and 177)
5.) You see most of what you said is Ignorance and rubbish, nothing to do with the sunnah noting to do with Islam, the only thing you talked about was Britian, Colonialism, Western Powers, Crusaders, Hosni Mubarak, etc. My religion doesn't revolve around these matters. It revolves around the Quran and the Sunnah of Rasoul'Allah.
6.) Also You don't even know what a ruler in Islam is to begin with which shows your lack of Understanding of Islam. This is what a ruler in Islam is.
Narrated 'Abdullah bin 'Umar: Allah's Apostle said, "Surely! Everyone of you is a guardian and is responsible for his charges: The Imam (ruler) of the people is a guardian and is responsible for his subjects; a man is the guardian of his family (household) and is responsible for his subjects; a woman is the guardian of her husband's home and of his children and is responsible for them; and the slave of a man is a guardian of his master's property and is responsible for it. Surely, everyone of you is a guardian and responsible for his charges."
Husband is the ruler of the Family, Master is the ruler of the Slave, and the King is the ruler of the Land.
7.) Also now my last point even though I have many.
Let's Hypothetically say you are doing Jihad okay?.
Now If I wanted to join your "Jihad" Which Ideology would I have to fight for? The Soufi Belief system? the Shi3a Belief system? The Nashqabandi belief system? The Deobandi Belief system? The Habashi belief system? The Kharajee belief system? The Ash'ari belief system?
Please let me know.
Also most of what you said like I said before is garbage and only emotional feelings. Noting sound on the sunnah just like how the Khwarij of the Past who killed Ali Radi'Allahu'an and the Khwarij of Today who use emotional Blackmail and show videos of Chechnya and Bosnia and Palestine as propoganda tool to spread their evil religion. Noting they have is sound on Islam.
daywalker
Junior Member
IS there any jihad happend which is according to your belief?
No doubt for some people its only emotional and nothing more than that. Islam has now to do with emotion and typing things in web.
I asked if I wanted to Join your "Jihad" and call my friends from college over so we can have secret meetings in the Headquaters(my Bedroom) to do preperation for Jihad, what kind of Manhaj you want us to have?
daywalker
Junior Member
Help first muslims, and dont ask for manhaj, like people ask are you from so and so manhaj or not, before giving salam! Help muslims.
user expired!
Junior Member
^ Let's not say anything that we will later regret!
just a quick Q to Salem,
Why was it ok for the Muslims to fight against Russia (Afghanistan war) in the 1980's and why was this considerd Jihad by all the major Ulama?
just a quick Q to Salem,
Why was it ok for the Muslims to fight against Russia (Afghanistan war) in the 1980's and why was this considerd Jihad by all the major Ulama?
Oem Soufiane
Junior Member
Astaghfirullah!!!!!!!!!!!!
Ahudu billah!!!!!!
some people...............
Ahudu billah!!!!!!
some people...............
because the Soviet Union(Russia) didnt have any treaties with Saudi Arabia and was not recongized as a ligitimate country.
alkathiri
As-Shafaa'i(Brother)
Shaikhul-Islam Ibn Taimiyya said:
فإذا تعذر إقامة الواجبات من العلم والجهاد وغير ذلك إلا بمن فيه بدعة مضرتها دون مضرة ترك ذلك الواجب : كان تحصيل مصلحة الواجب مع مفسدة مرجوحة معه خيرا من العكس
If establishing the obligations such as education, jihad and other obligations besides that becomes impossible except with the help of one who has bid'a and its harms are less than the harms of leaving the obligation: So obtaining the interest of the obligation - even if it has some evil as a result - is better than the opposite of this (i.e. abandoning ahl al-bid'a).
"Majmu al-Fatawa", 28/212
user expired!
Junior Member
so as long as Saudia have a peace treaty with US they can attack any country?
before replying please think brother.
before replying please think brother.
alkathiri
As-Shafaa'i(Brother)
What if they break that treaty.
Salem is making islam very rigid and he is making his own opinions( speaking from his hawa) . A lot of the people here often diasgree with what he posted .
user expired!
Junior Member
^ ok bro i get the point, i just wanted to see how far things would go.
podolski11
PAIN
no offence saleem but ur points r getting vague and illogical....I mean always pointing ur fingers at the taliban and calling them khwariji or wateva without even knowing them or even meeting them....yeah rite....talk to the hand!
daywalker
Junior Member
Come on brothers, its brother saleems thread. All your comment will get delete, only his thread will stay here. SO dont waste your time.
Use your time, and do some ibadah. have a life
I don't know where you got the taliban from. I didn't even mention taliban in this thread.
Also to alkathiri, you should know more then any body else to speak ill about your fellow brother and saying things like "he is talking hawa" because regardless if the majority of the people were against what I had to say doesn't nesseraly mean I am speaking "Hawa". Majority of the people during Shaykh-ul-Islams time didn't agree with his views and he was put in Jail by the Ottomans, you of all people should know that.
This "Hawa" is supported claims by the present day Ullema which you probably don't even recognize. : ) but thats besides the point.
Also this discussion is going no where, because it has gone from 3 good videos by a brother I posted to Saudi Bashing.
If you ever want to discuss with me again start your own thread and post arguements there because threads like these get closed because of arguements from people like you.
- Status