Serious Deadly attack on satirical magazine in Paris

Aapa

Mirajmom
Assalaam alaikum,

First, the actions are not those of Muslims. We must offer our heart felt sympathies to the families who lost loved ones.
We need to remember these actions are not of Believers. Believers fear Allah swt and make dua for guidance.

Islam is not new to the West. And there is nothing wrong with women in hijab and niqab. The frizzy beards and short pants are not offensive whatsoever.

I have nothing to apologize for as I am not guilty of the actions of those who are arrogant enough to use violence in the name of Allah, swt.

It is time for us to do more good deeds. It is time for more actions of the hands. May Allah swt forgive us for fearing the reaction of others and not Him.

iT
 

MehmetHilmi

Junior Member
I don't even want to watch the news anymore. Fox news is complaining that Muslims aren't condeming the attack. Actually we are and always have. They just choose to be deaf.

And Charlie Hebdo will print 1,000,000 copies next Wednesday instead of the usual 60,000. And i predict that a lot of other artists will take up drawing mocking cartoons of the prophet (saw) as well.

What falls on us is sabr. Ya Allah Meded. :(
 

friend263

Junior Member
Why don't those people understand just a simple logic that because of such so called Muslim terrorists each and every other normal Muslim like me u and us suffered a lot.... It is due to such people that the name of Muslims are only used when something bad or even worst happens it is because of those few people that we Muslims are SeeN only as a terror to the society... I feel sooo bad.. Y don't people learn and follow true Islamic teachings....
 

saif

Junior Member
[
Assalaam alaikum,

First, the actions are not those of Muslims. We must offer our heart felt sympathies to the families who lost loved ones.
We need to remember these actions are not of Believers. Believers fear Allah swt and make dua for guidance.

Assalamu alaikum

Aapa, it is simplistic to categorize terrorists amongst us to be "not muslim", "not true muslim" or "not really true muslim". This is a weak effort to distance oneself from them. Our voice against them is so weak, that we can hardly hear it ourself. It must be loud enough to reach each and every muslim and non muslim alike. Then I wouldn't care, if Fox News pretends to be deaf.

The bitter reality is, that those terrorists are among us. They have a strong voice and they confront us in every forum and try to justify their man-slaughtering by quoting verses from Quran and Ahadith. We need a counter-narrative, which we do not have or it is not effective, to say the least. We mostly rely on the same scholars, who are responsbile for this mess. The discussions on terrorism on this very forum just vindicate my theory. The only thing, the muslims want to bring against terrorism are fatwas, which are based on prohibition of suicide. It is not even worth considering as a counter-narrative.

It is time for us to do more good deeds. It is time for more actions of the hands.

I strongly agree with that. It is the field of good deeds, where we need to compete with others.

Wassalamu alaikum
 
Last edited:

saif

Junior Member
If attacks like the above represent a course of action for immediate or long term emigration to Muslim countries, then I for one, will not be intimidated by them and leave out of fear, nor will I see it as a means of it being something that shows I agree or disagree with the thoughts, behaviours, opinions or belief systems of the wider majority.

Assalamu alaikum brother Abu Juwairiya,
I can sense your concept of "hijrah" in your words. We keep on discussing here those fatwas, which make it a compulsion on all muslims to leave the non-muslim countries and emigrate to the muslim countries. We may agree or disagree on that. But please save that discussion for another time. Right now we are concerned about those muslims, who for one or the other reason decide to live in the west and who do not want to invite a holocaust on themselves for the deeds of a few misguided muslims.
Wassalamu alaikum
 

saif

Junior Member
Western nations or I should add the Kafirun have in the past, continue to in the present and will go on to further oppress, hurt, destroy and annihilate Muslims. Reasons for doing so are helpful, but not necessary. It facilitates an affair, gives legitimacy, popular support and makes the destruction of Muslims easier, both among their own people as well as among and from Muslims themselves, but it will not stop their dislike and internal hatred of Islam from the bottom of their hearts.

Assalamu alaikum,
Whether we have the right to call them "Kafirun", I will save that discussion for another time. But I would have thought, you were interested in da'wa. A da'ii should never go to the people with the idea, that he can never change their internal hatred of Islam with love for Islam. In fact, when they do injustice towards muslims, when they publish things, which we consider to be blasphemous, it provides us an opportunity to knock on the closed doors of their hearts.

It is hard for me to accept that the west in general will always hate Islam. It is easier for me to accept, that you might have a biased opinion. And Allah knows the best.
Wassalamu alaikum
 
Last edited:

saif

Junior Member
People on other forums are trying to defend this by bringing up the story of a sahaba who killed his wife after she insulted the prophet. They say that the prophet didn't say anything to this man and that's why it is allowed for us to follow in his footsteps. Can people shed some light on this issue?

Assalamu alaikum brother Mehmet,

As you know, muslims have a wide range of methodologies for ahadith. Unfortunately, for a vast majority of muslims, a story like that can be a source of legislation, provided its chain of narration is strong enough. So, even though, the grand mufti of Saudi Arabia, as quoted by brother Hassan, comes to a different conclusion in this particular case, he for sure belongs to the people, who consider such narrations as a source of legislation.

You have all right to disagree, but I am convinced by the scholars, who are of the opinion, that for a sahih hadith to become a source of legislation, it should be quoting the law (or the text of the law) from the Prophet himself. There are yet some other restrictions but we are not discussing the hadith methodology here.

I can elaborate my point by another example. Consider the case of that woman, who had comitted zina and who came to the Prophet several times and then finally the Prophet decided to stone her to death. You will agree, that it is highly unlikely, that in all the occasions, one and same narrator was present and he witnessed that "court proceeding" and also documented that. What we get in the hadith is nothing more than hear-say from secondary sources. The only thing, which we can conclude is, that such an event happened for sure. But it cannot be the source of the law. I may point out here, that there are other ahadith on the same issue, which can become a source of law and which also shed light on this event.

I hope it helps. In my next post, I will post an article, which was written in the context of blasphemy laws in Pakistan. I hope, it will further clarify a few misconceptions.

Wassalamu alaikum.
 

saif

Junior Member

Punishment for Blasphemy against the Prophet (sws )

I
The law for punishing blasphemy against the Prophet (sws) that is invoked in Pakistan has no foundation in the Qur’ān or Ḥadīth. Therefore, a pertinent question is: What exactly is the justification for this law? Some scholars have proffered Q. 5: 33-34 as a possible basis. In their opinion, God, in these verses of Sūrah Mā’idah, has prescribed the punishment for muḥārabah (rebellion) and fasād fi al-arḍ (disorder), and they believe that blasphemy against the Prophet (sws) is also a form of this offence of muḥārabah:
The text of the verse with its translation is:
إِنَّمَا جَزَاءُ الَّذِينَ يُحَارِبُونَ اللَّهَ وَرَسُولَهُ وَيَسْعَوْنَ فِي الْأَرْضِ فَسَادًا أَنْ يُقَتَّلُوا أَوْ يُصَلَّبُوا أَوْ تُقَطَّعَ أَيْدِيهِمْ وَأَرْجُلُهُمْ مِنْ خِلَافٍ أَوْ يُنفَوْا مِنْ الْأَرْضِ ذَلِكَ لَهُمْ خِزْيٌ فِي الدُّنيَا وَلَهُمْ فِي الْآخِرَةِ عَذَابٌ عَظِيمٌ إِلَّا الَّذِينَ تَابُوا مِنْ قَبْلِ أَنْ تَقْدِرُوا عَلَيْهِمْ فَاعْلَمُوا أَنَّ اللَّهَ غَفُورٌ رَحِيمٌ
The punishment of those who fight against God and His Prophet or create disorder in territory is that they be executed in an exemplary manner or be crucified or have their hands and feet cut off from opposite sides or be banished. This disgrace is theirs in the world, and in the Hereafter a severe retribution shall they have, except those who repent before you overpower them. So [do not exceed in severity with them and] know well that Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Ever-Merciful. (5:33-34)
As other viewpoints on foundations for blasphemy laws, this opinion too needs to be reviewed for the following reasons:
Firstly, the word used in the verse is yuḥāribūn (they fight/rebel against). This word entails that the sentences of punishment mentioned in the verse be given only if the offender persists in blasphemy defiantly, resorts to disruption or disorder, refuses to desist even after repeated exhortation and admonition and, in contrast to an attitude of consequent submission, actually takes a stance of retaliation. On the other hand, if the accused pleads that he’s not guilty or gives an excuse to explain his attitude and shows no volition for persistence, he cannot, in any sense of the word, be indicted for muḥārabah or fasād fi al-arḍ.
Secondly, the Qur’ān says that the sentence will not be applicable to those offenders who, despite their prior proclamation and persistence, submit and repent before the law apprehends them. Therefore, the directive is that those who have repented shall not be given these sentences. This aspect also entails that, before any action is taken against such offenders, they be called to repent and reform and be repeatedly warned that, if they are believers, they should not destroy their own future in the Hereafter by their wrong attitude or notions and, if they do not believe in God or the Prophet (sws), they should show regard for the feelings and sentiments of Muslims and abstain from this grave violation any further.
Thirdly, the verse does not make capital punishment obligatory. It gives the court room for a lenient sentence in consideration of the nature of offence and the state of the offender. The recommendation of banishment in the verse is for such offenders as deserve leniency.
In the present law, none of the aspects mentioned above has been considered. For sentencing, this law depends solely on testimony. There is no consideration whatsoever for confession or denial, which consideration the verse entails; there is no room for clemency on the repentance and reform shown in response to exhortation and admonition; and, as such, there is no other option except capital punishment. It would indeed be commendable even if the ‘ulamā were to accept muḥārabah verse as the foundation for blasphemy punishment and, consequently, show willingness to have amendments made to the existing law. Even that would end all criticisms on the present law. It is obvious from the Qur’ān that capital punishment can only be given in two cases: first, if a person murders another and, second, if he disrupts law and order in a country and, as such, becomes a threat to the life, property and honour of people. If the law is amended in accordance with the requirements of the muḥārabah verse, the requirement of confining capital punishment to these two cases will be fulfilled. Furthermore, the law will also be closer to the views of the highly venerated scholar of Islamic law, Imām Abū Ḥanīfah and to those of the great Ḥadīth compiler, Imām Bukhārī. In this regard, it is this opinion that seems more advisable. The Ḥanafīs have a majority in Pakistan, but, incongruously, their viewpoint has been completely ignored in enacting this law. Therefore, it is a fact that the blasphemy law in its present state is against not only the Qur’ān and Ḥadīth but also the opinion of Ḥanafī jurists. It should most certainly be changed for it has blemished the name of Islam and Muslims throughout the world.
II
Narratives related to punishment for blasphemy that are often cited also need to be understood correctly. Abū Rāfi‘ was one of those people who were guilty of bringing out the tribes against Madīnah in Ghazwah-e Khandaq (Battle of the Ditch). In Ibn Isḥāq’s words: فِيْمَنْ حَزَّبَ الأَحْزَابَ عَلَى رَسُولِ اللهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَ سَلَّم. About Ka‘b ibn Ashraf, the historians write that after Ghazwah-e Badar (Battle of Badar), he went to Makkah and recited vengeance inspiring elegies for those of the Quraysh who had fallen in battle, wrote odes (tashbīb) that prefaced the names of some Muslim women and caused much distress to Muslims, and, while residing in the domain of the Prophet’s government, endeavoured to incite people against him. Some narratives describe that he even went to the extent of devising deception to assassinate the Prophet (sws). ‘Abd Allāh ibn Khaṭal was sent for zakāh (obligatory alms) collection by the Prophet (sws). He was accompanied by a person from amongst the Anṣār and a servant. On the way, Ibn Khaṭal killed the servant on the pretext of insubordination, became an apostate, and ran away to Makkah.[1] Not only this; all three people mentioned here persisted in their denial of the Prophet (sws) even after the truth of his message had become conclusively evident to them. And, God Almighty has mentioned repeatedly in the Qur’ān that, as a Divine principle, the direct addressees of a rasūl[2] are within the range of Divine punishment. For that reason, if they go on to the extent of hostility, they can also be killed.
These details show that the wrongdoers in question were not merely guilty of blasphemy but had also committed all the other crimes mentioned above. Therefore, they were killed in response to these offences. ‘Abd Allāh ibn Khaṭal was a murderous fugitive. It was decreed on these grounds that he be killed even if he was hiding behind the covers of the Ka‘bah.
It was indeed offenders of this kind to whom Sūrah Aḥzāb refers. In order to sow the seeds of doubt in Muslims, to turn them away from the Prophet (sws), and to damage their reputation and the moral credibility of their religion badly, these wrongdoers would engage in many activities as cooking up stories about personal lives of Muslims, slandering them and carrying on scandal-mongering, sometimes expressing desire to marry ladies from amongst the Prophet’s holy wives, and spreading rumours of all kinds to unnerve and demoralize Muslims. They would sometimes tease Muslim ladies who went out to the fields at night or before daylight to pay heed to the call of nature. When reprimanded for this behaviour, these evildoers would come up with lame excuses as having approached a woman only because they mistook her for the slave-girl of such and such person and because they needed to ask her about such and such matter. The Qur’ān alludes to these aspects of their mischief, and narratives in Muslim tradition record many of the related instances in quite some detail.[3] Muslim ladies, therefore, were told to put their cloaks over themselves to appear different from slave-girls so that the mischievous miscreants would not have pretexts to tease them. Furthermore, the troublemakers were also warned that if they would not stop and would persist in their evil, they would be executed in an exemplary manner:
لَمْ يَنْتَهِ الْمُنَافِقُونَ وَالَّذِينَ فِي قُلُوبِهِمْ مَرَضٌ وَالْمُرْجِفُونَ فِي الْمَدِينَةِ لَنُغْرِيَنَّكَ بِهِمْ ثُمَّ لَا يُجَاوِرُونَكَ فِيهَا إِلَّا قَلِيلًامَلْعُونِينَ أَيْنَمَا ثُقِفُوا أُخِذُوا وَقُتِّلُوا تَقْتِيلًا
[Even after this measure] If these hypocrites do not desist and also those with a disease in their hearts and those too who spread lies in Medina, we shall make you rise against them; then they shall not be able to stay amongst you but with difficulty; cursed shall they be; wherever found, they shall be killed in an exemplary manner. (33: 60-61).
Other narratives of similar nature that are often related are usually not credible enough in terms of historical authenticity of the sanad (chain of narrators). However, even if they were to be assumed reliable enough, the nature of events described would still fall within the scope of same context: after full manifestation of hostility in their blasphemy and sacrilege, these people were within the purview of the same law that the Qur’an has described as a Divine custom pertaining to the denial of a rasūl by his people and direct addressees. Some murders were also vindicated on these grounds.لاَ يُقْتَلُ مُسْلِمٍ بِكَافِرis a description of the same principle.[4] The ‘ulamā are aware of these aspects, yet they insist on deriving the law for punishment of blasphemy from these narratives.
Here, someone might also refer to oft-related incident in which Sayyidunā ‘Umar (rta) is reported to have struck off the head of a man who refused to accept the Prophet’s legal verdict on a certain occasion. Our ‘ulamā relate this incident from the pulpits and directly encourage people to show the same attitude as reflected in the narrative towards those whom they perceive as blasphemers of the Prophet (sws). However, the fact is that not just the first and second degree of Ḥadīth collections (in terms of authenticity) but also the third degree works are devoid of this narrative. Even Ibn Jarīr Ṭabarī, who often relates narratives in all categories, has not regarded it worthy of consideration. This narrative comes from a gharīb (with isolated chain of narrators) and mursal (with omissions in the chain) Ḥadīth that has been cited by some exegetes in their commentaries; however, those acquainted to some extent with Ḥadīth sciences have clarified that, in the chain, its attribution to Ibn ‘Abbās is absolutely implausible. Moreover, in the sanads of Ibn Mardawayh and Ibn Abī Ḥātim, the narrator Ibn Lahī‘ah is ḍaī‘if (“weak”).[5] The view that exegetes relate this very narrative also as shān-e nazūl (an occasion for the revelation) of Q. 4:65 is also ill-founded. Although this verse of Sūrah Nisā is not in want of description of any reason of revelation, yet, quite contrary to this one, the narrative that Imām Bukhārī and other leading scholars of Ḥadīth have related as the occasion of revelation for this verse and which narrative is often cited by exegetes is one that pertains to a water dispute between the Prophet’s paternal cousin, Zubayr, and a person from the Anṣār. When the matter was presented to the Prophet (sws), he told Zubayr to irrigate his field and leave the remaining water for the Anṣārī. The Anṣārī immediately retorted by saying: “O Prophet of Allāh, is this because Zubayr is your cousin?” This highly impudent remark was clearly an imputation of injustice and nepotism. Therefore, it is related that the Prophet’s face changed colour, but he did not say anything save repeating his statement with more clarity and decreed that the water be retained up to the edges of the field and the rest be left for the Anṣārī.[6] One must commend the ‘ulamā on their choice in selection for ignoring this highly credible narrative reported by Bukhārī and Muslim that reflects the Prophet’s forbearance, forgiveness, compassion and kindness and instead enthusiastically and zealously relate everywhere a weak and improbable narrative related to how Sayyidunā ‘Umar (rta) struck off someone’s neck.
III
On the issue of blasphemy against the Prophet (sws), is the opinion of majority of jurists based on any directive in the Qur’ān or Ḥadīth related specifically to this punishment? The answer to this question is clearly in the negative. The basis of jurists’ opinion on punishment to a Muslim is apostasy and, to a dhimmī[7] it is violation of pact. The jurists say that a Muslim who blasphemes against the Prophet (sws) becomes an apostate, and the punishment for apostasy is death. Similarly, if a non-Muslim dhimmī is guilty of this offence, he loses protection of the pact with him, and, therefore, he too deserves capital punishment. According to the jurists, the reason for this inference is that the directive about non-Muslim Ahl al-Kitāb (People of the Book[8]) in Verse 29 of Sūrah Tawbah (9th Sūrah of the Qur’ān) entails they be killed if they refuse to remain subjugated and subservient under Muslim rule. Therefore, infer the jurists, if a dhimmī shows an attitude of sacrilege and disrespect to the Prophet, it means that he has rebelled against Muslim sovereignty and does not accept his subjugation under Muslim rule.[9] In Islamic law, this argumentation probably began with this statement of ‘Abd Allāh bin ‘Abbās’[10]:
أيما مسلم سب الله ورسوله أو سب أحدا من الأنبياء فقد كذب برسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم وهي ردة يستتاب فإن رجع وإلا قتل وأيما معاهد عاند فسب الله أو سب أحدا من الأنبياء أو جهر به فقد نقض العهد فاقتلوه
A Muslim who blasphemes against God or the Prophet or any of God’s messengers is guilty of denying the Prophet (sws). This is apostasy, which entails that repentance be demanded of the offender. If he repents, he shall be released; if not, he shall be killed. Similarly, if anyone from amongst non-Muslims protected under pact becomes hostile by openly blaspheming against God or the Prophet (sws) or any of God’s messengers, he is guilty of violating the pact; you shall kill him too.[11]
It is this argumentation which, according to the jurists, is the foundation of the punishment for blasphemy. However, deliberation on the Qur’ān and the Ḥadīth clearly shows that, after the age of the Prophet’s Companions, this basis has become ineffective forever. In my works, Mīzān and Burhān, I have argued at length that the punishment for apostasy was specific to the peoples who had been afforded conclusive evidence of truth by the Prophet (sws) himself but reverted to their denial after having accepted faith. The Prophet’s statement: مَنْ بَدَّلَ دِيْنَهُ فَاقْتُلُوْهُ (Kill the one who changes his religion[12]) relates to the same peoples. The decree of the punishment for them was in accordance with the sunnat-e ilāhī (the Divine way and principle) that has been described in the Qur’ān in relation to the direct addresses of the rusul. It has no relation to Muslims in times after the Prophetic age.
The issue of violation of pact is also similar in nature. No one now is dhimmī in the world and no one can be subjugated as such now. Verse 29 of Sūrah Tawbah is an offshoot of the same Divine principle mentioned above. Therefore, the right to wage war against any peoples perceived as deniers of the truth has ended forever the right to keep them subjugated and subservient by imposing jizyah (tribute) on them. Until the end of the world, no one now has any right whatsoever to wage a war against any people for this particular purpose or any right to impose jizyah to keep the vanquished subjugated.[13] Non-Muslim citizens of Muslim States are not dhimmīs or condemned to death in any principle or living under any grant of “protection” lifting which would entail their death. This diction and these notions belong to the past. They cannot, in any way, form the foundation for argumentation now.
Now, therefore, only two possibilities remain: First, that, in consideration of Islam and the interests of Muslims, laws [based without foundational religious texts] be enacted and a punishment be prescribed as ta‘zīr.[14] Second, Verses 33-34 of Sūrah Mā’idah be used as foundation for the enactment. It is this second possibility about which this article has already emphasized that, if these verses of Sūrah Mā’idah are used as a foundation, three aspects must be kept in mind as the words of the Qur’ān necessitate their inclusion:
1. A person regarded as guilty of blasphemy be invited to repent and reform and be repeatedly warned that, if he is a believer, he should not destroy his own fate in the Hereafter and should submit to God and the Prophet (sws), and, if he does not believe in God or the Prophet (sws), he should show regard for the feelings and sentiments of Muslims and abstain from persisting in this grave offence.
2. His case be filed in the court only if he refuses to change or repent, persists in his blasphemy with defiance, causes disruption, pushes away all efforts to convince him and, instead of showing remorse, actually resorts to belligerence and hostility.
3. Instead of having the option of capital punishment only, room for lighter sentences be left in consideration of any extenuating circumstances related to the actual nature and circumstance of offence and the capacity and state of the offender.
(Translated into English by Asif Iftikhar)
[1]. ‘Abd al-Malik ibn Hishām, Al-Sīrah al-nabawiyyah, 2nd ed., vol. 3 (Beirut: Al-Maktabah al-‘uḍwiyyah, 1999), 47, 248; Ibid., vol. 4, 44; Shiblī Nu‘mānī, Sīrat al-nabī, vol. 1 (Idārah islāmiyyāt, Lahore), 253.
[2]. As a specific term in the Qur’ān, a messenger of God sent as Divine judgment for or against his people and direct addressees; plural: rusul.
[3]. Muḥammad ibn Jarīr al-Ṭabarī, Jāmi‘ al-Bayān, 4th ed., vol. 10 (Beirut: Dār al-kutub al-‘ilmiyyah, 2005), 332; Ismā‘īl ibn ‘Umar ibn Kathīr, Tafsīr al-Qur’ān al-‘Aẓīm, 5th ed., vol. 3 (Beirut: Mu’asasah al-rayyān, 1999), 518; Muḥaammad ibn ‘Umar al-Zamakhsharī, Al-Kashshāf, vol. 3 (Beirut: Dār iḥyā’ al-turāth al-‘arabī), 569.
[4]. “No Muslim shall be sentenced to death in talion for these deniers.” Abū ‘Abdullāh Muḥammad ibn Ismā‘īl al-Bukhārī, Al-Jāmi‘ al-ṣaḥīḥ (Beirut: Shirkah dār al-arqam, n.d.), 42, (no. 111).
[5] Ibn Kathīr, Tafsīr al-Qur’ān al-‘Azīm, vol.1, 681.
[6] Ibid., 680.
[7]. Non-Muslims (of conquered lands) who were granted protection and rights under pact in a Muslim government.
[8]. In the Prophet’s time, the Israelites and the Nazarenes.
[9]. For details, see for example Ibn Ḥazm, al-Muḥallá, 1st ed., vol.13 (Beruit: Dār iḥyā’ al-turāth al-‘arabī, 1999), 234.
[10]. Raḍī Allāh ‘anhu (God be pleased with him).
[11]. Abū ‘Abdullāh Muḥammad ibn Abī Bakr ibn Qayyim, Zād al-ma‘ād fī hadyi khayr al-‘ibād, 1st ed., vol. 4 (Beirut: Dār al-kutub al-‘ilmiyyah, 1998), 379.
[12]. Al-Bukhārī, Al-Jām‘ al-ṣaḥīḥ, 635, (no. 3017).
[13]. For details of the argumentation for these views, see my book chapter “Qānūn-e Jihād” in Javed Ahmad Ghamidi, Mīzān (Lahore: al-Mawrid, 2009), 579-609.
[14]. A non-textual (not directly emanating from any foundational religious text) punishment decided on the basis of reasoning.

Source: http://www.al-mawrid.org/pages/articles_english_detail.php?rid=1157&cid=304&search=blasphemy
 

Asja

Pearl of Islaam
Assalamu allaicum wa rahmetullah we barakatuhu

Abu Huraira reported it was said to Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him): Invoke curse upon the polytheists, whereupon he said: I have not been sent as the invoker of curse, but "I have been sent as mercy."

Muslim..vol 3..no 2112

Assalamu allaicum wa rahmetullah wa barakatuhu
 

Abu Juwairiya

Junior Member
Assalammu Alaikum Brother Saif,

I will attempt to answer your first post here (about Hijrah') and your second in another.

When I spoke of 'Hijrah' I was not referring to the desire, aspiration, need or willingness to leave Non Muslim countries for a Muslim one, but rather the idea that I will not be coerced into leaving because I fear for my life, so hence I kept to the point you addressed in your post. If I was mistaken in my interpretation of what you meant or said, then I apologise.

However, since the subject of 'Hijrah' has been mentioned, my personal ambition is to leave for a Muslim country or countries. My reasons for doing so are varied, if I do not accomplish my worldly objectives fully, I will know that my intention/s and partial fulfilment has assisted me in my akhirah if nothing else, but I am hopeful at least 'something' for the Muslims will have been achieved.

No doubt as this site is watched by 'the authorities', the issue of travelling abroad can be construed to mean 'holy war'. My intentions are to help Muslims in the following areas; civil society, field da'wah among Muslims, relief operations and social networking.

As a qualified teacher, I will be working to support myself in addition to teaching and training others in the field to do so and where possible to create more educational institutions and welfare centres free of political thought.

I accept and realise the above already exist in Muslim countries. It is my aspiration to join and serve the Muslims in the capacity in which they exist and where necessary and possible to strengthen it in whatever form/s relevant and feasible to do so.
 

Bm.amina

Junior Member
As-salaam `Alaykum,

In a way, the executers of such a murder should be punished in view of the barbaric reaction they showed against those who are anti-Islam in one way or another. However, it is wrong to turn the public opinion to the reaction and forget or being lenient with those who are used to establishing such abuses against the prophet Muhammad(saw). It is our modest reactions against the previous attempts of such people that make them daring today do so, there is no hope in those who have been doing their best against Muslims and Islam so that it is shameful to be pleased (as Muslims) with their fake apologies, they should be punished but reasonably through an islamic way. Otherwise, it is strongly confusing and shameful to hear nowadays of a Muslim scholar who has been imprisoned for fifteen years just because he defended the prophet Muhammad(saw) whereas the abusers to the prophet Muhammad(saw) are free from any punishment!

"...Say: Allah leadeth to the Truth. Is He Who leadeth to the Truth more deserving that He should be followed, or he who findeth not the way unless he (himself) be guided. What aileth you? How judge ye?" Surah Yunus, verse 35.
 

Abu Juwairiya

Junior Member
Assalamu alaikum,
Whether we have the right to call them "Kafirun", I will save that discussion for another time. But I would have thought, you were interested in da'wa. A da'ii should never go to the people with the idea, that he can never change their internal hatred of Islam with love for Islam. In fact, when they do injustice towards muslims, when they publish things, which we consider to be blasphemous, it provides us an opportunity to knock on the closed doors of their hearts.

It is hard for me to accept that the west in general will always hate Islam. It is easier for me to accept, that you might have a biased opinion. And Allah knows the best.
Wassalamu alaikum

Jazakallah Khayrun Brother Saif for your comments and may Allah reward you for your sincerity of thought and intention. Due to the sensitivity of the above issue, I will respond via a private message to yourself.
 

kashif_nazeer

~~~Alhamdulillah~~~
Assalamo 'alaikom

I have been quite pained by this event and the repercussions of it.
How do we explain the unanimous decision of the European media of reprinting the very same or related cartoons? Isn't it obvious and an ominous sign?
It's not the first time that some people have killed some people for offending their religion. Wilhelm Gustloff was killed was shot in 1936 for distributing an anti Jewish propaganda book, "The protocols of the elder of the zions", by a Jewish student.
That was the time almost all Europeans remember as WWII era, when the bad guys were the Jews for the Nazis.

An atmosphere of fear and hate has engulfed the world and now the world is seeing Muslims as the bad guys, thus generally the only news concerning muslims is broadcast , is when they are behind the gun.
This, however does not justify the Paris attack. Indeed there are among us, elements that will always present us with such situations, as we are seeing now. Unless we educate ourselves and our families and friends, I don't see it stopping anytime soon. I have experienced one thing, it is easier to educate others, than our own. It's time to grow a spine and stand up firm against external and internal threats.
 

Aapa

Mirajmom
Brother Saif,,

I pray this finds you in high iman.

I distance myself from those who transgress the law of Allah swt. Even if they are Muslim. Their actions and deeds are in direct violation of the law of Allah swt.

I try with the best of intentions to do work within my scope. The world of politics and intrigue and plotting and planning are beyond my scope.

I heard a famous sheik state that Islam has been taken over by twenty year olds who are Google warriors and this is where we stand today. Hot heads who know nothing but are blood thirsty. They do not even know the words of the Prophet.

Until the moment that the Horn is blow mankind will attack our Prophet, swas. Yet, when he, swas, was asked if he, swas, wanted a city destroyed his, swas, response was no. He, swas,. always hoped people would turn to Allah swt.

We forget the power of dua. We forget the message. Our faith is simple to practice. It is not a faith of blood but a faith of compassion and mercy.
 

John Smith

Junior Member
As salaam walyakum.

Not been here a while & would just like to say how disappointed I am again that my faith has been hijacked once more.

There seems more to this tragic event that what's actually being reported, call me a conspiracy theorist but I don't buy what the media have been pushing.

Walyakum as Salaam.
 

saif

Junior Member
Assalammu Alaikum Brother Saif,

I will attempt to answer your first post here (about Hijrah') and your second in another.

When I spoke of 'Hijrah' I was not referring to the desire, aspiration, need or willingness to leave Non Muslim countries for a Muslim one, but rather the idea that I will not be coerced into leaving because I fear for my life, so hence I kept to the point you addressed in your post. If I was mistaken in my interpretation of what you meant or said, then I apologise.

However, since the subject of 'Hijrah' has been mentioned, my personal ambition is to leave for a Muslim country or countries. My reasons for doing so are varied, if I do not accomplish my worldly objectives fully, I will know that my intention/s and partial fulfilment has assisted me in my akhirah if nothing else, but I am hopeful at least 'something' for the Muslims will have been achieved.

No doubt as this site is watched by 'the authorities', the issue of travelling abroad can be construed to mean 'holy war'. My intentions are to help Muslims in the following areas; civil society, field da'wah among Muslims, relief operations and social networking.

As a qualified teacher, I will be working to support myself in addition to teaching and training others in the field to do so and where possible to create more educational institutions and welfare centres free of political thought.

I accept and realise the above already exist in Muslim countries. It is my aspiration to join and serve the Muslims in the capacity in which they exist and where necessary and possible to strengthen it in whatever form/s relevant and feasible to do so.

Assalamu alaikum brother Abu Juwairiya,

Your courage is commendable. But not every mother, who sends her children to school and waits for them on lunch, is as courageous as you are. Being worried about the repercussions is as natural as being careful for your own life, which, by the way, you should be.

May Allah reward you for your good intentions towards your hijrah. May everyone of us could follow your footsteps. I always say, if we all sinsible people would leave our countries, we would be doing the crime to leave them for the extremists. May Allah's help be with you. InshaAllah I will also return to my country some day.

As long as you don't make it a religious compulsion on everybody, quoting verses, which were meant for the hijrah of the Prophet from Makkah, I am fine with that. As you can see, I even encourage that. If you want, you can read a summary of my thoughts towards the fatwas in the market about hijrah here : http://turntoislam.com/community/threads/imaan-and-its-implications.97283/#post-617258

Wassalamu alaikum
 

saif

Junior Member
Assalamu alaikum brother Abu Juwairiya,

Just on a side and rather lighter note. Even if you were going to Syria and this site was "watched by authorities", that does not necessarily mean, they will try to stop you.

I once had to apply for the american visa and I was amused reading the following part on the forms:

Are you a member of a terrorist organization? YES NO
Note: Answering the above question with a YES does not necessarily mean the rejection of the visa.

I don't think, it is just by the force of the nature, that Turkey was used as a lauching pad for all jihadists against Syria, just like Pakistan was used against Soviet Union.

Wassalamu alaikum
 

Abu Juwairiya

Junior Member
Assalamu alaikum brother Abu Juwairiya,

Your courage is commendable. But not every mother, who sends her children to school and waits for them on lunch, is as courageous as you are. Being worried about the repercussions is as natural as being careful for your own life, which, by the way, you should be.

May Allah reward you for your good intentions towards your hijrah. May everyone of us could follow your footsteps. I always say, if we all sinsible people would leave our countries, we would be doing the crime to leave them for the extremists. May Allah's help be with you. InshaAllah I will also return to my country some day.

As long as you don't make it a religious compulsion on everybody, quoting verses, which were meant for the hijrah of the Prophet from Makkah, I am fine with that. As you can see, I even encourage that. If you want, you can read a summary of my thoughts towards the fatwas in the market about hijrah here : http://turntoislam.com/community/threads/imaan-and-its-implications.97283/#post-617258

Wassalamu alaikum

Assalammu Alaikum Brother Saif and Jazakallah Khayrun for your friendly reply. Firstly, I do not make it compulsory for everyone to leave. If you feel your role is here and you fulfil the conditions for remaining in a Non Muslim country, are not hindered in your responsibilities to your Creator and to your fellow Muslims and have the intention of leaving once the conditions for you to remain here are no longer a applicable and valid as they are now, then you are free to stay as a Da'ee and a preacher. Even if you are working or studying here, as long as your intentions are as a preacher, as a representative of Islam to Muslims first and Non Muslims second then you have legitimacy to remain here. It has to be Muslims first because they at least have accepted Allah and have more rights over you of protection and propagation and Non Muslims second because they still reject Allah, hence you must accept they believe you are wrong and they are right in their hearts and oppose Allah and His Messenger privately, even if they are polite and treat you with respect and have good manners.

If however, your Eeman is in danger, you and your family are adopting the customs, cultures, values and secular principles of the host country, then it is imperative for you to return and seek to stay there.
 

saif

Junior Member
Assalammu Alaikum Brother Saif and Jazakallah Khayrun for your friendly reply. Firstly, I do not make it compulsory for everyone to leave. If you feel your role is here and you fulfil the conditions for remaining in a Non Muslim country, are not hindered in your responsibilities to your Creator and to your fellow Muslims and have the intention of leaving once the conditions for you to remain here are no longer a applicable and valid as they are now, then you are free to stay as a Da'ee and a preacher. Even if you are working or studying here, as long as your intentions are as a preacher, as a representative of Islam to Muslims first and Non Muslims second then you have legitimacy to remain here. It has to be Muslims first because they at least have accepted Allah and have more rights over you of protection and propagation and Non Muslims second because they still reject Allah, hence you must accept they believe you are wrong and they are right in their hearts and oppose Allah and His Messenger privately, even if they are polite and treat you with respect and have good manners.

If however, your Eeman is in danger, you and your family are adopting the customs, cultures, values and secular principles of the host country, then it is imperative for you to return and seek to stay there.

Okay, I can see, that you are a subscriber of those fatwas and I am fine with that too. You must have your reasons.

Everybody will say, the hijrah becomes a compulsion, when your Eeman is in danger or when you cannot perform your duties towards your Creator. That means, under these "exceptional circumstances", it is an implication of your imaan, that you do hijrah.

For you, or for those muftis, however, is living in a non-muslim country an exception under certain conditions.

I must add here, that if being da'ii means "twasi bil haq" and "twasi bissabar", then it is a complusion on every muslim, irrespective of his place of living
 
Last edited:

saif

Junior Member
As-salaam `Alaykum,

In a way, the executers of such a murder should be punished in view of the barbaric reaction they showed against those who are anti-Islam in one way or another. However, it is wrong to turn the public opinion to the reaction and forget or being lenient with those who are used to establishing such abuses against the prophet Muhammad(saw). It is our modest reactions against the previous attempts of such people that make them daring today do so, there is no hope in those who have been doing their best against Muslims and Islam so that it is shameful to be pleased (as Muslims) with their fake apologies, they should be punished but reasonably through an islamic way. Otherwise, it is strongly confusing and shameful to hear nowadays of a Muslim scholar who has been imprisoned for fifteen years just because he defended the prophet Muhammad(saw) whereas the abusers to the prophet Muhammad(saw) are free from any punishment!

"...Say: Allah leadeth to the Truth. Is He Who leadeth to the Truth more deserving that He should be followed, or he who findeth not the way unless he (himself) be guided. What aileth you? How judge ye?" Surah Yunus, verse 35.

Mabrook dear sister. Some of our brothers have got your message. See this man carrying the same slogan, which was the intent of your post: "A strong message was needed..."

Peshawar rally pays tribute to Charlie Hebdo attackers
Agencies | Dawn.com
Published 32 minutes ago
54b504a74bb09.jpg

People rally to pay tribute to attackers of the satirical magazine Charlie Hedbo in Paris, Tuesday, Jan. 13, 2015 in Peshawar, Pakistan. — AP
PESHAWAR: While last week's attack on French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo sparked global outrage, dozens of people in Peshawar paid tribute Tuesday to the brothers who carried out the murders.
The small-scale event was led by local cleric Maulana Pir Mohammad Chishti.
Twelve people were shot dead — including a Muslim cop Ahmed Merabet — when two militants had stormed into the Charlie Hebdo offices in reaction to disrespectful cartoons of Prophet Muhammad (Peace Be Upon Him) published by the magazine.
Charlie Hebdo (Charlie Weekly) is well known for courting controversy with satirical attacks on political and religious leaders.

Pakistan condemns deadly Paris shooting: FO
Last week, the Foreign Office had condemned the deadly shooting at Charlie Hebdo that left 12 people dead.
FO spokesperson Tasneem Aslam had said that Pakistan deplores all forms of terrorism and extends condolences to the government of France and its citizens for the loss of life.
Aslam had also said that Pakistan's stance over blasphemous cartoons is very clear. While strongly condemning the attack, she added that Pakistan in the past had moved a resolution in the United Nations and the world needs to get out of Islamophobia.
Aslam had further said, "we are confident that the international community will persist in standing firm against terrorism and that the culprits behind terrorist activities will be brought to justice."

Charlie Hebdo publishes first cover since attack
Charlie Hebdo is publishing its first issue since extremists killed 12 people at its offices last week.
The newspaper Liberation hosted Charlie Hebdo staff as they prepared the new issue and is handling its special one million-copy print run in numerous languages.
Liberation published the Charlie Hebdo cover online late Monday night, ahead of the satirical magazine's publication on Wednesday.
The cartoon shows a bearded man holding a sign reading “Je suis Charlie” (“I am Charlie").
Overhead was the phrase: “Tout est Pardonne” (“All is Forgiven").

Source: http://www.dawn.com/news/1156760/peshawar-rally-pays-tribute-to-charlie-hebdo-attackers
 
Top