brother be careful

Society Religion & Philosophy
1

When you talked about the military support, or what is known in the Seerah as Seeking the Nussrah, I noticed a certain belittling in your tone. I pray to Allah(swt) for your sake Brother that this was unintentional.

Indeed Ibn Abideen in his Dar ul Mukhtar said that belittling a Sunnah amounts to Kufr.

Hafiz Ibn Hajr Asqalani has mentioned that he has verified that the Messenger(saw) went to over 40 tribes to seek this Nussrah.

Allah(swt) says:
Say (O My Prophet to the believers): If you love Allah, follow me."[tmq]

So brother, be careful, if you have a personal grudge against something that I did, then say so, otherwise why do you almost take yourself outside of Islam ?

Is it that you disagree that Khilafah is Fard ?
Or that it isn’t an obligation to remove these corrupt rulers and systems upon us ?

Brother if you sincerely want to discuss, then Al-hamdo-lilla, lets begin…

2

Who are you talking to?

Who do you think you are talking to?

If you want to dicuss something on Islam, then I suggest you go and make use of the religous forum.

Please have consideration for others when you post religous posts in non-religous forums.

They shoot partypoopers, don't they?

3

You really don't like me do you ?

Why do you have something against me ?

Is it because I proved you wrong ? I proved that the capitalist economic system is false from its basis, while you were so smitten by it !

Or is it because I proved that it doesn't look after human beings but rather exploits them and this went against your 'childhood dream' of becoming an economist.

Do you think I did this to show my superiority ? Then you are mistaken, because the reason i did this was to show the superiority of Islam. It was to show how Islam is the solutions to humanities problems.

4

Jalal-ud-deen, please read the following carefully:

[quote]
Originally posted by jalal_ud_deen:
**You really don't like me do you ?

**
[/quote]

It took you this long to realise?

[quote]
Originally posted by jalal_ud_deen:
**
Is it because I proved you wrong ? I proved that the capitalist economic system is false from its basis, while you were so smitten by it !
**
[/quote]

Proved? Thats a very strong word to use. In fact you did not even come near to any proof whatsoever.

Smitten? Smitten?

What kind of books do you read? Where do you get your vocabulary from? I've seen you use that word repeatedly especially when you are talking about capitalism and materialism. Why do you have to show off so much? Do you not feel bad about doing that?

[quote]
Originally posted by jalal_ud_deen:
*Or is it because I proved that it doesn't look after human beings but rather exploits them and this went against your 'childhood dream' of becoming an economist.
*
[/quote]

I find your attitude presumptious. Arrogantly presumptious. What exactly do you know about economics? You don't even know the meaning of the word. But I gave that to you, remember? Did you forget so quickly?

People like you would rather read 5 books by Hizb-ut-Tahrir rather than one chapter in an undergraduate economics textbook.

I don't know why you think I'm arrogant.

What someone like jalal-ud-deen is in effect saying is "I don't need to make a effort to understand where the conventional views of economists come from; I don't need to understand the stuff that's in every undergraduate textbook. I'm such a smart guy that I can make up my own version of economics off the top of my head, and it will be much better than anything they have come up with."

Then along comes this irritating guy who points out a few holes in his argument, basic errors that anyone who had bothered to understand the stuff in the undergraduate textbook would not have made.

And the people's response?

"That Mr Partypooper... he's so arrogant."

What can I do? So...

[quote]
Originally posted by jalal_ud_deen:
*Do you think I did this to show my superiority ?
*
[/quote]

Hmmm... you sure you really want to hear the answer to that?

[quote]
Originally posted by jalal_ud_deen:
**So brother, be careful, if you have a personal grudge against something that I did, then say so, otherwise why do you almost take yourself outside of Islam ?

**
[/quote]

Personal? No jalal... it's not personal at all. I actually quite like you as a person, but since you have become involved with HT, there is actually no personality left in you. When I talk to you, I always find that I'm not talking to jalal-ud-deen at all. I find that I only get lectured by a HT fanatic.

[quote]
Originally posted by jalal_ud_deen:
*Is it that you disagree that Khilafah is Fard ?
*
[/quote]

Yes. In fact in all the discussions that you have had with people where I am, nobody has been absolutely convinced of this point. Because you have provided no proof whatsoever from the Qu'ran and the Sunnah of our beloved Prophet ( pbuh ).

[quote]
Originally posted by jalal_ud_deen:
*Or that it isn't an obligation to remove these corrupt rulers and systems upon us ?
*
[/quote]

I see. So what have you done personally in this regard? Put your money where your mouth is. I challenge you to give me proof of what you have personally done to overthrow any corrupt rulers.

And that does not include handing out leaflets, by the way. I want to hear something you personally have done to overthrow corrupt rulers.

[quote]
Originally posted by jalal_ud_deen:
*Brother if you sincerely want to discuss, then Al-hamdo-lilla, lets begin...
*
[/quote]

Fine. Lets sort this out here and now. I invite you to a helping of two topics. Economics, or this issue of khilafah. Choose one. When we are finished, then we can go to the other topic.

Go to your Hizb-ut-Tahrir people for help. In fact bring all your friends.

We will take you all on. In public. Right here.

I will be very surprised if Admin tolerates this behaviour in this forum.

They shoot partypoopers, don't they?

[This message has been edited by Mr Partypooper (edited October 11, 2000).]

5

OK Brother, lets start.

Lets discuss the issue of Khilafah.

As Muslims we come to the conclusion that Allah(swt) is the Creator. That he is the one that created us and everything we see around us. After this conclusion, we as Muslims believe [and can prove] that the Quran is the revelation sent down by Allah(swt).

Hence as Muslims we restrict all our actions to Islam. And we refer to the Sharaih in all aspects of our lives. {or so we should}

The Messenger(saw) said :
**
He who does an action, not based upon my amr[command] it will be rejected.
**
Allah(swt) says:
**
"Whatever the Messenger give you take it, whatever he forbids you abstain from it."
[tmq]**
Allah(swt) says:
**
"But no, by the Lord, they will not believe (in truth) until they make you judge of
what is in dispute between them."
[tmq]**

So in summary Islam is what we refer to for all our actions and all and problems.

We can catagorise actions into five catagories, and they are :

  • Fard/Wajib - compulsory
  • Mandoub - recommended
  • Mubah - permissable
  • Makruh - disliked
  • Haram - Forbidden

The Issue of Khilafah

The evidence about the obligation of working towards the establishment of the Islamic State is conclusive in text (the Qur'an and the Sunnah) and in meaning; hence, whoever denies this Fard is a Kafir. As for he who acknowledges this fact but does not work towards it, he is sinful. Evidence for
this is reflected in the texts which command the Muslims to abide by and refer their affairs to the Islamic Shariah. It is also reflected in the texts which forbid the Muslims from referring their affairs
to other than the Islamic Shariah: Allah (SWT) says:**
"As for the thief, male or female, cut off his or her hand." [T.M.Q. Al-Maidah 5 : 38 ]**
He (SWT) says:**
"The woman and the man guilty of fornication lash each of them a hundred lashes."[T.M.Q An-Nur 24:2]**
Allah (SWT) says:**
"They wish to go for judgment to Taghut (False judges etc.) while they have been ordered to reject them..." [T.M.Q. An-Nisa 4 : 60]**
Allah (SWT) also says:**
"But no, by your Lord, they can have no faith until they make you judge in all disputes between them." [T.M.Q. An-Nisa 4:65]**
And there are many other Shariah texts to that effect. Hence, the largest part of the Shariah rules would be suspended in the absence of an Islamic State, for which the Ummah is responsible.
It is also conclusive in text and in meaning that this action must be undertaken by every Muslim with their utmost capability. Any Muslim who denies this would be a Kafir, and he who neglects it would be sinful. The evidence for this is obtained from the texts which have come to confirm and establish this meaning: Allah (SWT) says:**
"So fear Allah as much as you can." [T.M.Q. Al-Hajj 22:73]**
He (SWT) also says:**
"On no soul does Allah place a burden greater than it can bear." [T.M.Q. Al-Baqarah 2:286]**
This means that a person should give the utmost of his ability, not the half, or the minimum. And, when He (SWT) says:**
"So fear Allah as much as you can." [T.M.Q.Al-Hajj 22:73]** ,
this means that one should fear and obey Allah to the maximum of his ability, not half of it.

As for the Sunnah, Nafi‘a reported saying: “ ‘Umar said to me that he heard the Prophet (saw) saying: Whoso takes off his hand from allegiance to Allah (swt) will meet Him (swt) on the Day of Resurrection without having any proof for him, and whoso dies whilst there was no bay‘ah (allegiance or a pledge) on his neck (to a Khaleefah), he dies a death of jahilliyah.”

So the Prophet (saw) made it compulsory upon every Muslim to have a bay‘ah on his neck, and described whoever dies without a bay‘ah on his neck that he dies a death of jahilliyah. The bay‘ah cannot be for anyone except the Khaleefah, and the Prophet (saw) made it obligatory upon every Muslim to have on his neck a bay‘ah to a Khaleefah.

In regard with the Ijma‘a of the Sahabah they all agreed upon the necessity to establish a successor or Khaleefah to the Prophet (saw) after his death, and they all agreed to appoint a successor to Abu Bakr, then to ‘Umar, then to ‘Uthman, after the death of each one of them. The Ijma‘a of the Sahabah to establish a Khaleefah manifested itself emphatically when they delayed the burial of the Prophet (saw) after his death whilst engaged in appointing a successor to him, despite the fact that the burial of the dead person is fard, and that it is haram upon those who are supposed to prepare for his burial to engage themselves in anything else until they complete the burial. The Sahabah were obliged to engage themselves in preparing the burial of the Prophet (saw), instead some of them engaged themselves in appointing a Khaleefah rather than carrying out the burial, and some others kept silent on this engagement and participated in delaying the burial for two nights despite their ability to deny the delay and their ability to bury the Prophet (saw). So this was an Ijma‘a to engage themselves in appointing a Khaleefah rather than to bury the dead. This could not be legitimate unless the appointment of a Khaleefah is more obligatory than the burial of the dead.
Also, all the Sahabah agreed throughout their lives upon the obligation of appointing a Khaleefah.

Although they disagreed upon the person to elect as a Khaleefah, they never disagreed upon the appointment of a Khaleefah, neither when the Prophet (saw) died, nor when any of the Khulafa’a ar-Rashidun died. Therefore the Ijma‘a of the Sahabah is a clear and strong evidence that the appointment of a Khaleefah is obligatory.

6

More about the issue of the Khilafah

  1. *Imam ali (RA) in his book Nahj-ul-Balagha (part 1 page 91): *"People must have an Amir...where the believer works under his Imara (rule) and under which the unbeliever would also benefit, until his rule ended by the end of his life (ajal), the booty (fay'i) would be gathered, the enemy would be fought, the routes would be made safe, the strong one will return what he took from the weak till the tyrant would be contained, and not bother anyone.

[This message has been edited by jalal_ud_deen (edited October 16, 2000).]

7

** 2. Al-Imam Al-Mawardi in his book Al-ahkam Al-Sultaniyah
page 9 says:** "It is forbidden for the Ummah to have two Imams at
the same time."

8

** 3. Al-Imam Al-Nawawi in his book Mughni Al-Muhtaj, volume
4, page 132 says:** "It is forbidden to give an oath to two Imams
or more, even in different parts of the world and even if they
are far apart".

9

** 4. Al-Imam Al Qalqashandi in his book Subul Al-Asha, volume
9, page 277 says:** "It is forbidden to appoint two Imams at the
same time".

10

** 5. Al-Imam Ibnu Hazm in his book Al-Muhalla, volume 9, page
360 says:** "It is permitted to have only one Imam in the whole of
the world."

11

** 6. Al-Imam Al-sha'rani in his book Al-Mizan, volume 2, page
157 says:** " It is forbidden for Muslims to have in the whole
world and at the same time two Imams whether in agreement or
discord."

12

** 7. Al-Imam Al-Qadhi Abdul-Jabbar in his book Al-Mughni fi abwab Al-Tawheed, volume 20, page 243,
says:** "It is forbidden to give the oath to more than one."

13

** 8. Al-Imam Al-Joziri in his book Al-Fiqh Alal-Mathahib Al-
Arba'a (the fiqh of the four schools of thought), volume 5, page
416 says:** "The Imams (scholars of the four schools of thought)-
may Allah have mercy on them- agree that the Imama is an
obligation, and that the Muslims must appoint an Imam who would
implement the deen's rites, and give the oppressed justice
against the oppressors. It is forbidden forbidden for Muslims to
have two Imams in the world whether in agreement or discord".

14

Brother 'PartyPooper' I'm waiting...

are u OK ? [in terms of health etc]
I'll wait In sha Allah for a reply !

15

Mr Party Pooper where are u ?

At least reply and say something !

16

Mr Party Pooper where are you ?
Decided not to reply ?

17

Why should I reply when you did not even reply fully to my post?

They shoot partypoopers, don't they?

18

I think I am in the wrong forum....am I?

I have a few friends who are also active members of HT. They love this topic too. But I usually don't debate on this topic with them. May be they are right.

In any case, we those who are Ahle-Sunnah-wal-Jamma'a (abt 75% of all muslim population in the world), have the belief that Imam Mehdi (RA) will appear (very soon) and establish true khilafa, so yes, that will happen, Insha Allah. We certainly have no wish to turn back the clock and establish hereditaty 'khilafat' like what was present in Turkey in till world war I.

Again, I believe this is the wrong forum, and the Admn team will do everyone a favor by moving it to the 'Religion' Forum.

Adios!

[This message has been edited by Pristine (edited October 28, 2000).]

19

Pristine thanx

http://www3.pak.org/gupshup/smilies/smile.gif

Admin… could you please shift this thread to the religion forum… it will ba a better atmosphere in which to discuss…

Pristine, if they are right then why did it not take just a simple reference to a directive from the Qur’an and Sunnah? Why did this jalal-ud-deen guy have to give about 14-15 replies to put a very simple point across?

And the funny thing is he didn’t even prove it at the end of all those replies.

http://www3.pak.org/gupshup/smilies/rolleyes.gif

That’s why I smell something fishy here. A person who knows just a bit of the Qur’an can manipulate verses to his own ends. Just look at his sources from just the Qur’an. And then look at some of the hadith. They are all one liners. Jalal-ud-deen does not even provide the context let alone references to some of the sources. When he can’t provide sources he says “Oh these hadith are very well known among muslim scholars.”

At long last does this guy jalal have no decency? Frankly, he can say whatever he wants. I will let him. But he should know something. His way of thinking is Machievellan. It’s insensitive. It can’t stand up to any scrutiny. In any case I have already wasted enough breath on this thread.

Pristine, I think you are right about Imam Mehdi (r.a.) and the Turkish khilafah.

http://www3.pak.org/gupshup/smilies/smile.gif

They shoot partypoopers, don’t they?

[This message has been edited by Mr Partypooper (edited October 28, 2000).]

20

I was thinking abt this issue last night, and well, I have got one more point…

To those who say that khilafat is a must, I’d say why don’t you go to Afghanistan and take baiyaat in the hands of their supreme leader, Mullah Muhammad Umar. The supreme leader of Afghanistan is called “Ameer-ul-Momineen”.

We have been brought up with a heavy dose of western media, and with the concept of ‘fundamental’ muslims and ‘liberal’ muslims. This, in my opinion, is highly unfair. It is extremely unfashionable to suggest that Afghan rulers, the Taliban, are doing anything right. But once you get right down to it, IMO there is nothing they have done which is against the islamic rulings. I may be wrong, but if you go to a site like islam-qa.com and spend some time there, you will get an idea of what the life of a true muslim should be like. The culture being promoted by Taliban is, to me, quite similar to that. Those of us, heavily influenced by western media, cite the “injustices” being carried out on women by the Taliban. If you check out the unbiased media report and as one of my neighbour who visited Afghanistan a few days back tells me all those stories are rubbish and women in Afghanistan are carrying out all the activites which are permitted in Islam, including education, health care etc.

So for those of us, who think they will die the death of jahaliyya if they do not do baiyaat of a khalifa - my advice, go to Afghanistan and do the baiyaat of the Ameer-ul-Momineen. If someone is a shia, and wants to take baiyaat, the Supreme Spiritual leader of Iran, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei should be the person on whose hand you can take the baiyaat. Whats stopping you?

It is unfair of HT members to hold out their baiyaat, unless a ‘suitable’ (in their opinion) khalifa appears. Why not Afghanistan? And why not Mullah Muhammad Umar? The khilafat is already established there, go join it, and be the messangers of truth for the remaining world.

Any comments?

http://www3.pak.org/gupshup/smilies/smile.gif