We're in a similar boat as the Jews ... There are the Zionists on one hand and there are the Neturei Karta on the other ...
Without going in to major details ... essentially Zionists believe they have a right to the Promised Land and must take it by force, Neturei Karta on the other hand believe they have a right to the Promised Land and shall obtain it through the Will of God naturally, when they start to earn the right by returning to the faith.
Likewise ... Caliphate was an honour bestowed upon us and then Allah (SWT) took it away because we left our way ... to get it back we need to mend our ways and then the Kingdom of Heaven on Earth can arrive ... those who believe we should be taking lands by force no matter what - are subject to being viewed in the same way we view the Zionists.
to get it back we need
[QUOTE]
to mend our ways and then the Kingdom of Heaven on Earth can arrive ... those who believe we should be taking lands by force no matter what - are subject to being viewed in the same way we view the Zionists.
[/QUOTE]
jazakallah well said,
after pious caliphate taking lands in name of Jihad continued and the pious muslims who participated in it did it with the best of intentions but the rulers exploited it as a good way of challenging the energy of the religious class to keep them away from interfering with their corrupt practices at home.The land conquered and booty captured was not Mal of muslimeen but became Mal of Allah and caliph being God's caliph ( rather than the humble Ameer ul momineen ala Umar R.a ) took possesion of all public property.
he is a pro-establishment Alim ^ thats why I dont like him, he is the kind of scholars who endorse policies of muslim rulers even if they are tyrants.Many many people here love him though.
I don't love him but he looks so...errmmm....maasoom.
to get it back we need
jazakallah well said,
after pious caliphate taking lands in name of Jihad continued and the pious muslims who participated in it did it with the best of intentions but the rulers exploited it as a good way of challenging the energy of the religious class to keep them away from interfering with their corrupt practices at home.The land conquered and booty captured was not Mal of muslimeen but became Mal of Allah and caliph being God's caliph ( rather than the humble Ameer ul momineen ala Umar R.a ) took possesion of all public property.
You are speaking as though the "Pious Caliphate" were naive and hoodwinked by the "rulers" ... I agree at some point in history we started to interpret the meaning of "taking Islam to all corners of the Earth" as military campaigns ... but I disagree this was a "mistake" of our pious caliphate ...
^ Read my post again CAREFULLY , I wrote" after pious caliphate taking lands in name of Jihad continued "
who is talking about being hoodwinked and mistakes
"as though the "Pious Caliphate" were naive and hoodwinked by the "rulers" ... " this dosent even make sense unless we use pious salaf
and they were not hoodwinked but what options they had ? And when they got a chance they rose up against the kings
e.g Event of Harra, revolt of abdur rehman b Ashath b qays etc
Seriously I dont know where you are getting this from unless you are trying to put words in my mouth.
Please explain to me what you meant by the statement "after pious caliphate taking lands in name of Jihad" ... are you saying the pious caliphate were taking lands in the name of Jihad or after pious caliphate came and went then lands were being taken by force in the name of Jihad ... if you meant the latter I misunderstood you ...
^ no problem the fault is mine..meri angraisi kamzoor hai janab ! aur khopri thori garam !
pious caliphate = good salah ruler + enforcing shariah + intention to win converts = essence of Jihad as in times of the Prophet
After pious caliphate = rulers are corrupt + not properly enforcing shariah ( racial discrimination/ inequal distribution of booty/incorrect taxation) = same practices of Romans and persians but under a new slogan of "jihad"
"after pious caliphate, taking lands in name of Jihad" ... comma bhol gaya tha.What I meant was the slogan was the same as in earlier times but the net effect is only a SELECTIVE intrepretation of religion.As long as it suits the ruler its great and they appointed pious people as local Qadhis but they were not able to interfere with the actions of the rulers ( unlike earlier times)
sorry i do not feel what i said has been bulldozed, but i will admit my personal opinion may be out of line with current majority, if so obviously the view of majority will be closer to you. to your credit you have said you believe in Fighting in the Cause of Allah
for me Cause of Allah is seperate from self preservation but it can be same if you are a good muslim. self preservation is too wide spread an ideology to be in the ‘Cause of Allah’
i said *imo this means the governance should be for Muslims (Islam) and it is great act of virtue to gain more land for the worship of Allah SWT (capture land).
*what you are saying i said is actually the verse!
another verse:
And fight them until there is no more Fitnah (disbelief and polytheism, i.e. worshipping others besides Allah) and the religion (worship) will all be for Allah Alone [in the whole of the world ]. But if they cease (worshipping others besides Allah), then certainly, Allah is All-Seer of what they do 8:39 Mohsin Khan
moulana maududi said:
Here the war aim of Islam, which had previously been declared in 11: 193, has been repeated. This aim has two aspects-- the negative and the positive. On the negative side, the aim of war is to abolish (fitnah), and on the positive,** it is to establish Allah’s Way completely and in its entirety. This is the only objective for which it is lawful, nay, obligatory for the believers to fight.** There is no other object for which fighting is lawful, and it does not behoove the believers to resort to fighting for any other objective
imo its dangerous if you are not sided or sided with the disbelievers, when you are sided to the believers it is not dangerous. actually its an insult to the believers who extended our borders with the… blessed sword. indonesia is said to be blessed by conversion alone but other then that Allah SWT extended the borders with the believers and their swords
not a very articulate view but a view non the less
dont forget to look at the MAPS preferably with the (rapid) timeline
Writing name of Shaikh taqi Usmani and ghamidi in same category is realy lame das.
The more you are with scholars the more you would know the problems and why they can not still give a more brave fatwa. I do not agree/subscribe to all of his concepts but i know he is pious and gives fatwa with right intention mashallah.
[QUOTE]
The more you are with scholars the more you would know the problems and why they can not still give a more brave fatwa
[/QUOTE]
Indeed is maslihat aur taqiyah nay tu deen ko barbad kiya
Imam Abu Hanifa and Imam Malik openly preached it in their times
later ulema due to pressue of authorities started writing against uprisings against a MUSLIM tyrant so now there is plethora of anti-uprising ahadith and every uprising is termed a khariji fitna ...har maindak tarra raha hai
how are kharijis of that time comparable to those of today, khawarij is a term only for those who left party of ALi ( whose party which included akabir sahaba and tabaeen) the uprisings today are against fasiq and fajir rulers so those ahadith dont apply on them
secondly didnt the salaf know this when they revolted ? didnt ibn zubair ibn hanzala hussain b ali and ibn abi layla know this when they revolted against their rulers ? werent they aware of these pro-establishment ahadith ?
I think taqi usmani is a genius and Savent in terms of Islamic commerce but nothing more he dabbles in too many things
thanks for the book
Indeed is maslihat aur taqiyah nay tu deen ko barbad kiya
Imam Abu Hanifa and Imam Malik openly preached it in their times
later ulema due to pressue of authorities started writing against uprisings against a MUSLIM tyrant so now there is plethora of anti-uprising ahadith and every uprising is termed a khariji fitna ...har maindak tarra raha hai
how are kharijis of that time comparable to those of today, khawarij is a term only for those who left party of ALi ( whose party which included akabir sahaba and tabaeen) the uprisings today are against fasiq and fajir rulers so those ahadith dont apply on them
secondly didnt the salaf know this when they revolted ? didnt ibn zubair ibn hanzala hussain b ali and ibn abi layla know this when they revolted against their rulers ? werent they aware of these pro-establishment ahadith ?
I think taqi usmani is a genius and Savent in terms of Islamic commerce but nothing more he dabbles in too many things
thanks for the book
Brother , despite the difference practical mujahideen still have high regard for mufti taqi. Who else is more brave then mujahideen fighting with opressors, difference of opinion do not necessarily mean one is promoting fitna.
Shaikh Taqi usmani and his brother have participated in afghan jihad. :)
salam brother you know the afghan "jihad" against the soviets was a phoney jihad, it was banditry of the highest order ...taghoot i.e amreika kay tawan say jihad is none at all.These local folk heros like that clown zaid hamid were pawns in the great game.
it was afghan nationalism and to preserve the tribal culture and most importantly to prevent the land reforms which motivated this resistance ..what "islamic " values were they fighting for ? it can be seen in the barbarity that prevailed in early 90s
Its the superficial arguments like "oh they destroyed our mosques and trampled on Quran" we have to avenge this ! what about mujahideen factions obliterating themselves afterwards? it was all romantic and zealous back in the 80s when we didnt know all the facts now we know taghoot CIA KSA Pak army all sponsered this effort as a global cold war effort."Invasion " of afghansiatn in 1979 was little different than "invasion" of KSA in 1991 it was a peace keeping operation involving soviet troops only in big cities while the muslim afghan army retains control of countryside it was local resistance due to fear of land reforms which started the mujahideen and later caused soviet army to get more involved.Infact soviets had no intention of occupying afghanistan if it remained peaceful it was not like annexation of central asain republic in the 1920s.
What about the real jehad overthrow the corrupt govts of Saudi arabia (openly called a kingship, synonomous for opulance and ostentaious piety what a slap on the face of orthodoxx islam wudnt u agree ? oh but wait I dont want to labelled a ikhwani ) , Iran ( even khomeini after the initial rhetoric followed clasical persian nationalist interests i.e expansion of iranian influence there was incredibly repressive measures taken against all political oppnents which was more like OGPU and STAVKA than any islamic shariah punishments) , Pakistan ( corrupt army which selectively implements islam in their own country yet so enthusiastically supports it abroad ) and Turkey ( for all intents and purposes a secular county atleast that time) no ulema were preaching that why ?
[QUOTE]
Who else is more brave then mujahideen fighting with opressors, difference of opinion do not necessarily mean one is promoting fitna
[/QUOTE]
who are the pratical mujahideen ?
fitna is something else brother but standing up against a tyrant is not fitna brother its "command good and forbid evil"
salam brother you know the afghan "jihad" against the soviets was a phoney jihad, it was banditry of the highest order ...taghoot i.e amreika kay tawan say jihad is none at all.These local folk heros like that clown zaid hamid were pawns in the great game.
it was afghan nationalism and to preserve the tribal culture and most importantly to prevent the land reforms which motivated this resistance ..what "islamic " values were they fighting for ? it can be seen in the barbarity that prevailed in early 90s
Its the superficial arguments like "oh they destroyed our mosques and trampled on Quran" we have to avenge this ! what about mujahideen factions obliterating themselves afterwards? it was all romantic and zealous back in the 80s when we didnt know all the facts now we know taghoot CIA KSA Pak army all sponsered this effort as a global cold war effort."Invasion " of afghansiatn in 1979 was little different than "invasion" of KSA in 1991 it was a peace keeping operation involving soviet troops only in big cities while the muslim afghan army retains control of countryside it was local resistance due to fear of land reforms which started the mujahideen and later caused soviet army to get more involved.Infact soviets had no intention of occupying afghanistan if it remained peaceful it was not like annexation of central asain republic in the 1920s.
What about the real jehad overthrow the corrupt govts of Saudi arabia (openly called a kingship, synonomous for opulance and ostentaious piety what a slap on the face of orthodoxx islam wudnt u agree ? oh but wait I dont want to labelled a ikhwani ) , Iran ( even khomeini after the initial rhetoric followed clasical persian nationalist interests i.e expansion of iranian influence there was incredibly repressive measures taken against all political oppnents which was more like OGPU and STAVKA than any islamic shariah punishments) , Pakistan ( corrupt army which selectively implements islam in their own country yet so enthusiastically supports it abroad ) and Turkey ( for all intents and purposes a secular county atleast that time) no ulema were preaching that why ?
who are the pratical mujahideen ?
fitna is something else brother but standing up against a tyrant is not fitna brother its "command good and forbid evil"
Who are mujahideen in your opinion brother das reich? We can discuss why we disagree on certain ulema in some other thread. :)
How can one do jihad with anger...any help??? How not to get offended by things which you dont like and which you dont have and those that have been taken by others?
^ which part of the world ? and which conflict ?
if respect to pakistan my belief is any muslim who wants to enforce shariah in its full form ( not selectively like mr zia ul haq and bhutto did) is a maujahid, i dont follow local politics so i dont know their names or groups.Even if these groups are anti-pakistan they are still worthy of praise IF their goal is enforcement of sharia if thats what they sincerely believe in.
