Slavery in Islam

[Abdullah]

Edit triple same post

 

[Abdullah]

Edit triple same post

 

[Abdullah]

I have carefully read the information at the link you provided, thank you, however I have a few questions.

This is one of the bits you missed out:

Due to this spirit of Islam, Allah Most High granted the right of divorce to the husband and not the wife or any other third party. If one was to look at the verses in the Qur’an that deal with divorce, one will see that the address of divorce is directed to the husbands and not the wives.

Well in the section where it says that a woman can seek divorce in a Shariah court if certain rights of her are violated, it does not say "and the courts can issue a divorce without the husbands consent". Maybe what is meant is that, the court can order the husband to divorce the woman, and if he doesn't the court could punish him or put him in prison. In the hanafi madhab, if a divorce consent utterance, or a divorce consent on paper, is forced out of the husband, it is still effective and valid.

There are many reasons and much wisdom in giving this right to the husbands, just to mention a few:

1) As mentioned previously, divorce is the most detested of the lawful things in Shariah. Therefore, in order to prevent unnecessary divorces, there was great wisdom in giving the right of divorce to men.

Q. So why can a man divorce his wife instantly or by text message or through a friend, if the idea is to prevent unnecessary divorces? Surely by making divorce more difficult it prevents unnecessary divorces, not by making it as easy as possible?

I am sorry but the argument immediately loses credibility here.

The reason for this is that, in the case of a divorce, although both the husband and wife suffer as a result (psychologically for instance), a man encounters many financial disadvantages and has the additional burden of a heavy responsibility. He loses the dowry (mahr) that was paid to the woman, he will have to pay Mahr for the second time if he marries again, the wife is entitled to financial support and maintenance (nafaqa) whilst in the waiting period (idda), she is entitled to child maintenance if young children are in her custody, etc…

The husband has so much to lose financially if he divorces his wife and this acts as a natural deterrent from abusing his right of divorce. If women had such a right, however, there would be no such check on them because they do not have any financial responsibilities towards their husbands.

Why should you be confused and think that the argument looses credibilty when the great detterants for a man just divoricng at the drop of a hat, is explained above?

Q. Would you consider £60 sterling to be “so much to lose financially”? I only ask because in

Egypt this is the standard amount to be paid to a woman you are divorcing, no matter how rich you are. Now consider, a woman receives her £20 for the first month and a chicken is £3.50, a kg of apples is £1.65 and her electricity for the month will be about £4.50.

The overwhelimng vast majority of the people of the world are poor sister, what is 'not much' to you is a lot to them.

Q. These days many women often share the financial responsibility, pay half the mortgage, the bills, the food, clothing, etc and many homes would have great difficulty without the wage of the wife, so if financial burden is a driving force then why are women that earn money not permitted divorce rights? (please note I will not accept the answer “because it was not originally ordained” because fiqu can be issued on the basis that divorce rights are given to those with financial burden, as this is their argument).

In the hanafi madhab [and possibly others as well] the women shouldn't work if the men can work. it is the mans duty to work for a living and provide for his family...

2) There is no doubt in the fact that the Almighty Creator created men and women differently in many ways, physically, psychologically, mentally and emotionally. Both men and women have been given certain qualities, features and characteristics and according to these characteristics, Allah Most High divided their responsibilities.

Q. Please can you tell me which verses of the Quran set out the division of responsibilities.

Verse 34 of an-Nisa: is Men are the protectors and maintainers of women, because Allah has given the one more (strength) than the other, and because they support them from their means. Therefore the righteous women are devoutly obedient, and guard in (the husband's) absence what Allah would have them guard. As to those women on whose part you fear nushuz, admonish them (first), (then) wahjuruhunna fi’l madhaji’i (abandon them in beds), (and last) wadhrubuhunna (hit them (lightly)); and if they obey you, seek not against them means (of annoyance or harm), for God is most high, and Great (above you all).”

The verses which only gives man the responsibilty of holding the marriage tie [power to keep the marraige or divorce], is mentioned in that Darul Iftaa link.

Men and women have been given certain duties and responsibilities that suited them and that it conformed to the way they were created. The responsibility of providing the daily bread was placed on the shoulder of the husband, as it requires physical strength and men were naturally created with more physical power than women. Similarly, the responsibility of looking after the household affairs (to a certain degree) was given to the woman, as that was more suited to her.

Q. How much physical strength does it take to be a teacher or lawyer or doctor?
Q. Is there any evidence that A’ishah (pbuh) was endowed with an unusual physical strength? (one would think leading an army took rather a lot of strength (physically, psychologically, mentally and emotionally).

Is not Surah Nisa, verse 34, clear enough? and what about the verse that tells women to stay in their houses and not display themselves like the women of ignorance?, does not verse not indicate that women shouldn't go out iwthout neccessity[ and if the husband works, and his income is enough to provide the basic neccesseties, then there is no need for the women to work]

This is not a question of injustice or sexual discrimination. Let me give you an example: I had two friends that were ready to help and assist me due to seeing me overloaded with work. Now, I had two things that needed to be done, one was to thoroughly clean my office with the moving of heavy furniture, and the other job was to calculate my accounts. One of my friends was physically stronger and had a well-built body, whilst the other was not so quite fortunate in this regard, but had a great brain. It will only be from common sense that I hand the job of calculation to the one who was more able mentally and the lifting of heavy furniture to the one who had more strength, might and power. If the contrary was done, it would be condemned by everybody.

Similar is the case with Allah Almighty in that He distributed the responsibilities and rights between men and women in a way that was suited to them. Women naturally have been created with this great quality of women possess and we as men should definitely learn from it.

Q. What is this great quality women possess?
Q. How is this pertinent to rights of divorce? If men are worried women will divorce out of emotion then surely women could be required to wait 3 months before divorce then that is plenty of time for even our tiny little emotional brains to reflect and reconsider. Even the most emotional woman would find it hard to huff for 3 months (unlike many men).

Allah and His Messenger [saw] knew best of how this matter should be dealt with sister, and the Scholars just extracted their interpretation.

This is where the argument again loses a little credibility. Yes, alhamdolillah, we women are emotional creatures and if I had the right to divorce my husband instantly the poor man would never have a clue if he was married or not. However as quickly as our emotions rise they also fall. Men on the other hand hang onto their anger, often long after they have forgotten what they are angry about.

Emotions also fall do they?, well it dont take a second for a verbal divorce to take effect sister, so does your emotions rise and fall in a milli second?

Due to women being more sensitive than men, it was natural (keeping in mind the dislike of divorce in Islam) that the right to divorce was not given to them. If it was, then there would be many divorces and break-up of marriages. They would issue divorces in the heat of the moment and regret it later. Ask married couples how many times the wife divorces her husband during the day, but from the heart she truly and genuinely loves him and could not consider a moment of her life without him. A man due to his doggedness and generally having more ability to reflect and ponder was duly given this right of divorce.

Definition of Sensitivity
Sensitivity: 1. In psychology, the quality of being sensitive. As, for example, sensitivity training, training in small groups to develop a sensitive awareness and understanding of oneself and of ones relationships with other

Q. So is the argument that women are more able to understand themselves and their relationships with others therefore they should not be allowed to divorce because they would do so after understanding themselves and their relationships with others?????
Q. Due to their ‘doggedness’ are they not more likely to stick to a divorce even after they change their mind?
Q. Is there any scientific evidence that men have a higher ability to reflect and ponder? Here we are actually considering the brains ability to function. I have posted something on this below.

OH C'MON SIS, we all know what definition of 'sensitive' he was using...he obviuosly meant that a woman gets more hurt/angry easily then a man.

A woman can reflect and ponder just like a man. A woman can be more intelligent then a man. Ayesha [ra], and other great woman Scholars that we have had, are a proof of that, but it is a fact that she is subject to being more emotional/sensitive then a man, thus this is one of the wisdoms in not allowing her instantaneous divorces.

Please could you ask this gentleman to distribute the rest of this to his fellow scholars, particularly in the Middle East and Indian Subcontinent and Asia (in fact anywhere that isn’t considered ‘the west’), because clearly many of them were off sick that day.

He himself has learnt it from the Scholars of Asia sister [the Scholars of the Deobandi Madrasah in india], so you shouldn't be biased towards them.

I would never deny that women and men function differently, G-d forbid that women would take to such a violent and aggressive nature. Here is a little information on the differences in male and female brain function (please note the bits in bold):

We dont have to look up these 'studies' in order to understand, or judge the fiqhi principles concerning women, as such fiqhi principles are based on differences of men and women, that are obvious for all, and they are based on the Quran and Sunnah, which overides all other 'studies', if it does not conform to it, for Quran and Sunnah can never be wrong, but studies not based on them, can be.

Hope that helps

Salaam

 

[Abdullah]

No problem, we will continue our discussions based only on the Quran. So please answer my questions again (without referring to hadiths):

1. I am commanded by G-d to pray in mosques so why can’t I?

There is a verse in the Quran isn't there, which says that women should stay in their homes and not go out...indicating that women shouldn't go out except in neccessity...A Quranic verse, although it may be adressed to specific people, or pertain to a specific reason, yet it give's way to a general meaning/implication, so this verse regards all women, and not just the Prophet [saw's] wives.

Ikrimah said: "Whoever disagrees with me that it was revealed solely concerning the wives of the Prophet, I am prepared to meet with him and pray and invoke the curse of Allah upon those who are lying.'' So they alone were the reason for revelation, but others may be included by way of generalization.

Tafsir.com Tafsir Ibn Kathir

And the following verses:

Say: Obey Allâh and the Messenger, but if they turn their backs, Allâh loves not the disbelievers. (3:32)

And obey Allâh and the Messenger so that you may be blessed. (3:132)

O those who believe, obey Allâh and obey the Messenger and those in authority among you. (4:59)

So fear Allâh and set things right between you, and obey Allâh and His Messenger if you are believers. (8:1) [and there are many more verses like it]

Makes it absolutely clear that we are to obey the prophet [saw] and 'obey' is in the matter of orders and sayings emanating from him.

And the following verses:

Say, if you love Allâh, follow me and Allâh will love you and forgive you your sins. (3:31)

Those who follow the Messenger, the unlettered Prophet, whom they find written down with them in the Torah and the Injeel… (7:157)

Believe, then, in Allâh and His Messenger, the unlettered Prophet, who believes in Allâh and His words, and follow him so that you may be on the right path. (7:158)

Allâh has surely relented towards the Prophet and the Emigrants and the Helpers who followed him in an hour of difficulty. (9:117) [and there are many more like it]

establishes that we are to follow [the acts and practices] of the prophet [saw].

The following verses:

And My mercy embraces all things. So I shall prescribe it for those who fear Allâh and pay zakâh (obligatory alms) and those who have faith in Our signs; those who follow the Messenger, the unlettered Prophet whom they find written down in the Torah and the Injîl, and who bids them to the Fair and forbids them the Unfair, and makes lawful for them the good things, and makes unlawful for them the impure things, and relieves them of their burdens and of the shackles that were upon them. So, those who believe in him, and honour him, and help him, and follow the light that has been sent down with him- they are the ones who acquire success. (7:156-157)​

Establishes that the prophet [saw] makes laws [concerning the halaal and the haraam], other then waht Allah ahs revealed in the Quran, for what Allah has revealed in the Quran is allready established, therefore Allah says "and who bids then to the fair and forbids them the unfair" [of waht has been allready established, and then Allah says that the prophet [saw] "AND [in addition to the bidding to the fair and forbidding the unfair] makes [himself, by the leave of Allah] lawful for them the good things, and makes unlawful for them the impure things", and that indicates that the prophet [saw] made laws of other then what Allah revealed in the Quran [by Allah's leave and command] [there are other verses too that establishes this meaning]​

And the following verse:​

Whatever the Messenger gives you, take it; and whatever he forbids you, refrain from it. (59:7)​

is general in it's meaning. It is not only restricted to the verses of the Quran.​

I have shown you verses before which clearly establishes that some of the prophet [saw's] functions were to interpret the Quran, and set a practical example of the Quran, and that we can only be righlty guided if we are lead by the Prophetic interpretation/example.​

So now from the Quran itself, I have shown you that Allah commands us to follow/obey the Sunnah [words, actions and implicit consent of the prophet saw], and it can be seen from this evidence that the guidance of Islam consists of the Quran AND THE SUNNAH, and that the religion is not conmplete without either of them.

Therefore, it is not enough just to stick to the verses of the Quran and try to figure out a meaning for them from our own personal reasoning.​

We have to refer to the Sunnah as well, for the sources of the Islamic Law, rules and regulations, is the Quran, and the Sunnah, for the Sunnah compounds on, interprets, explains, and puts in it's correct context, the meaning of the text of the Quran for us, therefore we have to refer to the Sunnah as well.​

Now you may say "The Sunnah has been corrupted". This is nonsense, as the Sunnah is the meaning of the Quran, and it goes against the Divine Wisdom of Allah just to protect the text of the Quran and not it's meaning, thus to say that the meaning of the Quran has not been protected, is to negate the Divine Wisdom of Allah [swt]​

There are many hadiths which establishes that the view that women are prohibbited from the Mosque...is valid.​

The punishment for adultery is lashes, so why do the schools say it is stoning?

​

It does not say in the Quran that punishment for adultery is lashes, it says that the punishment for zina is lashes, but there are two types of zina, one is fornication [when a person is unmarried] and another is adultery [when a married person commits zina] thus when we look into the Sunnah that compounds and interprets the Quran for us, we know that the punishment for a married person who commits zina is stoning, and punishment for umarried person who commits zina is a hundred lashes.​

We will just start with those two because it may take you some time to answer them without referring to the hadiths.

​

Why should we not follow Allah's command in the Quran of obeying the Sunnah?​

Or would you prefer to stay with quoting the hadiths and answer my other questions:

1. You have stated that you believe G-d has protected both the Quran and Sunnah, so how did a goat manage to eat some of the Quran?

There are three type of 'abrogation' verses of the Quran, abrogated in recitation but command established; abrogated in command but recitation established; abrogated in recitation and command.​

The abrogation of recitation, does not fall under 'the verse has been corrupted", what such an abrogation means, is that Allah decided to abrogate it in recitation [it is no longer included in the Quran; Allah could will for it to be erased from the heart and mind and any material as well] but to establish it's ruling, and this could be bacause Allah wants to see who follows the Messenger [saw] and who turns their backs on him.​

Take a look at the following verse:​

And We did not appoint the Qiblah on which you were earlier, but that We might know the people who follow the Messenger as distinct from those who turn back on their heels. (2:143)


Now the Qiblah [direction of prayer] which the muslims 'were on earlier' [before the command came to face towards the Holy ka'aba], was Bayt Al Muquddus [Jeruselem], but no verse was revealed in the Quran to face towards Jeurselem, and Allah here says that Allah appointed [despite there being no Quranic verse revealed about it; this also goes to show that there were two kind of revelations; recited revelation [Quranic verses] and unrecited relvelation [Sunnah]] the previous Kiblah just to see who will follow the prophet [saw] and who will turn away [by saying "we dont want to accept that, it's not in the Quran"].

So you see sister, Allah [SWT] Sometimes wills for the Prophet [saw] to make laws that are not in the Quran, just to see who will follow him, and the 'abrogated in recitation but established in command' verses cuold just be to see who will follow/obey the prophet [saw] and who will turn away saying "it's not in the Quran".

And even without the verse not being in the Quran, there is still ample evidence that each and every saying/act of the Prophet [saw] regarding the Deen, is found in the Quran, in other words, it is indirectly connected to a verse of the Quran. I'll just post a hadith to show you what I mean:​

Ibn Masud (Allah be pleased with him) narrated that a woman came to him and told him: "You who says: May Allah's curse be on Al-Namisat [a woman who plucks hers or others eye-brows - completely or to be a thin line] and Al-Motanamisat [a woman who asks others to do it for her] and those who tattoo." He said: "Yes." She said, "I read the Book of Allah (Al-Qur'an) from its beginning to its end, I did not find what you have said." He told her: "If you have read it, you would have found it. As for your reading what the Messanger teaches you, take it, and what he forbids you, avoid doing it." She said: "Certainly". He said: "I have heard the Messenger of Allah (salaallaahu `alayhi wa sallam) says: "May Allah's curse be on Al-Namisat." (Bukhari & Muslim)​

If it was by the will of G-d then why do scholars insist we should follow the destroyed portion, when clearly G-d wanted it to be destroyed?

3. When the goat ate the verse how did everyone that knew the Quran by heart forget this verse?

As explained above
​

4.

Do you believe that the hadith “a group of monkeys ARRESTED a monkey for ADULTERY and stoned it to death” is authentic? If yes, please can you provide the scientific evidence that monkeys are monogamous and that they have a marriage ceremony in order for adultery to apply. If no, why do the scholars rely on it to support their argument for rajm?

I dont know about that hadith; what compilation it's from or it's classification, so I cannot comment on it, but one thing for sure is that the hadith evidences i have read for stoning, does not include that hadith, so the Scholars dont rely on it.
​

I didn’t say I blame the fiqu, I said I blame the scholars. They produce fiqu and then when they are told their fiqu is being misused they just shrug. If someone is going to take such an important position of authority it is incumbent upon them to ensure that their decisions are not misused.

If they become aware their fiqu is being misused then it is for the scholars to issue a fatwa stating this and correcting the misuse, not just sit back and shrug. If I was on another thread and said brother Abdullah believes we should eat pork I imagine you would have something to say about it and would wish to correct what I said. So why can’t the scholars do this?

There is nothing much the Scholars can do against state power [that runs the courts] for it's well known that the Muslim rulers are corrupt and they dont pay much heed to righteous Scholars.​

The Scholars [the righteous one's] are the best of our community, they have knowledge, piety, and are engaging in dawah work and admonishing the community... we should ber gtratefull for them, and not blame on the problems and injustices of the world on them.​

 

[Abdullah]

Of course I also have rather large issues with fiqu produced based on hearsay.

Hadiths [the one's that have been classified not fabricated] are not hersay sister, the Sahabah ra and the hadith compilers/Scholars took great care in protecting them. They knew it was the words, implicit consent and records of actions of the Messenger [saw], which was the meaning of the Holy Al-Quran al-Kareem, whcih was neccassary for mankind to save themselves from a fire which is seventy times hotter then the earth fire, and not just any old words. In other words,they knew that the responsiblity of protecting the hadith was absolutely imperative and one of the greatest ever, and they rose to the occasion [by the help of Allah and prayers of the Prophet saw] and took due care.​

Allah protected the meaning of the Quran [Sunnah] just like He protected the verses of the Quran, and He got his slaves to protect them both in basically the same way, which is by memmorisation, writing it down on various material, then paper, so if Allah's servants could protect the verses of the Quran in this way, then why do you they became careless about protecting the meaning of the Quran?​

Salaam​

ps: The Mujthadioun do take into consideration the strength of the hadith classifcations [wether they are 'Sahih' [rigorously authenticated], 'Hasan' [well authenticated], mutawatir [mass transmitted], 'daeef' ['weak'] etc, and extract rules accordingly.​

In the 'Authority of Sunnah' thread, on the last post of that thread I posted Mufti Taqi Usmani's brief, but yet satisfying explanation of how the hadiths have been protected, so you can read that to see for yourself sis.​

And also the following website, will give you a relatively comprehensive explanation of the hadith sciences and how they were preserved:​

USC-MSA Compendium of Muslim Texts​

Dont you agree that you should at least hear out "both sides of the argument' sis, before you make a judgement?...so go in those thread/sites and see the evidences for yourself...

Salaam​

​

 

[Muslimwoman]

Allah give me strength.

I can see now why non Muslims do not like to discuss religion with Muslims. If I quote the Quran you quote hadith, if I ask you about ahadith you quote a different one but of course don't actually answer the question and when you get stuck you just say Allah knows best. Your answer to the verse that CLEARLY states all Muslims must attend the mosque is that another says women should stay in their homes. Have you ever asked yourself why women are allowed into Mecca to pray? You would think if women were to be banned from mosques then Mecca would be the first to do this. Do you really think Allah is that confused? Anyone with half a functioning brain can see that Allah wants Muslim women to be modest and not hang around the village square gossiping and flirting BUT He also instructs us to go to the mosque to pray. Simple really, unless you are a man that wants to oppress women in which case you need to look for reasons to make women disobey G-d. It is disgusting and you should all be ashamed of yourselves.

Hearsay is information not seen or heard at first hand. The Quran was written down before the death of the Prophet Mohammad (pbuh), so we know he would not allow it to be written incorrectly. The bulk of the hadiths were not written until long after the death of the Prophet Mohammad (pbuh), by 2nd, 3rd, 4th and even 12th parties. That is the definition of hearsay, so the bulk of the hadiths are in fact hearsay.

Allah promised to protect the Quran, which is why I accept it has been protected. Allah made no such promise about the hadiths. You are fully aware that there are hadiths in the books that the scholars you follow so strictly state are unauthentic and others are weak. So why would Allah protect something we all know is unauthentic?

As for looking something up in an english dictionary it seemed obvious that as the Arabic is TRANSLATED into english that we can assume the english word used is of the english meaning. If you would prefer we can swap from this site and hold our conversations in Arabic?

 

[Abdullah]

My dear sister Muslimwoman,You are in great danger of being in the state of kufr sister.Here is why:You are being manipulated by the hypocryt agents of the west [the liberal modernist that reject ahadith/Sunnah and who put their own distorted interpretation to the verses of the Quran] who's aim it is to get Muslims away from their religion, and to re-interpret Islam to the liking of their and their western Political/Christian/idelogical masters. Their mission is nothing other then a verry crafty and manipulative front in the ideological/psycological warfare against Islam that is being lead by the west.Here is exactly why they are teaching you the stuff that they are:If they are to successfully get Muslims to adhere to their corrupt westernised/liberally modernised interpretation, then they have to get Muslims to loose confidence in their Scholars and not follow them any more, and they have to make the muslims doubt the Sunnah/ahadith, for the Sunnah/ahadith shows verry clearly and overwhelminlgy that the traditional Scholars interpretation of the Quran is correct, thus the Sunnah/ahadith, and the Scholars are a 'spanner in their works', so they will reject no matter how many clear and decicive proofs you show them that taqlid and adherance to Sunnah/ahadith is a must, and they will continue to argue against it and try throw doubt against it at all costs.One of the 'pillars' of their ideology is for the women to be made into a sex object, and corrupted, so that is why they will vehemently argue and emphasise and exagarate how muslim women are being opressed and how traditional Islam is interpreted by men that were biased agianst women and are bent on denyin women their rights and opressing them. while there is no doubt that Muslim women are being opresssed in certain ways in the cultures that some muslims, just like other women of other cultures/religions are benig opressed, but they try to blame it on the interpretation of Islam itself so that they can sexualise and wesernise the Muslim women.They also know that the sexualisation of women is a verry powerfull way to corrupt the Muslim ethical culture, so that is why the issue of trying to sexualise/libberally modernise/weternise the women are one of their major agendas.Another way to supress Islam, is to try prevent people from converting into Islam, that is why they spread the lies that Islam doesn't require people of other religions to convert and that all religions are valid to Allah. They also try to give the impression that there is no objective truth and that all religions [including Islam] is just a matter of faith.They spread lies that the Christian and the Jews are regarded as 'believers' in Islam, so that the Christian and Jews may have no fear of dying as kaafirs if they dont accept Islam.They know that their agents have to seem and sound to be convincing to traditional Muslims [and non-Muslims] so they even get them to wear hijab, offer salaat, etc, to give the impression that they are genuine believers.They say that hijab is not fardh [obligatory] although there is an absolute consensus on it that it is.They say that Islam can 'evolve' that is why they reccomend 'seperation of religion and state' for Islam as an ideal for all times to come.So these are the reasons why sister they have indoctrinated you with the corrupt concepts that they have, and telling you that that is Islam.If only they knew that Islam is really the truth and the Mushriks [those who join partners with Allah], kaafirs [those who reject Islam] and Munafiqs [non-Muslims who pretend to be Muslim] will surely abide in hell for all eternity.Do they not see for themselves that the Quran is such a wonderous, magnificient and divine book, with so many scientific miracles, and with such a uniquely beutifull and melodious way of recitation and with a oceon of knowledge in it, and the most perfect, ethical and moral teachings/guidance ever, without a single contradiction to it that it can only be from God Allmighty, The Lord and Master of all Creation?The Sunnah/ahadith rejectors have a number of kufr in their corrupt concepts and some of them are as follows:it is the consensus [in Islam] that to reject the Sunnah/ahadith is kufrIt is the consensus that to reject Mutawatir [mass transmitted] hadiths is kufr [mutawatir hadith is regarded as certainty of knowledge, for it would have been impossible for the Sahabahs/Muslims to have got together to conspire to lie about it, due to the sheer numbers of transmission] To reject matters on which there are absolute consensus is kufr.to put a corrupt interpretation to the Quran without evidence is kufrThese are just some of the things which puts you in great danger sister, so please try to look beyond the world and it's different agendas, and try to look at the reality that we all have to die one day and face Allah [swt] and then no liberal modernist will be able to save you from the wrath of Allah [swt].I will post some evidence of the points that constitutes kufr, in the psot below inshAllah.May Allah [swt] save all of us, ameenSalaam

 

[Abdullah]

My dear sister Muslimwoman,You are in great danger of being in the state of kufr sister.Here is why:You are being manipulated by the hypocryt agents of the west [the liberal modernist that reject ahadith/Sunnah and who put their own distorted interpretation to the verses of the Quran] who's aim it is to get Muslims away from their religion, and to re-interpret Islam to the liking of their and their western Political/Christian/idelogical masters. Their mission is nothing other then a verry crafty and manipulative front in the ideological/psycological warfare against Islam that is being lead by the west.Here is exactly why they are teaching you the stuff that they are:If they are to successfully get Muslims to adhere to their corrupt westernised/liberally modernised interpretation, then they have to get Muslims to loose confidence in their Scholars and not follow them any more, and they have to make the muslims doubt the Sunnah/ahadith, for the Sunnah/ahadith shows verry clearly and overwhelminlgy that the traditional Scholars interpretation of the Quran is correct, thus the Sunnah/ahadith, and the Scholars are a 'spanner in their works', so they will reject no matter how many clear and decicive proofs you show them that taqlid and adherance to Sunnah/ahadith is a must, and they will continue to argue against it and try throw doubt against it at all costs.One of the 'pillars' of their ideology is for the women to be made into a sex object, and corrupted, so that is why they will vehemently argue and emphasise and exagarate how muslim women are being opressed and how traditional Islam is interpreted by men that were biased agianst women and are bent on denyin women their rights and opressing them. while there is no doubt that Muslim women are being opresssed in certain ways in the cultures that some muslims, just like other women of other cultures/religions are benig opressed, but they try to blame it on the interpretation of Islam itself so that they can sexualise and wesernise the Muslim women.They also know that the sexualisation of women is a verry powerfull way to corrupt the Muslim ethical culture, so that is why the issue of trying to sexualise/libberally modernise/weternise the women are one of their major agendas.Another way to supress Islam, is to try prevent people from converting into Islam, that is why they spread the lies that Islam doesn't require people of other religions to convert and that all religions are valid to Allah. They also try to give the impression that there is no objective truth and that all religions [including Islam] is just a matter of faith.They spread lies that the Christian and the Jews are regarded as 'believers' in Islam, so that the Christian and Jews may have no fear of dying as kaafirs if they dont accept Islam.They know that their agents have to seem and sound to be convincing to traditional Muslims [and non-Muslims] so they even get them to wear hijab, offer salaat, etc, to give the impression that they are genuine believers.They say that hijab is not fardh [obligatory] although there is an absolute consensus on it that it is.They say that Islam can 'evolve' that is why they reccomend 'seperation of religion and state' for Islam as an ideal for all times to come.So these are the reasons why sister they have indoctrinated you with the corrupt concepts that they have, and telling you that that is Islam.If only they knew that Islam is really the truth and the Mushriks [those who join partners with Allah], kaafirs [those who reject Islam] and Munafiqs [non-Muslims who pretend to be Muslim] will surely abide in hell for all eternity.Do they not see for themselves that the Quran is such a wonderous, magnificient and divine book, with so many scientific miracles, and with such a uniquely beutifull and melodious way of recitation and with a oceon of knowledge in it, and the most perfect, ethical and moral teachings/guidance ever, without a single contradiction to it that it can only be from God Allmighty, The Lord and Master of all Creation?The Sunnah/ahadith rejectors have a number of kufr in their corrupt concepts and some of them are as follows:it is the consensus [in Islam] that to reject the Sunnah/ahadith is kufrIt is the consensus that to reject Mutawatir [mass transmitted] hadiths is kufr [mutawatir hadith is regarded as certainty of knowledge, for it would have been impossible for the Sahabahs/Muslims to have got together to conspire to lie about it, due to the sheer numbers of transmission] To reject matters on which there are absolute consensus is kufr.to put a corrupt interpretation to the Quran without evidence is kufrThese are just some of the things which puts you in great danger sister, so please try to look beyond the world and it's different agendas, and try to look at the reality that we all have to die one day and face Allah [swt] and then no liberal modernist will be able to save you from the wrath of Allah [swt].I will post some evidence of the points that constitutes kufr, in the psot below inshAllah.May Allah [swt] save all of us, ameenSalaam

 

[Abdullah]

somethings gone wrong with my computer, or the website as it is all coming up in one mash of a paragraph, although I wrote them out in different paragraphs.I've tired to edit it, but the edit button just dont work.So i hope you can read and understand the above without much problems

 

[Abdullah]

I would like to rephrase/revoke my statement, "to reject matters on which there is absolute consensus is kufr", to the following [as that particular meaning cannot be derived from it with certainty]:
.
There is ijmaa on the prohibition of muta. Ijmaa is regarded to be an absolute proof in shariah to go against an absolute prohibition and regard it as halal is kufr
.
Ask Imam :: Fatwa
.
al-Qarafi1 says: "And whoever interprets a verse or hadith in a manner that deviates from its intended meaning without proof [dalil] is a kafir." [from fatwa in 'pre-requiste of a Mujtahid' thread].
.
To deny or reject any chapter, verse, or letter from the Book of Allah (Al-Qur'aan) or to purposely give it deviant interpretations [Qur'aan 3:7, 6:21] i.e. not derived from the Qur'aan itself, the authentic Sunnah of Muhammad (sallallahu 'alaihi wa sallam) [Qur'aan 6:153, 16:64] or according to established methods of tafseer. Abu Hurairah (radiallahu 'anhu) reported that the Rasool (sallallahu 'alaihi wa sallam) said, "Don't pursue that which you have no knowledge of". Ahmed. [Qur'aan 4:59, 10:68-70]. What Constitutes Kufr?
.
Rejecting this sahih hadith would not be kufr because, as we just said, it is not mass-transmitted; but it would constitute a sin&quot; ... Ahl al-Sunna concur, unlike the Mu'tazila, that authentic lone-narrator reports are obligatory to believe and put into practice. Al-Qari relates, on this point, the consensus of the Companions and the Successors. Where scholars differ is whether the same hadiths convey certainty of knowledge (al-'ilm al-yaqînî) or only the compelling assumption of truth (al-zann al-ghâlib). These two categories differ insofar as obligatory practice and belief based on certainty of knowledge cannot be denied except on pains of apostasy, while the denial of obligatory practice and belief based on reports compellingly assumed to be true do not constitute apostasy but constitute sin. The scholars do concur that if one disbelieves in a sound lone-narrator report one commits a grave transgression (fisq) and is even considered misguided (dâll), but does not leave the fold of Islam. Al-Shafi'i, al-Risala (p. 460-461): &quot;If one disbelieves in them [lone-narrated reports], we do not say to him: 'Repent!'&quot; This is clearly unlike disbelief in a mass-transmitted report or in a verse of the Qur'an.<a href=&quot;http://www.sunnah.org/msaec/articles/blackdog.htmDenial&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;>Hadith: The Black Dog is a Devil
.
Denial of Rajm is kufr—kufr which expels the denier from the fold of Islam. This naseehat is for Muslims—those Muslims who have been thrown into doubt and confusion by the many modernist munaafiqeen lurking within the folds of the Ummah. These modernists who happen to be the agents of the Western Kuffaar as well as the agents of Shaitaan have abortively attempted to refute the validity of Rajm. In their exercise of kufr, they have failed.They will not gain recruits and followers for their kufr from the rank and file of the Ummah. Only those who have been condemned to kufr by Allah Ta’ala entertain views of kufr.
.
To appease the kuffaar, the munaafiqeen present utterly baseless arguments to refute Rajm so as to make their perculiar brand of ‘islam’ palatable and acceptable to their western masters.
.
WARNING: Warning the Mu’mineen of the traps of the munaafiqeen, the Qur’aan Majeed says:
.
“O Nabi! Fear Allah and do not follow the Kaafireen and the Munaafiqeen. Verily, Allah is the All-Knower, The Wise. Follow what has been revealed to you from your Rabb. Verily, Allah is fully aware of what they are doing.” (Surah Ahzaab)
.

Rajm has been prescribed by Allah Ta’ala. The arguments of the modernist munaafiqeen have absolutely no validity in Islam. These baatil interpretations are fabricated solely to appease the kuffaar intellectual and political masters.
.
RAJM-Stoning the Adulterors :: TheMajlis.net :: Journal Published by Mujlisul Ulama of SA

 

[Abdullah]

Here is an interesting Hanafi fatwa of the Deobandi Ulema, that seems to suggest that the Ulema/commitee of Muslim laymen who consult an upright Scholar, can anull the marriage of a woman who's rights are being violated..., without the husbands consent?:
.
If it does mean that [not sure though, as am a bit confused by Mufti Ibn Adams wordings, and now this fatwa], then what Mufti Ibn Adam might have meant by 'and issuing of divorce is not in the hands of any third party', is that, a third party cannot issue a divorce without a valid reason and without the court/kangaroo court process:
.
Question: If there are no Ulama in a place, how can an oppressed wife be freed from the Nikah of a tyrant who has abandoned and deserted her? The woman has no one to support her and she is also in need of a husband. What relief does she have in such a situation?</p>.

Answer: Three senior members of the community should form a committee to look into the matter. The woman should lodge with the committee an application for dissolution of her Nikah.
.
The committee of layman should communicate with an experienced Aalim of uprighteous character. He will advise the committee of the Shar’i procedure to adopt. After following the correct procedure, the committee can annul the marriage. There is no incumbent need for the committee members to be Ulama. In fact, every city/town should institute such committees which will act with the guidance of an Aalim who need not be a member of the committee.
.
Hitherto people have the impression that only the Ulama can annul marriages. This is incorrect. Uprighteous and experienced laymen who strictly follow the Shar’i procedure of their Math-hab, are also empowered to dissolve marriages. Establishment of such committees will ease the problem for the Ulama as well as for the people involved.
.
TheMajlis.net - Vol 16 No 07
.
ps: before we draw any conclusions from it, we should get it clarified first of wether the anullment power of the Ulema/commitee of laymen...is only regarding a woman who has been opressively abandoned and deserted, or wether it apllies to every case of violation of rights/opression
.

 

[Muslimwoman]

My dear sister Muslimwoman,You are in great danger of being in the state of kufr sister.Here is why:You are being manipulated by the hypocryt agents of the west [the liberal modernist that reject ahadith/Sunnah and who put their own distorted interpretation to the verses of the Quran] who's aim it is to get Muslims away from their religion, and to re-interpret Islam to the liking of their and their western Political/Christian/idelogical masters.

as salaam aleykum brother Abdullah

Thank you for trying to save me from the kufr ways. However, please credit me with a little intelligence. I am 42 years old, have lived all over the world and decided, all by my little self, to convert to Islam before I even met my husband. I have my own mind and whilst I will listen to the views of others I make my own mind up on any issue. To you this may be a kufr way but Allah blessed me with a good logical brain, capable of reasoning and decision making and I intend to always use it.

I do not wish to walk half naked in the street, drink alcohol, go out with men, listen to offensive western music about sex or make a problem in a mosque. I chose to be a Muslim, I am proud to be a Muslim and I will spend the remainder of my life trying to be the best Muslim I am capable of being. However, I will not allow men to insist I cover my face or I cannot take cough medicine because it may contain alcohol or I cannot listen to Sami Yusuf sing about the virtues of Allah and our Beloved Prophet or I cannot go to pray in a mosque.

no matter how many clear and decicive proofs you show them that taqlid and adherance to Sunnah/ahadith is a must, and they will continue to argue against it and try throw doubt against it at all costs.

Have you not noticed that I accept alcohol is forbidden? Yet this does not come from the Quran. You see everything as black and white and ignore all the shades of grey and colour. I will accept anything I believe is within the spirit of Islam and is written in the Quran but I will reject anything that I feel goes against these. I understand you see that as picking and choosing but to me it is sheer common sense. Will I accept that monkeys arrested a monkey and stoned it for adultery – not on your nelly (and I gave you the reference (book and number) for the hadith in another post).

One of the 'pillars' of their ideology is for the women to be made into a sex object, and corrupted, so that is why they will vehemently argue and emphasise and exagarate how muslim women are being oppressed

Now read some of my posts wherein I state that before people of the west say what oppresses Muslim women they should actually ask us because what seems like oppression to them is not necessarily oppression to us. That in no way states that I believe oppression of Muslim women does not occur, as I know from first hand experience that it does and when you become a Muslimah you can tell me otherwise.

and how traditional Islam is interpreted by men that were biased agianst women and are bent on denyin women their rights and opressing them.

Okay I would like you to explain in detail why you think women should not be allowed into mosques to pray. I gave you the verse of the Quran and (as you believe in them without question) the hadiths where the Prophet Mohammad (pbuh) forbids men from excluding women from mosques. Now interpret them for me, without posting a scholars opinion. And remember if you say “but another verse says stay in your houses”, that you may believe Allah is confused (perhaps through old age) but I do not. Allah put that instruction in the Quran for all Muslims not just men and Allah sees everything until the end of time. Why would Allah and the Prophet say not to exclude women from mosques if Allah knew the women would be naughty and have to be excluded a few years later?

So if following the word of Allah and the Prophet Mohammad (pbuh) is kufr then I am kufr and proud of it. Do I choose to ignore the so called evidence that say women should not go to mosques YES because they are not in the spirit of Islam so I reject them on basic reasoning. Did the Quran and the Prophet tell me to go to the mosque to pray? YES. Did Allah or the Prophet change their minds? NO. So the conclusion can only be that any evidence that women are not permitted into mosques to pray is purely man made and outside the spirit of Islam and I must therefore reject it. This conclusion can only mean one thing – men chose to oppress Muslim women in this way and I must reject it.

but they try to blame it on the interpretation of Islam itself so that they can sexualise and wesernise the Muslim women.

Are you quite mad? Sexualise? I am demanding my right, given to me by Allah and the Prophet Mohammad (pbuh) to pray in mosques not to go to the disco, get drunk and shag around. You are damned right that I believe excluding me from mosques, because of my gender, is oppression and because of the misinterpretation of Islam. This is not taught to be by westerners trying to sexualize me, westerners want me to stay out of mosques.

Another way to supress Islam, is to try prevent people from converting into Islam, that is why they spread the lies that Islam doesn't require people of other religions to convert and that all religions are valid to Allah.

Gosh I wonder how and why I managed to convert then?

They also try to give the impression that there is no objective truth and that all religions [including Islam] is just a matter of faith.They spread lies that the Christian and the Jews are regarded as 'believers' in Islam,

My personal belief, based on reading the Quran, is that anyone not placing partners with Allah and truly believing in Him is a believer and will be judged as such on Judgement Day. Remember I used to be a Christian and I never believed Jesus (pbuh) to be the son of G-d and I never placed partners with Him.

Perhaps you share my husband’s ludicrous and bigoted view that all Muslims will go to heaven, no matter how many sins they have committed because they will repent before death and be forgiven? Whereas a G-d fearing Jew, that follows the scriptures, believes in Allah and leads a good life will burn in hell?

We are mere humans brother, servants of Allah and only He will decide who to accept and who to reject, not you, not me, not my husband and not the scholars.

They know that their agents have to seem and sound to be convincing to traditional Muslims [and non-Muslims] so they even get them to wear hijab, offer salaat, etc, to give the impression that they are genuine believers.

Sorry but do you actually believe this? You are suggesting a conspiracy from within just because all Muslims do not believe exactly as you do? So I wear hijab, I offer salaat, etc but I do not accept stupid hadiths about monkeys and I demand my right to pray in mosques. So am I part of the conspiracy?

absolute consensus on it that it is.

You mean there is absolute consensus by the scholars of the 4 schools, quite a different thing than absolute consensus.

The issue of hijab is an interesting one. I choose to wear hijab, yet I am capable of reading and know for a fact it is not stated in the Quran. Again it is down to interpretation of hadiths and I accept you have one view but others are allowed to hold their views. Some Muslimah’s, who have forgotten more than I will ever know about Islam, have stated that it is not obligatory and is again misinterpretation by male scholars (yet these women still choose to wear it). This is what you do not understand about the issue, you feel every question about interpretation is a threat against the bedrock of Islam. Whereas, we questioners simply accept that people have different interpretations and misinterpretations have happened, quite deliberately, as a political tool. Just because we want to establish what is and what is not a misinterpretation doesn’t mean we want to run around bear headed and get drunk. If I was given direct proof today that I do not have to wear my hijab I would still wear it but I would be grateful and feel vindicated that my rights were not taken from me.

So these are the reasons why sister they have indoctrinated you

Where do you get these crazy ideas from? Who do you think is indoctrinating me? Al-Azhar, the Quran or the 70 million Muslim people I live with? Or are you assuming that because I choose not to follow blindly and I choose to ask questions that I am corrupted and indeed corruptible? Which one of us lives in a Muslim country by choice?

Oh and you can stop preaching to the converted now – literally.

It is the consensus that to reject Mutawatir [mass transmitted] hadiths is kufr

So did you find me evidence that monkeys hold marriage ceremonies and have a legal system that allows them to arrest another monkey? I gave you the hadith book and number, so it would be easy for you to verify that this hadith is in fact relied upon.

You choose to accept everything the scholars say. Now look at history, many Catholics will accept everything that the Pope says, without question, as absolute truth, as you believe the scholars. Did you know that it was only in the early 1980’s that the Vatican accepted that the world was round, not flat? So prior to this every Catholic was supposed to believe that the world was flat, even though we all knew and had proof it was round. How did this ludicrous situation come about? Because a Papal edict had stated the world to be flat and the Pope cannot be wrong according to some. This is blind following and brainwashing. By the Muslim scholars saying, do not think, do not use your own reason, just believe everything we say it is creating the same situation.

and try to look at the reality that we all have to die one day and face Allah [swt]

I am fully aware of this and I have no intention of allowing myself to stand before Allah on Judgement Day and be accused of blind following against my better will or judgement.

Salaam

 

[Muslimwoman]

Abu Hurairah (radiallahu 'anhu) reported that the Rasool (sallallahu 'alaihi wa sallam) said, &quot;Don't pursue that which you have no knowledge of&quot;. Ahmed.

So as this hadith is contained in a fatwa we must assume that the scholars rely on it as authentic. So how do they rely on it as authentic and still rely on the authentic hadith where the Prophet Mohammad (pbuh) states we must all seek knowledge, even unto China?

Or do they just rely on whichever suits their argument at the time?

Rejecting this sahih hadith would not be kufr because, as we just said, it is not mass-transmitted; but it would constitute a sin&quot; ... Ahl al-Sunna concur, unlike the Mu'tazila, that authentic lone-narrator reports are obligatory to believe and put into practice.

Is some of this paragraph missing? I only ask because it appears to totally contradict itself. How can something not kufr be a sin? It says it is not kufr but then it says it is obligatory to believe them anyway.

Al-Qari relates, on this point, the consensus of the Companions and the Successors. Where scholars differ is whether the same hadiths convey certainty of knowledge (al-'ilm al-yaqînî) or only the compelling assumption of truth (al-zann al-ghâlib). These two categories differ insofar as obligatory practice and belief based on certainty of knowledge cannot be denied except on pains of apostasy, while the denial of obligatory practice and belief based on reports compellingly assumed to be true do not constitute apostasy but constitute sin. The scholars do concur that if one disbelieves in a sound lone-narrator report one commits a grave transgression (fisq) and is even considered misguided (dâll), but does not leave the fold of Islam. Al-Shafi'i, al-Risala (p. 460-461): &quot;If one disbelieves in them [lone-narrated reports], we do not say to him: 'Repent!'&quot; This is clearly unlike disbelief in a mass-transmitted report or in a verse of the Qur'an.<a href=&quot;http://www.sunnah.org/msaec/articles/blackdog.htmDenial&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;>Hadith: The Black Dog is a Devil
.
Denial of Rajm is kufr—kufr which expels the denier from the fold of Islam. This naseehat is for Muslims—those Muslims who have been thrown into doubt and confusion by the many modernist munaafiqeen lurking within the folds of the Ummah. These modernists who happen to be the agents of the Western Kuffaar as well as the agents of Shaitaan have abortively attempted to refute the validity of Rajm. In their exercise of kufr, they have failed.They will not gain recruits and followers for their kufr from the rank and file of the Ummah. Only those who have been condemned to kufr by Allah Ta’ala entertain views of kufr.

Wow what a lot of fire and brimstone preaching. Now I begin to understand why you hold the views you do. So that makes me out of the folds of Islam then and you better not speak to me anymore or I might corrupt you. I shall inform my husband when he gets in from work that I am no longer a Muslim.

To appease the kuffaar, the munaafiqeen present utterly baseless arguments to refute Rajm so as to make their perculiar brand of ‘islam’ palatable and acceptable to their western masters.

SINCE WHEN IS THE QURAN AN UTTERLY BASELESS ARGUEMENT??? And these lunatics have the nerve to say I am out of the folds of Islam.

Rajm has been prescribed by Allah Ta’ala. The arguments of the modernist munaafiqeen have absolutely no validity in Islam.

So the punishment for adultery set down in the QURAN, given by the word of ALLAH has absolutely no validity in Islam. And you worry about me going to hell? This is nothing short of blasphomy.

 

[Muslimwoman]

ps: before we draw any conclusions from it, we should get it clarified first of wether the anullment power of the Ulema/commitee of laymen...is only regarding a woman who has been opressively abandoned and deserted, or wether it apllies to every case of violation of rights/opression
.

I will be very grateful for anything else you find on this issue, as it is a genuine problem for some women I know but I will need proper references so I can find the Arabic versions please. Thank you.

 

[Muslimwoman]

RAJM-Stoning the Adulterors :: TheMajlis.net :: Journal Published by Mujlisul Ulama of SA

This is just a political statement. It does not even offer a single proof or piece of evidence. It does not tell us how this opnion is formulated and is not even attempting to explain the ruling in order for us to learn. It quite clearly states the absolute consensus of the ummah - what is the ummah brother? Has it now only been reduced to the scholars of the 4 schools? Shame that, because the social system the Prophet Mohammad (pbuh) set up clearly stated that the ummah is the entire Muslim population.

All you are managing to convince me of at the moment is that the 4 schools are to avoided like the plague because they have taken a very strange and political path. When a teacher stops teaching and starts lecturing, he is no longer a teacher.

 

[Abdullah]

Assalamualkum wr wb

My dear sister, I am not in any way saying that you are not a Muslim, but just am pointing out that teachings of the LM'S does contain kufr in it. and how adhering to those teachings [out of being genuinley mislead, which I consider you are] is a risk and danger to our imaan.

There is an absolute ijma [and not just of the four Schools] on hijab being fardh:

Statement of Sheikh Yusuf Al-Qaradawi:

"Actually, all Muslims with their various affiliations and inclinations agree upon the obligation of hijab".

IslamonLine.net

Statement from European Coucil of Fatwa Research:

"There is no scholarly difference with regard to Muslim women’s obligation to wear hijab".

IslamonLine.net

Statement of Group of Mufti's:

"Hence, I call upon all our fellow Muslim sisters to hold fast to their hijab and stick to the Command of Allah, which is proven by the clear decisive texts of the Qur’an and unanimously agreed upon by all Muslim scholars".

IslamonLine.net

Q. If a person denies Hijab for women being obligatory are they a kafir or if not what is their status.

A. Assalamu alaikum,

This is very serious, because it has been traditionally agreed upon as being beyond question, given the clear texts of the Qur'an and Sunnah [see Sh. Gibril’s answer, below]. There is clear and decisive scholarly consensus (ijma`) on this. There are few obligations that are more decisively proven, and it is not a ruling subject to change.

However, given the troubled times we live in, the scholars do not declare people who denies this obligation disbelievers. Rather, our duty is to call people to sound understanding of Islam and the Shariah. If people understand the big picture, and the wisdom and mercy the Shariah is based on, they will understand and accept its rulings.

Denying the Obligation of Wearing Hijab

Now in the above Sunnipath fatwa, Sheikh Rabbani seems to suggest that the only reason why those who say that hijab is not fard, is not declared by the Scholars as a kaafir, is because of the troubled times we live in.

So it may be even the case that some Scholars could be of the opinion that because of the troubled times we live in, that they should refrain from declaring the Muslims who reject rajm as disbelievers. ...

So I'm yet to make a final conlcusion on this issue, but just for the sake of showing you how serious rejecting rajm is sister, I'll show you an article from The Majlis.net, which is a reliable, Hanafi website that is run by Scholars of world renouned Deobandi Madrasah, that should send shivers down any rejector of rajm's spine:

Even Muslims have described as barbaric the sentence of stoning to death which a Nigerian court has ordered for a woman found guilty of adultery. Some Muslims argue that stoning to death is not ordered by Islam. Please comment.

Answer: This type of modernist is a perfect example of a kaafir. A person who denies the Shariah’s Law of Rajm (Stoning) is a murtadd in the unanimous Ruling of ALL the authorities of Islam of all Four Math-habs. From the time of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) to this day, there has been no difference of opinion on this issue in the Ummah.

It is only in this age that zindeeqs and spineless so-called Muslims who have become the slaves of the West, deny this Shar’i Command on which there exists absolute certitude— a certitude which tolerates no scope for dissension. There are no two opinions in Islam on this question.

If zina is proved on the basis of evidence which is admissible in the Shariah, there will be a conviction and punishment will have to be meted out. The clamour of the kuffaar press against the Rajm law of Islam has constrained the modernist zindeeqs to openly voice their support for the demands of the kuffaar. Insha’Allah, we hope with taufeeq from Allah Ta’ala, to write a booklet explaining the Shar’i command of Rajm (Stoning for adultery).

TheMajlis.net :: Journal Published by Mujlisul Ulama of SA

This is not to pronounce takfir sister, it is only to show you the serious danger, of being in the state of kufr, you are in, and so that you may take heed and save yourself inshAllah.

Salamualikum wr wb

ps: Regarding that 'rejecting faraidh acts and beliefs based on ahad [non mutawatir] hadith is not kufr but is fisq [grave sin]', the reason why it's not kufr is because they are based on ahad [narrators fall less then the required amount for it to be mutawatir] shahih hadith, which are regarded as 'compelling assumption of truth', and not 'absolute certainty of knowledge', thus since the rejector does not reject 'absolute certainty of knowledge', that is why it is not kufr, but see what it says about rejecting the mutawatir [mass transmitted] hadith, which are regarded as 'absolute certainty of knowledge', it says that the ahle Sunnah [Sunni Muslims] concur [have a consensus on it] that to reject such a hadith is kufr [apostacy].

On the Sunnipath link that I gave the other day, about Rajm, it says there that rajm is based on [amongst other evidences] two mutawatir hadith.

Salaam

 

[Abdullah]

Here is an explanation of why there can be no doubt at all about the authenticity of mutawatir hadiths:

(1) Mutawâtir: It is a hadîth narrated in each era, from the days of the Holy Prophet (

) up to this day by such a large number of narrators that it is impossible to reasonably accept that all of them have colluded to tell a lie.
This kind is further classified into two sub-divisions:

(a) Mutawâtir in words: It is a hadîth whose words are narrated by such a large number as is required for a mutawâtir, in a manner that all the narrators are unanimous in reporting it with the same words without any substantial discrepancy.

(b) Mutawâtir in meaning: It is a mutawâtir hadîth which is not reported by the narrators in the same words. The words of the narrators are different. Sometimes even the reported events are not the same. But all the narrators are unanimous in reporting a basic concept which is common in all the reports. This common concept is also ranked as a mutawâtir concept.

For example, there is a saying of the Holy Prophet (

),

Whoever intentionally attributes a lie against me, should prepare his seat in the Fire.

This is a mutawâtir hadîth of the first kind, because it has a minimum of seventy-four narrators. In other words, seventy-four companions of the Holy Prophet (

) have reported this hadîth at different occasions, all with the same words.

The number of those who received this hadîth from these companions is many times greater, because each of the seventy-four companions has conveyed it to a number of his pupils. Thus, the total number of the narrators of this hadîth has been increasing in each successive generation, and has never been less than seventy-four. All these narrators, who are now hundreds in number, report it in the same words without even a minor change. This hadîth is, therefore, mutawâtir by words, because it cannot be imagined reasonably that such a large number of people have colluded to coin a fallacious sentence in order to attribute it to the Holy Prophet (

).

On the other hand, it is also reported by such a large number of narrators that the Holy Prophet (

) has enjoined us to perform two rak’ât in Fajr, four rak’ât in Zuhr, ‘Asr and ‘Isha, and three rak’ât in the Maghrib prayer, yet the narrations of all the reporters who reported the number of rak’ât are not in the same words. Their words are different. Even the events reported by them are different. But the common feature of all the reports is the same. This common feature, namely, the exact number of rak’ât, is said to be mutawâtir in meaning.

As for the mutawâtir, nobody can question its authenticity. The fact narrated by a mutawâtir chain is always accepted as an absolute truth even if pertaining to our daily life. Any statement based on a mutawâtir narration must be accepted by everyone without any hesitation. I have never seen the city of Moscow, but the fact that Moscow is a large city and is the capital of U.S.S.R. is an absolute truth which cannot be denied. This fact is proved, to me, by a large number of narrators who have seen the city. This is a continuously narrated, or a mutawâtir, fact which cannot be denied or questioned.

I have not seen the events of the First and the Second World War. But the fact that these two wars occurred stands proved without a shadow of doubt on the basis of the mutawâtir reports about them. Nobody with a sound sense can claim that all those who reported the occurrence of these two wars have colluded to coin a fallacious report and that no war took place at all. This strong belief in the factum of war is based on the mutawâtir reports of the event.

In the same way the mutawâtir reports about the sunnah of the Holy Prophet (

) are to be held as absolutely true without any iota of doubt in their authenticity. The authenticity of the Holy Qur’ân being the same Book as that revealed to the Holy Prophet (

) is of the same nature. Thus, the mutawâtir ahâdîth, whether they be mutawâtir in words or in meaning, are as authentic as the Holy Qur’ân, and there is no difference between the two in as far as the reliability of their source of narration is concerned.
Although the ahâdîth falling under the first category of the mutawâtir, ie. the mutawâtir in words, are very few in number, yet the ahâdîth relating to the second kind, namely the mutawâtir in meaning, are available in large numbers. Thus, a very sizeable portion of the sunnah of the Holy Prophet (

) falls in this kind of mutawâtir, the authenticity of which cannot be doubted in any manner.

http://www.comparative-religion.com/forum/the-authority-of-sunnah-7064.html

Salaam

 

[Muslimwoman]

Brother Abdullah

I am truly worried about the sites you are visiting. Have you actually looked at some of these questions and answers? This is not Islam, this is insanity with extra loonytunes on the side.

Some Ulama have passed the fatwa that it is permissible for women to cut their hair with the permission of their husbands? Is this correct?
This fatwa is baatil (baseless). It has no validity in the Shariah. Those who hold this view have no basis in the Shariah. The Y.M.M.A. has published a book refuting in detail this baatil fatwa. The book is available from:
What? now I am not allowed to have my hair cut, even with my husbands permission (like I would ask his permission anyway – I don’t think so. So what, my husband owns my hair now and my religion forbids me from cutting it?). Please provide relative Quranic verses.
Even Muslims have described as barbaric the sentence of stoning to death which a Nigerian court has ordered for a woman found guilty of adultery. Some Muslims argue that stoning to death is not ordered by Islam. Please comment.
This type of modernist is a perfect example of a kaafir. A person who denies the Shariah’s Law of Rajm (Stoning) is a murtadd in the unanimous Ruling of ALL the authorities of Islam of all Four Math-habs. From the time of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) to this day, there has been no difference of opinion o&shy;n this issue in the Ummah. It is o&shy;nly in this age that zindeeqs and spineless so-called Muslims who have become the slaves of the West, deny this Shar’i Command o&shy;n which there exists absolute certitude— a certitude which tolerates no scope for dissension. There are no two opinions in Islam o&shy;n this question. If zina is proved o&shy;n the basis of evidence which is admissible in the Shariah, there will be a conviction and punishment will have to be meted out. The clamour of the kuffaar press against the Rajm law of Islam has constrained the modernist zindeeqs to openly voice their support for the demands of the kuffaar. Insha’Allah, we hope with taufeeq from Allah Ta’ala, to write a booklet explaining the Shar’i command of Rajm (Stoning for adultery).
So this is the evidence for rajm? How much arrogance does it take from this person to post such a view without even pointing to a single shred of evidence?

My wife wants me to hold her hand whenever we are in the public. I have told her that this is not Islamic behaviour. What do I do?
Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said that hayaa (shame) is an integral branch of Imaan. The stronger one’s Imaan, the more shame will there be in one. It is shameless for a man to walk hand in hand with his wife in the public. Muslims nowadays see goodness and respect in the lewd habits and practices of the western kuffaar. Even kuffaar of the east frown on such shameless practices. It is not permissible for a man to walk in public holding hands with his wife. Our culture is the culture of the Sunnah.
I accept it is unacceptable to kiss in public but to hold hands with the person you are married to? I must remember to let my local sheikh know about this, he always holds his wife’s hand but then again he loves her.
All our children are now married. My wife now wants to learn to drive and apply for a job. What is the Shariah’s position?
Now when it is time for her to forge stronger links with Allah Ta’ala, to slacken her worldly ties and to make greater preparations for the grave and Aakhirah, she goes into the opposite direction. Her attitude does not bode well. If a person moves further from the Aakhirah the older he/she gets by the day, it indicates deprivation from Allah’s mercy. Her attitude and desires are highly detrimental for her Imaan. It is haraam for her to learn to drive and to seek a job, and it is haraam for you as her husband to allow her latitude in committing haraam.
Exactly when did it become haraam for a woman to learn to drive (other than in Saudi)? Please provide Quranic evidence (references to donkeys and camels is permissible).

Is it permissible to use washing powder to wash kafan material?
Although permissible, it is best not to use washing powder for this purposes on account of the doubtful ingredients.
Now we can’t clean our clothes?
Muslims visit holiday resorts in places such as the Dead Sea environment. We are told by Islam that Allah’s punishment had descended on this locality. Is it permissible to visit such places and spend one's holiday there?
A Muslim need not have much intelligence to understand that it is not permissible to holiday in a place on which Allah’s Wrath, La’nat (Curse) and Punishment had settled. Muslims nowadays are following in the footsteps of shaitaan and the kuffaar in every domain of life. Allah Ta’ala warns in the Qur’aan Majeed: “Do not follow in the footsteps of shaitaan, Verily, he is your open (declared) enemy. He instructs you (to commit) immoral and shameless acts.” Only those who have no understanding of the purpose of life ruin their souls with idle and immoral pursuits in emulation of the kuffaar
So now all decent Muslims must leave Egypt? There are few places in the world where Allah has displayed his wrath more than Egypt. Gosh I wonder where the 78,000,000 Muslims will go?

Is it permissible for a Muslim man to work in a driving school? He has to teach females as well.
It is not permissible for him to work in such a school where he will have to teach even females.
Oh here we are ‘even’ females, really women are just the scum of the earth!!!! So now teachers cannot teach females, doctors cannot treat females, etc. I wonder if we should just kill all the females and see how well you men get on without us.
According to The Majlis women are not supposed to attend Walimahs. I have been informed by some Maulanas that Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) used to allow women to attend Walimahs. Please comment.
The Maulanas are all Muqallideen or are supposed to be Muqallideen of the Math-hab. It is not permissible for a Muqallid to deduct Shar’i masaa-il from the Qur’aan and Ahadith. The limit for the Muqallid is the Rulings of the Fuqaha and the Aimmah-e-Mujtahideen. The Muqallid may not go beyond this limit. There are Ahadith which say that wudhu have to be taken after eating cooked food. There are Ahaadith which allow women to attend the Musjid. But the Ruling of Allah’s Shariah is that it is not permissible for women to attend the Musjid. Just as it was permissible for women to attend the Musjid during the age of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam), so too was it permissible for them to attend Walimahs in that age. Later when Musjid attendance was prohibited for them, it was extended to Walimahs to a greater degree. Do not be misled by the baseless arguments of men with shallow knowledge.
Gosh would this be men making things forbidden for women that were not forbidden during the life of the Prophet Mohammad (pbuh)? So if they were permissible during the life of the Prophet and Allah did not forbid them then on what authority do mere men forbid them?

This man is clearly demented and you should be careful what you read.

 

[Muslimwoman]

This is from the islamonline link that you provided. Please can you highlight for me where it says to cover the head or the word hijab perhaps because clearly my eyesight is failing again.

“And tell the believing women to lower their gaze and be modest, and to display of their adornment only that which is apparent, and to draw their veils over their bosoms.” (An-Nur: 31)

“O Prophet! Tell thy wives and thy daughters and the women of the believers to draw their cloaks close round them (when they go abroad). That will be better, that so they may be recognized and not annoyed.” (Al-Ahzab: 59)

You know already I have no argument with wearing the hijab, I love wearing mine but what I object to is men putting words where words do not belong.

 

[Muslimwoman]

ps: Regarding that 'rejecting faraidh acts and beliefs based on ahad [non mutawatir] hadith is not kufr but is fisq [grave sin]', the reason why it's not kufr is because they are based on ahad [narrators fall less then the required amount for it to be mutawatir] shahih hadith, which are regarded as 'compelling assumption of truth', and not 'absolute certainty of knowledge', thus since the rejector does not reject 'absolute certainty of knowledge', that is why it is not kufr, but see what it says about rejecting the mutawatir [mass transmitted] hadith, which are regarded as 'absolute certainty of knowledge', it says that the ahle Sunnah [Sunni Muslims] concur [have a consensus on it] that to reject such a hadith is kufr [apostacy].

So not believing in something that they admit they cannot provide adequate evidence for is a sin - says who? May I ask whether they have told Allah that yet?

Well I can introduce you a few million Sunni Muslims that do not believe monkeys get married and verses of the Quran were abrogated by a goat, so thats their consensus of the ummah out of the window.

On the Sunnipath link that I gave the other day, about Rajm, it says there that rajm is based on [amongst other evidences] two mutawatir hadith.

I may be wrong but so far I believe every link you have given me has referred to the evidence in the Quran and Sunnah but none have actually given a detailed, or even rough, list of the evidence they use for this. You know I will not just take the word of someone, I like to see proof.

Salaam