Mohammed Hijab gets called a pedo by the far-right, Zionists, and Ryan Garcia after an old video resurfaced in which he talks about underage marriage

[Removed]

It isn’t a weak attempt. It was to show you even you don’t believe in the classical opinion with regards to this topic hence you’re a hypocrite.

1.) There can be more then one major classical opinion on a topic. There just isnt one regarding age of consent being 18 in Islam

2.) Nice pivot. You’re a deviant for rejecting and i quote “the” classical opinion. You havent even denied being a reformist or liberal lol im happy if your the face of this

Hadith is not on the same level as the Quran.

Hadiths were transmitted orally for several generations before being compiled in written form, the hadiths without a doubt are full for human error and cultural/political influences over time.

Another example of liberal feminism inching people towards hadith rejection and kufr.

@Galool you are truly a strong man if your able to endure this brainrot in generals. I forget how much gaalo and liberals roam this place

 

[Galool]

Do you agree with that? What @World posted?

I may entertain your question about fiqh when you answer the original one about aqeedah, namely morality of marrying 9 year olds.

Until then, there is no point in entertaining your obfuscations.

 

[Angelina]

I may entertain your question about fiqh when you answer the original one about aqeedah, namely morality of marrying 9 year olds.

Until then, there is no point in entertaining your obfuscations.

I already did. Post #123

Answer this question and stop beating around the bush.

Post #123

 

[Angelina]

Nope never said that. I simply argue that a 9 yr old child doesn’t have the capability in this day and age.

@Galool,

Here it is and now answer my question.

Something tells me you probably won’t.

 

[World]

I may entertain your question about fiqh when you answer the original one about aqeedah, namely morality of marrying 9 year olds.

Until then, there is no point in entertaining your obfuscations.

Depends on the background of the husband, if he is a mawali (non-Arab Muslim) or a Zanji, then marrying an Arab 9 year old girl to him would be a bidah, and they should be separated as it violates kaf'a (compatibility).

 

[Angelina]

Depends on the background of the husband, if he is a mawali (non-Arab Muslim) or a Zanji, then marrying an Arab 9 year old girl to him would be a bidah, and they should be separated as it violates kaf'a (compatibility).
View attachment 333663

This is fascinating stuff. I know that many classical scholars disliked non Arab and Arab marriages but I didn’t know Ibn Hanbal was also of that opinion. Tbh modern Salafis kinda reject this now since there isn’t any sahih hadith that can actually back this argument.

 

[Galool]

Depends on the background of the husband, if he is a mawali (non-Arab Muslim) or a Zanji, then marrying an Arab 9 year old girl to him would be a bidah, and they should be separated as it violates kaf'a (compatibility).
View attachment 333663

Now you are joining in on the obfuscation by bringing up separate criteria in your case fiqh of compatibility.

Instead of obfuscating with fiqh, you should also make your beliefs on the morality of marrying at puberty with the assumption any fiqh or criteria you search for is met.

That is what this discussion is about.

 

[World]

This is fascinating stuff. I know that many classical scholars disliked non Arab and Arab marriages but I didn’t know Ibn Hanbal was also of that opinion. Tbh modern Salafis kinda reject this now since there isn’t any sahih hadith that can actually back this argument.

The Maliki madhab reject kafa (compatibility) in other than religion, but the rest of the madhab(Hanafi, Hanbali, Shafi) all accept kafa in lineage, and believe in the Arab superiority of other races in a community sense. So it's wrong for a non arab man to marry an arab woman, and a woman has a right to divorce if her father compels her to marry a non arab.

 

[Angelina]

The Maliki madhab reject kafa (compatibility) in other than religion, but the rest of the madhab all accept kafa in lineage, and believe in the Arab superiority of other races in a general sense. So it's wrong for a non arab man to marry an arab woman, and a woman has a right to divorce if her father compels her to marry a non arab.

Yep, I think modern Salafis now hold the Maliki view. I know Ibn Taymiyyah also believed in Arab supremacy but in a more toned way in a sense that Arabs are superior as the Prophet s.a.w was one but on an individual bases thats not the case. I don’t think Ibn Taymiyah had the view that a non Arab can’t marry an Arab woman though.

 

[Galool]

I just came upon this thread, I thought it would be fitting and beneficial to share it here.



The Apostasy of hating something the Messenger ﷺ came with [

]

﷽

Allāh سبحانه وتعالى described hating something which He revealed as—Disbelief.

But those who disbelieve - for them is misery, and He will waste their deeds. 47:8
That is because they disliked what Allāh revealed, so He rendered worthless their deeds. 47:9

Imām al-Mirdāwī al-Ḥanbalī says,

“Shaykh Taqī ad-Dīn رحمه الله said: if somebody dislikes the Messenger ﷺ or that which he came with, this person becomes (an Apostate) by consensus.”

Shaykh Al-Islām Ibn Taymiyyah said,

“If a person says I don’t accept this, and i’m not inline with it and i detest this truth and dislike this (thing from the Sharīʿā) then the Takfīr of this person is known by necessity from the religion, and the Qur’ān is full of making Takfīr on such people.”

Imām Ibn Baṭṭah al-ʿUkbarī said,

“It is obligatory to believe and affirm, everything the Messengers came with—that it is from Allāh, and everything Allāh said is the inevitable truth, and if a person affirms everything the Messenger came with except one thing, that rejection of one thing alone is sufficient to render him a Kāfir according to all the Scholars.”

Imām Muḥammad bin ʿAbdul Wahhāb said,

“The Fifth [Nullifier]: Whoever dislikes something the Messenger ﷺ came with - even if he acts in accordance with it - has disbelieved by consensus.”

Imām As-Ṣuyūṭī said,

“Know May Allāh have mercy on to you anyone who rejects the Ḥadīt͟h of the Prophet ﷺ - either by speech or action with the conditions known - this person leaves the fold of Islām, and he will be resurrected (in Hellfire) with the Jews and the Christians or whoever from among the groups of the Disbelievers, Allāh wants.”

Allāh سبحانه وتعالى warned us against opposing the Messenger ﷺ else a Fitnah may befall.

Do not make [your] calling of the Messenger among yourselves as the call of one of you to another. Already Allāh knows those of you who slip away, concealed by others. So let those beware who dissent from his [i.e., the Prophet's] order, lest fitnah strike them or a painful punishment. 24:63

Imām Aḥmad bin Ḥanbal comments on this Āyah,

“Do you know what the Fitnah is? the Fitnah is Shirk; perhaps if he rejects some of his statements deviation will creep into his heart and he will be destroyed.”

Doubt: If a woman hates her husband marrying multiple women, is it considered disbelief? A: No, if she hates for herself that’s fine. But if she hates the ruling of it being permissible in Islām or hates the verse allowing it, this is Apostasy.

x.com

x.com

 

[KillStreakIsCool]

Hadith is not on the same level as the Quran.

Hadiths were transmitted orally for several generations before being compiled in written form, the hadiths without a doubt are full for human error and cultural/political influences over time.

Because the Prophet constantly interpreted the Quranic verses in practice and in his speech, Muslims take both the Quran and Hadeeth provided the Hadeeths are authentic and do not contradict a Quranic Saying. How we pray and the method of prayers, ablutions and many Islamic practices are directly learned from Authentic sayings of the Prophet. So, muslims consider Authentic Hadeeths that do not contradict a verse from the Quran as good as the Quran in terms of their legitimacy as Islamic sources.

In the case of marriage, the rule is "Consent and permission" are required for the marriage to be valid. While Islam did not put an age limit on when a marriage contract can happen, for the the marriage to be valid, it requires Consent of both parties. There are many requirements for marriage and and all those requirements demand a particiapnt to be of sound mind, conseting individual and someone who understands what theya re getting into. We are now dealing with folks whose mind is so twisted that you have to tell them the Islamic position of this.

Arabs used to inherit a woman from their dead male relatives. Islam put a stop to that in chapter 4:19. This verse bans forced marriages. In place of the forced marriages, Islam replaced it with Consent and permission based marriages. Perhaps some cultures are deeply rooted in their bigotry that even today we are addressing their perncious pre-islamic cultures.

Most arguments from extremism, marriage, equality, racism, are all rooted in pre-islamic culture. Many are holding onto that and trying to justify it through Islam.

 

[KillStreakIsCool]

I just came upon this thread, I thought it would be fitting and beneficial to share it here.



The Apostasy of hating something the Messenger ﷺ came with [

]

﷽

Allāh سبحانه وتعالى described hating something which He revealed as—Disbelief.

But those who disbelieve - for them is misery, and He will waste their deeds. 47:8
That is because they disliked what Allāh revealed, so He rendered worthless their deeds. 47:9

Imām al-Mirdāwī al-Ḥanbalī says,

“Shaykh Taqī ad-Dīn رحمه الله said: if somebody dislikes the Messenger ﷺ or that which he came with, this person becomes (an Apostate) by consensus.”

Shaykh Al-Islām Ibn Taymiyyah said,

“If a person says I don’t accept this, and i’m not inline with it and i detest this truth and dislike this (thing from the Sharīʿā) then the Takfīr of this person is known by necessity from the religion, and the Qur’ān is full of making Takfīr on such people.”

Imām Ibn Baṭṭah al-ʿUkbarī said,

“It is obligatory to believe and affirm, everything the Messengers came with—that it is from Allāh, and everything Allāh said is the inevitable truth, and if a person affirms everything the Messenger came with except one thing, that rejection of one thing alone is sufficient to render him a Kāfir according to all the Scholars.”

Imām Muḥammad bin ʿAbdul Wahhāb said,

“The Fifth [Nullifier]: Whoever dislikes something the Messenger ﷺ came with - even if he acts in accordance with it - has disbelieved by consensus.”

Imām As-Ṣuyūṭī said,

“Know May Allāh have mercy on to you anyone who rejects the Ḥadīt͟h of the Prophet ﷺ - either by speech or action with the conditions known - this person leaves the fold of Islām, and he will be resurrected (in Hellfire) with the Jews and the Christians or whoever from among the groups of the Disbelievers, Allāh wants.”

Allāh سبحانه وتعالى warned us against opposing the Messenger ﷺ else a Fitnah may befall.

Do not make [your] calling of the Messenger among yourselves as the call of one of you to another. Already Allāh knows those of you who slip away, concealed by others. So let those beware who dissent from his [i.e., the Prophet's] order,1 lest fitnah2 strike them or a painful punishment. 24:63

Imām Aḥmad bin Ḥanbal comments on this Āyah,

“Do you know what the Fitnah is? the Fitnah is Shirk; perhaps if he rejects some of his statements deviation will creep into his heart and he will be destroyed.”

Doubt: If a woman hates her husband marrying multiple women, is it considered disbelief? A: No, if she hates for herself that’s fine. But if she hates the ruling of it being permissible in Islām or hates the verse allowing it, this is Apostasy.

x.com

x.com

https://x.com/AbuKittenTweets/status/1809275739029799106
https://x.com/AbuKittenTweets/status/1809275683023253753

https://x.com/AbuKittenTweets/status/1809275640387891604

The only person here prone to Kufr is you. You can quote the Quran and Verse, but you are the type the prophet described as people whose faith doesn't go past their necks. You perfectly fit that description.

 

[World]

Now you are joining in on the obfuscation by bringing up separate criteria in your case fiqh of compatibility.

Instead of obfuscating with fiqh, you should also make your beliefs on the morality of marrying at puberty with the assumption any fiqh or criteria you search for is met.

That is what this discussion is about.

It depends on the context, if a 9 year old Arab girl was married to a non-Arab, then yes it's morally reprehensible, because it violates kafa. The Arab race isn't a match for the non-Arab race, due to their superiority.

 

[Galool]

It depends on the context, if a 9 year old Arab girl was married to a non-Arab, then yes it's morally reprehensible, because it violates kafa. The Arab race isn't a match for the non-Arab race, due to their superiority.

So you are also mocking the morality of the marriage of Aisha RA to the Prophet SWS instead of giving a straight answer you bring up non-binding fiqh to obfuscate and mock.

Of course your liberal partner is laughing about it.

Islam is clear and will never change. Much more powerful reformists have tried before and failed.

Your mocking is in vain.

"For you is your religion, and for me is my religion."

 

[Angelina]

So you are also mocking the morality of the marriage of Aisha RA to the Prophet SWS instead of giving a straight answer you bring up non-binding fiqh to obfuscate and mock.

Of course your liberal partner is laughing about it.

Islam is clear and will never change. Much more powerful reformists have tried before and failed.

Your mocking is in vain.

"For you is your religion, and for me is my religion."

Answer my question. There is a reason why you didn’t answer my question. We both know it you hypocrite.

 

[World]

So you are also mocking the morality of the marriage of Aisha RA to the Prophet SWS instead of giving a straight answer you bring up non-binding fiqh to obfuscate and mock.

What does non-binding mean? It's what 3/4 of the madhab believe, and if a non-Arab is married to the Arab girl, she has the legitimate right to divorce him. So yes, the background of her husband is critical to determine the ethical basis of child marriage, and whether it's morally reprehensible.

Whats the reason you are picking and choosing for?

Ibn Taymiyyah declared, “Any who would adhere to ahl al-sunnah wa-l-jamāʿah [i.e., be an orthodox Sunni] must believe that the Arab race is superior to the non-Arab races, be they Hebrews, Aramaens, Romans, Persians, etc"

Are you part of Ahlus Sunnah wal Jammah or not?

 

[reer]

What does non-binding mean? It's what 3/4 of the madhab believe, and if a non-Arab is married to the Arab girl, she has the legitimate right to divorce him. So yes, the background of her husband is critical to determine the ethical basis of child marriage, and whether it's morally reprehensible.

Whats the reason you are picking and choosing for?

Ibn Taymiyyah declared, “Any who would adhere to ahl al-sunnah wa-l-jamāʿah [i.e., be an orthodox Sunni] must believe that the Arab race is superior to the non-Arab races, be they Hebrews, Aramaens, Romans, Persians, etc"

Are you part of Ahlus Sunnah wal Jammah or not?

no way you are using ibn taymiyya as part of your proof. of all people.

 

[reer]

As for lineage: the well-known doctrine of Imam Malik does not consider competence in lineage, and that it is permissible to marry a close relative, i.e. non-Arabs, and he used as evidence for this the Almighty’s saying: " Indeed, the most honorable of you in the sight of God is the most pious of you. Indeed, God is All-Knowing, All-Aware " [Al-Hujurat: 13].

Unlike Imam al-Shafi’i, he considers lineage. A freed man is not, according to him, equivalent to an original free woman, nor is someone who touched slavery one of his forefathers equivalent to someone who did not touch any of his forefathers.

الكفاءة بين الزوجين في مذهبي مالك والشافعي

مفهوم الكفاءة بين الزوجين يعني تساويهما أو تقاربهما في العديد من الجوانب الأساسية، بما في ذلك الدين والنسب واليسار. قد اختلف الأئمة فيما يعتبر من الكفاءة وما لا يعتبر، وكذلك قد اختلف أتباع كل مذهب عند تطبيق النصوص على بعض الحالات. يتفق الإمامان مالك والشافعي على أهمية الدين في تحديد الكفاءة،...

www.islamweb.net

 

[Angelina]

As for lineage: the well-known doctrine of Imam Malik does not consider competence in lineage, and that it is permissible to marry a close relative, i.e. non-Arabs, and he used as evidence for this the Almighty’s saying: " Indeed, the most honorable of you in the sight of God is the most pious of you. Indeed, God is All-Knowing, All-Aware " [Al-Hujurat: 13].

Unlike Imam al-Shafi’i, he considers lineage. A freed man is not, according to him, equivalent to an original free woman, nor is someone who touched slavery one of his forefathers equivalent to someone who did not touch any of his forefathers.

الكفاءة بين الزوجين في مذهبي مالك والشافعي

مفهوم الكفاءة بين الزوجين يعني تساويهما أو تقاربهما في العديد من الجوانب الأساسية، بما في ذلك الدين والنسب واليسار. قد اختلف الأئمة فيما يعتبر من الكفاءة وما لا يعتبر، وكذلك قد اختلف أتباع كل مذهب عند تطبيق النصوص على بعض الحالات. يتفق الإمامان مالك والشافعي على أهمية الدين في تحديد الكفاءة،...

www.islamweb.net

Modern Muslims have completely took the Maliki view due to changing modern sensibilities. Even Salafis never acknowledge this despite Hanbali and Ibn Taymiyyah having strong Arab supremacy views. Dont get me wrong, I believe that Imam Malik was definitely right in this regard.

 

[JustSomeGuy]

The whole place is crawling with Zios

Hasn’t he defended pedophilia before or am I missing something?