Sheikh Dr. Yusuf al-Qaradawi admonishes Muslims for not doing their best to have a developed and independent civilization

[Omar del Sur]

@AMusee btw since you are so joined with the ikhwanis would you mind telling them to stop pushing gay stuff on their (((Al Jazeera))) network? one moment they're talking about "jihad" on the Arabic version, next they're pushing the most degenerate filth on the English version... strange behavior for defenders of Islam

 

[AMusee]

@AMusee btw since you are so joined with the ikhwanis would you mind telling them to stop pushing gay stuff on their (((Al Jazeera))) network? one moment they're talking about "jihad" on the Arabic version, next they're pushing the most degenerate filth on the English version... strange behavior for defenders of Islam

You are arguing with yourself and creating phantoms because you know you cant defend your position without looking absurd to say the least.

 

[Omar del Sur]

I have said nothing of fighting any government or supporting rebellions. This is a dichotomy you have made up and is common of madkhalis. Such a long response against a phantom argument.

ok let me go by your own words here since you say I'm arguing with phantoms.

1- Because I criticize Qaradawi, one of the top Muslim Brotherhood people and because I don't make constantly inciting people against Saudi Arabia the sixth pillar of Islam, I am a "Madkhali" according to you.

There is no basis for you to claim that it is obligatory for me to be constantly people against Saudi Arabia. This is not from the minhaj of the Salaf. This is an innovated methodology more associated with Marxism and similar movements.

Even if we say it's halal for me to speak against Saudi, there is no way it's obligatory upon me so you have no basis attacking me for not doing so.

But you act like it's some sort of obligatory thing for myself and others to be in some sort of anti-Saudi campaign. And if not, I am supposedly a "Madkhali". And that's what you call me because I'm not interested in that kind of thing.

So what you're following is a deviated understanding of Islam and it's because you've gotten into the ikhwani minhaj.

And you say "but I don't call for fighting Saudi, I am not calling for revolution."

Sheikh Uthaymeen already refuted this. What you're doing is inciting. Yes, you may claim you are not calling for violent revolution- but where does this agitation against the government lead? and part of the issue is you are going by people like this random guy on Twitter instead of the actual scholars

A Analysis Of Those Who Talk About The Muslim Rulers In Public – Shaykh Uthaymeen

Shaykh Uthaymeen said, “…There is an issue now[days]: some people, out of their pride and honor for the religion of Allah, if they see crimes and evil deeds among the people which may b…

abdulkareemibnozzie.wordpress.com

Shaykh Uthaymeen said, “…There is an issue now[days]: some people, out of their pride and honor for the religion of Allah, if they see crimes and evil deeds among the people which may be circulated in the newspapers, radio stations, or seen on some satellite channels, they begin attacking and accusing the government of falling short and being responsible for these things.
They go and publicize the faults of the government among the people, inciting the hearts against the leadership. In turn, this causes the people to begin hating the authorities over them. This is actually a very serious mistake contradictory to Islamic legislation, dangerous to the society, and a cause for future trials and tribulations. If such people would only rush to advise and correct the society starting with themselves, it would have been better for them.
For example, those things circulated by the various means of communication, whether written, heard, or seen these people should rather warn others from those specific issues (instead of warning against the government).

For example, they could warn against certain magazines, against watching certain shows which are harmful to ones religion and life.
They could warn people from dealing with usury, for example. If the whole society begins to rectify and improve itself, the leader, as part of this society, would likewise improve .
As for those who pour out their so called pride and honor for Islam upon the leaders in this way and is without doubt a wrong approach. You all know the great afflictions that occurred during the time of.
Rather, it even began earlier during the time of Uthmaan which resulted in major calamities and people began declaring lawful the taking of other [opposing and criticizing the leadership] to be incorrect and forbidden by Islam.
If a person really had true pride and honor [for this religion], then he would direct others to that which is good. But amazingly, you find some people complaining and accusing the leaders, while therere people in his society making Shirk, worshipping others besides Allah [Shirk is much greater than whatever sins are committed by the leaders].

Or he may come and try to twist the meanings of some verses of the Quran to be in accordance with his desires.
So for example, he quotes the verse, “And whoever does not rule by that which Allah has revealed those, they are the disbelievers.” [Surah al-Midah, 5:44]
He then says that based upon this, every law and statute that opposes Islamic legislation is disbelief! This is also very wrong. Even if we were to assume the extreme that a leader is a disbeliever, does this then mean we can incite the people to oppose him, even if it causes revolt, chaos, and killing? This is definitely wrong.
The kind of rectification and improvement desired will never come by this approach.
Rather, the only thing it will bring is great corruption because if, for example, a group of people rise up in opposition to the leaders of some country and those leaders have strength and authority that the opposing insurgents do not have, what will happen?
Will this insignificant minority prevail? It will not.

On the contrary, the opposite will happen. Evil and anarchy will result and the public affairs will be in complete disorder. It is essential that an individual looks first from the Islamic legislative point of view and not just blindly look at the texts (of the Quran or sunnah) from a single perspective. We should consider all the texts together. A person should also look at the situation with the eye of intellect and wisdom.
What will come about from this thing?
So, we believe these ways of rectification [criticizing the leaders, rebellion, etc.] to be wrong and very dangerous. It is not permissible for anyone to support or assist someone in such things. One must instead clearly reject these we speak in general terms…
So the individual must look at the reality of his government and country and not go around publicizing and spreading the faults of his rulers, whether they are excused due to some reasons or not. These people are often blind to the overall well-being and benefit of the nation. Such a government may have something of good within it. Overlooking this and focusing on its faults is not justice.

Allah says, “Oh you who believe, stand up firmly for Allah and be just witnesses and just, that is closer to righteousness.” [Srah al-Mdah, 5:8]…”
Ref: Taken from the casette, Adf al-amalt al-miyyah id Wul Bild al-aramayn

 

[Omar del Sur]

"Even if we were to assume the extreme that a leader is a disbeliever, does this then mean we can incite the people to oppose him, even if it causes revolt, chaos, and killing? This is definitely wrong."

-Sheikh Uthaymeen

look at what the actual scholar says versus what the twitter guy says. this is the danger when you follow random nobodies instead of actual scholars.

and this approach that this twitter person is calling to... this is what led to the bloodshed and chaos in Syria. all those people are dead because of people like that guy in twitter. if what Sheikh Uthaymeen said had been followed, all those people would still be alive. and with all those people dead and with all those people turned into refugees- Assad is still in power.

"Even if we were to assume the extreme that a leader is a disbeliever, does this then mean we can incite the people to oppose him, even if it causes revolt, chaos, and killing? This is definitely wrong.
The kind of rectification and improvement desired will never come by this approach.
Rather, the only thing it will bring is great corruption because if, for example, a group of people rise up in opposition to the leaders of some country and those leaders have strength and authority that the opposing insurgents do not have, what will happen?
Will this insignificant minority prevail? It will not."

 

[mr.overeasy]

Materialism and religion should not be mixed. He shouldve stick to fear of God not economics.

this is foolish and anti-Islam.

it was muslims that invented the basic sciences and we were commanded to read and learn by ALLAH (SWT).

we should go back to pushing our knowledge in all areas to the absolute max.

once upon a time we somalis were able to defeat rhe strongest european powers like portugal at the time.

now we can't even agree on a single issue and we lack basic knowledge in many areas.

Islam is true and it breeds a love for learning!

 

[JaredAbdullahiKushner2000]

"Even if we were to assume the extreme that a leader is a disbeliever, does this then mean we can incite the people to oppose him, even if it causes revolt, chaos, and killing? This is definitely wrong."

-Sheikh Uthaymeen

look at what the actual scholar says versus what the twitter guy says. this is the danger when you follow random nobodies instead of actual scholars.

and this approach that this twitter person is calling to... this is what led to the bloodshed and chaos in Syria. all those people are dead because of people like that guy in twitter. if what Sheikh Uthaymeen said had been followed, all those people would still be alive. and with all those people dead and with all those people turned into refugees- Assad is still in power.

"Even if we were to assume the extreme that a leader is a disbeliever, does this then mean we can incite the people to oppose him, even if it causes revolt, chaos, and killing? This is definitely wrong.
The kind of rectification and improvement desired will never come by this approach.
Rather, the only thing it will bring is great corruption because if, for example, a group of people rise up in opposition to the leaders of some country and those leaders have strength and authority that the opposing insurgents do not have, what will happen?
Will this insignificant minority prevail? It will not."

He will never reply to your points. Ikhwaanis are the enemies of the Ummah. @AMusee you are worse and more dangerous than Jews ans christians. People like you with your fikr destroyed Somalia. Those who call to rebellion, make takfir of the general people, making their blood halal is more dangerous than gaalo. Drill that into your head. I know all about the history of Ikhwaan al mufliseen in Somalia. It all started with Hassan dahir Aweys and Al Islah. You have destroyed the Muslims. Its your faults that war on terror happened, its your fault 2000 and more innocent civilians where killed. Waxa istaahishaan inaad idin la laayo adinka dhan. Nacala

 

[Deleted L]

@Abu Ash’ari @AMusee Can you as Somalis promote people who promote and make halal the same thing we suffering from? You should he furious or are you supporters and condoners of Shabaab and the two bombings that killed a 100 women and children? You cannot be Somali and subscribe to khawarij fikr.

Sheikh Dr. Yusuf al-Qaradawi’s Fatwa permitting suicide bombing is no doubt an Ijtihad mistake on his part [A scholar will be rewarded once if he make a mistake in Ijtihad, twice if he is correct] but the sheikh has nothing to do with the Khawarij and he has condemned them, he condemned 9/11 and wrote a whole book [Fiqh of Jihad] to refute the extremists. As for his suicide bombing Fatwa, he wasn’t the only scholar to mistakenly permit it and he was specifically referring to the Palestinians resisting Zionist aggression so to assume that he allowed this against innocent Muslims is a slander. His Fatwa was about the Palestinians who are oppressed by the Zionists and according to his opinion (I respectfully disagree with his opinion), they have the right to defend themselves against their enemies by doing this act [Suicide bombing] against their enemies.

Disclaimer: I’m not defending his Fatwa but i’m contextualizing. I respectfully disagree with his Fatwa and scholars throughout history have made Ijtihad mistakes.

 

[JaredAbdullahiKushner2000]

Sheikh Dr. Yusuf al-Qaradawi’s Fatwa permitting suicide bombing is no doubt an Ijtihad mistake on his part [A scholar will be rewarded once if he make a mistake in Ijtihad, twice if he is correct] but the sheikh has nothing to do with the Khawarij and he has condemned them, he condemned 9/11 and wrote a whole book [Fiqh of Jihad] to refute the extremists. As for his suicide bombing Fatwa, he wasn’t the only scholar to mistakenly permit it and he was specifically referring to the Palestinians resisting Zionist aggression so to assume that he allowed this against innocent Muslims is a slander. His Fatwa was about the Palestinians who are oppressed by the Zionists and according to his opinion (I respectfully disagree with his opinion), they have the right to defend themselves against their enemies by doing this act [Suicide bombing] against their enemies.

Disclaimer: I’m not defending his Fatwa but i’m contextualizing. I respectfully disagree with his Fatwa and scholars throughout history have made Ijtihad mistakes.

Mistake? Do not try to make excuses for him, you will wear out and die of dehydration before excusing all his myriads and astronomical errors he double down on. Its only an mistake and to be overlood if he retract it but he doesn't he double-down.




There are even books about his innovations that he promotes written by the senior scholars. May Allah increase his punishment

 

[AraragiKoyomi]

now I've avoided mentioning something I think about him and I've stuck with what is undeniable. we can clearly see from his own words that he was a caller to secularism and everything in the videos above is clearly based on his own words. two show his words, one is a Sheikh talking about but based on what you can clearly see him saying in one of the other videos. all the evidence is undeniable.

elsewhere there's a video of him promoting suicide bombing. this Qaradawi shaytaan... he was a strange person, was he not? he called for "jihad," for suicide bombing (which undoubtedly is haraam, I have a fatwa proving this if anyone wants it) and also called for liberal secular democracy! is that not a bizarre combination??

anyways, I'm putting what I think here and people can deny it if they want (what is above in the videos is clearly undeniable) but- I am utterly convinced that Qaradawi was a freemason. calling for "jihad," calling for suicide bombing (which again I want to clearly state is haraam) and for liberal secular democracy?? it doesn't make any sense if you think he was some sort of "fundamentalist extremist" or however you want to put it.... but it does make sense if he was some sort of freemason.

View attachment 241850

Duncan's Masonic Ritual is a famous, old and authoritative book on Freemasonry. let anyone who doesn't believe me look it up.

ok now here is Qaradawi- and is this not the exact same gesture?

View attachment 241851

View attachment 241850

I'm putting it against just so people can see the pictures next to each other and see how exactly similar they look

it is believed that Malcolm X is doing the gesture here

View attachment 241852

I believe Malcolm X is doing it but... look at how Qaradawi is doing it in so an exact way

anyways, people don't believe in this kind of thing can call me crazy and skip over this part but what's the top with the three videos is undeniable even if you don't believe in this kind of thing

Have you changed since then? Do you still hold that the ikhwaan are deviants? Do you still believe that hisbiyyah is bad? If so then there isnt anything I disagree with you on.

 

[Omar del Sur]

Have you changed since then? Do you still hold that the ikhwaan are deviants? Do you still believe that hisbiyyah is bad? If so then there isnt anything I disagree with you on.

masha'Allah, I had it right. I am happy to talk to a representative of your way of thought. If you represent the true salafiyyah, then I am being honored to be discussing with a representative of السلفية صحيح. Whatever we call your way of thought, whether السلفية صحيح or.... something pejorative.... you do represent a distinct way of thought.

and I would like a respectful dialogue and if you flee from it I intend to make a thread on how Farris al Hammadi corrupts the people in their aqeedah and minhaj. including when it comes to tawheed.

I don't support ikhwan ul muslimeen. But yes I am a lot less harsh towards them than I used to be.

I believe ikhwan ul muslimeen does not put nearly enough emphasis on tawheed and aqeedah and I do think DH has tendencies in this direction.

As for hizbiyyah, I am opposed to it. That is why for example I'm opposed to Abu Khadeejah and SPUBS.

 

[AraragiKoyomi]

masha'Allah, I had it right. I am happy to talk to a representative of your way of thought. If you represent the true salafiyyah, then I am being honored to be discussing with a representative of السلفية صحيح. Whatever we call your way of thought, whether السلفية صحيح or.... something pejorative.... you do represent a distinct way of thought.

and I would like a respectful dialogue and if you flee from it I intend to make a thread on how Farris al Hammadi corrupts the people on their aqeedah and minhaj. including when it comes to tawheed.

I don't support ikhwan ul muslimeen. But yes I am a lot less harsh towards them than I used to be.

I believe ikhwan ul muslimeen does not put nearly enough emphasis on tawheed and aqeedah and I do think DH has tendencies in this direction.

As for hizbiyyah, I am opposed to it. That is why for example I'm opposed to Abu Khadeejah and SPUBS.

I dont represent Salaffiyah, I am only a person who seeks to adhere to the teachings of the salaf.

Neither does Farris Hammadi.

You know there is more to the Ikhwaanis other than them not putting enough emphasis on tawheed and aqeedah. There is this whole issue of them having a movement that goes against the principle of Islam. They seek political leadership and they will use any means necessary even if it goes against Islam. They cause rebellions and uprising(the arab spring) and lots of evil came originated from them Al Qaeda, Daesh, Al Shabaab and they still doing damage by slandering the scholars who condemn them and telling the youth that these are scholars for dollars. Also its funny how selective they are.

They wouldnt dare condemn Shaykh Uthaymeen, Shaykh Albani, Shaykh Ibn Baz, Shaykh Muqbil who condemned them and in the same mannernand as harsh as Shaykh Rabee al Madkhali, because they are beloved and more popular than Shaykh Rabee and it would damage their reputation.

I want to tell you something about Somalia that you may not know, since you are Mexican, but in the 90s we had a influx of people from the ikhwaan from arab countries who spread their ideology in Somalia. There were the salafis who studied under the scholars such as Shaykh Ibn Baz, Uthaymeen and Muqbil who were opposed to Islamic parties and movements being created amongst the Somalis, since it would divide us. This debate happened in the 90s I believe

Jama’atu Al-I’tisam جماعة الاعتصام (i.e. Ictisaam) [1996] | Toronto Dawah

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم 💥 Jama’atu Al-I’tisam جماعة الاعتصام (i.e. Ictisaam) [1996] 💥 I wanted to briefly share some information […]

torontodawah.com

Read this. Its in english

Some History On The Somali Group Al-Itihaad [1983 – 2002] | Toronto Dawah

Some History On The Somali Group Al-Itihaad [1983 – 2002] The history concerning how the somali group al-Itihaad [i.e the […]

torontodawah.com

Us Somalis didnt benefit from the ikhwaani methodology, it destabilized us and it created Al shabaab and planted the seed of Daesh. The youth are ignorant, and uneducated when it comes to tawheed, shirk and the basis of Islam, but you will see them make takfir of the federal government and kill the people.

Somalis need salaffiyah. We have so many Sufi graveworshippers in our country, there is morao decay, zina is spreading, the women have become less modest. The various mosque are engaging in bidah. Ikhwaani methodology hasnt benefitted so if you still persistent in your belief, keep it to yourself.

 

[Omar del Sur]

I dont represent Salaffiyah, I am only a person who seeks to adhere to the teachings of the salaf.

Neither does Farris Hammadi.

You know there is more to the Ikhwaanis other than them not putting enough emphasis on tawheed and aqeedah. There is this whole issue of them having a movement that goes against the principle of Islam. They seek political leadership and they will use any means necessary even if it goes against Islam. They cause rebellions and uprising(the arab spring) and lots of evil came originated from them Al Qaeda, Daesh, Al Shabaab and they still doing damage by slandering the scholars who condemn them and telling the youth that these are scholars for dollars. Also its funny how selective they are.

They wouldnt dare condemn Shaykh Uthaymeen, Shaykh Albani, Shaykh Ibn Baz, Shaykh Muqbil who condemned them and in the same mannernand as harsh as Shaykh Rabee al Madkhali, because they are beloved and more popular than Shaykh Rabee and it would damage their reputation.

I want to tell you something about Somalia that you may not know, since you are Mexican, but in the 90s we had a influx of people from the ikhwaan from arab countries who spread their ideology in Somalia. There were the salafis who studied under the scholars such as Shaykh Ibn Baz, Uthaymeen and Muqbil who were opposed to Islamic parties and movements being created amongst the Somalis, since it would divide us. This debate happened in the 90s I believe

Jama’atu Al-I’tisam جماعة الاعتصام (i.e. Ictisaam) [1996] | Toronto Dawah

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم 💥 Jama’atu Al-I’tisam جماعة الاعتصام (i.e. Ictisaam) [1996] 💥 I wanted to briefly share some information […]

torontodawah.com

Read this. Its in english

Some History On The Somali Group Al-Itihaad [1983 – 2002] | Toronto Dawah

Some History On The Somali Group Al-Itihaad [1983 – 2002] The history concerning how the somali group al-Itihaad [i.e the […]

torontodawah.com

Us Somalis didnt benefit from the ikhwaani methodology, it destabilized us and it created Al shabaab and planted the seed of Daesh. The youth are ignorant, and uneducated when it comes to tawheed, shirk and the basis of Islam, but you will see them make takfir of the federal government and kill the people.

Somalis need salaffiyah. We have so many Sufi graveworshippers in our country, there is morao decay, zina is spreading, the women have become less modest. The various mosque are engaging in bidah. Ikhwaani methodology hasnt benefitted so if you still persistent in your belief, keep it to yourself.

I don't support the ikhwan ul muslimeen. there is no way I'm aware of in which I follow their methodology. however- do I think every single ikhwani is a khariji who should should be imprisoned and tortured by the Sisis and MBSs of the world?

I am opposed to hizbiyyah. you know and I know- if I am not mistaken- that you consider DH and Muhammad Hijab to be following ikhwani ideology. But are DH and Muhammad Hijab responsible for what happened in Somalia?

my way of thinking is way different than the ikhwanis. I don't know of anything where I follow them in their minhaj. I am not a rabid sectarian who declares every ikhwani or perceived ikhwani to be a khariji but myself I am not remotely an ikhwani.

 

[Omar del Sur]

I don't mind people from the "Madkhali" group coming and discussing with me. I welcome it.

I think the issue here has to do with khurooj and rulers. I don't have any comment about the Somali ruler and I pretty much have zero comment about Somali politics. If I'm instigating khurooj against any ruler it's Maduro or other communist rulers in the region.

I don't have much to say about MENA politics, anyone can read my posts where I talk about politics and see I pretty much stick to the politics of my own region. My vision is for a regional power in the Americas. This in itself illustrates how fundamentally different I am than the ikhwanis. they are globalists and I am much more national and regionally oriented.

 

[AraragiKoyomi]

I don't support the ikhwan ul muslimeen. there is no way I'm aware of in which I follow their methodology. however- do I think every single ikhwani is a khariji who should should be imprisoned and tortured by the Sisis and MBSs of the world?

I am opposed to hizbiyyah. you know and I know- if I am not mistaken- that you consider DH and Muhammad Hijab to be following ikhwani ideology. But are DH and Muhammad Hijab responsible for what happened in Somalia?

my way of thinking is way different than the ikhwanis. I don't know of anything where I follow them in their minhaj. I am not a rabid sectarian who declares every ikhwani or perceived ikhwani to be a khariji but myself I am not remotely an ikhwani.

Alright then. I dont think there is much to disagree with. I am pro law and order and I hate reactionary muslims who dont think for a second. They will follow anyone who throws a slogan.

Both Hijab and DH propagate thoughts that encourages rebellion. Just because we dont openly share our hatred for the leaders doesnt mean we love them and support them. Its just that we dont want to cause harm greater than the harm that is present.

Egypt is a very fragile nation. Better it is under Sisi than no government and anarchy. I have been to Egypt two times. Its a poor overpopulated nation. Its very fragile and the smallest hike in inflation can cause chaos.

I believe that if someone is calling for rebellion, and calling for an uprising should be imprisoned. The Arab spring happened cause an inflation on bread happened.

Also DH is a hypocrite. Never does he ever criticizes Iran and their regime but he is busy talking about arab states.

Also I care about Somalia, what happens in the middle east effects us. So Egypt is destabilized it will effect us. Somalia is an island sorrounded by k

 

[Omar del Sur]

I want to say as well to the "madkhalis"- I believe in the same view of ruling by other than what Allah has revealed as is expressed in Aqeedah at-Tawheed by Sheikh Fawzan. I believe in the same view as is laid out in that book. But you "madkhalis" won't dare attack Sheikh Fawzan for the chapter he wrote in Aqeedah at-Tahweed on ruling by other than what Allah revealed. But you will attack us ordinary Muslims simply for following the view that Sheikh Fawzan clearly expressed in that chapter- rather than following the distorted aqeedah of spubs, shamsi and Farris al Hammadi. I do not need to change my aqeedah to serve the political interests of gulf rulers. yes, I was a lot less hostile to some of the Arab governments prior to October 7. yes, I am a lot more liable these days to openly attack MBS and Sisi. I am accountable to Allah and I don't expect that He will punish me for being opposed to MBS and Sisi- or for refusing to distort the correct aqeedah to suit their political interests.

 

[Omar del Sur]

Alright then. I dont think there is much to disagree with. I am pro law and order and I hate reactionary muslims who dont think for a second. They will follow anyone who throws a slogan.

Both Hijab and DH propagate thoughts that encourages rebellion. Just because we dont openly share our hatred for the leaders doesnt mean we love them and support them. Its just that we dont want to cause harm greater than the harm that is present.

Egypt is a very fragile nation. Better it is under Sisi than no government and anarchy. I have been to Egypt two times. Its a poor overpopulated nation. Its very fragile and the smallest hike in inflation can cause chaos.

I believe that if someone is calling for rebellion, and calling for an uprising should be imprisoned. The Arab spring happened cause an inflation on bread happened.

Also DH is a hypocrite. Never does he ever criticizes Iran and their regime but he is busy talking about arab states.

Also I care about Somalia, what happens in the middle east effects us. So Egypt is destabilized it will effect us. Somalia is an island sorrounded by k

if the Egyptians rise up against Sisi, it will be an action carried out by the Egyptians. when there was conflict with Communists in Peru, I was on social media instigating Peruvians against the communists. if the Egyptians rise up against Sisi, it will not have anything to do with me.

 

[Omar del Sur]

if there was a concern that I'm out to promote khurooj against the Somali ruler- shouldn't I have tons of posts about Somali politics? I don't know anything about Somali politics. and I don't seek to know anything about Somali politics. I try to post Islamic reminders and occasionally I complain about communist Latin governments. as for khurooj against Sisi, how would threads like the one I made for posting duas from Quran and Sunnah- how is that kind of content going to incite Egyptians against Sisi? I don't think anyone in Egypt is going to rebel against Sisi based on my SomaliSpot posts. if you want to know I feel towards Sisi, I despise him. I am overtly hostile towards him and I suspect him of being a zionist. How am I supposed to feel towards him? But if I criticize him on SomaliSpot, how would that influence anything in Egypt? And if my aim was that Egyptians rebel against Sisi, I don't think my post would be on SomaliSpot or in English.

 

[AraragiKoyomi]

if there was a concern that I'm out to promote khurooj against the Somali ruler- shouldn't I have tons of posts about Somali politics? I don't know anything about Somali politics. and I don't seek to know anything about Somali politics. I try to post Islamic reminders and occasionally I complain about communist Latin governments. as for khurooj against Sisi, how would threads like the one I made for posting duas from Quran and Sunnah- how is that kind of content going to incite Egyptians against Sisi? I don't think anyone in Egypt is going to rebel against Sisi based on my SomaliSpot posts. if you want to know I feel towards Sisi, I despise him. I am overtly hostile towards him and I suspect him of being a zionist. How am I supposed to feel towards him? But if I criticize him on SomaliSpot, how would that influence anything in Egypt? And if my aim was that Egyptians rebel against Sisi, I don't think my post would be on SomaliSpot or in English.

I havent really read any threads so far of something that I disagree with, to my knowledge. I would advice against promoting DH, Mohammed Hijab and co. Since that wouldnt benefit anyone

 

[Omar del Sur]

I havent really read any threads so far of something that I disagree with, to my knowledge. I would advice against promoting DH, Mohammed Hijab and co. Since that wouldnt benefit anyone

I don't think you're a shill for MBS or something like that. I think you're an ordinary Muslim like I am and you try to follow salafiyyah just like I do. However, our interpretations of salafiyyah are different, related and similar all simultaneously. We have way more in common with each other than either of us have to do with liberals, secularists, etc.

I think the key difference between us ideologically is our stance with regards to the issue of ruling by other than what Allah has revealed. My stance is that dismantling the shariah and implementing man-made law that contradicts the shariah is kufr akbar. However, if it is in an incident here and there... like a ruler here and there in certain incidents rules by other than what Allah has revealed- I say this kufr duna kufr, ie minor kufr.

However, if a ruler dismantles the shariah and rules by man-made law which contradicts the shariah- the ruler is a kaffir. Allah called him a kaffir in the Quran.

Scholars have debated using the term Tawheed al Hakimiyyah. Whether we accept the name or not, it's part of tawheed. It is part of the correct aqeedah. I cannot change the aqeedah because some rulers have sold out and knowing the true aqeedah might make their people revolt against them. If some ruler is a secularist, I mention secularists are kaffirs and the people eventually realize the ruler is a kaffir and rebel- who is at fault? I am not at fault because I simply explained the correct aqeedah, the ruler is at fault for being a secularist.

Let's say the ruler goes and TV and he says "I am a secularist, shariah is barbaric and unfit for modern times". You and I both know this ruler is a kaffir. And we can't try to change the aqeedah to prevent the people from rebelling against him. However, even though I call this ruler a kaffir- that does not actually mean I say to rebel against him. Sometimes the ruler really has committed open kufr. We can't try to change the rulings- we have to be sincere upholders of the dīn. However, I don't believe we necessarily have to rebel against a ruler just because they've committed kufr. If you are the head of the military and you can depose them in a bloodless coup then implement the shariah- I say do it. But if you're some ordinary person and you don't have the means to remove the ruler or to do so without it leading to a greater harm- then I don't believe you have any responsibility to try to remove the ruler.

 

[AraragiKoyomi]

I don't think you're a shill for MBS or something like that. I think you're an ordinary Muslim like I am and you try to follow salafiyyah just like I do. However, our interpretations of salafiyyah are different, related and similar all simultaneously. We have way more in common with each other than either of us have to do with liberals, secularists, etc.

I think the key difference between us ideologically is our stance with regards to the issue of ruling by other than what Allah has revealed. My stance is that dismantling the shariah and implementing man-made law that contradicts the shariah is kufr akbar. However, if it is in an incident here and there... like a ruler here and there in certain incidents rules by other than what Allah has revealed- I say this kufr duna kufr, ie minor kufr.

However, if a ruler dismantles the shariah and rules by man-made law which contradicts the shariah- the ruler is a kaffir. Allah called him a kaffir in the Quran.

Scholars have debated using the term Tawheed al Hakimiyyah. Whether we accept the name or not, it's part of tawheed. It is part of the correct aqeedah. I cannot change the aqeedah because some rulers have sold out and knowing the true aqeedah might make their people revolt against them. If some ruler is a secularist, I mention secularists are kaffirs and the people eventually realize the ruler is a kaffir and rebel- who is at fault? I am not at fault because I simply explained the correct aqeedah, the ruler is at fault for being a secularist.

Let's say the ruler goes and TV and he says "I am a secularist, shariah is barbaric and unfit for modern times". You and I both know this ruler is a kaffir. And we can't try to change the aqeedah to prevent the people from rebelling against him. However, even though I call this ruler a kaffir- that does not actually mean I say to rebel against him. Sometimes the ruler really has committed open kufr. We can't try to change the rulings- we have to be sincere upholders of the dīn. However, I don't believe we necessarily have to rebel against a ruler just because they've committed kufr. If you are the head of the military and you can depose them in a bloodless coup then implement the shariah- I say do it. But if you're some ordinary person and you don't have the means to remove the ruler or to do so without it leading to a greater harm- then I don't believe you have any responsibility to try to remove the ruler.

Well my friend. I want sharia to be implemented but I am not gonna decide wether a leader in a Muslim majority country is excused by the kufr duna kufr or if he isnt. That is up to the scholars of each land to decide. We have salafi scholars in our land, I believe so does many muslim countries.

As laymans we cant make an individual fatwas like that.