Demonstrations are Haram in Ahmadiyya

Hani Taher wrote on 25-Jan-2011 immediately after the start of the demonstrations in Egypt against the tyranny:

http://alsabiil.110mb.com/mqalat/2011/k5.htm

((A demonstration is an action that normally consists of asking people to protest against certain wrong situation. As a result a mass group of people would gather and walk in public to show their position against a wrong act that was committed by a president; this president could be a leader of a country, a minister, a general manager, etc))

((Asking people to participate in a demonstration would include backbiting of the president since you need to mention his bad deeds, although he [the president] doesn’t like mentioning of his bad deeds. This is exactly the backbiting which was forbidden by Allah and His prophet))

((Although the Quran didn’t forbid demonstrations, we believe that these demonstrations consist of committing some sins, such as backbiting, opening the door of corruption and killing. It is the duty of Muslims to close the doors of evil whenever they can. This is also applicable to the sit-ins since they also consist of backbiting and opening the doors of corruption))

((Therefore we believe that demonstrations and civil sit-ins are NOT ALLOWED in Islam))

((The reason of the bad conditions of the Arab people is that they are away from the right path and that they do not follow the teachings of Islam. The solution for these bad conditions is to believe in the promised Messiah who took the Islam back to its origins))

This Hani Taher is the same Arab Ahmadi of MTA who wrote the following suggestion on 3-Apr-2006:

http://alsabiil.110mb.com/mqalat/L198.htm

((With regard to Al-Aqsa Mosque, I don’t see any problem in giving the Jews a temple below it so that they can use it for worshipping Allah! The entry of the temple can be provided at the western side))

((What is wrong in building multi-levels which gather everyone?)) – The Final Solution & Al-Aqsa Mosque, by Hani Taher,

Indeed, “Love for Tyranny, Hatred for Muslims”, that is Ahmadiyya!

Be Sociable, Share!

40 thoughts on “Demonstrations are Haram in Ahmadiyya

  1. The “A” (Ahmadiyya) has not helped the Muslims in any country since its inception. They dont want Muslims to rise up, they dont want Muslims to be empowered, they dont want Muslims to rejuvanate their souls.

    I was watching MTA news just the other day and I was totally disgusted by the what they consider “news-worthy”. They pretty much BASH muslims throught the duration of the entire show.

    As an organization, the “A” hates Muslims more than any other organization in the entire world.

    • yup, they bash Muslims throughout the entire show. Even if Muslims are innocent, they always look for ways to insult Muslims.
      They are Islamophobes

  2. These statements prove once and for all that the Ahmadis are the enemies of the Muslims and are servants only to imperialist interests. I am absolutely staggered that they consider principled protest against tyranny to be against Islam. Muslims are encouraged to speak up against tyranny by Rasulullah (saw) himself.

    I am also surprised that they think a Jewish temple is under their Qadiani “masjid al Aqsa”, surely they would have discovered it when they were laying the foundations of this fraudulent building? Why would they want to build a temple on top of a temple anyway? Oh, wait, is Hani Taher suggesting that Masjid al-Aqsa is in fact in Al-Quds?

    The Qadiani leadership is hypocritical, Islamophobic and utterly confused.

  3. The fact is that MGA founded the cult called Ahmadiyyat to deceive the Muslims
    and later on those who followed his religion. His sons and some of the other prominent
    Ahmadis produced a mass of written rubbish for the purpose of continued DECEPTION
    of their followers. That is the only way they could have a Power Base and Money.The
    scale of deception is staggering. This web site helping in spreading the truth to those
    unfortunate Ahmadis who are trapped and cannot find a way out. May Allah be with
    you in your efforts.

  4. As an ex-ahmadi it’s clear that I believed that the religion I was following was nothing but falsehood and I praise Allah for saving me from the clutches of this cult.

    That having been said, as Muslims we need to be just and the comments in relation to protests above are not something which I can attack the Ahmadi’s for.

    This is obviously with the exception of the sentence which states

    ‘The solution for these bad conditions is to believe in the promised Messiah who took the Islam back to its origins’

    This sentence would have been infinitely better if it had the last and final Messenger Muhammad PBUH instead of the Promised Messiah.

    With the exception of the sentence that I have highlighted the above Ahmadiya position on protests, is something that conforms to that which the earlier generations and all those who followed them believe in and adhere to.

    Imaam an-Nawawi (rahimahullaah) said in Sharh Saheeh Muslim (12/229):

    And as for revolt – meaning against the rulers – and fighting them, then it is haraam by unanimous agreement (ijmaa’) of the Muslims, even if they are sinful oppressors. And the hadeeth are abundantly overwhelming with the meaning that I have mentioned. And Ahl us-Sunnah are united that the ruler is not to be removed, on account of his sinfulness. As for the angle that has been mentioned in some of the books of fiqh of some of our associates, that he is to be removed, and which is quoted from the Mu’tazilah, then this is an error on behalf of the one who says it and is in opposition to the Ijmaa’. And the Scholars have said, that the reason for the absence of his removal and the forbiddence of revolting against him, is due to what arises from that of tribulations, and shedding of blood, and also corruption that is evident. Hence, the harm from his removal is greater than from him remaining in place.

    Some benefits from the above statement:

    The saying of revolting against sinful, oppressive, tyrannical rulers is the saying of the khawarij and the Mu’tazilah.

    The prohibition of revolting against sinful, oppressive rulers is actually an Ijmaa’ (unanimous concensus). When contemporary takfiri groups – (who have adopted the Leninist methodology adopted by Sayyid Qutb in his books) – recognise this affair and find no way to argue against it, they adopt the issue of ruling by other than what Allaah has revealed as a means to elicit takfir, thereby justifying revolution against governments and rulers.

    Some of the fuquhaa (jurists) spoke with revolt, being influenced by or quoting from the Mu’tazilah. However, they opposed the Ijmaa’ in this. The contemporary takfiris (whose ideological origins lie in what is found in the books of Sayyid Qutb of Vladimir Lenin’s “revolutionary vanguard”) use the sayings of some of these jurists to claim the permissibility of revolting against the sinful, oppressive ruler.

    The ahaadeeth on the obligation of having patience up until we meet the Messenger at the Hawd (on the Day of judgement) are abundant and numerous. This indicates that the obligation of patience and absence of khurooj is applicable in all times until the Day of Judgement.

    When clear kufr is observed, outwardly, manifestly, clearly, with a clear proof from Allaah, then khurooj (revolt) itself is not automatically sanctioned but has additional conditions as has been explained by the orthodox scholars. Amongst them, the muslims having established, dependable strength, and that such evil and harm will not arise due to this revolt, that is more than what was already present previously. In many centuries of experience, the Scholars have explained that this has never ever been achieved, and in all cases, the harm and evil invariably increased by such rebellions and revolts.

    Not judging by what Allaah revealed upon His Messenger in this issue results to great harm and evil. Examples to reflect upon are Algeria, Egypt and Syria. Those further aback in history are abundant.

    What Allaah has revealed and what the Messenger came with is the truth, and is guidance, light and rectification. What Qutb borrowed from his communist past and from Vladimir Lenin (the revolutionary vanguard that topples the oppressors in order to restore the law of social justice in the land) is misguidance, darkness and corruption.

    Just as it is obligatory upon the rulers to judge by what Allaah has revealed, concerning their subjects, then likewise, it is upon the subjects to judge by what Allaah has revealed concerning the rulers. The obligation to rule by what Allaah has revealed is not restricted to one subset of people within the Muslim society but applies to all subjects, rulers and ruled, and it is not exclusive to laws and social dealings, rather it is inclusive of the whole religion and thus includes affairs of belief, of worship and methodology. And WHOEVER does not judge by WHATEVER Allaah has revealed, they are kaafirs, dhaalims, faasiqs – upon the tafseel of the Salaf.

    May Allah guide all Muslims to the correct Islam. Ameen.

    • If that was the case brother Allah would not have commanded Musa (a.s) to fight the tyranny of Firaun. It is perfectly alright to remove unjust rulers with peaceful means including protests.

  5. @ ex-ahmadi

    Be that as it may be….

    These islamic scholars never thought that Islamic societies would be invaded by christian powers and subsequently extorted. These islamic scholars never thought that Israel would be forcefully occupied by europeans who would kill Muslims for the only reason that they are Arab. These islamic scholars didnt plan or advise around the possibility of fuel being found in great abundance under arab lands and the subsequent extortion that would be placed on arab kings…FYI: If arab countries stopped selling oil to the world….that would be considered an act of war.

    Furthermore…the main natural resource that India had in the early 1800’s was opium. The white man set up a company in India to harvest and transport this drug to China and the rest of the known world. The Brits made trillions…they infected China with opium….the main reason that the Brits stayed in India was to sell drugs!!!!
    The Chinese people tried to block the drug trade and the Brits declared war.

    FYI: The Mirza family supported the Brits this whole time…MGAQ never objected to the drug trade that the Brits made trillions off of.

    Do the math

    • Brother please do not do yourself the disservice of implying that the Islam which Allah completed was deficient. Or that Allah SWT our creator did not know the conditions the Muslims would face in the future.

      Allah said (what means)

      ‘This day, I have perfected your religion for you, completed My Favour upon you, and have chosen for you Islaam as your religion’

      Therefore this completed religion remains until the end of time and it is not for us to suggest that the early Islam was somehow different to the Islam of our times.

      The religion of Islam is that of the Qur’an and the Sunnah, pure and free from any additions, deletions or alterations.

      It is to adhere to the Path of the Messenger (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam) and of the True Believers (as-Salaf us-Salih).

      As-Salaf is a collective term referring to the Pious Pioneers in Islam and all those who follow in their footsteps in belief, actions and morals.

      Allah has said (what means):

      Whoever contends with and contradicts the Messenger after guidance has been clearly conveyed to him, and follows a path other than that of the Faithful Believers, We shall leave him in the Path he has chosen and land him in Hell, what an evil destination! [An Nisa 4:115].

      Shaikh ul-lslam ibn Taymiyyah (rahimahullah) commented on this ayah: “All who contradict and oppose the Messenger (S), after the right path has been clearly shown to them, have followed other than the Path of the Believers. And all who follow other than the Path of the Believers have contradicted and opposed the Messenger (S). If one thinks that he is mistaken in following the Path of the Faithful Believers, he is in the same position as one who thinks that he is mistaken in following the Messenger (S).”

      As-Salaf us-Salih (or briefly: the Salaf) refers to the first and best three generations of Muslims. They are the Companions (Sahabah) of the Prophet (S), their immediate followers (Tabiun), and the followers of the Tabi’in.

      These were praised by the Prophet (S): ‘The best of people is my generation, then those who come after them, then those who come after them’ [Bukhari and Muslim].

      The term Salaf applies also to the Scholars of Ahl us-Sunnah wal-Jama’ah after the first three blessed generations who followed their way in belief and practices.

      Allah (T) said (what means): The first to embrace Islam of the Muhajirin (those who migrated from Makkah to al-Madinah in obedience to Allah) and the Ansar (the citizens of al-Madinah who gave aid to the Muhajirin), and also those who follow them in the best way; Allah is well pleased with them, and they are with Him [At-Tawbah 9:100].

      Among these scholars are (the number following the name is the Hijri year of death): Abu Hanifah (150), al-Awzai (157), ath-Thawn (161), al-Laith bin Sad (175), Malik bin Anas (179). Abdullah bin al-Mubarak (181), Sufyan bin ‘Uyainah (198), ash-Shafi’i (204), Is’haq (238), Ahmad bin Hanbal (241), al-Bukhari (256), Muslim (261), Abu Dawud (275), Ibn Taymiyyah (728), adth-Dthahabi (748), Ibn ul-Qayyim (751), Ibn Kathir (774), Muhammad bin ‘Abdil Wahhab (1206) and his many students, and, in our time: ‘Abd ul-‘Aziz bin Baz, Muhammad Nasir ud-Din al-Albani and others.

      Let us try and not imply that those who follow the way of the best of generations are somehow incorrect and do not understand the current plight faced by the Muslims today.

      You must remember brothers, that the Scholars alive today who follow and adhere to the way of the best of generations are not blind to current affairs.

      May Allah allow us all to try and follow the example fo the best of generations and not let Satan deceive us into believing we know better than those whom the Prophet S referred to as the ‘best people.’

      • I am simply saying that those times were different! What did Ibn Taymiyya write when the Mongolians invaded? Didnt he authorize a jihad?

        The type of rules that you are referring to ONLY apply in certain circumstances. The general rules of Islam state that if you are oppressed you have the right to stand up and be heard. How do you think that applies to the billionaire Arabs who have gotten filthy rich selling oil and have totally neglected thier brothers? Egpyt was totally paid off by the US and Israel, please tell me that you know that?

        Never did these Muslim scholars envision that Islam would be attacked the way it has been over the last 400 years.

        Remember…Edward Lane..the guy who wrote Lane’s Lexicon, he was a spy who was sent to the Arab world to learn Arabic so that the Europeans could learn how to destroy us…

        Remember, Muir was also a spy who was sent to learn about Islam and report his findings to Europe, there were many others like this…

        In fact, ^this was the reason that Muslims never wanted to translate the Quran into other languages.. These Muslims knew that the enemies of Islam would try to learn the Quran and subsequently use it against us.

        I even think I had a hadith that said something to the effect that a Quran should be well protected while travelling.

        • Brother I am merely stating that we should follow the way of the best of generations. If you feel better following your own way over the way of the best of generations then that is your prerogative, albeit an incorrect one.

          ‘Never did these Muslim scholars envision that Islam would be attacked the way it has been over the last 400 years.’

          Nobody said they did, but Allah is all knowing and he through the Prophet PBUH COMPLETED this religion for us.

          Completion means he told us what we needed to know until the end of time.

          If despite this you feel you know better then that’s your choice, I can merely advise that it is not the course you should take.

  6. Nice catch brother! This tells you everything about the mentality of this cult. It is also an eye opener to those that say they should be left alone as they are so insignificant. I agree that they are insignificant as a cult but we’re not going to leave the door unguarded so they can walk through with “200 million” followers with our identities. We will continue to make the distinction insha’Allah and continue praying for those trapped in this cult so they by the guidance of the Almighty (SWT) they make return to Islam.

  7. this is my first time i am posting on this blog though i had been attached to it since years (maybe 2006?)

    “The prohibition of revolting against sinful, oppressive rulers is actually an Ijmaa’ (unanimous concensus). When contemporary takfiri groups – (who have adopted the Leninist methodology adopted by Sayyid Qutb in his books)”

    what a fraud…a typical house negro would not want ppl to wake up and drag the house negros out their palaces and mansions. Islam is a practical religion and it talks about removal of injustice with hand.If you can not remove it with hand speak against it and if you can not speak against it then atleast consider it bad in your heart and that is the lowest level of faith.I dont need a house negro to tell me that I can not take part in revolt against these house negros who justify their opression by these so called islamic ruling when it has nothing to with islam.So not just demonstration but actual revolution is the message of Islam and the Negro tried to belittle syed qutb and attached him to lenin is just plain stupidity.Syed qutb is not an authority on Islam either but whoever talks about over throwing house negros from power has got the spirit of Islam . Only a house negro wont understand or a mirzai!!

    • Perhaps those in the UK might not understand the reference to “House Negro” and “Field Negro”, as it stems from a uniquely American experience.
      These were terms used by Al-Haj Malik al-Shabazz commonly known as Malcolm X.

      A “House Negro” is a term used to describe a member of any under-class who actively sides with the oppressive class to put down his own members. In this context, Leo is explaining that Ahmadiyya terms itself as Islam, but actively undermine the Muslims. For example:
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nA7nCadRVlc

      Here is Br Malcolm explaining these terms:
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=znQe9nUKzvQ

      • When I was a young Ahmadi (11) a local murrabi once told me that Malcom X was almost about to convert to Ahmadiyyat just before his death. I believed him instantly…

        Later in life I was to find out that the “A” was nothing but a sham that revolves around 20th century science, political alliance with europeans and a family that wants your volunteer time and money.

        • Rationalist,

          Since reverting to Islam and viewing ahmadiya from out of the grips of the cult, I noticed that they really like to put a 20th and 21st century spin on things, using metaphors aplenty. One sister recently described them as philosophers! In any event, I find it strange that they always seem to have a philosophical angle to push when the whole Muslim Ummah sees Islam in a simple yet profound way which is one of the many many strengths of Allah’s perfected religion.

          Talking of ‘stories’ told by ahmadis, I was told many times never to attend non-ahmadi mosques or pray with non-ahmadis because they prayed differently and incorporated anti-ahmadi utterances in their prayers. When Allah opened the way for me to start going to mosques, I found nothing of thr sort.

          A lot of this is scare mongering. It is a psychological battle for many ahmadis on the fringe and those who have left. But with Allah’s guidance, Insha’Allah, they will be given the strength to avail themselves from the psychological chains of ahmadiya.

    • Brother with the greatest of respect do you really have the courage to refer to these mountains of knowledge in Islam as ‘house negro’s’?

      If the answer is yes then our discourse ends here, for me however these Scholars had more knowledge than I will ever possess.

      Therefore for me, safety lies in following their example, which is also following the example of the Prophet S and his companions.

      Ibn al-Qayyim, the great Muslim scholar, said in his book, Miftaah Daar is-Sa’aadah (Daar Ibn ‘Affaan, 2/177):

      And reflect in His, the Most High’s wisdom in making the kings of the servants, their leaders and their rulers to be of the same type as their actions (i.e. the actions of the servant’s). Rather, it is as if their actions (those of the servants) became manifest in the appearances of their rulers and kings. If they remain upright, then their kings will remain upright, and if they turn away (from uprightness), then they (the kings) too will turn away from uprightness. And if they (the servants) oppress [themselves and others], then their kings and rulers will oppress [them], and if their appears plotting and deception from them, their rulers will [be made to] behave likewise (towards their subjects), and if they (the servants) prevent the rights of Allaah due amongst themselves, and become stingy with respect to them (i.e. withhold the rights of each other), then their kings and their rulers will withhold the right that they (the servants) have over them, and will become stingy with respect to them. And if they (the servants) take from the one who is considered weak what they do not deserve to take from him in their dealings (i.e. misappropriate from him), then the kings will take from them (the servants) what they do not deserve to take (from them) and will inflict them with taxes and [other forms of] service. And everything that they (the servants) take away from the weak person, the kings will take away from them with power, force.
      So their actions (those of the servants) become manifest in their actions (those of the kings and rulers). And it is not from the Divine wisdom that the evil-doers and the sinners are made to be ruled over [by anyone] except by one who is of their like.

      And when the very first band (of Islaam) was the best of the generations, and the most pious of them, then their rulers were likewise. And when they became tarnished (i.e. corrupted), the rulers were made corrupted over them.

      Thus, the wisdom of Allaah refuses that the likes of Mu’aawiyah, and ‘Umar bin ‘Abdil-‘Azeez are put in authority over us in the likes of these times [the 8th Century Hijrah], let alone the likes of Abu Bakr and ‘Umar.

      Rather, our rulers are in accordance with our (nature) and the rulers of those before us were in accordance with their (nature). And both of the two matters necessitate wisdom and what it requires.

      And the one who has deep rooted intelligence, when he moves his thought around in this subject will see the Divine wisdom that runs through al-Qadaa wal-Qadar (Ordainment and Pre-Decree), externally and internally, just as it runs through al-Khalq wal-Amr (the Creation and the Command). So beware from thinking with your corrupt thought that anything of His ordainments and decrees are devoid of the far-reaching wisdom. Rather, all of His, the Most High’s ordainments and decrees take place from the most perfect angles of correctness and wisdom. However, the weak intellects are veiled, by way of their weakness, from perceiving these [aspects of wisdom], just like eyes suffering day-blindness are veiled, by way of their weakness from the light of the sun”

      Stated Ibn Abil-Izz al-Hanafi in his explanation of Aqeedat ut-Tahaawiyyah:

      And as for adhereing to obedience to them (the Rulers), even if they commit oppression, then this is because the evils and harms that arise on account of rebelling against them, is numerous times more than that which occurs as a result of the oppression of the rulers themselves. Rather, in having patience over their oppression there is expiation of sins, and a multiplication of the reward. For Allaah did not empower them over us, except due to the corruption in our actions, and the recompense for an action is its like (al-jazaa’u min jins il-‘amal).

      Hence, it is upon us to strive (ijtihaad) in seeking forgiveness, making repentance and rectification of our actions. Allaah the Most High said, And whatever affliction befalls you, then it is from what your hands have earned, yet He pardons many and He the Most High said, … And whatever evil befalls you, then it is from your own soul , and He the Most High said, And thus do we turn some of the oppressors against others on account of what they used to earn Hence, if the subjects (of a state) wish to save themselves from the oppression of the tyrannical ruler, then let them abandon oppression themselves.

      Ibn Sa’d relates in his Tabaqaat al-Kubraa (7/163-165):

      A group of Muslims came to al-Hasan al-Basree seeking a verdict to rebel against al-Hajjaaj [a tyrannical and despotic ruler]. So they said, “O Abu Sa’eed! What do you say about fighting this oppressor who has unlawfully spilt blood and unlawfully taken wealth and did this and that?” So al-Hasan said, “I hold that he should not be fought. If this is a punishment from Allaah, then you will not be able to remove it with your swords. If this is a trial from Allaah, then be patient until Allaah’s judgement comes, and He is the best of judges.” So they left al-Hasan, disagreed with him and rebelled against al-Hajjaaj – so al-Hajjaaj killed them all. Al-Hasan used to say, “If the people had patience when they are being tested by their unjust ruler, it will not be long before Allaah will give them a way out. However, they always rush for their swords, so they are left with their swords. By Allaah! Not even for a single day did they bring about any good.

      Al-Hasan al-Basree (d.110) said as occurs in “Minhaj us-Sunnah” of Shaikh ul-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah(4/528):

      Verily, al-Hajjaaj is the punishment of Allaah. So do not repel the punishment of Allaah with your own hands. But you must submit and show humility, for Allaah the Most High stated, And indeed We seized them with punishment, but they humbled not themselves to their Lord, nor did they invoke (Allâh) with submission to Him. (Al-Mu’minun 23:76).
      And al-Hasan al-Basree also said, as occurs in “Adaab Hasan al-Basri” of Ibn al-Jawzee, pp.119-120:

      Know – may Allaah pardon you – that the tyranny of the kings is a retribution (niqmah) from among the retributions of Allaah the Most High. And Allaah’s retributions are not to be faced with the sword, but they are to be faced with taqwaa and are repelled with supplication and repentance, remorse (inaabah) and abstention from sins. Verily, when the punishments of Allaah are met with the sword, are more severe. And Maalik bin Deenaar narrated to me that al-Hajjaaj (Ibn Yoosuf) used to say, “Know that every time you commit a sin Allaah will bring about a punishment from the direction of your ruler (sultaan)”. And I have I have also been told that a person said to al-Hajjaaj, “Do you do such and such with the Ummah of Muhammad (sallallaahu alaihi wasallam)?” So he replied, “For the reason that I am the punishment of Allaah upon the people of Iraaq, when they innovated into their religion whatever they innovated, and when they abandoned the commands of the their Prophet – alaihis salaam – whatever they abandoned”.

  8. I repeat again that it is o.k to remove extremely unjust rulers by peaceful means. Allah s.w.t has told us that you are the best of my nations that forbid people from doing wrong…………….!

    • What is your evidence for this statement brother?

      I need evidence based on Quran and Sunnah, not just on your intellect.

          • Sura Al-Imran
            110:
            Kuntum khaira ummatin ukhrijat linnasi tamuruna bil marufi wa tanhaunaanil munkari wa tuminuna billahi wa lau amana ahlul kitabi lakana khairal lahum minhumul muminuna wa aksaruhumul fasiquna.

            110:
            You are the best of peoples evolved for mankind, enjoining what is right, forbidding what is wrong, and believing in Allah. If only the people of the book had faith, it were best for them, among them are some who have faith but most of them are perverted transgressors.

  9. “actions (those of the servants) became manifest in the appearances of their rulers and kings.“

    A mentality of blaming the victims and in this case the general populace. `Since its the servants actions that are bad so they get the rulers that are bad so the servants kind of deserved that` These thing basically were never uttered by the original scholars (classical scholars) in Islam (The qoutes that you have provided prove nothing.In addition to that there are many other qoutes that i can provide too but i simply prefer to write with my own brain).This house negro attitude was added to the Islamic doctrine by British(government) bought mullahs ( Mirzai`s follow one of such traitor). Another reason to despise any such ruling is that it takes away the right to a change for better for general populace. In addition to that the mere facts would be enough to debunk any such `traitors` from within our ranks who would deny the right to stand up even if you are repeatedly raped. That fallacy is quite obvious to a free mind but off course an enslaved brain would need a 1kv shock to come out of it.

    • ‘These thing basically were never uttered by the original scholars (classical scholars) in Islam (The qoutes that you have provided prove nothing.In addition to that there are many other qoutes that i can provide too but i simply prefer to write with my own brain).’

      With the greatest of respect brother, the quotes I provided above are from some of the greatest ‘Classical Islamic Scholars’ we have ever known.

      Choosing to bring in your own warped interpretations (using your own brain) over that of bona fide people of knowledge is one of the reasons this Muslim Ummah is in the state it is in.

      Tell me brother how proficient are you in the language of Allah ?

      Which great Scholars feet have you sat at to acquire your religious knowledge, that gives you the confidence to disagree with the likes of the Scholars quoted above?

      How many years have you devoted to the study of the deen of Islam?

      Which evidences can you give me from the book of Allah, the Prophet PBUH and the best of generations to support the positions you take using ‘your own brain’?

      Brother using ‘your own brain’ to leave a cult as I did is not the same as using ‘your own brain’ to make up the perfected and completed religion of Islam, based upon your whims and desires.

      May Allah guide me and all other Muslims to the correct understanding of our beautiful religion. Ameen.

  10. Core Islamic Theology:

    There are two parts to it

    1-part : Man can not rule man absolutely because man can not have absolute power.The absolute power belongs to God; the concept of tawheed.The greatest injustice is to give someone power that he does not deserve.That translates into that there can be no Emperor.As the same Emperors,if you remember,made ppl worship them and gave themselves the absolute power.And that is considered the greatest injustice and in this case its called shirk.

    if you believe only that you are a muslim (offcourse you have to believe in the person who brought that message and saved the mankind from the oppression of a man successfully.Imperialism had to modify itself a lot to counter that but eventually gave up and now its just subliminal imperialism.That is to say it exists today but can not dare come out openly.So that message had placed the genie back in the bottle.)
    Quran has categorized believers in two categories;muslims and momins.If you believe just the above you are a muslim.
    But to become a momin you must do the first two of the following

    2-part
    i) if you see injustice remove that injustice with your hand and that can include overthrow of the oppressors. And filthy rich elites do not let go their power and luxuries without a fight.

    ii) if you cannot remove injustice with your hand then speak against it .(true freedom of expression not freedom to abuse)

    iii) if you cannot even speak against it then atleast consider it bad in your heart and that is considered the lowest of the faith.

    Without understanding this core of the theology we are bound to get trapped into slavery of the mind.

    • Brother you have just put together various points from numerous sources in a mixed up way and used your own intellect to arrive at where you have.

      This is not from the correction of practising our religion.

      Please give me evidences from The Quran and Sunnah for your points above.

      Peace.

      • so you’ve got nothing to say ( except pointing to my various ‘sources’ while i have given none )on what I actually have written?

        🙂

        • Apologies for assuming what you wrote was from various sources.

          Let me comment by saying, what you wrote means nothing to me. I as well as the entire Muslim ummah was not commanded by our creator, or our beloved Prophet PBUH, to follow your opinions, or that of anybody else for that matter, unless they conformed to authentic Islamic teachings.

          Mere opinion and conjecture is for politicians and philosophers both of which I have no time for.

          Therefore what I have to say about what you have written, with respect, is that it is lacking understanding and insight. and to refer to it as ‘Core Islamic Theology’ without citing any reference’s to the Quran or the Sunnah is dangerous and deluded to put it mildly.

          Any further discussion on this issue would need you to present some Islamic evidences to support your positions otherwise your comments would be futile and pointless.

          You, I and all others would do well to remember that this religion was completed until the end of time and it is not for us to add to it or remove from it, or apply our limited intellects to arrive at incorrect positions.

          Forgive me if this sounds harsh and you have indeed been a student of Islamic knowledge for many years, however having read your comment this does not seem to be apparent.

          I pray Allah guides us all.

          • I know what i have written wont mean anything to you because what i have written is very basic stuff and thought would be common knowledge. And whatever I would write next in this regard would be just that;nothing . But I would still like to tell you a story here.

            Once upon a time the king of a country invaded nearby independent state.After overthrow of the govt. there and control he imposed taxes on the population.Occupied ppl paid those taxes and the king was surprised of that quick tax retrieval without any protest. His adviser(policy maker) was a clever guy he understood the situation very well and he advised the king to increase the taxes.King replied that “its too soon we should wait”. The adviser told him that “no …just do it” . The king raised the taxes and people still paid that increased tax.

            When this all kept working for a while the adviser told the king that people go out of the state to work in other states and comeback.We should impose toll taxes when go out and re enter the state. The king was too vary of that suggestion and didnt like it but after lot of discussion he agreed. So now whichever citizen leaves or re-enter the state would pay additional tax which they had never paid before and it worked !!

            The king was surprised but was now getting hang of it. His advisor asked him to order next that whichever citizen that would enter the state would have to go through ‘litrol ‘ or ‘chitrol’ ( now how i am gonna translate that into english?…lol…its like spanking with a big shoe).The king immediately said “NO…!! ,that is crazy..people would get mad” .His adviser again told him to just do it.He ordered that and surprisingly it worked !! After a while ppl started getting together they were mad and were marching towards the kings palace.King got aware of it and cursed his adviser saying, ” See..!! you’ve got us in trouble now”.The advisor told him “dont panic and lets listen to what their ‘leader’ has to say.King was scared and he said ” we can not go out to talk its dangerous”.Adviser told him that “We dont have to go out we’d talk from the outer shelter roof of our palace”The king agreed. The leader of the angry protestors came forward.The king asked him’ what is your problem’ .The leader replied ” His highness we are from working class and business community.When we re enter the city we have to go through ‘litrol’.There is huge queue to pass before we could enter the state and we get late to the work and get late in opening up our business spots as well. We request His highness to increase the number of posts so that we could get through that ‘litrol’ faster and get to work.

            The king replied that ‘ I will look into it and would make sure that you get more posts’.The angry protesters were very happy and returned home.

            The king and his adviser were having a good laugh in private.

            ps. Yea whatever I say means nothing to you so keep enjoying Litrol at the check posts!!

            🙂

  11. The problem espoused by the qadiani and also brother ex-ahmadis is that it correlates non-Islamic regimes with obedience to Islamic governments. This is like equalising the rules of marriage in Islam to wrong actions between unmarried individuals where they equate the latter to the marriage itself. In the same way to call speaking up against tyrants who run these non-Shariah regimes like mubarak, gaddafi as somehow backbiting or wrong is laughable. You can not take part of Islam and use it and forget the gaping hole which is the fact these people are running non-Islamic regimes.

    Its not surprising for the qadianis to come out with this falsehood having seen that they continue to support tyrants just like they did in the past. They at the same time fight against any semblence of a true Islamic state to arise but rather would support secularists to stay in power and staying quiet about oppression.

    To brother ex-ahmedis you can not use the rulings you stated for secular, non-islamic regime. The issue of not revolting is in relation to an Islamic regime not hosni mubarak, ben ali, gaddafi or any other of those tyrants who run secular regimes which have nothing do with Islam.

    and Allah knows best

  12. @ EX-AHMADIS

    Brother, I regret to say it is really shocking that there is a Muslim brother who agrees that peaceful protests against these criminals are not allowed in Islam! Do you seriously consider it backbiting to loudly object to the crimes of these crooks? Wrong brother wrong. Neither early scholars (Salaf) nor late scholars have supported such awful idea.

    As br. Abdullah has rightly indicated, apparently you have mixed up the issue of peaceful protests with the totally different subject of fighting a sinful ruler who has been accepted by the majority of the Muslim nation. Our case here is protests, not fighting; nevertheless I hope you do not really believe that the nations had really accepted Mubarak, Bin Ali, Qazzafai, etc.

    Quran is full of stories about brave prophets and believers who had objected openly against the tyranny. I am therefore taken aback by your request for evidences! However, I am listing herewith few evidences as per your request:

    (1) Meaning of the Quranic verse 3:104 ((And there may spring from you a nation who invite to goodness, and enjoin right conduct and forbid indecency. Such are they who are successful))

    (2) Meaning of the Quranic verse 5:79 ((They restrained not one another from the wickedness they did. Verily evil was that they used to do!))

    (3) Meaning of the Quranic verses 42:38/39 ((Those [believers] who hearken to their Lord, and establish regular Prayer; who conduct their affairs by mutual consultation; who spend out of what We bestow on them for sustenance)) ((And those who, when an oppressive wrong is done to them, they take revenge))

    (4) Meaning of the Sahih Hadith, Rasulullah (SAW) said ((If the people see a wrongdoer and they do not take him by his hands, soon Allah will inflict them all with punishment)) – Tirmidhi, ibn Majah, Abu Dawood and Musnad Ahmad.

    (5) Meaning of the Sahih Hadith, Rasulullah (SAW) said ((There is no prophet that was sent before me except that he had from his people supporters and companions. They would follow his way and implement his commands. Then came afterwards generations that would say what they did not do and do what they did not say. Whoever resists them with his hand is a believer. Whoever resists them with his tongue is a believer. And whoever resists them with his heart is a believer. Beyond that there is no faith, even equivalent to the amount of a mustard seed)) – Sahih Muslim

    Though we are not discussing the issue of fighting the sinful rulers as you have mistakenly applied here, I have noticed that you have blindly accepted the wrong information that all the early scholars (Salaf) did not allow fighting the sinful rulers. I am giving you herewith some examples to put your records right:

    – Imam Abu Hanifah did not only allow fighting the sinful ruler, but also supported the people who were fighting him (ex. His support for Zaid bin Ali against the Khalifa)
    – Imam Malik supported Mohammd bin Abdullah bin Hassan against the Khalifa.
    – Ibn al-Ashath with around 4000 of Muslim scholars have fought against al-Hajjaj
    – Saeed bin Jubair, Al-Shabi, ibn Abee Layla, Albukhturi and many other Tabiee’s have supported the people who fought against al-Hajjaj
    – Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal encouraged people to remove the sinful rulers if they can. Refer Tabakat Al Hanbilah, vol 2, p 305.
    – Qazi Eyadh encouraged people to remove the sinful rulers who do not apply the Islamic laws.
    – The great Sahabi Al-Husain bin Ali and his companions fought against the sinful ruler.
    – The great Sahabi Abdullah bin Az-Zubair and his companions fought against the sinful ruler.

    Moreover, apparently you did not know that most of the Salaf have allowed fighting the rulers who do not apply the Islamic laws. This of course includes some of the scholars which you have quoted in your comments. Here are some examples:

    – Ibn Taymiyyah wrote: ((Any group that refuses to accept any Islamic law must be fought until the religion is completely for Allah. This is by the agreement of all the scholars)) – al-Fatawa, vol. 28, p. 308.

    – Iman An-Nawai wrote ((It is not allowed to fight the sinful Khalifas unless they change the laws of Islam)) – Sharh Sahih Muslim, vol 12, p 195.

    Many other examples can be given if you are still not satisfied. However, please remember that we are discussing here the peaceful protests against the criminals.
    Wassalaam.

  13. [Admin: Please keep your comments shorter, and when cutting and pasting, please cite the full references clearly so that the readers can differentiate between what you are saying and what you are quoting. Note that the comment editor allows you to style quotes using the “b-quote” tag]

    SunhanAllah how can one be so misguided.

    I will end my discourse here and leave you and other like minded people to enjoy the loss of live resulting from these so called peaceful protests currently ongoing.

    The problem is you people use your very limited understanding of certain ayahs and ahadith to ineterpret them in a way that your whims and desires want you to.

    This is despite many more learned scholars past and present not to mention the consensus of the Salaf understanding the very same verse’s and ahadith you quote in a different way.

    I don’t know which is worse the stories from brother Leo or the gross misunderstandings from brother Fuad.

    Imaam al-Aajurree (d. 360H / 970CE), a Muslim Scholar from the past wrote in his book called “ash-Sharee’ah” (1/325) regarding the orthodox Muslim position on such individuals who harbor the takfiri methodology:

    The scholars, past and present, have not differed over the fact that the khawarij are a despicable people, and disobedient to Allah and His Messenger, regardless of their praying, fasting and that they exert great effort in worship, as this doesn’t benefit them in the slightest.

    They feign to enjoin the good and forbid the evil, but this didn’t benefit them, because they misinterpret the Quran in accordance to their desires, and they try to camouflage their falsehood before the believers.

    Allah, the Most High, warned against them, the Prophet (sallaahu alayhi was sallam) warned against them, the rightly guided Caliphs who succeeded him warned us against them, the Companions warned us against them, and similarly those who followed them in goodness.

    The Khawaarij are the Shuraat (those who claim that they sold themselves seeking the pleasure of Allah), filthy and foul.

    All who traverse upon their way, past and present, from the rest of the Khawaarij, inherit their belief. [They] rebel against the Muslim rulers and leaders, and declare the blood of the Muslims to be lawful.

    Shaykh Salih al-‘Uthaimeen:

    Shaykh Muhammad bin Saalih Al-‘Uthaiymeen (rahimahullaah) was asked: “What is the ruling regarding (protesting by) holding a general strike from all work activity in a Muslim country in hopes of bringing an end to the secularist governing system of that particular country?” He (rahimahullaah) responded by saying: “Without a doubt this question entails a great deal of peril (if its answer is not understood correctly) in the scope of guiding the Muslim youth. The issue of striking from work, whether private or public sector, has no basis to substantiate its validity in the Sharee‘ah. Undoubtedly, it will involve a lot of harm that will be relative to the length, need of the services and scale of the strike and this, certainly, is (used) as a pressure tactic against the government. In the question it is implied that this tactic is to be used to bring an end to secular rule (in a Muslim country). We must first establish that the governing is a secular form of government. If it is established that it is a secularist government then we make it known that going out against the governing authority is unlawful unless certain prerequisite conditions are met.”[2]

    The Shaykh (rahimahullaah) was also asked: “When the strike has neared its end, the organizers put forth their demands. When the demands are not met is it permitted (for them and their followers) to face the authority with a civil revolution?” He (rahimahullaah) responded: “I do not see the permissibility of a civil revolution in this instance. The material strength is possessed by the authority as is commonly known, while the protestors have little in their hands beside kitchen knives and sticks which are insignificant when compared to the tanks and weapons (of the authority). Yet, it is conceivable that such a situation may take place if the proper Shuroot (prerequisite conditions) are met. We are not to hurry the matter. Any country that has lived long years under occupation cannot be transformed between day and night into a (truly) Islaamic country. We must take in a deep breath to attain our objectives.
    If a person builds a home, he has laid a foundational root for himself, regardless of whether he will eventually reside in the home or depart the worldly life having never lived in it (he has accomplished something). What is important is that we set the stage for Islaam (and ensure its strength) even if we do not harvest the reward of that action for many years. I do not see the permissibility of impulsiveness in these types of issues or in civil revolutionary tactics that are mostly without substance. If a division of the army destroys a block the next one recants their previous stance.”

    He was then asked (rahimahullaah): “Along with the general work strike these groups of youth would also take over a place and perform a “sit-in” whereby they would take over a government position and remain fortified in it day and night. What is the ruling on this? Does it have any foundation in the legislated law?” He (rahimahullaah) responded: “Undoubtedly this is (used) as a pressure tactic against the government and it is an action that is imported (into the Muslim lands) as far as I know. It is known that the means (actions) are relative to the intention and are judged by the intention if the action is not prohibited. The takeover that you have discussed carries the same ruling that we have just previously discussed with you regarding the general strike from work.”

    Shaykh Ibn Baz:

    Shaykh, the -‘Alaamah ‘Abdul-‘Azeez bin Baaz (rahimahullaah) was asked: “Are the (street) demonstrations, attended by both men and women, which are held in protest of the ruling authority and the leaders a (correct) avenue of Da‘wah? And if one of the demonstrators is killed in these protests is he considered a martyr in the path of Allaah?” The Shaykh (rahimahullaah) answered: “I do not see the permissibility of (street) demonstrations involving men and women as a cure (for anything). On the contrary, it is one of the reasons for Fitnaah and evil, and it is oppression and transgression of one people against another without due right. The legislated means (of addressing the Muslim authority) is through written statements, Naseeha, Da‘wah (calling them) to goodness using the proper avenues. That is the way of the people of knowledge. That is the way of the Companions of Muhammad (sallAllaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) and those who followed them in righteousness. (The proper way is) the written statement, dialogue between those who find fault and the leader, communicating directly with him and advising him and writing to him without openly broadcasting his shortcomings on the pulpits or other public avenues. Wa Allaahul Musta‘aan, aid and reliance are sought from Allaah alone.”

    Shaikh Saalih Al-Fawzaan on Demonstrations

    By: Shaikh Saalih Al-Fawzaan

    Question and Answer session on Paltalk

    Question: May Allaah reward you O Shaikh, the next questioner is asking: What is the ruling on demonstrating. Is it considered Jihad in the Cause of Allaah?

    Answer: There is no benefit in demonstrations – it is just commotion. It is from the types of disorder. How will it cause harm to the enemy if the people go out and demonstrate in one of the streets, raising their voices? Rather, this is from the things that will only make the enemy pleased and happy. Thus he will say: “This has harmed and hurt them.” So the enemy will rejoice.

    Islaam is a religion of tranquility and calmness; it is a religion of knowledge. It is not a religion of clamor and commotion. It is a religion that strives to achieve tranquility and calmness, while at the same time, (encourages) doing deeds that are of benefit and praise, such as providing support for the Muslims, supplicating for them and providing them with money and weapons. This is praiseworthy. And also (what is beneficial is) arguing on their behalf to the various countries that the oppression they are in be uplifted and requesting from these countries, which claim to have democracy, that these Muslims be given their due rights. And the humanitarian rights is what these people boast so much about. However, according to them the only human is the disbeliever, whereas the Muslim in their eyes is not a human being – he is a terrorist! They call the Muslims terrorists! And the human being that has (humanitarian) rights, to them, is the disbeliever!

    So the Muslims must follow and adhere to the methodology Islaam has prescribed with regard to these occurrences and other situations. Islaam did not come with demonstrations and shouting and raising the voices out loud. It did not prescribe destroying property or committing violations. All of this is not part of Islaam. Yes… Nor does this bring about any benefit. This only causes harm to the Muslims and it does not harm the enemy. This only harms the Muslims and it does not harm their enemy. In fact, their enemy rejoices at this and says (to himself): “I have affected them”, “I have made them angry” and “I have influenced them.”

    We follow the Haq, the Haq doesn’t follow us……………….

    The vast majority of the groups present today in the field of da’wah try to win the sentiments and support of the people by focusing and pointing their fingers towards the rulers. They make them the scapegoats for all the calamities, evils and ills to befall the Ummah, and subsequently make their methodologies of reform based around coups, revolutions and bringing about the downfall and replacement of governments. All of this is based upon ignorance of the Sharee’ah and ignorance of Allaah’s Divine wisdom, and is a mental outlook that is based upon a corrupt underlying aqidah.
    The Shaikh and Imaam, Abdul-Lateef bin Abdur-Rahmaan bin Hasan Aal Shaikh – may Allaah have mercy upon them all – said, in powerful words that uncover the confusing doubts in this topic and that refute the one who spreads them from amongst the ignoramuses:

    … And those people – those who are under trial – do not know that with the exception of Umar bin Abdul-Azeez and whoever Allaah willed from among the Banee Umayyah – great mishaps, insolence, taking up arms [against the people] and corruption occurred from most of those in charge [wullaat] of the people of Islaam from the time of Yazeed bin Mu’aawiyah [till the present]. But along with that, the manner and behaviour of the notable scholars and mighty leaders with the rulers is well-known and renowned – they do not raise a hand against giving obedience in that which Allaah and His Messenger have commanded from among the legislated actions and obligatory duties of Islaam.
    And I will give you an example – that of al-Hajjaaj bin Yoosuf ath-Thaqafee, and his affair is well known in the ummah – that of oppression, repression, excessiveness in spilling the blood [of the Muslims], desecration of the Sanctities of Allaah, the killing of whomever he killed amongst the notables of the ummah such as Sa’eed bin Jubair, the besieging of Ibn az-Zubair even though he had sought refuge in the Haram, and making lawful the sacred and sanctified, the killing of Ibn az-Zubair – even though Ibn az-Zubair had given obedience to him and the people of Makkah, Medinah, Yemen, and most of Iraaq had given the pledge of allegiance to him [Ibn az-Zubair] and al-Hajjaaj was only a deputy of Marwaan, and then of his son Abdul-Malik and none of the khulafaa’ (successors) had given Marwaan a pledge and none of the influential people, those with power, had given the pledge of allegiance to him (Marwaan). And along with all of this none of the People of Knowledge hesitated in obeying him and complying with him in that in which obedience is permissible from amongst the pillars of Islaam and its obligations.

    And Ibn ‘Umar and whoever met al-Hajjaaj were from amongst the Companions of Allaah’s Messenger (sallallaahu ‘alaihi wasallam), and they never contested with him and nor did they prevent obdedience to him in that by which Islaam is established and by which eemaan is perfected. And it is likewise for those who were also in the era of al-Hajjaaj from among the taab’ieen such as Ibn al-Musayyib, al-Hasan al-Basree, Ibn Seereen, Ibraaheem at-Taimee and those like them from among the leaders of the ummah.

    And the affair continued like this between the leading scholars of the ummah – they would enjoin obedience to Allaah and His Messenger and making jihaad in His path along with every leader [imaam] whether righteous or sinful, as is well known in the books of the fundamental principles and beliefs of the religion.

    And similarly, Banu al-‘Abbaas, they conquered the lands of the Muslims forcefully, with the sword – and not one of the People of Knowledge and Religion aided them in that – and they killed hordes of people and many of the creation from among the Banu Umayyah, their leaders and their deputies. And they killed Ibn Hubairah, the ameer of Iraaq and they also killed Marwaan, the khaleefah – and it was reported that the murderers killed around eighty people from the Banu Umayyah in a single day – and then they placed their blankets above the corpses, sat upon them and then called for food and drink.

    So along with all of that the conduct of the leading scholars – such as al-‘Awzaa’ee, Maalik, al-Layth ibn Sa’d, ‘Ataa bin Abee Rabaah – with those kings is not hidden from the one who has a share in knowledge and realisation.

    And then next generation of the People of Knowledge such as Ahmad bin Hanbal, Muhammad bin Ismaa’eel [al-Bukhari], Muhammad bin Idrees [ash-Shaafi’ee], Ahmad bin Nooh, Ishaaq bin Raahawaih and their brothers … their occurred in their time what occurred from the kings of the great innovations and the denial of the Sifaat and they were called to [affirm] these things and were put to trial by them] and whoever was killed, was killed such as Ahmad bin Nasr. But along with all of this it is not known that a single one of them raised his hand against obedience [to those kings] and that he saw fit to attack them…

    Shaykh Salih al-Fawzan Addressing Some Doubts of the “Revolutionaries” And Aspects of Their Ideology
    In this short but very powerful statement the Shaykh has addressed and rebutted some of the major doubts of the Qutbiyyah regarding the issue of revolting and tyrannical rulers and he has hinted that the people only deviated in this regard when they started taking their knowledge from “mufakkirs” and “adeebs” and threw the inheritance of the Salaf, in knowledge and action, behind their backs.

    This statement is in the Shaykh’s book “Lumhah an Firaq ad-Dalaalah”, under the section on the Khawaarij, as a footnote (on page 21):

    وفي عصرنا ربما سمّوا من يرى السمعَ والطاعةَ لأولياء الأمور في غير ما معصية عميلاً، أو مداهنًا، أو مغفلاً‏.‏ فتراهم يقدحون في وَليَّ أمرهم، ويشِّهرون بعيوبه من فوق المنابر، وفي تجمعاتهم، والرسولُ صلى الله عليه وسلم يقولُ‏:‏ ‏(‏من أرادَ أن ينصحَ لسلطان بأمر؛ فلا يبدِ له علانيةً ولكن ليأخذْ بيدِه، فيخلوا به، فإن قَبِلَ منه فذَّاكَ، وإلا كان قد أدَّى الذي عليه‏)‏ رواه أحمد‏:‏ ‏(‏3/404‏)‏ من حديث عياض بن غنم – رضي الله عنه -، ورواه – أيضًا – ابن أبي عاصم في ‏”‏السنة‏”‏‏:‏ ‏(‏2/522‏)‏‏.‏
    And in our time, perhaps they will label the one who holds the [obligation] of hearing and obeying those in authority in whatever is other than disobedience to be a [paid] worker, a compromiser or a simpleton. You will see them reviling the one in authority over them, publicising his faults from the pulpits and in their gatherings, and the Messenger of Allaah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) says, “Whoever wishes to advices the ruler with a matter, then let him not proclaim it openly, but let him take him by the hand, take him into seclusion [and advise him], so if he accepts it from him [then so be it], and if not, then he has fulfilled that which is upon him.” Reported by Ahmad (3/404) from the hadeeth of Iyaad bin Ghunm (radiallaahu anhu) and it was also reported by Ibn Abi Aasim in “as-Sunnah” (2/522)
    أو إذا رأى وليُّ الأمرِ إيقافَ أحدِهم عن الكلام في المجامع العامة؛ تجمعوا وساروا في مظاهرات، يظنونَ – جهلاً منهم – أنَّ إيقافَ أحدِهم أو سجنَهُ يسوغُ الخروج، أوَلَمْ يسمعوا قولَ النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم في حديث عوف بن مالك الأشجعي – رضي الله عنه -، عند مسلم ‏(‏1855‏)‏‏:‏ ‏(‏لا‏.‏ ما أقاموا فيكم الصلاة‏)‏‏.‏
    And when the wali ul-amr (one in authority) considers the prevention of one of them from making speeches in public gatherings, they gather together and participate in demonstrations, thinking – out of ignorance on their behalf – that the prevention of one of them, or imprisonment of one of them permits revolt. Have they not heard the saying of the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) in the hadeeth of Awf bin Malik al-Ashja’ee (radiallaahu anhu) – which is in [the Saheeh] of Muslim (no. 1855), “No [do not contend with them] so long as they establish the prayer amongst you”.
    وفي حديث عبادة بن الصامت – رضي الله عنه – في ‏”‏الصحيحين‏”‏‏:‏ ‏(‏إلا أن تروا كفرًا بواحًا، عندكم فيه من الله برهان‏)‏ وذلك عند سؤال الصحابة واستئذانهم له بقتال الأئمة الظالمين‏.

    And in the hadeeth of Ubaadah bin as-Saamit (radiallaahu anhu) in the Two Saheehs, “Unless you see clear kufr for which you have a proof from Allaah”, and this was [in response to] the question of the Companions and their seeking permission to fight the oppressive rulers.
    ألا يعلمُ هؤلاء كم لبثَ الإمامُ أحمدُ في السجنِ، وأينَ ماتَ شيخُ الإسلامِ ابنُ تيمية‏؟‏‏!‏‏.‏ ألم يسجن الإمام أحمد بضع سنين، ويجلد على القول بخلق القرآن، فلِمَ لَمْ يأمر الناس بالخروج على الخليفة‏؟‏‏!‏‏. وألم يعلموا أن شيخ الإسلام مكث في السجن ما يربو على سنتين، ومات فيه، لِمَ لَمْ يأمرِ الناسَ بالخروجِ على الوالي – مع أنَّهم في الفضلِ والعلمِ غايةٌُ، فيكف بمن دونهم -‏؟‏‏؟‏‏!‏‏.‏
    To those people not know how long Imaam Ahmad spent in the prison, and [do they not know] where Shaykh ul-Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah died? Was not Imaam Ahmad imprisoned for numerous years, and flogged in relation to the saying of the creation of the Qur’an. Why did he not order the people to revolt against the khalifah?! Do they not know that Shaykh ul-Islaam spent what exceeds two years in prison and died therein. Why did he not order the people to revolt against the ruler – [and all of this] whilst they [Imaam Ahmad and Shaykh ul-Islaam] are in the extremity of excellence and knowledge. So how about those besides them?
    إنَّ هذه الأفكارَ والأعمالَ لم تأتِ إلينا إلا بعدما أصبحَ الشبابُ يأخذون علمَهم من المفكِّرِ المعاصرِ فلان، ومن الأديب الشاعرِ فلان، ومن الكاتبِ الإسلامي فلان، ويتركونَ أهل العلمِ، وكتبَ أسلافِهم خلفَهم ظهريًا؛ فلا حولَ ولا قوّةَ إلا بالله
    ‏.
    Indeed these ideologies and [courses of] action did not come to us except after the youth started to take their knowledge from so and so “mufakkir” (thinker) and from so and so “adeeb” (literary write) and from so and so “Islamic writer”, and they abandon the people of knowledge, and the books of their Salaf behind their back, and there is no might or power except by Allaah.

  14. Subhanallah! I give you names like Imam Abu Hanifa , Imam Malik, Saeed ibn Jubair and many many other great scholars of the Salaf but you still insist that whoever rejects the tyranny is a Takfeeri and Khawarej.

    Though Rasulullah (SAW) said ((He is a Martyr he who is killed while trying to protect his money)) – Abu Dawood, Nassai, Tirmidhi and Musnad Ahmad; you still do not consider those Muslims who were killed to be Martyrs although they were trying to protect the properties and the money of our Ummah against these criminals and robbers.

    You quoted ((If it is established that it is a secularist government then we make it known that going out against the governing authority is unlawful unless certain prerequisite conditions are met)). If you think that Bin Ali and Mubarak were not secular, then I rest my case.

    You quoted ((How will it cause harm to the enemy if the people go out and demonstrate in one of the streets, raising their voices? Rather, this is from the things that will only make the enemy pleased and happy)). Alhmdulillah, our brothers and sisters in Tunisia and Egypt have saved my time since they practically destroyed such dull and discouraging logic.

    • Apologies Admin for the long post.

      Brother Fuad you quote great Imams and expect me to follow your opinion on what the sayings of those Imams meant.

      On the contrary brother I follow the understanding of the real people of knowledge on these statements.

      Are you really saying that Mubarrak and Bin Ali through the virtue of them being secular are therefore kaafir ?

      And would you be just as pleased that people of Tunisia and Egypt had succeeded if your brother, mother, father or anybody else close to you had died as a result of the actions that these people took or would you be deluded into really believing they were martyrs.

      It’s this delusion that should be described as ‘dull and discouraging logic’, I do not apply my own logic I simply follow Allahs command where he says ask the people of knowldege if you do not know.

      And We sent not before you (O Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم) but men to whom We revealed. So ask the people of the Reminder [Scriptures – the Taurât (Torah), the Injeel (Gospel)] if you do not know.

      Soorah Al Anbiya (21, 7)

      And

      And We sent not (as Our Messengers) before you (O Muhammad صلى الله عليه و سلم) any but men, whom We sent revelation, (to preach and invite mankind to believe in the Oneness of Allâh). So ask (you, O pagans of Makkah) of those who know the Scripture [learned men of the Taurât (Torah) and the Injeel (Gospel)], if you know not.

      Soorah An Nahl, (16, 4)

      I’ll be the first to admit I do not know but I am also not deluded and foolish enough to be deceived into thinking I do.

      How many of these protesters and demonstrators due you see the Sunnah apparent on ?

      How many of those like yourself who consider it commendable to overthrow rulers understand that which the Prophet PBUH called to for almost thirteen years, Tawheed?

      These are fallacies you spread and you should fear Allah before so comfortably declaring people to be non-muslim.

      What you must remember is we are not talking about Qadiani’s now!

  15. @EX-AHMADIS

    Just because they said NO to tyranny, you consider all these millions of innocent Muslims to be Takfeeris, Khawarij, filthy and foul!

    Now you want us to re-interpret the straightforward quotes from all these verses, Hadeeths and sayings of the great scholars of our Ummah to match your odd understanding! May be because you still consider every single Arabic paragraph to be a metaphor!

    And worse, instead of praying to Allah (SWT) against the criminals who robbed our countries and committed uncountable crimes against our Deen and our Muslim brothers and sisters, you choose to side with the murderer against the innocent victims!

    Seriously EX-AHMADIS, are you really an EX?

    • I will end on this point my brother in Islam, albeit a very confused one.

      Your accusation that I want people to

      ‘interpret the straightforward quotes from all these verses, Hadeeths and sayings of the great scholars of our Ummah to match your (MY) odd understanding’

      is a baseless lie against me and I await your request for forgiveness for this lie.

      Anybody who reads all the previous posts will clearly see that from the outset I have stated that I know nothing and have not stated my own personal position on anything, let alone committing the heinous error of declaring somebody kaafir, based on them not implementing the deen.

      I have simply stated that I would rather rely on the REAL people of knowledge for the interpretations of verses from the Quran & Ahadith, rather than some jumped up, ignorant individuals, who deem themselves qualified to interpret so called straightforward verses and ahadith, despite not being able to speak or comprehend the language of the revelation.

      Even you will be able to see that I am not applying my understanding or logic, I have merely quoted the statements with explanations of some of the biggest scholars of Islam past and present, may Allah have mercy on all of them.

      These scholars amongst all other people of knowledge are the inheritors of the Prophets and with the utmost respect brother, you are just like me.

      Worse still if you continue to insist that you are better qualified than these great Scholars in Islam and need not go back to them for interpretations/explanations on the religion, the what would the difference be between you and that charlatan Mirza Ghulam Ahmad who did just that to invent a completely new cult which he also believed was Islam?

      Brother let me put my position to you and all others very simply so that their is no room for misunderstanding.

      I DO NOT follow my own opinions, whims or desires when it comes to interpreting and understanding the religion.

      I DO got back to the people of knowledge as Allah has commanded me to do if I do not know.

      These people of knowledge DO HAVE INFINITELY BETTER UNDERSTANDING than myself on these matters as they are the inheritors of the Prophets who even the fish in the sea are making supplication for.

      If YOU feel you are better that them at interpreting and understanding the religion then MORE FOOL YOU than me brother.

      Beyond this I will not comment further as this exchange has no benefit to it now.

      Brother Fuad if you ask for my forgiveness for the LIE you made against me then I would be more than happy to forgive you for the sake of Allah.

      If you do not, I will raise it with my creator on that great day when we will all be held to account.

      May Allah guide us all to the correct understanding of Islam and not leave us merely content after leaving the cult, despite wandering aimlessly in the religion.

      Peace be upon you all.

  16. @ EX-AHMADIS

    You want me to seek your forgiveness! Subhanallah! Rasulullah (SAW) said: ((Among the things that people have found from the words of the previous prophets was: “If you do not feel ashamed of anything, then you can do whatever you like”)) – Sahih Bukhari.

    Unfortunately you cannot put sugar on death. You call me brother but at the same time you cannot differentiate between me and the charlatan Mirza Ghulam! Please forgive me.

    You consider millions of my brave brothers and sisters to be Takkfeeris, Khawarej, filthy and foul for no reason but because they decided to say ENOUGH to the criminals who use air force against demonstrations! Please forgive them.

    You do agree with the unbelievable view of the Ahmadis who consider it “Backbiting” if we ask our killer to stop his bloodshed. Please forgive me.

    Now you say ((Anybody who reads all the previous posts will clearly see that from the outset I have stated that I know nothing)). Well, please forgive me for not realizing this from the beginning.

    • @ Fuad

      You dealt with this entire situation admirably and respectfully. I applaude all Muslims around the world who have stood up against tyranny.

  17. In one of the above posts I have forgotten to add one thing and that is about genuine revolution not propped by west to make people feel as if they themselves are the liberator.Like in Egypt and other places many multi-billion dollars were spent in producing color revolution as we speak.The moment I saw al-baradei (the house negro or the token guy)at the scene , I got suspicious that it might just be an artificial revolution too or he is there to high jack one.Al baradei is a type of house negro that never lived in egypt for 43 years in his life and now suddenly becoming the liberator. If not him the egyption army who is just playing a stooge for west would install some other puppet and make people feel as if now they should settle down. Just like the Pakistan Army had installed zardari,benazir,MQM and such criminal and corrupt personalities to give a false hope. I just forgot to add the caution.

    Nevertheless, revolution is a God given right specifically in these circumstances if its genuine though!

Comments are closed.