₦airaland Forum

How do you move on?

Well, start by indulging in hobbies, keep your mind busy. Just find a way to distract yourself from her. That is what works for me. If she doesn't love you, there is no much you can do.

Look man, I've been down that road. She'll never text me if I don't text her. Even when I text, her replies are belated, scanty and unlike someone who wants to talk. So I resolved to move on. I put her to a test by not texting for over a month, two months, three months, four months. She never called or texted once to say 'Hi'. And I got my proof. I didn't get the girl but I learnt a valuable lesson first hand. I see a fatal flaw in her, I have not been in love with this person all along. I have been in love with whom I fantasized her to be.

AbdelKabir:
Already drifting to the path of "war of words"? Common its just one question and you couldn't control yourself....

Anyway, what does " for people who understands " means?

Not a chance. I suppose you are only asking cos you believe its meaning discredit my understanding of the verse. You either tell us the meaning or forget it.

Logically speaking, when you want to explain something, how can you use that thing to explain itself properly?

If that thing is a book that state it is detailed, then its passages will provide all the necessary details required to comprehend it. A book can can be self explanatory.

How do you pray and what part of the Qur'an points to the correctness of your salaah?

I'll answer that question another time. To do so here will entirely derail the thread. I want this thread to be fixated on the salat according to hadith. Does the hadith teach salat? If yes, how did the early Muslim manage to perform salat uniformly in oblivion to many hadith on salat? Rather than multiple, unconnected reports by a few companions on different steps in salat, why isn't there a single hadith of the prophet fully demonstrating salat to many companions? These are focus of this thread. In a way, they'll help you better understand my position on salat, how and why I arrived at my conclusion.

AbdelKabir:
That whoever tries to distinguish between Allaah and his messenger, believing in one and disbelieve in one is in truth a disbeliever.....



Using the verse you brought, what can you say about the last part "for people who understand?"

You think it has a meaning that discredit my interpretation of the verse? If so, cut the crap. Otherwise, why even ask. Don't come playing mind games with me.

Allaah says the prophet was raised in order to EXPLAIN the Qur'an for us, where is this explanation?

In order not to waste my time, do all the "qur'aniyoon" pray fundamentally in a same manner?

For your first question.
If we agree that the Qur'an is detailed, then it is only logical to assume that the prophet explanation is derivable and verifiable from the Qur'an. For the prophet to have explanations that cannot be verified with the Qur'an is contradictory to Qur'anic verses.

For your second question
I and most most of the Qur'an focused Muslims I know agree that there is more than one way to perform salat. Thus, our salat may or may not be fundamentally the same.
You are the one wasting your time. The questions you raised so far have no bearing with the topic of this thread.

AbdelKabir:
ان الذين يكفرون بالله ورسله ويريدون ان يفرقوا بين الله ورسله ويقولون نؤمن ببعض ونكفر ببعض ويريدون ان يتخذوا بين ذلك سبيلا اولئك هم الكافرون حقا

Verily those who disbelieve in Allaah and his messengers, they wish to distinguished between Allaah and his messengers, they say we believe in some part and disbelieve ¹ in some, the wish to hold on to between this and that, these people in truth are disbelievers....

---

1 - و قال الله تعالى :ومن يكفر بالايمان فقد حبط عمله وهو في الاخره من الخاسرين

Whoever disbelieves in (the articles of) faith his deeds has already become dust and he will be in the hereafter among the losers.


When jibril alayhi salaatu wa salaam asked 'Oh Muhammad tell me about faith" The messenger sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam said: it is belief in Allaah, his Angels, his books, his messengers, the last day and its belief in qadr be it good or bad

What are you insinuating?

Quran 41:3
A Book, whereof the verses are explained in detail;- a Qur'an in Arabic, for people who understand;-

Everything the messenger taught is already covered in the Qur'an, this is what proves the Qur'anic verses are detailed.
Anyone, any Muslim who believes that the Qur'an is devoid of any atom of Islamic guidance is insincere or ignorant.

Please clear your mind of sectarian teachings, opinions of sages, traditions of mortals and approach the Qur'an with objectivity and reason.

ikupakuti:
....the word DHARABA in that vs actually means BEATING & the Quran also reported it application in Q38:44 in the case of AYUB (as) & his wife.

Peace.

First, Ayub can't be striking his wife as there is no mention of his wife in the verse.
Secondly, the object to be struck is not even mentioned and therefore translating dharaba as "strike" here is not tenable.

Look through the numerous verses like 7:160 where dharaba can only be interpreted as strike, there is always mention of the object to be struck. Not in 38:44

Peace.

I respond on behalf of myself and the relatively few in the Muslim community who share my views. I find the mainstream sharia unethical and unjust both in principle and application. I believe this law has nothing to do with the Islam but a product of distortion by of the message of Islam.
For further elaboration, please see my threads on the sharia.

https://www.nairaland.com/2042929/shariah-great-brain-robbery

https://www.nairaland.com/2054266/shariah-ii-phantom-heaven

https://www.nairaland.com/2069737/shariah-iii-war

As Mr. X cannot solve this puzzle, the early Muslim could never learn salat from hadith. For him to do so, he'll access to all the existing hadith on salat in form of compilations as we have now. But there were no such compilations in his days.

Not withstanding their oblivion to tons of hadith explaining salat, the early Muslims performed salat in uniformity. The only logical explanation of this is that Mr X or the early Muslim did not learn salat from the Hadith, for if he did, his undertanding and practice of salat would be vastly different.

There is no single hadith or couple of hadith from the same narrator demonstrating all the steps of salat in detailed sequence. There exist hadith that mention key areas like tone of recitatation, number of rakas, recitations while standing etc but none of them combines all this details that wholly make up salat.

Next, given that these hadith were not graded at this time, they couldn't be considered sahih. Finally, virtually all of these hadith were non-mutawatir. And thus, most early Muslims either never heard of hadith teaching salat or or heard one or two hadith teaching specific parts of salat rather than the whole salat. Salat then becomes like a broken puzzle, it pieces scattered randomly in different locations.

An early Muslim, Mr X though fortunate to have one piece of the puzzle cannot solve the puzzle and has no idea where to obtain the other pieces, how many of these pieces exist or how to identify a real piece from a fake.

The first flaw in this logic is it negates the role of the Qur'an as the criterion for valid or invalid, truth or false, right or wrong. Simply put, every tenet of Islam has to be confirmed by the Qur'an. If a detail in Islam cannot be verified Qur'anic wise, it is basically invalid or at best, unnecessary.

The second flaw properly brings us to the topic of this piece. You can't learn salat from the Hadith. For the sake of clarity, take the early Muslims after Muhammad as case study. In order for them to have learnt salat from the hadith, hadith must meet the following requirements;

I. There has to be an hadith or a couple of hadith from the same narrator outlining the complete detailed steps and sequences recommended for salat. This will prove that the Muhammad did invest his time in elaborating and recording salat which he supposedly was taught by the angel of revelation.

II. This hadith has to be sahih and mutawatir(generally known) since salat is a generally accepted tenet of Islam.
It is only reasonable that if something is going to be generally practiced in a community, it has to be generally known by all the inhabitants. Not just one or two persons who may have never even met.

The Qur'an reiterates that it is a complete book. Therefore, to become a genuine Muslim, one has to believe that the Qur'an alone is fully sufficient for spiritual life. And so the notion among traditionalists that Islam cannot be fully practised based on the Qur'an alone evidently spells the traditionalists' deviation from the Qur'an or worse still, denial of the Qur'an.

The traditionalists justify their claims of the insufficiency of the Qur'an and need for their traditions(hadith) on ground that the Qur'an does not teach fundamental doctrines like Salat, since the hadith cover these doctrines, Hadith become an essential in practice of Islam. There are two flaws to this logic.

Hi guys.

Does any of you publish on okadabooks.com? Are the sales good, is it worthwhile?

tintingz:
There is a hadith that prohibits women from using/wear perfumes because it attract men and leads to temptation?

But men are allow to wear perfumes?

I see this as inequality.

Now, Some people have this odour when they sweat it smells out, some even have natural body odour, how will such woman smell nice in this situation?

Peace.

Yes, it is injustice or inequality but who cares? Seriously, most traditional Muslim women wear perfume regardless of this hadith. This, I find hypocritical on their part but can I really blame them? Regardless of gender, body odor is real. The idea that perfume is prohibited for women because it attract men is too flimsy to be acceptable, given that perfumes are neither pungent enough to be sniffed beyond 3fts nor sexual to arouse men. This is what drove me from Islamic orthodoxy years ago, too many baseless laws supported by mere flimsy, and illogical excuses that
serve no more than damage control.

I know this old thread but it reminds me of last year when I bought a body spray for my mom on returning home after one year away. My mom thanked me but turned down my gift, reminding me that women are prohibited from wearing perfume in Islam. Of course, I do not believe this, but knowing my mom, I decided to let it pass. Gone are the days I try to explain to my family or any Muslim offline on why this is Islamic, that is acceptable or that is forbidden.

Rafidi:
this thread is meant for Sunnis. are you Sunni? i doubt. i suspect you are from the so called "Quran only" cult.

Trust me, I would never have responded if you had chosen your words carefully. Misconstruing Islamic terminologies like "Kafir, Jizya or Jihad" is a fatal blunder that cannot be overlooked in the slightest. I never intended to speak for the sunnis in the least, even if my post may give that impression.

how do you know?

and what does the Quran say about those who believe God is "three in one"?

I take it you are refering to verses like Quran 5:17, 73. Put these verses in context, they address Christians who received the messenger yet denied his revealation. The truth had been clarified for them and they rejected it. These are not random Christians who know little to nothing about Islam. You can't call such persons rejectors/deniers/kufr. I'd love to go further than this, but I believe I have presented enough for you to look further into the subject, starting with Qur'an chapter 109.

Peace Rafidi

I do not approve your language at all and I think if you want to preach Islam, you need to understand the meaning of common terms like kafir which you have inappropiately used to describe non-Muslim women like Melania Trump or Frederica Mogharani.

A kafir is not one who merely disbelieves but one who who recieved the message the but restrain or conceal it from others. And these women you addressed as kafirs evidently do not qualify as such because they've neither received the pure message nor restrained or concealed the message of Islam.

Next, according to the Book, there is only one holy site in Islam and it is definitely not in Iran.

Additionally, non-Muslims are under not compulsion to abide by Islamic dress code just as they are under no compulsion to abide by Islamic prohibitions on food.

You need to reconsider your words because you or any Muslim out here may be no better than these non-Muslims in the sight of God. Study Islam and question your beliefs, stop being a complacent Muslim. Most of us who claim to be Muslims are in the wrong path. No one can be 100% certain that he/she is on the true path.

Here are a couple of mine.

1. Cooking jollof rice or stew with too much oil. I noticed that food tend to taste better with oil, so I increased the amount of oil significantly in my cooking. I had no idea at the time, but looking back, I see this must have contributed a lot to my fat weight gain.

2. Cooking jollof rice without oil. In my quest to loose all the weight I had gained, I came about a diet high in carbohydrate and low in fat, recommending eating without oil. I prepared jollof rice that night; mixing diced onions, seasoning and spices in a pot, boiling in a small amount of water before finally adding rice to cook. The result is the blandest jollof rice I ever ate.

3. Burnt tuna fish: I was having a really bad day. For some reasons I decided to cook some fish I had stacked in my fridge for a while, Perhaps to drown my sorrow in. Unfortunately, while I sat in the bed moping over my misfortunes, I fell asleep. By the time I reawoke about 30 minutes later, I rush to the pot, all that was left were the fish pieces, blackened and stuck to the base of the pot. I remember sitting at the table that evening chewing the burnt, bitter tasting remain of the fishes, trying to convince myself that they were not really burnt. In the end, I just had to dispose the fish.

Of course they rarely bring anything to the table but instead of playing the blame game, why not look at it from another perspective?

Women mostly bring nothing worthwhile to the table because most of you men are cheap and lack standard. You are wowed instantly by pretty face, boob and butt so these women feel they need not to offer you more to get or keep your attention.

You want women to bring more to table? Demand more. Up your standard. Stop falling for airheads, inept, unambitious girls that only care about make up, boyfriend, money and fun. Control yourself. Discipline your mind. Stop getting carried away by their looks. Only then will women begin to offer you more

Peace OP.

There is a reason it hurt so much, because you failed to forsee this day. The certainty with premarital relationship is this, there is always the chance of a bitter ending. Even if you proceed to marriage, there is still the chance of divorce.

Go into a relationship with realistic expectations. A break up may not be something you hope for, but should be a possibility you are always conscious of. While you share good times with your partner, be prepared for the worst. And if the day comes, it won't hurt as hell. You simply count your losses and move on. Dating is like gamble, there is always a 50% chance of failure or break up

Empiree:
Okay, thanks for the writeup. But I am yet to see specific issue you might be concerned about with respect to "Hisba". Could you please expanciate what you have experienced so far with respect to hisba practices in Nigeria (North)?.

The issue with the Hisba is that it interferes with personal choice in terms of rights of God. Taking the northern Nigeria for example, the Hisba once arrested 9 non-Muslims on ground of blasphemy late 2015. Not only in Nigeria, all forms of religious police occur in Shariah compliant Muslim communities with diffferent name. In Saudi Arabia, they are called the Muttawa. I need not to mention their crimes. In Sudan and Egypt they once arrested Muslims for denying Hadith

I actually thought you were referring to specific situation in the north but it turned out that you are basically ranting. Let me clear something. Just be because something did not exist in the time of prophet(SAW) or his sahaba doesn't mean it is invalid. New situations do bring about new necessities. I will mute for now until you illustrate a specific case you are familiar with.

I think most people hate reading nowadays. If you read the entire article you'd realize that it analysed the religious police from the Quranic viewpoint. What you refer as "ranting" in the first half of the article captures the origin of Hisba, the dubious intent of those who invented what the Muslim community have adopted to infringe on rights and choices of men. Of course, there is room for innovation in Islam, but these innovations cannot violated Quranic principles, regardless of its purpose

And to be honest with you, i am not interested in most things you said regarding sahaba, Abased, Muawiya and all that. We already know they are not perfect base on hadith of the prophet(SAW) which states that rulings judgements, govts after the prophet and sahaba would be tainted. So there is no need to stall on that. Can you illustrate a specific case of hisba activity that you aware of?.

Of course you are interested. We know according to Hadith that the best generation of Muslims after the Muhammad's generation is the next two generations. These comprises of successors of the sahabas as well as the successors of the successors of the sahabas that lived during the Ummayad and Abbasid Times. Basically their genration is better and more perfect than yours, so you must be interested and learn from them.

When will Muslims start studying the Quran rather than mere singing it?

Peace

Concerning judgement among people on judgement day, God commanded the Prophet to announce this truth: ¢Say: O Allah! Creator of the heavens and the earth! Knower of the Invisible and the visible! Thou wilt judge between Thy slaves concerning that wherein they used to differ¢ (the Troops, 46).
These many verses are enough to show that religious differences among people are only left for God on the Day of Resurrection, and this applies to the Prophets no less.

After all this, is a Muslim who loves his religion, allowed to give himself/herself the right to take on a divine characteristic? Matters of faith are God's concern alone on the Day of Resurrection. But there are rights of people in their lives, property and honor when committed have their penalties awaiting him/her in this world. This is God's jurisprudence in controlling society. This is the field where the human judiciary may enter to protect people and society while abiding by divine jurisprudence.

Postponing Condemnation till Judgement Day:

Qur'anic jurisprudence does not give human beings the right to judge others concerning their belief. It clearly stipulates for postponement of condemnation till judgement day. God willed to create people who have different opinions, beliefs and trends, except for those who abide by the Book. He says: ¢and if thy Lord had willed, He verily would have made mankind one nation, yet they cease not differing¢ (Hud, 118). The history of humankind is a series of non-stop differences between religions, within each religion and within every sect.

Concerning the relationship between the Prophet and those who fight against him, God said: ¢Lo! Thou wilt die, and lo! they will die; Then lo! on the Day of Resurrection, before your Lord ye will dispute¢ (The Troops, 30-31). This means that the Prophet himself will dispute with his enemies in front of God. That is why God commanded him to tell them: ¢Lo! Allah will decide between them on the Day of Resurrection¢ (The Pilgrimage, 17). all religious conflicts have therefore been postponed till the Day of Resurrection. God said about all people: ¢Each soul earneth only its own account, nor doth any laden bear another's load. Then unto your Lord is your return and He will tell you that wherein ye differed¢ (Cattle, 164).

4- All people are equal in demanding repentance in front of God the Merciful. Each asks it of God, whether they be ordinary people or Prophets, even hypocrites and wrongdoers. God says about Abraham and Ismail that they lift the foundation of the Holy House and pray to God saying: ¢Our Lord! And make us submissive unto Thee and of our seed a nation submissive unto Thee, and show us our ways of worship, and relent toward us. Lo! Thou, only Thou, art the Relenting, the Merciful (The Cow, 128).

God says about the Prophet Mohammed concerning the emigrants and the Ansar during the battle of Zat al Asra: Allah hath turned in mercy to the Prophet, and to the Muhajirin and the Ansar who followed him in the hour of hardship. After the hearts of a party of them had almost swerved aside, then turned He unto them in mercy. Lo! He is Full of Pity, Merciful for them¢ (Repentance, 117). Mercifulness then and accepting repentance is for God alone, for he alone knows people's hearts and knows the truthfulness of their repentance. Asking others to repent therefore is a divine duty, so how are we giving ourselves the right to something divine?

2- Because the Prophet is a human being who does not know the secrets of the hearts, and because God alone knows what is hidden from the eyes and hidden in the chests, repentance is directed to God alone. He says: ¢But whoso repenteth after his wrongdoing and amendeth, lo! Allah will relent toward him. Lo! Allah is Forgiving, Merciful¢ (The Table Spread). Who could know the truthfulness of such repentance but He who knows the unknown?

3- Because repentance concerns God alone, one of His characteristics is that he is a 'forgiver'. This is repeated 11 times. Because repentance is only to God and no one may join Him in accepting it, it is closely related to His will. God says: ¢Allah relenteth toward whom He will¢ (Repentance 15). Also ¢That Allah may reward the true men for their truth, and punish the hypocrites if He will, or relent toward them (if He will)" (The Clans, 24). No human being is therefore allowed to interfere in God's will and make someone repent or punish someone for not repenting.

Asking People to Repent and Postponing Judgement till Resurrection Day:

Is it acceptable that a human being demand that another person or group of people repent under threat of punishment, otherwise known in Arabic as estetaba? The term 'repent' and its derivatives are mentioned in the Qur'an 87 times, and not one time is the word estetaba (asking someone to repent mentioned. Repentance is a special relationship between human beings and God, and no human being not even the Prophet himself, may come between man/woman and God in matters of repentance. Whoever makes himself or herself a go-between, and asks people to repent in the name of God, this person has clearly misunderstood Islam. We ask this person to provide us with the proxy he/she has from God to receive repentance in His name, or to ask others to repent in His name. In the Qur'an there are enough details concerning repentance. We here provide some of those verses:

1- In matters of faith and the secrets of the hearts which no one knows but God, repentance is to God alone. God commanded the Prophet to announce that: ¢Say: He is my Lord; there is no God save Him. In Him do I put my trust and unto Him is my recourse" (The Thunder, 30). This means that to Him alone do we repent, trust and believe. This is what the Prophet says, and what every believer should say as he/she repents and turns to God alone.

The Caliph Abu Gaafar adviced his son and follower Al Mahdi to pursue and murder apostates, and this son in turn adviced his own son Al Hadi with the same. The Abbasside era therefore was clearly founded on pursuing and murdering their opponents and enemies under the guise of apostasy.
It should be noted that many other 'apostates' were left completely unharmed since they did not criticize the State. Among them were poet Abi Al Ataheya, Ibn Saba and many others, some of whom were even close to the Caliph himself. Historians therefore agree that the term al mohtaseb appeared for the first time during the reign of Al Mahdi (158-169 higri; 774-785) and the first mohtaseb was called Abdel Gayar, otherwise known as Friend of the Apostates, whose duty was to seek apostates and murder them. This was in 163 higri.

This therefore was the scene that created the job of hisba and it is no wonder that it is mostly contradictory with many of the Qura'n's shari'a. Since the Abbasside era witnessed the beginning of scribing Islamic thought including the fikh , the hadith s and the interpretations, we have therefore inherited this deception and lived with it as though it were Islam itself, although God has given us the Qur'an and said that He would protect it so that we would always get back to it as a basis for our belief.

First: getting rid of his enemies and the conspirators against him within the State.

Second: portraying him as a defender of the faith who kills apostates, heretics, and all enemies of religion.

In this political environment, the redda(apostasy) punishment was created and the hisba position made.
The Abbasside state sent its forces to fight the Persian rebels under the leadership of Fatma, while concurrently steering its ulemas inside Baghdad to kill opponents under the guise of apostasy. Since there is no punishment for apostates in Islam, the State's clergy invented two hadtihs stipulating for the punishment of apostates, and the state immediately began inflicting such punishments.

The war between the two factions continued, and the Abbasside state sent its army to fight the Persians in the East. Fatma and her followers announced that they were adopting their old faith which is the Mazdakeya. They therefore fought the Abbasside state under that umbrella. Within the State itself, the Abbassides continued to pursue Fatma's aids and supporters, who were murdered for being heretics and apostates. Among those murdered were the poet Bishar bin Bard and poet Ibn Abdel Koddoos.

In the wake of the rise of the Abasside State with the help of Persian leader Abi Muslim al Kharsani, immediate suspicions began to surface between him and Abi Gaafar Al Mansour, the Abbasside Caliph. The latter felt insecure about his own power in the presence of Abi Muslim until he finally murdered him with his own hands in the year 137 higri.

Despite the precautions he took, he could not prevent the Persian rebellions in Kharsan and the Eastern provinces under the leadership of Fatma bint Abi Muslim, daughter of the slain leader. At the same time Abi Muslim's followers within the Abbasside state and in Baghdad began conspiring against the Abbasid state.

In the wake of the rise of the Abasside State with the help of Persian leader Abi Muslim al Kharsani, immediate suspicions began to surface between him and Abi Gaafar Al Mansour, the Abbasside Caliph. The latter felt insecure about his own power in the presence of Abi Muslim until he finally murdered him with his own hands in the year 137 higri. Despite the precautions he took, he could not prevent the Persian rebellions in Kharsan and the Eastern provinces under the leadership of Fatma bint Abi Muslim, daughter of the slain leader. At the same time Abi Muslim's followers within the Abbasside state and in Baghdad began conspiring against the Caliph in order to assassinate him. The Caliph knew that among the administrators and military of his state there were many of Abi Muslim's followers. Those of them who announced their loyalty to the Caliph were still treated with suspicion. Being a military Caliph who founded his Caliphate on religious grounds, needing to protect his state and defeat his enemies, he sought a religious legislation that would accomplish two objectives:

It has been historically established that the hisba was unknown during the times of the Prophet as well as during the times of the great Caliphs, although the latter killed their enemies of the Khawareg, Shi'a and Mawali on the grounds of mere suspicions. The Al Haggag, the Ummayade ruler over Iraq, killed his opponents just for doubting their loyalty, without need for legal justification nor courts. This system continued until the Abassides destroyed the Umayades with the help of the Persians.

This difference lies in the political system itself. The Prophet's state was founded on shura, freedom and justice, while the Ummayyds and the Abbasside states were founded on power, violence, injustice and the banning of rights. The Umayades were not bothered with acquiring a sanctioned fatwas to justify their actions, even while murdering Al Hussein and his followers, or while violating the Kaaba during the reign of Yazeed bin Moaweya.

The Abassides built their state under the slogan of gaining approval from the family of Mohammed, claiming to be his relatives and descendants. They clearly needed a legitimate and justifiable reason that would entitle them to murder their enemies on demand.
This is why they created new religious posts that would reinforce their powers, the most notable of which was creating the post of al hisba, or the mohtaseb. Al Hisba was therefore a new term not mentioned in the Koran, nor in any of the approved hadiths except to mean a 'volunteer'. The clergy of the Abbasside era found in the issue of Al Amr bel Maaroof wal Nahy an el Monkar a supportive basis for their hisba, making it an official religious post that would operate politically in favor, and at the service of, the State. This was approved despite the fact that the hisba itself is a volunteer work that by definition contradicts official employment and paid work.