₦airaland Forum

Shari'ah in practice:

Saudis order 40 lashes for elderly woman for mingling with men; http://edition.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/meast/03/09/saudi.arabia.lashes/

Remember that the Saudi state is the most faithful to Shari'a in the Muslim world.

SeverusSnape:
Nazis are better than those MuslimsIslamists, Believe me; mind you Nazis were more concerned about the extermination of Jews mainly, I'm Sorry to say, but MuslimsIslamists are against every other people who are not with them. Nazism was defeated, but Islamic extremism will and can never be defeated, It's something that is inculcated in them from birth. All in the name of allah

You must do your homework, pal. Islamism is stoppable but continue to flourish due to our inadequacies. Here are basic ammunition we need against Islamism.

I. Shun political correctness.
Obama 's continuous reminder that ISIS have nothing to do with Islam is the peak of political correctness. After series of decades suffering at the hands of terrorists who keep invoking Islam, there is need to approach mainstream Islamic literature analytically in bid for the truth. We must shun political correctness and reveal the identity of the criminals, the religion or religious literature or doctrines they invoked. Anyone offended by this should go back at the criminals.

II. Distinguish Islam; a faith from Islamism; a fascist, supremacist, totalitarian, cancerous, Theo-political ideology garbed as Islam. Thus we can discover the threat clearer. Islam is our ally while Islamism or Militant Islam is the threat.

III. Identify and promote true moderate Muslims instead of phony moderate Muslims.
CAIR, OIC, ISNA, Muslim Brotherhood are mainstream Muslim organizations promoted by governments and media as secular, moderate Muslims. These are not the good guys we should be assisting. These are green snakes in the grass who share the same ideology and agenda with Taliban or ISIS which they further via deceit and "petro-dollars" from Saudi Arabia rather than violence. They are white washed tombs who will rather hug Osama bin Ladin than pardon me for repeatedly condemning them. They will covertly instigate the murder of their critic while shedding crocodile tears at his funeral.

You want to know who the true moderate, secular and reform minded Muslims are? Try Ahmed Subhy Mansur, Edip Yuksel, Qanta Ahmed, Tarek Fatah, Raheel Raza, Zuhdi Jasser and organizations like Muslim Canadian Congress(MCC), Free Muslim Coalition(FMC), Muslims For Peace Justice and Progress(MPJP).

Kirinwa: Why are over 90% of terrorists in the world Moslems?

90% of terrorists are Muslims because;

I) Muslims remain averse to secularism. Any religious community that insist on merging state and temple will undoubtedly justify violence and terror with God. Have we forgotten that Christians too were killing in the name of Jesus centuries ago? It was secularism that terminated this.

II) although most Muslims condemn violence, an in depth analysis reveal their religious narrative or theology bear the root of aggression against non-Muslims or heretics.

There two ways to slay this beast which is a manifestation of Islamism.

I) Separate the Mosque from the State.
II) Revise and revamp the theology and narrative of mainstream Islam to purge out Islamism which manifest as terrorism.

Unless, these are accomplished, eliminating Islamism or terrorism is a pipe dream.

Peace to all.

Kirinwa: As a concerned citizen of Nigeria I have watched over the years as Moslems keep killing non believers(infidels) both theists and atheists over mattters of religion, political and personal reasons.

I keep hearing them say Islam is a religion of peace. Based on that I want moslems to come and tell us what Jihad is and what 'holy' war is.

Jihad is an Arabic word for 'struggle'. However, its connotation in Muslim history has been military invasion of non-Muslim lands to conquer and institute Shari'ah. Jihad and Holy war are synonymous in the realm of Islamism and Muslim history.

What is the difference between Nazism as practised by Germany that sought total annihilation of human race and Islamism?

First, we need to differentiate Islam from Islamism. This will be a bold step in fighting radicalism in the name of Islam. Islam is a faith or spirituality and a personal relationship between man and God. Islamism is a theo-political, ultra-conservative, fascist, totalitarian, supremacist ideology disguised or garbed as Islam.

There isn't much difference between Nazism and Islamism, both of which are highly infective and toxic ideologies that must not be tolerated in the slightest.
However, Islamism is more toxic than Nazism because Nazis were plain and upfront of their ideology and intent while Islamists are self-righteous, two face double dealers who exploit Islam and the ignorance or naivety of the masses to further their vile agenda of dominating and instituting Shari'ah worldwide.



NB: To differentiate moderate Muslims from Islamists, in order to avoid condemning all Muslims and undermining the efforts of moderate Muslims against Islamism, here is your litmus test for Muslims;

1. Do you stand for Shari'ah?

A. Yes, Shari'ah is God 's law that must be implemented and precede over all matters worldwide.

B. No, that bias, medieval and draconian law doesn't belong to our time. It cannot be from God.

2. Is it justice that Shari'ah states like Iran barres Christian preachers whereas, their own Muslim scholars can publicly preach and proselytize in Secular west?

A. It is justice. Islam is the only genuine religion that must be spread, the rest are falsehood and must not be spread. This has been ordained by Allah.

B. It is injustice and not Islam. Treat your neighbor as yourself.



Provided honesty is maintained, the response you will get from any Muslim is A:A, A:B or B:B.

A:A is an Islamist whose ideology and aspiration is no different from ISIS or Boko Haram; Islamism

A:B is a phony moderate with Islamist tendencies and who doesn't seem to be well educated on his religion.

B:B is a true moderate Muslim, genuinely peace and stand against Islamism.

CONCLUSION

Shari'ah isn't merely a law. It is a major component of Islamism, a more totalitarian, fascist and supremacist ideology or movement than even Nazism, Fascism or Communism.

If Shari'ah is so utopian, why is the ratio of non-Muslim immigrants in Shari'ah states to Muslim immigrants in secular states insignificant? It has barely much to offer.

Settling in the "infidels' domain" as a Muslim is frowned upon by clerics on authority of Shari'ah, yet more and more Muslims are migrating from Shari'ah compliant Somali or Pakistan to secular West. Any land ruled by a woman is considered cursed according to orthodox/mainstream Muslim ideology, yet we have orthodox Muslims among whom are Shari'ah advocates emigrating from Saudi Arabia, UAE to settle in a 'cursed' land like Britain ruled by a woman or Queen.

This concludes the second phase of my paper on Shari'ah. In the near future, the final phase will be published. Thank you for reading, and share the word.

So you mean it is alright to kill co-religionists whom you simply consider as hypocrite? In that case, all Muslim sects will be killing each other since each sect consider itself the true believers and the other sects as the hypocrites.

Isn't this why your Muslim world is rife with religious violence; Sunnis killing Shiites, Shiites killing Bahais, Salafis killing Secular Muslims e.t.c.

What you believe in is not Islam, it is Islamism; a totalitarian, supremacist, racist, fascist and radical ideology that constitute a threat to peace and harmony.

I am not convinced by your defense, so far. I will test you with another tradition of yours and i hope you turn up with a moral explanation.

Imam Bukhari reports in his isnad from Ali ibn Abi Talib (ra) that he said “ I heard the prophet (Saw) say : There would arise at the end of the age a people who would be young in age and immature in thought, but they would talk (in such a manner) as if their words are the best among the creatures. They would recite the Qur’an, but it would not go beyond their throats, and they would pass through the religion as an arrow goes through the prey. So when you meet them, kill them, for in their killing you would get a reward with Allah on the Day of Judgment .”

Can you explain to me the wisdom behind killing the people referred here.

alchemy007:
You said I contradicted myself, tell me how please considering the fact that there were no human rights anywhere...

You said your religion prohibit you from attacking first. Yet you confirmed that you militarily invaded and seized lands, forcing the inhabitants to either embrace Islam or pay jizya, otherwise they face war.

alchemy007:
It is true we conquered lands just like any other super powers of the time. We give 3 conditions:
-revert to Islam
-accept Islamic government and pay jizya as a non-muslims or;
- face war.
Please note, it's the Muslim government that's spread via wars NOT the religion.
Non-muslims do live in Islamic conquered lands peacefully and they practice their various religions peacefully PROVIDED THEY PAY THE JIZYA.

See how you contradict yourself in just two posts.

As for arms struggle, Islam forbids that I be the first to attack. This is evident in the prophet's last sermon... he said DO NOT OPPRESS AND DO NOT BE OPPRESSED...WE STRIKE ONLY AFTER BEEN STRUCK.

My friend, it is stark oppression to invade another land, compelling the inhabitants to either accept Islam, otherwise pay levy, otherwise face death. It is an indirect means of forcefully spreading the religion.

It is irony to claim you are prohibited from attacking first, yet you seem fine with Islamic states expanding their territories in the name of Islam, by invading other territories and fighting off resistance. Isn't this what ISIS is doing? Why then do most Muslims deny ISIS?

alchemy007:
And when we fight it doesn't necessarily means arms struggle.For instance,I can fight you by not sharing my top secrets with you.I am not supposed to do that until you are a Muslim like myself.
I would prefer to patronize a Muslim in business to patronizing you a non-muslim.I would choose a Muslim over a non Muslim in marriage even if d Muslim is from another country and d non-muslim is from my very own village.

That was brillant, but it works only we consider the first few lines of the Hadith i quoted. If A says he will fight B, he may not necessarily mean a physical combat. But if A says he will fight B till B makes a testimony, after which B 's blood and property will be considered sacred and to be protected; then A mean fight as in hitting physically and even killing.

alchemy007:
Username, your reply is not far fetched. Please note that it says 'sacred' the fact that your blood and property is not sacred to me doesn't mean I can attack and kill you at will. Bros, get it straight, we don't fight or kill anyone that haven't harmed or attacked us!
Hope that answers your question. THE FACT THAT YOU ARE NOT SACRED TO US DOESN'T MEAN YOU ARE MARKED FOR DEATH.

OP, you are selling half baked apologetics which no educated literate will buy. In any language and place, whenever a life or blood is deemed as not sacred, it mean that life or blood is permissible for wasting or shedding.

BABAAGBALABA:
are does in mosque also disbelievers

Jihadists and Islamists consider any Muslim who opposes his ideology to be a disbeliever, whether he is in the Mosque or not.

Is this the law that sane, educated, righteous men will revere as divine and advocate for its implementation worldwide? It is a law aimed at cutting off any relationship or interaction between opposite genders by enforcing gender segregation right from the temples to the offices and down to even buses or taxies.

It is a misorgynist law that requires women to be secluded as much as possible in the home thereby justifying Saudi Arabia 's ban of female driving. This same law prohibit women from traveling without company of a male authority, hindering women 's mobility and barring them from mobile fields like aeronautics, journalism, politics e.t.c. A man is never answerable to his wife yet a woman cannot even fast without her husband 's permission under Shari'ah. Prepubscent girls as young as about 9 may be married off legally!

This is Shari'ah, the law that even feminists, non-Muslims and women are protesting for, behind placards and banners in the name of 'freedom of religion'.

Do you know that under Shari'ah;

-a non-Muslim 's testimony in court is worth less than that of a Muslim

-a non-Muslim or apostate is not entitled to
a share of inheritance from a Muslim relative.

-an apostate loses costudy of his/her kids upon leaving Islam and his/her marriage is annulled if his/her spouse remain Muslim.

-a Muslim cannot be killed in justice for killing a non-Muslim.

-the testimony of a woman is generally half of a man 's, in the court.

-a woman have no right to divorce her husband. She may appeal to her husband or Shari'ah court to annull their marriage but in the end her fate depend on descretion of court or her hubby. If her appeal or request is granted, she is obligated to compensate her ex-husband with no less than her dowry.
On the other hand, a man may divorce his wife at anytime and he is not answerable to any one for his decision which the wife cannot object.

-wife beating is condoned as a disciplinary measure by husbands.

CIVIL MATTERS

As already stated, Shari'ah is an assault on one 's freedom of belief and choice. It robs the Muslim of his right to inquire, contemplate and decide on the truth, rendering him into a robot.

There is a lot beyond belief pertaining to civil matters under Shari'ah. The are voices from the left demanding Muslim minorities are granted autonomy to rule their community with Shari'ah. Except the Muslim community is completely separated from the rest of the state, this is not possible. Shari'ah cannot co-exist with a secular egalitarian national constitution for alternate reasons. Here is what i mean:

Shari'ah is perhaps the most vivid tool by which Islamists or Islamofascists seek to segregate themselves from non-Muslims when they migrate to the West. Although many Muslims flee Shari'ah in the Middle East for a moderate, modern, free-minded, progressive society provided in the West, Islamists on delegation of the Muslim Brotherhood migrate to the West and apply for validation of Shari'ah and Shari'ah court to precede over civil matters in the Muslim community.

This has been the case in many Western countries. The more troubling issue is that we have non-Muslims, Westerners standing for validation of Shari'ah by invoking 'freedom for religious practices' for Muslims. This only shows the level of ignorance and naivety of Westerners regarding Shari'ah.

In cases, some Muslims have stood publicly for secular laws over Shari'ah. In states like Canada, this has suppressed proliferation of Shari'ah. Other states like UK are paying the price for not having moderate Muslims oppose Shari'ah for state laws.

The key difference between a moderate Muslim and a radical is their position on Shari'ah.

sbaks:
Honestly islam is POO. A MESS I tell you all! hmmm. *feeling disgusted*

Oh no, please control your feeling and chose your words carefully. I am educating people on Shari'ah and the danger it poses, let 's not hurt anyone 's feeling. Thank you.

Don't also forget that Jews/Christians are levied in return for practising their religion under Shari'ah. They can only avert this levy by embracing Islam, otherwise they have to pay this levy to protect their lives and properties from the state. Other religious minorities like theists, polytheists, agnostics, atheists have only two choices; embrace Islam or death.

When you meet those advocating for Shari'ah, do not be brainwashed by their invoking of words like 'Justice, Peace, Rights, Freedom.' The law they are advocating is a very babaric, discriminatory, oppressive and misorgynist one that will regress mankind to medieval age.

In 1985, Muhammad Taha was executed on authority of Shari'ah court and Muslim Brotherhood. Taha was a reformist, although he had his blind spots, he was an exemplary figure who founded a Muslim movement in Sudan that stood for secularism instead of Shari'ah, preached for peace instead Jihad, promoted rights of women and minorities. Today, nothing is remembered of Taha, while war-mongers and violators of human rights like Ruhullah Khomeini, Saddam Husseini or Osama bin Ladin are fondly remembered in the Muslim world. Confirm

Educating and enlightening the masses with counter-ideas to the state religion whether by TV/Radio programs, lectures/seminars, newsletters or even internet articles is forbidden. Thus, minorities like Christians or Jews cannot preach or invite anyone to their faith, they cannot build new temples. There is no room for a Muslim to reaccess his faith and inquire for the truth because every information at his disposal has been censored by Shari'ah authorities who ban books and websites with alternate and counter ideas to the religion enforced by the state. In short, a Muslim under Shari'ah have no right to decide regarding his faith, the state decides and the Shari'ah authority enforces.

In fact, there are religious police in most Shari'ah compliant societies like Iran or Saudi Arabia to enforce Shari'ah, they roam about grounding and arresting for offenses like intermingling of men and women, women travelling without a male relative e.t.c. It doesn't matter whether a Muslim is disillusioned or unconvinced of the position of the State or Shari'ah authorities on a matter, he must comply or may be marked as an apostate to be ostracized or killed.

RELIGIOUS COERCION

The very existence of Shari'ah, a law enforced to compel people comply with religious teaching is a gross violation of the Scriptures which reaffirm there is no coercion in religious matter(Qur'an 2:256).
The Scriptures are our individual covenant and test with God. Shari'ah undermines this basic fact. It is no longer a test when believers are compelled by authorities regarding the the Scriptures.
That is why except for offences like theft, adultery that violate human right, the Scriptures prescribed no penalty for other offenses like apostasy, blasphemy, consuming 'unclean' food.

Under Shari'ah, there is no room for religious pluralism and any brand of the religion beside orthodoxy is forbidden and punishable. Criticising, debunking or even expressing contempt for any tenet of the religion may easily be marked as apostasy, dissidence or rebellion against the state and punishable by death. For this reason any attempt for reform, whether from within or outside the religion is futile from the onset, under Shari'ah.

@talibilm

Your own most revered mufassir; Ibn Kathir explain the essence of paying Jizya is to humiliate or disgrace or punish Jews/Christians for not embracing Islam and you come telling us that Jizya is merely 'state tax'?

Qur'an 9:29 exegesis by Ibn Kathir:

Paying Jizyah is a Sign of Kufr and Disgrace

Allah said, (until they pay the Jizyah), if they do not choose to embrace Islam, (with willing submission), in defeat and subservience, (and feel themselves subdued.), disgraced, humiliated and belittled. Therefore, Muslims are not allowed to honor the people of Dhimmah or elevate them above Muslims, for they are miserable, disgraced and humiliated. Muslim recorded from Abu Hurayrah that the Prophet said, « (Do not initiate the Salam to the Jews and Christians, and if you meet any of them in a road, force them to its narrowest alley.) This is why the Leader of the faithful `Umar bin Al- Khattab, may Allah be pleased with him, demanded his well-known conditions be met by the Christians, these conditions that ensured their continued humiliation, degradation and disgrace.

Yes, we know that non-Muslims did prefer the Caliphate to Christendom in the middle ages. The Jews, the persecuted Christian sects sought asylum in the Shari'ah Caliphate. But get your fact right, it wasn't because the Caliphate was so tolerant and peaceful. It was because Christendom was more intolerant, militant and antisemite than the Caliphate.

Ever since Christendom separated the Church from the State, ever since the renaissance or Protestant reformation, majority have preferred the West(Christendom). That is why most Jews, Christians, atheists, agnostics and even heterodox Muslims today prefer the West to the Middle-East, whereas some centuries ago, the reverse was the case.

MakeWeTalk: Also why does your bible command you not to beat your wife, while our quoran commands us to beat our wives?

Please sincere answers.

Good day. The Qur'an doesn't permit men to beat their wives. It is poor translation and interpretation that lead the orthodox clerics to sanction wife beating. OP, i opened a thread in Islam section discussing this matter last week and concentrating on clearing the misconceptions but Islam section agents deleted the thread and sent me this;

"Banned by a moderator in Islam for Muslims for Breaking rule 1 consistently with your antiIslamic dogma. Ban expires on 6:44am On Jan 09, 2015"

Watch the video below attentively, the speaker delved into linguistic and contextual analysis of Qur'an 4:34 and proves that Qur'an doesn't sanction wife beating.

The Quran: A Monotheist Translation

Chapter 4 V 34
The men are to support the women with what God has bestowed upon them over one another and for what they spend of their money. The upright females are dutiful; keeping private the personal matters for what God keeps watch over. As for those females from whom you fear desertion, then you shall advise them, and abandon them in the bedchamber, and separate from them. If they respond to you, then do not seek a way over them; God is Most High, Great.

I invite you to these sites; http://www.quranicpath.com/quranicpath/index.html
http://www.quran-islam.org/home_%28P1%29.html
http://free-minds.org/forum/


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ij5bajPyC8

Click here to download in your video format of choice; http://en.savefrom.net/#url=http://youtube.com/watch?v=0ij5bajPyC8&utm_source=youtube.com&utm_medium=short_domains&utm_campaign=ssyoutube.com