₦airaland Forum

Unfortunately, generations after the Prophet, fanatic muslims institutionalised the Islamic state as a totalitarian system vastly inhabited by orthodox muslims where secularism or democracy has no place, where adulterers are stoned, apostates are beheaded, power lies in the hands of Monarchs, Mullahs and moral police and non-muslims are reduced to second class citizens.

What is regarded as Islamic or Sharia law is so babaric and unholy that even orthodox muslims today have a hard time agreeing on and implementing it in full. Even Saudi Arabia is not implementing the full sharia law. Only the Talibans of Afghanistan did it in the 90s and we all can testify how primitive, savage and backward that it was.

Digging to the root of it, there is no such thing as Sharia state or Islamic state in the sense perceived by muslims.

The Islamic state of Medina established by Muhammad was a secular one. The non-muslims within took the laws as secular laws under a secular leader without compulsion. Muhammad didn't meet them and say, "these are the laws of my scripture, you must comply with them", but "these are the laws, do you accept?". Any state that adopt secularism, operate democracy while upholding human values of morality, peace, tolerance and justice is an Islamic state even if it is scarcely populated by Muslims and neither flog adulterers nor "cut off the thieves' hands".

TheBigUrban2: One of the successful ways to curb terrorism among young muslims is to have the mosques and imam speak against such acts and also have muslims who monitor any radical activities in the mosque.

Most of the mosques in UK are run and financed by Saudi government backed salafist groups. The salafists are the most extreme sects of orthodox Islam. Not to generalise, most staunch and unrepenting terrorists like Muhammad Yusuf(Boko haram) or Osama bin Laden belong to the Salafi sect. So, how effective have this measure been?

Then again, the mosque is only one of the media through which radicalisation occurs. Books, magazines, internet or lecture are other powerful media of indoctrination into extremism which breeds separatism that in turns breeds terrorism.

Thus, much is still required to combat active or passive terrors by the British government or Muslim moderates.

usermane: All the above fatwas condemn
terrorism by repeating that innocent life is sacred yet delving into the orthodox muslim texts or the terrorist ideology, sacred or innocent lives may not include the non- muslims killed in 9-11 or Christians bombed in their Church by Boko haram.

Bukhari :: Book 1 :: Volume 8 :: Hadith 387

Narrated Anas bin Malik:
Allah's Apostle said, "I have been ordered to fight the people till they say: 'None has the right to be worshipped but Allah.' And if they say so, pray like our prayers, face our Qibla and slaughter as we slaughter, then their blood and property will be sacred to us and we will not interfere with them except legally and their reckoning will be with Allah."

Narrated Maimun ibn
Siyah that he asked Anas bin Malik, "O Abu Hamza! What makes the life and property of a person sacred?" He replied, "Whoever says, 'None has the right to be worshipped but Allah', faces our Qibla during the
prayers, prays like us and
eats our slaughtered animal, then he is a Muslim, and has got the same rights and obligations as other Muslims have."

Your OP is too lengthy, preferably you should have cut it into 5 or 6 short posts instead of giving us epistle.

Once, i demanded you recommend for me a book by any orthodox muslim scholar that soundly analyses and debunk the "Islamist terror" ideology in details, today i renew my demand.

Vedaxcool, i dont know if you took your time through my last thread. Most of these condemnations while appreciable do very little in separating the grains from the shaft in terms of Islam and terrorism.

All the above fatwas condemn terrorism by repeating that innocent life is sacred yet delving into the orthodox muslim texts or the terrorist ideology, sacred or innocent lives may not include the non-muslims killed in 9-11 or Christians bombed in their Church by Boko haram.
This is what i term theological deception.

Empiree: Clearly from his latest activities, he has problem with Muslims, Arabs, Arabic Quran etc

Wrong fella, you have a problem with critics or reformists.

It is you who call me names

Empiree: He sounds like one of those ibn Shaitan.

It is you who have been picking my words out of context.

Empiree: I just came across this thread where i notice his post saying he detest the tag "Muslim".

And calling on your ummah against me.

Empiree: He's a confused fellow. Tricky, trying to be smart guy.

Fella, i used to be an orthodox muslim, not so hardcore but often taking steps to keep the "sunnah" untill my life too a drastic turn last year.

Fella, if being a muslim or keeping the sunnah entails:

1. Killing apostates and blasphemers.
2. Seeking intercession of Muhammad.
3. Freely preaching 'Islam' in Secular states while prohibiting preaching of other faiths in Sharia states.
4. Barring mixed gender relations while condoning marriages of Grandpas to prepubscent girls.
5. And so many baseless and anti Quranic doctrines, philosophies or ideals that have bound most muslims in self righteous backwardness;

Then i throw in the towel.

Fella, if you don't know me now, you might never do. Remember, based on certain criteria, i still term myself as "muslim" except that am no longer orthodox anymore.

TheBigUrban2: Christians are banned from worshipping in Saudi Arabia, Oppressed in Iraq. Brutalized in Egypt.

Atheists are executed or arrested in 6 islamic countries.

But no, finding places to pray in Italy as a muslim is a "Challenge". I wish the muslim well with his difficult life in Italy. It must be so challenging to be limited to 7 mosques and thousands of empty buildings in a country to pray, as compared to those in islamic countries who are arrested for just expressing their beliefs.

^^^^
Good, this exemplifies objectivity as enjoined by G-d. You 'll assume any educated Muslim like tbaba1234 can see this but could you expect any better from double thinkers?

QURAN 4:135

O you who have believed, be persistently standing firm in justice, witnesses for God, even if it be against yourselves or parents and relatives.
Whether one is rich or poor, God is more worthy of both. So follow not [personal] inclination, lest you not be just. And if you distort [your testimony] or refuse [to give it], then indeed God is ever, with what you do, Acquainted.

EPILOGUE

Passive terrorism is the precursor of active terrorism. Many are already tools of this phenomenon while coming forth as moderates and peaceful. Our war on terror is incomplete unless we confront the passive terrorists who groom, fill up and cover the active terrorists.

However, for this, we require stronger weapon than a missle or bomb. That weapon is non other than the Book of God; Quran. The passive terrorist may be very intelligent, pretentious and deceptive but even the collosal product of his strength, persona and traditions will crumble at the prouncement of the verses of the Book.

PEACE

8-Implications:

1-
Deep understanding of
passive forms of terrorism is needed to be able to distinguish between radical and moderate scholars and organizations. This distinction can allow us to support the moderates instead of giving support to the passive terrorists.

2-
Analysis of the fatwas and other Muslim responses to terrorism can help us evaluate both the extent and the progress of the problem of Islamic radicalism in a given society.

3-
Informing Islamist groups and organizations that pretend to be moderate that their passive support for terrorism is exposed can create some pressure on these organizations to force them to denounce terrorism properly. This can ultimately help in weakening radical Islam.

4-
Issuing strong fatwas against the terrorists needs to be encouraged and promoted within Muslim societies.

Ayomivic: I am a Christian that believed in searching for the truth as a way of salvation. Actually, i
believed in Bible but i still
want to learn about Islam, in quest for this, i read the English Quran to see if its a true book of God.

In defiance to the baseless claims by mainstream muslims that non-muslims musn't touch the Qur'an as well as the forgone conclusion by christians that the Qur'an is a product of satan, i congratulate you for reading the Qur'an cover to cover.

Ayomivic: The Quran used the pronoun such as our, we, he when refered to Allah. To me, Quran sound like words of advice or explanation rather than the report speech that it surpose be.

'We' or 'Our' refer to God and His Angels. God never use those pronouns for Himself.

The Qur'an is the direct speech of God and not reported, it 's an explanation in itself. Thus, it requires no Hadith to explain it, contrary to the orthodox view

The lack of such a strong reaction by other Muslim communities is suggestive of the presence of passive support for the terrorists in such communities. It is also noticeable that none of these fatwas were issued in the Arab world which is considered to be the heart of Islam.

The same principle applies to the Fatwa of apostasy against Bin laden that was issued in Spain four years after Madrid train bombings.
If the Fatwa against Bin laden in Spain was truly genuine it should have been issued shortly after September 11 rather than four years later when Muslims in Spain were facing a possible backlash following the Madrid
bombings.

Another good example to send a powerful message of disapproval to the terrorists is when Indian Muslims said they did not want the gunmen killed by the security forces during the attacks in Mumbai, but rather to be buried in Muslim cemetaries (as they considered the terrorists non- Muslims). Refusal to burry a Muslim in a Muslim cemetary is extremely powerful message that can deter young Muslims from pursuing the path of terrorism.

Unfortunately, this type of powerful reaction against the terrorists was unseen in any Muslim community other than Indian one.

It only considered the terrorists as "not martyrs" instead of strongly denouncing them by using more powerful expressions such as "apostates."

The former expression is weak and does not imply that the terrorists will not be in Paradise or that they will go to hell. In Islam, many non-martyrs, including the Prophet Mohamed himself, will go to paradise.

An example of the powerful fatwa is the Fatwa issued by Shaikh Muhammad Tahir-ul-Qadri against terrorism at the Institution of Mechanical Engineers in London on March 2,
2010. In this Fatwa the Shaikh described the terrorists as "Infidels" who will go to hell".

Unfortunately, this rare and late fatwa is not very influential as it was not issued by the most influential Islamic scholars or its leading
organizations such as the Organisation of the Islamic Conference (OIC).

2. The Fatwa issued by the Fiqh Council of North America that was supported and endorsed by more than 100 Islamic
organizations and individuals in the US, including CAIR.

It did not mention by name Bin Laden or any terrorists who participated and planned the attacks of 9/11.
It considered terrorism
"haram" (forbidden). This level of denouncement put terrorism at the same level as eating pork,
which is also "haram" in Islam.

If the fatwa was truly meant to deter young Muslims from doing terrorism and not just to
improve the image of Islam, it should have considered terror or contributions to it as an act of 'kufr' (an act that makes one an infidel). Failure to do so is a form of passive terrorism, leading to these organizations being perceived as moderates in the West even without effectively denouncing the terrorists.

Let us now take a deep look at some of the well-known fatwas that were issued against terrorism:

1. Amman statement that was issued by more than 50 leading Islamic scholars to denounce terrorism.
The Fatwa did not mention any terrorist by name. The denouncement was for terrorism (not the terrorists).

It did not mention killing non-Muslims. The Fatwa only discussed killing Muslims. Failure to clearly mention the killing of non-Muslims is a form of hidden approval for killing the latter.
The Fatwa stated that "Equally, it is not possible to declare as apostates any group of Muslims
who believes in Allah the Mighty and Sublime and His Messenger (may Peace and Blessings be upon him) and the pillars of faith, and respects the pillars of Islam and does not deny any 'Maloom Mina Al-Din Bil-Darura' - necessary article of religion." This very last sentence in the Fatwa indirectly conveys a message to the Jihadists that it is OK for them to kill Muslims who deny any "necessary article of the religion," such as those who refuse to practice Islamic or Sharia Law.

Let us now take a deep look at some of the well-known fatwas that were issued against terrorism:

1.
Amman statement that was issued by more than 50 leading Islamic scholars to denounce
terrorism.

The Fatwa did not mention any terrorist by name.
The denouncement was for terrorism (not the terrorists).
It did not mention killing non-Muslims.
The Fatwa only discussed killing Muslims. Failure to clearly mention the killing of non-Muslims is a form of hidden approval for killing the latter.
The Fatwa stated that "Equally, it is not possible to declare as apostates any group of Muslims who believes in Allah the Mighty and Sublime and His Messenger (may Peace and Blessings be upon him) and the pillars of faith, and respects the pillars of Islam and does not deny any 'Maloom Mina Al-Din Bil-Darura' - necessary article of religion." This very last sentence in the Fatwa indirectly conveys a message to the Jihadists that it is OK for them to kill Muslims who deny any "necessary article of the religion," such as those who refuse to practice Islamic or Sharia Law.

These forms of 'deceiving fatwa' serve the purpose of improving the image of Islam in the West
without upholding the main role of fatwa, which is, in such circumstances, to deter young Muslims from doing these acts of
violence or participating in them in any way ever again.

As noted before, this type of fatwa is a form of "passive terrorism" that sends a message of support to the terrorists and can partially explain to us why the phenomena of violent Jihad and terrorism are still powerful in the mind of many young Muslims.

If the leading Muslim
scholars issued fatwas that were truly powerful, they can significantly help in deterring young Muslims from participating in terrorism or supporting it.

7-Deceiving Fatwas:

Analysis of several statements and denouncements for
terrorism by leading Islamic organizations and individuals after 9/11 (33) reveals the following:

1-
Almost all of the statements did not mention Bin Laden by
name.

2-
None of these fatwas
considered Bin Laden and the terrorists as apostates.

3-
Many of these fatwas
denounced killing "innocents" without clearly defining what is
meant by this expression. In the context of denouncing terrorism it is vital to clarify that a non- Muslim, or "Kafer" (infidel) is not viewed as an innocent person by many Islamists and leading Islamic scholars. In their view, this person has committed the worst crime imaginable by not following Islam. In fact, those who do not follow Allah and Islam are considered by Islamists to be subhuman who must be fought.

Denouncing terrorists with weak expressions may serve a political purpose of improving the image of Islam, however, this is not likely to deter young Muslims from repeating the same act.

On the other hand, using the expression 'Murtad' is the most powerful way to denounce the terrorists, as according to traditional Islamic teaching, the ultimate consequence for this is going to hell forever.

3- Unconditional-

Denouncement for the evil nature of the act itself, not because it was 'not beneficial' to Muslims. The latter implies that it is okay to take a particular action if it is beneficial to Muslims.

4-
Must be general to all acts irrespective of the faith of the victim. Denouncement of acts of terror for killing Muslims is indirect approval of acts of terror that kill non-Muslims.

5-
Does not give any justification for the act.

6- Levels of Denouncement for Wrongdoings in the Muslim World:

Generally speaking, the
denouncement of an action or wrongdoing in the Muslim and Arab world can be effective in deterring others from doing it again if it follows certain criteria, which includes the following:

1-
To be directed against a person rather than just the act itself. For example, the Quran did not only denounce adultery, but
also warned that the 'persons' who do it will face severe punishment in hell. Even the fatwa against Salman Rushdie
represents this concept.

2-
Uses powerful expressions such as 'Kufr' and 'Redda'. There are several levels of describing mistakes in Arabic and Islamic
literature. In order of less severe to more severe, the following Arabic words could be used to
denounce a person who
commits a wrongdoing: Khatyea(made a mistake), Muzhneb(committed a minor sin), Faal Fahesha (committed major sin),
Mujrim (criminal), Kafer(Infidel), and Murtad (apostate).

1-
According to authoritative Islamic scholars, this hadith is considered to be a weak or non-binding hadith.

2- The Prophet said, according to Sahih (accurate) hadith, "I have been commanded (by Allah) to fight all mankind until they testify that none has the right to be worshiped except Allah and Muhammad is the messenger of Allah". According to the science of hadith, this particular passage is agreed upon (i.e. approved by Sahih by Al-Buchary and Muslim ; the two most authorative Hadith books in Sunni Islam). This level of hadith (Sahih) generally means that it is a very accurate
and binding one (unlike the former peaceful hadith).

This concealment of theological facts from westerners to avoid
confrontation of the radicalism problem while simultaneously teaching violent values to young Muslims via mainstream Islamic books serves as a form of passive support for terrorism.

This impedes the ability of the West to confront the reality of the terrorism problem.

D: Theological Deception:

In the context of this article, this term refers to deceptive and incomplete theological information presented to Westerners to make them less likely to recognize the true threat of radical Islam. For example, after 9/11 many Islamic organizations and scholars argued that jihad is predominantly taught as a peaceful concept and that it mainly means internal struggle.
Even some encyclopedias on terrorism use the same terminology to define Jihad.

The following hadith of the Prophet Mohamed was typically used by such groups to convey
the peaceful understanding of
the word jihad: "You have come from the minor jihad to the major jihad."...then he said "it is the striving of the servant
against his desires."

Those who used this hadith to convey that jihad is taught as a
peaceful concept failed,
intentionally or not, to bring to light the following things:

Dewze: So very few persons are willing, have the courage or even see it necessary to examine and re-examine themselves; human nature still I
guess.
Basic human nature is no
respecter of religion, tribe or affiliations. It simply respects a sound and understanding mind.
So, let us deal with these
problems by first of all having a sound understanding of what the problems really are

Thanks for the words of wisdom. See, objectivity is the key. Unfortunately, objectivity has no place in the fanatic muslim mindset.

elektra: I really hope this thread does not degenerate into some Islam bashing thread to avoid its deletion.
Usermane, I couldn't have said it better. The voice against Islamic terrorism is very weak in the Muslim community. I really wonder why they always claim not to be in support but are very sluggish to openly and actively condemn these activities.

NOTED. Bashing is driven by sentiments, and sentiments as i mentioned in the OP has no room here. The point here is to educate, making all to wake up and smell the coffee.

Nice usermane, quiet empowering.

vedaxcool: 100% agreed. Thats why I only posted a link.

Recommend for me a book or theisis by an orthodox Islamic scholar that examines and debunk in details the concept of offensive Jihad in the Terrorist ideology. Thanks.

[quote author= TheBigUrban2]Islamic isolationism leads to indifference towards Palestinian suffering by atheists, christians,
bhuddists and hindus.[/quote]Any reasonable observer feels for the palestinians(not Hamas) but somehow this indifference still looms because as you stated no one want a Sharia state like Iran or Pakistan that will suppress suppress non-muslims, critics, secularists. You can check the rights enjoined by Christians in Saudi A, comparing that with the rights enjoined by muslims in US.

Look at Isreal, after the first war(1948) the arabs or Muslims that remained in the new state of Isreal instead of joining the exodus were granted citizenship with full rights and priviledge enjoyed by any Jew or Isreali. Within a Sharia state like the one Hamas seek to establish, an isreali within will continue to remain a 2nd class citizen till he fully embraced Islam.

[quote author= TheBigUrban2]When Arab countries are not investing in Palestine and telling their leaders/Hamas to focus on using politics and negotiation to end the conflict, why would the
rest of the world care?
Palestine's brothers do not care.[/quote]Let aside that, how many percent of displaced palestinians have been admitted by neighbouring Arab countries? I feel so sad for the Palestinians. Even Hamas seen unconcerned for their worsening plight.

Majority of the Palestinians(and Isrealis) will die for the two state solution proposed over 60 yrs back. Hamas are too bent on crushing the entire Isreal and reclaiming the land wholly as before Jewish immigration to even listen to the cries of the Palestinians. They see this as a religious duty and its fulfilment rank above the well being of the Palestinians. This could partly explains for the high level of casualties on the Palestinian side.

Isreali government would never let the welfare of the Isrealis be second to any course.

I condemn the continous killing of the Palestinians by Isreali forces, expressing my deepest sympathy.

First thing first. They gave away too much and had no back up plan at the onset of the conflict. On teaming up against the new state, they never doubted their victory as odds were stacked against Isreal. For instance, other than getting driven from their land, a sizeable fraction of palestinians voluntarily vacated their land out of fear or compliance with the arab authorities, hoping to return once Isreal has been crushed.

The outcome was ursurption and annexation of the land by Isreal after arabs' defeat, partly to forestall any further security threat and thus leaving the Palestinians in the cold.

Shamed and distraught, majority of the Palestinians would pass the offer even if Isreal open her borders for them today.

@ jassie,
Knock it off. Even if you are a victim of Boko haram acts, even if it were questionable to lead such peaceful protest in this season, how can you sound as cold as those militants in this case where the Sheikh lost 3 sons?
Wrong place, wrong time but it is highly unlikely for a shiite to join Boko haram.
RISE ABOVE HATE

Sissie: My post about alexandria the great is to explain how that times was different than ours, that is why i asked you what was the marriage age bracket over 5 centuries ago?

Either Aisha was 9 or 18 when she married the prophet, i do know one thing she was matured enough for marriage, if she wasn't the marriage won't have taken place and the kuffars of that time would have used it against him.

Even if we were to agree that humans matured that fast a few centuries ago, we are given all indication by this hadith that Aisha was a Child.

Please note the highlighted words below. And read the links i, as well as @onegig presented.

Sahih Bukhari
Narrated 'Aisha: I used to play with the dolls in the presence of the Prophet, and my girl friends also used to play with me. When Allah's Apostle used to enter (my dwelling place) they used to hide themselves, but the Prophet would call them to join and play with me.
(The playing with the dolls and similar images is forbidden, but it was allowed for 'Aisha at that time, as she was a little girl, not yet reached the age of puberty) (Fateh-al-Bari page 143, Vol.13) Volume 8, Book 73, Number 151

Its two choices,
A. Believe the hadith and stick with the position that Muhammad married a kid OR
B. Reject the hadith as a fabrication and embrace the reality that Muhammad married a woman.
There is no middle course.

Sissie: but that monogamy is allowed, polygamy isn't compulsory, shes allowed to state it clearly. I know lots of muslim men who are not interested at all in polygyny, i have met more who are not interested in it than those who are

If that simple, i wonder why these issues persist. Monogamy, easier promised than kept. Many prospective monogamists end up in extramarital relations, serial monogamy or polygamy(muslims). The problem is that this polygamy isn't interpreted as detailed in the Book, it is overhyped, over justified and open doors for maneuvring and extorting submission from women.

QURAN 4:3, 127 specifically allow polygamy for the interest of destitute widows with kids(orphans). That is, as a bouyant man capable of maintaining justice with regards to wives and properties of orphans, you may marry a widow with kids to assist them. If you read the Book in its original language and literary context, this is what is mentioned of Polygamy. But as soon as you introduce Bukhari, Ibn Kathir or Hanbal, then you get the mainstream interpretation which encourage getting extra wife for petty reasons like boredom, aging of current wife or marital misunderstandings.

3- Political gains:

The West may exert more pressure on Israel if they were to accept the view that the Arab-Israeli conflict is the true cause of Islamic terrorism.
The West could also change its foreign policy in a way that is more supportive of the Muslim
world.


4-

Encourages the West to
pressure secular Arab regimes to be more democratic. A potential consequence of such democracy is that Islamist regimes could attain power easier.


It is important to note that the previously-mentioned justifications for terror, such as poverty and US foreign policy, do not answer the really imperative question: If such factors are the true causes of terrorism, why do non-Muslims in the Middle East who live in the same socio- economic and political circumstances as their Muslim neighbors not also contribute to terrorism and suicide bombings?

1-

Decreases pressure on the Muslim world to revise Islamic teachings so that the ideological cause of the terrorism problem does not have to be confronted, thereby allowing radical ideology
to grow unopposed.

2- Economic gains:

The West may be fooled by these deceptive justifications and thus give more financial support to Muslim countries and organizations, wrongly thinking that such aid
will fight poverty and help to end terrorism.

C: Diversionary Tactics:

Another effective method used by the passive terrorists is the intentional use of misleading justifications for the existence of
terrorism. Such justifications include poverty, lack of
education, the Arab-Israeli conflict, US foreign policy, political instability and lack of democracy in many parts of the Muslim world. However, this could be used to divert the West's attention from the true root cause of the problem, which is the prevalence of radical Islamic teachings in the Muslim world.

This form of deception helps the passive terrorists achieve the following things: