Are Muslims in Crisis?

[Peace]

I am interested in what ppl here think?

[AbuMubarak]

you still didnt tell me who is mocking our religion

methinks muslims who treat islam like its a form of buddhism are the mockers

they want to do any ol' thing and because they say they are muslim, they get upset when they are reminded of the purity and beauty of islam, they get personally offended and want to label any muslim who wants to practice quran and sunnah as a wahhabi

believers are not in a quagmire, only the everyday muslim is because he has one foot in kufr and the other in deen

[nam]

Sallaam

I find this an interesting question. Muslims refers to a group and a group can only be in a crisis if members of that group are in a crisis. So to answer your question, in my opinion, if you are firm in your deen then you are not in crisis. Sorry i am looking from a bottom up approach :)

Allah Hafiz

Nam ("Do we want to look for problems and not positives? Is this now the current trend of reasoning?" Nam 16/05/03)

[AbuMubarak]

nam, you may or may not know my beloved brother hassan

he used to be a frequent poster at ummah.com

before that, he was an avid salafi and worker in islamic movement

but he got burned out, and then started questioning EVERYTHING in islam

so he comes to the board and says a few things that we found objectionable, so we blasted him (remember those days hassan?)

anyway, he got all upset, told me he loved me, and then went to a mountain for a few months to reflect

he has returned from the mountain (i dont think it did much good) and now he is back

anyway, hassan, wallahi, i love you for the sake of Allah and just as i want the muslims here to remind me of my errors, i would like to be the first to say, i will remind you of yours

so please dont run away again, we got a lot of work to do

be sweet, and see you next thread

[nam]

Originally posted by Raafi
nam, you may or may not know my beloved brother hassan

he used to be a frequent poster at ummah.com

before that, he was an avid salafi and worker in islamic movement

but he got burned out, and then started questioning EVERYTHING in islam

so he comes to the board and says a few things that we found objectionable, so we blasted him (remember those days hassan?)

anyway, he got all upset, told me he loved me, and then went to a mountain for a few months to reflect

he has returned from the mountain (i dont think it did much good) and now he is back

anyway, hassan, wallahi, i love you for the sake of Allah and just as i want the muslims here to remind me of my errors, i would like to be the first to say, i will remind you of yours

so please dont run away again, we got a lot of work to do

be sweet, and see you next thread

Bro...thanks for ummah history lesson, but i remember the posts of Bro Hassan quiet well. I also remember your responses to his posts.

Just a question Bro raafi, are we not instructed in Islam to use our intellect to come to the conclusions we do? Thus, isn't some questioning or reasoning healthy then?

Allah Hafiz

Nam ("Indeed a shift of mamouth proportions has occured" Nam 16/05/03)

[Peace]

Originally posted by Raafi
you still didnt tell me who is mocking our religion

Salaams Raafi my dear friend :)

Allah said in the Qur'an "Do not go to excess/extremes in your religion" (nisa 171/maidah77)

I think someone who thinks waving to greet someone is HARAM is doing just that - and making a mockery of our religion.

Hassan

[Peace]

Originally posted by Raafi
he has returned from the mountain (i dont think it did much good) and now he is back

anyway, hassan, wallahi, i love you for the sake of Allah and just as i want the muslims here to remind me of my errors, i would like to be the first to say, i will remind you of yours

so please dont run away again, we got a lot of work to do

be sweet, and see you next thread

Actually staying away from this place makes you realised how isolated and detached this place is from the real world and the real feelings and views of ordinary Muslims.

I guess I need time to acclimatise myself again to the rather rare atmosphere up here ;)

Hassan

[Consider]

The muslims are in a pretty low state

Because they have abandoned the deen

instead, you see muslims comromising on their deen, embracing western ideals with open arms, and bootlicking like never before

whereas islam came to remove us from jahiliyah

Islam is Islam, it is the people who are losing it

and there will be ups & down, but the promise of Allaah is true

[Ammarah]

Happy days are here again!

Good thing though is more posts from akhi Hassan means more posts from akhi Raafi! ;) Alhamdulillah.

May Allah(swt) guide us all closer to his obedience. Love you for Allah’s sake.

Sis Ammarah (grabbing popcorn)

[canute]

This should be an interesting thread...

Asking if Muslims are in a crisis is not the same as asking if Islam in crisis or if God is having a nervous breakdown.

For a couple of years a big problem in the Catholic Church has emerged. Won't go into detail, but suffice it to say it is a problem with the HUMAN organization/structure of the Church, and not the religion or the belief itself. Does that make sense? I always like to be mindful that we are human and therefor to be in crisis is normal. We should not think "there can be nothing wrong with us" because out religion is pure, or because God is great. We are human, and have to remember that.

I agree with nam and hassan that a little questioning is healthy. The truth can stand up to questions, right? There is a difference between CYNICALLY asking questions and HONESTLY asking questions, and one should be able to discern berween the two.

[AbuMubarak]

Originally posted by hassanradwan
Actually staying away from this place makes you realised how isolated and detached this place is from the real world and the real feelings and views of ordinary Muslims.

I guess I need time to acclimatise myself again to the rather rare atmosphere up here ;)

Hassan again i disagree (this is becoming habitual)

this place is EXACTLY a duplicate of the world, except we cant ban people in the world

imagine if all of the banned people came back, THAT would be more like real life, and we would get nothing accomplished and things would be a real mess

[AbuMubarak]

Originally posted by nam
Bro...thanks for ummah history lesson, but i remember the posts of Bro Hassan quiet well. I also remember your responses to his posts.

Just a question Bro raafi, are we not instructed in Islam to use our intellect to come to the conclusions we do? Thus, isn't some questioning or reasoning healthy then?

Allah Hafiz

Nam ("Indeed a shift of mamouth proportions has occured" Nam 16/05/03) i never said question, nam (dont sit too close to hassan)

i said his conclusions contained some major flaws

and even in our questioning, we must fear Allah

as a matter of fact, last nite, a question regarding Allah punishing people in the hellfire forever entered my mind, i thought and i thought, then i made dua to Allah that my thoughts do not allow me to become misguided, because once we start questioning to that degree, we may approach kufr

[canute]

All religious belief begins with questions.

[TheGeneral]

Anyone with a Brain can see this poll is biased from a Mile off,

The way he casually puts it "Yes! Its all Americas fault" because he knows no-one is stupid enough to think that everything is Americas fault but he doesnt even leave space for any type of blame to fall on the americans, and the Israelis arent even mentioned!

As for the the last 3 options they are so stupid its not worth commenting on!

Most of the options are about 1/2 a line and then he comes out with "Yes! It is because we need to open the door of Ijtihad and review the Shari'ah in light of the radically different situation since the time of the Prophet" - its like WHERE DID THAT COME FROM :confused: As if the whole purpose of this thread was so ppl could blindly choose this option allowing mr.hasan to make a point about the Shariah.

If you have something to say about Ijtihaad or Shariah just say it, dont be sly like the yahood in trying to make it come out of other peoples mouths.

btw... thanx for that info Raafi it seems to explain a few things - mr.hasan here seems to have quite a fan club among the kuffar.

[Qurratulain]

salaam
yeah muslims are in crisis,why? many reasons, just take the example of this forum, look how lovely we all get together with each other, feel the love in here.

[AbuMubarak]

qurratulain,

i think islamic jihad spoke of this in her unity thread about a week ago, i was just reading it

look thru that, please

[AbuMubarak]

Originally posted by TheGeneral
mr.hasan here seems to have quite a fan club among the kuffar. yes he does, and he is proud of that because it gives him a feeling of feeling enlightened and one of the "peacemakers" between the extremists and the real world

[Peace]

As I expected the response is strongly in favour of;

"It is because we don't follow Qur'an and Sunnah"

Perhaps we need to look at that from a different angle?

Why is it that most Muslims are not following Qur'an and Sunnah?

There are about One and a half Billion Muslims in the world. Why is it that they don't follow Qur'an and Sunnah properly and to the letter?

No doubt I will be offered many reasons.

But I bet no one gives me this one;

Because Muslims are finding it impossible in the modern world to apply and practice many of the rules and regulations of Islam.

Nor do the vast majority wish - by choice - to live under regimes that apply such laws strictly and as fully as they should be.

Why is that?

Coz they are all weak faithed westernised corrupted Muslims.

Couldn't be that Islamic Law has stood still for 1400 years could it?

Hassan

[Consider]

Because Muslims are finding it impossible in the modern world to apply and practice many of the rules and regulations of Islam.

Nor do the vast majority wish - by choice - to live under regimes that apply such laws strictly and as fully as they should be.

Brother Hassan, what rules?

I dont see any rules that are difficult to apply in this time that are supposed to be applied and were applied since the Prophet (saws)

you say "strictly and as fully as they should be"

Note the word "should"

How do you think islam should change?

Is the islam that the Prophet (saws) brought not good enough for the rest of humanity for the rest of time?

Please elaborate - I would like to know what u think should be changed - maybe we are misunderstanding you or maybe you are misunderstanding some things...

[AbuMubarak]

hassan, i will go one better

it is NOT america or israel or russia or any kafir fault that the muslims are in the pathetic state they are in

it is the muslims fault, period

how about that one?

and i am being totally serious

[Peace]

Originally posted by Consider
Brother Hassan, what rules?

I dont see any rules that are difficult to apply in this time that are supposed to be applied and were applied since the Prophet (saws)

I refer you to an old thread entitled "Reviewing Shari'ah" if you do a SEARCH for it and read what I said there.

Hassan

[AbuMubarak]

consider, if you try to pin hassan down to an answer, he will leave again

i dont want him to leave, i want him to come here and share his thoughts on revising islam

and after that, you can escort him to the hospital, and after he recovers, we can all hug

[reachin'out]

Originally posted by Raafi
consider, if you try to pin hassan down to an answer, he will leave again

i dont want him to leave, i want him to come here and share his thoughts on revising islam

and after that, you can escort him to the hospital, and after he recovers, we can all hug

Is hugging (all of us, that is) according to the sunnah?

[Peace]

Originally posted by Raafi
hassan, i will go one better

it is NOT america or israel or russia or any kafir fault that the muslims are in the pathetic state they are in

it is the muslims fault, period

how about that one?

and i am being totally serious

Yes I would agree. But I would say it is Muslims fault because we allowed the Shari'ah to become something that was set in stone rather than dynamic and developing.

When Islam came it was revolutionary.

Now the Shari'ah's only answer to modern problems are solutions to problems and conditions that existed 1400 years ago.

I am becoming convinced more and more that Prophet Muhammad never meant it to be so.

I still have not fully worked it all out - maybe I won't - but I hope others will.

Hassan

[AbuMubarak]

so when the prophet told the muslims at the final sermon that he has left us two things to follow for our guidance, quran and his sunnah

what exactly do you interpret that to mean?

no reachin i aint huggin no one, sorry i even suggested such a dumb thing

[Peace]

Originally posted by Raafi
so when the prophet told the muslims at the final sermon that he has left us two things to follow for our guidance, quran and his sunnah

what exactly do you interpret that to mean?


OK consider this;

Muhammad brought a universal and timeless message as well as a specific message to his people.

The detailed laws were responses to the specific needs of the time, while the universal message of faith and morality were universal and timeless.

This is how Allah sent all the other prophets - it is Sunnatulaah - the Way of Allah - and the WAy of Allah NEVER changes.

Hassan

[Ammarah]

Islam has stood still for 1400 years and brother Hassan is here to save us from it. Review the whole thing for us because the imams and scholars got it all wrong?
Where you been all our lives Hassan?
Are you the Paul of Islam?

Astaghfirullah.

[Consider]

Yes, I read part of the trhead on reviewing the shariah

But listen, fitra is not sufficent to guide a person - ALL humans have been created on this fitrah, ALL humans have testified on the existence of their creator - but still, you have muslims, hindus, buddhists, atheists etc -

The fitrah that we have is not sufficient to guide us to the degree required for salvation - thats why so many people are not muslims, or disbelieve in a creator etc..

So you cant base your thoughts on simply fitrah

Now let me just add one thing here, islamic laws were put into practise long after the death of the Prophet (saws), for many years, and looking at history, the times they were implemented, they are the best of times, and society was at its peak in religion, sciences and so forth

So we have examples where they were implemented - not only during the time of the Prophet (saws) but further than that - these days should make no difference

That example u gave - about being stoned for adultery - do you know how difficult it is to get this punishment? there have to be four witnesses I believe - FOUR - now how many times can this be possible?

Do you know what that means? it means that it rests entirely on the person who commited the crime - there was a woman who owned up during the time of the Prophet (saws) - and she had a baby as well - she OWNED UP to be stoned and punished for this deed - because she knew that it would be better for her to recieve the punishment in this life compared to what she would recieve in the hereafter - which would be much worse - and she repented.

We are humans, we shouldnt interpret things wrongly - look at the world around you - look how people are so freely indulging in this - it is a great great sin

Why would there be such a punishment for such an act?

Allaah knows best - but use reasoning - look at its effects on families, on the social structure - look how it goes against the true nature of islam, it is a BIG sin

Insha'Allaah, I will touch upon the other topics later insha'Allaah - but you will find that there a reason for all the things u mentioned in the post and it is not simply 'stoning for adultery' or 'cutting the hand of a theif' or 'allowing slavery'

You have to look at the whole picture to understand its wisdom, and know that you should accept the laws of Allaah - as they stand - as you may not be understanding them correctly 100%

[Consider]

From your old thread:

My own feeling is that society has changed since the time of the prophet. Conditions have changed and these particular laws were applied to a very harsh and barbaric Jahiliyya society 1400 years ago – and they are no longer necessary in our day and age.
.

Trust me, the scoiety we live in has sunk probably further in jahiliyyah - look around you, open your eyes, look at the alcohol abuse, look at how it is destroying families, look at all the children being born without fathers, without knowing who their father is, look at the lack of modesty in women, where they are not covered, look at the murders, rapes and so forth that occur

This society has hit rock bottom

[AbuMubarak]

Originally posted by hassanradwan
OK consider this;

Muhammad brought a universal and timeless message as well as a specific message to his people.

The detailed laws were responses to the specific needs of the time, while the universal message of faith and morality were universal and timeless.

This is how Allah sent all the other prophets - it is Sunnatulaah - the Way of Allah - and the WAy of Allah NEVER changes.

Hassan that was a pretty good, two-step, you gonna have to show me that some time, but i believe i asked you a specific question, all i want to know, is what does "i have left you the QURAN AND MY SUNNAH mean to you?

[canute]

I'm a so glad Jesus said "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone."

Does God want sinful humans taking punishment out in his name on other sinful humans?

[AbuMubarak]

Originally posted by canute
I'm a so glad Jesus said "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone."

Does God want sinful humans taking punishment out in his name on other sinful humans? canute, what you are missing is that someone has to establish laws

how can you submit to man's law, but have skepticism to gods law?

do you really belive that god created us and has left us without guidance?

without a criterion to establish between right and wrong?

do you really think that mankind is capable of running this planet without help? without an instruction booklet?

we have one for our vcr, why would god leave us here without one for life?

and moreso, since we are all to die, dont you think he would also tell us about that also,?

how could we be tested for a final exam and we dont have anything to go by? so Allah left us information and examples so we dont have to walk around in the dark


but some of us choose darkness over light

[canute]

Actually, I see divine revelation in a lot of things. I don't deny that it exists.

On the other hand, I don't confine it to one time, one prophet, one era, one set of writings. The rules for life are all around us - they've been discussed, evaluated, judged for their Divine credentials for a long time now. And still are. We have yet a ways to go.

To me, that's not living in the darkness. I don't see it as kufr either, but I know you will disagree.

[Peace]

Originally posted by Consider
That example u gave - about being stoned for adultery - do you know how difficult it is to get this punishment? there have to be four witnesses I believe - FOUR - now how many times can this be possible?

I remember reading an eyewitness account of a stoning in Afghanistan under the rule of the Taliban where the 'witnessess had scaled the roof to look down into the courtyard to see the offenders. THe woman's husband had been absent for years but she was still legally married. The Taliban governor simply asked the witnesses to swear they saw it and the couple were dragged out to a field where they were stoned

THe witness said the woman's son was asked to throw the first stone - when he said he couldn't - they told him his mother would be forgiven and go straight to paradise - he threw and the others threw - soon both were lying on the floor.

Also the thread I referred you too was promted by - among other things - the case of Amina Lawal in Nigeria.

It happens and no matter how RARE you would like to make it - the reality is that it would be up to the local Mullah's not you or I.

But you and I must stand in front of Allah and say "Yes I supported this!"

Hassan

[Peace]

Originally posted by Raafi
that was a pretty good, two-step, you gonna have to show me that some time, but i believe i asked you a specific question, all i want to know, is what does "i have left you the QURAN AND MY SUNNAH mean to you?

It means exactly what he said, he has left the Qur'an and Sunnah and they will always be a source of guidance and inspiration for the people of the time and for all people at all times. But that doesn't necessarily negate the idea that there was both a universal message and a specific one for the people of the time.

Hassan

[Consider]

Brother hassan

It still boils down to the same thing

We cant trust what the west have said about the taliban - even if it is a witness acount u said! or whatever happened in Nigeria - I dont see any country that is properly applying the rules of the shariah in their lands because if they were, subhanAllaah, that would be a brilliant society

There are always going to be people who are unhappy - there were so many people going on and on about the women wearing burqa's in afghanistan - so look now, women still wear burqa, maybe some women who dont understand their religion or dont know about it dont like to cover, but the fact is that we are told to cover - and women still wear burqa

This is not to do with emotions - Allaah tells you in the quran to wage jihaad - and how many people are scared of killing? how many people would hesitate to kill? But it is needed to ward off agressors - and fight for justice - and with regards to waging it to opressors, peaceful means must be tried first of course

Islam is perfect, people are not, If the Prophet Muhammad (saws) ordered stoning for adultery, we accept it - but if some people misapply the laws, then that is wrong - but you dont say the law should be changed! You say people should fear Allaah!

Imagine brother, if we lived under a proper islamic state, where peoples hands would be cut off for stealing (and this has to be a certain amount!) who would go and steal? it would be foolish! to steal and you know that if you are caught, your hand would be cut off

Sadly, we dont live under the shariah, many countries are corrupt and so are their leaders - and if you tried to impose shariah, some would not like it, because they dont understand the deen, but we have seen how a true islamic state functions, we see it was successful, not for a small period of time, but for a long period of time - and it only failed when people went corrupt and abandoned their deen

[Luminol]

So what are we to do? Change it every year or so it fits in with the times?

Just think about what you're saying. If Muslims did that through the ages, it would be so distorted that the perfect deen of Allah (swt) would be unrecognisable.

It's people that need to change. Not Islam.

[Ammarah]

I'm pretty disgusted and appalled that some of the statements are from a Muslim. But for Allah's sake I will keep my cool.

Your statements about the taleban. *If* they are true, is that Islams fault or the fault of the persons in question? Same with the case in Nigeria? A flaw (na'udu billah) in Islam, or again of the persons in question? The Muslims.
To me it's like saying lets scrap salat because some do not know how to pray properly.

According to your logic these *mistakes* and unfair trials were because we are still in the 6th century follwing the Islam from back then. According to you we need to go forward and away from the way of the Prophet (saw) and sahaba(ra) and find our own way.

No Akhi. How about the Muslims get back to Quran and the Prophet's sunnah and truely learn the beautiful and fair nature of Muhammad. We need to learn and apply the teachings of Muhammad in full.

[Consider]

But that doesn't necessarily negate the idea that there was both a universal message and a specific one for the people of the time.

The Quran sets outlines, and the hadith show how it was implemented

You must examine the role of the Prophet (saws), he came to explain the Quran, and to show us how the laws should be implemented, otherwise how would we know how to implement them?

Like the Quran tells us that we must pray, but t is the hadith that tell us how to pray, no of rakah, what to say when u praye etc...

Like prayer, many hings are explained by the Prophet (saws) because if he hadnt explained them, we wouldnt know how to apply the laws that we are told about

like stealing, we have to cut the hand of a person who steals - but there are conditions, you know like how much a person stole, and if a person has reached the age of understanding etc...

You see, when theres a law in islam, there is no way of knowing ourselves how to apply that law, and the Prophet explained how to apply it

Like the Quran tells us regarding fasting, to eat & drink until the white thread is distinguishable from the black, one companion on hearing this kept a white thread and black thread under his pillow! and would look and see if he could telll the diff b/w the two! but the verse actually meant to differentiate between the white of dawn & the darkness of the light

So, The Prophet (saws) explained the laws to us, we would not know otherwise, and think, how can the application of laws be different? if u steal, ur hand must be cut, and so forth - other things like using a mike for calling the adhan, and other things, these are different, but otherwise the laws cant be changed

[Luminol]

A request for Hassan:

"Believe in Allâh and His Messenger and the light which He sent down." (64:8)

[AbuMubarak]

Originally posted by hassanradwan
It means exactly what he said, he has left the Qur'an and Sunnah and they will always be a source of guidance and inspiration for the people of the time and for all people at all times. But that doesn't necessarily negate the idea that there was both a universal message and a specific one for the people of the time.

Hassan thats the beauty of the quran, it was specific for then and universal for all of mankind, until the day of judgement

listen to yourself, if everyone thought like you, we wouldnt have hafiz, muhaddith, scholars, and like everything else in the west, things would all submit to whatever the superpower says

this is not the way of islam nor of the sunnah of Allah to leave us a message and then say, its ok to change it as we need, (or think we need)

the turks tried to change quran into turkish

i gave a scenario of muslims in the future wearing miniskirts and smoking pot in the masjid, if we dont hold on to this deen, thats exactly what would happen

because as you and i both know, no where in quran nor hadith does it say, dont smoke pot, and with many of these modernist sisters walking around talking about how their hearts are their hijab, its not too far a stretch to see them in the masjid with miniskirts

and its those crazy wahhabi, fundamentalist, salafi, jihadi, brothers that are holding this deen uppermost

i am not saying they are perfect, but i prefer to be raised with any of them on the day of judgement than any of these people who want to change islam

[Luminol]

Originally posted by Raafi
thats the beauty of the quran, it was specific for then and universal for all of mankind, until the day of judgement

listen to yourself, if everyone thought like you, we wouldnt have hafiz, muhaddith, scholars, and like everything else in the west, things would all submit to whatever the superpower says

this is not the way of islam nor of the sunnah of Allah to leave us a message and then say, its ok to change it as we need, (or think we need)

the turks tried to change quran into turkish

i gave a scenario of muslims in the future wearing miniskirts and smoking pot in the masjid, if we dont hold on to this deen, thats exactly what would happen

because as you and i both know, no where in quran nor hadith does it say, dont smoke pot, and with many of these modernist sisters walking around talking about how their hearts are their hijab, its not too far a stretch to see them in the masjid with miniskirts

and its those crazy wahhabi, fundamentalist, salafi, jihadi, brothers that are holding this deen uppermost

i am not saying they are perfect, but i prefer to be raised with any of them on the day of judgement than any of these people who want to change islam
Alhamdulillah! I agree.

['Inayah']

As-salaamu 'alaykum wa rahmatullahi wa barakatuh;

Keep struggling brothers ... it's when we stop struggling ... and give up on the fight ... that we are truly lost. Only Allah can see into our hearts and see what our true intentions are ... May He make them pure and good intentions ... and May He guide us all on the seerat al mustaquim!

'This is the book ;in it is guidance sure, without doubt, to those who fear God;'

Surah Al baqarah, verse 2

[Peace]

Originally posted by Raafi
thats the beauty of the quran, it was specific for then and universal for all of mankind, until the day of judgement

But not all the laws were meant to last for ever. Take the laws on Slavery for example.

The Shari'ah as it stand still allows Slavery and the taking of female concubines during war.

However many Scholars will tell you that this law is not applicable in our times and that any Islamic State today would not allow Slavery.

I remember I quoted Yusuf Ali's comments on the verse (Qur'an 4:24)

"Also (prohibited in marriage are) women already married, except those whome your right hand possess..."

Yusuf Ali explains in note 540 'those your right hand possess';

"captives taken in Jihad... <snip> ...the slave condition is now out of date, in the true spirit of Islam"

He is clearly saying that this verse is now out of date. Humanity has MOVED ON from allowing slavery.

He also refers to the "SPIRIT" of Islam - i.e. Islam encourages the freeing of slaves and that the aim is NOT to have slaves. Many scholars agree that slavery could not be banned outright because the Nomadic Arab society could not change so radically in such a short space of time.

But 1400 years later society HAS now changed - buying and selling human beings is no longer acceptable.

So we have 'de facto' abolished it - even in Muslim countries - but we continue to pay LIP SERVICE to it - are we hypocrytes?

Why can't we have the COURAGE to abolish it in the Shari'ah, clearly and plainly and admit that YES the Shari'ah DOES need re-viewing according to the changes that have taken place in human society.

Hassan

[reachin'out]

Assalam alaykum,

That may be Yusuf Ali's opinion.

But slavery has never been abolished. In fact, trading in slaves was common in the time of the Sahaba, though enslaving other than those who were booty in war was (and is) absolutely forbidden. Even today, slavery according to Islamic criterion is practiced in a broad belt of Africa from Mauritania to Chad as a normal aspect of their society, some slaves even indenturing themselves in order to have a chance earning their means to live.

Uncontrolled and illicit non Islamic slavery, particularly in women for pleasure, is practiced in the west and in non Muslim countries in the far east, such as India and Nepal. These, indeed are the depraved models of slavery that should be abolished, since they often are sold temporarily on a limited use basis, and this sort of trade is completely illegal by Islamic Sharriah.

However, to abolish slavery entirely would deprive us (the Muslims) of a major means of earning ajir (by the manumission of slaves). Do you wish for that?

[Peace]

Originally posted by reachin'out
Uncontrolled and illicit non Islamic slavery, particularly in women for pleasure, is practiced in the west and in non Muslim countries in the far east, such as India and Nepal. These, indeed are the depraved models of slavery that should be abolished, since they often are sold temporarily on a limited use basis, and this sort of trade is completely illegal by Islamic Sharriah.

Islamic Shari'ah allows the taking of female captives during war.

This was practiced by the Taliban in Afghansitan during their war with their enemies.

I reading about how the Taliban would take away hundreds of women from Uzbek or other areas and either keep them or sell them for use as concubines.

All perfectly legal according to the Shari'ah since these people were fighting against the Taliban and were conquered.

Hassan

[Qurratulain]

assalamulaikom
islamic shariah yes allows the taking of female captives during war, but it has to be in strict accordance with islamic laws, if someone abuses it , its his problem not with the islamic shariah. I read this on askimam since a while back there was this discussion of slavery in islam as well.

"One question that still remains is whether slavery still legally prevails anywhere in the Islamic world and whether it can be successfully implemented in this age. Well, there is no prevalence of lawful slavery in the Islamic world today and it would be difficult to implement it because of the stringent conditions attached to it. Firstly, the prisoners have to be captured in 'Jihaad' in the true sense of the word. Then again, If true 'Jihaad' did break out somewhere, there are still a number of other laws and conditions to abide by which are far too stringent for any Islamic country in the world to abide by in this time and age when people's personal gains and whims and desire are being given preference to over Islamic Law. According to Islamic Law, captive female prisoners are also part and parcel of the booty. One fifth of the booty has to be first distributed to the needy, orphans, etc. The remaining four-fifths should then be distributed among the soldiers who participated in the war. The distribution can only take effect after the booty is brought into Islamic territory. The Ameerul-Mu'mineen (Head of the Islamic State) remains the guardian of the female prisoners until he allocates them to the soldiers. Only after a soldier has been allotted a slave girl, and made the owner of her, will she become his lawful possession. After she spends a period called 'Istibraa', which is the elapse of one menstrual period, It becomes permissible for her owner to have relations with her. After possession of the slave too there are a number of other laws that affect the master and slave. There is hardly any Islamic country today that can abide to all these conditions, with the result that it is quite difficult to implement slavery in this time and age.

The subject of slavery in Islam is quite comprehensive and there are many laws that pertain to slaves which the Jurisprudents of Islam have outlined. It is, however, hoped that the above mentioned facts will be adequate enough to answer your question."
askimam

The same answer comes back than that its NOT islam that needs revision, its US muslims that need to act on it in accordance with its principles, since Allah's laws cant be changed, their applicable forever.

[Peace]

Originally posted by Qurratulain
Firstly, the prisoners have to be captured in 'Jihaad' in the true sense of the word. Then again, If true 'Jihaad' did break out somewhere, there are still a number of other laws and conditions to abide by which are far too stringent for any Islamic country in the world to abide by in this time and age when people's personal gains and whims and desire are being given preference to over Islamic Law.

OK fine - that pretty much means that slavery will never occur.

What about what the Taliban did then?

Does that mean they were not fighting a true Jihaad and did not rule according to the true principles of Islamic Law?

Hassan

[reachin'out]

Assalam alaykum,

Selling them as concubines or distributing them to their fighters?

If the second, it is perfectly in accordance with the Sunnah.

As for "selling them as concubines", what exactly do you mean? The taliban did not distribute them to the needy, but sold them instead? Or thwey sold them temporarily - in a form of prostitution. Neither is according to the Sunnah, as Qurra explained. So I doubt the stories concerning such are true.

I would hazard a guess they were distributed to the fighters. Now, if the fighters sold them as slaves to other Muslims - they are entitled to. If they sold them to non-Muslims, then they are committing a great sin. If they were selling their 'favours' (in temporary contracts), that is also against the Sharriah, and sinful.

Could you explain your story a bit more clearly?

[Peace]

Originally posted by reachin'out
Selling them as concubines or distributing them to their fighters?

The girls were distributed amongst the Taliban fighters - who could either keep them as concubines or sell them for money.

[reachin'out]

No problem, then. Why are you getting so indignant about it?

[reachin'out]

Assalam alaykum, OneShot,

Please do not be distressed. You are right.

Originally posted by oneshot
Point of Order, if I may. Speaking bluntly, my very initial reading of Ayat and Hadith leaves me with the clear impression that Mohammed (pbuh) brought order and law to the practice of slavery, that was otherwise abhorrently (aberrantly?) practiced in his time. However, throughout the readings, there is a repeated message that freeing slaves is the right thing to do.

You can see by Qurra’s post how ownership was brought rigidly into a legalized framework which limited the ownership of slaves, and below are hadith which show what is expected in the treatment of slaves under Islam.

Hassanradwan was referring to a practice of the Taliban leadership as if it was aberrant and abhorrent, when they were, in fact, following the Sunnah. How these women were treated by those whose right hand possessed them was not even touched upon, except that those who needed money more than another woman to look after sold their new asset.

Perhaps Hassanradwan can bring forward some evidence on how they were treated, remembering that their brothers and sons or husbands (if alive) had the right (and duty) to ransom them. Perhaps, if no ransomer came forward for them, the women had no male mahrams to look out for them. Then being given as a slave to someone who would take responsibility for them may have been a boon.

Please read the hadith below, and click on the title below them to read the other hadith and verses from the Qur’an addressing this topic of slave rights.

I am not being casual about this. I am talking about what is Sunnah. And so is Qurra'. Hassanradwan seems to think it is an outdated Sunnah.

Slaves Are To Be Treated Like Brothers

Hadith - Sahih Al-Bukhari 3.721, Narrated Al Marur bin Suwaid
I saw Abu Dhar Al-Ghifari wearing a cloak, and his slave, too, was wearing a cloak. We asked him about that (i.e. how both were wearing similar cloaks). He replied, "Once I abused a man and he complained of me to the Prophet. The Prophet (peace be upon him) asked me, 'Did you abuse him by slighting his mother?' He added, 'Your slaves are your brethren upon whom Allah has given you authority. So, if one has one's brethren under one's control, one should feed them with the like of what one eats and clothe them with the like of what one wears. You should not overburden them with what they cannot bear, and if you do so, help them (in their hard job).' "

Hadith - Al-Muwatta 54.41, Kindness to Slaves
Malik related to me that he heard that Umar ibn al-Khattab went to the villages every Saturday. If he found a slave doing work which he was not capable of doing, he lightened it for him.

Hadith - Sunan of Abu Dawud, #2694, Narrated Ali ibn Abu Talib
Some slaves (of the unbelievers) went out to the Apostle of Allah (peace be upon him) on the day of al-Hudaybiyyah before treaty. Their masters wrote to him saying: O Muhammad, they have not gone out to you with an interest in your religion, but they have gone out to escape from slavery. Some people said: They have spoken the truth, Apostle of Allah, send them back to them. The Apostle of Allah (peace be upon him) became angry and said: I do not see your restraining yourself from this action, group of Quraysh, but that Allah send someone to you who strike your necks. He then refused to return them, and said: They are emancipated (slaves) of Allah, the Exalted.

Hadith - Sahih Muslim, #2182, Narrated Abdullah ibn Umar
Khaythamah reported: While we were sitting in the company of Abdullah ibn Umar there came in his steward. He (Ibn Umar) said: Have you supplied the provision to the slaves? He said: No. Upon this he said: Go and give (the provision) to them, for the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) has said: This sin is enough for a man that he withholds the subsistence from one whose master he is.
Malik related to me from Nafi that Abdullah ibn Umar freed an illegitimate child and its mother.


The Non-Muslim Perspective

Annemarie Schimmel in "Islam: An Introduction", p. 67
Slavery was not abolished by the Koran, but believers are constantly admonished to treat their slaves well. In case of illness a slave has to be looked after and well cared for. To manumit [free] a slave is highly meritorious; the slave can ransom himself by paying some of the money he has earned while conducting his own business. Only children of slaves or non-Muslim prisoners of war can become slaves, never a freeborn Muslim; therefore slavery is theoretically doomed to disappear with the expansion of Islam. The entire history of Islam proves that slaves could occupy any office, and many former military slaves, usually recruited from among the Central Asian Turks, became military leaders and often even rulers as in eastern Iran, India (the Slave Dynasty of Delhi), and medieval Egypt (the Mamluks). Eunuchs too served in important capacities, not only as the guardians of the women's quarters, but also in high administrative and military positions.

From: slavery in Islam (http://muttaqun.com/slavery.html)

Jamila ;)

[Peace]

Originally posted by reachin'out
No problem, then. Why are you getting so indignant about it?

You feel completely OK about girls being taken against their will and kept as concubines or sold into slavery?

You don't think conquering armies should leave innocent civilians - women and children - alone?

You don't think mankind has moved on from the Middle Ages when it was accepted that invading armies would rape and pillage?

Hassan

[reachin'out]

Originally posted by hassanradwan
You feel completely OK about girls being taken against their will and kept as concubines or sold into slavery?

You don't think conquering armies should leave innocent civilians - women and children - alone?

You don't think mankind has moved on from the Middle Ages when it was accepted that invading armies would rape and pillage?

Hassan

Yes. I accept it. It is from Allah, and to Him I submit. And take the trouble to read Qurra's response and the hadith on my link to check just how far from rape and pillage the Islamic concept of Jihad and war booty is.

Jamila

[Luminol]

But no, by your Lord, they can have no Faith, until they make you (O Muhammad SAW) judge in all disputes between them, and find in themselves no resistance against your decisions, and accept (them) with full submission (Surat an-Nisa': 65).

And if you obey most of those on earth, they will mislead you far away from Allâh's Path. They follow nothing but conjectures, and they do nothing but lie( Surat al-An'am: 116).

[Raven]

Originally posted by hassanradwan
I am interested in what ppl here think?

I, a non-Muslim, believe I have the answer:

It depends. It depends on the Muslim.

[Ammarah]

Not a bad answer :)

[Ammarah]

Originally posted by hassanradwan
You feel completely OK about girls being taken against their will and kept as concubines or sold into slavery?

You don't think conquering armies should leave innocent civilians - women and children - alone?

You don't think mankind has moved on from the Middle Ages when it was accepted that invading armies would rape and pillage?

Hassan

Astaghfirullah! What are you implying? Rape and pillage? Fear Allah akhi.

[Sultan]

Hassan,

Do you think its ok if we change the Quran to make adultary halal in order to conform with western society?

After all, it seems that you want to update Islam to something that is acceptable in THIS TIME.

Come on then, Hassan, if adultary is not a crime in the UK, then surely, by your arguments, we must bring the shariah 'up to date' to make adultary halal instead of haram.

Instead, of trying to fit Islam into western society, you should enjoin others to fit western society into Islam.

[Ammarah]

:freedom:

[basictruth]

Originally posted by Consider
The muslims are in a pretty low state

Because they have abandoned the deen

instead, you see muslims comromising on their deen, embracing western ideals with open arms, and bootlicking like never before

whereas islam came to remove us from jahiliyah

Islam is Islam, it is the people who are losing it

and there will be ups & down, but the promise of Allaah is true

----------------------

THE LOGICAL ANSWER

WE CAN BLAME OTHERS BUT IT WILL NOT HELP TILL WE CLEAN OUR SELVES. AMERICA, BRITAIN, FRANCE, RUSSIA.... ALL KAFIRS
DOING WHAT EXPECTED OF THEM, WE ON THE OTHER HAND ARE
NOT TRUE MUSLIMS, A LOT OF US ENJOY KAFIRS BUTTLICKING AND BLAMING OTHERS.

THANK YOU

SORRY FOR THE CAPS, I aM NOT SHOUTING, KEYBOARD STUCK

-----------------------

NOW READ THE "GREAT" JEWISH LEADER MESSAGE OF PEACE AND LOVE:


"I vow that if I was just an Israeli civilian and I met a Palestinian I would burn him and I would make him suffer before killing him. With one hit I've killed 750 Palestinians (in Rafah, 1956). I wanted to encourage my soldiers by raping Arabic girls as the Palestinian women is a slave for Jews, and we do whatever we want to her and nobody tells us what we shall do but we tell others what they shall do."

(source: Ariel Sharon - interview with General Ouze Merham, 1956)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Peace]

Originally posted by Sultan
Do you think its ok if we change the Quran to make adultary halal in order to conform with western society?

After all, it seems that you want to update Islam to something that is acceptable in THIS TIME.

Come on then, Hassan, if adultary is not a crime in the UK, then surely, by your arguments, we must bring the shariah 'up to date' to make adultary halal instead of haram.

The Qur'an can never change. It is the revelation from Allah to his prophet Muhammad. ADultery will always be forbidden and a crime - but the punishment of stoning is no-longer the appropriate way of dealing with it in our present circumstances.

I am not saying the Qur'an or sunnah can be changed (stoning is of course NOT in the Qur'an) but that some of the punishments and laws were meant for their time.

For example there are many scholars who will tell you that slavery has been de-facto abolished by Islam.

When Yusuf Ali wrote in his famous Tafseer:

"the slave condition is now out of date, in the true spirit of Islam"

Do you think he was trying to change Qur'an?

Hassan

[reachin'out]

Originally posted by hassanradwan
The Qur'an can never change. It is the revelation from Allah to his prophet Muhammad. ADultery will always be forbidden and a crime - but the punishment of stoning is no-longer the appropriate way of dealing with it in our present circumstances.

I am not saying the Qur'an or sunnah can be changed (stoning is of course NOT in the Qur'an) but that some of the punishments and laws were meant for their time.

For example there are many scholars who will tell you that slavery has been de-facto abolished by Islam.

When Yusuf Ali wrote in his famous Tafseer:

"the slave condition is now out of date, in the true spirit of Islam"

Do you think he was trying to change Qur'an?

Hassan

There are a few problems with Yusuf Ali's Commentary, not the least of which is Judeo Christian terminology and concepts being forced into the Qur'anic exposition. He tried too hard to marry those concepts to Islam in a laudible attempt to attract the heart and intellect of the target audience and thus engage their belief sytems when reading the Qur'an.
Unfortunately, it seems to have rubbed of on the modern proslythizer, who tends to be shaped by, rather than shaping, his (or her) non-Muslim targets for da'wa.

[AbuMubarak]

Originally posted by hassanradwan
The Qur'an can never change. It is the revelation from Allah to his prophet Muhammad. ADultery will always be forbidden and a crime - but the punishment of stoning is no-longer the appropriate way of dealing with it in our present circumstances.

I am not saying the Qur'an or sunnah can be changed (stoning is of course NOT in the Qur'an) but that some of the punishments and laws were meant for their time.

For example there are many scholars who will tell you that slavery has been de-facto abolished by Islam.

When Yusuf Ali wrote in his famous Tafseer:

"the slave condition is now out of date, in the true spirit of Islam"

Do you think he was trying to change Qur'an?

Hassan stoning, slavery, chopping off the hands

anything else?

we already have the beards disappearing, the "islamic dress", attendance to the masjids is down, women islamic comedians, al-fatah, music is considered halal, men wear gold and silk

anything else?

why not just wrap our hearts with the quran? have sincere beliefs in our hearts, and sincere niyyat, isnt that sufficient?

Allah doesnt care about the outside, only our hearts, because the prophet did say that actions are judged by niyyat

and how about hadiths? do we really really need those?

there is so much confusion within them, why dont we just stick with the quran


woe to you hassan, you are beginning a descent down a very slippery slope, with shaytan waiting at the bottom to catch you, and when you get there, he wont be there

fear Allah, make dua to Allah that he remove this shakka and ra'iba from your heart

[Luminol]

Hassan, you attack Allah (swt's) Law for being outdated (which is an act of Kufr I might add)
but what would you have as an alternative punishment or is there to be any punishment at all for adultery, stealing etc?

It's upsetting to see that we're even discussing this. What ever alternative you have to offer, it will always be rejected and do you know why? Because the whole point of being Muslim is to submit to your Lord, body, heart and soul.

[Peace]

Originally posted by Luminol
what would you have as an alternative punishment

Of course such things will not be left to individual whims.

This would be a matter for the Scholars of Islam to look into - applying their Ijtihad and it is agreed that if the Scholars all reach consensus - Ijma' - upon a ruling, it will be correct.

I admit that - at the moment - they seem to be far from taking such steps to review the Shari'ah.

But I believe we need to start at least debating such things, calmly and rationally - without getting upset or calling people names.

Hassan

[AbuMubarak]

any "scholar" who would even debate what is clear is kafir

what Allah says is clear, what the Prophet said is clear, no one can debate or alter the foundations of this deen

[Peace]

Originally posted by AbuMubarak
any "scholar" who would even debate what is clear is kafir

what Allah says is clear, what the Prophet said is clear, no one can debate or alter the foundations of this deen

By "CLEAR" do you mean, slavery?

I'm sorry but there are very, very many scholars who would not agree with you as they would argue that Islam actually paved the way for the abolishment of slavery.

So do you call these scholars Kafir?

As regards the others punishments you call "CLEAR" i.e. Stoning, again many would point out that Allah actually does not proscribe stoning in the Qur'an - but 'Lashing' - and there are some scholars who would argue that Stoning is not appropriate in our day and age.

Do you call these Scholars Kafir?

Hassan

[AbuMubarak]

hassan, please refrain from throwing doubt into everything islamic

when you say that stoning isnt in quran, are you also saying that it is not a clear hudood in islam?

do we derive our islam solely from quran?

[Peace]

Originally posted by AbuMubarak
do we derive our islam solely from quran?

No

Originally posted by AbuMubarak
when you say that stoning isnt in quran, are you also saying that it is not a clear hudood in islam?

Yes, and here is someone else who thinks that too...

http://www.understanding-islam.com/related/text.asp?type=question&qid=389

Title:
Punishment of Rajam (i.e. Stoning to Death in case of adultery)

Question:

Background

This question relates to an article on Islamic punishment for sexual relations outside marriage written by Javed Ahmad Ghamidi in his book "Burhan".

Mr. Ghamidi rightly states and our jurists agree that verses relating to punishment of 100 lashes for zina do not differentiate between married and un-married people.

It is also a historic fact that the punishment of 'Rajam' was given by the Prophet to certain individuals. Our jurists tried to explain away this ambiguity/paradox by saying that Holy Prophet's action amends the verses of the Qur'an.

Mr. Ghamidi stresses the principle that Hadith can only elaborate/explain a law stated in the Qur'an, but it can not amend or contradict it. Only another verse of the Qur'an can amend/modify it. Hence he says that 'Rajam' given to some people was not because they were married or not but because this punishment comes under another verse of the Qur'an which stipulate death punishment to those who try to create 'Fasaad'-anarchy in the society.

He concludes that people who habitually indulge in illicit sexual relations with a view to spread this in the society, prostitutes and those dacoits who rape women can come under the category of creating 'fasaad'. Hence according to him people were given 'Rajam' by the Holy Prophet not because they were married, but because they came under one of the categories mentioned above.

My Question

What Mr Ghamidi says is quite logical. What I thought was lacking in his argument is that he has not substantiated his argument from the facts of history. From the details of the cases of persons who were given the punishment of 'Rajam' by the Holy Prophet can't we know about their character? Do the traditions relating to the incident give any evidence that these people were in fact involved in of one of the above-mentioned crimes which come under spreading 'fasaad' in the society?

On the other hand the older faqeehs [i.e. Muslim jurists] also do not substantiate their contention of punishment of 'Rajam' to married people and lashes to unmarried people from the actual case studies to prove that all those who were lashed in Medina were in fact unmarried and those stoned to death were married.

Secondly one thought that came to my mind is that in the absence of a law in the Qur'an sometimes the Holy Prophet used to follow the Musavi fiqah [i.e. The law given to Moses (pbuh)] - which jews observed. For an analysis of this issue I think it would be useful if we look into the punishment for zina in the Musavi fiqah and for the possibility whether Holy Prophet took that as precedence.



Answer:

Although it seems that you have understood the problem correctly, yet, to remove all doubts, I would still like to reiterate that the real problem in accepting the opinion, which is held by the majority of the Muslim jurists - in the case of the explanation of the incidents of stoning to death - is that their explanation results in accepting a change in the Qur'anic directive pertaining to the punishment of Zina (fornication/adultery).

The Qur'an has clearly stated the punishment of Zina to be one hundred lashes, to be implemented in public and the disqualification of the person involved in the crime from marrying a chaste man/woman. Nevertheless, there are a number of narratives, according to which during the times of the Prophet (pbuh), some people involved in the crime were stoned to death. Most of the Muslim jurists, on the basis of some pieces of information, reported in narratives of the proceedings of such cases, are of the opinion that the Prophet (pbuh) implemented the punishment of stoning to death to those, who were already married and yet committed the crime. Thus, the Muslim jurists are of the opinion that the Shari`ah has prescribed two separate punishments for the crime:

If an unmarried man or a woman commits Zina, the punishment shall be 100 lashes; and

If a married man or a woman commits Zina, the punishment shall be stoning to death.

This explanation, even though it is held by most of the Muslim jurists, results in an alteration in the implication of the related Qur'anic directive. The word 'Zina', used by the Qur'an covers both fornication (i.e. Zina committed by an unmarried person) as well as adultery (i.e. Zina committed by a married person). Thus, holding the opinion that the punishment of Zina, if it is committed by a married person, is stoning to death is, in effect, an alteration in the Qur'anic directive, which had prescribed the punishment to be 100 lashes. As a result of their opinion, the Muslim jurists, generally, also had to submit that Hadith can alter a Qur'anic directive.

The explanation given by my Ustaz (teacher), which you have referred in your comments, is, in fact, an alternative explanation of the reasons for which the criminals were administered the punishment of stoning to death by the Prophet (pbuh). I hold this explanation to be correct, primarily due to the reasons that:

It does not result in the alteration of the implication of the Qur'anic directive, on the basis of Hadith. I firmly believe, on the basis of the Qur'an itself, that nothing can alter the implication of the Qur'anic verses in any way; and

The punishment administered by the Prophet (pbuh) becomes one, which is substantiated by the Qur'an. In other words, rather than altering the implication of the Qur'anic directive, this explanation makes the implementation of the punishment of stoning to death one, which is actually based on the Qur'an.

The Qur'an (Al-Maaidah 5: 32) has restricted administering the death sentence to only cases where the subject is guilty of murder or Fasaad fi al-Ardh[1]. If the criminals that were subjected to the punishment of stoning to death, were not considered to be in the category of Fasaad fi al-Ardh, then the punishment is in contradiction to the stated directive of the Qur'an, as they were, obviously, not guilty of murder.

Any other explanation of the reasons for the administration of the punishment of stoning to death (even the one which you have suggested in your last paragraph), which does not alter the implication of the Qur'anic directive and does not contradict the Qur'anic directive regarding the restriction of the death sentence to murder and cases of Fasaad fi al-Ardh (and preferably is also one, which makes the punishment implemented by the Prophet (pbuh) to be based on a Qur'anic directive) would, indeed, be worth considering. Nevertheless, I believe it is worth mentioning here that the explanation that you have suggested is based on an important presumption, i.e. "in the absence of a law in the Qur'an sometimes the Holy Prophet used to follow the Musavi fiqah[2], which [the] Jews observed". I really think that for this particular explanation to deserve any consideration, this presumption needs to be fully established. Unless this presumption is fully established and accepted as a fact, the explanation that is based on this presumption would remain quite questionable and one based on conjecture. Moreover, it should also be remembered that the Qur'anic directive of restricting the death sentence to cases of murder and Fasaad fi al-Ardh alone (Al-Maaidah 5: 32), as is clear from the words of the referred verse, was a part of the Musavi Shari`ah as well. Thus, even if it is presumed that the Prophet (pbuh) administered the punishment according to the Jewish laws, the crime still has to fall under the two stipulated categories of either murder or fasaad fi al-ardh.

You write:

What I thought was lacking in his argument is that he has not substantiated his argument from the facts of history. From the details of the cases of persons who were given the punishment of 'Rajam' by the Holy Prophet can't we know about their character? Does the traditions relating to the incident give any evidence that these people were in fact involved in of one of the above-mentioned crimes which come under spreading 'fasaad' in the society?

If you would take a close look at pages 52 to 81 of the referred book[3] of my Ustaz, you shall see that in these pages, the author has commented on the information of the cases of rajam, as it has been reported in the narratives. The basic theme of these comments is that the information given in these narratives regarding a number of aspects of the crime as well as the criminal is not detailed enough for us to derive any conclusions on the basis of these narratives. Thus, we are left with no option but to look at the incident in the light of the Qur'anic directives and try to fill in the information blanks, which exist in these narratives.

I hope this helps.

26th May 2000

[Peace]

bump

[Umm Layth]

Who is Ghamdi??

[MMS]

Who is Ghamdi??

www.askjeeves.com (http://www.askjeeves.com)