Ads by Muslim Ad Network

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Tanzimat destroyed the Ottoman Empire

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #76
    YahyaIbnSelam so you're part of HT or just interested in them?



    What do you think of the topics they discussed?
    Amir ul-Muminin Sayyiduna Ali KarramAllahu Wajhah said,
    "Mahma tasawwarta bi-balik, fallahu bi-khilaf dhalik,"
    Whatever comes into your mind, Allah is other than that,

    Al-Aqeedah Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal (Riwayah Abu Bakr al-Khallal),
    1/116

    Comment


    • #77
      Ottoman province of Karaman, yes.

      Originally posted by Muhammad Hasan View Post
      How do you know that what I have linked is not an objective appraisal? You haven't even read it, its written in an western academic style, not Islamic scholarly one, and it references orientalist opinions etc.

      It seems you think the western orientalist is the objective judge of your religion. Why do you have such an obsession with the west, their academia, western democracy, liberalism etc.?

      I'm guessing you agree with the statement of Abduh (al-Mubtadi') who said:



      The essence of modernism and Islamic reformism.
      I did not say it is not objective. I had looked through the document but it has a very large scope. Muslims can write objective, too, of course, but that is seldom because that genre is not prevalent with Sharia scholars whose main work is to prove their own point, which is not a bad thing in itself, just a different genre.

      I know that statement of shaykh Abduh, but I strongly disagree with that appraisal of Western society. Islam is a whole. Ethics and justice are located in the same equation with obedience, which is all maruf and hasan. so they cannot be separated either. The only thing one can say about a moral disbeliever is that he would make a good believer. Such way of thinking as mentioend reminds me of the wrong Iman is ilm position, which suggests that non-believers are just ignorant of Islam. Yet in reality there are many disbelievers refusing to submit to Allah, despite their knowledge of the religion and its proofs. Besides that, I want to remind you that sheikhulislam Mustafa Sabri Efendi mentioned Abduh as al-sheikh, and al-marhum. There is no need to denigrate your opponent.

      I am not with HT, its program is autocratic based on a wrong understanding of the Sharia. He calls it a hukm shari, whereas scholars have discussed whether the caliphate is even obligatory by reason or by Sharia (see al-Mawardi's book). Yet he assumes that every rule is set by the Sharia, whereas disagreement existed even on the fundament. They demand AFAIK everyone to give bay'a to their Imam and they apply the hadiths on bay'a and jama'a on this issue, as if there was not any other jama'a working towards the caliphate, which is only the last stage of our goal. Defending Muslims at all levels but especially their lives and establishing Sharia rule at the local level is more urgent than establishing a global caliphate by collecting bay'a for their Imam, which is not a tangible strategy anyway. Nonetheless, I appreciate their subsidiary political work. They would make a good political party in the Islamic republic.

      You seem bad at guessing people brother, so I recommend you to avoid it and just be open, not attempting to fit people into categories.
      Last edited by YahyaIbnSelam; 19-03-21, 07:37 PM.
      “Let whosoever believes in Allah and in the Last Day either speak good or be silent.” — Prophet Muhammad pbuh | مَن كانَ يُؤْمِنُ باللَّهِ والْيَومِ الآخِرِ فَلْيَقُلْ خَيْرًا، أوْ لِيصْمُتْ

      Comment


      • #78
        Originally posted by YahyaIbnSelam View Post
        I did not say it is not objective. I had looked through the document but it has a very large scope. Muslims can write objective, too, of course, but that is seldom because that genre is not prevalent with Sharia scholars whose main work is to prove their own point, which is not a bad thing in itself, just a different genre.

        I know that statement of shaykh Abduh, but I strongly disagree with that appraisal of Western society. Islam is a whole. Ethics and justice are located in the same equation with obedience, which is all maruf and hasan. so they cannot be separated either. The only thing one can say about a moral disbeliever is that he would make a good believer. Such way of thinking as mentioend reminds me of the Iman is ilm position, which suggests that non-believers are just ignorant of Islam. Yet in reality there are many disbelievers refusing to submit to Allah, despite their knowledge of the religion and its proofs. Besides that, I want to remind you that sheikhulislam Mustafa Sabri Efendi mentioned Abduh as al-sheikh, and al-marhum. There is no need to denigrate your opponent.

        I am not with HT, its program seems autocratic to me.

        You seem bad at guessing people brother, so I recommend you to avoid it and just be open, not attempting to fit people into categories.
        Right. So you won't read it because it has "large scope"... Also what you have said confirms my views of you - you consider the westerner to judge your religion objectively. I wonder how much orientalist literature you've read... That's interesting, if you are working to prove your own point, your subjective in your view. So you think orientalists do not have an agenda or points they seek to prove then?

        I retract what I said on Allah's slave Muhammad 'Abduh in light of hearing from a respected Shaykh that he repented at the end of his life. As for Shaykh al-Islam calling him "al-Shaykh", I mean he also pointed out that what he was calling to was clear-cut heresy, so its not like he was calling him that in recognition (at that time) of any orthodoxy, if that's the point you're trying to make. He likely knew what he had said at the end of his life. As for 'al-Marhum', this is just showing respect for the deceased.

        What are you using to judge that a disbeliever is "moral", and would you consider western society "moral"?

        HT is democratic and constitutionalist, you know that as much as I do. You were the one promoting some literature they have not to long ago, and I've spoken to some of them, and they are of the exact same mindset as you. Do you wish for me to show you evidence of that or something?

        And what do you mean by be more open? I used to hold the views you do, although I debated whether parliamentary/presidential/semi-presidential is better etc. But you learn to think more critically, you learn more history, learn more about politics and political structure and come to the conclusion that it is actually a pretty bad system. There is no Muslim scholar who gave me that view on democracy, no disbeliever either. I just critically examined it, and realised it is flawed. Insha'Allah you'll come to the same conclusion eventually, if you are critical enough. (On top of that though it also contradicts the Sunnah)

        You say I am bad at guessing, but I've essentially guessed your perspective, not that this was some kind of goal. Fitting people into categories is what I do best, people are naive enough to think they are unique and there are none others like them. Western civilisation thinks this of itself. Its just a repeat of a cycle that is hundreds and thousands of years old. The same ideas, including denialism, thinking he is "progressing" etc. that we have seen since ancient times. Man doesn't change, he thinks he changes, but he makes the same mistakes, uses the same logic, etc. over and over again.

        It is a good idea for us to ponder on the Prophets Alayhim Salam and their missions.

        Ottoman province of Karaman, yes.
        Ottoman province? That's over a hundred years ago... So your grandparents or great-grandparents migrated? Tell me more about that, sounds interesting.

        Also, how did your ancestors answer the call to Jihad? What were their experiences of the great war like?
        Last edited by Muhammad Hasan; 19-03-21, 08:33 PM.
        Amir ul-Muminin Sayyiduna Ali KarramAllahu Wajhah said,
        "Mahma tasawwarta bi-balik, fallahu bi-khilaf dhalik,"
        Whatever comes into your mind, Allah is other than that,

        Al-Aqeedah Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal (Riwayah Abu Bakr al-Khallal),
        1/116

        Comment


        • #79
          Originally posted by Muhammad Hasan View Post

          What are you using to judge that a disbeliever is "moral", and would you consider western society "moral"?

          HT is democratic and constitutionalist, you know that as much as I do. You were the one promoting some literature they have not to long ago, and I've spoken to some of them, and they are of the exact same mindset as you. Do you wish for me to show you evidence of that or something?
          Moral in the sense of Abdullah b. Jud'an.
          قُلتُ: يا رَسولَ اللهِ، ابنُ جُدْعانَ كانَ في الجاهِلِيَّةِ يَصِلُ الرَّحِمَ، ويُطْعِمُ المِسْكِينَ، فَهلْ ذاكَ نافِعُهُ؟ قالَ: لا يَنْفَعُهُ، إنَّه لَمْ يَقُلْ يَوْمًا: رَبِّ اغْفِرْ لي خَطِيئَتي يَومَ الدِّينِ..

          الراوي: عائشة أم المؤمنين | المحدث: مسلم | المصدر: صحيح مسلم
          الصفحة أو الرقم: 214
          خلاصة حكم المحدث: [صحيح]
          التخريج: أخرجه مسلم (214))



          I did not know that HT supported constitutional democratic government, that is delightening to hear. Probably that is only in the final stage, after they have established the caliphate as the vanguard party, right? So still they are insisting that people pledge allegiance to them, in exclusion of other movements. Correct me if I am wrong.

          “Let whosoever believes in Allah and in the Last Day either speak good or be silent.” — Prophet Muhammad pbuh | مَن كانَ يُؤْمِنُ باللَّهِ والْيَومِ الآخِرِ فَلْيَقُلْ خَيْرًا، أوْ لِيصْمُتْ

          Comment


          • #80
            Originally posted by YahyaIbnSelam View Post

            Moral in the sense of Abdullah b. Jud'an.
            قُلتُ: يا رَسولَ اللهِ، ابنُ جُدْعانَ كانَ في الجاهِلِيَّةِ يَصِلُ الرَّحِمَ، ويُطْعِمُ المِسْكِينَ، فَهلْ ذاكَ نافِعُهُ؟ قالَ: لا يَنْفَعُهُ، إنَّه لَمْ يَقُلْ يَوْمًا: رَبِّ اغْفِرْ لي خَطِيئَتي يَومَ الدِّينِ..

            الراوي: عائشة أم المؤمنين | المحدث: مسلم | المصدر: صحيح مسلم
            الصفحة أو الرقم: 214
            خلاصة حكم المحدث: [صحيح]
            التخريج: أخرجه مسلم (214))
            This is not "moral", this is showing kindness. Even in an extremely immoral society which allows people to marry animals etc. you can get kind people who give charity or stop one societal wrong. "Moral" is the wrong word. The same person could be involved in something very immoral - would you count this kindness as a sort of morality? So e.g. a man who eats human flesh (of his deceased father) and is married to another man, feeds some orphans, stops murder, helps Muslims etc. He's moral is he?

            The biggest immorality is to not worship only and consider divine only Allah Azza Wa Jal.

            Originally posted by YahyaIbnSelam View Post
            I did not know that HT supported constitutional democratic government, that is delightening to hear. Probably that is only in the final stage, after they have established the caliphate as the vanguard party, right? So still they are insisting that people pledge allegiance to them, in exclusion of other movements. Correct me if I am wrong.
            Not that I want you to support HT and their laughable concept of "Islamic" democracy, though you have in the past, I find it funny that you are irked by them requiring people to pledge 'allegiance' to them in exclusion of other movements. So what is it that you exactly want? People to join different movements and parties and then form the Khilafah together or something? You actually support Partisan politics?

            Optimates and Populares, they're unavoidable.
            Amir ul-Muminin Sayyiduna Ali KarramAllahu Wajhah said,
            "Mahma tasawwarta bi-balik, fallahu bi-khilaf dhalik,"
            Whatever comes into your mind, Allah is other than that,

            Al-Aqeedah Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal (Riwayah Abu Bakr al-Khallal),
            1/116

            Comment


            • #81
              Originally posted by Muhammad Hasan View Post

              This is not "moral", this is showing kindness. Even in an extremely immoral society which allows people to marry animals etc. you can get kind people who give charity or stop one societal wrong. "Moral" is the wrong word. The same person could be involved in something very immoral - would you count this kindness as a sort of morality? So e.g. a man who eats human flesh (of his deceased father) and is married to another man, feeds some orphans, stops murder, helps Muslims etc. He's moral is he?

              The biggest immorality is to not worship only and consider divine only Allah Azza Wa Jal.

              Moral means: "1. Concerned with the principles of right and wrong behaviour. 2. Holding or manifesting high principles for proper conduct." (Oxford Lexico.com)

              Considering that disbelievers cannot know everything which is right and wrong via reason, especially so according to Ash'arites, their fault is in failing to submit to the Sharia. Maturidi scholars say some good can be established by reason before revelation. Do you konw any details on that?

              You are right when we see that right and wrong is universal and not relative, besides constituting a whole. Obviously disbelievers hold a different moral, but it does overlap with ours, with the univeral Islamic ethics. The second sense does not seem wrong: people may have high principles, while failing on others. Also, which word do you find more appropriate? Decent, right-minded, benevolent, gracious, honest, principled? It is not always about charity. People may stand up against injustice. They may be honest and refrain from cheating, lying and scamming. Reject bribes.

              We see in the narrations on Hilf al-Fudul and Hilf al-Mutayyabin words used such as al-mutayyabin (lit. making good and better) and non-believers making amr bil-maruf by fighting injustice. I have heard of the position that non-Muslims are not to be considered just/adil, but I assume there is some limitation for evident matters we can know by reason they are good. These are no judgements/hukm, but evident behaviour.

              Even if we do not call non-believers moral, they can certainly act morally. And we may call them mutayyab.

              لقدْ شَهِدْتُ في دارِ عبدِ اللهِ بنِ جُدْعانَ حِلْفًا، لو دُعِيتُ به في الإسلامِ لأَجَبْتُ، تَحالَفوا أنْ يَرُدُّوا الفُضولَ على أهْلِها، وأنْ لا يعد ظالمٌ مَظلومًا..

              الراوي: محمد وعبدالرحمن بن أبي بكر | المحدث: ابن الملقن | المصدر: البدر المنير
              الصفحة أو الرقم: 7/325
              خلاصة حكم المحدث: صحيح

              - شَهِدتُ حِلفَ المُطَيَّبين مع عمومتي وأنا غلامٌ، فما أحِبُّ أنَّ لي حُمرَ النَّعَم وأني أنكُثُه .

              الراوي: عبدالرحمن بن عوف | المحدث: الهيثمي | المصدر: مجمع الزوائد
              الصفحة أو الرقم: 8/175
              خلاصة حكم المحدث: [رجاله] رجال الصحيح


              Originally posted by Muhammad Hasan View Post
              Not that I want you to support HT and their laughable concept of "Islamic" democracy, though you have in the past, I find it funny that you are irked by them requiring people to pledge 'allegiance' to them in exclusion of other movements. So what is it that you exactly want? People to join different movements and parties and then form the Khilafah together or something? You actually support Partisan politics?

              Optimates and Populares, they're unavoidable.
              I support a majlis shura of Islamic movements with central command for the time being, similar to now-dissolved Jaysh al-Fath in Syria.
              Last edited by YahyaIbnSelam; 21-03-21, 06:49 PM.
              “Let whosoever believes in Allah and in the Last Day either speak good or be silent.” — Prophet Muhammad pbuh | مَن كانَ يُؤْمِنُ باللَّهِ والْيَومِ الآخِرِ فَلْيَقُلْ خَيْرًا، أوْ لِيصْمُتْ

              Comment

              Collapse

              Edit this module to specify a template to display.

              Working...
              X