Ads by Muslim Ad Network

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Why do we call them khawarij? - Sh Abdullah al Mohaisany

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

  • Why do we call them khawarij? - Sh Abdullah al Mohaisany

    :salams

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xr9z...ature=youtu.be

    The shaykh is in Syria and goes through the characteristics of the khawarij (and how they apply to ISIS), the primary two being :

    1) Takfeer on Muslims

    2) Shedding the blood of Muslims

    (First 5 minutes shows graphic footage)

  • #2
    Re: Why do we call them khawarij? - Sh Abdullah al Mohaisany

    Originally posted by Abdalla94' View Post
    :salams

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xr9z...ature=youtu.be

    The shaykh is in Syria and goes through the characteristics of the khawarij (and how they apply to ISIS), the primary two being :

    1) Takfeer on Muslims

    2) Shedding the blood of Muslims

    (First 5 minutes shows graphic footage)
    ISIS isn't on the correct Minhaj but they're not Khawarij in Fiqh or Aqeedah the Khawarij made Takfeer on Ali :RA: and Uthman :RA: ISIS hasn't ever said such things about them also the Khawarij today (the Ibadis) have their own Salat and Hadiths that ISIS and Ahlus Sunnah wal Jamaah don't follow. They are still Muslim but just very misguided just because the arrow doesn't hit the target every time doesn't mean it's not an arrow besides at least they were able to wear down Assad and YPG when they have their encounters with each other.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Why do we call them khawarij? - Sh Abdullah al Mohaisany

      Originally posted by Abu Jarir View Post
      ISIS isn't on the correct Minhaj but they're not Khawarij in Fiqh or Aqeedah the Khawarij made Takfeer on Ali :RA: and Uthman :RA: ISIS hasn't ever said such things about them also the Khawarij today (the Ibadis) have their own Salat and Hadiths that ISIS and Ahlus Sunnah wal Jamaah don't follow. They are still Muslim but just very misguided just because the arrow doesn't hit the target every time doesn't mean it's not an arrow besides at least they were able to wear down Assad and YPG when they have their encounters with each other.

      Bro, listen to the first 20 minutes if you have the time. If you don't, simply increase the speed to x2 and watch it for 10 minutes.

      The shaykh explains the characteristics of the khawarij and then explains how ISIS fall into this.

      Namely, they make takfeer on Muslims and shed their blood (due to the so called apostasy of the Muslims).

      These are the two fundamental points that need to be fulfilled to be a khariji. Everything else is a secondary characteristic.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Why do we call them khawarij? - Sh Abdullah al Mohaisany

        Originally posted by Abdalla94' View Post
        Bro, listen to the first 20 minutes if you have the time. If you don't, simply increase the speed to x2 and watch it for 10 minutes.

        The shaykh explains the characteristics of the khawarij and then explains how ISIS fall into this.

        Namely, they make takfeer on Muslims and shed their blood (due to the so called apostasy of the Muslims).

        These are the two fundamental points that need to be fulfilled to be a khariji. Everything else is a secondary characteristic.
        Akhi even if they are Khawarij Muslims occupy their territories and Assad and the YPG are a much greater evil at least they are effective there, there was a Fatwah posted here a few weeks ago from a Hanafi scholar saying that even if land is occupied by the Khawarij it is still necessary to defend them as they are still Muslims. But honestly it just seems like ISIS is ISIS they are their own near category in my opinion. They have split the ranks in Syria and caused a lot of problems for Muslims and of course have killed several brothers but like I said nothing near as bad as Assad or YPG.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Why do we call them khawarij? - Sh Abdullah al Mohaisany

          Originally posted by Abu Jarir View Post
          Akhi even if they are Khawarij Muslims occupy their territories and Assad and the YPG are a much greater evil at least they are effective there, there was a Fatwah posted here a few weeks ago from a Hanafi scholar saying that even if land is occupied by the Khawarij it is still necessary to defend them as they are still Muslims. But honestly it just seems like ISIS is ISIS they are their own near category in my opinion. They have split the ranks in Syria and caused a lot of problems for Muslims and of course have killed several brothers but like I said nothing near as bad as Assad or YPG.
          There's two points here bro :

          1) What ISIS are

          2) Are the regime and YPG worse than them

          Whilst the answer for 2) is that the regime / YPG are worse, it doesn't answer 1).

          For example, some people might say that they're mujahideen when even supporting them is dhulm and a person will be questioned over their support for Muslim blood being shed.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Why do we call them khawarij? - Sh Abdullah al Mohaisany

            Originally posted by Abdalla94' View Post
            There's two points here bro :

            1) What ISIS are

            2) Are the regime and YPG worse than them

            Whilst the answer for 2) is that the regime / YPG are worse, it doesn't answer 1).

            For example, some people might say that they're mujahideen when even supporting them is dhulm and a person will be questioned over their support for Muslim blood being shed.
            They're Muslims though in spite of their harms and corruption they're still Muslim it's not like they've decided to put down their arms and conform to Assad and join the SDF and all that crap they are still a huge threat to Assad and from a purely strategic view point they are an advantage while Assad is busy battling ISIS they'll exauhst rescources and men in the east leaving the west south exposed allowing an easier path way to Hamah. ISIS has done rediclious/questionable things like sending a suicide bomber to Liwa Al-Tawheed's HQ in Raqqah back in 2014/2013 and refusing to co-operate with Ahrar and refusing a peace deal with other rebel groups but still sometimes they work with them even Hassan Abboud (Rahim Allah) said so in spite of their hostilities and differences. The ultimate goal is peace in Syria by all parties including Assad but amongst the Muslims it is declaring Shari'ah and building a state ruled upon Sunnah and in a perfect world there would be no Nusra,Ahrar, ISIS etc there'd be one state and one flag uniting all Muslims. But this is a Fitnah in Sham and Inshallah everything works out in the end and the people of Syria may be spared of the atrocities going on and May the Muslims have victory.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Why do we call them khawarij? - Sh Abdullah al Mohaisany

              Originally posted by Abu Jarir View Post
              They're Muslims though in spite of their harms and corruption they're still Muslim it's not like they've decided to put down their arms and conform to Assad and join the SDF and all that crap they are still a huge threat to Assad and from a purely strategic view point they are an advantage while Assad is busy battling ISIS they'll exauhst rescources and men in the east leaving the west south exposed allowing an easier path way to Hamah. ISIS has done rediclious/questionable things like sending a suicide bomber to Liwa Al-Tawheed's HQ in Raqqah back in 2014/2013 and refusing to co-operate with Ahrar and refusing a peace deal with other rebel groups but still sometimes they work with them even Hassan Abboud (Rahim Allah) said so in spite of their hostilities and differences. The ultimate goal is peace in Syria by all parties including Assad but amongst the Muslims it is declaring Shari'ah and building a state ruled upon Sunnah and in a perfect world there would be no Nusra,Ahrar, ISIS etc there'd be one state and one flag uniting all Muslims. But this is a Fitnah in Sham and Inshallah everything works out in the end and the people of Syria may be spared of the atrocities going on and May the Muslims have victory.
              The problem with this view is that it ignores the fact that if not for ISIS and the fitnah created by it (due to the fact that they are khaariji in nature), Assad would have most likely been gone long ago. Before their fitnah advances against assad were huge and consistent. After their emergence, advances ceased and the situation now, years later, is still as it is.

              It's not for no reason that scholars state that the khawaarij are of the most harmful groups to the Ummah. This can't be ignored just because "others are worse" in terms of beliefs. Khawaarij typically have good intentions, supposedly purely for the sake of Allah (swt) and Islam as a whole. This does not negate their harm however, and in many different places it is stated clearly that good intentions do not make good actions.
              والمبادرة إلى التكفير إنما تغلب على طباع من يغلب عليهم الجهل - ابن تيمية رحمه الله - بغية المرتاد

              "Rushing towards takfir is an attitude which is dominant over those who are defeated by ignorance." - Ibn Taymiyyah Rahimahullah [Bughyatul Murtaad, page 354]

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Why do we call them khawarij? - Sh Abdullah al Mohaisany

                Originally posted by علي View Post
                The problem with this view is that it ignores the fact that if not for ISIS and the fitnah created by it (due to the fact that they are khaariji in nature), Assad would have most likely been gone long ago. Before their fitnah advances against assad were huge and consistent. After their emergence, advances ceased and the situation now, years later, is still as it is.

                It's not for no reason that scholars state that the khawaarij are of the most harmful groups to the Ummah. This can't be ignored just because "others are worse" in terms of beliefs. Khawaarij typically have good intentions, supposedly purely for the sake of Allah (swt) and Islam as a whole. This does not negate their harm however, and in many different places it is stated clearly that good intentions do not make good actions.
                Had all this infighting not started and Assard was booted out in the earlier day of the conflict who or what would of replaced him
                A. A state or government that rules with Islamic sincerity
                Or
                B. Or a puppet regime like the one in lybia
                Cause the way I see it, IS are neither kharwarj or extreme, maybe over paranoid due to there experiences during the Iraq war but I can't see the kharwarj in them

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Why do we call them khawarij? - Sh Abdullah al Mohaisany

                  Originally posted by Bilal el View Post
                  Had all this infighting not started and Assard was booted out in the earlier day of the conflict who or what would of replaced him
                  A. A state or government that rules with Islamic sincerity
                  Or
                  B. Or a puppet regime like the one in lybia
                  Cause the way I see it, IS are neither kharwarj or extreme, maybe over paranoid due to there experiences during the Iraq war but I can't see the kharwarj in them
                  Listen to at least 20 minutes of the lecture by the shaykh. He'll explain why they're khawarij and how the characteristics of the khawarij are apparent in ISIS.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Why do we call them khawarij? - Sh Abdullah al Mohaisany

                    I see more problems in mohaisiny, from an islamic perspective tbh

                    people have short memories, i recall JN openly cheering they had shot certain people in the back in an ambush. yet some people see them as somehow being on the right path

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Why do we call them khawarij? - Sh Abdullah al Mohaisany

                      Originally posted by nonameakhi View Post
                      I see more problems in mohaisiny, from an islamic perspective tbh

                      people have short memories, i recall JN openly cheering they had shot certain people in the back in an ambush. yet some people see them as somehow being on the right path
                      apparently everyone else is innocent, it was all one sided
                      شَكَوْتُ إلَى وَكِيعٍ سُوءَ حِفْظِي
                      فَأرْشَدَنِي إلَى تَرْكِ المعَاصي
                      وَأخْبَرَنِي بأَنَّ العِلْمَ نُورٌ
                      ونورُ الله لا يهدى لعاصي

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Why do we call them khawarij? - Sh Abdullah al Mohaisany

                        Originally posted by Rumaysah~ View Post
                        apparently everyone else is innocent, it was all one sided
                        Prophet saw said that he could dislike/hate someone but would never be unfair to them. We seem to have forgotten this principle

                        Unfortunately any discussion on this issue becomes a for or against and many people are defending a stance or side rather than what is in front of them

                        The only way to have this type of discussion is not to accuse peopel of being a supporter of one side or another but to look at the situations and apply the islamic rulings to them. For some reason people are not prepared to do this

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Why do we call them khawarij? - Sh Abdullah al Mohaisany

                          Originally posted by علي View Post
                          The problem with this view is that it ignores the fact that if not for ISIS and the fitnah created by it (due to the fact that they are khaariji in nature), Assad would have most likely been gone long ago. Before their fitnah advances against assad were huge and consistent. After their emergence, advances ceased and the situation now, years later, is still as it is.

                          It's not for no reason that scholars state that the khawaarij are of the most harmful groups to the Ummah. This can't be ignored just because "others are worse" in terms of beliefs. Khawaarij typically have good intentions, supposedly purely for the sake of Allah (swt) and Islam as a whole. This does not negate their harm however, and in many different places it is stated clearly that good intentions do not make good actions.
                          Brother look at Al-Wala wal Baraa we need to have Baraa towards the Munafiqeen and Kufar and Wala for our Ikhwan even in their corruption people in Raqqah are safer with them than under Assad or SDF/YPG.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Why do we call them khawarij? - Sh Abdullah al Mohaisany

                            Originally posted by Abu Jarir View Post
                            Brother look at Al-Wala wal Baraa we need to have Baraa towards the Munafiqeen and Kufar and Wala for our Ikhwan even in their corruption people in Raqqah are safer with them than under Assad or SDF/YPG.
                            Imagine applying the ''harm to ummah'' principle to the Prophet saw, which many did at the time.

                            try telling Sumaiyyah ra or bilal ra that harm was brought to them

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Why do we call them khawarij? - Sh Abdullah al Mohaisany

                              Originally posted by nonameakhi View Post
                              I see more problems in mohaisiny, from an islamic perspective tbh

                              people have short memories, i recall JN openly cheering they had shot certain people in the back in an ambush. yet some people see them as somehow being on the right path
                              Like what?

                              Also, when did this happen? Even if it did, I'm not saying both parties aren't guilty. It was a fitnah at the time and unfortunately innocent people from each side were killed.

                              However, when the groups asked for a Sharia court ISIS refused it. They also did not want reconciliation with the groups because ISIS believed they're apostates. To anyone reasonable, perhaps they may have been neutral during the fitnah but once it calmed down, it was clear where the haqq was.

                              Originally posted by Rumaysah~ View Post
                              apparently everyone else is innocent, it was all one sided

                              Either you step in the spotlight and join the discussion or it's best you remain on the sidelines without the need for posting sarky comments.

                              :up:

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X