You don't have permission to view the spoiler content.
Log in or register now.
Andrew tate self snitching
- Thread starter Flameboss1
- Start date
Countless i doubt that maybe your communties are weak can't restrain young and find them jobs
Can't say I'm surprised.
the thing with Yasir Qadh is... it isn't one thing. it's this huge list of things. I'll make a thread on it insha'Allah.
because the problem is- you point out something really wrong that comes from him- like doubting the Quran preservation- and people will come and try to make excuses for him. but it isn't just one thing or even a few things. it's a huge list of things. pushing for Westernization of Islam, ikhwani-ism, promoting making dua to saints and saying it's not shirk, promoting making an alliance with lgbt, etc. casting doubt on Quran preservation, weird beliefs about Gog and Magog.... just a giant list of stuff
That’s a major one. I need to watch him say that.
Pushing for Westernization in what way? Fiqh is ever evolving unless it goes against Quran and Hadith. Islamic ‘mortgages’ is the fact that scholars think that debit cards are halal is you could argue a form of Westernization.
Do you mean Tawassul? I need to watch what he says. Btw, a lot of classical scholars believed that Tawassul especially through the prophet isn’t haram.
That is crazy. I need to watch where he says that.
Hmm, going to look into him. I know he used to be Salafi and then he changed his ways.
Me too
You don't have permission to view the spoiler content.
Log in or register now.
reer
VIP
You don't have permission to view the spoiler content.
Log in or register now.
reer
VIP
You don't have permission to view the spoiler content.
Log in or register now.
JackieBurkhart
The years don't matter, the life in those years do
He's being framed!!!!!!
well I definitely encourage you to go look up the various things I mentioned- see for yourself. but I saw the clips of those things, I saw what he said... there's a book by Ayaan Hirsi Ali where she calls for "Islamic Reformation"... I haven't read it but it's in the title.... anyways... there is constantly this aim pushed of creating "Islamic Reformation" to make Islam in line with Western ideology.... no way do I think I will ever be okay with Westernization... there is no Westernization of Islam.... Islam was perfected over 1,400 years ago... Islam doesn't change, new things appear like new technology but Islam itself never changes and doesn't need to be "updated" to fit with Western liberal ideology- that is basically YQ's project
I definitely will. LGTB and Quranic preservation is what I find concerning.
Islamic fiqh is evolving and would take the Urf of the society that Muslims are in provided it doesn’t go against Quran and Sunnah. The West in the 21st century has too many cultural aspects that isn’t compatible with Islam, but issues like finances, education, minimum wages, pensions aren’t necessarily haram and can be made Sharia complaint. Fiqh is a lot more nuanced than you think.
Fiqh does change provided it doesn’t go against Quran and Sunnah. It’s always been that way because as society evolves different questions will arise. Example, a hundred years ago, the common fatwa was that smoking is halal and now it’s been updated to smoking being haram due to better understanding of the human body.
Look into fiqh and the purpose of it.
YQ is a shill for liberalism. He wants "liberal Islam," basically this "Islamic reformation" I mentioned.
If any scholar sells out to Westernization, if all the scholars sell out to Westernization it will always be wrong. The right way is to follow Islam as it was understood by the earliest generations. We have more than a thousand years of scholarship to fall back even if the current scholars became Westernized. I don't know much about the bank stuff and all that so I don't really have an opinion on that specifically.
If I am not mistaken, aren't you an ex-Salafi who left the minhaj? You are a fellow Muslim but I was taught the Salafi minhaj and I reject to follow any other minhaj.
The right way is to follow Islam as it was understood by the pious predecessors. I do not believe "fiqh is constantly evolving".
What forces want to push these kinds of notions? "Fiqh is constantly evolving". So in a few generations, lgbt, zina, etc. might be made halal? I do not believe this notion is in line with the correct minhaj or that we have any such statement from Quran, Sunnah or the pious predecessors. I don't want any new or updated Islam. I want the Islam of the earliest generations.
Last edited:
another thing I want to mention is that I do not believe there is any such thing as Western Islam, French Islam, Indonesian Islam, Pakistani Islam, Nigerian Islam, etc.
also it is wrong to imitate the kuffar.
any notion that Muslims in Australia should follow "Australian Islam," Muslims in Britain should follow "British Islam"- any such notion is wrong and should be rejected. you should protect your dīn with your life, you should never cave in to that kind of thing, you should never sell your dīn.
also it is wrong to imitate the kuffar.
any notion that Muslims in Australia should follow "Australian Islam," Muslims in Britain should follow "British Islam"- any such notion is wrong and should be rejected. you should protect your dīn with your life, you should never cave in to that kind of thing, you should never sell your dīn.
Give me an example please of something he has said that as liberal. I highly doubt Yasir would advocate for something that is clear cut haram.
The earlier generations understood that fiqh is ever evolving ONLY when it comes to issues that aren’t clear and when new issues arise. Also, there is even chapter on Urf in fiqh books that looks at how culture shapes the ijtihad of scholars.
Example: Most scholars were of the opinions that husbands do not have to provide medical care. That has been updated. Why? Because of modernization and the importance 21st century people put on hospitals and medical care being a human right.
Then we have minimum wage. Scholars of the past probably wouldn’t have approved as it is up to an employer, yet society has changed and that isn’t something scholars will disapprove based on the understanding of a 10th century scholar.
These are all issues that aren’t clear cut in the Quran and Sunnah. Omar I’m not talking about things that are haram Authobillah and May Allah protect us from that!
Im talking about fiqh here. Some aspects of fiqh simply cannot be used in this day and age. Example, no medical care ect.
You don't have permission to view the spoiler content.
Log in or register now.
With regards to what is clear cut from the Quran and Sunnah, then you are undoubtedly correct. But I’m talking about issues that aren’t clear according to scholars. Also, certain things are nuanced.
Example the Hanafis believe a woman can marry without her fathers consent, Shafis believe she can’t.
Then you have fiqh that is influenced by Urf (culture). The idea of marrying within your class and race which is influenced by the culture of the medieval Arab society. Most modern day Salafis would not subcribe to that would they? Is it due to modernism or Westernisation?
You’re not thinking logically now. I’m talking in the light of what is acceptable using the Quran and Sunnah. LGTB, Zina ect is most definitely haram and anyone that tries to legalize it is committing a form of Kufr!
Certain things are clear cut haram and there is a consensus and part of the Sharia. That cannot be changed. However, I’m sure you’re aware that there isn’t a consensus on many issues as it isn’t clear cut but requires the ijtihad of scholars.
This fatwa talks about in detail:
A lot of things cannot be changed and I 100% agree with you on that! I think there is a misunderstanding between us.
Lol, look up the life of Ibn Taymiyyah he was effectively imprisoned for his views which they felt wasn’t in line with the traditions before. Certain aspects of fiqh does indeed have various views. One such reason I read he was imprisoned for was his issues with triple talaq (divorce).
I’m not talking about things that are clearly haram. That can never be changed! A lot of things are simply NOT subjective and I wholeheartedly agree with you!
Last edited:
Lol, there always has been. Urf is a part of fiqh and even Salafi scholars acknowledge that, as long as it doesn’t contradict Quran and Sunnah and it is often used to fill in the gaps of what isn’t clearly defined in the Quran and Sunnah.
Example, the vast majority of Saudi scholars knew that cars for women most certainly isn’t haram, yet they disallowed under the guise of Urf and the impact they felt it could have on Saudi society. I drive, yet no Scholar can tell me driving is haram as Albani famously said about driving:
Questioner: Is it permissible for a woman to drive a car?
Answer:If it is permissible for her to ride upon a (female) donkey then it is permissible for her to drive a car.
Questioner: But there is a difference between a donkey and a car.
Sh Al-Albaanee: Which is more concealing – riding upon a donkey or in a car? I would suggest (riding in) a car.
Shaykh Naasir ud-Deen al-Albaanee
Answer:If it is permissible for her to ride upon a (female) donkey then it is permissible for her to drive a car.
Questioner: But there is a difference between a donkey and a car.
Sh Al-Albaanee: Which is more concealing – riding upon a donkey or in a car? I would suggest (riding in) a car.
Shaykh Naasir ud-Deen al-Albaanee
Yet, Saudi scholars motivated by their own cultural understanding still banned it, despite the fact that there is nothing in the Quran and Sunnah to suggest women not driving. Female Sahabas rode a animals and as Albani cleverly noted, having a car is more covering and concealing than any donkey or camel.
It is wrong to imitate them in things that are Haram or of no benefit. But even then, I’ve noticed scholars do not apply that for a lot of things. Take for example, white Wedding dresses. We all know this is a very Western thing that is symbolic, yet:
Yet if you read this Fatwa which sites Ibn Uthaymeen, he states that white wedding dresses are not haram because it is NOW culturally acceptable in Saudi and the rest of the Muslim world. Yet, If we go back less than a hundred years ago, such a dress would most definitely have been seen as a European Christian wedding tradition.
Therefore, you need to be specific as to what constitutes imitating the non Muslims. Are such acts now common? Is it halal? The list continues.
The bottom line is anything that goes against the Quran and Sunnah obviously needs to shunned, there is no debate regarding that.
I get where you’re coming from and Muslims most definitely should be staunch in the face of Haram and halal. My point isn’t about the things that are clearly outlined as haram in the Sharia. I’m talking about situations in which there are differences of opinions and new situations that arise due to modernization and different societies.
Last edited:
