Saudi getting severely karbashed by Houthi's

[Lum]

lol so if I use fuzzy words like tawheed and sunnah can I now claim my rightful position as emir al muminin? first order of business take down MBS

You are going against The narration of the
Messenger of Allah (salallaahu ‘alaihi wassallam) stated:
“Hear and obey the ruler in that which is difficult for you and in that which is easy for you, in times of invigoration and in times of dislike and weariness and when others are given preferential treatment over you – even if they take and consume your wealth and they beat your back – except that you do not obey them if it involves disobedience to Allāh.” [2]

 

[Formning1]

Camera caught a Somali man fighting for Aala Saud.

 

[Tukraq]

You are going against The narration of the
Messenger of Allah (salallaahu ‘alaihi wassallam) stated:
“Hear and obey the ruler in that which is difficult for you and in that which is easy for you, in times of invigoration and in times of dislike and weariness and when others are given preferential treatment over you – even if they take and consume your wealth and they beat your back – except that you do not obey them if it involves disobedience to Allāh.” [2]

He’s not my ruler, I’m my ruler

 

[Formning1]

 

[Umm-al-Dhegdheeriyaa]

View attachment 79769

 

[Lum]

He’s not my ruler, I’m my ruler

The hadith says to hear and obey a muslim ruler.

 

[Lum]

He’s not my ruler, I’m my ruler

You are a civilian.

 

[Tukraq]

The hadith says to hear and obey a muslim ruler.

I don’t consider him a legitimate Muslim ruler

 

[Tukraq]

You are a civilian.

He’s a civilian

 

[Lum]

lol so if I use fuzzy words like tawheed and sunnah can I now claim my rightful position as emir al muminin? first order of business take down MBS

«
The noble scholar Shaikh al-Albānī (rahimahullaah, died 1420H) was asked, “Is that which is known nowadays as a military coup against the ruler mentioned in the Religion or is it an innovation?”So the Shaikh answered:

“There is no basis for these acts in Islām. And it is in opposition to the Islamic manhaj (methodology) with respect to the daʿwah (Islamic call) and creating the right atmosphere for it. Rather it is an innovation introduced by the innovators which has affected some Muslims. This is what I have stated and explained in my notes to al-Aqeedah at-Tahāwiyyah [22].” [23]

The Messenger of Allāh (salallaahu ‘alaihi wassallam) made it explicitly clear that it is forbidden to speak openly against the Muslim ruler, but rather to advise him in private, regardless of his tyranny:

“Whosoever wishes to advise the Ruler, let him not do so openly. Rather he should take him by his hand and take him into seclusion [and advise him]. So if he accepts that from him, then it is in his favour, and if he does not accept, then at least he fulfilled his duty.” [24]

To advise the oppressive ruler directly to his face is considered in Islām to be from the best forms of Jihād. It is reported that the Messenger of Allāh (salallaahu ‘alaihi wassallam) said:

“The most superior form of Jihād is to say a word of truth in the face of an oppressive ruler.” [25]

He (salallaahu ‘alaihi wassallam) also stated in clear terms:

“The chief of the martyrs is Hamzah (the uncle of the Prophet) as well as a man who stands before an unjust ruler, commanding him with good and forbidding him from evil, for which the ruler kills him.” [26]

This reward is for the one who is in the presence of the ruler, not the one who screams for rebellion from pulpits thousands of miles away and from anonymous internet forums using hidden titles and invented names. That is certainly not Jihād and nor rectification.

True Jihād, in reality begins by combating (with textual proofs) the deviants who wish to corrupt the message of Islām, such as the extremists. Shaikh ʿAbdur-Rahmān as-Saʿdī (died 1376H, rahimahullaah), said:

“Jihād is of two types. The Jihād by which the correction and purity of the Muslims is intended and rectification of their beliefs, manners and all of the affairs pertaining to their lives, both the religious and the worldly affairs. And also [Jihād] in cultivating them with knowledge and action. This type is the fundamental basis of Jihād and its support. And it is from this first type that the second type finds its basis, and that is the Jihād by which those who show transgression against Islām and the Muslims, from amongst the disbelievers, hypocrites, heretical apostates and all of the enemies of the religion are repelled and held at bay.” [27]

And this is what the Salafi scholars of Ahlus-Sunnah have remained upon throughout the centuries. They consider that the Jihād against the innovators is the basis or the foundation, and the Jihād against the disbelievers branches off from that Jihād.

If one is not able to advise the rulers due to ignorance or inability, then he does not openly rebuke the rulers, as Allāh’s Messenger (salallaahu ‘alaihi wassallam) has forbidden that – upon him in this situation is to supplicate for the guidance of the Muslim rulers as agreed upon by the early scholars. [28]

The great Imām al-Barbahārī (died 329H, rahimhaullaah) stated the position and consensus of the Muslims towards their rulers:

“If you find a man making supplication against the ruler, know that he is a person of innovation (deviation). If you find a person making supplication for the ruler to be upright, know that he is a person of the Sunnah, if Allāh wills.

We are ordered to make supplication for them (i.e. the rulers) to be upright. We have not been ordered to make supplication against them, even if they commit tyranny and oppression, since their tyranny and oppression reflect only upon themselves but their rectitude is good for themselves and the Muslims.” [29]»

 

[Umm-al-Dhegdheeriyaa]

«
The noble scholar Shaikh al-Albānī (rahimahullaah, died 1420H) was asked, “Is that which is known nowadays as a military coup against the ruler mentioned in the Religion or is it an innovation?”So the Shaikh answered:

“There is no basis for these acts in Islām. And it is in opposition to the Islamic manhaj (methodology) with respect to the daʿwah (Islamic call) and creating the right atmosphere for it. Rather it is an innovation introduced by the innovators which has affected some Muslims. This is what I have stated and explained in my notes to al-Aqeedah at-Tahāwiyyah [22].” [23]

The Messenger of Allāh (salallaahu ‘alaihi wassallam) made it explicitly clear that it is forbidden to speak openly against the Muslim ruler, but rather to advise him in private, regardless of his tyranny:

“Whosoever wishes to advise the Ruler, let him not do so openly. Rather he should take him by his hand and take him into seclusion [and advise him]. So if he accepts that from him, then it is in his favour, and if he does not accept, then at least he fulfilled his duty.” [24]

To advise the oppressive ruler directly to his face is considered in Islām to be from the best forms of Jihād. It is reported that the Messenger of Allāh (salallaahu ‘alaihi wassallam) said:

“The most superior form of Jihād is to say a word of truth in the face of an oppressive ruler.” [25]

He (salallaahu ‘alaihi wassallam) also stated in clear terms:

“The chief of the martyrs is Hamzah (the uncle of the Prophet) as well as a man who stands before an unjust ruler, commanding him with good and forbidding him from evil, for which the ruler kills him.” [26]

This reward is for the one who is in the presence of the ruler, not the one who screams for rebellion from pulpits thousands of miles away and from anonymous internet forums using hidden titles and invented names. That is certainly not Jihād and nor rectification.

True Jihād, in reality begins by combating (with textual proofs) the deviants who wish to corrupt the message of Islām, such as the extremists. Shaikh ʿAbdur-Rahmān as-Saʿdī (died 1376H, rahimahullaah), said:

“Jihād is of two types. The Jihād by which the correction and purity of the Muslims is intended and rectification of their beliefs, manners and all of the affairs pertaining to their lives, both the religious and the worldly affairs. And also [Jihād] in cultivating them with knowledge and action. This type is the fundamental basis of Jihād and its support. And it is from this first type that the second type finds its basis, and that is the Jihād by which those who show transgression against Islām and the Muslims, from amongst the disbelievers, hypocrites, heretical apostates and all of the enemies of the religion are repelled and held at bay.” [27]

And this is what the Salafi scholars of Ahlus-Sunnah have remained upon throughout the centuries. They consider that the Jihād against the innovators is the basis or the foundation, and the Jihād against the disbelievers branches off from that Jihād.

If one is not able to advise the rulers due to ignorance or inability, then he does not openly rebuke the rulers, as Allāh’s Messenger (salallaahu ‘alaihi wassallam) has forbidden that – upon him in this situation is to supplicate for the guidance of the Muslim rulers as agreed upon by the early scholars. [28]

The great Imām al-Barbahārī (died 329H, rahimhaullaah) stated the position and consensus of the Muslims towards their rulers:

“If you find a man making supplication against the ruler, know that he is a person of innovation (deviation). If you find a person making supplication for the ruler to be upright, know that he is a person of the Sunnah, if Allāh wills.

We are ordered to make supplication for them (i.e. the rulers) to be upright. We have not been ordered to make supplication against them, even if they commit tyranny and oppression, since their tyranny and oppression reflect only upon themselves but their rectitude is good for themselves and the Muslims.” [29]»

Islam also tells us to stand up against oppression and if we can’t to hate it with our hearts, did you forget that part?

 

[Tukraq]

«
The noble scholar Shaikh al-Albānī (rahimahullaah, died 1420H) was asked, “Is that which is known nowadays as a military coup against the ruler mentioned in the Religion or is it an innovation?”So the Shaikh answered:

“There is no basis for these acts in Islām. And it is in opposition to the Islamic manhaj (methodology) with respect to the daʿwah (Islamic call) and creating the right atmosphere for it. Rather it is an innovation introduced by the innovators which has affected some Muslims. This is what I have stated and explained in my notes to al-Aqeedah at-Tahāwiyyah [22].” [23]

The Messenger of Allāh (salallaahu ‘alaihi wassallam) made it explicitly clear that it is forbidden to speak openly against the Muslim ruler, but rather to advise him in private, regardless of his tyranny:

“Whosoever wishes to advise the Ruler, let him not do so openly. Rather he should take him by his hand and take him into seclusion [and advise him]. So if he accepts that from him, then it is in his favour, and if he does not accept, then at least he fulfilled his duty.” [24]

To advise the oppressive ruler directly to his face is considered in Islām to be from the best forms of Jihād. It is reported that the Messenger of Allāh (salallaahu ‘alaihi wassallam) said:

“The most superior form of Jihād is to say a word of truth in the face of an oppressive ruler.” [25]

He (salallaahu ‘alaihi wassallam) also stated in clear terms:

“The chief of the martyrs is Hamzah (the uncle of the Prophet) as well as a man who stands before an unjust ruler, commanding him with good and forbidding him from evil, for which the ruler kills him.” [26]

This reward is for the one who is in the presence of the ruler, not the one who screams for rebellion from pulpits thousands of miles away and from anonymous internet forums using hidden titles and invented names. That is certainly not Jihād and nor rectification.

True Jihād, in reality begins by combating (with textual proofs) the deviants who wish to corrupt the message of Islām, such as the extremists. Shaikh ʿAbdur-Rahmān as-Saʿdī (died 1376H, rahimahullaah), said:

“Jihād is of two types. The Jihād by which the correction and purity of the Muslims is intended and rectification of their beliefs, manners and all of the affairs pertaining to their lives, both the religious and the worldly affairs. And also [Jihād] in cultivating them with knowledge and action. This type is the fundamental basis of Jihād and its support. And it is from this first type that the second type finds its basis, and that is the Jihād by which those who show transgression against Islām and the Muslims, from amongst the disbelievers, hypocrites, heretical apostates and all of the enemies of the religion are repelled and held at bay.” [27]

And this is what the Salafi scholars of Ahlus-Sunnah have remained upon throughout the centuries. They consider that the Jihād against the innovators is the basis or the foundation, and the Jihād against the disbelievers branches off from that Jihād.

If one is not able to advise the rulers due to ignorance or inability, then he does not openly rebuke the rulers, as Allāh’s Messenger (salallaahu ‘alaihi wassallam) has forbidden that – upon him in this situation is to supplicate for the guidance of the Muslim rulers as agreed upon by the early scholars. [28]

The great Imām al-Barbahārī (died 329H, rahimhaullaah) stated the position and consensus of the Muslims towards their rulers:

“If you find a man making supplication against the ruler, know that he is a person of innovation (deviation). If you find a person making supplication for the ruler to be upright, know that he is a person of the Sunnah, if Allāh wills.

We are ordered to make supplication for them (i.e. the rulers) to be upright. We have not been ordered to make supplication against them, even if they commit tyranny and oppression, since their tyranny and oppression reflect only upon themselves but their rectitude is good for themselves and the Muslims.” [29]»

I’d have to first of all see him as a ruler first, I don’t, I also consider myself already a legitimate ruler so I’m good to go

 

[Lum]

«
The noble scholar Shaikh al-Albānī (rahimahullaah, died 1420H) was asked, “Is that which is known nowadays as a military coup against the ruler mentioned in the Religion or is it an innovation?”So the Shaikh answered:

“There is no basis for these acts in Islām. And it is in opposition to the Islamic manhaj (methodology) with respect to the daʿwah (Islamic call) and creating the right atmosphere for it. Rather it is an innovation introduced by the innovators which has affected some Muslims. This is what I have stated and explained in my notes to al-Aqeedah at-Tahāwiyyah [22].” [23]

The Messenger of Allāh (salallaahu ‘alaihi wassallam) made it explicitly clear that it is forbidden to speak openly against the Muslim ruler, but rather to advise him in private, regardless of his tyranny:

“Whosoever wishes to advise the Ruler, let him not do so openly. Rather he should take him by his hand and take him into seclusion [and advise him]. So if he accepts that from him, then it is in his favour, and if he does not accept, then at least he fulfilled his duty.” [24]

To advise the oppressive ruler directly to his face is considered in Islām to be from the best forms of Jihād. It is reported that the Messenger of Allāh (salallaahu ‘alaihi wassallam) said:

“The most superior form of Jihād is to say a word of truth in the face of an oppressive ruler.” [25]

He (salallaahu ‘alaihi wassallam) also stated in clear terms:

“The chief of the martyrs is Hamzah (the uncle of the Prophet) as well as a man who stands before an unjust ruler, commanding him with good and forbidding him from evil, for which the ruler kills him.” [26]

This reward is for the one who is in the presence of the ruler, not the one who screams for rebellion from pulpits thousands of miles away and from anonymous internet forums using hidden titles and invented names. That is certainly not Jihād and nor rectification.

True Jihād, in reality begins by combating (with textual proofs) the deviants who wish to corrupt the message of Islām, such as the extremists. Shaikh ʿAbdur-Rahmān as-Saʿdī (died 1376H, rahimahullaah), said:

“Jihād is of two types. The Jihād by which the correction and purity of the Muslims is intended and rectification of their beliefs, manners and all of the affairs pertaining to their lives, both the religious and the worldly affairs. And also [Jihād] in cultivating them with knowledge and action. This type is the fundamental basis of Jihād and its support. And it is from this first type that the second type finds its basis, and that is the Jihād by which those who show transgression against Islām and the Muslims, from amongst the disbelievers, hypocrites, heretical apostates and all of the enemies of the religion are repelled and held at bay.” [27]

And this is what the Salafi scholars of Ahlus-Sunnah have remained upon throughout the centuries. They consider that the Jihād against the innovators is the basis or the foundation, and the Jihād against the disbelievers branches off from that Jihād.

If one is not able to advise the rulers due to ignorance or inability, then he does not openly rebuke the rulers, as Allāh’s Messenger (salallaahu ‘alaihi wassallam) has forbidden that – upon him in this situation is to supplicate for the guidance of the Muslim rulers as agreed upon by the early scholars. [28]

The great Imām al-Barbahārī (died 329H, rahimhaullaah) stated the position and consensus of the Muslims towards their rulers:

“If you find a man making supplication against the ruler, know that he is a person of innovation (deviation). If you find a person making supplication for the ruler to be upright, know that he is a person of the Sunnah, if Allāh wills.

We are ordered to make supplication for them (i.e. the rulers) to be upright. We have not been ordered to make supplication against them, even if they commit tyranny and oppression, since their tyranny and oppression reflect only upon themselves but their rectitude is good for themselves and the Muslims.” [29]»

»

 

[Lum]

The rest:
The great scholar Ibn Bāz (died 1420AH) was asked, “Is it from the methodology of the Salaf [30] to criticize the rulers from the pulpits? And what is the methodology of the Salaf in advising the rulers?” So he answered:

“It is not from the methodology of the Salaf to criticize the rulers from the pulpits, because that would incite chaos, and it would involve not listening and obeying in that which is good. And this would mean becoming engrossed in that which harms and does not benefit. However, the way of advising that the Salaf followed was to write to the ruler, or to convey the advice to the Scholars who would then convey it to him, until he has been directed towards good. So opposing the evil can be done without mentioning the doer. So adultery, intoxicants and interest can be opposed without mentioning the one who is involved in them. And it is enough of an opposition to sins that they be warned against without mentioning that so and so is involved in them, whether it is the ruler, or other than the ruler.

And when the fitnah (trial, discord) occurred in the time of ʿUthmān [31] , some people said to Usāmah bin Zayd , ‘Will you not speak to ʿUthmān?’ So he said, ‘Do you think that I have not spoken to him, just because you have not heard it from me? Verily I will speak to him concerning what is between him and me, without opening an affair which I would not like to be the first to open.’ [32] So when they (the Khārijites) opened it, evil took place in the time of ʿUthmān . They opposed ʿUthmān openly, thus completing the tribulations, fighting and corruption, which has not ceased to affect the people to this day, was brought about. And this caused the tribulation to occur between ʿAlī and Muʿāwiyah [33], and ʿUthmān was killed for these reasons…

Furthermore, a large number of Companions and others besides them were killed due to this open rebellion and the open proclamation of the faults of the ruler, until the people began to hate the one charged with authority over them and killed him. We ask Allāh for success.” [34]

In a visit to Mecca in the year 1926CE King Abdul-ʿAzīz Āl-Saʿūd , the then king of Saudi Arabia proclaimed the constitution of the Kingdom, stating:

“Article 5: All of the laws of the Kingdom are executed in accordance to the Book of Allāh and the Sunnah of His Messenger and in accordance to that which the Companions and the Salaf us-Sālih were upon.” [35]

Regardless of these proclamations from the rulers, the radicals still declare them to be unbelievers, worthy of being killed. And this is due to the fact that they see deficiencies and imperfections in the rule.

Shaikh Sālih al-Fawzān was asked:

“Respected Shaikh, yourself and your brothers who are scholars in this country are Salafīs – and all praise is due to Allāh – and your method in advising the rulers is that of the Sharīʿah and as the Prophet has explained, yet there are those who find fault with you due to your neglect in openly rejecting the various oppositions [to the Sharīʿah] that have occurred. And yet others make excuses for you by saying that you are under the control and pressure of the state. So do you have any words of direction or clarification to these people?”

So Shaikh al-Fawzān answered with clear and unambiguous words:

“There is no doubt that the rulers, just like people besides them, are not infallible. Advising them is an obligation. However, attacking them in the gatherings and upon the pulpits is considered to be the forbidden form of backbiting. And this evil is greater than that which occurred from the ruler since it is backbiting and because of what results from backbiting such as the sowing of the seeds of discord, causing disunity and affecting the progression of daʿwah (the call to Islām). Hence what is obligatory is to make sure advice reaches the rulers by sound and trustworthy avenues, not by publicizing and causing commotion. And as for reviling the Scholars of this country, that they do not give advice [to the rulers], or that they are being controlled in their affairs, this is a method by which separation between the Scholars, the youth and the society is desired, until it becomes possible for the mischief-maker to sow the seeds of his evil. This is because when evil suspicions are harbored about the Scholars, trust is no longer placed in them and then the chance is available for the biased partisans to spread their poison. And I believe that this thought is actually a schemed plot that has come into this country, and those who are behind it are foreign to this country [36]. It is obligatory upon the Muslims to be cautious of it.” [37]

Likewise the former Mufti of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, Imām Muhammad bin Ibrāhīm stated:

“The government [of Saudi Arabia], praise be to Allāh, its constitution (dustūr) is the Book of Allāh and the Sunnah of His Messenger ; and it has opened the Islamic courts for that purpose, for the actualisation of the statement of Allāh:

‘And if you differ in any affair between yourselves, then refer it back to Allāh and His Messenger.’ [38]

And that which is besides this, then he is one who judges by jāhiliyyah, about which Allāh, the Most High, said:

‘Do they then seek the judgement of (the Days of) Ignorance? And who is better in judgement than Allāh for a people who have firm Faith?’ [39]” [40]

Incitement begins with an ideology; an ideology that is preached and emotions aroused against the Muslim governments which, in turn leads to bloodshed and killing of innocents; youths who throw their lives away for sinful causes; as a result innocent Muslim and non-Muslim men, women and children are murdered indiscriminately. And this is the ultimate goal of Hizb ut-Tahrīr as they openly admit on their website:

“It is a call to the blood so that it agitates in the veins, to the hearts so that they become full with rage; thus they become firmly resolved, have [far] reaching aims.”

The corruption of the rulers and rulership is not something new, rather it is something found throughout the ages. The Messenger of Allāh (salallaahu ‘alaihi wassallam) said:

“The handholds of Islām will be demolished one by one, and every time one of them is demolished, the people will hold on tightly to the one that follows it. The first one to be demolished is the rule (al-hukum) and the last of them will be the prayer.” [41]

And the early hadīth scholar, Ibn Hibbān mentioned this narration under the chapter heading:

“A mention of the reports that the first breakage of the handholds of Islām will appear from the direction of the rulers; [and it] is the corruption of rulership and the rulers.”

So this was something well-known, yet we do not find in the example of the Companions and those early scholars, any methodology that resembles the methodology of the extremist groups of rebellion and bloodsheed.»

 

[Tukraq]

»

Posting the same thing that’s irrelevant in this matter, MSB Is not a ruler according to me in my opinion this this doesn’t apply

 

[Lum]

Footnotes:

[1] Muslim in the Sahīh, Book of Rulership.


[2] Ibn Hibbān in his Sahīh, no. 4562, authenticated by al-Albānī. Note that the Prophet commanded the Muslims not to obey the ruler in disobedience to Allāh, but he did not command with rebellion. And it is possible to disobey the Ruler without raising the sword against him or calling for his overthrow.


[3] Al-Bukhārī in his Sahīh.


[4] Shaikh Ibn ʿUthaimīn mentions that an example of this is like the one who loses control over his thoughts and does not know what he is saying – due to extreme joy, or other similar reasons. There is an authentic hadīth wherein a man lay under a tree waiting for death after losing his camel laiden with supplies; and then suddenly the camel’s reigns are caught in the tree, so he takes hold of them and exclaims, “O Allāh! Indeed you are my slave and I am your Lord!” mixing up his words due to extreme joy. (Reported by Muslim, no. 6611). So Allāh did not take him to account for that slip of the tongue, nor did He declare him to be a disbeliever. See Majmū al-Fatāwā war-Rasā’il, no.341.»


[5] This occurred in the time of Imām Ahmad bin Hanbal (died 241H) when the misguided Jahmite ‘scholars’, such Ibn Abī Duwād and Bishr al-Marīsī, convinced the rulers to adopt heretical beliefs, yet the scholars did not declare the rulers to be unbelievers.


[6] Al-Isrā’ 17:15.


[7] Majmūʿ al-Fatāwā, 3/229.


[8] Majmūʿ al-Fatāwā of Ibn Taymiyyah 3/231.


[9 Reported by al-Bukhārī and Muslim.


[10] Majmūʿ al-Fatāwā, 3/231.


[11] Visit takfiris.com and aqidah.com for more examples.


[12] Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyah, Iʿlām al-Muwaqqiʿīn ʿan Rabb il-ʿĀlameem.


[13] Hajjāj bin Yūsuf was responsible for widespread oppression and killing towards the end of the time of the Companions. He besieged Makkah and bombarded the Kaʿbah. He killed the Companion ʿAbdullāh bin Zubair and crucified him in Makkah. See as-Siyar of Adh-Dhahabī.


[14] Tabaqāt al-Kubrā (7/163-165)


[17] Mihnatul-Imām Ahmad (p. 70-72); al-Khallāl in as-Sunnah (no. 90) with an authentic chain of narration.


[18] This is the position of the scholars and jurists of the orthodox Ahlus-Sunnah and Salafism, i.e. that it is possible for a person to commit major disbelief in creed, statement or action, but still remain within the fold of Islām due to the fact that he was ignorant of the Islamic texts, and had he known of the Islamic ruling he would immediately correct himself.


[19] The Jahmites are an early sect that negate or explain away [by the use of metaphors] the Names and Attributes of Allāh, the Most High. They took their teachings from Jahm bin Safwān (died 128H) who in turn was a disciple of Jaʿd bin Dirham (died 124H) both of whom denied amongst other things that Allāh spoke to the Prophet Mūsā (Moses), that He took Ibrahīm (Abraham) as a close friend, that He is the Most High above His creation and distinct from it. See asharis.com for more information regarding this sect.


[20] Majmūʿ al-Fatāwā, 7/507-508.


[21] Ibn Taymiyyah, Minhāj as-Sunnah, 4/527 and onwards.


[22] A famous book of creed from the fourth century authored by Imām Abu Jaʿfar Ahmad ibn Muhammad At-Tahāwī (died 321H).


[23] Al-Asālah magazine, issue 10.


[24] Authentically reported by Imām Ahmad in al-Musnad, no. 15359, as-Sunnah, no. 1097 with al-Albānī’s checking.


[25] Refer to Sahīh Jāmiʿ as-Saghīr of al-Albānī, and it is authentic. It is reported by Abū Sāʿīd al-Khudrī, Abū Umāmah and Tāriq bin Shihāb.


[26] Reported by al-Hākim, verified to be authentic by al-Albānī in as-Sahīhah, no. 174.


[27] Wujūb ut-Taʿāwan bain al-Muslimīn (p.7-8).


[28] The Creed of Imām al-Bukhārī, p.40.


[29] Sharhus-Sunnah of al-Barbahārī.


[30] Salaf: Those who came before us from the earliest generations of Muslims. In the purest sense, the term refers to the Companions of the Prophet . And thus, a Salafī is a Muslim who precisely follows their way in creed, methodology and all affairs of religion.


[31] ʿUthmān bin Affān : The noble Companion of the Prophet , who married two of his daughters, after one died, the Prophet offered him the other for marriage – thus he is nicknamed “Dhun-Nurayn”, (Possessor of the two Lights). He was the third Rightly Guided Caliph of Islām. It is not permissible to criticise or attack him or his character. Sayyid Qutb famously launched severe criticisms against this Caliph as well as several other Companions of the Prophet . Visit themadkhalis.com and takfiris.com for evidenced proofs.


[32] An authentic narration: Related by Ahmad (3/403) and Ibn Abī ʿĀsim (2/521).


[33] ʿAlī bin Abī Tālib and Muʿāwiyah bin Abī Sufyān were both noble Companions of the Prophet and fourth and fifth holders of the office of rulership respectively.


[34] Refer to Al-Maʿloom min Wājibil-’Ilāqah baynal-Hākim wal-Mahkoom, pp. 22-33.


[35] Al-Wajīz fī Sīrat al-Malik ʿAbdul-ʿAzīz, pp. 90-91.


[36 Such as the ideology of Sayyid Qutb and his brother Muhammad Qutb.


[37] Al-Ajwibah al-Mufīdah of Shaikh Sālih al-Fawzān


[38] An-Nisā’: 59.


[39] Al-Māidah: 50.


[40] Fatāwā Ash-Shaikh Muhammad bin Ibrāhīm, 12/288.


[41] Imām Ahmad (5/251), Ibn Hibbān (6715), with a good chain of narration.


For further reading, refer to the book, “The Rise of Jihadist Extremism in the West,” Salafi Publications.»

 

[Lum]

Posting the same thing that’s irrelevant in this matter, MSB Is not a ruler according to me in my opinion this this doesn’t apply

don’t quote me.

 

[Diaspora ambassador]

Religion comes first. Allah (Subhanahu wa Ta’ala) created us to worship him. Saudi and Yemen are fighting the Houthis. May Allah(Subhanahu wa Ta’ala) hasten their victory.

That is my point exactly they ain't realy fighting over religion it is all a facade. They are fighting to install their own puppets.

 

[Diaspora ambassador]

Saudi is upon tawheed and sunnah.

Come again? What made the Saudis supreme in the religion even the prophet pbuh didn't bless them. The Saudis are obviously playing for their own agenda. Same goes for Iran.

 

[Tukraq]

don’t quote me.

Why are you insulting your ruler, don’t I deserve your respect as the Hadith says? I am on the tawhid and sunnah, that’s not a way to address your rulers