Imitating the Kuffar
Abdul Aziz
What is Imitating the Kuffar?
All Praise and All Thanks are for Allah (Subhanahu wa Ta'ala).
"And whosoever does not judge by what Allāh has revealed, such are the
Kāfirūn." (5:44 Interpretation of Meaning)
Imitating the kuffar can be of two kinds: the obvious one of imitating
their manners, their customs, their appearance, and the not so obvious
imitation of their ideas, their way of life, their system of
government and their laws.
"The genesis of truth is Allah alone, so do not be among those who do
not believe." (3:60 Interpretation of Meaning)
The first kind includes such things as men shaving their beard, eating
using the left hand, and behaving like the kuffar, while the second
kind involves accepting, or being influenced by, the standards, and
the values, of the kuffar, or using the kuffar, and their society, as
"role models" and so seeking to copy the kuffar and their society.
"Whoever imitates a group, then he belongs to them." Abu Dawood,
narrated by Hadhrat Ibn Umar (R.A).
The second kind of imitation is imitating their political system -
such as so-called "democracy" - and using kuffar terms and ideas to
describe Muslims and Islam itself. One relevant example here is the
use of the Kaffir term "terrorism". For those who adhere to Quran and
Sunnah alone there is only that which Allah (Subhanahu wa Ta'ala) has
ordained, and that which he has forbidden, such as imitating the
kuffar. If a Muslims does what Allah (Subhanahu wa Ta'ala) has
ordained, they are acting correctly - regardless of whether the kuffar
calls that Muslim a "terrorist" and his/her deed an "act of
terrorism". Thus, for Islam, the question of so-called "terrorism" is
irrelevant, for the question we as Muslims must ask is: was, or is,
this Muslim acting in accord with Quran and Sunnah?
Another relevant example is the much-debated issue of Islam and
so-called "democracy". For Islam, so-called "democracy" is irrelevant:
the Islamic question to ask is: is the government of that or this
Muslim country acting in accord with Quran and Sunnah? Is their law
Shariah and Shariah only?
To frame questions about Islam and Muslims using the terms, the ideas,
of the kuffar is to imitate the kuffar.
The essential criteria to determine what is, or is not, imitating the
kuffar is the criteria of judgement. A Muslim should use the Quran and
the Sunnah, and these alone, as their guides, their standard, their
criteria. That is, Quran and Sunnah determine what is right, and what
is wrong, and every issue should be referred to them for guidance.
"Correct guidance is the guidance of Allah." (3:73 Interpretation of
meaning)
"Whomsoever seeks a Way of Life other than Islam, it shall not be
accepted, for in the life to come they shall be the ones who have
lost." (3:85 Interpretation of meaning)
Imitating the kuffar is kufr - a concealment of the reality, the
truth, of Tawhid - and thus ignorance, a negation of one's Islam,
because we have been commanded, by Allah (Subhanahu wa Ta'ala) to
judge only by the Quran and Sunnah, and to follow the perfect example
of the Prophet Muhammad (salla Allahu 'alayhi wa sallam) who revealed
the perfect, the complete, Way of Life which is Al-Islam.
"This day I have perfected your Way of Life for you and completed My
Favour upon you and have chosen for you as your Way of Life Al-Islam"
(5:3 Interpretation of Meaning)
Distancing Ourselves from the Kuffar:
"The best of people is my generation, then those who come after them,
then those who come after them." [Reported by Bukhari and Muslim -
Mutawaatir. Muslim, Narrated 'Aisha ].
"In the Messenger of Allah you have the perfect example to follow."
[33:2 Interpretation of Meaning]
Our role models - those whom we as Muslims should admire and seek to
imitate - are the Prophet Muhammad (salla Allahu 'alayhi wa sallam),
al-Khulafaa' al-Raashidoon and As-Salaf as-Saalih. If we follow their
example, we shall, in our outward behaviour, distance ourselves from
the kuffar. But to distance ourselves from the kuffar in our minds and
in our hearts - to live, to breathe, to think Islam - is to embrace
Islam and Islam only by consciously rejecting the way of life of the
kuffar: their ideas, their system of government, their type of
society, the very terms they use to describe their ignorant,
dishonourable way of life.
Allah (Subhanahu wa Ta'ala) knows best.
Abdul Aziz
Count 1
> Our role models - those whom we as Muslims should admire and seek to
> imitate - are the Prophet Muhammad (salla Allahu 'alayhi wa sallam),
> al-Khulafaa' al-Raashidoon and As-Salaf as-Saalih.
According to who?
If we follow their
> example, we shall, in our outward behaviour, distance ourselves from
> the kuffar.
But to distance ourselves from the kuffar in our minds and
> in our hearts - to live, to breathe, to think Islam - is to embrace
> Islam and Islam only by consciously rejecting the way of life of the
> kuffar:
Yes. Unfortunately this kind of thinking from some muslims leads them to
call many muslims kuffar as well. The whole thing boils down to an
interpretation.
Now - what metric would you like to employ to demonstrate the relative
strength of Islamic cultures to Kuffar cultures?
their ideas, their system of government, their type of
> society, the very terms they use to describe their ignorant,
> dishonourable way of life.
Ignorants a rather poor choice of words don't you think? The government of
the Taliban (of which you have called a 'gift' from allah) enforced and
ensured ignorance. Especially for its women by telling them to stay at home
and banning them from schools. Even today many Muslim majority nations fall
far behind the west, and other muslim countries, in most educational areas.
And 'dishonorable' is a subjective term. It only has meaning to you so it
can't be adequately addressed.
Suffice to say I see someone acting *very* dishonorably here.
asimm...@yahoo.com
its very beginning as a result of the original momentum generated by
its faith. I made a type saying that to argue that it was because of
Islam is an absurdity, when I meant to say that to argue that the
Muslim world's situation NOW is because of Islam is an absurdity.
The Quran gives a set of guidelines for man to follow, and it is an
active and dynamic faith that calls for practical application. It is
not a creed or dogam, i.e that one simply calls himself Muslim and
then magically the world becomes la de da. One of the basic arguments
for the ressurection of man even from a worldy perspective is
acknowledgement of his own faults and weaknesses and correction of
them. Thus, it is recorded in the Quran that Noah (S) called His
people to God Almighty, and said that if they performed TAUBAH
(acknowledgement, repentance, and recitification) of their faults, God
would shower them with even material abundance.
Civilization is a product of men actively engaging in the world, not
of ascribing to a particular creed BY NAME ONLY.
asimm...@yahoo.com
> Now - what metric would you like to employ to demonstrate the relative
> strength of Islamic cultures to Kuffar cultures?
>
Kufr is one who knowingly denies the truth. One cannot declare any
culture kufr.
Islam does not deny culture, nor does it seek to replace it. It has a
certain set of moral guidelines to be followed for men to take into
account when formulating their own rites and laws. Religion affects
psychology, and ultimately people's culture. But it is a natural
process that happens over time.
There is no Islamic system.
> their ideas, their system of government, their type of
> > society, the very terms they use to describe their ignorant,
> > dishonourable way of life.
>
> Ignorants a rather poor choice of words don't you think? The government of
> the Taliban (of which you have called a 'gift' from allah) enforced and
> ensured ignorance. Especially for its women by telling them to stay at home
> and banning them from schools.
The treatment of women in Afghanistan, i.e. purdah, is more an example
of the cultural traditions of the people and existed PRIOR to Islam.
If one journeys to Egypt he will find women very much outside of the
house. "But Afghanistan will prove our point regarding Islam at this
particular moment, so let's just point out their faults on whatever
little knowledge we even have of their culture. But of course when we
need to discuss Saudi Arabia, we will not mention the fact they are
not denied education or that Saudi boasts a large percentage of female
doctors. Because that would not suit our point. Let's just mention
that women cannot drive."
Just use whatever image fits your opinion at the time and generalize
when you want. In European society during the feudal times, as was
Arabian society it was 'behoving' of the free woman to stay at home,
while letting the servants run their errands. Not that I am arguing
for it, but one has to see from another's cultural viewpoint.
Neither do I favor the Taliban, but even my Afghani friends who
vehemently hated them found them better then the rulers as compared to
now and prior to their rise, because their primary purpose was
maintaining peace in a society that had been at war for well over 20
years. Further, it was the battles between Masood and Hekmatyar that
led to many women being raped, elders killed, and children blown up.
But obviously, you expect Afghanistan to make a sudden change for the
better despite the crisis it faced. Oh, and the millions of Afghan
refugees that fled to Pakistan, but what do you expect? "The
uneducated Taliban should have done much better, though we know they
are uneducated and simple minded."
"We need to downplay Islam, so let us bring to mind the Taliban and
their lack of education and how that reflects Islam." You cannot win
with them.
The audacity of some people, coming off as if they are not casting any
moral judgements or even considering the situation. Sounds more like
an imperialistic viewpoint. The clash of 2 dogmatic minds who believe
in their superiority, one who cannot even fathom the West as having
any moral bearings, the other who simply wants to blast Islam.
Even today many Muslim majority nations fall
> far behind the west, and other muslim countries, in most educational areas.
> And 'dishonorable' is a subjective term. It only has meaning to you so it
> can't be adequately addressed.
>
This is part of a whole series of factors, and none of them can be
traced towards the application of Islam. The rise and downfall of
nations is an established fact of history, and the Muslim world is no
exception and neither does the Quran deny that they are. What the
Quran does address is why nations rise and fall. Even the classical
Muslim jurists argued that God honours nations, despite their
religious creed, if they implement justice, and further God humiliates
even a Muslim nation if they do not implement justice.
In early Muslim history, when the momentum of the Islamic force was
being felt, the Muslim world produced an unprecedented world culture,
absorbing and assimilating. To argue that it is because of Islam is
pure absurdity.
M shareef
> And 'dishonorable' is a subjective term. It only has meaning to you so it
> can't be adequately addressed.
You are true. Abdul Aziz is comparing your culture with the Islamic
culture, so you should not worry about his comments as it is
subjective. Moreover this group is about Islam and the comparison will
be with the Islamic culture and what muslims think best accordingto
their religion. If you have objection on this type of comparison then
you should be posting your mails on Christian forums glorifying your
culture.
> Suffice to say I see someone acting *very* dishonorably here.
Yes, we all know it and hopefully you do not require us to name them.
M Shareef
Abdul Aziz
> > Our role models - those whom we as Muslims should admire and seek to
> > imitate - are the Prophet Muhammad (salla Allahu 'alayhi wa sallam),
> > al-Khulafaa' al-Raashidoon and As-Salaf as-Saalih.
>
> According to who?
>
Allah (Subhanahu wa Ta'ala) says: "In the Messenger of Allah you have
the perfect example to follow." [33:2 Interpretation of Meaning]
"The best of people is my generation, then those who come after them,
then those who come after them." [Reported by Bukhari and Muslim -
Mutawaatir. Muslim, Narrated 'Aisha ].
> Now - what metric would you like to employ to demonstrate the relative
> strength of Islamic cultures to Kuffar cultures?
BTW, I could quibble here and write that Islam is a Way of Life, not a
culture. But if we define a culture as the unique customs, outlook,
traditions and achievements of a particular a community, group, people
or society, we can let this pass!
1) An Islamic community - one ruled according to Shariah alone - is
the way to Allah (Subhanahu wa Ta'ala) and thus Jannah. That is, it
offers the best guide we can have to the goal of this life, which is
Jannah.
This is the Islamic way to "judge" such an Islamic community,
contrasted with a kaffir society, for this judgment is based on the
perspective of Islam.
You, and others, might "judge" such a community by the values, the
ideas, the way, of the kuffar - by more material things, say; or
according to some kaffir idea such as "democracy".
But the most important thing, for Islam, is the next life, a goal
attained InshaAllah by true submission to Allah (Subhanahu wa Ta'ala).
As I have written - and said - many times, one way to describe this is
Zaid in dunya. It is things like dhikr, taqwa, which are important, in
this life: a balance between too little (asceticism), and too much
(Western materialism). The perfect example of this balance is the
Prophet Muhammad (salla Allahu 'alayhi
wa sallam). Other excellent examples are al-Khulafaa' al-Raashidoon.
2) An Islamic community is a place where honour and reason reside,
made manifest as these were and are by the example of the Prophet
Muhammad (salla Allahu 'alayhi wa sallam) and those who strive to
follow him from a desire to please Allah (Subhanahu wa Ta'ala).
3) An Islamic community is place of true justice - for justice resides
in Shariah; in following the commands of Allah (Subhanahu wa Ta'ala).
It does not reside in any human-derived law or in any human-derived
"Court of Law".
The above is the Islamic answer to your question. I refuse to answer
the question using the perspective of the kuffar, which is what you
might have been hoping - for I know some Muslims have tried to answer
such questions in such terms, and the result is a irrelevant argument
(from the viewpoint of Islam) about which society has the most
"freedom", the most "technology", the better roads, and so on.
If I wanted to play that game, I might make mention of the
achievements of Harun al-Rashid; of such things as the School of
Medicine at Jundishapur, the Bayt-ul-Hikma in Baghdad; of how the
scholars of Islam saved the manuscripts of people like Sophocles, and
Aristotle; of how the scholars of the early West traveled to Andalusia
to learn; of the early Muslim universities, pre-dating Western ones.
> Ignorants a rather poor choice of words don't you think?
No, it was the perfect, and Islamic, choice: Jahalliya. Ignorance of
the true meaning of life. Ignorance of the way to achieve the purpose
of this mortal life. Ignorance of the Message of the Prophet Muhammad
(salla Allahu 'alayhi wa sallam). Ignorance breeding the Tughyan of
the Kuffar - or, expressed in more kaffir-friendly terms, ignorance
breeding the hubris, the arrogance, of the tyrant.
> The government of
> the Taliban (of which you have called a 'gift' from allah) enforced and
> ensured ignorance. Especially for its women by telling them to stay at home
> and banning them from schools. Even today many Muslim majority nations fall
> far behind the west, and other muslim countries, in most educational areas.
See, you want me to play the kaffir game, after all. I judge them by
Islamic criteria - their adherence to the Quran and Sunnah; their
desire to obey Allah (Subhanahu wa Ta'ala) alone; their goal of the
achievement of Jannah, before anything else. It was the conditions
that existed in Afghanistan that favoured dhikr, taqwa, just as it is
the conditions which exist in the West, today, which favour dishonour,
and ignorance of Tawhid.
We have debated the Taliban before - they strived to create an Islamic
society, based on Quran and Sunnah, and - kaffir propaganda aside -
they were working toward this. Their achievements, given the
conditions they inherited and the sanctions imposed by the West, were
remarkable.
> And 'dishonorable' is a subjective term. It only has meaning to you so it
> can't be adequately addressed.
No, dishonour is an objective term, as of course, is honour. What is
honour? Best defined by example: that of the Prophet Muhammad (salla
Allahu 'alayhi wa sallam) - the archetypal honourable man.
The truth is that Islam encourages honour. As I wrote a while ago:
<quote>
"If there is one English word which can usefully sum up the Way of
Life which is Al-Islam it is honour. For Islam is a guide to how we -
as individuals, as individuals in a family, and as individuals in a
community - can live in a human way, according to those gifts, those
qualities, which make us human and which distinguish we human beings
from the other living beings on this planet of ours. These human gifts
of ours are reason, and our ability to control ourselves through using
our will.To live in a human way is to have honour - that is, nobility
of spirit. And this nobility of spirit is the cause, the genesis, of
civilization itself: that is, of the creation of a particular type of
community living.
Honour means fairness; it means civility - that is, manners: being
courteous to others. Honour means being honest; it means being
tolerant and using our reason, our ability to think. Honour means
using our will to restrain ourselves - that is, to follow an ethical
code whose standards we strive to uphold and which we consider more
important than our own personal desires, feelings, comfort or even
happiness.
Honour also means we accept that there is a God - a Creator, an
Eternal Being far more powerful than we mortals. There can be no real
honour without this understanding of God, for it is this understanding
of God which gives us the cosmic perspective we need to understand
ourselves, as humans, and judge ourselves - with such an understanding
and judgement being the beginning of morality. It is this
understanding alone which prevents us from being insolent - from
upsetting the natural balance by 'overstepping the mark'. Furthermore,
this understanding of God which is the basis of honour is not a
belief, a question of faith, but rather a reasoned apprehension - the
result of rational observation and reasoned thought.
One of the glories of Islam is that it expresses this reasoned
apprehension of God - for Islam, God is not a question of faith, but
the conclusion of us thinking about ourselves, our world, and the
cosmos itself..."
</quote>
BTW this will probably be one of my last posts for a while as
InshaAllah I shall be traveling again, soon.
May Allah Subhanahu wa Ta'ala forgive us for our mistakes and may He
guide us to and keep us on the Right Path.
Count 1
> This is the Islamic way to "judge" such an Islamic community,
> contrasted with a kaffir society, for this judgment is based on the
> perspective of Islam.
Fine. What comes next? IE - you have your Islamic community. It is just
fine and dandy and happily Islamic and you and whoever else you hang with
look at it 'Islamically' and judge it to be suitably 'Islamic'.
Yes...we all understand that. ::sigh::
So then you turn to your neighbor, an unislamic partner on this little blue
marble. What would you then look at to compare your 'Islamic community' to
their non Islamic community? IE - upon what metrics would you rely to
assess if your quality of life, outside your religious correctness, is as
high or higher than your neighbors??
Mr. 'Aziz'. You have been here for a long time posting your material. Its
time we started to move the conversation forward.
> You, and others, might "judge" such a community by the values, the
> ideas, the way, of the kuffar - by more material things, say; or
> according to some kaffir idea such as "democracy".
Don't you think democracy best serves several Islamic injunctions found in
the quran?
> But the most important thing, for Islam, is the next life, a goal
> attained InshaAllah by true submission to Allah (Subhanahu wa Ta'ala).
Great. Now in exercising your pleasure to serve Allah and attain Janna you
become a doctor. A pious man working to save lives. Would you want
whatever your neighbor has that ensures a much lower infant mortality rate?
Is this not a reasonable expectation of this man?
> > Ignorants a rather poor choice of words don't you think?
> See, you want me to play the kaffir game,
If by 'kaffir game' you mean assess the taliban beyond the narrow view of
how Islamic it was, then yes.
> We have debated the Taliban before - they strived to create an Islamic
> society, based on Quran and Sunnah, and - kaffir propaganda aside -
> they were working toward this.
I don't disagree. Unfortunately.
Their achievements, given the
> conditions they inherited and the sanctions imposed by the West, were
> remarkable.
Yes, and I will even give you largely misunderstood in the west. IE - in
many areas girls were still going to school and women were allowed jobs.
This was because the Taliban were too few in number to maintain an effective
presence in Afhganistan.
> No, dishonour is an objective term,
Oh. I can tell ya, I don't share any concept of the word with people who
argue for massive civilian casualities in the name of a God. So I'll just
snip you're 'universal' declaration of the meaning of the word and focus on
the interesting parts.
> Honour also means we accept that there is a God - a Creator, an
> Eternal Being far more powerful than we mortals.
All of human history refutes this point. If we all believe we are fighting
honourably for our god then none of us can be fighting honourable at all if
God is the only metric. The different god factors cancel themselves out,
and the argument disappears.
Look at you and I. We both believe we are acting honorably. Therefore,
neither of us are, if the only metric we use is pleasure of our god.
> BTW this will probably be one of my last posts for a while as
> InshaAllah I shall be traveling again, soon.
Feel free to get back to me via private email then Mr. 'Aziz'. Happy trails.
Abdul Aziz
>
> So then you turn to your neighbor, an unislamic partner on this little blue
> marble.
And the Prophet (salla Allahu 'alayhi wa sallam) gave glad tidings of
victory and triumph for the religion and its dominance as he said,
"This matter will reach wherever the night and day reach. And Allaah
will not leave a single home built either from hides or fur, except
Allaah causes this religion to enter it, from the supremacy of the
supreme of the humiliation of the humiliated; a supremacy by which
Allaah makes Islaam supreme with, or a humiliation by which Allaah
humiliates disbelief (Kufr) with." - narrated by Ahmad from the
Hadeeth of Tameem Ad-Daaree.
> Mr. 'Aziz'. You have been here for a long time posting your material. Its
> time we started to move the conversation forward.
There is little in the way of "conversation" - generally just a
statement and re-statement of our very differing views and
perspectives.
As I wrote, one of my aims is to, InshaAllah, "clarify the essence,
the base, of Islam - to present the Islamic perspective as I and many
other Muslims understand it."
>
> Don't you think democracy best serves several Islamic injunctions found in
> the quran?
No. Democracy, for Muslims, is an imitation of the kuffar. It is
wrong, in my view, for Muslims to even use this kaffir term. The
Islamic system, as I and several ovthers have pointed out here, on
SRI, and elsewhere, is the Khilafah which is based on the Bayah
contract.
>
> Great. Now in exercising your pleasure to serve Allah and attain Janna you
> become a doctor. A pious man working to save lives. Would you want
> whatever your neighbor has that ensures a much lower infant mortality rate?
> Is this not a reasonable expectation of this man?
No, because what matters as always is doing what Allah (Subhanahu wa
Ta'ala) has commanded. Being a Muslim comes before anything and
everything else, and especially before one's own personal feelings.
The criteria to judge what is or is not acceptable must be an Islamic
one - Quran and Sunnah - and not what one individual feels, or thinks.
That is, such things as Shariah come before ahwah. To follow one's
ahwah is to turn away from the path of Islam, which is total
submission to Allah (Subhanahu wa Ta'ala)
I give one example. The ruler of some Muslim country may well believe
that accepting a "loan" from a kaffir government might be a good
thing, enabling say a hospital or two to be built. But if part of the
"loan agreement" is that the ruler must make his country more
"democratic" or whatever - or arrest what the kuffar call "some
troublesome Muslims" - then that ruler is acting contrary to Quran and
Sunnah, and should decline the offer even though, in the short term,
it might have benefited some Muslims in material or other terms. Of
course, if there were no "strings attached" and there was no imitation
of the kuffar invovled, no "secret deals", no usury involved, then
such a loan might be acceptable.
Once again, the perspective is Jannah - the eternal life which awaits
- and not the immediate material, mortal, world. The criteria to judge
what is or is not acceptable must be an Islamic one, not one based on
material benefits or whatever.
>
> Look at you and I. We both believe we are acting honorably. Therefore,
> neither of us are, if the only metric we use is pleasure of our god.
This, to me, is a flawed argument. The truth I accept is firstly that
it is Allah (Subhanahu wa Ta'ala) who is and can only be the one to
judge whether or not we have acted honourably; and secondly that what
Allah (Subhanahu wa Ta'ala) has decreed and made manifest in Quran and
Sunnah is honourable. Therefore, if I strive to follow Quran and
Sunnah, I should be acting honourably.
I accept that you disagree with this. But it does represent, in my
view, the Islamic way - it is the essence of what being Muslim means.
In truth, it just means that the Way of Islam is quite diffrent from
the way(s) of the West.
As often, we shall have to agree to disagree.
Zuiko Azumazi
"Abdul Aziz" <abdus_...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:b3ba458d.03081...@posting.google.com...
> No. Democracy, for Muslims, is an imitation of the kuffar. It is
> wrong, in my view, for Muslims to even use this kaffir term.
Question:-
As you say 'in your view' you do not want Muslims to 'imitate the kuffar',
so why are you using the 'West's' ubiquitous technology, called the
'internet'? Is active participation in 'newsgroup' forums 'imitating the
kuffar' or un-Islamic? Is political propagandising 'imitating the kuffar' or
un-Islamic? Are you the Muslim exception to your own self-pronounced dogma
or are you just exercising your 'democratic' right to 'Western' free speech
at the same time censuring those other Muslims for using the same medium?
Please excuse me for using a kaffir language, but the "medium is the
message" as they say in the West!
--
Peace
To illustrate a principle, you must exaggerate much and you must omit much.
[Walter Bagehot]
Zuiko Azumazi
azu...@hotmail.com
count 1
> victory and triumph for the religion and its dominance as he said,
> "This matter will reach wherever the night and day reach. And Allaah
> will not leave a single home built either from hides or fur, except
> Allaah causes this religion to enter it, from the supremacy of the
> supreme of the humiliation of the humiliated; a supremacy by which
> Allaah makes Islaam supreme with, or a humiliation by which Allaah
> humiliates disbelief (Kufr) with." - narrated by Ahmad from the
> Hadeeth of Tameem Ad-Daaree.
So you can understand it when your neighbor, upon learning of this
interpretation, builds a large wall to keep you out?
> As I wrote, one of my aims is to, InshaAllah, "clarify the essence,
> the base, of Islam - to present the Islamic perspective as I and many
> other Muslims understand it."
And As I wrote, one of my aims is to get you to move beyond the
'theoretical'. I don't mind if you quote the texts at all. It actuall
helps me in discussion with other muslims who say the Islamic texts preach
nothing but peace and love. Your work here is very beneficial to me.
as I and several ovthers have pointed out here, on
> SRI, and elsewhere, is the Khilafah which is based on the Bayah
> contract.
But that contract does not rule out the possibility of many government
functions being off loaded to a house of commons or some kind of
proportional representation, does it? Please point out the specific Islamic
injunctions which you use to state democracy or some variation of such is
haram.
> > Great. Now in exercising your pleasure to serve Allah and attain Janna
you
> > become a doctor. A pious man working to save lives. Would you want
> > whatever your neighbor has that ensures a much lower infant mortality
rate?
> > Is this not a reasonable expectation of this man?
>
> No, because what matters as always is doing what Allah (Subhanahu wa
> Ta'ala) has commanded. Being a Muslim comes before anything and
> everything else, and especially before one's own personal feelings.
> The criteria to judge what is or is not acceptable must be an Islamic
> one - Quran and Sunnah - and not what one individual feels, or thinks.
> That is, such things as Shariah come before ahwah. To follow one's
> ahwah is to turn away from the path of Islam, which is total
> submission to Allah (Subhanahu wa Ta'ala)
What makes you think being a doctor who wants to give the best care for her
patients is somwhow unIslamic based on the Quran and Sunnah?
These came from a rudimentary search on an online DB. They took about 4
seconds to generate. (I didn't bother searching the hadiths, their highly
interpretative nature doesn't make them as reliable a source as the Quran)
[2.195] And spend in the way of Allah and cast not yourselves to perdition
with your own hands, and do good (to others); surely Allah loves the doers
of good.
[3.148] So Allah gave them the reward of this world and better reward of the
hereafter and Allah loves those who do good (to others).
[3.172] (As for) those who responded (at Ohud) to the call of Allah and the
Apostle after the wound had befallen them, those among them who do good (to
others) and guard (against evil)shall have a great reward.
[5.93] On those who believe and do good there is no blame for what they eat,
when they are careful (of their duty) and believe and do good deeds, then
they are careful (of their duty) and believe, then they are careful (of
their duty) and do good (to others), and Allah loves those who do good (to
others).
Can you point me to anything in the Quran and Sunnah you think leads a
muslim to not want to be a better saver of lives. I would be very
interested in seeing such a thing and understanding your interpretation of
it.
> This, to me, is a flawed argument. The truth I accept is firstly that
> it is Allah (Subhanahu wa Ta'ala) who is and can only be the one to
> judge whether or not we have acted honourably; and secondly that what
> Allah (Subhanahu wa Ta'ala) has decreed and made manifest in Quran and
> Sunnah is honourable.
[3.7] He it is Who has revealed the Book to you; some of its verses are
decisive, they are the basis of the Book, and others are allegorical; then
as for those in whose hearts there is perversity they follow the part of it
which is allegorical, seeking to mislead and seeking to give it (their own)
interpretation. but none knows its interpretation except Allah, and those
who are firmly rooted in knowledge say: We believe in it, it is all from our
Lord; and none do mind except those having understanding.
M shareef
> So you can understand it when your neighbor, upon learning of this
> interpretation, builds a large wall to keep you out?
No, He is not rquired to build a wall if his neighbor follows the
teachings of the Quran & hadith.
And serve Allah. Ascribe no thing as partner unto Him. (Show) kindness
unto parents, and unto near kindred, and orphans, and the needy, and
into the neighbor who is of kin (unto you) and the neighbor who is not
of kin....(4:36)
Sahih Al-Bukhari HadithHadith 8.45 Narrated byAbu Shuraih
The Prophet said, "By Allah, he does not believe! By Allah, he does
not believe! By Allah, he does not believe!" It was said, "Who is
that, O Allah's Apostle?" He said, "That person whose neighbor does
not feel safe from his evil."
Sahih Al-Bukhari HadithHadith 8.44 Narrated byIbn Umar
Allah' Apostle said, "Gabriel kept on recommending me about treating
the neighbors in a kind and polite manner, so much so that I thought
that he would order (me) to make them (my) heirs."
> What makes you think being a doctor who wants to give the best care for her
> patients is somwhow unIslamic based on the Quran and Sunnah?
Don't you think it is subjective? What do you think about the doctor
who believes in mercy killing and thinks that it is the best which he
can offer to his patient.?
M Shareef
Count 1
Thank you for a very nice opening passage.
> > What makes you think being a doctor who wants to give the best care for
her
> > patients is somwhow unIslamic based on the Quran and Sunnah?
>
> Don't you think it is subjective? What do you think about the doctor
> who believes in mercy killing and thinks that it is the best which he
> can offer to his patient.?
No - its not subjective. This question disseminated from a very specific
scenario being put to Mr. Aziz. In response to a query about Islamic doctors
wanting what the kaffir have and how reasonable an expectation that might be
his reply was:
"No, because what matters as always is doing what Allah (Subhanahu wa
Ta'ala) has commanded. Being a Muslim comes before anything and
everything else, and especially before one's own personal feelings.
The criteria to judge what is or is not acceptable must be an Islamic
one - Quran and Sunnah - and not what one individual feels, or thinks."
Apparently, Allah has commanded muslims not to learn from non muslims. I
know this is just Mr. Aziz's interpretation of Islam, and as he is a recent
convert you can take that for what it is. But it wasn't subjective.
Abdul Aziz
>But that contract does not rule out the
>possibility of many government
>functions being off loaded to a house
> of commons or some kind of
>proportional representation, does it?
>Please point out the specific Islamic
>injunctions which you use to state
> democracy or some variation of such is
>haram.
This has been much debated, on SRI in the past, and recently. I have
posted several articles to SRI about this very subject, of democracy
and Islam. See also:
http://alhaqq.jeeran.com/islam_and_democracy.html
>These came from a rudimentary search on an online DB. They took about
4
>seconds to generate. (I didn't bother searching the hadiths, their
highly
>interpretative nature doesn't make them as reliable a source as the
Quran)
All your quotes use the word "good".
The point is - as with the word "peace" - what does good mean, for
Muslims? In respect of the word "peace" I quote here what I wrote a
while ago:
<quote> "Over the past year, many people in the West - among them the
President of Amerika - have taken to saying that "Islam is a religion
of peace". Few Muslims, and especially those living in the West, have
challenged this misrepresentation. It is a misrepresentation because
what is meant by "peace" is what the West means by peace: a universal
concept, or ideal, which implies the possibility and the striving of
diverse peoples with diverse ways of life living in some kind of
pacifist harmony so that something akin to "the happiness of the
greatest number" is possible.
The crucial point to consider here is that, for Islam, peace is the
submission to Allah (SWT) and the safety which Allah (SWT) alone can
provide.
"Allah guides toward peace those who seek His pleasure." [5:16
Interpretation of Meaning]
"And this (Islam and the Quran) is the straight path of your Rabb. For
those who take heed of Our clear revelations there shall be that
dwelling which is peace (Jannah). [6:126-7 Interpretation of meaning]
</quote>
Good, in the context of Islam is what is right, according to Quran and
Sunnah: it is what Allah (Subhanahu wa Ta'ala) commands us to do. Thus
a "good" law is a Shariah law; a "good" punishment for particular bad
deed is a Shariah one, such as cutting off the hand. A "good" deed is
one which pleases Allah (Subhanahu wa Ta'ala).
For Muslims, this is beginning and the end of the argument.
>Can you point me to anything in the Quran and Sunnah you think leads
a
>muslim to not want to be a better saver of lives. I would be very
>interested in seeing such a thing and understanding your
interpretation of
>it.
You have make a false conclusion from my argument. The point was that
a priority for a Muslim is doing what Allah (Subhanahu wa Ta'ala)
commands us to do. This comes before our personal desires.
You asked: "Would you want whatever your neighbor has..." And I
answered: No, meaning if that "thing" meant imitating the kuffar or
was haram. If it was neither of these, then maybe it is acceptable for
a Muslim, provided it did not lead to either of those things. Each
issue must be based on Islamic criteria, not on one's personal desire,
or need or on what the kuffar might do. I then gave an example of what
might seem "good" but was not, from an Islamic point of view.
>[3.7] He it is Who has revealed the Book to you; some of its verses
are
>decisive, they are the basis of the Book, and others are allegorical;
then
>as for those in whose hearts there is perversity they follow the part
of it
>which is allegorical, seeking to mislead and seeking to give it
(their own)
>interpretation. but none knows its interpretation except Allah, and
those
>who are firmly rooted in knowledge say: We believe in it, it is all
from our
>Lord; and none do mind except those having understanding.
Another interpretation:
"It is He who gave to you this Book wherein are muhkan Ayat that are
umm al-Kitab, and others which are mutashabih. And as for those in
whose hearts there are doubts, they follow that which is not entirely
clear, seeking Al-Fitnah, and searching for hidden meanings, although
only Allah knows if there are hidden meanings and what they are. And
those who are versed in knowledge say: 'We believe in it; and that all
of it [both muhkan and mutashabih Ayat] are from our Rabb.' "
muhkan - decisive/clear/fundamental
mutashabih - unclear/various meanings/diverse/allegorical
umm al-Kitab - foundation/base of The Book
Allah (Subhanahu wa Ta'ala) knows best.
Abdul Aziz
Count 1
> http://alhaqq.jeeran.com/islam_and_democracy.html
Thank you - I've read it before. It doesn't really discuss how democracy is
un Islamic except through abstract concepts and subjective meanings.
What - specifically - in the quran and sunnah do you rely on to absolutely
dismiss any kind of proprotional representation for Islamic states?
> All your quotes use the word "good".
> The point is - as with the word "peace" - what does good mean, for
> Muslims?
Not bad?
<snipped discussion of peace>
> Good, in the context of Islam is what is right, according to Quran and
> Sunnah: it is what Allah (Subhanahu wa Ta'ala) commands us to do.
yes - you have stated this time and again. Does allah command you to not
learn from non muslims? That is the crux of the question.
Can you point to anything in the quran and hadith which state this? You are
saying a muslim cannot use the technology of the kuffar to extend their
medical knowledge and save the lives of muslims. You are saying this because
of your interpretation of Islam and its sacred texts but only in the
abstract. I am asking for the specifics.
> For Muslims, this is beginning and the end of the argument.
I'm sorry - I simply don't believe you can speak for all muslims. I don't
think you think that either.
You snipped this one.
[3.172] (As for) those who responded (at Ohud) to the call of Allah and the
Apostle after the wound had befallen them, those among them who do good (to
others) and guard (against evil)shall have a great reward.
I see this as being speaking directly to the medical community of muslims.
For those who responded after the wound - doctors in a crisis - and do
good - saving his life - shall have a great reward. It is a perfect
allegory for muslim medical professionals to do good. And if that good
means learning from your neighbors it should be embraced and not avoided.
> You asked: "Would you want whatever your neighbor has..." And I
> answered: No, meaning if that "thing" meant imitating the kuffar or
> was haram.
I asked if it was reasonable for a muslim doctor to have what his neighbor
had IF it meant more muslim lives would be saved. You say it is not
allowed, but you can't seem to generate the relevant Islamic references for
us.
If it was neither of these, then maybe it is acceptable for
> a Muslim, provided it did not lead to either of those things.
Oh. So there is room for movement and interpretation. Good.
> Another interpretation:
Yes - as you so often prove - differing interpretations of Islam abound.
Abdul Aziz
>Thank you - I've read it before. It doesn't
>really discuss how democracy is
>un Islamic except through abstract concepts
>and subjective meanings.
It is the principles which are important for an understanding of the
differences between Islam and so-called democracy.
And it is "subjective" only to the kuffar - for Muslims, Islam is THE
meaning.
>> Good, in the context of Islam is what
>>is right, according to Quran and
>> Sunnah: it is what Allah (Subhanahu wa Ta'ala)
>>commands us to do.
>yes - you have stated this time and again.
Because it is the essence of the argument - one of the most
fundamental differences between authentic Islam and the
misrepresentation of Islam by the kuffar and those imitating the
kuffar.
Peace, good, happiness - everything - for Islam is defined by
reference to the Quran and Sunnah: that is, by Allah (Subhanahu wa
Ta'ala).
When Muslims use such words they mean them - or should mean them -
according to Islam, not according to how the kuffar use or mean them.
Another example: what is happiness, for a Muslim? Doing that which
Allah (Subhanahu wa Ta'ala) has commanded, such as Salat, or fasting
in Ramadan. This is not, repeat not, the kaffir definition of
happiness.
Thus, for us, the kaffir definition is irrelevant, just as "democracy"
and "proportional representation" are irrelevant. We have such things
as Shura. Once a person is a Muslim, or accepts Islam, they accept
"the complete package" - they do not pick and choose what they want to
believe, what they want to do in terms of their obligations and duties
as Muslims, such as praying five times a day. To be a Muslim is to
submit, to Allah (Subhanahu wa Ta'ala) alone; to do what Allah
(Subhanahu wa Ta'ala) asks, or at least strive to do what Allah
(Subhanahu wa Ta'ala) asks.
I for one do not even deign to consider Islam in the terms of the
kuffar - for that, to repeat myself, in but one form of imitating the
kuffar.
Now, if you understand this simple - and to me, beautiful - truth
about the meaning of terms in Islam, you will understand my intent
here on SRI, and elsewhere.
But no doubt you will just ask again for Islam to be compared to some
kaffir idea or explained in the terms of the kaffir. I am not going to
do that. Islam is as Islam is - the complete and perfect Way of Life,
far superior to anything and everything Western - for it is the means
to attain such things as (defined Islamically) peace, honour,
happiness, justice, and of course, the next life, Jannah.
>I asked... <snipped>
As I wrote quite a while back on SRI, I am not going to answer biased
rhetorical questions phrased after the manner of some kaffir lawyer
who considers himself clever. Ever since I studied formal logic when
at school, I have realized the futility - and logical error - of
trying to argue from the particular to the general. One should state
the general first, with possibly some relevant examples. I do not
consider your example relevant to the general principles involved
here. Therefore, I have striven to return the argument, such as it is,
back to the general principles involved.
What is important are the principles. You wrote, earlier: "One of my
aims is to get you to move beyond the 'theoretical'..." That is not my
aim.
What is important, for Muslims - given the campaign against Islam
since the Jumaada Al-Thaani attacks - is for the essence of Islam to
be understood, especially by those who are prepared to fight the
kuffar, or support those who are fighting the kuffar. Part of this
involves countering the misrepresentation of Islam, by the kuffar. To
so present the essence, to so counter the misrepresentation, to so
support the Mujahideen and devout Muslims such as Sheikh ul-Mujahideen
Usama Bin Muhammad Bin Ladin (hafidhahullah), is my aim, here and
elsewhere.
If you want one minor but relevant (in terms of the Internet) example
regarding the campaign against Islam, here it is: consider how
alt.religion.islam has been all but "hijacked" by the Crusader and
anti-Islam bigot brigade since the Jumaada Al-Thaani attacks. Those
people have their own agenda.
>Oh. So there is room for movement and interpretation. Good.
You have your own ulterior motives for replying to my posts, motives
which - so an e-mail from someone informed me - you have made clear on
alt.religion.islam. My motives are simple: to strive InshaAllah to do
my duty as a Muslim, part of which is to strive to express my
understanding of the essence of Islam and to support those fighting
the kuffar.
Given your ulterior motives, there does not seem much point in
continuing this non-discussion.
It was related by Ahmad Musnad, on the authority of Jabar Ibn
Abdullah: "Rasullullah (salla Allahu 'alayhi wa sallam) ordered us to
hit with this (and he pointed to his sword) whoever goes out of that
(and he pointed to the Quran)."
May Allah Subhanahu wa Ta'ala forgive us for our mistakes and may He
guide us to and keep us on the Right Path.
Allah (Subhanahu wa Ta'ala) knows best.
Abdul Aziz
Count 1
> As I wrote quite a while back on SRI, I am not going to answer biased
> rhetorical questions phrased after the manner of some kaffir lawyer
> who considers himself clever. Ever since I studied formal logic when
> at school, I have realized the futility - and logical error - of
> trying to argue from the particular to the general. One should state
> the general first, with possibly some relevant examples. I do not
> consider your example relevant to the general principles involved
> here. Therefore, I have striven to return the argument, such as it is,
> back to the general principles involved.
I disagree whole heartedly. Moving from the 'general' to the 'specific', as
my question forces you, can expose weaknesses found in dogmatic adherence to
religous injunctions. You state the general, and then never give the
'relevant examples' you mention as important above. I provided the
'relevant examples' and you ignore them.
And you are still ignoring them. Its as simple as 1 2 3;
1) Islamic state,
2) Muslim doctor in the islamic state
3) Wants to provide the best care to please Allah
Can he have what the kaffir doctors across the border have?
> What is important are the principles.
I agree wholeheartedly, which is why I am raising this 'relevant example' to
further my understanding of the political system you argue for.
You wrote, earlier: "One of my
> aims is to get you to move beyond the 'theoretical'..." That is not my
> aim.
Yes it is. You have, as a stated goal for all muslims, the establishment of
an Islamic Caliphate. That *is* moving beyond the theoretical. I am very
interested in this political phenomenon, and would like further details.
Like the 'relevant example' I discuss above.
> You have your own ulterior motives for replying to my posts, motives
> which - so an e-mail from someone informed me - you have made clear on
> alt.religion.islam.
I have no unstated 'ulterior motives' in this forum. I say exactly what I am
after and I adhere to that. If you are interested in discussing any thread
in an unmoderated group on any topic, I invite you there. In this forum I
am very aware of the moderation guidelines and strive to adhere to them And
threads in ARI are very definitely off topic here.
--
Count 1
"There is no pain. You are receding."
Abdul Aziz
>I disagree whole heartedly. Moving from
> the 'general' to the 'specific', as
>my question forces you, can expose
>weaknesses found in dogmatic adherence to
>religous injunctions.
There is no dogmatic adherence, at least not on my part. And I, as I
explained in my previous reply, disagree with you about moving from
the specific to the general. So, we should just agree to disagree on
this point.
>You state the general, and then never give the
>'relevant examples' you mention as important above.
Yes, I do and have done, especially from Quran and Sunnah which are
the most important examples we Muslims have. I gave other examples,
when I consider they are required, as is evident from my replies, and
articles. In fact, in another thread you actually thanked me for
giving some examples!
I wrote several times that I do not regard the purely imaginary
example you gave as relevant to the principles involved. Therefore I
ignored it.
>I provided the
>'relevant examples' and you ignore them.
Because, as above, I did not consider them relevant - in fact, they
were not good examples at all. Just a hypothetical scenario.
> You have, as a stated goal for all muslims,
> the establishment of
>an Islamic Caliphate. That *is* moving
>beyond the theoretical.
Yes, of course it is a moving away, a striving to implement things in
this mortal world. But you seem to have missed the point - which was
about debating, discussing, a certain issue, and giving examples, in
speech and writing. This is quite different from applying general
principles in real life through such things as what you might call
"politics".
When you strive to apply things in real life you act, through such
things as war - in the case of Islam, through Jihad Fee Sabilillah -
or the doing of practical deeds. These create examples which are real.
Now, if you provide me with story of a Muslim who has done something
similar to your example, I may provide some comment. I say "may"
because it is the intent of the person which is important, and only
Allah (Subhanahu wa Ta'ala) can judge that. If I do comment, it would
be only my fallible opinion.
>threads in ARI are very definitely off
>topic here.
Fair enough. At least here we can have a fairly civilized debate here,
thanks to the Moderators.
"But they never lost heart for that which did befall them in Allah's
Way, nor did they weaken nor dishonour themselves. And Allah loves
as-Sabireen (the
patient ones)." [3:146 Interpretation of Meaning]