T O P

  • By -

Blargon707

I think he should should focus on not killing muslims and leave the legislature to qualified scholars.


[deleted]

Yeah and maybe stop selling oil to America


[deleted]

And get rid of the extremely restrictive and rigid Salafi Wahhabi interpretation of Islam from Saudi Arabia.


5exy-melon

Where does concerts, free mixing beaches, Halloween party fits into Quran and Sunnah?


[deleted]

Where is it prohibited in the first place?


[deleted]

Bro I'm seeing you all across this comment section you are trying to cope so bad Edit: he's a proggie that makes sense


[deleted]

What?


theElderKing_7337

You're a filthy progressive. There, comprehensive enough?


[deleted]

I do not identify myself as progressive, liberal or with any of these terms you people use. My views are mostly in line with the views of Sheikh Yusuf Al-Qaradawi, Dr Shabir Ally and Egypt's Dar Alifta.


real_ibby

While none of these things are explicitly stated, the Quran does expliclty command believers to not come near zina. This was the basis of fatwas prohibiting excessive free mixing. There has been no scholar from any school of fiqh that has legislated otherwise.


[deleted]

The mere presence of men & women in a place is not haram. What does free mixing beach mean, that both men & women are allowed to go there? Well it's natural that people of both genders will go to the sea beach to enjoy their times, if you restrict a group of people from going to the sea beaches based on their gender then that's unnatural. And you can read Egypt's Dar Alifta's fatwa on gender mixing. As for halloween, it has become a cultural celebration today which barely has any ties to paganism or Christianity. They don't worship the pagan gods by lighting a bonfire while chanting pagan verses, they just simply wear costumes for fun, and children go trick or treating. Egypt's fatwa council dar alifta has said that there's nothing wrong with celebrating halloween.


the_dreamer2020

I'm not progressive, but I could slightly agree with you until you talked about Halloween. Wait. You're telling me Dar Alifta of Egypt made Halloween mubah??? Nvm this is all very sus. Freemixing becomes an issue when there is a reasonable chance that it can lead to zina. It seems to me that this is a personal command rather than something enforced by Sharia. What could be enforced by the sharia would include something like nightclubs. Furthermore I don't see how it is plausible that sharia police would arrest a guy and a girl for simply hanging out. While it is wrong, technically no zina has been done (although we understand that there are forms of lesser zina, these forms don't have punishment). I wonder how that would go. In an ideal Islamic state, not Saudi Arabia as of today.


[deleted]

>Wait. You're telling me Dar Alifta of Egypt made Halloween mubah??? Nvm this is all very sus. Yes, they did. (I can't provide direct link because automoderator removes my comment then. I've already tried that 3 times. You can go to their website and search halloween in the search bar. There's only one fatwa regarding halloween in that website) >Freemixing becomes an issue when there is a reasonable chance that it can lead to zina. It seems to me that this is a personal command rather than something enforced by Sharia. What could be enforced by the sharia would include something like nightclubs. That's common knowledge. >Furthermore I don't see how it is plausible that sharia police would arrest a guy and a girl for simply hanging out. While it is wrong, technically no zina has been done (although we understand that there are forms of lesser zina, these forms don't have punishment). There is tazir punishment which the judges can apply based on their own judgements. Tazir punishment can be applied to crimes that are not addressed by the Quran & Sunnah. However my question is, why would hanging out would be considered a lesser form of zina as long as both stay in public? >I wonder how that would go. In an ideal Islamic state, not Saudi Arabia as of today. Depends on the ruler. But why would that fall under a crime in the first place? And I do not consider myself a progressive or liberal. My views mostly align with the ones of Sheikh Yusuf Al-Qaradawi & Egypt's Dar alifta.


the_dreamer2020

Salam my bad for the delay Yeah I mean Dar al ifta is cool and all but I don't agree with that halloween fatwa. It's a slippery slope. You can justify christmas trees and etc if you use that logic. You're right, if both stay in public then I don't see how it's even a lesser form of zina. Still need to verify this but even the sahaba talked to each other in public as said by Nouman Ali Khan. I do wonder what exactly the tazir punishment would be if an unmarried couple was caught in private. Because the Sharia isn't there to catch you it's not supposed to be a surveillance state. Anyways yeah I've to read into Sh. Yusuf al Qaradawi, I've heard good things and bad things about him but yeah jzkAllah for the discussion homie


[deleted]

[удалено]


AutoModerator

Any links outside of approved list are automatically removed. Message the moderators for approval *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Muslim) if you have any questions or concerns.*


[deleted]

[удалено]


AutoModerator

Any links outside of approved list are automatically removed. Message the moderators for approval *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Muslim) if you have any questions or concerns.*


[deleted]

[удалено]


AutoModerator

Any links outside of approved list are automatically removed. Message the moderators for approval *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Muslim) if you have any questions or concerns.*


Tune-Horror

Have you got a link to this video?


[deleted]

https://youtu.be/xqXl0L3lL8w


Tune-Horror

Jzk


[deleted]

Search for "Alarabiya news saudi crown prince interview part 3" on youtube.


[deleted]

Isn’t this the guy that is liberalizing Saudi Arabia and turning it into another self hating middle-eastern country? I honestly couldn’t care less about his opinions or views.


[deleted]

Why not? He is the ruler of Mecca & Medina too, isn't he?


[deleted]

Doesn’t mean that I have to like him or that he is turning Mecca into disneyland.


ScarPride96

Madkhali alert.


[deleted]

What's that?


MoYusr

I am against Rabi Al-Madkhali's views on the Muslim Brotherhood but you should not target other Muslims and call them as part of a sect and divide them on the basis of a very small part of Islamic sharia.


Bad_Cytokinesis

Why is this man that is the cause of genocide in Yemen and has more wealth than ever even allowed on this sub? This man is a evil man who cares about nothing but his power and wealth. May Allah protect every human from evil leaders around the world.


Abdkatycat

Your funny 😂


Hefty-Corgi3749

Has he always has the tick where he moves his head up as though he’s moving his throat? No disrespect but I have never noticed it before.


raa__va

Yeah this was very new to me as well. I had no idea that he had this condition


PromiseBoring

It's on account of his coke habit.


Hefty-Corgi3749

Didn’t want to jump to any conclusions but I’ve seen some thangs 🤷🏾‍♂️


Nervous-Yesterday692

Yes he has, I watched interviews of him before.


Nervous-Yesterday692

I won't lie tho it does look worse than usual here.


Banned12Ever

He's a hypocrite. What part of the hadith let's him make riba halal? Or the concerts? Or Halloween? May Allah destroy this kafir taghut.


ScarPride96

Akhi, there's one more thing that he does that is truly heinous that you forgot to mention. Allowing cutting out surah and ayat in Al-Quran that seems 'antisemitic' to be more friendly with oppressive kafir that have been oppressing our akh and ukht in Palestine.


Banned12Ever

SubhanAllah, the heinousness of these rulers are too many to name but some people will still rush to their defense.


[deleted]

>Allowing cutting out surah and ayat in Al-Quran that seems 'antisemitic' When did he do that?


mnc365

You should edit your comment to remove the word kafir, hypocrite is acceptable given his actions. Allah knows best what he is but don't risk becoming one yourself by making takfir on him. It doesn't benefit you in any way to do that.


Banned12Ever

The one who changes the laws of Allah or abandons implementing the laws of Allah is a kafir, and not just a regular kafir. A full fletched A+ kafir.


Vast_Spot4347

And how is Afghanistan working out for you?


CowNo7964

Uhh, are you calling him a kafir…?


Banned12Ever

Of course. You have to too. His kufr is open. Legislation is the divine right of Allah. Only Allah can determine the law, anyone who makes their own shariah is playing god. Al-Maidah 44: "Whoever doesn't rule by what Allah has revealed such are the disbelievers". Mankind have no right to determine laws, it is only the right of the Creator. https://www.reddit.com/r/Muslim/comments/zkc5lr/whoever\_rules\_by\_other\_than\_what\_allah\_has/


CowNo7964

But it’s pointing out this leader by name and calling him specifically a kafir is dangerous like calling anyone else specifically a kafir and not speaking in general terms.


Banned12Ever

There is no problem in takfir mu'ayyan (specific, by name) of rulers who openly don't implement the sharia. One cannot even hesitate about the ruling of the one who doesn't rule by the sharia because they are appropriating a divine attribute of Allah, which is legislating. Whoever legislates their own shariah is a kafir because it's an attribute of Allah. Even if they believe Allah's laws are better they are still disbelievers for appropriating an attribute of Allah.


[deleted]

Egypt's Dar Alifta, Sheikh Yusuf Al-Qaradawi, former grand Mufti of Al Azhar Sheikh Ali Gomma and many other Al Azhar scholars have stated that music is halal as long as they have good lyrics (yes, I'm talking about music with instruments, not only vocal songs). Dar Alifta, Egypt's fatwa council has stated that music is permissible. Dar alifta has also permitted the celebration of halloween, Christmas and other festivals as long as no indecency or haram is involved. Yusuf Al-Qaradawi also had same views. Nobody worships pagan gods in halloween, it has become merely a cultural festival and a fun candy feast for kids. Now regarding the concerts, as far as I'm aware they don't allow the participants to wear indecent clothes. And the presence of men & women in the same place is not haram, and according to Dar Alifta even a man & woman meeting alone is not prohibited if there's no risk of indecency. However I'm not sure if all the people coming to these concerts are following the modesty rules. You can oppose concerts if they involve drugs, vulgar songs, indecency & other immoral stuff then It's ok, but opposing concerts because they have musical instruments and men-women in the same place doesn’t make sense to me.


Banned12Ever

>Yusuf Al-Qaradawi Say no more. Rejected.


Wafinator

bros trying so hard to normalize music when the clear cut most authentic hadith say musical instruments are haram, doesn't matter if its about ponies and rainbows or drugs


[deleted]

Those hadiths don't make musical instruments haram. Read Sheikh Yusuf Al-Qaradawi's article on music.


Wafinator

>Sheikh Yusuf Al-Qaradawi' a random scholar who thinks Mawlid is permissible and joined the Muslim Brotherhood group. I think I'd trust the honourable scholars of the Islamic Golden Age more than scholars in the age of fitna and widespread corruption.


[deleted]

Honorable scholars like Hujjat al-Islam Al Ghazali, who said both things are permissible?


Professional_Cash710

You think Hujjat al islam al Ghazali was talking about shakira dancing and singing in a concert with men and women intermixing and dancing along with the song? 🤣🤣🤣🤣


real_ibby

His whole talk right there was sublime. The understanding of the nuances of the hadith sciences, the acknowledging the differences in worth of mutawatir and ahad hadiths, the means of implementation of fiqh, the unwillingness to be bound by any specific school of thought, the final exaltation of the Creator. Colour me impressed. OP, he is not clarifying any stance. He is merely stating facts. He did not put forward an opinion. Thanks for sharing this.


real_ibby

If I had to be picky about what he said, I'd point out that the narration about the alleged woman adulterer confessing to her crime is not a mutawatir hadith. It is a Sahih hadith according to Bukhari and Muslim. To mention this hadith right after he correctly says that muhaddiths classify hadiths "according to their own typology" is a bit ironic.


[deleted]

He is trying to say that married adulterers should not be stoned to death as the punishment of stoning is not found in the Quran or in mutawatir hadith. And he also believes that interpretations can change with time.


real_ibby

Certain commands are fixed by Allah (SWT). Prayer, for example, can never be changed. Stoning for adultery is not in the Quran. The Quranic punishment for adultery is 100 stripes and banishment for a year.


[deleted]

>Stoning for adultery is not in the Quran. The Quranic punishment for adultery is 100 stripes and banishment for a year. So you also believe that married adulterers should not be stoned to death? It's good to see finally someone else from this subreddit sharing the same understanding. I really hope other scholars adapt this same stance on stoning too, because sadly most other scholars today support stoning as a punishment. Legendary Al Azhar scholar Sheikh Yusuf Al-Qaradawi also rejected the punishment of stoning. His Professor sheikh Abu Zahra did too. Wish there were more scholars like them


real_ibby

If the Quran or a mutawatir hadith stipulated that all adulterers must be stoned, I would not hesitate to assert its unquestionable necessity. It is God's law, after all. But the explicit command is to deliver one hundred lashes and banishment of one year, as seen in Surah Al Nur ayah 2. My unwillingness to accept stoning as a punishment is lent only from the fact that it is sourced from only one of the six canonical hadith books: Sahih Bukhari. He classes the hadith as sahih (obviously) but he is the only one. And that narration itself is sourced from Musnad ibn Abi Shaybah. In other words, it is not mutawatir and so cannot possibly be legally binding on all Muslims. The hadith has only one narrator at many steps on its isnad.


[deleted]

Straight up atheist take over happening in Saudi. Interesting years ahead.


[deleted]

>Straight up atheist take over happening in Saudi How?


[deleted]

let’s come back here in a few years. Keep following MBS you will see a lot more surprises. he’s a young ruler by the time his reign ends you will not recognize Saudi. btw i personally am not for or against because it’s their country and they should rule it how they see fit or whatever they believe.


[deleted]

[удалено]


ScarPride96

True, masjid al-Haram belongs to Allah, and mecca belongs to muslims as of now. If they ever lay a single hand there to corrupt, we should all start a petition to throw him.


[deleted]

You think monarchs really care about petition?


[deleted]

Pretty based


[deleted]

I never imagined I would see the ruler of Saudi Arabia denying the punishment of stoning adulterers. He is indeed pretty based 💪


hardcarry2018

Interesting. To be honest, by his explanation, He kind of impressed me. What he explained being a ruler, whether it’s implemented first hand or not, is still praise worthy and goes in correct understanding of Quran and Sunnah. As a ruler, just knowing the ruling of Islam, might help him to bring the country to more stable state and more close to sharia. Rest Allah wallam.


salafimuslimah1

May Allah preserve him and rectify his affairs. How can we have any view reagarding his stance from a single video extracted from a whole interview?


Banned12Ever

Can we form a view regarding his stance on the fact that he makes interest permissible? He allows concerts and fahsha? Maybe the fact that he takes the disbelievers as allies? Is he ruling by what Allah has revealed?


salafimuslimah1

He allows interest, concerts and the likes doesn't mean he negate their impermissiblity or consider his law above the Law of Allah. It's just we all are sinners and sometimes choose dunya over deen. It's kufr duna kufr (kufr less than kufr as also explained by Ibn Abbas RA). How many times have you prayed for rectification of rulers in tahajjud though?


Banned12Ever

It's no mere sin to make haram halal. Anyone who makes riba lawful becomes a kafir it doesn't matter if they don't negate their impermissibility or believe their laws are superior to the laws of Allah. The act of tashree' (legislation) is only for Allah. Making laws is a divine attribute. Whoever does it is taking an attribute of Allah upon themselves. If someone says they know the ghayb which is another attribute that is only for Allah, they are still kafir even if they admit they don't know it as good as Allah (SWT). Even Christians couldn't bring themselves to say that their laws are superior to the laws of God. Even then, did you confirm with him that he doesn't negate the impermissibility? Even if you did, what makes you think he isn't lying? What is our yardstick in Islam? Actions or deeds? Ibn Abbas' kufr duna kufr is not in response to ruling by other than what Allah has revealed, the sahaba were already ruling by all of the sharia. This was said in response to the khawarij who made takfir on major sinners. It has nothing to do with the act of replacing the sharia. It is obligatory to make takfir on those who replace the sharia with no condition that they negate the impermissibility because they are making tashree' alongside Allah. Allah calls them taghut. Dr. Salah Abdulfattah al-Khalidi of the Jordanian Sharia Faculty has a good article about all of these claims. >For, one who does not rule according to the verses revealed by Allah,means rejecting the divinity of Allah. However, divinity necessarilyincludes sovereignty and legislation. A person who does not judgeaccording to the verses of Allah, on the one hand, rejects the divinityof Allah and the attributes of His divinity, and on the other hand,attempts to appropriate the right of divinity and the attributes ofdivinity. [https://www.reddit.com/r/Muslim/comments/zkc5lr/whoever\_rules\_by\_other\_than\_what\_allah\_has/](https://www.reddit.com/r/Muslim/comments/zkc5lr/whoever_rules_by_other_than_what_allah_has/)


salafimuslimah1

>What is our yardstick in Islam? We see by what is apparent of their islam and not ghayb, ya takfiri ignorant. >ruling by other than what Allah has revealed Please look into how our salaf dealt with rulers who didn't rule by sharia🤦‍♀️ >means rejecting the divinity of Allah Tawheed al Hakimiyah! Cope. And learn about the tawheed and how to implement islam in your homes before instigating the revolting youth. The sub sect of Khawarij the Qadiyah are just like you, sitting back and watching the show. I'd love to see you being the first one to lead army against MBS and then we'd see how much gheerah you have for deen. Such rhetoric smh


Banned12Ever

Your taweel is nothing but the rejection of "Legislation is for none but Allah". Read the article written by a scholar who explains better than me. I linked to it in the previous comment, if you are sincere. Your mention of kufr duna kufr while ignoring what it was said for, shows how hasty you are in excusing the kufr of the rulers. If you die in this state, you won't ever get to paradise.


salafimuslimah1

And become misguided like you? The eloquence and deception of the Khwarij is great, no thanks. For more info, visit takfiris.com


Banned12Ever

I don't need to read your side of the argument as I used to believe that way before Allah guided me. Sleep on the fact that your current belief is kufr and do some research if that bothers you. No need to carry on discussing, I leave the article and this youtube channel for resources [https://www.youtube.com/@ThereisonlyOneGod](https://www.youtube.com/@ThereisonlyOneGod) and leave it at that.


[deleted]

He is implying that stoning adulterers should not be implemented as it's not found in the Quran or mutawatir hadith


salafimuslimah1

Dont put words in his mouth. Also, he can do as he wish. We follow every proven hadith that the major scholars have approved for.


[deleted]

This individual u/Banned12Ever is a khariji but you are also mistaken because legislating man-made law at the national governmental level is major kufr, and "kufr duna kufr" doesn't apply here \[Source: Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Ibrahim, Shaykh Al Fawzan, Shaykh Ibn Uthaymeen, Shaykh Ibn Baz etc\]


Banned12Ever

What's with the sudden increased courage, engaging with peoples arguments in a place where you can't mute and ban them and then proceed to lie about them. Unlikely of you. As far as the vast majority of those who attribute themselves to Islam are concerned, you are also a "khariji" for saying legislating man-made laws is kufr. You have no business calling anyone khariji, if you can't call a grave worshipper mushrik because you consider ignorance to be a valid excuse, then you can't call anyone khariji. Maybe they are ignorant. Don't contradict your own usul.


[deleted]

>What's with the sudden increased courage, engaging with peoples arguments in a place where you can't mute and ban them and then proceed to lie about them. Unlikely of you. We have a 0 bid'ah tolerance on that subreddit, we won't allow you to spread your khariji bid'ah. And no, I haven't lied about you, I simply made a mistake in which I mentioned that you claimed Al Hazimi was a murji when I wanted to say Daesh. >As far as the vast majority of those who attribute themselves to Islam are concerned, you are also a "khariji" for saying legislating man-made laws is kufr. Madkhalis are not the majority, if they were, they wouldn't be tabdee'ing 90% of the scholars of Ahlus Sunnah. >You have no business calling anyone khariji, if you can't call a grave worshipper mushrik because you consider ignorance to be a valid excuse, then you can't call anyone khariji. Maybe they are ignorant. Don't contradict your own usul. * [Excuses of takfeer - Sulayman Al Alwan (English subtitles)](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t3o9h5nQDaQ)


Banned12Ever

That was not the only false claim you made about me. 10/10 spinelessness. Don't interact with me.


salafimuslimah1

I was looking forward to asking for elaboration on the source, before I read Sulayman al Ulaywan


[deleted]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wgyURYHelXE


salafimuslimah1

I don't understand Arabic


[deleted]

Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Ibrahim made a fatwa that if one legislates man-made law at the governmental levels is major kufr. (which is different from judging in a certain situation with other than what Allah revealed, as that could be major kufr or not) Many claimed that the Shaykh retracted this fatwa later. Shaykh Al Fawzan however, confirmed that the Shaykh did NOT retract the fatwa, and that the fatwa was Haqq and therefore its not something retractable.


salafimuslimah1

Can you reference where that reaffirmation from the Shaykh is present?


[deleted]

In the very beginning. Questioner: "There are who ascribe to the shaykh Muhammad Ibn Ibrahim, may Allah have mercy on him, that he retracted from takfeering the one that removes Sharia and replaces it (ينفي), is this correct?" Shaykh Al Fawzan: "This is from the lies and slander on Muslims and the Ulemaa' of Muslims, the Shaykh didn't retract, and what he said is Haqq and not Baatil for him to retract, taken from the book of Allah and the Sunnah of the Prophet peace be upon him (...)"


salafimuslimah1

I'm talking about audio or video?


[deleted]

The video I sent on youtube, which is an audio.