Sign in to follow this  
bint abee saeed

what is salafiyyah? what do salafees believe and call to?

Recommended Posts

sahal   

when Abdullah ibn Zubayr fought against Al-Hajjaj, the tabie'n that came after agreed that he was WRONG. So, if that is the case for that Salaf, one should really re-check their opinion before critizing the salafis. Allahu Musta'an

One of their decieves is the comparison between the leaders of early Islam and Al-saud and their cronies.

 

The early Islam leadrers, desbite their corruption and sometimes their cruelity like Hajaj, they were guarding Muslim borders and never collaberated or appointed by the enemies of ISLAM.

 

Furthermore, who were the Tabiciin who wronged Abdulahi Ibn Zubayr? starnge, he died as a MAN and SHAHID his mother ASMAA BINT ABU BAKAR was with him until his martydom encouraging him not to surrender to the oppressor who killed thousands of MUSLIM population including hundreds of SAHABA and you're saying he was wronged by Taabiciin ! .

 

One faced such TYRANY was wrong! which religion you're presenting for?

 

abu turaab I know this group very well; their bigest enemy is the one who challenge the tyranny like Abdulah Ibnu subayr, Said ibn Jubair, Ibn Taymiyah, Sayid Qutub and many others.

 

They don't like those who are in the prisons of the oppressors or being excuted.

 

In sum, they HATE AWLIYAAULAAH and they love tyrannies like FAHAD, JAMAL BADINASIR, MUBARAK and their likes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

salam all

 

what is wrong with you people!!

 

you are attacking because!!!

 

so what do you guys believe in???

 

Okay, all i keep seeing is Saudi family this that, why does it matter what they do? What makes them so relevant, what your going to run away from the deen because you don't like the Saudi family

 

brothers and sisters there is nothing between you and Allah, no one, not Saudi family not salaif, so what are you all so worried about, worship ur lord in the correct way according to the sunnah and the Quran and don't worry too much about the Saudi family.

 

as muslims we are not allowed to common on what happened between the sahabah after the death of the prophet (BPUH) and the emerge of the khawarij or shia as it is now called. so leave it

 

secondly for the brother who was attack abdual wahab, "fear allah", he did not name the al wahabis, it was a name given to them and he did not come with a new religion but revived Islam from a time of great difficulties when shirk and sinning was common and people when away from their religion. Many ullams have said that every hundred years Allah send someone to revive the sunnah, abdual wahab was one of those. his books are the foundation for the good belief and faith, one of the best books that he has written which is a must read of every Muslim regardless of age,(the three fundamental principles of Islam.

 

so how can u attack him after his death, what do you gain from it.

 

if anyone can honestly say to me that the use information for their deen from only none salaf's alone, i would be surprised, even the shia who are so different from the sunni's follow the works of salafi's, so unless ur worshiping how u wish i don't see how its possible.

 

i advice anyone who has a problem with obeying rules to read the foundation of the sunnah, which is also available is Somali, its not something that salafi's have made up.

 

islam is not based on what you like and what you dislike, nor is it what makes sense to us, but instead its based on Allah said, the prophet said and the uulam's said......

 

and those of u who are using the likes of Osama bin laden as a role model of what we should do:

 

NB: that salafis have kept their mouth close about him, all they have said is that IF he did step11, then he was wrong and it was not from the sunnah and QUran. many of you should no this, there are guidelines for war and it does not including killing women and children and trees and those who are not fighting you. and a state of war has to be declared which has not been..... so what are u'll supporting him for.....]

 

he is not a scholer, has never claimed to be one....

he is a political leader...that may or may not be one of the guided ones.

 

NB: the double standard; Ibn Taymiyah, who is a salafi ,is follwed by the sauid family (by mouth not action), many of his explainations and translations are complosory for schools to teach, in fact a guy was sacked from a newspaper for saying that it was his fault that there are so many freedom fighters, and that his teachong should be banned.

 

and i have never seen nor heard a salaf Scholar attacking Ibn Taymiyah, so maybe u got it twisted ppl

 

salamz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nomads

 

islam has a distinct code of conduct. Mohammad(salallahu alayhi wa salam) is the best example, and as such we take him as our example in all affairs, whether its intimately related to the dunyah(world) or directly related to the Akhirah. The muslim in genral, the ignorant, those who are devoit of Islamic knowledge and the people of knowledge all agree that the religion of islam is complete which requires only submission. Life, for a true Mu’meen is save trials and tribulations. But Allah did not leave us in darkness. We are obliged to take The Kitab and Sunnah as our guide in all our affairs.

 

The salafi manhaj meticulously fashions its Fiq(religious rulings), upon the kitab and sunnah upon the understanding of the Salaf. Allah does not like corruption, nor those spread corruption on earth. I cant speak for everything else but in my years of studying the Arabic language, and the religion of islam, understood by Ahlul sunnah waljamaca, we are required to abhor all forms of corruption for the sake of Allah.

 

No none in his right, who sincerely hopes for the day when all shall parish save his face(ie Allah) would love those who are criminals, whether rulers or other then them. since its in direct conflict with the essence of islam(ie Peace). Where we(ie salafies) part with other groups and parties is the "how", how should we deal with these corrupt people? Some advocate for rebellion, others taken different approach. We base our position on Athentic hadith & the Book of Allah,we let he text be our guide, which essentially instructs us to change ourself before Allah can chance our conditions, and this is done through tarbiyah was tafsiyah... So how is that the people reprehend us for implementing and adhering to commandments of Allah and the Sunnah of his Nabi. When will the wild emotional spree on SOL cease? HOw come they don’t they take it back to the Kitab and sunnah when they disgree?

Allah Jala wa ‘ala said, “Oh you who believe Obey Allah and Obey his messenger, and those who have authorities over you, and if you differ on anything then return it to Allah(quran) and his messenger(Sunnah),

 

So sincere nomads and all those who disparage the da’wah, if your disparagement is for the sake of Allah, your efforts, your da’wah is feesabililah, then return it to Allah and his messenger. Cease from this meaningless rethoric, this finger pointing, character assassinations. I realize it is the Somali disposition to rave and rant whenever we disgree with others but if our position with the rulers is unsatisfactory and it pleases you not , then give us an alternative based upon the kitab and sunnah. No more insults and wild accusations, we are muslims inshallah and as such, we should always strive on calling the people to guidance, if im wrong then correct me with kitab and sunnah not idle chatter.

 

Sahal,Sakina,Viking

You guys are at forefront in voicing your displease,Khair...

Then return it to Allah and his messenger, what should be our position, as muslims collectively when dealing with the corrupt rulers According to Allah And his messenger!

 

Miss_lander may Allah reward you with good, Hikma emanates from you, but unfortunately its all in vain when it comes to the Somalia-onlineeer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
sahal   

if im wrong then correct me with kitab and sunnah not idle chatter.

1.

 

" And do not incline to those who are unjust , lest the fire touch you, and you have no guardians besides Allah, then you shall not be helped". (11:113 - HUD)

 

You admitted that Al-saud are corrupt i.e unjust, so why do you incline to them?

 

 

2. "And (as for) the believing men and the believing women, they are guardians of each other; they enjoin good and forbid evil and keep up prayer and pay the poor-rate, and obey Allah and His Messenger; (as for) these, Allah will show mercy to them; surely Allah is Mighty, Wise". (9:71)

 

ALLAH (s.W.T) commanded us to be guardians to each other i.e to protect one another not to insult to each other and to call innovators etc.

 

3. "Surely this Islam is your religion, one religion (only), and I am your Lord, therefore serve Me." (21:92 - Al-Anbiyaa)

 

 

One Religion One Lord

 

 

4. "The Unbelievers are protectors, one of another: Unless ye do this, (protect each other) , there would be tumult and oppression on earth, and great mischief." (8:73-Al-Anfal)

 

Do you know the meaning UNLESS YOU DO THIS, Where are you or your group from this AYAH?

 

 

5. Forbidden to you is that which dies of itself, and blood, and flesh of swine, and that on which any other name than that of Allah has been invoked, and the strangled (animal) and that beaten to death, and that killed by a fall and that killed by being smitten with the horn, and that which wild beasts have eaten, except what you slaughter, and what is sacrificed on stones set up (for idols) and that you divide by the arrows; that is a transgression. This day have those who disbelieve despaired of your religion, so fear them not, and fear Me. This day have I perfected for you your religion and completed My favor on you and chosen for you Islam as a religion; but whoever is compelled by hunger, not inclining willfully to sin, then surely Allah is Forgiving, Merciful. (5:3-AlMaidah)

 

 

ALLAH (S.W.T) chosen for us ISLAM as a religion how one can call him/herself as salafi or khalafi etc.

 

6. And strive hard in (the way of) Allah, (such) a striving a is due to Him; He has chosen you and has not laid upon you an hardship in religion; the faith of your father Ibrahim; He named you Muslims before and in this, that the Messenger may be a bearer of witness to you, and you may be bearers of witness to the people; therefore keep up prayer and pay the poor-rate and hold fast by Allah; He is your Guardian; how excellent the Guardian and how excellent the Helper!

 

As ALLAH (S.W.T) IBRAHIM (S.A.W) also called us MUSLIMIIN, how someone can call us SALAFI in 20th century.

 

and last but not least

 

7. O ye who believe! stand out firmly for Allah, as witnesses to fair dealing, and let not the hatred of others to you make you swerve to wrong and depart from justice. Be just: that is next to piety: and fear Allah. For Allah is well-acquainted with all that ye do. (5:8 Al-Maidah)

 

When you're MOCKING Abula'ala al-mawduudi, Sayid Qutub, Sheikh Qaradawi, Salman Al-awda, Safar al-xawali, Abdiraxmaan abdulkhaliq, and many others who were fighting for the sake of ALLAH (we think so, ALLAH is the only one who knows their intention) with thier PENS, TONGUES, WEALTH, LIVES, for whole their life and some of them killed, excuted, tortured, imprisoioned for that, and you're calling them these great ULUMAS innovaters etc. (even if we assume that they're, which i don't believe) did you mentioned any of their knowledege, jihad and many other positive charecters they have/had or they don't have any HASSANAT?

 

where are you or your group from the above and many other similar QURAN VERSES?

 

 

Finally, if you don't benefit from these QURAN VERSES others will INSHAALLAH.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As-salamu alaykum wa rahmatullahi wa baarakatu

 

Sahal Axsanallahu ilayk,

 

Thanks for keeping your equanimity and not personalising things. Time as we know it is more precious then ever, we cant afford to play a trivial game of tug-a-war. Lets be straight and to the point inshallah. You have noticeably raised many questions, however I can’t help notice you’ve neglected to address the main and sole issue that flared this thread. Your position and manners when it comes to the corrupt rulers approved by Allah and his Nabi!

 

““You admitted that Al-saud are corrupt i.e unjust, so why do you incline to them?â€

 

bro i dont incline to any ruler, the sunnah is clear, Obey your muslim rulers, do not publicly vilify them, if you can advice them in private do so. Obedience and inclination are not interchangeable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sakina   

Shaikh Salih al-Fawzaan was asked, "Is Salafiyyah a hizb (party) from amongst the parties. And is ascribing to them (i.e. the Salafis) a blameworthy thing?"

 

To which he replied, "As-Salafiyyah (i.e. the Salafis) is the Saved Sect, and they are Ahl us-Sunnah wal-Jamaa’ah. It is not a hizb (party) from amongst the various parties, those which are called "parties" today. Rather they are the Jamaa’ah, the Jamaa’ah upon the Sunnah and upon the Deen (religion). They are Ahl us-Sunnah wal-Jamaa’ah. The Messenger (sallallaahu alaihi wasallam) said, "There will not cease to be a group from my Ummah manifest and upon the truth not being harmed by those who forsake them neither by those who oppose them" and he (sallallaahu alaihi wasallam) also said, "And this Ummah will split into seventy-three sects, all of them in the Hellfire but one". They said, which one is this O Messenger of Allaah? He replied, "They are those who are upon what I and my companions are upon today". Hence Salafiyyah is a group of people (i.e. the Salafis) upon the madhhab of the Salaf, upon what the Messenger (sallallaahu alaihi wasallam) and his companions were upon and it is not a hizb from amongst the contemporary groups present today. Rather it is the very old Jamaa’ah, from the time of the Messenger (sallallaahu alaihi wasallam) which inherits (this way) and continues, and which never ceases to be upon the manifest truth until the establishment of the Hour, as he (sallallaahu alaihi wasallam) has informed (us)." (Cassette: "at-Tahdheer min al-Bid’ah" second cassette, delivered as a lecture in Hawtah Sadeer, 1416H).

 

Shaikh Saalih Aal ash-Shaikh, Minister of Islamic Affairs of Saudi Arabia, stated, "Muslims are of two groups: Salafis and Khalafis. As for the Salafis, then they are the followers of Salaf us-Saalih (first three generations of Muslims). And as for the Khalafis, then they are the followers of the understanding of the Khalaf and they are also called Innovators - since everyone who is not pleased and satisfied with the path of the Salaf us-Saalih, in knowledge and action, understanding and fiqh, then he is a khalafi, an innovator."

Muslims have been happy with the Sharia of Islam ever since it came to rule their affairs and daily lives. In modern history, the first Saudi State was founded on the basis of Islam more than two and a half centuries ago, when two pious reformers, Imam Mohammed Bin Saud and Sheikh Mohammed Bin Abdul-Wahhab (may God have mercy on their souls!) committed themselves to it. (King Fahad's speech)

Salafi Dawa, nobody is against Salafi. There is no compulsion in religion. My problem with them is when your leaders and Sheikhs make these type of statements. The Salafi preach that they are the saved sect as you can see from your own sheikhs's statement and lately they are trying to call themselves the Jamaa'ah and saying that the rest of us The Ahlulsunna are not Jamaa'ah. Salafi Dawa what is your reply to these two statements from your leaders one from the sheikhs and the other from the saudi family)?

Since we are not following the Salafi (i.e. Abdul Wahhab) but the Ahlulsunna wa Jamaa'ah (i.e. Imam Shafi'i etc.) do we go to hell?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
sahal   

bro i dont incline to any ruler, the sunnah is clear, Obey your muslim rulers, do not publicly vilify them, if you can advice them in private do so. Obedience and inclination are not interchangeable.

According to your understand, All the SAHABA who Publicly declined the tyranies and were killed by HAJAAJ were wrong and HAJJAJ was right, Husein Ibn ALI (R.A) and all his family were wrong when they refused the oppression of Yasid and were MASACCARAED as a result and all the SALAF and KHALAF who refused the oppression and tyrannies were all wrong and tyrannies were right.

 

 

Or those were not the part of the SALAF you're saying i'm following them?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Originally posted by sahal:

quote: when Abdullah ibn Zubayr fought against Al-Hajjaj, the tabie'n that came after agreed that he was WRONG. So, if that is the case for that Salaf, one should really re-check their opinion before critizing the salafis. Allahu Musta'an

One of their decieves is the comparison between the leaders of early Islam and Al-saud and their cronies.

 

The early Islam leadrers, desbite their corruption and sometimes their cruelity like Hajaj, they were guarding Muslim borders and never collaberated or appointed by the enemies of ISLAM.

 

Furthermore, who were the Tabiciin who wronged Abdulahi Ibn Zubayr? starnge, he died as a MAN and SHAHID his mother ASMAA BINT ABU BAKAR was with him until his martydom encouraging him not to surrender to the oppressor who killed thousands of MUSLIM population including hundreds of SAHABA and you're saying he was wronged by Taabiciin ! .

 

One faced such TYRANY was wrong! which religion you're presenting for?

 

abu turaab I know this group very well; their bigest enemy is the one who challenge the tyranny like Abdulah Ibnu subayr, Said ibn Jubair, Ibn Taymiyah, Sayid Qutub and many others.

 

They don't like those who are in the prisons of the oppressors or being excuted.

 

In sum, they HATE AWLIYAAULAAH and they love tyrannies like FAHAD, JAMAL BADINASIR, MUBARAK and their likes.
Astaghfirullah

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Originally posted by sahal:

quote: when Abdullah ibn Zubayr fought against Al-Hajjaj, the tabie'n that came after agreed that he was WRONG. So, if that is the case for that Salaf, one should really re-check their opinion before critizing the salafis. Allahu Musta'an

One of their decieves is the comparison between the leaders of early Islam and Al-saud and their cronies.

 

The early Islam leadrers, desbite their corruption and sometimes their cruelity like Hajaj, they were guarding Muslim borders and never collaberated or appointed by the enemies of ISLAM.

 

Furthermore, who were the Tabiciin who wronged Abdulahi Ibn Zubayr? starnge, he died as a MAN and SHAHID his mother ASMAA BINT ABU BAKAR was with him until his martydom encouraging him not to surrender to the oppressor who killed thousands of MUSLIM population including hundreds of SAHABA and you're saying he was wronged by Taabiciin ! .

 

One faced such TYRANY was wrong! which religion you're presenting for?

 

abu turaab I know this group very well; their bigest enemy is the one who challenge the tyranny like Abdulah Ibnu subayr, Said ibn Jubair, Ibn Taymiyah, Sayid Qutub and many others.

 

They don't like those who are in the prisons of the oppressors or being excuted.

 

In sum, they HATE AWLIYAAULAAH and they love tyrannies like FAHAD, JAMAL BADINASIR, MUBARAK and their likes.
Sahal, May Allah pardon you, Ameen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Originally posted by sahal:

quote: when Abdullah ibn Zubayr fought against Al-Hajjaj, the tabie'n that came after agreed that he was WRONG. So, if that is the case for that Salaf, one should really re-check their opinion before critizing the salafis. Allahu Musta'an

One of their decieves is the comparison between the leaders of early Islam and Al-saud and their cronies.

 

The early Islam leadrers, desbite their corruption and sometimes their cruelity like Hajaj, they were guarding Muslim borders and never collaberated or appointed by the enemies of ISLAM.

 

Furthermore, who were the Tabiciin who wronged Abdulahi Ibn Zubayr? starnge, he died as a MAN and SHAHID his mother ASMAA BINT ABU BAKAR was with him until his martydom encouraging him not to surrender to the oppressor who killed thousands of MUSLIM population including hundreds of SAHABA and you're saying he was wronged by Taabiciin ! .

 

One faced such TYRANY was wrong! which religion you're presenting for?

 

abu turaab I know this group very well; their bigest enemy is the one who challenge the tyranny like Abdulah Ibnu subayr, Said ibn Jubair, Ibn Taymiyah, Sayid Qutub and many others.

 

They don't like those who are in the prisons of the oppressors or being excuted.

 

In sum, they HATE AWLIYAAULAAH and they love tyrannies like FAHAD, JAMAL BADINASIR, MUBARAK and their likes.
WE ALL KNOW IMAM AHMAD ibn HANBAL, when the ruler was killing those that said the Qur'an was NOT created, since the Qur'an is the SPEECH of ALLAH (SWT), IMAM AHMAD never Fought him, and he never called him a kaafir. However, Sahal, there is no way I am going to convince you, I could bring the statement of Ibn Abbas on that ayah on surah in Al-Ma'idah, and many things, but you will probably think we said people like Hajjaj (who killed many sahabi) or Yazeed was right. Instead, this is what the Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah (WHO YOU THE KADHDHIB ACCUSE US OF HATING, WHEN I LOVE HIM, But still, I don't like your shaykh Qutb) about Yazeed:

Shaykh al-Islam described people’s attitudes towards Yazeed ibn Mu’aawiyah, and said:

 

The people differed concerning Yazeed ibn Mu’aawiyah ibn Abi Sufyaan, splitting into three groups, two extreme and one moderate.

 

One of the two extremes said that he was a kaafir and a munaafiq, that he strove to kill the grandson of the Prophet SAWS (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) to spite the Messenger of Allaah and to take revenge on him, and to avenge his grandfather ‘Utbah, his grandfather’s brother Shaybah and his maternal uncle al-Waleed ibn ‘Utbah and others who were killed by the companions of the Prophet SAWS (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), by ‘Ali ibn Abi Taalib and others on the day of Badr and in other battles – and things of that nature. To have such a view is easy for the Raafidis who regard Abu Bakr, ‘Umar and ‘Uthmaan as kaafirs, so it is much easier for them to regard Yazeed as a kaafir.

 

The second extreme group think that he was a righteous man and a just leader, that he was one of the Sahaabah who were born during the time of the Prophet and were carried and blessed by him. Some of them give him a higher status than Abu Bakr and ‘Umar, and some of them regard him as a prophet. Both views are obviously false to one who has the least common sense and who has any knowledge of the lives and times of the earliest Muslims. This view is not attributable to any of the scholars who are known for following the Sunnah or to any intelligent person who has reason and experience.

 

The third view is that he was one of the kings of the Muslims, who did good deeds and bad deeds. He was not born until the caliphate of ‘Uthmaan. He was not a kaafir but it was because of him that the killing of al-Husayn happened, and he did what he did to the people of al-Harrah. He was not a Sahaabi, nor was he one of the righteous friends of Allaah. This is the view of most of the people of reason and knowledge and of Ahl al-Sunnah wa’l-Jamaa’ah.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But, I don't expect you to agree with me. In fact, I expect you to try to post your refutation. Don't worry sahal, i don't expect you to agree, but notice how you said we say Hajjaj was right. JAHANNAM IS REAL! you shouldn't act like that...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sakina   

One of the two extremes said that he was a kaafir and a munaafiq, that he strove to kill the grandson of the Prophet SAWS (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) to spite the Messenger of Allaah and to take revenge on him, and to avenge his grandfather ‘Utbah, his grandfather’s brother Shaybah and his maternal uncle al-Waleed ibn ‘Utbah and others who were killed by the companions of the Prophet SAWS (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), by ‘Ali ibn Abi Taalib and others on the day of Badr and in other battles – and things of that nature. To have such a view is easy for the Raafidis who regard Abu Bakr, ‘Umar and ‘Uthmaan as kaafirs, so it is much easier for them to regard Yazeed as a kaafir.

Was Yazid behind the killing of the Prophet's (saw) grandson? This is a big issue to me.

 

"...say (O' Muhammad unto mankind): I do not ask of you any reward for it (preaching the message), but love for my near relatives Ahlul-Bait'; and whoever earns good, we give him more of good therein,.."Qur'an (42:23)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The third view is that he was one of the kings of the Muslims, who did good deeds and bad deeds. He was not born until the caliphate of ‘Uthmaan. He was not a kaafir but it was because of him that the killing of al-Husayn happened, and he did what he did to the people of al-Harrah. He was not a Sahaabi, nor was he one of the righteous friends of Allaah. This is the view of most of the people of reason and knowledge and of Ahl al-Sunnah wa’l-Jamaa’ah.

 

 

I hope that answers your question sister Sakina,

 

your brother,

 

Abu Toraab

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
sahal   

But, I don't expect you to agree with me. In fact, I expect you to try to post your refutation. Don't worry sahal, i don't expect you to agree, but notice how you said we say Hajjaj was right. JAHANNAM IS REAL! you shouldn't act like that...

 

Furthermore, while people are talkinga bout somalia and their dictator, and iran etc., when Abdullah ibn Zubayr fought against Al-Hajjaj, the tabie'n that came after agreed that he was WRONG. So, if that is the case for that Salaf, one should really re-check their opinion before critizing the salafis. Allahu Musta'an

both above quotes are from you!

 

So, Abu turaab tell us, who was right and who was wrong Abdullah Bin Zubayr (R.A) or Hajjaj Bin Yousuf? or both of them were right/wrong?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sakina   

Abu Toraab

 

8. We worship Allaah by obeying the rulers, as long as they are Muslims who seek judgement through Allaah’s Legislation and who establish the prescribed punishments, and as long as they establish the prayer. Obeying them is an obligation even if they commit oppression. And whoever says something contrary to this and makes it permissible to revolt against the Muslim leader, even if he may be oppressive, then he is an innovator and a deviant. And it is obligatory on the Muslim scholars to refute this statement of his and to expose his deviance.

 

9. We hold that it is not permissible to spread the faults of the leaders, because doing this influences and brings about trials and afflictions (fitan), and causes them to spread.

According to the Salafi rules it was wrong for Hussein the grandson of the Prophet (SAW) to stand up against oppression.

 

Salafi Dawa

Sahal,Sakina,Viking

You guys are at forefront in voicing your displease,Khair...

Then return it to Allah and his messenger, what should be our position, as muslims collectively when dealing with the corrupt rulers According to Allah And his messenger!

Would this statement apply to the grandson of the Prophet(saw)as well, since he also refused to bow down to the oppression of the muslim ummah by the leaders?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this