|
Post by Deoband on Jul 16, 2016 9:01:35 GMT
“ISIS is a true product of Salafism, and we must deal with it with full transparency.”
[Shaykh Aadil al-Kalbani, a Salafi scholar and former Imam of the Haram Shareef in Makka]
Salafi Fatwas Encouraging Slaughter of Civilians [Note: The article below was written a number of years ago, well before the advent of ISIS, Boko Haram, the salafi-influenced Pakistani Fake Taliban (as opposed to the Afghan Taliban who are still largely rigid Hanafis), and other salafi-influenced groups whose “Jihad” closely resembles the “Jihad” of the Father-Figure and inspiration of ALL Salafi sects today, Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab. A future article will reveal descriptions of the “Jihad” of Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab, from the writings of his direct students, which will give an accurate portrayal of the brutality, mass-takfeer, and massacres that characterised Ibn Abdul Wahhab’s “Jihad”, and which will also make clear that Salafi groups such as ISIS, Boko Haram, Shabab, etc. are actually the most faithful adherents to the sect founded or “revived” by their Father-Figure. During rare moments of lapses from their normal mode of Taqiyyah (deception and covering up of true beliefs), prominent Salafis have admitted that Salafism itself is the source of all the abominations committed by groups such as ISIS. For example, Shaykh Aadil al-Kalbani, a Salafi scholar and former Imam of Makka, recently let slip that, “ISIS is a true product of Salafism, and we must deal with it with full transparency.”] THE SALAFI AND MODERNIST GENOCIDE OF THE DEEN
THE RESULT OF ABANDONMENT OF RIGID ADHERENCE (TAQLEED) TO THE FOUR MADH-HABS INTRODUCTION
In this day and age of ignorance, flagrant desires, and impiety, the natural consequence of ‘opening the doors of ijtihaad’ (directly formulating rulings using Quran, Sunnah and other evidences) for the scholars of today, and avoiding rigid adherence to one of the four accepted madh-habs (accepted schools of thought formulated over a millenium ago), is countless permutations or versions of ‘Deen’ (religion). An ominous example that portrays vividly the catastrophic consequences of the modernist and Salafi methodologies that allow the pure Deen (religion) to become subject to re-interpretation, is the increasing number of fatwas legitimising the murder of innocent men, women, and even children and babies. The horrific worldwide genocide perpetrated against hundreds of millions of Muslims world-wide in recent times, has naturally resulted in innumerable victims, along with those who empathize with them, seeking legitimacy for reprisals of the same nature. The Salafi and modernist methodologies provide them that very scope to overturn hitherto immutable aspects of the religion, including overturning the categorical prohibition on targeting civilians, transmitted by the four madh-habs over a millenium ago. Below is a sample of fatwas/statements by some of the scholars who have adopted the Salafi and modernist methodologies of “Direct interpretation of Qur’an and Sunnah” or “Pick n Mix Taqleed” to justify the merit of the numerous atrocities being committed today in the pure name of Jihaad. The new growing breed of hybrid modernist/Salafi “Deobandis” tend also to be enamoured by such scholars, or the methodologies (part-time Taqleed) that lead to such abominations. These fatwas which are well-known and well-accepted in many Salafi and modernist “Jihadi” circles where, at worst, they are tolerated as ‘valid ikhtilaaf’, serve to tarnish and desecrate the pure name of Jihaad and Islam. The Kuffaar enemies of Islam who gleefully orchestrate and instigate many of these atrocities, all of which serve their imperialistic motives, do not even need to dirty their own hands. In a number of previously classified documents that were leaked by whistleblowers, gullible ‘Jihadis’ are often manipulated to serve the Kuffaar agenda. Such easily-led ‘Jihadis’ are often labelled with the term “patsies” or “useful idiots.” In reality, Salafism and modernism allow the production of a tailor-made ‘Deen’ to cater for every person’s unique taste-buds. Due to its inherent malleability and flexibility, a Salafi or modernist ‘Deen’ (religion) is really the product of the inclinations, temperament and desires of each individual’s unique and chaotically varying intellects which is constantly being shaped and moulded by one’s circumstances and environment. Those who attempt to open the Pandora’s Box of ijtihad for themselves using such slogans as “strongest daleel”, “Quran & Sunnah”, “changing times, changing needs”, “pick ‘n mix from the madh-habs”, etc., have absolutely no right to hypocritically condemn others who employ the very same methodologies whilst arriving sincerely at a radically different version of ‘Deen’ Tbc..... reliablefatwas.com/salafimodernist-genocide-deen/
|
|
|
Post by Deoband on Jul 16, 2016 9:04:30 GMT
SALAFI and MODERNIST FATWAS LEGALIZING MASS-GENOCIDE OF WOMEN, CHILDREN, BABIES, etc. Important Note:
The chaotic standards used by Salafis to measure who is *no takfeer* and who is Muslim, usually determined by political expediencies, results in there being absolutely no restriction in who can potentially become Mubaahud Dam or Waajibul Qatl i.e. a legitimate target. Thus the fatwas/statements below are not only used to justify the targeting of non-Muslim civilians. Muslims can be instantly transformed into non-Muslims on the spur of an ijtihaadi moment. Shaykh Ibn Uthaymin’s Famous Ruling Allowing Equal Retaliation in Slaughtering Women and Children This is a well-known ruling quoted by many Salafi Jihadis. In Shaykh Ibn Uthaymins explanation of Bulugh al-Maram Tape 3, side 2 is found the following extract: Such is the subjective nature of ijtihaad today, that for every Salafi who attempts to brush the above ruling off as just ‘a slip’, or with some other stupid reasoning, there will be another Salafi who will agree completely with Shaykh Ibn Uthaymin’s fatwa and use of dalaa-il (evidences). Quotes from Shaykh Ibn Uthaymin’s direct students confirming the existence of, and agreeing with the fatwa and the use of dalaa-il, will be produced here soon insha-Allah. Tbc...
|
|
|
Post by Deoband on Jul 26, 2016 13:38:24 GMT
There really should be no surprise or shock expressed over the brutal atrocities being committed by salafi-influenced groups in the name of Islam, since fatwas from leading salafi scholars legalizing such abominations, such as Ibn Uthaymin’s explicit statement exhorting the slaughter of women and children, have been around for decades now.
Thus, the stupid surprise and "disgust" being feigned, and the deluge of criticism being currently offered by other Salafis to such groups who share the exact same spiritual and academic heritage as them, i.e. Ibn Taymiyyah and Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab, is just plain moronic and carries the stench of hypocrisy.
Furthermore, Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab, the very first Salafi ‘Jihadi’ whom ALL Salafi sects take to be a role-model, was himself responsible for far worse crimes during the Wahhabi’s first reign of terror. Books such as “Tareekh Najd” and “Unwan al-Majid fee Tareekh Najd”, authored by Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab’s direct students and supporters have chronicled in detail the massacres which the Wahhabis had committed in the name of Jihaad, including the Takfeer and subsequent pillaging of even those who were also against the widespread practices of bid’ah prevalent at the time, but who did not agree to his murderous crusade.
|
|
|
Post by Deoband on Sept 25, 2016 14:14:08 GMT
"MUFTI" ANWAR AWLAKI Civilians Are No Longer Civilians Due to Their Possible Participation in Voting for Their Government The very same Salafi methodology which allowed Shaykh Anwar Awlaki, only a few years ago, to strut around as a modernist, liberal Imaam also provides ample scope, once subject to the pressures of a wholly different environment, to cater for the ijtihaadi conclusion that civilians are no longer civilians. Whilst Anwar Awlaki did (at least once) refer to and agree to Shaykh Ibn Uthaymin’s famous fatwa encouraging the mass murder of women and children, he seems to (occassionally) prefer to quote the ruling of prohibition of killing civilians, and then proceeding to bypass such a prohibition by instantly transforming the civilians into war combatants: In another interview: Al-Malahem: Do you support such operations, though they target what the media calls “innocent civilians” etc.? Anwar Al-Awlaki: With regard to the issue of “civilians”, this term has become prevalent these days, but we prefer to use the terminology used by our scholars of Fiqh. They use the terms combatants or non-combatants. A combatant is someone who bears arms – even if it be a woman. Non-combatants are people who have no participation in the war. The American people as a whole are participants in the war because they elected this administration, and they finance this war. In the recent elections as well as previous ones, the American people had other options and could have elected people who did not want war. Nevertheless, these candidates got nothing but a handful of votes. Also before anything else, we must ex- amine this issue from the perspective of Islamic law, as this is what will settle the issue regarding its permissibility.” And: “We MUST also make their women and children as our enemies and targets” "Shaykh" al-Alawki also quotes "Mufti" Ibn Uthaymin for support for his ruling that “we must make their women and children enemies and targets”: It is better to target civilians than soldiers! In another publically broadcasted interview – that is still very easily available – Anwar Awlaki explains unambiguously why it is a better, and “much more potent and powerful” tactic to target a civilian population:
|
|
|
Post by Deoband on Mar 3, 2017 7:57:33 GMT
SALAFI FATWA DECLARING PERMISSIBILITY OF SLAUGHTERING 10,000,000 CIVILIANS (WOMEN, CHILDREN, BABIES, ETC.)
The Salafi scholar, Naasir Ibn Hamad Al-Fahd, whose writings have become quite prominent in the Salafi Ummah, explicitly declares here that it is permissible to slaughter 10,000,000 civilians:
“Indeed, the issue of striking America with these types of weapons is permissible without mentioning further evidence, except the following Verses:
“And if you punish (your enemy, O you believers in the Oneness of Allāh), then punish them with the like of that with which you were afflicted.”
“Then whoever transgresses the prohibition against you, you transgress likewise against him. And fear Allāh, and know that Allāh is with the pious.”
“The recompense for an evil is an evil like thereof.”
And whosoever looks at the transgressions of the Americans against the Muslims and their lands in these recent times, will realize the permissibility of this (using weapons of mass destruction against America) – by merely basing it upon the principle of “Equal Treatment”; and it would not even require mentioning more evidences.
So if a nuclear bomb was dropped upon the Americans, killing 10 million civilians, and destroying their lands to the extent that they have destroyed our lands – This would be permissible without any need to even mention another evidence. More evidence would only be required if we wanted to kill more than this number!!”
[“Hukm Istikhdām Aslihat Ad-Damār Ash-Shāmil”:Chapter 2]
|
|
|
Post by Deoband on Mar 23, 2017 11:35:40 GMT
Why do you flame "Deobandi"s claiming that they are non-muqallid, when you have that nickname /alias? Why is your language so foul? Why do you write in such a manner about the deceased? Can't you tackle the issue academically? Posts like this make it seem like bringing a thorough refutation of the salafi interpretation is impossible. Please bring the foulest example(s) of use of language in the articles in this thread, and we can then discuss academically the validity or invalidity of using such foul words for deviates who exhort slaughtering women, children and babies in the pure name of Jihad and Islam.
|
|
ubaidullahe
New Member
Kamaa Tadeenu Tudaan
Posts: 1
Courses Completed: Hifdh, `Aalimiyyah, Iftaa
|
Post by ubaidullahe on May 27, 2017 19:23:04 GMT
Are you unable to disprove them from an `ilmi perspective, is that why you resort to rambling away in long posts which you know no one would bother reading?
If you claim their fataawaa are wrong and contrary to ijmaa`, then really it shouldn't be hard to bring the madhaahib's books to disprove it.
|
|
faqir
Junior Member
Posts: 64
|
Post by faqir on May 29, 2017 23:06:49 GMT
Are you unable to disprove them from an `ilmi perspective, is that why you resort to rambling away in long posts which you know no one would bother reading? If you claim their fataawaa are wrong and contrary to ijmaa`, then really it shouldn't be hard to bring the madhaahib's books to disprove it. that would be a pointless exercise... even some of their own 'salafee' shayks have said as such islamqa.info/en/248850 but they don't give two hoots so why would they care what the 'madhaahib's books' say?
|
|
|
Post by Deoband on Jun 4, 2017 4:55:43 GMT
Are you unable to disprove them from an `ilmi perspective, is that why you resort to rambling away in long posts which you know no one would bother reading? If you claim their fataawaa are wrong and contrary to ijmaa`, then really it shouldn't be hard to bring the madhaahib's books to disprove it. Despite being a Maulana/Mufti, perhaps even one of those salafized “Mujtahids”, you miserably failed to understand the purpose of producing those Fatwas from prominent Salafi and modernist Imams exhorting the mass-slaughter of women, children, and babies. Perhaps this is because the article was not directed at you and your ilk whose deep Nafsaani attachment to such Zindeeq or accursed Bidatee Imams i.e. Gods besides Allah who flagrantly transgress Ijma’, prevent you and your ilk from intuitively appreciating the fact that perhaps roasting babies alive might be prohibited in the Shariah, even if the Kuffaar do the same to our babies.
The article was directed at those who already understand the prohibition of intentionally slaughtering women, children and babies, but who themselves employ the very same principles i.e. Ghair Muqallidism, which these Salafi and modernist Imams also employ to provide justification for their Fatwas legalizing mass-slaughter of women, children and babies.
The purpose of the article was to demonstrate the chaos and anarchy that stems from opening the door for each scholar to escape Taqleed of the ruling of one of the Four Madh-habs, and instead adopt a “minority” ruling, or come up with his or her own understanding of the Qur’an and Sunnah e.g. legalizing imitation of the Kuffaar in their orgy of mass-murder and mass-rapes throughout the world.
An article will be forthcoming insha-Allah which will thoroughly expose the hypocrisy of these Salafis and closet Salafis who, despite being the quickest at labelling others as deviates, adopt an extraordinarily deafening silence regarding their own “Gods besides Allah” even when their beloved Gods transgress Ijma’ multiple times.
For yours’ and others’ possible edification, as part of an exclusive preview, here are just a couple of explicit transmissions of Ijma’ (consensus) on the prohibition of mass-slaughter of women, children and babies:
Allamah Ibn Abd al-Barr said:
وَأَجْمَعَ الْعُلَمَاءُ عَلَى الْقَوْلِ بِجُمْلَةِ هَذَا الْحَدِيثِ، وَلَا يَجُوزُ عِنْدَهُمْ قَتْلُ نِسَاءِ الْحَرْبِيِّينَ وَلَا أَطْفَالِهِمْ؛ لِأَنَّهُمْ لَيْسُوا مِمَّنْ يُقَاتِلُ فِي الْأَغْلَبِ
"The Ulama are unanimous (i.e. Ijma') on advocating the generality of this hadith, and it is not permissible according to them to kill women and children from the Harbis (people whom the Ummah is at war with), because they are not generally from those who fight." (Tamheed)
Imam Nawawi said:
أجمع العلماء على تحريم قتل النساء والصبيان إذا لم يقاتلوا
"The Ulama are unanimous (i.e. Ijma’) on the prohibition of killing women and children when they are not fighting." (Sharh Saheeh Muslim)
However, despite the Ijma' cited above, and in other quotes to come in the article, Salafism and modernism possess a unique ability to overturn Ijma', as demonstrated in countless other issues.
Also, refer to the article "True Jihad is characterized by Justice, Honour and Integrity" which can be found online, based on a narration from Hazrat Umar (radhiyallahu anhu) used for Istidlaal in the books of the Salaf:
When Hazrat Umar (radhiyallahu anhu) sounded the threat of a death punishment for any Muslim who kills in a treacherous manner an accursed Kaaafir Harbee (a mass-murdering enemy combatant) on the battlefield, how many a brain cell(s) does one require to understand the prohibition of intentionally slaughtering women, children and babies, outside of an actual battlefield?
When committing istikhfaaf (treating lightly) of even the Sunnah status of the Miswaak expels one from the fold of Islam, then what is the accursed status of the one who commits Istikhfaaf (treats lightly) of a crime for which Hazrat Umar (radhiyallahu anhu) declared the death punishment, leave aside the mass-murder of women, children, and babies?
As will be demonstrated in another forthcoming article on the rules of Aman (a sacred contract enacted between the Muslims and an accursed Harbee even on the battlefield), there is Ijma’ on the severity of the crime for which Hazrat Umar (radhiyallahu anhu) declared the death punishment, though the Imams of the Salaf-us-Saaliheen differed on the manner of punishment for a Muslim who commits such a crime.
Despite the ingrained brutality and barbarism that is inherent in Kufr, which constrained the Kuffaar of every age, without exception, to pillage, ravage, plunder, ransack, defile and utterly destroy everything in their path, even ripping babies out of their mothers' wombs without compunction, Islam has always upheld the absolute prohibition of imitating the Kuffaar in this and in all other aspects.
Islam, which is represented only by the Four Madh-habs, stands apart from all other religions and ideologies.
Any “Deen” (religion) which opens the door to escape the ruling of the Four Madh-habs, even momentarily, such as the countless versions of Salafi and modernist “Deens” which have mushroomed in recent times, is a deviant imposter of Deen that has nothing to do with Islam.
For those who understand well and accept the prohibition of slaughtering women, children and babies, it needs to be stated that atrocities in the pure name of Islam and Jihaad, which are becoming increasingly common-place throughout the world, will only increase in frequency if the root-cause is not addressed, namely, Ghair Muqallidism i.e. Salafism, modernism, and all other 'isms' that exhort abandoning Rigid Taqleed (binding oneself tightly) to the immutable set of rulings and values represented by the Four Madh-habs.
One of the very first scholars to identify this root-cause was Shaykh Sulayman ibn Abdul Wahhab, the brother of the infamous Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab who is the "Mujaddid" and spiritual father of ALL Salafi sects today. Shaykh Sulayman Ibn Abdul Wahhab wrote the book, "The Divine Lightning" in refutation of the bloody crusade of mass-takfeer and mass-murder which his brother undertook in the name of Jihaad. The whole first chapter of the book is devoted to the disease of Ghair Muqallidism - the root-cause that allows justification for every single abomination conceivable in the name of the Deen.
However, since most people today, scholars and laymen alike, suffer themselves from the disease of Ghair Muqallidism to varying degrees, they are not willing to even issue a whisper regarding this root-cause highlighted explicitly by Shaykh Sulayman ibn Abdul Wahhab, leave aside attempting to address and refute it. Hence, the stupid boot-licking condemnations of the droves of scholars and laymen who suddenly and selectively decide to adopt the obligatory duty of Amr bi'l Ma'roof wa Nahy anil Munkar - for the sake of the Kuffaar (Fee Sabeelil Kuffaar) though - in condemnation of such atrocities, are devoid of slightest of substance.
The catastrophic result, chaos, and anarchy that stems from abandonment of Rigid Taqleed are becoming far more evident today, and will become even more so, as more and more mass-murders and other abominations are committed in the name of the Deen.
Take the example of these famous Fatwas of prominent Ghair Muqallid (Salafi) and modernist Imams such as Ibn Uthaymin and his teacher Hamoud ibn Uqla, Naasir ibn Hamad al-Fahd, Anwar Awlaki and many others exhorting the mass-murder of women, children, babies, etc. using such modernist “Daleel" as rationale, logic, and giving preference to one's own understanding of the Qur'an and Hadith, and one's own subjective perception of what the "stronger ruling" is.
Far worse than such abominable Fatwas is the satanic Usool (core principle) of ALL modernist, free-thinking Ghair Muqallids which exhorts abandoning the superior Taqleed of the Four Madh-habs, in favour of the potentially catastrophic Taqleed of one's own intellect.
According to this satanic Usool, it is FARD (obligatory) for Ibn Uthaymin and Co. to follow what they sincerely believe to be the “stronger ruling” according to their understanding of the Qur'an and Hadith, and what makes most logical sense to them i.e. it is FARD (obligatory) for them to exhort the mass-murder of women, children and babies. According to this satanic Usool, it is HARAAM for Ibn Uthaymin and Co. to abandon what they sincerely believe to be the “stronger ruling”, in favour of Rigid Taqleed to the ruling of the Four Madh-habs which unanimously prohibit the killing of male farmers, monks, and other non-combatants in a state of safety (Aman), leave aside the mass-murder of women, children and babies.
Ijma’ (consensus) has no immunity from the satanic Usool employed by such free-thinking Ghair Muqallids, since for each and every Ijma’, anomalous and marjooh rulings are available to give sanction to their abominations. The Ijma’ on 3 talaqs being 3, Taraweeh consisting of 20 rak’ats etc. are just a few of countless examples the free-thinking, modernist Ghair Muqallids have overturned in this age.
However, since attacking this satanic Usool entails attacking what virtually every scholar is guilty of today, to varying degrees, no-one will bother address it - until perhaps matters deteriorate to such a terrible degree which constrains people to realise that the doors of Ijtihaad firmly shut by the Ijma' (consensus) of the Fuqaha over a thousand years ago, should remain firmly shut for EVERYONE.
|
|