@ameeniooo Saudi in Operation Inherent Resolve were allying with kuffar against muslims, together they airstriked muslims, is allying with kuffar against muslims major kufr?
English
Bill Johnson
4.4K posts
Notice the tactic:
- I quote sh ar-Rajihi and make a very specific claim
- He spams dozens of comments, asks 3 irrelevant questions, brings Nasir al-Fahd into discussion, quotes me few more times, and then claims I am running away
Yes, I tend to run away from BS.
أمين@ameeniooo
“I didnt claim the view wasnt weak” after debating it for hours 😂 then you talk about attribution to scholars, we asked u which scholars? Answer the 3 questions. Also lets not forget that conversation about Nasir al Fahd, youre an embarrassment quit talking about topics you dont understand. Why are you constantly talking when the opposite party asks you 3 simple questions and you outright refuse to answer?
English
@Bedouin505 @Tarrasbulba123 Saudi in Operation Inherent Resolve were allying with kuffar against muslims, together they airstriked muslims, is allying with kuffar against muslims major kufr?
English
@Muadhibnaljabal He didnt insult him, hes labelling him correctly and what can be said is that mushrik is two faced
English
@abd_al_faqeer @equipmenttree1 @Tarrasbulba123 This kinda of mindset hurts Muslims more than anything. If someone is a good faith actor, you should deal with them with wisdom. Insulting and berating people is not from the sunnah of the prophet saw.
English
Bill Johnson retweetledi
@chmod119 Nothing is wrong with ransoming captives the prophetﷺ did it
Català
Bill Johnson retweetledi
Sh Muhammad Al-Amīn Shinqīti rh:
“And indeed if you follow the Shaytān in Tahlīl of what Allah has made Harām, …., you have made Shirk Akbar with Allah”
Română
Bill Johnson retweetledi
Khalid ibn Abdullah al-Qasri addressed the people during the sermon of Eid al-Adha, declaring openly from the pulpit:
"O people! Slit the throats of your sacrificial, may الله accept your sacrifices. For indeed, I am going to slaughter Ja'd ibn Dirham as a sacrifice today.
For he has maliciously claimed that الله didn't take Abraham as an intimate friend, nor did He ever speak to Moses directly with actual speech.
Exalted is الله far above what Ja'd ibn Dirham says, with an ultimate and magnificent Exaltation!"
He then descended from the pulpit and slaughtered him directly at the very base of the minbar.
Al-Bidayah wan-Nihayah Vol. 13, p. 195
English
@AmmartiSou74378 No, its neutrality with them unless theyre unprotected which then we fight them until they submit to jizya
English
@Alghurabaaaaaa Muslims can befriend with non believers ( etiquettes of course)
English
Bill Johnson retweetledi
@Alghurabaaaaaa So why does your kafir ruler befriend Christians who are enemies of Islam? Fawzaan should press that jahil for that but then he'd end up in a dungeon as MBS is an oppressive kafir ruler.
English
Bill Johnson retweetledi
Bill Johnson retweetledi
@qafilaseeker Wrong.
Believing the one they’re asking has divine power is shirk in it of itself of ruboobiyah, that belief alone without making dua to them is shirk, a seperate shirk even Quraysh didn’t have
Istigatha is worship, if directed to other than Allah its Shirk regardless of belief
English
Bill Johnson retweetledi
Bill Johnson retweetledi
@qafilaseeker Who invokes his favourite saint from any place, at any time, and in any language except by first having deified it, i.e. turned him or her into an all-hearing, all-seeing, all-knowing mini-god, with the cop-out of saying "by the permission of God"?
@muwahhid124
English
Bill Johnson retweetledi
Istigatha is interpreted differently by different people.
If they just mean, Talab al-Du’a, it’s not Shirk. If they believe whoever they’re asking has divine powers, then it’s Shirk.
*Quoting because his comments are off but he’s replying to my post.
Hassan@Hass_1302_
The thing is Istigaatha is not even the main point of contention between Ahlus Sunnah and Salafis. Ashari/Maturidi scholars consider it a secondary or a tertiary issue. Rejecting Istigaatha still makes you a Sunni Muslim. This issue shouldn't make you lean towards Wahabism.
English
Bill Johnson retweetledi
Replace the farā’id with the Sharī’ah, then you have the Murji’ Haddadis & Madkhalis
English
Bill Johnson retweetledi
Either be fair and just or stay silent, if he literally in later editions of books retracted and removed stuff, whilst praising the sahabah too like Uthmān, how can u go and attack him?
Either u be just or u shut up. Don’t go around slandering dead people.
ابن أبي زيد الهندي@wannabemuhadith
Friendly reminder that syeb qutb was a disgusting man who spewed filth about the sahabah and so did his muqallid maududi.
English
Bill Johnson retweetledi
Ibn al Qayyim clearly states that Al-Ma'idah 44 is taken upon its apparent, and its impossible to deny the name disbelief for it.
It is always disbelief, but its not always disbelief that takes one out the religion.
It is correct when asked about this verse to say it means kufr
English
Bill Johnson retweetledi
Is the mere action of joining the UN major kufr?
As you’ve seen some of the clear articles in the Charter that are clear kufr & shirk, and their resolutions against Palestine
Moreover, to join, even if you don’t agree & don’t implement it, you have to accept the Charter
English
Bill Johnson retweetledi
📌 Imam Nawawi narrates from Qadi Iyad, that if Rulers commits Kufr, Alters the Shariah, or commits a Bida (that is Kufr like grave worship, democracy, nationalism), rebellion against him is obligatory upon Muslims
-
English
Bill Johnson retweetledi
I noticed some coping by some adolescent Madkhalis, that was conveniently deleted (I wonder why), none the less, I repeat and emphasize, this is how “Kitāb” has always been understood, by the Salaf and Khalaf, and it was never understood as a Legislation back then. This Kitāb is simply a letter from a judge that has within it his judgement. It’s mentioned in every book of Fiqh, within the various Madhāhib. Nobody disagrees if a judgement of Qadi is attributed to Allah falsely, then this is Kufr Akbar, as well as the other known conditions that take an individual judgement from Kufran Duna Kufr to Major Kufr. These insincere and deceptive heretics, will try to change the meaning of words to justify their filthy creed, and will straw man in order to “attempt” to refute Ahlul Sunnah.
In the Shafi’i Madhhab, in Al-Hāwee al-Kabeer [16/216], Al-Māwirdi states:
فَإِذَا نُفِّذَ كِتَابُ الْقَاضِي بِذَلِكَ عَلَى مَا فَصَّلْنَاهُ فَالْحَقُّ الْمَحْكُومُ بِهِ عَلَى أَرْبَعَةِ أَضْرُبٍ
When the judicial letter (Kitāb) is implemented in accordance with what we have detailed, the right [or claim] adjudicated falls into four categories.
In the Maliki Madhhab, it’s narrated in Al-Mudawanah [4/521], that Imam Malik bin Anas (Salaf) said:
وَإِنْ عُزِلَ الْقَاضِي الَّذِي كُتِبَ إلَيْهِ الْكِتَابُ أَوْ مَاتَ فَوَلِيَ غَيْرُهُ فِي مَوْضِعِهِ. قَالَ: إنَّ هَذَا الَّذِي وَلِيَ بَعْدَهُ يَنْبَغِي لَهُ أَنْ يُنَفِّذَ مَا فِيهِ وَإِنْ كَانَ الَّذِي كَتَبَهُ قَدْ عُزِلَ أَوْ مَاتَ فَإِنَّهُ يَنْبَغِي لِلْقَاضِي الَّذِي جَاءَهُ الْكِتَابُ أَنْ يُنَفِّذَ ذَلِكَ، وَلَا يَنْظُرُ فِي عَزْلِ الَّذِي كَتَبَ بِهِ إلَيْهِ وَلَا فِي مَوْتِهِ.
If the judge to whom the letter (Kitāb, i.e., judgement) was written to, is dismissed or dies, and another takes his place — he said: the one who assumes [the position] after him ought to execute (the Kitāb, i.e., judgement) what is in it. And if the one who wrote it has been dismissed or has died, it is still incumbent upon the judge to whom the letter came to execute it, and he is not to consider the dismissal of the one who wrote to him, nor his death.”
And in the Hanafi Madhhab, it’s mentioned in Al-Muheet [8/124]:
والقاضي لا يقضي بكتاب واحد من الرعايا وكذلك لا يجوز كتاب القاضي إلى حكم حكمه رجلان بشهادة شهود شهدوا عنده
The judge does not judge on the basis of a single letter from one of the subjects [i.e., a private individual], and likewise the letter (Kitāb) of a judge is not valid [when addressed] to an arbitrator (judge) whom two parties have appointed, based on the testimony of witnesses who testified before him.
As you see clearly, when “Kitāb” [that was written by one’s hands] is used by the Salaf and Khalaf from the Fuqahā classically — it usually means a letter containing a judgement, and NEVER a legislation. Imagine basing your entire defense of your innovated creed, on an illiteracy in Arabic and basic Fiqh.
I’ve yet to find a semi-competent Madkhali who is not a liar and deceiver. Hence why dealing with these insincere toddlers is not worth it. Unfortunately for them, their deception is usually refuted with a mere 5-10 minutes of research.
Project Guiding Light@ProjectGuiding
(من حكم بكتابه الذي كتبه بيده) The same new-age Madākhilah who thought Al-Qāsim bin Sallām discussed “man-made laws,” in his book (hint: he doesn’t), have come with a new entry into their continuously growing wall of laughable displays of ignorance, only this time they’re charging money for it. These new-age Madkhalis have to be some of the most low IQ, intellectually deprived individuals in the history of the movement, which is saying something. In their pathetic and desperate attempts to try and prove that the Salaf dealt with man-made laws and that they were aware of it and still called it “Kufran Duna Kufr,” they are now championing this narration to finally “solidify their case”: عن عبدِ الرحمنِ بنِ زيدِ بنِ أسلمَ في قوله تعالى: (وَمَن لَمْ يَحْكُم بِمَآ أَنزَلَ ٱللَّهُ فأولئك هُمُ الْكَافِرُونَ) قال: من حكم بكتابه الذي كتبه بيده، وترك كتاب الله، وزعم أن كتابه هذا من عند اللّٰه فقد كفر. From 'Abd al-Rahman ibn Zayd ibn Aslam, regarding Allah's saying: (And whoever does not judge by what Allah has revealed, then they are the disbelievers among you.) He said: Whoever judges by the letter he wrote with his own hand, and abandons Allah's book, and claims that his letter (i.e., his judgement) is from Allah, then he has disbelieved. This narration only reaffirms the position of the Muslims, in that individual judgements made by a Qadi are not Kufr Akbar as a default, and instead require additional conditions to reach the level of Kufr Akbar. The feeble Madkhali mind, just as they were wound up when they saw the word شرائعهم in the book of Al-Qāssim bin Sallām, they too got wound up when they saw the words من حكم بكتابه الذي كتبه بيده, thinking this refers to man made laws. This Kitāb which is being referenced is not referring to man-made laws, it’s the judgement of the Qadi that he writes down and passes it along to be enforced. In Ar-Rawḍ al-Murbiʿ bi-Sharḥ Zād al-Mustaqniʿ, under the Chapter titled The Judge’s Letter to a Judge: (وَيُقْبَلُ) كتابُ القاضي (فِيمَا حَكَمَ بِهِ) الكاتبُ (لِيُنَفِّذَهُ) المكتوبُ إليه، (وَإِنْ كَانَ) كلٌّ منهما (فِي بَلَدٍ وَاحِدٍ)؛ لأنَّ حُكْمَ الحاكمِ يجبُ إمضاؤه على كلِّ حالٍ. (And it is accepted) the letter of the judge (in what he has judged) — the writer [i.e., the sending judge] — (so that he may execute it) — the recipient — (even if) each of them (in the same city); because the ruling of a judge must be carried out in every circumstance. Their entire premise of the Salaf being aware of man-made laws is built on this phantom hallucination of an interpretation, that even the most ignorant of Madkhali scholars wouldn’t dare make (due to the impending mockery of their ignorance which would undoubtedly ensue). Yet in their devilish attempts to solidify the thrones of the Tawagheet, they would rather make up their own definitions (keep in mind these kids can’t even read Arabic properly), than accept that Tashree’ is Right of Allah Alone, and anyone who shirks him in this Right, is a Mushrik. نسأل الله السلامة والعافية
English