A common misconception is that Shirk is limited to idol worship. Unfortunately, this is incorrect.
Examples of the different types of shirk are;
Shirk al-Ibadah (Shirk in Worship): This involves worshipping idols, saints, or any entity besides Allah.
Shirk al-Rububiyyah (Shirk in Lordship): This involves believing that creations like the sun, moon, or stars control one’s fate or hold power over Allah’s will.
Shirk in Legislation and Judgment: This involves making laws or judgments that contradict Allah’s law or obeying someone other than Allah in matters of faith.
Outward Shirk: This includes open and apparent acts of associating partners with Allah, such as worshipping idols or graves.
Hidden Shirk: This involves inwardly believing in or trusting in something or someone other than Allah, even while outwardly appearing to be a Muslim.
It is obvious that the shirk of democoracy and partaking in it is Shirk in Legislation, as Democoracy attempts to strip Allah from this right and places this right in the hands of man !!
#staymuslimdontvote
#murjiahexposed
ISLAMIC DEMOCRACY ?
A brother asks:
السلام عليكم ورحمة الله وبركاته
“Akhi how would we reply to the doubt some bring basically saying we can have a democracy in an lslamic state but it’s based on a shariah constitution so like how in the US.
it’s democracy but they cannot vote to change the constitution since that’s the foundation, so similarly we could have something like that, But the constitution is shariah basically, And everything can be voted on aslong as it doesn’t go against the shariah.
So, like we can vote to legalise or ban things, etc, I figured I’d ask you for your thoughts on this”
Answer:
وعليكم السلام ورحمة الله وبركاته
Democracy and Islam can never be the same. In Islam, we have the concept of shura, and what is used by the shura to determine outcomes is drawn from the Quran and Sunnah.
Democracy contrary to Islam, has its own system of lawmaking and passing bills and determining outcomes, politicians make the laws derived from their own whims and desires.
In fact Democracy is built on the majority ruling. This is achieved through the voting process.
You will be surprised to know that the idea of the majority rules was a concept that the Khawarij had put forth in order to govern their affairs and that of the people.
After their disagreement with both Ali (ra) and Muawiyyah (ra), and after establishing their administration in Haraura, the Khawarij now declared:
“Bai’ah is meant for Allah the Almighty alone. It is our duty to enjoin the good on the people of the land and forbid the evil.
There is no Caliph or ruler in Isla. After gaining victory, all matters must be settled by mutual consultation of the Muslims, and their *Majority should decide all issues.*
Both Ali and Muawiyyah are at fault.” (The History of Islam Vol.1, page 479.)
So, for those who adopt this view point, and screan democracy, calling it fair and just, or foolishly attributing it to Islam, are more in line with the view of the Khawarij and thier view on governance by majority vote.
Let us not forget it was Abu Bakr (ra) who was alone on his view to fight the Bughaat (rebels), while the majority were saying, “Are you going to fight a people who say Lailahailallah”
Allah (swt) sent Mohammed (saw) with a Shariah and a Minhaj, and whoever strays from it will be doomed!.
And Allah knows best.
-Abu ousayd
14 Rabi Al-Akhir 1446H
DOUBLE STANDARDS: A TRAIT ADOPTED FROM THE WEST
There’s a growing push for a Sunni-Shia unity under the pretext of victory for Gaza.
With some so blinded they are willing to set aside creedal differences for this cause.
This strikes me as hypocritical.
Let’s rewind to when ISIS was fighting on two fronts: against the Western coalition and Arab armies on one front and against the Syrian and Iraqi regimes on another.
Back then, and even today many of the same individuals calling for a Sunni-Shia alliance were amongst the loudest vioces against ISIS, pedalling the stances of the west and the Tawagheet against them!
What happened to putting aside differences then?
These advocates today lack understanding, foresight, and, most importantly, consistency.
I challenge anyone of them to say openly, “We should put aside creedal differences when dealing with the likes of Al-Qaeda or ISIS if it is to achieve victory in Iraq, Syria, and Gaza!”
By your standard and insight, It would be better to ally with the “khawarij” becuase the objective is victory, no matter who we ally with.
But you will never say that, because you are driven by desire not the truth, and you are not consistent, that is why you push us to join hands with the Mushrikeen Shiaa/Rafidhah those who claim the Quran is changed and incomplete, who accuse Aisha(ra) of zina, and assert that all the Sahabah apostated.
If the issue is that of extremism, than there is nothing more extremism than the ideas of the Shiaa, if it’s about “terrorism” than likewise Iran is looked at as a Terrorist state, founding terror organisation the likes of your Sayyid and Hezbulaat, again consistency.
The ‘Khawarij’ are known for many things, one of those is they refuse to lie as they see it as major sin, but you want to believe the Shiaa today knowing very well lying (taqiyah) is a foundemental part of their faith…
“Have they not travelled throughout the land so their hearts may reason, and their ears may listen? Indeed, it is not the eyes that are blind, but it is the hearts in the chests that grow blind” (Quran 22:46)
Victory comes from Allah (swt) not from ourselves, we just have to follow Allah’s orders and the Sunnah of His Messenger (saw) without compromise, only then will Victory be attained!
So be consistent.
Abu Ousayd.
October 6, 2024 / 3 Rabi al-Akhir 1446
KHAWARIJ AND HADITH
FACTS:
BUKHARI, MUSLIM AND ABU DAWUD NARRATED HADITH BY THE KHAWARIJ….
….BUT WOULD NOT NARRATE FROM THE MURJIAH!
__________
it is interesting that earlier scholars accepted innovators such as al-Khawarij to a degree for several reasons, You have figures such as ‘Imran b. Hittan, another Khariji, whose narrations are used by al-Bukhari, Abu Dawud, and al-Nasa’i.
__________
HADITH ARE OF DIFFERENT GRADES AND LEVELS
Ikramah is in those levels and he is a controversial figure due to his affiliation with the Khawarij. al-Dhahbi mentions this in al-Mizan al-I’tidal, entry #5716 (v.3, p.93).
__________
Abu Dawud said that from the people of desires (i.e. innovators), none are more correct in hadith than the Khawarij
(قال أبو داود : ليس في أهل الأهواء أصح حديثا من الخوارج ، ثم ذكر عمران بن حطان ، وأبا حسان الأعرج.).
__________
IKRAMAH ACCUSED OF BEING FROM THE KHAWARIJ
Al-Bukhari relied upon him because he believed that the Khawarij wouldn’t lie as for them lying is a sin and sin is kufr.
Muslim and Malik mostly avoided ‘Ikramah’s narrations except in a few instances.
_______
WITH ALL THAT SAID:
The Murjiah of the past could not be trusted, so the scholars of the Salaf would not rely on their words and opinions,
so why would you rely on the words of Murjiah today!
This article is in no way in support of the deviant Khawarij sect, their beliefs or understanding, rather it is to highlight that the scholars of the Salaf trusted them with Hadith.
Furthermore it is to show that there is in the Ummah a far worse deviant group that can never be trusted.
#murjiahexposed