Re: Slavery & our Reformation imperative: "I lower my head in shame"
Posted: Tue Mar 29, 2016 12:59 pm
Is there a single reputable Islamic scholar who justifies slavery in today's day and age?
Largest online Somali community!
http://somalinet.com/forums/
There isn't just one or two or 5, there are hundreds of "reputable" or as zumaale would put it "classically distinguished" scholars who support slavery yesterday, today, and tomorrow. But does that even matter to you? Deep down inside, you know that slavery is a barbaric abomination of a practice and per the Golden Rule(do unto others.....) you would never allow your female relatives to be enslaved, even if it is/was a "humane"(what a joke) form of slavery.. So apparently, according to the Official GateKeepers and Defenders of the One and Only True Faith: it's perfectly ok to enslave the "gaalo"/infidels, but it's never ok to enslave us "the chosen beoble" right? Fuck that hypocritical noise right in the baasto.Shirib wrote:Is there a single reputable Islamic scholar who justifies slavery in today's day and age?
The question should be: "Is there a single reputable mainstream/traditionalist/orthodox Islamic scholar who calls for the unequivocal abolishment of slavery in today's day and age?"Shirib wrote:Is there a single reputable Islamic scholar who justifies slavery in today's day and age?
And even tho your question was clearly rhetorical, I will still answer it: Salah Fowzaan gave a fatwa in 2003 which he openly justified and supported slavery not just for today, but for all times:Shirib wrote:Is there a single reputable Islamic scholar who justifies slavery in today's day and age?
Al-Fawzan's views on slavery—given in lectures recorded on cassette—came to light and caused some controversy in 2003. In the tape he was quoted as saying, “Slavery is a part of Islam ... Slavery is part of jihad, and jihad will remain as long there is Islam.” As for the modernist interpretation that Islam totally abolished slavery, he dismissed its exponents saying, “They are ignorant, not scholars. ... Whoever says such things is an infidel
"Questioner: ... one of the contemporary writers is of the view that this religion, at its inception, was compelled to accept the institution of slavery ... [but] ... that the intent of the Legislator [i.e. God] is to gradually end this institution of slavery. So what is your view on this?
Shaikh Salih alFawzaan: These are words of falsehood (baatil) ... despite that many of the writers and thinkers -- and we do not say scholars -- repeat these words. Rather we say that they are thinkers (mufakkireen), just as they call them. And it is unfortunate, that they also call them `Du'at' (callers). ... These words are falsehood ... This is deviation and a false accusation against Islaam. And if it had not been for the excuse of ignorance [because] we excuse them on account of (their) ignorance so we do not say that they are Unbelievers because they are ignorant and are blind followers .... Otherwise, these statements are very dangerous and if a person said them deliberately he would become apostate and leave Islaam."
My next question is: How would you like it inaa (immediate female relative)-daada aan soo xaraysto, oo habayn-kee marba dhinac oo gediyo, and then, marka aan ka dhargo,I would merely "gift" her and pass her on to anybody I wanted,oh, and if she ran away, then her prayer would not be accepted and if she dies, she will not enter Baradize!!! and I would be doing all this in the name of God and in the name of Islam.
Is this dude serious? Tomorrow I'm waiting for Leftist has a better understanding than Rasulu'Allah himself. What's home boy smokingLeftist wrote:There isn't just one or two or 5, there are hundreds of "reputable" or as zumaale would put it "classically distinguished" scholars who support slavery yesterday, today, and tomorrow. But does that even matter to you? Deep down inside, you know that slavery is a barbaric abomination of a practice and per the Golden Rule(do unto others.....) you would never allow your female relatives to be enslaved, even if it is/was a "humane"(what a joke) form of slavery.. So apparently, according to the Official GateKeepers and Defenders of the One and Only True Faith: it's perfectly ok to enslave the "gaalo"/infidels, but it's never ok to enslave us "the chosen beoble" right? Fuck that hypocritical noise right in the baasto.Shirib wrote:Is there a single reputable Islamic scholar who justifies slavery in today's day and age?
So again, I ask you, does your question even matter? No it doesn't. Because even if I produce hundreds of scholars who support slavery in our modern era, you would not dare disagree with them. Because you would be afraid of being called a murtad/aposate. Herd mentality and group-think has enervated you as it is has weakened and enervated hundreds of millions of muslims throughout the centuries.
You're going to have to get over the discomfort and pain of rejecting the practices of saxaabah, they lived in their era, we live in ours. To them their practices, to us ours.
Here some other practices that were ok then, but are fundamentally unacceptable in the 21st century:
- Jizya: You would be screaming bloody hell if you were forced to pay a "special" tax because you are a Muslim.....but if the so-called Mahdi/Messiah comes out tomorrow, and he announces the return of Jizyah, would you have the moral decency & honesty to reject his bullshit, or would you be a hypocrite like so many of our co-religionists are?
- chopping the hands of thieves: Name a single rich, elite person throughout 14 centuries that had his hands chopped off? No one? Yeah, so fuck that noise. You want me to accept chopping off the hands of the poor and working class while Haroon Rasheed and Ina Sufyaan live rich off their murder and slavery? Even if, theoretically, chopping hands, would be done on a equitable basis(which is a historical & statistical impossibility), it would still be wrong, because we have evolved in our morality, and chopping hands is barbaric and inhumane in the 21st century.
Again, if you want to live in the 21st century, you have absolutely no choice but to embrace the Reformation, and that requires you to reject practices that were seen to be ok and normal in the 7th century, but since mankind's morality has evolved since the 7th century, those practices like slavery, stoning, chopping, apostate-exeuction are seen as exactly what they are: barbaric and inhumane practices that mankind has evolved from. We are better Muslims now in the 21st century than we were in the 7th and 8th century. Muslims living today are 100% more moral and have a better understanding of Islam than the Saxabah and the Taabicieen, who engaged in unislamic and 100% xaraam slavery, for example.
and apparently you were all shocked like "OMG, how can he slap";Muslims living today are 100% more moral and have a better understanding of Islam than the Saxabah and the Taabicieen, who engaged in unislamic and 100% xaraam slavery, for example.
This report was narrated by al-Bukhary (6922) on the authority of `Ikrimah who said: Heretics were brought before Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) and he burnt them. When Ibn `Abbas (may Allah be pleased with him) was informed about this, he said, “If I were in his place, I would not have burnt them for the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) forbad this saying, “Do not torment with the torment of Allah” and I would have killed them, for the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) said, “Whoever changes his religion, kill him.”” When a deviant group called al-Saba’iyyah, who were the followers of the Jewish `Abdullah ibn Saba’, went astray and believed that Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) was a god – we seek refuge with Allah from this – he (Ali) set them on fire and said, “When I saw such an enormous evil, I set them on fire and called.
First of all, most of the people who used this report against Islam are Islamophobes. So for this guy to use against Islam is clear who he is and where his loyalties lie.Leftist wrote:^^
This report was narrated by al-Bukhary (6922) on the authority of `Ikrimah who said: Heretics were brought before Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) and he burnt them. When Ibn `Abbas (may Allah be pleased with him) was informed about this, he said, “If I were in his place, I would not have burnt them for the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) forbad this saying, “Do not torment with the torment of Allah” and I would have killed them, for the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) said, “Whoever changes his religion, kill him.”” When a deviant group called al-Saba’iyyah, who were the followers of the Jewish `Abdullah ibn Saba’, went astray and believed that Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) was a god – we seek refuge with Allah from this – he (Ali) set them on fire and said, “When I saw such an enormous evil, I set them on fire and called.
jalaaludin5 wrote:
-
-
-