The Apostasy Survival Kit

A fascinating intellectual tour de force, though with much to disagree with..

Asharis: Assemble

survival

After the summer break, we bring you an unabashedly provocative and controversial piece about what the author claims is a set of essential tools to survive the wave of doubt and apostasy facing Muslims in the West.

Essential and worrying reading.

A major event in world history went largely unnoticed by Muslims both in the West and elsewhere recently – namely the legalisation of gay marriage in Ireland, which, rather than the Vatican, is in fact the citadel of Catholicism in the West. Moreover, this occurred with the full consent of a significant majority of the population (over 60%) in a democratic referendum (unlike the recent liberalisation of marriage laws in the US, which essentially was pushed through a form of constitutional court after losing referenda in states such as California). My point here does not concern the merits or demerits of gay marriage, an issue that is wont to send…

View original post 14,979 more words



Categories: Islam

6 replies

  1. > Tablighi–Jamaat through to wannabee genocidal militants such as ISIS, so successfully to inculcate in lay Muslims the idea that hadith in general and hadith in Bukhari in particular were in fact incontestably uttered by the Prophet himself,

    This isn’t even what Hadith scholars state. In fact scholars of Hadiths from the time of al-Daruqtni to Ibn Hajar criticized hadiths found in Bukhari’s collection. See this: https://daarulhadeeth.org/2014/08/26/was-shaykh-al-albani-the-first-to-classify-some-hadith-in-al-bukhari-as-weak/

    > that when they hear hadith such as that the Prophet attempted a sexual assault on a captive woman

    No such thing.

    > or ordered no punishment whatsoever for the killing of non-Muslims,

    That is again not true, the hadith in question states that “a Muslim is not to be killed for a non-Muslim” (first, where is “no punishment” mentioned here?) and this has long before been interpreted by Hanafis as referring to non-Muslim combatants, Hanafi scholars did not accept this Hadith limiting the general Qur’anic edict of ‘A life for a life.’ They located versions of the Hadith that place it within the restricted context of warfare and treaties, giving it the circumscribed meaning that a Muslim would not be executed if he had killed a non-Muslim from another polity with whom the Muslim state had no treaty arrangement. The uniform principle of ‘A life for a life’ was preserved. However, for other schools of thought, the death penalty wouldn’t be enforced though other harsh punishments might be appropriate.

    > sanctioned the assassination of a single mother who mocked him

    The hadith is weak according to most scholars, it isn’t even in al-Bukhari’s collection.

    > said that the sun bows to the throne of God before rising again

    The prominent thirteenth-century Damascene scholar al-Nawawi concluded that the Hadith of the Sun Prostrating must be referring to a metaphorical prostration – the sun’s submission to God’s will through the order of His creation. As the Qur’an reads in a highly poetic passage: ‘The stars and the trees bow down’ (55:6).

    Again ISIS does not exist because of two or three hadiths. ISIS is not Islamically justified by those hadiths he quoted. In point of fact, no interpretation of Islam can exist that justifies ISIS without violating the Qur’an or the hadith corpus.

    And apostasy from Islam is not a “oh-look-controversial-hadith” based phenomenon. It’s simply for the same reason that many people in the world are becoming atheists, especially for Christians.

    Like

    • What a shameless liar!

      Typical – when a hadith is inconvenient, ‘oh, its not in Bukhari, so no need to worry’ (*don’t tell them that not all Sahih hadith are in Bukhari and even Imam Bukhari called his book the ‘SHORT version’ i.e he could not include all of the hadith he wanted – he died before completing it). So this is just a liar game you hypocrites play to ignore hadith you don’t like.

      So when the hadith IS in Bukhari, like the hadith of the sun prostrating, it must be metaphorical. Interesting how Salafis say that ‘hands’ and ‘feet’ of God must be ‘literal’ in the Quran but hadith are ‘metaphorical’ when the disagree with science. And how come neither the Prophet not Bukhari said its a metaphor? So are we following them or Nawawi?

      Also, have you read it? What exact metaphor is it conveying? Do you know anything about the supreme eloquence of the Prophet pbuh ? His perfect use of language? When he makes a metaphor, you will know it you idiot, it won’t take some 13th Century scholar to work it out. And it will be an ELOQUENT and APPROPRIATE metaphor. Read the hadith you fool.

      Basically, according to these people, the Prophet AND Bukhari are in-eloquent and unclear and don’t know how to express themselves in Arabic. What’s REALLY funny is that these same people argue that you need the hadith to understand the Quran (and thus they must be ‘preserved’ too). But then they need Nawawi to understand the hadith. So the Quran is preserved and infallible (true) and the hadith are preserved and infallible…and the opinions of the scholars are preserved and infallible (they probably have OTHER scholars that tell you what Nawawi meant to, ad infinitum, probably leading up to this guy who is also infallible).

      Also, no one understood the hadith until the 134th century is it? LMAO.

      I mean, childish lying dirt bags like you are the reason people actually leave religion. If you had genuine faith in ANY religion, you would never have to lie. Likewise, everyone knows there is the hadith which falsely alleges that prophet Muhammad pbuh touched a captive woman. But you just lie and say ‘no such thing’. You are either very ignorant or very stupid.

      Look at your tripe here:

      ”That is again not true, the hadith in question states that “a Muslim is not to be killed for a non-Muslim” (first, where is “no punishment” mentioned here?) and this has long before been interpreted by Hanafis as referring to non-Muslim combatants”

      Quite apart from the fact that the article included links to all of the hadith and fatwas and the fact that you are SOOOOO dishonest as to try the old switcherooo that since the hadith mentions only not to give the death penalty for killing non-Muslims, then IT’S FINE! Because there is SOME punishment (i.e a small fine, and even the fine is less (2/3) of what is paid for a Muslim victim). So if I kill a non-Muslim or say a baby, I have to pay 1/3-2/3 the blood money for a Muslim, so that’s justice! WOW! You amazing theological genius! How can people apostate whole we have such articulate and reasoned defenders of the faith! I mean a small fine for murder, what more do people want!

      You genocidal idiot, the hadith says that you don’t kill Muslims for killing non Muslims, it literally says that and that’s how Shafi, Malik and Ahmad (and ISIS) interpreted it. Not only that, they went further and said that there is no punishment even for killing MUSLIM slaves (or women or children), apart from a fine (i.e not even a criminal penalty, basically a parking ticket). Hanafis went against this and rejected the hadith. But all you do is LIE and pretend that IT’S NO PROBLEM!

      This game is what causes apostasy amongst the honest and genuine people, they see your dirty lies, which fool only the gullible and then leave the religion. You guys try to accept the hadith and then ignore the meaning or find a way out. If you people behaved with honesty and stopped trying to blame everything OTHER THAN YOURSELVES for apostasy, you would actually get somewhere.

      ‘However, for other schools of thought, the death penalty wouldn’t be enforced though other harsh punishments might be appropriate’

      You lying so and so. Do you even BELIEVE in GOD? To lie about religion so brazenly? ‘Harsh’ punishments? Like what!? Everyone knows that the punishment for killing non-Muslims or EVEN MUSLIM SLAVES according to Shafi and Malik etc is 2/3 of the blood money for a Muslim. Harsh punishment my bum.

      Its all here:https://asharisassemble.com/2015/07/05/many-muslim-leaders-denounce-isis-out-of-convenience-not-conviction/

      Same for your bald lie about the assassination of the widow being a ‘weak’ hadith according to the majority of (unnamed) scholars. If its so weak then why do they use it to justify the killing of those who insult the Prophet pbuh? Hypocrite!

      https://shaykhatabekshukurov.com/2016/03/10/islamic-blasphemy-laws-and-the-strange-case-of-mumtaz-qadiri-part-1/

      Throwing gays off buildings, killing them by burning, killing apostates, killing by burning and all of the other stuff ISIS do – all of those are from Hadith, in BUKHARI. You can’t have your cake and eat it. Reject the hadith or approve. There is no third way you waffler. Luckily honest Muslims rejected them from the earliest times.

      ‘And apostasy from Islam is not a “oh-look-controversial-hadith” based phenomenon. It’s simply for the same reason that many people in the world are becoming atheists, especially for Christians.’

      That’s because you are a DUMB PERSON. For a normal person, hadith and fatwas telling them that non-Muslims getting murdered warrants the same punishment as double parking is enough to cause them to doubt.

      Like

  2. We have to be very cautious of the hadith, even if some medieval scholars a thousand years ago thought certain hadith were likely authentic.

    The Prophet did NOT compile his sayings nor did he ever commission any of his companions to do it.

    If hadith was even half as important as most traditional scholars would make them be, then the Prophet would have surely compiled them or told his companions to compile them.

    I am not dismissing hadith…I myself follow them…but we need to put them under the light of the Qur’an…not just the letter of the Qur’an but the spirit of the Qur’an.

    And many Sahih hadith are not in harmony with the spirit of the Qur’an.

    We must remember the Sahih hadith FAILS the criterion given by Allah as a commandment to us regarding claims (2:282). This verse is regarding financial claims but it applies even more importantly to anything that can establish law…for what establishes law is more important than the price of chicken in a specific transaction.

    Allah (swt) commands us that for claims, we need two witnesses and the claim has to be
    written down (immediately), not decades or a century later.

    95% of sahih hadith have only 1 witness.

    And none of them were written down (immediately).

    Like

  3. Salam Omar,

    Again, I am being dismissive of the body of sayings attributed to the Prophet (pbuh). It’s just that their status have been exaggerated, unfortunately and unQuranically.

    In other words, let’s be wary of thinking we can be more Catholic than the Pope.

    What is so funny?

    There are some (I think a very small number) of hadiths where the Prophet is attributed to have encouraged the transmission of his sayings (unclear how certain we can be of these hadiths but I think some of are in the Sahih category and thus there is at least some credence to them….we cannot use these hadiths by themselves or it can be a circular argument unless any of these hadith are mutawattir and I am pretty sure they are not mutawattir).

    However, the Prophet did not commission any organized enterprise towards that objective.

    Am I mistaken?

    Like

  4. Response to “Tsurugi99”

    I’m the author of that post.

    I said that the hadith was not “even in Bukhari” because the author of that post was talking in the previous sentences about it. I do know that just because a hadith is in Bukhari’s collections does not mean it’s sahih (there are some weak hadiths there as al-Albani and previously al-Daruqtni and Ibn Hajar explained).

    > it must be metaphorical

    Yeah because its literal meaning contradicts what we know for sure in science, and there is an interpretation in language that allows for a meaning that does not contradict science.

    > Interesting how Salafis say that ‘hands’ and ‘feet’ of God must be ‘literal’ in the Quran but hadith are ‘metaphorical’ when the disagree with science.

    First of all I’m not a Salafi. So I don’t understand how you’re bringing this up. Second, no that’s not what Salafis say, they state that these attributes are believed without going into their meanings, while believing at the same time that there is nothing like God, and that God is not like his creation.

    > And how come neither the Prophet not Bukhari said its a metaphor?
    > So are we following them or Nawawi?

    The Prophet (Peace Be Upon Him) said something. Narrators reported his sayings from generation to generation. His particular statement arrived at al-Bukhari who investigated and found out that it fulfilled his criteria to include in his collection. al-Nawawi commented on that narration since he made a commentary to explain and elucidate the meanings of these hadiths.

    As you can see the only one who can tell us whether the meaning of that hadith is not the Prophet (peace be upon him) since he just reportedly said that, nor al-Bukhari since he just included that statement (his job was just to collect narrations), whereas al-Nawawi made a commentary to explain these hadiths.

    > Also, have you read it? What exact metaphor is it conveying? Do you know anything about the supreme eloquence of the Prophet pbuh ? His perfect use of language? When he makes a metaphor, you will know it you idiot, it won’t take some 13th Century scholar to work it out. And it will be an ELOQUENT and APPROPRIATE metaphor. Read the hadith you fool.

    I’m only quoting that 13th century scholar to show, 1) the metaphorical interpretation of that hadith is not something new, 2) that these scholars understood way before us that the Earth was round, 3) that the Arabic language allows for such an interpretation.

    Concerning your claim of metaphors being known to everyone, then that’s not true, unless you perfectly know classical Arabic then all you can rely is someone’s else translation (interpretation) of that hadith, which seems the case with you.

    Here is the exact metaphor he (peace be upon him) is conveying: “The prominent thirteenth-century Damascene scholar al-Nawawi concluded that the Hadith of the Sun Prostrating must be referring to a metaphorical prostration – the sun’s submission to God’s will through the order of His creation. As the Qur’an reads in a highly poetic passage: ‘The stars and the trees bow down’ (55:6).” See the book by Jonathan Brown, Misquoting Muhammad page 71.

    > Basically, according to these people, the Prophet AND Bukhari are in-eloquent and unclear and don’t know how to express themselves in Arabic.

    That’s not what these people are saying.

    > What’s REALLY funny is that these same people argue that you need the hadith to understand the Quran (and thus they must be ‘preserved’ too). But then they need Nawawi to understand the hadith.

    The truth is that we need hadiths as well as the scholarly tradition that dedicated itself to elucidating and interpreting these hadiths according to particular rules.

    > So the Quran is preserved and infallible (true) and the hadith are preserved and infallible…

    No one claims that all hadiths are perfectly preserved and infallible, there are many forged hadiths.

    > Also, no one understood the hadith until the 134th century is it? LMAO.

    Often, hadith commentaries include interpretations from generations earlier. It’s not that “oh, no one figured out the meaning of that hadith until the 13th century”

    > Likewise, everyone knows there is the hadith which falsely alleges that prophet Muhammad pbuh touched a captive woman.

    My point is clear: there is no such Sahih hadith that claims that.

    > Because there is SOME punishment (i.e a small fine, and even the fine is less (2/3) of what is paid for a Muslim victim).

    No, no such things as a “small fine”. The punishment in this case would be life-time prison according to those who state that the punishment is not death.

    > So if I kill a non-Muslim or say a baby, I have to pay 1/3-2/3 the blood money for a Muslim, so that’s justice!

    Where did I claim that? How can a ‘baby’ even be non-Muslim? Abu Hanifa clearly stated that the diyyah for the Muslim is the same as the one of the non-Muslim.

    > I mean a small fine for murder, what more do people want!

    You’re making that up man. You’re making up nonsense, claim that it’s embodied into our religion, and then blame it on people who do not even claim it.

    > You genocidal idiot,

    Where’s your adab? How am I “genocidal”? I didn’t even kill a single ant let alone being ‘genocidal’? Why are you insulting me? Is that how the sunnah of our Prophet (peace be upon him) told us to do to insult fellow human beings solely based on our difference between them?

    > the hadith says that you don’t kill Muslims for killing non Muslims, it literally says that and that’s how Shafi, Malik and Ahmad (and ISIS) interpreted it.

    And as I said, that doesn’t mean that the killer escapes punishment. Also Malik did not interpret it like that, in fact he said that if the killer killed the non-Muslim not by accident then he liable to the death penalty.

    > Not only that, they went further and said that there is no punishment even for killing MUSLIM slaves (or women or children), apart from a fine (i.e not even a criminal penalty, basically a parking ticket)

    Again you’re ignoring that it’s not a fine but a life-time prison stance.

    > ‘Harsh’ punishments? Like what!? Everyone knows that the punishment for killing non-Muslims or EVEN MUSLIM SLAVES according to Shafi and Malik etc is 2/3 of the blood money for a Muslim. Harsh punishment my bum.

    No, that’s not the punishment in that case, it would be a life-time prison stance according to these schools.

    > Its all here:https://asharisassemble.com/2015/07/05/many-muslim-leaders-denounce-isis-out-of-convenience-not-conviction/

    Again that’s not true, all schools of jurisprudence including Malikis, Hanafis, Shafi’i in one opinion, Hanbalis and even Shi’ite schools hold that unbelief is not the justification for war, and the justification for war is hiraba, they argued that if the reason for war was the unbeliever’s unbelief then the Prophet (peace be upon him) wouldn’t have forbade the killing of women, children …etc in legitimate war. Therefore it’s not the unbelief that is the cause of war. And this without even mentioning the Qur’an’s position on religious freedom. So ISIS cannot be Islamically justified.

    Add to that the second premise that ISIS has been mainly killing Muslims when the Qur’an states,

    But whoever kills a believer intentionally – his recompense is Hell, wherein he will abide eternally, and Allah has become angry with him and has cursed him and has prepared for him a great punishment. Qur’an – 4:93

    > Same for your bald lie about the assassination of the widow being a ‘weak’ hadith according to the majority of (unnamed) scholars. If its so weak then why do they use it to justify the killing of those who insult the Prophet pbuh? Hypocrite!

    No, most scholars who state that those who insult the Prophet should be criminally pursued don’t quote that hadith because it is weak, since it has a defect in its chain of transmission.

    > Throwing gays off buildings, killing them by burning, killing apostates, killing by y burning and all of the other stuff ISIS do – all of those are from Hadith, in BUKHARI.

    No, here’s what is in Bukhari: “none punishes with fire except God”

    Hadiths on killing apostates fall into chapters dealing with war.

    “Throwing gays off buildings” is not found in al-Bukhari, and has no legitimacy. It is merely a reported statement from Ibn Abbas (ra), and as Ibn Hajar says on a similar issue, when Companion rulings contradict one another (as they do in this case), they cease to have any real persuasive power.

    > That’s because you are a DUMB PERSON.

    Why are you insulting me again? Did honest early Muslims approve of insulting each other?

    > For a normal person, hadith and fatwas telling them that non-Muslims getting murdered warrants the same punishment as double parking is enough to cause them to doubt.

    You’re making up this stuff, as I said times and times again there is no hadith stating that, as for fatwas they do state that other harsh punishment may apply (I quoted that from Jonathan’s book) such as life-time prison.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: