-----

[وزارة الخارجية 🇸🇦 @KSAMOFA]

#خادم_الحرمين_الشريفين يُصدر أمره الكريم باستضافة 1000 حاج من ذوي الشهداء والمصابين من أهالي قطاع غزة لأداء مناسك الحج لهذا العام بشكل استثنائي، ليصل إجمالي عدد المستضافين من دولة فلسطين إلى 2000 حاج.

[----- @TrueK1416]

@RamonIHarvey @EdinburghUP I hope an Akbarian perspective would be included

[Hamza A. Tzortzis @HATzortzis]

Yesterday I posted about my commitment to Islamic laws as understood by the pious predecessors & the four schools of thought. The majority of Muslims believe in these laws & we affirm that they are the greatest manifestations of mercy & justice.

I was not surprised at the misrepresentations from apostates & liberal academics.

Most of the responses I have seen are summarised by Professor Gabriel Reynolds' (@GabrielSaidR) opportunism & misrepresentation. Amongst other things he framed my post on apostasy as life threatening. The following are some points to consider, I believe they are sufficient to refute the responses I have seen so far:

1. Islamic law does not condone vigilantism. The accused must go through an Islamic court of law under an Islamic government / authority. This law cannot be applied in secular societies (and in secular modern nation states with majority Muslim populations).

2. There is no mind control or an Islamic police seeking to know the innermost beliefs of people. If someone leaves Islam internally, without professing it, the law does not apply.

3. Muslims living in a Western or Muslim country are forbidden to take the law into their own hands.

4. Professor Reynolds' framing is self-defeating. If he perceives the laws of a society that he does not live in to be threatening, then he should feel constantly threatened by secular society. The laws in modern secular states out number the laws in pre-modern nations—many of which he may disagree with. Violations of such laws, & resisting them, can result in him being shot by an officer of the law (especially in the US). It is unfortunate that he implicitly framed my post in the worst possible manner.

5. Islamic laws have their nuances, pre-conditions, & exemptions, which classical scholars were aware of; it refuses to be reduced to a caricature of violence, regardless of Professor's attempts.

6. Citing this law as unfair or unequal because Islamic law allows Christians to leave their religion to embrace Islam yet forbids Muslims to leave Islam, falsely assumes a secular or liberal presupposition that all religions are equal or that it is an individual choice. Firstly, there is no violation of the equality principle. Similar things must be treated similarly, dissimilar things must be treated dissimilarly. Leaving Islam (the truth) for (another religion) falsehood is not the same as leaving Christianity (falsehood) for Islam (the truth). The liberal will assume that the two religions are the same. This is a false assumption which we can prove. Therefore the debate shifts from the apostasy law to the veracity of Islam. I welcome that debate. Secondly, the atomistic or individualistic approach is false. Muslims are under no obligation to adopt such an approach. In fact, theories on social influence & conformity reject such an approach. In a nutshell, human beings are not merely individuals. The choices they make impact society.

7. Finally, the notion of the harm principle can be applied to the apostasy law: the actions of individuals should be limited only to prevent harm to other individuals. Apostasy in Islam is considered as a great harm to society & to the individual who leaves Islam. For instance hell is a great harm to the individual (the final abode of apostates). Allowing people to leave Islam without a mechanism to prevent them can lead to social fragmentation of the Muslim social group which inflicts harm on the community (I appreciate this requires unpacking as the structure of Islamic society is different from a liberal one). Liberals will contend by rejecting this application of the harm principle. Our response is that they have metaphysical & social assumptions which we can prove false. The debate now becomes centred around the idea of the existence of hell & our view on society. If true (& we can prove them to be true) the harm principle renders apostasy laws as coherent & moral.

I'll be recording an online video soon, in-shā-a-Allāh.

[----- @TrueK1416]

@Terodotus @MuslimBibliophi @chonkshonk1 @profjkaminski Its not about having some secular non Muslims in the field, it's rather pointing out that they are the MAJORITY of "experts". In New Test. studies most are Christian. This is repeatedly pointed out by non Christians like Ehrman and Richard C Miller. Secular biasses do play a role

[----- @TrueK1416]

@TylerDMcNabb A more useful answer:

Traditional Sunni:

(A) Avicenna (for philosophers and logicians)

(B) Ibn Arabi (for philosophers valuing mystical insight)

(C) Fakhr Din al-Razi (for philosophical theologians valuing analytic reasoning)

Salafi Sunni: Ibn Taymiyyah

Shia: Mulla Sadra

[----- @TrueK1416]

@shiismstudies نعم القنوت عند ال��افعية صحيح في صلاة الفجر، وأيضا في النصف الأخير من رمضان في التراويح.

وعندنا قول في المذهب أن القنوت (سوى صلاة الفجر) في الصلوات الخمس جائز مطلقا ولو لغير نازلة.

[----- @TrueK1416]

@CosmicSkeptic I guess this has to do with you both conflating Islam with a very loud and vocal subset: Salafism, which doesn't by any means reflect the complexity of Islamic thought and philosophy throughout the ages. Maybe have a chat with @RealHasanSpiker or read Ibn Arabi's philosophy (2)

[----- @TrueK1416]

@CosmicSkeptic @CosmicSkeptic Unfortunately both you and Peterson severely caricature the Islamic worldview by saying that Muslims don't have an understanding of human "manifestation" of the word of God. Infact, there's a famous Muslim tradition that Prophet Muhammad was a walking Quran. (1)

[----- @TrueK1416]

@worldviewdesign Much appreciated. Thank you and God bless

[----- @TrueK1416]

@fahd_ibn_ala الإمام شيخ الإسلام حقا وتحقيقا، ومن ينظر في ترجمة الإمام الشعراني -رضي الله عنهما ونفعنا بهما- له في (الطبقات الوسطى) وما حكاه معاينةً من زهده وعبادته ومعرفته بالله وولايته وكراماته لا يملك إلا أن تدمع عينه ويحمد الله أن وفقه للانتساب في سلكهم عسى حصول تحقيق الانتساب بمنه وكرمه

[----- @TrueK1416]

@abhistoria وهذا قد يفسر مواقف الأطروش العقدية المخالفة للرؤية الإمامية مع كونه حسيني مدني وتربى على والده تلميذ علي العريضي ومن خواصه؟ أرفقت صورة رواية الأطروش عن الصادق في مسألة الجمع بين مسح القدم والغسل التي يرويها عبد الله بن حمزة في كتابه (العقد الثمين) وغيرها. تعليقكم إذا سمحتم (4)

[----- @TrueK1416]

@abhistoria وهل هذه المسألة وغيرها من المسائل التي قد تجمع من روايات العترة والعلويين عن الأئمة والتي قد تستجلى من فقه الأطروش وأمالي أحمد بن عيسى، إن كانت تبدي مخالفة لرواية الكوفيين وغيرهم من غير العلويين عن الأئمة في الفقه، هل هذا سيدل أيضا على اختلاف بين الفريقين في تصور عقيدة الأئمة؟(3)

[----- @TrueK1416]

@abhistoria لم أفعل أستاذ إهاب فقط نتيجة اهتمام بالعترة الطاهرة والزيدية ومطالعة ما يتعلق بذلك

[----- @TrueK1416]

@ayn_al_shams @ThamudicB كلامك كلام فارغ مكرر جاهل وصاحبه أضل من حمار أهله

ونكاية فيك وفي أمثالك، أقول:

مدد يا رسول الله غوثاه يا رسول الله غوثاه يا أولياء الله.

ومع أنك تعرف هذا الفيديو وصاحبه على الأغلب، ولكن غيرك ��بما فيه أمل وقد يستفيد ويريحنا من تكرار المسائل: https://t.co/Foxyahbb7L

[----- @TrueK1416]

@ayn_al_shams @ThamudicB بل على مذهب الأثر (قال عبد الله بن الإمام أحمد : " سمعت أبي يقول : حججْت خمس حجج ، منها ثنتين راكبا ، وثلاثة ماشياً أو ثنتين ماشياً وثلاثة راكبًا ، فضللت الطَّرِيق في حجَّة ، وكنت مَاشِيا ، فجعلت أقول : يا عباد الله دلوني على الطَّرِيق)

وعباد الله هنا أي الملائكة، راجع المصادر.

[----- @TrueK1416]

@_titanslayer_ I think for your needs nothing else than mastering Arabic would suffice