I'd like to take this opportunity to state that I've never received money for any of my dawah towards Shias, despite doing it since the early 2010s.
Monetary compensation isn't needed for one to feel obligated to defend the Sahaba and to invite to Islam in its original form.
This is a dishonest post. Farid, Adnan, Sh Uthman were not mentioned, this is a slanderous way of creating fitnah among duaat. I don’t believe any one of them is being paid.
@joebradford criminal to see all of this go completely unchallenged despite the recent and dramatic rise of a certain tool that can instantly sanity check any and all claims but what can you expect from someone who's primary qualification is "podcaster"
As an authority on Islamic law, I can tell you the claims this person are making are utter crap:
1) Islamic law does not require witnesses to prove rape, watch this (https://t.co/uNV3s0CDv8)
2) What he is mentioning is British colonial law, which was hostile towards
rape victims and generally assumed that any evidence put forth by a female victim was not
credible. See next.
3) Pakistani law does not require four witnesses to prove rape. (Section 375 of the Pakistan Penal Code). See the CMI report: (https://t.co/u7StMFDoVt)
4) The perpetrators are overwhelmingly British citizens or long-term UK residents, making it fundamentally a domestic failure of law enforcement, social services, and political will to protect vulnerable girls and deliver justice regardless of ethnicity.
5) Lowe's stats are inflated and highly inferential. Home Office 2020 report and Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse. Grooming cases in certain locales disproportionately involved South Asian. Broader child sexual abuse data shows most offenders nationally are white due to population demographics. Which is a bit of a no-brainer.
Trying to blame Muslims or Immigrants is an attempt to sidestep responsibility. Fomenting hatred and bigotry isn't going to solve the problem. Manning up and actually curbing the vices in your own society and having the political will to change will.
We must begin with the most important fact here in the discussion: Islam does not just give normative prescriptions here and there. It is hegemonic on all questions of law. This is a central concept of the whole Islamic aqeedah, that legislation is for Allah alone. So questions of rights, responsibilities, legality, are questions that Islam absolutely comprehensively addresses. The objective of ijtihaad is to uncover the answers to these questions through Quran+sunnah+the juristic toolkit (usul al fiqh).
But there is also the descriptive reality of the human activities that Islam legislates about: what the scholars call the manat. Ijtihaad has to marry together the intention of the legislator (prescriptive; understood from revelation) with the manat (descriptive; understood from human inquiry into reality).
Every human activity is like this. There is the prescriptive dimension (halal/haram) and the descriptive dimension.
Consider for example civil engineering. There may be different schools of thoughts and competing opinions between civil engineers about different construction methodologies, practices, etc. This is not a legislative debate. It is a scientific one. Qur'an and sunnah did not come to comprehensively describe and decide science.
BUT: if such a field is developed without the guidance of its Islamic prescriptive dimension, the resulting schools of thought will end up clashing with Islamic law and intention. They need to be thought about together.
Same thing with economics. There is definitely something called the Islamic economic system, and it is definitely comprehensive. The mistake you're making is not including descriptive-level differences people may have over economic realities into the diversity that can be had over Islamic economic thought. That would lead to different Islamic schools of economic thought.
Just as Muslims may differ on the interpretation of the text, they may differ on the manat. Many everyday fiqhi differences you're probably aware of are not all about differences in interpreting the text, but rather differences in understanding the manat. For example in evaluating the harm of certain foods or, say, cigarettes. Depending on what you believe about the science of different foods and drugs, scholars may differ on the harm and judge differently.
Bottom line: I totally reject your claim "attempts to articulate a field called Islamic Economics is a methodologically flawed pursuit". Revelation is complete in describing divine law, and it is up to the scholar to derive what is the Islamic law on any given economic reality. This requires understanding the revelation and understanding the reality upon which it speaks. Scholars can differ in both understanding the revelation and the reality. What stays the same is the Islamic thought process regarding the resulting policy: God intended it, according to valid Islamic reasoning.
There is a certain type of person everywhere now, especially online.
He consumes endless information every day: philosophy, psychology, productivity, spirituality, neuroscience, business, self-improvement, history.
He knows a little about everything and deeply experiences almost nothing.
His entire identity becomes built around understanding instead of living.
He watches videos about confidence instead of speaking confidently. Reads about discipline instead of becoming disciplined. Studies relationships instead of learning how to love. Consumes motivational content instead of taking action.
He feels intelligent because he is constantly mentally stimulated. But stimulation is not transformation.
Most of the time, knowledge becomes emotional protection. Reality is unpredictable. Reality humiliates. Reality exposes weakness. Books and ideas do not.
Inside information, he can continue imagining himself as intelligent, deep, insightful, different from ordinary people. So he remains trapped in preparation.
He constantly feels as if he is "becoming" someone, while his real life remains strangely untouched. He develops sophisticated language for problems he never confronts directly. He can explain human behavior beautifully while being unable to handle ordinary discomfort, rejection, uncertainty, loneliness, or risk.
He slowly turns life into observation instead of participation.
The internet rewards this personality heavily. He receives validation for sounding aware rather than becoming capable.
Eventually, he begins confusing self-analysis with growth and information with wisdom.
But beneath the intelligence usually exists the same thing: fear. Fear of failure. Fear of embarrassment. Fear of reality answering back.
Because action destroys fantasy. The moment he truly acts, he can no longer hide inside potential.
Social media wise, there’s a litmus test for nearly every ethnicity when it comes to Muslim’s suffering in their own region to filter out nationalists.
Malaysians with Rohingya
Pakistanis with East Turkestan
Arabs with Palestine
Indian Muslims with Kashmir