In The Name of Allah, The Most Merciful, The Bestower of Mercy.
Older members of the clans and tribes would often engage in humor, but then suddenly ceased or restricted their joking with certain youth and elders; why?
Abu Hurairah, may Allah be pleased with him, reported that it was said, “O Allah’s Messenger! Do you joke with us?” Allah’s Messenger, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, said: “Verily, I do not say anything but the truth”. [1]
Al-Abbas, may Allah be pleased with him and his father, said: “Allah’s Messenger, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, engaged in joking, thus joking became a Sunnah”. It was said to Imam Sufyan ibn Uyaynah, may Allah have mercy upon him, “Is joking a defect?” He said, “No, it is a Sunnah, but the matter depends on who can do it well and place it in the right place”. [2]
Ali, may Allah be pleased with him, said: “There are six aspects of sense of honour; three when resident and three when travelling. The three when resident are: reciting the Book of Allah, maintaining the mosques of Allah, and forming friendships for the sake of Allah. As for those related to traveling, they are: sharing provisions, exhibiting good character, and engaging in joking without committing sins”. [3]
Khalid Ibn Safwan, may Allah have mercy upon him, said: “There is no harm in joking that would lift a man from a state of frowning.” [4]
Saʿīd ibn al-ʿĀṣ, may Allah have mercy upon him, advised his son: “Moderate your joking; for excessive joking diminishes your dignity and emboldens the foolish against you. Conversely, being too reserved in your humour can alienate your companions and create distance with those around you.” [5]
Umar ibn al-Khattab, may Allah be pleased with him, stated: “Whoever engages excessively in something will be recognised for it; whoever jokes too much will be taken lightly; and whoever laughs frequently will lose their dignity.” [6]
Ya’la bin Munyah advised three things in a lengthy discourse: “Beware of joking; for it diminishes dignity, leads to reproach, and undermines honour”. [7]
Saʿīd ibn al-ʿĀṣ, may Allah have mercy upon him, said: “O my son! Do not joke with the noble, lest he harbours resentment against you, and do not joke with lowly one, lest he becomes bold towards you”. [8]
al-Khaṭṭābu ibn al-Muʿallā al-Makhzūmiyyū, may Allah have mercy upon him, said: “Beware of excessive speech and laughter, as well as joking and trivial joking with friends, for such behaviour diminishes one’s dignity and fosters animosity. Instead, embrace composure, without any arrogance attributed to you, nor any pride that is reported about you” [9]
[1] Sahih Sunan Al-Tirmidhi 1990
[2] al-Laṭāʾif wa-ẓ-Ẓarāʾif page 151 by Abu Mansur Abd al-Malik ibn Muhammad ibn Isma’il al-Naysaburi Ath-Thaʿālibi
[3] al-Tadhkira al-Ḥamdūnīya 831
[4] Muhadarat al-udaba 1/346
[5] Adab al-dunyā wa al-dīn 1/ 346
[6] al-Mūshī page 13 by Abū ʿAlī al-Ḥasan ibn Muḥammad ibn ʿAnbar ibn Shākir al-Baghdādī al-Washshāʾ
[7] al-Murūʾa pages 54-55 by Abū Bakr Muḥammad ibn Khalaf ibn al-Marzubān ibn Bassām al-Muḥawwilī al-Baghdādī al-Ājurrī
In The Name of Allah, The Most Merciful, The Bestower of Mercy.
Being mindful of Ahlul Bidah– hating and boycotting them- is the correct path to protect Ahlus Sunnah against falling into their fitnah. And to be lackadaisical about them- to harbour a good suspicion of them and inclining towards them- is the beginning of the path towards misguidance and deviation. Allah said:
And incline not toward those who do wrong, lest the fire should touch you. [Hud. 113]
Who is more unjust than Ahlul Bidah? Ahlul Bidah are more evil than the sinners, and due to this the jurist of Basra and the most intelligent of them- Salam Bin Abee Mutee, may Allah have mercyu upon him – said, “It is more beloved to me that I meet Allah with the scroll of Hajjaj than meet Him with the scroll of Amr Ibn Ubaid”.
Amr Ibn Ubaid was a devote worshipper and one who abandoned the unnecessary permissible pleasures of the worldly life MashaaAllah, but he was misguided and a Mubtadi, while Hajjaj was an evil doer, one who shed blood and a criminal. He [Salam Bin Abee Mutee] held that if he were to make a choice between meeting Allah with the scroll of Hajjaj and that of Amr Ibn Ubaid, he would choose to meet Allah with the scroll of Hajjaj- the blood shedder and oppressive evil doer. And why is this? Due to his realisation regarding the danger and ugliness of bidah. And it is sufficient for us that the Messenger, peace and blessing of Allah be upon him, described [bidah] in his khutbah as the worst of all affairs, as reported in Jabir’s hadith.
An Excerpt from Al-Mawqif As-Saheeh Min Ahlil Bidah. page 12
In The Name of Allah, The Most Merciful, The Bestower of Mercy.
Imam Ash-Shaatibi, may Allah have mercy upon him, stated:
Know that Allah has established this Shariah as proof against the creation (humankind and jinn) – the old and young alike, the obedient and the disobedient, the righteous and the wicked. He did not specify the proof against anyone in exclusion of another one. Also, all the other revealed laws were established as proof against all the nations to whom they were revealed. The Shariah is the judge- in general, and specifically; the judge on all those who have reached the age of responsibility. It is the path attached to (what Allah has ordained) and it is the Greatest Guide. Have you not heard the statement of Allah, The Most High:
And thus We have sent to you (O Muhammad) Ruhan (an Inspiration, and a Mercy) of Our Command. You knew not what is the Book, nor what is Faith? But We have made it (this Qur’an) a light wherewith We guide whosoever of Our slaves We will. And verily, you (O Muhammad) are indeed guiding (mankind) to the Straight Path (i.e. Allah’s religion of Islamic Monotheism). [Ash-Shura 52]
He (the Prophet) – peace and blessings of Allah be upon him- was the first to be guided to the Book and Iman, and then those who followed him. The Book is the Guide and also the Sunnah that was revealed to him explains that guidance (i.e. the Sunnah and the Qur’an explain each other). All the creation (mankind and Jinn) are guided through it. Therefore, when this is the case that the Shariah is worthy of being a decisive proof against them and a beacon by way of which they are guided to the truth, their nobility is determined by the extent to which they embrace its rulings- through acting upon them in speech, belief, and deeds– and not merely due to the level of their intellects or their nobility amongst their people. That is because Allah, The Most High, has determined nobility through Taqwa and no other than it. Allah, The Most High, says: [إِنَّ أَڪۡرَمَكُمۡ عِندَ ٱللَّهِ أَتۡقَٮٰكُمۡۚ- Verily, the most honourable of you with Allah is that (believer) who has At-Taqwa] [49:13]
In The Name of Allah, The Most Merciful, The Bestower of Mercy.
Imam Abdul Aziz Bin Baz, may Allah have mercy upon him, who said:
If a person is a student of knowledge and adheres to the Hanafi Madhab in certain matters that are clear to him to be correct and his Madhab is stronger than other than it; then follows Ash-Shafi’i, Maliki’s, or Ahmad’s in other matters where it appears that their Madhab in those matters is correct based on the proofs, there is no harm in this because a believer wherever Allāh gives him knowledge, he follows the proof and looks to the proof.
So, what is established with proof, it is obligatory to adhere to it, regardless of whether it aligns with the Madhab of Shafi’i, Abu Hanifa, Maliki, Ahmad, or any other scholars. The important thing is that it must agree with the proof – substantiated by a verse or a noble sound hadith from the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings of Allāh be upon him.
However, as for following whims or personal desires, then no. Playing about – sometimes this and other times that (arbitrarily between opinions), this is not permissible. But it is incumbent upon him to seek to know the proof and asking the people of knowledge regarding what is difficult for him. If he knows the proof, acquainted with the proof that this madhab in this issue is more valid while another is more valid in a different matter, there is no harm in this; otherwise, he should consult the scholars, seek their verdicts guidance, and act according to what they guide him to based on knowledge. [1] [Paraphrased] [End of quote]
In the above clarification provided by Imam Abdul Aziz Bin Baz, may Allah have mercy on him, he mentioned that one should avoid following personal desires. Does this imply that a student of knowledge cannot consult more than one scholar?
Question: If I ask a scholar and he gives me a verdict, is it impermissible to ask other than him? Also, the brother says: I present these two questions because I have heard them from some of the Mashayikh who give verdicts to the peopl, since I am not fully convinced by their responses. Firstly, it is said that if you ask a scholar and he gives you a verdict, you should follow what he says and not seek another verdict (a verdict from other than him). Is this correct, or am I able to ask until my heart is assured?
The response: This is incorrect, instead, it is obligated to the questioner to strive to ask until they find peace in their heart. They should seek -among the people of Shariah knowledge – for the [الأعلم فالأعلم – most knowledgeable in levels of knowledge] and [والأورع فالأورع – the ones known to possesses more fear of Allah that makes a person stay away from doubtful matters out of fearing of falling into something forbidden] until his (the questioner’s) heart is at ease that the verdict is correct, appropriate and in accordance with the Shariah, as the Prophet, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, stated, “Righteousness (birr) is good morality, and wrongdoing is that which wavers in your soul and which you dislike people finding out about.” He , peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, said: “Consult your heart. Righteousness is that about which the soul feels tranquil and the heart feels tranquil, and wrongdoing is that which wavers in the soul and moves to and fro in the breast even though people again and again have given you their legal opinion [in its favor].” [I] A believer seeks knowledge and understanding in the religion, and asks the people of knowledge until his heart is at ease that the verdict aligns with the Shariah based on his ability and how far he can strive.
Question: With regards to the student of knowledge, if someone approaches him for a verdict and it is known that the individual has already sought a verdict from someone else, is the student permitted to respond to this request for a verdict.
The Shaikh responded: There is no objection (or hindrance), but the mufti must diligently seek out the Shariah proofs and should not be lackadaisical. He should refer to the Quran and the Sunnah to provide the questioner with what he knows of Allah’s Shariah- the Book of Allah and the Sunnah of the Prophet, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him. He should not be lackadaisical (or approach the matter lightly), instead it is obligated to him to strive and investigate thoroughly so that he only issues rulings based on insight and knowledge. If a questioner asks him a question, while he knows that he has asked someone else, there is no objection (or hindrance). If he is asked, he says: “What did so-and-so say?” This is so that he would be able to either agree or disagree with the previous response. There is no harm in this. The companions used to do this, asking those who asked them (questions): “What did so-and-so say?” He (the questioner) said: “So and so says”, then he (i.e. the one asked the question) either says that he is in agreement with the verdict or he opposes it and says: “The verdict is such and such”.
Question: What if he refrains from giving a ruling, does that constitute concealment of knowledge?
The Shaikh: If he knows that the verdict is false (i.e. refrains from saying what is correct), it is tantamount to concealment of knowledge. However, if it is based on Ijtihad, investigation, and opinion, then there is no issue. [2] [Paraphrased] [II]
Another question: In light of verdicts and giving verdicts, many of our brothers ask about a single topic from more than one student of knowledge, and they may encounter differing opinions. What guidance do you offer to those who ask questions, should they be satisfied with the response of one individual, or can they ask this one and that one until they reach their desire (understanding or goal)?
If the Fatwa does not reassure the questioner’s heart, while he intends good, knowledge, and Al-Wara (i.e. his intention is the fear of Allah that keeps a person from doubtful matters lest they fall into what is forbidden), there is no harm. He asks until his heart is assured with the proof and that this is the Shariah ruling. However, if his intention is driven by personal desire, that is not permissible. If he is seeking what agrees with his desires, this is not permissible; instead, it is incumbent upon him to strive to know the truth based on its proof until his heart is assured and seek for those he believes to be closer to good conduct and knowledge among the scholars of fatwa- seeking a verdict from one regarding whom his heart is at ease with that they are closer to knowledge of the truth.
He searches for the people of knowledge, and when seeking their verdicts – from whom he thinks is most closer to reaching the truth. Thus, he gives importance to assurance and to reach the truth, and not seeking for what agrees with his desire. The one who asks questions to this one and that one so that his heart is at ease and upon tranquility with the verdict based on its proof, there is no harm on him in doing so because this is part of seeking confirmation of the truth. [3] [Paraphrased] [end of quotes]
In saying all this, Taqleed has its precise place. Al-Allamah Salih Al-Fawzan, may Allah have mercy upon him, stated on this link that the layperson or the beginner in the path of knowledge has no option but to make Taqleed because they do not have the ability to make Ijtihaad, so they make Taqleed of the people of knowledge, as Allah said:
Tolerated Differing and Impermissible Differing in Islam: The Great Imāms of Sunnah did not declare those who differed with them in the affairs of permissible ijtihād to be astray and they did not make binding upon others their own opinions- By Shaikh Abu Khadeejah, may Allah preserve him. https://abukhadeejah.com/tolerated-differing-and-impermissible-differing-in-islaam/
هل إذا سألت عالماً وأفتاني فلا يجوز سؤال غيره؟
السؤال: أيضاً يقول الأخ المؤمن: هذان سؤالان أعرضهما لأنني سمعتهما من بعض المشايخ الذين قد يفتون للناس، ونظراً لأنني لم أطمأن إليهما سألت عنهما.
الأول: يقال: إذا سألت عالماً فأفتاك فنفذ ما قاله لك ولا تستفت غيره، فهل هذا صحيح أو أنني أستطيع السؤال حتى يطمئن قلبي؟
الجواب: ليس هذا بصحيح، بل ينبغي للسائل أن يجتهد في السؤال حتى يطمئن قلبه، ويتحرى الأعلم فالأعلم والأورع فالأورع من أهل العلم حتى يطمئن قلبه إلى أن الفتوى صحيحة وأنها مناسبة وموافقة للشرع، كما قال النبي ﷺ: البر حسن الخلق، والإثم ما حاك في نفسك وكرهت أن يطلع عليه الناس ويقول ﷺ: استفت قلبك، البر ما اطمأنت إليه النفس واطمئن إليه القلب والإثم ما حاك في النفس، وتردد في الصدر، وإن أفتاك الناس وأفتوك.
فالمؤمن يطلب العلم ويتفقه في الدين ويسأل أهل العلم حتى يطمئن قلبه إلى أن الفتوى موافقة للشرع، حسب اجتهاده وطاقته.
المقدم: طيب بالنسبة لطالب العلم إذا أتاه شخص ليستفتيه وعلم منه أن قد استفتى شخصاً قبله، هل له أن يجيبه على هذا الاستفتاء؟
الشيخ: لا مانع، لكن على المفتي أن يتحرى الأدلة الشرعية، وألا يتساهل، أن يتحرى الكتاب والسنة فيعطي السائل ما يعلمه من شرع الله؛ كتاب الله وسنة النبي ﷺ ولا يتساهل، بل ينبغي له الاجتهاد والتحري حتى لا يفتي إلا عن بصيرة وعن علم.
وإذا سأله سائل يعلم أنه قد سأل غيره فلا مانع، وإن سأله قال: ماذا قال لك فلان؟ حتى يستطيع بذلك إما أن يوافقه أو يخالفه فلا بأس.
كان الصحابة قد يفعلون هذا، قد يفعلون هذا يسألون من سألهم: ماذا قال لك فلان؟ يقول: قال فلان، فيقول: هو على فتواه، وقد يخالفه فيقول: الفتوى كذا والفتوى كذا. نعم.
المقدم: طيب لو امتنع عن فتواه، هل يعتبر ذلك من كتمان العلم؟
الشيخ: إن كان يعلم أن الفتوى باطلة يكون من كتمان العلم، أما إذا كان بالاجتهاد والتحري والرأي فلا بأس
https://binbaz.org.sa/fatwas/5402/%D9%87%D9%84-%D8%A7%D8%B0%D8%A7-%D8%B3%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%AA-%D8%B9%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%85%D8%A7-%D9%88%D8%A7%D9%81%D8%AA%D8%A7%D9%86%D9%8A-%D9%81%D9%84%D8%A7-%D9%8A%D8%AC%D9%88%D8%B2-%D8%B3%D9%88%D8%A7%D9%84-%D8%BA%D9%8A%D8%B1%D9%87#:~:text=%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%AC%D9%88%D8%A7%D8%A8%3A%20%D9%84%D9%8A%D8%B3%20%D9%87%D8%B0%D8%A7%20%D8%A8%D8%B5%D8%AD%D9%8A%D8%AD%D8%8C%20%D8%A8%D9%84,%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%A8%D8%B1%20%D9%85%D8%A7%20%D8%A7%D8%B7%D9%85%D8%A3%D9%86%D8%AA%20%D8%A5%D9%84%D9%8A%D9%87%20%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%86%D9%81%D8%B3
[3]
حكم سؤال أكثر من عالم لاتباع المستفتي هواه
بمناسبة الفتوى والاستفتاء سماحة الشيخ؛ كثير من إخواننا يسأل عن موضوع واحد أكثر من طالب علم، ولربما وجد اختلافًا في القول، فما هو توجيهكم لأولئك الذين يسألون، هل يكتفون بسؤال شخص واحد؟ أم يسألون هذا، وذاك حتى يصلوا إلى مبتغاهم؟
إذا كان السائل لم يطمئن قلبه للفتوى، وهو قصده الخير، وقصده العلم، قصده الورع؛ فلا حرج، يسأل حتى يطمئن قلبه للدليل، وأن هذا هو الحكم الشرعي، أما إذا كان يقصد الهوى هذا لا يجوز، إذا كان يطلب ما يوافق هواه هذا لا يجوز، لكن عليه أن يجتهد في أن يعرف الحق بدليله؛ حتى يطمئن قلبه للفتوى، ويتحرى من يظنهم أقرب إلى الخير، وأقرب إلى العلم من أهل الفتوى يعني: يستفتي من يطمئن قلبه إلى أنه أقرب إلى معرفة الحق، يتحرى في أهل العلم، وفي استفتائهم من يظن، ويغلب على ظنه أنه أقرب إلى إصابة الحق، فهو يهتم بالطمأنينة، وإصابة الحق لا بما يوافق هواه، فالذي يسأل هذا وهذا لينشرح صدره، وليطمئن إلى الفتوى بدليلها؛ نرجو أن لا حرج عليه؛ لأن هذا من باب التثبت في الحق.
المقدم: جزاكم الله خيرًا.
https://binbaz.org.sa/fatwas/16116/%D8%AD%D9%83%D9%85-%D8%B3%D9%88%D8%A7%D9%84-%D8%A7%D9%83%D8%AB%D8%B1-%D9%85%D9%86-%D8%B9%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%85-%D9%84%D8%A7%D8%AA%D8%A8%D8%A7%D8%B9-%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%85%D8%B3%D8%AA%D9%81%D8%AA%D9%8A-%D9%87%D9%88%D8%A7%D9%87
In The Name of Allah, The Most Merciful, The Bestower of Mercy.
Imam Ash-Shawkaanee, may Allah have mercy on him, which the young learners do not know. The Imam stated:
Know that when differing arise among Muslims regarding whether this thing (matter) is a Bidah or not a Bidah, (something) disliked or not disliked, prohibited, or not prohibited, or other than that, there is a consensus among Muslims (i.e. their scholars) —both the early generations and those that followed, from the era of the Companions to the present day, which is the thirteenth century since the advent of the Prophethood—that the obligation in any differing – in any issue among the issues of the religion – between Imams of Ijtihad is to refer back to the Book of Allah, the Exalted, and the Sunnah of His Messenger, as stated in Allāh’s Book:
And if you disagree among yourselves over anything then refer it back to Allāh and the Messenger. [An-Nisa 59]
The meaning of referring back to Allah, the Exalted, is to refer to His Book, and the meaning of referring to His Messenger, peace and blessings of Allāh be upon him, is to refer to his Sunnah after his passing. This is a matter about which there is no differing among the Muslims.
If a Mujtahid among the Mujtahideen says that this (thing) is lawful while another says this (thing) is unlawful, neither is any of the two more entitled to the truth than the other, even if he possesses more knowledge, older, or closer to the (early era of Islam). This is because each of them is a servant of Allāh among the servants of Allāh, (required) to worship (Allāh) based on what is found in the pure Sharia- that which is found in Allāh’s Book and the Sunnah of His Messenger, and what is required of him is required of other than him among Allāh’s servants. His abundant knowledge, the attainment of the level of Ijtihad, or even surpassing it, does not exempt him from any of the religious laws legislated by Allah for His servants, nor do they exclude him from those who have reached the age in which one is held accountable for his actions among the servants (of Allāh). [1] [Paraphrased]
Al-Allamah Rabee Bin Hadi Al-Mad’khali, may Allah have mercy upon him, said:
All praise is due to Allah, and may peace and blessings be upon Allah’s Messenger, his family, companions, and those who follow his guidance. To proceed:
I advise myself and you to fear Allah, The Mighty and Majestic, to be sincere to Him in every statement and action, and to truthfully adhere to the Book of Allah and the Sunnah of Allah’s Messenger, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, and to be steadfast upon that. And that you learn beneficial knowledge derived from the Book of Allah and the Sunnah of Allah’s Messenger, which will aid us upon this firmness and steadfastness upon Allah’s true religion.
I advise my children and brothers to pursue the truth and search for it in every matter, whether it is a point of agreement or differing. A believer who seeks the face of Allah and the home of the Hereafter does not find peace of mind or relaxation in his conscience (or inner self) until he reaches the truth- reaches the truth, especially in matters of differing and during times of Fitna. He does not make a move on any basis other than truth, knowledge and clear-sightedness.
If two individuals differ, even if it is his father or Shaikh, it is not permissible for him to take his side or against him until he studies the affairs and becomes acquainted with it based on its complete reality. Thereafter, he determines his stance and align himself with the truth that has become clear to him. This is what is obligated to a Muslim, and anything contrary to it is considered one of the behaviours (or traits) of the pre-Islamic era of ignorance and the (traits) of false pre-Islamic alliances. It is not permissible for a Muslim to follow such an evil path.
O our sons and brothers! I advise you to fear Allah, and advise you with what I mention with regards to loving the truth and the pursuit of it in its rightful places until you reach the reality. I advise our sons and brothers to honour the Salafi methodology and be steadfast in it. Honour its scholars, and if they utter truth, it is not permissible to oppose them. When they speak about a matter and present evidence, there is no excuse for anyone to oppose them, nor is it permissible for anyone to hesitate or abstain. This (hesitation or abstaining) is a deed of the people of vain desires, those who endeavour to undermine the Salafi methodology and topple its scholars.
Regarding matters of Al-Jarh Wa-Ta’deel, it is sufficient for a single scholar to issue (a critique), and the recommendation of a single scholar is sufficient. If two truthful scholars – respected and free from vain desires – differ about some individual, it is incumbent upon other than them among the carries of knowledge to seek clarification from the critic and request evidence. If the evidence is provided, it is obligated to them to submit to this evidence and proof. If the one who gives recommendation or any other individual opposes, his position is dropped. This one who (deliberately) rejects the evidence, his trustworthiness is undermined and he cannot be trusted with Allah’s Religion. Even if a single scholar presents proof and evidence, while numerous individuals oppose him through falsehood, lies, and trickery, they are not heeded. These are the established principles of Al-Jarh Wa-Tadeel – in the subject matter of criticism and praise – which we are obligated to adhere with regards to the likes of these Fitan.
A person may be criticised by numerous scholars who present clear evidence regarding his falsehoods and Fitna, yet some people do not listen to them, claiming that the truth has not been made clear. This is not permissible. It is not permissible in Allah’s religion. Then let us approach the books of Al-Jarh Wat-Tadeel, evaluate every biography and say: “By Allah, the truth has not been made clear for me”. Examine every (criticised) belief and say: “By Allah, it is not made clear to me”. (For example) the differing between the Rafidah and the Salafis, or between the Rafidah and the Jahmiyyah, or between the Salafis and the Mu’tazilah, or between the Salafis and the Khawarij, or between the Salafis and the Murji’ah, or between the Salafis and the Sufis (is examined), a person says: “By Allah, it has not been made clear to me.” This behaviour would not be accepted from this person.
When two individuals among the Salafis differ, and the proof is with one of them, it is obligatory to support the one with the proof. I advise you to fear Allah, I advise you to uphold justice, and fairness, and distance from blind alliance and following desires.
ومن أضل ممن اتبع هواه
“And who is more misguided than one who follows his desires?” Rejecting the truth is a grave offense.
ومن أظلم ممن كذب على الله وكذب بالصدق إذ جاءه
And who is more unjust than one who lies about Allah and denies the truth when it comes to him?
Denial of the truth is a (deed, characteristic, behaviour or trait) of the proponents of misguidance, the disbelievers and the rawafid. Shaikh al-Islam describes the Rawaafid by stating, “No group is as prone to reject the truth and accept falsehood as the Rawaafid.”
At present, it is obligated to the one who adheres to the Salafi methodology to free himself from following these corrupt paths – blind alliance, (traits) of pre-Islamic alliance, and rejecting the truth for the sake of so and so. By Allah, even if he is one of the senior scholars and one of the senior Imams of the Sunnah, and he errs, it is not permissible to reject the truth; then how about the ignorant, and those known for lying and Fitan; how can we be on their side? This is unbecoming of a Muslim, let alone a Salafi. What does the Salafi call signify if you are staunchly allied based on ignorance and vain desires. What is the meaning of this?
May Allah bless you. Abandon this, for it is foul. Search for the truth, adhere to it, and bear witness to it, even if it is against yourselves, your parents, or your relatives. Allah, the Blessed and Exalted, said:
يا أيها الذين ءامنوا كونوا قوامين بالقسط شهداء لله ولو على أنفسكم أوالوالدين والأقربين
O you who have believed, be persistently standing firm in justice, witnesses for Allah, even if it be against yourselves or parents and relatives.
O brother! When scholars approach you, whether it be one, two, or three, presenting the truth, you must not hesitate to accept it. If they come to you with truth supported by evidence and proofs, it is (obligatory to accept it). If they merely present claims without substantiation, you should not accept it. However, if they approach you with truth backed by evidence and proofs, then your rejection of him is tantamount to rejecting truth, denial of truthfulness and truth. There is no one more unjust or ignorant than someone whose condition is as such.
I ask Allah to grant us all the success to follow the truth, distance the trials from us, and unite our hearts upon truth. I ask Allah to make this a reality, for indeed, our Lord is All-Hearing of supplications. May peace and blessings be upon our Prophet Muhammad, his family, and his companions. [paraphrased] [2]
فاعلم أنه إذا وقع الخلاف بين المسلمين في أن هذا الشيء بدعة او غير بدعة ، أو مكروه او غير مكروه ، او محرم او غير محرم ، او غير ذلك ، فقد اتفق المسلمون : سلفهم وخلفهم ، من عصر الصحابة الى عصرنا هذا – وهو القرن الثالث عشر منذ البعثة المحمدية – أن الواجب الاختلاف في أي أمر من أمور الدين بين الأئمة المجتهدين : هو الرد الى كتاب الله سبحانه ، وسنة رسوله الناطق بذلك
الكتاب العزيز ( ٤ : ٥٩ فإن تنازعتم في شيء فردوه إلى الله والرسول ( ومعنى الرد الى الله سبحانه : الرد الى كتابه
ومعنى الرد إلى رسوله ال : الرد الى سنته بعد وفاته وهذا مما لا خلاف فيه بين جميع المسلمين . فإذا قال مجتهد من المجتهدين
هذا حلال . وقال الآخر : هذا حرام : فليس
أحدهما أولى بالحق من الآخر وإن كان اكثر منه علماً ، أو اكبر منه سنا ، او اقدم منه عصراً لأن كل واحد منهما فرد من أفراد عباد الله ، ومتعبد بما في الشريعة المطهرة، مما في كتاب الله وسنة رسوله ، ومطلوب منه ما طلب الله من غيره من العباد . وكثرة علمه وبلوغه درجة الاجتهاد او مجاوزته لها لا يسقط عنه شيئاً من الشرائع التي شرعها الله لعباده ، ولا يخرجه من جملة المكلفين من العباد
In The Name of Allah, The Most Merciful, The Bestower of Mercy.
He, may Allah have mercy upon him, said:
It is incumbent upon the Ta’ifah Al-Mansurah (the victorious group)- which Allah’s Messenger, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, stated would remain and triumph, neither harmed by those who betray them nor by those who oppose them until the promise of Allah, The Blessed and Most High, is fulfilled (i.e. the day of Judgement); it is incumbent upon this blessed and good group to establish brotherhood for the sake of Allah, collaborate on righteousness and piety, and diligently strive to maintain the great status of being manifest on the truth- neither harmed by those who betray them nor by those who oppose them. This truth cannot be recognised (or acknowledged) about them except through (their adherence) to the knowledge inherited from Allah’s Prophets and His Messengers, and from the Seal of the Prophets – peace and blessings be upon them. The scholars are the heirs of the Prophets in conveying Allah’s message and delivering His commandments with regards to enjoining good and forbidding evil. There is a great deal of goodness for the Ummah in calling to the path of Allah, enjoining good and forbidding evil. Enjoining good and forbidding evil requires abundant knowledge (with regards to what the person is enjoining or forbidding).
[An Excerpt from “Marhaban Yaa Talibal Ilm”.page 200]
And those who say: “Our Lord! Bestow on us from our wives and our offspring who will be the comfort of our eyes, and make us leaders for the Muttaqun (the pious people). [Surah al-Furqan. Ayah 74]
Imam Ibn Al-Qayyim, may Allah have mercy upon him, said: They ask Allah to grant them the comfort of the eye by making their wives and offspring obedient to Allah, grant them happiness in their hearts due to being followed by the righteous in obedience and servitude to Allah. [1]
And those who believe and whose offspring follow them in faith, We will join their offspring with them, and We will not decrease the (reward) for their deeds in anything. Every person is held in pledge (only) for that which he (or she) has earned. [2]
Rational individuals would aspire for what is mentioned in the verses above; however, there are those among the Jews, Muslims and Christians who cultivate a mindset steeped in tyranny and brutality.
First, some Zionists composed a song as “The Friendship Song,” and disseminated by a certain Zionist online news platform before it was subsequently taken down. Below is a passage from this.
“Here the IDF is crossing the line; to annihilate the swastika bearers; in another year there will be nothing there; and we will return safely to our home within a year; we will annihilate them all, and then return to ploughing our fields”. [end of quote]
Hoothies – [Rafidah of Yemen]- Nurture Children Upon Violence and Corruption:
Who Are The Khawaarij? Listen here: The Ideological Origins of Al-Qaeda & ISIS by Shaikh Abu Iyaad, may Allah preserve him:
Who Are The Khawaarij? Listen here: The Ideological Origins of Al-Qaeda & ISIS by Shaikh Abu Iyaad [may Allaah preserve him]:
The far right
Mathilda stated:
Regarding the particular organization identified as Shiite, the creed of the Rafidah Shiites are well known, thus requiring no further explanation. https://abukhadeejah.com/the-devils-deception-of-the-raafidah-shiah/
Concerning the separation of boys and girls, whether advocated by Christians, Jews, or any other groups to promote modesty and deter immorality, no one should face censure for this practice, as it is commendable, much like the encouragement to dress modestly as prescribed by the Creator. For any reasonable observer, the concern shouldn’t revolve around segregation and dress code, as these aspects are unrelated to extremism and radicalisation. Millions of Muslims practice segregation between the two biological sexes and follow the appropriate Islamic dress code, yet they do not advocate for violence, engage in vandalism, or support any form of racist ideology. The real question is whether anyone has violated the laws of the land. If a community – due to their beliefs – prefers – in their own environment or where they are given the choice by others – not to mix with the opposite sex, only a bigot would seek to attack them. [Footnote a] However, if they are forced to free mix, they have a right to explore alternatives, as single-sex educational institutions are available globally, including in the UK. Therefore, as long as individuals are not violating the law or have pursued lawful alternatives, they should not be held accountable. Furthermore, there is no additional statement to be made regarding this group, whether they have breached the law or not, since it is understood that such issues would be addressed between the relevant authorities and the organisation in question. As for Mathilda and the others, they too need to take care of their backyard, as it is there that we discover the genocidal maniac and his accomplices. Read below:
Verily, We give life to the dead, and We record that which they send before (them), and their traces, and that which they leave behind], and all things We have recorded with numbers (as a record) in a Clear Book. [Yaa Seen. 12]
Imam As-Sadi, may Allah have mercy upon him, said: It is the good and evil outcomes about which they were the cause of its occurrence during their lifetime and after their death, and those deeds that emanated from their statements, deeds, and circumstances. [3]
In The Name of Allah, The Most Merciful, The Bestower of Mercy.
Allah, The Most High, said:
تِلْكَ ٱلدَّارُ ٱلْءَاخِرَةُ نَجْعَلُهَا لِلَّذِينَ لَا يُرِيدُونَ عُلُوًّا فِى ٱلْأَرْضِ وَلَا فَسَادًا وَٱلْعَٰقِبَةُ لِلْمُتَّقِينَ
That home of the Hereafter (i.e. Paradise), We shall assign to those who rebel not against the truth with pride and oppression in the land nor do mischief by committing crimes. And the good end is for the pious. [Al-Qasas 83]
In this article, we will provide a brief commentary on the bragging and misleading assertions transmitted by Amichai Stein from an American ideologue. The claims of this ideologue once again reveal the entitlement of those who back Netanyahu and the IDF, as well as their ongoing efforts to distract readers from the core issue. They assert their actions without being able to justify their appropriation of what does not belong to them, instead merely making claims and seeking the endorsement of like-minded individuals.
Amichai transmitted: Just win, stop apologizing’: Florida rep. Randy Fine urges Israel to ignore global critics. [end of quote]
Response: We insist that this title could have been phrased like this: Just invade, which may result in more deaths or not, and you can also gain a greater advantage to seize more land and reinforce the invasion, plunder, brutality, and theft that has been ongoing since 1948. Furthermore, do not feel the need to apologise for anything, as the so-called most powerful nation on earth is backing you, even though they will eventually face their Lord one day to answer for their actions.
Amichai said: Republican Congressman Randy Fine, a staunch pro-Israel voice from Florida, is spending this week in Israel – and his message to the Israeli government is crystal clear: stop apologizing, stop trying to please international critics, and focus on winning the war in Gaza. [end of quote]
Response: No apologies are expected from Netanyahu or the IDF, nor have they ever tried to please anyone. They have never listened to those who reveal their crimes, which are as obvious as the midday sun since 1948. This is because they consider themselves above all accountability, moral expectations, and fair play. Instead, these matters are subjected to their moral judgments, which are based on questionable claims of ownership and entitlement. Therefore, this American ideologue is only playing psychological games that are deceitfully played to present oneself as exceeding the standards expected of any rational person who is not aligned with a Firawnic and Namrudic temperament. The entire world observes the situation in Gaza, yet they gather numerous writers from all over to distort the narrative, obscure the reality, or divert attention from the main issue, which has been nothing but occupation and theft since 1948. They have demonstrated to the world during this war that they are capable of the most brutal and merciless actions against the vulnerable, all while framing it as collateral damage in their so-called self-defense.
Amichai transmitted: “Wars must end. Someone has to win, and someone has to lose,” Fine told The Jerusalem Post. “That’s how World War II ended. That’s how World War I ended. Israel’s problem is it stops wars without finishing the job.” [end of quote]
Response: This is not a war; rather, it is a continuation of brutality and impunity that has persisted since 1948, and an opportunity presented to them by Hamas. Furthermore, the issue this American ideologue has identified as a problem is not a real problem. Instead, it is a systematic approach to demoralising, oppressing, and brutalising a victim until they surrender. It is not merely a problem but a malevolent strategy that they attempt to frame differently to appear as if they are upholding all moral standards expected of rational individuals. However, their acts of brutality and the behaviour of their settlers mirror that of Fir’awn and his sinful followers, who dismissed every logical argument in favour of propaganda and a false sense of moral superiority. Despite Fir’awn’s evident criminality, he accused the noble Musa, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him. This is precisely what Netanyahu, the IDF and their die hard supporters are doing as well; they have been invaders and transgressors since 1948, retaliating excessively and unjustly. They are cunning, using the services and naivety of those who enable them to rationalise their brutality, such as Hamas and their counterparts.
Amichai transmitted: “I fully support Israel doing whatever it needs to do to get those 50 hostages home and ensure that Hamas is no longer in charge of Gaza. [end of quote]
Response: If the hostages were truly Netanyahu’s main concern, he wouldn’t have prolonged the war while causing the deaths of thousands of Palestinian women and children. Instead, his unwitting accomplice Hamas has allowed him to chase his more sinister objective: the appropriation of additional land and obstacle to the two state solution as demanded by Muslim rulers. Otherwise, he wouldn’t have proposed relocating Gazans outside of Palestine. This remains his agenda, and the only reason he has ceased discussing it recently is due to the backlash from the global community, including some of their allies who support him openly and others who do so covertly, as they find the idea too contentious. Regardless who governs Gaza, Netanyahu and his Zionist gang remain occupiers and thieves as long as they refuse to withdraw to the 1967 borders. However, no matter what agreements the Muslim rulers make with the Zionists to protect the innocent from Netanyahu’s unprecedented brutality and callousness since World War II, it would still be a better situation.
Amichai transmits: But for Fine, the battlefield is only half the war. The other front, he argues, is the information war, one in which, he believes, Israel is dangerously behind. [end of quote]
Response: This is due to the fact that lies, no matter how long they persist, will ultimately be revealed. Firawn engaged in deceit for many years, yet he was eventually uncovered. In a similar vein, Netanyahu and his gang have perpetuated lies, intimidation, and cruelty for a long time, and now, with the rise of social media, their fabrications, along with their true essence and reality, can no longer remain hidden. Indeed, they are perilously far from good conduct and fair play, and they are alarmingly close to the flames of hell if they persist in disbelief, deception, impunity, and brutality.
Amichai transmitted: “As strongly as Israel is winning the military war, it’s losing the propaganda war,” he said. “Muslim terrorists are good at lying. They’re willing to lie, and the world is willing to believe them. Why? Because of antisemitism.” [end of quote]
Response: This is not a war; it is an invasion characterised by theft and a lack of compassion, rooted in impunity and false assertions since 1948. While there are terrorists within various groups, including Muslims, Christians, Hindus, and others, it is crucial to acknowledge that there are also terrorists among Zionists and Jews. The Zionist state has perpetrated atrocities in recent history that no nation claiming moral superiority has committed. All terrorists engage in deceit, including Zionist terrorists and genocidal figures such as Netanyahu and his associates, but the global community is increasingly unwilling to heed their narratives. The reason for this shift is that their propaganda has become antiquated, and the public has recognised that terrorists excel at initiating their campaigns with propaganda. This mirrors the strategy of Firawn, who committed his offenses, disseminated propaganda to garner support from his people, coerced those who questioned his integrity, and subsequently accused Musa, peace be upon him, of being the wrongdoer. Netanyahu and his gang are replicating this behaviour: conducting an invasion and theft, but also exposing innocent individuals within their community to the unchecked emotions of those who cannot distinguish between the actions of Netanyahu and those of others. Antisemitism is a malevolent force, just as Netanyahu’s actions have been malevolent for a long time. The actions of Hamas against non-combatants on October 7th are reprehensible and denounced without any reservation, and Netanyahu’s subsequent retaliation has escalated into genocide and ethnic cleansing. Must call a spade a spade!
Amichai transmitted: “Israel is expected to do things no military in the history of the world has ever been asked to do,” Fine said. “You can never satisfy the unsatisfiable. So stop trying.” [end of quote]
Response: We leave you with prince Turki Al Fisal: https://youtu.be/Z3-cWyFcK5w
Truly amusing! Since 1948, no rational individual anticipates any form of decency from those specific Zionists who give little consideration to Palestinian dignity. This American ideologue is insulting our intelligence through his absurd psychological manipulations. Netanyahu and his gang have never aimed to fulfill anyone’s needs; otherwise, they would not have engaged in slaughter. Those who are impossible to satisfy have ceased their inquiries, as Netanyah’s horrific actions speak volumes in light of their assertion of moral superiority.
Amichai transmitted: He added that no one is truly starving in Gaza – except for the hostages – and accused international media of spreading falsehoods. “Israel is doing more to support its enemies than any country in the history of the world. It’s not the facts that are the problem. It’s telling the story.” [end of quote]
Response: No one is starving in Gaza!? This is yet another absurd claim that could only come from Netanyahu’s stooges and henchmen. Nevertheless, the hunger experienced by Gazans does not excuse the suffering of hostages. Every individual deserves to be treated with dignity. The greatest spreaders of misinformation are Netanyahu and his associates; in fact, Netanyahu propagated one of the most serious lies in 2001 concerning Iraq and its so called weapons of mass destruction. Despite the shortcomings of the international media, Netanyahu’s cruelty is unmistakable. You will all give account on the day of Judgement, regardless of who tells the tale.
Amichai transmitted: “Go to an Israeli army base. You’ll see soldiers heating food in microwaves, not dining halls. Why? Because they’re focused on staying alive, not comfort,” he said. “And just like they don’t prioritize gourmet food, they don’t prioritize winning the information war. But they should. The facts are on Israel’s side.” [end of quote]
Response: They satisfy their hunger to eliminate more Palestinians. At least they have sufficient food to stand tall. The facts are evident in this ideologue’s Zionist visage, being forcefully pushed down his throat while the truth suffocates him. When he attempts to expel the truth, the bitterness lingers on his tongue. Thus, he makes his absurd claims while frowning.
Amichai transmitted: ‘Stop Trying to Please Jew-Haters’. Fine did not mince words about international institutions and left-leaning media, accusing them of being driven by deep-rooted antisemitism. “There’s a disease in America: conservative politicians who want to be liked by The New York Times,” he said. “No matter what they do, they’ll never be liked. It’s the same with Israel; stop trying to win over the UN or Amnesty International. They will never like you.” [end of quote]
Response: antisemitism is not allowed, but it does not mean that the IDF’s atrocious behaviour is ignored nor should antisemitism be used as an political tool to silence people. Read here:
Amichai transmitted: Do what’s right. But also forcefully tell the truth about what’s happening.” [end of quote]
Response: Netanyahu and his gang are not part of this. They have neither acted correctly nor told the truth; instead, they overstep boundaries, deceive, and then exhibit a sense of entitlement and a victim mindset, retaliating excessively.
Amichai transmitted : “Look, there are 220 Republicans in the House. Two of them are antisemites. The rest? They love Israel,” he said. “In the Senate, all 53 Republicans have stood with Israel. So yes, the haters are loud, but they’re a tiny minority.” [end of quote]
Response: Here is your history with the United States and others:
Amichai transmitted: , “Some of these influencers are being paid by Qatar. The rest are old-fashioned neo-Nazis who’ve been around since I was a kid.” [end of quote]
Response: First, where is the evidence? Second, if they are compensating individuals to refute your falsehoods and reveal your cruelty, then that is a positive development. Regarding the allegations of Nazism, such claims necessitate evidence, and the responsibility to provide that evidence lies with the accuser.
Amichai transmitted: “Israel has never had a better friend in the White House. Not even Harry Truman,” said Fine. “Trump has Israel’s back.” [end of quote]
Response: Indeed, souls resemble enlisted soldiers, which leads us to anticipate that the genocidal Netanyahu will garner backing from those who share similar sentiments in their hearts. Even if they haven’t engaged in acts of genocide themselves, they are content to be mere onlookers, providing him with weapons and assisting in covert operations. However, once they reach the grave, there will be no allies present, as the angels will interrogate them unless Allah offers them guidance prior to their exit from this fleeting and trivial earthly existence. This life has transformed some individuals into feral beings, who care only for the cravings of their stomachs and sexual desires.
Amichai transmitted: “I dined this week with House Speaker Mike Johnson, who said that ‘Judea and Samaria belong to Israel.’ That’s unprecedented.” [end of quote]
Response: Let this American ideologue engage in meals with numerous sycophants, all the while being aware that his Lord sees through his willingly accepted deception, much like Haman and other leaders who flattered Firawn, despite his awareness of the falsehood he embraced. Remember, if he passes away in this state of disbelief, he will not share a meal again.
Amichai transmitted: “There’s a growing Judea and Samaria caucus in Congress. That sentiment is only getting stronger,” he noted. “Gaza proved land-for-peace doesn’t work. Israel pulled Jews out of Gaza, even their graves, and handed it over, and what did they get in return?” [end of quote]
Response: There will be no consensus on this in the eternal Afterlife, rather, one is held accountable for disbelief, theft, brutality, impunity and arrogance! They withdrew from that land because it doesn’t belong to them. You retracted because you returned one of the many stolen items. Incredible, so your remorse was not genuine, as you lament your own remorse. Some individuals plan to be remorseful before they commit a crime, which is bad enough, but you take it to the extremes by scheming for wrongdoing and then feel regret for your remorse. Truly astonishing! This can only be heard from Netanyahu’s supporters.
Amichai transmitted: “I don’t think you can make peace with people who take it as a religious faith that they have to kill you.” [end of quote]
Response: You don’t want peace, rather, you want to carry on the theft and brutality, and then tell a different story. You present yourself as morally superior while ignoring the root of the issue, and then you blame the victim for not wanting peace, all the while continuing your acts of theft and brutality since 1948. If peace is truly what you seek, the Muslim leaders have already provided guidance on how to achieve it. Instead of commenting on your absurd assertion, perhaps you should consider the statements made by your own people in this link:
O you who believe! Stand out firmly for justice, as witnesses to Allah; even though it be against yourselves, or your parents, or your kin, be he rich or poor, Allah is a Better Protector to both (than you). So, follow not the lusts (of your hearts), lest you may avoid justice, and if you distort your witness or refuse to give it, verily, Allah is Ever Well-Acquainted with what you do. [An-Nisaa. 135]
This is a brief reply to Hanan Shai, who aims to make the IDF avoid accountability while simultaneously isolating the primary cause of the conflict since 1948. It is an insult to our intelligence when these people try to misinterpret what is as evident as the midday sun. Hanan even attempts to show sympathy for the Palestinians, yet solely blames Hamas without addressing the fundamental issue at hand. The entire article represents yet another effort by these writers to shift all responsibility for the consequences of the situation onto others, both those who deserve it and those who do not, while consistently seeking to belittle our intelligence. Furthermore, the antisemitism card is frequently played inappropriately or exaggerated, as well as absurd comparisons to deflect blame onto others. This is not to suggest that antisemitism should be tolerated in any form; just as the far-right Zionist actions since 1948 are a heinous crime against Palestinians, antisemitism is also a grave offense when properly identified and not wielded as a political tool to silence those who speak out against the actions of Netanyahu, the IDF, and their supporters.
Hanan stated: There is a stark difference between the war zones of Lebanon and Gaza: in Lebanon, civilians can flee when fighting erupts. In Gaza, they are trapped. Hamas identified this and turned it into its greatest strength: civilians became its doomsday weapon. [end of quote]
Response: There is a clear distinction between the thief and the victim, the invader and the invaded, the oppressive colonialist since 1948 and the Palestinians, despite the attempts of the wrongdoer to switch roles, with the wrongdoer trying to present himself as the victim and the actual victim being labelled as the wrongdoer. Furthermore, in Lebanon, civilians have not been stripped of their homes, nor have they been brutalised and murdered daily since 1948, as is the case in Palestine. Although Hamas finds itself with nowhere to retreat in this conflict, the crux of the matter is that they should never have initiated the war or targeted non-combatants. On the other hand, callous Netanyahu and the IDF responded with excessive force while also pursuing additional objectives under the guise of self-defence. We emphasise that Hamas deserves condemnation for its actions against non-combatants, but there’s none who deserves more condemnation that those who have been murdering and stealing property since 1948. Thus, this comparison between Lebanese civilians and Gazans is a myth. Furthermore, Hamas serves as a tool for the Zionist far-right. Read: https://abuiyaad.com/w/hamas-israeli-right
Hanan said: Recognizing the IDF’s core advantage – long-range precision firepower – Hamas devised three tactics to neutralize it: using tunnels for manoeuvre and combat, turning civilians into human shields, and controlling humanitarian aid to feed its logistics and dictate the war’s duration. [end of quote]
Response: Netanyahu is not genuinely at war; instead, he is attempting to rationalise the theft and occupation that has persisted since 1948. This is significant because prior to the emergence of Hamas, Zionist forces were already committing atrocities against Palestinians. Thus, no matter what tactics Hamas employs, the core issue remains the occupation and theft. Regardless of which faction provides Netanyahu with a pretext to continue fighting, he remains an occupier and a thief. Regarding the assertion that Hamas employs civilians as human shields, there are also accounts of Zionist soldiers utilising Palestinians in the same manner. In this context, both Zionists and Hamas are responsible in the sight of Allah for this brutality, as Prince Turki Al Faisal, may Allah preserve him, has articulated with great clarity. Listen below:
Hanan said: Despite massive damage, Hamas has so far prevented Israel from achieving its two central war objectives: returning the hostages and dismantling it as a governing and military power. At the same time, through false claims of famine and mass civilian deaths, Hamas generated a collapse in Israel’s international legitimacy and unleashed an unprecedented wave of antisemitism. [end of quote]
Response: Netanyahu’s goal is not to secure the release of hostages; rather, it is to further undermine the possibility of a two-state solution. The claim of dismantling Hamas serves merely as a distraction, as the far-right Zionists have previously utilized Hamas to their advantage. Read here: https://abuiyaad.com/w/hamas-israeli-right
Furthermore, to assert that there is no hunger or starvation in Gaza is akin to denying the existence of the midday sun. Regarding antisemitism, it is essential to combat it, but it should not be invoked while committing injustice, as the core issue at hand is occupation, brutality, and theft. If the IDF is despised for its lethal operations, that animosity is justified; however, any harm inflicted on a non-combatant Jew or any Jew living peacefully elsewhere should also be condemned. In this context, we unequivocally denounce the vandalism aimed at synagogues and other acts of violence. Read about antisemitism here:
Hanan said: The use of civilians: The IDF appears not to have anticipated Hamas’s use of civilians as a strategic weapon – neither before the war nor at its outset. Only after the new IDF chief of staff took command was a clear concept developed in Operation Gideon’s Chariots: severing Hamas from Gaza’s civilian population. [end of quote]
Response: The IDF and its predecessors do not have to anticipate any situation, as they have always killed Palestinians regardless of who stands in their path. So, why do numerous observers, including medical professionals, report that snipers deliberately aim at civilians? The Zionist forces have been committing these acts of violence since 1948.
Read below:
The Deir Yassin Massacre: Took place on April 9, 1948, near Jerusalem, during which between 107 to 254 Palestinians were massacred at the hands of the extremist “Stern” gang.
The Nasr al-Din Massacre: Took place in April 1948. Al-Lajjun Massacre: Took place on April 13, 1948, in a Palestinian Arab village in the Jenin District, where the Zionist Haganah gang attacked it and killed 13 people.
The Saliha Massacre: Took place in May 1948, during which 75 Palestinians were massacred.
The Abu Shusha Massacre: Took place on May 14, 1948, near the village of Deir Yassin, and claimed the lives of (50) citizens, including women, men, children, and the elderly.
The Beit Daras Massacre: Took place in northeastern Gaza on May 21, 1948.
The Tantura Massacre: Took place on May 22, 1948, in the occupied city of Haifa, and claimed the lives of about (200) Palestinians.
The Lydda Massacre: Took place on July 12, 1948, in the occupied city of Lydda, and resulted in the massacre of about (500) Palestinians, including (150) who were massacred inside the city’s Grand Mosque. The Zionists threw many of them alive into the town’s wells.
The Dawayima Massacre: Took place on October 29, 1948, when a battalion from the terrorist “Lehi” organization led by Moshe Dayan attacked the village and then began searching homes and shooting at its residents. Entire families were exterminated in the massacre, which resulted in the killing of 200 men, women, and children.
The Zionist massacres did not stop after the Nakba of 1948, but rather their frequency, intensity, and brutality increased in light of the use of more lethal and destructive weapons. Among the most prominent of these massacres were: The Sharafat Massacre, which took place in February 1951, in which 11 Palestinians were massacred, and the rest of the village’s people were displaced. The Bethlehem Massacre took place in January 1952, in which 10 Palestinians were massacred. The Qibya Massacre took place on October 14, 1953, in the village of Qibya, east of Jerusalem, during which (67) Palestinians were massacred, most of whom were women and children, and during which 56 homes were destroyed. The Qalqilya Massacre took place on October 10, 1956, when the occupation forces attacked citizens in the city of Qalqilya in the West Bank, during which about seventy citizens were massacred.
The Kafr Qasem Massacre took place on October 29, 1956, in which 49 Palestinians were massacred, including 11 children, when they were all returning home from work. The Khan Yunis Massacre took place on November 3 and 12, 1956, in which between 280 and 500 Palestinians were massacred.
In 1970, Zionist aircraft struck Bahr al-Baqar Primary School and Abu Zaabal factories, killing more than 150 Egyptian students and workers. In 1980, the extremist Jewish organization Kach attempted to blow up Al-Aqsa Mosque, and a shipment of explosives weighing 120 kg was discovered. The Sabra and Shatila massacre took place in September 1982. This massacre lasted three days, and its direct perpetrators were members of the Lebanese Phalange forces allied with the Zionists led by Ariel Sharon. The Ibrahimi Mosque Massacre took place on February 25, 1994, when a Zionist named “Barog Goldstein” stormed the Ibrahimi Mosque in the city of Hebron, and fired bullets and bombs at the worshipers. This massacre resulted in the massacre of 29 Palestinians. The Qana Massacre took place on April 18, 1995. [Compiled from various old Arab Newspapers]
So, where were the Ikhwanis of Hamas while the Zionist forces were committing murder? Was there anything obstructing them? Furthermore, some Zionist soldiers have utilised Palestinians as human shields, which means this war has no heroes, as articulated by Prince Turki al-Faisal. Listen again:
Hanan said: The proposed method: redirecting humanitarian aid to safe, organized distribution zones and transferring civilians to them, rather than allowing Hamas to control the aid. This would have enabled encirclement, starvation, and defeat of Hamas, while providing protection to civilians. [end of quote]
Response: Having been convicted of shooting civilians during their alleged aid distribution, they now seek to shift the blame onto others while attempting to appear more compassionate. Their true goal is not to defeat Hamas; instead, it serves as a facade for their real aim: to continue the occupation and theft while obstructing the two-state solution. Hanan, cease your lies and the self-deception you are engaging in.
Hanan said: According to media reports, this effort was blocked after three reserve officers claimed the civilian transfer violated international law. If true, this reflects a grave misunderstanding. The Fourth Geneva Convention prohibits forced deportation but explicitly permits – and even mandates – temporary evacuation for life-saving purposes. Voluntary, protected relocation is not a war crime. It is a legal and moral duty. [end of quote]
Response: International law should be the last topic you bring up, as it is under America’s Zionist supporters who sanction and show hostility to any to speaks out very loud against Zionist brutality. No matter what happened in the above incident that Hanan mentioned, it is clear that not only do Netanyahu and his associates deceive, but they have also openly collaborated with others to express their intention to displace Palestinians after intentionally ravaging Gaza and then proposing to relocate them elsewhere. How can anyone trust Netanyahu and his ilk in their attempts to move civilians to safe havens when they bomb them no matter where they seek refuge? Therefore, cease invoking international law; instead, Netanyahu and his henchmen always act as they please and then play the victim. The entire world is aware of their deceitful tactics and falsehoods.
Hanan said: Jerusalem’s historical parallels
If this legal argument blocked the IDF from neutralizing Hamas’s human shield, it reflects a tragic failure: rigid obedience to the law without understanding its purpose. The result may be failure to defeat Hamas – just as rigid legalism once led to Jerusalem’s destruction. [end of quote]
Response: No legal constraints have prevented Netanyahu from killing civilians and devastating infrastructure to an unpredictable and unprecedented extent. His aim is not to neutralise Hamas; instead, they exploit Hamas to further their own objectives. Hanan attempts to insult our intelligence with their so-called rigid adherence to the law, while it is widely recognised that the Zionist utter genocidal rhetoric that have been documented by numerous organisations. Read here: https://salafidawahmanchester.com/2025/01/15/must-take-a-look-at-what-is-happening-in-their-own-backyard-first/
Hamas serves as their tool for seizing everything that rightfully belongs to the Palestinians. Netanyahu and his henchmen are the least qualified to discuss adherence to the norms of civilised society, given their blatant brutality since 1948. Hamas is merely their pawn.
Hanan said: The Talmud recounts how Rabbi Zechariah ben Avkolas refused a Roman sacrifice due to a minor legal flaw. The refusal sparked rebellion and led to catastrophe. Rabbi Yohanan lamented: “His scrupulousness destroyed our Temple, burned our sanctuary, and exiled us from our land.” Excessive legalism, detached from moral responsibility, proved ruinous. [end of quote]
Response: What transpired back then holds no significance for us, as the final infallible revelation clarifies that all earlier texts, including the Torah and the Injeel, have been altered.
Hanan said: Israel could have presented the world with a moral and strategic precedent: Britain’s World War II Operation Pied Piper, which evacuated 3.5 million civilians, including 1.5 million children, from cities like London to safe zones. Churchill didn’t wait for mass death – he acted pre-emptively. His aim: protect lives and enable effective warfare. [end of quote]
Response: Britain was engaged in a conflict with another nation to safeguard its sovereignty, whereas Netanyahu and his predecessors are invaders, robbers, and perpetrators of genocide. Their deceitful actions and treacherous conduct make it impossible for anyone to trust that they have honourable intentions. Instead, it appears that their goal is to displace others in order to seize land and carry out nefarious deeds in secrecy.
Hanan said: Two desperate incidents: Gazan civilians, held hostage by Hamas and used as shields, deserve similar protection. Like the Israeli hostages, they too are captives.
As the proposed “Witkoff Deal” is hopefully soon agreed upon, Israel may gain the hostages’ return – at the cost of abandoning its second war goal. But if the deal fails, combat will resume under worsening conditions. Then, like Churchill – not Rabbi Zechariah ben Avkolas – Israel must act: evacuate civilians, reclaim battlefield initiative, and fulfil its moral and strategic duty. The choice will be clear: defeat Hamas – or watch Israel undo itself.
Response: Gazans and the hostages are held hostage by you and Hamas because it is a useless war. As long as Netanyahu and others persist in their brutality, they will keep committing murder, theft, and displacement, exploiting individuals like Hamas for a futile conflict. Listen again: https://youtu.be/Z3-cWyFcK5w
In The Name of Allah, The Most Merciful, The Bestower of Mercy.
True Believers’ Attitude Towards Feeding Those in Need, Including Captured Combatants
Allah, The Exalted, informed us of some of the qualities of the Abrar – the pious, who fear Allah and avoid evil:
ويُطۡعِمُونَ ٱلطَّعَامَ عَلَىٰ حُبِّهِۦ
“And they give food, in spite of their love for it”. – Meaning, they are in a state in which they love wealth and food, but they give precedence to the love of Allah over the what their souls love and seek to feed the people who deserve and need it the most.
مِسۡكِينً۬ا وَيَتِيمً۬ا وَأَسِيرًا
“The Miskin (poor), the orphan, and the captive”(1); saying:
إِنَّمَا نُطۡعِمُكُمۡ لِوَجۡهِ ٱللَّهِ
“We feed you seeking Allah’s Countenance only. We wish for no reward, nor thanks from you”. – Meaning, to seek Allah’s Reward. Mujaahid and Ibn Jubayr, may Allah have mercy upon them, said, “As for these people, they did not make this statement, but Allah knows this is what is in their hearts, so He praised them for it as an exhortation for the one who desires to do so”.
لَا نُرِيدُ مِنكُمۡ جَزَآءً۬
“We wish for no reward”. – Meaning, by way of actions;
وَلَا شُكُورًا
“nor thanks”.
Meaning, by way of statement. (2)
So Allah saved them from the evil of that Day, and gave them Nadratan (a light of beauty) and joy]. [Al-Insan. 8-11]
The Quraish Attempted to Starve The Prophet and His Close Relatives
Abu Hurairah, may Allah be pleased with him, reported: On the Day of Nahr at Mina, the Prophet, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, said, “Tomorrow we shall stay at Khaif Bani Kinana where the pagans had taken the oath of disbelief.” He meant (by that place) Al-Muhassab where the Quraish tribe and Banu Kinaanah concluded a contract against Banu Haashim and Banu Abdul-Muttalib or Banu Al-Muttalib that they would not intermarry with them or deal with them in business until they handed over the Prophet to them. (3)
Usamah Bin Zayd, may Allah be pleased with him, said: I asked the Prophet, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, during his Hajj,”O Allah’s Messenger! Where will you stay tomorrow?” He said, “Has Aqeel left for us any house?” He then added, “Tomorrow we will stay at Khaif Bani Kinana, i.e. Al-Muhassab, where Quraish (polytheists) took an oath of disbelief in that Banu Kinana allied with Quraish against Banu Hashim on the terms that they would not deal with the members of the tribe or give them shelter.” (4)
The incident mentioned in the above narrations took place when the Makkan polytheists had a meeting at a place called the Valley of Al-Muhassab, where they established an alliance against Banu Hashim and Banu Al-Muttalib. They agreed not to have any business transactions with them, no marriage ties, no visits, and no verbal communication with the Prophet, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, and those who aided him. So, Abu Talib – the Prophet’s uncle who stood by him at the time – decided to move to a valley in the eastern suburbs of Makkah, then Banu Hashim and Banu Al-Muttalib also moved and they were all confined to a narrow passage. They remained in that situation for three years- from the 7th year of the Prophet’s Prophethood until the 10th year. It was a very repressive embargo that brought extreme hardship, and in addition to this, the vile polytheists bought everything that reached Makkah in order that nothing reached Banu Al-Mutallib and Banu Haashim. The situation became so bad that they had to eat the leaves of trees and animal skins, and children constantly cried due to hunger. They had nothing besides very little provision that was sometimes delivered secretly by some people in Makkah who sympathised with them. During the sacred months when fighting was not permitted, they used to go and buy provisions, but the prices of goods were inflated so that they would not be able to afford them. However, this great hardship never stopped the Prophet, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, from calling to the truth, rather he used to go to the Kabah and call people to Islam. By the grace of Allah, the agreement between the polytheists ended in the 10th year of the Prophet’s Prophethood, because some of them could no longer bear to see their relatives in that situation. (5)
The Quraish implored the Prophet to refrain from interfering with their food supplies, even though they had previously engaged in the same wrongdoing when they were in a position of power
Abu Hurairah, may Allah be pleased with him, reported: “The Prophet, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, sent a troop of fighters towards Najd and they brought a man from the tribe of Banu Haneefah who was called Thumamah bin Uthaal. He was then tied to one of the pillars of the Masjid. The Prophet went to him and said, “What have you got, O Thumama?” He replied, “I have got a good thought, O Muhammad! If you should kill me, you would kill a person who has already killed somebody, and if you should set me free, you would do a favor to one who is grateful, and if you want property, then ask me whatever wealth you want.” So, he was left till the next day when again the Prophet said to him, “What have you got, O Thumama?” He said, “What I have already told you”. The Prophet left him till the day after, and said to him again, “What have you got, O Thumama?” He said, “I have got what I told you. So the Prophet said, “Set him free”.
Then Thumamah) went to a garden of date palm trees near the Masjid, took a bath, entered the Masjid, and then said, “I testify that None has the right to be worshipped except Allah, and also testify that Muhammad is His Messenger! By Allah, O Muhammad! There was no face on the surface of the earth most disliked by me than yours, but now your face has become the most beloved face to me. By Allah, there was no religion most disliked by me than yours, but now it is the most beloved religion to me. By Allah, there was no town most disliked by me than your town, but now it is the most beloved town to me. Your troops arrested me (at the time) when I was intending to perform the Umra. And now what do you think?” The Prophet gave him good tidings of good in this world and the next, and ordered him to perform the Umra. So when he came to Makkah, someone said to him, “You have become a Sabian?” He replied, “No! By Allah, I have submitted to Islam with Muhammad, Allah’s Messenger. No, by Allah! Not a single grain of wheat will come to you from Yamamah unless the Prophet gives his permission.” (6)
The Prophet asked Thumamah, “What have you got O Thumamah?” He replied that he has good thoughts about the Prophet- Meaning, “You O Muhammad never oppress anyone, rather you are from those who pardon and do good”. So after he was set free, he entered Makkah to perform Umrah and then pronounced the Talbilya and he was the first to enter Makkah in that manner, so Quraish grabbed him and said, “You have the audacity to do this to us”, and they wanted to kill him; then a person amongst the Quraish said, “Leave him because you are in need of food from Yamaamah (i.e. from his land)”, so they released him. Then he said to them, “By Allah! Not a single grain of wheat will come to you from Yamamah unless the Prophet gives his permission.” Ibn Hisham said, “Then Thumamah returned to Yamamah and prevented the Quraish from bringing any food to Makkah, so the Quraish wrote to the Prophet saying, “Indeed, you command people to keep good the ties of kinship”, so the Prophet wrote to Thumamah to allow them to transport their food”.(7)
[1] Tafsir as-Sadi]
[2] Zadul Maseer Fee Ilmit Tafsir by Imam Ibn Al-Jawzi
[3] Al-Bukhari. 1590
[4] Al-Bukhari. 3058
[5] Zadul Ma’ad 3/31 and Seerah Ibn Hisham 1/350
[6] Al-Bukhari. 4372
[7] Fat’hul Bari Sharh Sahih Al-Bukhari 8/110-111 and Al-Hulalul Ibreeziyyah Min at-Taleeqaat al-Baaziyyah Alaa Sahih Al-Bukhari 3/319
