DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post - The moment a missile hits the minaret of a Masjid.

**draigenia** · 07-04-2012, 08:53 PM

1) What it means is that: if the Salafi is not willing to negotiate with the Sufi, then he is also misguided. Because guidance requires ilm, and ilm is achieved through education, and education can only be done when both parties are face-to-face. When only one party think he knows everything, then he is ignorant because he doesn't know what the other party has to say. And this applies to both sides.

2) I like to weigh both sides, and accordingly i like to scrutinize both sides. I wont "suck up" to Ansar Dine's portrait just as i wont suck up to the Western media's portrait of the situation. Most salafists however, are eager to eat up everything their favourite J!hadi group says, or whatever's the official line of Al-Fajr or GIMF.

4) Sure, people will always continue to "Respect the opinion of those in authority". They do it in pakistan, saudi, iran, and everywhere we have so-called "islamic states". We however, do J!had against them and their stooges, and this is because of their transgressions.

5) See all of the above.... And, we're not trying to scrutinize Islamic groups because we consider ourselves perfectionists, rather it is the perfectionists who scrutinize everyone else. We condemn the kuffar, but we also condemn the extremists; because from my experience, the extremists only force people to join the kuffar.

Timbuktu is not Ansar Dine's playground. It is an ancient location which attracts scholars from all around the Muslim world. If they did not break these tombs, then why should Ansar? And if it is necessary to do so, then it cannot be done without consulting the scholars first. If you know that the Western media (even though AlJazreera isnt western) is defamatory, then why would they refrain from blaming the scholars who apparently supported this as well?

1) Im more than happy to listen to the other side inshAllah

2) analysing things objectively is what we all should do inshAllah

4) you should respect the people in authrotity as long as they rule by islam, and ansar ad din clearly are not ruling by any other ideology. they hold the oppinion that graves shoudl be levelled and taht is based on daleel and athaar so shoudlnt we respect that opinion? Why do we have to respect one sides opinion but not the other

5) You cant just make a qiyaas like that, firstly what are you basing them being labelled extreme on? You cant blame them for sending people into the hands of the kuffar, in the last century we have thousands if not millions of murtads dispite most lands being full of sufism and ilm ul kalaam so you cant blame ridaa on others.

Scholars dont have political leadership so cant just go to a country and start smashing graves, where is teh hikmah in that? Ansar ad din do have the political position though and wish to implement the advice of the prophet SAW and they dont care what you or I or the UN world culttural heritage says, they only care about Allah SWT, they only wish to follow the sunnah of the prophet SAW who clearly told us to level graves and not build over them, and that was concerning prophets so what about saints who are less than prophets?

Clearly tehre is superstition in mali that is tantamount to kufr so why oppose the removal of this? Dont you think kufr is a bigger deal than tourist attractions? Isnt shirk a big deal? Isnt it the BIGGEST deal?

07-04-2012, 08:53 PM	#20
draigenia Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 534 Senior Member	1) What it means is that: if the Salafi is not willing to negotiate with the Sufi, then he is also misguided. Because guidance requires ilm, and ilm is achieved through education, and education can only be done when both parties are face-to-face. When only one party think he knows everything, then he is ignorant because he doesn't know what the other party has to say. And this applies to both sides. 2) I like to weigh both sides, and accordingly i like to scrutinize both sides. I wont "suck up" to Ansar Dine's portrait just as i wont suck up to the Western media's portrait of the situation. Most salafists however, are eager to eat up everything their favourite J!hadi group says, or whatever's the official line of Al-Fajr or GIMF. 4) Sure, people will always continue to "Respect the opinion of those in authority". They do it in pakistan, saudi, iran, and everywhere we have so-called "islamic states". We however, do J!had against them and their stooges, and this is because of their transgressions. 5) See all of the above.... And, we're not trying to scrutinize Islamic groups because we consider ourselves perfectionists, rather it is the perfectionists who scrutinize everyone else. We condemn the kuffar, but we also condemn the extremists; because from my experience, the extremists only force people to join the kuffar. Timbuktu is not Ansar Dine's playground. It is an ancient location which attracts scholars from all around the Muslim world. If they did not break these tombs, then why should Ansar? And if it is necessary to do so, then it cannot be done without consulting the scholars first. If you know that the Western media (even though AlJazreera isnt western) is defamatory, then why would they refrain from blaming the scholars who apparently supported this as well? 1) Im more than happy to listen to the other side inshAllah 2) analysing things objectively is what we all should do inshAllah 4) you should respect the people in authrotity as long as they rule by islam, and ansar ad din clearly are not ruling by any other ideology. they hold the oppinion that graves shoudl be levelled and taht is based on daleel and athaar so shoudlnt we respect that opinion? Why do we have to respect one sides opinion but not the other 5) You cant just make a qiyaas like that, firstly what are you basing them being labelled extreme on? You cant blame them for sending people into the hands of the kuffar, in the last century we have thousands if not millions of murtads dispite most lands being full of sufism and ilm ul kalaam so you cant blame ridaa on others. Scholars dont have political leadership so cant just go to a country and start smashing graves, where is teh hikmah in that? Ansar ad din do have the political position though and wish to implement the advice of the prophet SAW and they dont care what you or I or the UN world culttural heritage says, they only care about Allah SWT, they only wish to follow the sunnah of the prophet SAW who clearly told us to level graves and not build over them, and that was concerning prophets so what about saints who are less than prophets? Clearly tehre is superstition in mali that is tantamount to kufr so why oppose the removal of this? Dont you think kufr is a bigger deal than tourist attractions? Isnt shirk a big deal? Isnt it the BIGGEST deal?
	Quote