Fighting for Faith

[Om_Mohammed]

. FIGHTING FOR FAITH: WHAT THE QUR'AN REALLY SAYS ABOUT WAR
[By S. Imad-ud-Din Asad - Dawn Pakistan, June 29, 2001]
================================================== ====================

It is a common belief, among those who are ignorant of the Qur'an, that
Islam glorifies and encourages warfare. People of this opinion also
directly attribute the spread of Islam to the sword. Such concepts are
nonsense.

In order to know the truth, one must read what the Qur'an says on this
issue: "... But begin not hostilities. Surely Allah loves not the
aggressors." (2:190)

War as such is allowed only in self-defense, only if Muslims are left
with no other option. As long as disputes can be settled through pacific
means, and rights and claims can be peacefully enforced and obtained,
Muslims are required to refrain from fighting.

The Qur'an clearly enunciates the circumstances in which an Islamic
state might resort to war. These are:

1. When there is a grave and sudden threat to religion.
"...And if Allah did not repel some people by others, cloisters,
churches, synagogues, and mosques in which Allah's name is much
remembered, would have been pulled down. And surely Allah will help
him who helps Him. Surely Allah is Strong and Mighty." (22:40)

2. When Muslims are subjected to oppression.
"And what reason have you not to fight in the way of Allah, and of the
weak among the men and the women and the children, who say: Our Lord,
take us out of this town, whose people are oppressors, and grant us from
thee a friend, and grant us from thee a helper." (4:75).

3. When the Muslims are forced out of their land.
"Permission (to fight) is given to those... who are driven out from
their homes without a just cause only because they say: Our lord is
Allah..." (22:39,40)

4. When war is imposed upon Muslims.
"And fight in the way of Allah against those who fight against you,
but begin not hostilities. Surely Allah loves not the aggressors."
(2:190). "Permission (to fight) is given to those on whom war is made,
because they retaliates with the like of that with which he is afflicted
and he is oppressed, Allah will certainly help him..." (22:60)

5. When states commit deliberate breaches of treaties and pacts.
"Those with whom thou makest an agreement, then they break their
agreement every time, and they keep not their duty. And if they break
their oaths after their agreements and revile your religion, then fight
the leaders of disbelief -- surely their oaths are nothing -- so
thatthey may desist." (9:12)

Muslims are also instructed in the Qur'an, in explicit words, that all
acts of war by them must cease immediately if their enemies sue for
peace; pledge to end all persecution and oppression; and sincerely
undertake to abide by their oaths and covenants.
"But if they desist, then surely Allah is Forgiving, Merciful." (2:192).

"And if they incline to peace, incline thou also to it, and trust in
Allah. Surely He is the Hearer,the Knower." (8:61)

The Qur'an has restricted war to fighting in defense. All aggressors,
whether Muslims or non-Muslims, have been strongly condemned. Muslims
are to avoid war. However, if there is no way out, then they must fight
with full vigour and compel the enemy to see his salvation in peaceful
and equitable co-existence with the believers.

The issue of deterrence has also been discussed in the Qur'an. Muslims
are told that they must keep themselves well prepared and avail
themselves of all sources of strength, so that the enemy should, because
of their preparedness, also assume a peaceful attitude. It is said: "And
make ready for them whatever force you can and [have] horses tied at the
frontier, to frighten thereby the enemy of Allah, and your enemy, and
others besides them, whom you know not -- Allah knows them..." (8:60)

Is it not remarkable, in the above verse, that Muslims are ordered to
be ready for war, not for the sake of starting it, but so as to keep
the enemy from disturbing the peace?

As far as war for the propagation of faith is concerned, such a thing
is not mentioned even once in the Qur'an. This fact is an eye-opener for

those who say that Islam requires its followers to fight for the spread
of the word of God.

[umm suhayb (Guest)]

>.
>FIGHTING FOR FAITH: WHAT THE
>>
>those who say that Islam requires
>its followers to fight for
>the spread
>of the word of God.

Assalam alaykum,
Dear sis Om Muhammed,
Can't u see at all the poison this author trying to propagate...He's trying to kill the spirit of jihad..
It's all lies promoted by the orientalist.... Let us not be duped by the opinions of munafiqs and enemy of AllaH...

The prophet sallallahu alayhi wassallam said he had been commanded to fight (qital) mankind(kafeer) until they witness that there is no god except Allah...if they believe, then their lives and wealth will be safe...in a sahih hadith which was agreed upon..

And if u turned to the Quran...there are numerous ayah to promote jihad against the kafeer...

All i can't say is that the author is absolutely wrong about the concept of jihad....Yes Islam requires it's followers to fight in order to spread Islam... Jihad is the best form of da'wah and dying in the path of Allah is the best death for mu'meen.

wassallam alaykum

[Nzingha]

>The prophet sallallahu alayhi wassallam said
> he had been commanded
>to fight (qital) mankind(kafeer) until
>they witness that there is
>no god except Allah...if
>they believe, then their lives
>and wealth will be safe...in
>a sahih hadith which was
>agreed upon..
>
>And if u turned to the
>Quran...there are numerous ayah to
>promote jihad against the kafeer...
>
>
as salaam alaikum

So the non muslims who have been posting here are right.. that muslims are to behave violently in order to spread the religion of Islam. That we are to kill any and all that oppose us.. that we are to use violent means to gain control. Basically they are right and we are wrong. Why didn't you correct us when we were dispelling these beliefs of non muslims?


ma salaam
nzingha

Let there be no compulsion in religion: Truth stands out clear from Error: whoever rejects evil and believes in Allah hath grasped the most trustworthy hand-hold, that never breaks. And Allah heareth and knoweth all things.

[Ibrahim]

as-salaamu alaykum,

umm_suhayb, I am very glad we cna be agreeing so much on this topic. I also found this article to be a little apologetic.

nzingha,

The kuffar have the wrong opnion of Jihad in that they think it is a bloodthirsty means of acquiring material gains. When in fact Jihad is a struggle in the path of the Creator (swt), to make His deen dominant over other ways of life. Your quoting of the text "Let there be no compulsion in religion" is quite outof place, as Jihad is never to be sued as a means of forcing people to take shehadeh, and this in fact is strictly forbidden. Instead, Jihad (in offensive mode) is used as the last stage fo the foriegn policy of the Islamic state, to open the lands to the message of Islam, and so the people might experience the mercy of Allah (swt)'s laws.

[link:www.islaam.com|http://bozo.ugh.net.au/~alias/images/shehsig02.gif]

[Um Suhayb (Guest)]

>>
>>
Bismillah

>as salaam alaikum
>
>So the non muslims who have
>been posting here are right..
>that muslims are to behave
>violently in order to spread
>.......
Wa alaykum salam

To tell u the truth nzingha, i did'nt really follow up all the posts that those christian and atheist's been sending...To me their posts are like darkness....as our eyes,ears and mouths are windows to our hearts...i feel we should'nt give them the chance to fill our hearts with their zulumaat...



wassalam

Um Suhayb

"The World is held up by Four Pillars:
The Wisdom of the Learned, The Justice of the Great,
The Prayers of the Righteous, And the Valour of the Brave."

[Om_Mohammed]

Assalaamu alaikum.

First of all, let me remind all that the article that I posted was not my own writing...although I can understand quite frankly what the writer seems to be wishing to get across.

I do not object to Jihad...nor is it for me to object to Jihad. It is something prescribed upon muslims. Yet, it does need some understanding by muslims as well as non-muslims.

Umm Suhayb, the impression that you are giving in your response is that it is as the non-muslims are understanding of Islam, that Islam was spread by the power and fright instilled by the sword (i.e....force, not to mention unwarranted violence.) I am not apologizing for or trying to protect the image of the early Jihad which helped to spread Islam across the world.

However, please try to investigate for yourself what those Jihads were actually for, and how did they operate.

Those Jihads which took place were not outright fighting and battles without first works and attempts at dawah into Islam. We have been commanded in the Quran...the same Quran which calls for Jihad...to speak and preach with the best language. Also, perhaps you may recall the verse in the Quran: 'There is no compulsion in religion.'

The procedures of those Jihad expeditions...regardless during the time of the prophet(SAAW) or his companions (ARA) who followed him, were first expeditions of dawah campaigns. Those who were dispatched by the Prophet(SAAW) and later the caliphs (ARA) were instructed to first and foremost call the people of the new lands to Islam, by introducing them by beautiful language and expression to the religion and it's requirements...the basis of which is tawheed, or oneness of Allah. They were instructed, as well, to introduce the religion to them in steps...if they accepted one stage, then to move on gradually to the next logical stage, and so on and so forth until they had accepted Islam in it's completeness.

It was only in the cases where the peoples of the lands (and in particular the rulers) refused Islam after being duely and properly informed, that they were to offer them their options: pay the tax to be imposed upon the non-muslims who were to live under the rule of the incoming muslims, or to fight if they refused the tax. The first choice, to pay the tax, enabled the non-muslims to retain their preference of religion, and to live in freedom under the new islamic rule. In many cases, it was that they accepted the imposed taxes, and ended up living better lives under the rule of the tolerant muslims, than which they had previously under the rule of their many times tyrranical rulers. That in itself persuaded many of the inhabitants of the lands to eventually come into Islam, which in turn resulted in the taxes being lifted from them. For...under the procedures of the Jihad...the tax is only imposed upon the non-muslims who would make a treaty with the incoming muslims...in order that they not convert to Islam, yet they would live in peace, with a peace treaty with those new muslim rulers. It was the impression of the new muslim rulers, who were evidently more just and understanding than the previously tyrannical non-muslim rulers, which influenced many of the peoples to turn to Islam eventually.

It was only in the rare cases of those expeditions in which the peoples of the lands (led by their tyrannical rulers) refused both acceptance of Islam, as well as paying the protection tax, that the war of Jihad was inflicted upon them. In other words, the war itself was and should be the last resort. Procedures of understanding and concerned diplomacy were first and foremost, and a peaceful agreement of treaty was the first sought-after method.

That is Jihad. Not outright fighting without cause and need.

Now, as for places like Palestine, Chechnya and other current 'hot spots'...Jihad as a form of war is the only solution...for those oppressors of those lands are illegally oppressing the peoples, and this is a case of self-defense and the natural and God-given right to freedom to live in one's own homeland without oppression and racism.

Also, it is quite obvious, by the evidences of the many failed peace initiatives, that those tyrannical and racist oppressors of the mentioned lands know no other language than fighting. They are not apt to discussion or diplomacy or even human decency. They do not understand anything other than force. So, in these cases, a retaliation is called for.

Although our prophet (SAAW) was quite strong and unwavering in his fortitude and dedication to the cause of Allah, he was still the utmost example in tolerance. We should take advantage of that example, and implement to it's best advantage ourselves. One great example of this is when one of the companions(ARA) came complaining to the prophet(SAAW) that his people, the Daws tribe, to whom the prophet(SAAW) had sent him to call them to Islam, were still refusing Islam. He asked the prophet(SAAW) to make a prayer against them, calling for their ruin. To his surprise, the prophet(SAAW) called upon Allah to guide the tribe of Daws. The companion returned to his tribe. Within a year, it was noticed that this same companion was coming towards the prophet(SAAW) followed by a legion of around 80 people...all from the tribe of Daws...to pledge their allegience to the prophet(SAAW) and state their shahadah of entrance into and acceptance of Islam. Such a high example of patience and tolerance.

Allah knows best...and may Allah deliver those who are living under oppression, and help them as no other helper can.

These are two totally different entities.

Om Mohammed.

[Nzingha]

as salaam alaikum


>
>The kuffar have the wrong opnion
>of Jihad in that they
>think it is a bloodthirsty
>means of acquiring material gains. >>

actually this is not the view that most non muslims have. Many of them see it as a means to force our religion on others. To overtake the world with islam by shedding blood. Just as you said.


>When in fact Jihad is
>a struggle in the path
>of the Creator (swt), to
>make His deen dominant over
>other ways of life. Your
>quoting of the text "Let
>there be no compulsion in
>religion" is quite outof place,
>as Jihad is never to
>be sued as a means
>of forcing people to take
>shehadeh, and this in fact
>is strictly forbidden.>>



what however is being suggested is just that. killing those who don't believe as we believe. Jihad is a struggle in the path of Allah yes, a means to protect ourselves yes.. a means to make Islam dominant? this isn't done by war brother because this is compulsion.. what your saying believe as i do or die. This is the most severe form of compulsion. in which you have a mighty contradiction.

<< Instead, Jihad
>(in offensive mode) is used
>as the last stage fo
>the foriegn policy of the
>Islamic state, to open the
>lands to the message of
>Islam, and so the people
>might experience the mercy of
>Allah (swt)'s laws.
>
>

Yes i see.. mercy by killing people. This is mercy? at the threat of a sword believe as i do or i will kill you. I overtake your land.. force you to believe as i do.. or shed your blood. This is to open lands to the message of Islam? to experience Alah's mercy? And yet Allah says we are to compete in goodness not blood shed. I find your presentation a bit contradictory brother, no offense. I don't see mercy in threats of life. in fact Islam has been proven to be spread in a more peaceful manner. By traders, those who go to study in distant lands.. or to give dawah.. without a sword without shedding blood. This is the most successful way we can show the mercy of Allah.

ma salaam
nzingha


- Never do I argue with a man with a desire to hear him say what is wrong, or to expose him and win victory over him. Whenever I face an opponent in debate I silently pray - O Lord, help him so that truth may flow from his heart and on his tongue, and so that if truth is on my side, he may follow me; and if truth be on his side, I may follow him.
al-Imam Al-Shafi'i

[umm_suhayb]

Bismillah
>

>
>actually this is not the view
>that most non muslims have.
>Many of them see it
>as a means to force
>our religion on others. To
>overtake the world with islam
>by shedding blood. Just as
>you said.
>

>>
>>
>
>Yes i see.. mercy by killing
>people. This is mercy? at
>the threat of a sword
>believe as i do or
>i will kill you. I
>overtake your land.. force you
>to believe as i do..
>or shed your blood. This
>is to open lands to
>the message of Islam? to
>experience Alah's mercy? And yet
>Allah says we are to
>compete in goodness not blood
>shed. I find your presentation
>a bit contradictory brother, no
>offense. I don't see mercy
>in threats of life. in
>fact Islam has been proven
>to be spread in a
>more peaceful manner. By traders,
>those who go to study
>in distant lands.. or to
>give dawah.. without a sword
>without shedding blood. This is
>the most successful way we
>can show the mercy of
>Allah.
>
>ma salaam
>nzingha
>
>
Assalam alaykum,
Nzingha,
Well Actually there r two(or more) false opinions that have been thrown in by the enemies of Allah in order to kill the spirit of jihad among muslims.
The first one is basically what u’ve stated above, that islam is spread through sword-violence and cruelty and forcing other ppl to accept islam or else they face death…leaving them absolutely no options.
We know it’s not true at all…islam gave them 3 options, accept the faith, if they refused, then they have to pay jizya ,if they accept then take it from them.
their lives, property are then safe,and they the ahl kitab could practice their religion.
If they still refused any of option s then the muslim ruler will wage war against them. So where is the question of forcing ppl to embrace islam?


The second false theory is that Islam is a religion of compromise and tolerance,and we do not wage jihad against non-muslims,we fight against them ONLY when we are attacked by them and we act as self defense …I guess the article that Om Mohammed had posted said it all and that which u also seemed to advocate.
So what about this verse? “O ye who believe! Fight those of the disbelievers who are near to you and let them find harshness in you, amd know that Allah is with those who keep their duty ( unto Him)..Q 9:123

According to Dr Sa’id Ramadan al Bouti in his book fiqh al sirah, he mentioned that these 2 theories even though they looked totally opposite , they are actually one of the same that is to destroy the idea of AL Jihad from the minds of ummah …in other word to kill Islam itself…....
To me mujahids are like surgeon..would u equate a surgeon who remove cancerous tumors from his patient's body as someone who is barbaric and cruel?.well shirk is worst than any cancerous tumor.
Islam is spread thru ghazwah,qital and also thru other peaceful means that u've mentioned..
wassalam

[satisfaction26]

Yeah that's right.Let me add something.The three choices are opened only for those who refuse Islam in a proper manner.If the messenger sent by prophet Muhammad was killed or the letters sent was tore or burnt in an unpleasent way.Then war would be declared.This is because of the humiliation shown by them towards Islam.

Mardhiah Mansor

[Ibrahim]

as-salaamu alaykum sister nzingha,

actually this is not the view that most non muslims have. Many of them see it as a means to force our religion on others. To overtake the world with islam by shedding blood. Just as you said.

Yes you're correct in saying many do see it like this as well. But I think the majority believe it's a method for gasthering war booty.

a means to make Islam dominant? this isn't done by war brother because this is compulsion.. what your saying believe as i do or die.

Sis, according to the verse below, what you say is not correct. We are told it will be made superior even against the will of the disbelievers.

"It is He Who has sent His Messenger with guidance and the Deen of Truth
(Islam) to make it superior over all deens (ways of life), even though the
Mushrikun (disbelievers, polythiests) hate (it)." [TMQ 9:33]

Does this verse mean we force anyone to take shehadeh? No of course it doesn't, and nowhere in my posts will you find any such thing, in fact you'll find only the opposite. But this verse informs us that we must cause Islam to be dominant over other ways of life, not just spiritually as you seem to think but politically militarily, and most important governmentally. The Qur'an and Sunnah must be the supreme sources of legislation for all of mankind, whether they become Muslims or not is irrelevant (sure it's desireable, but not a hindrance to them being ruled by Islam).

Yes i see.. mercy by killing people. This is mercy? at the threat of a sword believe as i do or i will kill you.

Again you've completely taken yourself off on a tangent which has noting to do with what I have posted.

I don't see mercy in threats of life. in fact Islam has been proven to be spread in a more peaceful manner.

This is completely untrue. If you look at the spread of Islam, you'll find it was via military conquest. This doesn't mean roving armies forced people to convert, it means that the political/military expansionof Islam leads to a spiritual expansion. The few cases in which Islam spread simply by trade is in South East Asia, and these people never came under the rule of Islam. If we look at thelargest concentration of Muslims in the world (Sub-Continet), we'll find it was a land opened by Jihad, not a land opened by traders. Yes, we should send emmissaries first, to give daw'ah by the tongue, but they need to be reinforced with the daw'ah of the sword, to ensure that the kuffar do not try to extinguish Allah's light.

This is the most successful way we can show the mercy of Allah.

This comes from your own mind, not from reality, nor from Islam.

Ibrahim.

[link:www.islaam.com|http://bozo.ugh.net.au/~alias/images/shehsig02.gif]

[Umm suhayb (Guest)]

Bismillah
Dear sister,
The hadith that i quoted in my first post do not come from my pocketbook...but from Bukhari-muslim sahih..
This is the exact trans: The prophet sallallahu alayhi wassalam said"I have been commanded to fight people until they testify that there is no god but Allah and that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah, and perform the prayer, and pay zakat. If they say it, they have saved their blood and possessions from me, except for the rights of Islam over them. And their final reckoning is with Allah'';
and the hadith reported by Muslim,
``To go forth in the morning or evening to fight in the path of Allah is better than the whole world and everything in it."
In fiqh al islam, jihad is fardhu kifayah upon islamic state meaning they have to sent military expedition at least a year or else all muslims will be guilty of sin..
The second type of jihad which is personally obligatory(fardhu ayn) upon all muslim(men, women and children) in the islamic state is when the enemy kuffar forces have invaded our country.
U could find the reference fom all fiqh books on the subject of jihad.I've look it up in "The reliance of traveller",mazhab shafi'i al fiqh book.
sadly today muslim states have abandoned the first type of jihad...
We do'nt have to be apologetic about it ....

wassallam

[Om_Mohammed]

Assalaamu alaikum.

Sister Umm Suhayb...I don't believe that I ever recall stating or accusing that you brought such hadiths from your pocket. I am quite familiar with the hadiths, and in particular Bukhari. Nor am I in any way being apologetic. I am very much in support of Jihad, in the instances in which Jihad is called for. I am not 'wishy-washy' at all about this.

However, was merely bringing to mind and to recognition the history of Islam...the behaviour of our beloved prophet (SAAW), and the instructions of the Quran and the Hadith combined, as well as common sense of human nature.

Go right now yourself to any non-muslim community with the forces of swords or any other weapon of your choice...and fight them in a physical fight, and then when you have killed people, without telling them your reason for the fight to begin with, then tell them that this was all in the name of Islam. Tell me then, sis...what kind of a reception or impression that you think that will make for Islam and Muslims? On the other hand...tell them first about Islam, one step at a time...appealing to people's sense of logic and ability to think for themselves, without imlementing force, show them the love and care that Islam dictates, and show them and demonstrate to them the brotherhood of Islam, and see what kind of a reception is given.

This is not ignoring nor disobeying the order of Allah...it is in fact following the order of Allah, as well as copying the method of our beloved prophet(SAAW). He was ordered to fight those opposed to Islam, yes...but those who opposed Islam after knowledge had been brought to them. He dedicated a time of education to the peoples before waging war on them. That is what I am trying to emphasize.

Have you, sis...or anyone else for that matter, genuinely and sincerely engaged in educating and informing the peoples of varrying nations and faith...before you are attempting to declare or impose a war on them?

Remember now, that the world is vastly more populated than what it was at the time of the prophet, and so an attempt at educating and informing people will take much longer than it did in his time. Also, there is now a concentrated war of propoganda going on all over the world, an attempt at distorting the image and impression of Islam and Muslims, something also that was not present at the time of the prophet. Each time in history has it's own obstacles, and must fight a varied war.

Om Mohammed.

[Nzingha]

as salaam alaikum

> Well Actually there r two(or
>more) false opinions that have
> been thrown in by
>the enemies of Allah in
>order to kill the spirit
>of jihad among muslims.
>The first one is basically what
>u’ve stated above, that islam
>is spread through sword-violence and
>cruelty and forcing other ppl
>to accept islam or else
>they face death…leaving them absolutely
>no options. >>

read your post again.. you stated that according to the sahih tradition of Muhammmad pbuh we are ordered to fight mankind until they submit to the oneness of Allah. This is your statement

you also stated according to Qur'an we are to fight the kaffirun.

Now your changing things.

Now Ahul kitab (who are labeled as among them are kaffirun) are to be given options (i won't even go into the definition of ahul kitab at this point) they can live w/in an Islamic state.. pay tax or be fought against (everyone living in any state has to pay tax no big deal) much different than your impression the first go around.

>If they still refused any of
>option s then the muslim
>ruler will wage war against
>them. So where is the
>question of forcing ppl to
>embrace islam?
>
>

actually it was a reaction to the impression in which you gave. Fight all kaffirun until they believe in the oneness of Allah (Islam) what does this say to you?

>The second false theory is
>that Islam is a religion
>of compromise and tolerance,and we
>do not wage jihad against
>non-muslims,we fight against them
>ONLY when we are attacked
>by them and we act
>as self defense >>

Actually Islam promotes more compromise and tolerance than many are aware of. By way of treaties, by way of protecting others (although limited) to practice their religion. The Prophet pbuh had always shown patience, tolerance and compromise we just forget that.



…I guess
>the article that Om Mohammed
>had posted said it all
>and that which u also
>seemed to advocate. >>

actually i advocate a more balanced idea of Jihad than most do. Because i don't take verses in isolation and i don't forget the life of Muhammad pbuh



> So what about this verse?
>“O ye who believe! Fight
>those of the disbelievers who
>are near to you and
>let them find harshness in
>you, amd know that Allah
>is with those who keep
>their duty ( unto Him)..Q
>9:123
>

The thing about that verse is that you have to take it into context with the rest of Qur'an sister. You can not take a verse isolate it and makt it into something that is against the spirit of Qur'an. In order to understand our proper ways of fighting one must also remember that Allah calls on us to fight oppressors, to save the innocent. Allah tells us to fight when they fight us, to stop when they cease, to give them security when they seek it. It is extremely important on all issues that we take Qur'an in total, not by bits and pieces. When we do so we neglect the overal messge of Islam and wrong ourselves.

ma salaam



- Never do I argue with a man with a desire to hear him say what is wrong, or to expose him and win victory over him. Whenever I face an opponent in debate I silently pray - O Lord, help him so that truth may flow from his heart and on his tongue, and so that if truth is on my side, he may follow me; and if truth be on his side, I may follow him.
al-Imam Al-Shafi'i

[Nzingha]

>as-salaamu alaykum sister nzingha,
>
wa alaikum salaam ibrahim


>
>Yes you're correct in saying many
>do see it like this
>as well. But I think
>the majority believe it's a
>method for gasthering war booty.
>
>


I would disagree, from the non muslmis have dealt with in all my years of being muslim it wasn't a question of booty.. other than non muslim writers on "islamic invasions" throughout the years do meantion that booty is a consideration. However, the common people brother see things a force of our religion.



>Sis, according to the verse below,
>what you say is not
>correct. We are told it
>will be made superior even
>against the will of the
>disbelievers.
>
>"It is He Who has sent
>His Messenger with guidance and
>the Deen of Truth
>(Islam) to make it superior over
>all deens (ways of life),
>even though the
>Mushrikun (disbelievers, polythiests) hate (it)." [TMQ
>9:33]
>

Brother please don't make the mistake of isolating ayat.. it just isn't right. You must and it is extremely important to do so.. take the Qur'an as a whole.. and apply it as a whole. Islam being superior is not necessarily about imposing our religion on others.

>Does this verse mean we force
>anyone to take shehadeh? No
>of course it doesn't, and
>nowhere in my posts will
>you find any such thing,
>in fact you'll find only
>the opposite.

Than your totally missing me and responding for no reason. I'm responding to the notion that we are to fight all until they declare islam as their religion. this is according to hadith in which was posted here. I find this contradictory to Quran.


<< But this verse
>informs us that we must
>cause Islam to be dominant
>over other ways of life,
>not just spiritually as you
>seem to think but politically
>militarily, and most important governmentally.

For one.. Islam is superiour regardless.. wether we go out and kill people or not trying to convince them of it. Second there are other options than waging war.. Muhammad pbuh taught us that however we don't follow suit. We think going out in war is the only option.. far from it.



>
>Again you've completely taken yourself off
>on a tangent which has
>noting to do with what
>I have posted.
>

A tangent?? you haven't seen me off in a tangent brother :) please follow along with what is posted.. and what i'm responding to.


>
>This is completely untrue. If you
>look at the spread of
>Islam, you'll find it was
>via military conquest. This doesn't
>mean roving armies forced people
>to convert, it means that
>the political/military expansionof Islam leads
>to a spiritual expansion.>>


You do realize that Muslims once controlled lands they no longer do. Such as Parts of Italy.. however their leaving also meant islam left as well. There were muslims who ruled spain.. islam left when they did.. I don't agree that spiritual expansion is done by way of force.

Indonesia.. is the largest populated land of Muslims.. Malaysia is largerly populated muslims.. parts of china still has a strong muslims population in regions that their history goes back centuries. These lands were never overtaken by the sword.. these people were overtaken by the spirit of islam. and Islam remains with them today.

And exactly what military army took over East africa?

America.. one of the largest growing population of converts.. no sword their. also throughout europe many are converting to islam.. to the dislike of the kaffirun :).. there are muslims in south america who have been there for centuries.. not many swords flung there either.

Land is overtaken by swords.. but not hearts.. but not beliefs in Allah.. this is something a sword can not do.


<<Yes, we should send
>emmissaries first, to give daw'ah
>by the tongue, but they
>need to be reinforced with
>the daw'ah of the sword,
>to ensure that the kuffar
>do not try to extinguish
>Allah's light.

No one can ever distinguish the light of Allah.. this is quran brother.

btw why aren't you fighting jihad somewhere? if you truly believe what your telling me.. what war are you fighting in?


>
>This comes from your own mind,
>not from reality, nor from
>Islam.
>

Actually brother it is from reality.. MUSLIM actions has proven this.. you'll never convert by the sword.. you'll never show people mercy by killing them.. this is why Muhammad pbuh extended so many outs to war..this is why Allah lays down so many conditions to war.. because that is true mercy.


Ma salaam
nzingha

- Never do I argue with a man with a desire to hear him say what is wrong, or to expose him and win victory over him. Whenever I face an opponent in debate I silently pray - O Lord, help him so that truth may flow from his heart and on his tongue, and so that if truth is on my side, he may follow me; and if truth be on his side, I may follow him.
al-Imam Al-Shafi'i

[Nzingha]

>This is the exact trans:
>The prophet sallallahu alayhi wassalam
>said"I have been commanded to
>fight people until they testify
>that there is no god
>but Allah and that Muhammad
>is the Messenger of Allah,
>and perform the prayer, and
>pay zakat. If they say
>it, they have saved their
>blood and possessions from me,
>except for the rights of
>Islam over them. And their
>final reckoning is with Allah'';
>
>and the hadith reported by Muslim,
>

as salaam alaikum

this gives no outs for non muslims like you have written previously. Until people become muslim.. which is what it is.. la illah ill allah muhammadan rasullah.. even if it is merely by tongue and a show to man.. than there is no outs for the ahul kitab.. this is forced conversion.. this is compulsion.. and in this is non but Muslims are free to live.. all others must die.

Get out your sword sister there is alot of work to do

nzingha



- Never do I argue with a man with a desire to hear him say what is wrong, or to expose him and win victory over him. Whenever I face an opponent in debate I silently pray - O Lord, help him so that truth may flow from his heart and on his tongue, and so that if truth is on my side, he may follow me; and if truth be on his side, I may follow him.
al-Imam Al-Shafi'i

[umm_suhayb]

Bismillah


>wa alaykum salam

>
>


.. than there
>is no outs for the
>ahul kitab.. this is forced
>conversion.. this is compulsion.. and
>in this is non but
>Muslims are free to live..
>all others must die.

Actually nzingha this situation will indeed take place after the second coming of Jesus peace be upon him… After his final coming, nothing but Islam will be accepted from them, for taking the poll tax is only effective until Jesus' descent….ref umdat ul salik

Get out your sword sister there
>is alot of work to
>do
>


I guess the fiqh aspect of jihad is not your speciality…
Women and children are exempted from jihad expedition…but it’s still be good for us women and our children to go for some sword fighting training or even archery…just in case..Really nzingha I was kind of expecting u to put more input on this subject of jihad…..
unfortunately the concept of jihad is so misunderstood even by muslim themselves…Jihad it seemed has been equated with violence and aggression…..which is not true at all… We really need to change our mindset especially on this noble topic….
wassallam
Umm suhayb

[Ibrahim]

[link:bozo.ugh.net.au/~alias/media/bismillah.wma|http://bozo.ugh.net.au/~alias/images/basmsig02.gif]

[link:www.islaam.com|http://bozo.ugh.net.au/~alias/images/salam02.gif]

Sister Nzingha,

I would disagree, from the non muslmis have dealt with in all my years of being muslim it wasn't a question of booty..

Ok I am willing to cede this point to you.

Brother please don't make the mistake of isolating ayat.. it just isn't right. You must and it is extremely important to do so.. take the Qur'an as a whole.. and apply it as a whole. Islam being superior is not necessarily about imposing our religion on others.

I have not isolated this ayah. It appears a few times in the Qur'an and each time it has been understood by the mufasireen to mean that it is our duty as Muslims to raise the deen of Allah (Swt) above the deen's of the disbelievers. To make our deen the most dominant in this dunya, yes of course it is superior already, but it is to be made dominant, or to rule over them. Again though you have gone off on this tangent of forcing religion onto people, which I will make clear one last time I've never even suggested. Ruling by Islam, does not equal forcing people to convert to Islam.

Than your totally missing me and responding for no reason. I'm responding to the notion that we are to fight all until they declare islam as their religion. this is according to hadith in which was posted here. I find this contradictory to Quran.

Nope, not misunderstanding you I don't think. This saying of the prophet (Saw) comes from a very strong hadith, and I think it is you who is misunderstanding, misunderstanding what the hadith says. It doesn't state I will fight people and force them to declare "La ilaha ila'Allah", it says fight them until they declare it. And yes we are to fight the kuffar until Islam is dominant, and until kufr is completely wiped from the face of the earth. I would suggest searching for a commentary on this hadith sis, I did when I first became Muslim and this seemed like a contradiction to me, but upon closer inspectiion I found I was mistaken. Please look into it.

You do realize that Muslims once controlled lands they no longer do.

This only serves to further reinforce my statements. Tell me what happened sis, when the Muslims lost military/administrative dominance over Spain? What happened to the religion of Islam in Spain? How many Muslims remained? ZILCH, ZERO, NIL... You see sis, the military dominance is very much linked with the spiritual aspects of Islam. So is the political, we cannot factor them out, no matter how hard we try.

Sister, I would like you to ponder a very wise saying by one of the Companions of the prophet (Saw).

Imam Al-Khateeb narrated in his history and Imam Al-Khattabee narrated that Omar Ibn Al-Khattab (ra) said, "By Allah, What Allah protects and prevents by the ruler is greater than what he will protect and prevent
by the Qur'an".

Land is overtaken by swords.. but not hearts.. but not beliefs in Allah.. this is something a sword can not do.

No point having entire nations of converts if they don't live under Islam. Our deen is Islam, not just our daily rituals, our entire way of life, from the way we brush our teeth to the way we govern our state, all must be in accordance with the ahkam of Allah.

No one can ever distinguish the light of Allah.. this is quran brother

I did not say they would distinguish (extinguish I think you meant) the light of Allah, I said they will *try* to extinguish, and thisis most definitely in the Qur'an, that they will indeed try this.

btw why aren't you fighting jihad somewhere? if you truly believe what your telling me.. what war are you fighting in?

Insha'allah I will be able to fight one day. But I think you misunderstand the concepts here a little, I have been speaking only about Offensive Jihad, and this kind of Jihad is not permissable without an Islamic State, and would most certainly be pointless. How can we dominate someone elses land and tell them to implement something we ourselves have failed now for 70 years to implement? So I work to bring back the Islamic State, and insha'allah when it returns, then the Offensive Jihad will resume, and not cease until they testify that there is only one God.

Ibrahim.

[link:www.islaam.com|http://bozo.ugh.net.au/~alias/images/shehsig02.gif]

[Om_Mohammed]

Assalaamu alaikum.

There are more ways than one to fight those against Islam. The sword, as it is, should be the last resort. Again, I appeal to all to review the history of Islam itself, and review how was it that Islam began to spread in the first place. Yes...there was much fighting of swords and other instruments of death and injure between the muslims and non-muslims, causing much death and injury. However, look to what came before those swords. It was a major campaign of educating the non-muslims of Islam, and giving them the logical and humanistic chance of coming into Islam before any wars were waged. In other cases, some wars were revenge upon the non-muslims who had previously attacked the muslims without aggravation from the muslim side. And yet in other cases, the wars were a thing of protection from aggression.

I am not trying to be apologetic for any of those wars...that would be no right, and really of no use. However, look to the history of those wars...why they happened and how.

War was not waged upon non-muslims, in particular by the prophet(SAAW) himself, unless and until they were first given due information and invitation to become muslims. It was only after their knowledgeable and calculated refusal to Islam, that the wars were waged.

As for fighting the non-muslims...until there are no non-muslims left...I do not argue that the prophet was commanded thus, and therefore has instructed us as well to do so. But, as I said, there are more than one way to fight this. And, it seems to me, that a major campaign of instructing and informing people is an important base to this structure of this war. The fighting with sword (or any other such destructive instrument) will be quite weak if there is no strong base of information and invitation under it to support it. (consider this war, or this fight, as a pyramid...with the base of it being information and invitation to Islam).

Many people, sad to say, are willing to go out with their swords, but they do not realize even themselves the reason. That is a weak force, if you ask me. Even the muslims themselves need to be better educated.

Look to the example of the difference between the Palestinian situation and the Chechnya or even Afghanastan. The latter two conflicts were much shorter in duration, yet their fighters were even much less in numbers than those in Palestine. Also, those of the latter two had even much less weaponry than what the Palestinians have had throughout their struggle. Then...why is it that the Palestinian struggle has been going on for so much longer? Can it actually be that their opponent is so much more equipped and stronger and more manned than those opponents in Chechnya and Afghanastan? Is it really and truly possible that the Israelis are so much more in number than the Russians? Do not let yourself be fooled. There is an important element in the Palestinian's side that is missing. This important and very basic element is the element of faith, and dependence themselves (the Palestinians) upon Allah. They are very strong in numbers themselves...just witness for yourselves the vast numbers in the butchery going on daily by the Israelis, as well as the vast numbers of those in refugee camps, let alone the more vast number of those who have migrated to different places in escape of the problems. The Chechnyans and the Afghans...they themselves...in their times of need...including the forces of the armies and their fighters...would themselves present themselves in prayer asking for Allah's help and deliverence. One of their basic requests to people worldwide was that they asked people to remember them in their prayers, asking for victory over their enemies. This type of request has not come from the Palestinians. They have been asking for everything BUT this. This in itself is a basic mistake on their part. We can all feel for them, we can all help them all that we possibly can...but without the interference and help from Allah...nothing will come of all of it.

Allah knows best.

Like I said...being ready for the fight is something to be concerned of...but to be ready in more ways than one. Have a sword in one hand...maybe even in both...but have a stronger sword in your heart...the sword of faith and belief. The muslims themselves need to be more ready and trained. This war is also a war fighting ignorance and arrogance. Once that is accomplished, that ignorance and arrogance are overturned and replaced by true knowledge and obedience, then only the true enemies will remain to be fought. Until then, perhaps it is best that we all try to concentrate on educating and informing the masses. There is a great population out there that are truly ignorant and/or misinformed about Islam.

Om Mohammed.

[Nzingha]

as salaam alaikum

>
>Actually nzingha this situation will indeed
>take place after the second
>coming of Jesus peace be
>upon him… After his final
>coming, nothing but Islam will
>be accepted from them, for
>taking the poll tax is
>only effective until Jesus' descent….ref
> umdat ul salik
>

Than i guess no one truly needs jihad by the sword now do they? We can all sit and wait for Isa pbuh to return and take care of it all. This of course is exactly what the christians are doing. however part of the downfall of muslims is their need to sit and wait for someone else to come and do what needs to be done. We are waiting for isa's pbuh return .. or the mahdi.. or the dajjal.. or something to set things in motion. And here i was that Islam taught people are to act on themselves and not wait for a savior.


>
>I guess the fiqh aspect of
>jihad is not your speciality…
>
>Women and children are exempted from
>jihad expedition…

women, children, the insane, slaves, edelerly, and the sick and injured. The only ones whom scholars have concluded have any obligation to make jihad are those that are male, sane, of age, and free. There is the matter of the mother being able to prohibit.. but this is in cases when there is no other to do the job. And than there is the cases of those who are to stay behind to learn. However there are groups of muslims who do believe that it is just as incumbent upon women to wage jihad as it is for the man. but a whole other topic me thinks.. women in jihad.. our duties.. our expectations.. not that we haven't fought jihad.. not that women have not fought along side of Muhammad pbuh.. such as Umm Umarah, and Umm Sulaim.. even Aisha r.a did battle.. lead with two other men.. but a whole other topic indeed.

<<but it’s still be
>good for us women and
>our children to go for
>some sword fighting training or
>even archery…just in case..>>


I would suggest more than some sword fighting classes, considering the way that war is waged today there are many more options for women and the issue of Jihad. We are more than capable of firing a missle countries away from the actual war.. we don't have to do ground battles.. and go toe to toe with men.. of course this is unless the invaders are in our backyards. In such cases a sword.. and archey doesn't do much with guns.. by the time we get out the door to go chop off a head.. we are dead.. or worse wounded.. on our way to be raped and tortured.. shudder.. true weapons training is more like it.

Really nzingha
>I was kind of expecting
>u to put more input
>on this subject of jihad….. >>

oh i have alot to imput.. i just disagree that we are to fight until people believe as we do. this is a direct contradiction to Qur'an and the life of Muhammad pbuh.


>
>unfortunately the concept of jihad is
>so misunderstood even by muslim
>themselves…Jihad it seemed has been
>equated with violence and aggression…..which
>is not true at all…

Sister jihad is about aggression when you are talking about overtaking the land and homes of others. There is NO WAY around this. and yes the way that muslims have taken over lands is by way of violence.. i can give you some very explicit accounts of those who have fought jihad.. and you can not say it is not violent.

however the disctinction here is 1. fighting someone until they believe as we do.. 2. fighting to take over land 3. ensuring that others are free to choose their belief system (and i'm not dealing with apostates a whole other issue) 4. being extremely careful that we don't in the end become the oppressors.




ma salaam
nzingha



- Never do I argue with a man with a desire to hear him say what is wrong, or to expose him and win victory over him. Whenever I face an opponent in debate I silently pray - O Lord, help him so that truth may flow from his heart and on his tongue, and so that if truth is on my side, he may follow me; and if truth be on his side, I may follow him.
al-Imam Al-Shafi'i

[Nzingha]

as salaam alaikum

You are having fun with those pics aren't you?? :)



>
>I have not isolated this ayah.
>It appears a few times
>in the Qur'an and each
>time it has been understood
>by the mufasireen to mean
>that it is our duty
>as Muslims to raise the
>deen of Allah (Swt) above
>the deen's of the disbelievers.
>To make our deen the
>most dominant in this dunya,
>yes of course it is
>superior already, but it is
>to be made dominant, or
>to rule over them.>>>



This is what I mean about taking aya in isolation.. and please don't tell me sheikh such and such said so. It makes no difference to me.. if one is wrong one is wrong. Each of the three times this verse occurs it is preceeded by those who wish to extinguish (yes not distinguish hehe) the light of Allah with their mouths.. by their false teachings.. by their mouths denying Allah and making lies.. however Allah by his way of a Messenger (one who tells the people the message of Allah) will see that the diyn is superiour over all other religion. It is not about Jihad.. it is not about war.. it is not about we dominating by force other peoples.



<< Again
>though you have gone off
>on this tangent of forcing
>religion onto people, which I
>will make clear one last
>time I've never even suggested.
>Ruling by Islam, does not
>equal forcing people to convert
>to Islam. >>


but interpreted rules of islam does call for us to force others to convert. do or die.. this is the issue i'm dealing with.



>
>Nope, not misunderstanding you I don't
>think. This saying of the
>prophet (Saw) comes from a
>very strong hadith, and I
>think it is you who
>is misunderstanding, misunderstanding what the
>hadith says. It doesn't state
>I will fight people and
>force them to declare "La
>ilaha ila'Allah", it says fight
>them until they declare it.>>
I
>would suggest searching for a
>commentary on this hadith sis, >>


I have actually as well as its variant readings, how scholars have severely differed not only on its contents, but wether it is abrogated and still applicable.. of the litteral meaning is to be taken or the general implication.. yadda yadda. There is more than meets the eye on this hadith.

And no matter how you play on words.. we are not to fight those until the declare the oneness of Allah.. if this were true how can non muslims live in our society? how are they guaranteed safety and security that dhimmi status allows them?



>This only serves to further reinforce
>my statements. Tell me what
>happened sis, when the Muslims
>lost military/administrative dominance over Spain?
>What happened to the religion
>of Islam in Spain? How
>many Muslims remained? ZILCH, ZERO,
>NIL... You see sis, the
>military dominance is very much
>linked with the spiritual aspects
>of Islam.

hardly because military dominance never took over east africa, the us or s.e asia.. and the spiritual aspects of islam remain alive and well in the hearts and actions of Muslims. if one is forced into believing.. it is not belief at all. because once that force is gone.. you have what you had in italy and spain.. no muslims. Those who believe have left..or died fighting.. those who didnt turned apostate.. what kind of faith is that?

>
>Imam Al-Khateeb narrated in his history
>and Imam Al-Khattabee narrated that
>Omar Ibn Al-Khattab (ra) said,
>"By Allah, What Allah protects
>and prevents by the ruler
>is greater than what he
>will protect and prevent
>by the Qur'an".
>

I have to smile at that one.. knowing the character of Umar r.a.


>
>No point having entire nations of
>converts if they don't live
>under Islam. >>

I'm glad Muhammad pbuh never felt that way.. what if he said.. no point.. cause we are in a pagan society.. or no point because muslims are living under christian rule.. our souls is the point.. wether we live under a state Islamically run or not.. our souls are at stake.. there is a HUGE point brother.


>I did not say they would
>distinguish (extinguish I think you
>meant) the light of Allah,
>I said they will *try*
>to extinguish, and thisis most
>definitely in the Qur'an, that
>they will indeed try this.
>

and they can't.. which is the point.. there attemps are feeble.. because in the end.. truth stands clear from falsehood.


>
So I work
>to bring back the Islamic
>State, and insha'allah when it
>returns, then the Offensive Jihad
>will resume, and not cease
>until they testify that there
>is only one God.
>


until there.. there are many fighting the defensive jihad.. is this not an obligation? or do you have to wait for the islamic state to be built in order to fight? just wondering

ma salaam
nzingha

- Never do I argue with a man with a desire to hear him say what is wrong, or to expose him and win victory over him. Whenever I face an opponent in debate I silently pray - O Lord, help him so that truth may flow from his heart and on his tongue, and so that if truth is on my side, he may follow me; and if truth be on his side, I may follow him.
al-Imam Al-Shafi'i

[Ibrahim]

[link:www.islaam.com|http://bozo.ugh.net.au/~alias/images/salam.gif] Sister Nzinga,

You are having fun with those pics aren't you??

You betcha :)

I am using this forum as a bit of a testing ground I guess, to see how my graphics appear on the web. Hope you don't mind :)

it is preceeded by those who wish to extinguish (yes not distinguish hehe) the light of Allah with their mouths.. by their false teachings.. by their mouths denying Allah and making lies..

The verse states that it must be the deen dominant over all other deens. So it must prevail over all other methods of living. This means for instance, Islam cannot exist properly under Communism, nor Capitalism/Democracy, it must be the dominant system OVER these false ways of life, and it must seek to expose their falsehood and to eradicate them.

but interpreted rules of islam does call for us to force others to convert. do or die.. this is the issue i'm dealing with.

Can you please show me an example of someone who interprets the rules of Islam to mean that people should be forcefully converted? Regardless of this anyway, I, nor Sister Umm Suhayb ever promoted this idea, so who are you arguing it against?

And no matter how you play on words.. we are not to fight those until the declare the oneness of Allah.. if this were true how can non muslims live in our society? how are they guaranteed safety and security that dhimmi status allows them?

As we've already discussed it doesn't say "fight them and force them to declare shehadeh" it says "fight them until they declare shehadeh" in other words the fighting, the Jihad will not cease until they become Muslims. This concept exists in the Qur'an also where it states "And fight them until deen is for Allah", clearly showing that we must fight them until the deen of Islam prevails over them in this dunya (of course we all know that Islam is superior anyway).

if one is forced into believing.. it is not belief at all. because once that force is gone..

Still sis, you're arguing a point none of us here ever put forth. Who are you arguing this against?

I have to smile at that one.. knowing the character of Umar r.a.

hmm, I'm not really sure what to make of this comment...

I'm glad Muhammad pbuh never felt that way.. what if he said.. no point.. cause we are in a pagan society.. or no point because muslims are living under christian rule.. our souls is the point.. wether we live under a state Islamically run or not.. our souls are at stake.. there is a HUGE point brother.

Never felt which way? He (saw) most certainly didn't feel the way you do, that we should just leave it at spiritual expansion. He fought and planned to make Islam dominant over all other ways of life. His entire mission revolved around setting up an infastructure of Islamic dominance in this dunya. This doesn't mean he fought for the pleasures of the dunya, it means he fought to fulfil the command of Allah (swt) that we make this deen prevail over all others. If he was happy just having individuals embrace Islam, then perhaps half of Arabia may have become Muslims, who knows, but we wouldn't be seeing Islam like we do today.

until there.. there are many fighting the defensive jihad.. is this not an obligation? or do you have to wait for the islamic state to be built in order to fight? just wondering

Yes the defensive Jihad should still go ahead, of course, it is always compulsory on those who've been evicted from their homes or are being fought against, and those who live immediately around them. I will not make excuses for my not fighting defensive Jihad, insha'allah one day I will, either way it's not my intention to say people are neglecting Jihad here (anyone specifically) and I think for your part you should retract from doing the same in my direction. Yes call me to my obligations, I welcome it.

Ibrahim.

[link:www.islaam.com|http://bozo.ugh.net.au/~alias/images/shehsig02.gif]

[Nzingha]

as salaam alaikum

>
>I am using this forum as
>a bit of a testing
>ground I guess, to see
>how my graphics appear on
>the web. Hope you don't
>mind :)
>

nope don't mind.. do you have other graphics?

>
>The verse states that it must
>be the deen dominant over
>all other deens. So it
>must prevail over all other
>methods of living.>>>


and it does this on its own.. your missing my point. Your qouting the verse as a way to prove that we are to fight all other peoples until our diyn is dominant over there.. as a proof of offensive jihad.. i think it is a bit misplaced considering when you take it into context.. for the ayat you qoute is not about fighting physically but become supreme over other beliefs that are false.. and people of have lied about.



< This means
>for instance, Islam cannot exist
>properly under Communism, nor Capitalism/Democracy,
>it must be the dominant
>system OVER these false ways
>of life, and it must
>seek to expose their falsehood
>and to eradicate them.
>


i'll agree that islam can not implamented FULLY under such systems (except democracy a whole other issue we still disagree on as well)


>Can you please show me an
>example of someone who interprets
>the rules of Islam to
>mean that people should be
>forcefully converted?>>


tell me the role of pagans in interepreted muslim soceity. you'll begin to see.


Regardless of this
>anyway, I, nor Sister Umm
>Suhayb ever promoted this idea,
>so who are you arguing
>it against? >>


not you.. but umm suhayb you should re read the posts


>As we've already discussed it doesn't
>say "fight them and force
>them to declare shehadeh" it
>says "fight them until they
>declare shehadeh" in other words
>the fighting, the Jihad will
>not cease until they become
>Muslims.>>

your saying the same thing.. fight until they become muslims.. fight them utnil they become muslims.. if they don't become muslims you fight them..so they constantly live under the threat of fight and violence until they convert.. don't you see this yet? either convert.. or i'll fight you.. this is threat.. this is a forced conversion.

btw brother i suggest you look up the variants of this hadith.. because you won't be able to do justice to it unless you do. It gets rather interesting.



<< This concept exists in
>the Qur'an also where it
>states "And fight them until
>deen is for Allah", clearly
>showing that we must fight
>them until the deen of
>Islam prevails over them in
>this dunya>>


brother again don't neglect other parts of quran.. Allah says to fight the oppressors.. to extend peace.. not to fight when they don't.. if they seek aid we are to give it to them.. if they pay the jiziya we are to accept it from them.. Allah gives them more outs than your allowing.


>Still sis, you're arguing a point
>none of us here ever
>put forth. Who are you
>arguing this against?
>

are you sure your not putting forth the argument?


>hmm, I'm not really sure what
>to make of this comment...
>

Umar r.a was a forceful man.. he instilled fear into people.. the first thing that he would do for the people who offended muhammad pbuh was to suggest cutting off their head.. he is known to have beat slave women for covering.. he is known for having his own son punished for drinking.. he is known to be "heavy handed" if you will. nothing wrong just his personality. Of course when you take his personality into perspective and read that qoute again.. you can't help but to smile.. because it is a picture of him..


>Never felt which way? He (saw)
>most certainly didn't feel the
>way you do, that we
>should just leave it at
>spiritual expansion.>>


Actually it was a spiritual expansion that gave him the ability to expand in his hometown.. and his neighbors (not that he expanded to ethiopia.. but a whole other issue)


> If he was
>happy just having individuals embrace
>Islam, then perhaps half of
>Arabia may have become Muslims,
>who knows, but we wouldn't
>be seeing Islam like we
>do today.
>

first he only fought when he had the ability to do so.. he was more than happy with the 10 years in mekkah seeing people convert in such harsh conditions.. ever wonder why such early converts are spoken so highly of?? I tend to be a bit more fatalistic when it comes to matters of faith.. of people believing and the like.. i'm just odd that way. He would have never gotten to such a political position if these peoples faith weren't as deep as they were. To sacrafice what they had to.. would have never been successful with weak of faith.. or those converting out of threat.

either
>way it's not my intention
>to say people are neglecting
>Jihad here (anyone specifically) and
>I think for your part
>you should retract from doing
>the same in my direction.
>Yes call me to my
>obligations, I welcome it.
>


notice "just wondering" ahhhh relax :) there are many muslims who feel that such obligations are not incumbent upon them because there is no khalif of this day. Since you stated this was the same in the matter of offensive jihad just wondered your stance.

nzingha


- Never do I argue with a man with a desire to hear him say what is wrong, or to expose him and win victory over him. Whenever I face an opponent in debate I silently pray - O Lord, help him so that truth may flow from his heart and on his tongue, and so that if truth is on my side, he may follow me; and if truth be on his side, I may follow him.
al-Imam Al-Shafi'i

[um suhayb (Guest)]

Bismillah

>as salaam alaikum
Wa alaykum salam

>not you.. but umm suhayb you
>should re read the posts
>
May dust settle on your forehead!
Nowhere have i advocated a forceful conversion of non muslim....

What i've stated was only a situation which will come in the time of Jesus peace be upon him in which the kafeer have no option but to embraced islam...

Offensive jihad is something which already established in Islamic law...we simply cannot deny this..
And da'wa and jihad is inseparable, some ulama said it's the same....we simply can't do without any one of them...
If muslims were to launch a war against any non-muslims without doing da'wa first...it would be unjustifiable war....not a jihad....I'm sure u know about the account of khalifah Omar abdul azeez ra ordered the muslim troops out of samarkand, simply because the christians had complain to him that the muslims did not give them any options...

Now that is offensive jihad...but defensive jihad is another matter...it's obligatory for muslim inhabitants of the country which was overrun by kuffar forces to repel the enemies...by any means necessary.

Actually what i meant to say is this, Jihad is not an arbitrary violence nor a kind of unjustifiable aggression...whereby muslims can kill any non muslims with cruelty....
but the purpose of jihad is to uphold Allah's kalimah, the basis for jihad is laa illaha illallah...
Actually there was this joke going on a few years back,..a muslim man had captured a jew in central asia during the battle...He said to the jew, embraced islam or i'll kill you. The Jew said Ok, then tell me about islam..The muslim man replied" By Allah , i do'nt know".
THis more or less tell us the condition of today's ummah..
Wasallam
umm suhayb

[Nzingha]

> Bismillah
>
>>as salaam alaikum
>Wa alaykum salam
>
>>not you.. but umm suhayb you
>>should re read the posts
>>
>May dust settle on your forehead!
>
>Nowhere have i advocated a forceful
>conversion of non muslim....
>

as salaam alaikum


don't worry there is more than enough dust on my forhead no nead to ask for it.

you don't read what you write maybe??


your words

"Can't u see at all the poison this author trying to propagate...He's trying to kill the spirit of jihad..
It's all lies promoted by the orientalist.... Let us not be duped by the opinions of munafiqs and enemy of AllaH...
The prophet sallallahu alayhi wassallam said he had been commanded to fight (qital) mankind(kafeer) until they witness that there is no god except Allah...if they believe, then their lives and wealth will be safe...in a sahih hadith which was agreed upon.."

you stated according to Muhammad pbuh we are to FIGHT mankind until they WITNESS there is not God except Allah.. IF THEY BELIEVE than are their lives and wealth safe.

This is forced conversion.. maybe you forgot about this post?

i asked you specifically

"So the non muslims who have been posting here are right.. that muslims are to behave violently in order to spread the religion of Islam. That we are to kill any and all that oppose us.. that we are to use violent means to gain control. Basically they are right and we are wrong. Why didn't you correct us when we were dispelling these beliefs of non muslims? "

what was your response??

"To tell u the truth nzingha, i did'nt really follow up all the posts that those christian and atheist's been sending...To me their posts are like darkness....as our eyes,ears and mouths are windows to our hearts...i feel we should'nt give them the chance to fill our hearts with their zulumaat..."

again read what you first posted.. and if you can honestly sit there and say that this is not an idea of forced conversion.. than perhaps it is you that has too much dust on your forhead.

ma salaam
nzingha

- Never do I argue with a man with a desire to hear him say what is wrong, or to expose him and win victory over him. Whenever I face an opponent in debate I silently pray - O Lord, help him so that truth may flow from his heart and on his tongue, and so that if truth is on my side, he may follow me; and if truth be on his side, I may follow him.
al-Imam Al-Shafi'i

[umm_suhayb]

>Bismillah
MAY AllAH grants victory to mujahideen! Ameen

wassalam