Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Muslima wrote: However, although they hurt him, Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) looked beyond his own wounds and forgave them, replying when asked whether to destroy them‘No, do not destroy them, for I hope that Allah will bring out of their offspring people who worship Him alone without associating any partner with Him in worship." What a beautiful excellent response, look at the humiliy, the control. This is the man's values that we Muslims follow, we follow this beautiful Deen, the legacy oF Rassullulah, and the islamophobes will never be able to extinguish the light of this Deen because it is preserved in the hearts of the believers by Allah Azzawajal.

He wasn't nearly so forgiving when it came to the Banu Qurayza.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banu_Qurayza

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invasion_of_Banu_Qurayza

This was discussed in the political forum under the thread about the Oklahoma beheading. The Banu Qurayza broke a treaty and were treated as treasonous. They submitted to arbitration by a judge they approved, who was a Jewish convert to Islam. He ordered the punishment according to the Torah.

I have no idea why you keep bringing this ancient incident up as evidence against Islam. All of this was pretty par for the course at the time.

Demise of Banu Qurayza
Surrender and execution

After their garrisons were stormed by Ali they had no choice but to comply with Muhammad's judgement. Muhammad ordered that the men should be handcuffed, and this was done under the supervision of Muhammad bin Salamah Al-Ansari while the women and children were isolated in confinement. Thereupon Al-Aws tribe interceded begging Muhammad to be lenient towards them. He suggested that Sa‘d bin Mu‘adh a Muslim convert who was a former ally of the tribe, should decide their fate.[7][8][9][10][25][25]

Muir holds that the Qurayza surrendered on the condition that "their fate was decided by their allies, the Bani Aws" but mentions that Sa'd wanted to get revenge and that he said "Suffer me not to die until my heart hadth had its revenge against them".[37] Stillman also made the same claim, he said: "Sa`d took the hint and condemned the adult males to death and the hapless women and children to slavery." Furthermore, Stillman infers from Abu Lubaba's gesture that Muhammad had decided the fate of the Qurayza even before their surrender.[21]

According to Mubrakpuri, Stillman, Peters and Adil and Muir, when Sa'd arrived, his fellow Aws pleaded for leniency towards the Qurayza and on his request pledged that they would abide by his decision.[14] He then pronounced that "the men should be killed, the property divided, and the women and children taken as captives". Muhammad approved of the ruling, calling it similar to God's judgment.[7][8][9][10][11] Mubarakpuri states that the tribe who reached puberty were beheaded.[1]

Sa'd dismissed the pleas of the Aws, according to Watt because being close to death and concerned with his afterlife, he put what he considered "his duty to God and the Muslim community" before tribal allegiance.[25] Tariq Ramadan argues that Muhammad deviated from his earlier, more lenient treatment of prisoners as this was seen as "as sign of weakness if not madness"[35] and Peterson concurs that the Muslims wanted to deter future treachery by severe punishment.[14]

This is also mentioned in the Sunni hadith collections, stating:

Then the Prophet said, "O Sad! These people have agreed to accept your verdict." Sad said, "I judge that their warriors should be killed and their children and women should be taken as captives." The Prophet said, "You have given a judgment similar to Allah's Judgment (or the King's judgment)."Sahih al-Bukhari, 5:58:148

Anonymous wrote:

Muslima wrote: However, although they hurt him, Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) looked beyond his own wounds and forgave them, replying when asked whether to destroy them‘No, do not destroy them, for I hope that Allah will bring out of their offspring people who worship Him alone without associating any partner with Him in worship." What a beautiful excellent response, look at the humiliy, the control. This is the man's values that we Muslims follow, we follow this beautiful Deen, the legacy oF Rassullulah, and the islamophobes will never be able to extinguish the light of this Deen because it is preserved in the hearts of the believers by Allah Azzawajal.

He wasn't nearly so forgiving when it came to the Banu Qurayza.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banu_Qurayza

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invasion_of_Banu_Qurayza

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Done with you. You and your posse are RACIST islamophobes.

I am Islamophobic because I point out that you and the scholar your respect differ with regard to your positions on Shariah? Why?

Muslima wrote: However, although they hurt him, Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) looked beyond his own wounds and forgave them, replying when asked whether to destroy them‘No, do not destroy them, for I hope that Allah will bring out of their offspring people who worship Him alone without associating any partner with Him in worship." What a beautiful excellent response, look at the humiliy, the control. This is the man's values that we Muslims follow, we follow this beautiful Deen, the legacy oF Rassullulah, and the islamophobes will never be able to extinguish the light of this Deen because it is preserved in the hearts of the believers by Allah Azzawajal.

Anonymous wrote:

Muslima wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Muslima wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
So you never even watched the videos in the links I provided? Wow. HA! You just exposed yourself as a Islamophobe and Islam hater, do you know that? The questions you asked are directly addressed and answered in the youtube links!! You chose not to watch them!

No matter, because now they are permanently a part of DCUM and I assure you that others will watch them.

I hope you're not a Christian or Jew, as you reflect poorly on the vast majority of Christians and Jews I know.

OK. Muslima provided the links and videos between the hours of 1-3 last night. And you're asking about us watching the links *you* provided. Seems pretty clear that you and Muslima are the same person.

Busted!

Stop lying. I have not posted links to any youtube videos yesterday or the day before, or today......

Salaam Sister,

Hit the REPORT button and tell Jeff about the two posters who posted racist messages on this thread.
I plan to do same.

Salaam sister,

Great. Ignorance and prejudice are the handmaiden of propaganda and this has been demonstrated over and over by those posters. ..racist thought and action says far more about the person they come from than the person they are directed at.

Muslima, I have no idea how you haven't lost your temper with these racist islamophobes. You are a better Muslim than I. Its a testament to your faith. When practiced dutifully, Islam makes a person calm, probably because they fully submitted themself to God. After all that is what Islam literally means, submission.

Anonymous wrote:
Done with you. You and your posse are RACIST islamophobes.

Anonymous wrote:I was first invited to a beheading in Saudi Arabia while working as a physician in Riyadh. It was 1999, and I was an attending intensive care specialist in an advanced medical system that valued my U.S. training. As we finished resuscitating a patient, a colleague casually said: “We’re going to Chop-Chop Square tomorrow. Do you want to see a beheading?”

He was referring to Deera, the Riyadh district surrounding its major seminary and mosque. During the week, Deera bustled with commerce, home to the finest jewelers. But on Fridays, with shops closed for Islam’s holy day, people convicted of capital crimes such as murder, rape and incest were beheaded by the sword-wielding state executioner in full public view.

The horrific irony — saving a life while my colleagues discussed the entertainment of taking one — was too much for me. I politely declined the invitation, and in the days that followed, I did my best to push the incident out of mind as I grappled with the country’s tension between modern and medieval.

...


As a devout Muslim, the tragedies of recent days have packed an added blow. Along with the senseless loss of two promising young lives, I have been forced to confront the fact that the beautiful religion that continues to sustain me — that supports me in my life-giving work as a physician — is increasingly the domain of those who would use it to destroy everything I hold dear.

Recent events have left me able to draw only one conclusion: Islamism — the radical imposter form of my religion — has declared war on Islam.

see - http://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2014/09/05/my-beautiful-faith-is-being-overtaken-by-the-beheaders-ive-interviewed/?hpid=z7

Anonymous wrote:
Done with you. You and your posse are RACIST islamophobes.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I said many pages ago that I do NOT base my answers or defense of Islam on the Sharia, as Sharia is MAN MADE law. I base my answers on primarily on the Quran. The Sharia is flawed and does not accurate reflect what God intended. You can not google research Islam or read one or two books to understand it completely. There are huge loopholes in your understanding of the rationale of Islam. You must speak with a few scholars or reputable imams to clarify your questions. Here is one article that provides a couple of passages which explain under what terms more than one wife is permitted: http://www.quran-islam.org/articles/part_3/polygamy_in_quran_(P1411).html It may NOT be permitted on a whim. It is an extremely serious decision with very narrow boundaries.

Are you the person who's a fan of Hamza Yusuf? If so, how do you, with your rejection of Shariah, feel about the fact that Mr. Bin Bayyah - Mr. Yusuf's boss - thinks deriding Shariah is basis for takfir?

Hamza Yusuf is a cofounder of Zaytuna College, located in Berkeley, California. He is an advisor to Stanford University's Program in Islamic Studies and the Center for Islamic Studies at Berkeley's Graduate Theological Union. He also serves as a member of the board of advisors of George Russell's One Nation, a national philanthropic initiative that promotes pluralism and inclusion in America. In addition, he serves as vice-president for the Global Center for Guidance and Renewal, which was founded and is currently presided over by Shaykh Abdallah bin Bayyah, one of the top jurists and masters of Islamic sciences in the world. Recently, Hamza Yusuf was ranked as "the Western world's most influential Islamic scholar" by The 500 Most Influential Muslims, edited by John Esposito and Ibrahim Kalin, (2009).

Hey, I got an idea. You were saying Yusuf is accessible and all. Call him up and say, Sheikh, I reject Shariah but your boss says this is tantamount to disbelief. What should I do?

Ruling on Applying Man-Made Laws http://binbayyah.net/english/2012/01/19/ruling-on-applying-man-made-laws/

What is the ruling of applying man-made laws? Can we charge the ruler who rules with man-made laws with disbelief?

In the name of Allah, the All-Merciful, the Mercy-giving. This issue is problematic and there has been much ado about it. In the past century fatwas were given in this regard. The issue should be dealt with in detail.
First, it is undoubtedly prohibited and an enormous sin to rule with man-made laws, and there are Shari`ah texts contrary to implementing these laws. In the Quran we read, “And judge between them by what Allah has sent down. Nor are you to follow their whims.” [5:49] “Is it, then, the judgment of ignorance that they seek? Yet, who renders a fairer judgment than Allah to a people who have certainty?” [5:50]
As for the charge of disbelief, this is something that cannot be definitely decided unless, along with ruling with these laws, there is explicit derision, degradation or belittling of the status of the Shari`ah. One says, for example, that the Shari`ah is not suitable to be applied, or similar words. But if one believes that the Shari`ah is true and everything else is not true, enacting such laws is not enough reason for the charge of disbelief, as it may be due to his inability, ignorance or imitation of others. Therefore, Ibn `Abbas (may Allah be pleased with them) said about the Quranic verse that reads, “And whoever does not rule by what Allah has sent down – then such as these are the non-muslims,” [5:44] that this is a lesser disbelief, and about the verse that reads, ” And whoever does not rule by what Allah has sent down – then such as these are the ungodly,” [5:47] that this is a lesser ungodliness, which means that it does not cast the person out of the fold of the religion. This is the position we adopt based on many scholarly statements including statements from Sheikh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah (may Allah have mercy with him).
`Adyy ibn Hatem said: I heard the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) reading from Bara’ah, “They have taken their rabbis and their monks as lords apart from Allah” [9:31] and he said, “They did not worship them, but if they made things lawful for them, they would deem it lawful, and if they made things unlawful for them, they would deem it unlawful.” [Reported by al-Termidhy (3095) and others] This is the indirect meaning of worshiping them. They changed the prescribed injunctions given in the name of the lawgiver insomuch that they declared as unlawful what the lawgiver made lawful and as lawful what the lawgiver made unlawful, attributing this to the Shari`ah, such as saying, for example, that the Prayer, Fasting or Zakah are not obligatory in the Shari`ah, or that committing enormous sins is permissible. But committing these enormous sins and letting others commit them is not a reason for disbelief, in itself.
This position is contrary to the position of some muftis and sheikhs in the past century who considered merely doing this as enough reason for the charge of disbelief. We verified this point in a separate study titled (al-Takfeer bi al-Hukm bi Ghayr ma Anzala Allah) in the Contemporary Fiqh Research Magazine. Besides, the charge of disbelief will lead to wars and will stir devastating mischief. It is rather better to educate people and draw their attention to the importance of the Shari`ah and the great benefits the Shari`ah provides. Many of the Muslim countries were colonized and thus they inherited the laws of the colonizers and unconsciously continued in this way, lacking the courage to change these laws.
Hence, we do not deem this as enough reason for the charge of disbelief unless it is accompanied by disparaging or deriding the Shari`ah, or by a deviant conviction. Peace and blessings be upon our Prophet Muhammad.

Anonymous wrote:Oh I think I know which poster asked Muslima to go back to her country. It might have been UNconsensual. Who else could be that stupid to be so openly racist?
And my guess is you are the one who thought pointing out that Muslim converts are only African American or poor folks was a criticism.
Writing styles provide ample evidence. As for UNconsensual, she can't think, let alone write.