...torches 185 churches. In Islam, "peace" means no more Christians, Atheists, Buddhists, or any other non-Islamic person on the face of the earth (except perhaps those females groomed for rape, and slaves, of course). It also means no more Shias or other offshoots from whatever the dictator of the worldwide emirate dictates as "truth from Allah".
Barbarism was practiced and preached by The Prophet; it is the primary worldview of the culture.
18 comments:
Consider:
Link: What does the Religion of Peace Teach About...Lying (Taqiyya and Kitman)
Hmmm...
From what I can gather as a non-believer in Allah, the Great and Magnificent Deceiver, moral concepts such as being truthful or honoring your word are all relative and subject to "interpretation" depending on the context. That sounds suspiciously like atheist consequentialism to me.
"Peace" is one of those equivocations used to give a certain impression to gullible fools, who hear in it what they project into it, N-O-T what is actually intended towards them. It always comes as a shock when the Muslims do exactly what they have stated they will do to all non-believers/heretics when they gain power: convert them to Islam, subject them to slavery and jizyah (Dhimmis), or kill them.
ISIS (N-O-T ISIL, which verbally eliminates the state of Israel from existence without firing a shot):
“We offer them three choices: Islam; the dhimma contract – involving payment of jizya; if they refuse this they will have nothing but the sword.”
Strange, but that seems to be in complete accord with Islam and the Noble Qur'an, both as demonstrated by the Prophet Mohammad, may peace be upon his name, and his followers, may curses be upon their name. I guess that would mean that ISIS IS Islamic after all. (Maybe PBHO should have paid more attention to the imam while attending madrasa, instead of trying to find a "choon gang" as his companions.
It is no different with atheism. Any lie is permitted, as long as it serves the purpose of obtaining absolute power over the Other. Those who are gullible enough to engage in "wishful thinking" are usually the ones who are first given the eternal "peace" of death.
Off with their heads! (Peacefully, of course...)
UPDATE:
Link: Reports: ISIS is Winning
Could there ever have been any doubt?
Safwan reported from a number of Companions of the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) on the authority of their fathers who were relatives of each other. The Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) said: Beware, if anyone wrongs a contracting man, or diminishes his right, or forces him to work beyond his capacity, or takes from him anything without his consent, I shall plead for him on the Day of Judgment. -Sunan Abi Dawud, Book 19, Hadith 3046
Narrated `Abdullah bin `Amr:
The Prophet (ﷺ) said, "Whoever killed a Mu'ahid (a person who is granted the pledge of protection by the Muslims) shall not smell the fragrance of Paradise though its fragrance can be smelt at a distance of forty years (of traveling). -Sahih al-Bukhari, Vol. 9, Book 83, Hadith 49
Allah does not forbid you from those who do not fight you because of religion and do not expel you from your homes - from being righteous toward them and acting justly toward them. Indeed, Allah loves those who act justly. (Quran 60:8)
Your whole argument is equivalent to declaring the actions of the crusaders (Kill them all and let God sort them out) to be the teachings of the bible (oh wait, there is nothing condemning them in the bible). [tu quoque, tu qouque! Ignore our hypocrisy and double standards!]
You seem to be running on misinformation. Can you site sources for the claims "You are free to kill all non-Muslims for being non-Muslims", "You can rape females", and "All non-Muslims are to be slaves"
Also, can you explain what you mean by "barbarism"?
"I advise you ten things Do not kill women or children or an aged, infirm person. Do not cut down fruit-bearing trees. Do not destroy an inhabited place. Do not slaughter sheep or camels except for food. Do not burn bees and do not scatter them. Do not steal from the booty, and do not be cowardly." -Malik's Muwatta, Book 21, Number 10
Islam deals with human beings. Naturally, it means that it realistically must address situations where there is war, and situations where there is peace.
@Robert
Nice site of half truths mixed with outright lies.
http://www.loonwatch.com/2010/08/silencing-spencer-taqiyya-and-kitman-are-part-of-judeo-christian-belief/
Asma bint Yazid narrated that the Messenger of Allah said:
"it is not lawful to lie except in three cases: Something the man tells his wife to please her, to lie during war, and to lie in order to bring peace between the people." -Jami` at-Tirmidhi, Vol. 4, Book 1, Hadith 1939
Do you see "non-Muslim", "non-believer", or "infidel"?
I might as well use the genetic fallacy on you:
Romans 3:5-8
5 But if our unrighteousness brings out God’s righteousness more clearly, what shall we say? That God is unjust in bringing his wrath on us? (I am using a human argument.) 6 Certainly not! If that were so, how could God judge the world? 7 Someone might argue, “If my falsehood enhances God’s truthfulness and so increases his glory, why am I still condemned as a sinner?” 8 Why not say—as some slanderously claim that we say—“Let us do evil that good may result”? Their condemnation is just!
Philippians 1:15-18
15 It is true that some preach Christ out of envy and rivalry, but others out of goodwill. 16 The latter do so out of love, knowing that I am put here for the defense of the gospel. 17 The former preach Christ out of selfish ambition, not sincerely, supposing that they can stir up trouble for me while I am in chains. 18 But what does it matter? The important thing is that in every way, whether from false motives or true, Christ is preached. And because of this I rejoice.
Yes, and I will continue to rejoice,
Not sure where the consequentialism claim comes from, but I replied to it there:
http://atheism-analyzed.blogspot.ae/2014/09/the-asymmetry-between-palestinian-and.html
Dragon Fang:
Let's start with the two bible passages which you claim to condone lying. They do not.
The first quote is especially clear in saying that the critics condemnation of such practices by Christians is just.
The second must be corrupted in order to gain approval of lying; what it says, in fact, is that the liars trip themselves up by telling the truth as if it is a lie. The liars are those who are against Christianity. But their "lies" are actually truths which work for the purposes of the deity.
This is a specific situation, not condoning lying, but finding humor in the misapprehensions of anti-christian liars.
Next, there are several texts in the Qur'an Surahs and the hadiths which prescribe murder for "just" causes. It is up to the individual to determine what is "just", and that is what happens.
Further, the exemplary life of Muhammed includes much killing, including mass murder for the sin of being Jewish, where instances of the beheadings of 400 Jews, and the beheadings of 600-900 Jews are recorded. Further, Muhammed attacked Jewish strongholds because he lusted for their wealth, primarily gold. And Muhammed lusted also for the wives and children of other men, killing one groom in order to have his bride for himself, and marrying a nine year old (some say a four year old). He was of modest background until he married a wealthy woman more than 15 years older than himself; when she died, he became wealthy.
Barbarism and consequentialism go hand in hand. The term, barbarism, is being used in the sense of a culture of violence both domestic and inter-relational. The Shia/Sunni violence qualifies for that, as does the Islamic violence against non-Muslims around the world on a daily basis.
Regardless of the peaceful tone of some Surahs, the righteous killing of the Other which is contained in some Surahs cancels out peace. There will be no peace with Islam, short of total capitulation. That is contained in the Surahs, such as Surah 2:191; Surah 4:091; Surah 9:005; Surah 17:033.
It is not up to me to interpret these Surahs or similar hadiths. It is the Islamic interpretations which matter, and those interpretations are what drive the world of terrorism today.
Dragon Fang
We are all familiar with Muhammad's deeds.I for one have a copy of Sirat Rasul (Biography of the Prophet) by Ibn Hisham (abridged by Abdus salam)on my shelf.
Muhammad preached non-violence when he was in a weak position with very few followers.These are mostly Meccan suras.As soon he was in a position of power with thousands of followers,the "non-violent" verses was abrogated by the last surahs,such as At-taubah and the infamous verse of the sword;aka Medinan suras.
Like Stan said,what matters in the end is how your religious fundamentalists interpret these verses.
Those of us living in christian majority nations do not have your religious problems,they're unique to Islam because ultimately it boils down to the distinctions between the founders of Islam and Christianity.
Stan, if it is up to the individual to determine what is just, then you can say that Islam is no better than Atheism, correct?
@ Dragon fang
Part I:
It is highly amusing to see you ignorantly spew out “[tu quoque, tu qouque! Ignore our hypocrisy and double standards!]”. Given no tu qouque in the original post (there was no assertion of “You too!” comparing Islam to Christianity simply because there is no comparison of islam to Christianity in it; there is only a description and condemnation of the historical and current practices of Islam as barbaric behavior), I can only presume one of two things: either you are totally ignorant of what a tu quoque actually is, or you are so logically obtuse as to not understand that your subsequent Biblical references supposedly establishing a “You too!” for Christianity relative to Islam is the perfect illustration of tu quoque. So, I guess I should ignore your hypocrisy and double standards.
As for the obscurity (to you) of the consequentialism assertion:
I quote you (charitably assuming that you are accurately quoting the source given):
“Asma bint Yazid narrated that the Messenger of Allah said:
"it is not lawful to lie except in three cases: Something the man tells his wife to please her, to lie during war, and to lie in order to bring peace between the people." -Jami` at-Tirmidhi, Vol. 4,”
Under Islam, it is sometimes morally acceptable to lie, depending on the context. You provide 3 circumstances:
1. A man lying to his wife if it pleases her. (I presume based on the absence of specific guidance and the Islamist viewpoint toward women in general that a woman lying to her husband is not acceptable.)
2. Lying during war. There are numerous historical examples of this being done by the Prophet and his immediate followers,as well as modern-day examples. If it advances the cause of overcoming the “enemy,” then it is perfectly acceptable morally under Islam. The “enemy” is defined by Islam to be "non-Muslim", "non-believer", or "infidel".
3. Lying to bring peace among the people (who by definition are Muslims of the appropriate sect).
The moral relativism demonstrated in this quotation is sufficient to establish the consequentialism charge. It is for this reason that a "non-Muslim", "non-believer", or "infidel" would be well advised to NOT trust anything a Muslim (or an atheist) says. There will always be an “escape hatch” fashioned to allow any adverse consequences to the "non-Muslim", "non-believer", or "infidel" to be rationalized and thereby justified as being in accordance with the one true faith.
”Islam deals with human beings. Naturally, it means that it realistically must address situations where there is war, and situations where there is peace.”
I guess that would mean that “All’s fair in love and war.”
If so, then it should be morally acceptable (in accordance with the finest tradition of Islam) to eradicate Muslims through mass extermination until they no longer exist. As a Christian, I would strongly condemn that action.
(Continued in part II)
One more link to a supporting "interpretation" of the viewpoint that Islam is at war with the non-Islamist world (and the intentional ignorance (lies?!?) of a certain President of the United States of America, especially in light of the fact that he studied in a Islamic madrassa as a youth):
Islamic Scholar: Barack Obama Is Dead Wrong About Islamic State, “They Are True Muslims”
One more attempt: here is the raw link again (the previous post did not work as a link):
Link:
http://midnightwatcher.wordpress.com/2014/09/19/islamic-scholar-barack-obama-is-dead-wrong-about-islamic-state-they-are-true-muslims/
@Dragon fang:
I took a look at your supposed "refutation" of the charge of consequentialism against Islam that you cited. I quote you:
"Islam does not acknowledge consequentialism (self-evidently since we believe in objective morality), but rather: matters are considered in light of their objectives. Meaning that if the objective is invalid, then it is not to be considered, and if the method is invalid then the objective should not be achieved that way."
More equivocation: "objective morality" does NOT have anything to do with "objectives" to be gained by any "method."
The oft stated (by Islamists) overarching objective of Islam is the subjugation (by force if required) of the entire world under a Caliphate controlled by Muslims. The accepted and approved method (used by Islamists from the founding of the religion) is to use whatever means will assure that global dominance. There are only three options offered to those who are non-Islamist: (1) Convert to the "one true sect" of Islam (whichever one it is that forces its will on all the rest), (2) become a second-class citizen (Dhimmi) or slave (without choice), paying the jizyah (tax) for merely being non-Muslim and being allowed to continue existence, or (3) be summarily executed (with the preferred Islamic method being beheading by the sword).
The charge of consequentialism stands, supported by your own equivocation.
Please try again; you missed the target entirely.
Robert you killed it.It's always a pleasure to see westerners actually understand the islamic threat and not duped by all that PC bullcrap.
@Dragon Fang
We may be anti-atheism but unlike muslims we have no desire to subjugate,humiliate,imprison or kill Atheists.We are always prepared to engage in rational discussions and have no intention to assassinate critics of Christianity.
All Islamic nations silence their dissidents with fear.Even the most liberal muslim nation,Turkey, still persecutes apostates.
I just realized "anti-atheism" is a double negative.
(~~p=p) It is not the case that P is not the case ,is tautologically equivalent to P
(anti-atheism=theism) It is not true that theism is not true,is tautologically equivalent to theism is true.
I think the above is valid.
"When faced with a difference between the map and the terrain, believe the terrain."
"Which are you going to believe: me [with my taqiyya and kitman] or your own lying eyes, observing what Islamists have done to those who are not of the dominant sect throughout the history of Islam, continuing to the present moment?"
IF [Islam is at war with all persons NOT of the approved Islamic sect, as is propounded by ALL Islamic sects]
AND
IF [Islam justifies lying to all persons NOT of the one true Islamic sect as morally acceptable during war]
THEN [all persons NOT of the one true Islamic sect cannot trust anything said by ANY Islamist to be true] AND [Islam is NOT a religion of "peace" as that word is generally understood outside of Islamic thought]
Q.E.D.
"How do I know you're lying? I can see your mouth moving and hear what you are saying and see what you are doing."
Consider:
"Islam is a religion of peace."
Actual kitman meaning:
"Islam [defined narrowly as my particular sect of Islam] is a religion of peace [only with those of the sect to which I belong. Islam is at war with all other sects, and with all non-Muslims.]"
"Islam is not at war."
Actual kitman meaning:
"Islam [defined as my particular sect] is not at war [with members of my particular sect.]"
It is as tiresome as the perpetual evasion of atheists who persist in throwing up "no evidence" for theism, when in fact their implicit meaning is "no PHYSICAL evidence." Trying to pin them down as to meaning is so often like trying to pin down the definition of terms used by Islamists.
In a recent "discussion," one atheist made the mistake of asking for "irrefutable physical evidence" for the existence of God. I rephrased the question back to him.
"Are you asking: What is the irrefutable PHYSICAL evidence for the NON-PHYSICAL God?"
His answer: Silence, the "sound of one hand clapping."
If asked the same question, I would have answered, "The universe." That answer can be demonstrated metaphysically to be true, as can the truth that God is NON-PHYSICAL. That is the provenance of philosophy and natural theology.
I also can "appeal" to a specific "holy book" (but didn't):
Psalm 19:1 (ISV)
The heavens are declaring the glory of God, and their expanse shows the work of his hands.
Romans 1:20 (ISV)
For since the creation of the world God's invisible attributes—his eternal power and divine nature—have been understood and observed by what he made, so that people are without excuse.
The demand for PHYSICAL evidence of a metaphysically derived NON-PHYSICAL God is almost as stupid as the "If everything has a cause, then what caused God?" atheist snarkiness.
Ignoring the careful metaphysical process used to arrive at a demonstration of the logical necessity for an UNCAUSED First Cause, let's just play the game with the question as it is.
"If everything has a cause, then what caused God?" [Snarky laughter ensues...] (Thank you, Bertrand Russell; you may sit down now over in the dunce corner.)
Let's perform a simple substitution and see how it works.
God = UNCAUSED First Cause. That is the derived natural theology equivalence. (I didn't just pull that out of a "holy book.")
"If everything has a cause, then what caused the UNCAUSED First Cause?" [Silence ensues; over in his corner, Dr. Russell is now contemplating the sound of one-hand clapping...]
So Paul would not rejoice if lies were used to spread his message? This is what "the means justifies the end" is about.
Lets begin with the lie about the Jewish tribe (banu qurayza):
The Muslims were in a treaty with the Jewish tribe. The tribe broke the treaty, refused negotiations, and aided with an offensive siege against Muslims. Thus, they were l iable forpunishment and were not innocent. The tribe agreed to follow the judgement of a former Jewish chief (Sa'd ibn Mu'adh), and he judged against them with their own law based on Deuteronomy 20.
Deuteronomy 20
13 When the Lord your God delivers it into your hand, put to the sword all the men in it. 14 As for the women, the children, the livestock and everything else in the city, you may take these as plunder for yourselves. And you may use the plunder the Lord your God gives you from your enemies.
Second of all, The individual doesn't determine what is "just". The Quran and Sunnah determines what is just. And it is not the individual's job, it is an appointed judge's job.
Righteous killing of others who what? Who begin fighting Muslims? Who break peace treaties?
Part 1:
Tu quoque is the predicted and sterotypical response. As long as you don't use it, that's good enough for me.
It is really amusing watching you trying to find loopholes in the hadith. Smh.
A liar is not one who tries to bring reconciliation amongst people and speaks good (in order to avert dispute), or he conveys good. Ibn Shihab said he did not hear that exemption was granted in anything what the people speak as lie but in three cases: in battle, for bringing reconciliation amongst persons and the narration of the words of the husband to his wife, and the narration of the words of a wife to her husband (in a twisted form in order to bring reconciliation between them). -Sahih Muslim, Book 32, Hadith 6303
'Abdullah reported Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: Truth leads one to virtue and virtue leads one to Paradise and the person tells the truth until he is recorded as truthful, and lie leads to obscenity and obscenity leads to Hell, and the person tells a lie until he is recorded as a liar. -Sahih Muslim, Book 32, Hadith 6307
A military operation involves deception -Sun Tzu
So I guess every military force in the world are liars?
The teachings of Christianity are simply not practical and nobody can actually follow it. (For example: Cut off your own body parts for sinning, do not save money)
Allah does not forbid you from those who do not fight you because of religion and do not expel you from your homes - from being righteous toward them and acting justly toward them. Indeed, Allah loves those who act justly. (Quran 60:8)
Part 2:
It wouldn't be any different in Palestine if the Chinese invaded, colonized, and performed massacres and ethnic cleansing.
http://www.loonwatch.com/tag/jewish-law/
ISIS aren't the first people that went (We are the true Muslims, and all who don't agree with us dies!).
http://www.answering-extremism.com/ae/reader.aspx?file=ae_mnaa_2.pdf
So I guess the lord in the bible changes his mind?
Psalm 137:8-9
8 Daughter Babylon, doomed to destruction,
happy is the one who repays you
according to what you have done to us.
9 Happy is the one who seizes your infants
and dashes them against the rocks.
2 Chronicles 15:13
13 All who would not seek the Lord, the God of Israel, were to be put to death, whether small or great, man or woman.
Isaiah 13:15-18
15 Whoever is captured will be thrust through;
all who are caught will fall by the sword.
16 Their infants will be dashed to pieces before their eyes;
their houses will be looted and their wives violated.
17 See, I will stir up against them the Medes,
who do not care for silver
and have no delight in gold.
18 Their bows will strike down the young men;
they will have no mercy on infants,
nor will they look with compassion on children.
Furthermore, my opponent did not respond to the prophecized massacre on all nations and it's inhabitants (Yes that includes children) that do not follow Jesus.
Revelation 19:17-18
17 And I saw an angel standing in the sun, who cried in a loud voice to all the birds flying in midair, “Come, gather together for the great supper of God, 18 so that you may eat the flesh of kings, generals, and the mighty, of horses and their riders, and the flesh of all people, free and slave, great and small.”
Luke 19:27
27 But those enemies of mine who did not want me to be king over them—bring them here and kill them in front of me.’
Psalm 149
May the praise of God be in their mouths
and a double-edged sword in their hands,
7 to inflict vengeance on the nations
and punishment on the peoples,
8 to bind their kings with fetters,
their nobles with shackles of iron,
9 to carry out the sentence written against them—
this is the glory of all his faithful people.
Praise the Lord.
What innocent blood are you talking about? There are no such practices in Islam.
By the way: Prove to me that the "Islamic scholar Dr. Muhammad Zareef" exists. Where can I find his book "Allah’s Plan for Muslims"?
"The killing of non-Muslims in the name of Allah and Islam is considered to be the duty of every good and faithful Muslim,"
Because of that, We decreed upon the Children of Israel that whoever kills a soul unless for a soul or for corruption [done] in the land - it is as if he had slain mankind entirely. And whoever saves one - it is as if he had saved mankind entirely. And our messengers had certainly come to them with clear proofs. Then indeed many of them, [even] after that, throughout the land, were transgressors. (Quran 5:32)
If you truly find the article credible, then I can only shake my head at the Islamophobia kool aid you are drinking.
A weak reply followed by a Red herring was offered to my "refutation" of the so-called consequentialism.
Yes Islam is based on objective morality.
And We have revealed to you, [O Muhammad], the Book in truth, confirming that which preceded it of the Scripture and as a criterion over it. So judge between them by what Allah has revealed and do not follow their inclinations away from what has come to you of the truth. To each of you We prescribed a law and a method. Had Allah willed, He would have made you one nation [united in religion], but [He intended] to test you in what He has given you; so race to [all that is] good. To Allah is your return all together, and He will [then] inform you concerning that over which you used to differ. (Quran 5:48)
These three options are offered to non-Islamists who begin fighting Islamists or who prosecute Islamists for being Islamists (Which also brought Pope Benjamin back from exile). *rolls eyes*
Muslim's Zakat tax is often more expensive than Jizya tax, and Jizya is only taken from men able to work. Meaning that children, women, elders, people who are sick, and the poor are excluded.
@Dragon fang:
So, more tu quoque and irrelevancies and multiple examples of taking things out of context, as expected, without addressing the core issue.
Best of all, the attribution of "Islamophobia kool aid drinking" to your opponent as if that was conclusive evidence for the correctness of your position. Here's a clue, free of charge: using the language of political correctness to silence (not debate with) your critics does nothing to bolster your claims in the face of overwhelming contrary physical evidence.
Perhaps you should investigate the argumentum ad hominem fallacy. On second thought, never mind: you seem to like engaging in debate using various fallacies (tu quoque, genetic, ad hominem), so perhaps you misunderstood the basis of logical debate: fallacies are NOT to be used to support the search for truth.
[Sarcasm font in use]
Alas! I am undone, for I have drunk the forbidden Islamophobia kool aid. My mind has been corrupted by the poison of logical thinking. Certainly I should permit (without opposition) some righteous Islamist to separate me from that vile cesspool sitting above my shoulders. Oh kind and gentle warrior of Islam, would you be willing to remove my head for my egregious offense against the nonviolent, peaceful religion of Islam?
[/Sarcasm font in use]
@Robert
So you do find that article credible. That's pretty incredible.
The irrational bias (Islamophobia koolaid!) needed to find that article credible was the very object of question. I am interested in learning about how reached the logical conclusion that the article is in anyway credible and the "logical thinking" involved.
@Stan
I assume you call the LRA "Christianists"?
Nobody is stating that ISIS are non-Muslims, we state that they are violating the principles of Islam, just like we can say "A clean politician (if such thing exists) doesn't take bribes!".
Bring me a verse that says following the OT is a sin.
Matthew 5:17-18
17 “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. 18 For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.
Matthew 23:2
2 “The teachers of the law and the Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat. 3 So you must be careful to do everything they tell you. But do not do what they do, for they do not practice what they preach.
2 Timothy 3:16
16 All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness,
Actually, I am arguing that Christianity is much more bloody than Islam (smashing infants on rocks, really? Oh wait, they aren't innocent; original sin). Therefore, you have no moral authority. In fact, why aren't you more open to abortion?
Numbers 5:27-28
27 If she has made herself impure and been unfaithful to her husband, this will be the result:w When she is made to drink the water that brings a curse and causes bitter suffering, it will enter her, her abdomen will swell and her womb will miscarry, and she will become a curse. 28 If, however, the woman has not made herself impure, but is clean, she will be cleared of guilt and will be able to have children.
Genesis 38:24
24 About three months later Judah was told, “Your daughter-in-law Tamar is guilty of prostitution, and as a result she is now pregnant.”
Judah said, “Bring her out and have her burned to death!”
Revelation 2:22-23
22 So I will cast her on a bed of suffering, and I will make those who commit adultery with her suffer intensely, unless they repent of her ways. 23 I will strike her children dead. Then all the churches will know that I am he who searches hearts and minds, and I will repay each of you according to your deeds.
2 Samuel 12:13
13 Then David said to Nathan, “I have sinned against the Lord.”
Nathan replied, “The Lord has taken away your sin. You are not going to die. 14 But because by doing this you have shown utter contempt for the Lord, the son born to you will die.”
I have no need to self-justify anything. I am simply destroying your moral argument and authority at their root.
And if two factions among the believers should fight, then make settlement between the two. But if one of them oppresses the other, then fight against the one that oppresses until it returns to the ordinance of Allah . And if it returns, then make settlement between them in justice and act justly. Indeed, Allah loves those who act justly. (Quran 49:9)
Indeed, those who have divided their religion and become sects - you, [O Muhammad], are not [associated] with them in anything. Their affair is only [left] to Allah ; then He will inform them about what they used to do. (Quran 6:159)
Abu Sa'id Khudri reported:
One who Is better than I informed me, that Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) said to 'Ammar as he was digging the ditch (on the ocasion of the Battle of the Ditch) wiping over his head: O son of Summayya you will be involved in trouble and a group of the rebels would kill you. -Sahih Muslim, Book 41, Hadith 6966
By the way, the conflict was never about succession or particularly about religion. It was about making finding the rebels who assassinated Uthman a priority. A compromise was reached, however the rebels who were ignored in Ali's army, momentarily to stabilize the region, feared that an investigation will start so they attacked both camps to get the reconcilement cancelled and make Muslims on both sides think they were betrayed.
http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/showthread.php?30150-The-Battle-of-Jamal-%28Bassoorah-Camel%29
Post a Comment