Charlie Hebdo (Paris) Shooting of 12 people

Unspecified

3,243

Brother

2,561

#106 [Permalink] Posted on 11th January 2015 12:00

Black Turban wrote:

View original post

salaam

what is the hanafi fiqh in regards to settling in a non muslim country?

report post quote code quick quote reply

No post ratings

xs11ax

Bangladesh

1,549

Brother

1,808

#107 [Permalink] Posted on 11th January 2015 14:53

xs11ax wrote:

View original post

Wa 'Alaykumus Salaam

I don't know.

report post quote code quick quote reply

No post ratings

Black Turban

Unspecified

3,243

Brother

2,561

#108 [Permalink] Posted on 11th January 2015 15:19

Black Turban wrote:

View original post

i found the following after a quick google search...

islamqa.org/hanafi/askimam/29360

Is it Haraam to live in OR MOVE to, a non-Islamic country? Are there any “Islamic” countries in this world at the present time? Is it OK to move from one country to another for better livelihood?

(Pls provide Hadith references to support your answer.)
Answer

Kindly refer below a reply to similar query by Mufti Taqi Usmani.

and Allah Ta’ala Knows Best

Mufti Ebrahim Desai
FATWA DEPT.

Q: What is the ruling regarding adoption of the nationality of a non-Muslim country?
Many people who adopt the nationalities of these countries, or wish to do so, insist that they do so only because they are persecuted in their own countries, through imprisonment, threats and intimidation or confiscation of their property etc. Others see no difference between their own countries, which though Muslim, have no Shari?ah, and those of the West. They contend that whilst both are equal in having no Islamic laws, their personal rights, property and honour are safer in their adopted country, and they will not be imprisoned or persecuted without reason.

A. The issue of emigration to a non-Muslim country and permanent settlement there, is one on which the ruling would differ according to the situation, and the reasons for the emigration.

a) If a Muslim is forced by his circumstances to emigrate, e.g. he is persecuted in his country or imprisoned, or his property is confiscated etc., without his having committed any crime, and he sees no way out for himself other than to emigrate to a foreign country, then he would be permitted to do so in such a case without any Karahat (abho- rrence) whatsoever, as long as he resolves to protect his faith, and keep himself away from the widespread evil found there.

b) Similarly, if a Muslim is forced to emigrate due to his financial situation, i.e. he cannot find the necessary means of subsistence despite extensive effort and he sees no alternative other than emigration to a non-Muslim country, then he is permitted to emigrate subject to the above conditions. Earning a livelihood through permissible means is also a duty for a Muslim, after his other Fardh duties, and the Shari?ah has not specified a certain place for it. Allah Ta’ala says:

“He is the one who has made the earth manageable for you. So traverse ye through its tracts, and enjoy of the sustenance which He furnishes; And unto Him is the resurrection.” (Surah Al-Mulk, v. 15)

c) If a Muslim adopts the nationality of a Non-Muslim country for the purpose of calling its people towards Islam, or to convey Islamic laws to the Muslims residing there, and to encourage them to stay firm on their faith, then this is not only permissible, but also a source of reward. Many of the Sahabah and Tabi’een settled in distant Kuffar lands for this very purpose, and this action of theirs is counted amongst their virtues and points of merit.

d). If a person has enough means of livelihood available to him in his native country for him to be able to live according to the (average) standard of his people, but he emigrates in order to raise his standard of living and live a life of luxury and comfort, then emigration for such a purpose has at least some degree of Karahat in it, because such a person is throwing himself into a storm of evil, and endangering his faith and moral character without there being any necessity for it. Experience shows that the people who settle in non-Muslim countries for luxury and comfort find their religious restraint diminishing in the face of the many temptations of evil.

Therefore, it is reported in the ahadith that one should not live with disbelievers unnecessarily.
Abu Dawood narrates from Samrah bin Jundub that the Holy Prophet (Sallallaho Alaihi Wassallam)said: “He who mingles with a disbeliever and dwells with him is like him.” Abu Dawood and Tirmidhi also report that the Holy Prophet (Sallallaho Alaihi Wassallam)said: “I am free (i.e. I disavow myself) from every Muslim who lives with disbelievers.” The Sahabah asked “Why, O Messenger of Allah?” He replied “The fires of the two cannot co-exist.” Khattabi says in his commentary on this hadith that it has several meanings. One is that the two (a Muslim and a Kafir) are not equal in Hukm (ruling) they both have different rules.

Some scholars take this view. Others explain the meaning as being that Allah has differentiated between the lands of Islam and Kufr and consequently it is not allowed for a Muslim to live amongst disbelievers in their lands, because when the Kuffar light their fires he will be seen as one of them. The scholars also derive from this the ruling that one should not stay in the lands of the Kuffar when visiting for trade etc. (Khattabi, Ma’alim-As-Sunan, K. Jihad, 473 : iii).
Abu Dawood relates from Makhool in his ‘Maraseel’ that the Prophet ? said: “Do not leave your children amongst enemies (i.e. Kuffar). (Tahzeeb As-Sunan, Ibnul-Qayyim, 437 : iii)
For this reason, some scholars say that living in Kafir countries, and increasing their numbers solely for material wealth, is an action which damages ones ‘Adala (integrity). (Takmila Raddul-Mukhtar, p. 101, v. I).

Finally, if a person adopts a non-Muslim nationality solely for the purpose of increasing his standing in society, and as a matter of pride, or in preference to a Muslim nationality, or in imitation of the Kuffar, then all such actions are Haram without exception, and there is no need to cite evidence for this.

Q 2. For the Muslims living in the West, bringing up their children in such an environment has its drawbacks and disadvantages, and it also has its benefits. There is a strong possibility of these children picking up habits from Christian and Jewish children with whom they play and mix. This is especially so in those cases where the parents neglect their children?s upbringing due to their work etc., or where one or both of the parents have passed away.

What would be the effect of this presumed harm be on the ruling regarding emigration to a non-Muslim country? At the same time, many Muslims who live there contend that in the non-Muslim countries their children run the risk of being led away from Islam through mixing with atheist and communist groups etc., especially when in some non-Muslim countries these groups are supported by the authorities, their beliefs and doctrines are included in the educational syllabuses, the minds of common people are poisoned with them, and those who oppose them are tortured and imprisoned. In such circumstances, living in that country is more dangerous for our children?s’ faith and their beliefs.

A. Bringing up children in a non-Muslim country is a serious issue, and is a matter that is fraught with danger, and therefore, should be abstained from as far as possible in those cases where emigration to and residence in a non-Muslim country has been termed Makrooh or Haram. However, in those cases where adopting a foreign nationality and living there is allowed without Karahat (abhorrence), since a valid reason exists, the same ruling would apply to bringing up ones children in that country. Such a person should then attend to the upbringing of his children with special attention, and the Muslims living there should create an environment in which newly arriving Muslims can properly protect and preserve their beliefs, actions and moral character.

report post quote code quick quote reply

+2 -0Like x 2

xs11ax

11,704

Brother

289

#109 [Permalink] Posted on 11th January 2015 18:48

xs11ax wrote:

View original post

Very good, lets take this Fatwa as a starting point.

Does it discuss Muslims who are already here? Have nowhere to go and as far as Deen is concerned it is "relatively" safe?
Where does it state that Muslims (already resident) in Non-Muslim lands need to make Hijrah since it is Waajib (completely, utterly and totally)?

If someone says that under conditions and circumstances such Hijrah will be an obligation (I agree) but I am discussing:

A man with a Beard with his wife in Niqab studying in Shaykh (Maulana) Saleem Dhorat Saheb (HA)'s Darul-uloom need to make Hijrah to Tunisia as it is Waajib on them.
Where will 170+ million Muslims of India, go to?

report post quote code quick quote reply

+1 -0Like x 1Old x 1

There is no Plan B!

http://www.central-mosque.com/

Unspecified

690

Sister

612

#110 [Permalink] Posted on 11th January 2015 19:06

Why would the talib e ilm of DUloom need to make hijrah? he should just make the niyah of propagating Deen there..

Posted via the Muftisays Android App

report post quote code quick quote reply

No post ratings

Forgive and Forget..

Unspecified

3,243

Brother

2,561

#111 [Permalink] Posted on 11th January 2015 21:04

Muadh_Khan wrote:

View original post

salaam

it only states what is written therein. i would also like to know what the hanafi fiqh states about the questions that you have posed.

report post quote code quick quote reply

No post ratings

xs11ax

London

27,438

Brother

9,578

#112 [Permalink] Posted on 11th January 2015 22:46

Mentor of Charlie Hebdo gunmen has been UK-based
Djamel Beghal has been on western intelligence agencies’ radar for 15 years and has worshipped regularly at Finsbury Park mosque

Djamel Beghal is believed to have radicalised Chérif Kouachi, one of the Charlie Hebdo gunmen, in prison and to be one of al-Qaida’s leading recruiters in Europe.

The Guardian
Sunday 11 January 2015 21.33 GMT

Djamel Beghal, who has emerged as a mentor to two of the gunmen involved in last week’s attacks in Paris, has been on the radar of western intelligence agencies for more than 15 years.

The French-Algerian moved from France to Britain in 1997, and became a regular worshipper at London’s Finsbury Park mosque and a disciple of the radical preachers Abu Hamza and Abu Qatada. He came to be seen by UK and French intelligence as one of al-Qaida’s leading recruiters in Europe.

He was back in the news last week after it emerged that he was one of the links between Chérif Kouachi, one of the brothers behind the Charlie Hebdo massacre, and Amedy Coulibaly, who killed four hostages in a Paris kosher supermarket and also a policewoman.

French investigators believe Kouachi was radicalised by Beghal in prison, where he was serving a 10-year sentence for a plot to bomb the US embassy in Paris. Kouachi later visited Beghal when he was under house arrest in the Auvergne region of southern France. So did Coulibaly and his partner, Hayat Boumeddiene. She told police that they had gone there for “crossbow practice”.

Beghal left Algeria to study in France when he was 22. He married Sylvie, a French citizen, in 1990, while working as a youth worker and attempting to recruit Islamic converts in Corbeil-Essonnes, a small town on the river Seine south of Paris.

His first known contact with the authorities dates back to 1996, when he was questioned in France because his phone number had been found in the possession of a suspected terrorist. He was allowed to go free but remained under close surveillance in France.

In 1997, Beghal moved his family to Leicester, apparently earning money by making sandwiches and working for a homeless charity while studying information technology. But he made frequent trips to London and the Finsbury Park mosque.

According to legal documents in the case against Abu Qatada, who was deported from Britain after an 11-year battle, Beghal became an “extremist” under the influence of the preacher and was a member of a group involved in “distributing propaganda material” around Britain with Abu Qatada. Abu Qatada is also believed to have inspired him to move to Jalalabad in Afghanistan in November 2000.

When he was arrested at Abu Dhabi airport in July the next year, he claimed to have been travelling from Pakistan to Morocco with the wife and children of a friend. But he was suspected of returning to Europe to lead Osama bin Laden’s war on the west after a year of training with senior al-Qaida commanders in Afghanistan.

In a vivid account of his interrogation in Abu Dhabi given to the campaign group Cage in 2011, Beghal claimed he had been forced to endure deafening sounds and suffocating smells while being deprived of sleep, food and light.

Beghal said he had been interrogated and beaten by a British-accented agent who asked him solely about his connections with the UK. He said he was questioned about Leicester and prominent Muslims in London – chiefly Abu Qatada. “They wanted me to accuse Abu Qatada at any cost,” Beghal told Cage. “He would insist with brutality to reveal the link between Abu Qatada and Osama bin Laden, whom he called Abu Abdallah.”

Under interrogation, Beghal admitted to receiving training in Afghanistan, to meeting Abu Zubaydah – a key lieutenant of Bin Laden – and to travelling back to France to attack the US embassy in Paris.

Back in France he withdrew this confession but was convicted in March 2005 on terrorism charges and was sentenced to 10 years’ imprisonment.

He was released in 2009 but put under house arrest in the village of Murat, in the Auvergne, where he appears to have been visited by several aspiring jihadis including Kouachi and Coulibaly. They were all arrested in May 2010, accused of attempting to free Smaïn Aït Ali Belkacem, a convicted terrorist jailed for a 1995 bombing of the Paris metro.

Beghal’s wife, Sylvie, still lives in Leicester with their four children in a four-bedroom terraced house overlooking a park. She is mounting a supreme court challenge to anti-terrorist legislation after she was questioned by police on 4 January 2011 at East Midlands airport.

She was cautioned for failing to disclose information requested by officers under Schedule 7 of the Terrorism Act.

She pleaded guilty at Leicester magistrates court, but later brought unsuccessful appeals to the high court and court of appeal. In November 2014, she took her legal challenge to the supreme court, supported by the Muslim Council of Britain, Islamic Human Rights Commission and Cage.

In a statement after one court hearing, Sylvia Beghal said: “Once again my husband is punished for something he didn’t do … We just want to be left alone and live a peaceful life.”

report post quote code quick quote reply

+1 -0Informative x 1

Actions are judged by intentions, so each man will have what he intended.
ابو محمد

Unspecified

2,178

Brother

5,852

#113 [Permalink] Posted on 12th January 2015 08:32

السلام عليكم

Brilliant article shared by Shaikh Muhammed Daniel (haf). written by the Gary Younge, in the Guardian :

I found it better than the response by some of our hypocritical Apologist 'Scholars' or 'Imams'.

Charlie Hebdo: the danger of polarised debate

Attempts to explain the Paris attacks are reductive. The truth is more complex and difficult to accept

In times of crisis, those who would like us to keep just one idea in our heads at any one time are quick to the megaphones. By framing events in Manichean terms – dark versus light; good versus evil – an imposed binary morality seeks to coral us into crude camps. There are no dilemmas, only declarations. What some lack in complexity they make up for in polemical clarity and the provision of a clear enemy.

A black man kills two policemen in their car in New York, and suddenly those who protested against the police killing unarmed black people across the country and going unpunished have blood on their hands. Sony pulls a film about the fictional assassination of a real foreign leader after threats of violent reprisals, and suddenly anyone who challenged the wisdom of making such a film is channelling their inner Neville Chamberlain.

Straw men are stopped and searched in case they are carrying nuance and then locked up until the crisis is over. No charges are ever brought because a trial would require questions and evidence. You’re either with us or against us.

The horrific events of the past week have provided one such crisis. From both the left and right, efforts to explain the assassinations at Charlie Hebdo magazine, a Kosher supermarket and elsewhere inevitably become reductive.

Most seek, with a singular linear thesis, to explain what happened and what we should do about it: it’s about Islam; it has nothing to do with Islam; it’s about foreign policy; it has nothing to do with foreign policy; it’s war; it’s criminality; it’s about freedom of speech, integration, racism, multiculturalism.

There is something to most of these. And yet not enough to any one of them to get anywhere close. Too few, it seems, are willing to concede that while the act of shooting civilians dead where they live and work is crude, the roots of such actions are deep and complex, and the motivations, to some extent, unknowable and incoherent. The bolder each claim, the more likely it is to contain a qualifying or even contradictory argument at least as plausible.

continue reading.. www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jan/11/charie-hebd...

report post quote code quick quote reply

+4 -0Like x 1Informative x 3

London

27,438

Brother

9,578

#114 [Permalink] Posted on 12th January 2015 10:05

Well seeing the news, one thing is for certain, there are more than 4 MILLION people who supported the Blasphemy!!!!

Inna Lillahi wa Inna ilahi Rajioon

report post quote code quick quote reply

+0 -0Agree x 1

Actions are judged by intentions, so each man will have what he intended.
ابو محمد

11,704

Brother

289

#115 [Permalink] Posted on 12th January 2015 11:43

abu mohammed wrote:

View original post

In general and as a matter of course we (Muslims) have always faced this problem and always will but how much of this is a result of our (tactics)?

report post quote code quick quote reply

+0 -0Disagree x 1

There is no Plan B!

http://www.central-mosque.com/

Unspecified

7,126

Sister

834

#116 [Permalink] Posted on 12th January 2015 12:14

a short radio clip from a radio call in....why should all Muslims be held responsible and be apologetic?

audioboom.com/boos/2784684-a-james-o-brien-masterclass-in...

Posted via the Muftisays Android App

report post quote code quick quote reply

No post ratings

ربي زدني علما
(My Lord! Increase me in Knowledge)

Bangladesh

1,549

Brother

1,808

#117 [Permalink] Posted on 12th January 2015 15:33

Muadh_Khan wrote:

View original post

Got no rating in good tweets thread, but it's the main reason:

Loading tweet

report post quote code quick quote reply

+1 -0Agree x 1Winner x 1

Black Turban

London

27,438

Brother

9,578

#118 [Permalink] Posted on 12th January 2015 18:20

Paris march: TV wide shots reveal a different perspective on world leaders at largest demonstration in France’s history

Critics suggest images show dignitaries 'didn't lead march' after all, but many still speak positively about display of global unity

Full story

report post quote code quick quote reply

No post ratings

Actions are judged by intentions, so each man will have what he intended.
ابو محمد

Bangladesh

1,549

Brother

1,808

#119 [Permalink] Posted on 13th January 2015 02:14

B7MA-_MCAAEC8ef.jpg

Downloads: 137

[107.62 kB]

report post quote code quick quote reply

+2 -0Like x 1Winner x 1

Black Turban

Unspecified

1,241

Brother

1,935

#120 [Permalink] Posted on 13th January 2015 06:00

السلام عليكم

Charlie hebdo magazine to release more cartoons on Prophet Muhammad (saw)

tomorrow on their next edition.

May Allah's laanat be upon them. ameen thumma ameen.

report post quote code quick quote reply

+0 -0Agree x 1Ameen x 1

umar123

Charlie Hebdo (Paris) Shooting of 12 people

Font Size

Font Weight