السَّلَامُ عَلَيْكُمْ وَرَحْمَةُ ٱللَّهِ وَبَرَكاتُهُ Nice I’m at the beginning and I pre empted that discussion about voting I feel like it’s the same stuff talked about over and over tbh in regards to this conversation anyway .
The sheikh is missing the reality badly. By voting for one party to punish another one to support gaza 1. Will never result in supporting gazza in the first place 2. Results in Muslims using haram means Sheikh interrupts and is not able to fathom reality He must abstain from giving judgement- he is a muqalud The brother who questioned him is 💯
@@Al-MassariThank you brother for this invite. I would certainly love to request to meet with you when I am in London next. For now, I respond with the following: 1. The act of voting is installing humans to legislate within the Liberal Humanist system, regardless of the intention. 2. Islam makes exceptions to Haram-Halal actions under life-death situations only as opposed to the human quest to achieve some "good". 3. US foreign policy isn’t set by a party - there is a system behind all parties that drives f-policy. 4. The action of “Punishing” the democrats does not fall under life-death by any stretch of the imagination just like male-female intimacy outside marriage because the man can’t afford mahr doesn't. 5. When Khabbab ibn al-Aratt (RA) pleaded with the Messenger of Allah SAW, the answer was, remain patient and “By Allah, this religion will prevail”. 6. Calling on Muslims to vote represents disintegration of the islamic Usool (the Messenger didn't enter the Meccan government even when Muslims were being tortured and killed) whilst knowing nothing will change in Gazza or anywhere else. Your overall call of undermining and dismantling the usool from the time of Imam Shafi’I, calling for multiple states, revision of large portions of Islam the mujtahideen generally agreed upon etc points to the fact your thoughts align more or less with the modernists of the 19th century who called for a fresh pre-shafi’i revision and held similar views to yours.
السَّلَامُ عَلَيْكُمْ وَرَحْمَةُ ٱللَّهِ وَبَرَكاتُهُ Nice I’m at the beginning and I pre empted that discussion about voting I feel like it’s the same stuff talked about over and over tbh in regards to this conversation anyway .
Their is channel by the name of historyun the have upoaded a video(latest) you should do live stream and debunk it
Inshallah, ive been commenting on the video to see if they will host the Professor, if they dont respond, we will do something
@Al-Massari yes the channel started being normal now it's just govt funded cope check the comments they are cooking him 😂
The sheikh is missing the reality badly.
By voting for one party to punish another one to support gaza
1. Will never result in supporting gazza in the first place
2. Results in Muslims using haram means
Sheikh interrupts and is not able to fathom reality
He must abstain from giving judgement- he is a muqalud
The brother who questioned him is 💯
You are welcome to join our public q and as and discuss in detail
@@Al-MassariThank you brother for this invite. I would certainly love to request to meet with you when I am in London next. For now, I respond with the following:
1. The act of voting is installing humans to legislate within the Liberal Humanist system, regardless of the intention.
2. Islam makes exceptions to Haram-Halal actions under life-death situations only as opposed to the human quest to achieve some "good".
3. US foreign policy isn’t set by a party - there is a system behind all parties that drives f-policy.
4. The action of “Punishing” the democrats does not fall under life-death by any stretch of the imagination just like male-female intimacy outside marriage because the man can’t afford mahr doesn't.
5. When Khabbab ibn al-Aratt (RA) pleaded with the Messenger of Allah SAW, the answer was, remain patient and “By Allah, this religion will prevail”.
6. Calling on Muslims to vote represents disintegration of the islamic Usool (the Messenger didn't enter the Meccan government even when Muslims were being tortured and killed) whilst knowing nothing will change in Gazza or anywhere else.
Your overall call of undermining and dismantling the usool from the time of Imam Shafi’I, calling for multiple states, revision of large portions of Islam the mujtahideen generally agreed upon etc points to the fact your thoughts align more or less with the modernists of the 19th century who called for a fresh pre-shafi’i revision and held similar views to yours.
Am I blocked ?
@@Al-Massariam I blocked brother ?