How Specifically has al Qaeda "Distorted and Defiled Islam"?

[Sunni Man]

What does your video have to do with Sharia Law??

 

[Tom Clancy]

What does your video have to do with Sharia Law??

If you look at it, It talks about how Holland tried to ban the Burka. or whatever the thing the women wear is called.. But they were afraid that women would be raped as punishment for not wearing it.

 

[Sunni Man]

What does your video have to do with Sharia Law??

If you look at it, It talks about how Holland tried to ban the Burka. or whatever the thing the women wear is called.. But they were afraid that women would be raped as punishment for not wearing it.

The burka has nothing to do with Islam or Sharia Law.

It is a cultural piece of clothing that people from some countries traditionally wear, and it predates the arrival of Islam. .

 

[manifold]

Come on now Mal!

First of all, we both know your mind is made up here so pretending that you'd even entertain opposing arguments is silly and perhaps slightly intellectually insulting.

And secondly, who would know better about the Islam faith than a practitioner like Obama?

 

[Tom Clancy]

What does your video have to do with Sharia Law??

If you look at it, It talks about how Holland tried to ban the Burka. or whatever the thing the women wear is called.. But they were afraid that women would be raped as punishment for not wearing it.

The burka has nothing to do with Islam or Sharia Law.

It is a cultural piece of clothing that people from some countries traditionally wear, and it predates the arrival of Islam. .

Right, but when a Women isn't wearing it they Beat her, Rape her or even Stone her to death.

Hell, you aren't even allowed to go around Saudi Arabia and other Muslim Countries without it..

And like the Video said, Women were raped and beaten because of not wearing it.


Then you say Islam has all the Answers to the modern world.. yeah.. ok..

 

[Mr.Fitnah]

1 – Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“And tell the believing women to lower their gaze (from looking at forbidden things), and protect their private parts (from illegal sexual acts) and not to show off their adornment except only that which is apparent (like both eyes for necessity to see the way, or outer palms of hands or one eye or dress like veil, gloves, headcover, apron), and to draw their veils all over Juyoobihinna (i.e. their bodies, faces, necks and bosoms) and not to reveal their adornment except to their husbands, or their fathers, or their husband’s fathers, or their sons, or their husband’s sons, or their brothers or their brother’s sons, or their sister’s sons, or their (Muslim) women (i.e. their sisters in Islam), or the (female) slaves whom their right hands possess, or old male servants who lack vigour, or small children who have no sense of feminine sex. And let them not stamp their feet so as to reveal what they hide of their adornment. And all of you beg Allaah to forgive you all, O believers, that you may be successful”

[al-Noor 24:31]

2 – Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“And as for women past childbearing who do not expect wedlock, it is no sin on them if they discard their (outer) clothing in such a way as not to show their adornment. But to refrain (i.e. not to discard their outer clothing) is better for them. And Allaah is All‑Hearer, All‑Knower”

[al-Noor 24:60]

“Women past childbearing” are those who no longer menstruate, so they can no longer get pregnant or bear children.

We shall see below the words of Hafsah bint Sireen and the way in which she interpreted this verse.

3 – Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“O Prophet! Tell your wives and your daughters and the women of the believers to draw their cloaks (veils) all over their bodies (i.e. screen themselves completely except the eyes or one eye to see the way). That will be better, that they should be known (as free respectable women) so as not to be annoyed. And Allaah is Ever Oft‑Forgiving, Most Merciful”

[al-Ahzaab 33:59]

4 – Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“O you who believe! Enter not the Prophet’s houses, unless permission is given to you for a meal, (and then) not (so early as) to wait for its preparation. But when you are invited, enter, and when you have taken your meal, disperse without sitting for a talk. Verily, such (behaviour) annoys the Prophet, and he is shy of (asking) you (to go); but Allaah is not shy of (telling you) the truth. And when you ask (his wives) for anything you want, ask them from behind a screen, that is purer for your hearts and for their hearts. And it is not (right) for you that you should annoy Allaah’s Messenger, nor that you should ever marry his wives after him (his death). Verily, with Allaah that shall be an enormity”

[al-Ahzaab 33:53]

With regard to the Ahaadeeth:

1 – It was narrated from Safiyyah bint Shaybah that ‘Aa’ishah (may Allaah be pleased with her) used to say: When these words were revealed – “and to draw their veils all over Juyoobihinna (i.e. their bodies, faces, necks and bosoms)” – they took their izaars (a kind of garment) and tore them from the edges and covered their faces with them.

Narrated by al-Bukhaari, 4481. The following version was narrated by Abu Dawood (4102):

May Allaah have mercy on the Muhaajir women. When Allaah revealed the words “and to draw their veils all over Juyoobihinna (i.e. their bodies, faces, necks and bosoms)”, they tore the thickest of their aprons (a kind of garment) and covered their faces with them.

Shaykh Muhammad al-Ameen al-Shanqeeti (may Allaah have mercy on him) said:

This hadeeth clearly states that what the Sahaabi women mentioned here understood from this verse – “and to draw their veils all over Juyoobihinna (i.e. their bodies, faces, necks and bosoms)” – was that they were to cover their faces, and that they tore their garments and covered their faces with them, in obedience to the command of Allaah in the verse where He said “and to draw their veils all over Juyoobihinna (i.e. their bodies, faces, necks and bosoms)” which meant covering their faces. Thus the fair-minded person will understand that woman’s observing hijab and covering her face in front of men is established in the saheeh Sunnah that explains the Book of Allaah. ‘Aa’ishah (may Allaah be pleased with her) praised those women for hastening to follow the command of Allaah given in His Book. It is known that their understanding of the words “and to draw their veils all over Juyoobihinna (i.e. their bodies, faces, necks and bosoms)” as meaning covering the face came from the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), because he was there and they asked him about everything that they did not understand about their religion. And Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“And We have also sent down unto you (O Muhammad) the Dhikr [reminder and the advice (i.e. the Qur’aan)], that you may explain clearly to men what is sent down to them, and that they may give thought”

[al-Nahl 16:44]

Ibn Hajar said in Fath al-Baari: There is a report of Ibn Abi Haatim via ‘Abd-Allaah ibn ‘Uthmaan ibn Khaytham from Safiyyah that explains that. This report says: We mentioned the women of Quraysh and their virtues in the presence of ‘Aa’ishah and she said: “The women of Quraysh are good, but by Allaah I have never seen any better than the women of the Ansaar, or any who believed the Book of Allaah more strongly or had more faith in the Revelation. When Soorat al-Noor was revealed – “and to draw their veils all over Juyoobihinna (i.e. their bodies, faces, necks and bosoms)” – their menfolk came to them and recited to them what had been revealed, and there was not one woman among them who did not go to her apron, and the following morning they prayed wrapped up as if there were crows on their heads. It was also narrated clearly in the report of al-Bukhaari narrated above, where we see ‘Aa’ishah (may Allaah be pleased with her), who was so knowledgeable and pious, praising them in this manner and stating that she had never seen any women who believed the Book of Allaah more strongly or had more faith in the Revelation. This clearly indicates that they understood from this verse – “and to draw their veils all over Juyoobihinna (i.e. their bodies, faces, necks and bosoms)” – that it was obligatory to cover their faces and that this stemmed from their belief in the Book of Allaah and their faith in the Revelation. It also indicates that women’s observing hijab in front of men and covering their faces is an act of belief in the Book of Allaah and faith in the Revelation. It is very strange indeed that some of those who claim to have knowledge say that there is nothing in the Qur’aan or Sunnah that says that women have to cover their faces in front of non-mahram men, even though the Sahaabi women did that in obedience to the command of Allaah in His Book, out of faith in the Revelation, and that this meaning is also firmly entrenched in the Sunnah, as in the report from al-Bukhaari quoted above. This is among the strongest evidence that all Muslim women are obliged to observe hijab.

Adwa’ al-Bayaan, 6/594-595.

2 – It was narrated from ‘Aa’ishah that the wives of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) used to go out at night to al-Manaasi’ (well known places in the direction of al-Baqee&#8217 to relieve themselves and ‘Umar used to say to the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), “Let your wives be veiled.” But the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) did not do that. Then one night Sawdah bint Zam’ah, the wife of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), went out at ‘Isha’ time and she was a tall woman. ‘Umar called out to her: “We have recognized you, O Sawdah!” hoping that hijab would be revealed, then Allaah revealed the verse of hijab.

Narrated by al-Bukhaari, 146; Muslim, 2170.

3 – It was narrated from Ibn Shihaab that Anas said: I am the most knowledgeable of people about hijab. Ubayy ibn Ka’b used to ask me about it. When the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) married Zaynab bint Jahsh, whom he married in Madeenah, he invited the people to a meal after the sun had risen. The Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) sat down and some men sat around him after the people had left, until the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) stood up and walked a while, and I walked with him, until he reached the door of ‘Aa’ishah’s apartment. Then he thought that they had left so he went back and I went back with him, and they were still sitting there. He went back again, and I went with him, until he reached the door of ‘Aa’ishah’s apartment, then he came back and I came back with him, and they had left. Then he drew a curtain between me and him, and the verse of hijab was revealed.

Al-Bukhaari, 5149; Muslim, 1428.

4 – It was narrated from ‘Urwah that ‘Aa’ishah said: The Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) used to pray Fajr and the believing women would attend (the prayer) with him, wrapped in their aprons, then they would go back to their houses and no one would recognize them.

Narrated by al-Bukhaari, 365; Muslim, 645.

5 – It was narrated that ‘Aa’ishah (may Allaah be pleased with her) said: “The riders used to pass by us when we were with the Messenger of Allaah (S) in ihraam, and when they drew near to us we would lower our jilbabs from our heads over our faces, then when they had passed we would uncover them again.

Narrated by Abu Dawood, 1833; Ibn Maajah, 2935; classed as saheeh by Ibn Khuzaymah (4,203) and by al-Albaani in Kitaab Jilbaab al-Mar’ah al-Muslimah.

6 – It was narrated that Asma’ bint Abi Bakr said: We used to cover our faces in front of men.

Narrated by Ibn Khuzaymah, 4/203; al-Haakim, 1/624. He classed it as saheeh and al-Dhahabi agreed with him. It was also classed as saheeh by al-Albaani in Jilbaab al-Mar’ah al-Muslimah.

7 – It was narrated that ‘Aasim al-Ahwaal said: We used to enter upon Hafsah bint Sireen who had put her jilbab thus and covered her face with it, and we would say to her: May Allaah have mercy on you. Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning): “And as for women past childbearing who do not expect wedlock, it is no sin on them if they discard their (outer) clothing in such a way as not to show their adornment” [al-Noor 24:60]. And she would say to us: What comes after that? We would say: “But to refrain (i.e. not to discard their outer clothing) is better for them”. And she would say: That is confirming the idea of hijab.

 

[Mr.Fitnah]

Burka is a cultural term it has nothing to do with Islam or sharia

 

[Kalam]

According to Ibn Abi Zayd al-Qayrawani a 10th century Maliki jurist:

Ibn Abi Zayd was the imam of a mosque; he never occupied an official juristic position if I recall correctly. He affirms what I've posted in this thread concerning the killing of innocents:

There is no harm in killing an enemy prisoner but you may not kill anyone after a pledge of security has been given, nor may you break a treaty. Nor may you kill women and children. Killing monks and priests should be avoided unless they are involved in the fighting. Similarly, women who fight can also be killed. A pledge of security given by the least of the Muslims is binding on the rest of them. This also applies when women do this, and also children provided they are able to understand what is involved. It is also said that this is only acceptable if the man in charge says it is acceptable. - Risala, 30.2h-30.2l​

According to al-Mawardi an 11th Century Shafi'i jurist
The mushrikun [infidels] of Dar al-Harb (the arena of battle) are of two types: First, those whom the call of Islam has reached, but they have refused it and have taken up arms.

...

Ibn Taymiyya , a 14th Century Hanbali jurist15
Since lawful warfare is essentially jihad and since its aim is that the religion is God's entirely and God's word is uppermost, therefore according to all Muslims, those who stand in the way of this aim must be fought. As for those who cannot offer resistance or cannot fight, such as women, children, monks, old people, the blind, handicapped and their likes, they shall not be killed unless they actually fight with words (e.g. by propaganda) and acts (e.g. by spying or otherwise assisting in the warfare).

We have already seen what Ibn Taymiyyah had to say:

"...So it was allowed for the believers to fight in defending themselves and to retaliate against those who evicted them from their homes and prevented them from the tawheed of Allah and worship of Him, and women are not included from those who do this. Then, it was prescribed for them to fight absolutely, and this is explained in His saying, 'Fight in the way of Allah against those who fight you.' So those people who are nor people of combat are not permitted to be fought against.

....

The foundation is that the blood of Adam's progeny is sanctified and inviolable, and no one is killed except with right. Killing due to kufr is not something which the legislations have agreed upon at any one time of the shariah, such as killing the one who sits out of combat, for this is something that the legislations and intellect do not differ over. The blood of a disbeliever during the early history of Islam was sanctified and inviolable just like the original sanctity of a person. Allah prevented the Muslims from killing such a disbeliever."

- Ibn Taymiyyah, as-Sarim al-Masluul 'ala Shatim ar-Rasul, pp. 101-104

In the Hidayah, vol. Ii. P. 140 (Hanafi school)

They didn't list the author on the website from which you copied these passages? Shame. Al-Marghinani's work should not be considered an authoritative text on Hanafi jurisprudence; it is rife with rulings that contradict those of Imam Abu Yusuf, the madhab's greatest jurist apart from Abu Hanifah himself.

Abu Yusuf - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Ibn Khaldun the 15th century Tunisian Historian states

Here is an excellent explanation of the entire issue, including the mistranslated quote from Ibn Khaldun:

http://www.amss.org/pdfs/35/finalpapers/Imad-ad-DeanAhmad.pdf

Al-Ghazali, a Sufi orthodox Muslim, and follower of the Shafi’i school of Islamic jurisprudence, wrote this about jihad war and the treatment of the vanquished non-Muslim dhimmi peoples, in the Wadjiz

Al-Ghazali was most likely practicing taqlid and merely summarizing the opinions of ash-Shafi'i or some other jurisprudent.

 

[Kalam]

I'm not entirely sure what your point is. Why would any rational person allow the possibility of collateral damage to prevent them from carrying out crucial operations against enemy forces?

Yet the pro-Islamic groups scream whenever Islamic women and children are collateral damage.
Sounds like a double standard.
Or Hypocrisy.

There is a single standard; those who earn our ire simply do not live up to it. The Goldstone Report made it clear that Israel is willing to kill without discrimination. The Russian oppressors in Chechnya are the same way, as are the pseudo-Islamic oppressors in Sudan.

 

[Charles Stucker]

There is a single standard; those who earn our ire simply does not live up to it. The Goldstone Report made it clear that Israel is willing to kill without discrimination. The Russian oppressors in Chechnya are the same way, as are the pseudo-Islamic oppressors in Sudan.

Now I get it.
Anytime an Islamic group commits atrocities they are labeled "pseudo-Islam"
Well then all the other atrocities are by Pseudo-whatever so you cannot blame anyone else for them.
Unless you have a double standard.
FYI the Goldstone report was, what was that word, biased that's right.
And it was obviously about Pseudo-Jews

 

[Kalam]

Now I get it.
Anytime an Islamic group commits atrocities they are labeled "pseudo-Islam"

Well, of course.

It seems elementary to me. A party that commits atrocities, such as slaughtering Muslims because they happen to be of a different ethnicity in the manner of the Janjaweed and the Taliban, is un-Islamic regardless of its stated religious affiliation. A person who commits grave sins in Islam and does not summarily reform themselves or seek repentance cannot be considered a Muslim until they seek expiation.

Well then all the other atrocities are by Pseudo-whatever so you cannot blame anyone else for them.

Indeed. The concept of collective guilt and punishments based thereon are illogical.

Whoever goes aright, for his own soul does he go aright; and whoever goes astray, to its detriment only does he go astray. And no bearer of a burden can bear the burden of another. Nor do We chastise until We raise a messenger. - 17:15​

Unless you have a double standard.

I've made my position clear.

FYI the Goldstone report was, what was that word, biased that's right.

Oh, certainly, as is any work whose authors are uppity enough to imply that Israel is anything short of perfect. Yes, I've heard it all before.

And it was obviously about Pseudo-Jews

I'm not in a position to determine who is or is not a true Jew, as I'm not a Jew myself.