How often do you view the Islamic Society?

I really wasn't aware
If your incessant drumming up was about the above post then by all means you can expect an answer tomorrow just to humour you

Fair enough - I shall endeavour to minimise my incessant drumming until then.

I'm not calling Al-Farhan bad, I'm saying Tawheed's trying to make him look bad. http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/showthread.php?t=4217776&page=5&p=66484142#post66484142 Read the latter part of Tawheed's post and now look, is Tawheed trying to make Al-Farhan look bad? (Might've misunderstood you on the Al-Farhan part so forgive me if I have )

Sister I really disagree. This is more about religion if anything. The ISOC OP is purely a religious issue because people do not agree with certain beliefs being added (due to our great scholars having ruled against them). It would be akin to spreading falsehood if everyone agreed to it. World affairs are not being talked about with regards to the OP.

Moving unto world affairs, the Isoc behaves very strangely around issue. Now if I post about Sisi killing Egyptian Muslims, noone complains because noone is a Sisi supporter and people make their duas and make ameens. Now I post about Iranian backed militias murdering Muslims, people make make their "may Allah grant them Jannah" duas again and add ameens but then when one person defends the killer of the muslims, the Isoc, rather than defend their dying brothers, go into a shell and say "oh not politics again". The same Muslims who say they care about Syria suddenly can't find it within themselves to say "No, that man is evil and kills Muslims, you should not be supporting him". Rather they oppose anyone who highlights the atrocities being committed in Syria and tell them to stop with the politics. This is especially where my opposition to HAnwar comes from.

The Muslims are one ummah and they feel pain together so I will always denounce the killer of Muslims. This is not just politics, this is Islam. Do you think this is incorrect?

Do you not think it is evil if a person supports the killer of Muslims (e.g. Khameini, Assad, Putin etc...)? If the person can be excused by ignorance because they may just be naive, do you think it's right if other people don't challenge their views?

Noone has ever demanded such a thing and it's not correct to change ISOC rules to prepare for a scenario which does not look like occurring. In fact, it's a waste of time IMO. Yes, see that's why we would have no problem with you because you wouldn't push it. But in this case we have a user, who after being refused by majority ( and with no support shown from regular Isocers), has tried get around member's wishes and gone to the moderators. If you did this - http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/showpost.php?p=66438194&postcount=83 , you'd be challenged too

I assume by 'wahhabi' you mean to say salafi's.

There are fundamental Aqeedah differences between a number of groups in the ahlus-sunnah, and the salafi-subgroup. To give you a basic introduction, Salafi'ism is a brand of Islam that seeks to take a very literalistic, rigid interpretation of the Quran and sunnah. They are intolerant of any diverging views save their own,

and this leads them to abusing and asking others to forsake many scholars or groups in the ahlus-sunnah, such as Sheikh Hamzah Yusuf, Yassir Qadhi, the barelavi's, ashari's, even groups among the hanafi's (salafi-islam clashes a lot with hanafi-islam). They are quick to call others deviant, and very, very secterian.

Alhamdullilah, my salafi-cousin is rather kind to me, and not secterian, and i have had deep indepth discussions with him about his beliefs. So not all salafi's are like that.

Many converts often join salafi islam out of an idea of following the pure sunnah. Many , after research, often then leave salafi islam.

For one, Salafi's derive a lot of their teachings from Ibn Taymiyyah, and are prone to giving very literalistic interpretations about Allah azwj himself.

IslamQa, which is a well-known salafi website, promoting bigotry against other groups who do not adhere to their specific brand of Islam, affirm that Allah azwj has 'two feet':

"Affirmation Allah has two feet" https://islamqa.info/en/166843

Here is a salafi-sheikh affirming that Allah azwj has 'fingers': https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fr5cZZ-2DAE

A number of madhabs in the ahlus-sunnah do not believe Allah azwj has two feet, and interpret the ahadith differently. There are some significant differences therefore, in the understanding of Tawheed itself between salafi's and other groups within the ahlus-sunnah.

Here is a wonderful article written by Yassir Qadhi, who left the salafi-sect and became a Hanafi (afaik). He has had a lot of abuse from salafi's due to this, but here is his article: http://muslimmatters.org/2014/04/22/on-salafi-islam-dr-yasir-qadhi/

Video of why Sheikh Yasir Qadhi left the salafi-sect:

[video="youtube;hZv5eKzoA8Y"]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hZv5eKzoA8Y[/video]

Websites, video's and articles from scholars/sheikhs/alims/adherents from the Ahlus-Sunnah wal jamaah refuting the modern salafi-sect and movement:

1. Great set of articles by the ahlus-sunnah wal jammaah website sunnah.org refuting salafi-islam: http://www.sunnah.org/articles/Wahhabiarticleedit.htm
2. Ahlus-sunnah wal jmaah sheikh, Asrar discusses salafi islam (he calles them 'najdi's', so you don't get confused. Najd is where he believes they were founded):
3. Sheikh Asrar Rashid (ahlus-sunnah wal jamaah sheikh) talks about salafi-ism: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FY88v4yZTHg
4. Video where Sheikh Hamzah Yusuf (maliki sheikh) responds to the salafi-habit of refuting everyone and regarding anyone to does not adhere to their strict interpretation of Islam as apostates/deviants: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vMkyW06vu4k

I even have ahlus-sunnah wal jamaah family members, who respect me but have firm theological disagreements with shia Islam, tell me that they are opposed to the salafi's.

It's nice to see pleasantries exchanged between a Muslim and a non-Muslim on a thread like this.

I hope we all can get along in a friendly manner.
Debates will always happen and disagreements will occur. But we should remember our good character and virtues.

It's nice to see pleasantries exchanged between a Muslim and a non-Muslim on a thread like this.

Most (if not all) of these are Muslims; how are you supposed to understand or see a representative demographic if you're unfairly notifying Muslims?

You probs won't see any accurate stats with the non-Muslims.
(And you probably wouldn't have anyway because I guess / reckon Muslims would have had a disposition to click on this thread anyway. Just from a semi-scientific point of view. )

Nah, you didn't miss it. See posts #103, #107, #109, and #110.

It's all good fun from my point of view. I've poured my fair share of scorn but I have to say, I'm somewhat surprised by how personal much of this affair has gotten. This is what happens when people become incapable of admitting to mistakes on their part, I suppose.

Lol you did misunderstand me I was not referring to you, just in general more like against anyone saying bad about him.

Firstly, forgive me for my typing which may have made you soo confused lol. Bear with me insha'Allah, I am typing from mobile, it is annoying typing long posts in this way. Mostly goes wrong.

Also with the stuff I was on about that involved politics and not religion was just like a statement more like.

With the world affairs I agree with you because I do not approve of what he posted because firstly it was not necessary and introduced misunderstanding. Secondly, killers are killers may it be a king,Queen whatever on earth. Hence, if there is clear proof of this I do not reject. And I was more like trying to say, if one does find a fault, then first I think it may be a wiser option to pm or vm them and see if the response from them. Then still if the person does not justify, explain themselves then the next step would be imo to respond directly by post. I hope this makes it more clear. Actually, I was referring more to Tawheed bro that he should have done this if he did find fault. But also I feel we all should in future Insha'Allah. Although this may not really solve anything but one can never know, it may just. Like honestly, if a group did the killing then they did it, but I will not generalise the entire sect (including a its followers, may it be right or wrong) just that group or inviduals who did the evil action overall. I believe the post Tawheed bro responded to, did not direct it at a sect but individuals. Hence, I don't disapprove the post made by AlifunArnab (I think that was his name) entirely.

Yes in a honestly if majority went against me for a certain demand or view on that particular thread. Then of course I will be the better person to leave it and move on. Plus I do not have the time to push people and make the society look bad and introduce negativity. I will adopt any way to show my views that will seem less chaotic I guess.



Oh right thanks. Interesting poll lol.

The real purpose of the thread was to understand the demographic usage of the ISOC within the Islamic community (between Sunni and Shia), but based on experience, non-Muslims like to vote in polls too, so I decided to include them just for the hell of it - perhaps it might also teach me something about other TSRians My quoting in was just of people who posted a reasonable amount on the ISOC thread, not as a way of twisting the poll anywhich way, but just ensuring participation of its users themselves.

Sorry about that.

No don't worry, wasn't your fault.

I understand where you coming from regarding startinh from vm/pms but we are long past that stage. This has been going on for maybe a year. I don't think anyone lays a finger on the whole sect. It is just that certain people support the wrongdoing party, so this will always lead into conflict. Yeh Alifunarnub is normally quite specific about whom he's blaming for X atrocity.



Yw.

Np.

Tbh I agree I don't think that anyone was trying to do that. It is the party that one or two may disagree with, which they support, but that is not necessary to mention when one knows they are involved in certain evil actions. Even if that party may have had done good elsewhere.

Still I would really like to say to you, as a well wisher. If anything like this arises again, please use the your best, pleasant and merciful tone possible. This will make the other person hopefully think about the situation more carefully, will be more willing to even listen to you at the first place and allow a more calm discussion to proceed. (It does not matter how many times you may have to do this, to the same or different person). Then if the other person still does not appreciate it, they will be the one to leave a bad impression of themselves, not you. Also, then atleast you have not made anyone feel isolated or given them the reason to claim so. Remember our creator is watching us SubhanAllah. A small good act can be priceless.

I don't really understand your first paragraph.

That no one was trying to pick on a certain sect as you said. And that it is still wrong if a person supports a party entirely (that happens to be from or related to their sect etc), when it is clear that they are involved in some evil actions eg allowing killings of the innocents.

Ah right. It is clearly wrong but unfortunately you're no doubt going to see many many more debates about this same issue in future

Hello. I'm finally here
What's the point of this thread may i ask?