SomaliNet Forums

Thank you for that interesting perspective Dr. Yalaxoow.

^^last time he started a thread campaigning for kanisado in mecca and medina. I am just waiting for the day he says you can make wudoo with khamri

Don't be surprised sxb.

And on cue, his kaafir friend, Union thanks for his "interesting" perspective. Aabihiisa baa gaalobey, of course he'd follow.

Melo, it's impolite and rash to refer to everybody who disagrees with you as being an apostate. You have slandered three people in this thread alone, with the most severe case being your attack on Sheik Usama who has more Islamic knowledge in his left thumb than you do in your entire body.

I know you think you're some hotshot know it all Internet ayatollah, but why don't you go read some books on basic adab.

Melo, it's impolite and rash to refer to everybody who disagrees with you as being an apostate. You have slandered three people in this thread alone, with the most severe case being your attack on Sheik Usama who has more Islamic knowledge in his left thumb than you do in your entire body.

I know you think you're some hotshot know it all Internet ayatollah, but why don't you go read some books on basic adab.

Good adaab should not be shown to people who mock the religion of Islam. In fact, in an Islamic state, they would be put to the death.

Usamah might have more knowledge about me, but so does Iblis. That means nothing. I am very well aware of Usama and people within his own father's jamah have taken him to task for his kufri statements.

Nothing i say with respect to the religion is my own opinion. Everything i post is just a rehash upon what Islamic daacis and scholars have mentioned previously.

And lastly, i am not an ayatollah as i am not a shiica. Thank you and may allah swt guide you back to Islaam

Melo, it's impolite and rash to refer to everybody who disagrees with you as being an apostate. You have slandered three people in this thread alone, with the most severe case being your attack on Sheik Usama who has more Islamic knowledge in his left thumb than you do in your entire body.

I know you think you're some hotshot know it all Internet ayatollah, but why don't you go read some books on basic adab.

Good adaab should not be shown to people who mock the religion of Islam. In fact, in an Islamic state, they would be put to the death.

Usamah might have more knowledge about me, but so does Iblis. That means nothing. I am very well aware of Usama and people within his own father's jamah have taken him to task for his kufri statements.

Nothing i say with respect to the religion is my own opinion. Everything i post is just a rehash upon what Islamic daacis and scholars have mentioned previously.

And lastly, i am not an ayatollah as i am not a shiica. Thank you and may allah swt guide you back to Islaam

Everything you say is your own take on things, and the regurgitations of what other people have said. People have a right to disagree with them. Also, you said above that having more knowledge doesn't matter, then why should we listen to whatever long dead theologian you quote as if they were speaking holy writ?

Melo, it's impolite and rash to refer to everybody who disagrees with you as being an apostate. You have slandered three people in this thread alone, with the most severe case being your attack on Sheik Usama who has more Islamic knowledge in his left thumb than you do in your entire body.

I know you think you're some hotshot know it all Internet ayatollah, but why don't you go read some books on basic adab.

Good adaab should not be shown to people who mock the religion of Islam. In fact, in an Islamic state, they would be put to the death.

Usamah might have more knowledge about me, but so does Iblis. That means nothing. I am very well aware of Usama and people within his own father's jamah have taken him to task for his kufri statements.

Nothing i say with respect to the religion is my own opinion. Everything i post is just a rehash upon what Islamic daacis and scholars have mentioned previously.

And lastly, i am not an ayatollah as i am not a shiica. Thank you and may allah swt guide you back to Islaam

Everything you say is your own take on things, and the regurgitations of what other people have said. People have a right to disagree with them. Also, you said above that having more knowledge doesn't matter, then why should we listen to whatever long dead theologian you quote as if they were speaking holy writ?

Listen here saaxib. Not every opinion is valid. If a person comes today and says Homosexuality is allowed in Islam or that there is a prophet after nabi muhammad saws, such opinions are not valid. If that person tries to to promote such filth, he will be dealt with in a fashion that he deserves. So yes, while everyone might take their own takes, there are takes which take you out of orthodoxy.

For instance.. i agree with the scholars who say that suicide bombings are allowed in certain cirumstances. I realize that a lot of scholars oppose this view. I will not declare their opinion in valid or "WRONG". Similarly, i do not consider the hanafi madhabs judicial laws as invalid law, although it is in stark contrast in many areas to the other 3.

I have no problem with people having differeing opinions. I just do not accept opinions that oppose clearly established orthodoxy. They are invalid at their premise and should not be given any validity. They aren't just merely weak.

As for your suggestion about old theologians. You should know that in secular studies, an academic who comes about and dismisses established academia will be isolated and untill he/she proves that his/her premise is correct. The default position is to reject it. So in this case, Usama hassan opposes the ijmaa of the Sahabah, imaams and the Muslims of ahlussunah. Only baatinis who claimed paradise wasn't real, would probably agree with him. Even shiicas would not agree with his statement. So i reiterate, the default position to reject his opinion.

Now, lets analyse his statements. He says that the Jews and christians are not kaafirs and might enter paradise. He quotes an ayaat which proves he point. Little does Usama hassan know however but this argument was refuted centuries and centuries ago, that even laymen can demolish it.

Now there are ample enough of verses in the Quraan which seemingly contradict that ayaat. The first verse of Surah bayinnah, the ayaah in Imran and a host of other verses. These verses establish

1- Islam is the only way to paradise
2- To get to paradise, you have to accept prophet saws as a prophet
3-The Jews and Christians are disbelievers
4- The trinity is complete kufr and idolatory


There are also numerous axaadith in which the prophet saws mentioned that getting to paradise was predicated on accepting his prophethood, and he also condemned the Jews and Christians.

Which takes us to the quandry we now face. How do we understand these contradictory ayaats. There are 3 paths you can take

1- The quran is contradictory
2- Accept my proposition that the verse you quoted was abrogated and the doors were closed on the ahl-kitaab
3- Prove that the verse you quoted came AFTER the dozen or so verses which explicitly call christian and jews kaafirs, and which state that only Islaam and the acceptance of muhammad saw is the way to paradise

There is no 4th option.

Now tell me, which option do you take?

Knowledge isn't the end all be all. An individual for instance might have expertise in a particular field, but he might distort his opinion for whatever particular reason. He might also be suffering from the was was of shaytaan. Ibliis is not ignorant, but he is the Imaaam of naar. Allah SWT also says in the quran that the Jewish rabbis in Madinah KNEW that the prophet saw was a nabi, but that they hid that knowledge from the masses.

So like i said, knowledge without application means nothing. Usama might be more knowledgeable then some of his critics, but his application of this knowledge is surely lacking.

It is also a very arrogant claim to suggest that the large bulk of Islamic scholarship was wrong in their takes on issues such as these.

^^ I am just waiting for the day he says you can make wudoo with khamri

:lol firstable let me point that iam against of drinking alcohol contained beverages, and iam against smoking. dr yalaxoow is a non smoker and never in my life a tested drink whichs contained alcahol.

waryaa gaajounit mr FUTURE suicide bomber and cousin of hoteel shaamoow suicide bomber !! about wudduu and khamri(alcohol)?? actually is not forbidden to wash your hands whit alcohol for disinfectional of bacteria and other infections. myself every time i go public bathrooms i wash my hands whit KHAMRI(ALCOHOL)
so as a grand amatuer scholar its 100% halal to wash khamri(alcohol) for all over your body even the face for disinfectional reason. as may you know some facial creams are contained alcohol(khamri), so khamri itself its only haraam to drink but its NOT haraam to wash your hands and face.

Typical Dr Yalaxow post: " find an article/topic, google a pic or two, add some of his incoherent rants to it, curse a little bit , and then quote the quran to give it a finishing it".

jews do not have trinity like christians. and jews does not belief god have sons like chrisians.

And allah SWT refutes your statement

"AND THE JEWS SAY UZAIR IS THE SON OF GOD" - Surat Tawba ayat 30


Yalaxoow, stick to other issues.

And even if we agree that it was only the jews in Arabia, the Jews book the talmud is full of blasphemy.

yes maybe some jews sect back in tha days 1400 years ago when quran was revealed in that time jews could probably belief that uzayr was the son of god. but todays jews do not belief god has a son. jews who live today belief singel god and god whit out a son.

yes its christians who belief god have son and they dont deny that they belief so.

but ask any jew about god havins son, he will categorly deny that they belief so.

Actually yalaxoow, in their blasphemous texts, numerous people referred to sons of gods. In fact , the Jews call themselves the "children of god".