Are muslims authoritorian followers ?

[TashaN]

Speaking out against the ruler was made for the tyrant ruler not for Umar.
TashaN, I don't understand what you're trying to say. Do you say that we should be negative and we shouldn't oppose the corrupted governments?

I'm with choosing the most suitable method to face our challenges. We should not just read some books or listen to some lectures and say we have to do that and that and that like what the Sahabi did so and so. We have to understand the situation we live in, and with trying to have the faith the sahaba were enjoying, we have to find a way for us to deal with our current challenges. I hope you all got what i'm trying to say here.

And what's wrong with that? I have every right to get angry if I don't get my human rights or when I am oppressed and which can be my basis for opposing the government.

Cool, but you should distinguish between the two. The is a huge difference between getting angry for ourselves and getting angry for Allah. It's like someone who go and fight the enemy just for revenge, because they killed his brother, father, etc, instead of thinking like a real mujahid. Do you remember the story of Ali bin abi talib when he knocked down one of the mushrikeen then while being powerless, this disbeliever spit on Ali's face, then he was asked Ali to finish him up, but Ali left him alone, and said that, if he would kill him now, it would because he want to get revenge for himself, not to fight for Allah's sake.

 

[TashaN]

yes..that's a price that has to be paid sometimes..not for no reason....but for a very good reason ,indeed

Please read my reply to not4me.

but what if the ruler is hindering jihad ? what if our blood is being shed on daily basis ? what if al masjid al aqsa is being messed with ? what if one country falls after another ?

What do you suggest we do, maro? or should we leave that for the solution thread you have started?

You say ,eradicating those regimes violently is not the answer...And wallahy al azeem I agree ( so ,hopefully we will drop this point ).....but how come speaking up is not the answer either ?!!!!

There is so many things we can do, and speaking aimlessly is a waste of time. We have to find the right channels and methods to speak and criticize those puppet rulers other than the mass rallies which can be easily manipulated to achieve certain political gains for certain parties or regimes over others.

The ' educating our sons ' argument is no more than analgesic....A miracle is not going to happen after we educate our sons....An angel will not fall from the sky to rule our ' well educated' sons untill we exert real effort to change those regimes..and the whole political system

I'm really eager to discuss the solutions.

I disagree...the shariah we are hoping for is not ' al hudud'...and saudi arabia is certainly not representaive of the islamic shariah

They uphold the Quran and Sunnah as the main legal system and they apply it. What's wrong with that? do you want them to throw it out and adopt secular system instead? I prefer to live in a place where they partially apply shariah law than to live in a plain secular society. Don't you agree with me?

Isn't there something 'moderate' between a violent revolution and completely shutting up ?

Surely there is, and that's what i'm more interested to discuss about.

actually ,it's very relevant..

The law is garbage ,repressive and unislamic...and is meant to maintain the saudi dictatorship...and instead of critisizing it , one of the honourable scholars volunteered to make a funky fatwa so that the people shut up and submitt !...That type of scholars has to be comapred to abdul Rahman ibn awf...That was my point

Ok, i got your point now. My reply is this, if you can recall, the Ummiah and Abbasi Caliphs weren't angels who fell from the sky. Many people glorify them and compare them even with the early 4 caliphs for instance, and it's really misleading, because like that, we are creating a huge and unnecessary gap between us and them. There were many tyrant rulers in the time of bani Ummiah and bani Al-Abbas. I want you to dig into that and find out how the scholars and public in general have dealt with them. Don't just look up the good ones, try to dig up more into the past, and i'm sure you will find the answer if you looked hard enough.

 

[maro]

What do you suggest we do, maro? or should we leave that for the solution thread you have started?

How about recognizing our problems and speaking up against them by all means possible...The media...mass rallies...etc. , Exerting real pressure on those regimes...clearly anouncing our objection....To let them feel that their prisons and repressive strategies will not bring us down..will not shut us up....and that there is a huge obstacle of well ecucated alert people they have to overcome before they can go on with their strategies

There is so many things we can do, and speaking aimlessly is a waste of time.

That's exactly what we can't agree upon
You say ' speaking up '..is Aimless..and a waste of time ,while I think ' speaking up ' is the inevitable first step towards the real change we are hoping for...and those who arrest it are doing a great favour to those authoritorian regimes ,wether they are aware of this or not

We have to find the right channels and methods to speak and criticize those puppet rulers

You are now confusing me
Are you aginst 'spaeaking up ' or you just want to find the right channels ? and what are those channels ?

...other than the mass rallies which can be easily manipulated to achieve certain political gains for certain parties or regimes over others.

I am sorry Tashan..but this is the authoritorian mentality that view the people as kids who need to be protected from the manipulation by their regimes

Mass rallies is something agreed upon in the whole world except in saudi arabia...Even in my country ' which is also an authoritorian regime'...Mass rallies are still an available channel for us...they may face harassment sometimes , but at least not comletely banned

The people have the right to speak up for themselves without the custody of their repressive regimes..and the ' they can be manipulated ' excuse can be said about all means of expression...The newspapers...the media..etc. does that mean we have to ban all of them for fear of the manipulation ?!

They uphold the Quran and Sunnah as the main legal system and they apply it. What's wrong with that? do you want them to throw it out and adopt secular system instead? I prefer to live in a place where they partially apply shariah law than to live in a plain secular society. Don't you agree with me?

Tashan..my objection was to the word ' entirely ' you used....

but i have no problem with the word 'patrially ' you are using now...I agree that by applying al hudud , SA is partially applying the shariah....Only partially....and that's what i meant when i said they are not representaitves of the islamic shariah

when someone claims that the shariah is entirely applied..I have to ask about Al shura..al jihad...and even the scietific advancement , before i can agree

Ok, i got your point now. My reply is this, if you can recall, the Ummiah and Abbasi Caliphs weren't angels who fell from the sky. Many people glorify them and compare them even with the early 4 caliphs for instance, and it's really misleading, because like that, we are creating a huge and unnecessary gap between us and them. There were many tyrant rulers in the time of bani Ummiah and bani Al-Abbas. I want you to dig into that and find out how the scholars and public in general have dealt with them. Don't just look up the good ones, try to dig up more into the past, and i'm sure you will find the answer if you looked hard enough.

that's not a fair comparison ,IMO....bani ummiah and bani el abbas , although having a lot of drawbacks never hindered al gihad while the muslim blood is being shed daily....and never allowed the enemies of their ummah to use their own lands to beat other muslims...On the contrary , most of islamic conquests took place in their era

If you have something that you want to share with us about this era...which we are not fully aware of ... Please Go ahead

 

[Mr Spinkles]

What do you think of collaborative programs, such as youth programs, peace and human rights activists, etc. where people and student from different countries get together?

Do you see Western liberal activist groups, who care about Palestinian rights, human rights, democracy (real democracy, not Western-imposed pseudo-democracy), poverty and education, respect and tolerance for other cultures, nonviolence, respect for international law and the international consensus, etc. as allies? I'm thinking of groups like Amnesty International. Or someone like Rachel Corrie.

Or are those groups not attractive because of their views on gay rights, and a few issues of that sort?

 

[TashaN]

How about recognizing our problems and speaking up against them by all means possible...The media...mass rallies...etc. , Exerting real pressure on those regimes...clearly anouncing our objection....To let them feel that their prisons and repressive strategies will not bring us down..will not shut us up....and that there is a huge obstacle of well ecucated alert people they have to overcome before they can go on with their strategies

I don't know what does fit Egypt the most, you know better than me. That's why, every society has to step up and find proper ways to speak up and show their opposition for any injustice.

That's exactly what we can't agree upon
You say ' speaking up '..is Aimless..and a waste of time ,while I think ' speaking up ' is the inevitable first step towards the real change we are hoping for...and those who arrest it are doing a great favour to those authoritorian regimes ,wether they are aware of this or not

Please maro, read carefully what i said earlier. I didn't say "speaking up" is aimless as you claimed, but i said speaking aimlessly is a waste of time. We have to speak up but with specific goals, not to fall a prey for other parties agenda and become a political card for them.

You are now confusing me
Are you aginst 'spaeaking up ' or you just want to find the right channels ? and what are those channels ?

Please read above to understand what i meant.

I am sorry Tashan..but this is the authoritorian mentality that view the people as kids who need to be protected from the manipulation by their regimes

Mass rallies is something agreed upon in the whole world except in saudi arabia...Even in my country ' which is also an authoritorian regime'...Mass rallies are still an available channel for us...they may face harassment sometimes , but at least not comletely banned

As i said before, every country has it's own ways to deal with things, and mass rallies in Saudi Arabia most of the time have been used either by Al Qayda followers or the opposition party in London. I'm talking about Saudi Arabia, and those who live there should find apropriate ways to protest and speak up. Egypt and Saudi Arabia are two different political enviornment. The atomosphere in Saudi Arabia can't handle political propagandas on the streets because it's a very sensetive place to all Muslims. Any small fitnah might do a great damage. Remember the fitna of Juhayman in Mekkah?

Juhayman thought Al-Mahdi came in the person of his brother in law, so he took over the Sacred Mosque.
Grand Mosque Seizure - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The people have the right to speak up for themselves without the custody of their repressive regimes..and the ' they can be manipulated ' excuse can be said about all means of expression...The newspapers...the media..etc. does that mean we have to ban all of them for fear of the manipulation ?!

Nope, that's why only mass rallies are banned, not all the other things you have mentioned. The people of Saudi Arabia ya maro are different than yours. In Egypt, people have been exposed to various politcal regimes and even to colonization. So the tool which was of great help to Egyptians against the British for instance "mass rallies" couldn't be banned because your leaders came from within your own societies and they would be hypocrites if they banned such a thing, not to mention the level of education, mentality, and politcal experience Egyptians do have. They are very mature when it comes to politics, unlike the people in Saudi Arabia, who, in most of it's areas, are more into the bedwan mentality of the desert, who didn't reach yet into the kind of political maturity whom you and i wish for.

Tashan..my objection was to the word ' entirely ' you used....

but i have no problem with the word 'patrially ' you are using now...I agree that by applying al hudud , SA is partially applying the shariah....Only partially....and that's what i meant when i said they are not representaitves of the islamic shariah

They claim they apply the Shariah entirely, and when i said partially, i was just trying to say, even if it was applied in Saudi Arabia partially, i would be happy with that when seeing what happened to the countries surounding us.

when someone claims that the shariah is entirely applied..I have to ask about Al shura..al jihad...and even the scietific advancement , before i can agree

They have all the things you have mentioned.

that's not a fair comparison ,IMO....bani ummiah and bani el abbas , although having a lot of drawbacks never hindered al gihad while the muslim blood is being shed daily....and never allowed the enemies of their ummah to use their own lands to beat other muslims...On the contrary , most of islamic conquests took place in their era

If you have something that you want to share with us about this era...which we are not fully aware of ... Please Go ahead

I think it wouldn't make any difference even if i gave some examples, because you are waiting for a resemblance, not a similarity, not realizing that we are living in two different times, and two different political enviornment. If i were the ruler today, i would be a fool to expand my land by occupying other countries. The reasons why they were doing it before no longer apply today. If you want to discuss this issue more i'm more than willing to open a thread about it.

I already did
http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/islam/81105-jihad-conquest.html#post1559301

 

[TashaN]

What do you think of collaborative programs, such as youth programs, peace and human rights activists, etc. where people and student from different countries get together?

I read from a time to another in the local newspapers in Saudi Arabia that some students and some clubs from overseas visit Saudi Arabia, and the Saudi government also send some students outside to do the same thing as well. I think the human rights activities is another issue as you know (religious freedom, gays, gender, etc).

Do you see Western liberal activist groups, who care about Palestinian rights, human rights, democracy (real democracy, not Western-imposed pseudo-democracy), poverty and education, respect and tolerance for other cultures, nonviolence, respect for international law and the international consensus, etc. as allies? I'm thinking of groups like Amnesty International. Or someone like Rachel Corrie.

Or are those groups not attractive because of their views on gay rights, and a few issues of that sort?

Well, regardless of what they believe in, and even if they themselves were gays, it doesn't matter as long as they are not addressing this issue (gays), and instead, are trying to collaborate on a common goal at the beginning--yep, like Palestine--to reduce the gap between them and to allow for a bridge of trust and understanding to be built before looking into the other more sensitive issues.

As long as people in the West see us as un-civilized people who have nothing but oil, camels and a dozen of women, there won't be any kind of improvement in this field which you have mentioned. I highlighted the word trust because in many poor Muslim lands, many Christian missionaries have come under the cover of human rights activities in order to either preach or to encourage people to migrate to the West after converting to Christianity. This has been documented by the Indonesian government and some Muslim activity groups after the Tsunami wave on Indonesia.

 

[AbuKhalid]

I think it wouldn't make any difference even if i gave some examples, because you are waiting for a resemblance, not a similarity, not realizing that we are living in two different times, and two different political enviornment. If i were the ruler today, i would be a fool to expand my land by occupying other countries. The reasons why they were doing it before no longer apply today. If you want to discuss this issue more i'm more than willing to open a thread about it.

I already did
http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/islam/81105-jihad-conquest.html#post1559301

The other thread is important but I don't believe that it is addressing the point being made by maro. Her issue doesn't seem to be that these rulers are not expanding the Islamic lands but that they are preventing people going to wage defensive Jihad in places such as Iraq. They have also made Jihad haram under their man made laws.

 

[Sahar]

They are very mature when it comes to politics, unlike the people in Saudi Arabia, who, in most of it's areas, are more into the bedwan mentality of the desert, who didn't reach yet into the kind of political maturity whom you and i wish for.

So the solution is to oppress the political life more and the chance to be mature?

BTW, the Egyptian people, generally speaking, are not politically mature at all but I agree that there are political and social differences between Egypt and KSA.

 

[maro]

Please maro, read carefully what i said earlier. I didn't say "speaking up" is aimless as you claimed, but i said speaking aimlessly is a waste of time. We have to speak up but with specific goals, not to fall a prey for other parties agenda and become a political card for them.

My fault...i rushed into understanding it that way because of what you have said earlier...i guess you said we don't have the wisdom and iman of ibn awf and we don't have omar to crtitisize him and feel safe (or something like that )

now..what do you mean by 'speak aimlessly ' and 'speak with specific goals ' ?! Can you give examples of what you call 'aimless' speaking ?

They have all the things you have mentioned.

Saudi arabia is perfect then ?! It's not an authoritiorian regime hindering jihad and scientifically arrested as i though it to be ?!!!!

I think it wouldn't make any difference even if i gave some examples, because you are waiting for a resemblance, not a similarity, not realizing that we are living in two different times, and two different political enviornment.

Try me

If i were the ruler today, i would be a fool to expand my land by occupying other countries. The reasons why they were doing it before no longer apply today. If you want to discuss this issue more i'm more than willing to open a thread about it.

I already did
http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/islam/81105-jihad-conquest.html#post1559301

Abukahled -jazah allah khairan- has already clarified that what i meant here is jihad al daf3 جهاد الدفع(in palestine ,iraq and aghanistan ) and not conquesting other countries جهاد الطلب

I appreciate the thread you started..but that wasn't my point

 

[maro]

So the solution is to oppress the political life more and the chance to be mature?

That's a good point ,indeed

Can authoritorianism be justified by those excuses :

The people are uneducated bedwins
for fear of the manipulation
for fear of the fitnah

 

[Sajdah]

I see the opposite, this saying is very evident in the history and in the present time.

I don't know sister, but there were catastrophes that happened like the Crusades, and the Tatar. At the time of the Crusades Muslims in Egypt were ruled by Shia, but it doesn't mean that the Majority of Egyptians at that time were Shia like their rulers, in fact all of them were Sunnis. And also I see that the Hadith about Al-Mahdi proves that that saying is wrong, as Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) said: “Al-Mahdi will be of my stock, and will have a broad forehead, a prominent nose. He will fill the earth with equity and justice as it was filled with oppression and tyranny, and he will rule for seven years.” ( Reported by Abu Daud)

I say it goes both ways ,not4me...I remeber a man who told omar ibn abd el aziz " you are just ,that's why they " the people " are just...and if you were corrupt ,they would have been corrupt " عدلت فعدلوا , ولو رتعت لرتعوا

Also ,the famous saying : the people follow their kings' religions الناس على دين ملوكهم

I think that the ( what caused what ?) argument is a waste of time...both need to be changed ,simultaneously

I totally agree with you. That's what I'm trying to say.

 

[Sajdah]

I got what you mean now, but still, please don't tell me that all what happen to us is because of our rulers! Don't forget that those rulers, or let's most of them, have emerged from within the society they live in. There was a time when people fell for communist or secular way of living and the ruler came from within this society.

Certainly we are responsible too, and one of our responsibilities is to ADVICE those rulers. Allah tells us in Surah Azukhruf(43) about the pharaoh and his people "(51. And Fir`awn proclaimed among his people (saying): "O my people! Is not mine the dominion of Egypt, and these rivers flowing underneath me. See you not then'') (52. "Am I not better than this one (Musa) who is despicable and can scarcely express himself clearly'') (53. Why then are not golden bracelets bestowed on him, or angels sent along with him'') (54. Thus he fooled his people, and they obeyed him. Verily, they were ever a people who were rebellious.) (55. So when they angered Us, We punished them, and drowned them all.) (56. And We made them a precedent, and an example to later generations.)"

BTW: I have read a very wonderful article. It's An announcement to Muslim and Arab rulers: I am an honest advisor to you. By: Dr. Ragheb ElSergani.
Please, read it when you have time.

 

[TashaN]

The other thread is important but I don't believe that it is addressing the point being made by maro. Her issue doesn't seem to be that these rulers are not expanding the Islamic lands but that they are preventing people going to wage defensive Jihad in places such as Iraq. They have also made Jihad haram under their man made laws.

That''s exactly why i started the other thread. In order to discuss the expansion issue alone there and deal with maro's point which you have mentioned here.

 

[TashaN]

So the solution is to oppress the political life more and the chance to be mature?

BTW, the Egyptian people, generally speaking, are not politically mature at all but I agree that there are political and social differences between Egypt and KSA.

Did i say that?

I said, that's why they don't allow *mass rallies*. They can express themselves in way which is most suitable to the political atmosphere there.

My fault...i rushed into understanding it that way because of what you have said earlier...i guess you said we don't have the wisdom and iman of ibn awf and we don't have omar to crtitisize him and feel safe (or something like that )

now..what do you mean by 'speak aimlessly ' and 'speak with specific goals ' ?! Can you give examples of what you call 'aimless' speaking ?

It depends. For example in Egypt, you can speak up against the ruler, but the situation in Saudi Arabia is different. They can't do mass rallies but they can speak up through the media, or through Majlis Al-Shura, etc.

Saudi arabia is perfect then ?! It's not an authoritiorian regime hindering jihad and scientifically arrested as i though it to be ?!!!!

It's not perfect, neither was the Bani Ummiah and Bani Abbas Islamic state.

Try me

Ok then. If that's the case, i promise i'll go to the library and collect solid information from books about what i currently have in mind to give you very "specific" situations with names, places, and date, inshAllah.

Abukahled -jazah allah khairan- has already clarified that what i meant here is jihad al daf3 جهاد الدفع(in palestine ,iraq and aghanistan ) and not conquesting other countries جهاد الطلب

I appreciate the thread you started..but that wasn't my point

You mentioned جهاد الطلب too, that's why i would like to discuss that issue with you there if you don't mind. Check your previous post and you will see that you have mentioned it. I think it's a very important topic as well.

 

[maro]

It depends. For example in Egypt, you can speak up against the ruler, but the situation in Saudi Arabia is different.

So , by aimless speaking , you meant speaking against the ruler ?!! Is that the only speaking you consider to be aimless ?

It's not perfect, neither was the Bani Ummiah and Bani Abbas Islamic state.

first you refused to mention your opinion about the saudi regime as it will be 'unnecessary political debate ' (according to you ) and then you Said that the Saudi regime is applying al shura and al jihad...and that saudi arabia has scientific advancement....and now you are comparing the corrupt repressive saudi regime to the Caliphs of bani Ummahi and bani el abbas which is a very unfair and misleading comparison as i clarified earlier

Tashan...If you consider speaking up against the corrupt rulers to be a Taboo...that's your own business...but this is not Islam ' as i understand it '.....and i don't buy the ' people are uneducated bedwins who can be manipulated ' argument...

You mentioned جهاد الطلب too, that's why i would like to discuss that issue with you there if you don't mind. Check your previous post and you will see that you have mentioned it. I think it's a very important topic as well.

I mentioned it in the context of me talking about the bani ummayia and bani el abbas caliphs ..that was not a call for reviving that type of jihad

 

[AbuKhalid]

Yet another man asked the Messenger of Allah (S):
"'What kind of jihad is better?' He replied, 'A word of truth in front of an oppressive ruler!'"

(Sunan Al-Nasa'i #4209)

 

[TashaN]

So , by aimless speaking , you meant speaking against the ruler ?!! Is that the only speaking you consider to be aimless ?



first you refused to mention your opinion about the saudi regime as it will be 'unnecessary political debate ' (according to you ) and then you Said that the Saudi regime is applying al shura and al jihad...and that saudi arabia has scientific advancement....and now you are comparing the corrupt repressive saudi regime to the Caliphs of bani Ummahi and bani el abbas which is a very unfair and misleading comparison as i clarified earlier

Tashan...If you consider speaking up against the corrupt rulers to be a Taboo...that's your own business...but this is not Islam ' as i understand it '.....and i don't buy the ' people are uneducated bedwins who can be manipulated ' argument...



I mentioned it in the context of me talking about the bani ummayia and bani el abbas caliphs ..that was not a call for reviving that type of jihad

When you speak against the rulers, there must be rules for that. If the entire community started to speak up in every matter, there will be a great fitnah. We should follow our learned scholars.

Regarding the jihad, i'll refrain from discussing it more here until i finish my research about it.