Balls_of_Titanium_1 wrote:skynightblaze wrote:@BOT
[Allah forbids you not with regard to those who fight you not for your faith, nor drive you out of your homes, from dealing kindly and justly with them. For Allah loves those who are just. Allah only forbids you with regard to those who fight you for your faith, and drive you out of your homes and support others in driving you out, from turning to them for protection (or taking them as wali). Those who seek their protection they are indeed wrong- doers.] (Al-Mumtahinah 60: 8-9)
The above verse is self-explanatory.
47.35.
[047:035] So be not weak and ask not for peace (from the enemies of Islam), while you are having the upper hand. Allah is with you, and will never decrease the reward of your good deeds..
You brought up 60:8 -9 to tell us that you are supposed to fight only those who oppress you but 47:35 tells us that you are not supposed to make peace while you have the upper hand which means having a upper hand is a sufficient condition for you to fight and not engage in peace.So tells us what is the condition for you to fight? Is it having the upper hand or is it self defense?
The condition for the fight in stipulated in Al-Mumtahinah 60: 8-9.
And you are involved in a wrong interpretation of the second verse you quoted.
It does not say what you say it does. First of all, your translation is a mallicious one. It is not the standard translation of the Qur'an used by Muslims.
Quote this verse in the standard Qur'anic translations like Yousuf Ali, or Pickthal.
I do not give self-proclaimed Arabic speakers and translators at FFI more importance than I give to the flies that caught my dodg last summer.
Pickthall:
[047:035] So do not falter and cry out for peace when ye (will be) the uppermost, and Allah is with you, and He will not grudge (the reward of) your actio
The verse is clear itself. I dont need tafsirs to determine but lets what they say : After reading all the tafsirs why should we take your opinion as the standard over all these tafsir scholars? The condition for you to fight is self defense as well as to fight when you are in majority. This is the true and ugly face of islam.
Tafsir Jalalain wrote:So do not falter, [do not] be weak, and [do not] call for peace (read salm or silm), that is to say, a truce with the disbelievers should you encounter them, when you have the upper hand (al-a‘lawna: the third letter of the triliteral root, wāw, has been omitted), [when you are] the victors, the vanquishers, and God is with you, helping and assisting, and He will not stint you, diminish you, in [the reward for] your works, that is to say, of the reward for them.
Tafsir Tabrasi wrote:Not get weak from the fighting and let not any infidels to peaceful reconciliation when you have upper hand
. [/quote]Tafsir Al-Razi wrote:Obey Allah and his messenger requires fighting and do not make your position weakened nor tolerate “Kufr” when you (Muslims) are advancing
Tafsir Al-Shoukani wrote:Those who disbelieve and die in disbelief will not be forgiven.
Then the Almighty forbade believers from the weakness and vulnerability, he said: do not get weak from the fighting, and not to let the infidels peace from you. Qatada said: the meaning of the verse is "be not the first to offer peace"
Ibn Kathir wrote:(So do not lose heart) meaning, do not be weak concerning the enemies.
(and beg for peace) meaning, compromise, peace, and ending the fighting between you and the disbelievers while you are in a position of power, both in great numbers and preparations.
skynightblaze wrote:@BOT
Volume 1, Book 3, Number 125:
Narrated Abu Musa:
A man came to the Prophet and asked, "O Allah's Apostle! What kind of fighting is in Allah's cause? (I ask this), for some of us fight because of being enraged and angry and some for the sake of his pride and haughtiness." The Prophet raised his head (as the questioner was standing) and said, "He who fights so that Allah's Word (Islam) should be superior, then he fights in Allah's cause."
You are not asked just to fight in self defense but you are also supposed to take on offensive jihad as to spread islam. In other words you are supposed to spread islam by force.
"He who fights so that Allah's Word (Islam) should be superior, then he fights in Allah's cause."
Balls_of_Titanium_1 wrote:Muslims must be just and kind to Kufar who do not fight against them on the basis of Islam.
This is the general teaching of Islam.
winston wrote: Is it not simply the case that when a non-Muslim refuses to accept the invitation of Islam, or the position of a Dhimmi under Islamic law, then they are viewed as people who are 'fighting' Muslims on the basis of Islam? Islam is about political dominance and anyone who opposes the Shariah is a legitimate target of warfare, especially (as skynightblaze has already noted) when Muslims have the upper hand (through numbers or resources).
قال الزجاج: منع الله المسلمين أن يدعوا الكفار إلى الصلح، وأمرهم بحربهم حتى يسلموا
Balls_of_Titanium_1 wrote:Pickthall:
[047:035] So do not falter and cry out for peace when ye (will be) the uppermost, and Allah is with you, and He will not grudge (the reward of) your actio
Balls_of_Titanium_1 wrote:Yes. What is wrong with it?
Balls_of_Titanium_1 wrote: At any point, the verses 8-9 from Surah 60 guide the behaviour of Muslims towards non-Muslims. That is, Muslims must be just and kind to Kufar who do not fight against them on the basis of Islam.
This is the general teaching of Islam.
Balls_of_Titanium_1 wrote:The above verse that you quoted has to do with the attitude of Muslims. Muslim behaviour must not be cowardly. We should not BEG peace. We should seek it, we should prefer it, but we should not sit on our knees in front of the Kufar to mercy on us, if they desire fighting. This is the general impression the verse leaves on a reader who has read other Qur'anic verses.
Tafsir Jalalain wrote:So do not falter, [do not] be weak, and [do not] call for peace (read salm or silm), that is to say, a truce with the disbelievers should you encounter them, when you have the upper hand (al-a‘lawna: the third letter of the triliteral root, wāw, has been omitted), [when you are] the victors, the vanquishers, and God is with you, helping and assisting, and He will not stint you, diminish you, in [the reward for] your works, that is to say, of the reward for them.
Balls_of_Titanium_1 wrote:Let's for a moment believe the above exegesis must have to be accepted by any and every Muslim - which is definitely not the case
Balls_of_Titanium_1 wrote:I have two issues with you then -
Quote Tafsir Jalalain in the case of the verses 8-9 of Chapter no. 60.
Balls_of_Titanium_1 wrote:Secondly, let's see whether even the above tafsir supports your contention. It says that when you encounter the disbelievers, when you have a battle with them, do not offer a truce when you have the upperhand. An understandable military strategy. It SAYS NOTHING about THE REASON why this "enoucter" is taking place. It may be that the Kafirs are fighting Muslims "on the basis of their religion" in which case - as stated in verse 60:8-9, Muslims are to fight disblievers.
Balls_of_Titanium_1 wrote:Tafsir Tabrasi wrote:Not get weak from the fighting and let not any infidels to peaceful reconciliation when you have upper hand
Ditto - quote their tafsir of 60:8-9.
Not get weak - very understandable.
Again, don't accept true - fight the war to total victory if you have the upper hand
Why is there a war? No comment.
.Balls_of_Titanium_1 wrote:.Tafsir Al-Razi wrote:Obey Allah and his messenger requires fighting and do not make your position weakened nor tolerate “Kufr” when you (Muslims) are advancing
Ditto. (You know by now what I mean by that).
Secondly, "do not make your position weakened". NOTHING wrong.
.Balls_of_Titanium_1 wrote: "nor tolerate Kufr" - in which sense Razi says that, I don't know, when according to 60:8-9 we are to just and kind to kafirs if they do not against us on the basis of our religion.
Thus, no more comment on Al Razi behalf for me. Allah knows best.
.Balls_of_Titanium_1 wrote:Tafsir Al-Shoukani wrote:Those who disbelieve and die in disbelief will not be forgiven.
Point to be noted is that a Jews prosptitute was fogiven by God for her single good deed.
.Balls_of_Titanium_1 wrote: But I do not take much issues with that. What happens in Muslim after life must be of no consequence to you.
.Balls_of_Titanium_1 wrote:Then the Almighty forbade believers from the weakness and vulnerability, he said: do not get weak from the fighting, and not to let the infidels peace from you. Qatada said: the meaning of the verse is "be not the first to offer peace"
"forbade believers from the weakness and vulnerability" - NOTHING wrong.
Again, why the fighting is occuring is not made clear.
Balls_of_Titanium_1 wrote: Qatada says be not the first to make peace - which means, if Kafirs come to peace first, then it is ok - that's the collaray, isn't it?
Balls_of_Titanium_1 wrote: Again, talkign about a conflict that is already under way. There is nothing about WHY the conflict is under way. as such, in a conflict, do not get weak, do not beg peace, do not compromise, but if you have the upperhand, follow the war to your goal - something that every major western miiltary strategtist will agree to.
As to Ibn Kathir comparing Prophet (P) attitude attitude towars Meccans, there is a prevalent thought among Muslims scholars represented by modern scholars like Ghamdi (this site also brags about debating him) which holds that the the specific commandments towards the Meccans and the disbelievers of those days cannot be applied in general circumstances - as that was the time when a prophet of God was on earth, while in generally, this is not the case.
That's enough, I think, for this argument from tafsir, and not Qur'an.
KhaliL FarieL wrote:___________________________
I choose to answer Balls_of_Titanium1 since skynightblaze seems off-line.Balls_of_Titanium_1 wrote:Pickthall:
[047:035] So do not falter and cry out for peace when ye (will be) the uppermost, and Allah is with you, and He will not grudge (the reward of) your actioBalls_of_Titanium_1 wrote:Yes. What is wrong with it?
Balls_of_Titanium_1 wrote:skynightblaze wrote:@BOT
Volume 1, Book 3, Number 125:
Narrated Abu Musa:
A man came to the Prophet and asked, "O Allah's Apostle! What kind of fighting is in Allah's cause? (I ask this), for some of us fight because of being enraged and angry and some for the sake of his pride and haughtiness." The Prophet raised his head (as the questioner was standing) and said, "He who fights so that Allah's Word (Islam) should be superior, then he fights in Allah's cause."
You are not asked just to fight in self defense but you are also supposed to take on offensive jihad as to spread islam. In other words you are supposed to spread islam by force.
"He who fights"? In which sense? Fighting does not always have a lethal connotation.
I am fighting LIES on this forum.
I am FIGHITNG hatred on this forum.
Police FIGHTS crime.
Judiciary FIGHTS corruption.
MUSLIMS FIGHT DISBEILEF!
skynightblaze wrote:Balls_of_Titanium_1 wrote:skynightblaze wrote:@BOT
Volume 1, Book 3, Number 125:
Narrated Abu Musa:
A man came to the Prophet and asked, "O Allah's Apostle! What kind of fighting is in Allah's cause? (I ask this), for some of us fight because of being enraged and angry and some for the sake of his pride and haughtiness." The Prophet raised his head (as the questioner was standing) and said, "He who fights so that Allah's Word (Islam) should be superior, then he fights in Allah's cause."
You are not asked just to fight in self defense but you are also supposed to take on offensive jihad as to spread islam. In other words you are supposed to spread islam by force.
"He who fights"? In which sense? Fighting does not always have a lethal connotation.
I am fighting LIES on this forum.
I am FIGHITNG hatred on this forum.
Police FIGHTS crime.
Judiciary FIGHTS corruption.
MUSLIMS FIGHT DISBEILEF!
Thanks for responding . It is very important for us to know what Muhhamad meant by fighting because we are debating islam and we shouldnt be caring what you or other muslims interpret.
If fighting here means something other than violence then you should be able to show us that strategies used by Muhhamad to spread his religion involved no violence at all and it was always done through a healthy way. Can you show me when muhhamad spread his religion by use of education , debates or any other way than violence ?? You should be able to bring proofs from islamic scriptures here to prove whatever you have written above is true .
Btw you have been replied by khalil for the tafsirs that i brought up. I couldnt have replied better than him so i guess you could refute him .
Balls_of_Titanium_1 wrote:skynightblaze wrote:@BOT
Volume 1, Book 3, Number 125:
Narrated Abu Musa:
A man came to the Prophet and asked, "O Allah's Apostle! What kind of fighting is in Allah's cause? (I ask this), for some of us fight because of being enraged and angry and some for the sake of his pride and haughtiness." The Prophet raised his head (as the questioner was standing) and said, "He who fights so that Allah's Word (Islam) should be superior, then he fights in Allah's cause."
You are not asked just to fight in self defense but you are also supposed to take on offensive jihad as to spread islam. In other words you are supposed to spread islam by force.
"He who fights"? In which sense? Fighting does not always have a lethal connotation.
I am fighting LIES on this forum.
I am FIGHITNG hatred on this forum.
Police FIGHTS crime.
Judiciary FIGHTS corruption.
MUSLIMS FIGHT DISBEILEF!
Balls_of_Titanium1 wrote:I am fighting LIES on this forum.
I am FIGHITNG hatred on this forum.
AMUSLIMSEMANTICJIGGERYPOKERIST wrote:"He who fights"? In which sense? Fighting does not always have a lethal connotation.
I am fighting LIES on this forum.
I am FIGHITNG hatred on this forum.
Police FIGHTS crime.
Judiciary FIGHTS corruption.
MUSLIMS FIGHT DISBEILEF!
antineoETC wrote:
So "fight" doesn't have to mean PHYSICAL fighting? Fair enough. Let us look once again at verse 60:8 then:
60.8 Allah forbids you not, with regard to those who FIGHT you not for your Faith nor drive you out of your homes, from dealing kindly and justly with them:
So if "FIGHT" can mean other than fighting with swords, fists etc then the above permission to treat people "kindly" cannot extend to people who, "FIGHT" the Muslims with, say, spoken or written word. Correct?
The door swings both ways. I challenge you to fault my logic.
winston wrote:In addtion to this there is a quranic verse (can't remember off the top of my head) which says that the elderly and the sick are exempt from the struggle (jihad). So if jihad is a spiritual struggle or a 'fight' in a non physical sense, as many apoligists claim then why are these people exempt from it?
winston wrote:Balls_of_Titanium_1 wrote:Muslims must be just and kind to Kufar who do not fight against them on the basis of Islam.
This is the general teaching of Islam.
Is it not simply the case that when a non-Muslim refuses to accept the invitation of Islam, or the position of a Dhimmi under Islamic law, then they are viewed as people who are 'fighting' Muslims on the basis of Islam?
Islam is about political dominance and anyone who opposes the Shariah is a legitimate target of warfare, especially (as skynightblaze has already noted) when Muslims have the upper hand (through numbers or resources).
When you say that Muslims must be just and kind to Kufar who do not fight Muslims, you mean that Muslims must behave according to the rules of Dhimmitude which Muslims view as kindness and justice but which the Kufar most certainly do not.
Mohammed himself instigated physical hostilities against all of his non-Muslim neighbours, Jews, Christians and Pagans on the very basis that they rejected Islam and Dhimmitude to boot.
Return to Exclusive Rooms - One-on-One-Debates
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest