Tuesday, January 13, 2009

Its Shari'ah, Stupid #8

This is the eighth in a series of posts quoting Fiqh concerning offensive Jihad.
Ibn Qudama, d. 1223, hanbali. Cit. ur. Henri Laoust, Le précis de droit d’Ibn Qudama […] (Beirut 1950), s. 273-6, 281.
Legal war (jihad) is an obligatory social duty (fard kifaya); when one group of Muslims guarantees that it is being carried out in a satisfactory manner, the others are exempted. The jihad becomes a strictly binding personal duty (fard ain) for all Muslims who are enlisted or whose country has been [invaded] by the enemy. It is obligatory only for free men who have reached puberty, are endowed with reason and capable of fighting. Jihad is the best of the works of supererogation.

This Hanbali Fiqh is congruent with the Shafi'ite, compare it to Reliance of the Traveller, Book O9. Take due notice of the following points in this quote.
  • Offensive Jihad is a collective obligation, binding on the Ummah until enough men answer the call.
  • Defensive Jihad is an individual obligation, binding on all able bodied Muslims of full age and reason.
  • Jihad is the best of extra credit good works for Brownie Points from Allah.

7 comments:

Ema Nymton said...

.

Another boatload of wasted effort. To think, you spend so much time putting out so much meaningless blather for so many who simply do not believe anything you write. What a putze!

May Allah care. Because who else does?

.

PackSmack said...

Ema,

So what part are you saying is blather? The statements from Muslims outlining a Muslim's duty to war against all mankind, or the fact that Ben presents it?

Which part is unbelievable?

Are you saying that the people Ben quotes did NOT say this? And if they did say it, please, is there some kind of enlightened meaning that you are privy to that no other human being can understand? Please share your interpretation of these words if they are dissimilar to the normal reading of them...

Ema Nymton said...

.

PackSmack,

A fact is a fact is a fact is a fact.

And the world is round.

Is there a statement against Islam quoted by your beloved Ben, that cannot be countered by the christian hate sermon's of Westboro Baptist Church's Fred Phelps of Topeka, Kansas or by the super-christian Imperial Grand Wizard of the KKK?

Are you so afraid? Do you not have faith in your belief in Jesus?

Followers of Islam have been in USA since its inception. Get a grip on your fear.

.

PackSmack said...

Ema,

You wish that I was afraid...believe me, I am the least afraid person you know...for my own reasons.

Followers of Islam have been wrong since 630 A.D.

He who has the Son has the life; he who does not have the Son of God does not have the life.
-the Apostle John

(nowhere is Mo-lester-hammed named in there...)

Ema Nymton said...

.


"... Followers of Islam have been wrong since 630 A.D. ..."

And you know this how?

"... (nowhere is Mo-lester-hammed named in there...)"

OK as you insist in casting mud...,

You follow the teachings of an unmarried man who hung around with other men (nudge, nudge, wink, wink, nod, nod) and whose only know disciples were men. What family values are these?

.

PackSmack said...

Ema, how do I know Islam has always been wrong? Well, did you not read what I posted yesterday? For your benefit, I will re-post this Bible verse for you here: "He who has the Son has the life; he who does not have the Son of God does not have the life."
-the Apostle John

Mo-lester-hammed is the spirit of the anti-Christ because he denied the deity of Jesus Christ (as outlined also in the book of 1John.) Of course, to cover his incredulity, he made the audacious claim that Jews and Christians had 'distorted' Scripture. So in one statement, he attempted to nullify 3000 years of God's Word to man; pretty convenient, wouldn't you say? Too bad the Dead Sea Scrolls make Mo-lester-hammed look like the fool he is.

Ben said...

The identity, status, message & practices of Jesus Christ and his Apostles & Disciples makes absolutely no objective difference in the matter of Islam's validity.

Such discussions are diversions, not defenses. The Koran claims to confirm the books which preceded it. In fact, it contradicts them. It claims that they were distorted & corrupted, without pointing out the supposed changes.

It claims that Jesus Christ was not God's son; only a man, slave & messenger of Allah. It claims that he was not crucified. It claims that he was a warrior who led his followers in battle against Jews.

The Koran claims to be free from contradictions, yet contains many of them, lists can be found on the web with a simple search.

The Koran claims scientific knowledge, yet it tells us that the sun sets at night in a muddy swamp with people living nearby. It asserts that semen originates between the rib cage and the spine.

Moe is supposed to be the greatest and best of men; the perfect model for emulation. He was ignorant, superstitious, a lecher and child molester. Do a search for "Muhammad thighing". What a creep!!! Why do you think Khomeini ruled a man could derive sexual pleasure from an infant? Why did he lower the female age of consent?