Under the Shade of Sharia- Somalia

[ahmad12]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GfTU_...layer_embedded

[AbuMuslimKhorasani]

Salam Alaikum,
Bro at least give brief description of the video so what we know what the video is about.

Thanks,

[ahmad12]

It's a documentary about a city that has been under Shabaab rule for 3 years, and how they have implemented Sharia and the types of changes that have been made, and how the place has improved

[AbdurRaheem2]

It's a documentary about a city that has been under Shabaab rule for 3 years, and how they have implemented Sharia and the types of changes that have been made, and how the place has improved

they need to stop their fighters doing controversial things.

I have been told in some places they have destroyed raised tombs and thrown the bodies on saintly ancestors in the bush, that isn't good brother.

also today I heard on the BBC that some al-Shabab fighters have blown a church up in Kenya, this isn't good either.

also why don't they do a deal with President Sharif Sheikh Ahmad, he is a religious Muslim and was he not a key figure in the Islamic courts?

[ahmad12]

they need to stop their fighters doing controversial things.

I have been told in some places they have destroyed raised tombs and thrown the bodies on saintly ancestors in the bush, that isn't good brother.

also today I heard on the BBC that some al-Shabab fighters have blown a church up in Kenya, this isn't good either.

also why don't they do a deal with President Sharif Sheikh Ahmad, he is a religious Muslim and was he not a key figure in the Islamic courts?

First of all, news must be verified. There is intense propaganda surrounding mujahideen in any country so you must tell us the source of your claims

With regards to tombs being levelled, this is obligatory in every madhab. They do this but I have never heard of them removing bodies from the ground.

The BBC is not a good source as they sometimes claim Taliban did this or Hamas did this when in fact, the mujahideen release a statement to say the exact opposite! Not only that, but I don;t understand how Shabaab fighters would be in Kenya since they're always busy in Somalia (which is their priority)

A deal cannot be made with the President since he has sold his faith and apostated by allying himself with the invaders against the Muslims. His former position in the Islamic Courts holds no weight when compared to his treachery and betrayal thereafter, as he has willingly become a puppet of the US backed Ethiopia and has compromised on the implementation of the Sharia and the well being of the Muslims. Why would someone compromise with the people who invaded his land?

[abdulwahhab]

they need to stop their fighters doing controversial things.

I have been told in some places they have destroyed raised tombs and thrown the bodies on saintly ancestors in the bush, that isn't good brother.

also today I heard on the BBC that some al-Shabab fighters have blown a church up in Kenya, this isn't good either.

also why don't they do a deal with President Sharif Sheikh Ahmad, he is a religious Muslim and was he not a key figure in the Islamic courts?

As brother ahmad mentioned, these reports have to be verified from their own representatives, not from the mouthpieces of their opponents. For example, there have been a few occasions when the perpetrators behind the various church bombings in Nigeria have turned out to be Christians themselves who were part of the mafia who are also enemies of the Muslims, so they light a fuse to ignite the flame and incite enmities between the Muslims and Christians.

[warea]

With regards to tombs being levelled, this is obligatory in every madhab. They do this but I have never heard of them removing bodies from the ground.

This is not true at all. There are plenty of authorities within each madhab that recognised it. Somalis follow the shafi madhab. You cant impose Ibn Taymiyyas narrow interpretation on them.

Al Qaeda are good propogandists from day one. When a more wholesome view of the situation is seen yyou would see a different picture. Sure there might be some law and order improvements. So are there law and order improvements with all autocrats and tyrants too. But they all crumble when the bubble burst. The longer they continue with their najdi tradition the more backlash they will face and end up like their Wahhabi leaders of the first saudi state hanged and disperesed when the Pasha of Egypt came to help them.

[ahmad12]

This is not true at all. There are plenty of authorities within each madhab that recognised it. Somalis follow the shafi madhab. You cant impose Ibn Taymiyyas narrow interpretation on them.

Al Qaeda are good propogandists from day one. When a more wholesome view of the situation is seen yyou would see a different picture. Sure there might be some law and order improvements. So are there law and order improvements with all autocrats and tyrants too. But they all crumble when the bubble burst. The longer they continue with their najdi tradition the more backlash they will face and end up like their Wahhabi leaders of the first saudi state hanged and disperesed when the Pasha of Egypt came to help them.

Name those authorities. In the Shafi madhab, it is the opinion of Imam Nawwawi, Imam Ibn Hajar and others that building on braves in a public place is haraam and in a private place, it is makruh so what Shabaab have done is fine according to the madhab of Imam Shafi.

Don't let your hatred of Salafi's blind you to the fact that they have done good in Somalia

[warea]

Name those authorities. In the Shafi madhab, it is the opinion of Imam Nawwawi, Imam Ibn Hajar and others that building on braves in a public place is haraam and in a private place, it is makruh so what Shabaab have done is fine according to the madhab of Imam Shafi.

Don't let your hatred of Salafi's blind you to the fact that t8hey have done good in Somalia

Imam Shafi mentions that structures on private graves were never touched or destroyed, only those in public graveyards were removed by authorities. And the reason for removing the latter was only for making space.

Imam Gazzali is well known to permit it.

Imam Nawawi mentions that structures in private graves is permissible and not destroyed although undesirable. Moreover, Imam Nawawi in Rawdat at talibeen(commentary of Imam Gazzalis book) mentions that building is permissible over grave of ambiya, ulema and saliheeen for purpose of visitation and tabaruk. Therefore this exception and distinction and desirability in case of grave of ambiya, ulema and saliheen, as was the position of Imam Gazzali, is the prominent opinion (in addition to the distinction between public and private graves), in the madhab.

The commentary of the same book, by Ibn Hajr and Imam Ramli I.e., Tuhfa and Nihaya recognise and elaborate this position.*
Same opinion also by Ibn Qasim. See the section of "Wasiyya" in all of these books.

Imam Zarkashi permitted it and ccited opinion of Sharaf ad deen al Ansari and Ibn al Rif'ah permitting it.
Zainuddin Makdoum(student of Ibn Hajr) in Fathul Mueen permitted it.

Ibn Hajr al Asqalani in fathul Bari mentions its permissible to build mosque near a grave with the intention for tabaruk while discussing the meaning of the hadith "taking graves as masjid". While also comments on hadith of Uthman Ibn mazun grave, as proof of permissibility of a high grave.

Ibn Abdasalaam who in his life time was given the authority to renovate the mosques and structures in Egpyt, was asked about the structure of Imam Shafis grave(built by Salahudeen Ayyubi) and he allowed it, even though he gave permission for removing structures built on waqf property.

And more shafi scholars you can dig up from the likes of Imam Qastallani, Imam Samhudi and Imam Abdul Wahhab ash-Sharani.

Not to forget Imam ad Dhahabi al-shafi's opinion, blasting those who prohibit tabaruk by the grave to be the opinion of khawarij, despite being a student of Ibn Taymiyya. Enough to silence those who attempt to impose their falsehood upon others.

Its perfectly reasonable in hating the fanatic khawarij who believe the mushriks are better in belief than the Muslims of today. And its infact blindness for muslims to accept as Imam someone who believes that muslims are worse than mushriks and label muslims as "quburis" and "quraafis".

Until al-shahab or any such self styled gang agrees to abondon wahhabism and appoint shafi scholars who are well trained in the shafi madhab from authoritative line of scholarly tradition, I see no reason whatsoever in recognizing their legitimacy to tell what islam and Islamic government should be. Their equivalent to Hezbollah or Ayotallah and their revolutionery slogans barely impress me. If opposing the shariah imposed by the likes of Ayotallahs is "blind hate" then so be it.

And note that the shafi madhab is and always been a thorn in the eyes of wahhabism. The hadith scholarship, ashari theological scholarship and Sufi scholarship by nearly all the authorities of the madhab is heretical in their eyes and impossible for a Wahhabi to ever be a Wahhabi while being from the shafi madhab, unless they resort to taqiyya.

[ahmad12]

So basically, the shafi authorities considered building on private lands makruh and on public land, it is haram as I stated also? So what is the problem? The Shabaab haven't destroyed shrines on private land so...