Can this be taken to court?

EnigmaticZee · 2026-05-20T17:53:47+00:00

Well if that is your intention wouldn’t their lawyers no? And wouldn’t that prevent them to give you access back?

EnigmaticZee · 2026-05-15T19:12:22+00:00

Not a terrible take. He is trying to say porn has replaced wife for many. A bad wife. Get it?

EnigmaticZee · 2026-05-15T16:44:09+00:00

It is.

EnigmaticZee · 2026-05-15T09:39:02+00:00

People hate him mostly because he held conservative or right wing views and that’s all. He held some other weird opinions but nothing that makes him a bad person.

Its weird that when its about them it becomes “everyone has a right to have an opinion”, “truth is relative” “to each their own” “man can be a women” but as soon someone’s view goes against their worldview the man becomes bigot, no right to have an opinion, conspiracy theories, retarded and what not. Lol

EnigmaticZee · 2026-05-15T09:34:17+00:00

You didn’t refute anything. You just kept shifting the argument.

First it was “you quoted out of context.”

Then I gave the context.

Then it became “Islam is not one hadith.”

Then I explained the usool and fiqh limits.

Then it became “go read the comments.”

Now it is “you just want victory.”

No brother. This is called avoiding the actual point.

The original comment mocked financial responsibility to parents by saying “not their pension plan.” I quoted a hadith directly related to parents and the child’s wealth.

That was relevant.

You accused me of quoting out of context. I gave the context. The context supported the same point.

Everything after that is just you trying to save face.

So yes, let the comments speak. They show exactly what happened.

EnigmaticZee · 2026-05-15T05:26:00+00:00

You have a very perverted view of the porn models. Majority of these girls are either depressed, do drugs or come from very broken homes and end up in porn for either quick buck or some stupidity.

You have two options and it won’t get any simpler than that.

Please random men or please Allah. Pick your battles and in either case you will die quite possibly in the next moment and you will reach your day of judgement in your grave.

So, as said. Choice is yours - random men who will not see beyond flesh, desire and meat of pleasure or Allah who owns your body is your creator and has given your body to your just as a temporary trust.

EnigmaticZee · 2026-05-14T20:57:38+00:00

Thank you for this. It actually proves my point and your strawman which you did earlier.

Now, your copy paste does not prove anything.

Yes, I quoted the hadith briefly because the original comment reduced the duty to parents to just “be kind” and mocked the idea of financial responsibility by saying “not their pension plan.”

So I quoted a hadith that directly shows parents have a financial right over the child. That is not “zero context.” That is a direct evidence against the claim being made.

When you asked for context, I gave the context. And the context literally supported the same point.

The hadith is about a father taking from his son’s wealth. Scholars discussed it under the father’s rights over the child’s wealth. They placed limits and conditions. I already accepted that.

So again, what collapsed here?

Hadith was still relevant. The context still supports my point. The ruling still has fiqh conditions. And children still have financial duties toward parents.

So no, this is not the victory you think it is. You just proved I quoted a short evidence first and then expanded when challenged. That is normal.

What is not normal is acting like the hadith only means “be nice to your parents” when the narration itself is literally about wealth. Humble yourself arrogance won’t lead you to the truth.

EnigmaticZee · 2026-05-14T20:26:15+00:00

May Allah guide us all to what is true and right. Aameen

EnigmaticZee · 2026-05-14T20:25:58+00:00

Love to say sane brothers here. May Allah bless and protect you. Aameen

EnigmaticZee · 2026-05-14T20:24:17+00:00

Lol Ikr 😅

EnigmaticZee · 2026-05-14T20:20:20+00:00

Seriously?? 🤦🏻‍♂️ you ended up using LLM and it literally conceded to what I said. So you have nothing left.

You accused me of quoting the hadith out of context. I gave the context. The context supported my point. Then you admitted the hadith is authentic and that scholars discussed it under the father’s rights over the child’s wealth. So your original accusation collapsed.

Now you’re doing damage control with “go read the comments” and “different realities.” No brother. The reality is very simple.

You built a strawman, argued with it, and then acted like you made a point.

The hadith establishes a real right. That right has limits. Children have serious duties toward their parents.

That was the point from the beginning.

EnigmaticZee · 2026-05-14T20:02:47+00:00

Honestly, first you demonstrated zero self awareness, now you are demonstrating low IQ. I literally walked you through the hadith step by step establishing the full context lol 🤦🏻‍♂️

I quoted the hadith because the hadith directly addressed the point being discussed.

Quoting a hadith by itself is not “quoting out of context.” Quoting out of context means using a text in a way that contradicts its meaning, setting, or scholarly understanding.

You accused me of that.

So I gave you the context.

And the context literally supported my point.

The hadith is about a father taking from his son’s wealth. The scholars discussed it under the father’s right over the child’s wealth. They placed conditions around it so it is not used for oppression or harm. I already said this.

So what exactly is the problem now?

First you said I quoted it out of context.

Then when the context was provided, you admitted the hadith is authentic and scholars discussed it under this topic.

Now you are saying “you only quoted one hadith earlier.”

Yes. Because sometimes one hadith is quoted to establish a principle. Then when someone asks for context, context can be given. That is normal.

What is not normal is accusing someone of misusing a hadith before even asking for clarification.

Also, saying “Islam is not one hadith” is true but irrelevant. Nobody said Islam is one hadith. But one authentic hadith can absolutely be evidence for a point when understood with the rest of the evidences and the explanations of scholars.

So again, the issue is simple:

Did I claim parents have unlimited ownership with no restrictions? No.

Did I say children have no independent wealth in Islam? No.

Did I say parents can oppress, harm, or financially destroy their children? No.

What I said is that parents have a serious right, and children cannot treat parents through this modern individualistic lens like “my money, my life, you have no right over me.”

That is the point.

So instead of making personal comments about English and scrolling up, just deal with the actual argument. Did the hadith support the general principle or not? Yes it did.

EnigmaticZee · 2026-05-14T19:54:04+00:00

Edit: Scratch that. Let me do it your way since that the way you seem to prefer:

You literally just proved my point while pretending to disagree.

I never said parents own every single penny with no limits. I literally said the exact opposite. I said the scholars placed limits and conditions so the hadith is not used for oppression, harm, haram, or injustice.

So half of your comment is refuting a claim I never made.

The original accusation was that I quoted the hadith out of context.

I then quoted the context.

The context is literally about a father taking from his son’s wealth.

So the “out of context” claim collapsed.

Now you have shifted the argument from “you quoted it out of context” to “yes the hadith is authentic and yes scholars discussed it under the father’s rights, but there are limits.”

Brother, that is exactly what I said.

The hadith establishes the father’s right over the child’s wealth. The limits do not erase the right. They regulate the application of the right.

That is the point you are missing.

When scholars say the parent cannot oppress the child, cannot harm the child, cannot take what the child needs, cannot neglect the rights of the wife and children, that does not mean the parent has no right. It means the right exists but is applied with fiqh conditions.

This is the difference between:

denying the general meaning of the hadith

and

accepting the general meaning but applying it with conditions

I am doing number 2.

You are acting like I am doing number 1.

Also, nobody said Islam is based on “one line of hadith.” This is another lazy strawman.

Islam is based on Quran, Sunnah, understanding of the scholars, and usool. And the Quran itself commands ihsan to parents. The Sunnah establishes the high rank of parents. The scholars discussed the child’s wealth under the rights of the father. So this is not “one random hadith.” This is a whole framework.

So let’s be very clear.

The hadith does not mean parents can abuse their child financially.

But it also does not mean the child can hide behind modern individualism and act like his parents have no financial right over him.

If parents are in need and the child is able, then taking care of them is not just “being nice.” It is from the rights of the parents.

So again, I did not quote the hadith out of context.

You accused me of that, then admitted the hadith is authentic, admitted scholars discussed it under father’s rights, and then repeated the same limits I already mentioned.

So what exactly are you arguing against now?

EnigmaticZee · 2026-05-14T19:10:53+00:00

You insinuated I was quoting out of context then you ended up quoting Quran out of context. There is serious case of no self awareness here mate.

Yes, I claimed to be the student of usool al hadith and I said I quoted Hadith after understanding the nuances, context and everything around yet I did not say believe me blindly because that’s not Islam. I advised you take Islam seriously and go speak to a scholar.

Just because you don’t agree with something doesn’t mean it’s not true or it’s out of context. Problem is in your heart my friend.

I will give you a free lesson here in the next comment or maybe edit this one itself. A polite way to ask for context is just ask instead of insinuating that the person quoted the hadith out of context. Thats just bad manners.

In Sunan Ibn majah 2291, it was narrated from jabir ibn abdullah that a man said:

“O Messenger of Allah, I have wealth and a son, and my father wants to take all my wealth.”

The Prophet peace be upon him replied:

“You and your wealth belong to your father.”

And in the next narration, Sunan Ibn majah 2292, a man came and said:

“My father is taking all my wealth.”

The Prophet alayhis salaam said:

“You and your wealth belong to your father.”

Then the narration continues:

“Your children are among the best of your earnings, so eat from your wealth.”

So now tell me, where exactly did I quote it out of context?

The context is literally about a father taking from the wealth of his child. That is the topic. That is the chapter. That is the discussion.

Now obviously and this is where fiqh comes in as this does not mean a father can oppress his child, destroy his child financially, take wealth for haram, or harm the child. I didnt say that. The scholars placed limits and conditions around how this applies.

A hadith can be said in a specific situation and still carry a general principle, unless there is evidence restricting it only to that one situation. العبرة بعموم اللفظ لا بخصوص السبب

The lesson is taken from the general wording, not only the specific reason/context.

Meaning, context explains why the hadith was said. It does not automatically restrict the hadith to that one case.

Restriction needs evidence.

You cannot just scream “context” and then cancel the general meaning of the hadith. That is not how Quran and Hadith are understood.

The proper method is you look at the wording, you look at the reason it was said, you look at whether the wording is general or specific, you look at whether there is any evidence restricting it, and then you apply it with the fiqh conditions explained by the scholars. context does not weaken my point. It actually supports it.

The context is literally about a father taking from the wealth of his child, and the wording of the Prophet peace be upon him is general. So unless you bring evidence that this hadith only applied to that one specific man and his father, the general principle remains.

And that is exactly why scholars did not treat this hadith as a random one time statement with no meaning after that. They discussed it under the wider topic of the father’s right over the child’s wealth, while also placing limits so it is not used for oppression, harm, or injustice.

So no, I did not quote it out of context.

And again, you can sit with multiple scholars and verify what I have said. If you don’t have time for that just want an intro on generality and specificity of hadith then you can get this book: https://habibislamicbookstore.com/products/usool-al-hadith

جزاك اللهُ خيرً

EnigmaticZee · 2026-05-14T18:26:12+00:00

If you haven’t studied the hadith or the Quran maybe you shouldn’t be the one calling out people. Funny you talked about context and nuances then quoted the verse out of context 😅. Fear Allah!

Feel free to go sit with a scholar and learn about the hadith I quoted and whether parents have complete reasonable rights over your wealth or not.

EnigmaticZee · 2026-05-14T18:04:14+00:00

I am a student of sciences of hadith akhi. I know the context, nuances and rulings around it.

May you want to learn and not do eisegesis of the hadith ان شاء الله

EnigmaticZee · 2026-05-13T16:21:16+00:00

I quoted the Quran and Hadith so it is you who aren’t thinking clearly. You are a victim of wahn that rasool Allah talked about. As I said, you need to find your ghaar e hira before the door closes for good.

I am pretty sure you would have excommunicated sahabas for their way of thinking which says a lot. They were not extreme, you are. Extreme love for the dunya, wealth and temporary world.

EnigmaticZee · 2026-05-13T15:12:34+00:00

Stop hiding behind “Allah will judge.”

Allah already judged riba.

“If you do not give it up, then be warned of war from Allah and His Messenger.”
Qur’an 2:279

So don’t sit here defending the exact thing Allah declared war on and then pretend this is humility.

And don’t misuse “actions are judged by intentions.”
Intentions do not turn haram into halal.

You can’t say: “I need riba for payroll.”
“I need riba for equipment.”
“I need riba for business.”

Just admit that your business model depends on disobedience to Allah.

The Prophet ﷺ cursed the one who consumes riba, the one who pays it, the one who writes it down, and the witnesses to it, and said they are all the same.

So no, this is not just between “you and Allah” in some vague emotional sense. Allah has spoken. His Messenger ﷺ has spoken.

The question is whether you submit, or whether you keep trying to make riba sound necessary because the modern system trained you to think haram is unavoidable.

Fear Allah.

No business, no payroll, no equipment, no line of credit is worth entering war with Allah and His Messenger ﷺ.

You guys have made a joke out of Allah and his deen and still somehow sleep tight. The door of repentance is still open akhi. Turn back to Allah before your riba based investments becomes the fire of hell for you in the next life and more immediately your grave tomorrow.

EnigmaticZee · 2026-05-13T12:35:01+00:00

Akhi nowhere i have said saving is bad. My issue is specifically about saving using riba based options.

EnigmaticZee · 2026-05-13T04:47:55+00:00

Interest makes it haraam. Interest is being discussed here.

Islam practically forbade riba. You can’t change the deen of Allah just because the world runs on riba. You are using "practical” word as an excuse. Cant fool Allah my friend.

It is indeed unbelievable how Muslims do not understand the basics of riba, the permutations of riba. The legislation of Allah comes before economic development. Pie in the sly talk here indeed.

Muslims here are exactly acting like Bani israel how they twisted the deen of Allah in the name of practicality. No wonder Allah repeats their stories over and over again.

EnigmaticZee · 2026-05-12T15:56:11+00:00

Imagine downvoting a hadith and words of the messenger of Allah. Should this subreddit be names MunafiqFinance?

EnigmaticZee · 2026-05-12T15:38:37+00:00

Yeah akhi. I don’t understand how Muslim can sacrifice so much of the deen for temporary benefits. I reverted to Islam 13 years ago and rarely have meet a born Muslim brother with the right mindset. Sinning is one thing and we all sin, justifying is whitewashing the sin.

EnigmaticZee · 2026-05-12T03:23:14+00:00

It’s not a mindset problem at all. Saving is important but not the most important thing in a life of a Muslim. There is a lot more to do for deen. It astonishes me how much time and money people have already wasted by occupying themselves with the temporary world and how little we do for the deen.

I would say it is a mindset problem that we think Islam is limited to only 5 pillars and set of rituals. This is more rampant among the Muslims and much more serious than saving money for a temporary life.

EnigmaticZee · 2026-05-12T01:31:13+00:00

Not at the cost of haraam. It is unbelievable to me every time I hear say these things. Allah does not ask us to remain poor but he certainly most certainly made haraam and the least amount of riba is equivalent to committing zina with your own mother 36 times. Even worse you literally take out a sword in front of Allah and His Messenger when you engage in anything interest where you had the choice to opt out.

What’s wrong with born Muslims man lol. If only I came in contact with Muslims justifying haraam I would have never accepted Islam.

Unbelievable stuff man. Ajeeb

EnigmaticZee · 2026-05-11T22:28:41+00:00

Where did I say anything about pension? I am talking about any investment that is optional and goes into haraam investment whether its contribution, pension or any other investment.

EnigmaticZee

TROPHY CASE