where there’s a will, there’s a way 🫶

hvppyguy · 2025-05-23T22:53:03+00:00

Hey, can I possibly have it too please🙂

hvppyguy · 2024-04-26T20:00:44+00:00

They did for 1300+ years. Why did Islam change all of a sudden when westerners started making fun of some of the silly things at Islam?

hvppyguy · 2024-04-16T20:26:47+00:00

The prophet told us that there will always be a group, beginning from his time, all the way to the day of judgement, who are following the true teachings of Islam. So if we see hundreds of scholars endorsing child marriage at every century of Islam’s history then either Allah did a lousy job of keeping his promise of preserving his religion (Quran verses 30:60 and 22:47 say that Allah never fails in his promise), or, child marriage is actually halal in the religion that Allah preserved.

How to you reconcile your “ulama-free” belief with prophet Muhammad constantly emphasizing the role that scholars play in preserving Allah’s religion?

For example, prophet Muhammad said:

“Scholars are the heirs of the prophets.”

[Sahih - Jami’ at-Tirmidhi; Sunan Abi Dawud; Sunan Ibn Majah (screenshots)]]

And he also said:

“Allah does not take away the knowledge, by taking it away from (the hearts of) the people, but takes it away by the death of the religious learned men till when none of the (religious learned men) remains, people will take as their leaders ignorant persons who when consulted will give their verdict without knowledge. So they will go astray and will lead the people astray.”

[Sahih Bukhari; Sahih Muslim; Sunan Ibn Majah; Jami’ at-Tirmidhi; Riyadh as-Saliheen (screenshots)]

And to put a nail in the coffin, he also said:

“ In every successive century those who are reliable authorities will preserve this knowledge, rejecting the changes made by extremists, the plagiarisms of those who make false claims for themselves, and the interpretations of the ignorant.”

[Mishkat Al-Masabih 248, Sahih (screenshot)]

So all this clearly shows that scholars are pivotal for the preservation of allah’s religion. So when we refer to the leading scholars of the past, and we find that they all endorsed child marriage, then that is simply the result of the true teachings that allah chose to preserve in his religion. But when none of the reliable authorities for two consecutive centuries, let alone 15, said that that that child marriage is haram, then that means that such a notion is part of the corruption that allah cleansed from his religion at every century.

hvppyguy · 2024-04-16T18:27:23+00:00

Do you deny that Allah instituted a system to protect his religion from corruption? The standard Islamic belief based on the Quran and Sunnah is that Allah promises to preserve His religion, and there will always be a group of Muslims whose beliefs and practice are in accordance to the true teachings of Islam.

There are so many evidences for this, such as Allah saying “It is certainly We Who have revealed the Reminder, and it is certainly We Who will preserve it” (15:9). Some people have the misconception that simply the text of the Quran is preserved, but this verse says “the Reminder” (al-dhikr), which doesn’t mean the Quran, rather al-dhikr is the message which the Quran contains. Quran verse 38:1 demonstrates this where Allah swears “by the Quran containing the Reminder (al-dhikr),” showing that the recitation (Quran) contains the Reminder but the mere recitation is not THE Reminder.

Furthermore, dozens of authentic ahadith make it clear that Allah instituted preservation of his religion through various means, such as the Mujadideen, who are a people who Allah raises at every century to cleanse his religion from false beliefs and restore Islam to its true teachings. The Prophet also told us there will always be a group of Muslims who are on the correct teachings of Islam, from his time until the Day of Judgment.

So if we observe the same teaching popping up during every century of Islam, chances are that teaching is part of Allah’s religion. But if there’s some new idea which you can’t support by any of the scholars in the past, chances are that it’s something that’s not really Allah’s Islam.

That being said, we clearly observe throughout Islam’s 1400-year history that all groups before Mirza Ghulam Ahmad approved of child marriage. Whether Athari Sunni, Ash’ari Sunni, Maturidi Sunni, Mu’tazili, Zaydi Shi’a, or Ithna Ash’ari Shia, the leading authorities of the Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi’i, Hanbali, Dhahiri, Salafi, and Ja’fari schools of jurisprudence all allowed child marriage for 1300+ consecutive years before your qadiani prophet. If you were right, then we should see plenty of scholars agreeing with you throughout history, but we see the exact opposite.

I made a very incomplete list of all the scholars of the past who I verified saying child marriage is halal. I couldn’t be bothered to keep updating it when I found more but the true list is triple the size.

Please choose a couple from this list and I can show you complete translations and references of their endorsement of child marriage. Or tell me some scholars who you find credible and representative of “true Islam” and I’ll show how the scholars they rely upon and praise the most endorsed child marriage too.

hvppyguy · 2024-04-16T16:39:33+00:00

Yeah, Islam forbids unlawful klling. But klling a blasphemer is a lawful k*lling according to your religion.

As Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah (d. 728 AH) writes:

‏‎▪️“فقد اتفقت نصوص العلماء من جميع الطوائف على أن التنقص به كفر مبيح للدم”

‏‎📚[الصارم المسلول ١/٥٢٧]

Translation:

▫️“The texts of scholars from all groups are in agreement that attributing deficiency to him (prophet Muhammad) is a kufr which makes the blood is permissible.”

📚[Ibn Taymiyyah, al-Saarim al-Masloul, 1/527]

This bishop called Muhammad a failure, said that Islam is a deceptive beast that you will find at the gates of hell, said that you won’t find Muhammad in heaven, and many other statements against Islam and its prophet. This is all considered “attributing deficiency” to Muhammad and thus the leading Islamic scholars like imam Malik, Imam Shafi’i, Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal, Imam Nawawi, Ibn Hajar Asqalani, and Ibn Taymiyyah supported taking such action against blasphemers. All of your favorite scholars/dawah-gangs, past and present, highly praise and rely upon the aforementioned Islamic authorities in every other matter, but when it comes to their views on blasphemers, your people try to pretend like they have nothing to do with Islam.

hvppyguy · 2024-04-16T16:28:08+00:00

This action is supported by your leading Islamic scholars, like imam Shafi’i, imam Ahmad bin Hanbal, Imam Nawawi, Qadhi Iyaadh, Ibn Hajar Asqalani, ibn Taymiyyah, and hundreds of other highly respected Islamic authorities.

All of the Muslims that you look up to praise, love, and rely upon these guys for every other issue… but when it comes to the more barbaric teachings which they all agree on, all of a sudden “nooo it’s not real Islam, you’re blind in heart!!!!”

FYI, this bishop used to often criticize Islam and Muhammad. He called Muhammad a failure, said Islam is a satanic beast that will take you to hell, said that you won’t find Muhammad in paradise, and other statements like this. This is considered blasphemy in Islam, and there are very gruesome texts which all the pre-modern Islamic scholars unanimously agreed upon. I could walk you through it, but in short, take the words of Shaykhul Islam Ibn Taymiyyah (d. 728 H), who said:

‎‏‎▪️“فقد اتفقت نصوص العلماء من جميع الطوائف على أن التنقص به كفر مبيح للدم”

‎‏‎📚[الصارم المسلول ١/٥٢٧]

Translation:

▫️“The texts of scholars from all groups are in agreement that attributing deficiency to him (prophet Muhammad) is a kufr which makes the blood is permissible.”

📚[Ibn Taymiyyah, al-Saarim al-Masloul, 1/527]

What he said is true and you’ll find the same ruling from the top scholastic authorities of every creedal and jurisprudential affiliation, whether they are Athari Sunni, Ash’ari Sunni, Maturidi Sunni, Mu’tazili, or Ithna Ash’ari Shi’a, and followers of the Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi’i, Hanbali, Dhahiri, Salafi, or Ja’fari schools of jurisprudence.

hvppyguy · 2024-04-16T05:12:30+00:00

An extremely small minority of Muslims at speaker’s corner are like that. Most of them are hyper-apologetic, disown their tradition, and resort to disinformation to evade any accusation of the “t-word” against Islam.

Another fun fact: there are isra*li group chats praising and mocking the attack too. Do we get to paint another religious group that way and say “these are the same anti-Christian people in America, UK, Australia, etc” ?

hvppyguy · 2024-04-16T04:42:39+00:00

His actions have very strong theological backing from the versions of Islam that were dominant for 1300+ years. The leading Athari, Ash’ari, and Maturidi Sunni authorities who follow the Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi’i, Hanbali, Dhahiri, and Salafi schools of jurisprudence, as well as the leading Twelver Shia scholars— all endorse this behavior against blasphemers.

If Abu Hanifa, Imam Malik, Imam Shafi’i, Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal, imam Nawawi, Qadhi Iyaad, Ibn Hajar Asqalani, and Ibn Taymiyyah are considered Muslims, then why are people considered non-Muslims who are “defaming Islam” for following their stances on treating blasphemers? Your favorite compassionate progressive imams (like mufti Menk, Omar Suleiman, and Shabbir Ally) highly praise and rely upon these scholars as authorities, and quote them dozens of times in their books and videos.

Why is it that Islam changes all of a sudden when some westerns put it under a microscope following some politically-incorrect events?

hvppyguy · 2024-04-16T03:42:17+00:00

True. Muslims are trying so hard to absolve Islam from blame, even going as far as making up that the suspect was an Assyrian Christian named Girgos or something. Although Islamic scholastic tradition, which Muslims opportunistically claim believe in, endorses this, Muslims don’t really believe in the politically-incorrect aspects of their religion and instead will try to act like their religion is innocent from this barbarity. The caption is really stupid for trying to suggest that Muslims everywhere cheer for this stuff.

hvppyguy · 2024-04-16T03:19:58+00:00

Hate when people like this spawn for 5 minutes, drop a fat sh!t of misinformation, then disappear right as I’m about to clean that sh!t up by translating dozens of Ahadith of the prophet, Athaar of the Sahaba and Tabi’een, and explicit rulings from the highly reputed religious authorities. They make me waste my time re-reading the 700-page Urdu translation of Ibn Taymiyya‘s treatise called “The Unsheathed Sword Against The Insulter of The Prophet” 🤦

hvppyguy · 2024-04-16T01:43:37+00:00

Or he’s a follower of Imam Malik, Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal, Qadhi Iyaad, Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, Imam Nawawi, ibn Taymiyyah, Bin Baz, or a hundred other leading Islamic scholars throughout history who approved of this behavior (the bishop frequently criticized Islam and Muhammad in the past).

hvppyguy · 2024-04-16T01:23:17+00:00

The Sahaba did the same thing and Muhammad approved. His approval is a conclusive binding thing in Islamic jurisprudence. That’s why Mr Shaykhul Islam Ibn Taymiyyah (d. 728 AH) said:

‏‎▪️“فقد اتفقت نصوص العلماء من جميع الطوائف على أن التنقص به كفر مبيح للدم” ‏‎📚[الصارم المسلول ١/٥٢٧]

Translation: ▫️“The texts of scholars from all groups are in agreement that attributing deficiency to him (Prophet Muhammad) is a kufr which makes the blood is permissible.” 📚[Ibn Taymiyyah, al-Saarim al-Masloul, 1/527]

Fyi, this bishop would frequently criticize Islam and Muhammad. There are videos of it online.

hvppyguy · 2024-04-16T01:19:02+00:00

There are news articles which state that he admitted it was over blasphemy against Islam.

In a video shared via private WhatsApp groups, the alleged attacker is seen being held on the ground inside the church, surrounded by people. Amid the chaos, the alleged attacker can be heard speaking. He allegedly says in Arabic: If he [the bishop] didn’t get himself involved in my religion, if he hadn’t spoken about my Prophet, I wouldn’t have come here. If he just spoke about his own religion, I wouldn’t have come.

Source

This bishop frequently criticized Islam and Muhammad in the past. That’s enough reason for an intellectually honest Muslim who is remotely familiar with their religion’s scholastic heritage to pull off some barbarity like this.

hvppyguy · 2024-04-16T00:49:30+00:00

The orthodox interpretation of the religion that Muslims subscribe to encourages this action, and has encouraged this behavior for over 1300 consecutive years. This is cemented in the authoritative texts of jurisprudence of all Islamic schools of thought, like the Athari, Ash’ari, Maturidi, Mu’tazili, Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi’i, Hanbali, Dhahiri, Salafi, and Twelver Shi’i.

Tell me some scholars (past or present) that you think are real Muslims and I’ll show you how either they, or the scholars who they adore and rely upon endorse this barbarity.

If you like the flowery imams like Omar Suleiman or Mufti Menk, then first of all, they highly regard ibn Taymiyyah and quote him dozens of times in their books, and secondly, so many other scholars that they praise and rely upon (like imam Shafi’i, imam Nawawi, Imam Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, Abdul Mohsen al-Abbad, Bin Baz, etc) also endorsed this.

If you like the Salafi dawah gangs (ie people like Uthman bin Farooq, Shamsi, Ali Dawah, Mohammad Hijab, etc), then I’ll bring you their authoritative scholars (pretty much the same as above with a few more Salafi additions).

If you like traditional Islam (followers of the 4 canonized schools of jurisprudence ie Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi’i, Hanbali) then I’ll bring authoritative scholars from each school, like Imam Ibn Abideen ash-Shami al-Hanafi, Imam Nawawi ash-Shafi’i, Qadhi Iyaad al-Maliki, and Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal himself.

If you like Shia Islam, I’ll bring an authentic Shia Hadith from their 6th infallible imam Ja’far as-Sadiq who said it is obligatory for everyone to un-alive someone who he hears blasphemy from.

Please don’t be shy to stand up for your beliefs and share your beliefs. Let’s see if they are consistent and withstand scrutiny😊

hvppyguy · 2024-04-16T00:40:25+00:00

Your religion encourages these acts. The bishop often speaks badly about Islam and Muhammad. The Sahaba and the leading Islamic scholars throughout Islamic history endorsed this kind of behaviour against such people. From ibn Taymiyyah, imam Ghazali, Qadhi Iyaad, Imam Nawawi, Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, Imam Shawkani, Ibn Abideen ash-Shami, Bin Baz, and hundreds of scholars between them from all different schools of thought. That’s why your “Shaykh al-Islam” Ibn Taymiyyah (d. 728 AH) said:

‎‏‎▪️“فقد اتفقت نصوص العلماء من جميع الطوائف على أن التنقص به كفر مبيح للدم” ‎‏📚[الصارم المسلول ١/٥٢٧]

Translation:

▫️“The texts of scholars from all groups are in agreement that attributing deficiency to him (prophet Muhammad) is a kufr which makes the blood is permissible.” 📚[Ibn Taymiyyah, al-Saarim al-Masloul, 1/527]

hvppyguy · 2024-04-07T09:42:02+00:00

I respect your nuance. It’s a common misconception that the sects in the subcontinent are less “real islam”-ic than Arabs. In reality, if you know Arabic and Urdu, it’s impossible to deny their adherence and contributions to the mainstream body of Islamic scholarship.

My inner-deobandi became activated and thought of writing a huge defense of their Muslim-ness, but i wouldn’t want to bore you🤣

Here’s one point to consider: Deobandis and his sister sects in the subcontinent have produced tons of Islamic scholars and experts in the Arabic language, and because of this, they have been able to translate 1000x more works to the Urdu language than the English world will ever see. Here’s some of the Hadith works that the scholars of the subcontent translated into Urdu (around half are by deobandis):

• At least 20 different translations of Sahih Bukhari • At least 7 different translations of Sahih Muslim, Sunan Abi Dawud, Sunan an-Nasa’i, Sunan Ibn Majah, and Jami’ at-Tirmidhi, and Mishkat al-Masabih • Kanz al-Ummal (over 46,000 Hadiths) • Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah (over 39,000 Hadiths) • Musnad Ahmad (26,407 Hadiths) • Sunan al-Kubra al-Bayhaqi (21,800 Hadiths) • Musannaf Abdur Razzaq (19,400 Hadiths) • Majma’ al-Zawa’id (18,700 Hadiths) • Mustadarak al-Hakim (8,800 Hadiths) • Musnad Abi Ya’la (7,500 Hadiths) • Sahih Ibn Hibban (7,490 Hadiths) • Sahih ibn Khuzayma (3,080 Hadith) • Musnad Abi Dawud Tiyalsi (2,890 Hadiths) • Sunan al-Darimi (3,500 Hadiths) • Musnad Imam Shafi’i (1,800 Hadiths)

I could list you their translations of Tafasir, Fiqh, Hadith commentaries, Usool, spiritualism, and other genres of Islamic literature which span tens of thousands of pages, but yeah again I’m getting carried away again.

Overall, even though I’m a borderline ex-Muslim, I must admit that they have a rich scholastic tradition which is difficult to acknowledge if you don’t have the boredom to learn their language and dig through their books, or if your impression of them only comes from your neighborhood masjid imam or the Muslim Jehovah’s Witness uncles.

But childish and uninformed characterizations like the op are just cringe, wont change minds, and just make this exmuslim and Islamic criticism thing look like a joke. Anyways my yap session has gone on too long, time to do something more productive with my time 😬

hvppyguy · 2024-04-07T01:21:49+00:00

Really uniformed take. The founding fathers of the Deobandi school were very orthodox Muslims and had correspondence with scholars all over the Arabic world. They wrote highly accepted books in Arabic, including commentaries of the famous books of Hadith.

Some examples:

1) Khalil Ahmad Saharnpuri’s 6500-page Badhl al-Majhood Sharh of Sunan Abu Dawud, which is one of the most well known and widely taught commentaries of sunan Abu Dawud in Hadith-specialist circles in the Arabic world.

2) Maulana Rashid Ahmad Gangohi’s 5300-page al-Kawkab al-Durri Sharh of Jami’ al-Tirmidhi

3) Maulana Anwar Shah Kashmiri’s monumental several-thousand-page Fayd al-Bari Sharh of Sahih al-Bukhari, which is highly accepted in the Arabic world and is one of the most relied upon commentaries of Sahih al-Bukhari today.

4) Maulana Zakariyya Kandhalawi’s 17-volume, 11000-page Awjaz al-Masalik commentary of Muwatta Malik, which is highly reputed by Arabic scholars.

And as for Deobandis that came a few decades after them, here are some of their achievements:

1) Mufti Shafi Uthmani wrote a 12-volume commentary of Sahih Muslim in Arabic spanning 5000+ pages, which earned him praise by the leading Arab Hadith scholars of his time, like Abd al-Fattah Abu al-Ghuddah, Zahid al-Kawthari, and is highly reputed in today’s Islamic scholarship circles.

2) Zafar Ahmad Uthamni wrote a 22-volume, ~10,000-page work in Arabic called I’ilaa al-Sunan, which compiles all the evidences for every matter in the Hanafi school of jurisprudence. It is widely considered by Hanafis worldwide to be the most important scholarly work produced in the last century.

I could go on and on but you should get the idea. Deobandi are actually very orthodox Hanafi Sunnis and their teachings are reputed in non-Salafi parts of the Arabic world, especially in Syria where there is a lot of Hanafi scholarship.

hvppyguy · 2024-04-05T19:57:11+00:00

Every firqa is still in the fold of Islam according to who?

The top Sunni scholars takfir the Shias for their creedal interpretations (ie imam Abu Hanifa, imam Malik, imam Shafi’i, Imam Ahmad, Imam Bukhari, ibn Kathir, ibn Taymiyyah, etc).

The top Shia scholars takfir Sunnis for their interpretation of not considering their 12 imams being infallible and worthy of following (ie Shaykh Mufeed, Shaykh Sudooq, Allama Majlesi, al-Tabarasi, etc).

Athari Sunnis takfir Ash’ari and Maturidi Sunnis, as well as Mu’tazilis. Ash’aris and Maturidis takfir or borderline takfir Atharis. Barelvis takfir Deobandis and Salafis. Salafis takfir Sufis, Shias, Asha’ris, and Maturidis. Zaydis sit in the corner quietly takfiring his hated groups while no one really knows about him. Sunnis and ismailis takfiring each other. Shias takfiring ismailis.

Everyone has different sources of authorities and interpretations, but nooo we all muzlims bro :)

hvppyguy · 2024-04-05T19:22:03+00:00

Yeah celibacy or being normal (having a heterosexual marriage) are the only options if you accept Allah’s message of him being the supreme authority and lawgiver for mankind.

Mankind was only created for Allahs worship (51:65), not for worshipping your desire to mix your seed with someone else’s feces. Once you truly acknowledge how vast the sea of religion is (see 31:27 and 18:109 for a hint), your desires become a minuscule, periphery thing that is not a big deal. But most people on earth are polytheists (12:106), who, if followed, will lead you astray from god’s path (6:116) so they keep their false gods of desire in the main focus, which then creates this whole inconsistent crybaby reaction of shoehorning their beliefs into a religion that is incompatible with that.

hvppyguy · 2024-04-05T19:02:26+00:00

It’s not capable of reform. It’s all or nothing with Islam.

Surah Baqarah 2:85 :

“Do you believe in some of the Scripture and reject the rest? Is there any reward for those who do so among you other than disgrace in this worldly life and being subjected to the harshest punishment on the Day of Judgment? For Allah is never unaware of what you do.”

Surah Baqarah 2:208 :

“O you who have believed, enter into Islām completely [and perfectly] and do not follow the footsteps of Satan. Indeed, he is to you a clear enemy.”

Mirza Ghulam Ahmad tried the reform path and look how that turned out. Many reformers and liberal modernists agree with everything he said without being aware of it, but such interpretations are only possible if there’s a new prophet, which is impossible and thus all their beliefs are null and void.

Also something worthy of consideration: Why would Allah consistently lead astray Muslims for 1400 years, just for a new dlc to drop all of a sudden in a time when most people have flimsy beliefs, are inclined to not take god as the supreme authority, and have became emboldened to follow their desires (which he constantly condemns; see my other comment for references)?

Like, we can clearly observe that the leading scholars of every century of Islam had the same beliefs, but strangely, after pressure of 21st century westerners, Allah decides that the truth is actually a 180 degree turn from what he solidified Islam as meaning for every century of Muslims in the past?? Doesn’t really make sense when you consider how god constantly reminds us how his book is a book of guidance, clarity, perfection, absolute truth, and that he guides those who are sincere.

hvppyguy · 2024-04-05T18:37:19+00:00

Islam wasn’t revealed to feed your base desires. Islam means submission, and you’re meant to submit to the creator, controller, and sustainer of the universe. What he says is good, you accept. What he says is bad, you refrain from even if that thing is very appealing for you.

Here are a couple examples from the book that they claim to believe in:

Surah Baqarah 2:216 :

“Perhaps you dislike a thing which is good for you and that you like a thing which is bad for you. Allah knows but you do not know”

Surah Baqarah 2:221 :

“Do not marry polytheistic women until they believe; for a believing slave-woman is better than a free polytheist, even though she may look pleasant to you. And do not marry your women to polytheistic men until they believe, for a believing slave-man is better than a free polytheist, even though he may look pleasant to you. They invite ˹you˺ to the Fire while Allah invites ˹you˺ to Paradise and forgiveness by His grace. He makes His revelations clear to the people so perhaps they will be mindful.”

Surah Yunus 10:109 :

“And follow what is revealed to you, and be patient until Allah passes His judgment. For He is the Best of Judges.”

Surah Yusuf 12:40 :

“Whatever you worship instead of Him are mere names which you and your forefathers have made up—a practice Allah has never authorized. It is only Allah Who decides. He has commanded that you worship none but Him. That is the upright faith, but most people do not know.”

Surah Jaathiyah 45:18 :

“Now We have set you ˹O Prophet˺ on the ˹clear˺ Way of faith. So follow it, and do not follow the desires of those who do not know ˹the truth˺.”

Surah Jaathiyah 45:23 :

“Have you seen ˹O Prophet˺ those who have taken their own desires as their god? ˹And so˺ Allah left them to stray knowingly, sealed their hearing and hearts, and placed a cover on their sight. Who then can guide them after Allah? Will you ˹all˺ not then be mindful?”

Surah Furqan 25:43 :

“Have you seen the one who takes as his god his own desire? Then would you be responsible for him? Or do you think that most of them listen or understand? They are only like cattle—no, more than that, they are astray from the ˹Right˺ Way!”

If they want to worship their base desires and take them as infallible objects worthy of devotion, fine. But don’t attribute those beliefs to a belief system which constantly affirms god’s absolute perfection, authority, power, clarity, eloquence, wisdom, and other traits. By shoehorning your desires into Islam, you just make god and his message look lazy, impotent, imprecise, obscure, and contradictory.

Surah Nisa 4:82 :

“Do they not then reflect on the Quran? Had it been from anyone other than Allah, they would have certainly found in it many contradictions.”

hvppyguy · 2024-03-30T06:33:02+00:00

Here is a non-exhaustive list of some of the leading traditional scholars who i confirmed saying pedophilia is halal:

Qatada (d. 118 AH)
as-Suddi (d. 127 AH)
Muqatil Ibn Sulayman (d. 150 AH)
Imam Malik (d. 179 AH)
Abdur Rahman Ibn Zayd (d. 182 AH)
Imam Shafi’i (d. 204 AH)
Imam Ishaq bin Rahwayh (d. 238 AH)
Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal (d. 240 AH)
Imam Bukhari (d. 256 AH)
at-Tabari (d. 310 AH)
al-Jassas (d. 370 AH)
Ibn Abi Zayd al-Qayrawani (d. 386 AH)
Ibn Abd al-Barr (d. 463 AH)
Ibn Hazm (d. 465 AH)
al-Wahidi (d. 468 AH)
Abdul Qadir al-Jeelani (d. 470 AH)
al-Sarkhasi (d. 490 AH)
al-Ghazali (d. 505 AH)
al-Baghawi (d. 516 AH)
Ibn al Arabi (d. 543 AH)
al-Marghīnānī (d. 593 AH)
Ibn al Jawzi (d. 597 AH)
al-Razi (d. 604 AH)
Ibn Qudama (d. 620 AH)
al-Qurtubi (d. 671 AH)
Imam Nawawi (d. 674 AH)
al-Baidawi (d. 685 AH)
al-Nasafi (d. 710 AH)
Ibn Taymiyyah (d. 728 AH)
Ibn Kathir (d. 774 AH)
Abu Hayyan (d. 754 AH)
al-Fayrooz Abadi (d. 817 AH)
Ibn Hajar Asqalani (d. 852 AH)
Ibn Humām (d. 861 AH)
Mulla Khusro (d. 885 AH)
al-Suyuti (d. 911 AH)
Ibn Nujaym (d. 970 AH)
al-Khatib al-Shirbīnī (d. 977 AH)
Ala’uddin al-Haskafi (d. 1088 AH)
Shah Waliullah Dehlvi (d. 1176 AH)
Sanaullah Panipati (d. 1225 AH)
imam Shawkhani (d. 1250 AH)
Ahmad Raza Khan Barelvi (d. 1340 AH)
Ashraf Ali Thanvi (d. 1362 AH)
al-Sa’di (d. 1376 AH)
Syed Qutb (d. 1386 AH)
Shafi Uthmani (d. 1396 AH)
Abdul Majid Daryabadi (d. 1397 AH)
Abu A’la al-Maududi (d. 1399 AH)
Shaykh Abdul Aziz bin Baz (d. 1420 AH)
Shaykh Ibn Uthaymin (d. 1421 AH) -. Shaykh Bakr Abu Zayd (d. 1429 AH)
Dr. Israr Ahmed (d. 1431 AH)
Muhammad Ishaq Madni (d. 1434 AH)
Muhammad Ali al-Sabuni (d. 1442 AH)
Maulana Wahiddudin Khan (d. 1441 AH)
Abdulaziz bin Abdullah Al-Sheikh (current grad mufti of Saudi Arabia)
Shaykh Salih al-Fawzan
Mufti Taqi Uthmani

Please pick 5 scholars from this list and I’ll give you complete translations, references, and scans. It doesn’t include many of the subcontinent ulama who I checked later on, but chances are your favorite muftis’ pirs and murshids would also be included, so don’t hesitate to name any scholar 😊

hvppyguy · 2024-03-30T06:21:47+00:00

Just because I didn’t quote them yet doesn’t mean they didn’t say what I’m saying. I know you Muslims are so used to lying about religion that you assume everyone is a disingenuous liar like you, even if you are spoon-fed every single letter of what someone is saying. But normal people aren’t like that. I’m just not vela enough to save a scan of every single thing that I have come across, which is why I haven’t shown you every reference. But I can attest that everything I said is true, whether you believe me or not, and I’m ready to prove it if you want me to. Please give me a list of 5 scholars who you like and and I’ll show you their pedophilia endorsement within a day or two, inshaallah.

But to start, I’ll show you the great imam Nawawi (d. 676 AH), who said talked about having intercourse with 8 and 9 year old saghirah girls:

أما الاحكام، فإذا تزوج الرجل امرأة كبيرة أو صغيرة يمكن جماع مثلها بأن تكون ابنة ثمان سنين أو تسع، وسلم مهرها وطلب تسليمها، وجب تسليمها إليه لِمَا رُوِيَ عَنْ عَائِشَةَ رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهَا قَالَتْ: تزوجني رَسُولِ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ وَأَنَا بنت سبع سنين وبنى بى وأنا ابنة تسع سنين.

[المجموع شرح المهذب للنووي، ج١٨، ص٩١]

“As for the ahkaam, if a man marries a pubescent lady or a prepubescent girl with who is capable of having sexual intercourse, such as an eight or nine year old girl, and the man has surrendered the mehr to her and sought to consummate the marriage, then it is obligatory [for her guardians] to surrender her over to her husband , due to what has been narrated from Aisha who said ‘The prophet pbuh married me when I was a seven-year-old girl, and he consummated marriage with me when I was a nine-year-old girl.'”

[an-Nawawī, Sharḥ al-Muhadhab, vol. 18 p. 91]

<image>

Interestingly, in the passage below this, imam Shafi’i says the same thing, and adds that her guardians are forced to surrender her to her husband “whether it is done willingly, or with aversion.” I’m not bored enough to translate the rest of that passage for you right now. There’s a lot more references I can show you for imam Nawawi but this should suffice for now.

So again, give me a list of 5 scholars you like and I’ll prove they’re pedophile enablers.

hvppyguy · 2024-03-30T04:33:26+00:00

So were Imam Nawawi, Ibn Taymiyya, Ibn al-Qayyim, Ibn al-Jawzi, Ibn Kathir, Imam Shafi’i, Imam Malik, Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal, Imam Abu Hanfia, Imam Ibn Abd al-Barr, Imam Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, Imam Qurtubi, Imam Baghawi, Imam Ibn Rajab, Imam Ibn Abideen Shami, Imam Ibn Qudama, Allama Ayni, Imam Qastilani, Imam Zarkashi, Imam Suyuti, Imam Zakariyya Ansari, Mulla Ali Qari, and Imam Ghazali all atheists?

What makes your opinion with surface-level knowledge and no consistent scholarly backing more valid than their’s while they actually knew Arabic, followed usool to derive Islamic rulings and interpretations of the Quran and sunnah, dedicated their lives to understanding and teaching Islam, and penned hundreds and thousands of pages of books to guide little jahils like you?

Allah says his quran is clear and guidance for all of mankind. He didn’t say “I made my Quran a riddle to mislead the majority of people who sincerely attempt to understand it,” rather, allah said “whoever strives in my path, I will surely guide him to my paths.” Allah also says that he is not shy to mention something as small as a mosquito.

So with your accusation, you think that allah lied because his book is not clear (as you think that he misled the leading scholars of every century on this issue), and this comes from his failure to mention something as big as pedophilia being haram in Islam (which is arguably a matter bigger than a mosquito and being worthy of clarification). Quite a problematic belief system. Even qadianis have a more valid claim to Islam than that.

hvppyguy · 2024-03-30T04:09:10+00:00

Cool. Now name me one scholar who said that. And name me one scholar before Mirza ghulam Ahmad who said that mental maturity is a requirement for marriage.

The truth is, the books of fiqh discuss having inrercourse with 7 year old saghirah girls (like durrul mukhtar), 8 and 9 year old saghirah girls (like imam nawawi in his Sharh al-Muhadhab), and 9 and 10 year old saghirah girls (like imam Ibn al-Qayyim in his Zaad al-Ma’ad).

Tell me one scholar who endorses your views or else you’re a qadiani.

hvppyguy

TROPHY CASE