Mutazilah its pashtoon relevence by ScimitarXEdge

[Alchemist]

[ScimitarXEdge]

So far I have not seen one single pronouncement of Takfir on me.


I will say however that some of the quotes describing Mu'tazilah doctrine are not accurate. I will have a thread about it soon in the days to come when I gather up my source materials.

[BarakzaiAbdali]

I've actually been reading up recently on this dilemma of takfirism in modern Islam.

Baygham, I am no expert. I may be wrong and would do well to stand correct but here are some issues I have uncovered on this discussion:

Its tunnel vision that associates for example, the likes of Sayd Qutb with Osama Bin Ladin under one umbrella and assumes the latter, being a leading personality in the former and current Afghan wars, ascribes to the ideologies of the former. What I mean is that the common and simplistic refrain heard in the media and repeated in the BBC documentary Nightmares, that Bin Ladin and Mullah Omar are extensions of Sayd Qutbs thought processes are non evidence based.

1 Ibn Tayimmah, referred to as Shaykh Al Islam, Syrian Islamist jurist reaffirmed the edict of attacking rulers that refuse to govern according to Islamic law. He was the key formulator of Salafism. As an example, he put down the foundations for the doctrine of dealing with unIslamic governance under the recently converted Mongols who mixed their customs with shariah. Ibn Tamiyaah went so far as to label the Mongols as apostates.

2. Osama Bin Ladin was the target of three assassination attempts by takfiris himself and the evidence that he endorses Qutbs view that the world has reverted to paganism is nonexistent. Moreover, he, per my reading of Scheuer's latest book(which in turn references the primary speeches of Mr. Bin Ladin), has rejected Takfiri philosophy. Qutb was a leading proponent of Takfirism.

3. For instance, Qutb has a Hobbsian doctrine of a religious war of everyone against everyone else it appears. Mr. Bin Ladin prefers that the Saudi Royals be sent to an Islamic judiciary and has not called for their deaths. In fact, he said in 12/2004 "Correcting the mistakes you have made is nor hard at all if the ruler is willing to accept what it takes to bring about the needed change."

4. Mr. Bin Ladin also appears to reject Mr. Qutb's view that the duty of offensive warfare is now compulsory versus defensive warfare. The former has made it clear that he would not endorse the latter's view that the banner must be carried forth into foreign lands ... but appears to instead take an approach similar to the Christians we see that have faith that "the kingdom will come." Basically, the former belives divine providence will one day ensure the world comes under Islamic jurisdiction, but understands caliphate and offensive doctrines are impractical.

5. Qutb followed the teachings of Abu Al Hasan Al Ash'ari who championed a nonliteralist approach to the Quran and who supported the idea that the sunnah differed radically from the literalist Hanbali school. Mr.Bin Ladin appears to have been educated nearly 100% in the Hanbali school.

6. In summary, Mr. Bin Ladin might agree with the Saudi position that Mr. Qutb himself was a Takfiri whose view was out of touch with reality and rejected widely accepted Quranic interpretations.

7 Sayd Qutb was the on again and off again ally of Gamal Abd al Nassr and officially untrained in Islam. His university training was in literature.

8. The proof of the divergence between Mr. Bin Ladin and Mr. Qutb rests in the formers involvement in a 1989 peaceful reform movement in Saudi that called for reform but not dismantling Saudi society.


Why I give these two men as examples is that the driving force in Afghanistan appears to be found in the ideologies and mindset of Mr. Bin Ladin and not Mr. Qutb. The latter appears to have some more influence in Khybar Pashtunkhwa in terms of ideological drives. I think that is why we are so able to see the Pakistani factions regard one another as Takfir.


So the issue is a complex one and I am an amateur just trying to learn.
Reference: Scheuer's Texts

[Baygham]

So far I have not seen one single pronouncement of Takfir on me.


I will say however that some of the quotes describing Mu'tazilah doctrine are not accurate. I will have a thread about it soon in the days to come when I gather up my source materials.

The beauty of religion is its absolute claim of validity. It cant be vague, Allah may be wont do, its either crystal clear or it is not.

So guys stop beating around the bush. In your own version of islam is the views of 'Mu'tazilah' that absolute truth or not.

Yes or no. No theatrics,


thats why I like mullah sangar, he is blatantly honest and rips it out like the mullahs back home.

[BarakzaiAbdali]

The beauty of religion is its absolute claim of validity. It cant be vague, Allah may be wont do, its either crystal clear or it is not.

So guys stop beating around the bush. In your own version of islam is the views of 'Mu'tazilah' that absolute truth or not.

Yes or no. No theatrics,


thats why I like mullah sangar, he is blatantly honest and rips it out like the mullahs back home.

Would an answer of: I honestly do not know suffice?

I told you, I am not that educated in such terminologies. All I know of that brand of thought is that there was some conflict about the Quran being created vs not created long ago.

I tend to be very expansive in my own umbrella of what Islam is. For instance, I still consider you a Muslim as you have not made any claims to the contrary. Roshina can tell you about our back and forths, I disagree on many interpretations, but I cannot call her anything but a Muslim.

Where I tend to draw a line is with folks like Irshaad Manji who are creating fasaad and fitna and advocating a policy of death and destruction on others for profit of funds and popularit to themselves.

I mean its like that eternal debate between Hamza Yusuf fans and Awlaki fans... I barely listen to both, but each side appears to take to their imam like a Beatles or Rolling Stones fan does to their respective band.

[Baygham]

.......................

Why I give these two men as examples is that the driving force in Afghanistan appears to be found in the ideologies and mindset of Mr. Bin Ladin and not Mr. Qutb. The latter appears to have some more influence in Khybar Pashtunkhwa in terms of ideological drives. I think that is why we are so able to see the Pakistani factions regard one another as Takfir.


So the issue is a complex one and I am an amateur just trying to learn.

In pakistan we have a constitutionally backed Blasphemy law. This law gives certain humans certain powers. They use these powers, like every other human power, to further their cause.

The irony of the fact is that in the end every one has commited Takfir. So every one is kafir according to this law. Yet to repeal it is considered a loss of power by a large number of wheelers and dealers of this power. In pakistan the state establishment also uses this law to suppress decent. In short it is such a vague law and anybody can be silenced by the state with it. President Getulio Vargas - who ran Brazil from 1930 to 1954 summed it up beautifully "For my friends, anything - for my enemies, the law,".

He could very well be talking about this very law.

[ScimitarXEdge]

The beauty of religion is its absolute claim of validity. It cant be vague, Allah may be wont do, its either crystal clear or it is not.

So guys stop beating around the bush. In your own version of islam is the views of 'Mu'tazilah' that absolute truth or not.

Yes or no. No theatrics,


thats why I like mullah sangar, he is blatantly honest and rips it out like the mullahs back home.

yes and we all agree in the validity of Islaam; we just don't agree with every aspect of our understanding of it

As I said in the other thread, Islaam has certain standards of concepts which are essentiallly crucial for belief and things which are subject of understanding. Islaam only goes by what is required, everything else is just different peoples take on the same thing. That's why Islaam is beautiful it is much broader than we give it credit for.

I believe Mu'tazilah is a method for discovering and understanding the Absolute Truth, I don't claim to be right or wrong, I do claim that Mu'tazilah approach will help people have a better understanding of what Truth is because it incoporates logic.

For this reason I don't consider people with different understandings than I have as kafir, and I only consider those misguided to things which are not cohesive with practical relevance.

Although Sangar is blatantly honest, it's wrong to assume others are not on this account. I too am blatantly honest, but I'm also very nuanced and view things from a scope of texture not black and white notions. And something that doesnt try to examine the whole picture may be blatantly honest in so much as their zeal goes, but it's not necessarily honest in terms of actual introspection; and that's what I offer others, honesty in introspection not merely zeal.

[شمله ور خراساني]

I've actually been reading up recently on this dilemma of takfirism in modern Islam.

Baygham, I am no expert. I may be wrong and would do well to stand correct but here are some issues I have uncovered on this discussion:

Its tunnel vision that associates for example, the likes of Sayd Qutb with Osama Bin Ladin under one umbrella and assumes the latter, being a leading personality in the former and current Afghan wars, ascribes to the ideologies of the former. What I mean is that the common and simplistic refrain heard in the media and repeated in the BBC documentary Nightmares, that Bin Ladin and Mullah Omar are extensions of Sayd Qutbs thought processes are non evidence based.

1 Ibn Tayimmah, referred to as Shaykh Al Islam, Syrian Islamist jurist reaffirmed the edict of attacking rulers that refuse to govern according to Islamic law. He was the key formulator of Salafism. As an example, he put down the foundations for the doctrine of dealing with unIslamic governance under the recently converted Mongols who mixed their customs with shariah. Ibn Tamiyaah went so far as to label the Mongols as apostates.

2. Osama Bin Ladin was the target of three assassination attempts by takfiris himself and the evidence that he endorses Qutbs view that the world has reverted to paganism is nonexistent. Moreover, he, per my reading of Scheuer's latest book(which in turn references the primary speeches of Mr. Bin Ladin), has rejected Takfiri philosophy. Qutb was a leading proponent of Takfirism.

3. For instance, Qutb has a Hobbsian doctrine of a religious war of everyone against everyone else it appears. Mr. Bin Ladin prefers that the Saudi Royals be sent to an Islamic judiciary and has not called for their deaths. In fact, he said in 12/2004 "Correcting the mistakes you have made is nor hard at all if the ruler is willing to accept what it takes to bring about the needed change."

4. Mr. Bin Ladin also appears to reject Mr. Qutb's view that the duty of offensive warfare is now compulsory versus defensive warfare. The former has made it clear that he would not endorse the latter's view that the banner must be carried forth into foreign lands ... but appears to instead take an approach similar to the Christians we see that have faith that "the kingdom will come." Basically, the former belives divine providence will one day ensure the world comes under Islamic jurisdiction, but understands caliphate and offensive doctrines are impractical.

5. Qutb followed the teachings of Abu Al Hasan Al Ash'ari who championed a nonliteralist approach to the Quran and who supported the idea that the sunnah differed radically from the literalist Hanbali school. Mr.Bin Ladin appears to have been educated nearly 100% in the Hanbali school.

6. In summary, Mr. Bin Ladin might agree with the Saudi position that Mr. Qutb himself was a Takfiri whose view was out of touch with reality and rejected widely accepted Quranic interpretations.

7 Sayd Qutb was the on again and off again ally of Gamal Abd al Nassr and officially untrained in Islam. His university training was in literature.

8. The proof of the divergence between Mr. Bin Ladin and Mr. Qutb rests in the formers involvement in a 1989 peaceful reform movement in Saudi that called for reform but not dismantling Saudi society.


Why I give these two men as examples is that the driving force in Afghanistan appears to be found in the ideologies and mindset of Mr. Bin Ladin and not Mr. Qutb. The latter appears to have some more influence in Khybar Pashtunkhwa in terms of ideological drives. I think that is why we are so able to see the Pakistani factions regard one another as Takfir.


So the issue is a complex one and I am an amateur just trying to learn.

Yara barekziya ka wos delta way no ma ba da sta agha ganjay sar khkwal karai wo!

I love it when people have done research and know what they're talking about.

I do think I should add a few things to what you have explained.

Sayyid Qutb rahmatullahi alayhi was a Muslim thinker. Not a scholar. And he evolved through-out his life from a secular person into a devout Salafi Muslim.

Unfortunately most of his work is used and abused for various political aims by different groups.

But he was not by definition a takfiri. But Takfirism evolved from some of his writings.

And literalism is Dhaahiriyyah. Some scholars lean towards this school for various reasons. For example Ibn Hazm, is a famous proponent of Dhaahiriyyah.

Al Albani was likewise more or less Dhaahiri.

Takfiris, however are of various kinds. There are even Sufi takfiris.

The so called "salafi-takfiri movement" of Abu Muhammad al Maqdisi and Ayman al Zawahiri are primarily non-scholarly derivation of certain ayat and ahadith to suite the political agenda of such people.

Takfiris often mis-apply ayat and ahadith. Rulings on Takfir are codified by classic scholars.

People who give things a new twist today are often coyboys and macho's like this dude:





The irony is that these people liken themselves to the noble Amirul Mumineen Mullah Muhammad Omar Mujahid Hotaki.

Amiruna is not a takfiri. He did not even label Kharzoy as a kafir. Because he is very cautious with takfir.

[BarakzaiAbdali]

Yara barekziya ka wos delta way no ma ba da sta agha ganjay sar khkwal karai wo!

I love it when people have done research and know what they're talking about.

I do think I should add a few things to what you have explained.

Sayyid Qutb rahmatullahi alayhi was a Muslim thinker. Not a scholar. And he evolved through-out his life from a secular person into a devout Salafi Muslim.

Unfortunately most of his work is used and abused for various political aims by different groups.

But he was not by definition a takfiri. But Takfirism evolved from some of his writings.

And literalism is Dhaahiriyyah. Some scholars lean towards this school for various reasons. For example Ibn Hazm, is a famous proponent of Dhaahiriyyah.

Al Albani was likewise more or less Dhaahiri.

Takfiris, however are of various kinds. There are even Sufi takfiris.

The so called "salafi-takfiri movement" of Abu Muhammad al Maqdisi and Ayman al Zawahiri are primarily non-scholarly derivation of certain ayat and ahadith to suite the political agenda of such people.

Takfiris often mis-apply ayat and ahadith. Rulings on Takfir are codified by classic scholars.

People who give things a new twist today are often coyboys and macho's like this dude:





The irony is that these people liken themselves to the noble Amirul Mumineen Mullah Muhammad Omar Mujahid Hotaki.

Amiruna is not a takfiri. He did not even label Kharzoy as a kafir. Because he is very cautious with takfir.

Salamoona,

Thanks for the references.

I am not ganjaay... where did this rumor initiate? I have a few gray hairs... but I probably have about 8 years until I start balding if I go after my dad.

[BarakzaiAbdali]

Yara barekziya ka wos delta way no ma ba da sta agha ganjay sar khkwal karai wo!

I love it when people have done research and know what they're talking about.

I do think I should add a few things to what you have explained.

Sayyid Qutb rahmatullahi alayhi was a Muslim thinker. Not a scholar. And he evolved through-out his life from a secular person into a devout Salafi Muslim.

Unfortunately most of his work is used and abused for various political aims by different groups.

But he was not by definition a takfiri. But Takfirism evolved from some of his writings.

And literalism is Dhaahiriyyah. Some scholars lean towards this school for various reasons. For example Ibn Hazm, is a famous proponent of Dhaahiriyyah.

Al Albani was likewise more or less Dhaahiri.

Takfiris, however are of various kinds. There are even Sufi takfiris.

The so called "salafi-takfiri movement" of Abu Muhammad al Maqdisi and Ayman al Zawahiri are primarily non-scholarly derivation of certain ayat and ahadith to suite the political agenda of such people.

Takfiris often mis-apply ayat and ahadith. Rulings on Takfir are codified by classic scholars.

People who give things a new twist today are often coyboys and macho's like this dude:





The irony is that these people liken themselves to the noble Amirul Mumineen Mullah Muhammad Omar Mujahid Hotaki.

Amiruna is not a takfiri. He did not even label Kharzoy as a kafir. Because he is very cautious with takfir.

Salamoona,

Thanks so much for the references... I am not ganjaay though... I do not know where that rumor started. I still have about 8 years of good hair with some little bit of gray here and there if I follow in my father's genetic footsteps.

[شمله ور خراساني]

Salamoona,

Thanks for the references.

I am not ganjaay... where did this rumor initiate? I have a few gray hairs... but I probably have about 8 years until I start balding if I go after my dad.

I'm sorry. I thought I read somewhere that you were bald. No worries.

I use to be bald. Just like Scimitar.

[Baygham]

yes and we all agree in the validity of Islaam; we just don't agree with every aspect of our understanding of it

As I said in the other thread, Islaam has certain standards of concepts which are essentiallly crucial for belief and things which are subject of understanding. Islaam only goes by what is required, everything else is just different peoples take on the same thing. That's why Islaam is beautiful it is much broader than we give it credit for.

I believe Mu'tazilah is a method for discovering and understanding the Absolute Truth, I don't claim to be right or wrong, I do claim that Mu'tazilah approach will help people have a better understanding of what Truth is because it incoporates logic.

For this reason I don't consider people with different understandings than I have as kafir, and I only consider those misguided to things which are not cohesive with practical relevance....................

As things stand in pakhtoon land, you and I are in the same boat. Now I know people are refraining here because they know I will laugh the whole thing off, but in the practical world of say a pashtoon government, let run this out. The two of us are in parliment and sangar and BA are there too. We want to tackle domestic abuse in pashtoon families. We have not been funded by any NGO, its our concern because we have found out that it happens.
Now sangar proposes a Huddood law (basically like the one in Pakistan for the last 25 years). I object citing some data from Pakistan and its experience, he rejects citing a few hadith and Quranic verses and we are at a stand still. BA abstains and you are left. How will you settle the case. Remember if you go against him you are automatically, yes you guessed it right, a murtad as the blashphemy law was passed yesterday and you and I were sent away and did not participate in that vote. Sangar does head the blasphemy law division of the supreme court under mullah omar, if you want further details.

Although Sangar is blatantly honest, it's wrong to assume others are not on this account. I too am blatantly honest, but I'm also very nuanced and view things from a scope of texture not black and white notions. And something that doesnt try to examine the whole picture may be blatantly honest in so much as their zeal goes, but it's not necessarily honest in terms of actual introspection; and that's what I offer others, honesty in introspection not merely zeal...

Sangar jana, sa khoo oo wa ya, dha sa wai.

[BarakzaiAbdali]

I'm sorry. I thought I read somewhere that you were bald. No worries.

I use to be bald. Just like Scimitar.

I think its when DJZ and I went at eachother. She called me bald and since then I've been offered Rogaine via multiple PMs (lol jk).

[شمله ور خراساني]

I think its when DJZ and I went at eachother. She called me bald and since then I've been offered Rogaine via multiple PMs (lol jk).

LOL. take it easy on DZJ. She's not a bad person. She just tends to reply very harshly sometimes.

[شمله ور خراساني]

Sangar jana, sa khoo oo wa ya, dha sa wai.

Even if a muslim brother insults me, I will not allow a kaafir to bring distance between me and my brother.

This is called al walaa wal baraa http://www.pashtunforums.com/religio...ty-islam-1427/