> Sunni Response Disecting Kharijite Thought on Jihad and Geo-Politics

[al-boriqee]

Originally Posted by Ibn Ilyas

Assalamu Aleykum ww

Akhee al-boriqee I have one question though, How do we distinguish between khawarij, Jihadi and Takfeeri? Or do they mean pretty much the same thing? also do they come out of the fold of Islaam (Jihadi and Takfeeris) if it isn't the same thing that is.

Also who are the real mujahideen, could you please clarify insha'allah, I am getting a bit confused.

Jazakumollahu khayran

read this

Jihad Is Not Breaking Covenants « al-Mustaqeem Publications

The Shaykh himself as Im sure everyone is familiar with, is a true mujahid.

the brother arguing with him is he who is affected by this modern kharijite thought.

secondly,
jihaadi and takfeeri or khariji is not synonymous. It only became more synonymous in very recent times, but overall, the jihaadi is simply the one defending his land.

thirdly, i really don't like to use takfeeri. If someone is a takfeeri, then that means he is a khariji, because it is the khawaarij that makes unlegislated takfir not sanctioned by shariah.

So no, i don't see a jihaadi and takfeeri (or khariji) as the same even though there are intermixed between each other.

[salamfromrom]

I think the real problem is that the people who wish to kill innocents/become terrorists don't have any common sense at all. A small segment of humanity is just BatS**t insane, and there's nothing we can do, reasonable arguments against killing women and children do not reach them.

And bro Boriqee, may Allah(swt) bless you for your intellectual struggle, but is it really necessary to attach such labels(kaafir, etc) to these people who engage in criminal behaviour? They can be muslims (albeit bad) and criminals at the same time, it doesn't have to be mutually exclusive.

Salam

[al-boriqee]

Originally Posted by salamfromrom

And bro Boriqee, may Allah(swt) bless you for your intellectual struggle, but is it really necessary to attach such labels(kaafir, etc) to these people who engage in criminal behaviour? They can be muslims (albeit bad) and criminals at the same time, it doesn't have to be mutually exclusive.

Salam

the first thing i believe that you must do is to remove the conception that things are done based on labels. We are in an era where people continually throw tantrums over the classifications of realities, which is a basic human attribute. I am by no way making a reference to you but generally speaking, this modern conception and wave has reached to such extremes that it has virtually become a crime to call a spade a spade. The environment of political correctness is what bolsters this phenomenon even more.

secondly, takfir is made because of either an action that nullifies faith or belief related concepts that nullifies faith, or speech that is stated that cannot be fathomed by someone with a grain of faith.

thirdly, labels are by default a necessity of relaying a reality. Allow me to be a bit more intricate here.

Justice, as defined by Islam is to administer something into a position that demands to be there meaning that such a thing does not correctly belong no where else except for the place that demands its presence. Every single iota of what we do is fueled through this prism. Our living, our breathing, our doing, and even our dying is based on this. Everything that we do is either one of five things.

it is either
1. haraam
2. mandatory
3. allowed
4. recommended
5. discouraged

part of the systematic construction of Muslim thought in terms of understanding the criterion of good and evil is to recognize the adherents to each side AND the levels a certain segment of humanity has within each side. So we have some groups of humanity who operate on a more dangerous scale in terms of evil than other groups, and vice versa on the side of good.
Now here is where our matter comes into play.

It would be utter deception to relay a reality to a group of people that is not beffitting them. In other words, if I did not truthfully arrive at this conclusion and to relate what I felt was most proper about such people, then I have cheated everyone.

As you can see, there is an entire realm of religious physics here at work that forms an integrated whole here, and people who don't grasp all of this are usually are more prone and vulnerable to this conventional wisdom of "labels and its link with disunity" and the "are labels necessary" crowd, or the new one called COEXIST.

so while I agree that not every criminal is a kaafir, it does not entail that these specific criminals are not and I have already elaborated on the factors which lead me to my conclusion about them and Allah knows best.

[salamfromrom]

Salam

great explanation bro. However , as I'm sure you know, you must be 100% sure when you call someone a kaafir, etc that this is actually the case. If you're wrong...I'm sure you know the consequences of that. But you do take a stand and you're clearly passionate about protecting what you deem to be the real original islam so I respect that.

"labels and its link with disunity" and the "are labels necessary" crowd, or the new one called COEXIST.

It's fine to label people but it saddens me to see these labels are often used to make people hate eachother to the point of violence. Every islamic group thinks it's on the truth (and undoubtedly at least one is) but I only see warmongering and hate on most people's minds. Anyways this last part was a bit of a rant unrelated to what we're talking about here.

Take care, salam a leikum

[al-boriqee]

Originally Posted by salamfromrom

Salam

great explanation bro. However , as I'm sure you know, you must be 100% sure when you call someone a kaafir, etc that this is actually the case. If you're wrong...I'm sure you know the consequences of that. But you do take a stand and you're clearly passionate about protecting what you deem to be the real original islam so I respect that.

right of course, this is why our takfir from anyone stems from the viewpoint of this worldly life. Our judgments here only pertain to actions and statements, and not with what resides in the heart only because Umar radhiyallahu anhu said

"people used to be judged according to their reality (inner selves) because we had the revelation present. Once that ceased, we only judged people's cases based on their speech and action"

with that being said, it is upon us to be sincere with relaying truthfully what we understand to be the reality coupled with authentic knowledge. This is WHY both the performance of takfir AND the absence of takfir is both dangerous.

However, because the ummah is being plagued with irjaa in current times, we always here the dangers of making takfir due to the hadeeth of the prophet alaihi salatu salam, and this is rightfully so because too many people continually and perpetually do not make legislated takfir, rather they make takfir based on desires.

However on the other hand, the other danger is that "whoever does not aknowledge a kaafir to be a kaafir or doubts in the kufr of one who is a pure kaafir IS HIMSELF A KAAFIR".

So the extreme of both ends is dangerous.