A blistering sophomore effort from new contributor ‘YAK’!

Kaffir (n.), from Arabic Kaffir “unbeliever, infidel, impious wretch,” with a literal sense of “one who does not admit the blessings of God,” from kafara “to cover up, conceal, deny, blot out.” Technically, “non-Muslim,” but in Ottoman times it came to be used almost exclusively for “Christian.” Early English missionaries used it as an equivalent of “heathen” to refer to Bantus in South Africa (1792), from which use it came generally to mean “South African black” regardless of ethnicity, and to be a term of abuse since at least 1934.

Douglas Harper. Online etymology dictionary

The above quote is reflective of the evolution of the word ‘Kaffir’ – to show the use of the word in the past. Below is a commentary to show how it used today as a divisive tool by some sectors of the Muslim community.

This is a very hefty and sensitive subject matter for some people. So I’d like to start off with the premise of my belief. The prism through which I write is this very simple point. The Quran is the final word of the divine speaking directly to humanity and it is a word from the Almighty that is more tender than a beloved’s whisper and as merciful as a mother to her sick offspring. The connotation of each Chapter starting with the words “The most merciful and the most kind’’ is what we call a precedent. i.e. we must view the whole surah (chapter) through the context and prism of mercy and kindness. The Quran is for all time, but we have left it alone, reciting the Arabic verbatim, opening the book only to use it as magic potion to ward off demons, without even understanding what we’re reading. The Quran is for all time, yet it lies in dust. If it is for all time, then we must accept that the Almighty does not miss out things, he does not make distinctions between words for no reason, logically this means that time, place, and people are in a state of flux; this cultural and intellectual  diaspora is in the very spirit of the Quran. The words don’t change, but our understanding does. There are verses we still don’t understand, but I know one day we will. Also, through that same lens, the beloved Prophet ﷺ is a mercy to the worlds, a man of quietness, tenderness, and a true elegance that the world had not seen before him. If anything contradicts that belief system, it should be scrutinised before it’s rejected as it would be in non-compliance with the tone and all-encompassing, liberating force that we call Islam, free of power driven interpretations and free of people turning this great faith into a cult, which they have. This is the premise I begin the article with. All mistakes are mine, all perfection belongs to the vastness of the ever expanding Universe’s creator. As the universe expands, may our hearts and minds also expand to a greater understanding of what we have in front of us. Theologically, I follow the Hanafi way of understanding Islam.

I vividly remember after the 7/7 bombings ‘Sir’ Iqbal Sacranie from the Muslim Council of Britain being on television and being cross-questioned by two reporters on the term ‘kaffir’. The reporters were annoyed by the connotation of the term Kaffir. Our liege and master, Iqbal Sacranie, Officer of the Most Excellent Order of the British Empire, mumbled in the most excruciating and embarrassingly worded explanation behind the term. In effect, he was apologising. It was at that moment I realised two things. Firstly, we don’t have a spokesperson for Islam in the UK. Secondly, and perhaps most importantly, a person who is speaking on my behalf cannot answer a simple question on the basics of Islamic text. This memory has been stuck with me for a long time. This was not someone I wanted to represent my faith. I was perturbed and many years of introspection occurred within me about my faith. I flirted with many aspects of Islam: Wahhabi, HT, Shia and many, many others. Restlessly, I left Islam for a very short period in my life to introspect, which has led to ponder what it means to be a kaffir. I am a believer, and very comfortable and unchallenged in my faith today; I will not let those who hijack my faith dictate what it means to be a Muslim today.

However, like many Islamic issues in the West today, this journey got even more interesting. The word became synonymous as a derogatory term with the new Salafist interlopers. They colloquially say ‘kuf’. More recently, the loony that conspired to blow up a shopping centre in London said on Twitter, ‘these dirty kufs are dumb.’ This mental tribalism is effectively a technique employed by criminal gang members across the world: an ‘us versus them’ attitude. As isolated as these interlopers might be, the Salafist ideology has succeeded in creating a superiority complex within the new Muslim youth. The idea that you’re Muslim shouldn’t give you an advantage over somebody non-Muslim. I remember as a 12-year-old telling myself, “I am a Muslim, therefore I am better.” We are also taught this by our parents, and some of us still teach our children this strange segregation process. It’s wrong because it teaches us that we’re somehow saved from damnation. Quite the contrary: we shall be judged according to our deeds, not simply being born due to a lottery at birth. I was born a Muslim and many an anguished night I sat up not thinking as I was told, ‘you’re so lucky to be a Muslim.’ Instead, I was cross-examining my faith and my identity. After all, your identity is only a veil stopping you from realising your interconnectedness to ‘tawhid’ (oneness) with all of creation, including your neighbours and those you disregard. None of us chose our names, race or religion. The most important of part of the automated declaration of faith we repeat every day is a denial ‘la ilaha’ (there is no deity) and then affirmation ‘illallah’ (but the deity alone). This juxtaposition of the Kalima is vast in its understanding and has more than one meaning. Yin Yang, Light and Dark. Nothing and everything.  How do you attest and declare there is a creator without first going through the process of denial? You have to. To reach true faith, you must unlearn. Do not take for granted that being born a Muslim, gives you some sort of head start. By that logic, so does being a born anything else.

This article will explore the term kaffir as a key driver, but also bring in complimenting ideas such as takfir (a Muslim who accuses another Muslim of apostasy) and apostasy very briefly as they themselves are vast topics onto themselves, as these go hand in hand with the term Kaffir.

The root Arabic of the word;

Kaf-Fa-Ra = to conceal, to cover, to reject, to disbelieve, to be thankless, unthankful, ungrateful, to disown, deny, faithless, black horse.

Its primary meaning is to cover/conceal with active/conscious intent. From this is born rejection or disbelief because that is a conscious decision made by a person. (Please note: one can only reject something after hearing/seeing/experiencing it, not before.)

Simply put, he is one who does not accept the truth, but chooses to deny it. A Kaffir is someone who knows the truth with conviction and proofs (spiritually or rationally), yet still denies it openly and might conspire against you. This is a very explicit statement, and not a broad statement like some of our scholars have redefined. Allow me to give you a crass example. Many of you should have seen the film, The Matrix. There is a character called Cypher who chooses to betray his friends and accept the false luxury of a made up world. He says:

Cypher: You know, I know this steak doesn’t exist. I know that when I put it in my mouth, the Matrix is telling my brain that it is juicy and delicious. After nine years, you know what I realize?
[Takes a bite of steak]
Cypher: Ignorance is bliss”

Hence, a ‘kaffir’.

The freedom to choose your belief system is entirely yours. You may not be convinced of the arguments Islam has given you. That’s your prerogative. That does not make you a Kaffir. That makes you a non-Muslim. But if you say to me you do believe, but refuse out of political bias or ideological bias, then that is concealing the truth within you. People cannot be blamed for their ignorance if they’ve been uninformed or ignored.  Just to tell a non-Muslim to go and read the Quran is not the equivalent of giving them the truth. The ‘truth’ is something we cannot compel onto others. I cannot compel you to love me, the same way the Almighty cannot make you love him. That is a realisation based upon something far more complicated than just reading a book.

Now that we’ve defined the word ‘Kaffir’ – we must realise the power of the word when it is mentioned by the ‘Most Merciful and Most Kind‘.

Today, this word is used especially incorrectly in my opinion. Many of us, who will be reading this, have been born in the West. So we’re presented with a new dilemma. We juxtapose the historical and maligned image the West has had of the ‘Moor’, the lecherous Arab, the bloodthirsty ‘Mohammadan’. We are also guilty of equal suspicion. We have also vilified the ‘crusader’ very successfully with distrust and maligned him of being dirty, untrustworthy and shameless. The doomsday Muslims would have you believe otherwise – unfortunately for them, this is empirically not true. It is an oversimplification of our differences. The onus is on us to change this mindset. We cannot rely on others to change themselves for us. If we truly, believe in an all-encompassing, all merciful Islam, then the responsibility is on us to show who we really are. Nothing will bring people closer to the ever elusive quest of the ‘truth’ than a true representation of Islam within yourself. If you segregate yourself from the dirty ‘kuffar’ you are only creating a self-fulfilling prophecy to victimise yourself. Hearts and minds can only be won through interaction and dialogue. Although, ‘dawah man’ and his accomplices will have you believe otherwise. They’re busy creating a drone army of homogenous Muslims who drivel at the very sight of the word ‘kaffir‘. Had God wanted we would all be Muslim. Had the beloved Prophet ﷺ wanted, he would have cursed all of Taiba and all those who fought him.

On a more topical subject of hailing people ‘kaffir’ – the Mumtaz Qadri and Salman Taseer debate has crystalised this debate to a timely discourse.  A brief history – Last week, to those who don’t know, Mumtaz Qadri, a special forces officer in Pakistan who took the law into his own hands, by murdering a politician called Salman Taseer, this politician was gunned down in the most ruthless manner because he was deemed to be insulting the Prophet ﷺ. Mumtaz Qadri was hailed a martyr by Brevlis across the globe and especially in Pakistan. This has prompted adulation for Mumtaz, but ultimately it has exposed the double standards of many of our scholars. In the worst kind of irony, it takes bloodshed to have millions out on the funeral of Mumtaz Qadri. This corruption of religion united Wahhabis, Deobandis, Brevlis for once, at raising this murderer on a pedestal. Upon further discovery, it had turned out this politician had not committed any form of insult to the Prophet ﷺ or committed any blasphemy. Salman Taseer merely called the current Pakistani blasphemy laws a ‘black law’. He was defending a Christian woman, called Asia Bibi, who he deemed to be exempt from prosecution. On a more imperative note, he merely wanted the current law to be re-evaluated, as he did not deem it divine law, he saw it as a law that was misinterpreted and constructed by scholars. For many scholars, who much like gangsters, are out to protect their hegemony over the uneducated masses, deemed this as an act of aggression and apostasy.  They declared Taseer was a Gustakh e Rasool (insulting the Prophet) Henceforth, decrying Taseer as someone who had committed apostasy and he has now become a Kaffir. Therefore, according to these bloodthirsty Ulema (scholars of Islam) he was liable for death, by any member of the public. A free for all ‘ kaffir purge‘ if you like.

The hanging of Mumtaz Qadri in Pakistan has caused a social media storm. This has caused two polarities within the social strata of the Muslims across the globe. Those who have venerated Mumtaz Qadri as a martyr, and those who have condemned his act of murder.

This is sheer madness. Killing someone for the “love” of the beloved Prophet ﷺ is a contradiction of love itself.  These are the same Ulema who will gladly believe in the terribly embarrassing narrations of the Prophet’s sexual prowess, or the Prophet being affected by black magic. But will cry for blood if someone dares to question their rulings. They really have the gall to shout heresy when they themselves will popularise such denigrating narrations on the character of the Prophet ﷺ?

On a disturbing note, this has caused a dichotomy of epic proportions on the Islamic community in the UK. Our youth will leave Islam by the droves, if we do not tackle these issues, as it makes us look like a cult. Which it seems we are. A rather gigantic, insecure cult who are afraid if someone leaves Islam, or criticises Islam.

The killing of Salman Taseer wasn’t in defense of the Almighty or the Prophet ﷺ (as if an Almighty creator and the blessed Prophet need defending?). It was to protect the scholars. They propelled Mumtaz Qadri to commit murder for their own interests and mechanisms.  It is an act of wanton destruction and bloodshed, which has now split the Muslim community into further disarray.  

These were the same scholars who condemned the Charlie Hebdo killings and other forms of terrorism. However, when it’s their terrorists, they’re fine with it.  It is a contradiction of very disturbing proportions, because it begs the conclusion – that taking a human life is only correct when they say so.

Prior to this, we could all safely say the Brelvis stood for a form of passive Sufism, which although had academic problems, we really didn’t need to confront, as the Salafist/Wahhabis overtly stood for extremism in every sense of the word. The dichotomy is now more acute. It is now between those who stand for peace and those who do not. Nobody is safe from Takfir. We truly live in dangerous times, when people we deem as brothers and sisters will declare us fit for extra-judicial killing for simply not agreeing with their rulings.  

Takfir is also a favourite pastime of ours. We love excommunicating fellow Muslims; as if, just by declaring one Kaffir, it will excommunicate them. We don’t have the capacity to do that in a court of law for anyone who claims they are Muslim. Imam Ahmed once famously said, ‘a fatwa by Abu Hanifa is worse than camel dung’ and a host of other Imams declared Imam Abu Hanifa a Kaffir. As a thought exercise – does this make Imam Ahmed a Kaffir for disagreeing with a fatwa of Imam Abu Hanifa? Because Salman Taseer disagreed with the current law in Pakistan and was by de facto a kaffir according to the same thought process?

Apostasy and blasphemy – is a subject we have greatly misunderstood. Not just for lack of common sense, but it is a protectionist racket invented by many scholars due to their insecurities about their logic.  It is a vast topic I cannot go into my commentary fully. The above topic from a legal exegesis point of view has been tackled here by Sheikh Sulaiman Ahmed. It is a much more comprehensive ruling on the case of Taseer and Mumtaz.

In addition to this, the seminal book by Sheikh Atabek and Sulaiman Ahmed covers this topic as well as hadith methodology in the book ‘Hanafi Principles of Testing Hadith’. I truly do think this is one of the greatest books on Islam to date and a must to understand scholarly discourse at a rational level. It cleared up things for me and has made me reclaim my faith. Many subjects such as apostasy rulings, stoning, niqab are covered in that book comprehensively.

The imperative question remains unanswered though.

Do you honestly with your hearts and minds believe that it is perfectly reasonable to kill a person who leaves a religion –  at the same time as calling the Prophet ﷺ a ‘mercy to the world’ and Islam a ‘religion of peace’? I implore you: please do not make a mockery of the faith and the beloved Prophet ﷺ. No reasonable and free-thinking individual can truly believe this.

A counter-narrative must be louder than the narrative we hear from the Salafis and Deo-Brevlis. Instead, rational thought, intellect and a common sense approach is muted at the slightest questioning of a ruling that does not make sense.

Today, the problem is much more acute. We have people calling each other Kaffir simply for celebrating Mawlid (birthday of the Muhammad ﷺ) or for trivial matters that really don’t concern the core of the faith. I recall being called a Kaffir for stating to my fledgling Salafi friend that you cannot contain the Divine in a physical manifestation as he claimed. He does not have hands or feet. I was labeled a Kaffir, as this was apparently a key foundation in their belief.

The sheer disgust I feel from fellow Muslims when I hear them in groups espousing their own insecurities when calling people ‘kufs’. It’s disgusting because it’s a form of mental tribalism which gives a false sense of self-esteem. An ‘us and them’ attitude. It is tantamount to a form of reverse gangsterism. Often that is the case: these Salafis who go around self-adulating their belief system to others are more often than not uneducated, ex-gangsters. They’ve gone from one extreme to another.

It’s not just the Salafis, who use this word Kaffir as a tool to denigrate others. There are many cases where the manipulation of someone being a Kaffir has encouraged a dehumanisation of the ‘other’. It’s simply a tactic of power and is used effectively in warfare today and in the past. We’ve already mentioned the Salman Taseer case, but there are more examples by Daesh and their treatment of the Yazidis, Boko Haram and their treatment of Christians. More pressingly, they are getting their proofs to do their raping, pillaging and murder from a hijacked version of ‘Islam’. Sadly, it’s not just being propagated by the thobe wearing, unkempt beard, Bedouin ‘oil sheikhs’. We have scholars like Jonathan Brown who are also justifying ‘rape’ and ‘sex slavery’ through intellectual dishonesty. If this is the truth, then this is not my religion. If it is, I will say it loud and clear: I will leave today. Perhaps I have misunderstood the wisdoms behind these rulings? Perhaps my mind is not capable of such unethical behaviours. It is a disgrace to think the intellectual disparity we’ve come to, where we have to explain the constructs and rulings of past scholars about things that are profoundly oppressive to the mind and body, such as stoning, apostasy and slavery. We do not have to defend them. We are allowed to say, they made errors. We do not need to continue this sadistic behavior of trying to justify everything irrational or erroneous.

It’s no longer good enough saying they’ve misinterpreted texts or rulings. They are proponents of an intellectual tyranny that does not allow us think. It shouldn’t have to be explained to a grown adult, with some form of intelligence, that murder, stoning, throwing people of buildings and burning people is simply inhuman. It cannot be the ‘religion of peace’ they claim it is.

Ultimately, these matters are best handled by those have spent their lives in this quest. But we must have a pragmatic approach. Nothing can be set in stone. That is the very nature of rational truth. If we accept the Quran’s message absolutely, then we have to accept that as time goes by, the application of a legislation changes. Unfortunately, we have become stagnant in our research and intellectual discovery as Muslims. We are consistently told by our peers that all our research is done and all opinions are set in stone. The dynamic nature of the Quran as truth dictates to us rationally that we must revisit rulings according to time and place. The sheer stagnation of intellectual discourse and discovery in our faith today simply reminisces to a bygone era. The previous rulings and relevance of them apply today, the same way Isaac Newton’s works apply today. The baton has not been passed on. If scholars are truly the inheritors of the Prophets, then in today’s age, we’ve inherited nothing but a parrot’s speech. We have to be in a constant state of flux. For example, just to say something is Ijma of the scholars (consensus) does not make it right.

We have the machinations of Deobandis, Brelvis and those crazy Salafis all defending their particular version of Islam. As if they were to be honest with themselves and their ‘aql they would lose everything overnight. That is when they’re not busy with their notepads declaring takfir on everyone else who’s not on their puritanical fire-path.

In conclusion, we can see throughout our history and especially today, the word Kaffir has been used extensively for derogatory purposes. It is clear when pondering on the scripture that our purpose is to come together and recognise each other in our various facets of knowledge, tribes and cultures. We are meant to learn and evolve from each other, regardless of religion or creed. That is part of the divine plan.  The critics of Islam who claim we are a barbaric death cult, are sadly proved to be correct if carry we progress through ill-thought rulings, rationale and remain uneducated. A paradigm shift in our thought process is much needed.

The word Kaffir has been hijacked through the ages and especially today – to divide and rule us for power hungry leaders. In the past to appease the sultans court, and today to appease land grabbing, oil rich ideologies for greater hegemony over gulf states. It’s not stretch of the imagination that we are propagated this myth that Shi’a Iran is all Kaffir and is the Muslims greatest enemy. It’s not a coincidence that America and Israel are on the side of Saudi Arabia when it comes to Iran. Our use of the word Kaffir has huge political ramifications. Many of our youth are not even aware they are pawns in this game, when they declare everyone else Kaffir. Those youth from Europe fighting for the Daesh have a firm belief that they’re protecting Islam from the ‘dirty Kuf’, not realising in their  ‘holy’ quest, that they’re fighting a proxy war for hegemony and land, for a power that has no care for what religion you belong to.

Our religion has been hijacked. Not just by the usual suspects – the Wahhabis/Salafis. Instead, it is being held hostage by many of those who turned this great religion into an automated ritualistic ‘point based’ system of salvation. We must free ourselves from those people who stop us from thinking clearly, who stop us from questioning. Who have invented made up rules to protect themselves. We are busy calling each other kaffir, whilst making no progress intellectually, in matters of science or of broad worldly knowledge. We seem to be following this homogenous ‘Islam’. A distorted Islam, tainted by men who have mixed it with their politics, sects, histories and personal desires, not the Islam of the Almighty. The very people who condemn terrorism will find in their sources, their history of prominent figures and authorities, the Islam of a certain people’s idea of Islam which contradicts their condemnations and vilifications.  Dishonest academic scholarship can be a tool to justify hegemonic control over people.

So what is the solution? Quite simply, to be sensible and accepting of all ideas that shout for peace. Anything else that is destructive, perverted or inhumane can never be part of your faith. I’m merely calling for this strange interpretation that has seeped into our faith to be removed by just thinking for moment. Stop for a second and ask – what is the motive behind this ruling?  It’s a virus so dangerous that it has changed the shape of our thought process. It is intellectual tyranny. This abject notion must stop today; otherwise we will be driven out or leave this religion tomorrow.

All truth remains in sujood (prostration) and all else is conjecture. If the same coolness of prayer you feel in prayer encompasses you, then extend that same breath of mercy to all of mankind. When you denigrate other religions you are not elevating your own religion; you are succumbing to denigrating your own. That is not the religion of peace you claim to follow.

There are more fake gurus and false teachers in this world than the number of stars in the visible universe. Don’t confuse power-driven, self-centred people with true mentors. A genuine spiritual master will not divert your attention to himself or herself and will not expect absolute obedience or utter admiration from you, but instead will help you to appreciate and admire your inner self. True mentors are as transparent as glass. They let the Light of God pass through them. – Shams of Tabriz


87 thoughts on “‘Kaafir’

  1. “Had God wanted we would all be Muslim”

    Indeed. End of Qur’an 5:48 (Pickthall translation)

    For each We have appointed a divine law and a traced-out way. Had Allah willed He could have made you one community. But that He may try you by that which He hath given you (He hath made you as ye are). So vie one with another in good works. Unto Allah ye will all return, and He will then inform you of that wherein ye differ.

  2. Thank you very much for such an insightful and much needed article.

    Im on a long journey of discovery just like most people are here. When I started to doubt and question my religion, it was really hard for me to understand what Allah’s plan is, or what he wants us to do. Me and my brother both set out to study Islam, I am still in the process but he has stopped praying and on the brink of disbelief as he sees the same oppressive, repressive, backward and illogical teachings told by the ahadith and scholars alike. While we are in the subject, it is ijma that disbelievers are destined for eternal hellfire, there are some ayahs that clearly say this, others contradict this. That kind of proves that somehow, we got it wrong from the beginning, like you clarified the definition of kafir in Islam, you would also need to clarify the definition of mushrik and so on. Doesn’t that mean that Islam needs reformation, I have sadly started to think so.

    I used to think before that, why did Allah send down Jesus just so that his message is destroyed shortly after, that people were misguided for all those years. I started to think the same for Islam, the Sunni Islam as we know it is evil and unproductive. All the Muslims believe in the نسخ (abrogation) in the Quran. That makes me doubt Allah, why would another ayah cancel the other. Also, other ahadith that talk about the preservation of the Quran is scary. I mean, if the bible was lost and therefore imperfect, why couldn’t we say this about the Quran. So when u believe that the Quran is just a divine revelation but isn’t really Allah, then I don’t think u will have anything left of Islam. The vision of Islam is so unclear, what does Islam want, the hijab? 5 prayer a day? Shariah? There are so many questions that need answers.

    Where do we start from, I believe intellectual awakening. People need to understand that the so called ‘salaf’ of the 3 generations of Muhammad (pbuh) got it wrong. Just somehow, they misunderstood it quite badly.

    But I still don’t know why Allah does this, islam’s vision of religion, although the closest to reality still leaves me with great doubt.

    Why would Allah knowingly allow his message to be misconstrued so badly to the extent where Isis are representatives of Islam.

    There a lot of why’s but not enough convincing answers.

    • I understand your sentiments. I do agree that current Sunni Islam is unproductive as it is practised today. There is an expanded version of this article that with mmccluru’s permission I can link to another blog which explains the different facets of belief, mushrik, ahlul kitab, munafiqoon in greater detail.

    • Aslamu’Alaykum dear friend (if I may call you that?)

      I totally understand that you’re “going through the motions” as some would call it. It’s natural. Imam Ghazali (d.1111), arguably Islam’s most well known scholar, was paralysed by doubt so much so that he left Nizamiyya College in Baghdad, the Oxford equivalent of its time and spent many years searching for the truth; eventually coming across Sufism in Jerusalem and elevated himself to reach a degree of certainty in faith. The point is, even the best scholars in Islam underwent moments of spiritual crisis.
      The Modern age is full of extremes and its really hard to cypher past all the dogma and cultural factors to reach a true and more ethical view of Islam and the World. You are not alone nor should you be left to suffer alone.

      I can recommend some books that I feel beneficial for you and others in improving your understanding of Islam and how it should relate back to the rest of creation.


      The vision of Islam by Sachiko Murata. An epic analysis of Islam and what it’s all about. So much amazing stuff is in here and here’s one fantastic example. Chinese Muslims, geographically and culturally isolated from the rest of the Muslim world, used Confucianist philosophy to interpret Islam! How amazing and innovative is that! They practically found no issues with Islamic ethics and Confucianist ethics. The Han Kitab is a wonderful testimony to this reconciliation efforts.


      Islam: A short History by Karen Armstrong.
      I advocate in depth studies of Islamic history because in light of the Modern era, we need to make sense of our background and heritage in context.


      Al Ghazali Deliverance from Error
      The Imams autobiography in which he details how he was struck by a spiritual crisis that left him for many years to evaluate all kinds of knowledge and arrived at the conclusion that Sufism is the best path to realise the truth of religion.

      There are many other books I’d like to share in good time and insha’Allah, I’ll post them at some point. Hope I’ve helped 🙂

      • Thanks so much for the suggestions but I have to remove all the awful things I have been informed of.

      • You see what I mean about teaching a fish karate?

        When did I ‘admit’ I hadn’t read his books? Rather, I said the opposite.

        As for your err, ‘logical’ syllogism, its an idiotic and stupid attempt isn’t it? Based on nothing but semantic stupidity about the words ‘Islam’ and ‘truth’ (*in English no less). This is why I didn’t bother with you and went straight to being harsh – I knew from your initial comment that you are not capable of engaging in a discussion.

        This is further evidenced by the problem that you are not only too silly to understand what others say said but even what YOU yourself have said: you did indeed give the example of people wanting to end their life due to torture or pain as a ‘proof’ (LOL) that Hell can’t be eternal or that people would (SHOCK!) LIKE that not to be the case.
        But in this life you die and then are ressurected. So how do you die in the afterlife? What happens to those people in Hell after it is closed for buisiness. What does the false idol Ibn Taymiyyah say about that? Enlighten us, since you ‘read’ him.

        Of course Salafis are ashamed of Ibn Taymiyya’s views on temporary Hellfire and that the universe is eternal. This begs the question of how someone who makes such gaffes can be ‘Sheikh ul Islam’.

        Please don’t try to be clever. It doesn’t suit you. At least you are honest enough not to deny that you don’t believe in rationality. But that was obvious anyway.

    • So first of all, I can see you are an honest person and are asking genuine questions. Honest people will certainly be lead to doubts nowadays. Most of the people who don’t have doubts are either stupid, naive or dishonest. So don’t take this the wrong way, it isn’t all directed at you.

      Right, so we have two or three issues here:

      1) Insisting Allah do things ‘our way’ and completely getting rid of free will. So God promised to protect text of the Quran. That’s it. He didn’t say that he would protect us from all of the other crap that comes with human nature – pimping religion to get what people and governments want, lying, false interpretation, making up ‘extra-Quranic’ information etc. You are basically saying he should have done that – so you didn’t ‘judge’ him on his promise but what you think he should have done – which is that whenever anyone who claimed to be Muslim tried to falsify a hadith, give a dishonest fatwa, lie about religion etc, God should have stopped this. So that would mean that the bad side of human nature would be completely abrogated when it came to Islam (*but not for other religions). How exactly is that fair if for example Jews can lie about religion but Muslims are completely unable to do that? And why do Muslims deserve to be rewarded for that? This is just another version of ‘why does God allow poverty?’ In fact it is humans who allow poverty and poor distribution of wealth and it is within their power to fix this. If God jumps in every time humans make a boo – boo then what the hell is the point of free will? Misuse of religion or in fact misuse of information is a reality throughout human history, just like disease or poverty. It is our job as humans that are uniquely capable, to tackle these things. It may even be the purpose of our existence. Basically, your question simplified to ‘Why didn’t God make a perfect world, or at least make the Islamic world perfect?’ To as chive all this non fabrication, non-manipulation of religion by Muslims, you would need to basically abrogate human nature (in the Islamic world at least). So then why reveal the Quran, why not just change human nature for Muslims? Then you wouldn’t need the Quran at all, let alone preserving it.

      Things being unclear or confusing means they require investigation, so yes, there is a lot of confusion around issues. That is all extra-Quranic, non-God information. Why is God responsible for this? There was a lot of confusion around science too – magic, entrenched theories etc. People had to work hard to clear it up. That is what human endeavour is. So there is a lot of confusion around hijaab, violence in Islam etc. Did you work hard to clear it up? Or is that God’s job? If it is God’s job then we are just marionettes or puppets. If it is hard, then no one said life is easy, least of all God: ‘Verily, we have created man in strife’.
      Why do we have to judge Islam based on all the rubbish people have created around it, such as abrogation etc – because you are wondering why God allowed that. But how could he stop it? Technically everything is God’s ‘fault’ if you blame him for not stopping stuff, including creating anything in the first place. More likely, human actions have certain results.

      2) As for Salaf and the scholars being wrong, that is obvious, where did God protect even the Sahabah from error, let alone the ‘3 generations’? Shia, Mu’tazzila, Khawarij, tajsim (anthropomorphism), jabr (predestination) all of those errors are from the first three generations (or rather earlier, from the first successors). Yeah, God could have jumped in and stopped all of them, but 1) he never said he would and 2) then we don’t really have free will then if you think about it.

      Allah promised to preserve Quran. Where are the problems about hijaab, prayer, violence etc FROM QURAN? God is the author of confusion only if he authored it in the Quran, not next man’s books and opinions.
      So a bunch of people, ancient and modern, told you it was all sown up, this opinion and that opinion, Salaf are amazing and infallible, Imams blah blah, ijma this and that, hadith etc. They lied. If you have already figured that out by the age of eighteen then you are way ahead of what I was at your age. But the fault is with those people, not God. He didn’t tell you what they did.
      3) Hadith impugning Quran authenticity – that is true. But isn’t that proof that those hadith are fabrications? Single chain narrations going against testimony of thousands – isn’t believing them just like conspiracy theorists believing outlandish crap nowadays? We have a talk on this site by Atabek Shukurov about those hadith:

      4) Now, as for this business of Hell and non-Muslims going to Hell, first of all, there is the issue of who is ‘non-Muslim’, because no one says that all non-Muslims go to Hell. So there are two valid opinions I would say, Al Ghazzali and Maturidi, and according to Maturidi, even a polytheist, if he is honest is ‘Muslim’ and being Muslim is about doing your best with the lifespan and information in front of you, as neither of these are under your control, only how you handle them. So even an atheist can go to paradise, as long as he did his best. Qadhi Khan is even more lenient than that. So I don’t know of ANY religion that is so lenient and Maturidi is the ranking guy in aqeeda. So short of asking for God to let everyone into Paradise regardless of anything, just carte blanche (which is what most of the people who ask such things mean).
      Also, where is this ‘ijma’? Because how have you got ijma when Al Ghazzali and Maturidi are not following it?
      I think most people who come up with this ‘is hell eternal?’ stuff are basically being emotional. Now there is a GENUINE issue about how long is ‘forever’ in Islam and eternality of hell, but I don’t get into it with most people because I think they are talking rubbish as they all question why hell is eternal but have no problems with Paradise being eternal. Why are good deeds rewarded infinitively and bad ones in a limited way? What is the difference in ‘substance’ between good and bad deeds that one last forever and one doesn’t? Do we have some rational proof for this?

      Anyway, there is a lot to be said on this, and I know you are not one of these people but most people really means by this question ‘My non-Muslim friends are SOOOOOOOOOOO nice! How could God send them to hell?!’

      This is complete garbage. Apart from the fact that God never said they are going to hell ANYWAY, they are nice TO YOU. Neither they nor you are ‘nice’ to the child who dies from preventable causes every 1.2 seconds. So since we only know about ourselves, I think it is completely bourgeois to judge on superficial things (and lets face it, 99% of people you know, you know superficially – they are ‘nice’ they say hello, they don’t murder kittens etc). You don’t known what goes on in their soul nor how God judges things. So most of the time, the only person we can say with any confidence that they ‘deserve’ anything, good or bad, is ourselves. And most of us are not even honest enough to know for ourselves what we deserve.
      So when people can bring me their algorithm of why their non-Muslim friends or even themselves are so nice that they don’t deserve to go to hell, then we can look at this question a bit more. So for Jane next door, we have a list of Santa Clause style good and bad deeds and how they are ranked. Then we can talk about it.
      Also, hell being eternal, it’s no different from people who believe that this life as all there is. Then it is the same as life imprisonment or being handicapped for your whole life as far as they are concerned, as they were in prison for the entirety of their existence. So that is the same as Hell – it is the entirety of your existence. So what’s the difference? That it never ends? Then we need a proof that oblivion or non-existence is better than Hell. Where is this proof? And then we need another proof that everyone deserves to go to Paradise eventually. I haven’t seen either of these proofs from people who bring up this issue – because they are being (selectively) emotional.
      Nonetheless, we do have some narrations, even from Hanafis about Hell and it being eternal or not and also we know that time has a beginning so it can have an end to, so what is being in Hell ‘forever’ tantamount to. But before we discuss that, we need some answers for the above questions, first of all, why is it okay for Paradise to be eternal then?

      • I am so grateful for your reply. When I was Ahmadi, I used to track your blogs and seriously feel so inspired from the topics you discussed.

        For me, it’s a shame to see Islam being failed by Muslims. I mean, there are questions in my head that I cannot answer nor anyone can about Islam. For example, the second coming of the messiah and the mehdi, who is the dajjal? And if u don’t take that seriously, who are the yajooj and majooj mentioned in the Quran. I was only able to reach these conclusions about Islam from my experience through ahmadiyyat. I really saw how a cult functioned, how a group can be deluded, blinded by love and obedience, controlled by those in authority.

        I understand your point about free will, maybe allay intended to make things unclear to misguide us. But if u were to tell me to believe in abrogation according to Sunni Islam, then I apologise, Allan would be the author of confusion. If Allah left it to us to choose which of his verses have been deleted then that’s inaccurate.

        On the concept of hell, it is absolutely clear that the Quran that the disbelievers are thrown in the hell fire, there are so many verses, it’s probably one of the most clearest things Allan has made in the Quran. But as u said, the term kafir could be amended. However, to believe punishment for eternity is simply horrible and evil, especially in the way it’s described in the Quran.

        There is a Hadith that indicates that hell fire shall one day finish. And one verse indirectly:

        Abiding therein so long as the heavens and the earth endure, excepting what thy Lord may will. Surely, thy Lord does bring about what He pleases. But as for those who will prove fortunate, they shall be in Heaven; abiding therein so long as the heavens and the earth endure, excepting what thy Lord may will — a gift that shall not be cut off. (Chapter 11 Verse 108-109)

        Narrated `Abdullah:The Prophet (ﷺ) said, “I know the person who will be the last to come out of the (Hell) Fire, and the last to enter Paradise. He will be a man who will come out of the (Hell) Fire crawling, and Allah will say to him, ‘Go and enter Paradise.’ He will go to it, but he will imagine that it had been filled, and then he will return and say, ‘O Lord, I have found it full.’ Allah will say, ‘Go and enter Paradise, and you will have what equals the world and ten times as much (or, you will have as much as ten times the like of the world).’ On that, the man will say, ‘Do you mock at me (or laugh at me) though You are the King?” I saw Allah’s Messenger (ﷺ) (while saying that) smiling that his premolar teeth became visible. It is said that will be the lowest in degree amongst the people of Paradise.(Sahih Al Bukhari Hadith #6571)

        However, there is no clear indication that they will come out of the hell fire.

        Take this verse as an example

        whoever kills a believer intentionally – his recompense is Hell, wherein he will abide eternally, and Allah has become angry with him and has cursed him and has prepared for him a great punishment. (al nisa 93)

        This verse does not distinguish between a Muslim and a kafir so here, a Muslim can be thrown in hell forever!

        For me, the word خالدين does not mean forever. So either paradise and hell are both not eternal, or that paradise is the only eternal. I cannot believe that hell is eternal, not cause I feel sorry for jack next door, I’m the last guy who thinks about this. It’s a fact that seems illogical and unjust in the face of allah who says clearly that his mercy encompasses everything.

        And if you tell me, Muslims should be the first people to be thrown into the hellfire after their corrupt moral standards.

        This for me is a contested subject jut like abrogation. I don’t like to indulge in these issues as my knowledge is still very minimal.

        I want to study Quran and Hadith in Arabic so that I get a clear picture of our history, how to tackle these issues and understand them in the best light.

        I’m broke at the moment, so my thoughts are with faking a salafi identity to get into medina to study for free. I want to seriously improve my Arabic and become up to date with Arab affairs to help start an enlightened evolution. Although the I might feel entirely bored and depressed studying under traditionalists, I think that’s the only way for me to become more aware of what’s right and what’s wrong.

        For me, we have failed Islam and Muslims have failed the world. That is for me the most troubling concept. Such a logical and deeply rich religion defeated in the light of intellectual challenge and debate. How can it be that we have reached this place, where do we begin, and is there any hope for Muslim countries to improve and thrive.

      • I just re-read my English. I don’t think anyone could read that, sorry for my poor English.

        But let me make something clear.

        My concerns about the theological aspects surrounding Islam are many. I am willing to accept that this is natural but what really annoys me is the incapability of Muslims whether in the east or the west to have an honest, unified and fair internal discussion surrounding theological aspects of Islam. Why are we as Muslims not brave enough to speak about these issues? I know many people who understand these issues and are generally aware of them but are too scared to take the step to improve. Most of Muslims of course are unwilling to face the ugly truth.

        Muslims have never been in such a difficult situation before. Through the rise of the Internet, Isis and liberal thought, the Muslim world and Muslims as a whole have been torn apart (not suggesting that our history embodied division and ignorance). Divisions upon divisions.

        I raise these issues because Muslims will have a tough time explaining these and many others. Tariq Ramadan is probably the only one who is trying to fix things up.

        But the question is, for how long are we going to be in denial?

        Muslims think they have it easy, oh no they don’t. It ain’t a salafi problem, it’s a social and intellectual devastation that is engraved in the Muslim mind.

        As Allah rightfully said. Do the people think that they will be left to say, “We believe” and they will not be tried?

        Unfortunately, the Muslims are in a mess, like headless chickens torn apart of a primitive culture and a distinctive religion.

        What can I say
        God bless

      • “I think most people who come up with this ‘is hell eternal?’ stuff are basically being emotional”

        I see no difference between the topic of the eternity of hell and the topic of the definition of kafir. They both boil down to the question of Divine Justice. Asharis deny that Allah is Wise and Merciful because they think these attributes necessitate defects, but you nevertheless realize the problem in believing in a God that acts arbitrarily and might just as well send the non-muslim child to hell for all eternity. Solution? Tackle the definition of muslim and kafir which essentially relies solely on Allah being Just and Wise anyway since the Quran never states that a mushrik can be a muslim if he is sincere(the Quran does not describe disbelievers with sincerity and honesty but rather lying etc.) or that a person must first believe islam to be true in order to be a kafir, you just avoid using the words wisdom and justice.

        “I haven’t seen either of these proofs from people who bring up this issue – because they are being (selectively) emotional.”

        Or rather it’s because you are guilty of the same criticism you level against salafis. You have not read what Ibn Taymiyya(rh) actually wrote himself on the topic of the hellfire, rather you have only relied on your scholars describing the heresies of him, just like how salafis rely on salafi scholars to describe to them the heresies of the asharis. Ibn Taymiyya and Ibnul Qayyim(rh) gave several arguments for just the difference between the eternity of hell and paradise, but these arguments were not present in the selections you chose to read or post on this website(why would they be mentioned when they’re just going to be fuel for takfir anyway?)

        “why hell is eternal but have no problems with Paradise being eternal”

        Because most muslims believe that Allah is الرحمن الرحيم الكريم so there is no problem accepting that He would give humans eternal bliss. It also confirms to human fitrah. Why don’t we have courts deciding who can receive which gifts, like we do with courts deciding who can receive which punishments? Humans have an intuitive understanding of the difference between a reward/gift and a punishment.

        “Then we need a proof that oblivion or non-existence is better than Hell. Where is this proof? ”

        Personally, I see the proof in the Quran when Allah says that the kafir will on the day of judgement proclaim that he wished he had been dirt!

        Also, many humans prefer death over being tortured in this life, and this is in spite of the possibility of the torture ending. So what about a human who knows that his torture will go long for all eternity, would he not prefer death? So again I see proof in the human nature.

        “and according to Maturidi, even a polytheist, if he is honest is ‘Muslim’”

        Source? I’d happily read more on the topic because I’m not sure how it’s reconciled with the Quran.

      • Sources are for people who provide sources themselves. You accuse us of not reading your idol Ibn Taymiyya (*when unlike you, we at least provided some evidence that we did)…and then you fail to qoute him yourself.

        Apart from the fact that everything you said is incoherent garbage with ‘rational’ proofs such as that people ‘feel’ good about gifts or prefer death to torture,(I ‘feel’ you are stupid. That presumably settles it for you), or that human ‘fitra’ is a proof for what God should and should not do (?! – I know you guys are dumb and believe that ‘fitra’ means that people are pre programmed with everything they need – which is stupid), you also teach us that there is death…in the afterlife, after you are already dead. Genius.

        Lets not stand on ceremony here: you Salafis don’t believe in rationality at all, so please stop pretending that you do. In fact, your waffling and banal attempt to deploy reason proves this far better than anything I can say.

        This I’m afraid is what happens when you send Salafists to University. It’s like trying to teach a fish karate.

      • “we at least provided some evidence that we did”

        Except by your own admission, you have not read his works. So your are relying on second hand information, ie what you are accusing salafis of doing. Double standards.

        “Apart from the fact that everything you said is incoherent garbage”

        Yes yes everyone except you are incoherent salafis blah blah you’re seriously paranoid. Since when do salafis even acknowledge that ibn Taymiyya said the hellfire would cease to exist let alone entertain the arguments?

        “you also teach us that there is death…in the afterlife, after you are already dead. Genius.”

        When did I do that?

        I mean if we want to look at your superior “rational” proof we won’t have to look far. This is basically how your position goes

        – Islam is the truth
        – Denying the truth makes you a kafir
        – Denying Islam makes you a ???????

        Oh but wait a sec, only someone who believes Islam is true can be a kafir…so basically every kafir must be a mu’min first…also daesh because why not, everything has to do with daesh. Can’t make a rational proof without first mentioning daesh and the salafi boogeyman(of course everyone else are the ones being emotional!).

      • “Rather, I said the opposite.”

        Is your nickname shared or do you suffer from some kind of multiple personality disorder? You admitted never reading his arguments meaning you never read his book but rather parroted what you read from secondary sources.

        “you did indeed give the example of people wanting to end their life due to torture or pain as a ‘proof’ (LOL) that Hell can’t be eternal or that people would (SHOCK!) LIKE that not to be the case.”

        No retard, I never said people would die, I said people would wish to die, which is what the Quran itself says. The question was why people would prefer death/non-existence over hell. The answer is in the Quran. I’ve said this twice now but you’re clearly unable to understand writing properly.

        “At least you are honest enough not to deny that you don’t believe in rationality. ”

        Ignoring your pathetic and childish insults because I prefer discussion over emotional rants like yourself does not mean I concede them to be true.

      • Well, we can SEE how you prefer ‘discussion’ over insults! Pot/kettle.

        Perhaps first you should show us where I said that I haven’t read Ibn Taymiyyah and take him from secondary sources (I’ll ignore that you failed to quote anything from him and never yourself claimed to have read him). And which books? He has a lot! You want us to read all of his voluminous waffle? More importantly, have you?

        So I’m a ‘retard’ for telling the truth about your argument – that an eternal paradise is what people would like (SURPRISE!) and fits with ‘fitra’ (SHOCK!). Or did you not say that? Or was it not a proof? How are we to know that? And the Quran (is it the Salafi ‘Quran’ though?) says people wish they were dead in the afterlife? So ‘death’ according to God means non-existence is it? Or only after you are ‘dead’? Where did you get this from? And the people wishing they were dead – its just putting your idiotic argument as having come from God – ‘people wish for death in the afterlife, therefore Ibn Taymiyya is right. except Salafis disagree with him on the temporality of Hell. And I’m not going to say what I think, cos then I’ll look even dumber’. Hmmm…God quoting the inhabitants of Hell or Pharaoh or anyone – is it a proof or an argument from God? People preferring eternal rewards and temporary punishment is obvious – so is the peoples preference a proof or rational or justice or binding on God? So why abuse the Quran (*Salafi ‘edit’) to cover for your stupidity (TWICE!), we understood correctly the first time. Unfortunately, you are unable to think without knots.

        It makes me laugh how you can’t even bring yourself to SAY you believe in rational things. Salafism 101.

      • It’s painfully clear that you’re the one not interested in having any discussion. You’re too defensive from the start and anyone challenging you will cause you to be beyond triggered and start hurling as many insults as you can think of without actually responding to what anyone says. And you’re not impressing anyone by throwing in the word “rationality” here and there during your rants.

      • Likewise, to me it was painfully obvious from the stupidity and posing of your initial comment that you are not capable of discussing the issues involved, so yes, I told you off the bat that you are stupid. Ditto, I’m old enough to know not to waste time with people who are stupid enough to identify as Salafis (‘I never said I was Salafi blah blah’) or morally troubled enough to find Ibn Taymiyyah’s vile diatribes inspiring or knowledgeable. For an experienced person, its diagnostic. There’s no point ‘reasoning’ with you people. You either grow out of it, wake up or leave Islam or join the more consistent followers of Ibn Taymiyya in ISIS (you were kind enough to mention them – and yes, they ARE salafi).

        I know you feel dismissed and insulted. I am sorry for that, but for me, people like you are diagnostic – it’s like I see a guy passionately kissing a man, I don’t need to ask him if he’s gay, does he support gay marriage, discussing the merits or demerits of homosexuality with him, because I already know. Then again on the other hand, you find gay men who disagree with gay marriage, or are open minded etc, you can have a discussion with them. But I can spot you easily because I spend so much time reading Salafi rubbish. I want the best for you, you may have the potential to be a really smart guy but your remarks show that you are wilfully stupid or don’t have the life experience necessary. That’s evidenced by your amateurish but overconfident ‘philosophical’ posing (HT style?) and the passion for defending Ibn Taymiyyah. Anyone who HAS actually read Ibn Taymiyya or studies about him is nearly always against rationality and common sense morality. Taking statements like ‘there is no majaaz (metaphor) in Quran’ seriously or giving fatwas on whether monkeys will get turned on by women without hijaab seriously means I should not waste my time on people like you, especially as if you went to western school and still fall for stuff like that, you have problems…

        Its like the triggering you mentioned – isn’t that why you wrote in? Not for a discussion, but to defend Ibn Taymiyya because it triggers you? Or the idea that not everyone you disagree with will go to Hell? You should ask why that kind of stuff triggers you. I just dismiss salafis because there are actual sincere people who need and want help or can discuss matters, so why waste time with the willingly mentally euthanized?

      • And I summarised and responded to what you said – rather you failed to clarify anything including whether you have read Ibn Taymiyyah, where I said I hadn’t and what constitutes ‘rationality’ for you, whether you even believe in such a thing and how peoples wishes for an eternal paradise but not an eternal hell constitute a proof of the morality or justice of that i.e you didn’t discuss nor prove anything you said (but you wanted ‘references’ LOL. Like I’m going to hit the books for a time wasting waffler).

        So please stop playing the victim and posing.

  3. Wow, what an excellent article. It touches on so many points. Takfir is no longer being seen as a rare, serious matter but an OBLIGATION by rival Islamic groups who are obsessed with power and defending the ‘true’ faith. Unfortunately, its fostering problems within the Ummah and feeding anti Islam critics at the same time. I agree with YAK that a complete Paradigm Shift is required. But this can only be done through proper, ethical education (the vanquisher of ignorance and extremism). The question is, are Muslims willing to bother with learning or remain preoccupied with declaring who is a Muslim and who is not a Muslim?
    On a historical note, it is not a shock that the Muslims have reached this sad stage: colonialism, which played a role, gave rise and legitimacy to conservative religious classes who adopted a defensive yet dogmatic and culturally inspired stance against imperialism and westernisation. The best examples are the Wahhabis of Najd, Deobandis in India, and the Ayatollahs of Iran. Their prominence retains its important position in the Modern age primarily (in my opinion) due to globalisation and the fact that cultures are mixing together. Undoubtedly, some conservative scholars will see this a threat and subsequently hold a closed minded approach to the world – harming themselves and followers alike.

    • Indeed colonialism empowered a soulless, clinical version of Islam go take over the vaccum that was left by mughals in India, the bedoins of Arabia and the decadence of the secular Shah. It’s easy to blame wahhabism for that. But I don’t think it’s that simple. That cultural vaccum was there for this foreign “Islamic solution for all ills” to spread over the consciousness of those peoples, because of it felt like the correct antithesis to the efficient, logical, excellent administration of the previous imperial power.

      What had in fact taken over was a version of Islam that was deemed a better solution than imperialism, but also more spiritual. This was due to some reconstruction of islamic thought by people who genuinely thought, we can do this better. Thus in turn, forming into this weird cultist object that had no relation to the Islam before it. The current transmogrification we see is the the final scene from the movie the thing. It just so happened wahhabism seemed like that logical monster that would solve all the problems. A pure, well administrated, non debated, non plural, homogenous one eyed monster whose mother thinks “shit, I’ve given birth to sloth from the goonies”

      It does not know it’s ‘arse from its elbow’ as they say.

      • You sum it up well

        I suppose the issue that is becoming apparent now is this: Have were reached a point of no return?

        A) If so, what impact will this have on the future of Islam in relation to the rest of the world? How can Muslims interpret their faith without being bombarded with dogmatic thinking?

        B) If this is just a phase, how do we exit it? Why is it continuing to persist? Who is at fault? What needs to be done?

        The reality is that loads of factors, historical issues and modern day extremes all need to be taken into account. No one group or issue can be analysed in isolation to the rest. That will just reinforce it.

  4. @Jutki

    “I am not at a loss for a response but rather it does not befit the lion to answer the dogs” – Imam Shafee

  5. “I don’t remember saying you are an apostate bediuzzamin.

    “Probably you are or you will become one”

    There you go ladies and gentlemen, his retarded logic is at hand here. He says be doesn’t remember calling me an apostate but then proceeds to call me one.

    People, ignore this fool and do not bother to respond to this extremist.

  6. @Jutki

    I’m not being unfair, I’m just copying your style. You called me quite openly an apostate and clearly disregard any ethical teachings you may have had at some point in your life before you decided to bury.
    In response, I’m just saying what you really think and would espouse if we were all Extremists, namely rape of anyone.
    You are a shining example of what this article seeks to elaborate and tackle.

  7. I’ve had an idea forming in the back of my head for a while now. There should be a push for blanket ban on Takfir in sane countries. It’s clear from Muslims’ own histories that Takfir/ blasphemy laws and the like are the weapon of choice for rebels, insurgents and renegades anywhere. Instead of debating its conditions, requirements etc it deserves complete and utter annihilation. It has no safe applications, nor is it useful for anything other than point-scoring and settling scores with rivals. I can assure you that ISIS and Al Qaeda are not going to care much if some traditional scholar declares them outside the fold. But by eliminating the practice altogether we would greatly reduce the ammunition available to these groups in the first place.

    Disagreements should be handled by logical arguments and academic discussion and left at that. The minute it drifts into Takfir-zone it should be stopped. This same treatment should be extended to other faith groups who demonstrate the problem. It should become synonymous with child pornography and counterfeit money in that we should take it completely out of circulation . Anybody caught doing it even as a jest, should be arrested, fined and made to undergo some kind of re-education program to get it out of their system.

    And by consequence any works on Islam (written in the past or present) that contain favorable mentions of the practice should come with a context-based disclaimer added on why the practice is harmful and no longer valid.

    It’s a tall order and not for the faint of heart. But the way I see it, it’s the only way that we will be protected from the intellectual mind-rape and violence it has generated over the centuries. Otherwise, one group/ individual will claim its right to use it against others and the cycle will continue.

    • We should just call on takfeer a bid’ah and close the door for anyone to call on takfeer. Cause seriously, the way they use (especially takfeeres)takfeer, chain takfeer, takfeer al ijtihad and so on is totally un-authentic and just innovation upon innovation.

      • That’s silly and unenforcible. The bottom line is people have different views of orthodoxy and the right to express those views, this solves nothing as the actual problem is what people think should be done after the takfir (i.e killing or killing apostates specifically).

        And calling things a ‘bi’dah’ is another big problem Muslims have isn’t it? Invoking one problem to solve another is like hooking someone on heroin to get them off alcohol or vice versa. People will just start calling everything bidah and killing people for that instead (as Ibn Taymiyya did).

        So the actual problem with takfir is not the identification of someone as ‘non-Muslim’, as they can defend themselves against that claim, but rather the idea that once takfired or lowered to the status of a non-Muslim, that person becomes subject to violence or incarceration etc. We have already presented sufficient evidence on this site that apostates are not killed.

        I think people who do not believe that apostates are to be killed can takfir away. Making a hippy form of Islam where ‘anything goes’ is not going to help – see the recent history of Christianity and secular Judaism as proof. If anything doesn’t go, then there will be takfir in some form.

  8. Jukti said : ” The theory of Ibn Abdil Wahhab is illogical and contradictory but I don’t see why he is an issue. He has not invented the other issues on the list just his own Tawhid. I don’t believe in this and all the scholars before him didn’t.”

    So what today’s scholars believe is not an “issue”, only what Jukti believes and what scholars before Abdul Wahhab believed ?

    “Is someone who says “I believe that God exists most probably” a believer in God? There’s a huge difference between saying probably and for sure. ”

    Strictly speaking, certainty excludes “belief”.

    • Well like I said, this guy’s a dope and there’s no point in talking to him. He’s so obsessed with apostates (even asking a fellow person above to leave Islam?!) and human evolution. And he’s ‘freed’ himself of secular education and society – just like the Marxists, Anarchists etc. – and adopted the stance of ISIS…

      I can’t wait until mmmclmru deletes all of his comments 🙂

      • I understand what your saying

        However, these people need educating (there’s a lot of them)

        I don’t want anyone to delete his comments.

        Inshallah, I will reply to him and we will let people judge, there’s no benefit in deleting his comments.

        Inshallah I will give a full reply soon, I’m just quite busy now.

      • Wait no longer.
        The funny thing is he stopped denying that he was the Turkish apostate guy anymore.

        ‘WordPress’ doesn’t let you block people. So you have to manually delete each comment.

        But I sadistically let him keep posting so all his hard spamming would go to waste. That’s because he’s a nincompoop and was already told he’s banned.

        It was also really funny how despite being allowed to post again he STILL couldn’t bring any references from Maturidi etc. He can’t read Arabic probably. No problem at all – but why style it?

  9. بِسْم الله
    Okay brother, I totally understand what ur saying. I used to think this before, the so called moderate Muslims lie to themselves by saying Islam is a religion of peace, it never was and I don’t think it will ever be. I used to say to myself, the Quran is the primary source that we use to judge by, if it tells u to kill apostates, either obey it or leave the religion. Well that makes sense but it’s not that simple. The religion of Islam had complications from day one, can u please tell me when we followed the type of deen u seem right (Allan’s shariah). It ain’t working and that’s why people move towards western civilisations.

    Let me first make things clear. I’m 18 years old and studying at university, I live in a 6 bedroom house with 4 girls upstairs with shared kitchen and lounge. Until today (6 months on) I don’t know their names, I don’t talk to them, English people are the most dead people I have come across, I won’t stay in the UK after my bachelor. So please drop the thing with socialisation, I don’t care less what happens to them, but Allah tells me to treat them with goodness if they are not attacking. I could say the same with (there is no compulsion in religion) but u would bring up the نسخ and I honestly don’t want to go there, it’s too complicated.

    The concept of human evolution, I couldn’t care less cause that’s a thing that will bring no benefit nor any harm (to u it would but not me). I or anyone could easily say that the word هبوط when describing the descendent of Adam (as) from heaven doesn’t mean literal just like when Allah tells Moses (as) to go to Egypt by saying اهبطوا مصرا.

    Allah says in the Quran to judge justly. Justly to everyone and not only to Muslims. So what is to u just, as in, ur shariah that u have in mind is difference to others. To me, just means treating everybody the same, why would u oppress someone into believing what u believe. We know from our human experiences that treating people nicely if they treat u nicely is logical and morally correct, that’s not a western thing, that’s a human thing just like they say no one is born racist. U put a Shia with a Sunni together and they will just get along together fine until someone tries to impose their beliefs on the other. Fine, healthy debate is good but not enforcement, that’s not a western thing, that’s a human thing bro, whatever u say. So why would Allah tell us something against the very nature he has created us with?

    I say this with all respect to u as u try and take Islam that is known by our scholars. And yes, I do agree with u that this is all a joke, at the end of the day, I am lying to myself and these people here are doing the same. Whoever said that religion is the best lie is right.

    But u could go along with this belief that Allah is with u on it, but it’s ur own intolerance that keeps u dull and isolated. There is no room for people like u today, u know that very well, we wish it was all true but it isn’t. I don’t see barely anything wrong with Isis if u compare it to our history and scholarly work.

    I say this openly and freely, I reject taking everything from classical scholars.

  10. @lookingfortruth1

    I understand what you say. The image of Sufism has suffered over the last 200+ years. The violent Extremists, ideological Salafists, sadistic communists of the Soviet Union and China all sort to purge it for their own ends. False Sufis too have damaged the reputation of the spiritual aspect of Islam.

    With that in mind, I would like you to read Al Qushayri’s Epistle of Sufism. The Imam (986-1074) wrote what is effectively an encyclopaedia of Sufism. It details the biographies and stories of the famous saints of Early Islam and provides a sound explanation of the true Sufi pathway to God.
    It also played an immense role in reconciling mysticism with Orthodox Islam. His influence reached the likes of Al Ghazali, Ar Razi, Abdul Qadir Jilani, Rumi and countless of others. Trust me, this will clear all your doubts and issues with Sufism. Insha’Allah you benefit as should any other reader


      • “I cannot give you one particular reference.”

        Gives zero.

        Who brought up Sheffield?

        And again with the vulgarity.

        Do us all a favour and get a life.

      • And while you’re busy getting those references, how about you tell us who you’re studying from? Because even Ebrahim Desai (a Deobandi I believe) says it’s alright to work for armed forces and police in the UK. Will you make takfir of him too, now?

        So it seems to me like you’re either a Hizbi, a Robert Spencer muqallid here to troll us, an ISIS boy, or a basement dweller with no sanad who figures he’s stumbled upon arcane information unknown to ulama.

        And I find it hilarious that you decry islamophobia, as it seems from your perspective that it’s not intellectually dishonest, but in fact on the mark concerning its stance on “true Islam”.

      • He’s that same guy from before, ‘AHmed’ or whoever. The apostate guy who said he likes to ‘test’ Muslims.

        He’s got mental health issues. I’ll send you some of the emails he sent me if you want a laugh. He even admitted he’s on meds. It’s sad.

        But also funny.

  11. @Jukti
    “I’m against killing civilians. But (…)”

    We’ve all heard this so often before. Translated, it means something like “I love killing civilians so much” …
    You must have a particular affection for this website if you come back over and over again just to get your comments deleted.

  12. Wow. In one comment, you have:

    1. Accused people of zina with no evidence;
    2. Used vulgarity; and
    3. Lied about me.

    And you fancy yourself a “Defender of Islam”? Please see a psychiatrist.

  13. Okay. I forgive you.

    Now can you please get off this site and see a professional therapist? Because so far you’ve adduced 0 evidence for your takfiri positions except for Shaybani (who is known to have left the madhhab on certain issues, not to mention that he was living in a different context (speaking of which, how about you try and prove his fatawa before takfiring people)… and you haven’t even given page references!) and it seems to lead you to believe that the blood of every post-Tanzimat Grand Mufti is licit. So please excuse me if I think you’re a loon.

    • Although I love these blogs,

      Judging by my own knowledge and experiences. I have to side with jukti, the differences between mathahib are very minimal and they are barley to do with murder and so forth.

      I think making people believe in this Islam as being ‘there’ is a bit out of touch. Most of these beliefs didn’t come from scholars, rather reformists during the 19th and 20th century. I think that should be made clear, it’s not a maturdi or an ashari thing, it’s a reformist thing. That I believe has to be made clear before people start dreaming of an ever expanding Islam. That’s just not true, and if it is, don’t say it on behalf of maturdi or ashari works.

      I think that is what jukti is trying to say which I do agree on.

      However, what I don’t agree with jukti on is the fact that the people in charge of this website are islamophobes. I also believe that the differing point between salafis sitting in mansions in Saudi Arabia and the ones chopping people’s heads in Syria is nothing but hypocrisy and love of money. There isn’t that big of a difference between salafis and Isis fighter, islamophobes and those that have studied under salafis know that well but salafis love calling those that are more extreme than them; a ‘khariji’ and those that are less than them; a ‘modernist’. So there is no way out of this, the ignorance is peak.

      I don’t believe the answer to solving this issue is entirely with the asharis. We have to be honest that our history wasn’t great, we have to once and for all, say that the salaf of the 3 generation went wrong somewhere. If u have a better solution to this, I would love to hear it, but the truth is the truth. Sitting here blogging about an imaginary Islam is all cool but it’s a fantasy.

      Someone has to solve this issue, I am struggling to find someone who is brave enough to publicly tackle these tough issues. I’ve heard of ibrahem adnan but unfortunately, he was quickly shut down.

      Anyway, God bless.

      • And stop deleting his comments, it’s a shame to see such open-minded people delete a person’s comment. If u believe in free speech then let it be. Whoever has the haq should prevail, there is not need for insulting and abusive language (on both sides)

      • @lookingfortruth1

        Leaving comments that espouse insane ideologies, while you actually have the power to remove them, may actually constitute endorsing the ideology itself. And besides, this comment section doesn’t really lend itself to debate.

      • Then I think the author should delete all the comments that have a connection to jukti. And leaving stupid comments on a blog does no harm, the Internet is a vast place. There’s no need to chase these people up.

      • Are you sure they do no harm? It’s exactly this nonsense that convinces people of the validity of ISIS. Call the people who fall for it stupid or deluded or whatever, but this happens.

        And yes, I also think that all related comments ought to be deleted.

      • Dude, wise up.

        We are supposed to give ‘solid replies’ to people calling us bastards, shits and kaafirs? Did you swallow a happy pill or something? That guy can’t read Arabic at all but keeps quoting incorrectly and we asked him for months for references.
        For crying out loud he doesn’t even know that ‘harbi’ is ‘combatant’. Even bloody Google tells you that.

        If you are not careful, I’ll give YOU a ‘solid’ reply in a minute!

        I know you are young but take it from an old guy like me, if you think guys like that are ‘honest’ and invite them to tea (as you did), you are going to have a very tough life.

        As for the rest of your points about people going to hell and Salafis etc, I’m going to give you a solid reply to that soon too.

      • Like, did you read his comments?

        If you did, then what you are basically saying is that if someone comes into a lecture hall and pisses on your desk you have to be nice to them and reply to it.

        No, you just kick them out and clean up the piss.

        Censorship applies to speech not abuse.

        Anyway, even his cusses suck. Or I would have at least dissed him schoolyard style.

        And he already admitted to being an apostate last time.

  14. Yes, “ijma” again. Where? Remember how I said you adduced 0 evidence? Because I’d sooner do taqlid of Sh. al-Buti than an internet stranger.

  15. @Jukti

    “They are talking exactly the same way as islamophobes. Just substitute “Islam” for “Salafism” and you will see the same sentences.”

    You can accomplish a lot of magic by substituting words in sentences, indeed. I suppose that it’s the nearest thing to logical thinking for people like you.
    Fortunately for us humans, God will not judge us by substituting words in what we said or wrote.

  16. Considering this Jutki is a very mentally deranged person, I’ve happen to have seen a person under the alias ‘Jutki’ on anti Islam websites quite recently – bashing religions in general and believing extremist groups like ISIS to be presenting true Islam

    Wouldn’t happen to be the same person…?

  17. @bediuzzamansaidnursi123

    What you say is quite possible. That would be a “multiple personality disorder” issue.


    “Respect other opinions and don’t go for conspiracy theories.”

    Should we take that as a yes ? A

  18. As though being a serial killer was the only way not to accept “humanist secular standards”. What garbage.

  19. A suggestion to the sane people here: let’s just quit replying to Jukti. Ignoring him and letting mmmclmru delete his comments seems to work well.

    • Thanks to your suggestion, he has been reported to ‘WordPress’.

      Hopefully, he will get killed in a drone strike or something.

  20. Fear Allah. When I read about these killings that’s all I can think: Fear Allah. Where is the taqwa? It’s heedlessness of the highest order. Bloody, gore filled navel gazing. How can people be so devoid of mercy? All life is sacred from your fellow human, to the little animals, to the plants!

    I think as religious folk we need to start seriously rejecting political power and affiliation. We need to aim to be pillars of our community through faith, education, and gentle acts. This doesn’t mean we disappear from the public discourse and culture, but we need to seriously stand up to this lust for power that is eating away at the hearts and minds of our cultures. If we don’t then religion is going to simply disappear. And yes, that means standing up to these gatekeeper scholars who are peddling this muck. There are plenty of WONDERFUL sheiks and scholars out there, but no one should get a free pass. If someone is promoting violence, misogyny, tribalism, and warfare then we need to immediately stand up and say “NO!”. Take our children out of those schools and mosques, and take our families elsewhere. Heck, start your own congregation. I could be happy praying with my husband and a few close friends until the day that I die. I’d be no worse for wear because of it.

    We are heading towards an age of mass disbelief here in the West due to the perception that religion is nothing more than a power-hungry structure that imposes hegemony on all people. As Muslims we need to stand up to this, and join hands inter-faith. We cannot continue down this disastrous road of violence and alienation. Look at what it has earned us: Ruin.

    Become a healer. Study herbalism, study the body, study massage and holistic healing. Where are the days when people looked to us as the healers? Be good to people and good to the earth. See God in all things. Experience the sacred. Respect it. Now people see religious people and they are AFRAID of us because they think we’re going to judge them and be cruel. What happened? We need to re-claim our place, but the change has to start with us as individuals.

  21. I used to be a Muslim. Now I do not believe that Muhammad was a prophet but a man who through various influences made up the Quran. I am not sure that there is no God but if a God exists I would not accept him as good because of his sadism.
    Would you call me a “kafir”? Will I go to hell forever?

  22. Pingback: Being “Muslim” – manicmuslim

  23. “I’m old enough to know not to waste time with people who are stupid enough to identify as Salafis”

    That’s rich seeing as how you’ve been acting like a 7 year old this whole time. Your “tactic” from the start was to make a bunch of wild accusations and insults, then when I called you out on your silliness and how in fact you never responded to any of my points your response was “HAHA YOU NEVER DENIED IT HAHA LOLOL YOU R N IDIOT XDDDDD I WINZZ”. (at this point you start accusing your opponent of pulling the victim card, when ironically you’re the one portraying yourself as the victim of a made up crusade by salafis against you). You have the mental maturity of a child.

    “it’s like I see a guy passionately kissing a man…”

    Yeah I’m not interested in your homoerotic experiences.

    “So I’m a ‘retard’ for telling the truth about your argument – that an eternal paradise is what people would like (SURPRISE!) and fits with ‘fitra’ (SHOCK!). Or did you not say that? Or was it not a proof? How are we to know that? And the Quran (is it the Salafi ‘Quran’ though?) says people wish they were dead in the afterlife? So ‘death’ according to God means non-existence is it? Or only after you are ‘dead’? Where did you get this from? And the people wishing they were dead – its just putting your idiotic argument as having come from God – ‘people wish for death in the afterlife, therefore Ibn Taymiyya is right. except Salafis disagree with him on the temporality of Hell. And I’m not going to say what I think, cos then I’ll look even dumber’. Hmmm…God quoting the inhabitants of Hell or Pharaoh or anyone – is it a proof or an argument from God? People preferring eternal rewards and temporary punishment is obvious – so is the peoples preference a proof or rational or justice or binding on God? So why abuse the Quran (*Salafi ‘edit’) to cover for your stupidity (TWICE!), we understood correctly the first time. Unfortunately, you are unable to think without knots.”

    What an incoherent block of drivel. Vomiting out 200 questions does not constitute a rational argument.

    • @Yazan

      It’s painfully clear that you’re the one not interested in having any discussion. You’re too defensive from the start and anyone challenging you will cause you to be beyond triggered and start hurling as many insults as you can think of without actually responding to what anyone says. And you’re not impressing anyone by throwing in the word “rational” here and there during your rants.

    • Wow, so nothing but calling people ‘gay’ (amazing insult – original too. And here you were saying insults bothered you – that’s why I let you have them from the outset, because I know what you guys are like, playing the ‘adhab’ card) and just qouting my stuff back to me AT LENGTH to pad your ‘answer’.

      You see, this is why I dismissed you as incapable from the start. This is your level. To me it was obvious from the outset. I therefore don’t waste time with you types and belittle you immediately so that non-Salafis can be forewarned. Basically, you types are only worth engaging with to crush or to laugh at. It is impossible to justify any other energy expended on you. You can’t help people who refuse to use their brain.

      You see, you don’t even understand that they are RHETORICAL questions: they aren’t meant to be answered but rather to illustrate the banality of your position. It is akin to a commentary on your, errr, ‘points’. But you can’t even comprehend that. I understand you think you are smart. You probably are amongst Salafis. But that’s like being a toad in a pond. And then there’s the ocean, where most of the ‘kufaar’ you look down on live. They can take you guys faith like candy from a baby. But they choose not to: Salafis have always been the Wests ‘useful idiots’.

      Look, I don’t know why you guys have to try pretending to engage in stuff like critical thinking or theology or philosophy. You basically consider thinking for yourself to be forbidden and disbelief. No stress, each yo his own. But then why waste our time by being a fish trying to do karate?

      It was bad enough when Ibn Taymiyya did it…

      • “this is why I dismissed you as incapable from the start.”

        So basically, your plan was to ignore my points, insult me personally, wait until I return the insults, then proclaim ha! I knew you’d insult me. You’re truly a master manipulator of minds. Very impressive indeed.

        “Look, I don’t know why you guys have to try pretending to engage in stuff like critical thinking or theology or philosophy. You basically consider thinking for yourself to be forbidden and disbelief. No stress, each yo his own. But then why waste our time by being a fish trying to do karate?”

        You’re not even arguing against me at this point, you are arguing with the “salafis” that I don’t even represent. What you said above can very well be true, but it has literally zero impact on me.

        “and just qouting my stuff back to me AT LENGTH to pad your ‘answer’.”

        My answers were always much longer than what I quoted. Of course in your mind I’m the personification of wahhabism/salafism/whatever so you could be referring to literally anything you’ve ever read. But again it has no impact on me.

        @Catholic Commentator

        I think you forgot your reply.

      • Rather, YOU forgot to reply!

        Your answers were ‘always much longer’? Come on dude. Do you read what you write?

        Yes, Ibn Taymiyya fans and people who attack Asharis and defend Salafis AREN’T Salafi.

        But you can’t blame us: you never really stated a position on anything (*apart from the importance of FEELINGS).

        Silly boy!

      • Sorry dude, I’m spamming your new comments.
        You had yor chance to make a point or have a discussion but you wasted it posing and waffling and confusing me with the author.
        No second chances.
        It’s like chatting up a girl – if you blow it first time, they don’t let you try again.
        A valuable lesson for you.

      • Actually, in the interests of fairness I will leave them up, and ignore you.
        If anyone else has qurstions about anything he us spamming, I’m happy to clarify.

      • I see trolling was your intention all along.
        So I’ve spammed the rest of your rubbish apart from your last ‘meaningful’ comment.
        I’m pretty sure I’ve banned you before anyway. But you guys just keep trolling.
        Make your point in your first post, bring evidence or get lost. I’ve got no time for you people. I know you have lots of time but normal people have interests and hobbies, girls etc.
        How do I know you don’t? Because anyone who finds fulfilment in Ibn Taymiyya (*less successful Martin Luther of Islam), must have a very low threshold. There is a virtual infinity of Non- and Muslim thinkers out there who are actually worth discussing.

        However, please get lost and feel free to start/continue to jerk off to fatwas about sex between monkeys and women and other gems from ‘Sheikh Ul Islam’ Ibn Taymiyya.

  24. “Rather, YOU forgot to reply!”

    What? I only see him/her quoting me but no reply.

    “Your answers were ‘always much longer’? Come on dude. Do you read what you write?”

    I’m the only of of us reading what I write. My original post:


    Quotations of your post don’t make out a tenth of my post.

    “Yes, Ibn Taymiyya fans and people who attack Asharis and defend Salafis AREN’T Salafi.”

    1. Where did I attack asharis? From what I’ve read of your comments and articles, you’re not even ashari yourself. You attribute your creed to the “early Maturidis” but at some point the creed got corrupted/forgotten/hidden(?).

    2. I never defended salafis let alone the salafi creed(although it appears that anyone who disagrees with you must necessarily be defending salafis which obviously isn’t true since not everything is that black and white).

    “you never really stated a position on anything”

    If I’ve never stated my position on anything then when and how did I become a salafi? You’re being silly here.

    My position was actually quite simple. You attack salafis of account of them not reading the works of their adversaries first hand but instead relying on salafi scholars to explain the ashari creed. But then you go and do the exact same thing. I’m not taking a side, just pointing out how you’re showing double standards. I think you’re two sides of the same coin really.

    “*apart from the importance of FEELINGS”‘

    Stop kidding yourself, ranting about daesh in every other article is based on feelings. Rational arguments about religion has nothing to do with a group of people who have been relevant for a total of three years.

    Your definition of kafir and muslim(or rather the author’s but whom you agree with) is based on feelings as well. Notice how he defined kafir using the dictionary definition, but never defined “ghayr muslim” that way. Why? Because the term “ghayr muslim” does not appear in the Quran once.

  25. @Yazan,

    No, I didn’t forget to reply. And I wasn’t quoting you – I always use inverted commas or some equivalent typographical device to indicate quoting.
    That’s because I see that most of your accusations are correct except for one thing, the person you apply them to. Obviously, your head is full of awareness of all the bad in you but the burden of self-criticism terrifies you so you instinctively accuse other people of all that’s wrong with you.
    I’m helping you by sending the accusations back to their correct recipient.

  26. The word “Kaafir” really is over-used. I overheard someone claiming that Kaafir means all non-Muslim and God is referring to all non-Muslims as Kaafir when He says not to take them as allies in the Quran. Furthemore Kaafir to them refers to all non-Muslims in the legal sense as well in Islam and I don’t even want to imagine what he would think about the rights they have under his version of Islam(probably Salafism……)

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s