Islam, the religion of peace.

You should pursuit that track until it is exhausted then report back your findings.

With all respect... the track of pursuit of knowledge is never exhausted. How about if we just move forward for sake of argument and say that it does. I've found similar reference to al-Munkar meaning polytheism. Close enough? Where do you go from there?

As a clarification al-Mukar is often translated "wrong" or "evil" but it literally means, "that which is rejected" that's why it's used for unreliable scriptural evidence. So, yes, to be a monotheist necessarily means that one is not a polytheist or an atheist.
 
Last edited:
You should pursuit that track until it is exhausted then report back your findings.

With all respect... the track of pursuit of knowledge is never exhausted. How about if we just move forward for sake of argument and say that it does. I've found similar reference to al-Munkar meaning polytheism. Close enough? Where do you go from there?

As a clarification al-Mukar is often translated "wrong" or "evil" but it literally means, "that which is rejected" that's why it's used for unreliable scriptural evidence. So, yes, to be a monotheist necessarily means that one is not a polytheist or an atheist.
How according to the Quran are believers described when it comes to matters of al munkar ?
 
You should pursuit that track until it is exhausted then report back your findings.

With all respect... the track of pursuit of knowledge is never exhausted. How about if we just move forward for sake of argument and say that it does. I've found similar reference to al-Munkar meaning polytheism. Close enough? Where do you go from there?

As a clarification al-Mukar is often translated "wrong" or "evil" but it literally means, "that which is rejected" that's why it's used for unreliable scriptural evidence. So, yes, to be a monotheist necessarily means that one is not a polytheist or an atheist.
How according to the Quran are believers described when it comes to matters of al munkar ?

I think we'd move forward alot faster if you'd make the point your getting at. "Al munkar" is not part my everyday lexicon, and short of searching for every reference I'm not sure how you expect me answer. I accept the basic axiom, enjoin what is right, forbid was is wrong.
 
9:111. Verily, Allâh has purchased of the believers their lives and their properties; for the price that theirs shall be the Paradise. They fight in Allâh's Cause, so they kill (others) and are killed. It is a promise in truth which is binding on Him in the Taurât (Torah) and the Injeel (Gospel) and the Qur'ân. And who is truer to his covenant than Allâh? Then rejoice in the bargain which you have concluded. That is the supreme success[].

9:112. (The believers whose lives Allâh has purchased are) those who repent to Allâh (from polytheism and hypocrisy, etc.), who worship Him, who praise Him, who fast (or go out in Allâh's Cause), who bow down (in prayer), who prostrate themselves (in prayer), who enjoin (people) for Al-Ma'rûf (i.e. Islâmic Monotheism and all what Islâm has ordained) and forbid (people) from Al-Munkar (i.e. disbelief, polytheism of all kinds and all that Islâm has forbidden), and who observe the limits set by Allâh (do all that Allâh has ordained and abstain from all kinds of sins and evil deeds which Allâh has forbidden). And give glad tidings to the believers.

About Islam and Muslims - Islamic belief, Quran, Sunnah

Commanding the Right & Forbidding the Wrong
Answered by Shaykh Nuh Ha Mim Keller, SunniPath Academy Teacher

Question:
What is the fiqh of commanding the good and forbidding the wrong in Islam?

COMMANDING THE RIGHT AND FORBIDDING THE WRONG

From the Reliance of the Traveller (Book Q)

[The Reliance of the Traveller is a book every English-speaking Muslim should have, even if they are not Shafi`i, because it contains much that is necessary for every morally responsible person to know…]

Commanding the Right & Forbidding the Wrong
 
With all respect... the track of pursuit of knowledge is never exhausted. How about if we just move forward for sake of argument and say that it does. I've found similar reference to al-Munkar meaning polytheism. Close enough? Where do you go from there?

As a clarification al-Mukar is often translated "wrong" or "evil" but it literally means, "that which is rejected" that's why it's used for unreliable scriptural evidence. So, yes, to be a monotheist necessarily means that one is not a polytheist or an atheist.
How according to the Quran are believers described when it comes to matters of al munkar ?

I think we'd move forward alot faster if you'd make the point your getting at. "Al munkar" is not part my everyday lexicon, and short of searching for every reference I'm not sure how you expect me answer. I accept the basic axiom, enjoin what is right, forbid was is wrong.

Great what do you know about Al Fitnah ?
 
I'm curious what translation you're using. Mine is slightly different and doesn't contain any of the parenthesis, which seem odd to me.

I had opportunity to meet Shaikh Nuh some years ago and have known many of his students, and although I consider him a very sincere man, I take issue with some of his methodology. Just my impression.

I read through everything you linked, and I have my own objections but before we go there I'd like to hear your objections. With regard to your original question, does forbidding the wrong apply to disbelief, I don't believe these instructions apply to non Muslims because of where it says it is, "recommended to censure the act in order to manifest the standards of Islam and remind people of their religion." To me that implies these are instructions for Muslims correcting Muslims. Also, this is all in the context of life in a caliphate, of which none exists. But we can talk about that.

Still, I believe that the axiom of forbidding the wrong, in some contexts, applies to non Muslims. However, it would be irrational to try to remonstrate non Muslims toward Muslim behavior. I would never approach a Christian and try to persuade him to stop eating pork, but I might intervene if I saw a Christian hitting her child. There are some universal moral principles.

Finally, my understanding of "observe the limits set by Allah" is that a Muslim should not initiate aggression against a person or their property, nor escalate aggression, but may defend or retaliate. That's a major objection I have with this link, smashing instruments for example. That's also why I find the parenthesis in your translation so odd.
 
I use Noble Quran the one that does not translate Arabic words when there is no direct translation.
by Muhammad Khan and distributed by “King Fahd Complex for the Printing of the Holy Qur’an—The Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques.

HAVING THE CALIPH'S PERMISSION

q2.3 Some scholars stipulate that the person delivering the censure must have permission to do so from the caliph (def: o25) or his regional appointee, and do not grant that private individuals may censure others. This is untrue, for the Koranic verses and hadiths all indicate that whoever sees something wrong and does nothing has sinned. Stipulating that there must be permission from the caliph is mere arbitrary opinion.

Commanding the Right & Forbidding the Wrong

The Order to fight People of the Scriptures until They give the Jizyah
Tafsir.com Tafsir Ibn Kathir

Paying Jizyah is a Sign of Kufr and Disgrace
Tafsir.com Tafsir Ibn Kathir

Fighting the Jews and Christians is legislated because They are Idolators and Disbelievers

Tafsir.com Tafsir Ibn Kathir
 
I use Noble Quran the one that does not translate Arabic words when there is no direct translation.
by Muhammad Khan and distributed by “King Fahd Complex for the Printing of the Holy Qur’an—The Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques.

I personally wouldn't trust anything approved by the Saudi government in the last 100 years. I've read bad things, even that they alter traditional books they claim to be reprinting, specifically Ibn Kathir. But I don't know that for sure.

But we're wandering off topic I think if we're going to shift over to talking about a caliphate. Are we finished discussing enjoining the right and forbidding the wrong? You never expressed your objection. Do you object to the axiom of enjoining the right and forbidding the wrong?

Sorry, I am just much more interested in having a conversation with you, rather than wondering through endless links with no clear idea what we're talking about.
 
We dont really have anything to talk about, I object to Islam.You like Islam.
I dont have any questions concerning Islam until you make a statement concerning Islam that is not supported by scripture, then I may ask you how you arrive at that interpretation .
 
I really do not have any problem with Islam.

What so ever!

Other than the fact that like most religions (other than Scientology) they actually believe it is true.
 

Forum List

Back
Top