The Role of Adoption of Un-Islamic Thoughts, Concepts and Philosophies in the Destruction of The Khilafah - A Thread 🧵
#ReturnTheKhilafah
#YenidenHilafet
#خلافت_کو_قائم_کرو
#أقيموا_الخلافة
So Persian concept of hereditary monarchy, Greek inspired concept of mu'tazila and Hindu concept of body and spirit were practically adopted. As a result, the belief in Islamic thoughts had weakened, and the prophetic method of-
So any thought or concept that is not extracted from the sources (Quran and Sunnah) is False, and is the source of destruction for the Ummah. Now, when the current colonialist-
More from Religion
A TINY THREAD ON NON-ACCEPTANCE OF ATHEISTS IN SOME HINDU HOLY BOOKS.
Many RW Hindus with confused identity think that Hinduism accepts Atheists.
What do some of the Hindu sacred texts say on this topic? Let's see.
Shri Krishna was 100% clear on importance of Shaastras as we already know.
Shri Rama was also clear on what should be done to atheists.
Ayodhya Kanda of Valmiki Ramayana.
https://t.co/lbCkEkPobA
Maharaaj Manu on Atheists.
Bhagvan Ved Vyas Ji in Shanti Parva of Mahabharata said this to his son Shukadeva regarding Atheists.
Many RW Hindus with confused identity think that Hinduism accepts Atheists.
What do some of the Hindu sacred texts say on this topic? Let's see.
Shri Krishna was 100% clear on importance of Shaastras as we already know.
Shri Rama was also clear on what should be done to atheists.
Ayodhya Kanda of Valmiki Ramayana.
https://t.co/lbCkEkPobA
Maharaaj Manu on Atheists.
Bhagvan Ved Vyas Ji in Shanti Parva of Mahabharata said this to his son Shukadeva regarding Atheists.
Assalam Alaiki dear Sister in Islam. I hope this meets you well. Hope you are keeping safe in this pandemic. May Allah preserve you and your beloved family. I would like to address the misconception and misinterpretation in your thread. Please peruse the THREAD below.
1. First off, a disclaimer. Should you feel hurt by my words in the course of the thread, then forgive me. It’s from me and not from Islam. And I probably have to improve on my delivery. And I may not quote you verbatim, but the intended meaning would be there. Thank You!
2. Standing on Imam Shafii’s quote: “And I never debated anyone but that I did not mind whether Allah clarified the truth on my tongue or his tongue” or “I never once debated anyone hoping to win the debate; rather I always wished that the truth would come from his side.”
3. Okay, into the meat (my love for meat is showing. Lol) of the thread. Even though you didn’t mention the verse that permitted polygamy, everyone knows the verse you were talking about (Q4:3).
4. Your reasons for the revelation of the verse are strange. The first time I came across such. I had to quickly consult the books on the exegeses or tafsir of the Quran written by renowned specialists!
A lot of things Muslims do now and claim as Islamic rule is actually a culture that Islam curtailed or tried to perfect.
— Sule Nana (@izesule) January 2, 2021
Let's talk polygamy.
Islam didn't come and say, "oh men, marry four wives"
No.
Polygamy was in existence, long before the coming of Islam.
1. First off, a disclaimer. Should you feel hurt by my words in the course of the thread, then forgive me. It’s from me and not from Islam. And I probably have to improve on my delivery. And I may not quote you verbatim, but the intended meaning would be there. Thank You!
2. Standing on Imam Shafii’s quote: “And I never debated anyone but that I did not mind whether Allah clarified the truth on my tongue or his tongue” or “I never once debated anyone hoping to win the debate; rather I always wished that the truth would come from his side.”
3. Okay, into the meat (my love for meat is showing. Lol) of the thread. Even though you didn’t mention the verse that permitted polygamy, everyone knows the verse you were talking about (Q4:3).
4. Your reasons for the revelation of the verse are strange. The first time I came across such. I had to quickly consult the books on the exegeses or tafsir of the Quran written by renowned specialists!
I had written this thread in refutation to your false claims which you had made from your previous account and you had even quoted it from your old account and now you are lying that you didn't know about this thread?
Are you trying to say the Verse of Quran i had mentioned
in the thread is false? If that's your claim then say it clearly that all the verses of Quran and hadiths are false which talks about equality and your propaganda is the ultimate truth and hidden secret of Islam.
a) If you are trying to say that just being born in a Quraysh tribe
makes one superior than others then let me remind you that the first oppressors of the Prophet pbuh were Quraysh, the first battle of Muslims happened with Quraysh, the guy who was cursed by Allah in Quran was a Quraysh (ever read Quran?). And if you want to show that being from
the lineage of Prophets makes you superior than others then let me remind you that the son of Prophet Adam will be in hell (as informed to us by the narrations), the son of Prophet Noah will be in hell, the wife of Prophet Noah will be in hell, the wife of Prophet Lut will be in
hell. And if you are trying to say that only Quraysh had the right to rule and not others then let me remind you from history that the Messenger of Allah pbuh appointed leaders Abdullah bin Ruwaha, Zaid bin Haritha, and Usama bin Zaid, and all of them were not from Quraish.
Are you trying to say the Verse of Quran i had mentioned
I didn't know about this thread earlier but now that I have seen it, i wish to bring out the Paradox of Equality of Comb in to picture.
— Kungfu Pasmanda 2.0 (@AnisShafiullah) January 16, 2021
a) Bukhari Hadith on Quresh's exclusive right to Caliphate
b) A comb that's has equal teeth but... https://t.co/E1GuxFSUGy pic.twitter.com/7VtbVkgoeh
in the thread is false? If that's your claim then say it clearly that all the verses of Quran and hadiths are false which talks about equality and your propaganda is the ultimate truth and hidden secret of Islam.
a) If you are trying to say that just being born in a Quraysh tribe
makes one superior than others then let me remind you that the first oppressors of the Prophet pbuh were Quraysh, the first battle of Muslims happened with Quraysh, the guy who was cursed by Allah in Quran was a Quraysh (ever read Quran?). And if you want to show that being from
the lineage of Prophets makes you superior than others then let me remind you that the son of Prophet Adam will be in hell (as informed to us by the narrations), the son of Prophet Noah will be in hell, the wife of Prophet Noah will be in hell, the wife of Prophet Lut will be in
hell. And if you are trying to say that only Quraysh had the right to rule and not others then let me remind you from history that the Messenger of Allah pbuh appointed leaders Abdullah bin Ruwaha, Zaid bin Haritha, and Usama bin Zaid, and all of them were not from Quraish.
"Hinduism was one of the world's most easy-going faith traditions, famed for it's non-persecutory history."
I can assure you, it is NOT.
It is neither easy-going, nor non-persecutory. In fact it is the very opposite.
Thread.
Modern Hinduism is a British colonial concept, created in concert with Brahmins, who are at the "apex" of the caste system. The word "Hindoo" in fact, is of Persian origin, meaning a person who lives in the Indus valley.
Colonialists who attempted to study Indian religion in the 18th century (NOT, at the time, Hinduism) were baffled by it. Strata of people living distinctly (the caste system) with overlapping gods didn't fit into their Judeo-Christian understanding of religion.
Which has an ecclesiastical authority, a holy book etc., which Indian religions lacked. In studying "The Hindoo", colonialists prioritized textual sources of knowledge, which is where Brahmins, the priestly caste with a monopoly over education/text come in.
Brahminism was a distinct "religion" (although i don't really want to use the term in this way) that was frankly terrorized of other castes. In fact, the very basis of Brahminism is oppression. Brahmins had scholars who recorded *Brahminical* canon textually.
I can assure you, it is NOT.
It is neither easy-going, nor non-persecutory. In fact it is the very opposite.
Thread.
Hinduism was historically one of the world's most easy-going faith traditions, famed for its non-persecutory history. Now this ... pic.twitter.com/Obln4cns7b
— David Frum (@davidfrum) February 3, 2021
Modern Hinduism is a British colonial concept, created in concert with Brahmins, who are at the "apex" of the caste system. The word "Hindoo" in fact, is of Persian origin, meaning a person who lives in the Indus valley.
Colonialists who attempted to study Indian religion in the 18th century (NOT, at the time, Hinduism) were baffled by it. Strata of people living distinctly (the caste system) with overlapping gods didn't fit into their Judeo-Christian understanding of religion.
Which has an ecclesiastical authority, a holy book etc., which Indian religions lacked. In studying "The Hindoo", colonialists prioritized textual sources of knowledge, which is where Brahmins, the priestly caste with a monopoly over education/text come in.
Brahminism was a distinct "religion" (although i don't really want to use the term in this way) that was frankly terrorized of other castes. In fact, the very basis of Brahminism is oppression. Brahmins had scholars who recorded *Brahminical* canon textually.