“WE CAN’T [insert basic agreed upon Islamic ruling] BECAUSE IT BECOMES AN OBSTACLE FOR DAʿWAH IN THE WEST!”

The western “Daʿwah”:

“However, Tashkoprüzade (d. 962 AH / 1554 CE) pointed out the necessity of distinction, with regards to the objective, between ʿilm al-kalām and falsafa. The mutakallim, he relies on what has come in the religion in terms of beliefs, then seeks rational proofs to support them. The philosopher seeks with his mind [first], and sees what he has reached in terms of evidences without looking at what has come in the religion. The mutakallim believes then proves, and the philosopher proves then believes."

— al-Insān wal-ʿAql, Pg: 75

How’s your throat, Charlie?

#CharlieSquirt 😵🩸

“It may be observed by one who studies epistemological philosophy among Western philosophers in general that they did not depart from two paths in their inquiry into knowledge: the Platonic rationalist path and the Epicurean empiricist path. Whatever they added—here and there—amounted to no more than explanation and clarification, or limited attempts to fill the gaps they had noticed in Greek philosophy. Yet, they failed—just as their predecessors had failed before them—to present a comprehensive conception regarding the mind, its method of thinking, and the acquisition of human knowledge—from its beginning, through its course, and to its end.”

— al-Insān wal-ʿAql, Pg. 107

There are these widespread distortions that claim that one is only a kāfir if they:

1) Hear all about Islām in detail and THEN outright reject it.

2) Reject Islām after KNOWING that it is true.

Both of these positions are kufr.

الجامع لاحكام القران (تفسير القرطبي) ، ٥/٧٦ ، ط. الرسالة العالمية

Someone sent this in a WhatsApp group-chat… 😂

أمّا الديمقراطية - لفظاً ومحتوىّ - فنبتة غريبة عن أرض الإسلام، وقد جاء بها الاستعمار السياسي والثقافي لبلبلة عقول المسلمين، وليس أدلّ على ذلك من أنّها لم تدخل ديار الإسلام، ولم يسمع المسلمون بها في حياتهم السياسية إلّا بعد الغزو الثقافي السياسي الاستعماري الذي مارسه، وما زال يمارسه أعداء الإسلام على المسلمين. وهذه أمور لا يجهلها عالمٌ كبير مستوى الدكتور القرضاوي. ويكفي أن تكون موضع خلاف شديد بين المسلمين، لكي نقلع عنها بعد أن ظهر عُوارها لكل ذي عين باصرة وفكرٍ رشيد ."

‏— الديمقراطية في ميزان العقل والشرع، ص.١٩٠

“For it is not hidden from his eminence that shūrā (consultation) is one thing and democracy is another—both in essence and in origin—and it is in no way permissible to conflate the two. Shūrā is one of the manifestations of governance in Islam, intended to arrive at the correct opinion in light of Islamic thought and within the bounds of the Sharīʿah. This is because authority belongs to the Ummah, which appoints over itself whom it wills, and because the ruler is required to consult people of insight and expertise in managing the affairs of the state.

‎The Messenger ﷺ practiced it during his lifetime with his Companions, in obedience to the Qur’ānic command:

‎“And their affairs are [conducted] by consultation among them.” (al-Shūrā 42:38) and His saying, exalted is He:
‎“And consult them in the matter.” (Āl ʿImrān 3:159).

‎Likewise, the Caliphs after him practiced it throughout the different Islamic eras—some doing well, others erring in its application.