In the years since 9/11, we have seen a serious re-defining and whitewashing of what our deen is and is not. Since the Ft Hood shootings, and even before that, we have seen many Muslim organizations refer to US troops which are occupying Muslim lands, as “our troops”. They have celebrated Muslims that have gone over to fight and kill other Muslims. We see Muslim spokesmen saying that the Muslims must abandon the concept of “Ummah”. We are seeing Muslims and Muslim Organizations calling for American citizenship to be put above their loyalty to other Muslims around the world. This is a very strange thing as prior to 9/11 the ulamaa of Islam had many fatwas that said just the opposite, especially with regards to a Muslim joining a kufr army and going to fight other Muslims.
We find the people nowadays saying that it is perfectly permissible and even praiseworthy to join the kufr army. This is in contrast to what we saw in the past from the scholars. I would like to know what our friends at Muslim Matters have to say about the following fatwas from such scholars as Sh Ibn Uthaymeen and Sh. Al Munajid. What do they think the scholars would say about al wala wal bara (something completely forgotten about and not taught these days)?
This first fatwa is from Sh Al-Munajjid:
I work in the army of a non-Muslim state, and there are wars between them and the Muslims. What is the ruling if they send me with a division of this army to wage war against the Muslims? As a Muslim, my feelings are that I never want to fight against Muslims in any war. What should I do? What is the ruling if I go…?
Praise be to Allaah.
If you are sent to wage war against the Muslims, then it is not permissible for you to take part at all. Helping the kaafirs against the Muslims is a form of major kufr which puts one beyond the pale of Islam. Allaah says concerning one who supports the mushrikeen (interpretation of the meaning):
“And if any amongst you takes them (as Awliyaa’, i.e., friends), then surely, he is one of them”[al-Maa’idah 5:51]
With regard to how you may get out of this situation, and what excuse you can give to get out of this dilemma if it happens, we ask Allaah to help you, and we suggest that you consult some Muslims who have relevant knowledge or experience.
We want to emphasize to you the necessity of finding other employment and of leaving service in the army of the kaafirs, because that implies helping them, strengthening them and increasing the numbers of their fighters and supporters – unless your work can bring some benefits to the Muslims, such as giving information and secrets of the kaafirs to the Muslims so as to help the Muslims, or if your work is purely da’wah, such as giving khutbahs and leading prayers for the Muslims in the kaafir army whilst also advising them to avoid any work that will strengthen the kaafirs. We ask Allaah to keep you safe from temptation and to give you a good end in this world and in the Hereafter.
This one is from Sh Ibn Muhammad Saalih al-Uthaymeen, May Allah have mercy upon him:
What is the ruling on Muslims serving in the military of non muslim country ? What is the evidence for its permissibility or prohibition? And lastly, what is the status of a Muslim working to help those in the military to fulfill their obligations to Allaah while serving in the Army, Navy, or whatever?
Praise be to Allaah.
We put this question to Shaykh Muhammad ibn Saalih al-‘Uthaymeen, may Allaah preserve him, who answered as follows:
“Praise be to Allaah, the Lord of the Worlds. Military matters are problematic, because they involve helping these kuffaar to wage war against the Muslims or those who have entered into a treaty with the Muslims. If no such thing is involved, it may be advantageous for Muslims to work in these armies so as to learn their secrets and be aware of their potential evil. In other words, if working in these armies could be of benefit, it may be permissible, otherwise it is not allowed.”
On this basis, if a person works as a preacher or daa’iyah or imaam or muezzin, serving the Muslims and calling non-Muslims to Islam, then there is nothing wrong with this.
And for good measure, here is one more fatwa
So can the brothers find me a fatwa from a repudible scholar of the sunnah (not one that quotes from his desires) that says that it is permissible to put citizenship above our Islam and join the kafir army and to fight against Islam and the Muslims? It is permissible to join an army that calls for the men to shave their beards, salute the kufr flag and judge by other than what Allah revealed?
The evidence is clearly against those who are saying that these things are permissible.
Here is a question:
If a group of Muslims in Mecca attacked the United States and the US Army wanted to retaliate by taking the haram, would it still be permissible to join the kufr army?
64 responses so far ↓
MR // November 19, 2009 at 4:00 am |
What about the Saudi Army, or the Egyptian Army or the Pakistani Army or the Afghani Army or the Iraqi Army? What happens when it’s Muslim vs. Muslim?
Yus from the Nati // November 19, 2009 at 5:30 am |
You have a couple sociological reasons of course that you have to consider.
1) What’s the greater benefit if the scholars of America were to speak out? them getting locked up? or continue what they doing teaching about other issues?
2) Although I personally would never join the army (although I thought about it to pay for school, and still do from time to time to escape Riba) the issue I don’t believe is as simple as black and white.
Regarding intentions of WHY a person joined and what exactly their actions will be in the army I think needs further looking into from a scholarly standpoint (which again I think people are scared to do for some reason?…either b/c they think they’re not qualified, or b/c they don’t want to say the truth b/c it’ll be taboo)
I mean in end result, whether you are Muslim or not is irrelevant. From a moral standpoint I would joint something that in general I don’t agree with? First and foremost I’m an indentured servant and I’m also in a way prostituting myself. Blame the system, not the people. Allahu’alam.
Reminds me of that Michael Moore movie how they always trying to recruit people who can’t get money/career from no where else. sucks.
Hammad // November 19, 2009 at 8:10 am |
Generally the same ’scholars’ that have a variance of opinion on this topic are the same ones who have a variance in other basic issues of Islam: hijab, shaking hands with a woman, etc.
Wild Wild West // November 19, 2009 at 10:39 am |
May Allah reward you, Umar, for telling it like it is.
In response to your question: “If a group of Muslims in Mecca attacked the United States and the US Army wanted to retaliate by taking the haram, would it still be permissible to join the kufr army?”
It seems that some of these sell-out brothers and sisters would say yes, because they have already sanctioned what is worse than that, which is the slaughter of innocent Muslim souls.
Consider this Hadeeth:
“I saw the Prophet performing tawaf around the Ka’bah and saying, ‘How pure you are! And how pure is your fragrance! How great you are! And how great is your sanctity! By He in whose hands lies the soul of Muhammad, the sanctity of a believer is greater with Allah than even your sanctity. (The sanctity) of his wealth, his blood, and that we think nothing of him but good.’” (Ibn Majah)
This was narrated by Ibn ‘Umar – may Allah be pleased with him.
Continuing with the army theme… « Peace, Bruv // November 19, 2009 at 11:39 am |
[...] Continuing with the army theme… Jump to Comments Finally, one of the Muslim blogosphere’s more prominent writers has addressed a question that other popular blogs have steadfastly been ignoring. Umar Lee asks the question is it permissible for a Muslim to join a non-Muslim army? [...]
Abu Shu'aib // November 19, 2009 at 1:13 pm |
as-salaam ‘alaykum,
jazak-Allah khayr for this br. ‘Umar … its refreshing to see brothers still holding onto principles.
Khalil Rasheed // November 19, 2009 at 1:21 pm |
@ Yusuf in the Nati
So you think that the scholars should be afraid to tell the people the truth? You think they would really be locked up for telling the people to NOT join the army? How will the people be guided if the “scholars” in the West fear telling the truth to the people?
Just a few years ago, this was the COMMON opinion and now as Umar says the deen is being changed right before our eyes with people telling us that it is halal to shake hands with women, listen to music, celebrate kufr holidays and birthdays and all types of things.
May Allah reward you Umar for standing up and posting these fatawa from REAL scholars and not those “scholars” that are only worried about their dunya
Yus from the Nati // November 20, 2009 at 2:18 pm |
I am not saying that scholars should be afraid to tell the truth? and asking that is a little sensationalistic.
And yes, I really do believe that the students of knowledge that we look up to in the west would get locked up, or other sociological ramifications would incur which would result in “another bites the dust”. Just a little memory that people forget i.e. Ali Tamimi, Jamil Amin, Ahmed Jibril, and so on.
People have lives and responsibilities, just like me and you, and it’s easier said than done for every person to be the next Salahuddin. The faults are within ourselves, I blame no one.
As far as the Fiqh issues that you presented as “changing the religion” I believe are all just that, Fiqh issues that have basis in ijtihad. It would be ridiculous to make those fiqh issues an issue of wala wal bara as commonly done.
Abs // November 19, 2009 at 1:41 pm |
I think we may be jumbling up two different issues here.
First: You have the issue of whether one is allowed to be part of a non-Muslim army (one what that kills Muslims, to be specific).
Second: If one is working for that army and suddenly arrives at the understanding that it’s not permissible, does that mean he’s allowed to shoot everyone who is there (whether working for that army or not)?
Umar Lee aka/ Double H // November 19, 2009 at 2:02 pm |
@ Abs
If you look at the fatawa from the scholars you will see that they advise those in the army to find another means of work. The CORE issue is that it is not permissible in the first place and NO ONE is saying it anymore (even those who KNOW better) out of fear of the modernists and not being invited to the iftar dinner (with gay Muslims) at the White House. The result of this deafening silence is that we are seeing many confused youth that don’t know where to turn
Muslim Apple // November 19, 2009 at 2:54 pm |
People are already confused, they are not confused because people are not saying whether or not they can join the army. A few years, the discussion was whether or not we could even live in western lands as Muslims. That has led and continues to lead to immense confusion.
Both Yasir Qadhi and Yaser Birjas (writers on MuslimMatters) say the issue of al walaa wal baraa is among the most controversial and pressing issues of our day and it needs the world’s scholars to come together to begin the discussion so that we can understand what that means in terms of realities of the world today because the works in classical books never envisioned a world dominated by secular nation-states. YQ has rarely missed an opportunity to raise the issue at conferences and lectures in the last couple of years.
Sayf us-Sunnah // November 19, 2009 at 3:15 pm |
@ Muslim Apple
Islam is pure and clear guidance FOR ALL TIMES and there is no need for confusion. The confusion comes when people MAKE confusion out of these issues (that were once very clear).
So now we are going to redefine al wala and al bara? Where does it stop? Re-write the Qur’an? Islam is being re-written by the day. Shaykh Saalih Al-Fawzan is one of the foremost scholars of our time and wrote a great small treatise on al-wala wal-bara that you can read here. Please read it and see the clarity the Shaykh brings. I think you will agree that Sh Fawzan is older, wiser and much more knowledgeable than the young guys from Muslim Matters. When considering who we should take our deen from, read the following hadith and contemplate:
and consider this:
So we are seeing people that are making the haram into the halal and the halal into the haram and they are the ones with the microphones and CDs. Meanwhile those telling the truth are in prison or being called “extremists”. The haqq is CLEAR. VERY CLEAR. Always has been and always will be.
Muslim Apple // November 19, 2009 at 3:55 pm |
Sayf: Slogans might make one feel good but they elucidate little. I don’t take my deen from papers and websites with purported translated fatawa.
It is a simple fact that the classical books of Islam were written at a time when people lived in mostly religious lands dominated by the tribal system, monarchies, and religious authorities and that is no longer the case now. Every individual is influenced by the realities of the world around them and this manifests in his or her worldview. I think many of us can agree that when issues arise, it is important to refer matters back to the people of knowledge for proper elucidation.
A few years ago, people were saying (and some still say) Muslims could not live in western lands. A few years ago and even today people justify murder of innocent people as part of the religion. A few years ago and even today, people consume themselves with a fantasy Islamic utopian vision hoping Madinah University will raise the age limit so they can get in, making takfir on websites, engage in esoteric discussions in aqeedah all the while shunning getting an education and proper job, which will allow them to support their family, dissing the “kufr” society they live in while happily taking public assistance in food stamps, healthcare, or disability payments.
Sayf-us-Sunnah // November 19, 2009 at 4:08 pm
@ Muslim Apple
Sh Fawzan and others are REAL MEN and scholars of this deen. Ask Yasir Qadhi and others about them. These are the people they LEARNED from.
Sh. Fawzan is still living as are many others scholars so we are not talking about a past time here. If we want to know our deen, it is best to go to the people of real knowledge and not some young students that are in over their heads and misguiding the people. Truth is truth. And Islam is clear for everyone to understand
Yus from the Nati // November 20, 2009 at 2:25 pm |
Although I do not doubt that Sh. Fawzan is a scholar (his treatise on Al-Aqeedah Al-Wasatiyyah is great)…
It IS interesting that we mention him, and wala and bara, as some of his critics argue the same against him as being on the Saudi govt payroll if you will. It’s best not be stuck in the bubble of scholars being infallible like priests and don’t have complex situations to deal with.
As far as using our Shaikh as a reference for socio-political issues in 2009, specifically in America is moot. It’s the same for Allamah Sh. ‘Uthaymeen (r). He NEVER left ‘Unayzah. I think we need to be careful of “fatwa shopping” regarding situations that are happening in your own backyard, and that scholar not experiencing/knowing the full details/ramifications.
Knowing True Islaam // November 19, 2009 at 3:45 pm |
Our brother Abu Yusuf Khaleefa has been giving lectures on the Nullifiers (invalidators)of Islaam.
Listen in tommorrow (11/20/09) at 11PM
http://www.blogtalkradio.com/Knowing_True_Islaam/2009/11/21/the-nullifiers-of-islaam-part-6
This issue is clear for those that want to learn about their religion
Call-in Number: (347) 215-7527
Find a fatwa: in response to my piece ab… | Marriage Blog // November 19, 2009 at 6:44 pm |
[...] a fatwa: in response to my piece about muslim soldiers, Umar quotes a few fatwas that are most emphatically against muslims serving in the “kuffar” army. He asks [...]
Kashif // November 19, 2009 at 6:58 pm |
salaam aleikum,
I am proud to know that there are still some few sincere Muslims left in America who tell the truth.
3 points you might want to emphasize in your interactions with some of the pro-American army idiots amongst Muslims:
1. Nationalism, Patriotism, and ANY such sentiments (communalism, sectarianism, etc) is HARAM, evidence explicitly stated here:
“”He is not one us who calls for `Asabiyyah, (nationalism/tribalism) or who fights for `Asabiyyah or who dies for `Asabiyyah.”
(agreed upon)
further source:
http://members.cox.net/arshad/nationalism.htm
It is as haram to join the U.S. army to kill other Muslims just as it would be for a Muslim to join the Pakistani, Indian, Egyptian, Serbian, or Israeli armies to do the same.
You conveniently will NOT hear this hadith or its tafseer discussed among the “lets-apologize for-Islam” CAIR/MAS crowd, or the lets collect money for “our” soldiers crowd at ISNA, much less the Hamza Yusuf worshipping groupies.
2. In the past, most actions done by “Muslim” soldiers which called their loyalty to America into question involved the acts of converts i.e. Blacks or lower working class whites who joined the armed forces for economic reasons and when sent overseas saw the hypocracy of their actions as an instrument of war and had the light of Islam penetrate their hearts (despite all of the anti-Islam propaganda they were drilled with).
This is how the guard at Guantanimo:
http://www.newsweek.com/id/190357
as well as many others converted:
http://in.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idINIndia-28671120070726
Their knowledge of Islam is very rudimentary despite the sincerity of their understanding. This however, is the first case of a born and raised immigrant descended Muslim doing this which is why it is now going to call into question how well Muslims are assimilating into the system and if they can be trusted by the kuffar to kill other Muslims in battle.
The problem is that the shar’aa concepts of wal’aa and bar’aa (loyalty and allegiance) have NEVER been addressed to them from an correct Islamic viewpoint. Govt. backed stooges and puppets such as ISNA, CAIR, MAS, MPAC and the “white sheikh” are certainly NOT going to talk about this from this perspective as you have correctly stated this will not get them photo-ops with politicians or an invitation to have Iftar with Bush/Obama whilst Iraq or Afghanistan is being bombed.
3. Past U.S. history is also a good guide to back up what you are saying. Even though Nidal Hasan’s legal case against going to Iraq/Afghanistan failed, He still had a choice.
He could have filed for conscientous objector status and in all likelihood would have been court martialled and sent to prison, eventually being discharged with demerits and no future benefits.
This is what the boxer Muhammed Ali did in the 1960s when he was drafted for the Vietnam war. His statement here:
“War is Against the teachings of the Holy Quran. I’m not trying to dodge the draft. We are not supposed to take part in wars unless declared by Allah or the Messenger. We don’t take part in Christian wars or wars of any unbelievers”
“I Ain’t Got No Quarrel With The VietCong… No VietCong Ever Called Me a Nigger”
— Muhammad Ali, 1966
source: http://www.aavw.org/protest/homepage_ali.html
along with his court case (Clay v. United States 1966-1971) Had him sent to prison which he preferred to do rather than to fight for America in Vietnam, giving up his world championship status at the peak of his career. No doubt, he would be condemned by ISNA, CAIR, MAS for doing that today if he did so.
When you fight using political means on principled grounds, you actually do more to undermine the system as well as the actions it is trying to coerce the population to do.
Please stay strong and stick to the truth.
salaam aleikum,
Kashif
Dan // November 19, 2009 at 8:08 pm |
Kashif, how do you explain the hadith that says “hubbul wadan minal iman”? How can you say that patriotism is haram when this hadith states otherwise? And how can nationalism be conceived haram when it did not come into force until the 1600’s?
Abu Noor Al-Irlandee // November 19, 2009 at 9:50 pm
Dan,
What is the source of this ‘hadith’? I know it is a famous “saying” but I have not heard what the source is to try to verify its authenticity.
Abu Noor Al-Irlandee // November 19, 2009 at 9:52 pm
And how can you say a hadith justifies nationalism if it was not a concept known to the Prophet (saw)?
If the above is a hadith, we would have to figure out what hubbul watan would have meant at the time.
Kashif // November 20, 2009 at 4:32 am
1. The “hadith” you quoted is false. It has no basis nor a chain or narrators.
2. If an idea about organizing human life on a certain basis has NO foundations in Islam, then it’s a Kufr idea.
I strongly suggest getting a political science dictionary and looking at the origins of:
* nationalism
* sectarianism
* tribalism
* racism
all are forms of jahilliyah which Islam came to nullify and extinguish.
Umar takes the writers of Muslim Matters… | Marriage Blog // November 19, 2009 at 7:44 pm |
[...] Umar takes the writers of Muslim Matters to task for saying it is permissible “and even praiseworthy” to join the ‘armies of the Kuffar.’… [...]
Six Reasons Why the Fort Hood Killings by Nidal Hasan Are Clearly Impermissible // November 19, 2009 at 8:09 pm |
[...] [...]
Maverick // November 19, 2009 at 8:57 pm |
MuslimApple is deadl on the eight-ball.
Sayf-us-Sunnah, calm down. Islam’s principles and ethics are universal and timeless, however the opinions of scholars who lived in other times or other lands are not necessarily so.
The issue is NOT about joing a “kafir army” and if you see it that way you’re really being narrow-minded. The US Army is not just made for war, its also made for helping and assisting those in need even if its not war-time, whether inside US borders or outside of it. And please spare me the usual knee-jerk criticisms involving Somalia or Bosnia, I’m well aare that US political leaders often DO NOT have altrusistic reasons for sending the US military to overseas hotspots.
My point here is to make you pause and consider the example of nabeyuna Muhammad [saws] and Hilf-ul-Fudool, the pre-prophethood pact made by many leaders of the Quraysh that they would protect and help the weak and oppressed. The basis and spirit of that pact was perfectly in-line with the principles of Islam, and man years later Prophet Muhammad [saws] himself said that if he were to be called again to join that [renewed] pact, he would gladly do so.
Its really unfortunate to see that Major Nidal Hassan snapped and went all postal like that; to me it really seems logical and glaringly obvious to actively offer Muslim members of the US Armed forces the choice to opt out of such wars, instead of putting up roadblocks.
The Fort Hood massacre is a symptom of administrative incompetence, nothing more. Other symptoms include plenty of other fraggings throughout the years and decades, of non-Muslim US soldiers upon each other, whether in the combat arena or back in civillian life.
There are significant negative impacts on the nafs of ay soldier sent into modern combat, whether Muslim or non-Muslims and yet there is no substantial data available on this topic.
Here’s a quote from a Rolling Stone article which deals with another set of killings, from Ft. Carson, but the following is relevant to my comments here in this discussion:
For the past several years, David Foy, a psychology professor at Pepperdine University, has been engaged in a study on the “spiritual consequence” of participating in war. Until now, surprisingly, very few researchers have examined how war affects a soldier’s sense of morality or tried to quantify it. What Foy and his colleagues have found is that specific kinds of wartime experiences — notably the unintentional killing of civilians and the failure to save others from being killed — can cause “moral injury” to a soldier, as well as psychological trauma. The complex manifestations of PTSD — jumpiness, rage, sadness — are compounded by what Foy calls “changes in one’s ability to perceive themselves as capable of acting in a morally appropriate way.” Men who return from combat, he says, often see themselves as “damaged goods.”
By the time Bressler returned home, he had lost the moral guideposts that defined his identity as a soldier. His rage became obsessive, only intensified by drugs, alcohol and little, if any, sleep. One of the defining elements of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan is wide-scale sleep deprivation, which can last for months after soldiers return home — particularly for those who suffer from PTSD. “Nightmares or intrusive memories get them all wound up, and this can be self-sustaining,” says Dr. Jonathan Shay, one of the nation’s foremost experts on post-traumatic stress. “As a result, you see these kids become moral morons. A lot of the bad behavior — the violence, the anger — is due to the shutting down of the frontal lobe. Add alcohol, and they become functionally sociopathic.”
source: http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/30794989/the_fort_carson_murder_spree/1
Abu Noor Al-Irlandee // November 19, 2009 at 10:21 pm |
Maverick,
You and Muslim Apple make some good points. However, armies don’t allow soldiers to pick and choose which wars or jobs or tasks they agree with. That is not the way an army works. Without denying that the military could do some good, it makes no sense for Muslims to voluntarily enter into the military knowing they might be ordered to do something wrong whether it is fighting against Muslims or some other act of oppression.
By the way, I am not aware of Muslim Matters publishing anything saying that it is permissible to join the U.S. military, did I miss something?
I agree that many public figures in the Muslim community are not addressing this issue, perhaps because they do not believe the answer is clear cut or perhaps because they believe it would be harmful to the Muslims to state their opinion at this time. But I agree that we need guidance from scholars or students of knowledge who understand this society and this reality and while we should benefit from the opinions and teachings of recent scholars from other lands we do not need to yield to their opinions in all cases. Although I agree we should not ignore them or pretend that their opinions have all of a sudden become extreme or unmentionable.
Allaah knows best.
Muslim Grape // November 19, 2009 at 9:43 pm |
If it is permissible to fight and help kill or even directly kill Muslims, then what is the problem in spying on Muslims (i.e., working for the FBI, CIA, MI5, the Mosaad)?
Certainly killing Muslims is worse than spying on them right?? If we can join the army, then we can certainly spy
Sameer // November 19, 2009 at 10:08 pm |
Lets leave out all the wishy washy BS and put up front what those who advocate Muslims joining the U.S. army FULLY support and ENDORSE by their actions:
http://www.evtv1.com/player.aspx?itemnum=5695
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kpHWaUSfYj8&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KWGV8-uyAUk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DZmUv18a1zU
Either stand FULLY behind “your” war and “your” soldiers or stay silent.
Alana Weaver // November 19, 2009 at 10:34 pm |
I served in the U.S. Navy before 9/11 and since the beginning of the War on Terrorism. I took shahadah a few months ago. And I would proudly serve in U.S. military again, if personal reasons didn’t prevent me from doing so, because it says in the Quran we Muslims are to obey our country’s laws.
If I lived in any other country, I would fight to uphold what rights, freedoms (privileges) that country allows me to have. I will fight against those men (and women also) who cause chaos in the world.
Khalid // November 20, 2009 at 12:10 am |
Could you kindly point out WHERE it says this? Especially given that NONE of these laws or policies are derived from Islam ?
Muslim Apple // November 20, 2009 at 1:12 am |
I have not submitted anything about the permissibilty of serving in the military, my main contention is simply that people more knowlegeable in Islam than myself believe the issue of al walaa wal baraa is of critical importance today, is complex, and the standard classical opinions do not address the realities of the world today.
Khalil Al-Puerto Rikani // November 20, 2009 at 2:15 am |
Umar,
Assalamu alaikum wa rahmatullahi wa barakatuh
This issue raises some serious questions which I think are closely related to this:
(1) What is the permissibility of voting for the Commander and Chief of the military? Remember, he is the one who who will make the decision as to how many troop will be sent to Afghanistan
(2) What is the permissibility of voting for politicians (Andre Carson and Keith Ellison) who are on the Financial Services Committee of the House? Isn’t this committee the will decide how much the DoD will get for wars?
(3) What is the permissibility of paying taxes to a government that will use part of the money to fight wars against Muslims?
(4) What is the permissibility of working for companies that produce things for the military (e.g, Lockhead Martin, GE, etc.)
I think that if we are going to raise the issue of Muslims in the military, we need to answer these questions as well. You see brothers picking and choosing what we will discuss as haram. Why is it easy to condemn those brother who joined the military, but we are silent on Obama, Ellison, and Carson? Why don’t we address all (or at least most) of the Muslims in the U.S. who are paying taxes? These matters are all related.
Khalil
Maverick // November 20, 2009 at 2:22 am |
Abu Noor Al-Irlandee, you said:
“However, armies don’t allow soldiers to pick and choose which wars or jobs or tasks they agree with. ”
…
I’d like to politely disagree, via two points:
1.) In the US military, as well as many other armies around the world, soldiers can indeed opt out of some conflicts via conscientious objector (CO) status. Which is why I said the US military administration should actively consider giving Muslim members of the US armed forces the option of abstaining from actively participating in either direct combat, or supporting roles, in such conflicts.
2.) During the Nuremberg Trials immediately after WW2, many Nazi officers testified that they were merely “following orders” and yet that excuse of theirs was not accepted on the grounds that it was clear what they were being ordered to do was to kill innocents. American leaders must now be held to those same standards, and they should exempt Muslim or non-Muslim soldiers who claim CO status under such similar conditions.
Abu Noor Al-Irlandee // November 20, 2009 at 3:26 am |
Maverick, Jazzak Allahu Khayr for your response.
I will have to return the favor and politely disagree with your disagreement, at least in part.
First, in the United States a person to qualify as a conscientious objector must be opposed on religious grounds to fighting in ANY war. It cannot be opposition to a particular war. For this reason, it is extremely difficult for a person in our time and place to claim this status after voluntarily enlisting in the military. Perhaps it could be possible if one had converted since joining the military.
Obviously I still think that anyone who thinks a certain war is immoral should try to claim this status and be willing to be imprisoned for it. So, the idea that a Muslim could object to participating in only certain wars would indeed be a new idea which is not currently recognized by U.S. law.
You say that the U.S. leaders “should be held to the standard of Nuremberg.” Without getting into whether others would recognize serving in wars such as those in Afghanistan or Iraq as constituting crimes against humanity or that they are being “ordered to kill innocents” I would say that I’m not sure what function your should is filling here.
A lot of things “should” happen but I’m sure you are aware that the U.S. and its leaders have made clear that they are not subject to any law anywhere (they have refused to ratify the International Criminal Court treaty largely for this reason).
Now, if a Muslim already in the military would like to make these challenges to try to change the law then that might be a noble cause and if that’s what you are advocating that’s one thing. But what I wish to make clear is that is not the current state of the law and any Muslim who would think about joining the military should know that and should not join the military.
Allaah Knows Best.
Abu Noor Al-Irlandee // November 20, 2009 at 3:28 am |
Maverick,
I am not sure what your background is…I’m a lawyer and I’d be happy to refer you to some cases or statutes and you could do the same for me if you’re interested in pursuing this further. But I really don’t think we disagree too much…I think we were just kinda making different points (about what “should” be vs. what “actually is.”
susanne430 // November 20, 2009 at 3:37 am |
It’s funny that y’all are concerned with Muslims having to fight Muslims when they do that most every day already.
Maverick // November 20, 2009 at 4:00 am |
Abu Noor – it’s quite a relief to know that I’m dealing with an actual student of the law who does his due diligence as opposed to dealing with the customary angry and aimless mobs.
I apologize for not being clear, the previous posts were made in off-the-cuff haste:
On CO status, I was under the impression that there was some room for selective applications instead of applying to any and all wars. I will go verify.
In the meantime, I fully believe that if a Muslim member of any military should cannot selectively claim CO status according to the conflict at hand, then he or she should opt to go to prison rather than fighting in an unjust war. Standing up for truth and justice is never easy and never free.
Yes I’m familiar as to the reasons why the US has yet to submit to the authority of the ICC. You’re right about the other parts of my comments – I was indeed talking about “what should be” rather than “what is” already so.
No I’m not a lawyer but I frequently deal with them day in, day out – specifically those lawyers educated on a certain US federal law and how it applies to the healthcare sector’s finances.
If I may ask, what is your area of practice?
Touhid // November 20, 2009 at 6:12 am |
Assalamu alaykum,
I think the more basic question is that is it allowed for Muslims to become US citizens?
What does Sheik Uthaymeen, Sheik Fowzan, and Sheik Munajid have to say about US citizenship? If the answer is that it is permissable, then that citizen is bound by the ramifications of that respective social contract.
However, no one is forced to join the US military, but if one holds the opinion that it is permissable to be a US citizen, then how can one say it is impermissable to join the US military? I am simply talking being permissable, not that it is praiseworthy or not. All these opinions are based on ijtihad…So one has to be careful on which scholar or group of scholars he or she follows…I think the the only credible argument of declaring that joining the US military is haram, is by first declaring that being a US citizen is haram.
Again, I feel we live in confusing times, and the issue of citizenship is not black and white, a lot of these fiqh type of issues are in the grey area, and require serious scholarship that give proper advice…Of course, I hate the fact that Muslims are killing Muslims.
If there was a mandatory draft, then Muslims in a certain age group would have to make a very tough decision. I hope Insha’allah, that I would have the courage like Muhammad Ali, who risked his freedom in order to protest his participation in the Vietnam War.
** to slightly change the topic:
Are we not going to be held responsible for the actions of the DOD, b/c we tax payers indirectly support this institution, thru our income taxes, and other taxes?
Again, it seems to me that the more underlying question is the legality of US citizenship, under Sharia…We all have to make well-informed decisions, after researching these types of issues…May Allah (Swt) help us All.
We all shall be judged on the Final Day.
salam
DrM // November 20, 2009 at 10:35 am |
Asalamu Aliakum,
Straight up post. Muslim organization who have been bending over backwards for this are a disgrace. I’m not apologizing for something I didn’t do , nor am i going to shed crocodile tears for rapists, torturers and killers just because they wear an army uniform. I don’t approve of what Nidal did and I highly doubt a “devout” Muslim would be a regular at the local strip bar.
Back in my undergrad days a military recruiter tried to get me to sign up. I told him I’m not down with terrorism which left him red faced. But hey if the house Muslims want to throw their lives away to steal a barrel of oil, go for it.
No; it is not permissible for Muslims to join the kuffar army! — Winds Of Jihad By SheikYerMami // November 20, 2009 at 12:40 pm |
[...] for Muslims and hatred for non-Muslims.“Is It Permissible To Join A Kaafir Army?,” by Umar Lee, November 19:Updates:SecDef orders Army inquiry into why nobody reported the Fort Hood [...]
Kashif // November 20, 2009 at 4:10 pm |
Khalil, your questions remind me of what one brother used to comment on in the old days: nawazil. These are new issues which the ummah is confronted with and hasn’t had to deal with before, and providing answers to these problems isn’t easy. And every answer that you do come up with has some aspect of inconsistency with the shari’ah in it incorporating something which is disliked or haram.
(btw. i’m not referring to issues which are clear-cut to me e.g. the prohibition of joining the army)
Separately, whats with people putting the words ‘kufaar army’ in double quotes? Is there any dispute on the US/UK armies being kufaar armies? Or is it just the logical next step in this discussion for people to justify Muslim assimilation into the West and joining the army? “Hey they’re not kufaar, because only Allah is the judge!”
@MuslimApple – why is AlWalaa wal-Baraa such a controversial issue? Is it because of its implications on how our comfortable lifestyles in the West might change if we live according to its classical understanding? And as for your comment:
The ultimate end of this argument of yours is that cultural context permits us to change whatever part of Islam we want. And i’d like to ask you the same question that Sayf does: where do you draw the line. How much of your religion are you prepared to liberalise before you say enough is enough (if any)?
Abu Noor Al-Irlandee // November 20, 2009 at 4:21 pm |
Maverick,
I will also continue to research the issue.
By the way, do you agree with my main point? Are you encouraging Muslims to actually enter the military or are you just trying to find solutions for those already in?
Abu Noor Al-Irlandee // November 20, 2009 at 4:25 pm |
As to my area of practice, I work representing abused and neglected children in the foster care system…it’s a good way to keep from developing the rosy view of the reality of American society that some of us may get from living in the suburbs and working in the corporate world.
Of course, civil liberties issues have been a big interest of mine ever since before I went to law school so I try to keep up with them and understand them even though I don’t practice in the area.
So, I do try to make my opinions knowledgeable and well-informed, but my perspective remains unashamedly radical.
Sayf-us-Sunnah // November 20, 2009 at 4:26 pm |
How much of your religion are you prepared to liberalise before you say enough is enough (if any)?
And that is the ultimate question that no one wants to answer. We have seen the line moved again and again in response to negative pressure on the Muslims for the past 8 years since 9/11. We have seen speakers that we knew and once loved for Allah on this path of “using wisdom”. These speakers who once upheld the Sunnah are now saying that evolution is a “scientific fact” and that the hijab is not necessary. How long before we start seeing other speakers saying the same things? Don’t say it can’t happen because it has happened to others.
Pictures became halal. Music became halal. Women were allowed to travel without a mahram. Movies are halal now. Women are now marrying without a wali. Comedy shows are a staple at every Islamic event including the one that are supposed to uphold the sunnah. Beard is no longer required and now even speakers are trimming and shaving. We are now even seeing female Muslim singing groups! Where does it stop?
No hijab? Don’t say it can’t happen, because some speakers are ALREADY going in that direction. Will Muslim women be allowed to marry kaafir men? Don’t say that is ridiculous because who would have known 10 years ago that we’d allow the nonsense that we allow now?
Basic Muslim // November 20, 2009 at 4:32 pm |
I am always amazed at the hypocrisy of Muslims that want to live in the 7th century especially while they use their computers.
Why do you all insist that Muslims must live according to some 7th century dictatorship that is not practical in today’s times? Do you people use sticks to brush your teeth? Do you use stones for the toilet?
How can you not recognize that times change and that religion must change with it? Otherwise you will drive people out of Islam
Kashif // November 20, 2009 at 4:38 pm |
Basic Muslim you say:
“How can you not recognize that times change and that religion must change with it? Otherwise you will drive people out of Islam”
Dude, the gay rights movement is searching for people with views like just like that!
Abu Noor Al-Irlandee // November 20, 2009 at 5:51 pm |
Kashif, Umar, and Sayf us Sunnah,
Ikhwan, I’m in broad agreement with you guys on this issue generally, but I would encourage you and myself to do the following to strengthen our argument and make it more in line with truth and not necessarily just an emotional response.
It is good to notice trends and to question what are the forces behind these trends and ask where those trends may lead. Still, we should not assume that every opinion held by even major scholars we respect in the early 1990s was correct and can not be questioned. Neither should we equate major issues of ‘aqidah like wala and bara’ with fiqh disagreements like shaking women’s hands or growing a beard.
Each issue has its importance, but we have to be intelligent enough to prioritize them according to their true importance. And this of course requires deep study of the deen and deep sincerity. May Allaah (swt) increase each of you and myself in those endeavors as well as in our courage to stand up for the truth.
Umar Lee aka/ Double H // November 20, 2009 at 6:08 pm |
@ Abu Noor
Quickly, one of thhe major points that I am trying to make here is that these opinions exist and have existed for some time. Right now, the major Muslim organizations are pretending these opinions NEVER existed and/or represent some type of new “extremist” fold. I have been hearing the interviews on the radio and TV and I am seeing them dismiss these types of opinions as strange as if they never heard of such. That wreaks of dishonesty whether intentional or not and it makes me angry.
No one is equating the issues of fiqh with wala and bara, but the point is that no one is talking about the issue at all and to the extent one DOES speak on it, he is denounced as an “extremist”. There is a steady erosion of everything Islam stands for going on and it seems that very few even see it. Suddenly a “good muslim” is a clean shaven, hipster in hot pants that supports in same sex marriage. Everything else is “extreme”. the fact that no one seems to see this erosion is very disturbing
Is It Permissible to join a Kaafir Army? A response, well sort of « The American Muslim Blog // November 20, 2009 at 6:41 pm |
[...] written by a sincere brother, Umar Lee, who I have enjoyed reading over the years entitled “Is It Permissible To Join A Kaafir Army?” this article was being heralded by many gotcha types who used this writing as proof about [...]
Kashif H // November 20, 2009 at 8:31 pm |
salaam aleikum,
seems there are 2 Kashifs here ;-).
Anyhow 3 other points to add:
1. This discussion is highly relevant because of the fact that the U.S. occupying army is highly overstretched. It is not out of the realm of possibility that another conflict could ignite somewhere in the Muslim World — Iran, Somalia, Yemen, Saudi Arabia, etc.. When (not if) it does, there will be very very loud calls in the U.S. to reinstitute the draft or forced military conscription. As of now – due to long deployments they have gotten around this and it has not been an issue.
In May of this year in a congressional hearing Admiral Mike Mullen directly contradicted Defense Secretary Gates, and said that an “all volunteer army is unsustainable” with 2 wars and possibly a third. Most people took this comment to mean that the Generals do WANT a draft to get more soldiers if more wars become necessary.
We will see where the wal’aa and bar’aa of these alphabet soup “Muslim”/”Islamic” organizations and these celebrity “sheikhs” are once that new reality comes into play.
2. The cop out that those who don’t support Muslims joining the army, voting, or homosexuality should “go back to their own country” also doesn’t suffice. NO country is implementing Islam anywhere in the world. Further, in many cases if a Muslim were to go back he has to deal with the VERY same problem. Forced conscription into an army to fight not based on Islam. I know of a brother in Egypt who went back to get married, ended up getting forcibly conscripted into the Egyptian army, and his family had to pay out bribes to get him out. Many Muslim individuals and families that don’t have money or connections are forced to ride it out. That is a son or husband joins a so-called “Muslim” army that kills and tortures its own people (on behalf of the U.S. govt) or does nothing when it sees Muslims getting killed (as the Egyptian army closed and sealed the border between Gaza and Egypt so that the Israelis could bomb and kill the Palestinians before they made it to the border).
It is no different in any Arab “socialist” “ba’athist” countries. As was correctly said in another comment on another site,
anyone who thinks that serving in a “Muslim” country’s army is any different or any less full of problems than serving in the American army simply needs to view these videos:
Pakistani army interrogating “suspects”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PwADGsP2338&feature=related
Iraqi army being humiliated by U.S. Instructors:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O3-hNQs93bE&feature=player_embedded#
there is also the inconvenient little fact that Arab/Muslim armies are only good at killing their own people. In EVERY major military battle that Israel has fought against Arab armies they have won (with the recent exception of the “extremist” militia of Hizbullah in Lebanon). The same can be said of the Indian army (with half the “brave” Pakistani army surrendering in Bangladesh).
3. Lastly, for Umar, this discussion is moot for our sell out “American” Islam “leaders” as they have already thrown in their lot with kufr. They could give a “rat’s ass” about Muslims overseas as was said to me by an ISNA Majlis ash Shura member’s son, they consider themselves “fully American”.
It was/is not uncommon to see U.S. military and CIA recruiters at Islamic conventions. One wonders if the very same people who are now trying to kiss up to the establishment by collecting donations for Ft. Hood, ever said or did anything over the victims at Abu Gharaib, Bagram, or Guantinomo? More direct to the point, the deafening silence over John Walker Lindh also speaks volumes.
Keep speaking the truth, for that is all that we have in times like these.
salaam aleikum,
Kashif H
DrM // November 21, 2009 at 1:15 am |
@Basic “Muslim,” aka Basic Munafiq
We’re not living in the 7th century, but you, munafiq are living in the stone age with that slave mentality of yours. Seems to me you’re about as much a Muslim as the Australian neo-Nazi “sheikh yermami.”
Come on Toby, go sign up and throw your life away. Shell, Exxon, Mobil etc will be most pleased.
Maverick // November 21, 2009 at 2:25 am |
Abu Noor, you asked:
“By the way, do you agree with my main point? Are you encouraging Muslims to actually enter the military or are you just trying to find solutions for those already in?”
Both. I’m trying to find solutions for those already in there, and while I do NOT encourage Muslims to enter and sign up for the military if they don’t have the moral spine to go to jail for refusing to serve in US-vs-Muslim-countries conflicts, I do believe its both possible and necessary for Muslims to give substantial input to the national discussion about the scope and function of the US military in order to save the lives of innocents abroad, both Muslim and non-Muslim. As an American and North American Muslim community, I believe that an incredible amount of political and socio-economic leverage is well within our capabilities but sadly we’re not using it.
And while I don’t have a rosy view of the American system, I also refuse to believe that all is lost. I find many Muslims – including apparently some of the commentators here – are way too bitter and pessimistic about North American non-Muslims. I’ve given dawah at work, I’ve done it in school, I’ve given it out on the busy streets of the city. People, whether commoners or policy-makers, are essentially good people. Their fitrah is still intact to a large extent and when they see the wisdom in Islam, many of them accept it wholeheartedly.
I live in Canada and you, as an American lawyer, may or may not be familiar with the recent experiences of Canadian Muslims in getting the Ontario provincial government to allow faith-based arbitration [SHARIA!!! OMG!!!!] – formert Attorney General Marion Boyd [white, non-Muslim lady] studied Islam’s stance on family and spousal rights and came to the conclusion that it was fair to allow such a system to co-exist in Ontario. It was later removed because of the pro-regressive fanatic Tarek Fatah. Islamic banking is another aspect of Islam slowly being accepted by the West, and not for reasons that you think. Over in UK, they actually altered their national laws to allow shariah-compliant banking, and now Ottawa is following suit.
There are a lot of details I could go into, but my point is that I’m a lot more optimistic about the big picture than many others, and I refuse to take the pessimistic, knee-jerk approach. And without getting hyperbolic or melodramatic, lets remember that our ancestors moved aside entire mountains and split the oceans – both literal and figurative – in their quest to carry Tawheed to the four corners of this Earth. We can do the same, bi’idhnellah.
Muslim Apple // November 21, 2009 at 6:33 am |
Kashif, Sayf: We are not talking about changing the religion but rather an area in which there is flexibility in the sharia. The question is not to delete something fundamental but one of ijtihad. If someone was once allowed to come up with the concepts of darul harb/ darul islam to understand the world in context, it is not changing the religion to say that those distinctions can no longer be effectively applied today when estimates of upwards of tens or hundreds of millions of Muslims live outside Muslim majority countries in ostensibly secular-nation states.
Where is darul harb/darul Islam, where are these masses of Muslims to emigrate to, how should they live and participate in the lands in which they reside, will the lands of the Muslims even accept them or be able to handle such an influx, etc? If we can allow that at one time, it was believed Muslims should make hijrah to Muslim lands, why can we not allow scholars to look critically and think critically about the situations and issues, which arise today? Exercising critical thought is not a liberal idea, there is no need for this gangster mentality/Bush doctrine of “either you are with us or against us.” People can disagree with you on an issue and still be just as committed to Islam as you are, it doesn’t mean they want to change the religion and you are the upholders of orthodoxy.
Just a side note: Many people point to a fatwa by Ibn Uthaymeen (may Allah azza we jal have mercy on him) indicating that it was not permissible to reside in western lands. In Madinah, some western students asked him what this opinion meant for them, Muslims born and raised in the west and contrary to the popular belief that many have, he said that his answer was intended for the specific questioner and not to be applied as a general rule and especially not for Muslims already in the west or who were born and raised there. Think about it.
Sayf-us-Sunnah // November 21, 2009 at 12:47 pm |
@ Muslim Apple
You are making this issue more narrow than I see it. This is more than about hijrah. I don’t know of any scholars of the Sunnah that have decided that these issues need to change
Today, we are hearing people (not scholars) say that the Jews and Christians are not only our friends, but are indeed “believers” and will be in Jannah. We are seeing them say that the hijab is NOT necessary because of the changing of time. Suddenly, music is halal when we have never known such a thing. Suddenly, celebrating kufr holidays and birthdays is halal. Suddenly, free-mixing and making fun of the deen is halal. And (regarding this topic) we are seeing them say that it is permissible to join the army of the kufaar and fight against the Muslims. Where is the “flexibility” in the shariah in these matters? People are creating “flexibility” where there previously was none in certain matters.
Firstly, we are talking about the earliest and greatest scholars here. It wasn’t just some random “guy” who “came up with that”. Early scholars also “came up with” sciences such as fiqh, tafseer, tajweed and aqeedah. Are you saying that some young Westerner can just come and throw out these concepts because THEY think it no longer applies? Why stop there? Why not redefine aqeedah, since there was no such word as “aqeedah”. Why not delete or redefine “fiqh” – since there was no such concept at the Prophet’s (S) time? Why don’t we come up with new tafseer? What is to stop us from coming up with a completely new understanding and interpretation that was never known in the Ummah? Don’t say that is going too far because people are calling for that right now. My only question is where does it stop?
he said that his answer was intended for the specific questioner and not to be applied as a general rule and especially not for Muslims already in the west
So that means by extension that we can join the kufr army and fight the Muslims?
Muslim Apple // November 21, 2009 at 4:26 pm |
Sayf: If you cannot see that there are questions that have not been adequately addressed surrounding the issues of al walaa wal baraa than that is your problem, I can’t help you further. If you think everyone who disagrees with you must want to water down the religion than that is also your problem. Having an open mind and critical thinking are key to seeing all the colors on the spectrum reflected in a world that is more than just black and white.
Scholars including the ones you look up to have used their ijtihad in recent times to address new issues that have arisen in many areas including al walaa wal bra. If you look a little higher up in the comments, I mentioned that my comments here have not been about the permissibility of joining the army, so I don’t know why you try to reduce anything I’ve said to that. Umar and others mentioned people were confused about this issue and my response was that Muslims are confused by more pressing issues than whether or not to join the army.
Sayf, where do you live? In a “kufr” land? How do you interact with non-Muslims? Do you have non-Muslims in your family? If there was gov’t run healthcare or university financial aid or food stamps available and you needed those services, would you take them from a “kufr” gov’t. If a Muslim is born in the U.S. what are his or her rights and obligations to the society, how should she or he interact, what is allowed, where are the limits, is it okay to go around killing people vigilante-style as some fools would have us believe. So often, the Muslims loudest in their anti-this or that rhetoric on the internet are the ones who do nothing for their communities Muslim or non-Muslim, give nothing back, do not help in social services even while taking those services, and cause much unnecessary confusion.
Mohamed // November 21, 2009 at 5:38 pm |
exactly… esp your last line… usually they only type and type or cut paste, cut paste and talk about world affairs as if they plan to do anything… but no. They think they finished their responsibility by typing big words… I bet they have little “giving back” to their own, let alone non-muslims (who they have convenient way of ignoring by using wala wal bara, forgetting how prophet did not stop from interacting with non-muslims)
muslim apple, u wasting your time sis. They like this kind of long debate… it makes them feel better, and gives attention to them.
“First Muslim Minority” Thinking considered harmful « Islam in China // November 21, 2009 at 5:55 pm |
[...] all scholars have had such an opinion. One of the reasons for this post was the discussion going on here and here. Without taking any sides in the debate I will just state that one of the arguments that [...]
I Know I Shouldn’t Be Doing This But… « Ginny's Thoughts & Things // November 22, 2009 at 9:47 pm |
[...] about me than the blog post that is compelling me to comment in the first place. From Umar Lee (1, 2), as well as a [...]
Abu Umar // November 23, 2009 at 12:32 am |
Mohamed, there’s a difference between interacting with non-Muslims and serving in the armies of the harbi kuffar which are invading and occupying Muslim lands and supporting and protecting many of the tyrant rulers in the Muslim world so your comparison is ridiculous to say the least.
Khalil (Houston) // November 23, 2009 at 10:56 pm |
As salaamu alaikum,
I was just notified of the posting. Still at work. I’ll have to read the whole thing later on but at least I’ll say as a shahada veteran, common sense imaan must explain that the US military is not a place for a Muslim/muslima. There should be no shame in that position what so ever. I recall when myself and the brothers around me came to the consciousness of our situation as Muslim soldiers ,we began to prepare our packets to be discharged under the “unable to comply with mission” as a conscientious objector. At that time (pre-911) it took close to a year to go through but it worked for many. My time was short so I finished my time out. This was the position we took without juggling fatawas and stretching the truths. I’ll never forget the day one my barracks buddies (a neighbor in the soldier dorms) asked me, “Hey man, I’m Christian and I know your Muslim, are you allowed to be here? Does the military conflict with you getting close to God? These are some of the things I was faced with with just basic Islamic awareness.
At the same time I say that one can be totally American,non -terrorist and be against being a service-member.
Khalil
Bigmo // November 24, 2009 at 9:11 am |
And who said the US army is kaffir anyways? There are kaffirs and non kaffirs just like any other army. The Saudi army has kaffirs and non kaffirs.
This is Sunni talk and not Islam.
“First Muslim Minority” Thinking considered harmful « SEASONSNIDUR // November 25, 2009 at 2:47 am |
[...] all scholars have had such an opinion. One of the reasons for this post was the discussion going on here and here. Without taking any sides in the debate I will just state that one of the arguments that [...]
Muslims Not Permitted to Join Kaffir Army « The American Heritage Project // November 26, 2009 at 2:55 pm |
[...] It Permissible To Join A Kaafir Army?,” by Umar Lee, November 19: In the years since 9/11, we have seen a serious re-defining and whitewashing of what [...]
Why AA will always trump MM, YQ and ALM « Peace, Bruv // December 6, 2009 at 11:47 am |
[...] is propagated from the top down and its effects can be seen quite clearly in the comments section of this post where “Sayf us-Sunnah” voices his concern about the watering down of the religion and [...]