An Invitation from a Muslim Cleric to You
-
ok Bro RasulHamsa, actually all of us in that yahoo conference were muslim. But some of us were people that frequent this site. Hence, the free-minder versus non free-minds distinction.
I think you're making a non-issue out of nothing and I don't appreciate it.
Oooh...ok, I thought you would appreciate my concern...Alhamdulillah
But please am not free-minder......I am only a "Muslim"......Thanks
-
I was chatting with some free-minders yesterday on yahoo when I decided to bring in a friend who knows nothing about the quran alone movement.
You left the entire post and focused on this one sentence. I'm sure everyone else understood the distinction I was making. I will not be sucked into non-issues.
-
Peace Be Upon You too
That's great that you're interested. Healthy debate is always a treat D
I'll be sure to pass along the information as soon as I get it.
-
PEace Be Upon You Sis
Ecellent! bravo sun
i look forward to seeing you there as well
-
yeah, he's not like the Imam Mehdi who's supposed to kill all the lobsters is he? or was that pigs...I forget.
The concept of Imam Mehdi is wrong....there is no mention of him in the quran.
-
I have searched the whole quran and Imam is only mentiond with Ibrahim and only he was Imam and there is no name of Mehdi in the quran. And Ibrahim built the first Masjid and he was Imam. Alhamdulillah
-
As Salaamu Alaikum Forum,
Count me in either as debating or listening, I am cool with either. Hopefully other of our prevelant posters such as Tanveer, ayman, Wakas, Progod, Layth, etc. will join in at some point, just to do a little propogating the truth. I sincerely hope that anyone that does participate, adheres to politeness and respect towards all other people and that it can be done in a peaceful manner; realising that probably neither debater will change the other's views. But maybe someone listening from the sunni side will see our point of view, albeit an inconsistent one except for not following "hadith and sunnah" as guidance from Allah. So give the details so that anyone interested, including myself can be prepared with their time to contribute, Allah willing.
As-Salaamu Alaikum, peace
-
Its a waste of time, trust me. We have seen all the debates possible.
Yesterday I was reading some materials in the net by Gamal Banna, incredible stuff, but its in Arabic. I really think we must try to translate some of his stuff to English. He really brings a lot of information about hadiths, Islamic history and problems of Islamic fiqh.
He has good views about secularism and pluralism and whats more he is a moderate Quranite. His website
http//www.islamiccall.org/EHDAA.HTM
Maybe we can raise some money and try to translate his stuff.
-
Its a waste of time, trust me. We have seen all the debates possible.
Yesterday I was reading some materials in the net by Gamal Banna, incredible stuff, but its in Arabic. I really think we must try to translate some of his stuff to English. He really brings a lot of information about hadiths, Islamic history and problems of Islamic fiqh.
He has good views about secularism and pluralism and whats more he is a moderate Quranite. His website
http//www.islamiccall.org/EHDAA.HTM
Maybe we can raise some money and try to translate his stuff.
Gamal al Banna is a moderate, rational hadith believer. He opposes considering quraan aloners kafirs and he even redicules this idea. His principles in a nut shell sunnism believing in all hadiths is an extreme and quraan alone is an extreme, let's be in between. So he does not consider himslef a qur'aan aloner, because he accepts some hadiths.
His website is more political and concentrates more on Egyptian affairs. I find Dr A.S. Mansour more global, especially that, being a former prof. in Lazhar, he knows all about hadith and sira. And he considers himself a Q.A.
-
Gamal al Banna is a moderate, rational hadith believer. He opposes considering quraan aloners kafirs and he even redicules this idea. His principles in a nut shell sunnism believing in all hadiths is an extreme and quraan alone is an extreme, let's be in between. So he does not consider himslef a qur'aan aloner, because he accepts some hadiths.
His website is more political and concentrates more on Egyptian affairs. I find Dr A.S. Mansour more global, especially that, being a former prof. in Lazhar, he knows all about hadith and sira. And he considers himself a Q.A.
Dr Mansour has extreme anti sufi views and has a tendency to attack personally Abu Huraira and other "companions". He wrote an article once in the website metransparent.com called "Abu Huraira and the case of the dog", in it he accuses Abu Huraira of fabricating hadiths about dogs being negative because he loved cats. I am sorry but if you want to influence Muslim intellectuals you have to stop relying propaganda. So whats he saying that Abu Huraira is going to lie about hadiths because he loved cats and hated dogs! I may stomach that but most Muslims would find that too ridiculing of a companion even if that companion is controversial. After all Abu Huraira did not twist anyones arm to accept his hadiths and these hadiths were compiled over 150 years after his death. We don't even know if he ever said those hadiths. Mansour's style is too Arab, either you praise(madh) and if you can't you attack(hija). He has good knowledge, but only on Islamic history after all that is his speciality. He is a critic, but I find his anti sufi views too provacative and wahhabiesque plus he uses language that is also provacative, like shirk and stuff. He is trouble and not that different from Sunni islam, its my way or shirk and deviancy. He is not a pluralist.
I am now reading Banna's stuff about European concept of justice from the Greek to the modern era as compared to the Quran and Islamic history. I think Banna can influence the mainstream, whats more this guy had these ideas since the late 40s and thus can not be accused of copying the West. He also wants to continue what he believes was the unfinished work of Jamal al Deen Al Afghani and Muhammad Abdu. When I read Banna's stuff I feel there is hope and find his style mild but assertive. He builds slowly and never uses provacative language. I find Mansour's style too Arab, one sided and critical of others. I know some here like it that way, but if we really want to make a change we need someone who is able to get to the mainstream. Its not as hard as it seems.
Not every intellectual can be an influence to the masses, that needs some charisma but most it needs moderation. And very few Arabs can fill that role.
Last about him being too political and focussing on Egyptian affairs, this is why he is very imporatant. Egypt is the cultural capital of the Arabs and he is a believer as I am that religious reform can not take place without political reform, and vice versa, at least in the Arab world because religious reform requires freedom and that can't take place without political reform. Husni Mubarak and Al Saud and co. are not going to allow Islamic reformist breathing space, since both they and the Sunni establishment like the status quo.
