it aint a hadeeth, it's a saying from one of the early imams and its 70 excuses.

No im sure its 99 excuses

Allahu alam.

yes allah knows best

i think you've applied that hadith incorrectly theres a context to every hadith . would you make a hundred excuses for the muslim burglar that you caught red handed in your sitting room?

Would you make 99 excuses for the muslim who raped your sister,mother or niece?

Would you do the same for a muslim who committed a grave crime that you were aware of that harmed other muslims and non muslims?

i don't think i would does that make me a traitor,i don't think so, but perhaps you do.

I think i applied it correctly, i dont know whether i could but somebody who wasnt affected or knew the person raped or murdered might make excuses for them. If a muslim burglar was caught red handed in my sitting room maybe i would laugh at them for being so crap at stealing, however getting back to the point i might have sympathised, you never know adrenaline pumping and you dont know how your going to react.

"yashmaki" wrote:

i don't think i would does that make me a traitor,i don't think so, but perhaps you do.

Why do you constantly refer to being a traitor? it says you should there loads iof hadith people go against, how does that make them traitors?

Noor is right, it is 70 excuses.

To add to what yashmaki has said. "You may not think badly of a Muslim unless you have definite knowledge of his having done something evil, and there is no possible excuse or justification for him."

[size=10]Source: "Mukhtasar Minhaj al-Qasideen" (being Ibn Qudamah's abridgement of Ibn al-Jawzi's summary of al-Ghazzali's "Ihya' `Ulum al-Deen")[/size]

"Naz" wrote:

And another thing our loyalty lies with Muslims NOT the non believers.

Our loyalty is to God and the truth.

The Prophet described nationalism as supporting your people is something which is wrong. That nationalism is haraam.

So you cannot support a Muslims solely because he or she is a Muslim. Actually, you can, but it cannot be blind support no matter what the situation.

relief for lady, street protests in Sudan:

Quote:

[size=18]Sudan to free teddy row teacher[/size]
Gillian Gibbons, the British teacher jailed for allowing her pupils to name a teddy bear Muhammad, has been given a presidential pardon and will be freed today.
Senior Sudanese officials said she would also be flown back to England today.

The breakthrough came after a meeting between two British Muslim peers, Lord Nazir Ahmed and Baroness Sayeeda Warsi, and Sudan's president, Omar al-Bashir, in his palace in the capital, Khartoum, on banks of the Blue Nile.

etc etc etc

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sudan/story/0,,2221020,00.html

"You" wrote:

"Naz" wrote:

And another thing our loyalty lies with Muslims NOT the non believers.

Our loyalty is to God and the truth.

The Prophet described nationalism as supporting your people is something which is wrong. That nationalism is haraam.

So you cannot support a Muslims solely because he or she is a Muslim. Actually, you can, but it cannot be blind support no matter what the situation.

true but what if as a result of British Muslims interference the teacher is released without receiving any punishment have we not gone against Qur'anic law?

"Naz" wrote:

"You" wrote:

"Naz" wrote:

And another thing our loyalty lies with Muslims NOT the non believers.

Our loyalty is to God and the truth.

The Prophet described nationalism as supporting your people is something which is wrong. That nationalism is haraam.

So you cannot support a Muslims solely because he or she is a Muslim. Actually, you can, but it cannot be blind support no matter what the situation.

true but what if as a result of British Muslims interference the teacher is released without receiving any punishment have we not gone against Qur'anic law?

No, the Quran is in favour of justice no matter who its for or against.

"Naz" wrote:

true but what if as a result of British Muslims interference the teacher is released without receiving any punishment have we not gone against Qur'anic law?

Was the punishment just?

"Seraphim" wrote:

"Naz" wrote:

"You" wrote:

"Naz" wrote:

And another thing our loyalty lies with Muslims NOT the non believers.

Our loyalty is to God and the truth.

The Prophet described nationalism as supporting your people is something which is wrong. That nationalism is haraam.

So you cannot support a Muslims solely because he or she is a Muslim. Actually, you can, but it cannot be blind support no matter what the situation.

true but what if as a result of British Muslims interference the teacher is released without receiving any punishment have we not gone against Qur'anic law?

No, the Quran is in favour of justice no matter who its for or against.

right so let me get this straight if a person insults Islam (Muslim or non Muslim) the Qur'an states they walk, no punishment?

Did the person insult Islam? In this case, we simply do not know. There is a lot of spin that is available, very little facts.

And then there is the example the Prophet left us when a non Muslim decided to take a leak in the Prophet's mosque.

You know very well thats not what i said.

Re-read my post till it sinks in.

"You" wrote:

"Naz" wrote:

true but what if as a result of British Muslims interference the teacher is released without receiving any punishment have we not gone against Qur'anic law?

Was the punishment just?

40 lashes seems fair enough to me. But not execution, would be taking it too far.

"You" wrote:

Did the person insult Islam? In this case, we simply do not know. There is a lot of spin that is available, very little facts.

true we cant tell whether she did or not. But what is one suppose to do in this situation? How does one decide whether someone should or should no be punished where there are little facts?

"Naz" wrote:

"You" wrote:

Did the person insult Islam? In this case, we simply do not know. There is a lot of spin that is available, very little facts.

true we cant tell whether she did or not. But what is one suppose to do in this situation? How does one decide whether someone should or should no be punished where there are little facts?

Thats where ideally the matter is referred to a Qadi (Muslim Judge) Islamic law is pretty flexible, and very different judgements/fatwas etc can be made on the same facts. It has a LOT more depth and dimension than the (more bureaucratic) English legal system from what little ive learnt of it.. And whenever my knowledge in islamic law area increases, my total respect and honour for the likes of Imam abu Hanifa, etc only greatens

"Seraphim" wrote:

You know very well thats not what i said.

Re-read my post till it sinks in.

[size=18][color=orange][b]Sudan, the British Teacher and the Teddy Bear [/b][/color][/size]
By Majed Iqbal

The last couple of days have seen intense news coverage on an issue which has propelled out of proportion. The British teacher, Gillian Gibbons, 54, from Liverpool faces a jail sentence in Sudan for “allegedly” insulting Islam by letting her class of seven-year-olds name a teddy bear Muhammad as part of a school project.

Gillian, who works in the Unity High School, a British school where she taught the children of Sudanese professionals, expatriates and oil workers was arrested for “blaspheming” against Islam by allowing to name the teddy bear after the name of the Prophet of Islam. The story has struck an opportunity, once again in the press, to debate and air views over the “backwardness” of Islamic Culture, rules, customs and heritage which seems not to be synchronized with Western Civilisation standards and values which permeate many parts of the world.

Shock and horror is what can be currently described as the response of British people and press. How can such a menial issue of naming a teddy bear after a religious icon lead to barbaric punishments of lashing the victim? Why such fanaticism by Sudanese Authorities? How can such actions by the government be justified? Are these people even civilized? These are just some of the questions which will be circulating the minds and conscience of the British public coupled with utter disgust.And rightly so. Some of these questions will be causing concern. Here in Britain, British people are groomed with ideas of tolerance, respect for freedom of religion and fostering cohesion between different communities. However in this instance we seem to have been caught in an exchange of views which are equally narrow minded to those we have encountered by Sudanese authorities. A further look seems to display a very bigoted approach. Take the following messages for instance, posted on the day the story was covered in the Times newspaper.

The Sudanese embassy in London say that in their country the bear is seen as ‘fierce + dangerous’ - reminds one of a religion… possibly one whose founder was a polygamist, who practiced child marriage and sanctioned war to further his aims? (Adam, London)

It seems to me that Islamic law works on the principle that the end justifies the means. ‘The end’ (the spread of Islam and honour of Allah) justifies ‘the means’ (e.g. suppression of criticism, if necessary by force). Unless it is questioned whether Allah agrees with this principle, such persecution will continue indefinitely. (James, Romford, UK)

It’s a bear faced cheek - everyone in this country should rename their teddies ‘Muhammad’ in an act of soft toy defiance against these idiots! Either that or a simple solution to the ‘War on Terror’ - parachute 50,000 teddies into Afghanistan all labeled Muhammad and watch the Taliban self implode with rage… (Richard, Bromley, UK)

So where do we draw the line on the discussion on who is more civilized than the other with the array of views voiced above? Is there any difference between Sudanese and British responses?

Without a shadow of doubt, the British teacher has been caught up in case which is sense less and has been blown totally out of proportion by international media with a “good” versus “bad” limelight to the debacle. However, a further look at the case discloses more than meets the eye.

The article in the Times newspaper (27/11/07) clearly gives a quote from a parent stating that no complaints where made by any parents. A ”disgruntled fellow teacher ” is said to have had a grudge against the Christian set up school.

The first article printed in the times on 26/11/2007 quoted Bishop Ezekiel Kondo, chairman of the school council that “the school was in dispute with authorities over taxes, and suggested that Ms Gibbons, who arrived in Khartoum in August, may have been caught up in that ”

Several analysts have also said that the Sudanese government could be pressing the teacher’s case as leverage against the intense criticism from Britain and other Western countries over its handling of the crisis in Sudan’s Darfur region. Sudan has been a country marred by intervention by various colonial powers including America, who have been openly financing John Garang, former leader of the rebel Sudan People’s Liberation Army in attempting to create civil war in Sudan.

Further to this, the French and British welcomed the passing of UN resolution 1706 in August 2006 calling for the deployment of UN ‘peacekeepers’ to supplement the 7000 African Union troops adding to the turbulent political crisis in Sudan.

So does the case of the British teacher currently arrested in Sudan revolve around Religion or politics? Obviously the Teddy bear can’t tell us anything.

http://majedsblog.wordpress.com/2007/11/29/sudan-the-british-teacher-and...