Thread by @Aal_Moalim

Some questions to this ignoramus:

1- Where in the text highlighted with the red arrow does it say “but their blood and their wealth is permissible”?

https://twitter.com/aal_moalim/status/1436652089778884611

2- Why didn’t you read and translate the passage “وإن كنا لا نحكم على هذا الشخص لعدم قيام الحجة عليه? which comes right after the passage quoted above (Point 3)

https://twitter.com/aal_moalim/status/1436652093985722370

3- This ignoramus gives a horrible translation to Point 5 that completely distorts the intended meaning as shown in the linked tweet

https://twitter.com/aal_moalim/status/1436652097290780675?s=21

4- The ignoramus shoots himself in the foot here when he attempts to translate Point 7 as he doesn’t realise it destroys the entire rant he has in the middle of his video

Question:

You said that they “stop until the information is presented etc”

Stop from doing what?

https://twitter.com/Aal_Moalim/status/1436652101761908737

And that’s me ignoring the terrible translation & going just by what you said.

Stop from doing what? What are they “stopping themselves” from?

If you say stop from making Takfir, well they already said, according to you that this person is not a Muslim.

So it can’t be that

It can only be that they’re stopping themselves from applying the hukm of kufr (ie making the blood and wealth halal) until the Hujjah Al Risaaliyyah is established.

And as that’s the case, this completely renders the rant you had in the middle of the video irrelevant

As for the shock & horror drama show you put on because the Najdis say a person in the state of Shirk is not given the label of Muslim, then this is discussed here

https://twitter.com/Aal_Moalim/status/1436620595588907010

What should be shocking to everyone, be they Salafi, Ash’ari or Sufi, is the fact you think a person in the state of Major Shirk is still labelled a Muslim 🤣

We laugh at those liberals on here who label everyone Muslim no matter what they believe but you’re no different

Rather, as we mentioned above, Shirk and Tawheed are complete opposites that cannot be found in a person at the same time. It’s either one or the other

Ibn Qayyim said:

أن الله تعالى قسم الخلائق قسمين: سفيهًا لا أَسْفَه منه، ورشيدا فالسفيه من رَغِب عن مِلَّتِه إلى الشِّرك، والرشيد من تَبَرَّأ من الشِّرك قولاً وعملاً وحالاً فكان قولُه توحيدًا، وعملُه توحيدًا، وحالُه توحيدًا، ودعوتُه توحيدًا. فالمعرِضُ عن التوحيد مُشرك شاء أم أبى

But we differentiate between one whom Hujjah has been established & one whom the Hujjah has not been established.

The former is a Mushrik but the ruling of Kufr (ie the punishments attached in the Dunya & eternality in the fire) aren’t applied until the Hujjah is established

And some of the Najdiyyah attach these individuals to the Ahl Al Fatrah as we mentioned in thread 3

Whereas for the latter, the rulings of Kufr are applied in this Dunya as we judge by what’s apparent and Allah is the judge of what’s in the Batin

But neither are labelled Muslim

And to say this is like the Mu’tazilite belief of “Al Manzilah Bayn Al Manzilatayn” just exposes this individual’s ignorance further