If i could, I'd stop the speculative style & high frequency of pop lectures/videos on jinns, endtimes & dajjal (& freemason rubbish). It does not improve one bit Muslim life or action, but gives them excuses to be defeatist & fatalist -closing their minds with conspiracy theories
And any Muslims who thinks that the world is controlled by a cabal & every event that happens is deliberate by their design, should fear Allah (SWT). They attribute to humans the powers that only Allah (SWT) has. This is shirk of gnostics (believing in an evil god of this world)
Teach Muslims about jinns, dajjal and end times, but don't mix into it speculation. Also, those subjects were never meant to occupy our time and interest to the extreme level it does Muslims today. As hadith says (paraphrase) even if last day comes while planting a tree, plant it
I could sum up all the important points in one tweet: 1. Avoid Jinns 2. Memorise Surah Kahf 3. Don't worship humans not matter what they seem to do 4. Don't be surprised if the world may go through tumults 5. Prepare for your death, it is surely the end-time for you.
That's it.
Keep the reminder of surah al-kahf as a defence against ad-dajjal in the khutbah, and remind Muslims not to worship any humans (especially ones who can't even fix they're own eyes), but keep the public events & videos focused mostly on the practical effort to reimplement Islam
What's the point of preparing Muslims for dajjal, when most of them would've apostated to secular liberalism, marxism, atheism, feminism, LGBT/Queer theory, long before dajjal even arrives, becos Muslims were too busy thinking about estoteic matters to actually live/rule by Islam
Those obsessed with the topics (Jinn & Dajjal junkies), should be approached like food addiction. Eating alot is ok if you're also keeping active with all the other things you should be doing. But eating a lot when you're not active, makes u fat & more immobile.
Time for a diet
End-timer's paradox: the more we remind about Dajjal, the more we 'delay' his arrival. But the Mahdi can't arrive without Dajjal coming. And Muslims can't re-unite & revive Islam (FALSE!) without the mahdi. But the Mahdi will be 'delayed' if we keep reminding about the Dajjal..
This is the ridiculous paradox Muslims fall into when they start speculation on (ahad) narrations and use it to define their (in)actions today. If only we relied upon Allah (SWT) AND used our minds and hands to unite the Ummah and revive the implementation of Islam ourselves...
Therefore the problem is Muslims overly focusing on speculating the future & how close it is, as an excuse to inaction and barely pay attention to the glaringly lacking SERIOUS obligations we shud be doing like islamic ruling, unity, economics, preparing tech 4 defence, defence..
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
The governments of the Muslim world never seriously acted to save the Palestinians
In 1948, they sent less troops than the Israeli Haganah (later "IDF") had to fight to liberate the Palestinians.
Jordan stopped at taking the West Bank, Egypt stopped short of Tel Aviv.
THREAD
None of the Arab countries implemented mass mobilisation of their populations to supplement the number of the armies. Consequently, they only captured the West Bank and Gaza and Israel took the rest (including the areas designate by U.N for the Palestinian state).
The 1967 war wasn't initiated by the Arab states, but by Israel alone. Egypt's President never sent a full invasion army to the Sinai, but merely wanted a "show of force" to placate the Muslim populations demanding he retaliate for Israel's massacres of Jordanian villages.
Jihadis don't understand the difference between being able to fight pitched battles and guerrilla warfare. The Prophet's ﷺ army of Madinah, could fight much large forces because his army was able to fight pitched battles. A militia force that can't do that, isn't really an army.
Pitched battles are what armies are for, they mean you can 'stop' the enemy either from advancing or from conquering a fortified position. If you can't do that, you can't conquer them, and you can't stop them from going where they please - so no state can be formed by the Jihadis
Furthermore, it is wrong for Jihadis to disregard numbers. The Quran itself contains guidance for limitations of numbers (all other things being equal), 10-1 and then lessened to 2-1. The armies in the Muslim world outnumber Jihadis greater than 10-1, just in one state alone!
Why the 'Jihadi' methodology for revival is a weak opinion [THREAD]
Jihadis are those who believe in armed uprising against the warlords of the firaq ("rulers" of the factions controlling Muslim land with UnIslamic law and force, not consent).
Here's why this is a weak opinion
The reason Jihadis follow a weak opinion, and not a 'bida' method, is because they implement a hukm that comes from Islamic law to prevent Caliphs legislating not from the Book of Allah (SWT) - they just implement it in the wrong context (i.e. post-colonial Muslim world).
The reason they are the other side of the coin to Madkhalis, is that they both treat modern secular 'rulers' of nation-states with laws that assume a context of a Caliphate with 100% Islamic law. The former declare war, the latter obey and even don't publicly criticise their kufr
The deviation & 'bida' of Madkhalis (who demand we don't question the legitimacy of, or even publicly command the good and forbid evil to, secular regimes that legislate kufr laws over Allah's laws) is their treating of modern SECULAR rulers like a Caliphate w/ 100% Islamic laws
And as a defence mechanism, they will call anyone who calls to the classical Islamic understanding as 'deviants' and 'khawarij', despite the fact that mainstream classical and modern (salafi) scholars hold these positions (which is mine too):
The Madkhalis don't even understand how a state works, so they don't know how to intrepret scholars quotes and ahadith related to things like the difference between a Caliph judging badly in a one-off court case, and legislating secular kufr laws!
The Hijab IS NOT a 'religious symbol', it's just a covering that completes a dress covering the body (to the degree Islam mandates). The Hijab is no more religious than any other item of clothing eg blouse or (long) skirt
If Hijab is religious, then secular is full public nudity
This is because *ALL clothing* worn by Muslims is done for the sake of Allah (SWT) according to His commands.
If you pick on the 'hijab' a Muslim wears, you might as well pick on all clothing, as they all do the same thing - cover parts of the body not to be exposed in public
According to Islam, Muslims shouldn't wear low-cut tops, miniskirts or short-shorts (men included) or mid-rift exposing clothing (men included) - so are clothes that cover those areas also 'religious symbols' too according to secularists?!
The followers of Islam amongst the indigenous people of Al-Hind were rendered "foreign" by their exclusion from the British colonial categorisation "Hindu".
Before this, all people from the 'native' ethnicities of Al-Hind, were simply called Hindi (Arabic) or Hindu (Persian)
It is a falsehood that there is something that can be called 'Hinduism' when in fact it encompasses multiple mutually contradicting beliefs, folk religions and philosophies. If 'Hinduism' simply refers to all the religions believed by the people of Hind, then why not Islam too?
The Western export of the concept of Nationalism caused havoc in British occupied Hind, leading to the re-defining of Hindi to "Hindu", with one-nation theory, two-nation theory & multiple nation theory vying with one another to decide what Al-Hind wud look like wen British leave