Total Posts:4|Showing Posts:1-4
Jump to topic:

Muslim Opinion on Anjem Choudary

YassineB
Posts: 1,003
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/12/2015 5:37:31 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/11/2015 6:59:33 PM, ChristianPunk wrote:
What do you think of this statement? Is this usually his speech or is this possibly staged?



- I think these channels or programs should be avoided at all costs. & instead, if you're interested in Islam, either check what licensed muslim scholars say, & you can take whatever they say as face value, or enrol in a course in an academic capacity. Another way of learning about Islam, that is not quite educated, is asking actual muslims, they may not know much about it, but they'll sure help you get rid of any prejudices you might've had.
- I am not suggesting you do hold any prejudices against Islam, though we all have our own biases. In fact, I don't know many names of Christians on this website, but if I had to pick the most moderate of the lot, your name will probably be the first to come up, I think.

- That been said, in the Islamic Tradition, if someone is not a Licensed Scholar, then his/her personal opinion about any Issue of Islam is irrelevant to the Islamic Tradition, & that's because of the following (& let's take for example Shari'a Law):
> Shari'a Law is a purely academic discipline, & it's a vast science in its own. It is even more encompassing & much more vast than both Common Law & Civil Law. We never see unlicensed Lawyers, or unlicensed Judges, or Jurists. . . do we?! Well, it's the same.
> Shari'a Law in itself has many Legal Schools of Thought (there are 5 Major ones), most over 12 centuries old.
> These Legal Schools of Thought consists of:
* A Methodology -of inducing Laws- (a Legal Theory).
* A Corpus of Legal Positions (approved Laws).
* An Authoritative System.
> So, in order for a person's opinion on a legal matter (a matter in Shari'a) to be relevant to any of the Legal Schools of Thought, that person must adhere to any of the Methodologies (Legal Theory) adopted by the said Schools, & must be part of the Authoritative System of these Schools, otherwise, his/her opinion will not be admitted in any of the Legal Schools of Thought, it's thus worthless.
> Outside these Legal Schools of Thought, Shari'a doesn't exist.
=> The only way one can be part of the Legal Schools of Thought, is through License (Ijaza).
=> & the only way to get an Ijaza is to have a Sanad. Sanad is the Chain of Authority one must have attached to his name upon receiving the Ijaza (License), such that: the one that licensed him, was himself licensed by another, who was licensed by another, & so on, up to the Prophet himself.
=> In other words, if someones does not possess a Sanad, his/her opinions about Shari'a are irrelevant, & should be rejected.

- Now, back to out subject. Anjem Choudary or whatever his name is, is certainly NOT a Scholar, & thus whatever he has to say about Shari'a Law holds no weight, that is to the scholarly community, it'll probably hold some for his followers, or the Media that wants to exploit it. It's like a normal person deciding on what should or shouldn't be Legal, obviously he can't.

- Lastly, i watched the video, & this is what I got: Pretentious Biased Ignorance, with a political agenda, seemingly driven by religious fanaticism. . . wait for it: From Both Sides.
Current Debates In Voting Period:

- The Qur'an We Have Today is Not What Muhammad Dictated Verbatim. Vs. @Envisage:
http://www.debate.org...

- Drawing Contest. Vs. @purpleduck:
http://www.debate.org...

"It is perfectly permissible to vote on sources without reading them" bluesteel.
ChristianPunk
Posts: 1,710
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/12/2015 3:02:12 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/12/2015 5:37:31 AM, YassineB wrote:
At 2/11/2015 6:59:33 PM, ChristianPunk wrote:
What do you think of this statement? Is this usually his speech or is this possibly staged?



- I think these channels or programs should be avoided at all costs. & instead, if you're interested in Islam, either check what licensed muslim scholars say, & you can take whatever they say as face value, or enrol in a course in an academic capacity. Another way of learning about Islam, that is not quite educated, is asking actual muslims, they may not know much about it, but they'll sure help you get rid of any prejudices you might've had.
- I am not suggesting you do hold any prejudices against Islam, though we all have our own biases. In fact, I don't know many names of Christians on this website, but if I had to pick the most moderate of the lot, your name will probably be the first to come up, I think.

- That been said, in the Islamic Tradition, if someone is not a Licensed Scholar, then his/her personal opinion about any Issue of Islam is irrelevant to the Islamic Tradition, & that's because of the following (& let's take for example Shari'a Law):
> Shari'a Law is a purely academic discipline, & it's a vast science in its own. It is even more encompassing & much more vast than both Common Law & Civil Law. We never see unlicensed Lawyers, or unlicensed Judges, or Jurists. . . do we?! Well, it's the same.
> Shari'a Law in itself has many Legal Schools of Thought (there are 5 Major ones), most over 12 centuries old.
> These Legal Schools of Thought consists of:
* A Methodology -of inducing Laws- (a Legal Theory).
* A Corpus of Legal Positions (approved Laws).
* An Authoritative System.
> So, in order for a person's opinion on a legal matter (a matter in Shari'a) to be relevant to any of the Legal Schools of Thought, that person must adhere to any of the Methodologies (Legal Theory) adopted by the said Schools, & must be part of the Authoritative System of these Schools, otherwise, his/her opinion will not be admitted in any of the Legal Schools of Thought, it's thus worthless.
> Outside these Legal Schools of Thought, Shari'a doesn't exist.
=> The only way one can be part of the Legal Schools of Thought, is through License (Ijaza).
=> & the only way to get an Ijaza is to have a Sanad. Sanad is the Chain of Authority one must have attached to his name upon receiving the Ijaza (License), such that: the one that licensed him, was himself licensed by another, who was licensed by another, & so on, up to the Prophet himself.
=> In other words, if someones does not possess a Sanad, his/her opinions about Shari'a are irrelevant, & should be rejected.

- Now, back to out subject. Anjem Choudary or whatever his name is, is certainly NOT a Scholar, & thus whatever he has to say about Shari'a Law holds no weight, that is to the scholarly community, it'll probably hold some for his followers, or the Media that wants to exploit it. It's like a normal person deciding on what should or shouldn't be Legal, obviously he can't.

- Lastly, i watched the video, & this is what I got: Pretentious Biased Ignorance, with a political agenda, seemingly driven by religious fanaticism. . . wait for it: From Both Sides.

Good. Glad you disagree. To me, the 700 Club (CBN) is the Christian Right propaganda news channel. I disagree with their views, especially Pat Robertson. But Choudray has made bizarre statements that probably is the reason muslims are seen bad. Here's another video of him on Hannity.
http://youtu.be...
MEK
Posts: 253
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/13/2015 12:42:32 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/11/2015 6:59:33 PM, ChristianPunk wrote:
What do you think of this statement? Is this usually his speech or is this possibly staged?



I think the important thing to remember here is, as Sam Harris champions, beliefs matter regardless of the doctrine in which they are steeped. It simply doesn't matter whether or not his speech is staged or not because the propaganda he purports is widely accepted (by recent Poll and Pew studies) and supported by Muslims and non-Muslims alike. The concentrated efforts of violence through Jihad via the literal interpretation of the Quran cannot be overlooked and certainly not tolerated as any religion of peace.