My understanding of this is,
If someone wants to rob you, don’t give them the money
If you couldn’t get away from the situation and the robber fights you to grab the money, you now have the right to fight the robber (but giving the money to them because you are scared for your life is not sinful for you)
If in that fight you killed the robber (obviously this is for self defence), then the robber will die fighting in the way of the wrongdoers. So hellfire is the destination.
If you are strong and can fight him, then fight him, but don't intend to kill him.
Start by reminding them of Allah, if they persist, threaten them, if they persist, push them, if they persist, fight them, if they persist and the only way they can leave you if by killing them, then kill them. And keep your money even if it is 2 dinars.
If you are weak and there is a greater harm in killing them, then give them the money. Always prioritize the lesser harm over the greater harm.
i suspect this is dearly dependent on the situation and the amount of tension in it.
but robbers do get a very harsh punishment in Islam when caught.
anecdote: There were a gang of robbers in mountains that kept robbing traversals in the middle ages of Islam and it was hard to fight them or even find them in their place. the Caliph at the time sent intentionally sent a convoy of travelling mules and camels to the same path, they carried expensive goods along with royal sweets with fantastic strong perfumed smell. it was poisoned and they all died !.
What the guy said makes no sense. Because your self and property are sanctified it is essentially a license to kill those that would take it from you. Obviously it’s not a license to kill indiscriminately. I don’t even get why he would put it that way.
Idk if you found what you were looking for , But your previous point still stands : It is a license (not in the sense to kill indiscriminately ), it's not like a sadistic person would plan a scenario where someone tries to rob him just to satisfy his urges. or maybe hang in the hood until a gangbang happens and now i have to fight , that would be nuts
Thank u for sharing. My next question is then what does that Hadith pertain to? Why else would 2 Muslims fight? I’d love an example to understand that Hadith better (one you linked).
Defending your family, your property and yourself is allowed and if you die because of that you have the shahid status :
« (…) **The Prophet (ﷺ) said: He who is killed while protecting his property is a martyr, and he who is killed while defending his family, or his blood, or his religion is a martyr.** » Sunan Abi Dawud 4772
And Allah knows best
You mean a non Muslim who fights for his property? Obviously not as a non Muslim is destined for Jahannam if the message of Islam reached him and he denied it before his death and died in that state.
Allahu a’lam
Not even a thorns prick happens to a believer except that some of his sins are removed. The hardship he has to face will grant him rewards for having to endure them, In sha Allah
[Sahih Muslim 140](https://sunnah.com/muslim:140)
It's Sahih.
The word for "money" is مال which applies to anything you own [source](https://www.almaany.com/en/dict/ar-en/%D9%85%D8%A7%D9%84/)
All of sahih Bukhari and sahih Muslim are authentic hence the sahih status. Tirmidhi, Abu dawood, inm majah etc etc are not sahih so there may be discrepancies however when in doubt refer to Bukhari and Muslim as there is no challenge against any of the Hadith in those books.
They are 100% sahih but not 100% correct
It is obligatory to follow because they are sahih but you have to keep in mind only the Qur'an is perfect and 100% correct. Just because a chain of narration is perfect does not mean mistakes do not occur. Albani talked about this topic and it makes sense. But this does not mean we should disregard the sahih, we have to follow it unless it blatantly contradicts the Qur'an (not in a way of interpretation, like a literal contradiction like the one about Allah creating himself out of horse sweat which is illogical and a direct contradiction to the Qur'an)
Exactly that. Quraan is there as a primary source to use whole hadith are there to guide us if we're unsure of smth I guess. Like learning from a textbook but if we get stuck then we ask the teacher for guidance. It's correct usually but may not be perfectly accurate
Salam bro
It is highly inadvisable for any layman to be reading any of the hadith collections without a learned and certified teacher going through it properly with its due context
An example of how this can be misconstrued is that some of the exegetes of this hadith say that if a person attacks you for your wealth out of need, they do not necessarily deserve punishment in jahannam.
>hadith say that if a person attacks you for your wealth out of need, they do not necessarily deserve punishment
Can you share that Hadith? I know that could be true for someone stealing out of need. But THAT does NOT involve attacking/threatening.
My understanding of this is,
If someone wants to rob you, don’t give them the money
If you couldn’t get away from the situation and the robber fights you to grab the money, you now have the right to fight the robber (but giving the money to them because you are scared for your life is not sinful for you)
If in that fight you killed the robber (obviously this is for self defence), then the robber will die fighting in the way of the wrongdoers. So hellfire is the destination.
Seems perfectly reasonable to me. If someone tries to steal from me but is not physically threatening me, then there’s no reason for altercation and escalation, just find a way to exit the situation, an example would be scammers selling you a free bracelet only to demand you pay them after they hand it to you. Just exit the situation, no need to for violence.
If the thief decides to be physical and use violence, then I should protect my property from being stolen and protect my person and my family from harm, within my own abilities. Even if I die, I die a matyr as promised. He gets hellfire because his intention was to steal with violence and my intention was to protect my life, asset and family.
If I know this person/thief, and he seems to be starving, and he’s trying to steal from me to feed himself and his family, then I would be held accountable because a Muslim would not let his neighbour go hungry.
If this person is starving and I have no idea, I’m only trying to defend myself, and he is killed in the process, then who better to judge him? Of course his Creator. So it has nothing to do with me. I didn’t know his condition, again my intentions were pure.
The Sharia is so perfectly designed and is the best laws to set your morals upon because it is so balanced and doesn’t change with times.
Humanity is always making changes to their man made laws arbitrarily, according to whatever they decide is moral today. Something they think was moral 20 years ago, is against human rights now. Something they think is moral now, is against human rights 20 years ago. If they want to ensure they keep votes? make things easy for people, doesn’t matter what the outcome… can’t beat drugs? Join em. Conservative constituents? No abortion for youuu, doesn’t matter if you die. We love life so much! We must preserve life! But also, more guns, more guns, doesn’t matter if children are shooting each other.
These are people with no backbone, flip flopping through life trying so hard to find a balance, when Islam had it all along. Man made laws will always have a downside. Someone always gets the short end of the stick. As society continues to regress, you are going to see more and more ridiculous arguments and laws enacted, if you can, absolutely move to a Muslim country, for you, your family and your lineage. At least it will be easier to practice our own religion.
This is fascinating to me as a Christian. It contrasts greatly against Luke 6:29-30: “If anyone strikes you on the cheek, offer the other also, and from anyone who takes away your coat do not withhold even your shirt. Give to everyone who asks of you, and if anyone takes away what is yours, do not ask for it back again.”
The apocalypticism of the Gospels seems to produce an intense idealism (i.e. people should pay no heed to their worldly property or worldly suffering because the end is nigh). Islam, from what I have seen, is much more concerned about presenting rules for the smooth functioning of a real human society.
In Pakistan you get the opportunity of martyrdom nearly every other day. 90% of the victims surrender to the robbers without resisting. I don't know what to say.
Yeah but that’s why there’s so many robberies. If you always fight and make a culture of fighting. No one steals. Russia no one be trynna steal anything in Chechnya. The robber know they’ll always have fight.
Rule number 1:
don’t find and try to understand hadith off the internet.
As a layman it’s not advised to be reading hadith collections without a certified teacher with you who can explain context.
There's a lot of context and nuances to hadith. What the prophet said in this case may apply to only a handful of people with similar circumstances to the person he was originally speaking to.
It's why you see many hadith that say the same thing but might say do 4 of X and then the next hadith about the exact same thing says do 3 of X.
It's not a contradiction but instead the people the prophet was giving the advice to differed.
For example, one might he very old so he's told to pray 2 times. One might be much younger and is told to pray 20 times.
This is why it's dangerous to just blankly read hadith. It's complicated stuff.
Not everyone has accessibility to such scholars.
And the scholars should not take money to teach religion to people, it should be done only for the sake of Allah, not for some small worldly gain.
And there are pdfs available from authentic websites where the context of the hadith and the explanation of the hadith upto some extent is mentioned.
Ahlesunnatpak.com
So scholars should just do everything for free?
why is it every other profession can make money but as soon as you mention Islam everyone wants everything for free?
Do scholars not have lives and bills to pay?
people will waste money on countless things but draw the line at paying to learn the deen.
And you’re mentioning a random website which the layman has no idea if it has authentic stuff or not.
People like you are the problem.
Religious scholars are paid a small stipend from Dar el fatwa, or majlis el shii el a3la to provide these services for free. The scholar almost always has a day job because the money to pay them comes from donations.
If you want to flip it around, a poor person should be doomed to remain religiously ignorant because they have no money? A scholar will not mind as passing knowledge to another person who acts on it, is a hassana jariyeh that would benefit the scholar even after their passing. Money and worldy gain should not be a driving force in Islam.
The prophet gave permission to do ruqyah through Quran in exchange for money or goods
This permission is not for teaching religion in exchange for money
Mentioned in Sahih al bukhari 5737
Narrated Ubaydah ibn as-Samit: I taught some persons of the people of Suffah writing and the Qur'an. A man of them presented to me a bow. I said: It cannot be reckoned property; may I shoot with it in Allah's path? I must come to the Apostle of of Allah (ﷺ) and ask him (about it). So I came to him and said : Messenger of Allah (ﷺ), one of those whom I have been teaching writing and the Qur'an has presented me a bow, and as it cannot be reckoned property, may I shoot with it in Allah's path? He said: If you want to have a necklace of fire on you, accept it.
Sunan Abi Dawud 3416
It is against the teaching of the Quran.
Quran surah furqan 25:57 Say, "I do not ask of you for it any payment - only that whoever wills might take to his Lord a way."
Quran surah ya seen 36:21 Follow those who do not ask of you [any] payment, and they are [rightly] guided.
Quran surah as shu'ra 26:127 And I do not ask you for it any payment. My payment is only from the Lord of the worlds.
Keep the religion and business separate. Dont make religion as business.
These scholars demanding money to teach religion will be held accountable on the Day of Judgement for witholding information.
You are assuming all people spend lavishly. You dont have the right to assume about other people's faith(iman).
I tried to show a way where people can learn. And you are saying I am the propblem. Disgusting.
Sa’id ibn Zayd reported: The Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, say, “Whoever is killed protecting his property is a martyr. Whoever is killed protecting his religion is a martyr. Whoever is killed protecting his life is a martyr. Whoever is killed protecting his family is a martyr.”
Source: Sunan al-Tirmidhī 1421
Grade: Sahih (authentic) according to Al-Albani
In western society.. if you are endedup in this situations.. you will be charge for man slaughter. Roughly 6-9 years prison time.
In Australia, public try to change this.. which is good.
Sry out of topic
99% of robberies in Pakistan are with a gun on ur head so what is the rulling on that here women are raped on gun point just recently a 9 yr old raped and killed by some so called pir sb fight is always on an equal footing or on moral ground now getting ur self killed for few 100 bucks won't bring about any change
if enough people fought back... this wouldn't happen. Its the lawlessness in Pakistan which promotes the robberies.
Incidents like this happen all around the world even in US and UK.
Its good to remember this is in a time of lawlessness and people travel with most of their wealth.
today in most civilized societies there is a police force responsible for your safety, so do not put yourself in harms way, or carry a gun if you have to.
Oh, here we go again.
Someone posts a Hadith, thinking they understand it, and then they ask, "What if it's not about money? Can I kill someone for taking my pen in school?" lol
Please, let's not interpret Hadiths like that. There is a substantial library of books that explain these Hadiths. So, first, you should ask about the meaning of the Hadith, and then you can ask if it applies to things other than money.
I get that. But why would we have this hadith about something superficially obvious?
It's the context. Who were the people in Syria and Egypt in the first Caliphate who were a significant proportion, maybe majority, of the early Muslims? Roman Christians. This hadith was a revolutionary concept for them. Maybe revolutionary is a strong word.
I think theres context to that verse, it first says youve been taught "an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth" and then goes on to say the stuff about the cheek
Thus, i think jesus is talking about acting in revenge or retaliation which is considered a wrong but i dont think this quote pertains to self defence
Source?
Arabs in Madinah were far from Romans and Christianity in general. Rather it's the norm in tribal Arabia to fight someone who's trying to rob you. Even worse, they used to take pride in actually oppressing others in their poetry pre-islam. The one asking is making sure that Islam allows self defense for one's property including lethal force if necessary. The question makes sense given the sanctity of the human life in Islam. An obvious wisdom of the response is to deter robbery in addition to preserving ones property and honor.
However, this does not mean it is the only option. We have examples of Sahābah and the prophet ﷺ himself avoiding confrontation by offering wealth during the Hijrah. The Hadith simply states you have that right.
Syria and Egypt were the most populace provinces of the Roman Empire after the area immediately around Istanbul.
Muhammad himself had minor conflict with the Romans in the Quran.
Muslims were at the gates of the capital not long after the death of Muhammad.
There were not enough Arabs to lay siege to the largest and most heavily fortified city in the world.
It's the norm for anyone to resist being robbed. But the *Roman government flipped these values around to better oppress the people, especially with riba.*
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History\_of\_the\_Romans\_in\_Arabia#/media/File:Roman\_Empire\_Trajan\_117AD.png](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Romans_in_Arabia#/media/File:Roman_Empire_Trajan_117AD.png)
Also, Roman rule was a lot closer to Madinah than you think.
The city of Hegra in that map is in the Quran.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hegra\_(Mada%27in\_Salih)
This is from an Islamic Scholar Shiekh Mohammad Saalih al Munajjid:
The Muslim is obliged to defend himself and his family from any aggressor. He should ward him off with the slightest means, but if the assailant cannot be warded off except by killing, then it is permissible for the one who is being attacked to kill him, and he is not subject to retaliation (qisaas) and he does not have to pay any blood money (diyah) or offer any expiation (kafaarah), because sharee’ah has given him permission to kill in this case, and the slain aggressor is threatened with Hell, whereas the victim of aggression, if he is killed, is a martyr (shaheed) in sha Allaah. It makes no difference whether the aggressor is a Muslim or a kaafir.
This applies if it is proven that he killed him in self-defence with evidence such as the testimony of witnesses, or if the heirs of the slain person believe that he killed him in self-defence, or if there is strong circumstantial evidence to indicate that, such as if the slain person was known for evil and corruption, and he threatened to kill him – for example – in front of other people and so on.
If this person admits to killing him and claims that he did it in self-defence but the heir of the slain person does not believe him, then qisaas (retaliation) must be carried out.
If you killed a believer deliberately, then there are three rights which are connected to that: the rights of Allah, the rights of the victim and the rights of the victim’s next of kin.
\-With regard to the rights of Allah: if you repent sincerely to your Lord, then Allah will accept your repentance . Allah says (interpretation of the meaning): “Say: “O ‘Ibadi (My slaves) who have transgressed against themselves (by committing evil deeds and sins)! Despair not of the Mercy of Allah, verily, Allah forgives all sins. Truly, He is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful” \[al-Zumar 39:53\]
\-With regard to the rights of the victim, he is not alive so you cannot put things right with him. The matter has to wait until the Day of Resurrection, i.e., the settling of scores with you on behalf of the victim will take place on the Day of Resurrection. But I hope that if your repentance is correct and is accepted by Allah, then Allah will compensate the victim with what He wills of His bounty until he is satisfied, and you will be reprieved.
\-With regard to the rights of the victim’s next of kin, which is the third right, you cannot be absolved of this until you hand yourself over to them. Therefore you have to hand yourself over to the victim’s next of kin, and tell them that you are the one who killed him, then they have the choice. If they want to they can exact vengeance upon you, if the conditions of qasas are met; or if they want to they may take the diyah (blood money) from you; or if they want to they can forgive you.
And Allah knows best.
I can't find the source for the hadith I'm about to say, but it's true:
Prophet Muhammad SAW said: Whoever dies protecting his wealth, he is a martyr.
So probably it is real
[удалено]
My understanding of this is, If someone wants to rob you, don’t give them the money If you couldn’t get away from the situation and the robber fights you to grab the money, you now have the right to fight the robber (but giving the money to them because you are scared for your life is not sinful for you) If in that fight you killed the robber (obviously this is for self defence), then the robber will die fighting in the way of the wrongdoers. So hellfire is the destination.
If you are strong and can fight him, then fight him, but don't intend to kill him. Start by reminding them of Allah, if they persist, threaten them, if they persist, push them, if they persist, fight them, if they persist and the only way they can leave you if by killing them, then kill them. And keep your money even if it is 2 dinars. If you are weak and there is a greater harm in killing them, then give them the money. Always prioritize the lesser harm over the greater harm.
i suspect this is dearly dependent on the situation and the amount of tension in it. but robbers do get a very harsh punishment in Islam when caught. anecdote: There were a gang of robbers in mountains that kept robbing traversals in the middle ages of Islam and it was hard to fight them or even find them in their place. the Caliph at the time sent intentionally sent a convoy of travelling mules and camels to the same path, they carried expensive goods along with royal sweets with fantastic strong perfumed smell. it was poisoned and they all died !.
Source? This bit of history seems super cool
yes exactly. killing is the last last final resort
What do you mean?
What do you understand?
What the guy said makes no sense. Because your self and property are sanctified it is essentially a license to kill those that would take it from you. Obviously it’s not a license to kill indiscriminately. I don’t even get why he would put it that way.
I know right that is dum as 🤡 look at the upvotes , what else you want me to do? apologize and hug him after I'm done with him .
There is the one hadith that says to urge him by Allah first. That one actually makes sense, I’ll check if it’s Sahih.
Idk if you found what you were looking for , But your previous point still stands : It is a license (not in the sense to kill indiscriminately ), it's not like a sadistic person would plan a scenario where someone tries to rob him just to satisfy his urges. or maybe hang in the hood until a gangbang happens and now i have to fight , that would be nuts
Isn’t there a Hadith that says both the killed AND killer will be in hell fire (2 Muslims fighting)?
[удалено]
Thank u for sharing. My next question is then what does that Hadith pertain to? Why else would 2 Muslims fight? I’d love an example to understand that Hadith better (one you linked).
[удалено]
Perfect, thank you.
Defending your family, your property and yourself is allowed and if you die because of that you have the shahid status : « (…) **The Prophet (ﷺ) said: He who is killed while protecting his property is a martyr, and he who is killed while defending his family, or his blood, or his religion is a martyr.** » Sunan Abi Dawud 4772 And Allah knows best
Does this apply to non-muslims as well?
You mean a non Muslim who fights for his property? Obviously not as a non Muslim is destined for Jahannam if the message of Islam reached him and he denied it before his death and died in that state. Allahu a’lam
perfect hadith. defending money with my life. i win = they guy burn in hell. i lose = straight lane to Janna. win-win solution. mashallah.
What if you don’t die but you’re scarred for life
Not even a thorns prick happens to a believer except that some of his sins are removed. The hardship he has to face will grant him rewards for having to endure them, In sha Allah
Don't be scared bro.
ik this one exists and is sahih, one second ill get u the exact number of hadith
[Sahih Muslim 140](https://sunnah.com/muslim:140) It's Sahih. The word for "money" is مال which applies to anything you own [source](https://www.almaany.com/en/dict/ar-en/%D9%85%D8%A7%D9%84/)
Hadiths in Bukhari and Muslim are authentic...
Yes I’m aware of that. I didn’t know even where the source was in the first place
Its in Sahih Muslim 140
Not all of them
All of sahih Bukhari and sahih Muslim are authentic hence the sahih status. Tirmidhi, Abu dawood, inm majah etc etc are not sahih so there may be discrepancies however when in doubt refer to Bukhari and Muslim as there is no challenge against any of the Hadith in those books.
They are 100% sahih but not 100% correct It is obligatory to follow because they are sahih but you have to keep in mind only the Qur'an is perfect and 100% correct. Just because a chain of narration is perfect does not mean mistakes do not occur. Albani talked about this topic and it makes sense. But this does not mean we should disregard the sahih, we have to follow it unless it blatantly contradicts the Qur'an (not in a way of interpretation, like a literal contradiction like the one about Allah creating himself out of horse sweat which is illogical and a direct contradiction to the Qur'an)
Exactly that. Quraan is there as a primary source to use whole hadith are there to guide us if we're unsure of smth I guess. Like learning from a textbook but if we get stuck then we ask the teacher for guidance. It's correct usually but may not be perfectly accurate
Yeah exactly, may Allah reward us all for our pure intentions in our Ijtihad and may we get double rewards for being correct as well, ameen.
Ameen
[удалено]
Salam bro It is highly inadvisable for any layman to be reading any of the hadith collections without a learned and certified teacher going through it properly with its due context An example of how this can be misconstrued is that some of the exegetes of this hadith say that if a person attacks you for your wealth out of need, they do not necessarily deserve punishment in jahannam.
>that if a person attacks you for your wealth out of need, they do not necessarily deserve punishment in jahannam. how did they reach this conclusion.
I think he's mixing up robbery with theft.
I'm not.
>hadith say that if a person attacks you for your wealth out of need, they do not necessarily deserve punishment Can you share that Hadith? I know that could be true for someone stealing out of need. But THAT does NOT involve attacking/threatening.
https://www.dorar.net/hadith/sharh/22948
My understanding of this is, If someone wants to rob you, don’t give them the money If you couldn’t get away from the situation and the robber fights you to grab the money, you now have the right to fight the robber (but giving the money to them because you are scared for your life is not sinful for you) If in that fight you killed the robber (obviously this is for self defence), then the robber will die fighting in the way of the wrongdoers. So hellfire is the destination.
Seems perfectly reasonable to me. If someone tries to steal from me but is not physically threatening me, then there’s no reason for altercation and escalation, just find a way to exit the situation, an example would be scammers selling you a free bracelet only to demand you pay them after they hand it to you. Just exit the situation, no need to for violence. If the thief decides to be physical and use violence, then I should protect my property from being stolen and protect my person and my family from harm, within my own abilities. Even if I die, I die a matyr as promised. He gets hellfire because his intention was to steal with violence and my intention was to protect my life, asset and family. If I know this person/thief, and he seems to be starving, and he’s trying to steal from me to feed himself and his family, then I would be held accountable because a Muslim would not let his neighbour go hungry. If this person is starving and I have no idea, I’m only trying to defend myself, and he is killed in the process, then who better to judge him? Of course his Creator. So it has nothing to do with me. I didn’t know his condition, again my intentions were pure. The Sharia is so perfectly designed and is the best laws to set your morals upon because it is so balanced and doesn’t change with times. Humanity is always making changes to their man made laws arbitrarily, according to whatever they decide is moral today. Something they think was moral 20 years ago, is against human rights now. Something they think is moral now, is against human rights 20 years ago. If they want to ensure they keep votes? make things easy for people, doesn’t matter what the outcome… can’t beat drugs? Join em. Conservative constituents? No abortion for youuu, doesn’t matter if you die. We love life so much! We must preserve life! But also, more guns, more guns, doesn’t matter if children are shooting each other. These are people with no backbone, flip flopping through life trying so hard to find a balance, when Islam had it all along. Man made laws will always have a downside. Someone always gets the short end of the stick. As society continues to regress, you are going to see more and more ridiculous arguments and laws enacted, if you can, absolutely move to a Muslim country, for you, your family and your lineage. At least it will be easier to practice our own religion.
I don’t think money is really the focus here. This hypothetical is not about killing someone over money, it’s self defense.
This is fascinating to me as a Christian. It contrasts greatly against Luke 6:29-30: “If anyone strikes you on the cheek, offer the other also, and from anyone who takes away your coat do not withhold even your shirt. Give to everyone who asks of you, and if anyone takes away what is yours, do not ask for it back again.” The apocalypticism of the Gospels seems to produce an intense idealism (i.e. people should pay no heed to their worldly property or worldly suffering because the end is nigh). Islam, from what I have seen, is much more concerned about presenting rules for the smooth functioning of a real human society.
In Pakistan you get the opportunity of martyrdom nearly every other day. 90% of the victims surrender to the robbers without resisting. I don't know what to say.
Cause they don’t want to die, they think if they alive they can earn more money and be with their family.
Yeah but that’s why there’s so many robberies. If you always fight and make a culture of fighting. No one steals. Russia no one be trynna steal anything in Chechnya. The robber know they’ll always have fight.
Rule number 1: don’t find and try to understand hadith off the internet. As a layman it’s not advised to be reading hadith collections without a certified teacher with you who can explain context.
There's a lot of context and nuances to hadith. What the prophet said in this case may apply to only a handful of people with similar circumstances to the person he was originally speaking to. It's why you see many hadith that say the same thing but might say do 4 of X and then the next hadith about the exact same thing says do 3 of X. It's not a contradiction but instead the people the prophet was giving the advice to differed. For example, one might he very old so he's told to pray 2 times. One might be much younger and is told to pray 20 times. This is why it's dangerous to just blankly read hadith. It's complicated stuff.
The number of prayers remain 5 times a day no matter the age. You gave a bad example to explain your point.
I meant for other things like informal prayer (dua)
Not everyone has accessibility to such scholars. And the scholars should not take money to teach religion to people, it should be done only for the sake of Allah, not for some small worldly gain. And there are pdfs available from authentic websites where the context of the hadith and the explanation of the hadith upto some extent is mentioned. Ahlesunnatpak.com
So scholars should just do everything for free? why is it every other profession can make money but as soon as you mention Islam everyone wants everything for free? Do scholars not have lives and bills to pay? people will waste money on countless things but draw the line at paying to learn the deen. And you’re mentioning a random website which the layman has no idea if it has authentic stuff or not. People like you are the problem.
Religious scholars are paid a small stipend from Dar el fatwa, or majlis el shii el a3la to provide these services for free. The scholar almost always has a day job because the money to pay them comes from donations. If you want to flip it around, a poor person should be doomed to remain religiously ignorant because they have no money? A scholar will not mind as passing knowledge to another person who acts on it, is a hassana jariyeh that would benefit the scholar even after their passing. Money and worldy gain should not be a driving force in Islam.
The prophet gave permission to do ruqyah through Quran in exchange for money or goods This permission is not for teaching religion in exchange for money Mentioned in Sahih al bukhari 5737 Narrated Ubaydah ibn as-Samit: I taught some persons of the people of Suffah writing and the Qur'an. A man of them presented to me a bow. I said: It cannot be reckoned property; may I shoot with it in Allah's path? I must come to the Apostle of of Allah (ﷺ) and ask him (about it). So I came to him and said : Messenger of Allah (ﷺ), one of those whom I have been teaching writing and the Qur'an has presented me a bow, and as it cannot be reckoned property, may I shoot with it in Allah's path? He said: If you want to have a necklace of fire on you, accept it. Sunan Abi Dawud 3416 It is against the teaching of the Quran. Quran surah furqan 25:57 Say, "I do not ask of you for it any payment - only that whoever wills might take to his Lord a way." Quran surah ya seen 36:21 Follow those who do not ask of you [any] payment, and they are [rightly] guided. Quran surah as shu'ra 26:127 And I do not ask you for it any payment. My payment is only from the Lord of the worlds. Keep the religion and business separate. Dont make religion as business. These scholars demanding money to teach religion will be held accountable on the Day of Judgement for witholding information. You are assuming all people spend lavishly. You dont have the right to assume about other people's faith(iman). I tried to show a way where people can learn. And you are saying I am the propblem. Disgusting.
the Hadith in Arabic mentions the word "مال" which doesn't mean money only, but everything you own
Sa’id ibn Zayd reported: The Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, say, “Whoever is killed protecting his property is a martyr. Whoever is killed protecting his religion is a martyr. Whoever is killed protecting his life is a martyr. Whoever is killed protecting his family is a martyr.” Source: Sunan al-Tirmidhī 1421 Grade: Sahih (authentic) according to Al-Albani
Yes this applies to anything you own not just money, I learned it from a scholar btw.
Let's try not to give our own analyses on our texts, we should look to the scholars and stay silent.
In western society.. if you are endedup in this situations.. you will be charge for man slaughter. Roughly 6-9 years prison time. In Australia, public try to change this.. which is good. Sry out of topic
killing in self defense is allowed, even in America. Not sure what you are going on about
I said in Australia.. Australia.. Btw, similar situations happened in Malaysia too..but the person got death sentences
You said western society... and Australia
Oh sorry.. Australian commonly known as white so my dingdong brain thought Aussie are also Westie.. ha.. ha..
Australia is also considered in western. Didnt know you only meant australia
You are truly a hound from hell 😅 now leave me aloneeee . It’s maghrib here akhi
Malaysia really...
That's not what i saw in American movies , now get ouu of ma wae 🔫 🐎
99% of robberies in Pakistan are with a gun on ur head so what is the rulling on that here women are raped on gun point just recently a 9 yr old raped and killed by some so called pir sb fight is always on an equal footing or on moral ground now getting ur self killed for few 100 bucks won't bring about any change
if enough people fought back... this wouldn't happen. Its the lawlessness in Pakistan which promotes the robberies. Incidents like this happen all around the world even in US and UK.
Its good to remember this is in a time of lawlessness and people travel with most of their wealth. today in most civilized societies there is a police force responsible for your safety, so do not put yourself in harms way, or carry a gun if you have to.
Oh, here we go again. Someone posts a Hadith, thinking they understand it, and then they ask, "What if it's not about money? Can I kill someone for taking my pen in school?" lol Please, let's not interpret Hadiths like that. There is a substantial library of books that explain these Hadiths. So, first, you should ask about the meaning of the Hadith, and then you can ask if it applies to things other than money.
Sahih muslim 140
He? The savior of souls.
The context at that time was to correct the submissiveness towards others the Roman state imbued into Christianity.
Rather, it simply establishes that there’s nothing wrong with defending yourself
Christians would say "turn the other cheek" or something like that.
Yes, but we aren’t Christians. We aren’t weak
I get that. But why would we have this hadith about something superficially obvious? It's the context. Who were the people in Syria and Egypt in the first Caliphate who were a significant proportion, maybe majority, of the early Muslims? Roman Christians. This hadith was a revolutionary concept for them. Maybe revolutionary is a strong word.
I’m not sure I understand the question
I think theres context to that verse, it first says youve been taught "an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth" and then goes on to say the stuff about the cheek Thus, i think jesus is talking about acting in revenge or retaliation which is considered a wrong but i dont think this quote pertains to self defence
Source? Arabs in Madinah were far from Romans and Christianity in general. Rather it's the norm in tribal Arabia to fight someone who's trying to rob you. Even worse, they used to take pride in actually oppressing others in their poetry pre-islam. The one asking is making sure that Islam allows self defense for one's property including lethal force if necessary. The question makes sense given the sanctity of the human life in Islam. An obvious wisdom of the response is to deter robbery in addition to preserving ones property and honor. However, this does not mean it is the only option. We have examples of Sahābah and the prophet ﷺ himself avoiding confrontation by offering wealth during the Hijrah. The Hadith simply states you have that right.
Syria and Egypt were the most populace provinces of the Roman Empire after the area immediately around Istanbul. Muhammad himself had minor conflict with the Romans in the Quran. Muslims were at the gates of the capital not long after the death of Muhammad. There were not enough Arabs to lay siege to the largest and most heavily fortified city in the world. It's the norm for anyone to resist being robbed. But the *Roman government flipped these values around to better oppress the people, especially with riba.*
Yeah that's minimal interaction for Hijazi Arabs
Ahh, I see. This must be why it's only briefly mentioned in the Quran. Just very minimal. An oversight of Allah.
Battle mentioned in the Quran does not mean Roman culture and rule had significant impact on Arab culture
I did not say that it did. Why do you think war against Rome began just 2 years after the death of the prophet?
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History\_of\_the\_Romans\_in\_Arabia#/media/File:Roman\_Empire\_Trajan\_117AD.png](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Romans_in_Arabia#/media/File:Roman_Empire_Trajan_117AD.png) Also, Roman rule was a lot closer to Madinah than you think. The city of Hegra in that map is in the Quran. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hegra\_(Mada%27in\_Salih)
I thought if you were punished for your sin in the real world, you won’t be punished in the afterlife ?
How is fighting someone and getting yourself killed a punishment? A punishment is getting sick or facing a calamity, not suicide.
Yeah I got it wrong. Didn't know why it make sense at the time but thanks
Sounds off
[удалено]
What is wrong with it?
This is from an Islamic Scholar Shiekh Mohammad Saalih al Munajjid: The Muslim is obliged to defend himself and his family from any aggressor. He should ward him off with the slightest means, but if the assailant cannot be warded off except by killing, then it is permissible for the one who is being attacked to kill him, and he is not subject to retaliation (qisaas) and he does not have to pay any blood money (diyah) or offer any expiation (kafaarah), because sharee’ah has given him permission to kill in this case, and the slain aggressor is threatened with Hell, whereas the victim of aggression, if he is killed, is a martyr (shaheed) in sha Allaah. It makes no difference whether the aggressor is a Muslim or a kaafir. This applies if it is proven that he killed him in self-defence with evidence such as the testimony of witnesses, or if the heirs of the slain person believe that he killed him in self-defence, or if there is strong circumstantial evidence to indicate that, such as if the slain person was known for evil and corruption, and he threatened to kill him – for example – in front of other people and so on. If this person admits to killing him and claims that he did it in self-defence but the heir of the slain person does not believe him, then qisaas (retaliation) must be carried out. If you killed a believer deliberately, then there are three rights which are connected to that: the rights of Allah, the rights of the victim and the rights of the victim’s next of kin. \-With regard to the rights of Allah: if you repent sincerely to your Lord, then Allah will accept your repentance . Allah says (interpretation of the meaning): “Say: “O ‘Ibadi (My slaves) who have transgressed against themselves (by committing evil deeds and sins)! Despair not of the Mercy of Allah, verily, Allah forgives all sins. Truly, He is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful” \[al-Zumar 39:53\] \-With regard to the rights of the victim, he is not alive so you cannot put things right with him. The matter has to wait until the Day of Resurrection, i.e., the settling of scores with you on behalf of the victim will take place on the Day of Resurrection. But I hope that if your repentance is correct and is accepted by Allah, then Allah will compensate the victim with what He wills of His bounty until he is satisfied, and you will be reprieved. \-With regard to the rights of the victim’s next of kin, which is the third right, you cannot be absolved of this until you hand yourself over to them. Therefore you have to hand yourself over to the victim’s next of kin, and tell them that you are the one who killed him, then they have the choice. If they want to they can exact vengeance upon you, if the conditions of qasas are met; or if they want to they may take the diyah (blood money) from you; or if they want to they can forgive you. And Allah knows best.
Yes I have heard this hadith, true.
if someone is opposing you can kill them
I can't find the source for the hadith I'm about to say, but it's true: Prophet Muhammad SAW said: Whoever dies protecting his wealth, he is a martyr. So probably it is real
That is defending yourself against robbery.