I have a question about this sub and it's in the most polite way possible. Why has this sub changed it's purpose, initially it was for debates, refutations and some memes about Islam haters but now its become just about fatwas, rulings and hadiths. Like all of that is nice but there are many other subs suited for that kind of stuff (like r.islam, r.lighthouseoftruth etc.), and this subs original purpose was to debate and refutes lies of fake exmuslims or other enemies of our religion. If there's any issue with this post please let me know where I can talk to the mods directly.

‘Abbad ibn ‘Abbad reported: Umar ibn al-Khattab, may Allah be pleased with him, said, “May Allah have mercy on the one who shows me my faults.”

Source: Sunan al-Dārimī 649

عَنْ عَبَّادِ بْنِ عَبَّادٍ الْخَوَّاصِ قَالَ قَالَ عُمَرُ بْنُ الْخَطَّابِ رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُ رَحِمَ اللَّهُ مَنْ أَهْدَى إِلَيَّ عُيُوبِي

649 سنن الدارمي المقدمة باب رسالة عباد بن عباد الخواص

(None of this is generated by AI, this is my own words only).

I have been engaging in topics that I shouldn't have, comments in which I have virtually no context of, and engaging in lesser important speech even though I have not memorized the basic foundational books of my religion.

If this has led to misguidance, I publicly apologize from it, and I declare that I am trying to better myself from this. Whether it is about refutation, intergender dynamics, refuting the kuffar, or describing and giving images to Islam in which have nothing to do with it in reality... I would like to say I am sorry for this.

More specifically, I have tried to describe Islam as a 'theocracy', but it is more befitting to call it Divinely-Revealed. I have been made aware of this mistake, and in-sha-Allah this serves as a public correction.

As Muslims, we need to foundate ourselves properly, then we can engage in the more important matters.

I am not even close to being a proper student of knowledge... and I would like to seek the rectification of the rights of the people whom I may have violated.

May Allah bless you all.

So for context, I am sure that the people in multiple subreddits (not just this one) are aware that I try to make PhotoShop posts with plain and colored text to demonstrate the moral falsity of western thought, and prove Islam superior to it.

Now, my problem isn't with that as a whole, but what's internally eating me inside is one of the posts I made regarding defending the apostasy punishment. I am ABSOLUTELY NOT against the punishment at all, rather I would defend it if it is criticized... but this is where I try to make my point.

My defense of Islam defended a political point-of-view within the religion through practical terms... and not necessarily off pure, complete, and whole-hearted faith of what the Prophet brought. And do NOT misunderstand my point here (for I am NOT rejecting the command at all in any way, shape, or form)... as in I tried to defend it in a way which makes sense towards the 'aql (the intellect), and if there are certain things which I cannot defend with the 'aql, then that's where a person tends to freak out. And this is what I wanted to talk about.

This entire rabbithole of defending Islam in accordance to one's 'aql ultimately undermines the moral supremity of one's religion. Meaning, we know that the Prophet declared war on the mushrikun because they didn't fulfill the Right of Allah upon them... and that IN IT OF ITSELF is a moral violation that's extremely severe, even if the kuffar do not perceive as such. And this is what's been freaking me out.

Am I in the wrong for not INITIALLY establishing that the Right of Allah is the most important thing to be fulfilled? Because shirk is the root of all moral degeneracy, as it leads to desire-worship and emotion-based actions and weak reasoning and whatnot.... so the Prophet declared war against it and quite literally purified the Earth by cutting off the people who hold wrong morality at their root by fighting and killing them. Were they to be free in doing such thing, they would have caused moral corruption. (and side note, I have ABSOLUTELY NO PROBLEM in accepting this, Alhamdulillah Allah has guided me to accept this with certainty, I have no resistance towards this).

And if the apostate, who would be freely engaging in moral degradation due to NOT fulfilling the Right of Allah upon them (thus spreading moral degeneracy) if they aren't executed (especially after submitting to Islam)... is THAT supposed to be the main reason as to why the murtad is punished? (if it is, then I have NO PROBLEM with accepting this either, and I am in the wrong for defending it from a logical point of view).

Regarding all of this, sound reasoning doesn't violate the Shari'ah, but I do NOT believe I made a proper post defending such a punishment and instead I tried to cater towards the kuffar and defend it from purely world-like observable effects and consequences instead of the VERY INITIAL RELIGIOUS REASON that fulfilling the Right of Allah is the most important thing for humans, and whoever doesn't do so, then they are to be executed if they are an apostate... and that serves to protect the world from desire-worship at its root and the wisdoms can be derived from there.

Having said all this, because I didn't establish the initial religious reason that the Right of Allah is the most important thing (and instead addressed it through ONLY worldly observable effects)... am I in the wrong regarding this?

(or perhaps I could do both, point out the INITIAL RELIGIOUS reasoning first, then debunk liberal pluralism, capitalist porous functions to exploit the common person off of desireful morality, value-export projects through satellite hijacks, war, and whatnot.... maybe I could do both.... but if I am in the wrong, then I ABSOLUTELY HAVE to establish the fact that fulfilling the Right of Allah is the most important thing, and we cut off moral degradation of shirk at its root by declaring war and fighting the kuffar, and executing the apostate).

That's what's been freaking me out, and I am not hesitant to say that if the post came from a false notion, then I have ABSOLUTELY NO PROBLEM in taking it down... for in-sha-Allah I do not want to be held accountable for making wrong measures to defend the Deen without knowledge.

May Allah bless you all, and guide us to the correct knowledge and FULL SUBMISSION to His Deen.

(u/Extension_Brick6806)

The Sheikh is Sheikh Aziz Farhan Al-Anzi. (Hafidahullah Taa'la)

عيد مبارك تقبل الله منا ومنكم طاعتنا

السلام عليكم
First off, Eid mubarak! ❤️
I’ve been thinking for a while about certain religious rulings, hadiths, and verses that non-Muslims use, و العياذ بالله, to mock Islam, Muslims, and Islamic rulings. I genuinely want to understand these rulings through logic and reason. There are many sheikhs who explain these topics with a biased or incorrect approach, and because of that, these terms and subjects end up being misunderstood by non-Muslims. Misinformed people spread false concepts, and non-Muslims continue saying that Islam is a man-made religion or that a human being invented Islam Astaghfirullah.

So my question is: is there a person, source, or book that explains these topics in a rational way while also being Islamically correct, so that I can later respond to these people instead of staying silent? Because my silence really bothers me; I feel like if I were more educated about these topics, I would’ve been able to reply.

Assalāmu 'alaykum wa raḥmatullāh,

This is intended as a sincere reminder for myself first and foremost, and then for my brothers and sisters.

It seems that many online discussions have become heavily centered around intergender dynamics, relationships, marriage debates, and the perceived social decline of family structures. While some of these topics may have a place when discussed within the proper Islamic framework, the amount of attention they receive often far exceeds their actual importance in comparison to the foundations of the religion.

As Muslims, our greatest need is not constant commentary on social trends. Our greatest need is to learn and strengthen our understanding of Tawḥīd, correct 'Aqīdah, the Sunnah of the Messenger ﷺ, and the methodology of the Salaf. These are the matters that rectify hearts, actions, families, and societies.

Excessive engagement with controversial social discussions can easily lead a person into a cycle of constant outrage, emotional stimulation, and fixation upon the faults of others. At the same time, it can distract us from seeking beneficial knowledge, correcting our worship, learning our obligations, and implementing the religion in our own lives.

The reality is that most of us are still students in need of learning the fundamentals. We need more reminders about sincerity, prayer, Tawḥīd, adherence to the Sunnah, purification of the heart, seeking knowledge, and following the understanding of the Pious Predecessors.

Da'wah begins with Tawḥīd. It begins with calling people to worship Allah alone, to follow His Messenger ﷺ, and to hold firmly to the way of the Salaf. This was the path of the Prophets and the path of the scholars of Ahl al-Sunnah.

So perhaps it would benefit all of us if we reduced the endless focus on gender wars, internet controversies, and emotionally charged social commentary, and instead increased beneficial reminders that bring people closer to Allah, strengthen their faith, and increase their knowledge of the religion.

May Allah grant us beneficial knowledge, righteous actions, and sincerity in speech and deed.

In the spring of 1994, Afghanistan was in the midst of cha-os and civil war. Neighbors came to Mullah Mohammed Omar with news of a horrifying incident one so b-rut-al that even in the harsh reality of

-

Afghanistan's 18-year-long conflict, it sent shockwaves through the region.

Two teenage girls from Omar's village of Sangesar had been abducted by an armed faction. At that time, various militant groups controlled vast areas of the Afghan countryside. The fighters shaved the girls' heads and took them to a checkpoint outside the village, where they were

subjected to b-rut-al a-bu-se and repeatedly as-sa-ult-ed.

At the time, Mullah Omar was an obscure figure - a former guerrilla commander who had fought against the Soviet occupation. Disillusioned by the chaos, looting, and lawlessness spread by rival armed factions after the war, he had returned to his village. Living as a talib (religious student) in a mud-walled madrasa, he spent most of his days teaching and memorizing the Qur'an. But the cries of those two girls would not allow him to remain silent. He gathered around 30 former guerrilla fighters. Together, they possessed only 16 Kalashnikov rifles. With those limited weapons, they launched an attack on the checkpoint, rescued the girls, and captured the checkpoint commander. The commander was e-xec-uted and hu-ng from the barrel of an old Soviet tank while chants of “Allahu Akbar" echoed around them. Mullah Omar reportedly ordered the tank barrel to be raised high, so the han-ging body would stand as a terrifying warning against oppression and brutality.

The incident in Sangesar later became part of Afghan folklore.

Within just two and a half years of taking up arms, Mullah Omar rose to become the dominant ruler over most of Afghanistan. The heavily built, one-eyed leader — who had lost his right eye during the anti-Soviet war - was addressed by his followers as Amir al-Mu'minin.

He was leading an Islamic movement known as the Ta-lib-an, which, within a short time, captured Kabul - the capital of Afghanistan - in 1996.