The Imam Of Aqsa Mosque Denounces Takfiris

[Khudayar]

the Imam of the Holy al-Aqsa Mosque in al-Quds (Jerusalem) denounces the takfiri terrorists who wage war on Muslims in Syria and Iraq and he questions those who speak of the so-called freedom fight against Syria why they have never supported the freedom cause of Palestine millitarily:

 

Edited July 12, 2015 by Khudayar

[Sumerian]

Salamun Alaykum brother. It is said that Baytul Maqdis is not Masjid al-Aqsa, in Shia theology.

 

Read the following link: http://www.shiachat.com/forum/topic/234979032-what-does-masjid-al-aqsa-in-the-quran-refer/

[Ali_Hussain]

I've got nothing against this scholar, he is very eloquent, but from what I remember, he isn't actually the Imam of that mosque, I think that he is considered quite deviated by most sunnis, quite like dr. 'Adnan Ibrahim.

[colargol]

I've got nothing against this scholar, he is very eloquent, but from what I remember, he isn't actually the Imam of that mosque, I think that he is considered quite deviated by most sunnis, quite like dr. 'Adnan Ibrahim.

 

It's amazing how wrong you are in such a short sentence.

Care to specify the "most sunnis" part, how have you arrived at this quantifiable percentage? Like dr. Adnan Ibrahim? In what way? He is nothing like dr. Adnan in any possible way. If you measured him against Adnan Ibrahim, you won't find a single point where they are alike.

But the point of your post is to throw the name of Adnan Ibrahim against the wall and see if it sticks, isn't it!....

Edited July 12, 2015 by colargol

[Ali_Hussain]

It's amazing how wrong you are in such a short sentence.

Care to specify the "most sunnis" part, how have you arrived at this quantifiable percentage? Like dr. Adnan Ibrahim? In what way? He is nothing like dr. Adnan in any possible way. If you measured him against Adnan Ibrahim, you won't find a single point where they are alike.

But the point of your post is to throw the name of Adnan Ibrahim against the wall and see if it sticks, isn't it!....

 

Calm down, I had no ill or insincere intentions when I wrote this, if I'm wrong then I'll happily retract what I said.

 

Proving that "most sunnnis" find him deviated is very easy, have you heard his views on the war in Syria? For years he has been against the terrorists who have destroyed Syria, most Sunnis support the war in Syria and the only acceptable ending for them is the removal of the current regime, this is a fact, be it in real life or on the internet. It is clear. Sunnis have adopted a with us or against us policy on Syria, even after the rise of isis, most are too blind to realise what the removal of the current regime will mean.

 

My saying that he isn't the Imam of the mosque is based on the fact that he doesn't seem to have any scholarly credentials, he gives lessons there, sure, but does that make him the Imam? The press talk to him, sure, but he is very eloquent and controversial, the press love that kind of person, in reality the press probably raised his profile more than anything else.

 

The 'Adnan Ibrahim thing was more connected to the fact that he is a Sunni that Shi'as love, but he doesn't have the same appeal amongst his own. But you are right, they are different, Sunnis hate 'Adnan Ibrahim because of his beliefs, and hate Salah al-Din Ibrahim because of his political stance - although I'm sure that there are some belief issues as well, to be honest, I sort of looked into him 2 years ago or so, and now when you google his name, different hits come up from the ones that came up 2 years ago.

 

He doesn't seem very popular to me:

 

http://www.dd-sunnah.net/forum/showthread.php?t=161807

 

I'm sorry if I offended you, or said anything that was incorrect, I wasn't trying to be deceitful.

Edited July 12, 2015 by Ali_Hussain

[colargol]

@Ali Hussain.

 

Saying sunnis support the catastrophe that has become Syria, is like saying shias love the tyrant who rules it. Both are not true.

The complexities involved in shaping these views are too numerous to mention, and the support or opposition to these events is never clear cut but a mixture of many influences.

On the religious side, the traditional sunni view that is the view of the four madhhabs, is that an armed uprising against the rulers is not allowed even if the ruler is a tyrant, instead patience and self reformation, is the way, until God removes the affliction. The salafi view and of course we have to differentiate between the salafis of hijaz and those of egypt, is that an uprising is wajib when they attribute kuffr to the tyrant. Sunni opinion is divided accordingly. 

 

For instance most sunnis oppose anything resembling the khawarij that are currently fighting, at the same time they also want the tyrant gone. The ithna ashari are not far behind with "either with us or against us" logic. They perceive anyone who is against the tyrant as automatically being pro khawarij, and that is not the case at all. For this reasons i say that support or opposition is never clear cut.

 

The views of Salahedin ibn Ibrahim are not unique or rare among sunnis, most traditional scholars have held these views since the beginning of the uprising. He makes some points when he argues against a certain egyptian scholar which i agree, but he is also anti shia from a religious perspective. For this reason i found your comparison to Adnan Ibrahim, as unnecessary. 

 

I had no right to question your intentions, and i apologise brother, it is that scholars like Adnan Ibrahim, or Hassan Farhan al Maliki May Allah preserve them both, have a hard time in their own madhhabs, with accusations slanders and lies thrown against them from all directions. Many such scholars undergo a great deal of trials as a result of their views, but Alhamdulilah their following increases particularly among sunnis who have had problems with certain positions and have found it hard to keep practising Islam as a result of madhhabi dogma. 

 

Again i apologise sincerely for jumping to conclusion. 

 

Wa Salaam.