Boycott of zionist companies

[Mahdi.05]

Salam everyone. I am really confused with what kind of companies it is wajib for one to boycott islamically, ignoring the bds list. My marja' is sayed khamenei, and he prohibits any action that 'strenghtens zionists or helps them to oppose islam and muslims', but to what extent does this apply to? Does it simply refer to any company who deals with israel? I would really appreciate some help, since the topic is really causing me issues, especially when trying to find a job here in the west. 

[123xo]

If you live in the west there's really no way around it when it comes to finding a job unless you wanna work at some ethnic supermarket or a restaurant? Which doesn't really seem ideal in terms of working conditions and wages. So just work at any company that you can find work at. Allah knows your situation so i don't think you'll be punished for it really, Allah is the most merciful most understanding so please don't let people scare you...My man works for the gov (constable) and ever since the whole boycotting started a lot of arabs and muslims been saying to him that his work is haram and his income is haram cause he works for a gov that supports israel so i don't think your situation would be worse than that really, you just gotta do what you gotta do, at the end of the day Allah knows your intentions and knows you're on the right path. 

 

Goodluck 

[kadhim]

Let’s set something straight here. 

No one has any right or business bringing words like “wajib” or “haram” into this sort of question when it comes to specific companies or whatever. Wajib and haram are terms with serious meanings and require evidence to a level that matches that seriousness. Wajib and haram means that it is literally a sin not to do the thing, or vice versa a sin to do it.

When you say something is wajib or haram, you are putting yourself in a position to speak authoritatively on behalf of God. You’re claiming to speak on behalf of God on the subject of patronage of Starbucks or whatever company. That’s pretty presumptuous if you reflect on it for a few nanoseconds. 

But none of this has that level of evidence behind it when you get to specifics. You can state with some confidence that there are certain high level principles of Islam about politics, about avoiding supporting a clear oppressor, that sort of thing. At a high level of principle. But as to specific questions of, does what country x is doing count as oppression, that’s to a large extent a subjective judgment. Similarly, the question of what it means for an organization to “help” such a country or realm. Does that mean help the country specifically in the specific acts of oppression? Or something more general? And then the question, as an average person, does that then obligate you not to do business with this company. 

If you want to make arguments about haram when it comes to doing business with a company, you’re reasoning at two layers removed from the original country you’re talking about. So you have to prove to a standard of certainty not only that the country is engaging in oppression, but you have to prove with certainly those other layers, from the country to the company, and from the company to your actions as an individual. But it’s subjective at every layer. 

Anyone who gives a sweeping specific answer for a specific company in relation to this is just telling you a story. Anyone who makes claims to the effect of, it’s a sin and God will potentially punish you if you buy a coffee at McDonalds because McDonalds has restaurants in Israel or what not, that person is just making claims out of thin air. There is simply no basis for that strong an inference by any standards of classical jurisprudence. 

This is for the question of wajib and haram. 

Of course, the burden of proof for fuzzier discussions of ethical reasoning, of should or should not is much much lower, and allows for somewhat vaguer considerations. 

Edited April 13 by kadhim

[Haji 2003]

Opposite of boycott

 

 

 

[mahmood8726]

On 4/13/2024 at 5:29 PM, kadhim said:

Let’s set something straight here. 

No one has any right or business bringing words like “wajib” or “haram” into this sort of question when it comes to specific companies or whatever.

A qualified jurist such as immam khamenaei for example can. What nonsense is this? Last I remeber immam khamenaei did make a fatwah on it. Someone can correct me If I am wrong.

On 4/13/2024 at 5:29 PM, kadhim said:

 

Wajib and haram are terms with serious meanings and require evidence to a level that matches that seriousness. Wajib and haram means that it is literally a sin not to do the thing, or vice versa a sin to do it.

When you say something is wajib or haram, you are putting yourself in a position to speak authoritatively on behalf of God. You’re claiming to speak on behalf of God on the subject of patronage of Starbucks or whatever company. That’s pretty presumptuous if you reflect on it for a few nanoseconds. 

This is assuming some random person decided this, Jurists decide this. What is all this nonsensical strawmanning? By the time this sub was made, the fatwahs were already out from what I remeber. Again, someone can correct me here.

On 4/13/2024 at 5:29 PM, kadhim said:

But none of this has that level of evidence behind it when you get to specifics.

It absolutely does, there are companies like burger king and mcdonlads for example, giving food to an army of child killers known as idf soldiers and supporting a nation built on theft that goes against the foundations of Islam. Israel is a clear oppressive state. 

On 4/13/2024 at 5:29 PM, kadhim said:

 

You can state with some confidence that there are certain high level principles of Islam about politics, about avoiding supporting a clear oppressor, that sort of thing. At a high level of principle. But as to specific questions of, does what country x is doing count as oppression, that’s to a large extent a subjective judgment.

Absolute nonsense and garbage. This is pure mental gymnastics and some goal post that was made up. Israel is an oppressive usurping illegetemate state and this has been made clear over and over again. The leadership is opressive and the land theft done by israelis is oppressive. This land theft goes against one of the most basic principles of our immams(عليه السلام). 

On 4/13/2024 at 5:29 PM, kadhim said:

Similarly, the question of what it means for an organization to “help” such a country or realm. Does that mean help the country specifically in the specific acts of oppression? Or something more general? And then the question, as an average person, does that then obligate you not to do business with this company. 

More play with words, it's very clearly what is meant here, but here irrelevant questions are being asked to seem smart, when the answer very well known. 

On 4/13/2024 at 5:29 PM, kadhim said:

If you want to make arguments about haram when it comes to doing business with a company, you’re reasoning at two layers removed from the original country you’re talking about. So you have to prove to a standard of certainty not only that the country is engaging in oppression,

That has been determined. 

On 4/13/2024 at 5:29 PM, kadhim said:

 

but you have to prove with certainly those other layers, from the country to the company, and from the company to your actions as an individual. But it’s subjective at every layer. 

The companies are supporting an opressive state or supporting their army in some cases with money, food, etc... it's not that deep, this is all sophistry to seem smart. There is nothing ambigious here.

On 4/13/2024 at 5:29 PM, kadhim said:

Anyone who gives a sweeping specific answer for a specific company in relation to this is just telling you a story. Anyone who makes claims to the effect of, it’s a sin and God will potentially punish you if you buy a coffee at McDonalds because McDonalds has restaurants in Israel or what not, that person is just making claims out of thin air.

No they aren't, qualified Jurists have decided this. 

On 4/13/2024 at 5:29 PM, kadhim said:

There is simply no basis for that strong an inference by any standards of classical jurisprudence. 

This is for the question of wajib and haram. 

Of course, the burden of proof for fuzzier discussions of ethical reasoning, of should or should not is much much lower, and allows for somewhat vaguer considerations. 

Bunch of garbage, no wonder you were banned... this is such a shameless attempt at muddying the waters. 

[Haji 2003]

McDonalds

Quote

International sales declined by more than 1 per cent. The company recently warned that the war in Gaza had hurt its business in some Middle Eastern countries, as well as Indonesia and Malaysia. Sales were also lower in China and France.

https://www.ft.com/content/f79bbcd4-856e-49ea-8659-e067c67e0109

 

[Diaz]

Salam, I was wondering is there any google/safari alternatives? I heard Mozilla forefox and opera supports the Zionist entity but couldn’t find any sources.

[Dreamcatcher]

2 hours ago, Diaz said:

Salam, I was wondering is there any google/safari alternatives? I heard Mozilla forefox and opera supports the Zionist entity but couldn’t find any sources.

Wasalam,

You can use browser with less market share in Israel perhaps? 

https://gs.statcounter.com/browser-market-share/all/israel

Firefox market share is 1.6%. Most other browsers are based on Chromium open source project which is run by you can guess, Chrome/Google. You may try Brave which is also based on Chromium OR LibreWolf, based on Firefox.

Edited August 12 by Dreamcatcher