AnCap muslim

I don't know how other muslims think but I was raised to respect private property like islam doesn't even accept prayer in a private property that is taken through coercion

And no one has authority over another human being except God or whomever I believe has been delegated that authority (though that would only obligate >>me

Could Zakat not be considered a form of taxation? I mean they make it sound like charity but its really an obligation isn't it?

Well, good on you, man!
I can respect that.

There is no physical violance enforcing that so for example if I don't believe in it I would not pay but ofc if I do believe in it then I have morally obligated myself like if I believe in something I should do it

Thank you! I'm happy that you guys aren't judging me bc of my religion ^_^

I have been thinking of converting and have been wondering how Islam might function in some of our ideal societies, so this is very useful for me ideologically

How would the principles of sharia function in an ancap society, since it lays very clearly what the rules and punishments are, and not really go against the spirit of an anarchic society?

How so? You're welcome to ask anything, I'll try to answer the best I can

most answers i get on these issues either say that Islam is incompatible with political ideologies since they all products of man and therefore inferior to the laws of god, or that Islam needs no political ideology to support it, it can do so on its own merits and capabilities, which is honestly not too helpful even if they are honest answers

Well the school of thought that I believe in allows every person to choose the scholar they want to follow in the interpretation of the rules of the quran (like choosing an arbitor) and no one is obligated to follow or obey anything this scholar says if they do not think that he is qualified for jurispudence. Though if I am qualified I don't need to follow anybody.

don't know if this answers the question?

hmm possibly. What branch do you belong if you don't mind me asking? Your manner leads me to think you are Ibadi though i could be wrong

Just when you thought slide threads could not get any more retarded

but both answers mean that islam is incompatible with politcial ideologies, did I understand that correctly?

yes precisely, hence why someone like you, who thinks that they clearly are on some level, is useful for information

I'm shiite

makes sense i suppose

>I have been thinking of converting

Attached: Charles Bronson.gif (497x269, 951K)

I disagree with them completly, I'm not an experct but I can tell that scholars have different opinions on that. For example I do not believe that every rule written in the quran or otherwise practiced by the prophet or muslims centuries ago are rules that cannot be changed. Some of these rules are social and some of them are completly subject to the time and the society/culture they were practiced on

I know feels bad man but i have my reasons

Attached: 1548638215370.png (254x198, 8K)

The scholar that I most agree with has discussed that jurispudence changes with the time i.e. at the time the quran was ordained women did not work, they only stayed at home, so the were given rights to be provided for after a divorce if they had children with the husband and the woman was totally not obligated to provide since optunities for work were nonexistent so he discussed that these "rules" were not set in stone it's just justice or social provisions that fit with that society but they can be different for our modern societies where a household might have both the woman and the man working and that would require a different set of rules where the scholars job is to judge these

Literally the first Muslim iv ever talked to who feels that sharia and the Quran is subjective with time and context and not immutable and permanent

lol yeah many muslims have a kind of weird misconception that everything is set in stone but I don't believe that and I know that this idea was discussed by a scholar about 1000 years ago but it didn't gain popularity among scholars but now it's gaining more traction bc os said scholar I mentioned, he has been discussing these things publicly so even ordinary people can hear these ideas

>1000 years ago
Thought Islam began in 610 AD

what's your IQ?

Attached: 1525678966845.png (812x806, 797K)

also most shiites agree that everyone is only obligated to the rules that the scholar one follows has reached to through reason and investigation, so I can't even say that another shiite is doing something totally wrong bc they don't fast as long as me bc the scholar they follow allows breaking the fast earlier if you live in Scandinavia or somewhere else and the sun goes down maybe at 9 pm or later during the summer

how much for a rope?

Attached: EL2_7633.jpg (1140x761, 127K)

these are generally very minor laws that being subjective. What about laws relating to the punishment of homosexuality and and alcohol consumption and arguably drug use? how are they compatible with an ancap society?

yeah that means it began about 1400 years ago :)

Whites and Muslims are heading for serious disagreements. White converts will not be tolerated when things turn nasty. Your life.

whoopsie. I need more sleep

Attached: 3b6.jpg (353x400, 20K)

My brother, we must enact Sharia Law. Theoretically, we could have a mostly ancap society, but not completely, because we need an established legal system run by trusted Muftis. We must have Sharia, and if you don’t agree, you don’t fully believe the Quran, which is unacceptable.

They are also subject to interpretation and change according to historical time and the society. Personally I do not belive that those 'punishments' (though I don't even remember any of the scholars I agree with intellectually talking about homosexuality, alchohol or drug use punishments).

Personally as a muslim I don't care what people do, what their sexuality is or what they drink

Where is your proof for that as muslims we can practice our religion without involving anyone else in the matter if I believe in islam I will solve my disagreements with muslims by following justice or in social matters like marriage and such we will go to a scholar we both agree to follow his judgement in our disagreement

The entire Ummah is subject to Sharia. What about the Muslims who refuse to participate in the legal system? By reciting the Kaliyah, we have entered into a contract with Allah (Subhana wa ta’Ala) and thus, punishments and fiqh rulings are binding on us. What I’m saying is, we cannot live in a society in which we pick and choose when or if we want to participate in the legal system. We could have an ancap society, but only to the extent that hadd punishments and other practical rulings are required and not optional.

*Kalimah

Maybe I should clarify how I view other people and how I believe that islam views them. What I believe is that most people will go to Paradise (whatever that will look like) and people like ie Hitler would go to Hell. I do not belive that someone who searches for truth and reaches another conclusion is doomed and a bad human being.

No, I believe that person searched for the truth and he/she might have reached the conclusion that there is no god. Not out of malice or pure stubborness but bc the arguments simply did not convince that person. And such a person would be just like a muslim judged based on their actions like do not murder, rape ect

Can I pay a muslim so that he can watch me fuck his wife and daughter while he wear a dick cage?

All mainstream Sunni scholars agree that the al-Baqara verse about the People of the Book going to Jannah was abrogated by the advent of Islam. A person who has reached the Truth will have accepted Muhammad (peace be upon Him), Allah (Subhanahu wa ta’Ala), His Books, His Messengers, and His Angels. The only thing that scholars still argue about is whether or not Hell is eternal for kufar, or simply a very long time.

*Whether or not it is eternal for Muslims, not kufar. I’m not sure what the scholarly views on kuffar’s length of time in Hell is.

First of all what about muslims who disagree, why would your conclusions or my conclusion as to what God wishes for us to do bind everyone else to your or my conclusions?

Also in social contracts you don't need to belive in a relgion to have a contract with another human being about hiring them for work, you wouldn't need any religious figure to judge wether or not the contract has been fulfilled or not. In what scenarios do you imaginge that an ancap muslim society would need to be ruled by someone else's conclusions about God. Where did that person get any authority upon any random muslim other than him or herself?

Why haven't you killed yourself?
S

First, don't agree with you on that. Second, no, scholars are not in agreement about anything whatsoever (maybe only the requirement for hajj and prayers and a few other things). Third, even if they agreed what does that matter, is that supposed to be a logical argument?

It's forbidden :p

The muftis in charge of the legal system would only be accepted by the people if it is clear that they are following the Quran. If they stray from what is written in the Noble Book, then they would have no authority. The Quran and authentic Hadith are binding on all of us, my brother.

>There is no physical violance enforcing that
Ever heard of the ridda wars? Abu Bakr (ra) killed those who refused to pay zakat.
>Though if I am qualified I don't need to follow anybody.
That is false, you must hold on to the jama'ah (congregation) of the muslims.
>sh*A
>degenerate ideologue
no wonder
>For example I do not believe that every rule written in the quran or otherwise practiced by the prophet or muslims centuries ago are rules that cannot be changed.
kufr
>Personally I do not belive that those 'punishments'
kufr
>Personally as a muslim I don't care what people do, what their sexuality is or what they drink
>doesn't know walaa & baraa
>What I believe is that most people will go to Paradise (whatever that will look like) and people like ie Hitler would go to Hell. I do not belive that someone who searches for truth and reaches another conclusion is doomed and a bad human being.
kufr

Are you ancap too or...?

keked, my sides are in another dimension

Based. Asalamu alaykum, dear brother.

It's not 1 person, it's a shura council of learned scholars, so if one does an error another will correct him. Humans studying in groups are near infallible and able do achieve amazing things.

I believe in caliphate ruled by muftis and an elected caliph that enforces Quranic Law, but anything not related to matters of fiqh reflect a generally libertarian society.

wa aleykum asalam akhi

Dude I'm not here to discusse religion with another muslim, I don't agree with, and you don't have any arguements, you only give a general reference to the Quran or scholars. Refering to your interpretation of the Quran does not mean I agree with you, and scholars are NORMAL human beings, there opinions or conclusions do not bind me to anything whatsoever.

Wa alaykum alsalam

The quran & sunnah DOES bind you or else you are a kaffir.

Look if that 'rule' allowed anyone who disagrees to not follow such a rule then go for it otherwise it's just another state, another type of 'I know what it right and you don't so you have to obey'

My brother, you know I love you and wish the best for you. May Allah (swt) have mercy on you. But you are just so wrong. We can have liberty and freedom, but not to the extent that it violates the Law. Our other brother is right, the muftis in a group would check and balance each other. The Noble Quran MUST prevail.

So an Islamic society is incompatible with any level of an anarchic society because it has clear laws that must be enforced and obeyed strictly. So stuff like this is pure nonsense? (see flag)

Attached: hqdefault.jpg (480x360, 6K)

The quran binds me bc I reached a logical, based on reason conclusion, not bc of the words of other human beings. The words, opinions, views or conclusions of other human beings, even if they are called scholars, binds nobody but themselves bc it's their conclusions

My brother, Allah (swt) does know best and we are His slaves. His Law is binding forever and ever. We must have a structured, learned leadership that carries out His Will.

Yes. There is no compromising when it comes to Allah’s (swt) prescribed commandments. To create a society that does not enforce Sharia is absolutely haram.

Based on the quran you MUST enforce shariah and belong to a congregation of muslims. You can't enforce shariah on yourself, there has to be a 3rd party to be unbiased and just.

That seems to be understanding i find with most Muslims on this issue

does that mean its impossible to be a true Muslim in a non Muslim society?

how does it feel believing 2 retarded ideologies at the same time?

True, but not all, just like most Danish people agree that the state is necessary (I live in Denmark)

Yes but i have to admit my friend you are the only person i have found with such an opinion, no offence to you

No, the fault is on the society for not enforcing the law. In a non-Muslim society, a Muslim is theoretically subject to Sharia, but it would simply not be carried out. Such a Muslim would pay for his sins on the Day of Judgment, unless he repents. It’s more complicated than that, but there is nothing wrong with living in a place that doesn’t enforce Sharia. In that case, the blame lies on the leaders.

It's a sin to live in a non muslim society but does not take you out of Islam UNLESS you are pleased and agree with the current kaffir system. Hijrah (migration to muslim lands) is mandatory if there is an islamic state, if there isn't its better to live in the wilderness.

Look I wouldn't have any problems discussing this with another muslim but it would be a loooong discussion to remove all of the misconceptions and discuss all our disagreements, so I don't think we should

Just bring 1 ayah or hadith to back your claim.

That's okay, I don't take any offence. Actually a lot of people in the especially the shiite community are leaning towards views like me, not the majority yet

>you are pleased and agree with the current kaffir system
How would you define this? So it is fine to live in a non Muslim society as long as you recognise it is incompatible with Islam?

I’m going to go speak to my local Mufti about this at the Isha prayer in thirty minutes. If you’re still here at that point, I’ll let you know what he says. He is very fair and knowledgeable.

Look I'm pretty sure you mean well but I don't agree with the things you have said earlier

It's not fine, it's a sin as big as fornicating according to some scholars. If you agree with democracy for example you become an apostate.

Alright so for example if you live in a democracy but disagree with it, and continue to practice as a Muslim with a Muslim community there, do you become a non-Muslim automatically?

You become a sinner but still muslim. Which means you will get rekt in the afterlife but will get forgiven eventually.

Alright i think i understand. Thank you for clearing this up for me friend, i was not aware of this concept of "Hijrah" before this. Found a site that goes into about ti while you were talking missionislam.com/knowledge/hijrah.htm

Memeflag kike.

Attached: 1549325390226.png (625x344, 22K)

Attached: 1549324374954.png (900x1118, 488K)

Yup good site, can easily back it up with the quran.

4:97-101
Indeed, those whom the angels take [in death] while wronging themselves - [the angels] will say, "In what [condition] were you?" They will say, "We were oppressed in the land." The angels will say, "Was not the earth of Allah spacious [enough] for you to emigrate therein?" For those, their refuge is Hell - and evil it is as a destination.

Except for the oppressed among men, women and children who cannot devise a plan nor are they directed to a way - For those it is expected that Allah will pardon them, and Allah is ever Pardoning and Forgiving.

And whoever emigrates for the cause of Allah will find on the earth many [alternative] locations and abundance. And whoever leaves his home as an emigrant to Allah and His Messenger and then death overtakes him - his reward has already become incumbent upon Allah. And Allah is ever Forgiving and Merciful.

tehehe

Okay here's a quote from a scholarly lecture/discussion that I agree completly with (this is from a series of lectures, and this is from lecture 13 so there will be things that are lacking):

Our discussion was on whether a person who does not agree with the school of the Ahlulbayt will enter Heaven or not. >>We said that they would do provided they fulfil the one condition that they have evidence for acting in the way they did, irrespective of whether this evidence is in accordance with reality or not. This is what I mentioned in the first few lessons in explaining the reasoning behind my fatwa on >>the permission of worshipping according to any religion.>explanation of verse 98 from Surah Nisa:>every single person who hasn’t been able to find a path to the Truth.

meant (you)

the quote continued:

Just like we do. You who accept Islam, you who accept the Ahlulbayt, have you really gone and inspected Hinduism to see what it says? Have you looked into the Chinese religions? The African traditions? What about the different Christian sects? Hold on, what about all the different Islamic sects? Have you gone to each one of them and investigated their claims? No, because you’re convinced that the path you have taken is True and everything else is false. This is exactly the same for the other side, regardless if they’re scholars or just laymen, they’re all similarly convinced they are on the Truth and there’s no need to investigate other faiths and religions

"Verily the only acceptable religion to Allah is Islam." [Quran 3:19]

This. There is no argument to this. Even considering an argument to this is 100% haram and makes you kafr.

Hey OP, when are you going to blow up?

Attached: muhammad-bomb.jpg (400x500, 53K)

The final abode of the disbeliever. Please do not talk to my brother like that.

*Hell is the final abode of the disbeliever.