Timeline for Establishment of Ownership of Spoils of war & captives
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
14 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 15 at 6:58 | history | edited | UmH♦ |
Removed irrelevant tag: usool-ul-fiqh
|
|
| S Apr 17 at 12:48 | vote | accept | Mohammad Alam | ||
| S Apr 17 at 12:48 | vote | accept | Mohammad Alam | ||
| S Apr 17 at 12:48 | |||||
| Apr 17 at 12:48 | vote | accept | Mohammad Alam | ||
| S Apr 17 at 12:48 | |||||
| Apr 17 at 12:41 | answer | added | UmH♦ | timeline score: 3 | |
| Apr 17 at 12:16 | answer | added | Medi1Saif♦ | timeline score: 1 | |
| Apr 17 at 9:48 | comment | added | Mohammad Alam | @Medi1Saif My question was is it spoils of war to be brought and distributed in Dar Al Islam only or did any Fuqaha allowed distribution of spoils of war in dar Al Harb | |
| Apr 16 at 7:12 | comment | added | Medi1Saif♦ | Do you mean to ask whether the war booty needs to be distributed in the land of Muslims or it can be distributed in the land of the enemy? | |
| Apr 16 at 6:18 | comment | added | Medi1Saif♦ | This is your opinion. Provide your evidence and proofs, just because somebody explained some rules, doesn't mean that they hold the opinion that slavery is something that shall be kept till the end of time. First of all, if a Muslim leader won a war he has several options on what to do with the enemies he captured, so slavery is not a unique option. In other words, if there's an agreement it is legal in Islam not to enslave the captured enemies. Instead of blindly repeating other people's words, use your mind to understand and check their validity and proofs. | |
| Apr 16 at 6:12 | comment | added | Mohammad Alam | @Medi1Saif "except with him and Salafiya Jihadia none says the same". Imam Ahmad, Imam Abu Hanifah, Imam Shafi'i, & Imam Malik beg to differ from you. Muslims follow Salaf not Khalaf first. Secondly Kuffar have never adhere to these treaties in the first place they have captured our women raped and sold as well. | |
| Apr 15 at 11:43 | comment | added | Medi1Saif♦ | A Shaykh can say anything in his lessons or fatwas, but countries and Muslim leaders must follow international agreements as per qur'an verse 5:1. And except with Salafiya Jihadia and Isis and of course Salih al-Fawzan none says the same. While our prophet () hated that a Mulsim calls his slave by "my slave": " None of you should say: My bondman, for all of you are the bondmen of Allah, but say: My young man, and the servant should not say: My Lord, but should say: My chief." | |
| Apr 15 at 8:29 | comment | added | Mohammad Alam | @Medi1Saif Wrong understanding. Secondly slavery is part of Deen and will remain till the day of Judgement establish as Jihad will continue till the day of judgement. Shaykh Salih Al Fawzan has clarified it similar to your statement said by Syed Qutb in his Tafsir - youtube.com/watch?v=925wgx7NikA&t=52s Shaykh Albani disliked the banning of slavery - youtube.com/watch?v=NLp9PEq1WbY&t=433s | |
| Apr 15 at 7:08 | comment | added | Medi1Saif♦ | I don't see how this question even makes any sense dar al-Harb is a synonym for enemy land. ... I don't understand this excessive interest in the topic of slavery, because due to international agreement this topic is banned worldwide and Islam had from the beginning provided ways and means to reduce it, not to say abolish it. | |
| Mar 27 at 18:01 | history | asked | Mohammad Alam | CC BY-SA 4.0 |