RSS

Debunking a fallacy spread by the hypocrite from california

19 May

post edited on 08/28/16. Thanks to Bilal Hanafi from France for pointing out the error.

As-Salamu ‘Alaikum

The rotten kafir, the imam of kufr, the hypocrite from california, la’anahullah, who functions as a mouthpiece of the perennialists, keeps repeating a fallacy every now and again. He says that:

‘To be called kafir and be thrown in hellfire forever, a person must be a very bad, arrogant, obnoxious, hard hearted person.’

Some people might be swayed by this californian munafiq’s supposed eloquence, but astute Muslims can easily destroy his fallacies.

These two events are NOT NECESSARILY MUTUALLY INCLUSIVE*. They are both INDEPENDENT of each other. 

  1. Being a kafir
  2. Being a very, very bad person (aside from kufr beliefs) with a hard heart and a very obnoxious disposition
(* Being “necessarily mutually inclusive” would mean the two events can NOT occur independently of each other. This is the californian hypocrite’s position, that being a kafir NECESSITATES being a very, very bad person with a hard heart and a very obnoxious disposition. 
“Mutually exclusive” means that the two events can not occur simultaneously. In other words, if  a person is a kafir, it is impossible that he is also a very, very bad person with a hard heart and a very obnoxious disposition. OR it could also mean that if a person is a very, very bad person with a hard heart and a very obnoxious disposition, it is impossible that he is a kafir. This is also not the case. 
The two events are INDEPENDENT of each other. They are NEITHER “mutually exclusive” NOR “necessarily mutually inclusive”.
Jazak Allahu khayra for ‘Bilal Hanafi from France’ for pointing this out in the comments.)

Yes, indeed, the Quran does say that kufr is indeed the greatest of sins, worse than adultery or disrespecting parents and so on – and indeed it is our belief that the absolute worst of Muslims (in deeds, matters other than faith) is FAR EXALTED than the ‘best’ of kafirs (in worldly deeds, matters other than faith).

There isn’t even a comparison between a ‘bad’ Muslim and a ‘good’ kafir (the ‘good’ or ‘bad’ being in matters of worldly deeds).

But it does not mean that every kafir is the same. And it doesn’t mean that EVERY kafir on earth is a monster in EVERY aspect of life.

There are many kafirs, who aside from their false religions, are ‘nice guys’ in their dealings with people.

However, Allah tells us in the Quran, that He can forgive ANY SIN OTHER THAN KUFR, which is the worst of all crimes and unpardonable in the hereafter. If those ‘nice guys’ (in worldly deeds) want salvation in the hereafter, they MUST accept Islam.

In summary – kufr is the absolute lowest of sins and crimes, and unpardonable by Allah, but it is EXCLUSIVE (i.e., INDEPENDENT) of other crimes or good or bad character traits other than belief. A kafir can be truthful and honest in his financial dealings. Or he may be well mannered. Or he may abstain from adultery or homosexuality. People are people. It is not rocket science.

NOTE THIS WELL:

Both abu jahl and abu talib were uncles of our Master RasulAllah and indeed both were kafirs.

However, abu jahl was indeed an obnoxious, sneaky, petulant arch enemy.

abu talib despite his disbelief, was benign to RasulAllah and Muslims.

———————————–

The fallacy spread by the hypocrite from california that to be called a kafir, a person must be a hard-hearted serial killer or belong to the russian mafia or a south american drug cartel is laughable.

In case someone still doesn’t get it, let me explain by another example that may be easily understood by the kafir from california or those infatuated by him:

  1. First degree murder is the most serious crime carrying the heaviest of sentences
  2. Theft is a much lighter crime than first degree murder.

A criminal convicted of first degree murder IS WORSE than a criminal convicted of theft, both in the severity of the crime, and the sentence handed out.

BUT, does that mean that EVERY first degree murderer is a thief as well? No it doesn’t.

Only an idiot will suggest that.

It is well possible for a first degree murderer to have committed NO OTHER crime.

All said and done, the two crimes are NOT necessarily mutually inclusive. They could be done together at times, but it still doesn’t mean that being guilty of murder AUTOMATICALLY & NECESSARILY means being guilty of theft too.

kufr is far worse than just being an arrogant, hard-hearted, obnoxious person in worldly matters.

Both are bad things.

However, that doesn’t mean that one necessitates the other. It is well possible for someone to be a kafir, but a ‘nice guy’ in other matters other than faith. In the hereafter, he will be handed the ultimate punishment for the ultimate crime – disbelief in Allah. This is Allah’s Promise stated in crystal clear words in the Quran. 

Alas! If only the hypocrite from california could tell all those ‘nice guy’ kafirs that their false beliefs and religions WILL NOT lead to salvation in the hereafter, and that if they became Muslims, their being ‘nice guys’ would become infinitely more rewardable by virtue of Islam – in the unending life of the hereafter too, as opposed to only the short life of this world.

Instead, he spreads disbelief, and withholds from calling to Islam and helping people become Muslim, by delivering a message that says something like –‘Hey, everlasting hellfire is only for obnoxious, arrogant people with hardened hearts on the inside and ugly tattooes on the outside. You’re cool. No need to become Muslim. You can make it to heaven without becoming Muslim!’

A person who TRULY BELIEVES IN ALLAH OR CARES for all those ‘nice guys’, wishes for them to become Muslim and save their hereafter.

By such ugly demeanor, the californian has proven himself to be not just an enemy of Allah and Islam, but also an enemy of all those ‘nice guy’ disbelievers!

We seek refuge in Allah from the evils of the hypocrite from california.

Wa bi(A)llah-it-tawfiiq.

 

8 responses to “Debunking a fallacy spread by the hypocrite from california

  1. brooklynyte4ever

    May 19, 2016 at 2:24 pm

    Salamualaikum
    I’m just wondering who this Californian is? Any hints
    Jazakullah khayran

     
    • 'Abd-Allah al-Mujaddidi al-Naqshbandi

      May 19, 2016 at 4:10 pm

      Waleikum Salam

      You will get a lot of hints on this blog wherever he is mentioned. He’s the one who claims not to be a perennialist but will gladly co-author books with them, praise them, promote them, share the stage with them, and write obituaries for them. He is the one who keeps stooping only lower every time he wants to earn the good cheer of christians. He is the one who is shamelessly involved in deliberately misguiding and misinforming people, all based on trickery, doublespeak, equivocation, and prevarication. He is a liar who lies against Quran and hadith and imams like Al-Ghazali. He claims to be a lover of the ‘liberal arts’. The filthy kafir routinely recommends Muslims to read the accursed dante. He says quite openly that he belongs to us as well as them. He thinks he’s funny and a comedian and he can make audiences laugh when in fact he’s a pathetic self-hating islamite, and all his lame jokes will come to haunt him on judgment day lest he repents and gives up his campaign of misinforming innocent Muslims trying to push them to become apostates and hypocrites just as he is. He is an all-american hypocrite as evil as satan himself. May Allah cease his fitnah.

       
      • brooklynyte4ever

        May 19, 2016 at 8:58 pm

        Jazakullah khayran

         
      • brooklynyte4ever

        May 20, 2016 at 1:19 pm

        Salamualaikum
        I think I know now whom you are referring to
        . I remember back in the 90’s this Californian was very popular in videos and at ICNA and ISNA
        conventions. I believe that Allah is leading him astray because he openly mocked [snipped]. Anyway, shortly after 9-11, this Californian lost his popularity over night. A lot of Muslim just didn’t have an interest for him any more. Allah ta’ala says that he declares war on the one who hurts any of his friends ( waliullahs )
        Allahu alim. This is just my thoughts

         
      • idesireranks

        May 26, 2016 at 3:10 am

        He is popular for the same reason Fox News is popular. He tells his audience what they want to hear, and so they adore him. They will tell you it’s all about how he is a shaykh, and we must respect that, but it’s rubbish.

         
  2. Bilal Hanafi from France

    August 27, 2016 at 5:50 pm

    Assalamu Alaykum

    Isn’t “mutual exclusivity” the fact that two propositions cannot be true at the same time ? I think the first and the second proposition in your article are mutually inclusive (they always are both true and one cannot be held true with the other being false). Correct me if I am wrong on that point.

    Anyways, it is just logical jargon. We muslims all agree that kufr is an unforgivable sin and being a kâfir implies being a bad person and vice versa.

     
    • 'Abd-Allah al-Mujaddidi al-Naqshbandi

      August 28, 2016 at 4:13 am

      Waleikum Salam and jazak Allahu khayra.

      You are right about the definition of mutual exclusivity.

      It should have said that the two propositions are not necessarily mutually inclusive. Thanks for pointing out the error.

      Two propositions being mutually exclusive means that both can NOT occur at the same time.

      Being necessarily mutually inclusive would mean that the two events can’t occur independently.

      These are the two states mentioned in the article:

      1. Being a kafir
      2. Being a very, very bad person with a hard heart and a very obnoxious disposition

      Mutual EXCLUSIVITY would imply that if one state occurs, it is impossible for the other state to occur. This is not true.

      I think the first and the second proposition in your article are mutually inclusive (they always are both true and one cannot be held true with the other being false). Correct me if I am wrong on that point.

      They CAN BE mutually inclusive, but are not necessarily so.

      Necessary mutual INCLUSIVITY would imply that for one state to occur, the other state MUST also occur. This is also NOT true. In fact, this is the proposition of the hypocrite from california.

      It IS possible for one proposition (being kafir) to be true with the other (being an obnoxious, hard hearted person, other than religion) being false. See the example of abu talib. He was a kafir, but wasn’t an obnoxious person; he was benign and polite to RasulAllah ﷺ and Muslims. Do note that we are talking about being a kafir as one event, and bad character traits other than religion as the other event.

      On the other hand, a sinful Muslim too can be a terribly obnoxious and hard hearted person, despite being Muslim! This is why it is our belief as taught by Quran, hadith, and our elders that the ‘worst’ Muslim is indeed better than the ‘best’ kafir, the ‘worst’ and ‘best’ here referring to human character traits other than faith.

      What I should have said, should have been:

      The two state states are NOT NECESSARILY mutually inclusive.

      Many thanks and jazak Allahu khayra for pointing out my error. I will edit the post accordingly.

       
      • Bilal Hanafi from France

        August 28, 2016 at 9:36 am

        Wa anta min ahl al jaza, akhi.

        I know the individual you’re referring to and it is sad to see muslims being fooled by him in France. Muslims seem to be more organised in UK than in France.

        Here, we’re being sandwiched between wahhabi khariji zealots and fake “asharis” whose hearts are “colonised”… This leads to a misconception about islam : wahhabis claim to be ostracised in France because they are (allegedly) the only ones fighting kufri values. They play the victim card to pretend to represent the orthodoxy.

         

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

 
%d bloggers like this: