Yadda wrote on May 25
th, 2012 at 7:57pm:
falah wrote on May 25
th, 2012 at 12:14pm:
Islam permits the making of peace treaties.
Many peace plans have been offered to Israel over the decades.
Every moslem knows full well, that even the moslem salutation [the official moslem greeting
offered to other moslems]
"Assalam-U-Alaikum"
[literally; May Peace be with you),
is not to be offered to infidels Yadda are you not ashamed to be spew out such lies? You and Freeliar sure have a lot in common with all these lies. Are you sure you are not one of Freeliar's sock puppets?
The Jews in Madina used to greet the Muslims with "al-saam ‘alaykum" (may death be upon you). in this case Muslims were ordered to reply to them with "and also upon you".
However, Islamic scholars have said that if the non-Muslim greets with "peace" Muslims should return the greeting of "peace".
The great scholar of islam, Ibn al-Qayyim, said:
Quote: if the listener realized that the Dhimmi [Jew or Christian] has said “salaam ‘alaykum” and he is sure of that, should he say “wa ‘alayk al-salaam” (and upon you be peace) or just “wa ‘alayk” (and upon you)?
According to the evidence and principles of sharee’ah (Islamic law), he should say “wa ‘alayk al-salaam” (and upon you be peace), because this is more fair, and God commands us to be just and to treat others well.
[Ahkaam Ahl al-Dhimmah, 1/425, 426]
Another scholar, Ibn Uthaymeen, said:
Quote:If they greet us, then we can respond in a manner similar to that in which they greet us, because God says (interpretation of the meaning of the Quran):
“When you are greeted with a greeting, greet in return with what is better than it, or (at least) return it equally” [al-Nisaa’ 4:86].
[Majmoo’ Fataawaa Ibn ‘Uthaymeen, 2/97, 98]
Yadda wrote on May 25
th, 2012 at 7:57pm:
ISLAMIC law only permits a
temporary tactical truce, a 'hudna' with Allah's enemies [and the hudna truce is
only permitted whenever moslems are militarily weaker than their enemy].
It is unlawful, in ISLAMIC law, for a moslem nation or group or community of moslems, to accept, and be in a permanent state of peace, with any non-moslem community, or entity.
ISLAM does > NOT < permit moslems to make peace treaties, OR FOR MOSLEMS TO BE AT PEACE, with any sovereign non-moslem community, or entity.The sole purpose of a hudna truce, is to allow moslem forces to regroup, and gather their power, before a continuation of warfare with a non-moslem entity [......which is currently militarily stronger than the moslems]...
...An explanation of the ISLAMIC 'hudna' [a tactical truce] by DDA....
Quote:Hudna. Plain and simple. Hudna.......[is a] 'truce treaty', which Muslims may make with Infidels if they deem it prudent for the moment to retreat, regroup and rearm; and which may be broken at any time by the Muslim side, the moment they deem themselves strong enough once more to go in for the kill.
And a hudna is never meant to last more than *ten years*.
Why? Because the legendary Treaty of Hudaybiyya, believed by Muslims to have been made by Mohammed with the Meccans, a treaty which he insincerely made and then treacherously broke, was supposed to have a 'use-by' date of ten years.
more DDA.....
Quote:"Only when Muslim power is weak is "temporary truce" (hudna) allowed (Islamic jurists differ on the definition of "temporary")."...
Yadda do you actually believe this crap or are you happy to espouse lies all the time?
The Treaty of Hudaybiyyah was not broken by the Muslims but by the pagans:
Quote:Pre-Conquest Events
According to the terms of the treaty of Hudaibiyah, the Arab tribes were given the option to join either of the parties, the Muslims or Quraish, with which they desired to enter into treaty alliance. Should any of these tribes suffer aggression, then the party to which it was allied would have the right to retaliate. As a consequence, Banu Bakr joined Quraish, and Khuza‘ah joined the Prophet (God bless him and give him peace). They thus lived in peace for sometime but ulterior motives stretching back to pre-Islamic period ignited by unabated fire of revenge triggered fresh hostilities. Banu Bakr, without caring a bit for the provisions of the treaty, attacked Banu Khuza‘ah in a place called Al-Wateer in Sha‘ban, 8 A.H. Quraish helped Banu Bakr with men and arms taking advantage of the dark night. Pressed by their enemies, the tribesmen of Khuza‘ah sought the Holy Sanctuary, but here too, their lives were not spared, and, contrary to all accepted traditions, Nawfal, the chief of Banu Bakr, chasing them in the sanctified area — where no blood should be shed — massacred his adversaries.
[Ar-Raheeq Al-Makhtum, al-Mubarakpuri ]
Even after they had broken the truce, the Muslims still gave the pagans a chance to make amends, which they refused.
Quote:When the aggrieved party sought justice from their Muslim allies, the Prophet, as their leader, demanded an immediate redress for not only violating the treaty but also slaying men allied to him in the sanctified area. Three demands were made, the acceptance of any one of them was imperative:
1. to pay blood money for the victims of Khuza‘ah
2. to terminate their alliance with Banu Bakr; or
3. to consider the truce to have been nullified.
[Ar-Raheeq Al-Makhtum, al-Mubarakpuri ]
Forum
Pages: 
