Germantown Masjid’s Official Stance

62 Responses to “Germantown Masjid’s Official Stance”

» Tariq Nelson has the official statement … Talk Islam, on May 12th, 2008 at 4:25 pm Said:

[...] Nelson has the official statement of the Germantown Masjid regarding its refusal to bury the cop-killer. [...]
MR, on May 12th, 2008 at 4:33 pm Said:

This is an excellent press release for the public. I hope the Philly news spreads this more, God willing.
AbuSinan, on May 12th, 2008 at 6:26 pm Said:

Well, I guess because they dont want the actions of the people in their community to be related to them in death, they will also not be giving prayers for people who commit suicide, people who die of drug overdoses, people who die of AIDS, people who die of lung cancer, ect.

Wow, I wonder if the the daughter of a local Imam who ran away to get married because her father wouldnt accept a convert as a son in law, would get prayers if she died?

What about Shi’ites who live in areas where there is no Sunni community? How about Sunnis in Shi’ite areas, no prayers for them?

This, at it’s base, violates a very important Islamic tenent, the idea that only the person responsible for a sin be held accountable for it. By saying that the actions of a person taint the whole community, they are really saying that the entire community would be held responsible for the sins of the person being buried.

We can come up with fatawa and hadith that support both sides of the situation.

At the end of the day burials are not really FOR the deceased, they are for the living. In this case the man’s family has been held responsible, and punished for his sins, and THAT is almost a big a sin as what he did!
AbuSinan, on May 12th, 2008 at 6:26 pm Said:

PS……….I wonder if the choice would have been made as quick, and easily, if the brother who died was Pakistani or Egyptian? I would think not.
AbuSinan, on May 12th, 2008 at 6:32 pm Said:

I saw this:

“The Prophet, sallalahu ‘alayhi wa’assallam, did not pray over those who died while in debt, or those who committed major sins, i.e. suicide, murder etc, as an indication of His disapproval of the commission of such acts. see below:”

Good, all of those brothers, immigrants, who one liquer shops will be denied prayers and burial? Everyone of the brothers who has a mortgage on a house or a car? No prayers!

Wow, by these standards, if enforced evenly, the mosque will be doing 1 or 2 janazas a year.

Unless, of course, they just simgle out one of the sins listed as being punished with no prayers.

Lets see how many immigrant brothers who bought houses with riba loans they couldnt afford and got them repossesed will be getting prayers and buried when they have a heart attack at being over $250,000 in debt?

These guys are treating Islam as a cafeteria religion, they are wanting to pick and choose from it. If they use these justifications not to bury this guy, they had BETTER use it to refuse burial to the next brother who dies in debt from riba loans or they will be outed as hypocrites!
abuhunain, on May 12th, 2008 at 9:09 pm Said:

Peace,

As far as I’m concerned ‘permissiblity’ was never the question in my mind. I think is just another poorly applied attempt at the law.

http://abulaith.wordpress.com/2008/03/17/african-american-muslim-emancipation/
Margari Aziza Hill, on May 12th, 2008 at 9:18 pm Said:

Salaam alaikum Abu Sinan,

Basically, you’re saying that the imams are being judgmental. But someone brought this question up: what mosques prayed over the 19 hijackers? The answer would be: none. What would that have looked like? What would have been the repercussion for the community that did? Has anyone even thought about it, even tried? Has anyone lost any sleep wondering if we failed in our collective duty? Have you?
Abu Sinan, on May 13th, 2008 at 1:15 am Said:

What would that have looked like? If we left our deen to “what would it look like” you can count out about 50% of Islamic practices.

We need to be more concerned about what GOD things and less concerned what people where think. What are we living for? This duniya or the afterlife?

What if someone decides not to pray over you because you are “too out spoken for a woman”? What about brothers at a mosque raise up too many issues about the treatment of convert brothers?

Where does it stop and who decides? Wow, you think the state of the Muslim world is unfair, imagine someone decided who does and who does not get prayed over.

You want the people in US mosques, run by those from overseas, to decide who gets prayed over?

You have more trust in our leaders than I do.

I am a white brother with tattoos who got into trouble as a teen. Are my children going to see me buried by Christians because Muslims think I am not fit?

No thanks.
Ginny, on May 13th, 2008 at 1:52 am Said:

Assalamu alaikum, I thought that the issue wasn’t whether or not he would be given a janaaza, but whether or not that leaders of this particular masjid would do it, and in so doing, “appear” as though they’re sanctioning this man’s behavior. No one is saying that this man shouldn’t be washed, pryaed over and buried, but whether or not the leaders of the community should do it, and whether the janaaza should be done at this particular masjid.

I can’t say I’m completely happy about this decision either, in my heart anyway, however, as I know nothing of this community and their dynamics, and as I can only imagine how painful this decision must have been for the leadership, I leave it for them to decide. Inshallah, this will not start a rash of “we won’t participate in the janaaza of this person because … “, it doesn’t seem to be anything like that, we’re not talking about someone who’s actions may have only affected himself, but someone who, by using Muslim women’s dress, could have potentially put a whole community in danger. This is a sad situion all around and I don’t think the leadership too any pleasure in coming to the decision that they did, and Allah knows best.
Daud, on May 13th, 2008 at 4:26 am Said:

AbuSinan you don’t know what you’re talking about. You need to read, study, and learn more before you speak.
AbuSinan, on May 13th, 2008 at 1:33 pm Said:

Daud,

And you are scholar? It is clear that this ruling at this mosque will be selectively enforced! The hadith talks about debtors, do you think they will be refused burial? You think the immigrant led mosques will refuse burial for those “brothers” who sell alcohol everyday and feed their families with haram money?

No, it will be used selectively against American converts, mostly black.
Peaches, on May 13th, 2008 at 1:35 pm Said:

While I respect the feelings and decision of Imam El-Shabazz , I still struggle with this issue. I’m doing everything in my power understand his decision, but I don’t.

In lines 5-6 of paragraph, he said that they talked with the family about this issue, but they didn’t return his call. It wouldn’t surprise me if the calls weren’t returned for the reasons that are mentioned in his letter. Just imagine if the imam( or any other religious leader)came to the family and said ” We cannot bury your little boy because of what he did ” If that were the family’s reason for doing it, I cannot blame them for their lack of response.

I think about myself and people that I know who I can describe as far from perfect. They would be the kind of people that we’re ideal for any community. Nobody expected for them to turn rotten. Once in a while, I speak with a friend of mine who is a crack addict/prostitute( even as I speak,) she even has children who she has abandoned, but she ’s also trying to get help for her problem. She wasn’t brought up on the wrong side of the tracks. Her parents did everything they could to make sure that she and her younger sister,( Unfortunately ,who also became a teen mom ), to stray them away from trouble, but they still got into it.Nobody expected this or wanted to believe it.

When we found this out my mother got us and talked about her situation.. One of the things that she told us was that we not to overlook her because of it could happen to us. Yes, she shouldn’t have been a daredevil about it( She always did things on a dare), but she’s done it and is paying for it. My paternal grandmother would tell us not to speak with her because her activities.While I don’t walk the streets/do crack with her, we still talk. Besides,I don’t know why my grandmother would say that when there are some members in my family who some could consider to be “family embarrassments”.I myself, was a rebel who made bad grades and got into occasional after school fights.Otherwise, I never got into legal /life altering problems( eg teen pregnancy,drinking and drugs)

There are many Muslim men/women who have clean records, but there are also many others who don’t. I’ve been to masjids where I’ve heard of guys talk about their former lives of being drug dealers, alcoholics and and former gang bangers. All them became who they are because they wanted to be renewed. While it may not be Imam Shabazz intention of being standoffish, his decision may send the wrong message to them.
Daud, on May 13th, 2008 at 2:53 pm Said:

The fact of the matter is, the administration based their decision on an authentic text i.e. the hadith, while you people who disagree with them have nothing but your opinions. It is not permissible for a Muslim to turn away from a proof and go with opinions–regardless of who opinion it is. That is one of the leading causes of the humiliation that the Ummah faces today. Islaam is a deen of proofs, not opinions. The hadith clearly shows the leaders are allowed to refuse to pray over open sinners, which makes the obligation to do it on the rest of us. They followed the Sunnah, and many of you hate it…wallaahu musta’aan.

At Masjid As Sunna an Nabawiyyah, we have prayed our share of knuckleheads (may Allaah have Mercy everyone of them) and so has every other masjid in Philly. These criminals are the biggest obstacles to da’wah in the streets. Personally, I’m glad someone finally took a stand against them because they are ruining the Da’wah to Islaam. I only hope that they remain steadfast and consistent. This sends a message to all the Muslims: that they should fear an evil end, just like the Sahaba did (radiyyallaahu anhum).
Margari Aziza Hill, on May 13th, 2008 at 4:40 pm Said:

I don’t know Abu Sinan, I feel like you are taking the analogies too far. I just have problems with your reasoning, it is a bit far fetched for me. Maybe you have some image of some authoritarian imams leaving the corpses of lax Muslims to rot in the streets as some example of fire brimstone type wrath. We clearly have not been reduced tot hat level yet. Its like you’re trying to appeal to everyone’s emotions to make your case. People have misgivings, and expressed them. But this was a right that this community and its leader hid. They did not have to take part in the funeral of someone who was killed in the act of theft and murder. Like the statement said, he was buried. If he wasn’t, then the burden would have been on all of us. And I’m sure that those who refused would have been the first to be held accountable on the Day of Judgement. But since he is already buried, I don’t see how he was done an injustice. I think that this community finally drew a line and found textual support within our body of Islamic Law. Ultimately, Allah is the best of judges.

Also, I really doubt that the Muslim liquor store owners’ families have janazas in the communities where they are selling liquor stores. Maybe their communities don’t know what they really do and if they do only a few leaders have taken a strong stance.
AbuSinan, on May 13th, 2008 at 5:02 pm Said:

Daud,

I accept the legality of what they did, my problem is that the hadith used will not be equally applied to ALL members of the mosque.

If they decided to equally apply the said hadith to ALL members of the mosque, then it is something I would support 100%.

As the hadith says that it is proper not to pray over people who have committed a variety of sins, ie dying in debt, it should be equally applied.

It should not be used selectively, for a select group of people. We all know that this is probably the first, and last time this hadith will be used.

So there you have it, I am all for NOT burying this brother if it means that “Ahmad” down the street selling liquor to young kids will be refused just the same.

I support it if it means that “Saleh” who had a $1 million dollar loan with a high rate of interest whose foreclosure gave him a heart attck and killed him, will not get a burial either.

You cannot support the hadith’s use in one situation and then ignore it in another case. Either you use it or you dont. The selective use of it will certainly be towards American converts, and particularly black american converts.

Margari,

I am not appealing to people’s emotions, I am appealing to people’s sense of equality. The hadith used to justify their actions also justifies the same actions for other groups of people, many of which will be from the immigrant community.

If they are going to use this hadith to justify this one situation then they MUST follow it for the others.

The hadith says “the one who stole from the war-booty, the one who killed himself and the debtor”.

I just want to make sure that it is applied to those in our community who engage in riba and die in debt. That would be the fair and equitable way to do it.

If you excuse some and hold others accountable then you are being unjust and a hypocrite.

As to janazas in the communities where they sell the liquor, I guess that leads to a couple of issues. They are willing to sell liquor in the community, but unwilling to attend mosques there?

Besides which, I would have to argue with you on the idea in the first place. There are well known Muslims here in the Metro DC area who make money selling liquor in their establishments and their money is well taken in the mosque.

In one case I listened as an announcement was made concerning the amount of money one donor had made. Everyone who knows this person knows that they sell alcohol in their places of business, yet not only was that money taken by the mosque, the man himself was feted by the people running the mosque.

This was brought up to a person who worked at the mosque, he said that he couldnt be sure where the person got the money they donated, so the fact that their business consisted in part of selling alcohol was of no concern.

Shame!
SamirahbintJackieTodd, on May 13th, 2008 at 6:01 pm Said:

As Salaamu Alaikum

From veiwing most of the comments, it looks like Muslims picking and choosing what they want to accept out of this Din.

It says in Qur’an wa Sunnah that there will be a time you will like what is disliked and dislike what is liked. And this is what I see.

NO WHERE has the administration of As Sunnah An Nabawiyyah said HE COULD NOT be washed, prayed over and buried as a muslim , they clearly stated as the leadership in the community they will not do this as in accordance to what our Prophet Muhhamed SalAllahu Alaihi wa Salaam has ordered the leaders of the Muslims to do, in terms of dealing with the criminal or open sinner at time of death.

They CLEARLY stated that Muslims are allowed to perform this man’s rights upon him. But as leaders in the community they are going by our Nabi’s salAllahu Alaihi wa Salaam example. The Qur’an clearly states in several Ayat to obey the command of the Prophet of Allah. For obeying him is obeying Allah. What really disappoints me further , May Allah Guide us Amin, is that there Muslims openly debating other Muslims in front of the Kufar. Subhan’Allah.

The Islamic funeral home in Philadelphia is able to perform all the rights to this man as needed. There are several ahadith that support the praying Janazah prayer and at the grave site.

What further disturbs me is that everyone is sooo worried about this brother’s rights, when he and his companions had NO REGARD for the rights and safety of other Muslims in the community, especially the woman Authu Billahi. I as a believing woman struggle daily with the non believers just because of how I dress. No one has taken in consideration the immediate harm they installed to the woman of Islam by their actions. What a form of oppression they put upon us because they wanted to commit a crime.

But you cry about HIS rights, what about OUR rights?
Our rights to feel safe, to be protected, to be respected. Those brothers took that from us when they did what they did under the disguise of wearing the clothing of a Muslim woman to commit a heinious act.

So I implore you to step back and evaluate the reprecussions these men put upon us as a community,the harm they instilled to our women.

The masjid was correct in their stance and have solid dalil to back them up. In the end the brother got his rights, meanwhile we yet again stand in defense of our religion over the stupidty and ignorance of a few who blantantly disobeyed the command of Allah.

Where exactly should you be angry at? :

1. The brothers not getting his rights from a masjid? After robbing a bank imitating the believing woman to commit a crime,and shooting a police officer and killing him.

or
2. The harm the brothers caused to our community and namely our women for their own actions and desires?

Really where to stand? With the criminal or the believer who has been harmed do to the actions of the criminal.

Before you scream FEAR ALLAH! Say it to yourself first. wa Allahu Musta’an
AbuSinan, on May 13th, 2008 at 7:18 pm Said:

Samirah,

I understand where you are coming from. So you will support this mosque if they decide not to give prayers for those who have riba loans? You will support them for refusing to give prayers for those who benefit from the selling of pork and alcohol?

I am all for it as well.

What I am against is picking and choosing. If you are going to use this hadith to deny prayers for this man, you MUST use it to deny prayers for those in debt and the other things mentioned in the hadith.

You are right about picking and choosing and I am glad to see that the mosque has decided to implement this hadith.

I’d just be interested five years from now to check up on them again and see if they have applied it equally across the board.

Is this brother going to be the only person held up to this hadith? Are they going to forget about this hadith after the incident has died down?

Unfortunately, I dont think the message of the Prophet was what was being worried about here as much as it was the perception of non Muslims.

If they, in the future, use this hadith equally and we see that they have denied prayers for everyone who has a mortgage that is not Islamically based, I will be happy.

Somehow I think there are going to be more than a few who are going to be given prayers whilst their riba loans for houses and cars are still unpaid. Some of the funerals will be paid for by monies earned by the sale of alcohol and pork.

Either the hadith works for everyone or it should work for no one.

There is nothing worse than being a hypocrite in Islam (save for shirk) and if they bury even ONE Muslim in the future who has a house loan then they will have shown themselves to be hypocrites.
sabiwabi, on May 13th, 2008 at 7:35 pm Said:

I feel that this was an extreme incident and the Mosque simply didn’t want this group of thugs to be associated with the mosque. I can’t blame them. We are all “guilty by association” when it comes to being in the Muslim community anyways, so they were rightfully concerned.

I think if these idiots did not go out of this world in such a crazy, shoot ‘em up, blaze of glory, that they would have done the janaza.

I don’t think people need to get to bent out of shape over this, I think it is an extremely isolated event.
Abu Usamah al Aswad, on May 13th, 2008 at 9:06 pm Said:

Wa Laykum Salaam Sis SamirahbintJackieTodd,

Although I have stated my piece on the matter of “the janazah refusal” elsewhere and will no longer debate it I must say as one the first posters on the whole situation I stated

“the repercusions to the Sisters was my first thought”
http://tariqnelson.com/2008/05/08/philly-masjids-we-will-not-bury-this-muslim/#comment-27627

This was true a week ago and is true today. As expressed by others YOU, our sisters. wives and daughters are the ones on the front line and even as I feared I’ve gotten reports that the police are already haraasing sisters pulling them over and giving them tickets for trivial matters.

Police are given a bullet proof vest and guns on their first day knowing they may encounter a nut, while sisters don’t get boxing head gear, gloves and a groin guard on their wedding day expecting to fight their husbands.

Again as I have also posted else where
http://tariqnelson.com/2008/05/08/philly-masjids-we-will-not-bury-this-muslim/#comment-27643

A REAL statment would be to also distance Islam and ALL of our communities from the onslaught that some of our sisters face when they come home or distance Islam from the child deserters who are allowed to come to the masjid with impunity.

Isn’t child support a debt? Maybe Masjid As Sunna an Nabawiyyah does refuse the janazahs of debtors in the Masjid? Maybe, Masjid As Sunna an Nabawiyyah does have policy of exposing wife beaters? Maybe the police will ease off the community because of this annoucement?

Allah wrote for this to happen so there must be some good to come as after every difficulty there is ease. May this will be the turning point for cleaning up the masjids.

May Allah grant the indigenous Imams strength and courage in their efforts to protect our women and children HasbunAllah wa Ni’mal Wakil
Yeh-right, on May 13th, 2008 at 10:04 pm Said:

I’d just be interested five years from now to check up on them again and see if they have applied it equally across the board.

There is nothing worse than being a hypocrite in Islam (save for shirk) and if they bury even ONE Muslim in the future who has a house loan then they will have shown themselves to be hypocrites.

Okay tough guy, we’re waiting for your internet armchair tough guy smartest man in the room act to headline down in Philly. We’ll see if you talk all that smack walking around Philly masjids asking for the hypocrites to come out to meet you so that you can set them straight. Yeh right.
The masjed clarified their reasons, and since you aren’t a scholar can you seriously calm down and be quiet? Seriously.
Straight-out-Lies, on May 14th, 2008 at 12:37 am Said:

Did the brother kill himself or have a debt? NO! So stop the slow drag. Bait-and-switch. PERIOD! It is well know that German-Town (Masjid) GTM and the gangster Muslims of that area are engaged in and have been engaged in all types of ILLEGAL activity. All types, not to mention all the crimes they commit in the DEEN. Let me be the first to say, they aint consulted with no Scholar on this and if they did they did not let the brothers wife tell her story. SO WHERE IS THE TAPE? WHO DID YOU CALL? Qul hatu bur haa na kum in kum tum Sadeeqeen. NOPE. Well known fact that GTM will call a so-called scholar and say what if a person does x,y,z,…. And then come and say the scholar Fulaan said x,y,z about a specific person. So lets forget the published statement of GTM and get to the nutts and bolts of the issue. Where is your proof that your correct. We are ignorant so we leave it up to you smart people at GTM to explain in detail to the laymen why you violated this brothers rights or let us come back here after your explanation and make a public recantation of our ignorant position. The scenery has changed but the same ole ghost busters slime still runs under their street. All that the “mgr” of GTM presented has nothing to do with the current situation at all. IT is a PURE Bait and Switch move on behalf of some cowards. Just use the Hadeeth of Amr ibn Yaseer and say you were scared and then establish the fact that you did not give the brother his haqq due to your being duly scared. Period!!!!! Then we will begin to respect you again. Right now you are liars and magicians. The move GTM has made all along is acting as the one-eyed man in the land of the blind. Not only are you not King but your game is soooooooooo weak. Just like the last comment about coming to Philly, I mean Filthy, and setting the people straight. So is this a call out after what? We know yall Philly boys are tough…… Gun carrying, knife carrying and oh yes every body is a boxer and martial artist etc….. But scared to practice a hadeeth on a Muslims rights due HEAT. Just get out the kitchen and let the Men run the Masjid.
Samirah bint Jackie Todd, on May 14th, 2008 at 3:42 am Said:

la ilaha ilAllah….Wow @straight out lies……If you are Muslim where is your adhab? Are we reading the same article? Or have you been privy to an article from GTM noone else has seen. Because your statement not even comes close to addressing what was written, totaly off topic.

You cry about haqq where is your dalil please all I see is oppinions and no dalil from the people speaking ignorantly and out of turn.

Shaytan clearly has his foot in this Authu Bilahi minash shaytaan ir rajim.

Honestly the above response from you shows how truly ignorant we can be. May Allah guide us. Amin

And you claim to allow Men to run the masjid. La if they respond anywhere remotely how you have I wouldnt want YOUR version of a man run a ice cream truck let alone a Masjid. You definately have not approached this subject with Hikmah and adhab.
Take a breath step back reread your words and please clarify to me where you have responded in anyway according to the sunnah.

Ask Allah to open your eyes and clear away the obvious anger you have inside you.
As of now what is done is done it is in Allah’s hands Straight out lies. May Allah Guide us and Keep us on Siraatul Mustaqeem amin.
For Allah is the Best of Planners and only He can Rectify the Affairs of the Muslim.

People need to watch their tongues, seriously, totally sickening some of the responses on this. Everyone wants to be a armchair scholar. If you dont believe this Masjid did the correct thing then do what Allah Commands you to do. Take it to the people of knowledge let them tell you what the correct position is. But make sure you tell the Haqq to them not your version but what happened and what the brother did before he was killed.
wa Allahu Musta’an
AbuSinan, on May 14th, 2008 at 1:19 pm Said:

It isnt about the mosque doing the right thing, it is about them doing it consistantly.

If they use this hadith for this one brother, they had better use it for all brothers.

It is a sad day when even the leaders of a mosque will selectively pick and use hadith to target a single individual in a single case.

If they are going to enforce this hadith, it needs to be for everyone, all of the time.
dawudwalid, on May 14th, 2008 at 7:47 pm Said:

As-Salaamu `Alaykum,

Since this brother was washed & prayed over, I don’t think that the location was of major consequence except that having it outside of the masjid probably caused less people to have prayed over him. I mean, does the janazah have to be in a masjid like a church funeral service?

As much as I believe that killing a person is the second greatest crime in Islam after polytheism, I do think that he deserved to have been prayed over in the masjid. I’m not sure where we are getting this concept that a Muslim needs “membership” in a particular masjid to be prayed over.

If the Imam refused to pray over the man in the masjid for the sole purpose of how it would be perceived by the public, which is how it appears to me, then I think that a niyah check is in order. Was the refusal for PR purposes or because it was believed that it was a violation of Islamic law or its spirit?

The most heinous criminals in American history haven’t been refused funerals at churches. Lee Harvery Oswald was not denied a funeral even after most of the world assumed that he was the sole killer of JFK. The 19 hijackers, btw, didn’t have a funeral probably because of their bodies weren’t found. Someone would have prayed even over them.

The brother who committed the killing of the cop as well as the Imam who didn’t allow the janazah to be in the masjid will both answer to ALLAH for everything just as we all will.

May ALLAH forgive us all.

Wassalaam
Straight-out-Lies, on May 15th, 2008 at 1:21 am Said:

Was-Salaamu alaykum,
Well what I wrote I provided the Dalil for GTM to stand up and tell the truth. Just read it. (Just say “We are Cowards”. Now just for the record I sent out a challenge to provide my ignorant self the proof that those hadeeth about killing oneself or a debt apply to this situation. That’s all, a humble challenge. Since I claimed that the rhetoric that GTM presented was OFF base. Let’s not make our own ijtihad. NO. Let’s go to someone who has knowledge. “LIKE GTM HAS CLAIMED”.!!!!!!!! Let us see the email, the fax or hear the tape. That’s all. I am claiming for myself NO KNOWLEDGE @ all. And I am begging to be taught on this issue. See if we use those hadeeth they presented then I would assume that the circumstances would at least be similar to some degree. And if there is going to be the classification of major sins…….. Then know that the Companions also committed major sins…… However, as a group it is our belief that they are promised Paradise. Please show the Parallel. PLEASE! So I will just relax and pray to Allah that those who took the stance will teach us the REALity of their actions so that by the Grace of Allah we will all be guided to the right course.
It will no doubt come up again as Muslims commit the SAME crimes as non-Muslims, in this country.
Like all those brothers and sisters that have stores with boot-leg gear. ILLEGAL. Or the the boot-leg cd(s) and dvd(s) or the boot-leg coach purses….etc.. You know the knock off(s). Or the people that have stolen cable or the Bogus Section 8(s) that allow their husbands to not work. Oh yes and the frauding the govt with the food stamps and medical while they Married (with or without) the marriage license. Shall I go on…… The credit card and check fraud etc….. STOP IT they all go to that Masjid. I guess they will bury no-one else from Filthy. This applies to only the ones that are guilty of these things. All the righteous Muslims over their and Elsewhere, I make Taubah to Allah and await on the clarity.
Was-Salaam
Samirah bint Jackie Todd, on May 15th, 2008 at 2:34 pm Said:

Dalil on the practice of performing Janazah Salah outside the masjid.

Location of Prayer:

Inside the Masjid - The common practice today of holding the funeral prayer inside the masjid is based on the occasional practice of the Prophet sallallâhu ‘alayhi wa sallam. [See Sahîh Muslim, vol.2, pp.460-1, #2124]

Outside the Masjid - It is however, preferable to have a place (musallâ) set aside for the funeral prayer outside the masjid, as this was the usual practice of the Prophet sallallâhu ‘alayhi wa sallam. [See Sahîh al-Bukhârî, vol.2, p.191, #337, Sahîh Muslim, vol.2, p.452, #2077]

Between the Graves - It is forbidden for salâtul-janâzah to be said for the dead between the graves, according to the following hadîth narrated by Anas ibn Mâlik, in which he said:

“The Prophet sallallâhu ‘alayhi wa sallam forbade the performance of the salâh for the dead in between the graves.” [Collected by at-Tabarânî and authenticated in Ahkâmul-Janâ'iz, p.108, #72]

Also if a person is openly committing haram acts in the community then YES the same decision should apply to them also.

But as for me being in this community, I do NOT make it my business to know the sins of other Muslims. If it is known then act accordingly and if you know about it then you yourself are just as responisble as the person doing the haram act. For you havent told these people they are wrong. Its all part of enjoinng the good and forbidding the evil.

So lets step back and think as individulas in the community who know of the actions of certain people are we ourselves taking the responsibility of letting them know they are wrong? Or are we seeing this and turning a blind eye and blaming the leadership of the community for not ostresizing them?

Its as much your duty as a individual as it is the leadership of the community to approach these “sinners” and let them know that they are sinning. For you too will answere to Allah for your silence.

What I find ironic is noone is free from sin and yet we point fingers.

“Do you enjoin righteousness on humanity and forget to practice it yourselves?”(2:44)

METHODOLOGY OF ENJOINING RIGHT AND FORBIDDING WRONG

Enjoining right and forbidding wrong is done sometimes with the heart, sometimes with the tongue, and sometimes with the hand (i.e. physical force). As for practicing it with the heart, it is obligatory upon everyone in every time and situation, since its practice brings no hardship. whoever fails to do even that is not even a believer as in the full version of the previously cited hadith:

“Whoever of you sees wrong being committed, let him rectify it with his hand, if he is unable, then with his tongue, and if he us unable, then with his heart, and this is the weakest of faith — or in another version: beyond this there is not a single mustard seed’s weight of faith (iman).

Ibn Masood was once asked:

“Who are the living dead?”

to which he replied:

“He who does not acknowledge the right as such, and does not reject the wrong.”

He is referring to the person described in the following agreed-upon hadith who consistently failed to reject wrong when tested. The Prophet said:

“Tests are shown to the hearts like a straw mat, straw by straw. Whichever heart accepts them, and absorbs them, gets a black spot placed on it, and whichever heart rejects them, gets a white, clear spot on it. This goes on until the hearts are of two types: a heart which is white, smooth, and clear like a polished stone which will not be harmed by further trials or tests for as long as the heavens and the earth last, and another dark and blemished; it is like a hook turned over the wrong way on which nothing can be hung - it neither acknowledges what is right nor rejects what is wrong, except for that which happens to coincide with its lusts and inclinations with which this heart has become fully absorbed.”
PITFALLS OF ENJOINING RIGHT AND FORBIDDING WRONG

Two groups of people fall into error in this area:

One group leaves what is obligatory upon them in the area of enjoining right and forbidding wrong, clinging to an incorrect interpretation of the aya quoted previously:

[O, you who believe, your selves are your responsibility, those who go astray will not harm you when you stick to guidance.]

Abu Bakr once explained this error in a khutba saying:

“O people, verily you read this aya, and you apply it where it does not belong, for I heard the Prophet (sas) say: Verily when the people see the wrong-doer, and do not seize his hand, Allah is about to inflict them with a general punishment.”

The second group desires to enjoin and forbid the people with their tongues and their hands absolutely and in all situations without sufficient knowledge of the shari’a, nor forbearance, nor patience, nor regard for that which is beneficial and that which has more harm than benefit and that which is possible and that which is not possible. This is as in the hadith narrated by Abu Tha’laba Al-Khushaniy:

“… rather enjoin on one another what is right and forbid what is wrong until you see obedience to greed and following of lusts and preoccupation with this world and the absolute fascination of each one with his own opinion, and when you see a situation over which you have no power, what is upon you then is your private affairs. For verily, the Days of Patience are coming; patience in those days is like squeezing a hot coal in your hand. The reward of one who fulfills all of his obligations in those days is equal to the reward of fifty such people today.”

This group, then, enjoins and forbids believing that they are in obedience to Allah ta’ala when in reality they are transgressors of His boundaries. In this way, many of the deviant and misguided groups considered themselves to be enjoiners of right and forbidders of wrong such as the khawaarij, and the Mu’tazilah, and the Raafidhi (Shi’a), and others of those who erred in understanding that which Allah gave them in terms of enjoining right and forbidding wrong, and fighting jihad, and other issues. The corruption caused by this kind of enjoining and forbidding is much greater than any good which may result. [TOP]

REBELLION AGAINST THE IMAM OF THE MUSLIMS

For this reason, the Prophet ordered us to be patient when there is injustice on the part of the ruler of the Muslims, and forbad us to fight them, as long as they maintain the prayer, and he said:

“Give them what is due to them, and ask Allah what is due to you.” (Muslim and others)

Thus, one of the basic principles of Ahl As-Sunnah Wa Al-Jamaa: loyalty to the larger group of the Muslim Ummah, not rebelling against its rulers, and keeping away from battles when chaos and fitna arises.

As for the deviant groups such as the mu’tazilah, they view fighting the Imams of the Muslims as one of the principles of their religion. The Mu’tazilah make the basis of their religion five principles: “Tauhid” - which in their terminology means the negation of all of Allah’s names and characteristics, Divine Justice - which means the denying of the decree of Allah in all things, the station between the two stations - i.e. their erroneous theory that anyone who sins is no longer a believer and not quite a kafir, he is stuck somewhere in between, the carrying out of threats - taking literally the threats of punishment which Allah attaches to various sins in the Qur’ân, and enjoining right and forbidding wrong - part of their theory here is warfare against the imams of the Muslims

~ IBN TAIMIYYAH
Samirah bint Jackie Todd, on May 15th, 2008 at 2:44 pm Said:

Dalil taken from enjoining the good forbidding the wrong by Ibn Taimiyyah. And on that note I say Khalas the dalil is clear about supporting the Imam and his decision.
Khalas …wa alaikum as salaam wa rahmatullahi wa barakatuhu
Straight-out-Lies, on May 15th, 2008 at 3:19 pm Said:

Masha’Allah everyone is providing all the quotes from the text. You know like when we read Usool us Sunnah, how is it that we apply those text to the common everyday Muslim by the common everyday Muslim??? No doubt the Haqq is the Haqq. But is it applied in the manner in which it is being applied? Yes, no doubt the Prophet sallalahu alayhi was sallaam did not pray over the man with a debt. No doubt! So every Muslim that owes money on his phone, light, cable, gas, etc will now not be prayed over by the administrators of the varies Islamic Centers? Those are also debts… right? Or the Brother that does not complete his Mahr to his wife…. Debt…right? So no we refuse to wash and pray over him. What about the Student loan prior to Islam?
How come we take stuff so literal that applies to the rights of others yet don’t use the same application with our friends and family?
Like for example how many Marriages over in GTM have been conducted over the past 10 yrs with out fulfilling the conditions of marriage like the Wali…. oh yes just pick any brother to be your wali in the absence of the natural wali… sisters just appointing a wali for them self or the self appointed wali for all the sisters over there. Tradition. How about all the BOGUS khula(s) that those in the position of Imam or Amir at GTM issued against the Hadeeth. It clearly say she has to return the Mahr and he has to divorce her one time.
They listen and then tell the sister your divorced so she moves out. How many times at GTM? How many times a brother divorced his wife 3,4,5,6,7 and GTM tell her to stay with the brother?
Time for justice and returning to the haqq. They all need to resign and get one of those Graduates from Madeenah that they RAN away from over there back. Oh yes, the ones who could have advised you this. GTM the center of national headquarters for “lets run our Imams away”. Or shall we say the national headquarters for “if you ain’t with us then your not Salafi”. GTM stop giving ruling as you’re not qualified. And stop making comparisons with yourself and the Prophet sallalahu alayhi was sallaam and his actions. JUST STOP. When you has the right and position to establish the Hudud and the baitul Mal then we will listen to you. until then.
Was-Salaam
Abu Usamah al Aswad, on May 15th, 2008 at 6:02 pm Said:

@ Straight-out-Lies

Wa Laykum Salaam, You make some very good points (particularly about the various debtors), however at least to me the tone of your posts under cut your points

The best is not the best wrestler, but the one who can control their anger.

Eventhough most members of Masjid As Sunna an Nabawiyyah may disapprove of a dikr bead carrier such as myself, I have no doubt that there are indeed many good well meaning brothers who attend that majsid.

Please do not used this situation to attack the Masjid as your generalizations also attacks the good as well as those guilty. How do you know that the Imam isn’t reprimaning and admonishing these brothers after fajr for their unIslamic behavior?

Look the Muslims questioned the leadership’s actions and the leadership responded by suppying their rationel based on qiyas, which is Islamically legitimate.

Will everyone agree NO, but as they are the leaders there on the ground in Philly so their decision has to be respected. I for one am glad they did not seek to obtain a fatwa from overseas, in my humble lay oppinion we as indigenous Muslims have scholars from around the country that are one to two decades beyond needing fatwas from overseas (if there was ever a need).

Alhamdulillah, as their actions proved they have reserved the rights of the leaders and scholars for themselves. I am glad to see the leadership of this Masjid count themselves among the leaders and scholars, because for a number of years I heard the mantra that there were no Amirs and Ulema in the West, so alhamdulillah.

This whole situation the incident itself and the responses shows the need for Muslims to be attached to a particular community and leadership without being called hizbi. People want to do whatever they want to do, all sorts of rogue actions without accountability, that is until there are problems, then they are a part of a community.

My suggestion to bring about about justice is to do so in the community to which you belong. Thats where it starts where people give their love, life, wealth and abilies to make their communities better and just.

Justice for everyone equally (including criminals), particularly the women and children who are the weakest. The point you make about marriges should be addressed, but this should be internal to the Masjid.

Finally as I understand it, isn’t the building that was donated to the community by a now deceased brother, currently languishing? Perhaps all those concerned about justice in this community could help to support the establishment of an Islamic school, so that the children can be properly educated and when they grow up they won’t need to commit crimes to sustain themselves?
Straight-out-Lies, on May 15th, 2008 at 8:19 pm Said:

Good Post that was sent to me. However, I was not upset nor anything else. I just wanted to use the same tone that GTM uses with people. Thats all.

As for my making general statements that could be applied unjustly to the “other” brother and sisters in the community, I said,
“This applies to only the ones that are guilty of these things. All the righteous Muslims over their ( corrected there) and Elsewhere, I make Taubah to Allah and await on the clarity.”

So I say again.. the shoe was not for everyone. And may Allah guide us all.
Ameen.
was-Salaam
Straight-out-Lies, on May 15th, 2008 at 8:58 pm Said:

Just for the record Ibn Hazm in his book Al-Muhalla, did infact state that the not praying over the one in which committed some (major) crime was for the Imam Ratib (appointed Imam), and not for anyone else as a lesson to the people. Not the Masjid, Islamic Center etc., just the Imam. So there is/was no reason to totally boycott this brother by GTM other than what has proceeded. Allahul Musta’aan
Was-Salaam
Ibn Hazm, on May 16th, 2008 at 12:27 am Said:

Just for the record, the same position that you state (i.e. you as in Mr. Straight-out-lies) is the position of all four imams with regard to morally irresponsible, and especially violent criminals that died in the act.
The statements of Ibn Hazm do not hold precedent over all the other Imams that came before him and after him. That said, if you were to reference the books of the scholars you would find that they say the Imam AND/OR those people of virtue and distinguished nature should not pray over such people.

Additionally no where is it mentioned that the Janazah should be held in the masjid for any Muslim, in fact many scholars disliked that the Janazah prayer be prayed in the Masjid in the first place, based on a hadith on the subject.

Please brother spend your time learning instead of talking and you would do all of us a favor
AbdulHaq al-Ashanti, on May 16th, 2008 at 4:33 pm Said:

As-salaamu alaykum,

I think the rants from “Abu Sinan” demonstrate a fair degree of naivety and a clear lack of understanding of the seriousness of this crime.

It was not a mere case of “burying a criminal”, this brother (rahimahullaah) committed the following:

1. He intentionally dressed up as a Muslim woman, in full niqaab and jilbaab, while committing his crime. This in itself is a cowardly act which is not becoming of a Muslim, furthermore the repercussions of this upon other Muslim women are serious, there is even talk of banning the niqaab due to this, if you are aware.

2. Crimes were committed, whilst in the attire of the Muslim woman - so they used Islam as a means for the crime.

3. A Police officer was killed while trying to apprehend this individual and within the current situation the Muslims are going through enough without having to be seen to condone the actions of cop-killers.

Therefore, the decision by Germantown Masjid was the correct one, not only do they have the texts on their side but also as they are a well-known community known to be strict adherents of the Qur’an, Sunnah and way of the Salaf, and are respected due to this, this sends out a clear message to anyone who even thinks that they commit their crimes and justify them with Islam.

So there mere rants of “Abu Sinan” I feel should be thrown against the wall as he evidently has little experience of being part of an active, popular and focal Muslim community like Germantown.

AbdulHaq
Ghareebah, on May 16th, 2008 at 11:17 pm Said:

Bismillaah
As salaamu ‘alaykum
Abu Sinan have u ever been to Germantown Masjid? Majority of the muslims there are AFRICAN AMERICAN. So your statement about it would be selective and if it was indo/paks it would be different is thrown out the window. I think u need to learn ur deen. A hadeeth was given and you take it upon yourself to make your own sharh to it. Fear Allaah. And learn your basics of Islaam like the waajibaat of salaah and the ahkaam.
M. Landers, on May 17th, 2008 at 1:03 am Said:

So, by way of the list included in their reliance on “fatawa demonstrating the permissability” of their decision, they too would have refused me had I come to them for help when my husband died. Elhamdulillah that I did not because in the state that I was in I can not imagine what it would have done to my faith and my ability to even just get by, at least for that time. Widowhood is … you can not imagine the vulnerability until you’ve been there.

I don’t care what Howard Cain did. He made decisions that created a lot of despair and will answer for that in whatever way is just. But to place political expediency and appearances above the most immediate needs of a widow, and as I understand it unborn now-orphan, coming to them for help, and to justify it with a Q&A and a statement to the effect that “well, someone else took care of it, so it’s all good” … all I can say is may Allah subhana wa ta’ala forgive them, but I can hope call them to answer as well. Burials are not only about the dead.
Ghareebah, on May 17th, 2008 at 3:00 am Said:

As salaamu ‘alaykum
Well said akhee Abdul Haq may Allaah reward you abundantly aameen. ALlaah says in the Qur’aan ask the ppl of knowledge if u do not know. And abu sinan and straight out lies(what a username) need to implement this and ask the ppl of knowledge if they do not know since they have all the kalaam. Instead of ranting and raving here do us all a favour and firstly benefit yourself by seeking ‘ilm and then bring the daleel to us. not your hawaa
was salaamu ‘alaykum
Daud, on May 17th, 2008 at 5:56 am Said:

The Masjid is not responsible for burying the dead. The families are the ones who are actually responsible.
AbdulHaq al-Ashanti, on May 17th, 2008 at 6:14 pm Said:

http://www.nbc10.com/slideshow/16194712/detail.html?taf=phi
Abu Jameel Abdul Qaadir Camden, NJ, on May 19th, 2008 at 2:23 am Said:

As salaamu alaikum I think it be best we all hold our comments till we see what the shayook have said about this matter. Also there seems not to be a issue on the descion but rather some displayed anger at MASJID SUNNATUL NABAWEEYAH. The sad thing is in all of this confussion how many of the na sayers have made continuous du’a for Mr. Cain? Who has gotten up in the middle of the night to pray and ask for is forgiveness if you feel so bad, who in there selves see so much injustice have made du’a for the imaams who deal with marriages, classes, khutbah, burials, sicknesses, having to study , who are under paid, unappreciated, who dont sleep at night because of their phones ringing , hearing all of the sins and nasty things people have done, the back biting the slanders, they have their onw families , own problems, how do we look at the administrations who have to clean behind neglagent muslims, and as far as we havent thought sins have their levels, and we have to look at the harm and level of the harm as far as a action is taken by it. The one who dies in debt we can pay his debt… yes or no, who would give the blood money, did any one offer that oh yeah I forgot because we are not in dar Islam certain things cant be practiced. There is a server lack of understanding and a lack of sense of urgancy over this matter. We need to grow up and appreciate that this issue should move on to want to die in a state of Islamiya. How many of use thought about our own demise and how would be at our ending. Do we remember those narration about death, have we taken account before we are taken to account, and then some of the examples … if some one dies of say “Aids” that doesnt involve sin, and as for debt and even being moved to death there are conditions to that. None the less there has been much text given to suppor the descion how ever I havent seen a harf to support going against it but feelings. I am sorry to see that the masjid is to be blamed when the people can just simply wash him and move on. You feel for him want honor for him …MAKE DUA, have you forgotten this tool, and have you oh those who feel that he was wronged make du’a, come to the admin in private with your daleel, help them where was ad deen al naseeha .. in this case, where was advising in private done. How is it when we critisize the leaders and take on the character of the Khawaarij, it is plain to see that if any thing that people have a sore spot for the salafiyoon and not just the masjid, I am sure if it happened in another masjid that is Salafi then the people would go foolish. How about all of the good things that come from the masjid and how many have spoke about the long term marriages, and the many people who have been guided aright from these institutions, how many tapes, books, clearifications, advices have been given from those masjid and the people. Where is the support for advice… ? none the less you will see that this is a sickness that many have suffered and many will still suffer till the day of qiyyama we dont truly believe because we dont want for our brothers what we want for ourselves. If you want to die with honor you have to live honorably insha Allah we will await the descion over this issue from the shayook and people will have their hearts calmed

was salaamu alaikum
Abu Usamah, on May 19th, 2008 at 4:33 am Said:

Actually the scholars in Philly have spoken and pulled the cover off the truth http://www.nuruzzamaaninstitute.org/Page_3.html

I pray for ALL the Imams here in America who are trying to guide people to the truth even those who may error at times as none of us are perfect
abdul-halim, on May 19th, 2008 at 2:57 pm Said:

Asalam-alaikum,

Thanks for posting this. I think it is helpful to learn more about where the mosque leadership was coming from. At the same time, I’m not totally convinced that they should interpret themselves as being in the role of the the “elite” (the khalifah, the mayor, etc.) rather than “ordinary people”. I also wonder about whether local conditions should be taken into account. I mean, Bin Baaz and Ibn Taymiyah gave their fatwas in Muslim-majority societies and in that situation, it is easy to argue that if one group doesn’t pray janazah then at least someone else would take care of it. I’m not sure the same thing is true to the same degree in the US. If the local mosque doesn’t take care of it, it will be much harder to find someone else to take their place.
Daud, on May 19th, 2008 at 6:09 pm Said:

The brother’s laid around for 5 days before someone buried him. NO MASJID IN PHILLY WOULD TOUCH HIM, SO STOP SWEATING THE G-TOWN MASJID’S ADMINISTRATION. EVERYONE TOOK THE SAME STANCE IN PHILLY. NOTICE MASJID AS SUNNAH NABAIYYAH IS THE ONLY ONE THAT CAME WITH A PROOF. EVERYONE ELSE JUST JUMPED ON THE BANDWAGON, AS USUAL.
abuhunain, on May 19th, 2008 at 6:54 pm Said:

To: Daud

G-Town set a precedent they move they pulled. That’s the problem I had with the ‘decision’. Perhaps that position/opinion is applicable in a land that has a large Muslim population with burial grounds and people that will bury the person when the ‘leadership’ decides not to pray over the dead. How it plays out here is that when the leadership denies such a thing that means that the Masjid nor its member be involved. Unfortunately that’s part of the American Muslim landscape.

Effectively by G-Town taking the stance it did then how would the other masajid look? The other masajid would look ’suspect’ by taking on the responbility of burying the brother. Again, when a ‘leader’ takes such a stance that means the masjid and the members.

Masha Allah, the brother was washed and buried but I standby my position that G-Town choosing to make taqleed of Sh. Bin Baz’s fatwa is a poor shot at applying the law under the circumstances.

To Abu Sinan’s point, will this new standard of distancing and the ‘leadership’ refusing to pray over sinners be applied equally? What about the slanderers, scandal mongers and backbitters? Since we are going to make a hodge-podge of the law and its application what will be the ‘distancing strategy’ for the other sinners in the community? Or is it only for the ‘media-sinners’ that we will apply such distancing strategies.

Imam Luqman has been implicated by Daniel Pipes and crew so wil we ‘distance’ ourselves from him and Universal Group when the media heat gets too hot?
J. McConnel, on May 19th, 2008 at 7:17 pm Said:

Bismillahir Rahmanir Raheem
Many people have mentioned the right that the brother (rahimahullah) has to a janazah, and that his right was violated by Germantown Masjid (GM). This is a serious accusation that needs to be further investigated by everyone making this claim.
Let’s consider the following: There is consensus amongst the scholars of Islam that burying a Muslim is a communal obligation (fard kifiyah).
Ibn al-Mundhir (d. 318 AH) states in al-Ijmaa’ (p. 51), “The scholars unanimously agree that burying the dead is obligatory and binding upon the people. It’s not permissible for them to abandon it while having the ability to do so. Whoever performs the duty relieves the remaining Muslims of the obligation.”
وأجمعوا على أن دفن الميت لازم واجب على الناس، لا يسعهم تركه عند الإمكان. ومن قام به منهم سقط فرض ذلك على سائر المسلمين
This means that the act itself is not obligatory upon any individual person, masjid, or establishment unless they are the only ones capable of performing the act.
The question should not be whether or not the brother has a right to be buried, the question is WHO HAS TO FULFILL THAT RIGHT? Many people writing on this and other blogs seem to believe that Germantown Masjid is responsible for fulfilling that right. However, there are approximately 40 masjids in Philadelphia, many of them who have performed janazahs in the past. Since burying the deceased is a communal obligation, what is it that makes it obligatory upon Germantown Masjid specifically?
Those who claim that GM has violated the brother’s rights are implying that the burial of this brother was obligatory upon them. The burden of proof according to Islamic law is upon the one who makes the claim. They are ignoring the consensus of the scholars and somehow making this obligatory upon GM. What is the proof for this?
Some have claimed that he should have been given the janazah by the brothers he prayed with and the Masjid he gave sadaqa to; hence the obligation was GM’s to fulfill. Even if he did pray at GM (he was actually known to pray at another masjid in the city), is this sufficient as evidence to override the consensus of the salaf?
The reality is that no one, up until now, has mentioned any textual evidence indicating that it was obligatory upon GM to perform the janazah, especially with 40 other masjids in the city.
Could GM have handled the situation differently, have a few brothers pray over him elsewhere and ensure he got his rights? Maybe, and Allah knows best. The reality is that many of us who are not involved in urban communities don’t know what goes into burying someone by way of human and financial resources.
My only point is that to claim that GM violated the brother’s rights is a serious accusation. Those making it should really think about their meeting with Allah.
Abu Usamah al Aswad, on May 19th, 2008 at 8:41 pm Said:

@ Daud

ASA, Are you saying Muslims are all one body and all the Masajid in Philly operate upon knowledge and all should be held accountable equally?

Although we as Muslims need to move beyond the past let’s not act like there’s no reason for the acrimony some are showing toward GM.

When you run around trying to “Deebo” masajid people are not going to like you. Nothing happens in a valcuum, so don’t feign ignorance you know why people are “sweating” the administration of this masjid as you say.

What about his aqeedah? What about his minhaj? What about the dawah he ascribed to?

Are you saying that anyone that says the shahada is Muslim and his aqeedah and his minhaj should not separate Muslims from the general body of Muslims? If you are then alhamdulillah!!!

It’s interesting there is no mention of these things in the official letter, the brother is simply Muslim — as it should be. A Muslim simply being Muslim is a great place to start for unity. How wonderful would it be if this was always the case? Imagine if the communities could come together upon unity each recognizing one another as Muslims upon truth.

Another good opportunity for unity is to provide the widow (with child) some assistance. I am not scholar so there some distancing that should be aimed at her as well? Do you know Daud?

@ Abu Jameel Abdul Qaadir

ASA, you have some interesting points, what is your definition of leader? I am a laymen so perhaps I’m misunderstanding your post you wrote “come to the admin in private with your daleel, help them where was ad deen al naseeha .. in this case, where was advising in private done” Are you implying that a person takes on on the character of the Khawaarij when they publicly criticize American Muslim leaders? Are you saying someone must advise a leader in private before going public? Please advise.

@ anyone
Interestingly in the terms khaleefah, ruler, judges, president and mayor are all mentioned together, perhaps someone can enlighten me how and when did George ibn George and Nutter come to constitute leadership for the Muslims?
Abu Usamah al Aswad, on May 19th, 2008 at 8:42 pm Said:

Word of the day — pusillanimous
dawudwalid, on May 19th, 2008 at 9:25 pm Said:

Again, if the decision was motivated by public relations purposes, it was clearly out of order. Not burying him in the masjid didn’t please the enemies of Islam one bit, so let’s not get it twisted and think that some PR points were gained.

I hope that none of us who are posting on this and other blogs that have so much certitude that the GM masjid was correct are tested with a similar situation like if one of our Muslim relatives overdoses on heroin, gets killed at the liquor, or shot by the spouse of the person that they had an affair with. One could clearly argue that they died while committing an act of kufr and could be barred from having their janazah in the masjid, right? I wonder how many opinions of bin Baz (RH) would we reference then.

Regarding with what Abu Usamah eluded to, where are we getting this from that a leader cannot be challenged in public about potential wrong-doing and that he can only be questioned in private? Wasn’t Umar bin Al-Khattab (RA) questioned publically while he was khailfah? Did not the Prophet (SAAS) say that the best jihad is speaking truth to a wrong-doing leader? What if he cannot get access to the leader privately? Should one just hold their breathe? Let’s get for real.
abuhunain, on May 19th, 2008 at 10:56 pm Said:

@ dawud walid
“One could clearly argue that they died while committing an act of kufr and could be barred from having their janazah in the masjid, right?”

No, there was a crime but the crimes do not constitute kufr unless (as I understand it) they believe that stealing etc is lawful or disagree with the shariah in this regard. What was done was an act of fisq (gross crime) and not necessarily one of kufr.

..and Allah (swt) knows best…
Abu Jameel Abdul Qaadir Camden, New Jersey, on May 20th, 2008 at 2:05 am Said:

Wa alaikum salaam, no one who has spoken against the position of the Musaajids have given one ayyat or a hadeeth, athar or the like to support their emotions. We aren’t moved by emotions and let the people remember , the brother was WASHED AND BURIED of which the obligation and his rights have been fulfilled .

The fact of the matter is that Allah has placed a people over another and if he didn’t their would be much confusion and dissention (as if we don’t see much of it now). It is the fact that many of the former issues were because we have allowed thugs and ruffians amongst us and not making hija away from the people of evil is why we have dudes running around with Capri pants and beards. Our area (Philly Metro are full of BFN’s (beards for no reason) because the guys have an Islamic appearance have been doing things with out criticism and correction happen to adopted the salafi minhaj and there is nothing wrong with the minhaj rather its those who claim it and have marred its image. Lets not forget the Honorable Sahabah Ka’b Ibn Malik and his repentance and the boycotting of him this hadeeth is worth reading it is found in Bukharee and Muslim and it is on Abdullahi Ibn Ka’b from Riyyadus Salaaheen hadeeth #21 Volume one under the bab of Repentence.

And for the question regarding advising one who is Mukhalif in the land, state, town or even the masjid. Doing so only keeps the relationship and dignity of the people, coming out against the persons who have gained leadership only causes confusion and dissention. It weakens the authority of the Qur’an and Sunnah.

It is best for there one to remind himself of the narration of the messenger of Allah when dealing with this matter. That the messenger of Allah said some thing to the effect of “ help your leaders if he is a righteous or an oppressor” the messenger of Allah was asked about both situations regarding them both (i.e. the righteous, oppressor) as for the righteous one it is with what ever you can of physical help, money and advices. And the best advice is that which is done in private protecting ones self from riya, and if there was a mistake and you give the person a chance to retract his mistake or correct it, none the less even if he is an oppressor then make du’a for him. I wonder with all of these issues and questions that come to play, who from amongst the people here sought to wash the brother their selves. Who was so concerned about him has sent his family condolences? Much of the sunnah is left out, has any one been curious about his debts, or any of the debts of the muslims. How many of us even plan for the death of the people, who knows what to do … many a time the people run to the masjid because they don’t know what to do nor do they care case after case year after year and time after time it is a obligation put upon the same people what will happen in a case where the people who do the washing die?

And I beg your pardon akhi @ Abu Usamaah al Aswad, I stand to be corrected if I am wrong , but I don’t think no one has placed the Kufar over the muslims as leaders however from the door of obeying the laws of the land and not causing corruptions we respect the authority of those people in their lands and their laws as long as their laws don’t go against the command of Allah. None the less we are talking (well at least I am) about the Imaams and those who are placed in authority over the muslims. It is this in which I speak and there shouldn’t have been any confusion and at this point I must end this as I would want to reserve any more comment myself about this till we see the statement of the shayook as the positions we hold and have held before some times we are wrong and some times we are right. Many of us should hold tight and be cautious of our tongues and pens. And regarding the issue of Aqeedah and minhaj this does matter in fact some one can simply say he is muslim but his belief is that thing in which grants him the rights of a muslim, establishing the salaat, paying the zakat, does one who don’t believe in the existance of the Angels is he still muslim? Or one that makes the leaving off salaat or one who forbids jihad is he or she muslim.

Or the case of some one saying I don’t agree with the Qur’an in this issue or that is she or he muslim by just saying I am muslim or even the shahaddah .. If they never understood what they uttered are they muslim. There are conditions to this kaleema and its just not a utterance there are actions too. I am a layman how ever I look to perfect the understanding of Tawheed and Shirk as to firm my Tawheed and to avoid falling into shirk.

By the way taking on a character of some thing doesn’t make it a whole, so one can have characteristics of a munafiq and not be a munafiq, removing some thing from the road and having shyness is a action and a character of Imaan how ever it doesn’t make them a believer. So I don’t understand you reasoning, this is coming to a point that I have to prove day light exist and water is wet then I don’t know if I have the strength to provide for any more dialog on things that are clear if the classes are being attended, books are being read and people are concerned over their souls.

I also like to add that if there are any mistakes, errors on my behalf they are from me and my nafs and what has come of guidance and truth is from Allah and I welcome any correction and advice daarulathar@comcast.net

Ps even if its grammatical
Abu Jameel Abdul Qaadir Camden, New Jersey, on May 20th, 2008 at 12:10 pm Said:

I also wanted to add, public relations is also a part of our dawa(given money , visiting the kufar in their times of sadness and sickness, offering help and food, being kind to your neighborsetc) There are times in which as we can recall that the messenger of Allah salaahu alaihi was salaam would even visit the people who attempted to harm him (re: his neighbor who used to through trash in front of his apartment).

We do seek to protect the face of islam from harm, either it be by muslims and or non muslims. We censure and correct the actions of the kufar and misconceptions how ever when it comes to the misgivens of our companions we dont say jack. PR actions are speaking openly against terrorism who would not agree, should we have remained silent after 911. How many people here have been guilty of the campaign that Usama bin Laden didnt have any thing to do with the Hijacking of those planes? Blaming or saying this was a conspiracy and the Masad was the head of this and that even so .. if this is the case do we not still speak ill about actions attributed to islam ? How many people have found themselves defending Islam in mondane issues like, “oh I have a boy friend thats muslim” or job related issues when some one goes to shake the hand of a woman and he/she says I dont shake hands and the reply to the muslim is ” fulan wa fulana shakes hands” we have many PR things we do on a constant. Much of this is tail carrying none of which if any have sought any real answers the sad thing about blogs and blogging and may Allah remove me far away from doing this again. Giving opinions and speaking about that which we are not percise about may lead us to the fire, it is a way of expression an opinion and misguidence just as well as guidence. Blogs give a way for every one to express what he or she may “think” and this is what lead shaytan to his evil and demise. How much have we “thought” over the ayats of Allah when he may mention and “and this is a clear evidence for those who reflect, think, rememeber…” I ask our Lord Rabil Alameen causes us all to be patient in the turbalent time as the muslim are in a time of confussion and misgivens. I ask that all of us who seek jennah be guided upon this path which is accompanied with many other paths and its heads are shaytans. I pray that this issue of blogging doesnt destroy us and that we dont lose focus on the fact we are lowly beings who when our bones are ashes we would be forgotten and be mere memories and the only thing we will be remembered by is our words and we take to our grave our actions. Becareful Amatullah wa Abdullah, being excessive in given your opinon can be harmful to your soul, silence is better and not being known is more pescious.
dawudwalid, on May 20th, 2008 at 12:44 pm Said:

As-Salaamu `Alaykum,

I agree that public relations is needed and is a form of da’wah. I deal with PR on a daily basis; however, I’m not for compromising matters of `ibaadaat for PR.

My contention is not a matter of whether the decision was right according to a fiqhi perspective, as brothers constantly ascert when they state that they haven’t seen one ayah or hadeeth quoted for those who question the decision.

My contention is the intention/motive of the decision itself, which is a spiritual matter. And I question the motive based upon the circumstances and what was officially stated and direct quotes from the news.

The most mashhoor hadeeth, which is mutawattir and agreed upon by all Muslims (Sunni, Ibadi, Shi’is) is:
إنما الأعمال بالنيات
“Actions are but by their intentions…”

If the motive for not allowing the janazah was primarily for the pleasure of ALLAH (SWT) then that’s one thing. But if the blocking of the janazah was done PRIMARILY to save face and as a PR matter to curry favor with those who don’t respect Muslims anyway then that’s incorrect.

WALLAHU `Alim.

Wassalaam.
Abu Jameel Abdul Qaadir Camden, New Jersey, on May 20th, 2008 at 3:59 pm Said:

Na’m Akhi so I ask you have you opened the chest of the Imaam of Sunnah tul Nabaweeyah, and many of the things the people have mentioned prior to Taalib coming to Masjid Sunnah tul Nabaweeya then you cant hold that over his head. Rather not one man can say what a mans intentions are except he lays a precedence or pattern. Like a tree is just a tree till we see the produce of it, apple, cherry, peacan etc. I havent known from this man actions like this and I have known of him and his family when I lived in Maryland, and I am an associate of his step son. Can any one say that they have pray with Taalib, done business with him, traveled with him. Who can establish a precedence in which one can claim insight on his thinking to show malice?
Brother Dash, on May 20th, 2008 at 10:08 pm Said:

A Salaamu Alaikum,

Subhanallah. What we are seeing is why it is so critical to learn and follow qualified TRADITIONAL Islamic scholarship. When people start using their interpretations of ahadith (and for the sake of argument let’s assume the above hadith are even translated properly) for fiqh rulings you have a huge problem. As Muslims we follow FIQH for legal rulings not what you interpret from a hadith. Let me repeat…we follow fiqh. We have a Shariah. What’s the point of Islamic Jurisprudence if anybody can just crack open a hadith or reference ’scholars’ that have not been taught in accordance with the Sunnah? In Islam you learn from someone who learned from someone who learned from someone who learned all the way back to the Prophet, sallahu alaihi wa salaam…i.e. isnad. Just like we have hadiths that are related on the authority of so and so (with the chain) you also have a chain of scholarship. We don’t do the ’self taught’ thing. You get into serious trouble that way. Do you go to a medical doctor that is ’self taught’?

Even if we use the above where is the evidence that the fard kifaya (communal obligation) is absolved for a janaza of an alleged Muslim criminal? I see alot about suicide but nothing about being killed in a shootout while commiting a crime. And that’s me already convicting him. It’s not like he had a trial. And don’t get me wrong. I’m not defending the actions of these individuals. And in fact it is my belief that they were in fact guilty and it’s even more problematic that they put our sisters in harms way as a result of the “disguise” they chose to wear. But we are talking fiqh not my personal opinion. We are talking jurisprudence not a hadith about somebody eating too much and we somehow juxtapose that to suicide and this incident. When did the deceased commit suicide anyway? He was killed in a shootout. So even if we were to take the above as evidence, which you would not do as we follow fiqh not an interpretation of a hadith for legal matters, it’s still wrong!

And while I believe they were guilty as the day is long as a Qadi I would have to actually go through the evidence of the case. You still get due process in our deen. So this masjid and others based their decision without even going through a thorough investigation of the alleged crime. I mean even in Islam where theft is haram there are exceptions to the harshest of punishment if you are stealing to provide food for your family as opposed to material desire. It’s still wrong but this is in our fiqh. What investigation was done? This is serious. You are talking about someone’s burial AND a fard kifaya that has consequences of COMMUNAL SIN.

When we don’t follow traditional scholarship we open ourselves up to these landmines. We act like we are the first people in the history of Islam to have to deal with the issue of a janaza for a criminal Muslim. What does the Shariah say? What does the Maliki or Shafi’i madhab say? What instances do we have of this exact situation in the past? We have scholarship. We have methodologies and when we do this fly by the seat of our pants approach to fiqh matters we have big problems.

My major issue is not so much with what an individual Muslim does in terms of his own methodology. You wanna follow a madhab great. You don’t fine. You wanna reference scholars that study from institutions not based on the traditional model of Islamic learning fine. I don’t much concern myself with it but when your decision has a bearing on whether or not I get a sin placed on me as a member of a community then we have a problem. That’s the big issue. You are talking about fard kifiya not fard ‘ayn. For too many years we have not had traditional Islamic scholarship being taught and promoted in our communities to these dire consequences.
J. McConnel, on May 20th, 2008 at 10:48 pm Said:

Bismillahir Rahmanir Raheem
“O you who believe! Avoid much suspicion; indeed some suspicion is sinful” (49:12)
The Messenger (sallahu alaihi wa sallam) said, “Beware of suspicion, for suspicion is the worst of false tales” (Bukhari and Muslim)
Dawud Walid said: “And I question the motive based upon the [1] circumstances and [2] what was officially stated and [3] direct quotes from the news”

As salamu alaykum

With all due respect brother Dawud, you apparently do not know these brothers. Nor do you seem to be too familiar with things you indicate are causing you to question their motive.

(1) “Circumstances” The brothers at GM were asked on Sunday if they would perform the services. They declined shortly thereafter before the media even got involved (i.e. before they came to question anyone at Germantown Masjid). See #3. So if the decision was made before the media even got hold of it, how could it have been done “as a PR matter to curry favor with those who don’t respect Muslims anyway”?

(2) “What was officially stated” If you’re referring to what was written by the managing director of GM, then please reread their official statement, “The decision was not politically motivated but rather done to make it absolutely clear that we do not condone this type of behavior.” Where in this official statement does it indicate that the decision was primarily “a PR matter to curry favor with those who don’t respect Muslims anyway”?

(3) “Direct quotes from the news” I’m not sure which article(s) exactly you’re referring to, but I’ll share with you the following: http://www.philly.com/philly/hp/news_update/18756679.html which was Posted on Thu, May. 8, 2008 By KITTY CAPARELLA
“No, we will not bury him at Germantown Masjid,” said Tariq El Shabazz, managing director of the mosque. “We don’t want one slight scintilla hinting that we condone his behavior.”
On Sunday evening, a friend of Cain’s family asked if Cain’s burial could take place at the mosque on Germantown Avenue near Logan Street, El Shabazz said.
El Shabazz declined to conduct the service after researching Islamic law and meeting with Saadiq Abdul Jabbar, chief executive of the mosque; Imam Talib Abdullah, and others.” END OF QUOTE.

Googling Kitty Caparella, you’ll find that she’s been doing crime reporting for the Philadelphia Daily News for the past 36 years. She’s shrewd in her approach and apparently poked around to try to find out where the janazah was going to be (she’s very familiar with the Muslims in Philly). This is why she came back to the masjid days AFTER her initial interview. No one from the masjid called a press conference to make a public statement. So when the managing director was approached by Caparella, he informed her of the decision and why it was made. Why is that being considered “a PR matter to curry favor with those who don’t respect Muslims anyway”?

It seems to me that your basis of questioning these brothers’ motive is quite week. And all of those who know the Imam of the masjid (Talib Abdullah) will definitely agree that a decision made to appease non Muslims at the expense of the deen is not from his characteristics, and Allah knows best. And we ask Allah to make us and him from His sincere servants.

And let me say here, at the risk of being offensive, Who are we (me, you, and anyone else reading this) to question the INTENTIONS of these brothers? If your issue isn’t from a fiqhi perspective, then it would be better that you keep your conjecture to yourself. Since we can’t judge what’s in the heart, and because your “question of motive” is based on circumstantial evidence at best, you are merely spreading your suspicions.

Please brother: Fear Allah! Indeed some suspicion is sin.
“O you who believe! Avoid much suspicion; indeed some suspicion is sinful” (49:12)
The Messenger (sallahu alaihi wa sallam) said, “Beware of suspicion, for suspicion is the worst of false tales” (Bukhari and Muslim)
Umar bin al-Khattab said, “Never think ill of the word that comes out of your brother’s mouth as long as you can find a good expalnation for it.” (Muwatta of Imam Malik)

Brother Dawud, if you still feel strongly about the issue, it would be more befitting for you to contact the brothers at GM directly as opposed to spreading suspicions on the web. And Allah knows best.
AbdulHaq al-Ashanti, on May 20th, 2008 at 10:54 pm Said:

@ “Brother Dash”

As-salaamu alaykum,

Judging from your website “brother Dash” then with all due respect you are not really in the position to all of a sudden present such a pompous display of “adherence to traditional Islamic fiqh and shariah”?! So since when has performing poetry clean shaven and musbil had any connection to “traditional and classical Islamic fiqh and scholarship”?!

You seem to have a plethora of misconceptions about the da’wah Salafiyyah which you may have gained from Abdullah bin Hamid Ali, Hamza Yusuf, Zaid Shakir and Abu Alfa Muhammad bin Fareed Shareef, but instead of going into a rant by accusing the Salafis of not following scholars and going straight to the hadeeth to derive rulings - you should maybe actually ask the Salafis what their methodology is.

Brother Dash said:
“You wanna reference scholars that study from institutions not based on the traditional model of Islamic learning fine.”

This is nonsense and the usual argumentum ad nauseum that we hear from the so-called “traditional Islam” movement. These institutions that “Brother Dash” is insinuating do study in a traditional and classical way, but here is not the time to go deep into this matter. “Dash” also insinuated that the Salafis follow “self taught individuals” and this is another blatant misconception and the biography of the salafis scholars indicate this claim of “Dash” to be false, see for example: http://www.al-ibaanah.com/biography_era.php?BID=16

So to simplistically claim that the dearth of “traditional scholarship” (as defined and moulded by Hamza Yusuf, Zaid Shakir, Abdullah bin Hamid Ali and others) is a cuase for these controversies is utter folly. Furthermore, “Brother Dash” has attempted to claim that Germantown Masjid did not investigate the matter when this is false as their official statement contains much in the way of a study of how such matters have been dealt with from the ahadeeth of the Messenger of Allaah. So “Brother Dash”, don’t let your partisanship cloud your judgement, your flagrant disregard of the authentic hadeeth is also a cause for concern.

“Brother Dash” what you have presented here is nothing but a red herring, based on your own partisan adherence to madhdhab parochialism you have entered into this issue in order to attack Germantown Masjid (a Salafi masjid) yet you have said absolutely nothing about the other 50 or so masaajid who also took the same stance and do not follow the Salafi manhaj and some of whom in fact follow your very own methodology!

So Ahl us-Sunnah would rather follow the hadeeth than the “boom chicka boom” anyday!

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=2CqRfrzj2P8&feature=related
J. McConnel, on May 20th, 2008 at 10:55 pm Said:

BTW brother Dawud, “Actions are but by their intentions…” is as far away from a mutawaatir hadeeth that you can get. It is one of the examples that ALL hadeeth scholars use for a hadeeth that is Ahaad. But that’s just to correct a technicality, because Ahlus Sunnah’s measuring stick for the acceptance of a hadeeth is that it be sahih (they do not reject hadith simply because it’s khabr wahid).
J. McConnel, on May 20th, 2008 at 11:13 pm Said:

Ahlus Sunnah also accept the hadeeth that is hasan, and there are cases where a weak hadeeth may be used as supporting evidence. However, this thread is not for the purpose of discussing mustalah al-hadeeth in detail. Those who have interest can go back to the books of the scholars.
J. McConnel, on May 20th, 2008 at 11:20 pm Said:

Brother Dawud, you also state, “I agree that public relations is needed and is a form of da’wah. I deal with PR on a daily basis; however, I’m not for compromising matters of `ibaadaat for PR.”
What matter of ibaadah exactly was compromised in GM’s decision?
Brother Dash, on May 21st, 2008 at 1:06 am Said:

Judging from your website “brother Dash” then with all due respect you are not really in the position to all of a sudden present such a pompous display of “adherence to traditional Islamic fiqh and shariah”?! So since when has performing poetry clean shaven and musbil had any connection to “traditional and classical Islamic fiqh and scholarship”?!
Wa Alaikum A Salaam,
This is a long response so I’ll split it into two posts for easier reading.
Part 1
Unfortunately you illustrate my point. Look at the first word you used in your response…JUDGING! That is our problem. We need t

	patb on You think You Know Someon…
	UK Brother on The Tension between Black Amer…
	fairuza on You think You Know Someon…
	Peaceful Me on You think You Know Someon…
	Peaches on You think You Know Someon…
	Atif on Soaking Up The Boycott Bu…
	haroon on You think You Know Someon…
	Rasheed Moore on Integrating Islam in the …
	Peaches on Convert Leaves Fake Nail …
	Redwan Ahmed on Integrating Islam in the …

Tariq Nelson

Recent Comments

Recent Posts

Categories

Archives

Carnival of Brass

Germantown Masjid’s Official Stance

62 Responses to “Germantown Masjid’s Official Stance”