Tot slot heeft de moslimgemeenschap één bron van hadith, zoals onze shahada er ook één is. Om dat te bereiken, moet er consensus zijn (Je kunt mensen niet dwingen om op jou te lijken, omdat je denken veel logische fouten bevat. Het kan zijn dat jij de groep bent met de meeste kortsluiting). Dus om de eenheid van de islamitische wereld te bereiken op basis van wetenschap, is zelfintrospectie nodig van elke factie, met name de feodale orthodoxe islamitische factie, zodat de deconstructie van de doctrines die Salahuddin al-Ayubi heeft achtergelaten over islamitische scholen, scholen van fiqh, oude scholen van denken kan worden bekritiseerd, dan vindt de reconstructie van het handboek van hadith opnieuw plaats, waarvan het grote doel de reconstructie is van alle interpretaties van islamitische leringen die zijn aangepast aan de dialectiek van de moderne wereld. Dit is de meest logische radicale oplossing voor het radicale probleem van het verenigen van de islamitische gemeenschap in de toekomst in één "wet" na de onthoofding van "Sayidina Husein's hoofd" in Karbala als de eerste bel van de splitsing van de islamitische gemeenschap.
Omdat we dezelfde juridische basis nodig hebben om een gemeenschappelijk land te hebben. Het is onmogelijk voor een islamitische staat om te bestaan zonder islamitische wet die alle groepen vertegenwoordigt; er is geen islamitische wet voor alle groepen als er geen reconstructie is van de hadith, reconstructie van de ushuliyah-regels en reconstructie van de islamitische wet. Momenteel zijn we inderdaad verenigd in de kwestie van de shahada, hoewel we misschien nog niet hetzelfde begrip hebben van monotheïsme, laat staan theologie (kalam), en "zeker vastzitten" in de islamitische wet. Zolang de bron van hadith van de moslimgemeenschap nog niet één is, wat betekent dat de denkrichtingen in de islam een noodzaak/pluralisme lijken te zijn, dan is de oprichting van een "Islamitische Staat" die "zeker" een takfiri islamitische staat zal zijn zoals die van de Omajjaden, Abbasiden, Ottomanen tot moderne islamitische landen van vandaag die intolerant zijn voor radicale verschillen tussen hen, "haram". Omdat een islamitische staat moet worden opgericht voor de hele moslimgemeenschap, niet een instrument voor bepaalde groepen uit tirannieke kringen om hun prestige te vergroten en vervolgens andere moslims ongelovigen te verklaren met behulp van het voorrecht van de macht.
Stel je voor dat Mustafa, zoon van Suleyman de Grote, die bereid was Perzië te veroveren, in het verleden in het Ottomaanse Rijk erin was geslaagd de troon te bestijgen zoals Saladin, dan zouden tienduizenden hadiths die niet in de al-Sittah-pool stonden, uit Perzische bibliotheken zijn vernietigd, net als de boeken van mujtahids wiens genealogie niet verbonden was met de vier scholen van soennitische fiqh die Saladin vernietigde nadat hij de macht had overgenomen in Egypte, dat destijds het centrum was van het soennitische islamitische kalifaat.
Nu hebben onze oude wonden van tirannieën die in het verleden als islam werden vermomd, mensen als Mustafa Kemal voortgebracht, die het secularisme van de staatswet in landen met een moslimmeerderheid hooghouden om de ideologieën van afwijkende doctrines te ontgiften die de geesten van zijn volk volledig hebben verdorven om de achterlijke mensen in de wereld te worden. Wa makarụ wa makarallāh, nu is secularisme het beste middel totdat de islamitische gemeenschap weer eenheid in haar wet kan creëren in de richting van de profetie van de eenheid van de islamitische gemeenschap in een islamitische staat - "minhajin Nubuwah".
Vertaling :
The fiqh of orthodox Muslims always ends up declaring Salafis and Shiites as infidels because their legal reasoning is only analytical reasoning, not dialectical reasoning. Declaring others as infidels whose basis in the hadith book in determining their Sara' law is different will happen, and always happens because that is the "pattern" of their anthropology of thought for thousands of years.
If there are Shiites who issue Islamic law whose legal philosophy refers to the hadith book al-Kahfi, there are also Salafis who refer to the hadith book al-Bani. For these orthodox groups, the Shiites are already infidels; the Salafis are also infidels because their legal products and theirs are radically different. So their da'wah must be shackled, their community must be discriminated against until it is exterminated so that everyone must see Islam with the blinkers they wear. This group, if their arrogance is continued will become increasingly rude. Because the national model they use is a noble nationality where Islam. "In their eyes is similar to the social classes in Hindustan; There are Brahmanas and Sudras, the Brahmanas will always be the Brahmanas (with their feudal nicknames), and the Sudras will always remain Sudras.
In addition in the intellectual realm, they have a fanaticism that of approach to Islam wich they get from the yellow books of the Middle Ages. The books were written after the golden era of the Abbasid Caliphate, an era where reason was turned off, and the nobles arrogantly declared themselves as the shadow of God. The books that they chain and claim originated from the Prophet Muhammad SAW. In fact of course, the theosophical books came from the syncretism of Islam with the teachings of the Aryan nations. The era when Islam had conquered the core area of India which is now called Pakistan; The area where the most acute feudal dogma in the world was centred. Then with the understanding of monotheism that is mixed between monotheism with animism, pantheism, etc., with the concepts of kalam A la enslaved people from India. Where the marhaen people, the hungry, the destitute are told to forget the world that suffers them, to focus on the happiness of the hereafter (so that later in eternal life they will not return to being difficult, hungry, suffering as in the world.
Realize that God greatest blessing is being a godly human being. While the hereafter is a creation/creature, and the best creature is human. The only metaphysics is Allah, while all creatures including jinn, angels, demons and the hereafter are material, and the best material creation of Allah is human. Then, you exchange your humanity for slavery; Your freedom (fitrah) with false dogmas about the hereafter; Your monotheism with the idols of the nobility who claim to be a special class, even though the Prophets equated their "class" with prostitutes; Letting your brotherhood rights and social life be destroyed due to the impact of the damage caused by the fighting between them. The poor Gerwani was raped and killed just because she was affiliated with the communists who were hostile to America (Understand!, that when elephants and elephants fight, the victim is always the mouse deer); Then letting yourself become lackeys who can't even speak, becoming slaves who are shackled as individualism thanks to the hegemony of feudal power; Having no self-esteem because your economic and social environment is monopolized by the nobles and bourgeoisie, so that you are immediately thrown into submission and become a slave to a newborn bourgeois baby because there is "no fair competition" from the feudal rulers to regulate the competition for people's property rights in a limited by republic.
Be free my brothers, be free in your thoughts so that you can then preach to spread independence to the people, free the minds of the people so that you can then carry out the triad of revolution (mass action, guerrilla warfare, and diplomacy running sequentially), namely the revolution moving in mass action for independence as Soekarno did, continuing to fight guerrilla warfare for independence as Soedirman did, until gaining bargaining in the diplomacy of collective independence of your nation as Syahrir and Hatta did. Because there is no complete independence achieved alone!. Living alone in a feudal society, your thoughts may be free but your voice will be shackled!; and your economy will be monopolized because the feudal system is a collective system!; so overthrowing it must also be collectively national. However, the independence of a region does not have to involve bloodshed, as in the Saudi revolution, the Iranian revolution, and the Bolshevik revolution. If the da'wah (propaganda) runs smoothly, mass action like the Makkiyah futuhat is enough to win a revolution. jjjjjj
Furthermore, the orthodox Islamic monotheistic feudalism that is the basis of social feudalism will certainly end in political and economic feudalism. Do not expect anyone to discuss equality, freedom, and brotherhood in cooperation. In liberté, égalité, and fraternité, not a single word is considered in them. Those orthodox Muslims are not free to think; those orthodox people do not have equality because they live in castes a la Hindustan; those people also do not know brotherhood because feudalism is only a primordial art to trap the proletariat, the slave class, the marhaen class. So that they do not rebel, feel happy even in slavery, they are willing to die and rot with their descendants forever in slavery to the aristocracy (until they give up their souls and bodies until their daughters are raped in the colonization of infidel nations). Because of the religious aristocracy, the Dutch did not need to come to Indonesia for bring primordial ideas to preach. They only needed to come and pay the nobles, and then the ancient primordial slavery a la Islamic Hindustan got its new master through the feudalism of nobles and paid Islamic intellectuals/scholars. But they fought back after the VOC was overthrown by Napoleon so that the money that the VOC channelled to them stopped, and Daendels revoked their privileges in Napoleon's democracy. So those who were used to living comfortably on the suffering of the people rebelled against the Dutch over colonialism in the archipelago, which had been going on for thousands of years since the time of the Hindu kings whose throne they worshipped, they worshipped their blue blood when they were still on the throne!.
