Why do not the elders of the Sultan migrate?

News from the island

• Summit of the Twelve Assembly of Trump and Putin
• International experts confirm the bombing of Khan Sheikhan in Sarin
• Officially .. Alves leave Juventus
• Saudi killed in clashes with Houthi leaders
• Alaves includes Zidane's son from Real

When we see today, the sheikhs of the Wahhabi movement competed in hypocrisy and blessed the decisions of power, even if they were unjust or corrupt, we remember the famous story that we heard from these sheikhs themselves about the steadfastness of Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal in the face of the Caliph Mu'tasim in the Fitna of the creation of the Koran.

These sheikhs told us anecdote as the story of the victory of the Ahl al-Sunnah doctrine of the doctrine of the Mu'tazilah, although the meaning of the story is further from this and deeper. This story describes a unique confrontation between religion and state, and the insistence of the religious world on his opinion, despite knowing the consequences and the terrible consequences that will result from this determination.

Perhaps Imam Ahmad's answer to the question of creating the Koran is an unconvincing answer. We may consider it an escape from the same question, but what draws attention is the steadfastness in confronting the state and bearing the consequences whatever it may be.

It started with an interesting question from Christians to Muslims that Muslims were unable to answer. The question was: Is the Qur'an "the Word of God" a creature or an old God? The Mu'tazilites - who were the wisest of those who argue with other religions at the time - replied that the Word of God is old. The Christians then said that this means that Jesus is the son of Mary, because the Qur'an describes him as the "Word of God". He says, "His Word was delivered to Mary and his soul."

Here the Mu'tazilites have to answer that the Word of God is created, and although this puts them in a new predicament, that means that God has changed, but they have committed themselves to this view. But "Ahl al-Sunnah" rejected this answer, and they refused to answer the other, because the words of God are old, and they have stopped going into this matter. The controversy in the religious community then continued on this issue but without any crisis.

Then he took over the safe caliphate and was inclined towards the views of the Mu'tazilah. He wanted to force the jurists to accept his opinion, and here a clash of religion and state took place. The state wants to use its power to force jurists to a particular opinion. When he died in the midst of strife, he took over the Mu'tasim and continued his career in subjugating jurists to the opinion of the state.

Most of the jurists at the time decided to safety, and said that the Koran is created, but decided to Ben Ahmed Hanbal to stand up to the state. Imam Ahmad did not have an answer to the question originally as the Sunnis of the time. He used to say that the Qur'an is the word of God's house on his prophet, which is uncreated and not old, and ends up going into the matter. He thought the safest answer was to reject the answers. In fact, his opinion deserves praise, because the whole issue is empty rhetoric, in my opinion, and does not deserve attention at all.

When Imam Ahmad stood in the face of the Caliph al-Mutasim, the latter asked him about his opinion on the issue of the creation of the Qur'an. He could have influenced safety and said that the Qur'an was created, and he justified this act as an abomination. But he decided to face the state at all costs. The price was indeed terrible, and the torture was harsh but carried with all courage.

Some say today that many Wahhabi sheikhs are forced to say they support unjust decisions in a corrupt and unjust state. But the question is as long as some of them can leave and live in other countries, they are financially capable of doing so, and they can record their religious lessons on YouTube, for example, so why not emigrate?

We do not ask them to oppose them. We ask them to remain silent about talking in politics.

Forget the land of corruption as long as you can not face it. Is not he who saw you as a denier, let him change it with his hand, if he could not, then his tongue would not be able to beat him ?! So emigrate and reject with your heart all this evil, rather than stay and pray for him on the pretext that you are oppressed.

The problem is that Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal stood up for a sterile and meaningless philosophical issue, but the sheikhs are now silent about corruption and the shedding of great blood.

Hajar, religion will not be lacking if you stop talking for a while means. How many men and women have left their country to escape unjust oppressive power and escape hypocrisy.

But we will give everyone his excuse .. And we will consider that for some reason they are unable to face the state, and are unable to migrate, and are unable to remain silent .. Is it possible then ask them to just stop repeating the story of Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal, because it has become a provocative right .