-
Why Not Non-Muslims In Arabian Peninsula
Assalamu Alaikum
As there are logical arguments for why there is a God, and why He is one, why there should be a day for judgement etc, which are absolutely logical. But while non Muslims are granting citizenships to Muslims in their countries, why in Saudi Arabia it is not allowed for non Muslims to stay permanently? Because if the same rule is applied by others countries that “this is a country allocated by our lord Vishnu etc for his worship”, or this is a Christian country etc. what’s the logical (not religious) argument for that why non-Muslims aren’t allowed to stay permanently in Arab peninsula?
-
7 Replies
-
Why Not Non-Muslims In Arabian Peninsula
updated 1 month, 2 weeks ago
2 Members
·
7
Replies
-
It is beacause Arabian Peninsula has status like that of a Mosque therefore it is in accordance with such etiquettes of a mosque, that permanent residency of non-muslims or creation of non-muslim worship places be not allowed. Just the way a Hindu temple or other worship places are created on this earth and they follow certain protocols, simialrly, we have protocols for this land (Arabian Peninsula) which according to us has the same status as that of a mosque.
For further details, please refer to the video below from 11:24 to 14:58
-
Yes, as far as the making the center of Islam is concerned then it sounds good that only Muslims should be the permanent residents of the piece of land. But Arabian peninsula is a big piece of land, in that way if Hindus call the whole of India as their temple and no person from other religion can live there or if that’s done by all of the religions then there shall be no piece of land left where a person from any other religion can enter?
-
There is no prohibition of entering and staying, it is permanent residence which cannot be attained in these areas. This is to maintain the status of these lands by ensuring residency control. The hypothetical on India has not happened yet in the past many centuries and there is no emerging religion which makes such claim, when such a claim is being made by any other country then in addition to studying their arguments from their religious sources and countering it with arguments in case of any flaws, we will abide by their principles just the way they abide by ours. Currently, the nation state concept also imposes restrictions on free human movement (subject to certain conditions) and we despite arguing against it, follow their laws and respect their status.
-
-
That sounds good. But, being consisten, in theory we don’t want other religions to do such things on the same scale as Islam? The problem is such a vast area, a whole peninsula. A small part, e.g. Saudi Arabia, doesn’t sound objectionable as the center of Islam, but a whole peninsula is a pretty big area?
-
From 00 to 18:30
In this video also Ghamidi sahab seems to be advocating against national borders which are restricting people from entering into other areas of land. He based his argument on Quran. Then when you are advocating for that right to go into any part of the world without any restrictions, why then Arabian Peninsula is an exception, like such a vast land?
-
Ghamidi Sahab is argumenting against absolute prohibition of movement and if such a prohibition/mechanism is in place then it should be based on some genuine reason/argument. Therefore, we believe that we have religious argument to support our case as opposed to a nationalist argument which has no basis whatsoever. Secondly, there is no bar on entry or freedom of movement, the only bar is of permanent residency and parallel religious structures. This is because Kaaba in particular and Arabian Peninsula in general should be portrayed and seen by the rest of the world as center of monotheism or center of Islam and its message.
-
-
Please also watch similar discussion:
Sponsor Ask Ghamidi
