How to convert to Islam?

[Teutone]

Stand in front of a mosque and shout, "Mo was no molester", and you should be good to go.

Do you have any faith/believe/spirituality or are you just a matrix consumer? Because if you geniuely believe in something you might would realize that things are sacred, some things dont have to sacred to you personally but you can relate that insulting the prophet of a Religion in the most vulgar way is just disgusting and says alot about you.

[NSXD60]

Do you have any faith/believe/spirituality or are you just a matrix consumer? Because if you geniuely believe in something you might would realize that things are sacred, some things dont have to sacred to you personally but you can relate that insulting the prophet of a Religion in the most vulgar way is just disgusting and says alot about you.

From his child bride to young captives supplied, but the bride survived and the infidels died.

[Teutone]

[happycow]

[Incal]

Instead of following religions, which are all product of ignorance, fear and the lust man has to control others; read Philosophy, it'll help you much more.

[Ranger0075]

Stand in front of a mosque and shout, "Mo was no molester", and you should be good to go.

No reason to be disrespectful towards any religion, would like a leftist to shout Jesus was gay or something? I assure you here in Latin America in many places this guy would receive some shoots.

[Longbowman]

Do you have any faith/believe/spirituality or are you just a matrix consumer? Because if you geniuely believe in something you might would realize that things are sacred, some things dont have to sacred to you personally but you can relate that insulting the prophet of a Religion in the most vulgar way is just disgusting and says alot about you.

Why should he respect people who tell him his grandparents are in hell?

[SneedsFeedNSeed]

Why should he respect people who tell him his grandparents are in hell?

Why not? He seems completely fine with another people calling his grandparents pigs.

[SneedsFeedNSeed]

Hanbal was a ashab al hadith traditionalists/puritarians.
Hanafis accept judgements based on local customs when there is no strong hadith on the issue. A weak hadith and the view of the sahaba should have more value on any topic than a non islamic custom by basic logic. If Id convert, id only choose hanbali maddhab, no doubt.

That is too oversimplified. Nobody uses weak ahadith for important things, and rulings are not made in a vacuum with disregard to everything(scripture, reports, history, opinions of sahaba and scholars).
There is wide Hanafi consensus that weak ahadith take precedence over opinion if applicable and if they meet certain requirements, otherwise the weak hadith is not better than the most logical guess.
Weak ahadith can only be used for personal qualities(fada'il), not theology nor permissibility. Ahmad ibn Hanbal held this opinion himself.
There is wide consensus among Sunnis about this since Nawawi. Even in modern times, Albani practically treated all weak ahadith as fabricated.
Hanbalis believe that later scholars' consensus cannot supersede earlier ones - at the same time you would have to believe that the tabi'in were wrong because the term "ahl al hadith" did not exist at the time, and that they gave incorrect verdicts compared to people who came after them because of it.

Secondly, nobody will be punished for choosing one school of jurisprudence over another, and it is not something long-time muslims should worry about a lot, let alone new ones.
The type of thing where a weak hadith can be taken seriously are things like "if you pray 2 raka'ah between asr and maghrib, you will get something extra in jannah" to suppose that praying more is useful. You can choose whether to do it or not, and your choice is valid, it does not go against the hadith. Even if you were to say that the hadith's point is not true, it wouldn't matter, it doesn't take you out of the fold, it doesn't even make you a fasiq.
But weak ahadith can never be used for something serious, like theology for example; if there is a weak hadith saying that God prefers the color blue over the color green, this claim must be 100% verified before you can say that it is true.
The sahaba differed on some things. You can't pick one or the other as an ultimate authority, and you cannot say that those who take the other stance are wrong. You do not get punished if you do one or the other, and if it is your local custom to do either, it is fine if you do that one, or if you choose one because of circumstances necessitating it then that is fine too.

This is why Wahhabism came out of the Hanbali school of jurisprudence, instead of from the other ones. Reasoning was a gift from God, not a curse, and it has its place in our day-to-day life.

[Teutone]

That is too oversimplified. Nobody uses weak ahadith for important things, and rulings are not made in a vacuum with disregard to everything(scripture, reports, history, opinions of sahaba and scholars).
There is wide Hanafi consensus that weak ahadith take precedence over opinion if applicable and if they meet certain requirements, otherwise the weak hadith is not better than the most logical guess.
Weak ahadith can only be used for personal qualities(fada'il), not theology nor permissibility. Ahmad ibn Hanbal held this opinion himself.
There is wide consensus among Sunnis about this since Nawawi. Even in modern times, Albani practically treated all weak ahadith as fabricated.
Hanbalis believe that later scholars' consensus cannot supersede earlier ones - at the same time you would have to believe that the tabi'in were wrong because the term "ahl al hadith" did not exist at the time, and that they gave incorrect verdicts compared to people who came after them because of it.

Secondly, nobody will be punished for choosing one school of jurisprudence over another, and it is not something long-time muslims should worry about a lot, let alone new ones.
The type of thing where a weak hadith can be taken seriously are things like "if you pray 2 raka'ah between asr and maghrib, you will get something extra in jannah" to suppose that praying more is useful. You can choose whether to do it or not, and your choice is valid, it does not go against the hadith. Even if you were to say that the hadith's point is not true, it wouldn't matter, it doesn't take you out of the fold, it doesn't even make you a fasiq.
But weak ahadith can never be used for something serious, like theology for example; if there is a weak hadith saying that God prefers the color blue over the color green, this claim must be 100% verified before you can say that it is true.
The sahaba differed on some things. You can't pick one or the other as an ultimate authority, and you cannot say that those who take the other stance are wrong. You do not get punished if you do one or the other, and if it is your local custom to do either, it is fine if you do that one, or if you choose one because of circumstances necessitating it then that is fine too.

This is why Wahhabism came out of the Hanbali school of jurisprudence, instead of from the other ones. Reasoning was a gift from God, not a curse, and it has its place in our day-to-day life.

Ofc its no big issue, no sunni madhab would claim the followers of another one are takfiris.
But another point where I see hanbali strict in a logical sense is praying on graves.

What is wrong about wahabis?