Sunni - Shi'a unity

[YaAqsa]

Bismillah
Asalaam alaikum wr wb
Ramadan kareem & 'eid mubarak

I just pray that we can become one Ummah again and not fight or argue and call each other kafir or anything insha'Allah. This is the Holy Month of Ramadan, a time for good deeds and improving out imaan and Taqwa insha'Allah. There are many people calling for peace and unity, but only the conspirators wish to separate us from one another. "Divide and Conquer" tactics being used by disbelievers since thousands of years. They already invade the middle-east and surround our Muslim nations with armies, waiting to pounce, but first they must poison us by encouraging ignorance and sin, then dividing us amongst ourselves so not only do we have to fight the disbelievers but some of us ally with the disbelievers to fight each other! Subhanallah this is haraam and may Allah SWT bless us with His mercy and guidance, ameen.

Calling for peace, no calling each other Kafir
youtube.com/watch?v=LEoYXUru2L8

youtube.com/watch?v=zIM8kc-CwmU

youtube.com/watch?v=QhqMdwiyg6c

[Asiyah3]

:wa: wa wa

Ameen to the du'a.

Ramadan kareem & Eid Mubarak to you too. I agree with all you've said. May Allah swt unite us.

[*Yasmin*]

unite with who? with someone who swears our mother Aisha (radiya Allahu A'nha) ?
besides with ijma the Ulama (Consensus) whoever swears our mother Aisha( Radiya Allahu A'nha )is a kafir !


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=anbKFTYjRL0

[Maryan0]

^Agreed. A sheik was telling my uncle that he was in Iraq on a bus and they were passing the grave of a sahaba named Zubair al awam? and all the rafidi Shias on the bus started cursing him. I don't know if there are different kinds of Shias but I don't want unity with anyone that curses the sahaba.
Salam

Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up

[Asiyah3]

unite with who? with someone who swears our mother Aisha (radiya Allahu A'nha) ?
besides with ijma the Ulama (Consensus) whoever swears our mother Aisha( Radiya Allahu A'nha )is a kafir !

:sl:

Unite with those who believe in Allah, His angels, His messengers (peace be upon them), His books and the Day of Judgement.

Needless to say, I fully condemn swearing at any of the Sahabah. This attitude, however doesn't really help stop the bombings and killings of innocents.

Besides, are you sure all shi'is do this? Even if they do, we condemn swearing at the Sahabah, but are you against living peacefully side by side?

[*Yasmin*]

:sl:

Unite with those who believe in Allah, His angels, His messengers (peace be upon them), His books and the Day of Judgement.

Needless to say, I fully condemn swearing at any of the Sahabah. This attitude, however doesn't really help stop the bombings and killings of innocents.

Besides, are you sure all shi'is do this? Even if they do, we condemn swearing at the Sahabah, but are you against living peacefully side by side?

W3lekum Assalam

I think we should first define what we mean by “unity” is it unity between our madhabs! Is it accepting them with their wrong deeds?! Or is it just peaceful coexistence?! Or is it uniting the forces to fight against the enemies of the Islamic Ummah?

Let say we mean peaceful coexistence, well a lot of Muslims live in Europe and non-Islamic countries so we deal and live with non-Muslims. If we can coexist with non-muslims I believe we can coexist with “shiaa”, it’s a matter of dealing with the others as human beings with keeping in my mind that “I’m a Sunni Muslim”. So I have no problems with that however I’ll make limits and boundaries with them.

And let say uniting forces to fight our enemies? Well, do we call for that because we saw Nasru Allah and his success, or Ahmadi Najad and his strong country? Whereas there are no equivalents leaders from sunna in the Islamic countries? Would we really call for this "unity" if whatever Islamic country is strong enough to fight against our enemies? Do we call for this “unity” because the shiaa leaders fascinated our generations and they have become “people who inspire us”!
Do you know that in Iran there are around 20 million sunni Muslims and they are facing different styles of suppression and torture? (and that makes me re-think about “peaceful coexistence” again!) Do you know that there is not even one sunni masjid in Tehran ?
a note I’m not saying that Israel, the Jews and the kufar countries are less dangerous than shiaa.
but we can’t ignore the Shiaa danger as well. Not to mention that these days there are a lot of channels that try to make Muslims follow “Shiaa”.

regarding your question: Shiaa swear our mother Aisha Radia Allahu 3nha, if all of them or not i don't know. but think of that, there are different sects of shiaa,and the "closest" sect to Sunna is called "zaydeyah" and at the same time they swear our mother Aisha
p.s- the most biggest groups of shiaa are Ithna A'shreya and Ismailiah and they are deviants from the straight path.

[Galaxy]

:sl:

Maybe we should unite on the Qur'aan and the Sunnah

[Ghazalah]

Maybe we should unite on the Qur'aan and the Sunnah

Ditto.

I think people got the wrong idea of what the bro meant with "unite". We won't unite with the Shia's if they stick to their current beliefs, there's no argument to that. But I think he meant we all unite in the truth (Quran and sunnah) meaning they leave their current beliefs and we all unite to the straight path inshAllah.

[Abz2000]

there's no such thing as sunni shia unity, there's muslim unity, and there's mutual alliances
if you think of either as a sect then you are not on the path of the Prophet (pbuh).
if you think of the word sunni as being on the path of the Quran and teachings of the prophet (pbuh), then yes - it has a meaning, but if someone asks you which sect of Muslims you're from and you say "sunni" or "shia" - you're part of a sect, and there is only one Islam.

31. Turn ye back in repentance to Him, and fear Him: establish regular prayers, and be not ye among those who join gods with Allah,-
32. Those who split up their Religion, and become (mere) Sects,- each party rejoicing in that which is with itself!
Quran 30:31-32

Verily, those who divide their religion and break up into sects (all kinds of religious sects), you (O Muhammad SAW) have no concern in them in the least. Their affair is only with Allâh, Who then will tell them what they used to do.
Qur'an 6:159

The word used for "sects" in the above verses is "shi'a".

when brother malik el Shabbaz (malcolm x) returned from pilgrimage and renounced his previously held racially divided beliefs
- a reporter asked him: "so do you now believe there are good white people and good black people?"
he replied: "no, i believe there are good humans" - thereby allowing no divides to be made.

i believe we can ally on mutual causes etc for strategic purposes, but we cannot define Islam as containing sects,
you looks at a persons beliefs, and see if those beliefs keep them in the fold of Islam - or out.
yet we must bear in mind that there are certain times to settle smaller differences and that's not always when major issues confront us around the world.

peace,

[Riana17]

Salam Alaikkum

My husband told me that it is mentioned that there are worst than Jews in our UMMAH, also one day the earth will be AN ISLAMIC WORLD but most will be useless.

We shouldnt judge but it is unfortunate to admit that even in the holy month of RAMADAN no one is AWARE OF Allah. Fighting, killing continues and if we all gonna analyze this, WE cannot deny that this way beyond ISLAMIC teaching, killing your own people, greedy of powers, pharaoh never dies.

For me, the best solution is education, also I have to improve my own manner first and leave the judgment to Allah.

I have seen many bad people regardless of religion and we cannot be sure even with our own deeds until the Judgment day. We can fake ourselves that we are good, but how we will know for sure they are accepted?

Politics will never die,,, Unity is not impossible, one day all human being will be united with the TRUTH, when the most scary things come & meet our CREATOR, then how we all not be united WITH LA ILLAHA Ilallah?

[FS123]

there's no such thing as sunni shia unity, there's muslim unity, and there's mutual alliances
if you think of either as a sect then you are not on the path of the Prophet (pbuh).
if you think of the word sunni as being on the path of the Quran and teachings of the prophet (pbuh), then yes - it has a meaning, but if someone asks you which sect of Muslims you're from and you say "sunni" or "shia" - you're part of a sect, and there is only one Islam.

Let say don't think about them as sect, but that doesn't change the fact they have beliefs that certain sahabas are enemies including the first 3 Caliphs of Islam; and that forms the basis of their mentality. We should have peace with them, but not for victory. Victory is in the hand of Allah, and He can give victory to a small righteous group.

Here are some recent disturbing trends. Nasrullah didn't condem the killing of sunni in Syria (Syrian govt is shia, but majority is sunni), but he complained about Bahrain's sunni govt ruling over shia majority.

Here is recent happening in Iran:

ran is reported to have imposed severe restrictions on the religious freedoms of its Sunni minority during the Eid al-Fitr festival, continuing a growing trend of alleged religious persecution in the Islamic state. ‘Sunni Muslims banned from holding own Eid prayers in Tehran’ published by The Guardian, describes how Iranian authorities have ordered Sunni Muslims in Tehran not to worship separately from the Shia majority, instead asking them to have a Shia imam lead their prayers – ‘something that is against their religious beliefs’.

Not only are Sunni Muslims allegedly being prevented from accessing their places of worship, but they are also expected to attend Shia services

According to the report, this recent development is only the latest sign of discrimination against the Sunni minority, including the regular thwarting of attempts to build a mosque in Tehran

http://justjournalism.com/the-wire/i...-eid-services/

[*Yasmin*]

:sl:

Maybe we should unite on the Qur'aan and the Sunnah

if we are all united on the Quran and the Sunnah there won't be any problem with any kind of muslim! ..
the problem with shiaa that they drifted from the rulings of Islam and started to create their own rules! .. not to mention they reject most of the Al-Ahadith which we consider as Sahih!

there's no such thing as sunni shia unity, there's muslim unity, and there's mutual alliances
if you think of either as a sect then you are not on the path of the Prophet (pbuh).
if you think of the word sunni as being on the path of the Quran and teachings of the prophet (pbuh), then yes - it has a meaning, but if someone asks you which sect of Muslims you're from and you say "sunni" or "shia" - you're part of a sect, and there is only one Islam.

yeah when we say Sunni we mean on the path of our prophet Muhammed peace be upon him.



Question:"Please clarify how to differentiate between the groups that claim they are following the right path. We know that Ahlul Sunnah wal jama’ah is the group that follows the straight path. But there are many Muslims do not know the ruling on the other groups, which started to be widely spread these days as the prophet (PBUH) said. As he said what means that there will be many groups 73 sects, Allah knows best how many, and that only one is following the straight path.
How can we differentiate between all these groups? How to refute them? Shall we avoid them and their behaviours?
I wish you provide evidences from Quran and Hadeeth for the great importance of the matter, as the majority do not know, and we fear for the new converts to get lost amongst all these groups.
I found a related question on the site but I need more clarification.

Praise be to Allaah.

Firstly:

Division and differences among this ummah is something inevitable, to which history bears witness, as do the texts of the Sunnah of our Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him).

The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Whoever among you lives after I am gone will see a great deal of dissent.” Narrated by Abu Dawood (4067); classed as saheeh by al-Albaani in Saheeh Abi Dawood.

Dissent has occurred in the political field, as well as in the fields of thought and ‘aqeedah, which is represented in the appearance of different sects at the end of the era of the Rightly-Guided Caliphs, such as the Murji’is, Shi’ah and Khawaarij.

But by His mercy, Allaah decreed that this division should happen when some groups drifted away from the way of the main body of the Muslims and developed their own different approach, and they were distinguished by their own names and character. So the ‘aqeedah of Ahl al-Sunnah wa’l-Jamaa’ah, and the ‘aqeedah of the majority of Muslims, was not confused even for a day with that of the other, misguided sects, so that those sects would not dare to call themselves Ahl al-Sunnah wa’l-Jamaa’ah, rather they are called after the bid’ah (innovation) that they introduced, or the person who founded the sect. You can see that when you examine the names of all the sects.

The famous hadeeth about the ummah splitting into seventy-three sects bears witness to that.

It was narrated from Mu’aawiyah ibn Abi Sufyaan (may Allaah be pleased with him) that he said: The Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) stood among us and said: “Those who came before you of the people of the Book split into seventy-two sects, and this ummah will split into seventy-three: seventy-two in Hell and one in Paradise, and that is the jamaa’ah (main body of Muslims).”

Narrated by Abu Dawood (4597) and others; classed as saheeh by al-Haakim (1/128), who said: it is an important hadeeth that represents a basic principle. It was classed as hasan by Ibn Hajar in Takhreej al-Kashshaaf (63). It was classed as saheeh by Ibn Taymiyah in Majmoo’ al-Fataawa (3/345), al-Shaatibi in al-I’tisaam (1/430), and al-‘Iraaqi in Takhreej al-Ihya’ (9/133). It is mentioned frequently and often quoted as evidence by the scholars in the books of Sunnah, and it was narrated from a number of the Sahaabah via many isnaads, most of the soundest of which specify the number of sects as being seventy-three.

The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) described the saved group as the jamaa’ah, i.e., the consensus of the Muslim scholars. In other reports he also described them as “the vast multitude”, as in the hadeeth of Abu Umaamah and others which is recorded by Ibn Abi ‘Aasim in al-Sunnah (1/34) and al-Tabaraani in al-Mu’jam al-Kabeer (8/321), with an isnaad that is hasan li ghayrihi (hasan because of corroborating evidence).

The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) also described them in the following terms: “My ummah will split into seventy-three sects, all of whom will be in Hell except one group.” They said: Who are they, O Messenger of Allaah? He said: “(Those who follow) that which I and my companions follow.” This is mentioned in the hadeeth of ‘Abd-Allaah ibn ‘Amr which was recorded and classed as hasan by al-Tirmidhi (2641). It was also classed as hasan by al-‘Iraaqi in Ahkaam al-Qur’aan (3/432), al-‘Iraaqi in Takhreej al-Ihya’ (3/284) and al-Albaani in Saheeh al-Tirmidhi.

This is the clearest sign that the Muslim can use to determine what is the saved group, so he should follow the way of the majority of scholars, those whom all the people testify are trustworthy and religiously-committed, and he should follow the way of the earlier scholars among the Sahaabah, Taabi’een and the four Imams and other scholars, and he should beware of every sect that differs from the main body of Muslims (jamaa’ah) by following innovation (bid’ah).

Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allaah have mercy on him) said:

The sign of the people of bid’ah is that they do not follow the salaf. End quote from Majmoo’ al-Fataawa (4/155).

He also said (3/346): The sign of these groups – i.e., the seventy-two groups that go against Ahl al-Sunnah wa’l-Jamaa’ah – is that they forsake the Qur’aan, Sunnah and scholarly consensus. The one who follows the Qur’aan, Sunnah and scholarly consensus is one of Ahl al-Sunnah wa’l-Jamaa’ah. End quote.

It is not permissible for anyone to imagine after this that the Shi’ah, for example, are the saved group, or that the deviant Sufis, Khawaarij or Habashis are the saved group. Rather these are innovated groups which only follow invented ideas, that are denounced by the scholars and the majority of Muslims, who feel repulsion in their hearts towards them. Their ideas were never believed in for a day by Abu Bakr, ‘Umar, ‘Uthmaan or ‘Ali (may Allaah be pleased with them), or by Imam Abu Haneefah, Maalik, al-Shaafa’i or Ahmad ibn Hanbal. Would any wise person think that a belief that these imams were unaware of could be correct?

Think about it. There is the greatest and most obvious difference between Ahl al-Sunnah wa’l-Jamaa’ah (the saved group) and other, misguided groups.

Ibn Taymiyah (may Allaah have mercy on him) says:

Hence the saved group is described as Ahl al-Sunnah wa’l-Jamaa’ah, and they are the greater majority and the vast multitude. As for the other groups, they are followers of weird ideas, division, innovation and whims and desires, and none of these groups reached anywhere close to the size of the saved group, let alone being equal to them, rather some of these groups are very small in number. The sign of these groups is that they go against the Qur'aan, Sunnah and scholarly consensus. The one who follows the Qur’aan, Sunnah and scholarly consensus is one of Ahl al-Sunnah wa’l-Jamaa’ah.

Majmoo’ al-Fataawa (3/346).

Al-Shaatibi has mentioned many names of the doomed groups in al-I’tisaam (1/453-460).

Secondly:

The scholars of Ahl al-Sunnah wa’l-Jamaa’ah have stated in their books that the other sects are among the misguided and doomed innovated groups, and that they deserve to enter Hell because of the reprehensible ideas and grave innovations that they have introduced into the religion of Allaah. But in most cases they are not regarded as kaafirs, rather they are regarded as Muslim sects.

Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allaah have mercy on him) said:

Similarly, with the other seventy-two groups, those that are hypocrites are inwardly kaafirs, and those that are not hypocrites but rather believe inwardly in Allaah and His Messenger are not inwardly kaafirs, even though they are mistaken in their interpretations, regardless of what that mistake may be. Some of them may have some of the branches of hypocrisy, or they may not have the kind of hypocrisy that dooms a man to the lowest depths of Hell.

The one who says that each of the seventy-two sects is guilty of kufr that puts one beyond the pale of Islam is going against the Qur’aan and Sunnah and the consensus of the Sahaabah (may Allaah be pleased with them all), and the consensus of the four imams and others. None of them regarded any of the seventy-two sects as kaafirs, rather they regard one another as kaafirs.

Majmoo’ al-Fataawa (7/218).

This does not mean that every sect that calls itself Muslim is actually Muslim, rather they may be kaafirs and apostates, such as the extreme Raafidis, the extreme Sufis and the baatini sects such as the Druze, Nusayris and others. These are all beyond the pale of Islam and are not regarded as being among the sects mentioned in the hadeeth.

Thirdly:

The cause of difference and division among these groups mentioned in the hadeeth has to do with fundamental matters of religion and basic issues of ‘aqeedah, not differences of opinion regarding fiqh.

Al-Shaatibi (may Allaah have mercy on him) said:

These are regarded as sects because they differ from the saved group with regard to some fundamental issues of religion and basic rules of sharee’ah, not with regard to minor issues, because differences with regard to minor issues does not lead to division and factionalism, rather factionalism occurs when there are differences concerning fundamental issues of Islam.

Al-I’tisaam (1/439).

If some Muslim groups stand out from others because of a specific method of da’wah and working for Islam, but they do not go against Ahl al-Sunnah wa’l-Jamaa’ah in their ‘aqeedah, then they are not to be regarded as doomed groups, rather they are among the saved group in sha Allaah, if they follow the way of the Sahaabah and Taabi’een in ‘aqeedah and action.

There are a number of questions on our site that offer more information and details about this issue. Please see questions no. 206, 1393, 10121, 10554, 10777, 12761 and 21065.

And Allaah knows best.


Islam Q&A"

[Abz2000]

Let's look into it a little closer,
The big split happened when muawiyyah rejected the caliphate of ali (ra) on the grounds of not investigating the murder of Uthman, but then he passed it on to his son yazid - thereby turning it into a monarchy,
Those who advocated that ali (ra) was heir through descendancy were also trying to turn it into a monarchy since they also held that hasan (ra) and Hussain (ra) were heirs.

I personally believe both of those groups were wrong:

Hadhrat Huzaifa narrated that the Messenger of Allah said:
Prophethood will remain among you as long as Allah wills.
Then Caliphate (Khilafah) on the method of Prophethood shall commence,
and remain as long as Allah wills.
Then corrupt/erosive/biting/long periods of monarchy would take place,
and it will remain as long as Allah wills.
After that, despotic kingship/military kingdoms/martial law would emerge,
and it will remain as long as Allah wills.
Then, the Caliphate (Khilafah) shall come once again based on the precept of Prophethood.

Recorded in musnad ahmad ibn hanbal

We can see from here the caliphate on the lines of prophethood is mentioned before monarchies,
People in power from both contending groups wanted that, my humble opinion is they were both wrong - judging from the above Hadith.

"Truly, your nation is one united nation, and I am your Lord,"
Quran 21:92

"Verily this (your nation) is one nation, and I am your Lord, so keep your duty to Me."
Quran 23:52

I believe the only way we'll ever resolve this is through admitting that mistakes were made on both "sides" - then going back to he Quran and Hadith, and dismissing the rest as heretics,
Maybe that'll be done by Jesus pbuh,
But until we resolve it, hold peace and argue with each other on a kind footing with the hope of winning each other over and uniting on the truth.

And I definitely dont think those pictures of ali (ra) are accurate, Neither those of a blonde jesus.

Abu Sayeed reported that the messenger of Allah said:
"You shall follow the practices of those before you,
inch by inch and mile by mile,
to the degree that if they enter into the hole of a lizard, you will follow them."
He was asked: "O messenger of Allah, are they the Jews and Christians?"
He replied: "Who else?"
(Agreed upon)

Hey Catholics and protestants :hiding:

[Endymion]

Assalam Alekum Respected Brothers and Sisters In Islam.

A Muslim cannot be unite with non Muslims.Friends of Muslim can only be Allah SWT,Respected Angels and The Prophets PBUH and all the rejectors of Faith are the enemies of Allah SWT.And he who is the enemy of Allah SWT,cannot be a friend of Muslim.Shis are listed as "Munafiqoons" according to Respected Ulema's and Mufti's because they tried to attack Islam in the veil of Friendship.
The origin of Shia'ism is an eye opening for all Muslims and anyone can understand that they are not Muslims neither friends of Muslims.
Allah SWT and Muhammad SAW decleared that the honorable in the sight of Allah SWT is the one who has Taqwa

"O mankind! We have created you from a male and a female, and made you into nations and tribes, that you may know one another. Verily, the most honorable of you with Allah is that (believer) who has Taqwa (God-consciousness, fearing Allah). Verily, Allah is All-Knowing, All-Aware." [Soorah al-Hujurat (49): 13]

and Shia's tried to call back the time of Jahilliyah and the honors of Jahilliyah by nominating Ali RA as Khalifa,the head of Mumineen because He belong to the family of Prophet Muhammad SAW and the Father of Hassan and Hussein RA but the Mumneen of that time dealt with that fitna well that time but they were unable to kill it and Unfortunately,they are still here and have roots in Islamic societies and Muslim brains.
What Muslims need today is to hold on tight Quran and Sunnah and keep it in their minds that their friends are only Mumineens or those people of book who strictly follow their teachings and are not arrogant towards the words of Allah SWT and unity with Munafiqoons and Kuffars is just a fallacy which will drag them away from the right path.

May Allah SWT help us all avoid Fitnah and Bidah.Amen.

[Abz2000]

yes, but the ones who fought against it and prevailed also installed a monarchy - the umayyad dynasty, let's be fair about this and say: we need to return to the Quran and sunnah - i just went on a shia forum and the things they were saying about aisha (ra), abu bakr etc was making my head spin.

then will we in return abuse ali and Hassan Hussain as heretics since they fought against yazid?
?
when will we say - yes - they were all humans - and humans are not perfect and make mistakes,
this episode was an important lesson for time to come.
let's unite on the truth rather than divide on petty disputes which the kuffar love:

they even dress up as arabs to instigate sectarian violence

[FS123]

yes, but the ones who fought against it and prevailed also installed a monarchy - the umayyad dynasty, let's be fair about this and say: we need to return to the Quran and sunnah - i just went on a shia forum and the things they were saying about aisha (ra), abu bakr etc was making my head spin.

then will we in return abuse ali and Hassan Hussain as heretics since they fought against yazid?
?
when will we say - yes - they were all humans - and humans are not perfect and make mistakes,

First, we can't abuse Ali (ra), Hassan, and Hussain because they are revered people in our beliefs. Second, shia have their beliefs that will never go with us - they abuse Abu Baker, Umar, and Uthman. In Iran they were broadcasting obscene speeches about Abu Baker, Umar, and Uthman; and sunni minority had to listen those things. Trust is built in mutual respect, which is difficult with the religious beliefs of shia.

But doesn't mean we can't achieve peace with them. We can agree to disagree, simple as that. Prophet (pbuh) tried to achieve peace with every one living in Madina, and that should be our model. But I don't want to depend on them for any victory or support, because I fear they will turn on us once they get the chance. Since Iran is becoming big power, this is clearly getting visible. But like I said, making peace is the way of the Prophet (pbuh) so we should try that as much we can.

Regards,

[*Yasmin*]

i recommend you to read this article

Written by Dr. Ragheb Elsergany


Origins of Shia
Scholars of Usul Al-Fiqh (Principles of Islamic Jurisprudence) stated the following rule, "One cannot pass a judgment on something unless one has a clear conception of it". Based on this rule, it is meaningless to pass a judgment on Shia unless you have good knowledge about them. It is also meaningless to express one's opinion on reconciling the views of Sunnis and Shiites without recognizing the nature of both sects. Likewise, it is of no real sense to accept or reject talking about Shia without knowing the reality of the issue, to what extent it is dangerous, its rank as to our priorities and its relation to the multiple variables the Ummah is facing.

In short, before we proceed to criticize opponents or proponents of Shia, we should first understand who Shia are, what their origins are, what their theological and Fiqhi (Jurisprudential) backgrounds are, what their history is about, what their reality is an what their goals and ambitions are. Only after doing this, we can express our view foresightedly, especially when we know how many people changed their long-believed views and give up their ideas after they had been provided with sound information and clear vision.



Who are Shia?

The issue is not merely that of certain people living in a certain country who have some disputes with neighboring countries. Rather, it is an issue of theological, historical and Fiqhi backgrounds that have to be referred to.

Many historians differ on the real beginning of Shia.

What is commonly believed by the masses is that Shia are those people who supported `Ali bin Abu Talib during the caliphate of Mu`awiyah bin Abu Sufyan, (may Allah be pleased with him). Accordingly, this means that those who supported `Ali bin Abu Talib are Shia while those who supported Mu`awiyah are Sunnis. Such a notion has never been accepted by anyone. Moreover, Sunnis believe with regard to the dispute that arose between the two honorable Companions that `Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) was on the right, while Mu`awiyah (may Allah be pleased with him) exercised Ijtihad (independent judgment) but did not reach the truth. Thus, Sunnis thought is clearly siding with `Ali. Moreover, tenets, doctrines and ideologies held by Shia are entirely different from those held by `Ali bin Abu Talib absolutely. Therefore, it is incorrect to say that the rise of Shia was at that era.

Some historians say that the rise of Shia was after Al-Hussein (may Allah be pleased with him) was martyred. This opinion sounds to be more logical. Actually, Al-Hussein rebelled against the rule of Yazid bin Mu`aweiyah and, therefore, headed for Iraq after his followers there had promised to back him. However, they let him down at the critical time, which led to the martyrdom of Al-Hussein at Karbala. The group of people who invited him and failed to support him regretted doing so and decided to expiate their sin through rebelling against the Umayyad state. They actually did so and a large number of them were killed and thus were called Shia. This might explain why we notice that Shia are more attached to Al-Hussein bin `Ali than to `Ali bin Abu Talib (may Allah be pleased with him) himself. They also, as we can see, mark the anniversary of Al-Hussein's martyrdom while don not mark that of `Ali bin Abu Talib.

However, this sect only rose as a political one opposing the rule of the Umayyad dynasty and backed any attempts to rebel against it. Until that time, they did not hold theological or jurisprudential principles different from those of Sunnis. We will even come to know that earlier leaders whom Shiites claim to be their earlier Shia Imams were only Sunni men adopting doctrines and principles of Sunnis.

The situation continued to be stable for months after the martyrdom of Al-Hussein (may Allah be pleased with him). At this period lived `Ali Zainul-`Abdin bin Al- Hussein who was one of the most righteous personalities and great ascetic scholars. He has never been reported to have any beliefs or ideologies different from those held by Companions and later generations.

`Ali Zainul-`Abdin had two sons of a high level of piety and purity, namely, Mohammed Al-Baqir and Zaid, both of whom completely believed in beliefs held by Sunni scholars including Companions and Successors. However, Zaid bin `Ali (may Allah have mercy on him) differed in viewing that `Ali bin Abu Talib was worthier of assuming caliphate than Abu Bakr (may Allah be pleased with him). Although this opinion conflicts with the Ummah's consensus and contradicts many Hadith that explicitly held Abu Bakr Al-Siddik, `Umar and `Uthman in a higher rank than `Ali (may Allah be pleased with him), this difference of opinion, however, does not relate to doctrinal issues. While he viewed that `Ali was the best, he, however, admitted the high rank of the first three caliphs. He also believed in the permissibility of one less in rank assuming imamate despite the existence of those higher in rank. Accordingly, he did not deny the imamate of Abu Bakr, `Umar and `Uthman (may Allah be pleased with them). Apart from this view, he concurred with Sunnis in theology, principles and Fiqh.

Repeating the attempt of his grandfather Al-Hussein bin `Ali (may Allah be pleased with them both), Zaid bin `Ali rebelled against the Umayyad caliph Hisham bin Abdul-Malik, which ended up with his being killed in 122 A.H. His followers then founded a sect based on his ideas, known in history as Zaydiyyah, named after Zaid bin `Ali. Though considered to be a Shia-based sect, Zaydiyyah agrees with Sunnis in everything except in holding `Ali in a higher position than the first three Caliphs. The followers of this sect are mainly in Yemen and they are the nearest Shia sects to Sunnis - even one can hardly distinguish them from Sunnis in most respects.

It is worth mentioning that a group of the followers of Zaid bin `Ali asked him about his opinion on Abu Bakr and `Umar. In reply, he supplicated Allah to show mercy to both of them, but those who asked him refused to do the same and seceded from his sect. Therefore, they were known in the history as Rafidah (lit. dissenters) because they rejected the caliphate of Abu Bakr and `Umar on one hand, and rejected Zaid's opinion on the other. Subsequent generations of such a group founded a sect which was later known as Ithna `Ashriyyah (Imamiyyah) to turn into Shia's largest sect.

Mohammed Al-Baqir, Zaid bin `Ali's brother, died eight years before his brother (in 114 A.H.) leaving behind a son who became the reverend scholar Ja`far Al-Sadiq. The latter was a prominent scholar and a proficient Faqih (Jurisprudent), who held the same theology believed in by Companions, Successors and Muslim scholars in general.

Late at the era of the Umayyad caliphate, the Abbasid movement started activities aiming at rallying people against the Umayyad caliphate. The movement collaborated with the groups which seceded from Zeid bin `Ali and both toppled the Umayyad caliphate in 132 A.H. The Abbasid caliphate came to power headed by the founder Abul-`Abbas Al-Saffah and his successor Abu Ja`far Al-Mansur. Those who collaborated with this movement felt disappointed as they sought to establish a caliphate ruled by one of `Ali bin Abu Talib's grandchildren. Therefore, those people formed a group called Al-Talibiyyun (lit. proponents of `Ali bin Abu Talib (may Allah be pleased with him) compared to Abbasids who are named after Al-`Abbas bin Abdul-Muttalib) with the aim of staging a coup against the Abbasid caliphate.

Until this era, there were no essential theological or jurisprudential violations except that of the criticism of Abu Bakr and `Umar; actually, some of them who seceded from Zaid bin `Ali rejected them and would even curse them in public.

Ja`far Al-Sadik died in 148 A.H. leaving behind a son called Musa Al-Kazim, who was also a scholar but less in rank than his father. He died in 183 A.H. leaving behind some sons including `Ali bin Musa Al-Rida.

It happened that the Abbasid caliph al Ma'mun sought to contain the rebellion of Al-Talibiyyun who claimed the caliphate for the descendants of `Ali bin Abu Talib rather than those of Al-`Abbas. Thus, he nominated `Ali bin Musa Al-Rida as the crown prince, which fueled a fierce controversy among Abbasids. However, `Ali bin Musa Al-Rida suddenly died in 203 A.H., but Al-Talibiyyun accused Al-Ma'mun of killing him and once again staged successive revolutions against Abbasids just as they did with Umayyads.

Anyway, passage of years gave room for revolutions to relatively calm down. Until that time, Shia had not yet adopted an independent religious school of thought to be called Shia. Rather, there were only political movements aiming at assuming power and opposing rulers due to many reasons which did not include such theological reasons as those held by Shia now.

Strikingly, such dissenting calls found support on a large scale in the Persian region (currently Iran). Actually, many inhabitants of such a region felt sorry for the fall of the huge Persian empire and its fusion into the Islamic state. They, Persians, considered themselves of a higher race, a better ethnicity and a greater history than Muslims. This feeling led to the rise of Persophilia – an ideology which means giving priority to their race and ethnicity over anything even Islam. Some of them even showed deep adherence to their Persian roots, lock, stock and barrel, even the fire which they once worshiped.

As they were not powerful enough to rebel against the Islamic state, and being Muslims for decades, they found the Al-Talibiyyun's revolutions a way through which they would seek to topple the Islamic caliphate which toppled their Persian state before. In the same time, they did not want to forsake Islam which they embraced for many years. They, however, decided to interpolate it through injecting into it the heritage of the Persian state so as to secure instability within the Muslim Ummah. They kept a low profile, while Al-Talibiyyu maintained the high profile. Bearing in mind that Al-Talibiyyun are affiliated to `Ali bin Abu Talib, are a part of the Prophet's Household and thus held in a high esteem by people, such people secured continuation of there mission.

Thus, attempts of Persophils united with those of Al-Talibiyyun belonging to the Prophet's Household to form a new independent, not only political but also religious, entity.

Back to Al-Talibiyyun, we can see that after the death of `Ali Al-Rida whom Abbasid Caliph Al-Ma'mun nominated as the crown prince, he was succeeded by his son Mohammed Al-Jawad who died in 220 A.H. The latter was also succeeded by his son `Ali bin Mohammed Al-Hadi who died in 254 A.H. Finally, the latter was succeeded by Al-Hassan bin `Ali called Al-`Askary who also died suddenly in 260 A.H. leaving behind a young 5-year-old son, Mohammed.

Throughout previous years, separatist movements, which consisted of some of the Prophet's Household and Persophils, would swear allegiance to the elder son of Al-Talibiyyun's leader, starting with `Ali Al-Rida and ending with Al-Hassan Al-`Askary. Concerning the ascendants of `Ali Al-Rida, such as his father Musa Al-Kazim or his grandfather Ja`far Al-Sadik or his grandfather's father Mohammed Al-Baqir, they did not assume the revolutionary leadership against Umayyad or Abbasid rule.

However, after Al-Hassan Al-`Askary had died in 260 A.H., revolutionists got totally confused as to who is to assume leadership when Al-Hassan Al-`Askary left behind a young son. They even got more confused after the sudden death of that young son. This resulted in dividing such revolutionary groups into many sects each different from the other in terms of principles and ideas as well as even in laws and beliefs.

The most famous among such sects is Ithna `Ashriyyah (Imamiyyah), now prevailing in Iran, Iraq and Lebanon. It is the biggest Shiite sect at present.

The leaders of this sect started to add to Islam ideas that would work best for situations they are exposed to currently and that may ensure the continuation of their sect despite the absence of their leader.

They added many serious Bid'ahs (innovations in religion) to the religion of Islam, claiming them to be part and parcel of Islam. Thus, such Bid'ahs, with the passage of time, became a key component of their ideology and thought. Some of such Bid'ahs relate to Imamate (caliphate). Seeking a justification for the lack of a current imam, they argued that Imams are twelve only, arranging them in the following order: 1- `Ali bin Abu Talib, 2- Al-Hassan bin `Ali, 3- Al-Hussein bin `Ali, 4- `Ali Zainul-`Abidin bin Al-Hussein, 5- Mohammed Al-Baqir bin Zainul-`Abidin, 6- Ja`far Al-Sadik bin Mohammed Al-Baqir, 7- Musa Al-Kazim, 8- `Ali Al-Rida, 9- Mohammed Al-Jawad, 10- `Ali Al-Hadi, 11- Mohammed Al-Mahdi and 12- Al-Hassan Al-`Askary.

That is why this sect is called Ithna `Ashriyyah. Seeking to justify why the Imam succession came to an end, they claimed that the young child Muhammad bin Al-Hassan Al-`Askary has not died yet, and that, according to them, he has disappeared in a mountain cave and that he is still alive (over one thousand years now). They further claim that he will be back one day to rule the world. They also believe him to be the Awaited Mahdi (Righteous Imam). They also claimed that the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) bequeathed Imamate to those twelve names but Companions withheld such information. This is why they judge Companions in general to be disbelievers (however, some of them judge Companions to be only profligate) as they concealed such a bequeath. Influenced by the Persian system of rule, they introduced the inevitability of the monarchical system believing that the Imam must be the elder son of `Ali bin Abu Talib and likewise all succeeding Imams. As known to all, this notion is not Islamic at all. Even Sunni Islamic states based on a monarchical system, such as Umayyad, Abbasid, Seljuk, Ayyubi and Ottoman caliphates, never considered the monarchical system to be a part of religion or that ruling must be on a dynasty basis. Influenced also by Persia, they introduced sanctification of the ruling dynasty. Accordingly, they believed in the infallibility of the aforementioned Imams and thus considered their sayings to be as holy as the Qur'an and Prophetic Hadith. Moreover, most of their Fiqhi (jurisprudential) rules are even derived from the sayings of Imams, regardless of whether these sayings are authentically or falsely attributed to them. Furthermore, in his book "Islamic Government", Khomeini, the leader of the Iranian revolution, stated, "One of the fundamentals of our ideology is that our Imams are higher in rank than devoted angels and prophets.(1)" Hence, this explains their bitter hostility to all Companions (except for a few of them who do not exceed thirteen). They also show hostility to even some of the Prophet's Household, such as Al-`Abbas (may Allah be pleased with him), Allah's Messenger's uncle, and his son Abdullah bin `Abbas (may Allah be pleased with him), the great scholar of the Ummah. Unarguably, hostility to these two figures and judging them to be disbelievers is due to the historical conflict between Ithna `Ashriyyah and Abbasid caliphate.

Among their Bid`ahs also is that they consider most Muslim countries to be Darul-Kufr (House of disbelief). They also judge the people of Medina, Mecca, Egypt and Levant to be disbelievers, falsely reporting the Messenger of Allah to have said something in this regard and thus believe it to be a part of their religion.

You can refer to such ideas in their original resources, such as Al-Kafy, Bihar Al-Anwar and Tafsir Al-Qummi, Tafsir Al-`Ayyashi, Al-Burhan and other books.

Consequently, they do not acknowledge any Sunni scholars and all the authentic Hadith books, such as Al-Bukhari, Muslim, Al-Tirmidhi and Al-Nasa'i. They also deny the authority of Abu Hanifah, Malik, Al-Shafi`i and Ibn Hanbal. They also do not admit the excellence of Khalid bin Al-Walid or Sa`d bin Abu Waqqas, `Umar bin Abdul-`Aziz,, Musa bin Nusair, Nourul-Din Mahmoud, Salahud-Din, Qutuz and Muhammad Al-Fatih.

As a result of their non-recognition of Companions, Successors and books of Hadith and Tafsir (exegesis of the Qur'an), they depended largely on sayings attributed to their Imams through very weak chains of narrators. Consequently, many abhorred Bid'ahs took place regarding their doctrines, acts of worship, transactions and other wakes of life. In this article, I do not intend to give a list of their Bid'ahs; actually, such a goal requires composing many books. I only refer here to the origin of the problem so that we may understand its consequences. However, it requires a lengthy talk to speak about such Bid'ahs as Taqiyyah (a dispensation allowing Shiites to conceal their faith when under threat, persecution or compulsion) and Raj'a (the second coming or the return to life of their Imams after death), viewing that the Qur'an was interpolated, misbelieving in Allah, Bid'ahs committed at the shrines, building such shrines in mosques, abhorred Bid'ahs committed on the anniversary of Al-Hussein's Martyrdom and thousands of other Bid'ahs that became key pillars in religion according to Ithna `Ashriyyah.

All that I have mentioned so far is only a part of the ideology of Ithna `Ashriyyah. However, there are several other sects that rose during the same period in history, especially during the period known in history as the period of "Shia Bewilderment", which started as early as the middle of the third century A.H. following the death of Al-Hassan Al-`Askary (the twelfth and last Imam according to them).

From this period on, literature and books that plant their ideology and doctrines were composed. Their methodologies spread widely in the Persian region in particular and in the Muslim world in general. However, till then no state was established to officially adopt such ideologies. Anyway, by the end of the third century and the beginning of the fourth century A.H., serious developments took place that led to Shia assuming power in some areas, which had serious repercussions on the entire Muslim Ummah. This is what I will deal with in the next article, if Allah so wills.

However, I have to repeat the rule that "one cannot pass a judgment on something unless one has a clear conception of it". Thus, if we are to take a decision regarding a specific matter or issue, we have to have knowledge about it first. In other words, we can judge something to be right or wrong or say that it is better to do so-and-so only when authentic information is available. Undoubtedly, judgments based of passions and on no study leads certainly to evil consequences.



We ask Allah to glorify Islam Muslims.

By: Dr. Ragheb El Sergani



~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

and i was shocked when i read the following article which enlightened me tremendously!

Shia's Peril
Written by Dr. Ragheb Elsergany



Many Muslims view it is very difficult and confusing to adopt a certain attitude towards Shiites. Difficulty is actually due to many reasons.

Lack of information is one of such reasons. In fact, Shia as for many Muslims is something ambiguous. They know neither their entity nor their origin. Moreover, they neither have a historical look at their past nor can expect their future. Consequently, a good number of Muslims thinks that Shia is no more than an Islamic school of thought and thus similar to Shafi'i, Maliki or other Schools of thought. Thus thinking, they do not grasp the fact that difference between Sunnis and Shiites does not relate only to subsidiary matters but also to some fundamentals as well.

The fact that many Muslims are not realistic or practical is another reason for difficulty. Actually, some Muslims have unsubstantiated rosy dreams. Thinking they are reasonable, they think there is no reason for conflict and wonder why do not we sit together overlooking our disputes, a Sunni shaking hands with a Shiite and take one way since both parties believe in Allah, His Messenger and the Last Day. It seems they forgot it is a far more complicated issue. For example, we judge to be a disbeliever a person who, although believing in Allah, His Messenger and the Last Day, deems drinking wine and adultery lawful. Deeming them lawful means denying their being prohibited by the Qur'an and Sunnah. If we apply the same criterion here, we will find out that the issue of Shia is so dangerous that it requires Shari'ah (Islamic Law) scholars to adopt decisive situations as far as the Islamic ruling on enormous Shiite Bid'ahs (innovations in religion) is concerned. Another reason leading to difficulty is multiplicity of deep wounds that hit many Muslim countries and multiplicity of enemies such as Jews, Crusaders, Communists, Hindus and others. In this regard, some of those claiming to be reasonable view that we should not open a new bloc for conflict.

This might be true in case we are trying to open such a bloc when it is already closed. However, being wide-open and of constant harm, ignoring it is a vice. Furthermore, it is useless to pose the repeatedly asked question: Who is more dangerous, Jews or Shiites? In fact, asking such a question aims at squelching those who try to awaken the Ummah and to put in awkward situation those who strive to protect and safeguard the Ummah. In refutation of such an argument, I say that there is no problem to face two contingent perils at a time. I would like also to ask them: Is it Sunnis who search for a justification to attack Shiites? I think the actual fact substantiated by bulk of evidence tells us that it is Shiites who harm Sunnis.

In the two previous articles, Origins of Shia and Shia's Dominance, I gave an outline of the Shia history. Through these articles, we could see tremendous aggressions committed by Shiites against the Muslim Ummah. However, I do not think that our present fact differs from the past. Rather, I certify that history repeats itself and that sons have inherited fathers' and grandfathers' rancor. Besides, no good is expected from those who claim the Companions generation was corrupt except for a very few number of them, which stands for explicitly belying the saying of the Prophet (peace be upon him), "The best people are those living in my generation.<!--[if !supportFootnotes]-->[1]<!--[endif]-->" This Hadith (Prophetic tradition) is related by Al-Bukhari and Muslim as well as other compilations of authentic Hadith.

Undoubtedly, present Shias truth – just as their truth in the past – is very heinous.

Let us revise important matters to help us have a clearer vision and thus help us understand the ideal attitude we should adopt toward Shiites in order to know which is better, speaking or remaining silent.

First: Everyone knows the Shias attitude toward the Prophet' Companions ranging from Abu Bakr Al-Siddiq (the very truthful), `Umar Al-Faruq (one who distinguishes between truth and falsehood) and `Uthman Dhon-Norain (one who married two of the Prophet's daughters) to mothers of the believers, headed by `A'ishah the mother of the believers and ending with the whole great generation. Actually, Shias books and references, as well as even their creed and belief essentials, claim that this generation as a whole is profligate or even disbeliever and that the majority of which has gone astray and accuse them of hiding and interpolating the religion.

Regarding this, should we observe and remain silent in order to avoid Fitnah (disorder) as they calim?

I wonder what Fitnah can be more than accusing this generation of corruption and lying!

I would like that you try to comprehend the following statement said be the reverend Companion Jabir bin Abdullah (may Allah be pleased with both of them), "When later generations of this Ummah curse earlier generations, let those who have knowledge unfold it, for one who conceals such knowledge is as if concealing what is revealed to Muhammad (peace be upon him).<!--[if !supportFootnotes]-->[2]<!--[endif]-->"

Could you comprehend what depth this statement has?

Actually, defaming the Companion's generation does not stand for merely defaming some people who have passed away and thus, as claimed by some people, will not be harmed by such defamation being in Paradise in defiance of Shiites. More seriously, defaming Companions actually implies direct accusation of the authenticity of the whole religion. In fact, we received this religion through only Companions. Therefore, if doubt is cast on their morals, intentions and actions, how should we then follow this religion? Given this, the religion will be lost and the Prophet's Hadith and orders will be of no authority. On the contrary, we ask Shiites, what Qur'an do you recite? Is not it the Companions in mass, whom you defame, who transmitted the Qur'an? Is not it Abu Bakr Al-Siddiq (may Allah be pleased with him), whom you claim to have assumed caliphate through fraud, who collected the Qur'an? Based on your claims, why did not he interpolate the Qur'an if it is true that he interpolated the Sunnah?

The Prophet (peace be upon him) said, "Follow my Sunnah (manner of conduct) as well as that of my rightly-guided Caliphs.<!--[if !supportFootnotes]-->[3]<!--[endif]-->" Thus, the Sunnah of the four rightly-guided Caliphs is an indispensable part of the religion of Islam. Moreover, rulings and decisions issued by Abu Bakr, `Umar, `Uthman and `Ali are binding for all Muslims everywhere and at any time till the Day of Judgment. How can then defaming them be acceptable?

To this effect, our great scholars would tremble on hearing someone affronting the Prophet's Companions. For example, Ahmed bin Hanbal (may Allah be pleased with him) would say, "If you hear someone saying bad words about the Prophet's Companions, know that his being a Muslim is an object of doubt.<!--[if !supportFootnotes]-->[4]<!--[endif]-->" Moreover, Judge Abu Ya`la said, "Scholars are unanimous on judging one who insults Companions while deeming it permissible to be a disbeliever and one who does so while not deeming it permissible to be a profligate.<!--[if !supportFootnotes]-->[5]<!--[endif]-->"

To the same effect, Abu Zar`ah Al-Razy said, "If you see someone underestimating the Prophet's Companions, know that he is a heretic.<!--[if !supportFootnotes]-->[6]<!--[endif]-->"

Furthermore, Ibn Taymiyah said, "One who claims that all Companions - except for a few number not exceeding twenty - forsook Islam after the Prophet's death is undoubtedly disbeliever.<!--[if !supportFootnotes]-->[7]<!--[endif]-->"

Actually, such strict judgments regarding those who underestimate Companions is justified by the fact that it is Companions who transmitted the religion to us. Accordingly, underestimating them implies casting doubts on the religion itself. In addition, this great generation was praised in innumerable occurrences in Qur'anic verses and Hadith of the Prophet (peace be upon him). Therefore, defaming them indicates belying Allah and His Messenger.

Some people might argue that we did never hears so-and-so – a Shiite – insulting Companions. I would like to draw the attention of such people to three points:

The first point: The main point of Imamiyyah (a Shiite sect believing in the twelve Imams descending from `Ali) is that Companions conspired against `Ali bin Abu Talib, all the Prophet's Household and the Imams they believe in. Therefore, all adherents of Imamiyyah (found in Iran, Iraq and Lebanon) believe in the corruption of Companions. Should they admit the goodness of Companions, the Shiite main idea would be refuted. Therefore, it is acknowledged that all Shiites, were they leaders or followers, do neither respect or show reverence to Companions nor learn religion from them in the least.

The second point: Shiite leaders are always illusive in situations where their dislike of Companions is disclosed, although it is apparent in some of their expressions or situations as stated by Allah (may He be Exalted), "but surely you will know them by the tone of their speech" [Muhammad: 30]. In this regard, we perhaps watched the debate held between Dr. Al-Qaradawi (may Allah safeguard him) and Rafsanjani on Al-Jazeera TV.

We could see how Rafsanjani was illusive regarding attempts made by Dr. Al-Qaradawi to make him say something good about Companions or Mothers of the believers. By the same token, Khamenei – the current leader of the Iranian Revolution - gave the following indecisive reply to a question about the ruling on insulting Companions that gave no definite answer regarding permissibility or otherwise, "Any saying leading to sowing discord among Muslims is absolutely impermissible." According to him, insulting Companions is not prohibited on its own, but it is only prohibited on account of its sowing discord among Muslims. This was published in the Egyptian newspaper Al-Ahram on November 23, 2006.

The third point: A special care should be given to the Taqiyyah creed which constitutes nine-tenths of religion according to them. Tiqiyyah refers to a dispensation allowing believers to conceal their faith when under threat, persecution or compulsion. However, when they come to power, they openly disclose it. Throughout the Shia's history we referred to, we could know that when they dominate Sunni countries, such as Abbasid Caliphate in Iraq, Egypt, Morocco and other countries, they would publicly insult Companions considering it one of the essentials of their faith.

Through this point, we come to the conclusion that it is necessary to speak in order to clarify the truth regarding honorable Companions, for indeed refraining from telling' the truth is satanic. Moreover, keeping silent will result in loss of religion itself.

Second: Danger of the spread of Shiite faith in the Muslim world. Undoubtedly, propagating the Shiite faith is making its way rapidly throughout the Muslim world. It is extending beyond the borders of countries where it used to be such as Iran, Iraq and Lebanon. Rather, it is now spreading on a wide range in Bahrain, UAE, Syria, Jordan, KSA, Egypt, Pakistan, Afghanistan and other Muslim countries. More dangerously, many people have held the Shiite ideas and principles while thinking they are not Shiites. To this effect, after our articles in this regard have been published, we received a great bulk of messages whose senders claim to be Sunnis while their messages are overflowing with Shiite ideas and methodologies. We all know about fierce campaigns launched against Companions in newspapers and satellite channels in Sunni countries. Most famous are the campaign launched recently by an Egyptian newspaper against `A'ishah (may Allah be pleased with her), the campaign launched by another newspaper against Al-Bukhari (may Allah show mercy to him) and satellite programs presented by a famous journalist defaming Companions in all episodes.

What adds to the difficulty of the situation and the improbability of remaining silent thereon is the close relationship between Shiite and Sufi methodologies on the pretext that both of them love the Prophet's Household. As we know, Sufism is widespread in many Muslim countries when it is famous for committing many Bid'ahs and abhorred sins and shares Shia in that both sanctify the graves of the Prophet's Household. As a result, Shiism is expected to spread so long as Sufi sects are widespread in Muslim countries.

Third: The situation in Iraq is very dangerous.

It became a usual scene that Sunni Muslims are killed after glancing at their identity cards. Scholar Harith Al-Dary, Secretary General of the Association of Muslim Scholars in Iraq, stated that more than 100000 Sunnis were killed by Shiites from 2003 to 2006 only. This is in addition to constant displacements of Sunnis so that Shiites might easily have authority in such regions. Furthermore, most of those displaced outside Iraq are Sunnis, which might lead to serious change of the population structure which will result in evil consequences. The question that arises is: Is the Fitnah resulting from discussing the issue of Shia more dangerous than that of killing such a great number of Sunnis? Till when should we remain silent in this regard, when everyone knows that Iran fully supports killing Sunnis according to identity cards?

Fourth: Iran has its clear, or even explicitly publicized, coveted objects in Iraq. Previously, there was an eight-year-old war between the two countries. However, their way to it is now paved, bearing in mind that Iraq represents an ultimate Shiite religious importance. In Iraq there are the holy shrines and the graves of six Shiite Imams, including the grave of `Ali bin Abu Talib in Najaf, the grave of Al-Hussein in Karbala, the grave of Musa Al-Kazim and that of Muhammad Al-Jawad in Kazimiya, and the grave of Muhammad Al-Hadi and that of AL-Hassan Al-`Askary in Samarra. This is in addition to false graves of such prophets as Adam, Noah, Hud and Salih – all located in Najaf – whose names are well-known to be falsely attributed them.

Moreover, the dangers of Iran's ambitions in Iraq is reinforced by the fact that US backs and supports such ambitions. We can all see the American-backed and sponsored Shiite government. Furthermore, reciprocal unreal accusations between the US and Iran should make no sense. Actually, USA never thinks of launching war against Iran – refer to our article "A demon under control". However, worrying is not only ambitions in Iraq's oil or wealth, or even the expansion of Shiite-dominated land, but also the fact that brutality and criminality is part and parcel of their belief in religion. They consider Companions and other Sunni Muslims who followed them to have showed enmity to the Prophet's Household. They, therefore, call us Nawasib (understood by the Shiite to mean those who declared hostility against the Household of the Prophet), although we show more respect to the Prophet's Household than them. Based on accusing us as such, they issue very dangerous judgments. For Example, Khomeini said, "It is strongly substantiated to apply the same rulings of Ahlul-Harb (people otherwise at war with Muslims) to Nawasib. This means that it will be lawful to take booties from them and divide one-fifth of it among warriors. It is even strongly substantiated that it is lawful to take up their property wherever they may be and with any how. In such a case, one-fifth is to be singled out.<!--[if !supportFootnotes]-->[8]<!--[endif]-->" Asked about the ruling on one who denies the Imamate of the twelve Imams, the Shiite Imam Muhammad Sadiq Al-Rawhani said the following amazing statement, "Imamate is higher in rank than prophethood. Moreover, perfecting the religion took place through appointing Imam `Ali (peace be upon him) as the Commander of the Faithful. In this regard, Allah (may He be Exalted) said, "This day, I have perfected your religion for you, completed My Favor on you" [Al-Ma'idah 3]. Accordingly, he who does not believe in the Imamate of the twelve Imams dies as a disbeliever.<!--[if !supportFootnotes]-->[9]<!--[endif]-->"

In the article "Origins of Shia", we stated that Khomeini in his book "Al-Hukumah Al-Islamiyya (Islamic Government)" stated that Imams offer much Prayers to a degree never reached by a high-ranked angel or a prophet and thus disbelieving in them is more harmful than disbelieving in the Prophet (peace be upon him). I think this notion explains their judging others to be disbelievers, which results in deeming killing Sunnis in Iraq and everywhere to be lawful. Moreover, in this context we can understand also the inevitability of holding sway over Iraq for the Shiite sanctuaries there that is dominated by those whom they judge to be disbelievers.

Fifth: Their direct threat is not limited to Iraq only.



Rather, their ambitions extends to all the countries of the region. They consider Bahrain to be a part of Iran, which is explicitly stated by Ali Akbar Natiq Nouri, the head of the investigation section, in the Revolution leader's office while celebrating the Iranian Revolution thirtieth anniversary. He said, "Bahrain was in the past the 14th governorate of Iran and was represented by an MP in the Iranian National Consultative Assembly.<!--[if !supportFootnotes]-->[10]<!--[endif]-->" Besides, it is well-known that Iran occupies three important UAE islands in the Arabian Gulf.



Moreover,they are growing so largely in number in the UEA that they now constitute 15% of the whole population. In addition, they control trade centers especially in Dubai.

The situation in KSA is also not stable. Since the Iranian Revolution in 1979, turmoil took place frequently in KSA. It even took place immediately after the Iranian Revolution. At that time, Shiite demonstrations were organized in Al-Qatif and Saihat, the severest of which took place on November 19, 1979. The situation got worse to the extent that they demonstrated in and tried to destroy Allah's Sacred House, which happened during Hajj seasons in 1987 and 1989. Furthermore, 450 Shiite personalities submitted a request to the crown prince at that time Prince Abdullah to assume supreme positions in the Cabinet, diplomatic corps, military and security systems and to raise their representation ratio in the Shoura Council.

In the same regard, Ali Shamkhani, the top military counselor of the Supreme Guide of the Iranian Revolution, stated that in case USA strikes Iran's nuclear institutions, Iran will not strike only US interests in the Gulf, but will also use ballistic missiles to hit strategic targets in the Gulf as well as oil pumps and energy stations in the Arabian Gulf.


This statement was published by the British Times on Sunday June 10, 2007.

Is this everything?

No, there are much more things of which we gave no mention.

In this article, we have so far discussed only five points highlighting the danger and importance of the issue of Shia. However, there remains other very important five points which I prefer not to discuss them here in brief so that I may give them their due detail. Therefore, I will put them off – if Allah wills – till the next article, after which I will speak about the ideal way to deal with such serious circumstances.

Undoubtedly, the issue of Shi`ah is not that marginal issue within the story of Islam that is to be neglected or postponed. Rather, it is one of the priorities of the Muslim Ummah. Everyone could perceive that Palestine's liberation by Salahud-Din followed only from saving Egypt from the `Abidy Shiite reign. At that time, Salahud-Din did not suppose that war against crusaders should be given priority over discussing the Shiite rule in Egypt. This is because Muslims gain victory only when they have a sound creed and sincere soldiers. Actually, Salahud-Din would never use the Egyptian people to fight with him such a fatal battle unless he relieved them of the `Abidy innovative rule. The same should apply to the Iraqi case now, as well as all countries threatened by Shiites. In fact, we have to take lessons from history.

We ask Allah to glorify Islam and Muslims.

Dr. Ragheb ElSergany

[Abz2000]

i respectfully disagree,
firstly, the method they are using to make sure the divide, and thus the ideological reconciliation, remains the same or increases is through fear of each other, this divide and conquer strategy has been used by unscrupulous tyrants for millennia.
a state of fear and war is what keeps both sides disunited, unwilling to objectively learn from each other, and unwilling to accept the truth in the other's words simply due to psychological barriers.
the saudi's and iran fear saddam, and stand by while iraq is devoured, bahrain, saudi, and uae fear iran and help the us establish military bases to "protect them", etc etc, one thing we forget is the fact that iraq, libya, syria, lebanon, turkey and iran are united on one issue - Palestine. and i sincerely believe that this is the only issue that holds the muslim countries in some sort of psychological alliance at the moment, and will unite them under the caliphate soon - Insha-Allah.

taking that critical aspect into consideration, i would say that grinning while the enemies of God devour one country after another while we rejoice at the fall of another nation which professes belief in the One God is foolish.
even if they are "heretics" or "deviants", they are no-where near what the open enemies of God would install, we see opium coming out of Afghanistan in quantities never seen before http://abz2000.com/criminalwarsofagression.aspx
"muslim" lands welcoming strip clubs and maybe soon even condoning and protecting homosexuality and adultery, etc and so on.
things that even the shia wouldn't allow, so the issue is who would you prefer to settle your differences with afterwards?
the shia - or an overbloated dajjal army which openly states their enmity to God, khilafah, and even decency.
when we play monopoly and want to stand a chance of winning - we usually put our differences aside and gang up on the biggest player - then settle it between us. this is the kind of thinking colonialists don't like which is why they make tremendous efforts to ensure there's no reconciliation.
yes, we have our differences, maybe some differences will need to be settled in a way we dislike, but we won't be left to settle them if we continue down the road we are now.
we are even allowed to come to common terms with the people of the book, let alone a group who have acknowledged the Prophethood of the last Messenger (pbuh) and may be deviant in their ways.

64. Say: "O People of the Book! come to common terms as between us and you: That we worship none but Allah. that we associate no partners with him; that we erect not, from among ourselves, Lords and patrons other than Allah." If then they turn back, say ye: "Bear witness that we (at least) are Muslims (bowing to Allah.s Will).
65. Ye People of the Book! Why dispute ye about Abraham, when the Law and the Gospel Were not revealed Till after him? Have ye no understanding?
66. Ah! Ye are those who fell to disputing (Even) in matters of which ye had some knowledge! but why dispute ye in matters of which ye have no knowledge? It is Allah Who knows, and ye who know not!
67. Abraham was not a Jew nor yet a Christian; but he was true in Faith, and bowed his will to Allah.s (Which is Islam), and he joined not gods with Allah.
68. Without doubt, among men, the nearest of kin to Abraham, are those who follow him, as are also this Messenger and those who believe: And Allah is the Protector of those who have faith.
Quran 3:64-68

my interpretation of these verses would be that we do our best to come to common terms on issues which we can, and continue our disputes on the differences.
do you know that there are sahih hadiths that tell us we will fight the dajjal (antiChrist) alongside the christians who venerate the cross - and then settle our differences with each other?
in this situation, i would say there is nothing wrong with uniting on common goals,
the Prophet (pbuh) was a part of hilf-al-fudul (knights of justice) most of which comprised of Pagans - the only thing in common there was to unite on justice and fairness.
and he said he would be part of it if it was around even before his death.

so then you'd have to look at who's got more in common with you- and the verses of the Quran are quite telling:

Have you not seen those who were given a portion of the Book?
They believe in Sorcery and Evil
and say to the disbelievers that they are better guided in the (right) way than the Believers!
They are those whom Allah has cursed, and he whom Allah curses, you will not find for him (any) helper
(Qur'an 4:51)

in terms of strategy and common goals - who do you ally with?
the ones who used the Quran as toilet paper, abused the Prophet (pbuh), drew cartoons of pigs and dogs, said that the caliphate is evil, made theatrical lewd shows of adam and eve, say our ancestors are monkeys and apes who grew out of bacteria, promote homosexuality, adultery, incest and pornography, houses the church of satan, continuously equates Islam with terrorism simply because they hate what God has revealed and hate decency and chastity.

or with people who may be misguided in their fiqhi issues and say wrong things about the companions of the Prophet (pbuh), practice innovations in religion etc - however boldly proclaim with their hearts and tongues that there is no God but God , and Muhammad is the messenger of God, and Jesus (pbuh) is the messenger of God. and who would give their lives fighting for that.
bearing in mind that we are told that we will fight the dajjal (antiChrist) even alongside people who say that Jesus is not a human.

how would we open them up to listen to each other's views? by allowing the open enemies to divide us? or by coming together on common terms?
i'd say the latter especially when bearing in mind that innovations and all sorts of funny stuff is practised even among many of us who claim to be on the sunnah,
i don't think we can find two people on this planet who have exactly the same opinion on everything.
the only way to reconcile would be to unite and not divide.
we even see the enemies of God trying to create a new world order based upon common goals.
i'd say i'd fight the shia's and the christians last - after we've overcome the largest hurdle together.
this works towards dawah AND strategic purposes.

Ibn Fudail reported on the authority of his father that he heard Salim b. ‘Abdullah b. ‘Umar as saying:

O people of Iraq,
how strangeit is that you ask about the minor sins but commit major sins?
I heard from my father ‘Abdullah b. ‘Umar, narrating that he heardAllah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying

while pointing his hand towards the EAST( Najd): Verily. the turmoil would come from this side,

from where appear the horns of Satan

and you would strike the necks of one another;

and Moses killed a person from among the people of Pharaoh unintentionally and Allah, the Exalted and Glorious, said:” You killed a person but We relieved you from the grief and tried you with (many a) trial” (xx. 40). Ahmad b. Umar reported this hadith from Salim, but he did not make a mention of the words:” I heard”.(Sahi Muslim (Book #041, Hadith #6943).


a reminder - this is only my humble opinion on this topic - and there may be many other views out there.
peace

[karu-89]

Bismillah
Asalaam alaikum wr wb
Ramadan kareem & 'eid mubarak

I just pray that we can become one Ummah again and not fight or argue and call each other kafir or anything insha'Allah. This is the Holy Month of Ramadan, a time for good deeds and improving out imaan and Taqwa insha'Allah. There are many people calling for peace and unity, but only the conspirators wish to separate us from one another. "Divide and Conquer" tactics being used by disbelievers since thousands of years. They already invade the middle-east and surround our Muslim nations with armies, waiting to pounce, but first they must poison us by encouraging ignorance and sin, then dividing us amongst ourselves so not only do we have to fight the disbelievers but some of us ally with the disbelievers to fight each other! Subhanallah this is haraam and may Allah SWT bless us with His mercy and guidance, ameen.

Calling for peace, no calling each other Kafir
youtube.com/watch?v=LEoYXUru2L8

youtube.com/watch?v=zIM8kc-CwmU

youtube.com/watch?v=QhqMdwiyg6c

well brother there can be no unity with the shias , because they have very extreme beliefs and which take them out of islam , here are some of them , watch this and then decide ok brother
There is no difference between ALLAH and Ali (r.a) such as in the virtues for; The master of Khatim-e-Suleman, The Master of Doomsday, The master of Siraat (The Bridge over Hell) and Renaissance Field, The Creator of leaves on the trees, The one who ripens the fruits, The one who continued fountains, The one who made drift in the canals (Na'uzubillah). [Jila-ul-A'yoon, Vol#2, Pg#85 – Published Lahore]
013. Usman (r.a) made alteration in Surah Al-Rehman by eliminating words “MINKUM” (Na’uzubillah). [Haq-ul-Yaqeen, Pg#525 - Published Iran]



001. Neither we accept such Lord nor do we accept the Prophet of such Lord whose Caliph is Abu-Bakr (r.a) (Na'uzubillah). [Anwaar-ul-Na'umania, Vol#2, Pg#278 - Published Iran]



014. Quran has been purposely altered by the drunkard Caliphs {Abu-Bakr (r.a), Umar (r.a) and Usman (r.a)}; The present Quran is false; It’s the duty of Imam Mehdi (SHIAs 12^th Imam) to bring it in its original form; When Imam Mehdi (SHIAs 12^th Imam) will come, then the Quran will be recited in its original form (Na’uzubillah). [Quran Translation by Maqbool Hussain Delhvi, Chap#12, Pg#384 – Published India]
so now what do you say brother , do you want more proofs of shias being kafir ???????//:raging::raging::raging:

[Abz2000]

/\ bro, i won't say there aren't some serious questions there, but my point was regarding the fact that even dhimmi's can fight alongside Muslims to protect their lands, so strategically, these disputes would be lesser in importance than the ones who would do away with anything that has mention of God.
we can settle differences afterwards, even if it's with the sword.
right now, something bigger faces you. looks beyond the smaller disputes.

[YaAqsa]

/\ bro, i won't say there aren't some serious questions there, but my point was regarding the fact that even dhimmi's can fight alongside Muslims to protect their lands, so strategically, these disputes would be lesser in importance than the ones who would do away with anything that has mention of God.
we can settle differences afterwards, even if it's with the sword.
right now, something bigger faces you. looks beyond the smaller disputes.

Salaam alaikum wr wb

Everything you said in your long post above is very well put. It is a shame that most people can't look past such differences.

The Qur'an is clear on what makes one a Muslim. I'm sure many Sahabah had bad opinions of each other, maybe cursed each other or whatever, but that didn't make them not Muslim, they were just Human and made mistakes. So if people are cursing someone but still believe in Allah swt and Muhammad saws and the last day then that makes them a Muslim. Muslims should have akhlaq yes, but there are sunnis and shias without akhlaq, we cannot just call everyone without akhlaq a kafir or munafiq inshallah.

We should unite under our similarities, Islam, prophethood, instead of divide under our differences, historical matters and hadith. We all pray 5 salat, we have the same rakat, we love Muhammad saws and his family, etc...

Peace to all

[FS123]

I'm sure many Sahabah had bad opinions of each other, maybe cursed each other or whatever

No, this was not their character in hadith and quran, and prophet (p) wouldn't have allowed this.

Muslims should have akhlaq yes, but there are sunnis and shias without akhlaq, we cannot just call everyone without akhlaq a kafir or munafiq inshallah.

Correct.

We should unite under our similarities, Islam, prophethood, instead of divide under our differences, historical matters and hadith. We all pray 5 salat, we have the same rakat, we love Muhammad saws and his family, etc...

We can make peace with them but if uniting means trusting them, then I'm sorry. It looks like going out of fire and into the frying pan. Our situation is similar to that of Christians or maybe worse. We believe in Jesus (p) but they don't believe in believe in Prophet Muhammad (p). Similarly Shia don't believe in the rightly guided Caliphs, moreover, they consider them enemies and blame sunni for conspiring against Ali (r). I went into one of their majlis and they were praying that enemies has taken hold of Kabbah, that just freaked me out. They were calling sunni enemies. How can we trust them with beliefs like that? Unity is a two way path, unless you are suicidal.

but my point was regarding the fact that even dhimmi's can fight alongside Muslims to protect their lands

Correct, and that was my basis for making peace with them, Prophetic model is to achieve peace, he (pbuh) even made treaty with the oppressors (treaty of hudaybia) because that brought peace. They don't have to have the same beliefs, but unity and trust is something else.

we can settle differences afterwards, even if it's with the sword.

That is tantamount to taqyia, and we don't have that. And it is not righteous. In Quran, Allah clearly said that he is with the righteous and he will give victory to the righteous even if they are in small numbers, so stay on the path of righteousness.

[YaAqsa]

No, this was not their character in hadith and quran, and prophet (p) wouldn't have allowed this.


Correct.


We can make peace with them but if uniting means trusting them, then I'm sorry. It looks like going out of fire and into the frying pan. Our situation is similar to that of Christians or maybe worse. We believe in Jesus (p) but they don't believe in believe in Prophet Muhammad (p). Similarly Shia don't believe in the rightly guided Caliphs, moreover, they consider them enemies and blame sunni for conspiring against Ali (r). I went into one of their majlis and they were praying that enemies has taken hold of Kabbah, that just freaked me out. They were calling sunni enemies. How can we trust them with beliefs like that? Unity is a two way path, unless you are suicidal.



Correct, and that was my basis for making peace with them, Prophetic model is to achieve peace, he (pbuh) even made treaty with the oppressors (treaty of hudaybia) because that brought peace. They don't have to have the same beliefs, but unity and trust is something else.


That is tantamount to taqyia, and we don't have that. And it is not righteous. In Quran, Allah clearly said that he is with the righteous and he will give victory to the righteous even if they are in small numbers, so stay on the path of righteousness.

Well in all fairness, "rightly guided caliph" is not in sunnah nor in Qur'an. So belief in that is not part of the deen according to Qur'an and Sunnah.

[FS123]

Well in all fairness, "rightly guided caliph" is not in sunnah nor in Qur'an. So belief in that is not part of the deen according to Qur'an and Sunnah.

Rightly guided i meant Abu Baker and Umar. Prophet (pbuh) said the following about them.

The Prophet said of Abu Bakr and `Umar: “These two are [my] hearing and eyesight.”

The Prophet said: “You (Abu Bakr) are my companion at the Basin and my companion in the Cave.”

`Amr ibn al-`As asked: “O Messenger of Allah, who is the most beloved of all men to you?” He (the Messenger) replied: “Abu Bakr.”

And this is their supposedly first Imam's saying:
`Ali named him and `Umar the Shaykh al-Islam of the Community and said: “The best of this Community after its Prophet are Abu Bakr and `Umar,”

`Ali further said: “The most courageous of people is Abu Bakr,” and “The greatest in reward among people for the volumes of the Qur’an is Abu Bakr, for he was the first of those who gathered the Qur’an between two covers.”

^^ which they don't accept, which is perfectly fine with me. They are entitled to their beliefs. To them theirs and to us ours. My concern is different. I used to go to shia majalis because I wanted to know more about different sects before I choose one for me. And somethings I heard really disturbed me, one I mentioned. I'll quote it:

I went into one of their majlis and they were praying that enemies has taken hold of Kabbah, that just freaked me out. They were calling sunni enemies.

Who in their right mind will trust them? I'll repeat again, it doesn't mean we can't have treaty or make peace with them. I repeat again: to them theirs and to us ours. What more you guys want?

[Abz2000]

Originally Posted by YaAqsa
I'm sure many Sahabah had bad opinions of each other, maybe cursed each other or whatever


No, this was not their character in hadith and quran, and prophet (p) wouldn't have allowed this.

respected brother FS123,
my opinion is that you are sincere,
so i will try to correct your opinion on that point:

Once the Muhajireen and the Ansar argued, such that one of the Muhajireen said:
'O Muhajireen!' (meaning, come to assist me)
And one of the Ansar said: 'O Ansar!'
Upon hearing this, the Prophet (salla Allahu 'alayhi wa sallam) said:
'Is it with the calls of Jahiliyah that you cry out, while l am still amongst you?!'
[Reported by Al-Bukhaaree (8/137)]

And he became very angry at that."[Majmoo'-ul-Fatawa (3/456)]



they would even curse each other and then repent:

Abu Dharr, the leader of the tribe of Ghifar, and one who accepted Islam in its early days, narrates:

Once I was conversing with Bilal. Our conversation gave way to a dispute. Angry with him, the following insult burst from my mouth:

'You cannot comprehend this, O son of a black woman!'

As Islam expressly forbade all kinds of racial, tribal and colour discrimination, Bilal was both upset and greatly angered.

A while later a man came and told me that the Messenger of God, upon him be peace and blessings, summoned me. I went to him immediately. He said to me:

'I have been informed that you addressed Bilal as the son of a black woman.'

I was deeply ashamed and could say nothing. God's Messenger continued his reprimand:
'This means you still retain the standards and judgements of the pre-Islamic days of ignorance. Islam has eradicated all those false standards or measures judging people by blood, fame, colour or wealth. It has established that the best and most honourable of men is he who is the most pious and upright in conduct. Is it right to defame a believer just because he is black?'

Abu Dharr felt profound remorse. He went straight to Bilal's house and, putting his head on the threshold, said: 'This head will not rise from here until the blessed feet of Bilal tread on the face of foolish, impolite Abu Dharr.'

Bilal responded: 'That face deserves to be kissed, not trodden upon', and forgave Abu Dharr.

................yes they were human and were a rowdy lot who just came out of ignorance - Islam was continuously transforming them. :statisfie


non-Muslims were allowed to participate in defensive battles to protect their lands, it was usually on offensive ones that the Prophet (pbuh) had issues.

look at the bigger picture:

Sir Campbell Bannerman, [Prime Minister of Britain (1905-08)]
“ There are people who control spacious territories teeming with manifest and hidden resources.

They dominate the intersections of world routes.

Their lands were the cradles of human civilizations and religions.

These people have one faith, one language, one history and the same aspirations.

No natural barriers can isolate these people from one another

... if, per chance, this nation were to be unified into one state,

it would then take the fate of the world into its hands and would separate Europe from the rest of the world.

Taking these considerations seriously,

a foreign body should be planted in the heart of this nation to prevent the convergence of its wings

in such a way that it could exhaust its powers in never-ending wars.

It could also serve as a springboard for the West to gain its coveted objects.” - 1902



How Bush's grandfather

helped Hitler's rise to power

Guardian.co.uk

George W Bush's grandfather, the late US senator Prescott Bush, was a director and shareholder of companies that profited from their involvement with the financial backers of Nazi Germany.

The Guardian has obtained confirmation from newly discovered files in the US National Archives that a firm of which Prescott Bush was a director was involved with the financial architects of Nazism.
His business dealings, which continued until his company's assets were seized in 1942 under the Trading with the Enemy Act, has led more than 60 years later to a civil action for damages being brought in Germany against the Bush family by two former slave labourers at Auschwitz and to a hum of pre-election controversy.
The evidence has also prompted one former US Nazi war crimes prosecutor to argue that the late senator's action should have been grounds for prosecution for giving aid and comfort to the enemy.
The debate over Prescott Bush's behaviour has been bubbling under the surface for some time. There has been a steady internet chatter about the "Bush/Nazi" connection, much of it inaccurate and unfair. But the new documents, many of which were only declassified last year, show that even after America had entered the war and when there was already significant information about the Nazis' plans and policies, he worked for and profited from companies closely involved with the very German businesses that financed Hitler's rise to power. It has also been suggested that the money he made from these dealings helped to establish the Bush family fortune and set up its political dynasty.



Adolf Eichmann: The Mind of a War Criminal


Later, Eichmann joined the Linz branch of the Heimschutz, a right wing paramilitary association of army veterans.
He considered joining a Masonic club that recommended itself to him because it excluded Jews.

He spent some time at an SS training centre and with an exiled Austrian SS unit before he was posted to Dachau concentration camp. From there he applied to join the SD, the Nazi Party Security Service, and was accepted for work at one of its Berlin branches.

He worked as a clerk in the section that monitored Freemasons before he was spotted by the head of the Jewish section of the SD, Edler von Mildenstein, who became his next 'mentor'.

Von Mildenstein took a special interest in Zionism and Jewish emigration to Palestine as a solution to Germany's 'Jewish Question'. He encouraged Eichmann to study Jewish society and history.......

......While rabble-rousers like Joseph Goebbels railed against the Jews, and called for ever harsher but directionless measures against them, the SD quietly promoted Jewish emigration. To this end Eichmann contacted Zionist envoys and even made a visit to Palestine in 1937.

Finally, he established an 'assembly line' system whereby a Jew could up at the Central Emigration Office with his papers and proceed from desk to desk until he arrived at the end, with a passport and an exit visa but stripped of his property, cash and rights. Within a few months, the office had emigrated 150,000 Jews.
After this triumph, Eichmann was ordered to set up a similar office in occupied Prague, and in October 1939 was appointed to Department IV D 4 of the Gestapo in Berlin, which handled emigration from the Reich.

Population Control, Nazis, and the U.N!Rockefeller & Mass Murder
The Rockefeller Foundation is the prime sponsor of public relations for the United Nations' drastic depopulation program. Evidence in the possession of a growing number of researchers in America, England, and Germany demonstrates that the Foundation and its corporate, medical, and political associates organized the racial mass murder program of Nazi Germany.These globalists, who function as a conduit for British Empire geopolitics, were not stopped after World War II. This United Nations alliance of the old Nazi right, with the new left, poses an even graver danger to the world today than it did in 1941. Oil monopolist John D. Rockefeller created the family-run Rockefeller Foundation in 1909. By 1929 he had placed $300 million worth of the family's controlling interest in the Standard Oil Company of New Jersey (now called ``Exxon'') to the account of the Foundation.The Foundation's money created the medical specialty known as Psychiatric Genetics. For the new experimental field, the Foundation reorganized medical teaching in Germany, creating and thenceforth continuously directing the ``Kaiser Wilhelm Institute for Psychiatry'' and the ``Kaiser Wilhelm Institute for Anthropology, Eugenics and Human Heredity.'' The Rockefellers' chief executive of these institutions was the fascist Swiss psychiatrist Ernst Rudin, assisted by his proteges Otmar Verschuer and Franz J. Kallmann.Eugenics & Racial Laws
In 1932, the British-led ``Eugenics'' movement designated the Rockefellers' Dr. Rudin as the president of the worldwide Eugenics Federation. The movement called for the killing or sterilization of people whose heredity made them a public burden. - The Racial Laws - A few months later, Hitler took over Germany and the Rockefeller-Rudin apparatus became a section of the Nazi state.The regime appointed Rudin head of the Racial Hygiene Society. Rudin and his staff, as part of the Task Force of Heredity Experts chaired by SS chief Heinrich Himmler, drew up the sterilization law. Described as an American Model law, it was adopted in July 1933 and proudly printed in the September 1933 Eugenical News (USA) with Hitler's signature. The Rockefeller group drew up other race laws, also based on existing Virginia statutes.

The United Nations Headquarters complex was constructed in New York City in 1949 and 1950 beside the East River, on 17 acres (69,000 m²) of land purchased from the foremost New York real estate developer of the time, William Zeckendorf.

Nelson Rockefeller arranged this purchase, after an initial offer to locate it on the Rockefeller family estate of Kykuit
was rejected as being too isolated from Manhattan.
The $8.5 million purchase was then funded by his father, John D. Rockefeller, Jr.,
who donated it to the City.^[7]
The lead architect for the building was the real estate firm of Wallace Harrison,
the personal architectural adviser for the family.

The Rockefeller Museum,
formerly the Palestine Archaeological Museum, is anarchaeological museum located in Jerusalem,
Israel that houses a large collection of artifacts unearthed in the excavations conducted in Ottoman Palestine beginning in the late 19th century.
The museum is under the management of the Israel Museum
and houses the head office of the Israel Antiquities Authority.^[1]

Just like with the bombings of Iraqis and other Arabs...which are blamed on 'al Qaeda'...this one smells of the Mossad. Please read an almost IDENTICAL Mossad operation (very well documented) on our Iraqi Jews: http://www.rense.com/general34/cart.htmAs hard for it is for decent people of any religion to believe, Zionists have sacrificed Jews for their own devices many times...it is a fact.The bombings in Iraq against Iraqis and especially the most recent blasts in Saudi Arabia killing Arabs are both Mossad templates. For the most part, Arabs don't kill Arabs in bomb blasts if it can be avoided.In Iraq, killing civilians in 'suicide bombings' can serve to turn Iraqis against the 'resistance' and toward the US occupation forces...at least that would be the logic for a Mossad operation.In Saudi Arabia, the bombings were immediately labeled as the work of 'Al Qaeda' ... a transparent joke.And now Turkey. Remember ALWAYS to ask yourself immediately: geopolitically WHO BENEFITS THE MOST?The majority of phone calls and reports of organizations taking 'credit' for bombings are probably bogus and not made by the people actually responsible. It's all too easy to manipulate.I just watched the BBC report from the synagogue bombing in Turkey...blood everywhere.I listened VERY CAREFULLY to this initial report...so as to soak up every detail before the spins began.1. Some 'official' said that they had received ONE telephone from a Moslem organization taking credit for the bombs.2. The reporter was VERY CAREFUL to emphasise that this organization has been quiet for a long time, apparenty inactive, and that everybody in Turkey was more than surprised to hear that this organization would allegedly be involved in such a major bombing.3. The reporter, to my surprise, was also very careful to emphasize that this Moslem organization has NEVER attacked Jews, and had always concentrated only on objecting to secular Turkish institutions.4. CNN few minutes ago, 'reluctantly' announced that the Turkish government does not believe that this crime was done by ANY local Turkish organization, but it is the work of an international organization. CNN, 'as usual', immediately contributed their own opinion: that the bombing was done by 'al Qaeda'. It has become very clear that CNN and Fox have turned into mouthpieces for the Zionist Israeli government.5. I would hope that the public will finally realize that there is scant evidence that al Qaeda exists today. Most of al Qaeda was vaporized in their caves in the Afghan mountains. This allows the CIA, Zionist, and Pentagon to conduct their manipulative wave of terrorism undisturbed, and no one will ever blame them. Please pay attention that ALL references and innuendos in the 'news' are just assumptions coming from 'experts' or 'authorities' provided to CNN and Fox by 'confidential unidentified military sources'.MY CONCLUSIONThe 'telephone call' claiming credit for the bombing means NOTHING, zero.Traditionally, many people make calls after bombings to put the blame on someone else.IMHO, this was likely a Zionist Israeli job with the trained media putting the blame on an 'Islamic' organization which the current Turkish government hates.Talking about crocodile tears, Israel just announced, as I am writing this, that they will be glad to help Turkey to 'fight terrorism and find the terrorists...'sure...

The Alexandria Church Bombing:


Minutes into the new year, an explosion rocked al-Qiddissin Coptic Church in Alexandria, Egypt. 25 innocent people dead (1). At least 97 innocents wounded (2). A 17-year old eyewitness ominously stated, ‘The last thing I heard was a powerful explosion and then my ears went deaf. All I could see were body parts scattered all over (3).’
All initial reports stated that a car bomb was the weapon used to carry out the New Years Day bloodshed (4). The US-backed Zionist dictatorship that runs Egypt typically went against the facts on the ground however, with the Ministry of Interior blaming the assault on a suicide bomber, and without a drop of concrete evidence, stating that the attack was carried out by none other than Al-Qaeda (5), which doesn’t exist (6), and whose leader, CIA agent Timothy Osman a.k.a. Osama Bin Laden, is long dead (7).
From AP, to Yahoo, to the New York Times, the liars that run the Zionist media immediately went into overdrive, vociferously promoting virulent garbage about ‘sectarian tensions’ between Muslims and Christians in Egypt being inflamed after the bombing (8). Of course there is no evidence of such ‘sectarian tension,’ but the mouthpieces of Israel, from the television to print, have no interest in telling the truth and they never have.
Not promoted by the Zionist media is the longstanding unity between Egypt’s Muslims and Coptic Minority (9), nor has it been promoted that Islamic and Christian leaders have stood side by side in the aftermath of the bombing, which wounded innocents from both faiths (10). The enmity between the two religious groups is nothing more than carefully concocted Zionist fiction.
There is only one entity in the entire region that benefits from religious division in any Middle Eastern nation: Israel. One of the key strategic goals of the Zionist entity in Egypt is to trigger a communal war between Muslims and Christians (11). The Lebanese Resistance movement, Hezbollah, condemned the bombing, declaring it ‘serves the Zionist scheme… aimed at fragmenting our Arab and Islamic countries (12).’ All evidence, physical and circumstantial, points directly to Mossad being the culprit behind the al-Qiddissin church bombing (13).
In recent years, Zionist intelligence activity in Egypt has increased greatly. Tel Aviv was the hand behind the cut of Egypt’s maintain internet cable in January of 2008, severing Egypt from the international online network. Mossad was conducting surveillance on the phone calls of the highest tier of the Egyptian government. The Israeli agency employed a spy to infiltrate Islamic opposition groups in Egypt. All of this was discovered just days before the Alexandria church massacre, when a Mossad spy ring was busted, unveiling a plot of subversion that would target Egyptian telecom companies. This ring was connected to other Israeli espionage groups in Lebanon and Syria (14).
Egypt’s former Foreign Minister, Abdallah al-Ashal, and the Egyptian Bar Association have gone on record to state that the massacre at al-Qiddissin Church was the work of Mossad, reacting murderously to its spy network being unfurled (15).
In November, a warning was issued to the world that Coptic churches in Egypt would be attacked. The warning was issued by ‘Al-Qaeda-linked’ Islamic State of Iraq, who according to the Zionist media, carried out the horrific assault on Sayedat al-Najat Cathedral in the Karada district of Baghdad at the end of October (16).
This atrocious theory has been thoroughly debunked however. What took place at Sayedat al-Najat was a Mossad false flag operation, aimed at provoking tension between occupied Iraq’s Muslim and Christian communities, conducted with all of the usual tools: fake passports produced in Tel Aviv, Israeli-produced IEDs and the quintessential car bomb (17). The appalling murder of at least 58 Iraqi Christians was also used to cover up the condemnation of the Zionist entity’s occupation of Palestine by several prominent Christian leaders (18). The warning wasn’t issued by non-existent Islamic State of Iraq therefore, but Mossad.
The car bomb is the signature of the Israeli agency. It is the weapon that has been used to conduct sabotage, assassinations and false flag terrorism across occupied Iraq, Syria, Yemen, Lebanon and India (19). The Muslim Brotherhood, which was blatantly robbed by Zionist dictator Hosni Mubarak’s regime in the recent Egyptian elections (20), called for Egyptian churches to be protected after the fake Al-Qaeda group made its incendiary comments (21). But this call was not heeded. Only an hour prior to Mossad’s car bombing, Egyptian security forces inexplicably withdrew from their positions, leaving four policemen to guard the massive church with nearly 2,000 people attending midnight mass. The car bomb was detonated at the post that was left by Egyptian security forces (22).
This collusion between Israeli intelligence and Egyptian security forces is by no means surprising, considering the existing Israeli-Egyptian collaboration in illegally and brutally besieging the people of the Gaza Strip (23). The violent assault against the Coptic community on New Years Day was also executed to deflect the attention off of the stolen Egyptian elections (24); it is widely known that Egypt is a premier recipient of Zionist-occupied United States government aid money, receiving almost $30 billion in three decades (25). The usurping entity of Zion and its American counterpart couldn’t have their staunchest ally in the Middle East embarrassed by stolen elections. Answer? False flag attack.
The tactic being used to split the Muslim and Christian communities of Egypt is the oldest trick in the Zionist entity’s book: divide and conquer. It is widely known by the people of the Arab and Muslim world, especially Iraqis, that the only terrorism that exists in the Middle East (especially occupied Iraq), is the terrorism that is carried out by Israeli, American and British intelligence operatives (26). Divide and conquer has been used prominently in the Zionist-ravaged nation of Iraq, including a wall being built by an Israeli company to separate Sunni and Shia communities (27), and the nation of Lebanon, that was devastated by a savage civil war in the 1970s and 1980s contrived and manipulated by the Zionist entity (28) and the United States, with Zionist war criminal Henry Kissinger leading the way (29).
Muslims and Christians must stand together and reject these abhorrent divisions. People of conscience from all ethnicities, backgrounds and faiths must stand in solidarity with them. The victims of Mossad’s massacre at al-Qiddissin Church in Alexandria will not be forgotten. The fallen will be honored with sincere Resistance to all oppressive powers; be it the puppet Mubarak or the usurping regime of Israel itself.
Unified Resistance is what petrifies the occupiers more than anything else on earth.
Make them tremble; unity is an armor that cannot be pierced by their bullets or rattled by their bombs.


it is very different form taqiyya

[FS123]

I said:

I'm sure many Sahabah had bad opinions of each other, maybe cursed each other or whatever


No, this was not their character in hadith and quran, and prophet (p) wouldn't have allowed this.

so i will try to correct your opinion on that point:

Once the Muhajireen and the Ansar argued, such that one of the Muhajireen said:
'O Muhajireen!' (meaning, come to assist me)
And one of the Ansar said: 'O Ansar!'
Upon hearing this, the Prophet (salla Allahu 'alayhi wa sallam) said:
'Is it with the calls of Jahiliyah that you cry out, while l am still amongst you?!'
[Reported by Al-Bukhaaree (8/137)]

First, prophet didn't allow that, as I dictated by common sense.

Second, showing one (or even few) remote example(s) doesn't mean that was the character of sahabas. This is what is stated in Quran about the sahabas:

"You are the best of peoples ever raised for mankind, you enjoin good and forbid evil, and you believe in Allah." [3:110]

it is very different form taqiyya

Meaning? State your point clearly, please.

[Tyrion]

I think what the OP was getting at is that it's time we stop hating each other based on a few differing beliefs. Bottom line is that Shias are still Muslim. (albeit very misguided Muslims.)

i just went on a shia forum and the things they were saying about aisha (ra), abu bakr etc was making my head spin.

A forum isn't the best place to go to if you want to learn about a group of people... Even this forum makes my head spin at times, and I wouldn't consider it the go to place for people who want to understand Islam/Muslims...

[Abz2000]

United States support for Iraq during the Iran–Iraq War, as a counterbalance to post-revolutionary Iran, included several billion dollars worth of economic aid, the sale of dual-use technology, non-U.S. origin weaponry, military intelligence, Special Operations training, and direct involvement in warfare against Iran.^[3][4]
Support from the U.S. for Iraq was not a secret and was frequently discussed in open session of the Senate and House of Representatives. On June 9, 1992, Ted Koppel reported on ABC'sNightline, "It is becoming increasingly clear that George Bush, operating largely behind the scenes throughout the 1980s, initiated and supported much of the financing, intelligence, and military help that built Saddam's Iraq into" the power it became",^[5] and "Reagan/Bush administrations permitted—and frequently encouraged—the flow of money, agricultural credits, dual-use technology, chemicals, and weapons to Iraq."^[6]




this lecture should explain it all - you may need to scroll 2 min: 25 s past the arabic part of the Khutbah:













peace

[Abz2000]

[Abz2000]

[FS123]

I think what the OP was getting at is that it's time we stop hating each other based on a few differing beliefs.

Thats what I've been saying all along, you see that if you read my posts.

[FS123]

abz2000 whats the point of this? I asked you to clearly explain your point. Give lots of text and videos doesn't help. As for the news we all know what is happening. And to that here is the following verse:

Or do ye think that ye shall enter the Garden (of bliss) without such (trials) as came to those who passed away before you? they encountered suffering and adversity, and were so shaken in spirit that even the Messenger and those of faith who were with him cried:"When (will come) the help of Allah"Ah! Verily the help of Allah is (always) near.

[Quran 2:214]

[GuestFellow]

I think what the OP was getting at is that it's time we stop hating each other based on a few differing beliefs. Bottom line is that Shias are still Muslim. (albeit very misguided Muslims.)

Salaam,

The differences are fundamental...I agree that there needs to be less hatred and more dialogue.

[Abz2000]

Brother,
If the answer is in the 2nd last post, the one with the lecture on jumuah, the image of the Rose,
I can't explain that much in text,
It's so well explained.
And the "news" was to show how they are manipulating us to weaken each other,
They support saddam in fighting Iran for six years, Saudi, kuwait etc help them out of fear of a Shia iran, then they execute saddam and film Shias cheering, then they step up rhetoric against Iran,
Is this the time for us to be divided?
They are taking Muslim nations down one by one and getting half of us to cheer while the other half weeps. And then vice versa,


Hadith - Bukhari 9.237, Narrated Abu Huraira

Allah's Apostle* said, "The Hour will not be established

* * *(1) till two big groups fight each other whereupon there will be a great number of casualties on both sides and they will be following one and the same religious doctrine,

Maybe there is a big difference here but it's the only two big groups a I can see and the same Shahadah.
The main enemy is see here is Satan, causing turmoil and divisions.
And there are those who have a church of Satan (google it).

And did someone say they were kuffar for their foolish words?

Volume 9, Book 88, Number 197:

Narrated 'Abdullah:

The Prophet, said, "Abusing a Muslim is Fusuq (evil doing) and killing him is Kufr (disbelief)."




Volume 9, Book 88, Number 198:
Narrated Ibn 'Umar:

I heard the Prophet saying, "Do not revert to disbelief after me by striking (cutting) the necks of one another."

[M.I.A.]

i think we as current muslims, sunni, shia and everything in between should be very aware that allah swt can replace us all.

we may not even be included in any united ummah. when it happens it will be due to allah swt allowing it to happen.

i do agree that the media pushes in a certain direction, if this is intentional, unintentional, planning/strategy or paranoia..ultimately we believe in a god.
its a matter of who you attribute power to? the media, the devil, shaikhs and mosque leaders.
ultimately there are six billion people in the world..and god is well aware of all of us.

a real god,
creator of the heavens, earth and all things between.
all things are a means to an end,
just depends on if you are content in what you do.

i know that i sound like some amateur dramatics production, i make myself cringe sometimes.

as for the sunni-shia issue, i dunno how you unite both without forgetting a lot of history.. i doubt that is acceptable to most.
maybe there will be an ummah in passing before there is an ummah in congregation.

[FS123]

Brother,
If the answer is in the 2nd last post, the one with the lecture on jumuah, the image of the Rose,
I can't explain that much in text,
It's so well explained.
And the "news" was to show how they are manipulating us to weaken each other,
They support saddam in fighting Iran for six years, Saudi, kuwait etc help them out of fear of a Shia iran, then they execute saddam and film Shias cheering, then they step up rhetoric against Iran,
Is this the time for us to be divided?
They are taking Muslim nations down one by one and getting half of us to cheer while the other half weeps. And then vice versa,


Hadith - Bukhari 9.237, Narrated Abu Huraira

Allah's Apostle* said, "The Hour will not be established

* * *(1) till two big groups fight each other whereupon there will be a great number of casualties on both sides and they will be following one and the same religious doctrine,

Maybe there is a big difference here but it's the only two big groups a I can see and the same Shahadah.
The main enemy is see here is Satan, causing turmoil and divisions.
And there are those who have a church of Satan (google it).

And did someone say they were kuffar for their foolish words?

Volume 9, Book 88, Number 197:

Narrated 'Abdullah:

The Prophet, said, "Abusing a Muslim is Fusuq (evil doing) and killing him is Kufr (disbelief)."




Volume 9, Book 88, Number 198:
Narrated Ibn 'Umar:

I heard the Prophet saying, "Do not revert to disbelief after me by striking (cutting) the necks of one another."

Listen br, I already said that we can agree to disagree and try as much as hard to live peacefully with each other. Read my posts properly.

[Abz2000]

that's where i'll say you haven't read my posts properly,
when you say "we can agree to disagree", "and each other"
you are imagining there are two groups - two sects,
that's where we fail,
if all of us gave that up and each one of us said - i am a muslim, and not from any such group,
it would put things in better perspective, break down a barrier, and get people to think for themselves rather than follow a group like sheep.

i already put a verse regarding this topic:

Abraham was not a Jew nor yet a Christian; but he was true in Faith, and sincerely bowed his will to Allah's (hanifan musliman), and he joined not gods with Allah.

Without doubt, among men, the nearest of kin to Abraham, are those who follow him, as are also this Prophet and those who believe: And Allah is the Protector of those who have faith.
Quran 3:67-68

on the same note - it can be said that
Muhammad (pbuh) was neither a sunni nor a shia but he was true in Faith, and sincerely bowed his will to Allah's (hanifan musliman), and he joined not gods with Allah.
Without doubt, among men, the nearest of kin to Muhammad (pbuh), are those who follow him, So also will Jesus (pbuh) and those who believe:
And Allah is the Protector of those who have faith.


here's another:
The Jews say: "The Christians have naught (to stand) upon; and the Christians say: "The Jews have naught (To stand) upon."
Yet they (Profess to) study the (same) Book. Like unto their word is what those say who know not;
but God will judge between them in their quarrel on the Day of Judgment.
Quran 2:113

the prophet (pbuh) clearly told us to go back to the Quran and the sunnah as there would arise divisions after him,
then people can judge for themselves if they are on the right path without having to look to a sect for approval,
that's what makes them so stubborn, when any hadith are mentioned, they think it's a "sunni hadith" therefore reject it outright without even looking at the facts.
and i've seen some "sunnis" do the same with "shia hadith" despite the hadith clearly making sense.
i got these hadith from harun yahya's website and put them on my site, this guy showed them to someone else and the other guy told him that it was from a shia book therefore we shouldn't use it, i told him i didn't give a d**n because it made perfect sense and i'll even use texts from the previous scripture if they make sense.
Do you really believe some shia guy made this up 13 centuries ago when there was no electricity or satellites?:

Mahdi means: The One Who Is Rightly Guided

Certain it is that IN THE TIME OF HAZRAT MAHDI (AS)
IF A BELIEVER IS IN THE EAST HE WILL SEE HIS BROTHER IN THE WEST
.AND IF HE IS IN THE WEST, HE WILL SEE HIS BROTHER IN THE EAST.
(Bihar al-Anwar, Vol. 52, p. 391)


any of you got skype???

^{Hazrat Mahdi (as) will (spiritually) conquer both east and westand cause Islam (the moral values of Islam) to rule the world
...ALLAH WILL BESTOW SUCH POWERS ON PEOPLE THAT
EVERYONE WILL HEAR HIS (THE MAHDI’S (AS)) WORDS, WHEREVER THEY MAY BE
and Imam (as) will give life to Islam...}
(Bihar al-Anwar, Vol. 52, p. 27 and Vol. 53, p.12 Ikmal'ud- Din, Vol. 2, p. 367)

any of you heard of an international broadcast?

Sadir al-Sayrafi says: I heard from Imam Abu Abdullah Jafar al-Sadiq that: ...
He whose rights have been taken away and who is denied (HAZRAT MAHDI (AS))
WILL WALK AMONG THEM,MOVE THROUGH THEIR MARKETS AND WALK WHERE THEY WALK.
BUT THEY WILL NOT RECOGNIZE HAZRAZ MAHDI (AS)until Allah gives them leave to recognize him,
just as He did with the Prophet Yusuf (as).
(Sheikh Muhammad bin Ibrahim Nomani, al-Ghaybah al-Nomani, p.189)

what are we doing?
the pillars are becoming rotten so i feel God's going to break it back down to the foundation and leadership will be taken away
then we're gonna go all the way back and build it back with tears and find leaders that will judge by the Quran and sunnah rather than their desires.
when all we have to do is argue on a level plain and not talk about these sects, when are we all gonna say we don't know what these sects are and say i am a muslim are you? then lets straighten some points out.

And to the brother who said:

i do agree that the media pushes in a certain direction, if this is intentional, unintentional, planning/strategy or paranoia..ultimately we believe in a god.
its a matter of who you attribute power to? the media, the devil, shaikhs and mosque leaders.

yes - it is a very old conspiracy:

3. We rehearse to thee some of the story of Moses and Pharaoh in Truth, for people who believe.
4. Truly Pharaoh elated himself in the land and broke up its people into sections, depressing a small group among them: their sons he slew, but he kept alive their females: for he was indeed a maker of mischief.
5. And We wished to be Gracious to those who were being depressed in the land, to make them leaders (in Faith) and make them heirs,
6. To establish a firm place for them in the land, and to show Pharaoh, Haman, and their hosts, at their hands, the very things against which they were taking precautions.
Quran 28:3-6


and isn't UAE the place that brought in blackwater war criminal erik prince before all these mercenaries began destabilising the middle east?

Volume 9, Book 88, Number 197:

Narrated 'Abdullah:

The Prophet, said,
"Abusing a Muslim is Fusuq (evil doing)
and killing him is Kufr (disbelief)."

how can we say these leaders are rightly guided and the ones in iran aren't - without looking at the facts and impartially finding the faults of all while searching our own souls, it's that group mentality.
the governments of saudi arabia, uae, egypt, tunisia, morocco, qatar, kuwait - are all guilty of kufr if you judge by that above hadith.
musharraf and karzai? your guess is as good as mine.

while the government of Iran are guilty of fusooq for their foolish words about the companions, and their practice of innovations,
but still Muslim since they still vehemently oppose the occupiers of Muslim lands and murderers of muslims more than any other government in the region.
how can we say we are ok with these kuffar governments and say we will not fight alongside the only government which opposes the open enemies of Islam?
i do not deny that i see a lot among those who claim to be "shia" which i shake my head at, a lot, but i see grave worship when i go past shrines in bangladesh, from some among the people who claim to be sunni, they even get police protection from "extremists". some even say the Prophet (pbuh) was not a man like us but was made from light, despite the Quran clearly telling the Prophet to say: i am but a man like you, but it has been revealed to me that your God is One God.

may God guide all of us.
i'll go the way imam muhammad ibn abdul wahhab did, and say that even the madhaahib do not have a monopoly on truth.

peace be to those who follow the guidance.

[Eric H]

Greetings and peace be with you all,

my opinion is that you are sincere,

when two sincere people argue over their beliefs, then they are both right.

so i will try to correct your opinion on that point:

And there lays the problem, we strive to change others, when the only person we can change is ourselves. We are either a part of the solution, or we are a part of the problem.

We are all created by the same God, and the same God hears all our prayers, despite all our differences. We should pray for each other that we might all achieve salvation despite all our differences.

In the spirit of praying for a greater tolerance, understanding and friendship between all people.

Eric

[Abz2000]

brother eric, thank you for your kind opinion, the problem is not correcting a brother's opinion by telling him a fact when he may have mistakenly supposed a historical event to have been something else, it's like if you say 2+2=5 and i offer to give you the correct answer, it's not a problem, it's the duty of any muslim.

and your comment regarding FUNDAMENTAL differences sounds nice, but doesn't hold in faith, there always ends up a clash, people can unite strategically or on common goals or for the sake of human brotherhood or for hearing each other, but muslims know that out of all the lines drawn in the sand, only one is right. and it's our job to continue to strive to find that one, and to try to guide others to that light,

the person who wrote paul's section of the bible also doesn't accept major differences as the same thing either way:

For it hath been declared unto me of you, my brethren, by them which are of the house of Chloe,
that there are contentions among you.
12Now this I say,
that every one of you saith,
I am of Paul;
and I of Apollos;
and I of Cephas;
and I of Christ.
13Is Christ divided?
Corinthians 1:11-12

2 corinthians 12
For I fear, lest, when I come, I shall not find you such as I would, and that I shall be found unto you such as ye would not:
lest there be debates, envyings, wraths, strifes, backbitings, whisperings, swellings, tumults:
And lest, when I come again, my God will humble me among you,
and that I shall bewail many which have sinned already,
and have not repented of the uncleanness and fornication and lasciviousness which they have committed.
....I told you before, and foretell you, as if I were present, the second time; and being absent now I write to them which heretofore have sinned, and to all other, that, if I come again, I will not spare: 3Since ye seek a proof of Christ speaking in me.......



i'll add one last comment for all to think about - from the near past - as i prefer to share info in a positive way without it turning into something negative and i see this turning into an emotionally charged debate:

it was what someone said when the nazi's were coming after one group at a time:

Men like me, who were, are the greater offenders, not because we knew better (that would be too much to say)
but because we sensed better.
Pastor Niemöller spoke for the thousands and thousands of men like me when he spoke (too modestly of himself) and said that,
when the Nazis attacked the Communists, he was a little uneasy, but, after all, he was not a Communist,
and so he did nothing; and then they attacked the Socialists, and he was a little uneasier, but, still, he was not a Socialist,
and he did nothing;
and then the schools,
the press,
the Jews,
and so on,
and he was always uneasier,
but still he did nothing.
And then they attacked the Church, and he was a Churchman, and he did something—but then it was too late."



"Yes," I said.
"You see," my colleague went on, "one doesn’t see exactly where or how to move. Believe me, this is true.
Each act, each occasion, is worse than the last, but only a little worse.
You wait for the next and the next.
You wait for one great shocking occasion, thinking that others, when such a shock comes, will join with you in resisting somehow.
You don’t want to act, or even talk, alone; you don’t want to ‘go out of your way to make trouble.’
Why not?—Well, you are not in the habit of doing it.
And it is not just fear, fear of standing alone, that restrains you;
it is also genuine uncertainty.


I'M MORE CONCERNED ABOUT THIS AT THE MOMENT:

Annuit Cœptis (which encircles an illuminated left eye)
is translated by the U.S. State Department, The U.S. Mint,^[7] and the U.S. Treasury^[8] as
"He (God) has favored our undertakings." (brackets in original)

Ibn 'Omar said, "The Prophet mentioned the Dajjal (Deceiver) to the people.

He said,
"Almighty God is not one-eyed,
but the Dajjal is blind in his right eye,
and his eye is like a bulging grape.'" (Sahih Muslim)

[Middle English, from Old French seculer,
from Late Latin saecul

ris,
from Latin, of an age, from saeculum, generation, age.]

Secularity (adjective form secular)
is the state of being separate from religion.
Secular and secularity derive from the Latin word saecularis meaning of a generation, belonging to an age.

NOVUS ORDO SECLORUM - IN BOLD LETTERS
NEW ORDER OF THE AGES

Anas ibn Malik said, "The Prophet said,
'there has never been a Prophet
who did not warn his people
against that one-eyed liar.
verily he is one-eyed
and your Lord is not one-eyed.
On his forehead will be written the letters
Kaf, Fa, Ra (Kafir).'"
(Muslim, Bukhari)

Kafir (Arabic: كافر kāfir; plural كفّارkuffār)
is a term used in a Islamic doctrinal sense,
usually translated as "unbeliever" or "disbeliever", or sometimes "infidel".
The term refers to a person
who rejects God
or who
hides, denies, or "covers" the truth.

• Ali was reported to have said:

His right eye will be punctured,
and his left eye would be
raised
to his forehead
and will be
sparkling like a star.
Only the believers will be able to read
the word ‘Kufr’ [disbelief],
inscribed in bold letters,
on his forehead.

Central Administrative Office:
Church of Satan, P.O. Box 499, Radio City Station, New York, NY 10101-0499
USA


The Cloven Hoof:
Magistra Blanche Barton, P.O. Box 210666, Chula Vista, CA 91921-0666
USA

[Eric H]

Greetings and peace be with you brother abz2000;

Thanks for your thoughtful reply, and how we each sense that something better could exist. Your example of complacency during the Nazi uprising was very good, and we should learn from history, we have to do something.

We have experienced rioting in the UK, there is a feeling of unrest in this country, how do we search for a solution. Do the Sunni band together, the Shi’a group together separately, then the Christians, Hindu, etc, do we all look after own kind.

We all know it makes sense to help each other, but something within human nature urges us to only support people the same as us.

What stops Sunni, Shi’a, Christians, Hindu working together towards peace on Earth.

In the spirit of praying for peace in our time

Eric

[Futuwwa]

I think what the OP was getting at is that it's time we stop hating each other based on a few differing beliefs. Bottom line is that Shias are still Muslim. (albeit very misguided Muslims.)

This.

Accusing someone of kufr is a very serious matter. Thinking well of the sahaba is not a defining requirement of Islam. We are commanded to be one ummah. There is no practical reason why we can't leave judgement over our theological differences to the best of judges.

[Abz2000]

this is the kind of stuff i like:

[Abz2000]

look at it like this - and you'll see what i'm saying:

In April 2004 the resistance went through a qualitative change, becoming for the first time a national popular uprising. The countdown started with the closing of a newspaper close to Muqtada al-Sadr and the arrest of a senior aide for the murder of a rival cleric. Sadr’s supporters mobilised across Iraq, and members of his Mahdi Army seized government buildings in several southern governorates. US officials’ timing of their move against Sadr was disastrous. On 31 March four American mercenaries were killed by a crowd in Fallujah. The US army demanded the city hand over those responsible. The local council refused. The next day troops stormed into the town, but the resistance held its ground. The siege of Fallujah had begun.
The political impact of US forces fighting a combined Shia and Sunni insurgency was immense.

Solidarity demonstrations across Iraq clashed repeatedly with troops and local police.

In Baghdad tens of thousands of Sunnis and Shias filled the Sunni Umm al-Qura’ mosque for joint prayers

and on 9 April 2004 over 200,000 demonstrated in Baghdad in the biggest protest for a generation.

Iraqis responded to Fallujah’s appeals for medical supplies, blood and money. Across the country armed men, most of whom were local lads, attacked coalition troops with stones and guns.

The Washington Post concluded that the occupation had spent all moral and political credit with ordinary Iraqis:

The Sunni-Shia divide, already narrower in Iraq that in some parts of the Arab world,
is by all accounts shrinking each day that Iraqis agree their most immediate problem is the occupation.
Many here say that, whatever the value there was in deposing Saddam Hussein, Americans have exhausted their goodwill.

The final blow to the American onslaught on Fallujah came when crowds confronted the 650-man 2nd battalion of the Iraqi Army heading towards Fallujah from their base north of Baghdad. Iraqis begged the troops not to join the attack. The soldiers, many of whom were Shias, were stunned. At a decisive moment shots were fired, wounding several soldiers. The battalion turned back to its base while preparations were made to airlift the troops into battle, but it was too late, the popular feeling had penetrated the ranks of the troops and they refused orders-the encounter with the crowds had stiffened their opposition to the mission.

here's some links:

http://www.maskofzion.com/2010/11/baghdad-cathedral-massacre-zionist.html

http://warisacrime.org/content/iraqi-christians


True, the situation in Iraq was difficult prior to the war. Having visited the country in 1999, I can testify to this. But the hardship suffered by many Iraqis, especially political dissidents, was in some way typically characteristic of authoritarian and dictatorial regimes.
Iraq could, at that time, be easily contrasted with other countries living under similar hardships. But what has happened since the war can barely be compared to any other country or any other wars since World War II. Even putting aside the devastating death toll, the sheer scale of internal displacement and forced emigration is terrifying. This is a nation that had more or less maintained a consistent level of demographic cohesion for many generations. It was this cohesion that made Iraq what it was.
Iraqi Christian communities had coexisted alongside their Muslim neighbors for hundreds of years. The churches of the two main Christian groups, the Assyrians and Chaldeans, date back to A.D. 33 and 34 respectively. A recent editorial in an Arab newspaper was titled "Arab Christians should feel at home."
As moving as the article was, the fact is, the fact remains that Arab Christians should not have to feel at home — they already are at home. Their roots dates back to the days of Jesus Christ, and since then they have maintained a unique identity and proud history under the most difficult of circumstances.
The plight of Iraqi Christians seems very similar to that of Palestinian Christians, whose numbers have plummeted and continue to fall following the Israeli occupation of Jerusalem, the West Bank and Gaza in 1967. The Palestinian Christian diaspora was a direct outcome of the Israeli occupation and the original takeover of historic Palestine in 1948. The Israeli government sees no difference between a Palestinian Christian and a Muslim.


But none of this was deemed worthy of discussion in much of the Western media, perhaps because it risked hurting the sensibility of the Israeli occupier. The troubling news coming from Iraq can now be manipulated by presenting the suffering of Christians as an offshoot of a larger conflict between Islamic militants and Christians communities in Iraq.


The fact is that Iraqi society has long been known for its tolerance and acceptance of minorities. There were days when no one used such references as Shiite, Sunni and Christians; there one Iraq and one Iraqi people. This has completely changed, for part of the strategy following the invasion of Iraq was to emphasize and manipulate the ethnic and religious demarcation of the country, creating insurmountable divides. Without a centralized power to guide and channel the collective responses of the Iraqi people, all hell broke loose. Masked men with convenient militant names but no identities disappeared as quickly as they popped up to wreak havoc in the country. The communal trust that held together the fabric of the Iraqi society during the hardest of times dissolved. Utter chaos and mistrust took over, and the rest is history.

read more here:
http://search.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-b...0101111rb.html

[Maryan0]

This.

Accusing someone of kufr is a very serious matter. Thinking well of the sahaba is not a defining requirement of Islam. We are commanded to be one ummah. There is no practical reason why we can't leave judgement over our theological differences to the best of judges.

When the hypocrites of Madinah were spreading lies about Aisha Allah absolved her in the Quran ( "Allah wishes that you should never repeat the like of it again if you are believers." (24:18))and the Prophet pbuh ordered the people who were doing so to be punished. Asking for the curse of Allah to be upon her is not Islamic in any way shape or form and is unacceptable. I personally cannot look past it.
the people of Oman who follow the ibadi school of thought have an unfavourable opinion of the Sahaba Uthman's time of rule, they do not curse him. There's a difference.

It was narrated on the authority of Ibn Abbas, that the Prophet (pbuh) said: "May Allah (swt)'s curse be on those who insult my companions, and may the curses of all mankind and the angels be on them too."
Like others have mentioned we can get along as people or unite against a common enemy but unite as Muslims? I don't think so. Particularly when they slander the best of Muslims. Like any of us can compare to the sahaba and all they've done.
Prophet (s.a.w)said, "Do not abuse my Companions, for if any of you were to spend gold equal to (mountain of) Uhud in charity, it would not equal a handful of one of them or even half of that" [al-Bukharee, Muslim]."
I will not accuse them of kufr but those who insult and curse the sahaba are severely misguided.
Salam

[GuestFellow]

This.

Accusing someone of kufr is a very serious matter. Thinking well of the sahaba is not a defining requirement of Islam. We are commanded to be one ummah. There is no practical reason why we can't leave judgement over our theological differences to the best of judges.

Salaam,

The main problem is that some Shia's insult the Sahaba.

[ardianto]

:sl:

Visit Indonesia and ask lay Muslims who you meet "are you sunni or shia ?". Don't be surprised if almost all of them ask instead "what it sunni ? what is shia ?".

Indonesia is the country that has the biggest number of sunni Muslims, but ulama do not feel they need to inform the Muslim people that they are sunni. As long as Indonesian Muslim people realize they are Muslim who obligate to follow sunnah, it's enough.

But although Muslims in Indonesia are sunni, it doesn't means shia people are not exist here. They are exist in many places as minority although they do not call themselves shia. Some of public figures in Indonesia are shia. Even one of my uncle is shia. Me and my family did not know about it until a face veiled salafi sister rejected his marriage proposal. But never mind, we still regard him as a Muslim.

Shia in Indonesia can do their activities freely. I can monitor their events in Islamic event column in my newspaper. Same column which events from sunni organizations are informed.

Unity ?. We are in Indonesia have done this since long time ago.

[YaAqsa]

Salaam,

The main problem is that some Shia's insult the Sahaba.

Leave this to Allah insha'Allah, they still are Muslim according to both Qur'an and Sunnah

[GuestFellow]

Leave this to Allah insha'Allah, they still are Muslim according to both Qur'an and Sunnah

:sl:

Some scholars disagree and claim Shia's are kaffirs, though I personally will not pass such judgement.

[YaAqsa]

:sl:

Some scholars disagree and claim Shia's are kaffirs, though I personally will not pass such judgement.

Unfortunately they have no proof from Qur'an or Hadith, or else the matter would have been settled 1300 years ago.

[FS123]

that's where i'll say you haven't read my posts properly,
when you say "we can agree to disagree", "and each other"
you are imagining there are two groups - two sects,

You are giving lengthy articles but fail to explain what you want exactly? You want unity then what kind of unity? Agreeing to disagree is forming of unity where there are disagreements of beliefs or politics and living peacefully. If that's not what you want then what you want exactly? Giving lengthy videos and long text that doesn't explain your point is not helping.

[FS123]

This.

Accusing someone of kufr is a very serious matter. Thinking well of the sahaba is not a defining requirement of Islam. We are commanded to be one ummah. There is no practical reason why we can't leave judgement over our theological differences to the best of judges.

Yea there are minority of sunni that call them kafr, so there are minority of shia that call sunni kafr. They can insult the sahaba all the want, we can't restrict their requirement of belief. That is not the issue here, but their beliefs have lot of politics which causes the hatred of sunni. You won't understand it until you go among them and you see a lot of hatred of sunnis in general, which I did when I was trying to learn about different sects. On the sunni side i didn't see that much hatred, most sunni didn't even know much about the shia.

Read the last part of my post: http://www.islamicboard.com/importan...ml#post1461806

[Abz2000]

what i'm saying is that we are magnifying these differences when much bigger issues face us, they are among the closest to us in comparison to the foreign invaders - yet the invaders laugh while they have us seeking their help to fight each other - as could be seen with saddam and the iraninans and the muqtadar lot.
the iranian government has not invited them to build military bases all over their land despite the majority of those who claim to be on the sunnah doing so, do you believe they are on the sunnah? nah - it's just a label - sort of like a brand name which allows us to ignore the facts on the ground and what major issues face us.

aren't we straining at a gnat while swallowing a camel?

[Salahudeen]

It is not only the insulting of the companions, it's also the doctrine of the 11 or 12 imams can't remember the number, but as I remember they give these imams attributes of Allah which is what??

[Salahudeen]

I understand what some are saying, that the west are utilizing the divide and conquer tactic, but at the same time they do have devient believes, and when attempting to unite with such people there all ways exists the danger that they will infect us with those deviant beliefs that they possess and be a fitna for us. For example in college I had a shia friend and he was all ways trying to convert me to shia'ism, he was all ways going on about the imams and how there was a big cover up after the prophet (saw) died and I'm not going to lie, he did sow the seed of doubt within my heart, and I was left thinking why did I take this shia as a companion of mine.

He did it sneakly, first we never talked about religion, I had the whole lets unite attitude, and we never discussed matters of deen, then one day I mentioned Umar RA and how I'd love to be like him, and he replied with "why the hell would you wanna be like that munafiq" and we got into an argument, and after that day he was all ways trying to convert me to shia'ism and infect me with his beliefs. So how do we achieve this unity when they possess a hatred in their heart for people that we love greatly, I don't understand how such a thing can be achieved.

Understandably not all shia hate the companions but shouldn't the one's who don't curse the companions disassociate themselves from the term shia, when it's known that some amongst the shia curse the companions why would anyone want to label/associate themselves with that.

[FS123]

Understandably not all shia hate the companions but shouldn't the one's who don't curse the companions disassociate themselves from the term shia, when it's known that some amongst the shia curse the companions why would anyone want to label/associate themselves with that.

There are, but are a minority among shia. I heard zayedis don't do this and they respect all the rightly guided caliphs because Ali (ra) respected them too.

[Salahudeen]

Perhaps a more appropriate thread title would have been, "How do we achieve unity in spite of the major differences in creed" and people could post ideas as to how we resolve our differences.

[FS123]

what i'm saying is that we are magnifying these differences when much bigger issues face us, they are among the closest to us in comparison to the foreign invaders - yet the invaders laugh while they have us seeking their help to fight each other - as could be seen with saddam and the iraninans and the muqtadar lot.
the iranian government has not invited them to build military bases all over their land despite the majority of those who claim to be on the sunnah doing so, do you believe they are on the sunnah? nah - it's just a label - sort of like a brand name which allows us to ignore the facts on the ground and what major issues face us.

aren't we straining at a gnat while swallowing a camel?

Where did I say we can't make treaty or peace with them? I'm talking about trusting them. And what if shia shoot us first, in between, or right after? They are already doing in Syria and Iran. If they had more power wouldn't do any less than the foreign invaders you are talking about. But we should make peace with them because that is the model of the prophet (pbuh) and Allah likes those who strive for peace, that is my only reason, nothing more and nothing less.

Second, and most important, victory is in the hands of Allah and if you read the Quran there are so many examples where Allah supported the righteous small group who had no chance of winning against the large number of opposition they were facing. So the most important thing is righteousness.

[FS123]

Perhaps a more appropriate thread title would have been, "How do we achieve unity in spite of the major differences in creed" and people could post ideas as to how we resolve our differences.

First you have to define what unity means. If it means trusting them, then not a good idea. Trust somebody and then they shoot you in the back. If it is making peace, then there are Prophetic (pbuh) models to with mutual understanding and treaties. We are already trying to achieve peace in so many place. Malaysia, there are peaceful relationships not just with shia or other sects but also other religions. UAE is similar, but with the threat from Iran, dissent is growing.

[karu-89]

This.

Accusing someone of kufr is a very serious matter. Thinking well of the sahaba is not a defining requirement of Islam. We are commanded to be one ummah. There is no practical reason why we can't leave judgement over our theological differences to the best of judges.

well anybody who declares Sahaba Karam RA and Umhat Al Momineen (Mothers of Believers) kafir is not a muslim and anybody who says that Quran has been changed and this is not the real Quran is not a muslim , and there are many other extreme beliefs of shias which make them kafir ok , we dont accuse anyone of being kafir unless there is a sound proof and in shias case there are many proofs ok so open your eyes
001. Neither we accept such Lord nor do we accept the Prophet of such Lord whose Caliph is Abu-Bakr (r.a) (Na'uzubillah). [Anwaar-ul-Na'umania, Vol#2, Pg#278 - Published Iran]




002. None of the Prophets (a.s) had been bestowed with the Prophet Hood until He declared His belief in the fallacy character of ALLAH (Na'uzubillah). [Usool-ul-Kaafi, Vol#1, Pg#265 - Published Iran]

[Abz2000]

The UAE government worrying about Shia is laughable, the prophet pbuh would have slaughtered Erik prince if he stepped foot in madina, the only thing that could have saved him is Shahadah,
The UAE government give him a multi-billion dollar contract to train mercenaries, I'm looking at his situation From a strategic sense, and ignoring the doctrinal disputes ( which is a lot better than the UAE ignoring those who killed millions of Muslims, abused the prophet pbuh and consider him an impostor, used he Quran as toilet paper, and much more), rather the UAE government is seeking the help of those people against iran.
That is true diseased hearts.

[Abz2000]

When muawiyyah and ali were having their issues, the king of ghassan is reported to have written him a letter saying I have see how ali is wrong etc, I can help,
Muawiyyah is reported to have replied, yes I am having a small misunderstanding with my brother, but once we've settled it, we're both going to deal with you.

That is the fiqh of dignity,
Not grovelling and bowing and prostrating to obama and bush

[FS123]

The UAE government worrying about Shia is laughable, the prophet pbuh would have slaughtered Erik prince if he stepped foot in madina, the only thing that could have saved him is Shahadah,
The UAE government give him a multi-billion dollar contract to train mercenaries, I'm looking at his situation From a strategic sense, and ignoring the doctrinal disputes ( which is a lot better than the UAE ignoring those who killed millions of Muslims, abused the prophet pbuh and consider him an impostor, used he Quran as toilet paper, and much more), rather the UAE government is seeking the help of those people against iran.
That is true diseased hearts.

It is not laughable, Iran has already in occupation of 3 UAE Islands for more than 30 years. Massacres of sunni community in Syria is another. For the fears they are to blame. And for "contract to train mercenaries", yea thats was wrong and a mistake, but it is over anyway. It didn't work out.

the prophet pbuh would have slaughtered Erik prince if he stepped foot in madina

Don't really know, most likely not. Non-muslims stepped and stayed in his mosque he was very hospitable with them; a Jewish lady used to throw trash on him on his way to home, but when she was sick he visited her.

[Abz2000]

the jewish lady was a personal issue and only harmed him, not the believers or the deen - he usually forgave personal issues.

[*Yasmin*]

Twelver Shiaa consider Abu bakir, Ummar and Uthman( Radiya Allahu 3nhum) are kufar.
They consider everyone who doesn’t believe in their imamah (the 12 imams ) as a kafir.

They believe that their Mahdi (the imam number 12) after he appears he will resurrect our mother Aysha(Radiya Allahu 3nha) and will carry out the zina 7ad on her, while it’s clearly stated in the Quran that Allah exculpates her.
and another shii scholar says that Abu bakir and Ummar will be crucified.

Shiaa are even different from us in their Salat and Wudu (ablution).
And even some shiaa scholars believe the Quran was distorted!!!

We are not talking about differences between Shafi'I or Hanbali madhabs; in which "the difference between these schools of thought manifest in minor practical differences, as most Sunni Muslims consider them all fundamentally the same".
"They don't differ on matters of belief ".

However, we are talking about Shiaa, which is something different it's like new creeds! Shiaa innovated in big issues.

I think, if we could unite with shiaa then we would be able to unite with kufar!!!
what is the difference between the muslims and the kufar: tenet.
what is the difference between Sunni and Shiaa: tenet too.

I seriously can't understand what unity you are talking about.
How can we ignore such differences!!!!!!

let say we can ignore (however i strognly believe we can't); do you think Iran/Shiaa muslims care about other muslims country?
do you really believe Iran care about Palestine !!!
MY ANSWER: NO, AND HISTORY SPEAKS HERE.

[Zafran]

salaam

sunni and shia share many fundmental beliefs - In the Quran, in the prophets, in the angels, and in ahlbayet - Both are muslims - its history that splits us apart. Not all shia are the same as well.

On Iran are you serious - Iran is the only country to have the courage to stick up for palestine - non of the other arab/non arab have.

peace

[*Yasmin*]

salaam

sunni and shia share many fundmental beliefs - In the Quran, in the prophets, in the angels, and in ahlbayet - Both are muslims - its history that splits us apart. Not all shia are the same as well.

On Iran are you serious - Iran is the only country to have the courage to stick up for palestine - non of the other arab/non arab have.

peace

w3lekum Assalam

In their words and speeches yeah they sound they are with the Palestinians, this is what they are trying to spread to the world! but the reality is way different.

do you know according to some shiaa they believe that Masjid Al-Aqsa was ascended, in other words the current masjid is not masjid Al-Aqsa.
do you know their scholars believe the Palestinians martyrs are not matryrs ! just the shiaa muslims are matryrs according to them.
I've watched a video recently about shiaa and heard how they curse the Palestinians, they even cursed Sheikh Ahmad Yasin.
THEY SIMPLY HATE US.


just a note: do you know who fought against the Palestinians refugees in Lebanon ? the shiaa Amal movement. and NasruAllah was a memeber in it.


Regarding that because 'sunni and shiaa share many fundamental beliefs so they are both muslims'
I have nothing more to say regarding this issue. I posted articles in the first and second page.(in this thread) if you have time you could read them.


P.S I'm a Palestinian.

[FS123]

On Iran are you serious - Iran is the only country to have the courage to stick up for palestine - non of the other arab/non arab have.

And they are sticking it to other muslims too:

There are various types of persecution practiced against Sunnis, the most continuous and severe of which is the one arising from the theory upon which the Iranian political system is based. Those who do not believe in the Guardianship of the Jurist theory are not allowed to assume any political or governmental position or to be part of the intellectual elite in Iran.
And since the Guardianship of the Jurist theory is a product Shiite thought, it is unlikely that any Sunni embraces it. As a result, since the Islamic Revolution, there has been an obstacle in the way of the integration of the Sunni minority in the Iranian society.
Such political persecution is stated explicitly in the constitution of the Islamic Republic, which states that the president must be a Shiite Iranian who believes in the Guardianship of the Jurist theory. Consequently, throughout the past 30 years, Iran has witnessed neither a Sunni candidate running for president, nor a single Sunni minister. Moreover, no Sunni has been appointed as a governor of any of the governorates with Sunni majorities.
Thus, the persecution of Sunnis in Iran has been associated with the articles of the constitution.
The persecution of the Sunni minority in Iran can be found at the heart of Shiite rituals; Sunnis are weekly humiliated during what is known as Shiite prayers that are recited in collective rituals. These prayers contain curses of both contemporary and ancient Sunnis. Such explicit expression of hatred has put the Sunni minority in Iran in an inferior status.
Sunnis constitute around 20 percent of Iran’s 70 million residents, and they belong to different ethnic groups, such as Kurds, Balushis, Turkemans, Arabs, and Talishis.
Iran’s Sunni minority has faced systematic oppression; its leaders, such Ahmed Mufti Zadeh and Sheikh Ali Dahwary, were jailed and assassinated. Also, the authorities have demolished a number of Sunni mosques as a form of collective punishment.
Sunni religious schools do not receive an official recognition, local TV stations in governorates with Sunni majorities are forced to air Shiite missionary programs, and Sunni azan (call for prayer) is not allowed to be made.

http://khalid622.blogspot.com/2009/0...n-and-who.html

[Maryan0]

salaam

sunni and shia share many fundmental beliefs - In the Quran, in the prophets, in the angels, and in ahlbayet - Both are muslims - its history that splits us apart. Not all shia are the same as well.

On Iran are you serious - Iran is the only country to have the courage to stick up for palestine - non of the other arab/non arab have.

peace

Turkey has also stepped up. Saddam for all his faults also did. I admire Ahmadinjad for his strong rhetoric against western propaganda but that's about it.
To add to that Ahmadinjad hasnt had much to say to the massacre going in Syria by Al Assad neither does Nasrallah who had so much to say about the Shia's under sunni rule in Bahrain which is fair enough since they are Shia's and will look out for their own interests like any other group...
Salam

[GuestFellow]

On Iran are you serious - Iran is the only country to have the courage to stick up for palestine - non of the other arab/non arab have.

Asslamu Aliakum

Iran supports the Palestinians because it does not have many allies in the region and to distract its own people from the country's domestic problems like unemployment.

[Muhaba]

There are some basic things that the shias need to change in themselves. nobody is perfect and even in sunnis there are those who do grave mistakes like asking duas from graves etc which amounts to shirk. Only Allah can help a person in a supernatural way. for example, it isn't shirk to ask a person (face to face) to help you with something but if the person is all the way on the other side of the earth or if he is dead and you are calling out to him, then that is shirk and will not be forgiven unless you repent and mend your ways. We say in Surah Al-Fatiha, iyaka na'abodo wa iyaka nastaeen (we worship You (oh Allah) and We seek Your help) so we can't ask anyone else to help us in supernatural way.

One thing that the shias have done is making additions to the adhan (Azan). they have added that Ali (R) is the friend of Allah, etc. but if you analyze the rest of the Adhan you will see that everything in it has been stated in the Quran, that is, proven by the Quran. the statements "There is no God but Allah," "Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah" are in the Quran. but nowhere in the Quran does it say that Ali (R) is the friend of Allah, etc. Also, the other statements are part of faith so those who don't believe that Allah is the only one God is a kafir and those who believe that the Prophet Muhammad (SAW) is a messenger of Allah is also a kafir, however not believing that Ali (R) is the friend of Allah doesn't make a person kafir so statements about Ali have no place in the Azan or shahada. those who believe otherwise should present where in the Quran these statements have been proven. where does it say in the Quran that Ali is the friend of Allah or that belief in this is a part of faith. nowhere.

another thing is the bad things that the shais say about the sahaba especially Aisha and Abu Bakr and Umar (R) (May Allah be pleased with them). It is wrong to say anything bad about the companions of the Prophet (SAW). Furthermore, Aisha was the mother of the believers and part of ahl bait. The shias claim that ahl bait includes Ali because the masculine pronoun was used for ahl bait in the Quran. they use this to include Ali, Fatima, Hasan and Hussain in the Ahl Bait and take out the wives of the Prophet (SAW). however this is wrong because the ahl-bait includes the wives of the Prophet (SAW) mainly. in a place in the Quran the word ahl-bait is used for the wife of Ibrahim AS. And to my knowledge the reason the masculine pronoun was used for ahl-bait was because the word ahl is masculine.

[Abz2000]

the muslim cities were falling one by one and the only thing you saw when you walked into the mosques in andalus on friday was the imams talking about fiqhi issues which had nothing to do with the situation.

sometimes - even sworn enemies mutually agree to band together to defend themselves and settle their own disputes later.

amazing..............................

[YaAqsa]

A lot of these recent posts are the antithesis of Unity.

Please be more careful in our speech inshallah. There is a lot of propaganda going around so just saying random things is made up usually and not true in reality.

[YaAqsa]

The Shi'a narrations that are considered authentic are not cursing people and making takfir and causing disunity, but they are inspiring Haqq and Imaan, we should focus on this for Unity instead of looking at propaganda that is most likely invented by the enemies of Islam to cause disunity and fitnah.

See the following from a Shi'a source I read:

Imam al-Sadiq (AS) narrates that it is written in The Torah:

“O’Son of Man, if you empty yourself, i.e. disengage yourself from all other pre-occupations to make yourself available for My worship, I will fill your heart with richness and I will not abandon you to what you seek and long for. And it will be upon Me to close the door of poverty upon you and to fill your heart with awe for Me.

And if you don’t empty yourself for My worship, I will fill your heart with preoccupation with the world. I will not close upon you the door of poverty and will abandon you to what you seek.”

(al-Kulayni (RA), Usul al-Kafi,2, "Kitab al-'Iman wa1-Kufr', "Bab al-‘Ibadah", Tradition number 1)

[Insecured soul]

People who deviate on fix principle of sharia will definately will be punished in aakhirah insha allah, people who changes kalima and distort other islamic ehkaam are very dangerous and leading to hellfire. As a humanity we are supposed to show affections to everyone but there can never be real peace with them and allah knows best

salaam

[Zafran]

Salaam

These are replies to many posts

On Turkey - It used to be a close ally of Isreal - only recently has it changed its tone and thats not because of the palestinains but because its own citizens were killed during the convey. Also Erdogans got courage.
On Syria - its unfair picking on Iran - what about Egypt, saudi arabia (the strongest salafi ally of the US and has also called the sucide bombings by palestinians wrong) pakistan, Jordon, indonesia etc etc etc. Iran is doing far more then all the rest.

Furthermore Iran is one of the most isolated countries in the mid east because of its anti US stance - non of the other muslim majorty countries are as isolated as Iran - If Iran calls out against syria its closest ally it will be even more Isolated.

[*Yasmin*]

A lot of these recent posts are the antithesis of Unity.

Please be more careful in our speech inshallah. There is a lot of propaganda going around so just saying random things is made up usually and not true in reality.

we are not making up things and we are not saying random things. so please be more careful in your speech in sha' Allah.

[FS123]

Salaam

These are replies to many posts

On Turkey - It used to be a close ally of Isreal - only recently has it changed its tone and thats not because of the palestinains but because its own citizens were killed during the convey. Also Erdogans got courage.
On Syria - its unfair picking on Iran - what about Egypt, saudi arabia (the strongest salafi ally of the US and has also called the sucide bombings by palestinians wrong) pakistan, Jordon, indonesia etc etc etc. Iran is doing far more then all the rest.

Furthermore Iran is one of the most isolated countries in the mid east because of its anti US stance - non of the other muslim majorty countries are as isolated as Iran - If Iran calls out against syria its closest ally it will be even more Isolated.

Ohhh, so Erdogan is not courage but Ahmadinejad is? At least under Erdogan both shia and sunni can have their mosques, azan; and they are not getting cursed or massacred. I'll take a man who respects basic rights any day over a two-faced loud mouth.

[FS123]

The Shi'a narrations that are considered authentic are not cursing people and making takfir and causing disunity, but they are inspiring Haqq and Imaan, we should focus on this for Unity instead of looking at propaganda that is most likely invented by the enemies of Islam to cause disunity and fitnah.

See the following from a Shi'a source I read:

Imam al-Sadiq (AS) narrates that it is written in The Torah:

“O’Son of Man, if you empty yourself, i.e. disengage yourself from all other pre-occupations to make yourself available for My worship, I will fill your heart with richness and I will not abandon you to what you seek and long for. And it will be upon Me to close the door of poverty upon you and to fill your heart with awe for Me.

And if you don’t empty yourself for My worship, I will fill your heart with preoccupation with the world. I will not close upon you the door of poverty and will abandon you to what you seek.”

(al-Kulayni (RA), Usul al-Kafi,2, "Kitab al-'Iman wa1-Kufr', "Bab al-‘Ibadah", Tradition number 1)

Actions speak louder than words.

[Maryan0]

Salaam

These are replies to many posts

On Turkey - It used to be a close ally of Isreal - only recently has it changed its tone and thats not because of the palestinains but because its own citizens were killed during the convey. Also Erdogans got courage.
On Syria - its unfair picking on Iran - what about Egypt, saudi arabia (the strongest salafi ally of the US and has also called the sucide bombings by palestinians wrong) pakistan, Jordon, indonesia etc etc etc. Iran is doing far more then all the rest.

Furthermore Iran is one of the most isolated countries in the mid east because of its anti US stance - non of the other muslim majorty countries are as isolated as Iran - If Iran calls out against syria its closest ally it will be even more Isolated.

Well in that case it's all politics right and all groups are just looking out for their own interests?
Iran is mentioned because without Iran Shia's would not even be the sizeable minority that they are and I doubt we would even be talking unity if not for Iran and it's population. There are other Shia populations but not as large as Iran.
Salam

[Zafran]

Well in that case it's all politics right and all groups are just looking out for their own interests?
Iran is mentioned because without Iran Shia's would not even be the sizeable minority that they are and I doubt we would even be talking unity if not for Iran and it's population. There are other Shia populations but not as large as Iran.
Salam

Salaam

They are a majority in Bahrain, they are a minority in saudi arabia, 1/3 of pakistan, easily half of Iraq and all of azerbajian - so they are a sizeable minority in the muslim world.

peace

[Zafran]

Ohhh, so Erdogan is not courage but Ahmadinejad is? At least under Erdogan both shia and sunni can have their mosques, azan; and they are not getting cursed or massacred. I'll take a man who respects basic rights any day over a two-faced loud mouth.

salaam

read my post again you've misunderstood it.

peace

[FS123]

Very important message:

[Maryan0]

Salaam

They are a majority in Bahrain, they are a minority in saudi arabia, 1/3 of pakistan, easily half of Iraq and all of azerbajian - so they are a sizeable minority in the muslim world.

peace

:sl:
How big are the populations in those countries? Shia's do exist that wasnt my point it's just that the vast majority of Shia's come from Iran and Iran has a very large population. The Muslims in India numbers wise are very large but they are dwarfed by the hindu's because India has such a large population. I still stand by my point that we wouldnt even by talking unity if not Iran. and i'm not referring to the 60% that live in Iraq vs the 40%sunnis or the tiny island of Bahrain or Azerbaijan. Shia's are the largest minority amongst muslims but even with the 80 million that live in Iran and the other countries you mentioned they are still fairly tiny when we look at the demographics of the Muslim world and would be even more so if Iran wasnt in the picture.
Salam

[FS123]

salaam

read my post again you've misunderstood it.

peace

My apologies, I stand corrected.

[Eric H]

Greetings and peace be with you all,

If we are to unite for some kind of strategic military reason, then this is a secular form of unity.

If we are to unite for any kind of monetary advantage, then this is a form of secular unity.

If we are to unite only with the people who believe the same as we do, then this is also a kind of secular unity, aethists also seem to desire this unity.

If we are to unite by seeking justice for all people despite our differences, if we are to compete in doing good deeds, and helping others, then I believe this is a unity of God.

The same God created all people, and hears all our prayers dispite all our differences, and you will never look into the eyes of anyone who does not matter to God.

In the spirit of praying for justice for the poor the marginalised and the oppressed.

Eric

[Zafran]

Greetings and peace be with you all,

If we are to unite for some kind of strategic military reason, then this is a secular form of unity.

If we are to unite for any kind of monetary advantage, then this is a form of secular unity.

If we are to unite only with the people who believe the same as we do, then this is also a kind of secular unity, aethists also seem to desire this unity.

If we are to unite by seeking justice for all people despite our differences, if we are to compete in doing good deeds, and helping others, then I believe this is a unity of God.

The same God created all people, and hears all our prayers dispite all our differences, and you will never look into the eyes of anyone who does not matter to God.

In the spirit of praying for justice for the poor the marginalised and the oppressed.

Eric

salaam

ameen to that

peace.

[Futuwwa]

If we are to unite by seeking justice for all people despite our differences, if we are to compete in doing good deeds, and helping others, then I believe this is a unity of God.

This is a kind of unity I can sign up for. With a bayonet.

[Futuwwa]

When the hypocrites of Madinah were spreading lies about Aisha Allah absolved her in the Quran ( "Allah wishes that you should never repeat the like of it again if you are believers." (24:18))and the Prophet pbuh ordered the people who were doing so to be punished. Asking for the curse of Allah to be upon her is not Islamic in any way shape or form and is unacceptable. I personally cannot look past it.
the people of Oman who follow the ibadi school of thought have an unfavourable opinion of the Sahaba Uthman's time of rule, they do not curse him. There's a difference.

It was narrated on the authority of Ibn Abbas, that the Prophet (pbuh) said: "May Allah (swt)'s curse be on those who insult my companions, and may the curses of all mankind and the angels be on them too."
Like others have mentioned we can get along as people or unite against a common enemy but unite as Muslims? I don't think so. Particularly when they slander the best of Muslims. Like any of us can compare to the sahaba and all they've done.
Prophet (s.a.w)said, "Do not abuse my Companions, for if any of you were to spend gold equal to (mountain of) Uhud in charity, it would not equal a handful of one of them or even half of that" [al-Bukharee, Muslim]."
I will not accuse them of kufr but those who insult and curse the sahaba are severely misguided.
Salam

Then they are severely misguided, and will answer for their curses on the day of judgement. But they are still Muslims. Last time I checked, there was no part about compulsory sahaba fandom in the shahada.

The Shia are welcome to pray together with me, though I will expect them to keep their slander to themselves.

[Salahudeen]

Then they are severely misguided, and will answer for their curses on the day of judgement. But they are still Muslims. Last time I checked, there was no part about compulsory sahaba fandom in the shahada.

The Shia are welcome to pray together with me, though I will expect them to keep their slander to themselves.

If they have the belief that Ayesha was an adulteress when verses of the Qur'an clear her are they really still Muslims since they reject these verses and don't believe in them?

[FS123]

Then they are severely misguided, and will answer for their curses on the day of judgement. But they are still Muslims. Last time I checked, there was no part about compulsory sahaba fandom in the shahada.

The Shia are welcome to pray together with me, though I will expect them to keep their slander to themselves.

That is not the issue, the issue is can you trust them or they will stab in the back. And is this unity is for what? I agree with Br Eric.

[Eric H]

Greetings and peace be with you all,

A few hundred years ago, and not far from where I live, Christians were killing each other for not having the right beliefs. A hundred years ago we just resorted to cursing each other. Now it is a great blessing that we can pray together, we can pray for each other and the needs of the world.

Unity has to start with prayer, and for a number of years Christians from different denominations have been meeting for a monthly prayer breakfast, and I have just been to one this morning. Our ministers from different denominations meet together monthly.

Some tasks are too big for any one church to do on their own, and I find it a great blessing when Christians can work and pray together.

I would love to see more barriers come down, I would love to pray with and pray for non- Christians. Somehow the same God hears all our prayers, each and every one of us is very special to God.

In the spirit of praying for peace in our time

Eric

[Futuwwa]

If they have the belief that Ayesha was an adulteress when verses of the Qur'an clear her are they really still Muslims since they reject these verses and don't believe in them?

Considering the fact that they acknowledge the same Quran as we do, my guess is that they either don't actually believe she committed adultery in that incident, or have an explanation for those verses that you or I haven't heard about. In neither case would they actually reject any verses, just reject your interpretation of what those verses mean.

[Futuwwa]

That is not the issue, the issue is can you trust them or they will stab in the back.

How can I trust Sunnis? Maybe they will stab me in the back too?

I don't base human relations on the presumption that belonging to a particular group, in itself, makes people inherently evil.

[FS123]

How can I trust Sunnis? Maybe they will stab me in the back too?

I don't base human relations on the presumption that belonging to a particular group, in itself, makes people inherently evil.

Neither do I. It is because of their views. It is like saying Palestinians don't trust Zionist because they belong to a particular group. But is that the reason?

I don't trust every sunni, but here we are talking in context of military support. Neither I consider them evil. I deal with both in business muslims and non-muslims, I don't trust them with my life but I deal with them justly and kindly. Not trusting them doesn't translate to considering them evil or not treating them justly and kindly. Not trusting and dealing justly and kindly are separate things.

Issue is not belonging to a different group but it is their behavior and views. There are sufis, a different group and not my cup of tea, but I found them nice. You are worried about few here calling them kafir, but large number of them believe sunni to be fasiq, munafiq, and sometimes even kaffir for not following Imam Ali (according to their belief because Allah appointed him Imam after Prophet(pbuh)). You will not know this until you spend some considerable time with them. Not everyone is like that, I met few nice shias, but majority had hateful views for the sunnis. At that time I wasn't a sunni, so maybe they were more open to me. This is not about belonging to a different group. We trust them and they double cross and start to oppress, but then it will be too late.

This doesn't mean we can't treat them kindly and justly, but when it comes to trust it is entirely different issue.

Watch this video:

Ethnic and religious minorities make up nearly half of the Iranian population. Discontent among various minority groups has risen sharply over the past three years. Since Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad came to power in August 2005, the government has promoted the country’s majority Persian and Shi’a Muslim identity forcefully. In contravention to formal guarantees in the Iranian constitution and international commitments, Iran continued a crackdown on ethnic and religious minorities in 2007 through police repression, discrimination in education, and state media campaigns. The victims included Baluchis and Turkomans, Kurds and Sunni Muslims. UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon issued a report on human rights in Iran in October 2008 that highlighted the regime’s abuse against women and minorities as well as one issued in the 64th session of 2010.

The document also mentions increasing harassment, intimidation and persecution of political opponents and human rights defenders, forced closure of the Defenders of Human Rights Centre including the arrest of its staff, discrimination and other human rights violations against persons belonging to religious, ethnic, linguistic or other minorities like Arabs, Azeris, Baluchis, Kurds, Christians, Jews, Sufis and Sunni Muslims and their defenders as well as attacks on Baha’is and their faith in state sponsored media, increasing evidence of efforts by Iran to identity, monitor and arbitrarily detain Baha’is, preventing members of the Baha’i Faith from attending university and from sustaining themselves financially, and the continuing detention of seven Baha’i leaders arrested in March and May 2008 for serious charges but without meaningful access to legal representation.

In the post-election protests to the alleged fraud in the presidential elections of 2009, Iran’s security forces arrested over 4,000 people, and in the past year tens of journalists and human rights activists have been imprisoned by the Islamic Republic. Since then many lawyers have also become the target of persecution for their attempts to defend political detainees.

Before, the Sunni community was allowed to hold Eid congregation but now some Shiite extremists using their governing power have banned Sunnis of Tehran to do that. In addition there are other cities where the Sunni community was also banned to hold their congregation, including Isfahan, Kashan, Qum, Kirman, and Yazd. According to Iran’s local newspaper “The Sunni News”, this Shi’a state sent forces to secure venues of Sunni Eid congregation and forced them away led by a Sunni scholar.

Iran has been arresting people and then pressing charges as opposed to it being the other way round and it has alarmingly been carrying out executions against Sunni minorities under various pretexts including drug trafficking.

http://opinion.bdnews24.com/2010/11/...ution-in-iran/

Trust them for a military alliance, are you kidding me?

[Eric H]

Greetings and peace be with you Futuwwa;

How can I trust Sunnis? Maybe they will stab me in the back too?

More to the point, how can Sunnis trust you, what would you do to them, do Sunnis have any proof that you could be trusted?

In matters of peace and unity someone has to make the first move, someone has to put their trust in God, does God want unity, will God help those who do his will?

Every blessing be with you.

Eric

[Eric H]

Greetings and peace be with you FS123;

Trust them for a military alliance, are you kidding me?

A military alliance seems to be more of a secular reason for unity, is this the kind of unity that Allah seeks for us?

Every blessing

Eric

[flowergarden]

Salaam,
I believe unity will happen when everyone realizes sunnis and shia'a read the same Qur'an and believe the same things, but there is some extra beliefe in both sectors.

I don't see anything wrong with praying together, that is how it should be! a mosque is a mosque, haj is haj we pray the same direction... I just don't see why other talk badly about the other! it is haraam in Allah's eye, because He didn't say who find the right sector of islam will go to heaven, He said, he who choose and follows the word of Allah will go to heaven!

I find this to be a test to muslim and a lot of us are failing to unit.

Once in school while praying sisters and brothers started yelling, I am not going to pray with her.. because of the sector I belong to! That hurt, I am there to pray and instead I am ask to leave. Surely I didn't I finished than said to them they should be ashamed.. than left!

[*Yasmin*]

Some people here say their opinions about shiaa without reading anything about shiaa!.

[flowergarden]

I'm shia and I love it!!! :D

The truth is I love Sunnis too! We all need to get along, it is the Muslim thing to do, and the right thing to do!!!
Why fight when we can love?

I love learning so I learn about Sunnis too, and that's all we must do, learn from each other!

We are all believers of the Qur'an! that is all that matters!

[*Yasmin*]

I'm shia and I love it!!! :D

The truth is I love Sunnis too! We all need to get along, it is the Muslim thing to do, and the right thing to do!!!
Why fight when we can love?

I love learning so I learn about Sunnis too, and that's all we must do, learn from each other!

We are all believers of the Qur'an! that is all that matters!

Sunni and Shiaa (twelver) have differences which can't be ignored.

i read a lot about shiaa, i wish what i read is wrong!

and because you are a shiaa i wish you can give your opinion about shiaa cursing sahabah.

with respect,

[flowergarden]

Sunni and Shiaa (twelver) have differences which can't be ignored.

That's the mentality that is keeping the Muslims so separate and full of hate! Sad sad thing.

and because you are a shiaa i wish you can give your opinion about shiaa cursing sahabah

UMMM? what are you talking about! May be you should take your advice sister, and read scholarly acticles about Shi'as. True Shia. Shia's do not hate the sahaba. I do not know where you pulled that one out from.

Sahabas are who supported Prophet Muhammad pbuh and the Aimma-e-Masoomeen.
I thought you were helping Shia, but you do not like Shia's ?
Well InshAllah you read scholarly articles and not hypocrites making us out to be bad!

[flowergarden]

Wow!
I read some of these comments, the hate for Shia are horrible! And haraam. There are shia's out there that would never curse any sahaba, I never would, and it is a big shame that anyone can say we can get along with them because of their beliefs, well just to clarify we read the same word in the Qur'an as you do, and Allah looks at that before he looks at anything. He looks to see if you are following His words and commands. So how can any of you sit here and have hate toward all the Shia's when a lot of them are good people.

And for the most part, you are judging and that is Haraam! The Qur'an say not to hate or judge any person belief and I pray you all stop this.

I will not reply to this any more. Brother YaAqsa said he wished we could all unite, and I feel he means shia and sunni, and if no one can accept each other than that will never happen! Sadly I don't see it with the mentality going on here, and being yelled at while praying in school, but I do see it in the mosque, and haj when all pray untied... InshAllah one day.. may be!

[YaAqsa]

Sunni and Shiaa (twelver) have differences which can't be ignored.

i read a lot about shiaa, i wish what i read is wrong!

and because you are a shiaa i wish you can give your opinion about shiaa cursing sahabah.

with respect,

Salaam alaikum

There is a lot of knowledge available to read out there for anyone sincere who wants to learn all sides before forming an opinion without irrational bias.

Sahih Muslim, Book 01, Hadith #0141
Zirr reported: 'Ali observed: By Him Who split up the seed and created something living, the Apostle (may peace and blessings be upon him) gave me a promise that no one but a believer would love me, and none but a hypocrite would nurse grudge against me.

Sahih Muslim, Book 31, Hadith #5915
This hadith has been narrated. on the authority of Shu'ba with the same chain of transmitters. Amir b. Sa'd b. Abi Waqqas reported on the authority of his father that Muawiya b. Abi Sufyin appointed Sa'd as the Governor and said: What prevents you from abusing Abu Turab (Hadrat 'Ali), whereupon be said: It is because of three things which I remember Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) having said about him that I would not abuse him and even if I find one of those three things for me, it would be more dear to me than the red camelg. I heard Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) say about 'Ali as he left behind hrin in one of his campaigns (that was Tabuk). 'All said to him: Allah's Messenger, you leave me behind along with women and children. Thereupon Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) said to him: Aren't you satisfied with being unto me what Aaron was unto Moses but with this exception that there is no prophethood after me. And I (also) heard him say on the Day of Khaibar: I would certainly give this standard to a person who loves Allah and his Messenger and Allah and his Messenger love him too. He (the narrator) said: We have been anxiously waiting for it, when he (the Holy Prophet) said: Call 'Ali. He was called and his eyes were inflamed. He applied saliva to his eyes and handed over the standard to him, and Allah gave him victory. (The third occasion is this) when the (following) verse was revealed:" Let us summon our children and your children." Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) called 'Ali, Fitima, Hasan and Husain and said: O Allah, they are my family.

No rational and learned Muslim will curse someone unless Allah SWT has cursed them, and as we know "Muhammad(sawaws) speaks not of his own desire, rather it is a revelation revealed" (Qur'an 53:4). So if someone who is educated curses someone who curses 'Ali(AS) they're only cursing the hypocrites according to Qur'an and Hadith.

[*Yasmin*]

first, i don't read for hypocrites sunni scholars. i read and hear from well-known scholars in the Islamic Ummah.

well i read about things in your books. and hear things from shiaa scholars' mouths. and what i hear shocks me.
yani i'm not pulling things from no where!


salam.

[flowergarden]

^This is very nice!

JazakAllah Khair!

[flowergarden]

^This is very nice!

JazakAllah Khair!

That was to brother YaAqsa!

LOL yasmin! Allah guide you not to judge, as I talk about looking at the good shia's, shia's that wouldnt cruse anyone period!!!... and good you won't reply!
!

[flowergarden]

first, i don't read for hypocrites sunni scholars. i read and hear from well-known scholars in the Islamic Ummah.

you lack good education on shia's and you are stuborn to learn the truth from the real shia! What a shame!

[*Yasmin*]

That was to brother YaAqsa!

LOL yasmin! Allah guide you not to judge, as I talk about looking at the good shia's, shia's that wouldnt cruse anyone period!!!... and good you won't reply!
!

thanks for your mocking.

you lack good education on shia's and you are stuborn to learn the truth from the real shia! What a shame!

thanks for your judge! ..

[flowergarden]

I'm NOT judging! I never said anything to judge you, I merely said to truly educate yourself, not a judge! And how was I mocking you!?
this is funny and may allah bless everyone.



Ma'Salaam!!!

[*Yasmin*]

m3 assalamah.

[flowergarden]

Moderator****
Please delete all my comments on here.

As much as I would love a united Islam, this thread makes me sad and I don't want my account to be part of it, nor wish to raise any type of commotion.
Please delete them. JazakAllah Khair!
:sl:

[Futuwwa]

Today, I will be a shia too :)

[Riana17]

Today, I will be a shia too :)

Salam

A Muslim must stand with the right thing nomatter how much it cost, Yes I am with SHIAA today too.

This Shiaa and Sunni thing is like a non Muslim who doesnt want to listen to a Muslim that his religion doesnt teaches to hurt anyone, that its full individual's fault.

So if we people claims to be a Muslim and this is how we attack each other, then no need to expect that Non Muslim would be willing to pause and listen to us.

[Ghazalah]

^:ermm: ......

[FS123]

Wow!
I read some of these comments, the hate for Shia are horrible! And haraam. There are shia's out there that would never curse any sahaba, I never would, and it is a big shame that anyone can say we can get along with them because of their beliefs, well just to clarify we read the same word in the Qur'an as you do, and Allah looks at that before he looks at anything. He looks to see if you are following His words and commands. So how can any of you sit here and have hate toward all the Shia's when a lot of them are good people.

And for the most part, you are judging and that is Haraam! The Qur'an say not to hate or judge any person belief and I pray you all stop this.

I will not reply to this any more. Brother YaAqsa said he wished we could all unite, and I feel he means shia and sunni, and if no one can accept each other than that will never happen! Sadly I don't see it with the mentality going on here, and being yelled at while praying in school, but I do see it in the mosque, and haj when all pray untied... InshAllah one day.. may be!

I don't hate shia, but I've spend considerable time with them and learning about shia islam from shia scholars I saw lot of hate for sunnis. Some of things in the belief itself I found were really disturbing, one main thing was cursing of the sahabas. Maybe yours don't curse but I went to a number of places, what I learned from shia scholars in all those places is cursing is important belief in shia islam, except for zayidi shias. But thats not the main reason I decided shia islam is not for me, but it might have played a role, because it was a major turn off. But that doesn't mean we can't achieve unity of peace in regards to doing good as br Eric mentioned, I'm all for that. But I'm not in favor of any military support or alliance.

Not to mention, recent massacres of sunnis in Syria and Nassurallah or/and Sistani not saying anything against that was very disappointing.

[Ghazalah]

zayidi shias

I'm pretty sure these shia are just shia by name, ie they don't do any of the other things that are normally attributed to shias (cursing of sahabah, hitting themselves) they are mostly found in Yemen. My neighbor is a zaydi shia and if I didn't know she was shia I would think she was a sunnni.

[FS123]

No rational and learned Muslim will curse someone unless Allah SWT has cursed them, and as we know "Muhammad(sawaws) speaks not of his own desire, rather it is a revelation revealed" (Qur'an 53:4). So if someone who is educated curses someone who curses 'Ali(AS) they're only cursing the hypocrites according to Qur'an and Hadith.

Of course, hence, we don't. We love Ali (ra) and his family. They are our one of the most revered personalities.

[FS123]

I'm pretty sure these shia are just shia by name, ie they don't do any of the other things that are normally attributed to shias (cursing of sahabah, hitting themselves) they are mostly found in Yemen. My neighbor is a zaydi shia and if I didn't know she was shia I would think she was a sunnni.

You read it wrong, I said except zaydi shia. Meaning Zaydi shia don't do that. But for all the other sub sects of shias that I've learned about so far, cursing is part of their belief.

[Ghazalah]

You read it wrong, I said except zaydi shia. Meaning Zaydi shia don't do that. But for all the other sub sects of shias that I've learned about so far, cursing is part of their belief.

My post was not a reply to your post. I just quoted zaydi shias because I just wanted to point out they are not the same as the mainstream shia. :)

[Futuwwa]

Can we stop lecturing people of other denominations on what they believe in? I think they know best themselves.

[Zafran]

Salaam

I agree with Futuwwa let the individual define what he or she believes dont just say I read X or Y in "your" books when he or she doesnt believe what your saying about them and there beliefs - thats the same thing that all the anti Islam guys do - they define Islam for us.

peace

[Riana17]

Can we stop lecturing people of other denominations on what they believe in? I think they know best themselves.

Asalam

Most of the people I know who lectures others of what to do, are the ones who seriously needs help.

It is too simple, if a Muslim commits a crime, or a Christian or a Jew, sure thing its not the teaching of any religion nor its not in their Holy book, its personal action and can't blame religion for it, no one can claim, he or she is a Christian, Shiaa, Sunni if he has intention to hurt or judge others like that,


Flowergarden although born to a Muslim parents is a new Muslim like me, she is new and learning about ISLAM, if she has intention to curse the Sahabah (pbu them) etc... why she didnt curse anyone of us here?

So inshallah as claiming to be Sunni, let us show what Sunni really means if that's what we guys are trying to prove.

Or most of you are serious and would like to throw all the Shiaa hatred to Flowergarden ?? What's the difference of that to Christian hating Muslim for 9/11?

[FS123]

Flowergarden although born to a Muslim parents is a new Muslim like me, she is new and learning about ISLAM, if she has intention to curse the Sahabah (pbu them) etc... why she didnt curse anyone of us here?

I don't know about her, but if you want to know about the practice go to a shia majaalis. If that is not possible then go to one of their popular forum, see the common view of shias about the practice. Shiachat.com is one of the most popular shia forums: http://www.shiachat.com/forum/

[Riana17]

I don't know about her, but if you want to know about the practice go to a shia majaalis. If that is not possible then go to one of their popular forum, see the common view of shias about the practice. Shiachat.com is one of the most popular shia forums: http://www.shiachat.com/forum/

Salam Alaikkum

It is not ideal to look at other's mistake when I myself is full of sin, its okay I know very well about Shiaa (not knowledge but personal contacts)

My colleague sharing my room is Shiaa and I observe she is better than many people who claims to be Sunni, I live in Q8 where Shiaa is abundant, My kuwaiti inlaw is a Shiaa and wow I vouch for his kindness and generosity, my sister is too lucky to have him.Alhamdollelah

Subhanallah he loves charity, he has huge patience, he never disturb his neighbor, he studied Engineering in London for 7years & 3yrs in US, travelled the whole world but never at all show proudness or show that he is better than someone. I lived with him for 3yrs, I know, and enough to talk about him

I had the opportunity to spend almost 2weeks in Bahrain too and I observe their kindness and simplicity, they are so friendly, they are mostly Shiaa and to prove that, they surpass Canada as the Most friendliest country in the world, forbes.com

I know Shiaa believes in Sunnah and the Holy Quran, if they do not follow all of them, I am not to judge or hurt them. I gotta fix my own first and even after fixing it I still wont judge them and if I hear something bad about them and believe for a moment I should control myself, because it isnt correct

Salam

[FS123]

Salam Alaikkum

It is not ideal to look at other's mistake when I myself is full of sin, its okay I know very well about Shiaa (not knowledge but personal contacts)

My colleague sharing my room is Shiaa and I observe she is better than many people who claims to be Sunni, I live in Q8 where Shiaa is abundant, My kuwaiti inlaw is a Shiaa and wow I vouch for his kindness and generosity, my sister is too lucky to have him.Alhamdollelah

Subhanallah he loves charity, he has huge patience, he never disturb his neighbor, he studied Engineering in London for 7years & 3yrs in US, travelled the whole world but never at all show proudness or show that he is better than someone. I lived with him for 3yrs, I know, and enough to talk about him

I had the opportunity to spend almost 2weeks in Bahrain too and I observe their kindness and simplicity, they are so friendly, they are mostly Shiaa and to prove that, they surpass Canada as the Most friendliest country in the world, forbes.com

I know Shiaa believes in Sunnah and the Holy Quran, if they do not follow all of them, I am not to judge or hurt them. I gotta fix my own first and even after fixing it I still wont judge them and if I hear something bad about them and believe for a moment I should control myself, because it isnt correct

Salam

True; and their are Jews, Christians, Atheist, and Agnostics who are better than many who claim to be Muslims.

I know Shiaa believes in Sunnah and the Holy Quran, if they do not follow all of them, I am not to judge or hurt them.

Who is saying to judge or hurt them?

[Riana17]

True; and their are Jews, Christians, Atheist, and Agnostics who are better than many who claim to be Muslims.


Who is saying to judge or hurt them?

Salam

Thanks for seeing my points.

When we show the fault of Shi'ism we are hurting them like Flowergarden, just how we feel when non Muslims thinks our Muslim brothers attacked the Pentagon. We are helpless

[GuestFellow]

Salam Alaikkum

It is not ideal to look at other's mistake when I myself is full of sin, its okay I know very well about Shiaa (not knowledge but personal contacts)

Waliakum Salaam,

There is a difference between correcting someone and judging them. If someone says something that is incorrect, there is nothing wrong with correcting them in a polite manner.

My colleague sharing my room is Shiaa and I observe she is better than many people who claims to be Sunni, I live in Q8 where Shiaa is abundant, My kuwaiti inlaw is a Shiaa and wow I vouch for his kindness and generosity, my sister is too lucky to have him.Alhamdollelah

Is it not ironic? You say that it is not ideal to look at other's mistake but here you already passed a judgment that a Shia you know is better than many people who claim to be Sunni. Are you not being judgemental to the Sunnis that you know?

[FS123]

Salam

Thanks for seeing my points.

When we show the fault of Shi'ism we are hurting them like Flowergarden, just how we feel when non Muslims thinks our Muslim brothers attacked the Pentagon. We are helpless

First, I'm not trying to show fault of Shi'ism, out of all my posts in this thread I've touched on the theological issues only in one post.

Second, for "Muslim brothers attacked the Pentagon" I completely condemned those attacks and so did the prominent scholars of Islam. But that is not what happened in the recent massacres of sunni community in Syria; Nasrullah or Sistani, the two most prominent shia scholars, didn't condemn them. Both are silent. What you want us to make out of it? Mind you I'm not blaming all shia for this, but their two main scholars not saying against it is concerning. And it is fair asking us not be concerned about it?

[Salahudeen]

Personally I've resigned to the fact that these differences will remain in the ummah because it was prophesied by the prophet (saw) so I don't see how we can beat prophecy and cause a united ummah when it's all ready been predicted that it will split.

[Futuwwa]

We can be one ummah regardless of the differences, though.

[Eric H]

Greetings and peace be with you Futuwwa;

We can be one ummah regardless of the differences, though.

God created each and everyone one of us in a special and unique way, which means we are all different. As you profoundly said, we can be as one with the rest of God’s creation, despite our differences.

Every blessing be with you,

Eric

[flowergarden]

I don't hate shia, but I've spend considerable time with them and learning about shia islam from shia scholars I saw lot of hate for sunnis. Some of things in the belief itself I found were really disturbing, one main thing was cursing of the sahabas. Maybe yours don't curse but I went to a number of places, what I learned from shia scholars in all those places is cursing is important belief in shia islam, except for zayidi shias. But thats not the main reason I decided shia islam is not for me, but it might have played a role, because it was a major turn off. But that doesn't mean we can't achieve unity of peace in regards to doing good as br Eric mentioned, I'm all for that. But I'm not in favor of any military support or alliance.

Not to mention, recent massacres of sunnis in Syria and Nassurallah or/and Sistani not saying anything against that was very disappointing.

Dear brother,
I can understand what you say, and feel that SOME and only some shia are like that. I am shia, and I have and never will curse any muslim person, or any person in general. And NO it is not an important beliefe of Shia's to cruse any one! That is nowhere in any shia book of mine. I don't know why any one is saying this and I am shia, and have read the books.
And the scholars you have talked to, met. Maybe they are just extremist. I don't know who they are but my family is one of most peaceul families you will meet. I have had sunni friends and they love us. I have had men whom are sunni ask for my hand, and I really considered them. We would never curse any one.

About Syria, any person who has died in there attacks are traigic, and just becasue one person (or two or even thousands) don't send their prayers and condleances that doesn't mean all the shia's are sorry and sorrowed for what has happened! plus I haven't heard anything about Bahrain. and so many lives are being killed everyday.

But I'm not in favor of any military support or alliance.

Brother you a kind man, and I respect you... but if we don't have any Military support and alliance there will never be unity, so no there can be unity with out such!

Why isn't anyone realize we shia's and sunnis read the Qur'an before anything!? It is the words of Allah that matter first and foremost!

[flowergarden]

ie they don't do any of the other things that are normally attributed to shias (cursing of sahabah, hitting themselves)

Stop saying Shia curse Sahabah!
Some shia may, but majority of shia would never curse any person important to Islams! The few friends I have whom are shia, we would never curse ANY Sahabah. That is Haraam and wrong, and yes a Shia is saying it is Haraam and wrong!

And not all shia's hit themselvles, a lot of them consider that self harm and it being haraam. Some believe in it, a lot do not!

We pray like you 5 times a day, we fast with you, we celebrate Eid with you, we believe in all the verse of the Qur'an just like you! So please stop saying we curse others..
I could easyily say, I know allot of sunnis whom practice black magic, but I know not all, frankly most don't! So what your saying is judging and that is wrong brother, because most shia are not like that!

[IslamicRevival]

Who cares? Im past caring because lets face it, There will never be unity until the end of times, simple as that

[Eric H]

Greetings and peace be with you flowergarden;

but if we don't have any Military support and alliance there will never be unity, so no there can be unity with out such!

I sincerely believe that any kind of military unity is built more on secular ideals than on God’s will.

Consider for a moment that twenty five thousand children die needlessly every day, from starvation, grinding poverty and preventable disease. These children are from all faiths and no faith, our unity should be helping and caring for them.

Tragically in the time it has taken me to write this reply, another hundred children will have died needlessly, and without the world noticing or careing.

In the spirit of praying for justice for the poor, oppressed and marginalised.

Eric

[flowergarden]

[quote=FS123;1463047]But for all the other sub sects of shias that I've learned about so far, cursing is part of their belief.[/quote
So far you been speaking and reading wrong brother! With all due respect brother, nope, we DO NOT have that apart of our belief. Like I said that is haraam!

[flowergarden]

Salaam,

Just an add to one thing... if you are a Muslim.... do you say oh I am sunni? I am shia? You should not! Islam is Islam. It should be I am Muslim without a sector.
when people ask what sector are you, I say I am a Muslim. Period.

Like others say, NO ONE should say shia's do this sunnis do that unless you are a person in that practice of Islam. If you aren't and you just listening to what you heard and read- that that is being a hypocrite and not allowing yourself to learn the truth... If you can't look past some beliefs outside the Quran, and that is not what Allah wants.

Allah wants us as One. Not arguing about who is right. It all about following His words before anyone else! End of story!

We are all untied to opinions, but to judge people based on a couple of people, that is not very Islamic! I think this thread should be sharing Qur'an verse explain why we SHOULD unite, not explaining difference that most likely are not true! It is up to us to us to bring unity, and for now sadly it doesn't look like it will happen any time soon !

Wa Salaam!

[Futuwwa]

I think it is beautiful that Riana, who brandishes her sunni alignment openly in her avatar, is among those who is most accepting of our differences :)

[Abz2000]

i see all yous are still battling it out on the keyboard while nato drops bombs on all of us - i've come out of all sects and said i'm Muslim, not even a madhab, and decided to learn Islam without the interpretation of other people. yes i read the Quran, and i also read books, and the opinions of the imams - but i don't fear to disagree with any imam - unless he is appointed by the (non existent) Caliph (and i can see why he's non-existent so far) - in which case we can request him to reconsider or look into issues a little more - or say "we hear and we obey". and if we see him on kufr - we disobey.

how easy it would be if we all tried that.

[flowergarden]

incerely believe that any kind of military unity is built more on secular ideals than on God’s will.

Dear brother, I was just making a point. hehe.
But I just was saying if you can unite with your brothers and sisters than will be on alliances as a brother before was mentioning
.

[flowergarden]

Who cares? Im past caring because lets face it, There will never be unity until the end of times, simple as that

salaam, well you should have faith that we will unite brother. I truly feel when Allah see we are ready, than we will not care for the mere difference and we will see we are the slaves of Allah and follow his words and guidance... and unite!

So I care and probably many more other Muslims! :)

[IslamicRevival]

salaam, well you should have faith that we will unite brother. I truly feel when Allah see we are ready, than we will not care for the mere difference and we will see we are the slaves of Allah and follow his words and guidance... and unite!

So I care and probably many more other Muslims! :)

I have always championed for 'unity' amongst the Muslims, Whether one is Sunni, Shia, Bralwi, Deobandi, Salafi, whatever..We are MUSLIM and we should unite under the banner of ISLAM..but sadly... the reality is that were more divided now then we ever were.

Im past caring, As far as im concerned UNITY is a dream that may not come to fruition in my lifetime

[flowergarden]

I have always championed for 'unity' amongst the Muslims, Whether one is Sunni, Shia, Bralwi, Deobandi, Salafi, whatever..We are MUSLIM and we should unite under the banner of ISLAM..but sadly... the reality is that were more divided now then we ever were.

Im past caring, As far as im concerned UNITY is a dream that may not come to fruition in my lifetime

I understand now!

[Abz2000]

[FS123]

But for all the other sub sects of shias that I've learned about so far, cursing is part of their belief.

So far you been speaking and reading wrong brother! With all due respect brother, nope, we DO NOT have that apart of our belief. Like I said that is haraam!

Salam sister, I respect your opinion and I hope other shia come to be like you too. But I was told in number of imam barghas and by number of shi'i scholars that cursing carries great reward. Here is discussion on a shia forum http://www.shiachat.com/forum/index....58680-cursing/

If you direct this to them that would be better, because I'm just saying what I was told by shia scholars.

Regards,

[Riana17]

Waliakum Salaam,

There is a difference between correcting someone and judging them. If someone says something that is incorrect, there is nothing wrong with correcting them in a polite manner.



Is it not ironic? You say that it is not ideal to look at other's mistake but here you already passed a judgment that a Shia you know is better than many people who claim to be Sunni. Are you not being judgemental to the Sunnis that you know?

Salam Alaikkum, there is nothing wrong suggesting one made a mistake and he/she should see that, but everyone here would agree that it's like Flowergarden feels responsible for all the madness of Shiism.

Pls see where I am coming from, I am just showing that regardless of religion or sect that doesn't ensure a person is good or not, I didn't give an example or see it that way like people did here to Flowergarden, she could be questioned like 'Hi Ms Flowergarden is it true that Shiaa has hatred for Sahaba?' No, it wasnt brought that way, she was attacked already.


Hence my point of view is for people who has misconception about ISLAM, SHIAA, SUNNI, CHRISTIAN OR JEWS, how can we generalize?

I have given example of someone who claims he/she is Sunni and troubles everyone, and yes ironically always going to Mecca too, another one who claims he is a Muslim but terminated a person without any explanation or valid reason, and yes in the Holy Month of Ramadan???

Now my question is that, how can one ensure he or she is indeed a TRUE MUSLIM for real when judgment day is yet to come?











"Allah has revealed to me, that you must be humble. No one should boast over one another, and no one should oppress another." (Iyad b. Hinar al-Mujashi: Muslim)

[ardianto]

I was a member in shiachat. I came to them with clean heart and only to know closer my muslim family who stand on different side.

I introduced myself, said salaam, but no one replied me. I tried to discuss with them, but someone called me as a man from other religion. I asked some questions about shia in good manner, Mr.Toyibonline replied it with cursing sayeedna Umar. Astaghfirullah !

I tried to keep in patience, but I saw in shiachat I am regarded as their enemy. Not by all of them, of course. But only by extreme people there. However, it's enough as a reason for me to leave them. I told myself "Okay, if they can't accept me as a brother, I leave them".

I spend almost three years in Islamicboard. I feel like live in the big family of Muslims. I enjoy it, and I am happy. I know, admins and moderators here are sunni.

Then I see some shia came to this forum. They were coming with clean hearts, and they were coming because they wanted to join with their family in Islam from sunni.

Should I regard them as my enemies like extremists in shiachat regard me as their enemy ?. No !. I won't !. If I regard them as my enemies, what's difference between me and extremists in shiachat ?. I am not an extremist, that's why I accept them as my family in Islam.

I know, there are differences between sunni and shia. But I also know there are similarities between sunni and shia. My shia uncle did not perform salah taraweeh. But he does not hate sunni, even sometime me and him prayed together. Shia in this forum are shia who do not hate sunni. I know it.

Can we unite sunni and shia in the world as one ummah ?. I am afraid to dream about it because this is not realistic. Unite all sunni and all shia as one ummah is thousands times harder than only unite Saudi Arabia and Iran as one country.

But I believe, we can do something that more realistic, make a small world where sunni and shia can live together and respect each other. And Islamicboard forum is our small world. This world is too small for the real world, of course, just like an oasis in the great desert. But we can build more oasis.

So, try to throw away hatred in our hearts. Lets we build a small world of Muslims where non-Muslims who respect to Muslims can join too.

[flowergarden]

Salam sister, I respect your opinion and I hope other shia come to be like you too. But I was told in number of imam barghas and by number of shi'i scholars that cursing carries great reward. Here is discussion on a shia forum http://www.shiachat.com/forum/index....58680-cursing/

If you direct this to them that would be better, because I'm just saying what I was told by shia scholars.



Regards,

JazakAllah Khair, thank you brother.
How ever I was banned from that site! :heated: LOL! There are a lot of shia their who believe it is a must to curse, but I don't see the point, I actually see it as a sin. I leave all in Allah's hand. So brother you will come across shia such as, but my family wouldn't curse anyone. I am shia, but love my sunni brothers and sister, that just how I am. and I won't change. :D

[Maryan0]

I was a member in shiachat. I came to them with clean heart and only to know closer my muslim family who stand on different side.

I introduced myself, said salaam, but no one replied me. I tried to discuss with them, but someone called me as a man from other religion. I asked some questions about shia in good manner, Mr.Toyibonline replied it with cursing sayeedna Umar. Astaghfirullah !

I tried to keep in patience, but I saw in shiachat I am regarded as their enemy. Not by all of them, of course. But only by extreme people there. However, it's enough as a reason for me to leave them. I told myself "Okay, if they can't accept me as a brother, I leave them".

I spend almost three years in Islamicboard. I feel like live in the big family of Muslims. I enjoy it, and I am happy. I know, admins and moderators here are sunni.

Then I see some shia came to this forum. They were coming with clean hearts, and they were coming because they wanted to join with their family in Islam from sunni.

Should I regard them as my enemies like extremists in shiachat regard me as their enemy ?. No !. I won't !. If I regard them as my enemies, what's difference between me and extremists in shiachat ?. I am not an extremist, that's why I accept them as my family in Islam.

I know, there are differences between sunni and shia. But I also know there are similarities between sunni and shia. My shia uncle did not perform salah taraweeh. But he does not hate sunni, even sometime me and him prayed together. Shia in this forum are shia who do not hate sunni. I know it.

Can we unite sunni and shia in the world as one ummah ?. I am afraid to dream about it because this is not realistic. Unite all sunni and all shia as one ummah is thousands times harder than only unite Saudi Arabia and Iran as one country.

But I believe, we can do something that more realistic, make a small world where sunni and shia can live together and respect each other. And Islamicboard forum is our small world. This world is too small for the real world, of course, just like an oasis in the great desert. But we can build more oasis.

So, try to throw away hatred in our hearts. Lets we build a small world of Muslims where non-Muslims who respect to Muslims can join too.

^ I personally have no hate in my heart for Shia's or any other group. The point that I and many of the posters were trying to make was that some Shia's have views that are deviant. If there are shia's like flowergarden or the zayedi shia's mentioned in this topic who do not curse or malign the sahaba and the ummul mumineen then I would love to be unified with them. There are however those who do as you yourself mentioned and I want nothing to do with them. I love who the prophet loved which includes his companions and his wives and I dislike who he disliked. The prophet himself in a saheeh hadith cursed those who cursed his companions and punished those who spread lies about Ayesha. I don't see any leeway there neither do I get the whole "quran sunnah mantra" in light of the hadith in reference to cursing the sahaba and of Allah's words vindicating Ayesha. I don't think anybody was personally attacking anyone on this topic and Allah knows best.
Salam

[flowergarden]

Then I see some shia came to this forum. They were coming with clean hearts, and they were coming because they wanted to join with their family in Islam from sunni.

Should I regard them as my enemies like extremists in shiachat regard me as their enemy ?. No !. I won't !. If I regard them as my enemies, what's difference between me and extremists in shiachat ?. I am not an extremist, that's why I accept them as my family in Islam.

I am ashamed to have read that. Please accept my apology on behalf of the GOOD Shia community, that is so awful! Shia Chat is a mean place I was banned from there, they have a lot of extremist on there.

I hope you can see that not all Shia are like that, I am more like you brothers and sisters!

[flowergarden]

I just to mention, there will be bad everywhere in any religion or country... but we can always say ALL those people are bad just because of a couple of rotten apples. Just like Riana said, I feel awful that many have felt Shia hurt them, but truly there are many Shia who love all Muslim who follow Allah's words. It is a matter of looking at their hearts!

[Eric H]

Greetings and peace be with you Vision;

I have always championed for 'unity' amongst the Muslims, Whether one is Sunni, Shia, Bralwi, Deobandi, Salafi, whatever..We are MUSLIM and we should unite under the banner of ISLAM..

We need more people like you.

the reality is that were more divided now then we ever were.

Sadly I agree with you.

Im past caring, As far as im concerned UNITY is a dream that may not come to fruition in my lifetime

There is too much injustice in this world for unity to happen, but we must never give up on striving for justice with peace, that leads to unity. We are either a part of the solution, or a part of the problem, if we give up trying, then we become a part of the problem.

In the spirit of praying for justice and peace for all people.

Eric

[YaAqsa]

Salaam alaikum wr wb

"He said, "O my people have you considered: if I should be upon clear evidence from my Lord while He has given me mercy from Himself but it has been made unapparent to you, should we force it upon you while you are averse to it?" 11:28 Qur'an

[ardianto]

I am ashamed to have read that. Please accept my apology on behalf of the GOOD Shia community, that is so awful! Shia Chat is a mean place I was banned from there, they have a lot of extremist on there.

I hope you can see that not all Shia are like that, I am more like you brothers and sisters!

You don't need to apologize because you didn't do something wrong to me. Also I never regard Shia people are my enemies although some of them regard me as their enemy.

You are my sister in Islam.

[Crystal]

As someone who is interested in Islam I just wanted to say the following. I have always admired the unity of Muslims from the outside as when you see all the Muslims going to Mecca for pilgrimage together and how they all are side by side praying to God. It is really something Muslims should be proud of and it is one of the reasons which attracted me to Islam and wanted me to know more about it. It is a shame that this unity doesn't continue on the inside because not only does it do harm for the Islamic community itself but it also does harm for those seeking the truth in Islam when they see Muslims arguing amongst each other. People can sometimes be their own worse enemy.

[roohani.doctor]

Listening to this makes you wonder if such a thing is possible.....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mXuy_...eature=related

BUT I do think ALL Muslims should stand in unity and not hate on each other. :( Islam is the such a beautiful peaceful religion... it should not be the way it is now.

[Riana17]

As someone who is interested in Islam I just wanted to say the following. I have always admired the unity of Muslims from the outside as when you see all the Muslims going to Mecca for pilgrimage together and how they all are side by side praying to God. It is really something Muslims should be proud of and it is one of the reasons which attracted me to Islam and wanted me to know more about it. It is a shame that this unity doesn't continue on the inside because not only does it do harm for the Islamic community itself but it also does harm for those seeking the truth in Islam when they see Muslims arguing amongst each other. People can sometimes be their own worse enemy.

Salam Sister

We cannot avoid this, people have different opinions, however whether it is Sunni or Shiaa we all follow ONE QURAN and SUNNAH, we all pray 5times daily to one true God. I hope you will not loose your interest in ISLAM because of this issue. There is only kind of MUSLIM and I hope you find the right one.

May Allah show you the right path forever Amen.

[Salahudeen]

As someone who is interested in Islam I just wanted to say the following. I have always admired the unity of Muslims from the outside as when you see all the Muslims going to Mecca for pilgrimage together and how they all are side by side praying to God. It is really something Muslims should be proud of and it is one of the reasons which attracted me to Islam and wanted me to know more about it. It is a shame that this unity doesn't continue on the inside because not only does it do harm for the Islamic community itself but it also does harm for those seeking the truth in Islam when they see Muslims arguing amongst each other. People can sometimes be their own worse enemy.

It is sad indeed, but such issues arise because people deviate in their beliefs, when you go to the doctor and tell him you have an illness he diagnoses you with a disease, that disease has a name by which it is recognised, similarly we have a name for people who's belief has been infected with a disease and is no longer pure. It's important to diagnose the disease of these people so other people become aware of it and are able to avoid it and to recognise it's symptoms. If we didn't diagnose the disease and give it a name then people would not know to stay away from it instead they might become infected with it, until the disease spread through the entire population and we all became corrupted with the wrong belief. And the result would be that the true teachings of the prophet pbuh become lost.

We have many diseased people who's belief has become corrupted and they are no longer upon the belief of the early Muslims, not just Shia's but many other groups who's belief became corrupted, they've existed through out history, we've protected ourselves by terming their disease with a name and explaining why it's wrong.

But this shouldn't worry you, because the prophet of Islam predicted that people will invent new beliefs that are not from Islam and still call themselves Muslims even though their belief is not in accordance with the teachings of Islam, he said the Muslim ummah will split into 73 groups and the correct group is the one that is upon the same belief as him and his companions.

Pure uncorrupted belief is so important that it must be protected, if it isn't then the truth becomes lost in falsehood.

The reason why these devient beliefs spread through out the Muslim ummah is because when the Muslims spread Islam to other countries there were people who didn't like the fact that Islam had come to their land because it challenged the status quo, it gave people equal rights, it gave women the right to inherit, it gave wife's numerous rights so that their husbands could no longer treat them like crap, it gave slaves rights to the point that slavery became quite a good profession for people, when people think of slavery they automatically think negative but after Islam gave slaves rights then it was like a profession, it also encouraged the freeing of slaves as great reward-able acts, and there are many other instances where Islam challenged the status quo, as a result people sought to destroy the religion of Islam from within by claiming to be Muslim and then spreading deviant beliefs, one of the reasons Islam came was to free humans from worshipping the created things, whether it be a statue/elephant or a man claiming to be God or a man claiming the right to legislate laws for you on what you're allowed to do and what you aren't allowed to do.

Islam came to free people from this and bring them to the worship of the creator and take them away from the slavery and rule of men to the servitude of the creator it tells us that all men are equal before God and he looks at our hearts not our appearances.

So you had people who hated Islam for such reasons and want to destroy it, they figured the best way to destroy it was to infiltrate it and spread their disease from within, and that's how many deviant groups arose. You even had people from other faiths who wanted to destroy Islam so they would also try to spread deviance and sadly some of them succeeded in their task of corrupting the belief of the Muslims' for example Abdullah ibn sabah, a Jew, played a significant part in the establishment of the Shia creed. Which arose after the death of the prophet (saw). Of course modern Shia's will deny he ever existed and try to hide it, however it's "documented and confirmed in many of the earlier so called prominent and reliable shia books and their scholars, despite the fact that many of the contemporary shias completely deny he ever existed".

You may be wondering how these deviant beliefs are identified, well if they go against the Qur'an and authentic sunnah then they are not from Islam, for example there is a group who call themselves Muslims yet they believe there was another prophet after the prophet Muhammed (saw) this is a clear contravention of the Islamic texts which state that Muhammed was the final messenger to mankind, also this belief is not found amongst the early Muslims, that is another way we know it's know from Islam.

Yet this group walk around calling themselves Muslims, when they hold a belief that contradicts the testimony of faith. Hence the disease in their belief has been labelled with a name by the scholars of Islam.

I hope I've made things more clearer for you.

[FS123]

As someone who is interested in Islam I just wanted to say the following. I have always admired the unity of Muslims from the outside as when you see all the Muslims going to Mecca for pilgrimage together and how they all are side by side praying to God. It is really something Muslims should be proud of and it is one of the reasons which attracted me to Islam and wanted me to know more about it. It is a shame that this unity doesn't continue on the inside because not only does it do harm for the Islamic community itself but it also does harm for those seeking the truth in Islam when they see Muslims arguing amongst each other. People can sometimes be their own worse enemy.

We don't have disagreements on core beliefs like the nature of God and Quran.

[GuestFellow]

Salam Sister

We cannot avoid this, people have different opinions, however whether it is Sunni or Shiaa we all follow ONE QURAN and SUNNAH, we all pray 5times daily to one true God. I hope you will not loose your interest in ISLAM because of this issue. There is only kind of MUSLIM and I hope you find the right one.

May Allah show you the right path forever Amen.

Salaam,

Actually Shia's pray 3 times a day. o_o

[Riana17]

Salaam,

Actually Shia's pray 3 times a day. o_o

Salam Alaikkum

The Shiaa I know prays 5times a day, I also heard that but the truth according to lady sitting in front of me they pray 5times too, its just that for them it is not harmful to combine some prayers together if they are not able to do it on time.

The Shia acknowledge FIVE daily PRAYERS. However, they are allowed to pray
them in THREE distinct TIMES, not five; the five prayers are: Fajr
(Morning), Zuhr (Noon), `Asr (Afternoon), Maghrib (Sunset), and Isha
(Night).

Some interpret it this way (below info is pasted from site)

"Establish regular prayers at the Sun's decline till the darkness of
the night, and the recital of the Quran in the morning prayer; for the
recital of the dawn is Witnessed. [17:78]"

How many prayer times are mentioned? THREE, NOT five. Count them: the
"Sun's Decline, Darkness of the Night, and the Morning Prayer." That's
THREE, not FIVE.

[FS123]

Salaam,

Actually Shia's pray 3 times a day. o_o

Shia pray 5 daily prayers but they combine.

[GuestFellow]

^ Oh I get it now.

[Crystal]

I hope you will not loose your interest in ISLAM because of this issue.

No I haven't lost interest, I just study what is in the Islamic scripture not the opinions of people :)

I hope I've made things more clearer for you.

Thanks for the extensive post, very informative =)

[Futuwwa]

No I haven't lost interest, I just study what is in the Islamic scripture not the opinions of people :)

Good. That's what I did too. And now I'm here, in the firm embrace of the ummah, but occasionally pestering it with nonconformist thoughts ;D

[Ramadhan]

Islam is the such a beautiful peaceful religion... it should not be the way it is now.

Islam should not be the way it is now?
Maybe what you actually meant is: muslims should not be the way it is now?

[Tyrion]

Islam should not be the way it is now?
Maybe what you actually meant is: muslims should not be the way it is now?

I think the "it" in that sentence was general, and actually meant "things" (as in, "Things should not be the way they are now")... Or something like that... Sis londonfog can correct us if we're wrong. :p:

[flowergarden]

Salaam,

Actually Shia's pray 3 times a day. o_o

We pray 5 times a day!

[flowergarden]

Salam Alaikkum

The Shiaa I know prays 5times a day, I also heard that but the truth according to lady sitting in front of me they pray 5times too, its just that for them it is not harmful to combine some prayers together if they are not able to do it on time.

Salaam Alaikum sister,
Yes, what the lady told you was right, but this is only and only if you are unable to preform prayer while at work, school etc... if it is permitted and you are able to preform prayer at the proper time it is favorable and a must for us to do it at the right timing.

So think about it, if I am at school and I will miss than it is best to do the prayer when you can....

And exactly you just showed that the prayers are counted and accepted.... :) JazakAllah Khair my dear sister!

[Futuwwa]

What is unity like? What kind of unity are we talking about? What is the purpose of being one ummah?

My vision of unity is one where the matter of one Muslim is the matter of every Muslim. Where, whenever Muslims are in need anywhere, the rest of the ummah will come to the rescue. Where poverty and deprivation are everyone's issues to take care of. Where none is left behind. And where any instance of Muslims being persecuted, oppressed and abused anywhere will be met with a united response consisting of millions of bayonets, and tens of thousands of tanks, warplanes and nuclear-tipped missiles :raging:

The Shia are welcome to be part of that vision too :)

[IslamicRevival]

Beautiful post brother Futuwwa :)

Nothing more needs to be said

[Tilmeez]

:sl:

I'm locking this thread for now. I believe its too much on a topic which is not basically related to the cause we are here for. Also we don't have audience of such a high caliber to discuss such topics.

:threadclo