219 replies to this topic

[shiasoldier786]

"In the final analysis, I would say that one may do taqlid of any of the marãji'-e taqlid in all matters; but since they are silent or have no opinion on political issues and on issues related to the Islamic Movement world-wide, one should follow the Wali-e faqih of Iran who is best suited to guide on such issues.
Was-salaam."

Sayyid M. Rizvi

http://www.islamic-l.../waliefaqih.htm

[fyst]

Nope

[khuram]

Kufi hain na shami hain
ham rahbar k hami hain

[url="]

[url="]

Edited by khuram, 18 January 2010 - 10:28 PM.

[Shiatullah]

Polls are meant for opinions.  This isn't an opinion.  This is similar to asking if one takes the Imam Mahdi as their Imam, since Rahbar is his deputy.

We don't care how many people reject the Wilayat of the Imams by rejecting their deputy.




Hasan Sajjad
President

[Marbles]

Hasan_Sajjad, on 19 January 2010 - 11:11 AM, said:

Polls are meant for opinions.  This isn't an opinion.  This is similar to asking if one takes the Imam Mahdi as their Imam, since Rahbar is his deputy.

We don't care how many people reject the Wilayat of the Imams by rejecting their deputy.

Thanks for your non-opinion with respect  to the matter. The likes of you do a good job at exposing yourself.

[hussainmehdi]

Do you consider Imam Khamenei (HA) as the Wali Amr Al-Muslimeen?

YES!

[repenter]

Marbles, on 19 January 2010 - 11:28 AM, said:

Thanks for your non-opinion with respect  to the matter. The likes of you do a good job at exposing yourself.

Exposing themselves to what?

That we accept him as Wali Amr Al Muslimeen? We don´t need to expose it, we are telling you that we do.

[khuram]

repenter, on 19 January 2010 - 02:55 PM, said:

Exposing themselves to what?

That we accept him as Wali Amr Al Muslimeen? We don´t need to expose it, we are telling you that we do.

SABZIs dont have the ability to understand



[url="]

Edited by khuram, 20 January 2010 - 12:17 AM.

[khuram]

[khuram]

Indian Scholar Allama Aqeel ul gharavi praises Ayatullah Khamenie

[url="]

Edited by khuram, 20 January 2010 - 01:03 AM.

[Qaid313]

Ya Allah
Salams

Jazaka Allah dear Khuram for all these excellent videos.

Allah Akbar, Khamenei (HA) Rahbar

Salams and Dua's
thewave

[shiasoldier786]

^^ This vid says it all...

btw- thanks for all the vids khuram

[Qaid313]

shiasoldier786, on 20 January 2010 - 01:29 AM, said:

\
^^ This vid says it all...

btw- thanks for all the vids khuram

Ya Allah
Salam

It sure does, jazak Allah brother.

Salams and Dua's
thewave

[Maula Dha Mallang]

not in a million years.

surely one of the main criteria for the "wali e amr" is that he must be JUST?

keeping people under house arrest for political reasons such as ayatollah montazeri is not just, nor is it justifyable...unless you can show me any imams that kept their opponents under house arrest? oh wait. you cant,

so where are we left?

1) the wali e amr must always be just
2) ayatollah khamenei is not just
3) therefore, no matter how many people "believe" him to be, that does not change the reality of the fact that he is nothing of the sort.

1 + 2 = 3








oh yeah, and enough with the communist-style videos, comrade.

[Shiatullah]

^ House arrest is a legitimate punishment in Islam.  Look it up...

No Imams other than Imam Ali - only 3-4 years - and Imam Hasan - only 6 or so months - were given their right to rule, so how could the other Imams punish others when they weren't given their right to rule?

Imam Ali chopped fingers off, and many other Islamic punishments which you consider brutal.

I can't imagine the horrible names you would call Amirul Momineen during his rule. AstaghfarAllah.




Hasan Sajjad
President

Edited by Hasan_Sajjad, 20 January 2010 - 10:56 AM.

[Shiatullah]

^ I wonder if you people would accept Imam Ali as infallible like you claim to today.  

According to you, we should all just sit and twiddle our thumbs like a bunch of idiots and "wait" for our Imam.  Not realizing it is our Imam who is waiting for us.  

People like you just want to hold on to your precious money and pretend you are waiting for the Awaited , while instead you are delaying his return.

Prophet Muhammad (saw) said "The scholars are the inheritors of the ambiya"
Imam Jafar Sadiq made the scholars rulers over us.

I can give you many more hadith but as the Quran says:

[2:17] Their parable is like the parable of one who kindled a fire but when it had illumined all around him, Allah took away their light, and left them in utter darkness-- they do not see.
[2:18] Deaf, dumb (and) blind, so they will not turn back.


http://www.iranchamb...lack_shiism.php





Hasan Sajjad
President

[Darth Vader]

I have voted 'no' although I follow Mr. Khamenai and have his "tauzeeh" with me for guidance. Because in truth the words "wali" and "amr" are not applicable to him or his likes since we all, and even they, make mistakes. So it wouldn't be entirely correct ultimately to give any such titles to another man except the awaited Imam even if Mr. Khamenai's advice is among the most worthy and he should be fully respected.

Edited by Ibrahim Nakhaee, 20 January 2010 - 11:39 AM.

[Thurston]

sorry, but what does the fancy title translate in English to ?

[Nadir]

See, the other maraja DO have political views, and they DO issue political statements. Sayyed Sistani on Iraq is an example. What if Iraq adopted the system of Wilayatul Faqih, who would be the leader in Iraq? Sayyed Khamenei or someone ONLY Iraqis elect, just like ONLY Iranians elect Sayyed Khamenei? If it's another marja, then what happens if he and Sayyed Khamenei have political disagreements? If they're both representatives of the Imam, and they hold political office and DISAGREE on political issues, then at least one representative has to be wrong, doesn't he? A representative of the Imam cannot afford to make a wrong decision if he holds political office. If Sayyed Khamenei becomes the leader in Iraq, then voting cannot be limited to Iranians. If suffrage extends to Iraqis as well, then the leader of the Muslims will be voted in because of their nationality. Yes, religion should be more important than nationalism. Yes, religion should have a part to play in politics, BUT it doesn't. Simple as that.

I accept Sayyed Khamenei as my religious leader, and I will follow him on whatever he says. I believe it's my religious duty. However, firstly, I don't understand how he can be considered to be the leader of the Muslims if only Iranians are allowed to vote him in. Secondly, the political influence he has on non-Iranians is limited. The political statements he makes directly concern Muslims in Iran, not the world. The political statements he makes which concern the global Muslim ummah are similar to the ones made by other Maraja. Boycott Israel. Follow the law of the land unless it contradicts Islamic law. These things are said by ALL the maraja. I'm just asking with the aim to understand: how is Sayyed Khamenei the Leader of the Muslims of the world?

[Bonafide Hustler]

khuram, on 20 January 2010 - 12:39 AM, said:

Indian Scholar Allama Aqeel ul gharavi praises Ayatullah Khamenie

[url="]

I heard all his majalises this ashra as he was making a lot of noise in Karachi.  It was quite refreshing as I had been used to hearing out intense tabarra mongers in Irfan haider etc. At least Allama Aqeel was willing to approach certain topics with a rational mindset.  In any case, the scholarly body present within the subcontinent and especially India was a source of pride for shia muslims in our part of the world.  No where else in the muslim world existed a scholarly body comprising of both shia and sunni scholars working together with a progressive mindset encompassing of the wisdom around them yet still managing to be sufficiently independent and self sustaining.  There is no doubt in my mind that this recent shift in focus towards Iran instead by our bodies to seek out blind guidance with respects to local religious and importantly political affairs has been a backwards step and incredibly disheartening.

[Shiatullah]

Nadir, on 20 January 2010 - 12:32 PM, said:

See, the other maraja DO have political views, and they DO issue political statements. Sayyed Sistani on Iraq is an example. What if Iraq adopted the system of Wilayatul Faqih, who would be the leader in Iraq? Sayyed Khamenei or someone ONLY Iraqis elect, just like ONLY Iranians elect Sayyed Khamenei? If it's another marja, then what happens if he and Sayyed Khamenei have political disagreements? If they're both representatives of the Imam, and they hold political office and DISAGREE on political issues, then at least one representative has to be wrong, doesn't he? A representative of the Imam cannot afford to make a wrong decision if he holds political office. If Sayyed Khamenei becomes the leader in Iraq, then voting cannot be limited to Iranians. If suffrage extends to Iraqis as well, then the leader of the Muslims will be voted in because of their nationality. Yes, religion should be more important than nationalism. Yes, religion should have a part to play in politics, BUT it doesn't. Simple as that.

I accept Sayyed Khamenei as my religious leader, and I will follow him on whatever he says. I believe it's my religious duty. However, firstly, I don't understand how he can be considered to be the leader of the Muslims if only Iranians are allowed to vote him in. Secondly, the political influence he has on non-Iranians is limited. The political statements he makes directly concern Muslims in Iran, not the world. The political statements he makes which concern the global Muslim ummah are similar to the ones made by other Maraja. Boycott Israel. Follow the law of the land unless it contradicts Islamic law. These things are said by ALL the maraja. I'm just asking with the aim to understand: how is Sayyed Khamenei the Leader of the Muslims of the world?

Many of the maraja, do not voice their political views.  Banning the use of Israeli products isn't political, it is against Fiqh to support those at war with Islam.

In regards to your point on Iranis selecting Rahbar.  1st. The criteria to select the WF is that one should be a Mujtahid, i.e. the Ahlul Kibra must be comprised of mujtahideen.  2nd not all those in the Majlis are of Iranian Descent, yes they all may live in Iran, but not all are Iranians per se.  There are several from Iraq, Lebanon, and even few (at least 1 I know of) from Sub Continent.  3rd In any case it is safe to say that over 90% of today's mujtahideen are of Iranian descent, so if you have all them decide, at the end of the day the Iranians are still deciding, to put in your words.

You are turning this into a nationalism issue, who cares who decides as long as it is the mujtahideen who decide.  If you believe our ulema are our guides and leaders, then I don't see why it matters where our ulema are from, the majority are from Iran.  And that shouldn't matter to us.

In regards to the effect on those outside of Iran, there is some, but your right, it is not as great as it should be.  This system is young and is developing and inshAllah will be able to develop to an extent where it is more influential and helpful towards those outside of Iran.    But that is from a western perspective.  If you ask the Palestinians, the Hezbollahis, the Yemenis, the Sudanese, etc etc, they will tell you otherwise in regards to the influence/aid of the WF.  The system needs to be and inshAllah will be more expansive, but with how the West is today, it is difficult to be open about such things, since those involved will be tortured/killed.

No system is perfect until the Imam returns, we know that and acknowledge that.

There is no WF of Iraq/Iran/Lebanon, etc etc.  The WF is of the Muslim Ummah.  The mujtahideen amongst us decide who that is.

I hope, I have better explained the issues, if not, please accept my apologies.





Hasan Sajjad
President

Edited by Hasan_Sajjad, 20 January 2010 - 01:57 PM.

[shiasoldier786]

^ nicely put Mr President