Jump to content

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

 

 

As salamu alay cum.

 

I am wondering what if Shia come to take Mecca one day? What would be their attitude towards Sunnis and other groups for example. I have read that non Shia can be treated as non believers, for example in some Shia books (like "essence of life" -/ "ayn al hayat") this seems to be indicated,  but I am not sure of the legal weight of this or the interpretation I have. I am obviously not qualified. But then there are "less orthodox" the Sunnis (afaik) like the Ahmadis. I am wondering of the legal status of non Shia, especially for the rites of haj. For example I heard that the Taliban regarded Shia as non Muslims, sometimes at least. If a Sunni alim regards Shia as non Mulsims, would his followers  through taqlid be regarded as sound for the rites of haj etc? Where is the line drawn and how? I am presuming that non-Muslims aren't allowed on haj.

 

The purpose of this thread is that although I am a "Sunni" I am not a terrorist supporter and don't like to see killing in Iraq and Syria, but if Iranian backed Shia rule expands (hypothetically) I am wondering how much spiritual weight I might be giving to a "madhab" or school which may or may not respect my choices or school of fiqh.

 

At these times I would like to also extend apologies for any terror, plus pay respects to the martyrs of the Shia tradition. This may seem like mere words, but its all I can do at present.

 

Thanks in advance,

 

Luqman72.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Luqman72 said:

 

 

As salamu alay cum.

 

I am wondering what if Shia come to take Mecca one day? What would be their attitude towards Sunnis and other groups for example. I have read that non Shia can be treated as non believers, for example in some Shia books (like "essence of life" -/ "ayn al hayat") this seems to be indicated,  but I am not sure of the legal weight of this or the interpretation I have. I am obviously not qualified. But then there are "less orthodox" the Sunnis (afaik) like the Ahmadis. I am wondering of the legal status of non Shia, especially for the rites of haj. For example I heard that the Taliban regarded Shia as non Muslims, sometimes at least. If a Sunni alim regards Shia as non Mulsims, would his followers  through taqlid be regarded as sound for the rites of haj etc? Where is the line drawn and how? I am presuming that non-Muslims aren't allowed on haj.

 

The purpose of this thread is that although I am a "Sunni" I am not a terrorist supporter and don't like to see killing in Iraq and Syria, but if Iranian backed Shia rule expands (hypothetically) I am wondering how much spiritual weight I might be giving to a "madhab" or school which may or may not respect my choices or school of fiqh.

 

At these times I would like to also extend apologies for any terror, plus pay respects to the martyrs of the Shia tradition. This may seem like mere words, but its all I can do at present.

 

Thanks in advance,

 

Luqman72.

Mr. Label of being shia or sunni is not criteria for being a believer. 

Rather Allah will check the hearts of everyone how much one believes in Tawheed of Allah. That is real test who is believer. 

There is quite possible despite our claims of being a believer in Allah we may prove wrong in our claim. 

Because before Allah label dose not have have value. 

So all muslim sects will have full right to perform Huj. 

 

Edited by islam25

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Recent Posts on ShiaChat!

    • That is a good comment. Thanks for the points. First of all one user said that since eastern men think western women are freer, they are sinful. I did NOT mean that kind of freedom. It doesn't matter whether you are western or eastern. If you're Muslim, you won't do that. I mainly focused on freedom in working, money, and freedom in social interactions. These freedom I think does not attach man and woman to each other like before. For example, in SOME parts of eastern countries, man and woman are so dependent on each other. When you look at it, you see that they have some sort of limitations on their social interactions and give higher priority to family. You see that they spend MORE time than most western families with their family. I think one of the things that helped into these form of families is that wife is householder. She kept her husband around herself, and man became attracted and dependent on her. In western culture I think men at work are in contact with women. They are not Muslim and this is some sort of deterioration for his family base. Because he sees other women without Hijab, and if he doesn't follow religion correctly, he goes back home at night and compares his wife with his female colleagues (I know it's disgusting). These social interactions does not attach man and woman to each other in a proper way, and I think it is an introduction to freedom. I think it gives you this freedom to spend more time than before with your colleagues rather than your wife. Let me tell you from my experience of Iran. I personally cannot imagine that spending time with my friend is more enjoyable than my wife. I do know that other Iranian people have similar orientation if they are religious and did not have boy/girl friend in the past. I personally support women who work in companies with Hijab. It's some sort of advertisement and creates a good picture of Islam. About your idea on desi people, I think it's true to some of them. I also have this feeling towards them but not all. I asked my friend who is Indian: "do you like to support your wife financially if she wants to be house wife?" He said NO. That was surprising to me. He said she needs to work and earn money. I don't want to do that. When I said cultural differences, I mainly meant this 50-50 culture that man and woman are both responsible and working.
    • That's a Catholic thing. Protestant churches have an empty cross. Nobody worships it as a God. It is a symbol, a reminder. The Israelites were into idols, they made many graven images, including a golden calf, they worshiped as a god. 
    • The Wahhabi phenomenon only occurred 120 years ago, prior to the creation of the wahhabis, Shia's were still persecuted by the mainstream Sunnis.  
    • It is important that the readers also understand the sequences  that lead up to saqifa. 1) The calamity of pen and paper, Umar denying Rasulullah (pbuh@hf) to write a will for the Ummah. 2) Close companion of Rasulullah (pbuh@hf) not joining the battalion Usama. 3) Did Rasulullah (pbuh@hf) call Abu Bakr to lead the prays?  4) Where was Abu Bakr when Rasulullah (pbuh@hf) had called him? 5) Umar denying that Rasulullah (pbuh@hf) died. 6) Umar in state shock then suddenly runs of to Saqifa. 7) Senior companions not attending the burial of the Prophet (pbuh&hf)   These are some of the events that lead up to Saqifa, and are recorded in Sunni Sahih books.
    • Did anyone in the Uk watch the show The Truth About Muslim Marriages (that could also have been called why women have no brain) Thoughts?  
×