Berber-Shia

Argument #1 There is a difference between اليمني and اليماني. - Al-Yamaani (اليماني): Someone who is on the Right path and who calls to the Right path - Al Yamani (اليمني): Someone from Yemen Most if not all the hadiths use the first word. Examples: Most importantly this Hadith from Kitab Al Ghaybah where it clearly states that from all those that will rise up at that time (Sufyani, Khurasani,...), the flag of Yamaani is the rightful one and "It is not permissible for any Muslim to turn away from him and whoever does so, will be in Hell, because al-Yamani will invite to the truth and to the straight path." Others: https://thaqalayn.net/hadith/22/2/14/9 https://thaqalayn.net/hadith/22/2/18/15 https://thaqalayn.net/hadith/22/2/14/12 https://thaqalayn.net/hadith/22/2/14/11 https://thaqalayn.net/hadith/10/6/73/1 Argument #2 In many hadiths it is written that the Sufyani and the Yamani (and Khurasani) will race like horses towards Kufa to fight each other. If the Yamaani is from Yemen that implies that he would have to go through Hijaz or Najd region and would have to conquer it. But then why would the Sufyani send troops to take Medina when they will be swallowed by the earth? Sources: https://thaqalayn.net/hadith/22/2/18/15 Counterargument All I've found that would support the rising of the Yamani to be from Yemen is the following: - Wikishia article without sources - This Kitab al Ghayba hadith where it mentions that the Sufyani will not rise except after the rising from "the one from San'aa" but does not the mention Yamani by name. - Lots of Sunni sources

Where would you conclude that from? Capitalism, socialism and communism are all enlightenment ideas that came from Europe from the 17th century on and spread through colonialism. Capitalism's main ideology is the right to amass as much wealth as one wishes. That goes against Islam. Look at surah Al-Humazah. Socialism as a whole. Why? Because most if not all socialistic ideologies rely on either dialectical materialism or historical materialism. Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) gave us Islam in its complete form, that means also for political and economical means. So no need to merge Islam with socialism either. I think it's a mistake to identify God given rights and duties as things that stem from a man-made ideology. It is a God given right to own property, it's not a "capitalistic" thing. It is a God given duty to share some of your unused wealth, it's not a "socialistic" idea. اَللّٰهُ أَعْلَم‎

I don't want to be a party-pooper here, but all this talk of economic/political systems (that are not Islam) is just pointless. I understand that intellectual discourse and analysis is good since it adds to one's knowledge, but putting one's energy in enforcing a certain secular system, however righteous it deems itself to be, in this world is pointless for us as Shia of Ahlulbayt. Our political energy should be focused on standing up against Taghut in the name of Islam and the oppressed. Everything else is wasted energy. Capitalist or socialist, both are Taghut since they aren't Islam. (Yes one might be better than the other, everything is relative, but it is still Taghut. And by the way despite there being "similarities" between Islam and "socialism" and socialism allowing for "religious freedom", that doesn't excuse us from adopting their ideology. Their ideology is not Tawheed and their so called "religious freedom" is a "freedom" as long as it doesn't pose a threat towards their system. Read Ayatollah Khomeini's Islamic Government or Ayatollah Baqir Sadr's Our Philosophy. Or watch these lectures of Sheikh Sekalshfar below:

But the Saddams are irrelevant in Iraq politics nowadays, and since Saddams overthrow Shias have been at the forefront of Iraqi politics so I doubt they would let a Baathi take power. And according to these hadiths/interpretations Shaysabani will be from descendants of Ahlulbayt (though I'm not sure how accurate this is) I've edited the post as it is indeed a rumor. But that still doesn't remove the fact that Muqtada's followers have done some very bad stuff. Even if he stood up against oppressors and worked with the resistance that doesn't mean we should trust in him. Me personally, purely on instinct, I don't trust the guy

Salam, [Intro. Skip to Question if you want to] Recently I've been interested on the issue of the Reappearance and Mahdism, seeing as it is important for us to actively prepare for the reappearance of our Imam (aj). I've taken the time to learn about the Occultation and the signs preceding his reappearance and rising. As most of you probably know, 5 certain signs have to occur before our Imam (aj) will reappear: The rising of the Sufyani The rising of the Yamaani The murder of the Nafs Al Zakiyya (Pure soul) The swallowing of the army of the Sufyani by the earth The Sayha (the cry) These signs will be very close to one and other and close to the moment of the Imam revealing himself in Makkah. That's why the Prophet (sawas) and the Imams (عليه السلام) gave us other (preceding) signs to help us prepare. One of them being the Shaysabani. Question https://thaqalayn.net/hadith/22/2/18/8 This here hadith found in Al-Kafi and Bihar Al-Anwar talks about a certain Shaysabani rising from Ard Kufaan (Najaf?). The following interpretations I've found in Arabic sites and by some scholars: Shaysaban is another Arabic word for Shaytaan. Historically the Abbasids were known as Banu Shaysaban because they rose up against the Umayyads in the name of the Ahlulbayt but ended up oppressing and killing them Flow like water = Huge movement with many supporters Kill your delegation --> "Your" being the shia of ahlulbayt Other: He's hunchback He will rise under the name of his father He is immature and almost childish in his attitude (He's a batri) https://www.sh-alsagheer.com/post/3937 https://www.imamalmahdisigns.com/ar/Alsheesbani.html Now some people read this and immediately think of one person: Muqtada Al-Sadr. He did just win an election and he seems to have taken a harsh approach towards the other Shia who won (accusing them of being militias who work only for Iran's interests). And to be honest he seems to be meeting some of the requirements. Obviously we can't jump to conclusions so fast. But what do you all think? Sidenote: Many scholars frown upon him and it's been rumoured he was the one who ordered the killing of AbdulMajid Al Khoei (Ayatollah Khoei's son)

Through your eyes you see what happened as it being a "political failure", whereas Imam Ali (عليه السلام) stood firmly by his principles and would not compromise them for political self-gain, he did not want to involve himself in the game of political deception just like muawiya and his bunch.

Was this a rock concert or something? What in the world is going on over there?

Salam, If I may chime in with some more "esoteric" and less-analytical view of the situations in the Middle East, I still think the goal here is to achieve a Greater Israel. And it doesn't necessarily mean a territorial project wherein the Zionists control these lands but a strong alliance wherein israel is the main party and ruler of the region. That's why we see many of these countries having these big economic reform projects to attract investment to the region. From Egypt to Bahrain. But obviously they see Iran and the axis of resistance as a threat to their project that's why they are slowly pushing for an all out conflict against the Iranian gov to finish their project once and for all. Obviously this is not the main reason these projects have started, but I think an important one, idk.

Not true. Sham was and stil is the Levant region (Lebanon, Syria, Palestine, Jordan). Kurdistan is the Jazira region. Constantinople and modern-day Turkey was known as Rum. So no Turkey was and is not Sham.

Yes I am. Shiite islam may have not been so present as in other parts of the islamic world, but the love for the Ahlulbayt has been there forever. Twelver Shiism may be and may have been non existant there, but Wilaya of Ali (عليه السلام) was always present there.

So I was just bored scrolling through thaqalayn.net reading ahadeeth and I stumbled upon this hadith on Uyun akhbar al Rida (عليه السلام). In it the man asks the Imam (عليه السلام) what the width and length are of the moon and the sun. The Imam (عليه السلام) responds with: "900 farsakh by 900 farsakh". So naturally I got curious to see if it corresponds with the measurements we have currently of the moon and sun. What I found is this: The diameter of the moon is approximately 3475 km so that would be the minimal distance. The circumference of the moon is around 10920km of which its visible half would be 5450km and that would be the maximal. So we have an interval of [3475km - 5450km] (mean = 4462.5 km) When we look up what the measurement of a farsakh is, I found this: the Shar'i Farsakh is between 5 and 5.5 km. When we multiply them with 900 we end up with an interval of [4500km - 4950km] and a mean of 4725km. (4725 - 4462.5) / 4462.5 = 0.0588 --> ~ 6% difference which is incredible. As for the sun, because people at that time were not yet at the scientific level of astronomy, I presume the Imam gave the same measurements for the sun as he did for the moon because they are the same size in the sky (i.e. in our point of view) and to not confuse them. Now obviously I'm not trying to prove anything here, I'm just sharing my fun discoveries. But I got this feeling that maybe all this work is too far fetched or something. But then again why would the Imam (عليه السلام) give such specific measurements? Idk what do you all think?

Very dangerous to label hadiths from the Imams (عليه السلام) as innovations without any evidence to back your claim. The Sufyani, Yamaani and other signs are certain signs that are mutawatir in the hadith corpus that serve a good purpose for people to prepare for their awaited Imam (aj). However a valid point could be raised about other hadiths that could indeed be of false origins. That's why this topic needs studying and not just a plain dismissal. Thaqalayn bro, the hadiths and sunna of the Prophet (sawas) and Ahlulbayt (عليه السلام) are also important bro.

It is important to make the distinction between اليمني (someone from Yemen) and اليماني (someone who is on the Right path). Very common misunderstanding. There is a difference between the Sufyani and the Dajjal. Furthermore the Sufyani will be an Arab seeing as he will be from the descendance of the liver-eater (Umayyads). As for Rajab the hadith it is clear about it being on the month of Rajab and nothing to do with names. Many hadiths also clearly state that his rising will start from Sham, Damascus specifically, so not Turkey.