Aloysius Pendergast

I'm happy that's he converted. Alot of impressionable young men see him as an Idol. Him being a Muslim can only be a positive.

Agreed. And I think this goes back to your earlier point about creating space for and highlighting Shia thinkers(or emphasizers) that are also in that same space.

I think when someone becomes a Sunni or a Shia, you essentially become "boxed" into the historical narrative peddled by your intellectual and spiritual forefathers. This is why people like Shiekh Hamza Yusuf will downplay or dismiss the merits of the Ahlul Bayt(عليه السلام), and his counterpart Imam Zaid Shakir will continue to call Muawiyah as (رضي الله عنه). Whether it is intentional or just what they truly believe, the fact is that the nawasib legacy runs deep within the Sunni historical and theological tradition. Unfortunately, the nasabi narrative will live on until I imagine the return of the Mahdi(عليه السلام). We should promote and buy books that expose the nasibi narrative, while shedding light about the truth and mertis of the Ahlul Bayt(عليه السلام). I've been meaning to get a copy of this book. The price tag is a bit hefty, but looks like an essential read.

What a toxic conversation.

Truly embarrassing moment for the American Muslim community. So many tweets about "right-wing terrorists" when the threat is much closer to home. As tragic as this is, it ought to start a conversation about how real sectarianism is and how dangerous anti-Shia sentiment is. Let's see how the prominent Sunni organizations and leaders(CAIR, MPAC and so forth) respond here. Would you mind elaborating on the Mad Mumlucks. Curious to know what their agenda/role is. Thank you.

Salaam, I appreciate the original post. It's very thoughtful, and clearly it's from someone that's spend a lot of time in self-reflection about this topic. However, i do disagree with this part of your argument. Yes, our parents and us always had technology around(I'm 37 now). However, those of us that categorize as millennials(and earlier generations) were lucky enough to live in and grow up in a world without cell phones, ubiquitous access to the internet, countless social media platforms which are programmed to be addictive. These challenges were not around in the 90's or even the 2000's in many ways. The technocracy we live in today, many ways circa 2012 is vastly different than the world before it. Facebook, Instagram, snapchat and now Tiktok have absolutely changed the landscape of how young people engage and live their lives. Tech addiction and social media addiction is a huge challenge, and anxiety and depression that comes about use of these platforms is evident. There are young men & women absolutely suffering silently in addiction to these platforms. Things like porn have been around for decades, but it is never been easier and more accessible than today. There are children as young as 8 having full access to these things. I'm blessed to have been shielded from these things in my youth. My point is that these are absolute huge challenges that Gen Z faces, and equating access to tech vs in the 90's or 2000's is simply not an even comparison. As a community that sees Allah as it's first principle, we've been slow in our response to the rapid pace with how the technological landscape changes, and effects us all.

Salaam, Thanks for sharing. I have to see I've been quite pleased by the lecture topics and content from Sayed Jawad Qazwini this year. Really timely & engaging material. Best, Fahad

This is true. Dehumanization of the other isn't exclusive to any specific group or nation. History proves as such. Anyway, not to deviate from my point, which simply was to be cautious about those we assume as allies simply because there's alignment in what we detest and loate. This is an interesting point. The concept of "no compulsion in religion" is quite prominent within Islam, yet it is fair to argue that did not apply to the pagan arabs of Mecca. At the same time, one can easily argue that it was the belligerence and scheming of the pagan arabs of mecca that led to them being cast for elimination(ideologically speaking) vs their belief. As Juan Cole writes in his recent book "Muhammad," the Prophet(صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) engaged in allegiances with all sorts of groups in Medina, including Jews, Christians and yes even Pagans. So the idea of Islam being totally unforgiving for an existence of paganism in some form under Islamic rule is not true. In subsequent generations, there's plenty evidence of co-existence with Hindus, Buddhists and so forth. Religions that can rightfully be considered pagan, at least exoterically. Christian history, aside from some exceptions, had a very "take Christianity like a battering ram" and wipe out what was before way of doing things. Islam has been a mixed bag in that respect, with periods of intolerance and plenty of periods with co-existence and tolerance of other faiths, including Pagans. Feel free to correct me if I am wrong here. And God knows best. I think the concept of open borders is much more of a problem in Europe vs here in the U.S. Here, Muslim immigrants have thrived, whereas in Europe it seems our rep is a mixed bag. So it varies, but yes I agree, and I said earlier, there's absolutely nothing wrong with having a self-preservation instinct and to retain one's culture, moral values and community fabric. European countries tend to be a bit more insular, so it's expected that the push back on immigration there is more prominent vs in the U.S. Yes, but that's the individual's choice. Ultimately, your first focus is personal success and the success of your family and loved ones. If the country you are in, isn't providing you what you need to get there, then fair play to find greener pastures. Can't expect everyone to be fiercely nationalist. Most just want to create a good life for them and their families Thanks for sharing your thoughts!

Oh yes, absolute clear double standard when we talk about Western History and Islamic history. Although, to be fair, Shias are less inclined to glorify Islamic history as roses and grapes for obvious reasons. That aside, I think it's high time we stop reactionarily demonizing history that's Western and glorifying everything within an Islamic tint. It's a sign of maturity of an individual, community, group, or nation to be able to look inward and discuss and acknowledge flaws and misdeeds. We're not at that level of maturity yet.

Salaam, The example I gave was from 2003-2004, about regular folks in the U.S. wishing we nuke Iraq because some of their boys were killed(turned it they were blackwater contractors). Anyway, I don't disagree with you. I think it is strange that the Western world is supposed to bypass it's self-preservation instinct and open their borders to an influx of immigrants, without considering the impact on security, culture, politics and so forth. Muslim countries aren't nearly as forgiving, so it is curious to see the demands of Muslim immigrants for open borders given how woefully short our own countries fall when it comes to these things. That aside, my point was just to say that "the right" aren't our friends. There's some really principled libertarians that are worthy of admiration for their anti-war stance, and same with a fringe element on the left, but by and large, these people aren't principled our friends, even if our interests often align when it comes to family values, tradition, morality and so forth.

Salaam, I'm the Guest_Fahad that you replying to. Anyway, I'm not too sure on the "left alone" part either. There's this often used meme of a plane carpet bombing somewhere. One is just a generic looking plane, the other has a rainbow color flag on it's tail. That's essentially the difference between the right and left wing when it comes to their engagement with the global south. I still remember having conversations with people around 2003-2004 when the Iraq war was in full swing. The type of vitriol and dehumanizing rhetoric you heard from clean cut, unassuming blue collar white guys would drive you insane with rage. Unfortunately, that dormant racism will always be there. These people aren't our friends, neither are they in the business of just being left alone(unless we are talking about libertarians, which make a fraction of the conservative movement).

@Haji 2003 I'll get back to you on the first point. I usually source from, so will have to circle back once i get them back from family. I appreciate the second point, but i did not say they were a monolith. Many corporations were impacted negatively from the Iraq war, and were in opposition to it because of the risk of their brands being boycotted throughout the Muslim world. Nonetheless, the war went on anyway, and a fair share of corporations did indeed profit. That was obviously not the only motive, but nonetheless it happened, and in hindsight we all agree it was absolutely nefarious. Point is, not all key stakeholders or powerbrokers need to be aligned for bad things to happen or corruption to take place.

Salaam i will respond again after finishing viewing it, but i will say this, and this is simply an observation about British Islam in general. It's definitely a bit more provocative from Hiz-b-Tahir, to grooming gangs that were predominantly Muslim, to characters like Muhammad Hijab and Ali Dawah to Yasir Al-Habib on the other spectrum. I'm sure there more reserved voices that make up the majority of the notable figures in the UK, but all the characters from the UK that appear through my youtube algorithm all tend to have an extra bit of spice to them compared to the more conciliatory nature of the American Muslim leadership. Is it something in the water there?

Salaam, I'm glad there was pushback in this conversation from the typical cyber bullying and name-calling whenever someone questions the official Covid narrative. As with anything else that exists in the universe, there are questions to be asked, policies to be critiqued, bureaucracy and corporate profiteers to be questioned, and money to be followed. Anyone that frowns upon or tries to bully others through silly name calling isn't a good faith actor. People often conflate the scientific method, which is apparently unfalsifiable with the corporate bureaucracy and the very human impulses and desires that drive that scientific enterprise. Assuming the latter is above the potential of corruption is amateurish thinking. Dr. Anthony Fauci and his lackeys have made hundreds of thousands of dollars from kickbacks from pharmaceutical companies, and it's fact that they have invested in specific drugs over others, irrespective of efficacy. I'm ranting, but the humans and institutions that make up the scientific enterprise are not above question, and asking question and drawing conclusions from answers to those questions doesn't make one a quack or whatever else elitist label you're fond of using.

This is usually what happens when someone is making observations about a culture or a belief system without actually having lived amongst that culture or religion. It's a perfect illustration of when people talk about academics speaking from ivory towers disconnected from on the ground reality. Interestingly enough, much of it is is similar to how his good buddy Sam Harris views the Muslim world. He's less active on the topic, as he usually likes to comment on what's trending(he went pretty hard at the Covid narrative dissenters last year) but nonetheless, a lot of what Harris believed and shared about the Muslim world was drawn heavily from polls conducted from part of the Muslim world, as opposed to actually taking time to live amongst that culture and it's scholarship. He would without apology hold those polls as having all-encompassing explanatory power. Peterson may be sincere underneath all of it, but he's anchored by the ones he relies upon and trusts on these matters.