Search the Community

I came across an old article by Seymour Hersh today. I especially liked this video. Hersh in 2007 claimed that the US was working with the Saudis to create a terror cell to fight Hezbollah. Hersh implicated Prince Bandar, the newly elected Saudi intelligence chief as the prime culprit towards creating this terror cell. He alledged that the purpose of Fatah Islam was to eventually fight Hezbollah. Well for those who don't know, Lebanon's top Sunni terrorist and Fatah al Islam member was killed in Syria several months back: http://world.time.com/2012/04/23/in-syria-lebanons-most-wanted-sunni-terrorist-blows-himself-up/ Fatah al Islam and the Takfiris from other countries are going there in droves -- with full US + Saudi support. The US plan is to take out Assad, take out Hezbollah and ultimately bomb Iran. Even though this is an old video, I felt all of his points are becoming reality. I strongly suggest you take 5 minutes and watch it:

The last time I laughed so hard for 10 mins when I listened to the fatwa of Saudi Sheikh on soccer games' rules and regulation! Now listen to this! LOL _________________ Abdallah Al-Khilaf: First, we'd like to show you a fatwa, which appeared on the Lions of Sunna Internet forum. One Wahhabi wrote: "Dear Sheik, may Allah grant you martyrdom and black-eyed virgins in Paradise, I wanted to commit a martyrdom operation. I turned to Sheik Abu Dimaa Al-Qassab, who told me that they had invented a new and unprecedented form of martyrdom operations – explosive capsules are inserted into your anus. "In order to train for this method of Jihad, you must consent to being sodomized for a period of time, so that your anus becomes wider, making room for the explosives. "My question is whether I am permitted to allow one of the mujahideen access to my anus, if my intentions are honorable, and the purpose is to train for Jihad by widening my anus." The sheik praised Allah and said: "In principle, sodomy is forbidden. However, Jihad is more important. It is the pinnacle of Islam. If sodomy is the only way to reach this pinnacle of Islam, then there is no harm in it. "The rule is that necessity makes the forbidden permissible. Something that is required in order to perform a duty becomes a duty in and of itself. No duty takes precedence over Jihad. "Therefore, you must be sodomized... After you have been sodomized, you must ask Allah for forgiveness. "Know, my son, that Allah resurrects the mujahideen on Judgment Day on the basis of their intentions. Allah willing, your intention is to support Islam. May Allah include you among those who heed His call." This is the fatwa that led a man a while ago to carry out a bombing attack against then Interior Minister Naif bin Abd Al-Aziz

What do you think about this:

You think your better than them? Think again :shaytan:

Has anybody read the book "Memoirs Of Mr. Hempher, The British Spy To The Middle East". It's the story of a British spy of how he managed to have Abdul Wahab, the founder of Wahabi Salafi cult to destroy Islam and corrupt Muslims of Middle East and the rest of the world. The najis seed that Hempher planted, is now grown into this thorney stinky wild bush, maiming and destroying Muslims with thousands of wounds, emotional, physical, and cultural. Among their many crimes, they have destroyed almost all of the relics that belonged to the prophet of Islam, destroyed the houses where prophet, his family, and his friends used to reside. It's an interesting story of deceit, espionage, Sunni gullibility, how Sunnis could be misled into the kufr of wahabism in the absence of a system of marjaiat, how Shias were never deceived thanks to their system of leadership of ulema, and so on. Some eye opening observations and eiman shaking book for Sunnis. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memoirs_Of_Mr._Hempher,_The_British_Spy_To_The_Middle_East

Question: Isn't it a good idea for the Houthi movement's social branch to setup donation collecting centers in countries like Iran, Iraq, Lebanon, Kuwait and even EU to support the poor people in North Yemen? Most Shias might be willing to donate and help them, especially after years of poverty and multiple wars that were imposed on them by Saudi and their own puppet government. Now that they are free and in control of many areas in the North, they should use all resources to help people socially and economically to build themselves reputations amongst people. Abdulmalik Al Houthi From Wiki, Sheikh Sayyid Abdul-Malik al-Houthi (born 1982) is a leader of the Zaidiyyah in Sa'dah Governorate, Yemen. His brothers Yahia Badreddin al Houthi and Abdul-Karim Al-Houthi are also leaders of the movement, as was his late brother Hussein Badreddin al-Houthi. He was claimed to have been heavily injured during an air raid in December 2009, a claim denied by Houthi spokesmen. On 26 December 2009 it was claimed that Abdul-Malik has been killed after 2 days from a heavy air strike from the Royal Saudi Air Force. The claim however was refuted by the Houthis which then released video evidence proving he was alive. The al Houthi movement in Yemen traces its roots back to a political and paramilitary group called the Believing Youth established in the mid-1990s by Hussein Badr al Din al Houthi. In 2001, Hussein al Houthi increasingly spoke out against the state, and the group held mass anti-government and anti-American demonstrations. The government issued a reward for the capture of Hussein and security forces killed him in September 2004 during an attempt to arrest him. His death ignited an uprising by his followers, who became known as the al Houthis. The al Houthi movement draws its supporters from the Zaydi Shiite population in northern Yemen and is primarily active in Sa'ada and Amran provinces. The al Houthis' grievances include economic and social marginalization, corruption in the government, close alignment of the state with the U.S. and Saudi Arabia, and excessive Wahhabi influence on state policy and schools. Al Houthi leaders, however, are quick to deny accusations that the goal of the al Houthi movement is to re-establish a Shiite imamate in the north of Yemen – an accusation the government often repeats. The al Houthi movement claims to seek autonomy from the Yemeni state for the Zaydi Shiite population in order to redress its other stated grievances. Abdul Malik's Ashura speech (Arabic)

The decades-old winter of frozen and fossilised structures and systems in the Arab world are thawing. The term exceptionalism in the Arab context harks back to Samuel Huntington's thesis that envisages the progression of democracy in waves. The third wave was frozen after its initial advances in the 1970s. It never washed the shores of the Arab/Muslim world, according to this thesis. Hence the Arab exceptionalism. Today, the term has been reinvented in the context of the Arab Spring. The Spring is a year old, and not a single crowned head has rolled so far. Hence, the monarchical exceptionalism. The institution of monarchy does provide a buffer between the monarch and his subjects in the form of a government structure. The king has the privilege of sacking a besieged government and still remaining in power. In the case of Saudi Arabia, the oil-wealth, a small population, huge government patronage, welfare economy, etc., provide additional immunity. On the other hand, an ageing leadership, internet-savvy and educated youth, assertive women, sectarian divisions, and a contagious “Arab Spring” all around in the neighbourhood indicate a partial and potential vulnerability of the Saudi King. Youth, women & minorities The condition of the youth, women and the minorities is the barometer of a country's socio-political health. A closer scrutiny of these three segments of Saudi society is necessary to understand the general ethos in the country. There is no uniform mobilisation and there have been no widespread protests in the country so far. The Saudi youth, women and the Shias in the east of the country have voiced their grievances separately, nonetheless. In view of the tightly secured Saudi streets, cyberspace has provided an alternative platform to mark the popular protests. Internet activists have resorted to it in a big way. Blogs have appeared to express the anger; documentaries have been made to expose poverty that has never been acknowledged. Petitions have been signed to call for a constitutional monarchy. There was an attempt at forming a political party. The founders were arrested almost immediately. Saudi women live under the guardianship of their male relatives. Their decisions to get education, to work, to travel or to receive health care must be endorsed by their guardians. They are not permitted to drive or ride in a vehicle driven by someone who is not a close male relative or an employee. King Abdullah evoked a flurry of expectant speculation, when he stated that the Saudi women would “one day be able to drive.” That was soon after he inherited the Saudi monarchy. After waiting several years for that “one day,” the women have become restive. Late last year, some drove and posted the videos of themselves behind the wheels on YouTube and other social networks. Their cases are pending before the courts and they will not go unpunished. Late last year, King Abdullah announced in a five-minute speech televised live that he was granting women the right to vote in future municipal elections, the right to run as candidates, and that they would be appointed to the Shura Council, the 150-member body that advises the King on legislation and policy. This time around, fewer Saudi women are reported to be excited about it. Some are sceptical, and many more cynical. All Saudis follow Islam. There is a major sectarian cleavage between the Sunni and the Shia interpretations of Islam. The Shias are the largest minority in the country, constituting anywhere between four and 15 per cent of the population and numbering anywhere between one and four million. What makes the Shia situation crucial is the fact that the oil wealth is located under their soil and in the water around their land. Left to themselves, theirs could be the richest state in the entire region. Protests erupted in the Eastern Province on the “Day of Rage” in mid-March last year, and have continued since then. A hundred people have been arrested, scores have been shot dead. Survival, sectarianism & Iran The Saudi responses to the Arab Spring in its neighbourhood can neatly be summarised in three words: survival, sectarianism and Iran. Zainul Abedin ben Ali, Hosni Mubarak and Muammar Qaddafi did not survive the onslaught of the Arab Spring. The signs of its nascent arrival in the Kingdom are already evident. An active foreign policy to claim leadership of the Sunni Arabs, therefore, is an imperative for the royal survival. Iran, a Shia non-Arab power across the Gulf waters, to that extent, is the prime target of Saudi activism. The Saudi involvement with the Arab Spring has seen a progression with each case. The Saudis were reportedly disappointed by the U.S. abandoning the besieged Hosni Mubarak and offered to restore the monetary assistance that the U.S. withdrew from him. King Abdullah came out in support of Mr. Mubarak from his sickbed in Morocco. The Saudis' response to the Libyan developments was one of reticence, even as they went along with the Qatari lead in inviting foreign intervention. Yemen is a complicated and multi-layered conflict situation. The Saudis have three major concerns. One, the Saudi-born-and-bred al-Qaeda has found a safe haven in Yemen. Two, the long and uncontrolled border has been a regular route for illegal immigration, arms smuggling and narcotics trade. Three, the Saudis fear waves of Yemeni refugees, if the situation deteriorates. The Saudis have sought to manage the Yemeni situation, first by granting the former President, Ali Abdullah Saleh, political asylum, and then facilitating his exit. It was the Spring in Bahrain that jolted the Saudis into action. A small island Kingdom with a Sunni ruler and roughly 70 per cent Shia population, Bahrain has always been divided along the sectarian cleavage. The Spring, predictably, turned into the Shia struggle for equality. Political stability and a compliant regime in Bahrain are of utmost importance to the U.S., as the American base on the island is considered the most important strategic territory outside the U.S. proper. Any disturbance in the country would be unacceptable to the U.S. and its Saudi ally. As the violence erupted beyond the Bahraini authority's capability to tackle it, the Saudis stepped in. A convoy of 150 armoured troop carriers and about 50 lightly armed vehicles carried about 1,000 Saudi soldiers across the King Fahd Causeway into Bahrain in mid-March. The Saudi stand on Syria, unlike on Egypt, Yemen and Bahrain, is to support the uprising. Lest there be a doubt about its motive in castigating President Bashar al-Assad's repressive policy, the Saudi Prince, Turki al-Faisal, explained it thus: “The impending fall of Mr. Assad's barbarous regime provides a rare strategic opportunity to weaken Iran. Without this vital ally, Tehran will find it more difficult to foment discord in the Arab world. Today, there is a chance for the United States and Saudi Arabia to contain Iran and prevent it from destabilising the region.” The quote is an open admission; even an assertion. The Saudi path to Iran runs through Syria. What next? Tunisia, Libya and Egypt in North Africa have been the harbingers of the Arab Spring. All three of them have witnessed regime changes and are in the process of taking stock and moving forward at their own individual pace. Whether the Spring will spread eastward in a typical domino fashion to the rest of the Arab world remains to be seen. Whether it eventually brings about a comprehensive reshaping of the region is uncertain at best. What is certain is that the decades-old winter of frozen and fossilised structures and systems in the Arab world are thawing. And Saudi Arabia is no exception. The decades-old winter of frozen and fossilised structures and systems in the Arab world are thawing. The term exceptionalism in the Arab context harks back to Samuel Huntington's thesis that envisages the progression of democracy in waves. The third wave was frozen after its initial advances in the 1970s. It never washed the shores of the Arab/Muslim world, according to this thesis. Hence the Arab exceptionalism. Today, the term has been reinvented in the context of the Arab Spring. The Spring is a year old, and not a single crowned head has rolled so far. Hence, the monarchical exceptionalism. The institution of monarchy does provide a buffer between the monarch and his subjects in the form of a government structure. The king has the privilege of sacking a besieged government and still remaining in power. In the case of Saudi Arabia, the oil-wealth, a small population, huge government patronage, welfare economy, etc., provide additional immunity. On the other hand, an ageing leadership, internet-savvy and educated youth, assertive women, sectarian divisions, and a contagious “Arab Spring” all around in the neighbourhood indicate a partial and potential vulnerability of the Saudi King. Youth, women & minorities The condition of the youth, women and the minorities is the barometer of a country's socio-political health. A closer scrutiny of these three segments of Saudi society is necessary to understand the general ethos in the country. There is no uniform mobilisation and there have been no widespread protests in the country so far. The Saudi youth, women and the Shias in the east of the country have voiced their grievances separately, nonetheless. In view of the tightly secured Saudi streets, cyberspace has provided an alternative platform to mark the popular protests. Internet activists have resorted to it in a big way. Blogs have appeared to express the anger; documentaries have been made to expose poverty that has never been acknowledged. Petitions have been signed to call for a constitutional monarchy. There was an attempt at forming a political party. The founders were arrested almost immediately. Saudi women live under the guardianship of their male relatives. Their decisions to get education, to work, to travel or to receive health care must be endorsed by their guardians. They are not permitted to drive or ride in a vehicle driven by someone who is not a close male relative or an employee. King Abdullah evoked a flurry of expectant speculation, when he stated that the Saudi women would “one day be able to drive.” That was soon after he inherited the Saudi monarchy. After waiting several years for that “one day,” the women have become restive. Late last year, some drove and posted the videos of themselves behind the wheels on YouTube and other social networks. Their cases are pending before the courts and they will not go unpunished. Late last year, King Abdullah announced in a five-minute speech televised live that he was granting women the right to vote in future municipal elections, the right to run as candidates, and that they would be appointed to the Shura Council, the 150-member body that advises the King on legislation and policy. This time around, fewer Saudi women are reported to be excited about it. Some are sceptical, and many more cynical. All Saudis follow Islam. There is a major sectarian cleavage between the Sunni and the Shia interpretations of Islam. The Shias are the largest minority in the country, constituting anywhere between four and 15 per cent of the population and numbering anywhere between one and four million. What makes the Shia situation crucial is the fact that the oil wealth is located under their soil and in the water around their land. Left to themselves, theirs could be the richest state in the entire region. Protests erupted in the Eastern Province on the “Day of Rage” in mid-March last year, and have continued since then. A hundred people have been arrested, scores have been shot dead. Survival, sectarianism & Iran The Saudi responses to the Arab Spring in its neighbourhood can neatly be summarised in three words: survival, sectarianism and Iran. Zainul Abedin ben Ali, Hosni Mubarak and Muammar Qaddafi did not survive the onslaught of the Arab Spring. The signs of its nascent arrival in the Kingdom are already evident. An active foreign policy to claim leadership of the Sunni Arabs, therefore, is an imperative for the royal survival. Iran, a Shia non-Arab power across the Gulf waters, to that extent, is the prime target of Saudi activism. The Saudi involvement with the Arab Spring has seen a progression with each case. The Saudis were reportedly disappointed by the U.S. abandoning the besieged Hosni Mubarak and offered to restore the monetary assistance that the U.S. withdrew from him. King Abdullah came out in support of Mr. Mubarak from his sickbed in Morocco. The Saudis' response to the Libyan developments was one of reticence, even as they went along with the Qatari lead in inviting foreign intervention. Yemen is a complicated and multi-layered conflict situation. The Saudis have three major concerns. One, the Saudi-born-and-bred al-Qaeda has found a safe haven in Yemen. Two, the long and uncontrolled border has been a regular route for illegal immigration, arms smuggling and narcotics trade. Three, the Saudis fear waves of Yemeni refugees, if the situation deteriorates. The Saudis have sought to manage the Yemeni situation, first by granting the former President, Ali Abdullah Saleh, political asylum, and then facilitating his exit. It was the Spring in Bahrain that jolted the Saudis into action. A small island Kingdom with a Sunni ruler and roughly 70 per cent Shia population, Bahrain has always been divided along the sectarian cleavage. The Spring, predictably, turned into the Shia struggle for equality. Political stability and a compliant regime in Bahrain are of utmost importance to the U.S., as the American base on the island is considered the most important strategic territory outside the U.S. proper. Any disturbance in the country would be unacceptable to the U.S. and its Saudi ally. As the violence erupted beyond the Bahraini authority's capability to tackle it, the Saudis stepped in. A convoy of 150 armoured troop carriers and about 50 lightly armed vehicles carried about 1,000 Saudi soldiers across the King Fahd Causeway into Bahrain in mid-March. The Saudi stand on Syria, unlike on Egypt, Yemen and Bahrain, is to support the uprising. Lest there be a doubt about its motive in castigating President Bashar al-Assad's repressive policy, the Saudi Prince, Turki al-Faisal, explained it thus: “The impending fall of Mr. Assad's barbarous regime provides a rare strategic opportunity to weaken Iran. Without this vital ally, Tehran will find it more difficult to foment discord in the Arab world. Today, there is a chance for the United States and Saudi Arabia to contain Iran and prevent it from destabilising the region.” The quote is an open admission; even an assertion. The Saudi path to Iran runs through Syria. What next? Tunisia, Libya and Egypt in North Africa have been the harbingers of the Arab Spring. All three of them have witnessed regime changes and are in the process of taking stock and moving forward at their own individual pace. Whether the Spring will spread eastward in a typical domino fashion to the rest of the Arab world remains to be seen. Whether it eventually brings about a comprehensive reshaping of the region is uncertain at best. What is certain is that the decades-old winter of frozen and fossilised structures and systems in the Arab world are thawing. And Saudi Arabia is no exception. courtesy - the hindu

What do you think, what is the root cause of homosexuality in society? Remember societies are different, there are oppressive societies and cultures such as Saudi Arabia, Wahabi, Salafi cultures of over separation of genders and so on. And then there is ultra feminist, man hater cultures of the West. Please do not comment on Gender Identity Crisis (the disease) since I want to limit this topic only to probing the causes of homosexuality (the crime).

(salam) (bismillah) A gift to my momin brothers and sisters. (41) وَاسْتَمِعْ يَوْمَ يُنَادِ الْمُنَادِ مِنْ مَكَانٍ قَرِيبٍ [Shakir 50:41] And listen on the day when the crier shall cry from a near place [Pickthal 50:41] And listen on the day when the crier crieth from a near place, [Yusufali 50:41] And listen for the Day when the Caller will call out from a place quiet near,- Now some people may claim that this is about the "cry of Israfeel (a.s)" but Quran clears in the very next verse. (42) ‏يَوْمَ يَسْمَعُونَ ٱلصَّيْحَةَ بِٱلْحَقِّ ۚ ذَلِكَ يَوْمُ ٱلْخُرُوجِ [Shakir 50:42] The day when they shall hear the cry in truth; that is the day of coming forth. [Pickthal 50:42] The day when they will hear the (Awful) Cry in truth. That is the day of coming forth (from the graves). [Yusufali 50:42] The Day when they will hear a (mighty) Blast in (very) truth: that will be the Day of Resurrection. It is quite obvious that the translation by Yusufali is not compatible with arabic text as there is word of "kharooj" not "Qiyamat" (Resurrection).

(salam) 1. Who are Jahmis? 2. Are they Muslims? 3. Where they mostly exist? 4. Do they follow Sunni fiqh? 5. What is their main differences from other sects?

Destruction of Jannatul Baqi - The oppression on Janabe Fatima (sa) continues till today ON THE SAD OCCASION OF THE DESTRUCTION OF THE GRAVES OF JANNATUL BAQI BY THE WAHABIS( 8TH SHAWWAL -1345 AH / April 21, 1925) ____________________________________________________ HISTORY OF THE CEMETERY OF JANNAT AL-BAQI WHERE IMAM HASAN B. ALI (2ND IMAM), IMAM ALI B. AL-HUSAYN (4TH IMAM), IMAM MUHAMMAD B. ALI (5TH IMAM), & IMAM JA'FAR B. MUHAMMAD (6TH IMAM), PEACE BE UPON THEM, ARE BURIED On 8th Shawwal, Wednesday, in the year 1345 AH (April 21, 1925), mausoleums in Jannatul al-Baqi (Madina) were demolished by King Ibn Saud. In the same year (1925), he also demolished the tombs of holy personages at Jannat al-Mualla (Makkah) where the Holy Prophet (s)'s mother, wife, grandfather and other ancestors are buried. Destruction of sacred sites in Hijaz by the Saudi Wahhabis continues even today. According to some scholars what is happening in Hijaz is actually a conspiracy plotted by the Jews against Islam, under the guise of Tawheed. The idea is to eradicate the Islamic legacy and heritage and to systematically remove all its vestiges so that in the days to come, Muslims will have no affiliation with their religious history. The Origins of Al-Baqi <a href=" http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-dEIZ4ePCGt4/TmXLSBi_GkI/AAAAAAAAAOM/T3hYOhGIc_8/s1600/baqiiii.gif" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;">Literally "al-Baqi" means a tree garden. It is also known as "Jannat al-Baqi" due to its sanctity, since in it are buried many of our Prophet's relatives and companions. The first companion buried in al-Baqi was Uthman b. Madhoon who died on the 3rd of Sha'ban in the 3rd year of Hijrah. The Prophet (s) ordered certain trees to be felled, and in its midst, he buried his dear companion, placing two stones over the grave. On the following years, the Prophet's son Ibrahim, who died in infancy and over whom the Prophet (s) wept bitterly, was also buried there. The people of Madina then began to use that site for the burial of their own dead, because the Prophet (s) used to greet those who were buried in al-Baqi by saying, "Peace be upon you, O abode of the faithful! God willing, we should soon join you. O' Allah, forgive the fellows of al-Baqi". The site of the burial ground at al-Baqi was gradually extended. Nearly seven thousand companions of the Holy Prophet (s) were buried there, not to mention those of the Ahlul Bayt عليه السلام. Imam Hasan b. Ali عليه السلام, Imam Ali b. al-Husayn عليه السلام, Imam Muhammad al-Baqir عليه السلام, and Imam Ja'far al-Sadiq (a) were all buried there. Among other relatives of the Prophet (s) who were buried at al-Baqi are: his aunts Safiya and Aatika, and his aunt Fatima bint al-Asad, the mother of Imam Ali عليه السلام. The third caliph Uthman was buried outside al-Baqi, but with later extensions, his grave was included in the area. In later years, great Muslim scholars like Malik bin Anas and many others, were buried there too. Thus, did al-Baqi become a well-known place of great historic significance to all Muslims. http://oppressionsup...a.blogspot.com/ Al-Baqi as viewed by historians Umar bin Jubair describes al-Baqi as he saw it during his travel to Madina, saying "Al-Baqi is situated to the east of Madina. You enter it through the gate known as the gate of al-Baqi. As you enter, the first grave you see on your left is that of Safiya, the Prophet's aunt, and further still is the grave of Malik bin Anas, the Imam of Madina. On his grave is raised a small dome. In front of it is the grave of Ibrahim son of our Prophet (s) with a white dome over it, and next to it on the right is the grave of Abdul-Rahman son of Umar bin al-Khattab, popularly known as Abu Shahma, whose father had kept punishing him till death overtook him. Facing it are the graves of Aqeel bin Abi Talib and Abdullah bin Ja'far al-Tayyar. There, facing those graves is a small shrine containing the graves of the Prophet's wives, following by a shrine of Abbas bin Abdul Muttalib. The grave of Hasan bin Ali عليه السلام, situated near the gate to it's right hand, has an elevated dome over it. His head lies at the feet of Abbas bin Abdul Muttalib, and both graves are raised high above the ground, their walls are panelled with yellow plates and studded with beautiful star-shaped nails. This is how the grave of Ibrahim, son of the Prophet (s) has also been adorned. Behind the shrine of Abbas there is the house attributed to Fatima, daughter of our Prophet (s), known as "Bayt al-Ahzaan" (the house of grief) because it is the house she used to frequent in order to mourn the death of her father, the chosen one, peace be upon him. At the farthest end of al-Baqi is the grave of the caliph Uthman, with a small dome over it, and there, next to it, is the grave of Fatima bint Asad, mother of Ali b. Abi Talib (a)" After a century and a half, the famous traveller Ibn Batuta came to describe al-Baqi in a way which does not in any way differ from the description given by Ibn Jubair. He adds saying, "At al-Baqi are the graves of numerous Muhajirin and Ansar and many companions of the Prophet (s), except that most of their names are unknown." Thus, over the centuries, al-Baqi remained a sacred site with renovations being carried out as and when needed till the Wahhabis rose to power in the early nineteenth century. The latter desecrated the tombs and demonstrated disrespect to the martyrs and the companions of the Prophet (s) buried there. Muslims who disagreed with them were branded as "infidels" and were subsequently killed. The First Destruction of Al-Baqi The Wahhabis believed that visiting the graves and the shrines of the Prophets, the Imams, or the saints was a form of idolatry and totally un-Islamic. Those who did not conform with their belief were killed and their property was confiscated. Since their first invasion of Iraq, and till nowadays, in fact, the Wahhabis, as well as other rulers of the Gulf States, having been carrying out massacres from which no Muslim who disagreed with them was spared. Obviously, the rest of the Islamic World viewed those graves with deep reverence. Had it not been so, the two caliphs Abu Bakr and Umar would not have expressed their desire for burial near the grave of the Prophet (s). From 1205 AH to 1217 AH, the Wahhabis made several attempts to gain a foothold in Hijaz but failed. Finally, in 1217 AH, they somehow emerged victorious in Taif where they spilled the innocent blood of Muslims. In 1218 AH, they entered Makkah and destroyed all sacred places and domes there, including the one which served as a canopy over the well of Zamzam. In 1221, the Wahhabis entered Madina to desecrate al-Baqi as well as every mosque they came across. An attempt was even made to demolish the Prophet's tomb, but for one reason or another, the idea was abandoned. In subsequent years, Muslims from Iraq, Syria, and Egypt were refused entry into Makkah for Hajj. King Al-Saud set a pre-condition that those who wished to perform the pilgrimage would have to accept Wahhabism or else be branded as non-Muslims, becoming ineligible for entry into the Haram. Al-Baqi was razed to the ground, with no sign of any grave or tomb whatsoever. But the Saudis were still not quite satisfied with doing all of that. Their king ordered three black attendants at the Prophet's shrine to show him where the treasure of valuable gifts were stored. The Wahhabis plundered the treasure for their own use. Thousands of Muslims fled Makkah and Madina in a bid to save their lives and escape from the mounting pressure and persecution at the hands of the Wahhabis. Muslims from all over the world denounced this Saudi savagery and exhorted the Caliphate of the Ottoman Empire to save the sacred shrines from total destruction. Then, as it is known, Muhammad Ali Basha attacked Hijaz and, with the support of local tribes, managed to restore law and order in Madina and Makkah, dislodging the Al-Saud clansmen. The entire Muslim world celebrated this victory with great fanfare and rejoicing. In Cairo, the celebrations continued for five days. No doubt, the joy was due to the fact that pilgrims were once more allowed freely to go for Hajj, and the sacred shrines were once again restored. In 1818 AD, the Ottaman Caliph Abdul Majid and his successors, Caliphs Abdul Hamid and Mohammed, carried out the reconstruction of all sacred places, restoring the Islamic heritage at all important sites. In 1848 and 1860 AD, further renovations were made at the expense of nearly seven hundred thousand pounds, most of which came from the donations collected at the Prophet's tomb. The second plunder by the Wahhabis The Ottoman Empire had added to the splendor of Madina and Makkah by building religious structures of great beauty and architectural value. Richard Burton, who visited the holy shrines in 1853 AD disguised as an Afghan Muslim and adopting the Muslim name Abdullah, speaks of Madina boasting 55 mosques and holy shrines. Another English adventurer who visited Madina in 1877-1878 AD describes it as a small beautiful city resembling Istanbul. He writes about its white walls, golden slender minarets and green fields. 1924 AD Wahhabis entered Hijaz for a second time and carried out another merciless plunder and massacre. People in streets were killed. Houses were razed to the ground. Women and children too were not spared. Awn bin Hashim (Shairf of Makkah) writes: "Before me, a valley appeared to have been paved with corpses, dried blood staining everywhere all around. There was hardly a tree which didn't have one or two dead bodies near its roots." 1925 Madina surrendered to the Wahhabi onslaught. All Islamic heritage were destroyed. The only shrine that remained intact was that of the Holy Prophet (s). Ibn Jabhan says: "We know that the tomb standing on the Prophet's grave is against our principles, and to have his grave in a mosque is an abominable sin." Tombs of Hamza and other martyrs were demolished at Uhud. The Prophet's mosque was bombarded. On protest by Muslims, assurances were given by Ibn Saud that it will be restored but the promise was never fulfilled. A promise was given that Hijaz will have an Islamic multinational government. This was also abandoned. 1925 AD Jannat al-Mu'alla, the sacred cemetery at Makkah was destroyed alongwith the house where the Holy Prophet (s) was born. Since then, this day is a day of mourning for all Muslims. Is it not strange that the Wahhabis find it offensive to have the tombs, shrines and other places of importance preserved, while the remains of their Saudi kings are being guarded at the expense of millions of dollars? "HAI SAYYADA , HAI SAYYADA , HAI SAYYADA , HAI SAYYADA , PEHLU BHI SHIKASTA HAI , TURBAT BHI SHIKASTA HAI KYA HAL YE UMMAT NE , ZAHRA KA BANAYA HAI ......." Protests 1926, protest gatherings were held by shocked Muslims all over the world. Resolutions were passed and a statement outlining the crimes perpetrated by Wahhabis was issued and included the following: The destruction and desecration of the holy places i.e. the birth place of the Holy Prophet , the graves of Banu Hashim in Makkah and in Jannat al-Baqi (Madinah), the refusal of the Wahhabis to allow Muslims to recite Ziyarah or Surah al-Fatiha at those graves. The destruction of the places of worship i.e. Masjid Hamza, Masjid Abu Rasheed, in addition to the tombs of Imams and Sahaba (Prophet's companions). Interference in the performance of Hajj rituals. Forcing the Muslims to follow the Wahhabis innovations and to abandon their own ways according to the guidance of the Imams they follow. The massacre of sayyids in Taif, Madina, Ahsa, and Qatif. The demolition of the grave of the Imams at al-Baqi which deeply offended and grieved all Shias. Protests were lodged by Muslims in Iran, Iraq, Egypt, Indonesia, and Turkey. All of them condemn the Saudi Wahhabis for their barbaric acts. Some scholars wrote tracts and books to tell the world the fact that what was happening in Hijaz was actually a conspiracy plotted by the Jews against Islam, under the guise of Tawheed. The idea was to eradicate the Islamic legacy and heritage and to systematically remove all its vestiges so that in the days to come, Muslims will have no affiliation with their religious history. A partial list of the demolished graves and shrines Al-Mualla graveyard in Makkah which includes the grave of Sayyida Khadija bint Khuwailid عليه السلام, wife of the Prophet (s), the grave of Amina bint Wahab, mother of the Prophet (s), the grave of Abu Talib, father of Imam Ali عليه السلام, and the grave of Abdul Muttalib, grandfather of the Prophet (s) The grave of Hawa (Eve) in Jeddah The grave of the father of the Prophet (s) in Madina The house of sorrows (bayt al-Ahzan) of Sayyida Fatima (a) in Madina The Salman al-Farsi mosque in Madina The Raj'at ash-Shams mosque in Madina The house of the Prophet (s) in Madina, where he lived after migrating from Makkah The house of Imam Ja'far al-Sadiq (a) in Madina The complex (mahhalla) of Banu Hashim in Madina The house of Imam Ali (a) where Imam Hasan (a) and Imam Husayn (a) were born The house of Hamza and the graves of the martyrs of Uhud (a) "YA RABBA MOHAMMED AJJIL FARAJA AALE MOHAMMED YA RABBA MOHAMMED EHFAZ GHAIBATA MOHAMMED YA RABBA MOHAMMED INTAQIM LE IBNATE MOHAMMED (SAWA)" 'YA RABBAZ ZAHRA BE HAQQE ZAHRA ISHFE SADRIL ZEHRA BE ZUHOORIL HUJJAH " "O Allah HASTEN THE REAPPEARENCE OF IMAM E ZAMANA (ATFS) BY THE HAQ OF JANABE ZAHRA AND FOR THE CONTENT OF THE HEART OF JANABE ZAHRA !!!"

Abdullah Bin Saba existed or not is not relevant but this is harsh fact that Salafis and other Nasibis of like nature have found a character for putting all the blame on him. Let us see what were the crimes of so called companions, this character Abdullah Bin Saba has been used for:- CRIMES OF ABDULLAH BIN SABA WHERE COMPANIONS WERE QUITE INNOCENT: 1. During Usman era Abdullah bin Saba and his followers forced Usman to break the ribs of Abdullah Bin Mas'od (r.a) and force Abu Zar Ghaffari (r.a) to live in "Rabza". Usman was so innocent to call "bread" "Bledd") (Urdu: Rotee ko chochee kehtae thae). It was all fault of Abdullah bin Saba and his companions (Sabaaites) 2. There was no dispute of companions of the prophet with Usman. The rule of Usman was a just rule where every one was happy there was justice, equity and fairplay. Every one was getting his due. The door of the Baitul Mal was open for all needy people and it is wrong to say that Ummayads were made powerful and they looted and robbed Baitul Mal for themselves. These were Sabaiites (Followers of Abdullah Bin Saba) who surrounded the house of Usman and later killed him. The companions of the prophet were so weak that they could not save this great companion of Prophet (pbuh)and he was murdered right in Madina the Islamic capital of that time. All the companions were sad on his demise. There was no saying of Hazrat Aysha that "Kill this Naathal (Jew), he has become Kafir". Sabaiites managed to kill Usman while he was in the tight security of great companions and Marwan bin Hikm (His son in law). Companions were innocent. 2. After killing Usman, the Sabbaiites managed to persuade Hazrat Aysha to fight battle with Jamal. Again this time the companions were so innocent that they were easily used by Sabbaiites for creating battle between Ali a.s and Aysha. There was no fault of companions of prophet (pbuh). They were quite pious people. They just made mistake in Ijtehad not more than this. Hazrat Aysha was also innocent. (She was so innocent to call "bread" "Bledd") (Urdu: Rotee ko chochee kehtee theen). 3. In Jamal Sabbaaittes made fool of Talha and Zubair who had no greed for the governorship of Basra and Kufa but they were so innocent that they easily break "Baiyat of Ali a.s" and joined Aysha for battle against Ali a.s. This is again fault of Abdullah Bin Saba and his companions while these great companions were quite innocent. They were also so innocent to call "bread" "Bledd") (Urdu: Rotee ko chochee kehtae thae). 4. In Sifeen also Muawvia had no greed of power. He was not obliged to leave his governorship on the order of Ali bin Abi Talib a.s. He was very loving person who wanted to take revenge of Hazrat Usman from his murderers. Sabbaaites again conspired and forced him to fight against Ali bin Abi Talib a.s. While he was so innocent. It was only his Khata e Ijtehadi that he executed Hujr bin Udi and many other companions of Prophet (pbuh). He was also so innocent to call "bread" "Bledd") (Urdu: Rotee ko chochee kehtae thae). 5. There was no fault of Yazeed (l.a) in Karbala rather Sabbaiites and his followers killed Imam Hussain a.s. This justified Salafis to call Yazeed (la) as R.a. Yazeed was so innocent to call "bread" "Bledd") (Urdu: Rotee ko chochee kehta tha). So the Shias are founded by Abdullah Bin Saba. lol

Visitation of Graves and Wahhabism Visitation of graves and respecting them has been an age-old tradition, an act revered and considered absolutely important. The visitation of a pilgrim is widely accepted among the people and due to this they respect the pilgrim. This trait is found in all the religions and across all nations.People of the past and the present have always considered visiting graves as means of fortune and prosperity. Abu Hatim says that whenever Abu Mashur Abdullah Demeshqi Ghassani (died 218 A.H.) used to go towards the mosque people one after the other used to salute him and kiss his hands. Abu Sa’ad used to say that whenever Abul Qasim Sa’ad b. Ali Shaikh Haram Zanjani (died 471 A.H.) used to go towards the House of Allah (Kabaa) for circumambulation (tawaaf), people used to rise from their places to kiss his hands, many more times than they would kiss the Black Stone (Hajare Aswad). Ibne Kaseer in his Tarikh from pages 12-20 has mentioned the reason for their actions, saying, people by doing this used to seek an increase in blessings. Whenever Abu Ishaq Ibrahim b. Shirazi (expired 476 A.H.) used to pass through a city, residents of that place used to approach him with their families in quest for blessings. They used to rub themselves against his bridle and grasp the sand from underneath his horse’s hooves. When he reached the city of Savah , its inhabitants rushed towards him and wherever he would go, they would shower him with valuable gifts. http://www.seratonline.com/From these incidents, it is apparent that the devout find immense prosperity in visiting the graves of pious people and consider it a part of their creed. Religion permits, rather advocates, such an act. It certainly does not consider visitation of the pious’ graves as unlawful, then how is it possible that it deems visiting the graves of the Prophets (a.s.) and Imams (a.s.) as unlawful? Those who claim that visiting the graves of Prophets (a.s.) and their successors is unlawful make a false claim that has no basis in Islam; rather it degrades the Prophets (a.s.) and lowers their position. Doubts regarding the Visitation of Graves Ibne Taimiyyah, who is considered to be a Mujaddid (reviver of faith) among the Wahhabis, while raising questions regarding the visitation of graves wrote that visiting graves is an innovation (bid’at) and is tantamount to polytheism. To strengthen his argument he quoted a tradition which has been narrated in three different versions. 1. Do not travel for other than the three mosques – my mosque, Masjidul Haraam and Masjidul Aqsa. (Shifa Al Siqaam fi Ziarate Qubooor) 2. Travelling is only for three mosques, Masjide Kufah, my mosque and Masjide Eeliyah (Wafa Al Wafa vol. 4, pg. 1, 36) 3. Traveling is undertaken only for three mosques. Based on these traditions, the visitation of graves has been decreed as unlawful. Regarding the traditions that have been narrated in Hidaayat al-Saniyya they claim:’The traditions that have been narrated with regards to visitation of graves are false and fabricated. Except for Daar Qutni, no other scholar has permitted it (visitation).’ Answers to the doubts To prove the permissibility of visitation, many traditions can be quoted. We present a synopsis keeping in mind brevity. 1. Quran Allah, the Almighty, declares: ‘…and had they, when they were unjust to themselves, come to you and asked forgiveness of Allah and the Apostle had (also) asked forgiveness for them, they would have found Allah Oft-returning (to mercy), Merciful.’ (Surah Nisa (4): Verse 64) Visitation means to be present. This term can be interpreted differently as ‘to come’, which can be either for seeking forgiveness or for the fulfillment of a demand. In other words, visitation does not mean to submit oneself (as one submits to Allah) or to put oneself in the hands of another (as one resigns himself to Allah). Visiting the Prophet (s.a.w.a.) is considered as a virtuous act by the Holy Quran. Then whether he visits the Prophet (s.a.w.a.) while he is alive or dead is irrelevant; in both these situations, the visitation is a virtuous and commendable action. In his book Wafaa al-Wafaa (vol. 2), Sabki narrates from Mas’hoodi writes, ‘Most scholars have considered visitation as a recommended (mustahhab) act regardless of whether the Prophet (s.a.w.a.) is alive or dead. This is the view of scholars of all the four religious sects of the Ahle Sunnah. Ibne Asakir in his Tarikh and Ibne Jauzi in his famous work Al Sakin have narrated from Muhammand b. Harb Halali: ‘I entered Medina and went to the grave of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) and recited his Ziarat. After that I sat in front of the grave. I saw an Arab come and recite the Ziarat of the Prophet. Then he addressed the Prophet (s.a.w.a.)- “O Prophet’s (s.a.w.a.) grave, certainly Allah has revealed upon you in the truthful book.” (Narrated from Kashful Irteyaab, p. 362) 2. Sunnah Samhoodi in Wafaa al-Wafaa vol. 3, pg 394-403, among several other scholars, has narrated scores of traditions under this topic. We present below some of the most reliable traditions mentioned by Samhoodi. Daar Qutni and Bayhaqi narrate from Nafeh who relates from Ibne Umar that the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) said: ‘One who visits me, then my intercession is obligatory for him.’ Suyooti in Jaame’ al-Sagheer, Ahmad in his Musnad and Abu Dawood,Tirmidhi and Nesaaee have narrated the following tradition attributed to the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) from Haarith. ‘The one who visits my grave is like the one who has visited me during my lifetime.’ In another tradition, this portion is also added, The one who has not visited me has done injustice upon me.’ Abul Fath Azdi has narrated from Haroon b. Kazath that the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) said: ‘The one who has done the obligatory Hajj, visited my grave, fought in holy war (Jihad) and prayed at Baitul Muqqadas, Allah (on the Day of Judgment) will not question him about the obligatory actions or deeds.’ Apart from this, many other traditions have been narrated on the virtues of visiting the graves. The claim of the author of ‘Hadiyatul Sanniyah’ that these traditions are false is completely baseless because the raditionalists (muhadditheen) and the masters in the field of Islamic knowledge and jurisprudence have endorsed the veracity of these traditions. His claim that Daar Qutni is the only one who has narrated these traditions is equally misleading as Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, Abu Dawood, Tirmidhi, Nesaaee and Ibne Jauzi, to name a few scholars, have all narrated such traditions. Wahhabis have also objected to such traditions. The claim that the most important scholars are against the visitation of graves is again deceptive as all the relevant leaders of the Ahle Sunnah have been narrators of such traditions and considered visitation of graves as a recommended act and have compiled several books on this topic. Apart from making such baseless and fallacious claims, Ibne Taimiyyah and his elders have also objected that the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) replies to the people who salute him after his death. Sabki says that Samhoodi after presenting the arguments in support of visitation has said that the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) hears the salutation made to him from near the grave, recognizes the identity of the sender and even replies to the salutation. This argument itself is sufficient to prove why Muslims from across the world spend a fortune and just for a glimpse of the Prophet’s shrine. 3. Ijmah (Consensus) From the time of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) till date, the entire Islamic nation (with the exception of the Wahhabis) is of the view that not only the visitation of graves of Prophets (a.s.), their vicegerents (a.s.) and the virtuous ones, rather visitation of all believers, is a commendable act. Right from the time of the companions of the Prophet (s.a.w.a.), Taabeen (those who saw the companions but did not see the Prophet (s.a.w.a.)) and Tab’ Taabeen (those who saw the Taabeen but not the companions) till date, the act of visiting graves is enumerated among the established principles of Islam. There is complete consensus (except for the Wahhabis) on this principle. Rather, the consensus is a lot broader as it extends to all the people of the world whether they are learned or ignorant, old or young, man or woman, rich or poor. Samhoodi in Wafaa al-Wafaa vol. 2, p. 412 has narrated from Sabki saying that the scholars are united in their view that the visitation of the graves is a recommended act. In fact some scholars like Nauee are of the view that the visitation is among the obligatory acts of faith. Samhoodi in Wafaa al-Wafaa vol. 2, p. 410 wonders how some people in the past have objected to the visitation of the Prophet’s (s.a.w.a.) grave while the scholars have deemed the visitation of the graves of the believers as a recommended act. Then on the basis of the Prophet’s (s.a.w.a.) superiority, his visitation is far more preferable and meritorious. Taqiuddin Abul Hasan Sabki’s famous book Shifaa al-Seqaam, a dedicated book on this topic, writes in the preface that the visitation of the chief of believers and the grave of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) is a medium for attaining divine proximity. This is a concept that is well-known and well-acknowledged among the Muslims across eras and regions. Ibne Hajare Makki in his book Jauhar Munazzam Fi Ziarate Qabre Mukarram writes – as has been narrated by the author of Kashful Zunoon who has brought many arguments supporting the visitation of graves on the basis of consensus. After that he writes that anyone who objects and questions why should one visit the grave of the prophet or travel for it or seek his needs from them and asks for proof based on the argument that Ibne Taimiyyah has objected to the visitation, I say – Who is Ibne Taimiyyah and why should his word be heeded and accepted in religious matters? Isn’t Ibne Taimiyyah the one whose outlandish and deviated views have been questioned by the religious scholars who are of the opinion that he is astray and attributes falsehood to others? 4. Characteristics of historical figures In Wafaa al-Wafaa vol. 2, p. 410 Samhoodi, while writing about the characteristics of a believer, has written that traditionalists and historians have narrated many incidents which indicate that the companions of the Prophet (s.a.w.a.) used to go for visitation of the graves; moreover the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) himself used to go for it. Ibne Majaa and Nesaaee have narrated from Abu Hurairah that the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) visited the grave of his mother and cried over it and because of his crying the people around him also started wailing. The Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) used to visit the graves of Jannah al-Baqee and the martyrs of Ohad. Muslim narrates that whenever the Prophet (s.a.w.a.) was at Ayesha’s house, he (s.a.w.a.) used to visit the graveyard of Baqee in the latter half of the night and saluted. Ibne Abbas narrates that any believer who passes the grave of another believing brother who he knew when he was alive, salutes him, that person in the grave replies to his salutation. In another tradition it has been narrated the one who visits the grave of his parents or even one of them on a Friday, Allah enlists him among the good doers even though his parents would have disowned him in the world. Apart from these, many other traditions have come regarding Hazrat Fatemah (s.a.) who used to visit the grave of her uncle Hamzah every second or third day. For deeper understanding, kindly refer to Allamah Sayyed Mohsin Ameen’s (r.a.) Kashful Irtebaat. 5. Intellect Every man’s intellect bears witness to the fact that whosoever Allah wishes to grant greatness, he should be given due respect. Visiting the grave is like giving him respect. Visiting the grave of the Prophet (s.a.w.a.) or bestowing respect in any other form is to respect the signs of Allah and those who respect the signs of Allah are truly pious. Intellect conforms to this rationale and does not consider it a misguided notion. As for the question of the tradition to which Ibne Taimmiyah has objected, scholars have given a string of fitting replies in this regard. 1. In these three traditions the word of exception is used, i.e. exception has been has been made. An exception can only be made regarding something else. So if that something else is not mentioned, then obviously it is implied so as to form a meaningful sentence. So the tradition of travel to the three mosques can mean one of these two statements: a. Except for these three mosques travel for mosques should not be done. b. Under any pretext travel should be made only for these three mosques. If we accept the second interpretation then the tradition disallows us to travel to any mosque other than the three mentioned in the tradition, but where does the tradition indicate that a person cannot travel/visit to places other than the three mosques? One travels/visits religious schools, Imambargahs, factories, graves of martyrs and vicegerents. The odd part over here is that the objection is only for the visitation of graves! If we take into consideration the first meaning of the tradition then apart from those mosques, no other mosque should be visited. It is not because it is prohibited to visit other mosques but because visiting these mosques has more merit as compared to others but if one visits other mosques with the intention to glorify Allah then his this act is not considered as prohibited. Also the argument given for the tradition under both the conditions is abrogated as in many other traditions it has come that the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) used to visit Masjide Quba sometimes on foot, at other times on a mount to perform prayers. Therefore there is no comparison between this tradition and the tradition quoted by the Wahhabis. Then one has to accept that either this tradition is not correct or has not been correctly narrated especially since the narrator of this tradition is Abu Hurairah. Probably this was the reason that Ibne Taimmiyah claimed that the visitation of Masjide Quba is a recommended act only for the people of Madina. One should ask Ibne Taimmiyah whether the Prophet (s.a.w.a.) was only sent for the people of Madina or whether the words and actions of the Prophet (s.a.w.a.) was only for the people of Madina or for that matter, did Islam only come for the people of Madina? If we assume that the exception for travel is strictly for these three mosques, then would a common Muslim accept the ruling that he can only travel to these three mosques and none other? Would a scholar pass a ruling on that in the present day? Don’t Wahhabis visit mosques in their localities? Even then there can be a question raised that weren’t the Prophet (s.a.w.a.) and his companions traveling during Hajj or other than Hajj to different places? Aren’t there several verses of the Holy Quran and traditions urging Muslims to travel whether in the way of Allah, holy wars, meeting relatives/friends, spreading religion or for gaining knowledge? For instance in Surah Tauba (9), verse 122 Allah says: ‘And it does not beseem the believers that they should go forth all together; why should not then a company from every party from among them go forth that they may apply themselves to obtain understanding in religion, and that they may warn their people when they come back to them that they may be cautious?’ Moreover, we have also been ordered to travel for sustenance. We finish our discussion by quoting the words of al-Ghazzali in Ehyaa al-Uloom in which he mentions the second type of traveling which is done for worship like pilgrimage, holy war and visitation to the graves of Prophets (a.s.), Companions, Taabeen, scholars and the pious. In the same way visiting a person carries some reward, the same reward is bestowed upon the one who visits him after his death, is permitted and the tradition We beseech Allah, the Almighty through the mediation of His Last Proof (a.t.f.s.) to strengthen our faith and counter such doubts. We invoke Him to give us the opportunity to visit the graves of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) and his pure progeny (a.s.) and forgive our sins through their intercession (a.s.)!

The Returning of Sun for IMAM Ali (a.s) It has been experienced that some people have serious problems with the qualities of Ahlul Bayt (Family of Prophet – Peace be upon him). Starting from Ibn Taymiyah till neo-Salafis of today, they have been finding faults in Ahlul Bayt especially in Sayyidna Ali(alayhum salam). They show their hatred in different ways such as: a ) Rejecting the Sahih/Hasan hadiths with vigor just because they mention superior qualities of Prophetic family. B ) Showing fanatical support for enemies of Ahlul Bayt like Yazid (LA), Marwan (LA) etc… c ) Accepting same qualities for other Sahaba but illogically considering them “Ghuluw (excess) for Ahlul Bayt” like on the issue of Sayyidna Ali (A.S) being born inside Ka’ba or first to accept Islam, etc… I will concentrate on “Point # Úáíå ÇáÓáÇã this time and touch the Sahih/Hasan hadith of Sun being returned when Prophet Muhammad (Peace be upon him) was resting his head on the lap of Mawla Ali (A.S). Let us first of all read the complete hadith along with the chain. حَدَّثَنَا أَبُو أُمَيَّةَ ثَنَا عُبَيْدُ اللَّهِ بْنُ مُوسَى الْعَبْسِيُّ ثَنَا الْفُضَيْلُ بْنُ مَرْزُوقٍ عَنْ إبْرَاهِيمَ بْنِ الْحَسَنِ عَنْ فَاطِمَةَ بِنْتِ الْحُسَيْنِ عَنْ أَسْمَاءَ بِنْتِ عُمَيْسٍ قَالَتْ : { كَانَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَآلِهِ وَسَلَّمَ أُوحِيَ إلَيْهِ وَرَأْسُهُ فِي حِجْرِ عَلِيٍّ فَلَمْ يُصَلِّ الْعَصْرَ حَتَّى غَرَبَتْ الشَّمْسُ فَقَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَآلِهِ وَسَلَّمَ صَلَّيْتَ يَا عَلِيُّ قَالَ : لَا فَقَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَآلِهِ وَسَلَّمَ اللَّهُمَّ إنَّهُ كَانَ فِي طَاعَتِك وَطَاعَةِ رَسُولِك فَارْدُدْ عَلَيْهِ الشَّمْسَ قَالَتْ أَسْمَاءُ فَرَأَيْتُهَا غَرَبَتْ ثُمَّ رَأَيْتُهَا طَلَعَتْ بَعْدَ مَا غَرَبَتْ } Translation: Hadrat Asma bint Amays (ra) said: Once revelation was being sent on Prophet of Allah (Peace be upon him) and he was resting his head on the lap of Sayyidna Ali (A.S) and he Ali had not prayed Asr while the sun had set too. The Prophet (Peace be upon him) said: O Ali! Have you prayed? Hadrat Ali (A.S) replied: No. Hearing this, Prophet (Peace be upon him) made this dua: O Allah, he (Ali) was busy in obeying You and your Prophet, so return the sun upon him. Hadrat Asma (ra) said: I saw that Sun had sunken but then it came back again after sunset.[imam at-Tahawi in Mushkil al-Athaar (4/385)] Imam at-Tahawi also narrated another hadith with different chain. حَدَّثَنَا عَلِيُّ بْنُ عَبْدِ الرَّحْمَنِ بْنِ مُحَمَّدِ بْنِ الْمُغِيرَةِ ثَنَا أَحْمَدُ بْنُ صَالِحِ بْنِ أَبِي فُدَيْكٍ عَنْ مُحَمَّدِ بْنِ مُوسَى الْمَدَنِيِّ عَنْ عَوْنِ بْنِ مُحَمَّدٍ عَنْ أُمِّهِ أُمِّ جَعْفَرٍ عَنْ أَسْمَاءَ بِنْتِ عُمَيْسٍ أَنَّ النَّبِيَّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَآلِهِ وَسَلَّمَ صَلَّى الظُّهْرَ بِالصَّهْبَاءِ ثُمَّ أَرْسَلَ عَلِيًّا - عَلَيْهِ السَّلَامُ - فِي حَاجَتِهِ فَرَجَعَ وَقَدْ صَلَّى النَّبِيُّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَآلِهِ وَسَلَّمَ الْعَصْرَ فَوَضَعَ النَّبِيُّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَآلِهِ وَسَلَّمَ رَأْسَهُ فِي حِجْرِ عَلِيٍّ فَلَمْ يُحَرِّكْهُ حَتَّى غَابَتْ الشَّمْسُ فَقَالَ النَّبِيُّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَآلِهِ وَسَلَّمَ اللَّهُمَّ إنَّ عَبْدَك عَلِيًّا احْتَبَسَ بِنَفْسِهِ عَلَى نَبِيِّكَ فَرُدَّ عَلَيْهِ شَرْقَهَا قَالَتْ أَسْمَاءُ فَطَلَعَتْ الشَّمْسُ حَتَّى وَقَعَتْ عَلَى الْجِبَالِ وَعَلَى الْأَرْضِ ثُمَّ قَامَ عَلِيٌّ فَتَوَضَّأَ وَصَلَّى الْعَصْرَ ثُمَّ غَابَتْ وَذَلِكَ فِي الصَّهْبَاءِ The chain till Sayyidah Asma bint Amays (ra) is different in this hadith and all Rijaal are also Thiqa. The Tashih of this hadith! These hadiths have been authenticated by Jam al- Ghafeer(overwhelming + leading) Muhaditheen, however Ibn Taymiyyah al-Mujasmi wal Mubtadi and Ibn Jawzi have rejected these hadiths due to their strict attitude on classification of hadith. Ibn Jawzi was extremely strict in science of al-Jarh wa’t Tadeel so he may be excused but Ibn Taymiyyah on the other hand was known for his hardcore hatred for Ahlul Bayt just in opposition of Shi’ites. Now here are the highest ranking Muhadihteen who authenticated this hadith and in front of these legendary Muhaditheen combined together not even Ibn Jawzi (rah) stands a chance let alone Ibn Taymiyyah. Imam Nur ud-din al-Haythami said: رواه كله الطبراني بأسانيد ورجال أحدها رجال الصحيح عن إبراهيم بن حسن وهو ثقة وثقه ابن حبان، وفاطمة بنت علي بن أبي طالب: لم أعرفها. Translation: Imam at-Tabarani (rah) has narrated this hadith with different chains and the Rijaal of one of them are Rijaal of “SAHIH” except Ibrahim bin Hasan who is “THIQA” and Ibn Hibban called him “THIQA” too. As for Fatima bint Ali bin Abi Talib, I do not know her [Majma uz Zawaid (8/525)] As for Fatima bint Ali bin Talib then she was one of the daughters of Sayyidna Ali but not from Sayyidah Fatima. She was sister of Muhammad bin Ali bin al-Hanafiyyah [Tahdhib ul Kamaal (22/396, Narrator # 11550) plus Imam Ibn Hajr al Asqalani (rah) said of her in Taqrib: فاطمة بنت علي بن أبي طالب ، ثقة Translation: Fatima bint Ali bin Abi Talib is “THIQA” [Taqrib ut Tahdhib (2/654), Narrator # 11786] Hence this report is absolutely Sahih with all Rijaal being Thiqa. Imam Jalal ud-din Suyuti said of these hadiths: اخرج ابن مندة وابن شاهين والطبراني بآسانيد بعضها شرط الصحيح Translation: They are narrated by Ibn Mandah, Ibn Shaheen and at-Tabrani and “SOME OF THESE ARE ON THE CRITERIA OF SAHIH” [al-Khasais ul Kubra (2/137)] The great Imam at-Tahawi, Qadhi Iyaadh & Ibn Hajr Imam al-Mughlatai said: The Rijaal of this hadith are “THIQA” [al-Isharata ila Sirat al Mustafa # 140] Imam al-Qadhi Iyadh states after narrating one of these hadiths: قال وهذان الحديثان ثابتان ورواتهما ثقات و حكى الطحاوي أن أحمد بن صالح كان يقول: لا ينبغي لمن يكون سبيله العلم المتخلف عن حفظ حديث أسماء، لأنه من علامات النبوة. Translation: (Imam at-Tahawi –Rahimuhullah) said: Both these hadiths are “PROVEN AND THEY ARE NARRATED BY RELIABLE (THIQA)” narrators Imam at-Tahawi narrates that Ahmed bin Salih (rah) said: It is not worthy for a person who wants to reach knowledge to miss the hadith of Asma (ra) because this hadith is amongst the signs of Prophethood. [Ash-Shifa by Qadhi Iyaadh (1/176)] After such beautiful explanations by legendary Muhaditheen there remains no room for the haters of Mawla Ali (A.S) to doubt this hadith. Imam Badr ud-din Ayni the great Sharih of Bukhari said: وهو حديث متصل ورواته ثقات وإعلال ابن الجوزي هذا الحديث لا يلتفت إليه Translation: This hadith has a “CONTINEOUS CHAIN AND THE NARRATORS ARE THIQA” and no attention should be given towards Ibn Jawzi who found fault in this hadith [umdat ul Qari, Sharh Sahih ul Bukhari (15/43)] Sheikh ul Islam Ibn Hajr al-Asqalani said: وهذا أبلغ في المعجزة وقد أخطأ ابن الجوزي بإيراده له في «الموضوعات» وكذا ابن تيمية في كتاب الرد على الروافض في زعم وضعه والله أعلم Translation: This hadith is Baleegh in category of Prophetic Miracles and “IBN JAWZI DID MISTAKE” to mention it amongst fabricated hadiths, similarly Ibn Taymiyyah also made a mistake (blunder rather) to call it fabricated in his book Radd ala RawafidhFath ul Bari, Sharh Sahih ul Bukhari (6/347)] Imam as-Suyuti wrote a whole book on this The great Hanafi Imam who declared Wahabis as Khawarij i.e. Allama Ibn Abideen ash-Shami said: والحديث صححه الطحاوي وعياض، وأخرجه جماعة منهم الطبراني بسند حسن، وأخطأ من جعله موضوعاً كابن الجوزي، وقواعدنا لا تأباه Translation: This hadith has been authenticated by Imam at-Tahawi, Qadhi Iyaadh and group of other Muhaditheen have narrated it including at-Tabrani who narrated it with“HASAN CHAIN”. Those who considered it Mawdho “HAVE MADE A MISTAKE” like Ibn Jawzi [Hashiya Radd ul Mukhtar (1/389)] Sheikh ul Islam Ibn Hajr al-Makki said in his outstanding and world renowned book written against Shi’ites called “As-Sawaiq ul Muhriqa: وحديث ردها صححه الطحاوي والقاضي في ( الشفاء ) وحسنه شيخ الإسلام ابو زرعة وتبعه غيره ، وردوا على جمع قالوا : أنه موضوع Translation: This hadith has been declared “Sahih” by Imam at-Tahawi, Qadhi Iyadh in his ash-Shifa , Sheikh ul Islam Abu Zura’ declared it “HASAN” and other Muhaditheen have followed them by refuting those who called this hadith as Mawdho [as-Sawaiq ul Muhriqa, Page #161, Dar ul Fikr edition] There are many more Muhaditheen who declared this hadith as “SAHIH OR HASAN” such as Imam al-Qastallani called 2 different hadiths narrated by at-Tabrani as “HASAN” [al-Muwahib al Laduniya (2/529)] Shah Abdul Aziz Muhadith dhelvi said in his legendary book written on refutation of Shi’ites: As for the hadith in regards to returning of sun then many muhaditheen of Ahlus Sunnah have called it Sahih, such as at-Tahawi etc… and this is amongst the miracles of Prophet [Tuhfa Athna Ashriyah, Page # 463] Two fine Muhaditheen i.e. Jalal ud din Suyuti and Ibn Yusuf al Salihi wrote “COMPLETE BOOKS ON THIS TOPIC” and proved returning of Sun for Sayyidna Ali (A.S). Please refer to their respective books called: كشف اللبس فى حديث رد الشمس & مزيل اللبس من حديث رد الشمس Imam Zahir al Kawthari on Ibn Taymiyyah Refutation of Ibn Taymiyya al-Mujasmi wal-Mubtadi who said: قد ذكره طائفة كالطحاوي والقاضي عياض وغيرهما وعدوا ذلك من معجزات النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم لكن المحققون من أهل العلم والمعرفة بالحديث يعلمون أن هذا الحديث كذب موضوع Translation: This hadith has been mentioned by at-Tahawi and Qadhi Iyaadh and they “CONSIDERED IT AMONGST THE MIRACLES OF PROPHET” however the researchers in people of knowledge who have Ma’rifah in hadith knowledge know that it is “A LIE AND FABRICATION” (Naudhobillah) [Manhaj as-Sunnah (8/165)] Ibn Taymiyyah quotes Ibn Jawzi in calling this hadith asMawdho and I have already proven above that mighty Muhaditheen even refuted Ibn Jawzi in this regard and considered his viewpoint as mistaken. The late Muhadith of Arab world i.e. Imam Muhammad Zahid al-Kawthari destroyed the knuckles of Ibn Taymiyyah by saying: فتراه يحكم عليه هذا الحكم القاسي لأنه صحح حديث رد الشمس لعلي كرم الله وجهه. فيكون الاعتراف بصحة هذا الحديث ينافي انحرافه عن علي رضي الله عنه. وتبدو على كلامه آثار بغضه لعلي عليه السلام في كل خطوة من خطوات تحدثه Translation: Don’t you see him (i.e. Ibn Taymiyyah), how he passed a ruling on (Imam at-Tahawi) with his rigid judgment, he did this only because Imam Tahawi authenticated the hadith of Sun being returned for Sayyidna Ali – Karam Allahu Wajahu – the authentication of this hadith contradicted the deviation (hatred) for Ali which he had. The traits of Bughz (hatred) against Sayyidna Ali appear in words of Ibn Taymiyyah rather in every sentence of his. [Hawi fi Sirat at-Tahawi, Page # 27] Ibn Taymiyyah al-Mubtadi did not just stop here, he said: It is “STRANGE” that Qadhi Iyaadh with his great immense and greatness in knowledge of Hadith considerd this hadith to be proven and Rijaal to be Thiqa. Grteat rebuttal by Imam az-Zarqani In reply to this Imam az-Zarqani beautifully said: There is nothing to be amazed in this because the chain of hadith from Asma bint Amays (ra) is “HASAN (FAIR)” similarly the hadith from Abu Huraira also has a “HASAN CHAIN”. Imam Jalal ud-din Suyuti (rah) has explained this in detail (After this az-Zarqani showed the analysis of Imam Suyuti and proven mistake of Ibn Jawzi). It is a principle in science of hadith that a Hasan hadith after meeting another Hasan hadith or having multiple chains “BECOMES SAHIH” so “STRANGNESS UPON STRANGNESS IS ON THE KALAAM OF IBN TAYMIYYAH NOT QADHI IYAADH” because Qadhi Iyaadh’s (authentication) is according to the known principles as is mentioned in books of Hadith principles like “Alfiya tal Hadith li Iraqi” and even junior students of hadith know them (whereas Ibn Taymiyyah is ignorant) [sharh az-Zarqani ala Mawahib al Laduniya (6/488)] So It is clear like bright sun that Sun was returned for the sake of Sayyidna Ali. I would like to conclude this article with the saying of the great Sheikh ul Islam Ibn Hajr al-Asqalani, how he analyzed the book Manhaj as Sunnah by Ibn Taymiyyah: التي يوردها ابن المُطَهّر، وإن كان معظم ذلك من الموضوعات والوَاهِيَاتِ، لكنه رد في رده كثيراً من الأحاديث الجياد التي لم يستحضر حالة التصنيف مظانها؛ لأنه كان لاتساعه في الحِفْظ، يَتَّكِل على ما في صَدْرِهِ، والإنسان عامد للنسيان، وكم من مبالغة لتوهين كلام الرافضي ذاته أحياناً إلى تنقيص علي رضي الله عنه Translation: The reports which Ibn Muthar al-Hilli (Rafidhi Shia) narrated then indeed most of them are fabrications and cooked up (lies) but “IBN TAYMIYYAH EVEN REJECTED THE STRONG (AUTHENTIC) HADITHS” ... Conclusion ...which he did not remember properly while writing his book. Ibn Taymiyyah did such a thing because he used to rely on his chest due to his capacity of memorizing, and It is nature of mankind that he returns towards Nisyaan (forgetfulness). Ibn Taymiyyah went to the long extents in refuting the Ahanaat in sayings of Rafidhi to the extent that “IBN TAYMIYYAH HIMSELF STARTED TO FIND FAULTS IN ALI (A.S) AT CERTAIN PLACES” [Lisaan ul Mizaan (6/390)] This is indeed rightly said by Ibn Hajr al-Asqalani (rah) because Ibn Taymiyyah just in opposition of Shi’ites also rejected the “Mutawattir hadith” which states: For Whosoever I am Mawla then Ali is his Mawla [sunnan Tirmidhi, Hadith # 3713, where Imam Abu Isa Tirmidhi declared it "HASAN SAHIH"] Rejecting Mutawatir hadith is in reality a Kufr! I will discuss the validity and authencity of other hadiths which Ibn Taymiyyah al-Mujasmi al-Nasibi rejected in hatred of Ahlul Bayt. a) The Mutawatir and famous hadith which mentions the great title "MAWLA" for Sayyidna Ali (A.S) Remember rejecting Mutawatir hadith is equivilant to rejecting Qur'an so this was amongst the Kab'air sins committed by Ibn Taymiyyah just to win fame, he forgot that true Sunnis would easily thrash his absurd viewpoints. b ) The Sahih/Hasan hadiths which prove from Ahlus Sunnah texts that Sayyidna Ali (ra) was the first to accept Islam (if not putting the clause of Children and Elders) c) The authenticity of the hadith which states: I am the city of Knowledge and Ali is it's door. In rejecting such hadiths Ibn Taymiyyah crossed all limits and said things like Ali (A.S) had lesser knowledge than other Sahaba who were not even Khulafa ar Rashideen (Naudhobillah) Ibn Hajr's perfect analysis on bn Taymiyyah I am sure the lovers of Ibn Taymiyyah would be biting their nails because It has become clear like bright sun that he deliberately and mockingly rejected the Sahih/Hasan hadiths on merits of Ahlul Bayt and the explanation given by Imam Ibn Hajr al-Asqalani (rah) is so great that It has to be re-read. He said: التي يوردها ابن المُطَهّر، وإن كان معظم ذلك من الموضوعات والوَاهِيَاتِ، لكنه رد في رده كثيراً من الأحاديث الجياد التي لم يستحضر حالة التصنيف مظانها؛ لأنه كان لاتساعه في الحِفْظ، يَتَّكِل على ما في صَدْرِهِ، والإنسان عامد للنسيان، وكم من مبالغة لتوهين كلام الرافضي ذاته أحياناً إلى تنقيص علي رضي الله عنه . Translation: The reports which Ibn Muthar al-Hilli (Rafidhi Shia) narrated then indeed most of them are fabrications and cooked up (lies) but “IBN TAYMIYYAH EVEN REJECTED THE STRONG (AUTHENTIC) HADITHS” which he did not remember properly while writing his book. Ibn Taymiyyah did such a thing because he used to rely on his chest due to his capacity of memorizing, and It is nature of mankind that he returns towards Nisyaan (forgetfulness). Ibn Taymiyyah went to the long extents in refuting the Ahanaat in sayings of Rafidhi to the extent that “IBN TAYMIYYAH HIMSELF STARTED TO FIND FAULTS IN ALI (A.S) AT CERTAIN PLACES” [Lisaan ul Mizaan (6/390)]

(salam) Ibne Fars says that innovation lexically means creating and making something without any similar kind. Separation, weakness and debility are all other meanings of that word. (1) Here our desired meaning is the first. But there are various idiomatic definitions, some of which are exact and some of them are not. Here we have some of exact definitions: Innovation is something which should be made and in divine law of Islam (Shari'ah), none of principles have indicated to it. But if a principle indicates to something in divine law, that will not be legally innovation (even if that is lexically innovation). (2) "The origin of innovation is something which is made without any similar kind, and which is the opposite of tradition (Sunna) and is unpleasant, based on divine law of Islam", Ibne Hojr has said. In another place He has said:" he who makes new alternations in our rules (innovating), his act will be false”. These are things which are made and have no principle in Islamic law. They are called <innovation> in customary law of Islam and if something has principle in Islamic law, it will not be considered as innovation. (3) In brief, there are three conditions for considering something as innovation in Islamic law: First: when it makes alternations (adds or reduces) in beliefs or religious rules. Second: when it invites people to make alternations. Third: when there is not any Islamic reason that it is mainly or partly from religion. These conditions make the reality of innovation explicit. Reducing or even adding anything in religion is regarded as forging lies against God and He will reproach them. (4) So it is not considered as <innovation> in Islamic law, when someone makes something new without any relevance to religion –although lexically it is called innovation-, like as making some habits or even industries. Because the person who made that thing, believes it is irrelevant to religion. As a result, performing official celebrations, for some reasons, by various communities is not considered as innovation, because it does not have any relevance to religion. And they do not celebrate it, as if the divine law has ordered them to do, and its legality or illegality should be according to divine law. So if there was not any unlawful (Haraam) matter, the celebrations and feasts would be lawful (Halaal). But something like as a mixed party would be unlawful. Second condition, inviting people to make alternations (adding or reducing in beliefs or religious rules): If a person makes alternations in religion lonely or at his own home –for example adds in or reduces from his/her ritual prayer (Namaaz)- it is not consider innovation, although it is an unlawful (Haram) act and his/her ritual prayer is null and void. It is innovation, when this new thought or act as a part of religion be spread among the people. Abu Huraira in Sahih Moslem has written that messenger of God –S.A- said:" whoever guides and invites people to the truth -regardless of the rewards of followers- will have the same rewards that those people obeyed him have. And whoever invites people to the ignorance -regardless of the sins of followers- will have the same sins that those people obeyed him have, and the followers’ sins will not decrease. (5) Third point: not having any religious principle is one of the conceptions of innovation. It means in Quran and hadith, there have not been mentioned innovation is part of religion. Since if it had religious principle, it would not be innovation. The precedence has been mentioned for the definition of <innovation> by Ibne Rajab Hanbali and Ibne Hajar 'Asqalani. Allaameh Majlesi says: innovation in Islamic law has been made after messenger of God's era, and it has not had any special reason. (6) 1. Al-maqaai'is: volume 1, page 209, the word <Bada'a> 2. Jaame' Al-'olum Va Al-hekam by Ibne Rajab Hanbali: page 160, published in India 3. Fath Al-baari, Ibne Hajar ’Asqalaani: volume5, page 156 and volume 17, page 9 4. R.K: The Yunus (Jonah) Sura: 59 and The Al-hadid (Iron) Sura: 27 5. Sahih Moslem: volume 8, page 62; Ketabul-'elm 6. The aspects of shi'ite's creed, page 270 Not following the lifestyle of companions and the Successors (Taabi’een) Some of people of Vahaaby (Salafi) consider some matters as innovation, just for it had not been in the time of companions and the Successors (Taabi’een). For example, Ibne Teymyyeh believes, celebrating the birthday of messenger of God –S.A-, is innovation. Based on his opinion, the antecedents have not done it before, and if it was an appropriate act, the antecedents would have more competencies in celebrating; for they liked and respected messenger of God –S.A- more than us and had more desire in doing good act. (1) Ibne Teymyyeh also has said about kissing Quran and rising for it, out of respect:" I have not heard anything in this regard from antecedents!" (2) It should be said that <Thaqaleyn> is a criterion for recognizing innovation from tradition (Sunna), it does not make difference whether you comment Thaqaleyn as Quran and relatives of messenger of God ('Etrat) –most of people agrees with this comment- or as Quran and tradition (Sunna) –by the narration of Imam Malek in Movatta’ with the proof which is incompletely transmitted-. (3) So if there is indicated in Quran and tradition (Sunna) that something is a part of religion, it will not be innovation. It will be innovation, when it is not part of religion and unlike that is publicized among people. It was obligation that the antecedents as the others follow Thaqaleyn (Quran and the relatives of messenger of God ('Etrat), or Quran and tradition (Sunna)). So we cannot consider their agreement or disagreement as a criterion for truth and falsity, and consequently it will not be a correct result if we say all of antecedents have been righteous people. There have been corrupted, righteous, equitable and oppressor persons among them. There are good and evil men among people during all of eras. (4) As a result, it reveals that celebrating the birthday of messenger of God –S.A-, kissing Quran and rising for it, out of respect –by having the intention they are parts of religion- cannot be regarded as innovation. Because although these kinds of respects for messenger of God –S.A- or Quran have not been mentioned in divine law of Islam, these are derived from main principles of glorification and reverence. Quran says:" those who believe in him (Muhammad) and honor him, those who aid him and follow the light sent forth with him, shall surely prosper". (5) In the above-mentioned verse, the almighty God describes believers by three attributes: the people who believe in messenger of God, respect and glorify him, and help him. God has said to His messenger:" have we not raised your remembrance?" (6). It is obvious that celebrating for messenger of God is equal to raising his remembrance, and God had been already informed about it. Quran and tradition (Sunna) invite people to be friend and kind with messenger of God and his household. And we celebrate his birthday to show our affection and kindness. kissing Quran and rising for it, out of respect are examples of this affection. There is a comment from Quran; [the revealed Books are] upon highly honored pages, exalted, purified, by the hands of scribes noble and pious (7). Respecting Quran is similar to respecting prophets, angels and commands of God In jurisprudential books, there are peculiar rules about Quran; Muslims have been called to preservation of Quran and not disgracing it. (8) 1. 'Eqtezaa Al-seraat Al-mostaqim: page 276 2. Al-fataavi Al-kobraa: volume 1, page 176 3. Movatta' Maalek: page 648, number 1619 4. Al-salafyyah, Mohammad Sa'iid Booti: page 13-14 5. The Al-araf (Elevated Places) Sura:157 6. The Al-inshiran (Solace) Sura:4 7. The Abasa (He Frowned) Sura:13-16 8. The aspects of shi'ite's creed, page 273 The reasons of the emersion and extension of innovation one of the most significant factors of the emersion and extension of innovation in society is the extra eager for fame. By studying the history of the false claimants of prophecy, it has been proved that the whim of the soul and extra eager for fame have had main roles in the extension of this matter and the act of heretic, who had the claim of prophecy, would be innovation. And also narratives have indicated to this matter. Commander of faithful –pbuh- told people:” O people! By the emersion of seditions the human being will follow the whim of soul, innovate rules and will be hostile toward Quran. There are people who protect the heretics” (1). Extra eager for fame has an important role in the human’s life. By following this instinct, the human being will covet the ranks of prophets. Perhaps in the primitive centuries, some of the prevalent religions among the Muslims have been as a result of this instinct. Ibne Abi Al-hadid has narrated that one day, when commander of faithful –pbuh- was passing through the dead people of Khavaarej, said:” Woe to you! You have been deceived by some people who, in fact damaged you”. “Who did deceive them?” they asked. “They have been deceived by the deceptive Satan and their concupiscent soul. These two showed them how to be sinful and how to be dominance in wrong path, but in fact they threw these people in the fire (hell) (2)” commander of faithful answered. The followings are three significant reasons of the emersion and extension of innovation and irreligion matters: showing superiority over the low ranks, zealotry and obeying the cruel people. (3) (4) 1. kaafi: volume1, page 54, hadith1 2. the comment of Nahjul-Balaqa, by Ibn Abi Al-hadid: volume19, page 235 3. R.K: <Al-bed’ah>, page 60-56 4. The aspects of shi'ite's creed, page 27 Good innovation! when a person interferes with religion issues, reduces and adds in divine law of Islam and faith and does not make distinction among prayers, transactions and policies, his act –which is innovation- has just one kind and that is bad innovation. But sometimes it involves two kinds; good innovation and bad innovation. This word –which was derived from the word of Caliph ‘Umar Ibne Khattaab- has been mentioned by Shafe’ii, Ibne Hazm, Ghazaali, Dehlavi and Ibne Athir. In the year 14th Hejira, in Ramazaan month he forced people to perform recommendatory prayer by Imamat (leadership) of Aby Ibne Ka’ab, and then he said:”it is a good innovation”. It should be said that if the recommendatory (Mustahab) prayer was performed in congregation, it would have one of the following two forms: Performing recommendatory (Mustahab) prayer in congregation or by Qaari (who recites Quran) was mentioned in Quran and Sunna, so Caliph would revive the tradition which had been abandoned. So the word of ‘Umar Ibne Khattaab -“it is a good innovation”- was not appropriate, because his act is not considered as interfering in divine law of Islam. (This matter has been mentioned in some of narratives). Or performing recommendatory (Mustahab) prayer in congregation was not mentioned in Quran and Sunna –not in congregation and nor by Qaari -, and since caliph did not like people to perform recommendatory prayer dispersedly, forced them to perform prayer in congregation or altogether with a same Qaari. So his act is considered as an unlawful (Haraam) and bad innovation. More explanation: interfering, reducing and adding in religious matters and divine law of Islam are all innovation, to which has been indicated in Quran and Sunna. This kind of innovation is unlawful and abominable. So it is explicit that this innovation does not have a good kind. In religion and non-religion, innovation lexically has good and bad kinds. A good innovation is something new which is useful for the life, such as habits and customs, it is not unlawful and has no relevance to religion. In fact, it is something new and useful for the community. Here are some examples in this regard; commemorating the national Independence Day, gathering for expressing hatred of enemies and celebrating the birthday of a hero. So when something innately is lawful (Halal), people can make a tradition out of it and apply it in its appropriate time, it is a lexical innovation. Sometimes there is something unlawful (Haraam) which is accepted as a prevalent custom among people, in this case, that innovation is innately unlawful, and it is a prevalent sin. Such as the women who have no Hijab (a headscarf worn by Muslim women; conceals the hair and neck) and wear heavy makeup and attend in mixed celebrations.

(salam) (bismillah) (159) إِنَّ الَّذِينَ يَكْتُمُونَ مَا أَنزَلْنَا مِنَ الْبَيِّنَاتِ وَالْهُدَى مِن بَعْدِ مَا بَيَّنَّاهُ لِلنَّاسِ فِي الْكِتَابِ أُولَئِكَ يَلعَنُهُمُ اللّهُ وَيَلْعَنُهُمُ اللَّاعِنُونَ " Verily, those who conceal what We have revealed of the clear evidence and the guidance, after We made it clear for mankind in the Book; they are those that Allah does curse them and (also) curse them (all) those who curse (such ones) ." [Quran 2:159] Occasion of Revelation: Jalal-id-Din Suyuty has narrated in his book, 'Asbab-un-Nuzul, from Ibn-Abbas that several Muslim people, such as Ma'ath-ibn-Jabal, Sa'd-ibn-Ma'ath, and Kharijat-ibn-Ziyd asked scholars of the Jews several questions about some subjects in the Torah (which concerned the advent of the Prophet (p.b.u.h.) ) . They concealed the reality of the subject and, (in their answers) , did not refer to the main idea. The above verse was revealed about them. Lubab-un-Nuqul fi 'Asbab-in-Nuzul, p. 22 An ignorant Salafi from Sipah e Yazeed forum said that this verse clearly denounces Taqaya and Shias who do Taqaya actually are subject of this verse. The only thing we have to see is that whether there is "clear evidence and guidance" in Quran regarding "Taqaya" or not. If that guidance exists then it will be proved that factually Salafis and Sipah e Yazeed are cursed them in this verse. QURANIC EVIDENCE OF TAQAYA: let us see Quranic evidence of Taqaya. (28) لاَّ يَتَّخِذِ الْمُؤْمِنُونَ الْكَافِرِينَ أَوْلِيَاءَ مِن دُوْنِ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ وَمَن يَفْعَلْ ذَلِكَ فَلَيْسَ مِنَ اللّهِ فِي شَيْءٍ إِلاَّ أَن تَتَّقُواْ مِنْهُمْ تُقَاةً وَيُحَذِّرُكُمُ اللّهُ نَفْسَهُ وَإِلَى اللّهِ الْمَصِيرُ 28. " The believers should not take the infidels as their friends, rather than the believers, and whoever does that then nothing of Allah is his, except when you guard yourselves against them, guarding carefully; and Allah warns you to be cautious of (disobeying) Him; and toward Allah is the destination." [Quran 3:28] So one can conceal one's faith for protection. It is worth mentioning that Taqaya (concealing) one's faith is just for the sake of protection but where there is no danger and where there is chance of harm to the religion then Taqaya (concealing one's faith) is not allowed. (106) مَنْ كَفَرَ بِاللَّهِ مِنْ بَعْدِ إيمانِهِ إِلاَّ مَنْ أُكْرِهَ وَ قَلْبُهُ مُطْمَئِنٌّ بِالْإيمانِ وَ لكِنْ مَنْ شَرَحَ بِالْكُفْرِ صَدْراً فَعَلَيْهِمْ غَضَبٌ مِنَ اللَّهِ وَ لَهُمْ عَذابٌ عَظيمٌ He who disbelieves in Allah after believing in Him; not he who has been compelled, while his heart is still content with the faith, but he who opens (his) breast to disbelief, upon them shall rest wrath from Allah and for them shall be a great chastisement. " [Quran 16:106] In the early days of Islam, the pagans of Mecca martyred the parents of 'Ammar Yasir, a true believer, while torturing them for embracing Islam. As soon as it was 'Ammar's turn to be tortured, he declared those words which the pagans wanted him to utter and saved his life. 'Ammar was then blamed for having abandoned Islam by some persons. He called on the blissful Prophet (p.b.u.h.) while crying. The Prophet caressed him, saying: "If your life is at stake again, utter these words and save yourself; you are faithful all over. " (Tafsir Qurtubi, Safi, Burhan and Majma'- ul- Bayan and the books of Muslim scholars concerning the issue of concealing of faith) This procedure is called/ taqqiyah/ in Islam which requires certain rules. However, we must know that there are certain cases of 'Taqiyyah'. At times, it is compulsory while at other times, one must stand up to the end and utter his words, and not engage in Taqiyyah, like what the sorcerers of Pharaoh did. They embraced the faith as soon as they noticed the miracle of Moses (a.s.) not fearing the threats of Pharaoh and telling him to do what he wanted, and that they would not abandon their faith. Pharaoh martyred them all, the resistance of whom has been praised by the Qur'an. Certainly, the act of Taqiyyah (concealing of faith) is not a sign of excommunication, weakness, fear, retreat, loss of faith, and submission. On the contrary, it is a kind of cover- up and a strategy for the preservation of powers and programs. In Islamic quotations, it has been likened to a shield and 'guarding' against 'something' and 'boundaries'. Thus, in this noble verse, the Qur'an implies that he who disbelieves in Allah and abandons Islam, embracing paganism will be entangled with Allah's outrage and there is a great punishment awaiting him; unless he is compelled to utter words of blasphemy while feeling heartily in a different way, in which case, he will not be held responsible. CONCLUSION: Now this is proved beyond the shadow of any doubt that there is clear proof of 'Taqaya" in holy Quran and the Salafis/Wahabis are the people who are concealing this clear proof of Quran and saying that Taqaya is not allowed or it is against Islam. So the verse is cursing them because of concealing clear proof and guidance of Holy Quran. Wrath of Allah be upon Yazeediites.

Asslamoalaikum, 1. I heard that if some one offers his Qadha prayers instead of "Namaz e Shab" at night and then offer two Rak'at "Namaz e Shifa" and One Rakat "Witr" then his Namaz e Shab and Qadha Prayers both are offered. Is it true? 2. My second question is that to offer Namaz e Shab Is it necessary to sleep for sometime before offering? Sometimes i do not sleep till midd night or even after midnight then can i offer Namaz e Shab without sleeping and getting up or not? I am Muqalid of Ayatullah Ali Sistani (Hz). Please provide me any reference in this regard from him specially or from any other scholar.

(salam) An Administrator of Sipah-e-Yazeed (Laee'n) site says.

What is Ismailiites view about Imam Mahdi (a.s)?

Here is the part 1 to the recent article I came across.... Are we segregated in our own religion? Are we divided over who should have taken over the spread of Islam after the last Prophet? Do we lack the common sense to realize that the purpose of Islam and a true believer is to worship the one true God? Nonetheless, we have allowed ourselves to fight for thousands of years over the succession of our leaders. We seem to forget that no one owns the throne. We continue to fight over internal theology, land, money, and property. In these times, our religion demands unity and clarity of vision and yet, there still exists much inequality and confusion. Two of the biggest sects in Islam that have been in conflict are Sunni & Shi’ite. Let me ask you three questions: Do you pray to Allah? Do you read the Quran? Do you answer to the Adhaan? If both sides agree on these questions then no further justification is necessary. To be a Muslim means to be unified and not divided. Do not worship prophets, imams, and other greats who were sent to portray the ideal example of a true Muslim. The prophets were sent to prove the existence of God (Al-Lah) and chosen to exemplify the highest qualities a human being can possess. They even forbade their own followers from worshipping or idolizing them for they were only men. They reminded us not to focus on their miracles. Miracles would not exist without the power of the Creator. We pray to the one and only, most merciful, most greatest: God. The Prophet Muhammad (p.b.u.h.) who was sent to this world as the final Prophet of God, willed that his remaining materials and clothing be burned after his death. He did so to prevent the ignorance of humanity from idolizing or worshipping those meaningless and temporal material things. We are only meant to prostrate to God. No one else is worthy of worship since we all are human and we all are equal. Islam is unity! Islam is peace. Islam is a religion which teaches us to pray for our enemies and those who wrong us for they are in need of the fear and knowledge of God. Islam teaches us to be pious, generous, humble, loving, and to never disrespect other religions, regardless of our differences. Islam teaches us humility, self-control, and understanding the strength of patience. In Islam, just like other religions, there are good and there are bad. I say this in caps, IT IS THE INDIVIDUAL who chooses to do wrong, or chooses to do right. We are creatures of free will that is given by God according to His wisdom and plan. The mass media quickly and unjustly categorizes all of Islam as hateful due to the actions of a small minority. The media colors the word “Muslim” in such a negative light that it evokes fear and hatred in the masses. There are so many Muslims out there who live in fear of hate crimes and harsh discrimination against themselves and their families. It is truly tragic that these innocent Muslims live as prisoners in their own neighborhoods as if something was wrong with them. In addition, there are Muslims who are afraid to BE Muslim in public. They feel compelled to act in a certain manner and dress a certain way just to fit into their environment. In the post-Jim Crow era, African Americans had to make their best efforts to integrate into a desegregated environment but were still viewed as inferior. The situation of some Muslims living in the West is very similar in the post 9/11 era. I sincerely feel pity for the people who are quick to believe everything they hear and see. There are so many different issues that confront us during life in this world that it can easily fill numerous books and hours of conversation. I want to make two things very clear before I end this statement. The first: Islam is one! We do not need to divide and conquer within our own religion when the end result is the same and the faith we attain along the way is the same. The second point: My brothers and sisters, do not be afraid to be you! You do not and should not have to conform or wear a “uniform” to fit in. I write this to all Muslims that were raised being told that they fall within a certain sect. I urge them to wake up and put these differences aside. I also write this for people who are unaware of the real definition of Islam. Last but not least, I write this for the general public to realize the qualities we should learn to cultivate within ourselves to become more pure human beings. Qualities such as humility, generosity, kindness, gratitude, and patience. At the same time, we must to learn to turn away from the evils of jealousy, pride, egotism, envy, and hatred.

A salafi says:- How can we explain these hadiths?