Search the Community

Assalamu Alaikum Dear Brothers and Sisters, I hope this message finds you in the best of health and iman. I am writing here with a heavy heart, seeking clarity, understanding, and perhaps your guidance. I am a 3D artist by profession, and like many of you, my life was profoundly transformed by the spiritual treasures of Islam—particularly the duas of Imam Hassan (عليه السلام), Imam Hussain (عليه السلام), Imam Zainul Abideen (عليه السلام), and others from the purified Household of the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم). Their words awakened a deep connection to Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) in my heart, inspiring me to use my skills to share these gems with the world. When I decided to create a 3D animation of Imam Hassan’s (عليه السلام) dua in Urdu, I first turned to our Sunni books and collections, hoping to find his supplications. To my dismay, I found none. It was only through Shia sources... I discovered 14 beautiful duas attributed to him. These supplications, filled with wisdom and humility, moved me deeply. I wanted to share them in a creative way to inspire others. I shared my project on a Sunni forum, politely asking for help to verify or find Imam Hassan’s (عليه السلام) duas in Sunni texts. Instead of support, I faced hostility. The moderator accused me of promoting “Shia content,” claimed I was “portraying Sahaba” in my animation (though it was a generic 3D figure), and banned me without discussion. [Screenshots of the exchange are attached.] I am not here to stir division. My goal is simple: to use my art to spread the light of the Ahl al-Bayt (عليه السلام). The Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) said: “I am leaving among you two weighty things: the Book of Allah and my Ahl al-Bayt. If you hold fast to them, you will never go astray” (Muslim). If loving and sharing the teachings of the Ahl al-Bayt (عليه السلام) makes me “Shia” in the eyes of some, then I ask Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) to unite us all under the banner of their love. May Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) guide us to the truth and protect this Ummah from division. Jazakum Allah Khair,

Salamun 'alaykum, our brothers and sisters are getting slaughtered left and right and all some people can do is to show hatred towards other Muslims due to some differences in their school of thought. The issue doesn't even stop here! Some of these people are happy that the oppressors have killed Muslims that they disagree with! Let no one try to fool himself! Allah ta'ala is the Most Just and your secterian ideas will not lead to your salvation, but rather to the opposite! And if someone says "but look what they did in Syria and Iraq", then the answer is: And did you forget what people from the opposing side did there?! Or is it that you're blind to your own faults and only see the faults of one side? 5:8 يَـٰٓأَيُّهَا ٱلَّذِينَ ءَامَنُوا۟ كُونُوا۟ قَوَّٰمِينَ لِلَّهِ شُهَدَآءَ بِٱلْقِسْطِ ۖ وَلَا يَجْرِمَنَّكُمْ شَنَـَٔانُ قَوْمٍ عَلَىٰٓ أَلَّا تَعْدِلُوا۟ ۚ ٱعْدِلُوا۟ هُوَ أَقْرَبُ لِلتَّقْوَىٰ ۖ وَٱتَّقُوا۟ ٱللَّهَ ۚ إِنَّ ٱللَّهَ خَبِيرٌۢ بِمَا تَعْمَلُونَ ٨ O you who have believed, be persistently standing firm for Allāh, witnesses in justice, and do not let the hatred of a people prevent you from being just. Be just; that is nearer to righteousness. And fear Allāh; indeed, Allāh is [fully] Aware of what you do. ___

Salaam, I am a recent convert to Islam. I thought that the UK and Ireland had one of the most terrible but unique dynamics when it came to religious sectarianism. I was wrong, it pales in comparison to Islam. Has nobody found it strange how emphasised the differences between basic Sunni and Shia principles are? It seems quite clear to me but that is from a newcomer perspective. From the Sunni side, I have heard abhorrent and alienating things about Shias. I'm sure that the same applies vice versa. Ultimately though, the basic principles are the same and actual differences are minimal. Both sides believe in in Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى), the significance of Prophet Muhammed (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم), that the Quran is the word/of Islam, in praying to Allah, in the principles of Islam like charity and elderly care, Ramadan. There are some differences with how the two sides carry out their beliefs in these things but at the end of the day, both sides faithfully and legitimately follow Islam. One major difference I've heard is about Abu Bakr vs Ali. I may be incompetent as a newcomer but is this matter even religious. It is a debate about the leadership of a caliphate (Islamic version of empire) so it is ultimately political. Yes, the election process did seem rushed and shady. However, there is no rightful leader. Abu Bakr was a great man and devoted follower of Islam as was Ali. Regardless of the leader, Islam does not change from how it was revealed to us. Now, it is one thing to be passionate about your version of Islam but wrong to disrespect other views. Before converting, I was sceptical and hateful of Islam. Now I see, Islam is no the problem - it is the Muslims. It's absurd that we treat other sects worse than we treat Christians and Jews (though we should not be treating anyone badly). The Prophet Muhammed (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) formed the Rashidun Caliphate out of peace and cooperation. Bear in mind, not all places absorbed into the Caliphate were Islamic but the Prophet united all. For example, we stuck a deal with the Christian city of Najran. The sectarian divide is so much so that some countries even execute certain sects. Islam, to me it seems, is the most passionate about itself which is good. It is fierce and enthusiastic. But then, this becomes twisted and corrupted into superiority complexes, extremist ideas about martyrdom and jihadism etc. You are not a good Muslim if you die as a martyr for a war you wrongfully wage and instigate. The Middle East especially is a shameless embodiment of sectarianism and corrupted Islam. Sorry for this ranting but it genuinely upsets me to see something good (Islam) be tainted so much by selfish peoples. Bad media depictions of Islam do not come out of thin air, they media can justify it because of the way Islam is practiced.

Over years of research I have frequently encountered the claim that the British divided India in order to create Pakistan as a “Muslim” counterweight to India and/or the USSR. The British plan called for the transfer of power to provincial or special-interest groups rather than the central Indian government, resulting in the partition(s). At the time of partition, most of the Muslims who resided on the Indian side of the imposed boundary chose to remain in India, rather than migrate to Pakistan. The Pashtuns and Baluchis of the North-West Frontier largely opposed the creation of Pakistan, hence decades-long insurgencies vs. the Punjabi centralism. When the U.S. supplanted Britain as an imperial power, it continued the British-era support for Pakistan, as was the case during the 1971 Bengali war, vs. India. Is there any truth to the many sources that proffer this claim? The British and Americans certainly seem to have favoured Pakistan vs. India rather consistently over decades.

Read the Reddit comments to understand what the thread was about, since the post has since been deleted. ....................................................................................... I'm so tired of the utterly nonsensical and VERY COMMON Sunni notion of 'I am happy to seek unity with Shias as long as they don't curse/insult/abuse any Sahaba, and especially NOT Aisha, Abu Bakr, Omar, Uthman. Firstly, any Shia claim regarding the sahabi that happens to go against the Sunni narrative is considered insulting. Secondly, and more importantly, is that the same notion is true for Shias... You are insulting the Ahlul Bayt by not accepting them as divinely appointed leaders of Allah, and infallible individuals, and perfect preservers of the religion of Islam, and a high means of seeking closeness to Allah (intercession). Not only are you insulting revered Shia figures by not following them, you are commiting MAJOR shirk by giving a false attribute to Allah, by saying that Allah has not always appointed an infallible leader on this Earth, and that there currently isn't an infallible leader. Furthermore, the real kicker is that plenty of revered Shia figures, such as Abu Talib (رضي الله عنه), are considered kuffar by Sunnis. Is this not insulting? So, how can we Shias unite with Sunnis based on their own fallacious logic? Shias are the minority, and Sunnis are the majority. It makes Sunnis think that they are Orthodox and that they have to unite with Heterodox for political and humanitarian reasons, and that Shias must make [ridiculous] compromises. Shias are far more receptive to the unity message, because we actually understand Sunni Islam, and can see the commonalities. We understand that we can't make Sunnis compromise on their beliefs. Simply by being the minority within Islam, by nature we Shias already understand Sunni beliefs, whereas Sunnis have a basic strawman understanding of Shia beliefs... which is natural, considering that they are the majority. Anyways, the point of my post is the following: Let's compile a list of revered Shia figures that are not given their proper status by Sunnis, according to Shia Islam... with an explanation given. ...This is to show that we Shias and Sunnis can unite, but we cannot unite upon revered figures and imamah. ...This will also serve as a way of showing Sunnis that this argument of theirs makes no sense. Another important question we may ask is "What about commonly revered figures like Imam Ali (عليه السلام) who is given different status in both sects? Can we unite upon Imam Ali (عليه السلام)?" ...a common Sunni criticism of political unity is that "Ali ibn Abi Talib (رضي الله عنه) is given an improper status in Shia religion because they call upon him... tawassul (intercession) of the 'dead' is Shirk! So there is absolutely no room for unity since we can't even agree on the status of the sahabi" [yes, I am aware that the Imams (عليه السلام) are still alive, but Sunnis don't believe this...] I would love to hear your thoughts. Wassalam. JazakAllah Khair. Fi sabilillah.

As-Salam-u-Alaikum everyone, I am currently a Masters by Research student studying the relationship between Sunni and Shia groups in Britain, my research is completely unbiased with no political or religious agenda whatsoever. I myself come from a mixed religious and cultural background and contradicting opinions on religion have been part of my upbringing, as such I very much appreciate a healthy debate. I have focussed on the relationship between Salafi and Shia groups in Britain and how that relationship has potentially evolved since the initial emergence of Salafism in Britain in the 1980s. I wanted to ask the people on this forum for their potential insight into these groups? Particularly what you think may be the biggest influencing factor: whether that might be essential theological differences, international or British politics or societal factors? Again, I would really appreciate any feedback you may have and thank you all in advance. If you would prefer to contact me directly my email address is misha.monaghan.2016@live.rhul.ac.uk Jazakumullahu Khair

(BISMILLAH) (Salam) Very wise words from him, despite whatever he may have said/believed in the past: I particularly liked how frank he was - for example, when asked about whether he would participate in/be spearheading a campaign for a unified mosque. I'd say he, almost entirely, spoke my mind.

In His name, most high. Salam. As we all know, the Holy Prophet (s.a.a) leaves two weighty (things, souvenirs) behind, so that, the muslims are guided. And the two weighty things are, according to different views; the Holy Quran and Sunnah (traditions of the Prophet which was recorded in 2-3 centuries after the Prophet) or the Holy Quran and Ahlulbayt (the Household of the Prophet who were embodiments of the Quran and successors to the Prophet) And the Quran and Ahlubayt being the two is recorded in the shia and sunni hadith sources. Though, the sunnah was mentioned in sunni books (but not even in the sihah), it doesn't mean the second ones (Ahlulbayt and Sunnah) contradict each other. Rather, it is the opposite. Because, logically, only the family and closest ones to someone can know about him more than anyone. And they can narrate every aspects of his life. Thus, the Ahlulbayt are the true narrators and preserves of authentic sunnah of the Prophet. Please see: http://www.nahjulbalagha.org/SermonDetail.php?Sermon=209 And, please study the subject further here: http://www.al-islam.org/nutshell/files/family.pdf Yes, the two weighty things are Quran and Ahlulbayt. Though, in the aspect of Sunnah also, the Ahlulbayt are the authentic sources for that. Yet, sadly, the recorders of sunnah (of sunni hadith books) made a huge mistake, by resorting to other sources, but not to Ahlulbayt. Though true sunni scholars, such as Said Nursi, accept that, the Ahlulbayt is an infallible line and that even the devil can not find an argument against their narrations (see; The Miracles of Prophet Muhammad, the part of 'Miracles related to the abundance of food and water', Twelfth Example,), yet, some so-called sunni scholars from the past did find an ''excuse'' against them. Many of the bigot muhadditheen (hadith narrators) of the third century after hijrah sadly did not narrate a single hadith from him, neither most of the fuqaha (jurisprudents) of the fourth century after hijrah. Thus, they left the most authentic sources of the sunnah, and they resorted to other narrators. Even then, the bigotry had no end. Though some hadiths they took from other sources were also authentic, let us study how the so-called sunni scholars in the next centuries acted against even these sunnah. Here are some of the numerous unbelievable examples to sectarian bigotry in the history of Islam: a-) Famous scholars including Ali ibn Abu Bakr al-Marghinani (d. 1197) who was the writer of Al-Hidaya, said that ''About wearing the ring, the SUNNAH of the Prophet is to wear it in the right hand. But, since it is the motto of (a sign of being a) shia, we should leave this SUNNAH.'' They deserted the sunnah of the Holy Prophet in order to oppose shiites. Interestingly, the famous mufasser (interpreter of the Quran) Abu al-Qasim Mahmud ibn Umar al-Zamakhshari (d. 1144), in his ''Rabi al-Abrar'' says that, ''The first person who acted against the SUNNAH of the Prophet and wore ring in his left hand was Muawiyah ibn Abi Sufyan, the first king of the Umayyads.'' b-) Hujjatul-Islam Abu Hamid Muhammad ibn Muhammad al-Ghazali (d. 1111) says; ''About the graves, the SHAR'I ISLAMIC WAY is TASTIH (levelling, making it completely flat). But, since it is (also) the sign of shiites, we make it tasnim (raising).'' They left the sharia in order to oppose the shiites. Such bigotry! c-) Ibn Taymiyyah (d. 1328) (as per some, the so-called Sheikh'ul-Islam) says that ''...That is why, according to some jurisprudents, we need to leave some MUSTAHAB ACTS (islamically recommended deeds) which are signs of shi'ites. Because to DIFFER from shiites by leaving these deeds is far more important than the recommended deeds themselves.'' Not only they left the SHARIA of ISLAM and the SUNNAH of the PROPHET (or what was left over them in their books), they also left the MUSTAHAB (the recommended deeds) JUST TO OPPOSE SHIA MUSLIMS.. d-) Abdulrahim bin al-Husain bin Abdulrahman al-Iraqi al-Misri (d. 1403), the famous Shafii scholar of Hadith, AKA, Hafez al-Araqi, says that: ''About wearing the turban, the SUNNAH way of wearing is to lean the end of the turban from right to left, but, because this is a sign of shiites, in order to not be like them, we should leave this SUNNAH.'' (Muhammad bin Abdul Baqi bin Yusuf al-Zarqani al-Maliki, d. 1709, in his, Sharh al-Mawahib al-Ludaniya, vol. 5, p, 13) Unbelievable! How they deserted the little authentic sunnah they could get from other sources! Just to go against their shia brethren! They thought if they followed those requirements of sharia, sunnah and recommended deeds, they would be acting like shiites. So, let's leave the sunnah!! It is pretty sad. I really don't know what to say.. :( I wish all the Muslim brethren today, not only leave the bigot ways of some of the earlier scholars of 4th century hijri and onwards until today, so that they stick to the authentic sunnah shared by the sunni and shiite muslims before the 4th hijri century; but also that, they refer to Ahlulbayt to get the complete authentic and perfect sharia, sunnah and mustahab deeds. Thanks for your patience in reading my ramblings and also for studying the links. ma salam :)