Ayatullah Seestani Khums Account Located

[husainshahid]

As Salam Alaykum

EPIC DISCOVERY .

I have after much effort LOCATED the khums accounts of the pre-eminent Marja Syed Sistani in the UK owing to Britain's stringent financial regulatory structure. You can verify all the facts for your self on the Charity Commission website. There is no conjecture here.

I still feel like crying on reading this. This is the first expose in history of this. Thank you for all encouraging this site to investigate this issue using hard sources.

Sistani's office is the Imam Ali Foundation in Brondesbury Park. A man runs the UK Office (the most influential and powerful in Europe). His name is Hujjat-ul-Islam Al-Saiyid Murtaza Kashmiri (who subsequent enquiry uncovered to be Sistani's son in law) (see Imam Ali Foundation website

http://www.najaf.org/english/

The UK Charity Commission has rated Sistani's organisation the Imam Ali Foundation as very poor in its production of accounts. It is continually sending in extremely late accounting returns in distinction to for example the Al-Khoei foundation DESPITE having over £2 million pounds cash in the bank. At the time of posting they had not even submitted accounts for 2009. Sometimes the accounts are almost one year late - see the harsh summary statistics on late production of returns on the following UK Charity Commission website:

http://www.charity-commission.gov.uk/ShowCharity/RegisterOfCharities/CharityWithoutPartB.aspx?RegisteredCharityNumber=1075650&SubsidiaryNumber=0

ps iF THE ABOVE LINK DOES NOT OPEN GOOGLE CHARITY COMMISSION FOR THE UNITED KINGDOM

OPEN THE LINK.

THEN TYPE IN "IMAM ALI FOUNDATION" AND CLICK ON THE NAME OR CHARITY REG. NO.

The accounts are shown going back to 2004.

Now, I want you to follow me very closely to unravel this:

1.INCONTROVERTIBLE EVIDENCE THAT ALMOST ALL KHUMS HAS BEEN MISAPPROPRIATED BY OFFICE OF SISTANI.

Even taking out the irreligious, the tightfisted and those pious shias who have no net profit at the end of the year, the khums from britain is at least millions to tens of millsions of pounds. We know from the rich Khoja community that Khums is at least millions of pounds per year donated to sistani's representative just from them alone. This is excluding the projects that are directly funded. Anyhow it cannot be less then a few million even in a bad financial year from the business and professional classes combined. There are after all an estimated 2 million muslims in britain, and if the lowest figure of 12-13% being shia is taken that means about a quarter of a million shia muslims in UK MOST of whom take Syed Sistani as marja, and many of whom have enough money to save and hence pay 20% khums. Let's look at 2008 first in the Charity Commision report on Sistani's people.

[FURTHERMORE the sheer magnitude of fraud you are about to witness - THE ASTONISHING NUMBERS - will leave you with no option but to conclude this is GROSS fraud. The only question is who is the fraudster among Sistani's men / family and does it go a level higher to the big man himself - WE HAVE NO DIRECT EVIDENCE OF THAT WHAT WE DO IS OF THE FACT HIS UK OFFICE SEEMS 100% CORRUPT AND IT IS DIRECTLY CONTROLLED BY HIS CLOSEST FAMILY APPOINTED BY HIM.]

Go to column on far right marked "View"

Click on column saying "Accounts" for the row year ending 20 June 2008.

Open the accounts for 2008.

Go to page 8

This reads "Imam Ali Foundation

Notes to the Financial Statements

Year Ended 30 June 2008"

Follow the Donations box down to "Khums" In the columns marked for 2008 Sistani's office in UK allege they only received a paltry and shockingly unblievable ... wait for it....

£5,447 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

in khums donations from all the 250,000 shias in Britain (most of whom are his muqallids including multimillionaire khoja businessmen). This is implausible. Where did the money go after being donated and then accounted for as just £5,447 (as someone who has worked in charities this is less than the income of a small mosque in a working class area, let alone the number 1 khums tax collector who takes 20% of what Uk shias earn).

After like me going into shock as the collective spell the mullahs have been casting over the shia masses suddenly wore off , a recent ayatollater like me said the mullahs may not be pilfering it before declaring it because british shias were impoverished by the credit crunch in 2008.

In addition to being a ridiculous excuse which i laughed at (owing to the sheer magnitude of fraudulent declarations in the accounts) , let's go to the khums income that sistani's mullahs declared in the year to June 2007 (pre credit crunch).

You will see they have hidden it or not even declared it in the 2007 report. BUT in the 2008 report (the one above) they have been forced to declare it on the same page 8 above under the column "Total funds 2007" where the previous year's khums has had to be declared to compare with the current year's. There it says that the sum pre-credit crunch khums for the whole of UK to Sistani, by far the most popular and richest marja, allegedly ...wait for it.........EVEN LESS

£1,773 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!

Do my eyes deceive me?

NO! We've been had boys we've been made fools of. Are we expected to believe that the sum total of 20% tax of 250,000 shias including many of the most affluent in the world is just over a grand? If the numbers were not so unbelievable they might have got away with it.

Of note the khums accounts have only recently been produced by Sistani's men you will not find them in the earlier accounts. God knows what was happening to them in the years before 2007.

2. If you go to the accounts for all these years from 2004 onwards you will see TENS OF THOUSANDS OF POUNDS ACCUMULATED AS SOODH (INTEREST) ABOUT WHICH YOU DO NOT NEED ME TO TELL YOU from Habib Bank AG Zurich.

3. In 2007 the charity had stored up 2 million pounds in wealth.

The vast majority came from charitable donations (excluding khums almost all of which vanished without accounting the moment it was given to the mullahs).

Yet Sistani's office spent only 5% of this £2 million on charity and the like. One year later in 2008 we find almost all the £2 million pounds is still in the Habib Bank account gathering interest! Now even if this was illicit khums declared as charity money then 50% should have been given to syeds by Sistani's own laws. Instead it is sitting in a bank account earning interest!

Conclusions:

1. There has been massive misappropriation of Khums to the tune of millions or tens of millions of pounds.

2, Only 5% of Money given to Sistani's UK office reaches charities - the rest is stashed into bank vaults where it sits gathering interest.

3. According to Iraqi custom when a marja dies the beneficiary of the financial assets are the Sistani sons and son in laws. With so much money being stored this makes them politically very powerful.

As a side not Saiyid Kashmiri lives in mayfair / park lane the richest area in London. he is also sistani's son in law.

NOW put 2 + 2 together.

Millions of pounds of khums money have literally vanished into thin air before even being accounted for formally - unbelievably tiny amounts have been declared by Sistani's men to the UK Charity authorities.

The man in charge has enough wealth as a mullah to share the street he lives in with Russian oligarchs and Saudi princes and the international rich!

Millions of pounds of non-khums donations (sadqa etc) [which are always LESS than khums] have been stored in bank accounts for years and not spent. Only 5% is spent on charity.

The same family when Sistani dies will (according to iraqi custom) inherit total control over this money given by shias in the same way the Khoei family control that late marja's wealth.

The marjas see nothing wrong with antiquated system as this is the way they function (a notable exception was the great Syed Khomeini ) .

Wa Salam

When Sistani dies, the beneficiary are his family.

Thank you to all on this website who encouraged me to investigate this issue. Any excuses now offered in light of these hard financial statements can best be regatrded as delusional ayatollatry.

If it makes you feel any better, even this hardened iconoclast is shocked at the corruption of the priests, shias, sunnis, christians, all the same in this regard.

A solemn warning from Imam Mahdi (atf) to the Shias:

“Even though we are residing away from the settlements of oppressors [in ghaibat] – as Allah has destined this in the best interest of the Shias – yet our knowledge encompasses all your information. Nothing is hidden from us. We are conscious of the problems and the degradation which all of you are enduring right now. The reason for all this is that you are indulging in all those (prohibited) things from which your elders used to abstain and you have abandoned the promise and the pledge that was taken from you as if you have never ever known this promise…Then each one of you should perform such actions which will bring you close to our love and should abstain from those deeds which are a cause of our displeasure and anger. This is because our reappearance will occur unexpectedly and at that time your repentance will serve no purpose. Your remorse and your regret will not protect you from our chastisement.”

(Al-Ehtejaaj of Sheikh Tabarsi, vol. 2, p. 497, 498)

Don't lose heart. Put your faith in the 12th Imam (atf) not in mullahs of any faith or persuasion.

Wa Salam

Edited February 1, 2010 by husainshahid

[Haji 2003]

I've replied in the other thread. But just in case you were minded to edit your post, I thought I'd save your ignorance for posterity.

The UK Charity Commission has rated Sistani's organisation the Imam Ali Foundation as very poor in its production of accounts. It is continually sending in extremely late accounting returns in distinction to for example the Al-Khoei foundation DESPITE having over £2 million pounds cash in the bank.

http://www.charity-commission.gov.uk/ShowCharity/RegisterOfCharities/CharityWithoutPartB.aspx?RegisteredCharityNumber=1075650&SubsidiaryNumber=0

Er no most of it's the value of their property which appears to have been donated.

3. In 2007 the charity had stored up 2 million pounds in wealth.

The vast majority came from charitable donations (excluding khums almost all of which vanished without accounting the moment it was given to the mullahs).

Yet Sistani's office spent only 5% of this £2 million on charity and the like. One year later in 2008 we find almost all the £2 million pounds is still in the Habib Bank account gathering interest! Now even if this was illicit khums declared as charity money then 50% should have been given to syeds by Sistani's own laws. Instead it is sitting in a bank account earning interest!

No it's still the value of the property.

You don't seem to know the difference between fixed assets and current assets. Are you still at school?

[A follower]

With respect brother, if you are unable to research thoroughly the matter then you should refrain from posting such accusations and claims.

The khoja community in UK gives their khums to the World Federation, who is independent of the Imam Ali Foundation. The World Federation neither passes on the funds to them nor co-operates with them on this issue. They act independently because they have the ijaza from Ayatollah Sistani and the khums that is to be sent to the Marja is sent directly to Najaf. It is never collected in the UK office of the Marja, for many reasons. The Khoja communities in UK are allowed to collect khums so most of the members here pass it on to their communities which then is passed on to the World Federation.

Other factors which may bring about that number in their accounts could be due to the fact that there are more than one personnel/organisation in UK who have the ijaza to collect khums from the marja. For instance, Al-Khoei Foundation is also where the Muqallids of Ayatollah Sistani give khums or they may give to another personnel who deposits it in Najaf or Qum but there is no accountability of that in the accounts of Imam Ali Foundation because it does not come under them. Some people might even not give their khums in UK at all rather give it in Qum or Najaf when they go for ziyarah. There is no accountability of that hence just because the number is low it does not automatically shouts out 'fraud'.

I am not saying that the number is fully right however what I am saying is that due to different factors the number can be very low there and it should not lead to us making assumptions or throwing accusations of fraud.

Conclusions:

1. There has been massive misappropriation of Khums to the tune of millions or tens of millions of pounds.

2, Only 5% of Money given to Sistani's UK office reaches charities - the rest is stashed into bank vaults where it sits gathering interest.

3. According to Iraqi custom when a marja dies the beneficiary of the financial assets are the Sistani sons and son in laws. With so much money being stored this makes them politically very powerful.

1- You would have to know the full amount of Khums that should be recorded given the number of shias in UK and then come to the conclusion there has been massive misappropriation of Khums. The fact is that we know that the Marjas give Ijazas to different organisations and personnels to collect khums as well as their offices which spreads out the distribution and hence since there is no centralisation point [the office] the accounts will reflect a low figure rather than the full figure which shall only come about through all the people who giving their khums to the office alone and not to the other orgs etc.

2- If you do not have proof of such a thing you cannot make the assertion that it is stashed into bank vaults. That is an accusation which you have made without any proof whatsoever. Not saying that it could be false or true rather what I suggesting is that if you wish to claim such a big thing and point fingers then it would be better to do it with proof that it is going into bank vaults. It may well be that the money is being used for projects out of UK which do not involve charities, there may well be many explanations hence just because you see one figure does not mean that the rest of that figure is ending up in the pockets of the people who work in his office.

3- Sigh - if what you think what you have stated in this point is true then I am sorry you are gravely mistaken. The assets which are personal of the Marja are passed on to the family while anything that involves the money of the Ummah ie Khums etc is passed on to the successor of that marja or if a building etc is made from khums money that is made waqf. For example, Ayatollah Lankarani [r] had a Husseinyah/Madressa which he made in his time, after his death that became waqf and not counted in his personal assets.

This is not about delusional ayatollatry as you wish to consider. If you take your time to talk to people, research indepth then you can see there are many factors involved and just because there is a low figure it does not automatically mean there is fraud nor does it mean that money is being stashed away in bank vaults . I know you may very well take my response as nothing short of being delusional ayatollatry however that is your preception.

[husainshahid]

[ACCOUNTS LOCATED. As Salam Alaykum

EPIC DISCOVERY

I have after much effort LOCATED the khums accounts of the pre-eminent Marja Syed Sistani in the UK owing to Britain's stringent financial regulatory structure. You can verify all the facts for your self on the Charity Commission website. There is no conjecture here.

I still feel like crying on reading this. This is the first expose in history of this. Thank you for all encouraging this site to investigate this issue using hard sources.

Sistani's office is the Imam Ali Foundation in Brondesbury Park. A man runs the UK Office (the most influential and powerful in Europe). His name is Hujjat-ul-Islam Al-Saiyid Murtaza Kashmiri (who subsequent enquiry uncovered to be Sistani's son in law) (see Imam Ali Foundation website

http://www.najaf.org/english/

The UK Charity Commission has rated Sistani's organisation the Imam Ali Foundation as very poor in its production of accounts. It is continually sending in extremely late accounting returns in distinction to for example the Al-Khoei foundation DESPITE having over £2 million pounds cash in the bank. At the time of posting they had not even submitted accounts for 2009. Sometimes the accounts are almost one year late - see the harsh summary statistics on late production of returns on the following UK Charity Commission website:

http://www.charity-c...sidiaryNumber=0

ps iF THE ABOVE LINK DOES NOT OPEN GOOGLE CHARITY COMMISSION FOR THE UNITED KINGDOM

OPEN THE LINK.

THEN TYPE IN IMAM ALI FOUNDATION AND CLICK ON THE NAME OR CHARITY REG. NO.

The accounts are shown going back to 2004.

Now, I want you to follow me very closely to unravel this:

1.STRONG EVIDENCE THAT KHUMS HAS BEEN MISAPPROPRIATED BY OFFICE OF SISTANI.

Even taking out the irreligious, the tightfisted and those pious shias who have no net profit at the end of the year, the khums from britain is at least millions to tens of millsions of pounds. We know from the rich Khoja community that Khums is at least millions of pounds per year donated to sistani's representative just from them alone. This is excluding the projects that are directly funded. Anyhow it cannot be less then a few million even in a bad financial year from the business and professional classes combined. There are after all an estimated 2 million muslims in britain, and if the lowest figure of 12-13% being shia is taken that means about a quarter of a million shia muslims in UK MOST of whom take Syed Sistani as marja, and many of whom have enough money to save and hence pay 20% khums. Let's look at 2008 first in the Charity Commision report on Sistani's people.

[FURTHERMORE the sheer magnitude of fraud you are about to witness - THE ASTONISHING NUMBERS - will leave you with no option but to conclude this is GROSS fraud. The only question is who is the fraudster among Sistani's men / family and does it go a level higher to the big man himself - WE HAVE NO DIRECT EVIDENCE OF THAT WHAT WE DO IS OF THE FACT HIS UK OFFICE SEEMS 100% CORRUPT AND IT IS DIRECTLY CONTROLLED BY HIS CLOSEST FAMILY APPOINTED BY HIM.]

Go to column on far right marked "View"

Click on column saying "Accounts" for the row year ending 20 June 2008.

Open the accounts for 2008.

Go to page 8

This reads "Imam Ali Foundation

Notes to the Financial Statements

Year Ended 30 June 2008"

Follow the Donations box down to "Khums" In the columns marked for 2008 Sistani's office in UK allege they only received a paltry and shockingly unblievable ... wait for it....

£5,447 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

in khums donations from all the 250,000 shias in Britain (most of whom are his muqallids including multimillionaire khoja businessmen). This is implausible. Where did the money go after being donated and then accounted for as just £5,447 (as someone who has worked in charities this is less than the income of a small mosque in a working class area, let alone the number 1 khums tax collector who takes 20% of what Uk shias earn).

After like me going into shock as the collective spell the mullahs have been casting over the shia masses suddenly wore off , a recent ayatollater like me said the mullahs may not be pilfering it before declaring it because british shias were impoverished by the credit crunch in 2008.

In addition to being a ridiculous excuse which i laughed at (owing to the sheer magnitude of fraudulent declarations in the accounts) , let's go to the khums income that sistani's mullahs declared in the year to June 2007 (pre credit crunch).

You will see they have hidden it or not even declared it in the 2007 report. BUT in the 2008 report (the one above) they have been forced to declare it on the same page 8 above under the column "Total funds 2007" where the previous year's khums has had to be declared to compare with the current year's. There it says that the sum pre-credit crunch khums for the whole of UK to Sistani, by far the most popular and richest marja, allegedly ...wait for it.........EVEN LESS

£1,773 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!

Do my eyes deceive me?

NO! We've been had boys we've been made fools of. Are we expected to believe that the sum total of 20% tax of 250,000 shias including many of the most affluent in the world is just over a grand? If the numbers were not so unbelievable they might have got away with it.

Of note the khums accounts have only recently been produced by Sistani's men you will not find them in the earlier accounts. God knows what was happening to them in the years before 2007.

2. If you go to the accounts for all these years from 2004 onwards you will see TENS OF THOUSANDS OF POUNDS ACCUMULATED AS SOODH (INTEREST) ABOUT WHICH YOU DO NOT NEED ME TO TELL YOU from Habib Bank AG Zurich.

Conclusions:

1. There is a massive gap between accounted khums and amount which is likley to have been actually donated, a staggering discrepancy in fact.

2. According to Iraqi custom when a marja dies the beneficiary of the financial assets are the Sistani sons and son in laws. With so much money being stored this makes them politically very powerful.

As a side not Saiyid Kashmiri lives in mayfair / park lane the richest area in London. he is also sistani's son in law.

NOW put 2 + 2 together.

The marjas see nothing wrong with antiquated system as this is the way they function (a notable exception was the great Syed Khomeini ) .

Wa Salam

When Sistani dies, the beneficiary are his family.

Thank you to all on this website who encouraged me to investigate this issue. Any excuses now offered in light of these hard financial statements can best be regatrded as delusional ayatollatry.

If it makes you feel any better, even this hardened iconoclast is shocked at the corruption of the priests, shias, sunnis, christians, all the same in this regard.

A solemn warning from Imam Mahdi (atf) to the Shias:

“Even though we are residing away from the settlements of oppressors [in ghaibat] – as Allah has destined this in the best interest of the Shias – yet our knowledge encompasses all your information. Nothing is hidden from us. We are conscious of the problems and the degradation which all of you are enduring right now. The reason for all this is that you are indulging in all those (prohibited) things from which your elders used to abstain and you have abandoned the promise and the pledge that was taken from you as if you have never ever known this promise…Then each one of you should perform such actions which will bring you close to our love and should abstain from those deeds which are a cause of our displeasure and anger. This is because our reappearance will occur unexpectedly and at that time your repentance will serve no purpose. Your remorse and your regret will not protect you from our chastisement.”

(Al-Ehtejaaj of Sheikh Tabarsi, vol. 2, p. 497, 498)

Don't lose heart. Put your faith in the 12th Imam (atf) not in mullahs of any faith or persuasion.

Wa Salam

[husainshahid]

I've replied in the other thread. But just in case you were minded to edit your post, I thought I'd save your ignorance for posterity.

Er no most of it's the value of their property which appears to have been donated.

No it's still the value of the property.

You don't seem to know the difference between fixed assets and current assets. Are you still at school?

WA SALAM

YOU KEEP DODGING THE DREADED WORD AT THE HEART FO THIS THREAD BY FOCUSSING ON A SIDE ISSUE AND POKING FUN

I 'M GLAD.

BECAUSE EVERYEONE CAN SEE YOU ARE STEERING THIS AWAY FROM WHAT HAS BEEN UNCOVERED.

WHERE HAS ALL THE KHUMS GONE???????

THAT IS THE CORE QUESTION. THAT IS WHERE THE BIG MONEY IS. AND IT SEEMS TO BE MISSING.

YOU SERIOUSLY EXPECT PEOPLE TO BELIEVE THAT THE CENTRAL UK OFFICE OF SISTANI RECEIVED JUST UNDER £2000 KHUMS IN 2007 FROM 250,000 SHIAS

????

NEXT YOU WILL SAY MAYBE THEY GAVE IT TO THE TOOTH FAIRY.

WHERE HAS ALL THE KHUMS GONE?

I AM SORRY YOU REGARD WHAT SEEM TO BE MASSIVE DISCREPANCIES IN KHUMS AS A COMEDY.

THIS IS A SERIOUS ISSUE

AND IN ISLAM WE SAY SALAM

WA SALAM

[A follower]

No he is not being stupid, what he is mentioning is true. The property itself which is worth X amount of pounds will always be counted as an asset which will be reflected in the counts. Pick up any accounts of any new built centre and see what it reflects regarding the property and you will see it is regarded as an asset worth thousands if not millions. So please learn a thing or two before making such emotional and throwing accusations.

[husainshahid]

With respect brother, if you are unable to research thoroughly the matter then you should refrain from posting such accusations and claims.

The khoja community in UK gives their khums to the World Federation, who is independent of the Imam Ali Foundation. The World Federation neither passes on the funds to them nor co-operates with them on this issue. They act independently because they have the ijaza from Ayatollah Sistani and the khums that is to be sent to the Marja is sent directly to Najaf. It is never collected in the UK office of the Marja, for many reasons. The Khoja communities in UK are allowed to collect khums so most of the members here pass it on to their communities which then is passed on to the World Federation.

Other factors which may bring about that number in their accounts could be due to the fact that there are more than one personnel/organisation in UK who have the ijaza to collect khums from the marja. For instance, Al-Khoei Foundation is also where the Muqallids of Ayatollah Sistani give khums or they may give to another personnel who deposits it in Najaf or Qum but there is no accountability of that in the accounts of Imam Ali Foundation because it does not come under them. Some people might even not give their khums in UK at all rather give it in Qum or Najaf when they go for ziyarah. There is no accountability of that hence just because the number is low it does not automatically shouts out 'fraud'.

I am not saying that the number is fully right however what I am saying is that due to different factors the number can be very low there and it should not lead to us making assumptions or throwing accusations of fraud.

1- You would have to know the full amount of Khums that should be recorded given the number of shias in UK and then come to the conclusion there has been massive misappropriation of Khums. The fact is that we know that the Marjas give Ijazas to different organisations and personnels to collect khums as well as their offices which spreads out the distribution and hence since there is no centralisation point [the office] the accounts will reflect a low figure rather than the full figure which shall only come about through all the people who giving their khums to the office alone and not to the other orgs etc.

2- If you do not have proof of such a thing you cannot make the assertion that it is stashed into bank vaults. That is an accusation which you have made without any proof whatsoever. Not saying that it could be false or true rather what I suggesting is that if you wish to claim such a big thing and point fingers then it would be better to do it with proof that it is going into bank vaults. It may well be that the money is being used for projects out of UK which do not involve charities, there may well be many explanations hence just because you see one figure does not mean that the rest of that figure is ending up in the pockets of the people who work in his office.

3- Sigh - if what you think what you have stated in this point is true then I am sorry you are gravely mistaken. The assets which are personal of the Marja are passed on to the family while anything that involves the money of the Ummah ie Khums etc is passed on to the successor of that marja or if a building etc is made from khums money that is made waqf. For example, Ayatollah Lankarani [r] had a Husseinyah/Madressa which he made in his time, after his death that became waqf and not counted in his personal assets.

This is not about delusional ayatollatry as you wish to consider. If you take your time to talk to people, research indepth then you can see there are many factors involved and just because there is a low figure it does not automatically mean there is fraud nor does it mean that money is being stashed away in bank vaults . I know you may very well take my response as nothing short of being delusional ayatollatry however that is your preception.

as Salaam Alaykum

Your post implies i was talking of the World Federation.

I know wealthy khojas who are wealthy and do not give their khums via the World Federation.

On balance of reasonable probability, financial corruption is the most likely explanation (in english there is a saying - i was not born yesterday)

No one I have talked to even friends of the mullahs and their outspoken supporters have not been choked by how little khums the central office of britain's biggest marja was declaring. they agreed the accounts looked 'dodgy' but there was a small chance they were not (and had it not been mullahs in charge they would have said it was most likely blatant corruption).

Like i said the numbers are so very small (less than £2000 in 2007) it is almost inconceivable so little khums was received even with every caveat in the book and every excuse in existence dragges out to explain the small sums being declared..

However most agreed the accounts looked very suspicious and worrying.

In response to "

3- Sigh - if what you think what you have stated in this point is true then I am sorry you are gravely mistaken. The assets which are personal of the Marja are passed on to the family while anything that involves the money of the Ummah ie Khums etc is passed on to the successor of that marja or if a building etc is made from khums money that is made waqf. For example, Ayatollah Lankarani [r] had a Husseinyah/Madressa which he made in his time, after his death that became waqf and not counted in his personal assets.

I suggest you ask who is in charge of the Khoei Foundation? The Khoei family. Sistani did not inherit Khoei's khums pot, the Khoei family became the guardians. I am not saying they are corrupt. in fact they are given a clean bill of auditing health by the Charity Commission.

Sistani's office are however in the red - not filing accounts for almost one year later!!!!

Wa Salam

[A follower]

^ Al-Khoei Foundation was the office of Ayatollah Khoei, the offices are not inherited by their successor rather by the family which is correct. Ayatollah Lankarani's office today is run by his son because the office made by that marja cannot cease to exist just because the Marja has passed away due to their role and activities. If the office is confined to collecting khums only then you can argue this but if it not then your point does not stand.

And no my post did not imply that you were talking about World Federation in the slightest manner. I would suggest reading again what I wrote because what I am saying is quite different to what you are implying again and again.

Edited February 2, 2010 by A follower

[husainshahid]

No he is not being stupid, what he is mentioning is true. The property itself which is worth X amount of pounds will always be counted as an asset which will be reflected in the counts. Pick up any accounts of any new built centre and see what it reflects regarding the property and you will see it is regarded as an asset worth thousands if not millions. So please learn a thing or two before making such emotional and throwing accusations.

As Salam Alaykum

This thread is about khums.

The key question is this - do you believe that the accounting record is factually accurate when it states in 2007 the central office of the number 1 ayatollah for britain's 250,000 shias (of whom the majority follow him) received less than £2000 in khums over 12 months?

When all the excuses are written by apologists, I still find it an absolutely staggering fact that beggars belief.

My experience in the shia community has been that most shias are also shocked (taken that a large number of people who visit this site are heavily attracted to extreme usulism, plus the usual ultra-naive souls who will give almost anyone the benefit of the doubt.) I say that because I used to be one of them - see my early posts from a few years back and i was defending the mullahs.

Wa Salam

[A follower]

As Salam Alaykum

This thread is about khums.

No one has denied that but your assertion of £2 million asset in the bank was a conclusion of reading it wrongly which had to be pointed out and that is what Br Haji pointed at. The building itself constitutes as an asset it does not necessarily mean the asset of the family as you may think, rather it is an asset which is run by a board of trustees etc.

The key question is this - do you believe that the accounting record is factually accurate when it states in 2007 the central office of the number 1 ayatollah for britain's 250,000 shias (of whom the majority follow him) received less than £2000 in khums over 12 months?

You have failed to understand my post if you are still focusing on this, as I stated above let me repeat once more. Out of the 250,000 Shias, there is no consensus to show that majority of them give their khums to the office run by Sayed Kashmiri. The second point is that we know factually that Ayatollah Sistani has given ijazas to many organisations in UK to collect khums for their purposes, and to other personnel who are in UK too which means that the collection is scattered over these organisations, personnels and the office in question. Hence when you look at the figure of 250,000 there is only a fraction of those who are actually giving their khums to the office that you are questioning, there are possibiities such as giving to the personnel who have ijaza to take the money to Qum or Najaf, to donate themselves to the offices in Qum and Najaf or to give to the organisations who have the ijaza. Moreover, out of the 250 000 figure there are those who do taqleed to marjas other than Ayatollah Sistani. All these factors reduce the chances to the khums going to the office, hence if there is a low figure it could well be due to that. Other point as Br Haji stated that the donation side shows a large sum which includes a specific list which details the type of donation for example khums, sadaqa, etc. This shows that the donation catergory could well itself have a fraction of khums in it. And lastly one more point is what if the Khums money is being sent toQum or Najaf itself? And the figure in the accounts is a reflection of the Khums the office holds in London. Is that not a possibility?

When all the excuses are written by apologists, I still find it an absolutely staggering fact that beggars belief.

Giving 70 excuses is better than condemning or accusing others without any evidence.

My experience in the shia community has been that most shias are also shocked (taken that a large number of people who visit this site are heavily attracted to extreme usulism, plus the usual ultra-naive souls who will give almost anyone the benefit of the doubt.) I say that because I used to be one of them - see my early posts from a few years back and i was defending the mullahs.

Ultra-naive soul? My friend if you wish to label people with such tags then please start with yourself and I mean that with respect to you. You have displayed a lack of reading accounts and understanding them and then going on to throw accusations and when other possibilities are raised then you pass them off as being ultra naive and from those who are apologist and attracted to extreme usoolism. If you wish to learn and understand then question however if you wish to question just in order to criticise then it is a waste of time.

Edited February 2, 2010 by A follower

[husainshahid]

You have failed to understand my post if you are still focusing on this, as I stated above let me repeat once more. Out of the 250,000 Shias, there is no consensus to show that majority of them give their khums to the office run by Sayed Kashmiri. The second point is that we know factually that Ayatollah Sistani has given ijazas to many organisations in UK to collect khums for their purposes, and to other personnel who are in UK too which means that the collection is scattered over these organisations, personnels and the office in question. Hence when you look at the figure of 250,000 there is only a fraction of those who are actually giving their khums to the office that you are questioning, there are possibiities such as giving to the personnel who have ijaza to take the money to Qum or Najaf, to donate themselves to the offices in Qum and Najaf or to give to the organisations who have the ijaza. Moreover, out of the 250 000 figure there are those who do taqleed to marjas other than Ayatollah Sistani. All these factors reduce the chances to the khums going to the office, hence if there is a low figure it could well be due to that. Other point as Br Haji stated that the donation side shows a large sum which includes a specific list which details the type of donation for example khums, sadaqa, etc. This shows that the donation catergory could well itself have a fraction of khums in it. And lastly one more point is what if the Khums money is being sent toQum or Najaf itself? And the figure in the accounts is a reflection of the Khums the office holds in London. Is that not a possibility?

I have fully understood this and said as much in my original post.

You still don't get it. EVEN after all the alternative routes to give khums are taken out of the equation it is frankly astonishing that the central office of the biggest marja in the UK declared as having received less than £2000 in 1 year.

In my experience people give the central office a lot of khums money. SO DO YOU DENY THAT A CENTRAL FUNCTION OF THE REPRESENTATIVE IS TO COLLECT KHUMS FROM THE MUQALLIDS IN THE UK? IT IS NOT COMPULSORY TO GIVE IT TO HIM BUT MANY PEOPLE DO. Also mullahs tell them to send it there.

Had this guy said they got £50,000 in khums I might think - okay sounds low but plausible.

He says he got less than £2000 in khums!!!!!

That is not plausible based upon my experience or common sense even with all your caveats chucked in there.

Giving 70 excuses is better than condemning or accusing others without any evidence.

The accounts ARE evidence. It's not 100% conclusive, but it is on balance of probability representative of financial irregularity. I may be wrong, but I am probably right.

Edited February 2, 2010 by husainshahid

[Haji 2003]

The accounts ARE evidence. It's not 100% conclusive, but it is on balance of probability representative of financial irregularity. I may be wrong, but I am probably right.

Er No.

The accounts have been audited by a firm of professional accountants. If they had overlooked fraud on this scale, they would probably lose their licence to practice. In addition as a registered Charity the Imam Ali foundation would also need to satisfy the Charity Commissioners about its work, the sources of the money raised and where it was being spent (and whether these were actually charitable causes).

All you have done is to identify what seems to you like an implausible set of numbers. But for which there may be a number of different explanations.

What makes your little campaign even less credible is that any normal individual (and a Muslim at that) would have gone first to the Imam Ali Foundation and asked for an explanation, before throwing around daft accusations.

I'll retract my advice about reading a book on accounts, you clearly need to read a basic primer about Islam first.

[husainshahid]

Er No.

The accounts have been audited by a firm of professional accountants. If they had overlooked fraud on this scale, they would probably lose their licence to practice. In addition as a registered Charity the Imam Ali foundation would also need to satisfy the Charity Commissioners about its work, the sources of the money raised and where it was being spent (and whether these were actually charitable causes).

All you have done is to identify what seems to you like an implausible set of numbers. But for which there may be a number of different explanations.

What makes your little campaign even less credible is that any normal individual (and a Muslim at that) would have gone first to the Imam Ali Foundation and asked for an explanation, before throwing around daft accusations.

I'll retract my advice about reading a book on accounts, you clearly need to read a basic primer about Islam first.

As salam alaykum

This arch ayatollater would have use believe accountants all tell the truth and are not hired for purposes of tax evasion and tax avoidance.

LOL.

He would also have us believe people show their accountants all their funds.

LOL.

He would also have us believe in the tooth fairy and santa claus.

LOL.

But then this of course is the make believe world of ayatollatry. A world where subscribers are expected to believe all manner of imaginative excuses rather than consider the grown up's explanation that fraud is the most likely reason why in 2007 less than £2000 in khums was declared by what is in effect the prime khums collection office for the UK.

I have talked this issue over with 2 ulema and who have been told that if ulema look suspicious (even marjas) then shias have a duty to investigate and expose the specific ulema who may be involved in fraud (since it goes on) even if this goes all the way up to the Marjas. While at the same time shias must do so in a way that is mature and responsible and does not cause the people to totally discard the role of the ulema since they serve worthwhile functions. Well that was what they as ulema said (their views not mine).

Wa Salaam

[iraqi_shia]

HusainShahid,

I have already told everyone these figures. However your mistake is this:

1.INCONTROVERTIBLE EVIDENCE THAT ALMOST ALL KHUMS HAS BEEN MISAPPROPRIATED BY OFFICE OF SISTANI.

Even taking out the irreligious, the tightfisted and those pious shias who have no net profit at the end of the year, the khums from britain is at least millions to tens of millsions of pounds. We know from the rich Khoja community that Khums is at least millions of pounds per year donated to sistani's representative just from them alone. This is excluding the projects that are directly funded. Anyhow it cannot be less then a few million even in a bad financial year from the business and professional classes combined. There are after all an estimated 2 million muslims in britain, and if the lowest figure of 12-13% being shia is taken that means about a quarter of a million shia muslims in UK MOST of whom take Syed Sistani as marja, and many of whom have enough money to save and hence pay 20% khums. Let's look at 2008 first in the Charity Commision report on Sistani's people.

Firstly you bring zero evidence of corruption, and instead assume that people have paid khums, and that its gone missing.

In the past I mentioned the accounts of the Islamic centre in Maida Vale (Khamenei), which actually collected less than the Imam Ali foundation, and I know the people that collected the money, they told me that the khums collected was a few thousand pounds. I was supprised it was so low, and they said, "low, this is the best year we haev ever had".

I then was so shocked I asked the sheikh who was in charge of this and Sheikh Araki ( before he left) deputy, he said he was in norway, and there for the entire time he was there (a number of years) the khums money collected was a few hundred pounds.

Its not the money is being taken and used for fraud, its the opposite, the shia dont give khums, they make excuses etc.

[A true Sunni]

Can anybody remember what the Islamic punishment for slander is. Honestly havent the malangs got anything better to do then mud rake. Thats the problem with Malangs spend all their money sharpening blades and try to justify why they dont contribute anything to run the institutions.

[iraqi_shia]

^ brother, do you think these fitnah mongers are organised (ie a conspiracy) or just ignorant?

[Aabiss_Shakari]

Both. Some of them are getting benefits from this and some are blindly following them.

[Haji 2003]

^ brother, do you think these fitnah mongers are organised (ie a conspiracy) or just ignorant?

Bro, if the person who has raised these issues is anything to go by, they are hardly organised, obviously illiterate and a pretty bad advertisement for anything that they stand for.

There are clear processes involved for people who believe that a UK registered charity has misappropriated funds, which is the accusation here. If this chap truly believes what he says, he should know what to do. I doubt he will do this. I think instead he will just go around telling everyone in the community (his misinformed lie) hat Ayatollah Sistani has £2m in UK bank accounts and that they should not pay khums.

He obviously knows very little about tax (am I surprised?!). He accuses the auditors of both tax evasion and avoidance. Tax avoidance is perfectly legitimate. Every sensible person does this, it is the REASON for using an accountant! Tax evasion is illegal and if someone is caught doing this there can be severe penalties.

The challenge for this person is very simple. Find people who claim to have given khums to the Imam Ali (a.s.) foundation. They should have receipts. The OP claims that the figure runs to many thousands of pounds, so they should not be hard to find. If the total is greater than the declared amount, then there is a case to answer.

EDIT: One other point while I remember. This is the issue of *materiality*. As I may have said before, I am not an accountant, but AFAIK, this is an issue when auditors/tax authorities etc. look at accounts. For example in an organisation the size of Marks and Spencer and BP, there may be many thousands of pounds that cannot be accounted for, but the size of this sum is not material compared to the size of those multibillion pound organisations.

But this charity only has revenues of £400k. £100k going astray would be very material indeed and everyone would want to know what had happened. Even £1,000 that could not be explained would look strange! These would be material discrepancies.

If this person is to be believed either the professionals looking at the books are overlooking very material discrepancies, or the Foundation is asking khums payers to bring round sackfuls of used notes! That sounds really plausible!

Edited February 2, 2010 by Haji 2003

[Psychopath]

I think you should have a biscuit and go to bed. You're just making yourself look silly.

[Gypsy]

(salam)

Husainshahid

I can see why you are having a tough time explaining yourself.

You lied and said 250K people supposedly paid their Khums to Imam Ali foundation. You can’t back it up because you pulled the number out of thin air.

[Ali Fazel]

^ brother, do you think these fitnah mongers are organized (ie a conspiracy) or just ignorant?

1) He mentioned Khoja - I believe he is a Khoja.

2) In the past during the times of Ayietullah Khoei the World Federation of Khojas came out in defiance.

Large amounts (three incident min. of around 30-40 thousand pounds paid to Sayyied Madadi) , and the money returned as gift to build Stanmore mosque. --- This was in defiance to Ayietullah al-Khoei.

Where was this person when there was a big debate taking place on the issue.

3) Some NASTIQ Khojas have ever since been the opponents of Merjas - desguising their conflict as conflict against the wakeels of Merja.

They forget that its none of their business to take on the Waqeels - The Marjas themselves are responsible - If they have any problem they should report it to the Merja - and let him deal with it.

Today there is a movement amongst the Khojas, active people, who are totally against Marjiyet - they stand in defiance and YET when it comes to Fatwa they site the fatwa of these Mujtahideen. --- These hypocrites behave in the most unspeakable manner - Politics even against Merjas is their religion .

Husainshahid seems to be a hypocrite like this group. - if he is not, let him explain the above issue (world federation against Al-Khoei ) and where was he? If he is really concerned about Khums and accountability, did he ever call the leader of WF (Mullah Asgher) a thief just as he is referring to Ayietullah Sistani a thief?

Fitna is worst then killings.

Edited February 3, 2010 by Ali Fazel

[Maula Dha Mallang]

guys i think we all need to pay attention to what bro hajji is talking about....hes probably the number 1 qualified person on this entire forum to talk about financial things like this.

[Haji 2003]

1) He mentioned Khoja - I believe he is a Khoja.

Nah. He can't be khoja, reading accounts is hardwired into their DNA and he can't read accounts for toffee.

guys i think we all need to pay attention to what bro hajji is talking about....hes probably the number 1 qualified person on this entire forum to talk about financial things like this.

:!!!:

I am just an amateur bro (I've mentioned that I only have a lay interest in this). Seriously, the mistakes the OP made were very very basic. And since then the stuff he has said suggests he knows very little about the basics. Most of what he has written is conjecture and speculation.

[shiasoldier786]

Thank you Brother Haji for exposing these fitna mongers.

[Hameedeh]

Can anybody remember what the Islamic punishment for slander is. Honestly havent the malangs got anything better to do then mud rake. Thats the problem with Malangs spend all their money sharpening blades and try to justify why they dont contribute anything to run the institutions.

(bismillah)

(salam)

Off Topic for Khums Account, sorry. What is a malang? I keep reading it everywhere on sc.

[A true Sunni]

1) He mentioned Khoja - I believe he is a Khoja.

2) In the past during the times of Ayietullah Khoei the World Federation of Khojas came out in defiance.

Large amounts (three incident min. of around 30-40 thousand pounds paid to Sayyied Madadi) , and the money returned as gift to build Stanmore mosque. --- This was in defiance to Ayietullah al-Khoei.

Where was this person when there was a big debate taking place on the issue.

3) Some NASTIQ Khojas have ever since been the opponents of Merjas - desguising their conflict as conflict against the wakeels of Merja.

They forget that its none of their business to take on the Waqeels - The Marjas themselves are responsible - If they have any problem they should report it to the Merja - and let him deal with it.

Today there is a movement amongst the Khojas, active people, who are totally against Marjiyet - they stand in defiance and YET when it comes to Fatwa they site the fatwa of these Mujtahideen. --- These hypocrites behave in the most unspeakable manner - Politics even against Merjas is their religion .

Husainshahid seems to be a hypocrite like this group. - if he is not, let him explain the above issue (world federation against Al-Khoei ) and where was he? If he is really concerned about Khums and accountability, did he ever call the leader of WF (Mullah Asgher) a thief just as he is referring to Ayietullah Sistani a thief?

Fitna is worst then killings.

No he isn't a Khoja. Most Khojas I know are business people. They also know about Khums Ijazas etc. This guy is a Pakistani Punjabi . Mosy Malang Pakistani Punjabis don't pay Khums and yet are the firts to enquire where all this money goes.

[Maula Dha Mallang]

I've replied in the other thread. But just in case you were minded to edit your post, I thought I'd save your ignorance for posterity.

Er no most of it's the value of their property which appears to have been donated.

No it's still the value of the property.

You don't seem to know the difference between fixed assets and current assets. Are you still at school?

had a look through the report myself today, its definately fixed assets (i.e. the building), look at the depreciation etc a few pages down. however i am very suprised that the khums payment is so low, 404 raised 150k in one NIGHT last week, 4000 squid in a years worth of khums seems....strange.

any ideas why its so low?

Edited February 4, 2010 by maula dha mallang

[Haji 2003]

any ideas why its so low?

Bro people have suggested in this thread or the other one, that it could be low because

1. People just don't give khums

2. Ayatollah Sistani's muqallids can give via lots of other means, e.g. a number of imambaras have ijaza to collect on his behalf

3. People may send money direct to Iraq via intermediaries etc.

As I've said previously, there may theoretically be some discrepancies (I am not saying that there are), but they can't amount to much because the overall sums we are talking about are relatively low. A material discrepancy would be picked up by the auditors and the charity commission. The latter do ensure that sums expended, for example, are inline with the charity aims etc.

The only possible issue I can think of is that people who are giving khums are not making it clear that it is khums and so it is being held in a general fund. Many charities ask donors to specify what the money is for and that paperwork would have to be kept.

Given wider security/police etc. interest in Muslim issues, you can be sure that these guys would have to be squeaky clean and given their particular link with Iraq, even more so.

I am all for good governance and complained to one of the trustees of the Muhammadi Trust about their accounts being submitted late and since that is also an issue here, these people should also sort that out. But that is not fraud.

[Maula Dha Mallang]

usually im the first to jump on the anti-marja side, but to be honest theres nothing that ive read so far in defense that doesnt make sense. it is, at first glance, seemingly low but its like you said, there are plenty of explanations. my concern when it comes to khums isnt at the collection point, its at the distribution point, it would be good to see where all the khums GOs on, idaras, community projects etc. (im not talking about organisations that have ijazat to spend khums on their local community projects), so the remainder seems to just vanish into a black hole somewhere?

[Maula Dha Mallang]

^ Someone is taking care of the orphans, the widows, the hawza students, the Islamic movements, etc etc..

Hasan Sajjad

President

yeah, and i would like to see how much goes where

[A true Sunni]

yeah, and i would like to see how much goes where

Since you have never paid any money to the Marje nor have any intention of doing so. Surely your desire to find out where the money goes is just another way of you looking to do a bit of Marja bashing.

As a dyed in the wool Malang leave it to those who pay the money to satisfy themselves.

[iraqi_shia]

^ the irony is, those that pay arent bothered as they are comfortable they have done their duty, if someone else squanders it, its the fraudsters problem, not the one that pays. However there appears to be no evidence of fraud.

[husainshahid]

HusainShahid,

I have already told everyone these figures. However your mistake is this:

Firstly you bring zero evidence of corruption, and instead assume that people have paid khums, and that its gone missing.

In the past I mentioned the accounts of the Islamic centre in Maida Vale (Khamenei), which actually collected less than the Imam Ali foundation, and I know the people that collected the money, they told me that the khums collected was a few thousand pounds. I was supprised it was so low, and they said, "low, this is the best year we haev ever had".

I then was so shocked I asked the sheikh who was in charge of this and Sheikh Araki ( before he left) deputy, he said he was in norway, and there for the entire time he was there (a number of years) the khums money collected was a few hundred pounds.

Its not the money is being taken and used for fraud, its the opposite, the shia dont give khums, they make excuses etc.

As Salam alyakum

Naivety . .... the maida vale people unoffically admit sheikh araki was mysteriously removed by Syed Khamenei because of corruption beneath his nose in the London office. Millions went missing.

wa salam

Can anybody remember what the Islamic punishment for slander is. Honestly havent the malangs got anything better to do then mud rake. Thats the problem with Malangs spend all their money sharpening blades and try to justify why they dont contribute anything to run the institutions.

AA

Where is the slander?

I've said corruption seems plausible, i have not said it's proof of corruption.

Mud rake? No, this is called enquiry.

Have U made any enquiries?

To prove it you'd need a major enquiry.

Wa salam

[husainshahid]

Bro, if the person who has raised these issues is anything to go by, they are hardly organised, obviously illiterate and a pretty bad advertisement for anything that they stand for.

There are clear processes involved for people who believe that a UK registered charity has misappropriated funds, which is the accusation here. If this chap truly believes what he says, he should know what to do. I doubt he will do this. I think instead he will just go around telling everyone in the community (his misinformed lie) hat Ayatollah Sistani has £2m in UK bank accounts and that they should not pay khums.

He obviously knows very little about tax (am I surprised?!). He accuses the auditors of both tax evasion and avoidance. Tax avoidance is perfectly legitimate. Every sensible person does this, it is the REASON for using an accountant! Tax evasion is illegal and if someone is caught doing this there can be severe penalties.

The challenge for this person is very simple. Find people who claim to have given khums to the Imam Ali (a.s.) foundation. They should have receipts. The OP claims that the figure runs to many thousands of pounds, so they should not be hard to find. If the total is greater than the declared amount, then there is a case to answer.

EDIT: One other point while I remember. This is the issue of *materiality*. As I may have said before, I am not an accountant, but AFAIK, this is an issue when auditors/tax authorities etc. look at accounts. For example in an organisation the size of Marks and Spencer and BP, there may be many thousands of pounds that cannot be accounted for, but the size of this sum is not material compared to the size of those multibillion pound organisations.

But this charity only has revenues of £400k. £100k going astray would be very material indeed and everyone would want to know what had happened. Even £1,000 that could not be explained would look strange! These would be material discrepancies.

If this person is to be believed either the professionals looking at the books are overlooking very material discrepancies, or the Foundation is asking khums payers to bring round sackfuls of used notes! That sounds really plausible!

AA

I left sistani's taqlid which I had been in since the death of Syed Khoei as i am not convinced of his integrity. I was also repulsed by the worshipfulness of his entourage, their rude demeaning behaviour to others like on this site, and their paranoid behaviour in response to questions - people who accepted everything about him without questions and made it their mission to defend what they thought was 'the faith' no matter what. I later found most people like this were related to mullahs. I have also managed to turn several other people away from blind ayatollatry in a few months by providing a few arguments.

The honus is on those who follow him to prove his office is honest. As someone who followed him I did my investigation and while uanable to prove him financially corrupt within my time schedule came to the conclusion there was plausible evidence of wrongdoing. I could not therefore follow someone whose integrity I was not convinced of. I don;t have time to investigate anymore. The people who frequent this website were unable to provide accounts for their dear ayatollah for some months since i began my questions. That just proved their blind faith.

My soul is not in his hands anymore. God forgive me from being in his taqlid. Maybe sistani is honest. Maybe he is not. I cannot do his taqlid as i am not convinved of his integrity, no offence to him. His followers failed to provide any accounts for their great leader's taxation system. I had to find them, and what i saw, just form the london office, was deeply disturbing though fell short of conlusive proof of corruption without a formal investigation.

AA

Both. Some of them are getting benefits from this and some are blindly following them.

AA

Yes, it is the same with all mullah systems, all religious systems, that do not have an infallible guide. Unfortunately most of the shia mullahs are not representatives of the 12th Imam (atf) and have capitalised on his occultation. That is why he will behead shia and sunni mullahs alike when he rises.

AA

I think you should have a biscuit and go to bed. You're just making yourself look silly.

AA

That is the tragic state of many modern shia muslims. That is the attitude that blocks the Rising of Imam (atf).

The central tax office for sistani in the UK declares less than £2000 khums in 2007.

It is clearly a figure that seems to fall well short of what is expected.

The loyal ayatolatters however are least concerned and tell people to go to sleep.

We have been sleeping for too long..

AA

[A follower]

As Salam alyakum

Naivety . .... the maida vale people unoffically admit sheikh araki was mysteriously removed by Syed Khamenei because of corruption beneath his nose in the London office. Millions went missing.

wa salam

AA

The irony of this post is that what you have posted is displaying naivety while you are labelling others with the same measure. With respect, you said to the other brother regarding doing enquiries to find a conclusion then I would suggest you practise what you preach. The above statement is nothing but accusations which will sow further seeds of fitna in the community.

Take it from someone who knows, Sh Mohsen Araki was not mysteriously removed from his position as the representative of Ayatollah Khamenai nor was the reason corruption which led to his removal. His term ended and he left his position and returned back to Qum. This is quite widely known and if he was really removed by the leader Ayatollah Khamenai himself then why is it that till this day he is teaching Dars e Kharij in Qum Hawza?

What is expected khums amount is based on your ideal view which is that all Shias in UK are paying their khums to the office while the reality is quite different. If you ever decide to research with an open mind then look at the number of organisations in UK alone who hold an ijaza from Ayatollah Sistani to collect Khums. The amount is somewhere between 20 to 30 organisations, I would not be surprised if it is higher than that hence this clearly shows that the expected khums amount in the office will be well less than ideal figures that you have accepted without understanding the various issues which dilute that figure.

Your information really shows your lack of understanding and research on this issue. You have thrown insults, refused to listen to the advice of others and made very false statements regarding Marjas as well as the representatives of the Marjas. May Allah forgive you for such statements.

Edited February 7, 2010 by A follower