Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
ShiaChat.com
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله

Why Do Shi'ites Hate Umar Ibn Al-khattab?!

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

  • Advanced Member

One of the main points of contention between Shiite Muslims and other sects which claim to belong to the fold of Islam is the position taken towards the companions of the Prophet Muhammad (Allah's Peace and Blessings upon Him and His pure Family).

Shiites say that the companions of the Prophet Muhammad (Allah's Peace and Blessings upon Him and His pure Family) are just like any other companions of previous Prophets (Peace be upon Them) among whom are pious believers who are to be respected, and evil hypocrites whom we must hate and to whom we must not show any respect.

We can distinguish between the two groups by reviewing their roles in history. We respect and pray for mercy for those who were loyal to the Prophet and His pure Family (Peace be upon Them) and did not commit crimes or mortal sins. But in turn, as an expression of our rejection of their principles and morality, we loathe and curse those who were hostile to the Prophet and His Pure Family (Peace be Upon Them) and committed crimes and mortal sins. This is what Shiites say on the matter. This position is consistent with the rules contained in the Holy Quran and the Prophet's Noble Sunna, into which time does not permit us to go now.

In contrast, the Bakri sect insists on closing the door on researching this matter and steps back from studying the history of these companions claiming that it is our duty to believe that they were all sincere people and [true] believers, and that is our duty to be silent and turn a blind eye to their life story – to what Mortal Sins and heinous crimes there are in their career because they have all been forgiven.

This is one of the fundamental differences between Shiite Muslim beliefs and Bakri beliefs. For whereas Shiites are open to history and to studying renowned individuals with scientific impartiality in order to separate the good from the bad, Bakris prohibit what they consider to be digging up the past and close their minds with faith that is passed on from generation to generation, faith that dictates belief in all those old figures and in a duty to respect them without any scientific basis [for doing so].

The position on Omar Ibn al-Khattab is an example of the doctrinal division between Shiites and others.

Shiites have studied the history of this man and found him to be a hypocrite, criminal and killer. One of his most heinous crimes was his involvement in a plot to assassinate the Messenger of Allah (Allah's Peace and Blessings upon Him and His pure Family) and later, his direct involvement in killing his only daughter who survived him – Fatima al-Zahra (Peace be upon Her) because of her stand against the coup which was set up by him and his companion Abu Bakr Ibn Abi Qahafa following the martyrdom of her father.

However, the Bakri community refrain from in-depth study of the history of this man. Their leaders deny historical facts, which expose his crimes and mortal sins. They insist on denying them and use various tricks. But that is no longer good enough for the masses, for many members of this sect as a result of recent changes have become more open-minded. They have begun to study history in a scientific manner and reach conclusions which have led them to become Shiites.

One of the things most often denied by the leaders of the sect is the fact that Omar Ibn l-Khattab carried out a brutal attack on Our Lady Fatima al-Zahra (Peace be upon Her) which led to the miscarriage of her baby Mohsin (Peace and Blessings upon Him), one of her ribs' being broken and her remaining sick until she died as a martyr after a period not exceeding three months after the death of her father the Prophet (Allah's Peace and Blessings upon Him and His pure Family).

Leaders of the Bakri sect deny this even though many of their historical sources make specific mention of it. By way of example, all three of Shahristani, Safadi and al-Natham report that: "On the day of allegiance, Omar struck Fatima's stomach causing her to lose her baby! He shouted: “Burn the house no matter who is inside! There was in the house no other than Hassan, Hussain, Ali and Fatima"

After Abu Bakr and Omar seized power, the position taken by the Family of the Prophet (Allah's Blessings upon all of Them) was to reject this unlawful coup. For this reason, they and a group of their supporters refused to pledge allegiance to Abu Bakr and to recognise him as Caliph.

As an expression of protest, the Family of the Prophet shut themselves off from the world inside their house and did not go out. This prompted Omar Ibn al-Khattab to lead a mob of mercenaries from the tribe of Asslam to attack the rebels and drag them by force to pledge allegiance to Abu Bakr.

That day became known as the Day of Allegiance. On that day, Omar and his gang attacked the House of Prophecy where the rightful Caliph Ali Ibn Abi Talib (Peace and Blessings upon both of Them) was engaged in worship and compilation of the Qur'an, while Our Lady Fattima al-Zahra (Peace be upon Her) was behind the door of the house because she had tried to confront the attackers and remind them that what they were doing was unlawful.

Nevertheless, Omar took advantage of the opportunity to persecute her by attacking, once the door had been set alight. He stormed the house and beat the Greatest Lady of All Worlds, whom the Prophet had praised time and again and given repeated warnings against doing her wrong.

At this point Our Lady Fatima al-Zahra (Peace and Blessings upon Her) cried out. Imam Ali Ibn Abi Talib (Peace and Blessings upon Them) heard her voice and rushed to her aid. He took Omar, threw him to the ground, stepped on his nose and was about to kill him but for the fact of his thinking back to the order given to Him by the Prophet (Allah's Peace and Blessings upon Him and His pure Family) to be patient in the face of tyranny so long as his supporters were too few in number.

The leaders of the Bakri sect try to sow seeds of doubt in this historical fact as recounted by al-Natham and allege that he had been influenced by Shiite culture. The truth is that this man cannot be further from the Shiites – he was one of their staunchest opponents! Thus, there is no possibility that he was lying or that he had been influenced by Shiite culture in reporting this.

Who was al-Natham? He was Abu Ishaq Ibrahim bin Sayyar His pupil Aljahidh says about him: "He was one of the fiercest people in condemning the Rafidis (Shiites) because of their vilification of the companions!" He also says about him: "al-Natham believed that Abu Bakr was superior to Ali, and that the correct order of succession for the four was as follows: Abu Bakr, Omar, Uthman, Ali"!

So, al-Natham reported this event without giving any indication that it should be treated as a black mark on Omar's record! This is a normal occurrence. The Bakri sect has from the very beginning sought to justify Omar's actions no matter how repugnant they were with various excuses, including saying that such extremism was to protect Islam and maintain unity between Muslims – united behind a single Caliph!

This is why they do not feel any shame in narrating these accounts, which contain indications that Omar hit women. For this reason, we find that Bukhari mentions in his Sahih an account of Omar's hitting Abu Bakr's sister (Umme Farwa) and hitting the women who came to mourn his companion Abu Bakr. He does not consider this to be a black mark on his record for which Omar deserves to be condemned or to be something which ought to be hidden and not included in his Sahih.

al-Natham was also like Bukhari. He related this account, of Omar's beating Fatima al-Zahra (Peace be upon Her) without feeling any embarrassment to prompt him to cover it up. However, with the passage of time, leaders of the Bakri sect tried to cover it up because Fatima al-Zahra is not like any other woman.

Attacking her is one of the biggest sins. Moreover, it is Kufr and abandonment of the religion of Islam.

There are of course the statements of other Bakri scholars who confirm the fact that Omar carried out an attack on Our Lady Fatima al-Zahra (Peace and Blessings upon Her). Among them is Ibn Abi Darm who said: "Omar kicked Fatima causing her to lose Mohsin"!

This statement is reported by the most prominent Bakri scholars such as Al Thahabi and Ibn Hajjar. Who is Ibn Abi Darm? He is Ahmad ibn Muhammad ibn Al Sirri bin Yahya ibn Abi Darm. Al Thahabi describes him as follows: "upstanding; scholar of hadith; from Kufa. So Ibn Abi Darm, considered by the Bakri sect to be an upstanding hadith teaching Imam admit that Omar committed this heinous crime against the daughter of the Prophet (Allah's Peace and Blessings upon Him and His pure Family).

What do the Bakris do to get themselves out of this predicament? They claim that even though Ibn Abi Darm was a learned and upstanding man he began to lean towards the Shia towards the end of his life. For this reason we cannot accept this report of his.

Al Thahabi reports that Mohammed bin Ahmed bin Hamad Al Kufi described Ibn Abi Darm as follows: "He was generally upstanding but then towards the end of his life, most of what was transmitted by him was slander!" i.e. that Ibn Abi Darm was a man who followed Bakri beliefs but became a Shiite at the end of his lifetime and began to teach people about the shortcomings of the companions in his classes. In other words, he would reveal their true crimes. For this reason Al Thahabi says: "He was known for memory and knowledge but he was a Shiite"!

It really is reverse logic! Instead of examining themselves when they find one of their own scholars moving over to Shiism and speaking out and revealing the truth about Omar's crime, they ignore him and ignore the reasons that prompted him to reject Abu Bakr and Omar! Then they say: “He was an eminent scholar and Imam but at the end of his life, he became a Shiite” because of his realisation about Omar's crime against Fatima al-Zahra (Peace and Blessings upon Her)!

If the man was an eminent scholar and Imam, this means that he would not recklessly abandon his faith towards the end of his life and change to another religion unless he was confident that this other religion was the correct one.

In any event, Bakris insist on denying the truth of the brutal attack carried out by Omar against Our Lady Fatima al-Zahra (Peace and Blessings be upon Her) and on casting doubt on these hadith, which we have just been through by claiming that their chain of transmission is weak.

That way, they expect the Shia to give up their hostile attitude towards Omar Ibn al-Khattab, even though the Shia are satisfied that the fact that the sinful attack took place has been proven to the level of Tawatur, i.e. that many hadith have been transmitted by a huge number of narrators from the Infallible Imams (Peace and Blessings upon Them), who are the descendants of Fatima al-Zahra (Peace be upon Her) and they know best what happened to their oppressed and martyred mother.

The problem is that the Bakris boycott the hadith of the Infallible Imams (Peace and Blessings upon Them). They do not recognize them as authoritative. Through challenging the weakness of the chain of transmission, the Bakris imagine they can escape from the above hadith to prove that Omar hit Our Lady Fatima (Peace be upon Her) causing her to lose her baby but even if we were to give up on those explicit hadith, the hostile position taken by the Shia towards Omar Ibn al-Khattab remains the correct and lawful position.

The Shia can still prove it with Bakri hadith "passed down through sound chains of transmission", the authenticity of which cannot be challenged. We will provide an example here of one of those hadith. Ibn Abi shaiba al-Kufi reported that Omar Ibn al-Khattab said to Fatima al-Zahra (Peace be upon Her): "I swear by Allah, if that group [who refused to pledge allegiance to Abu Bakr] gathered together that would not stop me from ordering them [meaning the attackers] to burn down their home!"

This hadith is authentic, according to the criteria set by the scholars of the Bakri sect, i.e. all the narrators are honest and reliable. It is related on the authority of Muhammed bin Bashir, on the authority of Ubaidullah bin Omar, on the authority of Zaid bin aslam on the authority of his father Aslam (Omar's Mawla) on the authority of Omar bin al-Khattab.

The hadith contains explicit reference to Omar's threatening and terrorising The Greatest Lady of All the Worlds (Peace be upon Her), so that no one, not even the Bakris, can deny that Omar threatened Fatima al-Zahra that he would burn the house down along with all those assembled in it who were refusing to pledge allegiance to Abu Bakr, such as Imam Ali (Peace be upon Him ), Miqdad, Salman and Zubayr.

They just deny that the burning and attack actually took place. Well... Let us go no further than the threat made by Omar to terrorise the Daughter of the Greatest of Prophets (Allah's Peace and Blessings upon Him and His pure Family) and weigh it against the rules of law as contained in other Bakri hadith.

firstly - This act alone is enough for Omar to be treated as a criminal and as a sinner. This is because Abu Dawood reports that the Prophet (Allah's Peace and Blessings upon Him and His pure Family) said: "It is not permissible for a Muslim to terrorise another Muslim."

Secondly - This act alone is enough for Omar to be treated as a great tyrant. This is because al-Tabaraani reports that the Messenger of Allah (Allah's Peace and Blessings upon Him and His pure Family) had said: "No Muslim should terrorise another Muslim. Terrorising a Muslim is grand tyranny"

Thirdly - This act alone is enough for Omar to be considered cursed, cursed by the Angels. This is because Muslim reports that the Messenger of Allah (Allah's Peace and Blessings upon Him and His pure Family) said: Whoever points a weapon at his brother – and terrifies him – is cursed by the Angels. "

Instead of pointing a weapon, Omar brandished a flaming torch.

Fourthly - This act alone is enough for Omar to be treated as among those who perish on the Day of Resurrection those whom Allah will punish with terror and by throwing them in the Hellfire. This is because al-Tabaraani reports that the Messenger of Allah (Allah's Peace and Blessings upon Him and His pure Family) said: "It is Allah's right not to protect from the terrors of the Day of Resurrection whoever makes a Muslim afraid without just cause."

So, based on these hadith, Omar is a cursed, criminal tyrant who will perish in the Hellfire! This is because he carried out threats and intimidation which the Messenger of Allah forbade (Allah's Peace and Blessings upon Him and His pure Family). How can those who call themselves "ahlu Sunnah" ignore this "Sunnah" i.e. hadith and cling stubbornly to their love and respect for the tyrant Omar Ibn al-Khattab?!

We note that these hadith talk about terrorising an ordinary Muslim. Just imagine if that "Muslim" is the Best of all Ladies in Heaven and Daughter of the Seal of the Prophets?! There is no doubt that the sin would be many times greater. I wonder, how we would expect the Messenger of Allah (Allah's Peace and Blessings upon Him and His pure Family) to react to Omar after seeing what he had done – threatening and terrorising his daughter whom he had described her as “Part of me” i.e. an inseparable part of His Holy Self?!

Bkhari reports that the Messenger of Allah (Allah's Peace and Blessings upon Him and His pure Family) said: "Fatima is a part of me. Whoever angers her angers me" Based on this hadith, Fatima al-Zahra's anger leads to the wrath of the Messenger of Allah, and the wrath of the Messenger of Allah clearly leads to the wrath of Allah. The result is that Omar angered Almighty Allah, because he angered Fatima al-Zahra and angered her father the Messenger (Allah's Peace and Blessings upon Him and His pure Family).

Whoever angers Allah is damned to Hell, because Allah (May He be praised and exalted) said: "the Wrath of Allah is on them: He has cursed them and got Hell ready for them: and evil is it for a destination." Allah has warned us against turning for friendship to those with whom He is angry, and said: "O ye who believe! Turn not (for friendship) to people on whom is the Wrath of Allah, of the Hereafter they are already in despair, just as the Unbelievers are in despair about those (buried) in graves."

We do not have the time now to go through a huge volume of texts out of the many books which the Bakris have, such as Bukhari, Musnad ahmed ibn hanbal, Sunan al-Nisa'i, al-Tirmidhi, Ibn Majah, and other approved texts, which are overflowing with accounts and passages, which show the truth of the position taken by Fatima al-Zahra (Allah's Blessings upon Her) towards Abu Bakr and Omar, and what that dictates by way of Lord of the Worlds' wrath upon them.

Let us go no further than mentioning this account reported by ibn qutayba: "Abu Bakr and Omar walked in on Fatima and when they sat down she turned and faced the wall...:" She said: “Can you see yourselves acknowledging a hadith of the Messenger of Allah and acting upon it” They said: “Yes.”

She said: "I implore you by Allah … Did you not hear the Messenger of Allah (Allah's Peace and Blessings upon Him and His pure Family) say: “Fatima's contentment is my contentment. Fatima's anger is my anger; whoever loves Fatima, my daughter, loves me; whoever makes her happy makes me happy and whoever makes her angry makes me angry?”" They Said: “Yes … We heard that from the Messenger of Allah.”

She said: "With Allah and the Angels as my witnesses, you have made me angry and have not made me happy. When I see the Prophet (Allah's Peace and Blessings upon Him and His pure Family) I will complain to him about the two of you and will supplicate against you both in every prayer I pray." The meaning of this last hadith which says that Fatima al-Zahra (Peace and Blessings upon Her) is that she will supplicate against Abu Bakr and Omar in every prayer, or curse them.

This is exactly what Shiites do because they believe it to be a lawful and moral stance which expresses their rejection of whoever did monstrous injustice to her who has no parallel, the Daughter of the Greatest of all Prophets (Allah's Peace and Blessings upon Him and His pure Family).

Omar's crimes were not just limited to this one. There are dozens of other brutal crimes recorded by history as having been committed by this tyrant, including killing people without lawful cause, such as what he did to Sabigh bin Asal and such as the genocide of (Arab al-Saus) city in the Levant, in addition to his corruption of the Islamic religion and violation of many of its religious laws.

For these reasons, Shiites hate and curse Omar Ibn al-Khattab. In fact, anyone who does not hate this vicious terrorist is not really a Muslim, because he rejects the teachings of Muhammad, the Messenger of Islam (Allah's Peace and Blessings upon Him and His pure Family).

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 223
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

(bismillah) (salam) Yes, it's a dilemma. Modern technology (which, if stretched, includes the printing press as well as the internet) has made the learning material very public. This does restrict cer

I follow Wilayah Faqih. I am not understanding this well enough: you are from dearborn so i assume you are Lebanese. As confused as shia community is in Dearborn, they still love Sayed Nasrallah. And

shukranlillah, Umar died today, Eid e Zehra!!!!! LANAT on that oppressor!!!

  • Advanced Member

what is a bakri??

Sheikh al-Habib refers to Sunnis as Bakris. He says that the real Sunnis (Ahlul Sunnah) are the ones who follow the Sunnah of the Prophet Muhammad but Sunnis today rather follow the Sunnah and teachings of Abu Bakr since apparently Suunis nowadays have rejected Ali ibn Abi Talib and Ahlulbayt (even though Sunnis hold Ali to very high regard). He explained in one of his lectures titled "Bakris think they are Sunnis, but in reality are not" that when people wanted to distance themselves from the Shia, and follow Muawiyya, they started calling themselves the Jama’ah. He clarified that “Ahlul Sunnah” title was given to those who followed the Sunnah of Muawiyya, which 'was the cursing of Imam Ali'. This cursing was stopped after much pressure from the Shia of the time. But the “Sunnah” title stayed and was used in a different form.

Source: http://en.wikipedia....kris_and_Batris

Edited by Shia_Debater
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

I follow Wilayah Faqih. I am not understanding this well enough: you are from dearborn so i assume you are Lebanese. As confused as shia community is in Dearborn, they still love Sayed Nasrallah. And Sayed's speech against Habib is really obvious. Do you know what Habib has done?

His videos are used by talibans in Pakistan. His clips are translated and played to their recruit jahils. One of our brother risked his life to go undercover to see how they brain wash people. They show these videos, and talibans get so angry that the brother described some of them got him grabbed a dagger, cut their body at different locations and promised that they wont go back to their wives until they kill as many shias as they can. This is all happening: look at sawat, hazara. Children after children dying from suicide attacks, women being slaved there because if his videos. Yet you are so jahil that just to curse at some individuals you are willing for the other innocents to die. Every time i hear Yasir talk, i remember Imam Ali (as) famous saying O Allah take them away from me, or take me away from them.

I am not Lebanese I am not Iraqi either. Shi'as were killed long before the name Yasser al-Habib ever existed.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

Question arises why do sunnis love Umer!!!!! for insulting prophet s.a.w?? for plotting against Ahlebait??? for giving cursed tree members(umayyads) power??? for accepting islam late??? for not showing valor in battles?? for terrorizing women and kids??? or just in his rule Iran was conquered and their stupid intellect abilities make them think Iran as shia country since that time so they just love him for it!!!!!!? for changing the shariah???? for running away from Uhud and Khyber??? or giving them ways for pedophilia or homosexuality???

i m confused :cry:

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
Sheikh al-Habib refers toSunnis as Bakris. He says that the real Sunnis (Ahlul Sunnah) are the ones who follow the Sunnah of the Prophet Muhammad but Sunnis today rather follow the Sunnah and teachings of Abu Bakr since apparently Suunis nowadays haverejected Ali ibn Abi Talib and Ahlulbayt (even though Sunnis hold Ali to very high regard). He explained in one of his lectures titled "Bakris think they are Sunnis, but in reality are not" that when people wanted to distance themselves from the Shia, and follow Muawiyya, they started calling themselves the Jama’ah. He clarified that “Ahlul Sunnah” title was given to those who followed the Sunnah of Muawiyya, which 'was the cursing of Imam Ali'. This cursing was stopped after much pressure from the Shia of the time. But the “Sunnah” title stayed and was used in a different form.

Source: http://en.wikipedia....kris_and_Batris

I lol'd at Yasirs claim.

BTW, why do Shia's should have loved Umar, words from Iranian Sunni Shaikh

Edited by Rocke
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

MashAllah good response. I can only imagine the state of such a soul to come up with a response like this

Are you being sarcastic? Because that would only be denying facts bro and that's the truth

Question arises why do sunnis love Umer!!!!! for insulting prophet s.a.w?? for plotting against Ahlebait??? for giving cursed tree members(umayyads) power??? for accepting islam late??? for not showing valor in battles?? for terrorizing women and kids??? or just in his rule Iran was conquered and their stupid intellect abilities make them think Iran as shia country since that time so they just love him for it!!!!!!? for changing the shariah???? for running away from Uhud and Khyber??? or giving them ways for pedophilia or homosexuality???

i m confused :cry:

You have every right to be confused bro just don't be helpless try to convert these people more than you try to convert non-Muslims because a non-Muslim won't kill you and we have a greater right to converting those close to us

I lol'd at Yasirs claim.

BTW, why do Shia's should have loved Umar, words from Iranian Sunni Shaikh

You should be hiding now after all the refutes I refuted you.

In the video you sent I noticed many things

1) The man didn't even mention Imam Ali a.s he just mentioned the three animals.

2) He said Iranians should be grateful for Umar not knowing what Umar did when he invaded

3) He said Iranians should kiss the feet of Umar's horse and that is just silly because Umar never moved his fat teez from the throne

4) Kissing the feet of Umar's horse is tabaruk

5) He said he wants a dagger put through his chest, lets all raise our hands and say "ameen"

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

Bakris -- Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman, Aisha, Mu'awiya, Yazeed, every Tyrants before, inbetween, and after, and all of their puppets and praisers...

  • Murderers & oppressors
  • Take power by force; keep power by force
  • Invade other people's countries
  • Force people to convert to their religion
  • Their women breastfed adult men or taught them to do so

Shi'a of Muhammad -- Ameer al-Mu'mineen `Ali ibn Abu Taulib (as); Fatimah Zahra (as); Hasan & Hussain (as); and the nine descendant Imaams from Hussain (as) ending with Imam Az-Zaman al-Mahdi (ajtf)

  • Were all oppressed & murdered
  • Had their rights & property stolen from them
  • Watched as the religion was distorted by deviants who would not listen to their advice
  • When the time to fight came, they fought brave and valiantly and obeyed the rules of war as laid out by Allah SWT
  • Never forced anyone to convert
  • Used wisdom in their judgement and understood Shari'ah perfectly

So while you follow murderers we follow victims of murder... while you follow the one who burried their daughters alive in the earth, we follow one whose daughter was murdered by them.... you follow the one who called the Prophet (sawa) delusional, we follow the one who called the Prophet (sawa) father.... you follow the woman who disobeyed the Qur'an and left her house to fight against her Caliph and caused 20,000 deaths, we follow the one who was murdered by her father... you follow the one whose mother ate the liver of the Prophet's (pbuh) uncle, we follow the one whose mother was the Prophet's (pbuh) soul.... you follow the one whose grandfather was the greatest enemy against the Prophet (pbuh), we follow the one whose grandfather was the Prophet (pbuh).... you say the Prophet's (sawa) parents are in hell, we say the Prophet's (sawa) parents are in paradise.... you say the Prophet (sawa) frowned at the blind man, we say Uthman ibn Affan frowned at the blind man...

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

i m thankful to yasir al habib in sense that he exposed the 1400 year old taqiyya of shi'ites now true muslim can distinguish between real enemies of islam in their ranks.

looool , does your quote satisfy your fake faith!!!! ask yourself. So it is all about Umer isnt it!!!? is he your prophet?

what is a bakri??

its a small sheep who does baaa baaa , i guess some cult who worship Abu Bakr !!!! or they are agents of anti Islam forces...Allaho alim

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

i m thankful to yasir al habib in sense that he exposed the 1400 year old taqiyya of shi'ites now true muslim can distinguish between real enemies of islam in their ranks.

I have one thing to say to you in Arabic and that is "kel khara"

Link to post
Share on other sites

Followers of Yaser can kiss Makarem Shirazi good bye now.

been calling him a fool and non representative of Shia a while ago, but there are certain groups claiming to be shia whose purpose is nothing but to start fitna among muslims who rely on him.

What makes it more suspicious about his character is this:

"Funny as it sounds, after serious juridical pressures, the government and the so called human rights organizations of England have taken him under protection and support."

Edited by Awaiting_for_the12th
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

I'd have to disagree with that. He is helping a, probable, cause. The cause being the main cause Allah states in the Quran. Which is worship. I, for one, have greatly improved my way of worship and understanding thanks to, some, of the things he says. This has nothing to do with the fact that he upsets a great majority of muslims. Yes he indeed does. But seriously, what doesn't upset them? They will use almost anything to their expenses to put us and our scholars/books/philosophies in a negative image. I don't see how he's making things worse, he's just causing them to show how truely uncompromising they are.

Have you ever seen or heard of any sunni who, if he had been given the chance, has said that the shi'i population can live freely in a khilafah they will set up? They have, and will, always put us under pressure or some sort of confiment. It's always us who have to compromise in our beliefs. It's never them. ''Yes the shi'a are muslims and they should have the right to live next to us... BUT. And then they make rules for us as if we're slaves? And that is the exact reason why we shouldn't give in when one Yassir Al Habib comes up and says his opinions and things. Why should we? Our rights are the same as theirs, no matter how extreme the one or the other is.

Once again. He is extremely controversial, no doubt. People shun away. Sure. But just know that when the Imam (as) comes, people won't accept his (as) version of Islam because it would seem so weird and wrong. I'm just saying... Things aren't always as they seem.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

^agreed regarding the emotions, but point being he is fueling the anti shia propoganda which is damaging islam and claiming lives of innocents. He is not helping the cause rather making it worse. Hence, he has been condemned by so many scholars

taliban do not need video of yassir al habib but videos of aalim zameer akhtar naqvi is enough for them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

taliban do not need video of yassir al habib but videos of aalim zameer akhtar naqvi is enough for them.

i am not sure who that is. Sunnis need some education, these "scholars" are nothing but paid off to talk what people desires. We have malangs who sit on Mimbar of Prophet (pbuh) and talk about cursing, using zangeers, the crowd gets happy he gets the compliments and get paid. Sunnis get pissed and the community gets divided.

This is a disease and these scholars are fickle, you pay them money and they will talk what you want them to talk. Thats exactly what these yasir's etc are doing. What we need to focus is by yasir's words who actually is getting the advantage? Sunnis and Shias are fighting.

Malangs are so easy to manipulate, talk to them about stop cursing things that damage islam and they will turn against each other. Look at videos of their own propoganda against shia scholars and frankly speaking they have nothing to do with the essence of shia islam.

If sunnis want to learn about shia islam, then come to the right sources and dont look at stupid videos to make yourself feel better about your own faith. These habib's have nothing to do with us, our ideology is different, our mission is different, our Imams (as) taught us tolerance, Quran taught us not to even curse at someone's fake God, but these malangs come to get paid to fill their bellies and start fitna.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

i m thankful to yasir al habib in sense that he exposed the 1400 year old taqiyya of shi'ites now true muslim can distinguish between real enemies of islam in their ranks.

Yasir Al Habib??? Who is he, how did he expose and what was exposed which was unknown, for such a long time, to the likes of you???

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

Greeting

Makarem leader say that Yassir Habib speaker is foolish

http://www.abna.ir/d...ang=3&Id=207567

Sheikh Yasir al-Habib has responded to Makarem's comments publicly:

http://alqatrah.net/en/edara/index.php?id=122

First observation: Naser Makarem Shirazi has used abusive language against Sheikh al-Habib. In his offensive statement, he sharply “bore his teeth” by using a number of harsh words which he has not used against a Zionist, Nasibi, nor even a Jewish person before. The words he used were:

1. Stupid!

2. Fool!

3. Ignorant!

4. Liar!

5. Deviant!

6. Madman!

7. Traitor!

8. Dressed up like a religious scholar!

Followers of Sheikh Yasir al-Habib can belong to any religion or marjaa', but the majority are followers of Ayatollah Sadiq Shirazi.

Followers of Yaser can kiss Makarem Shirazi good bye now.

Most of them already have long before that... Because they follow the books and not the desires of people.

@ awaiting_for_the12th

You seem to be under the impression that the intent of a murderer can be blamed on anything BUT the murderer. If the pakistani talbian wanted to kill a shi'a, they can use any type of propaganda they want. This has nothing to do with al Habib and less so with what he says. You know very well that this is just emotion speaking and not ratio, less so the shari'ah. Yasser Al Habib, while controversial and perhaps extreme, is only quoting, some of, our books. In fact, most of the time, he is quoting ahlulsunnah wal jamaah books.

And not surprisingly, the only way THEY, the extreme zealot taliban types, can react is by blind hatred and emotions, not by acknowledging that this is indeed in their books and trying to defend it like men. No, they behave like the little female dog breeds they are.

I'm not saying I'm a follower of this man. But I will be the first to defend his rights to his opinions and thoughts. Telling people that he's a ''fool'' only means that certain people want to monopolize the media outlets and have their own version of things being told. But the truth is that opinions and tools can't be monopolized. Otherwise we would live in a dangerous world where different voices are banned.

Subhanallah P.Ease, I've thoroughly enjoyed reading your posts, and not just because you're saying good things about Sheikh Yasir al-Habib, no, but because I can see you are using intellectually informed opinions rather than blind following.

It is very true what you've said and I only hope everyone reads it.

Yes, he is controversial, like you said, but that what doesn't make Muslims upset now adays? Seriously, I'd rather please Allah and anger all of humanity than to please all of humanity and anger Allah.

^agreed regarding the emotions, but point being he is fueling the anti shia propoganda which is damaging islam and claiming lives of innocents. He is not helping the cause rather making it worse. Hence, he has been condemned by so many scholars

He isn't fueling anti-Shi'a propaganda... Anti-Shi'a propaganda is that:

  • "Shi'a lie" (which Yasir isn't doing)
  • Shi'a worship graves (which Yasir clarifies we do not, and explains from our books)
  • Shi'a think Ali is god (which Yasir refutes)
  • Shi'a believe Allah is everywhere (Which Yasir refutes) -- note: this is the concept of Khomeini and Fadhlalah, Wahdat al Wujood Wal Mawjood

Concisely, what his eminence said was that Mysticism (Irfan) in the way it is commonly known and practiced today is false and has no connection with the teachings of the pure household of the Prophet (peace be upon them). It is in fact synonymous to Sufism; both which are originally derived from Philosophy.

http://alqatrah.net/en/question/index.php?id=57

So, in fact, the opposite is true. Sheikh Yasir al-Habib is defeating the anti-Shi'a propaganda by exposing the truth from the books!!!!

I'd have to disagree with that. He is helping a, probable, cause. The cause being the main cause Allah states in the Quran. Which is worship. I, for one, have greatly improved my way of worship and understanding thanks to, some, of the things he says. This has nothing to do with the fact that he upsets a great majority of muslims. Yes he indeed does. But seriously, what doesn't upset them? They will use almost anything to their expenses to put us and our scholars/books/philosophies in a negative image. I don't see how he's making things worse, he's just causing them to show how truely uncompromising they are.

Have you ever seen or heard of any sunni who, if he had been given the chance, has said that the shi'i population can live freely in a khilafah they will set up? They have, and will, always put us under pressure or some sort of confiment. It's always us who have to compromise in our beliefs. It's never them. ''Yes the shi'a are muslims and they should have the right to live next to us... BUT. And then they make rules for us as if we're slaves? And that is the exact reason why we shouldn't give in when one Yassir Al Habib comes up and says his opinions and things. Why should we? Our rights are the same as theirs, no matter how extreme the one or the other is.

Once again. He is extremely controversial, no doubt. People shun away. Sure. But just know that when the Imam (as) comes, people won't accept his (as) version of Islam because it would seem so weird and wrong. I'm just saying... Things aren't always as they seem.

I'm with you on this one, P.Ease. He is indeed helping a cause as I've already pointed out.

The Prophet (pbuh) was extremely controversial, he had to flee Mecca because of it!

Sheikh Yasir al-Habib says something controversial and is forced into exile, but nobody realizes that is a Sunnah!

People don't use their 'aql, they just get angry when they hear something they disagree with, instead of thinking that they might be wrong. Sheikh Yasir al-Habib is merely quoting the books, I've never heard or seen him say something without references, whereas some people get on a mimbar and talk all day long without quoting anything to support what they're saying.

People are just looking to point a finger and try to place the blame of Sheikh Yasir al-Habib instead of admitting their own mistakes. Instead of being humble and saying "I'm just a human who makes mistakes" they have brainwashed themselves and others into thinking they're Ma'soom!!!! MA'SOOM!!!!! for God's sake people wake up!

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

Greeting

Makarem leader say that Yassir Habib speaker is foolish

http://www.abna.ir/d...ang=3&Id=207567

Look at what Ibn Hajar al-Haytami one of your greatest scholars said about Ibn Taymiya another one of your greatest scholars and his student Ibn Qaem al-Joziya

قال الشيخ ابن حجر الهيتمي في كتابه الفتاوى الحديثية (1) ناقلا المسائل التي خالف فيها ابن تيمية إجماع المسلمين ما نصه [وان العالم قديم بالنوع ولم يزل مع الله مخلوقا دائما فجعله موجبا بالذات لا فاعلا بالاختيار تعالى الله عن ذلك، وقوله بالجسمية، والجهة والانتقال، وانه بقدر العرش لا أصغر ولا أكبر، تعالى الله عن هذا الافتراء الشنيع القبيح والكفر البراح الصريح] اهـ.

وقال أيضا ما نصه (2) [وإياك أن تصغي إلى ما في كتب ابن تيمية وتلميذه ابن قيم الجوزية وغيرهما ممن اتخذ إلهه هواه وأضله الله على علم وختم على سمعه وقلبه وجعل على بصره غشاوة فمن يهديه من بعد الله، وكيف تجاوز هؤلاء الملحدون الحدود وتعدوا الرسوم وخرقوا سياج الشريعة والحقيقة فظنوا بذلك أنهم على هدى من ربهم وليسوا كذلك] اهـ.

وقال أيضا ما نصه (3) [ولا يغتر بإنكار ابن تيمية لسنّ زيارته صلى الله عليه وسلم فإنه عبد أضله الله كما قال العز بن جماعة، وأطال في الرد عليه التقي السبكي في تصنيف مستقل، ووقوعه في حق رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم ليس بعجيب فإنه وقع في حق الله، سبحانه وتعالى عما يقول الظالمون والجاحدون علوا كبيرا، فنسب إليه العظائم كقوله: إن لله تعالى جهة ويدا ورجلا وعينا وغير ذلك من القبائح الشنيعة] اهـ.

(1) الفتاوى الحديثية (ص/116).

(2) الفتاوى الحديثية (ص/203)

(3) حاشية الإيضاح (ص/443).

What Ayatollah Makarem said about Sheikh Yasser is because he doesn't see that sheikh Yasser's preaching method is acceptable that's all.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

Disappointed.................why do people forget what Imam Ali a.s said

Do not see who is saying but see what is being said......forget about Yasir al Habib good or bad and concentrate on the content of his speech. May Allah curse the enemies of Ahle Bait a.s

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

Disappointed.................why do people forget what Imam Ali a.s said

Do not see who is saying but see what is being said......forget about Yasir al Habib good or bad and concentrate on the content of his speech. May Allah curse the enemies of Ahle Bait a.s

May Allah bless your heart bro I hate when people change the subject and I drag myself along with their bullkhara

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

Are people so naive they think extremists need videos of someone telling the truth in blunt, straight language to justify their terrorism?>

Anjuman Sipah Sahaba (ASS for short) was formed in early 80's in Pakistan, long before internet/cable/mobiles were in significant usage. They started calling Shi'ah kafir and exhorting their sheep to kill them at every opportunity - was that Yasser Habib's doing?

But that was quite recent; the Alids' killed in Baghdad during the reign of Bani Abbas, who was the catalyst for that? How about the cursing of Maula Ali (as), the persecution of his devotees, wars fought against him and his Shi'ah and the treachery against their Noble Descendants (as) throughout the following years - which YT clip was used to encourage that?

If a child is brainwashed by watching a couple of videos, being shown pictures of 'Paradise' (trees, rivers and fruit) whilst being molested by slitty-eyed short-trousered wispy-bearded pot-bellied mullahs hiding in flithy hovels then no amount of being nice to Bakris will reverse that.

Wake up and smell the coffee. Stop pretending we're all one big happy Muslim Ummah that believe in virtually the same thing. For us Allah ÓÈÍÇäå æÊÚÇáì, His Glorious Prophet (SAW) and Immaculate Imams (as) and their teachings aren't anything like the Bakri Cult even if many of the outward actions seem similar.

Allah protect the brave scholars and truthful momins & curse the enemies of Allah (SWT) and His most beloved of Families (as).

ALI

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

Allah protect the brave scholars and truthful momins & curse the enemies of Allah (SWT) and His most beloved of Families (as).

ALI

I know you did not meant but this is wrongful and sinful and curse the enemies and His most beloved of Families. Astagfrullah

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

Shame that no one knows the clear ḥadīth and infallible ruling that the Shī`a are mute until the uprising of the Qāim.

How would our teachings be spread then? If we are to be mute, then we shouldn't publish books that anyone could buy, or put our teachings on the internet.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...