[Closed/Review]Sheikh Al-habib Calls For Shi'a Uprising

[bolbol]

What do you call Sayed Hassan Nasrollah and the whole Shia community in Lebanon?

Even the Bahranian community?

Unfortunately, the Shirazi ideology does bash the ideology of resistance, and I blame them.

The Lebanese community, and in particular the Hezbollah movement has completely assimilated into the Iranian way of calculation and thinking. Lebanese stores sell Shariati, Khomeini, Motahhari, Khamenei, and even Jalal al-e Ahmad. Many Lebanese are familiar with them and have a broader view of the world because of it. Particularist "Arab" grievances have thus turned into international affairs, their regional disputes no longer a matter of "Arab versus Jew" but that of "Zionist regime versus humanity". One only needs to look at the irreligious, passive state of Lebanese Shiites before Musa Sadr, an Iranian instructed cleric who radically reformed these views.

Bahrainis are just free riders, they thought they could capitalize off other revolutions in Sunni countries, not understanding that they are given a special kind of third class citizen treatment. After 30 years, they have no interest in either learning from Iranian political and social history, which is the closest to their political structure nor wish anything to do with Iran's Shiism. Instead, Bahrainis have taken their own route, dismissing their Iranian brothers and depending on Western lefties to help them 'expose the hypocrisy'. Good luck with that.

[Marbles]

Sheikh Yasir Al-Habib's idea of a Shia nation-state is naive, ill-thought and impracticable - and if an attempt is made towards is realisation - completely disastrous for Gulf Shia and Sunnis alike.

What Shia need is more rights within their respective countries. End of oppression and tyranny. Sociopolitical standing on equal footing with other non-Shia populations be it in Kuwait or Bahrain or some other Gulf country. That's what the Gulf Shia should strive for if they don't want to be labelled traitors.

As an afterthought though, Yasir al-Habib's attempted justification of a Shia state through the historical parallel with the Zionist state is troublesome. Views like his just make us Shia more Jewish in Sunni eyes than we already are.

[BillyJo]

Iraqis are Arabs, bolbol was referring to Arab thinkers at large.

You are the devil. May Allah curse you and put you in jahanam along with iblees and yasser arafat

[Marbles]

The Lebanese community, and in particular the Hezbollah movement has completely assimilated into the Iranian way of calculation and thinking.

This line of yours might well have come out straight from the pen of a mid 19th century British educationist devising plans to "civilise" the "barbarian" populations that they ruled. You only need to replace "Lebanese" with "native" and "Iranian" with "British".

I am sorry but this is a tad more than veiled racism. Not the first time I have seen that coming from Iranian religio-nationalists; arrogant, presumptive and disdainful as they are of others. Trust me Arabs or Lebanese don't like to be patronized and insulted.

[bolbol]

There is nothing factually incorrect there. If you find it 'racist' because you are taught to think in terms of color by your former masters, that is your problem. Nation or even state is not of relevance for muslims, cultures do develop within territories, denying that only adds to the romance we give other peoples who do not deserve it.

May I add that I hold the same dismissive view of Iranians abroad, and the Iranian upper class. Take a new guess.

Edited February 10, 2012 by bolbol

[Alejandro Sosa]

Shi3i why is Arafat in hell

What is wring with u?

[5a49]

Yassir al-Habib: Iran is neither a Shiite government nor an Islamic one

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1kDLHHRHb6Q

This guy was created by the British Intelligence.

[Shiabro]

Sayed Shirazi, as well as other Marja, tend to peace and non-violent resistant. So what Yasir Habib does, is on his own responsibility, not on Sayed Sadiq Shirazi's. Violence has great responsibilities, every rape and killing goes to your neck, on your account, if you make such a Fatwa. Even Sayed Khamenei did not make such a Fatwa:

http://abna.ir/data....ang=3&Id=294435

There're much better options for Bahrain, inschaAllah.

Roachy, what or whom you blame or not is irrelevant to society.

[5a49]

The Lebanese community, and in particular the Hezbollah movement has completely assimilated into the Iranian way of calculation and thinking. Lebanese stores sell Shariati, Khomeini, Motahhari, Khamenei, and even Jalal al-e Ahmad.

Ummm..these people speak about Islam, not about Iranian cultural thinking.

By the way, they sell these books all around the world.

One only needs to look at the irreligious, passive state of Lebanese Shiites before Musa Sadr, an Iranian instructed cleric who radically reformed these views.

Well before Imam Moussa alSadr most Shiites were Left Wing in Lebanon, being used by all political parties. There was a tiny Shiite religious community. Imam Moussa alSadr came to Lebanon to revive the Shiite community from blowing out. Imam Moussa alSadr was Lebanese by the way, not Iranian.

Roachy, what or whom you blame or not is irrelevant to society.

Islam is Society.

Islam is Politics.

Edited February 10, 2012 by RoAcHy

[Marbles]

There is nothing factually incorrect there. If you find it 'racist' because you are taught to think in terms of color by your former masters, that is your problem. Nation or even state is not of relevance for muslims, cultures do develop within territories, denying that only adds to the romance we give other peoples who do not deserve it.

May I add that I hold the same dismissive view of Iranians abroad, and the Iranian upper class. Take a new guess.

There was nothing "factually incorrect" with the British idea either, if you're looking for "facts"(??). And don't hide behind irrelevant excuse of pandering to colour-based racism as you very well know I was not referring to that. But thank you that you said it yourself. The red line is actually the red line you should not cross with your faux-aristocratic disdain for others. The same Arabs you hold in contempt have a great intellectual tradition running back centuries, and they can take a cue out of their own history to improve their current downfall. They don't need the aid of your little Persian Islamo-nationalist empire, which is no better anyway.

Ironically, whether or not you realise this, you are employing the same cultural, national and social constructs which the European masters have taught you through the aid of the English language. If religion were all that you cared you wouldn't be using these modern constructs. Religion, in fact, is merely a tool for your Persian superiority ideology. Enough said.

Edited February 10, 2012 by Marbles

[Shiabro]

Islam is Society.

Islam is Politics.

no one has denied that this comes also under the umbrella of Islam. so stop trolling around about Sayed Shirazi.

Edited February 10, 2012 by Shiabro

[Noah-]

No, I am talking about anyone who follows your Imams would understand the injustice that is happening when they see it. It's really not hard to grasp. Simple concept. The political pseudo-Shiites such as yourself will always look for an excuse when they see injustice happening, saying "Oh who cares about the dead! Zionists/Saudi/Qatar supports them!" The real Shiites know their Imams spoke about injustice whenever they saw it, not just of who was involved.

Ok. But, who the heck are you to define 'justice' and 'injustice' and conclude where is justice and where is not according to Imams?

You are giving out your 2 cents opinions, that is all. You are not any fact-finder or any justic-tracker! Accusing all others of everything while failing more than 100s of times to back up your views. Any person who has no idea of your reality and your hidden political beliefs and who says things that suits you then that guy is seeing justice according to Shia Imam. And btw; you are refering to the same Imams that you reject them at first place!

You're a Takfiri yourself, so I don't know why you are asking me.

No fool, the point was that you have no knowledge of these terms, better to stay away from them.

What Shia need is more rights within their respective countries. End of oppression and tyranny. Sociopolitical standing on equal footing with other non-Shia populations be it in Kuwait or Bahrain or some other Gulf country. That's what the Gulf Shia should strive for if they don't want to be labelled traitors.

Well, at least he puts forward a new idea. What you are suggesting is what Shias have been trying to do for the last 80 years of the modern era. But, it never worked. Some of them are even happy with some limited rights, but still being denied. The problem is not only the puppet governments, the people in general do not see Shias as their countrymen or as their equals. You can witness this almost in every single Sunni country, they can get along with all other sects, with other religions, but Shias are excluded, always looked upon Shias in very negative ways.

[5a49]

no one has denied that this comes also under the umbrella of Islam. so stop trolling around about Sayed Shirazi.

If no one has denied it, then I think a person better work on it.

[Ya Aba 3abdillah]

If this habib guy wants an uprising, how about he takes a gun and go to Riyadh.

[Thurston]

The Sheikh is correct. No more bakri rule. [Edited Out] all bakris.

[Dawud Miqdad al-Amriki]

Sayed Shirazi, as well as other Marja, tend to peace and non-violent resistant. So what Yasir Habib does, is on his own responsibility, not on Sayed Sadiq Shirazi's. Violence has great responsibilities, every rape and killing goes to your neck, on your account, if you make such a Fatwa. Even Sayed Khamenei did not make such a Fatwa:

http://abna.ir/data....ang=3&Id=294435

There're much better options for Bahrain, inschaAllah.

Roachy, what or whom you blame or not is irrelevant to society.

I disagree, Sheikh Yasser al-Habib has not called for any violence.

He is a student of Ayatollah Mujtaba Shirazi, and does taqleed to Grand Ayatollah Sadiq Shirazi. The numerous books written by this family of Shirazis on non-violence and politics can be accessed easily online as well as in libraries.

We believe in Jihad only when the Mahdi (ajtf) reappears, or when defending ourselves (not pressing an attack).

Nowhere did Sheikh Yasser al-Habib call for violence, you have not listened to his speech.

See the rest of my post below for more information...

Sheikh Yasir Al-Habib's idea of a Shia nation-state is naive, ill-thought and impracticable - and if an attempt is made towards is realisation - completely disastrous for Gulf Shia and Sunnis alike.

What Shia need is more rights within their respective countries. End of oppression and tyranny. Sociopolitical standing on equal footing with other non-Shia populations be it in Kuwait or Bahrain or some other Gulf country. That's what the Gulf Shia should strive for if they don't want to be labelled traitors.

As an afterthought though, Yasir al-Habib's attempted justification of a Shia state through the historical parallel with the Zionist state is troublesome. Views like his just make us Shia more Jewish in Sunni eyes than we already are.

Jazkallah khayra for staying on topic akhi, barakallah feek.

I don't think it was a bad thing to say, it was simply an example taken from history. When voices are raised, people listen, even if it's asking for your own state. So he is saying that the Shi'a should raise their voices, but do it properly, which is why he doesn't just say "Do what the Jews did" because that wasn't proper, he doesn't even say "Do what the Jews did".

The only Takfiris I have seen on this site are the political pseudo-Shiites (PPS) such as yourself. This "takfiri" word is being played out, and if you look at posts, it is mostly the political pseudo-Shiites doing takfir against any Sunni opposing them by falsely labelling them many things.

You are Iranian, so obviously you did not like the video and you negate it because I posted it. An interesting note regarding political pseudo-Shiites (PPS): Their opinions are not based on what is right and wrong according to their Imams, but rather who is supporting one side. I'm sorry, this is a very flawed interpretation of the world.

Yes akhi, this is true in many cases.

Sheikh Yasser al-Habib, who is a student of Ayatollah Mujtaba Shirazi, and does taqleed of Grand Ayatollah Sadiq Shirazi, do not make takfir on everyone (Fadlullah for example), rather he says they are Batri (inclining towards Bakri ideas, not Shi'i). However, as one can see from Ayatollah Mujtaba Shirazi's talk on Buhjet, you can see him do Takfir on people who believe in un-Islamic concepts such as Wahdat al Wujud.

If someone says "I believe in Allah and Qur'an and Muhammad, but I believe also that Buddha is my Prophet who I follow, and also I love the god Krishna and Vishnu, they are my greatest deities." then they have uttered kufr.

People have huge misconceptions about Sheikh Yasser al-Habib and I strongly urge anyone who is sincere and serious about learning and investigating matters before coming to conclusions to visit www.fadak.tv and view his Arabic lectures. He has lectures on many topics, dozens of hours worth to listen to.

Salam,

So this arm chair general Yasir Al Habib, WTH he is anti Ay. Khamenei and anti Iranian Islamic regime???

True that a new ME should have Shia empowered Bahrain, Iraq, Kuwait, and independent Hijaz. But not by the word of those who routinely oppose an already established Islamic regime.

I really wonder who pays him.

I already responded to this nonsense http://www.shiachat....ost__p__2341676

Kitab Al-Kafi Vol. 8 Pg. 295 from Imam Abu Abdullah (sa):

"The leader of every flag 'in an uprising' that is raised before the rising of the Qaim is an evildoer who is worshiped (taghut) by the people for his daringness beside Allah."

Kitab Al-Kafi Vol. 8 Pg. 310 from Imam Abu Abdullah (sa):

Five signs prior to the rising the Qaim: the cry, the Sufyani, the sinking (i.e. the land of Bayda), the killing of the pure soul (an nafs az zakiyya), and the Yamani. So I said, 'May I be made your ransom, if someone from your people of your house goes out (i.e. for Jihad) prior to these signs, do we go out with him? He (sa) said, "No".

Kitab Al-Kafi Vol. 8 Pg. 264 from Imam Abu Abdullah (sa):

"Do not leave taqwa (fear of) God, the One and without any partners, and watch over yourselves constantly. I solemnly declare that if someone has chosen a shepherd to care for his sheep, but afterward finds someone else who is more wise than the first one for the task, he will leave the first one and employ the services of the wiser one. By God, if you had two life-times, and you experimented with the first one, and were left with the second lifetime, then there would be no difficulty in utilizing the experience of the first lifetime. But the reality is other than this. Every person has no more than one self, for which, if it falls into peril, there is no possibility for repentance or return. Therefore, it is necessary for you to carefully evaluate and select the best way for your selves.

Hence, if one among us came to you and called upon you to revolt, think carefully and find out for what purpose he has revolted. Do not simply say [to justify his revolt by saying something like:] "Well, Zayd b. 'Ali also had arisen before!" The reason is that Zayd was a learned and truthful person and had not called upon you to acknowledge his own leadership; rather, he was calling towards a person who would be acceptable and endorsed by the ahl al-bayt. Had he succeeded, he would have acted upon his promise and would have handed over the power to its owner. Zayd revolted against the government so that he could overthrow it. But what is the one who has emerged today calling you? Is he calling you towards a person who is acceptable and endorsed by the ahl al-bayt? No, absolutely not. I am calling you to bear witness that we are not pleased with this person's revolt. This man has not even reached power and he has already started opposing us. And when he does seize power and raises his flag, he would certainly not submit to us in obedience.

Hence, accept the call of the one about whom all the descendants of Fatima are in agreement. That person is your Imam and your leader. When the month of Rajab dawns, come to the help of God. There is no problem if you wish to delay it until the month of Sha'ban. And, it is even better for you, if you wished to keep the fast of Ramadan with your family. If you need any signs, it is sufficient to remind yourselves about the rise of Sufyani"

Kitab Al-Kafi Vol 8. Pg. 224-225 from Imam Abu Abdullah (sa):

From Yaqub Al Sarraj, 'I said to Imam Abu Abdullah (sa), "When do your Shia get relief?" So he (sa) said, "When there will be ikhtilaf (disagreement) with the children of Al Abbas about their authority and greed among them. And those who did not show interest in them will show interest. The Arabs will leave their reign lose, and whoever has a spur raises it. When the appearance of Al Shami, the drawing near of Al Yamani, the movement of Al Hasani, and the rose of the owner of this command (i.e. Al Qaim) from Al Madinah to Mecca with the legacy of The Messenger of Allah (saw)."

So I (Yaqub Al Sarraj) said, "What is the legacy of The Messenger of Allah?" He (sa) said, The Messenger of Allah's sword, his armor, his turban, his garment, his staff, his banner, his helmet, and his saddle. He (sa) reaches Mecca, then he takes the sword from its sheth, and he wears the armor and hoists the banner. He dresses in the gown and turban, and he takes the staff with his hand, and seeks Allah's permission about his appearance. And he gets acquainted with few of his supporters, and Al Hasani comes and informs him of the news. So Al Hasani rushes to come out, but he is jumped by the people of Mecca, they kill him, and send his head to Al Shami. That is when the owner of this command (i.e. Al Qaim) appears, the people do bayah (allegiance) to him, and they follow him. Al Shami at that time sends an army to Al Madinah, and Allah destroys them before reaching it. On that day the children of Ali (sa) will flee from Al Madinah to Mecca and stick witht he owner of this command (i.e. Al Qaim). The owner of this command (i.e. Al Qaim) will approach near Iraq, and he (sa) will send an army to Al Madinah whose people will believe in him, and return to it (Al Madinah)"

(salam)

Ahsantum akhi, jazakallah khayra, hayyakallah

Everyone must read the above post from brother "Dawud."

You think waving a flag around and fighting means you love and support Ahl al-Bayt (sa), but they did not support these uprisings, they commanded us to be patient.

There are so many hadith about us not rising until the signs are clear, the coming of Al-Mahdi (AJTF). After the Sufyani has risen...

This concept of rising and fighting is a Bakri concept, the `Aimmah (sa) have warned us strongly against being impatient.

From Grand Ayatollah Sayed Muhammad al-Shirazi's book "War, Peace and Non-violence: An Islamic Perspective" (see my link in signature to the Shirazi website)

Related from Bashir, who said to Imam Saadiq (A): ‘I had a dream in which I said to you: ‘Fighting without an Imam to whom obedience is mandatory is prohibited in the same way that eating the flesh of animals not slaughtered (according to the Islamic law), or blood, or swine flesh is prohibited.’ Then you said to me (in the dream): ‘Yes, this is the case.’ Imam Saadiq (A) said: ‘Yes this is indeed the case.’

Related from Sama’ah, from Imam Saadiq (A) who said: ‘Abbad al- Basri met Ali ibn al-Hussein (A) on the road to Makkah and said to him: ‘O Ali son of al-Hussein, you have left jihad and its difficulties and turned to the Hajj and its easiness for indeed Allah Almighty and Exalted is He has said:

{Surely Allah has bought from the Believers their own selves and their wealth in return for Paradise, that they fight in the way of Allah . . .} The Holy Qur’an: Repentance (9): 111

Ali ibn al-Hussein (A) said: ‘Read on.’ He said: {Those who turn in repentance and do acts of worship . . .} The Holy Qur’an: Repentance (9): 112.

Then Ali ibn al-Hussein (A) said: “If we see those people who are described thus, then jihad with them is better then the Hajj.”

Related from Muhammad ibn ‘Abdullah al-Samandari who said: ‘I said to Imam Saadiq (A): ‘If I was by the gate (meaning the main gate) and there was a call to arms should I go with them?’ He (A) said: “Do you think that if you went out with them and you took a man prisoner then granted him sanctuary and gave him the same treaty that the Messenger of Allah (S) used to give to the Polytheists, would they fulfil the covenant?” I said: ‘No they would not fulfil it.’ He (A) said: “Then do not go out with them.”

Related form Abu Basir, from Imam Saadiq Úáíå ÇáÓáÇã, from his forefathers (A) who said: “The Muslim should not go out for jihad if he does not safeguard the rule or implement the command of Allah Almighty. If he were to die in that place he would be an aide to our enemy in limiting our right and putting our blood in danger. His death would be a death as of the days of ignorance.’

Related from Ja’far ibn Muhammad (A) in the hadith of the sharai’a aldin who said: ‘Jihad is mandatory with the just Imam, and whoever is killed defending his wealth is a martyr.’

Related from Bashshara al-Mustapha, from Komeil, from Amir-ul- Mu’mineen ‘Ali (A) who said: ‘O Komeil, there is to be no military raids without a just Imam.’

Related from Sayyid ‘Ali ibn Tawous in the book Kashf al-Yaqin with the chain of narration to the Prophet (S) regarding the blessed night ascension to Heaven: Allah Almighty revealed to the Prophet (S): ‘Walking on foot to jihad is only with you or with the Imams from yourprogeny.’

No uprising will be successful until the reappearance of Imam az-Zaman al-Mahdi (AJTF). What do you think, you can replace him? Naudhubilah. You think Hezbollah or Iran is going to be successful without him? You think they can do his job? Of course not, so what are they doing? Paving a path for him? Pave it the way the Imams (sa) commanded and instructed, which is through Sabr and increasing knowledge, and defending our land and honour, not by launching missiles or threatening to destroy nations. You hypocrites get so worked up when someone like Sheikh Yasser al-Habib quotes traditions of `Aimmah (sa) from our own books, but you don't even blink when innocent people are being blown up by weapons from Iran and Hezbollah. Think.

5- Al-Ghaiba of Sheikh Tusi: Abu al-Ja-ru-d narrates from Imam Muhammad Baqir (sa), who narrates from his father, who narrates from his grandfather: Said Ameerul Momineen (a.s) on the pulpit, “A man shall come from my progeny in the latter days; he will be white with a touch of red, of a broad abdomen, with legs of ample width, and of high shoulders. On his back are two signs, one sign of the color of his skin and another like the sign of the Messenger (saw). He has two names. One name will be hidden and the other proclaimed. The one that will be hidden is Ahmad and the one that will be announced is M. U. H. A. M. M. A. D. When his standards will wave, the east and the west will be illuminated for him. He will put his hand on the heads of people, so there will remain no believer but his heart will be stronger than a block of iron and Allah will grant him the might of forty men. There will remain no dead, but that gaiety will reach him in his heart and in his grave. The dead will be visiting each other and felicitating each other for the news of the rise of al-Qa-'im (a.s).

Allahumma sullee 3la Muhammad wa alee Muhammad wa a'jjil farajahum

[thenamelessone]

Well, at least he puts forward a new idea. What you are suggesting is what Shias have been trying to do for the last 80 years of the modern era. But, it never worked. Some of them are even happy with some limited rights, but still being denied. The problem is not only the puppet governments, the people in general do not see Shias as their countrymen or as their equals. You can witness this almost in every single Sunni country, they can get along with all other sects, with other religions, but Shias are excluded, always looked upon Shias in very negative ways.

(bismillah)

(salam)

I find myself both agreeing and disagreeing with most of the comments here in this thread. While I agree with what you said, as it is correct, Shia are looked down upon and are second class citizens in their own countries. The problem I see however is multilayer. Until a people are willing to die, quite literally die, they will never see equality. Aligning yourself with Iblees (la) in order to get equality within your society will not only never work, it will backfire and you will have to live with Iblees (la) for a very very long time, and eventually you will still have to die in order to get rid of Iblees (la) (I hope everyone understands to whom I refer when I say Iblees (la) ) Until the whole of the Shia population is willing to sacrifice their lives, and the lives of their wives and children, in order to change a system for the benefit of the ones that come after them, equality and a better life for Shia will never be seen. Death and extensive bloodshed is the only means of gaining freedom, and you wont live to reap its benefit.

When you decide, once and for all that death is truly the most preferable option, then is when you will find success. Death must be preferable to a life within chains, you cannot exchange one set of chains for another and think the latter might be better than the first. That is faulty thinking. And that my friends is why Iran succeeded and the rest of the middle eastern countries are not. When the women are willing to have as many babies as possible in order that they may die, when all the people are willing to sacrifice their lives and that of their families so that some might have a better life, all of them deciding the same thing at the same time, that death is preferable and for freedom they will not sell out to anyone regardless of promise, then is when you win. It wasn't until every single man woman and child in Iran was willing to rise at the same time, and unwilling to align themselves with anyone else but one another, that they won against the Shah's regime. And because it was all the people, there was not bloodshed.

The middle eastern countries can do the same, but sadly not until they quit trying to align with Iblees (la) and not until they are all willing to die. What is happening in Syria is sad, and I would wish it was not happening at all. But the protesters are as wrong as they are right, they are not willing to die. I saw a video of a Syrian man on the internet in Hums, he was calling for help, he said help us help us we don't care who just help us we are dying. While it is human to want to live, the resistance in Syria will fail for that very same reason. Because the desire is for life regardless of what that life will become.

I disagree with any man (sheikh or no) who sits on a pulpit and speaks of unjust Islamic style governments, while thinking his particular brand of governance could ever be any better. He is a man who has not taken to heart the teachings of Aale Muhammed (saw). Has not listened when They (a) told us there is no just government under someone who is not masum. Has not paid attention when we were taught against all these things. Yes we have a right to self defense (not offensive) and we must create governance for ourselves in the absence of the Imam (atf) as life must go on, but we must temper that with the knowledge that we can only do our best, and our best is still unjust! He does not see hypocrisy in the fact he sits comfortable, preaching an uprising he is not willing to die for, yet willing others to shed their blood.

Whatever we do can never be for greed, it cant be so we can gain riches in this world, it cant be for any other reason than we want our freedom, from all who would set themselves as masters over us but are not the Imam (atf). It must be for freedom, to gain equality and not power. And death is the only price.

Ma'a Salaama

Edited February 10, 2012 by thenamelessone

[Dawud Miqdad al-Amriki]

(bismillah)

(salam)

I find myself both agreeing and disagreeing with most of the comments here in this thread. While I agree with what you said, as it is correct, Shia are looked down upon and are second class citizens in their own countries. The problem I see however is multilayer. Until a people are willing to die, quite literally die, they will never see equality. Aligning yourself with Iblees (la) in order to get equality within your society will not only never work, it will backfire and you will have to live with Iblees (la) for a very very long time, and eventually you will still have to die in order to get rid of Iblees (la) (I hope everyone understands to whom I refer when I say Iblees (la) ) Until the whole of the Shia population is willing to sacrifice their lives, and the lives of their wives and children, in order to change a system for the benefit of the ones that come after them, equality and a better life for Shia will never be seen. Death and extensive bloodshed is the only means of gaining freedom, and you wont live to reap its benefit.

When you decide, once and for all that death is truly the most preferable option, then is when you will find success. Death must be preferable to a life within chains, you cannot exchange one set of chains for another and think the latter might be better than the first. That is faulty thinking. And that my friends is why Iran succeeded and the rest of the middle eastern countries are not. When the women are willing to have as many babies as possible in order that they may die, when all the people are willing to sacrifice their lives and that of their families so that some might have a better life, all of them deciding the same thing at the same time, that death is preferable and for freedom they will not sell out to anyone regardless of promise, then is when you win. It wasn't until every single man woman and child in Iran was willing to rise at the same time, and unwilling to align themselves with anyone else but one another, that they won against the Shah's regime. And because it was all the people, there was not bloodshed.

The middle eastern countries can do the same, but sadly not until they quit trying to align with Iblees (la) and not until they are all willing to die. What is happening in Syria is sad, and I would wish it was not happening at all. But the protesters are as wrong as they are right, they are not willing to die. I saw a video of a Syrian man on the internet in Hums, he was calling for help, he said help us help us we don't care who just help us we are dying. While it is human to want to live, the resistance in Syria will fail for that very same reason. Because the desire is for life regardless of what that life will become.

I disagree with any man (sheikh or no) who sits on a pulpit and speaks of unjust Islamic style governments, while thinking his particular brand of governance could ever be any better. He is a man who has not taken to heart the teachings of Aale Muhammed (saw). Has not listened when They (a) told us there is no just government under someone who is not masum. Has not paid attention when we were taught against all these things. Yes we have a right to self defense (not offensive) and we must create governance for ourselves in the absence of the Imam (atf) as life must go on, but we must temper that with the knowledge that we can only do our best, and our best is still unjust! He does not see hypocrisy in the fact he sits comfortable, preaching an uprising he is not willing to die for, yet willing others to shed their blood.

Whatever we do can never be for greed, it cant be so we can gain riches in this world, it cant be for any other reason than we want our freedom, from all who would set themselves as masters over us but are not the Imam (atf). It must be for freedom, to gain equality and not power. And death is the only price.

Ma'a Salaama

(salam)

Ahsantum

Jazakallah khayra akhi, well said.

Sheikh Yasser al-Habib doesn't call for any "pure brand government", he knows very well that it will only happen when Mahdi (AJTF) comes. But he calls for us to try. He believes that the government should be instituted slowly over time by the Shi'a, that they should not force it or elect any supreme leader or anything, but that they should be democratic and respectful about it and go with the flow of destiny, but they must change what is in themselves before they can change the larger destiny.

This is the teachings of the Shirazis and Sheikh Yasser al-Habib subscribes to these views.

He isn't saying "Knock down X and replace with Y", he is saying "Stop blindly following X and follow Ahlul-Bayt (as); stop fearing X and death and fear Allah and not speaking the truth"

(wasalam)

[bolbol]

Ummm..these people speak about Islam, not about Iranian cultural thinking. By the way, they sell these books all around the world. Well before Imam Moussa alSadr most Shiites were Left Wing in Lebanon, being used by all political parties. There was a tiny Shiite religious community. Imam Moussa alSadr came to Lebanon to revive the Shiite community from blowing out. Imam Moussa alSadr was Lebanese by the way, not Iranian.

You didn't pay attention to what I said.

There was nothing "factually incorrect" with the British idea either, if you're looking for "facts"(??). And don't hide behind irrelevant excuse of pandering to colour-based racism as you very well know I was not referring to that. But thank you that you said it yourself. The red line is actually the red line you should not cross with your faux-aristocratic disdain for others. The same Arabs you hold in contempt have a great intellectual tradition running back centuries, and they can take a cue out of their own history to improve their current downfall.

Start reading a book please, this is the second time you come into a thread and spurt out racial pus. "Arabs" do not have a "tradition running back centuries" because Arabs as a unified community have not existed longer than a hundred years. Most Arabs today have nothing to do with Arabs we know in our history books or the Islamic golden age and any obsessive focus on that era is an indication of modern failure, just as "Persians" or "Germans" did not exist, they are inventions kept alive by men who sought to mobilize the ignorant, and those like you, inferiority complex riddled fatalists who, after having been freed physically, still play the puppetshows their masters created in an era of deterritorialization and internationalization, spare us the agent provocateur propaganda. Nobody is racist here. Many Arabs are Iranians and vice versa. This is about a well recognized matter, that cultures of ideas, frames, states of thinking develop among communities and some carry positive consequences, others negative.

The 'positive consequence' I am referring to is of course, the culture of the Islamic Revolution, which for us has divided the muslim world and the third world in general. This is not a matter of barking the good old 'race' or even 'ideology' slogan...this extends into what Hassan Abbasi calls "Lifestyles" which took place after Cold War. Those who commit to Islam and utilize it for every aspect of their life, and those who stay on their leash.

May I also add that my usage of specific terms that carry Western payloads is not because I necessarily believe in them, but because when dealing with a derange Westoxified individual, incapable of real debate, we must lower ourselves to their frame, their words, their logic and their reason. That is what makes modern day "Islamofascistpersiannationalists" superior to their liberal cohorts.

Edited February 10, 2012 by bolbol

[5a49]

How come Sheikh Yasser Habib isn't waiting for Imam Mahdi to start a revolution? :mellow: Is he contradicting himself?

[Waiting for HIM]

Again don't people see here, Yasir Al Habib is stupid and dumb at best and agent of imperialsists at worst.

The clown is telling people to rise up and make a Shia homeland based on the example of Israel. And the same clown is vehemently against the already established Islamic regime of Iran. Add the two together, and you know the guy is screwed in the head by zionists agents. Those who give any iota of benefit of doubt to Yasir Al Habib must be as dumb as he is.

Strong words but true so no apologies from me!!

Edited February 10, 2012 by Waiting for HIM

[thenamelessone]

(salam)

Ahsantum

Jazakallah khayra akhi, well said.

Sheikh Yasser al-Habib doesn't call for any "pure brand government", he knows very well that it will only happen when Mahdi (AJTF) comes. But he calls for us to try. He believes that the government should be instituted slowly over time by the Shi'a, that they should not force it or elect any supreme leader or anything, but that they should be democratic and respectful about it and go with the flow of destiny, but they must change what is in themselves before they can change the larger destiny.

This is the teachings of the Shirazis and Sheikh Yasser al-Habib subscribes to these views.

He isn't saying "Knock down X and replace with Y", he is saying "Stop blindly following X and follow Ahlul-Bayt (as); stop fearing X and death and fear Allah and not speaking the truth"

(wasalam)

(bismillah)

(salam)

A man who makes false promises is a perfect politician, say whatever you think people might want to hear, agree with all and a politician is born. The reality is, what this shiekh is saying can never and will never work. It is nothing more than a collection of false hopes, placed in the bed of Iblees (la). If you want to win you do so. If not, don't speak, because speaking then becomes something you are doing in order to hear the sound of your voice and the sound of others saying your praises (all the while pretending humility, the politician is born)

If you don't want to be oppressed you must sacrifice your life and the life of your children. Imam Hussain (as) is our Teacher. Death is preferable to a life oppressed. (while this shiekh says there is no need of death) If you don't want to be oppressed don't make bayyah to one who seeks to oppress you. Imam Hussain (as) is our Teacher. Death more preferable than giving bayyah to one who is an unjust oppressor. (while this shiekh desires to offer his bayyah to the west in return for their support)

If you don't want to be oppressed and death is preferable if you are only a few you will be surrounded and die. Imam Hussain (as) is our Teacher. Aale Muhammed (as) and the Companions (ra) gave their life. If you don't want to be oppressed and death is preferable and you are many you will win. Iran is our teacher. We must change ourselves, we must decide death is preferable to a life oppressed. We are not willing to die yet.

The Imam (as) said; " We (as) know best when to rise" and I am sure it wont be until we are willing to sacrifice our lives according to the teachings of Muhammed wa Aale Muhammed (saw)

Ma'a Salaama

[Dawud Miqdad al-Amriki]

(salam)

I pray for people (Waiting for HIM) (Roachy) to read what I write and think about it before responding with baseless childish insults.

And "thenamelessone" you've completely misunderstood the Sheikh if you think he is calling for success, he knows we cannot be successful without the Mahdi (ajtf) but that doesn't mean we lay down and die either, but it also doesn't mean we take up arms and force, and it also doesn't mean we neglect participating in affairs, but we must do it according to Qur'an and Sunnah and the `Aimmahs (as) warnings.

I hope this makes sense to everyone. And please don't post on this thread anymore unless you're contributing to intellectual pursuits of understanding and within the confines of the topic. Jazakallah khayra.

[Waiting for HIM]

(salam)

I pray for people (Waiting for HIM) (Roachy) to read what I write and think about it before responding with baseless childish insults.

And "thenamelessone" you've completely misunderstood the Sheikh if you think he is calling for success, he knows we cannot be successful without the Mahdi (ajtf) but that doesn't mean we lay down and die either, but it also doesn't mean we take up arms and force, and it also doesn't mean we neglect participating in affairs, but we must do it according to Qur'an and Sunnah and the `Aimmahs (as) warnings.

I hope this makes sense to everyone. And please don't post on this thread anymore unless you're contributing to intellectual pursuits of understanding and within the confines of the topic. Jazakallah khayra.

Brother my posts is nothing againt you. I was venting against those facial hair clowns who wear a turban or two and think they are ulema, Yasir Habib being one.

[Dawud Miqdad al-Amriki]

Brother my posts is nothing againt you. I was venting against those facial hair clowns who wear a turban or two and think they are ulema, Yasir Habib being one.

Akhi I know you're not directing anything at me, but I'm saying that you should direct any arguments you have against anyone (Ulema, Sheikh, Pupil, Non-Muslim, etc) in an academic manner. This way, we can learn from it, but if you just outright attack without any evidence, support, references, etc... then we are just throwing opinions around and nobody will learn, rather we will all be misguided this way.

So whenever I say anything I pray I always have references and an open-mind, I can be wrong, and am wrong often, but at least then I'm moving closer towards knowledge because I can identify which sources are true and which are false. But if I just use my opinion and have no source, there is nothing to substantiate my opinion which has no substance to begin with, it is like grabbing air. Let's grab something solid, something real, such as references for our statements inshallah.

I follow Sheikh Yasser al-Habib's knowledge, you should look on this website http://www.fadak.tv/index.php?list=2∂=1

You can see from that link that Sheikh Yasser al-Habib has done many academic lectures, dozens of hours worth, he is an academic seeker of knowledge, he doesn't claim to be `Ulema, but he is a knowledgeable sheikh who happens to be mujtahid (look up mujtahid if you're not familiar), who studied under Ayatollah Sayed Mujtaba Shirazi (look him up if you're not familiar).

Some of his lectures are as follows:

الليالي المحمدية

الليالي الرمضانية

الليالي الحسينية

البحوث القرآنية

تحرير الإنسان الشيعي

الليالي الفاطمية

دروس الحوزة في الرواية والدراية والرجال

دروس الحوزة في القواعد الفقهية

تعليقات الشيخ الحبيب على الضجة

جلسات الحوار

بناء شخصية المستقبل

برنامج: كيف زُيِّف الإسلام؟

برنامج: أكذوبة عدالة الصحابة

So I ask you, does an ignorant armchair clown (or whatever) have so many lectures full of knowledge? Just listen to the lectures for yourself, if you don't speak Arabic then ask a trustworthy friend to listen and then tell you what he thinks. Of course you have free will, you don't have to do that, but it's good advice if you sincerely want to know the person you're against so strongly, you will either learn something which will increase your knowledge and imaan so you can become better, or you will learn something which will allow you to avoid misguidance so you can become better, in both cases you are learning and increasing your knowledge. Insha'Allah.

(wasalam)

[thenamelessone]

(salam)

And "thenamelessone" you've completely misunderstood the Sheikh if you think he is calling for success, he knows we cannot be successful without the Mahdi (ajtf) but that doesn't mean we lay down and die either, but it also doesn't mean we take up arms and force, and it also doesn't mean we neglect participating in affairs, but we must do it according to Qur'an and Sunnah and the `Aimmahs (as) warnings.

(bismillah)

(wasalam)

You appear not to have understood a word I said, perhaps I was very unclear in my wording. This is why I refrain from speaking, you have only reminded me to keep my silence. Thank you for that.

Ma'a Salaama

[BillyJo]

Shi3i why is Arafat in hell

What is wring with u?

Prove he isn't

[Marbles]

Start reading a book please, this is the second time you come into a thread and spurt out racial pus. "Arabs" do not have a "tradition running back centuries" because Arabs as a unified community have not existed longer than a hundred years. Most Arabs today have nothing to do with Arabs we know in our history books or the Islamic golden age and any obsessive focus on that era is an indication of modern failure, just as "Persians" or "Germans" did not exist, they are inventions kept alive by men who sought to mobilize the ignorant, and those like you, inferiority complex riddled fatalists who, after having been freed physically, still play the puppetshows their masters created in an era of deterritorialization and internationalization, spare us the agent provocateur propaganda. Nobody is racist here. Many Arabs are Iranians and vice versa. This is about a well recognized matter, that cultures of ideas, frames, states of thinking develop among communities and some carry positive consequences, others negative.

The 'positive consequence' I am referring to is of course, the culture of the Islamic Revolution, which for us has divided the muslim world and the third world in general. This is not a matter of barking the good old 'race' or even 'ideology' slogan...this extends into what Hassan Abbasi calls "Lifestyles" which took place after Cold War. Those who commit to Islam and utilize it for every aspect of their life, and those who stay on their leash.

May I also add that my usage of specific terms that carry Western payloads is not because I necessarily believe in them, but because when dealing with a derange Westoxified individual, incapable of real debate, we must lower ourselves to their frame, their words, their logic and their reason. That is what makes modern day "Islamofascistpersiannationalists" superior to their liberal cohorts.

Good lord. This habit of blowing hot air with the permanent smirk of Islamo-Persian superiority complex rings bells. Oh it rings massive church bells!!

Welcome back Mr. Rubaiyat ;)

You have not learned a word during your absence. But thank you for exposing your worth to one and all.

Edited February 10, 2012 by Marbles

[Philip]

he's completely unrealistic and either ignorant or playing a game .. he should know that UN is created and controlled by same forces that back zionism .. does anybody think that they + "international community" of nations will accept such a plan? They are already shivering because of Iran and Hezb Allah .. what do you think will be the reaction of the nations when the option of creating another shia nation is mentioned?

the only way in theory such a plan can happen is through force .. and if we talk force & a theoretic success over western forces, then he might as well say that his planned country should be part of the already present shia country Iran .. that's my opinion anyway .. and then join a "greater khurasan" force .. to prepare for the mahdi. or?

also, he did not mention anything concerning the coming Imam or any of the political hot-topics ..

again, placing any hope into the UN is completely irrational .. and expecting that the western friendly gulf nations will consider giving their power to non-violent shia demands, is also totally unimaginable .. just look at tiny bahrain. and look at the palestinians .. have they achieved any success from UN?

to call for such an "uprising" is totally pointless and i don't see any common sense in it. Allahu Aalam

Edited February 10, 2012 by Philip

[Alejandro Sosa]

Prove he isn't

What do you mean prove he isn't

He was a Muslim wasn't he.. Just bcos u believe he's a 'Bakri'?

[thenamelessone]

Prove he isn't

I was only yesterday on a shopping spree in hell-- the boiling chocolate is to die for-- and while there I asked if he was living there are I was hoping for a visit, and was told by those who know everyone who is everyone in hell, that he was not in fact living in hell! :shaytan:

:!!!: I kill myself!

Edited February 10, 2012 by thenamelessone

[5a49]

(salam)

I pray for people (Waiting for HIM) (Roachy) to read what I write and think about it before responding with baseless childish insults.

And "thenamelessone" you've completely misunderstood the Sheikh if you think he is calling for success, he knows we cannot be successful without the Mahdi (ajtf) but that doesn't mean we lay down and die either, but it also doesn't mean we take up arms and force, and it also doesn't mean we neglect participating in affairs, but we must do it according to Qur'an and Sunnah and the `Aimmahs (as) warnings.

I hope this makes sense to everyone. And please don't post on this thread anymore unless you're contributing to intellectual pursuits of understanding and within the confines of the topic. Jazakallah khayra.

We shouldnt sit and do anything but we should take arms either.

What shall we do than?

Wait for enemies to come kill us until Imam Mahdi arrives? What if Zohour wasn't anytime soon. People would just die without defending themselves?

Oh yea South Lebanon would have been a part of "israel" if there was no resistance.

Make some sense man.

If Sheikh Yasser Habib thinks he lives in peaceful London, and his biggest problem is a enemy which for him is watching a fat guy with a beard without a moustache walking down to tesco. We have bigger enemies that have been a threat to our society.

Al Qur'an clearly says: وأعدوا لهم ما استطعتم من قوة ومن رباط الخيل ترهبون به عدو الله وعدوكم وأخرين من دونهم لا تعلمونهم الله يعلمهم

What do you mean prove he isn't

He was a Muslim wasn't he.. Just bcos u believe he's a 'Bakri'?

I'm not saying he is in hell, but not in heaven either. Allah knows best.

But didn't he try to occupy South Lebanon making it his military base?

Didn't he shake hands with israelis?

Edited February 10, 2012 by RoAcHy

[Waiting for HIM]

Yasir Habib saying the same thing Zionists are saying. Look at the similiarity (no identicality) of the idea of the fictatious ME map.

http://www.democracy...ME-Peters06.htm <-- read the article

[Philip]

^^^ wow how strange .. what is going on ?!?!

[BillyJo]

What do you mean prove he isn't

He was a Muslim wasn't he.. Just bcos u believe he's a 'Bakri'?

No because he didn't accept a two state solution with al-Aqsa on the Muslim side