What Would Happen If We..

[Khudayar]

In the name of Allah. Salam.

 

Thinking what the sectarian takfiris (excommunicators) of sunnis, shias and sufis do in the world and how they (wahhabi shias, wahhabi sunnis, wahhabi sufis, etc.) are alike; I made up my mind on starting a poll. And my question is that, what would such sectarians of different sects do if they were locked in a confined place (which I believe what will happen in the hereafter/hell).

 

And the possible scenarios which came to my mind are that:

 

A- They would kill each other.

 

B- They would unite on sectarianism and agree that everyone else (supporters of the Global Islamic Republic and Muslim Unity) should be killed. And these sectarians would form a takfiri team just like what ibn Muljam did. And they would succeed in killing the noble and the blessed people but leaving the hypocrites like themselves aside.

 

C- They would agree on killing every non-sectarian peaceful people. But they would not try to do it themselves (because it may risk their lives). Rather they would issue fatwas for their ignorant followers to do the job.

 

I think it is C, but I would love to know about your thoughts.

 

Please mention what would happen in such a scenario by casting votes. And if what you think is not there in the options, please state it below. Thanks.

Edited June 21, 2015 by Khudayar

[Chaotic Muslem]

Heads of groups, manipulators and opportunists will just issue fatwas

Pseudo intellectuals , those with half sleeves thinking they are wearing wisdom cloak will make it plausible to kill each others.

Sheeps will kill each others

[Disobedient.Slave]

They won't do anything, they will argue and then will get tired and then will help each other get free, once free they will cause other sheep to kill each other.

[Sol 7]

Wahhabis are explicitly Non Sufi Sunnis. There can't be a Wahhabi Sufi or Wahhabi Shi'a.

But it's highly unlikely that takfiri fundamentalists would ever unite despite their sects.

[Sol 7]

On 6/21/2015, 3:53:16, Chaotic Muslem said:

Heads of groups, manipulators and opportunists will just issue fatwas
Pseudo intellectuals , those with half sleeves thinking they are wearing wisdom cloak will make it plausible to kill each others.
Sheeps will kill each others

Isn't viewing all others as sheep a pseudo intellectual view in itself?

[Abu-Jafar Herz]

On 11/29/2015, 6:09:56, Sol 7 said:

Wahhabis are explicitly Non Sufi Sunnis. There can't be a Wahhabi Sufi or Wahhabi Shi'a.

But it's highly unlikely that takfiri fundamentalists would ever unite despite their sects.

Deobandis follow tasawwuf but also make up the ideology behind the Taliban, so you'd be surprised.

[Sol 7]

1 hour ago, Abu-Jafar Herz said:

Deobandis follow tasawwuf but also make up the ideology behind the Taliban, so you'd be surprised.

Alright. Thats a common mistake so I'll give you that.

They (used to) say that they follow Tassawuf. And that their original adherents were Sufis. 

But the facts remain that they are a Wahhabi originated movement.

Also, they reject Murqaba as Bid'ah, think Music and dancing (for both spiritual and recreational reasons) as haram, they reject the reverence of Awliya, They reject all forms of Batiniyyah thought, they reject Itjihad except for their Ulema and they emphasise strict adherence to the literal letter.

If you reject all Sufi practices and ideas. You do not follow true Tassawuf. It's like me saying "I'm a Shi'a" and calling the concept of Imamate shirk.

[Abu-Jafar Herz]

8 minutes ago, Sol 7 said:

Alright. Thats a common mistake so I'll give you that.

They (used to) say that they follow Tassawuf. And that their original adherents were Sufis. 

But the facts remain that they are a Wahhabi originated movement.

Also, they reject Murqaba as Bid'ah, think Music and dancing (for both spiritual and recreational reasons) as haram, they reject the reverence of Awliya, They reject all forms of Batiniyyah thought, they reject Itjihad except for their Ulema and they emphasise strict adherence to the literal letter.

If you reject all Sufi practices and ideas. You do not follow true Tassawuf. It's like me saying "I'm a Shi'a" and calling the concept of Imamate shirk.

Hello bro, welcome to the forum, hope you're doing well.

I don't think if they reject music and dancing, batiniyyah thought and ijithad except for ulema makes them non-sufis. I don't think music and dancing is what is intrinsic to Sunni tasawwuf. And I'd say that according to all Sunnis ijithad al mutlaq is only reserved for a mujtahid mutlaq, this isn't a sufi idea.

Deobandis have a form of tasawwuf which they follow, they even praise and follow Ibn Arabi and Ghazali.

Sunni tasawwuf today has become rather weird/funny unfortunately(not all), especially with elements of Buddhism which is clearly found in it, such as humming and meditating.

Edited December 3, 2015 by Abu-Jafar Herz

[Sol 7]

14 minutes ago, Abu-Jafar Herz said:

Hello bro, welcome to the forum, hope you're doing well.

I don't think if they reject music and dancing, batiniyyah thought and ijithad except for ulema makes them non-sufis. I don't think music and dancing is what is intrinsic to Sunni tasawwuf. And I'd say that according to all Sunnis ijithad al mutlaq is only reserved for a mujtahid mutlaq, this isn't a sufi idea.

Deobandis have a form of tasawwuf which they follow, they even praise and follow Ibn Arabi and Ghazali.

Sunni tasawwuf today has become rather weird/funny unfortunately(not all), especially with elements of Buddhism which is clearly found in it, such as humming and meditating.

Thanks, brother.

But not really elements of  Buddhism. And not weird or funny. Just the traditions passed down and approved by the Prophet (pbuh) and Awliah. That which helps the individual connect with Allah. 

Spirit over letter, reverence of Awliya, individual Itjihad is actually sort of definitive of Sufis. True, banning Music and Dancing doesnt make one a non Sufi. But the Deobandis are the only "Sufis" to make that haram. 

If they truly followed ibn al Arabi, they would keep to his teachings. But they prefer Ibn Taymiyya and ibn abd al Wahab. Who teach the exact opposite, or at best a severely misguided version. 

Even the Deobandis hate being called Sufis. And go against everything Sufism stands for. 

[Abu-Jafar Herz]

1 minute ago, Sol 7 said:

Thanks, brother.

But not really elements of  Buddhism. And not weird or funny. Just the traditions passed down and approved by the Prophet (pbuh) and Awliah. That which helps the individual connect with Allah. 

Spirit over letter, reverence of Awliya, individual Itjihad is actually sort of definitive of Sufis. True, banning Music and Dancing doesnt make one a non Sufi. But the Deobandis are the only "Sufis" to make that haram. 

If they truly followed ibn al Arabi, they would keep to his teachings. But they prefer Ibn Taymiyya and ibn abd al Wahab. Who teach the exact opposite, or at best a severely misguided version. 

Even the Deobandis hate being called Sufis. And go against everything Sufism stands for. 

Wasalam.

I was once told by someone that if you ever want to see a "salufi" then look at the Deobandis. They have love and show reverence for Ghazali and Ibn Arabi while at the same time showing love and affection for Ibn taymiyyah, they even go as far as calling Ibn taymiyyah "shaykhul Islam". True tasawwuf, which is also called tazkiyyatul nafs or taharatul nafs has to do with getting closer to Allah by the means of dua,fasting,praying,abstaining from sins. We have hadith which mentions what tazkiyyatul nafs is, and how it pertains to achieving mariftul Allah. We have a hadith were a group of people were asked by the prophet [saw] about their condition, they responded that they were in a condition of certain faith and it as if they see the throne of Allah, the people of heaven and hell,etc. They told the prophet [saw] that they attained this state by siyaam/salat,etc, so you can clearly see that we have the science established in our hadith.

[Chaotic Muslem]

lol at Salufi

[Sol 7]

14 hours ago, Abu-Jafar Herz said:

Wasalam.

I was once told by someone that if you ever want to see a "salufi" then look at the Deobandis. They have love and show reverence for Ghazali and Ibn Arabi while at the same time showing love and affection for Ibn taymiyyah, they even go as far as calling Ibn taymiyyah "shaykhul Islam". True tasawwuf, which is also called tazkiyyatul nafs or taharatul nafs has to do with getting closer to Allah by the means of dua,fasting,praying,abstaining from sins. We have hadith which mentions what tazkiyyatul nafs is, and how it pertains to achieving mariftul Allah. We have a hadith were a group of people were asked by the prophet [saw] about their condition, they responded that they were in a condition of certain faith and it as if they see the throne of Allah, the people of heaven and hell,etc. They told the prophet [saw] that they attained this state by siyaam/salat,etc, so you can clearly see that we have the science established in our hadith.

Yeah, but the "reverence" they have for Ibn Arabi and Ghazali is purely for branding purposes. They could care less about their actual teachings. You just can't revere Them and Ibn Taymiyyah and Ibn Abd-Al Wahab at the same time. It's like revering Mahmoud Abbas and Nehatenyahu at the same time. It makes no sense. 

True Tassawuf, according to our Hadith, is reached through that, yeah, (although our traditions on what are actually sins may differ). But it's written that Muhammad (pbuh) ordered that to reach Allah, one must clear their mind and keep their tongue wet with the names of Allah and the Shahada. This present in several traditions, and reaffirmed by Awliyah Such as Abdul Aziz ad Dabbagh and Baha-ud-Din Naqshband Bukhari. 

Everyone's Hadith is a Science, technically, (although, by saying that, you say that they can be abrogated through reason, which, if I'm not mistaken, is kufr according to Orthodox Jafri fiqh). Everyone has their own traditions. None more inherently valid than the other.

 

 

[Kam]

On 03/12/2015 at 0:32 PM, Abu-Jafar Herz said:

Deobandis follow tasawwuf but also make up the ideology behind the Taliban, so you'd be surprised.

And shiais are following the Jews

Edited February 6, 2016 by Kam
Word forgotten

[Jaffery15]

Only shias are promised Paradise only. All other sects will be left hellfire

[Ibn Matta]

Wahhabis don't exist. You don't find anyone who calls themselves Wahhabi do you? The "Wahhabi" 'Aqeedah is basically just staunch Tawheed. Takfir as an issue has nothing to do with because ibn 'Abd al-Wahhab never called people Kuffaar, he labelled actions as Kufr or Shirk not people, to say that's Takfiri would mean all 'Ulamah of all sects are Takfiri.

[Ibn Matta]

On ‎25‎/‎02‎/‎2016 at 8:28 PM, Jaffery15 said:

Only shias are promised Paradise only. All other sects will be left hellfire

Takfir101

[Ibn Matta]

On ‎03‎/‎12‎/‎2015 at 6:15 AM, Sol 7 said:

Yeah, but the "reverence" they have for Ibn Arabi and Ghazali is purely for branding purposes. They could care less about their actual teachings. You just can't revere Them and Ibn Taymiyyah and Ibn Abd-Al Wahab at the same time. It's like revering Mahmoud Abbas and Nehatenyahu at the same time. It makes no sense. 

True Tassawuf, according to our Hadith, is reached through that, yeah, (although our traditions on what are actually sins may differ). But it's written that Muhammad (pbuh) ordered that to reach Allah, one must clear their mind and keep their tongue wet with the names of Allah and the Shahada. This present in several traditions, and reaffirmed by Awliyah Such as Abdul Aziz ad Dabbagh and Baha-ud-Din Naqshband Bukhari. 

Everyone's Hadith is a Science, technically, (although, by saying that, you say that they can be abrogated through reason, which, if I'm not mistaken, is kufr according to Orthodox Jafri fiqh). Everyone has their own traditions. None more inherently valid than the other.

 

 

You can disagree with something while respecting it as an academic piece you can't be black and white.

[Sol 7]

12 hours ago, Ibn Matta said:

You can disagree with something while respecting it as an academic piece you can't be black and white.

Why? They never respect any ither opinion. Why would anyone respect a Deobandi?

[Ibn Matta]

On ‎11‎/‎04‎/‎2016 at 8:17 AM, Sol 7 said:

Why? They never respect any ither opinion. Why would anyone respect a Deobandi?

You don't have any respect for their opinions so why should they respect you? I'm not even Deobandi I just think all this hate just because a Manhaj doesn't agree with yours is dumb Hizbiyyah. BTW you do know there are Deobandi Naqshbandis right?

[Sol 7]

3 hours ago, Ibn Matta said:

You don't have any respect for their opinions so why should they respect you? I'm not even Deobandi I just think all this hate just because a Manhaj doesn't agree with yours is dumb Hizbiyyah. BTW you do know there are Deobandi Naqshbandis right?

I know they call themselves Naqshbandi. But they aren't intitiated to a sheikh. And they call all Sufi practices bid'ah.

 

They're Sufis in the same way North Korea is a "Democratic Republic".

[Sol 7]

3 hours ago, Ibn Matta said:

You don't have any respect for their opinions so why should they respect you? I'm not even Deobandi I just think all this hate just because a Manhaj doesn't agree with yours is dumb Hizbiyyah. BTW you do know there are Deobandi Naqshbandis right?

And besides, I don't hate them because they "disagree with me". I hate them because they're lowbrow bigots and brainless savages. They hold Taliban-like views, lie about their alleigence and are too inbred to listen to anyone who wants away from their disgusting movement. 

[Ibn Matta]

48 minutes ago, Sol 7 said:

And besides, I don't hate them because they "disagree with me". I hate them because they're lowbrow bigots and brainless savages. They hold Taliban-like views, lie about their alleigence and are too inbred to listen to anyone who wants away from their disgusting movement. 

Circular logic. You hate them because they hate you because you hate them because they hate you. Btw i know deobandis so Id keep quiet if I were you if you're gonna throw disgusting and rather bigoted might I add accusations cuh I will check you

[Determined]

And my question is that, what would such sectarians of different sects do if they were locked in a confined place 

(salam)

Sorry to derail, but could not this world we inhabit be considered a confined place? If so, take a look around and you will have your answer as to the outcome. I think all three of your options have materialised at one point in time or another.

[AleviTurkmenKhorasan]

The turk sufis (alevi erenleri) hallaci mansur, ibn arabi, haci bektash veli pir ahmet yesevi yunus emre etc have a different meaning for 4 kapi and 40 makam 

4 doors of Alevi Sufi Bektashi are

*Seriat 

*Tarikat 

*Marifet

*Hâkikâtte 

The interpretation of these are totally distinctive than sunnis

 

[Danish14]

On 22/06/2015 at 6:40 AM, Disobedient.Slave said:

They won't do anything, they will argue and then will get tired and then will help each other get free, once free they will cause other sheep to kill each other.

Lol, cool people. You all are getting stressed too because you all have become extremist too as well but did not realize. In hell no one will have time for arguments. It is world where people argue and afterwards trial ends and reality begins. Shias must be nice to sunnis and sunnis shall be peaceful towards Shias. Extremism be pointed out and then be pacified in all sects including other known divine religions. 

[wmehar2]

More labels, more divisions, more this and that among sunnis and shia.  We're not different than anyone else, No differnet from gays, transgenders, christians, jews.  We just all need to label ourselves and separate ourselves from someone else to elevate our own stupid ego. 

[alabegh]

Hello, I find it really hard not to mention the A option. They are extremists. That's probably the extremest thing to do to get closer to their heavenly flawed vision of redemption.

Edited June 4, 2016 by alabegh

[wmehar2]

On 12/3/2015 at 9:26 AM, Sol 7 said:

Alright. Thats a common mistake so I'll give you that.

They (used to) say that they follow Tassawuf. And that their original adherents were Sufis. 

But the facts remain that they are a Wahhabi originated movement.

Also, they reject Murqaba as Bid'ah, think Music and dancing (for both spiritual and recreational reasons) as haram, they reject the reverence of Awliya, They reject all forms of Batiniyyah thought, they reject Itjihad except for their Ulema and they emphasise strict adherence to the literal letter.

If you reject all Sufi practices and ideas. You do not follow true Tassawuf. It's like me saying "I'm a Shi'a" and calling the concept of Imamate shirk.

Not to mention, they've attacked and blown up Sufi places/shrines. Also, Salaam, it's good to see another Sufi on here. 

As far as the question goes, I don't know if this is a necessarily productive Poll, ... Maybe introduce another option, D  - eventually they can't hide their private lives from each other, call each other out on their hypocrisy and sins, and flog each other to death. 

Edited June 16, 2016 by wmehar2

[janbiya]

People just don't get it. What happen now is a product of militant political movement. If a group is not militant, it won't cause so much trouble to others. Let us go back 3 decades or more ago. Is it a coincidence that we do not have all this mess like suicide bombing, kidnapping for ransom, terror activities in the name of Islam prior to 1979 revolution in iran? Before that, those activities are mostly done by secular/marxist groups and Iran regime encourage shia & sunni groups to use those methods. Even al qaida was not iran's enemy decades ago. You see, 79 revolution promote militancy and we see the result decades later, a big pile of mess and burnt middle east for everyone except for iran whose leaders are smiling in Tehran. The cure, stop exporting revolution, keep it to yourself, Iran. The sasanid or safavid empire are history.

[Pangea]

On 02 September 2016 at 10:11 PM, janbiya said:

People just don't get it. What happen now is a product of militant political movement. If a group is not militant, it won't cause so much trouble to others. Let us go back 3 decades or more ago. Is it a coincidence that we do not have all this mess like suicide bombing, kidnapping for ransom, terror activities in the name of Islam prior to 1979 revolution in iran? Before that, those activities are mostly done by secular/marxist groups and Iran regime encourage shia & sunni groups to use those methods. Even al qaida was not iran's enemy decades ago. You see, 79 revolution promote militancy and we see the result decades later, a big pile of mess and burnt middle east for everyone except for iran whose leaders are smiling in Tehran. The cure, stop exporting revolution, keep it to yourself, Iran. The sasanid or safavid empire are history.

People do get it. So no terrorist activities prior to 1979? How about the SwissAir bombing in February 1970? Did the Iranian authorities time travel to the past once they gained power in 79? Was it really secular/marxist groups?

Bunch of hokum my friend. You may need to look closer to home (we have an idea what you're propoganda is and on who's behalf you're promoting this anti-Iranian post).

Let's say what you're saying is true. You're gang of maurauding holier than thou mischief makers have certainly taken it up a notch or 10 since then haven't they?

A big pile of mess in the Middle East is certainly an understatement but you can argue it's the kingdoms of RSA and their ilk that are sitting pretty.

[Amber Saif]

On 6/21/2015 at 11:00 PM, Khudayar said:

In the name of Allah. Salam.

 

Thinking what the sectarian takfiris (excommunicators) of sunnis, shias and sufis do in the world and how they (wahhabi shias, wahhabi sunnis, wahhabi sufis, etc.) are alike; I made up my mind on starting a poll. And my question is that, what would such sectarians of different sects do if they were locked in a confined place (which I believe what will happen in the hereafter/hell).

 

And the possible scenarios which came to my mind are that:

 

A- They would kill each other.

 

B- They would unite on sectarianism and agree that everyone else (supporters of the Global Islamic Republic and Muslim Unity) should be killed. And these sectarians would form a takfiri team just like what ibn Muljam did. And they would succeed in killing the noble and the blessed people but leaving the hypocrites like themselves aside.

 

C- They would agree on killing every non-sectarian peaceful people. But they would not try to do it themselves (because it may risk their lives). Rather they would issue fatwas for their ignorant followers to do the job.

 

I think it is C, but I would love to know about your thoughts.

 

Please mention what would happen in such a scenario by casting votes. And if what you think is not there in the options, please state it below. Thanks.

Have a look at the below video , it shows a former Imam of the grand mosque of Mecca admitting to the direct link between Salafi and ISIS :

 

Edited November 1, 2016 by Amber Saif

[Pearl3112]

Salam I feel so dumb ri8 now 

I don't know which 79 revolution 

Terrorists has nothing to do with any revolution terrorism started at the very beginning when abubakr got a position

He planted trees of such thoughts 

Am I wrong after him the other two superlative degree's made more mess

Which we can see today as well 

And I feel c or d option 

Btw the person questioning why did u added shias in it like u mentioned shia sect as well ri8

And 1 more thing who r salafis .takfiris ........ 

Baba so many times these names comes I don't know any of scts sometimes these really confuses meme

And I think 1st  c will happen and then d 

But both will happen on after other

[AleviTurkmenKhorasan]

Mate sunni is zoroastrain, 

There is no Namaz nor mosques nor ezan during Prophet Muhammeds Time

[zeesh_ali110]

On 11/16/2016 at 2:27 AM, AleviTurkmenKhorasan said:

Mate sunni is zoroastrain, 

There is no Namaz nor mosques nor ezan during Prophet Muhammeds Time

What ???????????????????????????????????????

[AleviTurkmenKhorasan]

Yep thr elements of sunni Islam is that of Ummayid dynasty which took pieces from all faiths e.g. zoroastrian, Christianity, Judaism etc 

Their is no Namaz in the Qur'an 

There was no ezan back in Hz Muhammed time apart from calling people to prayer "Allah hu Akbar"

The mosques were built after by muaviye and they were cursing Hz Ali and Ahlibeyt 

A place of worship can be anything, with a roof and four walls 

I can provide videos but it's in Turkish 

Man you Iranian shias are seriously converted from sunnis after Shah ismail this is why thr similarities