Jump to content
In the Name of God بسم الله

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

  • Veteran Member

(salam)

Unfortunately, Sunni side is not much open for Shia muslims. So called hardliner Sunnis call Shias Kafir/Majoosi/Sabai/Jews etc. Even in mainstream Sunnis we do not see much struggle from Sunni side for unity among Ummah (Shia-Sunni Unity). Often we being Shias face an unreasonable demand from Sunni side for unity among Ummah (Shia-Sunni Unity) that "Shias should convert to Sunni for unity". This is like a Wahabi saying to a Brailvi convert to Wahabism if you want unity. One has to accept others with their faith/views for unity. One can not thrust upon his/her views to others. On the other hand major Shia scholars always tried and preached for Shia-Sunni unity. Because this is the only way to defeat imperialists/zionists in the world. There are many Shias who are working against Shia-Sunni unity but fortunately, they did not get good recognition from Shia community.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

True brother. There are many elements which are obstacles to shia-sunni unity. 

Firstly, how do we define 'unity' ? It seems that sometimes , people believe that unity means we accept the aqeedah of other sects/madhabs, thus compromising on fundamental belief. This is not what is meant or even intended by shia-sunni unity. Unity is looking at the various aspects we have in common, that are and should be a powerful point of commonality. For example, the belief in one God, the Prophethood of Muhammed s.a.w, and the unchanged book of Allah azwj - the Quran. Very similar Fiqh laws, very similar moral and ethical laws, and very similar global issues and outlooks.

Secondly, we must look at the currently obstacles, both in shia and sunni camps compromising unity. For one, the growth of salafi islam, the influence of saudi-arabia and gulf-state 'salafi' otherwise known as 'wahhabi' influence is something one must absolutely mention here. Many young people are now drawn to the salafi movement, including my own family members [who are sunni]. Salafi Islam teaches a very uncompromising and literalist version of Islam. This form of Islam refutes large swathes of sunni's -  never-mind shias. 

Furthermore, we must be honest and look at aspects of our own practises which may hurt our sunni brother/sisters. For one, our view on Abu Bakr, Umar, and Uthman, as well as  Umm Aisha. Yet, despite our views, our Ulema command us not to show disrespect or abuse at these revered personalities. Yet you see on shia forums, on youtube channels, on websites, shia's discussing these personalities in ways contrary to guidance from our Ulema. They abuse them, insult them, and many also send open Lanah, or do the daft thing of saying 'i won't send it openly, but i'll do it in private, so yeah i'll curse your abu bakr privately you bakri'.  Let us not even mention the devastating effect the lecture's of the notorious Yasser Habib has had on shia-sunni unity. 

Beliefs not even accepted by the majority of our Ulema, such as Umm Aisha and Hafsah killing Muhammed s.a.w, or committing adultery, or the obsession with the back-passage of certian caliphs [by yasser habib] are also not helpful to our cause.  Additionally, practises such as Tatbir and Blood letting, go against the fitrah of a human being, what civilisation deems to be humane and ethical behaviour, and this practise has been used to absolutely deface the image of our madhab. 

We must also look at political events. Currently in Syria, many of the so-called 'moderate' rebels are actually funded by Qatar, Saudi, and the US. Many of them work with Al Nusra - the official alqaeda affiliate before it rebranded, as well as Ahrar Asham, founded by an Alqaeda member. Many of these groups are millitant and terribly secterian. Now, if you combine that all you have a very grotesque, shia-hating group, influenced and working with Alqaeda, backed by enemies of Iran, against Bashar Al Assad. Naturally, shia's - and many sunnis- would never support groups that consider us majoosi, najis, rafidha, and so on. However, these groups as well as the US, western media, and gulf-states, in a bid to overthrow the syrian regime, have helped promote secterian narratives.

Thus you find these groups - who are excellent at social media- tweeting and promoting the following: Look at the shia's! Look at bashar slaughtering our women and children with his barrel bombs! Wallah you can not find anyone more deceitful and harmful than the rafidhites! They are treacherous, those muderous! They curse our mother (Aisha), and they kill our women and children with their barrel bombs! That shia khamanei is helping that murderous Assad with the Russians! The Rafidha are also slaughtering our women and children in Iraq, and raping.

 

Conclusion:

To achieve shia-sunni unity, we need to define what we mean by it, and be clear in what we intend. We need to deal with the growth of salafi Islam, and unite with other groups in the ahlus-sunnah wal jamaah who are often victims of the salafi's. We need to absolutely make sure the layman among us, our kids, our women, our men, understand clearly the need to respect the symbols in other madhabs, even if we do not like them. We need to get rid of self-mutilation and tatbir, and find a way to thwart the efforts of Yasser Habib. Simultaneously, we have got to do our level best to counter media propaganda of the syrian war, and absolutely expose these so-called 'moderate rebels' for who they really are , without supporting Assad himself or glorifying him.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Aabiss_Shakari said:

x

 

Sufi's, Ashari's, Baralevi's, maybe even Malaki's and some groups of the other of the Madhabs will often be sympathetic to unity. Hanbali's, some Hanafi's , but especially Hanbali's  - the father of salafi's- will be intolerant and hateful. 

This is not always the case, and i could be wrong in my judgement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Unregistered
9 hours ago, Aabiss_Shakari said:

(salam)

Unfortunately, Sunni side is not much open for Shia muslims. So called hardliner Sunnis call Shias Kafir/Majoosi/Sabai/Jews etc. Even in mainstream Sunnis we do not see much struggle from Sunni side for unity among Ummah (Shia-Sunni Unity). Often we being Shias face an unreasonable demand from Sunni side for unity among Ummah (Shia-Sunni Unity) that "Shias should convert to Sunni for unity". This is like a Wahabi saying to a Brailvi convert to Wahabism if you want unity. One has to accept others with their faith/views for unity. One can not thrust upon his/her views to others. On the other hand major Shia scholars always tried and preached for Shia-Sunni unity. Because this is the only way to defeat imperialists/zionists in the world. There are many Shias who are working against Shia-Sunni unity but fortunately, they did not get good recognition from Shia community.

 

There are many special operative, conducting false flag operation on the net. Their motto is everything goes in war. So, there are not legal,ethical or moral limits for them, lie and deception is their weapon of mass disruption. On the net people can construct and manage image that to gain trust and sympathy.

You will notice repeated topic/message, with the same underpinning. It's one of those operation, designed to deliver the payload which is hiding in the transport vehicle. This transport vehicle has stealth capabilities, so is not easily recognizable. You would want to infiltrate recognizing the enemy's weak point/points of division.

Some of the topic are misunderstood, so they are easily transport vehicles. Like Shirk, Kufr, Ghuluw, Unity, Respect etc..It's easy to utilize these to deliver the main payload(doubt/dawah), all the while not one suspects what is really going on or the objective.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member
10 hours ago, Tawheed313 said:

Beliefs not even accepted by the majority of our Ulema, such as Umm Aisha and Hafsah killing Muhammed s.a.w, or committing adultery, or the obsession with the back-passage of certian caliphs [by yasser habib] are also not helpful to our cause.  Additionally, practises such as Tatbir and Blood letting, go against the fitrah of a human being, what civilisation deems to be humane and ethical behaviour, and this practise has been used to absolutely deface the image of our madhab. 

I am asking you very nicely and politely to stay from the red issue highlighted above. I dont want to derail this thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Panzerwaffe said:

As long as sunni adhere dogmaticly to the principal of defence of ALL companions 

and shias  believe in a divine appointment of imams 

There is no hope of unity 

Shaikh Al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah said about the Raafidah, “They are more evil than most of the people of desires, and they are more deserving of being killed than the Khawaarij.” [Refer to Majmoo’ul-Fataawaa (28/482) of Ibn Taymiyyah]

And let me add, if people continue to glorify Ibn Taymiyyah.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Unregistered
2 hours ago, Panzerwaffe said:

As long as sunni adhere dogmaticly to the principal of defence of ALL companions 

and shias  believe in a divine appointment of imams 

There is no hope of unity 

What about the appointment of a successor, to the Seal of Prophets, Muhammad(peace be upon him and his progeny) ?

No succession plan given to the Muslims.

Above initself is a major issue.

*****

Assume

If no, Divine appointment and announcement at Ghadir Khumm. If it was only Mawla in terms of Friend & the Hadith of the two weighty things. Should have implied. That the Mawla be present, at any succession discussion, and if someone other chosen to be the Administrator for any other reason. The Mawla and the the one with most knowledge of the Book of Allah(awj). The door to the City of Knowledge. Be the Top Religious Authority "Jurist" of the Muslims Nation? 

Unless, its not only the rejection of the Qur'anic concept/command. But total disregard of the alleged mean of Mawla and Hadith of the two weighty things.

 

*****

Yazid b. Hayyan reported, I went along with Husain b. Sabra and 'Umar b. Muslim to Zaid b. Arqam and, as we sat by his side, Husain said to him:

Zaid. you have been able to acquire a great virtue that you saw Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) listened to his talk, fought by his side in (different) battles, offered prayer behind me. Zaid, you have in fact earned a great virtue. Zaid, narrate to us what you heard from Allah's Messenger (ﷺ). He said: I have grown old and have almost spent my age and I have forgotten some of the things which I remembered in connection with Allah's Messenger (ﷺ), so accept whatever I narrate to you, and which I do not narrate do not compel me to do that. He then said: One day Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) stood up to deliver sermon at a watering place known as Khumm situated between Mecca and Medina. He praised Allah, extolled Him and delivered the sermon and. exhorted (us) and said: Now to our purpose. O people, I am a human being. I am about to receive a messenger (the angel of death) from my Lord and I, in response to Allah's call, (would bid good-bye to you), but I am leaving among you two weighty things: the one being the Book of Allah in which there is right guidance and light, so hold fast to the Book of Allah and adhere to it. He exhorted (us) (to hold fast) to the Book of Allah and then said: The second are the members of my household I remind you (of your duties) to the members of my family. He (Husain) said to Zaid: Who are the members of his household? Aren't his wives the members of his family? Thereupon he said: His wives are the members of his family (but here) the members of his family are those for whom acceptance of Zakat is forbidden. And he said: Who are they? Thereupon he said: 'Ali and the offspring of 'Ali, 'Aqil and the offspring of 'Aqil and the offspring of Ja'far and the offspring of 'Abbas. Husain said: These are those for whom the acceptance of Zakat is forbidden. Zaid said: Yes.

حَدَّثَنِي زُهَيْرُ بْنُ حَرْبٍ، وَشُجَاعُ بْنُ مَخْلَدٍ، جَمِيعًا عَنِ ابْنِ عُلَيَّةَ، قَالَ زُهَيْرٌ حَدَّثَنَا إِسْمَاعِيلُ بْنُ إِبْرَاهِيمَ، حَدَّثَنِي أَبُو حَيَّانَ، حَدَّثَنِي يَزِيدُ بْنُ حَيَّانَ، قَالَ انْطَلَقْتُ أَنَا وَحُصَيْنُ، بْنُ سَبْرَةَ وَعُمَرُ بْنُ مُسْلِمٍ إِلَى زَيْدِ بْنِ أَرْقَمَ فَلَمَّا جَلَسْنَا إِلَيْهِ قَالَ لَهُ حُصَيْنٌ لَقَدْ لَقِيتَ يَا زَيْدُ خَيْرًا كَثِيرًا رَأَيْتَ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم وَسَمِعْتَ حَدِيثَهُ وَغَزَوْتَ مَعَهُ وَصَلَّيْتَ خَلْفَهُ لَقَدْ لَقِيتَ يَا زَيْدُ خَيْرًا كَثِيرًا حَدِّثْنَا يَا زَيْدُ مَا سَمِعْتَ مِنْ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم - قَالَ - يَا ابْنَ أَخِي وَاللَّهِ لَقَدْ كَبِرَتْ سِنِّي وَقَدُمَ عَهْدِي وَنَسِيتُ بَعْضَ الَّذِي كُنْتُ أَعِي مِنْ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم فَمَا حَدَّثْتُكُمْ فَاقْبَلُوا وَمَا لاَ فَلاَ تُكَلِّفُونِيهِ ‏.‏ ثُمَّ قَالَ قَامَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم يَوْمًا فِينَا خَطِيبًا بِمَاءٍ يُدْعَى خُمًّا بَيْنَ مَكَّةَ وَالْمَدِينَةِ فَحَمِدَ اللَّهَ وَأَثْنَى عَلَيْهِ وَوَعَظَ وَذَكَّرَ ثُمَّ قَالَ ‏"‏ أَمَّا بَعْدُ أَلاَ أَيُّهَا النَّاسُ فَإِنَّمَا أَنَا بَشَرٌ يُوشِكُ أَنْ يَأْتِيَ رَسُولُ رَبِّي فَأُجِيبَ وَأَنَا تَارِكٌ فِيكُمْ ثَقَلَيْنِ أَوَّلُهُمَا كِتَابُ اللَّهِ فِيهِ الْهُدَى وَالنُّورُ فَخُذُوا بِكِتَابِ اللَّهِ وَاسْتَمْسِكُوا بِهِ ‏"‏ ‏.‏ فَحَثَّ عَلَى كِتَابِ اللَّهِ وَرَغَّبَ فِيهِ ثُمَّ قَالَ ‏"‏ وَأَهْلُ بَيْتِي أُذَكِّرُكُمُ اللَّهَ فِي أَهْلِ بَيْتِي أُذَكِّرُكُمُ اللَّهَ فِي أَهْلِ بَيْتِي أُذَكِّرُكُمُ اللَّهَ فِي أَهْلِ بَيْتِي ‏"‏ ‏.‏ فَقَالَ لَهُ حُصَيْنٌ وَمَنْ أَهْلُ بَيْتِهِ يَا زَيْدُ أَلَيْسَ نِسَاؤُهُ مِنْ أَهْلِ بَيْتِهِ قَالَ نِسَاؤُهُ مِنْ أَهْلِ بَيْتِهِ وَلَكِنْ أَهْلُ بَيْتِهِ مَنْ حُرِمَ الصَّدَقَةَ بَعْدَهُ ‏.‏ قَالَ وَمَنْ هُمْ قَالَ هُمْ آلُ عَلِيٍّ وَآلُ عَقِيلٍ وَآلُ جَعْفَرٍ وَآلُ عَبَّاسٍ ‏.‏ قَالَ كُلُّ هَؤُلاَءِ حُرِمَ الصَّدَقَةَ قَالَ نَعَمْ ‏.‏

Reference : Sahih Muslim 2408 a

In-book reference : Book 44, Hadith 55

USC-MSA web (English) reference : Book 31, Hadith 5920

http://sunnah.com/muslim/44/55

Narrated Jabir bin 'Abdullah:

"I saw the Messenger of Allah during his Hajj, on the Day of 'Arafah. He was upon his camel Qaswa, giving a Khutbah, so he said: 'O people! Indeed, I have left among you, that which if you hold fast to it, you shall not go astray: The Book of Allah and my family, the people of my house.'"

حَدَّثَنَا نَصْرُ بْنُ عَبْدِ الرَّحْمَنِ الْكُوفِيُّ، حَدَّثَنَا زَيْدُ بْنُ الْحَسَنِ، هُوَ الأَنْمَاطِيُّ عَنْ جَعْفَرِ بْنِ مُحَمَّدٍ، عَنْ أَبِيهِ، عَنْ جَابِرِ بْنِ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ، قَالَ رَأَيْتُ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم فِي حَجَّتِهِ يَوْمَ عَرَفَةَ وَهُوَ عَلَى نَاقَتِهِ الْقَصْوَاءِ يَخْطُبُ فَسَمِعْتُهُ يَقُولُ ‏ "‏ يَا أَيُّهَا النَّاسُ إِنِّي قَدْ تَرَكْتُ فِيكُمْ مَا إِنْ أَخَذْتُمْ بِهِ لَنْ تَضِلُّوا كِتَابَ اللَّهِ وَعِتْرَتِي أَهْلَ بَيْتِي ‏"‏ ‏.‏ قَالَ وَفِي الْبَابِ عَنْ أَبِي ذَرٍّ وَأَبِي سَعِيدٍ وَزَيْدِ بْنِ أَرْقَمَ وَحُذَيْفَةَ بْنِ أَسِيدٍ ‏.‏ قَالَ وَهَذَا حَدِيثٌ حَسَنٌ غَرِيبٌ مِنْ هَذَا الْوَجْهِ ‏.‏ قَالَ وَزَيْدُ بْنُ الْحَسَنِ قَدْ رَوَى عَنْهُ سَعِيدُ بْنُ سُلَيْمَانَ وَغَيْرُ وَاحِدٍ مِنْ أَهْلِ الْعِلْمِ ‏.‏

Grade: Sahih (Darussalam)

English reference

: Vol. 1, Book 46, Hadith 3786

Arabic reference

: Book 49, Hadith 4155

http://sunnah.com/urn/636690

Narrated Abu Sarihah, or Zaid bin Arqam - Shu'bah had doubt:

from the Prophet (ﷺ): "For whomever I am his Mawla then 'Ali is his Mawla."

حَدَّثَنَا مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ بَشَّارٍ، حَدَّثَنَا مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ جَعْفَرٍ، حَدَّثَنَا شُعْبَةُ، عَنْ سَلَمَةَ بْنِ كُهَيْلٍ، قَالَ سَمِعْتُ أَبَا الطُّفَيْلِ، يُحَدِّثُ عَنْ أَبِي سَرِيْحَةَ، أَوْ زَيْدِ بْنِ أَرْقَمَ شَكَّ شُعْبَةُ - عَنِ النَّبِيِّ صلى الله عليه وسلم قَالَ ‏ "‏ مَنْ كُنْتُ مَوْلاَهُ فَعَلِيٌّ مَوْلاَهُ ‏"‏ ‏.‏ قَالَ أَبُو عِيسَى هَذَا حَدِيثٌ حَسَنٌ صَحِيحٌ غَرِيبٌ ‏.‏ وَقَدْ رَوَى شُعْبَةُ هَذَا الْحَدِيثَ عَنْ مَيْمُونٍ أَبِي عَبْدِ اللَّهِ عَنْ زَيْدِ بْنِ أَرْقَمَ عَنِ النَّبِيِّ صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏.‏ وَأَبُو سَرِيحَةَ هُوَ حُذَيْفَةُ بْنُ أَسِيدٍ الْغِفَارِيُّ صَاحِبُ النَّبِيِّ صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏.‏

Grade Sahih (Darussalam)

English reference

: Vol. 1, Book 46, Hadith 3713

Arabic reference

: Book 49, Hadith 4078

http://sunnah.com/urn/635920

Edited by S.M.H.A.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member
5 hours ago, Panzerwaffe said:

As long as sunni adhere dogmaticly to the principal of defence of ALL companions 

and shias  believe in a divine appointment of imams 

There is no hope of unity 

Brother - the abovementioned by itself is not the issue. 

Issues arise when Sunni insists on getting shias to believe their way is correct and then do takfir on the shias.

As shias, we are too busy amongst ourselves to care either way about the beliefs of the AhleSunnah.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is what i believe is perhaps one of the most disgusting speeches, full of religious hatred, where he condones the hatred and murder of shia muslims. Ofcourse, there are people who will seek to white-wash what he has to say, but anyone who understands the terms knows that 'Rafidah' is an offensive word used for shia muslims. The ummayads are hated by shia's - with a few exceptions- and calling shia's 'najis' and 'majoosi' [i.e iranians], again plays into absolutely loathsome, foul and secterian hatred. Do we want these kind of people to lead over a diverse nation like Syria?

 


It is possible, if not highly likely that, for salafi millitants like Alloush, one of his inspirations was Ibn Taymiyyah:

Shaikh Al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah said about the Raafidah, “They are more evil than most of the people of desires, and they are more deserving of being killed than the Khawaarij. [Refer to Majmoo’ul-Fataawaa (28/482) of Ibn Taymiyyah]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Unregistered
28 minutes ago, Tawheed313 said:


Shaikh Al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah said about the Raafidah, “They are more evil than most of the people of desires, and they are more deserving of being killed than the Khawaarij. [Refer to Majmoo’ul-Fataawaa (28/482) of Ibn Taymiyyah]

How many times, you(TheY) plan to display/advertise TheIr Ad for TheIr Sheykh here and content in Red? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, S.M.H.A. said:

How many times, you(TheY) plan to display/advertise TheIr Ad for TheIr Sheykh here and content in Red? 

Brother, are you seriously alleging that i am trying to promote and advertise filthy words from the likes of ibn Taymiyyah and Zahran Alloush? 

I am trying to expose them and their filth, and awaken us all to our enemy. 

Edited by Tawheed313
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Unregistered

We already know the basics. We need to move on from this hate materials/videos and focus on the Book of Allah(awj) and the Prophet Muhammad(pbuhahp).and Ahlul bayt(as). Lesson from Karbala

We do kind of very powerful dawah in two and half month period of Muharram. Its very direct and goes to the heart of the issue.

We don't care what others believe and personalities they want to worship and defend.

We only respond, if attacked.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member
8 hours ago, shiaman14 said:

Brother - the abovementioned by itself is not the issue. 

Issues arise when Sunni insists on getting shias to believe their way is correct and then do takfir on the shias.

As shias, we are too busy amongst ourselves to care either way about the beliefs of the AhleSunnah.

Shias Will do the same when they have political power see historical examples of Iraq safavis iran etc

ideologically there is no hope of reconciliation now

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member
1 hour ago, Panzerwaffe said:

Shias Will do the same when they have political power see historical examples of Iraq safavis iran etc

ideologically there is no hope of reconciliation now

Shia in any point of history never forced others to convert to Shia. Preaching the religion is something else. Even today Shia scholars insist on unity among Muslims in spite of Takfir of Shias by major Sunni scholars. When we talk about unity we do not insist on acceptance of Shia faith by other Muslims. Your basics are same hence there is no point of fighting on other issues.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/4/2016 at 10:59 AM, Aabiss_Shakari said:

(salam)

Unfortunately, Sunni side is not much open for Shia muslims. So called hardliner Sunnis call Shias Kafir/Majoosi/Sabai/Jews etc. Even in mainstream Sunnis we do not see much struggle from Sunni side for unity among Ummah (Shia-Sunni Unity). Often we being Shias face an unreasonable demand from Sunni side for unity among Ummah (Shia-Sunni Unity) that "Shias should convert to Sunni for unity". This is like a Wahabi saying to a Brailvi convert to Wahabism if you want unity. One has to accept others with their faith/views for unity. One can not thrust upon his/her views to others. On the other hand major Shia scholars always tried and preached for Shia-Sunni unity. Because this is the only way to defeat imperialists/zionists in the world. There are many Shias who are working against Shia-Sunni unity but fortunately, they did not get good recognition from Shia community.

 

W.salam

 

Prophet Muhammad S.A.W.W words on unity.

It was narrated that 'Arfajah bin Shuraih Al-Ashja'I said:
"I saw the Prophet [SAW] on the Minbar addressing the people. He said: 'After me there will be many calamities and much evil behavior. Whoever you see splitting away from the Jama'ah or trying to create division among the Ummah of Muhammad [SAW], then kill him, for the Hand of Allah is with the Jama'ah, and the Shaitan is with the one who splits away from the Ummah, running with him.'" Sunan an-Nasa'i 4020


Maula Ali a.s words on unity.

“With regard to me, two categories of people will be ruined, namely he who loves me too much and the love takes him away from rightfulness, and he who hates me too much and the hatred takes him away from rightfulness. The best man with regard to me is he who is on the middle course. So be with him and be with the great majority of Muslims because Allah’s hand of protection is on keeping unity. You should beware of division because the one isolated from the group is a prey to Satan just as the one isolated from the flock of sheep is a prey to the wolf. Beware! Whoever calls to this course [of sectarianism], kill him, even though he may be under this headband of mine.” Nahjul Balagha, Sermon 126


Unity can only be seen among those who are on middle course (from both shias and sunnies) regarding Imam Ali a.s. Those who love him too much and those who hate him too much will never be part of unity.

 

2 hours ago, Aabiss_Shakari said:

Shia in any point of history never forced others to convert to Shia. Preaching the religion is something else. Even today Shia scholars insist on unity among Muslims in spite of Takfir of Shias by major Sunni scholars. When we talk about unity we do not insist on acceptance of Shia faith by other Muslims. Your basics are same hence there is no point of fighting on other issues.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Safavid_conversion_of_Iran_to_Shia_Islam

Safavid conversion of Iran to Shia Islam

The Safavid conversion of Iran from Sunnism to Shiism took place roughly over the 16th through 18th centuries and made Iran the spiritual bastion of Shia Islam against the onslaughts of Sunni Islam. It made Iran the repository[peacock term] of Persian cultural traditions and self-awareness of Iranianhood, acting as a bridge to modern Iran. It also ensured the dominance of the Twelver sect within Shiism over the Zaydiyyah and Ismaili sects – each of whom had previously experienced their own eras of dominance within Shiism. Through their actions, the Safavids reunified Iran as an independent state in 1501 and established Twelver Shiism as the official religion of their empire, marking one of the most important turning points in the history of Islam.

Methods of converting Iran

Ismail consolidated his rule over the country and launched a thorough and at times brutal campaign to convert the majority Sunni population to Twelver Shiism and thus transform the religious landscape of Iran.[16] His methods of converting Iran included:

  • Imposing Shiism as the state and mandatory religion for the whole nation and much forcible conversions of Iranian Sufi Sunnis to Shiism.[17][18][19]
  • He reintroduced the Sadr (Arabic, leader) – an office that was responsible for supervising religious institutions and endowments. With a view to transforming Iran into a Shiite state, the Sadr was also assigned the task of disseminating Twelver doctrine.[20]
  • He destroyed Sunni mosques. This was even noted by Tomé Pires, the Portuguese ambassador to China who visited Iran in 1511–12, who when referring to Ismail noted: "He (i.e. Ismail) reforms our churches, destroys the houses of all Moors who follow (the Sunnah of) Muhammad…"[21]
  • He enforced the ritual and compulsory cursing of the first three Sunni Caliphs (Abu Bakr, Umar, and Uthman) as usurpers, from all mosques, disbanded Sunni Tariqahs and seized their assets, used state patronage to develop Shia shrines, institutions and religious art and imported Shia scholars to replace Sunni scholars.[22][23][24]
  • He shed Sunni blood and destroyed and desecrated the graves and mosques of Sunnis. This caused the Ottoman Sultan Bayezid II (who initially congratulated Ismail on his victories) to advise and ask the young monarch (in a “fatherly” manner) to stop the anti-Sunni actions. However, Ismail was strongly anti-Sunni, ignored the Sultan's warning, and continued to spread the Shia faith by the sword.[25][26]
  • He persecuted, imprisoned and executed stubbornly resistant Sunnis.[27][28]
  • With the establishment of Safavid rule, there was a very raucous and colourful, almost carnival-like holiday on 26 Dhu al-Hijjah (or alternatively, 9 Rabi' al-awwal) celebrating the murder of Caliph Umar. The highlight of the day was making an effigy of Umar to be cursed, insulted, and finally burned. However, as relations between Iran and Sunni countries improved, the holiday was no longer observed (at least officially).[29]
  • In 1501 Ismail invited all the Shia living outside Iran to come to Iran and be assured of protection from the Sunni majority.[30]

 

Is there any similiar example in history where an entire shia state was converted to sunni like this. Share and let me know. Honsetly I have no knowledge on this so far.

Edited by Fahad Sani
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, S.M.H.A. said:

We already know the basics. We need to move on from this hate materials/videos and focus on the Book of Allah(awj) and the Prophet Muhammad(pbuhahp).and Ahlul bayt(as). Lesson from Karbala

We do kind of very powerful dawah in two and half month period of Muharram. Its very direct and goes to the heart of the issue.

We don't care what others believe and personalities they want to worship and defend.

We only respond, if attacked.

 

True brother, true. But i do feel the need to warn as many people still. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
6 hours ago, Fahad Sani said:

Methods of converting Iran

Ismail consolidated his rule over the country and launched a thorough and at times brutal campaign to convert the majority Sunni population to Twelver Shiism and thus transform the religious landscape of Iran.[16] His methods of converting Iran included:

  • Imposing Shiism as the state and mandatory religion for the whole nation and much forcible conversions of Iranian Sufi Sunnis to Shiism.[17][18][19]
  • He reintroduced the Sadr (Arabic, leader) – an office that was responsible for supervising religious institutions and endowments. With a view to transforming Iran into a Shiite state, the Sadr was also assigned the task of disseminating Twelver doctrine.[20]
  • He destroyed Sunni mosques. This was even noted by Tomé Pires, the Portuguese ambassador to China who visited Iran in 1511–12, who when referring to Ismail noted: "He (i.e. Ismail) reforms our churches, destroys the houses of all Moors who follow (the Sunnah of) Muhammad…"[21]
  • He enforced the ritual and compulsory cursing of the first three Sunni Caliphs (Abu Bakr, Umar, and Uthman) as usurpers, from all mosques, disbanded Sunni Tariqahs and seized their assets, used state patronage to develop Shia shrines, institutions and religious art and imported Shia scholars to replace Sunni scholars.[22][23][24]
  • He shed Sunni blood and destroyed and desecrated the graves and mosques of Sunnis. This caused the Ottoman Sultan Bayezid II (who initially congratulated Ismail on his victories) to advise and ask the young monarch (in a “fatherly” manner) to stop the anti-Sunni actions. However, Ismail was strongly anti-Sunni, ignored the Sultan's warning, and continued to spread the Shia faith by the sword.[25][26]
  • He persecuted, imprisoned and executed stubbornly resistant Sunnis.[27][28]
  • With the establishment of Safavid rule, there was a very raucous and colourful, almost carnival-like holiday on 26 Dhu al-Hijjah (or alternatively, 9 Rabi' al-awwal) celebrating the murder of Caliph Umar. The highlight of the day was making an effigy of Umar to be cursed, insulted, and finally burned. However, as relations between Iran and Sunni countries improved, the holiday was no longer observed (at least officially).[29]
  • In 1501 Ismail invited all the Shia living outside Iran to come to Iran and be assured of protection from the Sunni majority.[30]

الحمد لله

6 hours ago, Fahad Sani said:

Is there any similiar example in history where an entire shia state was converted to sunni like this. Share and let me know. Honsetly I have no knowledge on this so far.

Egypt

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Unregistered
9 hours ago, Fahad Sani said:

W.salam

 

Prophet Muhammad S.A.W.W words on unity.

It was narrated that 'Arfajah bin Shuraih Al-Ashja'I said:
"I saw the Prophet [SAW] on the Minbar addressing the people. He said: 'After me there will be many calamities and much evil behavior. Whoever you see splitting away from the Jama'ah or trying to create division among the Ummah of Muhammad [SAW], then kill him, for the Hand of Allah is with the Jama'ah, and the Shaitan is with the one who splits away from the Ummah, running with him.'" Sunan an-Nasa'i 4020


Maula Ali a.s words on unity.

“With regard to me, two categories of people will be ruined, namely he who loves me too much and the love takes him away from rightfulness, and he who hates me too much and the hatred takes him away from rightfulness. The best man with regard to me is he who is on the middle course. So be with him and be with the great majority of Muslims because Allah’s hand of protection is on keeping unity. You should beware of division because the one isolated from the group is a prey to Satan just as the one isolated from the flock of sheep is a prey to the wolf. Beware! Whoever calls to this course [of sectarianism], kill him, even though he may be under this headband of mine.” Nahjul Balagha, Sermon 126


Unity can only be seen among those who are on middle course (from both shias and sunnies) regarding Imam Ali a.s. Those who love him too much and those who hate him too much will never be part of unity.

By Maula Ali, you mean (Friend) not the original and intended meaning of Mawla.

We have had few, who used Nahjul Balagha or other sources to Teach us Unity/other concepts. One thing is always common, ThaY cherry pick and think we are in Kingerdarten./pre-school. We may be Laypeople in Hadith sciences, due to our yearly continuing education classes in Muharram very well versed in the Basic concepts. 

And No Unity/Middle course, here does not mean, abandoning Waliyah. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Unregistered
9 hours ago, Fahad Sani said:

 

In general: Two Extreme Groups in Fiqhi(jurisprudence) Terms.

Ghulat (i.e. those who believe one of the holy twelve Imams to be God or say that God has penetrated into him) and khawarij and Nawasib (i.e. those who are enemies of the holy Imams) are also impure. 

https://www.al-islam.org/islamic-laws-ayatullah-abul-qasim-al-khui/impure-things-najasat#infidel

*****

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Unregistered
9 hours ago, Fahad Sani said:


Maula Ali a.s words 

Your Thoughts on the words of Mawla Ali(as)

*****

Sermon 3: By Allah, the son of Abu Quhafah….

Known as the Sermon of ash-Shiqshiqiyah1

ومن خطبة له (عليه السلام) المعروفة بالشِّقْشِقِيَّة

وتشتمل على الشكوى من أمر الخلافة ثم ترجيح صبره عنها ثم مبايعة الناس له

Beware! By Allah, the son of Abu Quhafah (Abu Bakr)2 dressed himself with it (the caliphate) and he certainly knew that my position in relation to it was the same as the position of the axis in relation to the hand-mill. The flood water flows down from me and the bird cannot fly upto me. I put a curtain against the caliphate and kept myself detached from it.

Then I began to think whether I should assault or endure calmly the blinding darkness of tribulations wherein the grown up are made feeble and the young grow old and the true believer acts under strain till he meets Allah (on his death).

أَمَا وَالله لَقَدْ تَقَمَّصَها ابْنُ اَبى قُحافَةَ ، وَإِنَّهُ لَيَعْلَمُ أَنَّ مَحَلِّيَ مِنهَا مَحَلُّ القُطْبِ مِنَ الرَّحَا، يَنْحَدِرُ عَنِّي السَّيْلُ، وَلا يَرْقَى إِلَيَّ الطَّيْرُ، فَسَدَلْتُ دُونَهَا ثَوْباً، وَطَوَيْتُ عَنْهَا كَشْحاً، وَطَفِقْتُ أَرْتَئِي بَيْنَ أَنْ أَصُولَ بِيَد جَذَّاءَ، أَوْ أَصْبِرَ عَلَى طَخْيَة عَمْيَاءَ، يَهْرَمُ فيهَا الكَبيرُ، وَيَشِيبُ فِيهَا الصَّغِيرُ، وَيَكْدَحُ فِيهَا مُؤْمِنٌ حَتَّى يَلْقَى رَبَّهُ.

Proposes Patience in Absence of Supporters

ترجيح الصبرعلى فقد الاعوان

I found that endurance thereon was wiser. So I adopted patience although there was [Edited Out]ing in the eye and suffocation (of mortification) in the throat. I watched the plundering of my inheritance till the first one went his way but handed over the Caliphate to Ibn al-Khattab after himself.

(Then he quoted al-A`sha’s verse):

My days are now passed on the camel’s back (in difficulty) while there were days (of ease) when I enjoyed the company of Jabir’s brother Hayyan.3

فَرَأَيْتُ أَنَّ الصَّبْرَ عَلَى هَاتَا أَحْجَى، فَصَبَرتُ وَفي الْعَيْنِ قَذىً، وَفي الحَلْقِ شَجاً، أرى تُرَاثي نَهْباً، حَتَّى مَضَى الاْوَّلُ لِسَبِيلِهِ، فَأَدْلَى بِهَا إِلَى ابْنِ الْخَطّابِ بَعْدَهُ. ( ثم تمثل بقول الاعشى):

شَتّانَ ما يَومي عَاى كُوْرِها * و يَوْمُ حَيَّانَ أخي جابِرِ

It is strange that during his lifetime he wished to be released from the caliphate but he confirmed it for the other one after his death. No doubt these two shared its udders strictly among themselves. This one put the Caliphate in a tough enclosure where the utterance was haughty and the touch was rough. Mistakes were in plenty and so also the excuses therefore. One in contact with it was like the rider of an unruly camel. If he pulled up its rein the very nostril would be slit, but if he let it loose he would be thrown. Consequently, by Allah people got involved in recklessness, wickedness, unsteadiness and deviation.

فَيَا عَجَباً!! بَيْنَا هُوَ يَسْتَقِيلُها في حَيَاتِهِ إِذْ عَقَدَهَا لاخَرَ بَعْدَ وَفَاتِهِ ـ لَشَدَّ مَا تَشَطَّرَا ضَرْعَيْهَا ! ـ فَصَيَّرَهَا في حَوْزَة خَشْنَاءَ، يَغْلُظُ كَلْمُهَا، وَيَخْشُنُ مَسُّهَا، وَيَكْثُرُ العِثَارُ فِيهَا وَالاْعْتَذَارُ مِنْهَا، فَصَاحِبُهَا كَرَاكِبِ الصَّعْبَةِ، إِنْ أَشْنَقَ لَهَا خَرَمَ، وَإِنْ أَسْلَسَ لَهَا تَقَحَّمَ، فَمُنِيَ النَّاسُ ـ لَعَمْرُ اللهِ ـ بِخَبْط وَشِمَاس، وَتَلَوُّن وَاعْتِرَاض.

Nevertheless, I remained patient despite length of period and stiffness of trial, till when he went his way (of death) he put the matter (of Caliphate) in a group4 and regarded me to be one of them. But good Heavens! What had I to do with this “consultation”? Where was any doubt about me with regard to the first of them that I was now considered akin to these ones? But I remained low when they were low and flew high when they flew high.

One of them turned against me because of his hatred and the other got inclined the other way due to his in-law relationship and this thing and that thing, till the third man of these people stood up with heaving breasts between his dung and fodder. With him his children of his grand-father, (Umayyah) also stood up swallowing up Allah’s wealth5 like a camel devouring the foliage of spring, till his rope broke down, his actions finished him and his gluttony brought him down prostrate.

فَصَبَرْتُ عَلَى طُولِ الْمُدَّةِ، وَشِدَّةِ الْمحْنَةِ، حَتَّى إِذا مَضَى لِسَبِيلِهِ جَعَلَهَا في جَمَاعَة زَعَمَ أَنَّي أَحَدُهُمْ. فَيَاللهِ وَلِلشُّورَى! مَتَى اعْتَرَضَ الرَّيْبُ فِيَّ مَعَ الاْوَّلِ مِنْهُمْ، حَتَّى صِرْتُ أُقْرَنُ إِلَى هذِهِ النَّظَائِرِ! لكِنِّي أَسفَفْتُ إِذْ أَسَفُّوا، وَطِرْتُ إِذْ طَارُوا، فَصَغَا رَجُلُ مِنْهُمْ لِضِغْنِه، وَمَالَ الاْخَرُ لِصِهْرهِ، مَعَ هَن وَهَن. إِلَى أَنْ قَامَ ثَالِثُ القَوْمِ، نَافِجَاً حِضْنَيْهِ بَيْنَ نَثِيلهِ وَمُعْتَلَفِهِ، وَقَامَ مَعَهُ بَنُو أَبِيهِ يَخْضَمُونَ مَالَ اللهِ خَضْمَ الاْبِل نِبْتَةَ الرَّبِيعِ، إِلَى أَنِ انْتَكَثَ عَلَيْهِ فَتْلُهُ، وَأَجْهَزَ عَلَيْهِ عَمَلُهُ، وَكَبَتْ بِهِ بِطْنَتُهُ.

Allegiance paid to ‘Ali

مبايعة علي (عليه السلام(

At that moment, nothing took me by surprise, but the crowd of people rushing to me. It advanced towards me from every side like the mane of the hyena so much so that Hasan and Husayn were getting crushed and both the ends of my shoulder garment were torn. They collected around me like a herd of sheep and goats. When I took up the reins of government one party broke away and another turned disobedient while the rest began acting wrongfully as if they had not heard the word of Allah saying:

That abode in the hereafter, We assign it for those who intend not to exult themselves in the earth, nor (to make) mischief (therein); and the end is (best) for the pious ones. (Qur’an, 28:83)

فَمَا رَاعَنِي إلاَّ وَالنَّاسُ إليَّ كَعُرْفِ الضَّبُعِ، يَنْثَالُونَ عَلَيَّ مِنْ كُلِّ جَانِب، حَتَّى لَقَدْ وُطِىءَ الحَسَنَانِ، وَشُقَّ عِطْفَايَ، مُجْتَمِعِينَ حَوْلي كَرَبِيضَةِ الغَنَمِ. فَلَمَّا نَهَضْتُ بِالاْمرِ نَكَثَتْ طَائِفَةٌ، وَمَرَقَتْ أُخْرَى، وَفَسَقَ [وقسط] آخَرُونَ كَأَنَّهُمْ لَمْ يَسْمَعُوا اللهَ سُبْحَانَهُ يَقُولُ: (تِلْكَ الدَّارُ الاخِرَةُ نَجْعَلُهَا للَّذِينَ لاَ يُريدُونَ عُلُوّاً في الاَرْضِ وَلاَ فَسَاداً وَالعَاقِبَةُ لِلْمُتَّقِينَ(،

Yes, by Allah, they had heard it and understood it but the world appeared glittering in their eyes and its embellishments seduced them. Behold, by Him who split the grain (to grow) and created living beings, if people had not come to me and supporters had not exhausted the argument and if there had been no pledge of Allah with the learned to the effect that they should not acquiesce in the gluttony of the oppressor and the hunger of the oppressed I would have cast the rope of Caliphate on its own shoulders, and would have given the last one the same treatment as to the first one. Then you would have seen that in my view this world of yours is no better than the sneezing of a goat.

بَلَى! وَاللهِ لَقَدْ سَمِعُوهَا وَوَعَوْهَا، وَلكِنَّهُمْ حَلِيَتَ الدُّنْيَا في أَعْيُنِهمْ، وَرَاقَهُمْ زِبْرِجُهَا! أَمَا وَالَّذِي فَلَقَ الْحَبَّةَ، وَبَرَأَ النَّسَمَةَ، لَوْلاَ حُضُورُ الْحَاضِرِ، وَقِيَامُ الْحُجَّةِ بِوُجُودِ النَّاصِرِ، وَمَا أَخَذَ اللهُ عَلَى العُلَمَاءِ أَلاَّ يُقَارُّوا عَلَى كِظَّةِ ظَالِم، وَلا سَغَبِ مَظْلُوم، لاَلقَيْتُ حَبْلَهَا عَلَى غَارِبِهَا، وَلَسَقَيْتُ آخِرَهَا بِكَأْسِ أَوَّلِها، وَلاَلفَيْتُمْ دُنْيَاكُمْ هذِهِ أَزْهَدَ عِنْدِي مِنْ عَفْطَةِ عَنْز!

(It is said that when Amir al-mu’minin reached here in his sermon a man of Iraq stood up and handed him over a writing. Amir al-mu’minin began looking at it, when Ibn `Abbas said, “O’ Amir al-mu’minin, I wish you resumed your Sermon from where you broke it.” Thereupon he replied, “O’ Ibn `Abbas it was like the foam of a Camel which gushed out but subsided.” Ibn `Abbas says that he never grieved over any utterance as he did over this one because Amir al-mu’minin could not finish it as he wished to.)

قالوا: وقام إِليه رجل من أهل السوادعند بلوغه إلى هذا الموضع من خطبته، فناوله كتاباً، فأقبل ينظر فيه، فلمّا فرغ من قراءته قال له ابن عباس: يا أميرالمؤمنين، لو اطَّرَدت مَقالتكَ من حيث أَفضيتَ! فَقَالَ(عليه السلام): هَيْهَاتَ يَابْنَ عَبَّاس! تِلْكَ شِقْشِقَةٌ هَدَرَتْ ثُمَّ قَرَّتْ! قال ابن عباس: فوالله ما أَسفت على كلام قطّ كأَسفي على ذلك الكلام أَلاَّ يكون أميرالمؤمنين (عليه السلام) بلغ منه حيث أراد.

Al-Sharif al-Radi says: The words in this sermon “like the rider of a camel” mean to convey that when a camel rider is stiff in drawing up the rein then in this scuffle the nostril gets bruised, but if he lets it loose in spite of the camel’s unruliness, it would throw him somewhere and would get out of control.“ashnaq an-naqah” is used when the rider holds up the rein and raises the camel’s head upwards. In the same sense the word “shanaqa an-naqah” is used. Ibn as-Sikkit has mentioned this in Islah al-Mantiq.

Amir al-mu’minin has said “ashnaqa laha” instead of “ashnaqaha”, this is because he has used this word in harmony with “aslasa laha” and harmony could be retained only by using both in the same form. Thus, Amir al-mu’minin has used “ashnaqa laha” as though in place of “in rafa`a laha ra’saha”, that is, “if he stops it by holding up the reins.”

قال الشريف الرضي: قوله (عليه السلام) في هذه الخطبة: «كراكب الصعبة إن أشنق لها خرم، وإن أسلس لها تقحم» يريد: أنه إذا شدد عليها في جذب الزمام وهي تنازعه رأسها خرم أنفها، وإن أرخى لها شيئاً مع صعوبتها تقحمت به فلم يملكها، يقال: أشنق الناقة، إذا جذب رأسها بالزمام فرفعه، وشنقها أيضاً: ذكر ذلك ابن السكيت في «إصلاح المنطق». وإنما قال (عليه السلام): «أشنق لها» ولم يقل: «أشنقها»، لانه جعله في مقابلة قوله: «أسلس لها»، فكأنه (عليه السلام) قال: إن رفع لها رأسها يعني أمسكه عليها بالزمام .

Alternative Sources for Sermon 3

(1) Al-Mufid, al-Jamal, 62;

(2) Ibn Qubbah, al-'Insaf, see Ibn Abi al-Hadid, Sharh, I, 69, see also `Abd al-Zahra', I, 309-310;

(3) al-Saduq, Ma`ani, 344;

(4) al-Hasan ibn `Abd Allah al-`Askari, from him al-Saduq in Ma`ani;

(5) Ibn `Abd Rabbih, al-`Iqd, IV, see `Abd al-Zahra', I, 311-312 and al-Majlisi, Bihar, vol.8, 160;

(6) al-Ka`bi (d.319/931) - see Ibn Abi al-Hadid, Sharh, I, 69;

(7) Ibn al-Jawzi, al-Manaqib, see Bihar, vol.8, 160; and `Abd al-Zahra', I, 310-11;

(8) al-Mufid, al-'Irshad, 135;

(9) al-Qadi `Abd al-Jabbar, al-Mughni, see al-Ghadir, VII, 83;

(10) al-Saduq, `Ilal, bab al-`illat allati min ajliha taraka Amir al-Mu'minin (A) mujahadat ahl al-khilaf;

(11) Abu Sa`id al-'Abi, Nathr al-durar and Nuzhat al-'adib, see `Abd al-Zahra', I, 313;

(12) al-Murtada, al-Shafi, 203, 204;

(13) al-Haffar, al-'Insaf from him al-Tusi in al-'Amali;

(14) al-Tusi, al-'Amali, I, 392;

(15) Qutb al-Din Rawandi, Sharh, from Ibn Mardawayh and al-Tabarani;

(16) Sibt ibn al-Jawzi, Tadhkirah, 133;

(17) al-Harrani, Tuhaf, 313;

(18) al-Murtada, Sharh al-Khutbat al-Shiqshiqiyyah, seeA`yan al-Shi`ah, vol. 41, p. 195;

(19) al-Tabarsi, al-'Ihtijaj; I, 95; for a detailed discussion of sources, see `Abd al-Zahra', I, 309-324.

https://www.al-islam.org/nahjul-balagha-part-1-sermons/sermon-3-Allah-son-abu-quhafah

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, mayf321d said:

 

Egypt

Any source to know when and how it happened in egypt??

 

12 hours ago, S.M.H.A. said:

By Maula Ali, you mean (Friend) not the original and intended meaning of Mawla.

We have had few, who used Nahjul Balagha or other sources to Teach us Unity/other concepts. One thing is always common, ThaY cherry pick and think we are in Kingerdarten./pre-school. We may be Laypeople in Hadith sciences, due to our yearly continuing education classes in Muharram very well versed in the Basic concepts. 

And No Unity/Middle course, here does not mean, abandoning Waliyah. 

 


True and correct meaning of word Mawla depends on the context in which it was being used. While originally word Mawla has so many meanings.

Brother, I am not here teaching anyone lessons on unity. I just shared my opinion to the OP based on my very little knowledge & understanding.

And I agree with you unity doesnt mean to abandone the wilayah/leadership. I also havnt said this in my previous post. These were my words indeed. WHich are in fact words of Imam Ali a.s as mentioned in sermon 126. And they are in general sense.

22 hours ago, Fahad Sani said:


Unity can only be seen among those who are on middle course (from both shias and sunnies) regarding Imam Ali a.s. Those who love him too much and those who hate him too much will never be part of unity.

 

12 hours ago, S.M.H.A. said:

In general: Two Extreme Groups in Fiqhi(jurisprudence) Terms.

Ghulat (i.e. those who believe one of the holy twelve Imams to be God or say that God has penetrated into him) and khawarij and Nawasib (i.e. those who are enemies of the holy Imams) are also impure. 

https://www.al-islam.org/islamic-laws-ayatullah-abul-qasim-al-khui/impure-things-najasat#infidel

*****

Exactly, these are the two extreme groups, which are the main obstacle for unity. But definition of these terms is broad, what you have mentioned in paranthesis is limited one. Because there are many ways in which a person becomes ghulat or nasibi or khariji.

 

12 hours ago, S.M.H.A. said:

Your Thoughts on the words of Mawla Ali(as)

*****

Sermon 3: By Allah, the son of Abu Quhafah….

Known as the Sermon of ash-Shiqshiqiyah1

Alternative Sources for Sermon 3

(1) Al-Mufid, al-Jamal, 62;

(2) Ibn Qubbah, al-'Insaf, see Ibn Abi al-Hadid, Sharh, I, 69, see also `Abd al-Zahra', I, 309-310;

(3) al-Saduq, Ma`ani, 344;

(4) al-Hasan ibn `Abd Allah al-`Askari, from him al-Saduq in Ma`ani;

(5) Ibn `Abd Rabbih, al-`Iqd, IV, see `Abd al-Zahra', I, 311-312 and al-Majlisi, Bihar, vol.8, 160;

(6) al-Ka`bi (d.319/931) - see Ibn Abi al-Hadid, Sharh, I, 69;

(7) Ibn al-Jawzi, al-Manaqib, see Bihar, vol.8, 160; and `Abd al-Zahra', I, 310-11;

(8) al-Mufid, al-'Irshad, 135;

(9) al-Qadi `Abd al-Jabbar, al-Mughni, see al-Ghadir, VII, 83;

(10) al-Saduq, `Ilal, bab al-`illat allati min ajliha taraka Amir al-Mu'minin (A) mujahadat ahl al-khilaf;

(11) Abu Sa`id al-'Abi, Nathr al-durar and Nuzhat al-'adib, see `Abd al-Zahra', I, 313;

(12) al-Murtada, al-Shafi, 203, 204;

(13) al-Haffar, al-'Insaf from him al-Tusi in al-'Amali;

(14) al-Tusi, al-'Amali, I, 392;

(15) Qutb al-Din Rawandi, Sharh, from Ibn Mardawayh and al-Tabarani;

(16) Sibt ibn al-Jawzi, Tadhkirah, 133;

(17) al-Harrani, Tuhaf, 313;

(18) al-Murtada, Sharh al-Khutbat al-Shiqshiqiyyah, seeA`yan al-Shi`ah, vol. 41, p. 195;

(19) al-Tabarsi, al-'Ihtijaj; I, 95; for a detailed discussion of sources, see `Abd al-Zahra', I, 309-324.

https://www.al-islam.org/nahjul-balagha-part-1-sermons/sermon-3-Allah-son-abu-quhafah

This sermon is perhaps the most controvercial one in the entire nahjul balagha. It seems like a fabrication. Because it is in contadiction to other sermons. and also to thousands of other narrations from majority of sahabah, including Imam Ali a.s himself.

Question:

Is there any sermon in nahjul balagha where event of ghadir is mentioned? As of my knwoledge there is no any such sermon. Plz correct me if I am wrong.

 

Edited by Fahad Sani
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
21 minutes ago, Fahad Sani said:

Any source to know when and how it happened in egypt??

 

google it. Saladin (LA) killed a lot of Shia Muslims in Egypt and converted it from a Shia Muslim Fatimid state to a sunnite state.

Edited by mayf321d
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Unregistered
4 hours ago, Fahad Sani said:

 

https://www.al-islam.org/articles/authenticity-nahjul-balaghah-sayyid-fadhil-milani

http://www.islamquest.net/en/archive/question/fa6913

http://www.sistani.org/english/qa/02414/

Just in case, some one has any doubts

*****

Fact remains, that people cherry pick passages/hadith/sermon. (beyond that is not the scope here)

Fact remains, that by writing Maula/Mawla someone can assume that you are a Shia. And take what you are presenting as the doctrine of Shi'a's. There may be were differences in opinions(based on context/meaning of the words), and it could be easily exploited.

Fiqhi(Jursit) position is very clear, beyond that is subjective and utilized to cause division. And enemy can come n many shape or forms. open/hidden/etc...Actually obstacle to Unity are the ones exploiting the subjective area.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Unregistered
4 hours ago, Fahad Sani said:


True and correct meaning of word Mawla depends on the context in which it was being used. While originally word Mawla has so many meanings.

So, the meaning that you understand it to be (whatever you rational is not the issue here for this conversation, at this point, unless you press it)

No one understood the 23 years of teaching/message. If no, Divine appointment and announcement at Ghadir Khumm.

*****

ASSUME

If it was only Mawla in terms of Friend & the Hadith of the two weighty things. Should have implied. That the Mawla be present, at any succession discussion, and if someone other chosen to be the Administrator for any other reason. The Mawla and the the one with most knowledge of the Book of Allah(awj). The door to the City of Knowledge. Be the Top Religious Authority "Jurist" of the Muslims Nation? 

Unless, its not only the rejection of the Qur'anic concept/command. But total disregard of the alleged mean of Mawla and Hadith of the two weighty things.

If you like you can share  your opinion(No obligation).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
On 8/4/2016 at 8:21 AM, Tawheed313 said:

Sufi's, Ashari's, Baralevi's, maybe even Malaki's and some groups of the other of the Madhabs will often be sympathetic to unity. Hanbali's, some Hanafi's , but especially Hanbali's  - the father of salafi's- will be intolerant and hateful. 

This is not always the case, and i could be wrong in my judgement.

Ashari is an aqeeda school while maliki is a fiqh school. Most malikis are asharis. Barelvis are hanafis. Barelvis consider Shia kuffar as Ahmed reda khan al barelvi gave a fatwa declaring shia to be kuffar. Malikis in north africa probably hate shia just as much if not more than Saudis do. Either way its just taqiyya shia that are running this unity non-sense. Unity with sunnis who praise the killers of Fatima is worse than unity with ibliss. 

Edited by Bint Abbas
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Unregistered

Narrated Al-Miswar bin Makhrama:

Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) said, "Fatima is a part of me, and he who makes her angry, makes me angry."

حَدَّثَنَا أَبُو الْوَلِيدِ، حَدَّثَنَا ابْنُ عُيَيْنَةَ، عَنْ عَمْرِو بْنِ دِينَارٍ، عَنِ ابْنِ أَبِي مُلَيْكَةَ، عَنِ الْمِسْوَرِ بْنِ مَخْرَمَةَ، أَنَّ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم قَالَ ‏ "‏ فَاطِمَةُ بَضْعَةٌ مِنِّي، فَمَنْ أَغْضَبَهَا أَغْضَبَنِي ‏"‏‏.‏

Reference : Sahih al-Bukhari 3714

In-book reference : Book 62, Hadith 64

http://sunnah.com/bukhari/62/64

It is common sense that every child his part of his father. But what about this, what does this really mean? May be Muslims can pick up Hadith Kisa (hadith of the cloak)  to understand it. & Surah Qadr 97. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Bint Abbas said:

Ashari is an aqeeda school while maliki is a fiqh school. Most malikis are asharis. Barelvis are hanafis. Barelvis consider Shia kuffar as Ahmed reda khan al barelvi gave a fatwa declaring shia to be kuffar. Malikis in north africa probably hate shia just as much if not more than Saudis do. Either way its just taqiyya shia that are running this unity non-sense. Unity with sunnis who praise the killers of Fatima is worse than unity with ibliss. 

Yes, you are correct, asharis, atari's and matruidis are the three main aqeedah schools. Maliki's, shafi's, hanbali's, hanafi's are schools of fiqh, although hanbali's are also at times, a school of aqeedah. You can be hanafi fiqh and hanbali aqeedah. 

There is no doubt, within every community, due to political, socio-political, secterian factors, there will be groups who will despise other groups.

However, i have found that while there is some rift, there is far less rift between us and barelevi's , than us and those who claim to be part of the modern-salafi movement. It does not mean every single barelevi scholar has been kind to us, rather it means on key aqeedah issues, such as tawassul, istigatha and such things, we are close to them. They have quite a strong hatred for 'wahhabisim'. Ofcourse, when you get people claiming Umm Aisha was a promicious woman, killed Muhammed s.a.w, slept with Talha, those disgusting human beings are ofcourse going to anger sunni brothers and sisters by holding beliefs that are against the majority view even in our own madhab.

Yet, if we are able to live in peace, where we respect one anothers symbols, they are far more receptive than the salafi's to unity, coexistence, peace and brotherhood. 

It's also interesting you class some of our greatest Ulema as merely 'taqqiya shia running unity nonsens'. I would take the views of Ayatullah Sistani (rh), Khamanei (rh), Fadlullah (rh) , Makarem Shirazi (rh), Khomeini (rh), Mutahari (rh) , who possess far more insight, wisdom and understanding, over the words of the fitnah mongerer, yasser al habib.

Our imams a.s gave us absolutely clear commands not to bring about disunity in the Ummah, nor bring about animosity, nor insult their symbols. Anyone who acts contrary i swear by Allah azwj is going against clear commands and will be - if Allah so wills- questioned.

There is absolutely nothing noble about allowing ones emotions to overrun , and breaking clear commands. There is nothing brave about it. Our Prophet s.a.w and Imams a.s give the command and we obey, without putting in our own opinions or emotions.

Edited by Tawheed313
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
Just now, Tawheed313 said:

Yes, you are correct, asharis, atari's and matruidis are the three main aqeedah schools. Maliki's, shafi's, hanbali's, hanafi's are schools of fiqh, although hanbali's are also at times, a school of aqeedah. You can be hanafi fiqh and hanbali aqeedah. 

There is no doubt, within every community, due to political, socio-political, secterian factors, there will be groups who will despise other groups.

However, i have found that while there is some rift, there is far less rift between us and barelevi's , than us and those who claim to be part of the modern-salafi movement. It does not mean every single barelevi scholar has been kind to us, rather it means on key aqeedah issues, such as tawassul, istigatha and such things, we are close to them. They have quite a strong hatred for 'wahhabisim'. Ofcourse, when you get people claiming Umm Aisha was a promicious woman, killed Muhammed s.a.w, slept with Talha, those disgusting human beings are ofcourse going to anger sunni brothers and sisters by holding beliefs that are against the majority view even in our own madhab.

It's also interesting you class some of our greatest Ulema as merely 'taqqiya shia running unity nonsens'. I would take the views of Ayatullah Sistani (rh), Khamanei (rh), Fadlullah (rh) , Makarem Shirazi (rh), Khomeini (rh), Mutahari (rh) , who possess far more insight, wisdom and understanding, over the words of the fitnah mongerer, yasser al habib.

 

 

Hanbali is not an aqeeda school. However Hanbalis are exclusive Atharis.

Barelvis have much in common with the shia that is true. They are probably the closet of the sunnis to the shia in belief. However it is from their belief that Shia are kuffar. They hate wahabis, deobandis, ahmadis and shia. As for what you said about Aisha, that is all in our books. Sheikh Yassir did not invent that. If you want us to hide what is in our books and belief in order to please sunnis thats your problem. 

Not sure why you put rh around people who are alive. As for Sistani seeing the situation in Iraq he has reasons fo his fatwas. I wont comment on the rest. Not sure why you dont mention the opinions of the likes of Grand Ayatollah Sadiq Shirazi? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Bint Abbas said:

Hanbali is not an aqeeda school. However Hanbalis are exclusive Atharis.

Barelvis have much in common with the shia that is true. They are probably the closet of the sunnis to the shia in belief. However it is from their belief that Shia are kuffar. They hate wahabis, deobandis, ahmadis and shia. As for what you said about Aisha, that is all in our books. Sheikh Yassir did not invent that. If you want us to hide what is in our books and belief in order to please sunnis thats your problem. 

Not sure why you put rh around people who are alive. As for Sistani seeing the situation in Iraq he has reasons fo his fatwas. I wont comment on the rest. Not sure why you dont mention the opinions of the likes of Grand Ayatollah Sadiq Shirazi? 

I never stated Hanbali are an aqeedah school - but the fact you can be a hanafi in fiqh and a hanbali in aqeedah, which is a fact so they can act as an aqeedah school per say. So it isn't simply a matter of hanbalis, hanafi's all being schools of fiqh, but that the hanbali's have that special position whereby you have people who follow hanbali in aqeedah despite being another madhab in fiqh.

Ayatullah Sistani has absolutely forbidden lanah , insulting, or abusing the symbols of our brothers in the sunni madhab everywhere.

This is a tactic used by Yasser Habib, and those against unity, peace, and coexistence, to claim Ayatullah Sistani is against shia-sunni unity else where, but only supports it in Iraq. This , with respect, is deceitful.

I don't mention the opinions of Ayatullah Sadiq Shirazi because they aren't the major and dominant opinion.

Edited by Tawheed313
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Unregistered

True Unity will be achieved, with clear understanding of  the Truth( as per the Qur'an and Authentic Traditions). No one has commanded us to not speak the Truth in an academic manner. Any one who say, that is a liar and probably working to ensure nothing comes out and everything stays hidden.Under the pretext of a slogan(s), wrongly utilized to silence the Truth.


We should just , have an academic discussion.(No emotions for ALL sides, unless you are looking to derail the Thread).Let's not get involve in infighting, My Jurist vs Yours. This is what "TheY" desire. Distract us, so we are not able to show a united front.(Shia/Shia Unity First?)

(Kindly, see Islamic Law(s) of any Jursit/Maraja- and under stand the context of any opinion on Unity- under it)

https://www.al-islam.org/islamic-laws-ayatullah-abul-qasim-al-khui/impure-things-najasat#infidel

 

Edited by S.M.H.A.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, S.M.H.A. said:

True Unity will be achieved, with clear understanding of  the Truth( as per the Qur'an and Authentic Traditions). No one has commanded us to not speak the Truth in an academic manner. Any one who say, that is a liar and probably working to ensure nothing comes out and everything stays hidden.Under the pretext of a slogan(s), wrongly utilized to silence the Truth.


 

I say this not to boast, but because there has been a consistent attempt to misinterpret what i am saying, and even my own intentions and character. There has not been a user other than me who has posted on this thread who has made more posts and threads on shiachat, as well as other forums, academically criticising the first three Caliphs, Umm Aisha, and Muawiyah, as well as Yazid, than i have.

This perpetual misconception that i am advocating people not to speak the truth , is false. 

What i am saying is the same as that our imams a.s commanded us to do so, and the same our Ulema have commanded us to do so:

1. When you talk about revered symbols of other schools, do so in an academic way, a respectful way that will open their hearts to the truth, or at least, be more conducive in doing so. This does not mean do not speak the truth or lie - but when discussing sensitive topics, be very careful about word choice and the manner in which one talks.

2. Do not call Umulmumineen Aisha a promicious woman who slept with Talha on the way to basra as Yassir Habib likes to quote, which is absolutely against the view point of the majority of our scholars. Do not claim she killed Muhammed s.a.w, which again is not a view held by the majority of our scholars. Do not abuse, mock or insult other symbols.

Do not spend ample ammounts of time, like Mr Yasser Habib, talking about the back-passage of certain companions revered by other schools. What on earth is the wisdom behind doing such ?

What i am saying is as per clear guidance of our imams a.s and clear guidance of the major ulema. [ barring Ay Sadiq shirazi ]. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, S.M.H.A. said:

True Unity will be achieved, with clear understanding of  the Truth( as per the Qur'an and Authentic Traditions).
 

Unity does not mean we expect sunni's to abandon their madhab and aqeedah and agree with us. Nor does it mean we abandon our own beliefs and compromise them either.

It means uniting on what is common, and agreeing to, in a proper and respectful manner, discussing politely what is not. It means fostering love, friendship, trust, and building networks and roots within each others communities, and making our Ummah stronger and more united.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Unregistered

Not sure why people have guilty conscious. Why everything is against them. Those were general comments.(Me included). 

There is no compulsion in religion. If we talk about the Truth, why is t that someone needs to get offended? 

Is saying, if there was no Divine appointment/announcement, and if Mawla meant only a Friend. What about the succession process. Or a Hadith that informs a True Muslim, about Sayedda Fatima Az Zahra (sa) . Fadak, Saqifa, Karbala etc...

Any Academic discussion to Further the Truth. Is somehow, know been linked to insults someones special figures? 

Not sure what, Wisdom is behind this? It would seem fishy to me.

Link to comment
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...