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

Sheikh Zaid al Salami exposed by Tawhidi!

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

  • Veteran Member
23 minutes ago, baradar_jackson said:

Re: newspapers lying

Bro, real newspapers lie about wars that destroy millions of lives. You think a tabloid is incapable of lying about one person?

 

This.

 

Note the thread title.

Don't you find it a bit strange that he himself doesn't explicitly accuse them of lying? Has he denied sending the messages? Or taking the pictures? No. I'm not even clear on what exactly his defenders think he has or hasn't done. It seems that you want to have it both ways, to pretend he is innocent, while at the same time trying to downplay the seriousness of it just in case he is guilty.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 193
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Based on the messages, how can you possibly think that he was looking without lust? It was the whole point of the messages! Do you seriously think he was just pointing out that she had less than ideal

OK I posted some quick reactions, which I regret but right now this is the most important topic on shiachat for a variety of reasons so certain things need to be said. Unfortunately many people w

I felt a need to respond to this thread and incident so please hear me out. I do not know the Shaykh personally at all, and have only seen some of his video clips that he has made and some have been s

Posted Images

  • Advanced Member
3 minutes ago, Haydar Husayn said:

Well, that's his fault. If he actually was innocent in any way, then he should say so, and state what it is that is untrue. Innocent people don't give these kind of lawyerly responses to accusations. But of course, he knows that it's not important whether he is innocent or guilty, he just has to create room for doubt, and that's what he is trying to do.

The whole point of this is not to say he is completely innocent (we don't know what he is). 

The whole point of this is not to be quick to accusation and not relying on proofs that are not sound and do not meet Islamic standards. And only accuse after the Islamic verdict has been given.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
Just now, E.L King said:

The whole point of this is not to say he is completely innocent (we don't know what he is). 

The whole point of this is not to be quick to accusation and not relying on proofs that are not sound and do not meet Islamic standards. And only accuse after the Islamic verdict has been given.

Short of two male witnesses looking over his shoulder as he sent the messages and pictures, I don't see how this could be proven to your satisfaction. According to what you seem to think are acceptable standards, someone could appear in porrnography, and as long as there weren't two male witnesses, everyone would have to ignore the video evidence and pretend like nothing happened. There is a difference between the burden of evidence needed to convict someone in an Islamic court, which due to the possible severe penalties needs to be extremely high, and the level of evidence needed to decide if someone is guilty in day to day life.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
1 minute ago, Haydar Husayn said:

Short of two male witnesses looking over his shoulder as he sent the messages and pictures, I don't see how this could be proven to your satisfaction. According to what you seem to think are acceptable standards, someone could appear in porrnography, and as long as there weren't two male witnesses, everyone would have to ignore the video evidence and pretend like nothing happened. There is a difference between the burden of evidence needed to convict someone in an Islamic court, which due to the possible severe penalties needs to be extremely high, and the level of evidence needed to decide if someone is guilty in day to day life.

In actual fact it requires the same amount of evidence with the exception of you personally being there. And I already gave you proof, you accuse someone of adultery and you are satisdied by the proof given to you. The Islamic court hears about it, you are now expected to prove your claim or you are liable for slander. What do you do?

As for appearing in a pornographic video, that may count as proof if the Islamic Judge is satisfied by it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
30 minutes ago, E.L King said:

In actual fact it requires the same amount of evidence with the exception of you personally being there. And I already gave you proof, you accuse someone of adultery and you are satisdied by the proof given to you. The Islamic court hears about it, you are now expected to prove your claim or you are liable for slander. What do you do?

As for appearing in a pornographic video, that may count as proof if the Islamic Judge is satisfied by it.

So the Islamic judge can use whatever evidence he wants, but nobody else can? And what if you don't have an Islamic judge available?

Are you really telling me that if a scholar appeared in a pornographic video, and didn't deny that it was him, then we would have to give the benefit of the doubt and continue to treat him with respect as if nothing had happened?

Let me ask you this, do you think that there is at least enough evidence for this person to have to answer questions, or do you not think he should have to do even that?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
29 minutes ago, Haydar Husayn said:

So the Islamic judge can use whatever evidence he wants, but nobody else can? And what if you don't have an Islamic judge available?

Are you really telling me that if a scholar appeared in a pornographic video, and didn't deny that it was him, then we would have to give the benefit of the doubt and continue to treat him with respect as if nothing had happened?

Let me ask you this, do you think that there is at least enough evidence for this person to have to answer questions, or do you not think he should have to do even that?

The Islamic judge can use the evidence which he sees is compatible with Islamic standards. You can't do that.

No not treat him with respect as if nothing happened, rather with suspicion.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest silasun

Message from Sheikh Zaid al-Salami (for all those who jumped to conclusions and accused him straight away):

Message from Sheikh Zaid Alsalami.
Sydney/Australia 
Thursday 4/5/2017
7th of Sha'ban 1438

"O you who believe, if a profligate person (fasiq) should bring you some news, verify it..." [Quran 49:6]

I have chosen to stay away from FB for a while, until Islamophobic bigots settle down a bit.

I apologise for wasting the valuable time of others for this petty insignificant issue that didn't need any attention, but the agenda and motive of those attacking is clear.

This low grade, far from reliable, Islamiphobic media-outlet mixed everything together, portraying me as a misogynist womeniser, and other things only for one purpose of trying to defame me. I will be pursuing legal action against them and all parties involved.

My dear brothers and sisters, Islamophobia comes in many shapes and sizes, and unfortunately, my family and I are being attacked not for personal reasons but rather because through me they wish to attack Islam.

It's clear that the Islamophobic media have an agenda to promote liberal, compromising, deviant personalities and are pushing them at us as role model Muslims, whilst they work tirelessly to malign and character assassinate scholars who are working effortlessly in the community.

It's easy to become a target of vilification. Living in the age of technology and social media it is very easy for things to be manipulated, and this has become a common avenue when trying to defame individuals and groups.

Very sadly in the case of some Muslims, the source needs no verification, and is automatically thrown into the grapevine.

My activities have always revolved around my community, especially my involvement with the youth, and I pride myself on the relationship I have formed over the years with the developing young community in Sydney. I have strived to keep myself approachable, but at the same time upholding a level of respect, reverence whilst keeping within the boundaries of Shar'.

Throughout my involvement, I have helped guide the community to the best of my ability which has helped me advance and develop not only my scholarly skills, but my personal dealings with others. But not all my relationships have ended positively. Unfortunately, sometimes serving others comes at a cost..... Betrayal is the worst.

These screenshots were released in an obscure manner to potray a deceptive illustration as a part of a personal attack by certain individuals whose goal was to diminish my image in the community.

Anything can be taken out of context, misconstrued and falsified for the purpose of ruining one's personality, and the more public the figure is the more devastating the reaction can be.

Things were put together, images were altered, comments were mixed into each other to better incriminate me. Accusations were thrown in, and sly evil cunning Islamophobic journalism was used.

Sadly, my children were also targeted and have been deeply affected by this article.

My humble request is to avoid discord, and let everything settle down so we can all get back to our work and anticipate towards being the best in what we do; united and as one.

Haq will prevail.

 

 

 

--

Isn't it amazing how this all blew up just days after I posted his statement condemning Tawhidi (the only one I have found from a Shia Sheikh in the West)? If he was such a sleaze then this would have come up much earlier, not straight after his condemnation of "The Imam of Peace".

All I can say is that I can't explain how disappointed I am that this thread was used in a manner to promote this as the truth - there is no doubt that it is haram in Shariah to do such a thing. Anybody who has spent some time reading Shariah would realise that.

I just hope that he forgives those who behaved in such an irresponsible manner. It's embarressing

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest silasun
10 hours ago, DigitalUmmah said:

ok so his reply is that everything is made up, he is completely innocent and the situation was manipulated to make him feel bad.

looks like his lottery has just come up then because he can now sue the paper for defamation of character. maulvi saab is gonna be driving to jummah in a bentley lol. it would be good for him to show screenshots of his own phone to highlight the lies. 

You have no shame.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

@DigitalUmmah @notme @Haydar Husayn

You guys disappoint me honestly you guys have taught me a lot about shia(you can't really trust the lot of them) no wonder many shia in the world get oppressed it's because of themselves half the time they easily fall for the propaganda of the enemy. 

When the imam of our time comes  I can't wait too see the reactions of people who call themselves shia who are like you now, to the propaganda of the enemy.

"oh he came wayyy too early shouldn't he know not too come out at this time?" 

"Oh well the New York Times says he is not the imam so it has to be true" 

"Washingtonpost called imam a terrorist imam Mahdi should know better then to err... act the way he's acting."

"I can't let my children spend too much time under him he gives them wayy to much false expectations and high hopes they need to learn reality and the world is not such a nice place"

Edited by Al Hadi
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
38 minutes ago, silasun said:

I apologise for wasting the valuable time of others for this petty insignificant issue that didn't need any attention, but the agenda and motive of those attacking is clear.

This low grade, far from reliable, Islamiphobic media-outlet mixed everything together, portraying me as a misogynist womeniser, and other things only for one purpose of trying to defame me. I will be pursuing legal action against them and all parties involved.

I look forward to seeing this legal action, but unfortunately it's a common tactic to tell one's supporters that legal action will be pursued, and then not following through with it. I would be amazed if this even went to court, let alone if he won.

38 minutes ago, silasun said:

My dear brothers and sisters, Islamophobia comes in many shapes and sizes, and unfortunately, my family and I are being attacked not for personal reasons but rather because through me they wish to attack Islam.

It's clear that the Islamophobic media have an agenda to promote liberal, compromising, deviant personalities and are pushing them at us as role model Muslims, whilst they work tirelessly to malign and character assassinate scholars who are working effortlessly in the community.

This may very well be true, but it's really just a diversion tactic. The motives of those behind this have nothing to do with the truth or falsehood of the claims.

38 minutes ago, silasun said:

It's easy to become a target of vilification. Living in the age of technology and social media it is very easy for things to be manipulated, and this has become a common avenue when trying to defame individuals and groups.

This is again true, but he hasn't explained in what way things were manipulated, and it's not easy to see how it was possible in this case.

38 minutes ago, silasun said:

Very sadly in the case of some Muslims, the source needs no verification, and is automatically thrown into the grapevine.

My activities have always revolved around my community, especially my involvement with the youth, and I pride myself on the relationship I have formed over the years with the developing young community in Sydney. I have strived to keep myself approachable, but at the same time upholding a level of respect, reverence whilst keeping within the boundaries of Shar'.

Throughout my involvement, I have helped guide the community to the best of my ability which has helped me advance and develop not only my scholarly skills, but my personal dealings with others. But not all my relationships have ended positively. Unfortunately, sometimes serving others comes at a cost..... Betrayal is the worst.

I don't know how this is relevant, unless he is trying to excuse his messages under the guise of 'involvement with the youth'.

38 minutes ago, silasun said:

These screenshots were released in an obscure manner to potray a deceptive illustration as a part of a personal attack by certain individuals whose goal was to diminish my image in the community.

He seems to be admitting that the screenshots are real (because he says 'released', rather than 'fabricated'), which makes it impossible for him to be completely blameless, because no matter what the context, the tone and language was inexcusable. The motives of those who released them are again besides the point.

38 minutes ago, silasun said:

Anything can be taken out of context, misconstrued and falsified for the purpose of ruining one's personality, and the more public the figure is the more devastating the reaction can be.

Things were put together, images were altered, comments were mixed into each other to better incriminate me. Accusations were thrown in, and sly evil cunning Islamophobic journalism was used.

If things have been taken out of context, then he should give the real context. I would love to know in what possible context he can justify those messages. Of course, a lot of what he says is clearly factually true. Images were altered, simply from the fact that they blanked out some names. Does that mean they were altered in a way that 'better incriminates' him? It's hard to say. Just to recap, here is the sum of the evidence against him:

Quote

Sheikh Zaid Alsalami, a Shia imam who has previously travelled to Iran for religious instruction, shared an image of a woman in a low-cut top, taken from behind, on WhatsApp.
'I arrived. This was her. Walahi. No bra,' he said, using the Arabic term for 'I swear to Allah'.
However, the sheikh declined to say if he or someone else took the images, even though the WhatsApp messages featured his mobile number.
'I don't really know if I took that or not. What's wrong with someone taking a picture like that? I don't understand,' he told Daily Mail Australia.

Did the Daily Mail misquote him? He doesn't make any claims of being misquoted, so I assume not. So does he defend taking those pictures and posting them to whatsapp?

Quote

Sheikh Zaid Alsalami's WhatsApp image featuring a woman at the airport and sleazy messages

Is he claiming these messages were altered, or that he didn't make them? Is there a context in which the messages would be ok? Do people on this forum talk like this with their friends? I hope that isn't the case. It might just about be understandable for some hormonal teenagers, but certainly not for any adults, let alone married ones, and even less so ones claiming to be scholars.

Quote

In another message featuring images of a woman's legs, Sheikh Zaid described another woman as being 'mutt-able'.

I'm not going to post the relevant screenshot, because of the uncovered legs, which in itself tells you something. A common convention on this forum is that we don't post such pictures. So why would a Shaykh think it's ok to have such pictures posted in a Whatsapp group?

Quote

The religious leader declined to say if he took the images and posted them to WhatsApp.
'I don't understand why you're calling me and asking me about something which I think you wish to incriminate me with,' he said. 
However, he didn't discount someone else posting the images from his phone.
'Actually, I would trust my phone with random people. I have no problem with that,' he said.

Is he still claiming that someone else might have posted them from his phone? Does he really expect us to believe that he 'trusts his phone to random people'?

Quote

Sheikh Zaid also uploaded a selfie of himself next to a scantily-clad Victoria's Secret model post at Sydney airport.

Again, I'm not going to post the picture on here, so why would he upload it?

Quote

The shiekh also shared a WhatsApp image describing his discomfort with sitting next to a woman on a plane because of his sexual urges

At least in this image, it's not clear which messages are his, if any. So if he has been misrepresented anywhere, it's likely to be here.

Unless he is going to claim that any of this stuff has been faked, I don't see how the old 'I was taken out of context' excuse can hold any weight. In what way was he taken out of context? As for the other nonsense in the Daily Mail article, it's not relevant to us. Of course they wrote a lot of rubbish. It's what they do. But that doesn't mean that some of the evidence against him isn't pretty damning.

38 minutes ago, silasun said:

Sadly, my children were also targeted and have been deeply affected by this article.

My humble request is to avoid discord, and let everything settle down so we can all get back to our work and anticipate towards being the best in what we do; united and as one.

Haq will prevail.

If you want Haqq to prevail, then just give a coherent explanation of the real context of the messages, and explain how you were misrepresented. All he has given here are red herrings and appeals to emotion.

 

It's sad that so many of you are taken in by this stuff. I have a respect for those who say that this hasn't been proven to the standards required in Islam. I don't agree, but at least it's a position I can respect, and doesn't require you to believe he is innocent. I have no idea how those who are actually trying to argue he is innocent make any sense of that in their minds.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
16 minutes ago, Al Hadi said:

@DigitalUmmah @notme @Haydar Husayn

You guys disappoint me honestly you guys have taught me a lot about shia(you can't really trust the lot of them) no wonder many shia in the world get oppressed it's because of themselves half the time they easily fall for the propaganda of the enemy. 

When the imam of our time comes  I can't wait too see the reactions of people who call themselves shia who are like you now, to the propaganda of the enemy.

"oh he came wayyy too early shouldn't he know not too come out at this time?" 

"Oh well the New York Times says he is not the imam so it has to be true" 

"Washingtonpost called imam a terrorist imam Mahdi should know better then to err... act the way he's acting."

"I can't let my children spend too much time under him he gives them wayy to much false expectations and high hopes they need to learn reality and the world is not such a nice place"

What propaganda do you think I've fallen for? Please tell me specifically what it is about the article that you think is false. And don't start talking about Iran or Hezullah, or other irrelevant matters. I just want to know about the specific claims surrounding his Whatsapp messages.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Moderators

@Al Hadi I'm not saying he's guilty. I'm just saying I would err on the side of caution. He works with youth, right? So maybe parents should be more attentive to what he is teaching and what example he is setting. 

If the pictures and text messages are entirely fake he should say so. There are experts who can verify whether they have been modified or sent from a fraudulent account. If they were taken/sent, but he claims there was somehow some legitimate context he has made a serious error in judgement. He hasn't clearly denied anything, nor has he expressed any regret, so I'll wait and see. Meanwhile I wouldn't trust him with my children. I won't hold it against anyone who chooses to put their youth under his tutelage, I just think the alleged misbehavior is serious enough to warrant caution for now. 

Edited by notme
Typo
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
11 minutes ago, Haydar Husayn said:

What propaganda do you think I've fallen for? Please tell me specifically what it is about the article that you think is false. And don't start talking about Iran or Hezullah, or other irrelevant matters. I just want to know about the specific claims surrounding his Whatsapp messages.

Read my previous posts about what is considered a sinful glance and what isn't note I posted clear fatawa. also @baradar_jackson made a good point on how we shouldn't jump right to conclusions there is a certain way men talk with one another. Also it wasn't only "Iran" or "Hezbollah" I read the whole article and much of the time they were jumping to the worst possible conclusions with texts that could be interpreted in different ways. That is called propaganda.

Edited by Al Hadi
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
18 minutes ago, Al Hadi said:

Read my previous posts about what is considered a sinful glance and what isn't note I posted clear fatawa. also @baradar_jackson made a good point on how we shouldn't jump right to conclusions there is a certain way men talk with one another. Also it wasn't only "Iran" or "Hezbollah" I read the whole article and much of the time they were jumping to the worst possible conclusions with texts that could be interpreted in different ways. That is called propaganda.

So in other words, you don't think there is anything wrong with posting such messages or pictures?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
1 hour ago, Haydar Husayn said:

So in other words, you don't think there is anything wrong with posting such messages or pictures?

I'm saying we should judge a brother with the best intentions possible it's a duty too a Muslim let alone a shaykh who on his wattsapp with some youth(which was supposed to be private!) texted some things that can be interpreted in different ways. I am interpreting it the best way possible as a Muslim brother. 

Also keep in mind if your still not convinced. If it is the case that you think he did sin then your supposed to try and cover it up. It's haram to reveal the flaw of a brother who is not a fasiq and could/may repent. Not join in with the enemies of Islam in bashing him. 

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

Covering up rumours and innuendos is what the Catholic Church did with their pedos priests. The best solution to them was to pretend it never happened and move the priest to another school or church and say nothing in warning to the new setting. This protection or forgiveness or wahtever it was, worked for a while until the numbers of people victimized grew and grew and the legal system held them accountable.  

Anytime youth are involved with a leader and esp a religous leader, all rumours and seemingly strange behaviour (and this behaviour does appear to be strange) need to be fully investigated and not ignored.  Leaders and educators of children have absolute unfettered access to vulnerable children and need to be held to the highest standard with no apologetics.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Moderators
1 hour ago, Al Hadi said:

If it is the case that you think he did sin then your supposed to try and cover it up. It's haram to reveal the flaw of a brother who is not a fasiq and could/may repent.

I've been saying this from the beginning, but no one seems to care about gheeba lol.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
13 minutes ago, forte said:

Covering up rumours and innuendos is what the Catholic Church did with their pedos priests. The best solution to them was to pretend it never happened and move the priest to another school or church and say nothing in warning to the new setting. This protection or forgiveness or wahtever it was, worked for a while until the numbers of people victimized grew and grew and the legal system held them accountable.  

Anytime youth are involved with a leader and esp a religous leader, all rumours and seemingly strange behaviour (and this behaviour does appear to be strange) need to be fully investigated and not ignored.  Leaders and educators of children have absolute unfettered access to vulnerable children and need to be held to the highest standard with no apologetics.  

You should reread our Islamic laws. We aren't the Catholic Church thank God. A pedophile priest is a completely different scenario. Our Islamic laws have rules for dealing with specific scenarios. Also keep in mind because of the rules of ahlulbayt and how we are at least following them somewhat we don't have pedophile priests thankGod.

we should cover up the sin of this is one when only a kafir source is quoting the incident.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

I think it is a useless thread as whatever had been said in news report if that is true then people should contact Ayatullah Khamnei office for the action rather than spreading it among masses and slandering the person for his wrong deeds. 

And if it is propaganda which is quite common by enemies of Islam then we erred greatly by spreading rumor against an Alim.

Photoshop can do lot of tricks including such messages of whatsup so don't be judgemental.

May Allah help us to remain steadfast on the path of Masoomeen as

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
4 hours ago, Al Hadi said:

You should reread our Islamic laws. We aren't the Catholic Church thank God. A pedophile priest is a completely different scenario. Our Islamic laws have rules for dealing with specific scenarios. Also keep in mind because of the rules of ahlulbayt and how we are at least following them somewhat we don't have pedophile priests thankGod.

we should cover up the sin of this is one when only a kafir source is quoting the incident.

Please tell me what specific laws we have to deal with pedophiles working with children, because if there are no witnesses I doubt any of you would ever be willing to take such an accusation seriously, especially when you start from the position that there are no such people in the Shia community. What experience has taught us is that in any profession where there is an opportunity to work with children, you will find pedophiles. I doubt there aren't any at all, but given that it's so difficult to get people to come forward even amongst non-religious people in the West due to the 'shame' factor or the fear that nobody will believe them, it's not that surprising that we may not have heard of any cases.

As for this whole 'kafir source' nonsense, what do you do if no Shia source is able or willing to cover such things? The source is irrelevant. What is important is the evidence.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
5 hours ago, Al Hadi said:

I'm saying we should judge a brother with the best intentions possible it's a duty too a Muslim let alone a shaykh who on his wattsapp with some youth(which was supposed to be private!) texted some things that can be interpreted in different ways. I am interpreting it the best way possible as a Muslim brother. 

I don't mind interpreting things in the best way possible, but sometimes there is no good way of interpreting things. I'm sorry to say, but none of the explanations that have been offered make any sense.

5 hours ago, Al Hadi said:

Also keep in mind if your still not convinced. If it is the case that you think he did sin then your supposed to try and cover it up. It's haram to reveal the flaw of a brother who is not a fasiq and could/may repent. Not join in with the enemies of Islam in bashing him. 

Once again, nobody on this thread has revealed anything. We are reacting to something that has already being revealed, and at that point it's not our job to cover it up. To use the pedophile example again, would you say that if a 'kafir source' did an investigation into a pedophile working in a madrassa, then it would be our duty to cover it up because he might repent? If not, why not?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
5 hours ago, Hassan- said:

I've been saying this from the beginning, but no one seems to care about gheeba lol.

You don't read what I replied to you, do you? I've told you that the news was revealed publically, how can you then turn your eyes away from it? If a Sheikh, God forbid, committed a serious (haram) mistake or sin, and it was revealed, it would be very strange not to criticize him. Yes, I agree with you that the person(s) who revealed the story in the first incident committed gheba, but you can not accuse us, who are reading the story and discussing it, by having committed gheba. By this, you commit tuham' (accusation), which itself is haraam. 

Your arguments could be used in the Tawhidi-case (so to speak), where pro-Tawhidi guys could say "You reveal something, which was not publically", e.g., that Tawhidi, according to some, had a mental illness. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Moderators
28 minutes ago, Ali-F said:

You don't read what I replied to you, do you? I've told you that the news was revealed publically, how can you then turn your eyes away from it? If a Sheikh, God forbid, committed a serious (haram) mistake or sin, and it was revealed, it would be very strange not to criticize him. Yes, I agree with you that the person(s) who revealed the story in the first incident committed gheba, but you can not accuse us, who are reading the story and discussing it, by having committed gheba. By this, you commit tuham' (accusation), which itself is haraam. 

Your arguments could be used in the Tawhidi-case (so to speak), where pro-Tawhidi guys could say "You reveal something, which was not publically", e.g., that Tawhidi, according to some, had a mental illness. 

 

Did you read my reply to you on the second page? here:

Quote

Tawhidi does it in public continuesly, and doesn't care if he's exposed to the public. Salami or whatever his name is does not want his sins to be exposed in public, that's the difference. If you expose his sins which he wanted it to be concealed, it would be gheeba.

What's the difference between this thread and the dailymail? Both are spreading the news of what the guy did. If you didn't make this thread, none of us would have knew about this. 

Again, even if dailymail exposed him first, you are also doing the same as what dailymail is doing, which is exposing his sins to the public. For example if person A came to you and told you person B committed zina in secret, than you go along and tell someone else that person A told you person B committed zina, YOU and Person A committed gheeba for exposing person B's sin which he didn't want people to find out. In this case here, what you are doing is using dailymail's words and spreading it more into the public, letting others know of that individuals sins. You and dailymail have committed gheeba. Do you get it now? 

It isn't just you that's doing gheeba, it's everyone in this thread that's attacking him. This thread is one big gheeba fest.

Edited by Hassan-
Link to post
Share on other sites

@Al Hadi @silasun

do you believe that salami is innocent, and this is all a made up plot by the omnipresent zionist illuminati? because I noticed that whenever @Haydar Husayn breaks down exactly why salamis statement is a load of rubbish, and he clearly is responsible for the things that the news article says he is, neither of you can actually respond coherently. 

lets just make this as simple as possible, since complexity of thoughts obviously are beyond your grasp. 

he is a youth leader. 

there are actual screenshots of him acting in a way no Islamic youth leader should act.

he hasn't actually denied that he did the things in the screenshots, only some vague lawyer-ish statement about conspiracies, context and Islamophobia that hasn't convinced anyone over the mental age of 12. 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
3 hours ago, Hassan- said:

Did you read my reply to you on the second page? here:

Again, even if dailymail exposed him first, you are also doing the same as what dailymail is doing, which is exposing his sins to the public. For example if person A came to you and told you person B committed zina in secret, than you go along and tell someone else that person A told you person B committed zina, YOU and Person A committed gheeba for exposing person B's sin which he didn't want people to find out. In this case here, what you are doing is using dailymail's words and spreading it more into the public, letting others know of that individuals sins. You and dailymail have committed gheeba. Do you get it now? 

It isn't just you that's doing gheeba, it's everyone in this thread that's attacking him. This thread is one big gheeba fest.

 

I did the same as Daily Mail. I have no words. Thanks for the accusation. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
4 hours ago, notme said:

It isn't gheeba if the actions are public!

Anything posted anywhere on the internet is public! There is no internet anonymity or privacy! I don't know why people persist in this delusion. 

If he has an explanation, he needs to produce it. He probably needs to express remorse too; at minimum it appears he's guilty of poor judgement. 

It is from one article I don't think I have seen it other than from that article. However if the "sin" is public then if it is a Muslim brother we should cover the sin if the person is not a fasiq and doesn't want the sin to be public because he may repent. If the sinner continues in his sin despite being told otherwise then gheeba is an option but definitely going about it with the way people here are is wrong. Keep in mind that is if it was a sin which I still hold firmly that what we have on him by itself cannot say that.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Moderators
4 hours ago, notme said:

It isn't gheeba if the actions are public!

Anything posted anywhere on the internet is public! There is no internet anonymity or privacy! I don't know why people persist in this delusion. 

If he has an explanation, he needs to produce it. He probably needs to express remorse too; at minimum it appears he's guilty of poor judgement. 

His actions weren't MEANT to be in public, he was not intending his actions to be so, it doesn't matter if the whole world found out. He does NOT want people to know what he did or even talk about him.

Abu Dharr is narrated to have said: I said: “O Messenger of Allah, what is ghibah?” He replied: “(It is) to mention of your brother that which he detests.” I said: “O Messenger of Allah, what if that which is mentioned of him should actually be in him?” He replied: “Know that when you mention that which is in him, you have committed his ghibah, and when you mention that which is not in him, then you have slandered him.”

Generally speaking, if a real matter relating to a believer person is discussed in their absence so that they would be angry if they heard about it and is actually mentioned for humiliating them or considered in the common view as humiliation, it is backbiting and impermissible. That both parties know it, it is done in order to raise the children with good behaviors or the like does not justify backbiting. However, the ruling of backbiting does not apply to talking about good qualifies of somebody. There is no objection to giving information [about somebody] in consultation either.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
8 hours ago, DigitalUmmah said:

@Al Hadi @silasun

do you believe that salami is innocent, and this is all a made up plot by the omnipresent zionist illuminati? because I noticed that whenever @Haydar Husayn breaks down exactly why salamis statement is a load of rubbish, and he clearly is responsible for the things that the news article says he is, neither of you can actually respond coherently. 

lets just make this as simple as possible, since complexity of thoughts obviously are beyond your grasp. 

he is a youth leader. 

there are actual screenshots of him acting in a way no Islamic youth leader should act.

he hasn't actually denied that he did the things in the screenshots, only some vague lawyer-ish statement about conspiracies, context and Islamophobia that hasn't convinced anyone over the mental age of 12. 

 

 

Who said anything about zionist illuminati?

This is about: a) what is our shar'i duty when we are faced with rumors about a fellow believer, and b) the (fairly obvious) way in which the more active Shia scholars in the west have been targetted and disposed of (think back to Sh Farrokh and Sh Hamza). 

We know what A is (and as all of us know even if not all of us are acting upon it: it's not to descend on the sheikh like vultures), and we know that B is a reality.

This isn't some distant, unrealistic crazy cooky far-out theory that only crazy crazies propose. This is tangible reality. Trying to paint it as illuminati stuff is either disingenuous or ignorant.

A screenshot, really? In the days of modern technology we're gonna trust a screenshot? And not just a screenshot, but one provided by the Daily Tawhidi? Our standards are that high? lol

Again: innocent until proven guilty. This isn't a conspiracy theory nor an attempt to cover up everything and keep all the corruption hush-hush. (God knows what y'all would do if you were Catholics and had some real scandals; this is just some bored housewife/auntie stuff). This is just doing things according to what we're supposed to, and not becoming a society of animals.

One last anecdote to illustrate the importance of this matter, to those of you who insist on sticking with your first kneejerk reaction:

In Imam Khomeini's last will he told people not to trust if something was actually, for certain, written by him unless it has his handwriting. And while some may find that excessive, to this day there are western published materials which will quote him without even providing a source.

For those of you who are too prejudiced to take a lesson from the above anecdote, here's one from Sayyed Sistani: someone came to the Sayyed asking him to sign his risalat amali. The Sayyed refused.

Why, you ask?

He said he could not vouch for the contents of the book. This was HIS risalah. He couldn't vouch for the content, because he didn't know everyone who was involved in its publication and so on. This was the extent to which he cautioned himself.

Caution. Restraint. Due diligence.

Not rapid knee jerk reaction and mob mentality.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

Just watched some of those videos.   Watching that demo with the tight pink guy was weird enough, who the hell dresses up some little girl like that?  What was the point of that? That is one of the most bizarre things I have ever seen.  

I read some of his statements, he was quite hesitant to deny the accusations outright.  If most of this is fabricated then the very first instinct is to unequivocally deny all the accusations.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
On 5/1/2017 at 10:03 PM, Hassan- said:

Well said bro. Even if it was true that he did this, exposing ones concealed sins is gheeba. Im pretty sure he doesn't want his sins to be exposed in public like this, especially through the media. This thread should be deleted. It's nothing but gheeba.

I have to agree on that one. Astaghfirullah. Reading Nur (24:1-31) would solidify that statement.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

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

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

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

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

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


×
×
  • Create New...