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
Sign in to follow this  
Mansur Bakhtiari

Whats with all this Shirazi-Khamenei beef?

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

On 6/5/2017 at 7:09 AM, DigitalUmmah said:

guys lets all take it down a level. especially those of us who do not actually know anything about whats going on but reliably know to always repeat "herp derp shirazi r evil mmkay?" lines. 

the shirazi family was a very highly respected line of sayed scholars. lets get that clear from the start. they haven't suddenly popped up out of the ground in the last few years to destroy the glorious iranian revolution. 

they were involved quite heavily in politics, and were behind the tobacco protest in Iran 100ish years ago. 

the split between the shirazi family/ WFers because of a difference in interpretation of what structure the WF should take. the shirazi believe in WF mutlaqa as well, but believe it should be a committee, while sayed khomeini believed it should be a single person. 

after the revolution. the shirazis believed that they would have a larger role in the running of the country, however they were pretty much entirely sidelined. this is the core of the split. 

secondly, they do indeed have a legitimate grievance, with how the funeral of marja taqlid sayed muhammad shirazi was interrupted in the most disgraceful and disrespectful way. I believe that sayed muhammad baqir - again, a fully qualified marja taqlid - was kept under house arrest until he died as well. 

in our lifetimes, we can see that the "cult" of shirazis has grown and expanded all over the world. its just as toxic as the "cult" of WFers. both extremes are morons. both are wrong. both are damaging our ummah. the only difference is that the shirazi cult is always highlighted as the problem, while extreme WFers are tolerated or ignored. right here in the UK for example people are accusing the head of majalis ulema shia of being a "western agent" because, while he is an open WFer himself, he is not pro-WF "enough". 

in terms of attacking other scholars, the core of the issue is actually due to some shia scholars taking parts of their usul/aqeeda from the likes of the filthy maloon ibn arabi - a guy who literally said that shias have the blood of pigs - which many shia feel is not a very smart idea.

you will see scholars who just luuuuurve ibn arabi are the ones being attacked the most. I do not agree with their beliefs myself, I believe that anything which forms part of my aqeeda must only come from the Masumeen (as) and not a sufi heretic who hated shia. but what do I know. 

its easy to whitewash the likes of yasser habib/allahyari/the shirazis/etc because of their lack of akhlaaq or understanding of the implications of what they say in public. especially when it comes to yasser habibs obsession with talking about the male anus on the mimbar.

if they actually stopped being idiots and discussed their differences academically, they would probably have 100X as many followers, since much of what they believe is actually spot on. 

1.they aren't idiots. I also thought you weren't an usooli? Maybe I misunderstood. 

you can't say one is labeled more as evil when you have so many YouTube videos attacking ayatollah khamenei(ha). As for the example you mentioned I don't know the entire situation so I can't comment. I'll say though that shirazis earn their mark with their generally terrible insight, sticking on the side of the oppressors and not standing with the oppressed Simply because they believe in folding their hands while they pray. They go around disrespecting people's faith with no morality or ethics making Ahlulbayt(as) look like a bunch of angry and dogmatic people hellbent on insulting the people they respect. They insult Shia scholars (even ones that don't openly acknowledge ibn arabi beliefs like Shaykh Isa qassim(ha) where that filthy yasir habib calls him something along the lines of a worm) shaykh bahjat(ra) has been insulted by their likes @Mansur Bakhtiari just watch mujtaba Shirazi those videos are public. I even heard that filth insulted shaykh waheed.

those and more are why people don't like Shirazis in my view I feel they will go and fight the imam(as) of the time when he comes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Al Hadi said:

1.they aren't idiots. I also thought you weren't an usooli? Maybe I misunderstood. 

you can't say one is labeled more as evil when you have so many YouTube videos attacking ayatollah khamenei(ha). As for the example you mentioned I don't know the entire situation so I can't comment. I'll say though that shirazis earn their mark with their generally terrible insight, sticking on the side of the oppressors and not standing with the oppressed Simply because they believe in folding their hands while they pray. They go around disrespecting people's faith with no morality or ethics making Ahlulbayt(as) look like a bunch of angry and dogmatic people hellbent on insulting the people they respect. They insult Shia scholars (even ones that don't openly acknowledge ibn arabi beliefs like Shaykh Isa qassim(ha) where that filthy yasir habib calls him something along the lines of a worm) shaykh bahjat(ra) has been insulted by their likes @Mansur Bakhtiari just watch mujtaba Shirazi those videos are public. I even heard that filth insulted shaykh waheed.

those and more are why people don't like Shirazis in my view I feel they will go and fight the imam(as) of the time when he comes.

On Mujtaba Shirazi and his obvious extremism, I think @DigitalUmmahhas already spoken my thoughts.

On 6/5/2017 at 7:09 AM, DigitalUmmah said:

both extremes are morons. 

if they actually stopped being idiots and discussed their differences academically, they would probably have 100X as many followers, since much of what they believe is actually spot on. 

As for videos attacking Sayed Khamenei, made by many channels such as Pearls of Islam, AbuBakrZindiq and Aisha Kafira, that should definitely be condemned. And as for videos done by many WF'ers calling Yasser al Habib, Sayed Shirazi, so on agents of the West, as even Sayed Nasrullah has stooped down to that level, is a lame excuse, really. These people make their earnings off of donations from their followers, not 100 Shekel bills stuck in love notes from the FBI. It also doesn't help referring to Khamenei as "leader of the muslim ummah," as the bulk of the Muslim Ummah does not follow him in matters of fiqh, etc.

If we don't recognize that there are extremists on both sides, then we will get nowhere. The two Sayeds are grown men. Their followers are grown men. Why not meet up and resolve this! Issues regarding some Shirazi affiliates like Al Habib and Tawhidi can be discussed. Khamenei's stance on Muslim "unity," and his relations with Hezbollah which many Shirazi followers are critical of, can be discussed. We need to end this stupidity and extremism and replace it with dialogue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

WF is a blessed movement on uniting  shia under the banner of fighting oppression. In Lebanon Hizbullah is a pure shia movement that has pure intentions. They do not want to take over the world! They dont even take over any non shia neighbouring villages, even though they could in minutes if they wanted to. All they want to do is defend their people and liberate their lands from Israeli and takfiri weeds. THIS is a legitimate form of jihad that is justified! These people are the nicest most pious people I have met. You look at their faces, they are shia men smiling and loving. They dont fight for money, nor do they do it to expand their power. They fight as a service to God and ahul beyt.

So when you have any idiots that come and call sayyed hassan or sayyed khamanei an oppresor. he is sowing discord among shia. WF is a nation with army ranks and when you have people trying to shake the leadership of these ranks especially shia, he will be treated as an enemy.

people like SCers above are too immature to understand what these people are doing for them. Their ego wont let him conform to a foreign form of leadership which is the exact same problem as shirazi. They want to share power! It is all about power for them. This is not about power. 

Any movement needs a leader! not a committee. A leader that we trust is guided by Allah. and al hamdellah our leaders have shown to have light in them, while others only preach hate and hasbara. with idiotic subjects like tatbir and lanat being their problems. like little damn kids. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Mansur Bakhtiari said:

On Mujtaba Shirazi and his obvious extremism, I think @DigitalUmmahhas already spoken my thoughts.

As for videos attacking Sayed Khamenei, made by many channels such as Pearls of Islam, AbuBakrZindiq and Aisha Kafira, that should definitely be condemned. And as for videos done by many WF'ers calling Yasser al Habib, Sayed Shirazi, so on agents of the West, as even Sayed Nasrullah has stooped down to that level, is a lame excuse, really. These people make their earnings off of donations from their followers, not 100 Shekel bills stuck in love notes from the FBI. It also doesn't help referring to Khamenei as "leader of the muslim ummah," as the bulk of the Muslim Ummah does not follow him in matters of fiqh, etc.

If we don't recognize that there are extremists on both sides, then we will get nowhere. The two Sayeds are grown men. Their followers are grown men. Why not meet up and resolve this! Issues regarding some Shirazi affiliates like Al Habib and Tawhidi can be discussed. Khamenei's stance on Muslim "unity," and his relations with Hezbollah which many Shirazi followers are critical of, can be discussed. We need to end this stupidity and extremism and replace it with dialogue.

Well keep in mind the ones calling them agents of the west, are ulema themselves just search on google "sadiq Shirazi mi6" and see what you find.

the difference is when they do that 1. They have a lot of evidence some of which I have seen myself which is already convincing. 

2. They don't call sadiq shirazi or habib a zindiq, kafir or najis. I can't say the same for the other side though. 

As for khamenei being the leader I know many Shia who don't follow him for taqleed that say he is "the leader". He is the leader of our political and social affairs not everyone's Fiqh. He is only the leader of people's Fiqh who accept him as their marja taqleed. Many Iran don't do his taqleed but on political issues they all do (or at least generally speaking). This is how he is the leader. I believe the most followed marja in Iran is shaykh makarem. Yet again on political issues Khamenei(ha) is the one who people follow there. And we should be the same. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, kirtc said:

WF is a blessed movement on uniting  shia under the banner of fighting oppression. In Lebanon Hizbullah is a pure shia movement that has pure intentions. They do not want to take over the world! They dont even take over any non shia neighbouring villages, even though they could in minutes if they wanted to. All they want to do is defend their people and liberate their lands from Israeli and takfiri weeds. THIS is a legitimate form of jihad that is justified! These people are the nicest most pious people I have met. You look at their faces, they are shia men smiling and loving. They dont fight for money, nor do they do it to expand their power. They fight as a service to God and ahul beyt.

So when you have any idiots that come and call sayyed hassan or sayyed khamanei an oppresor. he is sowing discord among shia. WF is a nation with army ranks and when you have people trying to shake the leadership of these ranks especially shia, he will be treated as an enemy.

people like SCers above are too immature to understand what these people are doing for them. Their ego wont let him conform to a foreign form of leadership which is the exact same problem as shirazi. They want to share power! It is all about power for them. This is not about power. 

Any movement needs a leader! not a committee. A leader that we trust is guided by Allah. and al hamdellah our leaders have shown to have light in them, while others only preach hate and hasbara. with idiotic subjects like tatbir and lanat being their problems. like little damn kids. 

 

The only real issue people had is when Sayed Nasrullah, whom I do respect very much, called Aisha Ummul Momineed and Sayeda. That obviously is an odd statement to come from a Shia. Of course I believe Hezbollah and WF are legitimate, blessed movements based on uniting Islam, but that doesn't mean it's free from being critiqued. If the Shirazi's don't agree with this system, they, as scholars, have a right to do so.

We shouldn't act like kids, especially not scholars. It's upon the both Sayeds to sort out this dilemme, really. Its a drain on the shia community.

11 hours ago, Al Hadi said:

Well keep in mind the ones calling them agents of the west, are ulema themselves just search on google "sadiq Shirazi mi6" and see what you find.

the difference is when they do that 1. They have a lot of evidence some of which I have seen myself which is already convincing. 

2. They don't call sadiq shirazi or habib a zindiq, kafir or najis. I can't say the same for the other side though. 

 

I found nothing except for 2 news articles and a video in urdu.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mansur Bakhtiari said:

I found nothing except for 2 news articles and a video in urdu.

Still something though right? But look at the content though. The scholar in the article ayatollah araki(ha) is very credible and he isn't acting like mujtaba shirazi when he is making his claims either. 

However what you found just now should already stir some suspicion, especially when you found it that easy. Imagine what happens when you actually search deeper like I have. As well as reflect on the information and take things in to context. Take into account the persons followers as well and things become pretty clear.

Edited by Al Hadi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mansur Bakhtiari said:

The only real issue people had is when Sayed Nasrullah, whom I do respect very much, called Aisha Ummul Momineed and Sayeda. That obviously is an odd statement to come from a Shia. Of course I believe Hezbollah and WF are legitimate, blessed movements based on uniting Islam, but that doesn't mean it's free from being critiqued. If the Shirazi's don't agree with this system, they, as scholars, have a right to do so.

Well if it's odd or not is up to the mujtahid to decide. Sayed Hassan was saying this in response to what al habib's fitna was causing. In those situations i would say it's definitely fine for him to say what he said. Besides she is umm al mumineen and call her sayeda, mistress Is also not a problem. Yes a person may have to be careful with the intention but aside from that there is no problem. Maybe if he said (ra) after her than we might have to question a little but not what he said especially in that context.

1 hour ago, Mansur Bakhtiari said:

 but that doesn't mean it's free from being critiqued. If the Shirazi's don't agree with this system, they, as scholars, have a right to do so.

We shouldn't act like kids, especially not scholars. It's upon the both Sayeds to sort out this dilemme, really. Its a drain on the shia community.

The problem is the Shirazis act like kids. If you know how to type in Arabic type Nasrallah al kathab [a'uthibillah and God forgive me] and see the other things the shirazi group has said like yasir al habib than come back and tell me who is the one acting like a kid and who isn't. 

But you need to understand we have some corrupt scholars. One of those scholars (not nasrallah and khamenei) is corrupt and trying to destroy the Shias like the corrupt scholars in the time of bani Israel. We need to figure out who those are. 

Edited by Al Hadi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Mansur Bakhtiari said:

The only real issue people had is when Sayed Nasrullah, whom I do respect very much, called Aisha Ummul Momineed

Do you have a problem with Allah, when he says the same thing?

 

Also, with regards to your discomfort on Sayed Khamenei being called 'leader of the ummah', the existence of this office is a legitimate jurisprudencial opinion held by many scholars, even apart from Sayed Khamenei and Sayed Sistani. The role of this hakim ash-shar'i has nothing to do with rulings of fiqh itself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Mansur Bakhtiari said:

The only real issue people had is when Sayed Nasrullah, whom I do respect very much, called Aisha Ummul Momineed and Sayeda. That obviously is an odd statement to come from a Shia. Of course I believe Hezbollah and WF are legitimate, blessed movements based on uniting Islam, but that doesn't mean it's free from being critiqued. If the Shirazi's don't agree with this system, they, as scholars, have a right to do so.

The Prophet is closer to the Believers than their own selves, and his wives are their mothers. Blood-relations among each other have closer personal ties, in the Decree of Allah. Than (the Brotherhood of) Believers and Muhajirs: nevertheless do ye what is just to your closest friends: such is the writing in the Decree (of Allah).
33:6

The Quran says it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, kirtc said:

The Prophet is closer to the Believers than their own selves, and his wives are their mothers. Blood-relations among each other have closer personal ties, in the Decree of Allah. Than (the Brotherhood of) Believers and Muhajirs: nevertheless do ye what is just to your closest friends: such is the writing in the Decree (of Allah).
33:6

The Quran says it.

Allah (aaz wa jal) in the  Qur'an also says other things about 'Aisha in Surah 66.

See this thread:

And this lecture: http://nudba.com/wp/the-incident-of-maghafeer-sayed-ammar-nakshawani/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, gotmuffins! said:

Allah (aaz wa jal) in the  Qur'an also says other things about 'Aisha in Surah 66.

See this thread:

And this lecture: http://nudba.com/wp/the-incident-of-maghafeer-sayed-ammar-nakshawani/

Sayyed Hassan and hezbullah are above you and your silly hatred about silly subjects. Neither you nor Shirazi are anywhere near their league of chivalry. Go buy some bassira

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What's all this rumble bumble? 

Just ask this, past 2-3 years, how many lectures on/related Hazrat Zaynab has the Shirazi affiliated scholars given? And ooooooh whyyyy so little????

From there....do some math......if you do the integrals and derivatives right, you will see things clearly. If not, you will always find them on Satellite TV and between Gucci and Dior shops in London!

Good luck peoples!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, kirtc said:

Sayyed Hassan and hezbullah are above you and your silly hatred about silly subjects. Neither you nor Shirazi are anywhere near their league of chivalry. Go buy some bassira

Dear brother, please don't personally attack my akhlaq or character. I have said nothing inflammatory towards you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, kirtc said:

Sayyed Hassan and hezbullah are above you and your silly hatred about silly subjects. Neither you nor Shirazi are anywhere near their league of chivalry. Go buy some bassira

Bro @gotmuffins! is cool he follows khamenei(ha) he used to be a shirazi. He already got some baseera.

Edited by Al Hadi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Al Hadi said:

Bro @gotmuffins! is cool he follows khamenei(ha) he used to be a shirazi though. He already got some baseera.

Thanks. Even if I wasn't moqallid of Khamenei--- the type of speech and accusations used above are unacceptable in my opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, gotmuffins! said:

Thanks. Even if I wasn't moqallid of Khamenei--- the type of speech and accusations used above are unacceptable in my opinion.

Forgive him. Please:cuddle:. I'm sure it was just a misunderstanding.

Edited by Al Hadi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, gotmuffins! said:

Thanks. Even if I wasn't moqallid of Khamenei--- the type of speech and accusations used above are unacceptable in my opinion.

Sayyed Hassan Nassrallah and all of hezbullah are men who decided they wanted to dedicate their lives for ahul beyt. They do not do it for the money or the power. They are men who want to fight for God and their country. Sayyed Hassan's son and many people including family members have been martyred defending against Israel and wahhabi scum. They give up their peaceful lives which btw is an option in Lebanon unlike other countries... You can easily just choose to go to the beach and drink coconut juice. But these people volunteered to leave this country and their peace to go fight terrorists for God. So when I see a shirazi or habibi that want to oppose shia heroes while they do nothing against the enemy except help them, I will be aggressive! Sorry I cannot respect shirazi or any of his followers even if it gets me banned from this site.

Edited by kirtc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, gotmuffins! said:

Allah (aaz wa jal) in the  Qur'an also says other things about 'Aisha in Surah 66.

See this thread:

And this lecture: http://nudba.com/wp/the-incident-of-maghafeer-sayed-ammar-nakshawani/

This has very little relevance to the fact that Sayed Nasrullah only repeated Allah's words when he called 'Aisha umm al-mu'mineen. The character of 'Aisha is not the discussion matter here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/9/2017 at 7:50 AM, kirtc said:

The Prophet is closer to the Believers than their own selves, and his wives are their mothers. Blood-relations among each other have closer personal ties, in the Decree of Allah. Than (the Brotherhood of) Believers and Muhajirs: nevertheless do ye what is just to your closest friends: such is the writing in the Decree (of Allah).
33:6

The Quran says it.

http://www.shiapen.com/comprehensive/ayesha/objections-to-shia-criticisms.html

and of course the links that bro/sis @gotmuffins! posted. 

I'm not here to debate the issue of Aisha, nor am I a follower of Shirazi or Khamenei. I'm just saying that two scholars who are having a feud, should meet up and discuss this! I have nothing against any scholars, I just don't like seeing scholars being insulted (Shirazi followers) and criticism of scholars being seen as slander (Khamenei followers). The two esteemed scholars should meet up and figure this out, and not let this continue any longer and cause more and more divisions in our community. So much for Shia/Sunni  unity when our scholars won't even discuss with each other.

And btw Ayatollah Makarem Shirazi seems to have no problem discussing with Sayed Sadiq, because this Ramadan they actually were sitting together at iftar along with many other scholars. Why can't it be the same with Sayed Khamenei?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Mansur Bakhtiari said:

http://www.shiapen.com/comprehensive/ayesha/objections-to-shia-criticisms.html

and of course the links that bro/sis @gotmuffins! posted. 

I'm not here to debate the issue of Aisha, nor am I a follower of Shirazi or Khamenei. I'm just saying that two scholars who are having a feud, should meet up and discuss this! I have nothing against any scholars, I just don't like seeing scholars being insulted (Shirazi followers) and criticism of scholars being seen as slander (Khamenei followers). The two esteemed scholars should meet up and figure this out, and not let this continue any longer and cause more and more divisions in our community. So much for Shia/Sunni  unity when our scholars won't even discuss with each other.

And btw Ayatollah Makarem Shirazi seems to have no problem discussing with Sayed Sadiq, because this Ramadan they actually were sitting together at iftar along with many other scholars. Why can't it be the same with Sayed Khamenei?

Calling Sayed Khamanei an oppressor is a big accusation, that's why. It also puts you in line with the enemies by saying it.

Edited by kirtc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, kirtc said:

Sayyed Hassan and hezbullah are above you and your silly hatred about silly subjects. Neither you nor Shirazi are anywhere near their league of chivalry. Go buy some bassira

My dear brother, @gotmuffins! actually switched his taqleed from Shirazi to Imam Khamenei. What he says about the meaning of mothers of believers is correct, it has nothing to do with piety or status, it's just a term used by Allah (awj) meaning we just can't marry the wives of the Prophet (saw) anymore. The reason why the great leader Sayed Hassan Nasrallah called Aisha 'ummul mumineen' was because he has massive amount of akhlaaq and wants unity between the Shias/Sunnis, as Lebanon is split between these two sects.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Hassan- said:

My dear brother, @gotmuffins! actually switched his taqleed from Shirazi to Imam Khamenei. What he says about the meaning of mothers of believers is correct, it has nothing to do with piety or status, it's just a term used by Allah (awj) meaning we just can't marry the wives of the Prophet (saw) anymore. The reason why the great leader Sayed Hassan Nasrallah called Aisha 'ummul mumineen' was because he has massive amount of akhlaaq and wants unity between the Shias/Sunnis, as Lebanon is split between these two sects.

good

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is important that we stop feuding and start dialogues and discussions. We have enough fitna's and beefs going around our Muslim Ummah as it is. We don't need anymore especially not within our own sect!

As a general rule, let's please not fall for any divide and conquer tactics.

May Allah guide us.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Mansur Bakhtiari said:

 And btw Ayatollah Makarem Shirazi seems to have no problem discussing with Sayed Sadiq, because this Ramadan they actually were sitting together at iftar along with many other scholars. Why can't it be the same with Sayed Khamenei?

Shows us a source to the bold part. Maybe a photo or something, please.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Mansur Bakhtiari said:

 

And btw Ayatollah Makarem Shirazi seems to have no problem discussing with Sayed Sadiq, because this Ramadan they actually were sitting together at iftar along with many other scholars. Why can't it be the same with Sayed Khamenei?

Never happened, and if it did, Ayatollah Makarem is a hardcore hezbollahi, he doesn't do anything publicly without getting the green light from Ayatollah Khamenei. But then again...never happened.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Salaam all,

Interesting topic, especially into a realm of Shiasm/politics I've not heard before.   I read a bit, not much concerning the post and to be honest I don't think I qualify to speak about much except I'm confused about something, please help me understand.

If Sayyid Sadiq Shirazi or his followers, are seen publicly disparaging other prominent scholars/leaders in the Shia realm (along with their struggle towards to support Palestine) and it's recorded/known,  yet people are on here saying we shouldn't say or accuse others/slander ------

My question is why isn't the focus on discrediting the credibility/merit of those Shirazi followers (not Shirazi if its not proven he's slandered) for disparaging and slandering other scholars?

Why are people here saying we shouldn't slander scholars who they themselves are slandering others, why are they any better or different? Shouldn't we shake our heads in disdain for any "scholar"/Imam/leader who publicly slanders/accuses/curses others who are respected Shia' as well?  I mean, if we're to follow Ideal Sunnah/AhlulBait akhlaq in Islam, isn't that the indicator that that person is untrustworthy for Knowledge/wisdom?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Al Hadi said:

Shows us a source to the bold part. Maybe a photo or something, please.

 

1 hour ago, repenter said:

Never happened, and if it did, Ayatollah Makarem is a hardcore hezbollahi, he doesn't do anything publicly without getting the green light from Ayatollah Khamenei. But then again...never happened.....

Sorry, you are right. I thought I saw Naser Makarem on a shirazi website news article, but it must have been a mistake. I see Ayatollah Wahid Khorasani meeting with him.

Kds_14132715027218.jpg.f9e0662ef0d2829ca380e6bf9536eaf8.jpg

 

 

 

 

 

 

I dont think anyone here has the guts to say they have more baseera then Sheikh Khorasani.....

39 minutes ago, wmehar2 said:

Salaam all,

Interesting topic, especially into a realm of Shiasm/politics I've not heard before.   I read a bit, not much concerning the post and to be honest I don't think I qualify to speak about much except I'm confused about something, please help me understand.

If Sayyid Sadiq Shirazi or his followers, are seen publicly disparaging other prominent scholars/leaders in the Shia realm (along with their struggle towards to support Palestine) and it's recorded/known,  yet people are on here saying we shouldn't say or accuse others/slander ------

My question is why isn't the focus on discrediting the credibility/merit of those Shirazi followers (not Shirazi if its not proven he's slandered) for disparaging and slandering other scholars?

Why are people here saying we shouldn't slander scholars who they themselves are slandering others, why are they any better or different? Shouldn't we shake our heads in disdain for any "scholar"/Imam/leader who publicly slanders/accuses/curses others who are respected Shia' as well?  I mean, if we're to follow Ideal Sunnah/AhlulBait akhlaq in Islam, isn't that the indicator that that person is untrustworthy for Knowledge/wisdom?

Sayed Sadiq Shirazi has not slandered anyone

And we also should have a line between slander and criticism. All scholars are open to criticism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Mansur Bakhtiari said:

Sayed Sadiq Shirazi has not slandered anyone

And we also should have a line between slander and criticism. All scholars are open to criticism.

A very good point taken.   There should be a line between slander/criticism well defined.   And it should be established first what is slander when someone says one is slandering.  Though it seems certain "followers" of Sayed Sadiq Shirazi seemed to be proven as slanderers according to some afore-posted videos - which of course is not implicating of Shrazi himself of slandering nor of his disposition.

Which I wonder, is Shirazi aware there are those who claim to follow him (which also in a sense represent him), that slander in the way they do?  It's such a dangerous thing to be a respected figure and have followers who act outside of what you would preach/teach.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mansur Bakhtiari said:

 

Sorry, you are right. I thought I saw Naser Makarem on a shirazi website news article, but it must have been a mistake. I see Ayatollah Wahid Khorasani meeting with him.

Kds_14132715027218.jpg.f9e0662ef0d2829ca380e6bf9536eaf8.jpg1.I dont think anyone here has the guts to say they have more baseera then Sheikh Khorasani.....

2.Sayed Sadiq Shirazi has not slandered anyone

3.And we also should have a line between slander and criticism. All scholars are open to criticism.

1.well maybe not us but I would be willing to say other scholars/Maraji do.  I have heard from one hawza student who talked about his wisdom in comparison to other Maraji and there were Maraji that were rated higher according to him. This photo shows this to me, honestly.

i also have trouble believing he's against tatbir with this photo as well. Cause he's visiting him. I have never seen him visit khamenei(ha) but I can't say for certain.

2.his brother has and he doesn't condemn him for it. He has given emamas to people who slander people (Yasir al Habib, and Tawhidi). When you have this kind of track record I wouldn't say for certain with 100% confidence that he doesn't slander anyone. 

3. Maybe academic criticism. But not calling a scholar whose name is fadhlullah to fadhlulshayton calling a scholar a zindiq and saying to another scholar that he's najis and spreads najasat. Note all this goes to the shirazi group that have done this. 

 

Edited by Al Hadi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Mansur Bakhtiari said:

 

Sorry, you are right. I thought I saw Naser Makarem on a shirazi website news article, but it must have been a mistake. I see Ayatollah Wahid Khorasani meeting with him.

Kds_14132715027218.jpg.f9e0662ef0d2829ca380e6bf9536eaf8.jpg

 

 

 

 

 

 

I dont think anyone here has the guts to say they have more baseera then Sheikh Khorasani.....

Sayed Sadiq Shirazi has not slandered anyone

And we also should have a line between slander and criticism. All scholars are open to criticism.

Meeting him in regards to what? Go ask his son why he met him, and only met him once. 

Secondly, you apparently havent googled enough to say Sadiq Shirazi hasn't slandered anyone. There is a youtube clip of Shirazi basically slandering Ayatollah Khomeini for 1 hour. You can call it criticism all you want, but when the person isn't alive to defend himself, then it's slander, specially when you accuse them of murder and slaughtering people. He is sitting safely in his house in Qum, with his "students" outside slandering everyone and not a single word is spoken by him to stop it. Tell him to go to Zahedan and speak, no escorts and protection, tell him to go to Saudi and speak like Nimr. 

Tell me do you know farsi?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, repenter said:

Secondly, you apparently havent googled enough to say Sadiq Shirazi hasn't slandered anyone. There is a youtube clip of Shirazi basically slandering Ayatollah Khomeini for 1 hour. You can call it criticism all you want, but when the person isn't alive to defend himself, then it's slander, specially when you accuse them of murder and slaughtering people

Would you mind showing us the video or linking it here?   I don't know Farsi, but it may be helpful to illustrate your point. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Al Hadi said:

1.well maybe not us but I would be willing to say other scholars/Maraji do.  I have heard from one hawza student who talked about his wisdom in comparison to other Maraji and there were Maraji that were rated higher according to him. This photo shows this to me, honestly.

i also have trouble believing he's against tatbir with this photo as well. Cause he's visiting him. I have never seen him visit khamenei(ha) but I can't say for certain.

2.his brother has and he doesn't condemn him for it. He has given emamas to people who slander people (Yasir al Habib, and Tawhidi). When you have this kind of track record I wouldn't say for certain with 100% confidence that he doesn't slander anyone. 

3. Maybe academic criticism. But not calling a scholar whose name is fadhlullah to fadhlulshayton calling a scholar a zindiq and saying to another scholar that he's najis and spreads najasat. Note all this goes to the shirazi group that have done this. 

 

1. Yeah, many maraji are higher than him. 

2. Yasser al Habib studied under Ayatollah Sayed Muhammad Reza al Shirazi (ra) while in Kuwait. 

As for Tawhidi, I think we need to let him (Shirazi) answer, and a lot of people are trying to inform his office.

13 hours ago, repenter said:

1. Secondly, you apparently havent googled enough to say Sadiq Shirazi hasn't slandered anyone. There is a youtube clip of Shirazi basically slandering Ayatollah Khomeini for 1 hour. You can call it criticism all you want, but when the person isn't alive to defend himself, then it's slander, specially when you accuse them of murder and slaughtering people.

2. He is sitting safely in his house in Qum, with his "students" outside slandering everyone and not a single word is spoken by him to stop it. Tell him to go to Zahedan and speak, no escorts and protection, tell him to go to Saudi and speak like Nimr. 

1. Muawiya and Yazid are not here to answer us, therefore lanat is slander.

Sayed Kamal Haidari takes quotes from books by Ibn Taymiyya, he is dead. Call Sayed Haidari a slanderer.

Many wrongs were commited by the IRI, nobody is allowed to criticize thise? We have to be fair in our criticism's. 

2. Tell Khamenei to go to Afghanistan.

And I speak farsi btw.

10 hours ago, Ron_Burgundy said:

People are going crazy....

Lol yeah

Share this post


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.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...