View on watch Lady of Heaven by Sheikh Al Habib

[Labyika ya Khamenei]

Peace be upon you, I heard that Lady of Heaven is prohibited and banned in Islamic countries what's the view of sistani and khamenei on Lady of Heaven is it permissible to watch?

[Ashvazdanghe]

Salam Imam Khamenei even before releasing  movie , has banned the making of any remarks insulting to the wives of prophets, including the Prophet Muhammad (S) which in similar  fashion grand Ayatollah Sistani has issued a Fatwa in similar fashion of Imam Khamenei ,so therefore, any kind of supporting  of the movie even watching the movie has not been allowed. 

Quote

Prominent Shiite authorities had issued several fatwas in the past, forbidding any sort of attack on Sunni figures and sites. These included Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani’s fatwa in October 2013, when he strictly forbade attacking Sunni sanctities, stating, “These are condemnable acts, and they violate the Shiite imams’ orders.” Moreover, the Supreme Guide of the Islamic Republic issued several fatwas on different occasions, in which he clearly forbade “offending Sunni figures and insulting the wives of the prophet.”

Read more: https://www.al-monitor.com/originals/2015/01/iran-iraq-fatwa-sunni-shiite-insults.html#ixzz77AhMT3GF

https://www.al-monitor.com/originals/2015/01/iran-iraq-fatwa-sunni-shiite-insults.html

Quote

In September 2010, Al-Habib angered Sunni Muslims by calling Aisha “an enemy of God”, which led Kuwait to revoke his citizenship, accusing him of trying to stir up discord among Muslims. 

Later, Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Ali Khamenei helped calm tensions between Shia and Sunni Muslims by issuing a fatwa banning the making of any remarks insulting to the wives of prophets, including the Prophet Muhammad (S).

Nevertheless, Al-Habib has claimed that his film conveys a message of love and peace. 

“It is a call to a better mindset dealing with challenges. I am very proud of this very high-quality cinematic production, as well as the entire team whose highly skilled backgrounds and ideas have contributed to its making. Indeed, the love for this great lady and the belief in her noble message released them,” Al-Habib has said.

In contrast, Iranian clerics Ayatollah Nasser Makarem Shirazi, Ayatollah Hossein Nuri Hamedani and Ayatollah Lotfollah Safi Golpayegani have banned watching the film, believing that it will cause discord among Muslims, particularly between Shia and Sunni Muslims. 

Before “The Lady of Heaven”, the films about the history of Islam produced in the Islamic countries like Iran, Kuwait, Qatar and Iraq helped promote unity among different Islamic schools of theology, but this film whose writer is known for causing division and discord, will deviate Muslims from unity

https://www.tehrantimes.com/news/456341/Is-The-Lady-of-Heaven-true-in-its-claim

[Ashvazdanghe]

https://www.tehrantimes.com/news/456341/Is-The-Lady-of-Heaven-true-in-its-claim

https://www.al-islam.org/mutual-respect-peaceful-co-existence-among-muslim/2-abusing-insulting-leaders-sunni-madhhab

Quote

This is one of the main reasons behind the recent verdicts prohibiting supporting and viewing this movie. Verdicts have been reported from a number of maraja’, including Ayatollah Makarem Shirazi, Ayatollah Nouri Hamadani, Ayatollah Ja’far Subhani, and Ayatollah Safi Golpaygani. Ayatollah Makarem Shirazi issued the following statement: “Without doubt, those who help to produce and release this film, as well as those who watch it have committed a mortal sin…It is quite likely that the enemies of Islam have a hand in all this and they have planned to incite a lot of bloodshed among the Muslims through this film. Therefore, all those who help in the production of this film will also be responsible for any Muslim blood that is spilled on its account…all Muslims must know that the messages intended to be conveyed through this film are neither the messages of Islam nor those of the Shia school.”

http://ijtihadnet.com/is-the-movie-lady-of-heaven-true-in-its-claim/

 

 

 

[Labyika ya Khamenei]

Thank you brother 

[Ali_Hussain]

Leaving aside the embarrassing levels of racism in the trailer alone, I don't really agree with fatawa banning the viewing of this film. The issue is that most people, the maraji' included, don't disagree with the events as we can assume will be depicted in the film, they are just embarrassed that Sunnis will know what they believe and that isn't a valid enough reason to prevent people watching something.

[root]

2 hours ago, Ali_Hussain said:

Leaving aside the embarrassing levels of racism in the trailer alone, I don't really agree with fatawa banning the viewing of this film. The issue is that most people, the maraji' included, don't disagree with the events as we can assume will be depicted in the film, they are just embarrassed that Sunnis will know what they believe and that isn't a valid enough reason to prevent people watching something.

I'm so happy we have shias just willy nilly disagreeing with fatwas given by prominent marjas, but also judges them as embarrassed. 

[Ali_Hussain]

40 minutes ago, root said:

I'm so happy we have shias just willy nilly disagreeing with fatwas given by prominent marjas, but also judges them as embarrassed. 

I didn't say that the fatwa was embarrassing I said that the ones issuing them are embarrassed that the world will know what they believe on a specific issue.

I also said that depicting Abu Bakr and co. as being black subsaharan Africans is embarrassing, the worst thing is that the people who support the film also believe that it is ok. Basically, as usual, Shias just being embarrassing.

[root]

25 minutes ago, Ali_Hussain said:

I didn't say that the fatwa was embarrassing I said that the ones issuing them are embarrassed that the world will know what they believe on a specific issue.

I also said that depicting Abu Bakr and co. as being black subsaharan Africans is embarrassing, the worst thing is that the people who support the film also believe that it is ok. Basically, as usual, Shias just being embarrassing.

"I didn't say that the fatwa was embarrassing I said that the ones issuing them are embarrassed that the world will know what they believe on a specific issue."

Oh, that makes it much better.......sigh

[Haji 2003]

4 hours ago, Ali_Hussain said:

The issue is that most people, the maraji' included, don't disagree with the events as we can assume will be depicted in the film, they are just embarrassed that Sunnis will know what they believe

Surely there is a distinction between believing something and smacking someone around the head with it.

You likely have beliefs about najasat that you do not explicitly share with associates and co-workers affected by that belief. And likely there are fundamentalist vegetarians who believe that you and I are murderers but they keep that opinion to themselves.

It's not about embarrassment it is about maintaining a civil society or indeed a society that can have some form of modus vivendi with the ones around it.

[Sumerian]

Everyone should follow their own marja on this issue.

Clearly not all of the mujtahids see eye to eye on these issues.

[Sirius_Bright]

8 hours ago, Ashvazdanghe said:

Imam Khamenei even before releasing  movie , has banned the making of any remarks insulting to the wives of prophets, including the Prophet Muhammad (S) which in similar  fashion grand Ayatollah Sistani has issued a Fatwa in similar fashion of Imam Khamenei ,so therefore, any kind of supporting  of the movie even watching the movie has not been allowed. 

I know about sayed Khamenei but Sayed Ali Sistani does not have any fatwa on the movie. Don't pick up his old fatwa and make conjecture and deviate people. 

If he has given direct fatwa on this movie, please post along with link to his website. 

[Sirius_Bright]

3 hours ago, Ali_Hussain said:

I also said that depicting Abu Bakr and co. as being black subsaharan Africans is embarrassing

Not 100 percent sure but Banu Tameem were black people. If it is true then Abu Bakr should be depicted as he was. 

[Guest Psychological Warfare]

fyi

Quote

A third hadith is from the Present Imam, Muhammad al-Mahdi, peace be upon him, who said in a reply to Ishaq ibn Ya'qub: "As far as newly occurring circumstances are concerned, you should turn (for guidance) to the narrators of our ahadith, for they are my proof over you just as I am Allah's proof."6

For the Marje-e-Taqlid and this "Institution" of Guidance to stay relevant. They should Only give view on New issues. 

If I was a Marja-e-Taqlid. Only two issues would have required my opinion. 

1) Situation in Iran in before the revolution.

2) recently, when ISIS was aiming to destroy the Shrines in Iraq. 

Beyond that there is Nothing warranting and opinion/fatwa/Guidance. 

Now in case of where we have Government of the Jurist, still that Jurist should work directly with the council or cabinet or learned scholars around them as they are able to understand his wisdom, and layman may not really understand the wisdom behind the opinion. and have them ( Mujtahids/Jurists) make the day to day administrative / foreign policy calls, under the Guidance and Approval (meaning road map needs to be given to them, and they follow the roadmap). Only interfere if the group around him is not able to see the wisdom or making a wrong decision an in private.  Stay as much as possible out o the view of the Media or make comments which will be printed used in media for opinions. Be the Overall Guardian of the State but behind the view of the layman/public. 

If we have this one vs the other opinion, public will discard them as useless for Overall Guidance. Marjaism along with Nationalism will be a lead to divide and conquer by enemy. 

You don't need an opinion if you can slander someone. it is a know/old issue with clear directives. Also you don't need an opinion on sending laan/intellectually informing the world of the Truth or facts no matter what the danger it may involve. These are clear old issues and have clear directives. 

Jurists should Only give opinion on New issues. Rest the public can refer to as they have been addressed. ( Qur'an/Hadith). or become irrelevant. 

Layman opinion, may be incomplete ...

[Zane Ibrahim]

If that's too long:

 

[Labyika ya Khamenei]

6 hours ago, Zane Ibrahim said:

If that's too long:

 

I can't take Sayed Ammar serious, most of the UK scholars they curse imam khamenei and tryna destroy unity with sunni brothers & sisters like disrespecting the companions right front of them or online etc.

[Guest Psychological Warfare]

Shia should Only talk about/mention Tragedy of Thursday, Tragedy of Saqifa, Tragedy of Fadaq, Battle of Jamal, Siffin and Karbala with other Muslims so this charge of attacking the revered personalities can be addressed. Now if ALL the above is against Unity.

We must be looking for social, economic, political Benefit/Acceptance /Progress. If you disregard Shia Unity,  I can assure you, Shia will never get it - , like Umar bin saad never got wheat of the city Ray.

We don't say Labbaik to any fallible. 

[Ashvazdanghe]

14 hours ago, Sirius_Bright said:

I know about sayed Khamenei but Sayed Ali Sistani does not have any fatwa on the movie. Don't pick up his old fatwa and make conjecture and deviate people. 

If he has given direct fatwa on this movie, please post along with link to his website. 

Salam this is not deviations  nevertheless  both of Imam Khamenei  & grand  Ayatollah  Sistani previously  have banned any insult toward revered Sunni figures which includes the movie too.

[Labyika ya Khamenei]

1 hour ago, Guest Psychological Warfare said:

Shia should Only talk about/mention Tragedy of Thursday, Tragedy of Saqifa, Tragedy of Fadaq, Battle of Jamal, Siffin and Karbala with other Muslims so this charge of attacking the revered personalities can be addressed. Now if ALL the above is against Unity.

We must be looking for social, economic, political Benefit/Acceptance /Progress. If you disregard Shia Unity,  I can assure you, Shia will never get it - , like Umar bin saad never got wheat of the city Ray.

We don't say Labbaik to any fallible. 

 

There's nothing wrong of saying Labbaik means here I am or I am here. 

Please provide evidence why I am not allowed to say it etc.

[Sirius_Bright]

1 hour ago, Ashvazdanghe said:

Salam this is not deviations  nevertheless  both of Imam Khamenei  & grand  Ayatollah  Sistani previously  have banned any insult toward revered Sunni figures which includes the movie too

Alaikas Salaam, 

Conjecture again. You don't have any fatwa specific to movie 'Lady of heaven' from Sayed Ali Sistani. 

[Diaz]

4 hours ago, Labyika ya Khamenei said:

most of the UK scholars they curse imam khamenei

Is this real? 
 

2 hours ago, Guest Psychological Warfare said:

We don't say Labbaik to any fallible.

Many people says Labbaika to sayid Khamenei or Sayid Nasrallah. 

[Ashvazdanghe]

8 minutes ago, Sirius_Bright said:

Alaikas Salaam, 

Conjecture again. You don't have any fatwa specific to movie 'Lady of heaven' from Sayed Ali Sistani. 

You are making conjecture just too for supporting  the movie & Shirazi grouplet which grand Ayatollah  Sistani never has supported the movie in contrast to propaganda of Yaser al Habib about his supoorting from movie which office of grand Ayatollah  Sistani has refuted any support from the movie in any social media in the name of grand  Ayatollah  Sistani which only it has mentioned  his official  site as only source for any confirmation or refutation  which there is no information  available  in his official site about supporting  or banning of movie nevertheless his followers according banning of insulting  to sunni revered figures by him have boycotted the movie .

Quote

Following Yasser al-Habib's claim that Ayatollah Sistani's office's referendums supported the film "Lady of Paradise", Ayatollah Sistani's office expressed its views on "social networks attributed to this authority of imitation."

Name of God

Greetings and best wishes for the longevity of the supreme authority of Ayatollah Sistani

Due to the increasing expansion of communication through social networks, recently many social pages (including: Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Telegram, etc.) in the name of His Holiness or his office to respond to religious issues and so on.

Does the office have an official or approved website or social page on the above networks?

Response

In Name of God

Mr. Sistani's office has no connection with the above-mentioned social sites and pages, and only www.sistani.org is the official and approved site.

 

Quote

Fake Propaganda of Yaser al Habib about supporting  of grand Ayatollah  Sistani in from the movie in Farsi/Persian & Arabic

https://www.hawzahnews.com/news/935291/آیا-دفتر-آیت-الله-العظمی-سیستانی-از-فیلم-بانوی-بهشت-حمایت-کرده

https://www.shia-news.com/fa/news/247477/آیا-دفتر-آیت-الله-سیستانی-از-فیلم-بانوی-بهشت-حمایت-کرده-است

 

[Ashvazdanghe]

2 hours ago, Diaz said:

Is this real? 
 

Many people says Labbaika to sayid Khamenei or Sayid Nasrallah. 

Salam some groups & people  likewise Shiazi grouplet are doing cursing on any Marja which they don't  agree with him.

Saying labbayk to them is different  than saying labbaik to infallible  Imams because  we know they are fallible persons nevetheless  saying Labbaik to infallible  Imams is mostly reffers  to Imam Hussain (عليه السلام)

[Diaz]

1 hour ago, Ashvazdanghe said:

Salam some groups & people  likewise Shiazi grouplet are doing cursing on any Marja which they don't  agree with him.

astaghfirullah, I can’t believe this. 
 

1 hour ago, Ashvazdanghe said:

Saying labbayk to them is different  than saying labbaik to infallible  Imams because  we know they are fallible persons nevetheless  saying Labbaik to infallible  Imams is mostly reffers  to Imam Hussain (عليه السلام)

I meant it’s permissible to say Labbayk to fallible, this is according to sayid sistani btw.

[Abu Hadi]

This is one of the main reasons behind the recent verdicts prohibiting supporting and viewing this movie. Verdicts have been reported from a number of maraja’, including Ayatollah Makarem Shirazi, Ayatollah Nouri Hamadani, Ayatollah Ja’far Subhani, and Ayatollah Safi Golpaygani. Ayatollah Makarem Shirazi issued the following statement: “Without doubt, those who help to produce and release this film, as well as those who watch it have committed a mortal sin…It is quite likely that the enemies of Islam have a hand in all this and they have planned to incite a lot of bloodshed among the Muslims through this film. Therefore, all those who help in the production of this film will also be responsible for any Muslim blood that is spilled on its account…all Muslims must know that the messages intended to be conveyed through this film are neither the messages of Islam nor those of the Shia school.”

 

This quote posted above by br. @Ashvazdanghe pretty much settles the issue. As a follower of Ahl Al Bayt((عليه السلام)) I don't know what more you would need to tell you that you cannot support this movie in any way. Watching it is supporting it, since the producers make money off the views they get. The more views, the more money they make, and the greater chance that projects like this, designed to cause fitna amoung the Ummah will be repeated. 

 

Some will take the position, like that of Sayyid Ammar Nakshawani, that nothing that is said in this movie is not said in Fatimmiyah programs, so we should just end the Fatimiyya programs then. I respectfully disagree with Sayyid Ammar on this point. A movie is primarily a visual medium, unlike majalis, which is primarily an auditory medium (spoken word), although there are some visual elements to it, but those elements are not central to the conveyance of the message. The figures which our Sunni brothers and sisters hold in High Esteem, i.e. the five (Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman, and Aisha, Hafsa (any wives of Rasoulallah(p.b.u.h)) are not allowed to be insulted, according to our Marjaa'. These figures were insulted in this movie, which is something that does not occur normally in Fatimiyya programs. Giving a historical account of what they did(Umar attacking the house of Ali((عليه السلام)) And Fatima((عليه السلام), etc) is not insulting them, it is a fact of history being recounted, but doing other things that were done in the movie are insulting them. You can insult someone in a movie, by just changing their apperance to make them appear ugly, disfigured, etc, when they weren't this way in real life. That isn't possible to do in a majalis. I  haven't seen the movie, but I take the words of my leaders, i.e. the marjaa' at face value and trust them that these things were part of the movie. Also, YH and his crew are known for this type of behaviour (insulting and mocking these personalities as well as doing the same with our marjaa' and anyone they don't like). So I don't want to support them in any way. Even without this statement by our marjaa', I still wouldn't see the movie in any way that would give them any type of support. 

 

Edited September 23 by Abu Hadi

[Syed Ali Mehdi Shah Naqvi]

How many people here think there are only three Mujtahids Khamaenai, Sayed Sistani and Khomeini? Lol

There are countless Shia Maraje karam who have dis agreed with so called unity you people are forcing and on top of that they aren't even shirazi.

Scholars have cursed other scholars in past see rijal books for that. But doesn't mean jahils have right to make parties and curse the opposing group.

Ever heard who's Wahid Khorasani? And that he's said unity between shia ad sunni is like unity between Ali and Umar. He's non shirazi and a grand ayatullah and this sentence was also confirmed by Allamah Sayed Ali Shakri sahab.

I agree we shouldn't insult  1 2 3 and Aisha openly because that would cause fitnah and it may make many people go away from truth forever. But i don't know why Rehbaris want shias to actually start respecting Abu Bakr Umar Usman or Aisha.  Thats never going to happen. And the one who respects them, he's not a shia in light of hadiths. We need to propogate the true hisotry and events that took place and if Sayed Ammar is doing this, he's doing right.

Ofcourse we can dis agree with Sheikh Yasir Habib for openly insulting 1 2 3 4. but that doesn't make Sheikh Yasir an enemy of Islam. Why some people take anyone opposing fatwa of Khamenai as if he opposed clear cut verses of Quran of Mutawatir hadith? For God's sake. Khamenai is just a scholar like others are.

[Sumerian]

There are examples of fuqaha in the history of our madhab that openly exposed, cursed and yes, insulted, the beloved figures of the other deviant sects, whether it be in their books or in their lectures. 

This is because they believed that taqiyya wasn't necessary for their time period or that particular situation, or they believed that the interest of doing such things - perhaps exposing the baatil or strengthening the truth - was more important than taqiyya or protecting people's lives.

The issue regarding this film is technically a jurisprudential issue, but it has become a political issue in the eyes of many. 

Basically it centres around the following points

1) When is taqiyya appropriate, and when is it not appropriate?

2) is this film in the interest of the madhab and strengthening the Haqq, or is it unnecessary or potentially harmful to the interest of the madhab?

These are matters for the fuqaha to deal with, and they have historically disagreed on these matters. It is best for one to follow what his marja says and to hold onto it.

Edited September 23 by Sumerian

[Guest Psychological Warfare]

When this kind of politics becomes infused in decision making process. People loose trust, as both sides can't be trusted to give an honest opinion. This will lead to Irrelevancy of Job function.

This is a clear danger we face, as this will remove the much needed guidance in New matters of Acts which are covered under their domain. 

[jmo]

On 9/22/2021 at 7:12 AM, Ali_Hussain said:

I didn't say that the fatwa was embarrassing I said that the ones issuing them are embarrassed that the world will know what they believe on a specific issue.

I also said that depicting Abu Bakr and co. as being black subsaharan Africans is embarrassing, the worst thing is that the people who support the film also believe that it is ok. Basically, as usual, Shias just being embarrassing.

The film tries to be historically accurate.  Abu Bakr and Umar were black as reported in the history books.  why is this bad?  bilal is black, why is this bad?  Fidda, the maidwoman of Fatima Zahra (sa) was also black, again being black alone has nothing to do with it.  you have both good and bad guys portrayed by black actors in a historical drama.

Imagine a movie about slavery where all the slaves were white, because some people will consider portraying slaves with black actors is racist.. is that what you want to see despite the facts?

Edited September 24 by jmo

[jmo]

The simple answer is if your Marja forbids watching this movie, then don't watch it.  But my Marja does not forbid it, so please don't force your beliefs on me because I don't follow your Marja.  Let's maintain the limits not force people into views they are not obligated to follow.

you have your marja, that's good follow them.  I also have my Marja and I don't need people forcing their beliefs on me. No thank you. I will follow my Marja.

[Syed Ali Mehdi Shah Naqvi]

6 hours ago, jmo said:

The simple answer is if your Marja forbids watching this movie, then don't watch it.  But my Marja does not forbid it, so please don't force your beliefs on me because I don't follow your Marja.  Let's maintain the limits not force people into views they are not obligated to follow.

you have your marja, that's good follow them.  I also have my Marja and I don't need people forcing their beliefs on me. No thank you. I will follow my Marja.

bhai jaan watching movie isn't from Faru e deen for Gods sake there is no taqlid in such matters.

[Abu Hadi]

17 hours ago, Syed Ali Mehdi Shah Naqvi said:

How many people here think there are only three Mujtahids Khamaenai, Sayed Sistani and Khomeini? Lol

There are countless Shia Maraje karam who have dis agreed with so called unity you people are forcing and on top of that they aren't even shirazi.

Scholars have cursed other scholars in past see rijal books for that. But doesn't mean jahils have right to make parties and curse the opposing group.

Ever heard who's Wahid Khorasani? And that he's said unity between shia ad sunni is like unity between Ali and Umar. He's non shirazi and a grand ayatullah and this sentence was also confirmed by Allamah Sayed Ali Shakri sahab.

I agree we shouldn't insult  1 2 3 and Aisha openly because that would cause fitnah and it may make many people go away from truth forever. But i don't know why Rehbaris want shias to actually start respecting Abu Bakr Umar Usman or Aisha.  Thats never going to happen. And the one who respects them, he's not a shia in light of hadiths. We need to propogate the true hisotry and events that took place and if Sayed Ammar is doing this, he's doing right.

Ofcourse we can dis agree with Sheikh Yasir Habib for openly insulting 1 2 3 4. but that doesn't make Sheikh Yasir an enemy of Islam. Why some people take anyone opposing fatwa of Khamenai as if he opposed clear cut verses of Quran of Mutawatir hadith? For God's sake. Khamenai is just a scholar like others are.

I've never heard any of them say to respect the 1 2 3 plus certain wives. The only thing I've ever heard is that we cannot insult them or mock them, this is for purposes of Unity and so that our Shia brothers in certain areas are not put in danger. That is the only purpose. Saying 'publically' is tricky nowdays because with the three factors of Internet, easily create and share video and audio footage all around the world in the click of a mouse, and the fact that there are certain group who are actively working to find these instances and broadcast them widely, there is no such thing as 'publicly' and 'privately' anymore. You must assume everything is potentially 'public' so better not to do it at all. 

[Labyika ya Khamenei]

4 minutes ago, Abu Hadi said:

I've never heard any of them say to respect the 1 2 3 plus certain wives. The only thing I've ever heard is that we cannot insult them or mock them, this is for purposes of Unity and so that our Shia brothers in certain areas are not put in danger. That is the only purpose. Saying 'publically' is tricky nowdays because with the three factors of Internet, easily create and share video and audio footage all around the world in the click of a mouse, and the fact that there are certain group who are actively working to find these instances and broadcast them widely, there is no such thing as 'publicly' and 'privately' anymore. You must assume everything is potentially 'public' so better not to do it at all. 

Imam Khamenei said it haram according to sharia law and in Iran its illegal to curse the companions and wife of prophet that's why religions Q and A moved to different countries so they keep cursing.

[Mahdavist]

18 hours ago, Syed Ali Mehdi Shah Naqvi said:

bhai jaan watching movie isn't from Faru e deen for Gods sake there is no taqlid in such matters.

This makes no sense. Every action has a categorization in fiqh. Obviously watching a movie would as well. Are you suggesting watching any and every type of movie is permissible? 

[Labyika ya Khamenei]

On 9/23/2021 at 5:38 PM, Diaz said:

Is this real? 

Yes I wish I was joking

[Labyika ya Khamenei]

44 minutes ago, Mahdavist said:

This makes no sense. Every action has a categorization in fiqh. Obviously watching a movie would as well. Are you suggesting watching any and every type of movie is permissible? 

This I suggest, if you disagree with your majri go follow another majri if you disagree with that too, don't follow any majri, follow yourself. No of us are smarter than a scholar, they studied for entire life.