hi few misconception about sunni and shia will be discuss in this article,
both sunni and shia has misconception about islam, both need to be clarify, pls waitin i m writing............
=======================================================================
hadith on prohibition of MUTAH
(Temporary Marriage)
It is a common misunderstanding that MUTAH wasn't
forbidden by Prophet Muhammad [SallAllah-u-Alaihi-wa-Sallam] rather it was Hadrat
Omar [RadiAllahu Tala Anho] who forbade it. I am quoting three hadiths from many
to prove this misconception wrong.Book 008, Number 3263:
Ali b. Abi Talib [RadiAllahu Tala Anho] reported that Allah's Messenger (SallAllah-u-Alaihi-wa-Sallam) prohibited on the Day of Khaibar the contracting of temporary marriage with women and the eating of the flesh of city's asses.
[Sahih Muslim]
Book 008, Number 3266:
Ali (RadiAllahu Tala Anho) heard that Ibn Abbas (RadiAllahu Tala Anho) gave some relaxation in connection with the contracting of temporary marriage, whereupon he said: Don't be hasty (in your religious verdict), Ibn Abbas, for Allah's Messenger (SallAllah-u-Alaihi-wa-Sallam) on the Day of Khaibar prohibited for ever the doing of it-And eating of the flesh of city 's asses.
[Sahih Muslim]
Book 008, Number 3267:
Ali (RadiAllahu Tala Anho) said to Ibn Abbas (RadiAllahu Tala Anho) that Allah's Messenger (SallAllah-u-Alaihi-wa-Sallam) on the Day of Khaibar forbade forever the contracting of temporary marriage and the eating of the flesh of city's asses.
[Sahih Muslim]
===============================
mufti hussain makki: maximum people who became murtad, they do not have root knowledge of Islam, like you can see in this post below, now i have answer and will re-check to this writing of murtad.
red in colour is my answer to murtad or atheist
===============================
(http://www.faithfreedom.org/articles/political-islam/sunni-or-shia-which-poses-a-greater-threat/)
Sunni or Shia? Which Poses A Greater Threat?
2/20/2012
Sunni or Shia? Which Poses A Greater Threat?
Mumin Salih (murtad and atheist)
Choosing
between Sunni or Shia is like choosing between the idiot and the fool;
both sects come from the same cult called Islam. (in islam, there is no sect, it is only islam, and in Islam, there are only two sect one is mumin and another is munafeeq, mumin follow sahi hadith, and munafeeq follow desire)
There are many other sects in Islam but these two are the major ones.
(he get the knowledge from munafequn, this sentence is invalid in islam, islam is only one religion, there is no sect at all, who design sect they are out of islam)
They both came to existence in the seventh century
(misquided knowledge athiest has, from begining of adam, there exist one religion and two sect, sect of prophet and sect of desire, in all the prophet life, you can find this, even in prohetic followers, there are two community, one is followers of prophetic teaching and other is followers of desire teaching, so when prophet Muhammad (saas) started re-teaching islam, their appear a sect of his followers, who follow their desire, called munafequn, so from starting of teaching of prophet Muhammad(saas) there exist two sect one is followers of peophetic teaching, and other is followers of their own desire teaching, this divide extended after the inteqal of prophet Muhammad(saas), so there exist two sect one is followers of sahi hadith and other is disobeyer of sahi hadith, so till 300 years, this two group existed, and after 300 years few of munafequn people given a name for their desire, so there is no word exist in islam, by name suni or shia,)
after the assassination of Ali, the fourth of the ‘rightly guided Caliphs’.
(who invented the word "rightly guided caliphs", the munafequn to hide their lust, they invited the word " rightly guided caliphs", in islam, their is only sunnah of khilafat, and their is nothing beyound this, and whatever other system are their that is lust and desire and indirectly shaitanism, so friend, there are many mumin muslim who practise this sunnah of khilafat,)
Ali was elected when the Islamic state was in turmoil following the brutal and merciless assassination of Uthman, the third Caliph.
(athiest
you have choosen the wrong word, merciless, a mumin is already prepared
to die in the cause of Allaah, so same way, uthman (ra) already know
that, the munafequn is trying to assasin him, and Uthman (ra) was
prepared to die in the cause of Allaah, and munafequn from back attack
him,)
Muslims endured a civil war that claimed hundreds of thousands of lives.
(there is no civil war in muslim community, it is war of islam, it is war of mumin and munafequn, it is war of follower of prophet and follower of desire, a wrongly word civil war was invented to hide shaitanism, so people of prophet and people of dsire, fight each other, like it is already done in history, like at the time of moses (as), Allaah order to kill the followers desire, and both sect fight each other, at last the follower of prophet win, so in same way, in the followers of prophet Muhammad(saas), the followers of prophet and the followers of desire, fought each other, and the followers of peophet win the battle, the followers of prophet killed the followers of desire, like recently qadafi got killed)
In fact, they still pay with their lives as a result of that divide.
(athiest still does not have knowledge of quran and sahi hadith, i m praying that, he/she should read quran and sahi hadith, and must not listen to munafequn, still there are muslim, who follow desire, and their are muslim who follow quran and Muhammad(saas), so their will be fight against coruption,)
The Shia Muslims were the ones who sided by Caliph, Ali, against the rebels.
(the word shia is invented after 300 years, so athiest used the word shia, so it shows that, athiest has wrong knowledge, there are only two group, followers of prophet and followers of desire)
The Sunni Muslims’ position was, and still, a more interesting one and is in line with their position regarding other Islamic absurdities; in one word: confusing. They believe that Ali was right and did the right thing for the service of Islam.
(athiest, again does not have sufficient knowledge, khalifah Ali was the right person, on right time, it was Allaah who choosen Khalifah Ali on right time, because every affairs is in control of Allaah, Khalifah Ali and family of Prophet done a great and excellent job, against the followers of desire, the knowledge which athiest has was from the followers of desire)
The history of the events, as it reached us, is in support of Ali. In addition, Ali was one of those ten Muslims who were guaranteed places in paradise, according to Mohammed, therefore Allah would protect him from committing sins. However, they refuse to condemn Ali’s opponents, the rebels.
(who refuse to condemn khalifah Ali opponents, the rebels, athies, in every country, any rebel is praise, no then here, who will praise rebel, this is just the assumption of athiest, and if somebody praise rebel, then he/she is from the followers of desire, and he/she is not the followers of prophet Muhammad(saas))
Therefore, the Sunnis believe whoever was on the right side and whoever was opposing those who were on the right side were both on the right side!! May look mind boggling, but this is Islam.
(athiest,
really does not have knowledge of Islam, we can not say him that,
he/she has knowledge of Islam, and he/she is murtad, we can say him, he
is already unknown to Islam, so how he/she is murtad, he is already does
not have knowledge of quran and sahi hadith, all he has assumption, and
illussion, so whatever he has written here is just illusion and his
assumption, the muslim follow quran and sahi hadith, and muslim support
the greatness of Allaah and greatness of prophet Muhammad, the
bani-ummayya from starting they are against Islam, and till end they are
against Islam, and against the teaching of Prophet Muhammad (saas),
bani-ummayya already told Muhammad (saas), we (bani-ummayya) will
believe in Islam, but you need to do few changes, like the poor is not
equal to richer, so the prophet muhammad (saas) rejected changes, but
when they do not have any choice, they accepted islam, and they practise
in the form of their own desire, but they were looking into right time
opportunity to strike on the teaching of prophet Muhammad(saas), and
they strike at the time Khalifah Uthman(ra) and khalifah Ali, bani
ummayya broke the bayt, broke the law of Muhammad(saas), broke each and
everything which comes their way, to follow their desire, and in
bani-ummayyah clan , king-muwaiyyah is the formost against the teaching
of Prophet Muhammad(saas), so he was leading the people of deisre, and
broke the pillar of law of Muhammad(saas),
so
now i think i must say you mind boggling knowledge you have, pls read
quran and sahi hadith and pls do not listen to followers of desire) Sunni Muslims refuse to discuss this issue on the basis that it is for Allah, not for humans, to judge that situation.
(who
uses this word, that it is not to discuss the issue, you know in
muslim, maximum people are followers of desire called munafequn, and
they do not want to discuss the issue, because they do not want to
follow the quran and sahi hadith in their life, so they do not want to
discuss,
and
may be it is like this, the people whom you have contacted, they do not
want to follow the teaching of quran and sahi hadith, and the person
who says this word, he/she does not have knowledge of quran and sahi
hadith, so he/she do not want to discuss, and because he/she does not
want to obey to the teaching of quran and sahi hadith in life, so he/she
do not want to discuss this issue, so they make this excuse,) The Sunni Muslims developed some phobia towards that part of history; they do not like to discuss it, read about it or know about it!
(who
said you, muslim do not like to discuss, this issue, it is totally your
assumption, first you must know that, in muslim, maximum people follow
desire, so they do not want to discuss this issue, because they do not
want to follow the teaching of quran and sahi hadith)
Of course there is a reason behind this phobia. Both fighting groups were no ordinary Muslims but highly revered companions of Mohammed, known as ‘Sahaba’.
(again
you are quoteing wrong knowledge, the word sahabah means, the person
who follow the teaching of Muhammad (saas), who die for the cause of the
teaching of Muhammad(saas), who live the life according to the
teaching of Muhammad(saas), who live the life according to the teaching
of Muhammad(saas), who live the life according to the teaching of
Muhammad(saas)
in
time of Muhammad(saas), there are munafequn also, if you read the quran
and sahi hadith you will come to know that, half of the quran teaching
is about exposing munafequn and their plots and their desire and their
conspiracy, the most problem in muslim community is that, the maximum
muslim do not read the quran, so what it mean, it mean that im muslim,
maximum people follow their desire, and maximum people do not know about
the quran and sahi hadith. so the followers of desire, they created
confusion to hide their conspiracy, so the followers of desire, has
invented the word sahabah for followers of desire,
so i think you got knowledge now, that the
word sahabah means who live the life according to the teaching of Muhammad(saas),
who live the life according to the teaching of Muhammad(saas)
who live the life according to the teaching of Muhammad(saas)
Those men were trusted with the Quran and Islam and considered exemplary to other Muslims. Those ‘Sahaba’ were ‘nearly perfect’ people because complete perfection is only for Allah. Muslims believe that the Quran, indeed the entire religion, reached us unaltered because of the ‘near perfection’ of those men. Any blemishes on their integrity would cast serious doubts about the integrity of Islam.
Unfortunately, the events of the war expose some barbaric conducts that only fit criminals.
(you are also one of those who follow their own desire, the quran says that, who is more astray then the person who follow their desire, because desire does not have any limits, so the people of followers of desire are more and bigger astray then other people, so you do not want to read quran and sahi hadith and want to blame, very interesting character you are , and simply expressing your assumption and illusion.)
Therefore it is better not to know about it!
(you
are making your assumption and living and now blaming on islam, what a
surprise, you do not want to read quran and sahi hadith, and you are
blaming on islam)
Just before jumping to early conclusions the reader can be assured that the Sunni foolishness and religious absurdities is more than matched by the Shia, but this is outside the scope of this article.
(already i have written about the word sunni and shia, so pls read the above answer, the murtad does not have enough knowledge of quran and sahi hadith, so i do not know that, why he is writing this article, i think he/she is writing this article just because of his hatredness or because he/she just follow the desire)
The 1980s- the Shia extremism
The Iranians had high expectations after the 1979 Islamic revolution but soon they were disappointed. In the turmoil that followed the revolution, the Mullahs had no idea how to steer the country and Iran was shifting from one conflict to another, usually with the West. In the 1980s, the Shia had a bad image in the West and were associated with extremism and religious fanaticism while the Sunnis were considered to be more moderate. Blinded by their inherent bias, It did not occur to the Westerners that the Sunnis were also engaged in another religious war against the Soviet Union in Afghanistan. That religious war was considered permissible and justified as long as it was against the Soviet Union! After 1979, America sided against Iran in all subsequent conflicts like the Iraq /Iran war. On the other hand it created a strong alliance with fanatic Sunnis like Osama Bin Laden. The Sunni fighters were called Mujahideen (from jihad), a word that will cost the West dearly in later years.
The Mulla’s regime may not have changed since the Islamic revolution but the Iranian people have changed. Iran is a radical state,
(you
do not have knowledge of quran and sahi hadith, even you do not have
knowledge of world politics, but then also you are writing agains islam,
i m surprise,
you
are quoting iran as radical state, this show that how much knowledge
you have, iran is not radical estate or islamic state, it is also state
like other state of muslim, it is also state of followers of desire, it
is not the state on the teaching of the last prophet Muhammad(saas), it
is not the state on the teaching of khalifah Ali(ra).
so
how you called it as radical state, you can called radical to
islami-emaarat-afghanistan of taliban, or similar state as radical
state, like shabab of somalia, ) but its radicalism is associated with its ruling regime; if the regime goes, the radicalism also goes. The Iranians learned the hard way, after 40 years of the Mullas rule, that radical Islam is not the way forward.
(you are confuse yourself and confusing others, it is not the mullas rule, it is purely rule of followers of desire)
This is not the case in Sunni countries like Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Somalia and .. to the end of the list. These countries are radical to the core; if the governments go, more radical regimes may emerge.
(again you showing that, you do not have knowledge of quran and sahi hadith, well this countries are followers of desire, they are not the followers of quran and sahi hadith)
The situation in Iran is the exact opposite to the situation in the Arab world. Until the ‘Arab spring’, the Arabs were largely radical people ruled by relatively secular governments. Iran, on the other hand, is largely a secular nation that is ruled by a radical government. The Arab nations, like in Egypt, forced their governments to pursue more religious policies. On the other hand, the Iranian Islamic government failed to completely radicalize its people.
(you are confused yourself and confusing others, in muslim world right now there is no government which rule on quran and sahi hadith, there are group who does their activity on quran and sahi hadith like (a)islami-emaarat-afghanistan (b) shabab of somalia (c) ansar-sharia of yemen (d) islami-emaarat of chechanya......and there are nearly more than 50 organisation in the world who follow quran and sahi hadith)
Iran and America; the war of the fools
Iran seems to be in a collision course with the America and Israel. The prospect of such unnecessary but fearsome war is a nightmare, not only to those directly involved, but to the entire Middle East. Sadly, it is the Iranian people who would be the main casualty if such a war breaks out.
The Mullas in Iran are more fools than radicals. Their fierce antagonism to Israel is completely unnecessary. Israel doesn’t pose any threat to Iran. Geographically, Iran is too far from Israel and it doesn’t make sense to think that Israel would consider attacking Iran, unless threatened. Israel is not short of enemies and is not interested in making new ones.
It is the Mullas who threatened to wipe off Israel from the map. But Israel is not an easy target to destroy; attacking Israel means destroying Iran. Even if Iran can destroy Israel it doesn’t gain anything from it other than getting destroyed itself.
Iran wouldn’t gain anything from destroying Israel. The Palestinians and the Arabs wouldn’t even say thank you to the Iranians because of their hatred towards the Shia. In the 1980s, it was the Arabs, not Israel, who rallied to destroy Iran during the Iraq/Iran war which claimed a million lives. The Arabs never rallied with such enthusiasm even against Israel. A conflict with Israel, if ever necessary, is a Palestinian concern; even the Arab countries are trying to distance themselves from the Israel/ Palestinian conflict. Other than foolishness, why should Iran fight somebody else’s war?
Iran, which is the largest country with Shia majority, could have used its influence to boost the position of other oppressed Shia communities, in particular the Arab Shia. The Shia in the Arab world are politically oppressed and often denied their political rights. They never had a fair deal even in countries where they are the majority like Iraq, Lebanon and Bahrain. The Sunnis have been taking most of the key positions for decades. The oil fields of the Gulf actually exist in Shia areas. In theory they should be the richest people on earth. All the oil of Saudi Arabia comes from the eastern province, where the Shia live in some of the least developed cities in the country. The Shia in Saudi Arabia are treated as third class citizens and not allowed to take key positions in the government or the army. Iran’s real enemy is Saudi Arabia, not Israel.
(you are confuse yourself and trying to confuse others, simply you are playing same card, as it is already played by followers of desire, so you and like you minded people created this card to play against muslim community, but interestingly, right now your card of divide and rule is over, because the muslim community read quran and sahi hadith,)
The American’s foolishness more than matches that of the Mullas in Iran. The Obama administration failed to offer any serious support to the Iranians’ revolution a couple of years ago. That ‘Iranian spring’ would have made all the difference in the current dilemma of how to deal with a ‘nuclear Iran’. The Americans’ feeble stand regarding the ‘Iranian spring’ contrasts sharply with the firm and unequivocal support they demonstrated towards the ‘Arab spring‘, which was set to replace the existing, relatively secular regimes, with radical ones.
(here you shows that your real intention is not solving proplem, but creating problem, so you follow the desire of shaitan)
In their ill-considered support to the Arab spring, the Americans made two ill-considered exceptions. The first one was the failure to provide any form of support to the uprising of the oppressed Shia population in the Eastern province of Saudi Arabia. The second is the failure to support the oppressed Shia in Bahrain. Regime change in the eastern region of Saudi Arabia, where all the oil comes from, would make remarkable difference to world peace.
For some mysterious reasons, America cannot come to terms with the fact that Saudi Arabia is the root of all evil in the Middle East, if not the world. Directly or indirectly, that desert Kingdom is the power source behind all the radical organizations around the world.
(really you lack the knowledge of quran and sahi hadith and knowledge of world politics,)
Thanks to the American silence and its appeasing policy, Saudi Arabia has succeeded in the radicalization of Muslims not only in the Arab world but also all over the world.
(saudia arabia itself do not follow quran and sahi hadith, how would they radicalise the arab world, they are main supporters of shaitan-israel,)
The Sunni extremism
America was the main strategic ally to the Mujahideen in Afghanistan. The war against the Soviet Union and the idea of setting up the Mujahideen and the propaganda campaign that followed were all for American desires. However, the honey moon between America and the Sunni radicals didn’t last long; in the 1990s the Sunnis turned against their previous allies with vengeance.
The ball of the Sunni radicalization started rolling in the 1970s, well before the Iranian revolution. I am afraid that sinister ball was created by American desire and was kept rolling also by American desire. That ball of radicalization is still rolling fast; the Sunni Muslims are getting more radicalized by the day.
The idea of this article is not to defend one sect of Islam or the other because they are all vicious. However, in our time it is the Sunni sect that tends to be more vile and violent, probably because they are the majority. It is well known that Muslims behave well when they are a minority. The Sunnis are arrogant because they feel the strength, while their Wahhabi indoctrination makes them least tolerant. They do not accept the other sects of Islam and have no tolerance to any practices except their own. The ultimate Sunni Islam is represented by Wahhabism, which is being embraced by an increasing number of Muslims everyday. In parallel with this trend there is an increasing number of Sunnis who started to hate the other sects of Islam in a similar way they hate the Jews and refer to them as infidels and make no secret of it. They consider other Islamic sects as the Jews from within who are set to destroy all the principles of Islam one by one.
Saudi Arabia dominates dozens of countries that constitute the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) which is the largest voting block in the United Nations. Add to this its special relations with America and you get a backward country that has become a world power to be reckoned with.
(saudia arabia already leading OIC, saudia arabia want they would have wipe out shaitan, but they are milking shaitan, because shaitan offered them support, so right now the saudia arabia is main designer of followers of desire, already OIC has everything, military power, to financial power, to technology power, they would have destroyed shaitan, but they are milking shaitan, in favour of support to followers of desire,)
The Americans may succeed in one way or the other in preventing a nuclear Iran, but they already failed in preventing a nuclear Pakistan. Although a non Arab country, Pakistan can be considered as the military wing of Saudi Arabia. The country survives on Saudi money and it was Saudi money which financed its nuclear program while America looked the other way. It is inconceivable that America still provides Pakistan with generous financial help and classifies the country as an ally.
Like Saudi Arabia, Pakistan is a country that is radicalized to the core. In both countries there are radical Islamic governments that are just not radical enough in the eyes of the people.
I am afraid that while the world is focusing on Iran, the real threat may lie further to the East, in Pakistan. I am afraid it is only a matter of time when Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal falls in the hands of terrorists.
=======================================================================
Comments