TwelverShia.net Forum
Sunni Shia Discussion Forum => Ex-Shias => Topic started by: Husayn on September 19, 2014, 12:30:57 PM
-
Assalamu Alaikum,
As requested by some of the brothers on this and other forums, I am officially announcing my rejection of Shiism and my acceptance of true Islam - that of Ahlul Sunnah wal Jama'a.
I'm going to keep this as a short introduction for the time being, and later on, insha' Allah, I will expound in further detail on exactly why I made this decision.
For some background information regarding myself - all that I will divulge at present is that I currently live in the western world and was born and raised as a Shi'i, and am in my late 20s.
I studied Shi'ism extensively and have been debating with Sunnis for a very long time, both on forums and in real life. I believed fully in the "truth" of Shi'ism and never intended on rejecting it.
I have never studied Shi'ism in any formal sense - my knowledge comes from books that I own, lectures I attended and most importantly the internet, which is a vast repository of almost limitless knowledge.
I am no expert in Rijal, Tafsir, Fiqh or anything of the sort - rather, I am basically a self-educated layman, and instead, I rely on other experts of both Shiism and Ahlul Sunnah to expound the beliefs of both schools and I judge for myself which I believe to be more logical and grounded in truth.
I will not be writing up some story about a journey of spiritual enlightenment or anything of the sort - rather, I'll keep this topic as simple as possible, and will basically share my views on the major issues between Ahlul Sunnah and the Shia, discussing both viewpoints from my understanding and explaining why I believe that the Shia are wrong about basically everything.
Wa Alaikum Assalam
-
This could be added to brother Ibn Faisal's post here in "reply #6":
http://forum.twelvershia.net/general-sunni-vs-shia/the-rise-of-the-sunnais-ex-shias-(video)/msg489/#msg489
-
Wa 3leyk Assalam,
Mashallah brother, Alhamdulillah that you have found this path and may Allah keep you firm and steadfast on it.
I believe brother Ebn Hussain has told me a great deal about you.
I hope to hear your stories, since I'm convinced you've got a great deal to say.
-
I'm just waiting for someone on SC to claim both of you weren't Shia in the first place, they've already made such generalizations in that same thread.
-
http://www.shiachat.com/forum/topic/235025019-are-there-shia-who-really-reverted-to-sunni/?p=2738610
I guess we'll see ;D
I'll add some more to this topic later tonight, insha' Allah.
-
Well they called you both "idiots" and likened your reversion to the Qur'an and the Sunnah to "converting to Christianity".
They also said you weren't believers in the first place...
I expected as much from them honestly, the reactions of little kids and the morals of street thugs.
-
The arrogance of the Shias (especially non Arab speakers i.e. 99% of the Rawafid) never cease to amaze me. As I told you lot, they are brainwashed they don't know what is going on in their VERY OWN fortress and how their OWN scholars admit that Shia SCHOLARS are leaving Shiism for Islam (and not just laymen):
http://forum.twelvershia.net/general-sunni-vs-shia/the-rise-of-the-sunnais-ex-shias-(video)/msg444/#msg444
Anyway, this post here cracked me up, a Rafidi claiming Tawheed, what an oxymoron:
(http://forum.twelvershia.net/general-sunni-vs-shia/why-i-left-shiaism/?action=dlattach;attach=109)
The Mushrik should tell us what non-perverted, NON-die hard Mushrik Ya Jesus/Mary/saints of the church yelling Mushrik would leave his Mushrik cult just in order to replace it with Ya Ali/Fatimah Imam x/y/z?
BTW, the comment about 12 hypocrites was funny too, reminded me of Judas Iscariot who was one of the 12 DISCIPLES of Jesus and a bloody hypocrite Dajjal just like the 12th cellar dwelling 3aj 3aj saviour of the Rafidah.
-
Brothers, brother HUSAYN has been active on Sunni-Shia discussion boards for over a decade. Do you know when I met him virtually? It was in the beginning of 2005 (around that time as far as I remember) i.e. almost a decade, I left Shi'ism in the beginning of 2004 (with the help of an Ex-Shia Hawzah, may Allah reward him) and since 2005 till 2014 (literally 2014!) I debated Husayn! Not just me, he had discussions with brother UmarbinKhatab, Efendi (Gift2Shias owner, also an Ex-Shia!) and many other brothers. Honestly, he was amongst those Rawafid who I thought will never change. Alhamdulillah I was proven wrong, to this day I can't really believe that someone such as Husayn who was so hard to crack, actually realised that Rafidism is nothing but kufr and Zandaqah and is now actively exposing Rafidism for what it is. It is such a joy to see more and more brothers leaving this shirk infested cult of Rafd and Zandaqah and it's just the beginning I believe:
http://forum.twelvershia.net/general-sunni-vs-shia/the-rise-of-the-sunnais-ex-shias-(video)/
The age of internet will break the ribs and back of Shiism, Omari style Inshaallah ;D I've no doubt about that. As for my story, well It's a bit long, maybe I write something about it one day, as for now here is ONE of MANY main reasons why I believe that Shiism is the religion of satan and the unholy progeny of satan (it's written by myself but from brother Ibn Al-Hindi's aka swords of sunnah's amazing blog):
http://youpuncturedtheark.wordpress.com/2012/05/06/from-whom-do-you-take-your-religion/
-
People convert all the time. Conversion doesn't mean much whether they converted from.Shia.to.Sunni or Sunni to Shia or Christian to Muslim etc. It just means that individual made a choice. We do not.know what they based this choice upon only the reasons they give. ALLAH knows what is in people's hearts but we do not.
For every example of.people.converting one way there are examples of others converting the.other way. I find that by far most brothers in ALL madhabs are.sincere in their beliefs although they may be misguided. I certainly believe the 12ers are misguided in many regards. It is.pretty easy to.see why one would convert from Twelver to Sunni. I went from borderline Twelver.to Zaydi myself.
And Allah knows best
-
So to begin, I'll start with the issue of the Sahabah, and Abu Bakr (RA) specifically.
As a Shi'i, I was taught to believe that the Sahabah were a gang of hypocrites - criminals who betrayed the Prophet and oppressed his family basically from the second he died. The word "Saqifah" invoked only evil connotations and was the embodiment of this betrayal.
As a youngster growing up, I actually took pride in being a "Rafidi". I would actually use this as a nickname even in video games and email accounts, that's how proud of it I was.
This is my old Battlefield 2 account: http://spieler-daten.de/bf2_stats/Rafidh (http://spieler-daten.de/bf2_stats/Rafidh)
Funny right?
Almost every (private) lecture I attended involved cursing of the Sahabah - either outwardly, or with innuendo. This never happened in public lectures, because Shi'is try to keep this as hidden as possible.
As time went on, however, I came to have serious doubts about these views, as I'll explain below, focusing mainly on Abu Bakr (RA).
Abu Bakr as-Siddique (RA) in the eyes of a Shi'i
As a Shi'i, Abu Bakr's case was clearcut. He was the instigator of this betrayal and by far the most despised of the companions in my eyes. The major reason, ofcourse, was that he was 'Aisha's father, so he recieved a double dose of curses whenever his name was mentioned. Not to mention, he stole Fadak from Fatima and made up some hadith from the Prophet to justify it. He was a thief and a devil. Not to mention he was a coward - remember how he was scared and about to betray the Prophet in the cave? I could never understand how Sunnis thought so highly of him - they were clearly misguided and ignorant people.
However, as time went on, certain facts came to light about Abu Bakr, and some doubts started creeping into my mind regarding him.
For example, he was one of the first people to become a Muslim. According to authentic reports, he was the first adult male to embrace Islam. Shi'is ofcourse deny this, and when I asked this question to a more "learned" Hajj, he said "no, more like the twenieth or thirtieth". Upon further research, it became clear that the consensus was that he was definitely the first adult male to embrace Islam. This complicated matters.
Let us assume he wasn't the first male - let's accept for arguments sake that Abu Bakr was the 30th male to embrace Islam. Either way, the same questions come to light. Clearly, he didn't embrace Islam when it was strong and the Prophet had many followers. Whether he was the first or the 30th, he embraced Islam when it was weak, and its future was very cloudy.
So why did this evil man accept Islam when so few others did?
Did he recieve any wealth because of it? No - the Prophet had no wealth to give him, and Abu Bakr was already a wealthy man.
Did he recieve power? Sure, Abu Bakr was from a minor tribe of Quraish, maybe his accepting Islam would give him more power? The answer to that is no - he didn't get any power from becoming Muslim, infact, he lost power as the chiefs of Quraish now viewed him negatively.
How about respect? Maybe Abu Bakr wanted people's respect by becoming a Muslim? No - Abu Bakr got the complete opposite, he actually lost respect, and authentic reports state that he was actually beaten up several times.
These were very tricky questions for me as a Shi'i. They didn't add up with the overall evil image we have of Abu Bakr. How is it possible to reconcile his later actions with his earlier actions? His earlier apparently sincere acceptance of Islam when it was weak and powerless, and his later actions as the chief tyrant who oppressed Ahlul Bayt and stole their rights?
-
MashaAllah, you got me very interested now your reversion and the evolution of your ideas, please do continue brother.
-
Masha'Allah!
Thank you brother for the beautiful post. Keep posting.
-
Interesting topic.
-
Interesting topic.
Good to have you here brother abu Zayd, we'd love to hear your story as well and how you left the Imamiyyah, I'm sure there's a lot of benefits we can learn.
-
Subhanallah. Me and Ibn Hussain were wondering where you were.
-
Salam Alekyum,
brother Husayn I would like to talk to you privatelt if possible?
Im litreally on the last stages of confirming my self as ahlul sunnah wa jamat. I come from a shia background however the whole concept of imamate does not seem rational to me. However I still have my doubts so would like to speak to you inshAllah
-
Salam Alekyum,
brother Husayn I would like to talk to you privatelt if possible?
Im litreally on the last stages of confirming my self as ahlul sunnah wa jamat. I come from a shia background however the whole concept of imamate does not seem rational to me. However I still have my doubts so would like to speak to you inshAllah
Walaikum Salam wr wb baradar,
Welcome to the forum. I read your comment and I thanked Allah (swt), He guides whom He wills.
If you have other questions please ask.
-
Salam, brother "ahki_irani" we're not being too active on the forum nowadays, I guess everyone is temporarily busy with some personal business, I have notified brother Husayn about your post.
(Until he replies, you're welcome to ask any of our members)
-
Thank you brothers for your reply and Ive left it late due to being out all day so to give a couple of the main reasons why I am still a bit apprehensive is this.
1. the invasion of persia - when persia had been invaded its believed that the libraries with a vast amount of history had been set a light and Umar had asked for this to happen. I realise as I am Iranian it may be a pride thing which is actually against Islam to hold such a thing in our hearts however this to me seems unjust.
2. the age of the prophet(pbuh) when marrying aisha..I believe in bukhari she was around 9 while the prophet(pbuh) was in his 50s. now to me I ponder and think if a man of that age marries anyone under 14 what would you honestly think about him? I realise in those days woman may have possibly have been more mature mentally etc however to accept this you would have to accept any man on the street of 50 to go with a girl of 9,10,11 or 12 as the prophet(pbuh) did.
3. Also what is your position on Imam hussein and yazid? One thing why I cannot accept shia islam is due to the making imams like almost god like humans due to them knowing the unseen ,which I believe in the quran it states only allah knows (i believe may allah forgive me if i am wrong). However i respect imam hussein so much due to his courage what is the ahlul sunnahs position on the events at karbala.
I have tons of stuff i could go into but if anyone could answer these with me for now i would be so grateful.
regards.
ali
-
بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم
1. the invasion of persia
Salam baradar let me ask you a few questions regarding the invasion of Persia:
1) Did the Persians all instantly convert to Islam (meaning that they were forced) or did they slowly covert to Islam over the span of like 300 years, especially after the Quran was translated into Farsi (meaning that they converted out of their free will) ?
2) Did the Arabs force Arabic on the Persians and eliminate the Persian language or did they allow the Persian language to be protected and remain with us to this day?
i highly recommend this book by Ayatullah al-Mutahhari where he disproves the propaganda of some of the Persian nationalists who claim that Islam is an Arab religion forced on the Persian people:
خدمات متقابل ايران و اسلام
http://www.aviny.com/library/motahari/PDF/khadamatemotegabel.pdf
Hopefully you'll find it beneficial insha'Allah
May Allah(swt) guide us all amen
Khuda Hafiz
-
1. the invasion of persia - when persia had been invaded its believed that the libraries with a vast amount of history had been set a light and Umar had asked for this to happen.
It is believed by whom? Points like these need to first be proven academically before being accepted as facts.
2. the age of the prophet(pbuh) when marrying aisha..I believe in bukhari she was around 9 while the prophet(pbuh) was in his 50s. now to me I ponder and think if a man of that age marries anyone under 14 what would you honestly think about him?
Dr. Jonathan Brown (Muslim convert) was asked about this in a lecture. He said something along the lines of, "Why do you care? This wasn't even an issue two hundred years ago, and nobody brought this point up against Islam until now!" Morals and values change with time. Are our standards today superior to the standards of the past simply because we have improved technologically? The correct standards are the standards of Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala).
3. Also what is your position on Imam hussein and yazid?
The position of the Shias towards Yazeed is not exclusive to Shias. Many Sunnis feel the same way and openly curse Yazeed. Ibn Al-Jawzi, the sixth century scholar, even authored a book on the permissibility of cursing Yazeed. However, there are Sunnis that disagree that Yazeed played a part in the death of Hussain in the first place because of the large distance between Dimashq and Kufa/Karbala.
Regardless, one can always say that if the Shias are correct in their position towards Yazeed, then the truth is not exclusive to them, since some Sunnis feel the same way. While if the Shias are incorrect in their accusation, then the truth can be found with the Sunnis that hold the other view.
Wallahu a'alam. I hope this helps.
-
A far as the Persian library, wasn't this in Ibn Khaldoun's book? The man died in the 9th century with around 800 years between him and this event, also it doesn't seem like this report has a chain to verify its authenticity, in fact it seems to be a direct ripoff from the text of the Alexandria library report.
As far as the age of marriage, my mother was married at 14, and my grandmother at 12, and no one criticized them for it nor did anyone find it odd at the time, this was only about 60-80 years ago, so imagine 1,400 years ago.
Yazid is a corrupt oppressive politician who is responsible for Husayn's martyrdom, this is the opinion of 90% of Ahlul-Sunnah, the other 10% will say he is not worthy of being a leader and is oppressive but it wasn't his direct fault rather the fault of his governor.
-
W Salam Baradar I am unable to read farsi (I believe it is farsi) however would be very interested to read that, is it available in english translation do you know?
-
A far as the Persian library, wasn't this in Ibn Khaldoun's book? The man died in the 9th century with around 800 years between him and this event, also it doesn't seem like this report has a chain to verify its authenticity, in fact it seems to be a direct ripoff from the text of the Alexandria library report.
As far as the age of marriage, my mother was married at 14, and my grandmother at 12, and no one criticized them for it nor did anyone find it odd at the time, this was only about 60-80 years ago, so imagine 1,400 years ago.
Yazid is a corrupt oppressive politician who is responsible for Husayn's martyrdom, this is the opinion of 90% of Ahlul-Sunnah, the other 10% will say he is not worthy of being a leader and is oppressive but it wasn't his direct fault rather the fault of his governor.
To be honest the library incident ive seen written in a couple of places however its probably the same narrator and to what reliability the narrator has I have no idea so the whole thing is questionable, I will admit however its probably my own pride over being persian that this whole incident bothers me.
I am unable to find the reading I have read however have found an online link which states "
"When the Arab commander (Saad ibn-e Abi Vaghas) faced the huge library of Cteciphon, he wrote to Omar: what should be done about the books. Omar wrote back “If the books contradict the Koran, they are blasphemous and on the other hand if they are in agreement with the text of Koran, then they are not needed, as for us only Koran is sufficient”. Thus, the huge library was destroyed and the books or the product of the generations of Persian scientists and scholars were burned in fire or thrown into the Euphrates.[1] By the order of another Arab ruler (Ghotaibeh ibn-e Moslem) in Khwarezmia, those who were literate with all the historians, writers and Mobeds were massacred and their books burned so that after one generation the people were illiterate.[2] Other libraries in Ray and Khorassan received the same treatment and the famous international University of Gondishapour declined and eventually abandoned, and its library and books vanished. Ibn-e Khaldoun, the famous Islamic historian summarizes the whole anihilation and conflagration:” where is the Persian science that Omar ordered to be destroyed?” Only few books survived, because the Persian scholars translated them into Arabic."
this can be found in http://www.cais-soas.com/CAIS/History/Post-Sasanian/zoroastrians_after_arab_invasion.htm
it looks biased but then again what history is totally neutral.
I am happy with the replies given for the other questions I asked and thank you brothers for answering my questions.
I have to say a lot of my issues are outside the books but rather whats going on in the world today when I read on social media muslims supporting sadam and some even IsIs it puts me off fully leaving shia islam if that makes sense.
-
W Salam Baradar I am unable to read farsi (I believe it is farsi) however would be very interested to read that, is it available in english translation do you know?
i was unfortunately only able to find the second volume in English (which doesn't cover nearly as much as the first volume regarding how the Persians were prior to and during Islam) but the first chapter regarding the language is better than nothing:
http://www.al-islam.org/al-tawhid/vol6-n2-1989/islam-and-iran-historical-study-mutual-services-ayatullah-murtadha-mutahhar-0#persian-language
-
Let's make one thing clear, Islam is a beautiful religion but it is being misrepresented in media and it is being misrepresented by some individuals who claim to adhere to it.
"Saddam" was a secular Arab leader, he was an oppressor, his people disliked him just as the Syrians today dislike Bachar. Yes, some pan-Arabist folks will support "Saddam" but they're not representing Islam by doing so as they're liberals and nationalists. Another group will support "Saddam" just out of hatred for Shia, they actually hate the man but will praise him for sectarian reasons only.
We Muslims are suffering a lot because of these tyrants who rule us, they're corrupt and filthy individuals the whole of them, we certainly do not appreciate them being around but this is the circumstance we're in today and so we have to exercise patience. We believe that by purifying our souls, by perfecting our manners and by being sincere in our worship, we can then become a good example for the coming generations who will succeed us, in a way that they can produce a better leadership.
Regarding "Isis", this group of ignorant fools is no more than a terrorist organisation, they've damaged the image of this religion and reduced us to a bunch of savages in the eyes of the people. These people have no knowledge in religion, they've got no common decency and certainly no mercy and humanity in their hearts. I assure you, not one of them has opened a legitimate book of religion and learned anything in his entire life, rather they make Takfeer on the people and fight the believers and cause division and tribulation in the lands. This is a Khariji Takfeeri sect, similar groups have emerged in Islam's history.
Finally, the library burning, so far I see no evidence which is remotely reliable, just the word of a 9th century historian, I'll look into it more and see if I can find anything. I think the burning of library as large and as great as the Persian library, deserves at least a Hadith or two with reliable chains, we have LOADS of narrations on so many details that took place, how come this thing is nowhere to be found? Huge question mark here.
-
"When the Arab commander (Saad ibn-e Abi Vaghas) faced the huge library of Cteciphon, he wrote to Omar: what should be done about the books. Omar wrote back “If the books contradict the Koran, they are blasphemous and on the other hand if they are in agreement with the text of Koran, then they are not needed, as for us only Koran is sufficient”. Thus, the huge library was destroyed and the books or the product of the generations of Persian scientists and scholars were burned in fire or thrown into the Euphrates.[1] By the order of another Arab ruler (Ghotaibeh ibn-e Moslem) in Khwarezmia, those who were literate with all the historians, writers and Mobeds were massacred and their books burned so that after one generation the people were illiterate.[2] Other libraries in Ray and Khorassan received the same treatment and the famous international University of Gondishapour declined and eventually abandoned, and its library and books vanished. Ibn-e Khaldoun, the famous Islamic historian summarizes the whole anihilation and conflagration:” where is the Persian science that Omar ordered to be destroyed?” Only few books survived, because the Persian scholars translated them into Arabic."
this can be found in http://www.cais-soas.com/CAIS/History/Post-Sasanian/zoroastrians_after_arab_invasion.htm (http://www.cais-soas.com/CAIS/History/Post-Sasanian/zoroastrians_after_arab_invasion.htm)
This is the first very fishy part, a lie was attributed to `Umar that he had ordered the books in Alexandria to be burned, this was sufficiently refuted by the scholars in detail. However, in that fake report about Alexandria, `Umar is quoted to have told `Amr when he asked him:
"Umar replied 'As for the books you have mentioned I can say that those which agree with the Book of God (The Quran) are to be disposed of because Quran is sufficient. And if they have things which contradict the Quran, so they must be deposed of."
And in this report above extracted from Ibn Khaldoun's book, `Umar is quoted to have told Sa`d:
"If the books contradict the Koran, they are blasphemous and on the other hand if they are in agreement with the text of Koran, then they are not needed"
Notice, that this lie is copied from the previous lie, the exact same sentence almost letter for letter.
This can be easily refuted because the reason `Umar gave for burning those books, is "If they contradict the Qur'an burn them", yet `Umar lived side by side with Jews and Christians and Magians in Yemen and `Iraq and Egypt and Persia, all of whom had books such as the Torah and Bible and "Avesta", yet he never ordered any of these books to be burned, he never took the bibles away from the Christians and burned any of them even though they directly conflicted with the Qur'an.
Thus the text above, not only has no chain of transmission, it even contradicts common sense and what is popular and known to all.
-
W Salam Baradar I am unable to read farsi (I believe it is farsi) however would be very interested to read that, is it available in english translation do you know?
i was unfortunately only able to find the second volume in English (which doesn't cover nearly as much as the first volume regarding how the Persians were prior to and during Islam) but the first chapter regarding the language is better than nothing:
http://www.al-islam.org/al-tawhid/vol6-n2-1989/islam-and-iran-historical-study-mutual-services-ayatullah-murtadha-mutahhar-0#persian-language
Non the less thank you for your efforts and still I will have a read. Are you shia by the way if you dont mind me asking?
-
Let's make one thing clear, Islam is a beautiful religion but it is being misrepresented in media and it is being misrepresented by some individuals who claim to adhere to it.
"Saddam" was a secular Arab leader, he was an oppressor, his people disliked him just as the Syrians today dislike Bachar. Yes, some pan-Arabist folks will support "Saddam" but they're not representing Islam by doing so as they're liberals and nationalists. Another group will support "Saddam" just out of hatred for Shia, they actually hate the man but will praise him for sectarian reasons only.
We Muslims are suffering a lot because of these tyrants who rule us, they're corrupt and filthy individuals the whole of them, we certainly do not appreciate them being around but this is the circumstance we're in today and so we have to exercise patience. We believe that by purifying our souls, by perfecting our manners and by being sincere in our worship, we can then become a good example for the coming generations who will succeed us, in a way that they can produce a better leadership.
Regarding "Isis", this group of ignorant fools is no more than a terrorist organisation, they've damaged the image of this religion and reduced us to a bunch of savages in the eyes of the people. These people have no knowledge in religion, they've got no common decency and certainly no mercy and humanity in their hearts. I assure you, not one of them has opened a legitimate book of religion and learned anything in his entire life, rather they make Takfeer on the people and fight the believers and cause division and tribulation in the lands. This is a Khariji Takfeeri sect, similar groups have emerged in Islam's history.
Finally, the library burning, so far I see no evidence which is remotely reliable, just the word of a 9th century historian, I'll look into it more and see if I can find anything. I think the burning of library as large and as great as the Persian library, deserves at least a Hadith or two with reliable chains, we have LOADS of narrations on so many details that took place, how come this thing is nowhere to be found? Huge question mark here.
I appreciate your efforts brother and if you ever manage to find what any of the scholars say about the alleged incident I would be grateful if you could send me it.
I agree with what youve said its my own pride that stops me I think and also I want to be 100% before I make my decision public as I don't want to be one of those people who go back and forth from different sects.
-
بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم
1. the invasion of persia
Salam baradar let me ask you a few questions regarding the invasion of Persia:
1) Did the Persians all instantly convert to Islam (meaning that they were forced) or did they slowly covert to Islam over the span of like 300 years, especially after the Quran was translated into Farsi (meaning that they converted out of their free will) ?
2) Did the Arabs force Arabic on the Persians and eliminate the Persian language or did they allow the Persian language to be protected and remain with us to this day?
i highly recommend this book by Ayatullah al-Mutahhari where he disproves the propaganda of some of the Persian nationalists who claim that Islam is an Arab religion forced on the Persian people:
خدمات متقابل ايران و اسلام
http://www.aviny.com/library/motahari/PDF/khadamatemotegabel.pdf
Hopefully you'll find it beneficial insha'Allah
May Allah(swt) guide us all amen
Khuda Hafiz
Aaah I wish I could read Farsi, do u have an english version of this?
-
Let's make one thing clear, Islam is a beautiful religion but it is being misrepresented in media and it is being misrepresented by some individuals who claim to adhere to it.
"Saddam" was a secular Arab leader, he was an oppressor, his people disliked him just as the Syrians today dislike Bachar. Yes, some pan-Arabist folks will support "Saddam" but they're not representing Islam by doing so as they're liberals and nationalists. Another group will support "Saddam" just out of hatred for Shia, they actually hate the man but will praise him for sectarian reasons only.
We Muslims are suffering a lot because of these tyrants who rule us, they're corrupt and filthy individuals the whole of them, we certainly do not appreciate them being around but this is the circumstance we're in today and so we have to exercise patience. We believe that by purifying our souls, by perfecting our manners and by being sincere in our worship, we can then become a good example for the coming generations who will succeed us, in a way that they can produce a better leadership.
Regarding "Isis", this group of ignorant fools is no more than a terrorist organisation, they've damaged the image of this religion and reduced us to a bunch of savages in the eyes of the people. These people have no knowledge in religion, they've got no common decency and certainly no mercy and humanity in their hearts. I assure you, not one of them has opened a legitimate book of religion and learned anything in his entire life, rather they make Takfeer on the people and fight the believers and cause division and tribulation in the lands. This is a Khariji Takfeeri sect, similar groups have emerged in Islam's history.
Finally, the library burning, so far I see no evidence which is remotely reliable, just the word of a 9th century historian, I'll look into it more and see if I can find anything. I think the burning of library as large and as great as the Persian library, deserves at least a Hadith or two with reliable chains, we have LOADS of narrations on so many details that took place, how come this thing is nowhere to be found? Huge question mark here.
And irrelevant to the post but saw this quote and thought it applicable to this about opressive tyrant rulers and trials and tribulations.
Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyyah, رحمه الله:
"For the people of sins there are three great rivers with which they purify themselves in this world and if these do not suffice in purifying them, then they are purified in the river of Hell-fire on the Day of Judgment:
1. A river of sincere repentance,
2. A river of good deeds that drowns the sins that surround it,
3. And a river of great calamities (that befall the sinner) that expiate (his sins)
Therefore, when Allaah intends good for His slave, He enters him into one of these three rivers, so he comes purified and cleansed on the Day of Judgement, not requiring the fourth purification.
And the fourth purification:
The river of Hell-fire on Yawm al-Qiyamah.
So swim in the river of repentance and doing good deeds and have patience in the river of calamities. And do not neglect these before a day comes when you will be drowned in the river of Hell-fire whose fuel is men and stones”
[Madaarij as-Saalikeen 1/312, Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyyah, رحمه الله]
-
Salam Alekyum,
brother Husayn I would like to talk to you privatelt if possible?
Im litreally on the last stages of confirming my self as ahlul sunnah wa jamat. I come from a shia background however the whole concept of imamate does not seem rational to me. However I still have my doubts so would like to speak to you inshAllah
MashaAllah, at least you realise that. Its a good start, many shia bury their head in the sand when it comes to this illogical & contradictive belief
-
When I read these personal stories, I always hope my shiite friend also starts thinking in a critical way about imamah (so far not much succes) and I give many arguments, but it's just that only Allah can guide people.
-
A lot of it is also about looking at history without cherry picking. Shi'a will focus on certain reports or events, but will ignore or be ignorant of the bigger picture.
-
Since I've been asked this question a few times, and it would be highly relevant to this thread, the single most important reason I left Shia'ism is because one of its most important tenants, one that sets it apart from other sects, is not in the Quran.
Reading books of history, hadith, and involving oneself in polemics is pointless if the Quran takes a back seat.
-
Indeed! Ma sha Allah Brother.
Imamate is absent from quran. But let's agree with shites that it is not necesary to be stated in quran and using narrations as a source for imamate is enough. Then where is the twelvth imam of our time, since for every generation there is a need of a masoom?
Conclusion: no imamate to be found in Quran AND in reality.
-
Salam Alekyum,
brother Husayn I would like to talk to you privatelt if possible?
Im litreally on the last stages of confirming my self as ahlul sunnah wa jamat. I come from a shia background however the whole concept of imamate does not seem rational to me. However I still have my doubts so would like to speak to you inshAllah
Any update?