About shias...

[tor_khan]

Al Hanif. You got all cranked up - I didn't actually call you an Arab. I just used it as an example. (It might be that, I am probably more Arab than you).

But on the matter of racism, I do know what I am talking about.

[Al Hanif]

do you have any doubt about this being lie ?

yes, i don't know what the average iranian shia thinks about it ? I've never met a shia in my life

or do you have any doubt about they are not kafir after saying this ?
this is kufer.

no, I have no doubt, this is clear and pure shirk and the people who believe it are as much muslim as an hindu

- there are people who say iranian shias are muslim but the iranian clerics, mullah and hirearchy are dibelievers and not muslims
this is what the naive muslims like karachi say.

here lies the problem

the people who told me this are hardcore anti-shiism and anti-iranian clerics and anti-shia clerics but they say that the average iranian is muslim and can be forgiven for what the shia clerics say since they are ignorant

[BarakzaiAbdali]

Complex Question with a Complex Answer.

Christianity, Islam, and Judaism are vibrant in their diversity. Not just inter religion, but intra religion, and then intra sect.

You need to read Nahj Al Balagha, the sayings of Ali, an added scripture to the Shiite cannon to get a more informed answer to your question.

The answer on the surface is much easier:
Think about it like this: Within Sunni Islam we have so much diversity as well.... not just the madhabs, but also in terms of your generally aware sunnis, who have either wide breath but shallow depth of knowledge or vice versa. Then you have your sunnis that are born into sunni families and practice as their parents did. They have little awareness of the trials and tribulations of the caliphate in the early era, of Siffin, of Muwiyah, and of Ali. To them, they just know God is one, the Prophet is holy and there are many friendships with Shiites as well. Then you have your folks who are theologically strict and very historically aware of what occured. They have an advesial view of shiites.

By this same token, my friend, within the shiite community there is great diversity. One cannot simply say that they are all adversial or all strict and theological. There are shiites who have no idea of the differences between sunni and shiite except some greater obligation to love Ali, but otherwise, they are not aware. Generally, for both sunni and shiite, these are the greater masses. However, then there are the shiite that rely on a history as well that takes a deeply divergent view of the caliphate and its establishment.

There is a general view through out the shiite literature that Ali's haqq was taken from him. Various sunni leaders such as Ayesha and Omar bin Al Khattab (R) are maligned.

By this same token, various literature in the early era from sunnis also contrived a relationship between shiites and jews to emulate a saint paul style motif (Pauline Christianity is seen to diverge sharply from Christianity), where an attempt was made by a certain Abdullah Bin Sabah (an unconfirmed personality) to divide the Muslims by sanctifying Ali.

In the modern era, this divide between certain groups of people has resulted in massive geopolitical earthquakes.

What one can say is that the Shiites are much savier and have played the game with greater finesse than we sunnis have.

For instance, Moqtada Al Sadr in Iraq is a key example of this. Years ago, I was impressed with his eloquence and firey rhetoric to the point where he seemed to be the one man calling for unified Iraqi independence. However, he is actually playing politics here where he has stacked the Iraqi political system in favor of the shiites and cleverly utilized the fire power of the US to destroy his sunni competition. In the mean while the Mehdi militia has inflicted an ethnic divide and driven sunnis out of the Baghdad proper area (Juan Cole noted that this was the real reason Baghdad was quelled, not the surge). In essence, Al Sadr has played chess in a way where many sunnis have been killed off for him by the United States.

Iran has also been extremely clever in this whole series of events across the last two decades. Afghanistan and Iraq are kept at low levels of war inflammation where the various insurgencies would never be permitted by Iran to win... but at the same time, they keep the US bogged down in both countries and divert its ability to attack Iran. And can you blame them? The Shah era has trained the Iranian public to know that it has enemies on multiple fronts, near and far.

As an example of the theolgical divide, the two invented surahs, Al walaayah and nurayn are examples of radicalized shiite theology... nonetheless, this attempt was quashed by more moderate shiite scholars and has left it so that the Quran studied in Iran in terms of its text (not interpretation) is the same as the Quran studied in Egypt. This unification behind the Uthmanic codex is a testament to its preservation across theological divides. Contrast this with the duoay bible of the catholics which is different cannon than the protestant division.

What I always tell my American friends that want to understand the theological divide between sunnis and shiite is that it is like the Protestant Reformation in reverse. Shiite theology is perhaps more akin to Catholicism (sanctification of scholarly and saintly figures, occasional utilization of iconic paintings) and is confirmed to be a
later development versus Sunnism more resembling strict protestantism (even to the point of destruction of tombs or shrines).

By this same token, just as Catholics have some very loosely observant catholics (these are the majority) and Protestants have some very loosely observant Protestants (these appear to be teh majority)... and these groups of people think of eachother as Christians in the whole... the majority of sunnidom and shiitedom consists of folks that are just as unaware of the theological divide.

[al-arab]

No, it is not unfair. It is correct. You made your apology. I accept it.

I don't care who was Muslim "first", but the one thing I do not accept is that occasional attitude we sometimes come across whereby Arabs (for example) look down on others because they consider themselves to have been the "original" Muslims and others to be the descendants of converts to Islam. There is no way that I or other Muslims should accept. I refuse to add to that level of fake pride in others. You can't justify it in Islam, and I am right to challenge it.

No Arab I know have ever considered himself a better Muslim than say Muslim Adyghe people or Muslim Senegalese. I do not know where you have heard that and why you even mention it.

This is also Haraam because racism and nationalistic views as well as sects is considered Haraam in the Holy Quran as in the Hadith.

There is nearly no difference between Sunnis and very little between Sunnis and Shias (some Shias are clear sects, Alawi, Ismaili and Iranian clerics) although there are people who have their own political agendas and every educated Muslim know who they are and why they do so.

So let us just leave this alone. Read the Holy Quran or consult your local schoolars.

[al-arab]

Complex Question with a Complex Answer.

Christianity, Islam, and Judaism are vibrant in their diversity. Not just inter religion, but intra religion, and then intra sect.

You need to read Nahj Al Balagha, the sayings of Ali, an added scripture to the Shiite cannon to get a more informed answer to your question.

The answer on the surface is much easier:
Think about it like this: Within Sunni Islam we have so much diversity as well.... not just the madhabs, but also in terms of your generally aware sunnis, who have either wide breath but shallow depth of knowledge or vice versa. Then you have your sunnis that are born into sunni families and practice as their parents did. They have little awareness of the trials and tribulations of the caliphate in the early era, of Siffin, of Muwiyah, and of Ali. To them, they just know God is one, the Prophet is holy and there are many friendships with Shiites as well. Then you have your folks who are theologically strict and very historically aware of what occured. They have an advesial view of shiites.

By this same token, my friend, within the shiite community there is great diversity. One cannot simply say that they are all adversial or all strict and theological. There are shiites who have no idea of the differences between sunni and shiite except some greater obligation to love Ali, but otherwise, they are not aware. Generally, for both sunni and shiite, these are the greater masses. However, then there are the shiite that rely on a history as well that takes a deeply divergent view of the caliphate and its establishment.

There is a general view through out the shiite literature that Ali's haqq was taken from him. Various sunni leaders such as Ayesha and Omar bin Al Khattab (R) are maligned.

By this same token, various literature in the early era from sunnis also contrived a relationship between shiites and jews to emulate a saint paul style motif (Pauline Christianity is seen to diverge sharply from Christianity), where an attempt was made by a certain Abdullah Bin Sabah (an unconfirmed personality) to divide the Muslims by sanctifying Ali.

In the modern era, this divide between certain groups of people has resulted in massive geopolitical earthquakes.

What one can say is that the Shiites are much savier and have played the game with greater finesse than we sunnis have.

For instance, Moqtada Al Sadr in Iraq is a key example of this. Years ago, I was impressed with his eloquence and firey rhetoric to the point where he seemed to be the one man calling for unified Iraqi independence. However, he is actually playing politics here where he has stacked the Iraqi political system in favor of the shiites and cleverly utilized the fire power of the US to destroy his sunni competition. In the mean while the Mehdi militia has inflicted an ethnic divide and driven sunnis out of the Baghdad proper area (Juan Cole noted that this was the real reason Baghdad was quelled, not the surge). In essence, Al Sadr has played chess in a way where many sunnis have been killed off for him by the United States.

Iran has also been extremely clever in this whole series of events across the last two decades. Afghanistan and Iraq are kept at low levels of war inflammation where the various insurgencies would never be permitted by Iran to win... but at the same time, they keep the US bogged down in both countries and divert its ability to attack Iran. And can you blame them? The Shah era has trained the Iranian public to know that it has enemies on multiple fronts, near and far.

As an example of the theolgical divide, the two invented surahs, Al walaayah and nurayn are examples of radicalized shiite theology... nonetheless, this attempt was quashed by more moderate shiite scholars and has left it so that the Quran studied in Iran in terms of its text (not interpretation) is the same as the Quran studied in Egypt. This unification behind the Uthmanic codex is a testament to its preservation across theological divides. Contrast this with the duoay bible of the catholics which is different cannon than the protestant division.

What I always tell my American friends that want to understand the theological divide between sunnis and shiite is that it is like the Protestant Reformation in reverse. Shiite theology is perhaps more akin to Catholicism (sanctification of scholarly and saintly figures, occasional utilization of iconic paintings) and is confirmed to be a
later development versus Sunnism more resembling strict protestantism (even to the point of destruction of tombs or shrines).

By this same token, just as Catholics have some very loosely observant catholics (these are the majority) and Protestants have some very loosely observant Protestants (these appear to be teh majority)... and these groups of people think of eachother as Christians in the whole... the majority of sunnidom and shiitedom consists of folks that are just as unaware of the theological divide.

Catholics are considered more strict than Protestants and are also older and the way bigger "religion". (1.2 billions) If anything Sunnis should be considered Catholics and Shias Protestants if an comparison should be made.

Al Sadr has not done anything special apart from what was expected to happen after Saddams fall. Iran influence in Iraq (among Shias) is big but so is Saudi Arabian/rest of Arab world interference in Sunni and Kurdish areas. Sunni compromise half of Iraq if not more despite claims of otherwise by Shia's. I do not agree that Iran's agenda is gaining support more than Sunni Arab agenda. Iran is a very divided country within and most of Iranians are not even religious. The greatest number of heroin addicts can be found in Iran as well a lot of alcoholics. You do not face the same problems in the Arab world. When the Alawi Shia sect in Syria will fall (Al-Assad) Iran's only ally in the region apart from Azerbaijan (Caucasus) will not exist anymore, bar Hezbollah's territory.

[randolph85]

Iran has also been extremely clever in this whole series of events across the last two decades. Afghanistan and Iraq are kept at low levels of war inflammation where the various insurgencies would never be permitted by Iran to win... but at the same time, they keep the US bogged down in both countries and divert its ability to attack Iran.



that is something many talib supporters here don't want to admit to, they can't understand that they are cannon fodder and the movement is supported just enough to be a thorn in natos ass, not to win.

[randolph85]

if u compare the populations of saudi arabia and iran, most saudis are probably very pro regime whereas in iran, the youth are very westernized and the government is depending on the old guard to keep the youth in check.

[Karachi]

shias are ****ed up in the head and this karachi dares to call muslims wahabis and call Islam a religion of terror.

I didn't call islam a religion of terror, stop putting words in my mouth.

[al-arab]

if u compare the populations of saudi arabia and iran, most saudis are probably very pro regime whereas in iran, the youth are very westernized and the government is depending on the old guard to keep the youth in check.

This is also a factor.

You can also say 400 million Arabs versus 80 million Iranians.

Or Sunnis vs Shias.

There is no chance that Iran and it's influence sphere will get bigger than the Arab one or Sunni Muslim one.

I also predict that the Iranian government will soon collapse while I find it harder to see a collapse of KSA because of many reasons.

[Al Hanif]

There is a general view through out the shiite literature that Ali's haqq was taken from him. Various sunni leaders such as Ayesha and Omar bin Al Khattab (R) are maligned.

By this same token, various literature in the early era from sunnis also contrived a relationship between shiites and jews to emulate a saint paul style motif (Pauline Christianity is seen to diverge sharply from Christianity), where an attempt was made by a certain Abdullah Bin Sabah (an unconfirmed personality) to divide the Muslims by sanctifying Ali.

In the modern era, this divide between certain groups of people has resulted in massive geopolitical earthquakes.

What one can say is that the Shiites are much savier and have played the game with greater finesse than we sunnis have.

But sunnis have higher birth rates in the world and shiism is declining. Also they are only 10% so aren't those gameplays just useless ?

For instance, Moqtada Al Sadr in Iraq is a key example of this. Years ago, I was impressed with his eloquence and firey rhetoric to the point where he seemed to be the one man calling for unified Iraqi independence. However, he is actually playing politics here where he has stacked the Iraqi political system in favor of the shiites and cleverly utilized the fire power of the US to destroy his sunni competition. In the mean while the Mehdi militia has inflicted an ethnic divide and driven sunnis out of the Baghdad proper area (Juan Cole noted that this was the real reason Baghdad was quelled, not the surge). In essence, Al Sadr has played chess in a way where many sunnis have been killed off for him by the United States.

I find it extremely hard in my mind to say that muslims can kill muslims. Al Sadr cannot be muslim and at the same time kill muslims. And using kuffars to kill muslims is an even greater sin. So Al Sadr is a hardcore sect guru for me. Their shia death squads are anything but muslims.

Iran has also been extremely clever in this whole series of events across the last two decades. Afghanistan and Iraq are kept at low levels of war inflammation where the various insurgencies would never be permitted by Iran to win... but at the same time, they keep the US bogged down in both countries and divert its ability to attack Iran. And can you blame them? The Shah era has trained the Iranian public to know that it has enemies on multiple fronts, near and far.

Iranians are huge pan-islamists but at the same time only pro-shia when it comes to sunni/shia interests. That's a big deal.

As an example of the theolgical divide, the two invented surahs, Al walaayah and nurayn are examples of radicalized shiite theology... nonetheless, this attempt was quashed by more moderate shiite scholars and has left it so that the Quran studied in Iran in terms of its text (not interpretation) is the same as the Quran studied in Egypt. This unification behind the Uthmanic codex is a testament to its preservation across theological divides. Contrast this with the duoay bible of the catholics which is different cannon than the protestant division.

Do all shias recognize those two surah ?

What I always tell my American friends that want to understand the theological divide between sunnis and shiite is that it is like the Protestant Reformation in reverse. Shiite theology is perhaps more akin to Catholicism (sanctification of scholarly and saintly figures, occasional utilization of iconic paintings) and is confirmed to be a
later development versus Sunnism more resembling strict protestantism (even to the point of destruction of tombs or shrines).

Excellent comparaison. I found it extremely dangerous to create a hierarchy among clerics such as catholicism and shiism. Look at how catholicism was destroyed by freemasons and you will realise the tremendous threat that is to have a centralized power among religious authorities. That's the best way to get infiltrated and i've always thought about orthodox sunni Islam to be a superior religion because it has no clergy and thus could not be infiltrated by jews or freemasons the same way the catholic church was destroyed.

By this same token, just as Catholics have some very loosely observant catholics (these are the majority) and Protestants have some very loosely observant Protestants (these appear to be teh majority)... and these groups of people think of eachother as Christians in the whole... the majority of sunnidom and shiitedom consists of folks that are just as unaware of the theological divide.

Here lies the problem : is the average iranian shia a muslim according to orthodox sunni theology ?

[graveyardofempires]

I didn't call islam a religion of terror, stop putting words in my mouth.

you said that muslims loved to kill in the name of Islam,that is suggesting just that.Dont call people things they arent.

you call people wahabi and than jump to call them terrorist,exactly like the typical islamphobes do.

[randolph85]

the collapse of the iran regime will not be good for the middle east. iran is a large and powerful nation. the youth will not be chanting allah u akbar if the ayatollahs fall. it will revert to a secular state that will be nationalistic in nature. we are better off with an iran that we know instead of the nation in the hands of non religious degenerates who have boners for the persian empire of the past.

[BarakzaiAbdali]

But sunnis have higher birth rates in the world and shiism is declining. Also they are only 10% so aren't those gameplays just useless ?



I find it extremely hard in my mind to say that muslims can kill muslims. Al Sadr cannot be muslim and at the same time kill muslims. And using kuffars to kill muslims is an even greater sin. So Al Sadr is a hardcore sect guru for me. Their shia death squads are anything but muslims.



Iranians are huge pan-islamists but at the same time only pro-shia when it comes to sunni/shia interests. That's a big deal.



Do all shias recognize those two surah ?



Excellent comparaison. I found it extremely dangerous to create a hierarchy among clerics such as catholicism and shiism. Look at how catholicism was destroyed by freemasons and you will realise the tremendous threat that is to have a centralized power among religious authorities. That's the best way to get infiltrated and i've always thought about orthodox sunni Islam to be a superior religion because it has no clergy and thus could not be infiltrated by jews or freemasons the same way the catholic church was destroyed.



Here lies the problem : is the average iranian shia a muslim according to orthodox sunni theology ?

By both Western and Eastern scholars alike, sunni and shiite alike the two are seen as forgery attempts. As far as I know, not a single shiite today accepts nuryan or waliyah.

[Al Hanif]

You wait and see this forum turn into a Sectarian conflict. Al hanif and Al Arab keep your Middle Eastern Sectarian non sense to yourselves.

Pashtun's are already suffering from the constant meddling by Punjabi/Arab/Iranian support of different groups fighting in the name of Sectarianism from Afghanistan to Kurram.

Do I consider a Pashtun who is Shia as an equal? I consider all Pashtuns as Equals regardless of their faith, Sunni or Shia, I don't care!

Woah woah woah look what we have there !

We have a masonic humanist rationalist humanrightist pro-democracy and for the emancipaton of women aganist the intolerant backward anti-civilisation muzzies.

[BarakzaiAbdali]

Catholics are considered more strict than Protestants and are also older and the way bigger "religion". (1.2 billions) If anything Sunnis should be considered Catholics and Shias Protestants if an comparison should be made.

Al Sadr has not done anything special apart from what was expected to happen after Saddams fall. Iran influence in Iraq (among Shias) is big but so is Saudi Arabian/rest of Arab world interference in Sunni and Kurdish areas. Sunni compromise half of Iraq if not more despite claims of otherwise by Shia's. I do not agree that Iran's agenda is gaining support more than Sunni Arab agenda. Iran is a very divided country within and most of Iranians are not even religious. The greatest number of heroin addicts can be found in Iran as well a lot of alcoholics. You do not face the same problems in the Arab world. When the Alawi Shia sect in Syria will fall (Al-Assad) Iran's only ally in the region apart from Azerbaijan (Caucasus) will not exist anymore, bar Hezbollah's territory.

Protestants and the reformation were accredited with having done away with the papal supremacy.

The ayatollahs in a sense, are not simply scholars in shiite theology. For instance, Moqtada Al Sadr is claimed to be a descendent of the Prophet (S) and his decrees are considered God guided. In this same way, catholicism assesses the pope as making decisions inspired by God and the Ayatollahs decrees are a sort of modern divine guidance.

The clash between Salafists and Bin Baaz shows rather clearly that Sunni Islam discards this concept. When Bin Baaz wrote the fatwa allowing bases on the Saudi peninsula, his fatwas were able to be questioned without concern for one's afterlife or spiritual guidance.

Iconography is also a prevalant art form in Iran.

So the concept of continued spiritual link to God via the Ayatollahs conceptually resembles Catholocism much more. This is not to say that Shiites accept these men as recieving the equivalent of revelation, but it is a significant difference.