Muharam why Sunnis are not observing this day???????

[RevolutionThroughReason]

Imam Hussain was killed by a dictator in a very tragic way. His case is very different. And I have seen Muslims celebrating 12th Rabiul Awal as Eid milad u Nabi everywhere except Salafis .

John the Baptist (Yahya) was killed by the Roman Dictators. No difference.

I can't believe you have such illogical brainwashed thinking. Please educate yourself and look at history from a perspective of logical analysis.

[کیش]

Karbala was the main reason why the ummah split between Shia and Sunni. Battle of camel started it, Battle of Siffin threw gas into the fire and Karbala was the last straw.

It's time for both parties to move fast the bury the sad history of these battles and unite again. Because that's what the Prophet would want for the ummah to do.

[کیش]

See that's the difference between you and I; I'm not deeply brainwashed by a group of small minded retards masquerading as Ulama Who hijack the names of great thinkers like Abu Hanifa in the bid to keep people ignorant and backwards for their social agenda and mind control.

We do not need to be gullible followers; Islam has a tradition of using REASON and LOGIC to determine which of these people are real ULAMA and who are merely injecting and inserting their twisted desires to misguide another generation of Muslims to keep us constantly squabbling over irrelevant events. Likewise we can use reason and Logic to examine these SAME events.

Using reason and logic we can see that Hussain was simply a mortal, a man with failings and shortcomings like anyone else. There was no divine power to inoculate If we look at things objectively and NOT some bundle of indoctrination of exaggerated reverence. We see that Hussain was filled with his family's propaganda about being somehow magically destined to be some sort of celestial figure on Earth. It was about his own self aggrandized ego.

On the flipside you had Yazeed; bitter about his fmaily's loss of dominance in the affairs of the Arabs yet realizing the prospect that the New religion Islam had in impacting over the Arabs and 'Ajam saw an opportunity to expand their power beyond what his predecessors could ever imagine

This isn't Marx that highlights these; this is Tabari and historical accounts from the Islamic Annals.

So instead of recommending repentenace for crimes which are not even apart of Islam anyways but just an emotional blackmail tool to silence intellectual thought. I recommend you repent for your ignorance. gullibility and weakmindedness as these are catastrophic and lower the quality of our species.

Good post, Mahmoud.

[Khorosani]

See that's the difference between you and I; I'm not deeply brainwashed by a group of small minded retards masquerading as Ulama Who hijack the names of great thinkers like Abu Hanifa in the bid to keep people ignorant and backwards for their social agenda and mind control.

We do not need to be gullible followers; Islam has a tradition of using REASON and LOGIC to determine which of these people are real ULAMA and who are merely injecting and inserting their twisted desires to misguide another generation of Muslims to keep us constantly squabbling over irrelevant events. Likewise we can use reason and Logic to examine these SAME events.

Using reason and logic we can see that Hussain was simply a mortal, a man with failings and shortcomings like anyone else. There was no divine power to inoculate If we look at things objectively and NOT some bundle of indoctrination of exaggerated reverence. We see that Hussain was filled with his family's propaganda about being somehow magically destined to be some sort of celestial figure on Earth. It was about his own self aggrandized ego.

On the flipside you had Yazeed; bitter about his fmaily's loss of dominance in the affairs of the Arabs yet realizing the prospect that the New religion Islam had in impacting over the Arabs and 'Ajam saw an opportunity to expand their power beyond what his predecessors could ever imagine

This isn't Marx that highlights these; this is Tabari and historical accounts from the Islamic Annals.

So instead of recommending repentenace for crimes which are not even apart of Islam anyways but just an emotional blackmail tool to silence intellectual thought. I recommend you repent for your ignorance. gullibility and weakmindedness as these are catastrophic and lower the quality of our species.

It isn't intellectual thought to slander a sahaba whose single strand of hair is worth more than your entire body. The Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) said

Prophet sallallahu ^alayhi wa sallam: “Al-Hasan and al-Husayn are the Masters of the youth of the people of Paradise.”

and Allah said that those of jannah are those who do not want "uluw" as in authority, supremacy ect in the land. There are multiple hadiths that reflect the same meaning. So how dare you say that the chief of the youth of jannah (pretty much everybody, cause everybody is a youth in jannah) somehow was deviated and believed he was supreme and he deserved the khalifah, he was only looking out for the interests of this ummah like his Father and brother.

If you aren't going to speak with sources such as the Quran and sunnah and the early scholars of Islam than you need to shut up and take a hike instead of looking at our texts with a western kaffir lens. Our scholarship is free from your methodology of viewing the texts.

Bring the quote of tabiri where he asserts such things.

Hmmm no that's not it; It's understanding that they're people and that human beings going through an event may not always be giving objective accounts so we have to take into account EVERYTHING and then take an analysis on that. That despite their petitions and agendas what was really occurring behind these events.

I understand if you've been raised to look at things from a brainwashed worldview peppered with filtered ways to interpret these events that it seems like sacrilege. But this is apart of the idiotic mind warp that you've had bashed into your head without questioning and blindly following like a SHEEP.

You are basically undermining the hadith traditions by saying that the sahaba, tabieen and the muhaditheen at whole wanted to DISTORT the image of such sahaba, what account of history can we trust than if that is the case? It has nothing to do with being a sheep it has to do with laymen such as you trying to view the religion with his own logic and in a way that is undermining the sciences of our religion. I expect this from kuffar but not from laymen such as yourself.

You are not any different from the claim you threw on me of being attached to certain scholars, you are exactly the same way. If you don't like a scholars work you threw it out the window as you did the text of ibn nuhaas on the issue of taking women as slaves, written by a shaffi and commemorated as the greatest text on Jihad which is taught by deobandis, salafis and other scholars of our time and dates back to 400 years back. Your just a person who has preconceived notions and thoughts and have established them as your beliefs. You have a twisted methodology that you most likely developed before you started getting interested by your religion.

[RevolutionThroughReason]

It isn't intellectual thought to slander a sahaba whose single strand of hair is worth more than your entire body. The Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) said

Prophet sallallahu ^alayhi wa sallam: “Al-Hasan and al-Husayn are the Masters of the youth of the people of Paradise.”

and Allah said that those of jannah are those who do not want "uluw" as in authority, supremacy ect in the land. There are multiple hadiths that reflect the same meaning. So how dare you say that the chief of the youth of jannah (pretty much everybody, cause everybody is a youth in jannah) somehow was deviated and believed he was supreme and he deserved the khalifah, he was only looking out for the interests of this ummah like his Father and brother.

If you aren't going to speak with sources such as the Quran and sunnah and the early scholars of Islam than you need to shut up and take a hike instead of looking at our texts with a western kaffir lens. Our scholarship is free from your methodology of viewing the texts.

I disagree; what isn't intellectual thought is to take any legitimate assessment which may not have been flattering to someone as "slander". In fact that's just a cowardly tool by weak minded individuals; which you seem to be one of of in defense of their hideous mind control and mental ineptitude and subordination.

Look at the fanatical gobbly goop you spew "one hair is worth more than you" ....Did you forget Islam teaches Fairness and Justice?!?!?!? How can people whose misguided and egotistic judgments that caused so much harm and bloodshed of innocent people somehow have hairs worth more than someone.

You evidently can't think with a clear head and re blinded by your irrational impulses. Behavior that resembles that of a menstruating woman, I may add.

Al-Hasan and Al-Hussain are the Masters of the Youth? And? What's your point? so people who enter heaven never did foolish things on Earth? Nabi(saw) once said that if there was a Prophet after me it would be Umar Ibn Khattab(ra) despite the fact the man murdered his infant daughter when he was a pagan. Nabi(saw) said nice things to build people's self esteem, and ease their egotistic anxieties, he used kind statements to calm peoples egoes and get them to cooperate. He was a psychologist.

You are blinded by an ideology which has crippled Muslims for centuries.

Bring the quote of tabiri where he asserts such things.

You are basically undermining the hadith traditions by saying that the sahaba, tabieen and the muhaditheen at whole wanted to DISTORT the image of such sahaba, what account of history can we trust than if that is the case?

That's the history you're supposed to trust; the stuff that doesn't try to white wash everything just to create a false and cosmetic picture. Reality is seldom. Trust your logic first. ....did you forget you have a brain? Well maybe you don't; you went through a lobotomy. For the rest of us we have brains. You're not going to stop us from using them.

It has nothing to do with being a sheep it has to do with laymen such as you trying to view the religion with his own logic and in a way that is undermining the sciences of our religion. I expect this from kuffar but not from laymen such as yourself.

No it has EVERYTHING to do with being sheep. Who told you that the men you follow are scholars? The MEN that you follow told you. Yes they hijacked the names of Imam Abu Hanifah or Imam Malik but neither of these men preached what YOUR scholars preach now, did they? Nope we find no evidence they did ...unless you mean the forged statements made up many generations later are theirs. You're naive and simple minded if you.

I never said there aren't good scholars, of course there are and maybe even some of the "bad" scholars occasionally good things to say or some of the good scholars occasionally say bad things. The point is knowing what to take and what not to take. This takes logic.

You are not any different from the claim you threw on me of being attached to certain scholars, you are exactly the same way. If you don't like a scholars work you threw it out the window as you did the text of ibn nuhaas.

Well of course; anyone who says violating and raping women is acceptable is clearly a vermin and cancer to society who should have a spear shoved into them from their back end and impaled and made and example of FOR JUST THINKING doing such things is acceptable. We know from study and research the type of emotional, physical and psychological damage being "War booty" does to women because this has been documented. ANy scholar who denies that this is true is ignorant and denies the facts and thus is not reliable as an opinion no matter how much repute they have. A real scholar is aware of information and makes judgement based on the most correct and accurate information. This requires some basic knowledge of things outside of mere doctrine but also psychology, science, politics.

So no I'm not doing anything at all of what you're doing; You're following people because some other people said how great they are; I follow people because the evidence ALL around demonstrate their reasoning was accurate. See the difference? No I guess you can't.

I'm not going to spoon fed you; but I will say this; there is a saying by Imam Hussain to the effect "Isn't it our right to rule as we are from the Ahl Ul Kisa" ....Now go find it

[Khorosani]

I disagree; what isn't intellectual thought is to take any legitimate assessment which may not have been flattering to someone as "slander". In fact that's just a cowardly tool by weak minded individuals; which you seem to be one of of in defense of their hideous mind control and mental ineptitude and subordination.

baseless allegations

Look at the fanatical gobbly goop you spew "one hair is worth more than you" ....Did you forget Islam teaches Fairness and Justice?!?!?!? How can people whose misguided and egotistic judgments that caused so much harm and bloodshed of innocent people somehow have hairs worth more than someone.

You evidently can't think with a clear head and re blinded by your irrational impulses. Behavior that resembles that of a menstruating woman, I may add.

I'm sorry if you find having gheera for the sahaba being that of behaviour that resembles "menstruating women". And yes his single hair is worth more than you will ever be, it has nothing to do with justice and equity of the sharia but rather his qualities of a believer and a man. EDIT: if you have been hurt by this statement let me apologise, i meant that his nail as him being a believer and the qualities of a believer is worth more than you and therefore he should be respected. Abu Bakr (RA) if he is to be weighed with the entire ummah he would outweigh them, that is where my comment is stemmed from.

Al-Hasan and Al-Hussain are the Masters of the Youth? And? What's your point? so people who enter heaven never did foolish things on Earth? Nabi(saw) once said that if there was a Prophet after me it would be Umar Ibn Khattab(ra) despite the fact the man murdered his infant daughter when he was a pagan. Nabi(saw) said nice things to build people's self esteem, and ease their egotistic anxieties, he used kind statements to calm peoples egoes and get them to cooperate. He was a psychologist.

You've shown the ultimate ignorance of our religion with this statement. First of all Umar did that action BEFORE he entered islam and second that athar is really really weak.

???? ??????? ???? ????? - ?? ??? ?? ??? ?? ?????? ??? ???? ??? ??? ????? ?? ???????? ?

‫

and here is the translation of the above video from another brother

n the video posted by bro Ibn Abbas, Shaikh 'Uthman Al-Khamis explained that the story about 'Umar burying his daughter was reported by a man named Jaber Al-Ju'fi and he is both a Rafidhi and liar. Therefore, the report is definitely fabricated and a blatant lie against 'Umar (radhiya Allahu 'anhu).

Actually, shirk is the greatest sin of Jahiliyaa and whatever sin was committed during that period fades in comparison to it. So, when the call of Islam came and people began entering it, they went from mushrikeen to mo'mineen overnight. Islam wipes away what comes before..

However, it was customary for Arabs in Jahliyya to bury their daughters, and the Shaikh mentioned Zayd bin 'Amr bin Nufail (the father of the great Sahabi, Sa'eed bin Zayd), although he did not live to witness Islam was still given the glad-tiding of Paradise because he was a muwahid upon the religion of Ibrahim, 'alayhi asalam. In Al-Bukhari, it is reported from the hadith of Asma bint Abi Bakr:

"I saw Zaid bin Amr bin Nufail standing with his back against the Ka'ba and saying. 'O people of Quraish! By Allah. none amongst you is on the religion of Abraham except me.' He used to preserve the lives of little girls: If somebody wanted to kill his daughter he would say to him. 'Do not kill her for I will feed her on your behalf.' So he would take her. and when she grew up nicely. he would say to her father. 'Now if you want her. I will give her to you. and if you wish. I will feed her on your behalf.' "

May Allah be pleased with him..

Second of all what your implying of Sayyiduna Hussein is worse than burying your daughter in jahiliyya, your implying Hussein had a MAJOR DISEASE in the heart in the state of Islam, after being called those of jannah.

Umar did an act that was bad in jahiliya, which Islam erased.
but your implying Hussein did an act in Islam that is actually a disease in the heart. The desire to be superior on the earth (which Allah stated is NOT a quality of those who will have jannah) and of course asabiya (feeling Banu Hashim is better than Umayya)

You are blinded by an ideology which has crippled Muslims for centuries.

Bring the quote of tabiri where he asserts such things.

Stop having su'athan You aren't able to make excuses for your brothers and the best of Muslims and think the best of them, especially those that the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) have SAID they are in jannah just so you can stick to your viewpoint and methodology of whims and desires disguised as "logic and reasoning".

That's the history you're supposed to trust; the stuff that doesn't try to white wash everything just to create a false and cosmetic picture. Reality is seldom. Trust your logic first. ....did you forget you have a brain? Well maybe you don't; you went through a lobotomy. For the rest of us we have brains. You're not going to stop us from using them.

Your assertions are free from the hadith sciences. If the muhaditheen used your logic we'd never have the strong science we have today.

No it has EVERYTHING to do with being sheep. Who told you that the men you follow are scholars? The MEN that you follow told you. Yes they hijacked the names of Imam Abu Hanifah or Imam Malik but neither of these men preached what YOUR scholars preach now, did they? Nope we find no evidence they did ...unless you mean the forged statements made up many generations later are theirs. You're naive and simple minded if you.

I follow scholars from all methodologies that are of this ummah, azhari, hanbali, deobandi ect ect but i mostly follow the old scholars and there text because the khalaf are bound to make more mistakes than the salaf (not salafusaliheen but salaf in terms of the ones who all ready passed) No scholar at all has implied what you have said except maybe some nasibis who are known for being nasibis.

I never said there aren't good scholars, of course there are and maybe even some of the "bad" scholars occasionally good things to say or some of the good scholars occasionally say bad things. The point is knowing what to take and what not to take. This takes logic.

It doesn't take logic (alone) it takes usool and aqeeda.

Well of course; anyone who says violating and raping women is acceptable is clearly a vermin and cancer to society who should have a spear shoved into them from their back end and impaled and made and example of FOR JUST THINKING doing such things is acceptable. We know from study and research the type of emotional, physical and psychological damage being "War booty" does to women because this has been documented. ANy scholar who denies that this is true is ignorant and denies the facts and thus is not reliable as an opinion no matter how much repute they have. A real scholar is aware of information and makes judgement based on the most correct and accurate information. This requires some basic knowledge of things outside of mere doctrine but also psychology, science, politics.

The issue wasn't rape. The issue had nothing to do with rape it had to do with sex and having slaves after war. That issue is for that thread I was just showing that you like to throw away texts to suit your conjecture.

So no I'm not doing anything at all of what you're doing; You're following people because some other people said how great they are; I follow people because the evidence ALL around demonstrate their reasoning was accurate. See the difference? No I guess you can't.

The Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) said he is one of the masters of the youth of Jannah and said he loves him. The scholars among the sahaba and the tabieen have vouched for these sahaba.

In addition Abdullah ibn Zubair (RA) is your refutation any way, he isn't from Banu Hashim rather from Banu Assad and due to the event of Karbala he declared a khilafa against the tyrant yazeed. Banu Hashim in Mecca would've went against Abdullah ibn Zubair but of course that didn't happen.

If you can't see the islamic reasoning in my statements than you are not being honest with me.

I'm not going to spoon fed you; but I will say this; there is a saying by Imam Hussain to the effect "Isn't it our right to rule as we are from the Ahl Ul Kisa" ....Now go find it

If the ahlul kisa quote you brought is sahih, it doesn't imply what you are arguing. Being of Ahlul kisa gives Hussein (RA) a higher status than of Yazeed the tyrant. It is known in Islam that whoever has the higher status and is capable of leading should lead and has more of the right to rule. That is why Abu Bakr (RA) was more appropriate of the khilafa than all the other sahaba. The ahadith on Abu Bakr (RA) being the greatest of the ummah is many and known. The reason why was because he led the prayer in absence of the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) and the one leading the people in the matters of the akhira is the most suitable to lead the people in the matters of the dunya.

second of all i don't have time to find a quote in Tabiri due to Tabiri being known to add weak and fabricated ahadith in his text. Either provide the Tabiri text with its isnad, grade, and explanation of a scholar or get lost.

Using your logic next thing you know your going to cast doubt on Abu Bakr (RA) claim on the Quraysh having more of the right in running the affairs of the ummah and in reality had an intention that: "he just wanted power to stay with Quraysh".

[Levanaye Zalmaye]

so basically, second hand sources giving their own personal view and interpretations of the events hold more weight than the actual people who narrated the events in real time and the scholars who have a chain of transmission to those people? Yes very convincing.

and how dare you call the amir of the believers "their guy" in a casual way. fear Allah in that matter.

The fact is that scores of Banu Umayyah supported Ali (ra) and ahlul bait (such as Umar ibn Abdul Aziz) thereafter and the picture you are painting has nothing to do with the reality but rather it has to do with negative qualities of humans in the case of banu umayyah (after Ali and Mu'awiyya's conflict) it has to do with the love of power and for Ali and Mu'awiyya's conflict it had to do with truth and what is right and just.

Comrade, Islamic sources are heavily biased towards one side or the other in this matter. Many Sunni authors will try to paint a very rosy picture in which Umar and Ali were besties and Muawiya and Ali were chivalric saints and what not. Shia authors will paint Abu Bakr and Umar as inherently evil.

We must understand that by the time Muawiya's rebelled against Ali, the Islamic empire stretched from North Africa to Central Asia. Politics is dirty. We can revere our holy men as saintly figures but we cannot escape reality. They were real men who lived in the real world. Of course, Ali and Hussain were more pious than Muawiya (who came from a family of opportunist tribal leaders). But their struggle was essentially for power.

Umar ibn Abdul Aziz was the only Banu Ummaya caliph who outlawed the ritual cursing of Ali and his family.

[Khorosani]

Comrade, Islamic sources are heavily biased towards one side or the other in this matter. Many Sunni authors will try to paint a very rosy picture in which Umar and Ali were besties and Muawiya and Ali were chivalric saints and what not. Shia authors will paint Abu Bakr and Umar as inherently evil.

We must understand that by the time Muawiya's rebelled against Ali, the Islamic empire stretched from North Africa to Central Asia. Politics is dirty. We can revere our holy men as saintly figures but we cannot escape reality. They were real men who lived in the real world. Of course, Ali and Hussain were more pious than Muawiya (who came from a family of opportunist tribal leaders). But their struggle was essentially for power.

Umar ibn Abdul Aziz was the only Banu Ummaya caliph who outlawed the ritual cursing of Ali and his family.

You either have to prove that Banu Ummayyah cursed Ali or go back to your hole.

If you are suggesting that the biases of our scholars have forced them to distort history or hide facts on certain events than that is undermining the whole Islamic tradition, sorry such views will not be tolerated.

Doubting the piety and the sincerity of the sahaba and slandering them with the attributes of tyrants and people of diseased hearts is not a small view that there can be difference of opinion and none of the sunnis, whether asharia, hanbali, salafi ect will accept such idiotic views. For the sahaba presented the Quran to the world, and doubting their sincerity is doubting the source from which we received the Quran and the Ahadith of Rasulullah (saw).

this letter totally refutes what you are implying on Mu'awiyya (two slanders now).

Once Amir Muawiyah Ibn Abu Sufyan (Radiallahu anhu) received a letter from the Emperor of Rome (Eastern Roman Empire), it said:

“I know that your brother Ali Ibn Abu Talib (Radiallahu anhu) has caused you a lot of trouble so if you wish I will send a large Roman army to help you against him."

In reply to this letter Amir Muawiyah (Radiallahu anhu) wrote:

“O Caesar don’t try to take advantage of the differences between me and Ali Ibn Abu Talib (Radiallahu anhu). I know that you want to fight the Muslims but beware if you send an army aiding us, the first person to come out from the army of Ali (Radiallahu anhu) to behead you will be Muawiyah.”

Mu'awiyya wanted to avenge for the murders of uthman and wanted to bring them to justice, Ali differed and by the concensus of the Ulema all of them agree with Ali (i guess they were also in favour of banu hashim being in power over banu umayyah even though most of our great scholars lived in that time) and furthermore Allah said if the MUMINEEN (which is a status that is really really high, those who are promised jannah and so forth) get into a fight than make peace between them. That shows that the believers, who don't have the qualities of wanting authority and fighting for reasons such as expansion of land are able to fight. The Quran has called the sahaba many times "believers" and the testimony for sahaba such as ali and muwaiyya and hassan and hussein has been made by the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) the sahaba and the scholars among our 1400 years of history.

Just because you are indoctrinated by Western thought, and thus see that the blockage of our advancement in the Muslim world is due to the scholars (false of course) you want to doubt their sincerity and tradition because you believe that they want to stretch their power over the Muslims and to do that they want to keep them ignorant in-spite of the fact that mulitple madrassas are absolutely or almost free and if you take the time you can go and study in them. The only reason you are doubting our sources is because of your inferiority-complex. I find the debate against modernists chumps like you and RTR is more important than debating other deviants in our religion.

[Talib Jan]

asSalamu `alaykum,

Apologies for the interjection. Extreme caution and care must be taken when speaking of the pure ahl ul-bayt (ra) and the honorable sahaba (ra) which is unfortunately missing amongst Muslims today. Hopefully the following will clarify how Muslims should view this period of Islamic history.

Ashura, Conflict Among Sahabas and Loving Ahlul Bayt - Dr Umar Faruq Abd-Allah - YouTube

[Badlun]

John the Baptist (Yahya) was killed by the Roman Dictators. No difference.

I can't believe you have such illogical brainwashed thinking. Please educate yourself and look at history from a perspective of logical analysis.

I do not know who is more important for Muslims a distant not very known prophet Yahya or the grandson of a prophet, son of Ali and Fatima fighting against an evil dictator who also claimed to be a Muslim not a Roman infidel.

However I agree with your real politik and Realism theory that all this was power game. Hussain could have waited for an appropriate time and would have not committed that suicide kind of combat but on moral grounds we must appreciate and remember his stand. All this also show that Islam is only in mosque and heart not in politics and wars.

I wish you could argue and prove your point instead of attacking the personality of a member and not advising like a professor to his pupil.

[Badlun]

After reading Khorosani views one strange thing came to my mind that why Taliban do not use the figure of Imam Hussain as their symbol of war against Muslim tyrants.

Sunnis totally ignore Muharram and observe it as Ashura to keep fast which is a pre Karbala tradition. But in their hate for Shiites Taliban ignore Hussain and many extremists even praise Yazeed being ruler of the time and his obedience was part of Iman.

[Khorosani]

I do not know who is more important for Muslims a distant not very known prophet Yahya or the grandson of a prophet, son of Ali and Fatima fighting against an evil dictator who also claimed to be a Muslim not a Roman infidel.

However I agree with your real politik and Realism theory that all this was power game. Hussain could have waited for an appropriate time and would have not committed that suicide kind of combat but on moral grounds we must appreciate and remember his stand. All this also show that Islam is only in mosque and heart not in politics and wars.

I wish you could argue and prove your point instead of attacking the personality of a member and not advising like a professor to his pupil.

Wait a minute, you know Islam better than Al Hussein did? He didn't seem to think Islam was only in the "mosque and heart".

This is the deviance of modernist ideology.

[Khorosani]

After reading Khorosani views one strange thing came to my mind that why Taliban do not use the figure of Imam Hussain as their symbol of war against Muslim tyrants.

Sunnis totally ignore Muharram and observe it as Ashura to keep fast which is a pre Karbala tradition. But in their hate for Shiites Taliban ignore Hussain and many extremists even praise Yazeed being ruler of the time and his obedience was part of Iman.

There were better warriors than Hussein that have fought against Tyranny like the Prophet Muhammad pbuh, Musa, Hamza ect. Besides the Taliban do not even make speeches on these issues so how would you even know their views.

In addition this is totally irrelevant to the conversation

[ډګروال]

let the shias beat themselves bloody , its non of my concerns.

Afghan shias did break this tradition by giving blood instead of beating themselves bloody on the streets.


If Hussan(ra) was a shaheed than isnt crying over his shahadath against Islam?

this badlun guy is a kafir who is here to constantly cause confusion and attacks the core of Pashtuns which is sunni Islam and constantly blames pashtuns for crimes committed against them.

i wonder why this forum wholeheartly allows such agenda driven anti pashtun propagandists of this forum.unless .................

[Ansari1]

I am really shocked to see that Sunni Muslims are not that much observing the Muharam and Ashura day/month as Shia Muslims do! Imam Husain was the grandson of the Prophet of both Sunnis and Shias but I dont see the zeal among Sunnis to commemorate this great tragedy of the history of Islam. Only Shia remember this day, mourn and express their religious sentiments while Sunnis almost remain almost silent or lukewarm.

Does it mean that Sunnis agree with what Yazid committed or their inertia on this matter has some other connotation?

I think you missed the foundation of fasting on the tenth of Ashuraa. It was instructed by the Prophet and it derives from the day Allah subhana wa ta'ala saved Musa from Fir'awn. The fasting is not linked with Karbala in the first place and it is not about mourning nor is it a celebration.

The narrations, [numerous of them] is as follows:

Ibn `Abbās (raḍī Allāhu anhu) said: “When the Messenger of Allāh (ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam) came to Madīnah, he found the Jews fasting on the day of `Āshūra. He asked: ‘What is this [that you are doing]?’ They replied: ‘This is a righteous day. On this day Allāh saved the Israelites from their enemies, and so Moses, on this day, observed a fast.’ The Messenger of Allāh (ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam) said: ‘I have a greater right on Moses (alayhis salām) than you.’ So, he observed the fast (on that day) and ordered the Muslims to also fast.’ [Agreed Upon]

The Shi'a have similar narrations in which they are instructed to fast.

On top of this, there are many sources in Shi'a fiqh which indicate not to mourn for the dead. Furthermore, Hussayn radiallahu anh advised his sister not to mourn or lament because of his dead as can be red in Shi'a books:

"Dear sister! I administer an oath to you that you will follow my advice. Do not tear your dress on account of my suffering, do not scratch your face and do not lament".

http://www.al-islam.org/probe-history-ashura-dr-ibrahim-ayati/chapter-17-imam-husayn-consoles-lady-zaynab

Only Shia remember this day, mourn and express their religious sentiments

It looks more like a celebration with crocodile tears. What do you think?

Mullah Crying Fake about Imam Hussain (a.s) - YouTube