Saudi Wahhabi cleric calls Shia Muslims as non-Muslims and requests to pay Jizya


519284Ali Alrabieei a Saudi Wahhabi cleric calls Shia Muslims as non-Muslims and calls on Islamic governments to collect jizya from them.

Under Islamic law, jizya or jizyah is a per capita tax levied on a section of an Islamic state’s non-Muslim citizens who meet certain criteria. The tax is and was to be levied on able-bodied adult males of military age and affording power.

Alrabieei calls Shia non-Muslim when Shia believes in the same God, Prophet and principles of Islam as any other Muslim sects do. In Arab countries one is called non-Muslim only to be looked down at and it is a way of degrading a person or a group. Anyone with basic knowledge and minimal education about Islam knows Shia are minorities within Islam, say Mustafa Akhwand the director of SRW. Also jizya can only be collected from male who meet certain criteria in return of the security and job opportunities that they enjoy in Islamic country.

Shia are Muslims. Even IF they were not considered Muslim, they would have to pay IF they enjoyed any security and financial ease…As the world witnesses Shia Muslims have no security in Islamic nations, and they are among the poorest population because of the oppression of their governments. Thousands of Shia Muslims are being killed and now they have to pay because they live in such environment?

This claim of Alrabieei is harmful and can lead to more human rights violations. SRW holds Saudi Arabia government responsible for this humiliating accuse since in this country all clerics are official employees of the government. Ali Alrabieei must be questioned by the authorities and stopped from enabling Shia rights violations immediately.

16 thoughts on “Saudi Wahhabi cleric calls Shia Muslims as non-Muslims and requests to pay Jizya

  1. ISLAMIC INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD IS A JOKE

    People of other nations, when they embrace Islam, come to be united under the Arabian hegemony, and call themselves Umma or one nation. What a self-deception it is! It is a self-deception because Muslims of other countries are treated as foreigners in Arabia. They are not considered as citizens of Hijaz (Arabia); neither are they allowed to buy property there, nor permitted to run businesses independently. These Muslims are complete foreigners in Arabia, subject to visa, passport and all other laws governing the behavior and obligations of the aliens.
    If Islam was really based on true brotherhood of all Muslims, irrespective of geographical boundaries, Mecca and Medina would have been international cities (at least to all the Muslims); since quotations from the address of the Prophet at the Last Pilgrimage do not measure up to his pan-Islamic conduct, they must be forgeries like many hadilhs. Again, it must be remembered that almost all his audience on that occasion consisted of the Arabs, and therefore, whatever he said, related to the Arabs only. This point becomes clear when we realize that Muhammad laid the foundation of an Arab Empire in the name of Islam and not an Islamic Empire.

    The foreign Muslims did not have top- level representation in the government of Arabia during the times of Muhammad himself. Neither did they enjoy any such privilege during the heyday of the Arab political ascendancy, nor is there any legal precedent to prove that a Muslim from any territory can become the President or Prime Minister of an Arab country. On the contrary, a person of any race and color could become the head of the mighty Roman Empire. Yet the Muslims claim the superiority of the Islamic system!

    It is absolutely necessary to counter the false Islamic propaganda of international brotherhood.

    Why do Arabs discriminate against other Muslims from the Ummah
    – Reason: Muslims are thugs. As they fight with others to commit thuggery, they also fight amongst themselves while sharing the spoils of their thuggery.
    We hear a lot of the unity and brotherhood of Muslims within the Muslim Ummah. Ummah is the global Muslim community that is alleged to be devoid of national, ethnic, color barriers amongst all Muslims. Sounds fantastic. But is it really so? Are Muslims really united and do not discriminate amongst themselves. We say they practice the worst form of discrimination amongst themselves. So what, you say, there is discrimination in all parts of the globe. But it is our contention that Muslims apart from the paranoid enmity they breed in their minds towards all non-Muslims, they also practice heinous discrimination amongst themselves. Let’s see how the Muslim Ummah compares with the EU (European Union).
    Somewhat parallel to the concept of Ummah we have the concept of an EU. If and when the EU is fully effective, all Europeans would be free to move from one part of Europe to another and settle anywhere. Does the Muslim Ummah extend this facility to the Muslims? Sudanese, Egyptians, Pakistanis, Indonesians, Malaysians go to the Middle East to share in the petro-dollar led boom in the Gulf. How many of these fellow Muslims are allowed to settle down in the Arab countries like Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Qatar, Oman, Bahrain, Kuwait. The answer is in none of them! So much for the Ummah.
    The brother Muslims from other countries who go there in droves can only work there and when they are out of work, they are repatriated to their country of origin. Why so? Why do not Muslim countries allow “brother” Muslims to settle down in the oil rich countries of the Gulf?
    This question become especially poignant, as Muslims from all over the world are allowed to migrate to the West and settle down in Europe, USA Canada, etc. That these immigrants cause flare-ups as we are seeing in France is another matter. Gratitude towards their benefactors has never been a Muslim virtue! And if these benefactors are non-Muslims, then the beneficiary Muslims have nothing but contempt for their benefactors. All acts of helping the Muslims are looked upon by the Muslim as a sign of weakness on part of the non-Muslims. Muslims are brainwashed to look upon Kafirs (Non-Muslims) as inferiors and to deceive them in all matters – small and large.

  2. THE ARABS ARE SUPERIOR IN ISLAM

    August 27, 2012

    Here is the original fatwa from Sunnipath. Those who are curious may go there and read it all
    The fact that Allah Most High has chosen the Arabs over other nations is affirmed in rigorously authenticated hadiths of the Prophet, may Allah bless him and give him peace; related by Bukhari and Muslim in their “Sahih” in the beginning of the chapter of merits, # 5897, on the authority of Wathilah ibn al-Asqa` who said, “I heard the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, say, ‘Verily Allah has chosen Kinanah from the son of Isma`il, and He has chosen Quraysh from among Kinanah and He has chosen Hashim from among Quraysh and He has chosen me from the Bani Hashim.’”

    So this hadith is a primary text about the preference of Arabs over others and the preference of some Arabs over other Arabs. And this is what the Imams have chosen from the………of their books, and even in individual books such as the book of Qurb about the merit of Arabs, authored by the great Imam al-Hafiz Zayn al-din al-`Iraqi. And it was summarized by Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Hajar al-Haytami and others.
    Therefore the preference of Arabs over other nations, and the preference of some Arabs over other Arabs is affirmed in the Sacred Law. Allah has even preferred some months over other months and some days and nights of over others, as well as places. So in the same way, Allah Glorious and Exalted is He, has chosen some men over others, such as the prophets over others and even some prophets over other prophets. Muslims should not have any objection to this, because all of this returns to the wisdom of the Most Wise, Glorious is He, who is not asked about what He does, but rather, they are the ones who are asked. So after a Muslim has believed in Allah as his Lord, the Truth, and that there is no God but Him, then he should know that this is from among His matters, Blessed and High is He, and there is nothing but magnificent wisdom in it that we might see or that we might not see. Either way, we are only responsible for submitting to His rule, Glorious is He. And among His rulings is that Arabs are preferred over others and that some Arabs are better than other Arabs, as the above hadith clearly explained. So it is not appropriate for anyone to disagree in this when the proof is perfectly valid.
    And there should be no disagreement in what has just preceded nor any disagreement in what appears in the Magnificent Book and in the sunna where we find that the real source of Allah’s preference is God-fearingness (taqwa) which result in the good deeds that people earn and that they are accounted for. So whoever sends forth good for himself, Allah has preferred him over those who have sent forth evil. As for the preference of an Arab over a non-Arab, and the preference of some Arabs over others, this is not a deed that one can earn. Rather, it is a bounty that Allah gives to whom He wills. So he may will something for these people, and there is no objection to your Lord’s rule. This is like the preference of some days over others, because the mind reasons that all days are the same in and of themselves, and there is no distinction that might appear between them. However, the mind can understand why something is better if there is not ……….. So the Sacred law came and affirmed the preference of some over others, and for some of those things there were reasons and wisdoms, such as the preference of the night of Power over others because the Majestic Qur’an was revealed during it. And in some of these things, the wisdom is not apparent to us and so this falls into the chapter of absolute obedience, such as the number of cycles (rak`ahs) in the prayer.

    It is obligatory on a Muslim to believe that Arabs are preferred over other nations because there is a proof for it. However, this is not one of the pillars of our religion such that if someone rejected this, they would be considered outside of Islam. But if one does reject this, one has sinned for not believing in it because it is an affirmed matter according to a clear rigorously authenticated hadith. Also, this issue is not something that is commonly known among most Muslims, so for this, one should not hasten to blame one who disagrees with it. It is necessary, rather, to tell him about the issue.

    And the fact that Arabs are preferred over others does not mean that a non-Arab can not have a higher merit in the religion than an Arab, because a person earns the good deeds that Allah has recommended we compete for. This is the highest merit of God-fearingness and this will be the basis upon which things are decided in the hereafter. However, the merit of the Arabs will still remain, in terms of their respect and exaltation being higher than others. And from this some hadiths have come to us about the Quraysh being put first for the caliphate before others, such as the hadith in Bukhari (#3500) on the authority of Mu`awiyah, may Allah be well pleased with him who said, ” I heard the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, say, ‘This matter of government belongs to the Quraysh. Anyone who takes a hostile attitude to them will be thrown on his face, as long as they are true to the faith.” And Bukhari also related (#3501) on the authority of Ibn `Umar from the Prophet, may Allah bless him and give him peace, that he said, “Government continues to belong to the Quraysh, even if they are (no more than) two.”

    So I say that the merit of God-fearingness is what counts, according to the rigorously authenticated hadith, “And he who is slow in doing good deeds, his noble lineage will not quicken him (into entering Paradise).

    So many Muslims hold this belief and even say that you are not a proper Muslim if you are not.

    Abu Usamah, an American from the Salafi sect, even wrote the following to his followers admonishing them for not believing that Arabs are better than non-Arabs:

    Sheikh-ul-Islam, Ibn Taymiyyah (ra) was of the opinion that Arabs ARE SUPERIOR (Afdal) than Non-Arabs and he claimed that this was the view that was held by the MAJORITY of the scholars – ‘Al-Jamhoor’- .

    He wrote:

    “And the MAJORITY of scholars are of the opinion that the Arab species is better (Afdal) than the Non-Arab (species) just as the nation of Quraish is better (Afdal) than the Non-Quraish nations and (just as) the nation of Bani Haashim is better (Afdal) than the Non-Bani Haashim (nations).” Majm’u Al-Fataawa 19/29

    Sheikh-ul-Islam, Ibn Taymiyyah (ra) wrote:

    “Verily, what Ahlul Sunnah is upon: Is the BELIEF (I’tiqaad) that the Arab race is better (Afdal) then the Non-Arab race. Whether (the Non-Arabs) are Hebrews, Aramaic, Romans, Persians and other than them…”. Iqtidaa As-Siraatil-Mustaqeem 2/419

    Abu Muhammad, Harb ibn Ismail ibn Khalaf Al-Kirmaany (died 280 – ra) who was one of the students and companions of Imaam Ahmed (ra) also mentioned this point when he wrote about the descriptions and BELIEFS of the PEOPLE OF THE SUNNAH.

    Shiekh-ul-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah (ra) said:

    “Know that the Ahaadith (that show) the superiority of Quraish and then the superiority of Bani Haashim are numerous and this is not the place (to gather all of them) but they also prove this (superiority of the Arab over Non-Arabs).

    And this is due to the fact that the relationship of Quraish to the Arabs is just like the relationship of the Arabs to the rest of the people (i.e. Quraish are superior to Non-Quraish and the Arabs are superior to Non-Arabs). Verily Allah the Most High has designated the Arabs and their language with ‘Ahkaam’ that are peculiar and unique.

    And then He preferred Quraish over the rest of the Arabs in what He has given them of prophecy and other than that from the ‘Khasaais’ (unique and peculiar qualities)”. Iqtidaa As-Siraat-il-Mustaqeem 2/431
    Sheikh-ul-Islam, Ibn Taymiyyah (ra) also said:

    “…The superiority of the Arab race and then (the superiority of) Quraish and then (the superiority of) Bani Haashim, is not simply due to the fact the Prophet (peace be upon him) is from them – even though this is (a point) of superiority – but instead, they themselves are superior within themselves”. Iqtidaa As-Siraatil-Mustaqeem 2/420

    To review:

    – The Arab is better than the non-Arab; the Arab from the tribe of Quraish (the tribe of Muhammad) is better than the Arab that NOT from the Quraish; The Ahl-Bayt (Member of Muhammad’s family) is better than those members of Quraish that are not Ahl-Bayt. (Most Muslims note the “significance” of being a member of “Ahl-Bayt”).

    – The Khalifah that jihadists always refer to is, according to Sunni texts, to always be a member of the Quraish (i.e., an Arab). So even if this Khilafah were to be established, then they would demand an Arab be the ruler at all times. A non-Arab can never hold that title.

    – As both Sunni Path and Abu Usamah note, this is not a strange or solitary opinion as many of the medieval scholars, including famous ones such as Imam Ash-Shafii, Abu Hanifah, and Imam Ahmad held this belief, and many modern Muslim scholars and laymen maintain this belief today. Indeed Sunnipath and Abu Usamah adamantly argue that MOST scholars held this opinion, are proud of it and demand it of others. Also, the Muslim Brotherhood today staunchly holds this belief as well (explaining why all of their leaders are Arab). Many Muslim Brotherhood members will not even deny it if asked.

    – No, not all Muslims (as Muslims are of many different types and beliefs) believe that Arabs are superior to them (many are unaware of these opinions) but the point here is that a very large segment of Muslims DO DOGGEDLY believe in the superiority of the Arabs but they hide this information from those they invite to Islam. This often comes as a shock to new Muslims because Islam is portrayed as egalitarian when in fact many scholars throughout Muslim history held this opinion. But this explains the haughty attitude of Arab Muslims toward non-Arabs.

    – To those Muslims who do NOT believe the Arabs to be superior, consider the following points:

    1) You pray (make salaat) in their language (and deem salaat unacceptable in any other language).
    2) You turn toward their land (qibla) to perform your salaats five times a day.
    3.) You feel that you are religiously obligated to travel to their land at least once in your lifetime.
    4.) You greet other non-Arab Muslims in their language (as-salaam alaikum).
    5.) And you even pepper your every day conversation in their language. (e.g. for an English speaker “alhamdulillah” instead of “praise God”; “insha Allah” instead of “God willing”, etc).

    So considering the points above, why would a non-Arab Muslim not think that Arabs are better even on a subconscious level? And none of this is to mention that many non-Arab Muslims give themselves and their children Arabic names, dress in Arabic clothing, and generally take on Arab customs. Also, why is it that an Arab can walk into a predominantly non-Arab masjid and instantly be held in the highest respect and even become the imam if that is what he desires? And some of you even wonder why so many non-Arabs hold the Arabs in such high regard. Start by looking at your daily actions. I did and I’m glad I did.

    Qibla > Answers > Guidance & Counsel > Methodology > Sources of Sacred Law > Arabs preferred over other nations
    Question ID:9427
    ARABS PREFERRED OVER OTHER NATIONS
    Answered by Shaykh Amjad Rasheed
    Translated by Ustadha Shazia Ahmad
    Question:

    I saw in the chapter of suitability of marriage that Allah has chosen Arabs over others. The outer purport of this hadith contradicts the sunna, can you explain?

    Answer:

    The fact that Allah Most High has chosen the Arabs over other nations is affirmed in rigorously authenticated hadiths of the Prophet, may Allah bless him and give him peace; related by Bukhari and Muslim in their “Sahih” in the beginning of the chapter of merits, # 5897, on the authority of Wathilah ibn al-Asqa` who said, “I heard the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, say, ‘Verily Allah has chosen Kinanah from the son of Isma`il, and He has chosen Quraysh from among Kinanah and He has chosen Hashim from among Quraysh and He has chosen me from the Bani Hashim.'”

    So this hadith is a primary text about the preference of Arabs over others and the preference of some Arabs over other Arabs. And this is what the Imams have chosen from the………of their books, and even in individual books such as the book of Qurb about the merit of Arabs, authored by the great Imam al-Hafiz Zayn al-din al-`Iraqi. And it was summarized by Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Hajar al-Haytami and others.
    Therefore the preference of Arabs over other nations, and the preference of some Arabs over other Arabs is affirmed in the Sacred Law. Allah has even preferred some months over other months and some days and nights of over others, as well as places. So in the same way, Allah Glorious and Exalted is He, has chosen some men over others, such as the prophets over others and even some prophets over other prophets. Muslims should not have any objection to this, because all of this returns to the wisdom of the Most Wise, Glorious is He, who is not asked about what He does, but rather, they are the ones who are asked. So after a Muslim has believed in Allah as his Lord, the Truth, and that there is no God but Him, then he should know that this is from among His matters, Blessed and High is He, and there is nothing but magnificent wisdom in it that we might see or that we might not see. Either way, we are only responsible for submitting to His rule, Glorious is He. And among His rulings is that Arabs are preferred over others and that some Arabs are better than other Arabs, as the above hadith clearly explained. So it is not appropriate for anyone to disagree in this when the proof is perfectly valid.
    And there should be no disagreement in what has just preceded nor any disagreement in what appears in the Magnificent Book and in the sunna where we find that the real source of Allah’s preference is God-fearingness (taqwa) which result in the good deeds that people earn and that they are accounted for. So whoever sends forth good for himself, Allah has preferred him over those who have sent forth evil. As for the preference of an Arab over a non-Arab, and the preference of some Arabs over others, this is not a deed that one can earn. Rather, it is a bounty that Allah gives to whom He wills. So he may will something for these people, and there is no objection to your Lord’s rule. This is like the preference of some days over others, because the mind reasons that all days are the same in and of themselves, and there is no distinction that might appear between them. However, the mind can understand why something is better if there is not ……….. So the Sacred law came and affirmed the preference of some over others, and for some of those things there were reasons and wisdoms, such as the preference of the night of Power over others because the Majestic Qur’an was revealed during it. And in some of these things, the wisdom is not apparent to us and so this falls into the chapter of absolute obedience, such as the number of cycles (rak`ahs) in the prayer.

    It is obligatory on a Muslim to believe that Arabs are preferred over other nations because there is a proof for it. However, this is not one of the pillars of our religion such that if someone rejected this, they would be considered outside of Islam. But if one does reject this, one has sinned for not believing in it because it is an affirmed matter according to a clear rigorously authenticated hadith. Also, this issue is not something that is commonly known among most Muslims, so for this, one should not hasten to blame one who disagrees with it. It is necessary, rather, to tell him about the issue.

    And the fact that Arabs are preferred over others does not mean that a non-Arab can not have a higher merit in the religion than an Arab, because a person earns the good deeds that Allah has recommended we compete for. This is the highest merit of God-fearingness and this will be the basis upon which things are decided in the hereafter. However, the merit of the Arabs will still remain, in terms of their respect and exaltation being higher than others. And from this some hadiths have come to us about the Quraysh being put first for the caliphate before others, such as the hadith in Bukhari (#3500) on the authority of Mu`awiyah, may Allah be well pleased with him who said, ” I heard the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, say, ‘This matter of government belongs to the Quraysh. Anyone who takes a hostile attitude to them will be thrown on his face, as long as they are true to the faith.” And Bukhari also related (#3501) on the authority of Ibn `Umar from the Prophet, may Allah bless him and give him peace, that he said, “Government continues to belong to the Quraysh, even if they are (no more than) two.”

    So I say that the merit of God-fearingness is what counts, according to the rigorously authenticated hadith, “And he who is slow in doing good deeds, his noble lineage will not quicken him (into entering Paradise).

    الجواب: اصطفاء الله تعالى للعرب على غيرهم من الأجناس ثابتٌ بصحيح الأحاديث النبوية، وذلك ما رواه الإمام مسلم في “الصحيح” أول كتاب الفضائل برقم (5897)عن واثلة بن الأسقع قال : سمعتُ رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم يقول :” إن الله اصطفى كنانة من ولد إسماعيل، واصطفى قريشاً من كنانة، واصطفى من قريش بني هاشم، واصطفاني من بني هاشم “.
    فالحديثُ نصٌّ في تفضيل العرب على غيرهم، وتفضيلُ العرب بعضهم على بعض، وهذا ما قرَّره الأئمة في طيات كتبهم، بل وفي كتب مفردة، ككتاب القُرَب في فضل العرب للإمام الكبير الحافظ زين الدين العراقي، واختصاره لشيخ الإسلام ابن حجر الهيتمي، وغيرهما.
    ومسألةُ تفضيل العرب على غيرهم، وكذلك تفضيل بعض العرب على بعض داخلةٌ في باب التفضيل الثابت في الشرع؛ فقد فضَّل سبحانه بعض الشهور على بعض، وفضل بعض الأيام والليالي على بعض، وكذلك الأمكنة، ومن ذلك أيضاً تفضيله سبحانه وتعالى بعض البشر على بعض ففضَّل الأنبياء على غيرهم، بل فضَّل بعضَ النَّبيين على بعض، ولا اعتراضَ للمسلم على شيء من ذلك؛ لأن كلَّه راجع لحُكم الحكيم سبحانه الذي لا يُسأل عما يفعل وهم يسألون، فالمسلمُ بعد أن آمن بالله رباً حقاً لا إله غيره وعلم أنه ما من شأن من شؤون الحق تبارك وتعالى إلا وله فيه حكمة جليلة علمناها أو جهلناها مكلفٌ بالتسليم لحكمه تسبحانه، ومن جملة أحكامه تفضيلُ العرب على غيرهم، وتفضيل بعض العرب على بعض، كما بينه الحديث الصحيح المذكور، فلا يسوغ لأحد المخالفة فيه بعد صحة الدليل.
    ولا مخالفةَ بين ما تقدم وبين ما ورد في الكتاب العزبز والسنة الصحيحة
    من أن مرجعَ التفضيل عند الله تعالى يكون بالتقوى، لأن مرجع التفضيل بالتقوى هو الأعمالُ التي يكتسبها الإنسانُ ويُحاسب عليها فمن قدَّم الخير لنفسه فضَّله
    الله تعالى على غيره ممن قدم الشر. أما تفضيلُ العرب على العجم وتفضيل بعض
    العرب على بعض فليس مرجعُه ذلك أعني عملاً اكتسبوه، بل هو فضل الله تعالى الذي يُؤتيه من يشاء، وقد شاءه لهؤلاء فلا اعتراضَ على حكمك يارب، كتفضيل بعض الأيام على بعضٍ فالعقلُ يحكم باستواء الأيام من حيث الذات؛ إذ لا ميزة تظهر لبعضها على بعض، لكنه يجوِّز حصول التفضيل لعدم المحيل لذلك، فجاء الشرع فأثبت الفضيلة لبعض دون بعض، ظهر لبعضها عللٌ وحكم كتفضيل ليلة القدر على غيرها بسبب نزول القرآن العظيم فيها، ولم تظهر الحكمة لنا في بعضها، فيصير ذلك من باب التعبدات، كتعيين أعداد ركعات الصلاة.
    فالواجبُ على المسلم اعتقادُ أن العربَ أفضلُ من غيرهم من الأجناس لقيام الدليل
    عليه، لكن ليس ذلك من أصول ديننا التي يكفر جاحدُها لكنه يأثم لعدم اعتقاده
    بأمر ثبت بحديث صحيح صريح، وأيضاً هذه المسألة ليست مما تشتهر معرفتها لذا لا
    يبادر إلى تأثم المخالف، بل لا بد من بيان الأمر له.
    وتفضيلُ العرب على غيرهم لا يمنع من أن يكون لغير العرب فضيلة في الدين أعلى من فضيلة العرب بسبب ما يكتسبه الشخصُ من أعمال الخير التي ندب الله الخلق للتنافس فيها، فهذه أفضلية التقوى وعليها المعوَّل في الآخرة، لكن تبقى أفضليةُ الجنس للعرب من حيث التعظيم والاحترام لهم زيادةً على تعظيم غيرهم، ومن هنا جاءت بعضُ الأحاديث في الأمر بتقديم قريش في الخلافة على غيرها من العرب وغير العرب كحديث البخاري برقم (3500) عن معاوية رضي الله عنه قال :” سمعتُ رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم يقول :” إن هذا الأمرَ في قريش لا يعاديهم أحدٌ إلا كَبَّه على وجهه، ما أقاموا الدين “. وروى البخاري أيضاً برقم (3501) عن ابن عمر عن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم قال : ” لا يزال هذا الأمر في قريش ما بقي منهم اثنان “.
    وقلتُ : إن أفضلية التقوى هي التي عليها المعوَّل؛ للحديث الصحيح :” من أبطأ به
    عمله لم يسرع به نسبُه”.
    MMVIII © Qibla.

    • IN THE BEGINNING!

      YO HO HO DUMB KAFIR SHIA MO,

      THE ASSAULT & DEATH OF FATIMAH

      QUESTION:

      The oppression against Al-Zahra, and the killing of Al-Zahra in that monstrous way by Omar…are there any sources in their (Sunni) books that mention this incident, even indirectly???

      ANSWER

      The sources that speak about the oppression of the Greatest Truthful Lady, Her Father’s Mother, Fatima al-Zahra (may Allah’s blessings be upon her), are more than to be counted. Here are some of them:

      • What has been narrated by Al-Shahrastani of Ibrahim, son of Sayyar al-Mu’tazili al-Nazzam, who said: «Omar hit Fatima on the day of the pledge of allegiance to such a degree that she lost the fetus in her stomach, and he used to cry out: “Burn her house along with those inside!” None were inside the house but Ali, and Fatima, and Hassan, and Hussain.» [1]

      This was also narrated by Al-Safadi on behalf of Al-Nazzam, with the following phrase: «Omar hit the stomach of Fatima on the day of the pledge of allegiance to such a degree that she lost Al-Muhassin.» [2]

      • What has been narrated of Al-Baladhiri, of Sulayman al-Taymi, and of Abdullah, son of ‘Awn – both of these are trusted by the Bakris – who both said: «Abu Bakr sent (a message) to Ali that he wanted for him to pledge allegiance, and he did not pledge allegiance to him. Thereupon, Omar came and brought a lamp with him. Fatima then approached him at the door, and Fatima said: “O son of Al-Khattab! Are you going to burn my door?” He said: “Yes.”» [3]

      • What has been narrated of Ibn Abd Rabbah – who is regarded as one of their approved and virtuous personalities – who said the following regarding those who failed to pledge allegiance to Abu Bakr (may Allah curse him): «They were Ali, and Abbas, and Zubayr, and Saad, son of Ubada. As for Ali, and Abbas, and Zubayr, they were sitting in the house of Fatima till Abu Bakr sent Omar, son of al-Khattab, to force them out of Fatima’s house, and he told him: “If they refuse, then fight them!” Then he approached them with a piece of burning wood in order to set their house on fire. Fatima approached him and said: “O son of Al-Khattab! Have you come to burn our house?” He said: “Yes, or you will enter that which the nation has entered (the allegiance of Abu Bakr).”» [4]

      • What has been narrated of Ibn Qutayba al-Daynouri – who is regarded by them as “Al-Sadouq” (the excessively truthful man), as Ibn Hajar described him – who said: «Abu Bakr was missing a people who failed to pledge allegiance to him who were at the place of Ali (may Allah dignify his face). So he sent Omar to them, who then came and called for them while they were in the house of Ali, and they refused to go ut. So he called for wood, and he said: “By Him whom in His Hands is the self of Omar, you will go out or I will burn it on those who are inside it!” Then it was said to him: “O Aba-Hafs! Fatima is in it!” He said: “And so what?!” So they went out and all pledged allegiance, except for Ali, for it is claimed that he said: “I have sworn to not go out, nor place my robe on my shoulders until I collect the Qur’an.” Thereupon, Fatima (may Allah be pleased with her) stood at her door and said: “I have never seen a people that have approached us in a worse way than you! You left the Messenger of Allah (may Allah’s blessings be upon him) a corpse between our hands and you agreed between yourselves to neither obey us nor return our right!”

      Thereupon, Omar went to Abu Bakr, and he said to him: “Will you not take this man who has failed to pledge allegiance to you?” Then Abu Bakr said to Qunfudh, who was a servant to him: “Go and call Ali to me.” So he went to Ali, and he (Ali) said to him: “What is your desire?” Then he said: “The successor of Allah’s Messengers calls for you.” Then Ali said: “How quick are you to lie about Allah’s Messenger!” So he returned and delivered the message. Thereupon, Abu Bakr cried for a long time. Then Omar said: “Do not act slowly for this man who failed to pledge allegiance to you.” Then Abu Bakr said to Qunfudh: “Return to him and say to him: ‘The successor of Allah’s Messenger calls for you to pledge allegiance.'” Qunfudh came to him and did what he was asked. Ali raised his voice and said: “Glory be to Allah! He claims something that is not for him!” Qunfudh returned and delivered the message. Thereupon, Abu Bakr cried for a long time. Then Omar stood up and a group of people walked with him till they reached the door of Fatima, and they knocked the door. When she heared their voices, the shouted with her loudest voice: “O my father, O Allah’s Messenger! What have we faced after you from the son of Al-Khattab and the son of Abi-Quhafa!”» [5]

      • What has been narrated of Al-Juwayni in his chain of narrators of Ibn Abbas, of the Messenger of Allah (may Allah’s blessings be upon him and his family) who foretold what will happen to his daughter, Al-Zahra (may Allah’s blessings be upon her). He said: «And when I saw her, I remembered what will happen to her after me as if I was her and humiliation entered her house, and her sanctity was violated, and her right was usurped, and she was prevented from her inheritance, and her side-rib was broken, and she lost her unborn child, and she was screaming: “O Mohammadah! And she was not answered! And she asks for help but is not helped! And she will remain, after me, sorrowful, and grieved, and crying.”» [6]

      • What has been narrated of Al-Suyuti in regards of Abu Bakr’s (may Allah curse him) regret for his attack on the house of Al-Zahra al-Batoul (may Allah’s blessings be upon her), in which he said: «I wish that I had not revealed the house of Fatima, and that I had rather left it, even if it would have remained closed for a war!”» [7]
      May Allah prescribe to you all that is good in this world and the Hereafter.
      The 24th of Sha’ban, year 1426.
      ________________________________________
      [1] Al-Milal wal-Nihal, by Al-Shahrastani, volume 1, page 57
      [2] Al-Wafi bil-Wafiyat, by Al-Safadi, volume 6, page 17
      [3] Ansaab-ul-Ashraf, by Al-Baladhiri Ahmad, son of Yahya, son of Jabir al-Baghdadi, volume 1, page 586
      [4] Al-Aqd al-Fareed, by Ibn Abd Rabbah al-Andalusi, volume 5, page 13
      [5] Al-Imama wal-Siyasa, by Ibn Qutayba, page 12
      [6] Fara’id al-Simtayn, by Al-Juwayni al-Shafi’i, volume 2, page 34
      [7] Musnad Fatima, by Al-Suyuti, page 34. The same report of Abu Bakr was also narrated of Al-Tabarani in Al-Mu’jam-ul-Kabeer, volume 1, page 62, and Al-Tabari in his history book, volume 3, page 430, and Ibn Abd Rabbah in Al-Aqd al-Fareed, volume 2, page 254, and many others.

      WITH COMPANIONS LIKE THIS, WHO NEEDS ENEMIES?

      • This is a matter of hiccup and well how true the narrations…..very very doubtful!

        Sunnis and the Shias should revert back to the Quran and current worldly affairs rather than sticking to 14oo years old stories of Umayyads and Fatimids!!!!!

        • ISLAMIC CLERIC CONFIRMS ALL SUNI MUSLIM MEN ARE SODOMITES

          You know how some people insult Muslims by calling them crude names that are the equivalents of sodomites and bestialists (butt- and goat-f**kers)? It turns out at least the sodomite insult is true! We have it straight from the mouth of none other than a Muslim cleric — a London-based Shiite cleric named Yasser Habib.

          ‘PERFUMED GARDEN’

          by Abu Nuwas:

          O the joy of sodomy!
          So now be sodomites, you Arabs.
          Turn not away from it–
          therein is wondrous pleasure.
          Take some coy lad with kiss-curls
          twisting on his temple
          and ride as he stands like some gazelle
          standing to her mate.
          A lad whom all can see girt with sword
          and belt not like your whore who has
          to go veiled.
          Make for smooth-faced boys and do your
          very best to mount them, for women are
          the mounts of the devils

          THIS IS REAL MOHAMMEDANISM:

          Surah 8:69: “But (now) enjoy what ye took in war, lawful and good.” (Yusuf Ali)

          ISLAMIC QUESTION & ANSWER, ONLINE WITH MUFTI EBRAHIM DESAI, SOUTH AFRICA, ASK THE IMAM:

          “It may, superficially, appear distasteful to copulate with a woman who is not a man’s legal wife, but once Shariah makes something lawful, we have to accept it as lawful, whether it appeals to our taste, or not; and whether we know its underlying wisdom or not.”

          ALL SUNNI MUSLIMS ARE SODOMITES

          Satan Attends Every Childbirth; He Touches Every Infant
          Except for Mary and her Son Jesus, all babies cry during their birth, because Satan touches them… (Sahih Bukhari, 4.55.641)
          Whenever a child is born, Satan pricks it; that is why the child cries. Only Mary and Jesus were not pricked by Satan…(Sahih Muslim, 30.5837, 5838)
          Say prayer during sexual intercourse, and Satan will not touch your child…(Sahih Bukhari, 4.54.503

          ALL SUNNI MUSLIMS FINGER FC-KED BY SATAN AT BIRTH

          In a broadcast on the UK’s Fadak TV on May 24, 2012, Habib calmly and dispassionately asserts that all non-Shiite males — especially the Shiites’ Muslim rivals, the Sunnis — are sodomized at birth by the devil, and grow up to become “passive homosexuals”, i.e., the “bottom” of a homosexual pair who is penetrated in anal sex.

          EVEN MUTT & HIS COMPANIONS

          Islamic cleric confirms Muslim men really are sodomites
          You know how some people insult Muslims by calling them crude names that are the equivalents of sodomites and bestialists (butt- and goat-f**kers)? It turns out at least the sodomite insult is true! We have it straight from the mouth of none other than a Muslim cleric — a London-based Shiite cleric named Yasser Habib.
          In a broadcast on the UK’s Fadak TV on May 24, 2012, Habib calmly and dispassionately asserts that all non-Shiite males — especially the Shiites’ Muslim rivals, the Sunnis — are sodomized at birth by the devil, and grow up to become “passive homosexuals”, i.e., the “bottom” of a homosexual pair who is penetrated in anal sex.

          TRANSCRIPTION OF YASSER HABIB:

          “Anyone who consents to being called ‘Emir of the Believers’ is a passive homosexual. Omar Ibn Al-Khattab, for example, who willingly assumed this title, was, without a doubt, a passive homosexual. The same goes for the caliphs Othman Ibn Affan, Muawiyya, Yazid, and the rules and sultans of the Umayyad and Abbasid dynasties, as well as some of the rulers and sultans of our day and age.

          For example, the king of Morocco bears this title. This is how you know that he is a passive homosexual. This is in addition to the evidence revealed by Western media, which showed that the current king of Morocco is indeed a passive homosexual who belongs to the homosexual community. This was leaked from his palace by his assistants, his servants, and his ‘boys,’ whom he would penetrate and who would penetrate him. They fled to Europe, sought asylum, and exposed all this.

          Cleric Yasser Habib exposes Kalifa Umar as a Sodomite

          It is told (in the hadith) that Umar Ibn Al-Khattab had an anal disease, which could be cured only by semen. One should know that this is a well-known medical condition, which is also mentioned in sacred texts. Someone who, God forbid, has been penetrated in the anus, a worm grows within him, due to the semen discharged in him…
          A disease develops in his anus, and as a result, he cannot calm down, unless. he is penetrated again and again.

          The Shiites are undoubtedly protected from this disease, and from committing this abominable and hideous act. As for the Nasibis (who hated the prophet Muhammad’s family), they are definitely afflicted with this homosexuality.
          One of the devils is present at the birth of every human being. If Allah knows that the newborn is one of our Shiites, He fends off that devil, who cannot harm the newborn. But if the newborn is not one of our Shiites, the devil inserts his index finger into the anus of the newborn, who thus becomes a passive homosexual. If the newborn is not a Shiite, the devil inserts his index finger into this newborn’s anus, and when he grows up, he becomes a passive homosexual.

          If the newborn is a female, the devil inserts his index finger into her vagina, and she becomes a whore. At that moment, the newborn cries loudly, as he comes out of his mother’s womb. Note that some children cry normally at birth, while others cry loudly and incessantly. You should know that this is the work of that devil, according to this narration.”

          Islam is NOT a religion, but an insane political system and sex cult populated by the severely mentally impaired.”

          When cleric Yasser Habib “says ‘passive homosexual’, he is referring to the receptive, submissive, female-equivalent partner. Dominant, inserting male homosexual activity is universally accepted in Islam. He has no problem with that. It’s grown men ‘catching’ that he has a problem with.”

          ANIMAL LOVING MUSLIMS:

          ISLAM & ZOOPHILIA

          IN THE ISLAMIC WORLD

          AFGHANISTAN

          In a society where homosexuals and adulterers are stoned to death for “sexual immorality” you would expect a similar outcome for someone caught having sex with an animal. Surprisingly this is not the case.

          An Afghan soldier was detained by police after being caught having sex with a donkey in southeastern Afghanistan, a police officer told AFP.
          The soldier was discovered with the donkey in an abandoned house in a small village of Gardez, the capital of Paktia province, last week, a local police officer said.
          “He was caught in the act by a small boy who immediately told police about what he had seen and police arrested him in action,” the Gardez-based officer told AFP, requesting anonymity.
          The soldier claimed he committed the act because he did not have enough money to get married.
          After being caught with the donkey in a village about 100km south of the capital Kabul, he was jailed for four days and then released without charge.
          According to tradition in south and southeastern Afghanistan, a suitor must pay around $US5,000 ($A6,800) to the parents of the girl he wishes to marry.
          Soldier caught with his pants down
          The Age, March 16, 2004
          Could it be that the soldier was released without charge because there is nothing in the Qur’an that prohibits bestiality?

          PALESTINE

          In 1923, the Director of Health in the British Mandate government in Palestine sent out a questionnaire to his Principal Medical and Health Officers in the country, asking them to report on various sexual practices and attitudes among the Muslim Arab population.
          As a result, the British discovered that the Muslim Arabs engaged in bestiality.
          The Nablus officer finds sodomy and “similar vices” “not uncommon in some of the towns but less so in the villages where…bestiality is by no mean unknown” and “immorality…rather lightly regarded” in those villages that are closer to the larger towns. He comments, “in the villages there seems to be curiously little feeling against bestiality which I have heard admitted in a very airy way on more than one occasion. Sodomy is considered disgraceful but not I think more so than ordinary immorality” (III).
          “Unnatural Vices” or Unnatural Rule? The Case of a Sex Questionnaire and the British Mandate
          Ellen L. Fleischmann, Jerusalem Quarterly File, Issue 10, 2000

          PAKISTAN

          In Southern Punjab, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Sindh and Balochistan, sex with animals is a common practice among rural youths and considered a rite of passage into adulthood.
          In southern Punjab, much of NWFP, Sindh and Balochistan sodomy and bestiality are common among rural youths. In fact, he caught two boys trying to rape a goat in the vicinity of the mazar of Hazrat Sultan Bahu. The punishment meted out to them was 10 blows with a chhittar (shoe) each on their butts. They protested however that in many rural areas having sex with an animal was considered a rite of passage on the way to becoming full members of the male society!
          Desegregation of the sexes and promiscuity
          Ishtiaq Ahmed (associate professor of political science at Stockholm University), Daily Times, June 27, 2006

          DONKEY KILLED AFTER BEING RAPED

          In June 2011, a male who was caught having sex with another man’s donkey was fined Rs 50,000. This fine was not imposed for having sex with an animal, but for committing adultery. The raped donkey was labelled a ‘kari’ (an adultress) and eventually honor killed by its owner.

          Incredible though it may sound, a donkey was declared ‘Kari’ and shot dead here in a remote area on Monday. The Jirga imposed 110,000 rupees fine on the alleged ‘Karo’.
          The reports said that in Village Ghahi Khan Jatoi, a villager Ghazi Khan alias Malang shot dead his donkey on being ‘Kari’ with Sikandar Ali alias Deedo. He attempted to kill Sikander too but the alleged Karo managed to escape and surrendered himself to an influential person of the area.
          Sources said the influential person summoned both the parties and imposed 110,000 rupees fine on the Karo. They said Sikander and his family were forced to pay Rs 50,000 on the spot and the remaining amount in two installments.
          The sources added that the alleged Karo pleaded innocence at the Jirga, but the Jirga members paid no attention to it. Sikander’s family said he paid Rs 50,000 to save his life otherwise he would have been killed.
          Donkey declared ‘Kari’ killed
          The News International, July 19, 2011
          Pakistan ranks number 1 for such varied search terms as “child sex,” “rape sex,” “animal sex,” “camel sex,” “donkey sex,” “dog sex,” and “horse sex”.
          The Muslim country, which has banned content on at least 17 websites to block offensive and blasphemous material, is the world’s leader in online searches for pornographic material
          . . .
          Google ranks Pakistan No. 1 in the world in searches for pornographic terms, outranking every other country in the world in searches per person for certain sex-related content.
          Pakistan is top dog in searches per-person for “horse sex” since 2004, “donkey sex” since 2007, “rape pictures” between 2004 and 2009, “rape sex” since 2004, “child sex” between 2004 and 2007 and since 2009, “animal sex” since 2004 and “dog sex” since 2005, according to Google Trends and Google Insights, features of Google that generate data based on popular search terms.
          The country also is tops — or has been No. 1 — in searches for “sex,” “camel sex,” “rape video,” “child sex video” and some other searches that can’t be printed here.
          No. 1 Nation in Sexy Web Searches? Call it Pornistan
          Kelli Morgan, Fox News, July 13, 2010

          OTHER COUNTRIES & BESTIALITY — RELATED SEARCHES

          Pakistani Muslims are not alone in their search for porn.
          Google, the world’s most popular Internet search engine, has found in a survey that mostly Muslim states seek access to sex-related websites and Pakistan tops the list. Google found that of the top 10 countries – searching for sex-related sites – six were Muslim, with Pakistan on the top. The other Muslim countries are Egypt at number 2, Iran at 4, Morocco at 5, Saudi Arabia at 7 and Turkey at 8. Non-Muslim states are Vietnam at 3, India at 6, Philippines at 9 and Poland at 10.
          Pakistan most sex-starved
          Khalid Hasan, Daily Times, May 17, 2006
          Here are the Muslim countries and how they placed in the top five world ranking of various bestiality-related internet search terms:[8]
          Pig Sex: Pakistan (No. 1) Egypt (No. 2) Saudi Arabia (No. 3)
          Donkey Sex: Pakistan (No. 1) Iran (No. 3) Saudi Arabia (No. 4)
          Dog Sex: Pakistan (No. 1) Saudi Arabia (No. 3)
          Cat Sex: Pakistan (No. 1) Iran (No. 2) Egypt (No. 3) Saudi Arabia (No. 4)
          Horse Sex: Pakistan (No. 1) Turkey (No. 3)
          Cow Sex: Pakistan (No. 1) Iran (No. 2) Saudi Arabia (No. 4)
          Goat Sex: Pakistan (No. 1)
          Animal Sex: Pakistan (No. 1) Morocco (No. 2) Iran (No. 4) Egypt (No. 5)
          Snake Sex: Pakistan (No. 1) Malaysia (No. 3) Indonesia (No. 4) Egypt (No. 5)
          Monkey Sex: Pakistan (No. 1) Indonesia (No. 3) Malaysia (No. 4)
          Bear Sex: Pakistan (No. 1) Saudi Arabia (No. 2)
          Elephant Sex: Pakistan (No. 1) Egypt (No. 3) United Arab Emirates (No. 4) Malaysia (No. 5)
          Fox Sex: Saudi Arabia (No. 1) Turkey (No. 4)

          MIDDLE EAST

          Bestiality is common among boys of tribal Arab cultures.
          Miner and DeVos (1960) comment that amongst Arab tribal cultures, “Bestiality with goats, sheep, or camels provides another outlet. These practices are not approved but they are recognized as common among boys.” Havelock-Ellis [note 52] states “The Arabs, according to Kocher, chiefly practice bestiality with goats, sheep and mares. The Annamites, according to Mondiere, commonly employ sows and (more especially the young women) dogs.”
          Historical And Cultural Perspectives On Zoophilia
          Serving History
          There is also a certain saying which remains popular among the Arabs:
          The Arabs have never taken quite so condemnatory an attitude towards the practice, and indeed a popular Arab saying had it that

          “The pilgrimage to Mecca is not complete without copulating with the camel.”[9]

          SUDAN

          In February 2006, a man caught having sex with a neighbor’s goat was not punished, but ordered by the council of elders to pay the neighbor a dowry of 15,000 Sudanese dinars ($50) and marry the animal because he “used it as his wife”.
          A Sudanese man has been forced to take a goat as his “wife”, after he was caught having sex with the animal.
          The goat’s owner, Mr Alifi, said he surprised the man with his goat and took him to a council of elders.
          They ordered the man, Mr Tombe, to pay a dowry of 15,000 Sudanese dinars ($50) to Mr Alifi.
          “We have given him the goat, and as far as we know they are still together,” Mr Alifi said.
          Sudan man forced to ‘marry’ goat
          BBC News, February 24,2006

          MOROCCO
          Morocco is an Islamic country, with 98.7% of the population Muslims.[10] The following is taken from a paper on sexuality in Morocco written by Nadia Kadiri, M.D., and Abderrazak Moussaïd, M.D., with Abdelkrim Tirraf, M.D., and Abdallah Jadid, M.D. Translated by Raymond J. Noonan, Ph.D., and Sandra Almeida.[11]
          In the rural world, zoophilia is still very widespread and not blameworthy. With masturbation, it constitutes an obligatory passage in the adolescent male’s apprenticeship of sexuality.
          The operative phrase is ‘obligatory passage in the adolescent male’s apprenticeship of sexuality’. Obligatory. It means in rural Morocco, Muslim males must have sexual intercourse with animals as part of their sexual apprenticeship.
          Also according to the scholars Allen Edwardes and Robert Masters, Ph.D, FAACS, the Muslims of Morocco believe that sexual intercourse with donkeys “make the penis grow big and strong” and masturbation is often scorned by them in favor of bestiality.[12]

          SLAMIC SCRIPTURE

          The above paper also says “it is prohibited without question by the Shariâ”. But is this alleged prohibition within the Shari’ah extracted (as it must be) from the Qur’an and Hadith, or has this fiqh been derived using external non-Islamic sources?

          QURAN

          In contrast with what secular and non-Islamic religious sources say about bestiality, this is what the Qur’an has to say on the subject:
          That’s right – absolutely, positively nothing. Unlike the Qur’an’s clear-cut rulings on the morality of homosexuality, Polygamy, rape, and pedophilia, the permissibility of bestiality seems to have been left open to ‘interpretation.’
          If Islamic teachings were truly opposed to such a practice, then this omission is somewhat surprising when you consider that, historically, bestiality was indigenously accepted in the Middle-East.[13]

          HADITH

          There is no prohibition against bestiality to be found within the two Sahihs. The following hadith is taken from the Sunnah Abu-Dawud collection, not Bukari or Muslim.
          Narrated Abdullah ibn Abbas: The Prophet (peace be upon him) said: If anyone has sexual intercourse with an animal, kill him and kill it along with him. I (Ikrimah) said: I asked him (Ibn Abbas): What offence can be attributed to the animal/ He replied: I think he (the Prophet) disapproved of its flesh being eaten when such a thing had been done to it.
          Abu Dawud 38:4449
          Sounds too good to be true, doesn’t it? And it is. Just look at the very next hadith.
          Narrated Abdullah ibn Abbas: There is no prescribed punishment for one who has sexual intercourse with an animal.
          Abu Dawud 38:4450
          This is a very clear contradiction. How can one hadith say kill the person committing bestiality, and the very next one say there is no prescribed punishment for the same person? Both statements cannot be true.
          What’s worse; these two contradictory hadiths (transmitted through different isnad) have been attributed to the same person. Abu Dawud himself had said the former of the two hadith is “not strong” and the latter further “weakens” it.[14]
          From the above, we can gather that Robert Masters had correctly stated, “bestiality was not specifically prohibited by the Prophet,”[9] so there is little wonder that Islamists generally shy away from mentioning Abu Dawud 38:4449 in their pronouncements on bestiality.

          • YO HO HO STUPID, IGNORANT, MORONIC, KAFIR MO,

            WHO HAS BEEN SLAUGHTERING YOU KAFIR SHIAS FOR THE LAST 1400 YEARS?

            SUNNI MOHAMMEDANS!

            YOU KAFIR SHIA & BAHIAS ARE ONE & THE SAME.

            ONLY WAHHABI ARAB MOHAMMEDANS ARE TRUE MOHAMMEDANS!

            ISLAMIC INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD IS A JOKE

            People of other nations, when they embrace Islam, come to be united under the Arabian hegemony, and call themselves Umma or one nation. What a self-deception it is! It is a self-deception because Muslims of other countries are treated as foreigners in Arabia. They are not considered as citizens of Hijaz (Arabia); neither are they allowed to buy property there, nor permitted to run businesses independently. These Muslims are complete foreigners in Arabia, subject to visa, passport and all other laws governing the behavior and obligations of the aliens.

            If Islam was really based on true brotherhood of all Muslims, irrespective of geographical boundaries, Mecca and Medina would have been international cities (at least to all the Muslims); since quotations from the address of the Prophet at the Last Pilgrimage do not measure up to his pan-Islamic conduct, they must be forgeries like many hadilhs. Again, it must be remembered that almost all his audience on that occasion consisted of the Arabs, and therefore, whatever he said, related to the Arabs only. This point becomes clear when we realize that Muhammad laid the foundation of an Arab Empire in the name of Islam and not an Islamic Empire.

            The foreign Muslims did not have top- level representation in the government of Arabia during the times of Muhammad himself. Neither did they enjoy any such privilege during the heyday of the Arab political ascendancy, nor is there any legal precedent to prove that a Muslim from any territory can become the President or Prime Minister of an Arab country. On the contrary, a person of any race and color could become the head of the mighty Roman Empire. Yet the Muslims claim the superiority of the Islamic system!

            It is absolutely necessary to counter the false Islamic propaganda of international brotherhood.

            AN EXPOSITION OF THE FALLACY OF SHI’ITE BELIEFS

            from Their Own Sources
            by Allamah Khalid Mahmood

            Shiite Beliefs about the Present Qur’an

            Shiite Beliefs regarding Prophethood

            Shiite Beliefs with regards to Hadhrat Aaisha, the wife of Rasulullah (SAW)

            Shiite Beliefs about the companions of the Prophet (SAW)

            Shiite Beliefs with regards to the family of Rasulullah (SAW)

            Shiite beliefs about the Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jamaah

            The beliefs of Allamah Khomeini, the Leader of the Iranian revolution.

            1. The Beliefs of the Shi’ites about the Present Quran

            Jabir reported that he heard Imam Baqir saying: ‘No one can claim that he has compiled the Quran as Allah revealed except a liar. The only person to compile it and memorise it according to its revelation was Ali ibn Abi Talib and the Imams who succeeded him. (Usul Kafi: 1:228)

            A man said that someone was reciting the Quran in the company of Imam Ja’far. The narrator said that he heard certain verses in the recitation which were not according to the recitation of the people. Imam Ja’far told the person reciting: ‘Do not recite like this. Recite as the people recite until the (promised) Mahdi arrives. When the Mahdi arrives, he will recite the Quran according to its original revelation and the Qu,ran compiled by Ali will be brought forward. (Ibid: 2.622)
            Allah says in Surah Ale Imraan (32):

            “Certainly Allah has chosen Adam, Noah, the family of Abraham and the family of Imraan above the (families of the) worlds.”

            Allamah Ali ibn Ibrahim AI-Qummi – one of the early Shi’ite commentators of the Quran said concerning this verse:

            ‘The Imam said: ‘The words: “The family of Muhammed” were also revealed along with “the family of Ale Imraan.” They (referring to the Companions of the Prophet S.A.W.) removed the words “The family of Muhammad” from the original text (Al-Qummi’s commentary:308). The allegation of removing the words preempts any possibility of abrogation. It is clear that the commentary is accusing the Companions of the Prophet (Sallallaahu Alayhi Wasallam) of distorting the Quran.

            Allah says in Surah Taha (115):

            “And We had given Adam an order before, but he forgot and We did not find any resolve in him (to disobey the order).”

            Imam Ja’far is reported to have said that Allah had revealed this verse with the following words:

            “We had ordered Adam before with some words about Muhammad, Ali, Fatima, Hassan, Hussain and the Imams from their offspring but he (Adam) forgot.” Ja’far said: ‘By Allah, these were the words which were revealed to Muhammad.’ (Usul Kafi: 1:416 and the footnotes of Maqbool’s translation: 637)

            Allah says in Surah Yusuf (49):

            “Then a year will come in which people will be given abundant help and they will press grapes.” In AI-Qummi’s commentary it is reported from Imam Ja’far that someone recited this verse in the presence of Ali. Ali said: ‘What will they press’? Wine?’ The person asked how he should read the verse. Ali replied that the verse was revealed thus: “Then a year will come in which people will he given abundant help and in which they will be given abundant rain. (Al-Qummi’s commentary: 192)

            The word Ya’siroon in the present Quran is in the active voice. According to this commentary it should have been read in the passive voice as Yu’saroon to alter the meaning. In the footnotes to the translation of Maqbool, it is written that this word (Ya’siroon) was changed from the passive voice to the active to suit the fancies of wine-loving khulafa (rulers). (Maqbool’s translation: 479)

            Allah says in Surah Muhammad (9):

            “That is because they resented what Allah revealed, so Allah in turn cancelled their deeds.” AI-Qummi has stated that Imam Muhammad Baqir said that Jibreel had transmitted this verse as: ‘That is because they resented what Allah revealed about Ali.’ But then the apostates removed Ali’s name (from the Quran). (Ibid: 1011)

            Allah says in Surah Waqi’ah (29):

            “And the Companions of the Right Hand. What about the Companions of the Right Hand. They shall be among thornless lote-trees and under clusters of bananas.”

            One person recited this verse in the presence of Ali. Ali said that the word Talh is not.appropriate and should read Tal’a as in Surah Shu’araa (………). Some enquired as why the word should not be changed. Ali replied that it was not the right time to do so because correcting the Quran would only confuse common people. He went on to say that among the Imams, only Imam Mahdi will have the right to reintroduce the Quran as it was during the time of the prophet (Sallallaahu Alayhi Wasallam). (Ibid: 1067)

            Abu Mansur Ahmed Tibrisi, a prominent Shi’ite scholar of the 8th century (H), has written:

            ‘Enumerating the distortions and omissions of this sort (from the present Quran) would become laborious and it will disclose what Taqiyyah (Shi’ite practice to conceal the ‘truth’ for religious purposes) requires me not to disclose: the good qualities of Allah’s friends and the vices of His enemies. (AI-Ihtijaj by Tibrisi: 1:254)

            Mullah Muhsin Kashani, an 11th century Shi’ite scholar comments on the above quoted statement:

            ‘It is clear from all of these traditions and quotations from the Family of the Prophet (Sallallaahu Alayhi Wasallam) that the present Quran is not the complete Quran which was revealed to the Prophet (Sallallaahu Alayhi Wasallam). In fact, there are verses that contradict that which was revealed; verses that have been distorted and places where omissions have been made such as the names of Ali, the Family of Muhammad (Sallallaahu Alayhi Wasallam) and, on several occasions, there were the names of the hypocrites. Moreover, the present order of the Quran is not according to the preferred order of Allah and His Messenger. Ali ibn Ibrahim (a renowned commentator) also holds this opinion.’ (Tafseer of Saafi: l:32)

            2. The Beliefs of the Shi’ites Regarding Prophethood

            Allah says in Surah Baqarah (26):

            “Certainly Allah does not disdain from giving a parable of a gnat or something larger.”

            Allamah Ali ibn Ibrahim explains that by the word “gnat” Allah refers to Ameerul Mumineen (Ali) and by the words “or something larger” He means the Prophet Muhammad (Sallallaahu Alayhi Wasallam). (AI-Qummi: 19)

            Sheikh Tusi and Nu’mani both narrate from the 8th Imam, Rida, that the sign of Imam Mahdi’s appearance will be that he will appear naked in daylight. An announcer will announce that here is the Ameerul Mumineen himself who has reappeared. Mullah Muhammad Baqir Majlisi says that the first disciple to take pledge at the hands of the nude Mahdi will be Muhammad (Sallallaahu Alayhi Wasallam) himself. (Haqqul Yaqeen: 2:337)

            The leader of the Iranian revolution, Imam Khomeini writes:

            ‘Every prophet came to establish justice on Earth. His aim was also to establish justice but he was not successful. The same is the position of the Seal of the Prophets who came to reform human society and establish justice but failed during his lifetime.’ (Ittihad wa-yak-jihati:15)

            Mullah Fathullah Kashani, a reliable Shi’ite scholar writes about Mut’ah:

            The Prophet (Sallallaahu Alayhi Wasallam) said: ‘Whoever performs mut’ah once will receive the status of Hussain. Who ever performs mut’ah twice will receive the status of Hasan. Whoever performs mut’ah thrice will receive the status of Ali and who ever performs mut’ah four times will receive my status. (Tafseer Manhajul Sadiqeen: 1:356)

            [Mu’tah is to marry someone for a short period of time (temporary marriage). In this marriage, the woman does not hold the status of a wife. Mut’ah is permissible and virtuous in Shi’ite law but forbidden and sinful in Sunni law.]

            Imam Khomeini writes in his book ‘A1Hukumatul Islamiyah’ (52):

            ‘It is a necessary principle of our faith that our Imams have ranks that exceed those of close angels and the appointed messengers.’

            3. Shi’ite Beliefs with Regards to Ayesha – the Wife of the Prophet (Sallallaahu Alayhi Wasallam)

            Mullah Baqir Majlisi writes:

            ‘When Imam Mahdi arrives, Ayesha will be resurrected so that she may be given a prescribed punishment and that Fatima be vindicated.’ (Haqqul Yaqeen: 347)

            The same author writes about Ayesha that “She was a traitor.” (Tadhkiratul Aimmah: 66)

            Again, Mullah Baqir Majilisi comments about Ayesha (R.A.) and Hafsa (R.A.) that: “They were both hypocrites.” (Hayatul Quloob: 2:745)

            Imam Khomeini writes about the prestige and worth of the oft-quoted Mullah Baqir:

            ‘Keep on reading the Persian books written by Majlisi so that you do not fall into any other such stupidity.’ (Kashful Asrar: 121)

            Maqbool Dehlavi, a Shi’ite translator of the Quran, quotes Imam Baqir as saying:

            ‘Two women poisoned the Prophet (Sallallaahu Alayhi Wasallam) before his death. These are the same two women (Ayesha and Hafsa). May Allah curse them and their fathers (Abu Bakr and Omar respectively). (His translation of Surah Ale Imraan: 134)

            4. What the Shi’ites believe about the Companions of the Prophet (Sallallaahu Alayhi Wasallam)

            Mullah Muhammed bin Yaqoob Kulaini, the most prominent Shi’ite scholar of Hadith, quotes Imam Baqir as saying:

            ‘People became apostates after the death of the Prophet (Sallallaahu Alayhi Wasallam), except for three people: Miqdad ibn Aswad, Abu Dharr Ghifari and Salmaan Farsi.’

            He continues:

            ‘Abu Bakr and Omar did not repent before they parted the world. In fact, they did not even mention what they had done to Ali. So may Allah, His angels and all of mankind curse them. (Furu’ul Kafi: Kitabul Rauda: 115)

            Mullah Baqir writes:

            ‘Regarding the doctrine of’ ‘Tabarri’ we believe that we should seek disassociation from four idols namely, Abu Bakr, Omar, Uthman and Mu’awiyah; from four women namely, Ayesha, Hafsa, Hind and Ummul Hakam, along with all their associates and followers. ‘These are the worst creation of Allah. It is not possible to believe in Allah, His Messenger and the Imams without disassociating oneself from their enemies. (Haqqul Yaqeen: 2:519)

            [The doctrine of ‘Tabarri’ means to have no association with the enemies of Allah.]

            Mullah Baqir writes:

            ‘One should say after each prayer: O Allah! Curse Abu Bakr, Omar, Uthman, Mu’awiyah, Ayesha, Hafsa, Hind and Ummul Hakam. (Aynul Hayat: 599)

            The Prophet (Sallallaahu Alayhi Wasallam), came to a person from the Ansaar and asked him if he had any food. The Ansaari said he had and slaughtered a goat. The man then grilled some meat and presented it to the Prophet (Sallallaahu Alayhi Wasallam) who wished that Ali, Fathima, Hasan and Hussain were present with him. Then Abu Bakr and Omar arrived. Ali also arrived shortly after. Allah then revealed the verse:

            ‘We have never sent any messenger prophet or Muhaddath before except that when ever they desired something, the devil interfered in their desire.’ (The Prophet then said) This is just as the devil has sent his two agents here right now (Abu Bakr and Omar). (The footnotes of Maqbool’s translation: Surah Hajj: 674)

            [Muhaddath is a non-prophet but he is inspired by Allah]

            Mullah Baqir Majlisi writes:

            ‘Pharaoh and Hamaan refer here to Abu Bakr and Omar. (Haqqul Yaqeen: 342)

            The same author also says:

            ‘The references in big books about the illegitimate birth of Omar cannot be discussed in this book. (Ibid: 259)

            Allah says in Surah Nahl (90):

            “And He prevents you from immorality, unlawfulness and rebellion.’

            Ali ibn Ibrahim AI-Qummi comments on this verse:

            ‘These three vices refer to so and so, so and so and so and so.’ (Al Qummi’s commentary: 218)

            Any ambiguity is cleared by the following comment: ‘Immorality refers to the first person (Abu Bakr); unlawfulness refers to the second (Omar) and rebellion refers to the third (Uthman). (Footnotes to Maqbool’s translation: 522)

            Mullah Baqir narrates a story from Imam Zainul Abideen that a man came to the Imam and asked him to inform him about Abu Bakr and Omar. The Imam informed him that they were both non-believers. (Haqqul Yaqeen: 551)

            5. The Shi’ites Belief Regarding the family of The Prophet

            (Sallallaahu Alayhi Wasallam)

            Mullah Baqir Majlisi writes: ‘Fatima (R.A.) described Ali (R.A.) thus:

            “You are hiding like a malformed foetus in a womb; you have ran home like those who are guilty of being untrustworthy and after having destroyed the strongest men on earth you have been overcome by these wimps.” (Ibid: 203)

            Mullah Baqir also writes:

            After hearing some women talking about Ali (R.A.) Fatima (R.A.) complained about her husband’s features:

            “He is a man with a big stomach. His hands are high and his bones look suppressed. He has a receding hair line, big eyes and shows his teeth all the time. He has no wealth either. (Jilalul Uyoon: 58, in the chapter on Fatima)

            The very same Mullah Baqir comments about a dream that Fatima had and establishes that the devil came to her:

            ‘The dream Fatima had was from a devil whose name is Uhaad. (Ibid: 52)

            The renowned Shi’ite scholar Abu Mansur Ahmed Tibrisi writes:

            ‘Abu Bakr sent Qunfudh to Ali with a delegation who entered Ali’s house without his permission. Ali went for his sword but the group had already taken it away. They captured Ali and tied a rope round his neck. When Fatima tried to intervene, Qunfudh hit her. The delegation dragged Ali to Abu Bakr where Omar, Khalid bin Walid and Abu Ubaidah ibn Jarrah (R.A.) were also present with many other people. Omar severely reprimanded Ali and told him to swear allegiance with Abu Bakr. Ali then took Abu Bakr’s hand and took an oath of allegiance. (Al-Ihtijaj, by Tibrisi: 83, 84)

            Mullah Baqir narrates Fatima’s displeasure with regards to Ali’s attitude about her in the words of Ali:

            “Jibreel came to the Prophet (Sallallaahu Alayhi Wasallam) and said “Allah sends His Salaam upon you and says that Fatima is about to come and complain about Ali. Do not listen to anything about Ali from Fatima.”

            When Fatima came, the Prophet (Sallallaahu Alayhi Wasallam) asked her if she came to complain about Ali. She replied that she had. The Prophet (Sallallaahu Alayhi Wasallam) said: “By the Lord of the Ka’bah! Go back to Ali and tell him that you are prepared to rub your nose in dust in order to keep him happy. You may do as you please.” (Jailul ‘Uyoon: 61)

            6. What is the Shi’ites belief about the Ahlus Sunnah Wa’l Jama’ah

            Muhammad ibn Yacoob Kulaini, the most prominent of all Shi’ite scholars of Hadith quotes Imam Baqir as saying:

            “Everybody, except us Shi’ites, are illegitimate.” (Furoo’u Kafi in Kitabul Raudah: 135)

            Mullah Baqir writes:

            “When Imam Mahdi appears, he will start to execute the Sunni scholars before turning to the non-believers.” Similar words of this hadith has also been quoted in the tafseer Majma’ul Bayan with reference to the Prophet (Sallallaahu Alayhi Wasallam). (Haqqul Yaqeen: 2:527)

            Mullah Baqir quotes Imam Zainul Abideen:

            A person asked the Imam about Abu Bakr and Omar.

            The Imam replied: “I have been informed that they were both non-believers and any one who befriends them (by thinking they are good) are also non-believers.” (Ibid: 2:522)

            The same author quotes Imam Ali-ul-Naqi:

            Imam Ali-ul-Naqi was asked about identifying the Nasibi group (those who prefer Abu Bakr and Omar over Ali): whether it was sufficient to know that they (the Nasibis) preferred Abu Bakr and Omar over Ali and that they held the Imamate of Abu Bakr and Omar in good standing. T’he Imam replied that whoever believed this was a Nasibi. (Ibid: 521)

            Again, Mullah Baqir writes about these Nasibis:

            The Nasibi (one who prefers Abu Bakr and Omar over Ali) is worse than an illegitimate person. It is true that Allah has not created anything more despicable than dogs. But the Nasibi is even more degenerate in the Eyes of Allah than a dog. (Ibid: 2:516)

            7. The Beliefs of Allamah Khomeni

            (the Leader of the Iranian Revolution)

            Nuri Tibiris, one of the most renowned Shi’ite scholars and mujtahids, wrote a book against the present Quran. The book is entitled: ‘Faslul Khitab Fi Tahreefi-Kitabi Rabbil Arbaab’ (The Final Verdict on the Distortion of the Book of the Lord of Lords).

            Allamah Khomeini mentions this scholar with great respect in his own book ‘A1Hukumatul Islamiyah” (The Islamic State). In fact, Khomeini has actually used Nuri Tibiris’s work entitled “Mustadrakul Wasail” to complete his theory of Wilayatul Faqih.

            [Wilayatul Faqih is the Islamic jurist’s right to overrule a ruling that contradicts Islamic law.]

            Khomeini writes about Abu Bakr and Omar (R.A.):

            “Those people who, in their envy to rule, attached themselves to the Deen of the Prophet (Sallallaahu Alayhi Wasallam) and formed their own cliques could not possibly refrain from their actions on the bases of Quranic advice. They had to materialise their aims at any cost.” (Kashful Asraar: 114)

            He also writes:

            ‘Those who had no affiliation with the Quran and Islam except through their desire for the world and power. They had made the Qurun a vehicle to promote their agenda. (Ibid)

            In his book Kashful Asraar, Allamah Khomeni has dedicated a whole chapter to Abu Bakr’s opposition to the Quran and another chapter to the Omar’s opposition. (Ibid: 114 & 117)

            He has then continued to write a chapter on how to answer the critiques of the Ahlus Sunnah W’al Jama’ah with the heading: “An eye on the answers of the foolish.” (Ibid: 120)

            Khomeni writes about Uthman (R.A.):

            “We worship and recognise only that God Whose actions are based on concrete rationalism and Who does not rule against that rationalism. We do not worship a god who creates a building for Divine worship and justice and then strives to destroy that very building himself by giving authority to rascals like Yazid, Mu’awiyah and Uthman. (Ibid: 107)

            These are but a few selected views of Majlisi, Maqbool Dehlavi, Noori and Allamah Khomeini, the leader of the Iranian Revolution. These have been presented to you without any critique or commentary. The reader should judge for himself how much he can accept these beliefs. The reader should also ask himself if the rise of Khomeini in Iran was a political revolution or whether he had an agenda to propagate the Shi’ite beliefs. Or whether it was a challenge to all of the Muslim world, or a threat to the bonafides of the beliefs of Sunnis.

            Was-Salam

            Jamiatul Ulama (KZN)

        • AYATOLLAH TORTURED, NEAR DEATH, IN IRAN FOR CRITICIZING POLITICAL ISLAM
          by Shadi Paveh
          February 5, 2014

          Ayatollah Boroujerdi’s condition has reportedly worsened as of January 28, 2014, when he suffered severe body tremors and was motionless for hours in his cell. The authorities still refuse to transfer him to a medical facility and are denying him the most basic medical care. We ask for intervention to save his life.

          Ayatollah Hossein-Kazamani Boroujerdi, a senior member of the Shiite Muslim clergy, is presently serving the eighth year of an 11-year sentence handed down to him by the Islamic Republic’s courts for advocating the separation of state and religion inside Iran. He has also spoken against political Islam and its leaders. As a result, during his time in prison, he has been exposed to torture especially reserved for the Islamic Republic’s dissident clergy and political prisoners.

          Boroujerdi HAS ENDURED THE RAPE OF HIS SPOUSE IN FRONT OF OTHER FAMILY MEMBERS.

          He has been purposely exposed to toxic chemical agents while kept in a small solitary cell. As a result, he now suffers permanent neurological damage, further aggravated by group beatings. Urgent medical attention has been systematically withheld for his long list of ailments, which are mostly a direct result of years of torture and malnutrition.
          Ayatollah Hossein-Kazamani Boroujerdi, in better times (left) and in his prison cell (right).
          On September 29, 2013, for example, Ayatollah Boroujerdi suffered a heart attack in prison for which he was refused medical intervention. His condition has reportedly worsened as of January 28, 2014, when he had severe body tremors and was motionless for hours in his cell, where he presently remains with no medical care.
          Possibly due to Ayatollah Boroujerdi’s prominence, the regime has apparently chosen not to execute him, but instead to kill him silently in prison. There were two failed attempts on his life by poisoning inside prison in 2012. His mother, detained at the same time, was also poisoned and died as a result. Previously, in November 2011, a prisoner on death row was told by the authorities that if he succeeded in killing Boroujerdi he would be set free. The attempt failed when other prisoners intervened.
          To protest the violent crimes of political Islam in the Islamic Republic, Boroujerdi announced via audio tape from prison that: “I am not inclined anymore to wear this frock; this frock has no credit or value in Iran or the international community” and removed his clerical robes.
          Ayatollah Boroujerdi descends from a long line of renowned Shiite clergy; both his father and grandfather were staunch opponents of religious leaders in politics. As a result, both of his parents, along with his brother, were killed by the authorities under mysterious circumstances, as is the regime’s custom.
          Despite his critical medical condition in prison, he remains defiant and his spirit remains unbreakable: he has stated hopes that his case will serve as a strong indictment of the Islamic Republic’s despotic rule and unspeakable human rights violations.
          Ayatollah Boroujerdi has risked losing his life slowly under torture by writing letters from inside prison to then-U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and to the United Nations, speaking of the absolute lack of freedom inside Iran, the grotesque human rights violations and the imminent danger of political Islam. Further, he recently urged people of Iran to boycott the so-called elections on June 14, 2013. As a direct result of this statement his tortures recommenced despite his extremely fragile medical condition.
          Ms. Roya Araghi, an advocate of Boroujerdi who herself was jailed and tortured for defending the him, and has since fled Iran, believes that without medical treatment and international intervention, Ayatollah Boroujerdi will most likely die soon under torture.
          On June 29, 2013, members of Ayatollah Boroujerdi’s family went to Evin prison to visit him, and were shocked to see nature of his physical condition in the seventh year of his 11-year sentence. He has developed acute heart disease, which has led to the severe swelling of his feet and knees. He also suffers from ocular, pulmonary and respiratory disorders, but has been denied medical treatment by officials until he “repents “and “mends his ways”.
          On July 8, 2013, Boroujerdi was interrogated for an extended period of time by government agents for his refusal to concede to the demands of the regime by signing a letter of “repentance.” He was informed that “the pressures and tortures will increase until he has been destroyed”. He has thus far refused to surrender.
          In a rare phone call to his family that followed this episode, he stated that he “will never give in to a single threat or intimidation tactic of the regime.” His family stated that he also added, “he does not regret any of his actions and stands by his word, as he is prepared to die”.
          After their visit, the Boroujerdi family announced that the tyrannical regime of the Islamic Republic’s fanatics continue systematically to exterminate political prisoners and prisoners of conscience through well-planned prolonged torture; both psychological and physical.
          Despite a statement by then-U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in 2012 and a plea by the UN Special Rapporteur on Iran, Dr. Ahmad Shaheed, to release Ayatollah Boroujerdi, the Iranian regime continues to torture this man of God whose only crime is advocating separation of religion from politics, democracy and human rights.
          On July 24, 2013, Andrew Bennett, Canada’s Ambassador to the Office of Religious Freedom, condemned the prolonged detention of Grand Ayatollah Boroujerdi by Iranian authorities, but to no avail.
          The regime of Iran is silently executing Mr. Boroujerdi, without a bullet or a noose — away from the eyes of the world. These silent executions are now a common method of killing political prisoners in Iran as the regime tries to hide its grotesque human rights violations and its escalating rate of executions of opponents.
          The human rights activists for democracy in Iran would like to bring to the immediate attention of all international human rights organizations and governments that Ayatollah Boroujerdi’s life is in grave danger due to deliberate withholding of necessary medical care by the authorities in Iran. We ask for an intervention on his behalf, to save his life.
          Iranian Shia intellectual questions the core of Shiism and the ‘Ayatollahs’ go nuts!
          November 13, 2013
          The situation for reasonable Shiite insides Iran who are tired of the with heresies and superstitions infested sect of Twelver Shiism (which has been condemned throughout centuries by Muslim scholars) is not easy. Criticising the ‘Ayatollahs’ and certain Shia beliefs and practices alone will get one in huge trouble, let alone declaring openly ones conversion to true Islam (Sunnism) or denouncing the core of Shiism.
          A Shia intellectual and scholar, Dr. Seyyed Ali Asghar Gharavi caused a stir when he indicated that the Sunni belief in regards to Ali Ibn Abi Talib (the fourth righteouss Caliph to the Sunnis and first ‘infallible’ direct successor of the Prophet by the Shiites) is the correct one i.e. that leaders are NOT chosen by God, neither the Shia ‘infallibles’ nor any other ruler (except the Prophets). Dr. Seyyed Ali Gharavi studied in Iran and Lebanon and holds doctorate in Islamic philosophy. He is from a major religious Shiite family, his father is the late Ayatollah Seyyed Jawad Gharavi who was also known for his reformists thoughts and opposition to many Shiite beliefs, which he (just like his son) considered heretical and superstitious.
          Ali Gharavi, is father was the late Ayatollah Jawad Gharavi
          Ali Gharavi’s father was in fact a friend of Ayatollah Al-Borqei who mentioned him (Ayatollah Borqei) in his autobiography. Ayatollah Jawad Gharavi back in his times was already accused of ‘Wahhabism’ (merely for speaking against some Shia practices and beilefs he believed to be heresies!), and today it seems to the turn of his son, who has been imprisoned for writing a small academical article on the topic of Imamate.
          Bahar published the article that sealed its fate on Oct. 28. In “Imam Ali, a Political Leader or a Religious Model?” the writer, Ali Asghar Gharavi, claimed that the religious role of the first Shiite imam was more important than his political role. He wrote, “He [Ali] is not just the political ruler for a few days of passing power in this world. Ali, more than being the commander of the faithful, is the imam and the role model for humanity.” The article appeared one day before the innovated ‘Eid Al-Ghadeer’ in Iran.
          Iran on Monday arrested Ali Asghar Gharavi, the author of a controversial article seen by critics as questioning the beliefs of Shiite Islam, a prosecutor general said. “In regards with the banned newspaper (Bahar), the author of that article was arrested yesterday,” prosecutor Mohseni Ejeie was quoted as saying by Fars news agency. In late October, the pro-reformist Bahar daily published an opinion piece penned by Gharavi, which drew heavy criticism from the authorities.

          Judiciary chief Ayatollah (of course an Ayatollah …) Sadegh Larijani has warned his department will “act with determination against those who falsify the history and try to undermine the fundamentals of the regime.” A single article has shaken the thrones of the Shia clergy and their whole belief system and they know very well that their whole existence is based on the heretical Shiite belief called ‘Imamate’, because with no Imamite, there is no justification for the innovated velayat-e faqih system.
          The establishment in Iran is stressing the point that the velayat-e faqih [guardianship of the jurist] is in fact the continuation of the rulership [velayat] of Imam Ali. Knowing this fact, Gharavi still emphasized the point that Imam Ali was more of a spiritual leader than a political one. In other words, he has questioned the position of Ayatollah [Ali] Khamenei as the political leader.” In one part of the article Gharavi wrote, “Imam Ali repeatedly mentions in Nahj al-BalaghaI [a book of quotations and sermons attributed to him] that political rule can only be achieved by people voting and paying allegiance.”
          But what was the crim of Dr. Gharavi? In his article, Dr. Gharavi mentioned that leaders are appointed through Shura (Quranic Sunni belief) of the people not divinely. He discuses the verses that Shia use to prove the appointment of Ali Ibn Abi Talib and refuted them. His article angered many ‘Ayatollahs’ who asked the government to punish him and shutdown the newspaper (that’s their intellectual strenght when dealing with critics).
          He was arrested on Sunday in Isfahan and transferred to a prison in Tehran. Not only that but even the newspaper, Roznameh Bahar, that published his article has been forced to shutdown. Note that Gharavi did not use any harsh words, let alone profanity, he simply criticised a Shiite belief that is already being criticised for ages by orthodox Muslims (i.e. the Imamite belief), yet instead of discussing with him, his opponents resorted to prosecution and even even shut down a newspaper (because of a single article!)
          After his arrests, a few Shia scholars popped out and wrote ‘refutations’, knowing well that the arrested Gharavi can’t defend himself when being put in prison by the very same Mullahs. It is to no suprise that nearly all the other newspapers, TV and radio (which are in the hands of the Mullahs) started a war on Gharavi and repeated the lie that Gharavi ‘insulted and disrespected’ Shiism, in fact they went so far to speak for the whole nation and accused Gharavi of having insulted the whole Iranian nation (as if all Iranians are Shiites!).
          ‘Ayatollah’ Makarem Shirazi and ‘Ayatollah’ Hamadani are two major Shia Marja’s of Iran who literally called for the prosecution of Gharavi and everyone who dares to question Shia beliefs. Makarem Shirazi said (as reported by the state owned FARS news agency):
          “نویسنده گستاخ در این روزنامه حرفهای بسیار زشتی نوشته بود، روزنامه توقیف شده است ولی نباید به این هم قناعت شود.”
          ‘The ‘Gustakh’ (Persian religious term, referring to people who do not give due respect to religious sanctities) author of this (Bahar) newspaper uttered very terrible words in and (thus) the newspaper has been shut down, but we shouldn’t be satisfied with that (this is not enough).’ He further said “Some people shouldn’t think that since there is a new government they can say anything they want”.
          Another frightened ‘Ayatollah’:
          ‘Ayatollah’ Hossein Nouri Hamedani, who has a substantial following as a marja – source of emulation –joined in the condemnation of the article, asking (as reported by Qomnew.ir),
          “Why should a newspaper permit itself the temerity and audacity to insult and malign sacred religious beliefs, the Ghadeer, the imamat, and the guardianship [of the supreme leader]?”
          Arresting someone for criticising Shiism (in an academic article) and shutting down the entire newspaper is not enough to this ‘Ayatollah’, he wants more prosecution, probably to intimidate futures ‘Gustakhs’. Shia are so proud that Iran is majority Shia, of course it’s gonna be majority Shia if doubting the Imamite belief itself in a respectable way will get you into so much trouble.
          The shutting of the paper is an unlawful and unethical measure especially when the newspaper even released an apology and three refutations of Mr. Gharavi’s article. This did not stop the Iranian regime and the Shia clergy to prosecute everyone who was involved in the release of a single article, most probably to give out a message for future thinkers, of how the Shia clergy will deal with those who dare to question the Shia creed.
          Mr. Gharavi’s article did not contain religious insults or slander, or even negate the necessities of religion, to deserve being labeled criminal and be banned. It is noteworthy that the article was written by a Shiite. Even if we suppose that it may have been written by a Sunni person then how does one reconcile the fact that just a few months ago, prior to the June presidential elections, the sitting president had gone to the Sunni provinces of Iran to get the votes of this 10-15+ percent minority and support in the June elections and through this act recognized their civil rights while the right of the Sunnis to express their thoughts and opinions through an article results in the closure of the newspaper where it was published?
          Some government officials who tried to rationalize the malicious closure of Bahar and stamp it as a peaceful act have said such articles incited the religious and sectarian differences. But a close look at what has been happening to the Sunnis reveals the source of the differences and conflicts: They do not have the right to have their own mosque in the capital of their own province and they face layers of political and security restrictions! It is these discriminatory and insulting acts that fuel religious and sectarian differences and not the publication of an article that happens to be different from the official Shiite narrative.
          There are so many resemblances between Shiism and Catholicism – especially the clerical caste, saint worship etc. – that one shouldn’t be really suprised that the Shia clergy act similar to the medieval Catholic priests and church who suppressed their opponents within the Catholic church in the name of Inquisition i.e. combating heresy, a scenario quite similar to what Shia thinkers and reformists face in Iran today.
          For a Muslim, there is no doubt that the Catholic church is based on the essence of heresies and those Christian reformers in the medieval times who tried to purify it (from at least some heresies) were no doubt closer to the truth and original Christianity than the Catholic church who (according to Islam) distorted the true message of Jesus (peace be upon) much more than the protestants for example.
          The situation of Shia reformists in Iran is quite similar (and there are many in Iran, not just Gharavi who happen to be a known Shia intellectual in Iran, Isfahan), for they too are the real victims and real reformers who have realised and acknowledged that the current Shia twelver sect is nothing but a sect infiltrated with the most hideous heresies and innovations. They too are being suppressed and silenced by the (Shia) clergy who are in fact the true propagators of heresies (just as the Catholic church) even if they claim to combat heresies (just as the Catholic church). They too are being thrown into the dungeons of the Shia church for merely writing academical articles in refutation of Shia Twelver beliefs whom they believe (just as the Sunnis) of not being the true beliefs of the Shias (supporters) of Ali Ibn Abi Talib, in this case, the belief in the ‘Imamate/Wilayah’ of Ali Ibn Abi Talib (upon which many other misguided Shia bliefs, including the Takfir of the Prophet’s companions are based upon).
          Throwing Mr. Gharavi into the dungeons of the regime and THEN releasing some ‘rebuttals’ by a number of Shia scholars is an easy task (how shall someone reply from his cell anyway, where he is most like being terrorised and tormented for questioning Shiism?!) and apparently in accordance to the Shia religion, as for Islam, it even encourages the discussion with non-Muslims (let alone Muslims):
          Say: “O People of the Book! come to common terms as between us and you: That we worship none but Allah; that we associate no partners with him; that we erect not, from among ourselves, Lords and patrons other than Allah.” If then they turn back, say ye: “Bear witness that we (at least) are Muslims (bowing to Allah’s Will).
          Invite to the way of your Lord with wisdom and good instruction, and argue with them in a way that is best. Indeed, your Lord is most knowing of who has strayed from His way, and He is most knowing of who is [rightly] guided. (Qur’an, 16:125)
          Refuting, discussing and arguing (in the best manner) is what Islam teaches and encourages (for the educated, not laymen) even with the Christians and Jews, let alone with fellow Muslims. The Safavids of today are only exposing themselves and proving their desperation if they deal so harsh with a single academical article. They are only proving that they are no different to their mass-murdering forefathers, who (by force and mass-executions) turned a majority Sunni Persia into Rafidi Persia with similar methods.
          During the Safavid era, after a genocide of the Sunni population of Khorasan/Persia, Shah Ismail (the Safavid) arrested the Sunni Mufti of these lands, the Allamah Taftazani, and urged him (Taftazani) to leave Sunnism and embrace Shiism. Taftazani gave a condition. He said that Shah Ismail should bring his Shia scholars, and if they can refute him (Taftazani) then he is ready to become a Shiite, but if he (Taftazani) refutes them, then they (including Shah Ismail) have to become Sunnis. Shah Ismail consulted with the Shia scholars but they refused and said: “There is no discussion with these people”. Thereupon Shah Ismail ordered the worst form of execution for Taftazani (and other Sunni scholars).
          (‘Tarikh Rashidi’, page 367-368, by Mirza Mohammad Haidar)
          This is why Mohammad Aref Espanagheshi (Iranian historian) writes: “Every Sunni scholar in those times (Safavid era) who challenged the Shia scholars for debates and discussion was facing execution. This is why some Sunni scholar kept silent (did not speak out) and other left the country.”
          (‘Inqilab Al-Islam bain Al-Khawaas wa Al-Awaam’, page 48 by Mohammad Aref Espanagheshi)
          And today, the descendants of the Safavids, the ‘Ayatollahs’ also claim to be upon the truth and the religion of Islam and Ahl Al-Bayt, yet the way they deal with their opponents WITHIN themselves is not much different to the classical Safavids, except that ordering mass-executions of Sunni scholars and Shias who question Shiism are not as easy today as back then. Nevertheless, as we can see in the case of Mr. Gharavi, the ‘Ayatollahs’ try everything to suppress the voice of any opposition, they are in fact afraid of an awakening amongst the Shias of Iran. Yes, an awakening, and it is not an exaggeration to claim so, for what is going behind the scenes is much bigger than most of us (particularly non Persian speaking ones) could have ever imagines. Ali Asghar Gharavi is NOT an isolated case (as been mentioned before), Iran is full of his likes, who try to reform Shiism from within (some leaving it completely, others opposing literally every heresy and superstition that Shia scholars today propagate as the ‘school of thought of Ahl Al-Bayt’. Amongst them are the likes of Ahmad Kasravi, Musa Al-Musawi (Iranian), Ahmad Al-Katib (Iraqi of Iranian origin),Ustad Qalamdaran, Ayatollah Al-Borqei (Iranian), Mostafa Husseini Tabatabai (Iranian), Shaykh Al-Muayyad (Iraqi) and many others.
          Here his article that has shaken the thrones of the Rafidi Shia Mullahs
          (That’s a translation of just some of his points, i.e. not the complete translation of the original article):
          This day I have perfected for you your religion and completed My favor upon you and have approved for you Islam as religion. [Maida:3]
          – The verses before and after shows that Allah (swt) gives the Prophet (saw) the responsibility to convey the message, nothing should stop him from doing his job and He shouldn’t worry about the opposition from the disbelievers. From the way and style of the verse it becomes clear that the “completion of favor” is the divine revelation (Quran) and Islam. Meaning, now that revelation has been conveyed to the people without any defects, the favor has been completed.
          – If the verse “Convey that which we have revealed upon you” [Madia: 67] was about introducing Ali (as) for caliphate, Allah would have mentioned it clearly right here in the verse. Allah is wise.
          – Ali (as) himself in Nahj al-Balagha emphasize that a political government comes through Bayah and vote. For example Amir al-Muminin says to Muawiah in letter 6 of Nahj al-Balagha:
          Verily, the people who payed allegiance to Abu Bakr, Omar and Othman, have payed allegiance to me based on the same principles as the allegiance to them. So anyone who was present has no right to go against his pledge of allegiance, and anyone who was absent has no right to oppose it. And verily Shura (consultation) is only the right of the Muhajirs and the Ansar. So if they decide upon a man and declare him their Imam, then it is with the pleasure of Allah.
          The words of Ali clearly shows that caliphate is not something divine, rather the political successors of the Prophet (saw) must be appointed through people.
          – Ali (as) never talks about his divine appointment and his appointment by the Prophet (saw). Even when he wants to defend his right for caliphate, he emphasizes on his merits and his suitabilities and informs the people about these points so that they don’t make mistake in appointing their leader. In entire sermons of Nahjul Balagha “awareness and selection (of leader)” is so clear that it leaves no doubt what opinion of Ali (as) was about a government.
          – The behavior of Ali (as) towards the three caliphs especially Abu bakr and Omar, as mentioned in many history books, clearly shows that he didn’t consider them to be people who would disobey the command of the Prophet (saw) and usurp the government. The cooperation of Ali (as) with Khulafa, which he himself have mentioned many times is so compassionate that leaves no room for doubt.
          For example in the book al-Gharat al-Thaqafi Shi’i Amir al-muminin Ali (as) says: “When the Prophet (saw) completed his mission, Allah took him from this world, peace and blessing of Allah be upon him, then the Muslims appointed two worthy men (Abu Bakr and Omar) as his successors and those two leaders acted upon the book and the Sunnah and did not deviate from the Sunnah and ways of the Prophet (saw). Then Allah took their souls. May Allah have mercy on them.”
          – If Amir al-Muminin was divinely appointed after the Prophet (saw), would his courage stop him to unleash his sword to implement the order and justice of Allah? Was it not expected from the gate of knowledge to explain the truth in time when needed?
          IRANIAN POET & PEACE CAMPAIGNER HASHEM SHAABANI HANGED FOR “WAGING WAR AGAINST GOD”
          r
          By
          Barry Duke
          – February 9, 2014

          NEWS has emerged from Iran that the young poet, who was arrested in February 2011 and subjected to extreme torture, has been executed.
          According to this report, an Islamic Revolutionary Tribunal had imposed a death sentence on the poet – a member of the Arabic-speaking Ahvazis ethnic minority – along with 14 others, last July on charges that included “waging war on God.”
          Press reports said Shaabani was hanged last month after his sentence was approved by President Hassan Rohani.
          In a statement on February 5, Freedom House said Shaabani was subjected to severe torture and interrogation during his three years in prison.
          Human Rights Voices also reports on the execution, writing:
          To those who knew him, Hashem Shaabani was a man of peace and understanding struggling to extend spaces of individual freedom within the despotic Khomeinist system … In one of his letters from prison, made available to use through his family, Shaabani says he could not have remained silent against ‘hideous crimes against Ahvazis perpetrated by the Iranian authorities, particularly arbitrary and unjust executions.’
          Shabaani added:
          I have tried to defend the legitimate right that every people in this world should have which is the right to live freely with full civil rights. With all these miseries and tragedies, I have never used a weapon to fight these atrocious crimes except the pen.
          The Jerusalem Post reported that Rouhani has presided over “an execution spree” and pointed out the The United Nations Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Iran Ahmed Shaheed and the UN’s expert addressing executions Christof Heyns urged Iran last month to stop the surge in hangings since the start of 2014.
          The UN experts said at least 40 persons have been reportedly hanged in the first two weeks of January.
          In 2013, Iran executed 625 people, including 29 women and political prisoners. Iranians faced the death penalty for the crimes of Moharabeh – a catchall phrase for “enmity against God” – or the charge of threatening “national security.”
          Said Heyns:
          It is deeply concerning that the Government proceeds with executions for crimes that do not meet the threshold of the ‘most serious crimes’ as required by international law and when serious concerns remain about due process rights.
          The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps dragged Shaabani into an Iran’s Press TV studio in December 2011 where confessed to involvement in “separatist terrorism,” and contacts with former Egyptian leader Hosni Mubarak and Libya’s former president Muammar Gaddafi.
          Shaabani wrote later wrote in a letter that he:
          Had never participated in any armed activity, whatever the motives. I disagree with armed activities if there are other peaceful channels to make demands and express our wishes and aspirations.
          US writer Stephen Hager declared President Rouhani as “the villain in this tragedy”.
          He’s the 7th President of Iran and has quietly executed over 400 dissidents, while projecting himself as a moderate in favor of women’s rights. Time magazine fawns on him, calling him the 9th most powerful person in the world. One wonders why his reign of terror gets virtually no play in the Western media. But then, Western media is really a carefully controlled cartel run by a handful of global corporations.
          Hashem Shaabani is the poet and hero of this tragedy. He held a Masters in Political Science and taught Arabic literature in high school. He also wrote poetry in both Arabic and Farsi.
          He leaves behind a widow and child and invalid parents he had been caring for until his arrest in February of 2011 in Khalafabad.

  3. ISLAMIC CLERIC CONFIRMS ALL SUNNI MUSLIM MEN ARE SODOMITES

    You know how some people insult Muslims by calling them crude names that are the equivalents of sodomites and bestialists (butt- and goat-f**kers)? It turns out at least the sodomite insult is true! We have it straight from the mouth of none other than a Muslim cleric — a London-based Shiite cleric named Yasser Habib.

    ‘PERFUMED GARDEN’

    by Abu Nuwas:

    O the joy of sodomy!
    So now be sodomites, you Arabs.
    Turn not away from it–
    therein is wondrous pleasure.
    Take some coy lad with kiss-curls
    twisting on his temple
    and ride as he stands like some gazelle
    standing to her mate.
    A lad whom all can see girt with sword
    and belt not like your whore who has
    to go veiled.
    Make for smooth-faced boys and do your
    very best to mount them, for women are
    the mounts of the devils

    THIS IS REAL MOHAMMEDANISM:

    Surah 8:69: “But (now) enjoy what ye took in war, lawful and good.” (Yusuf Ali)

    ISLAMIC QUESTION & ANSWER, ONLINE WITH MUFTI EBRAHIM DESAI, SOUTH AFRICA, ASK THE IMAM:

    “It may, superficially, appear distasteful to copulate with a woman who is not a man’s legal wife, but once Shariah makes something lawful, we have to accept it as lawful, whether it appeals to our taste, or not; and whether we know its underlying wisdom or not.”

    ALL SUNNI MUSLIMS ARE SODOMITES

    Satan Attends Every Childbirth; He Touches Every Infant
    Except for Mary and her Son Jesus, all babies cry during their birth, because Satan touches them… (Sahih Bukhari, 4.55.641)

    Whenever a child is born, Satan pricks it; that is why the child cries. Only Mary and Jesus were not pricked by Satan…(Sahih Muslim, 30.5837, 5838)

    Say prayer during sexual intercourse, and Satan will not touch your child…(Sahih Bukhari, 4.54.503

    ALL SUNNI MUSLIMS FINGER FC-KED BY SATAN AT BIRTH

    In a broadcast on the UK’s Fadak TV on May 24, 2012, Habib calmly and dispassionately asserts that all non-Shiite males — especially the Shiites’ Muslim rivals, the Sunnis — are sodomized at birth by the devil, and grow up to become “passive homosexuals”, i.e., the “bottom” of a homosexual pair who is penetrated in anal sex.

    EVEN MUTT & HIS COMPANIONS

    Islamic cleric confirms Muslim men really are sodomites
    You know how some people insult Muslims by calling them crude names that are the equivalents of sodomites and bestialists (butt- and goat-f**kers)? It turns out at least the sodomite insult is true! We have it straight from the mouth of none other than a Muslim cleric — a London-based Shiite cleric named Yasser Habib.
    In a broadcast on the UK’s Fadak TV on May 24, 2012, Habib calmly and dispassionately asserts that all non-Shiite males — especially the Shiites’ Muslim rivals, the Sunnis — are sodomized at birth by the devil, and grow up to become “passive homosexuals”, i.e., the “bottom” of a homosexual pair who is penetrated in anal sex.

    TRANSCRIPTION OF YASSER HABIB:

    “Anyone who consents to being called ‘Emir of the Believers’ is a passive homosexual. Omar Ibn Al-Khattab, for example, who willingly assumed this title, was, without a doubt, a passive homosexual. The same goes for the caliphs Othman Ibn Affan, Muawiyya, Yazid, and the rules and sultans of the Umayyad and Abbasid dynasties, as well as some of the rulers and sultans of our day and age.

    For example, the king of Morocco bears this title. This is how you know that he is a passive homosexual. This is in addition to the evidence revealed by Western media, which showed that the current king of Morocco is indeed a passive homosexual who belongs to the homosexual community. This was leaked from his palace by his assistants, his servants, and his ‘boys,’ whom he would penetrate and who would penetrate him. They fled to Europe, sought asylum, and exposed all this.

    Cleric Yasser Habib exposes Kalifa Umar as a Sodomite

    It is told (in the hadith) that Umar Ibn Al-Khattab had an anal disease, which could be cured only by semen. One should know that this is a well-known medical condition, which is also mentioned in sacred texts. Someone who, God forbid, has been penetrated in the anus, a worm grows within him, due to the semen discharged in him…
    A disease develops in his anus, and as a result, he cannot calm down, unless. he is penetrated again and again.

    The Shiites are undoubtedly protected from this disease, and from committing this abominable and hideous act. As for the Nasibis (who hated the prophet Muhammad’s family), they are definitely afflicted with this homosexuality.
    One of the devils is present at the birth of every human being. If Allah knows that the newborn is one of our Shiites, He fends off that devil, who cannot harm the newborn. But if the newborn is not one of our Shiites, the devil inserts his index finger into the anus of the newborn, who thus becomes a passive homosexual. If the newborn is not a Shiite, the devil inserts his index finger into this newborn’s anus, and when he grows up, he becomes a passive homosexual.

    If the newborn is a female, the devil inserts his index finger into her vagina, and she becomes a whore. At that moment, the newborn cries loudly, as he comes out of his mother’s womb. Note that some children cry normally at birth, while others cry loudly and incessantly. You should know that this is the work of that devil, according to this narration.”

    Islam is NOT a religion, but an insane political system and sex cult populated by the severely mentally impaired.”

    When cleric Yasser Habib “says ‘passive homosexual’, he is referring to the receptive, submissive, female-equivalent partner. Dominant, inserting male homosexual activity is universally accepted in Islam. He has no problem with that. It’s grown men ‘catching’ that he has a problem with.”

    • Lucky, who passes, condones and legitimises gay rights…is it the Muslims or Christians? Isn’t sodomy prohibited in the bible? What sort of lousy Christians are you buggers?

      • YO YOU DUMB PLUM KAFIR,

        ISLAMIC CLERIC CONFIRMS ALL SUNI MUSLIM MEN ARE SODOMITES

        You know how some people insult Muslims by calling them crude names that are the equivalents of sodomites and bestialists (butt- and goat-f**kers)? It turns out at least the sodomite insult is true! We have it straight from the mouth of none other than a Muslim cleric — a London-based Shiite cleric named Yasser Habib.

        ‘PERFUMED GARDEN’

        by Abu Nuwas:

        O the joy of sodomy!
        So now be sodomites, you Arabs.
        Turn not away from it–
        therein is wondrous pleasure.
        Take some coy lad with kiss-curls
        twisting on his temple
        and ride as he stands like some gazelle
        standing to her mate.
        A lad whom all can see girt with sword
        and belt not like your whore who has
        to go veiled.
        Make for smooth-faced boys and do your
        very best to mount them, for women are
        the mounts of the devils

        THIS IS REAL MOHAMMEDANISM:

        Surah 8:69: “But (now) enjoy what ye took in war, lawful and good.” (Yusuf Ali)

        ISLAMIC QUESTION & ANSWER, ONLINE WITH MUFTI EBRAHIM DESAI, SOUTH AFRICA, ASK THE IMAM:

        “It may, superficially, appear distasteful to copulate with a woman who is not a man’s legal wife, but once Shariah makes something lawful, we have to accept it as lawful, whether it appeals to our taste, or not; and whether we know its underlying wisdom or not.”

        ALL SUNNI MUSLIMS ARE SODOMITES

        Satan Attends Every Childbirth; He Touches Every Infant
        Except for Mary and her Son Jesus, all babies cry during their birth, because Satan touches them… (Sahih Bukhari, 4.55.641)
        Whenever a child is born, Satan pricks it; that is why the child cries. Only Mary and Jesus were not pricked by Satan…(Sahih Muslim, 30.5837, 5838)
        Say prayer during sexual intercourse, and Satan will not touch your child…(Sahih Bukhari, 4.54.503

        ALL SUNNI MUSLIMS FINGER FC-KED BY SATAN AT BIRTH

        In a broadcast on the UK’s Fadak TV on May 24, 2012, Habib calmly and dispassionately asserts that all non-Shiite males — especially the Shiites’ Muslim rivals, the Sunnis — are sodomized at birth by the devil, and grow up to become “passive homosexuals”, i.e., the “bottom” of a homosexual pair who is penetrated in anal sex.

        EVEN MUTT & HIS COMPANIONS

        Islamic cleric confirms Muslim men really are sodomites
        You know how some people insult Muslims by calling them crude names that are the equivalents of sodomites and bestialists (butt- and goat-f**kers)? It turns out at least the sodomite insult is true! We have it straight from the mouth of none other than a Muslim cleric — a London-based Shiite cleric named Yasser Habib.
        In a broadcast on the UK’s Fadak TV on May 24, 2012, Habib calmly and dispassionately asserts that all non-Shiite males — especially the Shiites’ Muslim rivals, the Sunnis — are sodomized at birth by the devil, and grow up to become “passive homosexuals”, i.e., the “bottom” of a homosexual pair who is penetrated in anal sex.

        TRANSCRIPTION OF YASSER HABIB:

        “Anyone who consents to being called ‘Emir of the Believers’ is a passive homosexual. Omar Ibn Al-Khattab, for example, who willingly assumed this title, was, without a doubt, a passive homosexual. The same goes for the caliphs Othman Ibn Affan, Muawiyya, Yazid, and the rules and sultans of the Umayyad and Abbasid dynasties, as well as some of the rulers and sultans of our day and age.

        For example, the king of Morocco bears this title. This is how you know that he is a passive homosexual. This is in addition to the evidence revealed by Western media, which showed that the current king of Morocco is indeed a passive homosexual who belongs to the homosexual community. This was leaked from his palace by his assistants, his servants, and his ‘boys,’ whom he would penetrate and who would penetrate him. They fled to Europe, sought asylum, and exposed all this.

        Cleric Yasser Habib exposes Kalifa Umar as a Sodomite

        It is told (in the hadith) that Umar Ibn Al-Khattab had an anal disease, which could be cured only by semen. One should know that this is a well-known medical condition, which is also mentioned in sacred texts. Someone who, God forbid, has been penetrated in the anus, a worm grows within him, due to the semen discharged in him…
        A disease develops in his anus, and as a result, he cannot calm down, unless. he is penetrated again and again.

        The Shiites are undoubtedly protected from this disease, and from committing this abominable and hideous act. As for the Nasibis (who hated the prophet Muhammad’s family), they are definitely afflicted with this homosexuality.
        One of the devils is present at the birth of every human being. If Allah knows that the newborn is one of our Shiites, He fends off that devil, who cannot harm the newborn. But if the newborn is not one of our Shiites, the devil inserts his index finger into the anus of the newborn, who thus becomes a passive homosexual. If the newborn is not a Shiite, the devil inserts his index finger into this newborn’s anus, and when he grows up, he becomes a passive homosexual.

        If the newborn is a female, the devil inserts his index finger into her vagina, and she becomes a whore. At that moment, the newborn cries loudly, as he comes out of his mother’s womb. Note that some children cry normally at birth, while others cry loudly and incessantly. You should know that this is the work of that devil, according to this narration.”

        Islam is NOT a religion, but an insane political system and sex cult populated by the severely mentally impaired.”

        When cleric Yasser Habib “says ‘passive homosexual’, he is referring to the receptive, submissive, female-equivalent partner. Dominant, inserting male homosexual activity is universally accepted in Islam. He has no problem with that. It’s grown men ‘catching’ that he has a problem with.”

        DID UMAR LIVE WITH EFFEMINATE MEN?

        ( Section : Misdeed )

        QUESTION:

        May peace and the mercy and blessings of Allah be upon you.

        We send our condolences to you for the remembrance of the martyrdom of the Greatest Truthful Lady Al-Zahra (may Allah’s blessings be upon her), and may the curse of Allah be upon Omar.

        Dear Sheikh, we want you to clarify this narration.

        Bukhari narrates in the Book of Hudud (i.e. punishments in which severe physical harm is caused to the body), in the chapter of “The expelment of the people of disobedience and the effeminate men”.

        Narrated on the authority of Ibn Abbas, who said:

        «The Prophet (may Allah’s blessings be upon him) cursed the effeminate men and the women who assumed the similitude (manners) of men. He said: “Expel them from your houses”, and he expelled such-and-such person, and Omar expelled such-and-such person.»

        Does this mean that there was an effeminate man who lived with Omar that was expelled by Omar later on?

        How true and authentic is this narration?

        Thank you very much.

        Ali

        ANSWER:

        In the Name of Allah, the All-Beneficent, the All-Merciful. Praise be to Allah, the Lord of all the worlds, and may blessings and peace be upon our Master, Mohammad, and his good and pure Family, and may the curse of Allah be upon all their enemies.

        Assalamu Alaikum,

        The Sheikh said:

        Yes, Omar used to have an effeminate man living in his house, and the reason is well-known.

        As for the effeminate man whom the Prophet (may Allah’s blessings be upon him and his family), it was not the Prophet himself who let him enter his house, but rather it was Aisha who let him into her house without any permission from the Prophet (may Allah’s blessings be upon him and his family). As soon as the Prophet (may Allah’s blessings be upon him and his family) discovered that he was in his house and that he was describing the female organ to Aisha; the Prophet expelled him and did not allow him to enter Medina except during Eid days.

        Our enemies acknowledge this fact. Ibn Hajar has narrated of Al-Baroudi through his chain of narrators on the authority of Abi-Bakr, son of Hafs, who said: «Aisha said to an effeminate man who was in Medina and who was called ‘Anna’: “Will you not lead us to a woman we can engage to Abdul-Rahman?” He said: “Yes.” Then he described for her a woman whom if one looks at her front, one can see four folded pieces of flesh, and if one looks at her back, one can see eight folded pieces of flesh (due to fatness).The Messenger of Allah (may Allah’s blessings be upon him) heard him, and he said: “O Anna, get out of Medina and go to Hamraa’ul-Aswad, and let your home be there, and do not enter Medina except on those occasions during which the people have Eid.» [1]

        The 11th of Rajab, year 1431
        The office of Sheikh al-Habib in London

        [1] Al-Isaba fi Ma’rifat-ul-Sahaba, by Ibn Hajar, volume 1, page 284, and Amdat-ul-Qari fi Sharh’ Sahih-ul-Bukhari, by Badr-ul-Deen al-Ayni al-Hanafi, volume 20, page 215

        Reading : 437

        ANIMAL LOVING MUSLIMS:

        ISLAM & ZOOPHILIA
        IN THE ISLAMIC WORLD

        AFGHANISTAN

        In a society where homosexuals and adulterers are stoned to death for “sexual immorality” you would expect a similar outcome for someone caught having sex with an animal. Surprisingly this is not the case.
        An Afghan soldier was detained by police after being caught having sex with a donkey in southeastern Afghanistan, a police officer told AFP.
        The soldier was discovered with the donkey in an abandoned house in a small village of Gardez, the capital of Paktia province, last week, a local police officer said.
        “He was caught in the act by a small boy who immediately told police about what he had seen and police arrested him in action,” the Gardez-based officer told AFP, requesting anonymity.
        The soldier claimed he committed the act because he did not have enough money to get married.
        After being caught with the donkey in a village about 100km south of the capital Kabul, he was jailed for four days and then released without charge.
        According to tradition in south and southeastern Afghanistan, a suitor must pay around $US5,000 ($A6,800) to the parents of the girl he wishes to marry.
        Soldier caught with his pants down
        The Age, March 16, 2004
        Could it be that the soldier was released without charge because there is nothing in the Qur’an that prohibits bestiality?

        PALESTINE

        In 1923, the Director of Health in the British Mandate government in Palestine sent out a questionnaire to his Principal Medical and Health Officers in the country, asking them to report on various sexual practices and attitudes among the Muslim Arab population.
        As a result, the British discovered that the Muslim Arabs engaged in bestiality.
        The Nablus officer finds sodomy and “similar vices” “not uncommon in some of the towns but less so in the villages where…bestiality is by no mean unknown” and “immorality…rather lightly regarded” in those villages that are closer to the larger towns. He comments, “in the villages there seems to be curiously little feeling against bestiality which I have heard admitted in a very airy way on more than one occasion. Sodomy is considered disgraceful but not I think more so than ordinary immorality” (III).
        “Unnatural Vices” or Unnatural Rule? The Case of a Sex Questionnaire and the British Mandate
        Ellen L. Fleischmann, Jerusalem Quarterly File, Issue 10, 2000

        PAKISTAN

        In Southern Punjab, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Sindh and Balochistan, sex with animals is a common practice among rural youths and considered a rite of passage into adulthood.
        In southern Punjab, much of NWFP, Sindh and Balochistan sodomy and bestiality are common among rural youths. In fact, he caught two boys trying to rape a goat in the vicinity of the mazar of Hazrat Sultan Bahu. The punishment meted out to them was 10 blows with a chhittar (shoe) each on their butts. They protested however that in many rural areas having sex with an animal was considered a rite of passage on the way to becoming full members of the male society!
        Desegregation of the sexes and promiscuity
        Ishtiaq Ahmed (associate professor of political science at Stockholm University), Daily Times, June 27, 2006

        DONKEY KILLED AFTER BEING RAPED

        In June 2011, a male who was caught having sex with another man’s donkey was fined Rs 50,000. This fine was not imposed for having sex with an animal, but for committing adultery. The raped donkey was labelled a ‘kari’ (an adultress) and eventually honor killed by its owner.

        Incredible though it may sound, a donkey was declared ‘Kari’ and shot dead here in a remote area on Monday. The Jirga imposed 110,000 rupees fine on the alleged ‘Karo’.
        The reports said that in Village Ghahi Khan Jatoi, a villager Ghazi Khan alias Malang shot dead his donkey on being ‘Kari’ with Sikandar Ali alias Deedo. He attempted to kill Sikander too but the alleged Karo managed to escape and surrendered himself to an influential person of the area.
        Sources said the influential person summoned both the parties and imposed 110,000 rupees fine on the Karo. They said Sikander and his family were forced to pay Rs 50,000 on the spot and the remaining amount in two installments.
        The sources added that the alleged Karo pleaded innocence at the Jirga, but the Jirga members paid no attention to it. Sikander’s family said he paid Rs 50,000 to save his life otherwise he would have been killed.
        Donkey declared ‘Kari’ killed
        The News International, July 19, 2011
        Pakistan ranks number 1 for such varied search terms as “child sex,” “rape sex,” “animal sex,” “camel sex,” “donkey sex,” “dog sex,” and “horse sex”.
        The Muslim country, which has banned content on at least 17 websites to block offensive and blasphemous material, is the world’s leader in online searches for pornographic material
        . . .
        Google ranks Pakistan No. 1 in the world in searches for pornographic terms, outranking every other country in the world in searches per person for certain sex-related content.
        Pakistan is top dog in searches per-person for “horse sex” since 2004, “donkey sex” since 2007, “rape pictures” between 2004 and 2009, “rape sex” since 2004, “child sex” between 2004 and 2007 and since 2009, “animal sex” since 2004 and “dog sex” since 2005, according to Google Trends and Google Insights, features of Google that generate data based on popular search terms.
        The country also is tops — or has been No. 1 — in searches for “sex,” “camel sex,” “rape video,” “child sex video” and some other searches that can’t be printed here.
        No. 1 Nation in Sexy Web Searches? Call it Pornistan
        Kelli Morgan, Fox News, July 13, 2010

        OTHER COUNTRIES & BESTIALITY — RELATED SEARCHES

        Pakistani Muslims are not alone in their search for porn.
        Google, the world’s most popular Internet search engine, has found in a survey that mostly Muslim states seek access to sex-related websites and Pakistan tops the list. Google found that of the top 10 countries – searching for sex-related sites – six were Muslim, with Pakistan on the top. The other Muslim countries are Egypt at number 2, Iran at 4, Morocco at 5, Saudi Arabia at 7 and Turkey at 8. Non-Muslim states are Vietnam at 3, India at 6, Philippines at 9 and Poland at 10.
        Pakistan most sex-starved
        Khalid Hasan, Daily Times, May 17, 2006
        Here are the Muslim countries and how they placed in the top five world ranking of various bestiality-related internet search terms:[8]
        Pig Sex: Pakistan (No. 1) Egypt (No. 2) Saudi Arabia (No. 3)
        Donkey Sex: Pakistan (No. 1) Iran (No. 3) Saudi Arabia (No. 4)
        Dog Sex: Pakistan (No. 1) Saudi Arabia (No. 3)
        Cat Sex: Pakistan (No. 1) Iran (No. 2) Egypt (No. 3) Saudi Arabia (No. 4)
        Horse Sex: Pakistan (No. 1) Turkey (No. 3)
        Cow Sex: Pakistan (No. 1) Iran (No. 2) Saudi Arabia (No. 4)
        Goat Sex: Pakistan (No. 1)
        Animal Sex: Pakistan (No. 1) Morocco (No. 2) Iran (No. 4) Egypt (No. 5)
        Snake Sex: Pakistan (No. 1) Malaysia (No. 3) Indonesia (No. 4) Egypt (No. 5)
        Monkey Sex: Pakistan (No. 1) Indonesia (No. 3) Malaysia (No. 4)
        Bear Sex: Pakistan (No. 1) Saudi Arabia (No. 2)
        Elephant Sex: Pakistan (No. 1) Egypt (No. 3) United Arab Emirates (No. 4) Malaysia (No. 5)
        Fox Sex: Saudi Arabia (No. 1) Turkey (No. 4)

        MIDDLE EAST

        Bestiality is common among boys of tribal Arab cultures.
        Miner and DeVos (1960) comment that amongst Arab tribal cultures, “Bestiality with goats, sheep, or camels provides another outlet. These practices are not approved but they are recognized as common among boys.” Havelock-Ellis [note 52] states “The Arabs, according to Kocher, chiefly practice bestiality with goats, sheep and mares. The Annamites, according to Mondiere, commonly employ sows and (more especially the young women) dogs.”
        Historical And Cultural Perspectives On Zoophilia
        Serving History
        There is also a certain saying which remains popular among the Arabs:
        The Arabs have never taken quite so condemnatory an attitude towards the practice, and indeed a popular Arab saying had it that

        “The pilgrimage to Mecca is not complete without copulating with the camel.”[9]

        SUDAN

        In February 2006, a man caught having sex with a neighbor’s goat was not punished, but ordered by the council of elders to pay the neighbor a dowry of 15,000 Sudanese dinars ($50) and marry the animal because he “used it as his wife”.
        A Sudanese man has been forced to take a goat as his “wife”, after he was caught having sex with the animal.
        The goat’s owner, Mr Alifi, said he surprised the man with his goat and took him to a council of elders.
        They ordered the man, Mr Tombe, to pay a dowry of 15,000 Sudanese dinars ($50) to Mr Alifi.
        “We have given him the goat, and as far as we know they are still together,” Mr Alifi said.
        Sudan man forced to ‘marry’ goat
        BBC News, February 24,2006

        MOROCCO
        Morocco is an Islamic country, with 98.7% of the population Muslims.[10] The following is taken from a paper on sexuality in Morocco written by Nadia Kadiri, M.D., and Abderrazak Moussaïd, M.D., with Abdelkrim Tirraf, M.D., and Abdallah Jadid, M.D. Translated by Raymond J. Noonan, Ph.D., and Sandra Almeida.[11]
        In the rural world, zoophilia is still very widespread and not blameworthy. With masturbation, it constitutes an obligatory passage in the adolescent male’s apprenticeship of sexuality.
        The operative phrase is ‘obligatory passage in the adolescent male’s apprenticeship of sexuality’. Obligatory. It means in rural Morocco, Muslim males must have sexual intercourse with animals as part of their sexual apprenticeship.
        Also according to the scholars Allen Edwardes and Robert Masters, Ph.D, FAACS, the Muslims of Morocco believe that sexual intercourse with donkeys “make the penis grow big and strong” and masturbation is often scorned by them in favor of bestiality.[12]

        SLAMIC SCRIPTURE

        The above paper also says “it is prohibited without question by the Shariâ”. But is this alleged prohibition within the Shari’ah extracted (as it must be) from the Qur’an and Hadith, or has this fiqh been derived using external non-Islamic sources?

        QURAN

        In contrast with what secular and non-Islamic religious sources say about bestiality, this is what the Qur’an has to say on the subject:
        That’s right – absolutely, positively nothing. Unlike the Qur’an’s clear-cut rulings on the morality of homosexuality, Polygamy, rape, and pedophilia, the permissibility of bestiality seems to have been left open to ‘interpretation.’
        If Islamic teachings were truly opposed to such a practice, then this omission is somewhat surprising when you consider that, historically, bestiality was indigenously accepted in the Middle-East.[13]

        HADITH

        There is no prohibition against bestiality to be found within the two Sahihs. The following hadith is taken from the Sunnah Abu-Dawud collection, not Bukari or Muslim.
        Narrated Abdullah ibn Abbas: The Prophet (peace be upon him) said: If anyone has sexual intercourse with an animal, kill him and kill it along with him. I (Ikrimah) said: I asked him (Ibn Abbas): What offence can be attributed to the animal/ He replied: I think he (the Prophet) disapproved of its flesh being eaten when such a thing had been done to it.
        Abu Dawud 38:4449
        Sounds too good to be true, doesn’t it? And it is. Just look at the very next hadith.
        Narrated Abdullah ibn Abbas: There is no prescribed punishment for one who has sexual intercourse with an animal.
        Abu Dawud 38:4450
        This is a very clear contradiction. How can one hadith say kill the person committing bestiality, and the very next one say there is no prescribed punishment for the same person? Both statements cannot be true.
        What’s worse; these two contradictory hadiths (transmitted through different isnad) have been attributed to the same person. Abu Dawud himself had said the former of the two hadith is “not strong” and the latter further “weakens” it.[14]
        From the above, we can gather that Robert Masters had correctly stated, “bestiality was not specifically prohibited by the Prophet,”[9] so there is little wonder that Islamists generally shy away from mentioning Abu Dawud 38:4449 in their pronouncements on bestiality.

        SAHIH (AUTHENTIC) HADITH

        As we have previously mentioned, there is no prohibition against bestiality to be found within the two Sahihs (Authentic). However there does exist a certain hadith and commentary by the renowned Islamic scholar al-Nawawi, which is of interest.
        The following narration does not exist in the English translations of Sahih Muslim, but a similar (but sanitized version) appears in: Sahih Muslim 3:684
        و حدثني ‏ ‏زهير بن حرب ‏ ‏وأبو غسان المسمعي ‏ ‏ح ‏ ‏و حدثناه ‏ ‏محمد بن المثنى ‏ ‏وابن بشار ‏ ‏قالوا حدثنا ‏ ‏معاذ بن هشام ‏ ‏قال حدثني ‏ ‏أبي ‏ ‏عن ‏ ‏قتادة ‏ ‏ومطر ‏ ‏عن ‏ ‏الحسن ‏ ‏عن ‏ ‏أبي رافع ‏ ‏عن ‏ ‏أبي هريرة ‏ ‏أن نبي الله ‏ ‏صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏ ‏قال ‏ ‏إذا جلس بين ‏ ‏شعبها ‏ ‏الأربع ثم جهدها فقد وجب عليه الغسل ‏
        ‏وفي حديث ‏ ‏مطر ‏ ‏وإن لم ينزل ‏ ‏قال ‏ ‏زهير ‏ ‏من بينهم بين ‏ ‏أشعبها ‏ ‏الأربع ‏ ‏حدثنا ‏ ‏محمد بن عمرو بن عباد بن جبلة ‏ ‏حدثنا ‏ ‏محمد بن أبي عدي ‏ ‏ح ‏ ‏و حدثنا ‏ ‏محمد بن المثنى ‏ ‏حدثني ‏ ‏وهب بن جرير ‏ ‏كلاهما ‏ ‏عن ‏ ‏شعبة ‏ ‏عن ‏ ‏قتادة ‏ ‏بهذا الإسناد ‏ ‏مثله غير أن في حديث ‏ ‏شعبة ‏ ‏ثم اجتهد ولم يقل وإن لم ينزل ‏
        Narrated by Zuhair Ibn Harb, narrated by Ghasan Al-Masma’i, narrated by Muhammad Ibn Al-Mathny, narrated by Ibn Bashar, who said that it was narrated by Muath Ibn Hisham, narrated by Abu Qatada, narrated by Mattar, narrated by Al-Hassan, narrated by Abu Rab’i, narrated by Abu Huraira who said:
        “The prophet — peace be upon him — said, ‘If one sits between a woman’s four parts (shu’biha Al-arba’) and then fatigues her, then it necessitates that he wash.’
        In the hadith of Mattar it is added ‘even if he does not ejaculate (yunzil).’ Zuhair narrated among them using the phrase ‘Ashba’iha Al-arba’. It was also narrated by Muhammad Ibn Umar Ibn Ibad Ibn Jablah, narrated Muhammad Ibn Abi Uday, narrated by Muhammad Ibn Al-Mathny, narrated by Wahb Ibn Jarir who both related from Shu’bah who narrated from Qatada who gave this same chain of transmission, except that in the hadith of Shu’bah it has the phrase ‘then he labored’ but did not have the phrase ‘even if he does not ejaculate.’
        Sahih Muslim – Book of Menstruation – hadith #525

        IMAM AL-NAWAWI (1234 — 1278 AD)

        Below is a short bio of al-Nawawi, whose commentary of Sahih Muslim is second only to Ibn Hajar’s commentary of Sahih Bukhari.[15]
        Imam Yahya ibn Sharaf al-Nawawi was born in the village of Nawa in Southern Syria, Nawawi spent most of his life in Damascus where he lived in a simple manner, devoted to Allah, engaging single-mindedly in worship, study, writing and teaching various Islamic sciences. The life of this world seems scarcely to have impinged upon him. He was a versatile and extremely dedicated scholar whose breadth of learning was matched by its depth.
        Imam Nawawi died at the young age of 44 years, leaving behind him numerous works of great importance, the most famous of these being:
        • al-Arba’un Nabawi (An-Nawawis Forty Hadith)
        • Riyadhus saleheen
        • al-Maqasid (Al-Nawawi’s Manual of Islam).
        • Kitab al-Adhkar,
        • Minhaj al-Talibin (a main reference for Shafi’i fiqh)
        • Shar’ Sahih Muslim (he was the first to arrange the sahih of Muslim in the now familiar categories)
        Although best known for his works in hadith, Yahya ibn Sharaf al-Nawawi (d. 676/1277) was also the Imam of the later Shafi’i school of Jurisprudence, and widely acknowledged as the intellectual heir to Imam Shafi’i. He was a renowned scholar and jurist who dedicated his life to the pursuit of Islamic learning.
        About Imam al-Nawawi

        COMMENTARY

        صحيح مسلم بشرح النووي ‏ ‏قَوْله : ( أَبُو غَسَّان الْمِسْمَعِيّ ) ‏ ‏هُوَ بِفَتْحِ الْغَيْن الْمُعْجَمَة وَتَشْدِيد السِّين الْمُهْمَلَة , وَيَجُوز صَرْفه وَتَرْكُ صَرْفه . وَالْمِسْمَعِيّ بِكَسْرِ الْمِيم الْأُولَى وَفَتْح الثَّانِي , وَاسْمه مَالِك بْن عَبْد الْوَاحِد , وَقَدْ تَقَدَّمَ بَيَانه مَرَّات , لَكِنِّي أُنَبِّه عَلَيْهِ وَعَلَى مِثْله لِطُولِ الْعَهْد بِهِ , كَمَا شَرَطْتهُ فِي الْخُطْبَة . ‏
        ‏قَوْله : ( أَبُو رَافِع عَنْ أَبِي هُرَيْرَة ) ‏ ‏اِسْم أَبِي رَافِع : ( نُفَيْع ) وَقَدْ تَقَدَّمَ أَيْضًا . ‏ ‏قَوْله صَلَّى اللَّه عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ : ( إِذَا قَعَدَ بَيْن شُعَبهَا الْأَرْبَع ثُمَّ جَهَدهَا ) ‏ ‏وَفِي رِوَايَة ( أَشْعُبهَا ) اِخْتَلَفَ الْعُلَمَاء فِي الْمُرَاد بِالشُّعَبِ الْأَرْبَع , فَقِيلَ : هِيَ الْيَدَانِ وَالرِّجْلَانِ , وَقِيلَ : الرِّجْلَانِ وَالْفَخِذَانِ , وَقِيلَ : الرِّجْلَانِ وَالشَّفْرَانِ , وَاخْتَارَ الْقَاضِي عِيَاض أَنَّ الْمُرَاد شُعَب الْفَرْج الْأَرْبَع , وَالشُّعَب النَّوَاحِي وَاحِدَتهَا شُعْبَة , وَأَمَّا مَنْ قَالَ : ( أَشْعُبِهَا ) , فَهُوَ جَمْع شُعَب . وَمَعْنَى ( جَهَدَهَا ) حَفَرَهَا كَذَا قَالَهُ الْخَطَّابِيُّ وَقَالَ غَيْره : بَلَغَ مَشَقَّتهَا , يُقَال : جَهِدْته وَأَجْهَدْته بَلَغْت مَشَقَّته , قَالَ الْقَاضِي عِيَاض رَحِمَهُ اللَّه تَعَالَى : الْأَوْلَى أَنْ يَكُون جَهَدَهَا بِمَعْنَى بَلَغَ جَهْده فِي الْعَمَل فِيهَا , وَالْجَهْد الطَّاقَة , وَهُوَ إِشَارَة إِلَى الْحَرَكَة وَتَمَكُّن صُورَة الْعَمَل , وَهُوَ نَحْو قَوْله مِنْ حَفَرَهَا أَيْ كَدّهَا بِحَرَكَتِهِ . وَإِلَّا فَأَيّ مَشَقَّة بَلَغَ بِهَا فِي ذَلِكَ . وَاللَّهُ أَعْلَم . وَمَعْنَى الْحَدِيث أَنَّ إِيجَاب الْغُسْل لَا يَتَوَقَّف عَلَى نُزُول الْمَنِيّ بَلْ مَتَى غَابَتْ الْحَشَفَة فِي الْفَرْج وَجَبَ الْغُسْل عَلَى الرَّجُل وَالْمَرْأَة , وَهَذَا لَا خِلَاف فِيهِ الْيَوْم , وَقَدْ كَانَ فِيهِ خِلَاف لِبَعْضِ الصَّحَابَة وَمَنْ بَعْدهمْ , ثُمَّ اِنْعَقَدَ الْإِجْمَاع عَلَى مَا ذَكَرْنَاهُ , وَقَدْ تَقَدَّمَ بَيَان هَذَا . قَالَ أَصْحَابنَا : وَلَوْ غَيَّبَ الْحَشَفَة فِي دُبُر اِمْرَأَة , أَوْ دُبُر رَجُل , أَوْ فَرْج بَهِيمَة , أَوْ دُبُرهَا , وَجَبَ الْغُسْل سَوَاء كَانَ الْمَوْلَج فِيهِ حَيًّا أَوْ مَيِّتًا , صَغِيرًا أَوْ كَبِيرًا , وَسَوَاء كَانَ ذَلِكَ عَنْ قَصْد أَمْ عَنْ نِسْيَان , وَسَوَاء كَانَ مُخْتَارًا أَوْ مُكْرَهًا , أَوْ اسْتَدْخَلَت الْمَرْأَة ذَكَرَهُ وَهُوَ نَائِم , وَسَوَاء اِنْتَشَرَ الذَّكَر أَمْ لَا , وَسَوَاء كَانَ مَخْتُونًا أَمْ أَغْلَف , فَيَجِب الْغُسْل فِي كُلّ هَذِهِ الصُّوَر عَلَى الْفَاعِل وَالْمَفْعُول بِهِ إِلَّا إِذَا كَانَ الْفَاعِل أَوْ الْمَفْعُول بِهِ صَبِيًّا أَوْ صَبِيَّة فَإِنَّهُ لَا يُقَال وَجَبَ عَلَيْهِ لِأَنَّهُ لَيْسَ مُكَلَّفًا , وَلَكِنْ يُقَال صَارَ جُنُبًا فَإِنْ كَانَ مُمَيِّزًا وَجَبَ عَلَى الْوَلِيّ أَنْ يَأْمُرهُ بِالْغُسْلِ كَمَا يَأْمُرهُ بِالْوُضُوءِ , فَإِنْ صَلَّى مِنْ غَيْر غُسْلٍ لَمْ تَصِحّ صَلَاته , وَإِنْ لَمْ يَغْتَسِل حَتَّى بَلَغَ وَجَبَ عَلَيْهِ الْغُسْل , وَإِنْ اِغْتَسَلَ فِي الصِّبَى ثُمَّ بَلَغَ لَمْ يَلْزَمهُ إِعَادَة الْغُسْل . قَالَ أَصْحَابنَا : وَالِاعْتِبَار فِي الْجِمَاع بِتَغْيِيبِ الْحَشَفَة مِنْ صَحِيح الذَّكَر بِالِاتِّفَاقِ , فَإِذَا غَيَّبَهَا بِكَمَالِهَا تَعَلَّقَتْ بِهِ جَمِيع الْأَحْكَام , وَلَا يُشْتَرَط تَغْيِيب جَمِيع الذَّكَر بِالِاتِّفَاقِ . وَلَوْ غَيَّبَ بَعْض الْحَشَفَة لَا يَتَعَلَّق بِهِ شَيْء مِنْ الْأَحْكَام بِالِاتِّفَاقِ إِلَّا وَجْهًا شَاذًّا ذَكَرَهُ بَعْض أَصْحَابنَا أَنَّ حُكْمه حُكْم جَمِيعهَا , وَهَذَا الْوَجْه غَلَط مُنْكَر مَتْرُوك , وَأَمَّا إِذَا كَانَ الذَّكَر مَقْطُوعًا فَإِنْ بَقِيَ مِنْهُ دُون الْحَشَفَة لَمْ يَتَعَلَّق بِهِ شَيْء مِنْ الْأَحْكَام , وَإِنْ كَانَ الْبَاقِي قَدْر الْحَشَفَة فَحَسْب تَعَلَّقَتْ الْأَحْكَام بِتَغْيِيبِهِ بِكَمَالِهِ , وَإِنْ كَانَ زَائِدًا عَلَى قَدْر الْحَشَفَة فَفِيهِ وَجْهَانِ مَشْهُورَانِ لِأَصْحَابِنَا أَصَحّهمَا أَنَّ الْأَحْكَام تَتَعَلَّق بِقَدْرِ الْحَشَفَة مِنْهُ , وَالثَّانِي لَا يَتَعَلَّق شَيْء مِنْ الْأَحْكَام إِلَّا بِتَغْيِيبِ جَمِيع الْبَاقِي . وَاللَّهُ أَعْلَم . ‏ ‏وَلَوْ لَفَّ عَلَى ذَكَرِهِ خِرْقَة وَأَوْلَجَهُ فِي فَرْج اِمْرَأَة فَفِيهِ ثَلَاثَة أَوْجُه لِأَصْحَابِنَا مِنْهَا وَالْمَشْهُور أَنَّهُ يَجِب عَلَيْهِمَا الْغُسْل , وَالثَّانِي لَا يَجِب لِأَنَّهُ أَوْلَجَ فِي خِرْقَة , وَالثَّالِث إِنْ كَانَتْ الْخِرْقَة غَلِيظَة تَمْنَع وُصُول اللَّذَّة وَالرُّطُوبَة لَمْ يَجِب الْغُسْل . وَإِلَّا وَجَبَ . وَاللَّهُ أَعْلَم . ‏ ‏وَلَوْ اسْتَدْخَلَت الْمَرْأَة ذَكَرَ بَهِيمَة وَجَبَ عَلَيْهَا الْغُسْل , وَلَوْ اسْتَدْخَلَت ذَكَرًا مَقْطُوعًا فَوَجْهَانِ أَصَحّهمَا يَجِب عَلَيْهَا الْغُسْل
        Commentary of Imam Al-Nawawi on the Hadith
        The saying of the prophet — peace be upon him- ‘When he sits between her fours parts) mostly its a home animal (shu’biha Al-arba) and has intercourse with her then fatigues her’

        In another narration the word ‘Ashu’biha’ is used. The scholars have disagreed about the intended meaning of ‘shu’biha Al-arba’ (the fours) for some said that it means the arms and the legs, while others have said that it refers to the legs and thighs, and other said it means the legs and the edge of the pubic area. Al-Qadi Ayad chose the meaning of the four areas surrounding the vagina. The word (Shu’b) means areas, its singular form being (Shu’bah). As for those who say (Ashba’iha) that is the plural of the word (Shu’b).
        The word Aj-hada-ha (fatigue her) means to plow her, which was also stated by Al-Khatabi. Others have said it means to make her reach exhaustion as in the phrase ‘she made him toil and labor till he was exhausted’. Al-Qadi Ayad — may Allah rest his soul- said ‘Primarily, the word (Jahada’ha) means that the man exerted his effort working in a woman, where the word (Juh’d) means energy and refers to motion by describing the type of work. This is similar to his (the prophet) saying ‘he who plowed her’ meaning he who penetrated her by his motion. Otherwise, what other fatigue could a man experience because of her, and Allah knows best.

        The meaning of the hadith is that the necessity to wash is not limited to when semen is ejaculated, rather it is when the penile head (Hash-fa, lit. “the head of the male member,” i.e. head of the penis) penetrates the vagina, then it is necessary for the man and the woman to wash. There is no disagreement on this today, even though there was disagreement on this by some of the early companions and others later. However, an agreement was later reached and this is what we have shown and presented previously.
        Our companions have said that if the penile head has penetrated a woman’s anus, or a man’s anus, or an animal’s vagina or its anus then it is necessary to wash whether the one being penetrated is alive or dead, young or old, whether it was done intentionally or absentmindedly, whether it was done willfully or forcefully.

        This also applies if the woman places the male member inside her while the man is asleep, whether the penis is erect or not, whether the penis is circumcised or uncircumcised. All these situations require that the person committing the act and the one the act is committed on must wash themselves, unless the person committing the act or the person the act is committed on is a young male or female. In that case it cannot be said that the person must wash, for they do not have the responsibility, rather it is said that this person is in a state of impurity. If that person can discern (the sexual act) then his guardian can command him to wash just as he commands him to perform the ablution washing for prayers. For if he prays without washing, his prayer has not been performed correctly; likewise if he doesn’t wash after he reaches puberty he must be forced to wash. If he washed as a youth and then reaches puberty, then he does not have to repeat the washing.

        Our companions have said that intercourse occurs when a healthy male’s penile head completely penetrates (an orifice), as has been unanimously agreed. Thus, when the penile head has completely disappeared (inside the orifice), then all the regulations concerning washing apply. It is unanimously agreed that it is not necessary that the entire penile shaft penetrate to apply the regulations of washing. If part of the penile head penetrates, then the regulations of washing are not imposed as is agreed, except by an odd few of our companions who said that even in this case all the regulations of washing apply. However, this opinion is wrong, rejected and abandoned. If the male member was severed and what remained was less than the length of the penile head, then none of the washing regulations apply. If the part remaining was equal in length to the penile head length then that part must completely penetrate for the regulation of washing to apply. If the part remaining was greater in length to the penile head length then there are two famous opinions for our companions. The most correct is that if the portion that penetrates is equal to the length of the penile head, then the regulations for washing apply. The other opinion is that none of the regulations for washing apply until the entire remaining length of the penile shaft completely penetrates and Allah knows best.
        If a man wraps a sheath around his male member and then ejaculates inside a woman’s vagina, then there are three opinions from our companions. The most famous is that the man must wash. The second is that he does not have to wash because he ejaculated inside the sheath. The third is that if the sheath is thick and prevents climax and wetness (in the vagina) then washing is not necessary, otherwise it is necessary and Allah knows best.
        If a woman inserts (in her vagina) an animal’s penis she must wash, and if she inserts a detached penis (thakaran maktu-an, lit. “a severed male member”) there are two opinions; the most correct is that she must wash.

        Sahih Muslim – Book of Menstruation – hadith #525 – Commentary

        ISLAMIC SCHOLARS

        Some Sunni Islamic scholars have ruled that bestiality does not invalidate the hajj or ones fast.
        ولو وطئ بهيمة لا يفسد حجه

        “If he had sexual intercourse with an animal, that will not make his hajj void”
        Abu Bakar al-Kashani (d. 587 H), Badaye al-Sanae, Vol. 2, p. 216
        “Sex with animals, dead people and masturbation, does not invalidate one’s fast provided ejaculation does not occur”
        Allamah Hassan bin Mansoor Qadhi Khan, Fatawa Qadhi Khan, Page 820
        Others have said it is halal.
        لقد كانت نكاح الحيوانات قبل البعثه منتشره وتروى كثير من الروايات انها حلال لكنها مكروه والاحوط وجوبا ترك هذه العاده التي تسبب الأذى النفسي ويجب عليك الاعتراف لصاحب الاغنام ودفع قيمتها لمالكها

        Sex with animals before the mission (Islam) was wide spread and many narrations are narrated that it is halal but makrooh (disliked). And on the compulsory precaution one should abandon this practice that may cause self harm. And you must admit this to the owner of the sheep and pay the owner.
        Sex with animals Fatwa
        al-Uzma Seyyid Ali al-Sistani

        CONCLUSION

        From all of the above, we can certainly see that, unlike the West, Islamic societies do not universally harbor negative attitudes towards bestiality. Many Muslims seek out gratification or are indifferent to this perversion, and in some cases it is even openly promoted and made obligatory.
        This is all in stark contrast with their attitudes towards homosexuality and their allowance of pedophilia. Therefore to claim that the West without the guidance of Islam has allowed bestiality is not only false, but hypocritical when you consider that this perversion, alongside pedophilia, is left largely unhindered by the Islamic clerisy in their societies and runs rampant among followers of Islam.
        Aside from their own embarrassment, we can also see that there is little basis for any Shari’ah prohibition of bestiality/zoophilia as the Qur’an and the Sahih Hadiths (Bukhari and Muslim) do not prohibit this unnatural practice, furthermore the references we have examined outside of the two Sahihs are considered weak.

        References

        1. ↑ Kelli Morgan – No. 1 Nation in Sexy Web Searches? Call it Pornistan – Fox News, July 13, 2010
        2. ↑ Online Etymology Dictionary, © 2010 Douglas Harper
        3. ↑ 3.0 3.1 3.2 3.3 Bestiality – Dictionary.com
        4. ↑ Collins English Dictionary – Complete & Unabridged 10th Edition 2009
        5. ↑ Merriam-Webster’s Medical Dictionary, © 2007 Merriam-Webster, Inc.
        6. ↑ Merriam-Webster’s Dictionary of Law, © 1996 Merriam-Webster, Inc.
        7. ↑ Rebecca F. Wisch – Overview of State Bestiality Laws – Animal Legal & Historical Center, 2008 (updated 2010)
        8. ↑ Watcher – Pakistan: Muslims Are Sex-Starved Surfers, With Bestial Interests – Eye On The World, May 18, 2006
        9. ↑ 9.0 9.1 Robert E.L. Masters – Forbidden Sexual Behavior and Morality – The Julian Press, 1st edition 1966,
        10. ↑ Africa :: Morocco – The online Factbook
        11. ↑ Read the full text here.
        12. ↑ Allen Edwardes and R.E.L. Masters – Cradle of Erotica (pp. 223-224) – Bantam Paperback; New Ed edition (1977), ISBN 0553103016
        13. ↑ Judith Worell – Encyclopedia of women and gender: Volume 1 (p. 298) – Academic Press; 1 edition, September 27, 2001, ISBN 9780122272455
        14. ↑ Dr. Ahmad Shafaat – Ahadith About Rajm – Islamic Perspectives, March 6, 2005
        15. ↑ ON TASAWWUF Imam Nawawi (d. 676) – Sunnah.org

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s