Tag Archives: sunnis

Iranian Sunni leader on the safavid like policies of the Iranian regime

بسم الله الرحمن الرحیم

Shaykh Abdol Hamid, Iranian Sunni leader, criticizes the Iranian regime for their dirty safavid like policies towards the Ahlus-Sunnah of Iran. The Shaykh mentions that the regime despite chanting too many slogans of Unity does not allow the Sunnis to have a Mosque in Tehran, a city where each year the regime holds ‘International Unity Conference’. The Shaykh also talks about the new plans of the regime like appointing Shia Ayatollahs as heads of Sunni religious institution.

Even in Israel there is no such policy towards the Muslims like appointing Rabbis as heads of Muslim religious centres.


Leave a comment

Filed under Articles

Ayatollah al-Khoei making Takfir on Sunni Muslims

by Hani (aka TripolySunni)
Posted by 13S2010

حرمة الغيبة مشروطة بالايمان: قوله: ثم ان ظاهر الاخبار اختصاص حرمة الغيبة بالمؤمن. أقول: المراد من المؤمن هنا من آمن بالله وبرسوله وبالمعاد وبالائمة الاثنى عشر (عليهم السلام)، اولهم علي بن أبي طالب (عليه السلام) وآخرهم القائم الحجة المنتظر عجل الله فرجه وجعلنا من أعوانه وأنصاره، ومن أنكر واحدا منهم جازت غيبته لوجوه: 1 – انه ثبت في الروايات (1) والادعية والزيارات جواز لعن المخالفين، ووجوب البراءة منهم، واكثار السب عليهم واتهامهم، والوقيعة فيهم اي غيبتهم، لانهم من اهل البدع والريب (2). بل لا شبهة في كفرهم، لان انكار الولاية والائمة (عليهم السلام) حتى الواحد منهم والاعتقاد بخلافة غيرهم، وبالعقائد الخرافية كالجبر ونحوه يوجب الكفر والزندقة، وتدل عليه الاخبار المتواترة (3) الظاهرة في كفر منكر الولاية وكفر المعتقد بالعقائد المذكورة وما يشبهها من الضلالات

Reference: Mishbahul Fuqahah 2/11, Dar Al-Huda, Beirut Libanon

Online Reference From Shia website:



[I say: What is meant by “believer” here is the one who believes in Allah and his messenger and the last day and the twelve Imams (as), starting with `Ali bin abi Talib (as) and ending with al-Qa’em al-Hujjah, the awaited one may Allah hasten his appearance and make us among his supporters, and he who denies one of them then it is allowed to backbite him for several reasons:

1- It has been proven in the narrations and Ziyarat and supplications that it is permissible to curse the ones who oppose us, and that it is obligatory to disown them, and increase their insults, and accuse them, and slander them, meaning to backbite them because they are from the people of innovation and doubt. There is no doubt about their Kufr, because denying al-Wilayah and the Imams (as) even if just one, and to believe in the Khilafah of others, and to believe in myths such as al-Jabr and other beliefs necessities Kufr and Zandaqah, as mentioned in the Mutawatir narrations that clearly demonstrate the Kufr of the rejector of al-Wilayah, and the Kufr of the one who believes in the mentioned beliefs and similar other misguided beliefs.

2- Those who oppose us commit Fisq publicly, because their deeds are annulled by default as stated by the countless narrations. They even adopted what is greater than Fisq as you now know, and we will mention later that it is permissible to backbite the one who commits Fisq publicly.

3- What we benefit from the verse and the narrations is that it is forbidden to backbite against the believing brother, and it is obvious that there is no brotherhood or sanctity between us and those who oppose us.

4- It is famous and spread since the past among the laypeople of the Shia and their scholars that they used to backbite against the ones who oppose us, rather they used to insult them and curse them at all times and in all lands, in fact it is mentioned in “al-Jawahir” that this is from the necessities.]

After we’re done, now let me show you Taqqiyah:

Imam al-Khu’i’s charity foundation called for a conference entitled “الوحدة الإسلامية والمذاهب الفقهية” “Islamic unity and schools of jurisprudence”:

كلمة سماحته في ندوة الاجتماع الدولي لوضع استراتيجية مشتركة للتقريب بين المذاهب الإسلامية المنعقد في فندق إيبلا الشام بدعوة من مؤسسة الإمام الخوئي الخيرية خلال الفترة 10 – 12 /4/1999م

This was held in Damascus 10/12/1999.

Talking about unity and love and respect and tolerance and brotherhood between all religions ect… is no more than Shia Bullsh*t and Taqqiyah.

—End of Article—

وَإِذَا لَقُوا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا قَالُوا آمَنَّا وَإِذَا خَلَوْا إِلَىٰ شَيَاطِينِهِمْ قَالُوا إِنَّا مَعَكُمْ إِنَّمَا نَحْنُ مُسْتَهْزِئُونَ

And when they meet those who believe, they say, “We believe”; but when they are alone with their evil ones, they say, “Indeed, we are with you; we were only mockers.” [2:14]



Leave a comment

Filed under Articles, Revealing Shia sect, Twelver Shia Hatred

Shia Narrators in Sunni Hadiths are Not Twelvers

Bismillah Alrahman Alraheem,

If you have clicked on this thread, then I am sure that you are already aware that much has been written by Twelver scholars about the reliance of Sunnis on Shia narrators. Of course, you are most likely also aware that the typical Sunni response is that there are no evidences that these Shias are Twelvers, but rather, are political Shias, that preferred Ali to Uthman, or were those that were critical of the people of Al-Shaam. However, neither of the two sides, in my opinion, have brought sufficient evidence to back up either claim, even though the burden of proof is upon the Twelvers of today.

In this thread, I share a few examples that will be sufficient in proving that there is no reason to believe that when Sunni scholars used terms like “shi’ee” or “rafidhee” that they were not referring to Twelvers.

1) Mohammed bin Ishaaq Al-Madani, the author of the seerah:

The Sunni scholar Al-Khateeb Al-Baghdaadi said: Some scholars didn’t see authority in the narrations of Ibn Ishaaq for reasons like: his tashayyu, his attribution to al-qadr, and his tadlees.

The Shi’ee scholar Al-Tusi said under his list of companions of Al-Baqir: Mohammed bin Ishaaq Al-Madani, sahib al-siyar,’aami.

2) Abdulsalam bin Salih Al-Harawi:

The Sunni scholars said:
Yahya bin Ma’een said: Thiqa saduq ila anahu yatashayya’.
Al-Daraqutni and Al-Uqaili said: He was a vile rafidhi.

The Shia scholar Al-Tusi said: Aami.

3) Abbad bin Ya’qoub Al-Rawajini:

The Sunni scholars said:
Ibn Adi said: He is extreme in his tashayyu.
Salih bin Mohammed said: He used to curse Uthman.
Al-Daraqutni said: He is a truthful shi’ee.
Ibn Hibban said: He was a rafidhi that called to it.

The Shi’ee scholar Al-Tusi said in his Fihrist: He was Aami al-mathhab.

4) Khalid bin Tahman

The Sunni scholar Abu Hatim said: He was one of the old shia.
The Shia scholar Al-Najashi said: He was one of the aama.

5) Ammar Al-Duhani:

The Sunni scholar Sufyan bin Uyayna accused him of tashayyu.
The Shia scholar Al-Najashi said about him, in the biography of Ammar’s son: His father Ammar was a thiqa among theaama wajhan (a major representative of them).

Note: The term aama is the term used by Shias to refer to Sunnis.

In conclusion, as we can see there is a clear contradiction between the opinions of the Sunni and Shia scholars. So, the only way to reconcile these contradictions is by saying that these narrators are Shi’ee in the eyes of Sunni scholars, in the sense of their political outlook, but are Sunnis in the eyes of the Shia scholars, for they were not Twelvers.

By Farid (may Allah protect him). 
Original Article Link: http://islamic-forum.net/index.php?showtopic=16895
Posted by: 13S2010

Leave a comment

Filed under Articles, Clarification about sunni hadiths, Exposing al-islam.org, Hadith science, Revealing Shia sect