Ishraqi

So....a prison sentence is a light sentence? Just because the father doesn't get executed doesn't mean he doesn't do time in jail. But if you really insist on death sentence as a retribution why not start petitioning your own country (chose UK or India/Khalistan). Again you're throwing at me articles about the Iranian government when it is very clear to anyone who has studied fiqh that the Iranian government has violated essential tenets of Shi'ite jurisprudence. And this is not some liberal human rights group saying but high ranking clerics who have chosen to stay out of the revolutionary government, people like Ayatollah Shirazi whose family has been persecuted under Khamenei for that very reason. Shi'ite fiqh prohibits the intrusion of the authorities into peoples' privacy, it also forbids the imposition of the dîn by force. Amîr ul Mu'minin (as) never had a problem with women who didn't wear the Islamic veil precisely because the hijab is a sign of mu'min (believer) as opposed to being the identity marker of someone who merely submits (muslim) to Allah (swt). Furthermore the Iranian government has banned the buying and carrying of swords whereas the hadith clearly say that it's mustahab. They alsp banned public tabarra against Omar (la), Abu Bakr (la) and Aishah (la). etc etc etc THe idea that somehow Khamenei and his regime are representatives of Shi'ite tradition is simply ludicrous and a sign of profound ignorance. Now as imperfect and doctrinally dubious the laws of the Iranian government may be, there still is a legal system with its good and bad aspects. Now you tell me: what legal system did the panj pyare of Gobind Rai use when they condemned 300 masands to be burnt alive and thrown into a well? I would like to see the legal system that would have justified such a ruling. Now you can't give me the source because there is no such legal source in Sikhism. It is pretty clear that these Masands have been judged without a clear legal framework, condemned to death for offenses that were mostly economical in nature. What rule of law can a citizen of your future Khalsa Raj expect when all decisions are the result of the fantasies of five pindoos? The penalty for stealing an apple might range from paying a fine to getting ones whole family gang raped (as it has happened many times in your region of the world) because of the absence of a clearly defined legal system, which you NEVER EVER HAD. What good can I as a citizen expect from a Guru that gets his disciple slapped for having dirtied his shirt with some plaster while he was plastering his Guru's house? On what basis was that punishment given? Where is the text stating the legality of such an action? There is none because you have no legal whatsoever unlike civilized people. Your rulings are ALL based on the whimps and desires of the council of five pindoos who basically decide what they want. I remember a case at the Paris gurdwara in Bobigny when I lived there: a granthi had stolen money from the golak, the panj pyare decided to have him tied up and kept him in a room. For several weeks people were allowed to visit that room and beat the hell out of him before he was sent back to India. Now...apart from the fact that this is completely illegal in France. The question I have is: on what basis, what legal principles did these panj pyare take that decision? None. They settled for whatever came through their heads. God knows what even happened to that guy when he returned to India. The pradhan's son told me he had his hand cut off apparently. So you can keep on pointing fingers at Iran all you want, but people in Iran are well of the disturbing abuses of the Khamenei regime and his own disrespect for basic tenets of Shiite jurisprudence. Your people can't even be asked to have a legal in the first place let alone have a structure to implement it. Khalsa Raj? yeah right my ass... Calling Iranian people retrograde because of the abuses that their own press reports is frankly taking the piss when your own people can't even be asked to preserve the life of millions of baby girls who are getting slaughtered every single day with the silent consent OF YOUR admin cut SAVAGE COMMUNITY. And your alternative to all of this is what? Drinking cannabis milkshakes and parading around in 18th century arms coz it's maryada like innit like? like? admin cut that shit!!!

Love the Ahl ul Bayt (as), fight their ennemies. Summs up Tashayyu pretty well.

I had one of my law students in Tehran check your so-called paragraph 220 which you mentionned... The actual paragraph is: "Section 16 A father or paternal grandfather who kills his son (or grandson) shall be liable only to pay the Diyat for the murder to the heirs as a Ta'zeer." Retribution for murder is a right of the victim's family. If the murderer happens to be the father of grandfather the retribution (death penalty) is converted into diyat or a prison sentence. Kind of not the same as the bullcrap you quoted. And why the hell are you qouting flipping Sunni hadiths when talking about Iran? All those spikes in your head must have made your brain gone soft. Also the cases you mentionned have been reported by the Iranian press. We all know there are retrograde elements in Iranian society, but at least Iran doesn't have the world's highest rate for female infanticide....

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/8072158/Mother-hacked-to-death-after-filing-for-divorce.html

Khalsa Dharam Shastar is I think a great work. It's by far the most serious and credible attempt at creating a traditionalist catechism. It's really sad it hasn't been published again since 1914.The section on the relations between Sikhism and Hinduism is truly fascinating like much of the rest of the work.

Kaljug wrote: I thank God for having made you stupid. That's probably one of the most blatant lies I have ever heard. WOW. Ever heard of tri-functional Indo-European societies? Read George Dumézil and Max Weber. admin cut

Obviously not Indian either...

The Prophet said about him and his family:" We are not Arabs". I won't say anymore on this subject as I think I shouldn't discuss the status of Fatimah (as) with people whose fate in the next world is already decided.

HSD wrote: 1. It's not "THE muslims", it's we Shi'a 2. Lady Fatimah (as) has titles such as Mistress of the women of all the worlds, the Virgin, the Pure One, the Blessed One,the Queen of Paradise etc...

Why should Tony and Kaljug be banned from a Sikh forum for insulting Ahlul Bayt (as) if Dasam Granth already does so? If you're banning these guys you have to ban Bachitar Natak as well.Tony and Kaljug are people I appreciate because they take away the cover of political correctness that makes many people forget the way the Prophet (saws) gets insulted in Dasam Granth and in teh rest of of post 1708 literature (even though I wouln't like to reduce Sikhism to that issue).

Kaljug wrote: You chose your username well I must say. Yes you know where you're going at least, you can prepare yourself for it now. Amazing how people just waste their precious souls in a few seconds by insulting Hazrat-e Fatimah (as). At least it's good to know you'll be dealt with properly in the after life.

My faith is not the result of my experiences, it is the way that has been established and show by all our prophets and Imams from Adam (as) to Imam-e Zaman (ajf) though Noah (as), Abraham (as), Moses (as), David (as), Jesus (as) and Mohammad (saws). For me to have Arab ideas would mean that I am either Arab or that I was brought up in Arabic which is not the case. And just in case you wondered: Shi'ism being non-tribal is NOT an Arab religion. Next time you wish to have a go at me chose better arguments.

I am perfectly calm and at peace my love thanks for caring.Suicide is haram for us so the idea of blowing myself up didn't cross my mind really and anyways the state in which Sunnis are i.e. absence of love for God's Face, is hell in and of itself.As for your rather incorrect picture of what happened 1400 years ago in Medina...I am not surprised that you reduce the Queen of all universes, who existed even before the world was created to..".an Arabni" and that you reduce the issue between Sunnis and Shi'as to a vulgar issue of zamin. After all it's the kind of realities you are used to. It would like asking a cockroach to appreciate Mozart. Your own incapacity to understand Fatimah's (as) status is your hell on earth (yes Bikramjit insulting Fatimah will get you a single ticket to hell )Trust me I am the last person on earth who will try to take you out of that hell by trying to prove to you that Shi'ism is the wa.And for your information...among the first Shi'as there were already a lot of Persians including the Sassanid regiments of Yemen who converted to Islam. Shi'ism transcends tribal consciesness but that's something you probably don't understand.And no I am not trying to prove to other Shi'as anything about my own faith.I have my own nafs to conquer and I can't care less about what other people think of me. It's Allah (swt) who will judge my deeds not other fallible human beings. Thanks for caring kisses xxx

@HSD: A set of European Arab set of ideas? I asked you to define me what these are. @tonyhp32: you're right about the Islamic world. Thank God the Sikh world has never known any sort of violence against different groups that came from it and are within it. One just needs to see how Sikhs, Nirankaris, Ravidasis and other cults live in harmony to be convinced by your statements :)If the majority were to define your religion you'd probably have to call yourself a Hindu... @Shaheediyan, the AhlulBayt Channel is the AhlulBayt Channel. Our Imams did advocate tolerance for those Sunnis that love AhlulBayt because they are ignorant of the opression were the victim of. It's a different deal with those who though exposed to the truth (that is present in their own hadith books) still continue to follow to the opressors of Fatimah (as). It is in that light that you should see the statements of these speakers which I personally find way too conciliatory whilst Shi'as are being raped, tortured, killed and kidnapped not only in Saudi Arabia but also in Morroco, Algeria, Yemen and parts of Pakistan. You cannot love both Fatimah (as) and Omar (la) who beat her, slapped her, whipped her until she miscarried her foetus and died 2 weeks later. It's an impossibility. Unfortunately many people are being fed the lie of Pan-Islamism these days which is detrimental to the very core of our faith. For you the bigger picture is peace between people between all backgrounds. For a Shi'a the big picture is the love of Fatimah Zahra (as).You (and Pan-Islamist SHi'as) ignore that our hadith clearly state that there are two types of clay that Allah (swt) used to constitute the bodies, hearts, souls and spirits of humanity. One is the clay of the heavenly world of the ’Illiyyûn and the other one stems from the infernal world of the Sijjîn. The bodies, hearts, souls and spirits of the all the prophets and imams are made of the heavenly ’Illiyûn clay. As for the mo’minûn their souls, spirits and hearts are made of the same heavenly ‘Illyûn clay as the prophets and imams but their bodies are made of a mixture of ’Illiyyûn and Sijjîn clay. In the ’alam ul-mithâq when Allah asked Am I not your Lord? (alastu birrabikum?) the mo’minûn paid allegiance to the unicity of Allah (swt), the nubuwwah, the walâya and the mission of Imâm-e Zamân (ajf). The rest of humanity’s souls, hearts, spirits and bodies are made of the mixture of clays from the ’Illiyyûn and Sijjîn and these being have only acknowledge the unicity of Allah (swt). This anthropology is rich and deep in meaning and we shall highlight a few aspects of this anthropology. There is first of all the fact that being a Shi’a, a mo’min, is a matter already established before one is even born on this earth as a result of one’s response to Allah’s question. It also implies a fundamental ontological difference between the Shi’a and the rest of humanity. Thus proselytism and pan-Islamism are in absolute contradiction with what Shi’a traditions states about the ontological nature of the true Shi’a. I use the term true Shi’a because it goes without saying that there is a difference between the real Shi’a and those have adopted the Shi’a social identity.A person my be exoterically a Hanefi but in reality a Shi'a as was the case of Rumi or Ibn Arabi (ra) (read Rumi's Spiritual Shi'ism by Seyed Ghahreman Safavi), or even a Catholic or Orthodox Christian (given that these divinely revealed traditions) externally and a Shi'a in the esoteric sense. Here is what Imam Ridha (as) said: Sulaiman Ibn Jafar narrated: We came to Imam al-Ridha while he was prostrating and performing a lengthy Sajda of al-Shukr. Once he raised his head, we said to him: You prolonged your Sajda.? He replied: ?Whoever calls (Allah) with this Duaa in Sajda al- Shukr is like a marksman in the battle of Badr beside the Apostle of Allah (&HF). We said: ?Can we write this down?? He : Write down that when you are performing Sajda al-Shukr, recite: O Allah! Curse those two who changed Your religion, turned Your blessing, accused Your Apostle (&HF), opposed Your principle, prevented Your path, obscured Your favors, rejected Your sayings, mocked Your Apostle (&HF), killed the son of Your Prophet (&HF), altered the meaning of Quran, denied and ridiculed Your signs, disdained to worship You, killed Your friends, sat in a position that was not lawfully theirs, and imposed people over the family of Muhammad (&HF). O Allah! Curse them the curse that is consecutive, and gather them and their followers in the Hell blear-eyed (referring to 20:102). O Allah! We seek nearness to You by cursing those two and disassociating (ourselves) from them in this world and in the Hereafter... O Allah! Curse those two the curse that is performed by every close Angel, every sent Prophet, and every faithful whose heart You have tested for the faith. O Allah! Curse those two with the curse that the People of Fire seek refuge from it and from their punishment. O Allah! Curse those two the curse that could never come to anyone's imagination. O Allah! Curse those two (Abu Bakr and Omar) in Your most concealed secret and in Your most manifest openness, and punish them to the extent of punishment that is measured and above that is measured, and join them their two daughters, their supporters, their lovers, and whoever has followed those two. 'Surely You hear the prayer (3:38).'" - Mustadrak al-Wasa'il, v5, p139, Hadith #5516 - Muhaj al-Da'awat, Sayyid Ibn Tawus, pp 257-258 - al-Misbah, al-Kaf'ami, pp 553-554 - Bihar al-Anwar, v83/86, p223, Hadith #44 Sunnis, my brothers in faith? Never.

Define "b*stardised arab muslim/european belief system", just curious to see what it means... As for insinuating that someone is not a Muslim, we have plenty of hadiths like these ones: imam zainul abideen :- anyone who believes that abu bakr umar and uthman were good people is a kaffir" If you have a problem with such statements I suggest you take 50p go to a phone box and phone someone who cares...

Sikhs have always been a minority in Panjab. Most Panjabis are "Muslims" (well so they say). You seem to forget that there were also Muslims among the Allies and make it sound as if all Muslims joined Hitler which is of course a joke. I suggest you watch the French movie Indigenes which talks about the Muslim regiments of the French army who fought against the Germans. Now let me guess what reason they had to join the Allies.And these regiments were far more numerous than all these small SS units you guys love to refer to. Joining one side or the other had more to do with opportunism than religion.No doubt both sides instrumentalised religion but in the end it's all a farce. Joining the SS to liberate Panjab or because you don't like the Jews is a stupid excuse whatever way you look at it. In the end they wore the SS uniform and condonned a regime that killed more than 9 million people in concentration camps. And to go even further I don't see any difference between the Nazis and two nations (India and Pakistan) that let millions of baby girls die through socially accepted gender-cide (and remember there is no regime there forcing these nations to do so...). It's the same inhuman barbarity and those who claim that it goes against their religion but dont move a finger to end this (why carry a sword if it's just s symbol) are as guilty as the other ones .

You guys are hilarious. "Oh the Singhs joined the SS they wanted to free India but Muslims did it because they're just evil" Clap clap clap clap great argument I am impressed...

A quick reminder for people with selective memories. There were Sikhs in the SS as well...

Thanks for Shaheediyan for writing competently about McLeod. McLeod was a historian and as such his findings were part of an academic debate. He had no agenda. A lot of his work needs to be reviewed but to be frank he has opened many doors and had it not been for him the only literature we would have in the West about Sikhism would be restricted to the 20 page 10 rupees booklets you can buy around the Golden Temple with titles such as "Hair: source of the life" or "The Sikhism: a religion for the modren man".

LMAO

Even from the point of view of classical Islamic jurisprudence these courts are illegal because the sharia for Muslims living in a non-Muslim country is the law of the land in which they are living. Sharia courts can only exist in countries that have an Islamic state and have competent jurists. Muslims who chose to live in a non-Muslim country are expected by Islamic law itself to live by the laws of the land as long as these don't encourage major sins. This certainly isn't the case in the UK which is a Christian country and whose laws are open enough to accomodate all citizens. This is a shame and the sooner these illegal courts get banned the better.The very fact that these (and other courts...) exist only shows that there is a will among some of the British elite to get rid of Britain's Christian roots.

Matheen wrote: You are absolutely right. There are many dimensions to this crisis. 1. Foreign interference: Russia, Europe and the US. Russia' interference is the strongest with its support for AN. Western interference limits itself at using the protests as some kind of "proof" that people hate the Islamic revolution which is not the case. 2.The old fight between the crocodile and the shark: Yazdi and Rafsanjani. AN follows Yazdi who authorized rigging the votes. 3. The electoral crisis in and of itself and the issue of transparency. If you think people here are fed up with the idea of an Islamic republic you're mistaken.The mosques are still full of young people at prayer time and they honour their marytrs. All they want is a transparent system and a state of law. No more no less.

To Tonyhp32: the people who get hanged are guilty of crimes and have been tried. There is a penal system like any other country applying sentences to those found guilty. In the case of hangings it's mostly drug dealers. Then again I am surprised you complain about these things when your own 10th master had 300 masands burnt alive and thrown in a well. To Amardeep: the system and constitution are fine. By the system I mean the idea of having a wali e faqih over the three powers and making sure the laws passed by the parliament are in agreement with shariah.The issue here is not about the system:it's about the fact that the elections were rigged. It's as simple as that.It's a clash between two ideas of what the revolution was about. The reforms they want is transparency in the dealing between the four powers, the abolition of the militia's right to interfere in people's lives, the fulfillment of the economic promises of the revolution (oil money back to the people).If people were against the system they wouldn't be using Imam Khomeini's portrait and the slogans of the revolution.