Jump to content

The Mufti And The Fuhrer


Kaljug

Recommended Posts

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...

..........well the sikhs did join up because they wanted to fight the british and free punjab. what reason did all those muslims have to support the nazis?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 67
  • Created
  • Last Reply

..........well the sikhs did join up because they wanted to fight the british and free punjab. what reason did all those muslims have to support the nazis?

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 :).

Link to post
Share on other sites

The issue of gender infanticide is going to be addressed on the Sikh Channel on a live chat show. Its not the solution, but at least it shows that 'real' Sikhs do care, and that they are finally bringing the monstrous problem to the public eye world wide.

Bahadur is right, we have just had our eyes closed to this problem, it really is time for us as individuals FIRST, and then as a kaum to focus our resources on addressing this issue.

The truth is that abortion is an accepted and relativelu unchallenged issue in the west - where millions of abortions are performed every year. In reality - our biggest hope is a drive for education and change in culture - looking at the reasons for this crule culture - namely dhaaj (dowry) and the excessive wedding culture of the west which has diseased Punjab.

Yes, there were many Muslim who fought for the British in WW1 and 2, being an ex medla collector I can confirm the numerous amounts of high end awards which are in circulation for brave Muslim soldiers.

We need to stop this tu tu mein mein nonsense, its pathetic and especially unbecmoing of this forum.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've heard of a few doctors in India being struck off/ imprisoned for facilitating female infanticide. The new laws there are helping (including the banning of dowry), as well as strong grassroots parchaar in Punjab. In fact, the birth rate for girls is now higher than that of boys for the first time in years.

The momentum needs to be maintained though.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's good to here that the abortions are being dealt with, is abortion actually legal in India?

This link has more info, but it isn't an official site and some of the data is outdated: http://www.indiavisitinformation.com/indian-law/Abortion.shtml also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_in_India and: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/8200497.stm

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks the 1st site is very good.

"Abortion

Abortion in India is illegal. However it is permitted under law only in special circumstances. These include when the woman was raped, when the child would suffer from severe disability, failure of contraceptive devices"

The last 'special circumstance' throws water over the whole purpose of the act!

Link to post
Share on other sites

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 :).

so sikhs are a minority.........and? were the portuguese not a minority when they went and made an empire? (and look at how many people suffered - all that rape, torture, murder etc all in the name of converting 'heathens' to christism; another thing islam shares with their semite brethren).

now consider this. there were a lot more muslims in the world than sikhs during the second world war. yet the number of muslims who fought against the nazis was nowhere near as much as the sikhs, nor where they as effective. as for the algerians, moroccans tunisians etc, what makes them "muslims"? surely just saying they are doesnt make it so, like when you mention punjabi "muslims". also, most of them were in the french army before the war, rather than joining up during the war. they had no choice. as for their reason for carrying on fighting, isnt it clear? after the war, the germans said that rapes and crimes against civilians were as barbaric in the french controlled sector as they were in the soviet one. and most of the perpetrators were north africans. you go on about sikhism and female infanticide, but what about islam and rape/kidnap/mistreatment of women? or the homosexual rape in iranian prisons (so much for an islamic republic)?.

if the germans had won in north africa, the entire muslim world would have joined them. turkey was making noises at the pinnacle of german expansion, and the iraqis tried to help the nazis. the muslims helping the nazis were far more numerous than the other way round. another thing you forget is that the sikhs did not condone what happened to the jews and gypsies. they had no idea that was happening. all the sikh ss refused to fight on the eastern front to make it clear their quarrel was with britain. if the musis knew about auschwitz, they would have volunteered to work there. no sikh body offered support to the nazis. the same cannot be said of the muslims.

and why do muslims say that everyone not like them are nazis? *yawn* change the record, that song is getting old. how is state controlled genocide the same as a culturally accepted attitude? millions of embryos are killed in abortions all over the world. and guess what - its a woman's choice. killing embryos is no different to having a pile of kids and forcing them to grow up in impoverished conditions with little opportunity in life apart from strapping explosives to themselves and blowing up a bunch of people they dont know.

finally, as a musi, you should know that in islam it is considered a sin to accuse or insinuate that other muslims are not muslims. your comment about punjabis, probably based on some kind of b*stardised arab muslim/european belief system you have going on involving a dislike of people you consider inferior, just goes to show how ever you dress up your comments, there is the simple underlying 'stench' on your posts. whatever issues you have, go sort them out. you will find no exorcisms here.

Link to post
Share on other sites

finally, as a musi, you should know that in islam it is considered a sin to accuse or insinuate that other muslims are not muslims. your comment about punjabis, probably based on some kind of b*stardised arab muslim/european belief system you have going on involving a dislike of people you consider inferior, just goes to show how ever you dress up your comments, there is the simple underlying 'stench' on your posts. whatever issues you have, go sort them out. you will find no exorcisms here.

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...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Define "b*stardised arab muslim/european belief system", just curious to see what it means...

its a combination of an arab and european set of ideas, which lead to a bizarre and paradoxical (yet amusing to me)belief system and attitude.

as for the hadith, what makes you think that being a muslim is the same as being a good person? that quote does not imply anyone is not a muslim.

and if i had a problem with your 'statements' i would just ignore them, as you have done to most posts that prove you wrong.

Link to post
Share on other sites

imam zainul abideen :- anyone who believes that abu bakr umar and uthman were good people is a kaffir"

Bahadur it is amusing to me that you consider possibly 90% of the Muslims (sunnis) in the world as Kafirs as per your dodgy pro-Shia hadith but that 90% consider you to be a kafir and a mad minority of these might take great pleasure in killing you. How does that expression go again? Issslamm issss Peeeaase!

Link to post
Share on other sites

"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... "

Bahadur, I occassionally watch the Ahlulbayt UK channel, it has some wonderful and intelligent speakers on there, I have never heard them say a bad word against Sunnis, in fact, listening to some of the audience call in asking questions re Sunni and Shia relationships, the speakers/advisors always give very compromising advice based on hadiths, sharia, Koran etc.

Are these people Kaffirs, uneducated or apologists too... or are they just 'real muslims' i.e. they see the bigger picture?

Link to post
Share on other sites

@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.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Bahadur,

You have a lot of anger and I don't think that this is conducive to your well being especially living in the trigger happy Middle East. Someone could easily use your anger to convince you that strapping on a bomb and setting it off amongst Sunnis is your ticket to paradise. Just because some Arab beat an Arabni 1300 years ago should not determine who a Portugese in love with Iran lives his life. You are basing your life and your opinions about others on a political rivalry between one group of Arabs and another group of Arabs. That fight started because the daughter of someone who killed and seized the lands of Jews wanted a share of that person's ill gotten gain. It was a fight over chori da maal not a fight between good and evil as you try and portray it. As for the ill gotten gain, in the rustic logic of the Punjab, Haraam di kamaie rehindi nahi.

I could understand your anger if you were born a Shia but you are an educated European so I think in your own interests you should cease this, trying to prove that as a convert you are more Shia than those who were born Shias.

Btw so it is true that Shias claim that Sunnis changed the Quran? I have heard Shias deny this, so they must been practising Taqqiya.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Bahadur,

You have a lot of anger and I don't think that this is conducive to your well being especially living in the trigger happy Middle East. Someone could easily use your anger to convince you that strapping on a bomb and setting it off amongst Sunnis is your ticket to paradise. Just because some Arab beat an Arabni 1300 years ago should not determine who a Portugese in love with Iran lives his life. You are basing your life and your opinions about others on a political rivalry between one group of Arabs and another group of Arabs. That fight started because the daughter of someone who killed and seized the lands of Jews wanted a share of that person's ill gotten gain. It was a fight over chori da maal not a fight between good and evil as you try and portray it. As for the ill gotten gain, in the rustic logic of the Punjab, Haraam di kamaie rehindi nahi.

I could understand your anger if you were born a Shia but you are an educated European so I think in your own interests you should cease this, trying to prove that as a convert you are more Shia than those who were born Shias.

Btw so it is true that Shias claim that Sunnis changed the Quran? I have heard Shias deny this, so they must been practising Taqqiya.

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

A set of European Arab set of ideas? I asked you to define me what these are.

a 'set of european arab set of ideas'?! i never used that phrase. what on earth are you on about now? if your referring to the arab muslim and european belief system, well i'm referring to your own belief system which is a result of your experiences, and your lack of ability to deal with certain issues.

Link to post
Share on other sites

a 'set of european arab set of ideas'?! i never used that phrase. what on earth are you on about now? if your referring to the arab muslim and european belief system, well i'm referring to your own belief system which is a result of your experiences, and your lack of ability to deal with certain issues.

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, I'm headed for hell because I don't give any credence to your fairy stories about some Arabni who lived 1300 years ago.

Come on Bahadur, do you really believe that drivel about Fatimah having existed before the creation of the world? I thgought that was Ali, or was it Mohammed? There I was thinking you are a rational educated human being. Ok you can accuse me of reducing her status somewhat but what you do is to make her into some kind of unique personage, I thought that was against your religion mind you it's hard knowing what your 'religion' is at any given time!

It's good to hear that we won't next read of you blowing yourself up but shouldn't you be informing the mullahs of Iran who support Hazbollah that suicide is forbidden.

Of course Shi'ism existed before anything was created, Shi'ism was there before even Ali was around. Man, your revisionist nonsense does you no credit.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not surprised that you reduce the Queen of all universes, who existed even before the world was created to..".an Arabni" ... 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 :) )

LOL

Actually, she (he?) was born in 1961 but I'm sure Fatima Whitbread appreciates the kind words of a loving fan.

fatima_whitbread_1987.jpg

Oh noes, I'm going to hell! :rolleyes:

Regards,

K.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Kaljug wrote:

Oh noes, I'm going to hell! :rolleyes:

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.:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.:)

Well, when I get there I'll be sure to give her a few clips round the ear from you for assuming that she is the queen of the universe.

What is amazing is that you who had a least a modicum of western education can believe this bullshit. Must be that all that banging your head against the concrete floor 5 times a day is giving you early brain damage.

K.

Link to post
Share on other sites

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).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...