Tuesday, February 07, 2006

On Ashura

A week ago, the Islamic world has celebrated the starting of the month of Moharram, the first month of the muslim lunar calendar. In Morocco, and in many other (mostly sunni) parts of the muslim world, the first ten days of Muharram are festive days. On Ashura day, which is the tenth day of Muharram, people will buy sweets, nuts and candy, and offer gifts and toys to their children. They will even congratulate one another by saying: "Mabrouk lewasher", and on Ashura night (or the night before) youngsters will festively burn tires and and throw water to one another. Yet, in other (mostly shia) parts of the muslim world, the first ten days are days of mourning, sadness and tears.

Have you ever thought about the contrast ? Happiness on one side, sadness on the other. Mourning on one side, festive mood on the other. Who is right ? Who is wrong ? Why are the shia mourning ? Why are some sunnis happy ? Did you ever wonder ? Did you ever care ?

56 comments:

Foulla said...

oh yes i did..and i never understood how some muslims can celebrate the death, the killing, the savage killing of Imam Hussein the beloved grand son of Mohamad (PBUH).

aya said...

Salam a tous,

I used to be happy on Ashura, got gifts, eat nuts, etc. I used to fast on the ninth and the tenth of this month like my mother did and like my grand mother did too. Then I learned that celebrating Ashura was bid3a. So, I just fasted. One day, I was reading a book about what happend after the Prophet death and for the first time in my life I met with the death of Imam Al Hussein. I was ...no words to describe my feelings that day. Crying was'nt enough! First thing I did was to think about my son. Crying was not enough! Then, I realized that it was about My Prophet son...Is crying for his killing by "muslims" enough? If I cried for your grand mother Foulla that I didn't know and who is just a normal human being, would it be fair to my beloved Prophet not to do so for his son? One would say that criying after a dead is haram. Well, read Coran and you'll find the answer there. One would argue that the whole story happened centries ago. I will say: so what? What's bad of mourning someone you cherish especially when you learn that the Prophet him self asked you to do so:

قُلْ لَا أَسْأَلُكُمْ عَلَيْهِ أَجْرًا إِلَّا الْمَوَدَّةَ فِي الْقُرْبَى وَمَنْ يَقْتَرِفْ حَسَنَةً نَزِدْ لَهُ فِيهَا حُسْنًا إِنَّ اللَّهَ غَفُورٌ شَكُورٌ

42/23

This is Coran. It is a command from Allah and his Prophet. Allah gave us Islam and in return asked us only one thing: the love of the Prophet family. If you can't pay the price of love, you don't deserve it!(sorry Jallal to talk again like that). Now, how one can show his love to someone if he does not be happy when this someone is happy and does not be sad when the loved person is sad? Why shia are sad and sunna (90% of muslims)happy? Someone would insist: the love of ahlu albeit is in our heart. Well, this is ad3fou al iman.

Foulla, Jallal, Karim and all the others: how would you show your love to the beloved son of Muhammad??? Don't look at how shia are mourning and give me please one example. Otherwise, you have the right to remain silent forever. A couple years of shame and disgratitude will be added to the register of muslims...who cares!!!

P.S. Karim thanks for daring!

Foulla said...

i don't celebrate Ashoura of course,but i try to read Karbala's tragedy every ashoura to remember..sometimes i fast ..btw Aya,long time no see;(

Mahdi El Wazzani said...

How ironic, Muslims every where are rioting, burning consulates for a caricature with no taste that is insalting the prophete...drwan by a non muslim that does not the status of the prophete (pbh)...

and for centuries tried to ignore the savage killing of his grand-son (Imam Hussein) by Muslims and his head, along with the heads of all the Hashimite men, offered to a drunk Khalifa...Yazid may Allah curse him, along with his followers until the day of judgement...

If the prophete (pbuh) was among us, he would probably pardon the Danish news paper, but not those that celebrate the EID that the omayades created on the 10th of Muharram...as the omayades said people do: They told them to fast, and bring gifts to their children and that's what they do...

Karim said...

Aya,

"Foulla, Jallal, Karim and all the others: how would you show your love to the beloved son of Muhammad???"

Wa rah les questions perso diyalek rahoum khatar!!! :-)

En fait, si tu dis que "crying is not enough", alors je ne vois pas quoi d'autre on pourrait faire???

More to come later ;-)

Foulla said...

well i think we need to help those around us understand what really happened in Karbalaa and why they have to stop celebrating Ashoura.
By the way,Shi3a cry to show their sorrow for not answering imam Hussein's famous call"ama min nassirin yansourouny?"..
Ad that's why,i think, their mourning is "bloody".

Karim said...

Salam everyone,

Sorry for being a little slow to follow up on this. I first will note that I was quite happy that Foulla has published a post on her blog on this topic, and that she was able to generate a lively and interesting discussion. One important point that has emerged from that discussion is that celebrating Ashura the way it is done in Morocco for example, with gifts being offered to children, etc., is an innovation for which there is no proof whatsoever in Islamic texts. Now, there remains a profound disagreement between sunnis and shias on the nature of Ashura. For while the sunnis claim that Ashura is a blessed day, where fasting is highly rewarded, the shias claim that the Hadiths on which the sunnis base this opinion were fabricated by the Omeyyads to "camouflage", so to speak, the atrocities they visited upon the family of the Prophet (pbuh) on that day. In order to clarify this point of disagreement a little more, here I would like to discuss some of these contentious Hadiths to try to discern where the truth lies.

First of all, let me start with the following Hadith, which is the Hadith number 3145 from the collection of Boukhari, and which is cited by sunnis as their main "proof" for the blessed nature of the day of Ashura:

حدثنا ‏ ‏علي بن عبد الله ‏ ‏حدثنا ‏ ‏سفيان ‏ ‏حدثنا ‏ ‏أيوب السختياني ‏ ‏عن ‏ ‏ابن سعيد بن جبير ‏ ‏عن ‏ ‏أبيه ‏ ‏عن ‏ ‏ابن عباس ‏ ‏رضي الله عنهما ‏
‏أن النبي ‏ ‏صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏ ‏لما قدم ‏ ‏المدينة ‏ ‏وجدهم يصومون يوما ‏ ‏يعني عاشوراء فقالوا هذا يوم عظيم وهو يوم نجى الله فيه ‏ ‏موسى ‏ ‏وأغرق آل ‏ ‏فرعون ‏ ‏فصام ‏ ‏موسى ‏ ‏شكرا لله فقال ‏ ‏أنا أولى ‏ ‏بموسى ‏ ‏منهم فصامه وأمر بصيامه

In this Hadith, we learn that the Prophet (pbuh) did not know about Ashura before the emigration, and did not fast on it until he found about it from the people of Medina. Now, in Hadith number 3544, al-Bukhari narrates the following:

حدثنا ‏ ‏مسدد ‏ ‏حدثنا ‏ ‏يحيى ‏ ‏حدثنا ‏ ‏هشام ‏ ‏قال حدثني ‏ ‏أبي ‏ ‏عن ‏ ‏عائشة ‏ ‏رضي الله عنها ‏ ‏قالت ‏
‏كان يوم عاشوراء يوما تصومه ‏ ‏قريش ‏ ‏في الجاهلية وكان النبي ‏ ‏صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏ ‏يصومه فلما قدم ‏ ‏المدينة ‏ ‏صامه وأمر بصيامه فلما نزل رمضان كان من شاء صامه ومن شاء لا يصومه ‏

By contrast to the first Hadith, this second Hadith tells us that the Prophet (pbuh) used to fast Ashura even when he was in Mecca, and that in fact fasting Ashura was a pre-Islamic custom. This inconsistency aside, we also learn in the second Hadith that fasting of Ashura, if fasting there was, has been supplanted by Ramadan. This fact is corroborated by many other Hadiths, of which I will cite the following one, which is Hadith number 1903 from Sahih Muslim:

حدثنا ‏ ‏أبو كريب ‏ ‏حدثنا ‏ ‏أبو أسامة ‏ ‏عن ‏ ‏الوليد يعني ابن كثير ‏ ‏حدثني ‏ ‏نافع ‏ ‏أن ‏ ‏عبد الله بن عمر ‏ ‏رضي الله عنهما ‏ ‏حدثه ‏
‏أنه سمع رسول الله ‏ ‏صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏ ‏يقول في يوم عاشوراء ‏ ‏إن هذا يوم كان يصومه أهل الجاهلية فمن أحب أن يصومه فليصمه ومن أحب أن يتركه فليتركه ‏
‏وكان ‏ ‏عبد الله ‏ ‏رضي الله عنه ‏ ‏لا يصومه إلا أن يوافق صيامه ‏ ‏و حدثني ‏ ‏محمد بن أحمد بن أبي خلف ‏ ‏حدثنا ‏ ‏روح ‏ ‏حدثنا ‏ ‏أبو مالك عبيد الله بن الأخنس ‏ ‏أخبرني ‏ ‏نافع ‏ ‏عن ‏ ‏عبد الله بن عمر ‏ ‏رضي الله عنهما ‏ ‏قال ‏ ‏ذكر عند النبي ‏ ‏صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏ ‏صوم يوم عاشوراء فذكر ‏ ‏مثل حديث ‏ ‏الليث بن سعد ‏ ‏سواء ‏

In this Hadith, we learn that Abdullah b. Umar did not fast on Ashura (except when Ashura coincided with one of his own regular voluntary fasting days). If Ashura was the great, blessed opportunity that sunnis talk about, the fasting of which expiated the sins of the previous and the following years, then why didn't Abdullah b. Umar care to fast on it? As a close companion of the Prophet Muhammad, and one whose father was one of the four "rightly guided" caliphs, it is hard to believe that he wasn't in the know. Am I missing something here?

As a last Hadith, I will give you this one, which is Hadith number 1916 from Sahih Muslim:

و حدثنا ‏ ‏الحسن بن علي الحلواني ‏ ‏حدثنا ‏ ‏ابن أبي مريم ‏ ‏حدثنا ‏ ‏يحيى بن أيوب ‏ ‏حدثني ‏ ‏إسمعيل بن أمية ‏ ‏أنه سمع ‏ ‏أبا غطفان بن طريف المري ‏ ‏يقول سمعت ‏ ‏عبد الله بن عباس ‏ ‏رضي الله عنهما ‏ ‏يقولا ‏
‏حين صام رسول الله ‏ ‏صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏ ‏يوم عاشوراء وأمر بصيامه قالوا يا رسول الله إنه يوم تعظمه ‏ ‏اليهود ‏ ‏والنصارى ‏ ‏فقال رسول الله ‏ ‏صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏ ‏فإذا كان العام المقبل إن شاء الله صمنا اليوم التاسع قال فلم يأت العام المقبل حتى توفي رسول الله ‏ ‏صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏


We understand from this Hadith that the Prophet didn't fast on Ashura until the last year before his death, and, in any case, didn't learn that the Jews and Christians honored this day until he was nearing his death. Now, let me ask: do you find it credible that, after having spent a whole decade in Medina, with its large Jewish community, the Prophet was still unaware of a (putative) Jewish celebration of Ashura? I personally don't.


In view of all these inconsistencies and contradictions between the different hadiths, I cannot help but think that the shias may be right on this one. I think it is historically well-established that the festive aspects of Ashura were introduced by the Omeyyads. It is therefore very plausible that they would also have introduced all these Hadiths to fool the muslim masses and induce them to believe that whatever they did to Imam Hussein was a blessed act because it happened on a blessed day, or at least to distract them and keep them from thinking about the Karbala tragedy and rebel against their rule.

Aya:
I think you are right: crying is not enough. That is why, as Foulla said, we should do our best to bring the tragedy of Karbala to the attention of our fellow muslims. In fact, there is much to say about Karbala, and so many lessons to learn from it. I am sure we will have ample opportunity to discuss those, either in the rest of this discussion, or in the years to come.

Jallal said...

Salam,

My opinion on the subject is that Ashura did exist before Islam and was celebrated by Jews and probably by Arabs and others. Muslims were asked to fast, if they want, 2 days for Ashura. The tragedy of Hussein and his family did happen on Ashura too, some 60 years after the Hijra.

My question is if the celebrations before the tragedy were festive or were reduced only to fasting. I won‘t be surprised if the festivities were related to the fact that God had saved many of his Prophets on this day. I won’t be surprised either if the festive character was invented by the Omayyads in a clear attempt to conceal their massacre of Hussein’s family. Actually, I won’t be surprised at all if they had done much more than that. What can you expect of the killers of the great son of the prophet? But I don’t find it plausible at all they invented that Ashura existed before the trajedy. If they could, they would have done it but my point is plausibility here. Creating something that important out of nothing is not likely in my viewpoint. It would mean that they made the muslims believe “their story” while up to the 60th year of the Hijra –we are talking here of some 60 years!- muslims didn’t use to fast nor commemorate Achoura whatsoever, and then, in a magic move, they started to do it and believe in all that just because the Omayyad ruler and his acolytes told them so! Mainstream Muslims knew from the outset that the love of Ahlou Al-Bayt is something very important, that the Prophet (pbuh) himself insisted on. So, I don’t buy this at all. It can be possible only if all these mainstream Muslims were hypocrites, which, I don’t buy neither, obviously!

Other than that, and whatever the interpretation or the view that anyone might have, the most important thing here is something else. It is the recognition of the incredible tragedy and of the Ahlou Al-Bait. Yes, it is the recognition of the incredible injustice that happened and from which the whole Muslim world is still suffering today. That tragedy is one the reasons behind the instauration of despotic regimes throughout Islam’s history. So whatever the real story of Ashura, might be, yes we have to commemorate it with the feelings of injustice in mind, with the feeling of love of Ahl Albait in mind, etc. And yes, I did fast a couple of times on Ashura, and hopefully I’ll dot it whenever I can. I’ll fast it in order to remember the sacrifices of Moussa, Ibrahim, Youness, etc. and their saving by God. And I’ll fast it in order to remember the sacrifices of Hussein and his family and the terrible injustice they were subject to. With this in mind, I agree, we should not give gifts or toys to children on Ashura. We should, instead, remind them, what happened during this day. I would love to have Shi3a and Sunnis insist on the meaning of the tragedy of Hussein, not to give much importance on the origin of Ashura.

Salam

AL MALIH said...

Yes. It is hard to believe that Omayyades would get away with the fabrication of Hadith!

It is also hard to believe that Muslims would create Hadith and say this is from Rassoul Allah! We are not like the Jewish people that according to the Kuran use to create verses and say this is from THORA…nah!

And if it did happened, it would have been mentioned in history books such as TABARI, YAKOBI, MASSOUDI, IBN KATHIR, IBN AL ATHEER..etc.

And if, it were to happen, would not the prophet (pbuh) warn about it? This is a serious matter!

But wait a minute, I remember now an Imam in a Mosque in Morocco use to repeat a Hadith (narrated by Dara-qutni) that says:

The prophet (pbuh) said: “after my death, the number of liars would increase. If a Hadith that contradicts the Quran reaches you, throw it to the wall”

And the history books mentioned that during the rule of Mu3awia, that the most lucrative business was the fabrication of AHADITHs…

Al Massoudi narrate a conversation between Mu3awia and a big SAHABI (I would not mention his name for not offending some…they can check for themselves…all history books are online for free now): here is summary of what happened.

Mu3ia offered 10,000 Dinars, the Sahabi didn’t accept, then he raised to 20, 40…then Mu3awia frustrated, he told him: Then how much you want. The Sahabi said: I am selling you my DIN (religion), I need 100,000 Dinars!

But again, history books, who cares about history books we have Cheikhs living among us that know the truth about what happened without need of history books…we could say they almost lived with the prophet…only these people can read history books, purge them from what is disturbing and present to us only the “bright” side!

But wait, what if the “bright” side is a total fabrication!?
Who cares Allah hold people accountable only based on their NIYYA…INNAMA AL AAMAL BI NIYYAT…

Cool…convinced, doubts go back to sleep!

aya said...

Salam a tous,

Jallal, voici quelques unes de mes remarques sur ce que tu as ecrit. Pardonne-moi le desordre de mes idees car je n'ai pas vraiment beaucoup de temps pour ecrire aujourd'hui.

"my point is plausibility here"

"plausibility" est ta propre deduction des choses, ce n'est pas un argument! Si tu n'es pas convaincu que les omayades ont cree cette histoire de jeuner le jour d'Achoura c'est tout a fait normal car tu ne ne peux pas imaginer que les gens qui etaient capables de tuer le fils du Prophete seraient bien tres capables de tout faire pour camoufler ce massacre a commencer par creer des hadiths.

- حدثنا الحسن بن أبي بكر ، أخبرنا أحمد بن كامل القاضي ، حدثنا أحمد بن علي الخراز ، حدثنا الهيثم بن خارجة أبو أحمد ، حدثنا عبد الرحمان بن عامر أبو الأسود مولى بني هاشم ، عن عاصم بن أبي النجود : عن زر بن حبيش ، عن حذيفة ، قال : رأينا [ يوما ] في وجه رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم تباشير السرور ، فقلنا : يا رسول الله لقد رأينا اليوم في وجهك تباشير السرور ؟ فقال : وما لي لا أسر وقد أتاني جبرائيل فبشرني " أن حسنا وحسينا سيدا شباب أهل الجنة وأبوهما أفضل منهما " .إبن عساكر - ترجمة الإمام الحسين ( ع ) - رقم الصفحة : ( 73 )

Ce hadith que personne ne peut nier prouve que l'Imam AlHoussein est l'un des deux sayyids de la Janna apres leur pere et le Prophete bien sur. Ceci dit, il a une place plus inportante que tout etre humain dans le paradis y compris sahabas et prohetes. Dans le paradis il n'y a pas d'age, par consequent on ne va pas pointiller sur le mot "chabab"! C'est un peu dur d'accepter de donner a ces deux sayyids quelque chose qui leur est legitime mais il ya beaucoup de recits qui montrent que les enfants de Fatima sont plus importants que les prophetes, entres autres celui de l'avenement de AlMahdi. N'est-ce pas qu'on raconte que le prophete 3issa priera derriere lui? Cela veut dire que pour nous et pour les autres prophetes, la progeniture de Mohammad est sans egale. De toute facon , je veux juste prouver que si l'on veut faire penser aux gens qu'a Achoura on celebre des evenements heureux relatifs a plusieurs prophetes, il serait logiquement plus plausible de ne pas penser que Dieu qui ne veut pas creer la confusion dans nos esprits ferait d'un meme jour un heureux pour Moussa et un malheureux pour Mohammad !

"Mainstream Muslims knew from the outset that the love of Ahlou Al-Bayt is something very important, that the Prophet (pbuh) himself insisted on. So, I don’t buy this at all. It can be possible only if all these mainstream Muslims were hypocrites, which, I don’t buy neither, obviously!"

Jallal, quand on jeune un jour on veut avoir ajr, n'est ce pas. Jeuner pour la baraka du mois de Ramadan, du lundi et du jeudi, des 6 jours de chaaban, etc. Pour Achoura??? le musulman a-t-il le choix entre le bonheur de Moussa et les autres prophetes et le malheur de la famille de Mohammad? Qu'est ce que Mohammad a decide?

"The tragedy of Hussein and his family did happen on Ashura too, some 60 years after the Hijra."

Tu as raison. Sauf qu'il ya des centaines de hadiths qui prouvent que,60 ans avant cette tragedie, les vrais musulmans le savaient deja car le Prophete leur en avaient parle:

"عن أم سلمة قالت كان الحسن والحسين يلعبان بين يدي النبي ( صلى الله عليه وسلم ) في بيتي فنزل جبريل فقال " يا محمد إن أمتك تقتل ابنك هذا من بعدك وأومأ بيده إلى الحسين " فبكى رسول الله ( صلى الله عليه وسلم ) وضمه إلى صدره ثم قال رسول الله ( صلى الله عليه وسلم ) وديعة عندك هذه التربة فشمها رسول الله ( صلى الله عليه وسلم ) وقال ريح كرب وبلاء قالت وقال رسول الله ( صلى الله عليه وسلم ) يا أم سلمة إذا تحولت هذه التربة دما فاعلمي أن ابني قد قتل قال فجعلتها أم سلمة في قارورة ثم جعلت تنظر إليها كل يوم تعني وتقول إن يوما تحولين دما ليوم عظيم.

"يوم عظيمqu'est ce que ca veut dire? "فبكى رسول الله " qu'est ce que ca veut dire? Should we do like the Prophet and mourn that day or should we do like the jewish and banou omayya and fast it?

"We should, instead, remind them, what happened during this day."

By mourning or by fasting?

" I would love to have Shi3a and Sunnis insist on the meaning of the tragedy of Hussein"

HOW?

"not to give much importance on the origin of Ashura."

Isn't that what omeyads wanted?!

aya said...

Salam a tous,

Jallal, juste rapidement, je sais que mon premier argument va te choquer probablement, a savoir que la place d'Alhoussein est plus importante que celle des prophetes (a part son pere et son grand pere). J'espere que tu vas prendre en consideration mes arguments qui le prouvent et en cas de besoin je peux t'en citer d'autres. Si tu veux refuter ce que j'ai dit, je te demande s'il te plait de me fournir des arguments (Coran ou hadith). Le sujet etant serieux et sensible, les emotions ne seront pas les bienvenus.

lili said...

Salam,
Comme j ai déjà dit à Aya sur mon blog, je ne saisis pas l ampleur du débat... Je n ai appris qu il y a un an que les chiites se battaient à en avoir du sang un jour de l année, et ce n est que jeudi passé (le jour de aachoura) que j ai appris que c était en ce jour là qu il le faisaient...
Personnellement s il y a des hadiths faux qui se prétendent être vrais déjà ça ça me fait peur... Mtn par rapport aux manifestations sanglantes que les chiites font je suis tout à fait contre la première fois que j ai vu ça j ai vrmt été écoeurée...
Je tenterai de mieux m informer sur ce qui s est passé le jour de Achoura pr être en mesure d émettre un avis...
Salam

Jallal said...

Aya,

You say I cannot imagine the killers of the Prophet’s grandson are able to invent Hadiths while I made it clear that I think they are able to do much more than that. Please read again what I wrote. That said, my point is that intention is one thing, and making the intention happen is quite another.

Yes, there are numerous hadiths showing the love of the Prophet for his grandsons, Hassan and Hussein. As far as I’m concerned, this is an additional argument supporting the weak likelihood of the invention of the hadiths in question. For I think it is much more easier to eliminate those hadiths (by claiming the weakness of the chain, etc.) than to invent new ones. This is humane nature: Destroying has always been much more easier than creating. In the context of the tragedy, it would have also been infinitely much more effective to eliminate the hadiths involving the prophet’s grandsons than inventing new ones dealing with the history of Ashura. Inventing hadiths deforming the origin of Ashura doesn’t, by no means, decrease the magnitude of the injustice done to Hussein’s family. On the contrary, if anything, it is worse to have massacred Hussein and his family on a day such as Ashura. On the other hand, eliminating the hadiths regarding Hussein, arguing that Ahlou Al-Bait are like other people would have dramatically attenuated the feelings of the muslims towards this tragedy. I think the inconsistencies in the hadiths mentioned by Karim are explained rather by the inherent imperfectness of the hadiths as a whole, whatever might be the confidence assigned to them.

As far as fasting is concerned, to tell the truth, I have fasted one or two times, and given my opinion on the subject, It is natural that I find it a good think to fast on Ashura. Fasting as I said before, means for me remembering the sacrifice of the Prophets and of Hussein for establishing truth and justice.


Finally, what Hussein’s killers wanted is not "not to give much importance on the origin of Ashura.". Their aim was to make Muslims forget their massacre of Hussein. They didn’t succeed. Worse, as a believer in the existence of Ashura before the tragedy, I find it even more horrible that their massacre occurred the day God saved Ibrahim, Moise, Youness, and Nouh.

Salam

Jallal said...

Aya, si tu l’as remarqué, j’ai évité, dans ma réponse, d’aborder le sujet de la place de Hussein par rapport à celle des autres Prophètes. Je l’ai évité pour la simple raison que, quelle que soit cette place, cela n’a pas d’incidence sur notre débat.

AL Malih said...

This idea attarcted my attention:

[[ For I think it is much more easier to eliminate those hadiths (by claiming the weakness of the chain, etc.) than to invent new ones. This is humane nature: Destroying has always been much more easier than creating]]

clever remark!

But does not fly. Yes it is much easier to destroy a tangible (physical) structure than to construct one. This does not apply to meta-physical things. On the countray in the metaphysics it's a lot harder to make people forget something than to spead falsehood...ask the neo-cons...or zio...people cannot forget that Israel took Palestine by force, but they can at least believe that Palestine was offered by God to the Jewish people!

For years the communists tried to divert people from religion. Yes it was easy to destroy close to 10,000 mosques, and 100,000 churches...they wrote books, made fun of religion...change curriculum in schools...and when the Berlin wall fell, I was in in Moscow, people rush to their religions...I still remember the maid of the hotel asking me to give her my Kuran and my carpet...

Those Hadiths about AHL ALBEIT lived in the heart of the faithfull Sunni and Shia...Money or emprisonment can do nothing to deter people from narrating these Hadiths...and by Allah they have tried...

But it very easy for the powerfull Omayad empire to spread some money to some SAHABA that does not have DAMIR to create Hadiths and these Hadiths use to be read out loud in the SOUKS (Markets) of BASRA, Karkh (Baghdad), Damascous, and even Makkah...would not that make those Hadiths more known than the Kuran itself...

A live example, even after 911 commission gave its finding and said there is no connection between 911 and Saddam, pulls are still showing 45% of Americans believing that there is connection...this is in the 21 century, in a country where 90% of people read or listen to close to 300 TV channels!!!

We do not have to make assumptions, or theories...only open History books!

We read for instance that during the Abbassites: Haroun Arrachid use to impose a tax on those that visit the tomb of Imam Hussein...that didn't stop people from visiting Aba Abdellah...the grand son of Haroun arrachid went event farther as cutting their hands...

Now are we going to go open those books and read about History, or are we going to set apart and imagine the History as we like it to be?!!

Karim said...

Lili,

Merci d'etre passee, et d'avoir laisse un commentaire.

"Je n ai appris qu il y a un an que les chiites se battaient à en avoir du sang un jour de l année"

Tu dois avoir appris cela en regardant les medias, n'est-ce pas? Bon, je pense que je n'ai pas besoin de te mettre en garde: toi-meme sur ton blog tu as aborde plusieurs fois la question des medias, et comment, souvent, ils deforment la realite. Ceux qui reduisent Ashura a ces seules scenes sanglantes deforment a mon avis la realite, pour la simple raison que
ceux qui font cela sont une infime minorite (but of course, the media loves to focus on them). En fait, la majorite des ulemas chiites n'approuve pas cette facon de commemorer la mort de l'Imam Hussein, et la grande majorite de chiites commemorent Ashura sans jamais avoir a s'engager dans des activites pareilles.

"Personnellement s il y a des hadiths faux qui se prétendent être vrais déjà ça ça me fait peur..."

Maintenant, une deuxieme mise en garde: je n'ai pas dit ce que j'ai dit dans le but de decridibiliser la sunnah. J'ai un grand respect pour nos traditions, et je trouve qu'en general les gens qui ont reuni tous ces receuils de Hadiths ont fait un travail remarkable. Mais de la a dire que tous les hadiths dans les collections de Boukhari et Muslim sont "sahih" il y a une grande difference. En fait, meme les salafistes d'Arabie Saoudite, qui pretendent etre des gens de Hadith par excellence, et qui disent que Boukhari et Muslim sont les livres les plus authentiques apres le Coran, reconnaissent (quand ca les arrange) que certains Hadiths dans ces collections ne sont pas authentiques (sinon, on n'aurait pas vu qlq comme al-Albani faire le tri et creer sa propre collections de Hadiths "authentiques" issus justement de Boukhari et Muslim).

En ce qui concerne notre debat d'aujourd'hui, ce qu'il faut garder en tete, c'est que les chiites, en tant que minorite, et pas n'importe laquelle, une minorite dissidente, a toujours ete sujette aux pires persecutions. Regarde: meme de nos jours Zarquawi et ses acolytes en Iraq tuent les chiites par centaines, et n'eprouvent aucun regret a le faire. Le chiite pour eux est un kafir qu'il est tout a fait licite de tuer, comme on peut tuer une mouche. Maintenant, tu vas me dire que ces gens la sont des terroristes. Eh bien, je serais desole de te detromper, mais ces gens la utilisent des fatwas criminelles donnees par des oulemas du mainstream saoudien, comme Ibn Jibrin par exemple. Et cela a ete le cas pendant des siecles: les chiites ont souvent ete massacres par la majorite sunnite, et les pires mensonges ont ete dits a leur egard. Donc, quand tu vas chercher des infos sur Ashura, please, ce n'est pas chez les saoudiens comme Ibn Jibrin qu'il faut aller le faire... Ok?

Mais revenons a nos moutons. Pour les Hadiths que j'ai mentionnes, force est de constater qu'il y a bel et bien des choses qui clochent, qui sonnent faux dans ces hadiths. Maintenant, je ne suis pas un savant en Hadith, et je n'ai pas dit que ces contradictions etaient une "preuve" irrefutable que les Omeyyades avaient fabrique la version disant que Ashura etait un jour beni. Tout ce que j'ai dit est que, pour moi, compte tenu de tout ce qu'on sait sur l'histoire et sur l'animosite que les Omeyyades ont eu envers Ali et ses fils, ces contradictions dans les hadiths que j'ai mentionnes donnent beaucoup de credit a la these chiite selon laquelle les Omeyyades auraient fabrique des hadiths pour exalter la journee du Ashoura.


Jallal,

When you say:

"Destroying has always been much more easier than creating. In the context of the tragedy, it would have also been infinitely much more effective to eliminate the hadiths involving the prophet’s grandsons than inventing new ones dealing with the history of Ashura."

you implicitely assume that the Omeyyads did not try to silence all the voices, and make people forget all the Hadiths that exalted the merits of Ahl al-Bait. A cursory look at history books will show that in fact they tried that as well, and in the most crude, vulgar and cruel fashion. Imam Ali, despite all his contributions to Islam, his close relashionship to the Prophet, and despite all the hadiths that the Prophet said about him, was cursed on the pulpits of the mosques for over forty years by order of the ruling Omeyyads (history books tell us that the Omeyyads used to bring people to the mosque, and ask them to curse Ali in public: those who refused were sometimes decapitated on the spot). During the Omeyyad period, when people like al-Hajjaj b. Youssouf at-Thaqafi ruled as provincial emirs, just the fact of naming your son "Ali" or "Hussein" was enough to subject you to harassment or emprisonment. So, when you speak about "destroying", yeah, they tried all they could, and it only backfired at them: the more crude, vulgar and cruel they became, the more people growed deeper in the love of Ali, whose integrity and justice muslims only started to appreciate after they endured the iron fist of Omeyyad rule. Inventing hadiths on the other hand is something more subtle, less violent, and that is why it may have been a lot more successful for them than the other cruel means they had to use to make people forget the position of Ahlu al-Bayt.

aya said...

Salam a tous,

"You say I cannot imagine the killers of the Prophet’s grandson are able to invent Hadiths while I made it clear that I think they are able to do much more than that."

Jallal, je n'aime pas les reponses vagues. Alors, sois precis s'il te plait et dit moi: ils ont cree des hadiths ou pas? Ou bien tu veux dire qu'ils etaint juste capables de le faire mais ils ne l'ont pas fait?

"That said, my point is that intention is one thing, and making the intention happen is quite another."

Tu veux dire que les omayades avaient l'intention de le faire mais ils ne l'ont pas fait? Quels sont tes arguments?

"Yes, there are numerous hadiths showing the love of the Prophet for his grandsons, Hassan and Hussein."

Tu n'as rien compris a mon argument visant l'importance de la famille du prophete.

"In the context of the tragedy, it would have also been infinitely much more effective to eliminate the hadiths involving the prophet’s grandsons than inventing new ones dealing with the history of Ashura."

and,

"On the other hand, eliminating the hadiths regarding Hussein, arguing that Ahlou Al-Bait are like other people would have dramatically attenuated the feelings of the muslims towards this tragedy"

Ils ne pouvaient pas le faire parce qu'ils devaient pour cela deformer le Coran d'abord. Ce qui est impossible.

"Inventing hadiths deforming the origin of Ashura doesn’t, by no means, decrease the magnitude of the injustice done to Hussein’s family."

Mais si! If you fast the day of Ashura with the believe it is a blessed day how can you mourn at the same time for the massacre of Imam Hussein? Unless you like contradictions!! Do you believe in contradictions, Jallal? That was my big question to you in my last writing. You just avoid to answer it.

" Their aim was to make Muslims forget their massacre of Hussein. They didn’t succeed."

Mais si! Ils ont reussi. La preuve c'est que ceux qui pleurent le massacre de l'Imam Houssein sont consideres Kouffar. La preuve, c'est que nos familles ne connaissent pas l'histoire de ce martyr illa man ra7ima rabbi!!! La preuve... Quand est-ce que toi Jallal tu as lu a propos de ce massacre? En ce qui me concerne, j'avais plus de 25 ans! 25 ans, tu imagines Jallal? Quelle honte! Serait-ce entierement de ma faute?

aya said...

Salam a tous,

"Aya, si tu l’as remarqué, j’ai évité, dans ma réponse, d’aborder le sujet de la place de Hussein par rapport à celle des autres Prophètes. Je l’ai évité pour la simple raison que, quelle que soit cette place, cela n’a pas d’incidence sur notre débat."

Mais si Jallal, parler d'Achoura c'est parler du massacre de l'Imam. Reconnaitre la valeur du sacrifice de cet Imam ce jour la, c'est reconnaitre sa vraie place car ce n'est pas pour rien que notre Prophete a dit de lui qu'il etait sayyid ahl aljannah. Faire de sa mort horrible un jour heureux pour d'autres prophetes serait diminuer de ce sacrifice, creer la confusion dans nos esprits. l'Imam AlHoussein merite qu'on reevalue sa place et le meilleur moment de le faire c'est Achoura.

P.S. Jallal, imagine-toi le jour d'Achoura en train de feliciter Ibrahim, Moise, Youness, and Nouh pour avoir ete sauve avec un grand sourire sur le visage. Ensuite, rapidement devenir chagrine et triste pour presenter tes condoleances sinceres a ton Prophete qui pleure amerement la mort de son fils tant adore!!! Tout cela le meme jour!!! Juste IMAGINE.

Jallal said...

The example regarding creation and destruction is wrong. Yes religion is not a physical entity, but we should compare the destruction of a religion vs. the creation of a new one. When the Prophet called to Islam, its opponents spent much of their time trying to deny and refute the new religion (attempt of destroying) rather than trying to come up with a new religion. That requires much more creativity.

As to the hadiths, I’m not saying that they were easy to destroy, but creating a dozen of hadiths out of nothing AFTER 60 years would have ignited the wrath and the outrage of the “faithfull Sunni and Shia” for which “Money or emprisonment can do nothing to deter people from narrating these Hadiths”. It is a question of logic. The same people that would feel outraged at the elimination of Ahl AlBait’s hadiths would be outraged when they see that the killers of Hussein are making up hadiths to make forget their crime.

And karim, I didn’t assume that the Omeyyads did not try to silence all the voices. But my statement (the one you quoted) was motivated by my feeling that creating new hadiths is even harder.

Regarding the hadith Hadith number 1903 from Sahih Muslim:

حدثنا ‏ ‏أبو كريب ‏ ‏حدثنا ‏ ‏أبو أسامة ‏ ‏عن ‏ ‏الوليد يعني ابن كثير ‏ ‏حدثني ‏ ‏نافع ‏ ‏أن ‏ ‏عبد الله بن عمر ‏ ‏رضي الله عنهما ‏ ‏حدثه ‏
‏أنه سمع رسول الله ‏ ‏صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏ ‏يقول في يوم عاشوراء ‏ ‏إن هذا يوم كان يصومه أهل الجاهلية فمن أحب أن يصومه فليصمه ومن أحب أن يتركه فليتركه ‏
‏وكان ‏ ‏عبد الله ‏ ‏رضي الله عنه ‏ ‏لا يصومه إلا أن يوافق صيامه ‏ ‏و حدثني ‏ ‏محمد بن أحمد بن أبي خلف ‏ ‏حدثنا ‏ ‏روح ‏ ‏حدثنا ‏ ‏أبو مالك عبيد الله بن الأخنس ‏ ‏أخبرني ‏ ‏نافع ‏ ‏عن ‏ ‏عبد الله بن عمر ‏ ‏رضي الله عنهما ‏ ‏قال ‏ ‏ذكر عند النبي ‏ ‏صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏ ‏صوم يوم عاشوراء فذكر ‏ ‏مثل حديث ‏ ‏الليث بن سعد ‏ ‏سواء ‏

I think I found its translation on the web (correct me please If I ‘m wrong)

Sahih Muslim, Book 006, Number 2507:
Abdullah b. 'Umar (Allah be pleased with both of them) reported that he heard the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) say about the day of Ashura: It is a day on which the people of pre-Islamic days observed fast. So he who liked to fast on this day should do so, and he who liked to abandon it should abandon it. 'Abdullah (Allah be pleased with him) did not observe fast except when it coincided (with the days when he was in the habit of observing voluntary fasts during every month).


So that means that Abdullah b. 'Umar didn’t use to fast on it because he was already regularly fasting every month (I may assume every Monday and Thursday), so it is very understandable that he didn’t fast on Ashura after Ramadan fasting became an obligation, especially given this hadith also related to him

Sahih Muslim, Book 006, Number 2504:
Abdullah b. 'Umar (Allah be pleased with them) reported that (the Arabs of) pre-Islamic days used to observe fast on the day of Ashura and the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) observed it and the Muslims too (observed it) before fasting in Ramadan became obligatory. But when it became obligatory, the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) said: 'Ashura is one of the days of Allah, so he who wished should observe fast and he who wished otherwise should abandon it.


More to come when I get hold of Sahih Bukhari and Sahih Muslim, because it would be very interesting to look at all the hadiths related to Ashura, and especially at the chain of narrators for each of them.

Jallal said...

Resalam

Jallal, je n'aime pas les reponses vagues.

Moi, non plus.

Alors, sois precis s'il te plait et dit moi: ils ont cree des hadiths ou pas?

Si je pensais qu’ils les avaient crées, pourquoi je débattrais avec vous ? Non, ils ne les ont pas créés.

Ou bien tu veux dire qu'ils etaint juste capables de le faire mais ils ne l'ont pas fait?

Voilà.

Tu veux dire que les omayades avaient l'intention de le faire mais ils ne l'ont pas fait? Quels sont tes arguments?

Oui. Et mes arguments, je les ai présentés depuis le début de ce débat. Qu’ils ne t’aient pas convaincue, je peux le comprendre.

Tu n'as rien compris a mon argument visant l'importance de la famille du prophete.

J’en suis désolé.

Ils ne pouvaient pas le faire parce qu'ils devaient pour cela deformer le Coran d'abord. Ce qui est impossible.

Une telle assertion signifierait que personne, qu’elle soit Sunnite ou Chiite, ne peut contester le fait qu’aucun hadith concernant Ahl Al Bait ne manque dans les collections de Hadiths Sunnites.

Mais si! If you fast the day of Ashura with the believe it is a blessed day how can you mourn at the same time for the massacre of Imam Hussein?

For me, Ashura is a day of remembrance, I remember the sacrifice of the Prophets and the sacrifice of Hussein for establishing the truth.

Unless you like contradictions!! Do you believe in contradictions, Jallal? That was my big question to you in my last writing. You just avoid to answer it.

As a matter of fact, I don’t like nor believe in contradictions. If, God forbids, a Muslim nation is hit by a nuclear bomb on Ramadan, on Eid Al-mawlid, or on Eid of Sacrifice, would it be contradictory to fast Ramadan or to celebrate these Aids the following years?

Mais si! Ils ont reussi. La preuve c'est que ceux qui pleurent le massacre de l'Imam Houssein sont consideres Kouffar.

Ce n’est pas une preuve. Ceux qui considèrent ceux qui pleurent Hussein comme Kouffars sont des extrémistes. On peut ne pas être d’accord (ce qui est mon cas) avec certaines manifestations lors de Ashura dans certains milieux chiites mais traiter les manifestants en question de Kouffars est un acte fanatique à condamner vigoureusement. Mais cela n’a rien à voir avec l’origine de Ashura. La raison est que les fanatiques religieux traitent de kouffars tous ceux qui ne partagent pas entierement leurs opinion et ne suivent pas strictement leur courrant de pensée. Du reste, ils ont déjà traité de Kouffars des gens comme Al-Qaradawi ou Amr Khaled.

La preuve, c'est que nos familles ne connaissent pas l'histoire de ce martyr illa man ra7ima rabbi!!!

Ce n’est pas une preuve, non plus. La preuve, justement, est qu’on a largement plus de chance de trouver des Marocains qui ont entendu parler de Qarbala’a et du massacre de Hussein que du sauvetage par Dieu de Moise ou de Youness. L’ignorance du massacre de Hussein est à lier à l’ignorance générale qui règne au Maroc que ce soit concernant l’histoire de l’Islam ou l’histoire tout court.

La preuve... Quand est-ce que toi Jallal tu as lu a propos de ce massacre? En ce qui me concerne, j'avais plus de 25 ans! 25 ans, tu imagines Jallal? Quelle honte! Serait-ce entierement de ma faute?

Si c’est ta faute ou pas, je n’en sais rien mais il a toujours existé au Maroc des bouquins décrivant le massacre de Hussein. Autre exemple, Kichk qui était populaire dans le monde arabe et au Maroc, avait consacré une cassette entière (que j’avais écoutée il y a bien longtemps) à parler du massacre de Hussein. Tout cela était disponible, mais le problème c’est nous qui nous n’avons pas cherché. Mais en ce qui me concerne, il y a plein, plutôt une infinité d’événements religieux que je ne connais pas. Et cela est plutôt un problème d’éducation et de culture.

Salam

Jallal said...

Aya,

1. La place de Hussein au Paradis n’a rien à voir avec l’invention ou non de Hadiths sur Achoura.

2. Sinon, je t’ai déjà répondu sur la question de félicitations lors de Ashura. De plus, Jeûner peut être vu aussi comme une remémoration de ce qu’a enduré Hussein. N’oublies pas que l’un des motifs de jeûner Ramadan est aussi de se rappeler les pauvres qui endurent une vie difficile. Jeûner n’est pas synonyme de célébrations. Apres tout, le jeune est une privation.

aya said...

ٍSalam a tous,

Merci Jallal d'avoir ete precis cette fois. Permets-moi, cependant, de revenir sur quelques points:

"Une telle assertion signifierait que personne, qu’elle soit Sunnite ou Chiite, ne peut contester le fait qu’aucun hadith concernant Ahl Al Bait ne manque dans les collections de Hadiths Sunnites."

Ce n'est pas ce que je voulais dire. Que les omayades aient "elimine" des hadiths concernant Hassan et Houssein, tu n'as qu'a ouvrir boukhari et mouslim pour avoir la preuve toi meme. Le hadith que j'avais cite "أن حسنا وحسينا سيدا شباب أهل الجنة وأبوهما أفضل منهما " n'existe pas dans ces deux sahihs et peut etre tu devines pourquoi. Ces deux sahihs que la oumma venere ne donnent aucune importance a ces 2 Imams. Vas-y lire leurs fada'ils (فضائل) la dedans, tu me raconteras plus tard ce que tu en penses. Donc, ce que je voulais dire c'est qu'ils ne pouvaient pas "diminuer" de l'importance de Ahlou Albait parce qu'elle est ecrite dans le Coran. Reste le probleme des tafsirs, et la encore c'est un vrai desastre!

"If, God forbids, a Muslim nation is hit by a nuclear bomb on Ramadan, on Eid Al-mawlid, or on Eid of Sacrifice, would it be contradictory to fast Ramadan or to celebrate these Aids the following years?"

It depends on wich muslim nation will be destroyed! Just jocking:)) Jallal, ecoute-moi bien: il n'y AUCUNE comparaison entre l'exemple que tu as donne et le sacrifice d'Alhoussein. Tu vois , je t'ai dit qu'il faut reevaluer sa place! Now a muslim nation that does not care about the killing of her Imam, the remain of her Prophete and enjoy Achoura deserves every thing that happen to her a commencer par les dictateurs qui l'opprime, en passant par les caricatures qui l'humilie et en aboutissant a une bombe atomique qui la rase en entier. What's the big deal? Is it going to harm Islam? Not a bit. Allah did not make our eids coincide with the day of the murder of Houssein, but people did( Coran vs hadith ).

"Ce n’est pas une preuve, non plus. La preuve, justement, est qu’on a largement plus de chance de trouver des Marocains qui ont entendu parler de Qarbala’a et du massacre de Hussein que du sauvetage par Dieu de Moise ou de Youness."

Franchement Jallal tu me laisses bouche bee! Tu regardes la tele? Toutes ces chaines salafies + iqraa et j'en passe n'ont fait que parler du sauvetage. A l'exception des chaines chiites qui ont commemorer la tragedie de Karbala. Le marocain collecte l'information de la tele en general vu qu'on ne lit pas au Maroc et meme si l'on veut les livres sur cette tragedie sont presque introuvables! De quel marocain tu parles?

" il a toujours existé au Maroc des bouquins décrivant le massacre de Hussein. "

Donne-moi un exemple et dis-moi ou le trouver. Personnellement, j'ai cherche sans succes. Peux tu me filer une adresse stp?

"Autre exemple, Kichk qui était populaire dans le monde arabe et au Maroc, avait consacré une cassette entière (que j’avais écoutée il y a bien longtemps) à parler du massacre de Hussein"

Allah ikhellik ilama dis-moi ce que tu as pense de kichk quand tu as entendu cette cassette ;) C'est pour te dire que l'hisoire du martyr d'Alhoussein n'a jamais fait partie de la culture sounnite a cause des omayades et d'autres. Et , chaque fois qu'un auteur s'aventure a en parler il est tout de suite etiquette de zindi9, kaffir, chiite ou pas du tout religieux! Juste essaye de parler dans une mosquee sounnite de l'Imam Alhoussein et tu verras comment les gens vont-ils te regarder! Oseras-tu le faire? Je n'ai aucun doute. Mais je ne te le conseille pas. Je te dis plutot que AlhamdouliAllah il y a des blogs comme le votre pour oser discuter de la verite.

aya said...

Salam a tous,

"Jeûner peut être vu aussi comme une remémoration de ce qu’a enduré Hussein."

C'est ce que tu dis. Il n'y aucune preuve pour te l'accorder, ni chez les sounnites ni chez les chiites.

"N’oublies pas que l’un des motifs de jeûner Ramadan est aussi de se rappeler les pauvres qui endurent une vie difficile"

Je m'abstiens a faire des associations avec le massacre de l'Imam.

"Jeûner n’est pas synonyme de célébrations. Apres tout, le jeune est une privation."

Alors tu es malheureux quand tu jeunes?

aya said...

Salam a tous,

Jallal, it's me again :)

"so it is very understandable that he didn’t fast on Ashura after Ramadan fasting became an obligation"

How come? Ashura comes four month after Ramadan!! Why would you find it "inderstandable" that a sahabi like A.bn umar does not fast one day more after four months of no fasting obligation? Was one day more too much? Wasn't he a sahabi? Wasn't it a blessed day (I mean 60 years before hijra, I mean way way back in jahilya time)?!!

Jallal said...

Aya,

As far as I know, the Sunni world fasts the day of Achoura, and for you, fasting it means enjoying it. If understood you well you, are you saying that the Sunni World deserves “every thing that happen to her a commencer par les dictateurs qui l'opprime, en passant par les caricatures qui l'humilie et en aboutissant a une bombe atomique qui la rase en entier. What's the big deal? Is it going to harm Islam? Not a bit.”

Are you saying that?

al malih said...

What started as a nice discussion is degenerating into Suni vs. Shi3a rivalary! Let's put it back on tarck....

Aya,

You cannot think of Suna as one entity, static in time, or a Shi3a as one entity, static in the time, that behaves in a certain way....Suni is just an umbrella of many tendencies that we simplify into this term...the same is also true for Shi3a...worse the Suni of today may have little resemblance to Suni during the Omayyads...and the Shi3a of today may have very little to do with Shi3a that were with Imam Hussein...

In any event, Karbala is not about Suni vs. Shi3a, it is actually, as Imam Hussein said: "To reform the the nation of my grand father, as much as I can; if they accept my reform, Allah will reward them, if not, I will be patient!".... This schism Suni vs. Shi3a was actually created by the Omayyads to separate people in two categories: Those that are Omayyads (these celebrate Ashoura) or at least passive to them (these fast during Ashoura) : Suni, and those that opposed them: Shi3a...


Now the discussion started by Karim is very limited in scope:

1- In Morocco (and not only Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, Libya, Palestine) people celebrate the day for Ashoura.... fasting is really not the issue (it is only for those that feel uncomfortable to be either with Omayyads or with Shi3a that fast)...Nobody that respects himself can ignore the festive mood in Morocco: Gifts, Nuts, Mubarak Lewasher, Drums, trumpets (in Sale, Casablanca)...this is not about what Karim, Al Malih or Jallal do on this day.... we are talking about a phenomenon! If we turn the discussion personal we limit our understanding, because we will spend our time on the defensive.

2- Shi3a Mourn Imam Hussein, and the way that some people show their sadness does not change anything in the discussion...that's a separate issue, that Shi3a's issue, which agree that we need to Mourn this day, they can educate their people!

3- We have some Hadiths that says that Allah on this day save this prophet or that (some people accounted for 10 events happening on this day!!!)...Suni Ulamas cannot defend these AHADITHs and ask the experts if you do not believe me!

4- As Muslims, we need to remember Karbala and ask what happened and why this is more important than the Tutankhamen (pharaoh) being drowned...as the event of Moses is more related to Jewish history...

So, the question remains: Why the celebration?

Fasting is just hiding behind a religious act so that you cannot be blamed for "celebrating" (close to Omayyads) or "mourning" (close to Shi3a)!

Someone may ask: what's wrong with fasting; it is an act of piety. The answer is: Not always! Even SALAT can be so hated by Allah (and we have many HADITHs in this regard) if the person is doing it to show off (3ujub), ...

Imam Ali asked someone who pretended to be Alim: "If Allah didn't ask from us SALAT, and someone would voluntarily do SALAT, would that man doing good or bad?"...The answer from Imam Ali came: "He would have
been wrong, because we cannot create our own religion"...the spirit is submission not SALAT or FASTING or ZAKAT....

So if you are fasting on Ashoura and you are helping Omayyads hide their crime in Ashoura, you will be with them, whether you like it or not, and if you remember Imam Hussein and share a tear on this day, you would In Chaa Allah be with Imam Hussein whether you are Suni or Shi3a!

aya said...

Salam a tous,

" If understood you well you, are you saying that the Sunni World deserves"

Don't tell me you want to talk again about musulman vs croyant et toute cette histoire de peches que Dieu pardonne! In fact, did you know that the killers of Alhussein were muslims and that they were saying the 2 shahadas and performing salat right in front of the bodies of the Prophet's family they just killed??

Jallal, the "sunni" word is your own contribution to my saying! Should I approve it or not?...You guess! Now, are you telling me that you are afraid to die! Didn't you say that you fasted for justice and truth? Didn't you say that you care? Didn't you say that moroccans knew? So what's your propleme? You tried to build your argumentation on wishes that are not true! Look it's falling behind you! I could believe you some day, but not today, not yet.

You see Jallal, I have been trying to make you say a word of sympathie for the love of Hussein but you resisted. I have been trying to share with you the sadness of the tragedy of Mohammad, to make you feel that joy and mourning do not go together...but you resisted. You couldn't say "I am sad for the love of my Prophete". You couldn't and it is very "understandable". Nobody likes to be labeled!

Now, you can raise you voice and your vote in the name of human rights maybe for a muslim nation that enjoys the day of her Prophet's son murder, I DON'T CARE. I HAVE NO REGARDS, ABSOLUTELY NO FEELINGS FOR HER MISERABLE PRESENT AND FUTURE UNLESS SHE CARES!!!

Al Malih said...

Aya,

when you say:

[I HAVE NO REGARDS, ABSOLUTELY NO FEELINGS FOR HER MISERABLE PRESENT AND FUTURE UNLESS SHE CARES!!! ]

I do not agree with you...

As this is not the way of AHL AL BAIT...they were so caring about Muslims, even after what they did to them...

Take Imam Ali for example, even though Omar wanted to burn his house. When Omar become Khalifa, Imam Ali was counseling him on politics...even with Mu3awia, he said (as narrated in NAHJ AL BALAGHA): If BANU AL ASFAR (The romain) did it, [i.e., attack the Muslims] I would put my hand in Mu3awia's hand...

Have you seen any greater people than these...

Imam Hussein Just hours before being killed, thirsty, and his head paraded in all middle east...just hours he was crying for the army that came to kill him...because he said: "They will enter hell fire, because of me"...

Anyone not loving and FOLLOWING AHL AL BAIT is to his dismise (he is the looser)...

We, as lovers and followers of AHL AL BAIT we should be patient with people...who knows what the future, may lead to.

I can understand your frustration, but this should not harden your heart...as the only one that will be saved are those that "will back to Allah with a sain heart" [Quran]

Jallal said...

Aya,

I won’t tell you anything, I promise.

Mais je tiens à te présenter mes profondes excuses pour avoir émis des objections sur le topic de Marock ainsi que sur mes maladresses tout au long de ce débat sur Ashura. Tout ce que j’ai exprimé relevait de mon ignorance.

Salam

Jallal said...

Al Malih

“Anyone not loving and FOLLOWING AHL AL BAIT is to his dismise (he is the looser)...”

Thanks for the compliment…

I’m sorry to tell you, nonetheless, that to state openly that you love Ahl Al Bait more than me or anyone else, just because I don’t or he doesn’t agree with you on some issues related to Ashura, is incredibly arrogant and obviously totally wrong, you like it or not. I or he may love and follow Ahl Bait more than you. It is God who knows!

“We, as lovers and followers of AHL AL BAIT we should be patient with people

I can understand your frustration, but this should not harden your heart...as the only one that will be saved are those that "will back to Allah with a sain heart" [Quran] “


“we” “we” ... and of course … “we” vs “them”. This tune reminds me of many memories... Sounds familiar, doesn't it!

And obviously, “we” are “the only one that will be saved” (hmm, I’m learning that we who belong to “them” will not be saved unless these “we” the self-proclaimed unique “lovers and followers of AHL AL BAIT” judge that we too love and follow Ahl AlBait. All of this of course, is backed and justified by a verse of the Quran: "will back to Allah with a sain heart"


Je ne suis pas d’accord, sans doute, avec tout ce que dit Rachid Benzine, mais je partage entièrement son opinion quand il affirme :

« Souvent les discours sur l'islam sont construits en amont. Et pour montrer que c’est bien ce que dit le "divin", on se comporte avec le Coran comme si c’était un supermarché dans lequel on va acquérir des versets sur mesure pour faire du copier-coller et prouver que notre discours est en totale adéquation avec le Coran . »

Voilà, réduire le Coran à un supermarché. Pour justifier qu’on sera les seuls « saved ».

Hmm, Jallal, tu viens d’apprendre des choses aujourd’hui. Either you love and follow Ahl Bait the way “we” see it correct, either you won’t be saved. What a terrible news!

Salam

Al Malih said...

Apparently, I got mistankly in the cross fire!

The one that I found to be a bit harsh and tried to cool off, got apologies !

And the one that thought I was helping lashed at me! Live and learn...

But since there have been a sarcastic statement about the importance of following AHL AL BAIT, I feel that I need to post this Hadith:


أخرج الطبراني ، وابو نعيم عن ابن عباس قال : قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه ( وآله ) وسلم : مثل أهل بيتي كسفينة نوح من ركبها نجا ومن تخلف عنها غرق ، فثبت لهم بذلك النجاة لانها إذا كانت منجية لغيرها فهي أولى بان تكون ناجية .

aya who is not "harsh" said...

Salam a tous,

"I won’t tell you anything,I promise."

What do you mean? Are you giving me a full freedom of speech here? Come on Jallal, aren't you weld bladi and a big fan of soccer?? Finahya rou7 ryadya:(?

En ce qui concerne tes excuses pour le sujet d'Achoura, laisse-moi te dire que je ne m'y attendais pas. Mais puisque tu l'as fait, je profite de ta modestie et de ta generosite pour partager ces excuses, dans ces jours de chagrins, avec notre Prophete Mohammad, Ali, Fatima, AlHassan et toute la liste des martyrs de Karbala: Imam AlHoussein, ses enfants, son frere Abou Alfadl AlAbbass, son neveu AlKassim qui n'avait que 13 ans, et tous les Sahabas qui l'ont soutenu, ainsi que les prisonnieres Zainab sa soeur, Rabab sa femme, ses deux orphelines, etc. Mon coeur saigne Ya Ali Ibn AlHussein pour cette perte o combien ignoree, dissimulee. Mes sentiments, comment pourrais-je les controler? Jallal, j'en suis vraiment desolee!

"Tout ce que j’ai exprimé relevait de mon ignorance"

A-t-on besoin du savoir pour s'appitoyer sur le sort de la famille du Prophete? Ma mere repondrait: li ma3endou 9elb ma3endou 39el! Je ne pense pas que benzine confirmerais ce mystere, mais Dieu si...

أَفَلَمْ يَسِيرُوا فِي الْأَرْضِ فَتَكُونَ لَهُمْ قُلُوبٌ يَعْقِلُونَ بِهَا أَوْ آذَانٌ يَسْمَعُونَ بِهَا فَإِنَّهَا لَا تَعْمَى الْأَبْصَارُ وَلَكِنْ تَعْمَى الْقُلُوبُ الَّتِي فِي الصُّدُورِ

N.B.Karim, Jallal m'a donne carte blanche pour dire ce que je veux:)

aya said...

ٍSalam a tous,

Al Malih, this hadith is even better:

حدثنا ‏ ‏أبو النضر ‏ ‏حدثنا ‏ ‏محمد يعني ابن طلحة ‏ ‏عن ‏ ‏الأعمش ‏ ‏عن ‏ ‏عطية العوفي ‏ ‏عن ‏ ‏أبي سعيد الخدري ‏
‏عن النبي ‏ ‏صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏ ‏قال ‏ ‏إني ‏ ‏أوشك ‏ ‏أن ‏ ‏أدعى فأجيب وإني تارك فيكم ‏‏ الثقلين ‏ ‏كتاب الله عز وجل ‏ ‏وعترتي ‏ ‏كتاب الله حبل ممدود من السماء إلى الأرض ‏ ‏وعترتي ‏ ‏أهل بيتي وإن اللطيف الخبير أخبرني أنهما لن يفترقا حتى يردا علي الحوض فانظروني بم تخلفوني فيهما ‏

Mousnad Ahmad, hadith # 10707 (this hadith is narrated 21 times in the 9 books of sounna )

I bet "them" have no idea about this hadith, since in fridays "them"'s cheikh only talks about... you know:

حدثنا ‏ ‏عبد الله بن أحمد بن بشير بن ذكوان الدمشقي ‏ ‏حدثنا ‏ ‏الوليد بن مسلم ‏ ‏حدثنا ‏ ‏عبد الله بن العلاء ‏ ‏حدثني ‏ ‏يحيى بن أبي المطاع ‏ ‏قال سمعت ‏ ‏العرباض بن سارية ‏ ‏يقول ‏
‏قام فينا رسول الله ‏ ‏صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏ ‏ذات يوم فوعظنا موعظة بليغة وجلت منها القلوب وذرفت منها العيون فقيل يا رسول الله وعظتنا موعظة مودع فاعهد إلينا بعهد فقال ‏ ‏عليكم بتقوى الله والسمع والطاعة وإن عبدا حبشيا وسترون من بعدي اختلافا شديدا فعليكم بسنتي وسنة الخلفاء الراشدين المهديين عضوا عليها ‏ ‏بالنواجذ ‏ ‏وإياكم والأمور المحدثات فإن كل بدعة ضلالة ‏

Sounan ibn Maja, hadith #42( this one only 5 times!!!)

The Prophete is warning the sahabas who are going to be khoulafaa by telling them: follow my sunna and your's too!! Why? Do they have a different sunna than his?? Now talk about creation of hadiths.

Let see how "them" are following Ahlou Albait by giving " we" one single proof ( I mean one 7oukm )from "them" fi9h! "Them" might find terrible news!

Karim said...

Aya,

"Mes sentiments, comment pourrais-je les controler? Jallal, j'en suis vraiment desolee!"

See, the problem is that you are too emotional, whereas Jallal is too analytical. You both should try to find some middle ground where you can meet one another :-)

I also notice that the discussion is getting really very, very far from what I intended in the beginning. That is not necessarily a bad thing, but sometimes one has to know when to stop. ;-)

More to come later...

aya said...

Salam a tous,

Oh man karim! I thaught the debate was just starting to be more fun and very interesting:( Anyway, I'll try to be less emotional. I promise... Enfin, je l'espere:). But it does not mean that I'll be not watching you Jallal:))) because as Karim said: you might be my perfect contrast!

salam.

Karim said...

Salam everybody,

Sorry again for being slow to follow up. Now, I think it would be good if we could summarize what has been said so far. Let me start by all these things on which we all seem to agree:

1. We all agree that the killing of Hussein b. Ali, grandson of Prophet Muhammad, along with his small band of followers, was an important event in Islamic history.

2. We all agree that the Omeyyads were capable of creating false Hadiths to fool the muslim ummah into believing that Ashura, the day where they committed the massacre against the progeny of the Prophet, was a blessed day, so as to conceal their massacre of the Prophet's family by transforming Ashura from a day where the muslim Ummah exprecienced shock and grief into a blessed and festive day.

3. The Hadiths narrated by Abdullah b. Umar, as well as those narrated by Aisha, describe Ashura as a day on which Quraish used to fast before the advent of Islam. These Hadiths do not mention anything about Ashura being a blessed day, or about fasting on Ashura being a recommended act, a sunnah. It is quite difficult to imagine a companion like Abdullah b. Umar, or one of the wives of the Prophet, not being aware that Ashura was a blessed day if that was indeed the case. I think we all agree that this is a strong argument in favor of the view stating that Ashura is not a blessed day, and that it is not recommended to fast on it, and that the Hadiths which declare so are a fabrication due to the murderers of Imam Hussein, i.e. the Omeyyads.

Now, here are a few points of disagreement:

1. Although Jallal agrees with points number 2 and 3 above, he has expressed the view that the hadiths in point no. 3 were not sufficient proof that the Omeyyads have indeed created these controversial Hadiths. In his view, a flaw in the chain of narration of the contested hadiths would be a more convincing proof.

2. Jallal has also voiced a few other reservation regarding these Hadiths. According to him, there are so many Hadiths narrating that the Prophet used to fast Ashura before Islam, that it is difficult to believe that Ashura did not exist at all until the tragedy of Imam Hussein happened. He argues that, even if Ashura is not a blessed day, it must have existed long before the Karbala events. More importantly, Jallal argues that the fact that the Prophet used to fast on Ashura points to a possible religious meaning to it. From a logical point of view, I think that Jallal rises a valid point here. However, I think that for Jallal's concerns to hold, he needs to prove that the final opinion of the Prophet before he died was that fasting on Ashura was a recommended act. For, if on the contrary it turns out that the last teaching of the Prophet regarding Ashura was that "he who liked to fast on this day should do so, and he who liked to abandon it should abandon it" as reported by the Ibn Umar hadith, then Jallal's concerns won't be valid in that case.

3. Aside from the issue of whether Ashura is a blessed day or not, there is a difference in opinion on whether it fasting on Ashura is a way to remember the tragedy of Imam Hussein. Jallal has mentioned at one point that his fasting on Ashura helps him remember the tragedy of Karbala. With all due respect, I think that, whether Jallal (or anyone else in this debate) thinks that fasting is a way to remember Karbala is irrelevant: the important question to ask, is whether there is an opinion among sunni scholars which holds that fasting on Ashura day is a way to remember the tragedy of Imam Hussein. To my knowledge, no sunni sholar has ever expressed such an opinion, and so from a general point of view I tend to agree with Aya that there is no evidence whatsoever that adherents of the sunni school of thought use their fast on Ashura day as a means to remember Imam Hussein's murder.

4. There is also disagreement on the degree of awareness in the sunni world about the Karbala tragedy. Jallal referred to books (he didn't mention any titles though) and to an audio tape of a lecture by Sheikh Abdulhamid Kishk on the subject. I will venture to say that I agree more with Aya on this issue, when she says that the tragedy of Karbala is seldom remembered in the sunni world. As for books, it is true that there may be a few titles out there, but Arabs, as is well known, in general do not read. As for lectures, in my view that particular one by Sh. Kishk is the exception, not the rule, as very few sunnis speakers talk about this topic. And, Aya, I think you've guessed right: the first reaction of most those who listen to the tape Jallal mentioned is that Kishk in it speaks "like a shii preacher". Funny, isn't it? It's as if the tragedy of Karbala should only be of concern to the shia, sunnis have nothing to do with it. It is in fact very revealing that we never hear about the Karbala tragedy in sunni mosques. As far as I can remember, I have never heard any Friday sermon in any mosque I have been to about the Karbala tragedy, whether it be in Morocco, in France, or in the US. For the sunnis at large, I think it's really as tough the event has never happened, or had no historical relevance whatsoever.

At this stage, I think that all parties have expressed their respective points of view. I think that there is no need to go any further in this debate now, since we cannot really say more unless we decide to sit down and examine what the scholars of Hadith have to say about the chain of narration of these controversial Hadiths, etc. (I might do that at some time - because I would like to get to the bottom of this, and if I do I will not fail to report on my findings on this blog). I therefore suggest that we put a stop to this discussion.

Next time, maybe an even better topic of debate would be to discuss the lessons of the Karbala tragedy, and its significance in the history of Islam. See you again next year!!!

Jallal said...

“As for lectures, in my view that particular one by Sh. Kishk is the exception, not the rule, as very few sunnis speakers talk about this topic. And, Aya, I think you've guessed right: the first reaction of most those who listen to the tape Jallal mentioned is that Kishk in it speaks "like a shii preacher". Funny, isn't it? It's as if the tragedy of Karbala should only be of concern to the shia, sunnis have nothing to do with it. It is in fact very revealing that we never hear about the Karbala tragedy in sunni mosques.”

Karim, could you tell me, sincerely, for the sake of Ahl AlBait, whether have anybody, except me, told you personally about the tape of Kichk regarding Qarbala? And how many?

That was by no means my reaction to the last posts, including your’s Karim. It is only a prelude.

aya said...

ٍSalam a tous,

"Karim, could you tell me, sincerely, for the sake of Ahl AlBait, whether have anybody, except me, told you personally about the tape of Kichk regarding Qarbala? And how many?"

Here is a web site for everybody who wants to participate to the debate statistique. We are trying to refresh some memories that didn't lessen to kishk's tape on "ma9tal AlHussein ". Your opinion is important:

http://imam-malek.ifrance.com/kechk.htm
(story #116)

Now, if you try to join the real debate tell us what you think about this statement:

"It is in fact very revealing that we never hear about the Karbala tragedy in sunni mosques."

aya said...

Salam a tous,

"That was by no means my reaction to the last posts, including your’s Karim. It is only a prelude."

You'r really scaring me Jallal:). Did you find the truth about Ashura? Did you "get hold of Sahih Bukhari and Sahih Muslim, because it would be very interesting to look at all the hadiths related to Ashura, and especially at the chain of narrators for each of them"?? Did you do it?? Ou est ce que tu vas juste pointiller sur des details pour esquiver le vrai probleme?!!

Karim said...

Jallal,

When you told me recently about the Kishk tape, I may have given you the impression that it was the first time I had heard of it. However, after we talked, I remembered that I in fact had heard of it before, and my general impression was the one I told of in my last comment, i.e. those who heard tapes of this kind tended to exclaim that the speaker spoke like a shii. I cannot remember exactly how many people told me this, but I can distinctively tell in all honesty that I have heard of that tape before, and I have heard that kind of reaction before. I can even tell another story that I remember in a little more detail, and which corroborates the point I was trying to make. When I was in France, I used to discuss a lot with fellow moroccan students, some of whom were from al-Adl wal-Ihsane. I remember at one point one of them told me of a certain videotape of Sheikh Yassine. He was under house arrest at the time, and used to record some of his "lectures" for distribution among his followers. So, here is our sheikh, giving his lecture as he would give any other lecture, except that at some point he came to mention the tragedy of Karbala, and started to weep. When he finished the lecture, a member of the audience raised his hand, and asked the sheikh the following question: "hal anta chi3i?", "are you shii?" Now, why would someone ask this question if the discourse of the sheikh on Karbala was considered to be a "normal" discourse, i.e. a discourse that people are accustomed to? The fact that this person from the audience asked this very question gives a strong indication that talking about Karbala and/or weeping about Imam Hussein's murder are seen as exclusively shii practices by the sunni masses. (In the remainder of the story, my friend told me that the sheikh had answered the question by saying that the shia should not be the only ones who mourn the tragedy of Imam Hussein, but that us, as sunnis, are concerned as well.)

If I think more, I am sure I can still remember other examples. In any case, the impression I have is that in the sunni world, mention of Karbala is quickly identified with shia discourse. You may of course have another impression based on different experiences you may have had, but to me after numerous discussions of this and other related issues this is how I think the story of Karbala is perceived by a vast majority of sunnis.

P.S.

In fairness, I should in fact mention that there was a time when I was like that myself, i.e. when I identified even the most innocuous talk about Imam Ali with shii discourse. I can even tell that at some point I secretly nourished a strong personal distaste for all the stories about Imam Ali for that reason: I was afraid they would be "contaminated" by shii ideas. It wasn't until much later when I realized how much some respected sunni scholars have praised Ali, and read the history of the early caliphate as it was told by sunni historians, that I overcame my aversion for talk about this great companion of the Prophet (pbuh).

Jallal said...

That’s fine with me Karim.

I guess I’m the last person to have talked to you, by email, about Kichk’s tape and I did mention something like "a shii preacher". I just hope you didn’t unclude me in your “the first reaction of most those who listen to the tape Jallal mentioned is that Kishk in it speaks "like a shii preacher", or did you?


Now let’s me tell you what I think.

A.

i. I thought your way of wrapping up the discussion was really funny. Wrapping a discussion, means carefully summarizing the viewpoints of everybody, and stopping there, not adding arguments from your part and then stating at the end that there is no need further to continue the debate.

ii. It is funny to read something like “I think we all agree that this is a strong argument in favor of the view stating that Ashura is not a blessed day"

Because I never agreed that this was a strong argument!

iii. In your point 2. you say “However, I think that for Jallal's concerns to hold, he needs to prove that the final opinion of the Prophet before he died was that fasting on Ashura was a recommended act. For, if on the contrary it turns out that the last teaching of the Prophet regarding Ashura was that "he who liked to fast on this day should do so, and he who liked to abandon it should abandon it" as reported by the Ibn Umar hadith, then Jallal's concerns won't be valid in that case.”

First of all, you are replying to an argument I gave you by email. Well, the first funny thing here, is that nobody except you will know what you are talking about. The 2nd funny thing is that I find it inappropriate to talk about something I told you by email in a lengthy conversation that you started and led from the beginning until the end. I would have expected from you to ask me whether It was ok with me. I find it inappropriate that you have initiated a lengthy discussion by email and then decided to pick whatever you wanted and then replied to it on the blog. But since, you have done it, I would have preferred and still prefer that you post our whole conversation on this topic without removing one single word. At least the reader will know what you are talking about. The 3rd funny thing is that I find it again inappropriate to editorialize here by arguing that for “jallal’s concerns to hold, he needs …” because your post was meant to “summarize what has been said so far” not to argue about or try to weaken Jallal’s arguments while others’ (those you share your opinion with) arguments were never argued about! The 4th funny thing is that regarding your

“More importantly, Jallal argues that the fact that the Prophet used to fast on Ashura points to a possible religious meaning to it. From a logical point of view, I think that Jallal rises a valid point here. However, I think that for Jallal's concerns to hold, he needs to prove that the final opinion of the Prophet before he died was that fasting on Ashura was a recommended act. For, if on the contrary it turns out that the last teaching of the Prophet regarding Ashura was that "he who liked to fast on this day should do so, and he who liked to abandon it should abandon it" as reported by the Ibn Umar hadith, then Jallal's concerns won't be valid in that case.”

I reply this: You say that I give a logical point view, then you say that I have to prove “the final opinion of the Prophet before he died was that fasting on Ashura was a recommended act”.

Since, at this point, neither me can prove this neither you could prove the opposite, I think that your whole observation here is inappropriate and irrelevant and only shows a strong bias towards your (in the plural) viewpoint. And please, answer to me whether you think there is any slight possibility that the Prophet could recommend and make obligatory a fasting without the latter having a religious significance. A clear question, I hope.


iv. in you point 3., you say
“With all due respect, I think that, whether Jallal (or anyone else in this debate) thinks that fasting is a way to remember Karbala is irrelevant: the important question to ask, is whether there is an opinion among sunni scholars which holds that fasting on Ashura day is a way to remember the tragedy of Imam Hussein. To my knowledge, no sunni sholar has ever expressed such an opinion, and so from a general point of view I tend to agree with Aya that there is no evidence whatsoever that adherents of the sunni school of thought use their fast on Ashura day as a means to remember Imam Hussein's murder.“

With all due respect, I find your whole observation here irrelevant as Jallal didn’t hint at all to the position of the Sunni scholars, and as, as a firm believer that Islam always needs Ijtihad, he doesn’t find it at all problematic that if he ever fasts (which he probably did a couple of times during his life), he can do it also with the remembering of the massacre of Hussein in mind. And Jallal said also that many muslims, and he is one among them, answer non muslims that one of the reasons they fast is remembering poors and needy people, and here as well he didn’t hint at all to the position of Sunni Scholars and whether they hold such a stance.

v. on your point number 4. you say “There is also disagreement on the degree of awareness in the sunni world about the Karbala tragedy.”

This is simply a wrong statement. Because Jallal, if anything, has rather agreed that the awareness in the sunni world about the Karbala tragedy was weak. He explained it by ignorance and lack of education. And he said that he thinks the awareness regarding the relationship of Ashura with saving the Prophets or Quraish’s fasting this day was even weaker. And Jallal doesn’t understand why he should give the reference of books, as he at least gave one reference (Kishk) that luckily he could remember. I said, honestly what I knew about Ashura, as I never heard somebody telling me that Younouss was saved on Ashura, or that Quraish had fasted it in pre-Islamic times, while I heard people telling me about the massacre of Hussein. I never disputed the fact that many Omayyads’ acolytes could do much more than concealing the massacre but I was saying that such an attempt was marginal in a country like Morocco.

vi. “At this stage, I think that all parties have expressed their respective points of view”

At this stage, I think rather, you have tried to give more credit to your (in the plural) position, while summarizing means expressing everyone’s position without editorializing on specifically the one that you happen not to agree with.

B. Yes, that was only A., which I consider as only details. For whatever my opinion on Ashura might be, correct or wrong, and whatever yours might be, correct or wrong, I, personally, find the disagreement a negligible one when compared to the incredible, and totally unacceptable drift that occurred on this funny discussion.

We have people saying

“Tu vois , je t'ai dit qu'il faut reevaluer sa place! Now a muslim nation that does not care about the killing of her Imam, the remain of her Prophete and enjoy Achoura deserves every thing that happen to her a commencer par les dictateurs qui l'opprime, en passant par les caricatures qui l'humilie et en aboutissant a une bombe atomique qui la rase en entier. What's the big deal? Is it going to harm Islam? Not a bit. Allah did not make our eids coincide with the day of the murder of Houssein, but people did( Coran vs hadith ).”

We have people saying (see the end of Marock topic)

“Don't tell me you want to talk again about musulman vs croyant et toute cette histoire de peches que Dieu pardonne!”

We have people saying

"Now, are you telling me that you are afraid to die! Didn't you say that you fasted for justice and truth? Didn't you say that you care? Didn't you say that moroccans knew? So what's your propleme? You tried to build your argumentation on wishes that are not true! Look it's falling behind you! I could believe you some day, but not today, not yet."

We have people saying

“Now, you can raise you voice and your vote in the name of human rights maybe for a muslim nation that enjoys the day of her Prophet's son murder, I DON'T CARE. I HAVE NO REGARDS, ABSOLUTELY NO FEELINGS FOR HER MISERABLE PRESENT AND FUTURE UNLESS SHE CARES!!!”

We have people saying

“Ma mere repondrait: li ma3endou 9elb ma3endou 39el!”

We have people saying (follow the logic here)

“as the omayades said people do: They told them to fast, and bring gifts to their children and that's what they do...”
then
“fasting is really not the issue”

then

“Someone may ask: what's wrong with fasting; it is an act of piety. The answer is: Not always! Even SALAT can be so hated by Allah (and we have many HADITHs in this regard) if the person is doing it to show off (3ujub), ...”

then
“So if you are fasting on Ashoura and you are helping Omayyads hide their crime in Ashoura, you will be with them, whether you like it or not, and if you remember Imam Hussein and share a tear on this day, you would In Chaa Allah be with Imam Hussein whether you are Suni or Shi3a!”

and finally the terrible conclusion:

“Anyone not loving and FOLLOWING AHL AL BAIT is to his dismise (he is the looser)...”

With, of course, "FOLLWING" judged by the self-proclamed holder of the unique truth. I wonder what the word dismise? or looser means here. Does it mean the “looser” deserves that Allah curses him as Yazid? What is the fate of this “looser”?


So, all this was said on this discussion. Now, I affirm that all these statements are unacceptable and hateful, and should never occur again on this blog.. What’s your opinion on them, Karim?


Salam

Karim said...

Jallal,

If you look at the time stamp of my last comment, you will find that I finished writing it past midnight eastern time. I was very tired, and our conversations were very long, and so it's not surprizing that I might have confused statements. If I mentioned something from our email discussion that you didn't mention in the blog, then that was done inadvertantly, not on purpose.

Now, since you consider you lengthy "A" as "details", I don't see the need for me to digress on it in great detail. A couple observations though:

-- "I think we all agree that this is a strong argument in favor of the view stating that Ashura is not a blessed day"

You don't like the word "strong"? Fine with me. I still think it is fair to say that you find the Hadiths I was referring to as "arguments". [I did precise later that you considered the Hadiths not to be "sufficient proof", so in all honesty I don't see why you felt the need to insist on this "detail".]

-- your point (iii): my mentioning of arguments from our email discussion was a confusion and a mistake on my part which I regret.

Now, you say:

"Since, at this point, neither me can prove this neither you could prove the opposite, I think that your whole observation here is inappropriate and irrelevant and only shows a strong bias towards your (in the plural) viewpoint."

and I don't quite understand why you find my observation inappropriate. I didn't take sides on this one, did I ? I just mentioned the facts. I said that you raised a valid point, but cautioned that this point may not be true. So, what's inappropriate about this?

"And please, answer to me whether you think there is any slight possibility that the Prophet could recommend and make obligatory a fasting without the latter having a religious significance. A clear question, I hope."

I think that, if Ashura fast was obligatory as some hadiths suggest, then yes this is a valid argument in favor of a religious origin to it.

-- regarding your point (iv): when I said that your position was irrelevant, I didn't hint at all that it is "problematic" to fast on Ashura as you seem to have understood. All I was trying to say, is that your personal position that "fasting is a means of remembering Karbala" is not representative of sunni thinking, and as such, does not have value as an argument. In other words, I find it more interesting to discuss the position of the whole sunni school of thought, rather than to discuss our own personal positions.

-- regarding you point (v): You're right, I didn't formulate my thoughts accurately on this. I think what I was trying to say, is that from all the topics that are discussed in sunni mosques, Karbala, which is an important topic in Islamic history, is missing. And thus while you, on one hand, argue that the information was there (on bookshelves) but we never looked, I wanted to emphasize that those who give information in mosques, who are supposed to be knowledgeable people, avoid carefully to talk about Ashura in public and as a consequence the public at large don't know about it as they know about other events in islamic history which are mentioned regularly on the pulpit (battles of the Prophet, or life of other companions, just to mention a couple examples). Why is it so? Can you give me a satisfactory answer to this question?

B

"So, all this was said on this discussion. Now, I affirm that all these statements are unacceptable and hateful, and should never occur again on this blog.. What’s your opinion on them, Karim?"

"Hateful" is a too strong a word to describe all the statements you mentioned, and I am not sure I would use it to describe all these statements "en vrac". But I agree with you that many statements claiming exclusivity of holding the truth have been made without proof, and as such are inacceptable in this kind of debate.

aya said...

Salam a tous,

"Now, I affirm that all these statements are unacceptable and hateful, and should never occur again on this blog.. "

WHY HATEFUL? What did you find hateful in my sayings?:

When I said:

"Tu vois , je t'ai dit qu'il faut reevaluer sa place!"

Isn't that true that most muslims do not care about the tragedy of Karbala? Is saying that something inacceptable in this blog? Si tu ne peux pas contredire ce fait par des preuves tu ne peux pas interdire aux gens de le dire.

When I said:

" Now a muslim nation that does not care about the killing of her Imam, the remain of her Prophete and enjoy Achoura deserves every thing that happen to her"

Ou reside la vraie haine Jallal: dans la raison ou dans la consequence? Veux-tu que je m'appitoie sur le sort d'une nation qui n'a aucun respect pour la famille du prophete et qui dissimule la verite...? Pourquoi? De toute facon, je pense que ce n'est pas moi qui lui a colle son miserable sort sur le dos, n'est-ce pas?

"a commencer par les dictateurs qui l'opprime,"

N'est-ce pas la une realite ou l'ai- je invente?

" en passant par les caricatures qui l'humilie"

N'est-ce pas la une realite ou l'ai- je invente?

" en aboutissant a une bombe atomique qui la rase en entier"

La bome c'etait ton idee qui a fait deborder le vase:) J'ai juge la comparaison d'une bombe atomique avec la tragedie de la famille du prophete malplacee et que si cette nation celebre son aneantissement pourquoi m'inquietterais-je de son sort? It's fair, non?

"Don't tell me you want to talk again about musulman vs croyant et toute cette histoire de peches que Dieu pardonne!"

N'est-ce pas cela ce que tu voulais faire? Tu aurais pu te defendre au lieu d'esquiver la discussion. En tout cas, je ne vois pas pourquoi tu as qualifie cette proposition de "hateful"!

" Allah did not make our eids coincide with the day of the murder of Houssein, but people did( Coran vs hadith )."

This is what I think. Why would it be hateful to say it and not acceptable in this blog?

"Didn't you say that you fasted for justice and truth? Didn't you say that you care?"

Didn't you say it?

"Didn't you say that moroccans knew? So what's your propleme? You tried to build your argumentation on wishes that are not true!"

J'ai tout a fait le droit de ne pas croire ce que tu as avance comme arguments surtout quand je peux facilement les infirmer! Tu as le droit de me contredire toi aussi et je ne verrai pas en ton acte a "hateful" one! je dirai tout simplement que c'est ce que tu penses et je vais essayer de te convaincre que tu as tort:) Franchement Jallal, would it be for you less funny to cheer with you on every thing you say? I can't do it and that's why I am blogging with you. Do you hate it? Just let me know and I will go:((

"Ma mere repondrait: li ma3endou 9elb ma3endou 39el!"

J'avoue que cette affirmation est dure et je t'accorde le droit de la refuser sur ton blog...si tu la juges en dehors de son contexte bien sur! A savoir: "A-t-on besoin du savoir pour s'appitoyer sur le sort de la famille du Prophete?" A part ca, et de facon general, je pense qu'une personne dotee de cerveau mais sans coeur n'est capable de produire que des choses destructives pour l'humanite.

Enfin Jallal, permets-moi pour la derniere fois de citer un hadith sur ton blog pour resumer mon point de vue sur le theme d'Achoura. Je ne sais si tu apprecies vraiment que je le fasse vu que tu l'as farouchement blame en citant benzine! Mon Dieu citer benzine... quelle deception tu m'as affligee ce jour la Jallal! Anyway...

قال رسول الله (ص) : لا يؤمن عبدٌ حتى أكون أحبّ إليه من نفسه ، وتكون عترتي أحبّ إليه من عترته ، ويكون أهلي أحبّ إليه من أهله ، ويكون ذاتي أحبّ إليه من ذاته

Sada9a Rasoul Allah. Ce hadith confirme le verset que j'ai cite dans ma 1ere intervention sur le theme d'Achoura. Je m'en vais et retire tout ce que j'ai dis.

Jallal, je te souhaite bonne continuation avec les gens qui partagent ton avis et ne constituent aucun derrangement a ta maniere de voir les choses...dans TON blog. Enjoy!

P.S. Karim, je pense que tu as eu tort quand tu as dis que Jallal was too analytical!

al malih said...

I feel like I need to answer this specific statement:

[and finally the terrible conclusion: "Anyone not loving and FOLLOWING AHL AL BAIT is to his dismise (he is the looser)..."

With, of course, "FOLLOWING" judged by the self-proclamed holder of the unique truth. I wonder what the word dismise? or looser means here. Does it mean the "looser" deserves that Allah curses him as Yazid? What is the fate of this "looser"?]

First of all, this was directed to Aya, who I felt was very harsh on the Ummah and what's happening to it. So if this sentence was hatefull and offending, it should have been offending to Aya. And to Aya I was saying, we arel all part of the same Ummah (Suni or Shia). As Prof. Rachid Benissa of Sorbonne used to say, the ennemy wants to eat Suni for lunch and Shia for dinner. And that's a red line that has been crossed only a couple of time by the extremists! And today it is again crossed by the Wahabi.

Imam Ali use to say: "I will lay in peace, as long as Islam is safe!" (he collaborated with even the one that wanted to burn his house).

I told Aya, you can be angry about why the Ummah didn't follow AHL AL BAIT and saved itself from all these problems. You can be angry about that, but do not weaken the Ummah (or show SHAMATA for it, because we are all in the same boat).

I don't understand what is terrible or hateful about what I said?!

So, Jallal, I do not understand your lashing at me at all! It seemed erratic behavior!

Are you offended, because I am claiming that Suni does not love AHL AL BAIT?

Well that's a reality if we agree on what love mean!

Love is not words you utter, love are actions. Loving in this case is not affection (and even this one was not shown to AHL AL BAIT: The Ummah took even their inheritance…a big and a powerfull Ummah could not even let AHL AL BAIT reach their few acres left by the prophet…it was confiscated…that's a shame! If I could I would work day and night just to buy the land of FADAK and give it back to AHL ALBAIT…but alas), it is following:

"If you love me [The prophet], then follow me and Allah will love you". (Quran)

You cannot also sustain that AHL Suna follow AHL AL BAIT, when they choosed to follow MALIK, ABU HANIFFA, ASHAFII, AHMAD IBN HANBEL…and the school of Jaafar Assadiq (The teacher to 3 of these guys) is not recognized in any Sunni land!

And I gave you Hadith ASSAFINAH (the boat), Aya mentioned HADITH ATHAQALAYN, there is also Hadith ATTAIR, AL GHADIR…etc It would be too long to mention all those Hadiths; in which the prophet (pbuh) emphatically asked the Ummah to follow AHL AL BAIT and AHL AL BAIT only!

Now, if the Prophet indeed said those HADITHs, don't you agree with me Jallal that we should take them very seriously? Just for the sake of argument, if we suppose for a moment that the Prophet did say these HADITHs, then how would you obey the Prophet's order to embark on AHL ALBAIT's boat (SAFINAH)?


The state of the matter is so clear that Ahl Suna does not follow Ahl Al Bait from the smallest thing to the most important: even the ablution, SALAT, A3qaad..etc. Read NAHJ AL BALAGHA you will see that even today the way you do the WUDU' (ablution) is different than what Ali Ibn Abi Taleb describe it!

So if we agree that the love and teachings of Ahl Al Bait is so great, and you find people not benifiting from them, aren't they loosing? It is like we entered a cave and found gold, we all agreed that is gold. Some took and others didn't. Clearly the ones that didn't take are loosers…

And even the prophet said: Whoever didn't embark with them will drawn!

Honestly I do not understand what is offending about it.

The other thing is what you said (and was displaced anger) and cited Benzine about a verse that its meaning is so known (no contention about it).

I was telling Aya, that a Moumin should not have hatered against anyone, except those that openly fight the Mouminins… because only those with a sain heart will enter paradise: ILLA MAN ATHA ALLAH BIQALBIN SALIM…. No need for supermarket talk and taking the verse out of its context… I give you 1 week to go research the verse to see if it has an other meaning other than this one!

I was expecting appologies… but then I remembered that is not a custom in Morocco…

Jallal said...

Well, let me first answer this last point.

First, I don't think it appropriate at all that you support your claims and arguments many times by hadiths and Quran. After all, This is what the Wahhabis, that you are criticizing (as I do), do in general. Besides, You know that I can do the same and also bring my whole army of hadiths and Quran verses. Juste imagine how the discussion will become like! Let's use them with great carefuleness and not in an abusive way.

Now, I did think that "sain heart" was directed to me and to all those which didn't FOLLOW the way you see it. I didn't think that because of all what you said before. But, if you are telling me that it wasn't directed to those who didn't share your opinion on Ashura, then non problem, I do apologize to you for my misunderstanding. I find it anyway very revealing that you you expect apologies even if you didn't explain anything but rather gave me another hadith regarding FOLLOWING the safina and all that, which if anything, supported what I thought! That's very revealing to me. That hadith was very misplaced in the context of our discussion. Could you tell me why you replied to me by the hadith regarding FOLLOWING the Safina instead of making it clear that it wasn't directed to me and to others?

But again my apologies for any misunderstandings from my part. We'll see if you dare to do the same.

I'll reply to the remaining of your post later.

Al Malih said...

First of all, you need to know that I have no problem apologizing…
In fact, I consider anyone not able to apologize as missing an important part of his humanity!

If you pinpoint what I need to apologize for, and if you deserve one, I won't hesitate!

To your question:

[Could you tell me why you replied to me by the hadith regarding FOLLOWING the Safina instead of making it clear that it wasn't directed to me and to others?]

Frankly when I saw your comment, I found it erratic, it is as if we were finishing a discussion (a different one than the current one!) about which I ignore everything…so how can I answer you?!…if Aya had said something to me I would understand…

Look at what you said: [This tune reminds me of many memories...Sounds familiar, doesn't it!]

What the heck are you talking about? It is as if you knew me?! And I knew you!

Actually I didn't want to answer you at all, I just want to make everyone reading the blog; know that I was very surprised by this answer…and I cited the Hadith because of what you said:

[Hmm, Jallal, tu viens d'apprendre des choses aujourd'hui. Either you love and follow Ahl Bait the way "we" see it correct, either you won't be saved. What a terrible news!]

A terrible but according to Hadith Assafina (and many others) it is true (we can discuss that in more detail). In the Hadith that is accepted by Suni and Shia as SAHIH, the prophete compare AHL AL BAIT to the arc of Noe: you embark= saved, not embark = drawn…pretty simple no interpretation needed.

So at least you see now that my Hadith (even if you don't recognize it) fit exactly with what you said!

You are probably not aware of the gravity of what you said, when you say:

[First, I don't think it appropriate at all that you support your claims and arguments many times by hadiths and Quran. After all, This is what the Wahhabis, that you are criticizing (as I do), do in general.]

All what we have is Quran and Hadiths, no more no less! So this the only way we can argue about something within Islam! Now we can use reason to do the discussion properly (unlike the Wahabi)…but our mind cannot create a religion…whatever our mind creates is only human…(or the prophet said: is going back to you [MARDUDOUN LAKUM]).

If I was discussing with a non-muslim I go to the next level of common ground...Aristotle Logic, or Hegel!

What we criticize the Wahabi is due to their falacies in the way they interpret Quran, and their subjective way to study Al Hadith:

The Wahabi makes two grave mistakes:

1-First, they say that Quran should be taken just to the letter [DAHIR](just the surface) no need for deep interpretation [refute that QURAN has BATIN]…you can open a ticket on this subject and I will tell you where their logic break down.
2-They are very selective in their Hadith, if a Hadith is so weak, but support their view they will use it…if a Hadith is so strong but against them they will ignore it…

Look at all the Hadiths I cited and try to challenge them and if you find any big Suni Alim that says these are DA3IF [weak] (I will apologize)…

In fact, I have faced so many Suni Alim with these Hadiths…all they could do is try to interpret them in a very lame way!

I stand by all what I have said on this blog about Ashoura, and can defend it patiently and with strong arguments. These are the fruits of many years of miticulous research about Achoura...unfortunately people do not realize how important Achoura is...understand it, and you will understand Muslim History and current affairs...It is not hot air that the big Sunni Alim, Al Ajiri said: Mohamed gave birth to Islam, and Hussein gave it perpetuity in time! Also if Ghandi can learn for Achoura it should be something important...then ask yourself why 90% of the Muslim are in darkness about what happen in Karbala!

Jallal said...

Dear Al Malih,

Let me quote you here:

“And even the prophet said: Whoever didn't embark with them will drawn!”
“Now, if the Prophet indeed said those HADITHs, don't you agree with me Jallal that we should take them very seriously? Just for the sake of argument, if we suppose for a moment that the Prophet did say these HADITHs, then how would you obey the Prophet's order to embark on AHL ALBAIT's boat (SAFINAH)?”

This is just one of many examples that clearly show your problem. Yes this is a hadith by the Prophet (pbuh). I presume you are striving to “embark with them” as best as you can. This attitude honors you. Your problem is that you are convinced that all the others that happen not to share your views on the way to “embark with them” are “the loosers”. You are ruling out the idea that many people, even if they happen to be Sunnis, are the most honest people, but might have different interpretations than yours. In their effort to “embark with them” some of them might have found that it is their way of WUDU’ that is closest to the Prophet’s, not yours. And this applies to all other questions, Ashura included. This is what I wanted to convey in this discussion. Even though I happen not to share your opinion on same points, I never said that you’ll be the looser since you are not FOLLOWING the sunna of the Prophet. And by the way, this is what many Salafists/Wahhabists say regarding the Shi3a, aren’t they? Do they not support each of their sentences by a hadith or a Kuranic verse “confirming” that the Shi3a are the “loosers” and are creating bida3, etc, etc. So don’t be arrogant and pretend to hold the truth and that your (or Shi3a’s) interpretations are the only ones that are correct.

I never had such an arrogant attitude. All I said is that I happen to differ on some points, and in general, the whole problem of Sunna vs Shi3a isn’t important to me. What is most important is the way we should deal with our differences. I criticize the Sunna and particularly the Wahhabis for bashing the Shi3a or even for stating that the Shi3a are deadly wrong. My position is rather that we shouldn’t see Sunnis as better than Shi3a or the reverse, but accept that the differences are natural and what matters is the honesty and the search for the truth. And God only is the judge.

That’s why that I’m not interested in discussing with you …“MALIK, ABU HANIFFA, ASHAFII, AHMAD IBN HANBEL, “ “Hadith ASSAFINAH (the boat), Aya mentioned HADITH ATHAQALAYN, there is also Hadith ATTAIR, AL GHADIR” …and all the historical stuff you brought up. I think the bashers of the Shi3a mourners of Ashura and of the shi3a in general, will be happy to do it. The Salafis will be happy to answer each of the hadiths you bring by ten hadiths of theirs, “confirming” (according to them of course) that you aren’t on the straight path! Will we have then a hadith contest!

So I’m not interested to prove that the Sunnis are better or to prove you wrong. What matters to me is the tolerance on both sides.

You say:

“Are you offended, because I am claiming that Suni does not love AHL AL BAIT?

Well that's a reality if we agree on what love mean!”

And I reply that yes, I am very offended to hear that. This is a very offensive and arrogant statement. Don’t be arrogant. Some modesty won’t hurt you. For the sake of Ahl Al Bait. You don’t hold the truth to give such a terrible statement about millions of Sunnis. You are in no position to claim that you love Ahl Al Bait more than all the Sunnisl You can say it about the killers of Ahl Al bait and their supporters but to say such a general statement as “Suni does not love AHL AL BAIT” is totally wrong. It shows only arrogance. I cannot believe what I’m reading here. But that, if anything, only proves again why I found your previous statements totally unacceptable.

And whether you quote Rachid Benissa or not, I think that your previous statements were clearer than water, and you actually confirmed them by your last post. Don’t think I can be fooled easily.

I’m sorry to tell you that, but if I were to behave the same you are doing, I will act as an irresponsible salafi, by decorating each of my statements by a hadith or kuranic verse to prove that I’m right and that you are “the looser”. That’s ridiculous.

The bottom line is, I find it unacceptable that somebody, Sunni or Shii (it doesn’t matter), dare to claim openly in a debate that he holds the truth and that the other is “the looser” (Shii or Sunni).
I’ll always make it known to you that it is unacceptable to tell a Sunni that he’ll be with Yazid and the omayyads if he doesn’t follow what you follow, and I’ll make it known to a Sunni that it is unacceptable to behave in the same way towards you or any Shii.


I hope you got the message and we’ll see if, as a wisdom giver (“I was expecting appologies… but then I remembered that is not a custom in Morocco…”), you’ll end up by admitting that you crossed the lines!

Salam

Jallal said...

Well, after I posted my last comment, I found your last one.

No, you got it wrong when you said
“Look at what you said: [This tune reminds me of many memories...Sounds familiar, doesn't it!]
What the heck are you talking about? It is as if you knew me?! And I knew you!”

Obviously, I don’t know you but this is what I said actually:

““we” “we” ... and of course … “we” vs “them”. This tune reminds me of many memories... Sounds familiar, doesn't it!”

I was referring to the tune of “we” vs. “them” as we hear it often now by the neo cons and their acolytes. They are the champions that either you are with them or against America! I was referring also to the wahhabists, they are the champions of the idea that only their interpretation is valid, and the others, including the Shiites of course, are the “loosers”. Those were the memories I was referring to. I don’t you Al Malih.

Regarding the Wahhabists and Salafists, you may interpret much better than them and that won’t be difficult, we agree, but you loose all your credits if you tell me that you are certain that “Sunni does not love AHL AL BAIT”. Are you aware of what you are saying?


And again, I’m not telling you not to “stand by all what I have said on this blog about Ashoura”. I’m not even saying that you are wrong. I find it healthy and very good that you defend your position, that’s how we all can learn. Tell me I’m wrong and I won’t find any problem in that. But don’t tell me that “Sunni does not love AHL AL BAIT”, and don’t tell me who are the loosers, and that if we don’t FOLLOW the Safina the way you think it correct, then …

That’s unacceptable.

Al Malih said...

Now I see your problem!
You put voluntarily yourself in the accusation chair…you took those challenges as if they were directed to you personally. Also you made yourself representing Suna; as if Suna is a monolithic body…and also as we (me, Aya, and Karim), just because we criticize the main stream Sunni explication of Ashoura, as outsiders…but this is not about you…and if there is a riticize to Sunni that celebrate on Ashura, the purpose is to raise the awareness of people about the gravity of the event! I want the reader to go, open the history books and stop those shameful celebrations! Anyone doing that will learn that Ashura is the sadest day in the history of Islam…

I guess this is the only message that I wanted to get trough and you stopped as a zealous defender of Sunna. I am sure if you open any book that talk about Karbala (for instance Al Fitna Al Kubra of Taha Hussein, suggested by Aya)…you would have understood from where I was coming from…as you have see, Aya, Foulla and Karim, we didn't run into each other, not because we know each other (which we don't)…but because we have read books (or marry an Iranian in the case of Foulla)…What was shocking to you was also shocking to me the first time I learned about it. All these Khotabs of Jummaa (I use to never miss one) for decades, not a word about Hassan, Hussein, Fatima, Ali Ibn Al Hussein etc. Not a word about Karbala…so something suspicious is going on!

When I discuss these issues such as Ashura, I do not target a person in particular. What I am interested in is a society or a phenomenon. Because how can I be interested in what Jallal think about Ashura?! Unless he exhibits the behavior of the main stream Sunni, which he is not!. Jallal's case is so unique that I have never met or read about a person that fast on Ashura for the sake of Imam Hussein!

Another thing is an advice to all, why we take things personally. Why cannot we present just ideas and test their veracity without reference to the person. A debate is when you bring your ideas and arguments and test them against your peers. If they hold, that's good, if they fall, it's better to leave them as fast as possible instead of living with them until they grow on you!

Here is what I need to prove:

1- Thinking that you hold the truth is NOT an act of extremism. It isa descent and a humain pursuit.
2- That Sunna does not love AHL AL BAIT, if love means respect and following their teaching.
3- Yes, I do believe that the Hadith of Safina is clear and yes you got it right: whoever does not "embark with them" is a loser.

Now all these, I can prove beyond the shadow of doubt.

About me being arrogant, I cannot help you there, because that's a subjective statement, which is not true. If it were true people who know me would have long told me that. Now, they did tell me that, in debate, I close all the doors to my opponent! I do not know if that's a plus or a minus…but an arrogant person would not spent time explaining to you…an arrogant person, like the Wahabi, would talk to you few sentences, if he find that your opinions is different than him he will tell you that you are Munafiq, if you insist, you may got to the level of Kafir, then the violence level!

I didn't even use verbal harshness with you or anyone on this blog!

Al Malih said...

Let's start...

1- Thinking that you hold the truth is NOT an act of extremism. It is a descent and a human pursuit.

All human being since the dawn of humanity had thought they hold the truth, even if they keep being proved wrong once and
again. It is like someone going up-stairs, and whenever he reaches a stair he says to himself, this is it, this is the peak
of the truth. Then he goes up one more stair, then he says "no! this is it"...and so on.

Nothing wrong with this process either. If you are familiar with the story of the prophet Abraham how he taught his people
to look for the truth...he says: "The moon is my God", then "the Sun because i bigger"...then he told them that God must be
much bigger...

Also, by logic once you think you found the straight way to the truth, by corollary you are also found out that any other
paths are not the right one...

That's why:

The Jews said that the only way to be saved is to be Jew.
The Christians said that salvation goes thru Jesus, and only thru Jesus.
Islam said that "No one coming with a religion different than Islam will be saved"
Buddhists said that Nirvana cannot be reached, only thru suffering and complete detachment from the life.

Also within each religion, each sect thinks that other sects will go ashtray. Actually we (Muslims) associate crusades with
Palestine, Hitin, Saladin, but crusades had started long before that: Christians doing crusades against other
Christians...this latest 500 years (what is called religious wars)...

Also in Islam, every sect recites this Hadith, because they think that they are the one saved, the others are not. The prophet (pbuh) said: "My Ummah will split in 72 sects (FIRQA), all in hell fire except for one".

One time, we were doing a B-B-Q in a park, and were approached by evangelical Christians...we talked, and at the end they
told us: "We love you! You are going to hell"...after they left my wife was so furious and told me "Why you didn't say
anything?". I told her but I did, I said: "You too... I love you!" (i.e. according to my referential system you are going to hell fire).


Someone looking to be saved, will be faced with two options: Either all religions lead to salvation, or only one will lead to salvation (because these religions have little in common). If all religions lead to salvation, then anything will lead to salvation, because the intersection between all religions is null. Therefore only one religion lead to salvation, let's assume Islam. Then let's repeat the same method. If all sects within Islam lead to salvation, then their intersection is enough to find salvation. Their intersection is only: Shahada (and even this one, we do not agree on it)...then Salat, Zakat, fast..all these things are not that important and we can do them any way we like, not do them at all. Then we are left with only one logical conclusion: one sect is right the others are wrong ...just like the Hadith said.


The Suni- traditional say that he holds the one...
The Sufi says that holds the right one...
The Shii says he holds the right one...
The Salafi says he holds the right one...etc.

So the question is then why are we blaming the Salafi/Wahabi?

Well because they want to impose their version of the truth by the force, not by Da3wa, i.e., debates! The way that the Quran and all Humanity uses to convert people...

By the way, even Wahabi started with Da3wa, but Mohammed Ibn Abdelwahab was so damn that he could not convince even his brother: Abde Salam Ibn Abdelwahab...but since his father was a judge, and he knew All Saud, they joined force and converted many people by the sword...that's what they are doing today in Iraq!


But debating Wahabi is fun...in fact, I have heard of many debates between Moroccan Alims such as Zemzmi, Al-Saqaf, that debated and won against Al Al-bani! They don't perform that well in debate. We don't mind that they think they hold the absolute truth, just come to us and peacefully convince us and if we convince you...then follow us. That's the way of Quran!

Therefore there is nothing wrong of thinking that you hold even the absolute truth. And even to think that whoever is different than you is going ashtary. As long as you are not obnoxous about it! and instead of saying to people: "you are going to hell", you tell them: "I am afraid for you, for the direction you are taking". And do not impose your truth by force, but rather by the gentle words and wisdom.

Jallal said...

After all what I explained, I’m told that I had reacted the way I did just because I felt I was personally targeted!

Al Malih said...

I know this discussion has gone for almost 20 days now, and start winding down, but as I promised Jallal, I have to answer him and explain to him that there was no hateful or unacceptable statements in my intervention! It’s only facts.


Let me start with two disclaimers:

1- When I say Suna, I mean Ahl Suna Wa ljama3a, the name coined by Mou3awia to distinguish the Muslims that didn’t contest the legitimacy of the 4 rightly Khalifs and consequently his own Khilafa. This was mainly aimed to isolated Shi3a and the Khawarij. Shi3a, because they contest all the Khilfa system, and claim, that the ones that should lead Muslims are Imams, chosen by Allah through his messenger. Al Kharji, refute the Khilafa of Ali Ibn Abi Taleb and the Khilafa of Mou3awia.

Today, Sunna means Muslims that follow Al Ash3ari for A3aqid

الاشعري في العقائد

And Malik, or Abu Hanifa, or Shafi3i, or Ahmed Ibn Hanbal in Fiqh

ومالك أو ابو حنيفة أو الشافعي أو احمد ابن حنبل في الفقه

In addition of the Salafi, which follows Abdel Wahab and Ibn Taymeyya for A3qad:

محمد بن عبد الوهاب وبن تيمية في العقائد

And Ahmed Ibn Hanbal for Fiqh

واحمد بن حنبل في الفقه


Those are the group of Muslims I will call Sunni in what follows.

2- If the dispute is about whether Sunni Muslims believe that any Muslim needs to love and respect Ahl Albait, then I agree and there is no need to go further, as all Muslims believe that. In fact even an extremist as Ibn Taymeyya said:

«محبتهم (أي آل البيت) عندنا فرض واجب يؤجر عليه. فإنه قد ثبت عندنا في صحيح مسلم عن زيد بن أرقم قال خطبنا رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم بغدير يدعى خما بين مكة والمدينة فقال: «ايها الناس. اني تارك فيكم الثقلين «كتاب الله» فذكر كتاب الله وحض عليه. ثم قال: «وعترتي أهل بيتي، أذكركم الله في أهل بيتي، أذكركم الله في اهل بيتي»..

But the dispute is about something else. It’s about people that know they have to love and respect AHL AL BAIL but they could not live up to this ideal!

It is like a husband that tells her wife that he loves her (and tell himself, I have to love her, because she is my wife), but when it comes to proofs of this love, he has nothing to show for: No gifts, no affections, forget her birthdays, does not know anything about her family…he forget her whenever he is far from her…! All people will tell you that is not love at all!

That kind of love is what Sunni have for AHL AL BAIT…a love without fruits…a love that they utter just for not being blamed to be on the side of NAWASIB (haters of AHL AL BAIT). This is what I will try to show in the next comment.

Dear Jallal, all I have to tell you is one sentence: Go and ask your Alim about Fadak? What’s the story behind it!

But I am not going to stop there!

I will be succinct because this could be too long, so if you want me to elaborate about an item, just let me know.

Here is something that you can check by yourself:

1- When a Sunni say the name of the prophet, he says: SALA ALLAHU ALAIHI WA SALAM
صلى الله عليه وسلم
and if he remembers the family of the prophet, he follows that with SAHBIHI, as if SAHABA are on equal foot with AAL (family of the prophet)
صلى الله عليه وآله وصحبه
One may say, well that not a big deal! It might be if the prophet himself (see Al Boukhari ) had told the SAHAB to never tell short salat on him!
لا تصلّوا عليّ الصلاة البتراء، فقالوا : وما الصلاة البتراء ؟ قال : تقولون : اللّهم صلّ على محمّد ، وتسكتون ، بل قولوا : اللّهم صلّ على محمّد وعلى آل محمّد
2- For a whole year, a Suni would hear a lot about SAHABA their sons, daughters, wifes, detail of their lives, but nothing About Fatima Azahra, Hassan Hussein, Zeinab, Ali Ibn Al Hussein, Al Baqer, Assadeq…etc. The Suni is confused about many things related to AHL AL BAIT, I have met people that believe that Zainab is the daughter of the prophet (i.e., the sister of Fatima) while we know that Zaneb is the daughter of Ali and Fatima! Some think that Hassan and Hussein are twins…etc.
3- Sunni do not know the birthdays of AHL AL BAIT, how they lived, and so on.
4- What happened in Samara last week is a live proof. People didn’t know who was Ali b. Mohamed Al Hadi, nor his father Hassan Al Askari, and if you hear the arab news, you hears the shrines of two Shi3a Imams! It’s like these are not the grandsons of prophet Mohammed, and were the most knowledgeable Alims of their life, i.e. we are Suni we are not concerned. Assume that the explosion happened in Abu Hanifa shrine what would happen?! The whole Sunni world would be turned upside down! So Abu Hanifa is more important than Ahl Al Bait…
5- Have you ever asked yourself why in Morocco there are so many Chourfa? Well these are from the prophet family that escaped persecussion in the hands of Abbassites!
6- Karim has mention that Imam Ali use to be cursed at the end of Friday prayers for about 80 years until the reign of Omar Ibn Abdel Azziz.
7- Fadak which is a land in Al Baqee3 (Medina) that the prophet possessed, had been taken out from the hand of Fatima and Ali. So this land was confiscated for about 100 years until Omar Ibn Abdel Aziz returned to Ahl Al Bait.
8- Imam Hussein with all his sons, and the sons of his brothers, his uncles were slaughtered by an army that the Khalif of Muslims sent.
9- Imam Ali was killed while doing SOBH prayer in Kufa Mosque by a "pious" Muslim.
10- Imam Ali was under house arrest for 30 years during the reign of the two 1st Khalif.
11- Imam Ali was forced to BAI3A after the death of Fatima.
12- The early Muslims wanted to burn Imam Ali’s house to force the people that didn’t want to give Bai3a to the 1st Khalif, to come out and give Bai3a to Abou Bakr.
13- And the most prevailent sign of “love” is: Where is the tombstone of lady Fatima Azahra…why we know the tombstone of every insignificant and significant person in the history of Islam…but not the tombstone of the daughter of the prophet…

If this love, then I don’t know what love is!?

Jallal, do not take my words for it, go check these facts.

So, don't you agree, if these facts are correct, the AHL SUNA cannot love AHL AL BAIT...

Today the Muslims are in need of unity more than anything else, and AHL AL BAIT is the only sign that unite all Muslims! so why don't we go to their heritage and live it!

Jallal said...

Al Malih,

“So, don't you agree, if these facts are correct, the AHL SUNA cannot love AHL AL BAIT...
Today the Muslims are in need of unity more than anything else,”

That’s getting too funny here! The person who is asking for muslim unity claims at the same time that Ahl Assuna cannot love Ahl Al Bait…

Well I won’t reply to your naïve arguments. But I tell you what, since you are certain that Assuna had go astray, and that they cannot love Ahl Al Bait and that if they fast they are with the Hussein’s killers and that if they don’t FOLLOW Ahl Al bayt the way you see it acceptable they will be the “loosers”, why you don’t create a blog with the mission of getting them back to “your” straight path. It takes just two minutes. And I’ll be happy to read, with the others, what will happen to all these “loosers”!

Vous avez dit suffisance…

Good luck !

Anonymous said...

Who can help me with .httpaccess ?
where i can fined full information about .httpaccess file syntaxis?

Anonymous said...

Hello arabobsmisc.blogspot.com ! :)
A young couple on the brink of divorce visit a marriage counsellor. The counsellor asks the wife what is the problem.
She responds "My husband suffers from premature ejaculation."
The counsellor turns to her husband and inquires "Is that true?"
The husband replies "Well not exactly, it's her that suffers not me."


computer blog
sanyo laptop battery

Anonymous said...

Hey guys, there's another English person about, :)
I'm a new on arabobsmisc.blogspot.com
looking forward to speaking to you guys soon