Ahlus Sunnah wal Jamaah

the empire strikes back…

Archive for January, 2007

Shia Cults in the News…

Posted by abu ameerah on Tuesday, January 30, 2007

I recently came across this article and I think the author makes a few good points. The reader should note that, unlike the vast majority of the (non-shia) Muslim world, the Shia are regarded as a heretical sectarian religious movement by a consensus of Islamic scholars and religious authorities. The Shia have essentially created a faith-within-a-faith, if you will, complete with its own all powerful religious bureaucracy. This bureaucracy, or clerical establishment, is an essential component in all aspects of Shia life. Therefore, it does come as much of a surprise to see a unique cult of personality that is formed around these figures as well as their most die-hard supporters.

Think, for a moment, about Iraq’s supreme Shia leader — the reclusive Grand Ayatollah Ali al Sistani. Sistani, is arguably the preeminent religious figure in all of Shiism at the moment. Also, consider the “firebrand” leader Muqtada al Sadr. Unlike the elder and reclusive Sistani, Al Sadr does not miss a single photo-op. Whole Shia neighborhoods throughout the middle east are awash with his pictures, posters, and statements. You can’t even escape his image in Bahrain (a tiny island nation that is economically and geographically dwarfed by it’s regional neighbors)! How about Hasan Nasrallah? Talk about a cult of personality. This guy is more popular than hummus in some parts of the middle east! Nasrallah is also an inescapable fixture in much of the Shia world — including Bahrain. The images of such men have become part of the structural landscapes in many Shia cities/neighborhoods — a truly ubiquitous part of the Shia cosmos.

So it also shouldn’t come as much of surprise that the Shia, followers of the Imamate, have spawned ultra-radical apocalyptic cults in middle east as well. Essentially, the whole sphere of influence that the Shia enjoy in various quarters of the Muslim world is owned not simply to a cult of personality (current leaders and historical “imams”) — but more to a sense of alienation and return of the “hidden” Mahdi. The Shia believe that they are the sole victims of this Earth and that in order for true justice to prevail and ultimately be established they must not only await the return of the Mahdi — but hasten his glorious return. The perceived victimization and alienation that the Shia feel is nothing more than a cruel ploy concocted by an ecclesiastical polity to exert control over the masses. Think about for a moment. What better way to control the “hearts and minds” of a nation than by invoking emotions of alienation and victimization in every moment possible? Enter the hidden Mahdi — whom the Shia believe has been in a state of occultation for quite some time now. The article that I have posted below speaks to this very notion somewhat.

Opinion of Ahlus Sunnah wal’Jamaah toward the Shia:

Those Shia that believe in or promote the idea of the Imamate are not from within the fold of Islam. However, those Shia who are not ideological followers of the Imamate (and related concepts of Shirk & Kufr) are indeed misguided sinners who must immediately repent. They are neither disbelievers nor, however, are they upon the correct Islamic methodology. Furthermore, those Shia that blindly follow, promote, and believe in the concept of the Imamate (and other extreme Shia concepts) must immediately repent and return to the authentic teachings of Islam – as embodied in the Qur’an and Sunnah – for their own salvation in this life and in the hereafter.

Other names for the Shia: Rafidaah, Twelvers, Shia Imamiya, Ithna Ashariya, etc.

hasssan.jpg Hasan Nasrallah with an image of Ayatollah Khomeini in the background. Doesn’t Khomeini somewhat resemble the evil wizard in Lord of The Rings? (Saruman The White)



Someone could use serious dental work — Muqtada…I’m looking in your direction…


Doesn’t Sistani kind of look like a cross between Gandalf the Grey and Gargamel from the Smurfs?

Waiting for the Hidden Imam


It’s hard to imagine how sectarian warfare marked by suicide bombing and the targeted killing of innocents could get more troublesome, but it appears that the emergence of the Shiite cult ‘Soldiers of Heaven’, so thorougly decimated by a combined U.S.-Iraqi Army force this week in the Holy City of Najaf, marks the next stage of descent into chaos for this sharply divided former nation.

In its account of the battle, the Associated Press reports “the planned attack on Najaf was an attempt by the cult to force the return of the “hidden imam,” a 9th-century saint who Shiites believe will return to bring peace and justice to the world…the gunmen planned to distribute leaflets in Najaf saying that the hidden imam will appear again…in the tents outside Najaf, troops found pamphlets titled “Heaven’s Judge,” according to the senior Iraqi security officers.

In a conflict fraught with serious developments, this latest episode is probably the most disturbing yet. The mixture of an end-times messianism with an already splintered fundamentalist conflict is a combination as explosive as ammonium nitrate and diesel fuel. Couple this with a U.S. administration shown to be deeply linked to an equally fundamentalist evangelical version of Christianity, with an equally apocalyptic world-view, and the seeds of disaster would appear to be well on their way to germination.

Of course, one doesn’t have to be toeing the U.S. administration’s party line to see the fine hand of Iran in this latest complication. As recently as December 19 , Iran’s President Mahmoud Ahmedinijad, in his ‘Christmas message’ mentioned that he is expecting both Jesus Christ and Imam Mahdi to return and ‘wipe away oppression’.

World Net Daily has written several articles about Ahmedinijad’s belief that his main mission “is to pave the path for the glorious reappearance of Mahdi Imam, may Allah hasten his reappearance.” Ahmedinajad, it says is challenging America, engaging in a final conflict with it over who will be the ‘final salvation’ in the region — the rightful Mahdi, or the “unjust” U.S.

The article goes on to describe actions the government of Iran has taken to prepare for the Mahdi, including the creation of an institute for study of the Mahdi, staffed with 160 employees, and the donation of $17 million to Jamkaran mosque, “where the link between devotees and the Mahdi is closest.”

There have been numerous claimants to the title of Mahdi over the years, with the one possibly most familiar to Westerners being the infamous Muhammad Ahmad, whose army laid siege to and overran Khartoum and defeated the forces of the British General Charles “Chinese” Gordon.

The Soldiers of Heaven are only the latest messianic, end-times sect to appropriate the coming of the Hidden Imam. The Mehdi Army of Moqtada al-Sadr is also said to be faithful to this eng-times harbinger (hence the name), which is why al-Sadr has said he cannot disband the militia, as they belong to the Mahdi , not to him.

So the emergence of even-more-fanatical sectarians, bent on hastening the end times, should be enough to cause a cold ball of fear to coalesce in the viscera of all right-thinking persons. And to have it take place in a deeply divided carcass of a nation, surrounded by nuclear weapons aspirants, nuclear weapons holders and fuelled by petro-dollars, all the while occupied by the only nation that has ever actually used nuclear weapons…

We should none of us sleep easy.


Posted in Religious matters | 1 Comment »

An interesting piece…

Posted by abu ameerah on Monday, January 29, 2007

I think this article makes a few good points. Just consider the hysteria that surrounds the raising of the national terror alert level, for example. Instead of being at orange or yellow — why not incorporate more artistic colors. How about fuchsia for example? Fuchsia could be utilized in a number of different ways. Let us envision a scenario in which the nation was attacked by throngs of homosexuals and this attack results in a massive epidemic of faggotry breaking out — “Alert Level FUCHSIA” would be a fitting tribute to our gay enemy.

Joking aside, consider how we receive immediate “breaking news” when a commercial flight is diverted for the most miniscule of mechanical glitches — let alone reports of an unruly passenger or threatening note handed to a flight attendant. Have we become so naive? Has this nation become so diluted in it’s thinking that the mere mention of an “evil doers” name in a public space results in the military going to DEFCON 3 ??? Maybe this article can provide some sanity…..

Was 9/11 really that bad?

The attacks were a horrible act of mass murder, but history says we’re overreacting.

By David A. Bell
January 28, 2007

IMAGINE THAT on 9/11, six hours after the assault on the twin towers and the Pentagon, terrorists had carried out a second wave of attacks on the United States, taking an additional 3,000 lives. Imagine that six hours after that, there had been yet another wave. Now imagine that the attacks had continued, every six hours, for another four years, until nearly 20 million Americans were dead. This is roughly what the Soviet Union suffered during World War II, and contemplating these numbers may help put in perspective what the United States has so far experienced during the war against terrorism.

It also raises several questions. Has the American reaction to the attacks in fact been a massive overreaction? Is the widespread belief that 9/11 plunged us into one of the deadliest struggles of our time simply wrong? If we did overreact, why did we do so? Does history provide any insight?

Certainly, if we look at nothing but our enemies’ objectives, it is hard to see any indication of an overreaction. The people who attacked us in 2001 are indeed hate-filled fanatics who would like nothing better than to destroy this country. But desire is not the same thing as capacity, and although Islamist extremists can certainly do huge amounts of harm around the world, it is quite different to suggest that they can threaten the existence of the United States.

Yet a great many Americans, particularly on the right, have failed to make this distinction. For them, the “Islamo-fascist” enemy has inherited not just Adolf Hitler’s implacable hatreds but his capacity to destroy. The conservative author Norman Podhoretz has gone so far as to say that we are fighting World War IV (No. III being the Cold War).

But it is no disrespect to the victims of 9/11, or to the men and women of our armed forces, to say that, by the standards of past wars, the war against terrorism has so far inflicted a very small human cost on the United States. As an instance of mass murder, the attacks were unspeakable, but they still pale in comparison with any number of military assaults on civilian targets of the recent past, from Hiroshima on down.

Even if one counts our dead in Iraq and Afghanistan as casualties of the war against terrorism, which brings us to about 6,500, we should remember that roughly the same number of Americans die every two months in automobile accidents.

Of course, the 9/11 attacks also conjured up the possibility of far deadlier attacks to come. But then, we were hardly ignorant of these threats before, as a glance at just about any thriller from the 1990s will testify. And despite the even more nightmarish fantasies of the post-9/11 era (e.g. the TV show “24’s” nuclear attack on Los Angeles), Islamist terrorists have not come close to deploying weapons other than knives, guns and conventional explosives. A war it may be, but does it really deserve comparison to World War II and its 50 million dead? Not every adversary is an apocalyptic threat.

So why has there been such an overreaction? Unfortunately, the commentators who detect one have generally explained it in a tired, predictably ideological way: calling the United States a uniquely paranoid aggressor that always overreacts to provocation.

In a recent book, for instance, political scientist John Mueller evaluated the threat that terrorists pose to the United States and convincingly concluded that it has been, to quote his title, “Overblown.” But he undercut his own argument by adding that the United States has overreacted to every threat in its recent history, including even Pearl Harbor (rather than trying to defeat Japan, he argued, we should have tried containment!).

Seeing international conflict in apocalyptic terms — viewing every threat as existential — is hardly a uniquely American habit. To a certain degree, it is a universal human one. But it is also, more specifically, a Western one, which paradoxically has its origins in one of the most optimistic periods of human history: the 18th century Enlightenment.

Until this period, most people in the West took warfare for granted as an utterly unavoidable part of the social order. Western states fought constantly and devoted most of their disposable resources to this purpose; during the 1700s, no more than six or seven years passed without at least one major European power at war.

The Enlightenment, however, popularized the notion that war was a barbaric relic of mankind’s infancy, an anachronism that should soon vanish from the Earth. Human societies, wrote the influential thinkers of the time, followed a common path of historical evolution from savage beginnings toward ever-greater levels of peaceful civilization, politeness and commercial exchange.

The unexpected consequence of this change was that those who considered themselves “enlightened,” but who still thought they needed to go to war, found it hard to justify war as anything other than an apocalyptic struggle for survival against an irredeemably evil enemy. In such struggles, of course, there could be no reason to practice restraint or to treat the enemy as an honorable opponent.

Ever since, the enlightened dream of perpetual peace and the nightmare of modern total war have been bound closely to each other in the West. Precisely when the Enlightenment hopes glowed most brightly, wars often took on an especially hideous character.

The Enlightenment was followed by the French Revolution and the Napoleonic wars, which touched every European state, sparked vicious guerrilla conflicts across the Continent and killed millions (including, probably, a higher proportion of young Frenchmen than died from 1914 to 1918).

During the hopeful early years of the 20th century, journalist Norman Angell’s huge bestseller, “The Great Illusion,” argued that wars had become too expensive to fight. Then came the unspeakable horrors of World War I. And the end of the Cold War, which seemed to promise the worldwide triumph of peace and democracy in a more stable unipolar world, has been followed by the wars in the Balkans, the Persian Gulf War and the present global upheaval. In each of these conflicts, the United States has justified the use of force by labeling its foe a new Hitler, not only in evil intentions but in potential capacity.

Yet as the comparison with the Soviet experience should remind us, the war against terrorism has not yet been much of a war at all, let alone a war to end all wars. It is a messy, difficult, long-term struggle against exceptionally dangerous criminals who actually like nothing better than being put on the same level of historical importance as Hitler — can you imagine a better recruiting tool? To fight them effectively, we need coolness, resolve and stamina. But we also need to overcome long habit and remind ourselves that not every enemy is in fact a threat to our existence.

David A. Bell, a professor of history at Johns Hopkins University and a contributing editor for the New Republic, is the author of “The First Total War: Napoleon’s Europe and the Birth of Warfare as We Know It.”

Posted in makes me think, politics | 3 Comments »

The correct opinion on Yazeed ibn Mu’aawiyah (continuation of Muharram Series)

Posted by abu ameerah on Monday, January 29, 2007

Since the Shia take the month of Muharram, and the day of Ashura, as a time of great great sadness and mourning (as they commemorate the death of the grandson of the Prophet SAAWS) here is a fatwa regarding the correct Islamic opinion toward Yazeed ibn Mu’aawiyah.


Our attitude towards Yazeed ibn Mu’aawiyah

I heard of this person Yazeed Ibn Muawiyah. I heard that he once a calipha of the muslims and he was a drunken sadistic person, who was not really a muslim. Is this true? Please tell me his story. Thank you and may allah bless you.


Praise be to Allaah.

His name was Yazeed ibn Mu’aawiyah ibn Abi Sufyaan ibn Harb ibn Umayaah al-Umawi al-Dimashqi.

Al-Dhahabi said: he was the commander of that army during the campaign against Constantinople, among which were people such as Abu Ayyoob al-Ansaari. Yazeed was appointed by his father as his heir, so he took power after his father died in Rajab 60 AH at the age of thirty-three, but his reign lasted for less than four years.

Yazeed is one of those whom we neither curse nor love. There are others like him among the khaleefahs of the two states (Umawi/Umayyad and ‘Abbaasi/Abbasid) and the governors of various regions, indeed there were some among them who were worse than him. But the issue in the case of Yazeed is that he was came to power forty-nine years after the death of the Prophet SAWS (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him); it was still close to the time of the Prophet and some of the Sahaabah were still alive such as Ibn ‘Umar who was more entitled to the position than him or his father or his grandfather.

His reign began with the killing of the martyr al-Husayn and it ended with the battle of al-Harrah, so the people hated him and he was not blessed with a long life. There were many revolts against him after al-Husayn, such as the people of Madeenah who revolted for the sake of Allaah, and Ibn al-Zubayr.

(Siyar A’laam al-Nubalaa’, part 4, p. 38)

Shaykh al-Islam described people’s attitudes towards Yazeed ibn Mu’aawiyah, and said:

The people differed concerning Yazeed ibn Mu’aawiyah ibn Abi Sufyaan, splitting into three groups, two extreme and one moderate.

One of the two extremes said that he was a kaafir and a munaafiq, that he strove to kill the grandson of the Prophet SAWS (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) to spite the Messenger of Allaah and to take revenge on him, and to avenge his grandfather ‘Utbah, his grandfather’s brother Shaybah and his maternal uncle al-Waleed ibn ‘Utbah and others who were killed by the companions of the Prophet SAWS (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), by ‘Ali ibn Abi Taalib and others on the day of Badr and in other battles – and things of that nature. To have such a view is easy for the Raafidis who regard Abu Bakr, ‘Umar and ‘Uthmaan as kaafirs, so it is much easier for them to regard Yazeed as a kaafir.

The second extreme group think that he was a righteous man and a just leader, that he was one of the Sahaabah who were born during the time of the Prophet and were carried and blessed by him. Some of them give him a higher status than Abu Bakr and ‘Umar, and some of them regard him as a prophet. Both views are obviously false to one who has the least common sense and who has any knowledge of the lives and times of the earliest Muslims. This view is not attributable to any of the scholars who are known for following the Sunnah or to any intelligent person who has reason and experience.

The third view is that he was one of the kings of the Muslims, who did good deeds and bad deeds. He was not born until the caliphate of ‘Uthmaan. He was not a kaafir but it was because of him that the killing of al-Husayn happened, and he did what he did to the people of al-Harrah. He was not a Sahaabi, nor was he one of the righteous friends of Allaah. This is the view of most of the people of reason and knowledge and of Ahl al-Sunnah wa’l-Jamaa’ah.

Then they divided into three groups, one which cursed him, one which loved him and one which neither cursed him nor loved him. This is what was reported from Imaam Ahmad, and this is the view of the fair-minded among his companions and others among the Muslims. Saalih ibn Ahmad said: I said to my father, some people say that they love Yazeed. He said, O my son, does anyone love Yazeed who believes in Allaah and the Last Day? I said, O my father, why do you not curse him? He said, O my son, when did you ever see your father curse anybody?

Abu Muhammad al-Maqdisi said, when he was asked about Yazeed: according to what I have heard he is neither to be cursed nor to be loved. He said, I also heard that our grandfather Abu ‘Abd-Allaah ibn Taymiyah was asked about Yazeed and he said: we do not deny his good qualities or exaggerate about them. This is the fairest opinion.

Sheikh Muhammed Salih Al-Munajjid

Majmoo’ Fataawa Shaykh al-Islam, part 4, p. 481-484

Posted in Religious matters | 4 Comments »

interesting…even though it’s not part of Muharram series…

Posted by abu ameerah on Sunday, January 28, 2007

Israel’s use of cluster bombs from U.S. examined

Story Highlights

• U.S. says Israel may have violated agreement by using clusters in Lebanon
• U.S. supplied the bombs, which have killed more than 20 people since end of war
• Israel says it “acted as any government would in … self-defense”
• Congress expected to be notified of the situation Monday



i’ll just point out the obvious:
1. israel used such weaponry on the entire nation of Lebanon…basically holding it hostage.
2. israel used (and continues to use) such weaponry against civilians.
3. israel violated international law (when it carried out hostilities against Lebanon).
4. israel doesn’t really care about civilians and human rights.
5. israel is a human rights violater on a scale far greater than anything seen in the Palestinian territories.
6. The US is israel’s supplier….the same way a neighborhood drug dealer supplies a crack fiend with his latest fix.
7. israel’s war against Lebanon was no more a war of “self defense” as America’s excursion in Iraq.
8. the AIPAC war room is working over time and will smooth things out on Capitol Hill by playing damage control.
9. Congress will take no action against israel.
10. israel will continue it’s hostility toward Lebanon and the Palestinian people.

Posted in In The News | Leave a Comment »

totally unrelated to current series on Muharram…

Posted by abu ameerah on Friday, January 26, 2007

Officer charged in Abu Ghraib to be court-martialed

Story Highlights

• Man was only officer to be criminally charged
• He faces court-martial on eight charges, including cruelty and maltreatment
• Officer is reservist from northern Virginia

znn1.gif ap.jpg


Surprise, Surprise! One of the valiant and honorable service members who brutalized prisoners in the Abu Ghraib scandal is from Northern Virginia (NoVa). What a shock! Why, that’s about as shocking as watching grass grow…or turtles mating…or field mice frolicking. All sarcasm and pathetic joking aside — there is no real surprise that this thug is from NoVa. Just drive down I-95 south and you’ll run into a bunch of these flag waving patriotic buffoons near the Dumfries, Stafford, Quantico, Fredricksburg areas, etc.

I often see these G.I. Joe wannabees in the morning as I drive off to work as well. Even if you go further up I-95 north and take a drive through places like Arlington or Alexandria — you still get to see these losers. They parade themselves around like they own this world and everything in it! I used to work with an army reservist — in addition to being a bigoted yokel — he also thought he was God’s gift to women. I always found it amusing when he would try to flirt with female employees and customers only to be immediately rejected. So, I ‘aint the least bit surprised that a military officer from NoVa would be involved and ultimately charged with criminal offenses in the Abu Ghraib scandal.

Posted in In The News | 1 Comment »

Day of Ashura: historical legacy

Posted by abu ameerah on Friday, January 26, 2007


The Day of ‘Ashura: The Children of Israel were saved from Pharaoh and His Army Who drowned

by Imâm Ibn Kathîr Tafsir of Surah al-Baqarah ayat 49 to 50

49. And (remember) when We delivered you from Fir’awn’s (Pharoah) people, who were afflicting you with a horrible torment, killing your sons and sparing your women, and therein was a mighty trial from your Lord.50. And (remember) when We separated the sea for you and saved you and drowned Fir’awn’s (Pharoah) people while you were watching.  

The Children of Israel were saved from Pharaoh and His Army Who drowned

Allah said to the Children of Israel, “Remember My favor on you

  And (remember) when We delivered you from Fir’awn ‘s (Pharaoh) people, who were afflicting you with a horrible torment,  

meaning, ‘I – Allah – saved you from them and delivered you from their hands in the company of Musa, after they subjected you to horrible torture.’ This favor came after the cursed Pharaoh had a dream in which he saw a fire emerge from Bayt Al-Maqdis (Jerusalem), and then the fire entered the houses of the Coptics in Egypt, with the exception of the Children of Israel. Its purport was that his kingship would be toppled by a man among the Children of Israel. It was also said that some of Pharaoh’s entourage said that the Children of Israel were expecting a man among them to arise who would establish a state for them. We will mention the Hadith on this subject when we explain Surat Ta Ha (20), Allah willing. After the dream, Pharaoh ordered that every newborn male among the Children of Israel be killed and that the girls be left alone. He also commanded that the Children of Israel be given tasks of hard labor and assigned the most humiliating jobs.

The torment here refers to killing the male infants. In Surat Ibrahim (14) this meaning is clearly mentioned,

  Who were afflicting you with horrible torment, and were slaughtering your Sons and letting your women live. (14:6).  

We will explain this Ayah in the beginning of Surat AI-Qasas (28), Allah willing, and our reliance and trust are with Him.

The meaning of, [who were afflicting you]is, “They humiliated you,” as Abu ‘Ubaydah stated. It was also said that it means, “They used to exaggerate in tormenting you” according to Al-Qurtubi. As for Allah saying, [killing your sons and sparing your women] that explains His statement, [who were afflicting you with horrible torment] then it explains the meaning of the favour He gave them, as mentioned in His statement, [Remember My favor which I bestowed upon you].

As for what Allah said in Surat Ibrahim, [And remind them of the annals of Allah] (14:5) meaning, the favours and blessing He granted them, He then said,

  Who were afflicting you with horrible torment, and were slaughtering your sons and letting your women live. (14:6)  

So Allah mentioned saving their children from being slaughtered in order to remind them of the many favors that He granted them.

We should state here that ‘Pharaoh’ (Fir’awn) is a title that was given to every disbelieving king who ruled Egypt, whether from the ‘Amaliq (Canaanites) or otherwise, just as Caesar (Qaysar) is the title of the disbelieving kings who ruled Rome and Damascus. Also, Khosrau (Kisra) is the title of the kings who ruled Persia, while Tubb’a is the title of the kings of Yemen, and the kings of Abyssinia (Ethiopia) were called Negus (An-Najashi).

Allah said,

  And therein was a mighty trial from your Lord.  

Ibn Jarir commented that this part of the Ayah means, “Our saving your fathers from the torment that they suffered by the hand of Pharaoh, is a great blessing from your Lord” [1] We should mention that in the blessing there is a test, the same as with hardship, for Allah said,

  And We shall make a trial of you with evil and with good (21:35) and,And We tried them with good (blessings) and evil (calamities) in order that they might turn (to obey Allah.) (7:168).  

Allah’s statement next,

And (remember) when We separated the sea for you and saved you and drowned Fir’awn ‘s (Pharaoh) people while you were watching  

means, ‘After We saved you from Fir’awn and you escaped with Musa; Fir’awn went out in your pursuit and We parted the sea for you.’ Allah mentioned this story in detail, as we will come to know, Allah willing. One of the shortest references to this story is Allah’s statement,[And saved you] meaning, “We saved you from them, drowning them while you watched, bringing relief to your hearts and humiliation to your enemy.”

Fasting the day of ‘Ashura’

It was reported that the day the Children of Israel were saved from Fir’awn was called the day of ‘Ashura’. Imam Ahmad reported that Ibn ‘Abbas said that the Messenger of Allah came to Al-Madinah and found that the Jews were fasting the day of ‘Ashura’. He asked them, “What is this day that you fast?” They said, “This is a good day during which Allah saved the Children of Israel from their enemy, and Musa used to fast this day.” The Messenger of Allah sallalahu alayhe was salam said,

  I have more right to Musa than you have.

So the Messenger of Allah sallalahu alayhe was salam fasted that day and ordered that it be fasted. This Hadith was collected by Al-Bukhari, Muslim, An-Nasai and Ibn Majah [2]



1 At-Tabari 2:48.
2 Ahmad 1:291, Fath Al-Bari 4:287, Muslim 2:796, An-Nasai in Al-Kubr 2:157, and Ibn Majah 1:553


Posted in Fiqh, Religious matters | Leave a Comment »

Muharram series (cont.)

Posted by abu ameerah on Friday, January 26, 2007


The Virtue of observing more nafil fasts during Muharram

Abu Hurayrah (may Allah be pleased with him) said: “The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said:

  ‘The best of fasting after Ramadan is fasting Allah’s month of Muharram.’” (reported by Muslim, 1982).

The phrase “Allah’s month”, connecting the name of the month to the name of Allah in a genitive grammatical structure, signifies the importance of the month. Al-Qari said: “The apparent meaning is all of the month of Muharram.” But it was proven that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) never fasted any whole month apart from Ramadan, so this hadith is probably meant to encourage increasing one’s fasting during Muharram, without meaning that one should fast for the entire month.

  It was reported that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) used to fast more in Sha’ban. It is likely that the virtue of Muharram was not revealed to him until the end of his life, before he was able to fast during this month. (Sharh al-Nawawi ‘ala Saheeh Muslim).

Allah chooses whatever times and places He wills

Al-‘Izz ibn ‘Abd al-Salam (may Allah have mercy on him) said:

  “Times and places may be given preferred status in two ways, either temporal or religious/spiritual. With regard to the latter, this is because Allah bestows His generosity on His slaves at those times or in those places, by giving a greater reward for deeds done, such as giving a greater reward for fasting in Ramadan than for fasting at all other times, and also on the day of ‘Ashura’, the virtue of which is due to Allah’s generosity and kindness towards His slaves on that day…” (Qawaa’id al-Ahkaam, 1/38).

`Ashura’ in History

Ibn ‘Abbas (may Allah be pleased with him) said:

  “The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) came to Madeenah and saw the Jews fasting on the day of `Ashura’. He said, ‘What is this?’ They said, ‘This is a righteous day, it is the day when Allah saved the Children of Israel from their enemies, so Musa fasted on this day.’ He said, ‘We have more right to Musa than you,’ so he fasted on that day and commanded [the Muslims] to fast on that day.” (Reported by al-Bukhaari, 1865).

“This is a righteous day” – in a report narrated by Muslim, [the Jews said:] “This is a great day, on which Allah saved Musa and his people, and drowned Pharaoh and his people.”

“Musa fasted on this day” – a report narrated by Muslim adds: “… in thanksgiving to Allah, so we fast on this day.”

According to a report narrated by al-Bukhaari: “… so we fast on this day to venerate it.”

A version narrated by Imam Ahmad adds: “This is the day on which the Ark settled on Mount Joodi, so Nooh fasted this day in thanksgiving.”

“and commanded [the Muslims] to fast on that day” – according to another report also narrated by al-Bukhaari: “He said to his Companions: ‘You have more right to Musa than they do, so fast on that day.”

The practice of fasting on `Ashura’ was known even in the days of Jaahiliyyah, before the Prophet’s mission. It was reported that ‘Aa’ishah (may Allah be pleased with her) said:

  “The people of Jaahiliyyah used to fast on that day…”

Al-Qurtubi said:

  “Perhaps Quraysh used to fast on that day on the basis of some past law, such as that of Ibrahim, upon whom be peace.”

It was also reported that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) used to fast on `Ashura’ in Makkah, before he migrated to Madina. When he migrated to Madina, he found the Jews celebrating this day, so he asked them why, and they replied as described in the hadith quoted above. He commanded the Muslims to be different from the Jews, who took it as a festival, as was reported in the hadith of Abu Musa (may Allah be pleased with him), who said: “The Jews used to take the day of `Ashura’ as a festival [according to a report narrated by Muslim: the day of `Ashura’ was venerated by the Jews, who took it as a festival. According to another report also narrated by Muslim: the people of Khaybar (the Jews) used to take it as a festival and their women would wear their jewellery and symbols on that day]. The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said: ‘So you [Muslims] should fast on that day.’” (Reported by al-Bukhaari). Apparently the motive for commanding the Muslims to fast on this day was the desire to be different from the Jews, so that the Muslims would fast when the Jews did not, because people do not fast on a day of celebration. (Summarized from the words of al-Haafiz Ibn Hajar – may Allah have mercy on him – in Fath al-Baari Sharh ‘ala Saheeh al-Bukhaari).

Fasting on `Ashura’ was a gradual step in the process of introducing fasting as a prescribed obligation in Islam. Fasting appeared in three forms. When the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) came to Madina, he told the Muslims to fast on three days of every month and on the day of `Ashura’, then Allah made fasting obligatory when He said (interpretation of the meaning):

  “… observing the fasting is prescribed for you…” [al-Baqarah 2:183] (Ahkaam al-Qur’aan by al-Jassas, part 1).  

The obligation was transferred from the fast of `Ashura’ to the fast of Ramadan, and this one of the proofs in the field of Usool al-Fiqh that it is possible to abrogate a lighter duty in favour of a heavier duty.

Before the obligation of fasting `Ashura’ was abrogated, fasting on this day was obligatory, as can be seen from the clear command to observe this fast. Then it was further confirmed later on, then reaffirmed by making it a general command addressed to everybody, and once again by instructing mothers not to breastfeed their infants during this fast. It was reported from Ibn Mas’ud that when fasting Ramadan was made obligatory, the obligation to fast `Ashura’ was lifted, i.e., it was no longer obligatory to fast on this day, but it is still desirable (mustahabb).

The virtues of fasting Ashura

The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said:

  “For fasting the day of `Ashura’, I hope that Allah will accept it as expiation for the year that went before.” (Reported by Muslim, 1976).

This is from the bounty of Allah towards us: for fasting one day He gives us expiation for the sins of a whole year.

Which day is Ashura?

Al-Nawawi (may Allah have mercy on him) said: “ `Ashura’ and Tasu’a’ are two elongated names [the vowels are elongated] as is stated in books on the Arabic language. Our companions said:

  `Ashura’ is the tenth day of Muharram and Tasu’a’ is the ninth day. This is our opinion, and that of the majority of scholars. This is the apparent meaning of the ahadith and is what we understand from the general wording. It is also what is usually understood by scholars of the language.” (al-Majmu’)

`Ashura’ is an Islamic name that was not known at the time of Jahiliyyah. (Kashshaf al-Qina’, part 2, Sawm Muharram).

Ibn Qudamah (may Allah have mercy on him) said:

  “ `Ashura’ is the tenth day of Muharram. This is the opinion of Sa’eed ibn al-Musayyib and al-Hasan. It was what was reported by Ibn ‘Abbas, who said: ‘The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) commanded us to fast `Ashura’, the tenth day of Muharram.’ (Reported by al-Tirmidhi, who said, a saheeh hasan hadith).

It was reported that Ibn ‘Abbas said: ‘The ninth,’ and reported that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) used to fast the ninth. (Reported by Muslim). ‘Ata’ reported that he said,

  ‘Fast the ninth and the tenth, and do not be like the Jews. ’

If this is understood, we can say on this basis that it is mustahabb (encouraged) to fast on the ninth and the tenth, for that reason. This is what Ahmad said, and it is the opinion of Ishaq.”

It is mustahabb (encouraged) to fast Tasu’a’ with `Ashura’

‘Abd-Allah ibn ‘Abbas (may Allah be pleased with them both) said:

  “When the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) fasted on `Ashura’ and commanded the Muslims to fast as well, they said, ‘O Messenger of Allah, it is a day that is venerated by the Jews and Christians.’ The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said, ‘If I live to see the next year, in sha Allah, we will fast on the ninth day too.’ But it so happened that the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) passed away before the next year came.” (Reported by Muslim, 1916).

Al-Shafa’i and his companions, Ahmad, Ishaq and others said:

  “It is mustahabb to fast on both the ninth and tenth days, because the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) fasted on the tenth, and intended to fast on the ninth.”

On this basis it may be said that there are varying degrees of fasting `Ashura’, the least of which is to fast only on the tenth and the best of which is to fast the ninth as well. The more one fasts in Muharram, the better it is.

The reason why it is mustahabb to fast on Tasu’a’

Al-Nawawi (may Allah have mercy on him) said: “The scholars – our companions and others – mentioned several reasons why it is mustahabb to fast on Tasu’a’:

  1. the intention behind it is to be different from the Jews, who only venerate the tenth day. This opinion was reported from Ibn ‘Abbas…
  2. the intention is to add another day’s fast to `Ashura’. This is akin to the prohibition on fasting a Friday by itself, as was mentioned by al-Khattabi and others.
  3. To be on the safe side and make sure that one fasts on the tenth, in case there is some error in sighting the crescent moon at the beginning of Muharram and the ninth is in fact the tenth.”

The strongest of these reasons is being different from the People of the Book. Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allah have mercy on him) said:

  The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) forbade imitating the People of the Book in many ahaadeeth, for example, his words concerning `Ashura’: ‘If I live until the next year, I will certainly fast on the ninth day.’” (al-Fataawa al-Kubra, part 6, Sadd al-Dharaa’i’ al-Mufdiyah ila’l-Mahaarim )

Ibn Hajar (may Allah be pleased with him) said in his commentary on the hadith

  “If I live until the next year, I will certainly fast on the ninth day”: “What he meant by fasting on the ninth day was probably not that he would limit himself to that day, but would add it to the tenth, either to be on the safe side or to be different from the Jews and Christians, which is more likely. This is also what we can understand from some of the reports narrated by Muslim.” (Fath, 4/245).

Ruling on fasting only on the day of Ashura

Shaykh al-Islam said: “Fasting on the day of ‘Aashoraa’ is an expiation for a year, and it is not makrooh to fast only that day…” (al-Fataawa al-Kubra, part 5). In Tuhfat al-Muhtaaj by Ibn Hajar al-Haytami, it says: “There is nothing wrong with fasting only on `Ashura’.” (part 3, Baab Sawm al-Tatawwu’).

Fasting on `Ashura’ even if it is a Saturday or a Friday

Al-Tahhawi (may Allah have mercy on him) said:

  “The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) allowed us to fast on `Ashura’ and urged us to do so. He did not say that if it falls on a Saturday we should not fast. This is evidence that all days of the week are included in this. In our view – and Allah knows best – it could be the case that even if this is true (that it is not allowed to fast on Saturdays), it is so that we do not venerate this day and refrain from food, drink and intercourse, as the Jews do. As for the one who fasts on a Saturday without intending to venerate it, and does not do so because the Jews regard it as blessed, then this is not makrooh…” (Mushkil al-Aathaar, part 2, Baab Sawm Yawm al-Sabt).

The author of al-Minhaj said: “ ‘It is disliked (makrooh) to fast on a Friday alone…’ But it is no longer makrooh if you add another day to it, as mentioned in the sahih report to that effect. A person may fast on a Friday if it coincides with his habitual fast, or he is fasting in fulfilment of a vow, or he is making up an obligatory fast that he has missed, as was stated in a saheeh report.”

Al-Sharih said in Tuhfat al-Muhtaaj:

“ ‘If it coincides with his habitual fast’ – i.e., such as if he fasts alternate days, and a day that he fasts happens to be a Friday. ‘ if he is fasting in fulfilment of a vow, etc.” – this also applies to fasting on days prescribed in sharee’ah, such as `Ashura’ or ‘Arafah. (Tuhfat al-Muhtaj, part 3, Bab Sawm al-Tatawu’)

Al-Bahuti (may Allah have mercy on him) said: “It is makrooh to deliberately single out a Saturday for fasting, because of the hadith of ‘Abd-Allah ibn Bishr, who reported from his sister: ‘Do not fast on Saturdays except in the case of obligatory fasts’ (reported by Ahmad with a jayyid isnad and by al-Hakim, who said: according to the conditions of al-Bukhari), and because it is a day that is venerated by the Jews, so singling it out for fasting means being like them… except when a Friday or Saturday coincides with a day when Muslims habitually fast, such as when it coincides with the day of ‘Arafah or the day of `Ashura’, and a person has the habit of fasting on these days, in which case it is not makruh, because a person’s habit carries some weight.” (Kashshaf al-Qina’, part 2, Bab Sawm al-Tatawu’).

Fasting `Ashura’ – for what does it offer expiation?

Imam al-Nawawi (may Allah have mercy on him) said:

  “It expiates for all minor sins, i.e., it brings forgiveness of all sins except major sins.”

Then he said (may Allah have mercy on him):

  “Fasting the day of ‘Arafah expiates for two years, and the day of `Ashura’ expiates for one year. If when a person says ‘Amin’ it coincides with the ‘Amin’ of the angels, he will be forgiven all his previous sins… Each one of the things that we have mentioned will bring expiation. If there are minor sins for which expiation is needed, expiation for them will be accepted; if there are no minor sins or major sins, good deeds will be added to his account and he will be raised in status… If he had committed major sins but no minor sins, we hope that his major sins will be reduced.” (al-Majmu’ Sharh al-Muhadhdhab, part 6, Sawm Yawm ‘Arafah).

Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allah have mercy on him) said:

  “Taharah, salah, and fasting in Ramadan, on the day of ‘Arafah and on `Ashura’ expiate for minor sins only.” (al-Fatawa al-Kubra, part 5).


Posted in Fiqh, Religious matters | Leave a Comment »

Religious innovation (bidah) and sin during the blessed month of Muharram…

Posted by abu ameerah on Thursday, January 25, 2007

As previously mentioned this article, and others that will follow inshallah, are part of a series to confront the political, religious, and sectarian maleficence that has become increasingly prevelant during the blessed month of Muharram. The ultimate purpose of these postings will be to expose the deviations and sins of the radical Shia (rafidah) during the month of Muharram.

Furthermore, while we are all aware of the rewards of fasting the day of Ashoorah, I purposely chosen to begin this series with the Bid’ah(s) that have become synonymous with this blessed month. Basically, dear brothers and sisters, we are all familiar with fasting Ashoorah – and we, inshallah, have a relatively firm grasp of the legal/Juridical rulings pertaining to the Month of Muharram. As Ibn Abbas (radi’allahu’anh) states:

“I never saw the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) so keen to fast any day and give it priority over any other than this day, the day of `Ashura’, and this month, meaning Ramadan.” (Sahih al-Bukhari, 1867).

The Prophet (saaws) states in an authentic hadeeth: “For fasting the day of `Ashura’, I hope that Allah will accept it as expiation for the year that went before.” (Muslim, 1976).

However, there are millions upon millions who take this month as one of excess in all things related (but not limited) to emotions of: sorrow/grief/guilt/anger/revenge/hatred/etc., celebration, worship, exteremism, sociopolitical radicalism, etc. etc.

The Shia (rafidah), for example, are known to take the month of Muharram as a time of mourning and sorrow as they remember the death of Husayn (may Allah be pleased with him). For the purposes of our discussion, we will focus upon the extreme Shia (rafidah) who not only sin during this month — but have systematically sought to pervert it’s very understanding — as the leaders of this sect play upon the emotions of their followers. With this series I hope to provide enough proof in the form of sporadic literature and video to prove, beyond a reason of a doubt (humorous legal jargon), the error that the extreme Shia and like-minded innovators are upon.

This will not be a theological debate of any kind and neither will it be a fair debate! This is simply me throwing out very solid information, inshallah, for public discourse. I plan on being as one-sided as possible! Here is but a taste of things to come, inshallah…..


And away we go!

Bidahs common on Ashura

Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allah have mercy on him) was asked about the things that people do on `Ashura’, such as wearing kohl, taking a bath (ghusl), wearing henna, shaking hands with one another, cooking grains (hubub), showing happiness and so on. Was any of this reported from the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) in a sahih hadith, or not? If nothing to that effect was reported in a sahih hadith, is doing these things bid’ah, or not? Is there any basis for what the other group do, such as grieving and mourning, going without anything to drink, eulogizing and wailing, reciting in a crazy manner, and rending their garments?

His reply was:

  ‘Praise be to Allah, the Lord of the Worlds. Nothing to that effect has been reported in any saheeh hadith from the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) or from his Companions. None of the Imams of the Muslims encouraged or recommended such things, neither the four Imams, nor any others. No reliable scholars have narrated anything like this, neither from the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him), nor from the Sahabah, nor from the Tabi’een; neither in any sahih report or in a da’if (weak) report; neither in the books of Sahih, nor in al-Sunan, nor in the Musnads. No hadith of this nature was known during the best centuries, but some of the later narrators reported ahadith like the one which says, “Whoever puts kohl in his eyes on the day of `Ashura’ will not suffer from eye disease in that year, and whoever takes a bath (does ghusl) on the day of `Ashura’ will not get sick in that year,” and so on. They also reported a fabricated hadith that is falsely attributed to the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him), which says, “Whoever is generous to his family on the day of `Ashura’, Allah will be generous to him for the rest of the year.” Reporting all of this from the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) is tantamount to lying.’

Then he [Ibn Taymiyah (may Allah have mercy on him)] discussed in brief the tribulations that had occurred in the early days of this ummah and the killing of al-Husayn (may Allah be pleased with him), and what the various sects had done because of this. Then he said:

  ‘An ignorant, wrongful group – who were either heretics and hypocrites, or misguided and misled – made a show of allegiance to him and the members of his household, so they took the day of `Ashura’ as a day of mourning and wailing, in which they openly displayed the rituals of jahiliyyah such as slapping their cheeks and rending their garments, grieving in the manner of the jahiliyyah…The Shaytan made this attractive to those who are misled, so they took the day of `Ashura’ as an occasion of mourning, when they grieve and wail, recite poems of grief and tell stories filled with lies. Whatever truth there may be in these stories serves no purpose other than the renewal of their grief and sectarian feeling, and the stirring up of hatred and hostility among the Muslims, which they do by cursing those who came before them… The evil and harm that they do to the Muslims cannot be enumerated by any man, no matter how eloquent he is. Some others – either Nasibis who oppose and have enmity towards al-Husayn and his family or ignorant people who try to fight evil with evil, corruption with corruption, lies with lies and bid’ah with bid’ah – opposed them by fabricating reports in favour of making the day of `Ashura’ a day of celebration, by wearing kohl and henna, spending money on one’s children, cooking special dishes and other things that are done on Eids and special occasions. These people took the day of `Ashura’ as a festival like Eid, whereas the others took it as a day of mourning. Both are wrong, and both go against the Sunnah, even though the other group (those who take it as a day of mourning) are worse in intention and more ignorant and more plainly wrong… Neither the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) nor his successors (the khulafa’ al-rashidun) did any of these things on the day of `Ashura’, they neither made it a day of mourning nor a day of celebration…As for the other things, such as cooking special dishes with or without grains, or wearing new clothes, or spending money on one’s family, or buying the year’s supplies on that day, or doing special acts of worship such as special prayers or deliberately slaughtering an animal on that day, or saving some of the meat of the sacrifice to cook with grains, or wearing kohl and henna, or taking a bath (ghusl), or shaking hands with one another, or visiting one another, or visiting the mosques and mashhads (shrines) and so on… all of this is reprehensible bid’ah and is wrong. None of it has anything to do with the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) or the way of the Khulafa’ al-Rashidun. It was not approved of by any of the Imams of the Muslims, not Malik, not al-Thawri, not al-Layth ibn Sa’d, not Abu Hanifah, not al-Uzaa’i, not al-Shafa’i, not Ahmad ibn Hanbal, not Ishaq ibn Rahwayh, not any of the Imams and scholars of the Muslims.’(al-Fataawa al-Kubra by Ibn Taymiyah)

Ibn al-Haaj (may Allah have mercy on him) mentioned that one of the bid’ahs on `Ashura’ was deliberately paying zakat on this day, late or early, or slaughtering a chicken just for this occasion, or – in the case of women – using henna. (al-Madkhal, part 1, Yawm `Ashura’)                                   Taken from:  http://www.islaam.net

Posted in Fiqh, Religious matters | Leave a Comment »

The Month of Muharram….

Posted by abu ameerah on Wednesday, January 24, 2007


The Virtues of Allah’s sacred month of Muharram

What are the virtues of the month of Muharram

Praise be to Allaah,

the Lord of the Worlds, and peace and blessings be upon our Prophet Muhammad, the Seal of the Prophets and Chief of the Messengers, and upon all his family and companions.

Allah’s sacred month of Muharram is a blessed and important month. It is the first month of the Hijri calendar and is one of the four sacred months concerning which Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“Verily, the number of months with Allaah is twelve months (in a year), so it was ordained by Allaah on the Day when He created the heavens and the earth; of them, four are sacred. That is the right religion, so wrong not yourselves therein…” [al-Tawbah 9:36]

Abu Bakrah (may Allaah be pleased with him) reported that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “The year is twelve months of which four are sacred, the three consecutive months of Dhu’l-Qa’dah, Dhu’l-Hijjah and Muharram, and Rajab Mudar which comes between Jumaada and Sha’baan.” (Reported by al-Bukhaari, 2958).

Muharram is so called because it is a sacred (muharram) month and to confirm its sanctity.

Allaah’s words (interpretation of the meaning): “so wrong not yourselves therein…” mean do not wrong yourselves in these sacred months, because sin in these months is worse than in other months.

It was reported that Ibn ‘Abbaas said that this phrase (so wrong not yourselves therein…) referred to all the months, then these four were singled out and made sacred, so that sin in these months is more serious and good deeds bring a greater reward.

Qutaadah said concerning this phrase (so wrong not yourselves therein…) that wrongdoing during the sacred months is more serious and more sinful that wrongdoing at any other time. Wrongdoing at any time is a serious matter, but Allaah gives more weight to whichever of His commands He will. Allaah has chosen certain ones of His creation. He has chosen from among the angels Messengers and from among mankind Messengers. He chose from among speech the remembrance of Him (dhikr). He chose from among the earth the mosques, from among the months Ramadaan and the sacred months, from among the days Friday and from among the nights Laylat al-Qadr, so venerate that which Allaah has told us to venerate. People of understanding and wisdom venerate the things that Allaah has told us to venerate. (Summarized from the Tafseer of Ibn Katheer, may Allaah have mercy on him. Tafseer of Surat al-Tawbah, aayah 36).

The Virtue of observing more naafil fasts during Muharram.

Abu Hurayrah (may Allaah be pleased with him) said: “The Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: ‘The best of fasting after Ramadaan is fasting Allaah’s month of Muharram.’” (reported by Muslim, 1982).

The phrase “Allaah’s month”, connecting the name of the month to the name of Allaah in a genitive grammatical structure, signifies the importance of the month. Al-Qaari said: “The apparent meaning is all of the month of Muharram.” But it was proven that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) never fasted any whole month apart from Ramadan, so this hadeeth is probably meant to encourage increasing one’s fasting during Muharram, without meaning that one should fast for the entire month.

It was reported that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) used to fast more in Sha’baan. It is likely that the virtue of Muharram was not revealed to him until the end of his life, before he was able to fast during this month. (Sharh al-Nawawi ‘ala Saheeh Muslim).

Allaah chooses whatever times and places He wills

Al-‘Izz ibn ‘Abd al-Salaam (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: “Times and places may be given preferred status in two ways, either temporal or religious/spiritual. With regard to the latter, this is because Allaah bestows His generosity on His slaves at those times or in those places, by giving a greater reward for deeds done, such as giving a greater reward for fasting in Ramadaan than for fasting at all other times, and also on the day of ‘Aashooraa’, the virtue of which is due to Allaah’s generosity and kindness towards His slaves on that day…” (Qawaa’id al-Ahkaam, 1/38).

by Sheikh Muhammad Salih al Munajjid


This article will be part of an interesting series to celebrate the Islamic month of Muharram, inshallah. Stay tuned!

abu ameerah

Posted in Religious matters | 3 Comments »

this guy is such a PIMP!

Posted by abu ameerah on Wednesday, January 24, 2007

Katsav, urged to resign, asks for leave



Posted in In The News | 2 Comments »

honored public servants at work…or something like that

Posted by abu ameerah on Wednesday, January 24, 2007

Libby Destroyed Evidence Prior To Testifying, Cheney ‘Deeply Involved’

During opening arguments in the case against Scooter Libby, prosecutors outlined evidence about Vice President Cheney’s role in the leak of CIA operative Valerie Wilson that is new and will astound a number of people, even those who have been following this case. The prosecutors said the evidence will make it clear that the very first government official who told Scooter Libby about Valerie Wilson, the wife of a critic and the fact that she was working at the CIA, the very first person who told him that was Vice Ppresident Cheney. The prosecutor said the evidence will also show Vice President Cheney himself directed Scooter Libby to essentially go around protocol and deal with the press and handle press himself, that Scooter Libby should be the one talking to the press to try to beat back the criticism of administration critic Joe Wilson.

Prosecutors also revealed today that Vice President Cheney himself wrote out for Scooter Libby what Scooter Libby should say in a conversation with Time magazine reporter Matt Cooper. It was during that conversation when Scooter Libby provided confirmation to Cooper that Valerie Wilson worked at the CIA. In addition, there were some blockbuster revelations this morning about Scooter Libby’s actions before he testified to the FBI about the original leak. According to prosecutors, the evidence will show that Scooter Libby destroyed a note from Vice President Cheney about their conversations and about how Vice President Cheney wanted the Wilson matter handled. (article source: thinkprogress.org 1/23/07)

Who says politicians are corrupt?

Posted in In The News | Leave a Comment »

Rape, Corruption, Lebanon Chaos….What’s goin’ on AIPAC?

Posted by abu ameerah on Tuesday, January 23, 2007

znn.jpg Rape charge for Israeli president

Story Highlights

• Israel’s President Moshe Katsav will be indicted on rape charges
• Katsav denies wrongdoing, his lawyer says he is victim of blackmail
• Investigation began after former employee alleged he forced her to have sex


i also found this a bit interesting….



Saying that Israel has an “epidemic” of corruption as the BBC link contends is like saying fat people like Oreo cookies! Tell us something new for goodness sakes!
How about we just blame some Palestinian militant group for Israel’s corruption problems…or perhaps we could blame the Sunni Insurgency in Iraq. Maybe, “UBL” did it!?!? 8)

Posted in In The News, Realpolitik | Leave a Comment »

Further proof that Bill O’Reilly is an idiot…

Posted by abu ameerah on Monday, January 22, 2007

Apparently Bill O’Reilly – the most powerful name in cable crap news – is a child psychologist, mental health therapist, and a criminal profiler because he seems to know an awful lot about this particular child abduction case. Perhaps Bill O’Reilly is just another right-of-center windbag that gets too much media attention. Nah, that’s probably just the fundamentalist in me thinking out loud.

The captivity riddle

Globe and Mail Update

Shawn Hornbeck’s kidnapper stole his childhood, threatened him and may have sexually abused him.

But in the four years since the boy was snatched off the street in Richwoods, Mo., Shawn’s captor also allowed him to ride his bike alone for hours, sleep over at friends’ houses and use the Internet.

So when Shawn was discovered last week, miraculously alive at the home of pizza-parlour worker Michael Devlin, it was easy to wonder: Why didn’t he run? Call for help? Why didn’t he escape?

The answers may be hard to understand for someone who hasn’t been in the shoes of a terrified young kidnap victim. Experts say the questions themselves, from the media and the public, also show a rather ugly side of human nature — our eagerness to distance ourselves from terrible events.

“It’s sort of like blaming the victim,” says Dr. Ann Dietrich, a Vancouver psychologist who specializes in trauma. “We don’t want to believe it would happen to us or someone we’re close to.”

Shawn disappeared when he was 11. Police discovered him, now 15 years old, when they tracked down William (Ben) Ownby, an 11-year-old boy who was kidnapped just days earlier, allegedly by the same man.

On Thursday, Shawn’s parents told Oprah Winfrey that they believe their son was sexually abused.

“You’re taught all your life to respect adults . . . and then we all expect him to make some sort of spectacular escape? How unreasonable of us,” says Liz Ballendine, development director for the Missing Children Society of Canada. “I don’t think anyone has the right to criticize or judge what he did.”

That didn’t stop Bill O’Reilly from blasting the young victim on his show this week.

He quipped that Shawn must have enjoyed his captivity because he didn’t try to escape — and when angry viewers complained, Mr. O’Reilly posted an online memo reiterating his view, and disparaging both the victim and his parents.

“It is hard for me to believe that a normal kid would stay in a horrible environment when escape was easy, especially if the child had confidence in his parents,” Mr. O’Reilly wrote.

“No question this monster Devlin made threats and intimidated Shawn. But teenagers have brains and Shawn had the freedom to get away if he wanted to.”

Escaping a kidnapper is not as simple as brains and courage, though. Adults can be cowed in such situations, and children are even easier to manipulate.

“If you’re threatened with your life, or your family’s life, and it’s beyond anything you have experienced . . . it leads to a condition of helplessness and hopelessness, and it leads to a perception that survival depends on total compliance,” says Dr. Alan Manevitz, a psychiatrist at New York-Presbyterian Hospital/Weill Cornell Medical Center. “Soon, you look to the captor to meet all your needs.”

That psychological breakdown can happen in just two to three days, Dr. Manevitz adds.

Natascha Kampusch and the captor who held her for eight years went on a ski holiday together — when he wasn’t forcing the Austrian girl to live in a cell in his basement and call him “master.”

She finally escaped last year, and her kidnapper, Wolfgang Priklopil, killed himself soon after. Ms. Kampusch said she was mourning him, in a way, because he was part of her life.

“To give you a metaphor — he carried me in his arms but also trampled me underfoot,” the 18-year-old said in a statement read by her psychiatrist.

Out of necessity, kidnap victims become closely attuned to their captors’ moods and often focus on small acts of kindness — being allowed to use the washroom, for example, or simply being allowed to live.

“You become hypersensitive to the captor’s ideas and needs,” Dr. Manevitz says. “You start to see the world through your captor’s eyes.”

Elizabeth Smart was kidnapped in 2002 from her bedroom in Salt Lake City by a religious zealot who had chosen her to be one of his wives. After a period of intense brainwashing, she followed her captor through several different cities — going to parties and restaurants dressed in a veil that hid her face. When police found her nine months later, she was initially hesitant to say who she really was.

Of course, identifying with one’s captors is nothing new. Perhaps the most famous example is the 1973 Norrmalmstorg bank robbery in Stockholm. During the five days they were held hostage, the bank employees came to sympathize with the robbers and defended them against the police.

The roots of the same phenomenon show up even earlier in fairy tales such as Beauty and the Beast, in which the heroine falls in love with her captor. And the very real stories of women who stay with abusive spouses are all too common, and rarely questioned.

So why do we keep asking the same question of children who have endured horrific trauma?

It’s a very human defence mechanism, in a way. According to Dr. Dietrich, most of us subscribe to what’s called the “just world hypothesis” — we want to believe that the world is safe and fair, so subconsciously we assume traumatic events won’t happen to us or our children.

In the face of tragedy, we also hold fast to the notion that we would do what it takes to escape a grim fate.

“We all like to think if we were in a particular situation, we’d react in a certain way, but I don’t think that holds true,” Ms. Ballendine says. “I don’t think anyone can understand what it’s like unless they are in that exact situation.”

Indeed, Dr. Manevitz says there’s only one way the public or the media should judge the actions of a kidnap victim. “The fact that anyone survives,” he says, “means they did the right thing.”

Posted in In The News | 6 Comments »

remembering Fallujah…

Posted by abu ameerah on Sunday, January 21, 2007

As the war in Iraq rages on enters its fourth year, I thought that I would take this opportunity to remind viewers of just one horror – out of the many – that have come to define the conflict in Iraq. The story of Fallujah is simply not about sectarian violence, ethnic cleansing, or the Iraqi insurgency. Rather, it is about Weapons of Mass Destruction. You know, the very same WMDs that Bush came looking for in the first place. The very same WMDs that former CIA director George Tenet testified as having presented the United States with a “slam dunk” case that Iraq possesed them as part of a sinister program to: 1) Delegitimize the international community (IAEA & UNSCOM) and most importantly 2) Threaten the United States and it’s allies in the post-9/11 era.

Nope. I’m not talking about those WMDs – I am referring to the WMDs that the United States military brought to Iraq in the form of white phosphorous. White Phosphorous, for those who don’t already know, is a lethal chemical agent that can be utilized for a variety of different purposes. It’s lethality, however, was displayed in the 2004 military offensive on Iraqi city of Fallujah. Fallujah, once a hotbed of insurgent activity, posed one of the most daunting problems for the US military – and still does today, to a lesser extent.

The use of WMD by the US military is not a new tactic and has been the case since the earliest days of the Vietnam War some forty years ago. Back then, the justification for the use and application of WMD into the military theater of operations was to deny the Viet Cong the ability to use the dense jungle they fought and seemingly disappeared in. The horror of Fallujah and the subsequent massacre by US forces (and use of WMD) is vividly told in this documentary. This documentary isn’t new and most of you have already seem some, or all, of it. Here it is in three parts:

part 1

part 2

part 3

 Allahuma man adhahum fa adhihi wa man adahum fa adihi – Allahuma Ameen!

Posted in makes me think | Leave a Comment »

they’re ALL a bunch of crooks if you ask me!

Posted by abu ameerah on Saturday, January 20, 2007

Top Blair aide arrested over ‘cash for honours’

By Colin Brown, Deputy Political Editor independent.gif




The net tightened on Tony Blair yesterday after one of his senior advisers was arrested on suspicion of perverting the course of justice, by police investigating the alleged “cash for honours” scandal.

Ruth Turner, the director of government relations inside Downing Street, was arrested under caution and bailed without charge after questioning. She could face more interviews.

In a statement released by 10 Downing Street, Ms Turner said: “I absolutely refute any allegations of wrongdoing of any nature whatsoever.”

She is the most senior official close to the Prime Minister to be arrested so far. She is the fourth person to be arrested by the Metropolitan Police, amid clear signals that they are determined to pursue evidence to make charges stick in spite of the damage and embarrassment it is causing to the Government.

Ms Turner, who acts as both the “gatekeeper” and “go-between” for the Prime Minister, was interviewed in September about e-mails and documents raising questions about which Labour donors should be placed on a list for honours.

A police statement yesterday made it clear they were unsatisfied and suspicious about the accuracy of the answers she gave.

Her arrest also raised fears in Labour circles that the police have found a “smoking gun” in the trail of e-mails and memos they have been pursuing in Downing Street. The Scotland Yard team, headed by Assistant Commissioner John Yates, questioned Mr Blair at Downing Street before Christmas over the offer of peerages to multi-millionaire businessmen in return for secret loans for the party before the 2005 general election.

The police closely questioned Mr Blair over apparent contradictions in the statements by some of his senior aides. Police have also recently questioned Jonathan Powell, his chief of staff, for a second time and John McTernan, the director of political relations, in Downing Street.

Those arrested by Scotland Yard so far are Lord Levy, a close friends of Mr Blair and high-value fundraiser for the party; Des Smith, a teacher and fundraiser for city academies who boasted to an undercover newspaper reporter that big backers for the schools could get honours; and Sir Christopher Evans, the head of a biotech company, who loaned Labour £1m before the last general election. Mr Blair was closely questioned about an alleged diary entry by Sir Christopher suggesting he had been offered a “K” (knighthood) or a big “P” peerage)’.

Scotland Yard said the arrest of Ms Turner was “in connection with alleged offences under the Honours (Prevention of Abuses) Act 1925 and also on suspicion of perverting the course of justice”.

It added that the new development would delay the delivery of a file on the cash-for-honours inquiry to prosecutors, which many in Westminster had been expecting this month.

The Scotland Yard statement said: “She was taken to a London police station where she was interviewed and later bailed to return pending further inquiries.

“As a result of this new development, additional investigation will be required before a final file can be submitted to the Crown Prosecution Service.”

The arrest of Ms Turner overshadowed an extraordinary turf war that erupted over the allegations last night between the Attorney General, Lord Goldsmith, and the Lord Chancellor, Lord Falconer of Thoroton.

Lord Goldsmith publicly slapped down Lord Chancellor for his earlier assurances that the Attorney General would not get involved in the Director of Public Prosecutions’ decision on whether to prosecute Mr Blair or other senior members of the Government and the Labour Party.

In a letter to a Commons select committee which is to investigate his role, Lord Goldsmith angrily dismissed Lord Falconer’s assurances. “I know the Lord Chancellor well understands he was not in a position to give an ‘assurance’, as you have termed it, as to how I would act,” he said.

“No other minister, however distinguished or senior, has the ability to bind the Attorney General in how he exercises his role.”

The loyal ‘gatekeeper’

* Ruth Turner is an ultra-loyal Blairite who Tony Blair trusts with his secrets. She was plucked from Labour’s ruling national executive to work at Downing Street because of a reputation for loyalty.

Ms Turner, 36, was one of the few of his close aides whom Mr Blair told about his plans to step down later this year. She is regarded as a quiet and does not like to be in the spotlight, unlike the film clips being shown yesterday on television of her making a speech at a Labour party conference, which was out of character. Ms Turner was an award-winning “social entrepreneur”. In 1992 she helped to set up ‘The Big Issue’ – a magazine to help the homeless – in the north, and is a founding director of Vision 21, a company specialising in market research and community consultation for the public and voluntary sectors.

She also helped to run the public participation unit at the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. But her role in the ‘loans for honours’ affair has been shrouded in confusion.

Downing Street said the Prime Minister had full confidence in Ms Turner. “She is still in her job,” a spokeswoman said, adding any investigation had to be allowed to run its course.

Posted in In The News | Leave a Comment »