Tuesday, March 06, 2007

A comment on Kid's post

After reading a post on the Kid's blog I was obliged to say few words and one thing led to another and it has became a long comment that I've decided to publish it on my blog since I'm too lazy to write any new post and I really thank the Kid for his post cause I was unable to write anything about this subject cause I was too afraid that I would not be giving Imam Al-Hussein what he deserve but the Kid's post moved somthing inside me so thank u Kid again and here is my comment:
Nice post indeed but please don’t discuss things when u don’t have enough background on them u r very good in political analysis but when it comes to Shiite doctrine I’m sorry but u r very week if u have just heard the story of Imam Al-Hussein don’t try to analyze such an event politically and I’m saying that not carried away by the built up legend I admit that there r a lot of stuff added but u can’t say it is nothing but a myth it is a truth as much painful and great. U can’t say that Imam Hussein revolution is a revolution for Shiite only it had a great effect on all Islam, u may say “Wow, this is too much” but I tell u it isn’t at all the revolution of Imam Hussein was not a political revolution to get to the chair, why? I should answer with these undeniable facts:
First Moawya started the corruption of caliphate u may say that I’m being too prejudice but the unfortunate truth is that I’m not since have u heard in the time of Abu Baker, Omar, Othman or Imam Ali, of a caliph having a big castle or hundreds of slaves and having bacchanal everyday with dancing and wine? (if this is how the prince of the believers is then how would an ordinary believer be?) In the time of the first caliphs the caliph was in the service of Islam and the people, and after that the caliph was served by the people and he is higher than Islam and for that Imam Hussein has started his revolution nothing less and if it wasn’t for him who knows how Islam would have been.
Second if u may do a little search u may find that Moawya used to write poetry and if u search all his poems u’ll never find one verse praising Islam or the prophet and some of his poems r very shameless so does such kind of a person is fit to be caliph?
And the last is a document written by Moawya himself (and u can find that if u search historical documents) in which he is assigning Omar bin Al-3as as a ruler of Egypt in which he say “مصر طعمة مني ما حييت” and that means that Egypt is a gift from him as long as he is alive and is that a way of a righteous caliph to act? Acting as if the Muslims land belongs to him and he may give them to whom he likes.
Well no I may consider the part that u’ve said that people claims that Imam Al-Hussein knew his fate while he actually didn’t well I’m not going to argue with u about knowing the future or not (even I could do that) but let’s say that Al-Hussein didn’t know and he went to Iraq and then he was surrounded so if he was caught of guard then he could easily got off hock since we all know that the truth that Moawya lost the real battle so Al-Hussein was able to give up and accept Moawya as caliph and then no one can open his mouth and that will be the real victory to Moawya but although Al-Hussein knew that he was going to be killed and also all his followers and that the women of the house of the prophet will be taken as slaves but he didn’t because he was fighting not for himself or for the caliphate but rather for the glory of Islam and for what is right so he knew his fate and he did accept it even for cost of his life.
In the end all can I say is if u r about to write a delicate post like this one please don’t take it so lightly and if u want to compare someone to Saddam u’ll never find a fit more suitable than Moawya himself since a lot of people now glorify him.
Thank u Kid for your post and may God bless u…


aNarki-13 said...

its wrong to accept the "general" concept that "Imam Hussein is for Shi'a" and now "Saddam is for Sunna".

Being outside iraq, i do hear this a lot, from people i talk to, from some friends, and even from some family members:

when i tell them its wrong to use Saddam as a symbol for Sunni people, most agree, but then say:

"oh but THEY -Iraq's current government/ppl in charge- have made him our symbol by saying he was with Sunna and doing all they did"

Screw that! if i don't like someone, and further along he/she comes telling me a lie that has only one outcome, hurting me, why would i use it?

i just wish people would for once use the brain God gave them.

David said...

Well, I don't know very much about the differences between Shia and Sunna, but I am interested to learn. From the little that I have read, it seems to me that Shia feel free to interpret and expand upon the verses of the Koran, while Sunna have a very literal view of the Koran. Is that a correct assessment?

Dr O2 said...

don pay too much attention to CNN n BBC people ;-)

C'mon Kyubi, it is no use explaining the extent of the event in short when there are large books. ;-)

Then agn religion is personal! why is it necessary to analyse other religions when it is not yours???

aNarki-13 said...

:) if i may:

David: it's not that simple:
most differences (if not all) are so minor one would be ashamed to count them even!

the problem is not in Sunni and Shi'i sects, its with Extremists on BOTH sides who always insist on being correct, and that the other guy will rot in hell.

these guys (the bane of ALL islam) are always present to remind us of our differences, instead of our common points.

Sunni and Shia sects are not solid sects, one-way sects, i mean: there are FOUR main branches of Sunni islam, following FOUR Imams, all varying to some extent..i believe Shi'i sect is the same.
so again, the answer is not so linear..

oh and IA's ending was the best part! its not as wrapped-up as the remake, the "good" doesn't always win in real life!

Dr.O2 : media ALWAYS failed to show the real picture.
in this day and age of haste, ppl are unwilling to read looong books (or even write "people" properly)
so, a "Cliff's Notes" version written by a well-read person would do great good..

all: check out this: i feel its gonna be a big hit :D

Konfused Kid said...

Hey Kyubai and all...

sorry for being a little late in reply because your comment somehow got emailed to my bulk folder and i didn't read it. anyway here is what i think:

I don't claim to know very well in Shiite doctrine, I don't usually read Shiite books concerning the ordeal nor Sunni books for that matter, but I try to read secular books like Hasan al-Alawi, Ali al-Wardi (both shiites originally). I did not try to defend Muawiya in my post nor did I try to defend Hussein, I merely wrote what I believe is my opinion, yes Imam Hussein was willing to do all of what you said but in the end he lost, that is a fact and there is nothing wrong with it. My post was not mainly about him but about his followers and how they make up stuff and make a whole fuss about it in the same way that the followers of Saddam Hussein today are doing (I mean they didn't care or help when they (saddam & imam hussein) were alive but now that they're dead they raise all those slogans). This is my point.

As for Anarki: Unfortunately the differences between the two sects are major, but we can live together if it were not for those extermists. That's all.
as for your saying Saddam is a Sunni dude, unfortunately that is also true by the way they killed him, it's an unfortunate result but that's how it got interpreted by the world at large. it is wrong but it came down to this.

Kyubai said...

Anarki: I don’t believe that there is anyone in the world who would accept to be related to Saddam (although there r some people who had sold their souls to the devil but I won’t dignify them by mentioning them) so it is not right for anyone to decide who belong to whom.
David: u’ve asked a very delicate question so I’ll try to answer it and I hope that my answer will be satisfactory to u:
Shia means in English followers and it stand for follower of the descendents of the house of our prophet Mohammed (God’s prayers upon him).
Suna means in English followers of the words and commandment of the prophet himself passed on from his followers.
For my simple understanding I see that there r absolutely no difference between the two since who is better to pass on the commandments of the prophet than his own kin so why all the fuss it can’t be that all the Shia and Suna r unable to realize that simple fact? Well to be completely honest there r some fabricated differences and I think that the main one is the dispute about the authentication of some of the passed on commandments and I believe that it all began from that and we stupidly were carried away forgetting the most important thing and that is Islam.
The thing that u’ve mentioned about shia tend to derive commandments from original scripts while suna do not I think that is not quite true Islam is very flexible and so we depend on people (whether suna or shia) that r professionals on the matters of religion and we chose to follow the derivations of that specific person so actually it depends on the person u trust and follow not about the doctrine and notice that those people make their derivations depending on the Holy Quran and the commandments of the prophet knowing that they have to take extra care not to make wrong derivation.
In the end I hope that what I’ve said does satisfy your question and as I final word I will say that only the people who want nothing good for Islam and Muslims r the ones who insists on making a big deal of the trifles and if anyone stop for a second and think things over he will find his true way and will be able to distinguish between what is right and what is wrong not blindly following the words of the real enemies of Islam.
dr o2: there r indeed big books but they r not for everyone to read and understand...
Kid: my point is not to try to analyze a religious event like a political one as u did u said that Hussein lost his battle but I say at the contrary there is no victory as his a loser would not be remembered after all these years.

David said...


Thanks for your comment. Differences of religious belief seem like trivial matters to me too, but as you said, when extremists get involved, the smallest difference might lead to hatred and murder. As far as I am concerned, such violent emotions have no place in a morality centered existence.

Did you read Sunshine's new post? She had some interesting things to say about her own religious beliefs and how they influence her behavior. Her beliefs motivate her to do good things and help other people. Now, that is the true path of a religious person, I think!

You are right, the "good" doesn't always win in real life. I suppose that I just enjoy seeing good crush the life out of evil! Maybe that's why I enjoy Clint Eastwood movies so much! ;)

David said...

Kyubai, thanks for answering my question. Hmmm, I am wondering, there are undoubtedly many people alive today who are direct descendents of the Prophet Mohammed. Can anyone prove such direct descent, or have all those records been lost? I suppost that many have tried to claim such direct descent, though, to enhance their power and prestige.

If I understand you correctly, the Shia perspective traces its origin to the descendents of Mohammed who felt entitled to rule the Muslims and issue their own interpretations of the religion as his heir, while the Sunna perspective's origin came from followers of Mohammed who believed that only his words and teachings should be the basis of true Islamic faith. Am I closer to understanding the source of the division?

aNarki-13 said...

if i may again:

Q: Can anyone prove such direct descent, or have all those records been lost?

A: Yes, it can be proved. The lineage is not broken or lost. the name of the tribe may have changed, for example: a person who is a direct male descendant of Imam Hasan may NOT have the surname (Hasani = from Hasan) , that is, changed it for example to the area he lived in: (Baghdadi = from Baghdad) or for fear of persecution or similar reasons, but he still has the lineage. oh and vice versa, someone may be named Hasani or Husseini but may not be a direct descendant. he/she just took the name because they like the Imams and would like to be honored with their names.
Maternal links also exist but are weaker somewhat, i believe.

i'll go check Sunshine now, i really like her.

Kyubai said...

Anarki: thank u for your comment and for the explaining
David: well almost there the thing is the interpretations of the words of the prophet is not for shia or suna alone they both has their own interpretations for different situations that has occurred in the modern world but the thing is the source of the words of the prophet some rely on the prophets followers and others on the descendants and yet it is all the same as our honorable Imam has said "take our words and if u find anything that disagree with the holy Quran and the words of the prophet then throw it away" so after all we have to use our minds to figure what is right and what is not...

David said...

Thanks again Anarki! Also, thank you Kyubai. I think your last sentence really says it all! If everyone would try to use their minds a bit more, maybe the passions in their hearts would burn a little cooler.

Konfused Kid said...


I also forgot to mention a few things, you tell me I am wrong on some facts regarding the battle but look at your own opinion:

1. al-Hussein fought with Yazid, not Muawiya.

2. Muwaiya's rule is incomparable to Saddam, Muawiya was a great politician and knew how to persuade people with money or promises, all Saddam did was kill anyone against his path, to my knoweldge no one glorifies Muawiya. Hussein is actually comparable to Saddam in terms of how his cause was hijacked by hypocrites the way Saddam's tyranny has been hijacked by hypocrites and turned it into something beautiful.

Aprilie said...

Salaam Kyubai : )

Thanks for passing by. V-experiment's interesting. Ethics and morals have gone nowhere, they're here and will remain as long as people (no matter how few) implement those values and principles in their daily lives.
Keep writing : )

Kyubai said...

Kid: thank u for stopping I agree with u I'm wrong in saying that Moawya is the one fighting with Al-Hussein but although he is the cause of all the trouble...
About Moawya being a man of politics not terror and that he doesn’t resemble Saddam allow me to correct that to u both Moawya and Saddam used the same strategy of terrorizing those who can not be bought with money and the proof of that that there r a lot of people who did benefit from Saddam and they wanted him back while about Moawya he was indeed a clever person (for the matter of life at least) and he did what he had to do to get the chair and about him not being glorified allow to say that I with my own ears have heard a person who is supposed to be of a high religious degree on the national TV of Jordan and he said the exact words of " سيدنا معاوية رضي الله عنه" and he was talking to people in a mosque also in Jordan so I was stunned then I was told that there exist such a kind of people...
Thank u again for your comment and may God bless u.
Aprelie: welcome to my blog and thank u for your kind words and indeed ethics is very important and I hope they will remain within us for ever and may God bless us all...

viagra pharmacy said...