How do you translate la'nat kardan? The English word for it is indeed to curse.
Why attribute (potential) intentions to me which do not actually reflect what I wrote, and are therefore akin to misrepresenting my standpoint? I won't defend not whitewash any of such actions and never did, but neither will I resort to foul language nor to la'nat in order to bring across my view. Etiquette is of import in a context like this.
La'nat in Islamic terminology is to appeal to Allah [SWT] to remove the blessings from the wrongdoer and visit punishment upon them. And la'nat comes under tabarra, which is part of Furooh-e-Deen.
Emam Sadegh {A} was visited by a Companion of His who said, "So and so is a person proclaiming his love for Ahlolbayt {A}." The Emam {A} responded he was a liar for he refused to condemn Their enemies. Those who keep silent in such matters are also wrongdoers and in Surah al-Kahf, the punishment is proscribed that they'll have boiling water that burns their flesh tossed in their faces in Hell.
It is our duty to send La'nat on the enemies of Ahlolbayt {A} failing which we have strayed from the Path of Allah [SWT].
Yes, but we don't need qulat-type clerics on MI6 payroll to teach us about these things. Our trusted ulema in Islamic Iran and beyond are doing a great job at it.
Sorry to say but no, they aren't. I've seen tarawih events in Mashad which is one of our holiest cities. Emam Aly {A} hated that bi'dah practice so much He sent Emam Hasan {A} with a dagger to break up the proceedings during His reign. I've seen sunni speakers invited to Islamic Centers run by Iran abroad and they had the gall to praise aisha (LA) from the pulpit and no one cut off their mic and pulled them down.
That the woman who ordered arrows rained on the funeral of our Emam {A} was allowed to be praised unchallenged in our mosque is a shame. Plus take the case of that bastard khaled meshal (former hamas secretary general) - the pedar sag actually walked into a Shia masjid with his shoes on when visiting Iran in ahmadinejad's time and instead of castrating him, pulling off his limbs and torturing his to a mess before beheading him, the Iranian government covered this up.
I support the Revolution 80% of the way but the 20% problems I have are ones like these I mentioned.
Shia aren't the only ones who qualify as Moslems since Sunnis aren't failing on their beliefs in the Oneness of God and the prophethood of Hazrate Muhammad (s.). Those denying this are simply mirroring anti-Shia takfiri rhetoric from certain well known quarters.
I did my duty in sharing with a fellow Shia Moslem what I'm convinced is Haqq, and I'm basing myself on nothing but Islamic rulings about takfir. Again, I'd invite you to consider these: takfir outside scholarly ijma' is illegitimate and will more often than not constitute a heavy sin. From here on, it shall be left to you to give it some thought.
Sorry, those who believe Allah [SWT] has the appearance of a beardless boy sitting on a throne with his flesh hanging off from either side and sticks his feet into hell to satisfy it's demands are no Muslims. And that's not even going into their views of the Prophet {S}, the Ahlolbayt {A}, the Quran and more.
I'd advise you to read their sahih al-bukhari (the 1960s edition - once Shia ulema began pointing out the problematic narrations in it, their subsequent editions were heavily revised and they even removed many legitimate hadith regarding Ahlolbayt {A} from it.
I was referring specifically to the Anbar province of Iraq. When it comes to preserving Iranian culture, I have often stressed the importance of such an endeavour, and identified the threats it faces.
On a side-note, these sorts of considerations would be untypical of the Shirazi clan, since Iranian civilization doesn't seem to rank highly among their concerns.
I'm no adherent of the Shirazis, Salar jan. I merely say that when they say something right, it is right and nothing can make it wrong and the same goes from the Velayat-e-Faqih camp.
Religion aside, Iranian demographics, culture and history are something I want preserved until the Qaem {ATFS AS HJ} Returns and until Hazrate Asrafeel (A) blows the trumpet to herald Qiyamat.
One can find just about every sort of occurrence in history, including numerous instances of peaceful cohabitation and cooperation between Shia and Sunni.
Moreover, there's no question that in present times the main driving force behind shiaphobia has not consisted of orthodox Sunni Moslems but of adherents to the salafist and wahhabi creeds, to a lesser extent certain deobandi currents (with whom entente has been easier to reach though, case in point the working relationship established by Islamic Iran and the Afghan Taleban).
This is while institutions such as Egypt's Al-Azhar, grand ulema such as Allame Tabatabai, revolutionary thinkers such as shahid Motahhari and mojaheds like Navvab Safavi have endowed us with a legacy of Islamic unity, which we shall uphold and build upon.
Even if the record had consisted exclusively of uninterrupted conflict - which it clearly doesn't, we are duty-bound by Islamic rules to work towards appeased ties between denominations and not to dwell on nor to perpetuate revolved incidents. Another reason is because this would directly feed the strategic goals of our existential enemies.
And here I'm talking about those enemies who're sitting at the top the pyramid, those who're pulling the strings of assorted anti-Shia takfiri groups and whose power, wealth and influence actually surpasses anything said takfiris could ever dream of. In short, shiaphobes would be nothing without the zio-American empire which is consistently empowering them.
This being part of the empire's strategy, practical political imperatives much like religious duty call for an inclusive approach towards our Sunni brothers in Islam.
No, you will
NOT find instances of Shia ulema or rulers concocting conspiracies to have sunni priests entrapped, put through fraudulent court proceedings and killed in ways like the Five Martyrs. We haven't gone around entombing people in walls or burning their books (quite the opposite, we studied them) and debated their ulema (sunnis end up killing ours because they can't stand us speaking our viewpoint and them having no answer to it).
While you're at it, al-Azhar isn't that place's name. The mosque was called al-Zahra {A} and was stolen from Shia by the sunnis who are occupying it. Yes, it's a Fatimid era mosque, go figure. Oh and by the way, we're not obligated to "appease ties" but to keep the peace while upholding the truth. And those existential enemies you speak of are largely sunnis - turks, arabs, pakistanis, central asians and even north caucasians all are overwhelmingly sunnis and most of them speak ill of the Shia creed and Iranians (particularly turks who aren't salafists - even during their secularist era where they hated Islam, they persecuted Alevis on their inborn sunni biases; Kurds do the same while larping as gabars/atheists but will still call you a "Son of Mu'tah" which I don't mind since it's halal but you see the thought process).
There is no brotherhood between Haq and ba'til and thus Shia and sunni can never cooperate on religious matters. Political issues are workable, so are cultural ones but that's as far as it goes.
I trust our Leadership and our maraje' to distinguish correctly between fact and falsehood. Like I said, I definitely don't need and won't listen to MI6-sponsored 'British turbans' when it comes to understanding the history of Shia-Sunni relations. Neither do the Iranian people.
I don't seeing their complete inaction with regards to sketching portraits of the Masoomeen {A} (completely haram) and those dramas where they enact the Tragedy of Karbala (Astaghfir-Allah, they even get someone to portray Emam Hoseyn {A} in caricature). What can I say when no marja in Iran ever issues an edict against such blasphemous things, let alone confront that sunni infidel rubbish encroaching into Islam?
Sorry to say, but Mossad and CIA handbooks on what narratives to promote in order to ignite civil war in Islamic Iran, will hardly be featuring much different content than the above. Try reflecting upon the potential impact of what you're going to write. We will all be held to account either way.
It won't come to civil war if you decode the strategy of the average karkasparast/sunni/kurd/arab/turanist in Iran. There are different ways to deal with them - look into the practices of the Stasi, for example. Zersetzung should be used by isolating leaders and tormenting them until they go insane or commit suicide.
Recently, there was a thread about the recent riots on 4Chan too. You know what one guy said there? "These guys white knighting for the roasties rioting in the street are simps. The Iranian police should shoot all of the females and the simps will run back home."
It struck me then - even a 4Chan poster has the right idea on how to deal with Iranian internal politics. Meanwhile, the nezam is in limbo, refusing to either crush these regular protests of every 2 years with tiananmen square style force and yet also unwilling to liberalize (they shouldn't, of course). If they want to remain an Islamic Republic and not become a gabar republic, then force needs to be used. Break skulls first and then pour sense in through the cracks with words, I say.
Iranian youth are lost and frankly morally bankrupt. Look inside the average middle class Iranian home. A man with daughters spoils them sick while he beats up his sons like dogs to assuage his sense of manhood like a beta male. I myself chewed out many spoiled Iranian bitches and they always screamed, "HOW CAN THIS MAN SPEAK TO ME IN THIS WAY WHEN EVEN MY BABA DIDN'T?!"
I'm not like your average Iranian dokhtar's cuckold baba who kisses her arse. Why are you putting women on pedestals they don't belong, brother? Our Prophet {s} Himself said that a beautiful woman in an evil environment is like a flower sprouting in mud (or a rubbish dump). Giving in to Eve's nagging got Adam cast out of Heaven, after all.
iranwire.com
