Connect with us


The Iranian Elections: What They Mean to the Ummah


ahmadinejad-mousaviBeing the only Iranian on the staff, I am somehow automatically qualified to write about my essentially non-existent knowledge of Iranian politics, wa Allahu al-Musta’an. Those of us who have been following the world news a bit might know that today, Iran is holding its presidential elections. Insha’Allah, I will just briefly share a few of my thoughts on the elections, and what they mean for the Ummah.

It seems there are four candidates running for election. Besides the incumbent, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, also running, there is the reformist, Mir-Hossein Mousavi, the “hard-line” former commander of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard, Mohsen Rezaei, and another reformist (and cleric) Mehdi Karroubi.

From what I have been reading, it seems that the only two relevant candidates are Ahmadinejad and Mousavi (i.e. the others supposedly don’t stand a chance). As such, this will, alhamdulillah, allow me to write a very simplistic, black-and-white, fourth-grade-level analysis of the state of affairs, as I am now able to simply divide the sides into conservative versus reformist.

Keep supporting MuslimMatters for the sake of Allah

Alhamdulillah, we're at over 850 supporters. Help us get to 900 supporters this month. All it takes is a small gift from a reader like you to keep us going, for just $2 / month.

The Prophet (SAW) has taught us the best of deeds are those that done consistently, even if they are small. Click here to support MuslimMatters with a monthly donation of $2 per month. Set it and collect blessings from Allah (swt) for the khayr you're supporting without thinking about it.

Ahmadinejad, the conservative, will most likely follow the same policies he held pre-election. Many Muslims here in the West seem to be quite fond of him, because, as we have seen, he is the only leader who has really had the guts to stand up to Israel and the West and speak frankly about issues concerning the Muslim world. However, I must remind everyone that with his belligerent behavior towards the Western powers also comes his belligerent behavior towards our Sunni brethren in Iraq via the funding of Shi’ah death squads. So please, brothers and sisters, do not view Mr. Ahmadinejad as the knight of the Muslim world. He has his own ideology, which is very different from our own, though it may intersect in some areas, and he is doing what he can to push it forward.

As for the “reformist” side, represented by Mousavi, we must understand what is usually meant by reform, when used in the context of Iranian politics. Usually it refers to reforming the laws that are used to enforce their version of the shari’ah. While there are stark differences between the meaning of shari’ah between Ahl usSunnah and the Shi’ah, by and large, the laws applying to society are very similar, if not the same in some cases. So, while we do not agree with their version of the shari’ah, we certainly do not want to find ourselves supporting the secularization of Iran. Reform, also implies a softer, more cooperative foreign policy. In other words, by this ideology, Iran would no longer be viewed as the only ‘Muslim’ nation with some manhood. At the same time, however, this might (or might not) mean less support for Shi’ah militias in Iraq.

As for the Iranian Sunnis, it seems that their oppression was increased under Ahmadinejad’s rule (from his predecessor, Khatami). In general, it seems that the perception is that the Sunnis (or any religious minority) will be less oppressed under a reformist president. As it stands, the Sunni adhan is banned in Iran, in much of Iran, Sunni Friday prayers are only available at the embassies of Sunni countries, and anyone who outspokenly calls to Ahl usSunnah is usually arrested and/or killed. I honestly don’t expect any of this to change no matter who is elected. According to a much more rigorous analysis of the situation on, it seems that, by-and-large, Iranian Sunnis prefer a reform candidate (as it would hopefully mean somewhat less oppression for them).

However, and Allah ta’ala knows best, it seems that neither side will benefit the Ummah much by their policies. Perhaps the most important issue to note is that the final decision making power in Iran doesn’t lie with the president, nor in any of the branches of elected government, but with the Supreme Leader (currently Ali Khamenei), who, much like the pope, occupies his position until death. Pardon my skepticism, but due to this, I really don’t expect that Iranian elections can really have much of an effect on anything at all.

Of course, as Muslims, we don’t pin our hopes on any individual or group, but only on Allah subhanahu wa ta’ala, who is over all things powerful. May Allah alleviate the oppression of our brothers and sisters in Iran and everywhere, and may He recompense the oppressors with what they deserve. Truly He is al-Hasib (the Reckoner), al-Muntaqim (the Avenger), and Ahkam al-Hakimin (the Most Just of Judges)!

Keep supporting MuslimMatters for the sake of Allah

Alhamdulillah, we're at over 850 supporters. Help us get to 900 supporters this month. All it takes is a small gift from a reader like you to keep us going, for just $2 / month.

The Prophet (SAW) has taught us the best of deeds are those that done consistently, even if they are small. Click here to support MuslimMatters with a monthly donation of $2 per month. Set it and collect blessings from Allah (swt) for the khayr you're supporting without thinking about it.



  1. PakistaniMD

    June 12, 2009 at 3:42 PM

    Great Analysis! Your description of Muslim support for Ahmednijad is on the spot: he is really only supported because he stands up to the West on dissimilarities. But on other issues, he does not deserve our respect.

  2. Ikram Hadi

    June 12, 2009 at 3:54 PM

    The well educated Iranians think that this is all a show. There are bigger people running it in the background. Nothing is going to happen if it is against their will.

    Iran assassinated a great Kurdish Sunni leader known as Naser Subhani whose tapes are still very popular in Iraq.

  3. Hassan

    June 12, 2009 at 3:56 PM

    Being the only Iranian on the staff, I am somehow automatically qualified to write about my essentially non-existent knowledge of Iranian politics,

    Thats how it works dude, you can become analyst for mainstream media (if you have to say what they want to hear), although still very good job. Bottom line to your article, is that it does not matter… perhaps that how east sees US elections between McCain and Obama…

    • Ahmad AlFarsi

      June 12, 2009 at 4:33 PM

      Funny you mentioned Obama and McCain. I was wondering if some Iranians actually view the Mousavi guy the way many Americans view Obama (but I think Ahmadinejad would draw more of a parallel in Bush rather than McCain :) ).

    • J

      June 13, 2009 at 2:58 PM

      I want to mention a very funny anecdote here. You guys know Fareed Zakariah of CNN right? My friend knows him personally, and says that Fareed even told him (my friend) that he (Fareed) was only hired as an “expert on Islam” since he looks Middle Eastern-ish…and Fareed openly told him that he (Fareed) doesn’t know anything about Islam, lol.

  4. Yahya

    June 13, 2009 at 2:05 AM

    very well put. and informative. i never really knew of the struffleges our sunni brothers and sisters go through in shia dominant iran.

  5. Abdullah

    June 13, 2009 at 5:36 AM

    Well written article, masha’Allah.

    It’s good to read from the perspective of an Iranian person. I never knew before that Sunnis in Iran have to go through all that.

    Your article sheds light on a political arena that many of us aren’t very familiar with.


    • Muhammad

      June 13, 2009 at 9:23 AM

      JazakAllah. ???

      complete it brother with “Khairan””

  6. Manas Shaikh

    June 13, 2009 at 9:48 AM

    I find is appalling that Sunni preachers are being killed. It’s a serious charge, that you bring forth, dear brother.

    Also, the economy and employment seems to have relegated to background. It should be regarded as issue of importance.

    • Manas Shaikh

      June 14, 2009 at 9:54 AM

      That’s just plain wrong! It’s stupid too, to do such things especially at such troubled times when divisions are so costly.

  7. Manas Shaikh

    June 13, 2009 at 9:53 AM

    Post election, I find it appalling that Mousavi declared fatah even when counting did not begin. It’s also very surprising that Ahmadinejad won 63% vote given the prediction “it’s a tight race.” But then, who can trust the corporate media? (Even Al Jazeera seems to have gotten it wrong this time.)

    Whatever, unless the government focuses on nation building, it’s all futile. In the end they’ll be colonized like most of the Sunni majority countries already are. Either by themselves or (better (sarcasm alert) still!) by a surrogate.

  8. MentalMuslim

    June 13, 2009 at 2:20 PM

    Jazakallahi Khairan for writing about this,

    As a Muslim observer in the states, I am so glad someone is throwing awarness on the plight of our Sunni brothers and sisters in Iran. I have been worried for some time about them, ever since I started following international news. I knew they were being oppressed, and may Allah deliver them and all the Muslims upon the straight path. And not just the Sunnis in Iran, but I find it so creul that the Iranian gov’t sanctions violence against Iraqi Sunnis. This is dispicable. May Allah unite our Ummah.

    Again, thanks for writing about the pressing (yet obscure from the public) issue.

    • Abidi

      July 21, 2015 at 12:32 AM

      I also ask everyone to do dua for the oppression of our Muslim brothers in Bahrain and Hijaz.

  9. Taimoor

    June 13, 2009 at 2:40 PM

    Great analysis. I think Ahmedinejad is the better of the two since he isn’t a US patsy. Sunnis should be given more rights in Iran and mosques should be established in Sunni-majority areas.

  10. J

    June 13, 2009 at 3:03 PM

    As-Salam Alaykum,

    Thank you for your blog post, brother. Unfortunately, many Sunnis in the West remain oblivious to the plight of Sunnis in Iran and Iraq….I’m not a “crazy Wahhabi” blasting ISNA/ICNA/CAIR, but they really do share blame for this…they have made the average (Sunni) Muslim in the West think it’s good to unite with Shi’ites.

    Having said that, I don’t deny the great good ISNA, ICNA, and CAIR do. May Allah [swt] reward them and correct their mistakes.

    Fi aman Allah

    • J

      June 14, 2009 at 12:39 AM

      Jazakh-Allah khair for your reply.

    • Manas Shaikh

      June 14, 2009 at 9:59 AM

      “they have made the average (Sunni) Muslim in the West think it’s good to unite with Shi’ites”

      That’s one of their merits.

      You are making the same mistake that we had been protesting for some time. Do not paint a people on the same brush. There may be some people who do this, but I am sure it’s not black and white. Some of them may be misguided in some matters, but that does not mean we should not try to reconcile, enjoin the good and forbid the evil.

      • J

        June 14, 2009 at 10:10 AM

        As-Salam Alaykum, Manas.

        You are welcome to your opinion. I humbly disagree with you. I think most of the MM staff would agree with me on this issue as well.

        Shi’ism is another religion altogether. Unity with them will only harm us, since they (the Shias) abuse unity in order to spread their dawah amongst our masses. That is the ONLY reason they want “unity”, because the bulk of their “converts” are from ignorant Sunnis, not Non-Muslims. The Shias should be abandoned, ostracized, and refuted.

        Fi aman Allah,

        • Manas Shaikh

          June 14, 2009 at 11:38 AM

          “the bulk of their “converts” are from ignorant Sunnis”

          By all means, educate them, brother.

          “The Shias should be abandoned, ostracized, and refuted. ”

          abandoned? ostracized?

          Sounds very much like the catholic church, bro.


          Yes, please.

          Anyway, I do not see reason in going through a very prolonged argument. May Allah bless you and me, and guide us to the right path, ameen.

          • J

            June 14, 2009 at 12:27 PM

            “abandoned? ostracized? Sounds very much like the catholic church, bro.”

            It is very much like that. It is actually *more* like the mainstream Christianity attitude towards Mormons. I don’t see what is wrong with that comparison?

            The issue is that most Sunnis–who call for unity with the Shias–do not know what the true beliefs of the Shia scholars are, nor do they know what the classical and orthodox Sunni scholars said about the Shias. For example, Imam Bukhari said:

            “I don’t see any difference between praying Salah behind a Jahmi or a (Shia) Rafidhi and a Christian or a Jew. They (Jahmis/Rafidhis) are not to be greeted, nor are they to be visited, nor are they to be married, nor is their testimony to be accepted, nor are their sacrifices to be eaten.”

            (Khalq Af’aalul-’Ibaad, p.14)

            So this is the traditional and orthodox opinion towards the Shias. Other scholars opined that the knowledgeable Shia’s aqeedah is more offensive than the aqeedah of the average Christian or Jew.

            Ameen to your du’a.

            Fi aman Allah

    • Manas Shaikh

      June 14, 2009 at 10:07 AM

      “but this is no different from how we could cooperate with Christians or Jews in the US in doing good works… but I don’t see how we could go any further than that. Wa Allahu ta’ala a’lam.”

      I don’t know, brother. I would say we should work more closely with the Shi’a than the Christians and the Jews. Two reasons I can think of. One is that they witness that Muhammad (SAW) is a prophet and a messenger. Secondly, they will identify with other Muslims more easily than anybody else.

      But what about religious issue? That they are performing kufr- does it negate that they are Muslims? Or just that they are not believers?

      Not that all of Sunnis are, either. Some Sunnis perform Kufr too. Should we abandon them too? Or should we try to guide and help them?

      • J

        June 14, 2009 at 10:14 AM

        “Some Sunnis perform Kufr too. Should we abandon them too? Or should we try to guide and help them?”

        Brother/Sister, we should do dawah to all groups, be they Christians, Jews, Hindus, atheists, Shias, Qubooris, etc.

        So this dawah to them is considered trying to “guide and help them.”

        However, we should not seek to unite with them, just like the Prophet [s] did not unite with the Arab mushrikeen (polytheists). Yes, he tried to “guide and help them”, but he did not unite with them (until they became believers), since doing so would have disintegrated the religion of Islam.

        As for “Sunnis” who are mushrikeen (i.e. Qubooris), then the same applies to them: we should abandon them in the sense that we do not unite with them. However, we should still do dawah to them, since they are polytheists just like the polytheists in the time of the Prophet [s].

        Fi aman Allah

        • Manas Shaikh

          June 14, 2009 at 11:32 AM

          Dear brother J

          I am talking about political unity. The Prophet did unite with jews and even polytheists. Those of them who upheld their treaties with him, he respected them and fulfilled his obligations too. For example letting them come to Mecca after it was conquered.

          Wa’Allahu Alim

    • J

      June 14, 2009 at 12:36 PM

      Wa alaykum as-salam, sister Manas.

      Yes, then political unity can be done with the understanding that they are like Jews and polytheists. The problem arises when (Sunni) Muslims preferentially call for unity with the Shias because they consider them part of the same faith.

      This is not to say that we do takfeer of the laity. However, it is a complex topic, and those who have knowledge on the topic (as opposed to those who don’t), know that unity with the Shias is not a good idea, and is like calling for unity with Israelis.

      Fi aman Allah,

      • Manas Shaikh

        June 14, 2009 at 2:23 PM

        that would be brother Manas, bro.

      • Abidi

        July 21, 2015 at 12:43 AM

        Why so against unity? We, Shias, believe in Allah and His Prophet, and the authority of him who pays zakat while bowing. (Holy Quran 5:55) We worship none but Allah. Shias are not against unity with Sunnis, we are only against Wahabbis- the remnants of those Umayyad and Abbasid Caliphs that have killed so many of us only because we express our love for the family of our Infallible Prophet. These are facts that I have stated.

    • MR

      June 15, 2009 at 2:28 PM

      There is a stark difference between the Sunnis and Shia in West versus the Sunnis and Shias in Iraq/Iran. HUGE difference.

      • J

        June 27, 2009 at 12:59 PM

        How so? The only difference I have seen is that the ones in the West do more taqiyyah and therefore present themselves as having a more sanitized religion.

  11. Zainab (AnonyMouse)

    June 13, 2009 at 4:55 PM

    Ahmadinejad won the elections, although of course the usual bout of accusations regarding rigged elections and manipulated polling stations is in full swing.

    May Allah protect our brothers and sisters in Iran, ameen.

    • Manas Shaikh

      June 14, 2009 at 10:02 AM

      Ameen to you Du’a.

      Also that they be guided, and not cause or fall prey to divide amongst us brethren.

      May Allah do what is best for us in this world and in the next. Ameen.

      • J

        June 14, 2009 at 10:17 AM

        Actually, I am 99.999999% sure that sister Anonymouse was referring to Sunnis when she said “our brothers and sisters in Iran.” :)

        • AnonyMouse

          June 14, 2009 at 4:46 PM

          Make that 100% :)
          Yes, I was referring to our Sunni brothers and sisters in Iran… may Allah protect them.

          As for the debate on uniting with the Shi’ah, I do think that we need a lot more awareness about just how complex the issue is. AlHamdulillaah that Sheikh YQ and others have discussed it in alMaghrib classes, etc. but it doesn’t seem to have reached many outside of those classes.

    • Miako

      June 15, 2009 at 1:10 PM

      My prayers to the disappeared.
      The riots are worse than usual.
      On official Iranian TV: fraggle rock reruns.

  12. AsimG

    June 14, 2009 at 1:03 AM

    Asalaamu alaykum,

    is this not just an election on who gets to be the ayatollah’s public relations officer and puppet?

  13. Ali

    June 15, 2009 at 12:41 AM

    Salam to all,

    I’am Shia. Although i dont understand how shia do kufr? You may be misinformed about the shia. I personally would like all muslims to unite on the 2 foundations of islam being there is no god but Allah(s.w.t) and the Prophet Muhammed is his messenger (p.u.h.h.p). spreading hatred and calling other islamic schools of thought Disbelievers is injustice. once again please clarify to me why Shia are kufar. Thank You Salam

    • sister

      June 15, 2009 at 1:07 PM

      Another excellent website which explores differences between Sunni and Shia beliefs in a step-by-step, clear, neutral manner is:

      ( The site was written by a brother who converted from Shi’ism to Ahlus Sunnah. )

      • bintFarhad

        June 17, 2009 at 2:24 AM

        Allahu Akbar, that’s my dad’s website AlHamdullilah.

        Jezakum Allahu Khayran.

  14. faraz omar

    June 15, 2009 at 11:02 AM

    There’s probably a little misunderstanding here in this article. I visited Iran some years back. An impoverished, left-to-rot Sunni town called Qeshm. I heard there are only two Sunni towns there. I was there from Dubai for changing my visa. I prayed the Jumuah in a Sunni masjid near the resort I was staying. The young Khateeb was a Sunni. Though his Khutbah was in Persian, I could understand the Arabic he was quoting (Qur’an, Hadeeth and statements of scholars of Ahlussunnah). May Allah preserve him and bless him and protect him for implementing the Sunnah in his words, actions and worship. And make his da’wah stronger.

    I closely observed him and I was impressed by him. I met him and tried conversing with him in Arabic. I didn’t meet him after that but I believe the da’wah is not dead Insha Allah. May Allah make his Kalimah strong in Iran. Aameen.

    Of course the town’s center (the developed area) was all Shia dominated. The whole trip was a very very strange experience. I hope I write on that someday Insha Allah.

    But yes this doesn’t mean Sunnis aren’t persecuted. Also I’ve heard that there are synagogues in the cities, but no Sunni mosque… as the author put it, they have laws against Sunnis.

    • Ahmad AlFarsi

      June 15, 2009 at 11:13 AM

      I got the information about Sunnis making Jum’ah in foreign embassies from the same article mentioned in my post. It says in the article:

      Significantly, Mousavi has undertaken to build the first big mosque for Iranian Sunnis, who make the Friday prayer in foreign embassies.

      Perhaps the article was referring to the normal case. Perhaps in the Sunni dominated areas they do have Sunni Jum’ah prayers, based on your experience. Maybe the article was referring to what the case is in the major cities. wa Allahu a’lam.

      • faraz omar

        June 16, 2009 at 11:02 AM

        Sunni dominated areas

        You obviously mean Sunni ‘populated’ areas

  15. Dawud Israel

    June 15, 2009 at 2:54 PM

    Don’t take Sh. Bilal Philips book as a reliable guide to information on Shi’ism. He’s an awesome dawah guy but his information on Muslim groups has been really wrong in the past. And the comments here of bashing other religious groups based on, “Oh look what we found in your books!” is biased and selective. Its based on your understanding of Islam, not theirs. Guys, hate…is a two-way street.

    Put things into context.

    Objective question: How many of you have actually talked to a Shia scholar? How many of you have cooperated with Shia Muslims to represent Islam in the West?

    Another question: How many Muslim scholars, intellectuals, thinkers and scientists came from Persia?

    • J

      June 16, 2009 at 9:09 AM

      “If you are a fair person who has some honesty with your own intellect, you will go and see for yourself, speak to Shias, read their books, see how they feel or understand their religion”

      Brother Dawud Isreal,

      As the admin of, I have debated Shias for many years. I know them very well. What I say about them is not based on conjecture, but certain knowledge. Their leaders, scholars, dawah carriers, etc. are all kufaar. This is confirmed by Ustadh Yasir Qadhi, who also does not speak out of conjecture. As harsh as this sounds, it is you–my dear brother Dawud–who is speaking out of ignorance. Please allow those who have studied the topic to deal with the situation, insha-Allah.

      As for Ibn Sina, he was a heretic.

      This is our theology. We cannot compromise Tawheed for purposes of unity. We cannot unite with those who call on other than Allah [swt] for divine aid or help, or who claim that their Imams control the very atoms of the universe, etc.

      As Imam Bukhari said about the Shias:

      Imam Bukhari declared:

      “I don’t see any difference between praying Salah behind a Jahmi or a (Shia) Rafidhi and a Christian or a Jew. They (Jahmis/Rafidhis) are not to be greeted, nor are they to be visited, nor are they to be married, nor is their testimony to be accepted, nor are their sacrifices to be eaten.”

      (Khalq Af’aalul-’Ibaad, p.14)

      Fi aman Allah,

    • Faraz Omar

      June 16, 2009 at 4:17 PM

      Brother J. I want to know if you’re specifically mentioning about 12ers the ithnaa asharis when u talk about the kufr ideology etc?

      what i knew was that even Shiah have many sects with some sects close to the ahlussunnah in the sense that they dont abuse the companions and dont have the belief in imaams etc but they have other issues which are not as serious as these?

      please clarify.

    • Faraz Omar

      June 16, 2009 at 5:07 PM

      …then won’t generalized statements made above about Shiah b injustice? we would be wrongly attributing Kufr to all of them, when we really need to be specific? Allah knows best. i don’t want to speak without knowledge.

    • Abû Mûsâ Al-Ḥabashî

      June 16, 2009 at 5:34 PM

      Isn’t true that the 12ers consider the Zaydi’s Sunnî, not Shî’a?

    • Abû Mûsâ Al-Ḥabashî

      June 16, 2009 at 6:39 PM

      I meant to say “Isn’t it true…”

      • Dawud Israel

        August 3, 2009 at 10:28 PM

        Actually, I think Ibn Sina was a Hanafi… might wanna double-check.

    • Danish Hasan

      June 18, 2009 at 7:33 AM

      Why not cooperate with Shii’s?

      Yasir Q. once in a lecture mentioned that we should even be willing to cooperate with homosexual groups…

      the point is….

      it depends on what we are trying to achieve and what we are cooperating on…

      this advise is probably more to me than others….bashing homosexuals, or deviated sects of sunnism, or the shia isn’t very conducive to much…..the benefit is almost next to none, and the ill feelings created are a road block to achieving some benefit in our communities…

      Do i currently have shia friends? Yes

      Do I cooperate with them on religious grounds? No

      Am I willing to cooperate with them on religious basis if it means I’ll be able to get my prayers on time (at work, school, etc.)? Yes, definitely. It’s worship, it;s what we’re created to do.

      Really living in this country we end up having to make these compromises, if you dont ever want to then just make hijrah, which is a topic in and of itself, and you’ll make other compromises.


    • Mehdi

      June 23, 2009 at 12:08 AM

      I do not know if ibn sina was an ismaili or not, but historical context has absolutely nothing to do with the deen. The deen is what Allaah says and what Rasoolullah says and what was understood by the sahaabah. If we have to bow down and pay respects to every kaafir who made a significant contribution to the world an ismaili would be way down on the list, probably even below a great many hindus.

      As far as our feelings for the Shia go,I pray that either Allaah guide them or destroy them. They are worse than the jews and the christians in their essence, because they declare islam with their tongue but their hearts are sold to Shaitaan. May Allaah burn those who speak ill of Abu Bakr, and I hope they get no refuge in this world or the next from His Wrath.

  16. Phil

    June 15, 2009 at 11:17 PM

    Since when did the Ummah not include a certain number of shia?

    And the “secularization” of Iran might not be such a bad thing. In fact it would be bringing them closer to the Sunni position.

    • J

      June 16, 2009 at 9:13 AM

      “Since when did the Ummah not include a certain number of shia? ”

      Since Hadhrat Ali [ra] burned them at the stake.

  17. Marya

    June 16, 2009 at 5:32 AM

    I agree w/Br. Dawud – there are better ways to discuss these differences then some of the rhetoric mentioned here. As a minority in the United States, we as a community are often still struggling to bring our youth to Islam. I utilized my Shi’ite friends in high school to maintain a strong Muslim identity and build a sense of community around prayer and consciousness of Allah. Yes, there were differences, but I knew what we disagreed on and that was it. This is a small scale example of how cooperation brings benefit to both groups.

    Why would we give in to the divide-and-conquer tactics used by the imperialist powers?

    • J

      June 16, 2009 at 9:15 AM

      Sister Marya and others–allow people with knowledge on the topic to speak. You allowing Shi’ites in your group is asking for trouble. They will find the most ignorant Sunni amongst your ranks and begin their dawah campaign on him, always saying “see, it’s even in Bukhari!” Trust me, we know them well.

      The reality is that most of you do not know the core beliefs of the Shias. Had you known them, you would be appalled. These Shias believe that their Imams are superior to the Prophets, that their Imams control the very atoms of the universe, that Abu Bakr [ra] and Umar [ra] were tawagheet, that calling on the dead for aid and help–instead of Allah–is permissible, etc.

      Look, I apologize to everyone for sounding harsh on this topic, but really, I would always be left to deal with the pieces when another Sunni left the folds of Islam to become Shia…I know them very well.

      • J

        June 16, 2009 at 9:25 AM

        I double apologize for sounding arrogant in this thread…but really, this is a topic that hits home.

        May Allah [swt] reward you all ,and I know that you all are sincere.

        Fi aman Allah

      • Hassan

        June 16, 2009 at 10:08 AM

        I have many shia co-workers, one of them (just worked one month) was stupid enough to do his dawah to us (sunnis in office). We do not speak religion in office, but once he started, we made him confess taqqiyah (he said, they do it to appeal to sunnis, and they later gradually tell them about how sahabah were evil etc). Frankly once they confess everything they believe, it is so easy to refute them.

        Bottom line to sunnis, do not believe anything they say in start, read their authentic books cover to cover, you would know how evil they are. And beware of taqqiyah, its the most convenient ideology on the face of earth

      • Danish Hasan

        June 18, 2009 at 7:45 AM

        jazaakAllahu khayran bro for your efforts Br. J

        I am in no way supporting shia or their beliefs….

        but I can totally understand where sister Marya is coming from.


        I don’t see anything wrong in working with the the shia students to establish an MSA so the brothers can get their Jummah/other prayers in on time.

        I’ve never done it, but in a society where the school admin can be against your faith is seen far too often, we MIGHT need to work with shia in some cases even if they are deviated and upon shirk. Does this mean you shoudl pray behind them or let them lead the prayers no. Get your time from the school to pray just make your own sunni jamaat if you have to.


  18. Abdullah Zahir

    June 16, 2009 at 7:57 AM

    Br. Ahmad, Jazakallahu khairan for speaking the truth.

    It is saddening to see people here bending over backwards, to the point of embarrassing themselves and tainting their reputation publicly, in their effort to bring us followers of Islam closer to shias and criticize us for pointing out the kufr in their man-made belief system. Trying to bring us closer to those whose leaders hate the sahabah and therefore rasulullah sallallahu alaihi wa sallam and his ahlalbayt! Never!

    These enemies of Allah ta’aalaa don’t include the wives of rasulullah sallallaahu alaihi wa sallam, the mothers of the believers radiyallahu ta’aalaa anhunn, among the ahl al-bayt. Wives of the Prophet sallallaahu alaihi wa sallam not part of the family of the house, they say. Amazing! The term appears twice in Quran, in surah hood referring to the wife of Ibrahim alaihis salam, and in surah ahzab in the context of several ayahs which directly address nisaa al-nabi, the wives of rasulullah sallallahu alaihi wa sallam. Yet official shia belief excludes the pure wives from the ahl al-bayt.

    Their beliefs on this matter and numerous other matters central to Islam are not supported by Quran. That is why you will find that their MO is to suppress truth, hide logical and factual arguments, and unashamedly present appeals to emotion, and selective quoting and absurd interpretation of ayaahs in a way that only one ignorant of Quran can be fooled by, or that only an inveterate enemy of Allah can claim to believe.

    We love for our Muslim brothers and sisters born to shia families in Iran to be guided to the sunnah of Rasulullah sallallaahu alaihi wa sallam as he taught the ummah through his Sahaabah, and we hate those Iranian leaders who seek to misguide them from Islam and tawheed which Omar radiyallahu anahu, whom shias curse, brought to Iran during his conquests of spreading the mercy of Islam by his potent sword.

    We also hate efforts and plans by non-Muslims to bomb and occupy the Muslim land and Muslim people of Persia.

    Obama’s hit man spreading death and Western liberal values into Afghanistan and Pakistan is Holbrooke. Obama’s hitman doing the same in Iran is Dennis Ross, who is so rabidly pro-Israel and pro-bloodshed, that as of yesterday or so Obama moved him further away from public view and closer to himself, so that together they can continue their planning against the Muslims.

    Here are their current plans on Iran, plans they shamelessly plan and publicize in broad daylight while most of us Muslims miss our salah and most of the college educated among us spend more time on the Internet than in the reading of Quran. Summary–be diplomatic, make sure that doesn’t work, do military build-up in the mean time, then after failed diplomacy, bomb them under the cover of media induced world-wide support. All this is justified because of our belief and practice of American exceptionalism.,8599,1904788,00.html?iid=tsmodule

    This is what they show us. What they conceal is much worse.

    Upon reflection, we can now better understand the joy the believers will experience in akhirah when inshaAllah we will see the disbelievers roasting in hellfire and we will be laughing and thanking Allah for guiding us. (See surah mutaffifeen and surah Saaffaat.)

  19. AbuMisbah

    June 16, 2009 at 1:28 PM

    Br. Ahmad, Jazakallahu khairan for speaking out. I didn’t knew anything much about what’s going on in iran until i read this post. I hardly see news (as it is biased information) and any news websites as they all seem to be the same. So reading this post was really refreshing, cos i trust our brothers here on MM.

    Any brothers who know of sites which give unbiased, and true picture of the world happenings pls email me on

    Thanks & Jazak Allah Khair!

    • Ahmad AlFarsi

      June 16, 2009 at 1:49 PM

      Don’t take it for more than what it is akhi; it’s certainly not an expert analysis by any means. I refer you to the disclaimers at the top of my posts pointing to my utter lack of qualifications to discuss Iranian politics :) . Jazakumullahu khayran.

  20. Dawud Israel

    June 16, 2009 at 9:41 PM

    Imam Bukhari declared:

    “I don’t see any difference between praying Salah behind a Jahmi or a (Shia) Rafidhi and a Christian or a Jew. They (Jahmis/Rafidhis) are not to be greeted, nor are they to be visited, nor are they to be married, nor is their testimony to be accepted, nor are their sacrifices to be eaten.”

    (Khalq Af’aalul-’Ibaad, p.14)

    Actually, Imam Bukhari included a narration in his Sahih from a trustworthy Shia. You can ask Shaykh Suhayb if you don’t believe me.

    For a discussion on politics…the hatred and sectarianism in these comments is really embarrassing and disappointing.

    • Dawud Israel

      June 17, 2009 at 12:43 AM

      I know brother. It’s OK. I’m just tired of not being able to get past this…its like we only have one narrative going- the same heresiology over and over again, yuno?

      Jazaka Allahu khayran for the article and for trying your best, brother. :)

    • Danish Hasan

      June 18, 2009 at 7:50 AM

      In reference to Dawud’s original post.

      It’s unfortunate when the people who we are supposed to look for knowledge give us incomplete knowledge on issues to make a point that fits their agenda or their purpose.

      This results in people getting wrong ideas……

      See it too often these days….

  21. nav

    June 17, 2009 at 2:02 AM

    You know Hell has frozen over when there are Persian Salafis in existence. Ahmed, you’re aware that a large segment of your countrymen would deem you as a traitor to the Iranian nation, right?

    • Ahmad AlFarsi

      June 17, 2009 at 9:09 AM

      You forget about Iran’s great Sunni past (according to you, hell froze over from the time of Umar ibn AlKhattab), prior to the forced conversion of its people to Shi’ism by the Safavi Empire.

      Anyways, perhaps, precisely as you said, it is because the Shia Iranians view Iranian Sunnis as traitors that they are currently being oppressed?

      • nav

        June 17, 2009 at 7:23 PM

        No offense bro but all this talk of an alleged forced conversion to Shi’ism by the Safavid is hogwash. I found this post very informative that seeks to dispel the ludicrous claim that Persia was forcibly converted to Shi’ism.

        On another note, at the risk of going off topic, if you’re going to cry about the alleged forced conversion of Persia, then you must by the similar token condemn the forced conversions of Shi’ite Hazaras and Nuristanis by Abdur Rahman Khan in the 1890’s.

        Also, Sunnis in Iran have it much better than Shi’as in Afghanistan under the Taliban. How ironic that you fail to point that out.

        • Ahmed Hassan

          June 27, 2009 at 10:51 AM

          I agree with this completely. Iran was converted forcibly to Shi’ism. Iran was the centre of the Shafi
          Madhab. Some of the greatest Shafi ‘ulama are from there: Imam AlGhazali, Imam Al Haramayn,
          and many many more. The Persian School of Sufism was based in Khorasan, which produced
          some of the most ilustrious Sufis.
          I wonder what would have been the intellectual state of Islam today had Iran remained a Sunni land.
          We are deprived of new Abu Hamid Ghazalis.


        • J

          June 27, 2009 at 12:57 PM

          Here are 60+ quotes that prove that Sunni Persia was forcibly converted to Shi’ism by the sword.

  22. Hilal

    June 17, 2009 at 7:09 AM

    Assalamu ‘alaikum guys!

    It seems the conversation here has degenerated into another one of those ‘sunni vs. shia’ debates. It is part of a wider question of “how do we deal with people of bid’ah”?

    In order to resolve this question, let me quote Imam Ibn Taymiyyah (yes him!):

    ھجر المبتدع خاضع حُکمہ للمصلحۃ

    – امام ابن تیمیہ

    There is obviously some detail to this, but in brief as long as a bid’ah that a person is committing does not fall under the category of a “kufri bid’ah with regards to ‘aqidah”, they’re to be given an excuse on the basis of some ta’weel they have and until the matter is cleared.

    Now with regards to dealing with people of bid’ah, first and foremost we MUST remember that the object of ire should be the BID’AH itself and not the PERSON. Dealing with person who may be committing bid’ah depends on whether the person is merely comitting it out of ignorance, or has some wrong ta’weel for it, or is an open propagator etc… All of these situations will warrant different bahivor towards the persons who may be comitting bid’ah. And, as Imam Ibn Taymiyyah mentions it really depends on the maslahah, and accordingly they should be dealt with.

    Also, Imam Ibn Taymiyyah has also extenslively discussed that it is possible to have bid’ah and sunnah in a person at one time i.e. they may be implementing sunnah and have fallen into bid’ah with regards to certain matters.

    Hence, it is clear that we shouldn’t paint all the people committing bid’ah and dealing with them is very relative and depends from person to person and situation to situation. WAllahu a’lam.

    [ With regards to Dawud Isreal’s contention regarding rafidhis: not ONLY Imam Bukhari but all the A’immah accepted narrations from rafidhis who were ‘thiqah’. But, what did they mean by ‘rafidhi’? They simply meant someone who went to extremes with their love for Ahl al-bayt. They did not accept narrations from rafidhis whose rafidhism fell into realm of ‘aqaaid and who were open propagators to rafidhism. Calm down Dawud, you seem to talk outta your backside waaaay tooo much]

    • Abû Mûsâ Al-Ḥabashî

      June 17, 2009 at 11:51 AM

      With regards to Dawud Isreal’s contention regarding rafidhis: not ONLY Imam Bukhari but all the A’immah accepted narrations from rafidhis who were ‘thiqah’. But, what did they mean by ‘rafidhi’? They simply meant someone who went to extremes with their love for Ahl al-bayt.

      Did the term ‘Râfiḍa’ include those who went to extremes with regard to their love for ahlul-bayt, but didn’t curse them, or were they merely called ‘Shî’a’/those who has some tashayy’ within them? I thought ‘Râfiḍa’ was used exclusively for those of the ‘Shî’a’ who spoke ill of Abû Bakr and ‘Umar (raḍiyAllâh ‘anhumâ).

      Calm down Dawud, you seem to talk outta your backside waaaay tooo much


      • Hilal

        June 17, 2009 at 12:15 PM

        I think it should be Shi’a. :)

  23. Dawud Israel

    June 17, 2009 at 7:51 PM

    Ya’ll might wanna take a look at this (its about Iran- not shias)

  24. Abu Rumaisa

    June 25, 2009 at 5:27 PM

    This is a good show abt Iranian elections.

    The reformist are mostly contained to Tehran & that’s whr they r rioting… rest of Iran is not up in the streets,

    btw, do u know what the western media is calling these riots by the reformists? “Acts of passion”.. when Muslims who loved Nabi Muhammed (saw) were angered and retaliated by rioting, the west was quick to condemn it but now it’s ok as it’s an act of passion. wow!

    And it looks like hypocrisy of the west never ends…. they are calling the crackdown by Iranian forces brutal & barbaric. Did they forget how they crackdown at protesters at WTO & G8 meetings? Anyone remembers Seattle? One doesn’t even have to bring up political demos, the crackdown on Red Sox fans after their win over Yankees… guess what! tear gas & rubber bullets were used and a young girl died. I guess, it’s ok when police in western countries crackdown on protesters & rioters but Iran can’t.

  25. Ahmed Hassan

    June 26, 2009 at 12:51 AM

    Why don’t you talk about the ‘plight’ of the Shia in Saudi Arabia where they are branded publicly that they are kuffar? Is this your version of ‘fear of Allah’?

    • Ahmed Hassan

      June 26, 2009 at 11:00 PM

      You seem to revel in hurling the word ‘kufr’ at others so easily. OK, let us see what you gain from it. The day you will be asked to account for every word you uttered/wrote is not that far. If you really KNEW that death is near you wouldn’t have indulged with what will not benefit you.

  26. khizar

    June 27, 2009 at 10:55 AM

    As-Salam Alaykum,

    WOW! i opened this blog to read about the elections and infact read a long argument about shias…lol

    well i have quite alot of shia friends since years, some really close friends, but i’ve never heard any of them saying anything wrong about the great caliphs personally. i’ve just always heard from some sunni brothers that shias indulge in such sinfull acts. maybe some shias do such things and we should condemn such acts and try our level best to stop them and argue with them with reason and still if they continue with such things than we should remember “ALLAH IS THE BEST JUDGE” and we all will be held accountable for our deeds.

    i know some of their beliefs have the element of shirk in them but to be honest i even know ALOT of sunnis who are pretty much caught up in such practices or are even worse.

    i wouldnt call them all as kufaar because they testify that there is no deity of worship except ALLAH and Prophet Muhammad (SAW) is the last and final messenger.

    as for the comment by brother J
    “They will find the most ignorant Sunni amongst your ranks and begin their dawah campaign on him, always saying “see, it’s even in Bukhari!” Trust me, we know them well.”
    well for this i think we all have to have good knowledge about our faith and beliefs through the Quran and the Sunnah of the Prophet (SAW) to be safe from such people because it is always the lack of knowledge which leads to destruction. And oh well we can do dawah to them too :)

    In the end, the comment by brother Ahmed Hassan is a good one.

    • Hassan

      June 27, 2009 at 11:38 AM

      Search Taqiyya

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *