Mushriks and Borderline Muslims have equal Status In the Eyes of the Extreme

According to the fatwa of 12r Shia scholar al Khoei all non-12rs are Muslim in the duyna, and kaffir in the aqira. Below is the fatwa.



Next the 12r apply this verse toward Sunni and claim we cannot be momin but just borderline Muslims.
The dwellers of the desert say: We believe. Say: You do not believe but say, We submit; and faith has not yet entered into your hearts; and if you obey Allah and His Apostle, He will not diminish aught of your deeds; surely Allah is Forgiving, Merciful. [Quran [49.14]]

Now the 12rs say at least we call you Muslims. However, the 12rs still believe the Sunni madhab must be exposed. In another words they are saying when we call you Muslim, it mean we are providing you safety. However, they are adding that if you call your self momins then that when the opposition begins.

Therefore, in Iran's capital Tehran, Sunni are allowed to come to 12r Shia mosques, but they are limited to freedom of expression, since they are considered non-momins.


Now from the Salafi point of view Sufis and 12rs are mushriks. In fact, they are even worst than Abu Jahal. By the way if you follow Hassnaian Rajabali lectures he too compares the 2 calipahs to Abu Jahal.



Now in comparison 12rs might say our sect is more lenient because we are calling you Muslim and we assure you safety. However, the reality is the Mushrikhs also have the assurance of safety according to the Quran.

And if any one of the polytheists seeks your protection, then grant him protection so that he may hear the words of Allah . Then deliver him to his place of safety. That is because they are a people who do not know. [Quran 9:6]



There is even an example of history where the Mutazilla encountered the Khawarij and managed to get their safety.


In the end the fitna starts where Sunnis in 12r Shia majority call themselves momin and challenge the 12r Shia majority. It gets worst throw labels toward their opposition such as monafiqeen, murshireek are thrown.
Likewise in a Salafi majority the same occurs.
In the end there is guarantee for safety for both sides. However, both sides have to make a comprise where they are a minority.

Future Plans of the Najdi's Exposed

This is what he said "We have no time to study you know about the great history of I don't know what and how Muhammad"

Look like these Najdis want the new generation totally move away from Islam.

Israr Ahmad on Imam Ali (as)

Israr Ahmad a wahabi scholar quoted a hadith from Tirmizi which actually ended up attacking Imam Ali's (as) personality. The hadith taken from Sunan al Tirmizi claims that Imam Ali (as) drank wine before it was prohibited. This is similar to the Bible claiming that some Prophets drank wine since there is no prohibition against it. Here is the version of hadith which is quoted in the clip above.


Ibn Abi Hatim narrated that `Ali bin Abi Talib said, "Abdur-Rahman bin `Awf made some food to which he invited us and served some alcohol to drink. When we became intoxicated, and the time for prayer came, they asked someone to lead us in prayer. He recited `Say, "O disbelievers! I do not worship that which you worship, but we worship that which you worship [misreading Surah 109]."' Allah then revealed [the verse] "(O you who believe! Do not approach Salah when you are in a drunken state until you know what you are saying."(Sunan, Tirmizi)

Of course this is not the only version available for this incident. The Hanafi Imam Abu BakrJassaas under this ayah reports in his classic jurisprudence book 'ahkam al-Quran' another version of this hadith which includes Ata bin Saib, but in that report it says that a man from Ansaar invited people, they drank, and the prayer was lead by Abd Ar-Rehman bin Awf . When Abd Ar-Rehman bin Awf read the surah under the influence of wine the verse of prohibition was revealed. As for Imam Ali (as), he is only the reporter and not as participant in Tirmizi's report.

Al-Wahabi Response
Israr Ahmad here has decided to take the report which attacked Imam Ali (as) character. Also the supporters of Israr Ahmad responded that this report is possible for two reasons. One reason is this incident occurred before the prohibition of alcohol and the other reason is that Imam Ali (as) was not infallible so its possible for him to be involved in this incident. Again I have posted another version which shows a contradiction to that report which attacks Imam Ali (as).



12r Shia Response
When this video of Israr was released the 12r shias were among the first ones to post a response. Then we had Tahir ul Qadri and a few Ahle sunnah scholar giving a response. A 12r shia friend of mine fowarded a clip which responded to the allegation made against Imam Ali (as). Now the problem with the 12r response was that it spent 1 1/2 hours bashing hadiths which are narrated in Bukhari. Then it focused on how the shia sect was a more rational sect to follow. When I saw these clip I was unsatisfied. The reason is the hadith quoted by Dr Israr isn't even taken from Bukhari. So why was the shia scholars wasting his time ? As for errors in hadith transmission let me post a shia hadith which attacks a son of Imam Zain Ul Abideen (as).

Sa`id b. al-Mansur, one of the leaders of the Zaydiya circle, asked him:
"What is your opinion about nabidh, for I have seen Zayd
drinking it?" Al-Baqir replied: "I do not believe that Zayd
would drink it, but even if he did, he is neither a Prophet nor
a Trustee of a Prophet, only an ordinary person from the
Family of Muhammad, and he is sometimes right and
sometimes may commit an error." (Kashshi, Rijal, p.232)

Now Israr Ahmad's supporters believed Imam Ali (as) was not infallible so it was possible for him to drink when the prohibition of wine was not enforced. Likewise, the 12r shia books here say its possible for Imam Zayd bin Ali (as) to drink nabidh since they believe he is capable of sinning.