Ali and Umar are what Muslims need today

I have spoken to many Sunnis about the killings of Muslims in Iraq, Afghanistan and in the west, in the name of several banners such as occupation, western oppression of Muslims and the list goes on, but they seem to justify these kinds of killings even though this declared Jihad is killing people indiscriminately. As long as they are able to kill some westerners; military or civilians, dose not matter how many Muslims get killed in the process. I must emphasize here that I do not condone killings of civilians regardless of their race, background or their affiliation to any military establishment.
We have to be frank and admit that there is a serious flaw in the Sunni branch of Islam in advocating hate and distorted definition of Jihad. Lets take Iraq for example, we find Sunni extremists have launched their attack on the shi’a Muslims for about three years and Shi’as has exercised fairly good level of restraint.
Sunni extremists have killed nearly 300,000 of Shi’a Muslims on the hands of the mass murderer “Al-Zarqawi” under the direct command of “Osama bin Abu Sufyan-Bi Ladin” But unfortunately some “week in faith” of the Shi’a followers have lost their restraint and began to commit murders against some innocent Sunni Muslims in revenge, despite the grand spiritual Shi’a leader Ali Sistani clear religious decree to prohibit any form of revenge against Sunnis. On the other hand we have seen several Sunni Muslim scholars, in response to Shi’a revenge against Sunnis, to call upon all the Sunni followers to counter attack against the Shi’a. It seems the majority of victims in Iraq are Shi’a, and according to the Iraqi president Mr. Jalal Talbani, Sunni Muslim, who stated that 70% of Iraqi’s victims are Shi’a.
Sunnis must take this problem very seriously and try to reflect upon their teachings. If you look at the Shi’a in general, we find the problem of terrorism not as prominent as it is in the Sunni branch of Islam. The reason for this, I believe is due to influence of the Ahlul-Bait’s true teachings which is embraced by Shi’as and this philosophy teaches peace and tolerance. Perhaps Sunnis may consider looking into Ahlul-Bait’s philosophy in addition to their philosophy.
Sunnis must ask themselves why is it that their scholars do not make attempts in making the philosophy of Ahlul-Bait as part of their common knowledge. Here I am talking about the Holy Prophet’s household whom are for all Muslims and not exclusive for Shi’as, where Shi’as seems to have claimed those great Muslim leaders; beacons of lights as were declared by the Holy prophet Mohammad.
Sunnis have developed an acute complex towards Ahlul-Bait. They think that adopting Ahlul-Bait philosophy should mean embracing Shi’ism. I personally draw a line between Shi’sm and Ahlul-Bait, for I do not believe that shi’as are following Ahlul-Bait true teachings. For example, Ahlul-Bait never cursed the “Sahaba-companions” but Shi’as do. Ahlul-Bait never called for the formation of shi’a school of thought, but Shi’as did. Ahlul-Bait did not encouraged Muslims to engage in the dispute of leadership of Ali or Umar but shi’a did. Ahlul-Bait never added the statement “Ali Walyul Allah” to the “Azan-the call to prayers” but shi’a did. Ahlul-Bait never beat their chest and backs mercilessly but Sh’ias did. Ahlul-Bait never stricken their heads with swords but Sh’ias did. Therefore such behaviors of Shi’as have intimidated Sunni followers which made Sunnis to abandon Ahlul-Bait teachings and made them unaware of the conspiracy against Ahlul-Bait committed by the early Muslim empire Rulers.
In addition, we can see that whatever terrorism committed by some Shi’a may not target civilians for it is not sanctioned nor permitted by Shi’a scholars. Shi’a scholars seem to be very cautious in involving civilians in their struggle against oppression, although there are some shi’a scholars may permit some terrorism but they represent very small minority and mainly because it is provoked by Sunni extremist attacks.
If we compare Shi’a extremist attacks to that of the Sunni branch of Islam you will see a great difference. You can see that the entire Shi’as school of thought do not sanction suicide bombing under no circumstances nor involving civilians in their struggle. On the other hand you will see that a lot of Sunni Muslims condone terrorist activities under many pretexts, such number is sufficient to make this terrorist behavior very prominent in the world and enough to disrupt life and progress. Take for example, all the killings which have been committed in New York, London, Afghanistan, Iraq, Egypt, Morocco, Algeria, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Sudan, Kenya, Madrid, Turkey, Yemen and etc.., all of which have been committed by Sunni Muslim extremists. And it is important to remember that no shi’a have participated in any of those murders.
I truly think that Sunni Muslims must make sincere efforts to look at the real causes of such hateful philosophy towards life. And they should ask themselves as to why Shi’as does not seem to have such dangerous disease of terrorism in their philosophy, in comparison.
It is true that Shi’as are busy with the issue of leadership of Imam Ali and his family, but they seem to be influenced by the philosophy of Ahlul-Bait of tolerance and patience. This characteristic of the Shi’a teachings is probably the main noble principle that Shi’as ought to be proud of.
I am not suggesting here that the philosophy of the “Sahabah” teaches terrorism, absolutely not, but I believe that many traditions which have been attributed to them were fabricated and taken by their followers as authentic. Sunnis considers the collections of hadeeths are to be authentic and has the same status of the Quran in terms of authenticity. This is I believe is the major problem in the Sunni philosophy. Nothing should be as authentic as the Quran and everything else should be measured by the Quran.
Frankly speaking, if Umar were alive today he would definitely command his Muslim army with the advice of Imam Ali, to fight those who are committing mass murders in their names. In Iraq we have heard the formation of several armed militia groups which carry the name of Islam’s great Muslim leaders, such as:
“Umar’s brigade” “Muhammad’s Army” “Islamic Jihad” “Ansaru Al-Sunna-The helpers of Sunna” “Mehdi’s Army” “Zul-Fiqar Army”

There are a lot more extremist groups in the Muslim world today. What makes the situation worse is when we hear reports from Iraq that these groups are often in power struggle. We heard that “Muhammad’s Army” was fighting with “Umar’s brigade” and “Mehdi’s Army” with “Zul-Fiqar’s Army” Such situation is truly miserable and shameful. I do not know what our future generations will say about this. Will they be proud of the mass murders of New York, Iraq, Afghanistan, etc.. It is for them to judge.

We need the return of Umar and Ali to save Islam from those rodents and Muslim criminals who are attacking all symbols of life, schools, places of worship, market places, funerals, wedding parties, workers gatherings, police stations, libraries, restaurants, and etc… all in the name of Islam, in the name of Ali, Umar, Abu Bakr, and other great Muslim personalities.

May Allah guide us all?


10 thoughts on “Ali and Umar are what Muslims need today”



  2. Hi really nice blog and i just got time to read only 2 topics but they were really nice inshallah i will read all but

    about this topic im not totaly agree with u about the sunni are who make more problems in islamic world for me we cant give name of even Muslims to any one who kill ppl with name of Islam so no need to call them Suni or Shai and there is no teach for such acts in any groups or believes.


  3. Assalamualikum Mehr

    Thank you for your visit and interest in my blog.

    I agree with you that those Muslims who are committing mischief in the name of Islam do not represent the teachings of Islam and do not reflect the vision of the honorable companions, but I believe that the main reason for the emergence of these Muslim criminal elements are due to the corrupted Sunni Muslim teachings which is inherited from our deviated Muslim empires throughout history; such as the Umayides and abbasyied and others. It is time to be courageous to speak out about such realities. Just look at the facts on the grounds and you shall see unfortunately all of the modern terrorist activities emerges from the Sunni Muslim school of thought whether they alqaeda, salafies, wahabies all of which are Sunni Muslims. Hence there is something fundamentally wrong with Sunni interpretations of Quran and Sunna. Please refer to my other posts for more details. My love and respect to all of the good Sunni Muslims who reject this perverted version of Islam which seem to represent the Sunna of Muawiya bin abi Sufyan and dose not in any way represent the great companions of the prophet teachings; Umer bin alkhatab, abu baker…..

    Thank you for your objective input.




  4. In my opinion the main dispute b/w the ideology of sunni muslims and shia muslims is the teaching of ahl -e-bait and brother as we all are muslims we should not indicate any one as you mention in the article that shia muslims are doing thing that are not the teaching of ahl-e-bait ( said they says ali un wali ullah in azan) beacuse when say thing many thing will be consider on your site (eg.travi which is not the way of our prophet did at all is only odered by hazrat umer which shia does not agree with other one is the way of tallaq and many others) but the true thing is that we should find thing that are some and important to some the problems that are facing by ummah and in this context i agree with you that the only true solution is to follow the only true path of Muhammad(pbuh) and Ale – Muhammad (as).


  5. Dear Syed atif shahrayar

    The reason I have alluded to some of the bad practices of the Shi’a Muslims such as the addition of the Azan, is out of love and concern for the integrity of of our Muslim unity. These practices are the main obstacles in the face of Muslim unity. For that reason we must identify the real causes of disunity. Sh’ia Muslims has a lot to offer should they address and acknowledge the main reasons of disunity. Are Shi’a Muslims ready to abandon the addition of their azan for the sake of Muslim unity just as Imam Ali alaihiasslam did with his rights to the leadership where he clearly advanced the Muslim interests over his rights to leadership.

    I thank you for your respectful way of dialogue. God bless you.



  6. Dear Katib,

    “The Ja’fari school of thought, which is also known as “al-Shia al- Imamiyyah al-Ithna Ashariyyah” (i.e., The Twelver Imami Shi’ites) is a school of thought that is religiously correct to follow in worship as are other Sunni schools of thought.”

    renowned Sunni scholar Shaikh Mahmood Shaltoot. Al-Azhar University

    you may also verify this fatwa from internet and other sources.

    With Ref. to above Fatwa from renowned and biggest sunni Islamic University The fique Ja’fari is correct to follow ,even for sunni muslims and the reason being that in Shia fique obligatory thing are still obligatory. (as for Azan in shia muslim,Reciting Ali un Wali ulla is not obligatory)and it also not conflict with quran and Hadis, that is why it is not any thing create disunity in muslims. The reason I point out the ruling of “Talaq”, “Divorce” in Hanafi School of thought is that,it conflict with quran and that makes the real disunity to the ummah.

    Therefore we should address those issues that are going against Quran (the Real and only source of unity amongst Muslims)

    As I follow the ruling given by Ayatullah sistani ( and Ayatullah Kamenei ( )
    and I have not find any thing against Quran in there rulings but I still say that even if you point any thing against Quran in there runing Please refer to me and inshallah you will not find me to follow then after words , I think this spirit (to take quran as the reliable source and Those hadis that are acceptable in light of holy book ,will Inshallah unit Ummah

    please forgive me if any thing of mine heart you

    Syed Atif Shaharyar


  7. Wa’alikum Assalam Br Syed Atif Shaharyar

    Yes I am very much aware of this fatwa of the renowned Sunni scholar Shaikh Mahmood Shaltoot, Al-Azhar University. And it is a good thing towards the path of unity. But please allow me to bring your attention to one important fact and that is the “al-Shia al- Imamiyyah al-Ithna Ashari school of thought, is a legitimate Muslim sect to be followed, in their own rights and they do not need to be legitimized by the Sunni religious authorities. No one has assigned al Azhar University or any Sunni religious authority to have the supreme authority over Muslims in determining the legitimacy of other school of thoughts.
    You said: “(as for Azan in shia muslim, Reciting Ali un Wali ulla is not obligatory)and it also not conflict with quran and Hadis, that is why it is not any thing create disunity in muslims.”
    Please know that the addition of the Azan is not part of the teachings of Imam Jafar Al-Sadiq. This was adopted at later time for political reasons, during the Safawid Persain Empire according to Shi’a history, to assert their loyalty to Imam Ali. Then afterward this has become common among Shi’a followers out of sincere love to him. The Shi’a faqhis-Jurists, dealt with this issue in their books only for the purpose of clarification and to alert their followers that this addition is not originally part of the early version of the Azan. But unfortunately this practice was exploited and used against the Shi’as, by the enemies of Imam Ali and hence is considered an innovation. Then the majority of Sunni Muslims were fooled by this propaganda. Consequently, it has become a real challenge to the hopes of Muslim unity. Now it is fair to say that if Shi’as considers the addition of Azan as non obligatory thing and they are aware of its potential damage to the prospect of Muslim unity, then would it not be a worthwhile cause to abandon such practice for the sake of Muslim unity. And please know that even if the Azan addition does not pose any conflict to Quran and Sunna, as you say, and I agree with you, and hence it is religiously permissible but know that not every permissible thing is recommended to adopt; such as the divorce issue is permissible in the Quran but we know that the prophet has discouraged Muslims from doing it and he declared it to be the most hated thing to do in the sight of Allah, because of its terrible social consequences. This addition of Azan is not a jurisprudent matter or an interpretation of Quran and it is seen by all Sunni Muslims as a real obstacle in the face of Muslim unity.
    You said: “The reason I point out the ruling of “Talaq”, “Divorce” in Hanafi School of thought is that, it conflict with Quran and that makes the real disunity to the ummah.”
    This issue is related to jurisprudent matter and interpretation strictly applicable to those who follow the Hanafi school of thought. And I do not think it pose a real challenge to unity because it is not obligatory upon all schools. This issue does not have similar religious implications as the issue of Azan because the Azan was uttered by Muslims for many centuries in a format known to all with slight variations but none of these variations has the phrase “Ali waliuallah”; only added later as I mentioned above.
    And please know that Muslim unity does not require Muslims to abandon their school of thoughts and join one only. Muslim unity does not necessarily mean unity of jurisprudent matters rather it is unity of the common interests of Muslims. Sunnis and Shi’a could maintain their membership to their own school and get united in their common goals, just as Imam Ali did. And to do that is first to identify all the obstacles which stands in its way and then work towards common goals.

    Please know that none of what you said in your comment was offensive rather it was objective and free spirited discussion.

    Thank you and May God Bless you



  8. Dear atif sheryar,

    You are right in your way that if muslims wants to be united then it is very important to have some comman things like for their spirituality they worship same god , they believe in same prophet but dispute starts from when they forgot that both imam abu hanifa and imam jaffar use to say that if you find any thing of mine confilicting quran then not follow it. thats where if Talaq goes against quran in Hanafiz then not follow their rulings. that the only practicle way for unity else of saying shias to abandon ali wali allah from azan or sunni to adandon taravis
    will have no effect b/c it is part of history.
    going against or for history in my view is easy but against quran it makes difference.

    any how I dont know much abt shia islam but this time your case was right.
    please tell me one thing atif, that why shia use to write (A.S) with Ahal e bait e athar not -Rasiallah (RA).

    and katib please tell me that who is Imam Ali ,is he the same Hazrat ali (RA) or other which you mensioned in your post,if same then was he Imam or khalifa if never seen Imam with his name.

    Thanks Brothers.

    Ayesha Omar


  9. Assaalmu alaikum Ayesha Omar

    As for your question “who is Imam Ali ,is he the same Hazrat ali (RA) or other which you mentioned in your post”; Yes he is the same person. He commonly known as “Imam Ali” among the Arabs” and perhaps he is also known as “Hazrat Ali” among the non Arabs Muslims.

    As for your question “was he Imam or khalifa if never seen Imam with his name”; he is an Imam by prophetic nomination and Khalifa of Muslims by people’s nomination. He is an Imam in a sense that he has inherited the prophet’s spiritual knowledge. And he is a Khalifa in a sense that he succeeded the prophet’s political role to lead the Muslim’s affairs.

    Thank you for your input.



  10. Dear sister Ayesha Omar,

    Using Alhis Salam i.e (A.S) with Ahl e Bait (A.S) is obligatory because we use to say Salam on Muhammad and Alhe Muhammad (PBUH), this is the same thing.
    on the other hand saing Rasi Allah with Ahle bait (A.S) is some thing make no meaning b/c we says this with those even who are not included in Dorood or Salam.

    And this is rather more political dispute b/w Shia and sunni’s Ulma then any other.
    one reason being that if we say that Ahe e bait (a.s) are purified by allah (Quran) and even Hazrat Esah (A.S) will stand behind Imam Mehdi (A.S) during Namaz as (in common Hadis) No body can give the answer that then why in history many personalities were standing in front of Ahl e Bait on political grounds and conducting the prayers Immediately after prophet (PBUH).

    Therefore it happed that people use to hide the real status of Ahl e bait (A.S) even not using Ala is salam with them so that they would not be distinguished from other personalities of history.
    As you were amazed reading (A.S) with imam Ali.

    And one thing to you to Katib that I dont thing that Prophet ever said that Ali only inherited the spiritual knowledge of mine rather use to say that
    “Mun kuntu moula Fa haza Ali un moula”
    here clearly mentioned that ali (A.S) is nominated leader of muslims for every mean , for Kilafat and Imamat and this is very important that if all muslims want to unit that we should put our own political decision at side as compare to oders of our holy prophet(PBUH).

    Thank you and May God Bless you.

    Syed Atif Shaharyar


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: