DO SHIITES CONDONE HOMOSEXUALITY?
The video which I have pasted above shows a Deobandi scholar from Pakistan, Ilyas Ghumman, who has ranted on about the "filth" of the Shiite ideology in one of his bayans. He claims that Shiites believe in homosexuality, permit men to engage in sexual activity with men and even write about that kind of stuff in their books.
 |
| Ilyas Ghumman (Click on the picture for his biography) |
One would assume that Ghuman will quote some reports from a Shiite hadith encyclopedia or mention any stuff from a Shiite fiqh book. But Ghumman brings Rijal al-Kashshi, a book containing names and ranks of different hadith-narrators, and produce the name of one particularly-interesting narrator: Muhammad ibn Nusayr al-Numayri.
Ghumman then reads the part of Rijal al-Kashshi regarding the homosexual tendencies of Ibn Nusayr who didn't just use to engage in such unnatural activities bu also was an avid supporter of gay relationships. Surprisingly enough, the audience shares the anti-Shiite emotions Ghumman is trying to transfer into them and, instead of objecting on the apparent misuse of a Shiite quotation against the entire Imamiyah school, people seem to agree with the mullah.
It is heart-wrenching to see people easily getting tricked by such remarks against a certain sect within Islam the adherents of which are spread throughout the country (Just go into a Shiite mosque and ask their leader; he won't do taqiyah so abruptly!). It is more upsetting to see a man of the stature of Ilyas Ghumman trying to pass off the individual beliefs of a single person as the dogma of one of the most ancient and the most respectful Islamic schools. How can the beliefs of a single person (who's only a hadith-narrator, not even a Shiite jurist) affect his other co-religionists and succeed in portraying them all as homosexuals? If you think Ghumman was wrong then you don't need to read this blog any further. You're a sensible man, congrats! If you still agree with Ghumman then the rest of this blog is written for you.
Ibn Nusayr was indeed a Shiite hadith-narrator and his homosexual tendencies are the part of the written Shiite history. He was also a student of some of our infallible Imams. But Ghumman's accusations are based on falsehood because of two simple and rational reasons:
(1) Ibn Nusayr was a deviant Shiite. Twelver Shiite Muslims believe that, after the death of Hasan al-'Askari, his infant al-Mahdi was our twelfth and final Imam. Al-Mahdi was hidden from public contact and was accessible only through his four deputies during his Minor Occultation. Afterwards, he entered his Major Occultation and Shiites were told against believing anyone who claimed intimate contact with al-Mahdi.
Ibn Nusayr claimed to be al-Mahdi's deputy and al-Mahdi's second deputy, Abu J'afar Muhammad ibn Uthman al-'Asadi, excommunicated him. Thereby, the actions and sayings of Ibn Nusayr are not the responsibility of Twelver Shiite Muslims. Ibn Nusayr has his own personal school of followers called Nusayris. You can find many of them in Syria. They will defend the actions of their master.
(2) There are thousands of hadith-narrators in the rijal books of both Sunni and Shiite Muslims. If any of them had deviant beliefs (and many did), you can't even blame the author of that book, lest the adherents of an entire sect of Islam, of being astray. It's just stupid! Sunni rijal books are filled with Rafidi, Khariji, Marji'i, Qadri and other deviant hadith-narrators. You don't believe me? Just read Lisan al-Mizan, Taqrib al-Tahdhib, al-Thuqat, Siyar alam al-Nubala, Tahdhib al-Tahdhib and other major albums and you'll find several such individuals who were not just weakened but outright rejected for their non-Sunni doctrines. You still have doubts? Well, Imran ibn Hittan was a narrator of Sahih al-Bukhari. He was a Kharijite who wrote a poem appreciating Abd al-Rahman ibn Muljim, the assassin of Ali ibn Abi Talib. Does it mean all Sunni Muslims are nawasib? Go figure.
Ghumman then reads the part of Rijal al-Kashshi regarding the homosexual tendencies of Ibn Nusayr who didn't just use to engage in such unnatural activities bu also was an avid supporter of gay relationships. Surprisingly enough, the audience shares the anti-Shiite emotions Ghumman is trying to transfer into them and, instead of objecting on the apparent misuse of a Shiite quotation against the entire Imamiyah school, people seem to agree with the mullah.
It is heart-wrenching to see people easily getting tricked by such remarks against a certain sect within Islam the adherents of which are spread throughout the country (Just go into a Shiite mosque and ask their leader; he won't do taqiyah so abruptly!). It is more upsetting to see a man of the stature of Ilyas Ghumman trying to pass off the individual beliefs of a single person as the dogma of one of the most ancient and the most respectful Islamic schools. How can the beliefs of a single person (who's only a hadith-narrator, not even a Shiite jurist) affect his other co-religionists and succeed in portraying them all as homosexuals? If you think Ghumman was wrong then you don't need to read this blog any further. You're a sensible man, congrats! If you still agree with Ghumman then the rest of this blog is written for you.
Ibn Nusayr was indeed a Shiite hadith-narrator and his homosexual tendencies are the part of the written Shiite history. He was also a student of some of our infallible Imams. But Ghumman's accusations are based on falsehood because of two simple and rational reasons:
(1) Ibn Nusayr was a deviant Shiite. Twelver Shiite Muslims believe that, after the death of Hasan al-'Askari, his infant al-Mahdi was our twelfth and final Imam. Al-Mahdi was hidden from public contact and was accessible only through his four deputies during his Minor Occultation. Afterwards, he entered his Major Occultation and Shiites were told against believing anyone who claimed intimate contact with al-Mahdi.
Ibn Nusayr claimed to be al-Mahdi's deputy and al-Mahdi's second deputy, Abu J'afar Muhammad ibn Uthman al-'Asadi, excommunicated him. Thereby, the actions and sayings of Ibn Nusayr are not the responsibility of Twelver Shiite Muslims. Ibn Nusayr has his own personal school of followers called Nusayris. You can find many of them in Syria. They will defend the actions of their master.
(2) There are thousands of hadith-narrators in the rijal books of both Sunni and Shiite Muslims. If any of them had deviant beliefs (and many did), you can't even blame the author of that book, lest the adherents of an entire sect of Islam, of being astray. It's just stupid! Sunni rijal books are filled with Rafidi, Khariji, Marji'i, Qadri and other deviant hadith-narrators. You don't believe me? Just read Lisan al-Mizan, Taqrib al-Tahdhib, al-Thuqat, Siyar alam al-Nubala, Tahdhib al-Tahdhib and other major albums and you'll find several such individuals who were not just weakened but outright rejected for their non-Sunni doctrines. You still have doubts? Well, Imran ibn Hittan was a narrator of Sahih al-Bukhari. He was a Kharijite who wrote a poem appreciating Abd al-Rahman ibn Muljim, the assassin of Ali ibn Abi Talib. Does it mean all Sunni Muslims are nawasib? Go figure.
The truth about Ibn Nusayr:
“A group from amongst those that believed in the Imamate of Muhammad bin Ali became misguided and claimed that Muhammad bin Nusair al-Numairi was a prophet and that he (Ibn Nusair) declared himself to be a Prophet that was sent by Abu al-Hassan al-Askari (as), he used to declare a belief in the transmigration of souls and held exaggerated beliefs for Abi al-Hassan and claimed that he was God and he legalized incest and legalized sodomy for men”
Furthermore: If we're talking about Shiite narrators having gay tendencies, what about Sunni narrators having mut'ah tendencies? Just search for Ibn Jurayj. Moreover, S'aduddin Taftazani was a major Sunni jurist. He believed that Caliph Ali was better than Caliph Uthman. Now, should all Sunnis be forced to agree with Taftazani? There were some Sunni scholars who claimed that Husayn was executed for being a rebel "by the sword of his grandfather (i.e. Prophet Muhammad - peace and blessings be upon him)". Does it mean we can call all Sunni Muslims supporters of the khilafah of Yazid? I will do justice and say that Sunni Muslims are innocent of nasb and rafd; I believe that Sunni Muslims sincerely appreciate the Ahlul-bayt - peace and blessings be upon them - and I will not judge them according to what a few individuals say.
Ibn Kathir writes:
Homosexuality has spread amongst the majority of kings, commanders, merchants, folks, clerks, clerics (Fuqaha), judges etc. except those who have been protected by Allah (swt), verily homosexuality contains countless defects, which is why the punishment varies for homosexuals, verily to kill a homosexual is better than allowing him to partake in it, because there is no likelihood of rehabilitation, unless Allah (swt)’s desires that he be cleansed of it, a man should therefore preserve his son during his childhood and adulthood, and he should not let him communicate with these cursed people who have been cursed by Allah’s apostle.
To summarize this entire debate, Sunni and Shiite Muslims areh brethren in faith. They share most doctrines between them. They basically follow the same shari'ah, we Shiites and the Four Schools of Sunni Islam. Scholars must research and do their homework before speaking ill or falsely accusing an Islamic sect of condoning un-Islamic activities. Shiites certainly do not condone homosexuality.
Comments
Post a Comment
Please write down your views about my blog here in the comment section...