Horrific scenes in Karachi
Two bombs were detonated within an hour of each other in Karachi, targetting the Shia.
A motorcycle fitted with explosives rammed into a bus carrying Shias near the Nursery bridge in Karachi, killing 12 people and wounding close to 50. The injured were taken to Jinnah Hospital. About an hour later another explosion outside the ward of the Hospital was detonated.
Shia-hatred is a mainstay of hardline Wahhabi-inspired ideology as promulgated by those darlings of the Islam Channel, Yasir Qadhi and Anwar al-Awlaki. Advocates of this line of takfiri thinking maintain the Shia are heterodox therefore lesser Muslims or, worse, not Muslim at all and even just simply kfar (“unbelievers”). They (wrongly) claim the doctrine of takkiyyah or dissimulation is embedded into Shia liturgy, they regard the practice of mutah to be degenerate and claim their texts are heretical.
It is very depressing to see sectarian hatred of this kind spilling across Pakistan. The Shia-Sunni sectarian hatred is deep-rooted and is old as Islam itself. For once, this violence cannot be blamed on the presence of the US Military or civilian deaths caused by unmanned US Air Force drones in the NWFP. The most depressing thought of all is that no solution for containing sectarian terrorist attacks on civilians is being put forward by the stakeholders. The only certainty is that US Military presence in Pakistan in peace-keeping mode is the only containment option we have.
Unfortunately here in Britain, Shia-hatred and Saudi-inspired ideologies continue to be peddled in mosques and on, particularly those funded by Saudi Arabia and the Persian Gulf states.
4 Comments
The title of this piece needs changing.
This should read: Sunni Islamism’s hatred of Shi’a…
Islamism is also a Shi’a phenomenon; and something that non-Khomeinist Twelvers, Ismai’ili and other Shi’a have been struggling against – usually quite forgotten – for years.
Edited the title and some of the post too, AF.
if u dont hav eemaan than dont blame Ahl.e.Eemaan(wahhaabees)4 havin hatred for heretics & deviant shias.
no doubt v hate those who attribute the quality of mistake to All-Mighty Allaah,who counter finality of Prophethood by Imaamat,who abuse the Beloved Mothers of the believrs;one of Ahl.e.Bait,who dont respct honourable Sahaaabah but at the same tym dont kill dm by bombings!
Not to involve myself too much with someone who thinks it is legitimate to *hate* people who disagree with his own views, but the previous poster has produced such garbled nonsense that it cannot bear to be ignored:
The assertion that the Shi’a attribute the “quality of mistake” to Allah is a garbled and half-understood attempt to make the sort of accusations made against intellectual strands in Islamic thought and theology made centuries ago – it actually revolves around the controversy concerning the eternity (or otherwise) of the Qur’an – and, in particular, the Shi’a claim that the Qur’an as collated by ‘Ali was discarded in favour of one collated by those surrounding his competitor, ‘Uthman. The discoveries of otherwise collated Qur’an examples in Sana’a of course suggest that bthe Shi’a might have some sort of point. Whatever the case, the actual position is not that the Qur’an as it stands is mistaken, nor that it differs radically from ‘Ali’s Qur’an, nor – especially – that it contains mistakes made by Allah. Of course, if you believe the Qur’an is uncreated (as the Wahhabi insist), then any differences between Qur’an copies would be tantamount to God changing His mind… well, perhaps He did. He has been known too before: this need not imply He was previously mistaken, incidentally.
The Shi’a tenet of Imamate is *not* denial of the finality of the prophethood of Muhammad, as the last poster falsely claims. The Shi’a Imams are not regarded as subsequent prophets by Shi’a – consequently the Shi’a cannot be accused of breaching the Quranic injunction that Muhammad is the Seal of the Prophets, the final prophet. Shi’a Imams are regarded as being the sole legitimate leaders of the Muslim community *after* the death of the Prophet – this is, quite clearly, a distinct issue (although just as contentious).
There is considerable criticism amongst Shi’a for the conduct of a number of the original followers of the Prophet subsequent to his death. In particular, Aisha’s encouragement and support for rebellion against ‘Ali, her treatment of Fatima. As vitally, there is open rejection of the appalling conduct of the early Ummayid caliphate – something that eventually led to not only the attempted liquidation of the Ahl ul-Bayt as descended through Fatima and ‘Ali, but also to the revival of pre-Islamic blood feuds between members of the early Muslim community.
It is heartening to learn that the Shi’a should not be killed by bombings – especially from one so witless as to, nonetheless, council hatred against “heretics and deviants”. The fact the the author of this piece of medievalist intolerance cannot make the connection between sectarian “hatred” and terrorism is a measure of his witlessness, however; and calls into question the degree to which he really objects to the murder of those with whom he disagrees.