u/DANTE_HNX

الي ما يعرف انا حاطه في القدر مال القلاية الهوائية "خزنة اخفاء وتهريب الأكلات في البيت"، سعتها 5لتر، لذا اتوقع كم انا حطيت😅

Peace, mercy, and blessings of God be upon you, and peace be upon Muhammad and his pure, immaculate family. Greetings, brothers. Today, I want to warn you about a phenomenon that has become widespread these days: the rise of lying sheikhs. This particular sheikh is a liar and is not one of us. You might say to me, "Woe to you! How can you call His Eminence—his exalted self—a liar? He has brought down a new religion from the heavens, one upon which neither the ancients nor those who came after have agreed; he is a sent prophet!" No, my dear friend; this person propagates disastrous ideas and has deceived many young people. I, too, was on the verge of being deceived and believing him, but—thank God—I was saved.

I received reports regarding the annual Herzliya Conference on Israeli National Security—specifically the 13th session, held from March 11 to 14, 2013, under the theme "A Time for New National and Regional Agendas." It was noted that the conference discussed—and its recommendations included—the need to fuel and intensify the Sunni-Shiite conflict in the region. The conference viewed this schism as a means to drain Israel's adversaries and embroil them in internal wars, thereby alleviating the security burden on Israel itself. That individual, my friend, is undoubtedly one of their agents. His dishonesty was exposed; he used to claim to be a turbaned cleric from a religious seminary, yet truly devout believers and trustworthy religious scholars revealed that he possesses no actual knowledge. He was deceiving young people and leading them down a path of ruin and the escalation of sectarian strife.

Among his statements is the claim that the Qur’an has been altered—a view not unanimously held by all Shias. He denies divine attributes belonging to God and ascribes them instead to the Prophet’s Household (Ahl al-Bayt), which we consider clear disbelief. He also declared that anyone who invokes God’s pleasure upon Aisha, Umar, Abu Bakr, and Hafsa is an unbeliever—a position not unanimously agreed upon by Shias. Furthermore, he accused Aisha of adultery based on conjecture derived from the books of Sunni opponents, and he reviled and denied the truthfulness of the prophets revered by Sunnis. I recall an incident where a Sunni man asked him, "Have you seen the Messenger?" and he responded by reviling the Messenger. While it is true that Sunnis have—in his view—distorted the image of the Prophet, there is only one Prophet Muhammad; how, then, could he revile him? He also declares as unbelievers both Sunnis and Shias who do not accept his specific creed.

There is a clip of his in which he claims that Imam Ali is the Creator of the heavens, that he distributes provisions, and that he creates and provides sustenance—having been granted this authority. While we believe the Imam provides sustenance by God’s leave—just as Jesus did—this speaker asserts that the Imam *is* the one who provides. This has caused problems for the Shia, effectively provoking Sunnis by implying, "Oh Sunnis, we are disbelievers; go ahead and do your duty [against us]." Furthermore, he stated that "to say the Ahl al-Bayt are not the Essence of God is disbelief." By "Essence of God," he means God Himself—equating them with God—which is a clear form of disbelief; no one has ever agreed with or stated this, save for him and his followers.

He goes so far as to say, "If I am an infidel, then I prostrate before the Family of Muhammad—they are our gods." We have a narration stating that a man once came to Imam Ali and told him there was a group that sanctified and worshipped him. The Imam replied—referring to his own body, entrails, flesh, and blood—that he was innocent of them, that God disavowed them, and that they were a people of disbelief. This individual is a prime example of that. He also boasts about Israel and its F-16 jets that bomb innocent people; he even gloated when they struck the Popular Mobilization Forces in Iraq. There is much more to be said, but this is just a sample of his rhetoric. My dear friend, do not place your trust in religious figures unless they are reliable, known for their truthfulness, and recognized by Shiite religious seminaries as legitimate clerics; only then are they worthy of being listened to. Thank you, and may God guide us all. Peace, mercy, and blessings of God be upon you.

This poem was written in response to a Kuwaiti song that included lines such as, "I am a Sunni Muslim; I am no Iranian lackey." Athar Allah responded with this piece; here are the lyrics:

I am a Shia Muslim, not the tail of the Afghani

I am a Shia Muslim, not the tail of the Afghani

The Umayyads, their origin is impure, their path established filth, and praising them

Your origin is ruined, your history is dirty, you clueless head

Your ancestors, O heedless one, where is the pride, while your commander fled at Khaybar?

Who was by the side of Haidar (Ali)? All of them

Your companions fled, and in the art of escaping, they registered history

The history of real men, O Nasibi (anti-Shia), how would you know it?

When all the books of your sheikhs are fabricated

The history of real men, O Nasibi, how would you know it?

When all the books of your sheikhs are fabricated

I am a Shia Muslim, not the tail of the Afghani

I am a Shia Muslim, not the tail of the Afghani

The tone of al-Bukhari, O heedless one, wrote in the mud

Hiding the truth from your mind so it turns to wood

The tone of al-Bukhari, O heedless one, wrote in the mud

Hiding the truth from your mind so it turns to wood

I am a Shia Muslim, not the tail of the Afghani

I am a Shia Muslim, not the tail of the Afghani

In battles, how much did Umar flee?

Count for me how many mountains he climbed, and tell me how many lions he killed?

Al-Hussein in your Battle of al-Taff made him repeat the apostasy

Ignorance has filled your mind, you challenge with a mute conversation

Who among the Shia is highly revered and wept for?

Who is the one who opened Basra, while your mother on the camel is deemed ungrateful?

A Muslim claims monotheism yet worships an absurdity

His god is fixed like a ruler

A Muslim claims monotheism yet worships an absurdity

Fixed like a ruler

I am a Shia Muslim, not the tail of the Afghani

I am a Shia Muslim, not the tail of the Afghani

The tone of al-Bukhari, O heedless one, wrote in the mud, hiding the truth

From your mind so it turns to wood

The tone of al-Bukhari, O heedless one, wrote in the mud

Hiding the truth from your mind so it turns to wood.

اخوان، هم انتو من يطلع لكم اكل طيب و مشهي جدا بالمقاطع او المنشورات بس بعدين تتذكرون انتم عايشين بالفغر من حيث الأموال و ما تعرفون من وين تجيبو مثله و غالبا الاهل راح يضحكو عليكم اذا جبتو مكوناته بطريقة ما، لو هذا بس آني؟😅

سلام عليكم، قبل فترة كنت اقلب في مجتمعات رياضية اشوف شنو الجديد، و مباشرة شفت هذي الصورة لمنشور يقول انه يشرب هذا العدد كل يوم و يفيده، و صورة ثانية لجسمة ما حطيتها لانه مقرف، عموما يقول ان هذي تساعده انه يتمرن و يصير قوي، و مو بس هو لا، صرت اشوف كثير ناس تسوي نفس الشي تقريبا، دون علم الي يسووه غلط و قد يسبب حالات خطرة تعيق التمارين او تخليك بشكل انثوي.

هذي المشروبات اذا استمر كل يوم بشربها و بكميات عالية تسبب تثدي و خلل في افراز هرمون التستوستيرون مما يئدي غالبا الى نعومة البشرة او تقليل شعر الجسم او نعومة الصوت، و ايضا اجهاد القلب و الاوعية الدموية و التوتر المستمر، اذا تسئل اذا هو هيج جا ليش ما يمنعوه؟ السبب الي هو يسبب هذي الأعراض هي السكر، المشروب فيه سكر كلش كثير يسبب سمنة و تراكم الدهون مما يئدي الى الأعراض الي ذكرتها، اما بخصوص البشرة الناعمة و نعومة الصوت فهي غالبا بسبب تراكم دهون و بسبب شربه و النوم مباشرة او تتمرن قليل و لم ينتهي مفعوله فتنام او تستريح، صح انا اشرب منه بس تقريبا اشرب منه كل ثلاث اشهر او كل خمس اشهر مرة وحدة مو اكثر من مرة، لان يعطي خوش دفعة بس آثاره كارثية اذا كثر، فبدل هذا سوي عصير طبيعي مثلج تستفاد و يعطيك دفعة، بدل اربع قناني من هذا المشروب، و عن تجربة بنضري، كان عندي صديق يشرب منه بكمية كثيرة، بعد فترة صار مثل البنات أجمل من اللبنانيات حتى ما تعرفت عليه، بعدين تركته قلت خاف اصير مثله، فانا كنت اعرف مشروبات الطاقة ما تجعل الشخص يصير مخنث كنت اعتقد يصير له دهون و سمين، شنو سبب انه صار مثل البنات الله اعلم، انت اذا بحثت عن المشروب اذا يسوي شخص مخنث ما راح تطلع، بس الي شفته قدامي التأثير فما صدقت فأنتم تجنباً لهذا لا تشربوه بكثرة، اذا تريد تشرب اشربه مرة بالشهر او كل شهرين مرة

اخذ مني ربع دينار كمبلغ، و نص ساعة حتى كمل😅

Peace, mercy, and blessings of Allah be upon you. May Allah’s peace and blessings be upon our Prophet Muhammad and his entire family. Some time ago, I shared a lesson on religious debate, drawing on material from Sunni texts. Since the topic seemed to interest you, I decided to share another one. Some of you might wonder how I manage this, given the time and effort involved. The answer is that, being Iraqi, I am already familiar with the narrations; the real challenge lies in locating the exact narration. Nevertheless, it is worth it, as what I share can benefit you in the future—whether you find yourselves in a debate or facing provocation—or simply provide you with useful information.

Also, the numbering I am referring to is the numbering I added to the image, not the app's numbering, as the latter sometimes makes mistakes.

The first narration concerns the practice of "breastfeeding an adult male." It recounts that Umm Salama said to Aisha, "A young man whom I would not like to see entering upon me comes to visit you." Aisha replied, "Do you not find a good example in the Messenger of Allah?" She then cited the case of the wife of Abu Hudhayfa: the woman had told the Prophet that Salim—who was by then a grown man—would enter her home, causing Abu Hudhayfa some unease. The Prophet instructed her, "Breastfeed him, and he may then enter upon you." However, Aisha did not view this as a measure restricted to that specific, unique situation; rather, she applied it to any man she wished to admit into her presence. In other narrations—which I have not been able to locate here—it is stated that whenever she wanted to admit a man she favored, she would have her sisters breastfeed him—even if he was a full-grown adult—until he had received five breastfeedings. Yet, the incident involving the wife of Abu Hudhayfa and Salim was an exceptional case, not a general rule; indeed, the other wives of the Prophet disagreed with Aisha’s interpretation and actions, but she remained steadfast in her position.

The second account concerns the dispute between Abu Bakr and Fatimah regarding her inheritance. It states that Fatimah and Al-Abbas went to Abu Bakr seeking their inheritance from the Messenger—specifically, the lands of Fadak and their share from the Battle of Khaybar. Abu Bakr replied that he had heard the Prophet say: "We, the company of prophets, do not leave an inheritance." Fatimah became angry with him, ceased speaking to him, and passed away while still angry with him. So, what is the significance of this? In the Holy Quran, Surah Al-Ahzab (Verse 57), Allah the Almighty says: "Indeed, those who harm Allah and His Messenger—Allah has cursed them in this world and the Hereafter and prepared for them a humiliating punishment." This implies that whoever harms Fatimah harms the Prophet, and whoever harms the Prophet harms Allah; thus, they face punishment in both this world and the Hereafter, as well as a humiliating torment.

Regarding the third narration—which is quite long, so I will clarify who said what to whom—it reads: Yahya ibn Bukayr narrated to us, Al-Layth narrated to us, from ‘Uqayl, from Ibn Shihab; and ‘Abdullah ibn Muhammad narrated to me, ‘Abdur-Razzaq narrated to us, Ma‘mar narrated to us; Al-Zuhri said: ‘Urwah informed me, on the authority of ‘Aishah... The narration continues at length, describing how the Prophet became distressed because the Revelation had ceased to descend upon him—so distressed that, according to what has reached us, he repeatedly contemplated casting himself down from the peaks of towering mountains. In other words, he wanted to commit suicide. What kind of prophet would want to commit suicide? The narrator is ‘Aishah in *Sahih al-Bukhari*, and the hadith is authentic; this is how she used to lie.

The fourth narration states: Ishaq bin Yusuf al-Azraq, Muhammad bin Abdullah al-Ansari, and Hawdhah bin Khalifah informed us, saying: Ibn ‘Awn informed us, on the authority of Muhammad bin Sirin, who said: ‘Umar bin al-Khattab said: "Nothing remains of the affairs of the Pre-Islamic Era (*Jahiliyyah*) in me, except that I do not care whom I marry, nor whom I give my daughters to in marriage." In essence, the claim is that he retained no trace of the *Jahiliyyah* other than an indifference regarding whom he would marry—whether the woman was good or bad—and whom he would give his daughters to—whether the man was a bad person or not. Is it rational to suggest that a person would not care if he married, for instance, an atheist or a Satan worshipper? Or that he would not care to whom he gave his daughters—even if the man were an alcoholic or a murderer? O people of reason, tell me: do *you* also disregard such details? For this is truly bizarre and defies all reason.

The fifth account states that when the Prophet handed the banner to Umar ibn al-Khattab on the day of the Battle of Khaybar, he set out but returned—with him and his companions accusing one another of cowardice; that is, upon his return, they labeled him a coward while he labeled them cowards. It appears he was indeed a coward—who knows? Perhaps his thoughts were on Aisha, and he was planning which mountain they would meet behind 🤭. This sheds light on the one whom people describe as brave; he returned a fearful coward.

The sixth narration states: Bishr ibn Muhammad narrated to us, saying: ‘Abdullah informed us, saying: Ma‘mar and Yunus informed us. Al-Zuhri said: ‘Ubaydullah ibn ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Utbah informed me that ‘A’ishah—the wife of the Prophet—said: "When the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) became critically ill and his pain intensified, he asked his wives for permission to be nursed in my house, and they granted it. He then came out supported by two men—his feet dragging along the ground—[walking] between ‘Abbas and another man." I [the narrator] told Ibn ‘Abbas about this, and he asked: "Do you know who the other man was, whom ‘A’ishah did not name?" I replied: "No." He said: "It was ‘Ali." The implication is that ‘A’ishah, due to her animosity toward ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib, did not mention his name but instead referred to him merely as "another person"—indicating that she harbored hatred toward him, This statement appears in *Sahih al-Bukhari*; in the same collection, it is stated that the Prophet said: "O Ali, none loves you but a Muslim, and none hates you but a hypocrite." So, what is the verdict regarding Aisha here? Is she a hypocrite? Or pure? Or a hypocrite? Or a hypocrite? The answer is: a hypocrite, without a doubt.

Brothers, these statements and narrations are found in *Sahih al-Bukhari* and *Sahih Muslim*—books belonging to the Sunni tradition; we do not face such issues. Thank you for your patience and for reading this. I wish you a happy life. Peace.

اكو ناس تعتمد على أكل الحار حتى ترفع الايض و حتى تضيف نكهة طيبة للأكل، بس للاسف بعض الناس صارو ما يحسون بالحار، فانا سويت هذي الصلصة تفيد وية كلشي

مكوناتها طماطة كاملة مثرومة، خمس سنون ثوم، زيت زيتون بكر ممتاز، شكو صلصة حارة او شطة عدكم منها عادي انا حطيت صلصة توباسكو و صلصة بولداك كاربونارا، اربعه قرون فلفل حار، خل تفاح او خل ابيض، و ماي، و ضربه بالخلاط و بالعافية

هاي سويت صلصة حارة من المكونات البايت بالثلاجة بدل ما اذبه،

المكونات هي بالصور بعد

بس ما اعرف ليش صار سائل كلش يمكن كثرت ماي اكثر من اللازم، حطو انتو شوي، طعمه فيه لجعة حرورة لا باس بها

تفيد للي يريد يحرق سعرات

ملاحظة يا متعصبين:- انا جاي اكل هيج لاني جاي اتمرن، انتو لأنكم ما متعودين على الحار فتموتون مثل الكتاكيت الي تشتريه الضهر يموت العصر، اما معدتي مبرمجة على الحار فما تأثر، لهنا تمام؟

When participating in a debate, you must avoid using offensive language and instead speak with the utmost courtesy; after all, your words reflect your upbringing. Be careful to avoid insults—especially regarding religious matters—and pay close attention to every word your opponent says, as some may try to evade the question. For instance, if you are debating the topic of Aisha, your opponent might attempt to shift the subject to the infallibility of the Imams, resorting to questions and insults. Do not take the bait; instead, insist that they stick to the original topic and hold firm to your question. This puts them in an awkward position. Many good Shia people feel pained when they see someone disparage the Ahl al-Bayt (peace be upon them)—and I used to be one of them. Now, however, I laugh at the contents of their books and the practices they follow—books they do not actually open, but merely boast about. I have brought these images to illustrate what they follow; please hold on tight, because a wave of laughter is coming that might just make you forget your own name.

The first point illustrates the nature of Aisha; they take great pride in her. This narration recounts an incident involving Aisha and Hafsa and how they caused distress to the Prophet. The crux of the story is that a young woman had given the Prophet a flask of honey, which he consumed. The two women decided to falsely claim that he smelled of *maghafir*—a substance resembling mayonnaise, ketchup, or gum but possessing a very foul odor—insisting that he had eaten *maghafir* rather than honey. The narration implies they knew the truth; one instructed the other that if the Prophet claimed it was honey, she should insist it was *maghafir*. The Prophet had stated, "Whoever intentionally lies about me, let him take his seat in Hellfire"—meaning that anyone who lies about him is destined for Hell. Since both women lied, it follows that both are destined for Hell. The second perspective sheds light on the actions of Umar ibn al-Khattab—whom they follow—indicating that the current situation in Palestine stems from his decisions. He brought Jews and Christians to Palestinian lands; if it is claimed that the Prophet ordered him to grant them these specific territories, that is incorrect. The Prophet did not specify any particular land; he merely instructed that they be given land to live on. However, Umar gave them Palestine. Today, the Jewish claim that "this is our land" exists because it was Umar who granted it to them—which explains why we see certain Gulf states cooperating with the "Blue Flag." The third image shows that the Prophet himself stated there were twelve hypocrites among his Companions—eight of whom would not enter Paradise. I therefore wonder: how can those who disagree with us claim to follow *all* the Companions, when the Prophet himself said that a significant number of them were hypocrites? The fourth image depicts the Prophet asking God, "Where are my companions?" God replies, "Do you not know what they did?" There is more to the text—though I did not find it in this specific edition of *Sahih al-Bukhari*—which continues: "They apostatized." God states that they renounced the faith and are thus in the Fire; this, too, clearly illustrates the point I am trying to make. The fifth image is truly laughable—just hold on a moment. They depict God—Blessed and Exalted is He—in the form of a beardless young man. There is even a detailed description of His appearance—though they didn't include it here—describing a beardless youth with eyes, feet, and teeth; one who laughs and descends during the last third of the night riding a donkey. *They* say this, not I. If they claim He laughs, does that mean if I were to tell a joke on the Day of Judgment, He would laugh? God is far greater than such a ridiculous notion. I refrained from citing the actual narration because I did not wish to embarrass them further; I will leave it at this. The sixth instance, brothers—I hardly know how to put it; I feel ashamed before God regarding what they worship. They claim that whenever God sits upon the Throne, a sound is emitted—like the creaking of a saddle on a horse. Laugh at what is written; I have come to thank God that I was not born among them. Finally, there is the depiction of God in anthropomorphic terms—specifically, the claim that God places His foot into Hell. What kind of concept is this? Was the narrator drunk? Is it conceivable that God—Blessed and Exalted be He—would place His foot into Hell? Yet the narration is considered *sahih*—meaning it has a sound chain of transmission and is not flawed. How can they cite such a thing? Is there any rational person who would say this? How can they claim to represent the true religion when their faith asserts that God has a foot which He places into Hell? In short, all these accounts demonstrate that they do not know what their religion actually is; I believe they never even open the book—they buy it and leave it as a decorative item in the house without reading it. Thank you for taking the time to read this; I hope you have learned a thing or two from those with differing views. I have respected everyone here and have not insulted or slandered anyone. Thank you all.

امس عمتي و احفادها راح يسافرون فبت عمتي أعطتنا هاي الببغاء الأزرق مالها حتى ندير بالنا عليه، الاخضر هو من زمان تقريبا صاله سنة من جاي، جان شارد و طب لنا فجأة و ابقيناه معانا أردنا نرجعه لصاحبة فما لقيناه فبقى ويانا، المشكلة هي ان الأخضر لطيف و متفاهم و عادي اذا يعض ما يوجع ابدا، الأزرق هذا متوحش يعض كان الا شوي و يقطع اصبعي بس الحمد لله انا كنت العب رياضة فما قدر يخترق اللحم ابن الزفرة، المهم شلونكم شخباركم🙃