But they used to invite me!

Tawhidi tries to trick the world by saying he was always a recognized Imam previously before he ‘reformed’ and became a peace-preacher:

These statements and pictures are filled with lies and deception. Firstly, here is a video done by the ‘Tawhidi Exposed’ facebook page:

Secondly, we know that Tawhidi lies about what he was doing at those places, and what he preached about. Here is an example of what Tawhidi lied about:

Capture

If we speak to people who actually attended these ‘lessons’ we find it had nothing to do with ‘world peace’ as he claims:

Capture

Other places he attended were open events that did not require invitation, nor was he invited – but rather showed up. These are events that were run in the heart of Melbourne Central, for example:

Please note these practices are the same type of practices that is still secretly supported by Tawhidi. See here.

Aside from this, we must emphasise that Tawhidi only visited fringe Shia centres, and no major ones, and only ones that were run by his own teacher, Sayed Sadiq Shirazi. In these centres, he only took part in rituals that he continues to secretly support.

As for the mainstream Muslims, or even the mainstream Shia, they have been against Tawhidi since day one. For example, he claims that his opposition only began to emerge in 2016/17, when he ‘reformed’.. yet people have been against him since 2011 !

The opposition since day one was proved in another post, where he said the following:

reformer.PNG

We replied:

  1. He claims these are ‘older’ videos from the past decade, while in reality they were from the past few years. The videos from Imam Hussain TV3 which he helped establish and proudly claims so on his website (see image below) was from as recent as 2014.
    imam hussain tv
  2. Tawhidi states that no one spoke out against him since 2007 – 2015 until he started supporting Australia publicly (2016). However, a petition was actioned on change.org to oust him  from the station he founded (above) due to his eccentric behavior. This was in 2014!! Because of this, his contract with them was terminated. Did you forget about this, Tawhidi? See image below or click here. Notice the date, three years ago – 2014.
    petition
  3. He claims no one was trying to silence him during that time. Another lie. One of the first pages established to try and expose this man was in 2013, on the popular Shia Forum, ShiaChat.com. See below, the first post in this massive thread. Link here.
    shiachat
  4. The “Exposing Tawhidi” page on facebook was established in 2015 also, before he claims he “woke up” in 2016
  5. What about when the Islamic Seminaries booted you out? Please see how the university he claimed to graduate from released a letter saying he was a drop out and they absolutely do not endorse him! See this post.
  6. There was NO gradual progression. It was a flick of the switch overnight, where Tawhidi publicly declared he will keep his beliefs concealed and now be more active in the media, as per request of his teacher, mentor, and idol. See here to see this public statement.
  7. There was a blog established in “defence” of Tawhidi back in 2011.. All posts were deleted because obviously his “defenders” realised he was also a fraud. Note the date it was created. 2011. If no one was against you why was there a need to have defenders of you? ha! Blog can be found here: http://truthfultawhidi.blogspot.com.au/
  8. If you are wondering about pre-2011? Well.. he was a nobody, making no noise. Just a kid.

Thus, it is clear that Tawhidi has been opposed since 2011, so his claims of always being supported until he reformed in 2016/17 is absolutely baseless.

Which countries have Islamic Governments?

This truly highlights the hypocrisy of Tawhidi.

When it suits him, countries like Egypt are governed by Islamic Law and Sharia. If there is anything negative from that country, it is because of Islam.

22281975_1130445283756433_3649576559006448162_n.png

However, if there is anything good – it is just a secular country with Muslims in there.. not an Islamic country with Islamic Law or Sharia.. no no no.. don’t mix those up with Saudi Arabia and Iran………….. lol.

21766513_1130445300423098_2860107177358427518_n

I feel sorry for those that fall for this mans lies.

Notice the dates on these two posts.. just one day difference lol.

 

Indecent allegations.

Tawhidi made the following post on his page:

Capture

This is a serious allegation, and the basis for it was the video has a particular scene where the angle looked as if the grand ayatollah was kissing the child on the lips. This is not true. Below is an image of the angle:

20140078_1991722977740047_6420400901008743087_n

However, we can see from other angles that photographers took that this was a complete lie:

20108246_1083772015090427_4425724735534259571_n.jpg

As you can see, Tawhidi has no limits. One could easily play on these images and create a story. For example, the following image with Tawhidi, we can create any story about where the hands of Tawhidi may be. However, this is dishonest and below the belt. May God save us from such behaviour.

20228257_1083668738434088_2738891041493943334_n.jpg

Terrorists dressed as women.

Tawhidi has a very bad habit of misconstruing, lying, or fabricating things for his own advantage. By doing this, it only exposes his own hypocrisy.

Notice the following posts he made. The first image shows him attacking the Iranian Government for “sexually abusing a female” and somehow concluding they stole and drank the alcohol being smuggled in.

20108456_1083640581770237_3236310045067033553_n.png

20157420_1083640611770234_8347543468094324403_o

Note in the above image, his followers can sniff something suspicious. See the following image, how it shows in reality this was not even a female. It was a man dressed as a female.

20245944_1083640831770212_8444655279620018074_n.jpg

The grand irony is the very next day as can be seen in the next image, Tawhidi posts about ISIS men dressing as women and celebrates how they were exposed.

20246055_1083640901770205_2435086680280638024_n.png

For those who have a little bit of intellect, you can see how his hatred for Iran will allow him to fabricate anything he likes for the sake of his agenda. He will use ambiguous and unverified reports as truth, and reject truth as “fake news”.

 

The fatwa on Roses..

19510151_1065930806874548_4534611364239717497_n.png

Tawhidi is complaining about these sort of fatwas lol.. what about the fatwa of your own teacher, mentor, guide, friend, and idol that you continue to praise and refuse to denounce? When are you going to share this fatwa with your muslim-hating best friends?

19510151_1065930806874548_4534611364239717497_n.png

Funny how you promoted this one yourself. Your blatant lying and deception is now comical. Your double standards are laughable. Share the fatwa of Sayed al-Shirazi on your page and mock it if you are a man (of your father).

The Islamic Legal Age of Marriage

After the ABC spoke to one of the Shia Sheikhs in Sydney, who showed no support for Tawhidi, we saw that immediately after Tawhidi approach the daily mail in an attempt to discredit and Shame the Sheikh. Here is the post:

This is clearly a smear campaign and totally dishonest write up and understanding of what this event is.

This is a takleef ceremony. This has absolutely NOTHING to do with marriage. This means the child reaches the age of takleef and maturity! Tawhidi himself said this in his classes he used to present in South Australia, so he is well aware of this.

Tawhidi says: A Mukallaf is the age that a person leaves childhood and enters adulthood.

He himself said it was 9 moon-years for a female that this age turns a girl into a woman.

See min 1:28 onward where this is all explained by Tawhidi himself. THIS VIDEO IS STILL THE VALID opinion of Tawhidi, since it is still on his Zanabiyah Hawza Youtube Channel that he runs.

https://youtu.be/bejq947ciPs?t=1m28s

It is clear Tawhidi has no honesty or integrity.

After Tawhidi saw this post exposing him, he made this tweet in order to save face:

19400058_1064258827041746_2410205099276561059_n

However, this only exposes him even more. That class that we showed above is based upon the teachings of the same man he revers, Sayed Sadiq al-Shirazi. The Zanabiyah Hawza was funded and directed by Shirazi. If Tawhidi was brainwashed by Shirazi, for him to previously teach it, why does he continue to revere and promote Shirazi?

In one post, which Tawhidi ended up deleting, he speaks about how his secretaries 10 year old girl was wearing a headscarf, and how it was pulled off her head. Aside from this being a fabricated story in which he was exposed, you can see how this particular age of taklif is being enforced by Tawhidi and his followers!

 

20525451_1093023047498657_8239378990574658475_n

Again, it is clear Tawhidi has no honesty or integrity.

Tawhidi’s allegations against Imam Ali (as)

Tawhidi enters into a debate with Zuhdi Jasser, a well known ‘reformist’, who has clashed many times via social media with Tawhidi. In this to-and-fro, Tawhidi blasphemes in order to win an argument.

I do not think any Shia or Sunni would accept these statements.

shia ali kill

Tawhidi has since deleted the post. Original URL was this: https://twitter.com/Imamofpeace/status/877122795032821760

Defence of Tashayyu` – Relations with minor

This post was made exclusively to defend the maraja` in the accusation of Tawhidi about ‘thighing’ and relations with a minor. Although we could write a book in defence of this issue, we will try keep it as short as possible.

Tawhidi made the false claim that the maraja` – namely al-Sayed al-Khomeini – promoted thighing or relations with a minor. Unfortunately, this is a very low blow by Tawhidi, who has stooped to this to try and promote his own agenda.

Please note, this is only in regards to the attacks on the Shia. The Sunni school attacks need to be defended by their learned as we do not have sufficient knowledge on this. Yes, even in this topic the Sunni school have certain fatwas that can be interpreted the way Tawhidi is done, however we do not defend or attack these scholars as we have not investigated their position.

What you will see as a conclusion to these discussions, is we will prove that the scholars in fact do not allow this to be done. The following will be demonstrated:

In conclusion we can say the following:

  1. The statement Tawhidi read was not something that is to be acted upon without understanding its context and totality of the laws.
  2. The statement needs to be put along side other laws which will be mentioned, such as the `urf (societal understanding), the law of the land, the immorality it poses, the harm it may cause etc. Based upon all of this, it is clear that this would be something clearly forbidden in our day and age, and not promoted at all by our scholars, which will be soon proven.

We will now go through some important points that need to be established and explained.

Firstly, this is not something exclusive to al-Sayed al-Khomeini. In fact, many of the Shia scholars have agreed upon this including Sayed Mohammed al-Shirazi, and his brother and student Sayed Sadiq al-Shirazi (the current teacher and mentor for Tawhidi). If indeed Tawhidi was honest in his attacks, he would have attacked his own teacher first. Instead, he continues to promote him.

Secondly, this statement by al-Sayed al-Khomeini, and other scholars, is speaking in theory, and not in practice. These statements are in no way encouraging or implying that these things should be done. It is an intellectual jurisprudencial discussion. In fact, Tawhidi himself said in his lecture on taqlid and ijtihad (https://youtu.be/bejq947ciPs) that one is not supposed to act on everything that is written in the books of the scholars. Many things are mentioned in these books to say IF this were to happen, what are the rulings and consequences. This does not consider the ethical, moral, or societal restrictions and prohibitions – in which scholars would often outlaw many of these types of scenarios, as will be explained later.

Thirdly, this ruling is only if the various rules and restrictions have been considered and fulfilled. These have not been discussed in this particular ruling, but elsewhere in the book(s).

Fourth, what has been made clearly forbidden in the same paragraph Tawhidi referred to, is that any form of penetration or intercourse with a minor is forbidden.

Fifth, what was stated is that other types of pleasures are not forbidden with a minor that is married. The reason for this is not because there are any proofs – be it Qur’an or Hadith – that state that this is permissible. Rather, the scholars have concluded that there is no proof to say that it is forbidden, i.e. there is no ayah in the Qur’an or hadith that mentions this topic in specific. The hadiths only mention that there cannot be any sexual intercourse with a minor at all.
Does this mean that the scholars allow and encourage sexual relations with minors? Absolutely not. However, to be honest and consistent, they admit that there is no proof from the origins of the books that have reached us, that suggest it is outlawed.
However, they may (and will) be outlawed due to secondary reasons – which has not been mentioned in that particular paragraph that Tawhidi read out.

This was actually indirectly explained by Tawhidi himself. He spoke about smoking and how Nasir Makarim al-Shirazi (not to be confused with his teacher, Sadiq Shirazi who is from a different family) has outlawed smoking. Now, smoking has not been mentioned at all from the Qur’an or hadiths, thus – Tawhidi says that Naser Makarim al-Shirazi has “no idea about jurisprudence” because there is nothing prohibiting it. Tawhidi goes on to explain that there is another principle, however, that prohibits anything that causes harm to the body. Tawhidi says that smoking does not cause immediate harm to the body, while Makarim Shirazi believes it does. This has been explained in detail here. It is ironic that Tawhidi claims Makarim Shirazi has no idea about jurisprudence when clearly in this topic, Tawhidi shows ignorance.

Sixth, building on above, there is a core principle in Islam: “Everything that has not been made impermissible (by the Qur’an and Hadiths), is considered permissible.” As explained earlier, there is nothing that has reached us that suggest it is not permissible. This is why when Sayed al-Kho’i (and others) mention this in their explanations, they say (لعدم الدليل على الحرمة بل لعمومات جواز الاستمتاع) or similar, which means, due to the lack of evidence of its prohibition, rather it goes back to the general [principle] of permissibility of enjoyment [with the wife].
However, as mentioned and will be explained, they are generally prohibited with a minor on secondary reasons.

Seventh, it is extremely important to note that this does not imply in anyway that it is marriage between an old man and a minor. Rather it is speaking about a marriage of a minor which may be with a young boy also. Again this is all speaking about the theory and not necessarily about it being a reality that happens. This is important as Tawhidi seems to imply that this is regarding a very old man with a baby, and also implies that this happens on a regular basis, which is not true.

Eighth, there is an established principle that if any marriage would result in harm, or immorality, then that marriage would be forbidden and void! This is discussed later.


Now, let us see what the scholars have said about this allegation that Tawhidi has mentioned. Instead of going to scholars that Tawhidi is against or hates, we will use the scholars that Tawhidi loves and respects.

The first is the nephew of Sayed Sadiq al-Shirazi, Sayed Murtadha al-Shirazi. Tawhidi often praises and speaks about him, such as here and here:

السؤال: من الذرائع التي يشنع بها علينا في أعلام العامة والنواصب ما جاء في بعض رسائل علمائنا العملية : من جواز الزواج من الرضيعة وجواز الاستمتاع بها كالتقبيل وغيره ،  فكيف نرد على هؤلاء؟ ثم ما هي الضرورة  لذكر ذلك في الرسائل العملية؟
الجواب: هذا الكلام جار في عالم  الثبوت والصحة والإمكان  لا في عالم الواقع والأفعال الخارجية فانه ليس  كل ما ذكره العلماء في كتبهم ورسائلهم وقالوا بجوازه  قد تم فعله  بالضرورة  ، بل قد يذكر للمثال أو لبيان المسألة أو غير ذلك  ، هذا من جانب.
ومن جانب آخر:  أن هذا  الزواج – على فرض وقوعه خارجاً – لا بد من أن تتوفر وتكتمل شروطه  الشرعية ، التي منها رضا ولي أمرها  مع وجود الغبطة والمصلحة لها بذلك الزواج ، فإذا كان هذا الزواج بغير رضا ولي أمرها  أو كان فيه  أذى أو مفسدة على الصغيرة  فلا يجوز ولا يصح .
ثم انه لا توجد آية أو رواية تنهى عن الزواج بالرضيعة ؛ وهذا ما أراده العلماء من ذكر هذا الكلام في هذه المسألة ، وبما أنه لا يوجد إشكال في المقام  فعلى المعترض أن يأتي بدليل يمنع ذلك إن أراد الاعتراض

Question: From the accusations that are put on us from the scholars of the general Muslims (Translator note: The Sunnis against the Shia) and those who bear enmity to the ahl al-bayt is what is within some of the jurisprudencial books of our scholars, being the permissibility of marriage with a minor and to engage in sexual relations with it, such as hugging and other things – so how do we respond to them? And what was the necessity in mentioning this in our jurisprudencial books?

Answer: This discussion takes place in the realm of establishment, validity, and contingency, and not in the realm of reality and/or practical actions. Not everything that is mentioned by the scholars in their books proving permissibility is necessarily established as something able to be acted upon. Rather, it is mentioned as an example or evidence for a point or another reason. That is from one perspective.
Another perspective is that this marriage, presuming it is even a practical thing, must fulfill and complete the jurisprudencial conditions, from it being the acceptance of the guardian of her affairs, with the necessary condition of felicity and benefit for her (the minor) in that marriage. If it is established that this marriage does not have the acceptance of the child’s guardian, or in it there will be any harm or immorality upon the minor, then it is not permission and it (the marriage) is void.

Furthermore, there is no existence of an ayah (of the Qur’an) or narration (from the hadiths) that forbid the husband from (enjoying) the minor, and this is what the scholars desired when mentioning this discussion in that point, and since there does not exist any problem in this position, then it is upon the objector to provide evidence that prohibits it if he wishes to object.

You can find this on the official page of Sayed Murtadha al-Shirazi (here).

Unlike Tawhidi, Sayed Murtadha al-Shirazi shows some intellectual honesty and discusses the fatwa, and instead of denying and calling it barbaric etc. he shows that indeed the scholars did not encourage or give actual permissibility for this.

Another example of a scholar whom Tawhidi loves, that has spoken and defended this is Sayed Sadiq al-Rohani. This Grand Ayatollah is one whom Tawhidi claims has given him license as a religious authority. See below:

Capture.PNG

You will notice that there is no link to actually see the license. This is because Tawhidi has explained in one of the videos that he will only release them after the Grand Ayatollah dies. Why? In Tawhidi’s words, because if he releases them they will be imprisoned and tortured by the Iranian regime.

Let us assume this is correct – then there would be no doubt that Sayed al-Rohani would not defend Sayed al-Khomeini about this issue. Right? Let’s see what he has to say:

استفتاء: أود بالحقيقه الاستفسار عن مدى صحة الكلام التالي هل صحيح بأن آيت الله الخميني أباح وحلل التمتع بالرضيعه دون سن التاسعه ؟
الكلام الذي جاء في كتاب تحرير الوسيله للإمـــام ؟
جواب: بإسمه جلت أسمائه
الولي وهو الأب والجد له الولاية على إجراء العقد على الصبي والصبية مشروطاً بوجود المصلحة او عدم المفسدة، واما التمتع بالصبية قبل البلوغ بالدخول فمن المحرمات الأكيدة، وبغير الدخول فإن ترتب عليه مفسدة وضرر فلا يجوز، وأما ما في تحرير الوسيلة فتدبروا فيه، ولا أظن أن يكون السيد أفتى بجواز الدخول أو التمتع بغير الدخول مع ترتب المفسدة .

Question: Is it true what is ascribed to the Grand Ayatollah al-Khomeini in the permissibility of enjoyment of the minor that has not reached over the age of nine? It is what has been discussed in the Imams book Tahrir al-Waseelah (EXPOSING TAWHIDI NOTE: the book Tawhidi presented)

Answer: The guardian, which would be the father and/or grandfather that have guardianship over the formalities of the marriage of the minor (boy or girl), is bound by the jurisprudencial law that demands that there exists a benefit and no possibility of immorality for the ones being married. As for enjoyment with a minor before the age of maturate by penetration, then it is absolutely forbidden. As for other than penetration, then (by definition of islamic law), if that entails immorality or harm to her, then it is not permissible. As for what is in Tahrir al-Waseelah (EXPOSING TAWHIDI NOTE: The book of Sayed al-Khomeini that Tawhidi presented), then ponder on it! I do not have any suspicion that the Sayed [al-Khomeini] would make a fatwa of penetration or enjoyment without penetration while it constitutes any sort of immorality.

You can find this statement on the official website of Sayed al-Rohani here.

Please note that al-Rohani has exactly the same statement in his books as Sayed Khomeini, and does not explain it as above – however, this shows that when we go into the details on if it can be acted upon, the answer is not as we initially read and what Tawhidi states!

If only, Tawhidi, you had the intellectual honesty as these scholars – who also have the academic knowledge to speak about these issues, unlike you.

The scholars here have clearly stated that the moral condition of that point was not discussed – while if you include the moral dilemma within it, this action would be forbidden! In fact, it is clear that even for two adults who want to marry, if the marriage will put either into harm or immorality then it is also forbidden!

In our day and age, the western society deems such acts as immoral and in many cases against the law. Because of this, all of our scholars, including Sayed al-Khomeini, would deem anything mentioned by Tawhidi as forbidden and outlawed.

In fact, one of the same scholars who Tawhidi mentioned, Makarim Shirazi (again not to be confused with his teacher Sayed Sadiq Shirazi, who is from another family), has clearly stated this when we personally asked him this question in 2014.

Question: For the issue of Thighing with infant (kissing and touching them after marriage, despite not age of puberty) – what is the opinion of ayatollah naser makarem? Can you also please provide reasoning? jazakallah
Answer:

  1. If a person contracts marriage with an immature girl with the consent of her guardian, it is haram to have sexual intercourse with her before she has completed her nine years, and it is not allowed as an obligatory precaution even after she has completed her nine years if she is not ready physically.
  2. Nowadays, it is not to their advantage and it is not permissible as an obligatory precaution.

Capture.PNG

Again, as we see here, any sort of marriage that would be harmful to a female, even if she is an adult but not physically ready or capable, then it would be forbidden!

Tawhidi, why didn’t you mention all of this?

In conclusion we can say the following:

  1. The statement Tawhidi read was not something that is to be acted upon without understanding its context and totality of the laws.
  2. The statement needs to be put along side other laws which have been mentioned, such as the `urf (societal understanding), the law of the land, the immorality it poses, the harm it may cause etc. Based upon all of this, it is clear that this would be something clearly forbidden in our day and age, and not promoted at all by our scholars as has been made clear.

The irony is he then goes on to speak about many other fatwas that “don’t make sense”, yet he was only recently promoting fatwas of his teacher and mentor Sayed Sadiq Shirazi (which he still supports and refuses to denounce) like this!!

valentines1.PNG

Why didn’t you share this in your “what the fatwa” episode? lol.

Aside from all this, we may even look into other religion scriptures and books and show how certain books stated that even prophets had young wives etc. However, this is beyond the scope of our discussion, but we wonder if Tawhidi would ever attack the other religions about their books, such as the Jews?

Tawhidi, you are a fraud and a liar.