Active TopicsActive Topics  Display List of Forum MembersMemberlist  CalendarCalendar  Search The ForumSearch  HelpHelp
  RegisterRegister  LoginLogin  Old ForumOld Forum  Twitter  Facebook
Advertisement:
         

Islamic INTRAfaith Dialogue
 IslamiCity Forum - Islamic Discussion Forum : Religion - Islam : Islamic INTRAfaith Dialogue
Message Icon Topic: SHIA SUNNI, MALEKI, SHAFI, HANAFI, WAHABI(Topic Closed Topic Closed) Post Reply Post New Topic
<< Prev Page  of 11 Next >>
Author Message
minuteman
 
Senior Member
Senior  Member


Joined: 25 March 2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1642
bullet Posted: 06 June 2007 at 4:36pm

 

 Andalus,  You are on the right lines. Perhaps your info is more than mine about these matters. But I wrote what I knew. Thanks for explaining. Please continue...

If any one is bad some one must suffer
IP IP Logged
aka2x2
 
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 12 September 2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 412
bullet Posted: 07 June 2007 at 11:28am

I think there is a little more to Shia Islam than "they have their own beliefs". I believe that Shia was a political movement started by Persian Muslims. The Persian Empire used to have a rigid class system. The majority of the population was born into the lower peasant class and stayed there all their lives. Islam promised equality and justice for all. Persian masses converted to Islam and the Persian Empire fell before the Arab Muslim army. However, afterwards, Arabs started to discriminate between Arab Muslims and Ajam Muslims, or Arab and non-Arab Muslims. This was particularly hard for Persians who had come to Islam for its promise of equality. Furthermore, the new religion was teaching them that they should follow God, the Prophet and those in charge of their affairs. In other words the Arab Khalif was telling the non-Arab population that they had to accept the status quo and dissent was forbidden by Quran.

 

Persians turned this argument on its head by rejecting the whole notion of Khalifate. They said the true leaders of the Muslim Ummah were chosen by God. They said the leaders should have been the Prophet’s descendants through his daughter and son-in-law Ali. Therefore, any other government was against the will of God and could be removed. They were then able to mount a military campaign against the central government which ended in a new Khalifate dynasty and a semi-autonomous Iran. Once the political objective was accomplished the Sunni/Shia debate became an academic affair for a long time.

 

Centuries later Otoman and Safavid empires were fighting each other for territory. They used the Sunni/Shia divide to justify a brutal war that pitched Muslim against Muslim. This war was welcomed and encouraged by the colonial powers. They grabbed land from both sides of the weakened Muslim Umma. The brutality of this war has split the Sunni and Shia ever since and enemies of Islam have exploited the division time and again.

 

Muslims in Iraq kill each other for the same reasons people kill each other anywhere else. They kill for the same reasons that Adam’s son killed his brother; Money, power, oil, intrigue, revenge, hatred, land, religious bigotry, whatever. Just take your pick.

 

However, there is normally an initial spark that starts the fire of war and the cycles of killing. In this instance, Bush and his cohorts lit the match and they kept on pouring fuel over the fire.

 

It saddens me to see Muslims provide the fuel for this fire.


Respectfully
aka2x2
IP IP Logged
rami
Male  Islam
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar
Senior Member

Joined: 01 March 2000
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2550
bullet Posted: 07 June 2007 at 2:53pm
Bi ismillahir rahmanir raheem

assalamu alaikum

Muhammad Ibn Abd al-Wahhab (1703-1792) joined forces in 1744 with a tribal chief, Muhammad Ibn Saud, to lead a militant reform movement in Arabia. Although known to us today as the "Wahhabi" movement, they called themselves Muwahidun: "those who advocate oneness,"  i.e. strict monotheists based on the Islamic doctrine of Tawhid which Abd al-Wahhab understood not merely as the "oneness" of God, but, the exclusiveness of the One God. Adherents of the movement also called themselves followers of al-salaf ("the predecessors"), a reference to the early companions of the Prophet Muhammad.

Influenced by the thought of medieval theologian Ibn Taymiyya, the Wahhabis practice a form of legalism somewhat resembling the Hanbali School of jurisprudence. An innovation of theirs, however, is the exclusion of  the normal Islamic practice of ijma ("consensus") as the basis of Islamic Sharia law.

Wahhabis in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries went on an uncompromising campaign against Sufis, Shiites, and all others deemed unfaithful to the Wahhabis' austere interpretation of the sunna ("custom") of the Prophet Muhammad. The ways of Muhammad and his community at Medina were the only acceptable models for the Wahhabis, and, all Muslims, in their view, should be compelled to follow them. Many practices of Muslims who came after the Prophet were labeled bida'a, "objectionable innovations."  At first, these included the building of minarets (acceptable to Wahhabis today) and the use of funeral markers. Wahhabi zealots even tried to destroy the tomb of the Prophet in Medina and were narrowly prevented from doing so through the intervention of King Abd al-Aziz al-Saud. Religious police, called mutawi'oon ("enforcers of obedience") were responsible for maintaining Wahhabi moral order. Today, Wahhabi standards have moderated somewhat from what they were, but the mutawi'oon remained a pillar of the religious Saudi establishment in the twentieth and early twenty-first centuries.

Ibn Abd al-Wahhab labeled all who disagreed with him heretics and apostates, which in his eyes justified the use of force in imposing both his beliefs and his political authority over neighboring tribes. This in turn led him to declare holy war (jihad) on other Muslims (neighboring Arab tribes), an act which would otherwise have been legally impossible under the rules of jihad.

In 1802, the Wahhabis captured Karbala in Iraq and destroyed the tomb of the Shiite Imam Husayn. In 1803 the Wahhabis captured Mecca. The Ottoman Turks became alarmed and dispatched Muhammad Ali, the Ottoman ruler of Egypt, to challenge the Wahhabis in 1811. He succeeded in reimposing Ottoman sovereignty in 1813. Nearly a century later in 1901 with Wahhabi help, Saudi amir Abd al-Aziz al-Saud recaptured Riyadh. Saud's sovereignty over the Arabian peninsula grew steadily until 1924 when his dominance became secure. The Wahhabis went on a rampage throughout the peninsula at this time smashing the tombs of Muslim saints and imams, including the tomb of the Prophet's daughter Fatima. (see Wahhabi raid of 1924) Saudi Arabia was officially constituted as a kingdom in 1932.

The first Wahhabi missionaries to Central Asia actually arrived there in 1912 led by a resident of Medina named Sayed Shari Muhammad. They set up cells in the Fergana Valley and Tashkent. (more on radical movements in Uzbekistan)  But, the big impetus for Wahhabi mission activity came in 1962 when the Muslim World League was founded in Saudi Arabia for the specific purpose of exporting Wahhabism throughout the world. (see Gilles Kepel, Jihad: The Trail of Political Islam (Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press, 2002), 52) After this time, Wahhabism began to fall under the influence of even more extreme ideas as exiled radicals from the Palestinian territories and Egypt found their way to the Saudi kingdom. Some (Abdullah Azzam and Muhammad Qutb, brother of Sayyid Qutb, whom the Egyptians executed in 1966) began teaching in Saudi universities and laid the foundations for the sahwa ("awakening") movement that took hold in the 1980s. The sahwa movement was based on a blend of Wahhabist ideas with those of Sayyid Qutb and contributed to such events as the Buraydah Uprising (1994).

The surge in oil prices following the 1973 Arab-Israeli war  that brought unprecedented high levels of wealth into Saudi Arabia meant huge amounts of money became available to fund these Wahhabi missionary movements. The Wahhabis began supporting Islamist revivalist movements in countries like Egypt, Pakistan, Malaysia, Indonesia, Western China, in East Africa, and in Central Asia. Wahhabi translations of the sayings of Ibn Taymiyya were distributed in Egypt and used by extremist members of the Jihad organization there to justify the assassination of President Anwar Sadat in 1981 (see Gilles Kepel, Jihad: The Trail of Political Islam (Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press, 2002), 72 and 86f.). Wahhabi dissidents seized and briefly held the Great Mosque in Mecca in 1979.

In the 1990s, in the aftermath of the war to liberate Kuwait, the Saudi government invited the United States to build military bases and station troops in the kingdom. As a result, tensions between the ruling Saudis and their Wahhabi allies began to grow. The Buraydah Uprising (1994) made it clear to the Saudis that Wahhabi fundamentalism had grown to become a potent threat to their sovereignty. Arguably the most famous Wahhabi Muslim of the late 20th and early 21st centuries was Osama bin Laden.

source: http://www.nmhschool.org/tthornton/wahhabi_movement.htm


Rasul Allah (sallah llahu alaihi wa sallam) said: "Whoever knows himself, knows his Lord" and whoever knows his Lord has been given His gnosis and nearness.
IP IP Logged
minuteman
 
Senior Member
Senior  Member


Joined: 25 March 2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1642
bullet Posted: 07 June 2007 at 7:30pm

 

 I have read this post by rami and found it to be more accurate descriptive of the matter under discussion. It is more detailed and true. Thanks to rami.

If any one is bad some one must suffer
IP IP Logged
Abu Mujahid
 
Guest Group
Guest Group


Joined: 14 April 2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 264
bullet Posted: 07 June 2007 at 11:11pm

Andulus

I stayed away from this thread except short comment thinking it was not helpful to open this serious chapter. But when I red Sonya complain I decided to make quick review of the follow ups. To my surprise, I found Andulus (moderator!!) -wearing The grand Muftil Islam turband- making offensive remarks and insulting to the intelligence of readers.

I understand more why muslims like this moderator!!! want commerial Islam!!. Commerical Islam that appease half truth and feed current fear climate.  Why on earth lying to this extent when every student in Islam can refute your bloating lies about Mohamed Abdul Wahab attempts to revive Islam. Why do you paint here the dreaded Sufis, Dahlan's and some Ikhwans version of the man. Don't you fear Allah?!!. Or Don't you know its one click away from the whole truth of the subject.

I still bound not say more than what I said but I want to clearfiy briefly very serious subject sister Sonya asked for. That is why he fought against Ottomans? Is it allowed to fight muslims? Under what condition? etc etc?

Sister, first you have know, Sahaba fought each other without believing the dead was kafir. Zakah rejectionist, khawarij etc were all killed without getting Kafir label. They were Sahaba (companion not Wahabis). Second, Ottomans at that time were in name only. There was no khilafah functioning in any meaningful way. Many muslim regions was taken by British soliders or their cohorts. The house of Ala Ottman was full of Jewish Donoma running the muslim affairs!!!. Bidah in creed and ibadah was the order of the day. Innovation (Ijtihad) to address all socio-economic/political ills were susupended by Turkish rulers long time ago. That made the whole ummah stuck in the middle of nowhere. Moreover, invited their innovative enemies to take advantage on Ummah and attack them into pieces.

Though I'm not fan of removing the khilafah title from Arabia, what Sheikh Mohamed Abdulwahab did was establishing his own enclave according to pure Islamic teaching. He removed all this tiny puppet Arab tribes that was neither following Ottomans or nor adhering to the teaching of prophet pbuh.  In the proccess there was some political mistakes but they marveled to some extent the revival of Islam. 

They revived tawhid and the way of Islam. They fought hard against sufis and grave worshippers. They established an Islamic states in their Arabian context......of course with many flaws. They removed Sherrif - another British solider- from hijaz. Sherrif refuge to Britian and was given later to Jordan. Moreover, Sherrif supporters wage campaign to discrect Mohamed Ibnu Abudulwah and his followers. He used his ala bayt name to fool weak ignorant muslims. He used traditionalist -similar to many current religious establishment- Dahlanis/Azhar to challenge Wahabis. It was great time of debate whereby Wahabis come out at the end victorious. But their name was trashed by lies of these fake sheikhs. Today, that lies was put to rest and truth prevailed. Even some current loyalist wahabis to ala Saud was challenged by the action of Mohamed Abulwahab. Their preach of blind loyalty to ruling family was grinded by Mohamed's fight against Turkish rule. 

Sister, he fought Turkish regime because they were disgrace to Ummah at least where he was. Hence, its allowed muslims with showkat (power) to fight ruling class that don't follow Islam as a way of life. That is not fitnah.

Egyptian Ikhwan tried to follow the foot step of Mohamed Abdulwahab in term of regime change. They were loyalist to faruq until Sayid Qutb changed the course. They fought hard with less strategic thinking until they fell into pieces. Jihadist took the banner while rest of ikhwan was tamed and incorporated to chamber parlaiment. Equally so, Wahabi sunnis is divided on the issue of loyality to ruling class. Salafist went on their way but traditionalist Wahabist stick on their war on limited important issue. They said like Ikhwan don't rock the boat or wil sink all toghether. That is what is coloring muslim world today including many muslim websites.

 

 

Abu Mujahid

 

Islam need true muslims
IP IP Logged
Andalus
 
Moderator Group
Moderator Group


Joined: 12 October 2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1187
bullet Posted: 08 June 2007 at 12:17am

Originally posted by Abu Mujahid

Andulus

I stayed away from this thread except short comment thinking it was not helpful to open this serious chapter. But when I red Sonya complain I decided to make quick review of the follow ups. To my surprise, I found Andulus (moderator!!) -wearing The grand Muftil Islam turband- making offensive remarks and insulting to the intelligence of readers.

No, I never made any claim to be Mufti, it is not I who declared thousands of Muslims to be kafir. No, I did not claim or make myself to be a "mufti".

I understand more why muslims like this moderator!!! want commerial Islam!!. Commerical Islam that appease half truth and feed current fear climate. 

I am sorry, you will have to me more clear for the "intelligent" readers you care so much for.

 

 Why on earth lying to this extent when every student in Islam can refute your bloating lies about Mohamed Abdul Wahab attempts to revive Islam.

Interesting, since you seem to be a person of repute, lets see if you have single handedly refuted me, since even a student can do it!

 

 Why do you paint here the dreaded Sufis, Dahlan's and some Ikhwans version of the man. Don't you fear Allah?!!. Or Don't you know its one click away from the whole truth of the subject.

This is called a strawman argument. In other words, it is a fallacy. I have never argued for any such "versions", I simply commented on Imam An-Najdi. Your bloated rhetoric is symptomatic of the intellectually bankrupt sect that you are so proud of, howlers, slogans, and over dramatic labeling of groups based upon uneducated "over" generalizations are simply fallacious, and this is why your fitnah has never become successful, even with the millions upon millions of oil money that has tried to push it.

 

I still bound not say more than what I said but I want to clearfiy briefly very serious subject sister Sonya asked for. That is why he fought against Ottomans? Is it allowed to fight muslims? Under what condition? etc etc?

Sure it is allowed, just preach to the uneducated that everyone else has violated your version of aqida, and we can kill them and steal their property. You must be proud!

Sister, first you have know, Sahaba fought each other without believing the dead was kafir. Zakah rejectionist, khawarij etc were all killed without getting Kafir label. They were Sahaba (companion not Wahabis).

And the truth for all to see! And you guys wonder why your sect cannot ever catch on. (I was indoctrinated to "wahabism" when I converted; thank God I was educated about Islamic civilization enough to know I was being sold a really bad product!)

This lout preaches his sects doctrine, and goes out of his way to excuse the practice of Muslims killing Muslims. What a shame. The Prophet (saw) stated that a true believer is one who's hand and tongue Muslims are safe by.

Your excuses for Muslim fighting other Muslims is as pathetic as it is sad, and explains to everyone why your sect is the modern khawarij fitna. Rejection of zikah, and the rejection of what the Prophet ordered and what the Quran ordered is completely different than declaring thousands of Muslims kafir due to self proclaimed "nuances" in theolgocial theory. Your reasoning is really sad. The two events (fitnah from Najd vs rejecting zakah) are not even related.

 

 Second, Ottomans at that time were in name only. There was no khilafah functioning in any meaningful way. Many muslim regions was taken by British soliders or their cohorts. The house of Ala Ottman was full of Jewish Donoma running the muslim affairs!!!.

And you wonder why no one takes you serious. You cannot even make a coherent rant to explain why your sect rebelled against the Ottoman's, and then favored the British (kafirs) in the process!

And all you have to say is that "the Jews" were controlling the Ottomans? LOL Seriously? That is so foolish, and obtuse, I will not even qualify that. But you should make up your mind, did you uprise against the Ottomans because they were really Jews, or because they were making shirk in the land?

 Bidah in creed and ibadah was the order of the day. Innovation (Ijtihad) to address all socio-economic/political ills were susupended by Turkish rulers long time ago. That made the whole ummah stuck in the middle of nowhere. Moreover, invited their innovative enemies to take advantage on Ummah and attack them into pieces.

Yes, the ever present "boogy men" of wahabism, bidah, shirk, kufr, daif, these are the trademark labels of your sect. Delare these words, and you can do whatever you want, and conclude what you want.

Could you show me the official qadi writings on the hundreds of Muslims that Imam An-Najdi declared kafir and were killed?

I love this, "That made the whole ummah stuck in the middle of nowhere. Moreover, invited their innovative enemies to take advantage on Ummah and attack them into pieces."

So let me get this straight, your sect was going to show those Jewish, bidah bringing, shirk acting Ottomans a thing or two and aid the kafir British and set up a string of "Arab" governments that aided kafirs and wasted the Ummah's money on lavish lifestyles, and have allowed themselves to be used by kafir foreign policy and stifled any growth in the Middle East? You all did a great job! You sure showed those Jewish Ottomans a thing or two! Things are soooo much better.

Though I'm not fan of removing the khilafah title from Arabia, what Sheikh Mohamed Abdulwahab did was establishing his own enclave according to pure Islamic teaching.

Amazing. So you and your buddies, your sectarian leader, and Ibn Taymiyyah are the only ones who really know what’s going on, and it is "everyone" else who are deviated and full of shirk, kufr, bidah, daif hadiths? You and your fellows are truly blessed to be chosen with such insight. It is a shame that God did not send "wahabism" to the fourth century so that the Ummah would not be so misguided for so long.

In case you have not noticed, your beliefs fall into definition of a sect.

 

  

 He removed all this tiny puppet Arab tribes that was neither following Ottomans or nor adhering to the teaching of prophet pbuh.  In the proccess there was some political mistakes but they marveled to some extent the revival of Islam. 

Funny, I have yet to find a single reputable scholar of any following that goes beyond your small group. If a revival took place, I think everyone missed it!

They revived tawhid and the way of Islam. They fought hard against sufis and grave worshippers. They established an Islamic states in their Arabian context......of course with many flaws. They removed Sherrif - another British solider- from hijaz. Sherrif refuge to Britian and was given later to Jordan. Moreover, Sherrif supporters wage campaign to discrect Mohamed Ibnu Abudulwah and his followers. He used his ala bayt name to fool weak ignorant muslims. He used traditionalist -similar to many current religious establishment- Dahlanis/Azhar to challenge Wahabis. It was great time of debate whereby Wahabis come out at the end victorious. But their name was trashed by lies of these fake sheikhs. Today, that lies was put to rest and truth prevailed. Even some current loyalist wahabis to ala Saud was challenged by the action of Mohamed Abulwahab. Their preach of blind loyalty to ruling family was grinded by Mohamed's fight against Turkish rule. 

This blithering is the same old sugar coated glory stories of the fitnah that Muhamad ibn Abd' Wahab created. The problem is that you can try and bury the truth by telling these creative stories over and over, but in the end, the core ideas and principles of your sect simply do not catch hold and are not long lasting, and we have historical reports that tell us the fitnah that your teacher brought, and his ideas have been refuted in volumes of work that show just how misguided he was. One day when the oil money backing runs out, his work will be buried in some library and forgotten about. That is the usual ending of sect.

 

Sister, he fought Turkish regime because they were disgrace to Ummah at least where he was. Hence, its allowed muslims with showkat (power) to fight ruling class that don't follow Islam as a way of life. That is not fitnah.

And so far, your group has not produced any proof that the hundreds of Muslims whom your leader declared takfir on were kafirs. He not only fought against the Ottoman's, but he fought against fellow Muslims. He twisted theological theory and had Muslims declared Kafir. He "killed" Muslims over "nuances" created by his single minded view, which no one agrees with.

 

Egyptian Ikhwan tried to follow the foot step of Mohamed Abdulwahab in term of regime change. They were loyalist to faruq until Sayid Qutb changed the course. They fought hard with less strategic thinking until they fell into pieces. Jihadist took the banner while rest of ikhwan was tamed and incorporated to chamber parlaiment. Equally so, Wahabi sunnis is divided on the issue of loyality to ruling class. Salafist went on their way but traditionalist Wahabist stick on their war on limited important issue. They said like Ikhwan don't rock the boat or wil sink all toghether. That is what is coloring muslim world today including many muslim websites.

 

 

Abu Mujahid

 

 

Your rhetoric is simply disturbing; you are now labeling your own fellow followers. This is why your sect will never have any real success, the beliefs allow you to manipulate who is a believer and not a believer to easily, and you move as quickly as possible to condemn others.  

 

A feeling of discouragement when you slip up is a sure sign that you put your faith in deeds. -Ibn 'Ata'llah
http://www.sunnipath.com
http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/
http://www.pt-go.com/
IP IP Logged
minuteman
 
Senior Member
Senior  Member


Joined: 25 March 2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1642
bullet Posted: 08 June 2007 at 7:36am

 

 The Wahhabis as they were called in the beginning were very much disliked by the common Muslims due to their bad ideas. They believed that Muhammad was a mere man like all of us. In their mind, they were doing good service to the religion of Islam. But there were serious mistakes.

Most important was their belief that most of the muslims were wrong. It was true. In fact the common Muslims were also misled by the uneducated maulvis and peers in India. Therefore there was a necessity to revive the true system. BUt the way they were forced or applied, that was wrong.

Those people were later, at their own request to the government, called the ahle Hadith. They do not believe in grave worship. They do not go near the graves. But what happens. They are not really spiritually guided. That is why they are misled. They just have a zeal for something. But that cannot be enough or replacement for guidance.

I give an example now: These Ahle Hadith (Wahhabis) taught that the prophet went to his mothers grave on the way to Madinah. He wanted to pray there but he was not allowed to do that because his mother was a mushrikah.

I was surprised. The mother of the prophet (Aminah) may be anything in her days. There was no Islam then. Nobody preached to her the real deen. She did not refuse to obey any command of Allah because there was no command conveyed to her. How could any one pass an order on her Kufr??

Similarly, there were many other things. These Wahhabis believed that Hadith was the utmost. Some of them even gave more importance to the Hadith over and above the verses of  the Quran.

It was not good of them to move politically, killing every one for the sake of the establishment of their creed. That was really bad. Ottoman empire was collapsing anyhow. Turkey was called the ill man of Europe (Europe kaa mard e beemar). The british took advantage of the sectarian feelings. There was a whiteman disguised as an Arab, called Lawrence of Arabia.

And later there was another one in Jordon, I have forgotten his name. He used to ride the camels and was commanding the Jordanian forces. He was a British national. Colonel Nasir of Egypt got him thrown out of Jordon in 1953/54. (I just remembered his name. He was called Gulab Pasha. His real name was Glubb.)

 



Edited by minuteman
If any one is bad some one must suffer
IP IP Logged
Abu Mujahid
 
Guest Group
Guest Group


Joined: 14 April 2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 264
bullet Posted: 08 June 2007 at 12:37pm

 

Andulus Moderator!!!

When I red your rambling/funny post, I said like what Imam Malik said in similar situation......"Let Abu Mujahid stretch his legs"

I really don't want to be rude or say similar to one who said, "My donkey is more fiqih than him" but you are rare king of your kind. Enjoy it. No wonder why IC -adopting affirmative action- choose you to be moderator.

PS: Please learn real Islam from Sunni Sheikh in your State.

 

Abu Mujahid

Islam need true muslims
IP IP Logged
<< Prev Page  of 11 Next >>
Post Reply Post New Topic
Printable version Printable version

Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot create polls in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

Disclaimer:
The opinions expressed herein contain positions and viewpoints that are not necessarily those of IslamiCity. This forum is offered to stimulate dialogue and discussion in our continuing mission of being an educational organization.
If there is any issue with any of the postings please email to icforum at islamicity.com or if you are a forum's member you can use the report button.

Note: The 99 names of Allah avatars are courtesy of www.arthafez.com

Advertisement:



Sponsored by:
Islamicity Membership Program:
IslamiCity Donation Program  http://www.islamicity.com/Donate
IslamiCity Arabic eLearning http://www.islamiCity.com/ArabAcademy
Complete Domain & Hosting Solutions www.icDomain.com
Home for Muslim Tunes www.icTunes.com
Islamic Video Collections www.islamiTV.com
IslamiCity Marriage Site www.icMarriage.com