Various scandalous and corrupt beliefs of Twelver Shias

[TripolySunni]

An Amazing Debate where one of the Top Shia debaters on the face of the planet (Wasil) runs with his tail between his legs and is no longer able to continue:
http://islamic-forum.net/index.php?showtopic=14843&pid=104572&st=300&#entry104572


(Also contains priceless refutations to allegations against Sayyiduna Abu Huraira RA)

[afriki_haqq]

السَّلاَمُ عَلَيْكُمْ وَرَحْمَةُ اللهِ وَ بَرَكَاتُه

Brother Tripoly,

I am not sure if you have discussed this already however if you have kindly direct me the correct post and any other link you may have.

I would like details regarding Hadhrat Ali (ra) and Hadhrat Muawiya (ra) and the their differences both from Sunni and Shia sources.

We find many people (Sunnis) during Muharram mourning on Ashura and having many other "mild" Shi'ite believes regarding that era of history.

:jazak:

[Maripat]

An Amazing Debate where one of the Top Shia debaters on the face of the planet (Wasil) runs with his tail between his legs and is no longer able to continue:
http://islamic-forum.net/index.php?showtopic=14843&pid=104572&st=300&#entry104572


(Also contains priceless refutations to allegations against Sayyiduna Abu Huraira RA)
:jazak:
The good news is rare these days.
Can you translate the supplications used by the Shia debater in his first post?
Wassalam

[TripolySunni]

السَّلاَمُ عَلَيْكُمْ وَرَحْمَةُ اللهِ وَ بَرَكَاتُه

Brother Tripoly,

I am not sure if you have discussed this already however if you have kindly direct me the correct post and any other link you may have.

I would like details regarding Hadhrat Ali (ra) and Hadhrat Muawiya (ra) and the their differences both from Sunni and Shia sources.

We find many people (Sunnis) during Muharram mourning on Ashura and having many other "mild" Shi'ite believes regarding that era of history.

:jazak:

السلام عليكم

Shia sources are a mess of lies and contradictions so I don't take anything from them, I doubt they even have authentic narrations according to their standards about these events.

I also don't have much time at the moment to translate Ahadith and check who graded them... if u want I can give you a very short summary in my own words.

[afriki_haqq]

:jazak: that would be fine also Br. Tripoly. Just a short summary with the main points. May Allah reward you.

However, I would appreciate something in more detail in the future. It is an important topic and I am certain that a lot of material exists on this. If I do find something beneficial I will post it and I request other members as well.

[TripolySunni]

:jazak: that would be fine also Br. Tripoly. Just a short summary with the main points. May Allah reward you.

However, I would appreciate something in more detail in the future. It is an important topic and I am certain that a lot of material exists on this. If I do find something beneficial I will post it and I request other members as well.

I can give u the name of an English book and u can buy it and it has everything in detail.

[shakibbhat]

Please go on!!!

[afriki_haqq]

What is the name of the book?

[TripolySunni]

What is the name of the book?

Link: http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/showthread.php?76238-Biography-of-Ali-ibn-abi-Talib-(kw)

[afriki_haqq]

:jazak:

[University.]

-

[TripolySunni]

^

Awla has nothing to do with Mawla, he's playing word games with you, basically the Prophet SAWS asks the people who are present after h heard that they disliked 'Ali, he says "Am I not more Awla(Having priority and authority) to the believers than themselves?" As in "Don't I have authority over you and I am more dearer to you than yourselves?" And they replied "Yes O Rassul-Allah SAWS", now that he reminded him that he is in charge and that what he says must be obeyed by those who love him, he now went straight to the point which is the problem between 'Ali and some of the Moujahideen who said they disliked him, he said: "Whomever I am his Mawla, 'Ali is also his Mawla" which simply means whoever supports and loves me must also support and love 'Ali, meaning that if you hate 'Ali then you hate the Prophet SAWS as he used to Love 'Ali, Then he says further "May Allah support/love those who support/love him and be the enemy of his enemies."

No one disagrees that the word Mawla has multiple meanings and the core of the subject now is this, did 'Ali understand the word Mawla as the Shia do? as in Caliphate and Ruling?

Let's us take three authentic narrations to see if he understood it as such:

(1) Bukhari Volume 5, Book 59, Number 728:
Narrated 'Abdullah bin Abbas:
Ali bin Abu Talib came out of the house of Allah's Apostle during his fatal illness. The people asked, "O Abu Hasan (i.e. Ali)! How is the health of Allah's Apostle this morning?" 'Ali replied, "He has recovered with the Grace of Allah." 'Abbas bin 'Abdul Muttalib held him by the hand and said to him, "In three days you, by Allah, will be ruled (by somebody else ), And by Allah, I feel that Allah's Apostle will die from this ailment of his, for I know how the faces of the offspring of 'Abdul Muttalib look at the time of their death. So let us go to Allah's Apostle and ask him who will take over the Caliphate. If it is given to us we will know as to it, and if it is given to somebody else, we will inform him so that he may tell the new ruler to take care of us." 'Ali said, "By Allah, if we asked Allah's Apostle for it (i.e. the Caliphate) and he denied it us, the people will never give it to us after that. And by Allah, I will not ask Allah's Apostle for it."

^ That narration above is clear, happened right before the death of the prophet SAWS and 'Ali has absolutely no idea that he is an appointed Caliph.


(2) Narrated Rayeh bin al harith: A Group of Ansars came to Ali RAA in al Rahbah and said: Al Salamu Aleykum Ya Mawlana, He replied: How Can I be your Mawla and you are Arabian people? They Said: We heard the Prophet of Allah PBUH say on the Day of Ghadeer Khum: Whomsoever’s Mawla I am, this (Ali) is also his Mawla. Riyah said: When they left I followed them and asked whom they were, They said some folks from the Ansars and amongst them was Abu Ayoub al Ansari.

>Narrated Imam Ahmad in His Munad 5/419, Shu'eib al Arna'out said Its ISNAD IS SAHIH, and it was mentioned in the Virtues of companions 2/570 #967.

So this is Ali Bin Abi Talib RAA Who Did not understand the saying of Ansars " Al Salamu Aekum Ya Mawlana" as " Al Salamu Aleykum O CALIPH/AMEER", Instead he understood it as a Muwalat of "Al Itq" meaning the ownership of a Slave or in other words "Freed slaves", this is why he asked them "How can I be your Mawla if you are Arabs?" Then when they explained to him that it was the Muwalat of Lovers, Supporters and Allies Then he agreed with them.

These are the Ansars who were at Ghadeer khum and this is how they understood it, and this is Imam Ali RAA himself and this is how He Understands it, So until when will The Persian ignorants keep explaining the word Mawla as Caliph and Ruler?


(3) They said to Ali: Will you not appoint a successor? He said: The Prophet PBUH did not appoint a successor so that I may do so, If Allah wishes that something good happens to you then he will make you all gather around the best (Man) amongst you just like he made them gather around the best Man (i.e Abu bakr) after their prophet PBUH.
Narrator: Shaqeeq.
Source: Al haythami in Mujama'a al Zawa'ed.
Rank: All narrators are that of the SAHIH except Ismail bin Abi al Harith and he is Trustworthy.

^ Also an explicit clear statement, no successor was appointed.

So in the light of the authentic narrations (and there are many others) the meaning of the word Mawla in the Hadith was never understood by anyone as ruler-ship and Imarah or Khilafah.

[TripolySunni]

Interview with brother Taha Syed (Pakistani Ex-Shia, famous in ShiaChat):

May I know something about your life and your experiences before you came into contact with Shias?

Reply:
BismillahAl-Rahman Al-Rahim,
Since my early childhood, my parents made an extra effort that my siblings and I got a good Islamic education. However, with age came questions - some that could not be answered by my parents. Some of the questions I was too scared to ask anyone,lest they think I became a 'kafir'. These questions started eating me from inside and I did not know the right person to ask. As time went along, I started reading the works of athiests like Freud and others, and they only increased my doubts in the existence of a Supreme Being, subhanahu wa ta'ala.

I came to a point where I was 99% atheist and I used to do things that are clear acts of kufr. It was after a bad experience with some drugs that I realized I needed a deeper meaning of my life, and it was around the same time that I first encountered shias, one of whom provided some propaganda reading material. As is the nature of propaganda material, I marveled at how the Shias rejected many of the views of the Ahlus-Sunnah, and I decided that maybe Shi'ism had answers to my questions. I then embarked on reading up on Shi'i theology, their Usool and their ahadith...

1. May I know how your parents tried to give you a good Islamic upbringing?

They tried their best to raise me in an Islamic manner, and our house was filled with Qurans, tafsirs, hadith books and other Islamic books.

2. Was there any reasons why you could not ask those people around you which ever doubts you had?

To me, asking in-depth questions was a taboo, something that I thought the 'moulanas' would object to. Also, the 'molanas' were of a very course and stern nature. This was in Diriyah, one of the outskirts of Riyadh.

3. When exactly did you encounter Shias?

While I had encountered Shias for the first time very early on, when I was about 13, I did not know enough about Shi'ism, nor was I bothered to know more about it.
The first time that I encountered Shias, and actually showed interest in finding out their beliefs was in my first year of University.

4. Did you have any views of Shias before the main encounter?

I used to think, from what people told me, that Shias were kuffar who believed that Ali was God, or that the angel Jibreel brought the Quran to Muhammad by accident; Ali being the one intended by Allah.
However,my mother told me these were lies, and that everyone who says he is a muslim, is a muslim - including shias. Albeit misguided..

5. Do you remember who was the Shia who gave you the material? And what material did the Shia give you to read?

The person who gave me the material was a friend of mine in University. The material included TMA (Thaqalayn Muslim Association) pamphlets as well as some common and well-known Shia websites.

6. If you became an atheist, does it mean you stopped to pray altogether? Or which actions of "Kufr" did you start to commit?

While it is generally not allowed in Islam to recount past sins, I will state this much that I did not perform any of the fundamentals outlined in Islam. As for the acts of Kufr, I'd rather not talk about them, as 'talking about sins is a sin'.

7. At what age did the questions you had start in earnest and what was the reason ?

It was probably around age 15. The questions arose after I read ahadith that I could not comprehend, and I saw the general nature of the Muslims in Riyadh, which struck me as 'highly irreligious'. I started to contemplate the possibility of the followers of other religions also thinking that they were right.

8. Can you briefly comment on what is "Usool" in general?

By Usool I mean the rules of the derivation of Islamic rulings and beliefs. This would include how the hadith system works, how the meaning is extracted from the texts, etc.

9. The next question is based on your quotation: I then embarked on reading up on Shi'i theology, their Usool and their ahadith. Could you explain in depth what this entailed? (I will ask many, many more questions about this of course, but not now).

Initially, I read from the typical shia websites like al-islam and rafed. All the reading were in english.
I then started reading the books of usool and the tarajim/rijal, the fundamentals of Fiqh and Rijal by Muhaqqiq Subhani, Kamal Haydari, etc...
Soon I realized the inner contradictions, gaps and flaws within the system.

10. May I know some of the books and websites you were refered to by the TMA ?

Mainly pamphlets that quoted sunni ahadith. Also websites like al-islam.

11. Were you thinking about the possibility of joining religions other than Islam, such as Hinduism, Christianity, Judaism, Buddhism, and so forth?

I did read upon several other faiths, but was never convinced.

12. Did any of your brothers or sisters ask questions similar to the ones you had ?

Not at all. I guess every family has a 'black sheep', and I was the one in myfamily. :)

13. The next question I would like to ask is: What was it in Shiaism that impressed you,and which was not present in your Sunni background nor in the other religions yuo had read about?

Salam,

After a near-death experience with drugs, which came about after many long hours of thinking that life did not have a meaning for me... I decided that I need to follow God.
I was not satisfied at all with the other religions, and within Islam, it was the ahadith that troubled me, not the Quran.
My first impression of shiism was something that had RESOLVED the issues I had, and did not contain what I had come to think was nonsense. This, of course, was because it is a polemical sect, which I would realize later......

14. What was it in the specific practices and beliefs of Shiaism which attracted you to the religion?

I read a theosophical book attributed to Imam Ja'far Al-Sadiq called "The great philosopher and scientist Imam Ja'far Al-Sadiq" and was greatly impressed. This was my initial interest (and only later would I find its incoherance with Islam,and even its inauthenticity).Later things that interested me were:

1) obejction to the Sunni hadith corpus, since I had trouble accepting some ahadith, and Shi'ism seemed like a leeway for that.

2) the challenge to the 'adl of the sahabah, since it seemed to me that the Ahlus-Sunnah over-exaggerated their status.

3) the concept that there is divine guidance after the Prophet.

4) the fact that there is one 'true' islam with the Ahlul-Bayt, when there were a billion 'islams' among the various sects (e.g. mu'tazila) Of course - again - I would later discover the internal fallacies and incoherance of these utopian theories.

15. Going back to the first answer you gave, could you please explain which books you read from Freud and others which drove you to the brink of atheism?

To be honest with you, I did not read any particular books of Freud. Rather, it was more of articles and OTHER books that quoted Freud's ideas of the disproof of God, the nature of materialism, the philosophies of Hume, etc.. etc..So more so than actual books, it was:

1) athiest articles

2) athiest books

3) athiest 'friends'

etc etc..Also, one of the inciting factors, I guess, would be the fact that I used to discuss a lot with people of other religions (e.g. Christians, Hindus, etc)... and I started to think that EVERYONE thinks he is right, and that ultimately every religion (including Islam) was made up by people to reassure themselves.

16. The next question is: You mentioned that "I read a theosophical book attributed to Imam Ja'far Al-Sadiq called "The great philosopher and scientist Imam Ja'far Al-Sadiq" and was greatly impressed. " If you still have the book with you or remember its contents well enough, could you give a detailed explanation concerning what was the impressive thing(s) you found therein the first time you read it???

A: While I do not have the book with me anymore, I do remember some of the things discussed therein. Perhaps what impressed me most -- as I was reading it as a near-atheist agnostic -- was the amount of scientific information Imam Ja'far had knowledge of. Things such as the existence and vibration of atoms, the circulation of blood etc etc..It was much later that I found out that the content of this book could not be traced back to earlier than the 1500's. And by that time, many of these scientific facts were well-known.Other than the scientific facts, another thing that impressed me was the no-nonsense style in which it showed Imam Ja'far debating.

17. A lot of the people who claim to have converted to Shiaism from the Ahl us Sunnah say that the four books of Muhammad Tijani Sammawi, Al Murajaat, and Peshawar Nights were the books that led them to Shiaism? Was that the case with you? (that is, did you proceed to read these books after the book on Imam Al -Sadiq, and did you think highly of them at thetime of reading them?)

Indeed, I did read these books, and the following were my reactions to them:

1) Tijani's books:

The first time I read "Then I was Guided" I was in love with Tijani, and I was much dismayed that the Ahlus-Sunnah had 'overlooked' the 'abundant' proofs against them. Later on, as I started reading more on Usool, the sciences of hadith, etc.. I saw the incoherance of his works, the deception and the simple polemic nature of the books. I voiced my distaste for his works, and did not cease to do so even when I was strongly convinced of the validity of Shi'ism.

2) Al-Muraja'at: From all the polemic books, I liked this one the most. While I was highly sceptical of the 'fakeness' of the correspondence between the sunni and shia scholars, I was nevertheless convinced by the content itself. Again, I would later find out that there was deception and misinformation in this book - much much later on, as this was only book that I really respected.


3) Peshawar Nights: Of all the books, this was the one that I disliked the very first time I read it. From my cursory knowledge of Islam at that time, even I had the ability to disprove many of the lies therein. Of all the shia polemic books, this is the most fake and its content the most fabricated. This was my initial reaction, and I held this view the whole while, much to the dismay of other shias.One may ask why I kept going, with my dissatisfaction with these famous shia books. Perhaps the best answer is that I was a jahil and I believed the truth was 'out there somewhere', and that I had not yet struck gold.

18. Who was your Marja-e-Taqlid during this period? (If you did not have,could you explain why, given the importance of the matter in Imaami Shiaism)

I didn't follow any.You see, while I had relatively strong conviction in shi'ism in general, I never felt convinced that the shi'ism of the present day was the 'true islam'. One aspect of it was surely of the whole marja' business. It takes less than a scholar to realize that the whole marja' business was a very VERY late development in history, and I did not want to follow anything that was a late development.Moreover, I had seen the fatawa of some of the maraji' of the past, and it was clear that they were emotional-based and that the only reason why one ayatollah's fatwa differed from another's was solely based on what they THOUGHT was correct.As dire as the situation seemed, I clinged to the hope that there were *some* sahih shia ahadith, and my aim was to follow them, and no fallible ayatollah.2.

Who was your support base during this period, i.e. who was supporting you towards becoming " a better Shia" ?

Mostly:

1) 'Ali 'Abbas (Abbas from [ShiaChat])

2) Another 'Ali, a friend from university

19. Could you explain how you found out that the concept of following the Marjaiyah was a later development, and why this bothered you so much?

Well, for one - there was no taqleed system until the time of Tusi (or was it Hilli). Moreover, the nature of taqleed changed dramatically not just in the past 100 years, but the ayatollahs gained absolute and unchallenged authority. Moojan Momen talks about this, if I recall correctly.This bothered me of course, because here was a system (the marja'iyyah) that expected the followers to pay them 1/5 of their wealth, asked to be followed absolutely, participated in propaganda (missionary Hajj trips and poisonous books), etc etc..

20. What were the attitudes of the Shias you knew either online or personally to your conversion, and also to your approach to Shiaism (i.e. not having a Marja, etc.)?

They were all very kind and helpful. Also, they understood why I did not follow a madhhab - I needed a firmer ground first.

21. It seems as if the online Shia communities (such as ShiaCHat) had a large impact on your development and research. Could you discuss something about that?

shiachat allowed me to see arguments from both sides - Sunni and shia. It allowed me to discuss with relatively well-read shias and sunnis. Of course, ignoring the ignorant ones who would just copy-paste the same arguments over and over.

22. How many Shias who claimed to be "formerly Sunnis" did you meet along the way (either online or in person)? And did you believe all of them to have been converts?

I met several online, and a few in-person.The ones I met in person were genuine cases, and in some cases (sadly) their reason for conversion was me.

23. What was the reason you started reading about the Usool methodology of the Shia religion, instead of starting to follow your new faith in its totality (i.e. Where did you get the idea that you should read on the Usool of the religion, given that most people would not consider going deeply into that aspect?)

Well, prior to looking at shi'ism, I was agnostic (99% athiest pretty much), so I was sceptical about EVERYthing. I needed 100% proof before I could completely accept anything. So without reading the Usool, I would have no proof regarding the legitimacy of the Shia faith. Hence, it was an important step. It's sad, however, that I started it very late.

24. What was the stated reason for other Sunnis to be so influenced by yourself that they converted to Shiaism? What did they see special about your case?

My friends, parents and everyone else always tell me that I am a good teacher, and a good speaker.Also, they knew that I was quite open-minded in general and that I was very critical in my approach. Also, I used to be quite vehement against Islam during my 'hayrah', so my return must have indicated to others that I really saw something.

25. How much did you try to preach Shiaism to your Sunni friends during this period?

Not at all. If people asked, I answered. If people objected, I explained.I was never a big fan of the 'in your face' approach.

26. Which scholars from the Shia side did you meet, either online or in person?

Syed Hejazi, Shuja' Ali Mirza, Syed Qazwini, Syed Muhammad Rizvi, Arif Abdul-Husain, and others.

27. What about Sunni scholars, did you meet any Sunni scholars to try to explain your new position as a Shia (as before whether they were onlin eor in person)?

I went to Qays Istefan, a very very strict and coarse salafi sheikh. I went, but did not talk to him about the subject since he was already "bashing the ahlul-bid'a" quite viciously when I had approaced him. I also talked to Sheikh Muhammad Iqbal Nadwi, and he was of immense help. He knew enough about Shi'ism and the flaws in its principles. He helped quite a bit, in fact..

28. You said that you read some of the ansar.org site. Is there any reason you did not delve into Arabic or Urdu anti-Shia propaganda (or any other language you know)?

Initially, I only read english material and barely understood arabic when I read it. Also, urdu was too difficult for me to read.

29. Considering that a lot of Shia literature is propaganda and that you were seeking an open-minded approach, did you read any Sunni writings refuting Shiaism (i.e. Sunni propaganda)?

To be honest with you, I did read some (e.g. ansar.org), however the sharp nature and overall confidence of the shia material had greater momentum. Moreover, I did not know the criterion for accepting what I read. Hence shi'ism, which seemed to prove itself from Sunni sources, seemed to me to have an upper hand for simply that reason. Finally, I must state that Shias will always have a preassumed bias even when reading Sunni responses to allegations. For example, if there is a 'radhiallahu anhu' after Mu'awiya's ® name, they will automatically tell themselves subconciously that the author is an enemy of the ahlul-bayt, and ignorant of the status of the Ahlul-bayt in Islam. While this was not too extreme in my case, I do now realize that I had become a victim of this as well.

30. Did you try to learn Arabic in order to examine the primary sources yourself, or how did you go about checking the primary sources? (Explain why it is important to know Arabic and look for the sources of Islam in arabic, whether in Sunni-Shia matters or any other issue based on Islam).

I did not start to learn arabic per se. Rather, I felt my handicap of not being able to comprehend the primary sources themselves.So what I did was simply open them up and try to understand. While I initially did not get much from the reading, over time I developed more and more understanding.The importance of this was that I was able to see the deliberate deception in translation by some of the shia authors (for example translating the muta of hajj as simply muta, to mislead the reader). Hence, it is not only useful but quite essential to have at least a basic understanding of arabic to get somewhere.

31. If it is fine, could you explain your discussions/relationship with the Shia and Sunni scholars you met along the way, and what impact they had on you?

With the shia scholars, it was always issues like infallibility, the absence of nass etc etc.With the sunni scholars, I was usually on the defensive. Regretfully, their approach was usually that of mockery and scorn, which disheartened me. However, near the end I started to become slightly aggresive in the sense that I put forward questions and demanded answers. This got some good results.Overall, I would have to say that the sunni scholars have to cut down the mocking and dissing attitude a bit, to allow the other side to actually absorb what they say.

32. What did your family say when they discovered you had converted to Shiaism?

Only my parents knew - and as expected - they were flabbergasted. My father firmly believed I was swayed and brainwashed by a 'shia propagandist'.These two years created a big drift between me and my parents, and I have yet to completely eradicate it.

33. You mentioned the mocking attitude of Sunni scholars with respect to the Shias. Could you specify which specific matters were disheartening for you in terms of Sunni schoalr's attitudes towards Shias?

Mostly, it was the mocking attitude expressed when discussing issues like mut'a, and calling shias 'people who don't mind their women being prostitutes in reality'. Or particular issues of Fiqh which were quite disturbing from (e.g.) the Fiqh compilation of Khomeini.It was overall the cold attitude, as opposed to helpful, that made me disheartened.

34. You mentioned the bigotted attitude of Sunni scholars with respect to the Shias; did you notice any disheartening attitudes of Shia scholars with respect to the Sunni faith?

As for the shia scholars, the ones that I met in person displayed good adaab. While they were not so kind to the 'saudi wahhabis', they were still generally fine with the 'other sunnis'.As for the shia authors, they were as bad (if not worse). A perfect example would be Syed Ali Milani, who not only propagates lies in words and lectures, but also does not have the adab to talk about those who disagree with him. Also, several other shia authors have this problem, and it was interesting to note that I did not see this in the scholars that I met with in person.

35. What would you say to the Sunnis making research into the Shia faith? What should they look for, and what, in general, is your advice to them?

My sincere advice would be:

1) to realize that the hadith corpus has many sciences, which the shia propaganda books cleverly ignore to bring up.

2) to take the 'problematic' ahadith to a scholar who is well-verses in the sciece of Rijal, and preferably is well-grounded in Usool Al-Fiqh.

3) after talking to a scholar, to realize the flaw of the shia argument, and to remember that they (possibly unconciously) spread lies, since they themselves only parrot what they hear/read from propaganda sources without actually checking the sources themselves.

4) thus, avoid shia works competely, as they suck the heart dry of eman and only create enmity for brethren in Islam.

36. If the manner in which the Shia scholars you met was commendable and if they answered your questions in a good manner, then what were the problems you saw in Shiaism which made you reconsider your decision to convert to the Shia faith?

While the shia ulema that I met personally displayed good akhlaaq, they were generally impotent when it came to answering some complex questions I had (e.g. about iradah takweeniyah vs. tashree'iyah), to which they either would try to come up with feeble answers, or promise to answer later on (which never happened). Moreover, I did not bind myself to the statements of 'ulema at any time during my research, since I was 'out there for the truth' where ever I found it. Hence I was ever-critical, and there is no denying that I was quite disappointed in many answers that shia 'ulema gave me. What kept me going was the hope and belief that there was a 'true shiism' out there.

37. You mentioned that it would be best if Sunnis avoid Shia propaganda altogether. However, Shias many times will seek to spark debates and arguments with their Sunni counterparts (this can also be in all general Muslim discussion forums, as well as in real life). Thus, at least some Sunnis will be drawn into these discussions without falling into doubt. What would be your advice to these people?

There are several things people should remember before engaging in a debate:

1) they are not themselves scholars, and are handicapped when its comes to referring to primary sources, their authenticity, applicability and meaning.

2) debates are more than just about where the truth lies. Debating skills usually judge which side will win, and the shias (and other sects like the Qadiyaniyyah) are known to have good debating skills because of the nature of their sectarianism. Since they go against the majority, every shia has to know the basics in how to retaliate to questioning and criticism.

3) many times people get so engrossed in minute details and semantics that they forget to see the bigger picture of Islam that the Prophet (s) brought. Hence, debating has the danger of making the person irrational and narrow-minded in their thinking.

38. May I know when you exactly became suspicious of the "current Shiaism" prevalent among the Shia masses and decided that theer should be some "true Shiaism" that you would hope to find?

Initially when I read the almost 'Utopian' books like 'Then I was Guided', it seemed like Shi'ism was so clearly the truth that anything besides it was silly and baseless.However, my scepticism started with interaction. This was in the form of live interaction with shia lay-people as well as scholars, and also from the shias I encountered on internet forums. It was quite clear that they had deviated from the core of the pristine sunnah, and that the manhaj was in general very far from that of the Prophet (s). Hence, I wanted an almost puritanical version of shi'ism with mimimum innovations and maximum adherance to the actual sunnah.

39. Is there laxness from part of the Sunni scholars in answering the Shia allaegations and polemics. If so, why is this, do you see this changing anytime soon, and what can the average Sunnis do to change this (if it is currently a problem)?

While there is no laxness (and there are many excellent books written), the problems are two:

1) the vast majority of the good books are not in english.

2) the books are not that publically accessible, compared to the widely circulated shia propaganda material.For the average sunni, I would actually not encourage delving into the theologies of the deviant schools. Rather, I would encourage strengthening one's own core beleifs and principles of faith/practice - and after that read about the deviance of the other sects if necessary.

40. Could you give examples of how the real Shias you met convinced you that they were not following the true Sunnah, in spite of the perfect picture painted by their propaganda?

The one thing that first struck me was that every shia seemed to know 'everything'. However, as I talked to more and more shias, I realized that they all had one and the same set of certain ahadith, attacks and defenses, very much like the Qadiyaniyyah. This defensive polemicist attitude worried me. Moreover, the average shia are really deeply convinced that they are right, since they believe that both shia and sunni books point in their direction. However, they are absolutely ignorant of Usool, the hadith sciences and the various cobwebs and loopholes in the shia system, since they only busy themselves with 4-5 of the standard issues (Fadak, Ghadir, etc..).

41. You mentioned the "complicated" questions you had asked Shia scholars (i.e. different types of Iradah). Are there any other "tough issues" which they found it difficult to come up with a proper answer?

some that come to my mind are:

1) The lack of authentic nass indicating the names of the 12 imams, while every shia scholar believes in the weak-chained reports in which they were supposedly named by the Prophet (s).

2) The absence of mutawatir fil-lafdh narrations

3) Issues with the occultation of the Imam, and the effects on Usool, protection of the religion, ijma' and other things.

4) Taqiyyah (deception) being practiced by the 'guides' from God.

5) Tahreef of the order and words of the Quran as held by the majority of early shi'ite 'scholars'.

6) The constantly evolving shia belief system (early - midieval - late - contemporary), and the addition/subtraction of 'essentials'.

Wal Salam,

[TripolySunni]

Thoughts of a Shia on the evidence used to support his sect

A very good article written by the famous Shia called "LINK" who is a writer on Shia webiste wilayat.net, he bravely speaks his mind about Shi'ism may Allah Guide him to the complete Islam:

Link to discussion is here:http://islamic-forum.net/index.php?showtopic=15947&st=0


Assuming Islam can be proven to be true, is there proof of Shiism being true. The first place that one would look for evidence of Imamate is in a book which claims to be the book of guidance that has an explanation of all things. A book wherein there is guidance for the God-fearing.

The main verse to prove Imamate is 4:59. Now Sunnis interpret to refer to authorities and see the obedience as conditional. Shias argue that there is no conditional obedience but that it's an absolute command. This is a case where people can see a phrase and imagine extra invisible words in it, that are inherent in it, because the literal meaning is absurd. This is not the only place this happens in Quran, so this is to no surprise. Shias however insist on it being literally true without it being conditional and no conditions are implied in the sentence. They believe due to this, those to be obeyed must be infallible, because a fallible person may issue commands that are contrary to God's Commands. However this is a fallacy of the excluded middle. One option that hasn't been considered is that a person can only have authority as long as he doesn't command contrary to God's Commands. As soon as he commands people to disobey God, then he looses his authority and the position of authority is stripped from him.
A thing contrary to Shia interpretation, is that the verse is commanding people of general authority. If only infallibles are these authorities, then infallibles cannot appoint authorities on their behalf, neither can there be an authority in absence of infallibles, which no society can function without. At any rate, this verse is certainly not conclusive to prove Imamate in Shia way of understanding. It is further complicated by 4:83 which intuitively (perhaps not conclusively) gives an understanding of ulil-amr against the Shia understanding.

The other verse which is used as proof is 33:33. The word athhab in other places of Quran clearly means remove, and at the very least it's not conclusive that it means keep away uncleanness from them. It seems rather the Quran is expressing God's desire to purify them. There is some issue with the "Inama" and what it excludes, but it excluding Ahlebayt for that wish, seems obviously wrong, as God intends by other verses to completely purify others as well. As God wishes to remove grief from people in paradise, it being exclussion of what God wishes to "yuthhab" to be uncleanness from them seems to be incorrect as well. At the end, there seems to be really no clear meaning as to what the Inama is for. The impression most people get the first time is that it's dealing with the only thing God intends with these commands. A problem is that it seems God desires more with such command like wishing to grant paradise and wishing more honor after purification and more spiritual level after purification, so there is a problem there. I've seen a suggesting it's emphasizing that's it but a wish to purify them, I don't know if it makes sense, but it would mean it's not to be exaggerated beyond a wish to purify them. I honestly don't know how it can be read that way but at the very least, it doesn't seem this verse is conclusive to prove anything about the people it's addressing.

The verse 5:55 is another proof. It's said it's the authority of Ali along with that of God and his Messenger. The Inama would mean only these are Wali over believers. However, Shias take other Imams as authorities, so how can it be just God, the Messenger, and Ali? If there is no exclusion by the Inama, then why can't it mean friend? Even if Ali is just referred to, why can't it mean friend or ally? It seems rather that what it means here is ally and refers to a general description of believers. However an argument against this is why aren't angles included if it means friend and ally. I've seen that their friendship and alliance is included as God's, because Angels lack free-will, and are agents of God. It's not a convincing explanation to me, but anyway you look at it, there is no conclusive proof either way of Imamate.

The verse 42:23. The issue with this verse is that it can have so many meanings. When you investigate the meanings with 25:57, you can see that it can't be really love of your own kin or kinship quraysh had with each other. However, it seems not to make sense even with love of ahlebayt. How can it be said the whole path towards God is love of Ahlebayt? Another view that can be given to it, is that it refers to love of closeness to God. There is a verse that states all those whom strive for God will be guided in God's ways. So it seems this explanation is a plausible as love of Ahlebayt if not more valid. Again, we don't see conclusive proof.

These are basically the only evidence I know of in Quran without hadiths.

When we come and look at hadiths. It's a whole different game. First what makes a hadith credible? If you don't trust the hadiths of Sunnis, then how can hadiths favoring Ahlebayt be conclusive proof. At most, if authentic hadiths support your view, it would make their hadith system inconsistent. But there is many hadiths that support the righteousness of Abu Baker and Umar and even superiority of them at that. Why don't you take these as authoritative? Well because you don't take Sunni Rijaal as authoritative, right. So why should Sunni hadiths about Ali and Imams be authoritative?

Well we can say perhaps there is so much hadiths of one incident that it really can't be doubted. And really when it comes to that, I think it really comes down to "Ali Mawla" hadith and thaqalain hadith.

Well for hadithal thaqalain, exactly what was said is not known. Narrations authentic and weak differ exactly about what was said. But they all seem to be suggesting there is some weight the family of the Prophet has. If we give what majority have said, we can even say it emphasized on taking guidance from them. But one thing to note, it didn't state only to take guidance from them. It also didn't state, if you don't take guidance from them, you will be astray. In other words, at most, these hadiths are saying his family is a source of guidance.

Now the word family is not all to clear. Shias believe it was given a special meaning that excluded people whom normally would be included in family. But is this conclusive? Sometimes when people take about family, they mean certain members in exclusion of others. For example, if your married and have kids, you sometimes will refer to your family as your wife and kids. If you don't have wife and kids, sometimes you will refer to your family as your brothers and parents. Sometimes it will be more then that, and include Uncles, Aunts and cousins. It depends on the context many times.

However one thing for sure it doesn't have to mean, is that it doesn't have to mean all future descendants. It could be referring to his cousins, uncles, and their children, at that time, whom he trusted were guided, and were taught the religion well, but not be referring to all future descendants included in whom he meant he is leaving as a weighty guidance.

So the notion it either includes all future descendants of Ali, Jaffar, Aqeel, And Abbas, or is a special chosen family (Fatima + 12 Imams) is a fallacy of excluded middle.

At the end, it doesn't seem all to clear what he meant. Ali being Mawla is also not all to clear to mean Master. While it seems an odd thing to say friend, perhaps, it had to do with how much heroes and people Ali killed, perhaps it was due to an incident. Although friend is an odd thing to say in front of masses, it's even more odd to pick a word that is open to interpretation as opposed to picking a word that will clearly establish the authority of Ali. This is ofcourse all in the context that he is a Messenger of God.

When did people really start understanding as friend instead of Master? Did one generation all understand it as Master, and then generation that followed them began to interpret it as friend? Does that make sense? Or really was there a misunderstanding.

The event of mubahila and harun manizalat hadith are not as widespread as ghadeer declaration. If you take these hadiths as authoritative in Sunni sources, why not take the hadiths from Ali stating Abu Baker and Umar and Uthman are first, second, and third best in community after Messenger of God, respectively, as authoritative? At the end, somewhat evidence, while you can have interpretation war, but even why it is taken as authoritative while not accepting other hadiths that are narrated just as frequently in their sources...is really a contradictory position to take. At most you can show Sunni hadiths have a contradiction, which will not prove Shiism to be true. It will just show Sunni rijaal is not authoritative and is wrong.

The hadith about 12 Caliphs from Quraysh although narrated with many chains, is at the end narrated from one companion. When did Shias trust all companions to make this one trustworthy? What if the man made it up? At the end, it's not conclusive either.

While the last three hadiths I mentioned can be evidence, it's not conclusive proof. At the end, it seems Shiism lacks conclusive proof.

Now to consider the 8 Imams after Hussain, where do they get their evidence from? Shia hadiths...of course isn't that circular reasoning to trust shia hadiths to establish their Imamate? So there proof seems to be established on circular reasoning. There can be all sorts of reasons shias fabricated it, and at the end, you are trusting shias to establish Imamate of Imams, but you trust them due to believe of Imamate of Imams.

At the end, Shiism is not founded on any conclusive evidence.

[University.]

Djazakalahoe gairan ya akhi.

[TripolySunni]

السلام عليكم

After we discussed the story of the flying elephant in post #113 HERE (http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/showthread.php?57727-Various-scandalous-and-corrupt-beliefs-of-Twelver-Shias/page12), now we are faced with another un-Holy flying beast ... a flying Naqah (She-Camel).



قول: روى مؤلف المزار الكبير باسناده إلى الأعمش قال: كنت نازلا " بالكوفة وكان لي جار كثيرا " ما كنت أقعد إليه وكان ليلة الجمعة فقلت له: ما تقول في زيارة الحسين عليه السلام ؟ فقال لي: بدعة وكل بدعة ضلالة وكل ضلالة في النار، فقمت من بين يديه وأنا ممتلئ غضبا " وقلت: إذا كان السحر أتيته وحدثته من فضايل أمير المؤمنين ما يسخن الله به عينيه. قال: فأتيته وقرعت عليه الباب فإذا أنا بصوت من وراء الباب: إنه قد قصد الزيارة في أول الليل فخرجت مسرعا " فأتيت الحير فإذا أنا بالشيخ ساجد لا يمل من السجود والركوع فقلت له: بالأمس تقول لي: بدعة وكل بدعة ضلالة وكل ضلالة في النار واليوم تزوره، فقال لي: يا سليمان لا تلمني فاني ما كنت أثبت لأهل هذا البيت إمامة حتى كانت ليلتي هذه فرأيت رؤيا أرعبتني. فقلت: ما رأيت أيها الشيخ ؟ قال: رأيت رجلا لا بالطويل الشاهق ولا بالقصير اللاصق، لا احسن أصفه من حسنه وبهائه معه أقوام يحفون به حفيفا " ويزفونه زفا بين يديه فارس على فرس له ذنوب على رأسه تاج للتاج أربعة أركان في كل ركن جوهرة تضئ مسيرة ثلاثة أيام. فقلت: من هذا ؟ فقالوا: محمد بن عبد الله بن عبد المطلب صلى الله عليه واله، فقلت: والاخر؟ فقالوا: وصيه علي بن أبي طالب عليه السلام، ثم مددت عيني فإذا أنا بناقة من نور عليها هودج من نور تطير بين السماء والأرض. فقلت: لمن الناقة ؟ قالوا: لخديجة بنت خويلد وفاطمة بنت محمد، قلت: و الغلام ؟ قالوا: الحسن بن علي: قلت فأين يريدون ؟ قال: يمضون بأجمعهم إلى زيارة المقتول ظلما " الشهيد بكربلا الحسين بن علي، ثم قصدت الهودج وإذا أنا برقاع تساقط من السماء أمانا " من الله جل ذكره لزوار الحسين بن علي ليلة الجمعة ثم هتف بنا هاتف ألا إنا وشيعتنا في الدرجة العليا من الجنة، والله يا سليمان لا افارق هذا المكان حتى تفارق روحي جسدي


The narrator of al-Mazar al-Kabir narrated from al-A'amash who said: I descended in al-Kufa and I had a neighbour and on the evening of the Friday I told him: "What do you say about the visit of al-Husein (as) ?" he answered me: "A Bida'ah(innovation) and every innovation is misguidance and every misguidance is in hell" I left him and I was full of anger and I said: "Later I will return and narrate some of the virtues of 'Ali to get back at him!" so I came and I knocked at his door, suddenly I heard a voice coming from behind the door, it said: "He went to make the Ziyarah early this evening" I went in a hurry and found him prostrating and making ruku'u all the time, I said: "Yesterday you told me this is a Bida'ah and every Bida'ah is a misguidance and every misguidance is in hell? today I see you visiting his grave?" he said: "Ya Suleiman do not reproach me for I did not believe in their Imamah until this night I saw a Vision that frightened me." I said: "What did you see?" He said: "A Man, not very tall and not very short, I cannot describe him well as he was very beautiful and with him were folks that surrounded him, in front of him was a warrior on a horse and on its head was a crown with four jewels that light the way for a trip of three days" I said: "Who is it?" they said: "Muhammad bin 'Abdullah bin 'Abdul-Muttalib SAWS" I asked about the other and they said: "his successor 'Ali bin abi Talib (as)"I stretched my sight and saw a She-Camel made from light carrying a small tent from light flying between the sky and the earth (http://manager.albawaba.com/img/new_sys/mediabank/59585_mb_file_36a4b.jpg)" I asked "Who is it for?" They said: "Khadeejah bint Khuwaylid and Fatima bint Muhammad" I said: "And the boy?" they said: "al-Hasan bin 'Ali" I asked: "Where are they going?" they said: :"To visit the oppressed one who was killed, the martyr in Karbala al-Husein bin 'Ali" then I went towards the tent of light and heard a voice say "We and our Shia are in the highest level of paradise" By Allah O Suleiman I will never leave this place until my soul leaves my body.


source: Bihar al-Anwar by al-Majlisi vol.98 pg58.

[AlGhuraba]

salam-o-laikum can somebody please tell me if this is an authentic hadith?


Hanafi scholar Ibn Jauzi in his work Tadhkirathul Khawwas al Ummah page 30, narrates this Hadeeth on the authority of Jabir (ra):

"The Prophet (s) said to 'Ali, 'O 'Ali, I swear by He who controls my life, verily on the Gate of Heaven there is written 'There is no God but Allah, Muhammad is His Messenger, 'Ali ibne Abi Talib is the brother of the Prophet' this Kalima was inscribed two thousand years before the creation of the Universe".

Modern day Hanafi scholar Mufti Ghulam Rasul in 'Hasab aur Nasab' Volume 1 page 116 has recorded the same Hadeeth on the authority of Jabir from the following esteemed Sunni works:

1. Manaqib 'Ali bin Abi Talib page 91
2. Hilayath al Awliya Volume 7 page 256
3. Tareekh Baghdad Volume 7 page 387
4. Meezan al Itidal Volume 1 page 457,
5. Dhukhayr al Uqba page 66
6. Mujmaa al Zawaad Volume 9 page 111
7. Tadhkiratul Khawwas al Ummah page 26
8. Kanz al Ummal, Volume 5, Page 36

[University.]

3712 - حدثنا قتيبة حدثنا جعفر بن سليمان الضبعي عن يزيد الرشك عن مطرف بن عبد الله عن عمران بن حصين قال : بعث رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم جيشا واستعمل عليهم علي بن أبي طالب فمضى في السرية فأصاب جارية فأنكروا عليه وتعاقد أربعة من أصحاب رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم فقالوا إذا لقينا رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم أخبرناه بما صنع علي وكان المسلمون إذا رجعوا من السفر بدءوا برسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم فسلموا عليه ثم أنصرفوا إلى رحالهم فلما قدمت السرية سلموا على النبي صلى الله عليه و سلم فقام أحد الأربعة فقال يا رسول الله ألم تر إلى علي بن أبي طالب صنع كذا وكذا فأعرض عنه رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم ثم قام الثاني فقال مثل مقالته فأعرض عنه ثم قام الثالث فقال مثل مقالته فأعرض عنه ثم قام الرابع فقال مثل ما قالوا فأقبل رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم والغضب يعرف في وجهه فقال ما تريدون من علي ؟ ما تريدون من علي إن عليا مني وأنا منه وهو ولي كل مؤمن بعدي

Does anyone have this hadith without: وأنا منه وهو ولي كل مؤمن بعدي
I still can't find it haha...

[TripolySunni]

salam-o-laikum can somebody please tell me if this is an authentic hadith?


Hanafi scholar Ibn Jauzi in his work Tadhkirathul Khawwas al Ummah page 30, narrates this Hadeeth on the authority of Jabir (ra):

"The Prophet (s) said to 'Ali, 'O 'Ali, I swear by He who controls my life, verily on the Gate of Heaven there is written 'There is no God but Allah, Muhammad is His Messenger, 'Ali ibne Abi Talib is the brother of the Prophet' this Kalima was inscribed two thousand years before the creation of the Universe".

Modern day Hanafi scholar Mufti Ghulam Rasul in 'Hasab aur Nasab' Volume 1 page 116 has recorded the same Hadeeth on the authority of Jabir from the following esteemed Sunni works:

1. Manaqib 'Ali bin Abi Talib page 91
2. Hilayath al Awliya Volume 7 page 256
3. Tareekh Baghdad Volume 7 page 387
4. Meezan al Itidal Volume 1 page 457,
5. Dhukhayr al Uqba page 66
6. Mujmaa al Zawaad Volume 9 page 111
7. Tadhkiratul Khawwas al Ummah page 26
8. Kanz al Ummal, Volume 5, Page 36

al-Albani said "Mawdou'u" or "Fabricated" (Which is a level way below weak) in al-Silsilah al-Da'eefah.
al-Dhahabi said "Fabricated" in Meezan al-I'itidal.

Besides the quotes he made, for example he quoted that the Hadith was in Majma'a al-Zawaed however he did not quote what the author of Majma'a al-Zawaed said, al-Haythami has said that it has weak and unknown narrators.

Besides the Shia intentionally quoted "Ibn al-Jawzi" and this is not the Famous Sunni scholar "Abu al-Faraj Ibn al-Jawzi" who was a Hanbali and who passed away in 592 Hijri, This is another Shia scholar called Sabt Abu al-Faraj ibn al-Jawzi who died in 654 Hijri and he had books to attack the Sahaba and spread the ideology of Shi'ism.

In fact let's read from his book:

"محمد بن الحسن بن علي بن محمد بن علي بن موسى بن جعفر بن محمد بن علي بن الحسين بن علي بن أبي طالب وكنيته أبو عبد الله وأبو القاسم وهو الخلف الحجة صاحب الزمان القائم والمنتظر والتالي وهو آخر الأئمة وقال : ويقال له ذو الإسمين محمد وأبو القاسم قالوا : أمه أم ولد يقال لها صقيل". (تذكرة الخواص صفحة204 ط.طهران)

Page 204 from Tathkiratul-Khawwas: "Muhammad bin al-Hasan bin 'Ali bin Muhammad bin 'Ali bin Musa bin Ja'afar bin Muhammad bin 'Ali bin al-Husein bin 'Ali bin abi Talib, known as Abu 'Abdullah and Abu al-Qassem, al-Muntazar and he is the successor, the Hujjah, Saheb al-Zaman, al-Qaem and he is the final Imam from the twelve." [Takhkiratul-Khawwas by Sabt ibn al-Jawzi, page 204, Print Tehran - Iran]

So he's a Shia.

^ That deceptive method is often used by Shia, for example they quote al-Tabari saying something but when you research you find out that there is a Sunni Tabari (the famous one) and some unknown Shia scholar who had the same name.

Salam Aleykum,

[TripolySunni]

Does anyone have this hadith without: وأنا منه وهو ولي كل مؤمن بعدي
I still can't find it haha...

They differed on this one, some said Sahih like Albani and some said Batil like Ibn Tayymiyah, I see that it reached us through Ja'afar bin Suleiman a reliable Shia with ghulu in 'Ali and an extreme hatred for the rightly guided Caliphs and he had little weakness in his Hadith, so if he makes taffarod, meaning if he narrates something exclusive without any other narrations backing them up then he's not as reliable.

Although he narrated a Hadith in which he says "The Prophet SAWS died while having not appointed any successors."

مات رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم ولم يستخلف أحدا

Which means although he was a Shia he never understood the Hadith like the present day Shias do, he just believed that 'Ali was more worthy but not appointed by a text.

As for the Hadith itself those who authenticated it explained it differently and interpreted it differently than the Shia, a group explained it as loyalty and support and another group explained it as the Imarah over the army of believers which he headed.
(If you know Arabic I can post that detailed explanation for you).

Another report exists with the same addition through al-Kindi who is also a Shia.

check post #629 here:
http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/showthread.php?57727-Various-scandalous-and-corrupt-beliefs-of-Twelver-Shias/page63

[TripolySunni]

Wallahi it's been a while Ya Grand Ayatullat Sistani, let's post some of his new pornographic Fatwas and see what our Shia friends have to ask.


السؤال:
زواج المتعة في مذهب أهل البيت ( ع ) جائز ، ولكن هناك أفراد يستغلون هذا الجواز ، حيث أن بعض هؤلاء الأفراد متزوجون ويتركون زوجاتهم ، ويسافرون لغرض زواج المتعة ، والبعض يسافر بزوجاته ويتزوج المتعة .. هل مثل هذا الزواج جائز ؟.. وهل هناك ظروف يجب ان تتحقق لزواج المتعة ؟
الفتوى:
يجوز ذلك ، ولكن إذا أرادوا التمتع بالكتابية ، فلا يجوز بدون إذن الزوجة المسلمة ، بل حتى بإذنها على الأحوط .


Screen:http://i449.photobucket.com/albums/qq218/hanysal/TTT1.jpg
Link:http://www.alseraj.net/ar/fikh/2/?TzjT8odmvl1075094365&271&300&10

Question 271: Mutah marriage in the Madhab of Ahlul-Bayt (a) is permissible, some individuals however take advantage and abuse this marriage, some individuals who are married leave their wives and travel for the purpose of Mutah, some even travel with their wives and do Mutah .. is this kind of marriage permissible? are there some special condition which must be fulfilled for Mutah marriage?

Fatwa: That is permissible, unless they want to make Mutah with a woman from Ahlul-Kitab then in this case it is not permissible unless they ask the permission of the Muslim wife, even with that it is not permissible by precaution.

- end -


السؤال:
أرسلت الى سماحتكم سؤال ، ونصه كالتالي : لدي خادمة واريد ان اعقد عليها زواج المتعة .. هل يجوز لي ذلك علماً انها بكر؟ وكان جوابكم هو : يجوز بإذن ابيها أو جدها لابيها .
سؤالي التالي هو .. هل اخذ الاذن من أبيها يكفي منها بأن تكلمه هي ، أم أنا الذي اكلمه ، علماً ان اهلها في اندونيسيا ، ونحن في السعودية ، وانا لا اعرف لغتهم ؟.. وهل يجوز ان اعقد عليها بدون اذن أهلها بحكم انها في غربة ، وقد لا تتمكن من اخذ الاذن من اهلها ؟
الفتوى:
يكفي أن تستأذن هي وتعقد عليها إن اطمأنت بالاذن ، وإذا تعسر اتصالها بوليها ، وكانت بحاجة ماسة إلى الزواج ، فيجوز لها الزواج من دون إذنه .


Screen:http://i449.photobucket.com/albums/qq218/hanysal/TTT2.jpg
Link:http://www.alseraj.net/ar/fikh/2/?TzjT8odmvl1075094365&271&300&10

Question 286: I sent your eminence a question and the text was: I have a house maid and I want to make Mutah with her .. can I do this knowing that she's a virgin? your answer was: "permissible with the permission of her father or paternal-grandfather." my next question is: is the permission fulfilled if she asks him for me or should I ask him? knowing that her parents are in Indonesia and we are in Saudi and I do not know the language .. can I make Mutah with her without their permission because she is in a strange land and might not be able to reach the parents?

Fatwa: It is enough if she asks for permission and you sense acceptance, if she could not call and is in dire need of marriage then it is permissible to marry her without their permission.

- end -


السؤال:
هل يجوز زواج المتعة ببنت أخت الزوجة ؟
الفتوى:
يجوز بإذن الزوجة .


Question 289: Is it allowed to do Mutah with the daughter of the wife's sister?

Fatwa: permissible with the permission of the wife.

- end -

[TripolySunni]

^ As Hard as he may try though, Ayatullat Sistani will never beat Ayatullat Roohani when it comes to Zinah and Adultery, Here is Roohani's retaliation:



السؤال :
لو انا جلبت لي خادمة من الخارج و طلبت منها زواج المتعة و وافقت على ذلك فهل يجوز لي ان اتمتع بها ؟


الجواب :
بإسمه جلت أسمائه

ان كانت مسلمة او كتابية يجوز التمتع بها.



screen:http://i449.photobucket.com/albums/qq218/hanysal/451.jpg
link:http://ar.rohani.ir/istefta-3315.htm


Question: If I got myself a foreign house maid and asked her for Mutah marriage and she agreed, is it permissible for me to have Mutah with her?

Answer:

Bi Ismihi Jallat Asmauhu,

If she was a Muslim or from Ahlul-Kitab then it is permissible.

- end -

[TripolySunni]

Salam Aleykum,


Beautiful narration from Ahlul-Bayt (ra) about the virtues of 'Aisha and the cleverness of ibn 'Abbas (ra):



لما خرجت الحرورية اعتزلوا في دار وكانوا ستة آلاف فقلت لعلي : يا أمير المؤمنين أبرد بالصلاة لعلي أكلم هؤلاء القوم . قال : إني أخافهم عليك ، قلت : كلا ، فلبست وترجلت ودخلت عليهم في دار نصف النهار وهم يأكلون فقالوا : مرحبا بك يا ابن عباس فما جاء بك ؟ قلت لهم : أتيتكم من عند أصحاب النبي - صلى الله عليه وعلى آله وسلم - المهاجرين والأنصار ومن عند ابن عم النبي - صلى الله عليه وعلى آله وسلم - وصهره ، وعليهم نزل القرآن . فهم أعلم بتأويله منكم وليس فيكم منهم أحد لأبلغكم ما يقولون وأبلغهم ما تقولون . فانتحى لي نفر منهم ، قلت : هاتوا ما نقمتم على أصحاب رسول الله - صلى الله عليه وعلى آله وسلم - وابن عمه ؟ قالوا : ثلاث ، قلت : ما هن ؟ قال : أما إحداهن فإنه حكم الرجال في أمر الله وقال الله : : { إن الحكم إلا لله } [ الأنعام : 57 ، يوسف : 40 ، 67 ] ما شأن الرجال والحكم ؟ قلت : هذه واحدة . قالوا : وأما الثانية فإنه قاتل ولم يسب ولم يغنم إن كانوا كفارا لقد حل سبيهم ولئن كانوا مؤمنين ما حل سبيهم ولا قتالهم . قلت : هذه ثنتان فما الثالثة ؟ وذكر كلمة معناها . قالوا : محى نفسه من أمير المؤمنين فإن لم يكن أمير المؤمنين فهو أمير الكافرين . قلت : هل عندكم شيء غير هذا ؟ قالوا : حسبنا هذا ، قلت لهم : أرأيتكم إن قرأت عليكم من كتاب الله جل ثناؤه وسنة نبيه - صلى الله عليه وعلى آله وسلم - ما يرد قولكم أترجعون ؟ قالوا : نعم قلت : أما قولكم : حكم الرجال في أمر الله فإني أقرأ عليكم في كتاب الله أن قد صير الله حكمه إلى الرجال في ثمن ربع درهم فأمر الله تبارك وتعالى أن يحكموا فيه . أرأيت قول الله تبارك وتعالى : { يأيها الذين أمنوا لا تقتلوا الصيد وأنتم حرم ومن قتله منكم متعمدا فجزاء مثل ما قتل من النعم يحكم به ذوا عدل منكم } [ المائدة : 95 ] وكان من حكم الله أن صيره إلى الرجال يحكمون فيه ، ولو شاء يحكم فيه فجاز من حكم الرجال ، أنضدكم بالله أحكم الرجال في صلاح ذات البين وحقن دمائهم أفضل أو في أرنب ؟ قالوا : بلى ، بل هذا أفضل . وفي المرأة وزوجها { وإن خفتم شقاق بينهما فابعثوا حكما من أهله وحكما من أهلها } [ النساء : 35 ] فنشدتكم الله ، حكم الرجال في صلاح ذات بينهم وحقن دمائهم أفضل من حكمهم في بضع امرأة ؟ خرجت من هذه ؟ قالوا : نعم . قلت : وأما قولكم : قاتل ولم يسب ولم يغنم أفتسبون أمكم عائشة ، تستحلون ما تستحلون من غيرها وهي أمكم ؟ فإن قلتم : إنا نستحل منها ما نستحل من غيرها فقد كفرتم ، وإن قلتم : ليست بأمنا فقد كفرتم : { النبي أولى بالمؤمنين من أنفسهم وأزواجه أمهاتهم } [ الأحزاب : 6 ] فأنتم بين ضلالتين فأتوا منها بمخرج أفخرجت من هذه ؟ قالوا : نعم . وأما محي نفسه من أمير المؤمنين ، فأنا آتيكم بما ترضون . أن نبي الله - صلى الله عليه وعلى آله وسلم - يوم الحديبية صالح المشركين فقال لعلي : ( اكتب يا علي : هذا ما صالح عليه محمد رسول الله ) قالوا : لو نعلم أنك رسول الله ما قاتلناك . فقال رسول الله - صلى الله عليه وعلى آله وسلم - : ( امح يا علي : اللهم إنك تعلم أني رسول الله امح يا علي واكتب : هذا ما صالح عليه محمد بن عبد الله ) والله لرسول الله - صلى الله عليه وعلى آله وسلم - خير من علي ، وقد محى نفسه ، ولم يكن محوه نفسه ذلك محاه من النبوة أخرجت من هذه ؟ قالوا : نعم, فرجع منهم ألفان, وخرج سائرهم فقتلوا على ضلالتهم, قتلهم المهاجرون والأنصار .


‘Abdullah ibn al-‘Abbas (ra) narrates: when al-Haruriyyah(Khawarij) rebelled they were six thousand so I told ‘Ali: “O Ameer al-Mumineen maybe I should go and talk to them?” ‘Ali said: “I fear they may harm you.” I said: “No.” Then I prepared myself and went to them in mid-day while they were eating, they said: “Welcome O Ibn ‘Abbas, what brings you?” I told them: “I was sent by the companions of Rasl-Allah SAWS, the Mouhajiroun and the Ansars and by the cousin and brother in law of our Prophet SAWS, the Quran was revealed on them. They know its explanation and meanings better than you and none of them is among you, I came to tell you what they say and to tell them your response.” A group of them came to me and I said: “what grievances have you against the companions and the cousin of the Prophet SAWS, the husband of his daughter and the first of those who believed in him?” they said: “Three things.” I said: “do tell.” The men proceeded to relate three main complaints against Ali. First, that he appointed men to pass judgment in matters pertaining to the religion of God - meaning that Ali had agreed to accept the arbitration of Abu Musa al-Asbari and Amr ibn al-As in the dispute with Muawiyah. Secondly, that he fought and did not take booty nor prisoners of war. Thirdly, that he did not insist on the title of Amir al-Muminin during the arbitration process although the Muslims had pledged allegiance to him and he was their legitimate amir. To them this was obviously a sign of weakness and a sign that Ali was prepared to bring his legitimate position as Amir al-Muminin into disrepute.
In reply, Abdullah asked them that should he cite verses from the Quran and sayings of the Prophet to which they had no objection and which related to their criticisms, would they be prepared to change their position. They replied that they would and Abdullah proceeded: Regarding your statement that Ali has appointed men to pass judgment in matters pertaining to Allahs religion, Allah Glorified and Exalted is He, says: O you who believe! Kill not game while in the sacred precincts or in pilgrim garb. If any of you do so intentionally, the compensation is an offering, of a domestic animal equivalent to the one he killed and adjudged by two just men among. I adjure you, by God! Is the adjudication by men in matters pertaining to the preservation of their blood and their lives and making peace between them more deserving of attention than adjudication over a rabbit whose value is only a quarter of a dirham?
Their reply was of course that arbitration was more important in the case of preserving Muslim lives and making peace among them than over the killing of game in the sacred precincts for which Allah sanctioned arbitration by men.
Have we then finished with this point? asked Abdullah and their reply was: Allahumma, naam - O Lord, yes! Abdullah went on: As for your statement that Ali fought and did not take prisoners of war as the Prophet did, do you really desire to take your mother Aishah as a captive and treat her as fair game in the way that captives are treated? If your answer is Yes, then you have fallen into kufr (disbelief). And if you say that she is not your mother, you would also have fallen into a state of kufr for Allah, Glorified and Exalted is He, has said: The Prophet is closer to the believers than their own selves and his wives are their mothers (entitled to respect and consideration). (The Quran, Surah al-Ahzab, 34:6).
Choose for yourself what you want, said Abdullah and then he asked: Have we then finished with this point? and this time too their reply was: Allahumma, naam - O Lord, yes! Abdullah went on: As for your statement that Ali has surrendered the title of Amir al-Muminin, (remember) that the Prophet himself, peace and blessings of God be on him, at the time of Hudaybiyyah, demanded that the mushrikin write in the truce which he concluded with them: This is what the Messenger of God has agreed... and they retorted: If we believed that you were the Messenger of God we would not have blocked your way to the Kabah nor would we have fought you. Write instead: Muhammad the son of Abdullah. The Prophet conceded their demand while saying: By God, I am the Messenger of God even if they reject me. At this point Abdullah ibn Abbas asked the dissidents: Have we then finished with this point? and their reply was once again: Allahumma, naam - O Lord, yes! Two thousand of them left and the rest fought and were killed by the Mouhajiroun and the Ansars.

Source: Ibn Hajar said Sahih in al-Dirayah 2/138.

[University.]

How can you prove that the itra' of Ali and other ahllalbayt were sunnis?

[Maripat]

How can you prove that the itra' of Ali and other ahllalbayt were sunnis?
itra'?

[TripolySunni]

How can you prove that the itra' of Ali and other ahllalbayt were sunnis?

From the Ahadith and from the fact that we know the history of the Shia and we know that the twelver Shia of today never existed at the time, Let's take al-Hasan ibn 'Ali (ra) as an example:

We know that the Shia believe that an Imam is to be appointed by text from the previous Imam, yet we read that 'Ali (ra) never appointed al-Hasan (ra):


قيل لعلي ألا تستخلف قال لا ولكن أترككم إلى ما ترككم إليه رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم
الراوي: علي المحدث: الهيثمي - المصدر: مجمع الزوائد - الصفحة أو الرقم: 5/200
خلاصة حكم المحدث: رجاله ثقات

They said to caliph Ali: Will you not appoint a successor? he said: No, but I leave you as the apostle of Allah left you.
Narrator: Ali
Source: Haythami in Mujama'a al Zawa'ed.
Rank: All narrators are trustworthy.

The Shia say the Imams were ordered to rule the nation but we read that al-Hasan (ra) abandoned leadership and offered his position to Mu'awiuyah (ra):


جبير بن نفير قال: قلت للحسن بن علي إن الناس يزعمون أنك تريد الخلافة. فقال: كانت جماجم العرب بيدي يسالمون من سالمت و يحاربون من حاربت، فتركتها ابتغاء وجه الله، ثم أبتزها بأتياس أهل الحجاز؟!
البلاذري في أنساب الأشراف (3/49)، و طبقات ابن سعد، الطبقة الخامسة (ص 258) بسند جيد

I told al-Hasan bin ‘Ali: “The people claim that you are running after the Caliphate.” Al-Hasan said: “The skulls of the ‘Arab were in my hands, they would make peace with whom I make peace and they would fight whom I fight, I left it all to seek the face of Allah.”

Source: al-Baladhuri in Ansab al-Ashraf 3/49, Tabaqat ibn Sa’ad, the fifth Tabaqah pg258 with a good Isnad.

The Shia say their Imam is infallible and cannot make mistakes but we read:


قلت للحسن بن علي رضي الله عنهما : ما تذكر من رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم ؟ قال : حملني على عاتقه فأخذت تمرة من تمر الصدقة فأدخلتها في فمي فقال : ألقها أما شعرت أنا لا تحل لنا الصدقة ؟

I said to al-Hasan bin ‘Ali (ra): What do you remember from Rasul-Allah SAWS? He said: He carried me on his shoulder and I took one of the dates of the Sadaqah and placed it in my mouth so he said: “throw don’t you know that Sadaqah is not permissible for us?”
Source: Ibn Hajar said Sahih in Muwafaqat al-Khabarul-Khabar 1/332.

The Shia say that al-Hasan (ra) loves them but he says:



قلت للحسن بن علي : إن الشيعة يزعمون أن عليا رضي الله عنه يرجع قال : كذب أولئك الكذابون لوعلمنا ذاك ما تزوج نساؤه ولا قسمنا ميراثه
الراوي: عاصم بن ضمرة المحدث: أحمد شاكر - المصدر: مسند أحمد - الصفحة أو الرقم: 2/312
خلاصة حكم المحدث: إسناده صحيح

Asim bin Dumrah said: I told al Hassan Bin Ali: The Shia claim that Ali may Allah be pleased with him will return(before Judgement day), He said: Those Liars! They have lied because if we knew this then his wives wouldn't remarry and we wouldn't have divided his inheritance.

Source: Musnad Ahmad 2/312 and Mujama'a al Zawa'ed for al Haythami.
Hadith rank: Sahih.

[dr.ati]

Meanwhile someone has hacked the main Rafidhi forum shia chat.com.

[islamicstudiescentre]

Assalamu alaikum bro. I was a shia but by the mercy and grace of Allah i have came back to the right path.Bro, Shias are not Muslims.This cult was started by the Jews and christians to destroy Islam

[shakibbhat]

:ws: brother
:mash:
Would you like to share how u changed to sunni?

[University.]

This hadith has been narrated. on the authority of Shu'ba with the same chain of transmitters. Amir b. Sa'd b. Abi Waqqas reported on the authority of his father that Muawiya b. Abi Sufyin appointed Sa'd as the Governor and said: What prevents you from abusing Abu Turab (Hadrat 'Ali), whereupon be said: It is because of three things which I remember Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) having said about him that I would not abuse him and even if I find one of those three things for me, it would be more dear to me than the red camelg. I heard Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) say about 'Ali as he left behind hrin in one of his campaigns (that was Tabuk). 'All said to him: Allah's Messenger, you leave me behind along with women and children. Thereupon Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) said to him: Aren't you satisfied with being unto me what Aaron was unto Moses but with this exception that there is no prophethood after me. And I (also) heard him say on the Day of Khaibar: I would certainly give this standard to a person who loves Allah and his Messenger and Allah and his Messenger love him too. He (the narrator) said: We have been anxiously waiting for it, when he (the Holy Prophet) said: Call 'Ali. He was called and his eyes were inflamed. He applied saliva to his eyes and handed over the standard to him, and Allah gave him victory. (The third occasion is this) when the (following) verse was revealed:" Let us summon our children and your children." Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) called 'Ali, Fitima, Hasan and Husain and said: O Allah, they are my family.

5915


'A'isha reported that Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) went out one norning wearing a striped cloak of the black camel's hair that there came Hasan b. 'Ali. He wrapped hitn under it, then came Husain and he wrapped him under it along with the other one (Hasan). Then came Fatima and he took her under it, then came 'Ali and he also took him under it and then said: Allah only desires to take away any uncleanliness from you, O people of the household, and purify you (thorough purifying)

5955

(sahih muslim)

How can I answer to a shia, if he sends me this?

[TripolySunni]

5915


5955

(sahih muslim)

How can I answer to a shia, if he sends me this?

Salam 'Aleykum,

You reply by saying, Ok great... and what conclusion does he draw from the texts? because all he did was quote 2 narrations.

[TripolySunni]

al-Salamu 'Aleykum,

I edited post #1250 here:http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/showthread.php?57727-Various-scandalous-and-corrupt-beliefs-of-Twelver-Shias/page125

I just added this 5th narration:

Narrated 'Ali (ra): The Prophet SAWS ordered me to bring him a tablet so that he could write on it what his nation will never go astray after, but I feared that while I go fetch it he could pass away, so I told him: "I will memorise and understand." He SAWS said: "My will is the Salat, the Zakat and that which your right hand posses."

Reference: Musnal Ahmad 2/84 - Graded "Hasan" by Ahmad Shakir.

[University.]

Salam 'Aleykum,

You reply by saying, Ok great... and what conclusion does he draw from the texts? because all he did was quote 2 narrations.
Tnx, is there any sahih hadith with: hold on my book and sunnah. ?

[Abdullah Efendi]

Shia Shaykhan Saduq and Mufid: Omission and Edition.
http://gift2shias.com/2011/12/21/saduq-mufid-bada-and-more/

[TripolySunni]

Tnx, is there any sahih hadith with: hold on my book and sunnah. ?

Yes. However, the correct version is the one in Sahih Muslim narrated by Zaid (ra):


The Prophet SAWS praised Allah, extolled Him and delivered the sermon and. exhorted (us) and said: Now to our purpose. O people, I am a human being. I am about to receive a messenger (the angel of death) from my Lord and I, in response to Allah's call, (would bid good-bye to you), but I am leaving among you two weighty things: the one being the book of Allah in which there is right guidance and light, so hold fast to the book of Allah and adhere to it. He exhorted (us) (to hold fast) to the book of Allah and then said: The second are the members of my household I remind you (of your duties) to the members of my family. He (Husain) said to zaid: Who are the members of his household? Aren't his wives the members of his family? Thereupon he said: His wives are the members of his family (but here) the members of his family are those for whom acceptance of Zakat is forbidden. And he said: Who are they? Thereupon he said: 'Ali and the offspring of 'Ali, 'Aqil and the offspring of 'Aqil and the offspring of Ja'far and the offspring of 'Abbas. Husain said: These are those for whom the acceptance of Zakat is forbidden. zaid said: Yes.

[TripolySunni]

Masha-Allah!

Iranian former twelver shia Sayyed Sa'eed Rasooli Nejad explains why he left the sect of shia and came to real Islam, the Islam of Muhammad (salalahu alaihi wasalam), his Ahlulbayt and Sahaba. All praise be to Allah (subhanahu watalah), he guides whom he wills.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=wJI1CciTGVY



P.S you can tell he's Iranian because he called it "Seegha" instead of "Mutah" hehe.

His channel:
http://www.youtube.com/user/Zakah1

[Maripat]

He has got nearly four million channel views. Our Shia brothers are really paying attention to him.

[TripolySunni]

al-Salamu 'Aleykum,

Three Shia men were married:

The first one did the proper Islamic permanent marriage.

The second one did Mut'ah (for the sake of fulfilling his desires).

The third Shia did Mut'ah (Just for the sake of opposing Caliph 'Umar bin al-Khattab [ra])

Which of these three will get the most reward and blessed progeny?

The Sheikh al-Muhadditheen of the Shia al-Majlisi (1st) will answer our questions after he quotes the "strong" narration of Salih bin 'Uqbah from his father, he comments by saying:



و يدل على فضيلة المتعة سيما إذا كانت رغما لعمر عليه لعائن الله

And it proves the virtue of doing Mut'ah especially if it is unacceptable by 'Umar may the curses of God be upon him.



و يدل على أن التزويج بالمتعة أفضل من الدائم إذا كان ردا على عمر

And it proves that doing Mut'ah is better than permanent marriage if it is done to oppose 'Umar.


Source: Rawdat al-Muttaqeen fi Sharh man la Yahduruhu al-Faqih for al-Majlisi, volume 8 page 497.

I leave the comments to you guys. :rolleyes:

Salam,

[TripolySunni]

al-Salamu 'Aleykum,

May the peace and blessings of Allah be on the Prophet Muhammad and his pure family and noble companions and all those who followed them in goodness until the day of judgement. When one observes the Twelver Shia belief in Imamah and compares it with that of Mu'utazilah he will realise that both teams conclude that it is obligatory by means of 'Aql. However, the difference between the two groups is that the Mu'utazillah say that it is obligatory upon the slaves of Allah to appoint their leaders to run their affairs while the Shia claim it is obligatory upon the creator to appoint a leader for his slaves.

The Shia chose a better term to describe this belief and said it is Lutf(Grace) from Allah and he does it out of kindness, the Shia will explain their belief in Lutf by saying: "We believe that Lutf is obligatory upon Allah because he wishes the obedience of his slaves, and he hates their disobedience. So if Allah knew that his slaves would follow in obedience and avoid disobedience if an Imam is appointed, then the Will of appointing an Imam is necessary for his Will of their obedience, because Willing something is also Willing what can help achieve it. That is the meaning we believe in when we say Obligatory upon Allah."

Let us quote in support of the above, the famous Shia website "*************", in which they say:


Lutf is the action on part of God which would help to bring His creatures nearer to His devotion and‑obedience, and facilitate moral correction. It must be mentioned here that "Allah has ordered us to be just, but He Himself treats us with something better than justice, names tafaddul‑grace." (Tafaddul has same meaning as lutf.)

The belief that lutf is morally incumbent upon God is the distinctive belief of the Shi'ah Ithna*'Asharis. The Sunnis do not believe that lutf is in*cumbent upon God.

Link: 'Adl-ilahi (http://www.*************/adl_ilahi/4.htm)
Let us also quote from the same website an article they wrote called "Leadership and Infallibility (Part 1 of 2)", they said:


Imamat is the Grace (Lutf) of Allah which attracts mankind towards His obedience and keeps them away from His disobedience, without compelling them in any way. When Allah orders mankind to do something yet He is aware that either they can not do it, or it is very difficult for them to do it without His assistance, then if Allah does not provide His assistance, He would be contradicting His own aim. Obviously, such negligence is evil according to reason. As such, Grace (Lutf) is one of Allah's character, and He is purified/exalted from inadequacy of lacking such attribute.

Link: Leadership and Infallibility (http://www.*************/encyclopedia/chapter1b/5.html)
Let me quote the 'Aqaed section of the Shia website "academyofislam.org", they state:


The need for a religious guide. Although human beings have been given their conscience to understand right from wrong, and then given heavenly books and Prophets to guide them, it is still possible that many people may stray from the right path. To prevent this from happening, Allah sends leaders who continue to guide to the truth. This is a mercy of Allah and in Islamic terminology is known as Lutf. Lutf is the grace of Allah through which mankind get more than just what is required, more perhaps than what they deserve. In His kindness Allah gives more so that human may benefit and get a better chance of remaining on the right path. An Imam is a Lutf of Allah to give human beings the advantage of continuous Divine guidance.

Link:Aqaed-Imamah (http://academyofislam.org/Madrasah/Lessons/Aqaed/Aqaed-Imamat.pdf)
Now that the reader understands what the Twelver Shia belief of Lutf(Grace) is concerning the divine appointment of an Imam, as an obligation incumbent on Allah, we must mention that the Scholars of Islam from all groups and schools of thought have refuted this belief in detail. We write this article because of the dangerous texts found within the main Shia "bible" called Nahjul-Balagha and because these texts that they attribute to their first divine Imam 'Ali ibn abi Talib (ra) destroy the Shia theory of Lutf(grace) and that it is incumbent upon Allah.

In these following shia texts, 'Ali ibn abi Talib (ra) will mention things that Allah did not do although doing them would have brought the slaves closer to his obedience and faster to the acceptance of the message.

The first thing: In the location of al-Ka'abah if it was filled with jewels and rubies it would have made it easier for the slaves to accept the message and submit.


"If Allah, the Glorified, had placed His sacred House and His great signs among plantations, streams, soft and level plains, plenty of trees, an abundance of fruits, a thick population, close habitats, golden wheat, lush gardens, green land, watered plains, thriving orchards and crowded streets, the amount of recompense would have decreased because of the lightness of the trial. If the foundation on which the House is borne and the stones with which it has been raised had been of green emerald and red rubies, and there had been brightness and effulgence, then this would have lessened the action of doubts in the breasts, would have dismissed the effect of Satan's activity from the hearts, and would have stopped the surging of misgivings in people."

Source: Nahjul-Balagha - Sermon 191
Known as "al-Khutbah al-Qasi`ah"
(Sermon of Disparagement).
The second thing: If Allah were to create Adam (as) from light instead of creating him from clay then accepting his superiority would have been easier.


Then He put His angels on trial concerning these attributes in order to distinguish those who are modest from those who are vain. Therefore, Allah, who is aware of whatever is hidden in the hearts and whatever lies behind the unseen said:

. . . "Verily I am about to create man from clay," And when I have completed and have breathed into him of My spirit, then fall ye prostrating in obeisance unto him. And did fall prostrating in obeisance the angels all together, Save lblis;... (Qur'an. 38:71-74)
His vanity stood in his way. Consequently, he felt proud over Adam by virtue of his creation and boasted over him on account of his origin. Thus, this enemy of Allah is the leader of those who boast, and the fore-runner of the vain. It is he who laid the foundation of factionalism, quarreled with Allah about the robe of greatness, put on the dress of haughtiness and took off the covering of humility. Do you not see how Allah made him low on account of his vanity and humiliated him for his feigning to be high? He discarded him in this world and provided for him burning fire in the next world.

If Allah had wanted to create adam from a light whose glare would have dazzled the eyes, whose handsomeness would have amazed the wits and whose smell would have caught the breath, He could have done so; and if He had done so, people would have bowed to him in humility and the trial of the angels through him would have become easier.

Source: Nahjul-Balagha - Sermon 191
Known as "al-Khutbah al-Qasi`ah"
(Sermon of Disparagement).
The third thing: Giving the prophets kingdoms and power and treasures and leadership makes the people accept them and believe them.


"If the prophets possessed authority that could not be assaulted, or honour that could not be damaged or domain towards which the necks of people would turn and the saddles of mounts could be set, it would have been very easy for people to seek lessons and quite difficult to feel vanity. They would have then accepted belief out of fear felt by them or inclination attracting them, and the intention of them all would have been the same, although their actions would have been different."

Source: Nahjul-Balagha - Sermon 191
Known as "al-Khutbah al-Qasi`ah"
(Sermon of Disparagement).
The Twelver Shia sect is now faced with two choices.

The first choice: Accepting everything 'Ali (ra) said in his sermon above, and thus admitting that the theory of Godly Lutf is false because Allah did not do any of the Lutf mentioned above, so it is incorrect to say that Lutf is incumbent and obligatory on Allah, which leads the Shia to drop everything they built based on their reasoning and 'Aql concerning the divine appointment of an Imam.

The second choice: They stick to what their scholars wrote concerning Lutf and Imamah, but they disprove the infallibility of 'Ali (ra) after he stated facts that opposed their sect.

And peace and blessing be upon Muhammad and his family and companions.

[Nahda]

Akhi Tripoly some Shia posted this on a forum what do you think about it?

Imam of Ahl'ul Sunnah Allamah Shaykh Sharawi Azhari in his famous Egyptian Risala Al Ahraam ul Sunnah page 103 periodical number 32932 wrote:

"The Imam of the Shi'a Imamiya, Hadhrath Imam Ja'far al-Sadiq was the teacher of Imam 'Abu Hanifa. These are the Imamia Ja'fari who as we previously explained adhere to a pure religion. It is with regards to them that our Shaykh Shaltoot issued a fatwa deeming it permissible to follow this madhab because this is a legitimate Islamic madhab, that acts as a source of guidance for its adherents. In Egypt we have incorporated certain principles of Shi'a fiqh on divorce and inheritance into our Law".

[DefendingIslam]

^

I am not sure about this particular statement of Sha'rawi, but as far as I know Shaltout was a sort of modernist with a Mu'tazili bent, thanks to the influence of Muhammad 'Abduh. Others can explain to the rest of us whether such a matter is absolutely true or not, but if there was a modernist streak latent within Shaltout, then the 'Fatwa' of accepting Twelvers as a pure religion would not be surprising.

[NNoor]

I have a slightly off-topic question. Are the mu'taziliyat considered to be Muslims by the scholars of ahl sunnah?

[TripolySunni]

Akhi Tripoly some Shia posted this on a forum what do you think about it?

Imam of Ahl'ul Sunnah Allamah Shaykh Sharawi Azhari in his famous Egyptian Risala Al Ahraam ul Sunnah page 103 periodical number 32932 wrote:

"The Imam of the Shi'a Imamiya, Hadhrath Imam Ja'far al-Sadiq was the teacher of Imam 'Abu Hanifa. These are the Imamia Ja'fari who as we previously explained adhere to a pure religion. It is with regards to them that our Shaykh Shaltoot issued a fatwa deeming it permissible to follow this madhab because this is a legitimate Islamic madhab, that acts as a source of guidance for its adherents. In Egypt we have incorporated certain principles of Shi'a fiqh on divorce and inheritance into our Law".

And The famous and renowned Shia scholar Mulla Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi author of "Bihar al-Anwar" said as reply to the clueless Shaltoot in his book "Miraat al-'Uqool" vol.2 pg.311:
"He who denies one of the Imams peace be upon them, he shall not benefit in his belief in all the Prophets."

So Shaltoot is a Kaffir according to Shia.

[MAFHHZB]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yeTyn2FFR6s

[TripolySunni]

al-Salamu 'Aleykum,

I've found an interesting narration while browsing through some history books, I believe the content of the narration are VERY beneficial and important for us all.


عن حصين بن المنذر، قال: شهدت عثمان بن عفان، وأتى بالوليد فشهد عليه رجلان أحدهما حمران أنه شرب الخمر، وشهد آخر أنه لم يتقيأ، فقال عثمان: إنه لم يتقيأ حتى شربها، فقال: يا على قم فاجلده فقال على: قم يا حسن فاجلده، فقال الحسن: ولَّ حارها من تولى قارها, فكأنه وجد عليه، فقال: يا عبد الله بن جعفر قم فاجلده، فجلده وعلى يعد، حتى بلغ أربعين فقال: أمسك، ثم قال: جلد النبي أربعين، وأبو بكر أربعين، وعمر ثمانين، وكل سنة، وهذا أحب إلىَّ

al-Hosayn bin al-Munthir said: I witnessed in 'Uthman bin 'Affan's time when two men testified against al-Walid that he drank wine and one of them was Humran, and that al-Walid vomited, so 'Uthman said: "He never vomited it unless he drank it, O 'Ali rise and lash him" 'Ali told al-Hasan: "O Hasan stand and lash him" al-Hasan said: "O 'Abdullah ibn Ja'afar stand and lash him" And he started lashing the man and 'Ali was responsible for counting, when he reached forty lashes 'Ali said: "Enough!" then 'Ali said: "The Prophet SAWS gave forty lashes (for drinking), and Abu Bakr forty, and 'Umar eighty, all of them are Sunnah and this one is what I prefer the most."

source: Sharh al-Nawawi on Sahih Muslim (Book of Hudoud) 11/216.

Ibn 'Abdul-Barr said in his book "al-Istithkar" 7/12 while commenting: "أثبت ما في الباب" "This is the strongest narration on the topic" (Which means Sahih).

Seikh al-Albani said SAHIH in "Sahih Sunan ibn Majah" #2100.

For more benefit, the same was narrated by another companion but with more detail:


أتي النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم بشارب ، وهو بحنين ، فحثى في وجهه التراب ، ثم أمر أصحابه فضربوه بنعالهم ، وما كان في أيديهم ، حتى قال لهم : ارفعوا فرفعوا . فتوفي رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم ، ثم جلد أبو بكر في الخمر أربعين ، ثم جلد عمر أربعين صدرا من إمارته ، ثم جلد ثمانين في آخر خلافته ، ثم جلد عثمان الحدين كليهما ثمانين وأربعين ، ثم أثبت معاوية الحد ثمانين

'Abdul-Rahman bin Azhar said: They brought the Prophet SAWS a man who got drank while they were in Hunain, so he threw sand in his face and ordered his companions to hit him so they hit the man with their shoes and whatever was in their hands, then he said: "Enough, enough". The Prophet SAWS passed away so Abu Bakr gave forty lashes for the one who drinks, then 'Umar gave forty at the beginning but then increased it to eighty towards the end of his Caliphate, 'Uthman did both forty and eighty, then Mu'awiyah would fix it at eighty.

source: Sahih abu Dawoud #4488.

And from Sahih Muslim:

Anas b. Malik reported that a person who drunk wine was brought to Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him). He gave him forty stripes with two lashes. Abu Bakr also did that, but when Umar (assumed the responsibilities) of the Caliphate, he consulted people and Abd al-Rahman said: The mildest punishment (for drinking) is eighty (stripes) and 'Umar their prescribed this punishment. (Sahih Muslim - Book #017, Hadith #4226).


What are the benefits of the Hadith of 'Ali?

1- It backs up the famous Hadith that says "Follow my Sunnah and that of the rightly guided Caliphs after me."
2- 'Ali did not claim that 'Umar did a "Bida'ah" because of the Hadith we posted above, he said "All of them are Sunnah".
3- 'Ali did not say "Forty is correct and eighty is wrong" he said "This one(forty) is what I prefer the most."
4- 'Ali was very close to 'Uthman and helped him in managing the affairs of the people.
5- 'Ali obeyed 'Uthman.

Salam 'Aleykum,

[Farouk_NL]

What is the general Islamic ruling regarding twelver Shi'is i mean the general people not the scholars of the Shi'i sect.

[abdulwahhab]

What is the general Islamic ruling regarding twelver Shi'is i mean the general people not the scholars of the Shi'i sect.

:salam:

There are two opinions:

1. The laypeople cannot be all called kaafir. Some are kaafir because they affirm the beliefs held by the Shi'a priests. Some are not kaafir because they believe in essentially the same fundamentals as Sunnis and may not know about the deviation of their religion.
2. The laypeople are also all kaafir. They can be compared to Christians. The Christians are unanimously all kaafir, regardless of some of them not understanding the parts of their beliefs that makes them kaafir (e.g. the Trinity, the humanization of God, the deification of Jesus :alayhis:). Similarly, the Shi'a are all kaafir because being a Shi'a automatically means that one accepts certain beliefs.

When referring to "Shi'a", I'm only referring to the 12ers.

[Farouk_NL]

:salam:

There are two opinions:

1. The laypeople cannot be all called kaafir. Some are kaafir because they affirm the beliefs held by the Shi'a priests. Some are not kaafir because they believe in essentially the same fundamentals as Sunnis and may not know about the deviation of their religion.
2. The laypeople are also all kaafir. They can be compared to Christians. The Christians are unanimously all kaafir, regardless of some of them not understanding the parts of their beliefs that makes them kaafir (e.g. the Trinity, the humanization of God, the deification of Jesus :alayhis:). Similarly, the Shi'a are all kaafir because being a Shi'a automatically means that one accepts certain beliefs.

When referring to "Shi'a", I'm only referring to the 12ers.

Wich scholars support your classifications.

[sunni-from-iraq]

why are there shias on the forum i dont get it the website is evan called sunni forum not shia forum
and i used to be shia half the shias are muslim there is a diffrence for example shia from pakistan or iran they forbid of drawing pictures of their imams and they use the name of the imams such as how people swear to god they swear to the imams as well. the ones in lebanan syria and some iraqi ones there bettar muslims for example they dont think that the imams are any stronger than the prophet and they say its ok to draw the face of ali for example

[Farouk_NL]

What are the beliefs of the Shi'is of Libanon and Iraq?

[TripolySunni]

What is the general Islamic ruling regarding twelver Shi'is i mean the general people not the scholars of the Shi'i sect.

Salam 'Aleykum,

The general ruling is "Deviant Muslims", some scholars say "Kouffar".

The level of deviance of each individual Shia is different, some are close to us, some are so far away from us that you can easily class them as Kouffar.

it depends on each person's 'Aqeedah and beliefs.

[TripolySunni]

What are the beliefs of the Shi'is of Libanon and Iraq?

Salam 'Aleykum,

The further you go to the east, the worst the Shia become, so the Pakistani and Indian Shia are worse than the Lebanese Shia for example.

There is no "specific" belief for twelver Shia in general, they disagree on so many things and when asked a question they each will respond with completely different answers.

[Farouk_NL]

Salam 'Aleykum,

The general ruling is "Deviant Muslims", some scholars say "Kouffar".

The level of deviance of each individual Shia is different, some are close to us, some are so far away from us that you can easily class them as Kouffar.

it depends on each person's 'Aqeedah and beliefs.

What bothers me the most about them is their calling upon the Imams of Ahlel Bayt i think most twelver Shi'is call upon Imams like saying Ya Ali Madad this places them beyond the pale of Islam if you ask me. Or do you think that not all Libanese and Iraqi Shi'is belief in such practices like calling upon Imams?

[TripolySunni]

What bothers me the most about them is their calling upon the Imams of Ahlel Bayt i think most twelver Shi'is call upon Imams like saying Ya Ali Madad this places them beyond the pale of Islam if you ask me. Or do you think that not all Libanese and Iraqi Shi'is belief in such practices like calling upon Imams?

99.99% of them do it.

[sunni-from-iraq]

What are the beliefs of the Shi'is of Libanon and Iraq?

like our brother said i know shias from pakistan and they use the names of the imams as same as they use Allah they see them as the same ranking basicly
the ones in lebanan and iraq are closer to being muslims

[Farouk_NL]

What kind of Shia is Ammar Nakshawani

See him mocking Sahaba here:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s46-2inNg50

[farah1]

Sawratu't-Tirmidhi in his Sunan, which is regarded as one of the six Sahih by you, Imam Ahmad Bin Hanbal in his Musnad, PART II, p.95, and Ibn Athir in his Jam'u'l-Usul have reported that a Syrian man asked Abdullah Bin Umar Bin Khattab what he considered about Mut'a-e-Nisa. He said:"Of course, it is lawful." The man said again, "But your father, the caliph, forbade the people to do it." He said, "It was ordered by the Holy Prophet; so if it has been prohibited by my father that order cannot supersede the order of the Holy Prophet. I am the follower of the Holy Prophet's order."

[abd7861]

Sawratu't-Tirmidhi in his Sunan, which is regarded as one of the six Sahih by you, Imam Ahmad Bin Hanbal in his Musnad, PART II, p.95, and Ibn Athir in his Jam'u'l-Usul have reported that a Syrian man asked Abdullah Bin Umar Bin Khattab what he considered about Mut'a-e-Nisa. He said:"Of course, it is lawful." The man said again, "But your father, the caliph, forbade the people to do it." He said, "It was ordered by the Holy Prophet; so if it has been prohibited by my father that order cannot supersede the order of the Holy Prophet. I am the follower of the Holy Prophet's order."

This is obviously a forgery on Abdullah Ibn Umar :anhu: The Shia's have great dexterity in forgeries. The actual opposite from Abdullah Ibn Umar :anhu: is reported in Imam Tabaraani's Awsat.

Please do not spread the lies of the Shiah 'Scholars'.

May Allah :taala: save the Ummah from the evil of those who curse the Sahaabah with whom He is pleased with.

[TripolySunni]

Sawratu't-Tirmidhi in his Sunan, which is regarded as one of the six Sahih by you, Imam Ahmad Bin Hanbal in his Musnad, PART II, p.95, and Ibn Athir in his Jam'u'l-Usul have reported that a Syrian man asked Abdullah Bin Umar Bin Khattab what he considered about Mut'a-e-Nisa. He said:"Of course, it is lawful." The man said again, "But your father, the caliph, forbade the people to do it." He said, "It was ordered by the Holy Prophet; so if it has been prohibited by my father that order cannot supersede the order of the Holy Prophet. I am the follower of the Holy Prophet's order."

Six Sahihs? I thought we had only two Sahihs? Subhanallah.

Why do Shia women defend Mut'ah so much I don't understand? :p

Let me show you what the authentic Hadith says:


نهانا عنها رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم وما كنا مسافحين

When he was asked about Mut'a-e-Nisa, ibn 'Umar (ra) replied: "The Prophet SAWS forbade us from doing it and we were not fornicators."

source: Ibn Hajar said "Isnad is strong" in al-Talkhees 3/1171.

And as brother "abd" said before me, what you quoted from the books of your lying scholars is no more than a lie attributed to ibn 'Umar (ra), let me show you the correct narration found in Musnad Ahmad without the forgery of your scholars:


سئل ابن عمر عن متعة الحج فأمر بها. فقيل: إنك تخالف أباك؟

"Ibn 'Umar was asked about the Mut'ah of Hajj so he permitted it. they said to him: "aren't you opposing your father?"

And here's the Hadith from al-Tirmithy without the forgery of your scholars:


ان عبد الله بن عمر سئل عن متعة الحج ، قال : هي حلال ، فقال له السائل : ان أباك قد نهى عنها ، فقال : أرأيت ان كان أبي نهى عنها وصنعها رسول الله أأمر أبي نتبع أم أمر رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله ؟


"Ibn 'Umar was asked about the Mut'ah of Hajj, he said: It is Halal. the questioner said: your father had forbade it. He replied: Do you see if my father forbade it and the Prophet SAWS had done it? would we follow the order of the Prophet SAWS or that of my father?"

- end -

So my advice is, before you copy and paste the lies and rubbish from the books of your lying scholars, always verify the sources, otherwise you'll be embarrassing yourself.

And peace upon those who reflect.

[Shahed-560]

Six Sahihs? I thought we had only two Sahihs? Subhanallah.

Why do Shia women defend Mut'ah so much I don't understand? :p

Let me show you what the authentic Hadith says:

When he was asked about Mut'a-e-Nisa, ibn 'Umar (ra) replied: "The Prophet SAWS forbade us from doing it and we were not fornicators."

source: Ibn Hajar said "Isnad is strong" in al-Talkhees 3/1171.

And as brother "abd" said before me, what you quoted from the books of your lying scholars is no more than a lie attributed to ibn 'Umar (ra), let me show you the correct narration found in Musnad Ahmad without the forgery of your scholars:

"Ibn 'Umar was asked about the Mut'ah of Hajj so he permitted it. they said to him: "aren't you opposing your father?"

And here's the Hadith from al-Tirmithy without the forgery of your scholars:

"Ibn 'Umar was asked about the Mut'ah of Hajj, he said: It is Halal. the questioner said: your father had forbade it. He replied: Do you see if my father forbade it and the Prophet SAWS had done it? would we follow the order of the Prophet SAWS or that of my father?"

- end -

So my advice is, before you copy and paste the lies and rubbish from the books of your lying scholars, always verify the sources, otherwise you'll be embarrassing yourself.

And peace upon those who reflect.

السلام عليكم

Why do Shia women defend Mut'ah so much I don't understand?

May be she is 'he' under Taqiyya!

Anyway, you made her furious with these correct quotes and now desperately looking to 'expose' you with some more quotes from 'Sunni scholars' which will be infact from their lying scholars under Taqiyya.

[Maripat]

السلام عليكم

Why do Shia women defend Mut'ah so much I don't understand?

May be she is 'he' under Taqiyya!

Anyway, you made her furious with these correct quotes and now desperately looking to 'expose' you with some more quotes from 'Sunni scholars' which will be infact from their lying scholars under Taqiyya.

In the meantime will it not be a good idea for all Shia women to rise against Mut'ah? And then Taqiyaa. And then Tabarrah. And then Imamate. By that time they all shall become Muslim, that is, Sunni by default. Even if they have become blinded to the reality of Tabarrah the insult hidden in Mut'ah should be rather obvious.

[sunni-from-iraq]

In the meantime will it not be a good idea for all Shia women to rise against Mut'ah? And then Taqiyaa. And then Tabarrah. And then Imamate. By that time they all shall become Muslim, that is, Sunni by default. Even if they have become blinded to the reality of Tabarrah the insult hidden in Mut'ah should be rather obvious.

most of them dont evan know anything about mut'a

[Maripat]

most of them dont evan know anything about mut'a
My impression was that the Shias are very educated people.

[mh16388]

Six Sahihs? I thought we had only two Sahihs? Subhanallah.

Why do Shia women defend Mut'ah so much I don't understand? :p

Let me show you what the authentic Hadith says:



When he was asked about Mut'a-e-Nisa, ibn 'Umar (ra) replied: "The Prophet SAWS forbade us from doing it and we were not fornicators."

source: Ibn Hajar said "Isnad is strong" in al-Talkhees 3/1171.

And as brother "abd" said before me, what you quoted from the books of your lying scholars is no more than a lie attributed to ibn 'Umar (ra), let me show you the correct narration found in Musnad Ahmad without the forgery of your scholars:



"Ibn 'Umar was asked about the Mut'ah of Hajj so he permitted it. they said to him: "aren't you opposing your father?"

And here's the Hadith from al-Tirmithy without the forgery of your scholars:



"Ibn 'Umar was asked about the Mut'ah of Hajj, he said: It is Halal. the questioner said: your father had forbade it. He replied: Do you see if my father forbade it and the Prophet SAWS had done it? would we follow the order of the Prophet SAWS or that of my father?"

- end -

So my advice is, before you copy and paste the lies and rubbish from the books of your lying scholars, always verify the sources, otherwise you'll be embarrassing yourself.

And peace upon those who reflect.

aoa,

jazak Allah khair for this. you may never know how many people you may have saved from going astray and from having doubts

[TripolySunni]

aoa,

jazak Allah khair for this. you may never know how many people you may have saved from going astray and from having doubts

Salam 'Aleykum,

If the Shia scholars don't fear Allah do you expect their laymen to fear Allah?

[mh16388]

Salam 'Aleykum,

If the Shia scholars don't fear Allah do you expect the laymen to fear Allah?


ws,
i was talking about sunni laymen who may have read her post and started harbouring doubts.

[amr123]

ws,
i was talking about sunni laymen who may have read her post and started harbouring doubts.

Yea that distinction of Mutah is unknown to most of us. It will help :insh:

@mh: offtopic, how are you bro? we haven't crossed path in threads much. Hope you are doing fine. :-)

[sunni-from-iraq]

My impression was that the Shias are very educated people.

some are some arnet it depends someone could be realy good at mathmatics and science but not know anything about religion

[TripolySunni]

Salam,

I haven't posted on here for a while so since you guys have bumped it, here's a present for you.

The grand Shia scholar al-Mirza Habibullah al-Khoei in his famous sharh called "Minhaj al-Bara'ah fi Sharh Nahjul Balagha" discusses the corruption of the Quran and I will quote from his book, firstly he starts by stating many examples of Shia Hadiths on Tahreef:

http://www.eld3wah.net/rafeda/books/mnhag-elbra3a-elkho2y.jpg
http://www.eld3wah.net/rafeda/books/mnhag-elbra3a-elkho2y_m2_p216.jpg
http://www.eld3wah.net/rafeda/books/mnhag-elbra3a-elkho2y_m2_p217.jpg

Then he says on pages 219 to 221:



و الانصاف أنّ القول بعدم النّقص فيه ممّا يمكن إنكاره بعد ملاحظة الأدلة و الأخبار التي قدّمناها ، فانّها قد بلغت حدّ التّواتر ، مضافا إلى أخبار ورود الامة على الحوض و قولهم بعد سؤال النّبيّ صلّى اللّه عليه و آله عنهم كيف خلّفتموني في الثقلين : أمّا الأكبر فحرقناه ( فبدلناه خ ل ) و أمّا الأصغر فقتلناه ، و هذه الأخبار أيضا متواترة ، و مع التّنزل عن بلوغها حدّ التواتر نقول : إنّه بانضمامها إلى الأخبار الاول لا محالة تكون متواترة مفيدة للعلم بثبوت النّقصان، إذ لو كان القرآن الموجود بأيدينا اليوم بعينه القرآن المنزل من السّماء من دون أن يكون فيه تحريف و نقصان ، فأىّ داع كان لهم على الطبخ و الاحراق الذي صار من أعظم المطاعن عليهم .
فان قلت : إذا ثبت وقوع التّغيير في القرآن فكيف يجوز لنا قرائته ؟ بل اللازم قرائته على نحو ما انزل فيما اطلعنا عليه .
قلت : إنّ الأئمة عليهم السلام رخّصونا على ما هو الموجود الآن و لم يأذنوا بقرائته على نحو ما انزل .
يدلّ على ذلك ما رواه في الكافي مرسلا عن سهل بن زياد عن محمّد بن سليمان عن بعض أصحابه عن أبي الحسن عليه السّلام قال : قلت له : جعلت فداك إنا نسمع الآيات في القرآن ليس هي عندنا كما نسمعها و لا نحسن أن نقرأها كما بلغنا عنكم فهل نأثم ؟
فقال عليه السّلام : لا ، اقرءوا كما تعلّمتم فسيجيئكم من يعلّمكم .
و فيه أيضا باسناده إلى سالم بن سلمة ، قال : قرء رجل على أبي عبد اللّه عليه السّلام و أنا أستمع حروفا من القرآن ليس على ما يقرئها النّاس ، فقال أبو عبد اللّه عليه السّلام :
مه كفّ عن هذه القرائة و اقرء كما يقرء النّاس حتّى يقوم القائم عليه السّلام : فاذا قام قرء كتاب اللّه على حدّه و أخرج المصحف الذي كتبه عليّ عليه السّلام .
فان قلت : سلّمنا وجود التّحريف فيه فلم لم يصحّحه أمير المؤمنين عليه السّلام حيثما جلس على سرير الخلافة مع أنّه لم يكن منه مانع يومئذ .
قلت : إنّه عليه السّلام لم يتمكن منه لوجود التقية المانعة من حيث كونه مستلزما
[ 220 ]
للتشنيع على من سبقه كما لم يتمكن من إبطال صلاة الضحى ، و من إجراء متعتي الحجّ و النّساء ، و من عزل شريح عن القضاوة ، و معاوية عن الامارة ، و قد صرّح بذلك في رواية الاحتجاج السّابقة في مكالمته عليه السّلام مع الزّنديق .
مضافا إلى اشتمال عدم التّصحيح على مصلحة لا تخفى ، و هو أن يتمّ الحجة في يوم القيامة على المحرّفين المغيّرين من هذه الجهة أيضا بحيث يظهر شناعة فعلهم لجميع أهل المحشر ، و ذلك بأن يصدر الخطاب من مصدر الرّبوبيّة إلى امّة محمّد صلّى اللّه عليه و آله ، و يقال لهم : كيف قرأتم كتابي الذي أنزلته إليكم ؟ فيصدر عنهم الجواب ،
بأنّا قرأناه كذا و كذا ، فيقال لهم : ما أنزلناه هكذا فلم ضيّعتموه و حرّفتموه و نقصتموه ؟
فيجيبوا أن يا ربّنا ما قصّرنا فيه و لا ضيّعناه و لا فرطنا ، بل هكذا وصل إلينا .
فيخاطب حملة الوحى و يقال لهم : أنتم قصّرتم في تبليغ وحيي و أداء أمانتي ؟ فيقولوا ربّنا ما فرطنا في وحيك من شي ء و إنّما فرط فيه فلان و فلان بعد مضيّ نبيّهم ،
فيظهر شناعه فعلهم و فضاحة عملهم لجميع أهل المحشر و يستحقّوا بذلك الخزى العظيم و العذاب الأليم مضافا إلى استحقاقهم للنّكال و العقاب بتفريطهم في أمر الرّسالة و تقصيرهم في غصب الخلافة .
فان قلت : سلّمنا أنّ عليّا عليه السّلام لم يتمكن من تصحيحه و أنّ بقائه على التّحريف كان مشتملا على المصلحة التي ذكرتها ، و لكن بقي هنا شي‏ء و هو أنّ الأئمة لم لم يدفعوا ما عندهم من الكتاب المنظم المحفوظ السّالم عن التّحريف إلى الامّة و ما كان المانع لهم من ذلك ؟
قلت : السّر في عدم إظهارهم عليهم السلام له وجوه كثيرة :
منها أنّه لو أظهر ذلك الكتاب مع بقاء هذا الكتاب المحرّف لوقع الاختلاف بين النّاس و يكون ذلك سببا لرجوع النّاس إلى كفرهم الأصلي و أعقابهم القهقرى .
و منها أنّ شوكة النّفاق يومئذ كان أكثر فلو أظهروه لأحدث المنافقون فيه مثل ما أحدثه رئيسهم قبلهم .
[ 221 ]
و منها أنّه مع إظهاره أيضا لا يكون له رواج ، لمكان شهرة ذلك المحرّف إلى غير هذه من الأسرار التي تستفاد من الأخبار .
و كيف كان فقد ظهر و تحقّق ممّا ذكرنا كله أنّ حدوث التّحريف و النّقصان في القرآن ممّا لا غبار عليه .
و أمّا الزّيادة ففيها تردّد و الأقوى العدم إذ الدّليل عليها ليس إلاّ عدّة روايات و هي لا تقاوم الاجماعات التي ادّعاها الشّيخ و الصّدوق و الطبرسي و المحقّق الكاظمي .

[page 219]

To be fair, the denial of corruption in terms of deletion can be countered by the proofs and narrations that we stated earlier and they have reached the level of Tawatur, also by adding the narrations of when the nation will be brought to the fountain(Hawd) and they will say after the Prophet SAWS asks them on what they did with the two weighty things: "As for the bigger one we burned/changed it, as for the smaller one we killed them." and these narrations are also Mutawatir, even if we were to say that doesn't reach Tawatur yet by adding them to the previous narrations they become Mutawatir and they would clearly prove the deletion from the Quran.
If the Quran in our hands today was the exact same as the one that was revealed from the sky without corruption or deletion, then I ask: for what purpose would they mess with it and burn it? by doing so this has become the biggest criticism against them.
You would say: "If this Quran was indeed corrupt, then how can it be permissible for us to read it? it is required that we read it the way it was revealed."
I say: The Imams permitted us to read what is present in our hands and they did not permit us to read it the way it was revealed, one of the proofs for this is what is narrated in the Mursal hadith in al-Kafi from Sahl bin Ziad from Muhammad bin Suleiman from some of his companions from Abu al-Hassan (as) that he asked him: "May I be a sacrifice for you, we hear the verses from the Quran unlike the ones we have, and we are not able to read them in the form that reached us from you(Imams), are we sinful?"
He (as) replied: "No, recite it as you have been taught. there shall come one who shall teach you."
And in it also is with the Isnad to Salim bin Salamah: "A man recited to abu 'Abdullah (as) and I heard words unlike those read by the people." He (as) told the man: "Meh! stop this recitation and recite it like the rest of the people until al-Qaem rises. When he does he shall revealed the true Quran written by 'Ali."
If you say: "We agree with you that it is corrupt, so why didn't Ameer al-Mumineen (as) correct it? was he not the Caliph and there was no one to stop him?"

[page 220]

I say: "He (as) did not do this for the purpose of Taqqiyah, because doing so will make the first three look horrible. He also could not abolish the prayer of Duha, and was not able to establish the Mutah of Hajj and the Mutah of women. He was not able to remove Shurayh from position of Judge nor Mu'awiyah from position of Ameer..."
.
.
[Then al-Mirza says after a couple of lines]
.
I say: "The reason why they (as) did not reveal it is based on many points.
from them: If that book was revealed while this corrupt one was present, then there would be difference among the people and they may return to their previous state of Kufr.
from them: the hypocrites were extremely dominant at the time so if they revealed it then the hypocrites would have changed it like their leaders before them did.

[page 221]

from them: if it was revealed it wouldn't spread much because of the popularity of the corrupted one, and there are many other reasons.
And no matter what the case, it is apparent and proven from all we have stated that there is no dust on the fact that the Quran is corrupted in terms of deletion.
As for the saying of corruption in terms of addition then this is not a strong opinion and is only based on a few narrations that cannot counter the consensus stated by al-Sheikh and al-Saduq and al-Tabrasi and al-Muhaqqiq al-Kathimi."

source: Minhaj al-Bara'ah fi Sharh Nahjul Balagha "منهاج البراعة في شرح نهج البلاغة" by al-Mirza Habibullah al-Khoei, al-Wafaa Beirut Lebanon, volume 2, pages 216 to 220.

Salam 'Aleykum,

[mh16388]

Yea that distinction of Mutah is unknown to most of us. It will help :insh:

@mh: offtopic, how are you bro? we haven't crossed path in threads much. Hope you are doing fine. :-)

aoa brother,

i am good alhamdulillah. just trying to do too many things at once. please pray that i have barakah in my time. ameen

[amr123]

aoa brother,

i am good alhamdulillah. just trying to do too many things at once. please pray that i have barakah in my time. ameen

Same here. May Allah give you barakah in time, Ameen.

[TripolySunni]

Wajdi 'Akkari finally does one on the Shia (Dogs in sheep's clothing):


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w4GzCQt6pRg

[Basil al-Mamluk]

I don't have a much higher opinion of him than I do of the shias to be perfectly honest akhi.

[TripolySunni]

^ probably because you're a Sufi and he's a Salafi, so you guys will usually not get along.

[TripolySunni]

Some old articles on Mut'ah:

(RFE/RL) -- Prostitution is illegal in the Islamic Republic of Iran, and the penalties are severe, ranging from flogging to execution.

But for reasons no one entirely understands, the number of prostitutes on the streets of Iranian cities and towns has grown substantially in recent years, particularly in Tehran and the holy city of Qom, which is a center for pilgrims and domestic tourists.

Prostitutes wear their veils loosely over their heads in a style that passes for risque in this strictly regulated society. With their faces heavily made up, they stand at traffic circles where men driving by can inspect them and make a deal. The women are often young, including many teenagers who have run away from abusive homes.

Based on official figures, there are some 300,000 women who work as prostitutes in Iran. And according to newspapers, the number is steadily rising, despite frequent police crackdowns.

Now, some senior religious figures are suggesting the only way to solve the problem is to bring it under state control. In recent weeks, several prominent conservative clerics have proposed that prostitutes be placed in government-run shelters for destitute women to be called "chastity houses," where male customers could briefly marry them under Islamic law.

Proponents of the idea argue that it would "eradicate social corruption" by legitimizing sexual relations between the men and women. Under the plan, the couples would register for a temporary marriage under Iran's Shiite religious law code. The code allows a man to marry a woman for a mutually agreed time as short as a few hours or as long as a lifetime by reciting a verse from the Koran.

The temporary marriage license would protect the couple from harassment by authorities and, according to some proposals, it would be accompanied by free contraceptives and health advice. Under religious law, a temporary marriage imposes no obligations on a man unless the union produces a child, who must be recognized as legitimate and can claim a share of any inheritance.

One cleric backing the plan, Ayatollah Mohammed Mousavi Bojnurdi, recently told a newspaper: "We face a real challenge with all these women on the street. Our society is in an emergency situation, so the formation of the chastity houses can be an immediate solution to the problem." He added that the plan "is both realistic and conforms to Sharia [Islamic] law."

But if proponents of the idea see it as a solution, critics say it will only push more poor women and runaway girls into becoming prostitutes. The critics include women's groups, liberal parliamentarians, and, as the idea has been widely discussed in the Iranian press, an increasing number of clerics and state officials.

Hojatolislam Mohammed Taghi Fazel-Meibodi, a member of Qom Seminary, recently told RFE/RL's Persian Service that the proposal is religiously legal. But he said it does nothing to solve the problems of the prostitutes themselves or to prevent more women from joining their ranks: "There are several different issues here. According to Sharia, temporary marriage is legitimate and everyone attests to that. But it is not a common [practice] in our society. Our young people are troubled. There is poverty, unemployment, and more and more girls are escaping from their homes. Establishing these chastity houses will come to no good," Fazel-Meibodi said. "In a society where there are sharp differences between rich and poor, rich men will use these poor girls for a quick thrill and to satisfy their impulses and lust. Also, we have so many serious problems right now, what [problems] are they trying to overcome by introducing these houses at this juncture?"

Some proponents of temporary marriage have said that it will help ease social discontent among young men who are forced by the struggling economy to marry later. The socialist-style economy is unable to provide sufficient numbers of new jobs to absorb the large numbers of young men entering the market and is plagued by double-digit inflation and unemployment. As a result, many young men are unable to afford to start families, and the average marrying age has jumped from the early 20s, common two decades ago, to about 30 today.

Women's groups have been particularly outspoken about the idea of "chastity houses." Reuters recently quoted Shahrbanou Amani, a female parliamentarian, as calling them "an insult and disrespectful to women." The Cultural Council for Women, a liberal Islamist women's group, said such houses would be a "deceitful and thinly disguised" form of prostitution.

Shadi Sadr, a female journalist and legal expert, recently told RFE/RL's Persian Service that the proposal to set up chastity houses also envisions them as shelters for women released from prison. She said that could also push the former inmates into prostitution. "At some point in this plan, there is mention of prison and [the exercise] of judicial power. It is, in fact, to house women when they are released from prison so they go to these registries and are issued temporary marriage certificates. And there is a clear endorsement of payment of fees [in these proposals], which are contrary to temporary-marriage laws," Sadr said.

In recent weeks, some officials have said they would not participate in any efforts to establish chastity houses. The newspaper "Tehran Towse'eh" quoted Mahmud Mirlowhi, a deputy interior minister, as saying in late July that his ministry has nothing to do with the proposals. He also said, "The police force is to reject any allegations linking this proposal with the Interior Ministry."

The rise in prostitution has dismayed the ruling clergy, which for decades has blamed morality problems on negative influences from the West, such as satellite television and videos. The Islamic Revolution that toppled the Shah for being too pro-Western in 1979 closed all of Iran's brothels, driving prostitution underground.

Rasool Nafisi, a sociologist and dean of general studies at Strayer College in Washington, D.C., told RFE/RL's Persian Service that it is uncertain just what is causing the increase in prostitution now. Some of the reasons, he said, may be the poor economy, a high rate of divorce, and the easy exploitation of girls who flee abusive families but have no way to live independently. "The major factor is the high rate of divorce, which is about 25 percent. The other is runaway girls who leave home for a variety of reasons and become bait for those who lure them into prostitution," Nafisi said.

The runaway girls are usually fleeing home situations where their parents are abusive or are drug addicts or where they are subjected to sexual assaults. Some also are reported to be girls who have been married off at a young age by impoverished parents but face conflicts with older, exploitative husbands. But after they escape to towns and cities, they find they have no employment prospects and end up begging, engaging in petty crime, or working as prostitutes.

source: http://www.parstimes.com/women/chastity_houses.html

[TripolySunni]

EFAF HOUSE: RELIGIOUSLY LICENSED PROSTITUTION IN IRAN

by Mitra Sistani*

Special to Iran Press Service

KOLN, 4 Aug. (IPS) The growing problem of street prostitution in Iran has called into action national institutions. A highly controversial plan, defended by the Interior Ministry's Deputy for Social Affairs Ms. Ashraf Boroojerdi, met with sharp criticism from women's groups and religious quarters last week.

"Some people believe that talking about such issues is taboo, but they are part of the reality of society, and turning a blind eye will not solve the problem," the BBC quoted Ms. Boroojerdi as saying.

According to the conservative journal "Afarinesh", a committee of several national boards discusses the establishment of a specific institution, somewhat equivocally baptized as Efaf, or Chastity Houses.

Authorities say that Chastity Houses mainly aims at installing religiously legitimate sexual contacts between men and women, who are not able or not willing to enter matrimony. Based on "sigheh", a contemporary marriage arrangement peculiar to Shiite religion, possible couples would be temporarily united according to a bureaucratic scheme.

All applicants have to sign up at a registration center first, which includes a free health check, where contraceptive services and even abortion for unwanted offspring are offered. An advisory center then arranges the couples, while another would issue a temporary marriage license, paid by the man. The couple would then be conducted to specific hotels or guesthouses, where they could consummate their arrangement without police harassment.

The "chastity houses" would not be open to any male -- only those with identity cards proving they were bachelors, widows, or married to women incapacitated by physical or mental illness would be admitted.

Certain Tehran hotels have already been earmarked for possible use, the newspapers said.


The head of the Imam Khomeini Research Centre, named after the revered founder of the Islamic republic, gave his backing to the plans in a press interview Monday.


"It is vital that we set up these decency houses, given the urgency of the situation," Ayatollah Mohammad Musavi-Bojnurdi told the "E’etemad" daily.

Considering the delicate matter, religious officials, the judiciary and the police are designated to constitute the board of trustees of Efaf.

Apart from the fact that sigheh has repute close to legalised prostitution in Iranian society, the question is, who would profit from this new plan. In 2000, a religious official from the city of Karadj, west to Tehran, was condemned for white slave trade. According to other reports, mullah candidates under critical hygienic conditions on the New Cemetery of the Holy City of Qom extensively practice contemporary marriage.

Women's groups and others reacted angrily, denouncing the plan as little more than licensed prostitution.

"It's euphemism for the official establishment of houses of corruption, the normalisation of illegitimate relations, and the destruction of the family", a member of the Women's Social and Cultural Council said.

Ms Boroojerdi nevertheless insists on this plan, describing it as a necessary response to social realities put under taboo.

Given the sharp reactions, it seems unlikely that Efaf houses will become reality.

The plans floated in the press were "contrary to morality and family values," the justice ministry said in a statement Monday, categorically denying any part in drawing them up.

"The judiciary considers that this proposal is completely without merit and warns those who are airing such ideas to stop upsetting public opinion".

But even when the scheduled "Chastity houses" would be set up, it will not help to solve the problem. In a young society with two thirds of the population below 25 years of age, prostitution increasingly appears as the last resort to high unemployment and strictly enforced segregation of the sexes.

According to welfare officials, at least 300,000 prostitutes are working in the country.

Controlling 60 percent of the domestic trade through religious foundations, as well as the clandestine drug and antiquity markets, it appears as if the ruling clergy is looking for a new source of revenue by profiting from socially and politically deprived women. ENDS EFAF HOUSES 4802.

source: http://www.iran-press-service.com/articles_2002/Aug_2002/efaf_house_4802.htm

[TripolySunni]

Bismellah al rahman a rahim
Temporary Marriage (Marriage is among the traditions of the Prophet Mohammad)

In order to elevate the spiritual atmosphere, create proper psychological conditions and tranquility of mind, the Province of the Quds’eh-Razavi of Khorassan has created centers for temporary marriage (just next door to the shrine) for those brothers who are on pilgrimage to the shrine of our eighth Imam, Imam Reza, and who are far away from their spouses.

To that end, we call on all our sisters who are virgins, who are between the ages of 12 and 35 to cooperate with us. Each of our sisters who signs up will be bound by a two year contract with the province of the Quds’eh-Razavi of Khorassan and will be required to spend at least 25 days of each month temporarily married to those brothers who are on pilgrimage. The period of the contract will be considered as a part of the employment experience of the applicant. The period of each temporary marriage can be anywhere between 5 hours to 10 days. The prices are as follows:

5 hour temporary marriage – 50,000 Tomans ($50 US)
One day temporary marriage – 75,000 Tomans ($75 US)
Two day temporary marriage – 100,000 Tomans ($100 US)
Three day temporary marriage – 150,000 Tomans ($150 US)

Between 4 and 10 day temporary marriage – 300,000 Tomans ($300 US)

Our sisters who are virgins will receive a bonus of 100,000 Tomans ($100 US) for the removal of their hymen .

After the expiration of the two year contract, should our sisters still be under 35 years of age and should they be so inclined, they can be added to the waiting list of those who are seeking long-term temporary marriage. The employed sisters are obligated to donate 5% of their earnings to the Shrine of Imam Reza. We ask that all the sisters who are interested in applying, to furnish two full-length photographs (fully hijabed and properly veiled), their academic diplomas, proof of their virginity and a certificate of good physical and psychological health which they can obtain through the health and human services of the township of their residence. Please forward all compiled material and send to the below address by the 31st of the month of Ordibehesht, 1389 (May 21st, 2010).

Attention: For sisters who are below 14 years of age, a written consent from their fathers or male guardian is required.

Address: Mash’had, Shrine of Imam Reza, Shaheed Navab-Safavi, Kossar passage, Bureau of Temporary Marriages
or call Haji Mahmood Momtaz : 98/511/222-5790.

Source: http://planet-iran.com/index.php/news/19414

[Maripat]

:astagh:
:astagh:

[mh16388]

Bismellah al rahman a rahim
Temporary Marriage (Marriage is among the traditions of the Prophet Mohammad)

In order to elevate the spiritual atmosphere, create proper psychological conditions and tranquility of mind, the Province of the Quds’eh-Razavi of Khorassan has created centers for temporary marriage (just next door to the shrine) for those brothers who are on pilgrimage to the shrine of our eighth Imam, Imam Reza, and who are far away from their spouses.

To that end, we call on all our sisters who are virgins, who are between the ages of 12 and 35 to cooperate with us. Each of our sisters who signs up will be bound by a two year contract with the province of the Quds’eh-Razavi of Khorassan and will be required to spend at least 25 days of each month temporarily married to those brothers who are on pilgrimage. The period of the contract will be considered as a part of the employment experience of the applicant. The period of each temporary marriage can be anywhere between 5 hours to 10 days. The prices are as follows:

5 hour temporary marriage – 50,000 Tomans ($50 US)
One day temporary marriage – 75,000 Tomans ($75 US)
Two day temporary marriage – 100,000 Tomans ($100 US)
Three day temporary marriage – 150,000 Tomans ($150 US)

Between 4 and 10 day temporary marriage – 300,000 Tomans ($300 US)

Our sisters who are virgins will receive a bonus of 100,000 Tomans ($100 US) for the removal of their hymen .

After the expiration of the two year contract, should our sisters still be under 35 years of age and should they be so inclined, they can be added to the waiting list of those who are seeking long-term temporary marriage. The employed sisters are obligated to donate 5% of their earnings to the Shrine of Imam Reza. We ask that all the sisters who are interested in applying, to furnish two full-length photographs (fully hijabed and properly veiled), their academic diplomas, proof of their virginity and a certificate of good physical and psychological health which they can obtain through the health and human services of the township of their residence. Please forward all compiled material and send to the below address by the 31st of the month of Ordibehesht, 1389 (May 21st, 2010).

Attention: For sisters who are below 14 years of age, a written consent from their fathers or male guardian is required.

Address: Mash’had, Shrine of Imam Reza, Shaheed Navab-Safavi, Kossar passage, Bureau of Temporary Marriages
or call Haji Mahmood Momtaz : 98/511/222-5790.

Source: http://planet-iran.com/index.php/news/19414

aoa,

is this article available here aswell:
http://www.aqrazavi.org/index.php?newlang=eng
?
because the one you linked to directs to this website and i cldnt find it

[TripolySunni]

Some Twever Shia scholars who became Sunni:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kc2CJvwzplA

[Aseatic]

:salam:


"Ibn 'Umar was asked about the Mut'ah of Hajj, he said: It is Halal. the questioner said: your father had forbade it. He replied: Do you see if my father forbade it and the Prophet SAWS had done it? would we follow the order of the Prophet SAWS or that of my father?"

What is Mut'ah of Hajj, if you don't mind?

I only know of mut'ah as a (forbidden) type of marriage. I didn't know there was another kind.

[TripolySunni]

:salam:



What is Mut'ah of Hajj, if you don't mind?

I only know of mut'ah as a (forbidden) type of marriage. I didn't know there was another kind.

Arabic wikipedia page:
http://ar.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D9%85%D8%AA%D8%B9%D8%A9_%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%AD%D8%AC

English wikipedia page:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mut'ah_of_Hajj

(Arabic one is much more detailed).

[TripolySunni]

Post #1250 on this page: http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/showthread.php?57727-Various-scandalous-and-corrupt-beliefs-of-Twelver-Shias/page125 Was edited by adding this Narration:



جاءت بنت هبيرة إلى النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم وفي يدها فتخ [ من ذهب ] [ أي خواتيم كبار ] ، فجعل النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم يضرب يدها [ بعصية معه يقول لها : أيسرك أن يجعل الله في يدك خواتيم من نار ؟ ! ] ، فأتت فاطمة تشكو إليها ، قال ثوبان : فدخل النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم على فاطمة وأنا معه ؛ وقد أخذت من عنقها سلسلة من ذهب ، فقالت : هذا أهدى لي أبو حسن ( تعني زوجها عليا رضي الله عنه ) _ وفي يدها السلسلة _ فقال النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم : يا فاطمة ! أيسرك أن يقول الناس : فاطمة بنت محمد في يدها سلسلة من نار ؟ ! [ ثم عذمها عذما شديدا ] فخرج ولم يقعد فعمدت فاطمة إلى السلسلة فباعتها فاشترت بها نسمة ، فأعتقتها ، فبلغ ذلك النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم ، فقال : الحمد لله الذي نجى فاطمة من النار

Thawban (ra) the servant of the Prophet SAWS narrated: Bint Hubayr came to the Prophet SAWS and in her hands she wore big golden rings, so he hit her hand with a stick he had and said: "Would you be happy if Allah made in your hands rings of fire?" So she went to Fatima to complain to her, then the prophet SAWS entered on them while I was present and she was wearing a golden necklace, she said: "This was a gift from abu al-Hassan ('Ali)" while holding it in her hand. The Prophet SAWS said: "O Fatima, would you be happy if people said: Fatima the daughter of Muhammad is holding a necklace of fire?" Then he gave her a harsh lecture and left (the house) and did not sit down. Fatima would sell the necklace and free a slave, when it reached the Prophet SAWS he said: "Praise be to Allah who saved Fatima from the fire."

sources:
- al-Mustadrak 3/178 al-Hakim said: "Sahih on the condition of the two sheikhs".
- Adab al-Zifaf page 158 by al-Albani and he said: "Sahih Mawsoul".

[TripolySunni]

Shirk 101


http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=Xuc9tXdCJ2s

[Usama2]

Shirk 101


http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=Xuc9tXdCJ2s


:jazak: for posting this, dear brother.

It sheds light on the open kufr which is supported by shia, their ayatullats in particular.

[TripolySunni]

:jazak: for posting this, dear brother.

It sheds light on the open kufr which is supported by shia, their ayatullats in particular.

:salam:

Always welcome mawlana Usama.

[Abdullah Efendi]

Very interesting discussion by al-Murtada
http://www.alsrdaab.com/vb/showthread.php?t=52382

Brother Tripoly, could u check it?

[TripolySunni]

Very interesting discussion by al-Murtada
http://www.alsrdaab.com/vb/showthread.php?t=52382

Brother Tripoly, could u check it?

السلام عليكم

I will insha-Allah.

For now I have a nice present while digging into the books of Hadith I found this:


قال لي النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم ولأبي بكر يوم بدر مع أحدكما جبريل ومع الآخر ميكائيل وإسرافيل ملك عظيم يشهد القتال أو يكون في الصف

al-Hakim says: 'Ali bin Himshath al-'Adl told me: Muhammad bin Suleiman al-Wasiti told us: abu Na'eem and Khallad bin Yahya both told me: Mas'ar bin abi 'Aoun al-Thaqafi from abi Salih al-Hanafi from 'Ali bin abi Talib (ra) that he said: The Prophet SAWS told me and Abu Bakr (ra) on the day of Badr: "With one of you will be Jibreel and with the other will be Mickaeel, and Israfeel is a great angel that will oversee the entire battle."

sources:
-Ahmad Muhammad Shakir said "Sahih" in Musnad Ahmad 2/308.
-al-Haythami said "Narrators are those of the Sahih" in Majma'a al-Zawaed 6/85.
-al-Hakim said "Isnad is Sahih" in al-Mustadrak #4492.

[justmuslim786]

the shia leaders (aytullahs) seemt o be brainwashing shias, because who are they to decide whats right and whats wrong, thats only upto Allah. Ok fair enough, mutah is a kind of a marrage, a temporary marrage, but it seems the aytullahs are out there to help the shias abuse what a marrage is... obviously people do take advantage of islam in wrong ways, abusing it, these are perfect examples of it. Just ashame these aytullahs seem hidden even though they openly say these things and produce these crazy fatwas, the shias really need to wake up to these leaders.

[TripolySunni]

the shia leaders (aytullahs) seemt o be brainwashing shias, because who are they to decide whats right and whats wrong, thats only upto Allah. Ok fair enough mutah is marrage a temporary marrage but it seems the aytullahs are there to help others abuse what a marrage is... obviously people do take advantage of islam in wrong ways, abusing it, these are perfect examples of it. Just ashame these aytullahs seem hidden even though they openly say these things, the shias really need to wake up to these leaders.

The Ayatullats are the ones who wrote all the Shia books, so if you take down the Ayatullats their whole fragile Shiite religion crumbles to dust.

(Also Mutah is not a marriage, it's fornication for a short while).

[TripolySunni]

Salam 'Aleykum,

عن أرقم بن شرحبيل قال : سافرت مع ابن عباس من المدينة إلى الشام فسألته : أكان رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم أوصى ؟ فقال : إن رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم لما مرض مرضه الذي مات فيه فذكر حديثا طويلا وفيه قال : ليصل للناس أبو بكر ، فتقدم أبو بكر فصلى بالناس ، ورأى رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم من نفسه خفة فخرج يهادي بين رجلين ، فلما أحس به الناس سبحوا ، فذهب أبو بكر يتأخر فأشار إليه بيده مكانك ، فاستفتح رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم من حيث انتهى أبو بكر من القراءة وأبو بكر قائم ورسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم جالس ، فائتم أبو بكر برسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم وائتم الناس بأبي بكر

Arqam bin Shurahbil narrated: I traveled with ibn 'Abbas from al-Madinah to al-Sham, so I asked him: Did the Prophet SAWS write a will or recommend? He replied: When the Prophet SAWS was in his last illness from which he passed away, and he (ibn 'Abbas) mentioned a long Hadith and in it he SAWS said: Let Abu Bakr lead the people in prayer, so he did and then the Prophet SAWS saw that he was in a good state of health so he went out to the prayer while leaning on two men, and when the people sensed his presence they made Tasbeeh (praised Allah in a loud voice) so Abu Bakr (who was leading the prayer) would step back and point with his hand to the Prophet SAWS, then the Prophet SAWS led the prayer and began reciting from where Abu Bakr last stopped, Abu Bakr was standing and the Prophet SAWS was sitting so he stood behind him and took him as an Imam, while the people later stood behind Abu Bakr as their Imam.

source: ibn 'Abdul-Barr said Sahih in al-Tamheed 22/322.

[TripolySunni]

ONE question, FOUR different answers by Four Shia scholars.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=Ai0kd2dYsf0

[TripolySunni]

الأنصار لا يحبهم إلا مؤمن ، ولا يبغضهم إلا منافق ، فمن أحبهم أحبه الله ، ومن أبغضهم أبغضه الله


al-Baraa bin 'Azib (ra) said: The Prophet SAWS said: al-Ansar(the supporters), No one loves them except a believer and no one hates them except a hypocrite, He who loves them then Allah shall love him and He who hates them then Allah shall hate him.

source: Sahih al-Bukhari.

[afriki_haqq]

:salam:

Came across this...thought I'd share it and brother Tripoly can give a short tafsir :insh:

http://www.afosa.org/zulu-nauhas-read-online.html

http://www.afosa.org/zulu_nauhas/muharram_nauhas_zulus.jpg

[mh16388]

aoa brother tripoly sunni,

i have a quite blunt question which i hope you can answer fully:

what is the ruling of the ahl al sunnah wal jamaah on the state of islam of the rafidhis?

1. how many (what approx percentage) and which scholars claim the rafidhis are kafir?i know of just one: imam malik (rah)

2. how many (what approx percentage) and which scholars claim otherwise?

3. how many (what approx percentage) and which scholars claim that rafidhi scholars are kafir but not laymen?

4. does the same ruling apply to all sub sects like twelvers, zaidis, etc?(i knw zaidis are more sunni)

please, as ever, bring as many proofs as you can. i fear in my country there is deep misunderstanding of this issue with rampant takfir on one side and slogans of muslim unity on the other. so i thought what best place to ask but here : )
jazak Allah khair in advance

[TripolySunni]

Real busy these days, translating something big, I'll reply whenever I am free, of course you can visit this forum where other members can give you the answers:
http://islamic-forum.net/

[mh16388]

Real busy these days, translating something big, I'll reply whenever I am free, of course you can visit this forum where other members can give you the answers:
http://islamic-forum.net/

no worries. post your reply when ur free in sha Allah

[TripolySunni]

One of the brothers has pointed out an important part of a narration for us:

Abi Burda reports from his father: He (Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu alaihe wa-sallam)) raised his head toward the heavens and said: "The stars are the protection for the sky - when the stars have gone, that which has been forewarned will come to the sky. I am the protection for my Companions - when I have gone, that which has been forewarned will come to my companions. My Companions are the protection for this Ummah - when they have gone, that which has been forewarned will come to this Ummah." [Saheeh Muslim]

[abid786]

ONE question, FOUR different answers by Four Shia scholars.


I'm neither Shia nor Sunni but I've spent time in both sects' mosques. Try seeing where sunnis place their hands while praying. Are there no differences there?? And if that's not enough, try looking at the positioning of the feet while sitting in salat; there's even more variations.

For being the "rightly guided" sect, there surely shouldn't be this many differences in something so fundamental that is mandated 5 times a day...

-Jason

[Maripat]

I'm neither Shia nor Sunni but I've spent time in both sects' mosques. Try seeing where sunnis place their hands while praying. Are there no differences there?? And if that's not enough, try looking at the positioning of the feet while sitting in salat; there's even more variations.

For being the "rightly guided" sect, there surely shouldn't be this many differences in something so fundamental that is mandated 5 times a day...

-Jason
Your comment is about the Ummah in general - it does not belong to this thread.

[NNoor]

I'm neither Shia nor Sunni but I've spent time in both sects' mosques. Try seeing where sunnis place their hands while praying. Are there no differences there?? And if that's not enough, try looking at the positioning of the feet while sitting in salat; there's even more variations.

For being the "rightly guided" sect, there surely shouldn't be this many differences in something so fundamental that is mandated 5 times a day...

-Jason

that's what you took away from the video? Sunnis differ on peripheral issues, usually having to do with what is most meritorious, not major issues of halal and haram.

Listen to the shiites in the video again- they are shamelessly interpolating meanings into the quran which are not suggested by the ayaat in the slightest! iblis refused to prostrate because he didn't believe in an intermediary between him and Ali?!!!! Where is any of that even alluded to in the quran? What utter nonsense! Look at the depths of ignorance that these shiites are living in. How can they just make up bullsh** like this so nonchalantly?

[TripolySunni]

I'm neither Shia nor Sunni but I've spent time in both sects' mosques. Try seeing where sunnis place their hands while praying. Are there no differences there?? And if that's not enough, try looking at the positioning of the feet while sitting in salat; there's even more variations.

For being the "rightly guided" sect, there surely shouldn't be this many differences in something so fundamental that is mandated 5 times a day...

-Jason

Salam 'Aleykum,

If you think the difference between the Muslims and the Shia is limited to secondary trivial issues like position of the hands or making sujoud on a rock, then you do not have sufficient knowledge on this issue.

And to correct you, I am also neither "Sunni" or Shia, I am a Muslim, and "Sunni" is not a sect, it is a term used in our days that refers to "Average Muslim".

Peace.

[TripolySunni]

"Discussing the reality of the crisis between the Shia scholars and the Quran" read here:
http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/showthread.php?84906-Reality-of-the-crisis-between-the-Shia-scholars-and-the-Quran

[astronomer]

"Discussing the reality of the crisis between the Shia scholars and the Quran" read here:
http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/showthread.php?84906-Reality-of-the-crisis-between-the-Shia-scholars-and-the-Quran

Brother tripoli sunni have you heard of a group called The Ansars of Imam Ahmad Al Hassan. This guy apparently is widespread over the internet. Apparently there is a new shia ideology now that there are 12 imams and 12 mehdis. He is apparently the first mehdi of them and calls himself the Yamani. he says he has the will of the Prophet(s) and I've read some stuff from him. He has quite a lot of knowledge I'll admit and is very convincing in his arguments and came out with very new and interesting information. People are claiming to have dreams of him all over the world and I'm wondering if this is just shaitan playing games with them. He says we must pledge allegiance to him before he emerges. The thing with him is though he speaks very well and as I said his books are very interesting yet he has some clear cut shirk stuff. First off he says he is the one who was crucified on the cross in the time of Isa(a) and that Allah brought him back to life. Secondly he says other weird things like he was the comforter mentioned in the bible and fact is he is very convincing and knows how to use all this information to make people believe in him. I was wondering what your thoughts were about him and have you heard about these people at all? I myself have seen some dreams referring to him but I know people who have seen him in dreams saying this or that will come true and it ends up happening the next day. Strange!

[TripolySunni]

Brother tripoli sunni have you heard of a group called The Ansars of Imam Ahmad Al Hassan. This guy apparently is widespread over the internet. Apparently there is a new shia ideology now that there are 12 imams and 12 mehdis. He is apparently the first mehdi of them and calls himself the Yamani. he says he has the will of the Prophet(s) and I've read some stuff from him. He has quite a lot of knowledge I'll admit and is very convincing in his arguments and came out with very new and interesting information. People are claiming to have dreams of him all over the world and I'm wondering if this is just shaitan playing games with them. He says we must pledge allegiance to him before he emerges. The thing with him is though he speaks very well and as I said his books are very interesting yet he has some clear cut shirk stuff. First off he says he is the one who was crucified on the cross in the time of Isa(a) and that Allah brought him back to life. Secondly he says other weird things like he was the comforter mentioned in the bible and fact is he is very convincing and knows how to use all this information to make people believe in him. I was wondering what your thoughts were about him and have you heard about these people at all? I myself have seen some dreams referring to him but I know people who have seen him in dreams saying this or that will come true and it ends up happening the next day. Strange!

Salam 'Aleykum,

al-Yamani is a Yemeni guy who claims to be a Mahdi, we consider him a joke in the Arab world and no one even wastes his time on this loony.

(btw it's not a new Ideology, the Shia have in their books several hadiths stating that there will be 12 Mahdis after the 12 Imams).

http://almahdinaser.files.wordpress.com/2009/02/348847084.jpg

[astronomer]

Salam 'Aleykum,

al-Yamani is a Yemeni guy who claims to be a Mahdi, we consider him a joke in the Arab world and no one even wastes his time on this loony.

(btw it's not a new Ideology, the Shia have in their books several hadiths stating that there will be 12 Mahdis after the 12 Imams).

http://almahdinaser.files.wordpress.com/2009/02/348847084.jpg

He says so many crazy things and I'm so surprised by his followers. They all claim he has so much depth to his speeches and yes it's true they are quite amazing but many of them as i've found are taken from other rare sources. I don't know if you've ever heard of the book Sulaym ibn Qays and Haft al Shareef( the Manuscript of Jafar as sadiq). These are like the two books they base their beliefs around. To be honest with you this guy did it for me once he said that in surah al qadr you should recite instead of wal mala ika tu wa roohoo fi ha bizni rabihim MIN kuli amr, BI kuli amr because al qadr represents not the actual night of laylatul qadr but Fatima(r) instead. I was so confused.

Apparently the Iraqi government is looking to kill him. There are a whole group of his followers in Egypt who are building schools and masjids and their own town apparently. Thank you for your response brother.

[TripolySunni]

He says so many crazy things and I'm so surprised by his followers. They all claim he has so much depth to his speeches and yes it's true they are quite amazing but many of them as i've found are taken from other rare sources. I don't know if you've ever heard of the book Sulaym ibn Qays and Haft al Shareef( the Manuscript of Jafar as sadiq). These are like the two books they base their beliefs around. To be honest with you this guy did it for me once he said that in surah al qadr you should recite instead of wal mala ika tu wa roohoo fi ha bizni rabihim MIN kuli amr, BI kuli amr because al qadr represents not the actual night of laylatul qadr but Fatima(r) instead. I was so confused.

Apparently the Iraqi government is looking to kill him. There are a whole group of his followers in Egypt who are building schools and masjids and their own town apparently. Thank you for your response brother.

These two books are fabricated forgeries according to Sunni and Shia scholars, as for his followers they make up less than 0.00001% of the Islamic nation.

[justmuslim786]

Brother tripoli sunni have you heard of a group called The Ansars of Imam Ahmad Al Hassan. This guy apparently is widespread over the internet. Apparently there is a new shia ideology now that there are 12 imams and 12 mehdis. He is apparently the first mehdi of them and calls himself the Yamani. he says he has the will of the Prophet(s) and I've read some stuff from him. He has quite a lot of knowledge I'll admit and is very convincing in his arguments and came out with very new and interesting information. People are claiming to have dreams of him all over the world and I'm wondering if this is just shaitan playing games with them. He says we must pledge allegiance to him before he emerges. The thing with him is though he speaks very well and as I said his books are very interesting yet he has some clear cut shirk stuff. First off he says he is the one who was crucified on the cross in the time of Isa(a) and that Allah brought him back to life. Secondly he says other weird things like he was the comforter mentioned in the bible and fact is he is very convincing and knows how to use all this information to make people believe in him. I was wondering what your thoughts were about him and have you heard about these people at all? I myself have seen some dreams referring to him but I know people who have seen him in dreams saying this or that will come true and it ends up happening the next day. Strange!

hello

thats alittle strange? wel freaky too lol. he comes in dreams? could this guy possibly be somone special for real? ive not heard of this before sounds like somthing to look into, have you got any videos, links of this guy?

[amr123]

hello

thats alittle strange? wel freaky too lol. he comes in dreams? could this guy possibly be somone special for real? ive not heard of this before sounds like somthing to look into, have you got any videos, links of this guy?

Shaytaan can also come in dreams voluntarily. So I don't think influencing ones dreams means haqq. :-)

[suleimanibnsalim]

watch out for trolls. dreams are not a proof of anything - it seems dreams are a running theme in a certain user's posts.

what do you mean by 'depth'? quoting from the forgery of Sulaym b. Qays does not qualify as 'depth', sorry. . .

[astronomer]

watch out for trolls. dreams are not a proof of anything - it seems dreams are a running theme in a certain user's posts.

what do you mean by 'depth'? quoting from the forgery of Sulaym b. Qays does not qualify as 'depth', sorry. . .

Hahaah brother Suleiman. Yes I used to put a lot of emphasis on dreams in my life before and i'm sure I still do but I'm trying to get out of the habit of it. A speaker once said this generation is the one that follows dreams. I don't blame you for saying what you did and I know now that it was wrong of me to take every dream that i saw and live my life based on it. I've changed a lot since then. Well when I say in depth I mean well you can hear it for yourself.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ry0NnpKl91Y&feature=related

Brother justmuslim786 don't get tricked. Dreams do not overcome the word of Allah or his laws and this man is changing them.

[astronomer]

hello

thats alittle strange? wel freaky too lol. he comes in dreams? could this guy possibly be somone special for real? ive not heard of this before sounds like somthing to look into, have you got any videos, links of this guy?

Also Brother one other thing as well. Don't waste your time on looking up this man. Shias tend to cause doubt in a person by using Sunni hadiths for their purposes by taking excerpts. You can get lost very easily so i really recommend if you will still jump into their ideologies do it smartly with someone of knowledge to guide you and show you their falsehoods.

[mh16388]

aoa
br. tripoly sunni. what abt what i had asked you?

[TripolySunni]

aoa
br. tripoly sunni. what abt what i had asked you?

Salam 'Aleykum,


1. how many (what approx percentage) and which scholars claim the rafidhis are kafir?i know of just one: imam malik (rah)

2. how many (what approx percentage) and which scholars claim otherwise?

3. how many (what approx percentage) and which scholars claim that rafidhi scholars are kafir but not laymen?

4. does the same ruling apply to all sub sects like twelvers, zaidis, etc?(i knw zaidis are more sunni)

I honestly never read any research that gives an approximation of how many scholars or Imams make Takfeer on the Rafidhah, as far as the companions are concerned from what I've seen they would kill anyone who insults any of the Major Sahaba or disassociate themselves from him.

Other than Malik (rah) you have ibn Hanbal (rah) and he makes Takfeer on them in several locations. al-Shafi'i criticizes them harshly but I am not sure it is considered Takfeer or not, Then you have Imam al-Bukhari (rah) and he made Takfeer on them saying that praying behind them is like praying behind jews and christians. Sufiyan al-Thawri made Takfeer on them, Suffian bin 'Uyaynah, al-Imam al-Zuhri also, Ibn Qutaybah whom they accuse of writing the pro-Shia book "al-Imamah wal-Siyasah" he actually makes Takfeer of them. 'Abdul-Qadir al-Baghdadi who is a Shafi'i scholar, he makes Takfeer of them. Ibn Hazm al-Dhahiri made Takfeer, al-Qadi abu Ya'ala made Takfeer of them and so did al-Qadi 'Iyad. Ibn Tayymiyah made Takfeer on them and so did Ibn Katheer, abu Hamid al-Maqdisi, abu al-Mahasin al-Wasiti...

These are some heavyweights who made Takfeer on them, it appears that those scholars who were closer to the narrations and Ahadith made Takfeer on them, and it is important to point out that all of these scholars gave Fatwas of Takfeer simply because the Shia claimed the Sahaba turned away from Islam or because they insulted them.

But I on the other hand don't make Takfeer on a Shia unless I see him do or saying something deserving of Takfeer, while taking Taqqiyah into consideration, I feel in our times this is the best method, it's also the best method to invite them into Islam. I also believe all their scholars are Kouffar.

As for "approx percentage" I don't think such a research exists.

[mh16388]

Salam 'Aleykum,



I honestly never read any research that gives an approximation of how many scholars or Imams make Takfeer on the Rafidhah, as far as the companions are concerned from what I've seen they would kill anyone who insults any of the Major Sahaba or disassociate themselves from him.

Other than Malik (rah) you have ibn Hanbal (rah) and he makes Takfeer on them in several locations. al-Shafi'i criticizes them harshly but I am not sure it is considered Takfeer or not, Then you have Imam al-Bukhari (rah) and he made Takfeer on them saying that praying behind them is like praying behind jews and christians. Sufiyan al-Thawri made Takfeer on them, Suffian bin 'Uyaynah, al-Imam al-Zuhri also, Ibn Qutaybah whom they accuse of writing the pro-Shia book "al-Imamah wal-Siyasah" he actually makes Takfeer of them. 'Abdul-Qadir al-Baghdadi who is a Shafi'i scholar, he makes Takfeer of them. Ibn Hazm al-Dhahiri made Takfeer, al-Qadi abu Ya'ala made Takfeer of them and so did al-Qadi 'Iyad. Ibn Tayymiyah made Takfeer on them and so did Ibn Katheer, abu Hamid al-Maqdisi, abu al-Mahasin al-Wasiti...

These are some heavyweights who made Takfeer on them, it appears that those scholars who were closer to the narrations and Ahadith made Takfeer on them, and it is important to point out that all of these scholars gave Fatwas of Takfeer simply because the Shia claimed the Sahaba turned away from Islam or because they insulted them.

But I on the other hand don't make Takfeer on a Shia unless I see him do or saying something deserving of Takfeer, while taking Taqqiyah into consideration, I feel in our times this is the best method, it's also the best method to invite them into Islam. I also believe all their scholars are Kouffar.

As for "approx percentage" I don't think such a research exists.

ws

jazak Allah khair for this gem. im sorry i used the incorrect terminology. what i meant by percentage was that i required a relative term...like majority, minority or that there is ijtihaadi ikhtelaaf. but it seems the answers to my questions are somewhat like this:
1. how many (what approx percentage) and which scholars claim the rafidhis are kafir?i know of just one: imam malik (rah)
majority
2. how many (what approx percentage) and which scholars claim otherwise?
minority.including imam shafi'i.but he criticized them heavily.
3. how many (what approx percentage) and which scholars claim that rafidhi scholars are kafir but not laymen?
thats your opinion, which i respect. but have scholars also shared this opinion?
4. does the same ruling apply to all sub sects like twelvers, zaidis, etc?(i knw zaidis are more sunni)
shall wait for this to be answered.

jazak Allah khair.

[astronomer]

Maybe someone can explain something to me. So basically I'm still confused about the story of the khalifate of Abu Bakr. Just today I have read four hadiths which are all said to be from Bukhair. One claims the Prophet left a will in which he said Abu Bakr will come after him. One says that his will was zakar, Salah, and basiclly as a whole Quran and sunnah. The third hadith says that Umar asked fatima to stop the companions from gathering in her house and then when Abu Bakr stood up that Ali was called to make bayah to him which he did right away. The fourth one says that Ali transgressed until later on he said he felt bad that he was not consulted and agreed to make bayah to Abu bakr . I'm confused. Which is right and which is wrong?

[TripolySunni]

al-Salamu 'Aleykum,

Here's something nice I came across:


أخرج الحاكم وصححه الذهبي عن مرة الطيب قال جاء أبو سفيان ابن حرب إلى علي فقال ما بال هذا الأمر في أقل قريش قلة وأذلها ذلا يعني أبا بكر والله لئن شئت لأملأنها عليه خيلا ورجالا قال: فقال علي: لطالما عاديت الإسلام وأهله يا أبا سفيان فلم يضره ذلك شيئاً إنا وجدنا أبا بكر لها أهلا.

From Murrah al-Tayyib that he said: abu Suffiyan ibn Harb came to 'Ali bin abi Talib and told him: "What is the matter with this caliphate? why is it given to the lowest in status and the smallest in number among the Quraysh?" -He means Abu Bakr and his tribe - He continued: "By Allah if you want I would order the riders and soldiers to rise against him." 'Ali then replied to him: "You always were an enemy to Islam and the Muslims O abu Suffiyan but you could never harm it! We saw Abu Bakr as deserving of it (Calipate)."

sources: al-Hakim made Takhreej for it and al-Dhahabi authenticated it, also Dr.Khalid Kabir 'Allal authenticated it in his research "Tahqiq Mawqif 'Ali min Khilafat Abu Bakr".

[TripolySunni]

Maybe someone can explain something to me. So basically I'm still confused about the story of the khalifate of Abu Bakr. Just today I have read four hadiths which are all said to be from Bukhair. One claims the Prophet left a will in which he said Abu Bakr will come after him. One says that his will was zakar, Salah, and basiclly as a whole Quran and sunnah. The third hadith says that Umar asked fatima to stop the companions from gathering in her house and then when Abu Bakr stood up that Ali was called to make bayah to him which he did right away. The fourth one says that Ali transgressed until later on he said he felt bad that he was not consulted and agreed to make bayah to Abu bakr . I'm confused. Which is right and which is wrong?

Salam 'Aleykum,

First Hadith:
He never left a Will to appoint anyone, you are talking about a conversation between the Prophet (SAWS) and 'Aisha (ra) in which the Prophet (SAWS) says that he wanted to call on Abu Bakr (ra) and his son to write something for them, then he changed his mind and said that he will leave the matter to Allah and that Allah and the Muslims will reject anyone except Abu Bakr (ra).

We assume that he (SAWS) was talking about the Caliphate as is obvious, he doesn't say it directly though, also assuming that 'Aisha (ra) at that point understood what he was talking about, he most probably asked her not to tell anyone about this as it would be the same as him appointing someone, which is why she did not speak of this until after Abu Bakr (ra) passed away.

Second Hadith:
When we hear the word "Will" that is not exactly a written will, the term used is probably "Awsa" which basically means the advice he gave the Muslims while on his death bed, and he advised them in several Hadiths on several different matters such as how to treat the foreign diplomats and to hold on to the Quran and to kick the non-Muslims from the Arabian peninsula ect...

Third Hadith:
This is not in Bukhari , I don't think the Hadith about 'Umar (ra) and Fatima (ra) is in Bukhari, the authenticity of this Hadith is not agreed upon, some weaken it and some say it's acceptable in terms of the chain of narrators. The Hadith basically says that 'Ali (ra) and al-Zubair (ra) were angry that they were not consulted in the matter of choosing the successor of the Prophet (SAWS), so they and several others went to the house of Fatima (ra) to discuss this, during this time Abu Bakr (ra) noticed that 'Ali (ra) and al-Zubair (ra) were not present during his Baya'ah so he asked the Muslims to call on them, 'Umar (ra) heard they were meeting in Fatima's (ra) house so he got angry as this would create disunity, he went to Fatima (ra) and told her "By Allah we loved your father the most and after him we love you the most" and he then told her that if they cause further disunity and return to the house he's gonna burn the house on them, so after they returned Fatima (ra) told them what 'Umar (ra) said and she told them to go and give Abu Bakr (ra) Baya'ah, and they went and gave him Baya'ah.

Fourth Hadith:
It is proven from the authentic narrations that 'Ali (ra) gave Abu Bakr (ra) the Baya'ah straight away, later after he finished with burying the Prophet (SAWS) and organizing the affairs of the family after his passing, Fatima (ra) got sick and she died shortly so 'Ali (ra) could not participate much in the affairs of the government, some people seem to have spread rumors that there is something between 'Ali and Abu Bakr, in order to clear this out to everyone, 'Ali would go and give him Baya'ah again after six months.

[TripolySunni]

Sheikh Ahmed Deedat exposes lies of Top Kuwaiti Shia scholar.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=EF_ERLIOjH4

[TripolySunni]

Check out this beauty:


كنت أخدم رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم فأعطاني أرضا وأعطى أبا بكر أرضا وجاءت الدنيا فاختلفنا في عذق نخلة فقال أبو بكر رضي الله عنه هي في حد أرضي وقلت أنا هي في حدي وكان بيني وبين أبي بكر كلام فقال لي أبو بكر كلمة كرهتها وندم فقال لي يا ربيعة رد علي مثلها حتى يكون قصاصا قلت لا أفعل فقال أبو بكر لتقولن أو لأستعدين عليك رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم قلت ما أنا بفاعل قال ورفض الأرض فانطلق أبو بكر رضي الله عنه إلى النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم فانطلقت أتلوه فجاء أناس من أسلم فقالوا رحم الله أبا بكر في أي شيء يستعدي عليك رسول الله وهو الذي قال لك ما قال فقلت أتدرون من هذا هذا أبو بكر الصديق وهو ثاني اثنين وهو ذي شيبة المسلمين فإياكم يلتفت فيراكم تنصروني عليه فيغضب فيأتي رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم فيغضب لغضبه فيغضب الله لغضبهما فيهلك ربيعة قالوا فما تأمرنا قال ارجعوا فانطلق أبو بكر رضي الله عنه إلى رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم وتبعته وحدي وجعلت أتلوه حتى أتى النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم فحدثه الحديث كما كان فرفع إلي رأسه فقال يا ربيعة مالك وللصديق قلت يا رسول الله كان كذا وكان كذا فقال لي كلمة كرهتها فقال لي قل كما قلت لك حتى يكون قصاصا فأبيت فقال رسول الله أجل فلا ترد عليه ولكن قل غفر الله لك يا أبا بكر فقلت غفر الله لك يا أبا بكر قال فولى أبو بكر رحمه الله وهو يبكي

Rabi'ah al-Aslami narrated: I used to serve the Messenger of Allah (SAWS) so he gave me a piece of land and he gave Abu Bakr a piece of land, then life and its pleasures came between us and we differed on a small part of land surrounding a palm tree, Abu Bakr may Allah be pleased with him said: "It is on my side of the land." and I said that it was on mine, so there was an argument between us and Abu Bakr told me a word that I hated to hear, then he regretted it and he told me: "O Rabi'ah, say to me what I said to you, as a Qasas." I said I wouldn't, Abu Bakr told me to do so otherwise he'd call the Prophet (SAWS), I insisted that I would not, so he refused that piece of land and he went to the Prophet (SAWS). I followed him and met some people from (the tribe of) Aslam along the way, they asked: "May Allah have mercy on Abu Bakr, why would he call on the Prophet (SAWS) because of you if he was the one who said what he said to you?" I replied to them: "Do you know who this is!? This is Abu Bakr al-Siddeeq, he is the second of the two (in the cave), he is the elder of the Muslims! So beware of letting him see you supporting me against him, then he would be angry and then the Prophet (SAWS) would come and be angry for his anger and then Allah would be angry for their anger and then Rabi'ah would perish!" They said: "What do you suggest we do?" I said: "Return." Then I continued to follow him alone until we reached the Prophet (SAWS), and he told him exactly what happened, so he (SAWS) raised his head and looked at me and said: "O Rabi'ah, what is between you and al-Siddeeq?" I said: "O Prophet of Allah, this and that happened, so he spoke a word I hated to hear, then told me to return the word as a Qasas and I refused." The Prophet (SAWS) then said: "Do not return the word, instead say: May Allah forgive you O Abu Bakr." So I said: "May Allah forgive you O Abu Bakr." Then Abu Bakr may Allah have mercy on him left with tears in his eyes.

source: al-Albani's al-Silsilah al-Sahiha 7/407, He said "Isnad is good".

And a Hadith of Ghadeer narrated by 12 people from Badr:


شهدت عليا رضي الله عنه في الرحبة ينشد الناس : أنشد الله من سمع رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم يقول يوم غدير خم : من كنت مولاه فعلي مولاه لما قام فشهد قال عبد الرحمن : فقام اثنا عشر بدريا كأني أنظر إلى أحدهم فقالوا : نشهد أنا سمعنا رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم يقول يوم غدير خم : ألست أولى بالمؤمنين من أنفسهم وأزواجي أمهاتهم فقلنا : بلى يا رسول الله قال : فمن كنت مولاه فعلي مولاه اللهم وال من والاه وعاد من عاداه
'Abdul-Rahman bin abi Laylah said: I witnessed 'Ali may Allah be pleased with him in al-Rahbah asking the people: I ask you by Allah, which of you has heard the Messenger of Allah on the day of Ghadeer Khum saying: "Whomever I am his Mawla, this Ali is his Mawla." So twelve from the people of Badr stood up and it is if I see them in front of me now, they said: We bear witness that the Messenger of Allah (SAWS) said on the day of Ghadeer Khum: "Am I not more worthy of the believers than themselves and my wives are their mothers?" we said: "Yes O Rassul-Allah." He then said: "So whomever I am his Mawla, this 'Ali is his Mawla, O Lord befriend who befriends him and be the enemy of his enemy."

source: Musnad Ahmad 2/199, Ahmad Shakir said "Sahih".

[Oblivion]

al-Salamu 'Aleykum,

Here's something nice I came across:


From Murrah al-Tayyib that he said: abu Suffiyan ibn Harb came to 'Ali bin abi Talib and told him: "What is the matter with this caliphate? why is it given to the lowest in status and the smallest in number among the Quraysh?" -He means Abu Bakr and his tribe - He continued: "By Allah if you want I would order the riders and soldiers to rise against him." 'Ali then replied to him: "You always were an enemy to Islam and the Muslims O abu Suffiyan but you could never harm it! We saw Abu Bakr as deserving of it (Calipate)."

sources: al-Hakim made Takhreej for it and al-Dhahabi authenticated it, also Dr.Khalid Kabir 'Allal authenticated it in his research "Tahqiq Mawqif 'Ali min Khilafat Abu Bakr".


salam brother. do you beleive this hadith to be authentic ? a simple yes or no would suffice.

[TripolySunni]

salam brother. do you beleive this hadith to be authentic ? a simple yes or no would suffice.

Salam 'Aleykum,

I mentioned the name of those who authenticated it, although they could be wrong but there's no way for me to know this since I am not a scholar of Hadith, if you wish brother I can ask a good friend of mine to grade it, I trust his knowledge in Hadith sciences so he can affirm authenticity.

Is this what you wish?

[Oblivion]

Salam 'Aleykum,

I mentioned the name of those who authenticated it, although they could be wrong but there's no way for me to know this since I am not a scholar of Hadith, if you wish brother I can ask a good friend of mine to grade it, I trust his knowledge in Hadith sciences so he can affirm authenticity.

Is this what you wish?


yes please brothee. that would be a great help as i have doubts abuot this hadith. jazakallah

[TripolySunni]

yes please brothee. that would be a great help as i have doubts abuot this hadith. jazakallah

Before checking the Sanad, please brother tell me what your doubts are, what do you think is strange about this Hadith?

[Maripat]

A Shia colleague narrated the same Hadith to me. Only his wording of Hazrat Ali(RA)'s reply were colloquial. According to him Hazrat Ali(RA) had quipped to Hazrat Abu Sufyaan(RA), "O Abu Sufyaan since when have you become a well wisher of Islam?"

[TripolySunni]

A Shia colleague narrated the same Hadith to me. Only his wording of Hazrat Ali(RA)'s reply were colloquial. According to him Hazrat Ali(RA) had quipped to Hazrat Abu Sufyaan(RA), "O Abu Sufyaan since when have you become a well wisher of Islam?"

Maybe there's another version.

[Maripat]

It is possible but I'll venture that it was uncalled for romanticism. Same person had been bad mouthing Hazrat Abu Hurairah (RA) (though not in my presence). Anyway it is not very wise for a layman like me to take Traditions from these friends of ours.

[TripolySunni]

al-Salamu 'Aleykum,

The Fitnah in the Islamic Ummah began when the people started to change, and this change happened during the final days of the companions, our respected Sheikh Muhammad al-Hassan Walad-ul-Dedu al-Shinqiti narrated this event that happened to 'Ali bin abi Talib (ra) in one of his lectures:

أمير المؤمنين ما لك اختلف الناس عليك وعلى عثمان واتفقوا على أبي بكر وعمر، فقال اتفق الناس على أبي بكر وعمر حين كان الناس أنا وعثمان، واختلف الناس علي وعلى عثمان حين كان الناس أنت وأمثالك

A man from the Khawarij came to Ameer 'Ali (ra) and said to him: "What is wrong with you, that the people disagreed on you and 'Uthman, while they agreed on Abu Bakr and 'Umar?" so 'Ali answered: "The people agreed on Abu Bakr and 'Umar when the people were me and 'Uthman, and they disagreed on me and 'Uthman when the people were you and your likes."

Meaning: The Khariji man wanted to criticize 'Uthman (ra) and 'Ali (ra) by telling him that the people were split concerning their right to be Caliphs, on the other hand the people never differed when it came to Abu Bakr (ra) and 'Umar (ra). So 'Ali (ra) would reply that when people agreed on the first two Caliphs, these people were all pious companions the likes of himself and 'Uthman (ra), and then later the people would differ on him and 'Uthman (ra) because the people were starting to become less pious and less God fearing like the questioner himself :)

[wellwisher]

أمير المؤمنين ما لك اختلف الناس عليك وعلى عثمان واتفقوا على أبي بكر وعمر، فقال اتفق الناس على أبي بكر وعمر حين كان الناس أنا وعثمان، واختلف الناس علي وعلى عثمان حين كان الناس أنت وأمثالك

A man from the Khawarij came to Ameer 'Ali (ra) and said to him: "What is wrong with you, that the people disagreed on you and 'Uthman, while they agreed on Abu Bakr and 'Umar?" so 'Ali answered: "The people agreed on Abu Bakr and 'Umar when the people were me and 'Uthman, and they disagreed on me and 'Uthman when they were like you and your likes."Akhee what is the primary source of this hadeeth?

[TripolySunni]

Akhee what is the primary source of this hadeeth?

و عليكم السلام

Go to Mauritania and ask him, if I knew I would have attributed it to the book not the scholar :)

[amr123]

و عليكم السلام

Go to Mauritania and ask him, if I knew I would have attributed it to the book not the scholar :)

I ve read this hadith somewhere else too, let me try digging it up. :insh:

[wellwisher]

و عليكم السلام

Go to Mauritania and ask him, if I knew I would have attributed it to the book not the scholar :)Can't you use any search engine to locate its original source?

[Oblivion]

Before checking the Sanad, please brother tell me what your doubts are, what do you think is strange about this Hadith?

without being rude brother, i rather not discuss this hadith if it turns out to be weak. It would be a waste of time for me and maybe for you also. So if you don't mind, it's best if we wait until it's authenticity is verified.

[godilali]

I spent a long time searching for the hadith, but the only thing I could find was the following incident found in Siraj al-Muluk of al-Tartushi mentioned without a sanad:

وقال عبيدة السلماني لعلي بن أبي طالب رضي الله عنه: يا أمير المؤمنين ما بال أبي بكر وعمر انطاع الناس لهما، والدنيا عليهما أضيق من شبر فاتسعت عليهما ووليت أنت وعثمان الخلافة ولم ينطاعوا لكما، وقد اتسعت فصارت عليكما أضيق من شبر؟ فقال: لأن رعية أبي بكر وعمر كانوا مثلي ومثل عثمان، ورعيتي أنا اليوم مثلك وشبهك!

[TripolySunni]

I spent a long time searching for the hadith, but the only thing I could find was the following incident found in Siraj al-Muluk of al-Tartushi mentioned without a sanad:

وقال عبيدة السلماني لعلي بن أبي طالب رضي الله عنه: يا أمير المؤمنين ما بال أبي بكر وعمر انطاع الناس لهما، والدنيا عليهما أضيق من شبر فاتسعت عليهما ووليت أنت وعثمان الخلافة ولم ينطاعوا لكما، وقد اتسعت فصارت عليكما أضيق من شبر؟ فقال: لأن رعية أبي بكر وعمر كانوا مثلي ومثل عثمان، ورعيتي أنا اليوم مثلك وشبهك!

May Allah reward you for your hard work, Can I please also ask you to look into the narration in post #1367.

This is a beautiful one from Fadael Ahmad:

جاء أبو بكر يستأذن على النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم فسمع عائشة وهي رافعة صوتها على رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم فأذن له فدخل فقال يا ابنة أم رومان وتناولها أترفعين صوتك على رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم قال فحال النبي بينه وبينها قال فلما خرج أبو بكر جعل النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم يقول لها يترضاها ألا ترين أني قد حلت بين الرجل وبينك قال ثم جاء أبو بكر فاستأذن عليه فوجده يضاحكها فأذن له فدخل فقال له أبو بكر يا رسول الله أشركاني في سلمكما كما أشركتماني في حربكما

al-Nu'uman bin Bachir narrated: Abu Bakr came to get the permission to enter on the Prophet (SAWS), so he heard 'Aisha raising her voice on the Prophet (SAWS), so he gave him permission and he entered and said to 'Aisha: "O daughter of Umm Ruman" and he scolded her "Do you raise your voice against Rassul-Allah (SAWS)!?" So the Prophet (SAWS) stepped between them, and when Abu Bakr left the Prophet (SAWS) tried to comfort her and please her, he (SAWS) said: "Do you not see that I stood between you and the man to protect you?" Then Abu Bakr would return and ask for permission and he would see that they were both laughing, so he would tell them (Jokingly): "Ya Rassul-Allah (SAWS), will you permit me join you two in your time of peace like you allowed me to join you in your time of war?"

source: al-Albani's al-Silsilah al-Sahiha 6/944 "Sahih Li Ghayrihi".

[Maripat]

May Allah(SWT) reward both of you, and others to, for the hard work.

On a related topic is there a site that presents things in easy Arabic? Like they have newspapers in Easy Hebrew etc? I sort of feel discouraged to go through the Arabic courses owing to the fact that I was a student rather long back.

[godilali]

May Allah(SWT) reward both of you, and others to, for the hard work.

On a related topic is there a site that presents things in easy Arabic? Like they have newspapers in Easy Hebrew etc? I sort of feel discouraged to go through the Arabic courses owing to the fact that I was a student rather long back.

http://www.lqtoronto.com/
You can go through the videos at your own pace and there are no classes to attend or exams or anything like that.

[godilali]

May Allah reward you for your hard work, Can I please also ask you to look into the narration in post #1367.


Imam Hakim mentioned this hadith in his Mustadrak without commenting on its authenticity. Although he compiled this book with the intention of mentioning those ahadith that met the conditions of Bukhari and Muslim or one of them that were not mentioned in the sahihayn, a hadith merely being cited in the Mustadrak is not sufficient proof of its authenticity. In fact, the Mustadrak contains some ahadith that are sahih but do not meet the conditions of the sahihayn, some ahadith that are hasan, some that are da`if, and even some that are mawdu`. The reason for this, given al-Hakim's immense expertise in the field, was that he did not get a chance to edit and complete this work before his death, so what we have before us today is just a rough draft, not what was supposed to be the final version of his compilation.

Al-Dhahabi said in his talkhis that the sanad of this hadith is sahih. As you know, that doesn't necessarily mean the hadith is sahih. I'm personally not even close to being qualified to give judgments, so unfortunately, I don't know the status of this particular narration.

إنما أنا ناقل و لست بعالم.

[Maripat]

http://www.lqtoronto.com/
You can go through the videos at your own pace and there are no classes to attend or exams or anything like that.
:jazak: akhi.
Enjoyed the first few minutes of the first DVD.

[TripolySunni]

Imam Hakim mentioned this hadith in his Mustadrak without commenting on its authenticity. Although he compiled this book with the intention of mentioning those ahadith that met the conditions of Bukhari and Muslim or one of them that were not mentioned in the sahihayn, a hadith merely being cited in the Mustadrak is not sufficient proof of its authenticity. In fact, the Mustadrak contains some ahadith that are sahih but do not meet the conditions of the sahihayn, some ahadith that are hasan, some that are da`if, and even some that are mawdu`. The reason for this, given al-Hakim's immense expertise in the field, was that he did not get a chance to edit and complete this work before his death, so what we have before us today is just a rough draft, not what was supposed to be the final version of his compilation.

Al-Dhahabi said in his talkhis that the sanad of this hadith is sahih. As you know, that doesn't necessarily mean the hadith is sahih. I'm personally not even close to being qualified to give judgments, so unfortunately, I don't know the status of this particular narration.

إنما أنا ناقل و لست بعالم.

To be honest al-Hakim himself is da`if in grading narrations.

[Maripat]

To be honest al-Hakim himself is da`if in grading narrations.
My apologies for disturbing the flow once again. Hasn't Shaykh Albani finished the task of grading completely? I'll request, as far as possible and feasible, a comprehensive reply even if it is short.

[TripolySunni]

^
Ask a scholar of Hadith =p

[Maripat]

^
Ask a scholar of Hadith =p
Oops!

[Is'haaq ibn Ahmad]

I love the Shii3i, and i always hope they change their views on the ashaba, the chosen companions of the prophet, Al Khulufa Ar Rashidun.

Becuase how can you love the prophet (saw) and not respect the men who fought tooth and nail to defend Islam? (Abu Bakr, Umar ibn Khattab, Uthman Ibn Affan) R.A to them all), If the prophet was here wallahi he would be ashamed, it is fardh in islam to respect the companions of the prophet (saw), they were all righteous and were on a righteous path and died in righteousness, To call a Comapnion coward is indeend slandering a major sin at that, haven't you not heard the hadith where the prophet (saw) was speaking to the companions whom umar r.a was with, he said he had a dream and that in his dream he was drinking milk, and he drank alot of milk, it started to come out of his fingernails, in his dream Umar (r.a) was with him and the prophet said the milk was too much so he gave some to umar(r.a). The Companions asked the prophet , How did you interpet this dream Ya Rasullalah? he said the milk was knowledge (Ilm) and that he gave some to Umar R.A. Umar was a man of God, whom Allah set him to be a Khalifah, before he was born, it was in his destiny to be a Khalifah, and he was a succesful one indeed, travelling lands far across, and Ali (R.A) respected him, as he was an elder, bear in mind Ali (R.A/A.S) was 9 years old when the prophet recieved Wahi (revelation). And yes , he is one of the blessed companions and All the companions will be with the prophet at high status in Jannah, Oh shias, why insult a man whom the prophet loved so much?, why?, where is the i7tiraam, where is the respect?, this is why we know Islam is at its lowest, because now Shia's are encouraging people to insult the companions, i love the Shias as i said, but please have respect to the men who did Allah proud, and lived and breathed the air of the Prophet (saw), they were his closest companions, the ones he ate with, the ones he laughed with, the ones he fought with. Forget about what your Shaykh said, you know its wrong to slander a companion.!

[abid786]

I love the Shii3i, and i always hope they change their views on the ashaba, the chosen companions of the prophet, Al Khulufa Ar Rashidun.

Becuase how can you love the prophet (saw) and not respect the men who fought tooth and nail to defend Islam? (Abu Bakr, Umar ibn Khattab, Uthman Ibn Affan) R.A to them all), If the prophet was here wallahi he would be ashamed, it is fardh in islam to respect the companions of the prophet (saw), they were all righteous and were on a righteous path and died in righteousness, To call a Comapnion coward is indeend slandering a major sin at that, haven't you not heard the hadith where the prophet (saw) was speaking to the companions whom umar r.a was with, he said he had a dream and that in his dream he was drinking milk, and he drank alot of milk, it started to come out of his fingernails, in his dream Umar (r.a) was with him and the prophet said the milk was too much so he gave some to umar(r.a). The Companions asked the prophet , How did you interpet this dream Ya Rasullalah? he said the milk was knowledge (Ilm) and that he gave some to Umar R.A. Umar was a man of God, whom Allah set him to be a Khalifah, before he was born, it was in his destiny to be a Khalifah, and he was a succesful one indeed, travelling lands far across, and Ali (R.A) respected him, as he was an elder, bear in mind Ali (R.A/A.S) was 9 years old when the prophet recieved Wahi (revelation). And yes , he is one of the blessed companions and All the companions will be with the prophet at high status in Jannah, Oh shias, why insult a man whom the prophet loved so much?, why?, where is the i7tiraam, where is the respect?, this is why we know Islam is at its lowest, because now Shia's are encouraging people to insult the companions, i love the Shias as i said, but please have respect to the men who did Allah proud, and lived and breathed the air of the Prophet (saw), they were his closest companions, the ones he ate with, the ones he laughed with, the ones he fought with. Forget about what your Shaykh said, you know its wrong to slander a companion.!

The hadith you narrated is from Volume 9 Book 87 Number 135. (I recently started reading Sahih Bukhari and just remember this off the top of my head). The Shia categorically reject all the hadith's that praise the companions of the Prophet Muhammad.

Also, why do you love the Shia so much if their beliefs make no sense to you?

-Jason

[TripolySunni]

The hadith you narrated is from Volume 9 Book 87 Number 135. (I recently started reading Sahih Bukhari and just remember this off the top of my head). The Shia categorically reject all the hadith's that praise the companions of the Prophet Muhammad.

Also, why do you love the Shia so much if their beliefs make no sense to you?

-Jason


Salam 'Aleykum,

I believe the origin of the matter in Islam is that one must love everybody and must want guidance for everybody, especially when talking about misguided laypeople and common followers, the hatred is for the belief and the act.

Sadly the satanic practices and beliefs of some groups, force you to hate them and wish them a bad fate.

By the way, I know of a recent convert to Islam called Jason Jadloski, are you him by any chance?

[Abdul1234]

I read today on two different websites that Ayatullah Khomeini wrote that it is halal to sodomize infants.

can anyone confirm if this accursed man actually said this or is it propaganda against him?

If it is true then the real Muslims should invade that country and make it Sunni again

- like it was before the Saffavids brutally forced the Sunnis of Iran to become Shiite a few centuries ago.

[sunni-from-iraq]

I read today on two different websites that Ayatullah Khomeini wrote that it is halal to sodomize infants.

can anyone confirm if this accursed man actually said this or is it propaganda against him?

If it is true then the real Muslims should invade that country and make it Sunni again

- like it was before the Saffavids brutally forced the Sunnis of Iran to become Shiite a few centuries ago.

khomani was not alive when the world wide web came out

[Abdul1234]

khomani was not alive when the world wide web came out

yes I remember his funeral, I saw it on tv when hell fell out of his kafan, but I rather liked him in those days.

sorry brother you misunderstand my English

what I mean to say is I read that he said it in one of his books of fatawa on two separate websites

(I read it on the websites that it said it in his book not he wrote on the websites himself).

it showed the alleged words translated, but I do not want to provide links because they were both anti-Islamic websites that are not suitable to encourage people to go to, that is the main reason I am asking for confirmation of whether he said it or not.

[Abdul1234]

Salam 'Aleykum,

I believe the origin of the matter in Islam is that one must love everybody and must want guidance for everybody, especially when talking about misguided laypeople and common followers, the hatred is for the belief and the act.

Sadly the satanic practices and beliefs of some groups, force you to hate them and wish them a bad fate.

By the way, I know of a recent convert to Islam called Jason Jadloski, are you him by any chance?

I doubt that Jason is our Jason here unless he has become a Muslim in the last few days as the last time I spoke to this one (abid786) he told us that he was using the account of a Shiah Muslim friend who had given up using Sunniforum because Sunnis were bullying him and that he himself wasn't personally a Muslim.

Maybe you should ask him if he has become a Muslim?

[abid786]

khomani was not alive when the world wide web came out

Indeed he wasn't but he wrote books which have been digitized. And this quote is true; see this (http://www.*************/forum/index.php?/topic/4867-tahrirolvasyleh/)



Salam 'Aleykum,By the way, I know of a recent convert to Islam called Jason Jadloski, are you him by any chance?

I'm not Muslim and no my last name is not Jadloski.

[Abdul1234]

sorry the link doesn't work for me, it is like it is blocked or something?

[sunni-from-iraq]

Indeed he wasn't but he wrote books which have been digitized. And this quote is true; see this (http://www.*************/forum/index.php?/topic/4867-tahrirolvasyleh/)




I'm not Muslim and no my last name is not Jadloski.
if you are not then you should put your madghab as non muslim by the way are you looking into islam

[sunni-from-iraq]

yes I remember his funeral, I saw it on tv when hell fell out of his kafan, but I rather liked him in those days.

sorry brother you misunderstand my English

what I mean to say is I read that he said it in one of his books of fatawa on two separate websites

(I read it on the websites that it said it in his book not he wrote on the websites himself).

it showed the alleged words translated, but I do not want to provide links because they were both anti-Islamic websites that are not suitable to encourage people to go to, that is the main reason I am asking for confirmation of whether he said it or not.
acualy about khomani their have been many good and bad things he has don their also have been unclear things for example in the iran iraq war isreal supported iran and gave them weopens it is hard to find if something is legit about him

[Abdul1234]

I didn't know that about the war, but if that happened with America supporting Saddam and Israel assisting Iran then obviously it sounds like there must have been some diabolical plan there to weaken the Muslims and reduce their strength by the energy, money and lives that were lost in that conflict - and the Muslims fell into that trap or Saddam and Khomeini realized what was happening but didn't care :rolleyes:

not that it is relevant to the thread, but if you look back, the speed that the West got rid of Saddam once he had started to turn towards Islam at the latter part of his reign is quite amazing.

[sunni-from-iraq]

I didn't know that about the war, but if that happened with America supporting Saddam and Israel assisting Iran then obviously it sounds like there must have been some diabolical plan there to weaken the Muslims and reduce their strength by the energy, money and lives that were lost in that conflict - and the Muslims fell into that trap or Saddam and Khomeini realized what was happening but didn't care :rolleyes:

not that it is relevant to the thread, but if you look back, the speed that the West got rid of Saddam once he had started to turn towards Islam at the latter part of his reign is quite amazing. i know at the end of his life he went from a evil dictatar to a good muslim he said this before he died "To the great nation, to the people of our country, and humanity,
Many of you have known the writer of this letter to be faithful, honest, caring for others, wise, of sound judgment, just, decisive, careful with the wealth of the people and the state ... and that his heart is big enough to embrace all without discrimination.

You have known your brother and leader very well and he never bowed to the despots and, in accordance with the wishes of those who loved him, remained a sword and a banner.

This is how you want your brother, son or leader to be ... and those who will lead you (in the future) should have the same qualifications.

Here, I offer my soul to God as a sacrifice, and if He wants, He will send it to heaven with the martyrs, or, He will postpone that ... so let us be patient and depend on Him against the unjust nations.

Remember that God has enabled you to become an example of love, forgiveness and brotherly coexistence ... I call on you not to hate, because hate does not leave a space for a person to be fair and it makes you blind and closes all doors of thinking and keeps away one from balanced thinking and making the right choice.

I also call on you not to hate the peoples of the other countries that attacked us and differentiate between the decision-makers and peoples. Anyone who repents — whether in Iraq or abroad — you must forgive him.

You should know that among the aggressors, there are people who support your struggle against the invaders, and some of them volunteered for the legal defence of prisoners, including Saddam Hussein ... some of these people wept profusely when they said goodbye to me.

Dear faithful people, I say goodbye to you, but I will be with the merciful God who helps those who take refuge in him and who will never disappoint any faithful, honest believer ... God is Great ... God is great ... Long live our nation ... Long live our great struggling people ... Long live Iraq, long live Iraq ... Long live Palestine ... Long live jihad and the mujahedeen.

Saddam Hussein President and Commander in Chief of the Iraqi Mujahed Armed Forces

Additional clarification note:

I have written this letter, because the lawyers told me that the so-called criminal court — established and named by the invaders — will allow the so-called defendants the chance for a last word. But that court and its chief judge did not give us the chance to say a word, and issued its verdict without explanation and read out the sentence — dictated by the invaders — without presenting the evidence. I wanted the people to know this"

here he may see him self alot but if you reed it it gives you the true meening of islam unity and peace


this is strange coming from me honestly because i used to hate him

[abid786]

if you are not then you should put your madghab as non muslim by the way are you looking into islam

I did edit it, and yes I am.

[Abdul1234]

:-)

[TripolySunni]

I did edit it, and yes I am.

We ask Allah to guide you, and I suggest you ignore small deviant sects like the Twelver Shia, concentrate on the Quran and its explanations and wisdom and on the life of the Prophet (SAWS) and his companions (ra) in order to understand what the essence of their message was and the hardships they had to go through, if you need any books, open a thread and request the topics you'd like to read and we'll recommend the authentic books.

Salam 'Aleykum,

[white-falcon]

We ask Allah to guide you, and I suggest you ignore small deviant sects like the Twelver Shia, concentrate on the Quran and its explanations and wisdom and on the life of the Prophet (SAWS) and his companions (ra) in order to understand what the essence of their message was and the hardships they had to go through, if you need any books, open a thread and request the topics you'd like to read and we'll recommend the authentic books.

Salam 'Aleykum,


Takfir: A Fitna of Our Times

Our Beloved Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) said, “Whoever accuses a fellow believer of kufr, it is as if he killed him.” [Bukhari]
As well as, “If a man says to his brother, ‘O disbeliever!’, then indeed it [the slanderous statement] returns upon one of the two.” [Bukhari, Muslim]
This hadith indicates that it is categorically prohibited to accuse one’s fellow Muslim of disbelief, as that is major slander and calumny. Allah Most High states, “And do not call one another bad names: wretched is the name of corruption after faith.” (49:11) Many commentators said this verse refers to calling one’s fellow Muslim ‘disbeliever’ (kafir) or ‘religiously corrupt’ (fasiq). [Ibn Abdul Barr, Istidhkar]
The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) also said on his farewell pilgrimage, “Do not go back, after my demise, as [acting like you did when you were] disbelievers, some of you striking the necks of others.” He made this statement after telling the Muslims to keep silent, thereby indicating that what was to follow was of timeless wisdom and immense gravity. And in another narration, he prefaced it with “Woe to you all!” — also highlighting the seriousness of the matter.
[Bukhari, Muslim; Sharh Qadi Iyad]
Indeed, because takfir is such a grave matter, our scholars have stated, “To be mistaken in deeming a thousand disbelievers as believers is better than to be mistaken in deeming a single believer a disbeliever.”
Imam Ghazali, a master jurist, theologian and saint of our tradition, explains at length that most takfir occurs due to fanaticism and is hence utterly baseless. He summarizes the matter as follows:
“It is established that a Muslim’s protected status and inviolability (`isma) is certainly derived from his statement ‘La ilaha illa Allah.’ This, then, cannot be repelled except with that which is also at the level of certainty.” [Ghazali, Iqtisad fil I`tiqad; Fatwa Shaykh Bin Bayyah, Amman Message]
That is to say, a doubtful issue that might suggest disbelief cannot outweigh the original certainty of a Muslim’s belief — only an act or statement of certain disbelief could do so. And this determination is not the function of the general laity of Muslims, but rather qualified jurists and theologians alone.

@Tripolysunni : there are millions of shias and if one of them turns out beleiver - you will be sinful - in this time we need unity among muslims despite our differences and focus in dealing with America and Israel -

[abdulwahhab]

Takfir: A Fitna of Our Times

Our Beloved Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) said, “Whoever accuses a fellow believer of kufr, it is as if he killed him.” [Bukhari]
As well as, “If a man says to his brother, ‘O disbeliever!’, then indeed it [the slanderous statement] returns upon one of the two.” [Bukhari, Muslim]
This hadith indicates that it is categorically prohibited to accuse one’s fellow Muslim of disbelief, as that is major slander and calumny. Allah Most High states, “And do not call one another bad names: wretched is the name of corruption after faith.” (49:11) Many commentators said this verse refers to calling one’s fellow Muslim ‘disbeliever’ (kafir) or ‘religiously corrupt’ (fasiq). [Ibn Abdul Barr, Istidhkar]
The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) also said on his farewell pilgrimage, “Do not go back, after my demise, as [acting like you did when you were] disbelievers, some of you striking the necks of others.” He made this statement after telling the Muslims to keep silent, thereby indicating that what was to follow was of timeless wisdom and immense gravity. And in another narration, he prefaced it with “Woe to you all!” — also highlighting the seriousness of the matter.
[Bukhari, Muslim; Sharh Qadi Iyad]
Indeed, because takfir is such a grave matter, our scholars have stated, “To be mistaken in deeming a thousand disbelievers as believers is better than to be mistaken in deeming a single believer a disbeliever.”
Imam Ghazali, a master jurist, theologian and saint of our tradition, explains at length that most takfir occurs due to fanaticism and is hence utterly baseless. He summarizes the matter as follows:
“It is established that a Muslim’s protected status and inviolability (`isma) is certainly derived from his statement ‘La ilaha illa Allah.’ This, then, cannot be repelled except with that which is also at the level of certainty.” [Ghazali, Iqtisad fil I`tiqad; Fatwa Shaykh Bin Bayyah, Amman Message]
That is to say, a doubtful issue that might suggest disbelief cannot outweigh the original certainty of a Muslim’s belief — only an act or statement of certain disbelief could do so. And this determination is not the function of the general laity of Muslims, but rather qualified jurists and theologians alone.

@Tripolysunni : there are millions of shias and if one of them turns out beleiver - you will be sinful - in this time we need unity among muslims despite our differences and focus in dealing with America and Israel -

Do you use this same measurement for Qadiyanis? There are even some Christians who don't believe in the trinity. Are they also to be considered Muslim?

There are certain conditions that have to be met to be considered a Muslim. Holding certain beliefs also takes one out of the fold of Islam.

The beliefs of a group are embodied within the scholars and the learned of the group. The Ayatullaat of the ithna-Ashariya Shi'a are all kaafir. If a person says that he or she is a Shi'a while knowing the beliefs of his or her Ayatullaat, then that person is also a kaafir. If a person was simply born into a Shi'a family and doesn't know any better, only then is there ikhtilaaf on kufr. Many scholars, thus, say that there is no blanket takfeer on all Shi'as but there is takfeer on 12-er Shi'ism. What does that mean? It means that the beliefs espoused by 12-erism are kufr and make those that believe them kaafir. But, many Shi'a are unaware and are 12-ers merely in name - and for this reason, there is no blanket takfeer on all the Shi'a.

An analogy would be if someone is born into a Qadiyani family and has known himself to be a Qadiyani, but he doesn't care nor believe in Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiyani, he isn't a kaafir. Yet, our ulama have made a united takfeer of Qadiyanism.

[white-falcon]

Do you use this same measurement for Qadiyanis? There are even some Christians who don't believe in the trinity. Are they also to be considered Muslim?

There are certain conditions that have to be met to be considered a Muslim. Holding certain beliefs also takes one out of the fold of Islam.

what i meant is - declaring whole group as Kafir isnt that risky ? i have many shia friends they dont have any weird beleifs - my point was only that in this time unity is needed thats all .

[abdulwahhab]

what i meant is - declaring whole group as Kafir isnt that risky ? i have many shia friends they dont have any weird beleifs - my point was only that in this time unity is needed thats all .

:salam:

The majority of Sunni ulama have said that there is no blanket kufr on the Shi'a layperson but there is blanket kufr on the Shi'a Ayatullaat. But then, those that do a blanket kufr over the Shi'as say that if a person does not believe the kufr beliefs of the Shi'a, then he himself is not a Shi'a in reality. It is like a person who calls himself a Christian, but rejects divinity of 'Isa :alayhis: and accepts prophethood of Rasoolullah :saw: and believes in the Qur'an and all the Islamic beliefs - but he just calls himself a Christian. Does that mean that Christians are Muslims? Of course not. It just means that this person isn't a true Christian, just how Shi'as who don't hold kufri beliefs aren't true Shi'a.

And what is a "true Shi'a"? As I said before, those learned in the religion - the Shi'a ayatullaat - are the ones that hold true Shi'a beliefs. Many Shi'a laymen don't know of many weird beliefs, such as mut'a or tahreef of the Qur'an or cursing of the sahaba :anhum: - but all the Shi'a ayatullaat know and sanction these beliefs.

[wellwisher]

:salam:
Many Shi'a laymen don't know of many weird beliefs, such as mut'a or tahreef of the Qur'an or cursing of the sahaba :anhum: - but all the Shi'a ayatullaat know and sanction these beliefs.Brother, all the Itna ashari Shia deniers of Khatme Nabuwwah. Though most of them might not be aware of it, due to their ignorance.

check this out:
http://youpuncturedtheark.wordpress.com/2011/06/16/part-4-shia-interpretation-of-hadith-thaqalayn-under-microscope/

[abdulwahhab]

Brother, all the Itna ashari Shia deniers of Khatme Nabuwwah. Though most of them might not be aware of it, due to their ignorance.

check this out:
http://youpuncturedtheark.wordpress.com/2011/06/16/part-4-shia-interpretation-of-hadith-thaqalayn-under-microscope/

:salam:

Yes, I know - imamah is simply a different word for nabuwwah (actually, it is an even higher rank than nabuwwah in most cases!) - but as you mentioned, most Shi'a don't know that. That is why majority of our ulama have not called all Shi'a kaafir.

[TripolySunni]

A sect of Satanists:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N0SZuHi17xA

[Maripat]

:salam:

Yes, I know - imamah is simply a different word for nabuwwah ...
:ws:
Then there was that video where Hazrat Ali (RA) was sort of doing favour to Allah(SWT). That one is even higher.

Once it enters the hilarious lane then it has no end. I suppose the thinking masses there must be paralyzed. If that was not the case then the sheer suffocation must be unbearable.

[TripolySunni]

al-Salamu 'ALeykum,

I'm happy that some of the brothers are translating what the Shia Rabbis say and spreading it on youtube, check their Sayyed al-Fali:



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gsv7YNjhNB8

[Maripat]

On the net it says that Jose means God will increase - He will multiply.

Any one trying to push Hazrat Hussain (RA) into California is doing injustice to Ahl-ul-Bayt.

[TripolySunni]

A brother wrote in the comments:
"On orders from Antonio María de Bucareli y Ursúa, Spanish Viceroy of New Spain, San Jose was founded by Lieutenant José Joaquín Moraga as Pueblo de San José de Guadalupe (in honor of Saint Joseph) on November 29, 1777, to establish a farming community."

^ But we don't really need any of this to realize that the Shia Sayyed is lying, but can you blame him? if his followers are donkeys?

[abdulwahhab]

:salam:

The equivalent of "Jose" in Arabic is Yusuf.

[Abdul1234]

I noticed the following post on Ummahforum it is by some who is pointing out some similarities between the twelver Shiah view of the Imam Mahdi and the Dajjal - the poster points out some similarities between the Shiah view of Imam Mahdi and the Dajjal. http://www.ummah.com/forum/showthread.php?218449-Will-the-shias-follow-the-dajjal-as-their-mehdi It is of course only speculation, but really it has some fascinating parallels.

Most strikingly those poster quotes a hadith from Tirmidhi that Dajjal will arise from Israfahan with a large army of Jews at the time of Imam Mahdi and then quotes Shiah hadeeth that their Mahdi will speak in Hebrew and resurrect the dead and kill the Sunni believbers (sound familiar?).

[TripolySunni]

"Finality of Prophet-hood" in the Shia religion. we touched upon it before, here is a video:



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yeSYfsvQQL8

One of their biggest classical scholars, al-Mufid says in "Awael al-Maqalat" pg.45:



- أوائل المقالات - الشيخ المفيد ص 45:
8 - القول في الفرق بين الرسل والأنبياء عليهم السلام
واتفقت الإمامية على أن كل رسول فهو نبي وليس كل نبي فهو رسول، وقد كان من أنبياء الله عز وجل حفظة لشرائع الرسل وخلفائهم في المقام، وإنما منع الشرع من تسمية أئمتنا بالنبوة دون أن يكون العقل مانعا من ذلك لحصولهم على المعنى الذي حصل لمن ذكرناه من الأنبياء عليهم السلام.


[ 8- The difference between the Prophets and the Messengers (as):
The Imami (Shia) have consensus that every messenger is a prophet but not every prophet is a messenger, from the prophets of Allah are those who preserve/protect the religious laws passed down by the messengers, they are their successors in this matter. The religious law has only prohibited us from claiming prophet-hood for our Imams although the intellect does not prohibit this, because they(Imams) have acquired the qualities that we have mentioned for the prophets peace be upon them.]

Related to this thread:
http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/showthread.php?73376-The-difference-between-the-Shia-Imams-and-the-Prophets

[abdulwahhab]

[ 8- The difference between the Prophets and the Messengers (as):
The Imami (Shia) have consensus that every messenger is a prophet but not every prophet is a messenger, from the prophets of Allah are those who preserve/protect the religious laws passed down by the messengers, they are their successors in this matter. The religious law has only prohibited us from claiming prophet-hood for our Imams although the intellect does not prohibit this, because they(Imams) have acquired the qualities that we have mentioned for the prophets peace be upon them.]

Related to this thread:
http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/showthread.php?73376-The-difference-between-the-Shia-Imams-and-the-Prophets

:salam:

This is extremely funny because it basically says that you cannot call a spade a spade or that if it looks, walks, and talks like something, it isn't that something. This is an example of obliteration of the fundamentals of logic.

[TripolySunni]

:salam:

This is extremely funny because it basically says that you cannot call a spade a spade or that if it looks, walks, and talks like something, it isn't that something. This is an example of obliteration of the fundamentals of logic.

و عليكم السلام و الرحمة

And since when did Shiism ever make sense?

[Maripat]

I have a simple query - please give me the link to relevant post(s). All of Shias are supposed to be Syeds. Now how is that possible? Particularly if all the modern Persians are Syeds then where are the off-spring of old Persians? I have not been able to figure that out. Must be elementary but even then.

[TripolySunni]

I have a simple query - please give me the link to relevant post(s). All of Shias are supposed to be Syeds. Now how is that possible? Particularly if all the modern Persians are Syeds then where are the off-spring of old Persians? I have not been able to figure that out. Must be elementary but even then.

Most Sayyeds are Sunni (about 80%), and most of the Shia who claim to be Sayyeds are liars.

[TripolySunni]

Salam 'Aleykum,

We were working on some videos to expose the Satanist Shia scholars, here you go I hope you enjoy these:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H8tg6SblQD8


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sdo6YIlM3hI

[white-falcon]

My Village is full of Naqwi Syeds - they are more influenced with Sufism - and their teachings are always loving Ahle Bait - their teachings are always to love Holy Prophet (S) and love Hazrat Ali (R) - because of them there is chilled atmosphere in our village - as they are syeds they are considered as chiefs of our villages - and because of their sufistic approach our village is free of barelwi - deobandi - salafi - wahabbi sect thing - here we are only Muslims and Sufis - i wish same kind of atmosphere should be in all world - trust me in our village you will find die-hard lovers of Hazrat Ali (R) and Ahle Bait - thats why i mostly share virtues of Hazrat Ali (r) here -

[TripolySunni]

'Ilm al-Ghayb again, I did this one on my own :)


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=euguIhmAjPw

[Maripat]

They have been working overnight and for so long on this perilous journey. They should fear Allah (SWT).

[AbuMuslimKhorasani]

Salam Alaikum


My Village is full of Naqwi Syeds - they are more influenced with Sufism - and their teachings are always loving Ahle Bait - their teachings are always to love Holy Prophet (S) and love Hazrat Ali (R) - because of them there is chilled atmosphere in our village - as they are syeds they are considered as chiefs of our villages -

Are they Sunni Muslim or deviant Shiites?

And What are you? Sunni Muslim?

Do the people in your village call Ali (ra) for help i.e Ya Ali Madad?


and because of their sufistic approach our village is free of barelwi - deobandi - salafi - wahabbi sect thing - here we are only Muslims and Sufis

So you consider 'barelwi - deobandi - salafi - wahabbi sect' as Kafir?


- i wish same kind of atmosphere should be in all world - trust me in our village you will find die-hard lovers of Hazrat Ali (R) and Ahle Bait - thats why i mostly share virtues of Hazrat Ali (r) here -

This shows your lack of information and knowledge. The Muslim Ummah (AhlSonnah) love and follow Ahlulbayt more than anybodyelse. The real lovers and followers of Ahlulbayt (ra) and Ali (ra) are the the Sunni Muslims (they make 90% of Muslim Ummah).

[white-falcon]

Salam Alaikum



Are they Sunni Muslim or deviant Shiites?

And What are you? Sunni Muslim? .

They are Sunni Muslims - but have sufistic approach - have you heard of Syed Abdul Qadir Gilani ? Shah Abdul LAtif Bhittai ? here in our village you will find these kinds of Saints -



So you consider 'barelwi - deobandi - salafi - wahabbi sect' as Kafir? .

did i said anything like that ? what i meant was our village is free of sect hatred - dont you agree that nowadays sect hatred is increasing ?




This shows your lack of information and knowledge. The Muslim Ummah (AhlSonnah) love and follow Ahlulbayt more than anybodyelse. The real lovers and followers of Ahlulbayt (ra) and Ali (ra) are the the Sunni Muslims (they make 90% of Muslim Ummah).

Thanks 4 increasing my knowledge but i already know that

[Abdul1234]

My Village is full of Naqwi Syeds - they are more influenced with Sufism - and their teachings are always loving Ahle Bait - their teachings are always to love Holy Prophet (S) and love Hazrat Ali (R) - because of them there is chilled atmosphere in our village - as they are syeds they are considered as chiefs of our villages - and because of their sufistic approach our village is free of barelwi - deobandi - salafi - wahabbi sect thing - here we are only Muslims and Sufis - i wish same kind of atmosphere should be in all world - trust me in our village you will find die-hard lovers of Hazrat Ali (R) and Ahle Bait - thats why i mostly share virtues of Hazrat Ali (r) here -

it sounds a nice village MashaAllah

[AbuMuslimKhorasani]

They are Sunni Muslims - but have sufistic approach - have you heard of Syed Abdul Qadir Gilani ? Shah Abdul LAtif Bhittai ? here in our village you will find these kinds of Saints -

I don't know those two saints who live in your village. I hope by 'Syed Abdul Qadir Gilani' you don't mean Sheikh Abdul Qadir Gilani (ra) since he died centuries ago.


Please don't reply to me as I don't to want spoil this thread with useless discussion. We will discuss later in a different thread.

Thanks,

[Abdul1234]

I don't know those two saints who live in your village. I hope by 'Syed Abdul Qadir Gilani' you don't mean Sheikh Abdul Qadir Gilani (ra) since he died centuries ago.

Assalamu Alaikum wa Rahmnatullah

brother the brother meant Saints with similar qualities, not these particular ones.

[sunni-from-iraq]

this has grown into a realy big thread

[Maripat]

this has grown into a realy big thread
Even then they persist on their path.
Is it possible to help them?

[TripolySunni]

this has grown into a realy big thread

Lots of Vitamins...

[TripolySunni]

Even then they persist on their path.
Is it possible to help them?

Salam,

Allah explicitly says in the Quran that he does not help or guide those who reject truth and persist in their evil ways:

And Allah does not guide the disbelieving people. [2:264]

And Allah does not guide the wrongdoing people. [2:258]

And Allah does not guide the evil doing people. [5:108]

[Maripat]

This is a bit humbling. Actually I only romanticize about them turning back on their deviant ways. When Ayatullah Khumaini allowed Shias to pray behind Sunnis simplistic people like yours truly thought of it as a big leap forward towards unification. I hope for that and more than that pray for it. This is oldest significant division in the ranks of Ummah and unfortunately there have been several others down the line. Enough of these 73 parts, we have seen them all, may Allah (SWT) turn us all towards a single Ummah. Ameen.

[TripolySunni]

This is a bit humbling. Actually I only romanticize about them turning back on their deviant ways. When Ayatullah Khumaini allowed Shias to pray behind Sunnis simplistic people like yours truly thought of it as a big leap forward towards unification. I hope for that and more than that pray for it. This is oldest significant division in the ranks of Ummah and unfortunately there have been several others down the line. Enough of these 73 parts, we have seen them all, may Allah (SWT) turn us all towards a single Ummah. Ameen.

Shia praying in the mosques of the Muslims: A sign of hope or hopelessness !? :confused:

http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/showthread.php?85646-Shia-praying-in-the-mosques-of-the-Muslims&highlight=shia+praying+in+the+mosques

[Maripat]

What to say Shaykh Tripoli?
Alhamdulillahi 'ala kulli haal.
This came out just last month so that I learn my lesson in time. :alhamd:.
As they say in India - you shave your head it rains hail stones.

[sunni-from-iraq]

Lots of Vitamins... I gatta say though you have made a realy good thead it just keeps on continuing

[TripolySunni]

I gatta say though you have made a realy good thead it just keeps on continuing

You need many volumes to extract all the disasters from the shia books. I ain't posting much in this thread actually, I'm posting the rest of the stuff on another forum which is specialized with researching the Shia... so I rarely ever post material on here.

The threads just gets bumped for some reason or another, Subhan-Allah it's the Shia themselves that bump it sometimes :)

[Maripat]

The other forum perhaps is in Arabic?

[TripolySunni]

A prostitute on Ahlul-Bayt TV (otherwise known as Ahlul-Kufr TV) who thinks he's some kind of scholar, says that Ameer al-Mumineen 'Umar (ra) is the founder of "Wahhabies":
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=29dini8U87M

The prostitute also quoted the book of Suleim bin Qays which is a fabricated book according to his own Rafidhi scholars.

[Maripat]

Ahem ...
pro --> de

[TripolySunni]

Did Jibreel (as) make a mistake and appoint Muhammad (SAWS) as prophet instead of `Ali (ra)?
Read here: LINK (http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/showthread.php?87376-Did-the-angel-Jibreel-(as)-make-a-mistake&p=758142#post758142)

[TripolySunni]

Website by a Shia who exposes Mut`ah temporary marriage:
http://mullaandmutah.weebly.com/index.html

[TripolySunni]

Salam `Aleykum,

Ahlul-Kisa' are now seven instead of five : )


حَدَّثَنَا عَبْدُ اللَّهِ ، قَالَ : حَدَّثَنِي أَبُو جَعْفَرٍ مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ الرُّزِّيُّ ، قثنا عَبْدُ الْوَهَّابِ بْنُ عَطَاءٍ الْخَفَّافُ ، عَنْ ثَوْرِ بْنِ يَزِيدَ ، عَنْ مَكْحُولٍ ، عَنْ كُرَيْبٍ مَوْلَى ابْنِ عَبَّاسٍ ، عَنِ ابْنِ عَبَّاسٍ ، قَالَ : دَعَا رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ الْعَبَّاسَ ، فَقَالَ : " إِذَا كَانَ غَدَاةَ الاثْنَيْنِ فَائْتِنِي أَنْتَ وَوَلَدُكَ " ، قَالَ : فَغَدَا وَغَدَوْنَا مَعَهُ ، قَالَ : فَأَلْبَسَنَا كِسَاءً لَهُ ، ثُمَّ قَالَ : " اللَّهُمَّ اغْفِرْ لِلْعَبَّاسِ وَلِوَلَدِهِ مَغْفِرَةً ظَاهِرَةً بَاطِنَةً لا تُغَادِرْ ذَنْبًا ، اللَّهُمَّ أُخْلُفْهُ فِي وَلَدِهِ " .

Imam Ahmad in his Fada'el: `Abdullah told us, he said: abu Ja`far Muhammad bin `Abdullah al-Razzi told me: `Abdul-Wahhab bin `Ata' al-Khaffaf told us: From Thawr bin Yazid, from Makhoul from Kurayb Mawla ibn `Abbas, from `Abdullah ibn `Abbas (ra) that he said: The Prophet (SAWS) called on al-`Abbas and said: "Tomorrow on Monday, come to me with your son." So the next day we came and he surrounded us with his cloak and said: "O Allah, forgive al-`Abbas and his son their outward sins and inward sins and leave no sin, O Allah take care of his child after he passes away."

Source: Fada'el al-Sahaba.
Grading: Hasan.

[TripolySunni]

Another interesting Hadith,


تزوج علي أسماء بنت عميس فتفاخر ابناها، محمد بن جعفر، ومحمد بن أبي بكر، فقال كل منهما: أبي خير من أبيك، فقال علي: يا أسماء اقضي بينهما، فقالت: ما رأيت شابًا كان خيرًا من جعفر، ولا كهلاً خيرًا من أبي بكر، فقال علي: ما تركت لنا شيئًا، ولو قلت غير هذا لمقتك. فقالت: والله إنَّ ثلاثة أنت أخسهم لخيار

Yahya bin Zakaria said: My father and ibn abi Khalid told me: from al-Shu'ubi: `Ali married Asma' bint `Umays so her two sons Muhammad ibn Abu Bakr and Muhammad ibn Ja`far started boasting with pride, each saying: "I am better and my father is better than yours." So `Ali said to Asma': "Why don't you be the judge between them?" So she said to ibn Ja`far: "As for you son, I have not seen a young man among the Arabs better than your father Ja`far." Then she said to Muhammad: "And as for you, I have not seen a mature man among the Arabs better than your father Abu Bakr." So `Ali said to Asma' (jokingly): "You've left nothing for me? (but) If you had said otherwise I would have hated it." She replied to him: "By Allah, you are lesser than them so the three (men) must be great."

In Musannaf ibn abi Shaybah: Muhammad bin Bishr: Zakariya told us: from 'Amir, from 'Ali and he mentions it...

Source: Fada'el al-Sahaba, Musannaf ibn abi Shaybah.
Grading: Researcher of Fada'el al-Sahaba said "Sahih", Ibn Hajar said "Sahih" in al-Isabah fi Ma`rifat al-Sahaba.


Comment: I added the word (Jokingly) between parenthesis because I know a lot of Shia are reading this thread and they have a deficiency when it comes to understanding narrations and religious texts, so I wanted to clarify this for them so that they won't make Takfeer on Asma' bint `Umays.

Now to briefly explain some parts of the Hadith to make it easier to understand for the readers:

> "And as for you, I have not seen a mature man among the Arabs better than your father Abu Bakr."

The Arabic word used for mature man is "Kuhoul" which is plural of "Kahl", and this refers to a Man who is not young but not yet old.

> "You've left nothing for me? (but) If you had said otherwise I would have hated it."

He means, if Ja`far is the best young man among the Arabs and Abu Bakr was the best of the mature older Arab men, then what did you leave for me? and he said this jokingly, but he followed it by saying that if she had said anything different then he would have hated it, in other words he agrees with what she said and agrees on the merit and superiority of the senior companions Abu Bakr and Ja`far.

> "By Allah, you are lesser than them so the three (men) must be great."

She means the fact that `Ali was the least good among the three, means that these three are extremely great men because `Ali is known for his greatness and virtue and honor, so all three companions must be extremely great if the lowest among them is `Ali.

[Usama2]

:jazak: for your efforts.

They are invaluable for keeping Muslims informed about this deviant sect.

[TripolySunni]

What you must know about the narrations concerning the battle of Siffin

Bismillah Alrahman alraheem,

The following are some important notes regarding Siffeen that I thought should be shared with forum members that are interested in the subject:


- The main sources for Siffeen were written by the following:

1) Abu Mikhnaf
2) Jabir Al-Ju'fi
3) Nasr bin Muzahim
4) Yahya bin Sulaiman Al-Ju'fi
5) Ibrahim bin Al-Hussain bin Daizeel

- The first three are Shia narrators. Each of them has been harshly condemned by Sunnis, and they have also been accused of fabricating narrations. The last two are Sunni scholars and are thiqa.

- Nasr bin Muzahim's book is the only one that reached us.
- Abu Mikhnaf's book has reached us through Al-Tabari's narrations in his tareekh and quotes from Al-Nasr bin Muzahim.
- Nasr bin Muzahim's book also recorded Jabir Al-Ju'fi's book, or at least, most of it.

- Ibrahim bin Al-Hussain bin Daizeel's book has reached us through the narrations of very late scholars, however, it mainly revolves around the narrations of Yahya bin Sulaiman, who in turn, mainly focuses on narrating from Nasr bin Muzahim. In other words, his book isn't very useful at all.

- It was said that Abdullah bin Ahmad bin Hanbal has a book on Siffeen. However, when I checked his biography, I find no mention of this. I do find that he had a book on Al-Jamal. It seems that he briefly spoke about Siffeen in that book, but nothing worth having it classified as a book on the subject.

- Nasr bin Muzahim's book, which is, by far, the ultimate source book for Siffeen is unreliable according to the standards of both Sunnis and Shias. He received 99% of his narrations from Sa'ad bin Omar or Amr bin Shimr, both are unknown and weak according to Sunnis and Shias.

- In conclusion, there is no book that did a good job of collecting the events of Siffeen, and most of the details, perhaps 98% of what has been recorded about Siffeen is either baseless or false.

- The most authentic narrations that can be found about Siffeen come from two sources: (1) Musanaf Ibn Abi Shaiba and (2) Al-Sunnah by Al-Khallal. Both include short chapters about Siffeen. Each has around fifty narrations, which usually have nothing to do with the fighting.

- Important lessons that can be learned from those two books include: (1) Most of the people of Badr and the "tree" did not take part, (2) the two saw each other as Muslims and not kuffar and regretted their actions, that (3) the early scholars feared Allah and did not dare condemn the sahaba for fighting, and that (4) the fighting only lasted for three days, which implies that the deaths couldn't have been tens of thousands.

Inshallah you all find this information beneficial and I suggest for those that are interested to review those two books that I mentioned at the end.

- END -

Written by brother Farid al-Bahrani.

[TripolySunni]

Jazakallahu Khayran Akhi Usama!

^^


Brothers and sisters I have an announcement, one of our Awliya (Abu `Uthman) has decided to open a channel and refute the Shia's arguments, and he is MORE than capable of refuting them insha-Allah because he's researched them for around 6 years, maybe more. So support him! Subscribe! Like and comment on his videos!!!

His videos so far...

Refuting the Shia in 2 minutes - Introduction:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y6IHYVJsTP0&feature=plcp


Refuting the Shia in 2 minutes - `Ali is from me and I am from him:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EZlLE23arM8&feature=plcp


Refuting the Shia in 2 minutes - Fadak (1):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f7qRxPknlcs&feature=plcp


Refuting the Shia in 2 minutes - Did Abu Bakr (ra) burn Hadith?:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K3QksQSQKGA&feature=plcp


Refuting the Shia in 2 minutes - The verse of Wilayah (1):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tzun1ULGXMw&feature=plcp


Refuting the Shia in 2 minutes - The verse of Wilayah (2):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gitr6BDQJmk&feature=plcp


Link to his channel: "2MinutesOnShiasm (http://www.youtube.com/user/2MinutesOnShiasm/videos)"

Salam `Aleykum,

[TripolySunni]

More videos about the verse...


Refuting the Shia in 2 minutes - The verse of Wilayah (3):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ghxN2QP8uo4


Refuting the Shia in 2 minutes - The verse of Wilayah (4):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ba3lyh27CMs

[lslam]

what is your view on Sunni-Shia unity?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=flVszFVefGs&feature=relmfu

[TripolySunni]

what is your view on Sunni-Shia unity?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=flVszFVefGs&feature=relmfu

Salam `Aleykum,

I've seen the movie before, definitely the work of an ignorant.

Unity between the Muslims and the Zaidi Shia sect is easy, unity between the Muslims and the Isma`ili Shia or Twelver Shia sects is impossible, unless the Twelver Shia decide to change some of their main beliefs, which they won't.

In order to give this topic its full rights, we need to get a team of Muslims, experts in Fiqh, and experts in `Aqaed, and experts in Hadith, and experts in History, then we need at least 3 or 4 individuals who have studied Shiasm in-depth, and they would research the possibility of unity with all of its details, they will reach a conclusion and write down the steps required for this unity to take place, all of this would be published in a big book, maybe several volumes long, and then revised by the biggest scholars of Ahlul-Sunnah... after that it is up to the Twelver Shia to implement the steps required for unity... and they won't, so forget it.

[TripolySunni]

Shia pigs expose one another:



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m6mRSaCtQIs

[Maripat]

What are Mera and Majja, or whatever?

PS: It is a bit chilling video.

[TripolySunni]

al-Salamu `Aleykum,

The Shia who was debating our brother Farid in this link:
http://islamic-forum.net/index.php?showforum=106

Has reverted to Ahlul-Sunnah as you can see in this link:
http://islamic-forum.net/index.php?showtopic=16157&st=0

So al-Hamdulillah.

[Maripat]

al-Salamu `Aleykum,

The Shia who was debating our brother Farid in this link:
http://islamic-forum.net/index.php?showforum=106

Has reverted to Ahlul-Sunnah as you can see in this link:
http://islamic-forum.net/index.php?showtopic=16157&st=0

So al-Hamdulillah.
:alhamd:

[TripolySunni]

More from the religion of polytheist retards and worshipers of Ahlul-Kufr wal-Zandaqah:

Journey to shirk - Reviving of Paganism Part 1-4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_1AUQ8rEhqM

Journey to shirk - Reviving of Paganism Part 2-4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hylur0FG0Lk&feature=relmfu

Journey to shirk - Reviving of Paganism Part 3-4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F7z-hg1cf74&feature=g-all-u

[TripolySunni]

Some Shia Takfeeri narrations:

8 – And in al-Khisal from his father from Sa`d b. `Abdullah from `Ali b. Isma`il al-Ash`ari from Muhammad b. Sinan from Abu Malik al-Juhani. He said: I heard Abu `Abdillah عليه السلام saying: Three whom Allah will not speak to them on the day of the resurrection, and not look to them, and not purify them, and for them is a painful punishment: One who claims an imam whose Imamate is not from Allah, and one who denies an Imam whose Imamate is from Allah, and one who claims that (either of) them have a share in Islam.

11 – And in `Iqab al-A`mal from his father from Sa`d from Ahmad b. Abi `Abdillah from `Isma`il b. Mihran from a man from Abu ‘l-Maghra from Dharih from Abu Hamza from Abu `Abdillah عليه السلام. He said: From us is the Imam whose obedience is decreed. Whoever denies him dies as a Jew or as a Christian – (al-hadith)

18 – And in the book Ikmal ad-Deen from Ahmad b. Muhammad b. Yahya from his father from `Abdullah b. Muhammad b. `Isa from al-Hasan b. Musa the wood merchant from more than one person from Marwan b. Muslim. He said: as-Sadiq Ja`far b. Muhammad عليهما السلام said: The Imam is a sign between Allah `azza wa jalla and His creation. So whoever recognizes him is a believer, and whoever denies him is a kafir.

19 – And in al-`Ilal from his father from Sa`d from Ahmad b. Abi `Abdillah from Ibn Faddal from Tha`laba from `Amr b. Abi Nasr [`Umar b. Abi Nasr – in al-`Ilal] from Sadir. He said: Abu Ja`far عليه السلام said – in a hadith: Verily the knowledge that that the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وآله placed with `Ali عليه السلام (is) (?) whoever recognizes him is a believer and whoever denies him is a kafir. Then after him it was al-Hasan عليه السلام that was of that station – (al-hadith)

20 – And in al-I`tiqadat he said: as-Sadiq عليه السلام said: Whoever doubts in the kufr of our enemies and the oppressors of us, then he is a kafir.

21 – Furat b. Ibrahim al-Kufi in his Tafsir said: al-Husayn b. Sa`id [from Aban b. Taghlab – in the Tafsir] – mu`an`anan (an expression Furat uses when shorten the isnad between the shaykh narrating to him up to the Imam) – from Abu `Abdillah Ja`far b. Muhammad as-Sadiq عليه السلام. He said: When this ayat “There is not one of the People of the Book but will assuredly believe in him” (4:159). He said: The Messsenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وآله said: Not one rejects [Not one will remain who rejects – in the Tafsir] what was mentioned about `Isa b. Maryam عليه السلام but that he be a kafir, and not one rejects what the Prophet صلى الله عليه وآله said regarding `Ali b. Abi Talib عليه السلام but that he is a kafir.

27 - `Ali b. Muhammad the silk dealer in al-Kifaya from Muhammad b. `Ali b. al-Husayn b. Babuwayh from `Ali b. Ahmad b. `Imran [`Ali b. Ahmad b. Muhammad b. `Imran the flour merchant – in al-Kifaya] from Muhammad b. Abi `Abdillah from Musa b. `Imran from al-Husayn b. Yazid from al-Hasan b. `Ali b. Abi Hamza [al-Husayn b. `Ali b. Abi Hamza – in al-Kifaya] from his father from Yahya b. al-Qasim [Yahya b. Abi ‘l-Qasim – in al-Kifaya] from Ja`far b. Muhammad from his fathers from the Prophet صلى الله عليه وآله. He said: The Imams after me are twelve. The first of them is `Ali b. Abi Talib and the last of them is the Qa’im –until he said: The one who acknowledges them is a believer, and the deniar of them is a kafir.

28 – And from Abu ‘l-Mufaddal from `Abdullah b. `Amir [`Abdullah b. Ahmad b. `Amir – in Kifaya] from `Ahmad b. `Abdan (?) from Sahl b. Sayfi (?) from Musa b. `Abd Rabbih from al-Husayn b. `Ali عليهما السلام from the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وآله in a hadith wherein he said: Whoever claims that he loves the Prophet صلى الله عليه وآله and does not love the Wasi, then he has lied. And whoever claims that he recognizes the Prophet صلى الله عليه وآله and does not recognize the Wasi, then he has become a kafir.

29 – And from al-Husayn b. `Ali [al-Hasan b. `Ali – in Kifaya] from at-Talla`ukbari from al-Husayn b. Hamdan from `Uthman b. Sa`d [`Uthman b. Sa`id – in Kifaya] from Muhammad b. Mihran from Muhammad b. Isma`il from Khalid b. Mufallisfrom Na`im b. Ja`far from Abu Hamza ath-Thumali from Abu Khalid al-Kabuli from `Ali b. al-Husayn عليهما السلام. He said: I said to him: How many Imams are there after you? He said: Eight, for verily the Imams after the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وآله are twelve – until he said: And whoever hates us and rejects us or rejects one from us, then he is a kafir in Allah and in His signs.

34 – And from Muhammad b. Ya`qub (in al-Kafi) from al-Husayn b. Muhammad from Mu`alla from Abu Dawud al-Mustariqq from `Ali b. Maymun from Ibn Abi Ya`fur. He said: I heard Abu `Abdillah عليه السلام saying: Three whom Allah will not speak to them on the day of the resurrection nor purify them, and for them is a painful punishment: One who claims Imamate from Allah (and) it is not for him, and one who denies an Imam from Allah, and one who claims that (either of) them have a share in Islam.

37 – And from Ahmad b. Muhammad b. Sa`id from `Uqda from Muhammad b. al-Fudayl from Sa`dan b. Ishaq and Ahmad b. al-Husayn and Muhammad b. Ahmad b. al-Hasan all fo them from al-Hasan b. Mahbub from al-`Ala b. Razin [`Ali b. Ri’ab – in al-Ghayba] from Muhammad b. Muslim from Abu Ja`far عليه السلام in a hadith wherein he said: Whoever enters upon the morning from this Umma while he has no Imam from Allah, he enters upon the morning errant, confused, astray. If he dies upon this state, he dies the death of kufr and hypocracy.

38 – And by the isnad from al-Hasan b. Mahbub from Abu Ayyub from Muhammad b. Muslim from Abu Ja`far عليه السلام. He said: I said to him: What do you regard to be the state of someone who denies an Imam from you? So he said: Whoever denies an Imam from the Imams [Allah – in al-Ghayba] and disassociates from him and from his religion, then he is a kafir [and an apostate] from Islam. For, the Imam is from Allah, and his religion is the religion of Allah, and whoever disassociates from the religion of Allah then his blood is halal in that state, unless he returns or repents to Allah from what he said.

43 – Muhammad b. Ya`qub from `Ali b. Ibrahim from Salih b. as-Sindi from Ja`far b. Bashir from Abu Salama from Abu `Abdillah عليه السلام in a hadith wherein he said: Whoever recognizes us is a believer, and whoever denies us is a kafir, and whoever does not recognize us and does not deny us is astray.

48 – And from al-Husayn b. Muhammad from Mu`alla b. Muhammad from Muhammad b. Jumhur from Yunus from Hammad b. `Uthman from al-Fudayl b. Yassar from Abu Ja`far عليه السلام. He said: Verily Allah `azza wa jalla set `Ali عليه السلام as a sign between Him and His creation. So whoever recognizes him is a believer and whoever denies him is a kafir. And whoever is ignorant of him is astray, and whoever sets something with him is a mushrik. And whoever comes with his walayat enters the Garden.

49 – And from al-Husayn b. Muhammad from Mu`alla b. Muhammad from al-Washsha from `Abdullah b. Sinan from Abu Hamza. He said: I heard Abu Ja`far عليه السلام saying: Verily `Ali عليه السلام is a gate that Allah `azza wa jalla opened. So whoever enters it is a believer. And whoever exits from it is a kafir.

[purana.paapi]

Brother Tripoly Sunni can you help refute the following link...Specially the following part in BOLD

http://www.alhassanain.com/english/book/book/beliefs_library/religions_and_sects/devils_deception_of_the_nasibi_wahabis/002.html




Hadhrath Umar's saying that the current Qur'an is incomplete

In Sahih Al-Bukhari Volume 8, pages 209-210, we read this sermon delivered by Hadhrath Umar during his last Hajj as Khalifa: "Certainly Allah sent Muhammad with the truth, and revealed to him the Book. One of the revelations which came to him was the verse of stoning. We read it and understood it. "The Messenger of God stoned and we stoned after him. I am concerned that if time goes on, someone may say, 'By God, we do not find the verse of stoning in the Book of God;' thus, the Muslims will deviate by neglecting a commandment the Almighty revealed.

"Stoning is in the Book of God. It is the right punishment for a person who commits adultery if the required witnesses are available, or there was pregnancy without marriage or adultery is admitted."

Again, we used to read in what we found in the Book of God:

"Do not deny the fatherhood of your fathers in contempt because it is disbelief on your part to be ashamed of the fatherhood of your fathers." So Nasibis, tell us where has this verse on stoning gone? Al-Muttaqi 'Ali bin Husam al-Din in his book "Mukhtasar Kanz al-'Ummal" printed on the margin of Imam Ahmad's Musnad, Volume 2, page 2, in his hadith about chapter 33, said that Ibn Mardawayh reported that Hudhayfah said:

'Umar said to me 'How many verses are contained in the chapter of al-Ahzab?' I said, '72 or 73 verses.' He said it was almost as long as the chapter of the Cow, which contains 287 verses, and in it there was the verse of stoning.

The revered Sunni scholar al Hafidh Jalaladeen as Suyuti writes:

"Hadhrath Umar said at the Saqifa that the Qur'an has 1,027,000 letters". "Tafsir al Itqan" by as Suyuti, page 88

The present Qur'an has 267,033 letters. According to Hadhrath Umar's research the Qur'an should have approximately 90 parts. We should console the Nasibis at their heavy loss - having lost 60 parts of the Qur'an! They themselves advocate that anyone that says the Qur'an has verses missing is a Kaffir thus a verdict on Hadhrath Umar in the light of the above narration will suffice as the final nail in the coffin for them. Perhaps the Nasibis should stop passing fatwas on the Shi'a and focus on Hadhrath Umar! As the saying goes "Those living in glass houses should not throw stones".

Abdullah ibne Umar's similar Fatwa that the Qur'an is incomplete Suyuti also records the following:

"No one can proclaim that I have found the Qur'an complete because most of the Qur'an has been lost".

"Tafsir Duure Manthur" as-Suyuti Volume 1 page 104

Nasibis swiftly pass kufr on the Shi'a claiming that we believe that the Qur'an is incomplete, whilst they have traditions that suggest that the belief of Hadhrath Umar and his son. If anyone states that to declare tahreef in the Qur'an makes you a Kaffir then there exist many personalities who are accredited by them as Imams who believed in tahreef.

The Nasibi Scholar Maulana Anwar Shah's Fatwa,
that there is Tahreef in the Qur'an
The famous Hadith scholar of the Deobandis Syed Anwar Shah Kashmiri in his recognised Ahl'ul Sunnah work "Fayz ul Bari" writes:

"It is my analysis based on Sahih al-Bukhari that the Qur'an has tahreef with regards to words and this was an accredited to Hadhrath Uthman's party as an unintentional or intentional mistake".

"Fayz ul Bari" Anwar Shah page 395 Volume 3 under the Chapter "As Shah'adhat" Maulana Shah has cut the nose of the Deobandi Nasibis without even using a knife! There is no limit to the Nasibis lack of respect. If those who believe in Tahreef are Kaffir then this is aqeedah of the companions and their learned Ulema.

[purana.paapi]

.

[wellwisher]

Brother Tripoly Sunni can you help refute the following link...Specially the following part in BOLD

http://www.alhassanain.com/english/book/book/beliefs_library/religions_and_sects/devils_deception_of_the_nasibi_wahabis/002.html




Hadhrath Umar's saying that the current Qur'an is incomplete

In Sahih Al-Bukhari Volume 8, pages 209-210, we read this sermon delivered by Hadhrath Umar during his last Hajj as Khalifa: "Certainly Allah sent Muhammad with the truth, and revealed to him the Book. One of the revelations which came to him was the verse of stoning. We read it and understood it. "The Messenger of God stoned and we stoned after him. I am concerned that if time goes on, someone may say, 'By God, we do not find the verse of stoning in the Book of God;' thus, the Muslims will deviate by neglecting a commandment the Almighty revealed.

"Stoning is in the Book of God. It is the right punishment for a person who commits adultery if the required witnesses are available, or there was pregnancy without marriage or adultery is admitted."

Again, we used to read in what we found in the Book of God:

"Do not deny the fatherhood of your fathers in contempt because it is disbelief on your part to be ashamed of the fatherhood of your fathers." So Nasibis, tell us where has this verse on stoning gone? Al-Muttaqi 'Ali bin Husam al-Din in his book "Mukhtasar Kanz al-'Ummal" printed on the margin of Imam Ahmad's Musnad, Volume 2, page 2, in his hadith about chapter 33, said that Ibn Mardawayh reported that Hudhayfah said:

'Umar said to me 'How many verses are contained in the chapter of al-Ahzab?' I said, '72 or 73 verses.' He said it was almost as long as the chapter of the Cow, which contains 287 verses, and in it there was the verse of stoning.

The revered Sunni scholar al Hafidh Jalaladeen as Suyuti writes:

"Hadhrath Umar said at the Saqifa that the Qur'an has 1,027,000 letters". "Tafsir al Itqan" by as Suyuti, page 88

The present Qur'an has 267,033 letters. According to Hadhrath Umar's research the Qur'an should have approximately 90 parts. We should console the Nasibis at their heavy loss - having lost 60 parts of the Qur'an! They themselves advocate that anyone that says the Qur'an has verses missing is a Kaffir thus a verdict on Hadhrath Umar in the light of the above narration will suffice as the final nail in the coffin for them. Perhaps the Nasibis should stop passing fatwas on the Shi'a and focus on Hadhrath Umar! As the saying goes "Those living in glass houses should not throw stones".

Abdullah ibne Umar's similar Fatwa that the Qur'an is incomplete Suyuti also records the following:

"No one can proclaim that I have found the Qur'an complete because most of the Qur'an has been lost".

"Tafsir Duure Manthur" as-Suyuti Volume 1 page 104

Nasibis swiftly pass kufr on the Shi'a claiming that we believe that the Qur'an is incomplete, whilst they have traditions that suggest that the belief of Hadhrath Umar and his son. If anyone states that to declare tahreef in the Qur'an makes you a Kaffir then there exist many personalities who are accredited by them as Imams who believed in tahreef.

The Nasibi Scholar Maulana Anwar Shah's Fatwa,
that there is Tahreef in the Qur'an
The famous Hadith scholar of the Deobandis Syed Anwar Shah Kashmiri in his recognised Ahl'ul Sunnah work "Fayz ul Bari" writes:

"It is my analysis based on Sahih al-Bukhari that the Qur'an has tahreef with regards to words and this was an accredited to Hadhrath Uthman's party as an unintentional or intentional mistake".

"Fayz ul Bari" Anwar Shah page 395 Volume 3 under the Chapter "As Shah'adhat" Maulana Shah has cut the nose of the Deobandi Nasibis without even using a knife! There is no limit to the Nasibis lack of respect. If those who believe in Tahreef are Kaffir then this is aqeedah of the companions and their learned Ulema.



Here is the reply for these shia arguments:

http://islamic-forum.net/index.php?showtopic=10501&st=0&p=115652&#entry115652

[TripolySunni]

^ That's just abrogation, nothing to refute, things were revealed and considered to be part of the Quran, then the Prophet (SAWS) received instructions that they no longer were required to be a part of the Quran, so he told his companions to drop them and they did.

[wellwisher]

The Nasibi Scholar Maulana Anwar Shah's Fatwa,
that there is Tahreef in the Qur'an
The famous Hadith scholar of the Deobandis Syed Anwar Shah Kashmiri in his recognised Ahl'ul Sunnah work "Fayz ul Bari" writes:

"It is my analysis based on Sahih al-Bukhari that the Qur'an has tahreef with regards to words and this was an accredited to Hadhrath Uthman's party as an unintentional or intentional mistake".

"Fayz ul Bari" Anwar Shah page 395 Volume 3 under the Chapter "As Shah'adhat" Maulana Shah has cut the nose of the Deobandi Nasibis without even using a knife! There is no limit to the Nasibis lack of respect. If those who believe in Tahreef are Kaffir then this is aqeedah of the companions and their learned Ulema.

[/FONT]
Did al-Kashmīrī Say the Holy Qur’ān was Distorted by `Uthmān (ra)?

http://www.sunnidefense.com/exp/content/17-did-al-kashm%C4%ABr%C4%AB-say-holy-qur%E2%80%99%C4%81n-was-distorted-uthm%C4%81n-ra

[TripolySunni]

Journey to shirk - Reviving of Paganism Part 4-4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s90-UYwG1uA&feature=g-all-u

[adam talha]

Did al-Kashmīrī Say the Holy Qur’ān was Distorted by `Uthmān (ra)?

http://www.sunnidefense.com/exp/content/17-did-al-kashm%C4%ABr%C4%AB-say-holy-qur%E2%80%99%C4%81n-was-distorted-uthm%C4%81n-ra


what did al-Kashmiri intend by the following "I say: this opinion would necessitate that the Qur’ān is distorted as well, since the distortion of the meaning in it, too, is not little."

did he intend the al-Qur'an al-Karim (bold part)?
was he being flippant?

references would be useful.

[wellwisher]

what did al-Kashmiri intend by the following "I say: this opinion would necessitate that the Qur’ān is distorted as well, since the distortion of the meaning in it, too, is not little."

did he intend the al-Qur'an al-Karim (bold part)?
was he being flippant?

references would be useful.

This is what he said:

You should know that there are three opinions concerning the occurrence of the distortion:

A group of scholars opined that distortion in the heavenly texts has occurred in every manner—both in text and meaning. This is what Ibn Ĥazm inclined towards.

A group opined that the distortion is little, and perhaps Ĥāfiž Ibn Taymiyya sided with this.

A group opined towards completely denying the textual distortion, and so the distortion according to them is all in meaning. I say: this opinion would necessitate that the Qur’ān is distorted as well, since the distortion of the meaning in it, too, is not little. What I have realized through research is that distortion in them is textual as well. As for whether it was done deliberately by them or by error, Allāh the Exalted knows best about it.” Fayđ al-Bārī Sharĥ Şaĥīĥ al-Bukhārī, of Anwar Shāh al-Kashmīrī (d. 1352), volume 3, page 395 [Beirut]


He was explaining that, the view of those people who think that previous scriptures were not distorted in their text but ONLY in meaning is incorrect because, distortion in meaning can even occur in Quran, because different people try to misinterpret quran according to their desires which is wrong and that is what distortion in meaning.

[TripolySunni]

al-Salamu `Aleykum,


161 Urdu Books on Shia - ردِ شیعہ پر 161 اردو کتابیں:
http://islamic-forum.net/index.php?showtopic=16642

[wellwisher]

Salam `Aleykum,

Ahlul-Kisa' are now seven instead of five : )


Imam Ahmad in his Fada'el: `Abdullah told us, he said: abu Ja`far Muhammad bin `Abdullah al-Razzi told me: `Abdul-Wahhab bin `Ata' al-Khaffaf told us: From Thawr bin Yazid, from Makhoul from Kurayb Mawla ibn `Abbas, from `Abdullah ibn `Abbas (ra) that he said: The Prophet (SAWS) called on al-`Abbas and said: "Tomorrow on Monday, come to me with your son." So the next day we came and he surrounded us with his cloak and said: "O Allah, forgive al-`Abbas and his son their outward sins and inward sins and leave no sin, O Allah take care of his child after he passes away."

Source: Fada'el al-Sahaba.
Grading: Hasan.
Salamalaykum

Akhee hani could you please translate this report:


حدثنا علي بن عبد العزيز، حدثنا إبراهيم بن عبد الله الهروي، حدثنا عبد الله بن عثمان بن إسحاق بن سعد بن أبي وقاص، حدثني جدي أبو أمي مالك بن حمزة بن أبي أسيد الساعدي، عن أبيه، عن جده أبي أسيد الساعدي، قال: قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم للعباس بن عبد المطلب:"يا أبا الفضل، لا ترم منزلك أنت وبنوك غدا حتى آتيكم"، فانتظروه حتى جاء بعدما أضحى، فدخل عليهم، فقال:"السلام عليكم"، قال: وعليك السلام ورحمة الله وبركاته، قال:"كيف أصبحتم؟"، قال: بخير، أحمد الله، فقال:"تقاربوا تقاربوا تقاربوا، يزحف بعضكم إلى بعض"، حتى إذا أمكنوه اشتمل عليهم بملاءته، ثم قال:"يا رب، هذا عمي وصنو أبي، وهؤلاء أهل بيتي، فاسترهم من النار كستري إياهم بملاءتي هذه"، قال: فأمنت أسكفة الباب وحوائط البيت، فقالت: آمين آمين آمين.

It was also narrated by Ajurri in Sharia, ibn as-Sunni in Amal Yawm wa Layl, Toose in Mustahraj.

And i came to know that , Al haythami said it is hasan, could you find the exact reference where he said this.

[mh16388]

Did al-Kashmīrī Say the Holy Qur’ān was Distorted by `Uthmān (ra)?

http://www.sunnidefense.com/exp/content/17-did-al-kashm%C4%ABr%C4%AB-say-holy-qur%E2%80%99%C4%81n-was-distorted-uthm%C4%81n-ra
aoa,
brilliant refutation. absolutely brilliant.

[wellwisher]

Salamalaykum

Akhee hani could you please translate this report:


حدثنا علي بن عبد العزيز، حدثنا إبراهيم بن عبد الله الهروي، حدثنا عبد الله بن عثمان بن إسحاق بن سعد بن أبي وقاص، حدثني جدي أبو أمي مالك بن حمزة بن أبي أسيد الساعدي، عن أبيه، عن جده أبي أسيد الساعدي، قال: قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم للعباس بن عبد المطلب:"يا أبا الفضل، لا ترم منزلك أنت وبنوك غدا حتى آتيكم"، فانتظروه حتى جاء بعدما أضحى، فدخل عليهم، فقال:"السلام عليكم"، قال: وعليك السلام ورحمة الله وبركاته، قال:"كيف أصبحتم؟"، قال: بخير، أحمد الله، فقال:"تقاربوا تقاربوا تقاربوا، يزحف بعضكم إلى بعض"، حتى إذا أمكنوه اشتمل عليهم بملاءته، ثم قال:"يا رب، هذا عمي وصنو أبي، وهؤلاء أهل بيتي، فاسترهم من النار كستري إياهم بملاءتي هذه"، قال: فأمنت أسكفة الباب وحوائط البيت، فقالت: آمين آمين آمين.

It was also narrated by Ajurri in Sharia, ibn as-Sunni in Amal Yawm wa Layl, Toose in Mustahraj.

And i came to know that , Al haythami said it is hasan, could you find the exact reference where he said this.bump

[TripolySunni]

حدثنا علي بن عبد العزيز، حدثنا إبراهيم بن عبد الله الهروي، حدثنا عبد الله بن عثمان بن إسحاق بن سعد بن أبي وقاص، حدثني جدي أبو أمي مالك بن حمزة بن أبي أسيد الساعدي، عن أبيه، عن جده أبي أسيد الساعدي، قال: قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم للعباس بن عبد المطلب:"يا أبا الفضل، لا ترم منزلك أنت وبنوك غدا حتى آتيكم"، فانتظروه حتى جاء بعدما أضحى، فدخل عليهم، فقال:"السلام عليكم"، قال: وعليك السلام ورحمة الله وبركاته، قال:"كيف أصبحتم؟"، قال: بخير، أحمد الله، فقال:"تقاربوا تقاربوا تقاربوا، يزحف بعضكم إلى بعض"، حتى إذا أمكنوه اشتمل عليهم بملاءته، ثم قال:"يا رب، هذا عمي وصنو أبي، وهؤلاء أهل بيتي، فاسترهم من النار كستري إياهم بملاءتي هذه"، قال: فأمنت أسكفة الباب وحوائط البيت، فقالت: آمين آمين آمين.

abi Usaid al-Sa`idi said: The Prophet (SAWS) said to al-`Abbas bin `Abdul-Muttalib: "O Abu al-Fadl, do not leave your house, you and your children tomorrow until I come." so they waited for him and he came and entered upon them saying: "Peace be upon you", al-`Abbas said: "And peace be upon you, and the mercy and blessings of Allah." He (SAWS) said: "How did you fair this morning?" al-`Abbas said: "We are good, I praise Allah." He (SAWS) said: "Come closer all of you, move in closer together (three times)" And when they did he covered them in a cloth then said: "O Lord, this is my uncle in position of my father, and they are my Ahlul-Bayt, so cover them (in protection) from the fire like I cover them with my cloth." he said: "So the doors and walls of the house made Ta'meen(saying Ameen)." so he (SAWS) said: "Ameen, Ameen, Ameen."

[wellwisher]

abi Usaid al-Sa`idi said: The Prophet (SAWS) said to al-`Abbas bin `Abdul-Muttalib: "O Abu al-Fadl, do not leave your house, you and your children tomorrow until I come." so they waited for him and he came and entered upon them saying: "Peace be upon you", al-`Abbas said: "And peace be upon you, and the mercy and blessings of Allah." He (SAWS) said: "How did you fair this morning?" al-`Abbas said: "We are good, I praise Allah." He (SAWS) said: "Come closer all of you, move in closer together (three times)" And when they did he covered them in a cloth then said: "O Lord, this is my uncle in position of my father, and they are my Ahlul-Bayt, so cover them (in protection) from the fire like I cover them with my cloth." he said: "So the doors and walls of the house made Ta'meen(saying Ameen)." so he (SAWS) said: "Ameen, Ameen, Ameen."

Jazakallah khairan akhee, you missed the grading of Al haythami on this report....

Here it is:

الراوي: أبو أسيد الساعدي المحدث: الهيثمي - المصدر: مجمع الزوائد - الصفحة أو الرقم: 9/273
خلاصة حكم المحدث: إسناده حسن‏‏

He said chain is hasan(good)

[pro.molai]

Is there any way to unite shia and sunni ?? i have stopped cursing Sahaba , though the only reason we hate Abu Bakr , and Umar was because of their attitude towards Sayeda Fatima (A.S) in issue of Fadak , we dont tolerate anyone who hurt Ahlul Bayt , thats the only reason of Hate , but now i have stopped hating them also . and most of Shias have also stopped cursing them , and Imam Ali Khameni issued fatwa in favour of not cursing sahaba and Wives of Holy Prophet (S.A.W.W) so is there any way to stop this hatred between shia and sunni @tripolySunni

[mh16388]

Is there any way to unite shia and sunni ?? i have stopped cursing Sahaba , though the only reason we hate Abu Bakr , and Umar was because of their attitude towards Sayeda Fatima (A.S) in issue of Fadak , we dont tolerate anyone who hurt Ahlul Bayt , thats the only reason of Hate , but now i have stopped hating them also . and most of Shias have also stopped cursing them , and Imam Ali Khameni issued fatwa in favour of not cursing sahaba and Wives of Holy Prophet (S.A.W.W) so is there any way to stop this hatred between shia and sunni @tripolySunni

good to hear.
show the fatwa here by virtue of a link or scan.
please provide evidence as to how we can believe most shias have stopped cursing the sheikhain.

what about the mothers of the believers?have you stopped cursing them too?
and does the Qur'an have errors?is the Qur'an we have now the same revealed by Allah (SWT) or not?

[pro.molai]

good to hear.
show the fatwa here by virtue of a link or scan.
please provide evidence as to how we can believe most shias have stopped cursing the sheikhain.

what about the mothers of the believers?have you stopped cursing them too?
and does the Qur'an have errors?is the Qur'an we have now the same revealed by Allah (SWT) or not?

brother search this on youtube Imam Khamenei's Fatwa Against Insulting Sahaba فتوة السيد علي الخامنئي

brother this fatwa states it is haram to curse any sahaba or Wives of Holy PRophet (S) , so definately i dont curse anyone

and Brother shias beleive in Quran , if not why would we recite Quranic verses in our namaz ??

[mh16388]

brother search this on youtube Imam Khamenei's Fatwa Against Insulting Sahaba فتوة السيد علي الخامنئي

brother this fatwa states it is haram to curse any sahaba or Wives of Holy PRophet (S) , so definately i dont curse anyone

and Brother shias beleive in Quran , if not why would we recite Quranic verses in our namaz ??

i'll look it up.
answer the rest of my original question about how we can believe others have stopped too?
as for Qur'an, would you make takfir of scholars who believe in tahrif of Qur'an?

[suleimanibnsalim]

i'll look it up.
answer the rest of my original question about how we can believe others have stopped too?
as for Qur'an, why do your scholars say it is not the same as the original one and the 13th Imam will bring back the actual Qur'an when he decides to come out?i do not think they prevent anyone from reading the Qur'an in prayer, yet they hold such kufr beliefs about the Qur'an. why?

Better not to go arguing down that root. They'll bring up a list of their scholars who denied tahrif al-Qur'an. The way to trap them is by asking what the ruling is of a person who believes in Tahrif. They'll never make takfir of their scholars who believed in Tahrif. This is sufficient to demonstrate kufr, since it amounts to rejecting the ayah "Inna nahnu nazzalanadh-dhikr...".

[Jadeed]

Is there any way to unite shia and sunni ?? i have stopped cursing Sahaba , though the only reason we hate Abu Bakr , and Umar was because of their attitude towards Sayeda Fatima (A.S) in issue of Fadak , we dont tolerate anyone who hurt Ahlul Bayt , thats the only reason of Hate , but now i have stopped hating them also . and most of Shias have also stopped cursing them , and Imam Ali Khameni issued fatwa in favour of not cursing sahaba and Wives of Holy Prophet (S.A.W.W) so is there any way to stop this hatred between shia and sunni @tripolySunni

Stop being mushrikeen, stop believing in thirteen or fourteen gods instead of One Allah, and stop murdering Sunnis, then we can talk.

[TripolySunni]

Is there any way to unite shia and sunni ?? i have stopped cursing Sahaba , though the only reason we hate Abu Bakr , and Umar was because of their attitude towards Sayeda Fatima (A.S) in issue of Fadak , we dont tolerate anyone who hurt Ahlul Bayt , thats the only reason of Hate , but now i have stopped hating them also . and most of Shias have also stopped cursing them , and Imam Ali Khameni issued fatwa in favour of not cursing sahaba and Wives of Holy Prophet (S.A.W.W) so is there any way to stop this hatred between shia and sunni @tripolySunni

al-Salamu `Aleykum,

Lots of steps must be taken to unite the mainstream Muslims with the Twelver Shia, there was a long study written in Arabic on how to unite, you say you have taken a positive step in the correct direction, this won't be enough, we need the entire Shia society to follow along, not just one guy, at the end of the day, you say you don't hate Abu Bakr (ra) and `Umar (ra) right? well the Shia and their scholars will simply make Takfeer on you since they will claim that you do not do Tabarra' from the "enemies" of Ahlul-Bayt.

So you'll be isolated by your own society, and they'll disown you and make Takfeer on you... To make it simpler, I'll just tell you that the Shia are not ready for unity, imagine for a second that your current religious leader "Sistani" declares that Tatbeer and Zinjeer is Haram, can you imagine what would be the reaction of the Shia? they'll attack him and disown him and make Takfeer on him, they'll accuse him of Nasb and "Wahhabism"... Now imagine Sistani orders the Shia to stop hating the two caliphs (ra), the reaction of the Shia will be ten times worse, they might kill Sistani for such a Fatwa.

I have a good Shia friend here:
http://www.revivingalislam.com/

^ Talk to him and see what he tells you about this unity.

[TripolySunni]

Amazing research done by one of the brothers here, grading the narrations in the Shia encyclopedia:

Since I can't post the link because of a childish decision from those responsible, I'll break it down for you, enter these two lines by connecting them:
http://www.ahlalhdeeth
.com/vbe/showthread.php?t=14569


Analysis of narrations quoted in Shia Encyclopaedia

[wellwisher]

Amazing research done by one of the brothers here, grading the narrations in the Shia encyclopedia:

Since I can't post the link because of a childish decision from those responsible, I'll break it down for you, enter these two lines by connecting them:
http://www.ahlalhdeeth
.com/vbe/showthread.php?t=14569


Analysis of narrations quoted in Shia Encyclopaedia

This can now be read on this link:
http://islamic-forum.net/index.php?showtopic=17965&pid=117061&st=0

[abid786]

imagine for a second that your current religious leader "Sistani" declares that Tatbeer and Zinjeer is Haram, can you imagine what would be the reaction of the Shia?

What am I missing here? http://www.ezsoftech.com/mazloom/zanjeer.asp


Question to Sistani: I want to know the status of beating our backs with knives (ZANJEER) on the day of Ashura? What is it status in our Fiqh?
Answer: those actions which are not understandable and causes misunderstanding and contempt for the religion must be avoided.

[Maripat]

@TS,
If you have posted the same thing on Ummah Forum then you can link to that post - that should take us there in two clicks.
@Jason,
Good point.
And I am always curious about your own progress - no pestering intended.

[TripolySunni]

What am I missing here? http://www.ezsoftech.com/mazloom/zanjeer.asp

You're missing that he didn't say Haram.

[TripolySunni]

al-Salamu `Aleykum,

Apparently Shia grand scholar al-Sistani allows taking interest from non-Muslims:


Q65: Is it permissible to take interest from unbelievers, especially for those who live in their countries?

A: Yes, apparently one is allowed to take interest from the unbelievers, whose property is not honored. God knows best.
(al-Mustahdathat min al-Masa'il al-Shar'iyyah, p. 27, Q49)

What do you guys think?

[suleimanibnsalim]

al-Salamu `Aleykum,

Apparently Shia grand scholar al-Sistani allows taking interest from non-Muslims:


Q65: Is it permissible to take interest from unbelievers, especially for those who live in their countries?

A: Yes, apparently one is allowed to take interest from the unbelievers, whose property is not honored. God knows best.
(al-Mustahdathat min al-Masa'il al-Shar'iyyah, p. 27, Q49)

What do you guys think?

There's a Hanafi opinion which says the same. . . Imam ash-Shaybani (Sahib of Abu Hanifah) was known for this.

http://fiqh.islammessage.com/NewsDetails.aspx?id=3205


القول الثاني : لا ربا بين المسلم والكافر الحربي في دار الحرب سواء دخلها بأمان أو بغير أمان وبه قال إبراهيم النخعي رحمه الله وهو ظاهر مذهب الحنفية[15] وهو رواية عند الحنابلة ذكرها الماوردي وقال :"وأقرها الشيخ تقي الدين على ظاهرها"[16].

وفي نسبة هذا القول إلى من نسب إليه أرى من المناسب التنبيه إلى ثلاثة أمور :

الأول : قد نسب هذا القول بهذا الإطلاق إلى الحنفية في كثير من كتبهم وكتب غيرهم كما يفيد ذلك ظاهر قولهم ؛ ولكن بعض المحققين من علماء الحنفية ذهبوا إلى أن قولهم بالجواز خاص فيما لو كانت الزيادة الربوية للمسلم وأما إذا كانت للكافر فلا يصح بمعنى أنه يجوز للمسلم أن يبيع الدرهم بدرهمين على الكافر الحربي ولا يجوز أن يشتري منه الدرهم بدرهمين.

يقول العلامة ابن الهمام -رحمه الله تعالى- في معرض ذكر أدلة الحنفية وما ورد عليها من مناقشات : " وهذا التقرير في التحقيق يقتضي أنه لو لم يرد خبر مكحول أجازه النظر المذكور؛ أعني كون ماله مباحا إلا لعارض لزوم الغدر، إلا أنه لا يخفى أنه يقتضي حل مباشرة العقد إذا كانت الزيادة ينالها المسلم والربا أعم من ذلك؛ إذ يشمل ما إذا كان الدرهمان من جهة المسلم ومن جهة الكافر، وجواب المسألة بالحل عام في الوجهين وكذا القمار قد يفضي إلى أن تكون مال الخطر للكافر بأن يكون الغلب له، فالظاهر أن الإباحة تفيد نيل المسلم الزيادة وقد التزم الأصحاب في الدرس أن مرادهم من حل الربا والقمار ما إذا حصلت الزيادة للمسلم نظرا إلى العلة وإن كان إطلاق الجواب خلافه "[17].

وقد أيد ابن عابدين -رحمه الله- ذلك وقال بعد أن ذكر كلام ابن الهمام السابق :" قلت ويدل على ذلك ما في السير الكبير وشرحه حيث قال : ( وإذا دخل المسلم دار الحرب بأمان فلا بأس بأن يأخذ منهم أموالهم بطيب من أنفسهم بأي وجه كان؛ لأنه إنما أخذ المباح على وجه عري عن الغدر فيكون ذلك طيبا له)[18] ثم قال معلقا على ذلك : فانظر كيف جعل موضوع المسألة الأخذ من أموالهم برضاهم فعلم أن المراد من الربا والقمار في كلامهم ما كان على هذا الوجه وإن كان اللفظ عاماً؛ لأن الحكم يدور مع علته غالبا "[19].

وبهذا يتبين أن مذهب الحنفية هو جواز الربا فيما لو كانت الزيادة للمسلم.

However, the most cautious thing would be to totally leave interest whatever the circumstance.

[TripolySunni]

However, the most cautious thing would be to totally leave interest whatever the circumstance.

و عليكم السلام

Ah! I knew there would be such opinions which is why I never mocked it, notice however the following:

1- This is a weak opinion as the stronger opinion suggests leaving Ribah altogether (because of the general Quranic verses)

2- In the text you presented it is talking about "al-Kafir al-Harbi" which requires Jihad to be established against them and it also allows you to kill their fighters anytime you meet them.

3- In Sistani's Fatwa it is allowed to take interest from "al-Kafir al-Dhimmi" inside the Islamic state.

4- Notice that Sistani said: "one is allowed to take interest from the unbelievers" and by this my friend he means Ahlul-Sunnah because we're not considered believers, if he meant otherwise he would have said: "one is allowed to take interest from the Muslims".

wal-Salamu `Aleykum,

[suleimanibnsalim]

و عليكم السلام

Ah! I knew there would be such opinions which is why I never mocked it, notice however the following:

1- This is a weak opinion as the stronger opinion suggests leaving Ribah altogether (because of the general Quranic verses)

2- In the text you presented it is talking about "al-Kafir al-Harbi" which requires Jihad to be established against them and it also allows you to kill their fighters anytime you meet them.

3- In Sistani's Fatwa it is allowed to take interest from "al-Kafir al-Dhimmi" inside the Islamic state.

4- Notice that Sistani said: "one is allowed to take interest from the unbelievers" and by this my friend he means Ahlul-Sunnah because we're not considered believers, if he meant otherwise he would have said: "one is allowed to take interest from the Muslims".

wal-Salamu `Aleykum,

good points, especially about the dhimmi vs. harbi, and the fatwa being aimed at ahl as-sunnah!

[TripolySunni]

good points, especially about the dhimmi vs. harbi, and the fatwa being aimed at ahl as-sunnah!

We're your students sidi Suleiman :p

By the way, have you seen the promo of the new "Ameer al-Mumineen `Umar bin al-Khattab (ra)" TV series? Check this thread for links:
http://islamic-forum.net/index.php?showtopic=12406&pid=84537&st=0&#entry117224

[Abdul1234]

There's a Hanafi opinion which says the same. . . Imam ash-Shaybani (Sahib of Abu Hanifah) was known for this.

http://fiqh.islammessage.com/NewsDetails.aspx?id=3205



However, the most cautious thing would be to totally leave interest whatever the circumstance.

This view is also on a Turkish Website called Questions on Islam, that in other questions is very strongly worded against riba.

[abdulwahhab]

al-Salamu `Aleykum,

Apparently Shia grand scholar al-Sistani allows taking interest from non-Muslims:


Q65: Is it permissible to take interest from unbelievers, especially for those who live in their countries?

A: Yes, apparently one is allowed to take interest from the unbelievers, whose property is not honored. God knows best.
(al-Mustahdathat min al-Masa'il al-Shar'iyyah, p. 27, Q49)

What do you guys think?

:salam:

This is very close to the Jewish opinion on riba, where it is forbidden to take it when dealing with fellow Jews but it is permissible or even recommended to take it when dealing with non-Jews. This is one of the reasons why Jews became wealthy and eventually hated in European society.

[Maripat]

:salam:

This is very close to the Jewish opinion on riba, where it is forbidden to take it when dealing with fellow Jews but it is permissible or even recommended to take it when dealing with non-Jews. This is one of the reasons why Jews became wealthy and eventually hated in European society.
Deuteronomy 23:20 (http://bible.cc/deuteronomy/23-20.htm)

[TripolySunni]

Shia scholars always provide us with some valuable gems, take this tainted gem for example:



Shia scholar Muhammad Nabi al-Tusirkani "محمد نبي التوسيركاني" wrote a small note in his book, he wrote "تنبيه" or in English "Attention" in order to grab the attention of the Shia readers, so let's see what he wants the readers to know:

[Attention: Know that the most honorable of places and times and conditions and the best occasion to send curses on them - may they be cursed- is in the area of urination (i.e bathroom), so when you are free from urine say during each Takhliya and Istibra' and Tathir continuously: "O Allah curse `Umar then Abu Bakr, and `Umar and `Uthman, and `Umar then Mu`awiyah, and `Umar then Yazid, and `Umar then ibn Ziyad, and `Umar then ibn Sa`d, and `Umar then Shamir, and `Umar then their armies, and `Umar. O Allah curse `Aisha and Hafsa and Hind and Umm al-Hakam, and curse the ones who are pleased with their actions until the day of judgement."]

Shia source: لئالئ الأخبار - La'ali' al-Akhbar 4/92, by al-Muhaqqiq al-Tusirkani.


Gems!!! :rolleyes:

[abdulwahhab]

Shia scholars always provide us with some valuable gems, take this tainted gem for example:

Gems!!! :rolleyes:

:salam:

Only the awliya of Shaytaan invoke Allah :taala: as they defecate...