461 replies to this topic

[Ameen]

To brother Ambrosechappel!

You mention about Arabs [Leaders] not being custom to naming and appointing their successors. Well, I don't know where you got your facts from but the story is absolutely opposite this, You had the Leader of Jordan, Shah Hussain, name and appoint his successor after him and that was his son, Abdullah. You also had the Leader of Syria name and appoint his successor after him and that was his son Bashar Al Assad. There are many more examples such as Bahrain, Qatar, Abu Dhabi, Mascat, Kuwait, etc and most of all Saudi Arabia.

[Seekingtruth14]

Salam brother Ameen and brother ambrosechappel!

I don’t want to interrupt your discussion. It is very interesting to follow. I just want to say to brother ambrosechappel that the concept of Imamat according to the Ahululbayt (A) School of thought is valid and authentic.

I therefore invite you, dear brother, to be a follower of the twelve Imams Úáíå ÇáÓáÇã. This is how I started my journey towards the School of Ahlulbayt Úáíå ÇáÓáÇã. I decided to accept the Imams of Ahlulbayt (A) in my life after I had researched about them. They are truly a hidden treasure which amazes everyone who decides to learn more about them.  

May Allah (swt) strengthen you to follow the true path, the path who belongs to the Blessed Ones [6:1 - 7:1]

[Ameen]

To brother Ambrosechappel!

I'm sure you believe that Hazrath Eesa [Jesus] is in Gaibath. why??? Because Allah has clarified it and it is in the Holy Quran that he is alive and well. Hazrath Eesa [Jesus] will appear according to the will of Allah at a time and purpose set by Allah himself. Tell me, before Allah clarified that Hazrath Eesa [Jesus] is not dead, hasn't been crusified what did people believe in??? The vast majority believed in his crucifiction but lets say a group of people believed he wasn't crucified and is still alive in Gaibath, how do you think these people must have been treated by the vast majority??? Probably the same as the Shias. Let me take this arguement a bit further. Has anybody stopped to think that why has Hazrath Eesa [Jesus] been kept alive in Gaibath??? For what purpose??? It's obvious that his Messenger status and mission is over. So he will not be appearing with his former celebrity status but what will he appear as??? What will his title be??? We still have a divine authority/guide in Gaibath, which one can't deny and that is Hazrath Eesa [Jesus] . What sensible and logical explanation is there about the Gaibath of Hazrath Eesa [Jesus] ??? There are Muslims who also believe in another individual who is also in Gaibath and that individual is Hazrath Khizar. So tell me brother, what are your thoughts about the Gaibath of these two??? Or are you going to doubt the Gaibath of these two individuals and accuse them of running away, being scared and going into hiding??? Tell me about your opinion on the Gaibath of the ones you believe in???

To brother Ambrosechappel!

You believe that Khilaafath isn't part of religion then what do you make of the following Ayath; Ateeullaha-Wa-Ateeurrasool-Wa-Ululamre-Minkum???? What do you make of Ululamre-Minkum??? Allah has said that Ululamre is amongst you, who is this Ululamre and what is their position and purpose???? Why has Allah made Ululamre's Ita'ath important as his and his Messengers????

[ambrosechappel]

Ameen, on 22 February 2012 - 03:40 PM, said:

Thank you very much for your response and the comments you have made. Brother your arguement is one sided and only developes around Shia Imaamath and belief. This is what I am trying to bring you out of. I said at the begining that lets agree Imaamath is a self-contradictory concept and lets keep the Shia belief/faith out of this discussion. But your whole arguement has gone sliding back towards Shia belief/faith and has just developed on and evolved around it. Discuss with a free mind [with out a mindset]. You are putting all the blame, regarding different factions and sects, on just one group, the Shia, who are a minority to begin with. You are totally disregarding reality and facts, for example; the Ahle Sunnah Wal Jama'ath are a group of people with different thoughts, opinions, point of view, belief, fiqh etc. There is a huge division amongst the Ahle Sunnah on all grounds, even schools of thought are different. There is a difference regarding Ahkamaath-e-Saum-o-Salaath, who is superior after the Prophet [pbuh]??? Some say Asshaab-e-Rasool and others believe Ahlul-Baith are superior. There is a difference regarding the Prophet's [pbuh] personality. Was he special, made of Noor or just like one of us but a Messenger??? The difference goes on.

You mention about the Ahle Sunna, well let me tell you what I have been told, straight from the Ahle Sunnah. Some believe the Prophet [pbuh] didn't name and appoint anyone but left the matter to the Ummah to get together and agree on chosing a leader to govern them. This is known as Shura. They say this to justify Hazrath Abu Bakar's [ra] selection as Khalifa and to prove his Khilaafath. Reference: the meeting in Sakeefa. When they are questioned that why was this method not used in selecting the second and third Khalifs and why did Hazrath Abu Bakar [ra] name and appoint his successor and why did Hazrath Umar [ra] take a totally different aproach? rather than answering they begin to question Imaamath and start throwing bits and pieces from Asool-e-Kafi all over the place. Some Ahle Sunnah say the Prophet [pbuh] did name and appoint his successor, did nominate someone to govern after him. They believe that person is Hazrath Abu Bakar [ra] and they justify this by giving the following reason; Pesh Imaamath and the Masala. The Prophet [pbuh] during his last days appointed Hazrath Abu Bakar [ra] to take his place as leader of the prayers [Pesh Imaamath]. They use this as the Prophet's [pbuh] way of naming and appointing his successor and selecting someone to govern after him. They believe Hazrath Abu Bakar [ra] is not just Khaleefatul-Muslimeen but also Khaleefa-e-Rasool and also the first imaam [Imaam-e-Awal] Oh yes! We shall talk more.

Brother,

I have already read about Islamic schools of though with an impartial and unbiased view as recommended by you and my opinion is based on that research. I started this thread for an unconventional and objective analysis of the problem but during the last few post, instead of getting any refutations of my arguments, I have received old and frequently repeated questions related to different issues starting from enquiries about my own faith, reasons of having sects in Islam, Jesus’ status, acts of Rashidoon Caliphs®, questions which I have already answered, need of having an Imam, differences in Sunnism, etc etc.
I wish this had not happened in this thread and a new thread had been started to discuss these matters. However, I will now deal with the different issues raised in the last three posts by you.

Brother, when you make a point, you must continue to own it. When you ask a question, you must first evaluate its validity. You must be vigilant that the question you ask to refute someone else must not be applicable against your own set of beliefs. I am sorry to say that I have witnessed the opposite to have happened recently. You asked me why sects have been formed in Islam. I am sure this was to indicate the importance and necessity of having an Imam following whom will save the Ummah as a whole to disintegrate into different factions. What you forgot to take into account was that the largest number of sects in Islam were formed in Shiism in a time when Imams were themselves present in the world and they were formed to identify the true Imam or to determine his exact status i.e. whether he had died, or gone into occultation, or whether he would return or not, or whether he was the Qaim or not. I made this assertion to show to you that even presence of Imam could not stop the formation of sects and history of Shiism is replete with such instances. This also showed that your argument was faulty as it was applicable against your own self. But then I felt that you erroneously concluded that by doing so I was implying that there are no differences in Sunnism and to further verify this charge you provided a list of differences that exist in different schools of Sunni thought. I NEVER SAID THER IS NO DIFFERENCE OF OPINION AMONGST SUNNI SCHOOLS OF THOUGTH.  I will just make one comment, this is not an intelligent way of discussion.


Additionally, I again think that you have misunderstood me when I said that

Arabs were not accustomed to nominating successors. They used to choose their next leader when the preceding leader passed away. This was the democratic nature of Arab traditions.

I was talking about the Arabs of the time of the Holy Prophet(s). They used to choose leaders after the death of their tribal chiefs.



Let’s discuss another new aspect of the problem which you have brought forth i.e. the matter of Jesus(as).

Quote

I'm sure you believe that Hazrath Eesa [Jesus] in Gaibath. why??? Because Allah has clarified it and it is in the Holy Quran that he is alive and well.

Yes, exactly.

Quote

Hazrath Eesa [Jesus] will appear according to the will of Allah at a time and purpose set by Allah himself.

Yes, right. I have another comment to make here which I will discuss later.

Quote

Tell me, before Allah clarified that Hazrath Eesa [Jesus] is not dead, hasn't been crusified what did people believe in??? The vast majority believed in his crucifiction but lets say a group of people believed he wasn't crucified and is still alive in Gaibath, how do you think these people must have been treated by the vast majority??? Probably the same as the Shias.

First of all you cannot compare the Shia and Sunni positions to the position of those who believe Jesus to be crucified and those who considered him to have been elevated by Allah. This is a wrong comparison. How? Let me explain:

Difference one:

All Christian groups considered Jesus(as) to be a real and holy person. They knew that he was a historically accepted individual. He spent his life in front of them.

On the other hand,

(Ithna Ashariya) Shia consider the 12^th Imam to be a real historical person.

Sunnis don’t think it to be true. They don’t even believe in Imamate.

There are other Shia groups that believe in Imamate. But they don't believe in occultation of 12th Imam.  

Difference two:

Those who believed in Jesus(as) crucifixion or elevation both believed in the truth of his teachings. They all were his followers. They acknowledged him to be a holy person – a person sent by God with an official position.  


Sunnis don’t consider the Imams to have any divinely bestowed status. They don’t believe in this office. The only other groups which believe in the concept of Imamate are Shia groups other than Ithna Ashariya.

Therefore any if any Islamic groups can be compared with the two Christian groups that came into being about Jesus(as) status can be Shia groups ONLY. Sunnis have nothing to do with this comparison. I hope you get my point.

Amongst these groups, Ithna Ashariya, the vast majority of Shiites, believes in the 12^th Imam and his occultation. The other minority Shia groups don’t believe in this. So if it’s a question of majority and minority as you asked, the comparison is between those Christians who considered Jesus crucified/ Those who believe him to be elevated and those Shias who consider the existance and occultation of 12^th Imam/Those who don’t.

If anyone is getting maltreated it’s the minority Shia in this case. This was done in Safavid Iran too!  Ithna Ashariya enjoy the privilege of being the majority here.

Moreover, Quran has not yet announced the existence of the 12th Imam nor has Allah done it in any other way yet. There seems to be no other way how he will do it as we are not expecting the arrival of a Prophet(as) in the future nor a revelation of any divine text. Let's say that somehow Allah will announce it in future(let's say through the Mahdi(as). How do you already know what the announcement will be? Just because Jesus' not being crucified was announced by Allah in the Quran automatically means that an announcement will be made that 12th Imam also existst. This sounds strange to me.

Quote

Let me take this arguement a bit further. Has anybody stopped to think that why has Hazrath Eesa [Jesus] been kept alive in Gaibath??? For what purpose??? It's obvious that his Messenger status and mission is over. So he will not be appearing with his former celebrity status but what will he appear as??? What will his title be??? We still have a divine authority/guide in Gaibath, which one can't deny and that is Hazrath Eesa [Jesus]  What sensible and logical explanation is there about the Gaibath of Hazrath Eesa [Jesus]???

I wrote earlier that I will discuss a point later. It makes me surprised to see how Shia brothers use Jesus(as) analogy to authenticate their beliefs. Jesus(as) story is altogether different from theirs as the denial of crucifixion on part of Islam is a blow to Christianity more than anything else which we need to understand as the main purpose of this doctrine. The Christian religion is centred around one incident i.e. Crucifixion (Just a side note: similarities of this incident and the resultant beliefs are striking in relation with Karbala and Shiism). The concept of original sin, absolution, and grace were created to make a foundation for this central tenet of Christianity. Even divinity was attributed to Jesus(as) because of this incident. On the other hand, if it is proven that crucifixion never took place, it is tantamount to giving a fatal blow to the whole religion of Christianity and its false set of beliefs. That’s what Islam did and this was the will of Allah to refute the fundamental tenet of Christianity. Quranic verification of this incident gave Christians a chance to get rid of an illogical belief system and enter into the folds of Islam. Jesus(as) return will again create another such opportunity. He will himself return to abandon eating of pork and break the cross.  He will come to endorse the Prophethood of the Holy prophet(s) before his followers and will assist (which again shows supremacy of Islam/Holy Prophet(s)) the Islamic Messiah in the Armageddon.  

Quote

There are Muslims who also believe in another individual who is also in Gaibath and that individual is Hazrath Khizar. So tell me brother, what are your thoughts about the Gaibath of these two???

I will give reference of my answer from another post to answer this,

Quote

Brother, you have given references of biblical parables, retold and corroborated by (current) Islam as well, in which extraordinary events and miraculous occurings have been narrated to have happened. Some of these events are supernatural and defy logic and common sense and one cannot believe them in normal life, but their presence in the Quran and Hadith of Holy Prophet(s) makes it compulsory for us to have belief in them without question. On the other hand, the Occultation of Imam Hasan Askari's® son, the Shia reported 12th Imam has nowhere been mentioned in Quran and Hadith. It is obviously an incident defying common sense. Our only source of information regarding this incident is Uthman Bin Said and the rest of the 3 alleged representatives of the 12th Imam. This source is not credible enough at least for a free thinking Muslim to have unquestionable belief in Occultation. Therefore this is utterly unfair to compare the authenticity quotients of these two types of incidents which have been narrated by two different sources having no comparison in the terms of their credibility. The similarity of details in these two stories with completely differently credible sources reporting them does not make the second story(story of Occulation) to be true and reliable. As I have said before in one of my posts, Shia brothers are bound to take help from things(similes, metaphors, illustrations) told in Quran and Hadith which are only similar in details of their doctrines and concepts, just because their own doctrines have not been explicitly explained in these sources.

It's like founder of a new sect in Islam says that I have travelled to Arsh-e-Mualla and have met Allah and returned during a fraction of a second and to authenticate this story he cites the incident of Me'raj and says that this phenomenon is not new to Islam as same kind of a journey has been performed by Holy Prophet(s) too. Would such a person not be called a heretic?

Same arguments holds true for your example of Khizar(as)

Quote

Or are you going to doubt the Gaibath of these two individuals and accuse them of running away, being scared and going into hiding??? Tell me about your opinion on the Gaibath of the ones you believe in???

We need to understand the nature of an individual’s office and responsibilities before we make any comparisons that are incommensurate in their contexts. The nature of the office of Jesus(as) or Khizar(as) are not the same as the office of an Imam. Neither of them hold the office, the existence of which is necessary till all times to come. An Imam is a person who HAS TO be present till the end of the world starting right from the demise of the Holy Prophet(s). Khizar(as) needs not to be discussed as he has no such function to perform. As far as Jesus(as) is concerned. The necessity of having a Prophet(as) at all times is not necessary. Prophets(as) came to this world, lived here, did their work of preaching and left. They were not required to necessarily nominate their successors so that the world is not empty without them at any given time. Secondly Jesus(as) was saved by a miracle when he was about to be crucified as per Islamic beliefs. The 12^th Imam did not face any such situation. Even under improved conditions, the 12^th Imam is still in occultation. He has a whole country and government of Iran to protect him. All his responsibilities are there to be taken care of. Muslims have divided into sects. There are many controversial jurisprudential matters to be decided. The Ummah needs political guidance. Leadership is required in each and every aspect of Islamic life. Jesus(as) does not have these responsibilities to perform. I can’t say he has run away. Where is the Imam of the time?

Quote

You believe that Khilaafath isn't part of religion then what do you make of the following Ayath; Ateeullaha-Wa-Ateeurrasool-Wa-Ululamre-Minkum???? What do you make of Ululamre-Minkum??? Allah has said that Ululamre is amongst you, who is this Ululamre and what is their position and purpose???? Why has Allah made Ululamre's Ita'ath important as his and his Messengers????

O you who have believed, obey Allah and obey the Messenger and those in authority among you. And if you disagree over anything, refer it to Allah and the Messenger, if you should believe in Allah and the Last Day. That is the best [way] and best in result.

Read with unprejudiced eye. In case of disagreement, refer to Allah and Messenger. Disagreement with whom. Obviously amongst yourselves or the Ulul Amr, if they commands according to commands of Allah and Holy Prophet(s), obey them in order to remain united. Otherwise in case of disagreement refer back to Allah and Messenger(s) ONLY. This sounds rational and sensible. And this remains applicable till the end of the world.

On the other hand, while taking Shia interpretation of the verse, it remains valid and applicable to people till only 329 A.H. (starting year of the greater occultation). After that this verse means nothing other than just waiting for the hidden Imam.

The utility of this verse and the message given therein has a longer life and more utility in Sunni rather than Shia interpretation of it.

Brother, I am compelled to say after this whole exercise that you have seriously failed to deal with the issue at hand. You are pouring questions all over the discussion from all sides and this is not even consistent. One question deals with one matter, the other deals with another. This is certainly not a proper way of discussing delicate and intricate religious and historical matters. This surely indicates the desperation, vulnerability and impatience of a person if nothing else. You may have a lot of information or questions and you may want everything to be discussed all at once but perhaps you don’t know how to present this information in form of cogent and well-arranged arguments. Do I hold a right to ask where is the answer of my original questions? I feel they are lost somewhere in this deluge of inconsistent arguments.

Edited by ambrosechappel, 24 February 2012 - 02:41 PM.

[power]

Ambrosechappe

Assalaamalaykhum.

first of all i must say that this article is quite impressive, and i am shia who is  saying this. Nevertheless i must pick upon one issue, you mentioned that there was more sect created from shia islam that any other religion? are you absolutely sure about this

Edited by power, 24 February 2012 - 04:14 PM.

[Ameen]

ambrosechappel, on 24 February 2012 - 02:08 PM, said:

Brother,

I have already read about Islamic schools of though with an impartial and unbiased view as recommended by you and my opinion is based on that research. I started this thread for an unconventional and objective analysis of the problem but during the last few post, instead of getting any refutations of my arguments, I have received old and frequently repeated questions related to different issues starting from enquiries about my own faith, reasons of having sects in Islam, Jesus’ status, acts of Rashidoon Caliphs®, questions which I have already answered, need of having an Imam, differences in Sunnism, etc etc.
I wish this had not happened in this thread and a new thread had been started to discuss these matters. However, I will now deal with the different issues raised in the last three posts by you.

Brother, when you make a point, you must continue to own it. When you ask a question, you must first evaluate its validity. You must be vigilant that the question you ask to refute someone else must not be applicable against your own set of beliefs. I am sorry to say that I have witnessed the opposite to have happened recently. You asked me why sects have been formed in Islam. I am sure this was to indicate the importance and necessity of having an Imam following whom will save the Ummah as a whole to disintegrate into different factions. What you forgot to take into account was that the largest number of sects in Islam were formed in Shiism in a time when Imams were themselves present in the world and they were formed to identify the true Imam or to determine his exact status i.e. whether he had died, or gone into occultation, or whether he would return or not, or whether he was the Qaim or not. I made this assertion to show to you that even presence of Imam could not stop the formation of sects and history of Shiism is replete with such instances. This also showed that your argument was faulty as it was applicable against your own self. But then I felt that you erroneously concluded that by doing so I was implying that there are no differences in Sunnism and to further verify this charge you provided a list of differences that exist in different schools of Sunni thought. I NEVER SAID THER IS NO DIFFERENCE OF OPINION AMONGST SUNNI SCHOOLS OF THOUGTH.  I will just make one comment, this is not an intelligent way of discussion.


Additionally, I again think that you have misunderstood me when I said that

Arabs were not accustomed to nominating successors. They used to choose their next leader when the preceding leader passed away. This was the democratic nature of Arab traditions.

I was talking about the Arabs of the time of the Holy Prophet(s). They used to choose leaders after the death of their tribal chiefs.



Let’s discuss another new aspect of the problem which you have brought forth i.e. the matter of Jesus(as).




Yes, exactly.



Yes, right. I have another comment to make here which I will discuss later.



First of all you cannot compare the Shia and Sunni positions to the position of those who believe Jesus to be crucified and those who considered him to have been elevated by Allah. This is a wrong comparison. How? Let me explain:

Difference one:

All Christian groups considered Jesus(as) to be a real and holy person. They knew that he was a historically accepted individual. He spent his life in front of them.

On the other hand,

(Ithna Ashariya) Shia consider the 12^th Imam to be a real historical person.

Sunnis don’t think it to be true. They don’t even believe in Imamate.

There are other Shia groups that believe in Imamate. But they don't believe in occultation of 12th Imam.  

Difference two:

Those who believed in Jesus(as) crucifixion or elevation both believed in the truth of his teachings. They all were his followers. They acknowledged him to be a holy person – a person sent by God with an official position.  


Sunnis don’t consider the Imams to have any divinely bestowed status. They don’t believe in this office. The only other groups which believe in the concept of Imamate are Shia groups other than Ithna Ashariya.

Therefore any if any Islamic groups can be compared with the two Christian groups that came into being about Jesus(as) status can be Shia groups ONLY. Sunnis have nothing to do with this comparison. I hope you get my point.

Amongst these groups, Ithna Ashariya, the vast majority of Shiites, believes in the 12^th Imam and his occultation. The other minority Shia groups don’t believe in this. So if it’s a question of majority and minority as you asked, the comparison is between those Christians who considered Jesus crucified/ Those who believe him to be elevated and those Shias who consider the existance and occultation of 12^th Imam/Those who don’t.

If anyone is getting maltreated it’s the minority Shia in this case. This was done in Safavid Iran too!  Ithna Ashariya enjoy the privilege of being the majority here.

Moreover, Quran has not yet announced the existence of the 12th Imam nor has Allah done it in any other way yet. There seems to be no other way how he will do it as we are not expecting the arrival of a Prophet(as) in the future nor a revelation of any divine text. Let's say that somehow Allah will announce it in future(let's say through the Mahdi(as). How do you already know what the announcement will be? Just because Jesus' not being crucified was announced by Allah in the Quran automatically means that an announcement will be made that 12th Imam also existst. This sounds strange to me.



I wrote earlier that I will discuss a point later. It makes me surprised to see how Shia brothers use Jesus(as) analogy to authenticate their beliefs. Jesus(as) story is altogether different from theirs as the denial of crucifixion on part of Islam is a blow to Christianity more than anything else which we need to understand as the main purpose of this doctrine. The Christian religion is centred around one incident i.e. Crucifixion (Just a side note: similarities of this incident and the resultant beliefs are striking in relation with Karbala and Shiism). The concept of original sin, absolution, and grace were created to make a foundation for this central tenet of Christianity. Even divinity was attributed to Jesus(as) because of this incident. On the other hand, if it is proven that crucifixion never took place, it is tantamount to giving a fatal blow to the whole religion of Christianity and its false set of beliefs. That’s what Islam did and this was the will of Allah to refute the fundamental tenet of Christianity. Quranic verification of this incident gave Christians a chance to get rid of an illogical belief system and enter into the folds of Islam. Jesus(as) return will again create another such opportunity. He will himself return to abandon eating of pork and break the cross.  He will come to endorse the Prophethood of the Holy prophet(s) before his followers and will assist (which again shows supremacy of Islam/Holy Prophet(s)) the Islamic Messiah in the Armageddon.  


I will give reference of my answer from another post to answer this,





We need to understand the nature of an individual’s office and responsibilities before we make any comparisons that are incommensurate in their contexts. The nature of the office of Jesus(as) or Khizar(as) are not the same as the office of an Imam. Neither of them hold the office, the existence of which is necessary till all times to come. An Imam is a person who HAS TO be present till the end of the world starting right from the demise of the Holy Prophet(s). Khizar(as) needs not to be discussed as he has no such function to perform. As far as Jesus(as) is concerned. The necessity of having a Prophet(as) at all times is not necessary. Prophets(as) came to this world, lived here, did their work of preaching and left. They were not required to necessarily nominate their successors so that the world is not empty without them at any given time. Secondly Jesus(as) was saved by a miracle when he was about to be crucified as per Islamic beliefs. The 12^th Imam did not face any such situation. Even under improved conditions, the 12^th Imam is still in occultation. He has a whole country and government of Iran to protect him. All his responsibilities are there to be taken care of. Muslims have divided into sects. There are many controversial jurisprudential matters to be decided. The Ummah needs political guidance. Leadership is required in each and every aspect of Islamic life. Jesus(as) does not have these responsibilities to perform. I can’t say he has run away. Where is the Imam of the time?



O you who have believed, obey Allah and obey the Messenger and those in authority among you. And if you disagree over anything, refer it to Allah and the Messenger, if you should believe in Allah and the Last Day. That is the best [way] and best in result.

Read with unprejudiced eye. In case of disagreement, refer to Allah and Messenger. Disagreement with whom. Obviously amongst yourselves or the Ulul Amr, if they commands according to commands of Allah and Holy Prophet(s), obey them in order to remain united. Otherwise in case of disagreement refer back to Allah and Messenger(s) ONLY. This sounds rational and sensible. And this remains applicable till the end of the world.

On the other hand, while taking Shia interpretation of the verse, it remains valid and applicable to people till only 329 A.H. (starting year of the greater occultation). After that this verse means nothing other than just waiting for the hidden Imam.

The utility of this verse and the message given therein has a longer life and more utility in Sunni rather than Shia interpretation of it.

Brother, I am compelled to say after this whole exercise that you have seriously failed to deal with the issue at hand. You are pouring questions all over the discussion from all sides and this is not even consistent. One question deals with one matter, the other deals with another. This is certainly not a proper way of discussing delicate and intricate religious and historical matters. This surely indicates the desperation, vulnerability and impatience of a person if nothing else. You may have a lot of information or questions and you may want everything to be discussed all at once but perhaps you don’t know how to present this information in form of cogent and well-arranged arguments. Do I hold a right to ask where is the answer of my original questions? I feel they are lost somewhere in this deluge of inconsistent arguments.

Dear brother, thank you very much for your response. I would like to make a couple of points here based on what you have said. Everything that I have said is related to the topic we are discussing. Nothing is irrelevant to what is being discussed. You are just saying this to avoid certain questions that I have put forward by brushing them aside. Brother, what you have said about making a point and asking a question, I would like to say, with all due respect, is that one should practice what they preach and one should act upon what they advise. I haven't seen you answer any of my question or justify any of your claims. All you've done is brush them aside. Your articles are very long and time consuming and I'm sure you've put alot of effort behind them, which I appreciate and respect. But they are just theories based on suspicion and doubt. You have constantly failed to provide any examples and references to back them up. Some of your claims are absolutely wrong for example;

Largest number of sects were formed in Shiaism. My friend, you have failed to give any reference here to back your claim. Also you have constantly disregarded reality and facts to balance the arguement and make it just and fair. You should have mentioned all the sects within Islam and then gave me a thorough explanation, through means of comparison, to put up a convicing arguement, that look here! this is my claim and here is the historical reference and a complete explanation, based on realtiy and facts, which is just, fair and balanced. You didn't do that.

Arabs were not accustomed to naming and appointing successors. You have failed to give me any example what so ever to back your claim. In vast majority of the Arab countries there has been no democratic leadership. There has always been Monarchy [Baadshahath] and successors have always been named and appointed even uptil now. Things are begining to change now in the name of the Arab spring. You say that Arabs use to chose their leaders and they had a democratic approach in doing that. It was never left to the Ummah [people] because there was no democratic process. Infact the leader was named and appointed as a successor or through referendum. Or you just had the Monarchy. There has never been a democratic aproach within Arabia, infact the Arabs have been accustomed to Monarchy and successorship all the way through.

You accuse my arguement of being faulty and the explanation you give is that it was applicable against my own self. Listen brother! There is no me, There is no, my own self. I'm a free agent and this is how I chose to discuss with you, with a free mind. Let me explain, I said at the begining that lets accept that Imaamath is a self-contradictory concept and lets keep Shiaism out of our discussion. Why should are discussion develope from this or it should be attached to this. Why should our discussion be based and develope around such a concept??? I was, am and will continue to discuss and debate with you in general and with a open mind as a free agent. You have disregarded the grounds of discussion/debate and accused me of nonsense. It's you, my friend, who is discussing with a mindset, with this ideology that Imaamath is a self-contradictory concept and Shiaism is wrong and you also see my arguement/discussion with a similar concept. We shall talk more.

Edited by Ameen, 25 February 2012 - 12:40 PM.

[Ameen]

ambrosechappel, on 24 February 2012 - 02:08 PM, said:

Brother,

I have already read about Islamic schools of though with an impartial and unbiased view as recommended by you and my opinion is based on that research. I started this thread for an unconventional and objective analysis of the problem but during the last few post, instead of getting any refutations of my arguments, I have received old and frequently repeated questions related to different issues starting from enquiries about my own faith, reasons of having sects in Islam, Jesus’ status, acts of Rashidoon Caliphs®, questions which I have already answered, need of having an Imam, differences in Sunnism, etc etc.
I wish this had not happened in this thread and a new thread had been started to discuss these matters. However, I will now deal with the different issues raised in the last three posts by you.

Brother, when you make a point, you must continue to own it. When you ask a question, you must first evaluate its validity. You must be vigilant that the question you ask to refute someone else must not be applicable against your own set of beliefs. I am sorry to say that I have witnessed the opposite to have happened recently. You asked me why sects have been formed in Islam. I am sure this was to indicate the importance and necessity of having an Imam following whom will save the Ummah as a whole to disintegrate into different factions. What you forgot to take into account was that the largest number of sects in Islam were formed in Shiism in a time when Imams were themselves present in the world and they were formed to identify the true Imam or to determine his exact status i.e. whether he had died, or gone into occultation, or whether he would return or not, or whether he was the Qaim or not. I made this assertion to show to you that even presence of Imam could not stop the formation of sects and history of Shiism is replete with such instances. This also showed that your argument was faulty as it was applicable against your own self. But then I felt that you erroneously concluded that by doing so I was implying that there are no differences in Sunnism and to further verify this charge you provided a list of differences that exist in different schools of Sunni thought. I NEVER SAID THER IS NO DIFFERENCE OF OPINION AMONGST SUNNI SCHOOLS OF THOUGTH.  I will just make one comment, this is not an intelligent way of discussion.


Additionally, I again think that you have misunderstood me when I said that

Arabs were not accustomed to nominating successors. They used to choose their next leader when the preceding leader passed away. This was the democratic nature of Arab traditions.

I was talking about the Arabs of the time of the Holy Prophet(s). They used to choose leaders after the death of their tribal chiefs.



Let’s discuss another new aspect of the problem which you have brought forth i.e. the matter of Jesus(as).




Yes, exactly.



Yes, right. I have another comment to make here which I will discuss later.



First of all you cannot compare the Shia and Sunni positions to the position of those who believe Jesus to be crucified and those who considered him to have been elevated by Allah. This is a wrong comparison. How? Let me explain:

Difference one:

All Christian groups considered Jesus(as) to be a real and holy person. They knew that he was a historically accepted individual. He spent his life in front of them.

On the other hand,

(Ithna Ashariya) Shia consider the 12^th Imam to be a real historical person.

Sunnis don’t think it to be true. They don’t even believe in Imamate.

There are other Shia groups that believe in Imamate. But they don't believe in occultation of 12th Imam.  

Difference two:

Those who believed in Jesus(as) crucifixion or elevation both believed in the truth of his teachings. They all were his followers. They acknowledged him to be a holy person – a person sent by God with an official position.  


Sunnis don’t consider the Imams to have any divinely bestowed status. They don’t believe in this office. The only other groups which believe in the concept of Imamate are Shia groups other than Ithna Ashariya.

Therefore any if any Islamic groups can be compared with the two Christian groups that came into being about Jesus(as) status can be Shia groups ONLY. Sunnis have nothing to do with this comparison. I hope you get my point.

Amongst these groups, Ithna Ashariya, the vast majority of Shiites, believes in the 12^th Imam and his occultation. The other minority Shia groups don’t believe in this. So if it’s a question of majority and minority as you asked, the comparison is between those Christians who considered Jesus crucified/ Those who believe him to be elevated and those Shias who consider the existance and occultation of 12^th Imam/Those who don’t.

If anyone is getting maltreated it’s the minority Shia in this case. This was done in Safavid Iran too!  Ithna Ashariya enjoy the privilege of being the majority here.

Moreover, Quran has not yet announced the existence of the 12th Imam nor has Allah done it in any other way yet. There seems to be no other way how he will do it as we are not expecting the arrival of a Prophet(as) in the future nor a revelation of any divine text. Let's say that somehow Allah will announce it in future(let's say through the Mahdi(as). How do you already know what the announcement will be? Just because Jesus' not being crucified was announced by Allah in the Quran automatically means that an announcement will be made that 12th Imam also existst. This sounds strange to me.



I wrote earlier that I will discuss a point later. It makes me surprised to see how Shia brothers use Jesus(as) analogy to authenticate their beliefs. Jesus(as) story is altogether different from theirs as the denial of crucifixion on part of Islam is a blow to Christianity more than anything else which we need to understand as the main purpose of this doctrine. The Christian religion is centred around one incident i.e. Crucifixion (Just a side note: similarities of this incident and the resultant beliefs are striking in relation with Karbala and Shiism). The concept of original sin, absolution, and grace were created to make a foundation for this central tenet of Christianity. Even divinity was attributed to Jesus(as) because of this incident. On the other hand, if it is proven that crucifixion never took place, it is tantamount to giving a fatal blow to the whole religion of Christianity and its false set of beliefs. That’s what Islam did and this was the will of Allah to refute the fundamental tenet of Christianity. Quranic verification of this incident gave Christians a chance to get rid of an illogical belief system and enter into the folds of Islam. Jesus(as) return will again create another such opportunity. He will himself return to abandon eating of pork and break the cross.  He will come to endorse the Prophethood of the Holy prophet(s) before his followers and will assist (which again shows supremacy of Islam/Holy Prophet(s)) the Islamic Messiah in the Armageddon.  


I will give reference of my answer from another post to answer this,





We need to understand the nature of an individual’s office and responsibilities before we make any comparisons that are incommensurate in their contexts. The nature of the office of Jesus(as) or Khizar(as) are not the same as the office of an Imam. Neither of them hold the office, the existence of which is necessary till all times to come. An Imam is a person who HAS TO be present till the end of the world starting right from the demise of the Holy Prophet(s). Khizar(as) needs not to be discussed as he has no such function to perform. As far as Jesus(as) is concerned. The necessity of having a Prophet(as) at all times is not necessary. Prophets(as) came to this world, lived here, did their work of preaching and left. They were not required to necessarily nominate their successors so that the world is not empty without them at any given time. Secondly Jesus(as) was saved by a miracle when he was about to be crucified as per Islamic beliefs. The 12^th Imam did not face any such situation. Even under improved conditions, the 12^th Imam is still in occultation. He has a whole country and government of Iran to protect him. All his responsibilities are there to be taken care of. Muslims have divided into sects. There are many controversial jurisprudential matters to be decided. The Ummah needs political guidance. Leadership is required in each and every aspect of Islamic life. Jesus(as) does not have these responsibilities to perform. I can’t say he has run away. Where is the Imam of the time?



O you who have believed, obey Allah and obey the Messenger and those in authority among you. And if you disagree over anything, refer it to Allah and the Messenger, if you should believe in Allah and the Last Day. That is the best [way] and best in result.

Read with unprejudiced eye. In case of disagreement, refer to Allah and Messenger. Disagreement with whom. Obviously amongst yourselves or the Ulul Amr, if they commands according to commands of Allah and Holy Prophet(s), obey them in order to remain united. Otherwise in case of disagreement refer back to Allah and Messenger(s) ONLY. This sounds rational and sensible. And this remains applicable till the end of the world.

On the other hand, while taking Shia interpretation of the verse, it remains valid and applicable to people till only 329 A.H. (starting year of the greater occultation). After that this verse means nothing other than just waiting for the hidden Imam.

The utility of this verse and the message given therein has a longer life and more utility in Sunni rather than Shia interpretation of it.

Brother, I am compelled to say after this whole exercise that you have seriously failed to deal with the issue at hand. You are pouring questions all over the discussion from all sides and this is not even consistent. One question deals with one matter, the other deals with another. This is certainly not a proper way of discussing delicate and intricate religious and historical matters. This surely indicates the desperation, vulnerability and impatience of a person if nothing else. You may have a lot of information or questions and you may want everything to be discussed all at once but perhaps you don’t know how to present this information in form of cogent and well-arranged arguments. Do I hold a right to ask where is the answer of my original questions? I feel they are lost somewhere in this deluge of inconsistent arguments.

You mentioned about all christians considering Jesus [as] but you've failed to mention and recognise that both Shias and Sunnis believe in the coming of Mahdi [as] in their owm way and according to their own belief/faith. Vast majority of the Shias and the Sunnis do believe in Mahdi [as]. So it's not just the Shias but the Sunnis too. This is why I say your arguement is always one sided and lacks reality and facts. Do you know that there is a group of Christians who also believe in the return of Jesus [as]??? Did you know that??? You mention alot about Shia sects and groups but let me tell you this, that there is no group with in the Shia which says, it doesn't matter which Shia group you join it's ok! It's accepted. Every single group amongst the Shias claim they are right but the other is wrong. Where as the Sunnis claim all four schools of thought are just and fine and it doesn't matter which school of thought you follow, all is accepted. As long as you're a Sunni it doesn't matter how much you differ in thought, opinion etc, everything goes. You have failed to include and mention such material within your arguement, which is therefore onesided.

You mention the Holy Quran that this is not in it and that is not in it, why isn't this not mentioned and why isn't that not mentioned in the book. I have heard this many times, so let me explain. When it comes to news you have the headlines, then the details. Both are important and without one another the true facts and the complete story and picture would not be known. Headlines are Kulliyaath and the details are Juziyaath. You can't use the excuse, that if this is true or if that was true, then why wasn't/isn't it in the headlines??? The Holy Quran is the headlines, the large print, Kulliyaath and the Sunnah is the details, the small print, Juziyaath. Both are attached to each other and are important to get the full story and the complete picture. There are many things which are not directly mentioned in the Quran, so using only the Quran to justify everything is foolish and absurd. In this case alot of things will have to be disregarded. There are many examples, lots of them. We shall talk more.

[ambrosechappel]

Brother,

While reading this 'discussion', I remembered a joke which I would like to crack just for the sake of adding some humour here,

A school boy memorized an essay for his english exam, 'A soccer match'. But the question in exam was to write an essay on 'An plane journey'. The boy did not know what to do so he came up with a clever idea, he wrote that while I was travelling by air, I looked down and a soccer match was being played and then he wrote down the whole story of the memorized essay on 'A soccer match' to fill the paper.

I wrote an article here and was waiting for refutations from other sides so that a relevant discussion would take place. Some brothers did contribute in this regard and some Shia brothers also appreciated the effort. And these laudatory comments were made not just for the length of the article but the contents as well because if I had presented a long stupid collection of words which meant nothing, it would certainly not have been commended.

Guess how I feel about what happened recently? I felt in the same way as the person marking the paper must have done on reading the essay. Brother, you did not even touch upon the points I had made just like the school boy ignored the actual question and wrote all what you knew about other aspects of the subject. But yes, the way both the boy and your respected self joined the two topics together to divert attention from the original question is also interesting. The boy used the plane journey to start with and proceeded to the soccer match and you declared Imamate to be self-contradictory just in order to move away from the original questions and then started to present the conventional set of questions, arguments, etc to support and validate Imamate itself because you remembered ONLY these questions to begin with. Don't forget that all those Shia brothers who provided refutations to my arguments also know about all the points you made but they understood me and tried to contribute to the thread in a positive and sensible way.

On the other hand, I feel that the case with us two is quite different. Perhaps we think in different ways. This is actually a drawback of chatting on websites because it is not always necessary that the two participants in a discussion understand each other or not. Perhaps I am a man with a lower Intelligence Quotient than you and it will take me some time and more experience to understand the valuable comments you are making. I have been posting on this site for quite some time now but have not yet experienced the uninque way how this discussion is progressing. I post here to increase my knowledge and enjoy the discussions, not to get myself involved in a tangle of different irrelevant arguments and get irritable.

Edited by ambrosechappel, 25 February 2012 - 07:22 PM.

[Ameen]

ambrosechappel, on 25 February 2012 - 07:15 PM, said:

Brother,

While reading this 'discussion', I remembered a joke which I would like to crack just for the sake of adding some humour here,

A school boy memorized only one essay for his english exam, 'A soccer match'. But the question in exam was to write an essay on 'An plane journey'. The boy did not know what to do so he came up with a clever idea, he wrote that while I was travelling by air, I looked down and a soccer match was being played and then he wrote down the whole story of the memorized essay on 'A soccer match' to fill the paper.

I wrote an article here and was waiting for refutations from other sides so that a relevant discussion would take place. Some brothers did contribute in this regard and some Shia brothers also appreciated the effort. And these laudatory comments were made not just for the length of the article but the contents as well because if I had presented a long stupid collection of words which meant nothing, it would certainly not have been commended.

Guess how I feel about what happened recently? I felt in the same way as the person marking the paper must have done on reading the essay. Brother, you did not even touch upon the points I had made just like the school boy ignored the actual question and wrote all what you knew about other aspects of the subject. But yes, the way both the boy and your respected self joined the two topics together to divert attention from the original question is also interesting. The boy used the plane journey to start with and proceeded to the soccer match and you declared Imamate to be self-contradictory just in order to move away from the original questions and then started to present the conventional set of questions, arguments, etc to support and validate Imamate itself because you remembered ONLY these questions to begin with. Don't forget that all those Shia brothers who provided refutations to my arguments also know about all the points you made but they understood me and tried to contribute to the thread in a positive and sensible way.

On the other hand, I feel that the case with us two is quite different. Perhaps we think in different ways. This is actually a drawback of chatting on websites because it is not always necessary that the two participants in a discussion understand each other or not. Perhaps I am a man with a lower Intelligence Quotient than you and it will take me some time and more experience to understand the valuable comments you are making. I have been posting on this site for quite some time now but have not yet experienced the uninque way how this discussion is progressing. I post here to increase my knowledge and enjoy the discussions, not to get myself involved in a tangle of different irrelevant arguments and get irritable.

Thank you very much for that lovely comparison you have made between me and the school boy. Believe me I have dealt with quite alot of yourkind who love to question the others but refuse to answer their own. Who raise suspicion and doubt regarding the others belief/faith but avoid to mention and discuss their own. I know you love to pass judgement and creat your own picture about the other with your eyes closed. Like i've said before your mind is already set, which can clearly be noticed from all your articles. If one disagrees then that's fine and if one likes to start a discussion/debate then that's fine too. But if you cick off this discussion/debate from where and on what you disagree then one will continue with that disagreement all the way through that discussion/debate till the end with possibly no or little result and no or less benefit. Now if one starts this discussion/debate from what we agree on then works towards that disagreement through out the discussion/debate then there is more to gain and achieve. That was my aim but like I said, your mind is already set and fixed and you want to discuss/debate with such mentality and then you start throwing accusations at me and think the same of me as my mind is also set. You think i'm avoiding the subject of Imaamath but i'm not but if that is what you only want to discuss/debate then you should have mentioned it at the begining, that don't question only answer and this is the subject, Shia Imaamath!!! Don't wory! I'm going start off Shia Imaamath and the title will be suspicions and doubts regarding Shia Imaamath. But let me cut this short and make it plain and simple. You have compared me to a student but i'm going to compare you to a teacher. The Teacher says Shia Imaamath is a self-contradictory concept and Shiaism is baseless and here are my findings. Now the student says ok teacher! Now where do we go from here??? Why don't you tell me teacher, what are you, why are you and do you have something better. Tell me what you have and why??? And the teacher starts accusing and avoiding the student, then starts telling him fairy tales and stories of some school boy to save his skin. We shall talk more. Chow for now!

[Seekingtruth14]

Salam brother ambrosechapple!

I don’t want to interrupt your discussion with brother Ameen. I have read through your posts and the posts in the thread you linked to me http://www.shiachat....16#entry2266516

You have written a lot in a very elegant way.

You believe that the concept of Imamat according to the School of Ahlulbayt is contradicting. I respect your view. Is there a possibility that your current view on the Imamat of Ahlulbaty is wrong?

Before answering my question, I would like that you consider all the great Sunni Scholars who after years of research, understood the significance of the Imamat and began to follow the School of Ahlulbayt . Is it possible that the information grasped by these ex-Sunni scholars hasn’t reached you yet?

Secondly, the principles of Imamat according to the School of Ahlulbayt were extracted from the authentic sayings and teachings of Rasulullah . It was the Messenger who said that his Caliphs are twelve individuals, no more or less. The Messenger explained who his successors and inheritors were and what attributes they have.

The first successor was Imam Ali and the last is Al Mahdi .

I hope that Allah (swt) will help you find the truth and help you to follow the path which belongs to the Blessed Ones [6:1 – 7:1]

Allahumma Sali ala Muhammad wa alii Muahmmad

[Ameen]

To brother Ambrosechappel!

All you've done so far is accuse and now you've started to crack jokes. Either you start putting restrictions on me by saying, that you can't do this and you can't use that or you accuse me of being prejudice or my arguement as being faulty. It's all one sided isn't it??? You seem to think you're calling the shots. You're the judge, the jury and the executioner. Not much of a fair, just and balanced discussion/debate on your behalf is it??? You mentioned that leadership in the face of Khilaafath and Imaamath, after the Messenger [pbuh], is not part of religion, therefore has nothing to do with religion. The Ayath Ateeullah-Wa-Ateeur-rasool and so on clearly proves that leadership after Muhammad [pbuh] is linked and has to be linked with Allah and his Messenger and therefore is and must be part of religion. You accuse me of reading this Ayath with a prejudice eye. Sunshine! Is this the best you can do??? The Ayath is absolutely clear and transparent. Allah has linked the obeying of Ullulamre, amongst us, with him and his Messenger and if there is any dispute then we should refer it to Allah. There is nothing about leaving it to the Ummah here or do as you please and make changes as you wish according to circumstances and conditions. I know this is a blow to your theory and we shall talk more.

[ambrosechappel]

power, on 24 February 2012 - 03:39 PM, said:

Ambrosechappe

Assalaamalaykhum.

first of all i must say that this article is quite impressive, and i am shia who is  saying this. Nevertheless i must pick upon one issue, you mentioned that there was more sect created from shia islam that any other religion? are you absolutely sure about this

Brother,

Thanks a lot for the appreciation. Since the time I joined this site, your comments are the greatest compliments I have yet received. This also indicates your maturity and impartiality in viewing things of controversial nature with an objective mind. Brother, I have read not about ALL other religions but I can say with certainty that the biggest number of sects in Islam were formed in Shiism in its nascent stage of development i.e. during the time of Imams. This is a fact which is equally known to Shia and Sunni Muslims and there is no dispute about this. On the other hand, there are a lot of reasons which explain why this happened.

[Ameen]

ambrosechappel, on 27 February 2012 - 11:37 AM, said:

Brother,

Thanks a lot for the appreciation. Since the time I joined this site, your comments are the greatest compliments I have yet received. This also indicates your maturity and impartiality in viewing things of controversial nature with an objective mind. Brother, I have read not about ALL other religions but I can say with certainty that the biggest number of sects in Islam were formed in Shiism in its nascent stage of development i.e. during the time of Imams. This is a fact which is equally known to Shia and Sunni Muslims and there is no dispute about this. On the other hand, there are a lot of reasons which explain why this happened.

Once again you are making and sticking to a claim with which no references and examples have been provided. No thorough explanation has been given what so ever and I don't think one will ever be given. Making claims without any references to justify them are baseless and have no foundation what so ever. You talk about greatest compliments, maturity, and impartiality, where do all these things go when it comes to you??? When it comes to you all one gets is, your arguement is faulty and no explanation is given, don't read with prejudice eyes and no reason is given with this accusation, I'm going to crack a joke instead of answering or providing references. Some debater we have here!

[ambrosechappel]

Brother,

I am not providing references to things that are undisputed and agreed upon facts. I don't copy paste information but prefer to present original ideas. But when it comes to dealing with disputed matters I do provide references. Formation of Shia sects in great numbers is an undisputed matter. I am surprised that you need to see reference for even this. Let me copy a link of post which I made on sects which were formed only on the occassion of the twelfth Imam's occultation:

http://www.shiachat....ost__p__2274279

Look at the number of sects formed at ONE time ONLY. This happened almost always on demise of Imams of every sect in Shiism. The main reasons being: 1. The office was not centrally controlled 2. The concept of Taqiyya

Read this as well for some more information. Just remove the dot '.' after h from following link to read as www.[URL not allowed]

http://www.kr-h.cy.c...240468934.shtml

and please do some more search on internet to find out about more sects of Shiism. You will find a lot of them.

This can be discussed in more detail.

Edited by ambrosechappel, 27 February 2012 - 01:07 PM.

[Ameen]

ambrosechappel, on 27 February 2012 - 12:38 PM, said:

Brother,

I am not providing references to things that are undisputed and agreed upon facts. I don't copy paste information but prefer to present original ideas. But when it comes to dealing with disputed matters I do provide references. Formation of Shia sects in great numbers is an undisputed matter. I am surprised that you need to see reference for even this. Let me copy a link of post which I made on sects which were formed only on the occassion of the twelfth Imam's occultation:

http://www.shiachat....ost__p__2274279

Look at the number of sects formed at ONE time ONLY. This happened almost always on demise of Imams of every sect in Shiism. The main reasons being: 1. The office was not centrally controlled 2. The concept of Taqiyya

Read this as well for some more information. Just remove the dot '.' after h from following link to read as www.[URL not allowed]

http://www.kr-h.cy.c...240468934.shtml

and please do some more search on internet to find out about more sects of Shiism. You will find a lot of them.

This can be discussed in more detail.

Your arguement brother is just onesided and you have put information forward which firstly could be true or false, or some of it my be true and some of it my be false, but how much, which needs to be clarified. So this case is greatly disputed. Secondly Shias have always been in a minority and the Ale Sunnah have always been in majority. So you're trying to tell me that there has been more division within the Shia [minority] than the Ahle Sunnah [majority]??? Thirdly you haven't balanced your arguement and made it fair and just by mentioning divisions within both sects, Shia and Sunni, and providing a list of that division to make your arguement absolutely clear and to back your claim 100%. You haven't provided any explanation regarding your other claims, such as leadership after Muhammad [pbuh] is not part of religion, having the thought of a saviour, which will come, is a false hope and the concept of Shia Imaamath and Mahdi is not justified. All you've done is provided your suspicion and doubt regarding these matters, without giving any references. You have not continued on my response or answered any of my questions. You want credit! No problem! I will give you credit but you have to discuss and debate. You can't expect to be given a compliment on the length of the article and avoid going into discussion and debate by refusing to answer, accusing the other and not giving references because you alone claim there is no need for any references because you alone believe the matters you have put forward are undisputed. We shall talk more.

To brother Ambrosechappel!

I have put forward the Ayath concerning Ullulamre against your claim that leadership after Muhammad [pbuh] is not part of religion. I would like your response and point of view in detail rather than you accusing me of prejudice and avoiding to discuss the matter and taking it further by putting your point of view forward. I have also mentioned to you that it is not just the Shias who believe in the coming of Mahdi [the saviour] the Ahle Sunnah also believe in the comming of the same saviour in their own way. So your point that the expectation of a saviour is a false hope on behalf of the Shias, then what do you have to say about the Ahle Sunnah??? Even if we leave Mahdi out of this discussion then the expectation of the arrival of a saviour and him also being divine still exists. Hazrath Eesa [as]! So what to you have say here regarding saviour and divine??? I will wait for your response.This is not over!

[ambrosechappel]

Ameen, on 27 February 2012 - 02:14 PM, said:

Your arguement brother is just onesided and you have put information forward which firstly could be true or false, or some of it my be true and some of it my be false, but how much, which needs to be clarified. So this case is greatly disputed.

Brother,

All references given are from Shia books. I see no point to debate with a person who is unwilling to accept facts which are undisputed.  I can only laugh to learn that you feel these references to be disputed. They are all in Shia books! And yes, This is just a glimpse of all those sects which emerged in those times. There were more than 100 sects that were formed in search of who the Imam is.

Quote

Secondly Shias have always been in a minority and the Ale Sunnah have always been in majority. So you're trying to tell me that there has been more division within the Shia [minority] than the Ahle Sunnah [majority]???

I think I am talking to a wrong man. I was not expecting such naive and silly remarks on this thread! You don't have a clue of what happened in Shia history. This is a knowledge of rudimentary level and needs to be obtained before a person starts to post on such discussion fora as this. I told you we think on different levels. I can discuss in detail about why sects were formed in Shiism and the different factors that were involved in this process. You, on the other hand, are not even aware that such splintering ever happened.

Quote

Thirdly you haven't balanced your arguement and made it fair and just by mentioning divisions within both sects, Shia and Sunni, and providing a list of that division to make your arguement absolutely clear and to back your claim 100%.

Why in the world do you think that I would ever do that. This is as obvious as daylight that this happened. You obviously need to improve you knowledge. You first say you need references, when they are provided, you say they are dispued.   I am not discussing different Shia sects here and for this I need to start another thread.

Quote

You haven't provided any explanation regarding your other claims, such as leadership after Muhammad [pbuh] is not part of religion, having the thought of a saviour, which will come, is a false hope and the concept of Shia Imaamath and Mahdi is not justified. All you've done is provided your suspicion and doubt regarding these matters, without giving any references. You have not continued on my response or answered any of my questions.

My dear I started this thread to discuss an issue. You started to contribute by giving a different dimension to the topic. Considering the scope of your understanding and the impression I have obtained from your post, I think I will myself have to advise you about what to do.

1. You must either refute my arguments and prove that they are wrong. For this you will have to discuss the main article. I doubt you will ever do that!

OR

2. If you cannot do this i.e. refute my article, present an alternate solution and prove that this can be successful. Write a complete and balanced article which proves your faith to be true. Don't discuss the matter in bits and pieces.

OR

3. Agree that you are unable to deal with the points I raised. This will be a morally correct thing to do.

OR

4. Don't accept the reality and start a new thread on which I will discuss with you whatever you wish to discuss. I will consider this unacceptance of reality a display of stubborness.

OR

5. Start a new thread anyway. Raise any point you consider to be the most valid one you think you have. I will Inshallah discuss it with you in detail.

Quote

You want credit! No problem! I will give you credit but you have to discuss and debate.

Lol! I don't want credit. I want to discuss my article which you are avoiding to do since the beginning.

Quote

You can't expect to be given a compliment on the length of the article

My dear, people would have criticized me and told me off rather than giving me compliments if i had made them read a long and stupid post. I enjoy to discuss not to get compliments.I will be blunt now. Are you feeling jealous?

Quote

and avoid going into discussion and debate by refusing to answer, accusing the other and not giving references because you alone claim there is no need for any references because you alone believe the matters you have put forward are undisputed.

Go and ask your scholars about what is disputed and what is not. I am getting irritated with this ignorance.

Quote

We shall talk more.

I seriously don't want to waste my time in talking to you. I am expecting the same amount of ignorance and stupidity in any discussion that will follow. I am more than happy to discuss the same points you have raised with a fellow who is more competent and intelligent than you.

I am feeling sorry that I ever started to talk to you and finally am compelled to write the above.

Quote

To brother Ambrosechappel!

I have put forward the Ayath concerning Ullulamre against your claim that leadership after Muhammad [pbuh] is not part of religion. I would like your response and point of view in detail rather than you accusing me of prejudice and avoiding to discuss the matter and taking it further by putting your point of view forward.

I thought I was finished with having to digest your posts when you edited and added some more material which has consolidated my opinion about you. I am evermore reluctant now to continue with talking to you (I am willing to talk to a more competent and sensible person though). Why? because of the following:

Quote

I have also mentioned to you that it is not just the Shias who believe in the coming of Mahdi [the saviour] the Ahle Sunnah also believe in the comming of the same saviour in their own way. So your point that the expectation of a saviour is a false hope on behalf of the Shias, then what do you have to say about the Ahle Sunnah???

When did I say it was a false hope. Show it to me and I will accept whatever you say. This is one of the reasons why I am getting irritated. I don't know where you are reading things from.

Quote

Even if we leave Mahdi out of this discussion then the expectation of the arrival of a saviour and him also being divine still exists. Hazrath Eesa [as]! So what to you have say here regarding saviour and divine??? I will wait for your response.This is not over!

I don't know what you are talking about and what your question is.

Perhaps you are here just to irritate me.

[ambrosechappel]

Seekingtruth14, on 26 February 2012 - 10:58 AM, said:

Salam brother ambrosechapple!

I don’t want to interrupt your discussion with brother Ameen. I have read through your posts and the posts in the thread you linked to me http://www.shiachat....16#entry2266516

You have written a lot in a very elegant way.

Brother,

Thank you for your nice and encouraging remarks.

Quote

You believe that the concept of Imamat according to the School of Ahlulbayt is contradicting. I respect your view. Is there a possibility that your current view on the Imamat of Ahlulbaty is wrong?

Before answering my question, I would like that you consider all the great Sunni Scholars who after years of research, understood the significance of the Imamat and began to follow the School of Ahlulbayt . Is it possible that the information grasped by these ex-Sunni scholars hasn’t reached you yet?

Dear brother, I agree there are Sunni scholars who converted to Shiism but there are a lot of Shia scholars as well who converted to Sunniism. We therefore have to make our own choice and this is not a convincing argument. May Allah guide us all to the right path. I appreciate your sincerety and kind demeanour.

[Seekingtruth14]

Salam!

Thanks for your response.

Is there a possibility that your current view on the Imamat of Ahlulbaty is wrong? Are you absolutely sure that you’re view of Imamat is correct? If not, are you open for other significant religious concepts or have you decided not to open this door?

Please take care!

[Ugly Jinn]

Another point which should compliment Amberosechappel's point from a different angle:

The concept of Imamat is contradictory if there is no physical divine Imam present to enforce divine laws/guide, it logically defeats the whole purpose of the concept. Now some will say that "he is still guiding behind the scenes", "he will guide when the time is right", or etc. These counter arguments are illogical and I'll explain why.

Nabuwat is part of Articles of Faith. The last Prophet was Muhammed.

Prophet Khizr is alive and a Prophet, but in occultation, is he still guiding?

If you answer 'Yes', then it will contradict the fact that Prophet Mohammed is the last Prophet to guide.  
If you answer 'No', then it proves that a divine agent cannot guide while in occultation (hence the concept of Nabuwat is intact).

Hence if Al-Mehdi is in occultation and cannot guide then it contradicts the concept of Imamat (there is no divine Imam to guide currently).

Edited by Ugly Jinn, 27 February 2012 - 06:02 PM.

[ambrosechappel]

Brother Ugly Jinn,

You have come up with a nice idea but, I have a doubt in my mind,
Can we use the Khizar(as) example as, according to my information, it is not clear as to whether he is a Prophet or not.


Brother Ameen,

My invitation to you for a further discussion is no longer valid as you may see from my last post. I am ready to discuss the same points as raised by you but with a more competent person.

Regards,

Brother Seekingtruth 14,

I am always ready to learn and change my mind provided that convincing arguments are presented. The most important thing in beliefs which determine which path a person will follow is how he thinks and what is in his mind. You can see my article to get an idea of how I think and what is in my mind. This will give you an idea of how I can get convinced. Believe me, if someone comes up and tries to convince me with strong logical arguments, I am ready to accept those ideas. On the other hand, can I request you too to please think in the same way and read my article with an impartial mind. Are you also ready to change your ideas if convincing arguments are furnished?

[Saladin]

Amazing Thread..!! Hats off to ambroschapel's intelligent work so far..!!

[ambrosechappel]

Saladin, on 27 February 2012 - 10:31 PM, said:

Amazing Thread..!! Hats off to ambroschapel's intelligent work so far..!!

Thanks a lot brother,

I hope this work is helpful in some people's search for truth.

[Seekingtruth14]

Brother Ambrosechappel,

ambrosechappel, on 27 February 2012 - 06:31 PM, said:

I am always ready to learn and change my mind provided that convincing arguments are presented. The most important thing in beliefs which determine which path a person will follow is how he thinks and what is in his mind. You can see my article to get an idea of how I think and what is in my mind. This will give you an idea of how I can get convinced.

Believe me, if someone comes up and tries to convince me with strong logical arguments, I am ready to accept those ideas. On the other hand, can I request you too to please think in the same way and read my article with an impartial mind. Are you also ready to change your ideas if convincing arguments are furnished?

Alhamdulillah, dear brother. That is a very good answer. I am an open-minded person and I am here to gain more knowledge about the truth. I am very glad that you also have this attitude. It is absolutely important to have this attitude in a discussion, because only then an individual can put his feelings aside and accept the truth as it is.

ambrosechappel, on 27 February 2012 - 06:31 PM, said:

Are you also ready to change your ideas if convincing arguments are furnished?

Yes dear brother, without any doubt. If you are, I am.

ambrosechappel, on 27 February 2012 - 06:31 PM, said:

The most important thing in beliefs which determine which path a person will follow is how he thinks and what is in his mind.

I totally agree with you. I will, based on your principle presented above, begin the discussion with introducing a hadith. The hadith that I will introduce is both accepted by the Shia - and the Sunni school.  The hadith is short, but the message in it is enormous.  The hadith is as following:  

Prophet Mohammed (pubh) said:

"Ali is from me and I am from Ali and he is the Master (wali) of every believer after me"

references:
1. Al-Isabah 4/569 (Al-Asqalani declares its chain to be strong)
2. Kanz al-Ummal 11/608 No. 32941 (al-Hindi declares the hadith sahih)
3. Kanz al-Ummal 13/142 No. 36444 (al-Hindi cites Ibn Jarir al-Tabari’s declaration of the hadith as being sahih)
4. Al-Sunnah Ibn Abu Asim 550, No. 1187 (al-Albani declares its chain to be sahih)
5. Sahih Sunan al-Tirmidhi 3/521 (al-Albani declares the hadith sahih)

I want us to only focus on this hadith and try to draw conclusions from this authentic narration.

Please tell me how you think and what is in your mind regarding this hadith. Remember, I only want to discuss with you about this particular hadith. It is important to stick to this condition so our discussion will not be divided into different subtopics.

Questions to think about:

1. What does “Ali is from me and I am from Ali” mean? What conclusions can be made from this statement?

2. What does “he is the Master (wali) of every believer after me” mean? What conclusions can be made from this statement?

Please answer these question as good as you can and. We will Insha’Allah together open this door and see what treasures we can find. I thank Allah (swt) that He has blessed us with this opportunity to together investigate this amazing truth.

P.S. Dear brother, I want to be clear from the beginning about the rules for discussion. We should choose hadiths that are accepted by both Sunni and Shia Muslims. For example, I can’t provide you a hadith from the Shia school which you may not accept, nor shall you give me hadiths from the Sunni School that I may not accept.  Secondly, the hadith that is provided in the discussion should be authentic. So in conclusion, the hadith should follow these criteria:

1. They are both accepted by the Sunni - and Shia school.  
2. The hadith should be clear.
3. The hadiths are authentic.


Please take care!

[Ayubi786]

Asalam alaikum brothe ambrosechappel i enjoyed reading your posts and the way you have presented it, i surely am learning a lot from this thankyou and keep it up
May Allah swt bless you with MORE knowledge

[ambrosechappel]

Brother Seekingtruth 14,

It seems that we will have to agree upon the material and method of our discussion first. I told you before that you need to read my article in order to know the type of arguments that can convince me. Have I used any verses, references, etc? No. I have used pure logic and have explained the problem on its basis. Do you know why I have done this? Because I know that different sayings of the Holy Prophet(s) and verses of Quran have been interpreted differently by both Shia and Sunni schools of thought. I am sure all the discussions which could have taken place in the minutest details have already been done in 1400 years time by renowned scholars of both the sects. They had more knowledge and understanding of the issues than any of us can ever imagine. Books and libraries are filled with the material on topics we want to discuss in this small chatting thread. People have spent their whole lives in order to form their opinions. Have we arrived at a conclusion which is acceptable for everyone? Of course not. What to do then?

I thought upon an idea of dealing with the problem using basic scientific methods of Observation, Inference, Experimentation and Conclusion to find a solution.

Following this, I made the observation of how the world works and inferred that the affairs of this world are governed by certain laws, a breach of which is not possible, except when Allah wills by allowing miracles and even this temporary breach in these laws does not in itself comprise any change in the laws of nature.  

I put the question of leadership to this inferred principle as an experiment in order to check for its validity. I concluded that this failed. This is MY litmus test to conclude the problem.

On the other hand I used the same principles to determine the implications of the verses of Quran and hadith of the Holy Prophet(s). I believe that Quran and Hadith CANNOT be wrong. Implications can be wrong though. If it is proven by the above method that the solution presented by a certain group on the leadership issue leads us to a situation which calls for the need of breaking this principle (LONAP) obtained through a scientific investigation of the matter, I can only say that in this situation the implications given to those verses are wrong, or alternatively, the Laws of Nature Principle (LONAP) is wrong.

If you want to convince me brother, please do so by proving that either my method is wrong or my arguments are faulty. This is a unique thread. You may have gone through a lot of discussions and debates with long and circuitous endless arguments but in the end the results would have been zero. This, at least in my eye, is a conclusive method of dealing with the problem. If you think it is not, please prove it and then we can move forward in the discussion and we will discuss your solution to the problem. Considering the singularity of the thread, I expect the contributors to discuss it with unique arguments. Conventional and indecisive debates will not do any good to serve the purpose of a developing a conclusive solution.  

On the other hand, if you still wish to discuss the problem using conventional tools, I am more than willing to do that but I am really not interested after having reached thus far in my quest and forming the beliefs I have presented in my posts. What will convince me is a refutation of my arguments. You want conventional debate, make a new thread. At least to increase knowledge and do some brainstorming.

Edited by ambrosechappel, 28 February 2012 - 12:05 PM.