Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'sunni'.

More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


  • News & Events
    • What's New @
  • Main Forums
    • Guest Lounge
    • General Discussions
    • The Thinker's Discourse
    • Quran, Hadeeth & Du'a Forum
    • Prophets and Ahlulbayt Forum
    • Imam Mahdi (af) Forum
    • Islamic Laws & Jurisprudence
    • Social, Family and Marriage Issues
    • Ethics and Self Development
    • Multilingual Forums
  • Religious Debates & Dialogues
    • Shia/Sunni Dialogue
    • Islam/Christianity/Judaism Dialogue
    • Philosophy, Atheism/Theism & Other Interfaith Dialogue
    • Research into Other Sects
  • Politics, Current and Regional Issues
    • General Politics and Current Issues
    • Syria & Lebanon Crisis
    • Iran Politics and Analysis
    • Iraq and the Post-war Conflicts
    • Occupied Palestine and the Uprising
    • Bahrain Uprising
    • South Asian Affairs Focus
    • Yemen War and Conflict
  • Local Community Forums
    • North/Central/South America
    • Europe
    • Asia and the Middle East
    • Australia & Others
  • Off-Topic Forums
    • General Off-Topic Discussion
    • Community Helpdesk
    • Economics, Business, Science and Technology
    • Education Forum
    • Sports, Health, Food and Fitness
  • User Specific forums
    • Sisters Forum
    • Brothers Forum
    • Reverts (Converts) to Islam
  • Islamic Resources and Material
    • Poetry, Lyrics and Songs
    • Articles, Graphics, Multimedia, etc.
    • Books and Video Reviews
    • Links
  • Discussion Forum Support & Feedback
    •'s Frequently Asked Questions
    • Technical Support, Suggestions and Feedback


  • Community Calendar


  • Blog
  • Insiyah Abidi
  • Misam Ali
  • Contemporania
  • Volcano Republic
  • Reflections
  • Al Moqawemat
  • Just Another Muslim Blogger
  • Amir Al-Mu'minin
  • Imamology
  • Musings
  • The Adventures of Wavey Bear
  • Religion
  • Ask Wise
  • Think Positive
  • Reflections
  • A Whole Heart of Hollow
  • Blogging at ShiaChat
  • Shian e Ali's Blog
  • From the cradle to the grave
  • repenters Beast mode 90kg - 100kg journey
  • My journey into a "White hat" Hacking career
  • The Sun Will Rise From The West
  • Muslim Coloring Book
  • Ramblings of a young Musulman
  • Qom
  • My Feelings and Emotions About Myself
  • Unity, the New iPhone and Other Suppressed Issues
  • Mohamed Shivji
  • The People's Democratic Republic of Khafanestan
  • Crossing the Rubicon
  • The 5 Schools
  • My Conversion Story; from Roman Catholic - to Agnostic - to Islam Shia
  • Inspire
  • With Divine Assistance You Can Confront a Pharoah, Even Empty Handed
  • Banu Musa
  • Erik Cartman Podcast
  • My Quora Digest
  • Transcriber's Blog
  • blog competition 2017
  • Quranology
  • Who/What is the Dajjal (Anti-Christ)?
  • A Marginalia to Mu'jam
  • Random Thoughts of ShiaMan14

Found 440 results

  1. Salam wa alaykum, brothers and sisters I have had something on my mind for a while and needed a place to talk to more people about it, gain more knowledge about it, and discuss the problems I See. As we all know, the major branches of Islam is Sunni & Shia, I myself am a open minded Muslim who even contemplated god and religion itself at one point. I think that was important because Allah SWT is the one who guided me on to a straighter path with clear answers. Most of us, actually, ALL of us are born and raised following what our fathers believed. I come from a Sunni family so I was taught the Sunni way, Shias as well, Christians as well, Jews as well. Many Christians say Jesus is god because they have not studied their religion but just believe what they were told, believe what their fathers have told them, believe what in their mind seems believable. Same to us Muslims, and every person of every religion. Until that person uses his own brain that Allah has given each of us to use and learn for themselves. Here are a few good examples for my point; SOME sunnis don't like Shias, Because; could be for many reasons, their own father was just a bad person that hates Shias, they went to a school where the teacher looked down on Shias. Etc etc. Also vice versa for Shias. (These are examples, taken place for any group of any party) Another example, some Shias call Imam Ali in the athan, this could be because of many reasons. One person was raised around other Shias who call him in athan, or, I have met a Shia who said Imam Ali was greater than the prophet, maybe he believes Imam Ali deserves it. REGARDLESS OF THE EXAMPLES,, my point is many people follow blindly. **please do not comment on my examples, they are one of 1000 examples of weird things I have seen sunnis and Shias do** -------- My main question by the way is, Do you agree that it is WRONG to call yourself a Sunni or Shia? - one might claim, no because "we are doing it the right way" - one might claim, no because "I don't want to be like those sunnies" "Shias" - one might claim, no because "they don't follow the imams the right way" ---- your duty as a Muslim is not to do anything for other people, but in the end for Allah. i call myself a Muslim and not a Sunni because for one, I am a Muslim Lol the Quran states, the prophet does not like those who separate Islam. By calling myself a Sunni I am HELPING the problem, and if you are a good Muslim, you would comprehend that, you would understand what I am trying to say instead of trying to find an excuse to keep calling yourself Shia or Sunni -- the Imam issues of ahlul bayt are another story, not here to discuss it but for the curious, my bottom line, is that for us to fight about what the imams did for the sake of Islam is dumb what happened back then, only god knows it is not our responsibility to figure it out or fight about it. You will only be talking to hard headed, stubborn people or believe they are right regardless. Facts tell it all. And regardless they did at they did for Islam, and Allah. -- THANK YOU ALL. BY THE WAY, i don't care if you reply, or if you agree or not, or agree but just have to much pride to NOT say it out loud. Even tho it would be for the sake of Allah, not me. I don't care, because I would rather hoped I could install some knowledge and wisdom into my fellow brothers and sisters instead of debating the issue. To each their own to understand, i have done my duty to try and spread my knowledge. There's only so much one can do.
  2. Salaam all, I have created this account because I love the helpful feedback and comments I've seen on this forum for months now, because I now am in need of help: To cut a long story short I keep wanting to leave my husband, he is very emotionless and my marriage feels one sided. I come from a Wahhabi and Sunni background, and he introduced me to the teaching of Shia Islam and I reverted within the week. I am young, and I did not have a wedding as my mum being from a Wahhabi background was unhappy with this choice, but my dad supported me, thank god, and we got our Nikah done. Since then, I have become increasingly isolated, I do not have any Muslim friends and I have never spoken to anyone about my marriage issues (besides my husbands- who does not seem to care). I have been pressured into wearing hijab by his family as they would forbid him marrying me, but he does not see any wrong in this and says that it was a good thing. All of these changes started to happen very fast, and I was 21 years old when I fell in love with him, I have been telling myself that things will get better, but nothing does and I am becoming increasingly depressed. I cannot speak to my parents regarding this because of everything we went through to be together, and I once spoke to my mum and she implied that I deserve this for my choice in husband. It has been a struggle and we have been together now for 4 years, he is a [occupation], which I realise is draining him and I am patient and try and be as good as I can, I cook for him his favourite meals, I am not [ethnicity] but have tried to learn some [language] and to learn all his favourite [ethnic] meals, and I try to give him space as best as I can too. All he wants to do is play computer/ video games when he comes home and very rarely spends time with me, I have brought this up many times, but nothing changes, and he seems not to care. Also, I have struggled with the hijab, as I live in a very racist town, but have persisted to wear it for God, the only thing that I hate is the hypocrisy that I'm starting to notice, such as, he pressured me to put it on, but when there is a semi naked lady on the telly he doesn't change the channel or look away? I don't understand, but we have had a few arguments regarding this. Today, I said to him I am very unhappy and am considering a divorce, he didn't seem to care and said go ahead... Problem is, I do actually love him, and don't want a divorce, especially as I know it will make things harder in many ways. Has anyone else gone through anything similar or has any advice or coping strategies please? I'm considering seeking professional help, but the town I live in rather racist and it would be hard to find a therapist that can empathise with a Muslim. Thanks for your time.
  3. Asalaam Alaikum wr wb brothers and sisters, Have you come across this narration from Prophet Muhammad sawas? "The Messenger of Allah Õáì Çááå Úáíå æÂáå æÓáã said: Hijaz will be ruled by a man who has the name of an animal (i.e King Fahd (leopard). If you looked at him you will see that he is cross-eyed from far and if you came close to him, you will not see anything wrong with his eyes. A brother called Abdullah will succeed him. Woe unto the Shia from him, he repeated it three times, give me the glad tidings of his death, I will give you the glad tidings of the appearance of the Hujjah" - 250 Signs p.122 Muhammad Ali Tabatabai
  4. Sheik Hassan Allahyari. Salam. Last week Sheikh Asrar Rashid issued at challenge to the Shia Ulema based in the West to debate him. I hereby accept the challenge. Having previously debated and destroyed a plethora of Bakri titans via TV debates, I'll happily do the same with you. I'm based in the USA so therefore fulfill your requirement that the scholar be from the West. As the debate will need to be via satellite I'm happy for it to be aired live for all to see. We can show it concurrently on my Ahlelbayt TV channel and whatever Bakri channel (using your facebook live or any other means of live streaming) you want to show it on. So Shaykh Asrar, I am here, ready, willing and able. Now all that's left is for us to agree the conditions of the debate on the uprightness of the Sheikhayn (Abu Bakr, Umar, A'isha ) and all other companions who deviated from the path of Allah (swt). I'll look forward to hearing from you in due course.
  5. Salaam to everyone This is my first post, hopefully not last (admins don't ban me) I'm new to Islam. After leaving the Hari krishna cult, which has given me nothing but misery. Lately, I've been finding it difficult to actually get a sense of belonging. I'd identify myself as a Muslim, in terms of my actions and where I get information from, I'd say more towards the Sunni persuasion. I do YouTube videos just for fun. But lately, it's become serious. Shocking, in terms of my views and opinions I've attracted a lot of support from the Shia community and have been shunned and even had death threats from people who identify themselves as Sunni. I speak against Wahhabi and Salafism. I want Shia people to give me their thoughts on Wahhabis and Salafis. Are there any Shia's who agree or support them? It seems like some Sunnis do but they would never identify themselves as Salafi but will be the first to scream and shout that they are Sunnis. Here is my video, please do go through the comments. Some are laughable, some are really stupid and some really good ones who support my ideas. Am I doing a wrong this but exposing Saudi Arabia? Am I incorrect in my understanding of Islam? Does Islam actually state you can't criticize people of Saudi Arabia because Mecca and Madinah sits with them? I do hope the above makes sense. Regards Praecursator 007
  6. Salaam all, I have gathered a few questions which have come to my mind and I would very much be interested in hearing the shia school of thought side. If the questions come across offensive, this is in no way my intention so please do not take it aggressively. Also, if points could be backed up with Quran and Hadith it would be preferred. 1) If Shia'ism is the closest method of seeking nearness to Allah - why are Sunnis in charge of Makkah & Medina etc? 2) How can the Prophet (pbuh) have spent his whole life amongst his companions (namely those who are known as the caliphs today) and loved the Sahaba when they were going to carry out acts which are claimed by the Shia school of thought - surely Allah (swt) would have prevented/informed him if this were to be the case? 3) It says in Qur'an Majeed in Sooratun Nasr that we will see the Deen of Allah being accepted in multitudes, which we are seeing today. However people are predominantly following the majority school, sunnism - could this be an indication that this school of thought is that which is nearest to reach Allah (swt)? I have more questions but will take it a bit at a time. Thank you in advance to all those who offer an intellectual insight.
  7. YOUR THOUGHTS? The Twelver Shia scholar admits that the Twelver Shias claim to follow ahlebait but in reality are following marjaas whose rulings are based on guesswork/conjecture. It can not be fully confirmed (may be this is the reason why they are not showing source for their rulings). Twelver Shias are following a marja instead of an actual Imam. This also justify above thread somehow.
  8. can gillani syeds be jafferi syeds as they were originally jafferi syeds but had to migrate to gillan (province of iran) hence became known as gillani syeds because they lived in gillan.
  9. many of my shia friends and their families prefer going to ziarat then going to umrah or hajj i asked them why is it so and they replied as it is financially easier to go to ziarat then to umrah or hajj. Can anyone explain this thought?
  10. Another version of the Proof of the Sincere given by Sadr al-Muta’alihin occurs in his commentary on the passage from the Qur’an: “Allah witnesses that there is no god but He” (3:17). Mulla Sadra writes: Know that the greatest of proofs and firmest of ways, the brightest path, the most noble and most secure is reasoning to the essence (dhat) of a thing by its essence (dhat). And that which is the most manifest of things is the nature of absolute existence (al-wujud al-mutlaq) in so far as it is absolute, and it is the Truth (haqiqah) of the Necessary Itself, the Exalted, and there is nothing except the First Truth (al-Haqq al-Awwal) which is the Truth (haqiqah) of existence itself, for whatever is other than It is either a whatness (mahiyyah), or an imperfect existence mixed with imperfection, or impotence and nothingness. There is nothing among them to be an instance of the meaning of existence by its essence (dhat). The Necessary Existent is pure existence than which nothing is more complete [more properly an instance of existence]. It has no limit [or definition] and has no end and it is not mixed with any other thing, whether a universality or specificity, nor [is It mixed with] one attribute in contrast to another besides existence. So we say: If there were not a Truth of Existence in existence, there would not be anything in existence, for whatever is other than the Truth of Existence is either a whatness (mahiyyah), and it is obvious that in respect to its essence (dhat) it would be other than existent, or it is an imperfect and incomplete existence, so there would be no alternative but to require composition and specification at a determined level and specific limit of all existence. Then a cause would be needed to complete its existence, and that which limits by a specific limit and brings it from potentiality to actuality and from contingency to necessity, for everything whose truth is not the truth of existence will not in its essence require existence, and neither will its ipseity require a specific limit of existence. So it will need something to dominate and limit it to benefit it with a determinate level. And that is the preponderant that is prior in existence to all, with a priority in simplicity over the composed, over the imperfect, the rich over the poor, and the gracious over the graced. So the Truth of the First Truth is the proof of its essence (dhat) and is the proof of all things. As is said by God: “Is it not sufficient for your Lord that He is a witness over all things?” (41:53) So this is the way of the Sincere, those who rely upon Him by Himself and who reason from Him to Him and who witness by His existence to other things, not by the existence of things to Him.[1] Here again, we find elements drawn from the Muslim peripatetics and from the ‘urafa. The passage begins with an affirmation of the Sufi claim that the sole reality is God, identified with absolute existence: “there is nothing except the First Truth (al-Haqq al-awwal) which is the Truth (haqiqah) of existence itself”. In order to prove that absolute existence must be God, i.e., the Necessary Existent, it is argued that no other candidate is independent, not whatness, not existence mixed with imperfection, and certainly not impotence and nothingness. So, if there is a God, it must be pure absolute existence, and if it can be shown that this Truth of Existence itself exists, is instantiated, this will amount to a proof of the existence of God. The next move is typical of the ‘urafa. It is claimed that if there were no Necessary Existent, no Truth of Existence, then there would be nothing at all. At this point, however, Sadra ceases to follow the line of the Sufis and takes a more peripatetic form of reasoning, claiming that the Truth of Existence is needed by all other existents as a cause. Whatness by itself cannot be responsible for existence, for if we consider merely the properties exhibited by reality, it will be a contingent fact that they are instantiated. If someone claims that there is no pure existence but only mixed imperfect existences, Sadra replies that they rely upon pure existence in two respects. First, the imperfect existent will require a cause, since no imperfect being in and of itself can be responsible for its own existence; and second, a cause is needed for the imperfect to determine its level of limited actuality, for the imperfect will not be able to determine a specific level or grade of being for itself on its own, but needs to be dominated from above, as it were. As in the statement in the Asfar, we find reference to the Sufi theme of the unity of existence, but this comes to be explicated in terms of the major principles of Sadra’s own transcendental philosophy: the fundamentality of existence and the gradedness of existence. Necessary and contingent are defined in terms of causal dependence, as in Ibn Sina, and the ultimate cause is then shown to be the Truth of existence. There is also a discussion of the Proof of the Sincere in the Epilogue to his Kitab al-masha’ir.[2] Here it is first admitted that there are many paths toward God, but that the strongest and most noble is that in which He alone can be the middle term of the argument, and that this direct route is that of the Prophets and of the Sincere. The discussion is punctuated with passages from the Qur’an, including those mentioned regarding the Proof of the Sincere by Ibn Sina. Those who take the route of the Sincere first consider the reality or Truth of existence, haqiqat al-wujud, and understand that this is the principle or origin (‘asl) of each thing, and that this is the Necessary Existent. Contingency, need and privation do not attach to existence because of its haqiqah, but because of flaws and privations external to this original haqiqah. This realization is said to give rise to an understanding of the unity of the Divine Attributes, and then from the Attributes to the qualities of His states and their effects. Then it is confessed that the sun of haqiqah arises from ‘irfan (gnosis), by which it is known that existence is a simple haqiqah, without genus, difference, definition, description or proof. The differences among the particular instances of reality are attributed to differences in grade of perfection, causal priority and independence. Pure existence is identified with infinite intensity of being, ultimate perfection. All other existences are of various degrees of imperfect existence. It is denied that deficiency in existence is implied by the Truth of Existence itself, because deficiency is a privation lacking positive ontological status. Rather, limitation and imperfection are a by-product of creation, since the effect is necessarily inferior to its cause. In his al-Hikmat al-arshiyah we find yet another statement of the Proof of the Sincere by Sadr al-Muta’alihin.[3] This work opens with the definition of the Truth of Existence as pure being without the admixture of generality or particularity, limits, whatness, imperfection or privation. This pure being is identified with God, the Necessary Existent, and it is argued that if the Truth of existence did not exist, nothing would exist. This is taken to establish the existence of the Truth of existence. In order to show that the Truth of Existence possesses necessary existence, it is argued that everything which exists imperfectly depends on being while pure being itself depends on nothing. The imperfect is that which results from the mixture or composition of being with some whatness or particularity. That which is mixed is posterior to and dependent on its simple elements. The element of whatness is really a privation or limitation of being without any independent reality of its own, so the imperfect is totally dependent on the perfect. Mixed being is dependent on the Truth of existence which itself is without need of anything. This statement is followed by another argument which is similar to that given by such ‘urafa as Ibn Turkah and al-Jami, to the effect that true predication presumes being: For to affirm any concept of something and to predicate it of that thing—whether (the concept be) a whatness or some other attribute, and whether it be affirmed or denied of something—always presupposes the being of that thing. Our discussion always comes back to Being: either there is an infinite regression (of predications and subjects) or one arrives in the end at an Absolute Being, unmixed with anything else.[4] The philosophical theology which finds expression here is far from any sort of pantheistic identification of the world or nature with God, but rather is an attempt to strike a balance between extreme immanence and extreme transcendence while retaining both. The pantheistic tendency sacrifices transcendence for the sake of immanence while more traditional theologies do the reverse. In Sadr al-Muta’alihin, divine immanence is maintained by identifying the deity with existence, while transcendence is maintained by insisting that what is meant here is not the imperfect world, but absolutely pure existence. The synthesis discovered by Mulla Sadra has inspired and continues to inspire numerous commentaries and elaborations on the themes of his philosophy. [1]Sadr al-Din Shirazi, Asrar al-ayat, ed. Muhammad Khajavi (Tehran: Iranian Academy of Philosophy, 1981), pp. 25-26. [2]Translated by Parviz Morewedge as The Metaphysics of Mulla Sadra (New York: The Society for the Study of Islamic Philosophy and Science, 1992). [3]Translated as The Wisdom of the Throne by James Winston Morris (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1981). [4]Ibid., p. 96. Can someone explain this argument to me in simpler words. It seems really hard to grasp
  11. Fatima's truthfulness is guaranteed in the Quran in Ayah Tatheer and Ayah Mubahila so they decide to call the person who opposed her SIDEEQ. The 'Sahaba' who doubted the Prophet the most and was openly rude towards him became FAROOQ. The wife that caused so much grief to the Prophet that Allah threatened her with divorce became the most beloved wife. The 'Sahaba' known for opulence and nepotism became GHANI The person known to be from the Accursed Tree became Katib-e-Wahi. The person responsible for killing Hussain and destroying Masjid-e-Nabawi & Kaaba was guaranteed Jannah because he took part in a naval attack (allegedly). The person who spent minimal time with the Prophet became the biggest narrators of ahadith. They would rather celebrate the fake sunnah (non-obligatory, optional) of fasting on Ashura in solidarity with the Jews than observe the wajib (muwadat-fil-qurba) of observing Ashura with solemnity. They get ready to burn cities to the groud if someone draws a cartoon of the Prophet or makes a movie about him, yet they keep quite or worse celebrate the martyrdom of his beloved grandson. I thank Allah everyday that I was not born into nor part of the hypocrisy that is the Sunni World.
  12. I'm a Sunni, I don't know much about Shia, I just want to know, if we both Sunni and Shia are following same God Allah, and Same Prophet Rasoolallah SAW and same religion Islam, why are we fighting in every aspect ? Killing each other in Yemen, Syria, Iraq, Pakistan, etc. Can't we unite under one banner ISLAM, and can't we fight our common Zionist enemy? And why Shias are disrespecting some of the companions of Prophet Muhammad SAW ?
  13. Hi all, Question 1. I have been doing some research about Sunni and Shia conflicts. Had some discussions with some Sunni friends and as well with Shias. A friend has suggested me to read this book "Tareekhi Dastawaiz By Maulana Zia Ur Rahman Farooqi Shaheed", download link Here are some screen shots if you cannot download book, Screen Shots This book presents a lot of points that seem very wrong. I want to know if any of you guys have read this book, and what do you think about this book authenticity. It quotes a lot from "Asool-e-Qaafi", which I believe is an authentic Shia book. Question 2. If you believe the references in above books are correct then can you please point me in right direction to read some books about Shia sect. I want to read about the points explained above, if Sahabas were wrong then why were they wrong? if Quran is not in original form then why not? If Some sahaba did wrong to Ahle bait, what is the source of that. Thanks.
  14. Salaam, I am also a sunni but want to research into Shiism.I accept Twelve Imams but I am stuck here that how could imams be chosen by Allah. I've seen the sahih international translation (just because I found difference in that of different ulemas) of Surah Maidah, ayat 55 and Surah Baqrah ayat 124. In Surah Maidah It is translated as your ally instead of your guardian. I accept Surah Baqrah ayat 124 as basis that God chose leaders but according to Shias it is choosing at that particular time. And they can try not to do any sin and were successful because they were humans and humans are statue of mistakes and sins. As for prophet and said in Surah Fatah ayat 2. But other than this Allah has forgiven as in Surah Ahzab ayat 33. So It is difficult for me to accept that all were immune to sins. One thing more That How can Hazrat Ali (R.A) and Hazrat Fatima (R.A) and Imam Husayn and Imam Hasan be made of light. There isn't any hadith as far as I think in sunni text proving that. We just believe that Holy Prophet (S.A.W) was made of noor only. And also about the story of Mushaf-e-Fatima. About Maatams. Any Shia brother or Sister can help me in this matter.
  15. When did the Quran have the punctuation marks added too it? As Muslims we all believe that the Quran is infallible and intact however is anyone familiar with the Quranic verses which Mention Ali, Fatima, Hassan and Hussian when you remove the punctuation? I forget the Ayat in which this miracle takes place can someone please help me.
  16. jafris

    I am Syed Abbas Ali and belongs to the family of Imam Jafar Sadiq. Basically My grand father had lost a major portion of our shajrah while migrating to Pakistan, and only a part containing 10 generations before me is left with him. None of his children (my uncles and my father) tried to complete it and he died when I was 2. My Far related grandfather (3rd Cousin to my grandfather) told me that My grandfather did tried to get the whole Shajrah back but was failed in this attempt as those of our relative in India and Lahore refused to provide us with that in fear of some sort of Property. Actually he is the one who told me that we belonged to Syed Qutb descendants who was descendant of Imam Jafar Saddiq and came from Iran or Afghanistan. My grandfather used to live in Jabalpur before seperation and his ancestors in Meeranpur, Jansath Tehsil, India. I tried to look back those Syeds in Meeranpur but found that They were Zaidis. Now I am totally Confused. I looked at a complete shajrah of Zaidis but couldn't find my ancestors name in it so we definitely belong to Jafris. "Syed Abbas s/o Syed Akhtar s/o Syed Aashiq s/o Syed Amjad s/o Syed Hasan s/o Syed Qasim s/o Syed Ameen s/o Syed Lal s/o Syed Dadan s/o Syed Qasim----- Syed Qutb (not mentioned but told to me)" Do anyone know Any book which has a complete shajrah of Jafris?? like those of Zaidis named "Shajrah Saadat e Barha"?? I am very Hopeful that you'll surely help me out. One thing I like to mention is that I'm a Sunni as my ancestors converted to Sunnism due to Taqiyya but many traditions and beliefs of Shia still exist in my family today. Please Anyone Help me.
  17. Question: There is a hadith that holds that Imam Ali (as) said that he created Prophet Adam (pbuh) with his own hands. Everyone believes in this, but I recently learned that the hadith isn't authentic. If that is the case then why do people believe in such a thing? Please tell me who has narrated this hadith? Is the narrator a reliable one? Brief Answer: If some people believe that Imam Ali (as) independently created Prophet Adam (pbuh), it will be against the Quran and considered shirk. Not to mention that the creation of Adam by the physical body (hands) of Imam Ali (as) doesn’t comply with existing realities, because his body was created after Prophet Adam’s and in a totally different time, making him one of Prophet Adam’s children and descendants. Of course taking into consideration the fact that sometimes creation is done through the mediation of others, and there are hadiths that maintain that the light of the infallibles existed before the creation of Adam (pbuh), believing that his creation took place through the mediation of their light won't be shirk and in conflict with Islamic fundamentals, although such a belief itself isn't considered one of the fundamentals of the Shia school of thought, thus more research can be done on it. Detailed AnswerWhat is for sure is that according to what one of the verses of the Quran clearly states, Allah ÓÈÍÇäå æÊÚÇáì created Adam (pbuh) with his own ‘hands’.[1] This verse and its content are accepted by all Shia scholars and interpreters, leaving no room for any doubt. On the one hand, after doing a general search in our hadiths, a hadith identical to what you mentioned in your question wasn’t found, but in the future if we stumble upon such a hadith, we will discuss its authenticity and chain of narrators. Also, if you have the Arabic of the hadith, please send it to us so that we can give a more precise answer to your inquiry. Anyhow, considering other hadiths and Quranic verses, we must say: keeping in mind the following premises, the creation of Prophet Adam’s (pbuh) earthly body through the light of the imams (as), of course with another explanation other than what might be common amongst people, is something possible and will not clash with the verse we mentioned either. We would like to draw your attention to these premises: 1- According to the Shia and many of the Sunnis, Allah ÓÈÍÇäå æÊÚÇáì bears no material body allowing us to say He is made of different parts and consider Him similar to other beings and creatures. That’s why we can't take some Quranic verses that attribute physical parts such as a face[2], hand[3], foot[4], eye[5], ear[6], etc. to Him for their literal meaning and are actually figures of speech that have an inner meaning and must be interpreted as Allah’s ÓÈÍÇäå æÊÚÇáì knowledge, power, existence, etc. This is why for instance when it is said that Adam (pbuh) was created by the hand of Allah ÓÈÍÇäå æÊÚÇáì, what is meant is that he was created by the power of Allah ÓÈÍÇäå æÊÚÇáì. 2- In many cases, Allah ÓÈÍÇäå æÊÚÇáì attributes what others apparently have done themselves and with their own hands to Himself, for example, He says that He is the one who provides the people with ships[7], although we all know that it is man who builds the ship, not Allah ÓÈÍÇäå æÊÚÇáì! Of course, since man’s power is in continuation and a part of Allah’s ÓÈÍÇäå æÊÚÇáì, explaining such a verse and understanding its true meaning isn't difficult, and in a sense, man and everything he has made are in reality, a creation of Allah's ÓÈÍÇäå æÊÚÇáì.[8] 3- According to some ahadith, the creation of the light of the imams (as) has taken place before the creation of Adam (pbuh). The prophet of Islam (pbuh) says: “When Prophet Adam (pbuh) was still amongst water and clay [hadn’t been created yet], I was a prophet.”[9] Similar to this hadith is another one that speaks of the chronological precedence of Imam Ali’s (as) imamate in relation to the creation of Adam (pbuh).[10] There are countless other hadiths that disclose the same meaning with different phrasings. 4- Imam Ali (as) was without a doubt one of the signs of Allah's ÓÈÍÇäå æÊÚÇáì might and power and because of this, he is called “The Hand of Allah” (ید الله). He himself in a hadith says: “أَنَا عَیْنُ اللَّهِ وَ أَنَا یَدُ اللَّهِ وَ أَنَا جَنْبُ اللَّهِ وَ أَنَا بَابُ اللَّهِ” (I am the eye of Allah, the hand of Allah, the side of Allah, and the path to Allah).[11] Keeping all of the above in mind, if anyone believes that Prophet Adam (pbuh) was created by the hands of Imam Ali (as), it will mean that Allah ÓÈÍÇäå æÊÚÇáì created him through one of the manifestations of His power, meaning the light of Imam Ali (as) that was created from before, not that the physical body of Imam Ali (as) independently did such a thing. On this basis, although the scale of belief in the matter you mentioned isn't as you put it, nevertheless, if anyone believes in it, it won't be in conflict with the accepted fundamentals of Islam, thus not causing those who might say so to be kafirs and mushriks. At the same time, it can't be said that believing in Imam Ali (as) creating Prophet Adam (pbuh) with his own hands is something that can't be denied in the Shia school of thought, on the contrary, it can be questioned and researched about. In the end, we would be grateful if you could send us the Arabic text of this hadith. [1] Sad:75 “قالَ یا إِبْلیسُ ما مَنَعَکَ أَنْ تَسْجُدَ لِما خَلَقْتُ بِیَدَیَّ أَسْتَکْبَرْتَ أَمْ کُنْتَ مِنَ الْعالین”. [2] Qisas:88 “کُلُّ شَیْ‏ءٍ هالِکٌ إِلاَّ وَجْهَه”. [3] Ma’idah:64 بَلْ یَداهُ مَبْسُوطَتان ; Fath:10 “یَدُ اللَّهِ فَوْقَ أَیْدیهِم” [4] Qalam:42 “یَوْمَ یُکْشَفُ عَنْ ساق”. [5] Taha:39 “وَ لِتُصْنَعَ عَلى‏ عَیْنی” [6] Ale-Imran:181 “لَقَدْ سَمِعَ اللَّهُ قَوْلَ الَّذین”; Mujadalah:1. [7] Ibrahim:32 “وَ سَخَّرَ لَکُمُ الْفُلْکَ”. [8] Saffat:96 “وَ اللَّهُ خَلَقَکُمْ وَ ما تَعْمَلُون” [9] Ahsa’i, Ibn Abi Jumhur, Awalil-La’ali, vol. 4, pg.121, hadith 200. [10] Ibid, pg. 124, hadith 208 “کنت وصیا و آدم بین الماء و الطین”. [11] Kuleini, Muhammad ibn Yaqub, Kafi, vol. 1, pg. 145, hadith 8.
  18. Salam to everyone out there! I urge everyone to read this post CAREFULLY. Being a sunni myself I find many sunni beliefs to be absolutely strange. I am born into a sunni family and have been practicing sunni Islam for decades. However, sunnis' blind belief in bukhari narrations have shocked me. It wasn't until I read bukhari myself. I found many ridiculous things in that book. In fact, many things found in bukhari are total non-sense and it looks like someone deliberately tried to corrupt this collection by adding false things in it. For example, bukhari contains a narration that states that monkey used to stone and kill each other for committing adultery. I find it strange that how can Sunnis believe in such a book that narrates such things. I asked a question about authenticity of bukhari from a strict bukhari believer some time ago. I told him that I don't believe in some narrations of bukhari, and he became furious and angry. He started to say things like "You are infected with believe that not all narrations in bukhari are authentic". The aim of this post is to investigate some claims sunnis put forward to make the case of bukhari strong. Here are some reasons for why sunnis believe in bukhari, and I want shia perspective on this. Reason #1. Sound chain of Narrators in Bukhari's collection Sunnis claim that bukhari's collection contain narrations that are extremely sound. It is very unlikely that bukhari's collection might contain fabricated narrations. Reason #2 Reliable Narrators Secondly, Sunnis also state that Bukharis collection is authentic because all the narrators in bukhari's collection are authentic, according to sunni Islam. Reason #3 Bukhari's criteria of hadith selection This third reason is also put forward by most sunnis. They claim that bukhari's criteria of selecting hadith was very strict. He never included anything in his collection until or unless he investigated and thoroughly examined narrations himself. So he cannot include fabricated narrations in his collection. Reason #4 Bukhari was a hadith expert Sunnis and many followers of bukhari also state that Bukhari was a hadith expert. He was a learned scholar who had great knowledge of hadith. Therefore, he should be trusted. My main question is: what is shia perspective on these reasons sunnis give for authenticity of bukhari? I think that the shia view is completely different from Sunni view of hadith. Shias believe that there is no such thing as "Sahih collection of hadith" because hadith collectors were fallible men. In fact, shias don't even consider their own hadith books as "100% authentic". I personally think that shias are RIGHT on this subject. I endorse this shia belief. However, I am not considering conversion to shia sect because of some issues associated with shia sect (I will create a new post about these issues later). However, can a sunni remain a sunni if he doesn't believe in SOME narrations of bukhari?
  19. Salam, Im a 20 year old sunni guy, currently speaking to this girl who I'm not sure if she's shia or not, Im assuming she is but not 100% sure. Anyway i really like her and i want to marry her, but i need to know if she is shia first, hence my question, how do i identify a shia, in terms of facial features, and please dont say the noor, on their face because thats not true.
  20. We will enlighten our readers by citing the following Sunni sources: 1. Al-Ghunyat liTalibin, Volume 1 page 409 2. Fathul Bari Sharh Sahih Bukhari Volume 14 page 450 Chapter 9 3. website by Safar al-Hawali Salafi scholar namely Safar bin Abdul-Rahman al-Hawali has written on his website: الرافضة هم الذين رفضوا خلافة الشيخين أبي بكر وعمر وزعموا أن الخلافة في علي “Rafidha are those who reject the Khilafa of Abu Bakr and Umar and claim that Ali is the Khalifa” Fatah ul Bari: والتشيع محبة علي وتقديمه على الصحابة فمن قدمه على أبي بكر وعمر فهو غال في تشيعه ويطلق عليه رافضي “Shiasm is the love of Ali and whoever prefers him over Abu Bakr and Umar is an excessive Shia also known as Rafidhi” Shaykh Abdul Qadir Jilani writes in his esteemed work Al-Ghunya li-Talibin (Published by Al-Baz Publishing, Inc. Hollywood, Florida): “As for the Shia, they are also known by several other names including Rafida. They came to be called Shia for the simple reason that they relied to support the cause of Ali and considered him superior to all of the rest of the companions. The Rafida were so called because of their rejection [Rafd] of the majority of the companions and their refusal to accept the imamate of Abu Bakar and Umar.” Sufficient Provision for Seekers of the Path of Truth (Al-Ghunya li-Talibin Tariq al-Haqq), Volume 1, page 409 This establishes the reason why we are called Rafidhi, one who abandons the Shaykhayn is a Rafidhi. Muhammad bin Aqeel Al-Shafi’yee said that the Sahaba and all the Banu Hashim were Rafidhi Ibn Aqeel al-Hadhrami al-Shafiy’ee records in his authority work al al-Atab al-Jameel ala ahl al-Jarh wa al-Tadeel, page 33: “According to Ibn Hajr Asqalani, all those lovers of Ali that deem him to be superior to Abu Bakr and Umar are Rafidhi. The conclusion of Ibn Hajr’s research would be that many major Sahaba, such as Miqdad, Zaid bin Arqam, Abu Dharr and Burhaida, the Banu Hashim and Banu Abdul Muttalib are Rafidhi, since they were his lovers and deemed him superior to Abu Bakr and Umar”. Imam Shafi’yee was a Rafidhi Fakhruddin al-Razi Tafseer al-Kabeer Volume 13 page 433 as well as Ibn Hajjar Makki have recorded the statement of Imam of Ahl’ul Sunnah Muhammad Idris Shafi’yee: وقال الشافعي رضي الله عنه ۔۔۔۔ إن كان رفضاً حب آل محمد فليشهد الثقلان أنى رافضي Shafi’yee (ra) said: “If a Rafidhi is one who loves the family of the Prophet (s), then I testify before the mankind and Jinns that I am a Rafidhi” Sawaiq al Muhriqah, page 449 & 450 (Faisalabad, Pakistan) Alhamdolillah we the lovers of Maula Ali (as) feel no offence at being called Shi’a or termed Rafidhi. Mulla Ali Qari’s acknowledgement if those that deem Ali superior are Rafidhi then we are all Rafidhi We read in Sharh Fiqh Akbar page 63 Dhikr ‘Afzaal al Naas badh al Nabi’: “A Sunni scholar said if we believe ‘Ali to be superior it is not due to any basis rather believing that ‘Ali is superior is compulsory since his virtues are many. One individual raised an objection, one who deems ‘Ali as superior has smell of Rafidhi. Another said ‘This is a lie, that this smell of Rafdiyat (Rafidhism), if we accept the superiority of ‘Ali smells of Rafdiyath from the Sunnah, then Sunni traditions will leave no one as a Sunni, rather everyone is a Rafidhi. Do not fight in the Deen, nor abandon the truth”
  21. The definition of Shi’a The term Shi’a has been used on countless occasions in the Qur’an, Hadeeth and the books of history. The literal meaning of Shi’a; The scholars of Arabic lexicon via two methods: 1. The literal meaning of Shi’a 2. The Arabic meaning to which the term is commonly associated The literal meaning al Qamoos Al-Muheet, Vol 3 page 92 Mufaridaat al Qur’an Volume 1 page 563, Urdu translation by Abdullah Firazpuri Tafseer Ma’arif ul Qur’an Volume 5 page 273, by Mufti Muhammad Sha’afi commentary of verse 10 of Surah Hajr Muqaddimah by Ibn Khaldun [Urdu translation b Maulana Raghab] page 196 al Qamoos: “Shi’a refers to the helper of another” Mufaridaat al Qur’an: “Amongst the followers [Shi'a] of Nuh was Ibrahim” Tafseer Ma’arif ul Qur’an: “The plural of al Shi’i is Shi’a which means to follow and support someone”. Muqaddimah: “Shi’a refers to a follower” Comment Whilst on its own, the term Shi’a means very little and doesn’t have any positive or negative meaning literally, when this word is used for a particular individual who is linked to a group that is led by a person of high moral excellence, then certainly the individual would benefit from it and will have the morals that the leader possesses, whom he follows, and to whom he is linked. Alternatively when a Leader is a man of ill repute / bad character, his adherents will likewise be frowned upon. The Nasibi author’s intentional misuse of the literal meaning to declare the Shi’a of ‘Ali (as) to be Kaafirs In the Qur’an, the term Shi’a has been used on several occasions in the context of groups, on some occasions negatively, and it is these verses that the Nasibi author picked up on. Let us analyse his opening shot in his magnificent article: The word Shia, Shiah, Shiite, or Shi’ah was used many times in the Holy Quran. It means sect or band but it mostly has a negative meaning. Let’s see: “As for those who divide their religion and break up into sects (Shiites), you have no part in them in the least: their affair is with Allah: He will in the end tell them the truth of all that they did.” (6:159) In this verse, God warns us not to divide ourselves into Shiites and declare people who do so as people who don’t belong to the prophet Muhammad (p). Comment Whilst there is no doubt that the term Shi’a used in this verse means to split into Sects, that is indeed the literal meaning but no logical person can use this to concluded that this is the exclusive term for the Kuffar and Mushrikeen. If we are to apply this approach then we should point out to the Nasibi author that the word ‘Deen’ is also used for the Kaafirs in the same verse, so is the word Deen also unacceptable (God forbid)? In the Quran the terms ‘Ummat’ and ‘Millat’ have also been used for past nations and for the nation of hell, does that mean that these terms are also not allowed for Muslims to use? We read the word ‘Ummat’ has been used for the people of hell fire in Quran. He will say: Enter into fire among the nations that have passed away before you from among jinn and men; whenever a nation (Ummat) shall enter, it shall curse its sister, until when they have all come up with one another into it; the last of them shall say with regard to the foremost of them: Our Lord! these led us astray therefore give them a double chastisement of the fire. He will say: Every one shall have double but you do not know. Quran 7:38 But Quran also informs us about the prayers of Prophet Ibrahim [as] and Ismail [as] wherein they used word Ummat: And when Ibrahim and Ismail raised the foundations of the House: Our Lord! accept from us; surely Thou art the Hearing, the Knowing: Our Lord! and make us both submissive to Thee and (raise) from our offspring a nation (Ummat) submitting to Thee, and show us our ways of devotion and turn to us (mercifully), surely Thou art the Oft-returning (to mercy), the Merciful. Quran 2: 217-128 There are numerous terms that have been used for the pagans, Christians and Jews, in this Glorious Book, are all of these terms condemnable? Any logical, rational and sane person will have to accept that the usage of term ‘Shi’a’ for Jews, Christians and Pagans (specifically) is wrong and baseless. If its just about the arguments for the sake of arguments, and keeping in view the approach, attitude and pattern of this Nasibi, if we say that the words even used occasionally for the misguided is a term that should generate hate and should be completely abandoned, then would the Salafis (known as Ahl’ul Hadeeth) kindly shed some light on the below on Surah Luqman, verse 6: “YUSUFALI: But there are, among men, those who purchase idle tales, without knowledge (or meaning), to mislead (men) from the Path of Allah and throw ridicule (on the Path): for such there will be a Humiliating Penalty.” This Nasibi author should know the term Hadeeth has been associated with misguidance, so where has the term Ahl’ul Hadeeth come from? Nasibis should either stop calling themselves Ahl’ul Hadeeth or remove this rubbish article from their site. Also in the Qur’an, the term Aima has been used for misguided people as well. In Surah Qasas, verses 41 – 42, the following is said about Kufr Imams: “And we declared them Imams who invite you to Hell fire, and on the Day of Resurrection they shall not be helped. And we caused to be followed in this world by a curse; and on the Day of Resurrection they shall be of the loathed ones”. The Salafis clearly need to abandon those with the title Imam, starting with their Imam Muhammad Ismael Bukhari, and the other Imams. states: “Say: “He has power to send calamities on you, from above and below, or to cover you with confusion in party strife (make you Shiites), giving you a taste of mutual vengeance – each from the other.” See how We explain the Signs by various (symbols); that they may understand.”(6:65) In this verse, God warns us that he can let us become Shiites as a great punishment to us. “Turn you in repentance to Him, and fear Him: establish regular prayers, and be not you among those who join gods with Allah, those who splite up their religion, and become (mere) Sects (Shiites), each party rejoicing in that which is with itself!” (30:31-32) In this verse, God associates the word Shiites with polytheist pagans who join gods with Allah! “Then shall We certainly drag out from every sect (Shiites) all those who were worst in obstinate rebellion against (Allah) Most Gracious.” (Qur’an Mariam:69) In this verse, God associates the word Shiites with those who are worst in obstinate rebellion against Him. “Truly Pharaoh elated himself in the land and broke up its people into sections (Shiites), depressing a small group among them: their sons he slew, but he kept alive their females: for he was indeed a maker of mischief.” (28:4) As far as Pharaoh is concerned, he proclaimed himself to be god. He divided his people into groups and parties so that he will be able to rule them easily. Each group is called Shi’ah. Summary of the Nasibi’s conclusion So this Nasibi basically is saying that the term Shi’a is used for the adherents of Pharaoh, rebels, polytheists and Hell Bound. We have already disproved this false approach by citing the first verse. Whilst the term Shi’a is expressed in the Qur’an, what this Nasibi author needs to recognise, whilst the terms Sunni, Ahl’ul Sunnah wa al Jamaah, Salafi and Ahl’ul Hadeeth are mentioned nowhere in the Qur’an. Any sect that has no mention in the Qur’an cannot be the saved one, since Allah (swt) did not revel any such terms in the Qur’an. The truth lies with that Sect that Allah (swt) refers to in the Qur’an in a positive manner, Alhamdolillah other than the Shi’a no other Sect can rely on any Qur’anic evidence. The common usage of the term Shi’a al-Nehaya, by Ibn al-Atheer, Volume 2 page 520 Lisan al Arab Volume 2 page 189 letter Sheen al-Qamoos al-Muheet, volume 3 page 47 Muntahy al Arab Volume 2 page 666 latter Sheen Darr al Maarif Volume 5 page 424 letter Sheen Islamic Encyclopaedia Volume 2 page 443 Qaydh al Lughut page 618 Farhang Aasfia, Volume 3 page 204 al Mihal wa al Nihal Volume 1 page 234 al-Mawaqif by Eji, volume 3 page 678 Sharh Maqasid Volume 2 page 297 Jami’a al Saul Volume 2 page 220 Sharh Aqaid Nafsee page 108 Sharh Fiqh Akbar page 147 al Ghunyat al Talibeen page 82 al Munjad page 423, Shi’ah Lughaat aul Hadeeth, by Maulana Waheedudeen Zaman Volume 2 page 162, the letter Sheen al Nihaya: وأصل الشيعة الفرقة من الناس وتقع على الواحد والاثنين والجمع والمذكر والمؤنث بلفظ واحد ومعنى واحد وقد غلب الاسم على من يزعم أنه يتولى عليا رضي الله عنه وأهل بيته “Shia is a group of people, this name can be used for singular and plural, for male and female, and this name is used for those who claim that they follow Ali (ra) and his Ahlulbayt” Lisan Al-Arab: وأصل الشيعة الفرقة من الناس ويقع على الواحد والاثنين والجمع والمذكر والمؤنث بلفظ واحد ومعنى واحد وقد غلب هذا الاسم على من يتوالى عليا وأهل بيته “Shia is a group of people, can be used for singular and plural, for male and female, this name is used for those who follow Ali and his Ahlulbayt” Darr al Maarif: “Shi’a refers to the lovers of ‘Ali. They believe that Imamate is restricted to the family of ‘Ali” Islamic Encyclopaedia: “Shi’a is a big Islamic Sect from amongst the Sects they believe that after the Prophet (s), ‘Ali was the immediate successor and after him Imamate was the exclusive right of his family” al Qamoos: وشيعة الرجل بالكسر أتباعه وأنصاره والفرقة على حدة ويقع الواحد والاثنين والجمع والمذكر والمؤنث وقد غلب هذا الأسم على كل من يتولى عليا وأهل بيته “Shia means a follower and it can be used for singular or plural, for male and female and this term is used for those who follow Ali and his Ahlulbayt” al-Mawaqif by Eji: من كبار الفرق الإسلامية الشيعة أي الذين شايعوا عليا وقالوا إنه الإمام بعد رسول الله بالنص إما جليا وإما خفيا واعتقدوا أن الإمامة لا تخرج عنه وعن أولاده “Shia is one of the largest Islamic sects, they are those who follow Ali and believe that he is the Imam right after Allah’s apostle by text, whether it’s a clear or unclear text, and they believe that Imamate is for his progeny”. al Mihal: “Shi’a are those who follow ‘Ali, they believe that after the death of the Prophet (s) the rightful Imam was ‘Ali”. Sharh Fiqh Akbar: “Shi’a believe after the death of the Prophet (s) the rightful Imam was ‘Ali”. Sharh Aqaid Nafsee: “Shi’a believe after the death of the Prophet (s) the rightful Imam was ‘Ali, then Hasan and Husayn up till Mahdi” Al Munjud: “The Shi’a of any person is he who will help him and follow him, the plural of Shia or Ashi’a. The word is generally used for more than one it can be used for masculine and feminine tense In this day and age it has become exclusively associated with those who love ‘Ali and his household, although it has become their specific name, the literal meaning of Shi’a is Sect”. Lughaat ul Hadeeth: “In principles Shi’a refers to a group. In this day and age it refers to those that love ‘Ali and his descendants” Lughaat al Hadeeth, Vol 2 page 162, letter ‘Sheen’ (published by Mir Muhammad Kutub Khana Karachi) Comment Verily the definition of Shi’a may indeed mean party, but in Islamic terminology it is associated with those that love ‘Ali (as) and deem him the rightful Imam, and believe in his infallible descendants after him. They have taken these teaching from the Qur’an and Sunnah of the Prophet (s). Shi’a refers to the lovers of ‘Ali, and came about in 37 Hijri The highly respected Sunni scholar Al Muhaddith Shah ‘Abd al-’Aziz Dehlavi in his discussion of Hadeeth relating to Ali and his Shi’a writes: “The title Shi’a was first given to those Muhajireen and Ansar who gave allegiance (bay’ah) to Ali (may Allah enlighten his face). They were his steadfast faithful followers during his (Ali’s) caliphate. They remained close to him, they always fought his enemies, and kept on following Ali’s commands and prohibitions. The true Shi’a are these who came in 37 Hijri” Tauhfa Ithna Ashari (Urdu) page 27, published in Karachi Note: 37 Hijri -the year Imam Ali (as) fought Mu’awiya at Sifeen. The reference proves that the term ‘Ahl ‘ul Sunnah wa al Jamaah’ was conceived later, after 37 Hijri. Although we believe that the title Shi’a goes back before this date, as this book is a ‘revered anti Shi’a masterpiece’, we will gladly accept this definition. Dehlavi states that the first Shi’a were the Muhajirun and Ansar, in other words they were the Prophet (s)’s Sahaba who sided with Ali (as) against Mu’awiya. Now let us break down that definition in to point form. The Shi’a were those who: Pledged their allegiance to Ali (as) Remained close to him Followed his orders Fought his enemies Alhamdullillah that is exactly the same definition of the Shi’a today. All the above attributes of the Shi’a then, are still inherent in the Shi’a today. When the Sahaba were Shi’a then this Nasibi author should have been ashamed for proving Shi’as misguided Kaafirs through Verses. By doing this, this Nasibi author has attacked the Sahaba he venerates; after all if the term Shi’a from Qur’an refers to negative terms such as ‘adherents of Pharaoh, rebels, polytheists and Hell Bound’, did the Shi’a Sahaba possess all of these attributes? Clearly an author from a site that professes undying love for the Sahaba should have some shame. The Nasibi has unwittingly heaped Kufr Fatwas on thousands of Prophetic companions! Nasibis changed their name to Ahl’ul Sunnah wa al Jamaah at about 40 Hijri According to Shah Abdul Aziz: “It should be known that the initial Shi’as (who are the Sunnis and the Tafdiliyyah) in old days were known as Shi’as. When the Ghulat and the Rawafid Zaydiyyah and Ismailiyyah used the name for themselves, Sunnis and Tafdiliyyah did not like this name for themselves and so they took the name of Ahlu’s-Sunnah wa l Jamaah.” 1. Tauhfa Ithna Ashari, Nawalkishor Press, Lucknow, n.d; pp. 4, 11, 59 2. Tauhfa Ithna Ashari (Urdu) page 19, published in Karachi This proves that the Sunni Sect originally kept the name Shi’a, and they changed it later on to Ahl’ul Sunnah wa al Jamaah. The Shah displayed dishonesty with regard to the reasons for the change. If a good man is called Abdullah and then he finds out a bad person called Abdullah, he won’t change his name. Whilst according to Dehlavi this second group named itself Ahl’ul Sunnah at about 150 AH (following Zaid bin Ali (as)’s martyrdom) it is interesting that their ideology existed long before that. What ideology was that? Well let us see the comments of Mulla ‘Ali Qari: “The belief in the eyes of Ahl’ul Sunnah and Muttazalis is that the duty to appoint an Imam is a duty of the public. In terms of hadith and logic this is a duty of the public. In accordance with this belief, there is a hadith in Sahih Muslim, narrated by Abdullah ibne Umar ‘He who dies without giving bayah to an Imam dies the death of one belonging to the days of jahiliyya’. This is why the Sahaba viewed the appointment of the Imam as so important that they preferred it to attending the Prophet’s funeral, because the Muslims need an Imam so that orders can be made on Jihad, and so that Islamic Laws can be implemented” Sharah Fiqah Akbar, by Mulla Ali Qari, p 175 (publishers Muhammad Saeed and son, Qur’an Muhalla The foundation stone of Sunni aqeedah is set out here. The Imam is appointed by the public, individual character is of no relevance. Once ijma takes place, the khalifa is the legitimate Head of State. Once the people give bayya to the khalifa, ijma is obtained hence the ‘Jama’ah’. So when did we have the first declaration of this Jama’ah? This concept developed from the Shi’a of Uthman, when their Imam Mu’awiyah used his legendary intimidation to take the reigns of power he declared the year to the year of Jama’ah when the people gathered under the single leader. As evidence we will cite Tareekh Khamees Volume 2 page 290: “When Mu’awiyah and Hasan stopped fighting, and made peace, Mu’awiyah entered Kufah, and declared it the year of Jamaah”. al-Tabari recorded that: “Sajah remained with Banu Taghlib until Mu’awiya transferred them in his days on the “year of the union (al-Jama’ah)”. When the people of Iraq agreed [to recognize] Mu’awiyah [as caliph] after Ali, Mu’awiyah took to expelling from al-Kufa those who had been vehement in the cause of Ali, and to settle in their homes those people of Syria and al-Basrah and the Jazirah who were most vehement in his own cause; it was they who were called the “transfers” in the garrison towns” [The translator of the work writes in reference to the year of the union as follows: ] Aam al-Jama’ah the year 40 A.H/A.D 660-661, so called because the Muslim Community came together in recognizing Mu’awiyah, ending the political division of the first civil war. Pace Caetani, 648; see Abu Zahra al-Damishqi, Tarikh, 188 (no. 101) and 190 (no. 105) History of al-Tabari, English version, v10, p97 Jalaluddin al-Suyuti mentions this very fact, with the utmost clarity in his work, History of the Caliphs (Tarikh ul Khulafa) with the following words: al-Dhahabi says that Ka’ab died before Mu’awiyah was made caliph, and that Ka’ab was right in what he said, for Mu’awiyah continued for twenty years, and none of the princes of the earth contended with him, unlike others who came after him, for they had opponents and portions of their dominions passed out of their sway. Mu’awiyah went forth against Ali as has preceded, and assumed the title of Caliph. Then he marched against al-Hasan, who abdicated in his favour. He therefore became firmly established in his Caliphate from Rabi’ul Akhir or Jamadi al-Awwal 41 AH. The year was therefore called the Year of the Union (al-Jama’ah), on account of the gathering of the people under one Caliph. During this year Mu’awiyah appointed Marwan Ibn al-Hakam over Medina. History of the Caliphs, by Jalaluddin al-Suyuti, English version, p204 (Chapter of Mu’awiyah Ibn Abi Sufyan) In Tauhfa, Shah Abdul Aziz also refer Sunnis as Ahl’ul Sunnah wa al Jamaah. ‘Sunn’ commonly means ‘year’, the term Sunni comes from it. The rebellious group were those who in the year 40 Hijri unanimously endorsed the Khilafath of Mu’awiyah ibn Hind, and then changed their name to Ahl’ul Sunnah wa al Jamaah. After that the influence of Mu’awiyah loving and Yazeed pruning led them developing into Nasibis [Nawasib]. The term Shi’a is so blessed that Allah (swt) uses this term for Prophet Ibraheem (as) The Nasibi author vigorously asserted in the introduction of his article: The word Shia, Shiah, Shiite, or Shi’ah was used many times in the Holy Quran. It means sect or band but it mostly has a negative meaning. The Nasibi has himself admitted that ‘it mostly has a negative meaning’. Through this admission at least he has acknowledged that it cannot automatically be equated with something bad, this being the case why has he only focussed on the negative usage of Shi’a to prove his point? His failure to cite the positive usage of Shi’a serves as evidence that this follower of Mu’awiya is adhering to shameless dishonestly in order to prove his point. Had this Nasibi possessed even an ounce of integrity he would have also mentioned the fact that the same term that ‘mostly has a negative meaning’ has been used in a positive light by Allah (swt) while referring to His blessed Prophets. The concept of Shari’a was first propagated by Hadhrat Nuh (as). The followers of Hadhrat Nuh (as) were referred to as Shi’a. This is clear from the fact that we read when referring to Hadhrat Ibraheem (as) Allah (swt) says that he was following the religion of Hadhrat Nuh (as). We read in Surah as Saffat verse 83: “Verily Ibraheem was a Shi’a of Nuh”. The Deobandi scholar Mufti Muhammad Shaafi in his commentary of this verse in his Tafseer Maarif ul Qur’an Volume 7 page 447 states: “Shi’a in Arabic means that groups whose core beliefs are based upon the teachings of another, in this case it refers to the fact that Hadhrat Ibraheem (as) was a follower of his predecessor Nuh (as)” Similarly Deobandi bulwarks Shah Rafiudeen and Maulana Waheed uz Zaman in their combined commentaries, published as Tafseer Ashraf under this verse have their explanation of Shi’a as ‘follower’ and the other ‘follower of a way’. Shams’ul Hind Hafiz Nazeer Ahmed in his transliteration of the Qur’an page 1340 defines Shi’a as ‘Follower of a path’. The Prophet (s) was likewise from the people of Ibraheem, that is because Allah (swt) says in Surah al Baqarah verse 134: “They say: “Become Jews or Christians and you would be guided (To salvation).” Say No (I would rather) follow the Religion of Abraham” Therefore this means that Hadhrat Muhammad (saww) was a Shi’a of Hadhrat Ibraheem (as) – who was a Shi’a of Hadhrat Nuh (as). The term Shi’a, should therefore not be viewed with hostility rather previous Prophets and their adherents were Shi’a. We appeal to justice. We will all have to answer our Creator one day. The term Nabi is a pure esteemed word. When Allah (swt) refers to one Nabi as a Shi’a can you only imagine how pure that name must be in the eyes of Allah (swt), and how pure are those who call themselves by this name? One should also point out that we are not referring to an ordinary Nabi here, the infallible Prophet being referred to, is the one whom Allah (swt) refers to as ‘Khaleel’. The Nasibi author cites verses that associate the term Shi’a with Kaafirs to prove that today’s adherents of Maula ‘Ali (as) are Kafirs, we will ask this product of Halala two questions: What right do you have to make such a conclusion when Prophet Ibraheem (as) is referred to as the Shi’a of Nuh (as)?’ Why would Allah (swt) associate this term with his Prophets, while this Nasibi author claims that the term is related to Kaafirs and the people of Hell fire? Is this Nasibi not insulting the Prophets in the process? We leave it to those with open minds, one can either accept the pure word that Allah (swt) links positively to Prophet Ibraheem (as) or accept this Nasibi author’s dishonest usage of Qur’anic verses which seems to suggest that the term Shi’a is always used in a negative manner. The adherent of Musa (as) was also a Shi’a “And he entered the City at a time when its people were not watching: and he found there two men fighting, – one of his Shi’a, and the other, of his enemies”. Quran 28:15 In this verse, Hadhrat Musa (as)’s party are referred to as Shi’a because Hadhrat Musa (as) was Shi’a. His followers were Shi’a as declared by the Holy Qur’an. This fact is acknowledged by the scholars of Ahl’ul Sunnah. We read in Tafsir Baydhawi Volume 4 page 125 (Publised in Egypt): “One was his Shi’a in others, one that followed his path”. Allamah Farah Baghawi in his “Mu’allim ul Tanzil” Volume 3 page 175 (India, Bombay edition) writes: هذا من شيعته وهذا من عدوه أي هذا مؤمن وهذا كافر “The fighter was a Shi’a – a momin, his enemy was a Kaffir”. The Deobandi scholar Mufti Muhammad Shaafi in his commentary of this verse in his Tafseer Maarif ul Qur’an Volume 6 page 622 states: “This was a time when Musa (as) began Prophethood and the truth, and people began to follow him, they were his Followers [Tabieen) and the word “min Shi’at” refers to this”. Comment The comments of this esteemed Deobandi Mullah confirm that the followers of Prophet Musa (as) were called his ‘Shi’a’. We appeal to justice one who fights an enemy is a friend; we can conclude that Allah (swt) has deemed the friend of a Prophet (s) to be a Shi’a. The Qur’an refers to Prophet Ibraheem (as) as a Shi’a. We appeal to this Nasibi cut and paste author, God forbid was he (Hadhrat Ibraheem (as)) also a rebellious, Hell bound adherent of Pharoah? If in accordance with the verse cited by this Nasibi the Shi’a of ‘Ali are , Hell bound adherent of Pharaoh, then why did the Salaf and Tabieen call themselves Shi’a. Were they ignorant of the verses cited by this Nasibi author?
  22. Bismillahi Rahmani Rahim Salam Aleykum, What would you do if Imam Mahdi is not shia? Will you believe and help him? If he has all the characteristics, sunnahs and struggles that Ahlul Bayt (as) mentioned, that both sunni and shia mentioned, trials, justice, Allah's Messenger's (saaws) Sunna and character, piety, knowledge, guidance and help of Allah , many Signs from Allah that he is the one, and everything about him shows you that he is Imam Mahdi, but he is not shia, will you accept him although it contradicts shia views of Imam Mahdi? What if Imam Mahdi is not arab but his origin is arabic? What if he is not born in Madina but Allah will show him from Madina? If he is sunni, but loves the Ahlul Bayt (as) like no other person, and struggles and fights for them while the rest are hesitating, and he struggles and fights for Allah's Messenger (saaws), will you accept him? If he loves the Sahaba (ra), and understands them better than anyone else, he knows what really happened and explains and proves that they were the best of people on earth after the Prophets (as), and as for Muawiya, he rejects him as Sahaba but leaves that matter to Allah's Hands to Judge and points out the errors that Muawiya made but warns to not curse him nor any Sahaba will you still accept him? He hates yazid and defends Hussein (as), when he hears about Hussein (as) his eyes flow with tears and his heart beats fast, but he also loves the Sahaba (ra) and his love for them is very great, will you still refuse him? He defends the shia in whatever they are right, and he even defends them against sunnis, still he loves both and wants them united, so he fights for both of them and teaches them mercy. He loves shia as brothers, LOVES IRAN and its people, supports them in their struggle against the enemies of Allah, he counts shia in Iran and Sayed Nasrallah as best among the best of the Ummah, but he explains shia that some of what they believe is not true and Islamic, but actually a corruption by the zionist crusade, and proves them that Sunni is the correct creed, will you still refuse him just because of what you have been taught all these years? If Imam Mahdi shows you that you have misunderstood the hadith about him from Ahlul Bayt (as), and that a lot of it has been added into your group, will you still refuse him even after that? I need to know whether you are ready to accept Imam Mahdi and fight for Allah with your life, heart and wealth, are you ready to accept him for the sake of Allah if he is not Shia? Ask yourself very well and honestly these questions and answer them, if you answer with "no" in all the questions, then ask yourself whether you are really sincere to Allah after all, whether you follow Allah's Qur'an, or you follow whatever tradition and parents follow. The jews refused Allah's Messenger Muhammad (saaws) because of their envy and pride against arabs, they did not accept him because of his being arab, though he had all the Signs that he is the one propheciesed in their books. That made them fall into worse sins that lead them to all the corruption and injustice they do today. So don't fall into the same trap! If you are not ready, then Shia will suffer trials until they are ready to accept him, even if he is not Shia, and only then Allah inshAllah will reveal him. Allah has Mercy for you, you still believe in His tawhid and you have not fallen to what jews have fallen to when Isa (as) and Muhammad (saaws) came. Therefore, build your Iman and relationship with Allah first, if you have built the Iman and are ready to die for Allah, then you will be ready for Imam Mahdi inshAllah even if he is not shia, Allah Azza wa Jal will enable you to accept him if you have Iman. If you are not ready, then there is much work to be done, work on it inshAllah my brothers and sisters because it will save you from being astray when the time comes, and the Iman will inshAllah earn you a place with Allah Azza wa Jall in Janna and save you from Jahannam. That time will be a very very very hard time, lots of trials will occur that you haven't even thought of, most of the world will be devastated and what will remain will be only few lands, it will be Allah's Help during a nuclear war, meaning when Imam Mahdi comes there will be already a world war which will increase and head towards Malhama. That will then be a huge battle between truth and falsehood, more precisely a battle between the army of Allah vs shaytan and his army, and I mean this literally. The dajjal's army is shaytan's army. Don't worry about the technology and guns, Allah Azza wa Jall already has Plans against that, built Tawakkul in Allah, Allah Azza wa Jal is the Protector. All tyrants and injustice will be broken down, thereafter comes a beautiful rain that will make earth beautiful similar to Paradise, this will be Allah's Mercy before he gives the believers the real Paradise. The earth will be destroyed and remade only after Muslims get Victory worldwide, this fight will not be for anything else except Allah's Haq and Justice. Therefore, Muslims, shia and sunni need a very strong foundation of Tawhid and Yaqin Certainty in Allah Azza wa Jal in their heart, because they will have to struggle like no other people in history, lots of time they will feel like giving up, this is why you must build your Iman in Allah Azza wa Jal, so that nothing can break you, NOTHING. Don't ask for Allah Azza wa Jal to hasten Imam Mahdi's arrival, until you are ready for it. Because when he comes, he is going to put you into work, from children to old, he will give you lots of different directions and teach you how to focus on Allah Azza wa Jal in everything you do, meaning whatever you do will be ONLY for Allah and His Love for you. Allah is number one, everything comes second, his army will be only with this type of men and women. You need to be ready for that work spiritually, mentally and physically, you will need to be educated a lot in Islam and other subjects, because you will do Da'wah while struggling in Allah's Way. Get to work inshAllah, the time is near inshAllah, but get to work and start being merciful to each other in the Ummah, start treating Sunnis as brothers except the extremist fools, but work on unity with Sunni, you will really need it! Whether the Imam is among us or not, our purpose is to serve and worship Allah, that is what matters, so start building Tawhid and Yaqin in Allah Azza wa Jal with knowledge, begin with the Qur'an, then science, know politics, and understand history, focus on fixing your Nafs, make a LOT of Zikr and memorise the Qur'an, learn a lot about spirituality from the Ahlul Bayt (as) especially Ali (as), make him (as) your role model only after Allah's Messenger (saaws); put on top Allah's Messenger (saaws), Shia do not know him almost at all, make more lectures about the Messenger (saaws), and learn how to be like him; never curse (ra) the Sahaba since you have no clue who they really were, their bodies were full of blood to defend Allah's Qur'an and His Messenger (saaws), nobody can dare to insult and slander them, Allah Azza wa Jal your Lord commands Muslims in the Qur'an to not slander each other so fear Allah Al Jabbar your Creator. Learn to take it easy on each other and mankind, be harsh only against Allah's Azza wa Jal enemies, serve Allah Azza wa Jal and help mankind, because a lot of them need Da'wa and will be Muslims especially after the major trials begin, your Da'wah will help them inshAllah. Talk to mankind and new Muslims only about Allah Azza wa Jal, the proofs of Islam and the Qur'an, leave the shia sunni issues aside especially when you yourself do not comprehend what really the issue is - a political one made by zionist jews to cause hatred amongst Muslims. Think about what I said, and do follow my advice seriously, inshAllah you will understand, may Allah Azza wa Jal help and strengthen you for Imam Mahdi, Amin Allah. Salam aleykum wa rahmatullahi wa barakatuhu
  23. So here I have a kind of question on the most popular criticism used bu Sunni/Wahabbis against shias. This is what I am talking about : Summary:Sunnis say that the beliefs of christians and shias are same as they take their prests/imams as gods other than Allah. Like in the case of Ali and Jesus, Christians believe that Jesus was a God but so week to die on a cross, while shias believe that Ali (a.s) is on higher rank than Prophet Muhammad and strong like God but so week to protect Islam after Prophet Muhammad and had to accept all kinds of accusations against him. (ASTAGFIRULLAH) Question : Now my question is that how can we prove them wrong ? Are we really saying that Ali has attributes of God ?
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.