Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Sufi are complete opposite of shias. Any one who says like has not heard the words of the 6 imam calling them our enemies. How can someone who is always on the look out for his inner demons and shows no concern for society be a follower of Imam Hussain (A.S).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, noortalpur said:

Sufi are complete opposite of shias. Any one who says like has not heard the words of the 6 imam calling them our enemies. How can someone who is always on the look out for his inner demons and shows no concern for society be a follower of Imam Hussain (A.S).

You clearly have no idea what you're talking about. The real historical definition of Sufis are those people who were descendants from the family of the prophet Muhammad saw and spread Islam around asia and they settled there. That how you have syeds who are from countries like Pakistan, India, Bangladesh etc. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Ahlulbayt&Sunnah said:

You clearly have no idea what you're talking about. The real historical definition of Sufis are those people who were descendants from the family of the prophet Muhammad saw and spread Islam around asia and they settled there. That how you have syeds who are from countries like Pakistan, India, Bangladesh etc. 

Those countries you stated mostly of it "seyyed" are just claims that are highly fakes anyway. Try to ask them some proof /documentation, lets see where it will leads. Anyway, noortalpur is right about the matter of Sufis. The Imams cursed them and called them our enemies.

Edited by Dhulfikar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Ahlulbayt&Sunnah said:

You clearly have no idea what you're talking about. The real historical definition of Sufis are those people who were descendants from the family of the prophet Muhammad saw and spread Islam around asia and they settled there. That how you have syeds who are from countries like Pakistan, India, Bangladesh etc. 

This is the first time I have heard Syed is same as Sufi. Please check your history books again. No one in Pakistan is sufi because he /she is a syed. Get your facts straight. All those who claim Sufis are somehow related to Shias is like equating us someone who our Imams have declared our enemies. So before you say anything read authentic shia books and I would recommend you go through Sufism and Shias differences by Allama Hashim Maroof Hasani. It is available in Urdu.

If you still want to live in ignorance then do as you please but do get the facts straight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please show me so some evidence where the 12 imams cursed sufis. And concerning your shia books I don't consider any of them to be authentic. The rafhida had a habit of fabricating hadeeths and changing and re writing major events. A bit like the jews. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First you ask for evidence and then you belittle us.This is why I usually dont debate here too many people will not listen to reason.What is point of posting any evidence if you consider it unworthy.

 

Please do not let your prejudice blind you.I gave you a book plus you could read the perfect man by ayatullah mutahhari then again you consider us untrustworthy.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Ahlulbayt&Sunnah said:

Please show me so some evidence where the 12 imams cursed sufis. And concerning your shia books I don't consider any of them to be authentic. The rafhida had a habit of fabricating hadeeths and changing and re writing major events. A bit like the jews. 

Yeah, after all you are asking an evidence from Sunni viewpoint that which itself is biased and rarely have something hadiths about the 12 Imams. That is because many times Sunnis reject the companions of Imams or consider their narrations as weak. Another example is Bukhari and how he doubt  Ja'far ibn Muhammad hadiths:

"al Bukharī doubted the ahadith of Ja'far ibn Muhammad, deeming them unreliable" In Minhaj al Sunnah, volume 4, page 383

Of course Bukhari did not doubt the Imam itself, but He did doubt the Imam Companions that narrated from the Imam and they consider them weak. 

For any one who use reasoning and who search for the truth without biased about the Imams sayings, they naturally search it first from their companions and family.

Edited by Dhulfikar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Ahlulbayt&Sunnah said:

Like Abu hanifa, who you completely reject and said he fabricated what the imams said and told lies. 

No, he was not even close to the Imam Ja'far al-Sadiq (as) or Imam al-Baqir (as) . Imam Jafar al-Sadiq did have very large seminars where hundreds people attain them to learn his fiq. Among them were Abu Hanifa. That's why you can find some similarity fiq with Abu Hanifa and Ja'far al-Sadiq, and of course we do not reject an fiq that is coming from Ja'far al-Sadiq.

A close companion of Imam (as) are those who Imams trust them, are very close to them, advice them, give them private lectures, they follow their Imam in all matters. These companions are the Shia's of the Imams, their belief is our belief.

Edited by Dhulfikar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/18/2016 at 4:22 PM, Ahlulbayt&Sunnah said:

You clearly have no idea what you're talking about. The real historical definition of Sufis are those people who were descendants from the family of the prophet Muhammad saw and spread Islam around asia and they settled there. That how you have syeds who are from countries like Pakistan, India, Bangladesh etc. 

Half of Pakistan are all sayeds apparently.........

Edited by Abu-Jafar Herz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 17/03/2016 at 8:22 PM, Ahlulbayt&Sunnah said:

You clearly have no idea what you're talking about. The real historical definition of Sufis are those people who were descendants from the family of the prophet Muhammad saw and spread Islam around asia and they settled there. That how you have syeds who are from countries like Pakistan, India, Bangladesh etc. 

the sufis you are on about for example chistis they are not direct descendants of Muhammed saw. They trace a 'spiritual lineage' to Imam Ali ra and they say Imam Ali ra taught his spiritual knowledge to his student and that student had another student and so on and so on (some of the students obviously made their way to India). A teacher - student relationship has nothing to do with being direct descendants  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/23/2015 at 9:59 AM, Shaykh Patience101 said:

Yes.

Sufism transcends both Shi'ism and Sunnism. It can't really be classified as one homogeneous sect.

 

I don't think sufi is sect . . sufi is the heart of islam , and eventhought I refuse sects I find sufi to be the most peaceful and loving among muslims , I never meet sufi muslim  who speak ill of either the sahabah or ahlybat  , or speak ill against shia or sunni , I always find sufi people to be so devoted and loving . 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There have been several Sufi Orders that either began as Shi'a or converted to Shi'a Islam. The Safavid Order is probably the most famous, although it is more or less extinct as a formal institution.

 

The Nimatullahi converted or at least openly professed Shi'ism at least since the Safavid era and see the Sufism as merely referring to the inner reality of Shi'a Islam. The Bektashi's beliefs concerning the succession of the Prophet (pbuh) as well as the 12 Imams makes me wonder if they should be considered just as much part of the Shi'a fold as any of us here on this site, though it seems like Bektashi have at times flip flopped, suggesting they are Shi'a, but also beyond both Sunni & Shi'a. The Alawites have at times seen themselves as being both Sufi and fiercely anti-Sufi. And the Alevis in general, not counting the Bektashi Order, seem to go back forth between calling themselves Shi'a and believing they are something distinct from Shi'a and Sunni, though their core beliefs don't seem too different from other Shi'a-Sufis like the Nimatullahi-Gonabadi, who are not shy about their "Shi'a" affiliation. The Uwaysi orders from Iran but now based in California seem to still be more or less Shi'a but don't really emphasize these things very much as they allow members from all faiths. The Dhahabiyya also have been openly Shi'ite since the Safavid era too. There are also some Qalandariyya faqirs in Pakistan/India who are Shi'ite. Most Sufi Orders remain Sunni, even those like the Shadhili which do allow both Shi'a and Sunni members. And some Sufi Orders which are probably really close to us Shi'a like the Naqshbandi, who believe in the Twelve Imams as well, have been known for sometimes being very anti-Shi'a/anti-Rafidi.

 

In the past, there was a much stronger Sufi-Shi'ism that set itself against the Sufism of the Sunnis. That is, if you went to Iran in the 1500's or the 1700's or 1800's and found Sufi dervishes there, they were usually just as likely to be the types who participated in Muharram commemorations and cursed the Sunni caliphs as much as the next Shi'a and the Safavids, as Sufis, during the wars with the Ottomans, encouraged things like burning effigies of Abu Bakr. The rise of "Irfan" as a politically correct alternative to "Sufism" that could bridge some of the gap between the anti-Sufi Shi'a ulama and the Shi'a followers of Sufism as well as the philosopher which began in the late Safavid period with the systematic works of gnosis and philosophy of Mulla Sadra, Shaykh Bahai and others and gained more current in the Qajar period, resulting in new movements like the Shaykhi movement under Shaykh Ahmad al-Ahsai for instance, led to a decline in more formal Sufi orders in Iran.

 

A lot of the debate centers on the definition of sufism itself and what individual shi'a and their scholars associate with the term, not so much the suggestion that there's an esoteric dimension or layers of meaning to the qur'an or the shariah, which i would say is more or less the mainstream view among the Shi'a. Can Sufism and irfan be considered the same thing? If so, what is the place of these Sufi Orders that seem to practice all these extra-curricular practices not demanded explicitly by the Shi'a sources of fiqh and who also seem to distinguish themselves from the mainstream body of the Muslims? Ayatollah Khomeini's irfan was pulled a lot from famous Sufi saints and writers to the point where it may be appropriate to call him a scholar of Sufism and he even wrote mystical poetry in the fashion of the Sufis, but his attitude towards popular Sufi Orders in Iran like the Nimatullahi was less than positive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Difference between shia and alevi

Alevi-Bektashi: 

* bloodline of the Prophet and follows what was told by Imam Cafer and imam Kazim 

Haci bektash and ahmet yesevi 

3ler 

5ler

7ler 

40 lar 

Kemerbeshler

Shia:

*Followers of Ahlibeyt whom also betrayed Hz Huseyin, which is why we say we are neither shia or sunni but our own as we were taught by Imam Cafer and Kazim.

Most sufism were also worried about the ottoman sunni oppression hence, they did not claim to be shia.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sufi's are not hostile towards Shia's. If we want to have all muslims united we should stop making enemies of friends.

They are the abridgment between Shia's and Sunni's.

Edited by Faruk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 27.4.2016 at 9:06 PM, Faruk said:

Sufi's are not hostile towards Shia's. If we want to have all muslims united we should stop making enemies of friends.

They are the abridgment between Shia's and Sunni's.

When it comes to religion matter, we are distance from them. Other than that, we should respect them as muslims and not have fitnah or war like wahhabis.

Edited by Dhulfikar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Recent Posts on ShiaChat!

    • Salam. If the person lives in another country and has the wish to be buried in Iraq, there are governmental regulations about shipping a person's remains. The country where that person lives has laws that need to be followed. For example, the person who died would need a medical statement that the body is not contagious. The casket would need to be inside a lead box that would not leak, then placed inside a wooden crate which is nailed shut and has special seals that show if there was tampering or opening. The funeral home would need government permission to transport the body by airline and not all airlines provide that service. The licensed funeral home worker would need to drive the prepared package with the person's remains to the licensed airline and make sure that the remains were placed on the airplane. At the arrival in the airport in Iraq, the person's remains would be in the customs area and the customs workers would wait for the person who would need to personally claim the body and sign documents that the body was picked up. Because the whole thing is very heavy and would not fit inside an ambulance or hearse, the wooden crate would need to be opened which means workers or relatives of the deceased would need to use crowbars to remove it. After lifting the lead box into the vehicle, the deceased would need to be transported to the cemetery location where the bodies are washed. The cemetery would take care of everything but of course the price will depend on the location of the cemetery. The most expensive part of the international burial is the western country (funeral home, trip to airport, airline shipping) and could reach $15,000. The price of the cemetery plot, washing the body, wrapping the body in kaffan, is a separate price. The temporary grave marker with the name written in chalk on it is probably free, but the grave stone with the name carved on it would be a separate price. This does not answer your question of whether someone can be buried in Iraq, but I just want you to know that the person needs to save his money if he has such a wish. May Allah SWT grant all halal wishes.  
    • That is the crux of the issue here brother. I am trying to understand what/who determines which parts to accept and which parts to reject.
    • Or this question: Can I use body wash to wash my hair?  
    • There isn't even unity among shias. You call non-twelver Shias heretics. Do you think you are ready to unity with Sunnis?
    • I suppose it all depends on the person. But yes, if someone took a literalist approach and did believe that the many strories of scripture were all true in a black and white way, and they simultaneously were consistent in believing all things they viewed as miracles, then yes they would believe both in the literal story of Adam and Eve, and the literal story of the virgin birth.
×