Hayhat MinnaZilla

Shia becomes an atheist?

Rate this topic

146 posts in this topic

23 minutes ago, Hassan Y said:

It seems like you didn't understand Hassanain properly. Heaven was not only made for Muslims, it was made for anyone that struggles to find the truth. All non-Muslims (whether they are, Christian, Jew, Hindu, Atheists) are potential candidates for heaven subject to the intentions of how willing they are to submit the the truth. Hell is not exclusively made for non-Muslims, but for people that reject the truth and good. Anyone that submits to the truth, or struggles to find the truth is considered a believer to God.

No. Heaven was made for the believers, and Hell was made for the unbelievers.

Specific cases of non-believers going to Heaven due to ignorance or due to being oppressed does not change that it is a reward for the believers, or that Hell is the abode for the kuffar. 

Sindbad05 likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, E.L King said:

No. Heaven was made for the believers, and Hell was made for the unbelievers.

Specific cases of non-believers going to Heaven due to ignorance or due to being oppressed does not change that it is a reward for the believers, or that Hell is the abode for the kuffar. 

No heaven was not just made for the believers, it was also made for people that struggle to find the truth. An atheist who is morally good and thinks rationally could go to heaven if all his life he/she struggled to find the truth but couldn't find it.

By the way, did you say ignorant people go to heaven? How does that make sense?

baqar likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, E.L King said:

Yes. What have I said which contradicts that?

You are culpable to the extent of your ignorance. In your example, someone is searching for the truth, as long as they are searching for the truth they are under the Mercy of Allah (SWT) - and not simply reject Tashayyu without giving it much thought. Yes, if only a distorted version of Tashayyu is being promoted, then that is problematic. It would be like living in an island in the ocean, with one TV, with one anti-Islamic channel, such a situation is not clear cut. As long as the truth is being searched for, that man's situation isn't clear cut, but by rejecting Tashayyu simply due to laziness and without proper research, then yes this person is accountable.

What is proper research? Learning Arabic and reading the primary texts of yourself?

56 minutes ago, E.L King said:

There is no Verse in the Holy Qur'an which says "You must believe in 12 Imams after the Prophet", it doesn't exist. Give a man a Qur'an for a year and put him in an island, he is not cuplable if he doesn't believe in 12 Imams. However, one is cuplable for rejecting something which he knows the Holy Prophet revealed. Rejecting just one thing the Prophet has revealed is like rejecting his entire Message, it is kufr. So like rejecting Salat, for example. Now, most Sunnis don't "know" that the Prophet revealed Wilaya, but Sunnis will be cuplable for not "searching for the truth". If they are contempt with what they have because a distorted version of Tashayyu is the only one available, or the only one being promoted, these people might be under the Mercy of Allah.

You think it makes sense for the Qur'an to not itself mention something that is the very key to salvation? Take yourself out of this ultra-orthodox sectarian box you've put yourself in for a second, and really think about that. It essentially means that everything the Qur'an talks about it worthless unless you have this one belief that the Qur'an doesn't even mention. To me, there is a real problem if a belief that comes from sources outside of the Qur'an becomes more important than the beliefs that are actually in the Qur'an.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was waiting for you to jump into this one Haydar. I think this is a topic that some here on SC ought to be more vocal about, so thanks.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Hassan Y said:

No heaven was not just made for the believers, it was also made for people that struggle to find the truth. An atheist who is morally good and thinks rationally could go to heaven if all his life he/she struggled to find the truth but couldn't find it.

By the way, did you say ignorant people go to heaven? How does that make sense?

Ignorant meaning jahil. Someone who lives in Morrocco and works as a farmer, never seen the city in his life, poor man, barely gets by, and can't read. This guy is not the same as a guy living infront of a computer with all the knowledge and proof in front of his eyes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Haydar Husayn said:

What is proper research? Learning Arabic and reading the primary texts of yourself?

You think it makes sense for the Qur'an to not itself mention something that is the very key to salvation? Take yourself out of this ultra-orthodox sectarian box you've put yourself in for a second, and really think about that. It essentially means that everything the Qur'an talks about it worthless unless you have this one belief that the Qur'an doesn't even mention. To me, there is a real problem if a belief that comes from sources outside of the Qur'an becomes more important than the beliefs that are actually in the Qur'an.

So you don't think Wilaya is key to salvation? So those who rejected Ghadir are okay? They haven't apostated? 

I believe the Holy Qur'an has mentioned Wilaya, such as in the Verse of Wilaya. The Holy Qur'an has mentioned the concept, the Sunnah explained it in detail (who are the Awliya). I believe someone that is a Sunni, and has all the proof of Wilaya infront of him, but rejects it, is going to Hell. Do you believe that or not? Or do you think Wilaya is just a "good thing to believe in" but not "key to salvation".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, E.L King said:

So you don't think Wilaya is key to salvation? So those who rejected Ghadir are okay? They haven't apostated? 

No, I don't think those who rejected Ghadir are ok, because they rejected a direct command of the Prophet (s). Nobody today is in that position though.

5 hours ago, E.L King said:

I believe the Holy Qur'an has mentioned Wilaya, such as in the Verse of Wilaya. The Holy Qur'an has mentioned the concept, the Sunnah explained it in detail (who are the Awliya). I believe someone that is a Sunni, and has all the proof of Wilaya infront of him, but rejects it, is going to Hell. Do you believe that or not? Or do you think Wilaya is just a "good thing to believe in" but not "key to salvation".

I don't believe whether or not someone is going to hell is simply a matter of he proof in front of them, it's about their ability to understand the proof and their intentions. If they recognised this was the truth, but rejected it, then they may go to hell (although I don't discount Allah showing them mercy of the Prophet (s) interceding for them). But there are plenty of reasons why someone might not recognise that it is the truth. If you are brought up as a Sunni, and you are very knowledgeable about your religion, then there are plenty of reasons that could be found to not accept Shi'ism, even if you were able to see some of the flaws in Sunnism.

I think the problem here is there is a danger of losing sight of what the religion is about. It's about worshipping Allah. Now, the best way of worshipping Him is through the teachings of the Prophet (s), and the Imams are the ones who properly preserved those teachings. But ultimately the focus is still on Allah. When instead you put all the focus on believing in the Imams, then they become the focus rather than Allah. This is why the cause of so many of the problems within the Shia world, where the centre of most of the devotion is the Imams.

The concept of wilayah is in the Qur'an, but where does it say that if you don't believe in it you will go to hell? You don't think that is something worth mentioning? Why instead put so much emphasis on not committing shirk, when even if you don't commit shirk you would still be going to hell anyway if you don't have wilayah, while if you have wilayah then apparently shirk isn't that big of a deal anyway (judging by the attitudes of many Shias, even those who don't fell comfortable with a lot of what they see).

The analogy with salah really doesn't work, because if someone went on a desert island for a year with the Qur'an even if he wouldn't be able to figure out how to pray, he would be in no doubt about its importance. This is true of any other essential Islamic belief as well. Can you say this is the case with wilayah? That's not to say it's not important, but more important than everything else put together? No. To believe that makes a mockery of the Qur'an, because most of it then just becomes empty words. And again, historically a certain strand within Shi'ism, generally the one that has tended more towards extremism in their beliefs about the Imams, have had a 'difficult' relationship with the Qur'an. Presumably because the focus of their religion and the focus in the Qur'an just don't seem to match up at all. Even in recent times, scholars such as Sayyid Khamenei or Kamal al-Haydari have said that the Qur'an has been neglected in the hawza. It's not difficult to see why.

If you can give me a good explanation as to why it makes sense for Allah to neglect to emphasise the most important part of His religion in His final message to us, then I'd be happy to go along with it. It's not like I'm treating to be difficult for the sake of it, but I just can't see any good explanation myself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Haydar Husayn said:

No, I don't think those who rejected Ghadir are ok, because they rejected a direct command of the Prophet (s). Nobody today is in that position though.

I don't believe whether or not someone is going to hell is simply a matter of he proof in front of them, it's about their ability to understand the proof and their intentions. If they recognised this was the truth, but rejected it, then they may go to hell (although I don't discount Allah showing them mercy of the Prophet (s) interceding for them). But there are plenty of reasons why someone might not recognise that it is the truth. If you are brought up as a Sunni, and you are very knowledgeable about your religion, then there are plenty of reasons that could be found to not accept Shi'ism, even if you were able to see some of the flaws in Sunnism.

I think the problem here is there is a danger of losing sight of what the religion is about. It's about worshipping Allah. Now, the best way of worshipping Him is through the teachings of the Prophet (s), and the Imams are the ones who properly preserved those teachings. But ultimately the focus is still on Allah. When instead you put all the focus on believing in the Imams, then they become the focus rather than Allah. This is why the cause of so many of the problems within the Shia world, where the centre of most of the devotion is the Imams.

The concept of wilayah is in the Qur'an, but where does it say that if you don't believe in it you will go to hell? You don't think that is something worth mentioning? Why instead put so much emphasis on not committing shirk, when even if you don't commit shirk you would still be going to hell anyway if you don't have wilayah, while if you have wilayah then apparently shirk isn't that big of a deal anyway (judging by the attitudes of many Shias, even those who don't fell comfortable with a lot of what they see).

The analogy with salah really doesn't work, because if someone went on a desert island for a year with the Qur'an even if he wouldn't be able to figure out how to pray, he would be in no doubt about its importance. This is true of any other essential Islamic belief as well. Can you say this is the case with wilayah? That's not to say it's not important, but more important than everything else put together? No. To believe that makes a mockery of the Qur'an, because most of it then just becomes empty words. And again, historically a certain strand within Shi'ism, generally the one that has tended more towards extremism in their beliefs about the Imams, have had a 'difficult' relationship with the Qur'an. Presumably because the focus of their religion and the focus in the Qur'an just don't seem to match up at all. Even in recent times, scholars such as Sayyid Khamenei or Kamal al-Haydari have said that the Qur'an has been neglected in the hawza. It's not difficult to see why.

If you can give me a good explanation as to why it makes sense for Allah to neglect to emphasise the most important part of His religion in His final message to us, then I'd be happy to go along with it. It's not like I'm treating to be difficult for the sake of it, but I just can't see any good explanation myself.

The problem is you are struggling to condemn anyone to Hell, and it seems you (and I don't want to misquote you) have a difficulty in believing numerous sahih hadiths and the consensus of the sect regarding this issue. 

You said this religion is all about worshipping Allah, and that is true. The essence of Islam is submission to Him and Him alone. But then you somehow connected that to believing in the Imams (AS) and that this has become the main focus. So let me tell you, someone believes in Allah (say an Orthodox Jew) - and he is completely monotheistic in his belief, but he rejects the Prophet. What do you say now? Is believing that the belief in Prophethood as a key to salvation also wrong? Same analogy, different person, and another one of the five "Usool al-Deen".

You just contradicted yourself. You just said that the belief in Wilayah is in the Holy Qur'an, and then you said where does it say that rejecting it takes one to Hell. Do you not realise how contradictory this statement is? Because rejecting even one single Ayah of the Lord is like rejecting the entire Message of the Qur'an. You just rejected a Revelation, that is kufr. And yes shirk is a big deal, because it doesn't just take someone out of Wilaya, it takes someone out of Islam as a whole, and so such a person is going to Hell.

The analogy does work with regards to normal everyday people. It does not work in the specific scenario that you outlined with regards to someone in the desert, but it does work with average everyday Sunnis living in the West. Because the proof is all there, and the condition to searching for the truth are all there. 

I never said Wilayah is more important than anything else, I don't think it is as important as Tawheed for example. Someone who loves the Imams (AS) but is a mushrik, his deeds are in vain, he is cursed, and he will go to Hell forever. So for example, the ghulat. 

Actually the importance of Wilayah has been made clear in the Holy Qur'an, see:

O Messenger, announce that which has been revealed to you from your Lord, and if you do not, then you have not conveyed His message. And Allah will protect you from the people. Indeed, Allah does not guide the disbelieving people.[5:67]

I don't think you are understanding that rejecting one part of the Revelation is like rejecting all of it, especially if it is an essential like Wilayah. Or is Wilayah not essential? Do you believe that religious pluralism with rejects to the other deviant sects of Islam? Do you believe that the deviants are as much saved as the Mu'mins? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, another fact: All the Mu'mins will go to Heaven eventually. Every single Mu'min. Mu'min meaning someone who believes in all the essentials of Islam, including Wilayah. And this is the consensus of our sect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 19/12/2016 at 4:30 PM, E.L King said:

The problem is you are struggling to condemn anyone to Hell, and it seems you (and I don't want to misquote you) have a difficulty in believing numerous sahih hadiths and the consensus of the sect regarding this issue. 

No, I think plenty of people are going to hell, because plenty of people will have either rejected the truth when thy recognised it, or will have done other bad things that deserve hell. What I'm careful about doing is condemning specific people to hell, when I don't know their level of knowledge or intentions. I leave that to Allah, and I think it's better to err on the side of caution, rather than pretend I'm comfortably installed in heaven and I can say who is and isn't going to hell. I don't see the benefit of this anyway.

Quote

You said this religion is all about worshipping Allah, and that is true. The essence of Islam is submission to Him and Him alone. But then you somehow connected that to believing in the Imams (AS) and that this has become the main focus. So let me tell you, someone believes in Allah (say an Orthodox Jew) - and he is completely monotheistic in his belief, but he rejects the Prophet. What do you say now? Is believing that the belief in Prophethood as a key to salvation also wrong? Same analogy, different person, and another one of the five "Usool al-Deen".

Are you seriously denying that the Imams have become the main focus in much of mainstream Shi'ism?

As for your analogy, it all depends on what you mean by 'reject'. If some Orthodox Jew doesn't know anything about Islam in any significant sense and is busy worshipping Allah, then I don't see why he would necessarily go to hell. It's all very well to say he should research, but why should he assume that he needs to research in the first place? How many Muslims do any research into their own religion, let alone any of the others?

If, on the other hand, this person recognised that Prophet (s) was who he said he was, but rejected him because he wasn't Jewish (for example), then yeah, he would be deserving of hell. But again, I don't put absolutes on these things, because I don't get to make these decisions. If on judgement day Allah allows into heaven someone you think deserves to go to hell are you going to complain? So we need to be careful about saying people are definitely going to hell unless we have very strong proof.

Quote

You just contradicted yourself. You just said that the belief in Wilayah is in the Holy Qur'an, and then you said where does it say that rejecting it takes one to Hell. Do you not realise how contradictory this statement is? Because rejecting even one single Ayah of the Lord is like rejecting the entire Message of the Qur'an. You just rejected a Revelation, that is kufr. And yes shirk is a big deal, because it doesn't just take someone out of Wilaya, it takes someone out of Islam as a whole, and so such a person is going to Hell.

Yes, if you knowingly reject it. But I don't see where there is any indication that all your deeds are useless unless you believe in it, in the sense that a twelver Shi'i would understand it. Again, my issue here isn't whether we need to believe in it or not. Rather it's the level of importance associated to a very specific understanding of it, and the relative level of evidence for that position.

Quote

The analogy does work with regards to normal everyday people. It does not work in the specific scenario that you outlined with regards to someone in the desert, but it does work with average everyday Sunnis living in the West. Because the proof is all there, and the condition to searching for the truth are all there. 

This is incredibly simplistic. You are acting is if there are absolutely no counter arguments to this proof, and no means of causing doubts. Not to mention the biggest factor, which is the behaviour of Shias themselves. Why would anyone assume that these are the people of the truth? It doesn't seem evident to me, and I'm one of them!

Quote

I never said Wilayah is more important than anything else, I don't think it is as important as Tawheed for example. Someone who loves the Imams (AS) but is a mushrik, his deeds are in vain, he is cursed, and he will go to Hell forever. So for example, the ghulat. 

Actually the importance of Wilayah has been made clear in the Holy Qur'an, see:

O Messenger, announce that which has been revealed to you from your Lord, and if you do not, then you have not conveyed His message. And Allah will protect you from the people. Indeed, Allah does not guide the disbelieving people.[5:67]

It's only made clear if you use external sources to interpret this verse. Can you explain why there is no clear and unambiguous verse in the same way as there is for everything else that is regarded as essential for salvation?

We have plenty of verses in the Qur'an that talk about the things that will land people in hell. For example:

In gardens, they shall ask each other about the guilty: What has brought you into hell? They shall say: We were not of those who prayed; And we used not to feed the poor; And we used to enter into vain discourse with those who entered into vain discourses. And we used to call the day of judgment a lie; Till death overtook us. So the intercession of intercessors shall not avail them.[74:40-48]

Why are these other things mentioned but not wilayah? Again, that's not to say that purposely not believing won't condemn you to hell, but the level of importance that some would like to attach to it doesn't seem to line up with the importance given in the Qur'an. I'd welcome being corrected, but you are going to need to bring some clear unambiguous verses, just like the one I quoted above.

 

Quote

I don't think you are understanding that rejecting one part of the Revelation is like rejecting all of it, especially if it is an essential like Wilayah.

Of course I understand that rejecting one part of the religion is like rejecting all of it. That's not where our difference lies. Our difference is in our understanding of what constitutes 'rejection'. You seem to think that due to the internet pretty much anyone who has access to a computer is either guilty of rejecting the truth or at best not searching for it. I just find this incredibly simplistic, and a little too easy for someone to say when they themselves have been born into the religion.

Quote

Or is Wilayah not essential? Do you believe that religious pluralism with rejects to the other deviant sects of Islam? Do you believe that the deviants are as much saved as the Mu'mins? 

I believe there is only one true religion, which is the one brought by the Prophet (s) and taught by the Imams (a). Therefore by necessity I believe that all other religions, including other Muslims sects, are deviated to some degree or another. I don't put them all in the same boat though. A Sunni is not the same as a follower of the Agha Khan, who has abandoned pretty much all he essentials of the religion. And of course a deviant is not as much saved as a mu'min, but it's not always so clear cut who the mu'min is, and who the deviant is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, E.L King said:

Also, another fact: All the Mu'mins will go to Heaven eventually. Every single Mu'min. Mu'min meaning someone who believes in all the essentials of Islam, including Wilayah. And this is the consensus of our sect.

Does that include those who commit shirk?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Haydar Husayn said:

Does that include those who commit shirk?

Someone who commits shirk has either apostated from the madhab (those who believe in tafweedh) or from the religion (straight out Ali is an incarnation of Allah), and needs to return to Islam/Iman. Punishment for apostasy is also bound.

And before you say that is going easy on the ghulat who believe in Tafweedh this is simply a Fiqh law with regards to tahara and what not. In the Afterlife they are going to be considered straight out kuffar.

Edited by E.L King

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Haydar Husayn said:

No, I think plenty of people are going to hell, because plenty of people will have either rejected the truth when thy recognised it, or will have done other bad things that deserve hell. What I'm careful about doing is condemning specific people to hell, when I don't know their level of knowledge or intentions. I leave that to Allah, and I think it's better to err on the side of caution, rather than pretend I'm comfortably installed in heaven and I can say who is and isn't going to hell. I don't see the benefit of this anyway.

Are you seriously denying that the Imams have become the main focus in much of mainstream Shi'ism?

I never condemned specific people to Hell who I do not know their environments. And I never said I will be comfortably installed in Heaven, clearly if I don't do my obligations I can end up in Hell with the kuffar or if I become a fasiq, may Allah keep me and you safe from that, I can end up in Hell as well. 

This has nothing to do with what mainstream Tashayyu says about the Imams (AS). What I have been posting are the views of the classical scholars, and I will do more of that later too insha Allah, and you will see how they agree with me that the people of innovation who reject the Wilayah are all deserving of Hell.

7 hours ago, Haydar Husayn said:

As for your analogy, it all depends on what you mean by 'reject'. If some Orthodox Jew doesn't know anything about Islam in any significant sense and is busy worshipping Allah, then I don't see why he would necessarily go to hell. It's all very well to say he should research, but why should he assume that he needs to research in the first place? How many Muslims do any research into their own religion, let alone any of the others?

If, on the other hand, this person recognised that Prophet (s) was who he said he was, but rejected him because he wasn't Jewish (for example), then yeah, he would be deserving of hell. But again, I don't put absolutes on these things, because I don't get to make these decisions. If on judgement day Allah allows into heaven someone you think deserves to go to hell are you going to complain? So we need to be careful about saying people are definitely going to hell unless we have very strong proof.

This is where me and you disagree. Because the people that can be excused are the mustad'afeen. This is clear from the Holy Qur'an and Sunnah. I have not seen an indication that other than the mustad'afeen from the kuffar/mukhalifeen, others can go to Heaven. Yes, I have seen some Ulama say the Jahil Taqsiris can go to Heaven. But in that specific analogy we are talking about a guy who has specifically heard about a religion other than his, or heard about it and rejected it on the spot. And now you tell me why should he research, because there's another religion out there, and by simply ignoring it he isn't using his aql, and that in itself is worthy of Hell, being called to Islam but putting your thumb in your ear (I don't want to listen, I am contempt with what I have). That's madness.

7 hours ago, Haydar Husayn said:

Yes, if you knowingly reject it. But I don't see where there is any indication that all your deeds are useless unless you believe in it, in the sense that a twelver Shi'i would understand it. Again, my issue here isn't whether we need to believe in it or not. Rather it's the level of importance associated to a very specific understanding of it, and the relative level of evidence for that position.

This is incredibly simplistic. You are acting is if there are absolutely no counter arguments to this proof, and no means of causing doubts. Not to mention the biggest factor, which is the behaviour of Shias themselves. Why would anyone assume that these are the people of the truth? It doesn't seem evident to me, and I'm one of them!

If you're asking about proof in the Sunnah, well the proof is mutawatir but it seems you will probably dismiss it.

Tell me, if someone doesn't believe in the Sunnah at all, and simply does what the Holy Qur'an tells him to do (prays but not like how we pray), and goes to Hajj (but not like us, without all the details) - does his deeds count? Is it all about the intention? Because he clearly believes in the concepts of Salat and Hajj, but simply dismisses the Sunnah as the one which explains it.

And the same analogy is there for Wilayah. The Wilayah is memtioned clearly in Ayat Al-Wilayah, that there is a Wilayah to a third person, just as Salat is mentioned in other Verses. Can I simply believe in something without the correct details and not be punished for it? The Wilayah is just another Faridha of Allah, same as Salat and Fasting. Tell me do you believe Wilayah is a Pillar of Islam? Do you believe it is from the Usool Al-Deen?

You are speaking as if Iman itself is not a condition for the correctness of deed of a person. This is all new and no one has said it before.

In fact this same analogy can be used for Tawheed. What if you believe in the Holy Qur'an literally without external sources, and end up believing in Allah with a foot sitting on a throne? Still won't be held accountable?

I already answered that if the only form of Tashayyu and Islam is available is a distorted version, then many people may be excused for not believing in it.

7 hours ago, Haydar Husayn said:

It's only made clear if you use external sources to interpret this verse. Can you explain why there is no clear and unambiguous verse in the same way as there is for everything else that is regarded as essential for salvation?

We have plenty of verses in the Qur'an that talk about the things that will land people in hell. For example:

In gardens, they shall ask each other about the guilty: What has brought you into hell? They shall say: We were not of those who prayed; And we used not to feed the poor; And we used to enter into vain discourse with those who entered into vain discourses. And we used to call the day of judgment a lie; Till death overtook us. So the intercession of intercessors shall not avail them.[74:40-48]

Why are these other things mentioned but not wilayah? Again, that's not to say that purposely not believing won't condemn you to hell, but the level of importance that some would like to attach to it doesn't seem to line up with the importance given in the Qur'an. I'd welcome being corrected, but you are going to need to bring some clear unambiguous verses, just like the one I quoted above.

I only posted that Verse to show Revelation is incomplete without Wilayah. But if you want a clear Verse of Wilayah, here:

Your ally is none but Allah and [therefore] His Messenger and those who have believed - those who establish prayer and give zakah, and they bow [in worship]. [5:55]

Clearly there is a Wilayah to a third 'thing' (I didn't want to say 'person' because I don't want to call Allah a person). This is clear from the Holy Qur'an, a third Wilayah. If you say the details are not there, I say that's not the defintion of unambigious. There is no Verse in the Holy Qur'an specifying # of rak'aat for prayers. None. This is the same logic used here.

In fact the Imam (AS) replies to this argument the same way I have:

Quote

A man asked Imam Ja`far as-Sadiq [a] about the verse, "Obey Allah and obey the Messenger and those in authority among you" (4:59). The Imam replied, "This was revealed regarding `Ali b. Abi Talib, al-Hasan, and a-Husayn." The man said, "The people say, 'Then why weren't `Ali and his Ahl al-Bayt mentioned by name in the Book of Allah?'" The Imam replied, "Say to them: The command for prayer was revealed to the Messenger of Allah (s), but Allah did not specifically mention [in the Quran] three or four units. It was the Messenger of Allah (s) who detailed that for them. The command to give alms was revealed to him, but He did not mention that it was applied to 1/40 dirhams. It was the Messenger of Allah (s) who detailed for them. The command for Hajj was revealed, but He does not say, 'Circle [the Ka`ba] seven times'. It was the Messenger of Allah (s) detailed that for them. He revealed, 'Obey Allah and obey the Messenger those in authority among you' (4:59), and it was revealed regarding `Ali, al-Hasan, and al-Husayn. The Messenger of Allah (s) said, regarding `Ali, 'Whoever takes me as a Master, then `Ali is his Master.' And he (s) said, 'I leave you with the Book of Allah and my Ahl al-Bayt, so I asked Allah to never separate them from one another until they return to me at the Pond [of Paradise], and He granted my prayer.' And he said, 'Do not lecture them, for they are more knowledgeable than you.' And he said, 'They will not lead you away from the gate of guidance, and they will not make you enter the gate of misguidance.' Had the Messenger of Allah (s) kept quiet, it would not be clear who his Ahl al-Bayt would be, and the dynasties would have claimed it (that title). But Allah revealed it in in a Book, clarifying it to His Prophet (s). 'Surely, Allah wishes to remove uncleanliness from you, Ahl al-Bayt, and purify you with a thorough purification.'

Hadith is sahih, translation by @Qa'im

 

Edited by E.L King

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Haydar Husayn said:

I believe there is only one true religion, which is the one brought by the Prophet (s) and taught by the Imams (a). Therefore by necessity I believe that all other religions, including other Muslims sects, are deviated to some degree or another. I don't put them all in the same boat though. A Sunni is not the same as a follower of the Agha Khan, who has abandoned pretty much all he essentials of the religion. And of course a deviant is not as much saved as a mu'min, but it's not always so clear cut who the mu'min is, and who the deviant is.

And this is where me and you disagree. I believe all the people of innovated sects are in the same boat in the Afterlife, the only difference is today's ulama, and not just today's ulama to be fair, tell us that they are atleast Muslims in this life. Or atleast outwardly Muslim. 

Like Al-Khoei said: "Muslims in this life, kafirs in the Afterlife".

Also sorry for cutting the post into two, was a mistake.

Edited by E.L King

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry to interject, but I've heard often that going to hell is an active process, as in the motions are set by ones conscious and deliberate actions. These actions are against proper God consciousness in our inbuilt fitrah. If we believe that ones fitrah is naturally towards seeking the truth (and heaven seeking by default), then one will use their free will and accept the truth if it was properly presented to them (and other Shaytani obstructions were pushed aside). This is a hypothetical scenario, since we don't know what people would really do. 

Fitrah dictates certain anti-human acts (cheating, stealing, lying, murdering) are regressive, accepted by believer or atheist alike. Nobody needs a direct external commandment from a divine source to understand this, so this is where the level playing field lies between those who are aware of divine scripture and those who aren't. I would think on those terms, if one actively pursued such activities, ignorance cannot be claimed. 

The mere claiming of beliefs is not sufficient, so born Muslims have minimal advantages, other than some clearer practices and understandings. In the end, wouldn't you feel born Muslims would be tested by the same things as others, which is the will of ones inclinations, rather than official titles and declarations? Aren't the universal things stated above tripping up more Muslims today than anything else? Yet I feel like we dismiss these so casually, and feel snug and secure in our position, as if being a Shia Muslim already places us on third base right from the start, and all we have is one last glorious sprint "home". All the while we think others are far behind us, because they havent heard our majlis or heard of the hottest topics on SC. 

Edited by magma

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/19/2016 at 8:07 AM, Hassan Y said:

No heaven was not just made for the believers, it was also made for people that struggle to find the truth. An atheist who is morally good and thinks rationally could go to heaven if all his life he/she struggled to find the truth but couldn't find it.

By the way, did you say ignorant people go to heaven? How does that make sense?

So, it means they are believers as well but are ignorant of the Hidayaah. They knew what is right and what is wrong and know that there is difference between them and they follow goodness in hearts then tell me who is master of All good, Allah swt, the sublime. It is just that they do not know His name but they follow him. They are not unbelievers but are ignorant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/6/2016 at 0:04 AM, The_Bible said:

what kind of God cannot make clear on whether or not one is qualified for salvation or not? 

Why does anyone besides God need to know? Only God knows what is in a person's heart: their history, their motivations, their understanding.

Doesn't it seem rather arrogant to claim to know the "mind" of God? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, notme said:

Why does anyone besides God need to know? Only God knows what is in a person's heart: their history, their motivations, their understanding.

Doesn't it seem rather arrogant to claim to know the "mind" of God? 

hahahaha, sister @notme, Is not it wrong to say that unbelievers will go to heaven and support them to be misled in their wrong doings ? So, God tells us that for unbelievers who deny Him, there is abode of Hell because wrong has punishment. Although as Imam Ali a.s says: "Not every unbeliever will go to hell because there are certain who are ignorant and are not aware". 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Sindbad05 said:

hahahaha, sister @notme, Is not it wrong to say that unbelievers will go to heaven and support them to be misled in their wrong doings ? So, God tells us that for unbelievers who deny Him, there is abode of Hell because wrong has punishment. Although as Imam Ali a.s says: "Not every unbeliever will go to hell because there are certain who are ignorant and are not aware". 

This is all correct, but not knowing what others have been taught, it's often difficult to say who is ignorant and who is wilfully denying. 

Obviously, Hell exists for a reason.

But I'm content to let Allah judge. There's absolutely no reason for me to decide who deserves Heaven and who deserves Hell. 

As long as a person believes, fulfills obligations, and does good deeds, he's doing the best he can do, there's no benefit to worrying even about his own fate. 

DownToEarth likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, notme said:

This is all correct, but not knowing what others have been taught, it's often difficult to say who is ignorant and who is wilfully denying. 

Obviously, Hell exists for a reason.

But I'm content to let Allah judge. There's absolutely no reason for me to decide who deserves Heaven and who deserves Hell. 

As long as a person believes, fulfills obligations, and does good deeds, he's doing the best he can do, there's no benefit to worrying even about his own fate. 

Even Muslim has to go through hell if he did sins and disobeyed God. This is also a kind of unbelief as I recently read a verse from Quran which says that those who do wrong will reside in Hell forever except if Allah Wills. So, even a Muslim should not think that he believes in God but can do whatever he wants, Belief means to belief in true spirit not mere saying that yeah I believe Him. 

notme likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, notme said:

But I'm content to let Allah judge.

Absolutely right!

No human being can pre-empt divine decisions.

We must leave it to Him.

It is simply illogical that all people defined as non-believers should go to hell.

Because in that case, we are paying for the misfortune of our birth.  

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.