Jump to content

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

"It does not matter what interpretation of Islam they have"

Most all interpretations are derived from the Prophet, this person is brain dead and has no understanding of how Islamic scholarship works.

She also quotes Ibn Ishaq who no Muslim scholar accepts as authentic as there are no narrations or isnad which he lists as his sources.

His biography of the Prophet also never survived we only have bits and pieces of it.

 

Ibn Ishaq (d. 150/767)….was a very controversial figure. Malik, Ibn al Qattan, Ibn Hanbal, and others considered him highly unreliable because he accepted hadiths from questionable narrators as well as Christians and Jews. But Ibn Shu’ba felt he was impeccably reliable… [Hadith, Muhammad’s Legacy in the Medieval and Modern World, Jonathan A C Brown, Oneworld Publications, Kindle, p86]

Throughout his work, Ibn Ishaq precedes every statement with the word za`ama or za`amu, he (they) alleged). It carries with it more than a hint that the statement may not be true, though it might be sound. This attitude reflects Ibn Ishaq’s caution and fairness.

Source: https://yahyasnow.wordpress.com/2015/07/20/who-was-ibn-ishaq-and-was-his-work-reliable/

Edited by Enlightened Follower

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Her whole argument falls under an Ad Hominem attack on the Prophet which is a logical fallacy:

"Ad hominem attacks can take the form of overtly attacking somebody, or more subtly casting doubt on their character or personal attributes as a way to discredit their argument. The result of an ad hom attack can be to undermine someone's case without actually having to engage with it."

Source: https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/ad-hominem

Edited by Enlightened Follower

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hahahahahaha, war mongering speech and attitude but medinah accepted him lolz, Meccan people evicted him and Medinian people did not that. What an idiot is she. Medinah is 448 Kms away from Makkah and Makkah was center of whole Arabia and Medinian people did not know what was happening ? This shows that Meccan people did not respected Prophet but Medinian people knew such a blessing and welcomed him. The reason for which Prophet PBUHHP evicted Jews out of Medinah was that they used to say to tribes of Medinah Ows and Khizrij that once our Prophet comes we will kill you but when Prophet came, Ows and Khizrij became Muslims. and their dreams were shattered and they begin to engage in conspiracy to fail Prophet PBUHHP by engaging in war support to infidels of Makkah.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People like her are dime a dozen. They are not out there to engage in a dialogue but to lead a smear campaign against Islam and the Prophet. So why give them coverage?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Marbles said:

People like her are dime a dozen. They are not out there to engage in a dialogue but to lead a smear campaign against Islam and the Prophet. So why give them coverage?

 

In the past when someone tried to write a book and ruin the face of Islam, all Muslim scholars, Sunni, Shia,... would write many volumes of books to answer a single false claim, but now as the Muslims are taken by a deep sleep, these attacks remained unanswered, only few tend to answer such nonsenses but they are outnumbered and cannot defend as they should.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

She reminds me of this neo-nazi named Evalion. Look her up. She basically made stupid remarks about Jews, Blacks and Muslims (50% of Iranians are born from incest???), then excessively praised Hitler in many videos. Thank God she was banned.

Is she an Islamic scholar? I, as a muslim would never be taken seriously talking about fiqh and interpretation of faith without formal education, but this woman is more qualified than Ayatollah Sistani?

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!

    • @eThErEaL Surely the Arabs possessed some virtues before the advent of Prophethood, but we shouldn't fool ourselves into believing that these virtues outstripped their many sins and vices. As Ja'far ibn Abu Talib capably summarized in his address to the King of Abyssinia,  “We were a people of Jahiliyyah, worshipping idols, eating the flesh of dead animals, committing abominations, neglecting our relatives, doing evil to our neighbours and the strong among us would oppress the weak…” Their actions are repudiated time and time again by the Qur'an. "And remember the favor of Allah upon you - when you were enemies and He brought your hearts together and you became, by His favor, brothers. And you were on the edge of a pit of the Fire, and He saved you from it." [3:103] “And when the news of a female (child) is brought to any of them, his face becomes dark, and he is filled with inward grief! He hides himself from the people because of the evil of that whereof he has been informed. Shall he keep her with dishonour or bury her in the earth? Certainly, evil is their decision” [al-Nahl 16:58]   Now I don't mean to be racist towards the Arab race, and nor are the practices of the people of jahiliyyah reflective of most Arabs today. But it seems to me that it took the best of the 124,000 prophets to bring the Arabs of that time into line for a handful of years- before they rebelled against his teachings once more as soon as he passed away, all for the greed of power and authority.
    • As a historical source I think it is fair to use. We may not have rijal information on all of the chains; that's partly because our rijal books are mostly focused on hadith narrators of the second hijri century - companions of the mid to late Imams. Abu Mikhnaf himself was not close to the Imams, he was a descendant of a companion of Amir al-Mu'mineen (as), but he is relied upon by Waqidi, Tabari, Shaykh al-Mufid, and other Sunni and Shia historians. It's one of the earliest accounts of the event. He died (d. 157 AH) in the early part of Musa al-Kadhim's Imamate, and his chains to the event are very short. Since his text is about a public event, and Najashi called him a scholar of Kufa in his time, and since he was not criticized until much later Sunni scholars like Dhahabi, I feel that it is a good source. There are some discrepancies, and so it's not holy scripture, but I found it to be very useful when I first converted. Here is a good post on the topic: http://www.shiachat.com/forum/topic/235023655-why-is-abu-mikhnaf-reliable/?do=findComment&comment=2716964
    • I don't quite understand this.  Hypothetically, let's say one's father is against you getting married, so if you attempt to change your wali to a grandfather or an uncle who says yes to the marriage, will it still be illegitimate?  And there are some fathers who won't let them get married no matter what the reason. What then? 
    • 8305 How algorithms are determining just about everything. Zuckerberg's "Frankenstein Monster". The best part is the 5th and 6th paragraphs. https://www.buzzfeed.com/charliewarzel/mark-zuckerberg-cant-stop-you-from-reading-this-because-the?utm_term=.onyQAO1dz#.ooA0yYkor 
    • Alhamdulillah. Thank you for letting us know. 
×