Jump to content
Faruk

Sunni/Shia How do you know your sect is on Haqq?

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

On 10/28/2017 at 1:04 PM, yam_110 said:

Instructions of the Prophet (pbuh)? Please tell me you are joking. You have no proof to support your baseless claim about Abu Bakr.'s fabrication 

Regarding the Khutba, it is strange that you call a khutba with Quranic verses as a fabrication but even after so many years you and your likes have not been able to refute the Quranic verses presented by Bibi Fatima (s). If you want to give it a try then why not give us one Quranic verse which proves the absurd claim made by Abu Bakr? Infact, Abu Bakr did not have a verse to support his fabrication. I am interested if you can go one step further than your master and bring us a verse to prove your point. If you can't then you know that you are supporting an usurper. We all know what has Allah swt promised for usurpers.

Marvelous words

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[just as wahhabis are salafis but not all salafis are wahhabis,

the same is true: salafis/wahhabis are sunnis but not all sunnis are salafis/wahhabis.

in fact, grozny declaration does not recognise salafis belonging to sunni faction.

https://hornofsatan.wordpress.com/2016/08/31/sunni-scholars-gather-and-reaffirm-who-are-ahlus-sunnah-wal-jamah/

]

A house that has a strong foundation, even though its external appearance is not to your liking, you can rest assured that it wont collapsed on you.

but the same cant be said if the foundation is shaky, even though its appearance is appealing to you.

if one were to be honest with him/herself, one has to admit that shia islam has a very strong case to be the true islam as propagated by the Prophet of Islam.

And unless you have a similar proof as shia has, as per page 56-57/208, "the life of imam ali al-hadi: study and analysis" which can be found here:

https://www.al-islam.org/printpdf/book/export/html/38204

i believe, shedding the blood of innocent shias is just buying your one-way ticket to hell.

 

 

Edited by hoskot

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/14/2017 at 1:14 PM, just a muslim said:

i believe shia's are not on haqq. this is an objective view, and not a subjective one. my belief is based upon that which we both agree on. the quran. sunnis believe in the 7 ahruf. and the qiraat as well. and there are masahif for those qiraat, which have slight differences in them. we have isnaads, countless, going back to the prophet pbuh of how to recite the quran. the shias dont. the shias' as far as i am aware, dont believe in the 7 ahruf either. or the qiraat. so if i were to give two different masahif to a shia, he wouldnt know which one is the "quran". i got to islam through the quran. and shias fail to provide the quran. sunnis dont fail to do so. so, if you cant bring the quran to me, and when i ask you how do you know that the book known as quran today is the one that the prophet muhammad pbuh received, all you give me are circular arguments instead of proper proof, then you cant possibly be on the haqq. and since we have multiple mushafs, with very slight variations between them due to the ahruf and qiraat, if one rejects any one them, one rejects the promise of Allah in the quran of protecting the quran. 

any shia here can feel free to correct me if i am wrong. 

there are other reasons as well. but this is the main one. 

Preface: I am a layman and what I say is not representative of my school, this is just my current understanding of the issue:

Let me flip the question: which of the contradictory qira'at do you believe is the correct one? I think you know there are contradictions between them, and deep down you haven't reconciled this with your belief that the qur'an is fully preserved, hence your use of the word "slight" in attempt to minimise the significance of this problem.

The shi'i view is that the qur'an was revealed in one harf. The Sunni view is that the qur'an was revealed in seven ahruf, and Uthman preserved one of them while burning the other 6.  The qira'at are simply variations in transmission of that one preserved harf over centuries. Some will try to argue that a harf and a qira'ah are synonymous, but this is easily disproven as there are more than 7 qira'at available regardless of the chains they came through, and in the Sunni view, Uthman supposedly burnt the rest of the ahruf anyway so they wouldn't be available for transmission. Sunni scholars have also generally come to the conclusion that the terms harf and qira'ah are not synonymous.

The reality is that today, despite them being consistent across most verses, the multiple qira'at contradict each other over a number of verses, the differences are not just "variations in recitation or style". These differences are in phrasing that leads to contradictory meanings. The Sunni worldview has a problem here, there is no way of telling which of these qira'at is the correct one or whether the correct reading for each verse is spread among them. Supposedly seven of the readings come through sahih chains, so how can you tell correctly among them? A Sunni has no way, in accordance with his own school's understanding, of assuming the correctness of a given reading among the differing versions. So when you recite a long surah, of which the readings contradict on particular verses, you have no mandate to read any of them.

As for us Shi'a, ironically, we have a divinely sanctioned mandate in a hadith (Al-Kafi) from Al-Imam Al-Sadiq (as) to read from these readings: "read as the people read" (ie the readings that are recited among the general muslims).

 محمد بن يحيى، عن محمد بن الحسين، عن عبد الرحمن بن أبي هاشم، عن سالم بن سلمة قال:

قرأ رجل على أبي عبد الله (عليه السلام) وأنا أستمع حروفا من القرآن ليس على ما يقرؤها الناس، فقال أبو عبد الله (عليه السلام): كف عن هذه القراءة اقرأ كما يقرأ الناس حتى يقوم القائم فإذا قام القائم (عليه السلام) قرأ كتاب الله عز وجل على حده وأخرج المصحف الذي كتبه علي (عليه السلام) وقال: أخرجه علي (عليه السلام) إلى الناس حين فرغ منه وكتبه فقال لهم: هذا كتاب الله عز وجل كما أنزله [الله] على محمد (صلى الله عليه وآله) وقد جمعته من اللوحين فقالوا: هو ذا عندنا مصحف جامع فيه القرآن لا حاجة لنا فيه، فقال أما والله ما ترونه بعد يومكم هذا أبدا، إنما كان علي أن أخبركم حين جمعته لتقرؤوه

You might counter this by saying people in glass houses shouldn't throw stones, but then you've misunderstood what's being said here. The point is that Sunnis don't have a line of reasoning to even suggest that the one, true qira'ah is preserved in any place or with any person. An intellectually honest Sunni has to admit to himself that his school and it's literature, in conjuction with the qira'at that are available today, forces him to conclude that the true reading of the qur'an is irreversibly lost. In contrast, we are not forced into such a hopeless conclusion, we have an infallible imam who it resides with who shall restore it upon his return, and in the meantime, we are to obey our imam's instruction. While not exhaustive, our hadith collections contain many of the verses in their true reading.

 

As for your argument that you are on truth and we are not, your argument concerning the qur'an does not take away the facts:

Ali's (as) designation as successor to the prophet is as clear as daylight. Adalat al-sahaba is a fundamental idea to Sunni thought that crumbles the moment you think about A'isha and Mu'awiya's actions towards Ali (as). The pledge of allegiance is wajib on every muslim, yet you can not tell us whom this pledge is made to today. There are 12 imams, yet you can not tell us who they are.

 

Edited by IbnMariam
adding source

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, IbnMariam said:

Preface: I am a layman and what I say is not representative of my school, this is just my current understanding of the issue:

Let me flip the question: which of the contradictory qira'at do you believe is the correct one? I think you know there are contradictions between them, and deep down you haven't reconciled this with your belief that the qur'an is fully preserved, hence your use of the word "slight" in attempt to minimise the significance of this problem.

The shi'i view is that the qur'an was revealed in one harf. The Sunni view is that the qur'an was revealed in seven ahruf, and Uthman preserved one of them while burning the other 6.  The qira'at are simply variations in transmission of that one preserved harf over centuries. Some will try to argue that a harf and a qira'ah are synonymous, but this is easily disproven as there are more than 7 qira'at available regardless of the chains they came through, and in the Sunni view, Uthman supposedly burnt the rest of the ahruf anyway so they wouldn't be available for transmission. Sunni scholars have also generally come to the conclusion that the terms harf and qira'ah are not synonymous.

The reality is that today, despite them being consistent across most verses, the multiple qira'at contradict each other over a number of verses, the differences are not just "variations in recitation or style". These differences are in phrasing that leads to contradictory meanings. The Sunni worldview has a problem here, there is no way of telling which of these qira'at is the correct one or whether the correct reading for each verse is spread among them. Supposedly seven of the readings come through sahih chains, so how can you tell correctly among them? A Sunni has no way, in accordance with his own school's understanding, of assuming the correctness of a given reading among the differing versions. So when you recite a long surah, of which the readings contradict on particular verses, you have no mandate to read any of them.

As for us Shi'a, ironically, we have a divinely sanctioned mandate in a hadith (Al-Kafi) from Al-Imam Al-Sadiq (as) to read from these readings: "read as the people read" (ie the readings that are recited among the general muslims).

 محمد بن يحيى، عن محمد بن الحسين، عن عبد الرحمن بن أبي هاشم، عن سالم بن سلمة قال:

قرأ رجل على أبي عبد الله (عليه السلام) وأنا أستمع حروفا من القرآن ليس على ما يقرؤها الناس، فقال أبو عبد الله (عليه السلام): كف عن هذه القراءة اقرأ كما يقرأ الناس حتى يقوم القائم فإذا قام القائم (عليه السلام) قرأ كتاب الله عز وجل على حده وأخرج المصحف الذي كتبه علي (عليه السلام) وقال: أخرجه علي (عليه السلام) إلى الناس حين فرغ منه وكتبه فقال لهم: هذا كتاب الله عز وجل كما أنزله [الله] على محمد (صلى الله عليه وآله) وقد جمعته من اللوحين فقالوا: هو ذا عندنا مصحف جامع فيه القرآن لا حاجة لنا فيه، فقال أما والله ما ترونه بعد يومكم هذا أبدا، إنما كان علي أن أخبركم حين جمعته لتقرؤوه

You might counter this by saying people in glass houses shouldn't throw stones, but then you've misunderstood what's being said here. The point is that Sunnis don't have a line of reasoning to even suggest that the one, true qira'ah is preserved in any place or with any person. An intellectually honest Sunni has to admit to himself that his school and it's literature, in conjuction with the qira'at that are available today, forces him to conclude that the true reading of the qur'an is irreversibly lost. In contrast, we are not forced into such a hopeless conclusion, we have an infallible imam who it resides with who shall restore it upon his return, and in the meantime, we are to obey our imam's instruction. While not exhaustive, our hadith collections contain many of the verses in their true reading.

 

As for your argument that you are on truth and we are not, your argument concerning the qur'an does not take away the facts:

Ali's (as) designation as successor to the prophet is as clear as daylight. Adalat al-sahaba is a fundamental idea to Sunni thought that crumbles the moment you think about A'isha and Mu'awiya's actions towards Ali (as). The pledge of allegiance is wajib on every muslim, yet you can not tell us whom this pledge is made to today. There are 12 imams, yet you can not tell us who they are.

 

thanks a lot for responding. you made a few mistakes in your comment, which form the basis of half of your response. i will inshaAllah explain in detail as soon as i get the time. salam.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/18/2017 at 11:23 AM, M.IB said:

I feel this verse is a bit of controversy,can you give some evidences that it isn't refering to the wives of the prophet.

it says people of the house not women or ladies or females of the house

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

8 hours ago, just a muslim said:

thanks a lot for responding. you made a few mistakes in your comment, which form the basis of half of your response. i will inshaAllah explain in detail as soon as i get the time. salam.

I've gone over my post and I do think there are some parts I may be mistaken on or should retract, I've highlighted them/made a note.

22 hours ago, IbnMariam said:

Preface: I am a layman and what I say is not representative of my school, this is just my current understanding of the issue:

Let me flip the question: which of the contradictory qira'at do you believe is the correct one? I think you know there are contradictions between them, and deep down you haven't reconciled this with your belief that the qur'an is fully preserved, hence your use of the word "slight" in attempt to minimise the significance of this problem.

The shi'i view is that the qur'an was revealed in one harf. The Sunni view is that the qur'an was revealed in seven ahruf, and Uthman preserved one of them while burning the other 6.  The qira'at are simply variations in transmission of that one preserved harf over centuries). Some will try to argue that a harf and a qira'ah are synonymous, but this is easily disproven as there are more than 7 qira'at available regardless of the chains they came through, and in the Sunni view, Uthman supposedly burnt the rest of the ahruf anyway so they wouldn't be available for transmission. Sunni scholars have also generally come to the conclusion that the terms harf and qira'ah are not synonymous.

The reality is that today, despite them being consistent across most verses, the multiple qira'at contradict each other over a number of verses, the differences are not just "variations in recitation or style". These differences are in phrasing that leads to contradictory meanings. The Sunni worldview has a problem here, there is no way of telling which of these qira'at is the correct one or whether the correct reading for each verse is spread among them. Supposedly seven of the readings come through sahih chains, so how can you tell correctly among them? A Sunni has no way, in accordance with his own school's understanding, of assuming the correctness of a given reading among the differing versions. So when you recite a long surah, of which the readings contradict on particular verses, you have no mandate to read any of them.

As for us Shi'a, ironically, we have a divinely sanctioned mandate in a hadith (Al-Kafi) from Al-Imam Al-Sadiq (as) to read from these readings: "read as the people read" (ie the readings that are recited among the general muslims).

 محمد بن يحيى، عن محمد بن الحسين، عن عبد الرحمن بن أبي هاشم، عن سالم بن سلمة قال:

قرأ رجل على أبي عبد الله (عليه السلام) وأنا أستمع حروفا من القرآن ليس على ما يقرؤها الناس، فقال أبو عبد الله (عليه السلام): كف عن هذه القراءة اقرأ كما يقرأ الناس حتى يقوم القائم فإذا قام القائم (عليه السلام) قرأ كتاب الله عز وجل على حده وأخرج المصحف الذي كتبه علي (عليه السلام) وقال: أخرجه علي (عليه السلام) إلى الناس حين فرغ منه وكتبه فقال لهم: هذا كتاب الله عز وجل كما أنزله [الله] على محمد (صلى الله عليه وآله) وقد جمعته من اللوحين فقالوا: هو ذا عندنا مصحف جامع فيه القرآن لا حاجة لنا فيه، فقال أما والله ما ترونه بعد يومكم هذا أبدا، إنما كان علي أن أخبركم حين جمعته لتقرؤوه

You might counter this by saying people in glass houses shouldn't throw stones, but then you've misunderstood what's being said here. The point is that Sunnis don't have a line of reasoning to even suggest that the one, true qira'ah is preserved in any place or with any person (strictly speaking, I still believe this to be true but on the basis of my own worldivew that the qur'an was revealed in one harf, and that there is only one true qira'ah. Ofcourse, as a Sunni, you reject this). An intellectually honest Sunni has to admit to himself that his school and it's literature, in conjuction with the qira'at that are available today, forces him to conclude that the true reading of the qur'an is irreversibly lost. In contrast, we are not forced into such a hopeless conclusion, we have an infallible imam who it resides with who shall restore it upon his return, and in the meantime, we are to obey our imam's instruction. While not exhaustive, our hadith collections contain many of the verses in their true reading.

 

As for your argument that you are on truth and we are not, your argument concerning the qur'an does not take away the facts:

Ali's (as) designation as successor to the prophet is as clear as daylight. Adalat al-sahaba is a fundamental idea to Sunni thought that crumbles the moment you think about A'isha and Mu'awiya's actions towards Ali (as). The pledge of allegiance is wajib on every muslim, yet you can not tell us whom this pledge is made to today. There are 12 imams, yet you can not tell us who they are.

 

having looked over your original post, I would say the conclusions you have come to are dependent on circular logic. Your post is reliant on the assumption that Sunni ideology is correct and that shiism is false. E.g. You assume that Allah revealed the qur'an upon seven ahruf. There is also an assumption (perhaps unknowingly) that the 12 imams are not divinely guided individuals who represent Allah. Without these biased assumptions, your argument against shiism makes no sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, IbnMariam said:

 

I've gone over my post and I do think there are some parts I may be mistaken on or should retract, I've highlighted them/made a note.

having looked over your original post, I would say the conclusions you have come to are dependent on circular logic. Your post is reliant on the assumption that Sunni ideology is correct and that shiism is false. E.g. You assume that Allah revealed the qur'an upon seven ahruf. There is also an assumption (perhaps unknowingly) that the 12 imams are not divinely guided individuals who represent Allah. Without these biased assumptions, your argument against shiism makes no sense.

nicely done.

okay, so, the thing is, i try not to bring in sources other than the quran, meaning hadith, in this discussion, the reasons for that are many. but lets start with the beginning. think of me as someone who turned to islam because of the quran. i dont know any hadith. i dont know any background. i have no knowledge about any of that. all i know is that i believe without the shadow of a doubt that the quran is the final divine book, and i believe in everything that the quran says. keeping that in mind,

1. what do you understand by the verses where Allah swt says that the protection of the dhikr is His responsibility? what does "hifz" mean? inna nahnu nazzalna adhdhikra wa inna lahu lahaafizoon. 15:9 for example. 

2. are you aware that there exist different recitations of the quran? and different masahif, books called quran, which have slight differences in vowel marks, letters or even words? and they are accepted by at least 80 percent of the total muslim population.

these two questions, when answered, i believe, lead to the conclusion that the sunni view of quran is correct. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

guest050817

  • Member
  •  
  • guest050817
  • Unregistered
  •  4,790
  • 5,839 posts
  • Religion: Islam - Quran and Sunnah (through Ahlulbayt asws)

"...Fatimah shunned him and did not speak to him about it until she died . 'Ali buried her at night and did not permit Abu Bakr to attend [her burial].'357 While Fatimah was alive, 'Ali held respect among the people. After she died, their attention turned away from him .1358 Falimah continued to live for six months after the Messenger of God 's [death] and then died. Ma'mar: A man asked al-Zuhri, "Did 'Ali not give his oath of allegiance for six months?" "No, nor anyone of the Bann Hashim until `Ali rendered his," he replied. "

Tarikh At Tabari

It just seems so strange:

1. Fatima a.s being buried secretly, very few even being informed of her death until she is buried. Given her absolute prominence and position , this is rather strange.

2. Ali ibn Abi Talib a.s and members of the banu hashim [as well as potentially other companions] not giving their oath of allegiance for six whole months. That is 1/4 of the caliphate of the first caliph.

3. Ali ibn Abi Talib a.s despite all of his bravery, sometimes single-handedly winning battles and clear superiority, seemed to lose respect after the death of Fatima a.s. This speaks volumes about the jealousy and hatred towards him. It's clear why the banu ummayah hated him, and why some of the kuffar of Makkah hated him [before they converted or had no other choice to convert to save face]. It is also clear why some prominent sahaba saw him a threat to their own rule, and jealousy and greed over power, especially one as attractive and appealing as the authority the Prophet [saw] had has turned many good men away from the right way and such examples are numerous in history.  

Edited by Ashvazdanghe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Imam ali (as) and other Imams are Living& speaking Quran For all good things that mentioned in Quran they are role model of it.

 وَمَن يَعْصِ اللَّـهَ وَرَسُولَهُ وَيَتَعَدَّ حُدُودَهُ يُدْخِلْهُ نَارًا خَالِدًا فِيهَا وَلَهُ عَذَابٌ مُّهِينٌ ﴿١٤

An-nisa[4:12]

And whoso disobeyeth Allah and His messenger and transgresseth His limits, He will make him enter Fire, where he will dwell for ever; his will be a shameful doom. (14)

Edited by Ashvazdanghe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 06/11/2017 at 5:20 AM, just a muslim said:

nicely done.

okay, so, the thing is, i try not to bring in sources other than the quran, meaning hadith, in this discussion, the reasons for that are many (1). but lets start with the beginning. think of me as someone who turned to islam because of the quran. i dont know any hadith. i dont know any background. i have no knowledge about any of that (2). all i know is that i believe without the shadow of a doubt that the quran is the final divine book, and i believe in everything that the quran says(3). keeping that in mind,

1. what do you understand by the verses where Allah swt says that the protection of the dhikr is His responsibility? what does "hifz" mean? inna nahnu nazzalna adhdhikra wa inna lahu lahaafizoon. 15:9 for example. 

2. are you aware that there exist different recitations of the quran? and different masahif, books called quran, which have slight differences in vowel marks, letters or even words? and they are accepted by at least 80 percent of the total muslim population.

these two questions, when answered, i believe, lead to the conclusion that the sunni view of quran is correct. 

1- If you don't want to bring in the hadith, then you are left with 14 variants of the qur'an available today (although  > 99% consistent across), and you have no way of telling me which one is the correct one.

2- Well then you are a layman who can not honestly judge the different sects as you don't know the ABCs of hadith.

3- Which one? How does a neutral muslim with no understanding of the hadith tell me which of the variations is the correct one? This is silly.

1st question: As for my understanding of this verse, it is whatever the Ahlulbayt tell me, I have not seen the tafseer of this verse. In any case, I think you're trying to say that this verse means the qur'an is preserved down to the letter, well then I believe this to be true regardless of the verse, it is with the imam (ajf). I ask you, bearing in mind points 1, 2 and 3, how do you believe this to be true in light of the fact there are 14 variations with contradictions in wording and meaning between them? As a Shi'i, I have an answer to this. A Sunni or a new convert of no denomination has no answer for this.

2nd question: Yes, I am aware. I noticed you used the word slight again. Like I said before, you know it's a problem and you want to minimise the significance of it, this is just a form of burying your head in the sand.

 

Your problem is that you can't just look at any one given issue in Islam on its own. You have to take everything as a whole to build a holistic and coherent picture of Islam that doesn't contradict itself all over the place. Succession to the prophet, our understanding of the companions and events after the prophet's death, the obligatory pledge of allegiance to an imam/khalifa in every age, the qur'an, the significance of the Ahlulbayt, and so on.  Your stance of trying to suggest that a neutral muslim who converts solely because of what he reads in the qur'an would be compelled to choose sunnism is full of holes and nonsensical.

 

 

 

Edited by IbnMariam

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/14/2017 at 8:14 PM, just a muslim said:

i believe shia's are not on haqq. this is an objective view, and not a subjective one. my belief is based upon that which we both agree on. the quran. sunnis believe in the 7 ahruf. and the qiraat as well. and there are masahif for those qiraat, which have slight differences in them. we have isnaads, countless, going back to the prophet pbuh of how to recite the quran. the shias dont. the shias' as far as i am aware, dont believe in the 7 ahruf either. or the qiraat. so if i were to give two different masahif to a shia, he wouldnt know which one is the "quran". i got to islam through the quran. and shias fail to provide the quran. sunnis dont fail to do so. so, if you cant bring the quran to me, and when i ask you how do you know that the book known as quran today is the one that the prophet muhammad pbuh received, all you give me are circular arguments instead of proper proof, then you cant possibly be on the haqq. and since we have multiple mushafs, with very slight variations between them due to the ahruf and qiraat, if one rejects any one them, one rejects the promise of Allah in the quran of protecting the quran. 

any shia here can feel free to correct me if i am wrong. 

there are other reasons as well. but this is the main one. 

assuming what you are saying is true, a follower like me still have the following big problem to ponder over:

[Shakir 2:166] When those who were followed shall renounce those who followed (them), and they see the chastisement and their ties are cut asunder.

[Shakir 2:167] And those who followed shall say: Had there been for us a return, then we would renounce them as they have renounced us. Thus will Allah show them their deeds to be intense regret to them, and they shall not come forth from the fire.

is there a possibility your imam (ibn Taymiyyah?) will abandon me on the Judgement Day? more important, will i suffer the intense regret then? TIA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, IbnMariam said:

1- If you don't want to bring in the hadith, then you are left with 14 variants of the qur'an available today (although  > 99% consistent across), and you have no way of telling me which one is the correct one.

yes. dont know about the exact number 14 but yeah. and it's 95% approximately.

10 hours ago, IbnMariam said:

2- Well then you are a layman who can not honestly judge the different sects as you don't know the ABCs of hadith.

more or less. 

10 hours ago, IbnMariam said:

3- Which one? How does a neutral muslim with no understanding of the hadith tell me which of the variations is the correct one? This is silly.

the one available to us. i wasnt aware of the different variants initially when i read the one we have today in most of the world. 

also, if you read what the variations are, you will realize that for the most part, at least to me, they dont seem contradictory. 

10 hours ago, IbnMariam said:

1st question: As for my understanding of this verse, it is whatever the Ahlulbayt tell me, I have not seen the tafseer of this verse. In any case, I think you're trying to say that this verse means the qur'an is preserved down to the letter, well then I believe this to be true regardless of the verse, it is with the imam (ajf). I ask you, bearing in mind points 1, 2 and 3, how do you believe this to be true in light of the fact there are 14 variations with contradictions in wording and meaning between them? As a Shi'i, I have an answer to this. A Sunni or a new convert of no denomination has no answer for this.

yes. preservation. at one place we have the preservation of the quran. and at another we have different variants of it. i reconcile them by saying that the variants are not because of human changes, rather they are all from Allah. and so all of them have been preserved. how do you reconcile the two? does the mere existence of different variants not make the promise of preservation false? specially if you believe that only one of them is from Allah? this is my MAIN question. 

10 hours ago, IbnMariam said:

2nd question: Yes, I am aware. I noticed you used the word slight again. Like I said before, you know it's a problem and you want to minimise the significance of it, this is just a form of burying your head in the sand.

no no. i use the word slight because the difference ARE slight, at least for the most part. i say for the most part because there are things i myself dont understand. but my lack of understanding is not evidence of its falsehood. 

10 hours ago, IbnMariam said:

Your problem is that you can't just look at any one given issue in Islam on its own. You have to take everything as a whole to build a holistic and coherent picture of Islam that doesn't contradict itself all over the place. Succession to the prophet, our understanding of the companions and events after the prophet's death, the obligatory pledge of allegiance to an imam/khalifa in every age, the qur'an, the significance of the Ahlulbayt, and so on.  Your stance of trying to suggest that a neutral muslim who converts solely because of what he reads in the qur'an would be compelled to choose sunnism is full of holes and nonsensical.

thing is, the truth, no matter how bad it is, i have to accept it. like, we have to pray 5 prayers. i may not like it(not that i dont. just an example), but that doesnt mean i am not obliged to pray 5 prayers daily. similarly, and this is just an example to explain why i take this approach, if Ali a.s. is not the successor, no matter how much i want him to be, wont change the "fact" that he is not the successor. similarly, if abu bakr and umar etc were wrong and bad people, no matter how much i believe them to be good, wont change the "fact". but there are differences in the ummah on all these matters. the first of the matter is the quran, because without it, one cant even claim to be a muslim. so, i am trying to find out which side is correct. i obviously believe the sunni version, of different variants, is correct. but that is because i believe there is no better explanation for it without going contradicting myself. going back to my main question, does the mere existence of different variants not make the promise of preservation false? try to answer this question first, and the rest may become unimportant. again, i do not seek to cause trouble or fitnah. i only seek to satisfy my own search for answers.

Share this post


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

assuming what you are saying is true, a follower like me still have the following big problem to ponder over:

[Shakir 2:166] When those who were followed shall renounce those who followed (them), and they see the chastisement and their ties are cut asunder.

[Shakir 2:167] And those who followed shall say: Had there been for us a return, then we would renounce them as they have renounced us. Thus will Allah show them their deeds to be intense regret to them, and they shall not come forth from the fire.

is there a possibility your imam (ibn Taymiyyah?) will abandon me on the Judgement Day? more important, will i suffer the intense regret then? TIA.

who said ibn taymiyyah was my imam? firstly, i dont follow people/scholars. i follow the prophet pbuh. secondly, even if you say that i follow scholars, i dont exactly follow ibn taymiyyah. have a lot of differences with him. i'm not your everyday salafi my friend ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, just a muslim said:

who said ibn taymiyyah was my imam? firstly, i dont follow people/scholars. i follow the prophet pbuh. secondly, even if you say that i follow scholars, i dont exactly follow ibn taymiyyah. have a lot of differences with him. i'm not your everyday salafi my friend ;)

salam bro,

i was responding to your posting, but the intended recipients are those who think:

1. shia islam was founded by ibn saba'.

2. shias are worst than jews and christians while the fact of the matter is that, they are among khairul bariyyah. Quran [98:7]

 

i can rephrase the question if i want to, but let's not dwell on it. to each his own.

let's live peacefully. our deeds for us, your deeds for you.

fi amaanillah.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, just a muslim said:

thing is, the truth, no matter how bad it is, i have to accept it. like, we have to pray 5 prayers. i may not like it(not that i dont. just an example), but that doesnt mean i am not obliged to pray 5 prayers daily. similarly, and this is just an example to explain why i take this approach, if Ali a.s. is not the successor, no matter how much i want him to be, wont change the "fact" that he is not the successor. similarly, if abu bakr and umar etc were wrong and bad people, no matter how much i believe them to be good, wont change the "fact". but there are differences in the ummah on all these matters. the first of the matter is the quran, because without it, one cant even claim to be a muslim. so, i am trying to find out which side is correct. i obviously believe the sunni version, of different variants, is correct. but that is because i believe there is no better explanation for it without going contradicting myself. going back to my main question, does the mere existence of different variants not make the promise of preservation false? try to answer this question first, and the rest may become unimportant. again, i do not seek to cause trouble or fitnah. i only seek to satisfy my own search for answers.

I'm not going to keep repeating myself and going in circles. This is now twice you've ignored my point on the importance of taking Islam as a whole. 

No, it does not. I think you're confused. You keep saying that the variant readings are all undoubtedly legitimate modes of revelation by Allah, despite several holes in this argument which I have already pointed out but will do so one last time, after this I won't bother as it would be clear everything is going in one eye and coming out of the other. Even if you take the Sunni position that the Qur'an was revealed in seven modes, these readings are not those seven. There are more than seven readings. Some of these readings are variations in transmission from the same reciter. For example (only one of many!): http://live.islamweb.net/quran_list/shuaba/s2.pdf, 2:222, Hafs has it as تطهرن, Shu'bah has it as يطهرن, they didn't take from different tabi'een or sahaba, they both transmitted from Aasim! Are you going to claim their differences in transmission are both revelation from Allah? Nonsense! Even if you posit that these differences in wording do not change the meaning (and this is incorrect anyway, but for argument's sake), to be consistent you would have to conclude that there is no problem with omitting or changing words in the Qur'an as long as the meaning stays the same, and that reciting any modification of an ayah in your salat is acceptable as long as the meaning stays roughly the same. Just look at this long list of differences between Hafs and Shu'bah http://www.mobile4arab.com/vb/showthread.php?t=86338. Changes in pronunciation. Changes in wording. Omissions, or arguably additions of words. You're telling me that all these differences, despite them taking from the same reciter, are divinely inspired? If you say yes, then surely you are deaf, dumb, and blind to the truth.

Guidance from Allah is not with the Qur'an alone, it is with the Qur'an and the Ahlulbayt together, the two weighty things. The Qur'an is with the Ahlulbayt, and the Ahlulbayt is with the Qur'an.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, just a muslim said:

 

also, if you read what the variations are, you will realize that for the most part, at least to me, they dont seem contradictory. 

The long list of differences I just posted the link to between Shu'bah and Hafs demonstrates this to be untrue. There are differences in meaning in several cases. If you look at it objectively, they shouldn't even differ on a single letter if they both took from the same reciter. Of course, these differences are simply down to human error, but this goes back to the point of the true qira'ah needing an infallible imam in every age to preserve it. Without one, these human errors can not be rectified and the proper reading is irreversibly lost.

Edited by IbnMariam

Share this post


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

I'm not going to keep repeating myself and going in circles. This is now twice you've ignored my point on the importance of taking Islam as a whole. 

No, it does not. I think you're confused. You keep saying that the variant readings are all undoubtedly legitimate modes of revelation by Allah, despite several holes in this argument which I have already pointed out but will do so one last time, after this I won't bother as it would be clear everything is going in one eye and coming out of the other. Even if you take the Sunni position that the Qur'an was revealed in seven modes, these readings are not those seven. There are more than seven readings. Some of these readings are variations in transmission from the same reciter. For example (only one of many!): http://live.islamweb.net/quran_list/shuaba/s2.pdf, 2:222, Hafs has it as تطهرن, Shu'bah has it as يطهرن, they didn't take from different tabi'een or sahaba, they both transmitted from Aasim! Are you going to claim their differences in transmission are both revelation from Allah? Nonsense! Even if you posit that these differences in wording do not change the meaning (and this is incorrect anyway, but for argument's sake), to be consistent you would have to conclude that there is no problem with omitting or changing words in the Qur'an as long as the meaning stays the same, and that reciting any modification of an ayah in your salat is acceptable as long as the meaning stays roughly the same. Just look at this long list of differences between Hafs and Shu'bah http://www.mobile4arab.com/vb/showthread.php?t=86338. Changes in pronunciation. Changes in wording. Omissions, or arguably additions of words. You're telling me that all these differences, despite them taking from the same reciter, are divinely inspired? If you say yes, then surely you are deaf, dumb, and blind to the truth.

Guidance from Allah is not with the Qur'an alone, it is with the Qur'an and the Ahlulbayt together, the two weighty things. The Qur'an is with the Ahlulbayt, and the Ahlulbayt is with the Qur'an.

I made a mistake here, but the point and everything else still stands.

Edited by IbnMariam

Share this post


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

I'm not going to keep repeating myself and going in circles. This is now twice you've ignored my point on the importance of taking Islam as a whole. 

No, it does not. I think you're confused. You keep saying that the variant readings are all undoubtedly legitimate modes of revelation by Allah, despite several holes in this argument which I have already pointed out but will do so one last time, after this I won't bother as it would be clear everything is going in one eye and coming out of the other. Even if you take the Sunni position that the Qur'an was revealed in seven modes, these readings are not those seven. There are more than seven readings. Some of these readings are variations in transmission from the same reciter. For example (only one of many!): http://live.islamweb.net/quran_list/shuaba/s2.pdf, 2:222, Hafs has it as تطهرن, Shu'bah has it as يطهرن, they didn't take from different tabi'een or sahaba, they both transmitted from Aasim! Are you going to claim their differences in transmission are both revelation from Allah? Nonsense! Even if you posit that these differences in wording do not change the meaning (and this is incorrect anyway, but for argument's sake), to be consistent you would have to conclude that there is no problem with omitting or changing words in the Qur'an as long as the meaning stays the same, and that reciting any modification of an ayah in your salat is acceptable as long as the meaning stays roughly the same. Just look at this long list of differences between Hafs and Shu'bah http://www.mobile4arab.com/vb/showthread.php?t=86338. Changes in pronunciation. Changes in wording. Omissions, or arguably additions of words. You're telling me that all these differences, despite them taking from the same reciter, are divinely inspired? If you say yes, then surely you are deaf, dumb, and blind to the truth.

Guidance from Allah is not with the Qur'an alone, it is with the Qur'an and the Ahlulbayt together, the two weighty things. The Qur'an is with the Ahlulbayt, and the Ahlulbayt is with the Qur'an.

you keep saying that islam has to be looked at as a whole, and not in one issue alone. and you say that you look at it as a whole through the quran and ahlul bayt. the reason i am asking about the quran only is because it is one of the things we agree on. i could respond to you by saying who says the quran and ahlul bayt. your underlying assumption is that ahlul bayt are infallible and the whole package. i dont believe that. so to present that as proof to me is of no use. but let's agree for the sake of this discussion with your view of quran and ahlul bayt. i ask you one question and one question only, which i asked earlier as well. Does the mere existence of different variants of the quran not make the promise of its protection false? forget everything else. help me understand and answer this question. answer using any premises, including the infallibility of the ahlul bayt. if you can explain how this is not a contradiction, i will admit that it is not correct to judge the falsehood or truthfulness of tashaiyyu based on this argument.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, just a muslim said:

you keep saying that islam has to be looked at as a whole, and not in one issue alone. and you say that you look at it as a whole through the quran and ahlul bayt(1). the reason i am asking about the quran only is because it is one of the things we agree on. i could respond to you by saying who says the quran and ahlul bayt(2). your underlying assumption is that ahlul bayt are infallible and the whole package. i dont believe that. so to present that as proof to me is of no use. but let's agree for the sake of this discussion with your view of quran and ahlul bayt. i ask you one question and one question only, which i asked earlier as well. Does the mere existence of different variants of the quran not make the promise of its protection false? (3) forget everything else. help me understand and answer this question. answer using any premises, including the infallibility of the ahlul bayt. if you can explain how this is not a contradiction, i will admit that it is not correct to judge the falsehood or truthfulness of tashaiyyu based on this argument.

(1) That's neither what I said nor what I meant, although I do believe this.

(2) Rasoolallah (s) said this. I'm sure you're aware of hadith al-thaqalayn, it's a mu'tabar hadith in your books too.

(3) I literally just answered this with "No, it does not", and then gave an explanation as to why your understanding of the variant readings is incorrect, which you completely ignored. The whole point is to show the very foundation by which you argued that the Qur'an demonstrates sunnism as true, and shiism is false, as per your original post, crumbles under basic scrutiny. 

I believe your points have been deconstructed for anybody who they would otherwise confuse and misguide, and so I have no further interest in discussing this with you.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, IbnMariam said:

(1) That's neither what I said nor what I meant, although I do believe this.

(2) Rasoolallah (s) said this. I'm sure you're aware of hadith al-thaqalayn, it's a mu'tabar hadith in your books too.

(3) I literally just answered this with "No, it does not", and then gave an explanation as to why your understanding of the variant readings is incorrect, which you completely ignored. The whole point is to show the very foundation by which you argued that the Qur'an demonstrates sunnism as true, and shiism is false, as per your original post, crumbles under basic scrutiny. 

I believe your points have been deconstructed for anybody who they would otherwise confuse and misguide, and so I have no further interest in discussing this with you.

 

2. yes. and nowhere in the hadith thaqalain does it say to hold on to the ahlul bayt. nor that guidance is with ahlul bayt. holding firm is to the quran, fearing is with respect to the ahlul bayt. 

3. i apologize. i didnt realize that was in response to my question. firstly, you have to understand that the different variations, called the qiraat, which amount to more than 7, and the ahruf, which are exactly 7, are not the same. qiraat and ahruf are not the same thing. the qiraat are made up of different combinations of the 7 ahruf. so for example, each qiraat can be made up of one third of one ahruf and the remaining of a second ahruf. as for the objection that uthman burned the remaining 6 and merged them into one. he made atleast 4 mushafs, for different city centers, and they were different from each other to accommodate the different ahruf. each mushaf in itself could accommodate some parts of the ahruf which were due to diacritical marks or dots, but the differences in words etc, they were adjusted in the other mushafs. 

2 hours ago, IbnMariam said:

Some of these readings are variations in transmission from the same reciter. For example (only one of many!): http://live.islamweb.net/quran_list/shuaba/s2.pdf, 2:222, Hafs has it as تطهرن, Shu'bah has it as يطهرن, they didn't take from different tabi'een or sahaba, they both transmitted from Aasim! Are you going to claim their differences in transmission are both revelation from Allah? Nonsense!

why is it nonsense? can the same person not know more than one recitation? or more than one harf? can he not teach different recitations or even ahruf to different students based on his understanding of who will find which one easier? ofcourse one can. i dont see why this is non sense. you can find many reciters even today who know more than one qiraat by heart and can recite to you any one of them upon request.

they could both be from Allah. aasim could easily have learnt both of them. again, i dont see why this is non sense. 

on the contrary, if i dont believe all of them are from Allah, then Allah failed to fulfill his promise of protecting the quran as there are different versions of the quran. and if you claim that the original one is preserved, as you know through the ahlul bayt, and the existence of the rest does not undermine the promise, then there is a few problems with that. 1. a non muslim looking into islam wont know which quran is real as he doesnt believe in the ahlul bayt, and so might easily turn away from it. 2. the ayahs of protection are so strong, with so much emphasis, that it is impossible that there could be any sort of acceptable change in the quran. 3. as i said, 80%+ of the muslims believe in the ahruf. they believe it and act on it. this is not protection of the word of Allah, that people believe something to be the word of Allah while it is not.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shia are the followers of the true path described in the verses of quran and the hadith of the prophet saaww and his pure progeny. This understanding is based upon following principles:

1.  There is no  verse in quran mentioning example of people chosen caliph for their guidance for people with the understanding that people can choose caliph after the prophet Muhammad saww instead of  Allah swt. The principle that does not exist in Quran is not followed for the religion Islam

2.  The principle is mentioned in many verses of quran  for the selection of leaders / imams/ caliphs /prophets by Allah swt for the guidance of the people so that they follow guided leaders. In the light of this principle the prophet saww has clarified that there will be 12 leaders/ caliphs .imams after him. The Sunni hadith does mentioned it that here will be 12 caliphs/ ameers/ imams / leaders after him.  

3. The examples mentioned in quran for selection of those leaders do exist in quran who were not prophets. They were appointed by Allah swt. These include selection of Talut over bani israel, 12 leaders in bani iisrael and Imams.

4. The verses of Quran, hadith of the prophet saww  and further research about the truth confirm that Shia are the follower of the religion of Ibrahim AS that is true path.

wasalam

 
Edited by skyweb1987

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎10‎-‎11‎-‎2017 at 8:47 AM, just a muslim said:

2. yes. and nowhere in the hadith thaqalain does it say to hold on to the ahlul bayt. nor that guidance is with ahlul bayt. holding firm is to the quran, fearing is with respect to the ahlul bayt. 

Narrated Jabir bin 'Abdullah:
"I saw the Messenger of Allah during his Hajj, on the Day of 'Arafah. He was upon his camel Qaswa, giving a Khutbah, so he said: 'O people! Indeed, I have left among you, that which if you hold fast to it, you shall not go astray: The Book of Allah and my family, the people of my house.'"
 
حَدَّثَنَا نَصْرُ بْنُ عَبْدِ الرَّحْمَنِ الْكُوفِيُّ، حَدَّثَنَا زَيْدُ بْنُ الْحَسَنِ، هُوَ الأَنْمَاطِيُّ عَنْ جَعْفَرِ بْنِ مُحَمَّدٍ، عَنْ أَبِيهِ، عَنْ جَابِرِ بْنِ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ، قَالَ رَأَيْتُ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم فِي حَجَّتِهِ يَوْمَ عَرَفَةَ وَهُوَ عَلَى نَاقَتِهِ الْقَصْوَاءِ يَخْطُبُ فَسَمِعْتُهُ يَقُولُ ‏ "‏ يَا أَيُّهَا النَّاسُ إِنِّي قَدْ تَرَكْتُ فِيكُمْ مَا إِنْ أَخَذْتُمْ بِهِ لَنْ تَضِلُّوا كِتَابَ اللَّهِ وَعِتْرَتِي أَهْلَ بَيْتِي ‏"‏ ‏.‏ قَالَ وَفِي الْبَابِ عَنْ أَبِي ذَرٍّ وَأَبِي سَعِيدٍ وَزَيْدِ بْنِ أَرْقَمَ وَحُذَيْفَةَ بْنِ أَسِيدٍ ‏.‏ قَالَ وَهَذَا حَدِيثٌ حَسَنٌ غَرِيبٌ مِنْ هَذَا الْوَجْهِ ‏.‏ قَالَ وَزَيْدُ بْنُ الْحَسَنِ قَدْ رَوَى عَنْهُ سَعِيدُ بْنُ سُلَيْمَانَ وَغَيْرُ وَاحِدٍ مِنْ أَهْلِ الْعِلْمِ ‏.‏

Grade Sahih (Darussalam)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, skyweb1987 said:

4. The verses of Quran, hadith of the prophet saww  and further research about the truth confirm that Shia are the follower of the religion of Ibrahim AS that is true path.

33. God chose Adam, and Noah, and the family of Abraham, and the family of Imran, over all mankind.

34. Offspring one of the other. God is Hearer and Knower.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Malikuddin said:
Narrated Jabir bin 'Abdullah:
"I saw the Messenger of Allah during his Hajj, on the Day of 'Arafah. He was upon his camel Qaswa, giving a Khutbah, so he said: 'O people! Indeed, I have left among you, that which if you hold fast to it, you shall not go astray: The Book of Allah and my family, the people of my house.'"
 
حَدَّثَنَا نَصْرُ بْنُ عَبْدِ الرَّحْمَنِ الْكُوفِيُّ، حَدَّثَنَا زَيْدُ بْنُ الْحَسَنِ، هُوَ الأَنْمَاطِيُّ عَنْ جَعْفَرِ بْنِ مُحَمَّدٍ، عَنْ أَبِيهِ، عَنْ جَابِرِ بْنِ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ، قَالَ رَأَيْتُ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم فِي حَجَّتِهِ يَوْمَ عَرَفَةَ وَهُوَ عَلَى نَاقَتِهِ الْقَصْوَاءِ يَخْطُبُ فَسَمِعْتُهُ يَقُولُ ‏ "‏ يَا أَيُّهَا النَّاسُ إِنِّي قَدْ تَرَكْتُ فِيكُمْ مَا إِنْ أَخَذْتُمْ بِهِ لَنْ تَضِلُّوا كِتَابَ اللَّهِ وَعِتْرَتِي أَهْلَ بَيْتِي ‏"‏ ‏.‏ قَالَ وَفِي الْبَابِ عَنْ أَبِي ذَرٍّ وَأَبِي سَعِيدٍ وَزَيْدِ بْنِ أَرْقَمَ وَحُذَيْفَةَ بْنِ أَسِيدٍ ‏.‏ قَالَ وَهَذَا حَدِيثٌ حَسَنٌ غَرِيبٌ مِنْ هَذَا الْوَجْهِ ‏.‏ قَالَ وَزَيْدُ بْنُ الْحَسَنِ قَدْ رَوَى عَنْهُ سَعِيدُ بْنُ سُلَيْمَانَ وَغَيْرُ وَاحِدٍ مِنْ أَهْلِ الْعِلْمِ ‏.‏

 

Grade Sahih (Darussalam)

my mistake. i had meant to say the one in sahih muslim.

but even then, 23 different chains of the hadith talk about the two of them separately. one or two of them talking about the two together doesnt override the 23.

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!

    • How can they be misguided when they believe in same pillars of the faith and books of hadiths?
    •   We must understand that the akhbaries are our brother in Islam, just misguided. Their literature is extremely persuasive and even attractive to the uninitiated. This 400 yr old dead philosophy had been reintroduced by mere chance amd the pervasive way in which their literature is being freely distributed is mere coincidence. OR Yasser Habib is able to have expensive Satellite broadcasting equipment, can take over a small British town, and is viciously aggressive towards Sunnis and their leaders. These Are paid for and planned activities designed to foment fassaad and fitnah. The same way wahabism,qadianis, and bhai were introduced as splintering movements. So when you play into hands of the puppet master and yourself  "QUO VADIS" Who benefits from Muslims, imamis, and shia  movements being splintered. Who is threatened by our Unity, who has encouraged Muslims to fight amongst themselves, who would be more vulnerable if we become United.   always ask not just what is being said, but what is the motivation and implication of such speech. Critical thinking skills used to be plentiful in the Muslim Ummah, let's revive that.  
    • Are you near your mother and can stay with her and help her? Praying for your mother. 
×