Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله
  • entries
    30
  • comments
    125
  • views
    6,913

Did the Sahaba become Kafir?

Sign in to follow this  
Islamic Salvation

7,494 views

هلك الناس أجمعون قلت: من في الشرق و من في الغرب؟ قال: فقال: إنها فتحت على الضلال

All the people were destroyed. I said: whomever was in the east and the west? he said: it (the whole earth) was opened up to misguidance

هلكوا إلا ثلاثة ثم لحق أبو ساسان و عمار و شتيرة و أبو عمرة فصاروا سبعة

All were destroyed except three - then they were joined by Abu Sasan, Ammar, Shatira and Abu Amra, so they became seven [Ja`far al-Sadiq]

 

Did the Sahaba Apostatize?

There are narrations which indicate that all the companions were destroyed except three, these were then joined by four others, so they became seven who were saved. However, most of the scholars have understood this Halak [destruction] to be that of Dhalal [misguidance] i.e. perished in Salvific terms, not Kufr [disbelief] - which is the opposite of Islam.

 

Who are the three?

They are the pillars of the Madhhab. They are explicitly named in some of the narrations below:

أبي بصير قال: قلت لأبي عبد الله عليه السلام: ارتد الناس إلا ثلاثة: أبو ذر، و سلمان، و المقداد؟ قال: فقال أبو عبد الله عليه السلام: فأين أبو ساسان، و أبو عمرة الأنصاري؟

[al-Kashshi] Abi Basir said: I said to Abi Abdillah عليه السلام: all the people turned back except for three - Abu Dhar, Salman and Miqdad? Abu Abdillah عليه السلام said: so where is Abu Sasan and Abu Amra al-Ansari?!

أبي بكر الحضرمى قال: قال أبو جعفر عليه السلام: ارتد الناس إلاثلاثة نفر سلمان وأبو ذر والمقداد. قال: قلت: فعمّار؟ قال عليه السلام: قد كان جاض جيضة ثم رجع ... ثم أناب الناس بعد فكان أول من أناب أبو ساسان الانصاري وأبوعمرة وشتيرة وكانوا سبعة فلم يكن يعرف حق أمير المؤمنين عليه السلام إلاّ هؤلاء السبعة

[al-Kashshi] Abi Bakr al-Hadhrami said: Abu Ja`far عليه السلام said: the people turned back except three individuals - Salman, Abu Dhar and Miqdad, I said: what about Ammar? He عليه السلام said: he wobbled a bit then he returned [to the truth] … then the people repented after that, so the first ones to return [to the truth] were Abu Sasan al-Ansari, Abu Amra, Shatira, and they became seven, none recognized the right of the commander of the faithful عليه السلام except these seven.

  • 'then the people repented after that, so the first ones ...' This shows that it was not just these seven, rather, these were the foremost of them.

علي بن أبي طالب عليهم السلام قال: خلقت الارض لبسبعة بهم ترزقون وبهم تنصرون وبهم تمطرون منهم سلمان الفارسي والمقداد وأبو ذر وعّمار وحذيفة رحمة اللّه عليهم. وكان علي عليه السلام يقول: وأنا إمامهم وهم الذين صلوا على فاطمة صلوات الله عليها

[al-Ikhtisas] Ali b. Abi Talib عليه السلام said: the earth was created for seven, because of them you are given sustenance, and because of them you are assisted, and because of them is rain made to fall on you, among them are Salman al-Farsi and al-Miqdad and Abu Dhar and Ammar and Hudhayfa - may Allah have mercy on them. Ali عليه السلام used to say: and I am their Imam, and they are the ones who prayed [Salat al-Mayyit] upon Fatima صلوات الله عليها            

 

The Three had a higher status than the Four

حمران قال: قلت لأبي جعفر عليه السلام: ما أقلنا لو اجتمعنا على شاة ما أفنيناها قال: فقال: ألا أخبرك بأعجب من ذلك قال: فقلت: بلى قال: المهاجرون و الأنصار ذهبوا إلا (و أشار بيده) ثلاثة

[al-Kashshi] Humran said: I said to Abi Ja’far عليه السلام - how few we (the Shias) are! if we gather to eat a sheep we will not be able to finish it, he (Humran) said: so he عليه السلام said: should I not inform you of something even more bewildering? he (Humran) said: I said: yes (do so), he said: the Muhajirun and the Ansar all diverted (i.e. went astray) except for - and he gestured with his hand - three.

In al-Kulayni’s variant the narration continues:

قال حمران: فقلت: جعلت فداك ما حال عمار؟ قال: رحم الله عمارا أبا اليقظان بايع وقتل شهيدا، فقلت في نفسي: ما شئ أفضل من الشهادة فنظر إلي فقال: لعلك ترى أنه مثل الثلاثة أيهات أيهات

Humran said: may I be made your ransom - what is the status of Ammar? He said: may Allah have mercy on Ammar Aba al-Yaqdhan, he pledged allegiance and died a martyr, I said in my heart: what thing is better than martyrdom, so he [the Imam] looked at me and said: perhaps you think that he [Ammar] is like the three [in status], how far! how far! [from truth that opinion is]. 

 

Does this mean all others became apostates?

The crux is the meaning of Ridda (ردّة) in these narrations. Whether it is to be understood in a linguistic sense or the technical sense of apostasy. If the latter is taken then it means all the Sahaba became Kafir [out of Islam] for not sticking to Ali.

Irtidad in the linguistic sense refers to ‘turning back from something’. It has been used with this meaning in a number of verses such as:

فَلَمَّا أَن جَاء الْبَشِيرُ أَلْقَاهُ عَلَى وَجْهِهِ فَارْتَدَّ بَصِيرًا قَالَ أَلَمْ أَقُل لَّكُمْ إِنِّي أَعْلَمُ مِنَ اللّهِ مَا لاَ تَعْلَمُونَ

(i) So when the caravan herald [fore-runner] came he threw it on his face so he returned to seeing, he said: did I not say to you that I know from Allah what ye do not (12:96)

قَالَ الَّذِي عِندَهُ عِلْمٌ مِّنَ الْكِتَابِ أَنَا آتِيكَ بِهِ قَبْلَ أَن يَرْتَدَّ إِلَيْكَ طَرْفُكَ

(ii) The one who had knowledge of a part of the Book said: I will bring it to you before your glance returns back to you [i.e. you blink and open your eyes again] (27:40)

مُهْطِعِينَ مُقْنِعِي رُءُوسِهِمْ لاَ يَرْتَدُّ إِلَيْهِمْ طَرْفُهُمْ وَأَفْئِدَتُهُمْ هَوَاء

(iii) Racing ahead, their heads bowed down, their glances not returning back to them [i.e. unblinking] and their hearts void (14:43)

Whenever Irtidad from the Diin - ‘turning back’ from the Diin i.e. apostasy in the technical sense is meant, the Qur`an qualifies it by explicitly mentioning Diin.

يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُواْ مَن يَرْتَدَّ مِنكُمْ عَن دِينِهِ فَسَوْفَ يَأْتِي اللّهُ بِقَوْمٍ يُحِبُّهُمْ وَيُحِبُّونَهُ

(i) O you who believe, whoever turns back from his Diin from among you then Allah will bring about a people whom He loves and they love Him (5:54)

وَمَن يَرْتَدِدْ مِنكُمْ عَن دِينِهِ فَيَمُتْ وَهُوَ كَافِرٌ فَأُوْلَئِكَ حَبِطَتْ أَعْمَالُهُمْ فِي الدُّنْيَا وَالآخِرَةِ

(ii) And whoever among you turns back on his Diin and dies whilst being a Kafir then those are they whose deeds have been nullified in the world and the hereafter (2:217)

It is clear that the narrations about the Irtidad of the Sahaba are not qualified by Diin. To understand that meaning from it would require further proof.

 

The Chosen Interpretation

The Irtidad in the narrations should be understood [in light of other narrations] as people turning away, after the messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وآله, from what they had made incumbent on themselves in his صلى الله عليه وآله lifetime, when they gave the Bay`a to Ali b. Abi Talib as the leader of the believers i.e. Irtidad from Wilaya not apostasy from Islam. 

Instead, they decided to give the Bay`a to someone else because of expediency and other reasons. This was a betrayal of epic proportions that opened up the door of misguidance and innovation in the Diin, however, they had not exited the apparent Islam, nor were all on the same level of liability for this.

This interpretation is aided by the following texts:

أبي جعفر عليه السلام قال: كان الناس أهل ردة بعد النبي صلى الله عليه وآله إلا ثلاثة. فقلت: ومن الثلاثة؟ فقال: المقداد بن الأسود، وأبو ذر الغفاري، وسلمان الفارسي، رحمة الله وبركاته عليهم، ثم عرَف أناسٌ بعدَ يسير. وقال: هؤلاء الذين دارت عليهم الرحا وأبوا أن يبايعوا، حتى جاؤوا بأمير المؤمنين مكرَهاً فبايع، وذلك قوله تعالى: وَمَا مُحَمَّدٌ إِلاَّ رَسُولٌ قَدْ خَلَتْ مِن قَبْلِهِ الرُّسُلُ أَفَإِن مَّاتَ أَوْ قُتِلَ انقَلَبْتُمْ عَلَى أَعْقَابِكُمْ وَمَن يَنقَلِبْ عَلَىَ عَقِبَيْهِ فَلَن يَضُرَّ اللّهَ شَيْئًا وَسَيَجْزِي اللّهُ الشَّاكِرِينَ

(i) [al-Kafi] Abi Ja`far عليه السلام said: the people were the people of Ridda after the prophet صلى الله عليه وآله except three. I said: who are the three? He said: al-Miqdad b. al-Aswad, Abu Dhar al-Ghiffari and Salman al-Farsi, may Allah’s mercy and blessings be upon them, then the people came to know after a while [the truth], these [three] are those around whom the banner revolved and they refused to give Bay`a [to Abu Bakr], until when they brought the commander of the faithful عليه السلام by coercion and he gave the pledge of allegiance, and that is His words the Elevated - “Muhammad is not but a messenger, messengers have come and gone before him, if he dies or is killed, will you turn back on your heels, and whoever turns back on his heels then he will not harm Allah a thing and Allah will recompense those who are grateful” (3:144).

  • The narration indicates that the uniqueness of the three was that they did not give the Bay`a to the usurper because of knowing the true status of Ali, it was only when Ali was forced to give the Bay`a, and he did [for the Masliha which Allah willed], that the three also agreed to do it.
  • The meaning of 'then the people came to know after a while ...' is that some people recognized their fault, and acknowledged that the commander of the faithful was the most rightful person to assume leadership.

That all the others apart from the three were paralyzed by fear is shown in the narration below:

أبي جعفر عليه السلام قال: جاء المهاجرون والأنصار وغيرهم بعد ذلك إلى علي عليه السلام فقالوا له: أنت والله أمير المؤمنين وأنت والله أحق الناس وأولاهم بالنبي عليه السلام هلم يدك نبايعك فوالله لنموتن قدامك! فقال علي عليه السلام: ان كنتم صادقين فاغدوا غدا علي محلقين فحلق علي عليه السلام وحلق سلمان وحلق مقداد وحلق أبو ذر ولم يحلق غيرهم؛ ثم انصرفوا فجاؤوا مرة أخرى بعد ذلك، فقالوا له أنت والله أمير المؤمنين وأنت أحق الناس وأولاهم بالنبي عليه السلام عليه السلام هلم يدك نبايعك فحلفوا فقال: إن كنتم صادقين فاغدوا علي محلقين فما حلق إلا هؤلاء الثلاثة قلت: فما كان فيهم عمار؟ فقال: لا؛ قلت: فعمار من أهل الردة؟ فقال: إنّ عمارا قد قاتل مع علي عليه السلام بعد ذلك

(ii) [al-Kashshi] Abi Ja`far عليه السلام said: the Muhajirun and Ansar and others came after that [the coup at Saqifa] to Ali عليه السلام and said to him: you are by Allah the commander of the faithful, and you are by Allah the most rightful person and closest to the prophet, put forth your hand so that we can pledge allegiance to you, for by Allah we are going to die in front of you [in your defense], Ali said: if you are truthful then come to me tomorrow having shaved your head [which would visually identify the ‘rebels’ to the authorities], so Ali shaved, so did Salman, Miqdad and Abu Dhar, and no one else did, then they came a second time after the first and said: you are by Allah the most rightful person and closest to the prophet, put forth your hand so that we can pledge allegiance to you, and they swore an oath, he said: come to me tomorrow having shaved your head if you are truthful, so no one shaved except three. I said: Ammar was not among them? He said: No, I said: Ammar is from the people of Ridda? He said: Ammar fought together with Ali after that.

  • This reaffirms that the uniqueness of the three is related to them not giving in and remaining with Ali to the end as far as his right is concerned. Note also how Ammar is not included among the Ahl al-Ridda, even in a historical sense, because of his later support for Ali.

In fact, one of the reasons behind Ali accepting to give Bay`a after his show of dissent was so that the masses do not renounce the faith totally. Recall that the Islamic polity was still unstable and there were a lot of Arab tribes whose allegiance had been personally to the prophet and not the Diin per se, the Jahiliyya was not far from their psyche.

أبي جعفر عليه السلام قال: إن الناس لما صنعوا ما صنعوا إذ بايعوا أبا بكر لم يمنع أمير المؤمنين عليه السلام من أن يدعو إلى نفسه إلا نظرا للناس و تخوفا عليهم أن يرتدوا عن الاسلام فيعبدوا الاوثان ولا يشهدوا أن لا إله إلا الله وأن محمدا رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله وكان الاحب إليه أن يقرهم على ما صنعوا من أن يرتدوا عن جميع الاسلام وإنما هلك الذين ركبوا ما ركبوا فأما من لم يصنع ذلك ودخل فيما دخل فيه الناس على غير علم ولا عداوة لامير المؤمنين عليه السلام فإن ذلك لا يكفره ولا يخرجه من الاسلام ولذلك كتم علي عليه السلام أمره وبايع مكرها حيث لم يجد أعوانا

(iii) [al-Kafi] Abu Ja'farعليه السلام  said: When the people did what they did - when they gave allegiance to Abu Bakr, nothing prevented the commander of the faithful عليه السلام from calling to himself (i.e. gather support to rival them publicly) except his fear for the people - that they would apostate from Islam, and begin worshiping the idols anew, and reject witnessing that there is no God but Allah, and that Muhammad is his messenger; and it was more beloved to him to acquiesce to what they had done rather than them apostatizing from the whole of Islam. Verily, those who clambered upon this (opposing Ali for rulership) have been destroyed. As for the one who did not contribute anything to that (opposing Ali for rulership) and entered into what the people entered into without knowledge (about his status) nor enmity towards him then this act of his does not make him a disbeliever, and it does not remove him from Islam, and this is why Ali kept quiet about his matter (status), and gave allegiance while displeased, when he could not find any supporters.

  • The narration makes it clear that had the Imam fought for his leadership i.e. a civil war it would cause irreparable damage, this is because of the tenuous position that Islam had, even the outward Islam (the Islam of the Shahadatyn) would have been wiped out. There were a lot of external and internal enemies waiting for this infighting to make sure that the whole foundation of Islam crumbles.

 

Conclusion

The Umma became, for the most part, misguided after their prophet. This is something that had also happened to the communities of past prophets. But this misguidance should not be understood to have taken all of them out of Islam as a whole, rather, by ignoring a central commandment of the prophet they have done a great sin which struck a blow to the pristine Islam.

Furthermore, the protagonists differ relative to their role in the fiasco. Some were quite unaware of the whole thing and lacked full knowledge of the Haqq of Ali and his Ma`rifa, this could be because they were blind to the order of the prophet (total ignorance); had some doubts; did not have the ability to influence the outcome because of some constraints [swept away by the wave of events]; or because they showed cowardice and faltered in coming to Ali’s aid. Others later acknowledged their mistake and made up for it in the following years. All these in their different categories can be said to be the majority. Their fate in the next world of “realities” is left to Allah

On the other hand, there were those who administered the whole thing. They had full knowledge of what the prophet had ordered them and what the divine commandment required them to do. They also knew the position of Ali. Despite this, they fought against this explicitly. These are those who should be treated as apparent Muslims in the daily life in this world [according to most scholars]. This is, after all, how Ali himself treated them, praying in their mosques, visiting them in sickness, helping them out when they faced challenges, eating with them etc. part of which is Taqiyya and safeguarding the greater principles of Islam, but they are undoubtedly people of the fire in the next world.

Note that this interpretation is dependent on the position of differentiating between the Dharuriyat of the Diin and that of the Madhhab and considering the Shahdatayn alone to be enough in making someone a Muslim [unless taken out for some other reason]. Whilst this is a popular position among scholars today, it has had its detractors among the scholars of the past, one of them being someone like Shaykh Yusuf al-Bahrani, who considered the rejectors of the Wilaya as Kafirs with the fullest implication this has [even in this world].  

Sign in to follow this  


54 Comments


Recommended Comments



Salam here is nice lectuure from sunni scoolar Dr.Adnan Ibrahim.He mention some companions and first generation and misinformation from them about Prophet(s.a.w.a).Look honest to me.May Allah prise him for speaking truth insha'Allah.

Wa Salam

Edited by AidAsSadik

Share this comment


Link to comment

No.shaba didn't became kafir.Even though they did wrong and ignorant actions. 

There are numerous historic evidence and saying of Hazrat Ali as that clearly indicate that sahaba did not became kafir. But yes those who fought against Imam Ali did great sin and fitnah. 

Or they were ignorant to status and knowledge and position of Imam Ali.

Even we today do not have real marifah and knowledge of status of Imam Ali and Prophet puh. 

And also those who were on side of Imam Ali once Ali as became Khalifa did recognise Imam Ali as.

So declaring kafir to one who disagree with Imam Ali as indicate the ones ignorance. 

But those are excluded who despite knowing Imam Ali still opposed him out of love for world and lower self passion. 

 

Edited by islam25

Share this comment


Link to comment
7 hours ago, islam25 said:

No.shaba didn't became kafir.Even though they did wrong and ignorant actions. 

There are numerous historic evidence and saying of Hazrat Ali as that clearly indicate that sahaba did not became kafir. But yes those who fought against Imam Ali did great sin and fitnah. 

Or they were ignorant to status and knowledge and position of Imam Ali.

Even we today do not have real marifah and knowledge of status of Imam Ali and Prophet puh. 

And also those who were on side of Imam Ali once Ali as became Khalifa did recognise Imam Ali as.

So declaring kafir to one who disagree with Imam Ali as indicate the ones ignorance. 

But those are excluded who despite knowing Imam Ali still opposed him out of love for world and lower self passion. 

 

Salam 

Wa Salam

Share this comment


Link to comment
11 minutes ago, islam25 said:

Can you write what he says. 

Salam.You have translation.He is one of top sunni scoolars,and he found at Buhari&Muslim narrations of companions that are leave Islam even while Prophets(s) was live.Try found some videos of him on that isue,and you will understand insha'Allah.

In sunni tradition have narration that every 100 years will came scoolar wich will reunion religion.Manny top sunni alims think Dr.Adnan Ibrahim is "reunior of Islam"(Even he by himself never say that)

Ofcourse there is salafi fatwa on him wich say:"He is not reunior of Islam.We are not sure if he is rafidi,munafiq or qafir".So,if salafi atack you so hard than you know you are doing something good insha'Allah.

Wa salam

Share this comment


Link to comment
26 minutes ago, AidAsSadik said:

Salam.You have translation.He is one of top sunni scoolars,and he found at Buhari&Muslim narrations of companions that are leave Islam even while Prophets(s) was live.Try found some videos of him on that isue,and you will understand insha'Allah.

In sunni tradition have narration that every 100 years will came scoolar wich will reunion religion.Manny top sunni alims think Dr.Adnan Ibrahim is "reunior of Islam"(Even he by himself never say that)

Ofcourse there is salafi fatwa on him wich say:"He is not reunior of Islam.We are not sure if he is rafidi,munafiq or qafir".So,if salafi atack you so hard than you know you are doing something good insha'Allah.

Wa salam

So it what I said. 

I do not believe that all sahaba ra who disagreed Ali as became kafir. 

Share this comment


Link to comment
10 hours ago, islam25 said:

No.shaba didn't became kafir.Even though they did wrong and ignorant actions. 

Salam.

You say this.And your sahih books say diferent.

Wa salam.

Share this comment


Link to comment
2 minutes ago, islam25 said:

What is my sahih books.

Salam

Im sorry i don know.But anyway your conclusion is wrong.

If your sahih books are sunni collections such as Sahih Buhari,or Sahih Muslim,they say diferent from you

If your sahih books are shia collections such as Kitabu-l-Kafi,or Biharu-l-Anwar,agan they say diferent from you.

Wa Salam

Share this comment


Link to comment
2 minutes ago, AidAsSadik said:

Salam

Im sorry i don know.But anyway your conclusion is wrong.

If your sahih books are sunni collections such as Sahih Buhari,or Sahih Muslim,they say diferent from you

If your sahih books are shia collections such as Kitabu-l-Kafi,or Biharu-l-Anwar,agan they say diferent from you.

Wa Salam

So you mean only that version is correct which says shaba are kafir. 

Can you tell me what is definition of kafir. 

And how many sahaba became kafir and how they became kafir? 

Share this comment


Link to comment
5 minutes ago, islam25 said:

So you mean only that version is correct which says shaba are kafir. 

Can you tell me what is definition of kafir. 

And how many sahaba became kafir and how they became kafir? 

Salam.Im not qulify for it.

But sunni Imams,authors of qutbu-l-sitte think theye where and in thers sahihs/sunans is your answar

Or you can turn at Imam Kulayni(q.r) or somme other shia scoolar,and find your answar

Wa Salam

Edited by AidAsSadik

Share this comment


Link to comment
10 minutes ago, AidAsSadik said:

Salam.Im not qulify for it.

But sunni Imams,authors of qutbu-l-sitte think theye where and in thers sahihs/sunans is your answar

Or you can turn at Imam Kulayni or somme other shia scoolar,and find your answar

Wa Salam

Mr.

There are indications in both shia and sunni books about kafir. But non of us or even scholars can  declear any one kafir.

And it's quiete possible that our declaration of some one being kafir may prove wrong. Because ultimately it lies with Allah. 

Have you ever read any narration from imam Ali declaring any sahaba kafir. 

Are even those who fought against imam Ali. 

Even I have heard great scholars who do not agree that sahaba who disagreed imam Ali necessarily all became kafir. 

What is your  view about sunnis are they kafir. 

Edited by islam25

Share this comment


Link to comment
Just now, islam25 said:

Mr.

There are indications in both shia and sunni books about kafir. But non of us are even scholars declear any one kafir.And it's quiete possible that our declaration of some one being kafir may prove wrong. Because ultimately it lies with Allah. 

Have you ever read any narration from imam Ali declaring any sahaba kafir. 

Are even those who fought against imam Ali. 

Even I have heard great scholars who do not agree that sahaba who disagreed imam Ali necessarily all became kafir. 

What is your  view about sunnis are they kafir. 

Salam

In sunni islam Buhari&Muslim are at ranq of Qur'an.99% of sunni ulama will say every single hadith in theese 2 books is 100% autentic,so in very same books u will find that not all of companions stay with Islam.

At other hand Shia do not beleve that for example Kitabu-l-Kafi is all sahih,most of it yes,but all no.However narrations about this isue are sahih,and clear.Every companion was not stay with Islam.

At end,i have enough moral to not answar at your last question,because i know where that lead.I give my opinion on topic.Give source of my opinion.

When you ask me question,i give u answar with source of my answar.Think is enough from me.

Wa Salam

Share this comment


Link to comment
11 minutes ago, AidAsSadik said:

Salam

In sunni islam Buhari&Muslim are at ranq of Qur'an.99% of sunni ulama will say every single hadith in theese 2 books is 100% autentic,so in very same books u will find that not all of companions stay with Islam.

At other hand Shia do not beleve that for example Kitabu-l-Kafi is all sahih,most of it yes,but all no.However narrations about this isue are sahih,and clear.Every companion was not stay with Islam.

At end,i have enough moral to not answar at your last question,because i know where that lead.I give my opinion on topic.Give source of my opinion.

When you ask me question,i give u answar with source of my answar.Think is enough from me.

Wa Salam

Mr. 

You didn't gave answer. 

All the sahaba whom you declear kafir gave bayat to Imam Ali. 

Imam regularly used teach them aaddress them. 

Used lead prayer. 

Never call them kafir. Give sermons of guidance. Despite you still call them kafir. 

And when even shia scholars clearly say that by denying imam Ali one don't necessarily become kafir. 

Again why you didn't answer my last question. 

Or what is definition of kafir. 

Edited by islam25

Share this comment


Link to comment
15 minutes ago, islam25 said:

Mr. 

You didn't gave answer. 

All the sahaba whom you declear kafir gave bayat to Imam Ali. 

:) Test never ended on Imam Ali (a.s). Many companions have exposed themselves in the caliphate of Imam Hasan (a.s).

If majority of sahaba were assumed as true believers, why they allowed Muawiya Laeen to curse Imam Ali (a.s)? 

 

Edited by Salsabeel

Share this comment


Link to comment
6 minutes ago, Salsabeel said:

:) Test never ended on Imam Ali (a.s). Many companions have exposed themselves in the caliphate of Imam Hasan (a.s).

If so majority of sahaba were assumed as true believers, why they allowed Muawiya Laeen to curse Imam Ali (a.s)? 

 

How many these were who talked bad about imam Ali . 2 or 3 or 10.The question is of thousands of sahaba. That too when some shia give blanket futwa of declaring near all them kafir. 

Edited by islam25

Share this comment


Link to comment
4 minutes ago, islam25 said:

Mr. 

You didn't gave answer. 

All the sahaba whom you declear kafir gave bayat to Imam Ali. 

Imam regularly used teach them aaddress them. 

Used lead prayer. 

Never call them kafir. Give sermons of guidance. Despite you still call them kafir. 

And when even shia scholars clearly say that by denying imam Ali one don't necessarily become kafir. 

Again why you didn't answer my last question. 

Or what is definition of kafir. 

Salam

I declare kafir?No it was Imam Buhari&Imam Muslim at first place

I did not answar just to see way you think.Ok.

If just think a little just a little,you will get answar without asking me.

I belive you are sunni,yes.And i say Salam to you,yes.Woul i say salam to kafir?

I give you videos of Dr.Adnan Ibrahim.Would i call upon him and made him my source or take anything from him if i belive all sunnis are kafirs?

Ofcourse i would not.

But you are not read,you are not listen,now i see that you are not even think!

Im sorry for say this,but you not have morals at first place.How many times i say salam to you?How many times you reply?I see you as brother you see me as mister!?

Im not go down any more at your level.Whatever you wrighte,think you are right.From me have dua that Allah SwT guide you to Truth,whatever Truth is.

Wa Salam

 

 

Share this comment


Link to comment
1 minute ago, islam25 said:

How many these many were. 2 or 3 or 10.The question is of thousands of sahaba

:) brother, keep your heart soft.

Assume, if thousands of companions would have opposed the public cursing of Imam Ali (a.s), Muawiya Laeen would have stopped that. 

Imam Hassan's coffin would never recieve the shower of arrows. The incident of Karbala & its aftermath would not occured.

 

Share this comment


Link to comment
5 minutes ago, AidAsSadik said:

Salam

I declare kafir?No it was Imam Buhari&Imam Muslim at first place

I did not answar just to see way you think.Ok.

If just think a little just a little,you will get answar without asking me.

I belive you are sunni,yes.And i say Salam to you,yes.Woul i say salam to kafir?

I give you videos of Dr.Adnan Ibrahim.Would i call upon him and made him my source or take anything from him if i belive all sunnis are kafirs?

Ofcourse i would not.

But you are not read,you are not listen,now i see that you are not even think!

Im sorry for say this,but you not have morals at first place.How many times i say salam to you?How many times you reply?I see you as brother you see me as mister!?

Im not go down any more at your level.Whatever you wrighte,think you are right.From me have dua that Allah SwT guide you to Truth,whatever Truth is.

Wa Salam

 

 

Wa Alikum salam. 

I am definitely sorry for not greeting salam. 

Still do you think someone declared by bukhari or shahahi muslim kafir is necessarily kafir. 

Does someone declaring kafir means he is necessarily kafir. 

Because kufur is state heart which Allah knows best. 

That too when Imam Ali lead the prayer of all most all sahaba and lived with them like Muslims never called them kafir. 

So why should I. 

Yes there may be one or two exceptions but that doesn't apply to all. 

Wa salam. 

Share this comment


Link to comment
9 minutes ago, Salsabeel said:

:) brother, keep your heart soft.

Assume, if thousands of companions would have opposed the public cursing of Imam Ali (a.s), Muawiya Laeen would have stopped that. 

Imam Hassan's coffin would never recieve the shower of arrows. The incident of Karbala & its aftermath would not occured.

 

So you mean few persons cursed Imam Ali made all others kafir. 

In other words does  whole ummah of the time of muawiya became kafir. 

I think that is not right view. 

Every single person is responsible for his sin. 

Edited by islam25

Share this comment


Link to comment
46 minutes ago, islam25 said:

So you mean few persons cursed Imam Ali made all others kafir. 

This "few" possess thousands not tens or hundreds.

30,000 fought against Imam Ali (a.s) in Jamal. 120,000 fought against Imam Ali in Siffin. 

For Imam Hassan's army of 40,000 which went to fight with Muawiyah Laeen army of 60,000, you can read the story at www.al-islam.org 

Brother, just see what Allah says in Quran:

Surah Ya Seen, Verse 7:

لَقَدْ حَقَّ الْقَوْلُ عَلَىٰ أَكْثَرِهِمْ فَهُمْ لَا يُؤْمِنُونَ

Certainly the word has proved true of most of them, so they do not believe.

(English - Shakir)

Share this comment


Link to comment
1 hour ago, Salsabeel said:

This "few" possess thousands not tens or hundreds.

30,000 fought against Imam Ali (a.s) in Jamal. 120,000 fought against Imam Ali in Siffin. 

For Imam Hassan's army of 40,000 which went to fight with Muawiyah Laeen army of 60,000, you can read the story at www.al-islam.org 

Brother, just see what Allah says in Quran:

Surah Ya Seen, Verse 7:

لَقَدْ حَقَّ الْقَوْلُ عَلَىٰ أَكْثَرِهِمْ فَهُمْ لَا يُؤْمِنُونَ

Certainly the word has proved true of most of them, so they do not believe.

(English - Shakir)

So the tens of thousands that were with Imam Ali didn't became kafir. Because the opening post was indicating that except few all sahaba became kafir. 

Edited by islam25

Share this comment


Link to comment
23 hours ago, islam25 said:

So the tens of thousands that were with Imam Ali didn't became kafir. Because the opening post was indicating that except few all sahaba became kafir. 

He did not say nor it indicated that they became kafir.

Share this comment


Link to comment

Which of you, then, will help me in this, and be my brother, mine executor and my successor amongst you?’ All remained silent, except for the youthful ʿAlī who spoke up: ‘O Prophet of God, I will be thy helper in this.’ The Prophet then placed his hand on ʿAlī’s neck and said, ‘This is my brother, mine executor and my successor amongst you. Hearken unto him and obey him.’

(Ibn Ishaq, Sirat Rasul Allah, tr. A Guilaume, The Life of Muhammad, 118)

Share this comment


Link to comment

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Add a comment...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Latest Blog Entries

    • By Ibn al-Hussain in Just Another Muslim Blogger
         2
      Follow on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/IqraOnlineBlog
      Follow on Instagram: https://instagram.com/aaleimran/
      The 11th Imam (a) was able to remain in contact with the general Shī’ī community over a large geographical area through the Wakālah system. The Wakālah system comprised of a large number of agents and representatives who would serve as the point of contact between the Imam and their respective communities. The foundations of this specific system can be traced back to the time of Imam Ṣādiq (a) and its exponential growth can evidently be seen from the time of Imam Kāẓim (a) onwards. After Imam Naqī (a), control of this complex network was transferred over to Imam ‘Askarī (a).
      There were a number of reasons why this network was developed. Firstly, to tackle the physical distance between the Imams (a) and their followers. Secondly, in cases where the Imams were imprisoned or under house arrest and were permitted to have very little contact with outsiders, it was more convenient to remain in contact with specifically chosen individuals rather than a large number of people – often for the safety of both the followers and the Imams. For example, since 11th Imam was under surveillance by the government, he would have to visit the officials once or twice a week to announce his presence and report on his activities, but some of his followers would try to use this opportunity to stand on both sides of pathway so they could meet him (a). Imam ‘Askarī (a) instead asks these followers to not talk to him or even point towards him as it would cause problems.
      It has been reported from ‘Alī bin Ja’far al-Ḥalabī who said: We gathered at the military compound to observe Abī Muḥammad (a) on the day of his visit. However, his (a) letter reached (us) with the warning: No one should say their greetings to me, no one should point towards me with their hand, and no one should signal (towards me), because your lives are not safe.
      Another reason a number of scholars have mentioned is that the Wakālah system foreshadowed what the Shī’ī community would have to deal with in the near future and allowed them to prepare for a smoother transition into the period of occultation of the 12th Imam. In other words, by the time of the occultation, much of the Shī’ī community was very much used to not having direct contact with an Imam, or rather, having contact with them through chosen representatives.
      Some of the tasks these agents would perform were the collection and delivery of letters, gifts, khums, zakāt, different types of endowments, and at times even addressing communal issues in their cities. By mid-third century hijrī, the network extended over four large areas: The Arabian Peninsula, Iraq, Iran and Transoxiana – though some reports indicate there were a couple of agents even in some cities in Africa.
      Much of the communication between the Imam (a) and the communities was occurring through letters. One of the famous agents, Aḥmad b. Isḥāq had to ask Imam ‘Askarī (a) for a sample of his (a) handwriting so that he would be able to recognize it from any possible attempts of forgery by government officials. Aḥmad says:
      “Once I went to see Abū Muḥammad (a) and asked him (a) to write for me few lines so that whenever I see his (a) handwriting I can recognize it. The Imam (a) said, ‘Yes,’ and then said, ‘O Aḥmad the writing with a fine pen and with thick pen will look different to you. Do not have doubts.” He (a) then asked for a pen and inkpot and began writing.
      One of these agents was ‘Uthmān b. Sa’īd al-‘Amrī who grew up in the house of Imam Jawād (a) from the age of 11, then became a wakīl for Imam Naqī (a) and ‘Askarī (a). His significance was such that he also became the first nā’ib of the 12th Imam (a). ‘Uthmān b. Sa’īd eventually began residing in Baghdad, disguising himself as an oil seller. If the Shī’a had to deliver that which was obligatory upon them to Imam ‘Askarī (a), they would send it to ‘Uthmān who would put their money or any other items in containers of clarified butter due to dissimulation and fear and carry it to Imam ‘Askarī (a) in Sāmarra.
      Another important agent was Aḥmad b. Isḥāq b. Sa’d al-Ash’arī, mentioned earlier. He was a wakīl of Imam Naqī (a) and ‘Askarī (a) in Qom and during the occultation he moved from Qom to Baghdad and became a close assistant of the aforementioned ‘Uthmān b. Sa’īd. Aḥmad’s significance was such that he was also the senior-most scholar in Qom during his time, whose narrations can be found in Shī’ī works of ḥadīth. He trained numerous students and had written a number of works. After Imam ‘Askarī (a), Aḥmad was one of the individuals who demonstrated that the brother of the 11th Imam, Ja’far – who at the time was claiming to be the Imam himself – could not have been the Imam and God’s authority on Earth.
      There is no denying that there was definitely a degree of confusion in the Shī’ī communities after the 11th Imam, but nevertheless, a lot of this confusion was contained and dealt with by these very agents and representatives who had garnered the trust of their communities over the decades. This is true not just in the case of the 12th Imam but as well as when confusion arose amongst some communities after the demise of any one of the previous Imams (a). In a meeting Imam ‘Askarī (a) has with Aḥmad b. Isḥāq after the Imamate had transferred to him from the 10th Imam, he (a) asks him about the people of Qom and whether their confusion regarding who the next Imam was had been dispelled. Aḥmad (a) who was also a wakīl for the 10th Imam in the city of Qom before that, responds to the 11th Imam saying, “O my master, when your letter was received, there was not a man or a woman from amongst us, and neither a young child who had reached a level of understanding, except that they confessed to the truth (of the fact that you are indeed the Imam).”
      Likewise, when the 12th Imam is born, Imam ‘Askarī (a) sends Aḥmad b. Isḥāq a letter in Qom informing him of the birth of his son. Aḥmad says that a letter was sent in the same handwriting of Imam ‘Askarī (a) in which all of his previous correspondences and letters would be sent, and it said we have been blessed with a child who will remain hidden from people and that the Imam (a) is only informing the closest of his followers.
      Later when Aḥmad visits the 11th Imam (a), the Imam tells him that if Aḥmad was not seen as a noble individual in front of Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) and the Imams, he (a) would not have informed him about the birth of his son – who will fill the Earth with justice and equity.
      The birth of the Mahdī (a) was kept closely guarded and hence many Muslims at the time never came to believe Imam ‘Askari (a) had a son. Few trustworthy individuals – especially from amongst the network of agents – who over the decades had not only gained the trust of the 11th Imam but as well as the trust of their own communities, had been told about the birth and some fortunate enough even had the opportunity to see the 12th Imam. While naturally there was confusion and perplexity in certain segments of the Shī’ī community, this confusion was addressed and dealt with by these agents and as well as Shī’ī scholars over the years. In essence, the Wakālah system and the individual agents themselves paved the path for a smoother transition into the occultation.
    • By Ibn al-Hussain in Just Another Muslim Blogger
         0
      Excerpt from: https://www.iqraonline.net/surat-al-inshirah-an-introductory-exegesis-of-the-meanings-and-messages-contained-within
      There is a question raised in the Quranic sciences, and the answer to it is a starting point that will distinguish the exegetical methodology that a scholar chooses. This question is whether the Qur'an is only a book of information or also a book of moral training and guidance?
      To clarify the first part of the question, let’s give an example. Suppose you visited a jurist to ask them for a ruling on a jurisprudential matter that concerns you. A jurist, in so far as he is a jurist, doesn’t have a responsibility beyond answering you with a yes or no based on his expert opinion on the matter. The jurist will not usually involve himself in the development of the person and his moral training in order that the person stays away from what is impermissible. Similarly, a mathematician who presents mathematical theories will explain his ideas so that others understand it but is not concerned with anything more than that.
      As for the second part of the question, let’s also give an example. Suppose you visited a psychiatrist and complained to them of a problem you are suffering from. The psychiatrist will not just suffice themselves with writing a prescription to help cure you. Rather, they will sit you down and have a discussion with you that seeks not to give you information per se, but in order that the very discussion itself acts as a positive help for your situation and improves your psychological state.
      After these two examples, let us present the question once again: Does the Qur'an play the same role as a jurist, philosopher, physicist or chemist in presenting ideas purely without thinking about a mechanism of ingraining them ideologically within the person’s mind thereby acting as a channel for knowledge that doesn’t have a responsibility beyond delivering information to the other person? Or is the Qur'an – in addition to being a channel for knowledge – a book of moral and spiritual training that seeks to convince its listeners of the ideas it presents, and furthermore seeks through various means to develop a person and deepen their ideas, removing unclarity from them, and thus through itself acting as a cause for human reform and to emphasize ideas that they may have previously known?
      Undoubtedly, the second option is the correct one. If the Qur'an was merely a book of information, what was the need to bring it down in such disparate stages? It would have been possible for Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) to give it all at once to His Prophet (p) and the Prophet can subsequently explain this divine information, whilst comparing all its verses, without the need to bring it down in divided stages.
      The Qur'an, however, plays an important role in building and reforming the Islamic society. One is mistaken if he expects answers akin to the jurists and scientists or considers it similar to a book that presents scientific theories in a dry mechanical style. The Qur'an, in addition to being a book with information, is a book of moral guidance and spiritual refinement, through its style, mode of presentation and its artistic way. The Qur'an aims through its eloquence, the arrangement of its words, its musical effect and its psychological impact to affect its listeners and to enter deeply inside their hearts, not merely to present them with some information. It is thus akin to an ethical scholar who seeks not to merely place information in the mind of his students, but rather act as a moral guide and exemplar for the information he has given them. If we restricted the role of an ethical scholar to just giving ethical information, the value of such scholars would be diminished.
      Based on this premise, we can address another question: Why does the Qurān repeat itself?
      [94:5-6] For indeed, after hardship will be ease. Indeed, after hardship will be ease.
      In Sūrah al-Inshirāḥ, Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) twice repeats the point: there will be ease after hardship. There are many other places where the Quranic verses are repeated, either congruently in their words, or with very minor differences conveying the exact meaning. What is the reason behind the Qur'an containing multiple verses saying the same thing? Exegetes have been divided in their understanding of the secret behind this repetition:
      a) A group of exegetes held the view that there is no repetition of meaning between any two verses, even though the same terms are used. For example, some advocates of this view argue that the basmalah at the start of Sūrah al-Baqara will indicate a different meaning to the basmalah at the start of any other surah. This is because each basmalah is part of a distinct composition that is exclusive to each chapter.
      This view is based on the premise that repetition is useless and futile. They went as far as to say that such futility is impossible for a wise being such as God. If the meaning was completed in the first text, what need would the second text be trying to fulfil? This is what caused some contemporary exegetes to refuse the idea of repetition for the purposes of emphasis like in these verses and other verses in the Qur'an. As such, “indeed, with hardship comes ease” in the sixth verse must give a different meaning to the fifth verse “for indeed, with hardship comes ease”. This way, the Qur'an is placed – according to them – in its lofty position and we do not attribute pointless repetition to God.
      b) In contrast to the first view, the second group of exegetes considered it unnecessary to go to these difficult lengths. Rather, repetition for emphasis amongst Arabs is something acceptable. As such, in the case of Sūrah al-Inshirāḥ for example, the second verse wished to emphasize the principle that ease accompanies hardship. A person who faces a hardship must not be overwhelmed by despondency and anxiety, because the Lord will place ease to accompany this hardship.
      This group of exegetes reject there being any issue with the Qur'an repeating itself, whether its stories or other concepts if this repetition represents a way to emphasize the moral training present in the Qur'an and if it increases the importance of these concepts in the mind and soul of the listener. This is akin to you repeating a concept dozens of times in front of your children. Your purpose is not merely that they know the concept; this is achieved with you mentioning it once, but that the concept is emphasized in their minds and so that they consider it a priority. This way, they can act accordingly. This is one of the main differences between books of information and books of moral training, especially those which use various rhetorical means and tools of influence like the Qur'an.
      Perhaps for this and other reasons, many narrations state that when a believer reads the Qur'an, he makes himself sad through it and he lives a state of fear, hope and is impacted spiritually and emotionally. This is because the Qur'an is not merely a book of information that has no ability to ability to impact through its content and style. It’s a book of knowledge that uses all the means of influence that purposeful and upright media would use.
    • By Ibn al-Hussain in Just Another Muslim Blogger
         0
      Follow on FB: https://www.facebook.com/IqraOnlineBlog/
      Many Muslim theologians in their discussions on the Problem of Evil have argued that existence in the material realm and the systems that govern it are the best possible systems (al-niẓām al-aḥsan) that could have been created and that they enjoy excessive good (ziyādah al-khayr) as opposed to excessive evil. Thereafter, Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) based on His infinite Love and Beneficence certainly [55:3] created man [95:4] in the best of forms, so that He [18:7] may test them to see which of them is best in conduct.
      Our lives are a journey where we are meant to improve day by day, working towards nurturing our best possible selves. In order to do so, we must refrain from anything that distances us away from that which is better for us and we ought to remain subservient to the Lordship of Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى), subscribing to the path He (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) has ordained for us – [3:19] Indeed, with Allah religion is submission (Islam). One of the prerequisites for self-improvement is to be able to manage our time and to have discipline. One of the greatest tragedies afflicting us in our lives is the loss of time, particularly when caused by lack of discipline and a failure to organize ourselves. This issue afflicts not just the young, but as well as the elders – males and females.
      Imam ‘Alī (a) in one of his letters advises his children to fear Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) and to keep their affairs in a naẓm. When the beads of a rosary are tied together with a string, this act is called naẓm – you give the beads an order, as you count the beads you expect there to be one bead after another, you know how many there are in total, and you know how many times you are meant to recite any given dhikr. Naẓm is the opposite of being disorderly and all over the place.
      The journey towards nurturing our best possible selves requires us to contemplate over our day to day affairs, make changes to our lifestyle, repent and learn from our past sins and mistakes, increase the amount of good we do, decrease our bad behaviour towards others, and so on. This can only be done effectively when we have discipline in our lives and are able to manage our time appropriately. In the limited lifespan we have, failure to make any improvement on a daily basis is nothing but a loss. Imam Ṣādiq (a) has said, one whose two days are equal has been deceived, one who does not see any improvement in themselves during the course of the day is at loss, and one who is at loss then death is better for them than life.
    • By Ibn al-Hussain in Just Another Muslim Blogger
         0
      Original post: https://www.iqraonline.net/disobedience-of-Allah-(سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى)-is-foolishness/
      إِنَّمَا التَّوْبَةُ عَلَى اللَّهِ لِلَّذِينَ يَعْمَلُونَ السُّوءَ بِجَهَالَةٍ ثُمَّ يَتُوبُونَ مِن قَرِيبٍ فَأُولَٰئِكَ يَتُوبُ اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِمْ ۗ وَكَانَ اللَّهُ عَلِيمًا حَكِيمًا
      [4:17] [Acceptance of] repentance upon Allah is only for those who commit evil out of ignorance, then repent promptly. It is such whose repentance Allah will accept, and Allah is all-knowing, all-wise.
      Repentance (al-tawbah) is expected from us when we sin and transgress. However, the scenario in which repentance for sin is expected is when we sin while knowing that a certain act is against Allah’s (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) legislation and commands, yet we engage in it. On the other hand, if a person commits an act without knowledge, it is not technically classified as a sin and therefore one is not expected to repent. This is all the while verse [4:17] cited above says that Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) only accepts the repentance of those who commit a sin out of ignorance (jahālah), instead of knowledge (‘ilm).
      The word jahl in Arabic is homonymous between two meanings: one meaning “absence of knowledge” which is the opposite of ‘ilm, and the other meaning can be loosely translated as foolishness or mindlessness, which is the opposite of ‘aql. For example, Shaykh Kulaynī in his Uṣūl al-Kāfī has a book titled Kitāb al-‘Aql wa al-Jahl, where jahl is used in the opposite of ‘aql – not ‘ilm – hence translated by some as the Book of the Intellect and Foolishness, rather than the book of knowledge and ignorance. The verse in question also uses the word jahalah as the opposite of ‘aql and not as the opposite of ‘ilm. In other words, the verse is saying repentance is for a situation where a person commits an act which the sound intellect does not permit one to do or is against one’s rational intuitions, yet due to the overpowering of one’s desires and lust they engaged in it. Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) accepts the repentance of those who commit evil when their sinning is a result of their foolishness, carelessness and mindlessness – while they know it is a sin. This would be in opposition to those who transgress the boundaries laid down by Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) while knowing it is a sin, but yet they engage in it due to hypocrisy or disbelief.
      Mullā Ṣadrā in his commentary on Uṣul al-Kāfī says that the word jahālah in the verse is either grammatically indicating a state of being – meaning they commit evil deeds while they are mindless, or it is an accusative of specification (tamyīz) – meaning they commit evil deeds which originate from foolishness and mindlessness, because committing a sin itself is foolishness and a feigning of ignorance. Hence some scholars have said, anyone who disobeys Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) is jāhil (foolish).
      As for the subsequent verse [4:18] But [acceptance of] repentance is not for those who go on committing misdeeds … these are people who have exceeded in their sins and are accustomed to it. Therefore Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) rejects the repentance of both those amongst the immoral ones who postpone their repentance till the time of their death and those who die upon disbelief. As such, what is meant by [4:17] those who commit evil (al-sū’) are the sinners from amongst the Muslims whose repentance is accepted and [4:18] those who go on committing misdeeds (al-sayyiāt) are the hypocrites whose repentance is not accepted.
      Furthermore, [4:17] says that the acceptance of repentance is “upon Allah” – the phrase generally indicating a type of obligation. Is the acceptance of repentance rooted in Allah’s (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) Justice, or His (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) Kindness? If He (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) decides not to accept someone’s repentance, does that mean He (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) has been unjust? The scholarly opinion on the matter is that His (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) acceptance of our repentance is rooted in His (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) Kindness, not His (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) Justice. After Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) granted us capacity, knowledge, innumerable blessings, sent forth Prophets (p) and made all the necessary preliminaries available to us, He (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) established His (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) argument and evidence upon us – leaving us with no excuse. If despite this a person commits a sin and Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) does not accept their repentance, then this is not inherently and initially unjust – it is against his Kindness.
      Though it can be argued it is also against His (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) Justice from one perspective, and that is because Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) out of His (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) Kindness promised to accept our repentance, then not fulfilling this promise would be an act of injustice. In other words, not accepting one’s repentance is not directly against Allah’s (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) Justice, rather His acceptance is a fulfillment of His (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) promise, which if unfulfilled is an act of injustice. The Qurānic verse acceptance of repentance “upon Allah” is also indicative of the fact that it is something He made necessary for Himself – not that His (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) initial Justice necessitated it.
    • By Ibn al-Hussain in Just Another Muslim Blogger
         8
      Originally posted here: https://www.iqraonline.net/riya-a-journey-towards-the-self-ikhlas-a-journey-towards-Allah/
      When you do an act that falls under the domain of worship (‘ibādah), you can either perform this action for Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى), you can do it for someone or something other than Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى), or you can do it for both Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) and another entity together. The latter two are called riyā’ (showing-off and ostentation) and Islam clearly condemns this. Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) says:
      أَنَا خَيْرُ شَرِيكٍ؛ مَنْ أَشْرَكَ مَعِيَ غَيْرِي فِي عَمَلٍ عَمِلَهُ لَمْ أَقْبَلْهُ إِلا مَا كَانَ لِي خَالِصاً
      I am the best of partners. Whoever associates others with Me in a deed that he has done, I will not accept it except that which is done for Me sincerely.
      Hence, riyā’ is to seek a position and status amongst people through an act of worship. All of us want praise and a reputation in the eyes of others, yet we have to fight and oppose this tendency and make our actions as sincere as possible for Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى). In a tradition attributed to the Prophet (p), it says:
      Verily, the first people to be judged on the Day of Resurrection will be a man who was martyred. He will be brought, the blessings of Allah will be made known and he will acknowledge them. Allah will say: What did you do about them? The man will say: I fought in your cause until I was martyred. Allah will say: You have lied, for you fought only that it would be said you were brave, and thus it was said. Then, Allah will order him to be dragged upon his face until he is cast into Hellfire.
      Another man studied knowledge, taught others, and recited the Qur'an. He will be brought, the blessings of Allah will be made known and he will acknowledge them. Allah will say: What did you do about them? The man will say: I learned knowledge, taught others, and I recited the Qur'an for your sake. Allah will say: You have lied, for you studied only that it would be said you are a scholar and you recited the Qur'an only that it would be said you are a reciter, and thus it was said. Then, Allah will order him to be dragged upon his face until he is cast into Hellfire.
      Another man was given an abundance of blessings from Allah and every kind of wealth. He will be brought, the blessings of Allah will be made known and he will acknowledge them. Allah will say: What did you do about them? The man will say: I did not leave any good cause beloved to you but that I spent on it for your sake. Allah will say: You have lied, for you spent only that it would be said you are generous, and thus it was said. Then, Allah will order him to be dragged upon his face until he is cast into Hellfire.
      As for riyā’ in non-worship acts, such as someone showing off their calligraphy or sports skills, or some other talent they possess, scholars have mentioned some intricate details that are worthy of note, but to put it roughly, riyā’ in those acts is not always condemned, in fact at times it is praised and necessary. The problematic riyā’ is applicable when an act should be done for Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) alone, but instead people become the Qibla and Ka’ba for one’s act. Often times, people in influential positions – whether on a large communal level, or even within their own smaller social circles – fall prey to riyā’ as all their efforts are in trying to acquire the satisfaction of people or both people and Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى), as opposed to only Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى).
      Stages of Riyā’
      First Stage: The first, most obvious and apparent stage of riyā’ is to practically perform an act for the sake of people – this is the only reason why one performs this act. In fact, if there are no people to look at him, or hear him, they will not do the act. There is absolutely no intention to reach proximity to Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) in this act.
      Second Stage: This is when the first intended audience for the act are people, but at the same time, there is an intention to perform the act for Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) as well. Both people and Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) are placed on the same horizontal plane. The individual will not perform the act if people do not see him, but at the time same he also expects Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) to accept his actions.
      In both the aforementioned stages, one’s act of worship is legally invalidated and incorrect.
      Third Stage: At this point the riyā’ becomes more hidden in relation to the previous two stages – though it is still defined as a manifested and conspicuous riyā’. The person intends to do an act of worship for both others and Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) and this relationship is equal – both have to be there for one to perform the act. If Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) is there, but people are not there, he will say, “Why should I bother doing it?” On the contrary if people are there, but Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) is not there, he will say, “Why should I burden myself with worship?” Legally speaking, even in this scenario the worship is invalidated.
      Fourth Stage: This is when riyā’ is defined as hidden and inconspicuous (khafī). The intention is primarily for Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى), but people should be there as well. If people are not present, he will perform the act for Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى), but that excitement and delight that would have existed if people were to see him is not present. This is a sign. When people are not present, they are lazy and not very motivated to do the act, but in front of people the worship is more vibrant, longer and so on.
      قال أمير المؤمنين: ثلاث علامات للمرائي: ينشط  إذا رأى الناس، ويكسل إذا كان وحده، ويحب أن يحمد في جميع أموره
      Imam ‘Alī (a) has said: There are three signs of a show-off, he is energetic when he see’s people, lazy when he is alone, and loves to be praised in all of his deeds.
      In essence, though his purpose is to pray for the sake of Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى), but what is really important for him is his own excitement and happiness.
      Legally speaking, there is no verdict here, perhaps very few jurists have said this also invalidates the action. Nevertheless, it does weaken the worship and there is a discussion on whether it is accepted or not in the eyes of Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى).
      Fifth Stage: During the act of worship, the intention is that it is only being performed for Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) and the person is conscious of this. However, after the act is complete, the person brings it up at a later time – even if it happens to be decades later – so that people get to know about it. Satan’s whispers to not let him off even after the worship is complete and follow him for a much longer time. There are different ways to convey this as well – for example, someone who prayed Ṣalāt al-Layl, but later wants people to know about it, says, “can you please pass me some water, my throat is really dry today as the recitation of my Ṣalāt al-Layl took really long.”
      It is here where ḥabṭ (fall of a deed) takes place. The act of worship was done correctly, the angels carry the act to Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى), but later it is declined and falls back. ‘Allāmah Ṭabāṭabā’ī and perhaps other scholars believe that when ḥabṭ occurs, it indicates there was definitely a problem when the action was first done, but it was extremely hidden. This stage is difficult to identify, because sometimes you may want to encourage others around you to worship, but Satan is cunning enough to set up traps for us.
      أبي جعفر عليه السلام أنه قال: الابقاء على العمل أشد من العمل قال: وما الابقاء على العمل، قال: يصل الرجل بصلة وينفق نفقة لله وحده لا شريك له، فتكتب له سرا ثم يذكرها فتمحى فتكتب له علانية ثم يذكرها فتمحى وتكتب له رياء
      Imam Bāqir (a): Preserving a deed is more difficult than performing the deed itself. A man said: “What does preserving a deed mean?” He (a) said: “It is when a man maintains good relations with relatives or spends something just for the sake of Allah – who has no partners. This will be recorded for him as a good deed performed secretly. He then mentions it to people, and the deed is erased and recorded as a good deed performed publicly. Then he mentions it to people again and it is erased and is recorded as an instance of riyā’.”
      Sixth Stage: This is when a person does an act for Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) and does not mention it himself afterwards either. However, someone else may bring it up and once it is brought up, they feel a sense of happiness and content.
      If they are happy because of what they see as Allah’s grace in having hidden their deficiencies and having exposed their goodness, using this as an opportunity to strengthen their relationship with Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى), then they have not only protected their deed, but rather they have further elevated it. This is very difficult to do since it requires for a person be able to see the Act of Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى).
      Satan whispers in many ways causing us to show off. When one learns that showing off and ostentation in one’s act of worship causes deficiencies, Satan further uses that as an opportunity to make you think that you might as well abandon the act altogether. Instead of committing to fighting against the whispers of Satan, one ends up abandoning the act completely.
      The solution to all of this is developing sincerity (ikhlāṣ), which is nothing but a journey towards Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) and it sits in contradiction to riyā’, which is a journey towards the self and Satan. In order to develop ikhlāṣ, one needs to see Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) as Ever-Living (Al-Ḥayy). There is no room for taking into consideration anyone other than Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) in one’s act of worship. All other lives are nothing but mere subordinates of Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى).
      هُوَ الْحَيُّ لَا إِلَٰهَ إِلَّا هُوَ فَادْعُوهُ مُخْلِصِينَ لَهُ الدِّينَ ۗ الْحَمْدُ لِلَّهِ رَبِّ الْعَالَمِينَ
      [40:65] He is the Ever-Living; there is no deity except Him, so call upon Him, being sincere to Him in religion. All praise is due to Allah, Lord of the worlds.
    • By Ibn al-Hussain in Just Another Muslim Blogger
         0
      Originally posted here: https://www.iqraonline.net/fasad-and-expectations-for-the-ulu-baqiyatin/
      1400 years ago the Umayyads seized complete power of the Muslim world, ruling for 90 years and came to be recognized as one of the most damaging dynasties to take control of the Muslim world. The Umayyads were able to alter and enforce an interpretation of Islam on the newly developing Islamic nation that dictated the fundamentality of tribalism, the superiority of Arabs, harshness, warfare and geographical expansions. In these 90-years, the Umayyads did not have much to do with Islam, rather they primarily saw it as a means to further strengthen their political power. Hence, we do not even see any significant depth in Islamic scholarship being produced during this period, in fact, on the contrary, some traditions indicate that some groups of Muslims were even unaware of rules concerning the Ḥalāl and Ḥarām during parts of Umayyad rule. The remnants of this enforced interpretation can be seen predominantly in certain theological discussions, the ḥadīth, Qurānic exegesis and jurisprudence, as it deeply embedded itself into the minds of the early Muslim community. Even some later Shī’ī traditions where the Imams (a) respond to individual questions can only be understood when one understands certain trends and ideas inherited by the community from the previous Umayyad dynasty.
      According to the Umayyad painting of Islam, any movement seeking reform, change and improvement was deemed sectarian and a cause of a split in the Muslim nation – a threat to their power – even if it happened to be one of their own, like the caliph ‘Umar b. ‘Abd al-‘Azīz. Hence, 1380 years ago, Imam Ḥusayn (a) was also seen as a troublemaker. Imam Ḥusayn (a) rightly deemed the Umayyad caliphate – still in its infancy – as a source of corruption (fasād) on Earth and described them as those who obey Shayṭān instead of obeying the Most Gracious. The Imam (a) took a stand against their corruption which continues to be remembered till today:
      So, he (a) called to You (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) flawlessly, gave advices, and sacrificed his soul for You to save Your servants from ignorance and perplexity of straying off. Yet, those whom were seduced by this worldly life, who sold their share (of reward) with the lowliest and meanest, retailed their Hereafter with the cheapest price, acted haughtily, perished because of following their desires, brought to themselves Your wrath and the wrath of Your Prophet. ~ Ziyārah of Arba’īn
      However, the stand of Imam Ḥusayn (a) was not against any petty corruption. At times you have corruption on the micro-level, perhaps between two individuals in a business transaction, or between a couple where one spouse is oppressive to the other. Fighting against this corruption would not have required him (a) to do what he did and say what he (a) did. He (a) could have given allegiance and remained in Medina to fight against such corruption. Other times you have a macro-level and systematic corruption – a type of corruption that is built into the very systems ruling over you. It can even be argued that the former types of corruption ultimately originate in some aspects of the latter.
      The Qurān contains examples of both types of corruption. For example:
      وَلَا تَنقُصُوا الْمِكْيَالَ وَالْمِيزَانَ ۚ إِنِّي أَرَاكُم بِخَيْرٍ وَإِنِّي أَخَافُ عَلَيْكُمْ عَذَابَ يَوْمٍ مُّحِيطٍ
      [11:84] Do not diminish the measure or the balance. Indeed I see that you are faring well, but I fear for you the punishment of an all-embracing day.
      This verse is referring to corruption that occurs in matters of transactions and business, asking individuals to not cheat one another – such a person would be a fāsid. In order to understand corruption on the macro-level, we should see who the Qurān describes as a mufsid. A few examples:
      ثُمَّ بَعَثْنَا مِن بَعْدِهِم مُّوسَىٰ بِآيَاتِنَا إِلَىٰ فِرْعَوْنَ وَمَلَئِهِ فَظَلَمُوا بِهَا ۖ فَانظُرْ كَيْفَ كَانَ عَاقِبَةُ الْمُفْسِدِينَ
      [7:103] Then after them We sent Moses with Our signs to Pharaoh and his elite, but they wronged them. So observe how was the fate of the agents of corruption!
      The verse asks us to go and investigate the fate of the mufsidīn – the very agents of corruption, those who caused corruption on a macro-level. A fāsid causes corruption on a micro-level which impacts him or herself and perhaps a few around them, but a mufsid impacts society at large. The Qurān repeatedly emphasizes the mufsid aspect of Pharaoh instead of his kufr.
      إِنَّ فِرْعَوْنَ عَلَا فِي الْأَرْضِ وَجَعَلَ أَهْلَهَا شِيَعًا يَسْتَضْعِفُ طَائِفَةً مِّنْهُمْ يُذَبِّحُ أَبْنَاءَهُمْ وَيَسْتَحْيِي نِسَاءَهُمْ ۚ إِنَّهُ كَانَ مِنَ الْمُفْسِدِينَ
      [28:4] Indeed Pharaoh exalted himself over the land, reducing its people to factions, abasing one group of them, slaughtering their sons and sparing their women. Indeed He was one of the agents of corruption.
      This verse further implies that it was the power and authority Pharaoh held which allowed him to cause the corruption that he did.
      وَمِنَ النَّاسِ مَن يُعْجِبُكَ قَوْلُهُ فِي الْحَيَاةِ الدُّنْيَا وَيُشْهِدُ اللَّهَ عَلَىٰ مَا فِي قَلْبِهِ وَهُوَ أَلَدُّ الْخِصَامِ وَإِذَا تَوَلَّىٰ سَعَىٰ فِي الْأَرْضِ لِيُفْسِدَ فِيهَا وَيُهْلِكَ الْحَرْثَ وَالنَّسْلَ ۗ وَاللَّهُ لَا يُحِبُّ الْفَسَادَ
      [2:204] Among the people is he whose talk about worldly life impresses you, and he holds Allah witness to what is in his heart, though he is the staunchest of enemies.
      [2:205] And if he were to wield authority, he would try to cause corruption in the land, and to ruin the crop and the stock, and Allah does not like corruption.
      These two verses are describing an individual as the staunchest or fiercest of enemies. The staunchest of enemies is someone whose speech and words will impress you, but when they gain power and take over, they cause corruption and destruction over the lands – this is not a micro-level corruption by any means.
      It was this type of corruption that the Imam (a) was primarily trying to expose and fight against. Furthermore, not everyone can necessarily fight against this corruption and neither is it expected from everyone and this is for a couple of reasons. Firstly, the Qurān considers this an expectation for the Ūlū Baqīyatin:
      فَلَوْلَا كَانَ مِنَ الْقُرُونِ مِن قَبْلِكُمْ أُولُو بَقِيَّةٍ يَنْهَوْنَ عَنِ الْفَسَادِ فِي الْأَرْضِ إِلَّا قَلِيلًا مِّمَّنْ أَنجَيْنَا مِنْهُمْ ۗ وَاتَّبَعَ الَّذِينَ ظَلَمُوا مَا أُتْرِفُوا فِيهِ وَكَانُوا مُجْرِمِينَ 
      [11:116] Why were there not among the generations before you a remnant [of the wise] who might forbid corruption in the Earth, except a few. Those who were wrongdoers pursued that in which they had been granted affluence, and they were a guilty lot.
      وَمَا كَانَ رَبُّكَ لِيُهْلِكَ الْقُرَىٰ بِظُلْمٍ وَأَهْلُهَا مُصْلِحُونَ
      [11:117] Your Lord would never destroy the townships unjustly while their inhabitants were bringing about reform.
      As per some works of tafsīr, the Ūlū Baqīyatin have been described as the intellectuals and scholars – in the general sense of the word – of society. They are expected to expose, forbid and fight against this level of corruption. Micro-level corruption can be forbidden by even the laity and in fact they are expected to do so given the right conditions, but macro-level corruption requires more and cannot necessarily be expected from them. It requires knowledge – specialist knowledge of who one is up against, knowledge of the system and how it works – and secondly, it requires purity and righteousness. As the verse implies, only a few special people come forth to forbid this extent of corruption, while the rest themselves are guilty of sins and corruption.
    • By Ibn al-Hussain in Just Another Muslim Blogger
         0
      Originally posted here: https://www.iqraonline.net/repulsing-the-basis-of-moral-vices/
      There are numerous ways to encourage one’s self to behave ethically. Scholars of all religions and ideologies have debated and offered different analyses on why people should behave ethically and how they can eliminate moral vices from their actions. For example, some argue people should act ethically because society appreciates and praises such behaviour, which eventually leads to worldly benefits. Speaking the truth is good because people will trust you more, it will give you a good reputation in society, it will increase your business sales. If you are known as a liar, not only will society not trust you, you will hurt your reputation and your business will not make any money.
      Some others argue one should act ethically and abstain from vices as this will result in benefits in the Hereafter. If you are patient in this world and endure its hardships, you will receive your reward in heaven. If you are generous in this world and spend from your money to help people, you will be given innumerable reward in heaven. This does not necessarily have anything to do with what people will think or say about you or what worldly benefits you will attain by acting ethically.
      Despite many other proposed reasons for why one should act ethically, according to ‘Allāmah Ṭabāṭabā’ī, the Qurān offers a reason no other book – not even the previous Divine Books – offer. He says, through the Qurān:
      “Man is trained in character and knowledge, and the knowledge is used in a way that does not leave room for the very basis of vices. In other words, this system removes the vile characteristics, not by eliminating them, but by repulsing all motives other than Allah.”
      The Qurān says [10:65] Indeed, honour belongs to Allah entirely; and [2:165] All power belongs to Allah. Why does one do any action for other than Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى)? It is because man is either seeking honour and power, or they fear someone else’s honour and power. Both become a basis from which moral vices emanate. However, if we were to truly understand and act on the meanings of these two verses, there would be no basis, no foundation, from which moral vices could originate.
      What would be the source of someone’s riyā’ (ostentation and showing-off)? Riyā’ is when one shows off to gain something for themselves or out of fear of what others might say about them if they do not see them behaving in a certain way. Would there be any basis left for committing this moral vice when one recognizes that all power and honour belongs to Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) – who would one fear other than Allah and what honour would one seek through showing-off when all of it belongs to Him alone? Others do not have anything to give to us for us to show off to them in the hopes of receiving something.
      What would be the source of stinginess? One is stingy when they do not want to give that which they believe is their own, in a situation where they should be generous. This is because they believe spending from their wealth will cause a dent in their power, authority and honour. Would there be any basis of being stingy when one recognizes all power belongs to Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) and He (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) is the Owner of all things? One does not own anything in reality for them to believe spending from it will result in a deficiency or loss.
      Such is the case with the rest of the moral vices. Essentially this is nothing but a different way of rendering the Tawḥīdī worldview. Thus, the Qurān does not fundamentally tell humans to behave ethically by telling them about the worldly benefits that will be achieved or the rewards of the Hereafter – a method which generally results in the selective elimination of certain vices after one has already attained them. Instead, the Qurān primarily trains humans to repulse away the very basis from where absolutely any moral vice could originate.
      قَالَ عَلِيُّ بْنُ الْحُسَيْنِ ع لَوْ مَاتَ مَنْ بَيْنَ الْمَشْرِقِ وَ الْمَغْرِبِ لَمَا اسْتَوْحَشْتُ بَعْدَ أَنْ يَكُونَ الْقُرْآنُ مَعِي
       Imam Zayn al-‘Ābidīn (a) said: I will have no fear or anxiety even if everyone between the East and West were to die, as long as the Qurān is with me.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Blog Statistics

    78
    Total Blogs
    423
    Total Entries
×
×
  • Create New...