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


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Al-Maghribi

  • Rank
    Rafidi Destroyer

Profile Information

  • Religion

Previous Fields

  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

1,264 profile views
  1. Please show me the doctrine of 12 imams from my books? If your talking about these Sahih MuslimNarrated Jabir bin Samura: I heard Muhammad saying, "The (Islamic) religion will continue until the Hour (day of resurrection), having twelve Caliphs for you, all of them will be from Quraysh."(Book 020: Number 4477, 4478, 4480, 4481, 4482, 4483) Sahih BukhariNarrated By Jabir bin Samura : I heard the Prophet saying, "There will be twelve Muslim rulers ." He then said a sentence which I did not hear. My father said, "All of them (those rulers) will be from Quraish.( Volume 009, Book 089, Hadith Number 329.) Sunan Abu Dawood The Prophet said: "This religion remains standing until there are twelve vicegerents over you, all of them agreeable to the nation, all of them from Quraysh."( Book 36: Number 4266) Musnad Ahmad ibn HanbalMasrooq rates that someone asked Abdullah Ibn Masood, "O Abaa Abd al-Rahmaan, did you ask the Messenger of Allah how many caliphs will rule this nation?". Abdullah Ibn Masood replied, "Yes, we did ask the Messenger of Allah and he replied, "Twelve, like the number of chiefs (nuqabaa) of Bani Israel"( Musnad-e-Ahmad, vol 1, pg 398) These ahadith have nothing to do with the the doctrine of 12er imama, Also Ali ibn Hussein, Baqir, Sadiq, Musa,Reda,Taqi,Naqi,Askari never ruled so the ahadith are not talking about them. Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman are the first 3. Uqbah bin Aws al Sadusi narrated: Ibn Umar RA said: In this nation there shall be twelve Caliphs, Abu Bakr Al-Siddiq, you got his name right, Omar Al-Farouq as an iron horn you got his name right, Othman who is Zhu Nourain (the one with two lights) has been given two portions of mercy for he was innocently killed, you got his name right. Takhreej Kitab al Sunnah 1154 Sahih Also Prophet (Peace & Blessings of Allaah be upon Him) said: "The world will not come to an end until the Arabs are ruled by a man from my family whose name is the same as mine and whose father�s name is the same as my father�s." Sunan Abi Dawud, 11/370) The Madhi name is Muhammad ibn Abdullah not Muhammad ibn Hasan Askari. Refuting the idea that 12er mahdism exists in Sunni books Dimashqiah further demolishes this As for the video i posted above. Why dont you try and disprove what Uthman al Khamis said?
  2. Had Charles Martel not been victorious at Poitiers -already, you see, the world had already fallen into the hands of the Jews, so gutless a thing Christianity! -then we should in all probability have been converted to Mohammedanism [islam], that cult which glorifies the heroism and which opens up the seventh Heaven to the bold warrior alone. Then the Germanic races would have conquered the world. Christianity alone prevented them from doing so. - Führerhauptquartier You see, it's been our misfortune to have the wrong religion. Why didn't we have the religion of the Japanese, who regard sacrifice for the Fatherland as the highest good? The Mohammedan religion [islam] too would have been more compatible to us than Christianity. Why did it have to be Christianity with its meekness and flabbiness? - Inside the Third Reich: Memoirs, pg. 115 I can imagine people being enthusiastic about the paradise of Mohammed, but as for the insipid paradise of the Christians! In your lifetime, you used to hear the music of Richard Wagner. After your death, it will be nothing but hallelujahs, the waving of palms, children of an age for the feeding bottle, and hoary old men. The man of the isles pays homage to the forces of nature. But Christianity is an invention of sick brains: one could imagine nothing more senseless, nor any more indecent way of turning the idea of the Godhead into a mockery. A n***** with his taboos is crushingly superior to the human being who seriously believes in transubstantiation - "Hitler's Table Talk", p. 143 The best thing is to let Christianity die a natural death. A slow death has something comforting about it. The dogma of Christianity gets worn away before the advances of science... The instructions of a hygienic nature that most religions gave, contributed to the foundation of organized communities. The precepts ordering people to wash, to avoid certain drinks, to fast at appointed dates, to take exercise, to rise with the sun, to climb to the top of the minaret — all these were obligations invented by intelligent people. The exhortation to fight courageously is also self-explanatory. Observe, by the way, that, as a corollary, the Moslem was promised a paradise peopled with sensual girls, where wine flowed in streams — a real earthly paradise. The Christians, on the other hand, declare themselves satisfied if after their death they are allowed to sing hallelujahs! ...Christianity, of course, has reached the peak of absurdity in this respect. And that's why one day its structure will collapse. Science has already impregnated humanity. Consequently, the more Christianity clings to its dogmas, the quicker it will decline "Hitler's Table Talk" "The only religion I respect is Islam. The only prophet I admire is the Prophet Muhammad." (Hitler, quoted by Ahmed Huber; Kevin Coogan, "The mysterious Achmed Huber: Friend to Hitler (Authenticity doubted)
  3. It seems like after all that study you learned nothing. Yazidism is not named after Yazid ibn Muawiyya its name comes from Yezdan meaning God thats why their other name is ئێزیدی. They do however belive Yazid is Sultan Ezi. They did not come from Sunni Islam they adopted some sufi deoctrines into their belief which is a mix of Mithraism and Zoroastrians. Their belief can be dated to the period of Gnosticism.
  4. Hello MFA No not really. We dont have taqiyya filled ahadith causing every hadith to have another one contradicting it. Also we dont have the belief in tahreef ahudubillah like you Shuyukh said about your sect ;) Thats not true at all. The marjas(who each are a madhab) differ on fiqh. The case is much much worse for aqeeda. Thisis why some of your scholars want gnosticism betought in the hawza while others reject it. Some of you hold the belief in wahdat ul wujood(like Kamal al Haidari and Khoimeinei) while other declare whoever hold such a belief a Kaffir (Yassir al Habib). You have no such thing as Ijma. Via fabricated ahadith made up later. Shi3i tawatur filled with taqiyya is should not be refered to as tawatur. Also Tahref is mutawatir in your booksyt you reject it. I challenge you to find me 1 source from the time of Jaafar al Sadiq saying he was a Shi3i. So did Zaydiyya, Ismailiya and other groups. And they spread after the death of Jaafar.
  5. Not like shiism. Notice Haydar knows nothing about Shiis. Back than shi3a didnt have sahih hasan daif etc etc. These was later introduced by Al Hilli. The chain you mentioned doesnt exist. It is the case. We do find contradiction everywhere. Something that bothered Al Tusi as we saw earlier. And just as Yusuf al Bahrani also pointed out. So one can dismiss all shi3i ahadith without a problem. No not really. I belive the mistakes Mosawi make are mistakes and not taqiyya. As for what that man said, thats just a mistake. Which i why i would prefer if the Deen show called Dimashqiah or Uthman Khamis next time. I dont see the problem with that. Zakir Naik have made many revert to Islam. I have yet to see a Shi3i be as effective. Mariam didnt receive a Quran from Jibril unlike what we read in al kafi about Fatima which was included in Al Jafr. This means the shi3a dont belive the revelation ended with Muhammad. Which is what the brother pointed out. “Many knowledgeable people have stated that Abdullah bin Saba was a Jew who had accepted Islam and showed great devotion for Hadhrat Ali (may Allah be pleased with him). As a Jew, he used to exaggerated the personality of Joshua, the son of Nun, and the Wasi of Moses. After becoming a Muslim he began to exalt the personality of Hadhrat Ali much beyond the due limit, and he was the first person to declare that it was obligatory to believe in the Imamate of Hadhrat Ali, and completely dissociated himself form his enemies and he openly opposed them and denounced them as infidels”.[Rijal-i-Kashi, page.71]. Sure
  6. Hell Mfah once we get rid of all your ad hominem i saw this The Jaafar of your sect was invented much later after Jaafar ibn Muhammad died. As for what i said about 12er rafidism i quoted you scholars and everything i said is in your books.
  7. Imam not imams its singular. And the Imam of the Muslims is Muhammad.
  8. Part 2 As for the part about Mariam. Mariam did not receive a revelation(book). According to al kafi Fatima received a Quran. So what he said about Gabriel was correct. Some call Al Kafi for Kulayni just as Shi3a here call Jami Bukhari for Sahih Bukhari or simply Bukhari. Likewise Tijani called al kafi for kulayni in his debate with Uthman al Khamis. I dont see a problem with that. Seeing your lack of knowledge about ahlu sunnah and about the historical Jaafar ibn Muhammad i can see the result to why you would make such a statement as this. Then again your sect was founded by Abdullah ibn Saba just as admited by Kashi and Nimatullah Jazairi. Later more ghulu came and you sect was 90% completed during the time of Behbahani were Khoimeinei added the final touch by inventing Wilayatu al Faqih. Just as we read in your books, Hasan Al Askari never had a son and non of his wives were found pregnant once he died. Also Hakima never existed and she is suppose to have witnessed the birth of the Mahdi. If you belive in him and that he is 1000+ years old. You than have lost the ability to make a statement like this. So lets sum up. Jaafar al Sadiq was a sunni. No non-shi3i historical source claims otherwise making. No evidence for the Mahdi. Making him non-historical. No one can accept a source that contains taqiyya making such ahadith non objective. I belive that sums it up.
  9. Hello Haidar let us see what you have for us today. As for the other forum i dont really bother talking about that here. Nor about you attacks on Dimashqiah as i know why shi3a dislike him after what he did to you. Because taqiyya was used you have contradicting ahadith. Making all of your ahadith books useless like your scholars admit. “The majority of contradictions in our narrations after observation and research or even all of the contradictions originate from Taqqiyah.” Source: al-Hadaeq al Nadirah by Yusuf al Bahrani 1/8. Only a small amount of the rulings of the religion were known for sure, because their narrations were mixed with the narrations of Taqqiyah(dissimulation), as was admitted by Thiqat al-Islam Muhammad bin Ya’aqoub al-Kulayni may Allah fill his grave with light in his collection al-Kafi. vol.1 pg.5: Even Tusi back in the days knew his religion had big holes. And among the Hadiths (narrated) by our companions (Shia scholars/companions of the Imams) are so many disparities, contrast, contravening and contradictions that you will not find a single report that we agree upon which doesn’t have another that contradicts it, and not a single Hadith is safe from another which denies it. These (contradictions) are to such an extent that our opponents (the Muslims/Ahl Al-Sunnah) have used it as the biggest accusation/attack against our school and as a proof for the falsehood of our creed.( Tahtheeb Al-Ahkam 1/8 by sheikh of the Shia sect al Tusi.) See how worthless your ahadith are? How is that any different than your scholars traveling collecting taqiyya filled ahadith? No you dont. You cant even agree about mutah or when to use taqiyya. We agree on prayer. As for were the hand should be we have qabt(even malikis not sadl as most shi3a wishfully think). As to were the hands should be than all the positions are correct as Rasul Allah used all. No not really. As they never saw the prophet what they said has no importance unless its ijtihad. Hahahaha. No such Iron-clad chain exists. No wonder you are so biased in your argumentation. Here comes the fun part. Now find me a contemporary sunni from the time of Baqir or Saddiq that said he was a shi3i. Seeing as no source exist. This claim here gets destroyed. Since what you have from them are all fabricated with a touch of Taqiyya. If you bothered to read he link you would have known the sunni view. So if the guy made a mistake than its not a problem as his a humanbeing. Not talking about William Campbell as his opponent. Rather Zakir Naik refrence pointing even if non related topics were introduced in the debate by Campbell. That is enough to respect Zakir Naik. Today perhaps. Perhaps you can name these debaters. William Lane Craig? James White? He has more knowledge than Deedat (he was also a student of Deedat). I dont think you are in the position to make such a statement. Esp since you know nothing about Shiism.
  10. This is a good example of how poorly educated the rawafid are. The fact that he refers to me as a salafi(indirectly via this silly pic) shows the rawafid do not know that the Salafis are against ISIS and Al Nusra. And they bash Sheikh Osama bin Laden (rh) day and night. Yet this poorly educated rafidi thinks that whoever is against the shi3a is a salafi.
  11. Lets see how biased the mods are here on RC
  12. Hello daru. Why dont you go back and being a wannabi Muhadith playing around with pseudo-hadith sciene Darul. It seems like since you cannot adress what was stated you decide to put in a lol trying to make what was said seem ridiculous. A very old fallacy.
  13. I am happy you admit the Shi3i God is a Triun Being just as Khoimeinei said. The difference would be the christian Version is Holy Spirit, Son and Father while the 12er Version is Ali, Muhammad, Allah? As for the passage i posted. It says God put lying spirits into Prophets. If you think that all good than good for you :)
  • Create New...