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

muslim720

Advanced Members
  • Content Count

    937
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

muslim720 last won the day on November 11 2013

muslim720 had the most liked content!

About muslim720

  • Rank
    Level 3 Member
  • Birthday July 20

Profile Information

  • Religion
    Islam

Previous Fields

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

2,035 profile views
  1. Salaam alaykum wa rahmatullah, After spending countless hours on ShiaChat, I am here to bid farewall to everyone here and this website. First, I would like to thank the moderators and administrators for being so understanding to allow me, a non-Shia, speak his mind as frequently and as openly. Second, I would like to apologize to anyone I may have offended. The intention was never to offend anyone but learn from each other. Last, no Sunni is better than Shia and no Shia is better than Sunni except in their faith, intention and deeds. I have said this before and I will say it again. I have Shia friends that I am jealous of because their piety and noble deeds exceed mine by miles. May Allah [swt] bless you all. Keep me in your prayers and I will keep you in mine. PS - it is a farewell note so please do not comment in a way which would force me to come back and respond. Also, do not turn this into another debate. We do not bicker and fight when parting from one of our brothers :)
  2. Walaykum as salaam, May Allah [swt] bless you and protect you (from harm) after sharing the above-mentioned points. I am not a Shia but even I was moved by your post. We must never lose sight of the four points I have highlighted from your post.
  3. Ahlul Bayt [ra] with uppercase "A" and the general with lowercase "a". Brilliant! I have never laughed this hard when it comes to religious blunders. Brother Abul_Hassan01, this is remarkable work.
  4. They were all Prophets [asws], not Imams [ra]. Furthermore, if Ibrahim [as] was an Imam, then the criteria was for him to first attain prophethood. Where is this exception made for Imams [ra] (that they can bypass prophethood and directly attain Imamat)? So, as we see, apples and oranges. We ask for proof for Imamat. You are showing us successorship among Prophets [asws]. Not to mention that these Prophets [asws] came when the religion had not been completed and perfected. Once the religion was perfected, there was no need for Divinely Appointed Prophets [asws] nor Imams [ra]. I asked you to prove Imamat from the Qur'an. I do not care for the Shia sense. If you present the example of Ibrahim [as] from the Qur'an then you have to play by the rules of the Qur'an. Ibrahim [as] was a prophet and then he was promoted to being an Imam as well (as per your claim). If this is true, then all Imams must first attain prophethood. Otherwise, you must establish proof from the Qur'an where it says that your Imams [ra] were exceptions to this rule; that they became Imams without attaining prophethood.
  5. Good point. I mean it. Here is where you have an opportunity to learn our position though you may continue to disagree with it all your life. Neither Abu Bakr [ra] nor Fatima [ra] can be right solely based on who they were. However, when it came to Fadak, Abu Bakr [ra] was right because he was upon the Sunnah. Please read the narration (I have read a few versions of the same one) which says that Abu Bakr [ra] assured Fatima [ra] that he would maintain Fadak like Rasulullah [saw] after which Fatima [ra] was pleased with him. While Abu Bakr [ra] was right, Fatima [ra], by asking for Fadak, did not do anything wrong just like angels - who are infallible - were not wrong when they only expressed their view that they thought they would be appointed vicegerents on earth. She only thought that Fadak would be her inheritance since the land remained in possession of the Prophet [saw]. The Qur'an attests that Fay cannot be owned by individuals. Through authentic Sunnah, we know that Fadak was never gifted. In fact, the Prophet [saw] used it for travellers (see my narration from Tirmidhi). Furthermore, it is unanimously agreed that Fay goes to the leader of Muslims (to be under his guardianship) after Prophet [saw]. And historically we know that Imam Ali [ra] did not change the way Fadak was maintained.
  6. 1. For example who? And I hope you are not talking about those who turned back on the religion upon whom Abu Bakr [ra] declared war. But knowing how imbecile you are, I would not be surprised if you start taking their side over one of the most eminent companions of the Prophet [saw]. 2. Really? Try to refrain from using such language. Sometimes the person in front of you might have spent a lot of time in situations you would faint in. So don't act tough when you cannot back it up. Of course you are looking at a screen otherwise you may have seen stars. 3. Now we have it straight from the horse's mouth. And then you have the nerve to accuse us of your own crime by saying, "The arguments come later and then you accuse us of reverse reasoning." That is what you do and you have admitted to it. Thank you. If Fatima [ra] disagrees, then forget the Qur'an, Sunnah and history. She must be right. Everything else can take a hike, right? 4. Let us assume Abu Bakr [ra] - as you allege - ran away from battlefields. But when he came to Fatima's [ra] house, according to your madhhab, Imam Ali [ra] could do nothing to save his wife. Furthermore, according to you, Abu Bakr [ra] took Fadak like it was nobody's business and still Imam Ali [ra] could not do anything. So you may consider Abu Bakr [ra] to be a coward but who is the bigger coward as per your own formula? 5. Without getting into the technicalities of what you have brought forth as proof and its tafseer, I will entertain your point. Going by your logic and taking your proof at face-value, Ibrahim [as] was an Imam (in the Shi'ee sense of the word). But Ibrahim [as] was a prophet before he was appointed an Imam. Was Imam Ali [ra] a prophet? Then where is the exception, in the Qur'an, that a person can become an Imam without attaining prophethood? Exactly, you have no point! 6. Actually this is your addition because you have not provided one verse that proves Imamat, let alone their Divine Appointment and preserving the message after the Seal of the Prophets [saw] departs. As I always say, what good is a hiding guide? Al-Kafi, as I am discussing in another topic, was compiled at a time when representatives of the 12th Imam were around. Yet Shias failed to keep it authentic and error-free. Again, what good is a guide who cannot give you one sahih book? What good is a Divinely Appointed guide who failed to establish justice and reclaim Fadak? 7. Again, if the Taurat was revealed in its entirety, that does not mean that the religion was completed. The favors were completed when the Qur'an was fully revealed. The religion was perfected through the Holy Prophet [saw]. Another fail! 8. The successor to Musa [as] was Yusha ibn Nun [as], not Haroon [as]. Furthermore, the Prophet [saw] also said that if there was a prophet after him, it would have been Umar [ra]. Learn Islam holistically please. 9. Shura cannot change the Sharia but the second part of your statement is problematic because it has not been proven. You are attacking one concept and then putting forth your own whims (which you consider to be proven Islamically). You have not proven the "eternal rule of Divine Appointment" so stop making statements in its favor. Establish proof for your claim before you support it. 10. The Holy Prophet [saw] nominated Abu Bakr [ra] to lead the Muslims in prayer in his own lifetime. What do you call the person who leads prayers? Imam. "Shura belongs to Muhajirs and Ansars and if they agreed on a man, and named him Imam, that is per pleasure of Allah." (Nahjul Balagha, letter 6) Imam Ali [ra] verifies that Shura is an acceptable process of electing a leader, confirms that the leader elected is considered Imam and that the whole process and the leader elected are per Allah's [swt] pleasure. 11. That is fine but how is Imamat your usool-e-deen when it is not in the Qur'an? 12. lol, sure! You have proven nothing but we will believe your conclusion. I am a believer now. I have been saved. All praise Sikandar Baig!
  7. To class something as sahih on the conditions of the two Shaykhs does not negate my point because what you have quoted are not from Sahihain. Please return when your mind has cleared up and you are a little less hurt.
  8. 1. I have addressed every narration posted here and I have refrained from insulting your books. I have accepted the reality of our books and that is precisely the reason I do not insult your books. You believe it is safe to reject anything that gives Allah [swt] a shape or form although that is not the intention of the report. I believe it is detrimental if I disbelieve in that which Allah [swt] attributes to Himself. Therefore, you say "no" to every such narration whereas I hear and I obey. As for what the alleged anthropomorphism in the narration, I adopt the same stance (towards the narration) that I have towards the Qur'an when it says that Allah [swt] has a "Hand" or "Shin" or "forgets". I do not take the narration literally just like we do not take the verses (that I have quoted) literally. 2. That is your prerogative. Would have been nice but I am not on their payroll. However, I borrow material from them, and other websites like theirs, to defend my beliefs. I borrow material that defends, not offends.
  9. 1. I know and I somewhat agree with your assessment. Since I respect scholarly works, I would be a hypocrite to disrespect Al-Kafi or the other three books knowing how much our Six Books, especially the Sahihain, mean to us. Having said that, the book is titled, "Al-Kafi" or sufficient and was compiled at a time when it could be confirmed by the representatives of the 12th Imam [ra]. In the preface, we are asked to “Test the various reports by the Book of God; whatever agrees with it take it, whatever disagrees with it reject it.” Then, the preface says, “…You wanted to have a book which would be sufficient (for your religious needs) (kafin), which would include all kinds of knowledge (’ilm) of religion, which would be adequate for the student, and to which the teacher might refer. Thus it could be used by anyone who wanted knowledge of religion and of legal practice (’amal) according to only sound traditions (athar) from the truthful ones (the Imams)…Allah, the Most Majestic, the Most Gracious, has made the compilation of the book that you had wished for possible. I hope it will prove to be up to your expectations” A book that is sufficient, containing sound narrations from truthful (infallible) ones. Makes a strong case for it being sahih. In fact, it is believed that Al-Kafi was compiled during the minor occultation under supervision of representatives of the 12th Imam: "…The compiler of al-Kafi, al-Kulayni was a contemporary of the four successive special representatives of Imam al-Mahdi. As al-Sayyid ibn Tawus has pointed out, 'All the works and the collections (of hadith) of al-Shaykh Muhammad ibn Ya‘qub al-Kulayni had been completed during the life time of the special representatives of Imam al-Mahdi. It is a ground to believe the veracity of his collection of hadith.' " Therefore, Al-Kafi was compiled in Baghdad during the Minor Occultation of the Hidden Imam (also refer to Aqa Buzurg Tehrani in “adh-Dhari‘ah”, vol.17, p.245) at a time when the representative of the Imam resided in that city, which afforded the opportunity for its contents to be scrutinized and ratified by the Hidden Imam himself (as stated by Ibn Tawus in his book “Kashf al-Mahajjah”, p.159) This is in itself proof of the authenticity of the narrations contained in the book (says al-Hurr al-‘Amili in “Wasa’il ash-Shi‘ah”, vol.20, p.71). Al-Kafi actually bears the seal of approval of the Hidden Imam himself, and he was the one who named it “Al-Kafi” (meaning “sufficient”) by saying, as reported by al-Khwansari in “Rawdat al-Jannat” (vol.6, p.116): “hadha kafin li-shi‘atina” 2. Considering Al-Kafi (fully) unauthentic is a later shift. Early scholars, now written off as Akhbaris, considered Al-Kafi to be authentic. Al-Tabrassi said: “Al-Kafi among the four Shia books (Al-Kafi, Al-Tahzeeb, Al-Istibsar, Al-Faqih) is like the sun among the stars, and who looked fairly would not need to notice the position of the men in the chain of hadiths in this Book, and if you looked fairly you would feel satisfied and sure that the hadiths are firm and accurate.” (Mustadrak Al-Wasa’el, vol.3, p.532) Al-Hur Al’amily said: “The authors of the four Books of the Shia (Al-Kafi, Al-Tahzeeb, Al-Istibsar, Al-Faqih) have testified that the Hadiths of their books are accurate (Sahih), firm and well conducted from the roots that all Shia agreed on, and if you consider those scholars (the authors of the four books) are reliable then you must accept their sayings and their narrations.” (Al-Wasa’el, vol.20, p.104) Sharaf Al Din Musawi said: “Al-Kafi, Al-Tahzeeb, Al-Istibsar, and Mun La Yahdu-Ruhu Al-Faqih are Mutawatirah (100% accurate) and agreed on the accuracy of its contents (the Hadiths), and Al-Kafi is the oldest, greatest, best and the most accurate one of them.” (The book of Al-Muraja’aat, Muraj’ah number 110) Muhammad Sadiq Al-Sadr said: “The Shia are unanimous as to the four books (Al-Kafi, Al-Tahzeeb, Al-Istibsar, Al-Faqih) being accepted and all the narrations in them are accurate.” (”Kitab Al-Shia”, The Book of Shia, p.127)
  10. 1. To forget is not an attribute of Allah [swt], is it? But we understand the meaning behind the verse while rejecting the literal meaning of it. Identical approach we adopt when dealing with such narrations. We believe in everything Allah [swt] attributes to Himself (otherwise we would be among those who disobeyed) without attempting to explain or imagine the shape, form or condition. 2. Exactly. So then what is wrong if we do the same with narrations and not take them literally? 3. Ibn Kathir [rah] says, "Our Lord will reveal His Shin, and every believing male and female will prostrate to Him. The only people who will remain standing are those who prostrated in the worldly life only to be seen and heard (showing off). This type of person will try to prostrate at that time, but his back will made to be one stiff plate (the bone will not bend or flex)". So yes, the verse is referring to disbelievers and hypocrites but "His Shin" is clear and so is its understanding (that we do not take it literally). 4. Actually, the narrations Abu Jafar has quoted (two feet and creaking) are not from the Sahihain. 5. Al-Kafi means "sufficient", not to mention scores of scholars that considered it to be sahih. Nahj al-Balagha is referred to as the "brother of Qur'an". As I have maintained, you have an escape route when needed but it is clear what you really think of, or ascribe to, your books.
  11. You have not accounted for the following. Please do so before you proceed to further question us. 1. It will also be said: "This Day We will forget you as ye forgot the meeting of this Day of yours! and your abode is the Fire, and no helpers have ye! (Qur'an 45:34) 2. "And the sky We built with hands; verily We outspread [it]". (Qur’an 51:47) When translated, they use "with power" for "bi'ayydin". 3. "The Day that the shin shall be laid bare, and they shall be summoned to bow in adoration, but they shall not be able." (Qur'an 68:42) 4. "And thy Lord cometh, and His angels, rank upon rank" (Qur'an 89:22)
  12. Why are you quoting the verse regarding inheritance when Fadak, according to you, was a gift? But to refute you thoroughly, as is my habit, allow me to remind you that Allah [swt] provides guidelines for Fay in the Qur'an. Concentrate on that before you get to inheritance. No where does it say that Fay can be taken as personal property which then can be gifted to, or inherited by, future generation. Obviously you will bring the narrations and reports which state that Fadak "belonged exclusively to the Prophet [saw]". I have already explained that while 4/5th of booty of war would go to those who took part in the battle (and would remain with them as their personal possession), the remaining 1/5th would be distributed among those mentioned in the Surah Al-Anfal verse 41. When it comes to Fay, 4/5th of it would remain with the Prophet [saw] and the remaining 1/5th would be further divided and (its proceeds would be) distributed among those mentioned in Surah Al-Hashr verses 7 through 10. That 4/5th which remained under the custody of the Prophet [saw] is the reason why Umar [ra] and others referred to it as belonging "exclusively" to the Prophet [saw]. In other words, the Prophet [saw] kept it under his management and when he left the world, it was passed down to the leader of the Muslims - who was none other than Abu Bakr [ra] - for him to keep under his guardianship and the quoted Shia hadith confirms this practice. In the light of everything said thus far, I see no reason why you mention inheritance because we have already exhausted all options. We have looked at inheritance of Prophets [asws] mentioned in the Qur'an (though you like to look the other way), we have combed through narrations (Fadak was kept for travellers - reported in Tirmidhi - so it could not have been gifted) and we know historically that Imam Ali [ra] and Imam Hassan [ra] never reclaimed Fadak. I have no doubt that Imam Ali [ra] would put his life on the line for justice and for truth, like Imam Hussain [ra] did in Karbala. Since Imam Ali [ra] chose to leave Fadak as it was, then you should too unless you believe Imam Ali [ra] made a mistake or that you are a better judge than him who looks out for Fatima [ra] more than he did.
  13. 1. To prove Imamat, you bring up Prophets [asws]? SubhanAllah. I asked for proof for Divine Appointment of Imams [ra], not Prophets [asws]. What you have brought forth is like bringing the verse regarding the distribution of "booty of war" to make a case for Fay. By the way, a Shia member here already did that. He also quoted Nahj Al-Balagha as a "Sunni source". Shura is a process and it is not our usool-e-deen. Imamat is your usool-e-deen. Prove it or shut it! By the way, since the religion is perfect and complete, there is no need for Divine Appointment of any individual. The best teacher [saw] had lived amongst Muslims for 23 years. As such, no other guide was needed since no other guide can uphold the religion better than the Holy Prophet [saw]. By the way, the last person to ensure that this religion remains free of any innovations would be a hiding guide. 2. So far, not a single Shia member has successfully proved anything regarding Fadak. Says a lot about Abu Bakr [ra], never mind your verbal diarrhea. 3. The discussion is not about successorship nor is successorship our usool-e-deen. You are a little hurt because you cannot prove Imamat from the Qur'an yet you take it as your usool-e-deen. As for making you trust Abu Bakr [ra], you do not even trust the Prophet [saw] enough to believe that he, after being the best example and teacher to his Companions [ra], could leave them without a Divinely Appointed guide. Your confidence in the Holy Prophet [saw] is mind-boggling.
  14. You are right. I assumed those with brain will understand. Those without need an explanation. Or just a reminder to read properly since the entire thought is summarized with, "In the end, innocent Muslims and non-Muslims pay with their blood." Translation, no matter which way you cut the situation, innocent blood will continue to spill until tyranny ends with the destruction of ISIS. In the same breath, however, I condemned the remaining tyrants and prayed to Allah [swt] for their destruction, whoever they might be, since the Supreme Judge [swt] knows that better than any one of us.
  15. 1. What a silly person you are! Really! You say to me, "it is up to you to prove your claim" and then you want me to not overlook the "main point" which was, "There wasn't one successor of a Prophet or King who became it by shura or some ancient form of democratic system". I had no claims and the "main point" was your own point. In other words, you want me to account for your whims. I have seen all sorts of trolls but you are from another realm. Well, baby genius, let me remind you that you said, "I don't know about you but the Holy Quran is clear about the concept of Imamat which is Divine Appointment" and I asked you to prove it. You cannot prove it, you will never be able to prove it. By the way, shura is not even relevant to our discussion but since you have treaded in that direction, let me remind you that a perfect system does not need Divinely Appointed leaders the last of whom is no where to be seen. Furthermore, we have enough confidence in the Holy Prophet [saw] that in those 23 years, he [saw] led the ummah and left them with enough knowledge to lead themselves after his departure. If Divine Appointment of leaders is a necessity, then you might as well concede that the Prophet [saw] failed as a teacher and leader, naudhibillah. 2. Well, since you are into the royalty, I thought you might drift there soon. "Lord", "Sire", you get my flow? 3. lol, I mean have some shame and just re-visit all the posts in this very discussion. What have the Shia members proven? Nothing. Abu Jafar was clinging on to Imam Ali [ra] being the best of judges. That is a far cry from the topic of Fadak. On the other hand, we have clearly and effortlessly dismantled all the arguments against truth. 4. Exactly, try again!
×
×
  • Create New...