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

ali mousavi

Basic Members
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About ali mousavi

  • Birthday 12/19/1985

Contact Methods

  • Website URL

Profile Information

  • Location
    Qom, Iran
  • Religion

Previous Fields

  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

1,683 profile views
  1. That's full of the questions! we will discuss them but we need to move step by step. firstly I think we should make something clear, the method of researching about the Islamic point of view. The point is that, how can we attribute a proposition to Islam? If we, as a man, think that something is correct, or something is based on the reason, or as you said if we think that something is relying on morality and common senses, is this enough to attribute it to Islam? For example, some people believe that the death penalty is morally rejected, so based on this sense are they able to say that the death penalty is rejected by Islam, too? Are we supposed to understand Islam through our mind and sense or we should try to get it through the established and reliable sources? The same about the topic, you based on your reason and sense believe in freedom of religion, no problem, you as a man is free to believe it, but is that enough to attribute it to Islam? Even though there might be some hadiths which reject it strongly? You know, when we are going to research about the Islamic perspective regarding a proposition we need to research the main sources to be sure that what's the exact point of Islam, and then, of course, we need to figure it out that why Islam supports that idea, and what's the reason behind it? However, if you disagree with this point we can discuss a little bit more about it, but if you accept my words so far, then we can move further to speak about the Islamic view regarding the topic and examine some sources. Of course, after these steps we can discuss your own view and critiques about the Islamic doctrine.
  2. Salam Apart from your discussion about Baha'i, you mentioned a few times about the freedom of religion and I just want to speak about it. The idea of freedom of religion came from the liberal perspective who believe that every religion (divine religions or not) are equal and truthful, so all of them are respected. But according to the Islamic view, we just have one truth it's Islam and the other non-divine religion are not correct, they lead people to the hell, so why should we let them spread their fabricated idea among believers and people, and ruin their afterlife? You said something about prevailing the truth, as liberal claim it, but you know, when there is a mix of truth and untruth, in most of the cases people just get confused. That's exactly what some arrogant country do to cover the reality of Islam, they made lots of human religion and fake spiritual sects in order to confuse the people. And the same happens about ISIS. Some western media is pretending that ISIS came from Islamic though to avoid their people thinking about the nature of Islam, as you see, lots of westerners believe it. Letting fabricated religion spread their beliefs is like, the government lets non-doctors beside doctors to freely give people prescriptions, with the same claim that people by themselves can prevail the truth, and they will get that which one is a real doctor and which one is not, which prescription works and which not! Anyway, An Islamic state should follow the Islamic doctrine and its Sharia, instead of liberal thought and its law which called human right. but you blamed Islamic states due to following the sharia! It seems you think freedom of religion is a great principle which came from the point of the divine law, so every Islamic state should follow it, but could you find any verse or hadith which confirm it? And as a question to think, do you believe that government should let ISIS be active freely to spread their thought and beliefs?
  3. Salam Alykum, Surely there are some verses and I will mention some of them. firstly we should note that we have some verses which prove the infallibility of all the prophets like these two verses: عالم الغيب فلا يظهر علي غيبه أحداً. إلاّ من ارتضي من رسول فإنّه يسلك من بين يديه و من خلفه رصداً. ليعلم أن قد أبلغوا رسالات ربّهم و‌أحاط بما لديهم و‌أحصي كل شيء عدداً Knower of the Unseen, He does not disclose His Unseen to anyone, except to an apostle He approves of. Then He dispatches a sentinel before and behind him. so that He may ascertain that they have communicated the messages of their Lord, and He comprehends all that is with them, and He keeps count of all things. (72/26-27) وَ مَا كاَنَ لِنَبىٍ أَن يَغُلَّ وَ مَن يَغْلُلْ يَأْتِ بِمَا غَلَّ يَوْمَ الْقِيَامَةِ ثُمَّ تُوَفىَ‏ كُلُّ نَفْسٍ مَّا كَسَبَتْ وَ هُمْ لَا يُظْلَمُونَ A prophet may not breach his trust, and whoever breaches his trust will bring his breaches on the Day of Resurrection; then every soul shall be recompensed fully for what it has earned, and they will not be wronged. (3/161) Besides some other verses confirm the infallibility of the holy prophet particularly like: و‌ ما ينطق عن الهوي. ‌ Nor does he speak out of] his own [desire] (53/3) Anyway, when they holy Quran introduce the prophet's life and conduct as a good exemplar, so it demonstrates that he is infallible: َقَدْ كانَ لَكُمْ في‏ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ أُسْوَةٌ حَسَنَةٌ لِمَنْ كانَ يَرْجُوا اللَّهَ وَ الْيَوْمَ الْآخِرَ وَ ذَكَرَ اللَّهَ كَثيراً In the Apostle of Allah, there is certainly for you a good exemplar, for those who look forward to Allah and the Last Day, and remember Allah greatly. (33/21) Regarding the other Imams we can point to these verses: قال ربّ بما أغويتني لاُزيّننّ لهم في الأرض و‌لأغوينّهم أجمعين. إلاّ عبادك منهم المخلصين He said," My Lord! As You have consigned me to perversity, I will surely glamorize] evil [for them on the earth, and I will surely pervert them, all, except Your exclusive servants among them." (15/39-40) Based on Quranic teaching Mukhlasin are the those who are immune from Satan. So we have some infallible people and we believe that Imam is the perfect man so he should be Mukhlas. و‌ إذ ابتلي إبراهيم ربّه بكلمات فأتمهنّ قال إنّي جاعلك للناس إماما قال و‌من ذرّيتي قال لا ينال عهدي الظالمين. And when his Lord tested Abraham with certain words, and he fulfilled them, He said," I am making you the Imam of mankind." Said he," And from among my descendants?" He said," My pledge does not extend to the unjust." (2/124) Based on this verse the state of Imam is higher than prophet, That's why Abraham (PBUH) wanted to achieve it. moreover, Allah says, the state of Imam is not for wrongdoer, so Imam must be infallible. of course, those are not the whole verses that mentioned and proved the idea.
  4. Salam alykum, Concerning the 3 first centuries, we have lots of difficulties because at the time most of the scholars preferred to collect hadiths instead of writing. on the other hand, lots of their works have gone and just a few of them are available now. Anyway, if you take a look at some Bibliographical or Biographical books like al-Zaria, al-Fihrist, al-Rijal al-Najashi, al-Rijal b. Davod, …. you will find some books written about the alteration of the Quran. I just name some of them: Al-Tahrif va al-Tabdil By Abu jafar Muhamad b. al-hasan al-kufi (d. 148 AH), companion of Imam Sadiq. Al-tanzil me al-Quran va al-Tahrif By abu al-Hasan Ali b. Hasan Fadhal al-kufi (died before 280), companion of Imam Hadi and Imam Hasan Al-Asgari. Al-Tahrif va al-Tabdil Abu Abdullah Muhammad b. Khalid al-Barghi, renowned companion of Imam Kazim, Imam Redha and Imam Javad. Al-Tahrif Ahmad b. Muhammad b. Khalid al-Barghi (d. 273 AH), well-known companion of Imam Javad and Imam Hadi. Al-Suyuti in his books like "al- itghan" and "al-Dor al-Manthor" mentioned, with no objection or justification, some hadiths which assert that some verses have been deleted. For instance, at the beginning of the surah al-Ahzab, he mentioned more than 10 hadiths which approve that some verses of the surah have been deleted, and he gives no explanation for them! Of course, some Sunni scholars have some unreasonable arguments to justify those hadiths, for instance: Alusi in his interpretation have some words (Ruh al-Ma'ani, V1, P26). In short he believes, Some verses of Quran, which Caliphs removed them, have been abrogated. The interesting point is that they are not able to find any historical evidence or hadith from the holy prophet saying those part of verses are abrogated! and even some great companions of the prophet like Umar or Abu Musa Ashari hadn't known that they are abrogated. However, What's the difference between this justification and believing of the alteration?
  5. In the name of Allah

    There is a difference between God and Allah that Muslims use this word for their God. The word “God” is used for any gods in all religions: Hinduism, Christianity, Zoroastrianism, Buddhism, but "Allah" is used only for a God with some powers (attribute). Indeed every religions use the word God for things they worship without intention to its power. For example Buddhism  believe in God without any power or Hindu believe some things like that however in Islam it is used to the god with all of its attribute

    So we cannot translate Allah to God.

    1. Show previous comments  1 more
    2. mostafa2020


      brother just pray for me, i am really  in doubt for Ramadan month.

    3. mostafa2020


      i forgot to say thanks for your profile picture 

    4. ali mousavi

      ali mousavi


      Of course, that's good.

      May Allah direct you to the best. I will pray for you.

      Since you said the pic looks like ISIS's flag, I'm feeling disgusted with it! 

  6. Salam Sorry I'm late, I was busy these days. Anyway, in brief, you mentioned 3 main points and I will speak about them. 1. All Shia scholars before the buyids believed in the falsification of the Quran? The idea came from Kohlberg's works, a Jewish orientalist, who believes the Quran is not from Allah and neither from the prophet. And asserts that it's made later by some companions and scholars. Of course, he used some Sunni and Shia sources to support it. and then claim the idea was common among Shia before the buyids dynasty, with no clear historical evidence. While he focused on Shia sources, there are some other orientalists like Blachere, Guynboll, John Burton etc. who prove the alteration based on Sunni sources! I think, they don't have any theological or historical purpose, they just wanted to say that the holy Quran is not reliable or revealed in order to reject the whole Islamic thought. Unfortunately, we, as Muslims include Shia and Sunni, just conflict with each other based on their idea and don't pay attention to their main purpose. 2. Is there any renowned Sunni scholar who believes in the alteration? Alusi and Al-Suyuti who are highly regarded among Sunni, accept it. Besides, There is no doubt that Omar, Ayesha and some other Sunni figures also believe in it. On the other hand, in Sunni primary sources like Sahih Bokhari or Sahih Muslim etc. there are lots of hadiths in which clearly the alteration asserted. according to Sunni standpoint, these two books are the most reliable sources after the holy Quran. Or you can take a look at the book Musnad of Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal, considered the founder of the Hanbali school, in which you can find some hadiths about the falsification with no objection. All of the hadiths, to his eye, are documented. So he somehow believed in the falsification! 3. Majlisi believed in the falsification of the Quran As far as I know, his opinion regarding the topic is not the same. in one book he somehow accepts it while in the other book written later, he rejects it firmly and even justifies the related hadiths. We can, However, name thousands of Shia scholars who denied absolutely the alteration. Shaykh Saduq, the early Shia scholar, says: "everybody who claims that Shia believes in any alteration, is definitely a liar." Why on earth, some Sunni brothers leave these ones and just refer to some unaccepted idea? To attribute an idea to a community needs the confirmation of the overwhelming majority, not a few ones. We have the same problem in some other theological or juridical matters. In lots of cases, we can find some Sunni or Shia scholars, even renowned ones, who have some odd and rare ideas while it's clearly rejected by other scholars. It's not fair to attribute these individual points to the sect.
  7. Shia Standpoint towards the alteration of the Quran We as Shia believe the Quran available today is the same one as was revealed to the prophet Muhammad. But some claimed that the Shia believe the Quran had been altered and some part of it had been deleted which Made the Shia thought be isolated by some Sunni Faghih (Islamic jurists). The basis for the accusation is the existence of some hadiths in Shia collections and of course, sometimes they refer to some unknown Shia Scholars' books too. However, according to the Shia point of view the charge is denied, here are some reasons to reject the accusation: 1) The overwhelming majority of reputable Shia scholars rejected the idea strongly. Some great scholars whose books are the main source of Shia thought like Shaykh al-Saduq, Sayyid al-Murtada, Shaykh al-Tusi etc. explicitly denied any alteration. (Attributing certain beliefs to any group, one has to not refer to the statements that they themselves don't accept.) 2) There seems to have been no Shia society in which this belief has been accepted, actually even ordinary Shia believers never held such a belief. 3) And there are some historical evidences: A: No one has ever seen a copy of the Quran different from the standard one in any part of the Islamic world. B: There are manuscripts of the Quran available today that go back to the time of Shia Imams and they are exactly the same as the current ones. Like some copies of great historical value kept in some international Museums, which several of them are attributed to Imam Ali or other Imams or their companions. 4) Despite a few weak hadiths that somehow imply some alterations, there are lots of hadiths in Shia collection which directly or indirectly reject the idea. Such those weak hadiths have no power to challenge with these authentic and reliable hadiths. 5) In addition, there are similar or even stronger hadiths exist in Sunni sources like Sahih al-Bukhari or Dor al-Manthur confirmed the alteration! Some of them are narrated from Umar (the second caliph) or his daughter Ayesha claimed some verses or even 200 verses of one chapter (surah) has missed. or Abu Musa Ashari believed that two chapters entirely are gone! According to these hadiths some Sunni scholars like Alusi (1270 AH), Shaarani (937 AH), Sijistani (316 AH) accepted the alteration of the Quran, insofar that Muhammad al-Khatib, a contemporary Sunni Scholar from al-Adhar university, wrote a book about the alteration of the Quran which is called al-furghan fi Tahrif al-Quran. In the book, based on Sunni sources he tries to prove that the Quran is altered.
  8. Hi

    your profile is looks like Isis flag.

    1. ali mousavi

      ali mousavi


      But I like it!

  9. Ayatollah Mojtaba Tehrani: There is a strong relationship between the Infallible Imams and the Holy Quran. If Imam wanted to be transformed into written words, he would be converted into the Holy Quran, as Imam Ali (PBUH) was "the speaking Quran" (= al-Quran an-Natiq). In fact, the Book is the written form of Imam. From there, if citing the Book has no effect on your heart, so no doubt, meeting of the Imam Mahdi (PBUH) won't have any effect on you! If you want to see your situation when you meet the Imam, look how do you feel when you are citing the Holy Quran!
  10. Dear brother You said that some Shi'a beliefs like Mahdism or others (not mentioned) formulated later. Could you bring us some examples? I'm waiting to hear some more details. Of course, we should make a distance between developing and fabrication, developing unlike fabrication, means the thought is based on the main sources, and it's supported by them. We have the same things in Fiqh. In this modern age, we are facing with lots of issues which are not mentioned in the primary sources of sharia, but we can solve it and find out a way by the development of the juridical rules. It doesn't mean that we fabricated it. Would you mind if I ask about your belief and sect? I just ask in case it needs to explain something from your belief or refer to your respected and accepted sources.
  11. What's your idea about Shari'a and Islamic Law (Fiqh), do you apply it or not? do you have Marja in Fiqh or not? and in which parts of Turkey, usually Alevi communities live?
  12. Salam, Actually I look forward to hearing more from you about your Alevi thought. as far as I know, your idea is the same as Shia,(in fact you are a type and a sect of Shia) so what makes you different? And you said that you don't believe in Tabarra from Caliphates, but I think that I've read a book written by one of your scholars (maybe Aziz Ibrahim or Al-tawil or someone else I'm not sure) which says that Alevi also believes in it. anyway, nowadays some media want to distinguish between Shia believers, as you know, BBC and other media attempt to demonstrate that Alevi thought is rejected by Shia and other Muslim scholars while they are supporting Bahaie who are rejected by great scholars, this double standard come from their political benefits. I hope Muslim and Shia nations be so careful about it.
  13. Some Sunny scholars and some orientalist claim that the Shia faith was not rooted from the Islamic doctrine, and believe it's originated later among Iranians. Recently some media especially Arabian media for some political reasons are going to support and spread this idea. Actually, they are going to make their audience believe that the Shia thought came out from Iranian tradition, not Islamic tradition, and on the other hand, they are spreading Iranophobia and want to demonstrate Iran as the enemy of Muslims in order to avoid thinking of Shia thought. But when we study the main Islamic sources and examine the historical facts, we can find out that the Shia faith at first was common among some other parts of Islamic regions and only a few centuries later Iranian came to accept the idea. Let me name some Islamic regions which accept Shia doctrine before Iranians: Hijaz, the origin of the Islam. There were lots of the companion of the prophet and members Bani Hashim who accept Shia beliefs. Bilad al-Sham (approximately present-day Syria and Lebanon) especially Jabal Amil. They converted to Shia faith by Abu Dharr the great companion of the prophet. The City of Kufa, in Iraq which was the capital of the Islamic state during the caliphate of Imam Ali. Yemen, the nation embraced Islam when Imam Ali went there to preach, so they loved him so much. At the beginning of Islamic history, Yemen was the main Shia region. Egypt, from the first entrance of Islam they knew of Shiism through contacts with some great companions of the prophet like Mighdad, Abu Dharr, Ammar etc.
  • Create New...