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

GreatChineseFall

Advanced Members
  • Content Count

    406
  • Joined

  • Last visited


Reputation Activity

  1. Like
    GreatChineseFall got a reaction from Mithul in Ammar Nakshawani VS Kamal al-Haydari   
    Why I am dragged into this?
    Thanks for reminding though as it shiachat just went down after that.
  2. Like
    GreatChineseFall got a reaction from Wisdom007 in Hypocrites of Medina/Hypocrites of Mecca   
    Please, if you start talking about the Matrix I already know what time it is. So anything that goes against the interest of the Ummayyads and Abbasids must be true and whatever is in their interest is obviously fabricated? How does that work actually? What have you read up until now?
  3. Like
    GreatChineseFall got a reaction from Wisdom007 in Hypocrites of Medina/Hypocrites of Mecca   
    What historical sources are you talking about? You mean at Tabari who can have over 50 different narratives about the same incident and then you quote the one you find shia's quoting? Tell me, which historical book have you read from cover to cover actually?
  4. Like
    GreatChineseFall got a reaction from Wisdom007 in Abu Bakr considered Fadak to be heritage   
    You can keep repeating yourself, but you have simply nothing to stand on. The Prophet's words are clear.
  5. Like
    GreatChineseFall got a reaction from Wisdom007 in Fadak belonged to Imam after Prophet not Fatima.   
    Keep me out of it, you still havent told me what Zayd did wrong here:
    Sahih International And [remember, O Muhammad], when you said to the one on whom Allah bestowed favor and you bestowed favor, "Keep your wife and fear Allah ," while you concealed within yourself that which Allah is to disclose. And you feared the people, while Allah has more right that you fear Him. So when Zayd had no longer any need for her, We married her to you in order that there not be upon the believers any discomfort concerning the wives of their adopted sons when they no longer have need of them. And ever is the command of Allah accomplished. and whether a person who is claimed to be a Prophet and a mercy for mankind is exposed if he himself punishes people.
    By the way, thanks again for showing how your thought processes work and how you arrive to your conclusions. Let's just say that this conclusion and your conclusions about the history after the Prophet's death are equally valid, agreed? And that the probability of al Mahdi being born already is just as great as the probability of the two accounts GreatChineseFall and onereligion belonging to the same person, ok?
    Better yet, let's do a small mubahala:
    May Allah curse me, the creator of the account GreatChineseFall, if the two accounts GreatChinesFall and onereligion were both created by me and may Allah curse you, the creator of the account shiaman14, if they were not both created by me.
    Now for you to say the same, just replace "you" by "me" and "me" by "you". Continue exposing yourself once again by crawling back to where you came from or continue to jeopardize your faith as before. Your choice.
  6. Like
    GreatChineseFall got a reaction from Bukhari8k in It makes sense?   
    Hilarious, twelver shia's are one of the last to speak about what makes sense and challenge sunni's about that. Why dont you concern yourself with your own predicament first?
    "A" establishes one of the most succesfull glass factories of all time. He appoints a successor and hands it over to "B" who later on hands it over to "C", and so on up until the twelfth successor of "A", "M"."M" however decides to go on a long vacation only a few minutes after having been installed. It is promised that he will still manage the company from his place of vacation by the use of internet and all the camera's installed in the factory. He however never contacts his employees personally but only send messages from time to time anonymously. As the company is left with no manager, other competitors see the oppurtunity and take most of the market share of the glass factory. At the same time, the company suffers from bad management, strikes and financial fraud. The people are however assures that this is not the end of the company and he promises to come back soon. The problem is the employees themselves who are not sincere enough and do not care about the company. It is promised that he will set things straight after most insincere employees have left the company who are only after money and 313 trustworthy and capable employees are left.
    This has been going on for over a 1000 years while at the same time, "M" has never been seen by any of his employees, save the ones who claimed to be present when he was installed, he has never trained any employee to do anything, he has never presided over any meeting, he has never held a speech to any group of employees and still Time Magazine chooses him every year as the Best Manager of the Year. Does this make sense to anyone?
  7. Like
    GreatChineseFall got a reaction from Wisdom007 in It makes sense?   
    Hilarious, twelver shia's are one of the last to speak about what makes sense and challenge sunni's about that. Why dont you concern yourself with your own predicament first?
    "A" establishes one of the most succesfull glass factories of all time. He appoints a successor and hands it over to "B" who later on hands it over to "C", and so on up until the twelfth successor of "A", "M"."M" however decides to go on a long vacation only a few minutes after having been installed. It is promised that he will still manage the company from his place of vacation by the use of internet and all the camera's installed in the factory. He however never contacts his employees personally but only send messages from time to time anonymously. As the company is left with no manager, other competitors see the oppurtunity and take most of the market share of the glass factory. At the same time, the company suffers from bad management, strikes and financial fraud. The people are however assures that this is not the end of the company and he promises to come back soon. The problem is the employees themselves who are not sincere enough and do not care about the company. It is promised that he will set things straight after most insincere employees have left the company who are only after money and 313 trustworthy and capable employees are left.
    This has been going on for over a 1000 years while at the same time, "M" has never been seen by any of his employees, save the ones who claimed to be present when he was installed, he has never trained any employee to do anything, he has never presided over any meeting, he has never held a speech to any group of employees and still Time Magazine chooses him every year as the Best Manager of the Year. Does this make sense to anyone?
  8. Like
    GreatChineseFall got a reaction from Maulana in If Imamat is not Divine   
    Wa alaikum salam,
    I am fine thanks, hope you are well too. Sorry for the delayed response.
    Let's first start with this then:
    Tafsir at Tabari:
    يعنـي جل ثناؤه بقوله: { إنّـي جاعِلُكَ للنّاسِ إماماً } فقال الله: يا إبراهيـم إنـي مُصَيِّرك للناس إماماً يؤتـمّ به ويقتدي به.
    Allah said: " O Ibrahim, it is indeed your destiny that you will be an Imam for the people, following you and imitating you"
    Tafsir al Qurtubi:
    السابعة عشرة: قوله تعالى: { إِنِّي جَاعِلُكَ لِلنَّاسِ إِمَاماً } الإمام. القُدْوة؛ ومنه قيل لخيط البناء: إمام، وللطريق: إمام؛ لأنه يؤم فيه للمسالك، أي يقصد. فالمعنى: جعلناك للناس إماماً يأتّمون بك في هذه الخصال، ويقتدي بك الصالحون.al Imam, a role model, and it is said for a builder's ruler: Imam, and the road: Imam, so the meaning is: I will make you an Imam for the people to imitate your qualities and the righteous will emulate you
    Tafsir Ibn Katheer:
    قال: { إِنِّى جَـٰعِلُكَ لِلنَّاسِ إِمَامًا } أي: جزاء على ما فعل، كما قام بالأوامر وترك الزواجر جعله الله للناس قدوة، وإماماً يقتدى به ويحتذى حذوه.
    The reward for what he did, by performing what was commanded and leaving what was prohibited, Allah made him an exemplar, an Imam who is imitated.
    Tafsir al Jalalyn:
    { قَالَ } تعالى له: { إِنّى جَٰعِلُكَ لِلنَّاسِ إِمَامًا } قدوة في الدين
    an exemplar in faith
    Tafsir al Shawkani:
    وأخرج عبد بن حميد، عن ابن عباس، { قَالَ إِنّى جَـٰعِلُكَ لِلنَّاسِ إِمَامًا } يقتدى بدينك، وهديك، وسنتك
    They will imitate you in your faith, in your guidance and in your sunnah.
    Tafsir as Samarqandi:
     فلما وفىّ الأمر جعله الله تعالى إماماً للناس [ليقتدوا] به
    When he completed the command, Allah made him an Imam for the people (to imitate him)
    Tafsir al Baghwi:
    قال الله تعالىٰ: { قَالَ: إِنِّى جَـٰعِلُكَ لِلنَّاسِ إِمَامًا } يقتدى بك في الخير
    "I will make you an Imam for the people", to imitate you with respect to goodness.
    Tafsir ibn Attiya:
     فأوحى الله إليه { إني جاعلك للناس إماماً } يأتمون بك في هذه الخصال، ويقتدي بك الصالحون.
    And Allah inspired to him: "I will make you an Imam for the people" to follow you in these qualities, and the righteous will imitate you.
    And countless countless other tafaseer. I can keep going for a while. And let's also see what the common meaning is of Imam. In Lane's Lexicon and when it comes to Arabic-English translation, this really is the only one worth considering due to its comprehensiveness and rigourousness, David Lane is quoting from several Arabic lexica what the common meaning is:

    For reference, S, Mgh, Msb, T, M, K refer to as-Sihah, the Mughrib, Misbah, Tahdheeb (Al Azhari), Muhkam and Kamoos respectively. And as I said earlier, I have no problem with calling it a leader, the meaning is clear, you are simply discussing semantics to avoid the issue. Even ar Razi who you quoted explains what an Imam generally means:

    فثبت بهذ أن اسم الإمام لمن استحق الاقتداء به في الدين وقد يسمى بذلك أيضاً من يؤتم به في الباطل
    And this proves that an Imam is one who is entitled to be emulated in matters of faith and it is also said for those who are followed in falsehood.
    It is one thing to disagree with me, it is another to misrepresent classical sunni tafaseer. Don't fool yourself, I can assure they hide their faces from you and your interpretation.
     
  9. Like
    GreatChineseFall got a reaction from Panzerwaffe in Warning: Very offensive hadith about Ali / Fatima   
    I dont think it was that significant, at least not at that time. I just believe its somewhat early where if I recall correctly there are narrations where the Imams are named up to Imam al Baqir, the rest are from al Baqir's descendents so the names were not even known, the downfall of Bani Umayya was predicted at the hands of al Mahdi etc. and simply the fact that it doesnt completely fit shia doctrine as is usual for early works that dont fit into a particular doctrine.
  10. Like
    GreatChineseFall got a reaction from Bukhari8k in Warning: Very offensive hadith about Ali / Fatima   
    I recently stumbled upon a very interesting narration in Kitab Sulaym ibn Qays:
    So there are a few points to be made as with regards to the claim that just doesnt make sense:
    -First, Kitab Sulaym ibn Qays is seen as one of the earliest Shi'i books that has survived and originated in the first century most likely while az Zuhri was still alive.
    -If we assume Amr ibn al 'As really spoke the truth and the supposed reply of Ali was invented and attributed to Ali to counter his claim, then we know that even in the time of Umar this narration was shared.
    -Even if we assume that Ali spoke the truth and gave such a sermon then still it can be established that Amr ibn al 'As spread this narration way before az Zuhri was even born.
    -Even if we assume that Sulaym ibn Qays invented everything and none of this is true then still it was before az Zuhri could have shared this.
    -Lastly, even if all of this is a lie invented by Aban abi 'Ayyash who was a contemporary of az Zuhri and who supposedly got it authenticated by Ali ibn al Hussein himself, then this narration was already pretty known at that time. It is very unlikely az Zuhri would attribute a lie to Zayn al Abideen while Zayn Al Abideen himself was still alive and would have to be in Imam al Baqir's time. It is also unlikely Aban ibn Abi 'Ayyash would go out of his way to lie about something that wasn't widespread and known so it was probably already widespread by the time this was invented to counter it while az Zuhri never claimed to have heard this from Amr ibn al 'As.
    -The book of Sulaym of ibn Qays and specifically this narration couldnt have come too late either because of several reasons and was most likely in al Baqir's time which shows that al these other narrations were at the very least pretty known at that time.
    This further shows that this book was a polemical rather than a historical piece of work as their are other examples like this.
    The irony of all this is that the one who accuses Amr ibn al 'As of attributing a lie to Ali ibn Abi Talib is actually the one who does exactly that, attributing a lie to Ali ibn Abi Talib! On top of that, if that wasn't enough, he attributes a lie to Amr ibn al 'As as well, insults him and invents a lie about the revelation and interpretation of a Qur'anic verse! How deceitful, devious and low one is prepared to be and go!
     
  11. Like
    GreatChineseFall got a reaction from Bukhari8k in Warning: Very offensive hadith about Ali / Fatima   
    I think you are focusing too much on az Zuhri. This has been narrated from Ali ibn Abi Talib from different narrators as well:
    1. حَدَّثَنَا يَعْقُوبُ بْنُ إِبْرَاهِيمَ الدَّوْرَقِيُّ، حَدَّثَنَا سُفْيَانُ بْنُ عُيَيْنَةَ، قَالَ ذَكَرَ دَاوُدُ عَنِ الشَّعْبِيِّ، عَنِ الْحَارِثِ، عَنْ عَلِيٍّ، عَنِ النَّبِيِّ صلى الله عليه وسلم قَالَ ‏ "‏ أَبُو بَكْرٍ وَعُمَرُ سَيِّدَا كُهُولِ أَهْلِ الْجَنَّةِ مِنَ الأَوَّلِينَ وَالآخِرِينَ مَا خَلاَ النَّبِيِّينَ وَالْمُرْسَلِينَ لاَ تُخْبِرْهُمَا يَا عَلِيُّ ‏"‏ ‏.
    2. حَدَّثَنَا هِشَامُ بْنُ عَمَّارٍ، حَدَّثَنَا سُفْيَانُ، عَنِ الْحَسَنِ بْنِ عُمَارَةَ، عَنْ فِرَاسٍ، عَنِ الشَّعْبِيِّ، عَنِ الْحَارِثِ، عَنْ عَلِيٍّ، قَالَ قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ ـ صلى الله عليه وسلم ـ ‏ "‏ أَبُو بَكْرٍ وَعُمَرُ سَيِّدَا كُهُولِ أَهْلِ الْجَنَّةِ مِنَ الأَوَّلِينَ وَالآخِرِينَ إِلاَّ النَّبِيِّينَ وَالْمُرْسَلِينَ لاَ تُخْبِرْهُمَا يَا عَلِيُّ مَا دَامَا حَيَّيْنِ ‏"‏ ‏.‏
    3. حدثنا عبد الله حدثني وهب بن بقية الواسطي ثنا عمرو بن يونس يعنى اليمامي عن عبد الله بن عمر اليمامي عن الحسن بن زيد بن حسن حدثني أبي عن أبيه عن على رضى الله تعالى عنه قال كنت عند النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم فأقبل أبو بكر وعمر رضى الله تعالى عنهما فقال يا على هذان سيدا كهول أهل الجنة وشبابها بعد النبيين والمرسلين
    (The wording of this one is even slightly different هذان سيدا كهول أهل الجنة وشبابها ie leaders of the mature and the youthful)
    Besides this has also been narrated from other companions besides Ali, like Anas ibn Malik:
    حَدَّثَنَا الْحَسَنُ بْنُ الصَّبَّاحِ الْبَزَّارُ، حَدَّثَنَا مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ كَثِيرٍ الْعَبْدِيُّ، عَنِ الأَوْزَاعِيِّ، عَنْ قَتَادَةَ، عَنْ أَنَسٍ، قَالَ قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم لأَبِي بَكْرٍ وَعُمَرَ ‏ "‏ هَذَانِ سَيِّدَا كُهُولِ أَهْلِ الْجَنَّةِ مِنَ الأَوَّلِينَ وَالآخِرِينَ إِلاَّ النَّبِيِّينَ وَالْمُرْسَلِينَ ‏"‏ ‏.‏ قَالَ هَذَا حَدِيثٌ حَسَنٌ غَرِيبٌ مِنْ هَذَا الْوَجْهِ ‏.‏4.
    And Abu Juhayfa:
    5حَدَّثَنَا أَبُو شُعَيْبٍ، صَالِحُ بْنُ الْهَيْثَمِ الْوَاسِطِيُّ حَدَّثَنَا عَبْدُ الْقُدُّوسِ بْنُ بَكْرِ بْنِ خُنَيْسٍ، حَدَّثَنَا مَالِكُ بْنُ مِغْوَلٍ، عَنْ عَوْنِ بْنِ أَبِي جُحَيْفَةَ، عَنْ أَبِيهِ، قَالَ قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ ـ صلى الله عليه وسلم ـ ‏ "‏ أَبُو بَكْرٍ وَعُمَرُ سَيِّدَا كُهُولِ أَهْلِ الْجَنَّةِ مِنَ الأَوَّلِينَ وَالآخِرِينَ إِلاَّ النَّبِيِّينَ وَالْمُرْسَلِينَ ‏"‏ ‏.‏
    Now regardless of its authenticity, because all these chains have weaknesses in them, I think your focus on az Zuhri is slightly based on conjecture.
    As far as the objection to the fact that there are no elders, this was already discussed in a previous thread:
    http://www.shiachat.com/forum/topic/235035375-abu-bakr-ra-and-umar-ra-are-the-leaders-of-the-elder-people-of-paradise/?page=1
    Let me try and exercise my right to "white wash" it and play it down. As is customary when looking at narrations, you have to look at all related narrations to make a conclusion. There is another narration that provides a little bit more information on the incident, which by the way again does not go through az Zuhri:
    أَخْبَرَنَا عُبَيْدُ اللَّهِ بْنُ سَعْدِ بْنِ إِبْرَاهِيمَ بْنِ سَعْدٍ، قَالَ حَدَّثَنَا عَمِّي، قَالَ حَدَّثَنَا أَبِي، عَنِ ابْنِ إِسْحَاقَ، قَالَ حَدَّثَنِي حَكِيمُ بْنُ حَكِيمِ بْنِ عَبَّادِ بْنِ حُنَيْفٍ، عَنْ مُحَمَّدِ بْنِ مُسْلِمِ بْنِ شِهَابٍ، عَنْ عَلِيِّ بْنِ حُسَيْنٍ، عَنْ أَبِيهِ، عَنْ جَدِّهِ، عَلِيِّ بْنِ أَبِي طَالِبٍ قَالَ دَخَلَ عَلَىَّ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم وَعَلَى فَاطِمَةَ مِنَ اللَّيْلِ فَأَيْقَظَنَا لِلصَّلاَةِ ثُمَّ رَجَعَ إِلَى بَيْتِهِ فَصَلَّى هَوِيًّا مِنَ اللَّيْلِ فَلَمْ يَسْمَعْ لَنَا حِسًّا فَرَجَعَ إِلَيْنَا فَأَيْقَظَنَا فَقَالَ ‏"‏ قُومَا فَصَلِّيَا ‏"‏ ‏.‏ قَالَ فَجَلَسْتُ وَأَنَا أَعْرُكُ عَيْنِي وَأَقُولُ إِنَّا وَاللَّهِ مَا نُصَلِّي إِلاَّ مَا كَتَبَ اللَّهُ لَنَا إِنَّمَا أَنْفُسُنَا بِيَدِ اللَّهِ ‏.‏ فَإِنْ شَاءَ أَنْ يَبْعَثَنَا بَعَثَنَا - قَالَ - فَوَلَّى رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم وَهُوَ يَقُولُ وَيَضْرِبُ بِيَدِهِ عَلَى فَخِذِهِ ‏"‏ مَا نُصَلِّي إِلاَّ مَا كَتَبَ اللَّهُ لَنَا ‏{‏ وَكَانَ الإِنْسَانُ أَكْثَرَ شَىْءٍ جَدَلاً ‏}‏ ‏"‏ ‏.‏
    It was narrated from Ali bin Husain, from his father, that: Hs grandfather Ali bin Abi Talib said: "The Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) came in to Fatimah and I, one night and woke us up to pray, then he went back to his house and prayed for part of the night, and he did not hear any movement from us. He came back to us and woke us up, and said: 'Get up and pray.' I sat up, rubbing my eyes, and said: 'By Allah, we will only pray that which has decreed for us; our souls are in the hand of Allah (SWT) and if He wants to make us get up, He will make us get up.' The Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) turned away, striking his hand on his thigh, saying: 'We will only pray that which Allah (SWT) has decreed for us! But man is ever more quarrelsome than anything.'"
    So you see, the Prophet first wakes them up, asks them to get up and pray, then returns and asks them to get up and pray again, Ali sat up and was not so much as being disobedient refusing to pray but was more being apologetic for not having stood up and prayed before. The Prophet took offense to him giving him excuses. By the way, how is Fatima acting like a child? Nothing is said about her.
    This really is the weakest argument of your post, I am sorry to say. The Prophet supposedly came at night  to Ali and Fatima, to the privacy of their home! Who else could have narrated this but Ali or Fatima?!!
    Besides, I am not even sure what you are trying to argue here. That az Zuhri was so intelligent that he uses these subtleties like including Ali himself to make it more believable, or that he was so stupid that he invents stuff, like Abu Bakr and Umar being the leaders of elder people, that can't even be technically true? Surely both cant be the case?
  12. Like
    GreatChineseFall got a reaction from Panzerwaffe in Bukhari?   
    And how come the collections of Sunni's, Ibadi's and Zaidi shia's are so alike and so different from twelver shia's?
    People defend al Kulayni saying that he was just a historian and collected as much as he could without authenticating. At Tabari and al Kulayni lived in the same area and in the same era. How come at Tabari's work and al Kulayni's work are so much different? At Tabari recorded enough shia narrations and al Kulayni just happens to never comes across a sunni who reports a sunni propagated narration? Or was he at least in some way filtering and authenticating, while at the same time recording some clearly blasphemous reports.
  13. Like
    GreatChineseFall got a reaction from Zamestaneh in "The two feet of Allah are above his foot-stool"   
    It's dual.
     
     
  14. Like
    GreatChineseFall reacted to goldenhawk in Bukhari?   
    That's a good point brother. Jazak Allah. 
  15. Like
    GreatChineseFall reacted to Zamestaneh in "The two feet of Allah are above his foot-stool"   
    Salaam
    I know I addressed this topic with you elsewhere, but could you respond to it here (seeing as the discussion has been reignited):
    "These are my ponderings on this matter now:
     
    If one were to say "Allah is The Merciful - He bestows His mercy", you wouldn't say you are worshipping His mercy, rather you are worshipping The Merciful, and similarly one wouldn't say you are worshipping Allah's hands, rather you are worshipping Allah. Even with your beliefs that Allah's hands or face are metaphorically indicative of attributes, you would still face a parallel situation to us, and I will use an example to explain:
     
    Let's take the sentence "Allah created mankind by His hands", and let's assume that means "Allah created mankind using His power". From your perspective, you would be worshipping The Powerful (Allah), not the power by which He created mankind, and it is similar we would be worshipping Allah, not His hands. Allah is The Powerful, and the power is from Allah but the power is not Allah, similarly the hands are from Allah but they are not Allah.
     
    It is thus that Allah can have the attributes of hands, foot, face etc in a way that befits His majesty without someone having the ability to say "I am worshipping Allah's hands".
     
    Although I can understand where you are coming from about dividing into parts, I would again say that it is comparative to how Allah's knowledge and power and seeing and hearing and mercy are all different things but still are with Allah in His oneness. The issue of divisibility is that one is thinking of Allah in an overly literal physical way like His creation, but the position has always been that Allah is unlike His creation. This is sufficient, I believe.
     
    With this understanding of not being like His creation but still having these attributes, we can then reject any attempt to logically comprehend Allah's feet being physically below the water and above the kursi as this is attempting to comprehend everything in a more physical way than intended perhaps. The balance between Allah's description being literal and metaphorical is on a knife's edge, but this does not make it incorrect, rather it is a matter left by Allah and His messenger and therefore not meant to be something that we try to understand the finer details of, since it is an obscure matter only known to Him."
     
    Could you also respond to the other point I once made about Allah saying "both My hands" as a plural rather than in singular which would invalidate a completely metaphorical interpretation since Allah would not be using His powers (double the same attribute) to create Adam (AS), rather just his power?
  16. Like
    GreatChineseFall got a reaction from Wisdom007 in Why Rasullulah s.a.w said it at Ghadeer not Hajj?   
    Wa alaykum salam,
    A reasonable attempt is made at explaining things instead of saying that Ghadeer was a departing point for everyone. But here are some of the issues that I think need to be addressed:
    Not as per shia understanding and this is important for the rest of your argument.
    Not really relevant but just as a side note, dont know what you mean by Uthman and Muawiyah but they were not present at Saqifah.
    Fair point, but here is why that argument is invalid. First of all, why not twice? He could have said it at Hajj and emphasized it once more at Ghadeer, I mean it's not like it takes a lot of effort and would definitely make things more clear.
    Second of all, as I said, as per shia understanding the Muhajireen and the Ansar did not have a say in the matter of Khilafah at all. And you can't use the sunni understanding to make the shia understanding more reasonable or sensible, because the sunni understanding is explicitly denied by the shia understanding. As a matter of fact, it wasn't even up to Ali or the Prophet, it was directly from Allah.
    Third, even if we were to accept that they had a say in the matter, you confuse two things. The right to have a say in the matter and the right to be informed. The Prophet didnt stop people and consulted them and asked them who should be the next Imam and then declared who the next Imam would be. He simply informed them of something. So either it is as the shia's say, that the Prophet didnt consult anyone and simply declared the next Imam or it is as the sunni's say that the Prophet reacted to something and informed them of their expected attitude towards Ali.
    In either case, this argument fails and in the case of the shia understanding the question then still remains, why at Ghadeer and not at Hajj because the right to be informed is with respect to everybody. Was it later officially spread or did the Prophet simply rely on the news to spread itsself?
    Ok, so here it's more like you are claiming that they didnt have a right but that they might feel they have a right so the Prophet explained them before any confusion might arise. This is an important difference and in this case, we know historically that many tribes apostated after the Prophet by completely turning away seeking to rule themselves or joining false Prophets to rule others including Madina. These people were unlikely to have been present at Ghadeer, because they were not Muhajireen and Ansar.
    Secondly, there is a very reasonable way of looking at this, if the goal of the Prophet was to remove any confusion and the people numbering more than a hunderd thousand en masse, didnt do as he commanded only moments after his death, what is the most reasonable thing to assume? That almost all of them didnt care, that they deliberately pretended not to understand or that they didnt understand? To add to that, wasnt the verse of purification a proof for Ali's infallibility? If the people were that stupid or that deliberality evil that they dont logically understand that an infallible leader instead of a fallible person should follow the Prophet, dont you think a transfer of authority needs a little bit more of preparation? The Prophet preached practically ALL DAY long, ALL YEAR long non-stop, how many times was Ali brought up in a sermon? These people still thought they had a claim after hadith al Manzila and hadith al Kisa, do you really think that the Prophet thought that this would be enough to remove any confusion?
    Let us look at some facts, we can still disagree about why he did it, but if you claim that he called people who went forward back, doesnt it at least show that the Prophet was showing reactionary behaviour and not pre-planned behaviour? If it was pre-planned, does it really make sense to let caravans pass and then call them back? And if he reacte to something, what was it that he reacted to?
  17. Like
    GreatChineseFall reacted to Ibn Matta in A question to challenge Sunni brothers!   
    Brother with all due respect how can you consider that Hadith (which is mindnumbingly disconnected and obviously Mawdu') to be authentic when none of the Shia knew who exactly all 12 Imams were hence why nearly everytime one of them died there was 1 or 2 Shi'i groups declaring a different son to be the actual Imam or that the imam had actually gone into Ghaybah (such as in the case of Musa al-Kadhim whom the majority of his Shi'ah became Waqifi after he died). Think.
  18. Like
    GreatChineseFall got a reaction from Panzerwaffe in To pray behind Sunni Imam/Issue antropomorphims   
    How about regular prayers? Did Ali never pray in congregation in the Prophet's mosque after the Prophet? What do shia narrations say?
  19. Like
    GreatChineseFall reacted to Panzerwaffe in To pray behind Sunni Imam/Issue antropomorphims   
    Wasn't the janaza of many companions led by the caliphs and local governers and all the personalities shia admire prayed behind them with exeception of a few like janaza of Abu dharr, abdullah b massood etc
  20. Like
    GreatChineseFall got a reaction from Panzerwaffe in Hypocrites of Medina/Hypocrites of Mecca   
    - I give weight to people who narrate or collect against their own beliefs.
    - That is why people should be reluctant, critizing should not be a requirement of your beliefs anyway.
  21. Like
    GreatChineseFall got a reaction from Panzerwaffe in Hypocrites of Medina/Hypocrites of Mecca   
    For my opinions I rely heavily on what those people themselves considered. If there are reliable reports where Ali specifically declared people hypocrites because of their hostility towards them, then that conclusion should follow.
  22. Like
    GreatChineseFall reacted to Bram in Imamate & Caliphate   
    Thank you for anwsering. I still got two questions:

    1. Why does Imam Ali a.s. say that the result of Shura is the consent of God?

    2. If Imam Ali a.s. does not believed in caliphate at all then why did he a.s. dissmiss Muawiya l.a. on those same conditions?
  23. Like
    GreatChineseFall got a reaction from Student_of_Deen in the scope of Prophets and Imams infallibility according to Shi`i Manhaj   
    You are correct, I saw that the translator did that too, but that was the translation I found.
    Good you made an attempt. I might disagree but we can come back to this later. Now the other verses.
    By the way, regardless of who is addressed here, do you agree that this verse proves that the one addressed in this verse is not infallible(at least in the strict sense) who ever he may be?
  24. Like
    GreatChineseFall got a reaction from Student_of_Deen in Doing Ijtihad   
    People exposed themselves according to you, Saqifa, the burning of the door, the miscarriage, the taking away of the Caliphate, the not giving Fadak while it was a gift.
    If that is correct and people already exposed themselves, why was it needed for the Ahl al-Bayt to expose them more while doing things that are not allowed under normal circumstances ( like asking for something on false grounds, participating in an ungodly process, handing leadership over to an unfit person)? And regardless, where does the permissibility come from?
  25. Like
    GreatChineseFall got a reaction from Student_of_Deen in Doing Ijtihad   
    Unfortunately, that is what sometimes the Ahl al-Bayt are reduced to, to expose people.
    When Fatima asked for her share of inheritance even though of course it was gifted, she knew they wouldn't give her anything. It was just to expose them.
    When Ali participated in the Shura process even though he was divinely appointed, he knew they wouldn't give him anything. It was just to expose them.
    When al Hassan handed over the leadership of the entire Ummah, even though he had fully the right to it, he knew the treaty would be violated, it was just to expose them.
    A more important question as to why they did this, is where does the permissibility come from? Where does the permissibility come from to do things that are under normal circumstances not allowed, but allowed if you are exposing people?
×
×
  • Create New...