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

Al Afari

Advanced Members
  • Content Count

    67
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Al Afari

  • Rank
    Level 1 Member
  • Birthday 01/26/1997

Profile Information

  • Religion
    al-Islam

Previous Fields

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Okay, I think we're getting there... I'll rephrase my questions: 1. What is Imamah (be specific!)? 2. Who (specific people) are the imams? 3. Why do we need Imamah? 4. What is the specific role of the current imam.
  2. Where does nidaa get separated from Dua? In surah Kahf it says: وَيَوْمَ يَقُولُ نَادُوا شُرَكَائِيَ الَّذِينَ زَعَمْتُمْ فَدَعَوْهُمْ فَلَمْ يَسْتَجِيبُوا لَهُمْ وَجَعَلْنَا بَيْنَهُم مَّوْبِقًا And [warn of] the Day when He will say, "Call 'My partners' whom you claimed," and they will invoke them, but they will not respond to them. And We will put between them [a valley of] destruction (Surat-ul-Kahf, 18:52) And yes, there is a big difference from calling someone who is alive and someone who is dead. When Ali (ra) was alive and I ask him to make dua for me that's one thing. If I asked him to "help me" when he is in Iraq and I am in Yemen, he couldn't do so because he cannot hear me. What makes him hear me when he is dead when only Allah is all Hearing? You might say that we send salams on the Nabi (s) while he's dead. That's true, but you can't use this fact to open the doors to other things because that may have dangerous consequences.
  3. The prophets are given arguments. Who says the arguments are scripture? Musa (as) showed his miracles to Fir'awn and his establishment. Allah ta'ala has revealed scriptures to some selected from the messengers in the past. That is because he chooses some to reveal his knowledge to. From the prophets he chooses some to be messengers. And the prophets are chosen from the greater mankind. By the way, your scholars and thinkers agree with me. That is because there is no disagreement between the understanding of nabuwwah. Answer my earlier questions.
  4. Shia grand Ayatullah Ja`far al-Subhani says in “Mafaheem al-Qur’an” 3/217-218: "The prophet, if he was sent with a new Shari`ah, or came with a new holy book, then his prophet-hood is Tashri`iyyah. On the other hand, if the prophet was sent for Da`wah(14) and guidance to the rulings previously established by Allah through past prophets, then his prophet-hood is Tablighiyyah. The first kind are messengers, and is restricted to five individuals mentioned in Qur’an and Hadith, as for the majority, they are from the second kind, they were sent to promote the religion that was revealed upon the messengers so their prophet-hood is Tablighiyyah." Shia philosopher Murtada al-Mutahhari in “al-Wahi wal-Nubuwwah” pg28-30: "Now we must see why was prophet-hood renewed in the past, and prophets used to come continuously one by one, even though not all of them were bringers of Shari`ah and laws and most were sent to execute an available Shari`ah? and why did the matter (abruptly) end after the seal of prophets, and the Tashri`i prophet will no longer come, even the Tablighi prophet will no longer come? …why? by consensus most prophets were Tablighi not Tashri`i, and maybe the Tashri`i prophets numbers wouldn’t rise above the number of the fingers in your hand, and the job of the Tablighi prophets was to deliver Shari`ah and spread it and execute it and explain it." Another Shia scholar al-`Allamah Ibraheem al-Ameeni in his book “al-Nubuwwah wal-Nabi” pg.138: "So why is there no more need for Tablighi prophets to promote these Shari’ah laws, just like Allah would send after the messengers of Ulil-`Azm, he would send many prophets after them to promote the previous Shari`ah and spread its message to coming generations? it is possible for us to say that human society in the time of the coming of the Prophet Muhammad (SAWS) had reached mental integrity and intellectual maturity to an extent that it became good enough to preserve the teachings of the prophets, and protect them from the danger of accidents, and that society itself can deliver the sacred virtues and knowledge, so society becomes self sufficient, so there was no more need to send prophets." Ahlus Sunnah and the Tashayyu' both agree on these definitions.
  5. The Qur'an only speaks of Itself, the Taurat, Zabur, Injeel, And the scripts given to Ibraheem. Scriptures were given to others, but there were many prophets named that weren't given scripture such as, Hud, Salih, Ya'qoob, and Zakariyyah 'alayhum salam. Also there is nothing saying that every prophet was revealed scripture. Anyways, what is the difference between the imams, and tablighi prophets? And answer my original four questions please.
  6. Not all prophets are given scripture. Imams are tasked with guiding and preserving what was sent to the Prophet Muhammad (S). They also receive wahy. How does that differ from Tablighi prophets exactly? And what evidence for Imamah is there besides inferences and conjecture?
  7. You and I both know that Nabuwa is as clear as day in the Qur'an. As in there are prophets who are sent to mankind as guiders, teachers and warners. Prophets are divided into two types: Tashri'i prophets: They are given Law, Scripture, and a new Message. Tabligi prophets: They affirm the message propagated by God and to the last Tashri'i prophet. Most prophets fit into this category. The first types are called messengers. Both types of prophets are presented with clear evidences in the Qur'an. Tashri'i prophets are like: Muhammad (S), Musa (as), Ibraheem (as) etc. Tablighi prophets are: Zakariyya (as), Yusuf (as), etc. مَّا كَانَ مُحَمَّدٌ أَبَا أَحَدٍ مِّن رِّجَالِكُمْ وَلَـٰكِن رَّسُولَ اللَّـهِ وَخَاتَمَ النَّبِيِّينَ ۗ وَكَانَ اللَّـهُ بِكُلِّ شَيْءٍ عَلِيمًا Muhammad is not the father of [any] one of your men, but [he is] the Messenger of Allah and last of the prophets. And ever is Allah, of all things, Knowing (Surah Ahzab, 33:40). Prophet-hood ended with Muhammad (S). You say that Imamah has to continue for after prophet-hood, what is the evidence for this? What difference is there between Imams and tablighi prophets? And what evidence for Imamah is there besides inferences and conjecture?
  8. What you're doing is that you've taken a LARGE multitude of verses with varying contexts and combined all the hints and inferences therein to support the Imamah (an Asl of religion). None of those explicitly support the Imamah as per the Twelver understanding. Don't you agree that a foundation of creed needs direct evidences? And also, could you (or anyone else) directly answer the questions that I posed?
  9. This was due to his interpretation of the meaning of Qur'an 17:33. Ibn Abbas (ra) even backed that up... The great scholar and Imam Ibn `Abbas understood from the general meaning of this Ayah that Mu`awiyah should take power, because he was the heir of `Uthman, who had been killed wrongfully, may Allah be pleased with him, and Mu`awiyah did event- ually take power, as Ibn `Abbas said on the basis of this Ayah. This is one of the stranger of matters.(end quote) [Mojam al Kabeer Tabraani 10/320] You keep talking about the Qur'anic verses that forbid rebellion. You have failed to bring proof that the word "baghi" meant rebellion in that case. Uthman did have sons, but he thought that this was referring to him because he is the heir that is in a position of power. Didn't you attack me for stipulating this earlier? He fought them to rule them and for revenge. I was talking about two armies out at war. Not civilians or by standers. Nobody anywhere who understands what the word murder means would stipulate that this referred to two armies that were in the midst of battle.
  10. I never could accept that Isa (as) would turn pure water into wine. It should at least be the other way around. It's like turning pure air into marijuana smoke. I doubt it. Could be an illusion or another trick.
  11. You're right my mistake (bad arabic) The whole "heir" business is based on his understanding of surah Isra' (17:33): وَلَا تَقْتُلُوا النَّفْسَ الَّتِي حَرَّمَ اللَّـهُ إِلَّا بِالْحَقِّ ۗ وَمَن قُتِلَ مَظْلُومًا فَقَدْ جَعَلْنَا لِوَلِيِّهِ سُلْطَانًا فَلَا يُسْرِف فِّي الْقَتْلِ ۖ إِنَّهُ كَانَ مَنصُورًا "And do not kill the soul which Allah has forbidden, except by right. And whoever is killed unjustly - We have given his heir authority, but let him not exceed limits in [the matter of] taking life. Indeed, he has been supported [by the law]". Uthman (ra), his cousin, was killed unjustly, Muawiyah was in a very large position of authority, therefore he felt that this verse was referring to him.
  12. Excuse my arabic, but to my knowledge, the word heir in arabic is "warith" or other conjugations of that. In the quote I only see the word "wali" which I don't see as translating into "heir" in any way. Well if it does you still have to prove it to me. You have to prove to me that the verses you quoted specifically refer to rebellion because as I demonstrated "baghi" has many meanings depending on the context. Here's my answer, it's not murder if it occurred during a war. It was a great fitna. I felt that this verse summed it up: 49:9 If two parties among the Believers fall into a quarrel, make ye peace between them: but if one of them transgresses beyond bounds against the other then fight ye (all) against the one that transgresses until it complies with the command of Allah; but if it complies then make peace between them with justice and be fair: for Allah loves those who are fair (and just). No where in that verse does it say that the believers who killed the others were doomed to hellfire. It emphasizes keeping peace between the warring parties. But here is the answer I think you want: Sahih Bukhari 6672, Sahih Muslim 2888: Abu Bakrah reported: The Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, said, “If two Muslims confront each other with swords, then both the killer and the killed will be in Hellfire.” It was said, “O Messenger of Allah, we understand for the killer, but why for the one killed?” The Prophet said, “Verily, he intended to kill his companion.” If you were looking for another thing feel free to quote that. Anyway, these two hadiths seem to be referring to a situation where two individual muslims are fighiting to the death due to anger/spite. There is nothing in this that indicates that this applies to two parties engaging in a war (that is what that Qur'an verse is referring to). In fact that was the opinion of the criminal khawarij at the time. They made takfir on both Ali (ra) and Muawiyah claiming that no true muslims would fight one another.
  13. I have no clue what he meant by that. I still don't see how it's relevant. One term can be used in many contexts. Baghi can mean immoral, or even wanton. Like in Surah Maryam 19:20: She said, "How can I have a boy while no man has touched me and I have not been unchaste?" He thought his enemies were the transgressors which is what lead him to battle. He wasn't justified to do battle with Ali (ra). That's why victory was given to Ali (ra).
  14. It seems to me that he is making relational terms with Uthman (ra) in order to justify his revenge for him. The word you translated as "rebellion" also translates to "oppression", and "transgression". You have to prove that it literally means rebellion. 49:9 If two parties among the Believers fall into a quarrel, make ye peace between them: but if one of them transgresses beyond bounds against the other then fight ye (all) against the one that transgresses until it complies with the command of Allah; but if it complies then make peace between them with justice and be fair: for Allah loves those who are fair (and just). Muawiyah transgressed, and Allah justified taking up arms against transgressors. And we see how Allah (swt) gives supremacy to those who are correct.
  15. I'm not aware of his saying this so I won't comment on it. The verses you quoted from the Qur'an don't talk about rebellion against a leader. Off topic. We're not talking about takfir and who and who isn't a munafiq also isn't what we're talking about here. That's another topic that delves into what nifaq is (lesser and major).
×
×
  • Create New...