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

John_313

Advanced Members
  • Content Count

    266
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by John_313

  1. Firstly you called me a brother in humanity considering me a disbeliever (you openly did takfeer) now you're saying that all the followers of a Marja Taqleed are somehow unbalanced. I don't care about your emotional status and feelings, that's up to you. I want facts that those two marjas (ha) are against public cursing, which you have failed to show. I just want the whole video so that it would disprove the earlier post that I made. You yourself asked where you want to put the whole video. There was no fatwa, it was fake, prove me otherwise. Respecting, being tolerant and peaceful towards sunnis is our duty, however we can't stop public cursing because of this justification. Just as we can't start calling Isa (as) the son of god because of being respectful, tolerant and peaceful towards Christians. Allah does not forbid you from those who do not fight you because of religion and do not expel you from your homes - from being righteous toward them and acting justly toward them. Indeed, Allah loves those who act justly. (60:8) Also isn't using the word "Bakri" impermissible in Shia Chat? Ok, you answer me until that link starts to work. And don't worry, I won't believe you. Throughout my whole life, not a single one of takfiris such as you have proved to me that Sheikh Yasser Al Habib (may Allāh ÓÈÍÇäå æÊÚÇáì lengthen his life) is a British agent.
  2. Put it here... let the viewers decide if it was out of context. What does it more specifically show? Please don't start using judgments or assumptions in this topic. I'm not expecting a hypothetical answer, I want a fact (the truth).
  3. In Shā Allāh! Oh, you heard? Which reliable sources? To me this isn't reliable at all. I couldn't understand any reasonable argument based on this. I can as well say that I personally met Ayatoll Wahid Khorasani (ha) and he (ha) told me that public la'na is permissible, or I heard one of my close friends tell me... I would like to watch the full video if possible (fair enough if you don't find it). It still doesn't make sense to me that Rafida team has a video which they know is out of context. As I wrote earlier, I'll accept this response (for now). Or do they? Maybe that was fake and had the seal. I mean, why not? Why can't someone fake a fatwa? The good thing is that it was removed. Why did Ayatollah Sayed Ali Sistani (ha) remove it though? Why isn't it there anymore?
  4. Alaikum salam Yes masterbation is haram. This is Grand Ayatollah Sayed Sadiq Shirazi's (ha) ruling: http://www.english.shirazi.ir/topics/masterbation As for the verse of the Holy Quran: "And they who guard their private parts Except from their wives or those their right hands possess, for indeed, they will not be blamed - But whoever seeks beyond that, then those are the transgressors -" (23:5-7)
  5. Assalamu alaikum Who's NAK? Does it refer to dr. Zakir Naik or someone else?
  6. Salam, This is his (ha) website where Sheikh Yasser Al Habib (ha) answers this same question you asked: http://alqatrah.net/en/an244 Yes, I have compared their behaviors. May Allāh ÓÈÍÇäå æÊÚÇáì guide both of us! Ameen!
  7. Alaikum salam Well, I don't know what to expect from someone who doesn't know how to properly spell the word "government". Again, what's the evidence that Hassan Nasrallah has for such claims? Maybe you mean "to not listen to him." Wait so, Hassan Nasrallah is a competent scholar in your opinion? Of course you meant. I have repeated this in many discussions that I have had with people saying that Sheikh Yasser Al Habib (ha) was a British agent. If Sheikh Yasser Al Habib (ha) is a British agent, and has enough money (since according to you he's founded by the British) why did he publicly ask for money in Fadak TV to make a movie? Also the "but he lives in Britain" argument is baseless and irrelevant. It's actually an argument against the Absolute Wilayatul Faqih propagators and Khamenei and Khomeini followers (who make these false accusations), because where was Khomeini before the revolution?
  8. I have shown the authentic Hadith. Grand Ayatollah Sayed Sadiq Shirazi (ha) believes that such narrations that indicate prohibition to the 3rd shahada in Adhan and Iqamah are a result of taqqiyah. Sheikh Sadooq has two narrations that contradict the earlier statements that state for 3rd Shahada to be Bidah in Adhan and Iqamah. To me it makes more sense for him to have been using taqqiyah. I personally respect Ayatollah Sayed Ali Sistani's (ha) rulings to the biggest extent as I believe that he's (ha) the most knowledgeable after Grand Ayatollah Sayed Sadiq Shirazi (ha). You follow your judgment, I can't question any of them (ha).
  9. Well, all I can tell is using "my marja says so" argument... Grand Ayatollah Sayed Sadiq Shirazi (ha): Case: The phrase “Ash_hado an-na Aliy-yan waliy-yol-la>h” is the integral part of both adha>n and iqa>mah, as some narrations point to. (Islamic Law, Page 146). Grand Ayatollah Sayed Muhammad Shirazi (r): Ash-haduanna Ali-an-Wali-Allah is a Juz (part) of Adhan. (Al-Fiqh, Volume 9, Chapter on the Adhan) Since there were two contradictory views from the same Sheikh Sadooq, then practicing taqqiyah for one and telling the truth for another makes more sense to me (and so did for other scholars as well). And there are Hadiths, but considering them as fabricated is a different thing.
  10. Sayed Husain Tabrizi: و فی بعض الروایات وردت الشهادة علی الولایة كما ذكره الصدوق و من صدوق و شیخ طوسی یظهران الشهادة بالولاية وردت فی بعض الاخبار مستد لا علی انه , قدورد فی الاحادیث المعتبرة ان الولایة و لرسالة مقرونتان و ان اسم امیر المومنین و اسم رسول الله مقرون و مذكور فی كل مكان In some narrations there exits the declarations of Wilayat like Sheikh Sadooq has quoted. It becomes evident from the words of Sheikh Sadooq and Sheikh Toosi that it has come in authentic narrations that Wilayat and Risalat are into one another and that the names of Prophet (saww) and Amir-ul-Mumineen (as) are always taken together. [Ref: Qawaid-ud-Deen Pg: 227] Muhammad Taqi Majlisi یمكن ان تكون جزاء واقعیا لولا التقیة It’s possible that this (Shahadat-e-Salisa) would be a Juz (part) if there had been no Taqayya. [Ref: Rauzat-ul-Muttaqeen, Vol: 2, Pg: 246] Sheikh Muhammad Raza Najafi: الذی یقوی انها جزء للاذان لولا التقیة Shahadat-e-Salisa not being a Juz (part) of Aazan is due to Taqayya. [Ref: Sirr-ul-Eeman, Pg: 41] Look at Ayatollah Sayed Abu Qasim Khoei's (r) stance on this issue: We don’t need any Hadees to prove Ali-un-Wali-Allah in Azaan & Iqamat, because Wilayat is a means for Completion of Risalat & strengthening of Eeman. And Wilayat is 1 of those 5 things which are the basis of Deen. It is a clear sign and means of identification of Shiat. [Ref: Mustanad Urwat-ul-Wusqa, Vol:2, Pg:288]
  11. I believe that I have answered you above. Why would there be contradictions between Sheikh Sadooq's views other than he was practicing taqqiyah? There are scholars saying that as well, Muhammad Taqi Majlisi, Muhammad Raza Najafi etc... look at: http://www.shahadat-e-salisa.com/home/shahadat-e-salisa-in-azaan for more info.
  12. قال صادق علیه السلام : الاذان و الاقامة مثنی مثنی الاذان عشرون حرفا و الاقامة اثنان عشرون حرفا Imam Jafar e Sadiq (as) said: “The Recitations in Azaan and Iqamat are double. The recitations in Azaan are 20 and in Iqamat are 22” [Al Hidaya (Sheikh Sadooq) Pg: 30, Bihar Al Anwar Vol: 84 Pg: 111, Mustadrak ul Wasail Vol: 1 Pg: 253] Got this from: http://www.shahadat-e-salisa.com/home/shahadat-e-salisa-in-azaan
  13. Of course brother: Where do you base such assumptions? It doesn't say anything to me... at all, because there is no evidence that Ayatollah Sayed Ali Sistani (ha) is against public cursing. How do you know that the fatwa isn't fake? Maybe the video was out of context, and I agreed with you. However I would like to know, just out of curiosity, what's the context of that video? I just wanted proof from a reliable source... otherwise you can't claim that I disrespect any of the scholars mentioned above, neither that they are against public cursing.
  14. "Abusive" words such as cursing the enemies of Ahlulbayt (as) publicly? Why are you against cursing the enemies (la) of Ahlulbayt (as) publicly when your or someone else's life is not at risk?
  15. Maybe not me or the Rafida team, but his writings can: It is a matter of basic common sense that there is no brotherhood or support/partnership between us Shias and the non-Shias. (Source: Misbahul fuqahah. Volume 1 Page 324. By Ayatollah Sayed Abu Qasim Khoei (r)) Which fatwa? The removed ruling revealed in his (ha) website without his (ha) permission? Could you link me the fatwa from a reliable source? It doesn't make sense to me that Rafida channel contains a video whose publishers know it's out of context, however for the sake of argument let's accept that (for now). Could you also link me Ayatollah Wahid Khorasani's (ha) real opinion because the link you sent last time didn't work?
  16. Obviously, I meant the act of publicly cursing.
  17. At the top of the comments section Rafida team has pinned "Moments to look for:", there you'll be more concerned to what happened and who actually won the debate. At the comments section there is a non-Shia himself admitting Mohammad Hijab's ignorance: "I'm no shia but I think Muhammad Hijab has no manners on debating." - Muslimb Atman This clearly shows who won the debate, Mohammad Hijab agreed (during the debate) that almost all his arguments at his video "The real differences between Sunni and Shia" were refuted.
  18. Muhammad Hijab made a video "The real differences between Sunni and Shias". So the Shias wanted to debunk his accusations such as incompleteness of the Quran etc... and they did.
  19. In my knowledge it was disobedience towards Allāh ÓÈÍÇäå æÊÚÇáì that made Iblees (la) the accursed one. However how is this relevant to our discussion or this topic?
  20. If Allāh ÓÈÍÇäå æÊÚÇáì says that the people curse the disbelievers, but the people disagree with that or don't curse the disbelievers, is Allāh ÓÈÍÇäå æÊÚÇáì lying (audhu bilah)? No, the verse applies a non-literal way of making la'na mandatory on the disbelievers FROM the people. As per the Hadiths... they make it as an option to forgive the ones who repent. If someone is cursed for a particular reason, but then repents and is forgiven by Allāh ÓÈÍÇäå æÊÚÇáì, the person is not cursed anymore is he? This is what I explained to you about the verse referring to the enemies of the believers (wives and children in the context) as well. So these people aren't damned by Allāh ÓÈÍÇäå æÊÚÇáì since they're forgiven, it's not obligatory to damn them. I can show you more Hadiths (or you can search on your own) about cursing being encouraged, however do you really disbelieve in the infallibility of the prophet Õáì Çááå Úáíå æÂáå and the Imams (as)? Because that would mean that the Hadiths aren't that reliable to you are they? - Just to be sure, I'm not accusing nor threatening you for your belief, just asking if such Hadiths would be valid to you. Yes, it would be wrong to go against Allāh's ÓÈÍÇäå æÊÚÇáì order... and I won't. Allāh ÓÈÍÇäå æÊÚÇáì has ordered us to pardon the bani Israel for breaking the covenant, but this doesn't apply to other cases as well (because everything is halal unless proven to be harām). The Hadith says: "from damning who is damned by Allah". However, since Allāh ÓÈÍÇäå æÊÚÇáì has commanded us to pardon bani Israel for such an act, then we pardon, but for the other cases such as the ones who die while disbelieving (as the verse 2:161 and 3:87 imply) or the enemies of Ahlulbayt (as), they have the damnation of Allāh ÓÈÍÇäå æÊÚÇáì upon them, so they should be damned, if you consider this to be a sin, then (according to the Hadith) you'll have the damnantion of Allāh ÓÈÍÇäå æÊÚÇáì upon yourself. By the way sorry for taking this long to respond, I just didn't have time...
  21. Here are some verses about cursing being made mandatory upon the people: Indeed, those who disbelieve and die while they are disbelievers - upon them will be the curse of Allah and of the angels and the people, all together, (2:161) Those - their recompense will be that upon them is the curse of Allah and the angels and the people, all together, (3:87) Thus the Hadith: The Messenger of Allah (pbuh) said:" He who prevents himself from damning who is damned by Allah, considering it a sin shall have the damnation of Allah upon him." is Sahih and in accordance to the Quran. The verses you mentioned were referring to another case as shown above on my replies.
  22. Ok, I guess there is no point on discussing the first argument at all... Irrelevant, even if there was no verse encouraging curse, does this mean that cursing is not permitted? Yes there is encouraging on forgiving the ones who have repented. The ones who are forgiven and have their curse removed from them cannot be cursed anymore, however the Hadith said that it's permissible to curse the ones whom Allāh ÓÈÍÇäå æÊÚÇáì has cursed. Did Aisha (for example) repent, or did she ever get forgiven from the prophet Õáì Çááå Úáíå æÂáå? Or Imam Ali (as), remember that Aisha was a wrongdoer even after their death and the wrongdoers have the curse (la'na) of Allāh ÓÈÍÇäå æÊÚÇáì upon themselves. And how could the prophet Õáì Çááå Úáíå æÂáå and Imam Ali (as) forgive them after their death, is there such a narration? It is an option to not curse the ones who have recognized their mistake and finally repented, this is how forgiveness follows. I recommend you accept the Authenticity of the Hadith mentioned earlier since it has no contradiction with the Quran.
  23. I guess you should discuss this with @First Responder as he was the one who responded to your argument...
  24. 1. It says to be aware of our enemies (who could have been our wives or children). However the option of pardoning and forgiveness is permissible when they repent (which is impossible when they're dead). I explained my argument through the example of the disbelievers coming to Islam. 2. The verse says: "But if you pardon and overlook and forgive - then indeed, Allah is Forgiving and Merciful." Allāh ÓÈÍÇäå æÊÚÇáì does not give an order to pardon, overlook and forgive, rather he gives us the option which is not mandatory neither obligatory. So it was up (as an option) to the prophet Õáì Çááå Úáíå æÂáå to forgive Aisha (if she indeed repented). 3. Again the verse doesn't command us to forgive and pardon our wives, it recommends (gives an option) of forgiving them (which is a result of their repentance).
×
×
  • Create New...