Jump to content
In the Name of God بسم الله


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited


Previous Fields

  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

4,114 profile views

User4628568309's Achievements


Newbie (1/14)



  1. Hadith Al-Thaqalayn, the deposed will of the last prophet to humanity. https://www.al-islam.org/hadith-al-thaqalayn-deposed-will-last-prophet-humanity-toyib-olawuyi I believe this book may have been shared on here before, I think it would be beneficial to share again as it is one of the more comprehensive works on hadith al-thaqalayn in Sunni books available in english. It is common to start a book and not finish reading it, so I would encourage anybody who is trying to find true Islam between the sunnis and the shia to read the chapters on hadith al-thaqalayn at the very least. The author (may Allah have mercy on him) also delved into discussions regarding imamah and the sahaba.
  2. Yet you have absolutely no reason to, after all, this is your worldview: Great, so there's no problem in religious people believing stuff because nothing matters. Rather than waste your precious limited time on religious forums, go have fun.
  3. Ridiculous argument. Three points come to mind: They're not our earliest books, most of the personal collections of the companions of the imams (the usool) predate them, they were gathered into larger collections such as Al-Kafi, so there was no need to copy and transmit them seperately thereafter, although some (AFAIK) have reached us in their original individual form. Al-kulayni and his collection Al-Kafi came before Saduq and his books, and you'll see plenty of narrations from the later imams in there, so clearly he and his mashayikh believed in these imams to preserve and transmit these narrations. Both books were written by twelvers. Basa'ir al-darajat was written by Muhammed bin Al-Hassan Al-Saffar who was a companion of Imam Al-Askari (as). How can one suggest twelver theology was later "developed" by saying there's a lack of evidence in a book written by a person who was a companion and believer of the 11th imam, clearly the author of the book believed in it already. As for Kitab Al-Mahasin, it was written by Ahmad Al-Barqi who was born 12 years before Imam Al-Hadi (as) and five years after Imam Al-Jawad (as), and was a companion of both, and he believed in the imamat of both. So if one wants to suggest twelver shiism "developed" later you're going to have to do better than evidence that claim by pointing out books written by companions of and believers in the 9th, 10th, and 11th imams, while making false assumptions about them being our earliest works. Edit: Just realised the objection is about the ghaybah specifically, Qai'm's points are sufficient. It can be added however that there are several narrations about the ghaybah in Al-Kafi reported from the earlier imams (1), given that Al-Kafi is compiled from the usool which predate the two books mentioned, the claim is clearly false. http://www.alseraj.net/maktaba/kotob/hadith/kafi1/html/ara/books/al-kafi-1/144.html
  4. You're reply is sound and valid, but I think it's appropriate to say this: My dear brother, I get it, you're trying to be academically honest so you're willing to listen to both sides, but you've read/listened to so much of their nonsense that it's led to you not seeing how nonsensical these objections are, and instead you feel the need to provide a counter-response to everything, no matter how silly. Frankly I think you've already done your duty in being honest in your search for truth, you've found it after closely considering both sides, and you're only doing a disservice to yourself by continuing to listen to people you know are not reasonable. Getting the attention of the audience? He got the companions to build him a platform (1) and then he stood on that platform with Ali (as) and started giving a sermon... and you know, he's rasool Allah (s)...when he starts delivering a sermon, you listen... this stuff doesn't even need to be said, it's an objection that flies in the face of reasonable thinking. Has no relation? Sorry what? It's literally the preceding statement which references a verse in the qur'an that makes it clear the total authority that the prophet (s) has over the mu'mineen through the word awla, and then in the next statement he says mawla...it's the same root word. I feel like banging my head on a table. One can not even think of these ideas unless they're actively trying to deny Imam Ali's (as) status. Edit: source for (1): http://ia902606.us.archive.org/34/items/waq47652/sahiha04.pdf
  5. Sunnis believe with regards to the companions that they had pure intentions even though they made mistakes, hadith al-ghadeer deconstructs this as it shows you can not fight Amir Al-mu’mineen with pure intentions as 1) he is the mawla of every mu’min 2) the prophet made a du’a for Allah to have enmity with whoever shows Ali enmity so Aisha and Muawiya could not have had pure intentions when they fought him
  6. The statement is a reference to the verse of the qur’an, and the sunni tafsirs of this verse all make it undeniable that the word awla is about authortity, check for yourself, there are several available here: http://quran.ksu.edu.sa/tafseer/tafheem/sura33-aya6.html so when the nabi (s) says من كنت مولاه فهذا علي مولاه he’s literally telling us that the authority he (s) commands over us, Ali (as) also has over us, that he is اولى بالمؤمنين من انفسهم Another point: the tafsirs also state that the meaning of awla is not only encompassing of allegiance, obedience and preference for his judgements over their own, but that he is also more beloved to them than themselves, so if anything, for a sunni the hadith means both master and friend, so if they have examples of it being used in the context of friend by a sahabi, that does not necessarily entail it does not mean master.
  7. I think there is another pertinent point that can be made about the three phrases in hadith al-ghadeer. Regarding the prophet’s (s) preceding statement before “for whomsoever i am his mawla..”, which is: - الست اولى بالمؤمنين من انفسهم؟ (am I not worthy over the believers than themselves?) in reference to 33:6 If this statement is not a qarina for the meaning of mawla, then a Sunni is forced to conclude that this initial phrase was a pointless and irrelevant thing for the nabi (s) to say as it served no purpose (والعياذ بالله). As we all know, the prophet (s) does not speak redundantly. A Sunni has to explain the significance of this first statement in the hadith if it is not the indicator of the meaning of mawla.
  8. Oh don’t worry, he definitely isn’t cold
  9. I think that condition is only referring to talking and not the two points beforehand, so all three points are independent of each other. I don't think they're saying expressing mutual love is only haram if done with the intention of deriving pleasure
  10. Much appreciated. I’m surprised I haven’t seen this before as I’ve asked various people specifically about joking/laughing, they would all discourage it but were very hesitant to label it haram outright, so it’s nice to finally get a solid answer.
  11. Source? I’ve been looking for years for rulings on laughing/joking and never seen anything that specific, rather they’re quite general on friendship and being alone. I’d really appreciate it if you could show me.
  12. I fully agree with the bolded part. ...buuuuuut I still think segregration is preferable because on the flip side there will be honest, pious young adults who may otherwise slip up in that unsegregated environment, and then trying to avoid sin after that is like climbing a soapy water slide that gets steeper with each sin. Yes, some sin regardless of segregation, but the segregation acts as a barrier of protection for those who are well intentioned perhaps this is a blessing, being comfortable around the opposite sex sounds cool but in reality it leads to much fasad in general,
  13. Brother, once again, and please pay attention this time, all I did was disagree that 25-28 is the ideal age of marriage because THE VAST MAJORITY OF MEN HAVE INDULGED IN HARAM COUNTLESS TIMES WELL BEFORE THAT AGE RANGE, HENCE MARRIAGE IS ALREADY WAJIB ON THEM WELL BEFORE THAT, why is that so difficult to understand for you? You can’t be selective in the examples of the aimmah, Imam Al-Jawad having two wives at 18 shows that marrying from specifically 25 onwards is not necessarily a sunnah like you keep on suggesting. As for the bolded part, I said no such thing, you’re putting words in my mouth and building a deconstruction based on that. I’m not repeating myself, go back and read what I said. If you were honest with yourself then you would realise the words and actions of the ahlulbayt in encouraging early marriage, as well as the example of Imam Al-Jawad (as) deconstructs your narrative. But you would rather deliberately misinterpret the Ahlulbayt’s examples just to not look bad in an argument on an internet forum infront of anonymous people, fear Allah. If you actually go back to Imam Ali’s marriage to Fatima (as), they were poor and barely had anything. So there goes your theory on amassing wealth out the window.
  14. Several times I stressed the importance of piety, maturity, compatibility, and I have mentioned that marriage comes with great responsibilities, that marriage is not just about sex, and yet you tag me in this and frame your replies to me countless times in a way that imply I think marriage is purely about "satisfying urges". You're insufferable. I see you also had no reply to my point about Imam Al-Jawad having two wives at 18. Do you stick by your point or drop it in light of this?
  • Create New...