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

SunniBrother

Advanced Members
  • Content Count

    529
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by SunniBrother

  1. The term Rafida was coined by Imam Zayd Ibn Ali after people rejected his call to revolt against the Caliphate of the Ummayyad. Imam Zayd did refused to speak bad about the Two Sheikhs (Abu Bakr and Omar). But he didn't called people Rafida for criticizing some Sahaba, rather it was meant the rejecters of his call to arms against a corrupt rule. Now for some reason we see Sunnis who use this term to attack anyone who dare criticize Muawiyah and accuse you of being kaffir for criticizing some sahabas. However criticizing sahabas are not kufr per se, they were not infallible nor they were prophets. So we Sunnis cannot accuse the Shia when they call us (Sunnis) Sahaba worshippers. However this is not the case when Sunnis criticize Fatima, Ali, Hussein and Hassan. Why is that? I call all my Sunni brothers to not be hypocrites and do not call everyone a Rafida for those who criticize clear Nasibis among the Sahaba and when criticize Nasibi feelings in the Sunni community. I also ask my Shia brothers to speak about this issue and discuss with the Sunnis in a peaceful manner without disparaging the 3 caliphs and without saying "come to my sect". Debate is good, but not arguments.
  2. The problem is I don't think them as infallible. Only Prophets are infallible. I do believe however that the consensus of Ali, Hussein, Hassan and Fatima is infallible. And this can be supported by the Qur'an. As for the rest of the imams there was problems in succession and many fabricated reports about them. I believe something more in line with the Zaydi madhab. Or fivers as people call them. Omar was very sad that Ali didn't got the caliphate after him. I don't believe that Abu Bakr and Omar or even Uthman became heretics or kuffar. They may have made mistakes but we need to look at the political situation at the time, the Arsan did rushed to elect a Caliphate, even Omar said that the election of Abu Bakr was done in a wrong manner and that it should not happen again, he even go as far to say that if someone is elected like Abu Bakr again he should be killed. There's several proof that Abu Bakr didn't wanted that position "I am not the best man among you" but he was forced due to circumstances.
  3. I am not born Muslim. I am a revert and that's why I question everything and I came from a non sect bias. So I am not brainwashed in any sect.
  4. I believe that the eight madhabs should make ijma among the eight and not internal. We have Shias not accepting reports of Sunnis and we have Sunnis not accepting the reports of Shias. In the Qur'an it says there's no sect in Islam. This doesn't mean in any way that one of the sects is the true path or Islam as it was brought in it's totality. Honestly I believe the fiqh according to the 8 madhabs is acceptable. The problem is more regarding the lines of kufr and theology
  5. The problem is I don't think twelvers are right either. There is also problem in logic among twelvers. Is not a question of what sect is right or wrong but the problem is that each sect make internal ijma and this became a vice in the sharia.
  6. In Sunni Islam Technically we don't think Abu Bakr and Omar are better then Ali, we have several reports saying Ali was superior to all. Even Muawiyah said Ali was higher then him. But in practice the outcome is different.
  7. I am Sunni myself. But I wont deny, we have problems in logic. If criticizing the 4 khulafa is kufr then what to say when lady Fatima got angry at Abu Bakr? Was she a kuffar? What about when Aisha criticized Uthman? Was Aisha a kuffar? What about when Muawiyah took up arms against the caliphate of Ali? _______ Praising Muawiyah. What's wrong with us? Why we praise him? It's quite clear he harbored hatred of Ali, he took up arms against the caliphate of Ali. He instituted cursing Ali, he killed several sahabas, he broke his own treaty with Hasan by appointing Yazid as successor. And then comes Yazid and kill Hussein. The cursing of Ali was still going until everyone thought it was a Sunnah. When Umar ibn Abd Aziz (r.a) took the caliphate he removed this bidah, a old man came to him and said "the Sunnah, the Sunnah", Umar ibn Abd Aziz replied "The heretic innovation, the heretic innovation, three times". He killed Aisha. ________ Confusion - There's a confusion regarding opening prayer with Bismillah, if this is said quietly, not said at all or it's said aloud, well it was consensus among Ali, Hussein, Hassan and Fatima that is said aloud, is not rocket science, why nit look the consensus of this 4 along with the Prophetic sunnah? _______ Jewish interpolation. Why we accept Kaab as reliable? He tough Abu Hurairah and influenced Muawiyah? Then we go around accusing others of following the way of Jews and Christians. We should criticize ourselves first.
  8. Salam If you're feeling remorseful just make tawbah and don't despair of Allah mercy for Allah love a sincere repentance Insha Allah.
  9. Can anyone tell me about the Zaydi Shias? What is their believes and how their jurisprudence works. What material they follow? Are they only found in Yemen?
  10. Some aspects of aqeedah can be debated using philosophy and other not. Islamic ulema normally discourage engaging philosophy among the laypeople for valid reasons, however there is a certain bias positions in Islamic circles. One example today is modern day atharis (followers of the Hanbali Madhab) that while they condemn philosophy as whole saying is a blameworthy innovation they actually engage in philosophy. According to them the Prophet (s.a.w.s) discussed everything that needed to be said regarding aqeedah and any attempt to rationalize is a blameworthy bidah, this was refuted by Imam Al Ashari and other Ashari Muslims. So following their discourse is clear they condemn everything related to philosophy even if they themselves engage in it, if you apply their narrative you'll notice that also include blaming Ali Ibn Abi Talib (r.a) of bidah and even other Sahabis, this makes 99% of Muslims heretics now this is the root cause of wahhabism and salafism is this dangerous discourse being exported by Saudi books and that gross piece of trash kitab al tawheed of Ibn Abdul Wahhab Najdi.
  11. Good. We both hate wahhabis. Lets unite on that and not some sectarian believe that spawned after the killing of uthman and developed under corrupt 'caliphates' who use Islam as political springboard.
  12. Shia speaking bad off sufis is a irony. They attack Ibn Taymiyyah and yet sometimes they sound just like him speaking against sufism. That's why Allah gave me Aql to use. If shias are so pure explain me the number of Ghulats that spawned from it and the numerous false Mahdi claimants . Just in the time of Ibn Taymiyyah there was already 700 Mahdi claimants (I also heard this is a issue in Iran like 'ahem' Baha'i Faith..) When Iran converted to shiism it was a Mahdi claimants that attacked the Ottoman empire like a mad dog and sacked Imam Abu Hanifa grave (Just like a wahhabi!)
  13. Did Did it ever occurred to you that this opposition of sufis by Shia imams was because those sufis followed a Sunni aqeedah (I.e not follower of imamiyah) And not because of tawwasuf itself? No Muslim believe Allah and creation is the same. Ashari Muslims believe just like you said, creation and Allah is separated and this explained by Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal. This confusion of Ibn Arabi concept is due to not understanding metaphysics you just sounded like Ibn Taymiyyah opposition to Ibn Arabi.
  14. I heard that the Shias refused to take arms with him because he wasn't"pure blood" Ahl al Bayt. And is narrated by Zaydis that the people of Kufa betrayed him asking his opinion about Abu Bakr and Omar. He said he never heard his family speak bad about them and that they ruled according to Qur'an and Sunnah, then they killed him because of this. A Sunni Imam donated to the cause of Imam Zayd, that was Imam Abu Hanifa.
  15. Well for what I have been tough the purpose of the religion and revelation is to make you a better person and perfect your character. That is spoken is the Qur'an as taskya and naf. And we have concepts such as Ahklaq. All this concepts are crystallized in the science of Sufism or tawwasuf. This is what I learned. Interesting enough we both Sunnis and Shias think that wahhabis are satanic because of their opposition to this aspect of Islam. How we explain imam Maliki and Imam Abu Hanifa studying with Imam Ja'afar? This people were mystics. Imam Abu Hanifa donated to Imam Zaydi ibn Ali cause to revolt against the caliph, and yet Imam Zayd was killed by some Shias at the time for refusing to speak bad of Abu Bakr and Omar. And hence the ones who coined the term rafida were the Zaydi Shias and later Sunnis adopted to refer to the ithna ashari. Yet Imam Ja'afar was deeply saddened by the death of Zayd ibn Ali. We have many tariqa in Sunni Islam that have Imam Ja'afar in the sisilah but both Shias and wahhabis would consider this blasphemous because the naqshbandi sisiliah have both Abu Bakr and Imam Ja'afar in it.
  16. Okay I am curious about Shia form of mysticism. We Sunnis have Sufism and Tariqas. What are the types of mysticism practiced by Shias and I would like a brief explanation about them and their practices.
  17. Abu Bakr (r.a) Ali (r.a) Both Ali and Muawiyah Hussein (r.a)
  18. Bukhari, Muslim, Abu Dawood, Tirmidhi, Sughra, Ibn Majah or Muwwata. But we have many other collections such as Musnad Ahmad. I trust Imam Nawawi selection in Riadhus Salihin for example.
  19. We believe that after the death of Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal (r.a) we no longer need a Mujtaheed Muqallid. As Imam Al Ghazali (r.a) put we believe that bidah have ended among the true Ahl Al Sunnah whal Jammah and so we regard the system we have to be sufficient.
  20. We don't hold them as infallible as I said. But this doesn't mean they are ordinary by any means, we regard them as Awliya. Yes a evil guy can claim being Ahl al Bayt and that's the point of them not being infallible. But the righteous Ahl Al Bayt are regarded as Awliya, far from being ordinary. We believe that infallibility is only to the Prophets
  21. I am Sunni. Theologically Sunnis and Shias are not much different, we have some differences regarding pillars and faith, but major differences is regarding succession and the sahabas. Our source of laws are a little difference. We don't deny Hazrat Ali (r.a) and the Ahl Al Bayt, we just don't think them as infallible and we take into consideration people that Shias don't.
  22. Why does this even matter? Having the name of a sect first doesn't mean being upon Haqq. There were many deviants who received a label by the Prophet (s.a.w.s) himself. One such groups were the Khawarij, but they gaining a label before others is not a sign of Haqq. Sunnis didn't had any labels before, we were just Muslims and followers of Islam, we just starting calling ourselves Ahl al Sunnah Whal Jammah later as it was a necessity since everyone was claiming to follow Islam. Ahl al Sunnah whal Jammah have various meanings, but roughly means "The people of tradition, the people of sunnah, the people of the prophetic way, etc"
  23. Sunni interpretation is different from the Shia tradition. In Traditional Sunni Islam the Ahl al Bayt are not limited too 14 imams and we do believe that the living descendents of Sayyidina Hussein (r.a) and Sayyidina Hassan (r.a) is to be regarded as part of the Ahl Al Bayt. Please keep in mind that Sunnis don't regard them as infallible like the Ithna Ashari (Similar to Zaidi Shias).
  24. Not necessarily. Not all salafis are wahhabis, but wahhabism is a branch of this movement. That aside there are many non-wahhabis that are not Sunnis, I believe Shias and Ibadis are not to be regarded as Wahhabis, not being wahhabi doesn't make someone Sunni.
×
×
  • Create New...