ali47

As salaamu alaikum, Is anyone able to translate this hadith from al Gharaat? al-Gharaat of Ibrahim bin Muhammad al-Thaqafi (d. 283) – a famous historical work covering the events that took place after the battle of Nahrawan – mentions a narration from a Sulaym in a mursal fashion (I.e. the chain is broken), and it is also not clear which Sulaym it is or if it is Saleem.[14] The narration is regarding the narrator coming to Imam Ali (عليه السلام) and informing him about the killing of Muhammad bin Abi Bakr, and Imam Ali (عليه السلام) informs him that the Prophet ((صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)) had told the truth when he referred to Muhammad bin Abi Bakr as alive and his sustenance provided for (hayyun yurzaq – حيّ يرزق). [14] The published edition researched and edited by Muhaddith Jalal ul-Deen has a footnote after Sulaym saying that this Sulaym could have been Saleem bin Aswad – father of al-Sha’sha al-Maharibi al-Kufi, or Saleem bin Balj al-Fazari or Sulaym bin Qays al-Hilali If you post your name I will be more than happy to mention it in my upcoming article. Thanks Ali

wise words!

Wahhabism is a type of fascism as it is extremely intolerant of other interpretations of Islam. ISIS is Salafism which is Wahhabism on steroids with their roots in Khawarijism - (an early movement in Islam which promoted takfir for not "ruling by God's" law). Ultimately these groups are divided among themselves and the Quran does not reach further than their throat. The irony is all of these groups are in denial and claim they are the authentic and saved sect of Islam - one only has to look at their actions and legal rulings to see the truth however.

Salamum alaikum all, I wanted get some perspective on what the Shi'i position is on imams or prophets making minor mistakes? I have heard many prominent lecturers state Imams make NO minor mistakes and therefore do not accept hadith of the Prophet (AS) praying an incorrect number of rakaats. To me this seems a form of ghuluww (exaggeration) and this is echoed by the hadith attributed to Imam Ridha (AS) below. It also agrees with common sense if you think about it, the only one who makes no mistakes is God indeed. Of course sins are a different matter, we know Imams (AS) are free of "rijs" and therefore do not commit minor or major sins - we are talking about minor human mistakes here and whether they form part of Isma (infallibility). It seems to be some of the ghuluww elements are still with us more than we would like to admit. In a hadith narrated by Imam Ridha (AS) in Uyun Akhbar by Sheikh Sadooq. If you have a copy of the English translation it is book 2 page 454: On the authority of Abi Salt al Harawi that he told Al Reza "O son of the Prophet of God! There are people in the vicinity of Kufa who think that the Prophet (S) never made any mistakes when saying his prayers". The Imam (AS) said: "May God damn them! They lie. The only One who makes no mistakes is God - the One and Only" Sheikh Sadooq further says "I have recorded whatever has been narrated on the subjects of boasters and those who believe in turning over the affairs in the book Ibtal al-Ghuluw wal Tafweedh". Thanks

Salaam brother, Only Abu Bakr and Umar doubted Fadak belonging to Fatima az Zahra (SA). Therefore it was up to them to prove their claim - otherwise we could all make unsubstantiated claims and get away with it. Ali (AS) says from Sulaym ibn Qays which is one of our major sources: "It is surprising for that Ummah who see the tradition of their prophet changing and altering day by day.... And he and his companion took away the Fadak, when it was in control of Fatimah, and during the time of the Holy Prophet she ate food from it. So, he asked an evidence from her, when it was in her hand. Neither did they accept her to be true or Umm e Ayman, although he surely knew, like we know, that it was in her hand, and it was not right for him to accuse her." Then people thought of him as good, praised him and said that he did that because he had fear of Allah and this is his merit." This is further proved by your hadiths in Sahih al Bukhari to at least say the seizing of Fadak is a historical fact. The million dollar question from a Sunni perspective is whether Abu Bakr's legal reasoning was correct or not. Furthermore, was Umar's legal reasoning threatening 'Ali with fire to come and give allegiance to Abu Bakr correct? You can find the above in Ibn Abi Shaybah’s book Al-Musannif with a graded Sahih isnad. The issue is that Sunni history is taught that everything was fine the glory years except a few minor mistakes here and there. The reality is the opposite unfortunately and you must at least acknowledge this. Granted some Shia's will and do go to extremes in their tabarra, as will any group, but you must see that this oppression happened and at least acknowledge it..

He should go into comedy instead

Seriously sick of people who become religious and then: Stop smiling Stop talking Stop thinking

Heh 10 out of 10 for this question!! It reminds me of "I think therefore I am" all experiences are truthful in as much as we trust our senses, as even if we believe our doubts it shows a degree of trustworthiness. Validation for me on a physical plane takes the form of following correct fiqh with the intention of closeness to Allah swt. After than it's all to do with the heart/qalb/dill - if you want to get good at differentiating between your nafs, shaytain and Allah you need to look inwards... but not too much ;) We are not at the level of the Imams [AS] when it comes to purity of intentions but it's certainty a good target to aim for ;) These illustrious figures were deeply spiritually engaged with themselves and watched themselves like a hawk with the inner eye.. At the end of the day we are human, not masum and Allah has made leniency in this deen, he knows we are not 100% going to be 100% absolutely pure in our intention, as absolute purity belongs to the pure right. Remember it says in the Quran you will be awarded for a good thought but not be punished for a bad, you will only be punished for a bad deed, even then you will be reward 10 times for one good deed.

Salamum alaikum sir, The classic justification is that Abu Bakr was the first caliph and he took the reigns of the khalifa, he paved the way for the Islamic empires to come and contained fitnah, such as the riddah wars etc. He was the second companion in the cave with the Prophet [AS] and allegedly led the entire prayers in the Prophet's [AS] final hours, which was enough for some to consider him fit to be the 1st khalifa and closest companion to the Prophet. There are also plenty of Sunni hadiths in Ali's [AS] name stating how superior Abu Bakr is etc. That is why he is often viewed as the best. As regards to purification you will find this point is not considered important by Sunni's, like many qualities of Ahl al Bayt [AS] or Ali [AS] they will be taught it means to hold them in high regard and that they were pious people but that's where it ends for them.

It's good there is a thread on here exposing this fitnah. Here's my 2 cents on Mr Tawhidi (Imam is much too high of a rank, forget about Shaikh!) Tawhidi appears to be a weird mix of fanatical Shi'ism, Islamic reformism and right wing politics, he strikes me as a very confused individual but malicious individual who has found a niche, conning the West into believing:- ALL Sunni Islam is the problem further flaming Sunni/Shia relations potentially undoing the work of Muslim leaders globally, last thing we want is a Shi'i ISIS....!! Preaching a brand of Shi'ism that involves meeting Tommy Robinson to discuss Aisha's sex life (I don't think Mr Tawhidi has read Surah Noor, he has incurred Allah's wrath big time for this one trust me). Touring around the globe pandering to right wingers who's experience with Islam, is probably having a kebab 2 or 3 times a year, so they instantly lap up his confused brand of Islam, which to the majority of sane minded Muslims on this forum, is clearly a confused mess of a beliefs and etiquette. Of course just a mention of the phrase Islamic reformism is enough to wet the appetite and induce the saliva glands... Tawhidi will eventually be seen for what/who he is, at the moment he's riding the wave of Islamic reformism so he can fool a few non-Muslims for now, but he lacks the practical experience to deal with real life world issues that Muslims leaders like Khamenei are dealing with across the globe. Tawhidi if you're reading, coming out reeling off hadiths from Al Bukhari, talking about Salafi's and being mates with Tommy Robinson will only get you so far. If you're serious, get back and finish that hawza course ;)

Salamun alaikum, Does anybody know the most authentic version of why Zayd ibn Ali (AS) was deserted by some of his alleged followers in Kufa? I read many contradictory things about his desertion including: i.) For his refusal to do tabarra of Abu Bakr and Umar, as neither did his parents etc Sunni/Zaydi view ii.) That he studied under Wasil ibn Ata the Mutzailite and did not do tabarra to attract a greater following, but this ended up working against him (there's even a hadith allegedly by Imam Baqir [AS] criticized Zayd for obtaining knowledge from someone like Wasil). Wasil or Mutazilism allegedly influenced Zayd [AS] into accepting Abu Bakr and Umar's caliphates as legitimate, albeit less superior compared to Ali's [AS]. Sunni/Shia view iii.) Zayd [AS] was deserted by people who didn't do enough tabarra of Abu Bakr and Umar so Zayd [AS] told them to get "cut off/out" (batara) which is how they got their name "Batriyyah" Thus the remaining uprisers were loyal to the cause of the illegitimacy and tabarra of the above. Shi'i/Zaydi. - Imami Shia view I was wondering if anyone knew the official Imami line that is taught these days on what happened and whether some share the Sunni version, it wouldn't surprise me given the mentality of some Shia's. But likewise it would not surprise me if this was propaganda to support the Sunni line that Imams [AS] were supportive and accepting of the 3 Caliphs... Thanks in advance

The people above have given good advice all I would say it don't worry and put your trust in Al Aziz. Im always afraid that i might go off the straight path in the future - it could happen but there is no point dwelling, if you do, then know the Allah loves tawba (meaning is to return back) im always afraid that i might do kufr or shirk in the future - it could happen but keep your mind sharp and think about Allahs creation and mercy manifested in the universe. what if i’m doing things the wrong way thinking that its right? we all fall into this category. what if i’m sinning without even realizing it - try keep away from the major sins first and hold yourself to account regularly but not all the time so you worry what if my prayers dont get accepted by Allah - assume they do, provided you are earning halal, abstain from major sins - even then, the mercy of Allah سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى is unlimited.... i always have these thoughts in my mind and dont know what to do to ease myself from these thoughts - try read there's a good book of hadith called Mizan al Hikmah that has sections explaining nicely all the stuff you have listed above. It is in the form of hadith from the Imams (AS) so it is easy to read :) moderation is the key here and just relax

Murtadha Mutahhari : Divine Justice, Light within Me, Man & his Destiny. Read widely too, get classic books on Ahl al Sunnah like Jalal-ud-deen Suyuti, Ghazali etc

Salaam, Yes definitely I agree in that this world has been made in a rational way, however from Allah's perspective rationality is just a creation at the end of the day. He can defy the laws by virtue of his power and might, after all they are creations of us. It's an interesting debate boarding philosophical which has been discussed by European and Islamic philosophers. Al Ghazali and Hume even went so far do deny cause and effect, in that it was merely an illusion and therefore could be used to explain miracles. (check Al Ghazalis Incoherence of the Philosophers). Shia scholars generally have a more sober approach affirming cause and effect in a material plane, but arguing Allah is the ultimate cause, in a way it's similar to Ghazalis "pseudo-causes", therefore miracles and bypassing of physical laws are all p.ossible. In summary, la hawla wa la quwwata illa billa is the best way to sum it all up :)

Even if we take the hadith to refer to inheritance law then this could still not be used in the Fadak argument. Fatima az Zahra (SA) is reported to have argued her rights to Fadak on the basis it was gifted to her during the lifetime of the Prophet (PBUH). The burden of proof would be on Abu Bakr and Umar to disprove this, but instead they shamefully asked her to provide the witnesses who were refused anyway.