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

Rashīd al-Hanafī

Advanced Members
  • Content Count

    65
  • Joined

  • Last visited


Reputation Activity

  1. Like
    Rashīd al-Hanafī got a reaction from AmirioTheMuzzy in Bahai prophecies ?   
    And from whence do they derive this seemingly convoluted, ad hoc concept?
  2. Like
    Rashīd al-Hanafī got a reaction from Ejaz in Do Shi'a call on the dead?   
    Sūrah al-Baqarah, āyah 154:
    وَلَا تَقُولُوا لِمَن يُقْتَلُ فِي سَبِيلِ اللَّهِ أَمْوَاتٌ بَلْ أَحْيَاءٌ وَلَٰكِن لَّا تَشْعُرُونَ
    "Do not say of those who have been martyred that they are dead; rather they are alive, although you may not perceive it."
    Regardless of one's position on istighāthah, two things are clear: (1) they upon whom are called are not dead, per se, and (2) it does not amount to shirk. And it's not a practice restricted the Shī`ah in any event. I advise you to study `aqīdah from non-Hanbalī/"Salafī" sources.
  3. Disagree
    Rashīd al-Hanafī got a reaction from Muslim2010 in Imamah   
    As a non-Shī`ī, my stance on Imāmah will obviously be that it cannot be from the usūl id-dīn. The only things in remote relation to it than CAN be firmly established are the Wilāyah of Imām `Alī `alayhi salām (via tawātur) and the purity of the Lady Fātimah and Imāms `Alī, Hasan, and Husayn `alayhim salām from filthy inclination and action (via Qur'ān).
    Anything else is speculation and contrivance, so Sunnīs and Zaydīs shouldn't be held to account for Ja`farī eisegesis.
    The position that any and all religious leadership must necessarily be infallible simply does not follow logically OR textually; in fact, the concept runs contrary to both realms of knowledge.
  4. Disagree
    Rashīd al-Hanafī got a reaction from Ashvazdanghe in Imamah   
    As a non-Shī`ī, my stance on Imāmah will obviously be that it cannot be from the usūl id-dīn. The only things in remote relation to it than CAN be firmly established are the Wilāyah of Imām `Alī `alayhi salām (via tawātur) and the purity of the Lady Fātimah and Imāms `Alī, Hasan, and Husayn `alayhim salām from filthy inclination and action (via Qur'ān).
    Anything else is speculation and contrivance, so Sunnīs and Zaydīs shouldn't be held to account for Ja`farī eisegesis.
    The position that any and all religious leadership must necessarily be infallible simply does not follow logically OR textually; in fact, the concept runs contrary to both realms of knowledge.
  5. Like
    Rashīd al-Hanafī reacted to ShiaMan14 in How can we Shi'a justify this?   
    I stand corrected brother. 
    Thank you.
  6. Like
    Rashīd al-Hanafī got a reaction from Ashvazdanghe in How can we Shi'a justify this?   
    With all due respect brother, that's simply not the case. What you're describing is a situation the Wahhabis find themselves in; and they have been disowned by the Sunnis. Tawassul is well-known as being allowed and encouraged.
    But the rest of what you said is completely right. They don't know who Allāh ﷻ is, so they don't know what `ibādah is. Because of that, they don't know what shirk is. So everything is shirk to them. Sunnis have been saying this since the Osmanlis bloodied the Wahhabis in Arabia.
  7. Like
    Rashīd al-Hanafī got a reaction from Ashvazdanghe in How can we Shi'a justify this?   
    Wahhabi Defense? Ignore them. They're a segment on the Fox News of the "Sunni" world.
  8. Like
    Rashīd al-Hanafī got a reaction from Ashvazdanghe in What does it mean to 'pray on time'?   
    I think this has more to do with making one's salawāt `adā instead of qadā. Wa Allāhu ﷻ a`lam.
  9. Will Look Later
    Rashīd al-Hanafī got a reaction from Ashvazdanghe in Historical reconstruction of Dhu-l Faqar   
    Assalaamu `alaykum, all. Having a great love for Mawla `Ali (karramAllahu wajhahu) and swords in general, I thought I'd do some research into the famed Dhu-l Faqar; perhaps one day I might order a reproduction made to the specifications outlined below:

    1. Arab swords of the early Islamic era were similar in almost every way to either the Roman spatha or the Sassanid longsword, i.e. they were straight and double-edged (the saber was an innovation originating in Central Asia, not finding its way to the Persians or Arabs until much later). The highest quality were made in Yemen from imported wootz ingots (made in southern India). They were uniformly worn hung from a baldric; wearing a sword on one's hip on a belt was not customary (in fact it seems to have been looked down upon) for the Arabs.

    2. I have effectively ruled out its name referring to a bifurcation of the tip or serration of the edges (as we see on Shī`ī pendants and Indo-Pakistani interpretations). Bifurcation of the tip would make a sword structurally unsound (particularly with the desired impact area being roughly the upper third of the blade), and such a measure would be ludicrous to as ferocious a warrior as `Alī (`alayhi salām); such a sword would not have been one famously used by him. Serration of the edge (such as on the medieval Flamberge), while indeed effectively improving the performance of a cut-centric sword (as spathae were), was not innovated until much later in history. Thus I have determined that the name either has to do with cleaving/separating (the vertebrae, specifically), or referring to a particularly intricate fuller design it may have incorporated (fiqr is a word meaning fine engraving). As it was quite ordinary for spathae to have multiple (quite attractive) fullers, I'm leaning more toward translating its name as "Lord of Cleaving."

    3. By investigating Ibn al-Qayyim's "Zād ul-Ma`ād" and Imām Tirmidhī's "Shamā'il," I have determined the parts of Dhū-l Faqār's furniture which were made of silver, and they are as follows:

    -Bikrāh: these are the part of the scabbard which attach to the rings through which the baldric straps are fed.

    -Dhu'ābah: this would usually refer to the lanyard hung from the pommel (used for weapon retention and decoration), but since this is mentioned along with those features made of silver, I have to assume this refers to a ring through which the lanyard was strung.

    -Na`l: this is the decorative (and protective) endcap at the base of the scabbard, also called chape. Not to be confused with chappe.

    -Halqah: throat (chappe). As spathae featured both a chappe on the scabbard and the hilt, I shall thus apply it to both. Note that the chappe of a spatha's hilt tended to be incorporated into the larger (usually) shoulder-style rounded handguard.

    -Qabī`ah: pommel cap and handle accents.

    4. The blade will resemble in length, width, and taper, that of a typical 7th-century Roman spatha. It should have a roughly spatulate tip. I have decided on a U-shaped fuller; this would be a double-fuller which is joined at the tip (and matches a picture I found of the Fatimid iconography).

    5. As I mentioned, the best quality swords made by the Arabs were made in Yemen, which had considerable Persian influence at the time. So why isn't this sword being made in the Sassanid longsword style? I'm not assuming Dhū-l Faqār was a Yemeni-made sword, because there is a hadīth which mentions that one of the swords (not named, unfortunately) belonging to RasūlAllāh ﷺ (as Dhū-l Faqār originally did) was made in the style of the Bani Hanīfah. This tribe inhabited the Yamāmah region, which is part of modern-day Najd; far from Persian influence. Furthermore, all of the anatomical features mentioned above are indicative of Roman style. None of the Sassanid longswords I've seen has incorporated them as described, while every spatha has.

    So that's where I am now. I've still got a lot of research to do for ideas on the particular style of decoration I'm going to use for the mountings. I've seen some examples from the period that experts aren't sure are Byzantine or Arab, so it's safe to assume Byzantine and Arab weaponry incorporated similar, if not identical, motifs.

    So what's everyone think of my sword ijtihād so far? Input is welcome!
  10. Like
    Rashīd al-Hanafī got a reaction from Faruk in Refuting "Thaqalayn – A Critical Study"   
    Um... my own Shaykh (Atabek Shukurov) and another Sunnī shaykh (al-Ninowy) I listen to heavily have both said this event has tawātur, if I'm not mistaken. How strange that anyone would try to weaken it.
  11. Subhanallah!
    Rashīd al-Hanafī reacted to Repentant in Exposing Imam Shaikh Brother Mohammad Tawhidi   
    I hope I am wrong but is he a Ghulat???
    On his twitter he posts:
    :no:
  12. Haha
    Rashīd al-Hanafī reacted to AnotherShepherd in Islam and martial arts   
    And if you use the martial arts to brain dead the enemy? 
    Ya Haider! 
  13. Like
    Rashīd al-Hanafī reacted to aaljibar in Slight doubt in way of saying tashahud?   
    Thank you guys.
    I've learnt to correct my mistakes. Now I will say "rasuluh" instead of saying "rasulahuu" and mohammadan before mohammadin in tashahud.

  14. Like
    Rashīd al-Hanafī reacted to megaman in Are people of Islam the Last People?   
    Sorry, I didn't know. It's just that I was talking about prophets who weren't Messengers and Imams came up.
    Thanks.
  15. Like
    Rashīd al-Hanafī reacted to megaman in Dragon Ball   
    The ones where he fights freeze, I remember that. I'd recommend dragon Ball super. You can skip the first few episodes because it's the same as that movie. You can also find a list of filler episodes online to skip too.
    I only played the Gundam games on game boy, it was good.
  16. Like
    Rashīd al-Hanafī got a reaction from shia farm girl in "Who created God?"   
    God having been created sets up an infinite regress of causes. His uncreatedness is therefore logically necessary. Hence His ﷻ title among our theologians - واجب الوجود.
  17. Completely Agree
    Rashīd al-Hanafī reacted to iraqi_shia in Is the Quran the final Book?   
    The question is wrong.
    Laws change with the time and situation, but the principles remain. This is why our fiqh is evolving, and our door to ijtihad is open and we follow alive maraja. 
     
    So it should read : 
    1. The Quran is the final book and its principles remain forever
    2. No, the Qa'im will bring a new set of principles.
     
     
  18. Like
    Rashīd al-Hanafī got a reaction from Ashvazdanghe in Are people of Islam the Last People?   
    You don't know the difference between نبي and رسول, and you don't know what وحي means, yet you think you've made valid points for me to engage. Curious.
    So from whence does the نبي get his (and her, according the Ashā`irah) نبأ? Do they make it up themselves, or is it revealed (يوحى) from Allāh ﷻ? And as for the رسول, who is it that sends - again via وحي - him his رسالة? Please. This fallacious differentiation you're seeking is non-existent; the way you define revelation is simply not valid.
    And all of this, I imagine, was meant to affect a digression from my original point, i.e. your position that the Ummah of Muhammad ﷺ is temporally central rather than final, is also invalid - at least according to the Qur'ān.
  19. Haha
    Rashīd al-Hanafī reacted to Badi19 in Are people of Islam the Last People?   
    If you are serious about "Independent Investigation of Truth" then learn Arabic and Persian. Even Baha'u'llah has asked Baha'is to learn these two languages:
    http://bahaitexts.blogspot.com/search/label/Learning Arabic
    Bab and Baha both revealed "verses" in these two languages, try to learn them. You can then directly read your "scriptures" in their original languages, thus not depending on the tampered translations done by "Baha'i Administration". Sometimes Bab and Baha revealed the "verses" by mixing these two languages! One such "holy verse" is:
    «ثم العاشر اذا استطعتم کل آثار النقطه تملکون و لو کان چاپا»
  20. Like
    Rashīd al-Hanafī got a reaction from AbdusSibtayn in Are people of Islam the Last People?   
    I don't know why you're transliterating نبي with an h, or how you've conflated وحي with رسالة, but this response reveals a real lack of homework on your part. And you've side-stepped yet further afield of my original points.
  21. Like
    Rashīd al-Hanafī got a reaction from notme in Are people of Islam the Last People?   
    You haven't actually addressed my point; instead you've sidestepped it.
    Muhammad ﷺ was the final prophet (recipient of revelation) of Allāh ﷻ, so the Qur'ān is the final revelation from Allāh ﷻ. The explicit, unequivocal āyah that states as much thereby precludes considering وسط in 2:143 having anything to do with sequential centrality. So any claimants to prophethood thereafter have been either mendacious or deluded, and their scriptures have been fabrication - on the Qur'ān's (i.e. Allāh's) authority.
  22. Like
    Rashīd al-Hanafī got a reaction from notme in Are people of Islam the Last People?   
    واسط also means "moderate," "best," "leading," et cetera. Translating it as "midmost" and associating that with temporality - as you seem to be - looks to me like ad hoc justification of a presupposed narrative. 
  23. Like
    Rashīd al-Hanafī got a reaction from AbdusSibtayn in Refuting "Thaqalayn – A Critical Study"   
    Yes, that was my point. The blind hatred of the nasibi munafiqs burns up everything, even their own selves.
  24. Like
    Rashīd al-Hanafī got a reaction from Ashvazdanghe in Refuting "Thaqalayn – A Critical Study"   
    Yes, that was my point. The blind hatred of the nasibi munafiqs burns up everything, even their own selves.
  25. Like
    Rashīd al-Hanafī reacted to Ashvazdanghe in Refuting "Thaqalayn – A Critical Study"   
    thank you ,but they are ready to destroy Sunni Islam for their enmity with Shia Islam.
×
×
  • Create New...