Jump to content
In the Name of God بسم الله

Leibniz

Advanced Member
  • Posts

    231
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Leibniz

  1.  

    8 hours ago, Muslim2010 said:

    History testifies that those influential people who were the key element in agitation against Uthman include Talha, Zubair, Aisha (the mother of believers), Abdurrahman Ibn Ouf, and Amr Ibn al-Aas (the army commander of Muawiyah).

    A) Talha

    Talha Ibn Ubaydillah was one of the biggest agitator against Uthman and was the one who plotted his murder. He then used that incident for revenge against ‘Ali by starting the first civil war in the history of Islam (i.e., the battle of Camel).

    Abzay said: I witnessed the day they went in against Uthman. They entered the house through an opening in the residence of Amr Ibn Hazm. There was a skirmishing and they got in. By God, I have not forgotten that Sudan Ibn Humran came out and I heard him say: "Where is Talha Ibn Ubaydillah? We have killed Ibn Affan!”

    Reference: History of al-Tabari, English version, v15, p200

    Marwan Ibn al-Hakam who was in the ranks of Talha, saw Talha is retreating (when his army was being defeated in the battlefield). Since he and all Umayad recognized him and al-Zubair as the murderers of Uthman, he shot an arrow at him and severely wounded him. He then said to Aban, the son of Uthman, that: "I have spared you from one of your father’s murderers.”Talha was taken to a ruined house in Basra where he died.

    References:

    - Tabaqat, by Ibn Sa’ad, v3, part 1, p159

    B) Al-Zubair

    al-Zuhri, another important Sunni narrator who is famous for his dislike of Ahlul-Bayt, reported the following dialogue of Imam ‘Ali with Zubair and Talha before the start of battle of Camel:

    "‘Ali said: ‘Zubair, do you fight me for the blood of Uthman after you killed him? May God give the most hostile to Uthman among us the consequence which that very person dislikes.’ He said to Talha:

    ‘Talha, you have brought the wife of the Messenger of God (Aisha) to use her for war and hid your wife at your house (in Medina)! Did you not give me your allegiance?’ Talha said: ‘I gave you the allegiance while the sword was on my neck.’

    Reference: History of al-Tabari, Arabic version, Events of year 36 AH v4, p905

    C) Aisha

    Talha and Zubair were not the only collaborators against Uthman. Sunni history tells us that Talha’s cousin, Aisha, was collaborating and campaigning against Uthman as well. The following paragraph also from the History of al-Tabari shows the cooperation of Aisha with Talha in overthrowing Uthman:

    While Ibn Abbas was setting out for Mecca, he found Aisha in al-Sulsul (seven miles south of Medina). Aisha said: "O’ Ibn Abbas, I appeal to you by God, to abandon this man (Uthman) and sow doubt about him among the people, for you have been given a sharp tongue. (By the current siege over Uthman) people have shown their understanding, and light is raised to guide them. I have seen Talha has taken the possession of the keys to the public treasuries and storehouses. If he becomes Caliph (after Uthman), he will follow the path of his parental cousin Abu-Bakr.”Ibn Abbas said: "O’ Mother (of believers), if something happens to that man (i.e., Uthman), people would seek asylum only with our companion (namely, ‘Ali).”Aisha replied: "Be quiet! I have no desire to defy or quarrel with you."

    Reference: History of al-Tabari, English version, v15, pp 238-239

    Many Sunni historian reported that Once Aisha went to Uthman and asked for her share of inheritance of Prophet (after so many years passed from the death of Prophet). Uthman refrained to give Aisha any money by reminding her that she was one those who testified and encouraged Abu-Bakr to refrain to pay the share of inheritance of Fatimah (sa). So if Fatimah does not have any share of inheritance, then why should she? Aisha became extremely angry at Uthman, and came out saying:

    "Kill this old fool (Na’thal), for he is unbeliever."

    References:

    - History of Ibn Athir, v3, p206

    D) Amr Ibn Al-Aas

    Amr Ibn al-Aas (the number 2 person in the government of Muawiyah) was one of the most dangerous agitators against Uthman and he had all the reasons to conspire against him. He was the governor of Egypt during the reign of the second Caliph. However, the third Caliph dismissed him and replaced him with his foster brother, Abdullah Ibn Sa’d Ibn Abu Sharh. As a result of this, Amr became extremely hostile towards Uthman.

    According to Tabari, when Uthman was besieged, Amr settled in the palace of al-Ajlan and used to ask from people about the situation of Uthman: ..Amr had not left his seat before a second rider passed by. Amr called him out: "How is Uthman doing?”The man replied: "He has been killed.”Amr then said: "I am Abu Abdillah. When I scratch an ulcer, I cut it off. (i.e., when I desire an object, I attain it). I have been provoking (people) against him, even the shepherd on the top of mountains with his flock.”

    Then Salamah Ibn Rawh said to him: "You, the Qurai[Edited Out]es, have broken a strong tie between yourselves and the Arabs. Why did you do that?”Amr replied: "We wanted to draw the truth out of the pit of falsehood, and to have people be on an equal footing as regards the truth.”

    Reference: History of al-Tabari, English version, v15, pp 171-172

    The divider of Muslims ignored what is well known in the history of Islam which was reported by important Sunni reporters. The revolt against Uthman was as a result of the efforts of influential companions in Medina, such as Aisha, Talha, Zubair, Aburrahman Ibn Ouf, and Amr Ibn al-Aas. The murder of Uthman provided a nice scapegoat for those who were fighting over more power, while serving under the government of Uthman. They were mainly his relatives, the Umayad, such as Muawiyah and Marwan, who thoroughly took advantage of Uthman’s life as well as his death.

    Imam ‘Ali said in the battle of Camel:

    "Truth and falsehood can not be identified by the virtue of people. First understand the truth, you will then realize who is adhering to it.”(Nahjul Balaghah, by Imam ‘Ali)

    https://www.al-islam.org/shiite-encyclopedia/companions-who-murdered-uthman

    Thus all your statements are just false conjectures baseless and without any evidence, these conjectures against Imam Ali (عليه السلام) stand rejected.

    wasalam

    There is alot of circumstanial evidence and countless narrations which implicate Imam Ali in the murder of Uthman. Pick Umar ibn Shabbah's Tareekh al madina and you shall find those narrations in one place. The killing of Uthman is not the topic otherwise i would have dwelled deeper into it

  2. 8 hours ago, Guest Borntowitness said:

    Ziyad was born our of wedlock. What is your proof. It is haram for a person to be Imam and lead prayer if he is born out of wedlock. Our proof is Imam Ali (عليه السلام) that appointed him as governor of persia because Imam Ali (عليه السلام) was gifted with hidden knowledge and was aware of parentage of all humans. Your claim is, therefore, weak.

    You are just speaking your belief. You believe that Imam Ali had knowledge of the unseen and what not and so it has become an objective reality just because you believe that. Ziyad was born out of wedlock and after having enjoyed Ali's patronage for some time , Ziyad shifted loyalities to Maviya. Muaviya had "honored" Ziyad by claiming that Ziyad infact was son of Abu Sufyan , fornication that Abu Sufyan had done long ago. Ziyad then used to refer to himself as Ziyad bin abu Sufyan

    https://en.wikishia.net/view/Ziyad_b._Abih

  3. 31 minutes ago, Berber-Shia said:

    Through your eyes you see what happened as it being a "political failure", whereas Imam Ali (عليه السلام) stood firmly by his principles and would not compromise them for political self-gain, he did not want to involve himself in the game of political deception just like muawiya and his bunch.

    Imam Ali did involve in politics and he tried the best of his manoeuvres too , like Maviya but failed. Its not as if Iman Ali was straight as an arrow in politics. He did what the rest ( Maviya , Ayesha , Zubayr , Talhah) were doing ie gathering political support by any means.

  4. 26 minutes ago, Ashvazdanghe said:

    you must provide a reference for your batalant lie not me because you have fabricated such nonsense about Imam Hasan (رضي الله عنه) & Muhammad ibn Abu bakr (رضي الله عنه) which every Shia knows him as loyal follower of Imam Ali(عليه السلام) which have good relation with Imam Hasan(عليه السلام)which you have fabricated a lie in name of Imam Hasan(عليه السلام) for humilation of Muhammad ibn Abu bakr (رضي الله عنه) then consequently Imam Ali(عليه السلام).

    It has been widely reported to Al Hassan used to refer to Muhammad bin Abi bakr as Fasiq bin abi bakr. For example in ibn Saad's Tabqaat Kabir أخبرنا : عمرو بن عاصم الكلابي قال : ، أخبرنا : أبو الأشهب قال : ، أخبرنا : الحسن قال : لما أدركوا بالعقوبة ، يعني قتلة عثمان بن عفان ، قال : أخذ الفاسق إبن أبي بكر ، قال أبو الأشهب : وكان الحسن لا يسميه بإسمه إنما كان يسميه الفاسق ، قال : فأخذ فجعل في جوف حمار ثم أحرق عليه

  5. 2 hours ago, Ashvazdanghe said:

    Salam this is just sunni belief  but on the other hand Zaidis belive  that every descendant  of lady Fatima (sa) who rises against  injustice is an Imam which if he fullfils all conditions  of Imamate  then there is hope that he will be Mahdi which several  Imams of them likewise Nafs Zakya has announced  themselves  as Mahdi which none of them could  fulfill  all conditions  for being Mahdi.

    https://en.wikishia.net/view/Zaydiyya

    Read here the Zaidi view of Mahdi 

     

  6. 1 hour ago, Ashvazdanghe said:

    Salam this is typical  rhetoric  of Wahabists  & Salafist for idolizing their narrators & their "siyar and Rijal discourse" & humilation  of Shia scholars  & narrators Rijal just for calling Shia narrators as weak persons with low credibility  in hope of not accepting  facts in Shia narrations  & calling every Shia narrations  & narrators as weak & untrustworthy because backbone  of credibility  all of Sunni narrators is based on their support from tyrants of cursed Ummayids  & Abbasids but on the other hand credibility  of Shia narrators  is based on supporting  of Quran & Ahlulbayt (عليه السلام) which every Shia narrator who has received  more endorsement  from Ahlulbayt (عليه السلام) is more trustworthy  but in contrast to Shis narrators credibility  of Sunni narrator is based on their support  from tyrants  which any Sunni narrator which has justified cursed Ummayids  & Abbasids has more credibility in Sunni Rijal which when a sunni narrator has confirmed a Shia narration then he has losen much of his credibility .

    Thanks for pointing me out as Wahabi. You are a wise man. Your comments regarding narrators are really enlightening. I feel more educated now. I wish one day you pick Ikhtiyar marifat rijal and tell us which of the narrators have the tawtheeq of which of the Imams and how and where is it documented. You shall do the world a service. 

  7. 2 hours ago, Ashvazdanghe said:

    Salam this is typical wahabi defending  of cursed Muawiah  by calling his rebel against legal caliph & causing deviation in Islam & misleading  muslims  by justifying  it as Ijtihad & justifying  his innovation  in religion & rulership by appointing  his cursed son as his successor  against  condition  of peace treaty with Imam Hasan (عليه السلام) for total destroying  of Islam which only sacrifice  of Imam  Hussain (عليه السلام) has saved Islam from total  destruction by enemies  of Islam likewise cursed Muawiah  & his cursed son &  successor .

    This is clearly a batalant  lie which just came out from deluded mind of a Nasibi (Enemy of Ahlulbayt (عليه السلام) as common abusive language  & propaganda  of Wahabist against  Ahlulbayt (عليه السلام):blabla::angry::furious::dwarf:

    Whats the lie? Mention it and let me give you the references 

  8. 31 minutes ago, guest 2025 said:

    He was offered the caliphhood on the condition he follows the way of Abu Bakr and Umar, and he rejected it. Even though at that point in time the most important thing that could happen in the world was Imam Ali (عليه السلام) becoming caliph, he rejected the position because in Islam the ends do not justify the means.

    Allah knows what is wrong with you to try to be blind to the ocean of light that this man possesses, light that Sunnis also deeply appreciate. He was the hero of every battle, the third Muslim of all time, one of the Prophet (عليه السلام)'s earliest supporters, the husband of the Prophet (عليه السلام)'s daughter, assassinated while in salah, a depth of wisdom and knowledge, and you're sitting here trying to see him in a negative light. Not even the most bitter salafis and wahabis cross this line. Is it because you're jealous of him? Do you hate the truth itself? Allah knows what disease you have.

    I am just a seeker of knowledge so no offence sir. I have nothing against Imam Ali or anyone else. I merely want to see things the way they are , not the way i have been taught to see. I do not think so that a rational person can judge a historic personality by not humanizing him first. We all are humans , ambitious and emotional and we err. 

    As far as Imam Ali rejecting Caliphate , that never happened. He desperately wanted it and during Abu Bakr and Omar era he stood no chance due to the stature of these two. He made all his efforts to become Caliph after Omar but the comitte head rejected him. He was angered and he castigated Abdur rahmna ibn awf in very strong words. 

    After Uthman's selection , Ali famously remarked "What a betrayal and now i shall wait till that is written comes off". Ali then waited for the right opportunity and he along with other contenders Talhah and Zubayr instigated the rebellion against Uthman.

    Caliphate was blood soaked and alarmingly controversial after Uthman but Imam Ali did seize the opportunity despite the fact that Hassan and Ibn Abbas requested him not to. Most of Uthman's killers were the pillars of Imam Ali's Caliphate like Malik alashtar , Kinana bin bashar , Muhammad bin abi bakr , Hakeem bin Jabala etc.

    @Muslim2010

  9. 48 minutes ago, hamz786 said:

    بِسْمِ اللَّهِ الرَّحْمَنِ الرَّحِيم

    As Salamu Alaykum. Thats an interesting perspective of the events that I have hardly heard. Out of curiosity could you point me to the references you've used regarding this perspective?
     
    I thought the belief was that Imam Ali (عليه السلام) wasn't there for politics or political ambitions, and his aim was Islam first and foremost. I agree that yeah maybe we can grade Muawiyah more politically successful on those grounds (possibly even grade Imam Ali (عليه السلام) as not a good politician?). However I wonder, if Muawiyahs maneuvering can be considered as not really Islamic, and if Imam Ali (عليه السلام) refused to go in that direction and play the game, then who was really the better person here? 
     
    Nontheless, it is something I have always thought about myself, the troubles of the Imam (عليه السلام) during his caliphate. I'm not knowledgeable enough but I hope one of the brothers or sisters here can continue your discussion InshaAllah
     

    All what i have written are historical facts well established. You can read Tabari's history and he has narrated these events from various narrators.

    I would not defend Maviya on theological lines. I think even the Sunnis are shy of doing so but the fact is Maviya had a different political theory which later became the established political foundation of the Ummayad Caliphate which is that Islam does not forbid hereditary kingship and that the Caliph has largely to use Ijtihad as a medium of statecraft , keeping the blunt use of religion aside. We can call it Secularism lite. Therefor i think it would be superfluous to judge Maviya's political actions on pure religious grounds.

  10. Also consider the fact that mutaqadimoon scholars of Sunnis like Al Dhahabi and Ibn Hajjar have further defrosted and expanded the hadith sciences in Sunnis by compiling biographies of narrators from early sources in voluminous books like Siyar alam unnubala and Tehdhib etc. They have simplified the stuff by collecting sayings of early muhadithoon about individual narrators in one place. 

  11. There is no limit to skepticism and one can always raise questions about non empirical things. Apparently it seems like a circular argument as you mentioned but deep down its not so circular. Hadith critics in Sunnis like Bukhari who has a three volume compilation (Tareekh al kabir , Tareekh ausat , Tareekh Sagheer) on biographies of narrators have a firm standing and validation of personal character with in the Sunni discourse of that era. Same goes for Darqutni , Yahya ibn Ma'een , Ibn al Jawzi etc. Secondly , in most casez the early Muhadithoon have agreed on the stature of a certain narrator despite their geographic differences adding objectivity to the siyar and Rijal discourse. As far as Shia Siyar wa Rijal , I am not well versed in it but after going through a few basic books like Rijal Kashi and Rijal Najashi, the science is not as evolved as in the Sunnis. The quantity and quality of information given about the Rijal in these books is by far too low when compared with Sunni compilations.

  12. One can not ignore the fact while going through history that Imam Ali made some very catastrophic decisions during his short political career. He was encountered by none other than Abdullah Ibn Abbas and Imam Hassan for such decisions. Right after the murder  of Uthman , Ali is seen as a power hungry man with very little political acumen who is haphazardly acting around till his death. 

    He first tried to dethrone Maviya by asking Abdullah Ibn Abbas to go to Damascus and take over governorship from Maviya. Ibn Abbas was taken aback by this proposal. Perplexed  and shocked he asked if Ali was serious about it and warned Imam Ali of the political consequences but Ali refused to listen.

    Imam Ali appointed Muhammad bin Abu Bakr as governor of Egypt in those precarious hours when Egypt was vital for Ali's Caliphate. Muhammad bin Abu Bakr (Imam Hassan used to call him Fasiq bin Abu Bakr) was himself a power hungry young lad and had no experience to handle a state like Egypt which was eyed upon by Maviya. Egypt fell with in a matter of days after Muhammad reached there just to get himself killed.

    Imam Ali could not keep his ranks assembled during Siffain and one portion of his xie hard supporters left him on the matter of Tehkeem. This group which later came to be known as Khawarij , not only diluted the military strength of Imam Ali but one Kharijite eventually killed Imam Ali as well.

    Imam Ali had lost popular support in his bastion Kufa by his last days. His last sermons in Kufa are filled with his self castigatings and condemnations of the people of Kufa. Tabari has recorded a shocking event in which Imam Ali announces Jihad from the pulpit in Kufa and went out to Nukhela waiting for Kufans to arrive. He waited there for a whole day and literally no one came out to join him.

    These are just a few short examples of Imam Ali's political decisions. One can quote dozens of more such examples from his political career. Maviya on the other hand emerged victorious due to his unparalleled political wisdom and immaculate decision making capability. 

  13. Shiasm is a heterogeneous mix of bad history and theology. A large part of Shia belief system relies on conspiracy theories. Its no wonder why the basic tenants of Shia Islam are missing from Quran. Shias have taken the politic conflict of rulership between Ali and the rest to another level. 

    Secondly , Shia Islam is just an antithesis of Sunni Islam and has no legs of its own to stand on. I have listened to various Sunni sermons/lectures focusing on other aspects of religion without the mention of Shiaism but i have not heard any Shia sermon devoid of rants regarding Sunnism.

  14. In terms of personal affiliation with religion , Shiasm might have some content but in terms of a social and political ideology there is a void. So much so that the very modern doctrine of "Willayat Faqih" utterly alien to classical Shiasm , has now become the dominant political doctrine of Usooli twelvers. The most mentioned "Path of ahlul bayt" is a vague and hollow emotional bandwagon which signifies nothing of a coherent and serious nature. As far as conversions , Shiasm can never attract masses like Sunnism for obvious reason. The basic tenants of Shiasm are feeble and stochastic , this chaotic structure is fogged and made palatable by the emotionalism of  Karbala , Ashura , Fadak , the broken rib etc but once the dust settles down , one finds himself chasing his shadow.

  15. 3 hours ago, Cool said:

    While I can see all of them are specifically about the Ahlul Bayt (عليه السلام) and some do points towards wilayah of Ameer ul Mo'mineen (عليه السلام).

    For you, following verse is sufficient with its full meaning specially the end part in bold.

    As Einstein said "God does not play dice". You are making God and his words sound like the vague language of Latino hip-hop  which only the intoxicated hippies can understand. None of the verses are about about any Wilayah or ahlul bayt at all.

  16. 27 minutes ago, Logic1234 said:

    :) 

    صِرَاطَ الَّذِينَ أَنْعَمْتَ عَلَيْهِمْ غَيْرِ الْمَغْضُوبِ عَلَيْهِمْ وَلَا الضَّالِّينَ 
    وَبَشِّرِ الصَّابِرِينَ الَّذِينَ إِذَا أَصَابَتْهُمْ مُصِيبَةٌ قَالُوا إِنَّا لِلَّهِ وَإِنَّا إِلَيْهِ رَاجِعُونَ أُولَٰئِكَ عَلَيْهِمْ صَلَوَاتٌ مِنْ رَبِّهِمْ وَرَحْمَةٌ ۖ وَأُولَٰئِكَ هُمُ الْمُهْتَدُونَ

    هُوَ الَّذِي أَنْزَلَ عَلَيْكَ الْكِتَابَ مِنْهُ آيَاتٌ مُحْكَمَاتٌ هُنَّ أُمُّ الْكِتَابِ وَأُخَرُ مُتَشَابِهَاتٌ ۖ فَأَمَّا الَّذِينَ فِي قُلُوبِهِمْ زَيْغٌ فَيَتَّبِعُونَ مَا تَشَابَهَ مِنْهُ ابْتِغَاءَ الْفِتْنَةِ وَابْتِغَاءَ تَأْوِيلِهِ ۗ وَمَا يَعْلَمُ تَأْوِيلَهُ إِلَّا اللَّهُ ۗ وَالرَّاسِخُونَ فِي الْعِلْمِ يَقُولُونَ آمَنَّا بِهِ كُلٌّ مِنْ عِنْدِ رَبِّنَا ۗ وَمَا يَذَّكَّرُ إِلَّا أُولُو الْأَلْبَابِ

    فَمَنْ حَاجَّكَ فِيهِ مِنْ بَعْدِ مَا جَاءَكَ مِنَ الْعِلْمِ فَقُلْ تَعَالَوْا نَدْعُ أَبْنَاءَنَا وَأَبْنَاءَكُمْ وَنِسَاءَنَا وَنِسَاءَكُمْ وَأَنْفُسَنَا وَأَنْفُسَكُمْ ثُمَّ نَبْتَهِلْ فَنَجْعَلْ لَعْنَتَ اللَّهِ عَلَى الْكَاذِبِينَ

    أَمْ يَحْسُدُونَ النَّاسَ عَلَىٰ مَا آتَاهُمُ اللَّهُ مِنْ فَضْلِهِ ۖ فَقَدْ آتَيْنَا آلَ إِبْرَاهِيمَ الْكِتَابَ وَالْحِكْمَةَ وَآتَيْنَاهُمْ مُلْكًا عَظِيمًا

    يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا أَطِيعُوا اللَّهَ وَأَطِيعُوا الرَّسُولَ وَأُولِي الْأَمْرِ مِنْكُمْ ۖ فَإِنْ تَنَازَعْتُمْ فِي شَيْءٍ فَرُدُّوهُ إِلَى اللَّهِ وَالرَّسُولِ إِنْ كُنْتُمْ تُؤْمِنُونَ بِاللَّهِ وَالْيَوْمِ الْآخِرِ ۚ ذَٰلِكَ خَيْرٌ وَأَحْسَنُ تَأْوِيلًا

    إِنَّمَا وَلِيُّكُمُ اللَّهُ وَرَسُولُهُ وَالَّذِينَ آمَنُوا الَّذِينَ يُقِيمُونَ الصَّلَاةَ وَيُؤْتُونَ الزَّكَاةَ وَهُمْ رَاكِعُونَ 

    And I can keep continue quoting verses after verses from chapter 1 to 114. 

    I feel you pasted the wrong verses , none of them talks about Ahlul Bayt , Wilayah of Ali etc

  17. On 5/13/2020 at 4:28 AM, Logic1234 said:

    Everywhere in Quran.

    So I am not talking about those verses. 

    And it too is a toy in the hands of nawasibs who try their utmost effort to hide the great station of Ahlul Bayt (عليه السلام) mentioned in Quran. And these nawasibs are the true sectarianists otherwise I have seen many Sunni scholars rejecting the reports that Imam Hassan (عليه السلام) married 300 wives & divorced 100's. Better look into yourself which school of thought you belongs to. 

    Yes, it is the case. What problem you have with it? Imam Ali (عليه السلام) did that and it is mentioned by Sunni & Shia scholars. 
    :) You accept wilayah of Abu Bakr by rejecting the wilayah of Imam Ali (عليه السلام) as mentioned in Quran & as made clear by Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) from Zul'ashera to Ghadeer. So you have to answer that to Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) one day. Get ready for it. 

    Where else in Quran? Quran is utterly blank about the Shia narrative. Its only through alot of dis-intellectual gymnastics that you can stretch twist fold the verses of make an unsuccessful case. I do not care a thing about what Sunni scholars say as i am not an orthodox Sunni. As far as problem , it is more than obvious. How on earth can someone give alms while doing Ruku'? And more importantly , why on earth would God use such a vague and whimsical situation to announce the Wilayah of Ali. If God intended so , there would have been explicit verses in Quran about it. 

  18. 1 minute ago, Logic1234 said:

    The "reality" of Ahlul Bayt (عليه السلام) is well defined by Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) in Quran and by Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) in his famous traditions. Anything contradicting to those are treated accordingly.  

    Where in Quran? No sane person can believe that the verses of Quran dealing with the wives of the Prophet would be infact telling us about the so called Itrat of ahlul bayt. You need a huge leap of faith and imagination to extrapolate that. The book of God has just become a toy in the hands of sectarianists who would twist the verses as their sectarian agenda fits into. Do you believe someone can be given charity while doing Ruku'? Do you think that God , as per 12ver version , would tell us about something as important as the Wilayah of Ali in such a whimsical way?

×
×
  • Create New...