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

hafeed al-zahra

Basic Members
  • Content Count

    13
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Profile Information

  • Religion
    tashayyu

Previous Fields

  • Gender
    Private

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Yes, it's true that you'll often hear popular speakers presenting this argument, or potentially even scholars, but our religion is not dependent on populist arguments, whether it comes from a speaker on the minbar, or even scholar who can be wrong about something given they are not infallible. Forget about all that. Focus on what the actual beliefs of the religion are, which are what the Ahlul Bayt (عليه السلام) tell us to believe. Look through the chapters on imamah in our hadith compilations, and you'll see that the belief we hold is that there is the world is never devoid of a hujjah of Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى), the ghaybah is not a contradiction to this.
  2. This is much more rational than arbitrarily casting doubt upon the authenticity of our earliest hadith collection which was transmitted by some of the closest and most trusted companions of the Imams (عليه السلام).
  3. I appreciate the others have made several derogatory remarks about you, that's wrong and you have every right to feel upset about that, and frankly the mods should have stepped in and closed this thread a while ago. However, you are a representative of the hawza and should know better. You have well and truly lost your cool, and let your ego get the best of you with these comments above. @Ibn Al-Ja'abi You've just added fuel to the fire. Can the mods please sort this out. @Haji 2003 @starlight @notme
  4. I do find much of what he says odd, like I said, but it is a big sin to accuse a mu'min of being an enemy trying to attack from within, so could we please avoid speaking about the brother like that. Not every disagreement has to lead to accusations like that.
  5. I must say that recently I find much of what @Ibn al-Hussain says to be odd. Especially his recent comments on the Imams and Sayeda Fatima (عليه السلام), it all seems very much out of line with our basic understanding of who the Ahlul Bayt (عليه السلام) are and their merits. They are the proofs of Allah upon this Earth who never seperate from the Qur'an, in fact they are all talking Qur'ans. Yet he speaks of them like they are just a bunch of average Joes who make blunders and errors in judgement like everyone else. The very idea of his that Imam Al-Hussein (عليه السلام) would disagree with Imam Al-Hassan (عليه السلام) on anything let alone a major decision that shapes the course of Islamic history is laughable. You'd expect a better grasp of basic aqeeda from somebody who's studied several years in the hawza. It just goes to show that information ≠ knowledge.
  6. The bolded part reminds me of a comment I saw the other day, it went something like this: Messi was only great because of Xavi and Iniesta, but they were only good because of Guardiola's system, but he was a fraud and his system was reliant on Messi, but Messi was only great because of Xavi and Iniesta, but they were only good because of Guardiola's system which was only great because of Messi who was reliant on Xavi and Iniesta and so on.
  7. Every single one of the imams of the Ahlulbayt (as) are each a walking, talking qur'an.
  8. You’re glossing over several facts in your description and analysis of events which conveniently supports your outlook. You’re also presupposing your own way of looking at the entire situation as truth. Try to look at things from your opponent’s perspective rather than talking to them like everything you believe is true for both of you. 1. Imam Ali (as) didn’t give bay’ah for 6 months, only after Fatima (as) was finally martyred from her injuries did he pledge allegiance. 2. Imam Ali (as) refused to give bay’ah initially which led to the attack on his house (in your books there is clear evidence from Aslam the slave of Umar that Umar threatened to burn down the house immediately after rasoolallah (s) died, and Alex Jones is not in the chain unfortunately for you). 3. Truth is not a numbers game. We Shia have always maintained that the companions failed to come to the imam’s aid when he called them to rise up with him apart from a few individuals, hence the imam did not rebel against the coup, our texts are clear on this. Although we say many repented later on for staying silent.
  9. Sunni hadith collections are no longer binding upon a person once they accept the succession of Imam Ali (as). Why would they be? They're collectively transmitted by people who rejected him. Are there some true narrations in them? Sure. But there are also thousands of fabrications by liars and those who hated him, as well as alterations made by later generations to suit their worldview, recent examples demonstrated in the following work: http://alfeker.net/library.php?id=2977 (My apologies if you can't read arabic, the english speaking Shia world is well behind on translations unfortunately). Why twelve infallible Imams?. Well as somebody who believes in the succession of Imam Ali (as), it's either that or you become a Zaidi or Isma'ili, and explaining why these two sects are wrong is also rather simple by the guidance of Allah سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى. The only alternative to choosing between these three sects is making up your own sect, but that's untenable for obvious reasons (ie you have to propose that truth was lost to humanity until you decided to revive it well over a millenium after the prophet, and you'll also have no proof for what you propose). As for the Zaidis, their divergence in believing Zaid to be an Imam is flawed as it goes against the very basis they agree the previous imams were chosen, which is divine appointment and clear designation from his predecessor. You can't say that Imam Ali, Imam Hassan, and Imam Hussain (as) were divinely appointed then suddenly change your theology and say no, rising up against tyrants is the criterion for identifying the imam, as Zaidis do. They also contradict themselves on this as Imam Hassan (as) stood down and accepted a treaty when he didn't have the manpower to overcome Mu'awiya's (la) rebellion. Zaidis also have had large gaps between their later "imams" with no successor between them, leaving them in limbo, this is not tenable. Furthermore, Zaidis have an almost non-existent body of hadith literature, they barely have any ahadith, and to my knowledge they don't have any works on the narrators of the ahadith. As for the Isma'ilis, simple again. Isma'il died before his father, the sixth imam Jafar Al-Sadiq (as), so he didn't succeed him. I believe Isma'ilis have the same problem as the Zaidis in that they have a sparse hadith body. As for us twelvers, our imams were designated by the previous one each time, leaving us with a unbroken transmission of authority from the prophet (s) to our current Imam, may Allah hasten his reappearance. Regarding infallibility, the narrations from the twelve imams (as) like those found in Al-Kafi are very clear on that. I've noticed in recent times that when people ask about or try to place doubt about shiism (not saying you are in particular), they'll often mention infallibility as if it's some sort of Achilles heel, when it's not an issue to dig into at all. If you don't believe in these imams then of course you're not going to believe in their infallibility. If you believe these imams are divinely appointed, and their word is binding upon you, you will believe they are infallible because they say they are, what else is there to say?
  10. The fact is that our religion prescribes two things. Firstly, a standard of clothing for free women in public that is thoroughly concealing. Secondly, an obligation upon the muslims to forbid evil for one another. Ignoring the commands of Allah سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى is evil, and so the abandonment of hijab is something the muslims are obliged to forbid for one another. The textual (qur'an and hadith) proof for hijab and the severe divine punishments mentioned for abandoning it have perhaps not been properly disseminated among the general muslim population, hence we find this lax atttitude. The lax attitude is more important to address than the "shaming" of that lax attitude.
  11. https://www.sistani.org/english/book/46/2056/ It is harãm to cut the ties with one’s relation even if that person had severed his ties [with you]. It is harãm to do so, even if he or she is negligent of salãt, a drunkard, and takes some religious injunctions lightly (for example by not observing the hijãb, etc) to the extent that there is no use in advising, counseling or warning him or her. This prohibition is only lifted when maintaining the ties encourages that relation to continue in his or her immoral ways.
  12. Sayed Munir Al-Khabaz has a short video on this topic: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dv9NrRb07rE Allah سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى has power over all things. That doesn't mean the answer is "yes" to every question "can Allah x?" where x is any possible combination of words, even if self-contradicting. A rock that he can not lift is not a thing. It's just a nonsensical combination of words that are contradictory and have no manifest reality.
×
×
  • Create New...