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

Ar.alhindi

Advanced Members
  • Content Count

    60
  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

About Ar.alhindi

  • Rank
    Level 1 Member

Profile Information

  • Religion
    Islam

Previous Fields

  • Gender
    Private

Recent Profile Visitors

172 profile views
  1. I can't read the Arabic but something I do know for certain about the book is that it was a refutation of the works of a Shia sholar. At times I have found Shia trying to deceive gullable lay Shia/Sunnis by quoting the book, but when I have watched refutation videos quoting more pages of the book, Ibn Taymiyyah has either been quoting the Shi'I scholar's book or otherwise highlighting what Shia in general say, or he makes a counter argument by saying essentially 'if you say X about the Sahabah, then by that logic, you have to say Y about Ali in order to be consistent in your logic'. Food for thought and InshaAllah I hope to be fluent in Fus7a one day and to be able to buy and read this great book.
  2. I read it 4 years ago when I first became Muslim and I searched each reference he listed and also researched the counter arguments as I read it and compared the strength of each point; I am not going to sit here rereading 140 pages to refute every point, but for example he attributes Kitāb al-Imāma wal-Siyāsa to Sheikh Ibn Qutaybah of Ahlus Sunnah. In reality it is likely a Shia book with no known author, heavily narrating a Twelver-centric narrative of the happenings after the death of the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم). That is just one critque I remember off of the top of my head, but I recall most points he made either had solid counter arguments or he was otherwise making weak ones.
  3. 1. You have created a false dichotomy - you have presented that either the revelations of the old messengers were final (which obviously they aren't) and complete or their revelations were not final and therefore incomplete. 2. You have adopted another unsubstantiated assumption that being the 'final' something and anything subsequently connected to it makes it inherently better than that which came before. 1 is wrong because the former messengers had their completed revelation for their time, though they were not the final revelations sequentually. The Qur'an is complete for our time just like the Injeel was completed for Isa (عليه السلام) and the tablets and scriptures for Musa (عليه السلام), etc. The only difference is that nothing comes after the Qur'an. 2 has no scriptural basis. Suplementary information is required to establish if the Qur'an is the greatest revelation and what qualifies it as such; its finality is not this qualifier. Secondly, there needs to be an evidence to substantiate the view that those who preserve the Qur'an and Sunnah (as the final revelation) are better or more important than those who preserved the revelations and Sunnah of their messengers - without an evidence, this is just a made up belief, and your Akl is different to my Akl. --- Anyways this kind of digresses form the point that I was raising (that Twelver beliefs essentially equate Nabuwa with Imamah).
  4. Al-Tijani's books (or at least Then I Was guided) has too many weak arguments including an example of a false reference (attributing a Shi'I source to a Sunni scholar to bolster a point), so it doesn't offer much in terms of honest academic discussion when trying to seek the truth. The Qur'an is the main thing that I would suggest reading since if that cannot guide one to Tashayyu, why should one use other books unless to imply the book of Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) is deficient?
  5. Muhammad Baqir Al-Majlisi, “Bihar al-Anwar” Vol 26, pg 82: "On the whole, after admission of the fact that the Imams are not Prophets, we are bound to acknowledge the fact that they are superior to all Prophets and legatees except our Prophet (salutations and peace upon him and his family). To our knowledge there is no reason not to describe the Imams as Prophets except consideration to the status of the Final Prophet. Our intellect too, cannot perceive a distinction between Prophet-hood and Imamah." Al-Sayed Amir Muhammad Kadhim Qazwini, “Al-Shia Fi Aqa’idihim Wa Ahkamihim” pg 73: "Because they deserved the higher rank which is Imamah, then by default they deserve the lower rank of Prophet-hood. The fact that they deserve it is established for the Imams of the prophetic household (عليه السلام) but the only preventative was the rank of ‘seal of Prophets’ that was awarded to our messenger (SAW)" --- Bit of a strawman to mention that Hadith. Using the conditional 'If' does not make Umar the recipient of divine revelation or miraculous power to the extent of Prophets Bi'ithinillah, rather it just means his character and/or judgement are akin to those of Prophets. This is like how the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) said to Ali that he is to him like Haroon (عليه السلام) is to Musa (عليه السلام) - it is a compliment of character and the task that Ali was undertaking in staying behind rather than going on an expedition.
  6. I have heard of scholarly quotes that effectively say that there is no difference between an Imam and a Nabi except the name and that the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) is Al-Khatim Nabiyeen. I would argue this is problematic because then it makes Twelvers hardly any different to Ahmediyyah (who believe in a non-law-giving Prophet after the Prophet (SAW)), but to each their own I guess....
  7. Sounds like a foot fetish to be honest, and it doesn't help with the staring at ankles stereotype really, does it
  8. It is something that I have been wanting to speak out about for a long time - I come across far too many people saying "we don't curse", which is far from the reality of the Twelvers. As a seeker of truth (may Allah keep me sincere), I just want the cold hard truth (and so do others), but it is hard to get that if people are being disingenuous or otherwise hiding their beliefs and trying to present a sanitised PR version of Twelverism.
  9. Is this not the very reason why Sunnis struggle to trust Twelver Shia with intellectual discussions? It is like a massive elephant in the room which is also stuck between a rock and a hard place. 1. If it is publically conceded that the official Twelver position is that various Sahabah died upon Kufr, Nifaq, Nasb, or otherwise Dhulm, then Sunnis would increasingly feel justified in their opposition to Twelvers. Or 2. Twelvers continue to stay silent on the topic and just encourage research to know what the position and belief is regarding various Sahabah, but this implies very strongly you guys are trying to hide Twelver beliefs so lay Sunnis do not feel averse to them ('reconciliatory Taqiyyah'?). I guess you guys just see more harm in 1 because then all Sunnis would hate Twelvers whereas 2 is a way of using ambiguity to slide under the radar and still reach the lay people. But rather than showing the academic integrity and strength of Twelver beliefs though, this just implies that the only way to call people to Tashayyu is through deceipt. I know that in a general manner all Muslims do this to some degree when talking non-Muslims e.g. about the Hudood, because they need to unpackage their questions and get to the crux of problem with their understanding (which is the fact they don't believe in La Illaha IlAllah), but at the end of the day, a Sunni would not ouright deny the existence of the Hudood or hide it - they would mention it and justify it and agree to disagree if they have to, even if the Kafir he is talking to hates Muslims because of the reality of Hudood. On the other hand, many Twelvers will use all the linguistic ambiguity at his desposal to deny the reality of La'nah upon the Dushman of the Ahlul Bait and those who make up that group.
  10. I am openly a Sunni on this forum, and Taqiyyah is not in my creed where I can proselytise my belief through deception, though I welcome any admin to I.P. check me. ItsMe is a user who by the looks of other posts on ShiaChat is someone I disagree with (as he argues against Sunni Islam), so I would be shooting myself in the foot if I was trying to deceive people to have doubts about Twelver Shi'ism. I can agree with him if he speaks the truth though.
  11. The concept of occultation was first attributed to the Shia of Muhammad Ibn Ali Al-Hanafiyyah. They claimed he was the Imam after his brother Hussain, as well as being the Mahdi who had come at the end times. When he was killed, his Shia could not explain his disappearance so they claimed he was in occultation receiving sustenance from Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) and that he would return at a later time to restore justice and rule the Earth. After some time passed and they realised he was dead and not coming back, this group of Shia merged back into the wider community where I imagine some of their ideas diseminated to later be recycled 100 or so years later during the time of Muhammad Bin Hasan Al-Askari when he disappeared, though this is my personal opinion given what I said. Given that the Mahdi is prophecised by the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) to have his name, and his father will have his father's name I.e. he will be called Muhammad Bin Abdullah in Sunni hadith, it proves to be a massive thorn in the sides of those who attempt to use Sunni texts to prove Twelverism, since this falsifies the 12th Imam being the Mahdi... but I guess that does not stop people from picking and choosing deceitfully to call people to their position
  12. You have not substantiated how the Imams can will anything to be with any evidence
  13. It is not an invitation, it is a command - "Direct... It has been made obligatory". Since it is a rewardable action and a form of 'Ibadah, such directives are meant to be sourced from Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) through the noble Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم). If it is not and instead from the Imams themselves, then you are saying they innovated into the religion of Islam since Islam has been completed since the time of the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) as said in the Qur'an, or otherwise the narrators are Kadhiboon attributing innovations to the Imams. For arguments sake, if it is not an innovation and it is the guidance of Allah through the Imams via the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم), then praise is directed to Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) still rather than the creation since it is His will that we visit the graves and not the Imams.
  14. I have not seen anything convincing in this thread to indicate that the Imams can will any part of your life from the grave, or that they invite people, or that any thanks should be directed towards them for being able to visit their graves. Nothing happens but by the will of Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) and all praise and gratitude is directed towards Him. That is why we say Alhamdulillahi rabbil 'alameen rather than directing our praise to the Imams in every Rakah. This is the essence of Tawheed.
×
×
  • Create New...