Abu Nur

Sunnah that were wrote hundreds years after the companions does not give any credibility for their adalah. The history clearly show how they were fighting each other and among them were those who innovated. Your adalah is an innovation of your scholars who interpreted the narrations and history such that it fits the narrative of adalah. It even contradict the reasoning of narration where Angels said some of companions of Prophet will enter Hell because of their innovations. Narrated ‘Abdullah: The Prophet said, “I am your predecessor at the Lake-Fount (Kauthar) and some men amongst you will be brought to me, and when I will try to hand them some water, they will be pulled away from me by force whereupon I will say, ‘O Lord, my companions!’ Then the Almighty will say, ‘You do not know what they did after you left, they introduced new things into the religion after you.’” Either you twist and interpret this such that magically it does not contradict adalah of sahaba but it will be unreasonable, or use aql and be honest that this narration proves not all companions were adl. It is logically reasonable concluded from quran and narrations that some of the sahaba were adl, but not all of them.

I always find how funny this is, it shows that Zaydiyyah truly are very close to Ahlus Sunnah wal Jamaah beliefs than us, something they hate to admit.

If you take it slowly and ponder to what I said, you will not make such a comment. When Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) makes something to us apparent and then He later decide to add or remove different terms, then that becomes Bada for the person. The Qadr is the final outcome. Ill make it easier for you: from Wikishia: Badāʾ' (Arabic: بَداء) is a terminology in theology, meaning that God reveals to people something other than what they thought would happen. However, when bada' is used about people, it refers to their changing their decisions. In the Qur'an, there are several verses concerning the notion of bada' and its instances; for example, "Allah makes to pass away and establishes what he pleases" (Quran 13:39); in a commentary on this verse, Imam al-Sadiq (a) says: "is not it the case that Allah makes to pass away what is established, and establishes what has passed away?"[4] By the definition of Bada, it is applicable. I could care less what they argued. Because it is an test. Something your Salafi mind can not comprehend , similar with bani Israel starting to doubt about Musa (عليه السلام) because he was longer than the appointed time: When the people saw that Moses was so long in coming down from the mountain, they gathered around Aaron and said, “Come, make us gods[a] who will go before us. As for this fellow Moses who brought us up out of Egypt, we don’t know what has happened to him.”

This translation is almost there, because it does not translate Bada as "appeared" to Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى). But I disagree about the translation of change of destiny thing. If Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) decreed something, then it is fully happening and there is no change. The arabic says: Badaa lillahi ta'ala fi abi Ja'far...makanahu No one will translate this as It's appeared to Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى), because it is a contradiction itself. Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) do not change His mind and Bada is not God changing His mind. Bada is very simple concept that is found in Qur'anic verses like this: (7:142) And We appointed for Moses thirty nights, to which We added ten, whereby the term of forty nights set by his Lord was fulfilled.99 And Moses said to Aaron, his brother: 'Take my place among my people, act righteously, and do not follow the path of those who create mischief.'100 Here it appeared to Musa (عليه السلام) that it is thirty days, but then God added ten. In God viewpoint it was always 40 days, but it is for humans that what really appeared as change from 30 to 40. It is Qadar that Musa (عليه السلام) was appointed for 40 days, but Bada trough our viewpoint that it changed from 30 to 40 days.

I don't agree with the translation.

Better word will be manifested that Ismael woul be the successor but then Allah have choosed kadhim instead. There is nothing foolishness here.

What is there foolish about?

I believe it is nonsense. I don't find any confirmation.

Every answer is in Qur'an about face of Allah and hand of Allah, rose above his Throne, it is Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) who threw etc. They try to include Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) eyes in following verse: “It (Nuh’s ark) sailed under the watch of Our eyes, as a reward for those (believers) who were rejected.” [Al-Qamar 54:14] When it is clear that this is a meaning of Guardianship and Oversight. Which is the verse itself answer by saying under God watch (trough the angels and other creations.) There is no mention of Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) fingers, Leg, Foot in Quran. These are all fabrications from hadiths.

Salam Aleikum, So for them it is absolutely haram to say two hands refers to Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) lutf? Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) says something about himself but no one knows what it could mean makes sense? The biggest hint is Quran itself: Nay, but both His hands are outspread [5:64].

If you add these two, then you know there is no such a thing that by permission of Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) He delegated creation and sustenance to Prophet (saws) or Imams (as): And it is related from Zurara that he said: I said to Imam Ja'far as-Sadiq that a man from among the descendants of Abdu'l-lah ibn Saba' is a believer in (the doctrine of) delegation (tafwid). And he said: And what is tafwid? I (Zurara) said: According to him Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى), (in the first instance) created Muhammad and 'Ali, and then delegated the matter (of creation) to them (this is equivalent of permission of Allah), and these two created and gave sustenance, and caused life and death. The Imam said: He, the enemy of Allah, has lied. When you return to him recite to him the verse of the Chapter of The Thunder (Ra‟ad ch 13): "Or assign they unto Allah partners who created the like of His creation so that the creation (which they made and His creation) seemed alike to them? Say: Allah is the Creator of all things, and He is the One, the Almighty" (13:16). Then I went to the man and informed him of what Imam Ja'far as-Sadiq had said: And he became as if I had forced him to swallow stones or as though he were struck dumb. In Vol 2, chapter 46, Hadith 3 Muhammad ibn Ali Majilawayh narrated that Ali ibn Ibrahim ibn Hashem quoted on the authority of his father, on the authority of Yasir, the servant: I asked Al-Ridha (عليه السلام), “What do you think about turning over the affairs (Tafweed)? He (عليه السلام) answered, “Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) has turned over the affairs of His Religion to His Prophet (saww) and said, “…So take what the Apostle assigns to you, and deny yourselves that which he withholds from you..” (59:7). God, however, will not turn over the affairs of Creation and provision of the sustenance to the Prophet (saww).” Then Al-Ridha (عليه السلام) added, “In fact, the Honorable the Exalted God said, „…Allah is the Creator of all things…‟ (39:62) God also said, „It is Allah Who has created you: further, He has provided for your sustenance; then He will cause you to die; and again He will give you life. Are there any of your (false) „partners‟ who can do any single one of these things? Glory be to Him! and high is He above the partners they attribute (to him)!‟” (30:40)

I just read the link of pdf you posted and they clearly say that the belief of Tawfeed of Sustance and Creation by permission of Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) is kufur, but the only tawfeed (delegation) was giving to prophet is to take whatever he gives and refrain whatever he said to refrain from.

The source comes from Reuters and all the media have taken from them. The language is so absurd that I doubt Ayotullah Khamenei talks that way.

The bold part I'm sure that it must be invented by Ghali. It is always about this secret knowledge or that only few type of people can know some knowledge.

Where it says Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) will be Merciful for such an action in day of Judgement?

There is no excuse for killing innocent civilian purposely. If someone targets military target but accidentally hits the civilian then it will be not consider killing civilian. But if someone bombs a target where there is literally civilians and they will die but they will make excuses that military target use them as shield then you can not bomb it. Also killing innocent civilians because others killed your people is not allowed. This mentality make every terrorist in west as martyr by killing civilians.

From Ayatullah Sistani By the majesty of God! By the majesty of God! Souls are sacred! Never should you do to them that which God has not deemed permissible. What great travesty it is to kill innocent souls, and what great honour it is to safeguard innocent souls, just as God, exalted is He, mentioned in His book [i.e. the Qurʾan]. The killing of an innocent soul has dangerous consequences, both in this world and in the hereafter. History has taught us that the Commander of the Faithful [i.e. ʿAli], peace be upon him, took much caution to protect the sanctity of the human soul in his wars. He, in his historical document, said to [his companion] Malik al-Ashtar, whose friendship and proximity to ʿAli is well known, “Be vigilant! Do not spill the blood of the innocent without any right to do so, for nothing is more inviting wrath, greater in evil consequences and more effective in the decline of blessings and cutting life span more than the unlawful spilling of blood. On the Day of Reckoning, God shall judge wisely between those servants of His who spilled blood. Do not strengthen your authority by the unlawful spilling of blood, for that will surely enfeeble and weaken the authority and [may] even cause it to perish or shifting (to other who are wise). There is no excuse for you in front of God nor I, if you kill unlawfully, because that shall cause you punishment.” If you [i.e. the fighters of the Popular Mobilisation Committees] find yourselves in an uncertain situation from which you fear the Divine Wrath, issue a vocal warning [to those fighting you], or issue a physical warning by directing your bullets in a manner which does not strike the target or cause its destruction apologizing (for such a disliked confrontation) to your Lord and taking precaution not to kill innocent souls.

Is that allowed in Islam?

Yes, but they don't target civilians.

Did Hisbullah even confirm that they were targeting and hitted civilians?

We need to always paint a picture that Sunnis represent those Muslims who were pro-ummayad and pro-khalifas (three khalifas) minus pro-alieds. All their narrations shifts heavily to that side and that is the truth. Sunnism do not represent at all Al-Thaqalayn, no matter how much they claim it does. It is spiritual (main) and political together. If politically is not possible, then spiritual is always there.

I think they want to join US to destroy Hisbullah and then they will go to Syria and get Syria and then they will attack Iran. US is giving green light to Israel to kill us much possible the Palestinians so that Hisbullah will join the war fully and then US and it's allies will have excuse. The whole point of US is to get control fully the ME gas and oil so they can sanction any country who wants to go to multipolar. If US attacks Iran, then Russia and China will help and give full support to Iran, like how they did in Vietnam.

Right now I don't think there is any solution available. US still controls the Middle East and Arab countries, so they will do anything to make the current Israel to be same. In the beginning of this attack, I knew that Iran have nothing to do with this attack, because it does not make any sense for them to cause it while they are developing their economics and they could really get away from the west sanctions. Rather It is the US who will benefit to bring exactly Iran to this war, because in future Iran will surely have more economical control with Russia and China in Middle East. If Iran-Russia-China-Allies can control ME oil and economy, you surely can say bye bye to Israel Zionist. If Hisbullah joins fully the war, then there will be literally millions of causalities in ME and mostly Lebanon, Iraq, Syria will be in mess while Us and west will control their oil fully. Arabs countries will continue normally their life with festivals. Just while ago Abdul Rahman Al-Sudais indicated that Sunnis should just submit to their kings and do nothing.

Wa Aleikum Salaam Dear Brother, This is not what I was implying. What I was implying is some beliefs who think Human being and God can have equal attribute or essence. For example the following belief of Christianity: John 10:30 I and the Father are one.” Instead of seeing this as Prophet Isa (عليه السلام) representing (Khilafa) and acting according to God will, they literally think that Prophet Isa (عليه السلام) Essence is same with God Essence Audhubillah.

This is proved by Qur'an and authentic Sunnah. It is very important to distinguish that there is an absolute of attributes of Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) that belongs only to Him (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) and all rest of attributing humans as being God hand, face etc are nothing but expression that human is acting according to God will. As for them being inseparable is false thinking. This is really an intepration of an attribute given by Christians about Jesus and God. And no Shia ever believe in this.