|
|
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله
realizm
-
Posts
4,031 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Calendar
Blogs
Everything posted by realizm
-
Thanks Covid, now I am less shocked by a covered face than I was two years ago. -
I do not confuse them. In biblical logic, prophets of Bani Israel were very often associated with the king, be it in good terms or bad terms. As like Nabi Yusuf (عليه السلام), Daniel (عليه السلام), Yahia (عليه السلام) etc. That was a particularity amongst the Religion of Israelites. And the reason I emphasize the period between Isa and Muhammad (sawas) is because from what we know, Allah's order (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) to go from an exclusive to an universal religion changed after nabi Isa.
-
Ok so maybe in 300 AD there was a hujja in Peru, who came after a prophet himself born and sent to Peruvian people. That would make sense indeed. It's a bit weird though because given the geographical proximity between the lands of Bani Israil and Muhammad (sawas), and also the chronological revelations, we logically think they followed each other without interruption.
-
Not debating this. It's seems consensual from Qur'an that there always were Prophets for Bani Israil, until `Isa (عليه السلام). But now we are talking about non apparent hujjat, which implies they were not the prophets you a talking about. And if they were 'silent' hujjat, we can suppose they were keepers of religion from amongst a nation that had received a revelation beforehand. Otherwise their role would have been useless.
-
Makes sense. Yet, I find it very strange that the period between Isa and Muhammad (sawas) is such a blurry period in time with regards to religious belief.
-
Seeing how central and crucial the concept of Hujja is in our version of Islam, and taking into consideration the hadith of "One who dies without knowing the Imam of his time".... It is not easy to accept that some of them were ghayb to the point they were unknown.
-
Sorry, I was not precise in my phrasing. I meant to say that it is strange that Nabi (sawas) never mentioned one Hujja that came after Isa (عليه السلام) and before him. He could have done so in order to convince, or to show some continuity in Allah's message (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى). And even weirder, that not a single of those Hujja ever claimed to be so, although he should have done so. Historical records all over the Christian world are numerous, the crowning of Charlemagne, Clovis, Roman and Byzantine Popes, all of those took place around the avent of Prophet (sawas). Yet we never read about 'Such or such claimed he was an argument of God, a tenant of the Religion'. Only exception would be Mani.
-
Allow me to remain skeptical, isn't it strange that Christianity -i.e the Shari`a of `Issa (عليه السلام) was not leaded any famous apostle that Nabi (sawas) would have mentioned at least once ? Maybe that 'earth&hujja' rule took place once 'Islam' began, and ia limited to one shari`a. Anyway, not a big issue to me.
-
Do we agree on the understanding of the hadith that a `alim can be hujja over a community?
-
Ok thanks. I understand you can then make abstraction of that belief but still remain a Muslim. Now can you go around in a mosque in Madinah, Cairo, Khartoum or Kuala Lumpur, and tell the sheikh 'Abu Bakr should not have become a Leader, the Ummah would have been better off without a leader just like no apostle of Jesus took over the affair of followers' and still considered a Sunni Muslim by that Sheikh?
-
Struggling with faith... not sure where to turn
realizm replied to HopefulBeliever's topic in General Islamic Discussion
I can relate too, although not with regards to misogyny because I am a male and also because I know Islam in itself is not misogynistic. Here it's more about the sanitary oppression which cut us from the rituals, weekly dhikr and all that. I had been regular for over a decade with very few exceptions. And since I stopped going not only because of governmental rules, but also because of zeal from communities -or is it lack of tawakul, no sure- I started to question some points of that 'community life' and think that maybe lonely worship is not that bad. But one direct effect that I could note is that indeed, I am less focused on religious issues than I used to be. May Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) help us. -
I wouldn't have been convinced !
-
I definitely would have asked !
-
I thought that was Sayid Kashif al ghita.
-
Yet, we never were aware of a Hujjah between Issa (عليه السلام) and Prophet (sawas).
-
I wanted to know if they had the same belief about Caliphs. Hujjah does not mean sustainer. And also, nowhere did I read that the day of qiyama will take place when Imam Mahdi (arts) dies. So I take it that the world can actually exist without an Imam or Prophet. I know, I was more speaking about overall missions, on which the brother seemed to insist.
-
Are you sure this saying is about choosing Abu Bakr over Ali ?
-
Can you say 'I reject the Caliphate of Abu Bakr which I consider oppression' and still be considered from amongst Ahl al sunna walk jama`a ?
-
@Debate follower As opener of the thread may I kindly ask you to open a separate thread to clarify your misconceptions on Shia Mahdism ('the shia Mahdi guiding us from behind clouds' being a clear example). As a reminder This thread is about 'can Sunni Islam exist without Caliphate', although the phrase 'Is Caliphate a tenant of Sunni Islam just like Imamate is to Shii Islam'. So far, my understanding is that it is not a principle -meaning Islam would have been complete even if the Rashidun had not been leaders at one point- , but that history has become an orthodoxy, making the truthfulness of those Khulafa Rashidun unquestionable in order to remain in the frame of belief.
-
You are bringing shari`i and Sunni/shia debate in that issue, while the reality is that exile ('ghurbah') is wished by no one. Ask Hazaras if they feels like leaving their country. Some will answer yes, because they feel they do not belong anymore, some will answer they'd rather die than leaving. It's just a matter of personal identity.
-
Not to mention Jamal Al Din Al Afghani, founder of the Ikhwani thought, who himself was most probably an Iranian Shia.
-
You are not teaching us anything here. Shias have the exact same stance on Mahdism as Sunnis, except for his identity. I fail to see what 'achievements of the Ummah' has to do with 'personality and zuhoor of Imam Mahdi'. I thought that Mahdi (ajtfs) will appear when Muslims are oppressed and divided? That's your take on the Shia creed. Where does this come from ? Maybe that's why you have some false bias towards Shia Islam?
-
See, that's where you sense that Mahdism as a concept had not been fully integrated into Sunni perception, although it is there in their books. Otherwise you would also be asking yourself 'why our Sunni Mahdi, with enormous power at his disposal, and 1.2 billion sunnis at his cause, not make his appearance'. You are still asking Shias to prove the logic of a Mahdi while we could ask you the very same questions. Better make up your mind now : - Either Mahdism is a Shia concept that infiltrated Sunni faith, making Sunnism corrupt, thus void - Or realize our issue is only about who the Mahdi (عليه السلام) is, and therefore stop questioning God's plan.
-
Sorry but just new here. Who were Amavides?
realizm replied to SMG's topic in General Islamic Discussion
Omeyyads ? -
Maybe because as in every family you have some rebellious elements who, despite being conscious of the concept of wrong and right, choose to live on the bad side. In Islam you have the adjective Fasiq which IMO explains this. To deliberately separate yourself from your innate path.
