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


Advanced Member
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About mansab.jafri

  • Rank
    Level 6 Member

Contact Methods

  • Website URL

Profile Information

  • Location

Previous Fields

  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

3,740 profile views
  1. Al-Salaamu `alaykum. In light of all the UMAA bashing, I would like to inform you all about my experience at this conference. I am currently at the UMAA Convention 2015. This years convention was great. I recommend people go to this conference and attend it in earnest before passing judgment. I think that everyone who complains about UMAA without actually having been to the event in recent years is highly distorted in their viewpoints, and is being uncouth. There are two types of events at UMAA, main sessions and workshops. I didn't get to go to all of the sessions, but from what I att
  2. (bismillah) ÇáÓáÇã Úáíßã Surprisingly, Fadhlullah doesn't know that this Du`a' ul-Iftitaah exists in al-Tahdheeb... Ó: åá ÏÚÇÁ ÇáÇÝÊÊÇÍ ÕÍíÍ ÇáÓäÏ Ãã áÇ¿ Ì: äÞáå ÌÚÝÑ Èä ãÍãøóÏ ÇáÚãÑí¡ æáã íÑæå Úä ÃÍÏ ÇáÃÆãøÉ (Ú)¡ ßãÇ íÐßÑ ÇáÓíÏ ÇÈä ØÇææÓ Ýí (ÇáÅÞÈÇá). Question: Is Du`a' ul-Iftitaah Sahih (authentic) in its chain or not? Answer: Ja`far b. Muhammad al-`Umari transmitted it, and he does not narrate it from one of the A'imma (Ú), as what is mentioned by al-Syed Ibn Tawus in al-Iqbaal. http://arabic.bayynat.org.lb/books/nadwas/fikr378Q2.htm Not only is the name wrong, but they ignored Tahdheeb
  3. (bismillah) السلام عليكم What you try and push is sad. These are not Shi`a like the Imaamiyya are Shi`a. Whoever believes in the above, how can they be Imaami? How can any Shi`i of Ahlul'bayt (عليهم السلام) say al-Imam `Ali (عليه السلام) considered their rule right and accepted their leadership? La Hawla wa la Quwatta illa Billah. We have narrations that show that the recognition of Abu Bakr and `Umar is of Shaytaan. محمد بن يحيى، عن أحمد بن محمد، عن الحسن بن محبوب، عن هشام بن سالم، عن زرارة قال: قلت لابي جعفر عليه السلام: أخبرني عن معرفة الامام منكم واجبة على جميع الخلق؟ فقال: إن الله عز
  4. (bismillah) (salam) This Du`a is Sahih (authentic). al-Shaykh has mentioned it in al-Tahdheeb 3/108, in part of a long narration whose chain is: محمد بن يعقوب عن علي بن ابراهيم عن ابيه عن ابن محبوب عن علي بن رئاب عن عبد صالح عليه السلام "Muhammad b. Ya`qub, from `Ali b. Ibrahim, from his father, from Ibn Mahbub, from `Ali b. Ri'aab, from `Abd Salaah (عليه السلام)..." al-Shaykh narrates it from the book of Muhammad b. Ya`qub, and his Tareeq to the books of Muhammad b. Ya`qub is mentioned in his Fihrist 211: أخبرنا بجميع كتبه ورواياته الشيخ المفيد أبو عبد الله محمد بن محمد ابن النعمان ، عن أبي
  5. السلام عليكم I opened this thread mainly for brothers like brother Macisaac and others who have an interest in this subject and have insight and knowledge. Anyway, there is a discussion on the Fast of `Ashura in the book al-Mustanad fi Sharh il-`Urwat il-Wuthqa written by the great master al-Syed ul-Khoe'i (قدس الله روحه), volume 12. The section is called Aqwaal fi Sawm Yawm `Ashura, and it's available here for those who want to read it: http://www.al-khoei.us/books/index.php?id=3258 Al-Khoe'i mentions this: Al-Khoe'i graded that narration as Muwaththaq, but I don't see how. If we look in a
  6. (salam) This man was a great master of Akhlaaq. The great Shiachat Sheikh albaqyr in his Rijal ul-Shiachat writes: Mahdaviat: Known as Bahr ul-Akhlaaq (ocean of akhlaaq). Trustworthy, trustworthy, distinguished from amongst our companions. His Akhlaaq was one to be emulated. baradur_jackson narrated to me: "o, wouldst thou not wish that he came back? wo to those who attacked him, for he was one of the oceans of akhlaaq." shiasoldier786 narrated to me: "his posts were firm and easy for the eyes and the heart. i have not seen a companion from amongst the shiachatters as insightful in the
  7. (salam) I quickly checked Rijal of al-Najashi (ra) and Naqd ul-Rijal of Tafrishi (ra) and Rijal of Sheikh Tusi (ra). Not sure about the first two, but I will check when I have some time to sit and read. I have to go right now. ا 1. ?? محمد بن علي بن أحمد بن هشام القمي، يكنى أبا جعفر، روى عن محمد ابن علي ما جيلويه، روى عنه إبن نوح رجال الشيخ , ص 446 2. ?? 3. محمد بن عمر بن عبد العزيز الكشي أبو عمرو، كان ثقة رجال النجاشي , ص 372 4. الحسن بن محمد بن سهل النوفلي ضعيف لكن له كتاب حسن كثير الفوائد جمعه رجال النجاشي , ص 37 Can I also see the source of the Hadith you are quoting this Isnaad fro
  8. Brother, the IR is not even fair to its own people (the `Ulema), so how can you expect fair treatment for Sunnis? :cry: - Mansab
  9. Hmm, he seems familiar. But I don't think I've ever been on yanabi.com. Is this the same as the user Amilcar? If so, then yes I know him. But this view is not accepted by our scholars... I don't know how you can trust a majhool person on the internet about our madhab rather than the Mujtahideen... - Mansab
  10. ?? Who is Wasil ibn Ata? And no, actually Ziyaarat `Ashura is the greatest proof of this. It is accepted unanimously by the great Maraaja' as being fully authentic and one of the great treasures from Allah that we have. I have been asking all the offices, and the reply is the same everytime. I recently got this in my inbox today: بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم السلام عليكم و رحمة الله و بركاته الجواب: زيارة عاشوراء من حيث السند هو حديث قدسي نزل به جبرئيل الامين من عند الله تعالى على الرسول الكريم، واللعن فيه مطابق للقرآن الحكيم حيث لعن من آذى الله في رسوله أو آذى رسوله في اهل بيته بقول الله سبحان
  11. We have an entirely opposite view on this subject. How would you know that Ahlul'bayt (as) never cursed `Umar? We are the ones who narrated the Ahadith of Ahlul'bayt (as), not the Ahlus'sunnah. It's more probable that you have an incomplete picture of who Ahlul'bayt (as) were since your Ahadith are not from them. And what little you do have from them is not even taken seriously. Ibn Taymiyya in Minhaj ul-Sunna, volume 7, page 529 even claims: فليس في الأئمة الأربعة و لا غيرهم من أئمة الفقهاء من يرجع إليه في فقهه "None of the Four Imams (Abu Hanifa, Shafi`i, Ahmad ibn Hanbal, Malik ibn
  12. lol @ this thread. Lord Botta, I am surprised that you even would bring all of that as evidence for a different view, as it really has nothing to do with anything. What we are clear about is `Umar's flamboyant disrespect towards the Messenger's (as) daughter. Just like he used to beat up his sister. I feel as if `Umar has a history of violence against women, unfortunately. He has no Akhlaaq, no dignity, and his rage should have been kept in check. I'm sorry if I'm being too straightforward about this. But this is the reality. So far, all we have seen is some people trying to justify `Uma
  13. (salam) Whoever denies this incident is just a kid, no offense. حَدَّثَنَا مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ بِشْرٍ ، حَدَّثَنَا عُبَيْدُ اللهِ بْنُ عُمَرَ ، حَدَّثَنَا زَيْدُ بْنُ أَسْلَمَ ، عْن أَبِيهِ أَسْلَمَ ؛ أَنَّهُ حِينَ بُويِعَ لأَبِي بَكْرٍ بَعْدَ رَسُولِ اللهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم ، كَانَ عَلِيٌّ وَالزُّبَيْرُ يَدْخُلاَنِ عَلَى فَاطِمَةَ بِنْتِ رَسُولِ اللهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم ، فَيُشَاوِرُونَهَا وَيَرْتَجِعُونَ فِي أَمْرِهِمْ ، فَلَمَّا بَلَغَ ذَلِكَ عُمَرَ بْنَ الْخَطَّابِ خَرَجَ حَتَّى دَخَلَ عَلَى فَاطِمَةَ ، فَقَالَ : يَا بِنْتَ رَسُولِ اللهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم ، وَاللهِ مَا مِنْ الْخَلْقِ أَحَدٌ
  14. (salam) It is a flawed argument, looking at it logically. Which is why Mulla Sadra (ra) and other great philosophers criticized it. The argument of Mulla Sadra (ra) for the existence of God is superior and essentially free of weakness. http://www.mullasadra.org/new_site/english/Paper%20Bank/Ontology/Hamid%20Reza%20Ayatullahi.htm - Mansab
  • Create New...