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
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Yaali110's Achievements


Newbie (1/14)



  1. (bismillah) I think it is Muslims that are needed. Not any specific sect. If Saladin conquered many states and spread the religion, he owes his own existence to Imam al Hussein ibne-Ali (a.s) who saved Islam on Kerbala. Islam needs imam, it always leave us with an imam to follow. Islam wasn't saved by Umer, Saladin, or Hezbollah, or Khomeni, or Zakir Naik for that matter. Islam was brought to us by Mohammad (saw) and was saved by Hussein (a.s). Death of Yazeed b. Muawiyyah mal3oon was a turning point. Islam's rebirth was on Ashoora. The good thing is that Shia & Sunni all agree on that. For ages, muslims have been inspired by Hussein (a.s)'s fight, his courage, his sacrifice. This thread was opened to condemn Zakir's derogatory comments. He called Yazeed- qatil-e-ibne RasoolAllah-a radi-Allah. I believe, it is very fair to condemn him on that stand. You can fight for Islam against Christians and Jews but if you forget who gave you this Islam, who saved it for you- it's sad. Yazeed changed the face of Islam- and in that sense- he was a bigger enemy of Islam. He is mal3oon to say the least. Says Mohammad (saw) : Husseino minni wa ana min-el Hussein. And, Al Hassan wal Hussein Sayyed-e- Shaba'b-e ahl-el janna'. We have to speak clearly and loudly. Are we with Hussein or with Yazeed. There is no option- both. We know it. Mohammed (saw) made it clear when he said that "...who loves ahlulbayt loves me, their enemy is my enemy...". If Hussein's Sacrifice for Islam is what we value, we cannot follow or take pity on Yazeed. One who does is not trying any unity- let's not be creative. One who wants to follow both -is riding two boats and will end nowhere. We follow Hussein, and condem, and curse who stood in his way, and way of Mohammad (saw). It is the respect for Hussein (a.s) and Mohammed (saw) that a lot of people hesitate, if not hate, to even name their son Yazeed. Mulslims know it. They condemn acts of Yazeed (l.a). Hope it helps. Thanks.
  2. (bismillah) Actually, Ali (a.s)'s God is not different than anyone else's. It's us, it's people who may wrongfully believe in different God or Gods. But the truth of the matter is that Allah is one. We can not justify the existence for Allah because our minds are limited, our thinking process goes only so far. Allah- on the other hand- is unlimited. When we cannot fully apprehend his creation, we can definitely not understand Him- the Creator. Says Imam Ali (a.s): "...He cannot be perceived by imagination nor measured by understanding....He cannot be perceived by senses. He cannot be thought of after the people..." (Nahj'al Balagha; Sermon 180). Also, regarding comaparison where you gave an example that how can negative be positive?- I agree that you can not justify existence of Allah with these limited tools of comparison and contrast, positive and negative. Here is what Imam Jaa'far Al-Sadiq (a.s) said on Deity. Following is an excerpt from Imam Al-Sadiq (a.s)'s conversation with an atheist on topic of Allah (swt)'s existence, "...Things entering our minds through external senses are known to be created objects and made-up instances. But in the way of proving the reality of the existence of God Who is the Creator of all things and beings we should try to ignore and condemn two ways of reasoning: "Negation" and "Comparison". "Negation" will directly imply the concept of the denial of His "Being", and nothing can be attributed to Him: This is in fact something allotted to the created persons, animals, objects and the like: The things with component parts, being in need of the-"Maker" Who is not of their mettle. Thus, the "Creator" may not be compared to the creatures.” If you succeed in proving the 'Existence' of God, then it seems as if you have defined Him as a limited and finite 'Being'! • '"No, this is not true. I have never restricted Him to certain limits; I merely try to prove the phenomenon of His 'Being'..."" Hope it helps. Thank you.
  3. (bismillah) Also, question is put forth in way as if it is a challenge that if Ali (a.s) was Moula from his birth, then what's the significance Ghadeer Khum. In order to calrify that- Imam Ali (a.s) was/is Imam since his existence. During his early ages- Mohammed (saw) was present. So, Mohammaed (saw) is the ultimate leader. If Ali's miraculous birth in Kaab'a wasn't enough, it was Mohammed(saw) who indicated that Ali(a.s) is the "chosen" one. From the time of dawa't-e-dul' asheera, Hijra't, and Bad'r, and khyber etc- Prophet (saw) made it very clear who the successor should be, and who is chosen by Allah. "...Ali is to me as Haroon was to Musa...", "Me and Ali are from one noor...", and numerous more. However, on Ghadeer occasion- Mohammed (saw) put an end to anyone's doubts, questions, and excuses by declaring once and for all, "Whoever regards me as his moula, should know that Ali is his/her moula...". Thus, a reason to celebrate wilaya' of Ali, and rejoice our faith in Ali and therefore in Mohammed (saw) as our Moula. Shiai' celebrate Birthday of Imam Ali (a.s) Rajab 13th and Eid-al Ghadeer with same fervor and enthusiasm. Eid-al Ghadeer is a way, a chance- for all Muslims- to show our Prophet (saw) that we did not forget his words. We took to our hearts what he gave us.
  4. 786/110 (salam) I think you are mistaken when you say ...both sects. Imam Ali (a.s) never gave baya to Abu-Bakr. Sunni traditions narrate that he did. It is ridiculous how the narration goes. According to Sahih al-Bukhari, Imam Ali (a.s) never gave baya to Abu Bak'r till Fatima b. Mohamad (s.a) died. After her demise, people's attitude changed towards Ali (a.s) and apparently, he thought of reconciliation with Abu Bakr...went to him and said that Abu-Bakr is the right caliph but he should have involved bani hashim also before they made decision to make Abu Bak'r as caliph. Abu Bakr felt bad and wept. Later on, Abu Bakr accepted Ali (a.s)'s excuse for not giving baya, so far, and Ali(a.s) pledges oath of allegiance. I'll say Highly unlikely. Can anything weaker than this narration be found? Long story short, Imam Ali (a.s) never pledged allegiance to Abu-Bakr or others. Says Imam Ali (a.s) in his khutba al-shaqshaqiyya: "Beware! By Allah the son of Abu Quhafah (Abu Bakr)dressed himself with it (the caliphate) and he certainly knew that my position in relation to it was the same as the position of the axis in relation to the hand-mill. The flood water flows down from me and the bird cannot fly upto me. I put a curtain against the caliphate and kept myself detached from it. Then I began to think whether I should assault or endure calmly the blinding darkness of tribulations wherein the grown up are made feeble and the young grow old and the true believer acts under strain till he meets Allah (on his death). I found that endurance thereon was wiser. So I adopted patience although there was [Edited Out]ing in the eye and suffocation (of mortification) in the throat. I watched the plundering of my inheritance till the first one went his way but handed over the Caliphate to Ibn al-Khattab after himself......." It's just part of his powerful khutba where he put an end to any misconceptions. No room for thinking that he was ever part of umayyad dynasty. Also, according to the historic events, Imam Ali (a.s) was tortured and forced to submit to Abu Bakr's Caliphate but to no avail. Following excerpt from Ali (a.s)'s reply to the letter of Mua3wiyya (l.a) explains the story: "...You want to impress the world with the idea that I envied all the previous caliphs and that I was jealous of them. Even if I grant this, I want to know what right and authority have you to ask for an explanation from me? You have no place in religion to talk of such things. You also want to taunt me by saying that when I refused to accept the caliphate of the First Caliph I was dragged like a camel with a rope round my neck and every kind of cruelty and humiliation was leveled against me. I swear by my life that by talking like that you want to bring disgrace to me but you are actually doing the greatest service to me and are disgracing yourself as well as the cause that you pretend to support. There is no disgrace for a Muslim if he is subjected to tyranny and suppression so long as he is firm in his faith and belief in Allah and religion. This is exactly what I say that every cruelty and tyranny was leveled against me to deprive me of the right which Allah and the Holy Prophet (s) have given me and this is exactly what you do not want to acknowledge and accept. Your taunts against me go a long way to prove that in reality there was no election, it was a coup d'etat followed by brutal force which decided the fate of caliphate by making it neither hereditary nor elective but possessive..." I hope this explains a lot of things. Thank you, ma3'salam Asad Ali.
  5. 786/110 Allahumm-al'3an qatlat'l Fatima Zahra (s.a) ! Salam ala' Sayyedat-un-Nisa' al 3alimeen ! May Allah (swt) curse the enemies of AhlalBayt (a.s).esp. those who tortured Fatima Zahra (s.a) and became the reason of her martyrdom.
  • Create New...