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

snafial

Advanced Members
  • Content Count

    48
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  1. Crown of Hay, I will answer you, but I have questions that I underlined, please answer them. Do not pick and choose. If I understand you right, what you are saying is very dangerous. Are you accusing Ali (ra) of saying something but believing in something else (lying)? I find that outrageous, but if that in fact is your opinion, why would Ali (ra) lie? (Note: I believe that Ali (ra) is above what you believe in him, I believe that he is brave, truthful, and trustworthy [a true believer] ) So the question again, Are you accusing Ali (ra) of saying something but believing in something else (lying)? If the answer is yes, why? Well, regardless of your twisted interpretation, how do you explain this specific sentence: “it would get approval and pleasure of Allah…”? Is Shurra worthy of Allah’s approval? That is what Ali (ra) said, but again, you may think that you have better judgment. That fact that you use this verse to prove Imamah is outrageous. You can’t just scan that Quran and look for the word (Aemmah) and twist it whatever way you want.: 1) This verse is for Bni Israel (read the verse within its context, so let’s read the verses before and after the verse you posted: Åöäøó ÝöÑúÚóæúäó ÚóáÇ Ýöí ÇáÃóÑúÖö æóÌóÚóáó ÃóåúáóåóÇ ÔöíóÚðÇ íóÓúÊóÖúÚöÝõ ØóÇÆöÝóÉð ãøöäúåõãú íõÐóÈøöÍõ ÃóÈúäóÇÁóåõãú æóíóÓúÊóÍúíöí äöÓóÇÁåõãú Åöäøóåõ ßóÇäó ãöäó ÇáúãõÝúÓöÏöíäó (4) æóäõÑöíÏõ Ãóä äøóãõäøó Úóáóì ÇáøóÐöíäó ÇÓúÊõÖúÚöÝõæÇ Ýöí ÇáÃóÑúÖö æóäóÌúÚóáóåõãú ÃóÆöãøóÉð æóäóÌúÚóáóåõãõ ÇáúæóÇÑöËöíäó (5) æóäõãóßøöäó áóåõãú Ýöí ÇáÃóÑúÖö æóäõÑöí ÝöÑúÚóæúäó æóåóÇãóÇäó æóÌõäõæÏóåõãóÇ ãöäúåõã ãøóÇ ßóÇäõæÇ íóÍúÐóÑõæäó (6) a. If these verses are for Imamah, can you explain to me the last verse? 2) If you insist on using this verse (even though I really don’t know the sense behind it), I can say anything from my imagination and apply it to it. I can say that my family is the one addressed in the verse, but if I don’t have a proof, I would be a liar, wouldn’t I? One last thing, can you answer Sermon 216 which you conveniently avoided?
  2. For the shia who still think that Sunnis are Muslims, let’s return to the purpose of the thread: 1) Can you provide me with the verses in the Quran that approves Imamah as understood by Shia?
  3. You say he/she who doesn’t obey Ahlu Albayt is a Kafir in the hereafter and will go to hell. Let’s see what Ali (ra) says in Nahjul-Balaghah and then judge if you obey Ali (ra) as you claim or if you will be a kafir in the hereafter as you claim. Note that I’m citing Nahjul-Balaghah because the majority of Shia accept it as sound and correct, while we Sunnis say that it does not have a sahih sanad. 1) In Letter 58, to the people of various provinces, giving them the causes of the Battle of Siffin: “The thing began in this way: We and Ahl Alsham were facing each other while we had common faith in one Allah, in the same Prophet (s) and on the same principles and canons of religion. So far as faith in Allah and the Holy Prophet (s) was concerned we never wanted them (Ahl Alsham) to believe in anything over and above or other than what they were believing in and they did not want us to change our faith. Both of us were united on these principles except for what we disagreed onin respect to the Murder of Othman.” a. Sunni: we obey Ali (ra) and say that the only point of contention was how to react to the murder of Othman (ra). b. Shia: we disobey Ali (ra) and say that the point of contention is in Imamah and we have different faiths. 2) In Letter 6, to Mu’awiya (ra): “…And so far as Shura was concerned it was supposed to be limited to Muhajirs and Ansars. And if they gather around a man and select him as an Imam, it would get approval and pleasure of Allah…” a. Sunni: we obey Ali (ra) and say that Asshura is legitimate and it is approved by Allah. b. Shia: we disobey Ali (ra) and say that Asshura is illegitimate and it is not approved by Allah. 3) In Sermon 216, delivered at the battle of Siffin: “…Therefore, do not abstain from saying a truth or pointing out a matter of justice because I do not regard myself above erring. I do not escape erring in my actions but that Allah helps me (in avoiding errors) in matters in which He is more powerful than I…” a. Sunni: we obey Ali (ra) and say that he is capable of error just like every human being is capable of error. Only Allah does not make errors. b. Shia: we disobey Ali (ra) and say that Allah does not make errors and Imams do not make errors. So, Crown of hay, are still sure that you obey Ahl Albayt? I think that you are not a follower of their teachings, the same goes with the Shia scholars you cited.
  4. I'm traveling right now, so sorry for the delay in answering your questions because I'm gonna have to wait until I get back home to give you detailed answers. As of Spizo's question and "Crown of hay" statement, I'd say: No. WOW
  5. Actually, Spizo, your question is very simple. If we go back and ask ourselves: “who amongst the companions have changed the deen?” we would find Abu bakr, Omar, Otham, and Ali (ra) perfectly clear of the blame, as it is the case with the majority of the Sahabah, that’s why the hadith in Arabic describes the number of those as (hamal alneam) which means very few. Unfortunately, the Shia had it the other way around, they say the majority changed the deen while three, or four, or nine only stayed in their religion. Is that the number that the prophet (pbuh) was capable of educating and elevating? Don’t you have a shame calling the prophet (pbuh) a failed teacher? I know you wouldn’t dare say that about the companions of Khomeini. 1) But if you are so trusting in Al-Bukhari, he also narrated a hadith that says: Volume 5, Book 57, Number 22: Narrated Abu Said: The Prophet said, "Do not abuse my companions for if any one of you spent gold equal to Uhud (in Allah's Cause) it would not be equal to a Mud or even a half Mud spent by one of them." So, Spizo, would you stop abusing the companions of the Prophet (pbuh)? 2) Plus, do you suggest the Allah didn't know that those companions would change the deen when Allah revealed (9:100): “And the first to lead the way, of the Muhajirin and the Ansar, and those who followed them in goodness - Allah is well pleased with them and they are well pleased with Him, and He hath made ready for them Gardens underneath which rivers flow, wherein they will abide for ever. That is the supreme triumph.” 3) Furthermore, we know that Arabia after the prophet (pbuh) separated into the believers and the muratadeen. We also know that the companions and Ahl Albayt were together (as they always are) in the camp of the believers who fought for the religion not to be changed. 4) Finally (please read carefully), If the first Caliph after the Prophet (pbuh) was Ali (ra) not Abu Bark (ra), I’m certain that we would have people like you cursing Ali (ra) and saying that the Caliphat should’ve gone to Abu Bakr, because some people are only interested in “should’ve’s” and they can easy be followers to whoever wants to bring about Fitnaa and divide the believers. 5) I leave you with this verse and hope that you would rethink your purpose in life from a caller of hate to caller of love, (48:29): “Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah, and those with him are firm of heart against the unbelievers, compassionate among themselves; you will see them bowing down, prostrating themselves, seeking grace from Allah and pleasure; their marks are in their faces because of the effect of prostration; that is their description in the Taurat and their description in the Injeel; like as seed-produce that puts forth its sprout, then strengthens it, so it becomes stout and stands firmly on its stem, delighting the sowers that He may enrage the unbelievers on account of them; Allah has promised those among them who believe and do good, forgiveness and a great reward.” Are you enranged at the Companions?
  6. Is this what you really think of Abu Bakr (ra) and the Compnaions (ra)? Shouldn’t you be more respectful of them? Why do you want to come between the Imams and the Companions? We sunnis believe that they were brothers, what was in their hearts for Allah and what they did for Islam overwhelms any mistakes, even though the mistakes you claim never did happen. How do I believe that they were brothers? (Sources from Shia books, ask for any specific point and let me provide the book and the page number) 1) Ali (ra) had: a son from Laila bint Masood named Abu Bark, a son from Om habeeb named Omar, and a son from Om Albaneen named Othman. You may say these names were common. Well, would any shia today name his/her son after one of these names, let alone naming three of your sons after three of the Khulafa (ra)? 2) Al-hasan and Al-hussain (ra) both had sons named Abu Bakr and Omar. Can you start admitting that there is a pattern going on here? 3) Um Kalthoom the daughter of Ali (ra) was married to Omar (ra). No comment here. 4) Ali (ra) sent Al-hasan and Al-hussain (ra) to defend Othman (ra). As far as our love for Ahl Albayt (pbuh): 1) The hadith of Al-kesa’a was narrated with sahih sanad only in Sunni books, and the narrator is, guess who?, Um Almomeneen Aishah (ra). 2) Fatima’s (ra) narrations in sunni hadith books are 11. Fatima’s (ra) narrations in Shia hadith books is zero, unfortunately. 3) Ali’s (ra) narrations: 1583 in Sunni books, 690 in Shia books. 4) The most important point in my view and I want you to think about this particular point: you will NEVER find a sunni cursing or saying anything bad about Ahl Albayt (as) , but you know what the Shia say about the loved Companions (ra). After all this, do you still want to divide Ahl Albayt and the Companions? Do you still hate them?
  7. Thanks for those who answered. I think it is good to admit Abu Bakr (ra) as one of the ancestors of seven of the Imams.
  8. Well, I know quite enough, But not enough to be convinced that not believing in Imamah is a reason for calling someone Kafir. This is the main purpose of this post: should Shia have the right to include Imamah in the five Usool of Adeen? And should the shia scholars have the right to call nonbelievers in Imamah (sunnis) kafirs? To start up the discussion, please provide me with the proofs (from whichever source you want) that states Imamah as part of Islam.
  9. Can you paraphrase your question, please. I couldn't understand you.
  10. Thanks for your good spirit and I think that you are honest. But we do have a problem here that cannot be resolved unless we stop flattering each (don’t mean yourself). Now, do I want to create a problem from nothing while you are telling me that Sunnis are Muslims? of course not. But a problem clearly exists when: 1) We see masjids for Sunnis and masjids for Shia. 2) We see that we stopped sharing the simplest rituals of Islam, like celebrating the Eid together or praying Fridays together. 3) We have Shia that say “we should free Mecca and Madinah from the Sunnis” 4) We see that our prayers, fasting, marriage, and even aqeedah are different. Now, is that the religion of Prophet Mohammed (pbuh)? Do you think that if the Prophet (pbuh) was amongst us he would be happy? That’s why we should confront our traditions that have nothing to do with Islam, and that have only divided us, one of which is considering Imamah as Asl in the Deen. You answered by saying it is not, but what do you say to the following quotes: 1) From Al-shia.com: Imam Al-Saduk says:“Our belief is that the one who rejects the Imamah of Ameer al Mumineen [Ali] and the Aimmah (Imams) after him, has the same position like the one who rejects the Prophethood of the Prophets.” And Al-Mufeed said: ““The Imamiyyah [shia] are in agreement (’Ijma) that the one who rejects the Imamah of one Imam and rejects the obedience to them which Allah ordered is a misguided Kaffir deserving to remain in Hell-Fire forever.” So, let's try to discuss the main point in this post: "Is there a verse that gives Imamah such a status in Islam?"
  11. Unfortunately, that’s not true. The majority of shia scholars consider Imamah to be part of Usool-e-Deen and rejecting it means that you are out of the circle of Islam (I’m talking about scholars from Al-kulaini till Sistani). But that’s exactly what I want to ask about. Why is it part of Usool-e-Deen? So, let’s focus on this aspect of the discussion.
  12. (bismillah) (salam) I will try to make this post as simple as possible and please let’s not try to “get smart” at each other. Since the Iamamah is the most important pillar in Shiasm and because of it the shia scholars are calling sunnis KAFIRS, do you think it is unreasonable for us to ask for a proof? While we see prayers, zakah…etc mentioned in the Quran, we don’t see any clear mention of Imamah in the Quran. So, please provide me with the verse that makes the Shia scholars so convinced of Imamah that they consider those who do not believe in it Kafirs?
  13. Unfortunately, it does. The Ithna asharis believe that the ALL ancestors of the Imams are Muslims. But they also believe that Abu bakr (ra) is not. How do you compromise that?
  14. I still did not get a satisfying answer on this question: What does it mean that the grandfather of Imam Jaafar's mother is Abu bakr (ra)?
  15. According to Allah is a big word man, are up to it? Plus, Imams are connected to the prophet (pbuh) only through Fatima (ra), by saying that the mother isn't important, you are obliterating one of the Pillars in Shiasm. So again, do not manipulate rules to fit your ideas, manipulate your ideas to fit the rules. With all due respect, I totally agree. But isn't Islam a mercy from Allah, if you think so, why that mercy is not easy? Please, stop listening to your mullas' saying that you are too stupid to understand your religion. Did Ali (ra) make Bayia to a Kafir? Do you see why being a Shia is not easy? because you have to believe that you are better than the Imams.
×
×
  • Create New...