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

tees maar khan

Banned
  • Content Count

    111
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About tees maar khan

  • Rank
    Level 1 Member

Profile Information

  • Religion
    Muslim

Previous Fields

  • Gender
    Male
  1. Well i think I have given suffiicent info to show that what sahaba(ra) believed in no way can be labbeled as tahreef from a sane person and i proved it in a logical and simple manner.. and if someone still accuses them falsely just inorder to defend this madhab then he is just deceiving his ownself... Thus I leave it with the audience to judge ... since we proved that what sahaba(ra) believed was i noway comparable to what shias believe ..
  2. regarding 57:4 its in general for every human(muslims and non muslims)... when Allah says "he is with you" ... But the rest verses shows that he is with the believers who posses certain qualities like: those who are patient(2:153) , and those who guard against evil( 2:194) , So this implies that hz abubakar(ra) posses these qualities and many more inshallah thats why prophet(Saw) said Allah is with "us" .. which indicates that he had these qualities with him that is why Allah was with him.. And you cannot insert the verse 57:4 here because its a general verse, but these are specific to Believers only , and the words of 9:40 also shows that it was for believers not general, prophet(Saw) said Allah is with us(9;40) this excluded the mushriks and non believers. And it was for prophet(Saw) and hz abubakar(ra)....
  3. lol, so atleast you go and read it and tell us what actually al kafi says...
  4. it seems you have comprehension understanding problems , or it is that you dont want to understand what answers you..for the first point i said this: again a clear example of understanding simple sentencesI said this: And regarding ibn abbas(ra)'s words then its comes under the issue of 7 ahruf...:It is possible that that was upon one of the 7 Ahruf just like how Umar(ra) denied one recitation of a man then when they came to the Prophet(saw) both recitations were approved by the Prophet. So as hz umar(ra) thought that the recitation of another man was incorrect similalry hz ibn abbas(ra) thought the other word he read was an error of scribe, but it was correct and what he recited too was correct. what he believed was that he knew the correct word and still the kalam of Allah was there with him in correct and appropriate form then how can he be labelled for believing in tahreef.. As i said that what he believed was also correct and what he considered to be error of scribe was also correc... this can only be pondered by people with brain. again an example, that either you cant even understand simple words or you dont want to , I said this for this one: Dhikr IS OF 7 TYPES..... AND Allah PROTECTED ONE TYPE OF DHIKR WHICH MEANS HE SAVED DHIKR.. this is quite simple to understand you dont need to be a phd to understand such sim[le explanation.. i wish i could have debated a honest person, who would have not ran in circles just inorder to escape from accepting his mistake.. nopes, since there is gap of around 9 years.. thus it seems that he was just narrating what some people used to believe.. Since we know that quran was not revealed in the form of a mushaf that if certain portion is lost then we loose the quran, And quran was memorized by several sahaba(ra) including hz zaid(ra) who was alive many years after the battle of yamama until the khilaphat of hz usman(ra) , so naturally even if a certain mushaf was lost that wouldn't have erased from the mind of the sahaba(ra) who had memorized it and other sahaba(ra) who had thier own mushafs.. So this point of common sense leads me to conclude that either it was mistake from the narrator who didnt mention that what mujahid said was regarding belief of some people.. well maraseel of sahaba(ra) are considered sahi, but not tabi'in... And even when they do against common sense... by the way plz quote me those who specifically said that maraseel of mujahid are sahi.. i prefer to see a specifc statement here.
  5. lol so he believed in both contradictory narrations ,lol .. the narration you quoted is weak , if for sake of argument not weak then atleast shaadh.. lol, first understand what is tahrif.. and then after that you will neeed to use your brain..atleast once. to understand what i said..
  6. well Mujahid ibn Jabr was born in Makkah in year 21 of the Islamic calendar, i.e. in the reign of Umar ibn Al-Khattab, the second Caliph. Where as battle of yamama (with musaylamah) took place in around 12hijri.. So this is a mirsal narrations is not acceptable...
  7. well if he considers the hadees he brings in his books are sahi then that means he believed in those... And its ONLY we who understood that in this manner which more plausible but EVEN your own scholars understood that in the same way that he way he counted him among those who believed in tahreef.In the introduction of al-Kāfī, he explicitly said:Verily, you solemnly wished that you possess a book which is sufficient, brings together the entire Islamic sciences of the knowledge of religion within it, wholly satisfies the needs of the student, acts as a reference for the seekers of guidance, and would be used by those who want to attain the knowledge of religion and practice upon it by deriving correct [şaĥīĥ] narrations of the truthful ones (as) and the upright and acted upon traditions from it—through which the compulsory duties of Allāh, the Powerful and Exalted, and the tradition of His Prophet (saws) can be fulfilled. (al-Kāfī, of Abū Ja`far al-Kulaynī (d. 329), volume 1, page 8 [Tehran] it shows that from where does most of your deen came to you.. well the argument was destroyed and crushed and we didnt receive any sensible reply for that.. but just weak answers which are run arounds of the arguments which were already answered..And to remind you be take our deen frrom those none of whom believed that quran as it was revealed from prophet(Saw) was not there with them...unlike kulayni
  8. TAFSEER IBN KATHEER (Then Allah sent down His Sakinah upon him) sent His aid and triumph to His Messenger , or they say it refers to Abu Bakr,(tafseer ibn katheer) TAFSEER JALALAYN Then God sent down His Spirit of Peace upon him, His reassurance — some say this means upon the Prophet, others, that it means upon Abū Bakr So its seems to be a matter of dispute that on whom was sakinah sent anyways it was sent on the one who need it during that situation.. However prophet(Saw) saying that Allah is with "US" itself is agreat virtue, since Allah is with true believers.. just compare the answer of moses(as) he said : And when the two hosts saw each other, the companions of Mûsa (Moses) said: "We are sure to be overtaken." (61) [Mûsa (Moses)] said: "Nay, verily! With me is my Lord, He will guide me." (62) (Al-Shuara ) Moses didnt say with "us" , yet prophet(Saw) said with "us" what would have stopped him from saying Allah is with "me" , like how moses(as) said... see both the situations were very similar...
  9. lol , its apparent that you dont have comprehension understanding skills... anyways someone good in it will surely understand inshallah..
  10. firstly you are jumping to conclusions a bit very quickly.. take a long breath and try to be slow and steady so that you may understand the issue: Secondly the answer to your question is that ibn masood(ra) did infact included those two surahs in his qiraat of quran.. as proved from mutawattir and authentic narrations, and the narrations which speak that he didnt recite them are weak.. however just for a sake of argument lets suppose that he didnt even recite because he didnt consider those to be part of kalam Allah..(its just an assumption actual answer is in point 2) Now if you have some knowledge on this issue then you may know that: The reason for ibn masood(ra) not including the last two surahs in quran was not because of his personal opinion but because of the teaching he got from prophet,(though he didnt knew that later prophet(Saw) said that they are part of quran) Now he believed that what he had along with him as quran was actually kalam Allah as taught by prophet(Saw).. Correct.. So this means that he believed that the kalam of Allah is still preserved along with him in correct and appropriate form as it shoud have been..so when he believes this that quran he has is the same as what prophet(Saw) taught him , then how could he believe in tahreef of quran. Because according to him.. quran was still present in correct form along with him. (i hope you will understand my point) NOw lets see what is the shia belief: the shia belief of tahreef is no way comparable to what ibn masood(ra).. because ibn masood(ra) believed quran HE HAD was correct and appropriate as revealed to prophet(Saw), where as shias believe that its not the way it shoud have been. And they dont have the correct mushnaf along with him unlike ibn masood(ra). So its the classical case of comparing apples with oranges..
  11. If a person is not willing to use his sense or brain then how can one help him.. anyways we are not accusing prophet(Saw) for teaching different things to sahaba(ra)... but this is to be understood in the manner that for a certain thing initially the ruling was different but later the ruling was changed.. but one sahabi knew the first rluing and the second ruling didnt reach him.. yet he cannot be blamed for following that ruling since he didnt do that from his own self but what he did was because of the teaching of prophet(Saw) he received.. So ponder on what i said being unbiased and sensible: And the bottom line is that it is impossible to accuse a sahabi for believing in tahreef, because they learned quran from prophet(Saw).. and even if a sahabi disagrees with another sahabi on certain issue regarding quran then it will not be labelled as tahreef, because at end of the day both of them got quran learned quran from prophet(Saw) and both of them believed that they had the correct and appropriate kalam of Allah along with them.. and that there was no tahreef done in what they considered to be correct which is opposite to what shias believe.....
  12. 1. your first scan was from yanabi mawadda: http://gift2shias.com/2010/02/15/qunduzi-and-his-yanabil-mawadda/ Well we dont consider it to be a sunni book, just see the title of that chapter.. you will realize that its a work of shia scholar.. 2. the book of shah ismail shaheed is not a hadees book its a secondary source plz bring us a primary source of hadees.. 3. then you posted scan of tafseer mazhari, but you failed to even read that the author himself after stating the part you quoted refutes that narration stating that its incorrect.. 4. lastly you posted translation of al-Sawa'iq al-Muhriqah which is also not ahadees book...so stop posting secondary sources and plz post the direct hadees... scan page of secondary source will not make it primary source..hadees!! well i will give you verse of quran dont worry: “Your Wali is only Allah, His Messenger, and the believers who establish prayer and give charity, and they bow down.” (al-Ma’idah:55) it doesnt speak of only one person but the believers in general..
  13. I guess you ment that hz ali(ra) alone is not wali Allah.. infact All the sahaba(ra) were wali Allah... isnt it?
  14. And the bottom line is that it is impossible to accuse a sahabi for believing in tahreef, because they learned quran from prophet(Saw).. and even if a sahabi disagrees with another sahabi on certain issue regarding quran then it will not be labelled as tahreef, because at end of the day both of them got quran learned quran from prophet(Saw) and both of them believed that they had the correct and appropriate kalam of Allah along with them.. and that there was no tahreef done in what they considered to be correct which is opposite to what shias believe.....
  15. well those links shows that the narration you produced is unacceptable .. (there were reasons mentioned there) one of them is that there are other narration from ibn abbas(ra) stating the verse in the same way as we do...
×
×
  • Create New...