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

Merdan

Advanced Member
  • Content Count

    479
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Merdan

  • Rank
    Level 2 Member

Previous Fields

  • Gender
    Male
  1. To you the issue might not be 'obeying the imam', however, the concept of imamate is clearly defined to you and everybody. As to 'who the imam is', well, a lot of things in the Quran are ambiguous. So if we can derive a clear cut meaning for other ambiguouis items; then imamate shouldn't be different. It's not by default, and I don't see why this would constitute blame to shias. So we know that Allah subhanahu wa taala makes some prophets as messengers and imams, hence it would be divine.You already know that there is vested authority with imams when prophets are not present and after the las
  2. Kind of going off topic. "Muslims" back then, even though they may have fought for the Prophet saws and accepted Islam, still had the capactiy (and did) to disobey the Prophet SAWs. To disobey things straight from his mouth. To be a Muslim, technically imamate wouldn't be involved per se. But what happens when you blanlently reject anything the Prophet SAWS says? (I'm not talking about knowing something is a sin, but you have weak faith, so you do it anyway. I'm talking about just flat out rejecting it and saying I ain't doing that.) Obeying the imam is just as clear as going to hajj or prayin
  3. First, you can't single out shias. Sunnis also put imamat (or a version of it) as a fundamental. i.e. if you don't believe that abu bekr is the rightful, you are ahlul biddah. If you don't don't believe in imamate per the shia perspective, then you just aren't a mumin. There were many so called muslims who heard from the prophet saws that there wouldn't be another prophet, but yet sided with self proclaimed prophets during the rebellion of abu bekr's time. this can't be the prophet's saws fault, right? we can go on and on. unfortunately, these muslims did have the capacity completely disregard
  4. It's not far fetched that the masses disobyed the Prophet saws, as they did disobey the prophet on religious matters on occasions. we both know this. maybe Abu bekr and omer thought they were doing the right thing. but we know where good intention might lead to, so to speak. in the end, they're accountable for their actions. call it what you want. if instead they had informed ali a.s. and they didn't just claim themselves to the throne, then maybe the real meaning of the ghadeer proclamation would be known the same by everybody. No, it's not like imam a.s. said to abu bekr, 'okay, now you'r
  5. To do your first quote, we have to do your second quote. Your argument is that the people did not see imam (a.s..) as divine and that their mindset is proof and history is history, etc. .... Somehow... you say that since people didn't have a particular mindset, imam cannot possibly be divine, but unfortunately history shows that peoples' mindsets can be corrupted. taraweeh is one example that i showed you, and that you can't explain why the vast majority of people directly corrupted the commadment of the prophet saws. you claim to know real history (that imam a.s. was cool with the establishe
  6. Then explain this to me: how can peoples' mindset go from: not doing taraweeh (because it was commanded by the Prophet saws) ----> taraweeh is a great sunnah. And although imam was entrusted by the Prophet saws on so many levels (while he was younger), the elders did not inform him of this one.
  7. you're so right. i forgot to add to the fact that the Prophet salallahu aleyhi was sallam also entrusted imam as a leader in the battlefield... a teacher of islam to the residents of yemen and beyond... a judge in islamic matters..... these are qualities right? and thanks for bringing up a great point bro, now if the elders are supposedly most qualified for leading the ummah and religious matters, why didn't they bury the prophet saws or not even attend his funeral? okay, but don't think for a second imam was cool everything and how it went down. also, imam practically "conceded" his rightful
  8. Shias have a right to question this because they didn't even bother to tell Imam aleyhis sallam. You might say, 'well he was too young to handle it'. Well that wouldn't make sense, since he was responsible for burying the holy prophet salallahu aleyhi was sallam. They might need some maturity. Doesn't quite make sense, because even in Bokhari (Volume 8, Book 82, Hadith 817 btw), it says that Imam aleyhis sallam opposed this so called election, and at the very least, they have to admit omer threatened to burn his house down. Sure, but there's probably more to it. Because think about it, why c
  9. Correct me if I'm wrong here, but your argument is that since Imam Ali a.s. "willingly" partcipated in the election process, he validated the process that determined the caliph (after Omer) To test that logic, I raised the question: Since Imam Ali a.s. "willingly" particpated in the arbriation process, does that mean he actually validated the process that determined the caliph, therfore conceding Moawiyah was right?
  10. I don't understand how I'm mixing things up. This is also a process that Imam a.s. validated, because he particpated. Here's what you said before: Arbritation is a very compatiable and comparable example to the topic of your thread. So either tell me how I'm mixing things up, or: If imam a.s. validated the process of arbritation (which he did, and this is independent of the results), does that mean moawiyah is entitled to caliph and was right?
  11. Thanks, but before I would discuss this further, I would want him to answer my question.
  12. If you're supposedly sticking to facts of what Imam a.s. did (as opposed to looking at the intentions behind them), then why don't we all become followers of Moaviyah? Let's take this sentence of yours: Based on your thinking, you probably think that mowiyah is the rightful caliph over Imam a.s. Is that right? Do you believe that Moawiyah is rightful because Imam a.s. agreed to the process of arbritation?
  13. Ironically, you have a sahih hadith that says Imam Mehdi afj will appear 'suddenly' and beginning of his destiny will have started. Where do you get that appear means "being born"?
  14. If you were actually trying to put this in context, you would look at the other letters in NB to get a better idea of what Imam a.s. thinks as well as other shia hadith, not just come up with your own "shia history". I understand what happened before Seffin and, to be technical, notice the quotation marks. I'm asking you, what happened afterwards with the 'arbitration'. Because Imam a.s. was willing to even consider it, does that make you think that Ali a.s. was thinking muawiyah was right?
  15. Ok, so now you're basing this on "history", rather than your initial argument of the letters in NB. You understand that if you looked at all the letters in NB, you would be debunked. Question: You agree that moawiyah was deceitful and a liar. Does Imam's willingness to 'concede/negociate' mean that moawiyah was right all along/did he approve of mowiyah's leadership, according to you? Pureethics made this point before.
×
×
  • Create New...