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 Members
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

About hoskot

  • Rank
    Level 1 Member

Profile Information

  • Religion

Previous Fields

  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

1,143 profile views
  1. salam bro i found this in fadhail ush-shia page 2/83, Chapter 1: My father (d) related to us from Abdullah bin al-Hussein al-Mueddib from Ahmed bin Ali al-Isfahani from Mohammed bin Aslam at-Tusi from Abu Rajaa from Hemmad bin Zaid from Abdirrahman as-Sarraj from Nafii that Ibn Omar said: When we asked him about Ali bin Abi Talib, the Prophet (s) was angry and said: [note: i did not quote the earlier portion, only the later part of the narration] Whoever loves the family of Mohammed will be saved from the Judgment, the Balance, and the Path. Whoever dies on the love for the family of Mohammed, I guarantee for him a place in Paradise with the prophets.[6] so i guess, if you are a shia, that question is irrelevant to you, Insha Allah.
  2. don't be fooled by a ploy to make iran keep her mouth shut up so that oppression will continue unabated.
  3. come on. be reasonable bro. only nasibis will get offended if you curse abu sufyan and hind. no sunni brothers/sisters hold them in high esteem.
  4. very true - it's not even like comparing an orange to an apple. most even don't know except for imam hassan (as) and imam hussin (as), let alone acknowledging the existence of the purified and goodly progeny. so, i say, someone has cool it down.
  5. let's be pragmatic. for the last 90 years or so, rallying behind "quran and sunnah", has failed the ummah miserably. One very sore point is the ummah failed to appoint a caliph, though the saying is "People disliked to be left even part of the day without being organized into a community (jama’ah)." [ed: without a caliph/leader] moving forward, let's give "quran and ahlul bayt" a chance to prove itself. the bonus point is we don't have worry about quranic verse 2:167. [Shakir 2:167] And those who followed shall say: Had there been for us a return, then we would renounce them as they have renounced us. Thus will Allah show them their deeds to be intense regret to them, and they shall not come forth from the fire. peace.
  6. salam bro i'm quite lost here. if i said something wrong, do correct me pls.
  7. salam bro i know what the preceding verse is all about. so you are saying, in peace time, muslims can quarrel among themselves and not be weak in heart and not lose power, like what's happening today? i believe, quarrelling is the first step towards disobeying the verse [Shakir 3:103] And hold fast by the covenant of Allah all together and be not disunited ..... totally agree with you if the verse ends like this, "then if you quarrel about anything, refer it to Allah and the Messenger."....... (1) for my comprehension skill will then conclude it's permissible to quarrel but we must refer it to Allah and the Messenger. this is applicable to sahaba during the Prophet's lifetime. after the Prophet's demise, logically muslims must refer to Ulil Amri as commanded by verse 4:59 due to the fact that we must obey Ulil Amri as we must obey the Messenger. but surely then if you quarrel about anything, refer it to Allah and the Messenger, if you believe in Allah and the last day; ........ (2). is not the same as in (1) above. so sorry to say, your conclusion is totally out of place, to me. pls do share with us the Prophet's explanation of who are these Ulil Amri. wali and ulil means the same thing? i don't know enuf arabic, tbh. the waqifis, fatahiya etc etc came much later. what amaze me is right after the event of ghadir khum, (was it 3 or 6 months?), people disobeyed the Mesenger. But what is more amazing is what Imam Ali (as) said to the jews, your feet have not yet dried but you have already disobeyed (or something to this effect). i use the word theory so as not to be too blunt about it bro. i believe the info is all out there, even in sahih bukhari/muslim. peace.
  8. in the other thread about theory of evolution, i made a reference to quranists. this is what i mean: [Shakir 4:1] O people! be careful of (your duty to) your Lord, Who created you from a single being and created its mate of the same (kind) and spread from these two, many men and women; and be careful of (your duty to) Allah, by Whom you demand one of another (your rights), and (to) the ties of relationship; surely Allah ever watches over you. and this is from one dr shabbir ahmed (qxp_dr_shabbirAhmed.pdf) 4:1 [The development of human personality can be easier achieved in a benevolent society (9:111, 16:71, 43:32, 59:9). In that situation, the individual and the society complement each other (14:34)] At the outset, it is imperative to know that all people have a common origin, therefore, you must consider all mankind as one community. 10:19, 57:25] O Mankind! Be mindful of your Lord Who began your creation from the creation of life at the unicellular level. There was one life cell and He created its mate, dividing the cell into two, male and female (6:99). [Evolution took place, as has been alluded to in this Book 16:8, 20:50, 21:30, 24:45, 30:20, 31:28, 51:49] Eventually, numerous men and women came into existence on the earth. Be careful of your duty to God in Whose Name you expect rights from one another, and you must strengthen your blood relations. God ever watches over you.
  9. salam i'm just trying to understand your question - no offence intended. does it means, you are brought up to believe in macro evolution? do you mean, macro evolution is a certainty? i believe, the theory of evolution (macro inclusive) applies to all with no exception. here's a quranic verse, it's apparent meaning is beneficial to me in my quest to find the truth. [Shakir 39:18] Those who listen to the word, then follow the best of it; those are they whom Allah has guided, and those it is who are the men of understanding. although i'm not one of his fans but the author has a point against evolution from muslim's viewpoint. i think it's a good read. https://www.muslim-library.com/dl/books/English_THE_EVOLUTION_DECEIT.pdf
  10. 4 monumental events have taken place so far:- 1. balfour declaration http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2017/10/100-years-balfour-declaration-explained-171028055805843.html 2. creation of israel 3. liberation (conquest for some) of jerusalem 4. trump announced jerusalem as capital city of israel. https://www.timesofisrael.com/netanyahu-likens-trumps-jerusalem-speech-to-israels-founding/ https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/889076/Benjamin-Netanyahu-Donald-Trump-Jerusalem-Israel-speech what's next?
  11. your view about those opposing man descends from an LCA is bit faulty. I (maybe quranists are the exception) believe Prophet Adam (as) had no father nor mother. but i surely believe how i evolved from a single cell (zygote is my biology knowledge still holds true) to a fully developed man as i am right now. even if science is able to show to the world what is believed to be an LCA for the present human beings, it's still doesn't contradict my belief since "that LCA" could well be from one of thousands of Adams before the last Prophet Adam (as). maybe, just maybe, if science can demonstrate how living organisms can evolve from non-living organisms, i will review/revise my belief system. no, i'm not trying to impose my view on you, dear friend.
  12. hoskot


    salam bro i found what is below on a forum. base on that, i would say yes to (1) and (2). Second dialogue between Umar and Abdullah Ibn Abass (ra). Umar:"How did you leave your cousin?" Ibn `Abbas said he thought `Umar meant `Abdullah ibn Ja`far; so, he answered: "I left him in the company of his friends." Umar said: "I did not mean him; I meant the greatest among you, Ahl al-Bayt(i.e. Imam Ali)." Ibn `Abbas said: "I left him exiled, irrigating while reciting the Qur'an." `Umar said: "O `Abdullah! I implore you not to be shy but tell me if he is still concerned about the issue of caliphate." Ibn Abass answered in the affirmative. Then `Umer asked: " Does he claim that the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) has selected him for it?" Ibn `Abbas answered: "Yes, indeed; moreover, I even asked my father if there was any statement made by the Messenger of Allah regarding selecting him for the caliphate, and my father informed me that that was the truth." `Umar then said: "The Messenger of Allah held him in very high esteem through his speeches and actions in a way that left no argument nor excuse for anyone, and he kept testing the nation regarding him for some time; nay, even when he was sick [prior to his demise], he wished to nominate him for it, but it was I who stopped him." Imam Abul-Fadl Ahmed ibn Abu Tahir in his book Tarikh Baghdad, indicating his reliable source to be Ibn `Abbas. It is also quoted by the Mu`tazilite scholar who discusses `Umer in his Sharh Nahjul Balaghah, page 97, Vol. 3. Third Dialogue Between Umar and Abdullah Ibn Abass (ra) `Umar said: "O Ibn `Abbas! I can see how wronged your friend [`Ali (as)] is." Ibn `Abbas said: "O commander of the faithful, then affect justice on his behalf." Ibn `Abbas said: "But `Umer pulled his hand from mine and went away whispering to himself for a good while. Then he stopped; so, I rejoined him, and he (Umar) said to me: `O Ibn `Abbas! I do not think that his people denied him [the caliphate] for any reason other than his being too young for it.' Ibn Abass said to him: `By Allah, neither Allah nor His Messenger regarded him as too young when they both ordered him to take Sürat Bara'a (Qur'an, Chapter 9) from him [from Abu Bakr].' Having heard this, he (Umar) turned away from me and started walking fast; so, I left him alone." This dialogue is quoted by authors of books of biographies in their discussions of `Umar, and it is quoted here from Sharh Nahjul Balaghah by the Mu`tazilite scholar; so, refer to page 105 of its third volume.
  13. if you can't disagree with the Prophet, the construct of the verse means you can't disagree with Ulil Amri also. you see bro, verse [Shakir 8:46] And obey Allah and His Messenger and do not quarrel for then you will be weak in hearts and your power will depart, and be patient; surely Allah is with the patient. cleary says "...do not quarrel...". while some people are interpreting the second part of verse [4:59] [Shakir 4:59] O you who believe! obey Allah and obey the Messenger and those in authority from among you; then if you quarrel about anything, refer it to Allah and the Messenger, if you believe in Allah and the last day; this is better and very good in the end. as allowing a possibility for disagreement/dispute/quarrel. if i were present during the revelation of this verse, i would certainly asked the Prophet "who are these Ulil Amri, whose obedience is commanded by Allah". the big question for those who seek the truth: shia has such ahadith. to me, it's logical to ask the Prophet and illogical not to ask. actually i have a theory for this discrepancy. the early muslim caliphs forbade the recording/dissemination of ahadith related with Ulil Amri. as a result, peope are of the opinion Ulil Amri are rulers or scholars or military commanders or sinless imams.
  14. actually, i did google a little bit before my previous posting Currently there are two major obstacles to the reconstruction of The Third Temple. One pertains to its location. The next temple can only be built where the two previous temples stood because the Holy of Holies must be on the exact same spot. But no one knows for sure where the previous temples were located on the Temple Mount. Most scholars believe that they stood where the Dome of the Rock currently stands. That conclusion may be wrong, but there is no way to prove the exact location without conducting archeological excavations on the Temple Mount, something which is currently prohibited by the Muslims. time to rebuild the third temple? It is only a matter of time now. The Israel Minister of Housing and Construction Uri Ariel on Friday expressed his wish to see the construction of a “Third Temple” in place of the Al-Aqsa Mosque that is currently occupying the Temple Mount. Uri Ariel said “The first Temple was destroyed in 586 BCE, the second Temple in 70 CE, and ever since, the Jewish People have been mourning its loss.” He then went on to say “Al-Aqsa Mosque is currently in the place of the temple, despite the temple being much holier than it. Al-Aqsa Mosque is only the third most holy mosque in Islam.” “Now that Israel has once again become a Jewish sovereign state, the desire to rebuild the Temple is growing stronger and stronger” he added. https://www.israelvideonetwork.com/finally-israel-officially-calling-for-third-temple-to-replace-al-aqsa-mosque/
  • Create New...