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


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About kalaam

  • Rank
    Level 2 Member

Contact Methods

  • Facebook

Profile Information

  • Location
    Face Book
  • Religion

Previous Fields

  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

1,412 profile views
  1. wow. such an explosion of emotions. something that doesn't let him think clearly. our sunni leader was attacked just a few days ago, and many were killed. but the shias are actually good at crying foul.
  2. If anyone does research, he will find that the money saudi govt throws in refuting shias is not even 5 % of what Iranian govt uses against Sunnis. Personally, I think it is not even 1 %, but just saying 5 % to be on the safe path.
  3. actually we all are not brothers and sisters in islam. Remember, Shiaism is like poison for Muslims. No one loves to include poison in his body, similarly Muslims are a body, this poison is an outsider. We don't consider it a part of us. We are indeed full of hate for this cult, since we have studied it in detail. Its claim of brotherhood are open fraud, anyhow, I personally don't try to waste time of people if they are in love with Shia Islam. Everyone has his choice, but there will be no choice in hereafter.
  4. lol, a shia with even a knife will not even smell the scent of Masjid nabawi (saww) for a million years. Rather remember my these words, Shiism will not expand now, it will only contract till it is in Isfahan and Qum only.
  5. Since you want to prove your claim by hook or crook, so you will never bother to look at my arguments. Do you even remember our last discussion, Majlisi had graded a narration as hasan, which means he authenticated it, and you said it is weak, because of this and that problem with it, now how would it be if I said, don't tell me the hadith is not authentic since Majlisi authenticated it? Now here I am proving that the saying of jamhur considering it madani is not correct, and I am giving evidences, and you are telling me that I should not tell you that this opinion is wrong? That is a big joke
  6. This is very logical, for he mentioned his view as mentioned in some books, and then also mentioned the difference of opinion regarding it. And how do you say that the surah being madani is his actual position? Similarly your mentioning of Tafsir al Baghawi shouldn't count here, since he mentioned the difference of opinion here only. Ibn Abi Zamaneen (d. 399 H) is a much earlier scholar than any of the mufassireen except for Imam tabari (d. 310) that you have mentioned, and Zamakhshari (d. 438 H) is also a much earlier mufassir than any of the scholars except Imam Tabari that you have mention
  7. He mentioned his view based on the saying of jamhur according to what is mentioned in al bahr, and then went on to discuss the other opinion regarding it. And I don't know from where do you consider that his real position is that it is madani, prove it. This is absolutely not his view at all. This is wrong, since I showed that nine scholars of the past absolutely declared it makki, and it is also mentioned in some books that jamhoor consider it to be makki, so your presenting one side of the argument is highly misleading, and deceptive. To say that it is the view of jamhur that the surah is
  8. How can I be doing tadlis when what I have mentioned is a conclusive proof that according to the mufassir himself, it is Makki, and the rest is the mentioning of difference in the opinion regarding it. It doesn't affect what the mufassir himself said in his book. And I mentioned only what the author of the book himself declared. I didn't bother about what he discusses afterwards regarding who considered it makki, and who didn't. So these ten mufassireen considered the surah to be makki, so how can the claim of jamhoor considering it as madani surah be considered right? Who is the jamhoor, ten
  9. We know it much better than the Shia religion, who even copied the terms used in hadith from us.
  10. Open a new topic, and lets discuss on the hadith of ghadeer khumm in detail whether it proves Ali (ra) as first imam or not. I will copy the discussion in our forum as well. Give a link to the new topic here too. So you are saying that this necessary characteristic of imams, if told to shias of their time, would have caused the Shias turning their backs to the Imams? That is a funny assumption, I am amused.
  11. This is one of the reasons he gave for the fabricated narration brought by the Shia scholar in his book. If you want to refute him, refute all his points, not just one. Secondly, 1. It is mentioned in Tafsir Kashaf 4/194 سورة الانسان مكية. وهى إحدى وثلاثون آية 2. It is mentioned in Tafsir Muqatil ibn Sulayman 3/425 سورة الإنسان مكية، عددها إحدى وثلاثون آية 3. Tafsir al Razi, 30/235 سورة الإنسان إحدى وثلاثون آية مكية 4. Tafsir Alusi 29/150 سورة الإنسان وتسمى سورة الدهر والابرار والأمشاج وهل أتي وهي مكية عند الجمهور على ما في البحر 5. Tafsir Baidhawi 5/425 سورة الإنسان مكية وآيها إحدى وثلاثون آ
  12. There is no evidence in our books as far as I know that whether the Prophet (saww) halted at eighty lashes, or this was one of the punishment he gave as had for drinking wine, but this is clear that Umar (ra) fixed it. He is going to break his stick while beating the rope with it.
  13. The narration that prophet (saww) didn't fix the hadd for drinking wine in our books is more than enough for destroying the sand castle that you built.
  14. It was viewed as hadd. Again, for the pw, this narration is a shia narration, sahih sanad, present in your book al Kafi علي بن إبراهيم، عن محمد بن عيسى، عن يونس، عن أبي بصير، عن أبي عبدالله (عليه السلام) قال: قلت له: كيف كان يجلد رسول الله (صلى الله عليه وآله)؟ قال: فقال: كان يضرب بالنعال و يزيد كلما أتي بالشارب ثم لم يزل الناس يزيدون حتى وقف على ثمانين، أشار بذلك علي (عليه السلام) على عمر فرضي بها It is narrated from Abu Basir that he said : I said to to Imam Jafar: How did the Prophet صلى الله عليه وآله strike for wine (drinking)? He said: He would strike by the sandals and increase w
  15. Funny reply again. The majority of the shia companions of the imams didn't consider them infallibles, they were not the Sunni companions, they were the Shia companions, as clearly mentioned in the book of your shaheed al thani. So why would you bring christians here? As far as your saying that the imamate of Ali (ra) was clearly announced to the entire ummah, that is a thing considered as myth by Sunnis. So don't present myths to us to prove your arguments. If all Shias of this forum condemn atleast Bashar al Assad al nusairi, or even if only a dozen of their major scholars from Iran condemn
  • Create New...