Search the Community

Text of sermon 3 or sermon shaqshaqiyah of nahjul balagha is here https://www.al-islam.org/nahjul-balagha-part-1-sermons/sermon-3-allah-son-abu-quhafah Sources of this Sermon Allama Baqir Majlisi in his historical work Bihar ul Anwar narrated all the versions of this Khutbah Shaqshaqiyah from all primary shia hadith books along with some other reports in the chapter named: باب شكاية أمير المؤمنين صلوات الله عليه عمن تقدمه من المتغلبين الغاصبين "Chapter of Ameer al mumineen's PBUH Complaints about those who preceded him from the oppressors who took his right" Online Source to this chapter from Bihar ul Anwar: http://ablibrary.net/فارسی/کتابها/7645_بحار الأنوار(29)/صفحه_545 Authenticity of this sermon from Shia Scholar and Researcher of Bihar ul Anwar Shaikh Asif Muhsini. Asif Muhsini in his "Mashara'at Bihar Al Anwar", said: اورد فيه المصنف ( 69 ) شاهداً من الاحاديث والروايات ، والمذكورة برقم (17) معتبرة سنداً فقط لا غير ] [ مشرعة بحار الانوار / محمد اصف محسني ج 2 ص 34 ] "the Musannif(Al Majlisi) has placed in this chapter 69 narrations, only that narration which is number (17) has an acceptable chain of narrators" [Mashra'at bihar al Anwar 2/34] So the only reliable narration out of all 69 narrations in the chapter is 17. Which in fact is not sermon of shaqshaqiyah. Check from online source of Bihar ul Anwar Here Below is the scan of what Shaikh Asif Muhsini said in his "Mashara'at Bihar Al Anwar". Some more thoughts on this fabricated sermon. Jazak Alah khairan.

Sincere Questions for our Shi’a brethren 1. Imamat for Imamiya Ithna Ashari Shi’as is considered as Usul e Deen and in maqam and position it is considered greater than Nabuwwah or atleast equal to Nabuwwah. We would like to ask you that how has this Usul e Deen not stated in Quran al Kerim. Allah Almighty time and again tells us to Believe in Allah and the Ambiyaa in Kutub wa Suhuf e Ambiyaa a.s, in Maa’d in Jannah in Jahannam in Meezan in Malak and many other important matters. But no where in the whole Quran al Kerim are we commanded or told to Believe in Imams or the understanding of “Imamat” is not in line with Quranic dawah. How can an Usul e Deen be established when it finds no mention in the Quran al Kerim? 2. Imam ‘Ali a.s did not consider the rebels of Shaam as Kuffar for they did not believe in the Imamah/Khilafah of Amirul Momineen and also those who did not accept Imamah of Imam al Hasan a.s were not unbelievers. So does a disbelief in any Usul e Deen imply Kufr and if not then please give us your definition of what “Usul e Deen “ is. 3. In Nahjul Balagha we do not find any support for the Shi’a concept of Imamah raher on contrary maters of Imamah wal Khilafah were considered as per consensus of Muhajireen wal Ansaar and at many places Imam ‘Ali himself stated that people have no option but to have an Amir be it good or bad. A sincere study of Nahjul Balagha will prove that the understanding of Imamah which was later developed by Shi’a was not the Manhaj and belief of Salaf e Saliheen and is a later innovation. 4. Is Khilafah of Imam ‘Ali a.s mansoos MinAllah if yes then how can Imam be ready for arbitration to chose a Caliph whereas this mansab is from Allah Almighty and not men. This amal of Imam Ali and also of Imam Hasan a.s proves that Khilafah is not Mansoos MinAllah in the sense the shi’a believe it btu rather as per the agreed upon choice of the best of Muslims of their time and that decision is condiered Mansoos MinAllah. 5. We would like to ask the Shi’a that whether the Promise of Allah Almighty in Surah Nur to give Khilafah and then peace and security to the Muslims , whether this promised has been fulfilled or we wait for time of Imam al Mahdi a.s for this to be fulfilled. In Nahjul Balagha the advises and words of Imam ‘Ali a.s to Hazrat ‘Umar r.a is a shining proof that Imam referred to a promise from Allah in terms of victories of Muslims over Kaiser wal Kisra. And referred to Khalifa as string for the beads. And many others words of wisdom from ‘Amir a.s are shining proof that Salaf e Saliheen understood Khilafat e Rashida r.a as fulfilling this promise of Allah for khilafah to Muslims . 6. Tahrif e Quran: The shi’a state that it is foundational belief of Shi’a Imamiya that there is not a Tahrif of a single Alif or a letter and it is present with us as it was before pure and in original form. Shaykh Saduq, Shaykh Tusi, Sharif Murtaza, Ayatullah Khoei and others are all unianimous on it. We have to give them the credit of trying to educate the Juhalaa among the Shi’a but we ask the Shi’a that do they consider those who believe in Tahrif of Quran al Kerim as Muslims anymore or Kuffar. However it is saddening that the shi’a do not do so as Al-Majlisi, Tabrisi, Qummi and Al-Mufid and others believe in Tahrif e Quran and yet the shia still looka t these scholars as leaders of guidance. Clearly this is a sign of their dishonest and hypocritical stand! Any sane and sincere looker can see through this fallacy and deception. I really believe that because of the stance of Shi’a towards Quran al Kerim they have produced very very scarce and few Huffaz and even they cannot meet the caliber of the Huffaz from Ahle Sunnah Wal Jamaah. The urge and great love for Tilawah and organizing the study of Quran al kerim and to do Hifz is found in Ahle Sunnah and not in shi’a and the reason is centuries of their Aqaaed of Tahrif e Quran and doubts over its being in original form and also in their notion that it is not present in the Tartib ‘Ali a.s had compiled. But now in Iran a lot of people are arising from this deception the late Ayatullah Tabatabai felt this big gap and hence produced a Tafsir known as Tafsir al Mizan. 7. Sahaba: In Quran al kerim, Nahjul Balagha, Sahifah e Sjaadiya if we look at the understanding of Sahaba then only way of Ahle Sunnah wal Jamaah is in line with Quran al Kerim and Nahjul Balagha and Sahifah e Imam Ali bin al Hussain. The fact that their praise in mentioned in Quran al Kerim and authentic ahadith is enough a proof for the Fazilat e Sahaba e Kiraam. The Shi’a never attack the companions of Imams and it seems from their ways that they honor ‘Ali a.s more than Rasoolallah saws as they do not realise the branches are not like the root. And the Adab and love of Rasoolallah Saws would have demanded from them to keep their tongues shut in matters of Sahaba e Kiraam and realized that they had believed and occumpanied Nabi e Akhiruzamaan saws and fought for Islam and laid their lives and wealth for the cause of Islam and spread the Word of Tawhid across the world. This is the reason that we find less love for Quran al Kerim, Implementing Sunnah and Jihad in the Shi’a as Sahaba e Kiraam are the real Pioneers in them and this Deen spread through them. This is why very few books on Seerah and few Naat khaawn were found among the Shi’a. This is why their hearts do not Brim with Zikr e Mustafa (Saws) like you find with Ahle Sunnah. Their support of Yahud wal Nasara and despising Jihad and how Allah Almighty has always strengthened Borders of Islam through followers of Sahaba e Kiraam and Ahle Sunnah wal Jamaah is another shining proof of the Shia being on misguidance. We will only focus on Usul. I fail to understand how can the reports of Holy Prophet Saws be relied upon unless we do not remove the shi’a way of thinking. In terms of Ilm e Rijaal and science of Hadith Shi’a cannot match the hardwork and knowledge base of Ahle Sunnah wal Jamaah. The foundation of Shia thought process is very weak but that of Ahle Sunnah is like steel so on what should one base his/her Aqaaed. Taqqiyah, Rajat and Badaa all these aqaaed are indeed not in line with understanding of the Quran al Kerim by the Salaf e Saliheen and hence are later innovations of the Shi’a. We seek sincere answers of the Shi’a to these questions of ours and ask them that is not their line of thinking actually trying to paint a very negative picture of First Muslims and What hope does his generation or many others have in a revolution and change and Tazkiyaa wa Tasfiyaa if he Greatest of all Teachers Nabi e Akhiruzamaan Saws could not bring such a change only handful of Muslims remained true to their belief and then their belief of Imamat and Taqqiyah . I believe these are genuine questions every shia should ponder over and Allah has power over all things and He alone is Al-Hadi

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم Assalam o Alaikum, Wa Rehmatullah, Wa Barakatuhu. GHADIR? CALIPHATE OR FRIENDLY LOVING RELATIONSHIP? قال الله تعالى في الآية 6 من سورة الأحزاب : (النَّبيُّ أولى بالمؤمنين من أنفسهم) قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم أَنَا أَوْلَى بِالْمُؤْمِنِينَ مِنْ أَنْفُسِهِمْ (Bukhari, Muslim, Trimizi, Abu Dawud, Nasai & others) Same words Prophet s.a.w.w repeated in Ghadir, before saying Man kuntu Maula'hu. أحمد في مسنده 19302 حدثنا حُسين بن محمد وأبو نعيم، المعنى، قالا: حدثنا فِطْرٌ، عن أبي الطُّفيل قال:جمع عليٌّ رضي الله عنه الناسَ في الرَّحْبة، ثم قال لهم: أنْشُدُ اللهَ كلَّ امرىءٍ مسلمٍ سَمِعَ رسولَ الله صلى الله عليه وسلم يوم غَديرِ خُمٍّ ما سمع، لَمَّا قام، فقام ثلاثون من الناس، وقال أبو نعيم: فقام ناسٌ كثير، فشهدوا حين أخذه بيده، فقال للناس: "أتَعْلَمُونَ أنِّي أوْلَى بالمؤمنينَ مِنْ أنْفُسِهِمْ؟" قالوا: نعم يا رسولَ الله. قال: "مَنْ كُنْتُ مَوْلاهُ، فَهذَا مولاهُ، اللّهُمَّ وَالِ مَنْ وَالاهُ وَعَادِ مَنْ عادَاهُ" قال: فخرجتُ وكأنَّ في نفسي شيئاً، فلَقِيتُ زيدَ بنَ أرقم، فقلتُ له: إني سمعتُ علياً رضي الله عنه يقول كذا وكذا. قال: فما تُنكر؟ قد سمعتُ رسولَ الله صلى الله عليه وسلم يقول ذلك له. First Prophet s.a.w.w asked a question that: "Do I not have more rights over your lives than yourselves? All answered: Yes Then Prophet s.a.w.w said: Of whomever I am Mawla, Ali is his Mawla. And Immediately after this Prophet s.a.w.w said: O Allah, befriend whosoever befriends him and be the enemy of whosever is hostile to him. Meaning, Mu'walat (love) and Mu'adat (enmity). Not caliphate or leadership. If it had been for caliphate then Prophet s.a.w.w would have said more explicit & unambiguous words like "O Allah love those who FOLLOW him or OBEY him, and be the enemy of those who don't FOLLOW him or DISOBEY him". The version of ghadir where it is said, Prophet s.a.w.w gave sermon of Ghadir to appoint Imam Ali a.s as caliph/successor after him, as per orders of Allah i.e Maida 67, is a clear fabrication. In Maida 67 protection was given By Allah to His Prophet s.a.w.w against the disbelievers/kafirs. [Maida 67] O Messenger, announce that which has been revealed to you from your Lord, and if you do not, then you have not conveyed His message. And Allah will protect you from the people. Indeed, Allah does not guide the disbelieving people. At ghadir were there any kuffar (disbelievers)? Who also performed hajj along with Prophet s.a.w.w? In fact, it was not the first time when Prophet s.a.w.w had declared those words about Imam Ali a.s. He s.a.w.w had also stated the same many days before the ghadir to one of his companion, when he expressed his anger about Ali in front of Prophet s.a.w.w. أحمد في مسنده 22945 حدثنا الفضلُ بن دُكَينٍ، حدثنا ابن أَبي غَنِيَّةَ، عن الحَكَم، عن سعيد بن جُبَير، عن ابن عباس عن بُرَيدةَ، قال: غَزَوتُ مع عليٍّ اليمنَ، فرأَيتُ منه جَفْوةً، فلما قَدِمْتُ على رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم ذَكَرْتُ عليّاً، فتَنَقَّصتُه، فرأَيتُ وجهَ رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم يَتغيَّرُ، فقال: "يا بُرَيدةُ، أَلستُ أَوْلى بالمُؤمنِينَ من أَنفُسِهم؟" قلت: بلى يا رسول الله. قال: "من كنتُ مَوْلاه، فعليٌّ مَوْلاه". Shaykh Mufid reported in Kitab al-Irshad pp.111-112 Buraida reported: "I wanted the earth to split open for me so that I could be swallowed into it. Then I said: I seek refuge in Allah from the anger of Allah and the anger of the Apostle of Allah. Apostle of Allah, forgive me. I will never hate Ali and I will only speak good of him." The Prophet forgave him. Even Imam Ali a.s himself did not understood anything about caliphate/leadership. Narrated `Abdullah bin `Abbas: Ali bin Abu Talib came out of the house of Allah's Messenger during his fatal illness. The people asked, "O Abu Hasan (i.e. `Ali)! How is the health of Allah's Messenger this morning?" `Ali replied, "He has recovered with the Grace of Allah." `Abbas bin `Abdul Muttalib held him by the hand and said to him, "In three days you, by Allah, will be ruled (by somebody else ), And by Allah, I feel that Allah's Apostle will die from this ailment of his, for I know how the faces of the offspring of `Abdul Muttalib look at the time of their death. So let us go to Allah's Messenger and ask him who will take over the Caliphate. If it is given to us we will know as to it, and if it is given to somebody else, we will inform him so that he may tell the new ruler to take care of us." `Ali said, "By Allah, if we asked Allah's Apostle for it (i.e. the Caliphate) and he denied it us, the people will never give it to us after that. And by Allah, I will not ask Allah's Messenger for it." [Sahih al-Bukhari 4447] Imam Shafai r.a words about ghadir. Same Imam Shafai who is famous for his words "If love for Muhammads ‘aal’ (family) is Rafdh (heresy). Then Jinn and Men bear witness I am a Rafidhi (heretic)." Being a Rafidhi he also had not considered ghadir in meaning of caliphate. What is meant by that is the concept of love for the sake of Islam, as Allah says:{that is because Allah is the Mawla of those who believe, and the disbelievers have no Mawla (Qur’an 47: 11)}. So the hadith does not say that ‘Ali should be the caliph after the death of the Messenger of Allah, it indicates that ‘Ali is one of the close friends of Allah, to whom love and support is due for the sake of Allah. [Haqbat min al-tareekh P-187] Jazak Allah Khairan

Latest publication from the Boss: التدابير النبوية لحفظ الرسالة الإلهية (The Prophetic measures to save/protect the Divine Message & Khilafah) It is widely accepted by people with foresight and at least 3 brain cells, that prevention is more sensible than trying to find a cure. It is also accepted by all Muslims that the Holy Prophet (s), is the wisest being to have ever existed/will ever exist, in all universes, pre-history, post-history, across all dimensions, and all worlds. Therefore, one might assume, that he would adopt preventive measures to save the prophetic message in the face of the expected coup by the sick-hearted and brain-dead. This is what this book tries to present. A set of clear measures and carefully planned procedures, without which no evidence of authentic Mohammedan Islam would have remained today. http://archive.alhaydari.com/ebook/ar/tadabir.pdf (only 600 pages)

List of non-Arab Sahabah Persian[edit] Salman al-Farsi - He was born in Persia but embarked on a long and continuous journey (away from his homeland) in search of the truth. He ultimately reached his destination in Arabia, when he met Muhammad and converted to Islam. It was his suggestion to build a trench in the Battle of the Trench that ultimately resulted in a defeat for the forces of the enemies of the Muslims. Fayruz al-Daylami - He was sent out by Muhammad to assassinate Aswad Ansi, who claimed prophethood in Yemen. Munabbih ibn Kamil- He was a Persian knight. He had two sons, who were both Islamic scholars. Salim Mawla Abu-Hudhayfah - He was a highly respected and valued Muslim (among his fellow Muslims), who died while fighting against the forces of Musaylimah during the Wars of Apostasy. Umar ibn al-Khattāb suggested he would have designated Salim as his successor to the Caliphate had he still been alive. Link/resource:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_non-Arab_Sahabah Salim Mawla Abu Hudhayfa From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (Redirected from Salim Mawla Abu-Hudhayfah) Salim Mawla Abu Hudhayfa (Arabic: سالم مولى أبي حذيفة‎) was one of the sahaba of the Prophet Muhammad. He was named so since he was the freed slave of Abu Hudhayfa ibn 'Utba, see Mawla. He participated in the battle against Musaylimah as a standard bearer of the Muhajireen and displayed unexpected valour. His people feared that he would show weakness or be too terrified to fight. To them he said, "If you manage to overtake me, what a miserable bearer of the Qur'an I shall be." He then valiantly plunged into the enemy ranks and eventually died in battle. The Prophet Muhammad is quoted as saying: "Learn the Qur'an from four persons: Abd-Allah ibn Mas'ud, Salim Mawla Abu Hudhayfa, Ubayy ibn Kab and Muadh ibn Jabal." Taha Husain, a 20th century Sunni Islamic scholar “ When Umar was dying, he was questioned about his successor, and he said: ‘If Abu Obaida bin al-Jarrah were alive, I would have made him the khalifa. If Khalid bin al-Walid were alive, I would have appointed him the amir of the Muslims. And ifSalim, the client of Abu Hudhaifa, were living today, then I would have designated him as your ruler.' This Salim was a slave who came from Istakhr in Persia. He was emancipated, and became a ‘mawali' (client) of Abu Hudhaifa. He was well-known for his piety. Many Muslims deferred to him in matters of Faith even in the times of the prophet Muhammad. Sometimes he led the Muslims in prayer also. He was killed in the Ridda wars during the khilafat of Abu Bakr. He was a devout and God-fearing man.[1] ” Ali Asgher Razwy, a 20th century Shi'a Twelver Islamic scholar states: “ It was really unfortunate for the Umma that Salim was dead or else Umar would have made him his successor, and he might have made an excellent khalifa.[1] ” He had contributed in all major battles, such as Badr, Uhud, Ahzab etc., so he is a Badrian Companion of the Prophet Muhammad. Link/resource: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salim_Mawla_Abu_Hudhayfa

Salam, It is a universally accepted principle in Islam that we all are slaves of Allah. Not a single Muslim disputes this. So, we are literally owned by Allah. Moreover, it is also universally accepted that the entire earth and all that its contains belong exclusively to Allah. To put it in a more familiar way, the entire territories of the United States, for instance, belongs to Allah Alone. Thirdly, it is universally accepted by all Muslims that the Kingdom of the heavens and earth belongs exclusively to Allah. Sovereignty only belongs to Allah, and never to the people or rulers of any land. There is no Muslim on this earth who disputes any of these three principles. Meanwhile, as slaves, we have do NOT have any wilayah, by ourselves, over anything, not even over ourselves. A slave owns nothing; and wilayah refers to control and authority. No slave, by himself, has wilayah over another slave. We are all equal in this respect. Even the Prophet and the Imams, 'alaihim al-salam, by themselves have zero wilayah over anyone. So, before a slave can exercise wilayah over another slave, he MUST derive his wilayah directly or indirectly from Allah, the only Wali. Also, no slave can exercise wilayah upon the land of his Owner without the Latter's explicit permission. Whoever arrogates to himself, without permission from Allah, wilayah over His land or slave is a taghut, as all Muslims unanimously agree. The question then is: did Yazid b. Mu'awiyah derive his wilayah directly or indirectly from Allah? What about the khalifahs before him?

Salam everyone :) I would like to share with u my thoughts about "Khulafaa Rashidun" which I explained in video.Thank u for watching and leaving comments. عليكم بسنتي وسنة الخلفاء الراشدين

Voila... الشيخ الأزهري أحمد كريمة - الخلافة لآل البيت<--

MSS

A little advice for Sunni & Shia

Amazing video implicitly identifying the 12 immediate successors of Prophet Muhammad (S), counted in Sahih Bukhari, Sahih Muslim & others...

(salam) I found this beautiful admission by the Ahl al-Sunnah on what really happened at Ghadeer Khumm: “According to the elders of our family, namely Mawlana Ghulam ‘Ali Qadiri, in his Mishkaat an-Nabuwat, the Prophet’s declaring Hadrat ‘Ali as the Master (Mawla) of all Believers was the statement which identified Hadrat ‘Ali as the possessor of the Khilafat i-Akbar (Major Khilafah). Hadrat ‘Ali was appointed by Rasulullah (S) as a Khalifa, while Hadrat Abu Bakr was appointed by Hadrat Umar as a Khalifa. While both Khilafahs are valid, they are not the same”. http://ahmedamiruddi...-the-shaykhayn/ Does any Sunnee here think these people made a mistake? If yes, what are your reasons? Thanks.