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

Ayatullah Fadlallah

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

  • Advanced Member

Salaam alaykum.

I'd been thinking about this recently and it was mentioned in another thread. I was wondering if anybody could summarise the controversy over A. Fadlallah and the arguments for and against doing taqleed of him. I'm particularly interested to hear about his approach to religion (i.e. his background philosophical views) which makes him stand out.

I know there is lots of things on the internet about this topic but I am asking for a summary so I don't have to read all of this myself. I hope this thread won't turn into a debate.

Perhaps each participant can limit themselves to 150 words unless using bulleted lists or providing links to other discussions, threads, web resources, etc.

Objectivity rather than devotion to entrenched positions will be appreciated

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 90
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Salam My sister made a summary of all the issues concerning the Syed. http://www.shiachat.com/forum/index.php?sh...t=0&start=0

Ayt. Sistani also says misyar is permissible a lot of accusations against Ayt Fadlullah are false. best thing is to email him bayynat.org.lb

(salam) Do visit Official website of AyatAllah Fadlallah of lebanon http://english.bayynat.org.lb

Posted Images

  • Advanced Member

Salam

My sister made a summary of all the issues concerning the Syed.

Let me just brief you on some of his beliefs (on which I've debated with his followers) - tawassul: not permissible, tarawih: permissible, misyaar: permissible, tragedy of lady zahra (S): improbable, wilayat-e-takwiniya: ghuluw tendencies, world created for the ahlul bayt (A) [based on wilayat-e-takwiniya]: ghuluw tendencies, aliyyun waliyallah in adhan: makruh [when according to most of the scholars it is mustahab], dua-e-tawassul: absolutely false and fabricated, dua-e-nudba (parts of it esp. tawassul parts): fabricated, ziyarat-e-ashura: fabricated [according to an update by his follower], hadith al-kisa: some parts are weak [and we ought to be cautious], cursing the oppressors: an absolute no-no, most importantly, according to him, wilayat/imamate: not an essential part of islam OR shi'ism.

http://www.shiachat.com/forum/index.php?sh...t=0&start=0

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

Thank-you Sr. Whizbee. That was a very good summary. Just for clarification for everyone...

A link to explain what misyar is:

...in brief: a marriage common in Saudi Arabia where the woman gives up rights like being provided for by her husband and living with him...the controversy is about it just being used for pleaseure like muta.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikah_Misyar

Wilaayatul Takweeneeyah = Existential/Genetic Guardianship

...in brief: the Imams (A) have special powers.

http://www.shiachat.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=234929333

participants may like to add other links to noteworthy discussions on the issues, but these 2 I thought were the least well known

Also:

"ghuloo" means "extreme" as in Imam Ali (A) is divine or the Imams (A) are incarnations of God (God forbid!).

"taraaweeh" is the night prayer that sunnis perform in congregation throughout Ramadan in which the Quran is completed. Shias have seen this to be an innovation.

"tawassul"=intercession

Edited by Hajj Amir
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
Let me just brief you on some of his beliefs (on which I've debated with his followers) - tawassul: not permissible, tarawih: permissible, misyaar: permissible, tragedy of lady zahra (S): improbable, wilayat-e-takwiniya: ghuluw tendencies, world created for the ahlul bayt (A) [based on wilayat-e-takwiniya]: ghuluw tendencies, aliyyun waliyallah in adhan: makruh [when according to most of the scholars it is mustahab], dua-e-tawassul: absolutely false and fabricated, dua-e-nudba (parts of it esp. tawassul parts): fabricated, ziyarat-e-ashura: fabricated [according to an update by his follower], hadith al-kisa: some parts are weak [and we ought to be cautious], cursing the oppressors: an absolute no-no, most importantly, according to him, wilayat/imamate: not an essential part of islam OR shi'ism.

Ayt. Sistani also says misyar is permissible

a lot of accusations against Ayt Fadlullah are false. best thing is to email him bayynat.org.lb

Edited by redman 123
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

...I meant to suggest that someone might like to give a summary of the "lies" against A. Fadlallah. I said to someone anti-Fadlallah about the lies and he said A. Fadlallah had watered down his original statements. Do the "lies" just come out of no where or are they based on misunderstandings? After all, often it is much easier to outright reject some challenging opinions by simplifying them rather than getting to grips with them.

Another suggestion: a summary of the conspiracy theories against A. Fadlallah.

Edited by Hajj Amir
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
...I meant to suggest that someone might like to give a summary of the "lies" against A. Fadlallah. I said to someone anti-Fadlallah about the lies and he said A. Fadlallah had watered down his original statements. Do the "lies" just come out of know where or are they based on misunderstandings? After all, often it is much easier to outright reject some challenging opinions by simplifying them rather than getting to grips with them.

Another suggestion: a summary of the conspiracy theories against A. Fadlallah.

Where can I get information on "conspiracy theories against A. Fadlallah."? By the way are you saying that Ayatollah Fadallah believes that "the Imams (A) have special powers."? Because I thought the do in the sense that they are given some knowledge of the unseen...

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

^ the point is that A. Fadlallah does not believe that the Imams (A) have these "special powers" although exacltly what is meant by this term is another topic beyond a summary. I am sure you will find your answer somewhere.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

Salam

All the points included in the summary are those that his followers DEFEND and not hearsay/rumors/lies.

As for lies against him, amongst other things, I believe that the Ayatullah Sistani fatwa against him doing the rounds is just pure nonsense. Ayatullah Sistani has himself said on numerous occasions that he does not comment on other people like this.

Edited by Whizbee
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Moderators

(salam)

Sis Whizbee, with all due respect, I don't think it is very helpful to list those issues en mass. I could give my understanding of his position on each of these and you would find that his stance on most are more nuanced and very close to that of the other eminent scholars of our time (Sayyid Ali Khameni, Sayyid Sistani, etc). He does have significant differences with current scholars on

1) Issue of the 'door'. His position, as I understand it, is that the specific detail regarding Umar pushing down the door, the door falling on Lady Fatima (as) , and her miscarriage as a result is contained in ahadith whose chain of narration is weak and therefore should not be accepted as fact by Shia without reservations. He does not say that Umar and his thugs did not try to force Imam Ali (as) and his household to make bayyat under threat of force. So his position is basically the same although he questions a few specific details due to weak chains of narration

2) Issue of impliments of gambling. His stance is that impliments of gambling (such as playing cards, chess pieces, dice, etc) are not haram in themselves but only become haram if they are used specifically for gambling. So he allows using cards, dice, etc in games where gambling is not taking place. This position is different from most other eminent scholars of the Shia.

There are other issues that we can discuss but I don't think it is helpful to go over them all in one shot, as it may cause confusion for some. The main issue in Lebanon with regards to Sayyid Fadlallah is that there are many in Lebanon who believe in Wilayat Al Faqih and specifically that there should be only one marja for all Shia in the world (they mostly choose Sayyid Ali Khameni).

These people have tried to force Sayyid Fadlallah to step down and ackowledge their philosophical position. The followers of Sayyid Fadlallah say that this is not necessary and that there is nothing in the traditions of Ahl Al Bayt that specifically state that in the Ghaib Al Kubra of Imam Mahdi(af)(as)

we (shia) should all follow one scholar in regards to taqleed(emulation). That is the main issue and unfortunately some of the Wilayat Al Faqih people resort to very false and nasty allegation against Sayyid Fadlallah hoping to create a backlash against him and also hoping that they could decrease the numbers of people who pray behind him in Salat Al Jummah. Sayyid Fadlallah doesn't reciprocate by making false allegation (and even true ones) against them because he believes that we shia should be united. Also, because of Sayyid Fadlallah's strong stance against the Zionist occupiers and US/European interferance in the internal politics of Lebanon, those same forces are constantly trying to undermine his reputation and authority amoung the Shia by spreading false rumors and allegations and also trying to assasinate him, which they have so far been unsuccessful at doing, Al Hamdu illah.

The other main tactic used by the US/Zionist forces has become very effective amoung the non arabic speaking shia. They will pull a quote from a book or speech by Sayyid Fadlallah, take it out of context, mistranslate it, then imply that by this quote the Sayyid is questioning or denying some basic tenant of Islam or Shiaism. I am not implying that this is what Sis Whizbee is doing and she is a good sister and I respect her alot for her knowledge, but she may have seen something on another board and posted it without checking the original source. I have done this before myself, and probably most of us have at some point. Like the br said, if you have a question with regards to some position of the Sayyid, it is best to go to bayynat.org.lb and contact someone in his office. The reply make take a while and this has frustrated my on several occasions.

If we Shia are the crown of Islam, then our scholars are the jewels in the crown. If you take any of them out or tarnish any of them, the crown itself will be diminished. If we want to question the position of our scholars, we should have sufficient knowledge of arabic, arabic grammar, ijtihad, hadith, and quran and make an argument on that basis. IMO, that is the only productive course in cases like this.

Edited by Abu Hadi
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
Sayyid Fadlallah doesn't reciprocate by making false allegation (and even true ones) against them because he believes that we shia should be united.

Really brother? Yes, you're right. He believes that 'Shi'a' [according to him, who follow his personal opinions] should be united but not with those who are ghuluw [that is, those who believe in tawassul and other wilayat-e-takwiniyya concepts].

Why do we always see the Fadlallah followers trying to show that they are distinct from us in their beliefs in front of Sunnis?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Moderators
Really brother? Yes, you're right. He believes that 'Shi'a' [according to him, who follow his personal opinions] should be united but not with those who are ghuluw [that is, those who believe in tawassul and other wilayat-e-takwiniyya concepts].

Why do we always see the Fadlallah followers trying to show that they are distinct from us in their beliefs in front of Sunnis?

I am not quite sure what you mean by the above, could you please clarify?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
I am not quite sure what you mean by the above, could you please clarify?

I meant, why is it that we always see Fadlallah followers trying to show the Sunnis that they are separate from us in their beliefs. I don't know whether it is a conscious act on their part, to show how disunited we are.

For example, recently there was a thread on Qur'an's authenticity started by a Sunni. Even though this is a contentious issue amongst the Shi'a themselves, the 'Fadlallah followers' made it out as if they were contrastingly different in their beliefs from the rest of the Shi'a or that the rest held heretical beliefs.

Another instance, was a thread on Lady Fatema (SA). They did their best to show that they were not with us [we, the ghuluw who believe in the concept of wilayat-e-takwiniyya] in our beliefs. That is, in every thread they try to show how disunited we are, simultaneously begging for unity with the Sunnis.

Similarly, for other contentious topics.

Anyway, brother it's not that I'm debating with you here. I'm already sick and tired of this worn-out topic. I've realised, to each his own. And Allah (SWT) guides Whom He Wills. :)

Edited by SpIzo
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
I could give my understanding of his position on each of these and you would find that his stance on most are more nuanced and very close to that of the other eminent scholars of our time

Actually his stance is vastly different, not just from the current scholars, but from ALL scholars in Shia history.

For example, he claims that Prophet Muhammad (pbuh&hp) could make mistakes in "ordinary and regular matters of life such as showing distractedness during prayers", (source) something that no scholar since Shaykh Saduq has claimed. In fact, Shaykh Saduq's own student showed this belief to be incorrect.

Next, he claims that wilayah takwiniyyah is unIslamic. Hence the hundreds or thousands of ahadith that support this concept are all false. This includes Hadith al Kisaa and many of the most renowned Shia duas. No scholar in the history of Shia Islam has ever doubted the authenticity of Hadith al Kisaa. In fact, there are a large number of traditions that talk about the merits of reciting this hadith, so not only does he have to deny these ahadith that support wilayah takwiniyyah directly, he also rejects the ahadith that support these aforementioned ahadith. This is a huge chunk of traditional and contemporary Shia beliefs thrown out of the window.

Next, he claims that cursing the caliphs is not allowed. Again there are hundreds of ahadith that support this concept, which are all rejected by Sayyid Fadhlullah. Some important ones include Ziyarat Aashurah, and several sermons from the Nahjul Balagha. Have you ever heard of ANY scholar in Shia history who rejected the validity of ziyarat Aashurah? There have been none. This is not a minor difference here - rejecting the validity of cursing the caliphs throws another large chunk of Shia belief out the window.

He also rejects the validity of seeking help from the Ahlulbayt or the Imam's. And I'm not saying that he personally doesn't think it is useful - he says it is impermissible. This again completely contradicts the beliefs of ALL Shia scholars in history!

As for the door issue, he doesn't simply say that the narrations are weak, he says that the event was unlikely.

Even though I respect Sayyid Fadhlullah for his lifetime of service to the Shia's of Lebanon, the fact remains that he does not have an ijazah for ijtihad. So what does Sayyid Fadhlullah say about this? He claims that it is not required. So the issue is, how can regular people like us know the extent of his knowledge in issues of fiqh? All other mujtahids have obtained ijazahs from at least one older Ayatullah. This serves as a seal of approval for that scholar from others whose credibilities are already acknowledged. Kind of like obtaining letters of recommendation from university professors before starting on a PhD program. But Sayyid Fadhlullah has no such official approval from any scholar. In absence of such an ijazah, how can a non-mujtahid have the right to assert that Sayyid Fadhlullah is a mujtahid, let alone an Ayatullah.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

Salaam. Thanks for replies. Just as a reminder, the shorther the replies are, the better. Potentially this thread could go very long and I'm going to have to read it all to get the answer to my original post. Its also in the interest of fraternity (given the topic) and keeping the topic on track.

Link to post
Share on other sites

In His Name, the Most High

Salaams

This thread has no value; and serves only to further fitneh against an Alem Rabbani; fitneh that has been answered adequately in the past; and has been dealt with.

The point is very simple.

In matters of Usul; one care read the opinions of many but has to formulate their own understanding. Therefore in this context; the opinions of Ayatullah al-Udhma Fadhlullah(HA) are exactly that; his opinions based on his extensive research. The issues in question and have been claimed as wrong by some people for motives best known to themselves.

The issues in question; do NOT include elements that directly work against the five Usul ad-Din:

1/ Tawheed (Monotheism)

2/ Adalah (Justice of Allah)

3/ Nubuwwah (Prophethood)

4/ Imamah (sometimes refered to as Wilayah) (Vicegerency or Guardianship)

5/ Qiyamah (Judgement/Resurection)

This is a fact. Sub concepts are the only areas that have been effected by the propoganda and campaigns against Ayatullah al-Udhma Fadhlullah(HA).

In matters of Furu; there are 3 (three) options:

1/ One operates on Ehtiyaat (operating on the basis of precaution)

2/ One does their own Ijtihaad (deduces the religious edicts themselves based on their own extensive learning and knowledge)

3/ One selects a Maraj'e Taqleed and follows his rulings in matters of Islamic Jurisprudence/Law (Furu ad-Din)

Now; if someone feels that they are unhappy with Ayatullah al-Udhma Fadhlullah(HA) that is fine; there is no compulsion on them to elect to make taqleed of him(HA), and they can elect another Marja' Taqleed.

If one does not make Taqleed of Ayatullah al-Udhma Fadhlullah(HA) then one has no place making comments on his integrity, level of learning, etc.

If one makes Taqleed of Ayatullah al-Udhma Fadhlullah(HA) then clearly one has determined (through the various means available for determining such) that he is the Marja' they follow; as a result they must follow him(HA); and if they feel that he is wrong in some matters (naturally after detailed reflection, questioning through the appropriate means and channels, etc); then they should change their Taqleed if they are satisified that he(HA) is no longer the most appropriate Marja' for them to follow in terms of his level of learning. This however doesn't give anyone the right to speak against him, chances are that on account of the disparity in level of understanding between the mukkalaf and the Marja'(HA), it is the mukallaf who is failing to understand, which gives him/her doubts and puts them in a situation where they have to move their Taqleed away from Ayatullah al-Udhma Fadhlullah(HA) to elsewhere - where no doubt they will face similar problems, as the problem is not with the Marja', but with the mukkallaf (follower, one who is tasked with).

The issue is simple.

No need for ANY mud-slinging, confusing stories that have all been refuted numerous times; and no more talk against Ayatullah al-Udhma Fadhlullah(HA).

Let us remember a number of things; when those speaking and bad-mouthing this great Alem Rabbani(HA) have studied and given to Islam and the Ummah as a whole what he has; then they will have the level of humility and intellect, understanding and wisdom, to approach him directly and resolve any confusion; anyone who as not contributed as much as he has to Islam and the Muslim Ummah; has no right whatsoever to speak against him.

If you don't like him, that's fine; keep it to yourself; and pray that Allah cleanse the impurities from your heart and give you light in your heart; and make the same prayer for all believers. Bas khalaas. Finished.

With Salaams and Dua's

Shabbir

Edited by shabbir.hassanally
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Moderators
Actually his stance is vastly different, not just from the current scholars, but from ALL scholars in Shia history.

For example, he claims that Prophet Muhammad (pbuh&hp) could make mistakes in "ordinary and regular matters of life such as showing distractedness during prayers", (source) something that no scholar since Shaykh Saduq has claimed. In fact, Shaykh Saduq's own student showed this belief to be incorrect.

(salam)

With all due respect br, you are misrepresenting his position. I did not have time to read over the original arabic, since I am alot slower reading and comprehending arabic vs. english, but by reading the translation,

It seems that he is saying that it is not necessary for the Prophet (pbuh) or Imams (as) to be infallible in every single moment of their lives in order for them to be considered Masoom from a religious and functional perspective. This is a purely philosophical issue and he is not saying that the Prophet (pbuh) or Imams (as) ever made a mistake in even a small way, such as being distracted during prayer. He is simply saying that being functional masoom does not preclude very small errors that do not effect their duties as leaders of the ummah and do not cause people to distrust their leadership. It is an issue of ahkam and not fiqh so whether you agree with him or not it doesn't have anything to do with his suitability for marja taqleed.

Next, he claims that wilayah takwiniyyah is unIslamic. Hence the hundreds or thousands of ahadith that support this concept are all false. This includes Hadith al Kisaa and many of the most renowned Shia duas.

No scholar in the history of Shia Islam has ever doubted the authenticity of Hadith al Kisaa. In fact, there are a large number of traditions that talk about the merits of reciting this hadith, so not only does he have to deny these ahadith that support wilayah takwiniyyah directly, he also rejects the ahadith that support these aforementioned ahadith.

No scholar has ever doubted the authenticity of Hadith Kisa? Really, read this

http://www.jafariyanews.com/2k6_news/jan/1...isa_removal.htm

Here is a quote from the above

Rai Shahri’s move comes after his claim that the Narration of the Cloak was either not originally included by Haj Shaikh Qommi in Mafatih Al-Jinan or was not included in its original form. The government of Iran has accepted Rai Shahri’s opinion and has asked that all future publications of the work to exclude this narration.

This is a huge chunk of traditional and contemporary Shia beliefs thrown out of the window.

How exactly? Hadith Al Kisa is a very beautiful and inspiring hadith. I even have a link to it in my sig.

The position of Sayyid Fadlallah and others , as I understand it, is that the wording that is currently included in Mufateh Al Jinan is possibly not the exact words of the Prophet (pbuh). He is not doubting that Quran 33:33 is refering to the Prophet (pbuh) , Imam Ali (as) , Lady Fatima (as) , Imam Hassan (as) , and Imam Hussein (as) . He is also not denying that a hadith very similar (if not exactly) to the version recorded in Mufateh Al Jinan was stated by the Prophet upon the revelation of 33:33, as the hadith is recorded (with variations in wording) by most Sunni traditionalists including al-Tirmidhi, Hanbal, Muslim, and many others.

Next, he claims that cursing the caliphs is not allowed. Again there are hundreds of ahadith that support this concept, which are all rejected by Sayyid Fadhlullah. Some important ones include Ziyarat Aashurah, and several sermons from the Nahjul Balagha. Have you ever heard of ANY scholar in Shia history who rejected the validity of ziyarat Aashurah? There have been none. This is not a minor difference here - rejecting the validity of cursing the caliphs throws another large chunk of Shia belief out the window.

- He does question the authenticity of some sermons in Nahjul Balagha. He is not alone on this. There have been lots of threads about this so no need to go over again.

- In the Al Jezeera interview (I think that is what you are referring to?) he said that we shouldn't curse the Sahaba in front of our Sunni brs and this harms wahidat (unity). The benefits gained by not doing it outweigh the benefits of doing it. Perfectly logical to me. Also, there is a hadith from Rasoulallah (pbuh) that says 'Don't belittle or make fun of anyone'. That includes everyone, even the enemies of Ahl Al Bayt.

Reciting and even constantly reciting the crimes The Caliphs committed against the Ahl Al Bayt is not cursing them and Sayyid Fadlallah does not discourage anyone from doing it.

He also rejects the validity of seeking help from the Ahlulbayt or the Imam's. And I'm not saying that he personally doesn't think it is useful - he says it is impermissible. This again completely contradicts the beliefs of ALL Shia scholars in history!

I'm sorry br, but I think you've gone off the deep end on this one. I have never heard him state anything to this affect. Please bring a direct quote for us to examine.

As for the door issue, he doesn't simply say that the narrations are weak, he says that the event was unlikely.

Even though I respect Sayyid Fadhlullah for his lifetime of service to the Shia's of Lebanon, the fact remains that he does not have an ijazah for ijtihad. So what does Sayyid Fadhlullah say about this? He claims that it is not required. So the issue is, how can regular people like us know the extent of his knowledge in issues of fiqh? All other mujtahids have obtained ijazahs from at least one older Ayatullah. This serves as a seal of approval for that scholar from others whose credibilities are already acknowledged. Kind of like obtaining letters of recommendation from university professors before starting on a PhD program. But Sayyid Fadhlullah has no such official approval from any scholar. In absence of such an ijazah, how can a non-mujtahid have the right to assert that Sayyid Fadhlullah is a mujtahid, let alone an Ayatullah.

I suggest you refer to this thread

http://www.shiachat.com/forum/index.php?sh...amp;#entry44470

I would like to conclude with a very good and succint quote from the br who posted on this thread

1/ Any issue with any Marja, such as allegations of this, that and the other, should be addressed directly to the Marja' or the office of the Leader of the Muslim Ummah, or both.

2/ Any heresay should be discounted when deciding upon a Marja', if the heresay and rumor regarding a Marja' are abundant, this does not mean that the Marja' is bad, or anything of the sort, but if you cannot be satisifed, then you do not have to make taqleed of that particular marja, and hence you do not have to say things against that Marja'. This is better for us, and prevents us from ebbing ever closer towards the horrible vices of Slander and Defamation of Character. Both of which we must fight against, in order to reach better understanding of Allah.

Edited by Abu Hadi
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
With all due respect br, you are misrepresenting his position.

Not really.

but by reading the translation, It seems that he is saying that it is not necessary for the Prophet (pbuh) or Imams (as) to be infallible in every single moment of their lives in order for them to be considered Masoom from a religious and functional perspective.

Yes, that is exactly what he is saying. All contemporary Shia scholars agree that this is incorrect, that the ma'soomeen are free from sins AND mistakes. You can e-mail your own marj'a for confirmation (if it is not Sayyid Fadhlullah), but here is the response from Ayatullah Sistani's office confirming this belief.

post-7863-1187749687_thumb.jpg

http://www.shiachat.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=90834

This is a purely philosophical issue

No, it's not. That's the whole problem! The idea that the Prophet could make mistakes has strong practical implications. Which is why it has been rejected by Shia scholars. Read this section on how such ideas about the Prophet making mistakes came about in Sunni Islam:

SECOND: Umayyad rulers spared no efforts to underscore their theory that the Messenger of Allah was not protected by Allah against falling into error as is the case with all other human beings who sometimes are right and sometimes are wrong, fabricating several "traditions" to support their claim. The purpose of fabricating such "traditions" was to make sure that the Prophet used to follow his own personal views; therefore, he often erred to the extent that some of his companions had to correct him, as indicated in the incidents of palm tree pollination, the revelation of the verse referring to the issue of hijab (veil), the case of accepting fidya (ransom) from the captives seized after the Battle of Badr, in addition to many such incidents claimed by "Ahl al-Sunnah wal Jama`ah" and included in their Sahih books in support of such an attitude towards the Messenger of Allah, peace and the best of blessings be upon him and his progeny.

http://www.al-islam.org/real/7.htm

Read the rest of the article for the refutation of these Sunni beliefs.

No scholar has ever doubted the authenticity of Hadith Kisa? Really,

Yes, really.

read this

http://www.jafariyanews.com/2k6_news/jan/1...isa_removal.htm

Here is a quote from the above

Rai Shahri’s move comes after his claim that the Narration of the Cloak was either not originally included by Haj Shaikh Qommi in Mafatih Al-Jinan or was not included in its original form. The government of Iran has accepted Rai Shahri’s opinion and has asked that all future publications of the work to exclude this narration.

This article is NOT implying that the Iranian government rejects the authenticity of the hadith! The issue is whether the hadith was originally part of the Mafatih, or was added later. If it was added later, then as meritorious as the hadith may be, it is not supposed to be in this particular book. It can be read separately, or as part of another book that compiles ahadith about the Ahlulbayt. This is why it was removed from the mafatih, NOT because any Shia scholar considers it unauthentic. You can ask the representative of Ayatullah Khamenei in your area to confirm this. Sayyid Fadhlullah considers it (or at least parts of it) inauthentic because it supports the concept of wilayah takwiniyyah, something that all major Shia scholars in history have accepted as valid.

How exactly? Hadith Al Kisa is a very beautiful and inspiring hadith. I even have a link to it in my sig.

The position of Sayyid Fadlallah and others , as I understand it, is that the wording that is currently included in Mufateh Al Jinan is possibly not the exact words of the Prophet (pbuh).

The issue is not the hadith itself. This hadith is part of a bigger problem. He rejects wilayah takwiniyyah! Hence he rejects those parts of the hadith that support this concept. Rejecting wilayah takwiniyyah means rejecting hundreds of ahadith that all major scholars in Shia history have accepted.

- He does question the authenticity of some sermons in Nahjul Balagha. He is not alone on this. There have been lots of threads about this so no need to go over again.

Which other Shia scholar has questioned the authenticity of the sermons in Nahjul Balagha? I have a response from the office of Ayatullah Sistani that states that this book is "generally considered authentic".

post-7863-1187748339_thumb.jpg

- In the Al Jezeera interview (I think that is what you are referring to?) he said that we shouldn't curse the Sahaba in front of our Sunni brs and this harms wahidat (unity). The benefits gained by not doing it outweigh the benefits of doing it. Perfectly logical to me. Also, there is a hadith from Rasoulallah (pbuh) that says 'Don't belittle or make fun of anyone'. That includes everyone, even the enemies of Ahl Al Bayt.

Reciting and even constantly reciting the crimes The Caliphs committed against the Ahl Al Bayt is not cursing them and Sayyid Fadlallah does not discourage anyone from doing it.

No, I'm not referring to the Al Jazeerah interview. I have the response from the office of Sayyid Fadhlullah that states that Ziyarat Aashurah is not authentic.

post-7863-1187748564_thumb.jpg

As for cursing in front of Sunni's, that is obviously immoral, but Sayyid Fadhlullah has actually declared EVERY SINGLE hadith that curses any of the caliphs to be inauthentic. And there are MANY such ahadith from the Ahlulbayt. Here are some of them:

-------------------------------------

This is Dua Saname Quraysh that is narrated by Imam Ali himself, and is dua #120 of Sahifa-e-Alaviya

In the name of Allah the Beneficent the Merciful.

O Allah! Curse the two idols of Quraish (Abu Bakr and Omar) and their two magicinas, their two rebellious people, their two accusers and their two daughters. Rebuke them, they have consumed Your sustenance and have denied Your obligations, both have discarded Your commands, have rejected Your revelation, have disobeyed Your Prophet, hav destroyed Your religion, have distorted Your book, have made Your laws ineffective, have declared Your obligatory actions as incorrect, have disbelieved in Your signs, have oppressed Your friends, have loved Your enemies, have spread corruption among Your people, have made Your world occur loses.

O Allah! Send Your curses on them and their helpers as they have ruined the house of Your prophet, have dug the door of his house, broken the roof, have brought down the walls, have made the skies, the ground, have destroyed its inhabitants, have killed their supporters have put to death, their children have deserted his pulpit by his successors of knowledge, have desired his prophethood, have ascribed a partner to their Lord, thus consider both of their sins to be great, and make their abode in 'saqar' forever, and do you know what is 'saqar?'

. . .

. . .

http://www.duas.org/alaviya/dua-120.htm

More details of the AhlulBayt cursing Abu Bakr and Omar:

(2) Ibn Qutaybah in al Imamah wa al Siyasa page 14 records that:

"Fatima said 'When I meet my father the Prophet (s), then I shall' complain about the both of you (Abu Bakr and Umar), and said to Abu Bakr 'By Allah I shall curse you after every Salat".

Ziyarat Ashurah:

O my Allah, let the curse I call down on the head of the first tyrant stick like a leech; and stay put for ever on the first, then the second, the third and the fourth.

O my Allah damn and call down evil on the fifth, Yazid son of Mua'awyah,

http://www.duas.org/ashura/z_ashura.htm

Hanan Ibn Sadir narrated:

I asked Imam al-Baqir AS about those two (Abu Bakr and Umar). He AS replied: "O Aba al-Fadhl! Do not ask me about them for, by Allah, non among us (Ahlul-Bayt) would die except that he is displeased with those two. No day passes to us except that we are angry with them. Indeed, they oppressed us and denied our rights and they were the first and foremost people who imposed themselves over us and opened the stream of injustice against us that does not stop until our Qa'im rises... By Allah! No affliction was set up against us and no trouble faced us Ahlul-Bayt except that those two founded its root. Thus upon those two 'are the curse of Allah and the angels and people all (2:161).'"

- al-Kafi, v8, p245, Hadith #340

- Bihar al-Anwar, v30, p269, Hadith #138

- Ta'wil al-Ayat al-Dhahira, p128, Hadith #4

Abu Hamza al-Thumali RA narrated:

I asked Ali Ibn al-Husain AS about Fulan and Fulan (i.e., Abu Bakr and Umar). He AS said: "Unto them be the curse of Allah, all His curse. By Allah, those two died disbelievers and polytheists to Allah, the Great."

- Basa'ir al-Darajat, p269, Hadith #2

- Bihar al-Anwar, v27, p29, Hadith #1; v30, p145, Hadith #1

Similar report has been narrated from Imam Muhammad al-Baqir AS:

Imam al-Baqir AS said: "Surely the two Shaikhs left this world while they did not repent and were not mindful of what they did to the Commander of Believers, peace be upon him, thus for them 'are the curse of Allah and His angels and people all (2:161).'"

- al-Kafi, v8, p246, Hadith #343

- Bihar al-Anwar, v30, p269, Hadith #137

Imam al-Jawad AS said: ... The Messenger of Allah pbuh&HF said: "He who is reluctant to curse whomever Allah has cursed, upon him is the curse of Allah."

- Rijal al-Kashshi, p528, Hadith #1012

- Bihar al-Anwar, v25, p318, Hadith #85

Imam Muhammad Baqir (as) said: The Messenger of Allah (pbuh&hp) said (in Ghadir Khum): "... O folk! Verily there shall soon come after me 'leaders inviting to the Fire and on the Day of Judgment no help shall they find.' O folk! Verily Allah and I disown (Barii) them. O folk! They and their helpers and their followers shall be in the lowest depth of Fire and what evil indeed is the abode of the arrogant... They shall usurp the rule and make it their kingdom. O the curse of Allah be upon those usurpers! 'And Soon shall We settle your affairs O both ye burdens! (55:31) On you will be sent (O ye evil ones twain!) a flame of fire (to burn) and a (flash of) molten brass, and you two shall not have any defense. (55:35)'..."

- al-Ihtijaj, v1, p62

- Rawdhatul Wa'idhin, v1, p95

- al-Sirat al-Mustaqim, v1, p303

- Bihar al-Anwar, v37, p211, Hadith #86

--------------------------------------------------------

I'm sorry br, but I think you've gone off the deep end on this one. I have never heard him state anything to this affect. Please bring a direct quote for us to examine.

Here is the response from his office that demonstrates this (responses 4, 5 and 6). It also rejects some other well known ahadith in Shia books that are accepted by our scholars.

post-7863-1187749106_thumb.jpg

This e-mail was not sent by me, but my friend forwarded the response to me.

Also, you can see this same stance expressed on his official website:

Q: What is the ruling on those who say for example: “Ya Ali” whenever they want to lift heavy objects? Is this considered an act of polytheism because one seeks the help of the Holy persons or Ahlelbeit rather than seeking it from Allah?

A: The pious person ought to abide by the Islamic instructions of the Quran and Sunna. Thus, he has to ask only for Allah’s help in conformity with Surat Al-Fatiha: Thee (alone) we worship; Thee (alone) we ask for help.

http://english.bayynat.org.lb/QA/qa.aspx?id=110

I read through the posts on that page; it is completely irrelevant. Sayyid Fadhlullah does not have an ijazah for ijtihad, which means that none of the scholars senior to him considered him worthy of being a mujtahid. This thread that you referenced does not say otherwise.

Edited by fyst
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
Ayt. Sistani also says misyar is permissible

Really?

I emailed him after this shocking revelation by you and here's the reply.

In the Name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful

In Islamic law, marriage is of two kinds: permanent and temporary. Permanent

Marriage means the marriage in which there is no fixed time. The wife in

this marriage is known as "the permanent wife".

Temporary Marriage means the marriage in which the time limit is fixed to a

year or more or less. The wife in this marriage is known as "the temporary

wife".

Wassalamu Alaykum

-----Original Message-----

From:

Sent: None

To: eanswers@najaf.org

Subject: Question from ------

Name :

Email :

Question : Salam

Does Ayatullah Sistani permit misyaar marriage?

I am not implying that this is what Sis Whizbee is doing and she is a good sister and I respect her alot for her knowledge, but she may have seen something on another board and posted it without checking the original source. I have done this before myself, and probably most of us have at some point. Like the br said, if you have a question with regards to some position of the Sayyid, it is best to go to bayynat.org.lb and contact someone in his office. The reply make take a while and this has frustrated my on several occasions.

Brother, we don't deny that Syed Fadhlallah has done a lot for the Shi'is in Lebanon but just because of that we cannot ignore the fact that he is destroying our beliefs and making completely unfounded statements on various issues. He cannot even back his stance with ahadith. Instead to prove that he is right he keeps rejecting authentic ahadith. We should not let our personal prejudices tint our judgment but if someone is hell-bent on corrupting Shi'a Islam with false claims, we cannot ignore that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

(salam)

Back to Fadlalah bashing arent we? I thought that Fitnah died in 1998

Just like bashing Mohamad Alsadr then when he died then attending his funeral. If we don't stop this hypocrisy we will never reach anywhere. Like Ibn taymnyah and others we make our priority the fight against some one from our own and forget Aithism, and Secularism, Chritianity, Judaism, Wahabism, and we concentrate on Fadlallah.

It looks like mixed up priorities is part of our life. Ibn Taymyah who made his first priority the fighting against the Shia and forgot aithism and all the other corruptions in the world and spent all his life fighting the ones who believe in the same prophet as him and in the same traditions as him.

Where are your priorities muslims?

Let me just brief you on some of his beliefs (on which I've debated with his followers) - tawassul: not permissible

Bring evidence where he says tawasul is not permissible. Yes maybe your type of tawasul where the human is not the waseela but the actual target then thats not tawasul anymore thats worship

Tawasul means seeking the aim using the tools (Waseela) and the infalibles are the tools but when you make them the target and forget about god then yes by all means you are a mushrik

, tarawih: permissible,

What I know is that the taraweeh is made up and its just some extra prayers so I don't think any scholar would forbid extra prayers !!!!!!!

misyaar: permissible,

Misyar is marriage in secret and in Shia school we don't require witnesses for marriage so there is nothing wrong with misyar as long as no rights have been violated.

tragedy of lady zahra (S): improbable
,

Tragedy improbable???? thats very vague if your talking about breaking her rib then thats not the only tragedy that she faced and thats a historically disputed matter.

Mohamad baqir Alsadr in his book Fadak in history says " and he burnt or came close to burning her house" so even Mohamad baqir Alsadr expressed doubt.

It is well stated that when they told him Fatima is in the house and he replied " And so what" so would the story of him breaking her rib make him any worse than what he is????

Infact which one is worse breaking her rib or stealing the khilafa???

Definatly the second one is bigger because it would effect billions of people and generations and not only Fatima (as). So there is no need to exaggerate Umars crimes to make him look bad because he is already bad enough. therefore we should be open to historical investigations rather than bash anyone who says an opinion without even reading his proofs,

The shirazies say that any hadeeth praising ahlulbait then there is no need to check it for authenticity because regardless of how much you can praise them you can never describe their true favor and their reality.

I only know one thing thats beyond description and thats god. All limited creatures can be bound by description and thats what makes god of unique attributes.

If the infalibles share all or some of gods attributes then God is not Unique anymore but the god i worship Is Unique in his attributes and associates no one with himself.

Some say that lying on ashura to make the people cry and hit themselves harder is a good act. To lie in order to provoke the people's emotions so that they can cry more and get more rewards because crying over imam hussain (as) is worship.

Fadlallah and Mutahari and Alsadr and even Khaminie All stood up strongly against these made up rubbish that has been injected in the religion to corrupt it so each of them addressed some of these corruptions in his own way.

Khamine forbade self Harm and hitting the self with knives.

Mutahari doubts most of the exaggerations they say on Ashura with historical evidence and regards attending these places a sin , read his book "Almalhama Al Husaynya"

Even Shaheed Mohamad Mohamad sadiq Alsadr Stood up against the Idea of "Lisan Alhaal ". He said: " saying things on the tongue of the infalibles without knowing the truth is lying upon them"

And he said " what is happening today is that the poet attributes his own feeling that he feels towards his sister or brother or son to the infallible and sticks it to them and claims that they felt this way where if they really did have even a small percentage of this feeling then they would have been on the wrong"

And said:

" they have reached their status by disregarding the worldly emotions and concentrating truthful emotions and that explains how the mothers sent their sons and the sisters sent their brothers to death "

And said " The majority of our slang and formal poems today carry two false concepts in them namely the family aspect and the tribal Aspect and they show the battle as if it was between two families rather than between right and wrong "

Even shaheed mohamad Baqir Alsadr said when he was asked about the Latum " these are all emotions"

wilayat-e-takwiniya: ghuluw tendencies, world created for the ahlul bayt (A) [based on wilayat-e-takwiniya]: ghuluw tendencies,

The mainstream say that Every atom in the whole creation is controlled by the Infalibles.

That Idea to me is not only a Ghulu tendency but a full scale Ghulu.

There is no difference between the path that chrisitanity took and the path that we are taking and the prophet already prophecised this in several hadeeths namely:

The prophet said: The jews of my nation and the chrisitans of my nation

also said " you will follow each step that ahlulkitab followed"

and he also said " Oh Ali Two get destroyed because of you, an extreme lover and an extreme hater"

aliyyun waliyallah in adhan: makruh [when according to most of the scholars it is mustahab],

Did they read Ali wali Allah in the prophets time???

did the imams order to read it??

again show us where he says Ali wali Allah is makrooh in azan

dua-e-tawassul: absolutely false and fabricated, dua-e-nudba (parts of it esp. tawassul parts): fabricated
,

sources

ziyarat-e-ashura: fabricated [according to an update by his follower], hadith al-kisa: some parts are weak [and we ought to be cautious],

Even I think Zyarat ashura and hadeeth Alkisaa is fabricated due to many reasons

Zyarat ashura says " god curse the all of the family of umayah" and the family of umayah had some good people so there is no way good ones too based on the action on the majority of them

Umar Ibn Abdulazzees returned Fadak to Imam Baqir and got killed after few years

And another Umawi person also used to criticize his father and his grandfather and used to say i wish i wasn't born to you.

And Allah says " no one should carry the burden of the other"

And says " the best amongst you in gods eyes is the most pious"

And says " there is nothing for the human other than what he strived for"

And says " the day that there is no relationships between them and they do not conversate"

collective punishment is against Islam.

so how can we curse all of Umayah without exceptions even if there was one good person in them???

Murttaza Al askari who is a famous historical investigator also doubted Zyarat Ashura's and Hadeeth Alkisaa's authenticity. ( that the whole creation was created only for the love of the 5)

" Oh Mohamad if not for you I wouldn't have created the orbits and if not for Ali i woudlnt have created You and if not For Fatima i wouldn't have created both of you "

So the whole secret of the universe is Fatima Alzahra (as) and she is the reason why the prophet and Imam Ali were created and hence the rest of the creation

They make it sound like The 5 had favors over god while if you read their words you will see that they say " If not the help of god we would not have been able to do anything"

cursing the oppressors: an absolute no-no

Who said that ??? and where???

no one says you shouldn't curse the 3, they automatically get cursed because Allah says " the curse of Allah be upon the oppressors"

and all shia believe they are oppressors

but the difference is that some say cursing them in an intimidating way is a worship and Allah says :

" do not swear at whom they call upon apart from Allah as they will swear at Allah due to ignorance"

and Allah doesn't encourage intimidating and provoking people by cursing their symbols

for example why dont you go around saying to christians " curse your cross, damn your cross the symbol of polytheism and damn John Paul the second"

what will you archive? in this method?

Allah says " do not attack god does not like the attackers"

but some people today they think Usool Aldeen is cursing the three as if no other evils exist on earth

Many of us are very similar to the three in many ways

Any person who forbids the lawful and makes Ijtihad opposing the text is the same as Umar in this issue

Any person who takes a role that they cant preform and fights for power is the same as Abubakr in this issue

Any person who puts his family and emotions forward and forgets about justice and Islam and treats his race and family favorably is like the third one

most importantly, according to him, wilayat/imamate: not an essential part of islam OR shi'ism.

Who said and where , yes its an essential part but the one who denies it is still Muslim. Tawheed is essential but others have different understanding of Tawheed yet they are still Muslims

Just like the Christians denying the unity of god but they are still l regarded from the monotheist religions when it comes to treating them.

Sunnies Shape god but still are regarded monotheists because its based on shubha and lack of knowledge and the admit that god is one and infinite but they contradict themselves and say we can see him

Edited by alimohamad40
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

Oh yes alimohammad40, everyone is a hypocrite (except you, of course). That we know.

And Ayatullah alimohammad40 thinks that Ziyarat Ashura is fabricated. LOL!

I am not going to waste my time replying to your pathetic accusations because as is obvious from your behavior and attitude, you are not sincere. If the OP or someone desires clarification, I will explain.

And this hadith that you keep quoting every time I praise Ali (as) (ghuluw :o), it is out of context.

Oh Ali Two get destroyed because of you, an extreme lover and an extreme hater

It is talking about the nusayris and the nasibis.

Love of Ali (as) has been stressed on by the Prophet (pbuh) again and again.

Oh wait! Are all those ahadith unauthentic too?

Edited by Whizbee
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

(salam)

[shakir 42:23] That is of which Allah gives the good news to His servants, (to) those who believe and do good deeds. Say: I do not ask of you any reward for it but love for my near relatives; and whoever earns good, We give him more of good therein; surely Allah is Forgiving, Grateful.

Are we gonna accuse Allah swt and His Prophet (pbuh) for saying that that he (the Prophet) did not ask any reward (for being a Prophet), but to love his Ahlulbayt. Are both too extreme? And the Prophet (pbuh) has ghulu tendency because instead of asking to love Allah swt, but the Prophet is asking to love his relatives?

[shakir 33:56] Surely Allah and His angels bless the Prophet; O you who believe! call for (Divine) blessings on him and salute him with a (becoming) salutation.

Are we gonna blame Allah swt to send so much blessings to His Prophet and Ahlulbayt (as). Why not just send blessings to Allah swt alone?

There are people who blame others of putting high priority of LOVE to Ahlulbayt (as) of having ghulu tendency...surely they have forgotten Allah swt, HIs Prophet (as) and Ahlulbayt and TOO MUCH of using THEIR OWN BRAIN.

Layman

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

Salaams,

Thanks for hijacking my thread. :lol:

The intention was to have a simple summary of the issues so I could do my own research inshallah. To me personally that would have value and presumably, therefore, for others also. In light of this, post number 2 has been the most useful so far, and then some of the others. Why don't you debaters start your own thread please. Something like....

"Ayatullah Fadlallah: more mud-slinging at each other"

There is so much of this type of debate out there already...no need for more. But I don't think there is any summary...so why not do something different?!.

SUGGESTION: could this thread be moved to "The Thinker's Discourse" sub-forum instead?

Best wishes, wassalaam,

Hajj Amir

:unsure:

PS quite amazing to see how sensitive this topic is.

Edited by Hajj Amir
Link to post
Share on other sites
In His Name, the Most High

Salaams

This thread has no value; and serves only to further fitneh against an Alem Rabbani; fitneh that has been answered adequately in the past; and has been dealt with.

The point is very simple.

In matters of Usul; one care read the opinions of many but has to formulate their own understanding. Therefore in this context; the opinions of Ayatullah al-Udhma Fadhlullah(HA) are exactly that; his opinions based on his extensive research. The issues in question and have been claimed as wrong by some people for motives best known to themselves.

The issues in question; do NOT include elements that directly work against the five Usul ad-Din:

1/ Tawheed (Monotheism)

2/ Adalah (Justice of Allah)

3/ Nubuwwah (Prophethood)

4/ Imamah (sometimes refered to as Wilayah) (Vicegerency or Guardianship)

5/ Qiyamah (Judgement/Resurection)

This is a fact. Sub concepts are the only areas that have been effected by the propoganda and campaigns against Ayatullah al-Udhma Fadhlullah(HA).

In matters of Furu; there are 3 (three) options:

1/ One operates on Ehtiyaat (operating on the basis of precaution)

2/ One does their own Ijtihaad (deduces the religious edicts themselves based on their own extensive learning and knowledge)

3/ One selects a Maraj'e Taqleed and follows his rulings in matters of Islamic Jurisprudence/Law (Furu ad-Din)

Now; if someone feels that they are unhappy with Ayatullah al-Udhma Fadhlullah(HA) that is fine; there is no compulsion on them to elect to make taqleed of him(HA), and they can elect another Marja' Taqleed.

If one does not make Taqleed of Ayatullah al-Udhma Fadhlullah(HA) then one has no place making comments on his integrity, level of learning, etc.

If one makes Taqleed of Ayatullah al-Udhma Fadhlullah(HA) then clearly one has determined (through the various means available for determining such) that he is the Marja' they follow; as a result they must follow him(HA); and if they feel that he is wrong in some matters (naturally after detailed reflection, questioning through the appropriate means and channels, etc); then they should change their Taqleed if they are satisified that he(HA) is no longer the most appropriate Marja' for them to follow in terms of his level of learning. This however doesn't give anyone the right to speak against him, chances are that on account of the disparity in level of understanding between the mukkalaf and the Marja'(HA), it is the mukallaf who is failing to understand, which gives him/her doubts and puts them in a situation where they have to move their Taqleed away from Ayatullah al-Udhma Fadhlullah(HA) to elsewhere - where no doubt they will face similar problems, as the problem is not with the Marja', but with the mukkallaf (follower, one who is tasked with).

The issue is simple.

No need for ANY mud-slinging, confusing stories that have all been refuted numerous times; and no more talk against Ayatullah al-Udhma Fadhlullah(HA).

Let us remember a number of things; when those speaking and bad-mouthing this great Alem Rabbani(HA) have studied and given to Islam and the Ummah as a whole what he has; then they will have the level of humility and intellect, understanding and wisdom, to approach him directly and resolve any confusion; anyone who as not contributed as much as he has to Islam and the Muslim Ummah; has no right whatsoever to speak against him.

If you don't like him, that's fine; keep it to yourself; and pray that Allah cleanse the impurities from your heart and give you light in your heart; and make the same prayer for all believers. Bas khalaas. Finished.

With Salaams and Dua's

Shabbir

In His Name, the Most High

Please read - reposted again since people are simply ignoring.

The subjects that are being discussed are invalid; if the subject resides within the Usul ad-Din, then it is not open to Taqleed; one take care an informed opinion of an Alem but doesn't have to abide by it - one has to make ones own mind up on the Usul ad-Din, however on the Furu; if one doesn't make Taqleed of Ayatullah al-Udhma Fadhlullah(HA) then his rulings on these subjects are of no value; but if one makes Taqleed of Ayatullah al-Udhma Fadhlullah(HA) then the muqallid has already determined that Ayatullah al-Udhma Fadhlullah(HA) is the best Marja' for them, and so follows him.

Finished.

What is wrong with you people that you must find excuses to mudsling and speak against; when you have done as much for Islam, and have studied as much as Ayatullah al-Udhma Fadhlullah(HA) you can then discuss DIRECTLY with him on these issues that you differ; but by that time; you will have realised how little you in reality know, and will be more concerned with improving your connection to Allah and knowledge to worry about what another Marja' says.

Please drop this subject now. All it will do is create fitneh and strife and work against the cohesion of the Ummah, or more specifically the Shia.

I would respectfully advise the moderators / administrators of Shiachat to close and lock this thread before it gets out of hand, at the end of the day; no-one wants the old Shabbir comming back to take out those who speak against Ayatullah Fadhlullah(HA), so better close this thread immediately.

I trust everyone understands.

With Salaams and Dua's

Shabbir

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

i have followed A. Fadlallah since the age of 9, only because my parents followed him at first, but now as i've matured, i have come to understand why my family follows him...and i now truly accept him as my marja

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

We cannot ignore this issue or avoid it just because people follow Syed Fadhlallah and it will create "disunity". As for those who say that we should accept him and not complain, you guys should have tried explaining that to Ayatullah Tabrizi (ar) who issued a statement forbidding people from co-operating with Syed Fadhlallah.

And no one is trying to create fitna but if someone asks for information about the Syed, should we lie? Conceal facts? Misinform them?

Edited by Whizbee
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
Salaamu alaikum brother, can you plz post the Fatwa?

There is no need to demand a fatwa from me, brother. Fatwas can be fake too, you know. Why don't you drop an email at tabrizi@tabrizi.org and inquire about it?

There was a time when we had scholars like Shaykh Murtada Ansari (qas) who, although was the most learned scholar of his time, didn't consider himself worthy of issuing fatwas till Imam (atfs) himself pointed at him and declared antal mujtahid. And today we have "scholars" who claim they don't even need the ijaza from those scholars who are senior to them.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Moderators
There is no need to demand a fatwa from me, brother. Fatwas can be fake too, you know. Why don't you drop an email at tabrizi@tabrizi.org and inquire about it?

There was a time when we had scholars like Shaykh Murtada Ansari (qas) who, although was the most learned scholar of his time, didn't consider himself worthy of issuing fatwas till Imam (atfs) himself pointed at him and declared antal mujtahid. And today we have "scholars" who claim they don't even need the ijaza from those scholars who are senior to them.

(salam)

Sister, the reason why I closed the thread was not because I didn't want the issue to be discussed, but because, it seemed to me, that it was taking on a disrespectful tone. I know this is hard to quantify, but that is what I felt at that time. I would have done the same thing if disrespectful comments were being made about any scholar that has reached the level of mujtahid. Also, any one of the many issues that were brought up (wilayat al taqwiniyat, authenticity of Hadith Kisa, etc)

deserve their own thread to be discussed, because all of these are very intricate and complex subjects that cannot be determined in a short statement.

If a simple list had been presented (He disagrees with this, agrees with this, etc) that would have been acceptable but blanket statements (like he doubts the authenticity (in total) of Ziyarat Ashura or Hadith Kisa) misrepresent his position on those issues and I felt that that was not fair and did not do justice to his actual positions on those issues. Then when statements were continuing like, "He doubts the very basis of Shiaism(that's not an exact quote), I decided to close the thread. If you say that he is doubting the basis of Shiaism, that is equivalent to saying that he is doubting the basis of the Religion of Islam, since we Shias believe that there is only one Islam, as taught to us by our Prophet (pbuh) and the Imams of Ahl Al Bayt (as) . I hope that the discussion can continue in a more accurate and fair manner.

Link to post
Share on other sites

can someone explain (preferably in ayatullah fadhlullah's own words or an approximation thereof) what his position is on tawassul/du'a tawassul? for those who are just curious about the differences and don't want to argue.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...