Imam Ali Infallible?

[Truthseeker786]

If the people knew that Imam Ali (raa) was free from sin and he himself knew he was free from sin then why would he have gone to the court when thew jew stole his sword did they not beleive he was infallible so why did they even go through the courts.

[abbas110]

It comes down to your understanding of the word 'Ismat' or Infallible as it is translated in English. If it means that Imam Ali (as) was on the level of Yaqeen where he refrained from committing any act that could result in the displeasure of Allah (swt) and his Propet (saww), then YES that is our aqeeda and we stand by it. But if it means that he was some sort of a robotic creation that was out there performing all the pre programmed, error free actions, then I am sorry, that is not our view.

Edited December 9, 2009 by abbas110

[Truthseeker786]

cool

so can you back that up with evidence from scholars or something cuz the shias i chat to beleieve differently

[abbas110]

^my friend, foremost, I would like you to back your original query by relevant proofs from the Shia scholars.

[Huseyin_Cetin_Turkish_Shia]

If the people knew that Imam Ali (raa) was free from sin and he himself knew he was free from sin then why would he have gone to the court when thew jew stole his sword did they not beleive he was infallible so why did they even go through the courts.

First of all i have never heard anything such as Jews stealing Imam Ali's Sword. No one would of dared to do such a thing. Haven't you ever heard that when Abu bakr, Omar and the other people were discussing caliphate issues whilst Imam Ali was burying Mohammad (pbuh) and they decided to go and take the prophet back out to do the janaza (funeral) again as they were absent, And Imam Ali stepped forward and took out his sword and said "Who ever comes near the grave to do such a act will be answered with my Zulfikaar". And one of the men amongst them said " I have heard this from the Prophet (pbuh) that when Ali (R.A) takes his sword out from its cover he will not put it away before beheading a man". There for yet you are saying some Jews stole his sword.

[yonus]

He means shield not sword !

Suppose you put your gun in your car and someone came and stole it .

[Abdul Qaim]

Let me ask you a question. If Muhammad (pbuh) was Rasoolullah, why didn't the majority of the Quraysh accept him as such?

[carlos]

If the people knew that Imam Ali (raa) was free from sin and he himself knew he was free from sin then why would he have gone to the court when thew jew stole his sword did they not beleive he was infallible so why did they even go through the courts.

Why was Khuzimah Ibn Thabit al-Ansari called Dhul Shahadatain?

[Basim Ali]

(salam),

Why are we jumping to conclusions? :huh: Here's the complete story:

During the rule of Imam Ali Ibn Abi Taleb (as), it is said that this incident took place...

Imam Ali (as) lost his shield in a battle and a jew took it.

After knowing that the jew had it, the Ameer Al Mou’meneen asked the jew to give him the shield back (according to another tradition he recognized his shield while it was with the jew). The Jew refused and insisted that this shield belonged to him and not Ali Ibn Abi Taleb.

Imam Ali took the case to court.

As the Jew and Ali stood in front of Qadhi Shuraih ibn al-Hârith (the judge), the judge said: "Please lay your case O Ameer Al Mou’meneen”.

Imam Ali said: “No, do not call me that!”

The judge asked:"Why?”

Imam Ali said: ”Because in front of the law, we are all equal. No names or statuses are to be mentioned or taken into consideration”.

The judge agreed and asked them to lay their cases.

After each one finished stating his case, the judge decided that per the Islamic law and due to lack of proof that the shield belonged to Imam Ali, then the Jew owns it.

Imam Ali said: “This is a fair verdict, I have no proof and by God this is what the verdict should be. I agree on any verdict that is a just judgment, even if that verdict was against me!”.

Overwhelmed by what he saw and heard in front of his eyes…

The Jew then recited the testimony of faith and said, "I have never seen or heard of anything like this!”

He then continued: ”Here O Prince Of Believers, take your shield, I swear in front of this court that it belongs to you”.

Imam Ali turned to him and said: “No my brother, keep it with you. For you are now my brother in Islam (since the Jew just converted to Islam), and that is something far more valuable than anything tangible in this world!”.

Being infallible does not mean you do not go by Islamic Law. Infallibility is not something given to every other person walking on the road. It is given to a responsible person, who is worthy of being infallible. Going by your thesis of infallibility, Imam Ali (as) would not have offered his Islamic rites, saying that he was Infallible and he would go to Heaven no matter what he did. (Nauzubillah)

Moving on, it is recorded in books that that the very same Qadhi once showed reluctance to judge in the presence of Imam Ali (as), which itself is a sign of the Qadhi's respect and knowledge of the Imam's status. Furthermore, you finished the whole story in one sentence, without really quoting (and I doubt you read the story yourself before) the complete verdict of the judge. He said that the shield belongs to the Jew and not Imam Ali on the basis of lack of proofs. Just because one is infallible, is not reason to break Islamic Law. Judgement is supposed to be given on the basis of evidences and testimonies, and not the character of the people involved in the case.

The shield was Imam Ali's (as) the Jew and Imam Ali (as) knew it. But Imam Ali did not have proofs to back his claim, so the shield automatically went to the Jew. This is law, you can't change it. The judge is not saying that the shield does not belong to Imam Ali. Keeping the Islamic law in mind, he has to give the shield to the jew, even if he personally believes that it doesn't belong to him.

Imagine a scenario, where a jew stole a shield from the Prophet (pbuh). It was stolen in secret, so there is nobody in the Prophet's (pbuh) defence to testify that the shield belonged to the Prophet (pbuh) (keeping in mind, false testimony is Haram). On the other hand, the jew gathered a lot of other jews who testify against the Prophet (pbuh). What would a Muslim judge do in this condition, knowing that the person without proofs is al-Sadiq? Wouldn't it seem unfair to the rest of the world, if the judge unjustly gave the shield to the Prophet (pbuh) who did not even have a single proof? You conclusion is yours.

Finally, if you refresh your memory a bit, you will remember that there were only four companions who testified to the right (and hence the infallibility) of Imam Ali (as) after the Prophet's (pbuh) death. I haven't seen this judge being mentioned as one of these companions.

wa (salam),

Basim Ali JAfri

[individualist]

wait! Do Shia believe that Ali didn't sin? not even TRIVIAL sins?

How about the prophet? Did he not sin (small sins)?

I also have a question I heard a long time ago about Shia beliefs... I heard that Shia believe that all the men in the prophet's lineage up to Adam were all believers (non of his grandfathers were Mushriks)! Do Shia really believe this?!

Finally, is there an online source of Shia Hadith? (preferrably in Arabic).

thanks.

[Awakened]

wait! Do Shia believe that Ali didn't sin? not even TRIVIAL sins?

yes.

How about the prophet? Did he not sin (small sins)?

yes same thing.

I also have a question I heard a long time ago about Shia beliefs... I heard that Shia believe that all the men in the prophet's lineage up to Adam were all believers (non of his grandfathers were Mushriks)! Do Shia really believe this?!

yes,

Finally, is there an online source of Shia Hadith? (preferrably in Arabic).

yes,

wa salam

[individualist]

Proof from the Quran that prophet Muhammed SINNED!

48:2

That God may forgive you your sins of the past and those to follow; fulfil His favour to you; and guide you on the Straight Way;

47:19

Know, therefore, that there is no god but God, and ask forgiveness for your sin, and for the men and women who believe: for God knows how you move about and how you dwell in your homes.

40:55

Patiently, then, persevere: for the Promise of God is true: and ask forgiveness for your sin, and celebrate the Praises of your Lord in the evening and in the morning.

Other prophets sinned too:

Abraham sinned

26:82

And Who, I ardently hope, will forgive me my sin on the Day of Judgment.

Jonah sinned

21:87

And (mention) Dhu'n-Nun, when he went off in anger and deemed that We had no power over him, but he cried out in the darkness, saying: There is no god save Thee. Be Thou Glorified! Lo! I have been a wrong-doer.

Moses sinned

28:15-16

And he went into the city at a time of unvigilance on the part of its people, so he found therein two men fighting, one being of his party and the other of his foes, and he who was of his party cried out to him for help against him who was of his enemies, so Moses struck him with his fist and killed him. He said: This is on account of the Satan's doing; surely he is an enemy, openly leading astray. He said: My Lord! Lo! I have wronged my soul, so forgive me. Then He forgave him. Lo! He is the Forgiving, the Merciful.

David sinned

38:24-25

He (David) said: Surely he has been unjust to you in demanding your ewe (to add) to his own ewes; and most surely most of the partners act wrongfully towards one another, save those who believe and do good, and very few are they; And David guessed that We had tried him, and he sought forgiveness of his Lord, and he bowed himself and fell down prostrate and repented. So We forgave him this (lapse): he enjoyed, indeed, a Near Approach to Us, and a beautiful place of (Final) Return.

Were all the grandfathers of prophet Muhammed believers? The Quran says NOOOO!

9:114

The prayer of Abraham for the forgiveness of his father was only because of a promise he had promised him, but when it had become clear unto him that he (his father) was an enemy to God he (Abraham) disowned him. Abraham was tender-hearted, forbearing.

Got it? Not yet? Ishmael is Muhammed's grandfather... this makes Abraham, Muhammed's grandfather too, this also makes Azar (Abraham's father) who is *an enemy of God* and whom Abraham disowned, one of Muhammed's grandfathers!

So I have just proved, using the Quran, that at least one of Muhammed's grandfathers was a KAFIR and an enemy of God! This destroys the myth that all of Muhammed grandfathers were believers.

READ YOUR QURAN!

Finally, you said yes, there is an online source for Shia Hadith... could you please give me the link? Thanks.

[Awakened]

Before bringing up verses, you should check the our point of view of them (which is shared by many (most) Sunnis as well) regarding it and then address how our interpretation does not make sense.

[individualist]

Why should I check any "interpretation" when the verses are as clear as the midday sun?

No one is above asking forgiveness for himself from God, NOT even prophet Muhammed, even though God has forgiven all his past and future sins! Prophet Muhammed is a SLAVE of God... that's why he prayed, fasted, asked for forgiveness... a slave of God must worship God, no matter what!

Also, are you saying that the fact that Abraham's father was a disbeliever was not clear enough too? this clear verse needs interpretation too?

Finally, could you please provide me with the online Shia Hadith source?

Thanks.

Edited December 14, 2009 by individualist

[Awakened]

Why should I check any "interpretation" when the verses are as clear as the midday sun?

You should see other verses describing the Chosen Servants of God and their traits, and then choose which one you will tweak. There are verses the apparent meaning is that Prophets (as) only act according to the Divine Command (the Light). Most Muslims accept that as the position of Prophets (as) and then intrepret the other verses in light of that (then come with the concept good acts of lower people can be seen as sins for higher people).

No one is above asking forgiveness for himself from God, NOT even prophet Muhammed, even though God has forgiven all his past and future sins! Prophet Muhammed is a SLAVE of God... that's why he prayed, fasted, asked for forgiveness... a slave of God must worship God, no matter what!

We don't dispute that, but the meaning of "Sins" is disputed. As well, some hadiths (ie. I think from Imam Retha (as)) show there is a different meaning of "sin", and other verses allude to that, for example, him telling the Mushrikeen they will not be asked of our Ajraam, the Ajraam in the eyes of Mushrikeen was going against their Gods, this is one intrepretation that he is being to ask protection from his "Sin" (ie. the Sin in the eyes of Mushrikeen which is not a real sin but the word can be used because he is talking in their terms).

Also, are you saying that the fact that Abraham's father was a disbeliever was not clear enough too? this clear verse needs interpretation too?

Well the sons of Yaqoub (as) didn't come from Ismail (as) yet the same word "Ab" is used to include him. So this leaves a possiblity of it not being that. And then if you read that Ibrahim (as) detached himself from Azar when it was shown he was an enemy of God, and then you read in OLD age, asking forgivness for his Parents (Waladayhi which denotes those whom he is born of), then you can come up with same conclusion.

Finally, could you please provide me with the online Shia Hadith source?

http://www.al-shia.org/html/ara/index.php

wa salam (and you welcome)

Edited December 14, 2009 by Awakened

[individualist]

@ awakened

I am speachless! Spin, spin, and more spin!

Edited December 15, 2009 by individualist

[Lord Botta]

^ You'd definately enjoy the Shia interpretation of:

48:2

That God may forgive you your sins of the past and those to follow; fulfil His favour to you; and guide you on the Straight Way;

Look it 'em up here: http://altafsir.com

[individualist]

[gogiison2]

at times we find the pious saying, 'God forgive me for that i didn't have more to offer him.' does this mean one has sinned? i think not.

i think sayed ammar nakshawani had a lecture on this and the wording used in the above verses meaning to protect from sins. this is why knowledge of the linguistics are vital.

Edited December 15, 2009 by gogiison2

[individualist]

linguistics?

Dear, I am a native Arabic speaker with very good knowledge of classical Arabic... now read and re-read these verses togeather.... there's no way that these verses meant anything but sin! Trivial sin, of course, since prophets are the best of men.

Here's an example of a trivial sin:

The prophet was reproached by God for the way he treated a poor blind man (he's clearly not perfect)

80:1-10

He frowned and turned away. Because the blind man came unto him. And what would make you know that he would purify himself (believe)? Or take heed and so the reminder might avail him?

As for him who considers himself free from need (of you), Unto him you turn your attention. Yet it is not your concern if he purifies himself (believe).

But as to him who came to you striving earnestly, And he fears, Of him you were unmindful.

Anyway, thanks for apparently agreeing that Abraham's father was a KAFIR and an enemy of God.

[gogiison2]

^ you're fault finding without adequate islamic knowledge. being a native arab doesn't equate to being a perfect muslim, else all of you would be pious. you should know this. you guys like to give your own interpretation which confuses you even more. i don't agree with your view of Prophet Ibrahim.

as for your interpretations of surah abasa, is it related that Prophet acted in any such way elsewhere, or no? what about at dhul asheera when others where interrupting him? please give references if you can, not just your misunderstandings of verses. i don't think any lover of the Prophet will say this is befitting of his character.

Edited December 15, 2009 by gogiison2

[Tawazun]

^ you're fault finding without adequate islamic knowledge. being a native arab doesn't equate to being a perfect muslim, else all of you would be pious. you should know this. you guys like to give your own interpretation which confuses you even more. i don't agree with your view of Prophet Ibrahim.

as for your interpretations of surah abasa, is it related that Prophet acted in any such way elsewhere, or no? what about at dhul asheera when others where interrupting him? please give references if you can, not just your misunderstandings of verses. i don't think any lover of the Prophet will say this is befitting of his character.

Stop the nonsense Beside Surah abasa which clearly shows that prophet Muhammad wasnt masoom, the Quran itself testify that prophet Adam did sin and disobeyed Allah .. let alone prophet Moses who killed an innocent person ..the concept of Esma is alien to the Quran..its man made concept ..

Edited December 15, 2009 by Tawazun

[individualist]

you're fault finding without adequate islamic knowledge. being a native arab doesn't equate to being a perfect muslim, else all of you would be pious.

What does piety have anything to do with understanding PERFECTLY CLEAR VERSES??!!

you should know this. you guys like to give your own interpretation which confuses you even more. i don't agree with your view of Prophet Ibrahim.

Aha! So you don't agree that Azar was a Kafir! I AM NOT interpreting anything! The verse says in PERFECTLY CLEAR language that Abraham, after learning that his father was an enemy of God, he disowned his own father for the sake of God! IN FACT, here's the verse again in CONTEXT:

9:113

It is not (fit) for the Prophet and those who believe that they should ask forgiveness for the polytheists, even though they should be near relatives, after it has become clear to them that they are inmates of the flaming fire.

9:114

The prayer of Abraham for the forgiveness of his father was only because of a promise he had promised him, but when it had become clear unto him that he (his father) was an enemy to God he (Abraham) disowned him. Abraham was tender-hearted, forbearing.

Why do you think this UTTERLY clear verse needs any interpretation?! Please don't give me a heart attack!!!

as for your interpretations of surah abasa, is it related that Prophet acted in any such way elsewhere, or no? what about at dhul asheera when others where interrupting him? please give references if you can, not just your misunderstandings of verses. i don't think any lover of the Prophet will say this is befitting of his character.

What are you talking about?!!! Then you tell me... who frowned at the poor blind man? Who turned his back on him? Who was unmindful of him despite his coming to him in all earnesty seeking God? Who was this person who did this to the blind man? YOU tell me!!!

[individualist]

@ Tawazun

Stop the nonsense Beside Surah abasa which clearly shows that prophet Muhammad wasnt masoom, the Quran itself testify that prophet Adam did sin and disobeyed Allah .. let alone prophet Moses who killed an innocent person ..the concept of Esma is alien to the Quran..its man made concept ..

The concept of Esma is not entirely wrong... God protected Muhammed from committing great sins... He also protected him from his enemies. Esma means "protection". (protection against great sins and protection from people's harm)... In fact, there is a verse in the Quran that uses this very verb: "ya3semuka"

يَا أَيُّهَا الرَّسُولُ بَلِّغْ مَا أُنزِلَ إِلَيْكَ مِن رَّبِّكَ وَإِن لَّمْ تَفْعَلْ فَمَا بَلَّغْتَ رِسَالَتَهُ وَاللّهُ يَعْصِمُكَ مِنَ النَّاسِ إِنَّ اللّهَ لاَ يَهْدِي الْقَوْمَ الْكَافِرِينَ

5:67

O Messenger! deliver what bas been revealed to you from your Lord; and if you do it not, then you have not delivered His message, and God will protect you from the people; surely God will not guide the unbelieving people.

This verse is meant to reassure the prophet that he should fully preach the message without fearing consequences from Kafirs.

Also, in another verse the Quran tells how God made the prophet firm against the demands of Meccans of adding verses in the Quran.

017.073

And their purpose was to tempt thee away from that which We had revealed unto thee, to substitute in our name something quite different; (in that case), behold! they would certainly have made thee (their) friend!

017.074

And had We not given thee strength, thou wouldst nearly have inclined to them a little.

017.075

In that case We would certainly have made you to taste a double (punishment) in this life and a double (punishment) after death, then you would not have found any helper against Us.

PS. Prophet Moses killed the man UNINTENTIONALLY... He hit him to protect the Israelite and he had no idea the Egyptian would die... he was defending the Israelite and the sin was not murder... it was *manslaughter*.

Edited December 15, 2009 by individualist

[Tawazun]

@ Tawazun

The concept of Esma is not entirely wrong... God protected Muhammed from committing great sins... He also protected him from his enemies. Esma means "protection". (protection against great sins and protection from people's harm)... In fact, there is a verse in the Quran that uses this very verb: "ya3semuka"

يَا أَيُّهَا الرَّسُولُ بَلِّغْ مَا أُنزِلَ إِلَيْكَ مِن رَّبِّكَ وَإِن لَّمْ تَفْعَلْ فَمَا بَلَّغْتَ رِسَالَتَهُ وَاللّهُ يَعْصِمُكَ مِنَ النَّاسِ إِنَّ اللّهَ لاَ يَهْدِي الْقَوْمَ الْكَافِرِينَ

5:67

O Messenger! deliver what bas been revealed to you from your Lord; and if you do it not, then you have not delivered His message, and God will protect you from the people; surely God will not guide the unbelieving people.

This verse is meant to reassure the prophet that he should fully preach the message without fearing consequences from Kafirs.

Also, in another verse the Quran tells how God made the prophet firm against the demands of Meccans of adding verses in the Quran.

017.073

And their purpose was to tempt thee away from that which We had revealed unto thee, to substitute in our name something quite different; (in that case), behold! they would certainly have made thee (their) friend!

017.074

And had We not given thee strength, thou wouldst nearly have inclined to them a little.

017.075

In that case We would certainly have made you to taste a double (punishment) in this life and a double (punishment) after death, then you would not have found any helper against Us.

In Verse 20: 121-122 in the Quran, Allah Almighty says:

Thus did Adam disobey his Lord, so he went astray.

Then his Lord chose him, and turned to him with forgiveness, and gave him guidance. (Quran, 20:121-122)

Prophet Musa (عليه السلام) also committed a mistake of killing an Egyptian man. In Verse 28:16 of the Quran, Allah Almighty says:

He [Musa] said: ‘My Lord! Verily, I have wronged myself, so forgive me.’ Then He [Allah] forgave him. Verily, He is the Oft-Forgiving, the Most Merciful. (Quran, 28:16)

Yes they are infallible in the specific aspect of conveying the Message of Islam. For example, the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) would never make a mistake when he was reciting the Quran...other than that they were just men, the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) repeatedly told his followers that he is just a man and no more...

PS. Prophet Moses killed the man UNINTENTIONALLY... He hit him to protect the Israelite and he had no idea the Egyptian would die... he was defending the Israelite and the sin was not murder... it was *manslaughter*.

Even if he did it UNINTENTIONALLY, the infallible in Shia Islam is the one who is incapable of doing sin/error/mistake..that ofcourse contradict with what happened to Moses who was supposed to be Masoom ( infallible ) !!

Edited December 15, 2009 by Tawazun

[individualist]

the infallible in Shia Islam is the one who is incapable of doing sin/error/mistake.

well, I didn't know that was their concept of Esma. This makes men angels, even gods!

[Tawazun]

well, I didn't know that was their concept of Esma. This makes men angels, even gods!

Exactly !! That's why they claim that Ali is higher in rank than angels, prophets and messengers (except prophet Muhammad) ..that's ofcourse goes against the Quran

To say Ali is masoom and incapable of doing mistakes/errors is nicer than to say He is perfect !! got the point !!

Edited December 15, 2009 by Tawazun

[individualist]

Tawazun,

As if all of the Quran is NOT clear on who the absolute judge is, this verse below addresses this issue specifically:

Þõáö Çááøóåõ ÃóÚúáóãõ ÈöãóÇ áóÈöËõæÇ áóåõ ÛóíúÈõ ÇáÓøóãóÇæóÇÊö æóÇáúÃóÑúÖö ÃóÈúÕöÑú Èöåö æóÃóÓúãöÚú ãóÇ áóåõã ãøöä Ïõæäöåö ãöä æóáöíøò æóáóÇ íõÔúÑößõ Ýöí Íõßúãöåö ÃóÍóÏðÇ

Kahf:26

Say: God knows best how long they remained; to Him are (known) the unseen things of the heavens and the earth; how clear His sight and how clear His hearing! There is none to be a guardian for them besides Him, and He does not make any one His associate in His Judgment.

[this is a clear evidence against the claim that we need Ali's guardianship or approval to go to heaven!!! ONLY GOD is the guardian, only He judges!]

Anyway, I think this verse is what caused your other thread to be locked and members to be threatened to be banned.

So if you want to hang around here... try to be less... "argumentative"...

as for me I was just passing by... leaving soon...

[gogiison2]

Stop the nonsense Beside Surah abasa which clearly shows that prophet Muhammad wasnt masoom, the Quran itself testify that prophet Adam did sin and disobeyed Allah .. let alone prophet Moses who killed an innocent person ..the concept of Esma is alien to the Quran..its man made concept ..

cleary shows? i don't even want to get into discussing the Quran and what is clear. you can check the tafsir from al-islam.org/quran if you want.

Edited December 15, 2009 by gogiison2

[gogiison2]

name='individualist' date='14 December 2009 - 08:54 PM' timestamp='1260842099' post='1996635']

What does piety have anything to do with understanding PERFECTLY CLEAR VERSES??!!

piety has everything to do with comprehending 'clear' verses.

Aha! So you don't agree that Azar was a Kafir! I AM NOT interpreting anything! The verse says in PERFECTLY CLEAR language that Abraham, after learning that his father was an enemy of God, he disowned his own father for the sake of God! IN FACT, here's the verse again in CONTEXT:

9:113

It is not (fit) for the Prophet and those who believe that they should ask forgiveness for the polytheists, even though they should be near relatives, after it has become clear to them that they are inmates of the flaming fire.

9:114

The prayer of Abraham for the forgiveness of his father was only because of a promise he had promised him, but when it had become clear unto him that he (his father) was an enemy to God he (Abraham) disowned him. Abraham was tender-hearted, forbearing.

Why do you think this UTTERLY clear verse needs any interpretation?! Please don't give me a heart attack!!!

where did i mention Azar? i mentioned Prophet Ibrahim. as for Azar, my understanding is that he was a kafir. but it's said that he wasn't his real father but rather a step father. also check the tafsir on al-islam.org/quran. it's said that the term of father is akin to how christians may call priests father or even saying God the father.

What are you talking about?!!! Then you tell me... who frowned at the poor blind man? Who turned his back on him? Who was unmindful of him despite his coming to him in all earnesty seeking God? Who was this person who did this to the blind man? YOU tell me!!!

please refer to my reply to Tawazun.

[gogiison2]

Exactly !! That's why they claim that Ali is higher in rank than angels, prophets and messengers (except prophet Muhammad) ..that's ofcourse goes against the Quran

To say Ali is masoom and incapable of doing mistakes/errors is nicer than to say He is perfect !! got the point !!

please cite verses so that we can see what you're trying to say.

one opinion that is given in favor of Imam Ali is that Rasoolullah's sharia is said to be the greatest sharia and likewise the one who would pick up the burden of this greatest sharia would also have to be of high ranking. also, what does ahadith say about the youths of paradise? and leader of women of paradise? and who will pray behind the 12th? what do all these have in common?............for somethings we must use our God given aql as well.

[individualist]

I just hit a wall in this thread. I'll back off.

[Tawazun]

please cite verses so that we can see what you're trying to say.

one opinion that is given in favor of Imam Ali is that Rasoolullah's sharia is said to be the greatest sharia and likewise the one who would pick up the burden of this greatest sharia would also have to be of high ranking.

probably the worst answer I have ever read, so Ali is higher in rank than prophets and messengers simply because his cousin ( prophet Muhammad) brought the greatest sharia !?

I'm speechless

....for somethings we must use our God given aql as well.

Do you have one !!?

[gogiison2]

name='Tawazun' date='14 December 2009 - 11:58 PM' timestamp='1260853138' post='1996682']

probably the worst answer I have ever read, so Ali is higher in rank than prophets and messengers simply because his cousin ( prophet Muhammad) brought the greatest sharia !?

I'm speechless

i'm just echoing what others are saying in this regard. it's not my job to raise masoomeen to higher ranks than Allah has already given them. with that said, i don't want to argue with you if you didn't read the rest of my previous reply since i see that you didn't add it to your quote.

Do you have one !!?

do i have one??

Edited December 15, 2009 by gogiison2

[Awakened]

Salam

Some things to recall from Quran.

Allah (swt) has spoken of given examples of his chosen ones as being pure without blemish of any uncleanness. We see this with Yahya (as), Mariam (as), and Isa (as). Indeed, evil deeds are done such that the person doing it is occupying an evil state, or at least, there is evil mixed into him, and this undoubtably impurity. So the "sins" of the Pure ones, are of course, short comings, and not to be mixed with what done according to the blessed command of God inspired by the blessed holy Spirit in the Anbiya (as). Yes even their Sins are such blessed deeds.

Now to go on to support this claim is God's word... "they don't precede him in speech and by his command do they act". It's funny how when exact same thing is said about Allah's (swt) Angels (as), everyone concludes without ambiguity, that Angels (as) are Ma'asoom and Pure and Sinless and completely obedient Servants of God.

Yet when the same thing is said about Anbiya (as), all of a sudden it's ambiguous.... and ofcourse, the fact Anbiya (as) SIN and DO EVIL, is ALL TO CLEAR.

This is similar to how Salafis say it's all to clear that Allah (swt) is above literally like physically above us, but when a first says he is closer to us then our juglar vein, they ignore all norms of language and go with farfetch impossible intrepretations to stick to a view that goes against the foundations of Tawheed.

Indeed, the Dignity and Majesty of the Anbiya (as) is one of the obligatory things to believe. It's part of what it means to believe in them. It's to appreciate their magnamity and Sacred souls.

Anyways, to add support to that verse, is what was said regarding Nuh (as).

Indeed Nuh (as) was told that his son was not of his family, and then to show indeed that he is not of his family, it said verily his act is other then good/righteous. Now if you were to think about it, indeed this verse is saying...

He did an act other then good, so how can he be of our family?

It shows the true family of Nuh (as) is of people whom acts ARE only Salihat. That means, nothing is other then that. Even the trivial things they do, is all righteous and done out a blessed Niya.

And this would include what Nuh (as) ASKS forgiveness for, indeed, his reaction, etc, his hastiness, all this was done out of a pure beautiful inspiration of God's command.

It's quite obvious if you just ponder over these verses, that "Sins" of Nuh (as) and Ibrahim (as) are not other then "Salihat".

Another thing to mention regarding the verse of "Thanb" of Mohammad (pbuh).

First if you see the verse, it says what has passed away from your sin (NOT PLURAL) and what remains of IT... You telling me Mohammad (pbuh) has ONE SIN that he did not abandon and is being told that he continues in it? Just think about it. There is a metaphoric understanding of it, but I would say if you look at the context, the victory here, it really doesn't seem to be spiritual especially by what the Surah then goes on to talk about.

You will realize that indeed the view that it's referring to the "Sin" accused by Mushrikeen (ie. preaching Tawheed), this flows well. It's say your "Sin" in their eyes, indeed you will be protected from all you have done regarding that, and all you will continue regarding that. And it's hinited "you will not be asked me Ajramna"..If you look at "Ajraam", it never is simply a trivial sin, it's referrring to something deep and very wicked unless your being very poetic.

Indeed what is determined as the very bad by that society by technically of the word, is "evil" "sin" "ajraam", but according to whom? Like "King", in Quran there is definition of true King, and then King in normal people words.

Here indeed, Mohammad (pbuh) IS TRANGRESSING their norms and is commitng Ijraam according to that society... And in fact, it's all BUT ONE SIN, and it's nothing but teaching the Truth.

If you would just forget your first impression and what you thought first, and just see in it light of this, you will, see that indeed it flows the well with the Surah. It's not off-topic.

Now the next issue is that of the blind man:

First, if it was a normal blind man, then it's not a trivial sin and reveals a very bad trait. The only thing that keeps you from seeing indeed how disgraceful and ugly it is to act like that with a blind man whom is sincerely coming to know the truth and striving hard, is the fact you believe the Nabi (pbuh) did it and hence it's "minor". The fact is that most people (include most non-Muslims) would never act like this to a blind person.... At least, this is the trait of people today. People will not belittle a blind person, they feel compassion but at the same time don't feel to belittle him, and indeed, if any blind man came up to any Muslim, Christian, or Jew sincerely to learn about the deen or to benefit from their wisdom, in most cases (99%) no one would frown on him and turn away. This act that most people will never commit ofcourse is said to be commited by the Al-Ahmad Al-Amjad, Mohammad (pbuh).

Now they say it's "obvious" it's referring to him, however, there is nothing wrong with it reprhending another person and speaking to that person. The person identified is the person whom did that, and then he is talked to.. to show a lesson to everyone. It's not weird at all and similar turn of addressment is found in Quran.

But let's say it's off the eloquence, and doesn't seem normal to do it, what made you conclude that the "blind man" is a physical blind man?

Through Quran, it talks about those whom are spiritually blind most of the time with the word "blind"...so why is that not popping up as a possiblity?

Let us say this is a possiblity, and let's say it's about Mohammad (pbuh).. let us say we won't to intrepret in away that absolves Mohammad (pbuh) from any sin which we should do, because people are free from a sin accused until proven so.

Let us say it's saying indeed by the Name of God, Mohammad (pbuh) frowned and turned away from the blind man when he came to him?... Then it can be turning to Mohammad (pbuh) and talking rhetorically to show people the wisdom of it... now before I go into that.. we have to see why this would not be a sin...

Through out Quran it talks about how the Mohammad (pbuh) can't guide the blind? And indeed whom are the blind? Those whom refuse to see and act arrogantly towards the truth and then others whom stick to love of world and stick to blind leaders thinking they are grat. But Mohammad (pbuh) is being question about his Act that was done by the blessed Name of Allah.

So it's saying "And how did you indeed know that perhaps he may purify himself? "Or that he be reminded so that the reminder may benefit him?" This is asking positively not sarcastically indeed how did you know, implying Mohammad (pbuh) knew that this act might purify him and cause him to remember?

Now why would it? Well here is the thing. Let's say this person holds a lot of esteem by others and for himself... he is ofcourse deceived by himself,.... he comes to Mohammad (pbuh) as if he cares to learn and seriously wants to have discussion or maybe just to argue, or what not... but he sees Mohammad (pbuh) whom preaches long for society and to tohers, known for his forbearance, for wanting to guide people with out most care...

He comes to Mohammad (pbuh) thinking Mohammad (pbuh) will ofcourse entertain him and go into this long discussion/debate or advice.. but Mohammad (pbuh) does something that all that talk could not do.

He just turns away from him all together... And this man probably here recognizes he may decieve others, he may even in times deceive himself, but now he realizes he can't fool Mohammad (pbuh) and comes to REALIZE his lowly inward and his insincerity, which is really what is keeping away from the truth and making him blind to the clear and manifest proofs brought by Mohammad (pbuh).

So Mohammad (pbuh) knew that indeed by doing this it might remind him and in fact, this is to clarify to him, that it was not simply because he realized your intentions, but rather he wished to show you that and that perhaps you will awaken to yourself and become sincere to yourself and really see if the proofs are not manifest and if your blindness is anyone's fault or if there is anything Mohammad (pbuh) can say more then what has been said, to manifest the clear truth.

Then the next part is sarcastic but it confirms his actions...

It says, as for those whom see themselves needless from guidance of God, will you address yourself?

(ie. saying.. indeed why would you address yourself and go on to lengths of knowledge and proofs when they see themselves not in need of learning or being reminded or shown the truth? Why would you go throuh the trouble guide a person whom has decided he doesn't need guidance and is guided?

And then saying as well... sacrastically

A person whom come sincerely striving, would you actually turn yourself away from him?

Ie. It;s saying indeed, had this blind man had sincerity and was striving, you would not turn away from himself...

Then if you ponder over the following verse, you will realize there was never any possible reading but this one:

كَلَّا إِنَّهَا تَذْكِرَةٌ

KALA, is negation, it's saying, indeed, not possible, indeed impossible. "Nay" "No" . This is what it means. The Kala doesn't make sense in the Sunni away it's read.

You read your way, it has no flow...

So indeed, the way I read these verses the 2nd time I read Quran before reading any tafsir, I come to conclude has always been the right way.

Indeed it's emphasizing on that is not upon Mohammad (pbuh) to guide the blind out of their error nor make the deaf hear, it's really up to them....

This was then related to awaken the rest of blind insincere souls...

IT's reminder for WHOM WANTS TO REMEMBER... Mohammad (pbuh) is not obligated nor anyone, to make you see the truth when you don't care to know, dont want to remember yourself... if you want to remember Allah and the light and see the signs and proofs, you will. If you don't you won't.

read it in the way I told you, put question marks where appropiate in translations, read it, and you will see this is the more logically one out of all of them and indeed provides the most guidance and flows well with what has been repeated through out Quran. And indeed it flows the most well with the Surah and what is said after of it being just a reminder, so whom wants to may remember.

Edited December 16, 2009 by Awakened