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
Sign in to follow this  
Righteous

Fundamentals Of Sunnism

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

A simple yes or no will suffice.

  1. All sahabas are Imams - since they are all stars and we can follow any one for guidance
  2. All companions loved each and lived happily with each other and there was absolutely no discord between them except for difference in ijtehad
  3. The sahihs are all sahihs as long as Shias dont use any material to prove their PoV then they can be ghareeb or weak or even false
  4. Ali's status is lower then any other sahaba and specialy 1-2-3 just because we say so. Not because they were better in knowlege in deen, eloquence or bravery then Ali. Just because we have some hadith saying so
  5. Anything or anybody related to Ali (as) needs to be downplayed, if he is the Zulfiqar then we will call someone saiful Islam even if that guy fought in every single war at the time of Prophet (pbuh) against muslims till the fall of Makkah and had no choice but to accept Islam
  6. We will justify the emaan and faith of the biggest enemy of Islam and his family - Abu Sufyan the leader of kuffar e makka and sowrn enemy of the prophet of islam (pbuh), abu sufyan's liver eating wife Hind who ate teh liver of Hz Hamza, their son muwayia who fought against Ali (as) and Hassan (as) and his Abu Sufyan's grandson Yazid who martyred the grandson of Prophet. These all evil people who had enmity against Banu Hashim were believing muslims but the Protector of Prophet (pbuh) was a kaafir on the evidence of Muwayia. Yes the hadith of ABu Talib dying a kaafir comes from Muwaya Laeen the sworn enemy

I can sincerely go on and on but this will be a good starting point for our visiting nasibis like qalandar ibn.askari et al.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A simple yes or no will suffice.

  1. All sahabas are Imams - since they are all stars and we can follow any one for guidance
  2. All companions loved each and lived happily with each other and there was absolutely no discord between them except for difference in ijtehad
  3. The sahihs are all sahihs as long as Shias dont use any material to prove their PoV then they can be ghareeb or weak or even false
  4. Ali's status is lower then any other sahaba and specialy 1-2-3 just because we say so. Not because they were better in knowlege in deen, eloquence or bravery then Ali. Just because we have some hadith saying so
  5. Anything or anybody related to Ali (as) needs to be downplayed, if he is the Zulfiqar then we will call someone saiful Islam even if that guy fought in every single war at the time of Prophet (pbuh) against muslims till the fall of Makkah and had no choice but to accept Islam
  6. We will justify the emaan and faith of the biggest enemy of Islam and his family - Abu Sufyan the leader of kuffar e makka and sowrn enemy of the prophet of islam (pbuh), abu sufyan's liver eating wife Hind who ate teh liver of Hz Hamza, their son muwayia who fought against Ali (as) and Hassan (as) and his Abu Sufyan's grandson Yazid who martyred the grandson of Prophet. These all evil people who had enmity against Banu Hashim were believing muslims but the Protector of Prophet (pbuh) was a kaafir on the evidence of Muwayia. Yes the hadith of ABu Talib dying a kaafir comes from Muwaya Laeen the sworn enemy

I can sincerely go on and on but this will be a good starting point for our visiting nasibis like qalandar ibn.askari et al.

1) No.

2) Yes, for some. No, for others.

3) Yes, for some. No, for others.

4) Yes, for many. No, for few.

5) You're confusing the nawasib with Sunnis, may the curse of God be upon the former.

6) Yes, for some. No, for others.

Ahl us-Sunnah hardly has consensus on anything. Some of them you could even consider weak Shi'ites, the shakkak, as the Imams (as) would call them. Point is, don't lump them all together into one entity. Sunni is basically a label that means next to nothing in the grand scheme of things.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A simple yes or no will suffice.

  1. All sahabas are Imams - since they are all stars and we can follow any one for guidance
  2. All companions loved each and lived happily with each other and there was absolutely no discord between them except for difference in ijtehad
  3. The sahihs are all sahihs as long as Shias dont use any material to prove their PoV then they can be ghareeb or weak or even false
  4. Ali's status is lower then any other sahaba and specialy 1-2-3 just because we say so. Not because they were better in knowlege in deen, eloquence or bravery then Ali. Just because we have some hadith saying so
  5. Anything or anybody related to Ali (as) needs to be downplayed, if he is the Zulfiqar then we will call someone saiful Islam even if that guy fought in every single war at the time of Prophet (pbuh) against muslims till the fall of Makkah and had no choice but to accept Islam
  6. We will justify the emaan and faith of the biggest enemy of Islam and his family - Abu Sufyan the leader of kuffar e makka and sowrn enemy of the prophet of islam (pbuh), abu sufyan's liver eating wife Hind who ate teh liver of Hz Hamza, their son muwayia who fought against Ali (as) and Hassan (as) and his Abu Sufyan's grandson Yazid who martyred the grandson of Prophet. These all evil people who had enmity against Banu Hashim were believing muslims but the Protector of Prophet (pbuh) was a kaafir on the evidence of Muwayia. Yes the hadith of ABu Talib dying a kaafir comes from Muwaya Laeen the sworn enemy

I can sincerely go on and on but this will be a good starting point for our visiting nasibis like qalandar ibn.askari et al.

(bismillah)(salam)

1. All the Sahabas are the Imams of Ahl e sunna wal jamaat Alhamduliah( if u dont take the word "Imam" in the shia sense).Allah has confirmed their faith in Quran As the Hadiths are Hujjat upon us and the primary narrators of the hadiths are the Sahabas so yes we are following them.For us each and evey person who has seen sydna Mohamad PBUH in the state of Iman and has died on that Iman is a blessed sahabi.Im living at a distance of 1400 years from the the era of Syedna Mohamad PBUH, How can i get the blessing of the faith which was brought by syedna Mohamad if i assume that the blessed people who lived in his age could not take guidance from him or (mazAllah) the prophet PBUH failed in his mission and he just inspired 7 people and only they are sahabas.

2.No, THE sahabas might have some discord which appeared during the caliphat of Hadrat Ali ra due to the conspiracies of the Sabai cult( lack of modes of communication was another factor) but they never did takfeer of each other and u are right that each one of them during the time of that discord did Ijtihad and even if their Ijtihad has gone wrong , they will get Ajar for it.Similarly,despite the differences between Hadrat Ali and Hadrat Muaviya, they never did takfeer of each other.

Here is what Hadrat Ali said about Hadrat muaviya ( despite the differences)

"In the beginning of our matter, the people of Sham and us met. It is obvious that our God is one, our Prophet is one, and our call in Islam is one. We do not see ourselves more in faith in Allah or more in believing His messenger than them, nor they do. Our matter is one, except for our disagreement in Uthman's blood, and we are innocent from his murder."

[Nahjul Balagha, vol.3, p.648]

Hadrat mauviya said about hadrat Ali

"Ali is better and more virtuous than me and I differ from him only in the matter of qisaas of Uthmaan (Radhi Allaahu Ta'ala 'anh) and if he takes the qisaas of the blood of uthmaan I will be the first of the people of syria to make bayah to him"

[al-Bidayatu wan Nihaayah page 129,259 vol 7]

3.No , We have an established science of hadith which has gone through alot of evolution at the hands of great muhaditheens like the Aima e AHadith and the later scholars like Imam Zahabi Ra,Imam Ibn Hajar Ra and Imam Nasir ud din Albani Ra etc.Our usool of Jarah wa tadeel and tekhreej fil hadith are far more mature. Like for example , their is a hadith in Sunan Ibn Maja which says that Quran is in Arabic, the language of the Prophet PBUH is Arabic and the language of Janah will be arabic. This hadith favours our cause but shiekh Albani Ra has termed it as daef on the basis of a weak narrator.

4.Though, the tenets of our religion are divine and they are not based on personalities unlike urs, we dont often get into this debate that "A is better than B and NO NO, C is better than B" but half of ur statement is right that Hadrat Ali Ra comes at number 4 as he was the 4th rightly guided caliph but other than the first three rightlly guided caliphs, no sahabi is better than him in status.

5. An absolute NO for that except the Majosies who were in Hadrat Ali Ra army in Jamal and siffain and Hadrat Ali Ra on many instances castigated them himself.Their are hundreds of such narrations which support my point but i will rely on two from Nijul balagha right now. Hadrat Ali ra said to his shia

"Woe to you. I am tired of rebuking you. Do you accept this worldly life in place of the next life? Or disgrace in place of dignity? When I invite you to fight your enemy your eyes revolve as though you are in the clutches of death, and in the senselessness of last moments. My pleadings are not understood by you and you remain stunned. It is as though your hearts are affected with madness so that you do not understand. You have lost my confidence for good. Neither are you a support for me to lean upon, nor a means to honour and victory. Your example is that of the camels whose protector has disappeared, so that if they are collected from one side they disperse away from the other side."

regarding the people who did Ghulu in Ali ra status,the wise and blessed man said

"With regard to me, two categories of people will be ruined, namely he who loves me too much and the love takes him away from rightfulness, and he who hates me too much and the hatred takes him away from rightfulness. The best man with regard to me is he who is on the middle course. So be with him and be with the great majority (of Muslims) because Allah's hand (of protection) is on keeping unity. You should beware of division because the one isolated from the group is (a prey) to Satan just as the one isolated from the flock of sheep is (a prey) to the wolf."

6. Needs explaination. plz read http://www.shiachat....act-or-fiction/

Edited by qalandar_1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(bismillah)

(salam)

[*]The sahihs are all sahihs as long as Shias dont use any material to prove their PoV then they can be ghareeb or weak or even false

This is not true at all. The hadiths that are weak are not weak because they prove the Shia point of view; they're weak because they're weak.

For example, there's 17 hadiths that quote the Prophet (pbuh) as saying that there will come a people known as "the Rafidhah" who will reject Islam. Now, this would be a clear proof against Shias beyond a shadow of a doubt, plus there are 17 of these hadiths so Sunnis would *of course* grade these as authentic, correct?

Actually, no. All of these hadiths are weak, so you don't see knowledgeable Sunnis using these as proofs against the Shia. Shaykh Abd al-Rahman al-Faqih discusses these here:

http://www.ahlalhdeeth.com/vb/showthread.php?t=25094

(post #3)

(and there's more that could be mentioned about each of these hadiths to weaken them)

Heck, EVEN Efendi gave up on this hadith when he realized that it's weak:

http://www.ahlalhdeeth.com/vbe/showpost.php?p=26551&postcount=3

So to say that Sunnis grade hadiths depending on whether they prove the Shia point of view or the Sunni point of view simply isn't accurate at all.

And there's other examples of some hadiths in praise of Abu Bakr and 'Umar being viewed as weak, yet Shias never bring that up.

Heck, even the hadith of the Companions being shining stars is weak to my knowledge.

w/s

Edited by lotfilms

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(bismillah)(salam)

1. All the Sahabas are the Imams of Ahl e sunna wal jamaat Alhamduliah( if u dont take the word "Imam" in the shia sense).Allah has confirmed their faith in Quran As the Hadiths are Hujjat upon us and the primary narrators of the hadiths are the Sahabas so yes we are following them.For us each and evey person who has seen sydna Mohamad PBUH in the state of Iman and has died on that Iman is a blessed sahabi.Im living at a distance of 1400 years from the the era of Syedna Mohamad PBUH, How can i get the blessing of the faith which was brought by syedna Mohamad if i assume that the blessed people who lived in his age could not take guidance from him or (mazAllah) the prophet PBUH failed in his mission and he just inspired 7 people and only they are sahabas.

this despite the fact that Surah Munafaqoon came for people who were a part of this rather large group and there are sahih ahadith in your books talking about companions innovating after the Prophet (SAW)?

2.No, THE sahabas might have some discord which appeared during the caliphat of Hadrat Ali ra due to the conspiracies of the Sabai cult( lack of modes of communication was another factor) but they never did takfeer of each other and u are right that each one of them during the time of that discord did Ijtihad and even if their Ijtihad has gone wrong , they will get Ajar for it.Similarly,despite the differences between Hadrat Ali and Hadrat Muaviya, they never did takfeer of each other.

Here is what Hadrat Ali said about Hadrat muaviya ( despite the differences)

"In the beginning of our matter, the people of Sham and us met. It is obvious that our God is one, our Prophet is one, and our call in Islam is one. We do not see ourselves more in faith in Allah or more in believing His messenger than them, nor they do. Our matter is one, except for our disagreement in Uthman's blood, and we are innocent from his murder."

[Nahjul Balagha, vol.3, p.648]

Hadrat mauviya said about hadrat Ali

"Ali is better and more virtuous than me and I differ from him only in the matter of qisaas of Uthmaan (Radhi Allaahu Ta'ala 'anh) and if he takes the qisaas of the blood of uthmaan I will be the first of the people of syria to make bayah to him"

[al-Bidayatu wan Nihaayah page 129,259 vol 7]

taken out of context and hence dishonest. Please go through all the exchanges of letters betwen muwayia (LA) and Ali (as). Are Salafis capable of being honest?

3.No , We have an established science of hadith which has gone through alot of evolution at the hands of great muhaditheens like the Aima e AHadith and the later scholars like Imam Zahabi Ra,Imam Ibn Hajar Ra and Imam Nasir ud din Albani Ra etc.Our usool of Jarah wa tadeel and tekhreej fil hadith are far more mature. Like for example , their is a hadith in Sunan Ibn Maja which says that Quran is in Arabic, the language of the Prophet PBUH is Arabic and the language of Janah will be arabic. This hadith favours our cause but shiekh Albani Ra has termed it as daef on the basis of a weak narrator.

yet you cannot debate that the whole science of ilm ul rijal was primarily developed to justify the believes and weed out what conflicts with them.

4.Though, the tenets of our religion are divine and they are not based on personalities unlike urs, we dont often get into this debate that "A is better than B and NO NO, C is better than B" but half of ur statement is right that Hadrat Ali Ra comes at number 4 as he was the 4th rightly guided caliph but other than the first three rightlly guided caliphs, no sahabi is better than him in status.

there was no concept of rightly guided caliphate in islam and this was developed later on by Sunnis and was restricted to first 3. It was only when Imam Ahmed added Ali as the 4th one that the concept was expanded.

5. An absolute NO for that except the Majosies who were in Hadrat Ali Ra army in Jamal and siffain and Hadrat Ali Ra on many instances castigated them himself.Their are hundreds of such narrations which support my point but i will rely on two from Nijul balagha right now. Hadrat Ali ra said to his shia

"Woe to you. I am tired of rebuking you. Do you accept this worldly life in place of the next life? Or disgrace in place of dignity? When I invite you to fight your enemy your eyes revolve as though you are in the clutches of death, and in the senselessness of last moments. My pleadings are not understood by you and you remain stunned. It is as though your hearts are affected with madness so that you do not understand. You have lost my confidence for good. Neither are you a support for me to lean upon, nor a means to honour and victory. Your example is that of the camels whose protector has disappeared, so that if they are collected from one side they disperse away from the other side."

regarding the people who did Ghulu in Ali ra status,the wise and blessed man said

"With regard to me, two categories of people will be ruined, namely he who loves me too much and the love takes him away from rightfulness, and he who hates me too much and the hatred takes him away from rightfulness. The best man with regard to me is he who is on the middle course. So be with him and be with the great majority (of Muslims) because Allah's hand (of protection) is on keeping unity. You should beware of division because the one isolated from the group is (a prey) to Satan just as the one isolated from the flock of sheep is (a prey) to the wolf."

You just proved my part.

Why externalize it and blame majoosies whereas it was the majority Sunnis or rather proto sunnis that were resisting. The handful of Shias were all there like Malik bin Ashtar, Ammar bin yasir etc.

and secondly you will see yourself as part of the group trying to lower his status without really realising since you are only following the Nasibis of yesteryear.

6. Needs explaination. plz read http://www.shiachat....act-or-fiction/

You just proved my point by trying to defend the enemies and killers of ahlye bayt by even denying karbala every happened or how did you put it "an accident".

lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(bismillah)

(salam)

This is not true at all. The hadiths that are weak are not weak because they prove the Shia point of view; they're weak because they're weak.

seems you are learning & searching truth.

may Allah guide you to right path.

For example, there's 17 hadiths that quote the Prophet (pbuh) as saying that there will come a people known as "the Rafidhah" who will reject Islam. Now, this would be a clear proof against Shias beyond a shadow of a doubt, plus there are 17 of these hadiths so Sunnis would *of course* grade these as authentic, correct?

Actually, no. All of these hadiths are weak, so you don't see knowledgeable Sunnis using these as proofs against the Shia. Shaykh Abd al-Rahman al-Faqih discusses these here:

http://www.ahlalhdeeth.com/vb/showthread.php?t=25094

(post #3)

(and there's more that could be mentioned about each of these hadiths to weaken them)

Heck, EVEN Efendi gave up on this hadith when he realized that it's weak:

http://www.ahlalhdeeth.com/vbe/showpost.php?p=26551&postcount=3

So to say that Sunnis grade hadiths depending on whether they prove the Shia point of view or the Sunni point of view simply isn't accurate at all.

And there's other examples of some hadiths in praise of Abu Bakr and 'Umar being viewed as weak, yet Shias never bring that up.

Heck, even the hadith of the Companions being shining stars is weak to my knowledge.

w/s

mashallah, you seems unbiased.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

this despite the fact that Surah Munafaqoon came for people who were a part of this rather large group and there are sahih ahadith in your books talking about companions innovating after the Prophet (SAW)?

taken out of context and hence dishonest. Please go through all the exchanges of letters betwen muwayia (LA) and Ali (as). Are Salafis capable of being honest?

yet you cannot debate that the whole science of ilm ul rijal was primarily developed to justify the believes and weed out what conflicts with them.

there was no concept of rightly guided caliphate in islam and this was developed later on by Sunnis and was restricted to first 3. It was only when Imam Ahmed added Ali as the 4th one that the concept was expanded.

You just proved my part.

Why externalize it and blame majoosies whereas it was the majority Sunnis or rather proto sunnis that were resisting. The handful of Shias were all there like Malik bin Ashtar, Ammar bin yasir etc.

and secondly you will see yourself as part of the group trying to lower his status without really realising since you are only following the Nasibis of yesteryear.

You just proved my point by trying to defend the enemies and killers of ahlye bayt by even denying karbala every happened or how did you put it "an accident".

lol

1.Indeed there were Munfiqs living around syedna Mohamad PBUH like Amdullah Ibn ubay. who denies that? As far as the hadiths are concerned, bring out the "hadiths" and they can be descussed

2.Hadrat Ali Ra was so clear in that sermon. I thought u will say that Ali Ra was under taqiyaa. Whats the context, can u provide that?

3.I dont know how u compare sunni sciece of Hadith with the shia science of hadith, they are incomparable. Inbetween,u accused us for showing our bias towards the hadiths which favour shia points ( which is inccorect according to lotfilms brother as well), I just pasted a few hadiths about Abdullah ibn saba from ur own books and all of them were termed as "daef" lolz.http://revivingalislaam.blogspot.com/2010/07/abd-allaah-bin-saba.html

4.Like there was no concept of "imamat" in the earliest political faction called shia? Why dou impose ur own errors on us? The concept of Imamat, Bida for Allah, tehreef fil Quran etc were put in by the fatamids and nourished by the safvids.I sometimes think that why on earth no shia raises this question that in the history of shiasm, why was khomeini the first person to come to know about "wilayat e faqih", could not the earlier scholars discover this pearl of "deputy-ship of Imam Mehdi". FYIAbu Hanifa Ra , a scholar of Ahl e sunnah lived before Imam Ahmed bin Hambal Ra and he supported Zayd Ibn Ali's revolt against the ummayids. So saying that Imam Hambal Ra was the first to include Hadrat Ali Ra in the Rashidoon is baseless.

3.I wonder how u mix up Malik al ashtar with Ammar bin yasir Ra.

4.I have been clear on that issue, i have said that i dont think that yazid is responsible for the events of karbala.I have presented the proofs there which are yet to be refuted(ur friends changed that thread into "tabari sunni or not , ibn khaldoon nasibi or not")..Secondly, i have clearly stated that i dont think that event of karbala is so significant that denying or accepting it will effect my faith at all.

Edited by qalandar_1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1.Indeed there were Munfiqs living around syedna Mohamad PBUH like Amdullah Ibn ubay. who denies that? As far as the hadiths are concerned, bring out the "hadiths" and they can be descussed

you agree that there were munafiq hidden in sahabas. Yet your belief is that you will follow all of them or any of them without discrimination.

here is a sample of ahadith for you.

Sahih Bukhari:

Volume 8, Book 76, Number 578:

Narrated 'Abdullah:

The Prophet said, "I am your predecessor at the Lake-Fount." 'Abdullah added: The Prophet said, "I am your predecessor at the Lake-Fount, and some of you will be brought in front of me till I will see them and then they will be taken away from me and I will say, 'O Lord, my companions!' It will be said, 'You do not know what they did after you had left.'

Volume 8, Book 76, Number 584:

Narrated Anas:

The Prophet said, "Some of my companions will come to me at my Lake Fount, and after I recognize them, they will then be taken away from me, whereupon I will say, 'My companions!' Then it will be said, 'You do not know what they innovated (new things) in the religion after you."

Volume 8, Book 76, Number 585:

Narrated Abu Hazim from Sahl bin Sa'd:

The Prophet said, "I am your predecessor (forerunner) at the Lake-Fount, and whoever will pass by there, he will drink from it and whoever will drink from it, he will never be thirsty. There will come to me some people whom I will recognize, and they will recognize me, but a barrier will be placed between me and them." Abu Hazim added: An-Nu'man bin Abi 'Aiyash, on hearing me, said. "Did you hear this from Sahl?" I said, "Yes." He said, " I bear witness that I heard Abu Said Al-Khudri saying the same, adding that the Prophet said: 'I will say: They are of me (i.e. my followers). It will be said, 'You do not know what they innovated (new things) in the religion after you left'. I will say, 'Far removed, far removed (from mercy), those who changed (their religion) after me." Abu Huraira narrated that the Prophet said, "On the Day of Resurrection a group of companions will come to me, but will be driven away from the Lake-Fount, and I will say, 'O Lord (those are) my companions!' It will be said, 'You have no knowledge as to what they innovated after you left; they turned apostate as renegades (reverted from Islam)."

Volume 8, Book 76, Number 586:

Narrated Ibn Al-Musaiyab:

The companions of the Prophet said, "Some men from my companions will come to my Lake-Fount and they will be driven away from it, and I will say, 'O Lord, my companions!' It will be said, 'You have no knowledge of what they innovated after you left: they turned apostate as renegades (reverted from Islam).

2.Hadrat Ali Ra was so clear in that sermon. I thought u will say that Ali Ra was under taqiyaa. Whats the context, can u provide that?

There is no one letter or sermon. It is a series of letters that were exchanged with Muwaiya laeen and just like the Prophet (SAW) writing to Christians and Jews talked about the belief in the same God, Imam Ali (as) did the same in the beginning. You can go and read it yourself, i am giving a couple of sample excerpts.

Letter 7

After praising Allah and invoking His Blessings and Peace on the Holy Prophet (s), I write to inform you that I am in receipt of many of your letters which appear to consist of various pieces of advice to me. You have very cunningly tried to couch them in flowery words and phrases. You have done this because of your natural evil-mindedness and because of the envy, enmity and malice you bear against me.

Letter 73

I have become sick of reading your letters and of replying to them. I feel that I have made an error in giving them undue importance and taking them seriously. You are always unreasonable and often irrational. Your sole desire is to make me accept your demand (for allowing your oppressive, tyrannical and apostatic sway over a big province) and for this you have carried on an unending series of correspondence. Your condition is like that of a man who wants to live in a land of happy dreams and does not want to face facts or like the one who is confused and who does not know what to do and where to go and who is unaware of what the future (life after death) has in store for him. I know that you are not a fool but you resemble foolish and unreasonable people.

I swear by Allah that had I not been disinclined to bring harm to you I would have taken the initiative and would have punished you very severely. Beware that Satan has made you incorrigible, it has made you blind to good things as shown by the Holy Prophet (s) and deaf to his teachings.

May the Peace of Allah be upon those who deserve it.

3.I dont know how u compare sunni sciece of Hadith with the shia science of hadith, they are incomparable. Inbetween,u accused us for showing our bias towards the hadiths which favour shia points ( which is inccorect according to lotfilms brother as well), I just pasted a few hadiths about Abdullah ibn saba from ur own books and all of them were termed as "daef" lolz.http://revivingalislaam.blogspot.com/2010/07/abd-allaah-bin-saba.html

I am talking about Sahih Sunni Hadith. WHich of what i have read and understood (and by no means very comprehensively) is hocus pocus and the art of contortion. I

4.Like there was no concept of "imamat" in the earliest political faction called shia? Why dou impose ur own errors on us? The concept of Imamat, Bida for Allah, tehreef fil Quran etc were put in by the fatamids and nourished by the safvids.I sometimes think that why on earth no shia raises this question that in the history of shiasm, why was khomeini the first person to come to know about "wilayat e faqih", could not the earlier scholars discover this pearl of "deputy-ship of Imam Mehdi". FYIAbu Hanifa Ra , a scholar of Ahl e sunnah lived before Imam Ahmed bin Hambal Ra and he supported Zayd Ibn Ali's revolt against the ummayids. So saying that Imam Hambal Ra was the first to include Hadrat Ali Ra in the Rashidoon is baseless.

tehreel ul quran is present as much if not more so in sunni hadith. but the discussion is about Ali being a rightful caliph or not. Please bring me proof that it existed before Imam Ahmed put it forth.

3.I wonder how u mix up Malik al ashtar with Ammar bin yasir Ra.

You can mix up Ali (as) and Muwayia (LA), mine at least makes sense.

4.I have been clear on that issue, i have said that i dont think that yazid is responsible for the events of karbala.I have presented the proofs there which are yet to be refuted(ur friends changed that thread into "tabari sunni or not , ibn khaldoon nasibi or not")..Secondly, i have clearly stated that i dont think that event of karbala is so significant that denying or accepting it will effect my faith at all.

I will only reply by quoting Imam Ali (as)

Your condition is like that of a man who wants to live in a land of happy dreams and does not want to face facts or like the one who is confused and who does not know what to do and where to go and who is unaware of what the future (life after death) has in store for him. I know that you are not a fool but you resemble foolish and unreasonable people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(bismillah)(salam)

"In the beginning of our matter, the people of Sham and us met. It is obvious that our God is one, our Prophet is one, and our call in Islam is one. We do not see ourselves more in faith in Allah or more in believing His messenger than them, nor they do. Our matter is one, except for our disagreement in Uthman's blood, and we are innocent from his murder."

[Nahjul Balagha, vol.3, p.648]

[ A letter sent by Imam Ali (a) to the people of various provinces, giving them the causes of the Battle of Siffin. ]

The thing began in this way: We and the Syrians were facing each other while we had common faith in one Allah, in the same Prophet (s) and on the same principles and canons of religion. So far as faith in Allah and the Holy Prophet (s) was concerned we never wanted them (the Syrians) to believe in anything over and above or other than what they were believing in and they did not want us to change our faith. Both of us were united on these principles. The point of contention between us was the question of the murder of Uthman. It had created the split. They wanted to lay the murder at my door while I am actually innocent of it.

I advised them that this problem cannot be solved by excitement. Let the excitement subside, let us cool down; let us do away with sedition and revolt; let the country settle down into a peaceful atmosphere and when once a stable regime is formed and the right authority is accepted, then let this question be dealt with on the principles of equity and justice because only then the authority will have power enough to find the criminals and to bring them to justice. They refused to accept my advice and said that they wanted to decide the issue on the point of the sword.

When they thus rejected my proposal of peace and kept on sabre rattling threats, then naturally the battle, which was furious and bloody, started. When they saw defeat facing them across the battlefield, when many of them were killed, and many more wounded, then they went down on their knees and proposed the same thing, which I had proposed before the bloodshed had begun.

I accepted their proposal so that their desire might be fulfilled, my intentions of accepting the principles of truth and justice and acting according to these principles might become clear and they might have no cause to complain against me.Now whoever adheres firmly to the promises made will be the one whose salvation will be saved by Allah and one who will try to go back upon the promises made, will fall deeper and deeper into heresy, error and loss. His eyes will be closed to realities and truth in this world and he will be punished in the next world.

http://www.balaghah.net/nahj-htm/eng/id/letters/index.htm

[3:64] Say: "O People of the Book! come to common terms as between us and you: That we worship none but Allah; that we associate no partners with him; that we erect not, from among ourselves, Lords and patrons other than Allah." If then they turn back, say ye: "Bear witness that we (at least) are Muslims (bowing to Allah's Will).

Maula Ali(as) were describing common terms between him and people of sham

Edited by elite

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

you agree that there were munafiq hidden in sahabas. Yet your belief is that you will follow all of them or any of them without discrimination.

here is a sample of ahadith for you.

Sahih Bukhari:

Volume 8, Book 76, Number 578:

Narrated 'Abdullah:

The Prophet said, "I am your predecessor at the Lake-Fount." 'Abdullah added: The Prophet said, "I am your predecessor at the Lake-Fount, and some of you will be brought in front of me till I will see them and then they will be taken away from me and I will say, 'O Lord, my companions!' It will be said, 'You do not know what they did after you had left.'

Volume 8, Book 76, Number 584:

Narrated Anas:

The Prophet said, "Some of my companions will come to me at my Lake Fount, and after I recognize them, they will then be taken away from me, whereupon I will say, 'My companions!' Then it will be said, 'You do not know what they innovated (new things) in the religion after you."

Volume 8, Book 76, Number 585:

Narrated Abu Hazim from Sahl bin Sa'd:

The Prophet said, "I am your predecessor (forerunner) at the Lake-Fount, and whoever will pass by there, he will drink from it and whoever will drink from it, he will never be thirsty. There will come to me some people whom I will recognize, and they will recognize me, but a barrier will be placed between me and them." Abu Hazim added: An-Nu'man bin Abi 'Aiyash, on hearing me, said. "Did you hear this from Sahl?" I said, "Yes." He said, " I bear witness that I heard Abu Said Al-Khudri saying the same, adding that the Prophet said: 'I will say: They are of me (i.e. my followers). It will be said, 'You do not know what they innovated (new things) in the religion after you left'. I will say, 'Far removed, far removed (from mercy), those who changed (their religion) after me." Abu Huraira narrated that the Prophet said, "On the Day of Resurrection a group of companions will come to me, but will be driven away from the Lake-Fount, and I will say, 'O Lord (those are) my companions!' It will be said, 'You have no knowledge as to what they innovated after you left; they turned apostate as renegades (reverted from Islam)."

Volume 8, Book 76, Number 586:

Narrated Ibn Al-Musaiyab:

The companions of the Prophet said, "Some men from my companions will come to my Lake-Fount and they will be driven away from it, and I will say, 'O Lord, my companions!' It will be said, 'You have no knowledge of what they innovated after you left: they turned apostate as renegades (reverted from Islam).

There is no one letter or sermon. It is a series of letters that were exchanged with Muwaiya laeen and just like the Prophet (SAW) writing to Christians and Jews talked about the belief in the same God, Imam Ali (as) did the same in the beginning. You can go and read it yourself, i am giving a couple of sample excerpts.

So this has to come out of the "collection"?These are general predictions which can be correlated with many other hadiths. Has the Prophet PBUH nominated anyone? Someone can come out and use these hadiths against Hadrat Ali ra as well. U always claims that the Prophet PBUH was infallible (which indeed he was) but i think now this pet sentence needs to be changed. For u it should be "The prophet was infallible except in the matters of selecting his wives and friends"

[ A letter sent by Imam Ali (a) to the people of various provinces, giving them the causes of the Battle of Siffin. ]

The thing began in this way: We and the Syrians were facing each other while we had common faith in one Allah, in the same Prophet (s) and on the same principles and canons of religion. So far as faith in Allah and the Holy Prophet (s) was concerned we never wanted them (the Syrians) to believe in anything over and above or other than what they were believing in and they did not want us to change our faith. Both of us were united on these principles. The point of contention between us was the question of the murder of Uthman. It had created the split. They wanted to lay the murder at my door while I am actually innocent of it.

I advised them that this problem cannot be solved by excitement. Let the excitement subside, let us cool down; let us do away with sedition and revolt; let the country settle down into a peaceful atmosphere and when once a stable regime is formed and the right authority is accepted, then let this question be dealt with on the principles of equity and justice because only then the authority will have power enough to find the criminals and to bring them to justice. They refused to accept my advice and said that they wanted to decide the issue on the point of the sword.

When they thus rejected my proposal of peace and kept on sabre rattling threats, then naturally the battle, which was furious and bloody, started. When they saw defeat facing them across the battlefield, when many of them were killed, and many more wounded, then they went down on their knees and proposed the same thing, which I had proposed before the bloodshed had begun.

I accepted their proposal so that their desire might be fulfilled, my intentions of accepting the principles of truth and justice and acting according to these principles might become clear and they might have no cause to complain against me.Now whoever adheres firmly to the promises made will be the one whose salvation will be saved by Allah and one who will try to go back upon the promises made, will fall deeper and deeper into heresy, error and loss. His eyes will be closed to realities and truth in this world and he will be punished in the next world.

http://www.balaghah....tters/index.htm

[3:64] Say: "O People of the Book! come to common terms as between us and you: That we worship none but Allah; that we associate no partners with him; that we erect not, from among ourselves, Lords and patrons other than Allah." If then they turn back, say ye: "Bear witness that we (at least) are Muslims (bowing to Allah's Will).

Maula Ali(as) were describing common terms between him and people of sham

Indeed Hadrat Ali was addressing the people of sham and their leader was Hadrat muaviya. My point was that indeed Hadrat Ali had a dispute which was flared by the sabai faction and the lack of communication added to it but they never did takfeer of each other. They were having the same faith. If u have the proof that Hadrat Ali did Takfeer of Hadrat muaviya (even from ur own books) then plz mention that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So this has to come out of the "collection"?These are general predictions which can be correlated with many other hadiths. Has the Prophet PBUH nominated anyone? Someone can come out and use these hadiths against Hadrat Ali ra as well. U always claims that the Prophet PBUH was infallible (which indeed he was) but i think now this pet sentence needs to be changed. For u it should be "The prophet was infallible except in the matters of selecting his wives and friends"

Indeed Hadrat Ali was addressing the people of sham and their leader was Hadrat muaviya. My point was that indeed Hadrat Ali had a dispute which was flared by the sabai faction and the lack of communication added to it but they never did takfeer of each other. They were having the same faith. If u have the proof that Hadrat Ali did Takfeer of Hadrat muaviya (even from ur own books) then plz mention that.

This is what Prophet (pbuh) said about Imam Ali (as)

Sahih Muslim Book 1, Number 0141:

Zirr reported: ‘Ali observed: By Him Who split up the seed and created something living, the Apostle (may peace and blessings be upon him) gave me a promise that no one but a believer would love me, and none but a hypocrite would nurse grudge against me.

Mawiya used to curse Imam Ali (as) according to Sahih hadith

Sahih Muslim No. 5915

This hadith has been narrated. on the authority of Shu'ba with the same chain of transmitters. Amir b. Sa'd b. Abi Waqqas reported on the authority of his father that Muawiya b. Abi Sufyin appointed Sa'd as the Governor and said: What prevents you from abusing Abu Turab (Hadrat 'Ali), whereupon be said: It is because of three things which I remember Allaah's Messenger (sallAllaahu alayhi wa sallam) having said about him that I would not abuse him and even if I find one of those three things for me, it would be more dear to me than the red camelg. I heard Allaah's Messenger (sallAllaahu alayhi wa sallam) say about 'Ali as he left behind hrin in one of his campaigns (that was Tabuk). 'All said to him: Allaah's Messenger, you leave me behind along with women and children. Thereupon Allaah's Messenger (sallAllaahu alayhi wa sallam) said to him: Aren't you satisfied with being unto me what Aaron was unto Moses but with this exception that there is no prophethood after me. And I (also) heard him say on the Day of Khaibar: I would certainly give this standard to a person who loves Allaah and his Messenger and Allaah and his Messenger love him too. He (the narrator) said: We have been anxiously waiting for it, when he (the Prophet) said: Call 'Ali. He was called and his eyes were inflamed. He applied saliva to his eyes and handed over the standard to him, and Allaah gave him victory. (The third occasion is this) when the (following) verse was revealed:" Let us summon our children and your children." Allaah's Messenger (sallAllaahu alayhi wa sallam) called 'Ali, Fatima, Hasan and Husain and said: O Allaah, they are my family.

Now no need for anyone to say anything. You can yourself decide how much Mawiya loved Imam Ali (as) and how he use to propagate cursing of him about Mawiya (LA) faith whether he is a hypocrite or Momin based on Prophet (pbuh) hadith.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So this has to come out of the "collection"?These are general predictions which can be correlated with many other hadiths. Has the Prophet PBUH nominated anyone? Someone can come out and use these hadiths against Hadrat Ali ra as well. U always claims that the Prophet PBUH was infallible (which indeed he was) but i think now this pet sentence needs to be changed. For u it should be "The prophet was infallible except in the matters of selecting his wives and friends"

Indeed Hadrat Ali was addressing the people of sham and their leader was Hadrat muaviya. My point was that indeed Hadrat Ali had a dispute which was flared by the sabai faction and the lack of communication added to it but they never did takfeer of each other. They were having the same faith. If u have the proof that Hadrat Ali did Takfeer of Hadrat muaviya (even from ur own books) then plz mention that.

[ A reply to a letter of Mu'awiya. ]

Letter no:17

You claim that your clan is also descended from Abd Manaf is true but you must remember, as the history of the Arabs will convince you, that your ancestor, Ummayya was not equal to our ancestor, the famous Hashim, neither Harb, another ancestor of yours, was equal to our Abdul Muttalib who was the defender and the guardian of Makkah nor Abu Sufyan could claim himself equal to Abu Taalib [who defended, guarded and suffered so much for the Holy Prophet (s) and Islam]. What is more, no freed-slave can be considered equal to a Muhajir and one coming from a doubtful lineage cannot claim to be equal to those who come from the noble parentage while there is no similarity between one who follows truth and Islam and one who doubts the truth of Islam. Remember also that the worst descendant is one who follows in the footstep of his ancestor in the way of paganism, hypocrisy and Hell.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So this has to come out of the "collection"?These are general predictions which can be correlated with many other hadiths. Has the Prophet PBUH nominated anyone? Someone can come out and use these hadiths against Hadrat Ali ra as well. U always claims that the Prophet PBUH was infallible (which indeed he was) but i think now this pet sentence needs to be changed. For u it should be "The prophet was infallible except in the matters of selecting his wives and friends"

What friends? OK I get it, now we need to trust the narration(which will suddenly become sahih, ilm dirayah be damned) found in the book of the persian mullah from bukhara.

As for the 2 special wives, well the "friends"(their fathers) begged the Prophet(PBUH) to marry them since they were known discarded rejects. The Prophet(PBUH) out of his mercy and graciousness married those useless pieces.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

and by your definition Qalandar, Allah (nauzobillah) made the mistake of creating Iblees or keeping Iblees close to Him.

A fallible prophet of a fallible God?

You salafis really take the cake.

Edited by Righteous

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(bismillah)

(salam)

This is not true at all. The hadiths that are weak are not weak because they prove the Shia point of view; they're weak because they're weak.....

So to say that Sunnis grade hadiths depending on whether they prove the Shia point of view or the Sunni point of view simply isn't accurate at all.

And there's other examples of some hadiths in praise of Abu Bakr and 'Umar being viewed as weak, yet Shias never bring that up.

Heck, even the hadith of the Companions being shining stars is weak to my knowledge.

w/s

With all due respect, I beg to differ on this submission of yours. I have seen Efendi rejecting many authentic Hadiths in praise of the Ahl al-Bayt (as). I have equally seen his Shaykh, Ibn Taymiyyah al-Nasibi, doing the same! I have seen al-Albani too doing the same. They reject authentic Hadiths in favour of the Ahl al-Bayt (as) when such seem to corner them.

I can still remember vividly how Ibn Hashmi declared Hadith al-Thaqalayn to be weak - yet, the Hadith is not just authentic, it is also mutawatir.

In case you still doubt my words, let me give you an example. Shaykh Shu'ayb al-Arnaut is a respected Salafi Hadithist. He has done Tahqiq for many of the Sunni books of Hadith, and the most famous is Musnad Imam Ahmad. In his Tahqiq of Musnad Ahmad, he has declared Abu Bilj (subject of discussion between us recently) "hasan" in Hadith. In Musnad, Number 7966, a chain containing Abu Bilj narrates a Hadith NOT about the Ahl al-Bayt (as), and this is al-Arnaut's comment:

åÐÇ ÅÓäÇÏ ÍÓä¡ ÃÈæ ÈáÌ åÐÇ ÍÓä ÇáÍÏíË¡ æÈÇÞí ÑÌÇáå ËÞÇÊ ÑÌÇá ÇáÔíÎíä

This chain is hasan, and Abu Bilj is hasan in Hadith, and the rest of the narrators are trustworthy, being narrators of the Two Shaykhs.

In Hadith Number 8753, another Hadith containing Abu Bilj in its chain, and NOT about the Ahl al-Bayt (as), he again states:

åÐÇ ÅÓäÇÏ ÍÓä¡ ÑÌÇáå ËÞÇÊ ÑÌÇá ÇáÔíÎíä ÛíÑ ÃÈí ÈáÌ -æÇÓãå íÍíì Èä ÃÈí Óáíã-¡ ÝÞÏ Ñæì áå ÃÕÍÇÈ ÇáÓää¡ æåæ ÕÏæÞ ÍÓä ÇáÍÏíË

This chain is hasan. Its narrators are trustworthy, being narrators of the Two Shaykhs, except Abu Bilj (i.e. neither al-Bukhari nor Muslim has narrated from him), and his name is Yahya ibn Abi Salim. The authors of Sunan have narrated from him. HE IS TRUTHFUL, and HASAN IN HADITH.

But in the Hadith about the ten merits of Imam Ali (as), Number 3061, this is what al-Arnaut says:

ÅÓäÇÏå ÖÚíÝ ÈåÐå ÇáÓíÇÞÉ¡ ÃÈæ ÈáÌ- æÇÓãå íÍíì Èä Óáíã¡ Ãæ ÇÈä ÃÈí Óáíã-¡ æÅä æËÞå ÛíÑ æÇÍÏ¡ ÞÏ ÞÇá Ýíå ÇáÈÎÇÑí: Ýíå äÙÑ¡ æÃÚÏá ÇáÃÞæÇá Ýíå Ãäå íÞÈá ÍÏíËå ÝíãÇ áÇ íäÝÑÏ Èå ßãÇ ÞÇá ÇÈä ÍÈÇä Ýí "ÇáãÌÑæÍíä"

The chain is WEAK with this context. Abu Bilj, and his name is Yahya ibn Salim, or ibn Abi Salim, EVEN IF SOME HAVE DECLARED HIM TRUSTWORTHY, al-Bukhari has said about him "fihi nadhar". THE FAIREST STATEMENT ABOUT HIM IS TO NOT ACCEPT HIS UNCORROBORATED REPORTS AS IBN HIBBAN SAID IN AL-MAJRUHIN.

I hope you now get what I was saying!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

and by your definition Qalandar, Allah (nauzobillah) made the mistake of creating Iblees or keeping Iblees close to Him.

A fallible prophet of a fallible God?

You salafis really take the cake.

Astaghfirullah brother. The concept of Badaa is ur faith not ours.Im sure that u will be aware of the fact that how and why shia adopted this concet of Badaa for Allah. I think we will need a separate thread for it but here is a brief glimpse.

the theory of Al-Imamah lead to the invention of Al-Bida. The Shia invented Al-bida to save their theory in Al-Imamah from collapsing. Many Shia narrations in the time of Jaffar Al-Saddiq reported from Al-Saddiq himself that the next Imam would be Isma’eel, the eldest son of Al-Saddiq. However, something happened that was not supposed to happen: Isma’eel died before his father did. This really hurt the Shia and the biggest split in Shiasim had just occurred. A huge sect of Shia insisted that Isma’eel was the next Imam, and they are the Isma’eeli Shia. The other sect of Shiasim (the twelver shia), who believed that Mousa the son of Al-Saddiq is the next Imam, claimed that bida happened to Allah. The twelver Shia attributed to Al-Saddiq that he said, “It had never appeared to Allah as it appeared in Isma’eel my son. Allah had taken him away before me so that we may know he is not the next Imam after me.” [Kitab Al-Tawheed, Ibn Babaweeh Al-Qummi, p.336, and Al-Kafi, vol.1, p.327]

Therefore, the Shia are saying that Allah told the people that Isma’eel is the next Imam, then he told them that Mousa is the next Imam. The same thing happened with Al-Hadi (the tenth Imam for the twelver Shias). Al-Hadi had announced that his son, Muhamed, was to be the next Imam. Nevertheless, Muhamed died before his father did. Hence, Al-Hadi gave the next leadership to his other son Al-Hasan Al-Askari and said, “O’ son, thank Allah, for He made a new decision about you.” [Al-Kafi, vol.1, p.326-327. Basa’er Al-Darajat by Al-Saffar, p.473. Al-Irshad by Al-Mufeed p.337. Al-Ghaybah by Al-Tusi, p.122]

Edited by qalandar_1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Astaghfirullah brother. The concept of Badaa is ur faith not ours.Im sure that u will be aware of the fact that how and why shia adopted this concet of Badaa for Allah. I think we will need a separate thread for it but here is a brief glimpse.

the theory of Al-Imamah lead to the invention of Al-Bida. The Shia invented Al-bida to save their theory in Al-Imamah from collapsing. Many Shia narrations in the time of Jaffar Al-Saddiq reported from Al-Saddiq himself that the next Imam would be Isma’eel, the eldest son of Al-Saddiq. However, something happened that was not supposed to happen: Isma’eel died before his father did. This really hurt the Shia and the biggest split in Shiasim had just occurred. A huge sect of Shia insisted that Isma’eel was the next Imam, and they are the Isma’eeli Shia. The other sect of Shiasim (the twelver shia), who believed that Mousa the son of Al-Saddiq is the next Imam, claimed that bida happened to Allah. The twelver Shia attributed to Al-Saddiq that he said, “It had never appeared to Allah as it appeared in Isma’eel my son. Allah had taken him away before me so that we may know he is not the next Imam after me.” [Kitab Al-Tawheed, Ibn Babaweeh Al-Qummi, p.336, and Al-Kafi, vol.1, p.327]

Therefore, the Shia are saying that Allah told the people that Isma’eel is the next Imam, then he told them that Mousa is the next Imam. The same thing happened with Al-Hadi (the tenth Imam for the twelver Shias). Al-Hadi had announced that his son, Muhamed, was to be the next Imam. Nevertheless, Muhamed died before his father did. Hence, Al-Hadi gave the next leadership to his other son Al-Hasan Al-Askari and said, “O’ son, thank Allah, for He made a new decision about you.” [Al-Kafi, vol.1, p.326-327. Basa’er Al-Darajat by Al-Saffar, p.473. Al-Irshad by Al-Mufeed p.337. Al-Ghaybah by Al-Tusi, p.122]

First Allah subhanhu told Musa alone to go to firon

[20:24] Go to Firon, surely he has exceeded all limits.

Then he changed his decision and told both ‘Musa’ and ‘Haroun’ to go to firon

[20:43] Go both to Firon, surely he has become inordinate;

What do you say about this?

Edited by elite

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Haha, this reminds me of a nasibi flashing his hadiths and rijaal around but his argument got shot down by the Qur'an (they always get burnt down by the Qur'an ^^) and guess what he said. He said that even Qur'an has isnaad ma'azAllah.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First Allah subhanhu told Musa alone to go to firon

[20:24] Go to Firon, surely he has exceeded all limits.

Then he changed his decision and told both 'Musa' and 'Haroun' to go to firon

[20:43] Go both to Firon, surely he has become inordinate;

What do you say about this?

Dont do tafseer bil raye" to prove ur wrong ideology.This is what the verses say

20:24 (Asad) "[And now] go thou unto Pharaoh: for, verily, he has transgressed all bounds of equity.

20:43 (Asad) go forth, both of you, unto Pharaoh: for, verily, he has transgressed all bounds of equity

Where does it say "Then he changed his decision and told both 'Musa' and 'Haroun' to go to firon"?

Haha, this reminds me of a nasibi flashing his hadiths and rijaal around but his argument got shot down by the Qur'an (they always get burnt down by the Qur'an ^^) and guess what he said. He said that even Qur'an has isnaad ma'azAllah.

Do u really think shias can face Quran? Im talking about Quran not the "tafaseer" of tabatabai.Tusi,Tubrisi etc. Learn arabic and start reading Quran urself,it will open door of wonders for u.Just take a look, this is what happens when it becomes Shia vs Quran>>shiachat.com/status of relatives.....

Edited by qalandar_1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do u really think shias can face Quran? Im talking about Quran not the "tafaseer" of tabatabai.Tusi,Tubrisi etc. Learn arabic and start reading Quran urself,it will open door of wonders for u.Just take a look, this is what happens when it becomes Shia vs Quran>>shiachat.com/status of relatives.....

Oh Salafi :wacko: :wacko:

Do you realize what happened there? Your buddy is saying not to apply any kind of reasoning which basically means that anyone who dont speak or understand Arabic is outside of the scope of explaining Quran including you :D Trust the salafis to understand contexts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dont do tafseer bil raye" to prove ur wrong ideology.This is what the verses say

20:24 (Asad) "[And now] go thou unto Pharaoh: for, verily, he has transgressed all bounds of equity.

20:43 (Asad) go forth, both of you, unto Pharaoh: for, verily, he has transgressed all bounds of equity

Where does it say "Then he changed his decision and told both 'Musa' and 'Haroun' to go to firon"?

It is the common sense. see here

[20:24] Go to Firon, surely he has exceeded all limits.

2nd person masculine singular imperative verb

[20:43] Go both to Firon, surely he has become inordinate;

2nd person masculine dual imperative verb

First he asked one person alone(Musa(as)) to go Firon and then he asked two person(Musa(as) and Haroun(as) to go to Firon.

What do you say about changing from one to two?

Edited by elite

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dont do tafseer bil raye" to prove ur wrong ideology.

[3:7] He it is Who has revealed the Book to you; some of its verses are decisive, they are the basis of the Book, and others are allegorical; then as for those in whose hearts there is perversity they follow the part of it which is allegorical, seeking to mislead and seeking to give it (their own) interpretation. but none knows its interpretation except Allah, and those who are firmly rooted in knowledge say: We believe in it, it is all from our Lord; and none do mind except those having understanding.

'Mutashabih’ is an expression that is capable of more than one meaning; but only one of those meanings is intended

That true meaning is only known by Allah subhanhu.. as per verse 3:7

That’s why we say for interpretation of ‘Mutaashabih’ verse an interpreter who would be from Allah subhanhu is required.

When people are getting different meanings from quran according to their wishes a judge from Allah subhanu whose decesion would be final in the matter of diferences is required or not?

Now do you understand why Imam who is appointed by Allah subhanhu is required?

Edited by elite

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Taking Arabic out of context has wrecked havoc on the understanding of the Quran. Salafis have done what Christians have done with the Bible- distorted the grammar and the words in such a way that they attempt to make the obvious things hidden. The way the Wahabis contort Surah Ahzab's Ayat 33, and Surah Maidah's Ayat of Wilayah is hilarious. Oh, not to mention the Ayah of Muwaddah...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(bismillah)(salam)

1. All the Sahabas are the Imams of Ahl e sunna wal jamaat Alhamduliah( if u dont take the word "Imam" in the shia sense).Allah has confirmed their faith in Quran As the Hadiths are Hujjat upon us and the primary narrators of the hadiths are the Sahabas so yes we are following them.For us each and evey person who has seen sydna Mohamad PBUH in the state of Iman and has died on that Iman is a blessed sahabi.Im living at a distance of 1400 years from the the era of Syedna Mohamad PBUH, How can i get the blessing of the faith which was brought by syedna Mohamad if i assume that the blessed people who lived in his age could not take guidance from him or (mazAllah) the prophet PBUH failed in his mission and he just inspired 7 people and only they are sahabas.

Ah yes, these Sahaba are your Imams who had sex with slaves of war (ooooo i see they were so horny)

hahahahhahha

the sahaba had sex with slaves of war

"If a man is torn between continued desire or releasing it, and if this man does not have a wife or he has a slave-girl but he does not marry, then if a man is overwhelmed by desire, and he fears that he will suffer because of this (someone like a prisoner, or a traveller, or a pauper), then it is permissible for him to masturbate, and Ahmad (ibn Hanbal) is explicit on this. Furthermore, it is narrated that the Companions of the Prophet (s) used to masturbate while they were on military expeditions or travelling".

source:

Bada'i al-Fuwa'id of Ibn Qayyim (Islamic scholar), page 129

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Do u really think shias can face Quran? Im talking about Quran not the "tafaseer" of tabatabai.Tusi,Tubrisi etc. Learn arabic and start reading Quran urself,it will open door of wonders for u.Just take a look, this is what happens when it becomes Shia vs Quran>>shiachat.com/status of relatives.....

Quranic exegesis or tafsir is not a Shia-only practice rather its Sunni as well, and Sunnis are not literalist muppets like your kind either.

Please read: This forum is for "Shia/Sunni Discussion" as is explicitly clear from its name. IMHO these mindless husks and outshoots of Saudi mass misguidance project started by abdul wahab (mal'oon) and funded by the British empire who gave Hijaz and surrounding lands to the Saudi brigands after WW1 should be restricted to debate in the "Other religions" subforum.

Seriously. It's so rare to see a debate among muslims in here now. Its usually these same old mindless clowns spamming each thread with their insolence and baseless pranks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Astaghfirullah brother. The concept of Badaa is ur faith not ours.Im sure that u will be aware of the fact that how and why shia adopted this concet of Badaa for Allah. I think we will need a separate thread for it but here is a brief glimpse.

This is what I found in Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 2, Hadith 3464 (narrated by Abu Hurayrah):

ÓãÚ ÑÓæá Çááå íÞæá Ãä ËáÇËÉ Ýí Èäí ÅÓÑÇÆíá ÃÈÑÕ æÃÞÑÚ æÃÚãì ÈÏÇ ááå ÚÒ æÌá Ãä íÈÊáíåã ÈÏÇ ááå ÚÒ æÌá Ãä íÈÊáíåã ÝÈÚË Åáíåã ãáßÇð

It has clearly associated bada with Allah! Why do you guys deny what is supposed to be an Attribute of your god?

I want to ask your opinion: do you think it is kufr to associate bada with Allah?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is what I found in Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 2, Hadith 3464 (narrated by Abu Hurayrah):

سمع رسول الله يقول أن ثلاثة في بني إسرائيل أبرص وأقرع وأعمى بدا لله عز وجل أن يبتليهم بدا لله عز وجل أن يبتليهم فبعث إليهم ملكاً

It has clearly associated bada with Allah! Why do you guys deny what is supposed to be an Attribute of your god?

I want to ask your opinion: do you think it is kufr to associate bada with Allah?

Bada has two meanings in the Arabic language: The first meaning is "Appearance after hiding." For example, you say "bada" the gates of the city, or the gates of the city had appeared. The second meaning is the "origination of the new idea." For example, you say "bada" for him a matter, or he got a new idea in a matter. [Mukhtar Al-Sahhah 7/2278, Lisan Al-Arab 14/66, and Majma'a Al-Bahrain 1/45]

The two meanings are reported in the Quran and are attributed to humans. For the first meaning of the word, Allah says, "Whether ye bida "show" what is in your minds or conceal it, Allah calleth you to account for it." [Al-Baqarah, 284] And the second meaning is when Allah says, "Then it occurred to the men after they had seen the Signs, (that it was best) to imprison him for a time." [Yousef, 35]

These two meanings – appearance after hiding and the origination of the new idea – must be preceded by ignorance and followed by knowledge. Both of these two meanings are according to the Sunni view on Bada not applicable to Allah. Sunnis view it is a disbelief to attribute such meanings to Allah.

Your badaa has alot of examples ias badda is one of the basic tenets of shiaism.The theory of Imamat stands on badaa. Here is an example

Al-Majlisi says in Bihar Al-Anwar that Abu Jaffar said, “O’ Abu Hamzah, if we told you something, and then another thing happened, then Allah does as he desires. And if we told you something today, and then we tell you the opposite tomorrow, then Allah deletes what He wishes, and confirms what He wishes.” [Bihar Al-Anwar by Al-Majlisi, vol.4, p.119. Tafseer Al-Ayashi, vol.2, p.217. Al-Burhan fi Tafseer Al-Quran, vol.2, p.299]

Edited by qalandar_1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Say: "I am no bringer of BIDA (new-fangled doctrine) among the messengers, nor do I know what will be done with me or with you. I follow but that which is revealed to me by inspiration; I am but a Warner open and clear." 46:9

Prophets testify that they are not bringing bida, but according to Bukhari, Allah (swt) does (nauzobillah)?

Abrogation is not bida, the fundamentals never change. The Qibla can be al Aqsa or Kaaba, but there can never be no Qibla.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bada has two meanings in the Arabic language: The first meaning is "Appearance after hiding." For example, you say "bada" the gates of the city, or the gates of the city had appeared. The second meaning is the "origination of the new idea." For example, you say "bada" for him a matter, or he got a new idea in a matter. [Mukhtar Al-Sahhah 7/2278, Lisan Al-Arab 14/66, and Majma'a Al-Bahrain 1/45]

The two meanings are reported in the Quran and are attributed to humans. For the first meaning of the word, Allah says, "Whether ye bida "show" what is in your minds or conceal it, Allah calleth you to account for it." [Al-Baqarah, 284] And the second meaning is when Allah says, "Then it occurred to the men after they had seen the Signs, (that it was best) to imprison him for a time." [Yousef, 35]

These two meanings – appearance after hiding and the origination of the new idea – must be preceded by ignorance and followed by knowledge. Both of these two meanings are according to the Sunni view on Bada not applicable to Allah. Sunnis view it is a disbelief to attribute such meanings to Allah.

Your badaa has alot of examples ias badda is one of the basic tenets of shiaism.The theory of Imamat stands on badaa. Here is an example

Al-Majlisi says in Bihar Al-Anwar that Abu Jaffar said, “O’ Abu Hamzah, if we told you something, and then another thing happened, then Allah does as he desires. And if we told you something today, and then we tell you the opposite tomorrow, then Allah deletes what He wishes, and confirms what He wishes.” [Bihar Al-Anwar by Al-Majlisi, vol.4, p.119. Tafseer Al-Ayashi, vol.2, p.217. Al-Burhan fi Tafseer Al-Quran, vol.2, p.299]

You are a Salafi. By your standards, you are supposed to AFFIRM for Allah whatever He has affirmed for Himself and whatever the Prophet (pbuh) has affirmed for Him in the authentic Hadiths IN THE LITERAL SENSE. I used to be a Salafi. So, I know this VERY WELL. I have PROVED, as well as other brothers, that bada has been affirmed for Allah in your sources. In Shi'ism, we are not bound to take "bada" literally. But you Salafis MUST!

If you are really serious about investigating the doctrine of bada according to our school, and its relation to Imamah, please read this article http://www.answering-ansar.org/answers/bada/en/chap1.php. There, you find answers to all your arguments and confusions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bada has two meanings in the Arabic language: The first meaning is "Appearance after hiding." For example, you say "bada" the gates of the city, or the gates of the city had appeared. The second meaning is the "origination of the new idea." For example, you say "bada" for him a matter, or he got a new idea in a matter. [Mukhtar Al-Sahhah 7/2278, Lisan Al-Arab 14/66, and Majma'a Al-Bahrain 1/45]

The two meanings are reported in the Quran and are attributed to humans. For the first meaning of the word, Allah says, "Whether ye bida "show" what is in your minds or conceal it, Allah calleth you to account for it." [Al-Baqarah, 284] And the second meaning is when Allah says, "Then it occurred to the men after they had seen the Signs, (that it was best) to imprison him for a time." [Yousef, 35]

These two meanings – appearance after hiding and the origination of the new idea – must be preceded by ignorance and followed by knowledge. Both of these two meanings are according to the Sunni view on Bada not applicable to Allah. Sunnis view it is a disbelief to attribute such meanings to Allah.Your badaa has alot of examples ias badda is one of the basic tenets of shiaism.The theory of Imamat stands on badaa. Here is an example

Al-Majlisi says in Bihar Al-Anwar that Abu Jaffar said, “O’ Abu Hamzah, if we told you something, and then another thing happened, then Allah does as he desires. And if we told you something today, and then we tell you the opposite tomorrow, then Allah deletes what He wishes, and confirms what He wishes.” [bihar Al-Anwar by Al-Majlisi, vol.4, p.119. Tafseer Al-Ayashi, vol.2, p.217. Al-Burhan fi Tafseer Al-Quran, vol.2, p.299]

Here is verse 33:37 where word 'bada' is attributed to Allah subhanahu

وَاتَّقِ اللَّهَ وَتُخْفِي فِي نَفْسِكَ مَا اللَّهُ مُبْدِيهِ ....

[33:37]....But thou didst hide in thy heart that which Allah was about to make manifest:..

Edited by elite

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A simple yes or no will suffice.

  1. All sahabas are Imams - since they are all stars and we can follow any one for guidance
  2. All companions loved each and lived happily with each other and there was absolutely no discord between them except for difference in ijtehad
  3. The sahihs are all sahihs as long as Shias dont use any material to prove their PoV then they can be ghareeb or weak or even false
  4. Ali's status is lower then any other sahaba and specialy 1-2-3 just because we say so. Not because they were better in knowlege in deen, eloquence or bravery then Ali. Just because we have some hadith saying so
  5. Anything or anybody related to Ali (as) needs to be downplayed, if he is the Zulfiqar then we will call someone saiful Islam even if that guy fought in every single war at the time of Prophet (pbuh) against muslims till the fall of Makkah and had no choice but to accept Islam
  6. We will justify the emaan and faith of the biggest enemy of Islam and his family - Abu Sufyan the leader of kuffar e makka and sowrn enemy of the prophet of islam (pbuh), abu sufyan's liver eating wife Hind who ate teh liver of Hz Hamza, their son muwayia who fought against Ali (as) and Hassan (as) and his Abu Sufyan's grandson Yazid who martyred the grandson of Prophet. These all evil people who had enmity against Banu Hashim were believing muslims but the Protector of Prophet (pbuh) was a kaafir on the evidence of Muwayia. Yes the hadith of ABu Talib dying a kaafir comes from Muwaya Laeen the sworn enemy

I can sincerely go on and on but this will be a good starting point for our visiting nasibis like qalandar ibn.askari et al.

Who are u to speak like that about Sunnis??? I am sunni and i know my deed better the u do...so dont lie about us anymore!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ali's status is lower then any other sahaba and specialy 1-2-3 just because we say so. Not because they were better in knowlege in deen, eloquence or bravery then Ali. Just because we have some hadith saying so

Of course sarcasm is obvious in many mentioned points. But I'd like to comment on some of them.

Marked part is blatant lie. We don't believe that he was lower that any other companion. We believe that he was 4 from top 4 of companions.

Yes the hadith of ABu Talib dying a kaafir comes from Muwaya Laeen the sworn enemy

It's also not true.

Abu Dawud in Sunnan narrated:

from Ali ibn AbuTalib:

I said to the Prophet (peace_be_upon_him): Your old and astray uncle has died. He said: Go and bury your father, and then do not do anything until you come to me. So I went, buried him and came to him. He ordered me (to take a bath), so I took a bath, and he prayed for me.

http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/crcc/engagement/resources/texts/muslim/hadith/abudawud/020.sat.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...