Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
ShiaChat.com
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله

Yasir Al-habib Still Fine Despite The Lies

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

  • Advanced Member

(bismillah)

(salam)

As you all know, there was a Mubahala between the Sunni Shaykh al-Koos and Yasir al-Habib

Ever since then, there have been all these rumors about Yasir dying in a car accident and about all of these things happening to him and they all turn out to be lies on top of lies on top of lies.

Recently, they've been saying that Yasir has been stricken with cancer. Al-Koos on this video himself says that his buddy called up the hospital and they confirmed it:

So I had a brother who knows Shaykh Yasir call him up and confirm this. However he said the Shaykh was well and even went on tv on prove it:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XBwsJHH01ok

So I ask these people, why do you feel the need to lie about this issue? These people were so happy when they "found out" that Yasir died in a car accident. Yet he didn't.

Now they say he is stricken with cancer and hospitalized, yet he got on tv (the video was just uploaded today) and showed to the world that he is doing just fine.

Now I ask, we can't trust these people for something as simple as knowing whether or not if a person is alive or is seriously ill, dying of cancer, can we trust them to get our religion?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Banned

So I ask these people, why do you feel the need to lie about this issue? These people were so happy when they "found out" that Yasir died in a car accident. Yet he didn't.

Now they say he is stricken with cancer and hospitalized, yet he got on tv (the video was just uploaded today) and showed to the world that he is doing just fine.

Sheikh Yassir Habib (HA) is a total badass of the highest order, id love to meet him one day

Link to post
Share on other sites

What I want to know is if he is really representing the 12r Shia aqeeda without the Taqiyah ?

Also, how knowledgeable is he is ilm-e-rijal ?

You'd be surprised how prevelent this is espcially from unexpected sources like some people who weep in your face for justice in specific countries and how the actions that are happening there are unjust, but secerly this is what they conceal. They will reveal it only when they have authority over others and not while others have authority over them.

The cake may look good from the outside, but in many cases it's made out of poison.

Edited by Glow
Link to post
Share on other sites

^And we've been tasting the poison of the Caliphates since 1200 years

And, what makes you think they considered you Muslims in the first place....

I mean, all evidences from the majority of people/scholars/rulers of the time say otherwise...

To them, saying that is equivalent to saying "And the Romans tasted the poison of Khalid ibn Waleed in the battle of Yarmock"

It's a fallcy

On a side note: Most of them commented by saying the end result of these people is: Treachery against the Ummah, dislike of the transmitters of knowledge, fabrications, innovations and concealing what they believe until they have authority over you, only then will they reveal their true intentions and it will be far what they have proclaimed when you had authority over them. But by then it will be to late.

And many would say that the course of history proved them right to a great extent.

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

^That portion ummah that thurned its back on the ahl-e-bayt in favour or Muaviah, who cares what it thinks

It can hide it's head in the sand of majoritarian excuses all it likes

I mean, all evidences from the majority of people/scholars/rulers of the time say otherwise...

Those people were all eating the cake. Look around you and see the result

Treachery against the Ummah, dislike of the transmitters of knowledge, fabrications, innovations and concealing what they believe until they have authority over you, only then will they reveal their true intentions and it will be far what they have proclaimed when you had authority over them. But by then it will be to late.

Thats a bit rich coming from people who've been had by the Ummayads and Abbasids

Edited by JimJam
Link to post
Share on other sites

And, what makes you think they considered you Muslims in the first place....

I mean, all evidences from the majority of people/scholars/rulers of the time say otherwise...

Sunnis are hypocrites. They declare us to be infidels, but:

1. They allow us to perform Hajj with them

2. Accept the reports of Shiites in their Sahih books

Yet,

1. Infidels must never be allowed to perform Hajj along with Muslims

2. Hadiths of infidels are unacceptable

You see what I mean, Mr. Glow?

As for Sheikh Yassir al-Habib (ra), may Allah continue to bless him and his family. He is a very brave person, and faces the Nawasib with full boldness and frankness.

ãõÍóãøóÏñ ÑóÓõæáõ Çááøóåö ۚ æóÇáøóÐöíäó ãóÚóåõ ÃóÔöÏøóÇÁõ Úóáóì ÇáúßõÝøóÇÑö

Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah, and those with him are firm of heart against the unbelievers.

I wouldn't blame the honourable Sheikh (ra) for being so severe against the Nawasib.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

As for Sheikh Yassir al-Habib (ra), may Allah continue to bless him and his family. He is a very brave person, and faces the Nawasib with full boldness and frankness.

The same way that the Imams taught us to. Oh, wait....

Link to post
Share on other sites

^That portion ummah that thurned its back on the ahl-e-bayt in favour or Muaviah, who cares what it thinks

What portion of the Ummah ? All our Imams of fiqh were killed by these government. These Kings did not favor anyone.

Also what did the 12rs Shia do ? Why did the 9 imams go into Taqiyyah ? Don't tell me a 12r Shia population did not exist at that time. In Kufa there were over 100,000 12r Shia.

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

What portion of the Ummah ? All our Imams of fiqh were killed by these government. These Kings did not favor anyone.

Also what did the 12rs Shia do ? Why did the 9 imams go into Taqiyyah ? Don't tell me a 12r Shia population did not exist at that time. In Kufa there were over 100,000 12r Shia.

For your kind info, the majority of Kufans considered Imam Ali (as) as Fourth Caliph and there are evidences even in your Sahih too that kufans were summoned to fight Aisha. Kufa was founded by Umar. Shias believe Imam Ali (as) is imam whether the people accept him or not. When majority approached Imam Ali (as) to be the caliph were fed up with the 3 caliphs and their corruption, Imam Ali (as) accepted it. Otherwise caliphate was more less than a sneeze of a goat in front of Imam Ali (as).

The evidence is the very few true Shias were those who fought alongside Imam Ali (as) and did not want peace with Mawiya (LA), while those who considered him the fourth Caliph wanted peace with Mawiya (LA) when he raised the Quran on the spears. Same was the case with Imam Hussain (as). The few true Shias were with him while the majority were in otherwards Sunnis.

Edited by zakzaki
Link to post
Share on other sites

For your kind info, the majority of Kufans considered Imam Ali (as) as Fourth Caliph and there are evidences even in your Sahih too that kufans were summoned to fight Aisha. Kufa was founded by Umar. Shias believe Imam Ali (as) is imam whether the people accept him or not. When majority approached Imam Ali (as) to be the caliph were fed up with the 3 caliphs and their corruption, Imam Ali (as) accepted it. Otherwise caliphate was more less than a sneeze of a goat in front of Imam Ali (as).

The evidence is the very few true Shias were those who fought alongside Imam Ali (as) and did not want peace with Mawiya (LA), while those who considered him the fourth Caliph wanted peace with Mawiya (LA) when he raised the Quran on the spears. Same was the case with Imam Hussain (as). The few true Shias were with him while the majority were in otherwards Sunnis.

That's what I am trying to point out. Where were the 12rs or the 'true shias' from the 4th imam to the 12th ?

Yes there is history of imam being oppressed, by the Ummavis and Abbasids never touched the large population of 12rs Shia through military force.

In fact, if we look at history, it was the 12rs who attacked Sunnis first during the Safavid period.

Edited by Abdaal
Link to post
Share on other sites

Sunnis are hypocrites. They declare us to be infidels, but:

1. They allow us to perform Hajj with them

2. Accept the reports of Shiites in their Sahih books

Yet,

1. Infidels must never be allowed to perform Hajj along with Muslims

2. Hadiths of infidels are unacceptable

You see what I mean, Mr. Glow?

As for Sheikh Yassir al-Habib (ra), may Allah continue to bless him and his family. He is a very brave person, and faces the Nawasib with full boldness and frankness.

مُحَمَّدٌ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ ۚ وَالَّذِينَ مَعَهُ أَشِدَّاءُ عَلَى الْكُفَّارِ

Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah, and those with him are firm of heart against the unbelievers.

I wouldn't blame the honourable Sheikh (ra) for being so severe against the Nawasib.

Sorry, My bad. I should have made it more clear.

They considered you the worst Mubtadi's/Munafiqs. Just on the verge of being non Muslim..

This is pretty much unanimous from all the major scholars and rulers. I am not saying the rulers were the epitome of righteousness I am just stating the facts.

Anyways, you will have a great difficulty of finding a major Scholar who did not heavily rebuke or out right call them Kaffirs. You will find alll the major scholars from past to present characterize them as one of 3 parties. Either Ignorant Muslims, Wicked Muslims or Non Muslims.

As for them accepting Shia in the Sahih, yes we accept the shi'a back then. According to Authentic narrations from those same Sahih's, these people shared the same exact Aqeedah as the rest of the Sahabah. Furthermore, they loved all the Sahabah especially the 4 (Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman Ali) but they just believed that Ali had more merit to be Caliph then Uthman. Furthermore they had nothing of this Imams = Infallibility concept, furthermore they shared the same ideology with the rest of the Sahabah on Shrine building, furthermore they shared their concept of Tawheed, furthermore, furthermore, furthermore and we can go on forever. I am not saying there was a prefect relationship or they were prefect but the overall atmosphere was not one of enmity between them.

This is very different from some of the Shia of today, who hate Most of the Sahabah and curse the first 3, do not share the same Aqeedah, continue to build shrines, do not share the same concept of Tawheed and the list goes on.

This is all from the Sahihs.

What you are doing is combining narrations from our Sahih's and your books. Basically picking and choosing whatever narrations fit your desires about them from both books, mixing them and then disregarding all the other narrations about them in the Sahih's. Then you present your argument as conclusive. That my friend is not how it works.

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

(bismillah)

Although this guy's banned now, I feel need to make a few points regarding the misinformation of his post.

Blah Blah blah...

As for them accepting Shia in the Sahih, yes we accept the shi'a back then. According to Authentic narrations from those same Sahih's, these people shared the same exact Aqeedah as the rest of the Sahabah. Furthermore, they loved all the Sahabah especially the 4 (Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman Ali) but they just believed that Ali had more merit to be Caliph then Uthman. Furthermore they had nothing of this Imams = Infallibility concept, furthermore they shared the same ideology with the rest of the Sahabah on Shrine building, furthermore they shared their concept of Tawheed, furthermore, furthermore, furthermore and we can go on forever. I am not saying there was a prefect relationship or they were prefect but the overall atmosphere was not one of enmity between them.

This is very different from some of the Shia of today, who hate Most of the Sahabah and curse the first 3, do not share the same Aqeedah, continue to build shrines, do not share the same concept of Tawheed and the list goes on.

This is all from the Sahihs.

No, there are rawafidh who have narrated in the Saheeh Sitta - yes even in the "Saheehayn." Rawafidh - plural for rafidhi - meaning they rejected Abu Bakr and `Umar and cursed them. And many of the Shi`ah, among whom were more than just the political shi`ah and were rawafidh, held beliefs that proto-Sunnism and current Sunnism deemed to be heretical, such as raj`ah. I'd like to point out the last Sahaba to die - Abu Tufayl `Aamir bin Waathilah is recorded by your `ulema of rijaal and history to be the following: a Shi`ah, flagbearer of Mukhtar al-Thaqafi, believer in Raj`ah, and be of the "exaggerating Rawafidh."

في أمان الله

Link to post
Share on other sites

Abu Tufayl `Aamir bin Waathilah is recorded by your `ulema of rijaal and history to be the following: a Shi`ah, flagbearer of Mukhtar al-Thaqafi, believer in Raj`ah, and be of the "exaggerating Rawafidh."

Ýí ÃãÇä Çááå

(salam)

Can you provide a reference for that? Both parts. Thank you.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

(bismillah)

(salam)

Can you provide a reference for that? Both parts. Thank you.

(wasalam)

http://wilayat.net/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=428:how-a-sahabi-converted-to-shiism&catid=94:Imam-Ali-bin-Abi-Talib-(as)-Project&Itemid=59

Edited by Dar'ul_Islam
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

(salam)

Can you provide a reference for that? Both parts. Thank you.

there can be a number of reasons to back mukhtar but its also true that abu tufayl was a participant in the revolt of ibn ashaath where he was accompanied by a lot of Qurra many of whom are the teachers of the imams of ahle sunnah.Clearly abu tufayl was not considered a heretical shiite by them ! also to note is the absence of kumayl b ziyad in mukhtars movement and later his remergence in time of ibn ashaath's revolt

so why didnt these devoted shias die with mukhatar and his band of followers when musab took kufa ?

more importantly these 2 seem to have good relations with many of the pious salaf of ahle sunnah

For your kind info, the majority of Kufans considered Imam Ali (as) as Fourth Caliph and there are evidences even in your Sahih too that kufans were summoned to fight Aisha. Kufa was founded by Umar. Shias believe Imam Ali (as) is imam whether the people accept him or not. When majority approached Imam Ali (as) to be the caliph were fed up with the 3 caliphs and their corruption, Imam Ali (as) accepted it. Otherwise caliphate was more less than a sneeze of a goat in front of Imam Ali (as).

The evidence is the very few true Shias were those who fought alongside Imam Ali (as) and did not want peace with Mawiya (LA), while those who considered him the fourth Caliph wanted peace with Mawiya (LA) when he raised the Quran on the spears. Same was the case with Imam Hussain (as). The few true Shias were with him while the majority were in otherwards Sunnis.

pray tell us who were these few "true shias" what makes them true and do we have a list of them somewhere ?

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

pray tell us who were these few "true shias" what makes them true and do we have a list of them somewhere ?

You can see in Siffeen they were 2 groups. Malik Ashtar (as) and his group who almost reached the tent of Mawiya (LA) in Siffeen to kill him but Imam Ali (as) had to withdraw due to the tricks of Amr bin aas who had bribed those in Ali (as) camp by raising quran on the spears. The group which sided Imam Ali (as), which was protecting Imam Ali (as) and considered him the live Quran and the one who were fooled were so-called Shias which threatened Imam Imam Ali (as) to stop fightting immediately because of insult to the papers of Quran which were raised on the spears.

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.

×
×
  • Create New...