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  
Haydar Husayn

Anti-shia Propaganda Videos

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

I don't know about the rest but this thing that you pointed out

39:00 Claims Khomeini said the prophet failed in his mission

is actually true.

These points are also true. And can be backed up from the Shia books

20:00 Shias believe the Quran is distorted, and claim there was a surah al wilyaha.

See Fasul Khitab

25:00 Shias claim all the sahaba are apostates apart from 3.

See Rijal Kashi

34:00 Shia claim the Imams are so pure that they were born from out of the thighs of their mothers, rather than having a normal birth. They claim the Imams have knowledge of the unseen, know the future, and control the world with Allah or on behalf of Allah. Shias call upon them and do tawaf around their graves. Shias claim the imams know when they are going to die, and only die by choice.

See al Kafi and Jila ul Ayun

51:00 Quotes a Shia narration about it being lawful to kill nasibis, and says that's what we call Sunnis. So for us it is lawful to kill Sunnis.

See Anwar al Numania

53:00 We say the 4 sunnis imams fabricated a religion, and do takfir of them.

See tazkiratul Aimma

1:05:00 Shias consider karbala better than the Kaaba, better than Mecca and Medina.

See Kamil al Ziyaarat

Edited by kalaam

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know about the rest but this thing that you pointed out

is actually true.

These points are also true. And can be backed up from the Shia books

See Fasul Khitab

See Rijal Kashi

See al Kafi and Jila ul Ayun

See Anwar al Numania

See tazkiratul Aimma

See Kamil al Ziyaarat

Please kindly post them here

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know about the rest but this thing that you pointed out

is actually true.

These points are also true. And can be backed up from the Shia books

See Fasul Khitab

See Rijal Kashi

See al Kafi and Jila ul Ayun

See Anwar al Numania

See tazkiratul Aimma

See Kamil al Ziyaarat

So if a Shia took any random narrations he wanted from Sunni books, and presented this as Sunni beliefs, you would have no complaints then?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(bismillah)

I don't know about the rest but this thing that you pointed out

39:00 Claims Khomeini said the prophet failed in his mission

is actually true.

These points are also true. And can be backed up from the Shia books

As I understand, this is meant in relation to the implementation of justice through the world - obviously that did not happen. Nor did the world become Muslim during his [sawa] life. Did he bring Islam perfectly and deliver it all as it was to be? Yes, so I wouldn't take his statement out of context.

20:00 Shias believe the Quran is distorted, and claim there was a surah al wilyaha.

See Fasul Khitab

Lol, the notion of a "Sura Wilayah" is unanimously rejected. Even the hardcorest of Akhbari scholars (Sh. Hurr al-`Amili) rejected tahreef al-Kitab. Did some of scholars believe in Tahreef? Sure, and no we don't judge kufr against them for it, but they were wrong.

25:00 Shias claim all the sahaba are apostates apart from 3.

See Rijal Kashi

You should see the ones with mu`tabar chains.

34:00 Shia claim the Imams are so pure that they were born from out of the thighs of their mothers, rather than having a normal birth. They claim the Imams have knowledge of the unseen, know the future, and control the world with Allah or on behalf of Allah. Shias call upon them and do tawaf around their graves. Shias claim the imams know when they are going to die, and only die by choice.

See al Kafi and Jila ul Ayun

The only really problematic ones here are the "controlling the world with Allah or on His behalf" and the doing Tawaf around their graves. The former is not true (and that's really not what wilayah al-takweeniyya is) and there's an entire chapter in Wasa'il about one is not to do tawaf of graves.

51:00 Quotes a Shia narration about it being lawful to kill nasibis, and says that's what we call Sunnis. So for us it is lawful to kill Sunnis.

See Anwar al Numania

No, sorry. I know it'd be convenient for you if we believed all non-Shias are shar`i nawasib, but they're not. But real shari` nawasib, yeah, I think even yajibul-qatl sometimes. Allahu a3lam.

53:00 We say the 4 sunnis imams fabricated a religion, and do takfir of them.

See tazkiratul Aimma

LOL. First time I've heard this. I don't think they maliciously made things up.

1:05:00 Shias consider karbala better than the Kaaba, better than Mecca and Medina.

See Kamil al Ziyaarat

Eh. I'm okay with it. And being okay with it has to do with understanding the `azaa' of Abi `Abdillah [as], which the likes of those who deny their [as] wilayah will never really understand.

في امان الله

Edited by Dar'ul_Islam

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course he advises people not to even talk to shia and be friends with them or debate them, as no one must think for themselves! As if people will debate with them they might learn some true things and that will lead all of them into Jahanam! lol the logic of this guy, i'd bet he salivates everytime the US or Israel threatens to attack iran

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its one thing to talk bad about Shias, but its another thing to believe those who talk bad about Shias. A true seeker of truth would learn about other people by asking them directly and researching their sources. So if this guy is misleading others, well others to be blamed to be mislead.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:lol:

His facebook page http://www.facebook....1075285?sk=info

Location

Jeddah, Saudi Arabia Affiliation

Jeddah Dawah Center About

The ONLY Official FB Page (There are fake ones which I am free of) of BRO. ABU MUSSAB WAJDI AKKARI of OneWayToParadise.net Personal Information

Wajdi Akkari Speaks about himself.

I was born and raised in Lebanon in an un-Islamic environment where we celebrated all the Christian holidays with no exception. Islam had no real role in my life except occupying the "Religion" slot on my passport along with some ritualistic practices in the later stages which did not survive, nor were they of any real substance. At the age of 18, I traveled t...o the United States with the hope to become a rapper or an NBA player. I got heavily involved with a group of Buddhists due to our common interest in music. I eventually started practicing Buddhism and lost touch of the real world and the purpose of life. Even though I was living, what appeared to be a lavish life, I was miserable on the inside and suffered immensely due to the kind of life I was leading. After the passage of 5 years or so, in the oddest of circumstances, Allah guided me to Islam and instilled in my heart the love for Dawah, something that I could have never done on my own, so all praise is due to Him, the Exalted. Furthermore, Allah also facilitated for me the acquisition of Islamic knowledge at the hands of qualified scholars in the middle of Los Angeles!

My life started to change and my previous interests in the many evil I used to engage in started to fade away (I ask Allah to help us all overcome our desires until we die). I eventually moved with my wife and children to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia where Allah facilitated for me the propagation of Islam in ways I could have never perceived. By Allah's Grace, I have been blessed with many opportunities to share Islam with the Muslims and non-Muslims.

I continue to strive in rectifying my condition and improving my relationship with my Master whom I ask to ever enslave me to His Majesty, grant me the honor to work in the service of His religion, and enable me to spread Islam until the last breath I shall breathe.

From Rock Bottom to the Surface (by the grace of Allaah):

http://www.onewaytoparadise.net

http://www.youtube.c...newaytoparadise

You know I am finding this trait very common in a lot of these idiotic anti-shia speakers. I remember myself when I grew up in Saudi Arabia the anti-shia Islamic teacher at our school being a ex-playboy who did all this bad stuff when he was in the USA (women, nude beaches etc) and then finding Islam and becoming a preacher.

I knew this guy in university that again, use to be a huge playboy (alcohol, women and maybe drugs) but then became a strict muslim who would pray a lot but would be extremley anti-shia and hate them so much.

I mean what is it in these people, is it that they hate that part of themselves so much in their lives and at what they used to do that they cant stand their own sight in the mirror and they have to take it out on someone else now?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know about the rest but this thing that you pointed out

is actually true.

These points are also true. And can be backed up from the Shia books

See Fasul Khitab

See Rijal Kashi

See al Kafi and Jila ul Ayun

See Anwar al Numania

See tazkiratul Aimma

See Kamil al Ziyaarat

Your response is the most retarded response in the world... So because one shia said something you generalise the whole belief system of shia ?

I could find you some messed up stuff that sunni scholars say and generalise the whole of you with that

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

An hour and a half of lies....

mal basta :mad: (if your iraqi you'll know what im saying)

 

 

Got you. Lol.

Astaghfirullah, these idiots dont even think about death for a second.

 

 

Death?.... No their only thoughts are "Create more Lies", "Effect the Audience" And "A Job Welldone".. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
He continues with some more nonsense later on, and generally his whole presentation was undermined by his emotions related to the Sahaba, which led him down this ridiculous path. He would have been much better off focusing on Shia mourning rituals, beliefs about the Imams (more clips of Shia scholars saying stuff about the Imams controlling the universe, etc), and only briefly talked about the rejection of the Sahaba, which I doubt many non-Muslims would find very interesting in the first place. I can only assume that this guy is not very bright, and has no clue what kind of audience he was addressing. Then again, I didn't expect much from him. The producers of this show think Zakir Naik knows his stuff when it comes to Christianity, so they clearly don't have much discernment.

 

The same washed up arguments come on this site, fom those who gladly accept the video as truth....

Edited by PureEthics

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes,Yes, strange that he didn't focused more on concepts like "wilayah takwiniya".Unfortunately there are scholars who believe in this ..

 

Or "shia" mourning rituals that you see in many youtube clips  ( that also many scholars even promotes this) 

 

Sayyid Fadlullah ( may Allah swt grant him jannah )

 

Q: Do the infallible Imams enjoy the WilayatTakwiniya (universal or absolute authority)? Do they have the knowledge of the unseen, if God, the Most Exalted wills so? 

A: The term WilayatTakwiniya means that Allah has given Prophet Muhammad (p.) and his household the mandate to run the universe or at least a part of it. The religious scholars are divided between those who believe in it and those who do not. And we tend to agree with those who do not, because if Allah does not interfere and has left the running of the universe to other distinguished creations (Angels, Prophets… etc) then they are independent is assuming their responsibilities and this is what the religious scholars have agreed to refuse. It is clear in this case that rejecting the mandate leads to rejecting the WilayatTakwiniya. If this Wilayat means something else: That they (prophets and imams) were honoured by Allah in asking them to run the universe, although He is the real administrator and the only source of power. We say that since their role is to guide people to the right path, any other task does not conform with this role. It is also not necessary to enable them to perform this role. Miracles do not constitute a proof in this regard. The miracle is an exceptional action that Allah made certain Prophets perform to prove their case. But it is not a proof of the WilayatTakwiniya, since it is not a constant attribute. In any case, what is relevant here is that Allah has ensured in His Holy Book that He is the only creator and the only one who runs this universe, and that He has no partners. If the angles were given a certain role in running certain affairs, they are not independent, rather, and according to the Quranic text, they follow His orders. Moreover it has not been proven that, with the exception of the angels, anybody else, especially, Prophets and Imams, have any role in running the universe. The traditions that say otherwise are either false because they contradict the Quran, or not authentic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:lol:

His facebook page http://www.facebook.com/pages/Abu-Mussab-Wajdi-Akkari-Official/123179511075285?sk=photos#!/pages/Abu-Mussab-Wajdi-Akkari-Official/123179511075285?sk=info

Location

Jeddah, Saudi Arabia Affiliation

Jeddah Dawah Center About

The ONLY Official FB Page (There are fake ones which I am free of) of BRO. ABU MUSSAB WAJDI AKKARI of OneWayToParadise.net Personal Information

Wajdi Akkari Speaks about himself.

I was born and raised in Lebanon in an un-Islamic environment where we celebrated all the Christian holidays with no exception. Islam had no real role in my life except occupying the "Religion" slot on my passport along with some ritualistic practices in the later stages which did not survive, nor were they of any real substance. At the age of 18, I traveled t...o the United States with the hope to become a rapper or an NBA player. I got heavily involved with a group of Buddhists due to our common interest in music. I eventually started practicing Buddhism and lost touch of the real world and the purpose of life. Even though I was living, what appeared to be a lavish life, I was miserable on the inside and suffered immensely due to the kind of life I was leading. After the passage of 5 years or so, in the oddest of circumstances, Allah guided me to Islam and instilled in my heart the love for Dawah, something that I could have never done on my own, so all praise is due to Him, the Exalted. Furthermore, Allah also facilitated for me the acquisition of Islamic knowledge at the hands of qualified scholars in the middle of Los Angeles!

My life started to change and my previous interests in the many evil I used to engage in started to fade away (I ask Allah to help us all overcome our desires until we die). I eventually moved with my wife and children to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia where Allah facilitated for me the propagation of Islam in ways I could have never perceived. By Allah's Grace, I have been blessed with many opportunities to share Islam with the Muslims and non-Muslims.

I continue to strive in rectifying my condition and improving my relationship with my Master whom I ask to ever enslave me to His Majesty, grant me the honor to work in the service of His religion, and enable me to spread Islam until the last breath I shall breathe.

From Rock Bottom to the Surface (by the grace of Allaah):

See More Email

onewaytoparadise@gmail.com Website

http://www.onewaytoparadise.net

http://www.youtube.com/onewaytoparadise

Mussab was the brother of Abdullah iibn Zubayr who has witnessed the burning Kaaba when Yazid has sent his army to win over Kaaba (Post Karbala tragedy) and kill Abdullah ibn Zubayr. That time Abdullah ibn Zubayr was happy to see kaaba burning instead of Saving the house of Allah because he wanted people to hate Yazid after the battle of karbala and his deeds in Medina so that he can rule the entire Arab. So Mr Abu Mussab (the father of Mussab) is from the same Shajra. How can we expect him to say good about Prophet's household (PBUH) and His believers. Ameeral Momineen Hazrat Imam Ali (A.S.) said silence is the best weapon one can use against illiterate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shia always pick the weakest videos and "adress them" :lol:  This is because touching the videos of Uthman al Khamis or Dimashqiah who both have completely refuted 12er shiism.

As for Anti-Shia(Exposing and refuting rafidism) than the Shi3a themself make very good stuff. Like the Shi3i Ahmad Al-Katib who destroyed the core of shiism. And recently Kamal al Haidari is doing a great favour to ahlu sunnah by exposing the other marjas also the son of al Khoei did a great favour in exposing his father.

 

Lets see

 

 

The highlights:

 

Starts off by going on about how Shia attribute divine characteristics to the Imams.

 

07:15 A clip of Muhammad Ridha Shirazi talking, with the translation below being "When we call on, pray to and ask for our personal and social needs from them (the Imams), you're calling on and asking from an Imam who has control of the universe and everything. And when and when an Imam says to something "be" and it is."

 

 

Dont see a problem With that.

 

08:05 Says that the Shia believe in 12 Imams, the last of which has been living in a tunnel in Samarra for a thousand years. Says people wait outside the tunnel with food, camels, and horses, for him to come out.

 

Dont see a problem With that

 

08:55 Says the Shia atribute divinity to the Imams by giving them divine characteristics such as knoweldge of the unseen.

 

Very true indeed

 

09:40 Says Jibrail (as) stayed on earth after the death of the Prophet (pbuh) in order to guide the Imams and give them revelation.

 

Very true indeed. Not only the Imams but fatima aswell. Thats why we read about the Quran of Fatima in al kafi.

 

 

11:00 Talks about how the companions are the ones who conveyed the Sunna, and hence the purpose of the Shia rejecting the companions is to reject the Sunna. Of course, he doesn't say that the Shia believe it makes more sense to get the Sunna from the Prophet's family, rather than a bunch of people who may have met him for a little while.

 

It makes no sense getting the Sunnah from rawafid who use taqiyya who narrated from unknow rijal who also use taqiyya who narrated from Imams who according to their own narrations they also used taqiyya and they never saw the prophet. Ofcourse as a sunni i belive Baqir and Sadiq are innocent from what you have attributed to them. 

 

 

That hadith is not even weak or fabricated in the books of the Sunna."

 

Very Nice article on the sunni view: http://www.schiiten.com/backup/http://www.*****************.com/www.http://www.*****************.com/articles/rebuttals/ghadir-khumm.html

 

 

It's hard to even know what to say about this. It's difficult to believe the man could be so jahil.

 

He made a few mistakes, but i dont see how you can label him as a jahil. That man has more knowledge than most of Your marjas.

 

 

 

The producers of this show think Zakir Naik knows his stuff when it comes to Christianity.

 

Seeing as he did very well in his debate with William Campbell  i dont see why the producers shouldnt think that. Of course Zakir Naik makes mistakes as he is only a human being.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(bismillah)

 

Shia always pick the weakest videos and "adress them" :lol:  This is because touching the videos of Uthman al Khamis or Dimashqiah who both have completely refuted 12er shiism.

As for Anti-Shia(Exposing and refuting rafidism) than the Shi3a themself make very good stuff. Like the Shi3i Ahmad Al-Katib who destroyed the core of shiism. And recently Kamal al Haidari is doing a great favour to ahlu sunnah by exposing the other marjas also the son of al Khoei did a great favour in exposing his father.

 

[...blah blah more epic BS...]

 

Lol.

 

^That is all your statements are worth.

 

والسلام على من اتبع الهدى

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(bismillah)

 

Lol.

 

^That is all your statements are worth.

 

والسلام على من اتبع الهدى

Hello daru. Why dont you go back and being a wannabi Muhadith playing around with pseudo-hadith sciene Darul. It seems like since you cannot adress what was stated you decide to put in a lol trying to make what was said seem ridiculous. A very old fallacy. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Haidar let us see what you have for us today.

 

As for the other forum i dont really bother talking about that here. Nor about you attacks on Dimashqiah as i know why shi3a dislike him after what he did to you.
 

So what if taqiyya was used?

 

Because taqiyya was used you have contradicting ahadith. Making all of your ahadith books useless like your scholars admit.

 

 

“The majority of contradictions in our narrations after observation and research or even all of the contradictions originate from Taqqiyah.” Source: al-Hadaeq al Nadirah by Yusuf al Bahrani 1/8.

 

Only a small amount of the rulings of the religion were known for sure, because their narrations were mixed with the narrations of Taqqiyah(dissimulation), as was admitted by Thiqat al-Islam Muhammad bin Ya’aqoub al-Kulayni may Allah fill his grave with light in his collection al-Kafi. vol.1 pg.5:

 
Even Tusi back in the days knew his religion had big holes.
 

And among the Hadiths (narrated) by our companions (Shia scholars/companions of the Imams) are so many disparities, contrast, contravening and contradictions that you will not find a single report that we agree upon which doesn’t have another that contradicts it, and not a single Hadith is safe from another which denies it. These (contradictions) are to such an extent that our opponents (the Muslims/Ahl Al-Sunnah) have used it as the biggest accusation/attack against our school and as a proof for the falsehood of our creed.( Tahtheeb Al-Ahkam 1/8 by sheikh of the Shia sect al Tusi.)

 

 

See how worthless your ahadith are?

 

 

 

 They didn't have to spend months at a time travelling to pick up a measily hadith from Egypt or Iraq like your scholars

 How is that any different than your scholars traveling collecting taqiyya filled ahadith?

 

In the end, we have a general overall consistency in our ahadith.

 

 

No you dont. You cant even agree about mutah or when to use taqiyya.

 

I don't think a sect that can hardly agree on any aspect of prayer

 

We agree on prayer. As for were the hand should be we have qabt(even malikis not sadl as most shi3a wishfully think). As to were the hands should be than all the positions are correct as Rasul Allah used all.

 

 

 

As for the Imams  (as) never having seen the Prophet  (pbuh), this argument is so stupid

No not really. As they never saw the prophet what they said has no importance unless its ijtihad.

 

 

 

 there was an iron-clad chain of transmission 

Hahahaha. No such Iron-clad chain exists. No wonder you are so biased in your argumentation.

 

Here comes the fun part.

 

 

 

Thereby making a complete fool of yourself from any objective historical point of view.

Now find me a contemporary sunni from the time of Baqir or Saddiq that said he was a shi3i.

 

Seeing as no source exist.

 

This claim here gets destroyed.

 

 

 

 it's absurd to think that they would have learnt to pray from anyone other than their respective fathers

 

Since what you have from them are all fabricated with a touch of Taqiyya.

 

 

 

Don't talk nonsense. Even a child who has read anything at all on the Sunni-Shia division would know about Ghadir Khumm, and it's Sunni sources. 

If you bothered to read he link you would have known the sunni view. So if the guy made a mistake than its not a problem as his a humanbeing.

 

 

 

Are you under the impression that William Campbell is some kind of renowned Christian debater?

Not talking about William Campbell as his opponent. Rather Zakir Naik refrence pointing even if non related topics were introduced in the debate by Campbell. That is enough to respect Zakir Naik.

 

 

 

Believe me, there are loads of Christians out there who would just love to have a chance to debate Zakir Naik

Today perhaps.

 

 

 

because they would rip him to shreds.

Perhaps you can name these debaters. William Lane Craig? James White? 

 

 

 He is nothing more than a cheap copy of Ahmed Deedat

He has more knowledge than Deedat (he was also a student of Deedat).

 

 

 

and understands nothing at all about Christianity

I dont think you are in the position to make such a statement. Esp since you know nothing about Shiism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Part 2

 

As for the part about Mariam. Mariam did not receive a revelation(book). According to al kafi Fatima received a Quran. So what he said about Gabriel was correct.

 

 

 

 

 thought Kulayni was a Shia book

Some call Al Kafi for Kulayni just as Shi3a here call Jami Bukhari for Sahih Bukhari or simply Bukhari. Likewise Tijani called al kafi for kulayni in his debate with Uthman al Khamis. I dont see a problem with that.

 

Seeing your lack of knowledge about ahlu sunnah and about the historical Jaafar ibn Muhammad i can see the result to why you would make such a statement as this.

 

 

 

then again, your sect is founded on denying the superiority of the Ahlubayt

 

Then again your sect was founded by Abdullah ibn Saba just as admited by Kashi and Nimatullah Jazairi. Later more ghulu came and you sect was 90% completed during the time of Behbahani were Khoimeinei added the final touch by inventing Wilayatu al Faqih. Just as we read in your books, Hasan Al Askari never had a son and non of his wives were found pregnant once he died. Also Hakima never existed and she is suppose to have witnessed the birth of the Mahdi. If you belive in him and that he is 1000+ years old. You than have lost the ability to make a statement like this.

 

 

 

objective historical

 

 

So lets sum up.

 

Jaafar al Sadiq was a sunni. No non-shi3i historical source claims otherwise making.

No evidence for the Mahdi. Making him non-historical.

No one can accept a source that contains taqiyya making such ahadith non objective.

 

I belive that sums it up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^..The amount of nonsense you have plastered throughout your last two posts beggars belief. Not a single retort of yours is worth a response from anyone of those who have had the displeasure of reading through your arguments. You're so misinformed about everything tashayyu` (you seem pretty ill-informed of your own madhaahib to boot). Everything you've stated is the foulest form of regurgitated polemical fiction and hyperbole. None of which stands up to real historical scrutiny; the Ja`far b. Muhammad [a] of 'our sect' makes much more sense than the individual your narrative, riddled with historical anachronisms and inconsistencies, seeks to uphold. Please allow your research to extend beyond the confines of the polemical, strawman works of your `ulema; those who have a penchant for back-projecting their own orthodoxy onto the early generations and claiming ijma` on issues where there was none.

Edited by MFAHH

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^..The amount of nonsense you have plastered throughout your last two posts beggars belief. Not a single retort of yours is worth a response from anyone of those who have had the displeasure of reading through your arguments. You're so misinformed about everything tashayyu` (you seem pretty ill-informed of your own madhaahib to boot). Everything you've stated is the foulest form of regurgitated polemical fiction and hyperbole. None of which stands up to real historical scrutiny; the Ja`far b. Muhammad [a] of 'our sect' makes much more sense than the individual your narrative, riddled with historical anachronisms and inconsistencies, seeks to uphold. Please allow your research to extend beyond the confines of the polemical, strawman works of your `ulema; those who have a penchant for back-projecting their own orthodoxy onto the early generations and claiming ijma` on issues where there was none.

Hell Mfah once we get rid of all your ad hominem i saw this

 

 

 

the Ja`far b. Muhammad [a] of 'our sect' makes much more sense

The Jaafar of your sect was invented much later after Jaafar ibn Muhammad died.

 

As for what i said about 12er rafidism i quoted you scholars and everything i said is in your books.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nor about you attacks on Dimashqiah as i know why shi3a dislike him after what he did to you.

What is he supposed to have done to us? I don't dislike Sunnis for making valid criticisms against what they perceive as Shi'ism. I just don't happen to think that Dimashqiah makes very good criticisms. Maybe you can point me to some videos where he 'destroys' Shi'ism.

Because taqiyya was used you have contradicting ahadith. Making all of your ahadith books useless like your scholars admit.

Sunnis don't have contradicting ahadith?

Even Tusi back in the days knew his religion had big holes.

And among the Hadiths (narrated) by our companions (Shia scholars/companions of the Imams) are so many disparities, contrast, contravening and contradictions that you will not find a single report that we agree upon which doesn’t have another that contradicts it, and not a single Hadith is safe from another which denies it. These (contradictions) are to such an extent that our opponents (the Muslims/Ahl Al-Sunnah) have used it as the biggest accusation/attack against our school and as a proof for the falsehood of our creed.( Tahtheeb Al-Ahkam 1/8 by sheikh of the Shia sect al Tusi.)

Notice how he didn't say for every sahih report, there is another that contradicts it. Sure, if you consider all the ahadith, there are contradictions, but are you so delusional that you don't think this is also the case with Sunnism? The whole point of his book was to sort out these contradictions through reconciliation and weakening narrations. So clearly he didn't think the ahadith were useless or he wouldn't have written the book (let alone devoting his life to the study of those ahadith).

See how worthless your ahadith are?

No.

No you dont. You cant even agree about mutah or when to use taqiyya.

In what way do we not agree on mutah?

We agree on prayer. As for were the hand should be we have qabt(even malikis not sadl as most shi3a wishfully think). As to were the hands should be than all the positions are correct as Rasul Allah used all.

Malikis don't prefer sadl? What planet are you on?

Anyway, answer me this. When you go into sajda, should it be hands first or knees first? And is there ijma on this issue?

No not really. As they never saw the prophet what they said has no importance unless its ijtihad.

Ok. Please explain to me how it would have been possible for the Imams to pray differently than the Prophet (pbuh).

Hahahaha. No such Iron-clad chain exists. No wonder you are so biased in your argumentation.

So the chain I mentioned isn't as strong as it gets?

Now find me a contemporary sunni from the time of Baqir or Saddiq that said he was a shi3i.

You go on and on about taqiyyah, and then you ask this? The proof of Imam al-Baqir and al-Sadiq being Shi'is is the fact that it would require an impossibly large conspiracy, among a huge number of people, spread out over great distances and time, in order to believe that the Imams were all Sunnis, and meanwhile you had all these Shia running around claiming to be their followers over many generations. Look into the biographies of the companions of the Imams. You think those are all fabricated? You think all those issues that arose after the death of each Imam were fabricated? Imam al-Rida (as) for example, wasn't trying to convince the Waqifis that he was the rightful Imam? The whole issue of the wakils of the Imams was all made up? This is pure nonsense.

Since what you have from them are all fabricated with a touch of Taqiyya.

If it was all fabricated, then you would expect contradictions everywhere, on every level, which isn't the case at all.

If you bothered to read he link you would have known the sunni view. So if the guy made a mistake than its not a problem as his a humanbeing.

I know the Sunni view, but that isn't the topic. The topic is your friend either lying or being incredibly ignorant. You want to brush it off as a 'mistake', when you certainly wouldn't be saying that if it was a Shi'i saying something similar about Sunnism.

Not talking about William Campbell as his opponent. Rather Zakir Naik refrence pointing even if non related topics were introduced in the debate by Campbell. That is enough to respect Zakir Naik.

'Reference pointing' is all Zakir Naik can do. He can't actually discuss anything in any depth. All he does is reel off verses at quick-fire speed.

Today perhaps.

No, I'm pretty sure there have been many people who have wanted to debate him for a long time, but he purposely avoids debating anyone who might present any danger. In fact, has he ever had a real debate apart from against William Campbell?

Perhaps you can name these debaters. William Lane Craig? James White?

Them, or any other half-decent Christian apologist out there. But yeah, if either of those two debated Zakir Naik, it would be a massacre, even if he and most of his followers would be too dumb to realise it.

He has more knowledge than Deedat (he was also a student of Deedat).

You do realise he often quotes Deedat word for word, right? And where is this knowledge you speak of? I've certainly never seen it. I don't count quoting verses without commentary, and often out of context, as knowledge by the way. Then again, that seems to be your preferred form of debate, so I can see why you would look up to him.

I dont think you are in the position to make such a statement. Esp since you know nothing about Shiism.

And you clearly know so much.

Part 2

As for the part about Mariam. Mariam did not receive a revelation(book). According to al kafi Fatima received a Quran. So what he said about Gabriel was correct.

So if Mariam (as) had written down the things Jibril (as) had told her, then there would suddenly be a problem?

Some call Al Kafi for Kulayni just as Shi3a here call Jami Bukhari for Sahih Bukhari or simply Bukhari. Likewise Tijani called al kafi for kulayni in his debate with Uthman al Khamis. I dont see a problem with that.

That would have been fine if he didn't start talking about Shia sources and then said 'like al-Kafi, Kulayni, etc'. It basically showed he only knew one book, that he probably heard of by watching some videos on youtube.

Then again your sect was founded by Abdullah ibn Saba just as admited by Kashi and Nimatullah Jazairi. Later more ghulu came and you sect was 90% completed during the time of Behbahani were Khoimeinei added the final touch by inventing Wilayatu al Faqih. Just as we read in your books, Hasan Al Askari never had a son and non of his wives were found pregnant once he died. Also Hakima never existed and she is suppose to have witnessed the birth of the Mahdi. If you belive in him and that he is 1000+ years old. You than have lost the ability to make a statement like this.

Right... So, Kashshi says ibn Saba founded Shi'ism? You mean the Shia scholar Kashshi who's book contains narrations about how Imam Ali (as) killed him for his kufr? Edited by Haydar Husayn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Jaafar of your sect was invented much later after Jaafar ibn Muhammad died.

 

As for what i said about 12er rafidism i quoted you scholars and everything i said is in your books.

 

What our Shuyukh have said is true for all sects (more so your own, if you only knew), in fact, it's true for the entire enterprise of historical analysis. Taking what's obvious from scholars and attempting to paint with it a misleading picture to the readers is something I could easily do to you and you would dismiss it wholesale as unfair and biased criticism. What's undeniable is that shi`a ta'ifah have had near ijma`and shuhra on the majority of our fiqh - let alone `aqidah - despite the sunnis' cries of taqiyya. The teachings of our madhab are traceable to the time of Imam al-Baqir [a], even as far back as Imam as-Sajjad [a]. And to actually believe that they thought of themselves as anything other than what the shi`a claim would be to outright reject both the notion of tawatur and also a significant portion of established history, i.e. the Imamite underground spread across countries, each of which was in direct contact with the Imam. What's funny is that whilst it was the proto-sunnis who contended themselves with expounding the meaning of tawatur, their very religion is almost entirely devoid of it.

 

Edit: Ah, brother HH has given excellent replies.

Edited by MFAHH

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Sunnis don't have contradicting ahadith?

Not like shiism. 

 

 

 

Notice how he didn't say for every sahih report

Notice Haydar knows nothing about Shiis. Back than shi3a didnt have sahih hasan daif etc etc. These was later introduced by Al Hilli.

 

 

 

So the chain I mentioned isn't as strong as it gets? 

The chain you mentioned doesnt exist.

 

 

 

If it was all fabricated, then you would expect contradictions everywhere, on every level, which isn't the case at all.

It is the case. We do find contradiction everywhere. Something that bothered Al Tusi as we saw earlier. And just as Yusuf al Bahrani also pointed out. So one can dismiss all shi3i ahadith without a problem.

 

 

 

I know the Sunni view, but that isn't the topic. The topic is your friend either lying or being incredibly ignorant. You want to brush it off as a 'mistake', when you certainly wouldn't be saying that if it was a Shi'i saying something similar about Sunnism.

No not really. I belive the mistakes Mosawi make are mistakes and not taqiyya. As for what that man said, thats just a mistake. Which i why i would prefer if the Deen show called Dimashqiah or Uthman Khamis next time.

 

 

 

You do realise he often quotes Deedat word for word, right?

I dont see the problem with that. Zakir Naik have made many revert to Islam. I have yet to see a Shi3i be as effective.

 

 

 

So if Mariam  (as) had written down the things Jibril  (as) had told her, then there would suddenly be a problem? 

Mariam didnt receive a Quran from Jibril unlike what we read in al kafi about Fatima which was included in Al Jafr. This means the shi3a dont belive the revelation ended with Muhammad. Which is what the brother pointed out.

 

 

 

Right... So, Kashshi says ibn Saba founded Shi'ism? You mean the Shia scholar Kashshi who's book contains narrations about how Imam Ali  (as) killed him for his kufr? 

 

“Many knowledgeable people have stated that Abdullah bin Saba was a Jew who had accepted Islam and showed great devotion for Hadhrat Ali (may Allah be pleased with him). As a Jew, he used to exaggerated the personality of Joshua, the son of Nun, and the Wasi of Moses. After becoming a Muslim he began to exalt the personality of Hadhrat Ali much beyond the due limit, and he was the first person to declare that it was obligatory to believe in the Imamate of Hadhrat Ali, and completely dissociated himself form his enemies and he openly opposed them and denounced them as infidels”.[Rijal-i-Kashi, page.71].

 

Sure

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello MFA

 

 

 

What our Shuyukh have said is true for all sects

No not really. We dont have taqiyya filled ahadith causing every hadith to have another one contradicting it. Also we dont have the belief in tahreef ahudubillah like you Shuyukh said about your sect ;)

 

 

 

What's undeniable is that shi`a ta'ifah have had near ijma`and shuhra on the majority of our fiqh

Thats not true at all. The marjas(who each are a madhab) differ on fiqh. The case is much much worse for aqeeda. Thisis why some of your scholars want gnosticism betought in the hawza while others reject it. Some of you hold the belief in wahdat ul wujood(like Kamal al Haidari and Khoimeinei) while other declare whoever hold such a belief a Kaffir (Yassir al Habib). You have no such thing as Ijma.

 

The teachings of our madhab are traceable to the time of Imam al-Baqir [a], even as far back as Imam as-Sajjad

 

 

Via fabricated ahadith made up later.

 

 

 

notion of tawatur

Shi3i tawatur filled with taqiyya is should not be refered to as tawatur. Also Tahref is mutawatir in your booksyt you reject it.

 

 

 

portion of established history

I challenge you to find me 1 source from the time of Jaafar al Sadiq saying he was a Shi3i.

 

 

 

he Imamite underground spread across countries

So did Zaydiyya, Ismailiya and other groups. And they spread after the death of Jaafar.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So Shi3I4lyf posted a response video which is retitled older videos. This is better than nothing i guess.

 

Make sure you subscribe to Shi34lyf. We should plan an online fundraiser for his efforts and support.

 

link

Edited by pakistanyar

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...