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  
Hot hot

Saying Inshaali Instead Of Inshaallah

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

I would have banned you rational thinking you are comparing the idols of their Bhagwan Sita with alam of gazi Abbas a.s you should be ashamed of your self.

hot hot I don't want to derail the topic.

I do not hate Hindus.

I dislike "hindu influenced Muslims", hence me calling them Hinduslims. Shias of India for most part seem to be most influenced with those Hindus and their traditions. I don't know if you have, but the Indian ulema I've met are most worried about Shia Islam's future in India due to this assimilation of Shia Muslims into Hindu traditions. One even went as far as saying that Shia Islam in its original form won't exist in India by next generation. Can you counter this? Have you noticed the most amount of inter-Shia fitna and new and totally alien things introducing in Islam originate from India? This topic is one such example.

I have never Met any Indian ulema saying all this rubbish, whom you have met with? I will try to contact him what was his name tell me? Which traditions? Fire walking khandaq? Then pakis can also be called Hinduslims? Aren't they? We don't go in their poojas we don't worship their idols we don't visit temples we don't sing bhajans we don't fire crackers on Diwali we don't celebrate any of their festival like ganesh chaturthi makar sanskranti etc

Have you ever been to India? Tell me how many hindu traditions you know which has been influenced to Shias?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

sorry not cathching what u mean here...

are u saying whoever thinks that if someone says inshAli is a mushrik...then God's (aj) curse on the accuser?

Where did you read that out of my post? O_o

I'm pretty sure he means that whoever says insha'Ali is a mushrik, and may God curse him or her.

This is what I mean. Insha'Ali is pure kufr and shirk. I feel dirty even writing that phrase to clarify for you.

Edited by al-Irshad

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Where did you read that out of my post? O_o

This is what I mean. Insha'Ali is pure kufr and shirk. I feel dirty even writing that phrase to clarify for you.

oh okay i didnt know if u were reffereing to the OP or the the people defending the insh'ali stance.

Shukran.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree and, doubtless, many here would consider me a ghaal, but "insha 'Ali" is a step too far, even for me. The Imam (as) wills what Allah (SWT) wills, but he is not the source of that will, so insinuation of tafweed aside, to utter that phrase is technically incorrect,

The many here also refer to our Ayatollah in the same manner as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Saying Inshallah wa Ali ibn Abi Taleb is shirk, because only God's will should be relevent. Also, it implies to Imam Ali (as) should also give his approval for a matter to happen, even if God (SWT) already approves of it.

Oh yes bro if you agree that ahlulbayth a.s do not have a will of their own but their will is Allah azwj's will then you would know that any given time a masoom's decision is Allah azwj's will.

Now if that is the case then saying inshallah at one stance and saying inshali at another by itself should not be a problem for you because you believe that Allah azwj's will is their Will.

I want u to look closely at the narration it says inshallah wa ali ibn abi talib and this is what makes it special and requires pondering but shirk brigade is up with arms again. I am sad that there can't be a sensible discussion on this site when someone wants to learn but people are only interested in threads which have catchy names and discuss only when there is a scandal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2ae03f2b-acae-4fcf-94b3-d2341582e522HiRes.JPG

DSC02433.jpg

WRONG EXAMPLE

If you post pictures like these and call it shirk, I'll post the picture of a big black clad cube with millions circling it, and will ask you to justify it.

Alam of Hazrat Abbas, Tazia, and other things used in Azadari are not SHIRK at all. They are for a remembrance of one of the Hujjat of Allah(swt), and in no way or form, Shia Muslims make it a deity. Test in case, read carefully behind the Ashura banner that you posted, its says "Ya Aba Abdillah", meaning "O the Father of the Slave of Allah". No this is not Hindu Assimilation. This is part of Islamic Dawa and Ashura ritual.

No sir this is not where HinduSlims confuse Islam and Hindusim. HinduSlims confuse Islam on much deeper and some superficial things.

Let's don't confuse my disagreement here with 'closet wahabis' attack on Azadari. Attacking Azadari is in fact one of the biggest form of Shirk in itself (I know this needs another topic).

Overall we need to protect ourselves from the machinations of both, the-Nusairis-the-Ghaleez, and the confused-closet-Wahabis.

Edited by Waiting for HIM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(salam)

WRONG EXAMPLE

If you post pictures like these and call it shirk, I'll post the picture of a big black clad cube with millions circling it, and will ask you to justify it.

The problem with this statement is the Ka`ba and tawaaf around it is mentioned in the Quraan and ahaadeeth. These narrations are both explicit and implicit, there is no running away from them. What arises: is there any 'ayaa or hadeeth which even closely instructs us to do what many do today for Muharram and mourning of 'Imaam al Husayn (as)? Is there any mention of 'Imaam `Ali bin al Husayn (as) decorating an `alam at his house, or Ummal Baneen decorating and keeping an `alam in memory/mourning of her sons?

No sir this is not where HinduSlims confuse Islam and Hindusim. HinduSlims confuse Islam on much deeper and some superficial things.

Let's don't confuse my disagreement here with 'closet wahabis' attack on Azadari. Attacking Azadari is in fact one of the biggest form of Shirk in itself (I know this needs another topic).

Overall we need to protect ourselves from the machinations of both, the-Nusairis-the-Ghaleez, and the confused-closet-Wahabis.

Perhaps it's ridiculously significant to mention here `Azadaari as defined and practiced by the Ahlul bayt (as), not as defined and practiced by any random "`azadaar."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(salam)

The problem with this statement is the Ka`ba and tawaaf around it is mentioned in the Quraan and ahaadeeth. These narrations are both explicit and implicit, there is no running away from them. What arises: is there any 'ayaa or hadeeth which even closely instructs us to do what many do today for Muharram and mourning of 'Imaam al Husayn (as)? Is there any mention of 'Imaam `Ali bin al Husayn (as) decorating an `alam at his house, or Ummal Baneen decorating and keeping an `alam in memory/mourning of her sons?

Perhaps it's ridiculously significant to mention here `Azadaari as defined and practiced by the Ahlul bayt (as), not as defined and practiced by any random "`azadaar."

Yes it does, in the Quran it talks about remembering Allah and His signs. Logically remembering Karbala is remembrance of Allah and zikr. These personalities remind us of Allah. So yes Allah has said it in the Quran. Just because something isn't mentioned doesn't mean it isn't allowed. Many on here think if something isn't in Quran or Hadith isn't allowed, which is far from it. That is why we have marja who find tafsirs of Hadith and Quran and apply principles to it, letting us know if it is a right act or not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(salam)

The problem with this statement is the Ka`ba and tawaaf around it is mentioned in the Quraan and ahaadeeth. These narrations are both explicit and implicit, there is no running away from them. What arises: is there any 'ayaa or hadeeth which even closely instructs us to do what many do today for Muharram and mourning of 'Imaam al Husayn (as)? Is there any mention of 'Imaam `Ali bin al Husayn (as) decorating an `alam at his house, or Ummal Baneen decorating and keeping an `alam in memory/mourning of her sons?

Perhaps it's ridiculously significant to mention here `Azadaari as defined and practiced by the Ahlul bayt (as), not as defined and practiced by any random "`azadaar."

Bro, search SC, this topic has been discussed many times, and every time the 'closet Wahabis' had to call their peace because of their lack of Quran and Hadith knowledge. I don't want to waste a breath on it. But read Quran again, the Aza, the remembrance, respecting material things related to even ordinary prophets, their animals, their belongings has been mentioned in Quran verses (ayaat) explicitly and loud &clear multiple times.

That's why I say, only revering Kaaba and ignoring the remembrances and the material things associated with Prophet and Aimah (as) is the worst form of SHIRK, and puts one directly in the bucket of accursed Shaitan who in his stupid version of Tawheed refused to do sajda to the Hujjat of Allah namely Adam.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Besides its not the fact of imams doing it then we do it too. It's the matter of, is it allowed, it's significance, it's meaning, it's spiritual meaning, it's relations.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bro, search SC, this topic has been discussed many times, and every time the 'closet Wahabis' had to call their peace because of their lack of Quran and Hadith knowledge. I don't want to waste a breath on it. But read Quran again, the Aza, the remembrance, respecting material things related to even ordinary prophets, their animals, their belongings has been mentioned in Quran verses (ayaat) explicitly and loud &clear multiple times.

That's why I say, only revering Kaaba and ignoring the remembrances and the material things associated with Prophet and Aimah (as) is the worst form of SHIRK, and puts one directly in the bucket of accursed Shaitan who in his stupid version of Tawheed refused to do sajda to the Hujjat of Allah namely Adam.

You say closet Wahhabis they say closet Nussairis. So easy to name call isnt it. You on a short slippery path

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Aslamalaykum,

Well said brother!

I agree and, doubtless, many here would consider me a ghaal, but "insha 'Ali" is a step too far, even for me. The Imam (as) wills what Allah (SWT) wills, but he is not the source of that will, so insinuation of tafweed aside, to utter that phrase is technically incorrect,

Yes your right Abdul, what Allah swt wills, Ahlul Bayt a.s will

(Only quoting a part of a lengthy narration)

ثم قال : وجئت تسأله عن مقالة المفوضة ، كذبوا، بل قلوبنا أوعية لمشية الله ، فإذا شاء شئنا ، والله يقول :وما تشآؤون إلاأن يشآء الله

Imam Hasan Askari (as) said:

"You have come to ask about the Mufaw'widha. They (Mufaw'widha) have lied. But our hearts are containers of the Will of Allah سبحانه وتعالى, so when Allah (swt) wills, We will. And Allah (swt) has said, "And you will not will, but as Allah Wills" [Quran 76:30]

[source: Al-Gaibha - Sheikh Toosi, Pg. 159]

Edited by muslimunity1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No suprise it's in India, the shias there really let the hindus influence them too much

If you have been to Iraq or Iran you will see the same stuff that you call Hindu influence. No doubt there are bits and pieces of Indian culture in what we do but somebody should tell me what is the proof that it is against religion?

If you see matters of love and affection through the lenses of halal and haram then you will end up speaking against without a proof against it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Siraatoaliyinhaqqun:

'The prophet saww the greatest sign (ayatollah al kubra) and that is Ali a.s '.

Please explain. Also, you didn't refute what I said. Do you hold any of it to be true?

Salamalaikum bro,

I think there isn't any refutation needed as it depends from person to person as how he believes His God to be.

Let's say you believe that rasool Allah saww went to mehraj and met Allah azwj and He spoke to Him whatever He spoke. Can a God who doesnt come in senses (hawaa) be seen, spoken to and defined in a place? Or let me make it more simple. If Allah azwj Met, spoke and was seen then you have ascribed to Him two things comparing Him to the sifaat of makhlooq and indication both are ascriptions which He has not ascribed to Himself. And some say He spoke in the voice of Ali a.s as He saw rasool Allah saww's heart wfilled with Love of Ali a.s. So why do u think he saww had love of Ali a.s not love of Allah azwj?

Can u tell me ur view?

Edited by siraatoaliyinhaqqun

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(salam)

The problem with this statement is the Ka`ba and tawaaf around it is mentioned in the Quraan and ahaadeeth. These narrations are both explicit and implicit, there is no running away from them. What arises: is there any 'ayaa or hadeeth which even closely instructs us to do what many do today for Muharram and mourning of 'Imaam al Husayn (as)? Is there any mention of 'Imaam `Ali bin al Husayn (as) decorating an `alam at his house, or Ummal Baneen decorating and keeping an `alam in memory/mourning of her sons?

Perhaps it's ridiculously significant to mention here `Azadaari as defined and practiced by the Ahlul bayt (as), not as defined and practiced by any random "`azadaar."

Please people read Quran, may be your minds get broadened a bit, what do you say about Taboot e Sakina ,without whom Bani Israel couldn't succeed in any battle, and when it was taken away they couldn't achieve victory for another 400 years, Allah descended it again, and Taloot, (as) got victorious over Jaloot,(la) . Was Allah dependent over this Taboot? Couldn't He give victory without it? But these are His clear signs to ''those who have eyes''. What did that Taboot contain?, slippers of Moses, (as) ,His shirt, shield, etc , what Allah teaches here, that you can't be victorious even without my loved one's slippers, let alone you people criticize these Sha'air who belong to Allah's most loved Creatures, much more than Moses,(as), when devaluing them could bring downfall to Israelites for 400 years, be afraid you don't meet the same fate by criticizing them, let alone devaluing.

As for ''do it as Aimma, (as) did'', can you really do as they did?

al Husain b. Ahmad b. Idris رحمه الله narrated to us. He said: My father narrated to us. He said: Ahmad b. Muhammad b. `Isa narrated to us. He said: al `Abbas b. Ma`ruf narrated to us from Muhammad b. Sahl al Bahrani (in the copy: Muhammad b. Suhail and in all the copies: al Najrani, and what we have proved is from the lexicon of the rijal), who traced it to Abu `Abdillah al Sadiq Ja`far b. Muhammad عليه السلام. He said: Those who have wept (excessively) are five – Adam, Ya`qub, Yusuf, Fatimah b. Muhammad صلى الله عليه وآله and `Ali b. al Husain عليهما السلام.

As to Adam, he wept over Jannah until his cheeks became like valleys (i.e. curved, sunk in). As to Ya`qub, he wept over Yusuf until his vision left and until he was told:‘By Allah! You shall not cease to remember Yusuf until you become become sick to the hilt or you are of those who perish’ [surat al Yusuf: 85].

As to Yusuf, he wept over Ya`qub until the inhabitants of the prison were hurt by it and they said: Either you weep by day and be silent at night or that you weep by night and be silent in the daytime. So he agreed to one of those two with them.

As to Fatimah b. Muhammad صلى الله عليه وآله, she wept over RasulAllah صلى الله عليه وآله until the people of Madinah were troubled due to it. And they said to her: You give us trouble through the excess of your crying. So she went out towards the graves of the shuhadaa’ and wept until her need was accomplished; then she would depart. And as to `Ali b. al Husain, he wept over al Husain عليهما السلام for twenty years or forty years. And food would not be placed in front of him but he would weep until a retainer of his said to him: May I be ransomed for you, O son of the Messenger of Allah! I fear for you lest you be of those who perish (i.e. due to the excessive crying and lack of nutrition). He said: I only complain of my sorrow and my grief to Allah, and I know from Allah what you know not. Verily I do not remember the perdition (battleground?) of the children of Fatimah but that I am choked with tears because of that.

Can you people exactly mourn, or cry this way? As you remain over enthusiastic in doing it the way 'exactly' they did? You can spend your whole life but can't mourn as they did, don't claim things you can't actually do, and those who do things according to Quran, and Sharia stop criticizing them, your criticism isn't able to stop any AZADAR INSHALLAH.

Edited by Kaniz e Zahra

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes it does, in the Quran it talks about remembering Allah and His signs. Logically remembering Karbala is remembrance of Allah and zikr. These personalities remind us of Allah. So yes Allah has said it in the Quran. Just because something isn't mentioned doesn't mean it isn't allowed. Many on here think if something isn't in Quran or Hadith isn't allowed, which is far from it. That is why we have marja who find tafsirs of Hadith and Quran and apply principles to it, letting us know if it is a right act or not.

What is the tafseer of the 'ayaa you are bringing up? Why wouldn't you argue it is MORE logical to remember Karbalaa' the way the survivors of Karbalaa' remembered it? These signs of today are signs you are creating and making up, not signs that are already present. Need anyone go any further than bringing up the mehndi of Qaasim "sign" which must also be respected? And I say this with all respect, brother.

Bro, search SC, this topic has been discussed many times, and every time the 'closet Wahabis' had to call their peace because of their lack of Quran and Hadith knowledge. I don't want to waste a breath on it. But read Quran again, the Aza, the remembrance, respecting material things related to even ordinary prophets, their animals, their belongings has been mentioned in Quran verses (ayaat) explicitly and loud &clear multiple times.

That's why I say, only revering Kaaba and ignoring the remembrances and the material things associated with Prophet and Aimah (as) is the worst form of SHIRK, and puts one directly in the bucket of accursed Shaitan who in his stupid version of Tawheed refused to do sajda to the Hujjat of Allah namely Adam.

But what sort of material things associated with RasoolAllaah (pbuh) and the Aa'imma (as) do you have? The only things we have is what we have created with our hands. The ahaadeeth are pretty explicit in saying all of these things are in possession of 'Imaam Mahdi (as), not physically with us.

Please people read Quran, may be your minds get broadened a bit, what do you say about Taboot e Sakina ,without whom Bani Israel couldn't succeed in any battle, and when it was taken away they couldn't achieve victory for another 400 years, Allah descended it again, and Taloot, (as) got victorious over Jaloot,(la) . Was Allah dependent over this Taboot? Couldn't He give victory without it? But these are His clear signs to ''those who have eyes''. What did that Taboot contain?, slippers of Moses, (as) ,His shirt, shield, etc , what Allah teaches here, that you can't be victorious even without my loved one's slippers, let alone you people criticize these Sha'air who belong to Allah's most loved Creatures, much more than Moses, (as), when devaluing them could bring downfall to Israelites for 400 years, be afraid you don't meet the same fate by criticizing them, let alone devaluing.

Sister, you have a misunderstanding. You are mentioning the shirt, shield, etc. of Nabi Musa (as). The closest thing to this we have are the sword, the armor and the banner of RasoollAllaah (pbuh). ALL of this is with 'Imaam Mahdi (as), not with us. If we were to have this, we would have been the Aa'imma, and we most certainly are not. What we have our actually cheap replicas of these that people lose their sanity for. You are using a valid Quraanic idea and attributing it to the wrong thing.

As for ''do it as Aimma, (as) did'', can you really do as they did?

al Husain b. Ahmad b. Idris رحمه الله narrated to us. He said: My father narrated to us. He said: Ahmad b. Muhammad b. `Isa narrated to us. He said: al `Abbas b. Ma`ruf narrated to us from Muhammad b. Sahl al Bahrani (in the copy: Muhammad b. Suhail and in all the copies: al Najrani, and what we have proved is from the lexicon of the rijal), who traced it to Abu `Abdillah al Sadiq Ja`far b. Muhammad عليه السلام. He said: Those who have wept (excessively) are five – Adam, Ya`qub, Yusuf, Fatimah b. Muhammad صلى الله عليه وآله and `Ali b. al Husain عليهما السلام.

As to Adam, he wept over Jannah until his cheeks became like valleys (i.e. curved, sunk in). As to Ya`qub, he wept over Yusuf until his vision left and until he was told:‘By Allah! You shall not cease to remember Yusuf until you become become sick to the hilt or you are of those who perish’ [surat al Yusuf: 85].

As to Yusuf, he wept over Ya`qub until the inhabitants of the prison were hurt by it and they said: Either you weep by day and be silent at night or that you weep by night and be silent in the daytime. So he agreed to one of those two with them.

As to Fatimah b. Muhammad صلى الله عليه وآله, she wept over RasulAllah صلى الله عليه وآله until the people of Madinah were troubled due to it. And they said to her: You give us trouble through the excess of your crying. So she went out towards the graves of the shuhadaa’ and wept until her need was accomplished; then she would depart. And as to `Ali b. al Husain, he wept over al Husain عليهما السلام for twenty years or forty years. And food would not be placed in front of him but he would weep until a retainer of his said to him: May I be ransomed for you, O son of the Messenger of Allah! I fear for you lest you be of those who perish (i.e. due to the excessive crying and lack of nutrition). He said: I only complain of my sorrow and my grief to Allah, and I know from Allah what you know not. Verily I do not remember the perdition (battleground?) of the children of Fatimah but that I am choked with tears because of that.

Can you people exactly mourn, or cry this way? As you remain over enthusiastic in doing it the way 'exactly' they did? You can spend your whole life but can't mourn as they did, don't claim things you can't actually do, and those who do things according to Quran, and Sharia stop criticizing them, your criticism isn't able to stop any AZADAR INSHALLAH.

Does this mean one can't follow their example? Or at least try to follow their example? I'm sure you are aware of the hadeeth if we were to shed a tear as small as a fly's wing our sins would still be forgiven. Now just because you can't follow their example completely because we are not that pious yet, or we aren't physically able to, does this mean we can add in our own substitutions? Who has given us permission for this? Just because you can't cry the way 'Imaam as Sajjad did or Sayyida Zahraa' did, this doesn't mean you can bring our swords and begin bleeding yourself with them to somehow make up for a lack of emotion. Please try to understand the Aa'imma (as) have described to us the religion of RasulAllaah (pbuh) and their words are sufficient for us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What is the tafseer of the 'ayaa you are bringing up? Why wouldn't you argue it is MORE logical to remember Karbalaa' the way the survivors of Karbalaa' remembered it? These signs of today are signs you are creating and making up, not signs that are already present. Need anyone go any further than bringing up the mehndi of Qaasim "sign" which must also be respected? And I say this with all respect, brother.

Everything is a sign of Allah, us, the earth, food, all existence. But, the ones that Allah has specifically chosen for a purpose, their sing is above. Why? Because they give importance and remembrance to the religion. How? They were the embodiment of the principles Allah has prescribed. They are the true role models. Well, whether you remember Karbala by the survivors or by emotion. It makes no difference, one isnt more logical then the other, because there is different perspectives. But, I will tell you one thing, those survivors had the imams and companions of the prophet with them. We have imam mahdi but by God's will we cant be in contact with him till his time or till we change as a whole. Which is why we tend to stick to the commemoration/emotion/lecture/spirituality part. What do you mean we are creating? Allah has created them, the prophet said be happy when my family is happy be sad when they are sad: “When the verses of the Most Gracious were recited unto them, they fell down prostrating and weeping.”[276] “And they say, 'Glory be to our Lord. Truly, the promise of our Lord must be fulfilled,' and they fall down upon their faces weeping, and it adds to their humility.”[277] “Ibrahim, our eyes shed tears, and our hearts are filled with grief, but we do not say anything except that by which Allah is pleased. O Ibrahim, we grieve over you.”[278] “But nobody is weeping for my uncle Hamzah,” so the women understood that the Prophet desired people to weep for his uncle, and that is what they did. The crying for all the others ceased, except the crying for Hamzah.[279]

I dont know what you mean by qasiim or what ever, but the idea of decorating an alam, isnt a "bidha" because we dont consider it a matter of permisibility, it isnt in the doctrine of the religion meaning something that should or shouldnt be done. Its a matter of another way of remembering Hussain. Arnt shrines, real life versions of an alaam? Why did Allah command the people to create a mosque over the children of the cave? So people can remember them. The matter is we are building a smaller version in a different way, portable. Please explain me the logic if it not being allowed just because the prophets or imams didnt do it, or provide me proof them telling us not to do it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This needs to be pondered, because the will of Ma'soumins is not the Absolute Will of Allah (SWT) who is All-Wise and Omniscient.

قال جابر لأبي جعفر عليه السلام: قوله لنبيه صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم: ليس لك من الأمر شي‏ء فسره لي؟ فقال عليه السلام: «لشي‏ء قاله الله، ولشي‏ء أراده الله. يا جابر، إن رسول الله (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم كان حريصا على أن يكون علي عليه السلام من بعده على الناس، وكان عند الله خلاف ما أراد رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم. قال: فما معنى ذلك؟ قال عليه السلام: «نعم، عنى بذلك قول الله لرسوله: ليس لك من الأمر شي‏ء يا محمد في علي، الامر إلي في علي عليه السلام وفي غيره، ألم أتل عليك يا محمد، فيما أنزلت من كتابي إليك: الم أحسب الناس أن يتركوا أن يقولوا آمنا وهم لا يفتنون إلى قوله: فليعلمن، قال: فوض رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم الأمر إليه». (العياشي)

Jabir said to Abi Ja'far (as): "His Word addressed to the Prophet (saws)" The decision in this case is not you affair", explain it to me.

Then he (as) said: "This verse relates to something that Allah has said, and something that Allah willed.

O Jabir, indeed the Messenger of Allah (saws) wanted that it would be Ali (as) after him who would have authority over people, but what Allah wanted was different from what would the Messenger of Allah (saws).

He said: "What then is the meaning of this?”

He (as) said: "Yes, it meant by that the word of Allah sent to His Messenger: “The decision in this case is not your affair” O Mohammad concerning Ali : the Decision about Ali (as) is Mine, as well as what concerns the others (the opponents).

Did I not recite to you, O Muhammad, in what I have revealed from My Book: "Men imagine that they will be left saying, “We believe”, without being tested ? We have already tested those who were before them. God knows those who speak the truth and those who are just lying.” (29: 23)

He (Abu Ja'far (as)) said: "The Messenger of Allah (saws) voluntarily accepted this decision from His Part.” (Tafseer 'Ayyashi)

Edited by LoveforTruth

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sister, you have a misunderstanding. You are mentioning the shirt, shield, etc. of Nabi Musa (as). The closest thing to this we have are the sword, the armor and the banner of RasoollAllaah (pbuh). ALL of this is with 'Imaam Mahdi (as), not with us. If we were to have this, we would have been the Aa'imma, and we most certainly are not. What we have our actually cheap replicas of these that people lose their sanity for. You are using a valid Quraanic idea and attributing it to the wrong thing.

Does this mean one can't follow their example? Or at least try to follow their example? I'm sure you are aware of the hadeeth if we were to shed a tear as small as a fly's wing our sins would still be forgiven. Now just because you can't follow their example completely because we are not that pious yet, or we aren't physically able to, does this mean we can add in our own substitutions? Who has given us permission for this? Just because you can't cry the way 'Imaam as Sajjad did or Sayyida Zahraa' did, this doesn't mean you can bring our swords and begin bleeding yourself with them to somehow make up for a lack of emotion. Please try to understand the Aa'imma (as) have described to us the religion of RasulAllaah (pbuh) and their words are sufficient for us.

These aren't ''cheap replicas'', please mind your language towards Sha'air e Ahlebait,(as). These are Shabeehs ,and making replicas are allowed and encouraged, even Ka'aba is a replica, Allah isn't physically living inside.

When we can't exactly mourn like them, then that shouldn't be claimed that mourn like them only, secondly, those who are using signs of rememberance to mourn them more aren't insane, Yaqoob,(as) also said to his sons, ''if you don't find me insane, i smell Yousaf,(as)''. So true lovers were always considered insane, by those who can't understand the intensity of their love. Lack of piety isn't reason of lack of tears, but lack of emotions. Those who make these replicas, feel more emotions, and cry thus developed nearness to the way of mourning as Masoomeen,(as) did.. It is more concrete in their case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Salamalaikum bro,

I think there isn't any refutation needed as it depends from person to person as how he believes His God to be.

Let's say you believe that rasool Allah saww went to mehraj and met Allah azwj and He spoke to Him whatever He spoke. Can a God who doesnt come in senses (hawaa) be seen, spoken to and defined in a place?

He did speak to Hazrat Musa

let me make it more simple. If Allah azwj Met, spoke and was seen then you have ascribed to Him two things comparing Him to the sifaat of makhlooq and indication both are ascriptions which He has not ascribed to Himself. And some say He spoke in the voice of Ali a.s as He saw rasool Allah saww's heart wfilled with Love of Ali a.s. So why do u think he saww had love of Ali a.s not love of Allah azwj?

I should think the Prophet's heart would have been suffused with love for Allah. Your contention rests on the sayings of 'some'; any names, please?

Messed up that reply, sorry. Hope you can make sense of it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you have been to Iraq or Iran you will see the same stuff that you call Hindu influence. No doubt there are bits and pieces of Indian culture in what we do but somebody should tell me what is the proof that it is against religion?

If you see matters of love and affection through the lenses of halal and haram then you will end up speaking against without a proof against it

 

Firstly the Iraq and Iranian community do not do that. Secondly even if they did, it would not make it right, it would still just be an obvious error. The "lenses" of halal and haram are for everything, including love and affection. The fact you seem to admit that this is beyond what is halal, but is ok because its a matter of love, is just your way of excusing this clear error.

 

  18:23

وَلا تَقُولَنَّ لِشَيْءٍ إِنِّي فَاعِلٌ ذَلِكَ غَدًا

    Wala taqoolanna lishay-in innee faAAilun thalika ghadan

    Nor say of anything, "I shall be sure to do so and so tomorrow"-

    18:24

إِلا أَنْ يَشَاءَ اللَّهُ وَاذْكُرْ رَبَّكَ إِذَا نَسِيتَ وَقُلْ عَسَى أَنْ يَهْدِيَنِ رَبِّي لأقْرَبَ مِنْ هَذَا رَشَدًا

    Illa an yashaa Allahu waothkur rabbaka itha naseeta waqul AAasa an yahdiyani rabbee li-aqraba min hatha rashadan

    Without adding, "So please Allah!" and call thy Lord to mind when thou forgettest, and say, "I hope that my Lord will guide me ever closer (even) than this to the right road."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What is the difference between ya ali madad and inshaali ?....

Brother haydar husayn

There was a time when nobody had heard "Ya Ali Madad" either. Maybe in a few decades or centuries, this will also become the norm among a certain type of Shias. It really wouldn't surprise me.

Here is the kind of argument that could be used to defend it:

`Ali only acts in accordance with the will of Allah. Allah's will is his will, and his will is Allah's will. So really, there is no difference in what you say. Additionally, `Ali had wilayah over creation, so if he doesn't want something to happen, then it won't. Therefore it makes sense that you would say "if `Ali wills". Just remember that ultimately all power is from Allah, and everything is ok.

Whoever says this is a mushrik, may God curse him or her.

Edited by Nima

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What is the difference between ya ali madad and inshaali ?....

Brother haydar husayn

There was a time when nobody had heard "Ya Ali Madad" either. Maybe in a few decades or centuries, this will also become the norm among a certain type of Shias. It really wouldn't surprise me.

Here is the kind of argument that could be used to defend it:

`Ali only acts in accordance with the will of Allah. Allah's will is his will, and his will is Allah's will. So really, there is no difference in what you say. Additionally, `Ali had wilayah over creation, so if he doesn't want something to happen, then it won't. Therefore it makes sense that you would say "if `Ali wills". Just remember that ultimately all power is from Allah, and everything is ok.

Why?

But it is okey to say ya ali madad ( o ali help me)............if the intention is correct......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I've never read or heard "inshaali" or "subhanali" before in my life, not from the vilest of mouths from among the marijuanaized malangs of muawiya, nor from obviously nusehri, who otherwise believe in too much ghuloo

 

 

I have personally seen this "inshaAli" and "SubahanAli". I am sure the origins is from the sub-continent. Many many practices of the shi'is in the subcontinent resembles Hindu rites and rituals. I recall there is one incident where the Tazia crosses the river and this is exactly what the hindus do. 

 

This is because they are lead by Zakirs that promote Shirk.

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...