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  
Ali-Reza

Who Was Abdullah Ibn Saba? - Sheikh Yasser Habib

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

Wow, "Sheikh" Yasir Habib? Some of us are so gullible, we listen to any guy without basic akhlaq (as long as he calls himself 'Shia').

That is not true.

Syed Ammar has done a rigorous analysis of this in quite a few lectures of his. I think one was the one on misconceptions about shia.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is not true.

Syed Ammar has done a rigorous analysis of this in quite a few lectures of his. I think one was the one on misconceptions about shia.

I don't understand, are you saying that Sayed Ammar doesn't have basic akhlaq?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't understand, are you saying that Sayed Ammar doesn't have basic akhlaq?

I never said that brother. I made two points. First being that your statement of Sheikh Habib lacking basic akhlaq is not true. Secondly, Ammar has done a very good analysis on the historical myth behind Ibn Saba from all angles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I never said that brother. I made two points. First being that your statement of Sheikh Habib lacking basic akhlaq is not true. Secondly, Ammar has done a very good analysis on the historical myth behind Ibn Saba from all angles.

I don't believe in the wahabi ibn saba myths either, but are talking about the same Yasir Habib?

I was referring to the man who calls Shias 'Batris', calls Sunnis Bakris, insults senior Shia scholars, shows his jahiliya traits by name-calling and cursing Sunni symbols, celebrates the death of a wife of the holy Prophet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't believe in the wahabi ibn saba myths either, but are talking about the same Yasir Habib?

I was referring to the man who calls Shias 'Batris', calls Sunnis Bakris, insults senior Shia scholars, shows his jahiliya traits by name-calling and cursing Sunni symbols, celebrates the death of a wife of the holy Prophet.

Batris is not a new term and was used by Shia scholars before Yasser Al-Habib was born. The dominant sect of the Zaydis refer to themselves as Batris. So what if he calls Sunnis Bakris? He is not criticizing or insulting them with this label because it's a true fact. Some Shias erupt when they hear their own brothers and sisters calling Sunnis Bakris but keep a silent word when the other group labels them as rawafid and majoosis. Sheik Yasser does not blindly insult any random scholar out of ignorance and pride. He has valid reasons and if you were to actually put the time to research about his opinion you would understand why. He is not a unique personality. His views reflect exactly as the views as the Shiraizi scholars. The only thing that makes him different from Shirazi scholars is that he is more open to what he says than they are. Since when is cursing Sunni symbols the acts of jahilya? Do you not read what our hadith books say? There are countless narrations that clearly show how the imam cursed their personalities so I do not think it would be wise to consider this an act of the Jahilya if our Imams did so. If you go to the Shia villages in Bahrain, the practice in celebrating the death of two the prophet's ex-wifes exists there and has been allowed for decades. It is like any other celebration.

You also speak of Akhlaq and accuse Yasser Al-Habib for lacking that. For the sake of arguing, I can also say that Sayed Hassan Nassarllah lacks akhlaq for fabricating, lying by making baseless claims that Sheik Yasser Al-Habib is an M15 agent that works for the British government. Logically speaking, isn't accusing someone of something they do or making baseless claims about them an insult? Where is the sincerity and piety of Sayed Hassan Nassrallah? Does he not lack akhlaq for defaming Sheik Yasser Al-Habib? Of course, you will never dare accuse Sayed Hassan Nassrallah for his baseless claims because your political bias towards him prevents you from doing so. Weather I support sheik Yasser or am against him, I still refuse to believe that he is an M15 agent if Sayed Hassan Nassrallah does not back up his baseless claims in which he makes. I cannot simply feed on every single thing a person says just because they wear an 'imama on their head as long as they bring proof to support all the claims that they make.

(wasalam)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't believe in the wahabi ibn saba myths either, but are talking about the same Yasir Habib?

I was referring to the man who calls Shias 'Batris', calls Sunnis Bakris, insults senior Shia scholars, shows his jahiliya traits by name-calling and cursing Sunni symbols, celebrates the death of a wife of the holy Prophet.

In addition to what Br Mujtaba said, my respect for this guy went sky high when i saw his akhlaaq here :

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're not making much sense when you say "Batris is not a new term". If Yasir didn't invent it, it doesn't become ok to use. If a person calls Muslims backward terrorists, fanatics, nuts, etc, would you say they're akhlaqi? (they didn't invent the term 'terrorist' either, and just like you they'll argue that it's fact, not an insult)

In addition to what Br Mujtaba said, my respect for this guy went sky high when i saw his akhlaaq here :

I don't think you know him enough, he's the antithesis of Islamic etiquette

Thanks to brother kadhim:

It's one thing to feel comfortable to speak freely, in a straightforward way relating our sources without feeling afraid, without feeling the need to hide or sugarcoat.

It's another to display a personality where you go beyond a simple teaching of accepted facts, going out of the way to provoke people. Especially when you show a tendency to rely on sketchy / questionable materials simply because they are provocative.

This is the big problem with this character.

And this is the kind of strawman / false dichotomy error he commits. He kind of paints a stark choice between going out of your way to provoke people in a rude, boorish manner -OR- being timid like a mouse and hiding / sugarcoating sensitive material.

There is lots of room in between these two options.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sheikh yassir as a person (not others) has very good akhlaaq...of course he's not perfect (like any others shia person) but overall he is good. He's only harsh against the nawaasib & their idols.

Last week sheikh had a debate with a 'sunni' scholar. Both of them were respectful towards each other & addressed one another as 'sheikh'.

Edited by Labbayk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're not making much sense when you say "Batris is not a new term". If Yasir didn't invent it, it doesn't become ok to use. If a person calls Muslims backward terrorists, fanatics, nuts, etc, would you say they're akhlaqi? (they didn't invent the term 'terrorist' either, and just like you they'll argue that it's fact, not an insult)

I don't think you know him enough, he's the antithesis of Islamic etiquette http://www.shiachat....e/#entry2489455

Thanks to brother kadhim:

Salaam,

I think your a bit confused between his akhlaaq and the way he expresses his beliefs. I think they are two different things all together. We are talking about his akhlaaq here and there is not a single video (that I have seen) where he raises his voice, swears or curses anyone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(bismillah)

Hard to take these types of claims and research very seriously given that we have 5 narrations in al-Kashi's Rijali about this figure named عبد الله بن سبأ and there are 5 narrations about him and his extreme kufr/mal`un status. Three of them are mu`tabar without dispute, an extra one if you're a bit more logical with rijalism.

I dunno, seems rather strange and unlikely for an entire section on this guy to be "inserted" into our books like that. Would really call into question the legitimacy of how our literature has been preserved, I think.

في امان الله

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These childish and lame accusations are out of date and have been refuted in other posts. I have yet to see anything new and academic brought to the table other than him being an M15 agent or a fitnah monger.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(bismillah)

Hard to take these types of claims and research very seriously given that we have 5 narrations in al-Kashi's Rijali about this figure named عبد الله بن سبأ and there are 5 narrations about him and his extreme kufr/mal`un status. Three of them are mu`tabar without dispute, an extra one if you're a bit more logical with rijalism.

I dunno, seems rather strange and unlikely for an entire section on this guy to be "inserted" into our books like that. Would really call into question the legitimacy of how our literature has been preserved, I think.

في امان الله

I believe Syed Murtadha al-Askari has a book in which he proves that Abd Allah Ibn-Saba' is a fabrication?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe Syed Murtadha al-Askari has a book in which he proves that Abd Allah Ibn-Saba' is a fabrication?

Abdullah Ibn Saba‘and Other Myths by Sayyid Murtada Al-Askari

I have the PDF if anyone can't find it online.

Edited by Repentant

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These childish and lame accusations are out of date and have been refuted in other posts. I have yet to see anything new and academic brought to the table other than him being an M15 agent or a fitnah monger.

Have you watched this foolishness from Yasir Habib?

Salaam,

I think your a bit confused between his akhlaaq and the way he expresses his beliefs. I think they are two different things all together. We are talking about his akhlaaq here and there is not a single video (that I have seen) where he raises his voice, swears or curses anyone.

Wa alaikum assalam. How one expresses oneself is akhlaq. Do watch the above video if you get a chance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have you watched this foolishness from Yasir Habib?

Wa alaikum assalam. How one expresses oneself is akhlaq. Do watch the above video if you get a chance.

It is foolish enough to use a Zionist channel like Memri TV as a source who can easily deceive the public from their clips, but I will put that aside for now. What he was reading in the series is actually from the books written by Sunnis themselves on the history of Omar.. It has nothing to do with Shia beliefs and he is only exposing what their books say. It obviously is not good stuff and very lame, but it's written in the books of Sunnis themselves and he is reading what the Sunni author wrote in that book to show how foolish their scholars are. That being said, I doubt that the Sunni scholar who wrote the copy of the book he is reading off will be embarrassed from it's content since it's partially under their beliefs just as Aisha's breast feeding men is mentioned in their authentic(SAHIH) Hadiths that they cannot dare to deny.

Moreover, if you are going to be picky on Sheik Yasser Al-Habib and try to pick a flaw from him to degrade his entire work and label him as foolish then what do you say about our early scholar ; Sheik Nur Al-Tabrasi? Nur Al-Tabrasi differed from all of our scholars and believed in the textual distortion of the Quran even when Allah(swt) clearly stated that he will protect it from any distortions? Using your logic, would you call Sheik Al-Tabrasi "foolish" and degrade his entire work when obviously none of our scholars have? None of our scholars are perfect and are fallible just like you and I and therefore are capable of mistakes so just keep that in mind next time.

(wasalam)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On Abdullah ibn saba

Both sunnis and shias agree that he existed

- Shias say that he attributed divinity to Ali r.a. and then he was punished by the latter.

- Sunnis say he existed and well you guys know the rest.

So its safe atleast to conclude that such a person atleast existed was closely related to events of fitan.

On Yasser habib

An extremist hardcore shia without taqiyyah.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(bismillah)

As brother Dar'ul_Islam has pointed out, our literature points to an Abdullah ibn Saba, but this man claimed Imam Ali (as) was God (Naoudobillah), as opposed to the Sunni version where they claim he was the man who fooled people into believing in the 'Imamate' of Amir ul Mumineen (as).

Kashi mentions something intersting at the end of his chapter about him:

الكشي وذكر بعض أهل العلم أن عبد الله بن سبأ كان يهوديا فأسلم ووالى عليا عليه السلام، وكان يقول وهو على يهوديته في يوشع بن نون وصي موسى بالغلو، فقال في اسلامه بعد وفات رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله في علي عليه السلام مثل ذلك. وكان أول من شهر بالقول بفرض امامة علي وأظهر البرائة من أعدائه وكاشف مخالفيه وكفرهم، فمن هيهنا قال من خالف الشيعة أصل التشيع والرفض مأخوذ من اليهودية

Kashi: Some of the people of knowledge mentioned that Abdullah b. Saba' was a Jew then he submitted to Islam and befriended/attached to Ali (as). He was saying while he was still a Jew about Yusha b. Nun was the successor of Musa with exaggeration. So he said in his Islam after the death of the Prophet (sawa) about Ali (as) like that. He was the first to spread the belief of the obligation of the Imamate of Ali and publicizing the dissociation from his enemies, exposing those who opposed him and declaring their unbelief. So here therein, those who oppose Shi'ism say: The origin of shi'ism and rafdh was taken from the Jews

So basically Kashi is affirming that this guy, Abdullah b. Saba' (la), was a Ghali who was openly declaring his ghuluw - just as he had when he was a Jew - and he had abandoned taqiyya by publicizing dissociation unstrategically. He mentions that our enemies like to say, using his guy as an example, he was the one who created Shi'ism and such, but that this is not true.

في أمان الله

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(bismillah)

Well, there's two ways - at least I hold - to read it seeing as Kashi himself is an Imami.

1 - Everything he's relating is what the Sunnis/Ahl al-Khilaf say

2 - He was a Ghali who dropped taqiyya and Sunnis accuse him of starting Tashayyu`

في امان الله

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't believe in the wahabi ibn saba myths either, but are talking about the same Yasir Habib?

I was referring to the man who calls Shias 'Batris', calls Sunnis Bakris, insults senior Shia scholars, shows his jahiliya traits by name-calling and cursing Sunni symbols, celebrates the death of a wife of the holy Prophet.

I have watched 100s hours of Sheikh Yaseer's video ,

He calles some Shia batris who use 'RA' on the killers of Fatima Alzahra , He doesn't take in count that sunni won't be pleased when he insult the killers.

He calles sunni bakris , because it is the correct accurate term.

Sheikh Yasser doesn't consider specific Maraji' as valid , in which he stats those can not be considered Marji' by the full terms.

Sheikh Yasser explained how ''Taqiyya'' is a license and not obligation.

He explained how bakris idolized theif scholars in which they are lost now and have pretty obvious false ahkam. This is why we need to crticize our scholars and refine the best of which we can consider as maraji'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure if thread is about ibn Saba or Yasser Habib. Title implies the former but post content suggests the latter.

Anyway, I think there's enough to suggest that ibn Saba did in fact exist, but wasn't the founder of shiaism (in it's early form).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure if thread is about ibn Saba or Yasser Habib. Title implies the former but post content suggests the latter.

Anyway, I think there's enough to suggest that ibn Saba did in fact exist, but wasn't the founder of shiaism (in it's early form).

Yup this thread was def. about "ibn Saba" for sure that was my intention.

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...