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  
StrugglingForTheLight

Verse 4:59 - Ulil Amr.

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

Brother just the truth, if you are allowed to disagree with the Ulul Amre then, where does this disagreement begin and end??? Or are you allowed to disagree with the Ulul Amre, when ever and over what ever you like??? You said that everything comes under the umbrella of Islam, now if a father (the Ulul Amre) wants his son to be an engineer but the son is keen and interested in a different profession or the mother (the Ulul Amre) wants her daughter to become a doctor but the daughter has other plans then, what does this disagreemnt come under??? What will this disagreement be??? Do the children have to obey their parents here???

Lets say that the father wants his daughter to get married, as soon as she hits the first stage of puberty because he believes that girls suppose to get married, have children, be house wives and just look after their husbands but the girl is interested in education and a career, now should the girl obey her father (the Ulul Amre)??? You have to make your position clear on all matters. Don't duck and dive or play hide and seek. Just come straight out into the open. Where does this disagreement and difference with the Ulul Amre, regardless of who they might be, begin and end??? What is the criteria and procedure???

You question about referring the matter of disagreement back towards Allah and his Messenger (pbuh)??? If you are allowed to disagree with the Ulul Amre, when ever and on what ever then, what is the point of obedience towards the Ulul Amre??? You can disagree basically on anything, since this is what "fee shay inn" means. Then what is the point of the Ulul Amre, if matters have to be referred back to the higher command??? How and in what way are these matters going to be resolved???

For example, Bashar Al Assad is the Ulul Amre of Syria and its people. Certain people or group have a disagreement/difference with the Ulul Amre, in what way are they referring this disagreement/difference back towards Allah and his Messenger (pbuh)??? By taking up arms??? Through bloodshed, mayhem and murder??? You said in one of your posts that, referring the matter back towards Allah and his Messenger (pbuh), would be fighting the Ulul Amre, meaning taking up harms. How do you justify this through Quran and Sunnah???

Yazeed Ibne Muavia is your Ulul Amre of the time. What did this Ulul Amre do or say, for Hazrath Hussain (as) to stand up against him??? Did the Ulul Amre (Yazeed) go against the Quran and Sunnah??? If yes, then would this make him a Kafir??? What does the Ahle Sunnah say about someone who goes against Quran and Sunnah??? What was the battle of Karbalaa all about??? What is your point of view regarding Karbalaa??? Did Hazrath Hussain (as) rise against the Ulul Amre (Yazeed) to save Islam???

You refused to comment on this, why??? Is this not a serious religious matter??? On one hand you say that, if the Ulul Amre goes against Quran and Sunnah then, people have the right to fight the Ulul Amre and say good bye to him, since Islam is under threat and on the other hand you brush Karbalaa aside, as though it is meaningless and has got nothing to do with Islam. Why the double standards??? What's with being two faced and two sided??? Why the hypocritical element???

You mentioned the names of two individuals in one of your previous posts, who went against the Ulul Amre of their time and fought him. I asked you why they went against the Ulul Amre and what was the reasons behind this and you just sheepishly disappeared back stage. Would you like to clarify this and make it clear??? Or are you going to continue to avoid such block buster questions and points??? You have to come out from hiding behind this statement "Oh, give me a precise verse from the Quran" and start taking the Messenger (pbuh) and his Sunnah seriously because the Quran falls short without it. You need to understand this.

You are just asking for everything precisely from the Quran then, what is the point of the Sunnah when, everything is precisely in the Quran??? You should follow Hazrath Umar's (ra) statement and belief then "hasbona kithaballah" meaning "Allah's book is enough for us". The man clearly showed that he wasn't interested in anything else. You just ask from the Quran, i say prove to me through the Quran or the Sunnah that, Allah meant Hakim-e-Waqth, commanders, teachers, parents etc, basically anyone who gets into authority, who ever and how ever, by Ulul Amre.

Edited by Ameen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Prophet (pbuh) said "i am going to leave two weighty things behind, the Quran and the Ahlul Baith". Well there you go! The third party/group that Allah has put in authority, right alongside himself and his Messenger (pbuh), is the Ahlul Baith ofcourse. "Ulul Amre minkum" means "those who are worthy of authority among you" not "those who are in authority among you" because the strangest of the strange can get into authority.

Brother just the truth, you said "Sakeefa was wrong but the decision was right". How can the base be wrong but the structure on top of it is right??? The principal is wrong but the practice connected to it is right????

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

YOU SAID

(1) And how do we refer to the Quran? Would like to explain to me how and from who should we take our Ahadith from to Interpret the Quran? Please Answer this Question with Direct sense.

MY ANSWER

Have I not shown you in letter 53 where imam ali a.s says that you should refer to quran by going to the clear and explicit verses, you never replied on that issue.

We should take hadith from sahaba and AHLE BAYT of course. There are hadiths in our books where we have individuals who were very knowledgeable in quran from among the sahaba.

YOU SAID

(2) When the prophet Passed Away, not all the verse Were given its meaning, so who should the people at the time refer to after the prophet (s)? Ahlulbayt (s)? or Abu bakr? Umar? uthman?

MY ANSWER

AHLE BAYT senior sahaba prophets wives.

YOU SAID

(3) How do we refer to the prophet (s)?

(4) In Sunan Ibn Majah the prophet (s) said: "Ali is from me, and I am from Ali". I said this a while back and I asked you if you think Aby bakr is superior why does he not have this position?

MY ANSWER

Re read letter 53 nahj ul balagah.

Have you read the merits of abu bakr in sahih sittah?? FUNNY HOW YOU SINGLE OUT ALI a.s FROM SAHIH SITTAH WHEN YOU KNOW VERY WELL THAT THE MERITS OF ABU BAKR r.a ARE ALSO THERE.

YOU SAID

I think I know very Well what it means. But I wonder whether you know the meaning of "Evading".

MY ANSWER

Excuse me.... Is that a question or a statement

YOU SAID

(1) Na'zozobillah, Allah as made his Book Perfect in every Aspect.

(2) Uli al Amr have both knowledge of the book of Allah and of What the prophet (s) has.

(3) you cannot make that judgement as you have no knowledge that is pure about the Book of Allah.

MY ANSWER

What do you mean na'zozobillah??like I said it wasn't a perfect book

Look at verse 4:59 I say it's perfect in everyway way shape and form. Allah (swt) IS CLEARLY SAYING REFER TO Allah (swt) and messenger (pbuh). That is perfect whereas you're saying it should say refer to ulil amr. I'm saying what the holy quran is saying and that is IF YOU DIFFER IN ANYTHING REFER TO Allah (swt) AND HIS MESSENGER (pbuh). So it's na'zozobillah to you my friend.

I will repeat what I said previously which you seem to have missed. IF Allah (swt) has not told us who the ulil amr are the very least YOU should have if you want to use this as a PRECISE verse is the INSTRUCTIONS ie; refer to ulil amr also.

Lete give you a few examples

Allah witnesses that there is NO DEITY except Him, and [so do] the ANGELS and those of knowledge - [that He is] maintaining [creation] in justice. There is NO DEITY EXCEPT HIM, the Exalted in Might, the Wise.

Do I need hadith to understand Allah (swt) is one?? NO

All] praise is [due] to Allah , Creator of the heavens and the earth, [who] made the ANGELS MESSENGERS having wings, two or three or four. He increases in creation what He wills. Indeed, Allah is over all things competent.

DO I NEED HADITH TO TELL ME WHO Allah (swt) is talking about in this verse?? NO BECAUSE IT SAYS ANGELS.

Now let's take a look at verse 4:59.

IT DOES NOT SAY REFER TO ULIL AMR YET YOU MAGICALLY SOMEHOW SEEM TO JUMP STRAIGHT TO HADITH AND TRY TO PROVE THAT WE SHOULD REFER TO ULIL AMR WHEREAS IN THAT VERSE THERE IS NO MENTION OF REFERRING TO ULIL AMR.

So how can you call this a PRECISE verse?? When it doesn't say refer to ulil amr

2. First prove that it is your imams that are the ulil amr.

3. Answered above.

YOU SAID

(1) As we have proven Earlier, you must know what the prophet (s) said in order to understand a Particular verse, otherwise your interpretation or any other Tafsir would Simply become false.

(2) Your mumbling non-sense, since you have not proven anything so far.

(3) I never said Leave the verse and go Directly to a Hadith. Can you pease Quote me saying such a thing.

MY ANSWER

1. Look here what you're saying in point 1 for Christ sake. Then you again contradict yourself in point 3 saying you don't have to go to hadith.

LET ME GET THIS STRAIGHT FOR YOU THE WHOLE REASON WE ARE TOLD PRECISELY WHAT Allah ( swt) IS TALKING ABOUT IN THE PRECISE VERSES IS SO THAT WE DO NOT NEED HADITH TO UNDERSTAND EXACTLY WHAT Allah (swt) IS TALKING ABOUT SO OTHER VERSES CAN BE INTERPRETED DIFFERENTLY JUST AS LONG AS YOU DONT GO AGAINST QURAN.

Read surah 3:7 properly for crying out loud

Surah 3:7

It is He who has sent down to you, [O Muhammad], the Book; in it are verses [that are] PRECISE - they are the FOUNDATION of the Book - and others UNSPECIFIC. As for those in whose hearts is deviation [from truth], they will follow that of it which is UNSPECIFIC, seeking discord and seeking an interpretation [suitable to them]. And no one knows its [true] interpretation except Allah . And those firm in knowledge say, "We believe in it. All [of it] is from our Lord." And no one will be reminded except those of understanding.

Now do you understand.

If a verse is specific then THE ONLY REASON WE NEED TO GO TO HADITH IS TO FIND OUT ADDITIONAL INFORMATION and not go to hadith to try and find OUT EXACTLY WHAT THE VERSE IS SAYING, because the verse should PRECISELY SAY WHAT Allah (swt) is trying to say.

Let me show you a few examples AGAIN..

1. All] praise is [due] to Allah , Creator of the heavens and the earth, [who] made the ANGELS MESSENGERS having wings, two or three or four. He increases in creation what He wills. Indeed, Allah is over all things competent.

Does Allah ( swt) keep us guessing as to who he (swt ) is talking about in this verse?? NO. We are told ANGELS.

Now.. do we need to go to hadith to know WHO Allah (swt) is talking about in this verse?? NO because we know Allah ( swt) is talking about ANGELS. Also Allah ( swt) tells us that the angels are messengers.

Now let's take a look at ulil amr verse.

Firstly we are not told WHO exactly are the ulil amr.

Secondly we are not told to refer to ulil amr.

SO HOW ON GODS EARTH IS THIS VERSE PRECISE.

Now let's look at another precise verse talking about usul

Verily, We did send down the TORAH [to Musa], therein was guidance and light, by which the Prophets, who submitted themselves to Allah’s Will, judged the Jews. And the rabbis and the priests [too judged the Jews by the TORAH after those Prophets] for to them was entrusted the protection of Allah'S BOOK, and they were witnesses thereto. Therefore fear not men but fear Me (O Jews) and sell not My Verses for a miserable price. And whosoever does not judge by what Allah has revealed, such are the disbelievers." (5:44)

So here we are told precisely the books of Allah (swt ) and their names there are other verses talking about zaboor and quran if you want I can get them for you.

Anyway, do we need hadith to know Allah ( swt) sent holy books?? NO

And I can go on with precise verses forever.

Now let's go back to ulil amr

Is ulil amr a precise verse?? NO

1. We are not told who the ulil amr are?? EVEN IF NOT BY NAME THEN ATLEAST BY DESCRIPTION BROTHER ie "appointed imams".

Now because we are not told exactly who the ulil amr is/are then all we can do is take it as though it's anybody with authority. Just because according to sunni hadith it was sent for commanders THIS DOES NOT MEAN IT IS ONLY FOR COMMANDERS, because if Allah (swt) was to send this verse only for commanders then he (swt) would have said "army commanders" so because it says "those vested with authority" then this can only mean anybody with authority and if we differ then go back to Allah ( swt) and messenger (pbuh).

2. We are not told to refer to ulil amr so how can you call this a PRECISE verse?? When the instructions are not PRECISE?? Ie refer to ulil amr.

Now you say I'm "mumbling". Well what do you exactly mean ?? How am I mumbling when I'm giving you quran as my witness and evidence?? RATHER IT IS YOU WHO IS MUMBLING FOOLING YOURSELF INTO THAT IT SAYS REFER TO ULIL AMR!!

so how you call this verse precise is beyond me!!

TELL ME IF THIS VERSE IS YOUR PRECISE VERSE THEN WHY ARNT WE TOLD TO REFER TO ULIL AMR.

Now if I was to say to you obey X Y and Z and if you differ refer to X and Y. Now tell me if I was trying to tell you PRECISELY that Z has the same authority as x and y then why wouldn't I tell you to refer to Z

X is Allah (swt)

Y is prophet (pbuh)

Z is ulil amr

Now I've given you verses where we are told that if you disobey Allah ( swt) and messenger (pbuh) there are deadly consequences and if the ulil amr was as important as Allah ( swt) and his messenger (pbuh) then why wouldn't Allah (swt) also threaten us with deadly consequences??

So let's see what we have here regarding ulil amr.

1. We are not told exactly who they are.

2. There is no mention of referring to them

3. There is no verse telling us that we will face deadly consequences.

NOW ASK ANY NEUTRAL PERSON AND THEY WILL TELL YOU THAT THE ULIL AMR CANNOT BE A GODLY APPOINTED INDIVIDUAL(S).

YOU SAID

(1) You never Answered my Question to begin with.

(2) please Answer the Question above from the start.

​(3) I believe my answer was very much detailed, while you have not refuted any of my stance, that is why you seem repeat your question every single time. I am waiting for your Objection to my third/Second last response on page 18.

MY ANSWER

Read what I've written above and try to refute it.

YOU SAID

Quote

(1) you claim that When we give you a Verse it is Unspecific.

(2) This is the Excuse you use to Not accept The Imamah of Imam Ali .

(3) You Prefer to Exclude even your own books for the sake of your beliefs.

(4) please Define for us what us Precise and Unspecific to you?

(5) Your Asking for the Exact names from the Quran, because you deny Authentic Traditions.

(6) I will ask you once more, Why was the Instructions on how to preform Salat not mentioned in the Quran?

(7) The Successors of Prophet Jesus (s), Solomon (s), Moses (s) Where not mentioned by name, but my other terms.

(8) Imam Ali (s) Was mentioned in 5:55, And he is to be obeyed. So May I ask you, if you lived in the time of prophet Jesus (s), and in the book of Allah the only term you got for his Successors Was "AlWareen", Will you deny the Successors? because they Were not mentioned by name?

(9) If you lived for example in the time of prophet Jesus (s), Moses (s), Ibrahim, (s), and you only had What a book they left for example but the Successors Were not mentioned by name, bu you were ordered to by them to obey the Successor after them Will you Still deny?

(10) We all know that the prophet Luqman (s) Is mentioned in the Quran, but in the Quran there is no verse where it says he is a prophet (s), So Do you deny prophet Luqman (s)?

MY ANSWER

you really want me to answer your questions?? Fine.

1. Is that a question or a statement.

2. Is this a question or a statement.

3. Is this a question or an insult.

4. I believe I have if you read my answer above along with the verses I've given you.

5. Is that a question or a statement.

6. We are talking about usul's and not furus. Anyway even in furus the instructions given are precise ie; pray salah give Zakah. These are precise instructions now if you look at ulil amr the verse does not tell us to refer to ulil amr so how on earth is that a precise verse.

7. Maybe because it's not important for us to know there names but it is very important for the ummah to know the names of our successors. Maybe I'm being a bit harsh asking for names, but at asking for a precise verse where Allah (swt) says he will appoint imams for this ummah is DEFINATELY not too much too ask for. Even something as simple as;

I WILL SEND IMAMS AFTER PROPHET WHO WILL BE APPOINTED BY ME.

8. I've been over this verse with you in my previous reply.

9. Firstly nowhere does it say in 5:55 OBEY and secondly why are you using the word THEY when there is no specific verse where Allah (swt) tells us to OBEY your imams.

10. What has luqman a.s got to do with imamah of 12 imams?? Maybe I'm being a bit harsh asking for names then atleast give me one precise verse where Allah (swt) says he will send imams.

As for shura then not a single verse says Allah ( swt) has appointed imams so this was the affair of the ummah.

YOU SAID

One Who does not Believe in all one of the Twelve Khalifas, Does not believe in All them. According to the school of Ahlulbayt (s).

The Ismailis Stop at the sixth Imam I believe.

MY ANSWER

The last two words in your above reply are not very convincing "I believe". This is your "own assumption"

YOU SAID

What Kind of Question is this? How are We suppose to Question What Allah says?

And keep in mind that When Allah Intends, He wants, and When he Wants he has been done.

are you saying that What Allah Wants will not get? (Istaghfarallah)

Sorry but you make no sense let us Examine the following:

وَلَا تُعْجِبْكَ أَمْوَالُهُمْ وَأَوْلَادُهُمْ ۚ إِنَّمَا يُرِيدُ اللَّهُ أَن يُعَذِّبَهُم بِهَا فِي الدُّنْيَا وَتَزْهَقَ أَنفُسُهُمْ وَهُمْ كَافِرُونَ

" And let not their wealth and their children impress you. Allah only intends to punish them through them in this world and that their souls should depart [at death] while they are disbelievers. " - 9:85

We can see here very Clearly that Allah is telling not to care about the Wealth and Children of others of Certain people, and that Allah INTENTS only to punish them through them. So here you cannot say, that Allah has Punished them before, But he does this TO THEM, To punish them, and this goes Vise-verse to the Purification verse. Allah INTENDS to Remove "Rijs" From Alhulbayt to Purify them, from All that is "Rijs" (sin).

Again lets take another look at another verse:

_______

وَأَنِ احْكُم بَيْنَهُم بِمَا أَنزَلَ اللَّهُ وَلَا تَتَّبِعْ أَهْوَاءَهُمْ وَاحْذَرْهُمْ أَن يَفْتِنُوكَ عَن بَعْضِ مَا أَنزَلَ اللَّهُ إِلَيْكَ ۖ فَإِن تَوَلَّوْا فَاعْلَمْ أَنَّمَا يُرِيدُ اللَّهُ أَن يُصِيبَهُم بِبَعْضِ ذُنُوبِهِمْ ۗ وَإِنَّ كَثِيرًا مِّنَ النَّاسِ لَفَاسِقُونَ

"And judge, [O Muhammad], between them by what Allah has revealed and do not follow their inclinations and beware of them, lest they tempt you away from some of what Allah has revealed to you. And if they turn away - then know that Allah only intends to afflict them with some of their [own] sins. And indeed, many among the people are defiantly disobedient." - 5:49

We see the same issue here, that if they the people Turn away from What Allah has Revealed to them, then Allah Well Intend to Afflict them With their own sins, and keep reading and he says "Many people are Defiantly Disobedient, to assure this issue stated. But When We Compare this verse to the Purification verse we see, that in the Purification Allah is being Direct That he "Only Intends", and no Factors for that intention is Required to make the "Intention" happen, but it is Direct and a Must. Same with the Above verse.

there are many more verses I can mention Also on this issue.

MY ANSWER

Brother am i talking French I summat??

If your imams were born sinless then why would Allah (swt) INTEND TO PURIFY THEM??

When Allah (swt) INTENDS on doing something then he intends to do it, it doesn't mean he has already done it.

So now tell me if your imams were born sinless ali hasan Hussein a.s then why would Allah (swt) INTEND TO PURIFY THEM.

It's a bit like Allah (swt) saying he intends on making hell. Whereas we all know this would not make sense because why would Allah (swt) INTEND on making hell if he already has made it.

When you intend on doing something that means it's your intention and intention comes before the action.

Now tell me why would Allah (swt) intend to purify your imams if they were born sinless.

YOU SAID

(1) I never said the verse was mentioned as Imamat. please Quote me saying such a thing.

(2) the verse proves the Infalibility of Ahlulbayt (s).

(3) Fatimat'olZahraa is Infallible.

MY ANSWER

1. Stop lying dear brother you have in previous posts. Also this verse is used by shia to prove that imam ali a.s had more right to caliphate then abu bakr r.a because he was "sinless".

2. We will see about that.

3. Yea buh y?? I know she us from AHLE BAYT buh what was the reason or her r.a being infallible??

Brother can you explain your point on letter 6 nahj ul balagah as I am confused as to what you're exactly saying.

The Prophet (pbuh) said "i am going to leave two weighty things behind, the Quran and the Ahlul Baith". Well there you go! The third party/group that Allah has put in authority, right alongside himself and his Messenger (pbuh), is the Ahlul Baith ofcourse. "Ulul Amre minkum" means "those who are worthy of authority among you" not "those who are in authority among you" because the strangest of the strange can get into authority.

Brother just the truth, you said "Sakeefa was wrong but the decision was right". How can the base be wrong but the structure on top of it is right??? The principal is wrong but the practice connected to it is right????

AMEEN you really need to stop imagining what YOU THINK it says and read what it ACTUALLY says.

I want you to tell me two things.

1. Fee shayin

Does it mean ANYTHING IN THIS like you've been saying

Or does it mean IN ANYTHING like I've been saying

2. PROVE TO ME WHERE IT SAYS THAT Ulul amre minkum MEANS those who are WORTHY of authority among you"

SHOW ME WHERE IT SAYS WORTHY.

Before you go on your dead end quest of finding me the word WORTHY make sure it's from a reliable source via a link.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also ISLAMIC HISTORY you said that all shia believe that ulil amr are your imams only whereas al islam seem to think differently: this is what it says ion their website.

http://www.al-islam.org/a-short-treatise-on-the-guardianship-of-the-jurist-mansour-leghaei/5.htm

"However, during the era of occultation, when the community is deprived of the most perfect example, then the authority to TAKE CHARGE OF THE AFFAIRS goes to he who is closest to the perfect example and that is the QUALIFIED JURIST, so that he may STOP ANARCHY.

This is interesting!! So what they're saying is while imam mahdi is in occultation the jurist become the ulil amr.. They become "those in charge of the affairs"

Very interesting indeed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Statement:

Have I not shown you in letter 53 where imam ali a.s says that you should refer to quran by going to the clear and explicit verses, you never replied on that issue.

 

I never Replied? You are falsely accusing me, of not replying now? I have very disappointed. Second of All Imam Ali (s) Did not say "Sunnah", third of all he told him to refer to the Quran. And what is wrong with this? If one needs to understand how to make a good choice, does one not need to refer to the Quran?, Of course he does, and Imam Ali (s) said this to him, as he was going to pick his men. 

 

 

 

Statement:

Read what I've written above and try to refute it.

 

Where? Which post? Proof? Which book? throughout this Whole debate you have never given one Shia Source? nor  a poper logical Explanation.
 

We should take hadith from sahaba and AHLE BAYT of course. There are hadiths in our books where we have individuals who were very knowledgeable in quran from among the sahaba. 

 

(1) Most of the Sahabas mentioned in Bukhari as the enemies of Ahlulbayt (s)
(2) Most of the Sahaba in Sunni Books did not gave Baya to Imam Ali (s).
(3) The so called Sahabahs of yours oppressed Fatima al Zahraa  (as).
(4) Most of your Hadiths come from the Sahabah and not Ahlulbayt (s) ( I have read many Sunni works ) and this issue is true.
(5) Most of the Ahadith on Ahlulbayt (s) in for example the Six Sahihs ( are claimed to be lies by most of Sunni Investigators Sadly)

 

    

 

Statement:

AHLE BAYT senior sahaba prophets wives.

 

(1) The Wives are not from Ahlulbayt (s).
(2) The Sahabah are not From Ahlylbayt (s). 
(3) I have proved to you from Bukhari and Muslim the Identity of Ahlulbayt (s).
(4) please give a Hadith to prove your point and yet you are still making false assumptions.

 

 

Statement:

Re read letter 53 nahj ul balagah.

 

Brother your Ignoring my Question, can you please reply with an Actual Answer.

Have you read the merits of abu bakr in sahih sittah?? FUNNY HOW YOU SINGLE OUT ALI a.s FROM SAHIH SITTAH WHEN YOU KNOW VERY WELL THAT THE MERITS OF ABU BAKR r.a ARE ALSO THERE.

  
The merits of Abu bakr? yes and most of them are false. Would like you state them for me and I shall prove it to be so. That hadith ( of Imam Ali (s) is not in Sunan ibn Majah only my brother, I am sure I mentioned other Sunni Sources if you have read page 17/18.
 

 

 

 

 

Statement:
Look at verse 4:59 I say it's perfect in everyway way shape and form. Allah ÓÈÍÇäå æÊÚÇáì IS CLEARLY SAYING REFER TO Allah ÓÈÍÇäå æÊÚÇáì and messenger (s). That is perfect whereas you're saying it should say refer to ulil amr. I'm saying what the holy quran is saying and that is IF YOU DIFFER IN ANYTHING REFER TO Allah ÓÈÍÇäå æÊÚÇáì AND HIS MESSENGER (s). So it's na'zozobillah to you my friend. 
I will repeat what I said previously which you seem to have missed. IF Allah ÓÈÍÇäå æÊÚÇáì has not told us who the ulil amr are the very least YOU should have if you want to use this as a PRECISE verse is the INSTRUCTIONS ie; refer to ulil amr also. Lete give you a few examples  Allah witnesses that there is NO DEITY except Him, and [so do] the ANGELS and those of knowledge - [that He is] maintaining [creation] in justice. There is NO DEITY EXCEPT HIM, the Exalted in Might, the Wise. Do I need hadith to understand Allah ÓÈÍÇäå æÊÚÇáì is one?? NO All] praise is [due] to Allah , Creator of the heavens and the earth, [who] made the ANGELS MESSENGERS having wings, two or three or four. He increases in creation what He wills. Indeed, Allah is over all things competent. DO I NEED HADITH TO TELL ME WHO Allah ÓÈÍÇäå æÊÚÇáì is talking about in this verse?? NO BECAUSE IT SAYS ANGELS. Now let's take a look at verse 4:59. IT DOES NOT SAY REFER TO ULIL AMR YET YOU MAGICALLY SOMEHOW SEEM TO JUMP STRAIGHT TO HADITH AND TRY TO PROVE THAT WE SHOULD REFER TO ULIL AMR WHEREAS IN THAT VERSE THERE IS NO MENTION OF REFERRING TO ULIL AMR. So how can you call this a PRECISE verse?? When it doesn't say refer to ulil amr 2. First prove that it is your imams that are the ulil amr. 3. Answered above.
 

Brother Just the Truth, You did not reply to my Answer you only Repeating the same Question over and Over without Refuting my Points? Why So?

I quote once more:

 

 

 

 

Brother first of all the verse obliges the Muslims to obey two things: First, to obey Allah; second, to obey Messenger and those vested with authority (Ulul-Amr). The arrangement of the words shows that the obedience of Ulul-Amr is as much obligatory as is the obedience of the Messenger because Quran uses just one verb for both of them without repeating the verb again. Naturally, it means that Ulul-Amr should be of the same importance as the Messenger; otherwise Allah would not have joined them together in this verse (Waw of Atf) under one verb. Interesting to note that Allah employs a separate verb for Himself before mentioning the Messenger and Ulul-Amr which shows that Allah has higher authority than that of the Messenger and Ulul-Amr. It is also clear from the above verse that Ulul-Amr are not restricted to messengers otherwise Allah would only have said: "Obey Allah, and Obey Messenger only." But He added Ulul-Amr (those who are given authority by Allah). This is one of the places where the concept of Imams and the necessity of obedience to them come from. In the previous post "Appoiting a Successor" I quoted verses proving my stance and here as we see, many verses of Quran to prove the infallibility of the Prophet (s). All those verses proved the following two points:


1. The authority of the Messenger of Allah (s) upon the believers was unlimited and all-comprehensive. Any order given by him, under any condition, in any place, at any time, was to be obeyed unconditionally. 
 
(2) Supreme authority was given to him because he was sinless (Ma'sum) and free from all types of errors and sins. Otherwise, Allah would not have ordered us to obey him with no questioning or doubt.
 
Also from the verse 4:59 we concluded that Ulul-Amr have been given exactly the same authority over Muslims as of Messenger, and that the obedience of Ulul-Amr has the same standing as the obedience of the Messenger.
 
It naturally follows that Ulul-Amr must also be sinless (Ma'sum) and free from any type of error, otherwise, their obedience would not have been joined with the obedience of the Prophet and WITHOUT any condition. The Commander of Believers, Imam Ali (s), said:




The one who disobeys Allah is not to be obeyed; and "verily obedience is for Allah and of His Messenger and those vested with authority." Verily, Allah ordered (people) to obey the Messenger because he was sinless and clean (pure), who would not tell people to disobey Allah; and verily He ordered (people) to obey those vested with authority because they are sinless and clean (pure), and would not tell people to disobey Allah." (Ilal al-Sharaye', by Shaikh al-Saduq, v1, p123).
 
 
Like you and many of your kind tend to interpret "Ulul-Amr Minkum" as the rulers from among yourselves, i.e., Muslims rulers. This interpretation is not based on any logical/Quranic reasoning; it is solely based on the twists of history. The majority of the Muslims have remained as a vassal of the monarchs and rulers, interpreting and reinterpreting Islam and the Quran to strengthen their own kingdom.
 
The history of Muslims (like any other nations) is replete with the names of rulers whose injustice, debauchery and tyranny have tarnished the name of Islam. Such rulers have always been and will be. And we are told that they are the Ulul-Amr mentioned in this verse!
 
If Allah were to order us to obey such kings and rulers, an impossible situation would be created for Muslims. The wretched followers would be condemned to the displeasure of Allah, no matter what they do. If they obey these rulers, they have disobeyed the Command of Allah: "Do not obey a sinner" (Quran 76:24). And if they disobey such rulers, they have again disobeyed the Command of Allah: "Obey the Muslim rulers" (if it would mean so). Therefore if we accept this interpretation, Muslims are condemned to eternal disgrace whether they obey or disobey their fallible (sinful) Muslim rulers.
 
Also, there are Muslim rulers of different schools and persuasions. There are Shafi'is, Hanbalis, Malikis, Hanafis, as well as the Shi'a and Ibadis. Now, according to this interpretation the Sunnis residing under an Ibadi king (like in Amman) should follow Ibadi tenets; and those residing under a Shi'a ruler (like in Iran) should follow the Shi'a beliefs. Do these people have the conviction of courage to follow their professed interpretation to its logical end?
 
The famous Sunni scholar, Fakhr al-Razi, concluded in his Tafsir al-Kabir that this verse proves that Ulul-Amr must be infallible (Ma'sum). He argues that Allah has commanded people to obey Ulul-Amr unconditionally; therefore, it is essential for the Ulul-Amr to be infallible; because if there is any possibility of their committing sin (and sin is forbidden), it means that one has to obey them and also disobey them in that very action, and this is impossible! However, in order to dissuade his readers from the Ahlul-Bait, Fakhr al-Razi invented the theory that the Muslim community as a whole is infallible! (Tafsir al-Kabir, by Fakhruddin Muhammad Ibn Umar al-Razi, v10, p144)
 
This interpretation is unique, and no Muslim scholar ever subscribed to this theory and it is not based on any tradition. It is quite surprising that Fakhr al-Razi accepts that each individual of the Muslim nation is fallible, yet claims that their sum total is infallible. Even a primary school student knows that 200 cows plus 200 cows makes 400 cows and not one horse. But Fakhr al-Razi says that 70 million fallible people plus 70 million fallible people will make one infallible! Does he want us to believe that if all the patients of a mental hospital join together they would be equal to one sane person?
 
Obviously, with his knowledge of Quran, he was able to conclude that Ulul-Amr must be infallible; yet he did not pause to see that the verse contains the word "minkum" (from among you) which shows that Ulul-Amr should be part of Muslim community, not the whole Muslim nation. Moreover, if the whole Muslim nation is to be obeyed, then who is there left to obey?
 
Moreover, the whole community have never had a single voice. Then who should we follow among them? Also, the opinion of majority is not a good criteria to distinguish the false from the truth. Looking at the Quran, one could see that Quran severely denounces the majority of by frequently saying that "the majority do not understand," "the majority do not use their logic," "the majority follow their whims"... since the vision of the majority of people is always impaired due to their tendencies.( see e.g. 6:116, 5:49, 10:92, 30:8) We now turn to the correct interpretation of the above verse, that is the interpretation of the verse by Ahlul-Bait. Imam Ja'far al-Sadiq (the 6th Imam) said that this verse was revealed about Ali, al-Hasan and al-Husain, peace be upon them. Upon hearing this, someone asked the Imam: "People say, why did Allah not mention the name of Ali and his family in His Book?" Imam answered: "Tell them that there came the command of Salat (prayer), but Allah did not mention whether three or four units to be performed; it was the Messenger of Allah who explained all the details. And (the command of) Zakat (religious tax) was revealed, but Allah did not say that it is one in every forty Dirhams; it was the Messenger of Allah who explained it; and Hajj (pilgrimage to Mecca) was ordered but Allah did not say to perform Tawaf (turning around Ka'ba) seven times; it was the Messenger of Allah who explained it. Likewise, the verse was revealed: Obey Allah, and obey the Messenger and those vested with authority from among you, and it was revealed about Ali and al-Hasan and al-Husain (who were the only living Imams at the time of the Prophet)."
 
It is quite obvious that if Allah would have ever mentioned the name of Imam Ali (s) in Quran explicitly, those who bore mountains of hatred against him would have attempted to alter the Quran. Thus this was the Grace of Allah that He codified all the branches of knowledge of religion in Quran to be understood ONLY by the processors of the understanding mind. And in this way, Allah kept Quran intact.
 
On the commentary of the verse 4:59 of Quran in which Allah orders us to obey Ulul-Amr, al-Khazzaz in his book, Kifayatul Athar, gives a tradition on the authority of the well-known companion of the Prophet (s), Jabir Ibn Abdillah al-Ansari ®:




When the verse (4:59) was revealed, Jabir asked the Prophet (PBUH&HF): "We know Allah and the Prophet, but who are those vested with authority whose obedience has been conjoined to that of Allah and yourself?"
 
The Prophet (s) said: "They are my Caliphs and the Imams of Muslims after me. The first of them is Ali; then al-Hasan; then al-Husain; then Ali son of al-Husain; then Muhammad son of Ali who has been mentioned 'al-Baqir' in the Torah (the old testament). O Jabir! You will meet him. When you see him, convey my greetings to him. He will be succeeded by his son, Ja'far al-Sadiq (the Truthful); then Musa son of Ja'far; then Ali son of Musa; then Muhammad son of Ali; then Ali son of Muhammad; then al-Hasan son of Ali. He will be followed by his son whose name and nick name will be the same as mine. He will be Proof of Allah (Hujjatullah) on the earth, and the one spared by Allah (Baqiyyatullah) to maintain the cause of faith among mankind. He shall conquer the whole world from the east to the west. So long will he remain hidden from the eyes of his followers and friends that the belief in his leadership will remain only in those hearts which have been tested by Allah for faith."
 
Jabir said: "O Messenger of Allah! Will his followers benefit from his seclusion?" The Prophet said: "Yes! by Him who sent me with prophethood! They will be guided by his light, and benefit from his leadership during his seclusion, just as people benefit from the sun even though it is hidden in the clouds. O Jabir! This is from the hidden secrets of Allah and the treasured knowledge of Allah. So guard it except from the people who deserve to know." 
 
(Kifayatul Athar, by al-Khazzaz, p53).
 
Now that we know who "those vested with authority" are, it is evident that the question of obeying tyrant and unjust rulers does not rise at all. Muslims are not required by the above verse to obey rulers who may be unjust, tyrannical, ignorant, selfish and sunk in debauchery. They are, in fact, ordered to obey the specified Twelve Imams, all of whom were sinless and free from evil thoughts and deeds. Obeying them has no risks whatsoever. Nay, it protects from all risks; because they will never give an order against the order of Allah and will treat all human beings with love, justice, and equity.
 

 

 

 

 

You really are Narrow Mined my dear brother. I will tell you to ask "your" self how can we refer to the prophet? Did he not say I have left in My Ummah two Weighy things Which if you hold on to them you "Will Never" go astray? The book of Allah and My Ahlulbayt? did he not say that? and if we want to Refer to the book of Allah Do we not neeed a prophet Interpretation from an Authentic hadiths? And Who knows The Quran better than Ahlulbayt (s)? your making up a baseless Excuses here; The Ahlulbayt (s) have knowledge of the prophet (s) and the Book Of Allah. And When the verse says "if you Differ" in "anything" that does not mean the Uli al amr are of bad. How can this be so? When in a another verse Allah is telling them the people to Refer To the prophet (s) and Uli al amr, and Allah says it Would be better? Where is your logic?   

And...

 

 

 

(1) The Hadith in Bukhari I proved to by Incorrect and Illogical, then you resorted to claiming that Alui al amr are Parents, teachers, and etc..... Your are continuously Switching you position, and that is why this Contradicts the above statement you made. 
(2) Na'azobillah, I cannot Know why Allah put the wording as he as perfectly done.
(3)You did not answer the above points?
(4) How can the differing be in Uli al amr? when it says Everything as in "Among them" , "the people". so how does that make them Uli al amr who are appointed by Allah wrong? you make no sense. So if the people at the time of the message of prophet (s), they differed as a side saying a group of people believed that he was not the prophet (s) and the other group believed he was the prophet (s), so does that make the prophet (s) Wrong? Does that make him false? 
(5) I am starting to doubt whether you actually read my replies. You seem be taking my words out of context, infact I assure that you might not be reading at all. 

 
      

 

 

 

 

Statement:

If a verse is specific then THE ONLY REASON WE NEED TO GO TO HADITH IS TO FIND OUT ADDITIONAL INFORMATION and not go to hadith to try and find OUT EXACTLY WHAT THE VERSE IS SAYING, because the verse should PRECISELY SAY WHAT Allah ÓÈÍÇäå æÊÚÇáì is trying to say.

 

(1) Your are mistaken, According to Sunan Abu Dawood, you cannot understand a verse without what the prophet (s) says about it. as you do not know the full Truth of the Book, Which came down from Allah (s.w.t), and therefore you have to refer to the prophet (s) and to refer to the prophet (s) you must refer to Ahlulbayt (s) as we have proved Earlier on. Second of All we need to know 1) why the verse came down and to whom. And this can be take from what the prophet (s) as he is the one who revived its revelation. Third of All just because a verse it not Precise it does not mean it has no meaning at all and therefore you can make your own false assumptions, if the prophet (s) says something about it, then surely you would know it in total form.
 

 

Statement:

Now if I was to say to you obey X Y and Z and if you differ refer to X and Y. Now tell me if I was trying to tell you PRECISELY that Z has the same authority as x and y then why wouldn't I tell you to refer to Z

X is Allah ÓÈÍÇäå æÊÚÇáì
Y is prophet (s)
Z is ulil amr

 

First of all this is Invalid, you are tying to justify your stance through false reasoning. This cannot be take as a metaphor even. The verse is telling you to obey, nor did the verse refer to Uli al mar in a bad manner so you can a false accusation and claim they are to be or are wrong. Third of all you have not Answered my Question Weather Uli al amr are referred in the Quran ina bad manner? Also you did not tell me how we we refer to the Quran and Complete knowledge, nor have you told me how do we refer to the prophet (s) in Complete knowledge. 

Statement:

Now I've given you verses where we are told that if you disobey Allah ( swt) and messenger (s) there are deadly consequences and if the ulil amr was as important as Allah ( swt) and his messenger (s) then why wouldn't Allah  also threaten us with deadly consequences??  

 

your Again trying to Justify one verse to other verses. My dear brother, But how do you Disobey Allah? if Allah gives you a Direct order to Obey The Uli al amr (eg. Imam Ali (s)) Then everyone Who fought Imam Ali (S) has Disobeyed Allah, and When the prophet (s) said I have left in you two things, Hold on to them and you will never go astray 1) The book of Allah and 2) his Ahlulbayt then if you disobey one of them you have disobeyed the prophet (s), and by Disobeying them you have also Disobeyed the Commandments mentioned in the Nobel Quran.

   

 

Statement:

We are not told exactly who they are.

 

Yes we are Told. As I have mentioned the The Authentic Hadith where the prophet (S) has mentioned them Name by name. Where is your Refutation for that Hadith? You cannot Skip my evidence and later on claim that I have given you nothing. This is False reasoning with me and the Audience who read this. very Sad indeed.

 

statement:

There is no mention of referring to them

 

You need to stop Skipping my Analyses, and start making some proper refutes. We are told to refer to them in verse: 4:83.
 

 

Statement:
There is no verse telling us that we will face deadly consequences.

(1) can you give me a verse where it says if we don't pray, Pay Zakat, do good deeds there will be a Deadly consequence?
(2) This does not prove anything, there are many Obligatory things in Islam that are not mentioned with a Consequence in the Quran.
(3) can you first tell me where I can find a verse where it tells us how to exactly pray?
  

  

Statement:

NOW ASK ANY NEUTRAL PERSON AND THEY WILL TELL YOU THAT THE ULIL AMR CANNOT BE A GODLY APPOINTED INDIVIDUAL(S).

 

(1) Why did you ignore my Reply at page 19? brother, Can you must be Narrow minded here. Allah (s.w.t) is Ordering you to  Obey them, and you must obey Allah on this issue. Secondly they are Appointed by the Prophet (s) who we explained later on, can only do things by the orders of Allah I even gave you verses Concerning/to prove this issue. : 

 

 

So If Our brother Justthetruth does not want hadiths and Explanation from the companions which in his Sunnah School of thought are the best of people after the prophet (s), then he must go against his own Sunnah, and this Causes him to be Technically Excluded from his own sect, rather he is now a mere branch of it. Now you have seen I have put forward proof even back then in "Appointing a Successor" from my Our resources, which I have spent much time researching, but all in all I did not lose, for I myself have gain knowledge along the way. So now that our brother demands only from the Quran, that means he go against the following verses in the Quran, Infact he would therefore be having doubt in the words of Allah. Why? Well lets examine the verses:


Verse 3,4, of Surat An-Najm:

 

 

وَمَا يَنطِقُ عَنِ الْهَوَىٰ
 Nor does he speak from [his own] inclination.
 
 
إِنْ هُوَ إِلَّا وَحْيٌ يُوحَىٰ
It is not but a revelation revealed,
 
 
So My Dear brother the prophet (s) Does not Do what he Likes to do, but Everything he Says to us is a Revelation from Allah, So how can one even dare to Exclude the Revelation of Allah? how can one dare to even Question it? If it is proved to be Authentic and match's the Quran? how? How can one dare to even think of doing so? Therefore Our Brother JustTheTruth in this verse he is going against, as one he is Refuting my Proof without even one small bit of evidence. He Also Claims that when the prophet (s) says There Will be 12 Khalifas, he claims it just a mere prophecy? I mean really? do you think Allah is just reveling for no reason (Na'aozobillah) ? Look at the verse my dear brother Justthetruth The prophet (s) does not say anything from his own, he and what he says is a Revelation to us. And if Allah is Reveling to us, do you think its a mere prophecy? or in fact a Command which we must obey? lets take at this verse:
 
Surat Al Hashr, verse 7:
 
مَّا أَفَاءَ اللَّهُ عَلَىٰ رَسُولِهِ مِنْ أَهْلِ الْقُرَىٰ فَلِلَّهِ وَلِلرَّسُولِ وَلِذِي الْقُرْبَىٰ وَالْيَتَامَىٰ وَالْمَسَاكِينِ وَابْنِ السَّبِيلِ كَيْ لَا يَكُونَ دُولَةً بَيْنَ الْأَغْنِيَاءِ مِنكُمْ ۚ وَمَا آتَاكُمُ الرَّسُولُ فَخُذُوهُ وَمَا نَهَاكُمْ عَنْهُ فَانتَهُوا ۚ وَاتَّقُوا اللَّهَ ۖ إِنَّ اللَّهَ شَدِيدُ الْعِقَابِ
 
 

And what Allah restored to His Messenger from the people of the towns - it is for Allah and for the Messenger and for [his] near relatives and orphans and the [stranded] traveler - so that it will not be a perpetual distribution among the rich from among you. And whatever the Messenger has given you - take; and what he has forbidden you - refrain from. And fear Allah ; indeed, Allah is severe in penalty.

 

 

So what the prophet (s) says We must take, and lets not forget he the prophet (s) says Hold on yo the book of Allah And his Ahlulbayt (s) and if we were to hold on to them, this means "OBEY!" and not simply "LOVE" as the Sunnah School Thinks so. How? how can one think of such? When they are being equaled to the Quran, You cannot be Equaled to the Quran and one part of it you obey and the other part you love. You must Obey both of them. Ameen My brother me and you have proven things from his own books, the Six sahihs, Bukhari and Muslim, and look till today he Ignores it. Why? How can one go against his own school of Thought? What is the debate about in the first place? is it not between the two main school of thoughts? So Its clear if the prophet said Twelve Khalifas until to the day of Judgement. Then We must obey them. Full stop.

By the Way Brother Ameen, I thank you for your support. May Allah Reward you for your Efforts. Inshallla.
 

And please do not make false Accusations an claim that "Everyone" you ask. The Imam of your mosq is not Everyone. Thank you.

 

 

 

Statement:
Is this a question or an insult.

 

No my dear brother it is a Valid Statement: because you have Excluded The Ahadith about Ahulbayt (s) and your own books from Throughout this debate. I am sure you Deeply acknowledge so.  Don't Worry I did not call you Stupid, Dumb Founded, And So On Along with the Rest of your Insults.

 

 

Statement:

I believe I have if you read my answer above along with the verses I've given you
 

No you have not. Again please define more me in your Understanding, According to the English Language what is the Difference between Specific and Precise Thank you.

 


statement:

 We are talking about usul's and not furus. Anyway even in furus the instructions given are precise ie; pray salah give Zakah. These are precise instructions now if you look at ulil amr the verse does not tell us to refer to ulil amr so how on earth is that a precise verse.

 

(1) We proved through What the Prophet (s) said who Uli al amr are. And you never Refuted one Hadith. Not even one.
(2) Please Answer the Question, In the Noble Quran,  We where not given the the number of Units in the Salah or even the name of the Salah. So is there? can you please Quote?



Statement:

5. Is that a question or a statement.

 

This is a Statement as you have not Refuted My Authentic Narrations Concerning verse 4:59.
 

 

Statement:

7. Maybe because it's not important for us to know there names but it is very important for the ummah to know the names of our successors. Maybe I'm being a bit harsh asking for names, but at asking for a precise verse where Allah ÓÈÍÇäå æÊÚÇáì says he will appoint imams for this ummah is DEFINATELY not too much too ask for. Even something as simple as;

 

Please Answer the Question Directly: The Successors of Prophet Jesus (s), Solomon (s), Moses (s) Where not mentioned by name, but my other terms and same with Imam Ali (s) he was mentioned by Action and not by exact terms. Can you please give me One Hadith where the prophet (s) says if a verse is not Specific, Ignore what I say and Just use the verse? (N'aozobillah)

 

Statement:

I've been over this verse with you in my previous reply.

 

Brother you did not Reply to my Analyses on this issue? Where? which post?

 

 

 

First of Allah Did not Mention the names of the Previous Imams of the Ummah, for example for have the Successor of prophet Solomon Who he was not mentioned by name, but was refer to the One "Who has the knowledge of the book", or for example the "Haware'en" Of prophet Jesus (s) Allah did not mention them by name, Also the 12 Khalifas of Israel Who Allah Appointed them, He did not mention them by name, So we Return to verse 5:55 Where All Literate Muslims know that Only Imam Ali (s) gave his Ring While Ruku, and in the verse We are ordered to obey him. 

 

Meaning of Wali:

 

 

Brother. No Muslim scholar could ever cast any doubt in the documentation of the tradition of Ghadir Khum, for it has been narrated with as much as 150 authentic chains of transmitters by the Sunnis alone. (Please see Part III for the evidences in this regard). A Mutawatir report is a report which has been narrated unbrokenly and independently by so many people so that no doubt can be entertained about their authenticity. Even the students of Ibn Taymiyyah such as al-Dhahabi and Ibn Kathir who have proven their enmity toward the Shia, emphasized that the tradition of Ghadir Khum is Mutawatir and Sahih (authentic) (See al Bidayah wan Nihayah). However some people did try to interpret the tradition in a different way. They particularly tried to translate the words WALI (master/guardian), MAWLA (master/leader), and WILAYAH (mastery/leadership/guardianship) as friend and friendship.


Dictionaries give a minimum of 20 meanings for the Arabic word WALI, depending on context, most have to do with the position of leadership and
guardianship. Only in one instance it could mean a friend.

Arabic References:
- Elias' Modern Dictionary, by Elias A. Elias, Arabic-English, p815-816,
Lebanon.
- al-Munjid fi al-Lughah, v1.



Some suggested that what really the Prophet (s) wanted to say was: "Whoever I am his friend, Ali is his friend."

There was no doubt that Imam Ali  (as) had a very high status in comparison with all other people. He was the first male who embraced Islam (Sahih Tirmidhi, v5, p642; Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal v4, p317; Mustadrak by al- Hakim, v3, pp 111,136; Sirah Ibn Hisham, p345; Tabaqat by Ibn Sa'd, v3, p71,72; al-Istiab by Ibn Abd al-Bar, v3, p30). He received the title of the "brother" of Prophet (Sahih Tirmidhi v5, p363; Sirah Ibn Hisham, p504; Tahdhib v4, p251). He was the one for whom Prophet said: "Loving Ali is believing, hating Ali is hypocrisy." (Sahih Muslim, v1, p48; Sahih Tirmidhi, v5, p643; Sunan Ibn Majah, v1, p142; Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal v1, pp 84,95,128). Thus it does not seem to be logical for the Prophet (s) to keep more than a hundred thousand people in such unbeatable heat, and keep them waiting in such condition until those who have left behind reach the place, and then all to tell them was that "Ali is the friend of believers!"


Moreover how can we justify the revelation of Verse 5:67 which was revealed before the speech of the Prophet in which Allah said:

"O Apostle! Deliver what has been sent down to you from your Lord; and if you don't do it, you have not delivered His message (at all); and
Allah will protect you from the people ..." (Quran 5:67).


Is it logical to say that Allah warned his Prophet that if he does not convey the message of "friendship of Ali", he has spoiled all he has done?! Also what danger can be imagined for Prophet if he states "Ali is the friend of believers"? Then what danger from the side of people is the above verse referring to?

Furthermore, how can the phrase "Ali is the friend of believers" complete the religion? Is the verse of completeness of religion (5:3) which was revealed after the speech of Prophet suggesting that without saying "Ali is the friend of believers" the religion is not complete?

Also, as we quoted in the first part, Umar and Abu Bakr congratulated Ali by saying: "Congratulations O son of Abu Talib! Today you became the MAWLA of all believing men and women." If, here, the word MAWLA means friend then why the

congratulations? Was Ali the enemy of all believers before that time, so that Umar said that this day you BECAME the friend of them?!

In fact, every WALI is a friend, but the reverse is not always true. This is why the Arabs use "Wali al-Amr" for the rulers, meaning the master of the affairs. Thus, logically speaking, the word MAWLA can not be interpreted as friend, and we should rather use its other more-frequently- used meanings which are Leader and Guardian.

Perhaps one would ask why Prophet didn't use other words to further explain his intention. In fact, people asked him the same question, and the following Sunni documentations are the answers of the Prophet (s):

When the Messenger of Allah (s) was asked about the meaning of "whomever I am his MAWLA then Ali is his MAWLA". He said: "Allah is my MAWLA more deserving of me (my obedience) than myself, I do not dispute him. I am the MAWLA of the believers, more deserving in them than themselves, they do not dispute me.

 

Therefore, whomever I was his MAWLA, more deserving in him than himself (and) does not dispute me, then Ali is MAWLA, more deserving in him than himself, he does not dispute him."

Sunni references:
- Shamsul Akhbar, by al-Qurashi, Ali Ibn Hamid, p38
- Salwat al-'Arifin, by al-Muwaffaq billah, al-Husain Ibn Isma'il al
Jurjani.



(2) During the reign of Uthman, Ali protested by reminding people the following tradition. Also, he reminded it again during the war of
Siffin:

When the Messenger of Allah spoke of (Tradition of Ghadir)..., Salman stood up and said: "O' Messenger of Allah! What does WALAA mean? and how?" Prophet replied: "The same way that I am your WALI (Wala-un ka wala'i). Whomever (considered me) I was more deserving in him than himself, then Ali is more deserving in him than himself."


Sunni reference: Fara'id al-Samtain, by Hamawaini (Abu Is'haq Ibrahim Ibn
Sa'd al-Din Ibn al-Hamawiyia), section 58.



(3)  Ali Ibn Abi Talib was asked about the saying of the Messenger of Allah "Whomever I am his MAWLA then Ali is his MAWLA". He said: "He erected me chief ['alaman]. To the time I am up there, whomever contradicts me then he is lost (misguided in religion)."

Sunni reference: Zain al-Fata, by al-Hafiz al-'Asimi


(4) On the commentary of Verse: "And stop them, they are to be asked (Quran 37:24)", al-Daylami narrated that Abu Sa'id al-Khudri said: The Messenger of Allah (PBUH&HF) said: "And stop them, they will be asked of WILAYAH of Ali."

Also, al-Hafiz al-Wahidi commented on the above verse saying: "This WILAYAH that the Prophet (s affirmed to Ali, will be asked about on the Day of Judgment. It is said that WILAYAH is what Allah meant in the verse 37:24 of Quran where He said: "And stop them, they are to be asked [37:24]". This means that they will be asked about the WILAYAH of Ali  (ra). The meaning is: They will be asked if they truly accepted him as their WALI as they were instructed by the Prophet
(s)? or did they loose and ignore it?"

Sunni references:
- al-Sawa'iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar al-Haythami, Ch. 11, subheading 1,
p229 quoted from al-Wahidi; also quoted from al-Daylami on the authority
of Abi Sa'id al-Khudri.
- Fara'id al-Samtain, by Hamawaini (Abu Is'haq Ibrahim Ibn Sa'd al-Din Ibn
al-Hamawiyia), section 14
- Nudhum Durar al-Samtain, by Jaml al-Din al-Zarandi
- al-Rashfah, by al-Hadhrami, p24



Countless scholars of Quran, Arabic grammar, and literature have interpreted the word MAWLA as Awla which means "having more authority." The following Sunni specialists all confirmed the above meaning:

1. al-Wahidi (d. 468), in "al-Wasit"
2. al-Akhfash Nahwi (d. 215), in "Nihayat al-Uqul"
3. al-Tha'labi (d. 427), in "al-Kashf wal Bayan"
4. Ibn Qutaybah (d. 276), in "al-Qurtayan", v2, p164
5. al-Kalbi (d. 146, quoted in "Tafsir al-Kabir", by al-Razi, v29, p227)
6. al-Farra' (as quoted in "Ruhul Ma'ani", by al-Alusi, v27, p178)
7. al-Nasafi (d. 701), in his "Tafsir", v4, p229
8. al-Tabari (d. 310), in "Tafsir al-Tabari", v9, p117
9. al-Bukhari (d. 215), in "Sahih al-Bukhari", v7, p271
10. al-Zamakhshari (d. 538), in "Tafsir al-Kashshaf", v2, p435
11. Qazi Nasiruddin al-Baydawi (d. 692), in "tafsir al-Baydawi", v2, p497
12. al-Khazin al-Baghdadi (d. 741), in his "Tafsir", v4, p229
13. Muhib al-Din al-Afandi, in "Tanzil al-Ayat"
14. Mu'ammar Ibn Muthanna al-Basri (as quoted in "Sharh al-Mawaqif", by
al-Sharif al-Jurjani, v3, p271)
15. Abul Abbas Tha'lab (as quoted in "Sharh al-Sab'ah al-Mu'allaqah", by
al-Zuzani)
16. Ibn Abbas, in his "Tafsir" written on the margin of Durr al-Manthur,
v5, p355
17. Abu al-Saud al-Hanafi (d. 972), in his "Tafsir"
18. and many more such as Yahya Ibn Zaid Kufi (d. 207), Abu Ubaida Basri
(d. 210), Abu Zaid Ibn Aus Basri (d. 125), Abu Bakr Anbari (d. 328),
Abul Hasan Rummani (d. 384), Sa'd al-Din Taftazani (d. 791), Shaba
Uddin Khafaji (d. 1069), Hamzawi Maliki (d. 1303), Husain Ibn Mas'd
(d. 510), Abu Baqa Ukbari (d. 616), Ibn Hajar al-Haythmai (d. 974),
Sharif Jurjani (d. 618), Abdul Abbas Mubarrad (d. 285), Abu Nasr Farabi
(d. 393) and, Abu Zakariya Khateeb Tarizi (d. 502),...



Thus the word WALI or MAWLA in the tradition of Ghadir Khum does not mean a simple friend, rather it means master and guardian who has more authority
over believers than what they have over themselves as Prophet himself mentioned by saying "Don't I have more authority (Awla) on believers than what they have over themselves?". At least 64 Sunni traditionists have quoted this preceding question of the Prophet, among them are al-Tirmidhi, al- Nisa'i, Ibn Majah, Ahmad In Hanbal. Therefore, the opinion of the above Sunni scholars accords with what Prophet (s) said by using the word Awla before the word MAWLA. In fact, when a word has more than one meaning, the best way to find out its true connotation is to look at the association (qarinah) and the context. The word Awla (having more authority) used by the Prophet gives a good association for the word MAWLA. Also the prayer of Prophet after his declaration in which he said:

"O' God, love those who love him, and be hostile to those who are hostile to him. Help those who help him, and forsake those who forsake him",


shows that Ali (S) on that day was entrusted with a responsibility (rulership) which, by its nature, would make some people his enemy, and in carrying out that responsibility he would need some helpers and supporters. Are helpers ever needed to carry on a "friendship"? Moreover, The declaration of Prophet (PBUH&HF) that "It seems the time is approached when I will be called away (by Allah) and I will answer that call" clearly shows that he was making arrangements for the leadership of Muslims after his death. Also when at the end of his speech, the Prophet (s) said twice: "Behold! Haven't I conveyed the message of Allah?" or "It is incumbent upon every one who is present to inform the absent for they may understand it better than those who are present" (Sahih al-Bukhari, Arabic-English, traditions 5.688, 7.458, and 9.539) shows that the Prophet was conveying a very important message which was going to be transferred to all coming generations. This matter could not have been a simple friendship. It is worth mentioning that Prophet did use the word Caliph in his speech in Ghadir Khum, but it does not appear in the majority of Sunni documents since there is no way to tamper the meaning of that word. However the Prophet (s) also used the word MAWLA in his speech to survive this event from being wiped up from the historical records with no trace. It is interesting to note that the words WALI and MAWLA are also used in Quran frequently with the meaning of master and guardian. For instance, the Holy Quran states:

"Allah is the WALI of those who believe; He brings them out of darkness (and takes them) into light." (Quran 2:257)

The above verse does not mean that Allah is just a friend of believers, because a simple friend who has no authority can not move anybody into light. Rather it means Allah is the Master of believers and that is why He moves them from darkness to light. In another verse Allah said: "Surely the AWLIYAA of Allah have no fear nor do they grieve." (Quran 10:62)

The word AWLIYAA is the plural form of WALI. The above verse does not mean that whoever is the friend of Allah does not have any fear. Many good Muslims may have experienced fear for some events in their lifetime while they are NOT the enemies of Allah. Thus the above verse suggests something else than a simple friend. Here the word WALI is in the form of FAEEL with the meaning of MAF'OOL. So the above verse means: "Those whose guardian and the master of their affairs is Allah are not subject to fear and apprehension." So if a believer TOTALLY submits to Allah, he then will not have any fear. But ordinary believers whose submission are not perfect, will probably be subject to fear of this and that, while we are still friends of Allah. Thus "WALI of Allah" is a person who has totally submitted his affairs to Allah and therefore he is totally protected by Allah from any kind of flaw and sin. This status is much higher than position of being just a "Friend of Allah". Nevertheless Allah uses the word AWLIYAA in its general meaning that is "protectors". The Holy Quran states:

"The believers, men and women, are AWLIYAA of one to the other: they command to what is just and forbid what is evil" (Quran 9:71).


Looking at different translations, one can find that they have used the word "protectors" for the meaning of AWLIYAA. The above verse does not want to say that believers are just friends of each other. Rather the believers are under a mutual obligation to one another, and are occupied with each other's affair. As a result of these obligations, they "command each other what is good and forbid each other what is evil" as the rest of above verse suggests. Thus here the meaning of AWLIYAA, though is still higher than "friends", but it is clearly lower than "master" and "leader". Here AWLIYAA has been used in its general meaning. But for a special meaning of WALI, see the following verse:

"ONLY Allah is your WALI, and His Messenger and those among believers who keep alive prayer AND pay Zakat while they are in the
state of bowing." (Quran 5:55)


The above verse clearly suggests that NOT all the believers are our WALI with the special meaning of WALI in this verse which is "master" and "leader". Again, here it is clear that WALI does not mean just friend. because all the believers are friends of each other. The above verse mentions that only three things are your special WALI: Allah, Prophet Muhammad, and Imam Ali for he was the only one at the time of Prophet who paid Zakat while he was in the state bowing (ruku'). Muslim scholars are unanimous in reporting this event. Here are just some of the Sunni references which mentioned the revelation of the above verse of Quran in the honor of Imam Ali Earlier:

 
 

Quote


(1) Tafsir al-Kabir, by Ahmad Ibn Muhammad al-Tha'labi, under Verse 5:55
(2) Tafsir al-Kabir, by Ibn Jarir al-Tabari, v6, pp 186,288-289
(3) Tafsir Jamiul Hukam al-Quran, by Muhammad Ibn Ahmad Qurtubi, v6, p219
(4) Tafsir al-Khazin, v2, p68
(5) Tafsir al-Durr al-Manthur, by al-Suyuti, v2, pp 293-294
(6) Tafsir al-Kashshaf, by al-Zamakhshari, Egypt 1373, v1, pp 505,649
(7) Asbab al-Nuzool, by Jalaluddin al-Suyuti, Egypt 1382, v1, p73 on the
authority of Ibn Abbas
(8) Asbab al-Nuzool, by al-Wahidi
(9) Sharh al-Tjrid, by Allama Qushji
(10) Ahkam al-Quran, al-Jassas, v2, pp 542-543
(11) Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v5, p38
(12) Kanzul Ummal, by al-Muttaqi al-Hindi, v6, p391
(13) al-Awsat, by Tabarani, narrated from Ammar Yasir
(14) Ibn Mardawayh, on the authority of Ibn Abbas

 

 

Paying Zakat during bowing (ruku') is not a Sunnah. This is accepted by ALL Muslim scholars. Thus the above verse does not seek to set down the desirability or the necessity of paying Zakat during bowing (ruku'), nor does it want to lay it down as duty or something recommended legally in the Islamic sense as a kind of Divine Law (Shari'ah). Rather it is a reference to an action which took place when someone did something in the external world, and now Quran is pointing that action to indicate that person. In an indirect way, the verse wants to say that this WALI is a special WALI whose authority has been put beside the authority of Prophet Muhammad (s) since they are jointly mentioned. One may object that even though Ali did this action, a plural form has been used in the above verse, thus it might encompass some other people as well. First, the history tells us that there was no other individual who did this at the time of Prophet. Second, this way of approach in Quran which uses plural form but actually referring to just one person who did that particular act, is NOT uncommon in Quran. For instance Allah mentioned:

"They say: If we return to Medina the mightier (element) will soon drive out the weaker." (63:8)


Here also Quran is referring to a story which took place, and uses the phrase "They say" while the speaker of the above sentence was not any more than one person. According to Shia and Sunni commentators he was Abdullah Ibn Ubayy Ibn Salul. Quran tries to avoid using names of people as much as possible. This is done for many reasons such as generality to make it a universal book, and also to make Quran safer from any possible alteration by those who hate a special individual who has been praised in Quran, or by those who love a person who has been denounced in Quran. Using plural while referring to single, has another application too. Sometimes the act of a single person is worthier than the deeds of a whole nation. This was the case for Prophet Muhammad, Imam Ali, as well as the case for Prophet Abraham. Quran mentions that Abraham  (as) was a nation (Ummah), meaning that his deeds was more valuable than all other people.
Allah stated:


"Lo! Abraham was a nation (Ummah) who was obedient to Allah, by nature upright, and he was not of the idolaters" (Quran 16:120)

The famous and respected companion of Prophet, Ibn Abbas  (ra) said:

"There is no verse in Quran in which the term `Believers', unless Ali is at the top of them and the chief of them and the more virtuous one among them. Surely Allah has admonished the companions of Muhammad (s) in Quran, but He did not refer to Ali except with honor."

Sunni references:
- Fadha'il al-Sahaba, by Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v2, p654, tradition #1114
- al-Riyadh al-Nadhirah, by Muhibbuddin al-Tabari, v3, p229
- Tarikh al-Khulafaa, by al-Hafidh Jalaluddin al-Suyuti, p171
- Dhakha'ir al-Uqba, by Muhibbuddin al-Tabari, p89
- al-Sawa'iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar Haythami, Ch. 9, section 3, p196
- Others such as Tabarani and Ibn Abi Hatam


And further, Ibn Abbas said:

"There hath not been revealed in the Book of God regarding any one what hath been revealed concerning Ali," and that "three hundred verses have been revealed concerning Ali."


Sunni references:
- Ibn Asakir, as quoted in:
- Tarikh al-Khulafaa, by al-Hafidh Jalaluddin al-Suyuti, p171
- al-Sawa'iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar Haythami, Ch. 9, section 3, p196


Thus the verse (5:55) is actually saying that ONLY Allah is your WALI, and then Prophet Muhammad, and Imam Ali. Thus we can conclude that the WILAYAH (mastership/leadership) of Imam Ali is the same as that of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH&HF) since Allah put them beside each other. The authority
of Prophet Muhammad is explained by the following verses of Quran:


"The Prophet has a greater priority/authority (Awla) over the believers than what they have over themselves" (Quran 33:6)

or:

"O' you who believe! Obey Allah, and obey the Messenger and those from among you who are given authority (by Allah)." (Quran 4:59)

One may look at other verses with regard to the authority of Prophet such as 4:65, 59:7, 9:103, 33:21. Putting all these verses beside the verse
5:55, one can derive that this priority and authority will also be for Imam Ali after the demise of the Messenger of Allah.


al-Nisa'i and al-Hakim have also recorded other versions of the tradition of Ghadir Khum with different wordings which provide more insight to the meaning of the tradition. They narrated on the authority of Zaid Ibn Arqam that:

Prophet added: "Certainly Allah is my MAWLA and I am WALI (master/ guardian) of all the faithful." Then he grasped the hand of Ali and said: "He (Ali) is the WALI of all those of whom I am WALI. O Allah! Love those who love him and hate those who hate him."


Sunni references:
- Khasa'is, by al-Nisa'i, p21
- al-Mustadrak, by al-Hakim, v3, p109



In another wording:

Prophet  (pbuh) asked three times: "O' people! Who is your MAWLA? They replied: Allah and His Messenger." Then he grasped the hand of Ali and
raised it and said: "Whoever his WALI is Allah and his Messenger, then this man is his WALI also."

Sunni reference: Khasa'is, by al-Nisa'i, p6



If WALI means friend, then why people answered only Allah and His Messenger are WALI? They should have answered all the believers are WALI. This clearly shows that people got it right, but they later chose to act otherwise. Now let us look at the following tradition:

Ali came to the plain of Rahbah, and some people told him "Peace on you O' our MAWLA!" Ali replied: "How can I be your MAWLA while you are Arabs (free men)?" They said: "We heard the Messenger of Allah  (pbuh) on the day of Ghadir Khum who said: `Whoever I was his MAWLA he (Ali) is his MAWLA.'"


Sunni reference: Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v5, p419


If MAWLA means friend, then why was Ali  (as) asking the above question? Was friendship new to Arabs? In fact Imam Ali was asking this question to reiterate the importance of the word MAWLA and showing that people at that time did not mean it friend for him, and that what they meant is master of the believers.

Concluding the above discussion, it is clear that any individual who tries to trivialize the tradition of Ghadir Khum by saying that Prophet just wanted to say "Ali is the friend of believers", is neglecting the above-mentioned traditions of prophet in which he explained what he meant by WALI, and also neglecting the above-mentioned verses of Quran (those which were revealed in Ghadir Khum and those which explain the importance of WALI). Finally, the following tradition from Sunni references further illuminates the fact that WALI means Imam since the tradition uses the phrase "follow them" and "Imam". Ibn Abbas  (ra) narrated that the
Messenger of Allah said:

"Whoever wishes to live and die like me, and to abide in the Garden of Eden after death, should acknowledge Ali as WALI after me, and take his WALI (i.e., Imams after him) as WALI, and should follow the Imams after me for they are my Ahlul-Bayt and are created from my clay and are gifted with the same knowledge and understanding as myself.Woe unto those who deny their virtues and those who disregard their relationship and affinity with me, for my intercession shall never reach them."


Sunni references:
(1) Hilyatul Awliya', by Abu Nu'aym, v1, pp 84,86
(2) al-Mustadrak, by al-Hakim, v3, p128
(3) al-Jamiul Kabir, by al-Tabarani
(4) al-Isabah, by Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani
(5) Kanzul Ummal, v6, p155
(6) al-Manaqib, by al-Khawarizmi, p34
(7) Yanabi' al-Mawaddah, by al-Qunduzi al-Hanafi, p149
(8) History of Ibn Asakir, v2, p95

 


Statement:

Firstly nowhere does it say in 5:55 OBEY and secondly why are you using the word THEY when there is no specific verse where Allah ÓÈÍÇäå æÊÚÇáì tells us to OBEY your imams.

 

(1) You are Commanded to Obey your Wali.
(2) verse 4:59 clearly says Obey. 
(3) You did not prove to me that Uli al amr are not appointed by Allah to justify you stance?
(4) Is your Wali abu Bakr or Imam Ali (s)?

 

Statement:

What has luqman a.s got to do with imamah of 12 imams?? Maybe I'm being a bit harsh asking for names then atleast give me one precise verse where Allah  says he will send imams.
 

​(1) the bases of this Argument is the Identity of Uli al amr and I am sure you are Knowledgeable enough to Recognize the points Have point forward to justify my Stance on this issue. Since the names of Uli al amr are not mentioned as you claim, then I ask you why Was the prophet Luqman (as) was not mentioned as a prophet In the Quran?

     

Statement:

As for shura then not a single verse says Allah ( swt) has appointed imams so this was the affair of the ummah.

 

(1) Allah Has appointed Imams for the Ummah Excuse me. We have made a guide for all nations and you Ali is the Guide" (the prophet (s) said this and I have proved it to be Authentic. 

(2) Give me one verse from the Quran where Choosing the Successor of the prophet (s) is the Affair of the Ummah? Why are you lying? All the previous nations the prophets (s) have chosen their Successors? do you even know the Definition of Successorship? Can you give me One Hadith where the prophet (s) told them to go make shura? 

(3) What was the Significance of Ghadeer Khum?

 

Statement:
The last two words in your above reply are not very convincing "I believe". This is your "own assumption"

 

(1) This cannot be an Assumption this is according our Hadiths that you must Believe in the Twelve Khalifas. Shall I mention them.

(2): 

 

 

One Who does not Believe in all one of the Twelve Khalifas, Does not believe in All them. According to the school of Ahlulbayt (s).
The Ismailis Stop at the sixth Imam I believe.

 

 

Statement:

Brother am i talking French I summat??

 

Can you please Quote where I said: "Summat"? On this page. And My dear bother there is not Reason to be Sarcastic. This is a Debate and not a form of entertainment.

 

Statement:

If your imams were born sinless then why would Allah ÓÈÍÇäå æÊÚÇáì INTEND TO PURIFY THEM??

 

This Question is Invalid. So When the prophet (s) became a Prophet (s) and Declared it to the public, Why would Allah say he is to be obeyed in the Quran? Brother These verses are a Revelation to us, No doubt they were purified since birth, but the verse down when the prophet (s) put them under the Kisa with him and he said they are my Ahlulbayt (s). These verses are Revelation to us, and not facts which we are support to know before hand.  

 

 

Statements:
If your imams were born sinless then why would Allah  INTEND TO PURIFY THEM??

When Allah  INTENDS on doing something then he intends to do it, it doesn't mean he has already done it.

It's a bit like Allah  saying he intends on making hell. Whereas we all know this would not make sense because why would Allah ÓÈÍÇäå æÊÚÇáì INTEND on making hell if he already has made it. Now tell me why would Allah intend to purify your imams if they were born sinless.:

 

As mentioned Above Allah has Purified them before birth. And the verse is a Revelation to us, to simply inform us. As I proved to you what the Word: "intend" means when it is mentioned in the Quran:

 

 

Sorry but you make no sense let us Examine the following:

 

وَلَا تُعْجِبْكَ أَمْوَالُهُمْ وَأَوْلَادُهُمْ ۚ إِنَّمَا يُرِيدُ اللَّهُ أَن يُعَذِّبَهُم بِهَا فِي الدُّنْيَا وَتَزْهَقَ أَنفُسُهُمْ وَهُمْ كَافِرُونَ

 " And let not their wealth and their children impress you. Allah only intends to punish them through them in this world and that their souls should depart [at death] while they are disbelievers. " - 9:85

We can see here very Clearly that Allah is telling not to care about the Wealth and Children of others of Certain people, and that Allah INTENTS only to punish them through them. So here you cannot say, that Allah has Punished them before, But he does this TO THEM, To punish them, and this goes Vise-verse to the Purification verse. Allah INTENDS to Remove "Rijs" From Alhulbayt to Purify them, from All that is "Rijs" (sin).


Again lets take another look at another verse:

_______


 

وَأَنِ احْكُم بَيْنَهُم بِمَا أَنزَلَ اللَّهُ وَلَا تَتَّبِعْ أَهْوَاءَهُمْ وَاحْذَرْهُمْ أَن يَفْتِنُوكَ عَن بَعْضِ مَا أَنزَلَ اللَّهُ إِلَيْكَ ۖ فَإِن تَوَلَّوْا فَاعْلَمْ أَنَّمَا يُرِيدُ اللَّهُ أَن يُصِيبَهُم بِبَعْضِ ذُنُوبِهِمْ ۗ وَإِنَّ كَثِيرًا مِّنَ النَّاسِ لَفَاسِقُونَ

"And judge, [O Muhammad], between them by what Allah has revealed and do not follow their inclinations and beware of them, lest they tempt you away from some of what Allah has revealed to you. And if they turn away - then know that Allah only intends to afflict them with some of their [own] sins. And indeed, many among the people are defiantly disobedient." - 5:49 

We see the same issue here, that if they the people Turn away from What Allah has Revealed to them, then Allah Well Intend to Afflict them With their own sins, and keep reading and he says "Many people are Defiantly Disobedient, to assure this issue stated. But When We Compare this verse to the Purification verse we see, that in the Purification Allah is being Direct That he "Only Intends", and no Factors for that intention is Required to make the "Intention" happen, but it is Direct and a Must. Same with the Above verse.   


there are many more verses I can mention Also on this issue.

 


(1) When Allah Does something Or he Intends on Doing something, that means he Will do it. And if your saying he Will not then you are saying Allah is Limited and cannot do it, which means Kufar. So My dear brother if Timing is your issue can you please tell me When Did Allah Purify Ahlulbayt (s)?


Statement:
When you intend on doing something that means it's your intention and intention comes before the action.


(1) So Allah Intended which means He Will Do the Action of it. So When did he Purify them?

 

Statement:

1. Stop lying dear brother you have in previous posts. Also this verse is used by shia to prove that imam ali a.s had more right to caliphate then abu bakr r.a because he was "sinless".

 

(1) Before you go around and calling people liars can you please Quote me saying "This verse is for Imamat".
(2) Can you please give me One of our books and Quote where it says this verse is for Imamat.?

 

 

Statement:
2. We will see about that.

 

Brother I think the verse is very Clear. Purification of All Rijis. Can you please give me the Definition of Rijis? do you know what it means? 

 

 

Statement:
3. Yea buh y?? I know she us from AHLE BAYT buh what was the reason or her r.a being infallible??

 

In the verse it is very clear they have been Purified from All Rijis. Again do you know what Rijis means?

 

 

(wasalam)


Statement:

"However, during the era of occultation, when the community is deprived of the most perfect example, then the authority to TAKE CHARGE OF THE AFFAIRS goes to he who is closest to the perfect example and that is the QUALIFIED JURIST, so that he may STOP ANARCHY.

 

Brother as you can see it says "However". Please Quote from our Books or Tafsir where it says the Jurist is of Uli al amr.


Statement:

Also ISLAMICHISTORY khamenei refers to himself as WALI UL AMR AL MUSLEEN

 

(1) Can you please Quote where he says I am the Uli al amr of All Muslims. Brother please don't make up Facts from your head. Please provide Proof of this statement.

(2) In the post Appointing a Successor. I have Explained to you the Difference between Wali al Faqih and Wali al amr. And Sayed Ali Al Khamenei is Wali al Faqih.

(3) Sadly as I gave you Evidence of my statements, you have given me nothing. Which is very Typical from our last last "Did the prophet (s) Appoint a Successor"

(wasalam)


 


Statement:

AMEEN you really need to stop imagining what YOU THINK it says and read what it ACTUALLY says.

 

Can you please stop offending others? It not really polite. What you just have been said to me by you a number of times.
Yet I am waiting for your Proof. As we find there is none.



 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The ISLAMIC history please could you explain letter 6 to me so I may give you are full answer on all your points  

I just did? 

 

 

 

 

The following is a letter to Mu'awiya and in it Imam Ali Úáíå ÇáÓáÇã has used the same principle that he applied on Talha and Zubayr. Imam Ali Úáíå ÇáÓáÇã in this letter has raised all the points which were once quoted against him. He says if an election on the basis of general franchise is the criterion to decide such a caliphate, then general election took place to elect him the Caliph and nobody can deny this fact, and if limited franchise (Shura) was the criterion then those who represented this group (Muhajirs and Ansars) were amongst those who elected him and therefore even according to the rules formulated by opponents of Imam Ali Úáíå ÇáÓáÇã his election was lawful, regular and bonafide. Thus no Muslim has a right to speak or act against him.

(1) So my dear brother, No were does Imam Ali (s) claim they are the Khalifas.

(2) The letter is in accordance to the Atrocities of Muwaiyah.

(3) lets not forget your so called Khalfia umar appoint Muwiyah, so how can Umars khilafa be pure?

Do you not understand this?

And Also we are not looking for Assumptions. We are looking for a Conclusion based on Authentic proof.

(wasalam)

Please don't forget not everyone payed Allegiance to the three Khalfias I mentioned many in "Appointing a Successor". 

Also Where does the prophet (s) say Abu bakr is the Khalfia after me? Authentic Hadith? And if there was then what was the Significance of shura? Did the prophet (s) say go do Shura?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just did?

Do you not understand this?

And Also we are not looking for Assumptions. We are looking for a Conclusion based on Authentic proof.

(wasalam)

Please don't forget not everyone payed Allegiance to the three Khalfias I mentioned many in "Appointing a Successor".

Also Where does the prophet (s) say Abu bakr is the Khalfia after me? Authentic Hadith? And if there was then what was the Significance of shura? Did the prophet (s) say go do Shura?

I will get back to you tonight brother just at work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also ISLAMICHISTORY khamenei refers to himself as WALI UL AMR AL MUSLEEN

Who gave him the right to call himself that??

Since this is only for the infallibles (according to shia) and here we have a top class ayatollah giving himself the title of "wali al umr ul muslimeen"

 

Where is the reference to prove your claim??? First you need to prove that, he calls himself that, then ask who gave him the right to call himself that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Where is the reference to prove your claim??? First you need to prove that, he calls himself that, then ask who gave him the right to call himself that.

 

 

Like All People who are against Iran, These Myths Spread between people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Once again brother just the truth has sheepishly slipped away and wouldn't or couldn't answer my questions. You said "fee shay inn" means "on anything" basically anything at all what so ever. So one could disagree and differ, with the Ulul Amre on anything and everything. This is exactly what you said in one of your posts but then in another post you said "I mean in religious matters". There has been a change of stance there but this is exactly what I mean, "fee shay inn" meaning "on anything" but on anything in what??? On anything about what??? On anything regarding what???

 

You claim "fee shay inn" is a general and open statement and then later changed your stance. Where as i believe it is a specific and closed statement or it is in particular. "on anything" regarding what??? About what??? With in what??? Or in what??? You said "on anything" then you said "in religious matters" and this is exactly my point, to which we have finally arrived. "on anything" in something or with in something or about something or regarding something. So one can put up what ever dispute/difference/disagreement with the Ulul Amre, when ever they like.

 

But later on you changed your stance and said "with in religious matters only" and there you have with in, to which we have finally arrived. So one can dispute/differ/disagree with the Ulul Amre but with in religious matters and in all other matters, one has to obey the Ulul Amre. This is what you mean??? Or would you care to elaborate??? You still haven't answered my question or respond to my points. I would like to get to know about your point of view, on the issues I have mentioned. Don't be afraid to put your point of view forward.


Brother just the truth, you claim Ulul Amre means hakim-e-waqth. Basically anyone in authority. You need to prove this through the Quran. You ask for proof and we deliver but you run away, when asked for proof

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Brother just the truth, you were talking about "Ulul amre minkum", meaning according to you, "those who are in authority among you" and meaning according to me, "those who are worthy of authority among you". Now you want proof from me but I also want proof from you.

 

Take a look at the following two verses:

 

Surah Al Ambia, verse 73. "And we made them Imaams, who guided people by our command, and we revealed to them the doing of good and the keeping up of prayer and the giving of the alms and us alone did they serve".

 

Surah Al Qasas, verse 41. "And we made them Imaams, who call to the fire and on the day of resurrection, they shall not be assisted".

 

In the following two verses both individuals are in authority but both are not worthy of authority. You can refer to both as, those who are in authority but you can only refer to one as, those who are worthy of authority. It is crystal clear who is worthy of authority. Now lets go by your meaning, "Ulul amre minkum" meaning "those who are in authority among you". This would apply to Imaams (leaders) of both verses, where as my meaning "those who are worthy of authority among you" would only apply to those mentioned in Surah Al Ambia, vesre 73. So by Allah saying "Wa ulul amre minkum" do you think Allah is speaking about both individuals/parties or would you finally go by my meaning that, Allah is speaking about only one individual/party???

 

Why on earth would Allah command you to obey "those who are in authority among you", when those in authority could be from Surah Al Ambia, vesre 73 and Surah Al Qasas, verse 41??? Allah has given you the command to obey "those who are worthy of authority among you", which only applies to those in Surah Al Ambia, verse 73.

Edited by Ameen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

According to some people, some leaders might be good and pious but according to others, the same might be bad and wicked. You might find and take someone as good and pious but I might take the same as bad and wicked. Certain people find and take the first three Khalifs as good and pious, where as others find and take them bad and wicked. The same applies to some other companions and wives of the Prophet (pbuh) But when it comes to Hazrath Fatimah (as) and the 12 Shia Imaams, everybody finds and takes them, as good and pious. Nobody doubts their character, performance and achievement. Everybody considers the 12 Shia Imaams as Awlia and Awsia. As intelligent, noble and wise men. You won't find anything wrong or bad about them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Brother ISLAMIC HISTORY if you in some way think that by you going round in circles deliberately, I'm going to get fed up and stop replying THEN YOU CAN DREAM ON.

I will keep replying to you till the end UNTIL YOU START GIVING ME PROPER ANSWERS.

It's actually very sad that I've given you precise verses regarding other usul's and shown you how precise they are and yet you havnt compared them to verse ulil amr and proven to me that ulil amr verse is precise as the other verses on the other usul's IF this verse is talking about an usul (imamat).

YOU SAID

I never Replied? You are falsely accusing me, of not replying now? I have very disappointed. Second of All Imam Ali (s) Did not say "Sunnah", third of all he told him to refer to the Quran. And what is wrong with this? If one needs to understand how to make a good choice, does one not need to refer to the Quran?, Of course he does, and Imam Ali (s) said this to him, as he was going to pick his men.

MY ANSWER

I've shown you where it says follow sunnah. What is wrong with you??

I don't understand why you're so against following sunnah, just to prove something on verse 13:7. Tell me one thing if you can refer to your imams through their teachings then why not same for prophet (pbuh)?

Anyway here's the part below where it says refer to sunnah:

Letter 53

When you are faced with problems which you cannot solve or with a difficult situation from which you cannot escape or when uncertain and doubtful circumstances confuse and perplex you, then turn to Allah and the Holy Prophet (s) because Allah has thus ordered those whom He wants to guide. The way to turn to Allah is to act diligently according to the CLEAR and EXPLICIT orders GIVEN IN HIS HOLY BOOK and to the turn to the HOLY PROPHET (s) means to FOLOW THOSE OF HIS ORDERS about which there is no doubt and ambiguity and which have been generally accepted to be CORRECTLY RECORDED

http://www.al-islam.org/nahjul/letters/letter53.htm

Now do you understand. The orders of the prophet (pbuh) are his SUNNAH/HADITH.

Now tell me if ali a.s was the guide and not the prophet (pbuh) then why did imam ali a.s tell Malik al ashtar r.a to refer to the sayings of the prophet (pbuh).

YOU SAID

(1) Most of the Sahabas mentioned in Bukhari as the enemies of Ahlulbayt (s)

(2) Most of the Sahaba in Sunni Books did not gave Baya to Imam Ali (s).

(3) The so called Sahabahs of yours oppressed Fatima al Zahraa .

(4) Most of your Hadiths come from the Sahabah and not Ahlulbayt (s) ( I have read many Sunni works ) and this issue is true.

(5) Most of the Ahadith on Ahlulbayt (s) in for example the Six Sahihs ( are claimed to be lies by most of Sunni Investigators Sadly)

MY ANSWER

1.prove it

2. SO WHAT

3. How??

4. So what

5. If they're authentic then they're authentic if they're not then they're not. Have you ever read merits of ali a.s in our books?? Or do you turn a blind eye to this.

YOU SAID

(1) The Wives are not from Ahlulbayt (s).

(2) The Sahabah are not From Ahlylbayt (s).

(3) I have proved to you from Bukhari and Muslim the Identity of Ahlulbayt (s).

(4) please give a Hadith to prove your point and yet you are still making false assumptions.

MY ANSWER

1. We will get to this very soon

2. So what

3. No you havnt. Our beliefs regarding AHLE BAYT are very very very different but our views regarding AHLE KISA are the same. So no you have not proved a thing

4. Hadith on what??

YOU SAID

Brother your Ignoring my Question, can you please reply with an Actual Answer.

MY ANSWER

Letter 53

When you are faced with problems which you cannot solve or with a difficult situation from which you cannot escape or when uncertain and doubtful circumstances confuse and perplex you, then turn to Allah and the Holy Prophet (s) because Allah has thus ordered those whom He wants to guide. The way to turn to Allah is to act diligently according to the CLEAR and EXPLICIT orders GIVEN IN HIS HOLY BOOK and to the turn to the HOLY PROPHET (s) means to FOLOW THOSE OF HIS ORDERS about which there is no doubt and ambiguity and which have been generally accepted to be CORRECTLY RECORDED

http://www.al-islam.org/nahjul/letters/letter53.htm

YOU SAID

The merits of Abu bakr? yes and most of them are false. Would like you state them for me and I shall prove it to be so. That hadith ( of Imam Ali (s) is not in Sunan ibn Majah only my brother, I am sure I mentioned other Sunni Sources if you have read page 17/18.

MY ANSWER

....and how you going to prove me wrong??

YOU SAID

But He added Ulul-Amr (those who are GIVEN AUTHORITY BY Allah). This is one of the places where the concept of Imams and the necessity of obedience to them come from.

MY ANSWER

where on earth in that verse does it say that the ulil amr are "given authority by Allah"?? STOP ADDING YOUR OWN BITS IN.

YOU STILL HAVE NOT TOLD ME EVEN AFTER I HAVE SHOWN YOU PRECISE VERSES REGARDING OTHER USUL AD DIN THAT HOW COME WE ARE NOT TOLD TO "REFER " TO ULIL AMR??

1. 1. The authority of the Messenger of Allah (s) upon the believers was unlimited and all-comprehensive. Any order given by him, under any condition, in any place, at any time, was to be obeyed unconditionally.

THIS IS TRUE

2. (2) Supreme authority was given to him because he was sinless (Ma'sum) and free from all types of errors and sins. Otherwise, Allah would not have ordered us to obey him with no questioning or doubt.

THIS IS TRUE TO A CERTAIN EXTENT, BECAUSE YOU STILL HAVNT PROVEN TO ME THAT PROPHETS A.S CANT MAKE MINOR MISTAKES

3. Also from the verse 4:59 we concluded that Ulul-Amr have been given exactly the same authority over Muslims as of Messenger, and that the obedience of Ulul-Amr has the same standing as the obedience of the Messenger.

THEN HOW ON EARTH ARE SUNNIS MUSLIMS

I WILL REPEAT AGAIN WHAT I HAVE SAID BEFORE

If a verse is PRECISE then we should not have to go to hadith to understand exactly what Allah ( swt) is talking about.

Here are a few examples... AGAIN

Allah witnesses that there is NO DEITY except Him, and [so do] the ANGELS and those of knowledge - [that He is] maintaining [creation] in justice. There is NO DEITY EXCEPT HIM, the Exalted in Might, the Wise.

Now tell me do I need to go to hadith to understand anything??

Surah 35:1

[All] praise is [due] to Allah , Creator of the heavens and the earth, [who] made the ANGELS MESSENGERS having wings, two or three or four. He increases in creation what He wills. Indeed, Allah is over all things competent.

NOW HERE Allah SWT WANTS TO TELL US THAT HIS ANGELS ARE MESSENGERS. DO WE NEED HADITH TO KNOW THAT ANGELS ARE MESSENGERS?? NO

Now tell me regarding verse ulil amr why do we need to go to hadith to find out exactly what Allah ( swt) is telling us??

ITS SIMPLE, THE VERSE OF ULIL AMR IS NOT PRECISE ENOUGH TO CALL IT A VERSE THAT CAN POINT OUT AN USUL.

If this verse was precisely telling us about your imams then sunni would be kafir NO DOUBT.

YOU SAID

Your are mistaken, According to Sunan Abu Dawood, you cannot understand a verse without what the prophet (s) says about it.

NOW STOP DODGING MY QUESTION AND TELL ME IF VERSE 4:59 IS PRECISELY TELING US ABOUT YOUR IMAMS THEN HOW ON EARTH ARE SUNNI MUSLIMS???

DO NOT DO NOT DO NOT IGNORE THIS I WANT A STRAIGHT UP ANSWER

TELL ME IF I DENIED ANY OTHER FOUNDATION OF ISLAM WOULD I REMAIN MUSLIM?? NO.

SO THEN WHY ARE WE SUNNIS CONSIDERED MUSLIMS IF THERE ARE PRECISE VERSES IN QURAN (according to shia) TELLING US TO OBEY YOUR IMAMS??

YOU SAID

your Again trying to Justify one verse to other verses. My dear brother, But how do you Disobey Allah? if Allah gives you a Direct order to Obey The Uli al amr (eg. Imam Ali (s)) Then everyone Who fought Imam Ali (S) has Disobeyed Allah, and When the prophet (s) said I have left in you two things, Hold on to them and you will never go astray 1) The book of Allah and 2) his Ahlulbayt then if you disobey one of them you have disobeyed the prophet (s), and by Disobeying them you have also Disobeyed the Commandments mentioned in the Nobel Quran.

MY ANSWER

Tell me how SUNNIS are Muslims for rejecting an usul ( according to shia) and if there are "PRECISE" verses then how can we be Muslims (sunnis).

Imamate according to shia is a direct command from Allah. (Swt) and his prophet (pbuh) so it is hujjah on the ummah, now tell me how are SUNNIS Muslims??

YOU SAID

Yes we are Told. As I have mentioned the The Authentic Hadith where the prophet (S) has mentioned them Name by name. Where is your Refutation for that Hadith? You cannot Skip my evidence and later on claim that I have given you nothing. This is False reasoning with me and the Audience who read this. very Sad indeed.

MY ANSWER

"Refutation for that hadith"??

It's a shia hadith so why do I need to refute it since it's not hujjah on me.

YOU SAID

You need to stop Skipping my Analyses, and start making some proper refutes. We are told to refer to them in verse: 4:83.

MY ANSWER

Firstly verse 4:59 and 4:83 were not sent together. So how can you try to link them is beyond me.

Secondly, the differing was not with the ulil amr so this is why we were told to refer to ulil amr AND prophet ( pbuh)

Also it says clearly in that blessed verse refer to messenger AND ulil amr. Now since you don't believe we can actually refer to prophet (pbuh) But we have to refer to ulil amr instead THIS VERSE DOES NOT HELP YOU.

Let me make it clear for you.

IF it said refer to messenger (pbuh) OR ulil amr then you had an argument that we can refer to ANY.

But since it says refer to messenger AND ulil amr you have to refer to BOTH. And not just refer to ulil amr ONLY.

TELL ME ONE THING WAS TALUT r.a INFALLIBLE??

(1) can you give me a verse where it says if we don't pray, Pay Zakat, do good deeds there will be a Deadly consequence?

(2) This does not prove anything, there are many Obligatory things in Islam that are not mentioned with a Consequence in the Quran.

(3) can you first tell me where I can find a verse where it tells us how to exactly pray?

MY ANSWER

1. You're having a laugh right?? No seriously?? Anyway here's the verses for people who do not pay Zakah;:

“And (as for) those who hoard up gold and silver and do not spend it in Allah’s way announce to them a painful chastisement.

On the day when it shall be heated in the fire of hell, then their foreheads and their sides and their backs shall be branded with it, this is that you hoarded up for yourselves, therefore taste what you hoarded.”

(Surah at-Tawba 9: 34-35)

“And let not those deem, who are niggardly in giving away that which Allah has granted them out of His grace, that it is good for them; nay it is worse for them; they shall have that whereof they were niggardly made to cleave to their necks on the resurrection day; and Allah’s is the heritage of the heavens and the earth; and Allah is aware of what you do.”

(Surah Āli-‘Imran 3: 180)

http://www.al-islam.org/greater_sins_complete/42.htm

Now I've given you verses now you give me a verse where it says THERE WILL BE DIRE CONSEQUENCES FOR DISOBEYING ULI AMR.

2.

4:150

to top

Sahih International

Indeed, those who disbelieve in Allah and His messengers and wish to discriminate between Allah and His messengers and say, "We believe in some and disbelieve in others," and wish to adopt a way in between -

4:151

to top

Sahih International

Those are the disbelievers, truly. And We have prepared for the disbelievers a humiliating punishment.

USUL NUMBER TWO NUBUWWAH

Look at verse above

Now the ulil amr is as you put it "side by side" with Allah (swt) and messenger (pbuh) so it would only be fair that the ulil amr also gets the pleasure of ONE verse where we are threatened to dire consequences.

3. Like I've already told you WE ARE TALKING ABOUT USULS AND NOT FURUS.

Let me make this a bit more clear for you.

AT LEAST WE ARE PRECISELY told what to pray ie; SALAH whereas in verse 4:59 we are not to who to obey precisely.

YOU SAID

1) Why did you ignore my Reply at page 19? brother, Can you must be Narrow minded here. Allah (s.w.t) is Ordering you to Obey them, and you must obey Allah on this issue. Secondly they are Appointed by the Prophet (s) who we explained later on, can only do things by the orders of Allah I even gave you verses Concerning/to prove this issue. :

MY ANSWER

Brother when a verse is precise it DOES NOT need other verses to help you explain what that verse means BUT the unspecific verses CAN be linked to the PRECISE VERSES to understand them better.

So you CANNOT use verse 5:55 to prove 4:59 and you CANNOT use 4:59 to prove 5:55 if these verses are your precise verses.

"al-Muhkamat" (translated here as decisive) is derived from the root word h - k - m; THIS ROOT IMPLIES THAT A THING IS SO PROTECTED that nothing can PERVERT or BREAK it or INTERFERE with it. Some infinitive verbs made from it are al-ihkam (to make precise, to confirm, to strengthen), at-tahkim = to arbitrate) and al-hukm (to judge); some other words are al-hikmah (perfect knowledge, wisdom) and al-hakamah (bit of a horse's bridle). All these meanings have the elements of PROTECTION and PRECISENESS in them. Some people say that the root-word gives the meaning of protection and reformation.

al-Ihkam of the verses means MAKING THEM SO PRECISE that no AMBIGUITY remains therein, contrary to "al-mutashdbihat" (ambiguous) ones.

http://www.shiasource.com/al-mizan/tafsir/3-7-9/

SO NOW TELL ME THE WORDS USED IN 5:55 ARE NOT PRECISE SO HOW CAN THE VERSE BE PRECISE.

ALSO THE THE INSTRUCTIONS REGARDING REFERRING TO DO NOT PRECISELY TELL US TO REFER TO ULUL AMR.

So read the link above and try to understand that verse 5:55 and 4:59 are not precise enough to prove an usul.

WE ALSO FIND

The decisive and unambiguous verses have been given this title because the ambiguous verses return to them. One part of the Book (i.e., the ambiguous verses) returns to the other part, (i.e., to the unambiguous ones).

THE UNSPECIFIC VERSES RETURN TO THE PRECISE ONES AND NOT PRECISE VERSES TURNING TO ANY OTHER VERSE.

But at-tashabuh mentioned in the verse under discussion means something different. The verse contrasts such verses with the decisive ones that are the basis of the Book, and then goes on to say that those in whose heart there is perversity follow such verses seeking to mislead people and to give them their own interpretation. This context makes it clear that the adjective mutashabihat, refers here to ambiguous verse whose connotation cannot be decided by the hearer just by hearing; his mind remains un­decided between one meaning and the other; this continues until he refers to the decisive verses and only then is able to fix the true connotation and semantic value of the ambiguous one. At this stage, the ambiguous verse too becomes decisive and unam­biguous but with the aid of decisive verse; WHILE THE DECISIVE VERSE IS DECISIVE BY ITSELF.

http://www.shiasource.com/al-mizan/tafsir/3-7-9/

SO THE DECISIVE VERSES ARE DECISIVE SO YOU CANNOT USE 4:59 4:83 and 5:55 TOGETHER TO PROVE IMAMATE. PICK ONE VERSE AND CALL THAT VERSE YOUR PRECISE VERSE.

YOU SAID

Verse 3,4, of Surat An-Najm:

وَمَا يَنطِقُ عَنِ الْهَوَىٰ

Nor does he speak from [his own] inclination.

إِنْ هُوَ إِلَّا وَحْيٌ يُوحَىٰ

It is not but a revelation revealed,

MY ANSWER

Will you stop misinterpreting verses PLEASE. This verse is talking about the quranic verses and NOT every single word the prophet (pbuh) spoke was a revelation so STOP LYING.

Ok, so you tell me, if the prophet asked his wives to cook him food or wash his clothes etc etc.. Were these words a revelation?? NO. SO STOP LYING.

YOU SAID

No you have not. Again please define more me in your Understanding, According to the English Language what is the Difference between Specific and Precise Thank you.

MY ANSWER

Read the link I've given you regarding surah 3:7.

YOU SAID

(1) We proved through What the Prophet (s) said who Uli al amr are. And you never Refuted one Hadith. Not even one.

MY ANSWER

.....and which "hadith" did you provide where we are told from prophet (pbuh) who the ulil amr are?? FROM SUNNI SOURCES....OF COURSE.

YOU SAID

This is a Statement as you have not Refuted My Authentic Narrations Concerning verse 4:59.

MY ANSWER

WHAT NARRATIONS

YOU SAID

Please Answer the Question Directly: The Successors of Prophet Jesus (s), Solomon (s), Moses (s) Where not mentioned by name, but my other terms and same with Imam Ali (s) he was mentioned by Action and not by exact terms. Can you please give me One Hadith where the prophet (s) says if a verse is not Specific, Ignore what I say and Just use the verse? (N'aozobillah)

MY ANSWER

Read the link I've given you regarding verse 3:7

YOU SAID

Brother you did not Reply to my Analyses on this issue? Where? which post?

Quote

First of Allah Did not Mention the names of the Previous Imams of the Ummah, for example for have the Successor of prophet Solomon Who he was not mentioned by name, but was refer to the One "Who has the knowledge of the book", or for example the "Haware'en" Of prophet Jesus (s) Allah did not mention them by name, Also the 12 Khalifas of Israel Who Allah Appointed them, He did not mention them by name, So we Return to verse 5:55 Where All Literate Muslims know that Only Imam Ali (s) gave his Ring While Ruku, and in the verse We are ordered to obey him.

Meaning of Wali:

MY ANSWER

Brother it seems even you shia can't make your minds up regarding the meaning of wali.

If you go to this link:

http://www.al-islam.org/encyclopedia/chapter3/5.html

The word master has been used but then they've switched there stance from master to guardian in verse 56.

They need to tell us does the word wali mean guardian or master

Then we have another link

5:55Only Allah is your Guardian and His Messenger and those who believe, those who keep up prayers and pay zakat while they bow.

5:56And whoever takes Allah and His Messenger and those who believe for a Guardian, then surely the party of Allah are they that shall be triumphant.

http://www.shiasource.com/al-mizan/tafsir/5-55-56/

NOW here the word guardian is used throughout from verse 55 and 56.

A guardian dies not necessarily have to be a leader a guardian is somebody who guards who protects and even angels are said to be our guardians in the quran:

13:11

For his sake there are angels following one another, before him and behind him, who GUARD him by Allah's commandment; surely Allah does not change the condition of a people until they change their own condition; and when Allah intends evil to a people, there is no averting it, and besides Him they have no protector.

http://www.shiasource.com/al-mizan/tafsir/13-7-16/

SO IF YOU READ the link I gave you for verse 3:7 you will understand that the word wali is not precise enough do describe Imamate.

Also the instructions are not precise enough in surah 4:59 to call this verse precise ie; who we should refer to.

YOU SAID

(1) You are Commanded to Obey your Wali.

(2) verse 4:59 clearly says Obey.

(3) You did not prove to me that Uli al amr are not appointed by Allah to justify you stance?

(4) Is your Wali abu Bakr or Imam Ali (s)?

MY ANSWER

1. No we are not. Where does it say obey the wali

2. Yes. But don't forget you cannot do this, you cannot link4:59 and 5:55 together like that read the link I left you for surah 3:7. You cannot use another verse to prove a precise verse otherwise how on earth can the verse be precise in the first place.

3. ... And you havnt proven that they are appointed.

4. Imam ali. A.s

YOU SAID

​(1) the bases of this Argument is the Identity of Uli al amr and I am sure you are Knowledgeable enough to Recognize the points Have point forward to justify my Stance on this issue. Since the names of Uli al amr are not mentioned as you claim, then I ask you why Was the prophet Luqman was not mentioned as a prophet In the Quran?

MY ANSWER

This is one of the most silliest things I've ever heard. Have you read the description regarding luqman in the quran then look at the description we get for ulil amr which is literally nothing.

YOU SAID

(1) Allah Has appointed Imams for the Ummah Excuse me. We have made a guide for all nations and you Ali is the Guide" (the prophet (s) said this and I have proved it to be Authentic.

(2) Give me one verse from the Quran where Choosing the Successor of the prophet (s) is the Affair of the Ummah? Why are you lying? All the previous nations the prophets (s) have chosen their Successors? do you even know the Definition of Successorship? Can you give me One Hadith where the prophet (s) told them to go make shura?

(3) What was the Significance of Ghadeer Khum?

MY ANSWER

1. You have not proven their authencity

2. Prove imamat of your 12 imams from quran since it's an usul

3. I'm not going over this again. We've been over this

Verse 33:33

Brother give me one single verse in the quran where Allah ( swt) says he intends to do something but he has already done it!!!

YOU SAID

Brother as you can see it says "However". Please Quote from our Books or Tafsir where it says the Jurist is of Uli al amr.

MY ANSWER

So what if it says "however"

Brother are you seriously telling me that your ayatollahs do not call themselves wali al umr al muslimeen??

Nahj ul balagah letter 6.

Verily, those who took the oath of allegiance to Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthman have sworn allegiance to me. Now those who were present at the election have no right to go back against their oaths of allegiance and those who were not present on the occasion have no right to oppose me. And so far as Shura (limited franchise or selection) was concerned it was supposed to be limited to Muhajirs and Ansars and it was also supposed that whomsoever they selected, became caliph as PER APPROVAL and PLEASURE of Allah.

So the approval and pleasure of Allah (swt) is in shura so get your fax straight brother.

Once again brother just the truth has sheepishly slipped away and wouldn't or couldn't answer my questions. You said "fee shay inn" means "on anything" basically anything at all what so ever. So one could disagree and differ, with the Ulul Amre on anything and everything. This is exactly what you said in one of your posts but then in another post you said "I mean in religious matters". There has been a change of stance there but this is exactly what I mean, "fee shay inn" meaning "on anything" but on anything in what??? On anything about what??? On anything regarding what???

You claim "fee shay inn" is a general and open statement and then later changed your stance. Where as i believe it is a specific and closed statement or it is in particular. "on anything" regarding what??? About what??? With in what??? Or in what??? You said "on anything" then you said "in religious matters" and this is exactly my point, to which we have finally arrived. "on anything" in something or with in something or about something or regarding something. So one can put up what ever dispute/difference/disagreement with the Ulul Amre, when ever they like.

But later on you changed your stance and said "with in religious matters only" and there you have with in, to which we have finally arrived. So one can dispute/differ/disagree with the Ulul Amre but with in religious matters and in all other matters, one has to obey the Ulul Amre. This is what you mean??? Or would you care to elaborate??? You still haven't answered my question or respond to my points. I would like to get to know about your point of view, on the issues I have mentioned. Don't be afraid to put your point of view forward.

Brother just the truth, you claim Ulul Amre means hakim-e-waqth. Basically anyone in authority. You need to prove this through the Quran. You ask for proof and we deliver but you run away, when asked for proof

AMEEN it is not me who sheepishly runs away but it is indeed you who does the running away.

Now without dodging my question tell me;

Fee shayin: does it mean IN ANYTHING like I have been saying

Or

Fee shayin: does it mean ANYTHING IN THIS like you've been saying.

Also tell me where dies it say "worthy" in surah 4:59

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Just the Truth I see how Ignorant you are. You will keep replying thinking you have Won.

before I reply to this I would like to ask you.

You said  

 

Brother give me one single verse in the quran where Allah ( swt) says he intends to do something but he has already done it!!!

 

Are you saying what Allah Intends to do, does not happen? Please Answer me.

 

Where does action come from? please explain?

Edited by TheIslamHistory

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just the Truth I see how Ignorant you are. You will keep replying thinking you have Won.

before I reply to this I would like to ask you.

You said

Brother give me one single verse in the quran where Allah ( swt) says he intends to do something but he has already done it!!!

Are you saying what Allah Intends to do, does not happen? Please Answer me.

Where does action come from? please explain?

ISLAMIC history there's two things.

Number 1. You are too ignorant

Number 2. You don't understand basic English so Arabic is way out of your league.

il explain to you the best way I possibly can.

When Allah (swt) INTENDS to do something this means he ( swt) has not done it before he made the intention.

Never once have I said when Allah (swt) INTENDS to do something he doesn't do it.

But..

What I am saying is that IF Allah ( swt) INTENDS TO PURIFY AHLE BAYT THEN HOW CAN THEY (imam ali hasan Hussain FATIMA (May Allah be pleased with them all) BE BORN PURIFIED??

Do you understand now.

Edited by Just the truth

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ISLAMIC history there's two things.

Number 1. You are too ignorant

Number 2. You don't understand basic English so Arabic is way out of your league.

il explain to you the best way I possibly can.

When Allah ÓÈÍÇäå æÊÚÇáì INTENDS to do something this means he ( swt) has not done it before he made the intention.

Never once have I said when Allah ÓÈÍÇäå æÊÚÇáì INTENDS to do something he doesn't do it.

But..

What I am saying is that IF Allah ( swt) INTENDS TO PURIFY AHLE BAYT THEN HOW CAN THEY (imam ali hasan Hussain FATIMA (May Allah be pleased with them all) BE BORN PURIFIED??

Do you understand now.

 

 

You are Insulting me by saying I have no Literature value. You have done this many times.

I will ask you again.

So when Allah Intends to do something does that mean he cant do it? has he done it?

please stop with a Insults.

 

if the verses was Raveled to mankind at that moment Under the Prophets (s) Kisa, Then does not that mean it has been done before.

And What will this change? They are still Purified fro mall Rijis am I not correct?

its sad to see your Goal is to Earn the last reply.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are Insulting me by saying I have no Literature value. You have done this many times.

I will ask you again.

So when Allah Intends to do something does that mean he cant do it? has he done it?

please stop with a Insults.

if the verses was Raveled to mankind at that moment Under the Prophets (s) Kisa, Then does not that mean it has been done before.

And What will this change? They are still Purified fro mall Rijis am I not correct?

its sad to see your Goal is to Earn the last reply.

1. You insulted me first by calling me ignorant and narrow minded, so don't throw your dummy out of your pram when I give you insults back.

2. When Allah (swt) intends to do something how on Allah (swt) earth can this mean he has already done it.

3. YOU SAID

if the verses was Raveled to mankind at that moment Under the Prophets (s) Kisa, Then does not that mean it has been done before.

MY ANSWER

how can it have been done before??

4. YOU SAID

And What will this change? They are still Purified fro mall Rijis am I not correct?

MY ANSWER

YOU ARE WRONG... This verse says Allah ( swt) INTENDS TO PURIFY

Also you believe they were born purified when Allah (swt) clearly says he INTENDS TO PURIFY.

If anything it makes more sense to say they were purified AFTER this verse was revealed.

5. YOU SAID

its sad to see your Goal is to Earn the last reply.

MY ANSWER

what are you talking about

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Brother just the truth, I have given you a detailed response on everyting you have put forward but you haven't. "Fee shay inn" means "on anything". Now you tell me "on anything" full stop??? Or "on anything" in something, within something, about something or regarding something???

Brother just the truth you said "in authority". Now tell me which word from "Wa ulul amre minkum" means "in"??? Or "in authority"???

Brother just the truth, i see from your posts and how you are running around in circles, concerning "fee shay inn" and precise verse and how you are hiding behind these two excuses, just to survive in this discussion. Once again no constructive response from you, what so ever, concerning anything from my posts.After running around in circles you have reached a dead end and are cornered by me and brother Islam history.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Brother just the truth, I have given you a detailed response on everyting you have put forward but you haven't. "Fee shay inn" means "on anything". Now you tell me "on anything" full stop??? Or "on anything" in something, within something, about something or regarding something???

Brother just the truth you said "in authority". Now tell me which word from "Wa ulul amre minkum" means "in"??? Or "in authority"???

Brother just the truth, i see from your posts and how you are running around in circles, concerning "fee shay inn" and precise verse and how you are hiding behind these two excuses, just to survive in this discussion. Once again no constructive response from you, what so ever, concerning anything from my posts.After running around in circles you have reached a dead end and are cornered by me and brother Islam history.

Lol... AMEEN you're too funny!!! Lol.

I'M running around in circles?? Get a grip.

You said it said Fee shayin means ANYTHING IN THIS whereas I said it means IN ANYTHING so don't come here telling meim running round in circles.

Now il tell you again what I told you before.

When it says IN ANYTHING then that's what the holy verse means IN ANYTHING.

If you've got an issue with that wait till yawm al qiyamah and take it up with Allah (swt).

Islam is not just a basic religion but it is a WAY OF LIFE.

Islam tells us how to drink eat sleep walk live talk pray how to do politics how to talk to people how to educate how to go toilet how to sit how to do literally every single thing our lives so this is EVERYTHING and if we differ in ANYTHING because islam is EVERYTHING and ANYTHING in our lives.

..and no where in that verse does it say we SHOULD differ but it says IF.

ALSO BEFORE YOU DO ANYTHING ELSE TELL ME WHY YOU HAVE CHANGED YOUR STANCE ON FEE SHAYIN AND...,

....WHERE DOES IT SAY THE WORD "WORTHY" in that verse.

Edited by Just the truth

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

you haven't responded to any single question about your Ulul Amre of Karbalaa and the one who stood against him, about parents being Ulul Amre and disagreement with their children etc etc. I don't think i need to go over and over again. All my posts are there.

So you want me to disappear??? What, like you decided to, just a while back??? And then you came back, probably because you felt ashamed, for letting the Ahle Sunnah down???

I haven't changed my stance or position on anything because you have constantly failed, to put anything constructive forward. Never mind about this, you have been to hesitant, to respond to most of the material in my post. If the children have a disagreement with their parents, over who to marry, their career, which car to buy etc, what would the childrens religious duty be here??? Obey their parents (UlulAmre) or not to obey??? Would such disagreements also be religious, since according to you everything comes under the umbrella of religion???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

you haven't responded to any single question about your Ulul Amre of Karbalaa and the one who stood against him, about parents being Ulul Amre and disagreement with their children etc etc. I don't think i need to go over and over again. All my posts are there.

So you want me to disappear??? What, like you decided to, just a while back??? And then you came back, probably because you felt ashamed, for letting the Ahle Sunnah down???

I haven't changed my stance or position on anything because you have constantly failed, to put anything constructive forward. Never mind about this, you have been to hesitant, to respond to most of the material in my post. If the children have a disagreement with their parents, over who to marry, their career, which car to buy etc, what would the childrens religious duty be here??? Obey their parents (UlulAmre) or not to obey??? Would such disagreements also be religious, since according to you everything comes under the umbrella of religion???

 

 

The reason Why his Posting is because.....:

 

 

Brother ISLAMIC HISTORY if you in some way think that by you going round in circles deliberately, I'm going to get fed up and stop replying THEN YOU CAN DREAM ON.

I will keep replying to you till the end UNTIL YOU START GIVING ME PROPER ANSWERS.

 

 

 

So there is no use talking. However I will reply later on Inshalla. As I am a bit busy these days. 

(wasalam)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

you haven't responded to any single question about your Ulul Amre of Karbalaa and the one who stood against him, about parents being Ulul Amre and disagreement with their children etc etc. I don't think i need to go over and over again. All my posts are there.

So you want me to disappear??? What, like you decided to, just a while back??? And then you came back, probably because you felt ashamed, for letting the Ahle Sunnah down???

I haven't changed my stance or position on anything because you have constantly failed, to put anything constructive forward. Never mind about this, you have been to hesitant, to respond to most of the material in my post. If the children have a disagreement with their parents, over who to marry, their career, which car to buy etc, what would the childrens religious duty be here??? Obey their parents (UlulAmre) or not to obey??? Would such disagreements also be religious, since according to you everything comes under the umbrella of religion???

AMEEN STOP...you making a fool of yourself.

Why you keep talking about Karbala?? I've already told you yazid was the ulil amr whether we like it or not because all ulil amr means is "those in authority". Now whether we like it or not he had authority but everybody differed with him they tried to refer him to Allah (swt) and messenger (pbuh) but he was too lost, imam Hussein a.s was martyred by him and abdullah bin Zubair r.a was martyred fighting his forces.

As for differing with parents in marriage etc then we would naturally refer our parents to Allah (swt) and messenger (pbuh) and we all know that it is haram for parents to force their children to marry. There are hadith to prove this.

The only reason I wanted to " disappear" before was to avoid this situation we are in now. Not because of any other reason and yes you're right I felt ashamed to walk away without exposing you and your tehreef of this verse.

YOU ARE LYING THROUGH YOUR BACK TEETH. You know very well that you've changed your stance regarding FEE SHAYIN.

Now tell me why did you constantly and stubbornly stick to your point that fee shayin means ANYTHING IN THIS??

Oh wait..... Il tell you why it's because you couldn't give a monkeys as to what it says in that verse all you're interested in is winning and nothing else.

The reason Why his Posting is because.....:

So there is no use talking. However I will reply later on Inshalla. As I am a bit busy these days.

(wasalam)

NO the reason I'm posting is because you and AMEEN think you can run around me in circles and you think for some reason that I will get fed up and leave so then once I've gone you two can pat each other on the back to a job well done when really you ain't done anything.

This is why you're disappointed at the fact that I've said I'm not going anywhere because you two thought you could make me leave my getting me fed up, well THIS TACTIC WILL NOT WORK.

You said this is not about "winning" but deep down in your heart you know that all you and AMEEN want is to "win". You really think I'm going to let AHLE sunnah down and let you two raise the flag of victory when you don't deserve it?? NO NEVER!!!

Edited by Just the truth

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will reply with a Detailed Reply Inshalla Soon. When I am free. 

if you can please stop making statements that have no support or Quote. Perhaps Stop insulting Ameen as well.
you misunderstand what I meant by Ignorant and Narrow mindednees. All in well, I Will reply Soon Inshalla.

(wasalam)

Edited by TheIslamHistory

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let me repeat this again, for the sake of the viewers, not that it's going to widen your narrow mind. "fee shay inn" means "in anything with in this". "With in this" is attached to "fee shay inn" just as "those" is attached to " ulul amre". You

translate "ulul amre" as "in authority". Where have you brought "in" from???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just the truth, you're not going to let the Ahle Sunnah down??? Ok! Why don't you start off by answering this, did Yazeed go against the Quran and Sunnah??? You said "one must obey the Ulul Amre unless, they go against the Quran and Sunnah". Now did Hazrath Hussain (as) stand up to Yazeed because he went against the Quran and Sunnah??? Going against the Quran and Sunnah, would this make one a Kafir??? You are letting the Ahle Sunnah down very badly, by not answering. You need to stop the circles and the insults and step up to the mark. There is no place to hide now, so start cracking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just the truth, you're not going to let the Ahle Sunnah down??? Ok! Why don't you start off by answering this, did Yazeed go against the Quran and Sunnah??? You said "one must obey the Ulul Amre unless, they go against the Quran and Sunnah". Now did Hazrath Hussain (as) stand up to Yazeed because he went against the Quran and Sunnah??? Going against the Quran and Sunnah, would this make one a Kafir??? You are letting the Ahle Sunnah down very badly, by not answering. You need to stop the circles and the insults and step up to the mark. There is no place to hide now, so start cracking.

 

I will reply very soon to him as soon As possible Inshalla. Yesterday I was Typing my Reply and Suddenly it Just went, I had Technical issues. But Its okay. I will reply very soon.

(wasalam)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let me repeat this again, for the sake of the viewers, not that it's going to widen your narrow mind. "fee shay inn" means "in anything with in this". "With in this" is attached to "fee shay inn" just as "those" is attached to " ulul amre". You

translate "ulul amre" as "in authority". Where have you brought "in" from???

Subhanallah, AMEEN my dear brother carry on replying.

You're soo stuck regarding FEE SHAYIN that you don't know whether you're coming or you're going.

My dear brother YOU SHOULD KNOW THAT YOU ARE GUILTY OF TEHREEF regarding fee shayin. I am NOT going to even bother telling you to stop with your TEHREEF.

You carry on, I will now repeat what you have written my brother FOR THE SAKE OF THE VIEWERS.

AMEEN SAID:

Let me repeat this again, for the sake of the viewers, not that it's going to widen your narrow mind. "FEE SHAYIN" MEANS "IN ANYTHING WITHIN THIS". "WITHIN THIS" IS ATTACHED TO "fee shay inn" just as "those" is attached to " ulul amre". You

translate "ulul amre" as "in authority". Where have you brought "in" from???

MY ANSWER

Ulil amr means THOSE IN AUTHORITY or THOSE WITH AUTHORITY both these phrases mean the same thing just like you can say fee shayin means IN ANYTHING OR ABOUT ANYTHING.

Tell me one time I have not used the word THOSE?? Not using the word "THOSE" would be stupidity as the blessed verse will not make sense.

Just the truth, you're not going to let the Ahle Sunnah down??? Ok! Why don't you start off by answering this, did Yazeed go against the Quran and Sunnah??? You said "one must obey the Ulul Amre unless, they go against the Quran and Sunnah". Now did Hazrath Hussain (as) stand up to Yazeed because he went against the Quran and Sunnah??? Going against the Quran and Sunnah, would this make one a Kafir??? You are letting the Ahle Sunnah down very badly, by not answering. You need to stop the circles and the insults and step up to the mark. There is no place to hide now, so start cracking.

AMEEN my dear brother it is NOT ME who is running in circles BUT IT IS YOU.

Regarding the full story what went on between imam Hussein a.s and yazid l.a then I'm not fully clued up regarding what exactly went on. As far as I know when yazid l.a came into power a lot of people differed with him. They tried to refer him to quran and sunnah but at no avail.

As for whether he was kafir then honestly I do not know. I've heard he was a fasiq but I havnt really read into the full story.

Due to my Exams I Will take a long to reply. So please be Patient.

(wasalam)

Take your time brother. Concentrate on your exams, there is no time limit to replying remember we agreed.

Good luck with your exams

Assalamu alaykum

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just the truth, you accuse me of being wrong then you accuse me off tehreef. You behave as though you have been given the seal of approval and a certificate to enter heaven. Take a look at yourself, i mean take a good look at your posts. You put forward your thought, opinion and point of view but as soon as we start discussing and challenging it, you're all over the place. You start hopping on to something else, to derail the subject and to divert attention, to save your skin.

"Ulul Amre" means "worthy of authority". "Ulul" means "worthy" and "Amre" means "authority". "fee shay inn" means "on anything within this".

What i say, i definately stand by but i also discuss and debate it, with a positive attitude and in a pleasant manner, based on reality and facts, with sense and logic. YOU DON'T!

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...