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

Verse 4:59 - Ulil Amr.

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

  • Advanced Member

You have the owner and the manager. Now the owner is going on holiday and the manager is taking emergency leave, due to domestic circumstances and both, the owner or manager turn around to the staff and chose one of them to supervise the staff then, both expect the same level of obedience and the same standard of respect, towards the supervisor from the staff, as they would expect towards them. Here on both (owner or manager) say to the staff that, if you quarrel, disagree or differ with yourselves or have any issue concerning the supervisor then, refer the matter to us. Now you have the owner and the manager, who expect the same standard of respect and the same level of obedience, towards the supervisor from the staff as they would for themselves. Now the status of all three concerning each other is different. One is superior than the other but for the staff they are all people of authority and are the same. Also the three would expect the same from the staff. If you find anything difficult, do not hesitate to ask further. If the staff have an issue with themselves or with the supervisor and the top bosses want you to refer back to them and carry on, regardless with your duties and stay obedient to the person put incharge, rather than quarrel and cause mayhem because this is in the best interest of the company and its staff then, what seems to be the problem???

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 903
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Salam alaykum,   Just the truth, A word of advice: if you want to have a 'discussion' about something, maintain at least the basic level of akhlaq. I've been looking through this thread and in near en

رقم الحديث: 18485 (حديث مرفوع) حَدَّثَنَا أَحْمَدُ بْنُ يَحْيَى الصُّوفِيُّ ، قَالَ : ثنا الْحَسَنُ بْنُ الْحُسَيْنِ الأَنْصَارِيُّ ، قَالَ : ثنا مُعَاذُ بْنُ مُسْلِمٍ بَيَّاعُ الْهَرَوِيِّ ، عَنْ عَ

They are all still of the opinion that the Ahlul Bayt [as] are the holders of divine authority. That's what is agreed upon.

Posted Images

  • Advanced Member

You spoke about civil war, correct me if i'm wrong, civil war is where the local authority/government is dismantled or doesn't exist anymore and the civilians part into groups, either on political, religious, sectarian, tribal or on any other

Grounds and start fighting each other to have their way or have their demands met. This is civil war. If someone/group/party etc have an issue with the local authority/government and use violence and threatening behaviour to have their demands met then, misuse their status and influence to rebel and cause rebellion against the local authority/government then, this is not civil war, infact this is terrorism. Jamal and Safeen wasn't civil war it was terrorism and the fourth rightly guided khalif of the Muslims and the Ahle Sunnah Ulul Amre(hakim-e-waqth) of the time, was dealing with terrorism and facing and fighting terrorists.

and

Link to post
Share on other sites

You have the owner and the manager. Now the owner is going on holiday and the manager is taking emergency leave, due to domestic circumstances and both, the owner or manager turn around to the staff and chose one of them to supervise the staff then, both expect the same level of obedience and the same standard of respect, towards the supervisor from the staff, as they would expect towards them. Here on both (owner or manager) say to the staff that, if you quarrel, disagree or differ with yourselves or have any issue concerning the supervisor then, refer the matter to us. Now you have the owner and the manager, who expect the same standard of respect and the same level of obedience, towards the supervisor from the staff as they would for themselves. Now the status of all three concerning each other is different. One is superior than the other but for the staff they are all people of authority and are the same. Also the three would expect the same from the staff. If you find anything difficult, do not hesitate to ask further. If the staff have an issue with themselves or with the supervisor and the top bosses want you to refer back to them and carry on, regardless with your duties and stay obedient to the person put incharge, rather than quarrel and cause mayhem because this is in the best interest of the company and its staff then, what seems to be the problem???

Bro you've totally missed the point. I asked if the ulil amr has the same authority as the prophet ( pbuh) which according to shia he has. Then why shouldn't he be referred to??

What's the point of having an infalliable if we still need to refer to Allah ( swt) and messenger ( pbuh). It beats the whole purpose of having an appointed infalliable.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You spoke about civil war, correct me if i'm wrong, civil war is where the local authority/government is dismantled or doesn't exist anymore and the civilians part into groups, either on political, religious, sectarian, tribal or on any other

Grounds and start fighting each other to have their way or have their demands met. This is civil war. If someone/group/party etc have an issue with the local authority/government and use violence and threatening behaviour to have their demands met then, misuse their status and influence to rebel and cause rebellion against the local authority/government then, this is not civil war, infact this is terrorism. Jamal and Safeen wasn't civil war it was terrorism and the fourth rightly guided khalif of the Muslims and the Ahle Sunnah Ulul Amre(hakim-e-waqth) of the time, was dealing with terrorism and facing and fighting terrorists.

and

Like I promised we will discuss this after we come to a reasonable agreement as to who ulil amr are??

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

Because the Prophet (pbuh) is superior than Ali (as). So if you have a disagreement with or about Ali (as) then, you refer the matter to the next level. What is difficult for you to understand here??? Or are you trying to hold on to the arguement by a thread??? According to the Shia Hazrath Ali (as) is the Ulul Amre, now if you have an issue among yourselves, about each other or about the infallible UlulAmre then, refer the matter to the next level up. Even two Prophets don't have a similar status, so could you provide me with a reference that Ali (as) has a similar status to the

Prophet (pbuh) according to Shia???

Either you haven't understood the matter or you are just holding on to the arguement. According to the Shia the Ulul Amre has the same authority has Allah and his Messenger (pbuh). What this means is, as you obey Allah and his Messenger (pbuh), you also have to obey the Ulul Amre in a similar manner. To be continued.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

Now when this verse was revealed and after the demise of the Prophet (pbuh), all the way uptil now, not everybody is a Shia. Allah knows everything, the past, present and the future. So Allah makes a statement, which is general and covers everybody. As far as Shia are concerned, they are going to stick to "and also obey the Ulul Amre". They are not going to bother with the rest of the verse because it begins with " and if you disagree" etc. The Shia consider the Ulul Amre infallible, so they are not going to differ and obviously there will be no need to refer anything to anyone. Now everybody is not a Shia, so therefore those who do not consider Ulul Amre as infallible, they will probably or most definately at some stage, develope a disagreement about or with the Ulul Amre. The rest of the verse applies to such individuals.

"

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

Like i have said before, what is the purose of Allah starting off the new message from him??? Why mention his Messenger (pbuh) next??? Why not just come straight out with the message??? Allah wouldn't mention anyone, just anyone, along with him and his Messenger (pbuh). Allah wouldn't start off in such a serious manner, if the matter was just simple and ordinary. It seems to me you have totally ignored by turning a blind eye to all that i have said.

This is why the Shia believe that, the Ulul Amre has to be pure, just as the two supreme authorities. Now don't creat confusion by saying that, this means the status of the Ulul Amre is the same as Allah and his Messenger (pbuh). Even the Messengers (pbuh) status is not the same and equal to Allah but the standard and level of obedience towards all three, by the Muslims should be the same and this is what is required by Allah, since he has started off with this new message from himself and his Messenger (pbuh), rather than just coming straight out with the new message itself and on its own. Come on brother, seriously, have i been speaking to and talking to myself or a brick wall, all this time???

"Obey Allah and obey the Messenger and the Ulul Amre among you". Now since there is a sequence here and how the new message has been addressed and all the material that, i have put forward to you, the Shia have a strong case to believe that, the Ulul Amre are infallible, pure etc, how ever you want to put, just as Allah. Now it is clear from the Quran that, there is a group/party, which Allah has kept purified to the state of purification, specifically for this job (Ulul Amre) and this acts has further evidence to back the Shia ideology and theory, regarding the Ulul Amre.

S

Link to post
Share on other sites

Like i have said before, what is the purose of Allah starting off the new message from him??? Why mention his Messenger (pbuh) next??? Why not just come straight out with the message??? Allah wouldn't mention anyone, just anyone, along with him and his Messenger (pbuh). Allah wouldn't start off in such a serious manner, if the matter was just simple and ordinary. It seems to me you have totally ignored by turning a blind eye to all that i have said.

This is why the Shia believe that, the Ulul Amre has to be pure, just as the two supreme authorities. Now don't creat confusion by saying that, this means the status of the Ulul Amre is the same as Allah and his Messenger (pbuh). Even the Messengers (pbuh) status is not the same and equal to Allah but the standard and level of obedience towards all three, by the Muslims should be the same and this is what is required by Allah, since he has started off with this new message from himself and his Messenger (pbuh), rather than just coming straight out with the new message itself and on its own. Come on brother, seriously, have i been speaking to and talking to myself or a brick wall, all this time???

"Obey Allah and obey the Messenger and the Ulul Amre among you". Now since there is a sequence here and how the new message has been addressed and all the material that, i have put forward to you, the Shia have a strong case to believe that, the Ulul Amre are infallible, pure etc, how ever you want to put, just as Allah. Now it is clear from the Quran that, there is a group/party, which Allah has kept purified to the state of purification, specifically for this job (Ulul Amre) and this acts has further evidence to back the Shia ideology and theory, regarding the Ulul Amre.

S

Bro no offence but you're going round in circles. I asked you one simple question and you're going in circles.

The verse is full and complete so you using "the last part doesn't apply to us", then this wrong my dear brother. If we use your theory then anybody can pick and choose a verse half quote it and follow that which suits them. This would DEFINATELY lead people astray.

All I asked was if ali (a.s) was to become this new authority of being the new appointed infallible then shouldn't he also have had this same status of being referred to??

I mean like seriously what's the point of being an appointed if people can skip you and refer to quran and hadith??

Let me make this as simple as I can. The whole point ali a.s became this new appointed infallible ( according to shia) is because people could turn to ali a.s or better still refer to ali a.s in all religious matters. Now if we read this verse Allah (swt) says refer to Allah (swt) and messenger(pbuh).

If the verse finished refer to Allah messenger and ulil amr then you had a leg to stand on but since this verse finishes with only Allah and his messenger it leaves a BIG question mark on ulil amr

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

Brother you have gone absolutey in the wrong direction and let me explain how. The owner and the manager of a company want to make an announcement. They ask all the staff members to suspend/terminate their duty for the time being and to start making their way to the meeting room. The owner starts of with him and the manager about what he expects from the staff and towards him and the manager. Then he comes out with the announcement that, he has deciided to

Select a supervisor among them and he wants the staff to respect and follow him. To be continued.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

Continued. After making the announcement and additional statement is being made, which is connected to the announcement and that is, if you have any issues then please do not hestate to see me or the manager. To be continued.

Continued. Now what does the owner mean by " And if you have any issues, then please do not hesitate to see me or the manager "??? It's obvious that the issues would only be concerning this announcement, this decision of getting the staff to respect and follow the supervisor from among them, any issues concerning and related to the supervisor or the supervisory role. To be continued.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

You've also Accused me, Of Going around In Circulars, but you provided me with no logical Explanation of how Allah can leave the earth without a Divine Authority, /prophet/Imam, In your case you have been Excluding Fundamentals of Religion and Plucking verses out of context and sayings this is the foundation, when I answered you, you simply refused and did not Actually give a proof, to refute my claims, besides your Conclusion on English Translated text, which does not come close to the Original Arabic meaning which expands on a wide Variety on the Spectrum. May I also mentioned when Yusha on the tpic he posted mentioned that  Sayed Al sistani allows marriage with a baby, you with no sense claimed it was madness, later on it was proved from the four schools Ahul-Sunnah, and what he meant was in the meaning of AQ'ED and not NIKAH. You simply did not read the topic it was under, which makes me doubt whether you have read anything at all of my Answers. 

Second Of All Imam Ali (as) is what people have to refer to, there are many Ahadith and Speech's about him, so you have to refer to Ahllbayt (as), can you please tell me why most of your Ahadith are from Abu bakr and umar? and Why we should refer to Them? your Logical is No where near the original Definition. After Imam Ali (as) passed away he then Declared that Imam hassan (s) is the Khalifa after him. Can you please explain to me, Why Imam Ali (s), did not give Bai'ya to Abu bakr? only after he Burnt his house and Killed his wife the Daughter of the prophet (p.b.u.h), and please don't tell me it did not happen I gave you Authentic hadiths from the history of Tabari your own History books and much more. but did you have the Bravery to go check them? I don't think so, you only complained. And tell me why Imam Hassan (as) did not do Ba'yah to Muawaiahy? Why was he not buried next to the prophet (pbuh)? when it was his own will? Why did Imam Hussain Not give B'ayah to Yaid (LA)? Why Did the Rest of the Imams get Poisoned and oppressed after the Khailfat of yazed (LA) and so on? Do you know what Ahlulbayt (s)? even is? I gave you so much proof, any Person Will come to the conclusion of Understanding the truth. And Now tell me, if the wives are of Ahlulbayt (s), Why did Um Salama When she was present in the house, why did she not go under the Kisa? can you pelase explain. Also If the wives are of Ahulbayt (as), On the War of Jamal, Who will we be with? Imam Ali (as) or Aysha? can we love them both and say "yeah its okay let them have war, we love them both"? Brother where is your common sense? How can we Hold on to Ahlulbayt (s), When your saying the wives are a part of them? which then Contradicts the Whole Hadith of Al Thaqlain. because if Ahlulbayt (s) are fighting Each other on the War of jamal Who will we hold on to? Which one is Which?

My dear brother I'm not being Offensive, but I assure you, you have made no sense whats so ever.

 

(salam)

 

 

 

 

 

The problem, is the Concept of Imamah he already Rejects, so there is no use in that even if many proofs where provided, because you cannot Believe In Someones position, while you ignore the reason of why such a position Exists in the first place, and that the problem our Dear friend here is facing, while Imamah has been mentioned many times in the Quran, even like we mentioned earlier, prophet Abaraham (as), was made an Imam for his people, and lets not forget the position of prophet Yusuf over his father yaqoob (as), As he was given the position of Wilya, these are all fundamentals, so if he rejects those, then no use in a Dialogue or so to speak an Argument.

(salam)  

Edited by TheIslamHistory
Link to post
Share on other sites

You've also Accused me, Of Going around In Circulars, but you provided me with no logical Explanation of how Allah can leave the earth without a Divine Authority, /prophet/Imam, In your case you have been Excluding Fundamentals of Religion and Plucking verses out of context and sayings this is the foundation, when I answered you, you simply refused and did not Actually give a proof, to refute my claims, besides your Conclusion on English Translated text, which does not come close to the Original Arabic meaning which expands on a wide Variety on the Spectrum. May I also mentioned when Yusha on the tpic he posted mentioned that Sayed Al sistani allows marriage with a baby, you with no sense claimed it was madness, later on it was proved from the four schools Ahul-Sunnah, and what he meant was in the meaning of AQ'ED and not NIKAH. You simply did not read the topic it was under, which makes me doubt whether you have read anything at all of my Answers.

Second Of All Imam Ali (as) is what people have to refer to, there are many Ahadith and Speech's about him, so you have to refer to Ahllbayt (as), can you please tell me why most of your Ahadith are from Abu bakr and umar? and Why we should refer to Them? your Logical is No where near the original Definition. After Imam Ali (as) passed away he then Declared that Imam hassan (s) is the Khalifa after him. Can you please explain to me, Why Imam Ali (s), did not give Bai'ya to Abu bakr? only after he Burnt his house and Killed his wife the Daughter of the prophet (p.b.u.h), and please don't tell me it did not happen I gave you Authentic hadiths from the history of Tabari your own History books and much more. but did you have the Bravery to go check them? I don't think so, you only complained. And tell me why Imam Hassan (as) did not do Ba'yah to Muawaiahy? Why was he not buried next to the prophet (pbuh)? when it was his own will? Why did Imam Hussain Not give B'ayah to Yaid (LA)? Why Did the Rest of the Imams get Poisoned and oppressed after the Khailfat of yazed (LA) and so on? Do you know what Ahlulbayt (s)? even is? I gave you so much proof, any Person Will come to the conclusion of Understanding the truth. And Now tell me, if the wives are of Ahlulbayt (s), Why did Um Salama When she was present in the house, why did she not go under the Kisa? can you pelase explain. Also If the wives are of Ahulbayt (as), On the War of Jamal, Who will we be with? Imam Ali (as) or Aysha? can we love them both and say "yeah its okay let them have war, we love them both"? Brother where is your common sense? How can we Hold on to Ahlulbayt (s), When your saying the wives are a part of them? which then Contradicts the Whole Hadith of Al Thaqlain. because if Ahlulbayt (s) are fighting Each other on the War of jamal Who will we hold on to? Which one is Which?

My dear brother I'm not being Offensive, but I assure you, you have made no sense whats so ever.

(salam)

The problem, is the Concept of Imamah he already Rejects, so there is no use in that even if many proofs where provided, because you cannot Believe In Someones position, while you ignore the reason of why such a position Exists in the first place, and that the problem our Dear friend here is facing, while Imamah has been mentioned many times in the Quran, even like we mentioned earlier, prophet Abaraham (as), was made an Imam for his people, and lets not forget the position of prophet Yusuf over his father yaqoob (as), As he was given the position of Wilya, these are all fundamentals, so if he rejects those, then no use in a Dialogue or so to speak an Argument.

(salam)

I will get back to you tonight on all the threads inshallah

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

Salaam to brothers Just the truth, The Islam history and also to all the other brothers and sisters.

 

The verse 4:59, " Ya-Eyo-Hallazeena-Amanoo, Atee-Ullaha, Wa-Ateeur-Rasool,Wa-Ulul-Amre-Minkum ", meaning in English, " O you who believe, Obey Allah and obey the Messenger and those in authority among you ", meaning in Urdu, " Eh emaan walo, Allah ki ita'ath karo, aur Rasool ki ita'ath karo, aur un logo ki ita'ath karo jo tum meh seh sahib e amar hai ".

 

Now the second bit of the same verse, " Fa-in-Tana-Zathum-Fee-Shay'in ", meaning in English, " And if you disagree about this thing ", meaning in Urdu, " pas aghar tum ikhtelaaf karo iss shay meh ".

 

The next bit is, " Fa-Rud-Doo-Ho-illallah-Heh-Wa-Rasoo-Leh ", meaning in English, " Just turn it towards Allah and his Messenger ", meaning in Urdu, " pas useh lota doh Allah aur uske Rasool ki taraf ".

 

Here is the next bit, " in-Kuntum-Tu'me-Noona-Billaha-Hai-Wal-Yaumil-Akhe-Reh ", meaning in English, " If you believe in Allah and the last day ", meaning in Urdu, " Agar tum Allah aur akharat keh din par eemaan rakte ho ".

 

And the last bit, " Zalika-Kheyrun-Wa-Ahsano-Taweela ", meaning in English, " This is better and very good in the end ", meaning in Urdu, " Yeh tumare liyeh behtar hai aur akhar meh acha hoga ".

 

Now there seem to be a couple of issues here that, we are going to look into. 1, Ulul Amre, what does these two words mean??? 2, Who are the Ulul Amre??? 3, What is their status??? 4, To what degree should we obey them??? 5, Disagreement about what and with whom??? 6, What should be done if disagreement takes place??? 7, why should this be done??? 8, What will the result be at the end??? To be continued!

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

Continued.

The announcement that needs to be made here and the message that needs to be delivered is, for the believers to obey the Ulul Amre. Now like i said before, Allah could have just come straight out with it and simply just could have said " Obey the Ulul Amre " but he didn't do that. He started off with himself and then the Messenger (pbuh) by saying " Obey Allah and Obey the Messenger ". This was a well known fact and this was also something that, the Muslims were already doing. So why did Allah start off as such???

Like i said to give the matter seriousness and to set down the standard of respect and the level of obedience Allah required, from the Muslims towards the Ulul Amre. Now if you look at the sequence, Allah is infallible, the Messenger (pbuh) is infallible, therefore the Ulul Amre should also be infallible. Otherwise why would Allah go to such effort and give this matter seriousness, by starting off with himself and his Messenger(pbuh) and put the command of obedience towards the Ulul Amre, right at the very top alongside himself and his Messenger (pbuh)???

Ok, one could question that is there a group of people that are infallible??? Do such people exist??? Has Allah created or taken anyone to such a level, for whom this command was announced??? Yes. Who??? The Ahlul Baith. Well it's very easy to say yes but where is the proof??? Where is the evidence??? Oh and it must be from the Quran, since the matter is so serious, we will not accept anything else but the Quran.

Take a look at Ayath-e-Tatheer and the incident of the blanket as back up. " absolutely and there is no doubt about this that, Allah has decided to keep rijs away from you, oh Ahlul Baith and he is going to keep you purified, to the state of purification ". What does purified mean??? Why not take a look at the dictionary. There is much more evidence, straight from the holy book but they say for an intelligent and wise person, even a sign is just enough.

To be continued.





























 

Edited by Ameen
Link to post
Share on other sites

Continued.

The announcement that needs to be made here and the message that needs to be delivered is, for the believers to obey the Ulul Amre. Now like i said before, Allah could have just come straight out with it and simply just could have said " Obey the Ulul Amre " but he didn't do that. He started off with himself and then the Messenger (pbuh) by saying " Obey Allah and Obey the Messenger ". This was a well known fact and this was also something that, the Muslims were already doing. So why did Allah start off as such???

Like i said to give the matter seriousness and to set down the standard of respect and the level of obedience Allah required, from the Muslims towards the Ulul Amre. Now if you look at the sequence, Allah is infallible, the Messenger (pbuh) is infallible, therefore the Ulul Amre should also be infallible. Otherwise why would Allah go to such effort and give this matter seriousness, by starting off with himself and his Messenger(pbuh) and put the command of obedience towards the Ulul Amre, right at the very top alongside himself and his Messenger (pbuh)???

Ok, one could question that is there a group of people that are infallible??? Do such people exist??? Has Allah created or taken anyone to such a level, for whom this command was announced??? Yes. Who??? The Ahlul Baith. Well it's very easy to say yes but where is the proof??? Where is the evidence??? Oh and it must be from the Quran, since the matter is so serious, we will not accept anything else but the Quran.

Take a look at Ayath-e-Tatheer and the incident of the blanket as back up. " absolutely and there is no doubt about this that, Allah has decided to keep rijs away from you, oh Ahlul Baith and he is going to keep you purified, to the state of purification ". What does purified mean??? Why not take a look at the dictionary. There is much more evidence, straight from the holy book but they say for an intelligent and wise person, even a sign is just enough.

To be continued.

Brother you asked why Allah ( swt) says obey Allah ( swt) and messenger (pbuh) if people were already doing it??

The answer is simple.. How many times has Allah (swt) started his verses of with obey Allah (swt) and messenger (pbuh) when they were already doing so and this was common knowledge that they had to. Would you like me to point them out??

You want the reason well that's even more simple..

Islam came down for all generations of Muslims that were to come and not just for the ones that were present. So since the prophet (pbuh) was there at the time to tell the Muslims that they must obey Allah (swt) and himself (pbuh) then why all these verses??

Simple... Because they're for US me and you and the billion Muslims around the world!! We don't have the pleasure of having the holy prophet (pbuh) in our company so he (pbuh) can't tell us to obey Allah (swt) and messenger (pbuh) directly so instead we have these verses from the holy quran telling us to obey.

How do we obey Allah (swt) and his messenger (pbuh)??

Simple quran hadith sunnah, but quran is the most important.

Bro we're not talking about the verse of purification here. We are talking about why;

The ulil amr is not mentioned at the end of the verse regarding refer to??

If the ulil amr (according to shia is ali a.s) and he has the same authority as the prophet (pbuh) then why can't we refer to him.

What is the point of having an "appointed" if we still have to refer to Allah (swt)and messenger (pbuh)??

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

Continued!

 

Lets take a look at the next bit of the verse, " Fa-in-tana-zathum-fee-shay-inn ", meaning " And if you disagree about this thing ". First of all take a look at the begining of this part of the verse, (Fa) means (and), (inn) means (if). And if. Excuse me, what have we here??? There is clearly a situation followed by solution and (if) tells you about this condition. " And if you disagree ". This means in the situation of disagreement, what is the solution??? What needs to be done??? That comes later but if there is no disagreement then, the solution doesn't apply. If you disagree then this is what you have to do and if you don't disagree then, it is obvious that nothing needs to be done or what follows doesn't apply. It only applies in the situation of disagreement.

 

 

Now disagreement in what or about what??? The words " Fee-Shay-in " have been used, meaning, this thing. Fee means this and Shay means thing. So basically the meaning in depth would be, " if you disagree or differ, quarrel or argue ", which ever way you want it, about what??? " About this thing/matter or about anything concerning/regarding this thing/ matter. What do we do??? What is the solution??? What needs to be done, in the event of disagreement??? The next bit of the verse, " Fa-rud-doo-ho-illallah-wa-rasooleh ", meaning, " Just turn it towards Allah and his Messenger ".

 

We obviously need to get sense and logic involved in this. This thing or matter is obviously the announcement that has been made and the message that has been delivered. If you disagree in the recognition or position of the Ulul Amre or anything or matter concerning and regarding or about the Ulul Amre or if you have any confusion or doubt or disagreement about the Ulul Amre then, refer the matter back towards Allah and his Messenger {pbuh}, in this situation.

 

Now if we go by brother just the truth and his confusion that, if you disagree in anything, basically everything then turn for a solution towards Allah and his Messenger (pbuh). In other words if you disagree in absolutely anything then, turn the matter towards Allah and his Messenger (pbuh) for help, solution and guidance. Now doesn't common basic sense tell you that, what is the point of the Ulul Amre and his authority, if you are not going to turn to him about your issues, problems, matters etc, in what ever form be it disagreement or difference???

 

If the words " Kulle-Shay " was used than this means everything/matter or anything/matter. Kulle means every/any and shay means thing/matter. The words " Fee-Shay"  have been used, meaning, this thing or matter. Like I said what is the point of the supervisor, if you are going to turn to the manager regarding and concerning every issue, problem, matter, quarrel, argument, disagreement, difference etc, with yourselves and about yourselves only on your daily shift or routine??? In such a situation the manager will have a go at you that, why are you approaching me, when you supervisor is there and has especially been put in place to deal with these matters.

 

But if you have an issue, matter or problem with the supervisor or the supervisory role or about how the decision concerning the supervisory position was made then you would obviously turn to the more higher and greater authority.


Brother you asked why Allah ( swt) says obey Allah ( swt) and messenger (pbuh) if people were already doing it??

The answer is simple.. How many times has Allah ÓÈÍÇäå æÊÚÇáì started his verses of with obey Allah ÓÈÍÇäå æÊÚÇáì and messenger (pbuh) when they were already doing so and this was common knowledge that they had to. Would you like me to point them out??

You want the reason well that's even more simple..

Islam came down for all generations of Muslims that were to come and not just for the ones that were present. So since the prophet (pbuh) was there at the time to tell the Muslims that they must obey Allah ÓÈÍÇäå æÊÚÇáì and himself (pbuh) then why all these verses??

Simple... Because they're for US me and you and the billion Muslims around the world!! We don't have the pleasure of having the holy prophet (pbuh) in our company so he (pbuh) can't tell us to obey Allah ÓÈÍÇäå æÊÚÇáì and messenger (pbuh) directly so instead we have these verses from the holy quran telling us to obey.

How do we obey Allah ÓÈÍÇäå æÊÚÇáì and his messenger (pbuh)??

Simple quran hadith sunnah, but quran is the most important.

Bro we're not talking about the verse of purification here. We are talking about why;

The ulil amr is not mentioned at the end of the verse regarding refer to??

If the ulil amr (according to shia is ali a.s) and he has the same authority as the prophet (pbuh) then why can't we refer to him.

What is the point of having an "appointed" if we still have to refer to Allah (swt)and messenger (pbuh)??

It's simple bro, " And if you have a disagreement " and that is about the following decision that has been made or a disagreement regarding and concerning or with and about the Ulul Amre then, in this case my friend you are not going to refer to the Ulul Amre are you??? Because it is him or regarding him that the disagreement is about and here is where basic common sense comes in that, you refer the matter back towards Allah and his Messenger (pbuh), who are the top bosses who are next up in line. If you have an issue/matter/problem with your supervisor then, who are you going to refer the issue/matter/problem to???? The manager or to the supervisor concerned???

Link to post
Share on other sites

Continued!

Lets take a look at the next bit of the verse, " Fa-in-tana-zathum-fee-shay-inn ", meaning " And if you disagree about this thing ". First of all take a look at the begining of this part of the verse, (Fa) means (and), (inn) means (if). And if. Excuse me, what have we here??? There is clearly a situation followed by solution and (if) tells you about this condition. " And if you disagree ". This means in the situation of disagreement, what is the solution??? What needs to be done??? That comes later but if there is no disagreement then, the solution doesn't apply. If you disagree then this is what you have to do and if you don't disagree then, it is obvious that nothing needs to be done or what follows doesn't apply. It only applies in the situation of disagreement.

Now disagreement in what or about what??? The words " Fee-Shay-in " have been used, meaning, this thing. Fee means this and Shay means thing. So basically the meaning in depth would be, " if you disagree or differ, quarrel or argue ", which ever way you want it, about what??? " About this thing/matter or about anything concerning/regarding this thing/ matter. What do we do??? What is the solution??? What needs to be done, in the event of disagreement??? The next bit of the verse, " Fa-rud-doo-ho-illallah-wa-rasooleh ", meaning, " Just turn it towards Allah and his Messenger ".

We obviously need to get sense and logic involved in this. This thing or matter is obviously the announcement that has been made and the message that has been delivered. If you disagree in the recognition or position of the Ulul Amre or anything or matter concerning and regarding or about the Ulul Amre or if you have any confusion or doubt or disagreement about the Ulul Amre then, refer the matter back towards Allah and his Messenger {pbuh}, in this situation.

Now if we go by brother just the truth and his confusion that, if you disagree in anything, basically everything then turn for a solution towards Allah and his Messenger (pbuh). In other words if you disagree in absolutely anything then, turn the matter towards Allah and his Messenger (pbuh) for help, solution and guidance. Now doesn't common basic sense tell you that, what is the point of the Ulul Amre and his authority, if you are not going to turn to him about your issues, problems, matters etc, in what ever form be it disagreement or difference???

If the words " Kulle-Shay " was used than this means everything/matter or anything/matter. Kulle means every/any and shay means thing/matter. The words " Fee-Shay" have been used, meaning, this thing or matter. Like I said what is the point of the supervisor, if you are going to turn to the manager regarding and concerning every issue, problem, matter, quarrel, argument, disagreement, difference etc, with yourselves and about yourselves only on your daily shift or routine??? In such a situation the manager will have a go at you that, why are you approaching me, when you supervisor is there and has especially been put in place to deal with these matters.

But if you have an issue, matter or problem with the supervisor or the supervisory role or about how the decision concerning the supervisory position was made then you would obviously turn to the more higher and greater authority.

It's simple bro, " And if you have a disagreement " and that is about the following decision that has been made or a disagreement regarding and concerning or with and about the Ulul Amre then, in this case my friend you are not going to refer to the Ulul Amre are you??? Because it is him or regarding him that the disagreement is about and here is where basic common sense comes in that, you refer the matter back towards Allah and his Messenger (pbuh), who are the top bosses who are next up in line. If you have an issue/matter/problem with your supervisor then, who are you going to refer the issue/matter/problem to???? The manager or to the supervisor concerned???

Bro you've misunderstood the verse. It says:

O you who have believed, obey Allah and obey the Messenger and those in authority among you. And if you disagree over ANYTHING, refer it to Allah and the Messenger, if you should believe in Allah and the Last Day. That is the best [way] and best in result.

So now this anything could be literally anything like the verse says.

So now What I've been asking since the start is if imams are the divine authority and deen has been inherited to them like shia believe. Then why would Allah say refer to Allah (swt) and messenger (pbuh) if the imams were to be this new authority of religion?? Don't forget shia believe obedience to ulil amr is unconditional.

It's like shia chat saying to you that AMEEN you're the new authority now and obedience to you is unconditional as you are our representative here and then you in turn say to me just the truth you're the new authority over the people and obedience to you is unconditional like it is to me but if they differ with you refer them back to shia chat and me (AMEEN).

Now don't forget brother shia say obedience to ulil amr is unconditional like it his to prophet (pbuh) but why then do we not have to refer the messenger but need to refer ali(a.s)??

Don't forget brother it says ANYTHING so if we differ with ali regarding ANYTHING we have to refer it back to Allah (swt) and messenger (pbuh)?? What kind of authority does that leave ali ( a.s)?? If ANYTHING and everything has to be referred back to Allah (swt) and messenger (pbuh)??

...because realistically bro imagine I'm the appointed one here and everybody disagrees with me regarding anything and all I say is go back to Allah (swt) and messenger(pbuh) then anybody with half a brain cells going to turn around and say hold up, if all you're doing is referring us to Allah (swt) and messenger (pbuh) then why can't we do that??? What's so special about you all you're doing is referring us. I can refer people to Allah (swt) and his messenger (pbuh ) aswell.

Edited by Just the truth
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

It's like shia chat saying to you that AMEEN you're the new authority now and obedience to you is unconditional as you are our representative here and then you in turn say to me just the truth you're the new authority over the people and obedience to you is unconditional like it is to me but if they differ with you refer them back to shia chat and me (AMEEN).

Now don't forget brother shia say obedience to ulil amr is unconditional like it his to prophet (pbuh) but why then do we not have to refer the messenger but need to refer ali(a.s)??

Don't forget brother it says ANYTHING so if we differ with ali regarding ANYTHING we have to refer it back to Allah ÓÈÍÇäå æÊÚÇáì and messenger (pbuh)?? What kind of authority does that leave ali ( a.s)?? If ANYTHING and everything has to be referred back to Allah ÓÈÍÇäå æÊÚÇáì and messenger (pbuh)??

...because realistically bro imagine I'm the appointed one here and everybody disagrees with me regarding anything and all I say is go back to Allah ÓÈÍÇäå æÊÚÇáì and messenger(pbuh) then anybody with half a brain cells going to turn around and say hold up, if all you're doing is referring us to Allah ÓÈÍÇäå æÊÚÇáì and messenger (pbuh) then why can't we do that??? What's so special about you all you're doing is referring us. I can refer people to Allah ÓÈÍÇäå æÊÚÇáì and his messenger (pbuh ) aswell.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

It's like shia chat saying to you that AMEEN you're the new authority now and obedience to you is unconditional as you are our representative here and then you in turn say to me just the truth you're the new authority over the people and obedience to you is unconditional like it is to me but if they differ with you refer them back to shia chat and me (AMEEN).

 

expanding on ur analogy....it will be more complete if we add to the end of the sentence like so...

"if you believe in shiachat and her terms n conditions" ie the third IF.

 

now, it's common sense that if i disagree with bro justthetruth, i will refer to bro ammen n shiachat.

what if i disagree but i don't refer to bro ameen and shiachat? obviiously this means i don't believe in shiachat n her terms and conditions.

 

 

Don't forget brother it says ANYTHING so if we differ with ali regarding ANYTHING we have to refer it back to Allah ÓÈÍÇäå æÊÚÇáì and messenger (pbuh)?? What kind of authority does that leave ali ( a.s)?? If ANYTHING and everything has to be referred back to Allah ÓÈÍÇäå æÊÚÇáì and messenger (pbuh)??

 

 

now i can ask the same question:

what kind of belief do we have in the messenger saww?? If ANYTHING and everything, Allah has to question our belief in Allah and the last day??

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

Brother just the truth, you claim that i have got it wrong and i claim that you have got it wrong. So where do we go from here??? You are a Muslim and so am i. We both are in disagreement about, lets say, almost everything concerning and regarding the UlulAmre. Now in such a case, we are told to refer the matter back towards Allah and his Messenger (pbuh). Now what does this mean and how is Allah and his Messenger (pbuh) going to resolve the issue???? You said " everything needs to be refered back to Allah and his Messenger (pbuh), in the situation of disagreement ", now would you mind explaining to me how is Allah and his Messenger (pbuh) going to resolve this, especially in todays time???

How on earth is my argument "my own assumption" it's what our ulema say.

Now stop dodging my questions in my previous post and answer if you can

Brother do you know exactly what your Ulema say???

Salams

Link to post
Share on other sites

Brother just the truth, you claim that i have got it wrong and i claim that you have got it wrong. So where do we go from here??? You are a Muslim and so am i. We both are in disagreement about, lets say, almost everything concerning and regarding the UlulAmre. Now in such a case, we are told to refer the matter back towards Allah and his Messenger (pbuh). Now what does this mean and how is Allah and his Messenger (pbuh) going to resolve the issue???? You said " everything needs to be refered back to Allah and his Messenger (pbuh), in the situation of disagreement ", now would you mind explaining to me how is Allah and his Messenger (pbuh) going to resolve this, especially in todays time???

You tell me and in your answer you will find my answer

Link to post
Share on other sites

Bro if I was alive 1400 years ago I could have easily started a new sect abd said caliphate is usul ad din and proved it from quran by using unspecific verses like shia have but astagfirullah why would I when Allah swt himself has said that the foundations are in precise verss. You want to know how??

Well here we go..

Adam a.s and dawud a.s are both called caliphs so believing in the "concept" of caliphate is usul ad din

...and abu bakr is the "second of the two" the first bring the prophet (pbuh) and the second being abu bakr r.a

But this wouldn't make sense because Allah (swt) says clearly that the foundations are in precise verses and there is not one single verse which precisely says ali a.s is the leader after the prophet (pbuh).

I could then turn around and say that abu bakr r.a is the ulil amr.

This is exactly what the shia have done!!

You see my brother how much of a problem it is when we don't follow the guidelines of surah 3:7 that the foundations are in precise verses.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

You tell me and in your answer you will find my answer

"Just the truth", why don't you just answer his question. How do you know what he is going to say anyway? 

 

You provide no evidence for any of your claims and you continuously avoid questions and provide non-answers and you own opinions to most things. Your posts are really not worth reading! I tend to skip over them now as the provide nothing in terms of intellectual debate.

Link to post
Share on other sites

"Just the truth", why don't you just answer his question. How do you know what he is going to say anyway?

You provide no evidence for any of your claims and you continuously avoid questions and provide non-answers and you own opinions to most things. Your posts are really not worth reading! I tend to skip over them now as the provide nothing in terms of intellectual debate.

Lol ok..

If my posts are not worth reading then why you telling me to answer the questions....??? Ehhh gajarkahalva lol

Also "gajarkahalva" don't come here telling me my posts are "not worth reading" when you haven't contributed anything.

Edited by Just the truth
Link to post
Share on other sites

How on earth is my argument "my own assumption" it's what our ulema say.

Now stop dodging my questions in my previous post and answer if you can

Salams

What on earth are you talking about, Me? dodging your Questions?

 

I am talking about the Answer I gave on this Thread.

brother Answer post 118# on the Thread. For the last time, Stop Ignoring me.

(salam)

(sa 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

Bro if I was alive 1400 years ago I could have easily started a new sect abd said caliphate is usul ad din and proved it from quran by using unspecific verses like shia have but astagfirullah why would I when Allah swt himself has said that the foundations are in precise verss. You want to know how??

Well here we go..

Adam a.s and dawud a.s are both called caliphs so believing in the "concept" of caliphate is usul ad din

...and abu bakr is the "second of the two" the first bring the prophet (pbuh) and the second being abu bakr r.a

But this wouldn't make sense because Allah ÓÈÍÇäå æÊÚÇáì says clearly that the foundations are in precise verses and there is not one single verse which precisely says ali a.s is the leader after the prophet (pbuh).

I could then turn around and say that abu bakr r.a is the ulil amr.

This is exactly what the shia have done!!

You see my brother how much of a problem it is when we don't follow the guidelines of surah 3:7 that the foundations are in precise verses.

You said " there is not a single verse that says, Ali ( as) is Khalifaa after the Prophet (pbuh) ", Ok! After the Prophet's (pbuh) demise, what is next??? Can you justify Sakeefa, through Quran and Sunnah for me??? Or is there no need to justify Sakeefa???? Is Sakeefa automatically endorsed???

You tell me and in your answer you will find my answer

Are you serious??? You're having a laugh! This is no sign of a healthy discussion. You said " I got it wrong ", so I just want you to explain to me, what is right.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You said " there is not a single verse that says, Ali ( as) is Khalifaa after the Prophet (pbuh) ", Ok! After the Prophet's (pbuh) demise, what is next??? Can you justify Sakeefa, through Quran and Sunnah for me??? Or is there no need to justify Sakeefa???? Is Sakeefa automatically endorsed???

Are you serious??? You're having a laugh! This is no sign of a healthy discussion. You said " I got it wrong ", so I just want you to explain to me, what is right.

brother / Sister like I said, If he Ignores the Foundation of Imamat, there is no Use. its like saying " believe in the Starts, But Don't Believe in the Sun."  

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

brother / Sister like I said, If he Ignores the Foundation of Imamat, there is no Use. its like saying " believe in the Starts, But Don't Believe in the Sun."

Salaam brother and I'm also your brother. It's obvious that he's going to ignore it because if he doesn't and he acknowledges it then, Sakeefa and everything else along with it, goes straight out of the window. By the way I couldn't read all of your posts and have read just few of them, due to shortage of time. You have put forward excellent references, as evidence and proof. Remarkable work. Keep it up. Just a bit of friendly and brotherly advice, keep the discussion going. Why??? It's not about trying to convince your rival, it's actually winning those, who are just viewing the conversation and you can only do this by putting up a healthy discussion and a good debate and this requires a lot of patience and tolerance. Edited by Ameen
Link to post
Share on other sites

Salaam brother and I'm also your brother. It's obvious that he's going to ignore it because if he doesn't and he acknowledges it then, Sakeefa and everything else along with it, goes straight out of the window. By the way I couldn't read all of your posts and have read just few of them, due to shortage of time. You have put forward excellent references forward, as evidence and proof. Remarkable work. Keep it up. Just a bit of friendly and brotherly advice, keep the discussion going. Why??? It's not about trying to convince your rival, it's actually winning those, who are just viewing the conversation and you can only do this by putting up a healthy discussion and a good debate and this requires a lot of patience and tolerance.

 

Yeah I agree, I started Continuing it again on "Appointing An Imam" Post. 

The reason Why I stopped for a While is because he Ignored Some of the Stances I gave him, and claimed it was no true, 

yet I even gave Scanned paper proof. Well at the end of the day, the one who looses is the one who didn't Want to learn anything.

 

Btw, I'm Continuing on with the thread "Appointing an Imam" Again =)

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...