Revisitingthesalaf Refuted!

[Abu'l Khattab]

(salam) (bismillah)

One of our brothers from the HCY forum ([url Edited]) has complied a number of refutations of the RevisitingTheSalaf group (99% refuted apparently) and  has asked for the link to this website to be distributed to Shi'a websites and circles for reading.


www.twelvershia.net

Enjoy.

(salam)

[Grief]

Edited November 4, 2013 by BuggyLemon

[Al-Hussayni]

(wasalam)

 

Anyone can make a refutation of anything. If our faith was solely based on refutation then our deen would not exist! Allah guide whom he wills and misguides whom he wills!

 

Lets take an example in the following article:

 

http://twelvershia.net/2013/06/12/475/

 

Regarding 4:59

 

The first issue with the narration is that the verse says: “Believers, obey Allah, His Messenger, and your leaders”. RTS saw it fit to add in “who possess divine authority” even though nothing in the verse implies it.

 

- Clearly this doofus didn't read the verse properly. The verse clearly states that obedience is Mandatory to Allah, the messenger and those in authority from amongst you! 

 

- If this guy thinks it means the world leaders, then I pray for the recovery of his IQ

 

The verse, when quoted in full though, seems to go against the concept of Imamate. The continuation says, “If ye differ in anything among yourselves, refer it to Allah and His Messenger, if ye do believe in Allah and the Last Day: That is best, and most suitable for final determination.”

 

- Clearly he just brushed aside the first part of the verse where the obedience is made clear and mandatory to all 3 categories! 

 

- Yes the verse does go onto say "If you differ in anything among yourselves, refer it to Allah and his messenger.." which is saying because Allah & his messenger are the point of revelation, so if they deny the Ulil 'Amr then go back to Allah & his messenger! The Ulil 'Amr are only the protectors of revelation.

 

This implies that the Muslims are to only refer to Allah and His Messenger, and not to anyone else. If the Imamate was a matter of divine authority, then surely Allah would have told us to refer it to Allah, His Messenger, and our leaders (the Imams).

 

- Again, making his own opinion of the verse, he has clearly ignored the first part!  Trying to imply and make excuses!

[Abu'l Khattab]

Only academic and serious responses, please. 

[Grief]

Only academic and serious responses, please. 

My apologies. Was hard to resist :P.

[Rasul]

Wondering, why did Sunnis then revolted against Gaddafi [Not to mention Assad] or why Sunnis revolted against Ottoman Empire [Ottoman Caliphate] :D
 

[TheIslamHistory]

On 11/4/2013 at 12:41 PM, Al-Afasy said:

(salam) (bismillah)

One of our brothers from the HCY forum () has complied a number of refutations of the RevisitingTheSalaf group (99% refuted apparently) and  has asked for the link to this website to be distributed to Shi'a websites and circles for reading.

www.*************

Enjoy.

(salam)

Taking Opinions of Different Ulama is not a Refutation and taking Narration without knowing whether its correct or not, and not checking upon it, is baseless.

(wasalam)  

I invite the Author To a Debate Anytime.

______________________

(wasalam)

[Rasul]

Quote

''The verse, when quoted in full though, seems to go against the concept of Imamate. The continuation says, “If ye differ in anything among yourselves, refer it to Allah and His Messenger, if ye do believe in Allah and the Last Day: That is best, and most suitable for final determination.''

I don't see how this verse goes against concept of Imamah, after all Imams (عليه السلام) are successors of Prophet (saww) - of course, while Prophet (saww) was alive one would refer to him (saww) after him (saww) one must refer to his (saww) successor - which is Ulul Amr.

Interestingly, we find:

The Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) said to Alee ((عليه السلام)): "You explain to my Ummah after me what they differ about."

Footnote: Narration is Saheeh (Authentic) according to the rules of the Sheikhayn (Bukhari and Muslim) but they didn't record it.

Source: Al-Mustadrak ala As-Sahihain. Vol. 3, Pg. # 132, H. # 218 / 4621.

[TheIslamHistory]

On 11/4/2013 at 2:06 PM, Rasul said:

I don't see how this verse goes against concept of Imamah, after all Imams (عليه السلام) are successors of Prophet (saww) - of course, while Prophet (saww) was alive one would refer to him (saww) after him (saww) one must refer to his (saww) successor - which is Ulul Amr.

Interestingly, we find:

The Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) said to Alee ((عليه السلام)): "You explain to my Ummah after me what they differ about."

Footnote: Narration is Saheeh (Authentic) according to the rules of the Sheikhayn (Bukhari and Muslim) but they didn't record it.

Source: Al-Mustadrak ala As-Sahihain. Vol. 3, Pg. # 132, H. # 218 / 4621.

In Addition to what you have just said Brother, The Differing between peoples Affairs from Religion to Worldly Matters does not show that Uli al amr are of Falsehood, Or of Mistake, Since When the Arguments between people Make a third person outside of it Wrong? Also The Narrations on Thaqalain Clearly tells us how to Hold on to the Right path and not go astray. And we ask Who knows the Religion of Allah Better than Ahlul Bayt ((عليه السلام))? I find it Strange How people Manipulate things.

(wasalam)

[Abu Tufayl]

(bismillah)

Silly. This website has nothing good to offer aside from a nice, but very deceptive, URL.

In any case, all little points and arguments that can be brought up (by anyone, not just this particular website) but fall flat in the presence of the qat` yaqeen of certain events:

Ghadeer

Thaqlayn

Twelve Imams/Ameer

Fadha'il Praise of `Ali

The explanations and "contextualization" Sunnis try to give these are batil and they're only using Zhanni sourced arguments. All Zhanni things must be in line with the qat` or they are false. 

Please, just accept the basic foundations of Twelver Imami Shiism and move on. Kthxbai.

في أمان الله

[Maulana]

On 11/4/2013 at 1:59 PM, TheIslamHistory said:

Taking Opinions of Different Ulama is not a Refutation and taking Narration without knowing whether its correct or not, and not checking upon it, is baseless.

(wasalam)  

I invite the Author To a Debate Anytime.

______________________

(wasalam)

you are taking me to laugh!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

you mean this seriously????

 

look at your answer here:

http://www.shiachat.com/forum/index.php?/topic/235018227-question-to-Shia/#entry2641877

 

Do you really have checked the hadith you posted????!!!!!!

actually I did not want to answer, but shell I realy disgrace you??

[Abul Hussain Hassani]

On 11/4/2013 at 1:59 PM, TheIslamHistory said:

Taking Opinions of Different Ulama is not a Refutation and taking Narration without knowing whether its correct or not, and not checking upon it, is baseless.

(wasalam)  

I invite the Author To a Debate Anytime.

______________________

(wasalam)

Go to their forum.

[TheIslamHistory]

On 11/4/2013 at 2:25 PM, Abul Hussain Hassani said:

Go to their forum.

Invite them Here, I am already debating with Three people, I don't need the Whole Ummah.

(wasalam)

[Al-Hussayni]

They've been challenged on fb to go for a debate on paltalk but declined! 

[Maulana]

On 11/4/2013 at 1:59 PM, TheIslamHistory said:

I invite the Author To a Debate Anytime.

InshaAllah you will become your debate!!!!

[Abul Hussain Hassani]

On 11/4/2013 at 12:41 PM, Al-Afasy said:

(salam) (bismillah)

One of our brothers from the HCY forum () has complied a number of refutations of the RevisitingTheSalaf group (99% refuted apparently) and  has asked for the link to this website to be distributed to Shi'a websites and circles for reading.

www.*************

Enjoy.

(salam)

(wasalam)

I like your signature. 

[Maulana]

On 11/4/2013 at 2:27 PM, Hussainiyat Zindabad said:

They've been challenged on fb to go for a debate on paltalk but declined! 

please look here for the challenge:

/index.php?showtopic=20498

Quote:

This is a call for a one on one debate, any Shia who wants to join is welcome. Topic is "Was `Ali (رضي الله عنه) divinely appointed as Imam?"

This is the main pillar of Shia faith, so I assume they should at least have ONE strong explicit solid proof for it. I challenge the Shia to present ONE strong explicit solid proof for the theory of Wasiyah and Imamah and we'll discuss it.

(No more than one, and when we're done with it we can move to another)."

@TheIslamHistory

you are welcome!!!!!!!

[Abu Hadi]

I clicked on the first article, and I'm sorry, I wasn't sure if I was on a comedy website or a religious one. 

The author of this site says 

 

This is a tree graph containing the names of certain individuals that the Shia of the past have claimed them to be gods or prophets or divine leaders (Imams) whether by their permission and acceptance or not...

 

http://twelvershia.net/2013/11/02/tree-of-men-believed-to-be-imams-by-the-shia-sects/

 

I'm not sure who he is talking to but I have never heard any Shia in my entire life claim any of these people were gods(astaghfirAllah) or Prophets. All Shia that I have ever talked to or cooresponded say that the last Prophet was Muhammad ibn Abdullah(p.b.u.h) and there is no Prophet after him. As for Imams, I have never heard of anyone claiming Salman Al Farsi(ra) or Al Abbas ibn Abdulmutallib(ra) to be an Imam. As for the other names he mentions, I didn't read all of them because after his first few statements, which are complete fiction, I didn't know whether to laugh or cry. Also, what sources is he referring to that says 'some of these are gods or Prophets'. Is there any Shia who would say this? I haven't heard one yet. Also, since his site is called 'Twelver Shia', he should be addressing the beliefs of twelver shia. There is no difference between twelver Shia about who Allah(s.w.a) is, who the last Prophet is, and who the Imams are. When he refer to those other sects, who believe this and that person was the Imam, he is not reffering to twelver Shia, but various group thorough history, some of which had a few hundred followers, and most of which are now extinct, with the exception of the Ismaelis(7ers) and the Zaidis(5ers). 

 

I shouldn't have expected any sort of serious academic work from this group. The site design and the colors are nice. At least I said something nice about it. 

 

The last note is that it is obvious to me that the author of this site has no other aim than to create fitna where none exists. The only disagreement between us and our Sunni (non Salafi) brothers and sisters is about who the Imam is. We agree about who Allah(s.w.a) is and who the Prophets(peace be upon all of them) are. 

Edited November 4, 2013 by Abu Hadi

[Abul Hussain Hassani]

Abu Hadi I don't think you understood the article. 

 

The article is about different Shia sects in history and it lists the people they claimed to be divine Imams. 

Edited November 4, 2013 by Abul Hussain Hassani

[Abu Hadi]

There were plenty of misguided sects throughout history since the time of Rasoulallah(p.b.u.h), probably thousands, some claimed to be Shia and some Sunni. The author is trying to tie many of these misguided sects to the Twelver Shia (this is what his site is called). 

This is what I disagree with. 

Edited November 4, 2013 by Abu Hadi

[IbnSohan]

There were plenty of misguided sects throughout history since the time of Rasoulallah(p.b.u.h), probably thousands, some claimed to be Shia and some Sunni. The author is trying to tie many of these misguided sects to the Twelver Shia (this is what his site is called). 

This is what I disagree with. 

Abu Hadi, just give up, your heart may get an attack if you really considered conversing with them. Shia are majooos! We have tails, we worship fire, we worship Imam Ali and we worship graves as well as the rock we place under our forehead in salat, we are worse than Jews, we are followers of Abdullah ibn Saba', we are ... I've lost the count of what they made out of us honestly.... we slaughter a goat in Ashura after naming it Umar...we have a red mut'ah night in ashura in ma'atam... we have another Quran....look to make it short.. we are aliens.

Edited November 4, 2013 by IbnSohan

[Abu Hadi]

I know brother, I've heard all this too. At the same time, I think we have a duty to speak up and refute all this nonsense whenever we can and to the capacity that Allah(s.w.a) has given us. I should say I heard all these except for the aliens thing, but that will probably be next, lool . 

[TheIslamHistory]

Only academic and serious responses, please. 

 

 

I challenged them to a debate, How long will they take to Respond?

__________

The site is Academic, But To put it in better Words, Theories from false observations.

(wasalam)  

[Ameen]

(wasalam)

I like your signature.

And i'm waiting for your response on the Ulul Amre thread and i see that you have been here but avoiding to respond there. What's keeping you???

[GodBlessAli]

I challenged them to a debate, How long will they take to Respond?

__________

The site is Academic, But To put it in better Words, Theories from false observations.

(wasalam)  

 

There's no point talking to those guys on that website. They invite you to their website, then while the debate is going on, they parade and beat their drums like some kind of 'war' or 'contest' is going on, as though debating is not for seeking the truth, rather a game (not that I have debated anyone or even have an account there - but from what I have seen). As for this Abul Hussain Hassani character, I tried to ask him why he constantly refers to that trash website 'schiiten.org' even though I told him the authors lie time and time again here. 

 

Abu Hadi I don't think you understood the article. 

 

The article is about different Shia sects in history and it lists the people they claimed to be divine Imams. 

[Goswami]

Lol tell the comedian that most of the articles have been refuted.you will see the responses in the original article. Tell them to grow a pair and come here or Paltalk and we can debate on any of these subjects.

Let me show you its rather funny..

Quote

RTS then quotes this narration from abu al-Tufayl (ra) and al-Hasan (ra):

14798 – Narrated Abil-Tufayl, who said [as follows]: ‘Hassan bin Alee bin Abi Taalib gave a sermon, he praised Allah (swt), and he mentioned the Commander of the faithful, Alee (r.a), the seal of the awsiyah, and the successor of the Prophets, and the [most] honest of the truthful and the martyrs.

This narration is weak as it was only narrated through Ma`rouf bin Khurboudh and Ibn Ma`een weakened him.

Now in the same article the idiot goes on to use the same narrator who is actually a narrator in Bukhari

Sahih al-Bukhari 1/217 we read:

حَدَّثَنَا عُبَيْدُ اللَّهِ بْنُ مُوسَى عَنْ مَعْرُوفِ بْنِ خَرَّبُوذٍ عَنْ أَبِي الطُّفَيْلِ عَنْ عَلِيٍّ بِذَلِكَ

[`Ubaydullah bin Musa told us, from Ma`rouf bin Kharaboudh, from abi al-Tufayl, from `Ali with it...]

http://twelvershia.net/.../

Troll alert....



 

In fact  its made the articles better because it has Nawaasb objections then their rebuttal

[TheIslamHistory]

 

 

Lol tell the comedian that most of the articles have been refuted.you will see the responses in the original article. Tell them to grow a pair and come here or Paltalk and we can debate on any of these subjects.

Let me show you its rather funny..

Quote

RTS then quotes this narration from abu al-Tufayl (ra) and al-Hasan (ra):

14798 – Narrated Abil-Tufayl, who said [as follows]: ‘Hassan bin Alee bin Abi Taalib gave a sermon, he praised Allah ÓÈÍÇäå æÊÚÇáì, and he mentioned the Commander of the faithful, Alee (r.a), the seal of the awsiyah, and the successor of the Prophets, and the [most] honest of the truthful and the martyrs.

This narration is weak as it was only narrated through Ma`rouf bin Khurboudh and Ibn Ma`een weakened him.

Now in the same article the idiot goes on to use the same narrator who is actually a narrator in Bukhari

Sahih al-Bukhari 1/217 we read:

حَدَّثَنَا عُبَيْدُ اللَّهِ بْنُ مُوسَى عَنْ مَعْرُوفِ بْنِ خَرَّبُوذٍ عَنْ أَبِي الطُّفَيْلِ عَنْ عَلِيٍّ بِذَلِكَ

[`Ubaydullah bin Musa told us, from Ma`rouf bin Kharaboudh, from abi al-Tufayl, from `Ali with it...]

http://twelvershia.net/.../

Troll alert....

 

In fact  its made the articles better because it has Nawaasb objections then their rebuttal

 

 

 

 

 

I thought the site was a Comedy One. Until I went to the Contact Section as it says: 

"Do not Hesitate to Provide us Materials and Refutations and so on..."

_______________________________

 

 

Don't worry we don't need to Hesitate...

I also Challenged them to a debate and I  am waiting to receive an Answer:

 

 

________________

 

[Abul Hussain Hassani]

I thought the site was a Comedy One. Until I went to the Contact Section as it says: 

"Do not Hesitate to Provide us Materials and Refutations and so on..."

_______________________________

 

 

Don't worry we don't need to Hesitate...

I also Challenged them to a debate and I  am waiting to receive an Answer:

 

challange1.JPG

 

challange2.JPG

________________

 

 

One of the authors of that site was banned here so they can't come here. Don't waste your time contacting them. You can go to their forum and show them the lies on their website. 

[TheIslamHistory]

One of the authors of that site was banned here so they can't come here. Don't waste your time contacting them. You can go to their forum and show them the lies on their website. 

 

 

Really? Why were they Banned? Were they Extremist?

 

[Abul Hussain Hassani]

Really? Why were they Banned? Were they Extremist?

 

 

They were refuting your brothers. :)

Edited November 5, 2013 by Abul Hussain Hassani

[TheIslamHistory]

They were refuting your brothers. :)

 

 

Really? Why not Lead me to their Posts? And I shall See for my self?

And You have not Answered me On Uli al amr....

(wasalam)

Edited November 5, 2013 by TheIslamHistory

[TheIslamHistory]

Brother if your Masha`Allah have faith in their Articles I dare you to post One of their Articles here. And I will Analyse it Carefully.

_____________________________________

 

[Abu'l Khattab]

Wow I honestly posted this thinking that some people here would have good refutations but all I got instead was people either mocking it (without a valid reason) or copy-paste responses on a thread from Facebook. 

(wasalam)

 

I like your signature. 

BarakAllahu feek. Or should I say, BarakAli feek and call it Tawasul? 

Edited November 5, 2013 by Al-Afasy

[TheIslamHistory]

On 11/5/2013 at 9:34 AM, Al-Afasy said:

Wow I honestly posted this thinking that some people here would have good refutations but all I got instead was people either mocking it (without a valid reason) or copy-paste responses on a thread from Facebook. 

BarakAllahu feek. Or should I say, BarakAli feek and call it Tawasul? 

I read some of the Articles and found it un-amusing academically. And If you have Trust in what your saying, I dare you to post one of the Articles here, for a debate.

(wasalam)

__________

[Abu'l Khattab]

On 11/5/2013 at 9:39 AM, TheIslamHistory said:

I read some of the Articles and found it un-amusing academically. And If you have Trust in what your saying, I dare you to post one of the Articles here, for a debate.

(wasalam)

__________

You want to me debate me on it, or them?