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  
Ethics

Doubts Regarding Raj'ah

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

Before some of you start condemning me to hell and plastering me with Quran and Hadith regarding the proof for this concept, I would like to say, I have no stance on it as of now. Yes I understand there were instances where Allah brought people back to life. I am speaking of this concept in regards to the near ends of time. I am still reconciling and researching, which is why I made this thread. I am hoping you all can help me inshAllah.

 

About Raj'ah:

 

  • A group of the best of believers and the worst of disbelievers will come back to life during the time of Imam Mahdi A.S
  • In it included, prophets, messengers, and all the Imams A.S.
  • They will seek revenge and justice by killing their oppressors.
  • Those amongst them who never reached the status of perfection due to death will get a chance to and those who did not die as martyrs will come back to be killed and become martyrs
  • Imam Hussain A.S will help rule with Imam Mahdi A.S and Jesus A.S will come back

 

This is pretty much what this concept is about. I do not know where to start so I will just begin by listing my points.

 

Why is this based so much on revenge? Why would they need revenge? Why do they need to be the ones to get their justice? I cannot fathom the idea that our imams are so revenge hungry against their killers. Is Allah not the all just?  What is the purpose of judgement day for then? They have been burning in hell and will continue to do so for eternity? So why bring them back and let the imams re-kill them? It just makes God look so cruel and revenge hungry too. Does this not de-signify what our imams went through and why they did what they did?  Whats the point of all this talk about karbala, why not just be happy for later he will come back and kill yazid. The significance of Karbala becomes useless to me now.

 

The idea that Imam Hussain A.S comes back to help rule is  bit acceptable, but Isa A.S coming back to convert christians and such seems overplayed to me. Are we saying our great Imam Mahdi A.S does not have the ability and knowledge to convince the christians? Also, if prophets/messengers where to come back, does this not mean prophethood/messenger-ship wasnt sealed? Does it not imply their purpose was not finished? That would imply Muhammad A.S was not the last prophet, for Isa A.S is suppose to come back and convince the christians. Then same argument can be applied to imamate. Imam Mahdi A.S would not be the last imam since Imam Hussain A.S would be back.

 

Then some say imam mahdi A.S will get martyred. Then what? God brings him back as well right after he gets killed to get justice like the other imams? Is it simultaneous or first the imams come back gets justice, then after a while imam mahdi gets killed then comes back and gets revenge and khalas. Is Raj'ah for justice? Or is Yao-mul Qayima which Allah speaks about in the Quran the ultimate justice. There are so many contradicting factors at play. It makes everything seem as a joke and a game. It only gives credit to the hindus with reincarnation and other sects who believe in re-coming of prophets and such like ahmidis. I agree with brother Rajabali, and believe most maybe concocted. I do not know if he changed his position as of now, but according to the video, like me he does not have a position on it, since he is still looking for answers. If I have anymore questions I will post it up. Please bear with me.

 

 

PLEASE watch this to understand my questions more clearly. Before anyone makes rude comments about Rajabali regarding how he talked in this video, they were at a camp. Everyone was speaking in a friendly matter, it wasnt a one on one session with a sheik, but more so of friend's discussing with each other freely.

 

(wasalam)

 

Edited by PureEthics

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
About Raj'ah:

 

 

The core idea of Raj'ah is that certain groups of people will be brought back to life before Qiyamah.  Some of the stuff you mention like Imam Hussain ruling isnt part of the core doctrine and is debatable.  This core idea of Raj'ah is in the Qur'an:  http://slaveofali.wordpress.com/2008/09/28/rajah-the-return-before-the-day-of-judgement/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The core idea of Raj'ah is that certain groups of people will be brought back to life before Qiyamah.  Some of the stuff you mention like Imam Hussain ruling isnt part of the core doctrine and is debatable.  This core idea of Raj'ah is in the Qur'an:  http://slaveofali.wordpress.com/2008/09/28/rajah-the-return-before-the-day-of-judgement/

 

Thank you dear brother. I have read and looked into this already. But it begs to answer any of my questions, with due respect.

 

"The exceptionally evil will be brought back to life and will receive their just punishments in this life before the hereafter."

 

Again, what is the point of them being brought back up to be punished and killed again, if there is judgement day? What is judgement day then? What is the point of hell then? If they are already [supposed to be] burning in hell for eternity. Maybe this verse is speaking about something else? Clearly we would all agree, one amongst them must be yazid, but again the questions above that I have posted will arise...

 

(wasalam)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ziyarat ale Yasin is clear on al-Rajah:

 

"WA ANNA RAJ-A'TAKUM HAQQUN LAA RAYBA FEEHAA"

 

 

But, yes, there can be dispute over this. I would like to read the scholars opinion regarding this issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow. I'm slightly shocked by Rajabli's tone, and his casual dismissal of some well-established concepts. He basically talks to the others as if they are simpletons for believing some things that have pretty strong support in the ahadith.

Anyway, PureEthics, shouldn't you just follow Sayyid Sistani on this? I'm guessing he believes in Raj`a.

To address, some of Rajabali's points:

Regarding `Isa (as), the main problem seems to be that Rajabali's concept of Imamate can't accommodate a role for anyone else. `Isa (as) is the Messiah (according to the Qur'an), and a Messiah has a function. Even if we limit his function to the Jews, then he still has to do something. If you look at what `Isa (as) did during his time on earth, I don't think it would be anyone's idea of a Messiah. Whether it will be Imam Mahdi (as) or Nabi `Isa (as) who kills the Dajjal, obviously either one can do it, and however it happens, that will be the will of Allah. To ask the question of whether one can't do it by themselves is nonsensical, because ultimately neither can do anything without the permission of Allah.

Neither does `Isa (as) coming back invalidate Muhammad (pbuh) being the seal of the prophets. `Isa (as) wouldn't be coming back in his function of a prophet, and wouldn't be delivering any new message. `Isa (as) will be coming back as a follower of Muhammad (pbuh).

As for the Raj`a, sure it sounds weird, and I'm not going to claim to understand the ins and outs of it, but I will say this. It's a concept (in some form or another) that has been associated with the Shi`a from a very early stage, and there are many ahadith to support it, which makes it very difficult to dismiss so easily. Even Sunnis were aware that this was something the Shi`a believed in from at least the says of al-Baqir and as-Sadiq (as). Quite how this could have all being an 'Ummayyad concoction' would takes some proving. I do take his point that it seems strange, and doesn't seem to have much to support it in the Qur'an, and many of the details may well be fabricated (the details would need to be looked at on a case by case basis), but you can't simply dismiss these things so easily without giving plausible reasons for doing so, and how exactly this could have found itself embedded so deeply in our tradition. A lot of the reasoning he used could easily be applied to other Shi`a concepts as well by the way, and he needs to be careful about simply rejecting anything in the ahadith that he doesn't understand regardless of the evidence for it (although I'm all for rejecting stuff that doesn't have any real evidence of course).

Edited by Haydar Husayn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Again, what is the point of them being brought back up to be punished and killed again, if there is judgement day?

 

 

 

If you look at it from the perspective of those being judged then you might wonder what the point is.  But if you look at it from another perspective, then Raj'ah becomes an expression of God's justice on Earth.  I imagine myself witnessing the trial of Pharaoh, Hitler, Namrud, Yazid, Muawiyyah and many of the countless criminals in history.  Raj'ah is justice being done in front of the eyes of humanity on Earth, during the reign of the final Imam who brings and end to injustice and oppression.  There is something symbolic and beautiful about it. 

 

 

btw don't confuse the second coming of Isa [a] with Rajah.  They're not the same thing.

Edited by .InshAllah.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

  • A group of the best of believers and the worst of disbelievers will come back to life during the time of Imam Mahdi A.S

*During the time of Imam Mahdi[a.s] and after his death*. 

 

It is a debatable topic, but I would just like to point out that we have over 200 reports about al-Raj'ah, so it is beyond mutawatir in Shiite literature. I think instead of you questioning this belief in itself due to it not making sense to you, question the authenticity if the hadiths mentioning it. 

 

(wasalam)

Edited by Abe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks brother for giving your input. As I mentioned before, telling me to believe it because hadiths says so, is not enough reasoning for me to accept it so easily. I didnt ask anyone to prove or disprove this concept, but the questions that arise from it.

 

 

Regarding `Isa (as), the main problem seems to be that Rajabali's concept of Imamate can't accommodate a role for anyone else. `Isa (as) is the Messiah (according to the Qur'an), and a Messiah has a function. Even if we limit his function to the Jews, then he still has to do something. If you look at what `Isa (as) did during his time on earth, I don't think it would be anyone's idea of a Messiah.

 

Again, his role as a "Messiah" comes in relation to his prophethood. One can argue and say that role was completed. Saying we think he still has to do something is no argument, because fact is he has done what Allah has ordained. IF there is no evidence by Allah saying he did not finish his task then who are we to say he didnt finish it? Again, if Isa A.S comes back as a Messiah, that is his role as a prophet, which then begs the question again, Is Muhammad A.S not the seal of prophethood? You seem to contradict yourself later in your post:

 

 

Neither does `Isa (as) coming back invalidate Muhammad (pbuh) being the seal of the prophets. `Isa (as) wouldn't be coming back in his function of a prophet, and wouldn't be delivering any new message. `Isa (as) will be coming back as a follower of Muhammad (pbuh).

 

The problem with this argument is it is unclear whether he has died or still alive. If he is still alive, what is his purpose, if he is no prophet anymore? Either way, what is the point of his coming back? How is it in relation to the system of God? He is already a believer and he is already granted paradise. If he is coming back to show Christians he is a follower of Muhammad A.S then that begs the question again, is his prophethood/messenger-ship role still there?

 

 

Whether it will be Imam Mahdi (as) or Nabi `Isa (as) who kills the Dajjal, obviously either one can do it, and however it happens, that will be the will of Allah. To ask the question of whether one can't do it by themselves is nonsensical, because ultimately neither can do anything without the permission of Allah.

 

Again, if Isa A.S purpose is to kill the dijal, that would imply his role as a divine agent of God is not finished. Why would it be nonsensical? We are challenging the significance of their roles, their purpose,, not whether they can or cannot do it by the will of God.

 

To address, some of Rajabali's points:


A lot of the reasoning he used could easily be applied to other Shi`a concepts as well by the way, and he needs to be careful about simply rejecting anything in the ahadith that he doesn't understand regardless of the evidence for it (although I'm all for rejecting stuff that doesn't have any real evidence of course).

 

He isnt talking about other concepts, just this one. Look, he never rejected anything. He said himself, he has no issue with accepting it, but the problem is questions that arise from it.


If you look at it from the perspective of those being judged then you might wonder what the point is.  But if you look at it from another perspective, then Raj'ah becomes an expression of God's justice on Earth.  I imagine myself witnessing the trial of Pharaoh, Hitler, Namrud, Yazid, Muawiyyah and many of the countless criminals in history.  Raj'ah is justice being done in front of the eyes of humanity on Earth, during the reign of the final Imam who brings and end to injustice and oppression.  There is something symbolic and beautiful about it. 

 

 

btw don't confuse the second coming of Isa [a] with Rajah.  They're not the same thing.

 

I sincerely appreciate your reply my dear brother, but I dont find it convincing. Why do we need to witness it when we whole-heartedly believe it to be it, and in so their eternal justice they shall receive in the after life? Is not the day of judgement the most beautiful?

 

Okay thanks I wont confuse the two, but maybe it will be good in relation to the discussion :)

 

(wasalam)

Edited by PureEthics

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyway, PureEthics, shouldn't you just follow Sayyid Sistani on this? I'm guessing he believes in Raj`a.

 

That would constitute to being an invalid Taqlid . You can only follow a Faqih on Fiqh related issues and not Aqeedah (for example Raj'ah).

 

Doing so, that is, blindly following you're Marja' on Aqeedah related issues, even if you have doubts over them would constitute to doing blind Taqlid to a person that the Imams(AS) staunchly condemned.

 

(wasalam)

Edited by Al-Najashi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyway, PureEthics, shouldn't you just follow Sayyid Sistani on this? I'm guessing he believes in Raj`a.

Why would he do taqlid in a matter of beliefs, or Aqa'ed? All the maraji' have stated clearly that you can not follow them when it comes to beliefs and Usool ul-Deen.

Edited by Abe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks brother for giving your input. As I mentioned before, telling me to believe it because hadiths says so, is not enough reasoning for me to accept it so easily. I didnt ask anyone to prove or disprove this concept, but the questions that arise from it.

I'm really confused. Myself and others get all kinds of abuse of not accepting things that have next to no back from the Qur'an and ahadith, but Rajabali gets away with making fun of one of the most famous doctrines in Shi`ism? Talk about double standards. Maybe someone should ask him whether he believes in making du`a to Imam `Ali (as). I think there may be a chance he doesn't (since he places so much importance on the Qur'an), and then all his fans will be free to rethink the issue.

 

Again, his role as a "Messiah" comes in relation to his prophethood. One can argue and say that role was completed. Saying we think he still has to do something is no argument, because fact is he has done what Allah has ordained. IF there is no evidence by Allah saying he did not finish his task then who are we to say he didnt finish it? Again, if Isa A.S comes back as a Messiah, that is his role as a prophet, which then begs the question again, Is Muhammad A.S not the seal of prophethood? You seem to contradict yourself later in your post:

You need to prove that the role of the Messiah is linked to prophethood. Imam Mahdi (as) is referred to as a Messiah, but he isn't a prophet, and that role is separate to his role of an Imam. 

 

The problem with this argument is it is unclear whether he has died or still alive. If he is still alive, what is his purpose, if he is no prophet anymore? Either way, what is the point of his coming back? How is it in relation to the system of God? He is already a believer and he is already granted paradise. If he is coming back to show Christians he is a follower of Muhammad A.S then that begs the question again, is his prophethood/messenger-ship role still there?

System of God? This is something Rajabali likes talking about, but it's just his own theory. Allah is not bound by Rajabali's understanding of what God's system is supposed to be. 

If `Isa (as) comes back, it will be to fulfil a role given to him by Allah. It's not specifically to convert Christians, but that could be one of the roles. I don't see why someone couldn't at one time fulfil the role of a prophet, and another time some other role. Rajabali says Khidr (as) was a prophet. Does he accept that he was alive at the same times as Muhammad (pbuh)? If so, what was Khidr's 'role'? Instead of looking at these personalities in terms of their 'roles', how about we look at it in terms of Allah being able to do what He wants, for His own benefit, and he isn't bound by our man-made conceptions of His servant's roles?

Again, if Isa A.S purpose is to kill the dijal, that would imply his role as a divine agent of God is not finished.

So? What is wrong with that?

Why would it be nonsensical? We are challenging the significance of their roles, their purpose,, not whether they can or cannot do it by the will of God.

It's nonsensical to say question whether `Isa (as) has a role by asking whether that role couldn't just be fulfilled by Imam Mahdi (as). Their roles are determined by Allah, and that's it.

 

He isnt talking about other concepts, just this one.

Sure, but if there are Ummayyad fabrications all over the place, then to be consistent, you would need to put a lot of things in question. He is opening a whole can of worms for himself in the way he is going about challenging this.

Look, he never rejected anything. He said himself, he has no issue with accepting it, but the problem is questions that arise from it.

He might not be outright rejecting the possibility of `Isa (as) coming back, but dismisses the concept of raj`a as a 'Hindu concept', and clearly makes fun of it by saying 'how about Adam comes back? How about Fir`awn', etc.

That would constitute to being an invalid Taqlid . You can only follow a Faqih on Fiqh related issues and not Aqeedah (for example Raj'ah).

 

Doing so, that is, blindly following you're Marja' on Aqeedah related issues, even if you have doubts over them would constitute to doing blind Taqlid to a person that the Imams(AS) staunchly condemned.

 

(wasalam)

 

 

Why would he do taqlid in a matter of beliefs, or Aqa'ed? All the maraji' have stated clearly that you can not follow them when it comes to beliefs and Usool ul-Deen.

Yes, I'm aware of this. I was making reference to something he said to me in another thread: http://www.shiachat.com/forum/topic/235007456-it-is-permissible-to-say-ya-muhammad/?p=2721247

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm really confused. Myself and others get all kinds of abuse of not accepting things that have next to no back from the Qur'an and ahadith, but Rajabali gets away with making fun of one of the most famous doctrines in Shi`ism? Talk about double standards. Maybe someone should ask him whether he believes in making du`a to Imam `Ali (as). I think there may be a chance he doesn't (since he places so much importance on the Qur'an), and then all his fans will be free to rethink the issue.

 

Why do you just argue just for the sake of arguing? Does my stance on Tawassul boil your blood so much? o_O Forget about Rajabali and address the topic at hand.

 

 

You need to prove that the role of the Messiah is linked to prophethood. Imam Mahdi (as) is referred to as a Messiah, but he isn't a prophet, and that role is separate to his role of an Imam.

 

The proof is that his "messiah" role comes only after he is chosen as a prophet by Allah (even though you would have to prove him being called a messiah was not just for hinting towards the next prophet but an actual messiah). You are the one that would have to prove otherwise, because Isa A.S significance according to the Quran is his prophethood/messenger-ship. Imam Mahdi A.S being referred to as a messiah doesnt mean he IS the messiah by divine decree, because until it can be proven his role is only in significant to his overall purpose which is being an Imam.

 

 

`Isa (as) comes back, it will be to fulfil a role given to him by Allah. It's not specifically to convert Christians, but that could be one of the roles. I don't see why someone couldn't at one time fulfil the role of a prophet, and another time some other role.

 

Okay, lets say I agree with you here. But the questions still stand, what is that role and what is its purpose? Is it purposeless? Then why?

 

Rajabali says Khidr (as) was a prophet. Does he accept that he was alive at the same times as Muhammad (pbuh)? If so, what was Khidr's 'role'?

 

I believe he said, Khidr A.S has died or that his role as a prophet was done. But I get what your trying to say.

 

 

Instead of looking at these personalities in terms of their 'roles', how about we look at it in terms of Allah being able to do what He wants, for His own benefit, and he isn't bound by our man-made conceptions of His servant's roles?

 

With due respect, I get what you are trying to say and I do not deny it. But putting it this way seems like an excuse to believe what ever you are told. I need  and want to know and understand, to clear my doubts and understand the beautiful system Allah has endowed. I want to be certain this path is the best. I dont think there is nothing wrong with that and I believe this is encouraged in Islam. Besides, every single thing has a meaning in Islam, and I believe this is the mercy of Allah. Telling me God can do what ever He wants, doesnt prove anything. God can become Jesus A.S too, according to chrsitians. God can become a bunch of gods according to hinduism...

 

 

So? What is wrong with that?

 

We would have to prove, Isa A.S coming to kill the dijal is outside of his prophethood. Also, the problem isnt whether it is or isnt possible, its why him? Why does he need to come back to kill dijal? Get it? Every single prophet/messenger/imam had a purpose, and we can clearly see each one signified their purpose and as to why Allah chose them and gave them such tasks. It begs to ask the question, can Imam Mahdi A.S not do it? Is Imam Mahdi A.S weak? What then becomes his purpose?

 

If we dont ask these questions we will end up like every other religion full of senseless notions and ideas just trashing the system of God. Full of rubbish and senseless ideology. Full of doubts and confusions, except they just blindly accept what ever they are given to believe. Islam is the truth and indeed TRUTH IS CLEAR FROM ERROR.

 

 

Is Rajabali saying that Isa (as) not will come back? 

 

No he is just challenging the notion. He doesnt have a stance on it.

Edited by PureEthics

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If we dont ask these questions we will end up like every other religion full of senseless notions and ideas just trashing the system of God. Full of rubbish and senseless ideology. Full of doubts and confusions, except they just blindly accept what ever they are given to believe. Islam is the truth and indeed TRUTH IS CLEAR FROM ERROR.

Ok, so what would you say to the Waqifis about the roles of the Imams after al-Kadhim (as)? What was so important about their roles? Doesn't it make more sense for al-Kadhim to be the Mahdi, since the overwhelming number of our ahadith were already transmitted by that point, and there was no need for the others?

 

 

No he is just challenging the notion. He doesnt have a stance on it.

I think it's fair to say he is leaning towards rejecting it though, and his stance on raj`a is pretty clear. I notice you didn't bother even contradicting me on that point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, so what would you say to the Waqifis about the roles of the Imams after al-Kadhim (as)? What was so important about their roles? Doesn't it make more sense for al-Kadhim to be the Mahdi, since the overwhelming number of our ahadith were already transmitted by that point, and there was no need for the others?

 

 

Again, why are you bringing this topic here? I dont understand what your trying to prove. I am not going to waste my time explaining why I believe in 12 imams rather than 7. But I will say, the most logical answer is guidance, and the number of hadith at that point is insignificant. Whats important is what those hadith were about. Also, other significant hadith that were proven to be against waqifi (ex 12 imams). The numbers of imams is insignificant so long as it was commanded by Allah and does not seem to contradict or bring up insignificant questions. Where as this topic, clearly as my post above shows, it brings many questions, which you have not even bothered trying to answer.

 

The only person who even bothered sticking to the topic, may Allah bless him, was my wonderful brother .inshAllah.

Edited by PureEthics

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Again, what is the point of them being brought back up to be punished and killed again, if there is judgement day? What is judgement day then? What is the point of hell then? If they are already [supposed to be] burning in hell for eternity.

Not that this diminishes the validity of your argument, but couldn't the same point be made about the 12th Imam?

The 12th Imam is going to reappear to kill all of the enemies and reestablish Islam in its pristine form as the world religion. In this case, exactly the same question can be posed: what is the purpose of Judgment Day?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Salaam brother pureethics

That's a lot of questions.

Once you've acquired faith, don't seek doubt, seek answers.

If Allah is Merciful, Just and Forgiving is established look at things in light of it not starting afresh.

Revenge: it is Allah's prerogative. Even in hell when bodies perish, they'll be recreated. This is recompense of denying the ONE despite his signs. He sent messengers after messengers. It's reported that some ummat murdered 70 prophets in a day. Their punishment is with him. And this punishment can't be excess because it negates adl or justice. If Allah isn't just, nauzobillah, worshipping him isn't fruitful since he wouldn't recompense properly.

That means even if he brings back anyone to life any number of times to either revenge or to be killed it will never be excess.

Role: All prophets and Imam have role and time frame of those role. Their existance on earth at same point of time doesn't nullify anything. Imam Hassan and Imam Hussain were present with Imam Ali. Prophet Mohammed (sawa) lead prayer with many prophets behind him on night of ascension. Hazrat Khizr is alive but he is a prophet but his prophethood is over.

Similarly Prophet Mohammed is seal of prophet but hazrat Isa will not be back as prophet to deliver message or warn people. That period of believing in unseen would be over. Allah will manifest his signs.

As regards importance of what Imam did (mercy to killers, sacrifice of karbala) they did their part and took blessings of Allah by doing so. If after Allah manifests his signs and expects them to avenge, you'll not find anyone of them hesitate to carry Allah's wish. Allah could finish oppression with same hands which prayed for mercy or restrained themselves but Allah wants disbelievers to witness both sides of His Mercy and Wrath. Of His Patience and Retribution. Of His Respite and His Control over everything. Our purpose of being created is to recognize and worship Him.

Hope that helps.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another slightly odd thing he said was: why is Allah asking 'Isa on Judgment Day "Did you say to the people that you are my son?" That to me is a redundant question if he's already come with Raja'a...I have asked this question to big scholars, but I have yet to get an answer

 

Wouldn't a simple answer be so that his testimony reaches the hundreds of millions of people who held this believe over the year who were not there to witness his return?

 

Even the narration about this verse talks about Allah gathering all the Christians before this question is asked.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another slightly odd thing he said was: why is Allah asking 'Isa on Judgment Day "Did you say to the people that you are my son?" That to me is a redundant question if he's already come with Raja'a...I have asked this question to big scholars, but I have yet to get an answer

 

Wouldn't a simple answer be so that his testimony reaches the hundreds of millions of people who held this believe over the year who were not there to witness his return?

Why would "witnessing his return" have to be a necessary prerequisite for the question to be asked?

It doesn't make sense, anyway, that a group of Christians who witness his return gain easy salvation by being able to witness the truth, thus believe the truth, and not the rest of the faithful Christians gone by before who are condemned for their sincere belief of Jesus as Son of God. It doesn't exactly make for a level playing field on Judgment Day, does it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why would "witnessing his return" have to be a necessary prerequisite for the question to be asked?

It doesn't make sense, anyway, that a group of Christians who witness his return gain easy salvation by being able to witness the truth, thus believe the truth, and not the rest of the faithful Christians gone by before who are condemned for their sincere belief of Jesus as Son of God. It doesn't exactly make for a level playing field on Judgment Day, does it?

 

I think you are diverting away from the point at hand, who will and won't accept 'Isa (a) when he returns, and Allah's justice are not related to Rajabali's comment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Salaam brother pureethics

That's a lot of questions.

Once you've acquired faith, don't seek doubt, seek answers.

If Allah is Merciful, Just and Forgiving is established look at things in light of it not starting afresh.

Revenge: it is Allah's prerogative. Even in hell when bodies perish, they'll be recreated. This is recompense of denying the ONE despite his signs. He sent messengers after messengers. It's reported that some ummat murdered 70 prophets in a day. Their punishment is with him. And this punishment can't be excess because it negates adl or justice. If Allah isn't just, nauzobillah, worshipping him isn't fruitful since he wouldn't recompense properly.

That means even if he brings back anyone to life any number of times to either revenge or to be killed it will never be excess.

Role: All prophets and Imam have role and time frame of those role. Their existance on earth at same point of time doesn't nullify anything. Imam Hassan and Imam Hussain were present with Imam Ali. Prophet Mohammed Õáì Çááå Úáíå æÂáå lead prayer with many prophets behind him on night of ascension. Hazrat Khizr is alive but he is a prophet but his prophethood is over.

Similarly Prophet Mohammed is seal of prophet but hazrat Isa will not be back as prophet to deliver message or warn people. That period of believing in unseen would be over. Allah will manifest his signs.

As regards importance of what Imam did (mercy to killers, sacrifice of karbala) they did their part and took blessings of Allah by doing so. If after Allah manifests his signs and expects them to avenge, you'll not find anyone of them hesitate to carry Allah's wish. Allah could finish oppression with same hands which prayed for mercy or restrained themselves but Allah wants disbelievers to witness both sides of His Mercy and Wrath. Of His Patience and Retribution. Of His Respite and His Control over everything. Our purpose of being created is to recognize and worship Him.

Hope that helps.

 

I appreciate your answer my dear brother but it still begs to answer any of my questions. God is not vengeful, He is the All Good, All Just. When vengeance comes anger. Anger is not an attribute of God. Our imams were very clear, anger is an attribute of satan.

 

Having doubts is good. It challenges ones self. It brings about progress. It helps bring answers :)

 

 

It makes total sense why his lectures are the way they are.

 

Thank you Nader for your reply, but this thread isnt about Rajabali.  That isnt the point. Just to mention again, this video is old and his views could have changed. The topics and how he chooses to speak on issues, he has mentioned before. He wants our ummah to get the basis of our deen before understanding other topics. He speaks about our usool and the quran. Coming from someone who has practically listened to all his lectures, he spoke in terms of hadith many times and in fact, this ramadan it was shown he had al kafi in his hand, if it makes you feel any better ;) No one is answering the topic at hand. We all know there are hadiths.

 

 

Wouldn't a simple answer be so that his testimony reaches the hundreds of millions of people who held this believe over the year who were not there to witness his return?

 

Even the narration about this verse talks about Allah gathering all the Christians before this question is asked.

 

No because, again what would be the point of the question, if he was to come during Imam Mahdi's A.S time to do exactly that?  Get it? Why cannot Imam Mahdi A.S just give a testimony and say this is what Isa A.S says, so now follow me. Why does Isa A.S have to come in body form? If the testimony is enough proof for those who do not witness the coming of Isa A.S. It is clearly inconsistent... This again falls into the topic of the justice of Allah. Because you expect them to believe in a book they do not believe in, and then Allah expects them to believe it, but gives more solid evidence later on by bringing Isa A.S as a body and making him say it directly to all the christians... This is why Rajabali says its redundant. Also, the question is in past form? So this testimony was said during his time correct? Now a question can be asked, what about the people after him, and those who are not there when Imam Mahdi A.S comes?

Edited by PureEthics

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...