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  
ZHussein

Nade Ali (As) By Bassim

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

You don't speak for everyone. Many people are calling on the Imams (as) directly to answer their duas with the powers given to them by Allah.

 

I dont speak for everyone but you somehow have the power to know other people's intentions and peek inside their hearts. Strange that people who call themselves "rational thinker" and pretend to be literalist have no problems uttering such nonsense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1- I do not know why the son of jacob asked their father, rather than God directly, to ask for forgiveness!

 

 

قالُوا يا أَبانَا اسْتَغْفِرْ لَنا ذُنُوبَنا إِنَّا كُنَّا خاطِئينَ (97)

This isn't the same thing. First of all, the children of Yaqoob (as) had wronged him personally. Secondly, there is obviously nothing wrong with asking someone to pray for you. That is completely different from calling on a supernatural being to provide your needs though. You are talking like all people do is say "Ya `Ali, ask Allah to forgive me", which is plainly not to case.

If you want to have a serious discussion, then we need to at least be honest with what it is that is going on.

 

2- I do not know why the people of Mosa asked him to pray for a change in their food and they did not do it on their own?

 

وَ إِذْ قُلْتُمْ يا مُوسى‏ لَنْ نَصْبِرَ عَلى‏ طَعامٍ واحِدٍ فَادْعُ لَنا رَبَّكَ يُخْرِجْ لَنا مِمَّا تُنْبِتُ الْأَرْضُ مِنْ بَقْلِها وَ قِثَّائِها وَ فُومِها وَ عَدَسِها وَ بَصَلِها

and if it was wrong why did not God rebuke them for this?

Again, notice how the people of Musa (as) asked him to pray to Allah for a change in their food. Why didn't they just say "Ya Musa, change our food"? That is the question I would like you to answer. I would also like you to explain why it is that we don't find a single dua in the Qur'an that is similar to the duas many Shias make to the Imams. However, we have many duas in the Qur'an addressed to Allah. Why don't we have one example of someone calling upon a Prophet who has left this world, or the Ahlulbayt for that matter (since many people believe that every past Prophet talked about them, and asked for their intercession)?

 

 

dear brother, @hayder Huseyn

I did not expect you discard the important part of Shia ideology!

waiting your answer.

If it is such an important part of 'Shia ideology', then can you explain why Shaykh Saduq made absolutely no mention of it whatsoever in his I'tiqadqtu 'l-Imamiyyah (translated into English as a 'Shiite Creed')? Here is an English translation for those who want to verify this for themselves: http://www.wofis.com/asset/Books/003.pdf

I dont speak for everyone but you somehow have the power to know other people's intentions and peek inside their hearts. Strange that people who call themselves "rational thinker" and pretend to be literalist have no problems uttering such nonsense.

I don't need to know people's intentions, or peek into their hearts. Many people freely admit it, and have no problem in doing so. Just to be clear, do you think it is wrong to call on the Imams to help you, out of their own power that was given by them to Allah?

Edited by Haydar Husayn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
@peace seekers II

 


Your  repsponse was:


 


we can be sure that the martyrs are living somewhere, however it's probably in some soul astral form .like non material spirits. that is the reason why they can appear to us in dreams for instance. it is like the way we exist when we leave our bodies in our sleep. we can not point at a nose or ears or hands of any martyr to prove they really hear us then and there, and especially that they can react.


 


When you are not sure of your supposition and you try to put your misconceptions to the other wow? I have already responded to your misquotes version of verse in my post no 47.


 


As your are unable to swallow what has been responded to you for another verse 72:18 in post no. 68, thats why you are running away. 


 


Regards.


 


 


Edited by skamran110

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't need to know people's intentions, or peek into their hearts. Many people freely admit it, and have no problem in doing so.

 

the term "many" can used to damm all muslims. Its done daily on Fox news.

 

 

Just to be clear, do you think it is wrong to call on the Imams to help you, out of their own power that was given by them to Allah?

If any individual is saying "Ya Ali Madad" with the intention that it is Ali (AS) not Allah (SWT) who is the granter of their wish is on the wrong.

If it is such an important part of 'Shia ideology', then can you explain why Shaykh Saduq made absolutely no mention of it whatsoever in his I'tiqadqtu 'l-Imamiyyah (translated into English as a 'Shiite Creed')? Here is an English translation for those who want to verify this for themselves: http://www.wofis.com/asset/Books/003.pdf

 

 

Thanks for posting this link to help educate people on their religion. It is indeed more beneficial to read and understand these text then to engage in useless polemics.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First off, that is a terrible analogy. It's like saying why get your guidance from humans, when you should go directly to Allah. You don't need prophets or imams right? Just Ask Allah to guide you directly. All you need is Allah right? Is Allah not capable of being the source of guidance? Why follow a book called the Quran?

I'm not really following you, because Allah is the source of guidance, and guidance comes only from Allah. I thought all Muslims believed that?

إِنَّكَ لَا تَهْدِي مَنْ أَحْبَبْتَ وَلَٰكِنَّ اللَّهَ يَهْدِي مَن يَشَاءُ وَهُوَ أَعْلَمُ بِالْمُهْتَدِينَ

Indeed, [O Muhammad], you do not guide whom you like, but Allah guides whom He wills. And He is most knowing of the [rightly] guided. [Qur'an 28:56, Sahih International]

Well, we ask the prophets and imams because they short cut us to Allah.

Who says you need a short cut? How can you get a short cut to someone who is already closer to you than your jugular vein, and who promises to answer the prayer of the one who calls on Him?

And We have already created man and know what his soul whispers to him, and We are closer to him than [his] jugular vein [Qur'an 40:16, Sahih International]

And when My servants ask you concerning Me, then surely I am very near; I answer the prayer of the suppliant when he calls on Me, so they should answer My call and believe in Me that they may walk in the right way. [2:186]

Allah has signified them and exalted them for this very purpose.

I don't see much evidence for this. If it was meant to be the primary form of worship, then you would expect some explicit mention in the Qur'an, or some ahadith from the Prophet (pbuh) and Imams (as) explaining this. There are none however. It seems pretty strange for their to be so much silence on an issue that is now so important.

We don't see it as anything but asking Allah, because they are capable through the power of Allah. Just as following and obeying the prophet is obeying Allah.

You can see it whatever way you like. It doesn't make it right. The pagan Arabs believed the similar things:

And they serve beside Allah what can neither harm them nor profit them, and they say: These are our intercessors with Allah. Say: Do you (presume to) inform Allah of what He knows not in the heavens and the earth? Glory be to Him, and supremely exalted is He above what they set up (with Him). [Qur'an 10:18, Shakir translation]

Now, surely, sincere obedience is due to Allah (alone) and (as for) those who take guardians besides Him, (saying), We do not serve them save that they may make us nearer to Allah, surely Allah will judge between them in that in which they differ; surely Allah does not guide him aright who is a liar, ungrateful. [Qur'an 39:3, Shakir translation]

As for obeying the Prophet (pbuh) being the same thing as obeying Allah, that is true, but notice how in the Qur'an, Allah always speaks of obeying Allah and the Prophet (pbuh). He doesn't simply say to obey the Prophet, because ultimately the person you are obeying is Allah. The Prophet is simply the way Allah chooses to communicate to us how we should obey Him.

Loving the prophet and his holy family is loving Allah, is it not? Asking our needs from His chosen creatures, is through the permission of Allah.

It's a very indirect form of 'love'. It's a bit like showing lots of love to someone's children, but never talking to that person, and then saying "of course I love you. I love your children, don't I?".

Notice how in all these justifications, Allah gets reduced to simply a 'primal cause'. He created everything, and then we focus all our attention on His creation. There is no real personal relationship with Allah here. We show our love to Allah by loving others, we call on Allah by calling others, ... It's all through others. Why not just make salah to others, and then say it is ultimately making salah to Allah?

What I never understood is calling on those whom is purified and chosen by Allah is shirk, but getting help from a doctor or calling on a friend for help isn't. Let's be consistent with our argument here.

You talk about bad analogies, and then you come out with the old 'doctor analogy'? A doctor is one of the ways Allah has given us to seek help in this world. Nobody sits at home and calls out "Ya doctor, please cure me". There is clearly a difference between a material being or object in this world that Allah has provided us with to help us in the dunya, and calling on a supernatural being who can answer all your prayers in the way most people call upon a deity. If you can't see the difference, then I don't know what to say to you.

the term "many" can used to damm all muslims. Its done daily on Fox news.

Ok, well I am arguing against those who do it. If you think it is a tiny minority, then it is against that tiny minority that I'm arguing.

If any individual is saying "Ya Ali Madad" with the intention that it is Ali (as) not Allah ÓÈÍÇäå æÊÚÇáì who is the granter of their wish is on the wrong.

Ok, good to know where you stand. Others on this page clearly don't agree though.

Thanks for posting this link to help educate people on their religion. It is indeed more beneficial to read and understand these text then to engage in useless polemics.

You're welcome.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, well I am arguing against those who do it. If you think it is a tiny minority, then it is against that tiny minority that I'm arguing.

You're welcome.

I was bored and came online to SC for some mental stimulation but it feels like we are back to the basics again beating a dead horse. I am hoping to make this my last reply and i hope brother PureEthics will let go as well because we have being going back and forth on this for more then a year now.

 

The Ayatollah who are well and alive today in majority agree to this practice being halal and allowed. With this in mind there is no reason to refer to classical scholars who are not available to justify their book and their writing.

 

 

Ok, well I am arguing against those who do it. If you think it is a tiny minority, then it is against that tiny minority that I'm arguing.

Then you sit in the same camp as Sean Hannity and other Fox news pundits because they have the same argument.

 

I think you are smarter then that. It seems like you are out here misguiding the people. So be very careful in your speech especially when passing takfeer cause you will be held responsible for your words.

 

 

 

Ok, good to know where you stand. Others on this page clearly don't agree though.

 

 

People on this thread/forum who think its Ali (AS) not Allah who is granting your wish please raise your hand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

@peace seekers II
 

Your  repsponse was:

 

we can be sure that the martyrs are living somewhere, however it's probably in some soul astral form .like non material spirits. that is the reason why they can appear to us in dreams for instance. it is like the way we exist when we leave our bodies in our sleep. we can not point at a nose or ears or hands of any martyr to prove they really hear us then and there, and especially that they can react.

 

When you are not sure of your supposition and you try to put your misconceptions to the other wow? I have already responded to your misquotes version of verse in my post no 47.

 

As your are unable to swallow what has been responded to you for another verse 72:18 in post no. 68, thats why you are running away. 

 

Regards.

 

 

 

 

so you brought proof in one of the instance that the following verse says they don't have noses and eyes? what about the rest? what is your proof in post #47? zero! your opinion that it's idols when the word idol isn't even there is useless.

 

what is your explanation for the verses where Allah tells us not to make dua to others than him without specifying .. like all of them .. except your far-fetched claim that saying no hands means it's an idol..

 

and also that an idol can't be humans and devils. as i've proved quran refers to people and jinn as potential gods (pharaoh & shaytan) .. or is idol now separate from gods for you?

 

 

and if you believe that martyred people prior to resurrection have hands and feet .. can you proove that too?

 

so you say i run away from 

 

in the link i provided many times i wrote:

 

 

further discussion:

 

the word dua is used in the Quran in many different ways, including calling as well as inviting. In the following verse it refers to addressing the prophet vs. addressing other people:

 

 

لا تجعلوا دعاء الرسول بينكم كدعاء بعضكم 

 

Do not make calling (duas) of the Messenger among yourselves as the call (dua) of one of you to another. 24:63

 

 

so, just like the example of the doctor, we can not compare asking from Allah to asking others than Allah. Even though other people can hear a little, it does not mean that they have the Name of al Sami' السميع .. or the Hearing (Name of God). They only hear as much as Allah wants them to, and Allah is the one who enables them to act upon it.

 

So when referring to duas such as dua kumayl and duas in prayers, then it is something that should be reserved for Allah and Allah alone. While calling humans for whatever reason can not be compared to this. At the same time asking a person who is in front of us to pray for us is also not supplicating to that person.

 

The more we can be independent from all others than Allah, the better. That is the reason why i will never (in sha Allah) make dua tawasul (supplication for intercession) or call for help from servants of Allah who were martyred ( such as saying ya Ali Madad ).

 

The Quran and 99% of hadiths are consistently clear about this, and also imam Ali for instance never said Ya Muhamad Madad. or Imam Hassan never said Ya Ali (Abi) Madad .. etc

 

http://www.shiachat.com/forum/topic/235017372-about-ya-ali-as-madad/page-4#entry2668946

 

 

so don't run away and tell me what does Allah mean when he says dua "other than me"? what kind of dua is He talking about?

 

don't run away and explain it. why doesn't Allah say "make dua to idols" .. why generalize and say noone other than Him? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This isn't the same thing. First of all, the children of Yaqoob (as) had wronged him personally. Secondly, there is obviously nothing wrong with asking someone to pray for you. That is completely different from calling on a supernatural being to provide your needs though. You are talking like all people do is say "Ya `Ali, ask Allah to forgive me", which is plainly not to case.

If you want to have a serious discussion, then we need to at least be honest with what it is that is going on.

probably I misunderstood you bro!

let me put it this way, do you see any contradiction between Dua Tawasol and what you recently said

does it make difference to say :

 

انا توجهنا و استشفعنا و توسلنا بک الی الله و .... یا وجیها عند الله اشفع لنا عندالله

or:

یا ابانا استغفرلنا انا کنا خاطئین

؟؟

This isn't the same thing. First of all, the children of Yaqoob (as) had wronged him personally.

if they had wronged him why Allah himself confirm this process of interceding of prophet between God and sinners?

 

وَ إِذا قيلَ لَهُمْ تَعالَوْا يَسْتَغْفِرْ لَكُمْ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ لَوَّوْا رُؤُسَهُمْ وَ رَأَيْتَهُمْ يَصُدُّونَ وَ هُمْ مُسْتَكْبِرُونَ (5)

Edited by mahdi servant.01

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Forget tawassul  for a minute. Do you recite Ziarats after salat? If they cant hear you then why are you sending your salams to them?

 

 

there is no guarantee they do, nor any proof for that. 

 

just like there is no guarantee that our prayers are accepted by Allah to start with,

 

that's why we say taqabal Allah in order to express our hope that Allah doesn't make our prayer void .. including sending salams to the prophet.

 

 

 

and in any case .. it's Allah who sends them for us. as la hawla la qowata ila bilah

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

probably I misunderstood you bro!

let me put it this way, do you see any contradiction between Dua Tawasol and what you recently said

does it make difference to say :

 

انا توجهنا و استشفعنا و توسلنا بک الی الله و .... یا وجیها عند الله اشفع لنا عندالله

or:

یا ابانا استغفرلنا انا کنا خاطئین

؟؟

if they had wronged him why Allah himself confirm this process of interceding of prophet between God and sinners?

 

وَ إِذا قيلَ لَهُمْ تَعالَوْا يَسْتَغْفِرْ لَكُمْ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ لَوَّوْا رُؤُسَهُمْ وَ رَأَيْتَهُمْ يَصُدُّونَ وَ هُمْ مُسْتَكْبِرُونَ (5)

What Allah confirms is the right to ask someone to pray for you, particularly when you have wronged them (in this case, telling Yaqoob (as) that his son Yusuf (as) was dead). If I slander someone, and apologise to them, and ask them to pray to Allah to forgive me (which might carry more weight since they are the ones I slandered), then that doesn't mean I need to ask them to pray to Allah to forgive me for missing salah. Clearly that is something I should ask Allah directly. It's amazing to me how people are completely ignoring the context here.

Now, could you please answer my last post as a whole, rather than focusing on a small part?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think this Tawasul problem might be a problem with how Islam dealt with the issue of Shirk and at the same time, put chosen ones at a very high station.

 

When people were doing "Shirk", they weren't deeming those who they worshiped as equal to God, they just had a super high reverence for them. Now is there reverence level any higher then the reverence level Shias have for their Imams? That is debatable.

 

At the same time, the type of practices they did to express their reverence was calling out to them...the Quran says they can't hear you, they won't respond, and that on the day of judgement, they will disavow their worship of them saying they were totally heedless of it. 

 

But what makes it the case that it's alright to call upon Imams but not these individuals, just that it happens they weren't right, or is there some type of universal argument here? It seems it wouldn't make sense for the Quran to argue these points if there wasn't some universal argument going on here.

 

And what exactly is the reverence level that is called "worship". The Mushrikeen didn't deem their gods as equals to God, they saw them as close and gave them kinship, but is this all too different from Imams being created from the light of God etc?

 

At the same time Prophets and Imams, what level can you give them that would not be on par with what the mushrikeen worshiped. It just seems now it's a semantic war where the mushrikeen are said to worship when they call upon the dead or how much they revere their gods but Muslims don't worship Prophets or Imams no matter how much reverence they have for them because they of course are monotheists.

 

As you see this is a problem because there is ambiguity of what defines worship from reverence. The Quran actually is not all too clear as to what constitutes worship and what doesn't..and neither is language....this is one of the things that changes in time and culture.

 

Someone can have  less reverence than Shias have for Imams for some tree but we will say he worships the tree, because his culture used that word, while at the same time, Shia reverence for the Prophet might be so high it exceeds the reverence that many cultures had for their imperfect gods, and they won't be said to worship it because in Shiism, worshiping other then God is forbidden.

Edited by StrugglingForTheLight

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

(bismillah)

 

(salam)

 

 

From now on i will only respond to posts that i personally see as :

 

1. Valid

2. Relevant

3. Holding Integrity

 

 

.. in sha Allah

 

 

Namaste

fi amanilah

 

(wasalam)

 

 

It is important to know the fundamental beliefs of the person to understand their point of view.

 

  1. According to your  belief, ALL Prophets were fallible.

  2. According to your  belief, ALL the Imams were fallible, including the Last Imam.

  3. You are not a Quranist.

 

What I do not know is:

  1. According to your belief, is the Quran infallible(Y/N)?

  2. According to your belief, was the Quran compiled in book form during the lifetime of the Prophet Muhammad(pbuhahp) (Y/N)?

  3. According to your belief, did the Prophet Muhammad (pbuhhp) announce a successor(Y/N)?

 

 

These questions, in Post 56 are very  important, related and relevant. Depending on your answer to 4, how do you reconcile your belief in 1. If you don’t understand or properly articulate the basics, its highly unlikely you have a handle on more complex issues.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What Allah confirms is the right to ask someone to pray for you, particularly when you have wronged them (in this case, telling Yaqoob (as) that his son Yusuf (as) was dead). If I slander someone, and apologise to them, and ask them to pray to Allah to forgive me (which might carry more weight since they are the ones I slandered), then that doesn't mean I need to ask them to pray to Allah to forgive me for missing salah. Clearly that is something I should ask Allah directly. It's amazing to me how people are completely ignoring the context here.

Now, could you please answer my last post as a whole, rather than focusing on a small part?

first of all this is not as small as you think, all we have to discuss about is these Quranic verses!

any way this is the second time you are running away answering the verses I raised in conversation. the first was in post #63

 

 

I don't need to know people's intentions, or peek into their hearts. Many people freely admit it, and have no problem in doing so. Just to be clear, do you think it is wrong to call on the Imams to help you, out of their own power that was given by them to Allah?

 

as long as you believe they are the pious slaves of Allah, and have no independence power helping us there is nothing wrong with that.

 

 

بصائر الدرجات في فضائل آل محمد صلى الله عليهم، ج‏1، ص: 241

 حَدَّثَنَا أَحْمَدُ بْنُ مُحَمَّدٍ عَنِ الْحُسَيْنِ بْنِ سَعِيدٍ عَنِ الْحَسَنِ بْنِ بُرْدَةَ «2» وَ أَبِي عَبْدِ اللَّهِ عَنْ جَعْفَرِ بْنِ الْحُسَيْنِ‏ «3» الْخَزَّازِ عَنْ إِسْمَاعِيلَ بْنِ عَبْدِ الْعَزِيزِ قَالَ: قَالَ لِي أَبُو عَبْدِ اللَّهِ ع ضَعْ لِي فِي الْمُتَوَضَّإِ مَاءً قَالَ فَقُمْتُ فَوَضَعْتُ لَهُ فَدَخَلَ قَالَ فَقُلْتُ فِي نَفْسِي أَنَا أَقُولُ فِيهِ كَذَا وَ كَذَا وَ يَدْخُلُ الْمُتَوَضَّأَ فَلَمْ يَلْبَثْ أَنْ خَرَجَ فَقَالَ يَا إِسْمَاعِيلَ بْنَ عَبْدِ الْعَزِيزِ لَا تَرْفَعُوا الْبِنَاءَ فَوْقَ طَاقَتِنَا فَيَنْهَدِمَ اجْعَلُونَا عَبِيداً مَخْلُوقِينَ وَ قُولُوا فِينَا مَا شِئْتُمْ قَالَ إِسْمَاعِيلُ كُنْتُ أَقُولُ فِيهِ وَ أَقُولُ حَدَّثَنَا.

Edited by mahdi servant.01

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All these verses that have been referenced for not calling upon someone have something in common:

 

من دون الله which means besides Allah (s.w.t.).

 

What we tried to establish here was that we are not calling upon Ahlullbayt (a.s.) besides Allah (s.w.t.), assuming that They (a.s.) have power besides Allah's (s.w.t.) power.

 

My dear Shia brothers and sisters, please don't forget this important verse:

 

إِنَّمَا وَلِيُّكُمُ اللَّـهُ وَرَ‌سُولُهُ وَالَّذِينَ آمَنُوا الَّذِينَ يُقِيمُونَ الصَّلَاةَ وَيُؤْتُونَ الزَّكَاةَ وَهُمْ رَ‌اكِعُونَ ٥٥

 

 

Your ally [wali] is none but Allah and [therefore] His Messenger and those who have believed - those who establish prayer and give zakah, and they bow [in worship]. (55)

 

 

Allah (s.w.t.) puts Rasul and His Ahlulbayt صلوات الله علیهم اجمعین at the same level as Himself, when it comes to walayat!

 

According to al-islam.org:

 

The original meaning of this root-word, according to the famous Qur'anic lexicon Mufradatu 'l-Qu'ran, is

“the being situated of something besides something else, in the sense that there is no separation between them",

that is to say that if two things are so contiguous one with the other that there is nothing between them, the root-word "waliya" is used.

As a result of this, the word has come to be used in the sense of nearness and affinity, usually to mean a special or spiritual affinity.

And again, for the same reason, it has been used with the meaning of "intimacy", "friendship", "being in charge", "being in control",

and with other meanings of the same variety. In all of these, there exists a kind of personal contact and contiguity.

 

When we ask Ahlulbayt (a.s.) we are asking those whom Allah (s.w.t.) has appointed in-charge!

 

The example of doctor is not irrelevant. The doctor's power is not supernatural, but Ahlulbayt's (a.s.) power is supernatural, given to them by Allah (s.w.t.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

so you brought proof in one of the instance that the following verse says they don't have noses and eyes? what about the rest? what is your proof in post #47? zero! your opinion that it's idols when the word idol isn't even there is useless.

 

what is your explanation for the verses where Allah tells us not to make dua to others than him without specifying .. like all of them .. except your far-fetched claim that saying no hands means it's an idol..

 

and also that an idol can't be humans and devils. as i've proved quran refers to people and jinn as potential gods (pharaoh & shaytan) .. or is idol now separate from gods for you?

 

 

and if you believe that martyred people prior to resurrection have hands and feet .. can you proove that too?

 

so you say i run away from 

 

in the link i provided many times i wrote:

 

 

http://www.shiachat.com/forum/topic/235017372-about-ya-ali-as-madad/page-4#entry2668946

 

 

so don't run away and tell me what does Allah mean when he says dua "other than me"? what kind of dua is He talking about?

 

don't run away and explain it. why doesn't Allah say "make dua to idols" .. why generalize and say noone other than Him? 

 

You are totally confused again. The verse i quoted for the martyrs say that they are alive. Where does I or that verse mentions any thing about the hands ? No mentioned.

 

In verses 4:123 and 4:45 Allah says that He is the Only and Sufficient Protector (Guardian).

لَّيْسَ بِأَمَانِيِّكُمْ وَلا أَمَانِيِّ أَهْلِ الْكِتَابِ مَن يَعْمَلْ سُوءًا يُجْزَ بِهِ وَلاَ يَجِدْ لَهُ مِن دُونِ اللّهِ وَلِيًّا

[Yusufali 4:123] whoever works evil, will be requited accordingly. Nor will he find, besides Allah, any protector (Waliyan)

وَاللّهُ أَعْلَمُ بِأَعْدَائِكُمْ وَكَفَى بِاللّهِ وَلِيًّا

[Yusufali 4:45] But Allah hath full knowledge of your enemies: Allah is enough for a protector (Waliyan),

 

But in verses 5:55 and 66:4, Allah says that He is Wali and along with Him, His messenger saww, true believers who establish prayers and pay Zakaat when they bow down (this refers to Imam Ali [as] who gave his ring to a beggar in state of bowing) are also the protectors/guardians.

إِنَّمَا وَلِيُّكُمُ اللّهُ وَرَسُولُهُ وَالَّذِينَ آمَنُواْ الَّذِينَ يُقِيمُونَ الصَّلاَةَ وَيُؤْتُونَ الزَّكَاةَ

وَهُمْ رَاكِعُونَ

[Pickthal 5:55] Your guardian (Waliukum) can be only Allah; and His messenger and those who believe, who establish worship and pay the poor due, and bow down (in prayer).

وَمَن يَتَوَلَّ اللّهَ وَرَسُولَهُ وَالَّذِينَ آمَنُواْ فَإِنَّ حِزْبَ اللّهِ هُمُ الْغَالِبُونَ

[Pickthal 5:56] And whoso taketh Allah and His messenger and those who believe for guardian (will know that), lo! the party of Allah, they are the victorious.

 

Is it associating partners to Allah, when we say that Rasool Allah (saww) and some believers are also our Waliys along with Allah? 

 

We call Ahl albayt as they are appointed by Allah. They are means to approach Allah. They are not partners to Allah as  salafi minded thinks.

 

And if we accept that Rasool Allah saww. and some believers are also our Waliys, does it mean that Allah is not the Only Wali (i.e. beside Him there are other Waliys too)? And does it mean that He is not enough as Wali?

 

When Allah says that He is the ONLY and SUFFICIENT Wali, then Rasool Allah [saww] and some believers are already included in it allegorically.

 

(Allah has used the term Wali 43 times in the Qur’an in a sense that He is the only Guardian, or take no guardian beside him, and He is enough as Guardian and on four occasions, Allah has said that Rasool Allah [saww], some Momineen, Gabriel (as) and angels are also our guardians).

 

Regards

Edited by skamran110

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@SeyedMajid

You said

"Allah (s.w.t.) puts Rasul and His Ahlulbayt صلوات الله علیهم اجمعین at the same level as Himself, when it comes to walayat!"

That is definitely partnering with God.

So according to you al Waly is in the same level as anybody else?

Obviously not.

Nobody can compare to God nor be put in the same level.

Find the difference between Waly and al Waly

It's an infinite difference.

No partners no shareek.

And all powers of a doctor are Gods power 100%

La hawla wala qowata ila bilah (research this saying)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These are related to your current creed of :

La illah ila Allah Muhammad Rasul Allah

In order to have a meaningful conversation and avoid any confusion, answer the following question in order and in its entirety, as they are related to your current  creed.

 

1) Four school of sunni thoughts: Which one- if none of the four - which one-name will suffice.

 

2) Are you a Quranist?(Y/N)

 

3) Is Prophet Muhammad(pbuhahp): Infallible (no error/no sin/no mistake): (Y/N)

      If no, explain your understanding.

 

4) Was the Quran compiled during the lifetime of the Prophet Muhammad(pbuhahp): (Y/N)

    4a) If No why not and when was it compiled and by whom?

 

5) Did the Prophet Muhammad(pbhahp) announce a successor:(Y/N)

  5a) If no, did he gave direction as to which method should be used to select one:(Y/N)

   If 5a is yes, which method.

 

*****

 

I would answer them but I wonder whether are you offended by the verses I've quoted? Seriously, these are not my words. I've also pasted Arabic text with them so one might not say that it's wrong translation.

 

 

وَلَا تَحْسَبَنَّ الَّذِينَ قُتِلُوا فِي سَبِيلِ اللَّهِ أَمْوَاتًا ۚ بَلْ أَحْيَاءٌ عِندَ رَبِّهِمْ يُرْزَقُونَ
Shakir
And reckon not those who are killed in Allah's way as dead; nay, they are alive (and) are provided sustenance from their Lord; (3:169)

 

 

I wish you read some other parts of Quran too, the life after death of Maqtooleen in the cause of Allah is in Jannah.

 

Sorah Yasin

 

36: 26 It was said, (after that man was killed) "Enter Paradise." He said, "I wish my people could know."

 

36: 27 Of how my Lord has forgiven me and placed me among the honored."

 

If the martyred are not PHYSICALLY dead, why are they buried? Why their wives become widows and their children become orphans> Why it is allowed to marry their widows? Why is their inheritance distributed?

 

[sahih Muslim - Book 020, Hadith 4651]

It has been narrated on the authority of Masruq who said: We asked ‘Abdullah about the Quranic verse: “Think not of those who are slain in Allah’s way as dead. Nay, they are alive, finding their sustenance in the presence of their Lord..” (3:169). He said: We asked the meaning of the verse (from the Holy Prophet) who said: The souls, of the martyrs live in the bodies of green birds who have their nests in chandeliers hung from the throne of the Almighty. They eat the fruits of Paradise from wherever they like and then nestle in these chandeliers. Once their Lord cast a glance at them and said: Do ye want anything? They said: What more shall we desire? We eat the fruit of Paradise from wherever we like. Their Lord asked them the same question thrice. When they saw that they will continue to be asked and not left (without answering the question). They said: O Lord, we wish that Thou mayest return our souls to our bodies so that we may be slain in Thy way once again. When He (Allah) saw that they had no need, they were left (to their joy in heaven).

Edited by Ramis Khan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@skamran

You still didn't answer what does Allah mean when he repeatedly says not to make dua to others than him? What dua is He talking about.

Then the next point.

Imam Ali is wali Allah. What us Allah? Al Waly. If you say Allah shares His Waly-hood with others then you say Allah has partners in something.

So there you have it.

You said above that when Allah says He's the only Waly, that he means Himself, Mohamed Ali etc etc?

Kind of reminds me of people who say God is one yet 3.

There is only one al Waly .. To you maybe al Waly is several creatures, but that's partnering in Allahs unique name.

Just think about what you wrote ..

"When Allah says that He is the ONLY and SUFFICIENT Wali, then Rasool Allah [saww] and some believers are already included in it allegorically."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

first of all this is not as small as you think, all we have to discuss about is these Quranic verses!

any way this is the second time you are running away answering the verses I raised in conversation. the first was in post #63

 

I'm sorry brother, but if you want me to continue the discussion, you will need to be a bit fairer than this. I have not run away from anything. I answered your posts point by point (http://www.shiachat.com/forum/topic/235025820-nade-ali-as-by-bassim/?p=2744514), dealing with the verses you posted. Meanwhile, you haven't responded to what I have said about them, and haven't answered any of my questions.

 

If you don't understand what I wrote, then say so, but it is completely unfair to say that I haven't responded to the verses you posted, or have run away from them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4. N

5. N

6. Y

 
Based on above, This is what you belive. 
  1. According to your  belief, ALL Prophets were fallible.

  2. According to your  belief, ALL the Imams were fallible, including the Last Imam.

  3. You are not a Quranist.

  4. According to your belief, the Quran is fallible.

  5. According to your belief, the Quran was not compiled in book form during the lifetime of the Prophet Muhammad(pbuhahp).

  6. According to your belief, Prophet Muhammad (pbuhhp) did  announce a successor.

Just to confirm, falliable  (something has/someone) mistake, errors, sin.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

@skamran

You still didn't answer what does Allah mean when he repeatedly says not to make dua to others than him? What dua is He talking about.

Then the next point.

Imam Ali is wali Allah. What us Allah? Al Waly. If you say Allah shares His Waly-hood with others then you say Allah has partners in something.

So there you have it.

You said above that when Allah says He's the only Waly, that he means Himself, Mohamed Ali etc etc?

Kind of reminds me of people who say God is one yet 3.

There is only one al Waly .. To you maybe al Waly is several creatures, but that's partnering in Allahs unique name.
Just think about what you wrote ..

"When Allah says that He is the ONLY and SUFFICIENT Wali, then Rasool Allah [saww] and some believers are already included in it allegorically."

 

So you are clearly denying the verses that do not suit your so called theory of wilayah.  Allah, The prophet, Imam Ali and Momineen are also Wali. Allah is above all but this does not mean that the others wilayah should be denied, like you who is denying the verses of Quran like 5:55 and others.

 

 

Regards

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sorry brother, but if you want me to continue the discussion, you will need to be a bit fairer than this. I have not run away from anything. I answered your posts point by point (http://www.shiachat.com/forum/topic/235025820-nade-ali-as-by-bassim/?p=2744514), dealing with the verses you posted. Meanwhile, you haven't responded to what I have said about them, and haven't answered any of my questions.

 

If you don't understand what I wrote, then say so, but it is completely unfair to say that I haven't responded to the verses you posted, or have run away from them.

 

could you please repeat the questions that I did not answer???

you asked about my idea concerning the power of Imams and I've already responded in my last post

 

but as it feels like you have not seen my reply, here you are:

 

Haydar Husayn, on 17 Oct 2014 - 8:46 PM, said:

I don't need to know people's intentions, or peek into their hearts. Many people freely admit it, and have no problem in doing so. Just to be clear, do you think it is wrong to call on the Imams to help you, out of their own power that was given by them to Allah?

 

as long as you believe they are the pious slaves of Allah, and have no independence power helping us there is nothing wrong with that.

 

 

بصائر الدرجات في فضائل آل محمد صلى الله عليهم، ج‏1، ص: 241

 حَدَّثَنَا أَحْمَدُ بْنُ مُحَمَّدٍ عَنِ الْحُسَيْنِ بْنِ سَعِيدٍ عَنِ الْحَسَنِ بْنِ بُرْدَةَ «2» وَ أَبِي عَبْدِ اللَّهِ عَنْ جَعْفَرِ بْنِ الْحُسَيْنِ«3» الْخَزَّازِ عَنْ إِسْمَاعِيلَ بْنِ عَبْدِ الْعَزِيزِ قَالَ: قَالَ لِي أَبُو عَبْدِ اللَّهِ ع ضَعْ لِي فِي الْمُتَوَضَّإِ مَاءً قَالَ فَقُمْتُ فَوَضَعْتُ لَهُ فَدَخَلَ قَالَ فَقُلْتُ فِي نَفْسِي أَنَا أَقُولُ فِيهِ كَذَا وَ كَذَا وَ يَدْخُلُ الْمُتَوَضَّأَ فَلَمْ يَلْبَثْ أَنْ خَرَجَ فَقَالَ يَا إِسْمَاعِيلَ بْنَ عَبْدِ الْعَزِيزِ لَا تَرْفَعُوا الْبِنَاءَ فَوْقَ طَاقَتِنَا فَيَنْهَدِمَ اجْعَلُونَا عَبِيداً مَخْلُوقِينَ وَ قُولُوا فِينَا مَا شِئْتُمْ قَالَ إِسْمَاعِيلُ كُنْتُ أَقُولُ فِيهِ

 

 

 

I'm sorry brother, but if you want me to continue the discussion, you will need to be a bit fairer than this. I have not run away from anything. I answered your posts point by point (http://www.shiachat.com/forum/topic/235025820-nade-ali-as-by-bassim/?p=2744514), dealing with the verses you posted. Meanwhile, you haven't responded to what I have said about them, and haven't answered any of my questions.

 

If you don't understand what I wrote, then say so, but it is completely unfair to say that I haven't responded to the verses you posted, or have run away from them.

nope! I compeletly understood what you wrote, it was not that philosophical!! -_-

 

this is the verse mentioned in one of my posts and you have not answered, whether you did not see or run away!

 

اسْتَغْفِرْ لَهُمْ أَوْ لا تَسْتَغْفِرْ لَهُمْ إِنْتَسْتَغْفِرْ لَهُمْ سَبْعينَ مَرَّةً فَلَنْ يَغْفِرَ اللَّهُ لَهُمْ ذلِكَ بِأَنَّهُمْ كَفَرُوا بِاللَّهِ وَ رَسُولِهِ وَ اللَّهُ لا يَهْدِي الْقَوْمَ الْفاسِقينَ (80)

 

 

4- I do not know why God put a kind of superiority and importance for the forgiveness asked by prophet rather than that of asked by ordinary people??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Your understanding of "Words" ?

 

فَتَلَقَّىٰ آدَمُ مِنْ رَبِّهِ كَلِمَاتٍ فَتَابَ عَلَيْهِ ۚ إِنَّهُ هُوَ التَّوَّابُ الرَّحِيمُ {37}

[shakir 2:37] Then Adam received (some) words from his Lord, so He turned to him mercifully; surely He is Oft-returning (to mercy), the Merciful.

[Pickthal 2:37] Then Adam received from his Lord words (of revelation), and He relented toward him. Lo! He is the relenting, the Merciful.

[Yusufali 2:37] Then learnt Adam from his Lord words of inspiration, and his Lord Turned towards him; for He is Oft-Returning, Most Merciful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

could you please repeat the questions that I did not answer???

you asked about my idea concerning the power of Imams and I've already responded in my last post

You didn't answer any of the questions I asked, and I never asked you about the power of the Imams. I saw the hadith you quoted, and ignored it, because you can't claim we need to focus on the Qur'an, and then start quoting ahadith. I'm aware that there are certain ahadith that would appear to attribute god-like knowledge and power to the Imams, but then there are also ahadith that deny such things. That is why we need to go to the Qur'an, particularly when it comes to an issue like supplicating to the Imams.

Here are the facts:

The Qur'an repeatedly warns people not to call on anyone other than Allah. There are no exceptions made, and no mention is made of how the 'real issue' is calling on those that you believe are independent if Allah. Compare this with the issue of intercession on Yawm al-Qiyamah. There we have some verses that say there is no intercession, and then others that say that there is no intercession except by those who Allah has granted permission. Allah could very easily have made the same distinction about making dua, but He didn't.

Furthermore, Allah gives many examples of making dua in the Qur'an, and they are all addressed to Allah. It is absurd to suggest that this form of making dua is not optimal, when Allah gives it in His own book. Again, Allah could very easily have given an example of someone calling on a Prophet who had passed away, but He doesn't.

As for the verses mentioned in the Qur'an that are used to support this practice of calling upon others, they are all about asking someone who is present in this world to pray to Allah for their forgiveness. This is nowhere near similar to calling on Imam Ali, who is no longer in this world, to grant you this or that through his own (God-given) supernatural power. Aside from that, we have a clear instruction not to call on other than Allah, and you can't ignore a clear instruction in favour of some verses that don't speak about the same situation.

When it comes to the ahadith, although there are some that attribute great knowledge and power to the Imams, and some others that mention asking them to intercede with Allah for us, these are in the context of being near their graves, and it is always Allah who is addressed first. Even then, since a hadith can not overrule the Qur'an, I don't think sensible people who accept them as proof in the absence of any Qur'anic evidence, given the strong apparent message in the Qur'an against such practices.

this is the verse mentioned in one of my posts and you have not answered, whether you did not see or run away!

اسْتَغْفِرْ لَهُمْ أَوْ لا تَسْتَغْفِرْ لَهُمْ إِنْ‏ تَسْتَغْفِرْ لَهُمْ سَبْعينَ مَرَّةً فَلَنْ يَغْفِرَ اللَّهُ لَهُمْ ذلِكَ بِأَنَّهُمْ كَفَرُوا بِاللَّهِ وَ رَسُولِهِ وَ اللَّهُ لا يَهْدِي الْقَوْمَ الْفاسِقينَ (80)

4- I do not know why God put a kind of superiority and importance for the forgiveness asked by prophet rather than that of asked by ordinary people??

I didn't respond to this because I didn't want to repeat myself, and the argument against it is the same as against the others (I notice by the way that you haven't disputed what I said about those verses). Since I obviously need to spell it out for you, I will tell you why this verse doesn't apply to your argument. First of all, there is a context, which you have so carefully avoided. The context is that the verses are speaking to the hypocrites who were refusing to obey the Messenger (pbuh). This can be seen clearly in reading the verses that preceded the one you quoted:

And when it is said to them, "Come to what Allah has revealed and to the Messenger," you see the hypocrites turning away from you in aversion.

So how [will it be] when disaster strikes them because of what their hands have put forth and then they come to you swearing by Allah , "We intended nothing but good conduct and accommodation."

Those are the ones of whom Allah knows what is in their hearts, so turn away from them but admonish them and speak to them a far-reaching word.

And We did not send any messenger except to be obeyed by permission of Allah . And if, when they wronged themselves, they had come to you, [O Muhammad], and asked forgiveness of Allah and the Messenger had asked forgiveness for them, they would have found Allah Accepting of repentance and Merciful.

But no, by your Lord, they will not [truly] believe until they make you, [O Muhammad], judge concerning that over which they dispute among themselves and then find within themselves no discomfort from what you have judged and submit in [full, willing] submission.

And if We had decreed upon them, "Kill yourselves" or "Leave your homes," they would not have done it, except for a few of them. But if they had done what they were instructed, it would have been better for them and a firmer position [for them in faith].

Here I just quoted 4:61 to 4:66, but I could have quoted even more to prove my point. You don't have to take my word for it either, here is what al-Tabatabei says in his Tafsir al-Mizan about these verses:

QUR'AN: And We did not send any Messenger but that he should be obeyed...: It is an all-encompassing refutation of these hypocrites' evil-doings described above: resorting to taghuts judgment, turning aside from the Messenger, swearing and offering excuse of having intention of good and concord. All this is, in one way or another, disobedience of the Messenger of Allah, whether accom­panied by any excuse or not. Allah has made his obedience compulsory without any restriction or condition; He has sent him only to be obeyed by Allah's permission. No one should imagine that it was only Allah's obedience that was required, while the Messenger was merely one of the human beings, who was obeyed only for people's good; and if such a result could be achieved without his obedience then there was no harm in going ahead independently, leaving the Messenger aside; otherwise it would mean associating him with Allah, and worshipping him. This attitude was reflected, every now and then, in their talk with the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.), when he took a decision about some important matter, and someone would ask him: Is it by Allah's order or by yours?

Therefore, Allah has made it clear that the obligation to obey the Prophet (s.a.w.) is all-encompassing and unconditional; it is nothing but Allah's obedience because it is by His permission. The verse in effect says what is declared in the verse 80 of this same chapter: whoever obeys the Messenger, he indeed obeys Allah.

Then Allah says that if they had returned to Allah and His Messenger, repenting for the sin of disobeying the Messenger and turning aside from him, it would have been better than their swearing in the name of Allah and offering lame and useless excuses which could not please the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.), as Allah would inform him of the reality behind that facade. This is the import of the second half of the verse: and had they, when they were unjust to themselves, come to you and asked forgiveness of Allah and the Messenger had (also) asked forgiveness for them, they would have found Allah Oft-returning (to mercy), Merciful.

So we see that once again, the reason they need to ask the Prophet for forgiveness is that they had wronged him for refusing to obey him. This isn't taking about asking him for forgiveness of private sins, or asking for their needs. Can you imagine if people during the time of the Prophet or Imams actually believed what you guys do? They would hardly be able to move, such would be the crowd of people around them asking them to pray on their behalf to Allah, or even for them to answer their needs themselves. I don't think there are records of even the ghulat doing such things.

could you please repeat the questions that I did not answer???

Read my post again, and look for the sentences with a question mark at the end. Quote them, and then answer them.

I know many people have their minds made up about these things, and nothing anyone says will change it. After all, only Allah can guide someone. I just hope that those who are more on the fence can see who it is that responds to the points made, and who it is that selectively quotes both their opponents and even the Qur'an. I also hope they can see who it is quoting the clear and decisive verses, and those who are relying on very convoluted arguments to defend things that aren't even the practices they are supposed to be defending. For a long list of verses from the Qur'an against calling on other than Allah, see: http://www.shiachat.com/forum/topic/234998451-calling-on-other-than-Allah-in-the-quran/

People need to ask themselves why Allah has given so many verses in the Qur'an that oppose calling on other than Him, and why there is nothing to support these practices that actually deals with calling on other than Him (asking someone to pray for you is hardly the same thing).

Edited by Haydar Husayn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So you are clearly denying the verses that do not suit your so called theory of wilayah. Allah, The prophet, Imam Ali and Momineen are also Wali. Allah is above all but this does not mean that the others wilayah should be denied, like you who is denying the verses of Quran like 5:55 and others.

Regards

You said earlier that Al Waly is on the same level as mohamed and ali due to your interpretation of that verse. Ever thought that I'd interpret it in a way where al Waly is a unique name of Allah who has no partners .. Including his walaya?

Tell me .. So you believe that Allah has partners in his wilaya?

So this means that Allah la sharik lahu .. Is limited .. In case of wilaya he has shuraka/ partners

And you truly believe as you said that when Allah tells us He's our only Waly, that he is referring to himself as a division of different people as well as himself?

This is very interesting for me.

Al Waly = Allah + mohamed + ali+ hassan + Hussein + .... + ourselves +.....+ Mahdi + ...

If that's not shirq / partnering then what is?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

0.

 

لَّا تَجْعَلُوا دُعَاءَ الرَّ‌سُولِ بَيْنَكُمْ كَدُعَاءِ بَعْضِكُم بَعْضًا

 

Do not make [your] calling of the Messenger among yourselves as the call of one of you to another.

 

Please do not use Mohammad or Ali to refer to the Prophet (s.a.w.a.w.) or Imam Ali (a.s.).

 

1.

 

مَّن يُطِعِ الرَّ‌سُولَ فَقَدْ أَطَاعَ اللَّـهَ ۖ وَمَن تَوَلَّىٰ فَمَا أَرْ‌سَلْنَاكَ عَلَيْهِمْ حَفِيظًا ٨٠

 

He who obeys the Messenger has obeyed Allah; but those who turn away - We have not sent you over them as a guardian. 80

 

Does it mean that, in case of obedience, Allah (s.w.t.) has a partner?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

" Please do not use Mohammad or Ali to refer to the Prophet (s.a.w.a.w.) or Imam Ali (a.s.)."

Why? In Quran he's referred as muhamad and we all say Alahuma sali ala mhmd wali mhmd ..

Not Alahuma sali ala rasul mhmd (saawaws) w aali (as)

-----

First read what you wrote above .. Third and in sha Allah last time I tell you

You said:

1. Allah is on same level with anyone

2. When Allah says He's the only Waly (as in al Waly, His Holy Name) you said that included him and other individuals.

This verse you posted ..

"He who obeys the Messenger has obeyed Allah; but those who turn away - We have not sent you over them as a guardian. 80

Does it mean that, in case of obedience, Allah (s.w.t.) has a partner?"

Obedience is from us .. Allah isn't the one obeying .. So you can't say Allah obeys & the prophet obeys etc (can't compare obeying .. Verb coming from us .. With a name of Allah such as al Waly only reserved for the One.)

Do you understand that this can not be compared with saying that al Waly = Allah + several people?

Al Waly = noun Name of Allah

Obey = verb action of people

Totally incomparable

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. Quran is Allah's (s.w.t.) words and your words are your words.

I thought the verse that I provided was enough.

 

2. I don't know where you're going with al-waly and waly thing!

I did not say Allah (s.w.t.) is waly and "that included him and other individuals."

I simply copied and pasted a verse from Quran, and provided it's translation.

So basically it's what Quran says!

Quran states that our waly is Allah (s.w.t.) and the Prophet (s.a.w.a.w.) and Ahlulbayt (a.s.).

If you have problem with "at the same level", I take it back.

That was not the point, at all. The point was about knowing those whom Allah (s.w.t.) has appointed in-charge.

 

3. Obedience is from us, so is making dua!

Obey = verb action of people

Making dua = verb action of people

 

So according to Quran, we obey the Prophet (s.a.w.a.w.), and it's as if we obeyed Allah (s.w.t.).

We've been trying to say, we call the Prophet (s.a.w.a.w.), and it's as if we called upon Allah (s.w.t.) and it's not calling someone besides Allah (s.w.t.).

But you're trying to tell us that we call the Prophet (s.a.w.a.w.), and it's as if we're moshrikin!!!

 

In sha Allah (s.w.t.) I won't repeat myself anymore.

 

أقول قولي هذا وأستغفر الله العظيم لي ولكم

و السلام علیکم و رحمة الله و برکاته

و لعاقبة للمتقین

Edited by SeyedMajid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It looks to be a version of Salafi group or HCY .


 


Misquoting the verses addressing the non-muslims / idol worshipers and applying them to believing Muslims thats the tricky game played by the salafi minded here.


 


Taking Literal meaning of verses in hard form is the salafi disease also present in the heart of some persons present in the group. The same philosophy Wahhabi follow to declare the muslims as nonmuslims. Very funny


 


No need to waste of time any more.


Edited by skamran110

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Walaikum salaam warahmat Allah wabarakatu

"Allah (s.w.t.) puts Rasul and His Ahlulbayt صلوات الله علیهم اجمعین at the same level as Himself, when it comes to walayat!"

.. Partner in His wilaya

This is skamran who wrote this

""When Allah says that He is the ONLY and SUFFICIENT Wali, then Rasool Allah [saww] and some believers are already included in it allegorically."

.. So when Allah says He's the only Waly you guys interpret it as being He and some other guys are the only Waly. Again changing the clear meaning of the statement .. And using this one to ignore further statement of Allah saying not to make duas to others.

In your logic when Allah clearly and repeatedly says only make duas to Him, you say that this equally means He means the opposite. That He means make dua to Him and others as well.

So you might as well tell me that when Allah tells you only to worship Him, that He actually means Him and some other guys. Why not? The word abd is used for slaves of people too! Just like there are two uses of the root word dua that is not related with making duas to God at all.

Allah tells us countless times only to make duas to Him, that He's the only Waly .. You can interpret it us untrue, that He actually meant He and other but said the opposite. I won't go down that road ever. You have your way and I have mine, based in fact that Allah says we should make only duas to Him. That's me and you keep making duas to others than God and let's see who is right very soon in sha Allah.

(Wasalam)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When Allah says that He is the ONLY and SUFFICIENT Wali, then Rasool Allah [saww] and some believers are already included in it allegorically.


 


In addition to the following: the part which is neglected


 


(Allah has used the term Wali 43 times in the Qur’an in a sense that He is the only Guardian, or take no guardian beside him, and He is enough as Guardian and on four occasions, Allah has said that Rasool Allah [saww], some Momineen, Gabriel  (as) and angels are also our guardians).


 


http://www.shiachat.com/forum/topic/235025820-nade-ali-as-by-bassim/page-4


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^^ ok again confirming that when Allah tells you He's your only Waly, you take it as Allah is not your only Waly ..

 

in other words, you say that in the verse where He says He's the only waly, the meaning of the word Waly is the same as the verses where He refers to others as waly. and you chose to use the shared version to Allah's unique version. 

 

As you guys are saying: Allah is sharing/partnering in his Wilaya, meaning that the statement

 

Allah la sharika lah is conditional and limited. For you guys there are instances where Allah partners up with creatures. Instance where one can make shirk. ( such as example of prophet or imam being sharik/partners in Allah's wilaya and recipients of dua )

 

same level .. shared task of wilaya, dua, etc .. that's definition of partnership/shirq

 

 

whatever your definition of those verses including the word waly are, you can be sure it is in line with principles of

 

1. Allah has no sharik / partner ( example: in wilaya, hearer of duas, etc)

2. Allah can not be compared ( example: His Wilaya, Hearing duas or anything)

3. there is no might and power other than Allah ( example: all Wilayat, responding to dua, etc )

 

 

 

.. and as i said in my previous post, you might as well apply that to the word abd .. you might as well start saying when Allah says worship noone other than me, He meant "me and Mohamed and Ali etc" .. especially that the word abd is used for abd of other people in the quran. 

 

this is what happens when people partner duas to Allah with talking to others. the Wilaya of Allah with wilaya of others .. and ultimately the worship of Allah with the slavery of others.

 

finally, the argument of Allah telling us to obey Him and the prophet:

 

Allah never says "only obey me" .. He says repeatedly clearly obey Him and the prophet.

 

however, He says "only make dua to me", and "i'm your only waly" .. think of it.

 

 

and let me tell you that the standard teachings of any sect are filled with mistakes, so best one thinks critically of ones own scholars and religious beliefs.

Edited by peace seeker II

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

It looks to be a version of Salafi group or HCY .

 

Misquoting the verses addressing the non-muslims / idol worshipers and applying them to believing Muslims thats the tricky game played by the salafi minded here.

 

Taking Literal meaning of verses in hard form is the salafi disease also present in the heart of some persons present in the group. The same philosophy Wahhabi follow to declare the muslims as nonmuslims. Very funny

 

No need to waste of time any more.

 

 

yeah when the interpretation doesn't suit you, then it's "misquoted" .. although what is written there is clear:

 

Allah tells us He is our only Waly .. so saying "Allah is our only Waly" is misquoting for you .. interesting. especially backed up by fact that Allah has no partners, can not be compared and that there is no might and now power except with Allah. 

 

yeah it's us misquoting right?

 

and it's us misquoting by repeating that we should only make dua to Allah .. when that is what is written there in the quran again and again. And it's not even written once otherwise. Can you get a verse that says "make dua to Allah and Mohamed and Ali, etc?" .. or "go to the mosque and make dua to Allah and others?" no! so who is misquoting here?

 

can you really blame us for sticking to what Allah actually said? in line with concepts such as tawheed, and that Allah has no partners and is beyond comparison? i think you are the one taking a bigger leap of misquoting than us.

 

 

 

Taking Literal meaning of verses in hard form

 

i could say the same about you when you take the verse literally that Allah and others are our wali. (taking this literally as a green light to change the meaning of "Allah is your only Waly" and "make duas only to Allah" ... to include the imaginary word " and others as well". why only us taking it literally, because we say only Allah is our Waly, which is clearly stated repeatedly, and supported by the fact that only Allah carries the name al Waly. fact! so clearly the wilaya of Allah isn't the same as wilaya of humans. just like being slave of God is different from being slave of human.

 

read this and you will understand what trap you are falling into by creating fitna between brothers and referring to us as the enemy, just because the enemy is using our weaknesses to get to us, and futher distance us from the truth they falsely claim as their own now.

 

http://www.shiachat.com/forum/topic/235025119-conversation-with-the-devil/#entry2744670

 

and you are falling into the trap of looking at who said it and not at what is being said. shows how prejudism is harmful, and how you are not even listening to what is being said, or giving it a chance.

 

also shows how you think your scholars and beliefs are infallible, and you are not open to change what is within us .. within you .. within the modern day shia who have been without direct guidance since over a millenium.

Edited by peace seeker II

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...