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  
AlKhidr

Shia Challenging Questions

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

Salaam Power

 

You have not answered my questions that I have asked you.  Also you are a Shia Muslims and the subjects that I addressed, I know for a fact you are fully aware of them and the sources from which they come from.  I have took the belief system of the Shia sect and compared it to the Qur'aan.

 

Now I have more questions for you:

 

1.  Did you read my Shia Challenging Question document?

 

2.  What do you think of the image of the 12 imams the Shia Ulama has created, do you think they accurately reflect the race of the 12 Imams?

 

3.  You believe the Ali, 12 Imams. Ahlul Bayt are infallible?

 

4.  Do you believe Allah placed a Khalifa to be the successor after Prophet Muhammad?

 

5.  Do you believe that the 12 Imam whom the Shia sect is the hidden or invisible one that will come?

As Salaamu Alaykum To All

 

I have uploaded my document  inside this forum that I wrote exposing the Shia fabricated Mut'ah and proved that it does not exist in the Qur'aan and how as usual the Shia Ulama and their scholars twist and distort the Arabic in the Qur'aan to try to justify it.  Below is the direct link to the post in this forum:

 

http://www.shiachat.com/forum/topic/235033528-shia-mutah-does-not-exist-in-quraan/?p=2855637

I am waiting too. We were discussing (yourself) and your misrepresentation about (harem) and (halal).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, the boxed words are tuharrimu and ahalla, which are both verbs; tuharrimu is a masculine singular imperfect verb in the second person and ahalla is a masculine singular perfect verb in the 3rd person. Yes, tuharrimu and ahalla derive from halal and haram but the latter are nouns and different meanings. You are playing a dangerous game by twisting the words of the Qur'an. Why don't you be a good neophyte, log off Shiachat and play Dungeons & Dragons? (All right, I am sorry that was uncalled for, I can't take anybody who uses the word "neophyte" seriously. Apologize, won't do it again.)

But in all seriousness, by claiming that the words halal and haram are mentioned in 66:1-2, you effectively done what you accuse us of doing; Distorting and lying about the Qur'an, your credibility, if you had any, is destroyed by your lying. Anybody in audience who studies Arabic seriously or anyone who can read this and use an Qur'anic dictionary knows beyond a shadow of a doubt, that you just lied to them. Just like you lied to me and Shiaman14, and now you have spoken too soon about schooling anyone. Sorry for the harsh tone but I don't tolerate misrepresentation of the Qur'an in the name of progressivism, liberalism and reform. Islam does not need a reform; It is Allah's perfected religion for me,you, us and all of mankind.

The problem with disproving the Shia sect with 48:2 is that we are a diverse group,some of us believe in the ismah of the Imams (as) ,some of us don't and again if you read it in context with 48:1 and 3,the meaning changes. I'll get into more detail later when I can.

6:159 could also apply to the Qur'aniyoon movement, there's a lot of disagreement over the correct form of Qur'an alone, Code 19'ers, Ahl-e Qur'an and Kalo Kato all differ from one another from practices and beliefs. Since you are so worked up about Shia committing shirk, I am going to let you in on something; Followers of Rashad Khalifa commit shirk big time with the Code 19 and Khalifa considered himself a prophet; Guess what, they prove their beliefs with sources out of the Qur'an to prove the existence of a code within the Qur'an. Now, I believe that the Qur'aan has an inner and an outer message but Code 19 isn't it. These guys say that the Qur'an is corrupted and have the gall to not twist the Qur'an but to deliberately remove two verses of Surah At-Tawbah so their code 19 works. No Shia or Sunni does this atrocity, only Qur'aniyoon do this and the 19ers are very much a part of the Qur'an aloners.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Salaam Shiaman14

 

Let me school you again:

 

"Everyone with half a brain knows that when reading the Quran anything in parentheses is the writer's interpretation and not translation."

 

Let me correct you and shed some proper light on this subject.  When one translates the Qur'aan parenthesis are not diminished to the writers interpretation, thus parenthesis can be used to help bring about the correct meaning and interpretation of the Arabic text and lastly, whether one uses parenthesis or not, you have to accurately reflect the meaning, context of the Arabic text of the Qur'aan which is a rule (for those who manifest taqwa) follow.  However, you the Shiaman14 constantly take words out of context, distort the meaning of the Qur'aan to support your Shia sect school of thought which I have exposed over and over just like your recent mistranslation below:

 

 

Qur'aan 66:1 "O Prophet! why do you forbid (yourself)"-mistranslation by Shiaman14

 

So not only are you mistranslating the Qur'aan, you are misusing and abusing the use of parenthesis to conceal the fact that this verse proves that Muhammad is NOT infallible.  This verse does not say, why Muhammad forbids himself, this verse (Qur'aan 66:1) is clearly saying that Muhammad prohibited something that Allah has made lawful in order to please his wives, which was a clear and obvious mistake because no one has the authority to change anything that Allah has decreed.  Now this neophyte (Shiaman14) continues to make himself look like [edited out] before the thousands of viewers of this post by saying this:

 

"But then in his [Edited out], he quotes the same verse with (haram) and (halaal) in parentheses."

 

By you actually saying this, you must don't realize that the Arabic words: HARAAM & HALAL are in the Arabic text.  Let me help you my neophyte, look below I have placed a box around the Arabic words HARAAM (PROHIBIT) & HALAL (LAWFUL) to make it easy for you to see:

 

Quraan%2066%20verse%201%20haraam%20amp%2

 

haraam%20amp%20halal.jpg

 

As we can all see the Arabic words: HARAAM (PROHIBIT) & HALAL (LAWFUL) are in the Arabic text so when I placed the parenthesis in the English translation, those parenthesis reflected the accuracy of the meaning of the verse in Arabic unlike when you concocted this mistranslation below, again to hide the fact that Muhammad was not infallible which is pure shirk that the Shia sect teaches:

 

Qur'aan 66:1

O Prophet! why do you forbid (yourself) seeking to please your wives that Allah has made lawful for you; and Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.

 

Mistranslation by Shiaman14

 

The thousands of viewers of this debate have witnessed how the Shi'ite Moslems can't even show us one single verse that proves that Ali, Ahlul Bayt, Muhammad are infallible but yet they just want you to believe it.  The Shia sect are teaching us a Christianized Form Of Islaam.

 

This is one thing that I have learned about the Shia sect: There are a lot of verses in the Qur'aan that causes damage to the Shia school of thought and when they come across those verses, they will mistranslate it to support their sect school of thought and below are some examples that I exposed earlier in this post.  This verse below is another one that proves Muhammad is not infallible for the simple fact Allah forgave Muhammad for his faults (past & future).  If Muhammad would not have any faults then there would be no need for Allah to forgive him:

 

Quraan%2048%20verse%202%20translation%20

 

Below is the Arabic break down for this verse so these Shia Moslems can't deceive you:

 

Quraan%2048%20verse%202%20Arabic%20break

 

This is another verse that causes damage to the Shia school of thought so what they do is mistranslate this verse to conceal that fact that Muhammad had faults that Allah forgave him for which ultimately proves that Muhammad is not infallible:

 

Quraan%2048%20verse%202%20Shia%20mistran

 

You will notice in this mistranslation by these so-called Shia scholars try to make it look like the faults (as they say shortcoming) are on the followers of Muhammad and not Muhammad himself.  Below is another example of how they mistranslate this verse and in this mistranslation Shakir distorted the verse to put the faults on the community when there is nothing in the Arabic text that talks about a community having faults:

 

Quraan%2048%20verse%202%20Shakir.jpg

 

And these are some of the reasons why Allah tells us to avoid and not be part of sects:

 

V15940.jpg

 

The key Arabic words are:

 

SECTS40.jpg

 

Prophet Muhammad followed Qur'aan ALONE and this is the only true path of Al Islaam.

 

 

 

 

 

[Noted from Moderator: Please refrain from personal remarks and derogatory language]. 

Edited by Jaafar Al-Shibli
Personal remarks and Derogatory language.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is referring to the mistakes he committed out of forgetfulness, this does not impinge upon his infallibility.

 

The prophet [saw] is protected from intentional sins and by making mistakes in guiding us in Islamic teaching, logic dictates that the latf(grace) of Allah protects our prophet [saw] in teaching us Islam.


So not only are you mistranslating the Qur'aan, you are misusing and abusing the use of parenthesis to conceal the fact that this verse proves that Muhammad is NOT infallible.  This verse does not say, why Muhammad forbids himself, this verse (Qur'aan 66:1) is clearly saying that Muhammad prohibited something that Allah has made lawful in order to please his wives, which was a clear and obvious mistake because no one has the authority to change anything that Allah has decreed.  Now this neophyte (Shiaman14) continues to make himself look like [edited out] before the thousands of viewers of this post by saying this:
 
"But then in his [Edited out], he quotes the same verse with (haram) and (halaal) in parentheses."
 
By you actually saying this, you must don't realize that the Arabic words: HARAAM & HALAL are in the Arabic text.  Let me help you my neophyte, look below I have placed a box around the Arabic words HARAAM (PROHIBIT) & HALAL (LAWFUL) to make it easy for you to see:

 

 

The verse in Arabic isn't saying that the prophet [saw] made haram what Allah has made halal, it means that he is restraining himself a mubaah(permitted) action which Allah has allowed him to do.

 

Secondly you are spewing blasphemy and you don't even know it, because the prophet [saw] can never make something haram which Allah has made halal nor say something which isn't from Allah without being destroyed by God or committing kufr (Noathbillah).

 

"Or have they partners with Allah who have instituted for them a religion which Allah has not allowed." [surah Shura (42), ayah 8] 

 

 

Surah Al haqqah 40-48
 
40. That this is verily the word of an honoured Messenger [i.e. Jibrael (Gabriel) or Muhammad  which he has brought from Allah].
 
41. It is not the word of a poet, little is that you believe!
 
42. Nor is it the word of a soothsayer (or a foreteller), little is that you remember!
 
43. This is the Revelation sent down from the Lord of the 'Alamin (mankind, jinns and all that exists).
 
44. And if he (Muhammad ) had forged a false saying concerning Us (Allah),
 
45. We surely should have seized him by his right hand (or with power and might),
 
46. And then certainly should have cut off his life artery (Aorta),
 
47. And none of you could withhold Us from (punishing) him.
 
48. And verily, this Qur'an is a Reminder for the Muttaqun (pious - see V.2:2)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Salaam Shiaman14

 

Let me school you again:

 

"Everyone with half a brain knows that when reading the Quran anything in parentheses is the writer's interpretation and not translation."

 

Let me correct you and shed some proper light on this subject.  When one translates the Qur'aan parenthesis are not diminished to the writers interpretation, thus parenthesis can be used to help bring about the correct meaning and interpretation of the Arabic text and lastly, whether one uses parenthesis or not, you have to accurately reflect the meaning, context of the Arabic text of the Qur'aan which is a rule (for those who manifest taqwa) follow.

 

So I say "interpretation" and its a problem. You say the exact same thing and its okay. I have seen pieces of  dead wood with more common sense than you.

 

From the link you gave me (http://readquranonline.org/index/view/s/66/a/1):

Muhammad Ahmed - Samira[66.1]:  O PROPHET, WHY should you forbid (yourself) what God has made lawful for you, in order to please your wives? Yet God is forgiving and kind.
Ali Quli Qara'i[66.1]:  O Prophet! Why do you prohibit [yourself] what Allah has made lawful for you, seeking to please your wives? And Allah is all-forgiving, all-merciful.
Ali Ünal[66.1]:  O Prophet (you who are the greatest representative of Prophethood)! Why do you forbid (yourself) what God has made lawful to you? You seek to please your wives. And God is All-Forgiving, All-Compassionate.
Amatul Rahman Omar[66.1]:  Prophet! why do you forbid yourself the things which Allâh has made lawful to you? You seek the pleasure (of Allâh) for your wives. And Allâh is Great Protector, Ever Merciful.
Faridul Haque[66.1]:  O dear Prophet (Mohammed – peace and blessings be upon him)! Why do you forbid for yourself the things that Allah has made lawful for you? You wish to please some of your wives; and Allah is Oft Forgiving, Most Merciful.
Shakir[66.1]:  O Prophet! why do you forbid (yourself) that which Allah has made lawful for you; you seek to please your wives; and Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.
Umm Muhammad (Sahih International)[66.1]:  O Prophet, why do you prohibit [yourself from] what Allah has made lawful for you, seeking the approval of your wives? And Allah is Forgiving and Merciful.
 
Either don't provide links or be ready to back them up.
Sometimes silence is the best answer.
Dont for a second think that I am not on to your diversionary tactic of focusing on "yourself" to avoid the actual question that whether I include the word yourself in the translation or not, there is no mistake here. Me saying "I prohibit chicken on me" and me saying "chicken is haram" are entirely different sentences with completely different meaning.
 
Let's say for argument's sake that Muhammad made wives haram. Was it just on HIMSELF or all muslims? If you say just Muhammad, then "yourself" is the correct translation and if you say all Muslims, you would be a liar because that absolutely did not happen.
 

 

This verse does not say, why Muhammad forbids himself, this verse (Qur'aan 66:1) is clearly saying that Muhammad prohibited something that Allah has made lawful in order to please his wives, which was a clear and obvious mistake because no one has the authority to change anything that Allah has decreed.  Now this neophyte (Shiaman14) continues to make himself look like [edited out] before the thousands of viewers of this post by saying this:

 

"But then in his [Edited out], he quotes the same verse with (haram) and (halaal) in parentheses."

 

By you actually saying this, you must don't realize that the Arabic words: HARAAM & HALAL are in the Arabic text.  Let me help you my neophyte, look below I have placed a box around the Arabic words HARAAM (PROHIBIT) & HALAL (LAWFUL) to make it easy for you to see:

 

Quraan%2066%20verse%201%20haraam%20amp%2

 

haraam%20amp%20halal.jpg

 

As we can all see the Arabic words: HARAAM (PROHIBIT) & HALAL (LAWFUL) are in the Arabic text so when I placed the parenthesis in the English translation, those parenthesis reflected the accuracy of the meaning of the verse in Arabic unlike when you concocted this mistranslation below, again to hide the fact that Muhammad was not infallible which is pure shirk that the Shia sect teaches:

 

Qur'aan 66:1

O Prophet! why do you forbid (yourself) seeking to please your wives that Allah has made lawful for you; and Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.

 

Mistranslation by Shiaman14

 

The thousands of viewers of this debate have witnessed how the Shi'ite Moslems can't even show us one single verse that proves that Ali, Ahlul Bayt, Muhammad are infallible but yet they just want you to believe it.  The Shia sect are teaching us a Christianized Form Of Islaam.

 

This is one thing that I have learned about the Shia sect: There are a lot of verses in the Qur'aan that causes damage to the Shia school of thought and when they come across those verses, they will mistranslate it to support their sect school of thought and below are some examples that I exposed earlier in this post.

 
Brother Gaius spoke about haram and halal and your gross mistranslation very eloquently so I will just re-quote him:

 

No, the boxed words are tuharrimu and ahalla, which are both verbs; tuharrimu is a masculine singular imperfect verb in the second person and ahalla is a masculine singular perfect verb in the 3rd person. Yes, tuharrimu and ahalla derive from halal and haram but the latter are nouns and different meanings. You are playing a dangerous game by twisting the words of the Qur'an. Why don't you be a good neophyte, log off Shiachat and play Dungeons & Dragons? (All right, I am sorry that was uncalled for, I can't take anybody who uses the word "neophyte" seriously. Apologize, won't do it again.)

But in all seriousness, by claiming that the words halal and haram are mentioned in 66:1-2, you effectively done what you accuse us of doing; Distorting and lying about the Qur'an, your credibility, if you had any, is destroyed by your lying. Anybody in audience who studies Arabic seriously or anyone who can read this and use an Qur'anic dictionary knows beyond a shadow of a doubt, that you just lied to them. Just like you lied to me and Shiaman14, and now you have spoken too soon about schooling anyone. Sorry for the harsh tone but I don't tolerate misrepresentation of the Qur'an in the name of progressivism, liberalism and reform. Islam does not need a reform; It is Allah's perfected religion for me,you, us and all of mankind.

 

 

Surah Fath has already been discussed and your incorrect theory that it is referring to Muhammad has been proven incorrect but I will re-quote myself here:

You are correct - the Quran refers to the Prophet as "you" at times and as Messenger others and lots of other adjectives for him. I am going to put Shakir's translation below and then replace "you" with Muhammad thereafter:

[shakir 48:8] Surely We have sent you as a witness and as a bearer of good news and as a warner,

[shakir 48:9] That you may believe in Allah and His Messenger and may aid him and revere him; and (that) you may declare His glory, morning and evening.

...

[shakir 48:12] Nay! you rather thought that the Messenger and the believers would not return to their families ever, and that was made fairseeming to your hearts and you thought an evil thought and you were a people doomed to perish.

[shakir 48:13] And whoever does not believe in Allah and His Messenger, then surely We have prepared burning fire for the unbelievers

 

[shiaMan14 48:8] Surely We have sent Muhammad as a witness and as a bearer of good news and as a warner,

[shiaMan14 48:9] That Muhammad may believe in Allah and His Messenger and may aid him and revere him; and (that) you may declare His glory, morning and evening.

...

[shiaMan14 48:12] Nay! Muhammad rather thought that the Messenger and the believers would not return to their families ever, and that was made fairseeming to your hearts and Muhammad thought an evil thought and you were a people doomed to perish.

[shiaMan14 48:13] And whoever does not believe in Allah and His Messenger, then surely We have prepared burning fire for the unbelievers

If you are correct, then verse 8 & 9 and 12 & 13 make no sense whatsoever.

The problem is that you read Quran to find problems with Muhammad while I read the Quran to glorify Allah. Anyone with an iota of intelligence will realize that multiple people are being spoken to in the same surah.

 

For now we will ignore 53:1-5, so again for arguments sake, lets say the Prophet made mistakes? By that definition the veracity of every surah prior to 48 (1-47 by your definition) is in doubt because what if Muhammad made a mistake in relaying the ayah to us?

 

So far all you have schooled me in is the fact that you have no idea what you are doing. At times you read verses in isolation but when convenient you refer to preceding or following verses or even verses from a different surah. Every time you post something, you make my case stronger and stronger. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, the boxed words are tuharrimu and ahalla, which are both verbs; tuharrimu is a masculine singular imperfect verb in the second person and ahalla is a masculine singular perfect verb in the 3rd person. Yes, tuharrimu and ahalla derive from halal and haram but the latter are nouns and different meanings. You are playing a dangerous game by twisting the words of the Qur'an. Why don't you be a good neophyte, log off Shiachat and play Dungeons & Dragons? (All right, I am sorry that was uncalled for, I can't take anybody who uses the word "neophyte" seriously. Apologize, won't do it again.)

But in all seriousness, by claiming that the words halal and haram are mentioned in 66:1-2, you effectively done what you accuse us of doing; Distorting and lying about the Qur'an, your credibility, if you had any, is destroyed by your lying. Anybody in audience who studies Arabic seriously or anyone who can read this and use an Qur'anic dictionary knows beyond a shadow of a doubt, that you just lied to them. Just like you lied to me and Shiaman14, and now you have spoken too soon about schooling anyone. Sorry for the harsh tone but I don't tolerate misrepresentation of the Qur'an in the name of progressivism, liberalism and reform. Islam does not need a reform; It is Allah's perfected religion for me,you, us and all of mankind.

The problem with disproving the Shia sect with 48:2 is that we are a diverse group,some of us believe in the ismah of the Imams (as) ,some of us don't and again if you read it in context with 48:1 and 3,the meaning changes. I'll get into more detail later when I can.

6:159 could also apply to the Qur'aniyoon movement, there's a lot of disagreement over the correct form of Qur'an alone, Code 19'ers, Ahl-e Qur'an and Kalo Kato all differ from one another from practices and beliefs. Since you are so worked up about Shia committing shirk, I am going to let you in on something; Followers of Rashad Khalifa commit shirk big time with the Code 19 and Khalifa considered himself a prophet; Guess what, they prove their beliefs with sources out of the Qur'an to prove the existence of a code within the Qur'an. Now, I believe that the Qur'aan has an inner and an outer message but Code 19 isn't it. These guys say that the Qur'an is corrupted and have the gall to not twist the Qur'an but to deliberately remove two verses of Surah At-Tawbah so their code 19 works. No Shia or Sunni does this atrocity, only Qur'aniyoon do this and the 19ers are very much a part of the Qur'an aloners.

 

Salaam Gaius

 

"No, the boxed words are tuharrimu and ahalla, which are both verbs; tuharrimu is a masculine singular imperfect verb in the second person and ahalla is a masculine singular perfect verb in the 3rd person. Yes, tuharrimu and ahalla derive from halal and haram but the latter are nouns and different meanings."

 

I cannot believe how you Shi'ite Muslims are distorting clear and obvious verses to try to support your shirk sect school of thought of teaching that Ali, 12 Imams, Ahlul Bayt, Muhammad are infallible.  Below is the Arabic word tuharrimu which is translated as "you prohibit", which is taken from this website: http://corpus.quran.com/wordbyword.jsp:

 

tuharrimu.jpg

 

tuharrimu%20you%20prohibit.jpg

 

And I want you to look closely at the prefix "tu" on the word "harrimu''.  The prefix "tu" does not change the meaning of the word "harrimu'' and notice that they translate this Arabic word as "you prohibit" because that is exactly what it means.  Again the prefix "tu" does not change the meaning of the word "harrimu'', thus the prefix "tu" is letting us know that Allah was speaking to Muhammad in the present tense.

 

There are thousands of people looking at this debate and can see how the Shia Muslims are a joke in distorting the Qur'aan to support their sectarian school of thought.  Two or three days ago we had over 4040 views and it is one of the fastest growing post in this forum which shows you how important this subject is to the masses of the people and guess what, the so-called moderators have turned off the statistics that shows us how many people are viewing this post as a tactic to not bring attention to the people's eyes.  When you now look at how many views this post has, it says ZERO "0".  In addition the moderator deleted my post in response to Shiaman14 and then I reposted it again.  These are the games you Shia Muslims are playing all because this knowledge pose a threat to your belief system, your school of thought.  Again below is the correct translation of this verse (66:1) that Shia Muslims, scholars, shaykhs are notorious for mistranslating to prevent their school of thought from being exposed because they are deceiving people to believe that Ali, 12 Imams, Ahlul Bayt, Muhammad are infallible.  Any clear thinking person can read this verse below (66:1) and see that Muhammad made a mistake by trying to prohibit something that Allah has made lawful because he (Muhammad) wanted to please his wives:

 

Quraan%2066%20verse%201%20correct%20tran

 

Below is the other verse which proves that Muhammad had faults (past & future) that Allah forgave him for which ultimately proves beyond doubt that he (Muhammad) is NOT INFALLIBLE:

 

Quraan%2048%20verse%202%20translation%20

 

This is referring to the mistakes he committed out of forgetfulness, this does not impinge upon his infallibility.

 

The prophet [saw] is protected from intentional sins and by making mistakes in guiding us in Islamic teaching, logic dictates that the latf(grace) of Allah protects our prophet [saw] in teaching us Islam.

 

The verse in Arabic isn't saying that the prophet [saw] made haram what Allah has made halal, it means that he is restraining himself a mubaah(permitted) action which Allah has allowed him to do.

 

Secondly you are spewing blasphemy and you don't even know it, because the prophet [saw] can never make something haram which Allah has made halal nor say something which isn't from Allah without being destroyed by God or committing kufr (Noathbillah).

 

"Or have they partners with Allah who have instituted for them a religion which Allah has not allowed." [surah Shura (42), ayah 8] 

 

 

Surah Al haqqah 40-48
 
40. That this is verily the word of an honoured Messenger [i.e. Jibrael (Gabriel) or Muhammad  which he has brought from Allah].
 
41. It is not the word of a poet, little is that you believe!
 
42. Nor is it the word of a soothsayer (or a foreteller), little is that you remember!
 
43. This is the Revelation sent down from the Lord of the 'Alamin (mankind, jinns and all that exists).
 
44. And if he (Muhammad ) had forged a false saying concerning Us (Allah),
 
45. We surely should have seized him by his right hand (or with power and might),
 
46. And then certainly should have cut off his life artery (Aorta),
 
47. And none of you could withhold Us from (punishing) him.
 
48. And verily, this Qur'an is a Reminder for the Muttaqun (pious - see V.2:2)

 

 

Salaam Abu Jafar Herz

 

I notice as result of what Shia Muslims are saying, I have to keep reminding YOU that: INFALLIBLE means: PERFECT, INCAPABLE OF ERROR and I noticed that you said this without proof from the Qur'aan:

 

"This is referring to the mistakes he committed out of forgetfulness, this does not impinge upon his infallibility"

 

Where is your proof at in the Qur'aan that Muhammad made this mistake out of forgetfulness????  Are you just making up your own hadiyth (conjecture) to try to support the Shia sectarian school of thought which teaches shirk that Ali, Ahlul Bayt, Muhammad are infallible?   I AM CHALLENGNING YOU STRAIGHT UP, WHERE IS YOUR EVIDENCE AT INSIDE THE QUR'AAN THAT MUHAMMAD MADE THIS MISTAKE OUT OF FORGETFULNESS IN QUR'AAN 66:1 (TARRIM VERSE 1)????  Jafar if you cannot prove this in the Qur'aan, then you are guilty of building a premise based on flawed logic and arguments.  I must remind you Jafar that if a man like Muhammad done something out of forgetfulness (as you have stated in your quote up above) that means Muhammad could never be infallible.  By you saying that he made this mistake in Qur'aan 66:1 out of forgetfulness, you have trapped your self because now there is no escaping the fact that he (Muhammad) was not infallible.  If you are infallible, you do not make mistakes out of forgetfulness.  I cannot believe the things I'm hearing from Shi'ite Muslims, I thought you (the Shi'ite Muslims) were more deeper than the Sunni Muslims.

 

"The verse in Arabic isn't saying that the prophet [saw] made haram what Allah has made halal, it means that he is restraining himself a mubaah (permitted) action which Allah has allowed him to do"

 

I need you to look at this verse carefully:

 

Quraan%2066%20verse%201%20correct%20tran

 

Qur'aan 66:1 is clearly saying that Prophet Muhammad prohibited something that Allah has made lawful to please his wives.  This verse does not say in Arabic what you are trying to imply when you said this: "it means that he is restraining himself a mubaah (permitted)"  Below I have taken from the following website: http://corpus.quran.com/wordbyword.jsp where you can clearly see how they translate TUHARRIMU as YOU PROHIBIT because this is the correct translation of the Arabic text:

 

Arabic%20break%20down%20corpus%20Quraan%

 

 

Any body who has an elementary knowledge of Arabic can see that Qur'aan 66:1 says: "O you Prophet, why do you prohibit what Allah has made lawful for you, just to please your wives"  Every body translates this verse correctly except the Shia Muslims or those who have been influenced by the Shia doctrine.

 

It is important to understand that Muhammad was a human being like all of us and as a human being you are subject to make mistakes, errors for the simple fact that you are a human being and not The Creator.  Now don't confuse Muhammad making mistakes and associating that with the Divine Revelation of the Qur'aan like Jafar has which I will soon deal with to show how he is taking verses out of context.  When it comes to the WAHI (REVEALATION OR INSPIRATION) from Allah Ta'ala to His Anbiya (Prophets) there are no mistakes when it comes to the Kitaab (Scripture) that were Divinely revealed to them.  However, the Prophets are human beings and they also exist, have a life outside of the revelation of their scripture and of course as being a human they will make  mistakes but those mistakes are outside of the WAHI which makes the Kitaab (Scripture) that Allah reveals or sends down free from error, mistakes, contradictions and this is something the Shia Muslims don't realize.  For example in Qur'aan 66:1 Prophet Muhammad prohibited something that Allah made lawful to please his wives, this right here took place outside of the revelation of the Qur'aan, it is just that Allah saw fit to put this narration in the Qur'aan so that we will not take him (Prophet Muhammad) as some divine object of worship, like when Christians do with Jesus who they also say is infallible which we can also dispel in their Bible, like we are doing in the Qur'aan with Shia Muslims. 

 

Now Jafar you have said:

 

"Secondly you are spewing blasphemy and you don't even know it, because the prophet [saw] can never make something haram which Allah has made halal"

 

I'm not spewing blasphemy but you are committing shirk by believing that Ali, 12 Imams, Ahlul Bayt, and Muhammad are infallible.  There is nothing in existence that can share this unique Attribute of Allah:

 

Qur'aan 4:48

Surely, Allah does not forgive those who associate partners with Him.  But He forgives things beside that to whomever He wills; and He who associates partners with Allah, He indeed has forged a supreme sin.

 

You also said this which I will demonstrate how you are taking two separate Suras out of context: "nor say something which isn't from Allah without being destroyed by God or committing kufr (Noathbillah)" and after that you quoted Sura Al-Haqqah 40-48 (Qur'aan 69:40-48).  You have to understand what is taking place in this Sura and in Sura Taahrim 1 (Qur'aan 66:1).  In Al-Haqqah 40-48 (Qur'aan 69:40-48) is making it clear that Prophet Muhammad will not go outside of the revelation and make up his own sayings, words, etc. so this Sura is talking about or dealing with the revealing of the Qur'aan when Taahrim 1 (Qur'aan 66:1) is talking about how Muhammad prohibited something that Allah made lawful to please his wives.  You see Taahrim 1 (Qur'aan 66:1) is not talking about or dealing with the revealing of the Qur'aan, Allah has narrated how Muhammad made a mistake in order to please his wives and this has nothing to do with the WAHI (REVEALATION OR INSPIRATION) OF AL QUR'AAN.  So Jafar, you are misappropriating two different Suras as though they both are dealing with the revealing of the Qur'aan when this is not the case at all.  Now I want everyone to read both Suras so that you can simply see this for your selves:

 

This Sura (which is the translation that Jafar used) is dealing with the revealing of the Qur'aan and of course there will be no mistakes when it comes to the WAHI (REVEALATION OR INSPIRATION) OF AL QUR'AAN AND MUHAMMD WOULD NOT USE A SECOND SOURCE OR ANY OTHER SOURCES OUTSIDE OF THE REVEALATION OF THE QUR'AAN:

 

Al-Haqqah 40-48 (Qur'aan 69:40-48)

40. That this is verily the word of an honoured Messenger [i.e. Jibrael (Gabriel) or Muhammad  which he has brought from Allah].

 41. It is not the word of a poet, little is that you believe!

42. Nor is it the word of a soothsayer (or a foreteller), little is that you remember!

43. This is the Revelation sent down from the Lord of the 'Alamin (mankind, jinns and all that exists).

44. And if he (Muhammad ) had forged a false saying concerning Us (Allah),

45. We surely should have seized him by his right hand (or with power and might),

46. And then certainly should have cut off his life artery (Aorta),

47. And none of you could withhold Us from (punishing) him.

48. And verily, this Qur'an is a Reminder for the Muttaqun (pious - see V.2:2)

 

Now read this Sura so you can see its not dealing with the revealing of the Qur'aan but an aspect of Prophet Muhammad's life outside of the revelation of the Qur'aan that Allah saw fit to narrate in the Qur'aan as a lesson for us:

 

Taahrim 1 (Qur'aan 66:1)

O you Prophet, why do you prohibit (haraam) what Allah has made lawful (halal) for you, just to please your wives?  Allah is Forgiver, Merciful.

Edited by AlKhidr

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Taahrim 1 (Qur'aan 66:1)

O you Prophet, why do you prohibit (haraam) what Allah has made lawful (halal) for you, just to please your wives?  Allah is Forgiver, Merciful.

Do you really think that by continuing to make the same asinine assertions we will believe you all of a sudden. The different colors and font sizes you use are nothing more than diversionary tactics. You have no other argument other than "look I can use red and green so I must be right."

 

Using the link you provided (Surah 66:1), only 1 out of 31 translators has used the word haram for tuhariimu and halal for ahallu. Please confirm the other 30 are wrong so we can ignore their translations.

Using the link you provided (Surah 66:1), only 7 out of 31 translators has used the word "yourself" which I also did. Please confirm the other 24 are wrong so we can ignore their translations.

 

The argument is not whether the Prophet prohibited his wives onto him - he did. The argument is that it is not a mistake because he had a choice in the matter about whether he slept with his wives or not.  Let's say for argument's sake that Muhammad made wives haram. Was it just on HIMSELF or all muslims? If you say just Muhammad, then "yourself" is the correct translation and if you say all Muslims, you would be a liar because that absolutely did not happen.

 

It is funny that you talk about context and reading following verses for Surah 69:40-48 but do not do the same for Surah 66 which is clearly an admonishment for the wives and not the Prophet. (see - I can use colors too).

There are thousands of people looking at this debate and can see how the Shia Muslims are a joke in distorting the Qur'aan to support their sectarian school of thought.  Two or three days ago we had over 4040 views and it is one of the fastest growing post in this forum which shows you how important this subject is to the masses of the people and guess what, the so-called moderators have turned off the statistics that shows us how many people are viewing this post as a tactic to not bring attention to the people's eyes.  When you now look at how many views this post has, it says ZERO "0".

 

Do you take any medication for your paranoia?

Edited by shiaman14

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alkhidr, habibi, can you please teach me how to pray and when to pray from the Quran? Also, can you teach mehow to do wudhu properly?

Don't bother with these people, they are illiterate sect that follow hadith and worship people that arent even mentioned in the Quran, just help me please, appreciate it habibi!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alkhidr, habibi, can you please teach me how to pray and when to pray from the Quran? Also, can you teach mehow to do wudhu properly?

Don't bother with these people, they are illiterate sect that follow hadith and worship people that arent even mentioned in the Quran, just help me please, appreciate it habibi!

 

As Salaamu Alaykum Repenter

 

Shukran for your sincere question.  Since I'm addressing the Shia persuasion of Islaam, its important to highlight that Prophet Muhammad was NEVER directed, instructed, commanded by Allah to follow no deen, sunna, or milla of Ahul Bayt.  Prophet Muhammad was COMMANDED, INSTRUCTED, DIRECTED to follow Milla Ibrahiym (The Religion Of Abraham):

 

Milla%20Ibrahiym%201%20Quraan%2016%20ver

 

Milla%20Ibrahiym%202%20Quraan%206%20vers

 

And Allah says whoever forsakes Milla Ibrahiym (The Religion of Abraham) will make a fool of himself and Allah further states that He chose Abraham in this physical world and in the Hereafter (Spiritual Realm, Jannah).  Allah has never made any of these statements towards Ali or the 12 Imams:

 

Milla%20Ibrahiym%204%20Quraan%202%20vers

 

First I want to establish the fact that Salaat which is a prescribed form of worship existed before Muhammad was born.  In the verse below we can see that Allah taught Abraham, Isaac, Jacob how to observe Salaat and Zakaat and they existed thousands of years before Muhammad was born and there were no ahadiyth at the time. Salaat was well known, established and intact, and this was all by the will of Allah:

 

Abraham%20amp%20Salaat%201.jpg

 

Abraham%20amp%20Salaat%202.jpg

 

SALAAT BEFORE HADIYTHS WERE WRITTEN

 

I want to raise this very strong point to open up people's minds:

 

Hadiyth were written 250 years AFTER Muhammad’s death, so the gap period after Muhammad’s death and before hadiyth were written, compiled was 250 years, that means Muslims within this gap period of 250 years was doing Salaat without hadiyths because they were not written at the time.  This is proof that they were doing Salaat and did not need the details of hadiyth in order to perform or do Salaat.  The knowledge of Salaat and the details of Salaat was not lost, Muslims of this 250 years gap period (after Muhammad’s death and before hadiyths were written, compiled) their generations salvations was not lost because they did not have hadiyth to explain Salaat, no not at all.  Again this was all by the will of Allah and they were observing Salaat without no hadiyths.

 

SALAAT WAS WELL KNOWN & ESTABLISHED BEFORE MUHAMMAD WAS BORN

 

 

We even have historical evidence thousands of years before Abraham was born, that our people were observing Salaat.  I will reference the following book and video which proves that the ancient Nubians (whom so-called European scholars like to call Egyptians which is a Greek word that they never used for themselves):

 

Cheikh Anta Diop wrote in his book entitled, The African Origins Of Civilization, page 126, par. 5 & 6 which provides historical evidence that Islaam, including Salaat existed thousands of years before Abraham was born:

 

Cheikh%20Anta%20Diop%20African%20Origins

 

“They addressed a direct invocation to the seven planets.  The 30-day fasting period already existed as in Egypt.  They prayed seven times each day, with their faces turned toward the north.  These prayers to the sun at different hours somewhat resemble Moslem prayers which take place during the same phases, but which have been reduced by the Prophet to five compulsory prayers “to relive humanity”; the other two prayers are optional.

There were also sacred springs and stones, as in Moslem times; Zenzen, a sacred spring; Kaaba, a sacred stone.  The pilgrimage to Mecca already existed.  The Kaaba was reputed to have been constructed by Ishmael, son of Abraham and Hagar the Egyptian (a Negro Woman), historical ancestor of Mohammed, according to all Arab historians.  As in Egypt, belief in a future life was already prevalent.  Dead ancestors were deified.  Thus, all the elements necessary for the blossoming if Islam were in place more then 1,000 years before the birth of Mohammed.  Islam would appear as a purification of Sabaeanism by the “Messenger of God.”

 

Below is a picture (from the 20th Dynasty) of a Nubian (Egyptian) prostrating himself before his Creator, Allah.  He is worshipping in the same manner in which Muslims worship today.  This picture came right off the walls of the pyramids, and again there were no so-called hadiyths back then:

 

Egyptian%20prostrating.jpg

 

The video below proves that Salaat existed in Ancient Nubia (The Egyptian Empire) thousands of years before Abraham was born:

 

ISLAMIC TRUE ORIGINS AND DIDN'T TAKE ANYTHING FROM THE ISRAELITE PART 2

 

 

Also the name Allah was found in the ancient Nubian Temple of Ptah.  When you watch this video you will see in the Metu Neter (which are called hieroglyphics by so-called European scholars).  The ancient Nubians were worshiping Allah:

 

 

I THOUGHT IT WAS IMPORTANT FOR ME TO PRESENT THIS INFORMATION TO LAY A FOUNDATION.  NOW LET ME FURTHER RESPOND TO YOUR QUESTIONS ON SALAAT

 

1.  The Sunni and Shia sect both have corrupted the True Kalima, Shahaada, First Pillar of Faith by placing Muhammad's name in the Shahaada and also placing Ali or other Khalifas in the Shahaada.  This right here violates the Qur'aan and Tawhiyd.  The original Shahaada that all the Prophets (including Muhammad), the Angelic Beings, and those who possess knowledge professed, testified to-bears Allah's name alone: LA ILAHA ILLA Allah.  There is nothing in existence that can share the same abode with Allah.  Below is the Shahaada (as revealed by Allah) in the Qur'aan and notice that the very first Arabic word in this verse is Shahida:

 

Quraan%203%20verse%2018%20Shahaada.jpg

 

After seeing the Shahaada in the Qur'aan, notice that you do not see "Muhammad Rasuwl Allah" or "Ali and the Khalifas" name mentioned after the Shahaada that Allah Himself has revealed because that was never the true Kalima, Shahaada, First Pillar of Faith of Allah's prescribed Way Of Life (Al Islaam).  The Sunni and Shia sect has corrupted the original Shahaada by adding bida (man-made innovations) as a result of them exalting, worshiping Prophet Muhammad, Ali, the Khalifas.  Their man-made shirk Shahaada was innovated around 250 years AFTER the death of Prophet Muhammad.  Thus, no one on al ard (the planet earth), assamawaati (the galactic heavens), Aalamin (all the Boundless Universes) in the Spiritual and Physical Realm cannot share the same abode with Allah!!!!

Below is a video of one of the top Shia scholars giving the Shahaada which is infested with shirk and no where found in the Holy Qur'aan:

 

Algerian Sunni converts to Shia Islam - The True Islam

 

There is only one true Kalima that has always existed since the foundation of this Physical Universe and throughout the Spiritual Realm:

 

 

لا إله إلا الله

LA ILAHA ILLA Allah

There is no god except Allah

 

 

2.  The Sunni and Shia sect both have corrupted wudu.  You will find many Muslims doing either 7, 8, 9 steps for wudu when Allah only prescribed 4 steps for wudu.  Muslims who follow Qur'aan ALONE just like Prophet Muhammad did only do the 4 steps of wudu as prescribed by Allah:

 

Qur'aan 5:6

O you who believe, when you observe the Salaat, you shall: (1) wash your faces, (2) wash your arms to the elbows, (3) wipe your heads, and (4) wash your feet to the ankles. If you were unclean due to sexual orgasm, you shall bathe. If you are ill, or traveling, or had any digestive excretion (urinary, fecal, or gas), or had (sexual) contact with the women, and you cannot find water, you shall observe the dry ablution (tayammum) by touching clean dry soil, then rubbing your faces and hands. Allah does not wish to make the religion difficult for you; He wishes to cleanse you and to perfect His blessing upon you, that you may be appreciative.

 

Below are the 4 steps for wudu highlighted in Arabic from this verse (Qur'aan 5:6)

 

 

wudu%204%20steps.jpg

 

3.  When we observe Salaat or in the process of doing Salaat, we do not mention Muhammad, Abraham, Ali or any of the khalifas because this right here is also shirk and violates the Qur'aan.  Why do I say that because Allah specifically told us while we are worshiping Him, not to mention, utter, call upon anyone except Him (our Creator):

 

Quraan%2072%20verse%2018.jpg

 

So when Muslims who follow Qur'aan ALONE, just like Prophet Muhammad did, when we observe Salaat, we will never mention, utter, call upon anyone except Allah Ta'ala.

 

4.   Muslims that follow Qur'aan ALONE just like Muhammad did observe 5 Salaat as prescribed by Allah in the Qur'aan:

 

(1) The Dawn Prayer (Fajr) given in 11:114 and 24:58

(2) The Noon Prayer (Zuhr), given in 17:78 and 30:18

(3) The Afternoon Prayer (Asr), given in 2:238

(4) The sunset Prayer (Maghrib), given in 11:114

(5) The Night Prayer (Isha), given in 24:58

 

The way Muslims who follow Qur'aan ALONE do our Salaat, it is Pure (safe from man-made innovations and shirk) that is commonly found and practiced among the Sunni and Shia sect.  We can use the Qur'aan to purify our Salaat and restore it to its original prescribed form during the days of Prophet Abraham, Muhammad and beyond them when they walked this planet earth.

 

Now to further answer your question about how we do Salaat, you can go to the website below and watch the video and also download the book on how to observe Salaat based on Al Qur'aan without all that shirk, man-made innovations that has crept into Islaam:

 

http://www.freewebs.com/salaat

 

OR

 

http://www.salaat.webs.com

 

You can also go to my other website and examine my article where I exposed the 3 Salaat Theory and you will also find a lot of good and important information on Salaat there as well:

 

 

http://www.freewebs.com/tawhiyd/3salaattheoryexposed.htm

 

 

For those who are sincerely seeking Al Haqq, it is important that we constantly strive to seek PURE ISLAAM and devote your Way Of Life (Al Islaam) to Allah ALONE:

 

Quraan6verse162mysalaatritesofsacrafice.

 

Quraan%2039%20verses%202-3.jpg

 

Quraan%204%20verse%20146.jpg

Edited by AlKhidr

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

"This is referring to the mistakes he committed out of forgetfulness, this does not impinge upon his infallibility"

 

Where is your proof at in the Qur'aan that Muhammad made this mistake out of forgetfulness????  Are you just making up your own hadiyth (conjecture) to try to support the Shia sectarian school of thought which teaches shirk that Ali, Ahlul Bayt, Muhammad are infallible?   I AM CHALLENGNING YOU STRAIGHT UP, WHERE IS YOUR EVIDENCE AT INSIDE THE QUR'AAN THAT MUHAMMAD MADE THIS MISTAKE OUT OF FORGETFULNESS IN QUR'AAN 66:1 (TARRIM VERSE 1)????  Jafar if you cannot prove this in the Qur'aan, then you are guilty of building a premise based on flawed logic and arguments.  I must remind you Jafar that if a man like Muhammad done something out of forgetfulness (as you have stated in your quote up above) that means Muhammad could never be infallible.  By you saying that he made this mistake in Qur'aan 66:1 out of forgetfulness, you have trapped your self because now there is no escaping the fact that he (Muhammad) was not infallible.  If you are infallible, you do not make mistakes out of forgetfulness.  I cannot believe the things I'm hearing from Shi'ite Muslims, I thought you (the Shi'ite Muslims) were more deeper than the Sunni Muslims.

 

 

"On a day when shin shall be exposed, they shall be ordered to prostrate, but be unable" (Qur'an 68:42),

 

Show me where in the Qur'an does it say that this "shin" is metaphorical, word for word please.

 

 

 

"The verse in Arabic isn't saying that the prophet [saw] made haram what Allah has made halal, it means that he is restraining himself a mubaah (permitted) action which Allah has allowed him to do"

 

I need you to look at this verse carefully:

 

Quraan%2066%20verse%201%20correct%20tran

 

Qur'aan 66:1 is clearly saying that Prophet Muhammad prohibited something that Allah has made lawful to please his wives.  This verse does not say in Arabic what you are trying to imply when you said this: "it means that he is restraining himself a mubaah (permitted)"  Below I have taken from the following website: http://corpus.quran.com/wordbyword.jsp where you can clearly see how they translate TUHARRIMU as YOU PROHIBIT because this is the correct translation of the Arabic text:

 

 

Funny thing is I knew you'd say this...

 

1- The therms "halal, haram,mubaah,makruh" came later on when fiqh was codified. "Haram" in this verse is not using the shari3i meaning which is used in Fiqh, the word haram here simply means forbidding, it is not using the shari3i meaning but rather the lo8awi (linguistic) meaning.

 

2- Also you claim to follow the "Qur'an only" when the Qur'an itself says that if Muahmmad [saw] attributes anything to Allah which is not from Allah then he would be killed.So I have a question, if the prophet [saw] when making something halal into haram (in the shari3i sense) changing God's religion, yes or no?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Weren't the Nubians a different civilization entirely, than the Egyptians?

 

 

Also, just because there is some drawing of an Egyptian dude prostrating doesn't mean he is doing salaat.

 

The Chinese would also prostrate (or "kowtow") not only before their gods but before their emperors and kings. This does not mean they were doing salaat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 Prophet Muhammad was COMMANDED, INSTRUCTED, DIRECTED to follow Milla Ibrahiym (The Religion Of Abraham):

 

Milla%20Ibrahiym%201%20Quraan%2016%20ver

 

Milla%20Ibrahiym%202%20Quraan%206%20vers

 

 

Milla%20Ibrahiym%204%20Quraan%202%20vers

 

 

What is the Religion of Ibrahim as according to Quran? The link describes as below:

 

http://www.shiachat.com/forum/topic/235031965-quran-for-religion-of-ibrahim/?p=2829543

 

Wassalam

Edited by skamran110

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shukran for your sincere question.  Since I'm addressing the Shia persuasion of Islaam, its important to highlight that Prophet Muhammad was NEVER directed, instructed, commanded by Allah to follow no deen, sunna, or milla of Ahul Bayt.  Prophet Muhammad was COMMANDED, INSTRUCTED, DIRECTED to follow Milla Ibrahiym (The Religion Of Abraham):

Learning salat from you is like trying to learn the rules of the sabbath from Hitler.

 

Remember first we have to get you to accept the infallibility of the Prophet (you already accept he is sinless, so now we need you to take 1 more step). Then we get you to say the shahada and only then should we discuss/teach you the practices of Islam.

 

Suffice to say that you say that the salat should be recited as Prophet Ibrahim did and you also say it should be said in Arabic. Last I checked, Prophet Ibrahim spoke a number of languages but none of them were arabic.

 

Anyway, back to making you a muslim first:

 

 

Do you really think that by continuing to make the same asinine assertions we will believe you all of a sudden. The different colors and font sizes you use are nothing more than diversionary tactics. You have no other argument other than "look I can use red and green so I must be right."

 

Using the link you provided (Surah 66:1), only 1 out of 31 translators has used the word haram for tuhariimu and halal for ahallu. Please confirm the other 30 are wrong so we can ignore their translations.

Using the link you provided (Surah 66:1), only 7 out of 31 translators has used the word "yourself" which I also did. Please confirm the other 24 are wrong so we can ignore their translations.

 

The argument is not whether the Prophet prohibited his wives onto him - he did. The argument is that it is not a mistake because he had a choice in the matter about whether he slept with his wives or not.  Let's say for argument's sake that Muhammad made wives haram. Was it just on HIMSELF or all muslims? If you say just Muhammad, then "yourself" is the correct translation and if you say all Muslims, you would be a liar because that absolutely did not happen.

 

It is funny that you talk about context and reading following verses for Surah 69:40-48 but do not do the same for Surah 66 which is clearly an admonishment for the wives and not the Prophet. (see - I can use colors too).

 

Edited by shiaman14

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am sure some of you must have been wondering why I kept asking AK to tell me what translation of the Quran to use and he continuously buck danced and shuffled his way out of giving me an answer. The links he gave for salat confirmed my suspicions about him that he is nothing but a follower of the false prophet Rashid Khalifa.

 

Khalifa said that he was a messenger of God and that the archangel Gabriel "most assertively" told him that chapter 36, verse 3, of the Quran, "specifically" referred to him. His followers refer to him as God's Messenger of the Covenant. He promoted a strict monotheism and was a prominent Quranist, rejecting the hadith and sunnah as fabrications attributed to Muhammad by later scholars. He declared that he is the messenger of the covenant , Messenger of the Covenant, prophesied in the Quran in 3:81. He presented a lengthy document with proofs of his messengership from the Quran. He defended the fact that the Prophet Muhammed was the LAST Prophet according to the Quran but not the LAST messenger, also according to the Quran, see 33:40. He emphasized the fact that God is teaching us that, the Prophet Muhammed was one of the prophets who took the covenant mentioned in 3:81. The Prophet Muhammed took it along with the other prophets as per 33:7. Dr. Khalifa put the proofs of his messengership in the appendix of his translation of the Quran for those who would seek such proofs.
 
He wrote that the Quran contains a mathematical structure based on the number 19 and made the controversial claim that the last two verses of chapter nine in the Quran were not canonical, telling his followers to reject them.[8] His two-fold reasoning was that the verses, in addition to disrupting an otherwise flawless nineteen-based pattern, were sacrilegious inasmuch as they appeared to endorse worship of Mohammed. Starting in 1968, Khalifa used computers to analyze the frequency of letters and words in the Quran. In 1974, he claimed that he had discovered a mathematical code in the text of the Qur'an involving the number 19. The details of this analysis are available in his book, Quran, the Final Testament.
 
So now you know why he does not want acknowledged the infallibility of Muhammad saw as it impacts his own messenger namely Rashid Khalifa. And of course if RK does not believe in the perfection of the Quran then neither does AK and yet here he is trying to us Islam.
 
In honor of Rashid Khalifa, I too did some calculations on the number 19 and came up this:
 
01) Number of letters in "Muhammad Rasool Allah": 19
02) Number of letters in reference to the Prophet teaching us the Book and wisdom in 2.151 (وَيُعَلِّمُكُمُ الْكِتَابَ وَالْحِكْمَةَ) is equal to 19
03) square root of Ayah Mubahila 361 = 19
04) The following went to Mubahila (محمد  علي  فاطمة  حسن  حسين). The letters in their names added up to: 19
05) Ayah Muwaddat is Surah 42 verse 23. 42 minus 23 = 19
06) Number of character in (أمير المؤمنين علي مولى) is 19
07) Characters in "Fatimah bint Muhammad" is 19
08) Characters in names of other imams (علي محمد جعفر موسى علي محمد علي حسن محمد-المهدي) is 38 / 2 = 19
09) Birthdate of Imam Hasan is 28 Feb 625 and 282625 / 14875 = 19
10) Birthdate of Imam Hussain is 8 Jan 626 and 3 Shaban 4AH. 8 + 1 + 6 + 2 + 6 + 3 + 8 + 4 = 38/2 = 19 
11) Number of characters in (أبا عبد الله حسين بن علي) is 19
12) Number of days from Mecca to Kerbala on Camel: 19
13) Number of Bani Hashim that died in Kerbala (including Muslim bin Aqeel): 19
14) Date Imam Mehdi became Imam 8 Rabi-ul-Awal 260 AH so 8 + 3 + 2 + 6 + 0 = 19
15) Number of people who will understand this: 19
16) Number of people who will not understand this: ∞ - 19
17) Hours it took to come up with this list: 19
18) Days I have been waiting to post this: 19
19) If you don’t agree with any of the above, at least know that today is Nov 19.
 

AK - Do you consider yourself a messenger too? You say Muhammad was to only deliver the Quran and not teach it (you should read 2.151) but you are teaching us so that must mean you think of yourself as a messenger.

 

Based on the 19-list above, am I a messenger? do I get concubines? What are the benefits?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its interesting to note, that the Sunnis did not participate on the matter of the  Prophet being infallibile, do the mainstream Sunnis also believe that, Prophets can make mistakes?

Edited by power

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its interesting to note, that the Sunnis did not participate on the matter of the  Prophet being infallibile, do the mainstream Sunnis also believe that, Prophets can make mistakes?

I had the same question and didn't receive a response either:

 

 

 

Dear Brothers and sisters of Ahlu-Sunnah,
 
I mean no disrespect and am not looking for an argument.
 
When shia-sunni debates take place, the issue of Black Thursday usually comes up - an incident that is quoted in Sahih Bukhari/Muslim where Caliph Umar called the Prophet delusional. Most sunnis reject this sahih hadith saying that 1) Caliph Umar would never say that and 2) if he did say it, the Muslims would have defended the Prophet.
 
Here were are 1,400 years later - AlKhidr offends and insults the Prophet and no sunni has stepped up to defend the Prophet. Maybe no sunni has seen this post or read his pamphlet; maybe you are afraid to challenge AlKhidr; maybe you agree with him. And if after 1400 years people are afraid to speak up, can you really blame the early muslims for staying silent?
 
Regardless of the reason, once again it is the shia who have come to defend the honor and sanctity of the Prophet. 
 
I apologize if this post offends you. Hopefully your anger is directed towards AlKhidr's insults and not me.

 

As it turns out Rashid Khalifa and AK are no different than  Musaylimah bin Ḥabīb who claimed prophethood after the demise of the Prophet. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Weren't the Nubians a different civilization entirely, than the Egyptians?

 

 

Also, just because there is some drawing of an Egyptian dude prostrating doesn't mean he is doing salaat.

 

The Chinese would also prostrate (or "kowtow") not only before their gods but before their emperors and kings. This does not mean they were doing salaat.

 

Salaam  baradar_Jackson

 

The Nubians and Egyptians are the same people or race, the only difference is that Nubia/Nubian are the original names they used for themselves and the word "Egypt/Egyptians" are Greek words the Europeans gave them after they conquered, colonized, enslaved them.

 

When you said this, you are in great denial and I can tell that you did not take the time out to view the videos that I posted which proves that they worshiped Allah, The Creator of all that exists and also practiced the tenants of Islaam long long long long before Abraham was born.  Islaam is not a new religion, Islaam has always existed since the beginning of time.  The Saudi Arabs Islaamic history has been altered, changed, distorted because they will have you believe that Islaam started in Saudi Arabia with Muhammad which is not true at all.  I will end by saying this, the Nubians were the first to teach Tawhiyd, Monotheism on the planet earth.  They were the first to teach that we will return back to our Creator who is ONE.  They were the first to practice the 5 Pillars of Faith.

Its interesting to note, that the Sunnis did not participate on the matter of the  Prophet being infallibile, do the mainstream Sunnis also believe that, Prophets can make mistakes?

 

Salaam Power

 

Of course no Sunni Muslims will not come to your aid and speak out against me because they don't believe that Muhammad is infallible.  No Muslim on the planet earth believes that Ali, 12 Imams, Ahul Bayt, Muhammad are infallible except Shi'ite Muslims and that's it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am sure some of you must have been wondering why I kept asking AK to tell me what translation of the Quran to use and he continuously buck danced and shuffled his way out of giving me an answer. The links he gave for salat confirmed my suspicions about him that he is nothing but a follower of the false prophet Rashid Khalifa.

 

Khalifa said that he was a messenger of God and that the archangel Gabriel "most assertively" told him that chapter 36, verse 3, of the Quran, "specifically" referred to him. His followers refer to him as God's Messenger of the Covenant. He promoted a strict monotheism and was a prominent Quranist, rejecting the hadith and sunnah as fabrications attributed to Muhammad by later scholars. He declared that he is the messenger of the covenant , Messenger of the Covenant, prophesied in the Quran in 3:81. He presented a lengthy document with proofs of his messengership from the Quran. He defended the fact that the Prophet Muhammed was the LAST Prophet according to the Quran but not the LAST messenger, also according to the Quran, see 33:40. He emphasized the fact that God is teaching us that, the Prophet Muhammed was one of the prophets who took the covenant mentioned in 3:81. The Prophet Muhammed took it along with the other prophets as per 33:7. Dr. Khalifa put the proofs of his messengership in the appendix of his translation of the Quran for those who would seek such proofs.
 
He wrote that the Quran contains a mathematical structure based on the number 19 and made the controversial claim that the last two verses of chapter nine in the Quran were not canonical, telling his followers to reject them.[8] His two-fold reasoning was that the verses, in addition to disrupting an otherwise flawless nineteen-based pattern, were sacrilegious inasmuch as they appeared to endorse worship of Mohammed. Starting in 1968, Khalifa used computers to analyze the frequency of letters and words in the Quran. In 1974, he claimed that he had discovered a mathematical code in the text of the Qur'an involving the number 19. The details of this analysis are available in his book, Quran, the Final Testament.
 
So now you know why he does not want acknowledged the infallibility of Muhammad saw as it impacts his own messenger namely Rashid Khalifa. And of course if RK does not believe in the perfection of the Quran then neither does AK and yet here he is trying to us Islam.
 
In honor of Rashid Khalifa, I too did some calculations on the number 19 and came up this:
 
01) Number of letters in "Muhammad Rasool Allah": 19
02) Number of letters in reference to the Prophet teaching us the Book and wisdom in 2.151 (وَيُعَلِّمُكُمُ الْكِتَابَ وَالْحِكْمَةَ) is equal to 19
03) square root of Ayah Mubahila 361 = 19
04) The following went to Mubahila (محمد  علي  فاطمة  حسن  حسين). The letters in their names added up to: 19
05) Ayah Muwaddat is Surah 42 verse 23. 42 minus 23 = 19
06) Number of character in (أمير المؤمنين علي مولى) is 19
07) Characters in "Fatimah bint Muhammad" is 19
08) Characters in names of other imams (علي محمد جعفر موسى علي محمد علي حسن محمد-المهدي) is 38 / 2 = 19
09) Birthdate of Imam Hasan is 28 Feb 625 and 282625 / 14875 = 19
10) Birthdate of Imam Hussain is 8 Jan 626 and 3 Shaban 4AH. 8 + 1 + 6 + 2 + 6 + 3 + 8 + 4 = 38/2 = 19 
11) Number of characters in (أبا عبد الله حسين بن علي) is 19
12) Number of days from Mecca to Kerbala on Camel: 19
13) Number of Bani Hashim that died in Kerbala (including Muslim bin Aqeel): 19
14) Date Imam Mehdi became Imam 8 Rabi-ul-Awal 260 AH so 8 + 3 + 2 + 6 + 0 = 19
15) Number of people who will understand this: 19
16) Number of people who will not understand this: ∞ - 19
17) Hours it took to come up with this list: 19
18) Days I have been waiting to post this: 19
19) If you don’t agree with any of the above, at least know that today is Nov 19.
 

AK - Do you consider yourself a messenger too? You say Muhammad was to only deliver the Quran and not teach it (you should read 2.151) but you are teaching us so that must mean you think of yourself as a messenger.

 

Based on the 19-list above, am I a messenger? do I get concubines? What are the benefits?

 

Salaam Shiamuslim14

 

I just read your post and I could not help but laugh.  I'm laughing big time over here with all your conjecture about me.

 

"The links he gave for salat confirmed my suspicions about him that he is nothing but a follower of the false prophet Rashid Khalifa."

 

I am not a follower of Rashad Khalifa and I reject Rashad Khalifa's claim of being a messenger, along with several other claims that he made which are not supported in the Qur'aan.  Below is my website and examine it thoroughly and quite fabricating lies about me:

 

http://www.freewebs.com/tawhiyd

 

Also for those who are interested, you can download my debate with Sunni Muslims on hadiyth:

 

http://www.freewebs.com/tawhiyd/hadiythdebate.htm

 

I CHALLENGE you Shiaman14, prove that I am a follower of Rashad Khalifa?  Prove that I belong to their community they call Submitters?  Don't just present conjecture, lies, your wishful thinking, show all of us the evidence.  You had to have been desperate to even go there.  I guess after I have intellectually annihilated you ever since you stepped foot in this debate so you have to seek those measures against me based on falsehood and out right lies and slander-even Gaius was smart enough not to go there.  I noticed that Gaius kept brining up the name Rashad Khalifa and I was just sitting here waiting for him to go there because I would have got him good on that one but, I see he was smart enough not to  go there and let you be the guinea pig.

 

Now you asked me this ridiculous question:

 

"AK - Do you consider yourself a messenger too?"

 

I am not a Rasuwl (Messenger), I am not a Nabi (Prophet), I'm just a regular human being, read the link below:

 

 

http://www.shiachat.com/forum/topic/235032954-shia-challenging-questions/?p=2850337

 

"On a day when shin shall be exposed, they shall be ordered to prostrate, but be unable" (Qur'an 68:42),

 

Show me where in the Qur'an does it say that this "shin" is metaphorical, word for word please.

 

 

 

Funny thing is I knew you'd say this...

 

1- The therms "halal, haram,mubaah,makruh" came later on when fiqh was codified. "Haram" in this verse is not using the shari3i meaning which is used in Fiqh, the word haram here simply means forbidding, it is not using the shari3i meaning but rather the lo8awi (linguistic) meaning.

 

2- Also you claim to follow the "Qur'an only" when the Qur'an itself says that if Muahmmad [saw] attributes anything to Allah which is not from Allah then he would be killed.So I have a question, if the prophet [saw] when making something halal into haram (in the shari3i sense) changing God's religion, yes or no?

 

 

Salaam Jafar

 

You said this in regards to my rebuttal to you, "Funny thing is I knew you'd say this",  and that is because you knew the weaknesses of your arguments.  I noticed Jafar that you BUCKED DANCE and SHUFFLED your way out of proving your assumptions in your previous post.  I'm not going to let you forget when you said this or made this argument which actually trapped you:

 

"This is referring to the MISTAKES he COMMITED OUT OF FORGETFULNESS, this does not impinge upon his infallibility"

 

Jafar, I know that you did not forget when I called you to task to prove your ASSUMPTION, WISHFUL THINKING, OPINION, CONJECTURE, GUESSWORK, FEELINGS, BELIEF when I said this in response to what  you said:

 

"Where is your proof at in the Qur'aan that Muhammad made this mistake out of forgetfulness????  Are you just making up your own hadiyth (conjecture) to try to support the Shia sectarian school of thought which teaches shirk that Ali, Ahlul Bayt, Muhammad are infallible?   I AM CHALLENGNING YOU STRAIGHT UP, WHERE IS YOUR EVIDENCE AT INSIDE THE QUR'AAN THAT MUHAMMAD MADE THIS MISTAKE OUT OF FORGETFULNESS IN QUR'AAN 66:1 (TARRIM VERSE 1)????  Jafar if you cannot prove this in the Qur'aan, then you are guilty of building a premise based on flawed logic and arguments.  I must remind you Jafar that if a man like Muhammad done something out of forgetfulness (as you have stated in your quote up above) that means Muhammad could never be infallible.  By you saying that he made this mistake in Qur'aan 66:1 out of forgetfulness, you have trapped your self because now there is no escaping the fact that he (Muhammad) was not infallible.  If you are infallible, you do not make mistakes out of forgetfulness.  I cannot believe the things I'm hearing from Shi'ite Muslims, I thought you (the Shi'ite Muslims) were more deeper than the Sunni Muslims."

 

JAFAR WHY DON'T YOU SHUT MY MOUTH UP BY PROVING WHAT YOU HAVE SAID IN THE QUR'AAN?  THERE ARE OVER 5000 VIEWERS AT THIS POINT IN TIME, AND WE ARE ALL WAITING AND STILL IS WAITING FOR YOU TO PROVE THAT MUHAMMAD MADE THIS MISTAKE OUT OF FORGETFULNESS????????  JAFAR IF YOU MADE A MISTAKE, THEN JUST COME OUT AND BE A MAN AND ADMIT IT, NOBODY ON THE PLANET EARTH IS INFALLIBLE AND THIS ALSO INCLUDES: ALI, 12 IMAMS, AHUL BAYT, PROPHET MUHAMMAD.

 

You have asked me this question:

 

 

"On a day when shin shall be exposed, they shall be ordered to prostrate, but be unable" (Qur'an 68:42),  Show me where in the Qur'an does it say that this "shin" is metaphorical, word for word please."

 

 

Jafar I don't know if you have amnesia or what but we are not talking about that verse (Qur'aan 68:42), we are talking about this verse (Qur'aan 66:1).  As a result of you trapping your own self by saying this: "This is referring to the MISTAKES he COMMITED OUT OF FORGETFULNESS, this does not impinge upon his infallibility" now you are trying escape, flee use diversion tactics in hopes that we will all forget.

 

You have made this statement below and I'm not going to allow you to try to mystify this word

 

"The therms "halal, haram,mubaah,makruh" came later on when fiqh was codified. "Haram" in this verse is not using the shari3i meaning which is used in Fiqh, the word haram here simply means forbidding, it is not using the shari3i meaning but rather the lo8awi (linguistic) meaning"

 

The so-called figh that you are talking about which is different from Shia school of thought to Sunni school of thought has nothing to do with these Arabic words that are in the Qur'aan that you are clearly trying to distort:

 

tuharrimu%20you%20prohibit.jpg

 

Halal%20Quraan%2066%20verse%201.jpg

 

You have to understand this, the Qur'aan has its own vocabulary, sentence structure, context, grammar and this is what we use to define, explain, and understand the Qur'aan with and not your sect fiqh that was codified hundreds of years AFTER the Qur'aan.  The Qur'aan was revealed and compiled before the Shia and Sunni sect created their fiqh (which is again different from each other).  The so-called fiqh these sects talks about are motivated by political agendas and they have been used to distort the true meaning of the Qur'aan to support their (Shia & Sunni) sectarian school of thought.  We cannot use your fiqh to redefine or change the meaning of words in the Qur'aan:

 

Abrogate1.jpg

 

The Qur'aan is actually easy to understand, the problem is that these so-called sects disguise their man-made innovations, political agendas as part of Islaam and this is what makes the Qur'aan, Islaam difficult to understand:

 

Quraan54verse40easytolearn3.jpg

 

The Qur'aan is the only LAW, JUDGE that determines what is halal and haraam.  The Arabic words in Qur'aan 66:1 are very clear as you can see up above, they both mean: prohibit and lawful.  Jafar I will not sit back and allow you to mystify these words all because you want to continue in believing in a shirk doctrine that teaches that Ali, 12 Imams, Ahul Bayt, Muhammad are infallible.  

Jafar you said this:

 

 

"Also you claim to follow the "Qur'an only" when the Qur'an itself says that if Muahmmad [saw] attributes anything to Allah which is not from Allah then he would be killed.  So I have a question, if the prophet [saw] when making something halal into haram (in the shari3i sense) changing God's religion, yes or no?"

 

 

Since you mentioned that I follow Qur'aan alone, I must highlight that Prophet Muhammad followed Qur'aan alone, he did not follow two sources: hadiyth & Qur'aan.  Now to directly answer your question here "So I have a question, if the prophet [saw] when making something halal into haram (in the shari3i sense) changing God's religion, yes or no?" No Prophet Muhammad did not change Deen ul Allah (Allah prescribed Way Of Life) which is Al Islaam.  Prophet Muhammad simply made a mistake and you proved and trapped your self at the same time when you said he (Muhammad) made a mistake out of forgetfulness:

 

 

"This is referring to the MISTAKES he COMMITED OUT OF FORGETFULNESS, this does not impinge upon his infallibility"

 

 

We already proved beyond doubt that Prophet Muhammad was not infallible on more than one occasion in this debate:

 

http://www.shiachat.com/forum/topic/235032954-shia-challenging-questions/?p=2852676

 

http://www.shiachat.com/forum/topic/235032954-shia-challenging-questions/?p=2853818

 

Now I CHALLENGE you Jafar to prove in the Qur'aan that:

 

ALI, 12 IMAMS ARE INFALLIBLE

 

?????????????????????????????????????????

 

Edited by AlKhidr

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Salaam,

What about the Copts, aren't they the descendants of the ancient Egyptians? Besides the Nubians didn't rule Egypt until the 25th dynasty. Sorry, I am not trying to offend you or derail the thread but you keep saying that the Nubians and Egyptians are the same. So, I am wondering what do you think of the Copts? And if history is wrong like you say, then who are the Copts?

Edited by Gaius I. Caesar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Salaam,

What about the Copts, aren't they the descendants of the ancient Egyptians? Besides the Nubians didn't rule Egypt until the 25th dynasty. Sorry, I am not trying to offend you or derail the thread but you keep saying that the Nubians and Egyptians are the same. So, I am wondering what do you think of the Copts? And if history is wrong like you say, then who are the Copts?

 

Salaam Gaius

 

You must have just taken a 24 hour crash course in African History for you to say this "the Nubians didn't rule Egypt until the 25th dynasty".  You are 100% wrong again.  The ancient Nubians are the ones who started the civilization in the area that you call Egypt (which is not its original name) so they have been there since the beginning of its inception for the simple fact that they were the ones who created that civilization and the prymaids.  You must not have read that article that I gave you/posted in this forum on the Nubians.  Below is a documentary, I would advise you to watch it before you open up your mouth again.  Also during ancient times the area that is called today Sudan and Egypt was one Empire and yes they were the same race.  Also the word "Copts" and the "Coptic Church" are all Greek/Roman names because the Europeans when they conquered and enslaved them, they gave them (the Nubians) their pagan Christian religion.

 

Ancient Nubia The Greatest Wonder Of The World

Edited by AlKhidr

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What makes you think I'm interested in reading that incoherent mess you just posted? Your arguments are not substantiated by anything and no one on this forum is taking you seriously, especially with your circus font posts. This is a forum not a techno club, please clean up your posts and come with an actual coherent argument if you wish to discuss further.


Just answer me this one question ,did the Prophet [saw] change the laws of Allah ?


And in regards to fiqh I have another question, how many rakat are in salatul ishaa? If I laugh is my prayer broken? What if I forget a prostration do I break the entire prayer or can I mend it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Salam,

Consider me not being able to answer any of your questions due to lack of knowledge, and since you seem to know what the Quran is saying,

Just out of curiosity for the third and last time, what kind of meat is halal and what haram according to the aya I posted about what kind of meat and food can be consumed according to your interpretation of the Quran?

Or better to say what kind of meat you prohibit yourself and what you allow according to the Quran?

Or what kind of meat do you permit me to eat and what not?

Would appreciate a response.

Edited by tendersoul

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Salam,

Consider me not being able to answer any of your questions due to lack of knowledge, and since you seem to know what the Quran is saying,

Just out of curiosity for the third and last time, what kind of meat is halal and what haram according to the aya I posted about what kind of meat and food can be consumed according to your interpretation of the Quran?

Or better to say what kind of meat you prohibit yourself and what you allow according to the Quran?

Or what kind of meat do you permit me to eat and what not?

Would appreciate a response.

 

Salaam Tendersoul

 

Another loaded question.  I have not answered or responded to that question because its off topic.  If you are interested email me and I will send you a good article on the subject.

What makes you think I'm interested in reading that incoherent mess you just posted? Your arguments are not substantiated by anything and no one on this forum is taking you seriously, especially with your circus font posts. This is a forum not a techno club, please clean up your posts and come with an actual coherent argument if you wish to discuss further.

Just answer me this one question ,did the Prophet [saw] change the laws of Allah ?

And in regards to fiqh I have another question, how many rakat are in salatul ishaa? If I laugh is my prayer broken? What if I forget a prostration do I break the entire prayer or can I mend it?

 

Salaam Jafa

 

I see you came back here empty handed because you again failed to prove your false empty statement:

 

"This is referring to the MISTAKES he COMMITED OUT OF FORGETFULNESS, this does not impinge upon his infallibility"

 

Jafar you can't prove this in the Qur'aan???  This only proves that you was just making up stuff to try to support your Shia sect school of thought.  You trapped your self when you made this statement and at the sametime you proved my argument which is Muhammad is not infallible.  Any body who makes mistakes are not infallible.

 

You must be delusional to make this statement:

 

"no one on this forum is taking you seriously"

 

The last time I looked we have 5250 views so the people must be taking Al Khidr seriously and also witnessing me intellectually DESTROY the Shia sectarian school of thought and no one in here has been able to refute my arguments in this post nor my arguments in my book: SHIA CHALLENGING QUESTIONS.

 

In closing Jafar, why can't you prove your Shia fundamental belief of Ali, 12 Imams, Ahlul Bayt are infallilbe in the Qur'aan????  We all have been waiting for this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FYI:

 

Ayatullah Agha Haji Mirza Mahdi Pooya on page #256 under chapter III, ‘Revelation’ in his book ‘The Essence of The Holy Qur’an’( the Eternal Light) writes:

 

"The Infallibility of the Last Prophet (The Prophet of Islam)

And Other Prophets (Part I)"

 

“Therefore , unless the soul (mind and heart) is free from the influence of this lowest sphere, and is released from the narrow bents of animal instincts and sexual desire and unless the mind is raised to the zenith of creative intellect, it cannot become the ground for receiving the entire light, i.e, the exact and undisturbed information and suggestion dispatched from the angelical sphere of higher order. The angelical spheres range from the first immaterial sphere to the highest spheres of direct and immediate communion with Absolute ( the stage of the nearest point): the Prophet, as the Qur’an indicates reached the ‘nearest point’

 

Holy Qur’an: An-Najim (The Star):v 9[53:9] Till he was (distant) two bows' length or even nearer,

 

These spheres differ from each other in comprehensiveness and in the nature of their dispatches, but there is no possibility of error in whatever the dispatch.’They do not disobey God of what He has ordered them and they do whatever they are ordered. They do not go ahead of Him in saying (or doing) and they do according to His order.

 

Holy Qur’an: At-Tahrim (The Prohibition):v 6[Pickthal 66:6] O ye who believe! Ward off from yourselves and your families a Fire whereof the fuel is men and stones, over which are set angels strong, severe, who resist not Allah in that which He commandeth them, but do that which they are commanded.

 

There is no confusion whatsoever in the higher spheres. They are free from all profaneness of the material world.

 

Holy Qur’an: Abasa (He Froned): v 13-16: [

80:13] On honoured leaves

80:14] Exalted, purified,

80:15] (Set down) by scribes

80:16] Noble and righteous.

 

So, also must be the receiving station, the human mind which is the recipient. It must be free from the impediments of temporal life and the bondage of the material world. So long as the zenith of the human mind, the intellect, is drawn toward its base, the material and sensual ground, man is liable to commit mistakes in both theory and practice, whatever may be the source of information and suggestion.

 

Holy Qur’an: Al-A’araaf (The Heights):v 175-176

 

[Pickthal 7:175] Recite unto them the tale of him to whom We gave Our revelations, but he sloughed them off, so Satan overtook him and he became of those who lead astray.

[Pickthal 7:176] And had We willed We could have raised him by their means, but he clung to the earth and followed his own lust. Therefor his likeness is as the likeness of a dog: if thou attackest him he panteth with his tongue out, and if thou leavest him he panteth with his tongue out. Such is the likeness of the people who deny Our revelations. Narrate unto them the history (of the men of old), that haply they may take thought.

 

Being in possession of signs man should have been raised. But he detached himself from the sign bestowed on him by God and he was drawn downward toward the earth. But if he the whole edifice of the human mind from the base upward is drawn toward the zenith, i.e, the active intellect, and is totally controlled by it, then the zenith can become a pure refined recipient ground. It becomes capable of receiving light from the above as exactly as it is dispatched. It will be also capable of judging precisely the truth and the value of what is received from below. In short, the pure contents of the worlds of purity cannot be reached but by the pure and purified minds.

 

Holy Qur’an: Al-Waaqia (The Inevitable):v.75-79

56:75] Nay, I swear by the places of the stars -

56:76] And lo! that verily is a tremendous oath, if ye but knew -

56:77] That (this) is indeed a noble Qur'an

56:78] In a Book kept hidden

56:79] Which none toucheth save the purified,

 

Holy Qur’an: Al-Bayyina (The Evidence):v.1-3

[98:1] Those who disbelieve among the People of the Scripture and the idolaters could not have left off (erring) till the clear proof came unto them,

[ 98:2] A messenger from Allah, reading purified pages

[98:3] Containing correct scriptures.

 

In essence, no one touches it but those who are purified. To establish direct and infallible connect with the heavenly kingdom and the spheres beyond the material one, the mind should be completely refined and free from the fetters of this material world.

 

This is what Qur’an means by the term ‘MUTTAHRUN’, Purified ones, ‘SUHAFAN MUTTAHIRA’, Purified books, ‘MUSTAFAUN, Chosen and refined, and ‘MUKHLISIN, Servents of God freed from sinning.

 

Holy Qur’an: SAAD (The Letter ‘Saad’): V. 46-47,83

[38:46] Lo! We purified them with a pure thought, remembrance of the Home (of the Hereafter).

[38:47] Lo! in Our sight they are verily of the elect, the excellent.

[38:83] Save Thy single-minded slaves among them.

 

‘We have freed, released them from all concerns but the remembrance of the abode (the heavenly or eternal kingdom).’

 

It does not mean that they are not in this material world in this lowest sphere. They are in it but they are not attached to it.’Ali says, ‘They (the true servents of God) have accompanied this lowest world of matter with their bodies, the souls of which are attached to the spheres of higher order. Had not the fixed term been ordained by God for them (to remain here), their souls would not have remained in their bodies.(15)

 

In other words, the purity of mind as opposed to its impurity (Rijis). It means complete control of the active intellect over the whole structure of mind including its material base on the one hand, and absolute submission of the active intellect as recipient ground to the spheres of higher order on the other. This is the state of divine revelation.

 

Holy Qur’an: Al-An’aam (The Cattle):v 50

[ 6:50] Say (O Muhammad, to the disbelievers): I say not unto you (that) I possess the treasures of Allah, nor that I have knowledge of the Unseen; and I say not unto you: Lo! I am an angel. I follow only that which is inspired in me. Say: Are the blind man and the seer equal? Will ye not then take thought?

 

The Holy Prophet’s answer to all the questions raised by anyone: the believers, unbelievers, sceptics, heretics, hypocrites, friends and foe was a divine revelation to unveil the truth.

 

Thus, the body is controlled and governed by the mind and its faculties. The mind in turn is controlled and governed by the active intellect, which in turn is fully controlled and governed by the divine will dispatched to it, direct, or through the angels. Such an accomplished person, though he shares, with other men all aspects of humanity ( a human being like you), yet he is distinguished from the rest of mankind, by not only being the recipient of the revelation (16) (I FOLLOW NOTHING BUT WHAT IS REVEALED TO ME.’)

 

Holy Qur’an: Al-Kahf (The Cave): v.110[Pickthal 18:110] Say: I am only a mortal like you. My Lord inspireth in me that your Allah is only One Allah. And whoever hopeth for the meeting with his Lord, let him do righteous work, and make none sharer of the worship due unto his Lord.

 

He should be so fully controlled by the divine will dispatched to him, that his life becomes the embodiment of divine will. His will is the will of God.

 

Holy Qur’an: An-Nisa (The Women):v.110

[ 18:110] Say: I am only a mortal like you. My Lord inspireth in me that your Allah is only One Allah. And whoever hopeth for the meeting with his Lord, let him do righteous work, and make none sharer of the worship due unto his Lord.

 

Holy Qur’an: Al-Anfaal (The Spoils of War): v.17

[ 8:17] Ye (Muslims) slew them not, but Allah slew them. And thou (Muhammad) threwest not when thou didst throw, but Allah threw, that He might test the believers by a fair test from Him. Lo! Allah is Hearer, Knower.

 

So, to secure the infallibility of the message the purity and infallibility of both the sources of dispatch, and the receiving mind, is necessary. With regard to the purity of the dispatching side, from God down to the last angelical sphere at its base, there can be no doubt. The question is about the purity of the receiving side—the receiver which is the active intellect, the zenith of the mind. The zenith cannot be pure unless the whole of the mind and its faculties from the base are pure. The purity of mind and its faculties mean harmonious functioning of all the physical and physical parts of mental mechanism towards actualization of the potential intellect and the development of the active intellect. There should be nothing wrong anywhere, even for a moment, in the progressive movement towards attaining the state of active intellect. Every part of the mechanism should be perfect. Otherwise any drawback anywhere at any stage of the process would mean a fall in the degree of attainment and in the active aspect of the intellect; a fall in the height of the zenith. In other words the ego should always be alive to its incessant needs and should always look upwards submissively and ask for help.”


 

On page # 269 he further explains:

 

”But keeping in mind what has already been explained in light of the Qur’an and sound reasoning, One has to come to the conclusion that WITHOUT PURITY AND INFALLIBILITY OF THE RECEiVING GROUND, NO REVELATION CAN BE TAKEN AS COMPLETELY RIGHT AND DIVINE IF NO MARGIN CAN BE FIXED FOR THE DIVINE AND THE PROFANE STATES OF THE RECEiVING MIND, AND AS SUCH THE REPRESENTATIVE STATUS OF THE PROPHET AND VICEGERENTS OF GOD WOULD BE SHAKEN TO THE GROUND”

 

On page #281:

 

“Here the first man, the top entity in the arc of ascent received knowledge directly from God, of the things which the angels did not know. It was the knowledge of the names of certain conscious entities of high order (‘aleen). Those entities were other than angels and jinns. They were the entities whose names could be made known to Adam, by God directly and the angles and the other being of lower order through the medium of Adam. They were those who could at one and the same time represent God in all spheres of creation, and creatures of all spheres before God. They are the entities who due to the highest degree of their recipiency, submissiveness and devotion to the Absolute, have attained the nearest possible stage of direct communion with Him on one side, and due to their utmost paternal affection and love of His creatures have come closer and nearer to every being, than the being itself or himself—a stage of ‘AULA-BIL-MOMININ, ‘A GREATER CLAIM ON THE SELVES OF THE BELIEVERS, ‘ which refers to the Prophet:

 

Holy Qur’an: Al-Ahzaab (The Clans):v.6[ 33:6] The Prophet is closer to the believers than their selves, and his wives are (as) their mothers. And the owners of kinship are closer one to another in the ordinance of Allah than (other) believers and the fugitives (who fled from Mecca), except that ye should do kindness to your friends. This is written in the Book (of nature).”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/20/2015, 6:24:28, AlKhidr said:

I CHALLENGE you Shiaman14, prove that I am a follower of Rashad Khalifa?  Prove that I belong to their community they call Submitters?  Don't just present conjecture, lies, your wishful thinking, show all of us the evidence.  You had to have been desperate to even go there.  I guess after I have intellectually annihilated you ever since you stepped foot in this debate so you have to seek those measures against me based on falsehood and out right lies and slander-even Gaius was smart enough not to go there.  I noticed that Gaius kept brining up the name Rashad Khalifa and I was just sitting here waiting for him to go there because I would have got him good on that one but, I see he was smart enough not to  go there and let you be the guinea pig.

Now you asked me this ridiculous question:

"AK - Do you consider yourself a messenger too?"

I am not a Rasuwl (Messenger), I am not a Nabi (Prophet), I'm just a regular human being, read the link below:

Dude - do you even read your own rhetoric? The links you provide show Rashid Khalifa telling people how to pray salat in youtube videos and the PDF refers to the code of 19 - another invention of Rashid Khalifa.

At least update your own junk before leading others to it.

I say you must think of yourself as a messenger because even though you assert that Muhammad did not teach us the Quran (refuting 2.151) but here you are trying to teach it to us.

You can keep saying prohibit and haram are the same thing when through your own link I proved that only 1 out of 31 translators says what you say.

And what is up with I CHALLENGE YOU in every post. I think you have seen to many westerns and really, really, really want an old fashioned duel at high noon.

you are a joke and anything but a Muslim. I CHALLENGE YOU TO PROVE YOU DONT BELIEVE IN RASHID KHALIFA. 

Edited by shiaman14

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If he guys noticed he hasn't answered a single question that I've asked him.

He also believes that Rashid Khalifa [EDITED] who immigrated from Egypt to the United States who started claiming he was a messenger of god who came to abolish hadith in the 20th century is going to teach us how to pray.  You linked us to this "Rashid Khalifa", the person who created the concept of the 19 code and claimed it was his proof for his prophet-hood?

 

Let's make a deal ok? If you can answer these two questions logically [EDITED]

Did Prophet muhammad [saw] change the religion of Allah?

How many rakaa are in salatul fajr and where can I attain the number?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/21/2015 4:39:47, AlKhidr said:

Salam,

Consider me not being able to answer any of your questions due to lack of knowledge, and since you seem to know what the Quran is saying,

Just out of curiosity for the third and last time, what kind of meat is halal and what haram according to the aya I posted about what kind of meat and food can be consumed according to your interpretation of the Quran?

Or better to say what kind of meat you prohibit yourself and what you allow according to the Quran?

Or what kind of meat do you permit me to eat and what not?

Would appreciate a response.

 

Salaam Tendersoul

 

Another loaded question.  I have not answered or responded to that question because its off topic.  If you are interested email me and I will send you a good article on the subject.

 

What makes you think I'm interested in reading that incoherent mess you just posted? Your arguments are not substantiated by anything and no one on this forum is taking you seriously, especially with your circus font posts. This is a forum not a techno club, please clean up your posts and come with an actual coherent argument if you wish to discuss further.

 

Just answer me this one question ,did the Prophet [saw] change the laws of Allah ?

 

And in regards to fiqh I have another question, how many rakat are in salatul ishaa? If I laugh is my prayer broken? What if I forget a prostration do I break the entire prayer or can I mend it?

 

 

Salaam Jafa

 

I see you came back here empty handed because you again failed to prove your false empty statement:

 

"This is referring to the MISTAKES he COMMITED OUT OF FORGETFULNESS, this does not impinge upon his infallibility"

 

Jafar you can't prove this in the Qur'aan???  This only proves that you was just making up stuff to try to support your Shia sect school of thought.  You trapped your self when you made this statement and at the sametime you proved my argument which is Muhammad is not infallible.  Any body who makes mistakes are not infallible.

 

You must be delusional to make this statement:

 

"no one on this forum is taking you seriously"

 

The last time I looked we have 5250 views so the people must be taking Al Khidr seriously and also witnessing me intellectually DESTROY the Shia sectarian school of thought and no one in here has been able to refute my arguments in this post nor my arguments in my book: SHIA CHALLENGING QUESTIONS.

 

In closing Jafar, why can't you prove your Shia fundamental belief of Ali, 12 Imams, Ahlul Bayt are infallilbe in the Qur'aan????  We all have been waiting for this.

A very good question. But one thing you need to understand is "Do we have everything in the Quran? " or "Can every single thing be proven from the Quran?" You need to establish this principle first then one can move on.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Ameen said:

A very good question. But one thing you need to understand is "Do we have everything in the Quran? " or "Can every single thing be proven from the Quran?" You need to establish this principle first then one can move on.  

first we need to get this guy to become a muslim before we 'learn' Islam from him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On November 23, 2015 at 6:49:16 PM, Abu-Jafar Herz said:

If he guys noticed he hasn't answered a single question that I've asked him.

He also believes that Rashid Khalifa [EDITED] who immigrated from Egypt to the United States who started claiming he was a messenger of god who came to abolish hadith in the 20th century is going to teach us how to pray.  You linked us to this "Rashid Khalifa", the person who created the concept of the 19 code and claimed it was his proof for his prophet-hood?

 

Let's make a deal ok? If you can answer these two questions logically [EDITED]

Did Prophet muhammad [saw] change the religion of Allah?

How many rakaa are in salatul fajr and where can I attain the number?

 

Do not go gentle into that good night, @Abu-Jafar Herz, (I don't know how to tag people) rage, rage against the dying of the light...

 

one more day and the resurrection begins ...

Edited by ~ThePond~

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting tid bit of info there, Abu Jafar Herz, I had no idea, any sources?  However, Khidr is not a Code 19'er, otherwise his posts would have consist of meaningless numbers and shown an inability to carry a normal discussion of Islam without Code 19.

What needs to be dealt with is his lack of understanding in history and his wrong-headed way of mixing black supremacism with Islam. Just look at the videos he posted,  this is pure distortion of facts at best and utter lies at worst. The Egyptians and Nubians were a separate peoples, each with their own distinct culture that borrowed a lot from each other. In ancient Egyptian society, Nubians were often slave labor or mercenaries, fighting with Pharaoh for a price and noted as exceptionally brave. Besides Islam belongs to all people, not just blacks, there are no chosen people in Islam except for the Prophets (saws) and Imams (as).

The whole thing is really based the misinterpretation of hamaa' salsal in 15:26 and 15:28 and the subsequent misinformation that Khidr has spread due to his misinterpretation and lack of understanding. 

Honestly, I think we should lock this thread if he is not coming back. For all I care, he should keep this clearly misguided garbage only at Freeminds.org. 

Edited by magma
removed quote

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Gaius I. Caesar said:

Interesting tid bit of info there, Abu Jafar Herz, I had no idea, any sources?  However, Khidr is not a Code 19'er, otherwise his posts would have consist of meaningless numbers and shown an inability to carry a normal discussion of Islam without Code 19.

What needs to be dealt with is his lack of understanding in history and his wrong-headed way of mixing black supremacism with Islam. Just look at the videos he posted,  this is pure distortion of facts at best and utter lies at worst. The Egyptians and Nubians were a separate peoples, each with their own distinct culture that borrowed a lot from each other. In ancient Egyptian society, Nubians were often slave labor or mercenaries, fighting with Pharaoh for a price and noted as exceptionally brave. Besides Islam belongs to all people, not just blacks, there are no chosen people in Islam except for the Prophets (saws) and Imams (as).

The whole thing is really based the misinterpretation of hamaa' salsal in 15:26 and 15:28 and the subsequent misinformation that Khidr has spread due to his misinterpretation and lack of understanding. 

Honestly, I think we should lock this thread if he is not coming back. For all I care, he should keep this clearly misguided garbage only at Freeminds.org. 

Brother Gaius - the links he posted for 'real' namaz had videos of Rashid Khalifa and the PDF referred to 24434 being divisible by 19 (see attached).

He came here to prove shias wrong and in return he was humiliated and proven to be a nothing but a follower of the false Prophet Rashid Khalifa. I doubt he will come back.

 

19.jpg

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...