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

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

Salaam Alkhidr,

 

Since i did not mention or commented on the  Imams (as) with regards to verse: 24:55 How did you assume it was referring to Caliphate? Which part of my post make this suggestion? Therefore, i will disregard your answer, as it's based upon your assumption and its  really completely irrelevant to what i'm seeking from you?

 

I will once again reiterate my question:

 

"Allāh has promised those among you who believe, and do righteous good deeds, that He will certainly grant them succession [to authority] in the earth, as He granted it to those before them, and that He will surely establish for them [therein] their religion which He is pleased with for them. And He will surely give them in exchange a safe security after their fear (provided) they (believers) worship Me and do not associate anything with Me. But whoever disbelieved after this, they are disobedient sinners." [24:55]

 

​Allah swt has promised there would be successor to authority in his religion of Islam, from the Quran, to whom is this succession will belong to? Just to add another point, what do  you understand by succession to authority from the Quran? 

 

Salaam Alkhidr,

 

I'm rather disappointed by you, for not attempting to  answering my above question. It has been almost a week when i had initially had  asked you this question, is there a problem? 

 

Anyway, i will move on to my next question. 

 

[Pickthal 9:40] If ye help him not, still Allah helped him when those who disbelieve drove him forth, the second of two; when they two were in the cave, when he said unto his comrade: Grieve not. Lo! Allah is with us. Then Allah caused His peace of reassurance to descend upon him and supported him with hosts ye cannot see, and made the word of those who disbelieved the nethermost, while Allah's Word it was that became the uppermost. Allah is Mighty, Wise.

 

we know that Prophet(Pbuh&hf) was in the cave, but WHO  was the other? Once again, i liked to know from the Quran as to who was the other?

Edited by power

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Salaam Power

 

Have a little bit more patience with me, I will respond to that verse in my next post


fa in means 'so/therefore if". If It was just "if" it would start as "in".

 

What you presented is not necessarily true.  The word "fa" can be expressed in various ways in English and not just only "so" or "therefore".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Salaam Power

 

Have a little bit more patience with me, I will respond to that verse in my next post

 

What you presented is not necessarily true.  The word "fa" can be expressed in various ways in English and not just only "so" or "therefore".

In some places it can be where it has the same implication of so/therefore, however 'but' is 'wa laken', 'then' would be 'thuma' in this place, and 'and' would be wa.

 

As the primary meaning is that of so/therefore, and that's what it means most of the time through out Quran even if didn't have to mean that here, why assume it means otherwise here?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Salaam Shiaman14

 

"I will allow 1 personal attack (fairly common). Next one will receive a retort and eventually it may lead us both to getting banned"

 

You will not allow 1 of anything, you must don't realize who you are talking to.  I do not bow down to no so-called person on the internet.  I will speak my mind as I see fit.  If you enter the atmosphere of debate, it comes with the territory and plus you did not see me sit here and cry/complain about some of your snide remarks.  In closing on this point, what I pointed out about how you distorted the Qur'aan cannot be denied.  You attempted to quote Qur'aan 19:50 and try to say this was Ali and you purposely left out the verse before it which is Qur'aan 19:49 which clearly shows that the context of that verse is talking about Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and not Ali.  Abraham, Isaac, Jacob are mentioned by name in that section of the Qur'aan and not Ali.  You got caught try to manipulate, distort the context of the scripture, just like the so-called Jews:

 

Qur'aan 4:46

Among the Jews there are some who take the words out of their context and say: "We hear but we disobey" and "Your words are falling on deaf ears" and "Raa'ina (which is an ambiguous word meaning: "listen, may you  become deaf" or "be our shepherd") as they twist their tongues to slander the religion.  If only they had said (instead): "We hear and we obey" and "Hear us" and Unzurna ("Look upon us" or "watch over us" or "pay attention to us"), it would have been better for them and more proper; but Allah has cursed them for their disbelief, so they believe not, except for a few.

 

Notice that you said this:

 

"This is not shirk because the INFALLIBILITY of the Prophet and the IMAMS is by the creation of Allah and not inherent to them"

 

Again the only thing that you can give us is your EMPTY STATEMENT, ASSUMPTION, OPINION, WISHFUL THINKING but you are NOT giving us Al Haqq BECAUSE YOU ARE NOT SHOWING US NOTHING IN THE QUR'AAN TO PROVE THAT THE 12 IMAMS ARE INFALLIBLE.  YOU ARE NOT QUOTING NOTHING IN THE QUR'AAN THAT SAYS THE 12 IMAMS ARE INFALLIBLE.  WHO IS GOING TO BELIEVE YOUR SHIRK CULT BELIEF WHEN YOU CAN'T PROVE NONE OF IT IN THE QUR'AAN.  IN MY BOOK THAT YOU DOWNLOADED, I HAVE CLEARLY PROVEN THAT Allah IS THE ONLY REALITY THAT IS INFALLIBLE AND UNLIKE YOUR SELF, I QUOTED VERSES AFTER VERSES TO PROVE MY ARGUMENTS. PEOPLE LIKE YOU ARE EASY TO DEBATE BECAUSE YOU COME WITH NO FACTS, NO EVIDENCE IN THE QUR'AAN EXCEPT YOUR OPINIONS WHICH MEANS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING!

 

And I see here that you continue to distort the Qur'aan:

 

"This is similar to "Bismi Allāhi Ar-Raĥmāni Ar-Raĥīm". Allah is Merciful but in 9.128 He tells us that the Prophet is also merciful. Is this shirk? Are they sharing traits? No because Muhammad's mercy comes from Allah whereas Allah is Mercy himself. Similarily Allah is PERFECTION, he made Muhammad perfect - where is the shirk!"

 

Note that when you quote the Bismilah it has the definite article "AL" in front of Rahmaan and Rahim but notice that in the verse that you quoted (Qur'aan 9:128) when its referring to Muhammad it DOES NOT have the definite article "AL" before Rahim so there is no shirk and there is definitely no infallibility on the part of Muhammad.

 

Look at the Bismilah and you will see the definite article "AL" in front of Rahmaan and Rahim:

 

Bismilah%20box%20around%20AL.jpg

 

Now look at the verse below (that's related to Muhammad) and you will not see the definite article "AL" before Rahim:

 

Quraan%209%20verse%20128.jpg

 

It is clear that Muhammad does not extract the full glory and connotation of the word Rahim for the simple fact that he does not have the definite article AL in front of it and this also refutes your man-made shirk doctrine of trying to distort clear and obvious verses in Arabic.  We need to definitely be aware of our commentary of the Qur'aan because you have an agenda to alter, distort the true teachings of Islaam in order to support your Shia sectarian school of thought and these are the reasons why Allah tells us not to be a part of sects

 

This is important for all to understand, we as humans can manifest the Attributes of Allah but not to the excellent, infallible degree of our Creator Allah for the simple fact that our Creator has the definite article AL in front of the Attributes and we as humans do not.  These are basic teachings of Tawhiyd.  Let me give you an example: As a human being we can kill and destroy others but when it comes to the Creator Allah He is Al (The) Destroyer, Al (The) Killer when it comes to the wicked people on this planet.  Allah Ta'ala can wipe all existence out but we (as humans) cannot even come close to that degree.  As humans we could never extract the full, infallible connotations of Allah's Attributes.  I see that I need to take you back to school and teach you the basics of Tawhiyd.  Remember Sura Ikhlaas?:

 

         Ikhlaas%20verse%201.jpg                                                             

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ahad.jpg

 

 

Now read the whole Sura Ikhlaas and for you and the Shia sect to teach that the 12 Imams, Ahlul Bayt or anyone for that matter are infallible is straight up shirk and as we

all can see, there is no evidence for this shirk belief to exist in the Holy Qur'aan.

 

Al-Ikhlaas verses 1-4

1.  Say: O He Allah is alone, no equals has He.

2.  Allah is in need of nothing, for He has no deficiencies; but everything is in need of Him: He is The Provider and Sustainer of all things big and small.

3.  Neither mother nor father has He and He was not conceived by the union of any two, nor did He conceive an individual son.

4.  And nothing and no one can equal Him (for He is the Sustainer of Majesty who is without companion or counterpart).  He is alone (in His Omnipotent existence).

 

The viewers should download my book because I went in depth on this particular subject and proved beyond doubt that the 12 Imams, Ahlul Bayt, Prophet Muhammad are not infallible.

 

Shiaman14, remember when you quoted Sura Maryam verse 50 (Qur'aan 19:50) and you said it was referring to 12 Imams and how I exposed your lie and distortion of the Qur'aan?  I want to further expose your and your corrupted commentary or tafsir.  You see I also have S.V. Mir Ahmed Ali who used Agha Pooya tafsir or commentary of the Qur'aan and his commentary does not say Qur'aan 19:50 was the 12 Imams, his commentary says exactly what I said which is that it refers to Abraham, Isaac, Jacob.  Below is Agha Pooya tafsir which you avoid quoting:

 

Agha%20Pooya%20tafsir%20Quraan%2019%20ve

 

This right here totally DESTROYS the premise of your argument of trying to associate this with the 12 Imams.  I also went back to review your post and you actually try to say that last Arabic word in Qur'aan 19:50 has Ali's name in it.  Your own man tafsir Agha Pooya exposed you.  I want everyone to look at this verse that Shiaman14 quoted in his post to try to say this was Ali:

 

Quraan%2019%20verse%2050%20Arabic%20only

 

The Arabic word at the end where I put a box around is not Ali's name, this word is aliy and it means high, exalted, lofty, elevated, sublime, and just like I have proven to you in my previous post the context of Qur'aan 19:49-50 is talking about Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and Agha Pooya tafsir or commentary confirms this.

 

 

Qur'aan 19:49-50

49.  Because he abandoned them and the gods they worshiped besides Allah, We granted him Isaac and Jacob, and We made each of them a Prophet. 

50.  We showered them with Our mercy, and We granted them an honorable position in history.

 

You have made these statements as a result of being indoctrinated by the Shia school of thought:

 

"Using your translation above, have you achieved true insight into the Quran (79). Are you purified? If so, then the entire ummah should listen to you for Quran lessons. If not you, then who? Who should we follow for true insight into the Quran?"

 

You have to understand that Allah did not set up our Way Of Life (Al Islaam) to be following one man, like that one man represents the total truth.  Allah has never subjected us believers to follow or rely on one man or the so-called scholars, shaykhs, muftis.  When you think like this, then religion turns into a slave making religion.  I have thoroughly broke this down in my book that you downloaded.  Our Imam, guide, scholar, shaykh is Qur'aan alone.  We are suppose to devote our entire religion to Allah alone:

 

Qur'aan 39:2-3

2.  We sent down to you this scripture, truthfully; you shall worship Allah, devoting your religion to Him alone.

3.  Absolutely, the religion shall be devoted to Allah alone.  Those who set up masters beside Him say, "We idolize them only to bring us closer to Allah; for they are in a better position!"  Allah will judge them regarding their disputes, Allah does not guide such liars, disbelievers.

 

And Allah revealed the Qur'aan in such a way that its possible for anybody to learn and understand the Qur'aan and even Allah Himself says this would be easy for us-thus, He never told us to rely on one man or the ulama and their so-called scholars, shaykhs, muftis:

 

 

Quraan54verse40easytolearn.jpg

Edited by AlKhidr

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In some places it can be where it has the same implication of so/therefore, however 'but' is 'wa laken', 'then' would be 'thuma' in this place, and 'and' would be wa.

 

As the primary meaning is that of so/therefore, and that's what it means most of the time through out Quran even if didn't have to mean that here, why assume it means otherwise here?

 

Salaam StrugglingForLight

 

I don't think you and I have a disagreement.  I don't say "fa" can be translated only one way.  I'm saying that it can be expressed in various ways in English and I can show you many examples.  The way "fa" is rendered in English in the translation that I used, is perfectly fine, thus the context, meaning in Arabic is reflected in the English translation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Salaam StrugglingForLight

 

I don't think you and I have a disagreement.  I don't say "fa" can be translated only one way.  I'm saying that it can be expressed in various ways in English and I can show you many examples.  The way "fa" is rendered in English in the translation that I used, is perfectly fine, thus the context, meaning in Arabic is reflected in the English translation.

Salam

 

I think 'so/therefore' is important to be translated here. 

 

For example if I say

 

O my son, obey your Parents and obey your teachers so if Mr. Flemming tells you to do your homework, then do it.

 

O my son, eat fruits, therefore eat oranges and apples in the fridge.

 

In both of these sentences, the next statement doesn't negate the beginning statement but compliments, emphasizing on a particular instance of that obedience.

 

The same is true of 4:59 in my opinion. Allah [swt] could of not written it with the "fa".

 

Now aside from this reason if the Quran or Rasool said:

 

"Verily God has chosen Ibrahim, Ismael, Isaac, Yaqoub, and Yusuf as leaders and examples to humanity. O you who believe obey me and the leaders from you therefore if I order you to battle, obey me."

 

I think no sane person would assume leaders here means any type but the chosen type of leaders that God chooses. And I think no sane person would assume the emphasis on obedience to battle when Rasool orders it, means that you don't have to obey those leaders in obeying that.

 

What makes sense, is that since they are his successors, they will be taking on this role AFTER his death. That disagreements for example and disputes are going to be referred during the time of the Prophet to the Prophet.

 

Now if the verse is talking to believers in all times, but at the same time, during that time, the Messenger was the one to be referred to for disputes and his government was under his leadership, then I think we have a very similar sentence.

 

Just as perhaps Mr. Flemming was emphasized because he was the teacher at that time, but the son is expected to obey his future teachers, then it makes sense.

 

Just as eating all type of fruits is good, but the ones in the fridge only were apples and oranges, then it makes sense to emphasize on that.

 

So we see a different sentence.

 

Now aside from this, what gives the impression that it's about chosen possessors of the authority from the nation?

 

Have you seen a portion of those given a portion of the book, they believe in the Jibt and Taghut and say these are more guided then those who believe. Or do they have a share in the authority then they would not give the people at date stone. Or do they envy the people for what God has given them out his grace, so then indeed we gave the family of Ibrahim the book, the wisdom, and gave them a great authority. So of them is who believed in it and of them of is who turned away from it, and sufficient is hell as a burning. Indeed those who disbelieve in God's Ayat (Signs/revelations/instances of guidance), soon God will enter them the fire, so as often their skins are thoroughly burned, we will change them for other skins, that they taste the chastisement, surely God is Mighty, Wise.  As for those who believe and do good deeds, we will make them enter gardens beneath which rivers flow, to abide in them for ever, they shall have therein pure mater, and we shall make them enter a dense shade. Verily God commands you to make over the trusts to to their owners and that when they judge between people you judge with justice, surely God admonishes you with what is excellent surely God is seeing, Hearing. O You who believe, obey God and obey the Messenger and those who possess the Command/Authority from you, therefore if you differ with regards to a thing, refer it to God and the Messenger if you believe in God and the last day, that is better and most suitable at the end."

 

This is very similar to the following:

 

Some people who are given a portion of the divine revelations believe in the inordinate authorities that are false authorities and believe in the sorcery cast by the devils on the heart and say these people who are instances of false authority and who are really an illusion from sorcery in the hearts are more guided then believers. Do they have a share of the authority, and were it that case, they would not give the people anything. Is rather due to envy of people who God graced, and this is while God has appointed Imams like Ibrahim, Ismael, Isaac, Yaqoub, and Yusuf who they accept and bestowed grace upon them and gave them a great leadership. So some people believed in their guidance and leadership and some people turned away from their guidance and leadership, and hell is sufficient as a punishment to those who turned away. God will punish those who disbelieve in instances of his guidance with a burning fire and will reward those who believe and do good with paradise and enter them a densely shade. God wants you to give trusts to their owners and to judge justly between people if you judge between people. O you who believe, obey your Lord, and obey the Prophet and your Imams to the extent that you refer all disputes back to God and the Prophet if you truly believe in God and the last day. 

 

The context of authority is obviously about divine leadership that is chosen by God. The same is true of the 'Al-Amr' in Quran in 4:59, the context was the great authority (mulk) of the family of Ibrahim. It was emphasized that those who turned from the great authority of the family of Ibrahim were in hell.

 

So I think given the context, the translation should include "so/therefore", because it's obvious the obedience is absolute and in context of chosen leaders and guides such as the family of Ibrahim. The "Amr" that is in that context, is the obedience owed to God, that obeying the chosen ones is obeying God.

 

It's not about worldly authority but about divine leadership that God bestows.

Edited by StrugglingForTheLight

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am so amazed how people are able to launch endless discussions about such clear verses that even a kid can grasp making an issue about a two-letter word just to distort (the verse) its meaning or making it meaning-less.

Edited by Skanderbeg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Salaam Shiaman14

 

"I will allow 1 personal attack (fairly common). Next one will receive a retort and eventually it may lead us both to getting banned"

 

You will not allow 1 of anything, you must don't realize who you are talking to.  I do not bow down to no so-called person on the internet.  I will speak my mind as I see fit.  If you enter the atmosphere of debate, it comes with the territory and plus you did not see me sit here and cry/complain about some of your snide remarks. 

 

1,400 year ago, someone raised the slogan "the book of Allah is sufficient for us" in order to usurp the rights of the AhlulBayt after the demise of the Prophet. Since then, those people and the people who believe in them have stopped at nothing to ensure they point of view is the only one people adhere to. In their hatred of the Ahlulbayt, they were and are willing to stoop down to any level including insulting the Prophet by calling him delusional followed by trying to reduce him to nothing more than a regular person such as us who sinned. For 1,400 years, they have been failing.

 

So now we have AlKhidr who thinks he has finally figured out how to break the Shias. His (their) strategy is:

§  Step 1: Reject all shia books of hadith because they prove shia are right

§  Step 2: Reject sunni hadith books as well since these shias can fairly easily use them to prove they are right

§  Step 3: Reject all Islamic caliphs, imams, scholars and other books

§  Step 4: Reject the above on the basis that all books compete with Quran to be the Word of Allah

§  Step 5: Corner the shia into only using the Quran

§  Step 6: Reject any and all tafseers and/or translations the shia use based on the biases they have.

§  Step 7: Along with Quran, use non-relevant sources such as pictures to discredit the imams

§  Step 8: In order to seem unbiased, attack the ahle-sunnah as well but keep the focus on the shia

§  Step 9: Make false accusations that the shia put the Prophet ahead of the AhlulBayt

§  Step 10: Insult/degrade the Prophet to show how unbiased they are in terms of LOVING only Allah

 

I could simply fall for the trap and start getting into the debate by going back and forth using the Quran. For example, he has been discussing what the Arabic word for mud is and more recent the explanation of ‘fa-in’.

Perhaps willingly or unwillingly he thinks we will let his insults against the Prophet go by but I have some unfortunate news for you.

We love the AhlulBayt, but we love the Prophet more.  

We respect the AhlulBayt, but we respect the Prophet more.

We love the message of Allah, but we love his Messenger more.

 

You should NOT have started your pamphlet by insulting the Prophet by saying he sinned and that he is not infallible. Your zest to prove shia wrong has gone to a level where you have rejected the kalima and taken Muhammad out of it. You can’t even pray 2-rakat namaz without Muhammad’s name in tashhahud and yet you have taken him out of the kalima.

 

Since your first attack was against the Prophet, I will start by discrediting this theory first. I will boldly claim that if Muhammad is not infallible, then the Quran is not infallible. If the Quran was written down in physical text during the Prophet’s lifetime, where is that copy today? If you cannot provide this copy, then the Quran IS wrong because Allah could not protect it when He promised he would.

 

By the end of this debate, either you will admit to Muhammad’s infallibility as a miracle of Allah or you stop debating me by simply running away. That is a promise and a challenge.

 

PS. Next time you write a pamphlet, attack Muhammad at the very end and not the beginning.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am so amazed how such clear verses that even a kid can grasp can cause endless discussion about two-letter words just to distort its meaning.

A kid can grasp it, but the thing is with Quran, there is unseen sorcery in forms of locks regarding it, that prevents people from seeing a lot of clear things in it aside from the clear proofs of the family of Mohammad and their affair.

 

I remember when I read Quran and asked my mother where the Imams are in the quran at all, and I had the same locks. It takes time, patience, sincerity, and deep reflection, then it's clear bright signs and it's themes begin to awaken.

 

I never really thought about Suratal Fatiha and it's link to Ahlulbayt and their Wilayah or the Wilayah of Prophets in general, but as a non-Muslim, I began to think about Suratal Fatiha alot.

 

Quran has a very exalted meaning that is locked because devils know Surahs can bring a wisdom and level of reason and light to the soul, that will exalt humans who can hear it or see it's majesty.

 

It takes time. Even after reasoning, the waswas and Seher is not fully gone regarding them no matter how clear the proofs are, and must be fought with the name of God/face of God/sword of God/Sword of honour.

 

It's one of the miracles of Quran that it self emphasized on the Jibt right before Ulil-Amr verse. Indeed in that is signs for people who see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Notme

 

You need to look at the post the and comment that I was responding to about this subject.  The person again who I was responding to indicated that Hamma does not mean Black, when it clearly does.  Second, the Shia sect has fabricated false images of Ali and the 12 Imams as European or White people.  I would advise you to read my document where I have addressed this issue.   When I was agreeing with you about all people who are descendants of Adam and are Black since this is their origin, I was not talking about in the sense that Chinese people can be considered Black who are descendants of Adam vs. the original Black race such as Adam and the Prophets.  All the Prophets on earth were on race and not of different races.  Their bloodline was pure, undiluted, they belonged to the same progeny as the Qur'aan states.  I believe you are intelligent enough to know the difference and between being original Black and descendant of the Black race.

 

Now I have a question for you, the Shia sect fabricated images of Ali and the 12 imams as white people and I want to know if you believe this was the correct image, race of Ali and the 12 Imams?  I hope you are not the type of person that expects all people to keep their mouths quiet about this form of racism in Islaam.

 

Prophet Adam wife Hawwa was she also dark in complexion? What dose the holy Quran say about this?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Shiaman14, remember when you quoted Sura Maryam verse 50 (Qur'aan 19:50) and you said it was referring to 12 Imams and how I exposed your lie and distortion of the Qur'aan?  I want to further expose your and your corrupted commentary or tafsir.  You see I also have S.V. Mir Ahmed Ali who used Agha Pooya tafsir or commentary of the Qur'aan and his commentary does not say Qur'aan 19:50 was the 12 Imams, his commentary says exactly what I said which is that it refers to Abraham, Isaac, Jacob.  Below is Agha Pooya tafsir which you avoid quoting:

 

Agha%20Pooya%20tafsir%20Quraan%2019%20ve

 

This right here totally DESTROYS the premise of your argument of trying to associate this with the 12 Imams.  I also went back to review your post and you actually try to say that last Arabic word in Qur'aan 19:50 has Ali's name in it.  Your own man tafsir Agha Pooya exposed you.  I want everyone to look at this verse that Shiaman14 quoted in his post to try to say this was Ali:

 

I have repeatedly asked you to tell me what translation and tafseer you would like me/us to use and until you do, I will feel free to use any I want.

 

 

You have made these statements as a result of being indoctrinated by the Shia school of thought:

 

"Using your translation above, have you achieved true insight into the Quran (79). Are you purified? If so, then the entire ummah should listen to you for Quran lessons. If not you, then who? Who should we follow for true insight into the Quran?"

 

You have to understand that Allah did not set up our Way Of Life (Al Islaam) to be following one man, like that one man represents the total truth.  Allah has never subjected us believers to follow or rely on one man or the so-called scholars, shaykhs, muftis.  When you think like this, then religion turns into a slave making religion.  I have thoroughly broke this down in my book that you downloaded.  Our Imam, guide, scholar, shaykh is Qur'aan alone.  We are suppose to devote our entire religion to Allah alone:

I need to know who are the purified ones in this ayat. Last I checked the Quran, it told me more than 20 times to obey Allah and obey the Messenger

I never really thought about Suratal Fatiha and it's link to Ahlulbayt and their Wilayah or the Wilayah of Prophets in general, but as a non-Muslim, I began to think about Suratal Fatiha alot.

Brother - you are exactly correct. Just the last 2 verses of Surah Al-Fatiha is sufficient to prove us right but where is the fun with that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know where you are but I am sure you and I read exactly the same when it comes to meaning. We don't even have to explain a letter to eachother while on the other hand there are people you can write a whole book for them only about this verse and they still will not get it.

This is mostly the case when there are certain axiomas that are put above the Quran. 

Maybe the course of history should prevail.

 

Edited by Skanderbeg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bismillah ir-Rahman ir-Rahim

 

I was going to let it this topic go I dont think AlKhidr will be coming back but then decided that no one gets to offend the Prophet saw and get away with it without being put in their place. I am not saying this with arrogance but rather with complete faith in Allah as my Lord, belief in Muhammad as his Prophet and conviction the Imams as my guide that it is really not even fair on you to debate with anyone of us, specially someone as unlearned and un-intelligent as me.

 

So to make it fair, I will give you insight into my way of thinking. I asked you politely to put some rules around the discussion and also point to the exact translation/tafseer we should use simply so that we can actually have a meaningful discussion. Expectedly, you declined.

 

So I put Plan B into action. I answered a couple of points on the early pages and then answered Q1 only. Knowing fully well the preceeding and following verses, I specifcially chose that verse (19:50) and Pooya's tafseer so that 1) you establish the rule of rejecting a tafseer 2) you establish a rule of not looking at any verse by itself but in its full context by referencing the preceeding and following verses and 3) you will immediately state that manipulating the words of Allah is not allowed. All 3 of these will come in handy with your questions.

 

You went into a long diatribe about my reference when all you had to do was ask for a screenshot or reference (http://quran.al-islam.org --> Select Surah 19:41-50 and select Commentary). But of course that could mean setting the rule of using quran.al-islam.org.

 

You also confirmed my point that AL-Rehman and Muhammad as Rehman is not shirk because of AL (AR). Similarly, Allah is Al-Kamil (Perfect) and Muhammad is kamil - there is no shirk. This will also come in handy if/when we discuss 33:33.

 

You have also created the rule that it is ok for us to insult each other.

 

Other rules you have established with other brothers/sisters are:

* one word can have several meanings

* many words can have similar meaning

 

So where do we go from here. You will never agree to any tafseer I recommend. I could agree to a tafseer you recommend but of course you have ruled out all external references so really no tafseer can be allowed. Which means you and I have to translate the Quran based on our knowledge. I will admit to not being an expert on the Quran at all. Which leaves you!

 

You quote Quran (54:40) "We made the Quran easy to learn. Does any of you wish to learn?" which brings us full circle to you insulting the Prophet. The Quran is easy yet do not understand a simply issue of who offended the blind (The Prophet or someone else). You say the Prophet sinned by prohibiting his wives to himself when really it's similar to me not eating chicken when it is permissible to do so. There is no sin in that either. If you can't understand such base concepts of the Quran, you are in NO position whatsoever to write a pamphlet and question anyone on the Quran. As a matter of fact, I would even qeustion if you are within the realm of Islam at all because all Muslims on this forum will agree that more than anything a person is considered a muslim when they recite the shahada, "lā ʾilāha ʾillā-llāh, Muhammadur rasūlu-llāh". By taking the Prophet out of the shahada, you have taken him out of the azan, the iqamah and tashhahud. By this definition, you are not even a Muslim anymore.

 

No doubt Muhammad was a man. However per the Quran, he is also

 

Abd'Allah, Ahmad, Amin, Bashir, Burhan, Dai, Hâdî, Ha-Mim, Khatem, Muddaththir, Muhammad, Mujtaba, Munir, Mustafa, Muzammil, Nabi al-Ummi, Nadhir, Ni’matullah, Qadam al-Sidq, Rahim, Rasul al-Rahmah, Rauf, Siraj, Sirat al-Mustaqim, Ta-Ha, Urvah al-Wusqa, Ya-Sin

 

so NO he is DEFINITELY not like you nor me unless of course you have been on the meraj as well.

 

Because of your hatred of the Prophet and his progeny Allah has set a seal upon your heart. Your specific words are that "La ilaha illa-llah" ONLY so here is the Quran just for you:

[shakir 2:7] Allah has set a seal upon their hearts and upon their hearing and there is a covering over their eyes, and there is a great punishment for them.

[shakir 2:8] And there are some people who say: We believe in Allah and the last day; and they are not at all believers.

[shakir 2:9] They desire to deceive Allah and those who believe, and they deceive only themselves and they do not perceive.

 

[Yusufali 2:7] Allah hath set a seal on their hearts and on their hearing, and on their eyes is a veil; great is the penalty they (incur).

[Yusufali 2:8] Of the people there are some who say: "We believe in Allah and the Last Day;" but they do not (really) believe.

[Yusufali 2:9] Fain would they deceive Allah and those who believe, but they only deceive themselves, and realise (it) not!

 

[Pickthal 2:7] Allah hath sealed their hearing and their hearts, and on their eyes there is a covering. Theirs will be an awful doom.

[Pickthal 2:8] And of mankind are some who say: We believe in Allah and the Last Day, when they believe not.

[Pickthal 2:9] They think to beguile Allah and those who believe, and they beguile none save themselves; but they perceive not.

 

Since you do not understand the Quran, let me use a completely different source and tell you, "There is no version of this where you come out on top" (Tony Stark/IronMan - The Avengers).

 

If you admit the Prophet is kamil (perfect/infallible) - you lose

If you don't admit the Prophet is infallible, I can prove neither is the Quran - you lose

If you use a source other than the Quran - you lose

If you say the Prophet's name in azan, iqmah, tashhahud but not shahada - you lose

If you DONT say the Prophet's name in azan, iqmah, tashhahud - you lose

You reject all shia/sunni hadith books but reference Ahmed Deedat, Zaikir Naik, etc - you lose

By your own definition when someone associates the attributes of Allah in Al-Iklas to people that is shirk and shias dont do that obviously - you lose

If you dont answer to this - you lose

If you answer to this - you lose

You set out to prove the kufr and shirk of the shia and yet before even getting to your list of questions, I have proven you are nothing more than a disbeliever with a seal upon his heart - you lose

Yazeed was boasting to Imam Sajjad a.s. that he won and Imam Hussain lost. Imam Sajjad replied, "As long as the name of Muhammad is in the Azan, we win and you lose!"

 

We can continue this discussion once you say the shahada.

 

Buck dance and shuffle your way out of this.

 

 

Allaahumma salli 'alaa Syedina wa nabiana  wa maulana Abul-Qasim Muhammad wa 'alaa ali Muhammadin

Allaahumma baarik 'alaa Syedina wa nabiana  wa maulana Abul-Qasim Muhammad wa 'alaa ali Muhammadin

 

PS: Moderators - someone had to respond in defence of the Prophet. Hopefully you do not ban me for this

Edited by shiaman14

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.


×
×
  • Create New...