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  
FromShiaSunniBrotherhood

Cursing The Khulafa And Aiesha!

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

Salaam,

 

2) I need to see the places/read from any one of the tweleve Imams where they encourage their Shia to indulge in it and it has to be authentic, not some guy born after a century can tell us what they did, cause like i have mentioned already before sayings are not archeological remains or pictures.

 

so first of, I would like to stress that whereas la'an is permissible in the shia faith, the actual tenet is tabarra - the doctrine that refers to the obligation of disassociation with those who oppose God and those who caused harm to and were the enemies of the Islamic prophet Muhammad or his family.

Now, a lot of  people immediately think that this mean doing la'an on everyone. but dissociating and la'an are different. We can expand more on this later.

La'an specifically may not have been encouraged but it has not been discouraged either. However, one place where la'an is specifically mentioned is Ziarat-e-Ashura which we are highly encouraged to read. The tradition dates back to Imam Al-Baqir as and has been mention in:

1. Misbah al-Mutahajjid by Shaykh al-Tusi
2. Kamil al-Ziyarat by Ibn Qulawayh
Before proceeding any further, I will need to know if this is acceptable to you or not.
 

 

2.1) Mohammed Moussa mentions in the lecture the concept of MUGHALEEN, i.e PEOPLE WHO GO ONE STEP AHEAD OF AHLUL BAYT IN CURSING THE PEOPLE AHLUL BAYT SHOWED PATIENCE FOR or TRYING TO AVENGE FOR AHLUL BAYT WHEN THEY THEMSELVES SHOWED PATIENCE OVER THE MATTER. Because he means, you can not be better than Ahlul Bayt in any way, ever.  If you listen to more of Mohamed Moussa's lectures, who by the way is amazing BeAmrillah, he has mentioned at another place that you can not "OUTLOAD" say laanatullah aleih for the people under discussion. 

I agree. La'an just like other matters of faith is best kept personal. An outward show of any act is, at times, for others rather than Allah. Hurting someone's feelings is an absolute sin and should be avoided under all circumstances. As an extreme example, one should not even make fun of hindu gods in front of hindus whether we understand idol-worshipping or not. Similarly la'an should be an internal expression but I will tell you that I don't mind whenever someone says a general la'an on the enemies of the Ahlulbayt without taking names. In both dua sanam-e-quraish and ziarat-ashura, their names are not mentioned.

 

 

3) If all of this is true, don't you see that this is Allah's will? That the Quran should remain in the order of sequence only with the Imams and the ummah shall be revealed the truth via Imam Al Mahdi when he comes?

 

I am going to not answer this because i am not sure what you are implying. By Allah Will, do you mean predestination? That should be a separate topic and i would be a good one to discuss.

 

 

 

5) My understanding of this verse is either all liars should be cursed or it is meant for the liars under question i.e christians of Najran. 

 

Some of my questions haven't been answered which are as follows:

How can any human alive issue the fatwa of another human being jahannami??

regardless of who this specific verse is targeting, it is setting the precedence that under some circumstances, it is ok to send la'an.

Is Salman Rushdie jahannami? Is Yazid?

There are plenty of hadith from the Prophet that Allah hates those who hate Ali, or Allah hates those who hate fatima and Allah hates those who hate Hasan & Husain. If Allah hates someone, does that not make them jahannami?

 

How can somebody curse their own mother when prophet Muhammad clearly said "summa ummuka summa ummuka summa abbuka" or do you deny she is your mother?

Notice the word 'Islam', how it is not "IL-LA'AN", how and when did the  religion of SALAM find any room for la'an in it? Now Muhammad and Ahlul Bayt are the only flag bearers of Islam, nobody bears the "SALAM" like them. I would never buy they cursed/encouraged it. The problem comes WHEN WE START TO SEE AHLUL BAYT AS ORDINARY PEOPLE, PEOPLE LIKE US WHO CAN'T STAND LITTLE BIT OF UNEASE, US WHO ARE SLAVES OF OUR EGOS, US WHO WOULD SPILL BLOOD FOR BLOOD, BUT THEY AREN'T ORDINARY PEOPLE LIKE US. ACCUSING THEM OF CURSING IS  OUR ORDINARY HUMAN EGO TRYING TO JUSTIFY HOW THEY LIVED WITH ALL THOSE ATROCITIES, BUT THEY DID, THEIR LOVE (FOR Allah AND HIS PEOPLE) WAS MORE THAN OUR LIMITED IMAGINATION. Do not belittle them because of the constraints of an ordinary person's imagination, because their lives of patience and love do not justify an ordinary person's "revenge system". No, do Not be unjust

 

Far from us that we belittle the Ahlul-Bayt. They are the purified ones. As I stated above, people may confuse la'an and tabarra but thats people not the Ahlul-Bayt. 

 

How can our own mother cause one brother to fight another leading to the death of thousands of sahaba? How can my mother hate Imam Ali as? How can my mother refuse to let Imam Hasan to be buried next to his grandfather who loved each other very much? How can our own mother have caused so much strife in the live of the Prophet saw?

 

 

 

Thank you for holding up a logical debate with patience!\

We need more people like Sastani.  :)

 

Thank you and please keep in mind the intention here is not to offend but learn.

 

 

As a side note, our tenets are salat, saum, hajj, zakat, khums, jihad, encouraging good, forbidding evil, tawalla (expressing closeness to Allah, the Prophet saw and his progeny), tabarra.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Take a look at the following;

Allah in his pure book sends curse on his behalf and others on various types of people, for example in Surah Baqarah verse 161 we read:

"Those who reject Faith, and die rejecting, - on them is Allah's curse, and the curse

of angels, and of all mankind"

In Surah Aal-e-Imran verse 61 we read,

"If any one disputes in this matter with thee, now after (full) knowledge hath come to thee, say: "Come! Let us gather together, - our sons and your sons, our women and your women, ourselves and yourselves: Then let us earnestly pray, and invoke the curse of Allah on those who lie!"

It is stated in Surah Hud verse 18,

"Who doth more wrong than those who invent a life against Allah? They will be

turned back to the presence of their Lord, and the witnesses will say, "These are the ones who lied against their Lord! Behold! The Curse of Allah is on those who do wrong"

Surah Hud verses 59-60,

"Such were the 'Ad People: they rejected the Signs of their Lord and Cherisher; disobeyed His messengers; And followed the command of every powerful, obstinate transgressor.And they were pursued by a Curse in this life, - and on the Day of Judgment. Ah! Behold! For the 'Ad rejected their Lord and Cherisher! Ah! Behold! Removed (from sight) were 'Ad the people of Hud"

Surah Maida verse 78,

"Curses were pronounced on those among the Children of Israel who rejected Faith,by the tongue of David and of Jesus the son of Mary: because they disobeyed and persisted in excesses"

Surah Tahreem verses 66:10-11, which incidentally had descended as a warning to Aisha and Hafsa:

"Allah has set forth an example to the disbeliever's, the wife Of Noah and the wife of Lot. They were both married to two servants from among our righteous servants,but they were deceitful/treacherous to their husbands. And they benefited nothing before Allah on the account of their (husbands). Instead they were told: "Enter the Fire with those who enter." Allah cited an example for the believers, the wife of Pharaoh when she said: "O my Lord, build for me a house in paradise, and save me from Pharaoh and his deeds; and save me from the people who do wrong".

Where has sense and logic gone now? I thought you said that you were having a logical argument/discussion?

You wanted evidence of curse and you got it.

 

 

LOL. Let me point out we are not speaking of cursing in general here but cursing Abu Bakr, Omer and Aiesha! 

 

You can not bring Quranic verses on cursing and assume i would believe the Quran promotes the sole reason the Shia and Sunni fight! Sorry, NO. 

I have mentioned many references as to why i think it is not proper to say "Lanat ullah aleih" for these people outloud. That's not how you assert your love for Ahlul Bayt, at least that is NOT my way. Please come up with the refutations of  the things i have mentioned and do not try and interpret the Quranic verses about cursing in general like they are talking about cursing Ayesha, Omer and Abu bakr.

 

Thank you! :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Salaam,

 

so first of, I would like to stress that whereas la'an is permissible in the shia faith, the actual tenet is tabarra - the doctrine that refers to the obligation of disassociation with those who oppose God and those who caused harm to and were the enemies of the Islamic prophet Muhammad or his family.

Now, a lot of  people immediately think that this mean doing la'an on everyone. but dissociating and la'an are different. We can expand more on this later.

La'an specifically may not have been encouraged but it has not been discouraged either. However, one place where la'an is specifically mentioned is Ziarat-e-Ashura which we are highly encouraged to read. The tradition dates back to Imam Al-Baqir as and has been mention in:

1. Misbah al-Mutahajjid by Shaykh al-Tusi
2. Kamil al-Ziyarat by Ibn Qulawayh
Before proceeding any further, I will need to know if this is acceptable to you or not.
 

 

I agree. La'an just like other matters of faith is best kept personal. An outward show of any act is, at times, for others rather than Allah. Hurting someone's feelings is an absolute sin and should be avoided under all circumstances. As an extreme example, one should not even make fun of hindu gods in front of hindus whether we understand idol-worshipping or not. Similarly la'an should be an internal expression but I will tell you that I don't mind whenever someone says a general la'an on the enemies of the Ahlulbayt without taking names. In both dua sanam-e-quraish and ziarat-ashura, their names are not mentioned.

 

 

I am going to not answer this because i am not sure what you are implying. By Allah Will, do you mean predestination? That should be a separate topic and i would be a good one to discuss.

 

 

regardless of who this specific verse is targeting, it is setting the precedence that under some circumstances, it is ok to send la'an.

Is Salman Rushdie jahannami? Is Yazid?

There are plenty of hadith from the Prophet that Allah hates those who hate Ali, or Allah hates those who hate fatima and Allah hates those who hate Hasan & Husain. If Allah hates someone, does that not make them jahannami?

 

Far from us that we belittle the Ahlul-Bayt. They are the purified ones. As I stated above, people may confuse la'an and tabarra but thats people not the Ahlul-Bayt. 

 

How can our own mother cause one brother to fight another leading to the death of thousands of sahaba? How can my mother hate Imam Ali as? How can my mother refuse to let Imam Hasan to be buried next to his grandfather who loved each other very much? How can our own mother have caused so much strife in the live of the Prophet saw?

 

 

Thank you and please keep in mind the intention here is not to offend but learn.

 

 

As a side note, our tenets are salat, saum, hajj, zakat, khums, jihad, encouraging good, forbidding evil, tawalla (expressing closeness to Allah, the Prophet saw and his progeny), tabarra.

 

Salam

 

Since you have come up with very honest answers i feel extremely happy we are reaching common grounds somewhere. Hence i feel i can rest my case with following conclusions. 

2) Tabarra sounds okay to me. 

I have read Ziarat e ashura, i found la'an for banu umayyads in it. Not the people under discussion.

 

2.1) For me anyone who makes curses  on those whom Ahlul Bayt didn't send curse on is a mughaleen.

 

5)  Firstly, the right to announce anyone's fate strictly lies with Allah. secondly, You can not compare Yazid to the  people under discussion.

REASON BEING WE HAVE EVIDENCE FROM THE Quran which says "Allah is happy with those who took allegiance under the tree" which also includes Talha and Zubair, now we know what Talha and Zubair did. Because we have evidence from the Quran which says "the wives of the Prophet are mothers of believers", and we know what happened  in history. Because we have evidence from the Quran which calls Abu Bakr the companion or in some translations "friend" of the Prophet. We have evidence Abu Bakr was Imam Jafar Sadiq's grandfather (Imam's mother was umme farwa, daughter of Muhammad bin abu bakr). So with regards to the people under discussion the situation is not easy as with Yazid. Also in the people under discussion the situation is sensitive pertaining to the threat to the much needed Shia Sunni unity. 

 

As for Aiesha, she is still the mother of believers because she is Prophet Muhammad's wife. 

 

This was very informative! Thank you! :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Salam

 

Since you have come up with very honest answers i feel extremely happy we are reaching common grounds somewhere. Hence i feel i can rest my case with following conclusions. 

2) Tabarra sounds okay to me. 

I have read Ziarat e ashura, i found la'an for banu umayyads in it. Not the people under discussion.

 

2.1) For me anyone who makes curses  on those whom Ahlul Bayt didn't send curse on is a mughaleen.

 

5)  Firstly, the right to announce anyone's fate strictly lies with Allah. secondly, You can not compare Yazid to the  people under discussion.

REASON BEING WE HAVE EVIDENCE FROM THE Quran which says "Allah is happy with those who took allegiance under the tree" which also includes Talha and Zubair, now we know what Talha and Zubair did. Because we have evidence from the Quran which says "the wives of the Prophet are mothers of believers", and we know what happened  in history. Because we have evidence from the Quran which calls Abu Bakr the companion or in some translations "friend" of the Prophet. We have evidence Abu Bakr was Imam Jafar Sadiq's grandfather (Imam's mother was umme farwa, daughter of Muhammad bin abu bakr). So with regards to the people under discussion the situation is not easy as with Yazid. Also in the people under discussion the situation is sensitive pertaining to the threat to the much needed Shia Sunni unity. 

 

As for Aiesha, she is still the mother of believers because she is Prophet Muhammad's wife. 

 

This was very informative! Thank you! :)

 

 

Allah swt is happy with those who took oath under the tree, including Talha and Zubair. My question to you is: Would Allah swt still be happy with Talha and Zubair who had created fitna and fought against Imam Ali (as) ? And what was this oath they taken under the tree? 

Edited by power

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Salam

 

Since you have come up with very honest answers i feel extremely happy we are reaching common grounds somewhere. Hence i feel i can rest my case with following conclusions. 

2) Tabarra sounds okay to me. 

I have read Ziarat e ashura, i found la'an for banu umayyads in it. Not the people under discussion.

 

There are 2 specific sections:

 

O Allah, pour curses upon the foremost persecutor who usurped the right of Muhammad and Muhammad’s Household and the last follower who acceded to his deed. O Allah, pour curses upon the gang that struggled against al-Husayn and who supported each other against him, paid homage to his enemies, and participated in slaying him.
O Allah, pour curses upon all of them.
 
O Allah, pour special curses on the foremost persecutor nd begin with him first, and then pour curses on the second, the third, and the fourth.
O Allah, curse Yazid fifthly, and curse `Ubaydullah ibn Ziyad, the son of Marjanah,`Umar ibn Sa`d, Shimr, the family of Aba-Sufyan, the family of Ziyad, and the family of Marwan up to the Resurrection Day

 

 

 

5)  Firstly, the right to announce anyone's fate strictly lies with Allah. secondly, You can not compare Yazid to the  people under discussion.

REASON BEING WE HAVE EVIDENCE FROM THE Quran which says "Allah is happy with those who took allegiance under the tree" which also includes Talha and Zubair, now we know what Talha and Zubair did. Because we have evidence from the Quran which says "the wives of the Prophet are mothers of believers", and we know what happened  in history. Because we have evidence from the Quran which calls Abu Bakr the companion or in some translations "friend" of the Prophet. We have evidence Abu Bakr was Imam Jafar Sadiq's grandfather (Imam's mother was umme farwa, daughter of Muhammad bin abu bakr). So with regards to the people under discussion the situation is not easy as with Yazid. Also in the people under discussion the situation is sensitive pertaining to the threat to the much needed Shia Sunni unity. 

 

As for Aiesha, she is still the mother of believers because she is Prophet Muhammad's wife. 

 

This was very informative! Thank you! :)

Agreed that there is no comparison between Yazid and anyone so bad example by me.

"Past actions are not indicative of future results" meaning just because someone did something good in the past, it will not absolve them of wrong they do in the future. An example is Iblis who had years and years of ibadah under his belt but 1 act of defiance turned him into shaitan. The other opposite example (http://www.shiachat.com/forum/topic/235032981-dunya-vs-akhira/) is Hurr ibn Yazid Al-Rayhaee. Up until the Day of Ashoor, he was the biggest criminal of Hussain. He literally stole janna from the gates of hell in an instance when he went to Imam Hussain, asked for forgiveness and attained shahada with the Imam.

Secondly, I have another post w/o commentary and names that there are hadith from the Prophet about Companions turning apostates and going to hell.

 

 

As for Aiesha, she is still the mother of believers because she is Prophet Muhammad's wife. 

 

In looking at how Imam Ali handled her after Jamal, he had her escorted back to Mecca (I think) with her brother and distanced himself from her so at least for me that is my attitude towards her - one of bara'at (distancing or tabarra) rather than cursing.

 

jazāk Allāhu khayran

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LOL. Let me point out we are not speaking of cursing in general here but cursing Abu Bakr, Omer and Aiesha!

You can not bring Quranic verses on cursing and assume i would believe the Quran promotes the sole reason the Shia and Sunni fight! Sorry, NO.

I have mentioned many references as to why i think it is not proper to say "Lanat ullah aleih" for these people outloud. That's not how you assert your love for Ahlul Bayt, at least that is NOT my way. Please come up with the refutations of the things i have mentioned and do not try and interpret the Quranic verses about cursing in general like they are talking about cursing Ayesha, Omer and Abu bakr.

Thank you! :)

First of all cursing is permitted, it is allowed as far as beeing it general or in particular is concerned you are laying down the boundaries. Allah didn't say in the Quran that anyone and everyone who lies and regardless of how small or big that lie is they all must be cursed, like you said that "well everyone must have lied one way or the other somewhere and sometime in their life, so hey why not curse, send lanath on all the Ummah, the entire Muslim nation".

Brother on one hand you are asking for a sensible and logical discussion and on the other hand you are not making any sense at all and throwing logic straight out of the window. Allah has spoken about and cursed, send lanath in particular and on specific people. He has pointed out certain people and groups. And the reason for curse/lanath is known by reading the entire paragraph so you can get to know the whole incident.

As far as the companions and wives of the Prophet are concerned, well it all depends on what they have said, done, been part of and involved in. It also depends on the nature, circumstances and the consequences surrounding what is connected to them. It doesn't matter what your privilege is, who, what and how you are, it all depends on your character, performance and achievement. Allah has been clear about certain children and wives of Measengers/Prophets in the past and the Quran is clear about them. So how are companions and wives of the last Prophet immune?

The question should be "why are certain companions or wives of the last Messenger being cursed, sent lanath by certain members of a particular community, what was the reason and what did they do or were part of and involved in" not "should they be cursed or is it allowed to curse them".

If you believe they are wrongly accused and cursed then step forward and by all means be their advocate and discuss it.

Edited by Ameen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Salam

 

Since you have come up with very honest answers i feel extremely happy we are reaching common grounds somewhere. Hence i feel i can rest my case with following conclusions. 

2) Tabarra sounds okay to me. 

I have read Ziarat e ashura, i found la'an for banu umayyads in it. Not the people under discussion.

 

2.1) For me anyone who makes curses  on those whom Ahlul Bayt didn't send curse on is a mughaleen.

 

5)  Firstly, the right to announce anyone's fate strictly lies with Allah. secondly, You can not compare Yazid to the  people under discussion.

REASON BEING WE HAVE EVIDENCE FROM THE Quran which says "Allah is happy with those who took allegiance under the tree" which also includes Talha and Zubair, now we know what Talha and Zubair did. Because we have evidence from the Quran which says "the wives of the Prophet are mothers of believers", and we know what happened  in history. Because we have evidence from the Quran which calls Abu Bakr the companion or in some translations "friend" of the Prophet. We have evidence Abu Bakr was Imam Jafar Sadiq's grandfather (Imam's mother was umme farwa, daughter of Muhammad bin abu bakr). So with regards to the people under discussion the situation is not easy as with Yazid. Also in the people under discussion the situation is sensitive pertaining to the threat to the much needed Shia Sunni unity. 

 

As for Aiesha, she is still the mother of believers because she is Prophet Muhammad's wife. 

 

This was very informative! Thank you! :)

You said "I have read Ziarat e ashura, i found la'an for banu umayyads in it. Not the people under discussion"

Now we are getting some where. So the question is not Curse/lanath but should certain individuals be cursed, sent lanath. If you have found lanath for bani Umeya in it then Muavia was also a companion of the Prophet and his brother in law, what is your your opinion on sending lanath/ cursing Muavia?

You said "2.1) For me anyone who makes curses on those whom Ahlul Bayt didn't send curse on is a mughaleen"

Just because the Ahlul Baith did something doesn't make it obligatory/compulsory and just because they didn't do something doesn't make it forbidden or wrong, unless otherwise they said it and gave clear instructions about it. In (2.1) you have given your opinion and it is not necessary for others to agree with your opinion and vice versa.

You said, "you can't compare Yazeed to the people under discussion"

Well one thing is established that you can send lanath/curse but it all depends on the crime you have committed, how far you went and what you did. This is exactly my point that it all depends on what you said, did, were part of and or involved in and the nature, circumstances, consequences and the impact of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yazeed didn't do anything himself but ordered it, Muavia didn't do anything himself but ordered it, Aisha didn't do anything her self but ordered it, Usman didn't do anything himself but ordered it, Umar didn't do anything himself but ordered it, Abu Bakar didn't do anything himself but ordered it be it. The nature, circumstances, consequences and the impact of what they decided, did, were part of and involved be it directly or indirectly is different but they all were involved in and connected to some serious stuff one way or another. How much of it is true and to what extent can and should be discussed and has always been open to discussion.

What happened during Yazeed didn't happen over night, a storm or illness doesn't come with full force and impact just like that. It starts from prediction and then you get the signs followed by the symptoms and there on. If it wasn't for Sakeefa and the violence and threatening behaviour that was imposed to get everyone to accept the decision made in Sakkefa we wouldn't have gone through all this and ended up having Karbalaa.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First of all cursing is permitted, it is allowed as far as beeing it general or in particular is concerned you are laying down the boundaries. Allah didn't say in the Quran that anyone and everyone who lies and regardless of how small or big that lie is they all must be cursed, like you said that "well everyone must have lied one way or the other somewhere and sometime in their life, so hey why not curse, send lanath on all the Ummah, the entire Muslim nation".

Brother on one hand you are asking for a sensible and logical discussion and on the other hand you are not making any sense at all and throwing logic straight out of the window. Allah has spoken about and cursed, send lanath in particular and on specific people. He has pointed out certain people and groups. And the reason for curse/lanath is known by reading the entire paragraph so you can get to know the whole incident.

As far as the companions and wives of the Prophet are concerned, well it all depends on what they have said, done, been part of and involved in. It also depends on the nature, circumstances and the consequences surrounding what is connected to them. It doesn't matter what your privilege is, who, what and how you are, it all depends on your character, performance and achievement. Allah has been clear about certain children and wives of Measengers/Prophets in the past and the Quran is clear about them. So how are companions and wives of the last Prophet immune?

The question should be "why are certain companions or wives of the last Messenger being cursed, sent lanath by certain members of a particular community, what was the reason and what did they do or were part of and involved in" not "should they be cursed or is it allowed to curse them".

If you believe they are wrongly accused and cursed then step forward and by all means be their advocate and discuss it.

 

Let's be clear, i am the biggest advocate of everyone knowing the history of Islam after the Prophet but biggest critique  of cursing outloud .I AM NOT DEBATING TO PROVE  ANYONE'S REVERENCE, NOT DO I REPRESENT A SECT, NO WAY. I would love if all read what happened at Jamal and Saqifa and why and how Imam Ali is the successor of Prophet Muhammad. 

 

Now you have become the JUDGE and sentenced some PEOPLE to be worthy of cursing! Please tell me how and when did you acquire that status? You are repeatedly saying Allah HAS MENTIONED CURSING IN THE QURAN, DO YOU CLOSE YOUR EYES TO THE PART WHERE Allah SAYS THE WIVES OF PROPHET ARE MOTHERS OF BELIEVERS WITHOUT MENTIONING ANY EXCEPTION? I am not denying what Aiesha did but i CAN NOT AND WILL NOT DENY THE VERSE WHERE Allah CALLS HER MY MOTHER. WHEN AND HOW DID YOU BECOME THE JUDGE BETWEEN QURAN AND HISTORY??

How do explain the Hadith of Imam Jafar As Saqid about denying the cursing of his own grandfather (Abu Bakr)??

 

 

You said "I have read Ziarat e ashura, i found la'an for banu umayyads in it. Not the people under discussion"

Now we are getting some where. So the question is not Curse/lanath but should certain individuals be cursed, sent lanath. If you have found lanath for bani Umeya in it then Muavia was also a companion of the Prophet and his brother in law, what is your your opinion on sending lanath/ cursing Muavia?

You said "2.1) For me anyone who makes curses on those whom Ahlul Bayt didn't send curse on is a mughaleen"

Just because the Ahlul Baith did something doesn't make it obligatory/compulsory and just because they didn't do something doesn't make it forbidden or wrong, unless otherwise they said it and gave clear instructions about it. In (2.1) you have given your opinion and it is not necessary for others to agree with your opinion and vice versa.

You said, "you can't compare Yazeed to the people under discussion"

Well one thing is established that you can send lanath/curse but it all depends on the crime you have committed, how far you went and what you did. This is exactly my point that it all depends on what you said, did, were part of and or involved in and the nature, circumstances, consequences and the impact of it.

 

"JUST BECAUSE THE AHLUL BAYT DIDN'T DO SOMETHING DOESN'T MAKE IT FORBIDDEN?"

 

If it's not the Ahlul bayt then who is it you are following? Are you saying you liked the idea of cursing and started it?

Watch the video for Mughaleen , i posted the thread for it in this post. Then we will talk!

Edited by FromShiaSunniBrotherhood

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The status mother of believers was launched after some companions got the nerves to express their desire to marry the wives of the Prophet s.a.w. after divorce or his departure. 

The meaning of the saying they're like mothers is so none of them could marry them.

 

Edited by Skanderbeg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You said;

" Let's be clear, i am the biggest advocate of everyone knowing the history of Islam after the Prophet but biggest critique of cursing outloud .I AM NOT DEBATING TO PROVE ANYONE'S REVERENCE, NOT DO I REPRESENT A SECT, NO WAY. I would love if all read what happened at Jamal and Saqifa and why and how Imam Ali is the successor of Prophet Muhammad"

Are you a biggest critique of cursing out loud in general or just a biggest critique of cursing certain people in paricular? When would you consider someone eligible to be cursed? I mean how far does one need to go or how much does one need to do to be considered? Allah hasn't mentioned and layed out any rules and regulations for mankind regarding cursing/lanath, if he has then let me know. But who Allah has cursed and considered eligible to be cursed/sent lanath, Allah has clearly mentioned in the Quran of why they are being cursed or under curse/lanath.

As far as humans are concerned one has always thought I'll and bad about their enemies, rivals, opponents etc or if not this then one has always disliked and turned away from those who have hurt and or harmed them. Just an example that there might be close or far relations who have terribly harmed and hurt me one way or the other but due to my nature and humbleness I will certainly not curse/send lanath on them. Hey I wouldn't even think I'll or bad about them but if I am an influential and popular figure, some kind of leader be it religious or political then I will have opponents, enemies, rivals all sorts and after my demise or even during my life time my followers and supporters will see things differently and have a different approach.

Just because the Ahlul Baith prefer and chose to be patient and tolerant to such a high level or remain to be silent and quiet about certain issues, problems or matters or have a particular approach doesn't mean that it is compulsory and wajib. What ever they did and behaved was down to the nature and situation of those times and generation.

Edited by Ameen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll never understand this. If they are in heaven then curses can not reach them. And if they are in hell then idolizing won't save them. How this silly issue has been made an issue while it conforms to basic anthropology. Those who think they are defending them are instead repeatedly inviting evidence which continuously  defames them. If you really want to hide their flaws then you should change your oldest books instead of refreshing everyone's memory of them. Might work.

 

What is more amusing is that the people who do not believe that our blessings uttered for the prophet actually reach him, in sharp self contradiction believe that curses can reach and harm ordinary human beings in some way. What else can be the cause for concern here. How interesting.

Edited by Darth Vader

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll never understand this. If they are in heaven then curses can not reach them. And if they are in hell then idolizing won't save them. How this silly issue has been made an issue while it conforms to basic anthropology. Those who think they are defending them are instead repeatedly inviting evidence which continuously  defames them. If you really want to hide their flaws then you should change your oldest books instead of refreshing everyone's memory of them. Might work.

 

What is more amusing is that the people who do not believe that our blessings uttered for the prophet actually reach him, in sharp self contradiction believe that curses can reach and harm ordinary human beings in some way. What else can be the cause for concern here. How interesting.

 

It is NOT SILLY! 

I wouldn't stop chasing a thing which has weak link itself in Shia following which also happens to be a seed of discord between Shias and Sunnis because even though nobody really pays attention to this and hardly i have ever seen a Shia or a Sunni scholar mentioning verses from the Quran where Allah says "beleivers are brothers in faith" or talks about "those who are with Muhammad are soft among themselves and strong with the disbelievers". All i ever hear is a Sunni person quoting hadiths on the exalted abu bakr omer and aiesha and Shias quoting the how abu bakr omer and aiesha are cursed. So yes this is NOT SILLY. 

In times like today when we  there are a 100 other evils  one which can be dealt with head on and easily is the SPILT BETWEEN THE UMMAH. So no NOT SILLY!

The argument that someone who saw and believed in the Prophet s.a.w. and died as a muslim is saved no matter what he said or did during his life.is just not good enough for me to believe in.

 

i do not see where in all of this post have i ever given this argument?? 

I need answers for my questions some of which the ingenius Shiaman14 did come up with honestly. We did end up the debate at a common ground please go read that :)

You said;

" Let's be clear, i am the biggest advocate of everyone knowing the history of Islam after the Prophet but biggest critique of cursing outloud .I AM NOT DEBATING TO PROVE ANYONE'S REVERENCE, NOT DO I REPRESENT A SECT, NO WAY. I would love if all read what happened at Jamal and Saqifa and why and how Imam Ali is the successor of Prophet Muhammad"

Are you a biggest critique of cursing out loud in general or just a biggest critique of cursing certain people in paricular? When would you consider someone eligible to be cursed? I mean how far does one need to go or how much does one need to do to be considered? Allah hasn't mentioned and layed out any rules and regulations for mankind regarding cursing/lanath, if he has then let me know. But who Allah has cursed and considered eligible to be cursed/sent lanath, Allah has clearly mentioned in the Quran of why they are being cursed or under curse/lanath.

As far as humans are concerned one has always thought I'll and bad about their enemies, rivals, opponents etc or if not this then one has always disliked and turned away from those who have hurt and or harmed them. Just an example that there might be close or far relations who have terribly harmed and hurt me one way or the other but due to my nature and humbleness I will certainly not curse/send lanath on them. Hey I wouldn't even think I'll or bad about them but if I am an influential and popular figure, some kind of leader be it religious or political then I will have opponents, enemies, rivals all sorts and after my demise or even during my life time my followers and supporters will see things differently and have a different approach.

Just because the Ahlul Baith prefer and chose to be patient and tolerant to such a high level or remain to be silent and quiet about certain issues, problems or matters or have a particular approach doesn't mean that it is compulsory and wajib. What ever they did and behaved was down to the nature and situation of those times and generation.

 

 

I definitely agree with you about this, but you can NOT be doing what Ahlul Bayt didn't do.

WHY?

Because you are not smarter than them, or more far sighted or the flag bearers of religion or an appointed judge over people's fate.

The Ahlul Bayt chose to remian silent and patient but it WASN'T "JUST BECAUSE". Everything they did had a deep science behind it which we can NOT IGNORE BY ANY JUST BECAUSES!

(and i am the biggest critique of following things religiously which were incorporated into Islam by people who came a THOUSAND years later than imam ali i.e dua sanam  quraish, biggest critique of a following without research.) 

I'll never understand this. If they are in heaven then curses can not reach them. And if they are in hell then idolizing won't save them. How this silly issue has been made an issue while it conforms to basic anthropology. Those who think they are defending them are instead repeatedly inviting evidence which continuously  defames them. If you really want to hide their flaws then you should change your oldest books instead of refreshing everyone's memory of them. Might work.

 

What is more amusing is that the people who do not believe that our blessings uttered for the prophet actually reach him, in sharp self contradiction believe that curses can reach and harm ordinary human beings in some way. What else can be the cause for concern here. How interesting.

 

 

I probably  haven't repeated this enough number of times already that i am NOT DEFENDING ABU BAKR OMER or AIESHA. It would be very kind of you all to stop throwing that in my face in further replies. 

 

If you think Sunnis "IDOLIZE" Abu Bakr, Omer and Aiesha, i am sorry you are following the wrong guy from the pulpit. 

 

Everyone is doing the same mistake differently, Sunnis accuse Shias of shirk and shias accuse sunnis as shirk, while i see this game of blame as a revolt against system of Allah.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I need answers for my questions some of which the ingenius Shiaman14 did come up with honestly. We did end up the debate at a common ground please go read that :)

Dear sister - please note that I am no authority so the other brothers/sisters don't have to agree with my stance on anything. However, like you I too thought that we had reached an amicable understanding on this issue. We agreed that:

  • The focus on la'an from both sides is misplaced. Shiaism is more than just sending la'an on people. The actual tenet is tabarra and it is more than just sending la'an on people. You distance yourself from the people and the actions that hurt the AhlulBayt. On a side note, I heard a great poetry once that Fadak was given to Hz Fatima a.s. as part of Khums. We curse the people who stole fadak from her but then we don't pay khums ourselves so in effect we curse ourselves too. 
  • La'an is permissible but you are against it in a public setting. Plenty of shia scholars have the same stance as you. Moreover you are even okay with la'an the way it is stated in ziarat-ashura.

I am not sure what more is left to be discussed on this matter but at least I am done with this topic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

i do not see where in all of this post have i ever given this argument?? 

 

Because this is exactly the argument Sunni muslims use for their prohibition on cursing the cursed.

They were saved because they saw the Prophet s.a.w., believed in the Prophet s.a.w. and died as muslims. 

What they said or did during and or after the demise of the Prophet s.a.w. for them is totally unimportant.

The question is rather what do the ones cursed by Shia muslims mean to you?

Do you believe they are saved or cursed?

Edited by Skanderbeg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

THANK YOU

 

Dear sister - please note that I am no authority so the other brothers/sisters don't have to agree with my stance on anything. However, like you I too thought that we had reached an amicable understanding on this issue. We agreed that:

  • The focus on la'an from both sides is misplaced. Shiaism is more than just sending la'an on people. The actual tenet is tabarra and it is more than just sending la'an on people. You distance yourself from the people and the actions that hurt the AhlulBayt. On a side note, I heard a great poetry once that Fadak was given to Hz Fatima a.s. as part of Khums. We curse the people who stole fadak from her but then we don't pay khums ourselves so in effect we curse ourselves too. 
  • La'an is permissible but you are against it in a public setting. Plenty of shia scholars have the same stance as you. Moreover you are even okay with la'an the way it is stated in ziarat-ashura.

I am not sure what more is left to be discussed on this matter but at least I am done with this topic.

 

 

Thank you for your honesty again, that is precisely what i wanted people here to realize there is so much more to shia following than cursing! And tabarra sounds like the right way to me too 

I am done with this topic  as well and i have my answers but then some over zealous brothers who apparently didn't read all the questions i have raised and things i have already agreed on, have to come and throw the "love of sahaba in my face" . I do not have to give the proof of who i love and who i don't to anyone here. 

Thank you again. 

Jazak Allah e khair!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not about you at all. 

The belief that some people are cursed is a general belief in Shia Islam.

But you know very well that when you admit certain people are cursed, the curse is actually not an offense / or a problem at all. 

And if to you they are saved then it's outside the fold of Shia Islam. 

When you say A, then have the courage to go to Z as well instead of starting something and then abort it whenever you want unless you're in PM box private messaging but this is a public forum so at least be courageous enough to deal with counter-arguments instead of just waiting for a confirmation of your opinion.

 

Edited by Skanderbeg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is NOT SILLY!

I wouldn't stop chasing a thing which has weak link itself in Shia following which also happens to be a seed of discord between Shias and Sunnis because even though nobody really pays attention to this and hardly i have ever seen a Shia or a Sunni scholar mentioning verses from the Quran where Allah says "beleivers are brothers in faith" or talks about "those who are with Muhammad are soft among themselves and strong with the disbelievers". All i ever hear is a Sunni person quoting hadiths on the exalted abu bakr omer and aiesha and Shias quoting the how abu bakr omer and aiesha are cursed. So yes this is NOT SILLY.

In times like today when we there are a 100 other evils one which can be dealt with head on and easily is the SPILT BETWEEN THE UMMAH. So no NOT SILLY!

i do not see where in all of this post have i ever given this argument??

I need answers for my questions some of which the ingenius Shiaman14 did come up with honestly. We did end up the debate at a common ground please go read that :)

I definitely agree with you about this, but you can NOT be doing what Ahlul Bayt didn't do.

WHY?

Because you are not smarter than them, or more far sighted or the flag bearers of religion or an appointed judge over people's fate.

The Ahlul Bayt chose to remian silent and patient but it WASN'T "JUST BECAUSE". Everything they did had a deep science behind it which we can NOT IGNORE BY ANY JUST BECAUSES!

(and i am the biggest critique of following things religiously which were incorporated into Islam by people who came a THOUSAND years later than imam ali i.e dua sanam quraish, biggest critique of a following without research.)

I probably haven't repeated this enough number of times already that i am NOT DEFENDING ABU BAKR OMER or AIESHA. It would be very kind of you all to stop throwing that in my face in further replies.

If you think Sunnis "IDOLIZE" Abu Bakr, Omer and Aiesha, i am sorry you are following the wrong guy from the pulpit.

Everyone is doing the same mistake differently, Sunnis accuse Shias of shirk and shias accuse sunnis as shirk, while i see this game of blame as a revolt against system of Allah.

Like I said Bro, it's all about circumstances, situation and the condition that the Ahlul Baith were in and faced. The choices that they made were down to them. Secondly everything is not recorded in history and a lot was done to try and hide the fact that people had issues and problems with the Ahlul Baith.

How you feel and react towards your rival, enemy, opposition etc is down to you. Now if we look at things through your perspective then how did the Khalifs/companions treat their rivals or people they didn't get along with?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ali, the 4th rightly guided Khalifa of the Muslims, was cursed by Muawiyah and he made it obligatory/compulsory and part of the Jummah khutba. This was a common practice in (Syria) Sham which was controlled and influenced by Muawiyah.

Those who believe in and are all time lovers of the Sahaba can they tell me who do they follow when they call Shias Kafir and carry out their killings or consider Shia killings permissible?

And if i am not wrong even Umar cursed his killer/attacker. I will post you the reference

A question that needs to be asked and answered is that those who hate Shias and what they think, say and accuse them of, which companion do they follow?

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...