Jump to content
StrugglingForTheLight

Coincidence? 12 number in Quran.

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

20 minutes ago, أبو فاطمة المحمدي said:

The statements of the scholars are in the context that I mentioned - the context of 'Abd Allah b. Ubayy. His kufr is clearly exposed in the Qur'an. This verse was revealed about him and his followers:

That is because they believed, and then they disbelieved; so their hearts were sealed over, and they do not understand.

Qur'an 63:

Everyone knew him. Yet, he was treated as a Muslim for all legal purposes. The case of deniers of Imamah is exactly like that.

did the Prophet (peace be upon him) and his companions ever called Abd Allah b.Ubay a Muslim after they came to know of his hypocrisy ? 

 

20 minutes ago, أبو فاطمة المحمدي said:

And, why does it matter to you that much? You guys call us total kuffar for disliking Abu Bakr. So, what is this pretense by you?

Blatant lie nobody ever called Shiites Kuffars for disliking the Companions. the only time i know Shiites get called Kuffars is when they call the Companions Kuffars Naudhubuilah and that is when they get called Kuffars because we all agree on the hadith that if a Muslim calls another Muslim a kaffir then one of them is surely a Kaffir. if the person he called Kaffir is in fact a Muslim, then the Kuffer returns on him. 

it is important to me because you are not being honest. first you said they are legally Muslim and then you said they are Munafiqs who are in reality Kuffars. why are you using 2 contradictory statements like these ? 

Edited by Student_of_Deen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Student_of_Deen said:

did the Prophet (peace be upon him) and his companions ever called Abd Allah b.Ubay a Muslim after they came to know of his hypocrisy ? 

So, you are saying that the Prophet and his Sahabah were openly calling 'Abd Allah b. Ubayy a kafir and treating him like a pagan/atheist/mushrik? I would like to see evidence of that. It doesn't matter. You can quote Sunni references.

Quote

Blatant lie nobody ever called Shiites Kuffars for disliking the Companions. the only time i know Shiites get called Kuffars is when they call the Companions Kuffars Naudhubuilah and that is when they get called Kuffars because we all agree on the hadith that if a Muslim calls another Muslim a kaffir then one of them is surely a Kaffir. if the person he called Kaffir is in fact a Muslim, then the Kuffer returns on him. 

This is from Tafsir Ibn Kathir:

(that He may enrage the disbelievers with them. ) Relying on this Ayah, Imam Malik stated that the Rawafid are disbelievers because they hate the Companions, may Allah be pleased with them all. Malik said, "The Companions enrage them, and according to this Ayah, he who is enraged by the Companions is a disbeliever.'' Several scholars agreed with Malik's opinion, may Allah be pleased with them. There are numerous Hadiths mentioning the virtues of the Companions and prohibiting the criticism on their mistakes.

http://www.qtafsir.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2001&Itemid=104

If you want to lie next time, watch out carefully.

Quote

it is important to me because you are not being honest. first you said they are legally Muslim and then you said they are Munafiqs who are in reality Kuffars. why are you using 2 contradictory statements like these ?

If your comprehension skills are not so great, I am not to be blamed for that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, StrugglingForTheLight said:

From Imam Retha (as): “The Honorable the Exalted God gave distinction to the (prophetic) household over other people in the Wise Book.” Al-Ma’mun asked him (s), “Where is that in God’s Book?” Al-Reza (s) told him, “Indeed the Honorable the Exalted God says, ‘Allah did choose Adam and Noah, the family of Abraham, and the family of 'Imran above all people. Offspring, one of the other: And Allah heareth and knoweth all things.’ In another place the Honorable the Exalted God says, ‘Or do they envy the people for what God hath given them of his bounty? So then We had given the family of Abraham the Book and Wisdom, and conferred upon them a great mulk.’ He then addressed this effect to the rest of the believers, so he said: O ye who believe Obey God, and obey the Apostle, and those who hold the Authority among you.’ This means those whom God has given them the Book and the Wisdom for which they are envied. Therefore, what is understood from the Honorable the Exalted God’s words, ‘Or do they envy the people for what God hath given them of his grace? So then We had given the family of Abraham the Book and Wisdom, and conferred upon them a great mulk.’ This refers to obeying the Chosen Pure ones.”, so the mulk here refers to the obedience owed to them.

Will be posting more hadiths about the link between 4:54 and 4:59 (ie. the flow).

In The the term Aal is used for both: the family or descendants of a person, or the people or followers of a person.

Verse 4:54 is talking about the Aale Ibrahim which is not just talking about the immediate family of Prophet Ibrahim (peace be upon them all) instead it`s talking about all of his descendants.  let see some other verses from the Quran for better understanding In`sha Allah.

Thus will thy Lord choose thee (O Yusuf) and teach thee the interpretation of stories (and events) and perfect His favor to thee and to the Aale-Yaqoob (descendants of Yaqoob) even as He perfected it to thy fathers Ibraheem and Ishaaq aforetime! For Allah is full of knowledge and wisdom."  (The Holy Quran 12:6)

In the above quoted verse of Surah Yusuf, the term Aale-Yaqoob clearly implies the descendants of the Noble Prophet Yaqoob (a.s.).

Allah Says in the Holy Quran Chapter 40 Surah Mumin verses 45-46:

Then Allah saved him from (every) ill that they plotted (against him), but the brunt of the Penalty encompassed on all sides the Ale-Firaun (People and followers of the Pharaoh). In front of the Fire will they be brought morning and evening: and (the sentence will be) on the Day that Judgment will be established: "Cast ye the Aale-Firaun (People and followers of the Pharaoh) into the severest Penalty!"

 

Allah Says in the Holy Quran Chapter 2 Surah Baqarah verse 50:

And remember We divided the sea for you and saved you, and drowned Aale-Firaun (people of the Pharaoh) within your very sight.

But in the above quoted verses of Surah Mumin and Surah Baqarah, the term Aale-Firaun is not restricted to the family or descendants of the Pharaoh, but implies the nation or people or followers of the Pharaoh.

So the Great Kingdom (Mulk e Azeem) Allah subhana watala mentioned in verse 4:54 is Probably the Kingdom of Sulayman (Peace be upon him) and  Allahu alaam.

But even if we agreed that the verse is talking about the immediate family of Ibrahim (peace be upon him) and the great Mulk is referring to the obedience of the chosen pure ones then again BOTH THE SONS OF PROPHET IBRAHIM WERE PROPHETS OF Allah IN 2 DIFFERENT LANDS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE GUIDANCE OF THEIR OWN UMMAH IN JERUSALEM AND MAKKAH RESPECTIVELY. 

how can you use them as a proof for Imamah of Divinely guided Infallible Imams who were themselves Ummatis of The Prophet (peace be upon him) ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, أبو فاطمة المحمدي said:

If you want to lie next time, watch out carefully.

If your comprehension skills are not so great, I am not to be blamed for that.

first of all Alhamdulilah i have no need to use lies because i do not hide my beliefs. 

And Secondly i know my comprehension skills and grammar are pretty bad and i don`t hesitate in admitting it. however you can ask anyone else on this thread and i`m sure he/she will also tell your 2 statements are contradictory and illogical because if they are denying an Entire Pillar of Islam then how come they could still be counted as Muslims ? i would like to see evidence of that from Shia Sources.

51 minutes ago, أبو فاطمة المحمدي said:

So, you are saying that the Prophet and his Sahabah were openly calling 'Abd Allah b. Ubayy a kafir and treating him like a pagan/atheist/mushrik? I would like to see evidence of that. It doesn't matter. You can quote Sunni references.

I did not say or claimed anything here, instead i just asked you a question because you seem to know more about this subject but you didn`t answered my question. 

53 minutes ago, أبو فاطمة المحمدي said:

(that He may enrage the disbelievers with them. ) Relying on this Ayah, Imam Malik stated that the Rawafid are disbelievers because they hate the Companions, may Allah be pleased with them all. Malik said, "The Companions enrage them, and according to this Ayah, he who is enraged by the Companions is a disbeliever.'' Several scholars agreed with Malik's opinion, may Allah be pleased with them. There are numerous Hadiths mentioning the virtues of the Companions and prohibiting the criticism on their mistakes.

http://www.qtafsir.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2001&Itemid=104

Imam Ibn Kathir did not mention the entire incident because that would have made his tafsir even larger than it is right now. So before you call me a liar, please check the entire story in Tafsir Al Qurtubi from where Imam Ibn Kathir recorded this incident in his tafsir.

During one of Imam Malik's classes, it was mentioned that the raafidi Shia curse the sahaba. Imam Malik recited the verse, "Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah and those with him are harsh with the disbelievers and gentle among themselves. So that the disbelievers may become enraged with them." (48:29) He then said, "Whoever becomes enraged when the sahaba are mentioned is the one about whom the verse speaks." (Tafseer al-Qurtubi)

Now it is obvious that cursing & abusing the Sahabah also includes calling them kaffirs (Naudhubillah) which is also found in numerous places in the Shi`i books. the person who mentioned this in the Class of Imam Maalik chose not to mention this because of obvious reasons such as it would have upset the people present in the class. 

So nice try brother but unfortunately it`s not going to work. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Student_of_Deen said:

first of all Alhamdulilah i have no need to use lies because i do not hide my beliefs. 

In that case, tell us your belief about Shi'ah. Are they Muslims or kuffar?

Quote

And Secondly i know my comprehension skills and grammar are pretty bad and i don`t hesitate in admitting it. however you can ask anyone else on this thread and i`m sure he/she will also tell your 2 statements are contradictory and illogical because if they are denying an Entire Pillar of Islam then how come they could still be counted as Muslims ? i would like to see evidence of that from Shia Sources.

Again, you need to work on your comprehension skills. They are so poor. Let me rephrase the argument. Maybe, you will get it this time:

1. Someone who is legally a Muslim is one who is treated as a Muslim for all legal purposes. He acquires this status only on account of his two Shahadahs. A munafiq like 'Abd Allah b. Ubayy denied the nubuwwah, which is even superior to Imamah. Yet, he was treated as a Muslim for legal purposes by the Prophet.

2. Deniers of Imamah are like him exactly.

This is from Kitab al-Kafi, and its chain is reliable:

عدة من أصحابنا، عن سهل بن زياد ومحمد بن يحيى، عن أحمد بن محمد جميعا، عن ابن محبوب، عن علي بن رئاب، عن حمران بن أعين، عن أبي جعفر عليه السلام قال: سمعته يقول: الايمان ما استقر في القلب وأفضى به إلى الله عز وجل وصدقه العمل بالطاعة لله والتسليم لامره والاسلام ما ظهر من قول أو فعل وهو الذي عليه جماعة الناس من الفرق كلها وبه حقنت الدماء وعليه جرت المواريث وجاز النكاح

 

Narrated Humran b. A’yan:

I heard Abu Ja’far, peace be upon him, saying: “Iman is what is firmly established in the heart, with which one comes to Allāh the Almighty, and which is by action through obedience to Allāh and submission to His Commands. As for Islam, it is what is OUTWARD from statements and actions, and upon it are the majority of the people from ALL the sects; and through it the blood is spared and upon it arises inheritance and upon it marriage becomes permissible.”

 

Quote

I did not say or claimed anything here, instead i just asked you a question because you seem to know more about this subject but you didn`t answered my question.

So, you now agree that the Prophet and the Sahabah were not calling 'Abd Allah b. Ubayy a kafir, despite his denier of nubuwwah?

Quote

 Imam Ibn Kathir did not mention the entire incident because that would have made his tafsir even larger than it is right now. So before you call me a liar, please check the entire story in Tafsir Al Qurtubi from where Imam Ibn Kathir recorded this incident in his tafsir.

During one of Imam Malik's classes, it was mentioned that the raafidi Shia curse the sahaba. Imam Malik recited the verse, "Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah and those with him are harsh with the disbelievers and gentle among themselves. So that the disbelievers may become enraged with them." (48:29) He then said, "Whoever becomes enraged when the sahaba are mentioned is the one about whom the verse speaks." (Tafseer al-Qurtubi)

You forgot to highlight the part in blue. Malik's fatwa was prompted by the cursing habit of a Rafidi. But, the fatwa was general, and included whoever is enraged by the name of Mu'awiyah, for instance. Perhaps, you did not know Sunni Imams like al-Nasai and 'Abd al-Razzaq al-San'ani are kuffar according to this reckless fatwa of Malik. They both hated Mu'awiyah and 'Abd al-Razzaq in particular was "enraged" by any mention of that hypocritical Sahabi in his presence.

Quote

Now it is obvious that cursing & abusing the Sahabah also includes calling them kaffirs (Naudhubillah) which is also found in numerous places in the Shi`i books. the person who mentioned this in the Class of Imam Maalik chose not to mention this because of obvious reasons such as it would have upset the people present in the class.

Does this then mean you consider us to be kuffar? Just say it, and stop hiding.

 

Edited by أبو فاطمة المحمدي

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, أبو فاطمة المحمدي said:

Again, you need to work on your comprehension skills. They are so poor. Let me rephrase the argument. Maybe, you will get it this time:

1. Someone who is legally a Muslim is one who is treated as a Muslim for all legal purposes. He acquires this status only on account of his two Shahadahs. A munafiq like 'Abd Allah b. Ubayy denied the nubuwwah, which is even superior to Imamah. Yet, he was treated as a Muslim for legal purposes by the Prophet.

2. Deniers of Imamah are like him exactly.

This is from Kitab al-Kafi, and its chain is reliable:

عدة من أصحابنا، عن سهل بن زياد ومحمد بن يحيى، عن أحمد بن محمد جميعا، عن ابن محبوب، عن علي بن رئاب، عن حمران بن أعين، عن أبي جعفر عليه السلام قال: سمعته يقول: الايمان ما استقر في القلب وأفضى به إلى الله عز وجل وصدقه العمل بالطاعة لله والتسليم لامره والاسلام ما ظهر من قول أو فعل وهو الذي عليه جماعة الناس من الفرق كلها وبه حقنت الدماء وعليه جرت المواريث وجاز النكاح

 

Narrated Humran b. A’yan:

I heard Abu Ja’far, peace be upon him, saying: “Iman is what is firmly established in the heart, with which one comes to Allāh the Almighty, and which is by action through obedience to Allāh and submission to His Commands. As for Islam, it is what is OUTWARD from statements and actions, and upon it are the majority of the people from ALL the sects; and through it the blood is spared and upon it arises inheritance and upon it marriage becomes permissible.”

So you admit those who deny Imamah are only Muslims by name but they are Munafiqs as per Shia Manhaj ? alright.

 

26 minutes ago, أبو فاطمة المحمدي said:

In that case, tell us your belief about Shi'ah. Are they Muslims or kuffar?

i cannot make Mass Takfir of Shi`ah Muslims like you do in the case of 1 Billion+ Non-Shi`ah Muslim. you can check the opinions of Ahle Sunnah`s scholars regarding Shi`ah if you wish.

29 minutes ago, أبو فاطمة المحمدي said:

So, you now agree that the Prophet and the Sahabah were not calling 'Abd Allah b. Ubayy a kafir, despite his denier of nubuwwah?

i did not agreed to anything man i just asked you a question on this topic. 

 

30 minutes ago, أبو فاطمة المحمدي said:

You forgot to highlight the part in blue. Malik's fatwa was prompted by the cursing habit of a Rafidi. But, the fatwa was general, and included whoever is enraged by the name of Mu'awiyah, for instance. Perhaps, you did not know Sunni Imams like al-Nasai and 'Abd al-Razzaq al-San'ani are kuffar according to this reckless fatwa of Malik. They both hated Mu'awiyah and 'Abd al-Razzaq in particular was "enraged" by any mention of that hypocritical Sahabi in his presence.

when the questioner already mentioned Shi`ah Curse and abuse Sahaba then it can be understood by being enraged it is meant cursing, abusing and sending lanah as if the person is/was a Kaffir. Imam Maalik does not needs to mention every single thing which is said and done by the Shi`ah when they get enraged at the Companions. 

 

36 minutes ago, أبو فاطمة المحمدي said:

Does this then mean you consider us to be kuffar? Just say it, and stop hiding.

there is a Hadith which speaks against Shi`ah when they say the Companions were Kaffir Naudhubillah. i have no need to pass a verdict on you when there are clear evidence in the Quran & Sunnah which condemns your actions and even says the Kuffer returns on you if you falsely accused a Muslim of being a kaffir.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Student_of_Deen said:

i cannot make Mass Takfir of Shi`ah Muslims like you do in the case of 1 Billion+ Non-Shi`ah Muslim. you can check the opinions of Ahle Sunnah`s scholars regarding Shi`ah if you wish.

But, you do make pointed, individual takfir of Shi'ah. Correct? Every Shi'i believes that Mu'awiyah was a munafiq (and many Sunnis do too). Are they kuffar for that or not?

Quote

there is a Hadith which speaks against Shi`ah when they say the Companions were Kaffir Naudhubillah. i have no need to pass a verdict on you when there are clear evidence in the Quran & Sunnah which condemns your actions and even says the Kuffer returns on you if you falsely accused a Muslim of being a kaffir.

If a Sahabi was a kafir, then calling him a kafir is in line with that hadith. Every munafiq is an inward kafir as you know (I am sure you cannot contest that without becoming a real kafir). And, everyone who hated Imam 'Ali, 'alaihi al-salam, in any way, manner or form was a munafiq.

Edited by أبو فاطمة المحمدي

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Student_of_Deen said:

So you admit those who deny Imamah are only Muslims by name but they are Munafiqs as per Shia Manhaj ? alright.

That's what he's been saying all along. There's nothing to "admit", he already said it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, The Batman said:

That's what he's been saying all along. There's nothing to "admit", he already said it.

No that`s not what he`s been saying all along. Read his first comment about this topic he said Sunnis are legally Muslims but they have some serious errors in their Iman. Now he is saying those who rejected Imamah are just like  'Abd Allah b. Ubayy denied the nubuwwah. 

there`s a huge difference between a Muslim with problematic Iman and a Munafiq who denies Islam altogether because a Munafiq is the worst kind of Kaffir.

HUGE DIFFERENCE.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, أبو فاطمة المحمدي said:

But, you do make pointed, individual takfir of Shi'ah. Correct? Every Shi'i believes that Mu'awiyah was a munafiq (and many Sunnis do too). Are they kuffar for that or not?

i`m only telling you what Islam tells us regarding this matter. What every Shi`i believes about Mu`awiyah (ra) based on their opinions and reasoning is on them and they will be held accountable for their words just like everyone else.

 

26 minutes ago, أبو فاطمة المحمدي said:

If a Sahabi was a kafir, then calling him a kafir is in line with that hadith. Every munafiq is an inward kafir as you know (I am sure you cannot contest that without becoming a real kafir). And, everyone who hated Imam 'Ali, 'alaihi al-salam, in any way, manner or form was a munafiq.

yes i agree but do you claim to read minds and know what is in people`s hearts ? so that you can know they were in fact Munafiqs ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Student_of_Deen said:

No that`s not what he`s been saying all along. Read his first comment about this topic he said Sunnis are legally Muslims but they have some serious errors in their Iman. Now he is saying those who rejected Imamah are just like  'Abd Allah b. Ubayy denied the nubuwwah. 

there`s a huge difference between a Muslim with problematic Iman and a Munafiq who denies Islam altogether because a Munafiq is the worst kind of Kaffir.

HUGE DIFFERENCE.

This is what I said:

He is legally a Muslim. However, his iman has some very serious problems.

He believes in a (fake) form of tawhid, and believes in a (blasphemous) form of nubuwwah. Then, he denies imamah. Those are very serious problems with his iman. For instance, Salafis worship a sky man, with his own body (weight), who floats between the skies and resides on a physical throne. Worshiping that kind of a nonexistent "god" is major Shirk. Sunnis generally attribute lots of blasphemous attributes to Allah, and to His Messenger. Again, that is major apostasy. But, they profess Islam, and recite the two Shahadahs, So, they are to be treated as Muslims.

Quote

i`m only telling you what Islam tells us regarding this matter. What every Shi`i believes about Mu`awiyah (ra) based on their opinions and reasoning is on them and they will be held accountable for their words just like everyone else.

It is simple logic:

1. Mu'awiyah hated Imam 'Ali.

2. The Prophet said that whosoever hated Imam 'Ali was a munafiq.

3. Therefore, Mu'awiyah was a munafiq.

We can the same about several other people too.

But, here, you think the Prophet was wrong. This is your logic:

1. Mu'awiyah hated Imam 'Ali.

2. The Prophet said that whosoever hated Imam 'Ali was a munafiq.

3. Therefore, Mu'awiyah was a mumin!

Let us leave that.

You believe that anyone who makes takfir of a mumin is a kafir. And you maintain that Mu'awiyah was a mumin. So, what stops you from issuing takfir against the Prophet and the Shi'ah?

Are you hiding your faith now?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, أبو فاطمة المحمدي said:

This is what I said:

He is legally a Muslim. However, his iman has some very serious problems.

He believes in a (fake) form of tawhid, and believes in a (blasphemous) form of nubuwwah. Then, he denies imamah. Those are very serious problems with his iman. For instance, Salafis worship a sky man, with his own body (weight), who floats between the skies and resides on a physical throne. Worshiping that kind of a nonexistent "god" is major Shirk. Sunnis generally attribute lots of blasphemous attributes to Allah, and to His Messenger. Again, that is major apostasy. But, they profess Islam, and recite the two Shahadahs, So, they are to be treated as Muslims.

your every other post opens possibilities for several new discussions which is why it is getting hard to keep track of the main topic of this thread which is Imamah. 

let me tell you it`s is not just the Salafis who believe Allah subhana watala is above his throne (In a Manner which suits his glory and majesty) but also the all the Sunni Muslims around the world believe the same. we Sunnis do not imagine anything about Allah subhana watala we only believe in Al istiwah (which is beyond our knowledge and understanding) as mentioned in the Qur`an but Naudhubillah we do not imagine Allah to be a sky man who floats between the skies. we believe Allah comes down to the first heaven every last third of the night but we do not claim to understand or imagine anything about this incomprehensible phenomenon which is mentioned in Hadith Qudsi.

Now you tell me if our beliefs are fake and major shirk then what do you believe about Allah subhana watal and what attributes do you give to him ?

32 minutes ago, أبو فاطمة المحمدي said:

It is simple logic:

1. Mu'awiyah hated Imam 'Ali.

2. The Prophet said that whosoever hated Imam 'Ali was a munafiq.

3. Therefore, Mu'awiyah was a munafiq.

We can the same about several other people too.

But, here, you think the Prophet was wrong. This is your logic:

1. Mu'awiyah hated Imam 'Ali.

2. The Prophet said that whosoever hated Imam 'Ali was a munafiq.

3. Therefore, Mu'awiyah was a mumin!

i think it would be the best if you stop making things up attributing it to me. you`re doing it from the start and it`s only making your argument weaker. you false accused me of thinking the Prophet (peace be upon him) was wrong. i ask you what proof do you have to make such a grave accusation on me ?

this is my logic.

1) Mu`wiyah (ra) did not hated Imam Ali (ra).

2) The Prophet Said that only a believers will love Ali (ra) and a Munafiq will hate him which is absolutely true.

3) Therefore, Mu`awiyah was a Mumin because he didn`t hated Ali (ra) instead he loved and respected him and there are narrations which tells us he cried when he heard the News of Imam Ali (ra) death and also on his death bed he was extremely remorseful for the conflict with him.

you should also keep in mind The Prophet (peace be upon him)  said, "The sign of faith is love of the Ansar and the sign of hypocrisy is the hatred of Ansar" [al-Bukharee, Muslim].

Now here`s your logic: 

1) i hate almost all the Ansar and the Muhajirs

2) i make the mass takfir of more than 1 Billion Muslims present in the world right now and millions of Muslims who lived in the Past.

3) i caste doubts at the Imaan of Sahabah and even call many of them Kaffir but still i`m a Momin believes i claim to love the Ahle Bayt (ra).

your last question is not even worth reading, let alone answering. 

Edited by Student_of_Deen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Student_of_Deen said:

let me tell you it`s is not just the Salafis who believe Allah subhana watala is above his throne (In a Manner which suits his glory and majesty) but also the all the Sunni Muslims around the world believe the same. we Sunnis do not imagine anything about Allah subhana watala we only believe in Al istiwah (which is beyond our knowledge and understanding) as mentioned in the Qur`an but Naudhubillah

Do you believe that Allah has a body (jism)? Don't worry. We are not talking about the size, shape or weight of your "god" yet. Does Allah have a body?

Also, does your "god" have a particular shape? Was Adam created in "his" shape?

 

Quote

we do not imagine Allah to be a sky man who floats between the skies. we believe Allah comes down to the first heaven every last third of the night but we do not claim to understand or imagine anything about this incomprehensible phenomenon which is mentioned in Hadith Qudsi.

Now you tell me if our beliefs are fake and major shirk then what do you believe about Allah subhana watal and what attributes do you give to him ?

You have just raised another issue: al-hulul. Your "god" possesses a bodily form, and with that body "he" comes "down" INTO the first sky. He comes INSIDE the lowest heaven. Al-Hulul is to say that Allah comes inside His creature; and it is major kufr.

 

Quote

i think it would be the best if you stop making things up attributing it to me. you`re doing it from the start and it`s only making your argument weaker. you false accused me of thinking the Prophet (peace be upon him) was wrong. i ask you what proof do you have to make such a grave accusation on me ?

this is my logic.

1) Mu`wiyah (ra) did not hated Imam Ali (ra).

2) The Prophet Said that only a believers will love Ali (ra) and a Munafiq will hate him which is absolutely true.

3) Therefore, Mu`awiyah was a Mumin because he didn`t hated Ali (ra) instead he loved and respected him and there are narrations which tells us he cried when he heard the News of Imam Ali (ra) death and also on his death bed he was extremely remorseful for the conflict with him.

I did not know you have such great talents for humour. So, Mu'awiyah abused and cursed Imam 'Ali out of love? He also fought the noble Imam out of love?

I personally would like to see your authentic narrations which prove that Mu'awiyah cried when he heard of Imam 'Ali's death. I would also like to see your authentic reports which prove that Mu'awiyah regretted his bloody rebellion against the Khalifah of Allah and His Messenger.

Quote

you should also keep in mind The Prophet (peace be upon him)  said, "The sign of faith is love of the Ansar and the sign of hypocrisy is the hatred of Ansar" [al-Bukharee, Muslim].

Now here`s your logic: 

1) i hate almost all the Ansar and the Muhajirs

2) i make the mass takfir of more than 1 Billion Muslims present in the world right now and millions of Muslims who lived in the Past.

3) i caste doubts at the Imaan of Sahabah and even call many of them Kaffir but still i`m a Momin believes i claim to love the Ahle Bayt (ra).

The hadith about the Ansar is not accepted by us. It is also not logical, Many of the Ansar - including 'Abd Allah b. Ubayy - were hypocrites. Plus, your appeal to emotion would not help you here. I have told you our view of those who reject the Prophetic teachings on Imamah. But, again, your comprehension skills are not much helpful.

Yet, Salafis consider at least 95% of that so-called 1 billion Muslims as total infidels. Are you gonna say Salafis are kuffar for that? Or, are you gonna claim again that Salafis make takfir of them out of love for them?

Edited by أبو فاطمة المحمدي

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I always thought it was, "Love for Ali is a sign of faith and hatred for Ali is a sign of hypocrisy." - isn't that an accepted narration for (some) Sunnis? And even if not, Shi'a have their authentic narrations about that - and many more in regards to those who fought Imam Ali (a). If anyone wants to prove to us that we are wrong, wouldn't it be more logical to give us an authentic narration from our sources? Bukhari, Muslim can be quoted as much as one wants, they are not hujjah upon us.

On that note, it might be better if you guys stick to the actual topic, here, instead of starting on other issues. For that, old threads can always be dug out- or a new one created if you think you have something "new" to discuss or ask on these matters.

Ma'asalama.

Edited by Noor al Batul

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, أبو فاطمة المحمدي said:

Do you believe that Allah has a body (jism)? Don't worry. We are not talking about the size, shape or weight of your "god" yet. Does Allah have a body?

Also, does your "god" have a particular shape? Was Adam created in "his" shape?

No we do not claim to imagine anything about Allah. we do not claim to understand the ambiguous Ayahs of the Quran in which Allah talks about his hand or rising above the throne. we only believe in what the Holy Qur`an says but we don`t deploy our minds to misinterpret those verses and corrupt our Aqeedah,

Adam (peace be upon him) was created in the image of God is actually what the Bible says about him. we as Muslims do not believe Adam (peace be upon him) was created in the image of God naudhubillah rather Adam was created in his own image (i,e in his adult form).

1 hour ago, أبو فاطمة المحمدي said:

You have just raised another issue: al-hulul. Your "god" possesses a bodily form, and with that body "he" comes "down" INTO the first sky. He comes INSIDE the lowest heaven. Al-Hulul is to say that Allah comes inside His creature; and it is major kufr.

okay if that`s kufr then you tell me where exactly is Allah ? 

 

1 hour ago, أبو فاطمة المحمدي said:

I did not know you have such great talents for humour. So, Mu'awiyah abused and cursed Imam 'Ali out of love? He also fought the noble Imam out of love?

there are no evidence in the Sunni sources which says Mu`awiyah (ra) cursed and abused Imam Ali (ra). there are no evidences even to prove he commanded people to curse Ali (ra) but People intentionally misinterpret that narration in which he asked Sa`d ibn Abi Waqqas (ra) what him from cursing Ali (ra) ? 

The confusion stems from the fact that it says:

أمر معاوية بن أبي سفيان سعدا فقال ما منعك أن تسب أبا التراب
Translation: Muawiya bin abi Sufyan commanded Saad, asking him: what prevented you from insulting Abu Turab?


Now a typical liar would translate this as “Muawiya ordered Saad to insult Abu Turab” but anyone can see that is not what is written, even though it could have very easily been written differently if Muawiya was truly commanding someone to insult someone.

And of course, Saad responds by saying all the great things about Ali (ra) and Muawiya (ra) doesn’t object at all.

We see that Mu’awiya refered to Ali [ra] as Abu Turab, the most beloved Kunya to Ali [ra], since it was given to him by the Prophet of Allah. Let us present it to you, (Sahi bukhari 8.297): Narrated Sahl bin Sa`d: There was no name dearer to `Ali than his nickname Abu Turab (the father of dust). He used to feel happy whenever he was called by this name.

Rather we should ponder over that, what would have stopped Mu’awiya [ra] from putting a punishment on Sa’d [ra] if he had ordered for Ali [ra] to be insulted and Sa’d [ra] refused? Mu’awaiya [ra] was the Caliphate at the time, so what would stop him? And with this, no punishment or penalty was placed on Sa’d [ra]. 

1 hour ago, أبو فاطمة المحمدي said:

I personally would like to see your authentic narrations which prove that Mu'awiyah cried when he heard of Imam 'Ali's death. I would also like to see your authentic reports which prove that Mu'awiyah regretted his bloody rebellion against the Khalifah of Allah and His Messenger.

After moula Ali(RA) died , Mu`awiyah bin Abi Sufyan said to Dirar bin Damrah

“Describe ‘Ali to me.”
“Will you not excuse me from answering you,” said Dirar.

“No, describe him,” insisted Mu`awiyah.

“Please excuse me from doing so,” said Dirar.

“I will not,” said Mu`awiyah.

” I will do so, then” said Dirar with a sigh.

“By Allah, he was (far-sighted) and very strong. He spoke with a truthful finality, so that, through him , truth became distinguished from falsehood. He ruled justly, and knowledge gushed forth from him, as did wisdom. He felt an aversion to the world and its (pleasure). He was comfortable with the night and its darkness ( meaning he prayed a lot). By Allah he would cry profusely ( from fear of Allah); long durations would he spend in contemplation, during which time he would converse with his soul. He showed a liking to coarse garments and lower-quality food. By Allah, it was as if – in his humbleness- he was one of us: when we asked him a question, he would answer us; when we would go to him, he would initiate (the salam); and when we would invite him (to our homes), he would come to us . Yet, in spite of his closeness to us, we would not speak (freely) with him, because of the dignity and honor that he exuded if he smiled, he revealed the likes of straight and regular pearls(his teeth). He honored religious people and loved the poor. The strong person could not hope to gain favors from him through falsehood. And the weak person never lost hope of his justness. I swear, by Allah, that on certain occasions, I saw him in his place of prayer when the night was dark and few stars could be seen; he would be holding his beard and crying the way a very sad person cries; and I would hear him saying,

“O world, O world, are you offering yourself to me? Do you desire me? Never! Never! Deceive someone other than me, I have divorced you for the third time, so that you cannot return to me (metaphorically, of course; he is alluding to the fact that, in islam, the third divorce is final) your life is short, the existence you offer is base, and your danger is great. Alas for the scarcity of sustenance (good deeds), the great distance of the journey, and the loneliness of the road!”

Upon hearing this description, Mu`awiyah’s eyes swelled with tears, and not being able to hold them from gushing forth, he was forced to wipe them with his cuffs; and the same can be said for those who were present. Mu`awiyah then said, “May Allah have mercy on the father of Al-Hasan, for he was, by Allah, just as you described him to be. “

He then said, “O Dirar, describe your sadness at having lost him.”

“My sadness” began Dirar “is like the sadness of a woman who cannot control her tears or allay her grief after her child , while in her lap, has just been slaughtered.”

Dirar then stood up and left.

Sifatus-Safwah 1/66.

 

وقال جرير بن عبد الحميد ، عن مغيرة قال : لما جاء خبر قتل علي إلى معاوية جعل يبكي ، فقالت له امرأته : أتبكيه وقد قاتلته ؟ فقال : ويحك ! إنك لا تدرين ما فقد الناس من الفضل والفقه والعلم

Rough translation: "When the Khawarij killed Ali (ra) the news reached Mu'awiyah (ra) so he started crying then his wife asked him "You cry for him although you fought with him?" He replied: "How dare you! You have no idea what the people have just lost from Fadl and Fiqh and 'Ilm. [Al Bidayah Wan Nihayah Ibn Kathir 11/429]

 

When the time of departure came for Hazrat Muawiyah may Allah be pleased with them, he said: ‘O Allah, have mercy on this sinful and cruel old man. O Allah, take away my stumbles (and forgive my mistakes), and treat mildly with this persons stupidity who does not rely upon anyone but you, nor does he have hope upon anyone but you.’ Saying this he started to cry inconsolably.
 

Muhammad bin Aqeer states that when the time of departure came close for Amir Muawiyah may Allah be pleased with them he was stating: ‘Alas, I wish I was a hungry (poor) person of Quraish and had nothing to do with Khilafat.’ (Ihya-ul-Uloom pg 677, Vol 4)
 

1 hour ago, أبو فاطمة المحمدي said:

The hadith about the Ansar is not accepted by us. It is also not logical, Many of the Ansar - including 'Abd Allah b. Ubayy - were hypocrites. Plus, your appeal to emotion would not help you here. I have told you our view of those who reject the Prophetic teachings on Imamah. But, again, your comprehension skills are not much helpful.

you yourself said the Hypocrites were known from the believers so what is the matter that you don`t love the Momineens among the Ansar ? 

what do you mean by my appeal to emotion ? i`m just stating a hadith in defense of the Ansar and the Muhajireens and yeah i know i can`t use emotions because i know you Shi`is got a monopoly on emotion and no one else can us it.

yes you told me your views on those who reject Imamah. you called them Hypocrites who are Non-Muslims in reality. Al-Kafi says they are like pagans who associate partners with Allah.

1 hour ago, أبو فاطمة المحمدي said:

Yet, Salafis consider at least 95% of that so-called 1 billion Muslims as total infidels. Are you gonna say Salafis are kuffar for that? Or, are you gonna claim again that Salafis make takfir of them out of love for them?

Salafis never make Mass Takfir on the Ummah like you Ithna Asheri Shias. when we see an act of Shirk we call it shirk, when we see an act of Biddah we call it Biddah based on the evidences we have as our Hujjah. but we never ever makes Mass Takfir on the Muslim Ummah like you do, because we don`t claim to read a persons mind and his heart to know whether he commits shirk or he doesn't. Now i hope you won`t bring in the ignorants and extremists we got among our people just like you got people like Yaseer Al Habib.

Edited by Student_of_Deen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Noor al Batul said:

I always thought it was, "Love for Ali is a sign of faith and hatred for Ali is a sign of hypocrisy." - isn't that an accepted narration for (some) Sunnis? And even if not, Shi'a have their authentic narrations about that - and many more in regards to those who fought Imam Ali (a). If anyone wants to prove to us that we are wrong, wouldn't it be more logical to give us an authentic narration from our sources? Bukhari, Muslim can be quoted as much as one wants, they are not hujjah upon us.

On that note, it might be better if you guys stick to the actual topic, here, instead of starting on other issues. For that, old threads can always be dug out- or a new one created if you think you have something "new" to discuss or ask on these matters.

Ma'asalama.

it`s almost the same meaning with different wordings in Sunni and Shia collections. In The Sunnis Book it`s like this  “No one will love Ali except a believer and no one will hate Ali except a hypocrite.” however this hadith is not the point of dispute here. 

yes i agree with you we should to the topic otherwise this thread will become very difficult to follow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, أبو فاطمة المحمدي said:

Student_of_Deen,

Would you mind opening a new thread with exactly the posts you have just made above?

I think it would be very interesting to discuss Mu'awiyah at full length.

Thanks.

I will be expecting your thread.

yes In`sha Allah i will open that thread since you are asking for it, you`re welcome.

but as for now i`m waiting for brother @StrugglingForTheLight to come online and reply to my post so we can continue our discussion on Imamah. which is by far the more important subject at hand.

Edited by Student_of_Deen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, أبو فاطمة المحمدي said:

He acquires this status only on account of his two Shahadahs. A munafiq like 'Abd Allah b. Ubayy denied the nubuwwah, which is even superior to Imamah. Yet, he was treated as a Muslim for legal purposes by the Prophet.

How can that be? If, as you claim, that Abdullah b. Ubay denied prophethood i.e. he denied a part of the shahada, how can then he be treated as a Muslim at all? You said that one is legally a Muslim if he utters the shahada and then claim that Abdullah b. Ubay denied a part of it and yet was treated a Muslim. I'm getting confused on your statements brother.

Also, I find it strange that you are calling nabuwwah to be higher than Imamat. When in fact, Shias consider the other way round. I find that you are switching the concepts conveniently.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Sunnibro said:

How can that be? If, as you claim, that Abdullah b. Ubay denied prophethood i.e. he denied a part of the shahada, how can then he be treated as a Muslim at all? You said that one is legally a Muslim if he utters the shahada and then claim that Abdullah b. Ubay denied a part of it and yet was treated a Muslim. I'm getting confused on your statements brother.

Also, I find it strange that you are calling nabuwwah to be higher than Imamat. When in fact, Shias consider the other way round. I find that you are switching the concepts conveniently.

You do not need to get dishonest, brother. Just remain calm and ask what you do not understand. And, by the way, I am still waiting for your response in the tahrif thread.

The Prophet himself treated 'Abd Allah b. Ubayy as a Muslim, despite his denial of nubuwwah. I have no fault here. He treated him as a Muslim because he said the two Shahadahs. The Qur'an has made it clear that it was only a false testimony:

إِذَا جَاءَكَ الْمُنَافِقُونَ قَالُوا نَشْهَدُ إِنَّكَ لَرَسُولُ اللَّهِ وَاللَّهُ يَعْلَمُ إِنَّكَ لَرَسُولُهُ وَاللَّهُ يَشْهَدُ إِنَّ الْمُنَافِقِينَ لَكَاذِبُونَ

When the hypocrites come to you they say, ´We bear witness that you are indeed the Messenger of Allah.´ Allah knows that you are indeed His Messenger and Allah bears witness that the hypocrites are certainly liars.

Qur'an 63:1

He and his friends were giving false Shahadahs. Yet, the Prophet had no choice but to treat them as Muslims, on account of the Shahadahs. That shows you how powerful the Shahadahs are in the real Islam.

As for your claim that Shi'ah consider nubuwwah to be superior to Imamah, you apparently do not understand the context of our arguments. The Nubuwwah of Prophet Muhammad is superior to the Imamah of ANY Imam or the nubuwwah of any prophet since the start of creation till the Day of al-Qiyamah. When we make the Shahadah, we testify only about the Nubuwwah of Muhammad, and then the Imamah of the Imams. We Shi'ah also believe that without the Nubuwwah of the Prophet, there would have been no Imamah of the Twelve Imams; and without Tawhid of Allah, there would have been no Nubuwwah of the Prophet. That was the context of that statement.

 

 

 

Edited by أبو فاطمة المحمدي

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. 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...