Jump to content
In the Name of God بسم الله

Sunni sisters take on salafi sister on waseelah

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

:bismillah:

:salam:

This is a must watch! The salafi sister in in the red, and the two sunni sisters on the other side of her. The older lady in the single chair is the host. They like to label we shia's as worshippers of the Imams a.s due to our belief in waseelah of the Prophet s.a.w and his purified progeny asws.

As most of you here know, i held pretty salafi-positions on the issue of waseelah and istigatha for a long time, being one of the most vocal advocates against it. Alhamdullilah, i learned the error of my ways.

 

 

 

Edited by Tawheed313
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, repenter said:

watched around 35 mins of it. Couldn't bare the fumbling around anymore.....

You are used to the intellectual hawzah circles agha in Iran, i found the video a good basic introduction for people who are confused.

The part that hit me the most was - yes, Allah azwj is closer to us than our jugular vein, but ... are we close to him? 

Edited by Tawheed313
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Tawheed313 said:

You are used to the intellectual hawzah circles agha in Iran, i found the video a good basic introduction for people who are confused.

The part that hit me the most was - yes, Allah azwj is closer to us than our jugular vein, but ... are we close to him? 

Maybe. But the point is that they started talking about Surah Qaf: 16. Which according to Al-Mizan has nothing to do with what they were ranting about.

Al Mizan explains as such:

و مـعـنـاى جـمله اين است كه : ما به انسان از رگ وريدش كه در تمامى اعضائش دويده و در داخـل هـيـكـلش جـا گـرفـتـه نـزديـك تـريـم، آن وقـت چـگـونـه بـه او و بـه آنـچـه در دل او مى گذرد آگاه نيستيم ؟

Which basically means...in simple terms. God is closer to you than your jugular vein, therefore are we not aware of what is in your heart?

 

The point of this verse is God explaining to humans that he knows of everything we think, feel and experience. Has nothing to do with what they were talking about. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, repenter said:

I see where you are coming from but i feel you have misunderstood the context of their discussion here. The salafi sister was arguing that because of the verse which talks about how Allah azwj is closer to man than his jugular vein, she questioned why anyone would even require a waseelah for their dua's, forgiveness, needs ? She said, if Allah is so close to you, and you have a direct connection with him, why not just ask directly - you never need a waseelah.

The sunni sisters in reply to her stated, yes, even if Allah azwj by his knowledge is closer to us than our jugular vein, the same applies even for an apostate or a kaffir. Just because he is closer to us than our own jugular vein in his knowledge, does not mean that we are close to him.

We too, need to seek means to get closer to him. It can be fasting, salah, ibadah, and it can also be through the waseelah of Muhammed s.a.w

I'll admit, the discussion can sometimes get fragmented and go off on a tangent, but this is basically what the context was.

On an off-topic note - where can i find Al Mizan fully in english?[almizan.org only has a few surahs] I'm still learning arabic, and i don't speak farsi. Are you translating this from the original works yourself brother?

Edited by Tawheed313
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Bismillah Ar-Rahman Ar-Raheem

I agree with brother repenter. The correct way to demonstrate this belief (or any of ours beliefs for that matter) would be through the Qur'an and Ahlulbayt. It is important to remember that even if someone is defending a belief that is shared by the school of Ahlulbayt (as), the specific arguments used may not be valid or relevant in which case the defence is not futile - in fact, it can even be counterproductive and lead to people rejecting the belief because the wrong arguments were used.

Wallahu A'lam

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Follower said:

Bismillah Ar-Rahman Ar-Raheem

I agree with brother repenter. The correct way to demonstrate this belief (or any of ours beliefs for that matter) would be through the Qur'an and Ahlulbayt. It is important to remember that even if someone is defending a belief that is shared by the school of Ahlulbayt (as), the specific arguments used may not be valid or relevant in which case the defence is not futile - in fact, it can even be counterproductive and lead to people rejecting the belief because the wrong arguments were used.

Wallahu A'lam

 

Salamunalaykum,

The arguments used by the sisters in the video are among the accepted arguments in the jafferi madhab/imami madhab. 

I can say this with a good degree of assurance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member

I'll watch the video later, but I find it hard to believe that it would contain anything that you hadn't been exposed to before (or should have been exposed to before arguing so strongly for one side), and if you have been swayed by 'standard' arguments, then I find that very disappointing. I hope that it's not the case that you now find it easier to accept after discovering that many Sunnis also have the same views.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/24/2016 at 5:40 PM, Haydar Husayn said:

I'll watch the video later, but I find it hard to believe that it would contain anything that you hadn't been exposed to before (or should have been exposed to before arguing so strongly for one side), and if you have been swayed by 'standard' arguments, then I find that very disappointing. I hope that it's not the case that you now find it easier to accept after discovering that many Sunnis also have the same views.

Dear brother Haydar Husayn,

Firstly, i am glad to see you back on here. You were missed on these boards, as well as your contributions.

The video is not what swayed me. What swayed me was a very deep few years of reflection, consciously and subconsciously, looking at many arguments again, with a clearer head, and looking at new - but very pertinent - material and properly mediating on the verses of the Quran.

The video is designed to show:

1. Sunni's accept it.

2. Give a good basic argument for and against, to introduce the subject.

 

I disagree with the way it's done by some shia's today, who go over the top as well as the wrong wording used in some nasheeds. i myself, have not uttered 'Ya Ali Madad' in my life at all so far, so this was not a 180. But i am certianly now, closer to the position i was always arguing against.

Time permitting, i will present my evidence and my arguments. Would you prefer to stumble on it yourself, or would you prefer i tagged you in the future when i do write it ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, The Batman said:

I don't want to derail this thread bro... but the title doesn't make sense.

It would be like me creating a title:

"Shi'i sisters debate Akhbari sister on taqleed".

There are far bigger Aqeedah differences between large bodies of sunni's and large bodies of salafi's, than we and akhbari's.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Tawheed313 said:

There are far bigger Aqeedah differences between large bodies of sunni's and large bodies of salafi's, than we and akhbari's.

 

Salafism is a Sunni movement. There's no getting around that, you can't seperate that. Their aqeeda is very similar to that of Ahmad ibn Hanbal anyway. They always cite him for proof.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, The Batman said:

Salafism is a Sunni movement. There's no getting around that, you can't seperate that. Their aqeeda is very similar to that of Ahmad ibn Hanbal anyway. They always cite him for proof.

There are enormous differences of Aqeedah depending on which sunni group.

Ashari's, Barelevi's, even Hanafi's have some enormous problems with Salafi's.

This ranges from their Aqeedah on Tawheed, Tawassul, Istigtha, and a number of other beliefs. They also do Takfir [though not blanket] on many other large bodies of ahlus-sunnah, and condemn a number of ahlus-sunna scholars.

Salafi-ism describes itself as a sunni movement, and it may be in many regards, but many sunni groups and many sunni scholars would describe it as a modern-cult and not orthodox. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Tawheed313 said:

There are enormous differences of Aqeedah depending on which sunni group.

Ashari's, Barelevi's, even Hanafi's have some enormous problems with Salafi's.

This ranges from their Aqeedah on Tawheed, Tawassul, Istigtha, and a number of other beliefs. They also do Takfir [though not blanket] on many other large bodies of ahlus-sunnah, and condemn a number of ahlus-sunna scholars.

Salafi-ism describes itself as a sunni movement, and it may be in many regards, but many sunni groups and many sunni scholars would describe it as a modern-cult and not orthodox. 

Exactly, so you cannot pick and choose which is Sunni and which isn't, since they have enormous theological debates amongst themselves on who is correct and who isn't.

It is also incorrect to say "Hanafis have problems with them" - Hanafism has very little to do with theology. It is a school of law.

Of course they have aqeeda differences just as the early Sunnis had aqeeda differences. If you look at Ahmad ibn Hanbal's aqeeda you would find very little difference between what he taught theologically and what Ibn Taymiyyah taught. But of course there probably is some differences.

In fact Salafism is closest in its aqeeda with the Athari Creed (literalism, anti-kalam etc...) which some argue is the most Orthodox or oldest Sunni creed depending on who you ask.

Read about it here as it is very important my brother:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traditionalist_Theology_(Islam)

All in all these theological debates are not new in Sunnism, they have been going on for centuries. It isn't like what most of the things Salafis preach in theology is new, it is based on books and older texts. And like I said, Salafis have a very similar aqeeda to Ahmad ibn Hanbal in a lot of things (of course their may be differences)

Just as others regard them as un-Orthodox, they turn around and say the others are into bid'a and are unorthodox.

We don't have to pick favourites just because one group is "nicer" and shares a "better relationship" with Shi'as - so we label them as Sunnis just for that.

:salam:

Edited by The Batman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, The Batman said:

x

You've made valid points which i will address at another time, hopefully, inshAllah.

However, it is not i who have grouped them. Many sunni groups do not truly regard the salafi-cult to be part of the ahlus-sunnah wal jamaah.

My salafi-cousin, part of the modern movement, himself declares hamzah yusuf, baralevi's, ashari's and other large bodies of sunni's are not part of ahlus-sunnah.

A common belief is that the only difference between the schools is that of Fiqh. However, it is also in many cases, that of Aqeedah, especially when it comes to the hanbali's.

As Yassir Qadhi said, you can be a shafi' in fiqh and hanbali in aqeedah etc.

Edited by Tawheed313
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Tawheed313 said:

You've made valid points which i will address at another time, hopefully, inshAllah.

However, it is not i who have grouped them. Many sunni groups do not truly regard the salafi-cult to be part of the ahlus-sunnah wal jamaah.

My salafi-cousin, part of the modern movement, himself declares hamzah yusuf, baralevi's, ashari's and other large bodies of sunni's are not part of ahlus-sunnah.

A common belief is that the only difference between the schools is that of Fiqh. However, it is also in many cases, that of Aqeedah, especially when it comes to the hanbali's.

As Yassir Qadhi said, you can be a shafi' in fiqh and hanbali in aqeedah etc.

http://muslimmatters.org/2014/04/22/on-salafi-islam-dr-yasir-qadhi/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, The Batman said:

I have read that, he is still sympathetic to Ibn Taymiyyah. But my point still stands, you can be shafi' in fiqh, and hanbali in aqeedah, according to yassir Qadhi. The point about there only being fiqh differences between the four madhabs is not the correct view.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member

Ok, I somehow managed to make it through 26 minutes of that video, before I couldn't take it anymore. The level of discussion was worse than what you would get on a ShiaChat thread. It's amazing to me how anyone can turn up to debate wasilah, and not be familiar with all the relevant verses from the Qur'an on the issue. The Salafi sister, who claims to 'train people' to debate this stuff seemed completely stumped by having ayah 5:35 quoted to her, and said she needed to consult her shaykha to find out 'the true interpretation' (despite earlier claiming that the Qur'an was self-explanatory). It must show the level of discussion she usually has that she has never come across this verse before, when it is probably the most commonly quoted one in this context. 

If there is anything specific later on that is worth listening to, then I'd be grateful if someone could tell me which part to skip forward to, but overall I don't think that video is at all a good illustration of this debate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Haydar Husayn said:

Ok, I somehow managed to make it through 26 minutes of that video, before I couldn't take it anymore. The level of discussion was worse than what you would get on a ShiaChat thread. It's amazing to me how anyone can turn up to debate wasilah, and not be familiar with all the relevant verses from the Qur'an on the issue. The Salafi sister, who claims to 'train people' to debate this stuff seemed completely stumped by having ayah 5:35 quoted to her, and said she needed to consult her shaykha to find out 'the true interpretation' (despite earlier claiming that the Qur'an was self-explanatory). It must show the level of discussion she usually has that she has never come across this verse before, when it is probably the most commonly quoted one in this context. 

If there is anything specific later on that is worth listening to, then I'd be grateful if someone could tell me which part to skip forward to, but overall I don't think that video is at all a good illustration of this debate.

Give me a bit of time to create my thread on my official retraction and complete analysis on why i have altered my position on this issue. 

The video and debate gets better, try to watch it all. It essentially is just a basic introduction to the issue. It isn't a masterclass, but a number of points were quite solid.

One being, the argument i myself have used: Allah azwj knows my heart, he is closer to me than my own jugular vein. I never bought the idea that 'we need to talk to the secretary to get to the president' seeing as Allah azwj is closer to us than anything ever could be. That analogy i found utterly weak. However, my mind was opened by simple statement: Allah azwj is even close to a kaffir by his knowledge. 

Tawassul, intercession, and waseelah are not because he is far from us, but we are far from him.

Furthermore, i disliked the attemps to turn the waseelah verse to only mean tawassul and istigatha. Waseelah can be through salah, prayer and so on and so forth, as you demonstrated on one of your threads.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member

Well, I'll have to wait for your thread to see in what way you have changed your opinion, and for what reasons, but something tells me that you are going to be using arguments that you used to argue against. Could you tell me where in the Qur'an Allah says that we are far from him, and hence can't supplicate to him directly? Why does Allah use examples in the Qur'an of mushriks who call on Him and have their prayer answered? Or for example when Nabi Yunus (a) was in the belly of the whale, why doesn't he supplicate through someone else? In fact, how come in the whole Qur'an we don't find a single example of this concept? Seems a little odd to me.

I'd advise you to reflect on the ayah talked about in the following video:

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Haydar Husayn said:

Well, I'll have to wait for your thread to see in what way you have changed your opinion, and for what reasons, but something tells me that you are going to be using arguments that you used to argue against. Could you tell me where in the Qur'an Allah says that we are far from him, and hence can't supplicate to him directly? Why does Allah use examples in the Qur'an of mushriks who call on Him and have their prayer answered? Or for example when Nabi Yunus (a) was in the belly of the whale, why doesn't he supplicate through someone else? In fact, how come in the whole Qur'an we don't find a single example of this concept? Seems a little odd to me.

I'd advise you to reflect on the ayah talked about in the following video:

 

Brother Haydar, i've thought about this myself, deeply too, given that it was i who was arguing based on these verses. I haven't done a complete 180 either, but i am definitely not in the same camp as before.

I deem it 'permissible'  - not something i do or encourage [so i will defend its permissibility] Before, my position was that it was wrong, but not something i would do takfir of shia's and sunni's over. 

Eitherway, i will watch if i can , and i'll look to finding time to produce my thread.

Edited by Tawheed313
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
26 minutes ago, Haydar Husayn said:

Well, I'll have to wait for your thread to see in what way you have changed your opinion, and for what reasons, but something tells me that you are going to be using arguments that you used to argue against. Could you tell me where in the Qur'an Allah says that we are far from him, and hence can't supplicate to him directly? Why does Allah use examples in the Qur'an of mushriks who call on Him and have their prayer answered? Or for example when Nabi Yunus (a) was in the belly of the whale, why doesn't he supplicate through someone else? In fact, how come in the whole Qur'an we don't find a single example of this concept? Seems a little odd to me.

I'd advise you to reflect on the ayah talked about in the following video:

 

*squeaks like a Luma*

Salaam.

Excellent video. It was filled with lots of good information and points.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...