Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

Logic is the assessment of fallacy in thoughts concerning subjects. Then, who wants to be knowledgeable at the school of human thought, first of all should learn logic. Comprehend what Aristotle and other philosophers specified as a logic, after that enter in a scientific/philosophical issues. It is the false way produced by humans and it won’t work on religious topics. Because the source of each way is different from each other. The method of knowing/worshiping must be defined by God for it to be approved and accepted by him. Is it even possible that our creator would not guide us on how to know/worship him? He has sent prophets and ahlulbayt to teach us how to recognize facts. This all suggests that we can’t move as we please and by our false thoughts. We don’t need to learn philosophy or mysticism to understand the true way because it was not the way prophets taught. They have not come to be just for educated people.
 
God has certainly defined the path. This path is engraved in knowing the chosen ones and to surrender to them. One that claims to be a worshipper of God but does not accept the path defined by Him is, in essence, denying God.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The prophets of Allah s.w.t are superior to Ahlul Bait in every way. Ahlul Bayt are not infalliable. Ameer Ul Mu'mineen Ali R.A is free from the idolatry of the shia. Hussein ibn Ali R.A died a martyr in the cause of Allah when killed by Yazids forces and is free from the shirk which goes on in Karbala everyday. Fatima R.A is one of the 4 best women to ever stand foot on this planet and she was not killed by Ameer Ul Mu'mineen Umar R.A.....

 

Now speaking of Umar, who is cursed by the Shia...... When he went to Jerusalem to complete the Islamic conquest, who did Umar R.A leave in charge of the caliphate in his absence? It was Hadhrat Ali R.A. Don't they both hate each other? 

 

Why would an infallible marry his daughter off to Umar? I've read answers on this that Shias claim it's not true, but facts are facts.

 

In order for Shi'ism to exist, many pieces of factual evidence must be thrown away and we must assume that all the companions of Rasoolallah (Peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) were apostates, apart from 3 or 4.

The Shias must assume that ALL these noble companions had a severe hatred against Imam Ali R.A and without this hatred, Shiism wouldn't exist.

 

I will conclude this by saying Ali R.A was not mistreated by the sahaba who understood his noble status. Hassan & Hussein (May Allah be pleased with them) are free from the Shias who made them gods. The same way Isa Ibn Maryam (Peace be upon him) is free from what the Christians attribute to him.

I understand that I bashed the Shias and no I'm not a Wahhabi. I'm not a fan of Yazid and I believe Husayn & ibn az zubayr (May Allah be pleased with them) had every right to challenge his caliphate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

I understand that I bashed the Shias and no I'm not a Wahhabi. I'm not a fan of Yazid and I believe Husayn & ibn az zubayr (May Allah be pleased with them) had every right to challenge his caliphate.

No you did not bashed us, rather you just expressed your belief about us which of course is wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, Ozzy said:

In order for other sects to exist the factual evidence of Ghadir must be thrown away.

The hadeeth was narrated by Imaam Muslim in his Saheeh (no. 2408) from Zayd ibn Arqam, who said: “The Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) stood up and addressed us one day at a well called Khum, between Makkah and Madeenah. He praised Allaah and exhorted and reminded us. Then he said: ‘I am leaving among you two important things: the first of which is the Book of Allaah’ – and he urged us to adhere to the Book of Allaah, then he said: ‘And the people of my household (ahl bayti). I remind you of Allaah with regard to the people of my household, I remind you of Allaah with regard to the people of my household, I remind you of Allaah with regard to the people of my household.’” Zayd said: his wives are among the people of his household, but the people of his household who are forbidden to receive sadaqah (charity) after his death are the family of ‘Ali, the family of ‘Aqeel, the family of Ja’far and the family of ‘Abbaas. All of these are forbidden to receive sadaqah.”

 

Ahlul Bayt includes more than just your Twelver demi gods. If Ali was the rightful first caliph why didn't he fight Abu Bakr if we was justified? Ali RA never waged war against Abu Bakr, Umar or Uthman RA

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Dhulfikar said:

No you did not bashed us, rather you just expressed your belief about us which of course is wrong.

In what way is it wrong? In the Shia beliefs Ali R.A just happens to be hated by EVERYONE. If he was so hated, why would Umar appoint him as one of the six to choose a new caliph. Why was he put in charge of the caliphate when Umar went to Jerusalem? Why did he ACCEPT Umars decision to leave him as caliph if he hated Umar? 

In reality, the Sahaba R.A acknowledged Ali as a senior Sahaba and gave him the respect he deserves. Ali is not infallible. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

In what way is it wrong? In the Shia beliefs Ali R.A just happens to be hated by EVERYONE

Why you are exaggerate things? No, in Shi'a belief not every sahaba hated Imam Ali (as). If a sahabi don't give bay'ah to Ali (as), it does not mean they hated him. And no, In Shi'ah beliefs the Imams are not attached to any idolatry beliefs. And even if Umar give task to Imam Ali (as), it does not mean he do it for love of Umar or for sake of Umar, rather we all know that Imam Ali only do it for Allah (swt) sake if its good. And yes he did married his daughter to Umar, but nor for Umar sake again. And it is pure absurdness to assume that Shiasm exist because of the absence of factual evidence. Such a statement comes only from ignorance and emotional, not from intellectual research and reflection.

And no, Shias do not assume that all noble sahabas (who are a noble sahabi? Different sects will interpreter differently) were against Imam Ali (as). It's your Sunni fantasy to think that All sahabis loved each others, when if you have time to read actual history without biased, you will observed that it is not true. And no, in Shi'a Islam Imams are not Gods. Nor in Shia Islam we worship Imams.
 

Edited by Dhulfikar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Ozzy said:

The hadith was narrated by many people, Zayd adds his own interpretation to how he understood it, did others say the same?

One sahih hadith from them says that Wifes are not included. Of course they favor Zayd hadith the most.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Dhulfikar said:

One sahih hadith from them says that Wifes are not included. Of course they favor Zayd hadith the most.

Let's just assume the wives RA are not included. It still means Ja'far R.A, Abbas R.A and their families are part of Ahlul Bayt.

my point is that the title of Ahlul Bayt isn't just for the twelver imams and Fatima R.A

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, Ozzy said:

Evidence? More like in Sunni beliefs just about everyone in Arabia hated Abu Bakar.

Despite the fact that Rasulullah said the Umayyads were not fit for leadership, Umar allows Mu'awiya to rule and creates an opportunity for Uthman bin Affan. At the same time, adds Imam Ali عليه السلام to the circle. This is no different to British politics where they would leave a land and then create opportunities for opposing parties to fight it out.

Because whenever anyone needed help, they could rely only on the Ahl Bait عليهم السلام to not start a coup, was there anyone else fit enough for the post? trust an Umayyad? Whenever an Ummayad was in power he would not leave the post ...

Of course they could rely on Ahlul Bayt. Ali R.A was a pious and noble man who could be trusted. But, the 'usurper' trusted him? I'm trying to say that Shias say bad about Umar when he trusted Ali. As for the Umayyads, Umar did put Uthman R.A as one of the six to decide who would be the next caliph.

dont disrespect Uthman R.A he was the father of Muhammad SAWS grandson.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ozzy said:

The hadith was narrated by many people, Zayd adds his own interpretation to how he understood it, did others say the same?

  The angels said to Saarah the wife of Ibraaheem (peace be upon him) (interpretation of the meaning):

  “The Mercy of Allaah and His Blessings be on you, O the family [of Ibraaheem (Abraham)]”

[Hood 11:73]

  And because Allaah excluded the wife of Loot from the family of Loot (peace be upon him) with regard to survival, when He said (interpretation of the meaning):

  “(All) except the family of Loot. Them all we are surely, going to save (from destruction). Except his wife…”

 

Assuming Zayd added his own interpretation, this does suggest that the wives are members of Ahlul Bayt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Dhulfikar said:

Why you are exaggerate things? No, in Shi'a belief not every sahaba hated Imam Ali (as). If a sahabi don't give bay'ah to Ali (as), it does not mean they hated him. And no, In Shi'ah beliefs the Imams are not attached to any idolatry beliefs. And even if Umar give task to Imam Ali (as), it does not mean he do it for love of Umar or for sake of Umar, rather we all know that Imam Ali only do it for Allah (swt) sake if its good. And yes he did married his daughter to Umar, but nor for Umar sake again. And it is pure absurdness to assume that Shiasm exist because of the absence of factual evidence. Such a statement comes only from ignorance and emotional, not from intellectual research and reflection.

And no, Shias do not assume that all noble sahabas (who are a noble sahabi? Different sects will interpreter differently) were against Imam Ali (as). It's your Sunni fantasy to think that All sahabis loved each others, when if you have time to read actual history without biased, you will observed that it is not true. And no, in Shi'a Islam Imams are not Gods. Nor in Shia Islam we worship Imams.
 

“Indeed, Allaah was pleased with the believers when they gave the Bay‘ah (pledge) to you (O Muhammad) under the tree, He knew what was in their hearts, and He sent down As‑Sakeenah (calmness and tranquillity) upon them, and He rewarded them with a near victory”

[al-Fath 48:18] 

 

We Sunnis don't need to believe all Sahabas loved each other we have respect for them because Allah was pleased with them. It's no fantasy. 

 

Why did Imam Ali R.A marry his daughter off to Umar R.A then. The two of them had good relations with each other and it's not like the relationship depicted by the Shias where Umar is a villain. You falsely accuse Umar R.A of killing Fatima bint Muhammad R.A.

 

you said imam does it for Allah's sake if it's good. You're completely right, its good that Umar married Ali's daughter because it proves their good relationship and doesn't seem to me like a man who's been wronged marrying his daughter off to a villain 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Hafsa Bint Umar said:

Let's just assume the wives RA are not included. It still means Ja'far R.A, Abbas R.A and their families are part of Ahlul Bayt.

my point is that the title of Ahlul Bayt isn't just for the twelver imams and Fatima R.A

The sources in your book is so confusing because you have many different versions and interpretation of who are the Ahlulbait that it makes it is highly probility forged by time. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Hafsa Bint Umar said:

We Sunnis don't need to believe all Sahabas loved each other we have respect for them because Allah was pleased with them. It's no fantasy. 

Yeah all of them were pleased by Allah even when some of them went away from path of Allah after nabi. That verse do not imply that Allah is pleased to every sahabi, nor does it mean the pleasment can't change. 

 

21 minutes ago, Hafsa Bint Umar said:

you said imam does it for Allah's sake if it's good. You're completely right, its good that Umar married Ali's daughter because it proves their good relationship and doesn't seem to me like a man who's been wronged marrying his daughter off to a villain 

Do you expect Umar to be villain if the only books you take reliable is the ones that speak high of him? And why you assume that they had good relationships because he married his daughter to him? It can have so many reasons why he married her. 

Edited by Dhulfikar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

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

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

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

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

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


×
×
  • Create New...