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

Why I became Muslim (Sunni)

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

  • Advanced Member
11 hours ago, Munzir Ahmed said:

Exactly.

Similarly people can not compare other Imams with the first three, as only 3 of them were part of hadith al Kisa in other words only 3 were infallible.

 

What about the second hadiths I quoted about Imam Ali(AS)? Who disobeyed Imam Ali(as)?

What about the hadith of seyyeda Fatima(AS) and the hadith of who she was angry with?

Do you, like the OP, believe that your belief in Allahسُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى and his message and messenger(S), depends on what you may say or not say regarding one of the prophets wives?

 

 

Lastly, if you believe in Ahlul Kisa and their infallibility. Then surely you understand that Kalifa belonged to Imam Hassan(as) and Imam Hussein(as) and that whatever hadith came from from them was said from an infallible person, so that if they said to the people to follow their family, surely you would?

Surely if you admit that they are infallible then you would want them to lead the religion?

Or do you still write RA after the name of muawiya(la)? And at the same time write RA after the name of Imam Ali(AS), the person muawiya(la) ordered to curse in the masjids?

 

How confused isnt the minds of our sunni brothers and their reasoning...

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 226
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Are you sure you want to do this?   The preservation of the Quran was supported by Saduq, Tusi, Sharif Murtada, and [arguably] Mufid; and it is the dominant position (near consensus) in th

Salam, I will try and be quick. These are JUST three points that made me leave this religion and became a Muslim, trust me there are many. The only reason I even bother to write this is because I

1) you are a fake. 2) deluded fake. 3)your post tell us all, you are a deluded fake. 4) why do worship your sahabas? Especially the first three? They were just humans, history is laiden

Posted Images

  • Advanced Member
On 24/08/2017 at 10:52 AM, SheikhAlHabib'fan said:

Brother, he's concerned because his Abu Bakar committed shirk lol. Run @Mohammed72 run, because you're running out of replies.

I have a question, why do followers of people who doubted Islam (such as Omar) keep repeating the same Stone Age arguments which have been answered so many times? 

@Mansur Bakhtiari what do you think of this guy, using the Ya Ali argument lol.

he shouldnt take his info from a shia kafir cuz taqiyya and all......

maybe a fellow "muslim" won't be a snakeish......

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Unregistered
On 8/23/2017 at 5:12 PM, Mohammed72 said:

Salam,

I will try and be quick. These are JUST three points that made me leave this religion and became a Muslim, trust me there are many. The only reason I even bother to write this is because I used to be one of you. Blindly following these mawlanas, but alhamdullialah Allah guided me and without a doubt there are many Shia out there that don’t know the truth about their religion. Inshallah Allah will guide them. BTW I can provide scans for all the below. 

Here is the Actual Text:

Quote

Taqlid

Following a Mujtahid

1. It is necessary for a Muslim to believe in the fundamentals of faith on the basis of proof and he cannot follow anyone in this respect i.e. he cannot accept he word of another with regard to the fundamentals without demanding proof.

However, in order to act on Islamic code (except in those matters which are considered by all to be indisputable e.g. the obligatory nature of the five daily prayers, fasting during the holy month of Ramadan etc.) a person must adopt one of the following methods:

    i) The man concerned should be a Mujtahid (jurist)1himself and should know the Articles of Acts on the basis of Ijtihad2 and reason (i.e. he should be a man of such high learning and scholarship that he can solve problems from his study of the Qur’an and Hadith).

    ii) If he is not a jurist himself, he should follow a jurist i.e. he should act according to the judgment (fatwa) of the jurist without demanding proof.

    iii) If he is neither a jurist nor a follower (muqallid) he should act after taking such precaution that he should become sure of his having performed his religious duty. For example, if some jurists consider an act to be unlawful and some others say that it is not unlawful, he should not perform that act and in case some jurists consider an act to be obligatory (wajib) and others consider it to be recommended (mustahab) he should perform it. Hence it is obligatory for those persons who are not jurists and cannot also take precautionary measures (ihtiyat) to follow a jurist.3

2. Following (taqlid) means acting according to the judgment of a jurist. It is necessary that the jurist who is followed is male, Shi’ah Ithna ‘Asha’ari,4 adult, sane, legitimate, alive and just (‘adil). A person is said to be just when he performs all those acts which are obligatory for him and refrains from all those things which are prohibited for him. And the sign of a man’s being just is that he is apparently a good man so that if enquiries are made about him from the people of his locality or from his neighbours or from those persons with whom he associates, they should confirm his goodness. And if it is known that the judgments of the jurists differ with regard to the problems which we face in everyday life, it is necessary that the jurist who is followed should be a’lam (the most learned jurist) who possesses better capacity to understand religious matters as compared with his contemporary jurists.

 

Ayatullah Sayyid Abulqasim al-Khui

https://www.al-islam.org/islamic-laws-ayatullah-abul-qasim-al-khui/taqlid

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Unregistered
On 8/23/2017 at 5:12 PM, Mohammed72 said:

The Quran.

Firstly, the Quran is the best guide for any Shia as it completely destroys every aspect of their aqeedah. Anyway, I was shocked by the Shia scholars and tahreef! What shocked me the most about this is the fact that these Shia scholars are not only still considered Muslims but are highly praised in the howzat. For example, Majlisi in his “Miratul uqul” (3/31) he said:

و الأخبار من طريق الخاصة و العامة في النقص و التغيير متواترة، و العقل يحكم بأنه إذ كان القرآن متفرقا منتشرا عند الناس، و تصدي غير المعصوم لجمعه يمتنع عادة أن يكون جمعه كاملا موافقا للواقع، لكن لا ريب في أن الناس مكلفون بالعمل بما في المصاحف و تلاوته حتى يظهر القائم عليه السلام، و هذا معلوم متواتر من طريق أهل البيت عليهم السلام و أكثر أخبار هذا الباب مما يدل على النقص و التغيير و سيأتي كثير منها في الأبواب

 and traditions from the ways of the elite (i.e Shia) and the public (i.e Sunnah) regarding omission and change are mutawatir, and logic dectates that if the Quran was seperated and spread amongst people, then if a fallible has tried to collect it, then it is highly unlikely that its collection would be complete and in compliance with reality. However, there is no doubt that people are obliged to work with what is included in the Mushafs and to read it until Al-Qayem appears, and this is known through numersous traditions (mutawatir) from the way of Ahlul Bayt and most traditions relating to this topic point to omission and change, and many of it will be related in the chapters……….”

 

Here Read it, 

 

Quote

The belief of Shaykh Muhammad Baqar Majlisi (d. 1111 H)

Shaykh Baqar Majlisi is also a prominent Shia scholar who Nawasib allege believe in Tahreef of the Quran and they base their proof on the statement of Shaykh Baqar Majlisi wherein he said that some of (Shia) traditions on Tahreef are Mutawatur (Mir’atul-Uqool, Vol 12 page 525). What these people deliberately avoid citing is the similar statement of Shaykh Majlisi written in Mir’atul-Uqool, Vol 3 page 31 wherein he says such traditions from both Shia and Sunni texts are Mutawatur .

If the Ahle Sunnah and Nasibi elements amongst them want to base their proof on the basis of this text, then by the same token they should likewise deem all the Sunni ulema the Kaafirs for they graded many Sunni traditions evidencing Tahreef or mistakes in the Quran to be ‘Sahih’. For example Imam Ibn Hajar Asqlani called a tradition ‘Sahh’ according to which the word ‘YAY-ASI’ in verse 13:31 has been written in Quran ‘by mistake’ while it should have actually been ‘YATBAIN’ (Fatah al Bari, Volume 8 page 373).

In order to know the actual belief of Shaykh Baqar Majlisi about the Quran, we read following his citation of a tradition that implies Tahrif in Quran as follows:

“If someone advance his doubts over present Quran being the actual book of Allah سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى when there exist many traditions according to which the Imams (as) recited verses of the Quran in a manner that are different from the existing Quran for example “Ye are the best of Imams, evolved for mankind” , “Thus We have appointed you a middle Imams” and “They ask you the windfalls” - reply of such notion will be the same as already cited i.e these traditions that are counted amongst the ‘Akhbar Ahad’ and when they are (measured) against Quran then their authenticity is unsure therefore we do not rely on such traditions and haven’t abandoned whatever is found in the present Quran because we have been ordered to act upon it …”
Bihar al Anwar, Volume 89 page 75

The three verses mentioned in the text are 003.110 , 002.143 and 008.001.

At another place whilst explaining the verse 15:9, Shaykh Baqair Majlisi advanced his unequivocal belief in the authenticity of the Quran in the following manner:

” إنا نحن نزلنا الذكر ” أي القرآن ” وإنا له لحافظون ” عن الزيادة والنقصان والتغيير والتحريف

“We have revealed the Reminder” means the Quran “and We will most surely be its guardian” from addition, loss, change and Tahreef. 
Bihar al-Anwar, Volume 9 page 113

In his another book Mirat al-Uqool, Volume 2 page 273, Shaykh Baqar Majlisi stated:

ليعلم أن للقرآن حملة يحفظونه عن التحريف في كل زمان

“It must be known that in every era, there are people who protect Quran from Tahreef”]

Nothing new, same stuff repeated by people....

http://www.shiachat.com/forum/topic/235040418-did-alama-majlisi-believe-the-quran-was-distorted/?tab=comments#comment-2939604

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Unregistered
On 8/23/2017 at 5:12 PM, Mohammed72 said:

Also, Al Kulayni! And Al Qummi! And Al Alayshi and the list goes on and on and on. Al Kulayni writer of Al-Kafi the number one Shia hadith book believes in tahreef… Al Qummi and Al Ayashi writers of the two oldest Shia tafseers believe in tahreef. And you want me to take hadiths from the likes of these people? And I don’t even want to talk about “Fasl Al-Khitab Fi Tahrif Kitab Rabb Al-Arbbab” by Noori. The only cult ever in any religion to write books attacking the authenticity of their holy book must be the Shia. Even modern-day Shia like Qazwini and Al-Fali and others believe in tahreef. Al-Ghizi even went and said that whoever doesn’t believe in tahreef is a kafir as he has gone against the muttawatir!

What’s funny is that Shias claim that the Quran is the greater thiqah and the Ahlulbayt is the smaller thiqah yet those who attack the greater thiqah are praised and buried next to Imam Ali like Noori!!!

 

Here

Quote

Fasl al-Khitab  Ayatullah Agha Haji Mirza Mahdi PooyaThe following article is taken from the appendix of the first chapter of the book"Essence of the Holy Quran - The Eternal Light" by the same author.

After discussing in detail the views of the celebrated theologians and jurists on the genuineness of the Holy Qur'an and its authoritative status, one feels it is inevitable to remove the fallacious notions created by certain authors and a few solitary and weak traditions relating to tahrif (i.e. the distortion of the letters, words, verses or arrangement of the Qur'an). In the last two centuries of the Hijrah some traditionalists had tried to question the status of the Qur'an within the very narrow field of the sporadic traditions which are dearer to them than reason and the Qur'an.

 

In the beginning of the present century, the late Haji Mirza Hussain N'uri (d. 1320/1908), who belongs to this group, has written many valuable books which earned a name for him, but unfortunately his book Fasl al-Khitab, a bundle of contradictions, represents the views against the unanimous verdict of Shi'ah scholars of all centuries regarding the genuineness of the Qur'an and subjected him to the severe criticism of his contemporaries whose superiority in learning is unquestionable.

 

The study of the book will show that it refutes its own contentions. While he insists that the Qur'an was not put into book form as it is now, he asserts at the same time that 'Ali used to write every verse of the Qur'an with its revealed commentary and its inner significance by the order of the Holy Prophet. Here the question arises whether 'Ali's writing of the Qur'an was based on a particular order or system or was it something haphazard? Secondly, it is obvious that the the Holy Prophet's reference to the Book of God, the text of which he was leaving among the people with the Ahl al-Bayt, was in complete accord with the text which he had already dictated to 'Ali. Therefore there is no room left for the author of Fasal al-Khitab to assert that the Qur'an was not put into writing during the lifetime of the Holy Prophet.

The story that 'Ali had kept himself engaged in collecting the Qur'an after the demise of the Holy Prophet is nothing but a mere fabrication of the ruling party just to give reason for 'Ali's delay in participating in the ba'yat. They wanted to prove that 'Ali thought that the collection of the Qur'an was more important than the issue of ba'yat, otherwise he was not opposed to Abu Bakr being the caliph. This baseless propaganda gave a chance to the unscrupulous traditionalist of the later period to accept the fact that the Qur'an was not collected and arranged during the lifetime of the Holy Prophet.

Another point which the author of Fast al-Khitab takes for granted is that the arrangement of the so-called collection of 'Ali was chronological. Without repeating the details which have already been discussed, it is an accepted fact that no Shi'ah traditionist has ascribed the chronological arrangement to any Imam (Masum). The first person who attributed this type of arrangement to 'Ali is Ibn Sireen whose fidelity to the Ahl al-Bayt is questionable. All that we have received from the Ahl al-Bayt are two traditions in this connection narrated by Kafi from the fifth Imam through Jaber-e Jaufi. Jaber says,

"I heard that the fifth Imam Abu Ja'far used to say that excluding 'Ali ibn Abi Talib and the Holy Imams after 'Ali nobody except a liar could claim that he had collected the Qur'an as a whole as it was revealed, compiled and preserved as God has sent it down."

Next to this tradition Kafi narrates through the same traditionalist Jaber from the same Imam that he (the Imam) said that

 

except the successors of the Holy Prophet (i.e. the Imams) nobody could claim that he was in possession of the Qur'an as a whole with its outer letters (exoteric form) and inner significance (esoteric form).

The second tradition from Kafi explains what the Imam meant by the word 'Qur'an as a whole' as it was narrated in the first tradition.

The Imam meant that nobody except 'Ali and his successive Imams were in possession of the Holy Qur'an with both its exoteric and esoteric aspects which were revealed to the Holy Prophet and dictated to 'Ali then and there. This tradition is a general explanation for all the traditions which have been narrated from the Ahl al-Bayt giving various versions of particular verses. These particular verses are not found in the text in hand, they refer to the inner significance of the verses.

 

it is surprising the author of Fasl al-Khitab, in order to prove that the Qur'an in hand is not the whole one that was revealed, quotes the first tradition ignoring the second which explains the former. It is very difficult to say that the second tradition escaped his notice.

 

Nuri has criticized Mullah Faid-e Kashani for not narrating the tradition which states that the Qu'ran contains seventeen thousand verses and confined himself to narrating the tradition of seven thousand verses. He has boldly accused the Mullah of dishonesty. The question of the number of verses has already been discussed at length to disprove this statement. Moreover he himself cannot escape similar charges. Anyhow all his contemporaries and scholars of later periods wished that the late Nuri would not have written this book which has damaged his reputation.

 

We would like to point out here that Mullah Faid-e Kashani is far above any allegation and he is a link in narrating the tradition between the author of Fasl al-Khitab and the Imams. When the above author discredits Mullah Faid-e Kashani, he loses the important link

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Unregistered
On 8/23/2017 at 5:12 PM, Mohammed72 said:

 

 But those who attack the Ahlulbayt are nawasib that more najis than dogs and pigs.

Here

Quote

khawarij and Nawasib (i.e. those who are enemies of the holy Imams) are also impure.

 

Ayatullah Sayyid Abulqasim al-Khui

https://www.al-islam.org/islamic-laws-ayatullah-abul-qasim-al-khui/impure-things-najasat#infidel

Quote

 Khawarij and Nawasib who express enmity towards th e holy Imams, are also najis. 

https://www.sistani.org/english/book/48/2132/

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/24/2017 at 6:41 PM, ali_fatheroforphans said:
On 8/24/2017 at 5:26 PM, Munzir Ahmed said:

There isn't any hadith book written by ahlebayt themselves. Their narrations reached us via fallibles like zurarah, abu basir etc.

Likewise prophetic narrations of sunni books also reached us via fallibles like ibn abbas, ibn umar etc.

Both sides have fallible people in the chain and at the top of narrations one side has 12 Imams mostly while other has prophet himself most of the times.

So now tell which narrations carry more weight. 1. those narrated by 12 Imams or 2. those narrated by prophet himself?

The problem with the Sunni hadiths is that you take them for personalities who have had friction with the family of the Prophet(not all of them though). For example you have Umar and Aisha. Also these personalities are fallible who are nowhere near the Imams (as) in terms of knowledge.

Sunnis take hadith from anyone who happened to encounter the prophet. Does this mean that these hadiths are credible? What if a certain companion had poor understanding? what if he omits something? contradicts the prophet? etc.

That's why I am not surprised at some stupid and offensive narrations which attack the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh). For example, many of your hadiths state that Prophet Muhammad had a demonic possession. Unlike Sunnis, we Shias don't take any hadith and say it is sahih. Our hadiths can't contradict the Quran and Ahlulbayt (as), otherwise we reject them.

No one understood the sayings and the teachings of Islam more than the Imams (as). It amazes me how you are willing to take any narration from anyone who happens to encounter Prophet Muhammad (pbuh). May Allah guide you.

1. There are many narrations in praise of ahlebayt from both Umar and Aisha. They had narrated ahadith of prophet which is infallible. Just like narrators like zurarah and abu basir who narrated from Imams. Moreover, there are many reports from Imams cursing zurarah and abu basir and vice versa but there are none from prophet cursing umar or aisha, rather there are several reports from prophet in their praise.

2. Not everything from any sahabi is true. There are many zaeef reports as well. See Albani's work on zaeef reports. And in case of contradiction among sahaba, mutawatir report is considered because as you said one or two companions can omit or misunderstood but all of them can not.

3. So you reject almost all narrations on basis of just one or two which doesnt make sense to you. Likewise people also reject narrations on prophet forgetting in salah. To which shia Shaikh Sadooq said this is beginning of ghuluw.

4. Ok then provide ahlebayt narrations on these issues atleast. a) incident of pen and paper b) tafsir of 33:33 c) complete adhan with 3rd testimony.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/24/2017 at 8:39 AM, islam25 said:
On 8/24/2017 at 8:13 AM, Munzir Ahmed said:

 

So shia doctrine of imamah carry no weight in terms of differences. Are you sure?

What is wilayah brother which only Imam Ali had from amongst sahabah and ahlebayt?

Willayah is status were ones all action and his existance  is only for Allah. 

And it is the highest rank before Allah.

 

On 8/24/2017 at 10:37 AM, islam25 said:
On 8/24/2017 at 8:53 AM, Munzir Ahmed said:

Only Imam Ali had this quality after prophet?

No. Any body can acquire this quality. 

It is point were person is free from even from traces of shrik. That is ones heart never free from remembering Allah and love only for Allah fear only of Allah. 

If anybody can acquire then why so much focus on only wilayah of Imam Ali?

And if this is the definition of wilayah (most important shia article of faith) then even sunnis also believe in it except some nasibis.

This definition of wilayah is common among shia and sunni.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/24/2017 at 7:46 PM, Hassan- said:
On 8/24/2017 at 6:03 PM, Munzir Ahmed said:

Then why did you say that shia narrations are from infallibles while sunni ones are from fallible people?

But we also know that many ahlebayt narrations are either weak or fabrications, then how can we confirm which ones are in agreement with the sunnah. For that purpose we need sunnah as a separate entity so one can verify. Am I right?

Above hadith say do not accept a narration on our authority except that which is in agreement with the Qur’an and the Sunna. We all have same quran but where is sunna?

If Sunnis take narrations from the Prophet or the Imams than they are taking their hadiths from infallible people, otherwise they are not. The sunnah is from the sayings of the infallibles, and are past on to us through fallible people. Whether these fallible people are trustworthy or not, or whether these sayings are indeed from the infallibles requires immense research and study on each fallible individual, and whether the hadith is inline with the Quran.

Exactly.

Thus your initial statement was wrong. As most of sunni narrations are from prophet who is teacher of all Imams. You can confirm yourself here sunnah.com and research is already been done to a greater extent by many scholars from both sides which is known to us as ilm ul rijal.

Awaiting your answer for above underlined question.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/24/2017 at 9:55 PM, AfricanShia said:
On 8/24/2017 at 5:29 PM, Munzir Ahmed said:

Exactly. That's why Imam Ali was not prophet's successor or first caliph because Aaron wasn't the successor of Moses either.

Musa (as) left Harun (as) in charge. Just like Prophet Muhammad (SAWA) to Amir al-Mumineen (as). And this is backed either way by Surat an-Nisa, ayat 59.

But Harun (as) was not his successor, this is also a reality.

Following this sunnah caliph Umar also left Imam Ali in charge when he went to bait ul maqdas. This shows there wasnt any enemity between them.

And when Imam Ali sent Malik Ashtar as governor to egypt he also mentioned 4:59 in favor of malik ashtar. See letter to malik ashtar in nahjul balagha.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Unregistered
On 8/23/2017 at 5:12 PM, Mohammed72 said:

. You can even give the Quran to a non-Muslim in any language and if you asked him about all the pillars of Islam he would know about them but if you asked him about Imammah he will say "what is that?"

Arabic/English

وَإِذْ قَالَ رَبُّكَ لِلْمَلَائِكَةِ إِنِّي جَاعِلٌ فِي الْأَرْضِ خَلِيفَةً ۖ قَالُوا أَتَجْعَلُ فِيهَا مَنْ يُفْسِدُ فِيهَا وَيَسْفِكُ الدِّمَاءَ وَنَحْنُ نُسَبِّحُ بِحَمْدِكَ وَنُقَدِّسُ لَكَ ۖ قَالَ إِنِّي أَعْلَمُ مَا لَا تَعْلَمُونَ {30}

[Shakir 2:30] And when your Lord said to the angels, I am going to place in the earth a khalif, they said: What! wilt Thou place in it such as shall make mischief in it and shed blood, and we celebrate Thy praise and extol Thy holiness? He said: Surely I know what you do not know.
[Pickthal 2:30] And when thy Lord said unto the angels: Lo! I am about to place a viceroy in the earth, they said: Wilt thou place therein one who will do harm therein and will shed blood, while we, we hymn Thy praise and sanctify Thee? He said: Surely I know that which ye know not.
[Yusufali 2:30] Behold, thy Lord said to the angels: "I will create a vicegerent on earth." They said: "Wilt Thou place therein one who will make mischief therein and shed blood?- whilst we do celebrate Thy praises and glorify Thy holy (name)?" He said: "I know what ye know not."

*****

وَإِذِ ابْتَلَىٰ إِبْرَاهِيمَ رَبُّهُ بِكَلِمَاتٍ فَأَتَمَّهُنَّ ۖ قَالَ إِنِّي جَاعِلُكَ لِلنَّاسِ إِمَامًا ۖ قَالَ وَمِنْ ذُرِّيَّتِي ۖ قَالَ لَا يَنَالُ عَهْدِي الظَّالِمِينَ {124}

[Shakir 2:124] And when his Lord tried Ibrahim with certain words, he fulfilled them. He said: Surely I will make you an Imam of men. Ibrahim said: And of my offspring? My covenant does not include the unjust, said He.
[Pickthal 2:124] And (remember) when his Lord tried Abraham with (His) commands, and he fulfilled them, He said: Lo! I have appointed thee a leader for mankind. (Abraham) said: And of my offspring (will there be leaders)? He said: My covenant includeth not wrong-doers.
[Yusufali 2:124] And remember that Abraham was tried by his Lord with certain commands, which he fulfilled: He said: "I will make thee an Imam to the Nations." He pleaded: "And also (Imams) from my offspring!" He answered: "But My Promise is not within the reach of evil-doers."

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Unregistered
On 8/23/2017 at 5:12 PM, Mohammed72 said:

 

1:5 It is You we worship and You we ask for help.

And we read this every day in our Salah but we don’t think about what we are saying.

Answer is here.

*****

إِيَّاكَ نَعْبُدُ وَإِيَّاكَ نَسْتَعِينُ {5}

[Pickthal 1:5] Thee (alone) we worship; Thee (alone) we ask for help.

اهْدِنَا الصِّرَاطَ الْمُسْتَقِيمَ {6}

[Pickthal 1:6] Show us the straight path,

صِرَاطَ الَّذِينَ أَنْعَمْتَ عَلَيْهِمْ غَيْرِ الْمَغْضُوبِ عَلَيْهِمْ وَلَا الضَّالِّينَ {7}

[Pickthal 1:7] The path of those whom Thou hast favoured; Not the (path) of those who earn Thine anger nor of those who go astray.

*****

PAth of those who questioned the Prophet Muhammad(Peace be upon him and his pure progeny), doubted him, and his authority. Violated the commands of the Qur'an in terms of the Ahlul Bayth(as). 

Ghadir Khum

Tragedy of Thursday.

Saqifa

Fadaq

Attack on the House/Fadak

Battle of Jamal

Battle of Siffin

Funural of Imam Hassan(as)

Karbala.

Now the version of the prophet you follow did not leave any constitution, or any directive on leadership. Apparently the ones directly or indirectly responsible for the above- had more wisdom to collect the document and appoint a leader. Did not inform the daughter but informed the companion - directly responsible for the fitna created by who complied the book, leadership and fadak issues. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Unregistered
On 8/23/2017 at 5:12 PM, Mohammed72 said:

2)Shirk.

 

وَإِذْ قُلْنَا لِلْمَلَائِكَةِ اسْجُدُوا لِآدَمَ فَسَجَدُوا إِلَّا إِبْلِيسَ كَانَ مِنَ الْجِنِّ فَفَسَقَ عَنْ أَمْرِ رَبِّهِ ۗ أَفَتَتَّخِذُونَهُ وَذُرِّيَّتَهُ أَوْلِيَاءَ مِنْ دُونِي وَهُمْ لَكُمْ عَدُوٌّ ۚ بِئْسَ لِلظَّالِمِينَ بَدَلًا {50}

[Shakir 18:50] And when We said to the angels: Make obeisance to Adam; they made obeisance but Iblis (did it not). He was of the jinn, so he transgressed the commandment of his Lord. What! would you then take him and his offspring for friends rather than Me, and they are your enemies? Evil is (this) change for the unjust.
[Pickthal 18:50] And (remember) when We said unto the angels: Fall prostrate before Adam, and they fell prostrate, all save Iblis. He was of the jinn, so he rebelled against his Lord's command. Will ye choose him and his seed for your protecting friends instead of Me, when they are an enemy unto you? Calamitous is the exchange for evil-doers.
[Yusufali 18:50] Behold! We said to the angels, "Bow down to Adam": They bowed down except Iblis. He was one of the Jinns, and he broke the Command of his Lord. Will ye then take him and his progeny as protectors rather than Me? And they are enemies to you! Evil would be the exchange for the wrong-doers!

*****

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/24/2017 at 7:50 PM, IbnSina said:

What about the second hadiths I quoted about Imam Ali(AS)? Who disobeyed Imam Ali(as)?

What about the hadith of seyyeda Fatima(AS) and the hadith of who she was angry with?

For following hadith see its full version from the same narrator from the same link you shared. You are ignoring the context.

On 8/24/2017 at 1:15 AM, IbnSina said:

Narrated Al-Miswar bin Makhrama:

Allah's Apostle said, "Fatima is a part of me, and he who makes her angry, makes me angry."

http://www.muslimaccess.com/sunnah/hadeeth/bukhari/057.html

And for following hadith.

On 8/24/2017 at 1:15 AM, IbnSina said:

Speaking of Ahlul Kisa, theres another hadith, regarding Imam Ali(as):

The Messenger of Allah said:

"Whoever obeys 'Ali, obeys me, whoever obeys me, obeys Allah, whoever disobeys 'Ali disobeys me, whoever disobeys me, disobeys Allah"

Sunni reference:

Kanz ul Ummal, hadith numbers 32973

Should we ask who disobeyed Imam Ali(as) and disobeyed him? If you disobeyed Imam Ali(as) then you have disobeyed Allah سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى and disobeying Allahسُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى is a form of kufr. Who fought against him?

Firstly kanzul umaal is not the primary source. Secondly prophet also uttered same words for others and also in general sense. See book of government in sahih muslim.

On 8/24/2017 at 7:50 PM, IbnSina said:

Do you, like the OP, believe that your belief in Allahسُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى and his message and messenger(S), depends on what you may say or not say regarding one of the prophets wives?

No. Same goes for 12 Imams. Majority of sunnis also love and adore ahlebayt. Difference is only the beliefs concerning them.

On 8/24/2017 at 7:50 PM, IbnSina said:

Lastly, if you believe in Ahlul Kisa and their infallibility. Then surely you understand that Kalifa belonged to Imam Hassan(as) and Imam Hussein(as) and that whatever hadith came from from them was said from an infallible person, so that if they said to the people to follow their family, surely you would?

Surely if you admit that they are infallible then you would want them to lead the religion?

Or do you still write RA after the name of muawiya(la)? And at the same time write RA after the name of Imam Ali(AS), the person muawiya(la) ordered to curse in the masjids?

How confused isnt the minds of our sunni brothers and their reasoning...

You are right. Its muawiya & co. vs ahlebayt. And after muawiya (due to treaty with Imam Hassan) caliphate was right of Imam Hussain. Alhamdulilah sunnis in general love, respect and follow ahadith of ahlul kisa, ahadith which are in agreement with prophetic narrations. Because there are many fabricated reports from them as well.

Surely Imam Mahdi will lead. Before him Imam Ali and Imam Hassan led the nation as caliph. Rest were Imams of knowledge but not caliphs of their time.

I personally write nothing after name of muawiya. As he was the first one (not Abu bakr, Umar or Uthman) who used to curse Imam.

Writing RA or not is no issue, problem is not admitting his crimes.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/24/2017 at 2:50 AM, Mohammed72 said:

I do not see the modern day shirk of Shia Ya Ali and Ya Muhammad included.

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VB1W8Cfziwk

If that isn't shirk I do not know what shirk is.

Brother, just saying Ya Ali (as) and Ya Muhammad (saww) or Ya Hussain (as) isn't shirk but saying the same with intention that they are all-hearing, who can hear our supplication and are all-powerful, who can grant us help, sustenance, success, children etc or can request Allah on our behalf is a clear shirk.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/24/2017 at 4:32 AM, Qa'im said:

Tawassul is often compared to shirk, but to be honest, there will always be an intermediary between one and God. The names of Allah are created and separate from Him, and our words, actions, and rituals are all mediums between us and Him. As Imam al-Hadi once said, we share no medium with Allah, because that would be tashbeeh. We are creation, and we interact with creation - the Creator in His Essence is only known though His created signs. The Infinite God acts through the finite. Allah gives life, by allowing His created Spirit to breathe a soul into our bodies. Allah ends life, by allowing His created angel to remove our soul from our bodies. Allah delivers rizq to us through created means. So tawassul and ziyara, like salat, zakat, sawm, hajj, and other good deeds, are ultimately a path to God. They are all different means through which He is reached. A truly "direct" relationship is not plausible. As long as one believes that all created things have no power in and of themselves, then tawassul can only be an intercession to God, and not calling on a separate deity. Otherwise, the same argument can be made about all of our good deeds.

What is the best possible means out of all these?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Moderators
1 hour ago, Munzir Ahmed said:

Exactly.

Thus your initial statement was wrong. As most of sunni narrations are from prophet who is teacher of all Imams. You can confirm yourself here sunnah.com and research is already been done to a greater extent by many scholars from both sides which is known to us as ilm ul rijal.

Awaiting your answer for above underlined question.

Most Sunni narrations are from the Prophet but how do we know if those are indeed the sayings of the Prophet when they rely on fallible people to transmit his sayings as well? I don't get what point you're trying to make dear brother.

As for the statement you underlined, how do you determine what the sunnah of the Prophet is? Is it not determined through hadiths that are transmitted to us through fallible people?

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

But Harun (as) was not his successor, this is also a reality.

Following this sunnah caliph Umar also left Imam Ali in charge when he went to bait ul maqdas. This shows there wasnt any enemity between them.

And when Imam Ali sent Malik Ashtar as governor to egypt he also mentioned 4:59 in favor of malik ashtar. See letter to malik ashtar in nahjul balagha.

Think what you want. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Unregistered
1 hour ago, Munzir Ahmed said:

Brother, just saying Ya Ali (as) and Ya Muhammad (saww) or Ya Hussain (as) isn't shirk but saying the same with intention that they are all-hearing, who can hear our supplication and are all-powerful, who can grant us help, sustenance, success, children etc or can request Allah on our behalf is a clear shirk.

 

Learning from All the Above and many other Threads: 

People have an issue with saying  "Ya Muhammad(pbuhahp).

So, I do not even what  entertain the Ya Ali(As) Ya Hussain(as) question, they are just a smoke screen argument(s).

*****

I suggest you read the above Threads and reflect.

Who are you or anyone else to Judge anyone Intention ?

Who gave this rigth away? The Ultimate Judge gave it to the people to judge everyones intention? 

Its is childish to say, its ok to do it as long as you don;t think that ..............


This is a Code for You worship other than Allah(awj), mistake Iblis did not even make (read the first thread posted ). If people do not know it , its fine. Reflect on it, what is been said ---as long as you do not believe them to be All-..............Only ALL- is Allah(awj) and if you reflect and understand the kalma its states it. So, this is a propaganda that we need to address it head on. 

We like to focus on the Shirk Iblis is guilty of. These are deflections, made to misguide us from the real issue. We laypeople, Shia of Ali(as) need to recognize it or be part of the game to misguide/misdirect the Muslims from the Real Issue of Disobedience of the Command of Allah(awj) and His Prophet Muhammad(pbuhahp).

(  Iblis disobeyed )

We will be questioned on this, we came here and did what- played nice to appease all - be nice but be firm lets have some self respect. lets not have people walk all over us like we are some stepchild/second class citizens of the Ummah. We do not need a lecture on what we do. 

 

Edited by S.M.H.A.
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Unregistered

This will clarify the  Hadith ( Sunnah/Tradition) issue for the one who really do not know. ( The Imam here does not mean the Four Jurist you call Imam.

Imam here means the Khalifa/Vicegerent of Allah(awj). Allah(awj) Khalifa/representative on Earth(with no time limitations Qur'an 2:30) 

 Who is  your Imam (Leader(in all aspects))i.e Mawla. (As per Ghadir Khum declaration)

Quote

Hadith of Silsilat al-Dhahab

When Imam al-Ridha (a.s.) was leaving Nayshabur, a group of scholars of hadith, including Muhammad b. al-Rafi‘, Ahmad b. al-Harith, Yahya b. al-Yahya, and Ishaq b. al-Rahuwayh held the bridle of Imam al-Ridha’s (a.s.) camel and said, “We swear you to your purified forefathers to narrate a hadith from your father to us.” It is also related in a hadith that Abu Zar‘a and Muhammad b. Aslam, both memorizers of Prophetic traditions, said to his holiness: “O noble son of the noble! O Imam Son of the Imams! O pure and praiseworthy summation of the prophets! We swear you to your purified forefathers and your noble ancestors to show us your blessed face and recite a hadith from your forefathers to us as a keepsake from you.”

At this time, the Imam’s camel halted, the curtain [of the camel litter] was pulled away and the Muslims’ eyes glistened at the sight of his blessed radiant face. The hair hanging from both sides of the Imam’s head was like those of the Prophet (S); some of the (excited) people who were standing there were crying and weeping and tearing their clothes and prostrating on the ground.

Some were kissing the bridle of his camel and others were stretching their necks to better see the face of his holiness. The people waited there until noon, as tears were rolling down their eyes like little brooks.

The dignitaries and judges shouted: ‘O people! Listen and surrender your hearts; do not disturb the Prophet (S.AW.) concerning his household. Then, while 24 thousand pens were ready to write down, Imam al-Ridha (a.s.) said,

“I have heard my father – that competent servant of God – Musa b. Ja‘far (a.s.)

saying that he heard from his father Ja‘far b. Muhammad al-Sadiq (a.s.)

saying that he heard his father Muhammad b. ‘Ali (a.s.)

saying that he heard from his father ‘Ali b. al-Husayn (a.s.)

saying that he heard from his father al-Husayn b. ‘Ali (a.s.)

saying that he heard from his father ‘Ali b. ‘Abi Talib (a.s.)

saying that he heard from the Holy Prophet (S)

saying that he heard from Gabriel saying that Allah told him:

‘I am God. There is no god but Me. Worship Me then. The phrase La ilaha illa Allah is My fortress, whoever sincerely utters it, may enter My fortress, and whoever enters My fortress shall be secure from My punishment’. When they moved on, the Imam (a.s.) said out loud: ‘There are certain conditions to this (the entrance to the fortress) and I am one of its conditions.”18

 

https://www.al-islam.org/story-sun-look-imam-al-ridha-life-sayyid-muhammad-najafi-yazdi/imam-al-ridhas-historical-emigration#hadith-silsilat-al-dhahab

Edited by S.M.H.A.
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
On 8/26/2017 at 12:14 AM, Munzir Ahmed said:

For following hadith see its full version from the same narrator from the same link you shared. You are ignoring the context.

Which one of the two hadiths mentioned are you talking about?

On 8/26/2017 at 12:14 AM, Munzir Ahmed said:

Firstly kanzul umaal is not the primary source. Secondly Prophet also uttered same words for others and also in general sense. See book of government in sahih Muslim.

Do you accept that hadith or no?

On 8/26/2017 at 12:14 AM, Munzir Ahmed said:

No. Same goes for 12 Imams. Majority of Sunnis also love and adore ahlebayt. Difference is only the beliefs concerning them.

So since your answer is no and the OP's answer is yes, would you say that makes him a takfiri since he would judge such a person as a kafir?

On 8/26/2017 at 12:14 AM, Munzir Ahmed said:

You are right. Its muawiya & co. vs ahlebayt. And after muawiya (due to treaty with Imam Hassan) caliphate was right of Imam Hussain. Alhamdulilah Sunnis in general love, respect and follow ahadith of ahlul kisa, ahadith which are in agreement with prophetic narrations. Because there are many fabricated reports from them as well.

Surely Imam Mahdi will lead. Before him Imam Ali and Imam Hassan led the nation as caliph. Rest were Imams of knowledge but not caliphs of their time.

I am confused by your reasoning. You admit the caliphate of Imam Ali(عليه السلام) and Imam Hassan(عليه السلام) and you confess to the crimes of muawiya(la), yet you do not consider the truthful caliphate belonging to Imam Hussein(عليه السلام)? Or would you say the son of the one born from the liver eater(la), the friend of a monkey and the killer of Imam Hussein(عليه السلام) to be the rightful ruler? The one who openly committed haram? You would call such a man amir ul mumineen?

Take a stance if you are sincere in your heart and clear in your mind.

On 8/26/2017 at 12:14 AM, Munzir Ahmed said:

I personally write nothing after name of muawiya. As he was the first one (not Abu Bakr, Umar or Uthman) who used to curse Imam.

Writing RA or not is no issue, problem is not admitting his crimes.

So you admit to his crimes but you do not condemn him?

How can you say writing RA or not does not mean anything? Would you write RA after the name of Abu lahab(la)?

Then what is your opinion of zakir naik, the famous Sunni speaker and "scholar" who says RA after the name of yazid(la)? Makes no difference? How can one admit to the nature of such a creature and say RA too? Have they lost their minds?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
On 8/25/2017 at 11:21 PM, Munzir Ahmed said:

If anybody can acquire then why so much focus on only wilayah of Imam Ali?

And if this is the definition of wilayah (most important Shia article of faith) then even Sunnis also believe in it except some nasibis.

This definition of wilayah is common among Shia and Sunni.

Mr. . willayah is level  of purification of heart were ones all actions and slef  are dissected for Him. So any body can acquire this level of purification. When ever one acquires it he is called wali.

It is almost near impossible. Even after becoming wali there are grades. And highest of it is with Imam Ali.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Unregistered

 

[Qur’an 5:55] Your guardian can be only Allah; and His messenger and those who believe, who establish worship and pay the poordue, and bow down (in prayer).

This particular post, who is a Wali..

http://www.shiachat.com/forum/topic/235034818-a-dialogue-on-your-understanding-of-shirk/?tab=comments#comment-2883362

*****

"

In al-Kafi, al-Kulayni reports with his isnad from Abu al-Hasan al-Madhi (Imam Musa al-Kazim) that Muhammad bin al-Fudayl says: When asked concerning the meaning of the verse, “Is he who goes inverted on his face more rightly guided or he who walks upright on a straight path?” the Imam replied, “Verily, God has struck a similitude [in this verse]: one who deviates from the wilayah of ‘Ali (A) is like one who walks on his face and is not guided, and He has made one who follows him as one who walks upright on a straight path, and ‘the Straight Path’ is Amir al-Mu’minin (A).”11

In another tradition, the ‘Straight Path’ is explained as meaning ‘Ali (A) and the rest of the Imams (A).12

Also, it is narrated in the noble al-Kafi from Fudayl that he said, “I entered the Holy Mosque (of Makkah) with Imam al-Baqir (A) and he was leaning upon me. Then he threw his blessed glance upon the people as we stood at the Door of Bani Shaybah. Then he said, ‘O Fudayl, they used to circumambulate in this manner [even] during the days of the Jahiliyyah!

They neither recognized any truth nor followed any creed. O Fudayl, look at them, they walk inverted on their faces! May God damn them, they are a disfigured creation walking on their faces.” Then he recited the noble verse, Is he who goes inverted on his face more rightly guided or he who walks upright on a straight path. Then he added, “By God, that means ‘Ali (A) and his awsiya’ (A).”13"

https://www.al-Islam.org/forty-hadith-an-exposition-second-edition-Imam-Khomeini/thirtieth-hadith-kinds-hearts#explanation-believers-being-straight-path

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
Quote

I used to be a Shia (mushrik), to be short used to say things like Ya Ali and that the Prophet has Ilm' Al Ghayb.

No one has 'IlmAl Ghayb(prediction of the future) except Allah,and any prophecy then it has been given to them by Gabriel from Allah.

Ya Ali: Ya Ali we love you! That is shirk ? Ya Ali(Nida'/Calling/screaming) this is hirk for you,I wonder how do you think :confused:

How can anyone debate with this guy more? You can know he has been indoctrinated with Youtube videos from devils such as AntiMajos and Mohammed Hijab etc..

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
On 8/27/2017 at 7:30 AM, M.IB said:

No one has 'IlmAl Ghayb(prediction of the future) except Allah,and any prophecy then it has been given to them by Gabriel from Allah.

Ya Ali: Ya Ali we love you! That is shirk ? Ya Ali(Nida'/Calling/screaming) this is hirk for you,I wonder how do you think :confused:

How can anyone debate with this guy more? You can know he has been indoctrinated with Youtube videos from devils such as AntiMajos and Mohammed Hijab etc..

I don’t know how your supposed to debate with someone who already judges you as a kafir and has done takfir in you.

Just read the label of this thread:

"Why I became Muslim (Sunni)"

That pretty much summarizes his mindset, we are not Muslim and he became Muslim when he accepted the succession of the holy Prophet(S) with Abu Bakr and not Imam Ali(عليه السلام). 

And then, while projecting this takfiri mindset, he expects anyone to take his "guidance" and to accept this "correction".

Its like me coming up to you and tell you that: "Hey, your mother is such and such, now let me guide you and correct you regarding your faith."

What a primitive and arrogant approach, but alas, what can you expect from a takfiri, someone so quick you judge you.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
On 8/27/2017 at 7:46 AM, IbnSina said:

Just read the label of this thread:

"Why I became Muslim (Sunni)"

Why such Muslims hide in their caves when discussions carry on?

They  remain unable to present answers in response to the truth and yet they are Muslims and others are not.  This is what Qur'an refers blindness of heart in its verses.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/26/2017 at 10:54 AM, Hassan- said:

Most Sunni narrations are from the Prophet but how do we know if those are indeed the sayings of the Prophet when they rely on fallible people to transmit his sayings as well? I don't get what point you're trying to make dear brother.

 

Point is that a shia brother here accused sunni narrations and said we only take narrations from infallibles unlike them.

Where as same is the case with shia narrations as they are also transmitted via fallible people. And if we compare pure prophetic narrations then sunnis have an edge.

 

On 8/26/2017 at 10:54 AM, Hassan- said:

As for the statement you underlined, how do you determine what the sunnah of the Prophet is? Is it not determined through hadiths that are transmitted to us through fallible people?

Yes. But here issue is that shia take narrations from fallible people on praise of ahlebayt but dont take any narrations in praise of some sahabah narrated by the same fallible people. Both becomes sunnah when proven authentic.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/26/2017 at 11:10 AM, S.M.H.A. said:

Who are you or anyone else to Judge anyone Intention ?

Who gave this rigth away? The Ultimate Judge gave it to the people to judge everyones intention? 

Its is childish to say, its ok to do it as long as you don;t think that ..............

Only Allah swt knows the true intentions but we people can also figure out somehow on basis of their speech. 

for e.g if someone says YA MUHAMMAD or YA ALI  followed by words like help me or grant me success or child or accept my supplication or remove my hardships etc then it clearly shows their intention that they are making dua to other than Allah swt.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/26/2017 at 2:59 AM, IbnSina said:
On 8/26/2017 at 12:14 AM, Munzir Ahmed said:

For following hadith see its full version from the same narrator from the same link you shared. You are ignoring the context.

Which one of the two hadiths mentioned are you talking about?

Hadith on annoying sayeda (sa).

On 8/26/2017 at 2:59 AM, IbnSina said:
On 8/26/2017 at 12:14 AM, Munzir Ahmed said:

Firstly kanzul umaal is not the primary source. Secondly Prophet also uttered same words for others and also in general sense. See book of government in sahih Muslim.

Do you accept that hadith or no?

Yes (but I don’t know its original source). Same was also said by Prophet for others and I also accept that.

Here is one such version.

Narrated Abu Huraira:

Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) said, "Whoever obeys me, obeys Allah, and whoever disobeys me, disobeys Allah, and whoever obeys the ruler I appoint, obeys me, and whoever disobeys him, disobeys me." Sahih al-Bukhari 7137

On 8/26/2017 at 2:59 AM, IbnSina said:
On 8/26/2017 at 12:14 AM, Munzir Ahmed said:

No. Same goes for 12 Imams. Majority of Sunnis also love and adore ahlebayt. Difference is only the beliefs concerning them.

So since your answer is no and the OP's answer is yes, would you say that makes him a takfiri since he would judge such a person as a kafir?

Can you quote his exact words?

I believe those who curse any wife of Prophet to hell are takfiri in nature. Also those who say not believing in 12 Imams as we do will surely send you to hell-fire are takfiri (but are not kafir themselves).

As I said Sunnis in general love and respect ahlebayt which is enough, belief in 12 Imams is not compulsory.

On 8/26/2017 at 2:59 AM, IbnSina said:
On 8/26/2017 at 12:14 AM, Munzir Ahmed said:

You are right. Its muawiya & co. vs ahlebayt. And after muawiya (due to treaty with Imam Hassan) caliphate was right of Imam Hussain. Alhamdulilah Sunnis in general love, respect and follow ahadith of ahlul kisa, ahadith which are in agreement with prophetic narrations. Because there are many fabricated reports from them as well.

Surely Imam Mahdi will lead. Before him Imam Ali and Imam Hassan led the nation as caliph. Rest were Imams of knowledge but not caliphs of their time.

I am confused by your reasoning. You admit the caliphate of Imam Ali(عليه السلام) and Imam Hassan(عليه السلام) and you confess to the crimes of muawiya(la), yet you do not consider the truthful caliphate belonging to Imam Hussein(عليه السلام)? Or would you say the son of the one born from the liver eater(la), the friend of a monkey and the killer of Imam Hussein(عليه السلام) to be the rightful ruler? The one who openly committed haram? You would call such a man amir ul mumineen?

Take a stance if you are sincere in your heart and clear in your mind.

I also admitted that see bold part.

Rightful caliphate was ended with Imam Hassan (عليه السلام) as per prophetic hadith.

On 8/26/2017 at 2:59 AM, IbnSina said:
On 8/26/2017 at 12:14 AM, Munzir Ahmed said:

I personally write nothing after name of muawiya. As he was the first one (not Abu Bakr, Umar or Uthman) who used to curse Imam.

Writing RA or not is no issue, problem is not admitting his crimes.

So you admit to his crimes but you do not condemn him?

How can you say writing RA or not does not mean anything? Would you write RA after the name of Abu lahab(la)?

Then what is your opinion of zakir naik, the famous Sunni speaker and "scholar" who says RA after the name of yazid(la)? Makes no difference? How can one admit to the nature of such a creature and say RA too? Have they lost their minds?

I condemn him but do not curse him to hell. Rather I curse all oppressors in general but not by name except yazid l.a

RA is a dua which is permissible to make for Muslims. Even Imam Ali (عليه السلام) used to make dua for his opponents that may Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) guide them and he (عليه السلام) also prayed their funeral. While Abu lahab was a kafir and we are not allowed to make dua for dead kuffar.

Yes, he once said that but I think later he has changed his mind. In the hereafter Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) will weigh good and bad deeds and will decide accordingly. So we should not multiply peoples all good deeds by zero due to their one or two mistakes/sins.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/26/2017 at 3:39 AM, islam25 said:

Mr. . willayah is level  of purification of heart were ones all actions and slef  are dissected for Him. So any body can acquire this level of purification. When ever one acquires it he is called wali.

It is almost near impossible. Even after becoming wali there are grades. And highest of it is with Imam Ali.

How can you say for sure that a person has acquired it and now he is wali? And what is mean by word wali or waliullah to you?

All Sunnis in general also believe the same for Imam Ali (عليه السلام) and for his progeny. There is no dispute between Shias and Sunnis as per definition of wilayah you shared.

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...