Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله
Sign in to follow this  
Guest syed ali burhan naqvi

shahadat e salisa

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

Aliyun Waliullah in adhan, iqamah and tashuhud are an innovation. Get over it. Every proof to back it’s innovation, you will play the taqqiyah game. This is the sad state of the malangi Shias. Everything that goes against the teaching of Muhammad and aal Muhammad goes into “they were in taqqiyah”. How convenient.

Edited by 786:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Syed Ali Mehdi Shah Naqvi said:

Plus according to you, if only tashaud was based on 2 testimonies,
then why did Imam (عليه السلام) say if it was fixed, people would have perished?

This is true and also present in other books. Tashhahud is not fixed.

4 hours ago, Syed Ali Mehdi Shah Naqvi said:

Plus according to you, if only tashaud was based on 2 testimonies,

Not according to him, or me, or others, rather "two testimonies in tashahud" is in a vast number of hadiths.

4 hours ago, Syed Ali Mehdi Shah Naqvi said:

Imam jaffer e Sadiq says whenever  :
There is no restriction of tashahud, azaan, iqamah, kalima

The same Imam had taught tashahud and of two testimonies in it. These matters are not like Saqeefa that according to Sunnis it is something open to our own decision. Taqleed is also from the Imams. They did not forget anything and left it for us to fight over. They have taught everything. There is no confusion. You simply refuse to entertain those vast number of hadiths.

For everyone else other than your small new sect in Indo-Pak, everything is clear and settled, since the last 1400 years brother.

4 hours ago, Syed Ali Mehdi Shah Naqvi said:

we read in Surah Maari'j 33, those who stand by (atleast three) testimonies and protect their prayers, for them are gardens.

Allah has declared min criteria to be 3 testimonies therefore its fine in light of other hadiths and verses that 3 testimonies are just fine.

If you read Sunni translation of the verse of wudhu they add in brackets, as you have, (wash the feet) and do masah. Anyway, this is a far-fetched explanation and it ignores a vast number of hadiths that specifies two testimonies in tashahud.

You talk of azaan but that is not the topic and can not be used to support tashahud as well.

Do tell us,

1) have you read all the books and all the hadiths that specifically tell us of two testimonies in tashahud. And do you reject all of them based on your far fetched derivations and conjecture?

2) Do you think, like Sunnis who held Saqifa to decide the caliph, the 14 masoomeen have left matters open and not already settled everything? Have they left things like tashahud and following of scholars for contestation among us people? Just lik eSunnis think the Prophet left the issue of caliphate to us to decide for ourselves? OR have they settled everything? Answer yes or no only.

 

P.S.: I know you will refuse to understand. You are trying very hard in the face of overwhelming evidence to justify a new path after 1400 years. But lets try anyway

P.S.S.: We not interested in adhaan, that was not the topic, for now. And only adds strawman for you.

P.S.S.S.: PLEASE do not call names or other such things, that is against this site rules. I would like you to stay around. Please lets have a SCHOLARLY discourse.

Edited by Darth Vader

Share this post


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

This is true and also present in other books. Tashhahud is not fixed.

Not according to him, or me, or others, rather "two testimonies in tashahud" is in a vast number of hadiths.

The same Imam had taught tashahud and of two testimonies in it. These matters are not like Saqeefa that according to Sunnis it is something open to our own decision. Taqleed is also from the Imams. They did not forget anything and left it for us to fight over. They have taught everything. There is no confusion. You simply refuse to entertain those vast number of hadiths.

For everyone else other than your small new sect in Indo-Pak, everything is clear and settled, since the last 1400 years brother.

If you read Sunni translation of the verse of wudhu they add in brackets, as you have, (wash the feet) and do masah. Anyway, this is a far-fetched explanation and it ignores a vast number of hadiths that specifies two testimonies in tashahud.

You talk of azaan but that is not the topic and can not be used to support tashahud as well.

Do tell us,

1) have you read all the books and all the hadiths that specifically tell us of two testimonies in tashahud. And do you reject all of them based on your far fetched derivations and conjecture?

2) Do you think, like Sunnis who held Saqifa to decide the caliph, the 14 masoomeen have left matters open and not already settled everything? Have they left things like tashahud and following of scholars for contestation among us people? Just lik eSunnis think the Prophet left the issue of caliphate to us to decide for ourselves? OR have they settled everything? Answer yes or no only.

 

P.S.: I know you will refuse to understand. You are trying very hard in the face of overwhelming evidence to justify a new path after 1400 years. But lets try anyway

P.S.S.: We not interested in adhaan, that was not the topic, for now. And only adds strawman for you.

its sad to see you didn't read my comments but at least you agree with me partially on adhan.
if u can see 2nd comment of mod, discussion of adhan started from there.
therefore I had to prove it.

Plus kamal ud deen wasnt written in India neither Al-Ehtejaj
refute those hadiths and prove that tashahud is out of their scope.

plus if you agree tashahud isn't fixed, how come namaz became batil will wilayah e Ali?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Syed Ali Mehdi Shah Naqvi said:

Plus kamal ud deen wasnt written in India neither Al-Ehtejaj
refute those hadiths and prove that tashahud is out of their scope.

plus if you agree tashahud isn't fixed, how come namaz became batil will wilayah e Ali?

I don't have to prove anything brother. You do not answer me so why should I?

 

You did not claim that there is a problem with saying two testimonies, and you can not. The number of hadiths that speak of two testimonies in tashahud are too many and very specific in their wording.

Rather the burden of proof was on you. You have chosen to ignore my two questions and not answered them. I will write them again.

 

1) Have you read all the books and all the hadiths that specifically tell us of two testimonies in tashahud. And do you reject all of them based on your far fetched derivations and conjecture?

And,

2) Do you think, like Sunnis who held Saqifa to decide the caliph, the 14 masoomeen have left matters open and not already settled everything? Have they left things like tashahud and following of scholars for contestation among us people? Just lik eSunnis think the Prophet left the issue of caliphate to us to decide for ourselves? OR have they settled everything? Answer yes or no only.

 

Please answer so we can debate further.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Everything according to you is clear since the last 1400 years? I agree.

Al-Marasim e Alawiya fi Ahkam e Nabwiyah 
Author: Hamza bin Abdul aziz Muhadis e salaar 448 Hijri 
900+ years old book of Shias.

Published from beruit Labnan!

book is with tehqeeq of Syed Mohsin Al Husseini Al Amini
Ayatullah sheikh sanad in his book wilayat e Ali also testified to this Tashahud and accepted this manuscript.

900+ years old book has wilayat e Ali mentioned in tashahud and you said its new sect of India?
Was Al Marasim written in India?

cover.JPG

1.JPG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What about the majority of hadith that specify two testimonies in tashahud.

Brother you see one simply can not refuse all other evidence because of one book from somewhere has one narration that is contradictory. You understand that right? Because then not just tashahud but the very fabric of all our practices will become purely chaotic as contradictory hadiths will be found about a lot many other matters.

Do you follow?

This is specifically why I wrote those two questions, twice now, which you are avoiding. A person can not just cherry pick hadiths to form a new religion. That is also against 'aql.

What does you 'aql say to all the majority of hadiths from multiple, accepted sources that does not speak of silasa in tashahud?

So then all those scholars are lying? Because you found something contradictory? That is not scholarly / aqli discourse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The longer you avoid my simple questions, the weaker and weaker your case will become to any readers.

You should realize that.

What does you 'aql say to all the majority of hadiths from multiple, accepted sources that does not speak of silasa in tashahud?  Should we just throw them all out of the window because you found something else somewhere without analyzing anything further?

 

Perhaps this is the unrealistic attitude that has caused the Indo-Pak region to remain third world region. We do not use 'aql brother. Perhaps this is why we never invented anything except Charpai and Hookah. We failed to think things.

Edited by Darth Vader

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So basically you want to say, narration of two testimonies are more than ones supporting third testimony.
Therefore we should recite tashahud with 2 testimonies.

On 9/28/2019 at 10:07 AM, Darth Vader said:

What does you 'aql say to all the majority of hadiths from multiple, accepted sources that does not speak of silasa in tashahud?  Should we just throw them all out of the window because you found something else somewhere without analyzing anything further?

throwing away means rejecting them, while no Shia preaching third testimony deny 2 testimonies(shahdatein) in tashahud.

You know, if I were to pick few cherry hadiths, then my view wouldn't be same as 900+ years old Scholor hamza bin abdul aziz and what I quoted from his book is his fatwa not hadith.
therefore, you cannot say we have made a new religion.
if oldest scholors were reciting shahadat e salisa, why marjas today (majority) insists not to recite shahadat e salisa in namaz?
its not me who has found new hadiths, oldest scholors used to testify to this as I mentioned Hamza Bin Abdul Aziz!

as for hadiths, most of haadiths, I previously metnioned which you ignord that shahadat e salisa was not recited due to practice of taqqiyah.
you seem to me a knowledge able person.
you must've read hadiths in al kafi from whom its clear that taqqiyah was being practised from 4th or 5th Imams time.
May I present a simple question,
on which thing taqqiyah was practised?
la ilaha illalah?
or Muhammad ur Rasool ullah?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Syed Ali Mehdi Shah Naqvi said:

I previously metnioned which you ignord that shahadat e salisa was not recited due to practice of taqqiyah.

You don't have to recite tashahud out loud so others can hear. Maybe that thinking could apply to adhaan but that is not the topic in this discussion.

3 minutes ago, Syed Ali Mehdi Shah Naqvi said:

if oldest scholors were reciting shahadat e salisa, why marjas today (majority) insists not to recite shahadat e salisa in namaz?

Why do you doubt all the Shia scholars of today? And at the same time, trust 1 or 3 scholars of ancient times who you never met and did not see and do not even know how they read their own tashahud? They may have only copied the hadith. They may even not be Shia. Thing is, how do you know they recited three testimonies in namaz? Simply because a book today says so? Do you know about Sunni books? Do you know who Abu Huraira and other rijaal are and if they are all real? Or have you read the Urdu translation of Tabari? The deobandis have blatantly made wrong translations in parts of it and in the chapter of Abu Dharr banished to Rabza desert the translator simply writes in that book "I do not wish to translate the things written here". So then how can you be so certain just because you have found a book and a name and a hadith??? So certain in fact that you leave all the Shia billions of us both living and dead who have existed since 1400 years, to form a new religion.

And with this attitude which is same as Sunnis' with Saqeefa as you think it is all open to change, you should realize your sect is only merely starting its innovations. Tomorrow your children will have invented even newer things based on newer hadiths they found. Especially take Tafsir uth Thaqalayn book. Why don't you follow ALL the things written in that book and only choose the hadith of silasa in it? Because its other teachings are non-Shia. But I tell you your later generations have that door open to them because of your attitude towards deen and they WILL adopt even the other non-Shia practices in that book brother. So here again your practice proves to be unsound and a proliferation and a front to the aimma who have taught the tashahhud and determined the limits of it. Yours is not a tashahhud that is written and recommended by them. See brother that is a big problem for a simple person like me. I am not a big scholar like you are, I want to say namaz the way my aimma have taught me. I can not pick choose and adopt. I can not innovate. I can not contest the basics of aql or deen. I can not reject the clear and majority of hadiths. I have not spent 50 years of my life nor am I a marja. I am a jahil. I am an ordinary person. I have no reason to doubt the marja system. The marja system has been given to us by the aimma. I do not accept there being things in religion open for me to decide as I choose. I belive the religion is complete as the Qur'an says. I hope you follow. So when you make case for a innovation it better be an extremely complete case that answers all questions a person may have. Otherwise it will not work for anyone not ready to act like a Sunni at Saqeefa.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, 786:) said:

Aliyun Waliullah in adhan, iqamah and tashuhud are an innovation. Get over it. Every proof to back it’s innovation, you will play the taqqiyah game. This is the sad state of the malangi Shias. Everything that goes against the teaching of Muhammad and aal Muhammad goes into “they were in taqqiyah”. How convenient.

So? Imams (عليهم اسلام) were in Taqaiyah most of their life. You think Banu Umayyah and Banu Abbas were friends with Aale Rasool (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)? There are many things that was said in Taqaiyah. You're no authority to label things you don't like as innovation. 

It is upto religious fuqaha to deduce any conclusion and there's diversity among them for the mentioned issue. Each individual need to stick with his muqallad and respect others.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Sirius_Bright said:

So? Imams (عليهم اسلام) were in Taqaiyah most of their life. You think Banu Umayyah and Banu Abbas were friends with Aale Rasool (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)? There are many things that was said in Taqaiyah. You're no authority to label things you don't like as innovation. 

It is upto religious fuqaha to deduce any conclusion and there's diversity among them for the mentioned issue. Each individual need to stick with his muqallad and respect others.

Man this is what I wanted to tell but I wonder how people deny the facts about taqqiyah.
I asked this question here many times but no one seems to pay attention.
I asked in times of taqqiyah, how was it possible to go out and call Ali un wali ullah in call to prayers?
How was it possible to go out 5 times a day and say Ali un wali ullah twice a prayer(except fajar)?

prayers are recited aloud and so is adhan.
and taqqiyah wasn't practised to hide la ilalha illalah or Muhammad ur Rasool ullah was it?
what was hidden then? Ali un wali ullah? then don't these guys feel guilty calling Ali un wali ullah an innovation?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Darth Vader said:

You don't have to recite tashahud out loud so others can hear. Maybe that thinking could apply to adhaan but that is not the topic in this discussion.

Why do you doubt all the Shia scholars of today? And at the same time, trust 1 or 3 scholars of ancient times who you never met and did not see and do not even know how they read their own tashahud? They may have only copied the hadith. They may even not be Shia. Thing is, how do you know they recited three testimonies in namaz? Simply because a book today says so? Do you know about Sunni books? Do you know who Abu Huraira and other rijaal are and if they are all real? Or have you read the Urdu translation of Tabari? The deobandis have blatantly made wrong translations in parts of it and in the chapter of Abu Dharr banished to Rabza desert the translator simply writes in that book "I do not wish to translate the things written here". So then how can you be so certain just because you have found a book and a name and a hadith??? So certain in fact that you leave all the Shia billions of us both living and dead who have existed since 1400 years, to form a new religion.

And with this attitude which is same as Sunnis' with Saqeefa as you think it is all open to change, you should realize your sect is only merely starting its innovations. Tomorrow your children will have invented even newer things based on newer hadiths they found. Especially take Tafsir uth Thaqalayn book. Why don't you follow ALL the things written in that book and only choose the hadith of silasa in it? Because its other teachings are non-Shia. But I tell you your later generations have that door open to them because of your attitude towards deen and they WILL adopt even the other non-Shia practices in that book brother. So here again your practice proves to be unsound and a proliferation and a front to the aimma who have taught the tashahhud and determined the limits of it. Yours is not a tashahhud that is written and recommended by them. See brother that is a big problem for a simple person like me. I am not a big scholar like you are, I want to say namaz the way my aimma have taught me. I can not pick choose and adopt. I can not innovate. I can not contest the basics of aql or deen. I can not reject the clear and majority of hadiths. I have not spent 50 years of my life nor am I a marja. I am a jahil. I am an ordinary person. I have no reason to doubt the marja system. The marja system has been given to us by the aimma. I do not accept there being things in religion open for me to decide as I choose. I belive the religion is complete as the Qur'an says. I hope you follow. So when you make case for a innovation it better be an extremely complete case that answers all questions a person may have. Otherwise it will not work for anyone not ready to act like a Sunni at Saqeefa.

You asked me why I doubt shi'I scholors today.
because, following don’t allow Ali un wali ullah in tashahud:
Ayatullah Bashir Najafi
Ayatullah Sistani
Ayatullah Waheed 
Ayatullah Khamenai
and list goes on...

You called it an innovation like that of people of saqeefa while you forgot that following scholors of modern era has allowed it:
Ayatullah Sheikh Sanad
Ayatullah Mazher Shirazi
Ayatullah Sadiq Shirazi
Ayatullah Syed Muhammad Shirazi (died 2001 Qom)
Ayatullah Syed  Muhamamd Ali Tabatabai (Died 2017)

So I ask you question in your terms, Why do YOU DENY these scholors?
Why do you term their fatwas as innovations?

at one occasion you are telling me not to doubt scholros of current era while on the other side you are calling others innovators.
Aren't you doing the same thing?

For God's sake stop mentioning saqeefa, I will now tell you where is saqeefa!
Which hadiths were presented at saqeefa to establish caliphate by ijma?
none.
Similarly which hadiths are presented to declare namaz batil with addition of Ali un wali ullah?

none.

While I continuously presented hadiths whichc elarly mention from old books to sheikh sadooq as well that when you testify to tauheed, you must testify to Risalat and then you must testify to Wilayat and now its your duty to prove that tashahud is out os scope of these hadiths!

 

11 hours ago, Darth Vader said:

Thing is, how do you know they recited three testimonies in namaz? Simply because a book today says so? Do you know about Sunni books? Do you know who Abu Huraira and other rijaal are and if they are all real? Or have you read the Urdu translation of Tabari? The deobandis have blatantly made wrong translations in parts of it and in the chapter of Abu Dharr banished to Rabza desert the translator simply writes in that book "I do not wish to translate the things written here". So then how can you be so certain just because you have found a book and a name and a hadith??? So certain in fact that you leave all the Shia billions of us both living and dead who have existed since 1400 years, to form a new religion.

Thing is that why you don't recite Ali un wali ullah?
Just because a molvi says so?

Many alims from past to present have continued to recite Ali un wali ullah intashahud and Imams have ordered to do so.
thing is we don't see much narrations becuase it was hidden and it was time of taqqiyah.
And for namaz, visist a masjid and tell me if namaz is recited aloud or not.
taqqiyah was practised on wilayat e Ali. it was hidden as we have hadiths on this topic therefore, such narrations donot prove that Ali un wali ullah wasn't there else I can show you narrations for kalima from Imams having 2 testimonies, so would that make Ali un wali ullah in kalima mustahab?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, 786:) said:

Aliyun Waliullah in adhan, iqamah and tashuhud are an innovation. Get over it. Every proof to back it’s innovation, you will play the taqqiyah game. This is the sad state of the malangi Shias. Everything that goes against the teaching of Muhammad and aal Muhammad goes into “they were in taqqiyah”. How convenient.

Whoever calls Ali un wali ullah bidah in azan/iqamah or tashahud, he himself is a biddah (Allama Taj ud deen Haideri)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All the tashahuds, appearing in from Kutab e Arba to the 3 later books,

The start as follows.
Bismillah e wa Billah e wa asma-ul-husna kulloha lillahe....... and so on.

I want all you guys, Shias of Ali, to put Qur'an on heads and swear by Allah and tell me, who are asma-ul-husna?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, Syed Ali Mehdi Shah Naqvi said:

Thing is that why you don't recite Ali un wali ullah?

Because I have read hadiths of the Aimma who have clearly taught the tashahhud and the third testimony is not in it. Those scholars who have allowed it have allowed it because the tashahud is not fixed according to hadith, and can vary. Tashahud can even be recited while standing up, in qiyam, if need be. That is not the crux of the problem with your kind brother. The problem is your incalculable ignorance and arrogance when you always allege all who do not recite it as "non-halali". You think reciting or not reciting something changes a man. It does not. Our religion is in right action, not in saying words. With this innovation you are separating away from the main body of what we were, and this is but the first of your sect's innovations. I know about the rest too. Why should I follow? I have no reason to. Rather much more reason to avoid your way.

I think I have written enough on this subject. To any readers, whatever was not written and left are also answers.

Take care.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Syed Ali Mehdi Shah Naqvi said:

Man this is what I wanted to tell but I wonder how people deny the facts about taqqiyah.
I asked this question here many times but no one seems to pay attention.
I asked in times of taqqiyah, how was it possible to go out and call Ali un wali ullah in call to prayers?
How was it possible to go out 5 times a day and say Ali un wali ullah twice a prayer(except fajar)?

prayers are recited aloud and so is adhan.
and taqqiyah wasn't practised to hide la ilalha illalah or Muhammad ur Rasool ullah was it?
what was hidden then? Ali un wali ullah? then don't these guys feel guilty calling Ali un wali ullah an innovation?

It’s innovation. You sound like a fool. You mean to tell me the Prophet left out aliyun waliullah due to the fear of his life? Get outta here. Rasool Allah struggled and fought for la illaha ill Allah, but he hid aliyun waliullah? Makes zero sense. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, 786:) said:

It’s innovation. You sound like a fool. You mean to tell me the Prophet left out aliyun waliullah due to the fear of his life? Get outta here. Rasool Allah struggled and fought for la illaha ill Allah, but he hid aliyun waliullah? Makes zero sense. 

I think you are out of your mind.

I have quoted hadith jn which Allah ordered Caller to Give Adhan which had three testimonies in it. You want to take them out today? Why?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem here with brother Naqvi is so obvious. He has created a strawman out of "Aliyyun Wali Allah" testimony which all Shia believe in and act according to. But, while he jumps to one foot of his own tashahud version and when someone answers about tashahud he immediately jumps to the other foot of adhaan, and when that is answered he jumps back to Aliyyun Wali Allah being imperative (which no one disagrees with to begin with).

Then like Sherlock Holmes, or like the Sunni, he is very fond of using conjecture. Conjecture in determining something that is ALREADY very clear, since 1400 years. And to the vast majority of ahadith proving him wrong he states "it must be taqayya".

How can anyone "debate" with that? Might as well have a political debate if we want to delude ourselves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sadly, the list of faults with my brother Naqvi do not end there.

He goes on to defy all aalims who do have not agreed with him, not just common people. Is he in taqleed of any of the marajiy he says allow him his new tashahhud? No. None of his fellow are neither. They do not believe in taqleed. And what is worse than that, they offer no alternative solution to the system of learning and following from scholars. Misguiding the masses.

Jesus (عليه السلام) said: "A beneficial tree is known by its fruits, and a bad tree is known by its thorns"

Therefore, how can anyone sensible call a thorny tree a good tree? I for one can not. I am not an ignorant person or a villager that I would feel blackmailed when his mullas call me "illegitimate of birth". Nope that won't work either with any of us my brother.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You must go and ask alims about taqqiyah and other facts and why was there need of taqqiyah and what was hidden during taqqiyah? Get Answers to these questions!. 
I don't think I need to state any more hadiths.
I quoted Haamza Bin Abdul Aziz who was found of taqleed and is an usooli scholor who wrote Ali un wali ullah in tashahud 900+ yers ago.
It was practised long before advent of your so called mullas.

yeah I previously mentioned that I am an akhbari Shia not usooli and I believe taqleed is haram but we are not debating on taqleed or akhbari - usooli issue since its minor ikhtelaaf and taqleed isn't a part of usool e deen or 10 furu e deen. therefore it isn't a big problem and we should'nt dis- unite.

I ask scholors about masail but I consult more than one which I believe is better and I consult both usoolis akhbaris and ask them about rulings in light of hadiths. 
Just like I metioned names, I think they are alim e deen and small ikhtelaaf shouldn't dis-unite us.
As for wilayat e faqih, its already disputed by usoolis themselves so no need to dis-cuss it here.
 

19 hours ago, Darth Vader said:

Sadly, the list of faults with my brother Naqvi do not end there.

He goes on to defy all aalims who do have not agreed with him, not just common people. Is he in taqleed of any of the marajiy he says allow him his new tashahhud? No. None of his fellow are neither. They do not believe in taqleed. And what is worse than that, they offer no alternative solution to the system of learning and following from scholars. Misguiding the masses.

You continue to say that while you defy all the alim e deen I present. So you have no right to say that to me.
here are alim e deen who say you should recite Ali un wali ullah absed on hadiths:

Ayatullah Syed Ahmed mustanbit
Ayatullah Syed Muhamamd shirazi (2001 Qom Iran Dead)
Ayatullah Syed Muhamamd Ali Tabatabai (2017)
Ayatullah Syed Sadiq Shirazi
Ayatullah Syed Mazher Shirazi
Ayatullah Sheikh Sanad
Ayatullah Taqi Behjat (He was asked and he allowed to recite)
Ayatullah Mubashir Kashani
Ayatullah Yasoob ud deen Rustagar
Ayatullah Sheikh Murtaza Al-e-Yaseen
Ayatullah Syed Muhamamd Ali Shirazi
Ayatullah Muhammad Ali garami
Ayatullah Syed Abbas Madrisi
Ayatullah Sheikh Muhammad Yaqoobi Al Najafi
Ayatullah SHeikh Muhamamd Fazil
and list goes on I can quote 40+ alims

You said its innovation there fore youd eny what all these ulima say and callt hem innovators.
Sadly you are also against them so you have no right to claim I don't follow ulima or I am making a new deen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did you read the other thread that is older? I posted the link in this very thread. There are people who lead prayers who are pressured, otherwise they will lose their position in the community and not be able to influence Islam where they live.

On 9/24/2016 at 2:01 PM, Jawid Akbari said:

As a student of religion and jurisprudence, I request all my Pakistani and Indian brothers to read carefully the Resalahs (Manuals of Islamic Laws) authored by religious authorities such as Grand Ayatollah Khamenei and Grand Ayatollah Sistani. None of the prominent religious authorities has ever allowed the recitation of the third testimony in Tashahhud. Grand Ayatollah Sistani, for example, says, "You must not recite third testimony (Ashhadu anna alian waliullah) in prayers, as an obligatory precaution. You should perform your Tashahhud in the same way as prescribed by a qualified Mujtahid in his book of Islamic Laws." [See Q & A on www.Sistani.org]

Read late Imam Khomeini's book of Islamic Laws (Resalah) and you will find nothing as to indicate that reciting the third testimony in Tashahhud is permissible. It should be noted that we do not have the right to add anything to the prayers despite that thing being very much true or even a basic part of our religious beliefs. The shape and form prayers should remain intact and must not be tampered with. If someone knowingly adds to the prayer what is not a part of the prayer, his prayer becomes void.

Unfortunately, the contention and debate concerning the third testimony has caused disunity among Shia communities in Pakistan and India with some laymen trying to somehow influence Shia clerics by putting pressure on them to recite the third testimony in prayers. Some have given in to the pressure. 

Why aren't other Shiites around the world disputing over the third testimony? That is simply because they are acting upon the verdicts of prominent religious authorities.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/29/2019 at 10:42 AM, Syed Ali Mehdi Shah Naqvi said:

Ayatullah Taqi Behjat (He was asked and he allowed to recite)

he said that saying it is not obligatory but permissible 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Ashvazdanghe said:

he said that saying it is not obligatory but permissible 

I am debating only with people who call it innovation.
 

On 9/24/2016 at 2:01 PM, Jawid Akbari said:

Unfortunately, the contention and debate concerning the third testimony has caused disunity among Shia communities in Pakistan and India with some laymen trying to somehow influence Shia clerics by putting pressure on them to recite the third testimony in prayers. Some have given in to the pressure. 

it has caused disunity I agree but thhey are being forced to recite shahadat e salisa? this is I swear by Allah, an absolute lie. Followers of jawabd naqvi came to our masjlid near Thokar Niaz Baig to say do taqleed and why you are reciting Ali un wali ullah in tashahud.
From Bhatti masjid,Molvi who recited Ali un wali ullah was expelled. and they calimed that namaz is batil.

no one is masjid is allowed to recite yet you say we are forcing them? aren't people funding them from some place to leave Ali un wali ullah?
The molvi who taught me how to read Qur'an was getting wazeefa ffrom Iran for stopping Ali un wali ullah in namaz but fortunately he never did so.

All we can do is challenge these people, to come forward and prove namaz is batil. This hate speech of your molvis have caused dis unity.
Previous marjas like Taqi behejet or Khomenei sahib never even issued such fatwas not even Agha Khoi ! Its hate speech of todays ayatullahs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Problem with the people is, they follow personalities.

In Qur'an 4:59, in case of dispute, paying all due respect to all marjas and muhadiths,  if you are a momin and believe in akhrat and must refer to Allah Rasool (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) and ulil Amr (Tafseer e Qummi)  

but in case of dispute, we continue to refer to common people which is reason why we are dis united and facing serious issues.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would like to end this discussion with a widely accepted hadith, when Allah took oath from Prophets and even all the souls,
They testified to 3 testimonies, the very first tashahud, had three testimonies.

The one who has forgotten about this oath, we can only remind him, 
he, in front of Allah promsied to testify to three testimonies, and today he calls it an innovation.
ITs totally between him and Allah.

Allah huma swalle ala Muhammad wa ale Muhammad (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)

Salam un aliakum Ya Ali (عليه السلام) Madad

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Syed Ali Mehdi Shah Naqvi said:

Problem with the people is, they follow personalities.

In Qur'an 4:59, in case of dispute, paying all due respect to all marjas and muhadiths,  if you are a momin and believe in akhrat and must refer to Allah Rasool (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) and ulil Amr (Tafseer e Qummi)  

but in case of dispute, we continue to refer to common people which is reason why we are dis united and facing serious issues.

Haha look at the disingenuous attempt here. The Qur'an says in event of a dispute, refer back to Allah and his messenger.

Pathetic attempt. At least don’t twist the book of Allah to how you want it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, 786:) said:

Haha look at the disingenuous attempt here. The Qur'an says in event of a dispute, refer back to Allah and his messenger.

Pathetic attempt. At least don’t twist the book of Allah to how you want it.

Refer to Tafseer e Qummi for this. if you want a scan of Imam jaffer e sadiqs hadith, I will send.

Ok lets suppose its Refer back to Allah and Messenger

then you should refer to Allah and messenger in dispute not personality of your choice.

Imam Sadiq (عليه السلام) has said about this verse that refer back to Allah and Messenger and ulil Amr. so pathetic is your attempt to deny Imam's hadith(tafseer)!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Syed Ali Mehdi Shah Naqvi said:

Refer to Tafseer e Qummi for this. if you want a scan of Imam jaffer e sadiqs hadith, I will send.

Ok lets suppose its Refer back to Allah and Messenger

then you should refer to Allah and messenger in dispute not personality of your choice.

Imam Sadiq (عليه السلام) has said about this verse that refer back to Allah and Messenger and ulil Amr. so pathetic is your attempt to deny Imam's hadith(tafseer)!

Hadith can be tampered. However the Qur'an cannot be. Also, it’s rubbish to point to a Hadith which tries to overwrite (correct) the Qur'an.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A discussion on the subject can be found at the following link.

https://www.shiachat.com/forum/topic/235060388-third-testimony-shahadat-e-salisa/

No Shia denies the Wialayat of Imams after the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم). from his progeny.

The logical conclusion can be seen where the evidence of saying third testimony during prayer in tashud  is missing from authentic  hadith from Shia Kutub arbaa (4 Shia books).

wasalam

Edited by Muslim2010

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Muslim2010 said:

A discussion on the subject can be found at the following link.

https://www.shiachat.com/forum/topic/235060388-third-testimony-shahadat-e-salisa/

No Shia denies the Wialayat of Imams after the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم). from his progeny.

The logical conclusion can be seen where the evidence of saying third testimony during prayer in tashud  is missing from authentic  hadith from Shia Kutub arbaa (4 Shia books).

wasalam

Praying as taught by the Imams is "Aliyyun Wali Allah" in action. Disobeying them even for what may look good is denying Aliyuun Wali Allah. They have further divided the deen of Ali, fought with other Shia over it. Oh well.

A sign of end times. "You (the Shia) will be milled like grains of wheat, and the chaff will separate from the flour".

Edited by Darth Vader

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, 786:) said:

Hadith can be tampered. However the Qur'an cannot be. Also, it’s rubbish to point to a Hadith which tries to overwrite (correct) the Qur'an.

I have quoted Qur'an man.

Ok. What is Tafseer e Qummi?

Isn't it having Qur'an written within it?

And there are alot of such hadiths so take them as something only Imams know. We can't claim anything.

 

Plus why you feel ao offended oupon hearing the word "ulil amr"?

Was your inner wahabi hurt that bad?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Muslim2010 said:

A discussion on the subject can be found at the following link.

https://www.shiachat.com/forum/topic/235060388-third-testimony-shahadat-e-salisa/

No Shia denies the Wialayat of Imams after the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم). from his progeny.

The logical conclusion can be seen where the evidence of saying third testimony during prayer in tashud  is missing from authentic  hadith from Shia Kutub arbaa (4 Shia books).

wasalam

1: Adhan (some wahabis called 3rd teatimony not a part or innovation) I proved from Kutab e Arba.

2: I quoted hadith regarding tashahud from Kutab e Arba. I ask you the questions.

Bakar Bin Habeeb says I asked Imam about tashahud he said recite what seems best. If it was fixed , people would have been perished/killed.

1: When Imam say, tashahud isn't fixed and recite what seems best, isn't it prime duty to show the world what shii religion is based on? (Wilayah)

2: Why Imam never said:

Recite what we have told you and don't excede the limit? Rather Imam said recite what YOU THINK IS ehsan.

3: If third testimony is innovation of past few years, then why Imam said if it was fixed, people would have been killed? Since all Sunnis recited 2 testimonies in tashahud? (This fact point to taqqiyah) that something was hidden and if it was said people would have been killed?

Rest I will come back and prove it from kutab e Arba.

Also only kutab e arba arent authentic.

This claim reminds me off retarded salafis who say Bukhari Muslim like those are only books there.

All books are equally authentic and have sahih and fabrications as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, Syed Ali Mehdi Shah Naqvi said:

I have quoted Qur'an man.

Ok. What is Tafseer e Qummi?

Isn't it having Qur'an written within it?

And there are alot of such hadiths so take them as something only Imams know. We can't claim anything.

Plus why you feel ao offended oupon hearing the word "ulil amr"?

Was your inner wahabi hurt that bad?

No you didn’t hurt my inner wahhabi. I don’t subscribe to any sect as sects lead to bias. All sects have their good and bad.  

Anyways, all I pointed out was that you were misleading by incorrectly stating the Qur'an. The Qur'an is not something we add and subtract from to fit our agenda and narratives. 

Here is the full ayah:

O you who have believed, obey Allah and obey the Messenger and those in authority among you. And if you disagree over anything, refer it to Allah and the Messenger, if you should believe in Allah and the Last Day. That is the best [way] and best in result.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

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

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

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

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

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

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...