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

Reality of Cursing the Sahaba

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

  • Advanced Member

Brother, the posts written are all my own when i discussed this with another Sunni brother. The copy and pastes are mainly traditions graded Authentic and reliable and there is no other way of bringing this information to your attention without doing so. My duty here my dear brother is to bring you evidence, and whether you read it or engage with is a matter between yourself and the Almighty.

Refer to this on Ghadeer, where you will find it was nothing to do with an incident with Khalid, and a slave girl during an expedition in Yemen: https://whoaretheshia.com/ghadeer-response/

Edited by Intellectual Resistance
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 82
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Allahumma al'an qatalata Amiril Mo'mineen (asws) Allahumma al'an Muawiya bin Abi Sufyan (L).  If this make me incompatible with ummah, I am proud on not being a part of such ummah.

1) Mainstream Muslims will find cursing of any personality, even someone like Abu Lahab (who is cursed by name in the Qur'an) and Abu Jahal, as an ugly expression of religion. Uh, which mainstrea

Anyone ever bother to ask why we curse whoever we curse? Someone draws a cartoon of the Prophet (saw) and the entire Ummah holds protests, curses the people who did it, burns buses in their own c

  • Moderators
15 minutes ago, Cyrax said:

I don't believe Fatima al-Zahra عليها السلام was killed, rather she died a natural death.

18 yr old don't just die one day.

16 minutes ago, Cyrax said:

I also believe she died approving of Abu Bakr, that's why sources say

I don't know which sources you are talking about. Can you quote them? Both Shia and Sunni books say that she died angry with Abu Bakr. Why did Imam Ali Bury her at night and Abu bakr and Omar were not allowed to be part of her funeral?

5 minutes ago, Cyrax said:

Fadak was oppression against Fatima عليها السلام, it would've also been oppression against Ayesha and Hafsa and the other wives of the Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم because they too would've gotten a share.

Fatima(as) wasn't his wife. She was the Prophets(as) only surviving child. Surely you are aware that there are different inheritance rules for wives and children? 

9 minutes ago, Cyrax said:

I don't think Ghadeer has ANYTHING to do with Imamah 

Of course,the prophet (saw) just randomly decided to stop the pilgrims  and stand there in front of them with Ali besides him just for a random chit chat.No significance whatsoever. 

Your reasonings and logic..... I am at a loss for words. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Cyrax said:

As far as this post is concerned, I generally have a no-discussion policy with people who don't want to be part of the Muslim Ummah while claiming to be Muslim

Is this the love of Muawiya speaking? What prevent you to identify him as a leader of rebellious group who called the Muslims to hell fire? While there are sahih ahadith in your books mentioning the same thing.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
11 minutes ago, Intellectual Resistance said:

A prime example as to why threads like this should be minotired. It's a highly sensitive issue and being bombarded with Lay people - like myself, leaving a Sunni brother with one long lasting perception as to who we are.

Wake up, those with insight and authority.

My interpretation of Shi'asim comes from people like Al-Mufid and Kamal al-Haydari; to me those are real Shi'is.  The reality is, I am on here every day and I know exactly how each user was going to respond.  I try to stay away from posting on here because I literally can waste hours (like I have been doing.)

8 minutes ago, Salsabeel said:

If they are those:

1. Who conceal the clear proof & guidance.

2. Mix up truth with falsehood.

3 Liars (specifically before the Ahlul Bayt as verse 3:61 mentions them as Sadiqeen)

Then curse of Allah is already on them whether I curse them or not. I am personally not the pure soul to invoke the curse of Allah on anyone of them.

Alhamdulilah, from this I got that Abu Bakr, Omar, Uthman, Hafsa and Ayesh cannot be cursed, and you don't curse them.  Alhamdulilah we've reach this conclusion.

7 minutes ago, Intellectual Resistance said:

I don't believe there is any good evidence she was physically attacked by a group of men either. This is not from the Aqa'id issues of the Sheeah. However, i must say there is an authentic chain going up to the slave of the Caliph, Umar ibn al-Khattab as per Sunni Hadith sciences whereby it is clear Umar made a threat. There are many other chains and corroborating witnesses.  In my view, even making a threat alone on the house of the daughter of the Messenger of Allah is worthy of condemnation, wouldn't you agree? Are you aware why the second Caliph went to the door of Fatima and made that threat? It was because Ali ibn Abi Talib , the Banu Hashim and a number of their companions rejected the authority of the first Caliph, Abu Bakr.

Umar said: “‘Ali Ibn Abi Talib, Zubair Ibn Awwam and those who were with them separated from us (and gathered) in the house of Fatimah, daughter of the messenger of Allah.”

References:  [1] Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v1, p55 [2] Sirah al-Nabawiyyah, by Ibn Hisham, v4, p309 [3] History of Tabari (Arabic), v1, p1822 [4] History of Tabari, English version, v9, p192

“And no doubt after the death of the Prophet (ﷺ) we were informed that the Ansar disagreed with us and gathered in the shed of Bani Sa`da. `Ali and Zubair and whoever was with them, opposed us, while the emigrants gathered with Abu Bakr.

References: [1] Sahih Bukhari :Book 86 [Kitab Al Hudud] Chapter 31.

“Narrated Muhammad bin Bashir from Ubaidllah bin Umar from Zaid bin Aslam that his father Aslam said: ‘When the homage (baya) went to Abu Bakr after the Messenger of Allah, Ali and Zubair were entering into the house of Fatima to consult her and revise their issue, so when Umar came to know about that, he went to Fatima and said : ‘Oh daughter of Messenger of Allah, no one is dearest to us more than your father and no one dearest to us after your father than you, I swear by Allah, if these people gathered in your house then nothing will prevent me from giving order to burn the house and those who are inside.’

References: [1] Musnaf of Imam Ibn Abi Shaybah, Volume 7 page 432 Tradition 37045. [Saheeh Chain]

 

Sigh... The only report that indicated that there was a threat comes from ibn Abi Shayba, a disputed individual with no corroborating evidence whatsoever.  In fact, it contradicts what we know of these events from other sources.  I agree that the chain doesn't have a problem with, but when its a singular report that contradicts more authentic reports, it becomes Shadh.  I replied to this despite it being a copy and paste for the record.

1 minute ago, Intellectual Resistance said:

I am sure in your current state of mind, if you heard Abu Bakr was named Caliph, you would have rejoiced. You would have heard - or believed - in the narrations whereby the Pophet (saw) regarded him the best of the Ummah, extolled is merits, and you would have felt at the time no-one could be better than he to lead. So why my dear brother ,do we find Ali ibn Abi Talib opposing Abu Bakr for many, many months until the death of Fatima binte Muhammed?

Copy and paste, this just distracts from the post.  Bring everything up point by point or else we can't have a discussion.  This is a discussion board, not a place where we exchange copy and pastes.

Just now, Salsabeel said:

I don't care what turns them off or on. There is always no shame in telling the truth and what else can be the truth if not the words of God and Ahlul Bayt (asws)?

This is not the attitude of the Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم or the Ahl al Bayt عليهم السلام, or the Sahaba.  From our perspective, you've pretty much refuted yourself.

Just now, Intellectual Resistance said:

Brother, the posts written are all my own when i discussed this with another Sunni brother. The copy and pastes are mainly traditions graded Authentic and reliable and there is no other way of bringing this information to your attention without doing so. My duty here my dear brother is to bring you evidence, and whether you read it or engage with is a matter between yourself and the Almighty.

 

I already know all this information بارك الله فيك, I've been involved in Sunni/Shi'a debates since at least 2006.  You should bring up everything point by point instead of copying and pasting your conclusions.  How is that a discussion?

Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Cyrax said:

Alhamdulilah, from this I got that Abu Bakr, Omar, Uthman, Hafsa and Ayesh cannot be cursed,

I do recognize Abu Bakr & co as a liar. He is an identified Liar, who has refused the claim of Siddiqah, usurped the right of a Sadiq.

They indeed have concealed the truth.

Edited by Salsabeel
Spelling
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
3 minutes ago, starlight said:

18 yr old don't just die one day.

They actually do all the time, even in our times and especially in 7th century Arabia.  All of the Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم's children (except for Fatimah عليها السلام) died before he did.  In fact, both of his sons died WAY before 18 years old.

Quote

I don't know which sources you are talking about. Can you quote them? Both Shia and Sunni books say that she died angry with Abu Bakr. Why did Imam Ali Bury her at night and Abu bakr and Omar were not allowed to be part of her funeral?

“When Fatima became ill, Abu Bakr came to her and asked for permission to enter. So Ali said, ‘O Fatima, this is Abu Bakr asking for permission to enter.’ She answerd, ‘Do you want me to give him permission?’ He said, ‘Yes.’ So she allowed him (to enter), and he came in seeking her pleasure, so he told her: ‘By Allah, I only left my home and property and my family seeking the pleasure of Allah and His Messenger and you, O Ahlel Bayt.’ So he talked to her until she was pleased with him.” (Sunan Al-Bayhaqi)

Quote

Fatima(as) wasn't his wife. She was the Prophets(as) only surviving child. Surely you are aware that there are different inheritance rules for wives and children? 

Yes, of course there are different rules; but they STILL would've inherited from it, so I'm not sure what exactly was your point here.

Quote

Of course,the prophet (saw) just randomly decided to stop the pilgrims  and stand there in front of them with Ali besides him just for a random chit chat.No significance whatsoever. 

He stopped them because they were complaining about Imam Ali عليه السلام.  If this decleration was some important, he would've declared at the Farewell Pilgrimage where most Muslims would've heard it, not at a random watering hole where only a small minority would've remained.

Quote

Your reasonings and logic..... I am at a loss for words. 

I've found that when someone resorts to insults, he has already lost the debate.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
2 minutes ago, Salsabeel said:

I do recognize Abu Bakr & co as a liar. He is an identified Liar, who has refused the claim Siddiqah, ururped the right of a Sadiq.

They indeed have concealed the truth.

I hate to upset you, but I, and pretty much everyone who isn't a Shi'i agree with Abu Bakr here.  You are going to have to go a LONG way to prove he was in the wrong and this wrong makes him a someone you can justify cursing.  However, you can do it all you want; but understand why such an attitude is not going to get you very far in convincing people of your "truth"

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Cyrax said:

You are going to have to go a LONG way to prove he was in the wrong and this wrong makes him a someone you can justify cursing

I dont really need a long course brother. A simple question can solve the problem of identifying him as a liar.

Once identified, I don't really even need to curse him at all. 

So let me know who was on truth in the matter related to fadak? Abu Bakr or Syeda Fatima (s.a)?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
16 minutes ago, Cyrax said:

Sigh... The only report that indicated that there was a threat comes from ibn Abi Shayba, a disputed individual with no corroborating evidence whatsoever.  In fact, it contradicts what we know of these events from other sources.  I agree that the chain doesn't have a problem with, but when its a singular report that contradicts more authentic reports, it becomes Shadh.  I replied to this despite it being a copy and paste for the record.

1.  Where are the other reports which contradict it? Abi Shayba is hardly a disputed individual, being one of your major Hadith compilers. The chain is authentic, and of serious weight.

2. It is not Shadh, there are many other chains from other sources all agreeing on the fact at least a threat was made independent of this source.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
14 minutes ago, Salsabeel said:

I dont really need a long course brother. A simple question can solve the problem of identifying him as a liar.

Once identified, I don't really even need to curse him at all. 

So let me know who was on truth in the matter related to fadak? Abu Bakr or Syeda Fatima (s.a)?

Abu Bakr without a doubt.  Ali عليه السلام confirmed it by not taking back Fadak, and Fatima عليه السلام confirmed it by dying while being pleased with Abu Bakr.

 

12 minutes ago, Intellectual Resistance said:

1.  Where are the other reports which contradict it? Abi Shayba is hardly a disputed individual, being one of your major Hadith compilers. The chain is authentic, and of serious weight.

2. It is not Shadh, there are many other chains from other sources all agreeing on the fact at least a threat was made independent of this source.

 

1. I'll be the first to admit when I am wrong, I remember that Abu Bakr bin Abi Shayba was disputed but I am no longer sure why I thought that.  I think he may have had a brother that was disputed, but I can't find him.

2. Where are the other reports?  Its Shadh because it contradicts reports that Ali عليه السلام pledged allegiance twice to Abu Bakr.

3. If Omar did threaten Ali عليه السلام, does that justify Ali عليه السلام pledging allegiance to him, Omar and Uthman?  Are you seriously trying to tell me that Ali عليه السلام gave up the Imamah (a divine appointment) because he was scared of Omar? *edit*  This is the same Omar that we are told was a giant coward while Ali عليه السلام was the bravest warrior of all-time; so much so that even the Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم relied on him in battle.  How can you possibly expect me to believe that this coward suddenly got brave and thought that he can attack Ali عليه السلام's home without suffering repercussions?

At the end of the day, this isn't a thread about whether you can or can't curse whoever you want; rather it is to show how your guys' attitude come off to non-12ers (including Zaidis and Ismailis).  Zaidis have the same problem (at least some of them) with the Sahaba as the 12ers, but why don't we see them on the minbars cursing?  I think Yazeed and Marwan were evil, do you see me cursing them?  It is not befitting of a believer to behave this way, no matter how many Qur'anic verses you take out of context

Edited by Cyrax
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Cyrax said:

Abu Bakr without a doubt. 

This is why it is necessary for us to curse him. When people try to declare certified truthful one (as per 3:61) as liar, it becomes obligatory on us to curse the actual liar.

Rijs has been kept away from Syeda Fatima (s.a) but not from Abu Bakr. Syeda (s.a) is pure of making false claims but not the Abu Bakr.

Therefore Abu Bakr lied to her when he invented a false hadith before her. Abu Bakr was a liar when he refused her claim.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Moderators
Quote

“When Fatima became ill, Abu Bakr came to her and asked for permission to enter. So Ali said, ‘O Fatima, this is Abu Bakr asking for permission to enter.’ She answerd, ‘Do you want me to give him permission?’ He said, ‘Yes.’ So she allowed him (to enter), and he came in seeking her pleasure, so he told her: ‘By Allah, I only left my home and property and my family seeking the pleasure of Allah and His Messenger and you, O Ahlel Bayt.’ So he talked to her until she was pleased with him.” (Sunan Al-Bayhaqi)

 

Who Shi'a really cares about your sources? In our source no such a thing happened.

Edited by Abu Nur
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
42 minutes ago, Salsabeel said:

This is why it is necessary for us to curse him. When people try to declare certified truthful one (as per 3:61) as liar, it becomes obligatory on us to curse the actual liar.

Rijs has been kept away from Syeda Fatima (s.a) but not from Abu Bakr. Syeda (s.a) is pure of making false claims but not the Abu Bakr.

Therefore Abu Bakr lied to her when he invented a false hadith before her. Abu Bakr was a liar when he refused her claim.

 

The hadeeth is authentic according to both Sunnis and some Shi'as.  The Shi'as who authenticated the hadeeth did so with the thought in the back of their mind that Fadak was a gift.  I am going to agree with my scholars and the Shi'a scholars who authenticate the hadeeth and absolve him of any lying.  Context of the hadeeth also makes it pretty obvious that Fatima عليه السلام  didn't disagree with the hadeeth either.

God wants to remove Rijs O, Ahl al Bayt, has nothing to do with infallibility, I'm not sure how you can reach that conclusion even if you take the verse out of context.

3 minutes ago, Abu Nur said:

Who Shi'a really cares about your sources? In our source no such a thing happened.

I think you may have missed the discussion, بارك الله فيك, he was making the claim that this didn't exist in our sources.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Moderators
Quote

I think you may have missed the discussion, بارك الله فيك, he was making the claim that this didn't exist in our sources.

 

Fair enough. In our sources and belief we have very validity to curse those who we believe are oppressors of Ahlulbait (as) and enemy of Allah سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
2 minutes ago, Abu Nur said:

Fair enough. In our sources and belief we have very validity to curse those who we believe are oppressors of Ahlulbait (as) and enemy of Allah سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى.

yes my problem with this these days, is the people who are staunch supporters of this don't see that it applies to the present.. as if there are no more oppressors of Ahul beyt. 
 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Moderators
5 minutes ago, abuhaydar said:

yes my problem with this these days, is the people who are staunch supporters of this don't see that it applies to the present.. as if there are no more oppressors of Ahul beyt. 
 

It applies in every era.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

We will continue to curse the enemies of ahlul bayt (as) as our imams (as) have instructed us to do as this is a expression of bara'ah which is a fundamental part of our faith. You can disagree but we are not going to compromise our beliefs to appease you. Its a tired pointless discussion that gets nowhere. The simplest answer is from the Quran itself.

لَكُمْ دِينُكُمْ وَلِيَ دِينِ - 109:6
For you is your religion, and for me is my religion.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
2 hours ago, Cyrax said:

I'll be the first to admit when I am wrong, I remember that Abu Bakr bin Abi Shayba was disputed but I am no longer sure why I thought that.  I think he may have had a brother that was disputed, but I can't find him.

There isn't even a question about Abu Bakr b. Abi Shayba and the tradition in his Musannaf. I will spare you a long post i was going to write because of your honesty, but had you not corrected this , it would have been an enormous error. You are a human being, and you can misspeak. I will give you the benefit of the doubt, as tempting as it is to delve further into this. But what you were trying to say was akin to me question Ahmad b. Hanbal when citing a Hadith from his book.  I want a sincere conversation without ad hominem attacks and half-baked slanders, so i'll let this pass. 

As for your reply, i will address it at another time, inshAllah. 

Edited by Intellectual Resistance
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Development Team
Quote

...But she was the wife of Prophet (sawa). 

Being a wife of Prophet doesn't earn you a free pass. Read Surah Tahreem (66): Verse 10. 

Quote

... Imam Ali (a.s.) escorted her respectfully. 

It was Imam's (a.s.) hikmat and not necessarily respect. 

Otherwise, we have to stop cursing Ibn Muljim (la) because Imam Ali (a.s.) asked to untie his hands and gave him sherbet.

Similarly, not cursing Haseen ibn Nameer (Qatil of Janabe Ali Akbar (a.s.)) because Imam Sajjad (a.s.) gave him food and water. 

Will do? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

:salam:

1) Mainstream Muslims will find cursing of any personality, even someone like Abu Lahab (who is cursed by name in the Qur'an) and Abu Jahal, as an ugly expression of religion.

Uh, which mainstream Muslims are you referring to, exactly? I know tons of Sunnis who also hate Abu Lahab because, as you rightly pointed out, the Qur'an itself curses him - and in his case, he is literally the only individual the Qur'an has cursed by name. Others have been referenced and alluded to indirectly, or general terms may have been used but if you look at the tafsir and the context of revelation, you may find the Qur'an is referencing specific individuals. He, however, has the distinct (dis)honour of actually being named. So, if you think even cursing Abu Lahab and asking God to remove His Mercy from him is an 'ugly expression of religion', then you're basically arguing that the Qur'an is an ugly expression of religion. Need I say anymore with regard to that line of thinking?

As for your second point, I don't really see how that's really a point about the permissibility of la'n. I suppose it allows us to discuss the socioeconomic conditions surrounding the matter but I think given your rather erroneous position above, one that is contradicting the Qur'an itself, I believe that's a much more important issue to discuss.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Basic Members

I think if Ahly Bait stand for the prophet house hold. Then this cursing is unnecessary & over the board. And can only grow hate & bitterness. Because our prophet didn't curse or tell anyone to use a slander word against any of his companions or wives..... سلام كول من رب الرحيم if God words is peace why should we chose to curse others.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Basic Members
37 minutes ago, Abdulai said:

I think if Ahly Bait stand for the prophet house hold. Then this cursing is unnecessary & over the board. And can only grow hate & bitterness. Because our prophet didn't curse or tell anyone to use a slander word against any of his companions or wives..... سلام كول من رب الرحيم if God words is peace why should we chose to curse others.

Sorry i didn't quote the verse well سلام قولا من رب رحيم

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

@Cyrax

Salaam.

12 hours ago, Cyrax said:

 

1) Mainstream Muslims will find cursing of any personality, even someone like Abu Lahab (who is cursed by name in the Qur'an) and Abu Jahal, as an ugly expression of religion.  Could you imagine a mainstream Muslim dedicating lectures, Jum'ah khutbahs or other gatherings just to call them "worse than dogs and pigs?"    

1) surely you are not saying the Quran uses an ugly form of expression. That would mean the Prophet and Allah use an ugly expression. Please re-phrase.

12 hours ago, Cyrax said:

السلام عليكم ورحمة الله وبركاته

Ramadan Mubarak to all the brothers and sisters here; I hope everyone is having a blessed month, إن شاء الله.

I have, time and time again, thought about posting this topic (among others) on this forum, but I generally tend to reconsider because of how defensive I perceive some brothers on here.  I want this discussion إن شاء الله to be a means to at least attempting to understanding each other.  Please don't take this as attack and please (and I am looking at certain members here :grin:) don't flood my post with cutting-and-pasting.

Having said that, I wanted to point out two things that all of brothers and sisters here that never seem to take into consideration regarding cursing the Sahaba and other mainstream Islamic personalities:

1) Mainstream Muslims will find cursing of any personality, even someone like Abu Lahab (who is cursed by name in the Qur'an) and Abu Jahal, as an ugly expression of religion.  Could you imagine a mainstream Muslim dedicating lectures, Jum'ah khutbahs or other gatherings just to call them "worse than dogs and pigs?"   

2) The Shi'as who practice the most taqiyya regarding this topic are generally people who live in the safest regions when it comes to expressing their opinion towards the Sahaba.  Meaning, you'll find in politically torn regions that most outspoken cursers of the Sahaba, while in areas where a violent response is impossible, you'll find the most "unity" leaning clerics.

2) we don't curse sahaba. We curse the enemies of the Prophet (saw) and his AhlulBayt regardless of who they were.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Moderators
11 hours ago, Cyrax said:

I've found that when someone resorts to insults, he has already lost the debate.

Prophet's sons who died were either neonates or infants. You are comparing neonatal mortality with death of a healthy young adult? 

About Abu bakr and fatima (as) read what the Sahih bukari says.

Think whatever you want but I really find it a waste of time to debate with someone who is so poorly versed in history. 

Have a nice rest of Ramadan.

Wasalam. 

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

The hadeeth is authentic according to both Sunnis and some Shi'as. 

Surah Al-Baqara, Verse 42:
وَلَا تَلْبِسُوا الْحَقَّ بِالْبَاطِلِ وَتَكْتُمُوا الْحَقَّ وَأَنتُمْ تَعْلَمُونَ

And do not mix up the truth with the falsehood, nor hide the truth while you know (it).
(English - Shakir)

Your comments shows that you're totally unaware of what your own sahih books are mentioning. 

You have selected Abu Bakr as truthful over the one who has been certified as truthfull by Allah (s.w.t) as per verse 3:61 and then has commanded you to "be with the sadiqeen". 

Surah At-Taubah, Verse 119:
يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا اتَّقُوا اللَّهَ وَكُونُوا مَعَ الصَّادِقِينَ

O you who believe! be careful of (your duty to) Allah and be with the true ones.
(English - Shakir)

You have selected the person who will bite his hands on the day of judgement and will say this for himself & for his close friend:

Surah Al-Furqan, Verse 27:
وَيَوْمَ يَعَضُّ الظَّالِمُ عَلَىٰ يَدَيْهِ يَقُولُ يَا لَيْتَنِي اتَّخَذْتُ مَعَ الرَّسُولِ سَبِيلًا

And the day when the unjust one shall bite his hands saying: O! would that I had taken a way with the Apostle
(English - Shakir)

Surah Al-Furqan, Verse 28:
يَا وَيْلَتَىٰ لَيْتَنِي لَمْ أَتَّخِذْ فُلَانًا خَلِيلًا

O woe is me! would that I had not taken such a one for a friend!
(English - Shakir)

And after your this selection, I have no way left to help you out in this matter. Therefore agree to disagree with me & wait for we are waiting too.

قُلِ انتَظِرُواْ إِنَّا مُنتَظِرُونَ

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Basic Members

I can see you have created another part of Muslims as mainstream Muslims who takes soft stance in Qur'anic expression about Abu Lahb & Abu Jahl, but i doubt there is any Muslim who takes light stance on the two as per Qur'an clearly described them. Their cursing has been justified in the Qur'an with the witnessed of our beloved Rasoolullah (s.a.w). Do you want to tell me that Allah & our prophet (s.a.w) forgot or deliberately skipped mentioning some of the transgressors or enemies names from Qur'an? Like every Muslim read Surat al Massad, there could be a surah that curses Abu Bakir & Aisha if they were really enemies of Islam & prophet (s.a.w) house hold. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Moderators
Quote

Do you want to tell me that Allah & our prophet (s.a.w) forgot or deliberately skipped mentioning some of the transgressors or enemies names from Qur'an? 

Be careful, because these kind of mentality could create false stories about what Shi'as believe. 

Edited by Abu Nur
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
17 hours ago, Cyrax said:

وعليكم السلام ورحمة الله وبركاته

Akhi, بارك الله فيكم, would you consider saying that someone is "worse than dogs and pigs" to be a Sabb or La'nah?

Also, I'm not sure why you would think asking Allah to remove his mercy from a known Muslim to be any better than "sabb?"  Both are equally vulgar in my estimation.

Finally, this post isn't here to discuss why and who Shi'a "disassociate from"; rather, this post is to show how Shi'as who promote these practices are viewed by the rest of the Ummah.

It's better and completely justified and encouraged because of the clear evidences in the Quran and hadith that I showed you, again they are:

Verse of Mubahilla 3:61:

"Then whoever argues with you about it after (this knowledge has come to you - say, "Come, let us call our sons and your sons, our women and your women, ourselves and yourselves, then supplicate earnestly (together) and invoke the Lanaat of Allah upon the liars (among us)"

Read any tafsir about this verse from any school and there is only one incident that is mentioned, Allah SWT is COMMANDING the Prophet S.A.W to perform this action. And then you have the ayat of Ayat 11:18 "Lanaat of Allah be on the Zalimoon", that means every single muslim including the Prophet S.A.W is doing "lanaat" whenever he/she recited this verse. Are they all being vulgar then? If you dispute this then basically you have a problem with the Quran and should argue with what is written in there. Allah is telling Prophet S.A.W to do lanaat, everybody's else's opinion on the matter doesn't matter then whether it's "vulgar in their estimation"

Lanaat is a dua, plain and simple. It is showing the ultimate act of disassociation from the enemies of Allah SWT albeit in a respectful manner BECAUSE basically it's upto Allah SWT to accept that dua or not. If the person truly is deserving of that lanaat then he will get punished and if the person is not deserving of that lanaat then it won't happen, so why are you worried?  If the personalities you care about so much are not deserving of that lanaat then Allah SWT will not shower it on them :grin:

As for calling someone "worse than dogs and pigs", that would fall under insulting language and sabb but it also depends in what context did you hear that and what was said exactly, I would like to know.

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

:bismillah:

Surah Al-Baqara, Verse 159:
إِنَّ الَّذِينَ يَكْتُمُونَ مَا أَنزَلْنَا مِنَ الْبَيِّنَاتِ وَالْهُدَىٰ مِن بَعْدِ مَا بَيَّنَّاهُ لِلنَّاسِ فِي الْكِتَابِ أُولَٰئِكَ يَلْعَنُهُمُ اللَّهُ وَيَلْعَنُهُمُ اللَّاعِنُونَ

Surely those who conceal the clear proofs and the guidance that We revealed after We made it clear in the Book for men, these it is whom Allah shall curse, and those who curse shall curse them (too).
(English - Shakir)

Who are "Laenoon"? Ohh they must be kafirs or mushriks I guess!

But wait here is another verse:

Surah Aal-e-Imran, Verse 61:
فَمَنْ حَاجَّكَ فِيهِ مِن بَعْدِ مَا جَاءَكَ مِنَ الْعِلْمِ فَقُلْ تَعَالَوْا نَدْعُ أَبْنَاءَنَا وَأَبْنَاءَكُمْ وَنِسَاءَنَا وَنِسَاءَكُمْ وَأَنفُسَنَا وَأَنفُسَكُمْ ثُمَّ نَبْتَهِلْ فَنَجْعَل لَّعْنَتَ اللَّهِ عَلَى الْكَاذِبِينَ

But whoever disputes with you in this matter after what has come to you of knowledge, then say: Come let us call our sons and your sons and our women and your women and our near people and your near people, then let us be earnest in prayer, and pray for the curse of Allah on the liars.
(English - Shakir)

I think this makes clear who are included in the "Laenoon".

So what is the criteria of invoking the "Curse of Allah"? Are the above two verses not mentioning that?

Are there Muslims who conceal the truth? Are there Muslims who mixup the truth & falsehood? Are there Muslims who have lied before the Sadiqeens (mentioned in Quran 3:61)?

If yes, then know that the curse of Allah is upon them already whether anyone curse them or not. But there are some, other than Allah (s.w.t), who curse and they are mentioned as "La'enoon" in above verse.

44 minutes ago, Abdulai said:

there could be a surah that curses Abu Bakir & Aisha if they were really enemies of Islam & prophet (s.a.w) house hold. 

For hypocrites, there are verses in Quran where Allah (s.w.t) has cursed them. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

Shiachat: Don't curse x y, z, else you will be warned or banned.

Shiachat: Go ahead and have a fully fledged discussion about how it's okay to go and curse them privately.

If that isn't ignorance, i don't know what is. I'm sorry to be so direct here, but let us reflect please. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Tafseer Imam Hassan Al-Askari (asws)
– S 333 & 144

"Imam Hassan Al-Askari (asws) said: 'The Words of the Mighty and Majestic Surely those who are concealing what We Revealed from the clear Proofs [2:159] –from the description of Muhammad (saww) and the description of Ali (asws) and their features, and the Guidance after having Clarified it for the people in the Book -and that which was Revealed afterwards – is the Guidance. It is what We
Manifested from the signs of their merits and their positions. 

Like the cloud which shaded Rasool-Allah (saww) in his journeys, and the salty water 
of the wells which turned sweet by his saliva, and the trees which used to lower their fruits when he sat by them, and the disabilities which passed away when he touched them by his hand, or by his saliva.

And like the Signs which were manifested upon Ali (asws) from the salutations of the mountain and the rocks and the trees who said: ‘O Guardian from Allah (azwj), and O 
Caliph of Rasool-Allah (saww)!’ And the killer poison which the one who took it by naming his name over it, its scourge did not affect him; and the great deeds from the hills and the mountains which he uprooted and threw them like the small 
pebbles; like the disabilities which were removed by his supplications, and the calamities and the affliction which were released with the healthy ones by his(negative) supplications, and the rest of these from what Allah (azwj) the Exalted 
Particularised him with, from his merits. 

So this is from the Guidance which Allahazwj Clarified it for the people in the Book. 

Then He (azwj) Said those – those, the ones concealing these descriptions of Muhammad (asws) and of Ali (asws), the ones fearing for it from the ones seeking it, those upon whom its manifesting was necessitated during the removal of Dissimulation, 
Allah will Curse them – Curse the concealing ones.

and the cursing ones will curse them (too) [2:159] – regarding it are (various) aspects. From it, the cursing ones will curse them (too) - there isn’t anyone, whether he was right or false, except he would be saying, ‘May Allah (azwj) Curse the 
unjust ones, the concealers of the Truth’.

The unjust one, the concealer of that truth will also be saying, "Curse of Allah (azwj) be on the unjust, the concealers'. They, would be upon this meaning, in the cursing of 
every cursing ones, and in cursing themselves. 

And from it are the two, when one of them is annoyed upon the other and they both curse each other. The two curses get elevated and they seek Permission of their 
Lord (azwj) regarding the falling upon the ones who sent them.

So Allah (azwj) Mighty and Majestic Says to the Angels: “Look! So if it was such that the cursing ones is (himself) deserving of the curse, and the one intended with it isn’t 
deserving of it, then descend both of these together upon the cursing one. And if it was such that the indicated one is deserving of it and the cursing one isn’t, so divert
both of these towards him. And if it was such that both of them were deserving of it, then divert the curse of this to that one, and divert the curse of that one to this one.

And if none of the two are deserving of it due to their Eman, and that the annoyance made them needy to that, so divert both the curses to the Jews, the concealers of the attributes of Muhammad (saww) and his (saww) description, and the mention of Ali (asws)
and his (asws) features, and (divert the curses) to the Nasibis, the concealers of the merits of Ali (asws), and the repellers of his merits”.

Then Allah (azwj) Mighty and Majestic Said Except those who repent – the ones who 
concealed it, and amend – their deeds, and correct what they had been spoiling by the evil interpretation, so they rejected by it the merits of the meritorious one and rights of the rightful ones, and make manifest – what Allah (azwj) the Exalted 
Mentioned from the attributes of Muhammad (saww) and his description, and from 
the Mention of Ali (asws) and his features, and what Rasool-Allah mentioned, so 
those, I will Turn to them – Accept their repentance, and I am the Oft-turning, the 
Merciful [2:160].

(Source: Tafseer Hube Ali)

Edited by Salsabeel
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Moderators
20 minutes ago, Intellectual Resistance said:

Shiachat: Don't curse x y, z, else you will be warned or banned.

Shiachat: Go ahead and have a fully fledged discussion about how it's okay to go and curse them privately.

If that isn't ignorance, i don't know what is. I'm sorry to be so direct here, but let us reflect please. 

Because that is discussion about the laws. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Agha Mehdi poya has said this in the tafseer of verse 2:159

"Those who withhold what has been revealed to them of the book, be they Jews (who knew the truth about the Holy Prophet - refer to verse 40, 75 to 79, 89 to 91, 101, 105, 109 and 124 of this surah; and the holy Kabah - Psalms 118: 22 and Matthew 21: 42) or be they the Muslim hypocrites (who know the true interpretation and application of verses - Ahzab: 33; Shura: 23; Nisa: 54 and 59; Ali Imran: 61 and 103;

Tawbah: I 19; Rad: 43, Hud: 17; and Ma-idah: 3, 55, 67 in connection with the event of Ghadir Khum) are cursed by Allah and by the angels and by those who follow His right path. In verses 86 and 87 of al Nisa also the angels and the believers join Allah to curse the wicked. In verse 56 of al Ahzab, Allah and His angels bless the Holy Prophet; and Allah commands the believers to send blessings on him. Unless we join Allah and His angels to curse the enemies of the Holy Prophet, our asking Allah for sending blessings on him will be incomplete. Therefore, the followers of Muhammad and Ali Muhammad bless the Holy Prophet and his Ahl ul Bayt and curse their enemies. Justice demands that we identify the devil as a devil, and curse him even if he is disguised in the garb of a Muslim like Yazid and others. Cursing and expression of dislike and disgust for any evil or evildoer is essential to remain on guard against wickedness, as has been made clear in the above-noted verse and verse 7 of al Fatihah, therefore, tabarra has been prescribed as one of the fundamentals of the religion."

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...