Jump to content

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, Salsabeel said:

 Yes it is impossible for me.

 

Punishment cannot be prescribed for any sort of impossibilities. 

Brother your inconsistencies are showing and I think its just best to admit you were wrong.

Multiple equal Gods is not possible. No one can prove that it is possible. No Christian can prove that multiple equal Gods is possible. 

So if it is impossible, is the punishment for it also impossible?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Shi3i_jadeed said:

Many of the attributes of God are not unique to God (e.g. creatures can be merciful and God is merciful). If you mean the essential attributes of God then no they can't if those attributes are absolutely unique to Him (e.g. having no beginning, omniscience, omnipotence). Nothing that exists is independent of Allah, nothing can happen expect by His will. I don't know exactly what you mean by independent. Defining deity or gods is a bit tricky. Its rationally possible for God to create a lesser god that He would order people to worship, this is basically what early logos theologians believed about Jesus. This lesser god can still be dependent on God. 

To pray to anyone besides Allah is shirk regardless of whether one believes the thing they are praying to is independent of Allah, I dont know what needs to be explained there. The mushrikun of quraish ultimately believed those who they worshiped besides Allah were dependent on Allah. They said they worshiped them only to get closer to Allah. 

Yeah that’s right, they were asked if they believe in other than Allah and they said no they believe in only Allah. But it’s the fact they took waseelah in other than what Allah appointed,those idols to some were ways to reach Allah. so that made them mushrik or kaffir. This is fact in Quran, recited multiple times

of course there are those who literally see them as multiple gods .

the thing with religion is it requires faith and belief. So there is a variable of the individual as well. That’s why we will be judged individually. A persons ‘belief’ in multiple Gods even after the revealing of truth, and no matter how faulty their logic is will be tried as shirk. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Follower of Ahlulbayt said:

Brother your inconsistencies are showing and I think its just best to admit you were wrong.

There is no inconsistancy in my view point. 

The difference between your view point & mine is that I am viewing shirk as "human deed" while Ahadiyyat belongs solely to Allah (s.w.t). 

Can we call any deed as rationally impossible? So your supposed believe i.e., shirk is rationally impossible is absurd.

Furthermore, here is another reference:

Surah Yusuf, Verse 106:

وَمَا يُؤْمِنُ أَكْثَرُهُم بِاللَّهِ إِلَّا وَهُم مُّشْرِكُونَ

And most of them do not believe in Allah without associating others (with Him). (English - Shakir)

Let me say it again that the scope of shirk is not limited to believe in multiple gods. It is broader than what you have assumed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shirk has different thresholds and meanings depending who you talk to.

The most straightforward I suppose is to get it straight from Quran.

Concept of shirk is associating anything with God, or imposing  Gods attributes on anyone or thing with God, such as people as intercessors or lords, idols.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Salsabeel said:

There is no inconsistancy in my view point. 

The difference between your view point & mine is that I am viewing shirk as "human deed" while Ahadiyyat belongs solely to Allah (s.w.t). 

Can we call any deed as rationally impossible? So your supposed believe i.e., shirk is rationally impossible is absurd.

Furthermore, here is another reference:

Surah Yusuf, Verse 106:

وَمَا يُؤْمِنُ أَكْثَرُهُم بِاللَّهِ إِلَّا وَهُم مُّشْرِكُونَ

And most of them do not believe in Allah without associating others (with Him). (English - Shakir)

Let me say it again that the scope of shirk is not limited to believe in multiple gods. It is broader than what you have assumed.

Might be good to supplement with  6:121

And eat not of that over which God's Name has not been mentioned; it is ungodliness. The Satans inspire their friends to dispute with you; if you obey them, you are idolaters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, wmehar2 said:

Might be good to supplement with  6:121

And eat not of that over which God's Name has not been mentioned; it is ungodliness. The Satans inspire their friends to dispute with you; if you obey them, you are idolaters.

Thank you for the reference brother. Appreciate!

This blessed verse is mentioning shirk in obedience. 

Share this post


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

Thank you for the reference brother. Appreciate!

This blessed verse is mentioning shirk in obedience. 

Well obedience is one way to look at it perhaps.  I haven't tried looking at it that way.

I figured it was because  in this  verse 6:121, compliance/obedience (or conceding) to the mushrik/disblievers about eating what God has forbidden and making it halal .. is indirectly associating them with God (at least God's  authority, when it was made clear in message what we can and cannot eat)...  which is essentially a form of disobedience but not sure if it directly correlates to someone knowingly disobeying knowing its wrong yets ask for forgiveness.  In that case they do not make what Allah has made forbidden as halal, invalidating them as committing shirk, but  disobedient only .

But it demonstrates if we let others influence us ( like taking non Muslims as protectors or allies per Quran verse) it relegates us as disbelievers ( obeying friends of shaytan in 6:121). Which is shirk. So that makes  sense .

They (mushrik or anyone) cannot undo Gods decree in that we must eat that which Gods name is mentioned, and food must not be carrion/already dead, etc.  Otherwise we committed shirk per Quran.

Perhaps a more compelling verse is the verse telling us Muslims to fight!

وَمِنْهُمْ مَّنْ يَقُولُ ائْذَنْ لِّى وَلَا تَفْتِنِّىٓ  ۚ  أَلَا فِى الْفِتْنَةِ سَقَطُوا  ۗ  وَإِنَّ جَهَنَّمَ لَمُحِيطَةٌۢ بِالْكٰفِرِينَ
"And among them is he who says, Permit me [to remain at home] and do not put me to trial. Unquestionably, into trial they have fallen. And indeed, Hell will encompass the disbelievers."
(QS. At-Tawba 9: Verse 49)

This says they would be disbelievers, this form of disobedience supports that point directly.

Edit: Actually this could make the argument that 9:49 is referring to a person who always was a disbeliever pretending to believer.  The prior verses indicate  Allah prevented  such individuals joining fight lest their agenda was to spread dissension and cause weaknesses on field due to lack of faith.  But I think other verses command us to fight otherwise we are of mushrik 

Edited by wmehar2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, wmehar2 said:

Well obedience is one way to look at it perhaps.  I haven't tried looking at it that way.

There are many other points in this verse alone, for instance, satanic inspirations (وَإِنَّ الشَّيَاطِينَ لَيُوحُونَ إِلَىٰ أَوْلِيَائِهِمْ) and then obeying him. 

It is reported that the infidels, who used to eat carrion, told the Holy Prophet that it was Allah who killed the animals which they ate, so what was wrong in eating animals killed by Allah when the Muslims ate the animals killed by man. This argument created doubts in the minds of some of the Muslims. So it has been clarified that those who listen to the satanic suggestions are indeed polytheists.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Shi3i_jadeed said:

By lesser God I mean ontologically lesser. Polytheistic pantheons typically had a hierarchy of gods, its not like they were all equal. Some would even be the children of other gods which is something the idolaters of quraish believed. They believed Allah had daughters who were goddesses. It is impossible for there to be a god that is ontologically equal with the necessary existence. I don't see why it would be irrational for Allah to create a lesser god that has independent powers or a god that is dependent on His will. 

I really don't see how that verse proves what you are saying. This ayah is in reference to their claims regarding the idols and images according to shaykh toosi. Obviously idols and images do not have power over things and nor do they reason, they are things humans make. أَمِ اتَّخَذُوا مِن دُونِ اللَّهِ شُفَعَاءَ can just be that those intercessors they took besides Allah weren't actually given the power of intercession by Allah regardless of what they believe. This is reminiscent of when Abraham (as) destroyed the idols and his conversation with his people. Are you saying idol worship would have been okay if they believed it was with the permission of Allah? 

I don't see how this proves they believed their idols had ontologically equality with Allah nor does it say they believed they had power that wasn't contingent on Allah. There are many ayat that seem to posit that the idolaters of quraish posited their gods and idols as lesser than Allah. Allah would be the supreme creator God in their pantheon.

For instance:
فَإِذَا رَكِبُوا فِي الْفُلْكِ دَعَوُا اللَّهَ مُخْلِصِينَ لَهُ الدِّينَ فَلَمَّا نَجَّاهُمْ إِلَى الْبَرِّ إِذَا هُمْ يُشْرِكُونَ - 29:65
And when they board a ship, they supplicate Allah, sincere to Him in religion. But when He delivers them to the land, at once they associate others with Him. 
Why would they do this unless they believed that ultimately Allah is in control and is greater than their other gods?

قُلْ مَن يَرْزُقُكُم مِّنَ السَّمَاءِ وَالْأَرْضِ أَمَّن يَمْلِكُ السَّمْعَ وَالْأَبْصَارَ وَمَن يُخْرِجُ الْحَيَّ مِنَ الْمَيِّتِ وَيُخْرِجُ الْمَيِّتَ مِنَ الْحَيِّ وَمَن يُدَبِّرُ الْأَمْرَ ۚ فَسَيَقُولُونَ اللَّهُ ۚ فَقُلْ أَفَلَا تَتَّقُونَ - 10:31

Say, "Who provides for you from the heaven and the earth? Or who controls hearing and sight and who brings the living out of the dead and brings the dead out of the living and who arranges [every] matter?" They will say, " Allah," so say, "Then will you not fear Him?"
 

Ok so you have stated that is possible for Allah to create a lessor God that has independent powers. This is not correct. al-Samad, is a unique attribute of Allah. Everything depends upon him, and he depends on nothing. By saying Allah can create another lesser God which has independent powers, you have by default, also said that Allah can create another lesser God which is all-knowing, or all-powerful etc. An independent being is synonymous with a Necessary being. It is a irrational impossibility to have two Necessary beings. Again, I would say a "lesser God" which is dependent on Allah and has no unique attributes of Allah, is not any type of God. The Imams and Prophets were dependent on Allah, and had no unique attribute of Allah. I think a better word for a "lesser God" would be a superhuman.

 

Yes, I knew the verse was talking about idols. And I agree with you, idols are made and cannot have independent power. I disagree with your interpretation of the verse.  If Allah meant that, then he would have said the verse differently. He would have said something along the lines of "we did not give the idols the permission to intercede". However, the verse rather says that they have taken besides Allah intercessors. Meaning, they didn't believe the intercessors were interceding by the permission of Allah, they believed they were interceding independently of Allah. 

I'm saying if they believed their idols did not have any unique attributes of Allah, meaning that they also believed that their idols were dependent, then this would not be alright, but yes, it wouldn't be polytheism. Otherwise, we would have to have another definition of Shirk, which is what I am asking for.

 

When Allah says they took "partners with Allah", I don't understand how you don't see this as explicit proof that the idol worshippers of Quraysh made their idols equal and independent of Allah. As in what is a partner? From Lanes Lexicon:

Quote

It is also a subst. from أَشْرَكَ بِٱللّٰهِ; (Mgh, Mṣb, Ḳ, TA;) thus in the Ḳur xxxi. 12; (Mgh, TA;) meaning The attribution of a شَرِيك [or copartner &c., or of شُرَكَآء i. e. copartners &c., (see 4,)] to God: (Mgh:) [so that it may be rendered belief in a plurality of gods:]

If the idol worshippers believed that their idols were not equal with Allah, dependent on Allah and having none of the unique attributes of Allah, then how would this constitute as a "partner" to Allah?

The other verses you mentioned can be explained. The idol worshippers rationally conceived that their could only be one ultimate being, the creator of the heavens and earth. But, because of their desires and blind following of their ancestors, they believed that their idols were independent of Allah.

If you say otherwise, then why would Allah command to the Prophet (saw) to preach Surah al-Tawheed? Why would Allah command the Prophet (saw) to say اَللّٰهُ الصَّمَدُ, if the idol worshippers already believed that Allah has no equals and nothing besides Allah was independent?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Follower of Ahlulbayt said:

Ok so you have stated that is possible for Allah to create a lessor God that has independent powers. This is not correct. al-Samad, is a unique attribute of Allah. Everything depends upon him, and he depends on nothing. By saying Allah can create another lesser God which has independent powers, you have by default, also said that Allah can create another lesser God which is all-knowing, or all-powerful etc. An independent being is synonymous with a Necessary being. It is a irrational impossibility to have two Necessary beings. Again, I would say a "lesser God" which is dependent on Allah and has no unique attributes of Allah, is not any type of God. The Imams and Prophets were dependent on Allah, and had no unique attribute of Allah. I think a better word for a "lesser God" would be a superhuman.

 

Yes, I knew the verse was talking about idols. And I agree with you, idols are made and cannot have independent power. I disagree with your interpretation of the verse.  If Allah meant that, then he would have said the verse differently. He would have said something along the lines of "we did not give the idols the permission to intercede". However, the verse rather says that they have taken besides Allah intercessors. Meaning, they didn't believe the intercessors were interceding by the permission of Allah, they believed they were interceding independently of Allah. 

I'm saying if they believed their idols did not have any unique attributes of Allah, meaning that they also believed that their idols were dependent, then this would not be alright, but yes, it wouldn't be polytheism. Otherwise, we would have to have another definition of Shirk, which is what I am asking for.

 

When Allah says they took "partners with Allah", I don't understand how you don't see this as explicit proof that the idol worshippers of Quraysh made their idols equal and independent of Allah. As in what is a partner? From Lanes Lexicon:

If the idol worshippers believed that their idols were not equal with Allah, dependent on Allah and having none of the unique attributes of Allah, then how would this constitute as a "partner" to Allah?

The other verses you mentioned can be explained. The idol worshippers rationally conceived that their could only be one ultimate being, the creator of the heavens and earth. But, because of their desires and blind following of their ancestors, they believed that their idols were independent of Allah.

If you say otherwise, then why would Allah command to the Prophet (saw) to preach Surah al-Tawheed? Why would Allah command the Prophet (saw) to say اَللّٰهُ الصَّمَدُ, if the idol worshippers already believed that Allah has no equals and nothing besides Allah was independent?

 

If a non believer  or a polytheist, or one committing shirk  does not acknowledge Allah's existence.. and instead imposes Deity on let's say, an idol, or an object/or person.. is that not assocoating partners with Allah?

And what about those the Quran refers to below? @Salsabeel

 

أَلَا لِلَّهِ الدِّينُ الْخَالِصُ  ۚ  وَالَّذِينَ اتَّخَذُوا مِنْ دُونِهِۦٓ أَوْلِيَآءَ مَا نَعْبُدُهُمْ إِلَّا لِيُقَرِّبُونَآ إِلَى اللَّهِ زُلْفٰىٓ إِنَّ اللَّهَ يَحْكُمُ بَيْنَهُمْ فِى مَا هُمْ فِيهِ يَخْتَلِفُونَ  ۗ  إِنَّ اللَّهَ لَا يَهْدِى مَنْ هُوَ كٰذِبٌ كَفَّارٌ
"Unquestionably, for Allah is the pure religion. And those who take protectors besides Him [say], We only worship them that they may bring us nearer to Allah in position. Indeed, Allah will judge between them concerning that over which they differ. Indeed, Allah does not guide he who is a liar and [confirmed] ingrate."
(QS. Az-Zumar 39: Verse 3)

 

Edited by wmehar2
Kafoorana means ingrate not disbeliever.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/3/2019 at 8:21 AM, Follower of Ahlulbayt said:

Salam,

What is the Shia definition of Shirk?

I believe Shirk is giving any thing other than Allah the attributes which are unique to Allah.  I understand Shirk to be rationally impossible. However, some have defined Shirk as worshipping other than Allah. What is worship? Well, according to the earliest linguists, worship is defined as extreme humility and submissiveness.

Although, i do not see how extreme humility and submissiveness to other than Allah can be Shirk, as it is not rationally impossible for one to have extreme humility to other than Allah.

So how do we define Shirk and how do we define worship?

Covenant we made......   anything we do against this is shirk.

172. And (mention) when your Rabb took from the children of Adam, from 
their loins (semen, genes), their descendants and made them testify to their 
own selves, asking them, “Am I not your Rabb?” and they said, “Yes, 
indeed we bear witness!” (Of this we remind you) – lest you say on the day 
of Resurrection, “We were cocooned (unaware of this knowledge) of this” 
(This refers to man being created upon the natural disposition of Islam).
173. And so that you don’t say, “Our fathers lived only as dualists, and we 
are their descendants (the continuation of their genetic coding) so will You 
destroy us because of our fathers’ denial of the Truth?” (i.e. This is an 
invalid excuse as everyone is created upon the natural disposition of Islam, but their understanding of religion derives from the environmental conditionings they receive).
174. Thus We explain in detail the proofs – signs – that perhaps they will 
return (to their essential reality).

This is what we are doing........    Shirk

175. Give them the news of the man to whom We have given Our signs, yet 
he detached himself from the knowledge and left it (forgot the reality and pursued a life based on ego-identity)... (Then) Satan (accepting one’s self as only the body) made him a follower (of this belief, until finally) he became of the astray ones.
176. Had We willed, We would have elevated him with these signs... But 
(instead) he settled on earth (bodily life) and followed his baseless impulses! So, his example is like that of a dog: if you chase him he pants, if you 
leave him he pants... This is what the people who deny Our signs look 
like! Relate this to them, perhaps they will contemplate upon it.
177. How wretched is the state of people who deny Our signs 
(manifestations of Names) and (hence) do wrong to their selves!

 

Surah  Al araf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, wmehar2 said:

And what about those the Quran refers to below? @Salsabeel

 

أَلَا لِلَّهِ الدِّينُ الْخَالِصُ  ۚ  وَالَّذِينَ اتَّخَذُوا مِنْ دُونِهِۦٓ أَوْلِيَآءَ مَا نَعْبُدُهُمْ إِلَّا لِيُقَرِّبُونَآ إِلَى اللَّهِ زُلْفٰىٓ إِنَّ اللَّهَ يَحْكُمُ بَيْنَهُمْ فِى مَا هُمْ فِيهِ يَخْتَلِفُونَ  ۗ  إِنَّ اللَّهَ لَا يَهْدِى مَنْ هُوَ كٰذِبٌ كَفَّارٌ
"Unquestionably, for Allah is the pure religion. And those who take protectors besides Him [say], We only worship them that they may bring us nearer to Allah in position. Indeed, Allah will judge between them concerning that over which they differ. Indeed, Allah does not guide he who is a liar and [confirmed] ingrate."
(QS. Az-Zumar 39: Verse 3)

 

To take guardians beside Allah without His permission is strictly prohibited. And 5:55 specifically mentions who actually are the guardians of Muslims:

Surah Al-Maeda, Verse 55:

إِنَّمَا وَلِيُّكُمُ اللَّهُ وَرَسُولُهُ وَالَّذِينَ آمَنُوا الَّذِينَ يُقِيمُونَ الصَّلَاةَ وَيُؤْتُونَ الزَّكَاةَ وَهُمْ رَاكِعُونَ

Only Allah is your Vali and His Apostle and those who believe, those who keep up prayers and pay the poor-rate while they bow. (English - Shakir) 

Surah Al-Maeda, Verse 56:

وَمَن يَتَوَلَّ اللَّهَ وَرَسُولَهُ وَالَّذِينَ آمَنُوا فَإِنَّ حِزْبَ اللَّهِ هُمُ الْغَالِبُونَ

And whoever takes Allah and His apostle and those who believe for a guardian, then surely the party of Allah are they that shall be triumphant. (English - Shakir)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/5/2019 at 12:34 AM, wmehar2 said:

If a non believer  or a polytheist, or one committing shirk  does not acknowledge Allah's existence.. and instead imposes Deity on let's say, an idol, or an object/or person.. is that not assocoating partners with Allah?

Yes it is shirk.

Edited by Raheel Yunus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×