Jump to content
In the Name of God بسم الله

Cursing the enemies of Ahlul Bayt

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

  • Veteran Member

:salam:

Is it a part of Tabarra to curse the enemies of Ahlul Bayt by name or will saying  “may Allah curse the enemies of Ahlul Bayt” suffice?

I am looking for responses in light of Syed Khamenei and Syed Sistani’s fatwas. Sorry if this question has been asked before.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Sayed Sistani says curse in private, so to not create fitnah. I believe he considers it mustahhab, and would consider it part of tabara. Please note that curse here is لعن (la'an) and not سب (sab). لعن is to ask Allah to send his curse on someone, while سب is to insult or cus someone, which I think is considered Haram.

Imam Khamenei says you are not allowed to curse the respected figures of other sects or religions, but I'm not sure if by curse he meant سب or لعن, as I don't speak Farsi, so I don't have access to his original fatwa, only the translation. I have found recordings of him reciting Ziyarat Ashura, which has something like "May Allah curse the first oppressor of Ahlul Bayt, may  Allah curse the second oppressor of Ahlul Bayt, may Allah curse the third oppressor of Ahlul Bayt" which is quite obviously referring to the Abu Bakr and Omar and Uthman, but I'm not sure if these recordings were before this fatwa, or if he allows cursing not by name, or if he only meant سب. A Farsi speaker can shed light on this.

"May Allah curse the enemies of the Ahlul Bayt" would suffice under both of them, but I'm not sure if it is better to say by name.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

If you understand Urdu, then the video below should be an enjoyable watch. I highly recommend you and anyone else who has questions related to the matter of Tabarra to watch it: 

 

If you don’t understand Urdu then there are English subtitles, but obviously subtitles won’t do justice...

For those who don’t know this speaker, he’s extremely popular in the Urdu speaking community and travels all around the world throughout the year to give lectures. He was also and probably still is, active in the hawza in London.

He’s actually a legend in my opinion. Always delivers very high quality lectures in an extremely skilled and pleasing to hear way.

Edited by AStruggler
Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Ejaz said:

:salam:

Is it a part of Tabarra to curse the enemies of Ahlul Bayt by name or will saying  “may Allah curse the enemies of Ahlul Bayt” suffice?

I am looking for responses in light of Syed Khamenei and Syed Sistani’s fatwas. Sorry if this question has been asked before.

Yes.  That should suffice.  “May God curse the enemies of the Ahl Bayt”.  

But right now you are focusing too much on the historical repercussions of tabarra which has been emphasized by those who have reduced religion to a cult of personality worship bereft of the Divine Presence.  

How about we see it more from a God centered point of view where in the Qur'an (Surah al-Saba) God commands us to say:213A86A6-3A0D-433A-9662-43B48040D016.jpeg

4B1D7C92-403E-4697-82F3-05857FA3ED76.jpeg

F897E3DC-9BC4-4F86-8468-B59142E30795.jpeg

Say, "Who provides for you from the heavens and the Earth?" Say, " Allah . And indeed, we or you are either upon guidance or in clear error." 

Say, "You will not be asked about what we committed, and we will not be asked about what you do.

"Say, "Our Lord will bring us together; then He will judge between us in truth. And He is the Knowing Judge."

Edited by eThErEaL
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
8 hours ago, 7ssein said:

Sayed Sistani says curse in private, so to not create fitnah. I believe he considers it mustahhab, and would consider it part of tabara.

Salaam Brother, where did you get this info? 

Edited by AStruggler
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Hassan- said:

Imam Khamenei does not allow the cursing of the first three caliphs for fitnah reasons, but cursing the enemies in general is fine.

No, not because of Fitnah Reasons.  Because it is JUST PLAIN WRONG.

Ayatollah Khamenei said: “Disrespecting the pure wives of the Prophet ((صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)) should be avoided. The Prophet’s ((صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)) wives are all respectable; anyone who insults any of them has insulted the Prophet. I resolutely declare this offensive. The commander of the Faithful, Imam Ali ((صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)) treated her eminence Aisha in such a respectful manner. He treated a woman, who had come to fight against him, with the utmost respect because she was the Prophet’s wife; otherwise the Commander of the Faithful (عليه السلام) would not stand on a ceremony with anyone: hence, no such disrespect should ever occur.”

May God bless Ayatollah Khamenei for issuing this fatwa.  The same would apply to Abu Bakr, Umar & Uthman... because Imam Ali (عليه السلام) protected their lives in their very capacities as Caliphs.  Cursing or saying ill words against Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman and Aisha is tantamount to saying ill words to Imam Ali (عليه السلام) and Seyyidina Muhammad Mustafa (S).

I don't think most Shias are representing their faith properly.  If they did they would heed Khamenei's advice and take it very seriously.  

Edited by eThErEaL
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member
26 minutes ago, eThErEaL said:

No, not because of Fitnah Reasons.  Because it is JUST PLAIN WRONG.

Ayatollah Khamenei said: “Disrespecting the pure wives of the Prophet ((صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)) should be avoided. The Prophet’s ((صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)) wives are all respectable; anyone who insults any of them has insulted the Prophet. I resolutely declare this offensive. The commander of the Faithful, Imam Ali ((صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)) treated her eminence Aisha in such a respectful manner. He treated a woman, who had come to fight against him, with the utmost respect because she was the Prophet’s wife; otherwise the Commander of the Faithful (عليه السلام) would not stand on a ceremony with anyone: hence, no such disrespect should ever occur.”

May God bless Ayatollah Khamenei for issuing this fatwa.  The same would apply to Abu Bakr, Umar & Uthman... because Imam Ali (عليه السلام) protected their lives in their very capacities as Caliphs.  Cursing or saying ill words against Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman and Aisha is tantamount to saying ill words to Imam Ali (عليه السلام) and Seyyidina Muhammad Mustafa (S).

I don't think most Shias are representing their faith properly.  If they did they would heed Khamenei's advice and take it very seriously.  

Can you show me a source for it please? This doesn’t disprove what I said. Imam Khamenei’s motive is to prevent the Shias from cursing and disrespecting the respected figures of the Sunnis, with the goal to not cause division between the Muslims. You say it’s “plain wrong”, and yes I agree it’s plain wrong to publicly curse because of fitnah reasons, but if you remove fitnah from the equation, it’s mustahab according to our ahadith.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Hassan- said:

Can you show me a source for it please? This doesn’t disprove what I said. Imam Khamenei’s motive is to prevent the Shias from cursing and disrespecting the respected figures of the Sunnis, with the goal to not cause division between the Muslims. You say it’s “plain wrong”, and yes I agree it’s plain wrong to publicly curse because of fitnah reasons, but if you remove fitnah from the equation, it’s mustahab according to our ahadith.

Even children at Shia madrassa's know that.

It is taught IN VERY BASIC curricula of Shia Madressas!   If you don't believe me let me take a snap-shot of it when I get my hands on the book (as it is not ready at hand).

I am so surprised most Shias are so uneducated about their own teachings.  It is incredible and mind blowing.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
11 hours ago, 7ssein said:

May Allah curse the first oppressor of Ahlul Bayt, may  Allah curse the second oppressor of Ahlul Bayt, may Allah curse the third oppressor of Ahlul Bayt" which is quite obviously referring to the Abu Bakr and Omar and Uthman,

Salam shaitan (la) also was from enemies of Ahlul Bayt (عليه السلام) & he can be first oppressor also there was people from children of Adam (عليه السلام) till end of time that were hating them so they can be other figures that mentioned & cursed in Qur'an but this three can be in this range thast it's based on very closed frame understanding of the three enemies of Ahlul Bayt (عليه السلام) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, 7ssein said:

Sayed Sistani says curse in private, so to not create fitnah. I believe he considers it mustahhab, and would consider it part of tabara. Please note that curse here is لعن (la'an) and not سب (sab). لعن is to ask Allah to send his curse on someone, while سب is to insult or cus someone, which I think is considered Haram.

Imam Khamenei says you are not allowed to curse the respected figures of other sects or religions, but I'm not sure if by curse he meant سب or لعن, as I don't speak Farsi, so I don't have access to his original fatwa, only the translation. I have found recordings of him reciting Ziyarat Ashura, which has something like "May Allah curse the first oppressor of Ahlul Bayt, may  Allah curse the second oppressor of Ahlul Bayt, may Allah curse the third oppressor of Ahlul Bayt" which is quite obviously referring to the Abu Bakr and Omar and Uthman, but I'm not sure if these recordings were before this fatwa, or if he allows cursing not by name, or if he only meant سب. A Farsi speaker can shed light on this.

Why are you always misleading others, huh? Insulting the enemies of God, is what Allah did in his Holy Book:

(62:5):

“The example of those who were entrusted with the Torah,

then failed to carry it,

is that of a donkey carrying books.

Evil is the example of the people who

deny Allah’s signs,

and Allah does not guide the wrongdoing lot.”

 
Edited by Simon the Canaanite
Link to comment
Share on other sites

(1:176):

Had We willed, We could have elevated him thereby, but he adhered [instead] to the Earth and followed his desire. So his example like is that of a dog: if you make for it, it lolls out its tongue, and if you let it alone, it lolls out its tongue. That is the example of the people who denied Our signs. So recount these narratives, so that they may give thought.

 
Edited by Simon the Canaanite
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

I believe Allah wants the future generations to know the high status of Ahlul Bayt (عليه السلام), to the extent that if anyone oppressed them, then a party will emerge who will send la'nah on these certain individuals day and night. 

Honestly, it's such a blessing that not a single Muslim has the audacity to ever curse any of our Imams (عليه السلام) and Ahlul Bayt (عليه السلام). Whereas so many Muslims are able to point fingers at the companions who had oppressed the Ahlulabayt (عليه السلام).

Lets not feel ashamed of cursing those who deserved to be cursed, however within limits set by our marja.

Edited by ali_fatheroforphans
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
3 hours ago, Simon the Canaanite said:

Why are you always misleading others, huh? Insulting the enemies of God, is what Allah did in his Holy Book:

(62:5):

“The example of those who were entrusted with the Torah,

then failed to carry it,

is that of a donkey carrying books.

Evil is the example of the people who

deny Allah’s signs,

and Allah does not guide the wrongdoing lot.”

 

How am I misleading anyone brother? Did Imam Khamenei not declare it Haram? And did Sayed Sistani not say do it privately? Not once have I given my opinion, only referred the the maraji', and you have came and attacked me. I also know people like Shaykh Vahid Khorosani consider it highly mustahhab, but that is not what OP was asking for, was it?

Note: The Imam Khamenei fatwa is widely available online. The Sayed Sistani fatwa I've learned from several scholars over the year, whom I trust, so if you don't want to trust it, be my guest.

The closest Sayed Sistani fatwa I can find online is the following, but doesn't really prove what I'm saying:

Quote

Question:
As-Salaamun ‘alaykum wa rahmatullahi wa barakatuh.

A video clip is circulating on social media of a mourning procession on the anniversary of the martyrdom of Imam al-Jawad ((عليه السلام).), and a group of people in the area of al-A‘dhamiyya are seen shouting abuses on ‘Umar and ‘Aisha and others.

Is such an act condemned by the highest religious leadership (marji‘iyyat)? Especially since it relates to abusing the religious symbols of our Sunni brethren and this, in turn, will further enflame the fire of blind civil strife among the Iraqi people.

Was-salaam.

Answer:

In the name of Allah, the Kind, the Merciful

This behavior is condemned and strongly objectionable, and is against what the Imams of Ahlul Bayt ((عليه السلام).) has ordered their followers (Shi‘as). Allah is the Guide.

From https://www.al-Islam.org/mutual-respect-peaceful-co-existence-among-Muslim/2-abusing-insulting-leaders-Sunni-madhhab

From Imam Khamenei you can view here:

http://english.Khamenei.ir/news/3905/Ayatollah-Khamenei-s-fatwa-Insulting-the-Mother-of-the-Faithful

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
7 hours ago, eThErEaL said:

No, not because of Fitnah Reasons.  Because it is JUST PLAIN WRONG.

Ayatollah Khamenei said: “Disrespecting the pure wives of the Prophet ((صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)) should be avoided. The Prophet’s ((صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)) wives are all respectable; anyone who insults any of them has insulted the Prophet. I resolutely declare this offensive. The commander of the Faithful, Imam Ali ((صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)) treated her eminence Aisha in such a respectful manner. He treated a woman, who had come to fight against him, with the utmost respect because she was the Prophet’s wife; otherwise the Commander of the Faithful (عليه السلام) would not stand on a ceremony with anyone: hence, no such disrespect should ever occur.”

May God bless Ayatollah Khamenei for issuing this fatwa.  The same would apply to Abu Bakr, Umar & Uthman... because Imam Ali (عليه السلام) protected their lives in their very capacities as Caliphs.  Cursing or saying ill words against Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman and Aisha is tantamount to saying ill words to Imam Ali (عليه السلام) and Seyyidina Muhammad Mustafa (S).

I don't think most Shias are representing their faith properly.  If they did they would heed Khamenei's advice and take it very seriously.  

 

3 minutes ago, shadow_of_light said:

He meant insulting.

Thank you for the corrections.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, 7ssein said:

How am I misleading anyone brother? Did Imam Khamenei not declare it Haram? And did Sayed Sistani not say do it privately? Not once have I given my opinion, only referred the the maraji', and you have came and attacked me. I also know people like Shaykh Vahid Khorosani consider it highly mustahhab, but that is not what OP was asking for, was it?

Note: The Imam Khamenei fatwa is widely available online. The Sayed Sistani fatwa I've learned from several scholars over the year, whom I trust, so if you don't want to trust it, be my guest.

The closest Sayed Sistani fatwa I can find online is the following, but doesn't really prove what I'm saying:

From https://www.al-Islam.org/mutual-respect-peaceful-co-existence-among-Muslim/2-abusing-insulting-leaders-Sunni-madhhab

From Imam Khamenei you can view here:

http://english.Khamenei.ir/news/3905/Ayatollah-Khamenei-s-fatwa-Insulting-the-Mother-of-the-Faithful

Who said I believe in what Khamenei and Sistani say? And who said I attacked you? You were misleading others.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
40 minutes ago, Simon the Canaanite said:

Who said I believe in what Khamenei and Sistani say? And who said I attacked you? You were misleading others.

I was not misleading anyone. The OP asked for what Sayed Sistani and Imam Khamenei say, and I have them it. Nowhere did I say if it was right or wrong, or anything, although I do follow one of them.

Whether you believe what they say or not, doesn't change the fact that they said it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
2 minutes ago, Sumerian said:

Sayyed Al-Khoei famously said sabb can become wajib in certain circumstances.

Would you say cursing is a spiritual act? Like by cursing the enemies you get closer to Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى), because some people deny this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, ali_fatheroforphans said:

Would you say cursing is a spiritual act? Like by cursing the enemies you get closer to Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى), because some people deny this.

If Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) curses His enemies, and if the Prophets (عليهم السلام) did and if the Imams (عليهم السلام) also did - and it was confirmed  by them to be a mustahab act, then how can it not be a spiritual act to get closer to Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى)?

Edited by Sumerian
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, 7ssein said:

Whether you believe what they say or not, doesn't change the fact that they said it.

Sayyed Al-Sistani never forbid cursing or insulting the enemies of Ahlul Bayt (عليه السلام), it is reported he spoke against those who were publically insulting them. That's all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:bismillah:

إِنَّ الَّذِينَ يَكْتُمُونَ مَا أَنْزَلْنَا مِنَ الْبَيِّنَاتِ وَالْهُدَىٰ مِنْ بَعْدِ مَا بَيَّنَّاهُ لِلنَّاسِ فِي الْكِتَابِ ۙ أُولَٰئِكَ يَلْعَنُهُمُ اللَّهُ وَيَلْعَنُهُمُ اللَّاعِنُونَ {159}

[Shakir 2:159] 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).
[Pickthal 2:159] Lo! Those who hide the proofs and the guidance which We revealed, after We had made it clear to mankind in the Scripture: such are accursed of Allah and accursed of those who have the power to curse.
[Yusufali 2:159] Those who conceal the clear (Signs) We have sent down, and the Guidance, after We have made it clear for the people in the Book,-on them shall be Allah's curse, and the curse of those entitled to curse,-
[Pooya/Ali Commentary 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 comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, shadow_of_light said:

Insulting is forbidden in Qur'an and narrations. Imam Ali (a) told his followers: I don’t like you to use offensive language. You can, instead, criticize them (the enemy).

You can say that to the 20+ scholars that declared insulting the enemies of Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) to be halal and in fact mustahab.

______

The Messenger of Allah (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) said: “When you will find people of bid`ah (innovation) and doubt/suspicion after me, do baraa’ (disassociation) from them and increase in your insults (sabihim) to them, and oppose (them) and bring evidences against them so they may not become greedy in bringing fasaad (corruption) to Islam. You must warn people against them and do not learn their bid`ah (innovation). Allah will write for you hasanaat (good deeds) for this, and will raise you darajaat (levels) in the next life.’”

 

Source:

1.     Al-Kulayni, Al-Kaafi, vol. 2, ch. 159, pg. 375, hadeeth # 4

Grading:

1.       Al-Majlisi said this hadeeth is SaHeeH (Authentic) 
à Mir’aat Al-`Uqool, vol. 11, pg. 77



 

Other Scholar's who have said this hadeeth is SaHeeH:

 

1.    al-FaaDil al-Kaadhimi (d. 1065), Masaalik al-Afhaam 'ila Ayaat al-Ahkaam, vol. 2, pg. 397

2.    Shaheed al-Thaani (d. 966), Masaalik al-Afhaam ila TanqeeH Sharaa'I` al-Islaam, vol. 14, pg. 434

3.    al-Majlisi I (al-Majlisi's father), RawDah al-Muttaqeen, vol. 9, pg. 327

4.    Muhaqqiq al-Sabzawaaree (d. 1090),Kifaayah al-Ahkaam, vol. 1, pg. 437

5.    `Abd al-`Ala (d. 1414), Mahdhab al-Ahkaam, vol. 16, pg. 134

6.    `Abd Allaah al-Jazaa'iree (d. 1173), al-TuHfah al-Suniyyah, pg. 83

7.    Yoosuf al-Bahraani, al-Hadaa'iq al-NaaDirah, vol. 18, pg. 164

8.    al-Hussayn bin Aal `Asfoor al-Bahraani,Sadaad al-`Ibaad, pg. 446

9.    Muhammad Mujaahid al-Tabataba'I (d. 1242),al-Munaahil, pg. 259

10.  Ahmad al-Naraaqi (d. 1245), Mustanad al-Shee`ah fee Ahkaam al-Sharee`ah, vol. 14, pg. 162

11.  Murtada al-Ansaari (d. 1281), Kitaab al-Makaasib, vol. 1, pg. 353

12.  al-Khoei, MisbaaH al-Fuqaahah, vol. 1, pg. 354

13.  Jawad al-Tabrizi, Irshaad al-Taalib 'ila al-Ta`leeq `ala al-Makaasib, vol. 1, pg. 162

14.  Jawad al-Tabrizi, Asad al-Hadood, pg. 235

15.  Abu Talib al-Tabrizi, al-Ta`leeqah al-Istidilaaliyyah, pg. 430

16.  al-Sayfa al-Mazandaraani, Daleel Tahreer al-Waseelah, vol. 2, pg. 174

17. al-RooHaani, Fiqh al-Saadiq, vol. 14, pg. 296
18. al-RooHaani, MisbaaH al-Fuqaahah, vol. 1, pg. 379
19. Muhammad Sa`eed al-Hakeem,MisbaaH al-Minhaaj, pg. 359
20. `Alee al-Namaazee al-Shahroodi,Mustadarak Safeenah al-Bihaar, vol. 1, pg. 303 & vol. 8, pg. 202
21. Haadi al-Najafi, Mawsoo`ah aHaadeeth Ahl al-Bayt, vol. 2, pg. 25
22. al-Turayhi, Majma` al-BaHrayn, vol. 3, pg. 343
23. Muhammad Taqi al-Isfahani, Mikyaal al-Makaarim, vol. 2, pg. 259

http://www.revivingalislam.com/2010/12/exposing-bidah-reward-for-doing-so.html?m=1

Edited by Sumerian
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member
39 minutes ago, Sumerian said:

People forget that Al-Khomeini, in his Al-Makasib, said that Aisha, Talha and Muawiyah are more spiritually najis than a dog or a pig. 

This is not true brother.

He is talking about another issue and just presents a hypothetical case in which he says "even if they (Aisha and ...) are XYZ". He doesn't say they are XYZ.

Here is the text:

3_2.jpg

Pay attention: ".........even if.......".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Sumerian said:

Sayyed Al-Sistani never forbid cursing or insulting the enemies of Ahlul Bayt (عليه السلام), it is reported he spoke against those who were publically insulting them. That's all.

This statement is a bit odd as as it publicly condones private insults.  I don't see how this helps.  

Edited by eThErEaL
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member
3 hours ago, Sumerian said:

You can say that to the 20+ scholars that declared insulting the enemies of Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) to be halal and in fact mustahab.

______

The Messenger of Allah (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) said: “When you will find people of bid`ah (innovation) and doubt/suspicion after me, do baraa’ (disassociation) from them and increase in your insults (sabihim) to them, and oppose (them) and bring evidences against them so they may not become greedy in bringing fasaad (corruption) to Islam. You must warn people against them and do not learn their bid`ah (innovation). Allah will write for you hasanaat (good deeds) for this, and will raise you darajaat (levels) in the next life.’”

 

 

This narration is against Qur'an:

And do not insult those they invoke other than Allah , lest they insult Allah in enmity without knowledge...6/108

 

The above narration also is not mutawatir and besides, it is mistranslated. Here, باهتوهم means "astounding them by presenting strong arguments":

الوقيعة في الناس: الغيبة. والظاهر أن المراد بالمباهتة الزامهم بالحجج القاطعة .... From al-Kafi (footnotes)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member

مجلسی : و المراد بسبهم الإتيان بكلام يوجب الاستخفاف بهم، قال الشهيد الثاني رفع الله درجته: يصح مواجهتهم بما يكون نسبته إليهم حقا لا بالكذب

حائری : و لا تصحّ مواجهته بما يكون نسبته إليه كذباً؛ لحرمته، و إمكان الوقيعة فيه من دونه.

This is what some scholars say about that narration.

مکارم : هذا و لكن ذلك لا يخلو عن إشكال.

أمّا أوّلا لحرمة الكذب ذاتا، و لا يجوز التوصّل بالباطل إلى الحقّ،

و أمّا الاولى فالبهت و البهتان- كما يظهر من متون اللغة- في الأصل بمعنى الحيرة و التحيّر، و لذا يقال بالأخذ بغتة بالعذاب البهت، قال اللّه تعالى بَلْ تَأْتِيهِمْ بَغْتَةً فَتَبْهَتُهُمْ و إطلاقه على نسبة ما ليس في إنسان إليه من هذا الباب لأنّه يحيّره كما صرّح به أهل اللغة، فكأنّ المراد: احملوا على أهل البدع من كلّ جانب و اجعلوهم متحيّرين حتّى لا يطمعوا في الفساد في الإسلام، فتأمّل.

Edited by shadow_of_light
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, kamyar said:

This is not true brother.

He is talking about another issue and just presents a hypothetical case in which he says "even if they (Aisha and ...) are XYZ". He doesn't say they are XYZ.

Here is the text:

3_2.jpg

Pay attention: ".........even if.......".

What are you talking about? Do you know Arabic at all?

This is the whole quote:

"And as for the rest of the sects from the nasawib in the khawarij, there is no proof of their najasa even though their punishment is more severe than the kuffar, so if a ruler rose against Amir Al-Mu'mineen (عليه السلام) for a worldy reason and not a religious reason, rather for the sake of rulership, or for another thing, such as with A'isha, Zubayr, Talha, Mu'awiyah and their likes, or that one has nasb against one of the Imams (عليه السلام) not for a religious reason, but rather for the hatred of Qurayshi, or Bani Hashim, or the Arabs, or that he is a killer of his father or his son, or something like that, then that does not constitute - apparently - that they are najis, even THOUGH they are more wicked than the dogs and pigs, due to a lack evidence from consenus or reporting on it."

Please brother, you know you are wrong. The above means that if someone was to oppose the Imams (عليه السلام) on non-religious grounds then although they are not apparently najis from the standpoint of Fiqh, then they are still more wicked than a pig or a dog, and he used A'isha, Talha and Zubayr as an example of those who rose for worldly reasons, I.e rulership and such.

And what backs this up even more, is he himself does not believe in any Shar'I issue in relation to insulting or doing gheeba on Sunnis, let alone their leaders.

Edited by Sumerian
Link to comment
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...