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
Ejaz

Cursing the enemies of Ahlul Bayt

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Share this post


Link to post
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

Share this post


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

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)

 

Like I told you, 20+ jurists agree to it being authentic. 

12 minutes ago, shadow_of_light said:

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.

This is in relation to "bahituhum" not in relation to insults. Some believed bahituhum means "bring evidences" others believed it meant basically waqee'a. But no one even had an issue with "sabihim".

Here is a thread discussing the hadith, dear sister. I recommend you read it before you make your opinion:

https://www.shiachat.com/forum/topic/235031376-the-controversial-hadith-of-dawood-bin-sarhan/?page=3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cursing the enemies of Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَتَعَالَىٰ) and the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) is a part of our religion. Nowadays (historically it wasn’t an issue), the scholars (not concerned about politics) disagree only one aspect; if the cursing should be allowed publicly or only privately. In al-Kafi there is endless list of ahadith that state, for example, that people who reject wilayah of Imamah have doors to paradise closed, and all go to hell. All of them. Therefore anyone saying that we can’t curse those that insulted, tormented and killed those blessed by Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَتَعَالَىٰ), tries to change our religion.

For example, the day of Umar's assassination (9 Rabi' al-awwal), is still celebrated in Iranian villages and was previously celebrated in major Iranian cities until the protests of Sunni countries resulted in its banning there by the post-1979 authorities... The celebration is known as jashn-e Omar koshi (the celebration of the killing of Umar).

By the “Caliph’s” degree, Sunnis previously cursed Ahlul Bayt in mosques all over the Umayyad state for almost 100 years. Since the time of the Umayyads,  and the label they acquired as the “Ahlul Bayt haters”, they realised that one can’t be a Muslim by openly hating the Prophet’s family, so they started making up tons of ahadith, whilst pretending to love them but they still insult closer Ahlul Bayt by saying they “made mistakes”, “weren’t infallible”, or downgrading their status to the mere people around the last Prophet, while they openly curse and insult further Ahlul Bayt. Wahhabis are front runners in this behaviour. So in conclusion, while we curse the enemies of Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَتَعَالَىٰ), they curse Prophet’s closer and further family. In the instance, the cursing isn’t only by mouth but also writings and their theology, after all it was perfectly fine for the second Sunni Umayyad caliph to ambush and slaughter Prophet’s own grandson.

Edited by OrthodoxTruth

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Sumerian could you please elaborate on what sabb/insulting refers to? Because most of us I think perceive it as using those usual vulgar words, which I would find extremely hard to believe is permissible. 

Calling people pimp, najis, or bas**** child, etc. if that's what they are we wouldn't really think of it as an insult (if it's true). But if this is what is meant by sabb/insulting it would make more sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, dragonxx said:

@Sumerian could you please elaborate on what sabb/insulting refers to? Because most of us I think perceive it as using those usual vulgar words, which I would find extremely hard to believe is permissible. 

Calling people pimp, najis, or bas**** child, etc. if that's what they are we wouldn't really think of it as an insult (if it's true). But if this is what is meant by sabb/insulting it would make more sense.

Sure brother. I would recommend you read the following thread first, as all the questions are basically answered;

https://www.shiachat.com/forum/topic/235031376-the-controversial-hadith-of-dawood-bin-sarhan/

Including the one you just asked right here:

https://www.shiachat.com/forum/topic/235031376-the-controversial-hadith-of-dawood-bin-sarhan/?do=findComment&comment=2821438

Where Makarem Al-Shirazi defines sabb.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, OrthodoxTruth said:

For example, the day of Umar's assassination (9 Rabi' al-awwal), is still celebrated in Iranian villages and was previously celebrated in major Iranian cities until the protests of Sunni countries resulted in its banning there by the post-1979 authorities... The celebration is known as jashn-e Omar koshi (the celebration of the killing of Umar).

it's abandoned in villages too but sometimes a few radical groups may do it ,if it was celebrating at least we had a video on social media 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mods would like to remind everyone that it is allowed to discuss cursing, but cursing is against the rules. Please remain polite in your discussions.

Quote

Cursing of the 3 "Caliphs" (Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthman by name or number) and of any of the Holy Prophet's ((صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)) wives, as well as Sunni scholars is strictly prohibited. This involves cursing by name, swear words and defamatory language. The Moderator/Admin team also reserves the right to edit/delete or not approve posts or profile comments or ban members in accordance with the application of these rules. Respect is the only way to keep peace between the 2 parties and allow constructive discussions. 

https://www.shiachat.com/forum/topic/12120-shiachatcom-rules-and-policy/

Edited by ShiaChat Mod
Link to ShiaChat rules.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So in summary

-Sayed Sistani & Sayed Khamenei prohibit cursing in public

-Saying “la’na on enemies of Ahlul Bayt” should suffice

Wsalam

 

Share this post


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

So in summary

-Sayed Sistani & Sayed Khamenei prohibit cursing in public

-Saying “la’na on enemies of Ahlul Bayt” should suffice

Wsalam

 

There is no summary on this subject. Just refer to your marja’ on that.. and as for Ayatollah Sayyid Ali as-Sistani (may Allah prolong his life), his position in fact is not clear. He issued a fatwa prohibiting cursing in public based upon a particular and specific situation, where a group of brothers in Iraq at the height of sectarian conflict (more like our genocide as always...) just “lost it” publicly when the People of Ignorance bombed al Askari’s (peace be upon them and their descendants) mosque second time. If you read it in Arabic, the fatwa didn’t prohibit cursing of the enemies of Islam in public or private, it forbid the practice in that particular moment. 

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.


×
×
  • Create New...