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
Syed Ali Mehdi Shah Naqvi

Double standards of Shias with azaan/iqamah and Namaz

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

Long time ago we have had a discussion on wilayat e Ali in tashahud

Many people here consider namaz to be batil with it.

Since no Imam recited it. (Atc to them)

May I question which Imam recited it in azaan/iqamah?

If none then congrats, all your azaan/iqamah have been batil till now.

Defend it.

You yourself are doing biddah 5 times a day aren't you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As-salam alaykum, brother!

Firstly, ordinary people have no say in this matters. While some scholars deem it permissible to recite 3rd testimony in prayer (e.g. Ayatollah Sadiq Shirazi), others state that this makes prayer invalid.

Secondly, when we recite 3rd testimony in adhan/iqamah, we should not consider it as the part of adhan/iqamah. This is an optional addition.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How noble of you addressing this monumental problem faced by the whole rest of the Shia nation all over the world, every Shia since 1450 years, all other than your 8 minutes old sect limited to a few places in central punjab and numbering less than the army of Muawiya at Siffeen.

I pray for your success in this endeavor.

Share this post


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

Long time ago we have had a discussion on wilayat e Ali in tashahud

Many people here consider namaz to be batil with it.

Since no Imam recited it. (Atc to them)

May I question which Imam recited it in azaan/iqamah?

If none then congrats, all your azaan/iqamah have been batil till now.

Defend it.

You yourself are doing biddah 5 times a day aren't you?

I don’t say it in either, but I am sure I don’t count.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Nash smith

Ya Ali madad wilyat Ali in everything, I always say in namaz, if you are true Shia fiqh  jafferi. You say in tashud, 

Share this post


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

I don’t say it in either, but I am sure I don’t count.

I know you very well hahaha

Let this topic be for people who call prayer invalid but azaan ok with shahadat e salisa. 

According to their own arguments, their azaan/iqamah have been batil so they should think about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, The Green Knight said:

How noble of you addressing this monumental problem faced by the whole rest of the Shia nation all over the world, every Shia since 1450 years, all other than your 8 minutes old sect limited to a few places in central punjab and numbering less than the army of Muawiya at Siffeen.

I pray for your success in this endeavor.

8 minutes old is a lie hahahah

Since your own people say it was started in 70s lol

First you should decide with your community 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, The Green Knight said:

How noble of you addressing this monumental problem faced by the whole rest of the Shia nation all over the world, every Shia since 1450 years, all other than your 8 minutes old sect limited to a few places in central punjab and numbering less than the army of Muawiya at Siffeen.

I pray for your success in this endeavor.

How about Sistani Khamenai and Bashir Najafi and etc allowing it in azaan/iqamah?

Not as a juzz but as mustahab thing?

It seems to me like a Mustahab biddah lol

Since no sahih us sanad report says its included in azaan/iqamah

And no sahih us sanad report says you can innovate azaan/iqamah

Lets see how you defend your azaan/iqamah along with that of your big mullahs

Share this post


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

As-salam alaykum, brother!

Firstly, ordinary people have no say in this matters. While some scholars deem it permissible to recite 3rd testimony in prayer (e.g. Ayatollah Sadiq Shirazi), others state that this makes prayer invalid.

Secondly, when we recite 3rd testimony in adhan/iqamah, we should not consider it as the part of adhan/iqamah. This is an optional addition.

I'm not talking about Syed Sadiq Shirazi since he is considered Mi6 by Muqalids of Khamenai/Bashir Najafi/Sistani

I myself consider it as a juzz in both azaan/namaz

I just want to ask people who say following:

1.Prayer is batil with third testimony

2.but still recite it in azaan/iqamah

So according to their own arguments, their azaan/iqamah are void but they don't know about it.

I want them to answer.

I respect Syed Sadiq Shirazi though

But just being a scholor, wont allow you to add/subtract something by choice. If you think scholor can do so,

Then perhaps Umar as sahabi had more right to add as salat o khairum minan nawm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, The Green Knight said:

How noble of you addressing this monumental problem faced by the whole rest of the Shia nation all over the world, every Shia since 1450 years, all other than your 8 minutes old sect limited to a few places in central punjab and numbering less than the army of Muawiya at Siffeen.

I pray for your success in this endeavor.

What about Manlayahzarahu al faqih

Is that book 8 mins old? 

Hahahahhaa

What about Sadooqs comment on azaan with third testimony?

Share this post


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

As-salam alaykum, brother!

Firstly, ordinary people have no say in this matters. While some scholars deem it permissible to recite 3rd testimony in prayer (e.g. Ayatollah Sadiq Shirazi), others state that this makes prayer invalid.

Secondly, when we recite 3rd testimony in adhan/iqamah, we should not consider it as the part of adhan/iqamah. This is an optional addition.

And your fav alims big brother Syed Muhammad Shirazi considered it juzz e wajib of azaan/iqamah

Share this post


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

I just want to ask people who say following:

1.Prayer is batil with third testimony

2.but still recite it in azaan/iqamah

So according to their own arguments, their azaan/iqamah are void but they don't know about it

 

1. Prayer is baatil if third testimony is read as wajib 

2. In azaan and iqamah, it is not recited as wajib 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The need for unity in the Shia nation far outweighs this little trick to create yet another little rift for no reason. Look at this person, the OP. He bad mouths and rejects the purpose of there being scholars to guide the religious affairs of the Shia people. Then with the same mouth he cites their lenience in the matter. He is fully aware he is only peddling a fitna to cause disunity and is being an enemy to the Imam Mahdi (عليه السلام) and trying to free us of scholars in hopes we follow ignorant punjabi zakirs and singers with zero grasp of the message of Islam.

Share this post


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

You yourself are doing biddah 5 times a day aren't you?

Salams,

For any useful discussion on Fiqh and Usul al-Fiqh we need to understand the terms we're using. I never recite the third shahada in tashahhud, and I don't really recite it in Adhan either, but when using terms like Bid'ah we need to have a good conception of them. What exactly is a bid'ah in the context of Shii Usul, you'd need to bring precedence for your definition from the works of major scholars of Usul and with reference to any relevant hadith -- this further requires you to be able to read in at least Arabic and ideally also Persian.

You also would've ideally referred to works by scholars on this, such as Sh. Sanad's al-Shahadat al-Thalitha, although this is a book defending the recitation of the third shahada. Liyakat Takim's article is a good starting point, and that's really where reviving al-Islam's blog post seems to also jump off of, but it's one article on the history and development of it, not the modern discussions in Usul as it's developed (we're not really following the same principles of Usul the Qudama did anymore, it's evolved quite a bit in the past 500 years).

This certainly seems to be a bit above what the people on this thread are going to be capable of doing, but this would be the most productive discussion on the topic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Ibn Al-Ja'abi said:

This certainly seems to be a bit above what the people on this thread are going to be capable of doing, but this would be the most productive discussion on the topic.

Regardless, I fail to see the necessity of going to such lengths over this.

- Only two shahadas are obligatory in tashahhud (as specifically mentioned in Tahdhib, Al-Istabsar, Wasail). There is no conflicting hadith from Shia sources.

- The Qur'an commands obedience of the Ool il amr in the exact same manner as of the Prophet's because it uses a single "obey" (atee') for both and to us "Awwaluna Muhammad, awsatuna Muhammad, akhiruna Muhammad wa kulluna Muhammad". We do/can not differentiate their religious role capability. It is the essence of our religion. The Imams are inheritors of Prophetic knowledge and Qur'an tells us to exercise same obedience to both offices.

There are multiple arguments making OP's proposition baseless and void without having to research further or on a deeper level especially since he has no understanding of scholarly discourse nor a constructive intent.

Share this post


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

do you say 'Ali yun wali ullah...' after 'La illha illallah'  in your Kalma?

 

Muhammad ur Rasool Allah comes after La ilaha illallah.

This was a trick question?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, The Green Knight said:

 

Muhammad ur Rasool Allah comes after La ilaha illallah.

This was a trick question?

I meant after do you say Ali yun waliullah in your Kalma at all??

No, this wasn't a trick question, I just didn't type all of 'La ilaha illallah Muhammad ur RasulAllah'. 

Do you say Ali yun waliullah wasi Ur RasulAllah after the above?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, starlight said:

I meant after do you say Ali yun waliullah in your Kalma at all??

No, this wasn't a trick question, I just didn't type all of 'La ilaha illallah Muhammad ur RasulAllah'. 

Do you say Ali yun waliullah wasi Ur RasulAllah after the above?

Yes. I do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/14/2020 at 3:43 PM, Syed Ali Mehdi Shah Naqvi said:

Long time ago we have had a discussion on wilayat e Ali in tashahud

Many people here consider namaz to be batil with it.

Since no Imam recited it. (Atc to them)

May I question which Imam recited it in azaan/iqamah?

If none then congrats, all your azaan/iqamah have been batil till now.

Defend it.

You yourself are doing biddah 5 times a day aren't you?

I think you have made a very good point. Both positions are wrong. Don't recite in tashahud or Azaan. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@starlight

I knew where you were getting with your question. Please read the following page from Wasail ushShia and let me know what you think, if there is any doubt left regarding there being any room for the 3rd testimony.

5.thumb.jpg.7b2732bb45e42deee491ad1b6c0adfee.jpg

It very explicitly, repeatedly and precisely indicates "two testimonies". There is no room for attahyaatu lillahi.. or Allahumma wabehamdeka wattbara ismuka et al. There is no way except Muhammad's (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) especially when something is so clear and from the biggest, multiple Shi'I sources. The above is only for you and anyone else who still may carry an alive conscience by the graces of Allah. There are non-issues being turned into fitnahs.

 

P.S.: I am sharing just one page due to upload limit on files. Otherwise Tashahhud's entire chapter in fact the whole book is most worth reading.

P.S.S.: Since this problem is carried by a tiny cult in punjab only and since Urdu is their language, I hope the translation in Urdu alone will suffice. Thanks. For anyone else, the translation says "two testimonies" and I have underlined those parts in red for further clarity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, The Green Knight said:

knew where you were getting with your question. Please read the following page from Wasail ushShia

Lolz... I wasn't going anywhere. That's the way I say it too. But if you look at narration no.6 it's says 'kum az kum' and no of the hadiths you quoted above says it's forbidden to recite anything else. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't particularly see the issue... You can add dhikrullah, salawat, and testimonies of all Halal sorts to the azan and iqama. Also, remember that adhan and iqama are mustahab acts.

Oftentimes in adhan and iqama, salawat is said after 2nd testimony "ashadu anna Muhammadan Rasulullah... sallallahu alaihi wa alihi wa sallam"

Oftentimes instead of "Aliyyan waliullah", "Aliyyan hujjatullah" is said.

This doesn't really seem like it should be a big issue, though correct me if I'm wrong.

Edited by AmirioTheMuzzy

Share this post


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

and no of the hadiths you quoted above says it's forbidden to recite anything else. 

Two things fyi.

- OP and his cult believe that it is obligatory (not mustahab) to recite the third testimony in tashahud.

- It can be debated that the third testimony in tashahhud can be read as mustahab. This is the determination of all scholars who allow it. However it is not obligatory. Big technical point. This is the issue why they curse the Shi'I scholars. Personally I wish to follow the holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) exclusively in all things possible including salat recitation, as would any believer with any understanding of the religion. Mimicking the Prophet in religion is better than any and all mustahabaat and various mustahab recitations in the tashahhud are also mentioned in the same chapter but do not include the 3rd testimony. The reason must be the Qur'anic verse of Ool il amr where only two "atee'" (obey) words are used. The second "atee'" for Prophet and Imam both.

Its preposterous, these non-issues and these people.

Edited by The Green Knight

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/15/2020 at 2:16 AM, Anonymous-Male said:

1. Prayer is baatil if third testimony is read as wajib 

2. In azaan and iqamah, it is not recited as wajib 

So in azaan iqamah, you recite it with intention of Mustahab biddah?

Any act obligatory/Mustahab needs to have an order from a Masoom

Like there are many things in namaz that you/me don't recite yet they are mustahab like wajjahato wajhe lilazi.. etc

Mustahab doesn't mean you can innovate anything you like

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/15/2020 at 2:59 AM, The Green Knight said:

The need for unity in the Shia nation far outweighs this little trick to create yet another little rift for no reason. Look at this person, the OP. He bad mouths and rejects the purpose of there being scholars to guide the religious affairs of the Shia people. Then with the same mouth he cites their lenience in the matter. He is fully aware he is only peddling a fitna to cause disunity and is being an enemy to the Imam Mahdi (عليه السلام) and trying to free us of scholars in hopes we follow ignorant punjabi zakirs and singers with zero grasp of the message of Islam.

That particular comment:

If I prove in azaan/iqamah and namaz

You say jahil punjabi zakirs

If I try to disprove, still you say jahil punjabi zakirs and mullahs

I mean really?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/15/2020 at 4:43 AM, Ibn Al-Ja'abi said:

Salams,

For any useful discussion on Fiqh and Usul al-Fiqh we need to understand the terms we're using. I never recite the third shahada in tashahhud, and I don't really recite it in Adhan either, but when using terms like Bid'ah we need to have a good conception of them. What exactly is a bid'ah in the context of Shii Usul, you'd need to bring precedence for your definition from the works of major scholars of Usul and with reference to any relevant hadith -- this further requires you to be able to read in at least Arabic and ideally also Persian.

You also would've ideally referred to works by scholars on this, such as Sh. Sanad's al-Shahadat al-Thalitha, although this is a book defending the recitation of the third shahada. Liyakat Takim's article is a good starting point, and that's really where reviving al-Islam's blog post seems to also jump off of, but it's one article on the history and development of it, not the modern discussions in Usul as it's developed (we're not really following the same principles of Usul the Qudama did anymore, it's evolved quite a bit in the past 500 years).

This certainly seems to be a bit above what the people on this thread are going to be capable of doing, but this would be the most productive discussion on the topic.

Sheikh Sanads shahadat e salisa book is avalible in Urdu as wilayat e Ali

Also this post has nothing to do with him and his followers since I respect him a lot.

Sanad considers Ali un wali ullah to be a juzz in azaan/iqamah and tashahud

So by no means, this post has any connection with him

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, The Green Knight said:

@starlight

I knew where you were getting with your question. Please read the following page from Wasail ushShia and let me know what you think, if there is any doubt left regarding there being any room for the 3rd testimony.

5.thumb.jpg.7b2732bb45e42deee491ad1b6c0adfee.jpg

It very explicitly, repeatedly and precisely indicates "two testimonies". There is no room for attahyaatu lillahi.. or Allahumma wabehamdeka wattbara ismuka et al. There is no way except Muhammad's (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) especially when something is so clear and from the biggest, multiple Shi'I sources. The above is only for you and anyone else who still may carry an alive conscience by the graces of Allah. There are non-issues being turned into fitnahs.

 

P.S.: I am sharing just one page due to upload limit on files. Otherwise Tashahhud's entire chapter in fact the whole book is most worth reading.

P.S.S.: Since this problem is carried by a tiny cult in punjab only and since Urdu is their language, I hope the translation in Urdu alone will suffice. Thanks. For anyone else, the translation says "two testimonies" and I have underlined those parts in red for further clarity.

I know I have read them all and in no way above statements justify your claim that there is no room for shahadat e salisa.

All hadiths suggest that tashahud is fine with two testimonies.

"Kafi hai" here refers to validity of tashahud with 2 testimonies.

And same goes for "kam az kam"

Plus, the era of taqiyyah where Shias had to hide their emaan, its so obvious that this is taqqiyah, else their necks would've been chopped off.

Same goes for hadith in al kafi in tashahuds chapter

Bakar bin Habeeb asked Imam about what to recite in tashahud and qunut Imam said recite what seems best, if it was fixed people would've been perished.

If shahadat e salisa had no origin in tashahud, then what would cause people to perish if Imams fixed tashahud?

I don't know how can you ignore all this.

By the way I wanted not to discuss this but wanted you to defend your azaan/iqamah with current beliefs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, The Green Knight said:

The second "atee'" for Prophet and Imam both

Correct. That's why considering that third testimony is wajib implies you are separating Prophethood from imamut, whereas Allah combined them both with a single "atee". Considering third testimony as wajib would imply that Prophet (s) (naoudobillah) failed in his mission to deliver the concept of imamut to us, and thus imamut has to be testified separately. Thats why prayer becomes invalid if you believe that Prophet (s) failed in his mission. 

Share this post


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

I don't particularly see the issue... You can add dhikrullah, salawat, and testimonies of all Halal sorts to the azan and iqama. Also, remember that adhan and iqama are mustahab acts.

Oftentimes in adhan and iqama, salawat is said after 2nd testimony "ashadu anna Muhammadan Rasulullah... sallallahu alaihi wa alihi wa sallam"

Oftentimes instead of "Aliyyan waliullah", "Aliyyan hujjatullah" is said.

This doesn't really seem like it should be a big issue, though correct me if I'm wrong.

You just need to justify you claim brother.

Write hadith in which Imam said you can add anything to azan/iqamah

Thats all

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Anonymous-Male said:

Correct. That's why considering that third testimony is wajib implies you are separating Prophethood from imamut, whereas Allah combined them both with a single "atee". Considering third testimony as wajib would imply that Prophet (s) (naoudobillah) failed in his mission to deliver the concept of imamut to us, and thus imamut has to be testified separately. Thats why prayer becomes invalid if you believe that Prophet (s) failed in his mission. 

This would put you in trouble.

Testifying to wilayat e Ali means Prophet failed in his mission?

Lol what?

Then why did Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) announce imamate at ghadeer? There was no need I mean since he didn't fail in his mission did he?

Stupid question.

Second many ayahs in Qur'an has one atee for both Allah and Rasool so as per them is it sufficient to say testify to Allahs wilayat only in tashahud? Answer this.

If testifying to imamate of Ali after prophethood means we are seperating it, then congrats, all you prayers have been batil till now,

Since you are testifying to prophethood after Allah's wilayat thus you are also seperating prophethood from it

Edited by Syed Ali Mehdi Shah Naqvi

Share this post


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

Write hadith in which Imam said you can add anything to azan/iqamah

When we say ashhudo unna Muhammad Ur Rasool Allah....we can add sullul laho elayhay wa aalay hi wassalam after it because this is what we have been strongly advised to do whenever we say his name. It is not part of azaan but we read it. Ali un wali ullah is also not part of azaan but we read it in the same way as we read salawat after Rasool's name. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Anonymous-Male said:

When we say ashhudo unna Muhammad Ur Rasool Allah....we can add sullul laho elayhay wa aalay hi wassalam after it because this is what we have been strongly advised to do whenever we say his name. It is not part of azaan but we read it. Ali un wali ullah is also not part of azaan but we read it in the same way as we read salawat after Rasool's name. 

When you read (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم), its part of 2nd testimony and doesn't appear as some other testimony,

While addition of third testimony is yet to be proven from hadiths

Also saying (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) after his name is order from. Hadith.

Show 3rd testimony in azaan in sahih us sanad hadith

Share this post


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

This would put you in trouble.

Testifying to wilayat e Ali means Prophet failed in his mission?

It would put you in trouble if you believe that testifying to wilayat e Ali is still wajib after first testifying to Risalut. That in effect means that you are yourself declaring that the testimony of Risalut is defective and incomplete (naoudobillah).

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...