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

Double standards of Shias with azaan/iqamah and Namaz

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

  • Advanced Member
Just now, Anonymous-Male said:

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).

This would put you in trouble

Because you are believing in imamate after prophethood which means prophethood was defective

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 130
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

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

Basically what I understand from the general sentiment of this thread is that you can basically “add” whatever you want to the Adhan as long as you know what you are saying is not a part of the Adhan.

No, they have all confirmed that it isn't part of the adhan or the prayers, which is consistent with our hadith. 

Posted Images

  • Moderators
1 minute ago, Syed Ali Mehdi Shah Naqvi said:

Because you are believing in imamate after prophethood which means prophethood was defective

Lolz, how did you derieve this conclusion? 

So you believe Hazrat Ali (عليه السلام) wasn't an Imam?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
1 minute ago, Anonymous-Male said:

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).

Tafseer al Burhan

Qur'an 5:67

Was revealed at ghadeer e khum regarding wilayat of Ali (عليه السلام)

Allah says if you don't announce wilayat e Ali, o messenger your risalah is incomplete.

And you here say if you testify to it, then it means risalah is incomplete

Don't contradict Qur'an my dear

Stay blessed

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
Just now, starlight said:

Lolz, how did you derieve this conclusion? 

So you believe Hazrat Ali (عليه السلام) wasn't an Imam?

Problem with you people,

I replied to The member you used such words according to his own logic

Please don't twist

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

Lolz, how did you derieve this conclusion? 

So you believe Hazrat Ali (عليه السلام) wasn't an Imam?

Whoever denies it is a kafir and whoever associates someone with Ali (عليه السلام) in position of imamate is a mushrik

Edited by Syed Ali Mehdi Shah Naqvi
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
2 minutes ago, Syed Ali Mehdi Shah Naqvi said:

And you here say if you testify to it, then it means risalah is incomplete

Risalah became complete at Ghadeer. 

We testify to risalah - this automatically means we testify Ghadeer. 

If you say we have to testify both separately, you have yourself negated Ghadeer, because testifying risalah means testifying Ali un wali Allah. 

The third testimony is an explanation of second testimony, it is not a separate entity - if you make it separate, you have negated risalut as well because you have not even understood that risalah is inseparable from imamah.

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

Risalah became complete at Ghadeer. 

We testify to risalah - this automatically means we testify Ghadeer. 

If you say we have to testify both separately, you have yourself negated Ghadeer, because testifying risalah means testifying Ali un wali Allah. 

The third testimony is an explanation of second testimony, it is not a separate entity - if you make it separate, you have negated risalut as well because you have not even understood that risalah is inseparable from imamah.

There is famous hadith that wilayat of masomeen is Wilayat of Allah

Also one atee has been used in many ayahs with both Allah and Rasool (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) so as per your logic, you are seperating wilayat e Muhammad (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) from Wilayat e Allah j.j.h so you are doing the same!

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

Problem with you people,

I replied to The member you used such words according to his own logic

Please don't twist

I think you are the one who is twisting words here.

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

Risalah became complete at Ghadeer. 

We testify to risalah - this automatically means we testify Ghadeer. 

If you say we have to testify both separately, you have yourself negated Ghadeer, because testifying risalah means testifying Ali un wali Allah. 

The third testimony is an explanation of second testimony, it is not a separate entity - if you make it separate, you have negated risalut as well because you have not even understood that risalah is inseparable from imamah.

And Risalah became complete with wilayat e Ali (عليه السلام)

When something as critical as risalat of Muhammad (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) isn't complete without Wilayat e Ali, how is your tashahud?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
56 minutes ago, Syed Ali Mehdi Shah Naqvi said:

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

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

Before going any further please define do you consider Azan and Iqama as Mustaheb or wajib?

The answer to this question may define the direction for further discussion. please.

wasalam

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
52 minutes ago, Muslim2010 said:

Before going any further please define do you consider Azan and Iqama as Mustaheb or wajib?

The answer to this question may define the direction for further discussion. please.

wasalam

Azaan and Iqamah are mustahib

But they have a definition in hadith don't they? Even if they are mustahab, they are defined by hadith,

Also mustahab means we can innovate as we like? No! Because if this was the case then in Al-Kafi when Imam was asked about prayer is better than sleep, he said we don't know what is it. (Biddah)

Why do you people object Sunnis if you think adding something to mustahab act is not biddah?

Why did Imam Ali raza (عليه السلام) term reduction of Hayaala khairil amal from azaan as hate for descendents of Fatimah s.a? Since its mustahab isn't it?

Edited by Syed Ali Mehdi Shah Naqvi
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Moderators
On 2/14/2020 at 4:43 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?

It isn't part of the adhan, the iqamah or prayers as taught by the ma'soomeen (عليه السلام). 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
3 minutes ago, Mahdavist said:

It isn't part of the adhan, the iqamah or prayers as taught by the ma'soomeen (عليه السلام). 

Thus when you people say in azaan with that belief, it makes your azaan/iqamah invalid as well.

Jazak'Allah

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Geat5!Monad

you need a better hobby.

I will write in a way indo-pakistanis like. Poetry so you can say wahwah.

You; assumes all. You; gives the impression that everyone recieved a clean vessel with pure water. If, the teacher interpretes something in his way, but lacks the expressive qualities, then the student recieves what is unclear. Thus, the reciever drinks what is tainted. However, Belief of a thing does not make it concrete. If a said word were to make a belief invalid then all words should be chosen with care. But words do not make belief, they are just expressions. Thus the expression to Ali is the allegiance to what is right. Therefore what is right (pure) cannot taint what is already pure.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Great5!Monad

you need a better hobby.

I will write in a way indo-pakistanis like. Poetry so you can say wahwah.

You; assumes all. You; gives the impression that everyone recieved a clean vessel with pure water. If, the teacher interpretes something in his way, but lacks the expressive qualities, then the student recieves what is unclear. Thus, the reciever drinks what is tainted. However, Belief of a thing does not make it concrete. If a said word were to make a belief invalid then all words should be chosen with care. But words do not make belief, they are just expressions. Thus the expression to Ali is the allegiance to what is right. Therefore what is right (pure) cannot taint what is already pure.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
1 hour ago, Syed Ali Mehdi Shah Naqvi said:

Thus when you people say in azaan with that belief, it makes your azaan/iqamah invalid as well.

Jazak'Allah

This is according to the view of

 آیت اللہ العظمی علامہ سید علی مہدی شاہ نقوی لاہوری

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
3 hours ago, Syed Ali Mehdi Shah Naqvi said:

Why would I brother

 آیت اللہ العظمی سید علی مہدی شاہ نقوی کو لیلی نظر آتا ہے اور مجنون نظر آتی ہے۔

معاف کیجیے گا میری انگریزی تھوڑی کمزور ہے۔ بس اتنا بتانا تھا کہ اسٹار لائٹ برادر نہیں خواہر ہیں۔

ویسے کیا واقعی شیعوں کو نماز پڑھنا نہیں آئی ابھی تک؟

کیا پڑھنا ہے اور کیا نہیں، کب پڑھنا ہے اور کہاں پڑھنا ہے۔ کب اور کہاں نہیں پڑھنا ہے ، یہ سب کچھ اختلافی معاملہ ہے ابھی تک شیعوں میں؟ جب کہ آپ دعویدار ہیں کہ آپ کو وفات رسول کے 200 سال بعد تک بھی سنت تک رسائی حاصل رہی کیوں

کہ آپ اہلیبیت میں سے اماموں کی پیروی کرتے رہے۔ 

 

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

Thus when you people say in azaan with that belief, it makes your azaan/iqamah invalid as well.

Jazak'Allah 

'Invalid' doesn't have any technical significance here because adhan or iqamah are not mandatory acts to be validated or invalidated.

However, the ulema have indeed confirmed what the hadith already show us, which is that it isn't part of the adhan or iqamah and shouldn't be recited as part of either. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
On 2/16/2020 at 1:10 AM, Syed Ali Mehdi Shah Naqvi said:

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.

You are saying, without proof, that Imams repeatedly did taqayyah / dissimulation and/or the writers and narrators of those books and hadiths repeatedly did taqayyah when talking about tashahhud's testimonies (only issue worthy enough to be suppressed...lol). Ah yes, why suppress the rest of the whole tashayyu... lol. Because uttering Aliyyun Waliallah in tashahhud really gets their goat. Makes so much sense it could fill up a swimming pool.

On 2/16/2020 at 1:10 AM, Syed Ali Mehdi Shah Naqvi said:

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.

How does this make the 3rd testimony wajib in tashahud? Or did you cult's doctrine changed overnight?

2a2f8f63feb34433915580a796789310.thumb.jpg.6e9045d695619bda87c4993779003487.jpg

Anything else? LOL

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Shawn128

 Syed Ali Mehdi shah the III, you debating yourself lol? Nobody here cares how you pray your namaz. You do what you gotta do or say brother but no need to stress about what everyone else thinks about it. If your Marja says it's ok then go for it bruv, if he doesn't then don't. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member (With Brothers Forum Membership)
On 2/16/2020 at 5:01 PM, 786:) said:

I don’t know why OP is so eager to prove the third testimony. It is clearly a later practice introduced as a political ploy during the Safavid Era. Why else do the early scholars condemn the practice?

Salam your Azan & Iqamah is not complete & parts of it changed or removed by first two caliph so your Azan & Iqama are not valid & your Namaz is just praying toward Qibla with preserving numbers of it but you still suffer from Safavid syndrome.:hahaha:  

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member (With Brothers Forum Membership)
On 2/16/2020 at 1:26 AM, Syed Ali Mehdi Shah Naqvi said:

Problem with you people,

سؤال1: خواندن شهادت ثالثه (اشهد ان علیاً ولى الله) در تشهد نماز چه حکم دارد؟
پاسخ: به احتیاط واجب جایز نیست
According to grand Ayatollah Sistani saying it in Tashahud based on precautionary wajib is not premissible .
or
 
رسش: حکم نمازکسانی که در تشهد این عبارت (و اشهد ان امیرالمؤمنین و امام المتقین علیا ولی الله و اولاده المعصومین حجة الله) را می خوانند چست؟
پاسخ: احتیاط واجب آن است که داخل نماز گفته نشود.
precautionary Wajib is that you don't say it inside Namaz
 
Imam Khamenei:
اموري كه جز تشهد نمازهاي واجب نيست اگر آن را به قصد اينكه شرعاً به عنوان جزئي از تشهد وارد شده است بگويند نماز را باطل مي‌كند، هر چند آن امور في نفسه حق و صحيح باشند، نماز و تشهد را همانگونه كه مراجع عظام شيعه (كثر الله امثالهم) در رساله‌هاي عمليه بيان نموده‌اند بخوانيد و چيزي بر آن اضافه نكنيد و هر چند كلام حق باشد.
  the matters that is not from Tashahud of wajib namaz , if we say it with intention that is from Sharia is a part of Tashhud will ivalidate the Namaz , even by itself  it will be true &Sahih , pray  namaz & Tashahud as said in  in Risalas of marajis of Shias (Allah increases their number
 so don't add it anything to it even it 's true word
& same ruling from Ayatollah Rohani
only Ayatollah Behjat said it can be said as part of Salawat in namaz but it must be done sometime not as a routin
 
اللّهمّ صلّ على محمّد و آل محمّد سيّما على اميرالمؤمنين خليفة رسول‌اللّه‌ بلا فصل و على اولاده اوصيائه الطّاهرين
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
On 2/16/2020 at 3:36 PM, Cool said:

This is according to the view of

 آیت اللہ العظمی علامہ سید علی مہدی شاہ نقوی لاہوری

You must listen to Muhammad Hussein Najafi Al-Maroof Dhakko lol

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
On 2/16/2020 at 6:04 AM, Mahdavist said:

'Invalid' doesn't have any technical significance here because adhan or iqamah are not mandatory acts to be validated or invalidated.

However, the ulema have indeed confirmed what the hadith already show us, which is that it isn't part of the adhan or iqamah and shouldn't be recited as part of either. 

Still no answer to my question.
innovation is an innovation, just like praying taravih in jamaa't, they pray it as mustahib but we Shias
continue to say its a Biddah so it doesn't matter, Biddah is Biddah

On 2/16/2020 at 3:00 PM, Anonymous-Male said:

It's wajib, not mustahab. 

really? but wajib in Mustahab Amal? means even this mustahab amal has defined limits which
you cannot cross.
Addition or reduction in azaan isn't allowed by any of Imams (عليه السلام) sicne we have seen their
reaction on addition of prayer is better than sleep, and reduction of Haya ala khairilamal
former was termed as an addition (biddah) and later as hate of children of Syeda (عليه السلام)

On 2/16/2020 at 5:01 PM, 786:) said:

I don’t know why OP is so eager to prove the third testimony. It is clearly a later practice introduced as a political ploy during the Safavid Era. Why else do the early scholars condemn the practice?

safavid era is much after sheikh sadooq isn't it? yet sadooq 1000 years ago spoke againt third testimony in azaan according to
you in man layahzarahu al faqih. so its been in azaan for more than 1000 years dude wake up!

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
15 hours ago, The Green Knight said:

You are saying, without proof, that Imams repeatedly did taqayyah / dissimulation and/or the writers and narrators of those books and hadiths repeatedly did taqayyah when talking about tashahhud's testimonies (only issue worthy enough to be suppressed...lol). Ah yes, why suppress the rest of the whole tashayyu... lol. Because uttering Aliyyun Waliallah in tashahhud really gets their goat. Makes so much sense it could fill up a swimming pool.

 

How does this make the 3rd testimony wajib in tashahud? Or did you cult's doctrine changed overnight?

2a2f8f63feb34433915580a796789310.thumb.jpg.6e9045d695619bda87c4993779003487.jpg

Anything else? LOL

what we get from your comment is that you want to say there is no proof of taqqiyah.
hahahah really I mean? 
What else would've made people to perish if tashahud was fixed by Imams?

weren't Shias recognized by Ali un wali ullah back then?
our whole mazhab is based on wilayat e Ali and its a very bold identity
which had to be hidden when they were hiding that they are Shias of Ali (عليه السلام)

had to pray 5 times with their enemies around dude, could they really utter Ali un wali ullah
in tashahud or azaan? plus we have bunch of hadiths of kalima in which there is no Ali un wali ullah
would that make it mustahab? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

It is not an addition. It is just like saying sallul laho wa aalayhi wasulum in azaan after saying Ashhhado unna Muhammad Ur Rasool Allah. 

This sallul laho wa aalayhi wasulum is not part of azaan, but adding it is not a biddah. Similarly, adding Ali un wali Allah is not part of azaan but adding it is not biddah. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
5 hours ago, Ashvazdanghe said:

 

Salam your Azan & Iqamah is not complete & parts of it changed or removed by first two caliph so your Azan & Iqama are not valid & your Namaz is just praying toward Qibla with preserving numbers of it but you still suffer from Safavid syndrome.:hahaha:  

I say ‘Hayya Ala Khayril Amal’ in my adhan and iqamah. Please tell me what is incomplete about my adhan.

I do not say ‘Aliyun Waliullah’ or ‘Asalaatu Khairul Min al Naum’. Both are deviations from the original Adhan of our master Muhammad (saw)—even if both statements are true.

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

Still no answer to my question.
innovation is an innovation, just like praying taravih in jamaa't, they pray it as mustahib but we Shias
continue to say its a Biddah so it doesn't matter, Biddah is Bidda

We are in agreement brother, adding this line to the prayers or the adhaan is an innovation. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
1 minute ago, Mahdavist said:

We are in agreement brother, adding this line to the prayers or the adhaan is an innovation. 

So Khamenai, Bashir Najafi and Sistani and company also allow adding this to Adhan/Iqamah
Whether as mustahab or whatever
Thus it makes them innovators as per your statement

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
3 hours ago, Anonymous-Male said:

It is not an addition. It is just like saying sallul laho wa aalayhi wasulum in azaan after saying Ashhhado unna Muhammad Ur Rasool Allah. 

This sallul laho wa aalayhi wasulum is not part of azaan, but adding it is not a biddah. Similarly, adding Ali un wali Allah is not part of azaan but adding it is not biddah. 

saying (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) is proved from hadith,
prove Ali-un-wali-ullah in azaan/iqamah from sahih-us-sanad hadith (since its only standard you accept)

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...