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

A Syed Girl's marriage with Non-Syed Boy - Why is this even a topic of discussion?

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

  • Advanced Member

Famous argument used against us is from Quran 33:6

The Prophet is more worthy of the believers than themselves, and his wives are [in the position of] their mothers. And those of [blood] relationship are more entitled [to inheritance] in the decree of Allah than the [other] believers and the emigrants, except that you may do to your close associates a kindness [through bequest]. That was in the Book inscribed.

It is said that Rasool (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)'s wives are mothers and nikah with daughters of mothers is invalid. Thus we proved it from Quran that such a marriage is invalid.

If nikah with daughters of mothers is invalid, then nikah with sons of mothers is also invalid isn't it? (Definitely it is)

So From Imam Hassan (عليه السلام) to Imam Hassan Al-Askari (عليه السلام), how many sisters did our Imams (عليه السلام) marry? (Nauzobillah)

These silly arguments aren't just Qias but are against merits and character of our Imams (عليه السلام). And same people curse Nasbis for believing in things attributed to Ahlebait (عليه السلام) against their merits, but themselves are doing the same thing and making fun of mathab.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest child!Monad

lookin for a wife?

It is an issue, that has been brought up by individuals who know this to be logically correct but are denied due to the incompetence of their family or local tribal leaders who have ursurped marriage as a means to procure wealth connections and create a lineage of royal superiority. I recall a looooong time ago a scholar claimed his friend a scholar visited a particular country and made the above statement. The locals threatened to kill him in the mosque. :hahaha:

The case would be similiar to a human being of a different nationality, color, to ask for marriage of a person of the opposite color, ethnicity or nationality.

indian non indian

arab vs arab of different nationality or non arab

revert - non-revert

arab vs non arab

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
Posted (edited)

Next, there comes a hadith from Faru-Al-Kafi Kitab Al-Nikah Ch#5 The Believing man is a match for the Believing woman

Chain: Al Husayn Bin Al Hassan Al Hashimy, from Ibrahim Bin Is’haq Al Ahmar and Ali Bin Muhammad Bin
Bundar, from Al Sayyari, from one of the Baghdadis, from Ali Bin Bilal who said

So Abu Abdullah (عليه السلام) said to him (Khariji) : ‘You are a match regarding your blood,
but your nobility among your people, but Allah Mighty and Majestic Safeguarded
us (عليه السلام) from the charity, and it is a dirt from the hands of the people. Thus, we (عليه السلام)
abhor that we (عليه السلام) associate you in what Allah has Preferred us (عليه السلام) with, (as you
are) the one whom Allah has not Made for you the like of what Allah has Made
for us'

Indo-Pak special Note:

First of all, Mr.Zarq Naqvi is a well-known figure and personality among these people.
Yesterday, in debate with Kamil barelvi, He challenged that Nasibi to bring tawtheeq for Syyari and criticized him for
Giving a narration that has Al Sayyari, in chain of narration.

He (Zarq) said due to Sayyari

"Hadees farig hai" trans:Hadith is a waste.

Even your own debater (i too respect him though) Calls this narrator as severely weak. Don't trust me go here: 

and watch at 2:14:51 and onwards.

Additionally Allamah Majlisi in Mirat Ul Uqool v20 page 40 said hadith is weak

Scan: 

image.thumb.png.e248352a26a8f9da0a62476950a46c5c.png

I may question, why are you quoting hadiths that are waste according to your own standards and debaters?

Now if you want to believe in each and every hadith then here is a gift from Man-Layahzarahu-Al-Faqih hadith 4382

Rasool (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) said: I am a bashar like you (Its in Quran as well). I will take your daughters (In Nikah) and will give mine as well except for Fatimah S.A.

 

And this Sayyar isn't only weak in hadith. He has corrupted belief System (Fasid Al Mazhab) as said by Nijashi in his rijal.

Scan:

20200619_192630.thumb.jpg.030eae87aa269650c3d5123a17fca8bf.jpg

So now shall we trust a man who is weak in hadith, and has corrupted belief system, on a thing that has been narrated by him alone?

Edited by Syed Ali Mehdi Shah Naqvi
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Guest child!Monad said:

lookin for a wife?

Ofcourse........ not!

1 hour ago, Guest child!Monad said:

lookin for a wife?

It is an issue, that has been brought up by individuals who know this to be logically correct but are denied due to the incompetence of their family or local tribal leaders who have ursurped marriage as a means to procure wealth connections and create a lineage of royal superiority. I recall a looooong time ago a scholar claimed his friend a scholar visited a particular country and made the above statement. The locals threatened to kill him in the mosque. :hahaha:

The case would be similiar to a human being of a different nationality, color, to ask for marriage of a person of the opposite color, ethnicity or nationality.

indian non indian

arab vs arab of different nationality or non arab

revert - non-revert

arab vs non arab

I agree. This is the real reason but they should make it fit islam. Yes people here are worst kind of extremists.

For the sake of argument, lets assume that the marriage is invalid, but if someone allow it due to some error or mistake, how would he become kafir, enemy of Ahlebait, of illegitimate birth etc. This isn't even a part of Usool e Deen or Faru-e-Deen.

Edited by Syed Ali Mehdi Shah Naqvi
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Moderators

Brother you have presented some good and well researched arguments. Jazakumallah.

In reality I think most people adopting such stances are repeating what they may have heard in their family and social circles rather than referring to actual narrations or rulings.

It just confirms that our religious views and positions should have a basis and a justification rather than just copying what is conventional or inherited.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

Prophet Muhammad ((صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)) married a Coptic slave named Maria al-Qibtiyya, Maria the Copt. Imam Hussein (عليه السلام) was married to a Persian slave, Shahrbanu, the mother of Imam Ali ibn Hussein (عليه السلام). The mother of the seventh Imam (عليه السلام) was a Berber slave, et al. Who should we emulate if not the infallible successors? It’s more than clear that the “purity of an Arab bloodline” was not an issue at all, and we talk here about the purified, infallible ones. Berbers, Persians, Copts, Greeks, all were married into the Ahlul Bayt (عليه السلام). What’s more, they all became Muslims. Berbers from nativism, Persian from Zoroastrianism, Copts and Greeks from Christianity. 

By the way, this became a major problem among Indian and Pakistani communities who, instead of doing taqlid to a marja’, preoccupy their intellectual capabilities with making sure that the hierarchy is in place Hindu style. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
On 6/19/2020 at 3:17 PM, Mahdavist said:

Brother you have presented some good and well researched arguments. Jazakumallah.

In reality I think most people adopting such stances are repeating what they may have heard in their family and social circles rather than referring to actual narrations or rulings.

It just confirms that our religious views and positions should have a basis and a justification rather than just copying what is conventional or inherited.

some weeks ago, I myself was a supporter of that view.

One day, by chance i thought of possible ways, my arguments could be countered and i reached this conclusion that what i used to believe had no basis.

Then i looked for this hadith and found that its weak. Baqir Majlisi said its weak and narrator Ahmed Bin Muhammad Bin Sayyar Al-Sayyari is weak and everyone agreed to his weakness.

There is more to come inshaAllah. purpose of sharing my views here is to check where i stand. if I am wrong, people here would refute what i said by using strong evidences and that would be a great opportunity for me to get close to Sirat Al Mustaqeem.

On 6/19/2020 at 3:58 PM, OrthodoxTruth said:

Prophet Muhammad ((صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)) married a Coptic slave named Maria al-Qibtiyya, Maria the Copt. Imam Hussein (عليه السلام) was married to a Persian slave, Shahrbanu, the mother of Imam Ali ibn Hussein (عليه السلام). The mother of the seventh Imam (عليه السلام) was a Berber slave, et al. Who should we emulate if not the infallible successors? It’s more than clear that the “purity of an Arab bloodline” was not an issue at all, and we talk here about the purified, infallible ones. Berbers, Persians, Copts, Greeks, all were married into the Ahlul Bayt (عليه السلام). What’s more, they all became Muslims. Berbers from nativism, Persian from Zoroastrianism, Copts and Greeks from Christianity. 

By the way, this became a major problem among Indian and Pakistani communities who, instead of doing taqlid to a marja’, preoccupy their intellectual capabilities with making sure that the hierarchy is in place Hindu style. 

They do taqleed of their Ulima lol

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

Another argument is by using hadiths and ayahs, they prove that Sadaat (Descendents of Rasool (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)) are Afzal. There are many hadiths and even books written on this topic. I will try to summarize a speech here:


 it was said that Ma'mun questioned Imam Ali Raza (عليه السلام) that has Allah given superiority to Itrah (of Rasool (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)) over other people?
Imam Ali Raza (عليه السلام) replied that it has been documented in the Book of Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى)
And recited verse of Surah Al-Imran ayah 33-34
Then preacher said: This is why descendants of Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) are superior to others.
Since they are superior, respecting them is obligatory.
Then preacher gave reference of Jami-Al-AKhbar page 140
There was a hadith in which Rasool (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) said: Respect my descendants. Those who are good, respect them for the sake of Allah and those who are bad, respect them for me.

Then another quote from Imam Hassan Askari (عليه السلام) was presented in which Imam (عليه السلام) said:

Respecting descendants is obligatory in every condition, and do not dis-respect them nor consider them worthless.

Note: Then he presented a hadith that Sadqa is haram for descendants. inshaAllah this will be covered in seperate post.

Then he was further quoting hadiths on Fazail.

Then he quotes an Ayah Quran 4:34

Men are in charge of women by [right of] what Allah has given one over the other and what they spend [for maintenance] from their wealth

Now he said: that a Syeda is superior to Ummah, so how can she marry non-Syed, since Men have authority over women thus Men are superior, thus she would have to obey that Non-Syed which is totally against Quran. Thus it is not possible for a Syeda to obey Non-Syed thus from Quran its proven that Syeda cannot marry a Non-Syed

                                                                                                 <-- Speech Ends -->


So i think i have covered almost everything he said regarding that.

1. First of all, in the sermon that Imam Ali Raza (عليه السلام) delivered, Imam (عليه السلام) did mention that if Rasool (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) was alive today, he could marry your daughters but not mine.
Imam mentioned his daughters, but never mentioned anywhere that our daughters cannot marry anyone from Ummah. I can't believe while explaining all merits of descendants of Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم), how come imam (عليه السلام) forgot such an important thing?

Since he was mentioning merits of Sadaat, no one can dare to claim that he did taqqiyah. He did explain all the merits, even mentioned his daughters but never said our daughters cannot marry anyone from Ummah.

2. So basically these people made a principle that "Superior cannot obey Inferior, therefore marriage is invalid since former would have to obey latter in case of women"  since it opposes above mentioned verse of Quran.

I would like to mention a few things regarding Parents here:

Quran 17:24 

And lower to them the wing of humility out of mercy and say, "My Lord, have mercy upon them as they brought me up [when I was] small." (quran.com)

And make yourself submissively gentle to them with compassion, and say: “O my Lord! have compassion on them, as they brought me up (when I was) a child.” (Al-Islam)

Quran tells us to submit to our parents both Father & Mother. 

عَنِ الرِّضَا (ع) فِي كِتَابِهِ إِلَى الْمَأْمُونِ قَالَ: وَ بِرُّ الْوَالِدَيْنِ وَاجِبٌ وَ إِنْ كَانَا مُشْرِكَيْنِ وَ لاَ طَاعَةَ لَهُمَا فِي مَعْصِيَةِ الْخَالِقِ.

In a letter to Ma`mun, Imam ar-Ridha (peace be upon him) wrote: “To do good to one’s parents is obligatory, even if they are of the polytheists, however, they should not be obeyed in acts that go against the commands of Allah.”

Biharul Anwar, Volume 74, Page 72

Then Imam Ali Raza (عليه السلام) told us to obey parents even kafirs but not if they go against commands of Allah.

Thus its proven that we have to obey parents and submit to them. Just Keep that in mind.

Now if a Syed Boy marries a Non-Syeda, and if they get blessed with a child, 

The Child would be Syed (Whose respect is wajib) and he will have to obey parents as well and submit to them.

How will a Syed child, obey and submit to Non-Syeda Mother?

If we apply this principle, marriage of Syed Boy with Non-Syeda Girl is rendered invalid as well.

Then what is fatwa on marriages of Imams (عليه السلام) with Non-Syeda Women? Nauzobillah Nauzobillah Astagfirullah Those marriages were invalid? 

If Syed child  can obey Non-Syed mother without issue of superiority, then Syeda Girl can also obey Non-Syed Husband without issue of Superiority.

And their respect is upon both Mother and Husband. Even Imam (عليه السلام) has told us to respect our wives. But that doesn't negate the authority that Husband has over wife.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest well!Monad

you raised some good points,

but interestingly it shows how the divines seems to contradict themselves as time progressed or everything is contextual. It is either aimed at a particular individual or a group or as a whole. But there is no real evidence to prove which one of these is the criteria for a proposed narration.

Regarding quranic Verses.. The verses are based on social balance but they never address particular human complexes. On the contrary this is only observed when humans do not follow the system or obey the rule of the authority. But it also states piety is the main criteria.

I doubt it is logical to respect the prophets decendents if they are bad, as that would excuse them to further their bad behavior.

On 6/20/2020 at 9:42 AM, Syed Ali Mehdi Shah Naqvi said:

Then he quotes an Ayah Quran 4:34

Men are in charge of women by [right of] what Allah has given one over the other and what they spend [for maintenance] from their wealth

The Prophet Married a lady who was older and wealthier. So who was in charge of who?. See the contradiction. A poor man marries a wealthy female and states now your wealth is mine for me to provide for you?.

Can a highly intelligent person follow a lowly intelligent person.

Parents can be wrong too and it generally does not need to go against islamic convention. Decision making skills are also based on habit or the desires of one self or whatever emotion is influencing a particular thought or choice being made by either part of the equation. Be it the parent or child, or child who is not an adult or an adult. There is a difference between obedience when a parent tells a child of a young age to do something to when the same parent is telling a child who is now an adult to do something. There comes a point where the child now decides for themselves, but according to the quran a sin is being made.

Obedience to non-conformity is based on many components. Intelligence via non - Rationality vs irrationality. Maturity vs non. Risk taking vs non risk taking. cowardly vs courage. Self interest vs benefit of others.

When we start to go into the details, we notice way too many contradictions and flaws.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
47 minutes ago, Guest well!Monad said:

Parents can be wrong too and it generally does not need to go against islamic convention. Decision making skills are also based on habit or the desires of one self or whatever emotion is influencing a particular thought or choice being made by either part of the equation. Be it the parent or child, or child who is not an adult or an adult. There is a difference between obedience when a parent tells a child of a young age to do something to when the same parent is telling a child who is now an adult to do something.

Husband can be wrong too.

We are talking here about conditions, in which obeying parents and husband is must.

If Non-Syeda can't marry because she can't obey, then Syed child can't obey Non-Syed Mother thus the relation becomes invalid because this nikah leads to voilation of Fazail / merits of Descendants.

This evidence is flawed this can't serve the purpose. I know where i came from. I myself used to consider it haram. And few months ago, idk how but my heart felt that if I were to counter all my arguments that i use in defence of my current belief, they would get destroyed very easily.

Issue of Sadqa-Zakat and story of Isa Bin Zaid Bin Ali Bin Hussein Bin Ali (عليه السلام) is left. InshaAllah i'll share my opinion on this as well.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

Now we will look into the story of Isa Bin Zaid Bin Ali Bin Hussein Bin Ali Bin Abi Talib. ( عيسى بن زيد )

Summary: He was living somewhere with his identity hidden. He married a woman and had a daughter from her but he even hid it from his wife that he was a Syed. When his daughter grew up, ruler  asked him to marry her to his young son and even his wife wanted to do that. But Isa bin zaid prayed to Allah one day, that O Allah, you know that she is a Syed and then his daughter died. And Isa bin zaid said: She was from descendants of Muhammad (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) and son of that ruler wasn't a kuf for her.

It is located in book مقاتل الطالبيين by أبي الفرج الأصفهاني  Page:No: 345 download here: http://shiabooks.net/library.php?id=9383

Who is Isa Bin Zaid ?

1. 1st Reference Al-Mufeed Min Mujam Al Rijal Al-Hadith page 447  المفيد من معجم رجال الحديث - محمد الجواهري - الصفحة ٤٤٧
9177 - 9176 - 9195 - عيسى بن زيد: بن علي بن الحسين بن علي بن أبي طالب (ع) أبو يحيى - أسند عنه - من أصحاب الصادق (ع) في رواية ضعيفة له كلام خشن مع أبي عبد الله (ع) لو صحت يظهر منها خبثه وجرأته على الله وعلى رسوله - مجهول 

Google translation:

 Isa bin Zaid: bin Ali bin Al Hussein bin Ali bin Abi Talib ((صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)) Abu Yahya - attributed to him - from the companions of Al-Sadiq ((صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)) in a weak narration, he has rough words with Abu Abdullah ((صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)), if it is correct, it shows his malice and his daring to God And on His Messenger - anonymous

http://shiaonlinelibrary.com/الكتب/3021_المفيد-من-معجم-رجال-الحديث-محمد-الجواهري/الصفحة_455

2. Mujam Al Rijal Al-Hadith - Ayatullah Khoi - معجم رجال الحديث - السيد الخوئي - ج ١٤ - الصفحة ٢٠٤

 في رواية محمد بن يعقوب، له كلام خشن مع أبي عبد الله عليه السلام، لو صح فإنه يظهر منه خبثه وجرأته على الله وعلى رسوله! ويأتي في ترجمة محمد بن عبد الله بن الحسن، لكن الرواية ضعيفة السند

Google Translation:

In the narration of Muhammad ibn Yaqoub, he has rough words with Abu Abdullah (عليه السلام), peace be upon him. If he is correct, he will show his malice and daring to God and His Messenger! It comes in the translation of Muhammad bin Abdullah bin Al-Hassan, but the narration is weak

http://shiaonlinelibrary.com/الكتب/3005_معجم-رجال-الحديث-السيد-الخوئي-ج-١٤/الصفحة_201
Also Tusi (رضي الله عنه) and Barqi (رضي الله عنه) mentioned him among companions of Imam Jaffer Al-Sadiq (عليه السلام) only and nothing more than that.

Conclusion:

Thus this guy Isa Bin Zaid is Unknown مجهول. In narrations hence this narration has no value.

For Those Who Reject Ilm-Al-Rijal:

I know two groups here who:

1. Reject Ilm-Ur-Rijal.
2. Accept Whole Kutab-e-Arba as reliable.

They might argue that If he is Majhool so what? We don't accept Ilm-Ur-Rijal. Then for those, situation gets even worse.

From above two references, it can be seen than in a weak narration he had some rough words with Imam Jaffer-e-Sadiq (عليه السلام). And this narrations appears in Al-Kafi so you people won't be able to deny it now. Take the reference. Chapter is ما يضل به بين دعوى المحق والمبطل في أمر الإمامة  ""

الكافي - الشيخ الكليني - ج ١ - الصفحة ٣٦٣ at http://shiaonlinelibrary.com/الكتب/1122_الكافي-الشيخ-الكليني-ج-١/الصفحة_411

for Al-kafi (Arabic) in 8 volumes at alfeker.net , Volume 1 page 225 chapter 138

for Urdu readers Usool-e-kafi jild 2 safha 345-346

for English readers Al-Kafi volume-1 at https://www.hubeali.com/online-books/online-english-books/  Book of Divine authority part 7 page 33 Last Paragraph 

here goes hadith:

He (the narrator) said, ‘So Muhammad Bin Abdullah appeared during that and called
the people to his allegiance.
So we were three who pledged allegiance to him and
urged the people to pledge allegiance to him, and neither the Qureysh opposed him,
nor the Helpers, nor the Bedouins. And he consulted Isa Bin Zayd, and he was from
his trustworthy ones
, and he was (a commander) upon his police force. So he
consulted him regarding the sending to face his people. So Isa Bin Zayd said to him,
‘If you call them with an easy calling, they will not answer you, or you should be
harsh upon them. Therefore leave me and them’. So Muhammad said to him, ‘Go to
whoever you intend from them

So he said, ‘Go to their chiefs and their elders, meaning Abu Abdullah Ja’far (عليه السلام) Bin
Muhammad (عليه السلام)
, for if you are harsh upon him (عليه السلام), they would all know that you will
make them pass upon the path which you passed Abu Abdullah (عليه السلام) upon’. So it was
not long before they came with Abu Abdullah (عليه السلام) until they paused him (عليه السلام) in front of
him. So Isa Bin Zayd said to him (عليه السلام), ‘Submit, you (عليه السلام) will be safe’.

(This hadith and this harsh conversation continues and Isa Bin zaid tells Imam Sadiq (عليه السلام) that he will be harsh with him then Muhammad orders Isa to imprison Imam Jaffer e Sadiq (عليه السلام) and isa Bin Zaid says:)

 So Isa Bin Zayd said to him,But, if you were to throw him (عليه السلام) in the prison, and the
prison has been ruined, and there is no lock upon it today. We fear that he (عليه السلام) might
flee from it
’. So Abu Abdullah (عليه السلام) smiled, then said: ‘There is neither a Might nor
Strength except with Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) , the Exalted, the Magnificent! Or do you think you will
be imprisoning me (عليه السلام)?’ He said, ‘Yes, by the One (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) Who Honoured
Muhammad (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) with the Prophet-hood, I will be imprisoning you (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) and will be
intensely harsh upon you (عليه السلام).

So Isa Bin Zayd said, ‘Withhold him A.Sin the hide-out, and that is the house of
Rayta today’. So Abu Abdullah (عليه السلام) said: ‘But, by Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى), I (عليه السلام) shall be saying
(something) and I (عليه السلام) will be ratified’. So Isa Bin Zayd said, ‘If you speak, I shall
break your (عليه السلام) mouth’
. So Abu Abdullah (عليه السلام) said to him: ‘But, by Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى), O bald
one, O blue-eyed one! It is as if I (عليه السلام) see you looking for a hole for yourself to enter
into, and you will not be among the mentioned ones during the meeting (the enemy
during battles), and I (عليه السلام) think that when (someone) claps behind you, you will flee
like the fleeing ostrich. So Muhammad rushed upon it with the rebuke, ‘Withhold
him (عليه السلام), and be severe upon him (عليه السلام), and be harsh upon him (عليه السلام)’

<Long hadith Continues but i end it here>

So the only question thats left is: Can we trust him if we reject Ilm-Al-Rijal? 
I Leave it to people.

And story of such person who is Unknown مجهول.by ilm ur rijal and THE WORST without ilm-ur-rijal is by no means acceptable for both

1. The ones who accept Ilm-ur-Rijal
2. The ones who reject ilm-ur-rijal

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

The next argument is related with Sadqa.

That Sadqa (Charity) is haram for Descendants so a Syeda who cannot take Sadqa cannot marry Non-Syed.

We all know that Syeds can't recieve Zakat from Ummah as well. Does It mean that for Syeds its haram to go to house of anyone from Ummah and eat there? Since those people from Ummah can recieve Zakat which is Haram for Syeds. 

So what if a conclusion based on this logic is derived that It is impermissible for Syed to go  to his friend's house and eat or drink there. 

It would be silly. It would be said that Zakat is for that person, and what he buys from it or cooks is his property and not Zakat, so he is allowed to invite Syed to eat with him or to give any gift to Syed from his property. 

So if a Syed can eat food served by non-syed without any problem, why can't a Syeda eat from her Husband's property whether her Husband took it as sadqa from someone or not?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...
  • Advanced Member

Has Rasool (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) married anyone outside family?
Has any Syeda married outside in Era of Rasool (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)?
Has any Imam allowed any Syeda to Marry Outside family?

Response:

it begins with the question, Who are Sadaat? You'll get different answers when you ask people about it. so I'll respond accordingly.

A group is there that believes only descendants of Fatimah (عليه السلام) are Sadaat since Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) called Hassan (عليه السلام) and Hussein (عليه السلام) sons of prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) in The Book Quran. So if thats the criteria, then only Sadaat are descendants of Fatimah (عليه السلام) and not the others. Then its pretty much settled since Syeda Zainab Bint e Ali (عليه السلام), descendant of Syeda Fatimah (عليه السلام) was married to Son of Jaffer bin Abu Talib (عليه السلام) who was not a Syed according to them since Rasool (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) never took any son of Jaffer (عليه السلام) in Mubahila right? Thus its proven that Syeda Zainab (عليه السلام) married outside Sadaat.

Now some people like Ghazanfar Tonsvi answered this. They said, They were Syed. Because its illogical that Hassan (عليه السلام) and Hussein (عليه السلام) were Syeds but Ali (عليه السلام) was not a Syed. And If Ali (عليه السلام) was a Syed then how can his brother Jaffer (عليه السلام) be not a Syed. Thus Syeda Zainab (عليه السلام) married in Sadaat.

Lets take this even Further. Its also illogical, that if Ali (عليه السلام) and Jaffer (عليه السلام) were Syeds, and Abu Talib (عليه السلام) was not a Syed. Definitely he was. 
This makes all sons of Abudul Mutlib (عليه السلام) Syeds i:e Abu Talib (عليه السلام), Abdullah (عليه السلام) (father of Muhammad (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)) , Zubair bin Abdul Mutlib (Uncle of Muhammad (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم))
So now Zubair Bin Abdul Mutlib (عليه السلام) was also a Syed and he had a daughter named Dhuba Bint e Zubair Bin Abdul Mutlib (رضي الله عنه) and she was also a Syeda, definitely if her father was a Syed then so was she (رضي الله عنه).

Here viewers, see to whom Rasool (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) married Dhuba Bint e Zubair.

علي بن الحسن بن فضال عن محمد بن عبد الله عن محمد بن أبي عمير عن معاوية بن عمار عن أبي عبد الله عليه السلام قال إن رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله زوج ضبيعة بنت الزبير بن عبد المطلب من مقداد بن الأسود فتكلمت في ذلك بنو هاشم فقال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله اني أنما أردت أن تتضع المناكح


Ali bin Al Hassan bin Fadhal on the authority of Muhammad bin Abdullah on the authority of Muhammad bin Abi Omair on the authority of Muawiyah bin Ammar on the authority of Imam Jaffer Bin Muhammad Al-Sadiq (عليه السلام) who said:


Rasool (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) married Dhuba the daughter of Zubair Bin Abdul Mutlib ( Syeda - Hashmi and his cousin ) to Miqdad Bin Al-Aswad ( His Companion and non hashmi ) and Banu Hashim spoke about it so Rasool (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) replied: "I just wanted the marriage to be done"


Grade: Mosaq (Reliable) see Tehzeeb Al-Ahkam Volume 7 Page 456 (pdf) from alfeker.net
http://shiaonlinelibrary.com/الكتب/1167_تهذيب-الأحكام-الشيخ-الطوسي-ج-٧/الصفحة_395#top
Ref: Jami-Al Ahadtih e Shia volume 20 Page 74

عدة من أصحابنا عن أحمد بن محمد بن عيسى عن علي بن الحكم عن هشام بن سالم عن رجل عن أبي عبد الله عليه السلام، أن رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله زوج المقداد بن أسود ضباعة بنت الزبير بن عبد المطلب ثم قال انما زوجها المقداد لتتضع المناكح وليتأسوا برسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله ولتعلموا أن أكرمكم عند الله أتقاكم وكان الزبير أخا عبد الله وأبي طالب لأبيهما وأمهما


Several of our companions on the authority of Ahmed bin Muhammad bin Isa on the authority of Ali bin Al-Hakam on the authority of Hisham bin Salem on the authority of a man on the authority of Imam Jaffer e Sadiq (عليه السلام):


The Messenger of God, married, Dabaa, the daughter of Al-Zubayr bin Abdul-Muttalib ( Syeda and Hashmi and his cousin ), to al-Miqdad bin Aswad ( Non Hashmi ) then said: “I married her to Miqdad, so that the there would be ease in marriages and they should follow Rasool (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) and that they should know that a Pious (Muttaqi) is more honorable to Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) 


Grade: Mursal( But Reliable with support ) 


Ref: Al-Kafi volume 5 page 29 (Hubeali.com Urdu edition volume 5 part 2)
جامع أحاديث الشيعة - السيد البروجردي - ج ٢٠ - الصفحة ٧٤
الكافي - الشيخ الكليني - ج ٥ - الصفحة ٣٤٤

When Rasool (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) himself married Syeda to Non Syed, and said that he wanted the marriage to be done and for the purpose of leniency in marriages, so that people should follow Messenger (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم), then who are you to say that such a marriage is haram and the one who does that or believes in that isn't a Syed? If that's the case then what is fatwa for Rasool (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)? Nauzobillah if Rasool (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) wasn't a Syed according to you, then who the hell are you? 

And these people taunt marjas and abuse them. May Allah save us from Shaitani people. Ameen

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member (With Brothers Forum Membership)

I believe the reason for such marriages is due to the oppression certain Shias faced at a time, in certain cultures and societies anyone who was a Shia was being massacred and in order to preserve the lineage of Ale-Muhammad, as well as the community from being extinguished. It was a necessary and effective means of marriage to combat the issue, however, with time its necessity was no longer an issue and it remained as a common custom.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member (With Brothers Forum Membership)
Posted (edited)
On 6/22/2020 at 10:43 PM, Syed Ali Mehdi Shah Naqvi said:

So if a Syed can eat food served by non-syed without any problem, why can't a Syeda eat from her Husband's property whether her Husband took it as sadqa from someone or not?

Salam prepared food is not from Zakat & Syeda is under authority  of her husband but Sadaqa & Zakat still is forbidden  for her but she can eat from her Husband's property if it's not Sadaqa & zakat  or she doesn't  know it's  Sadaqa or not.

Quote

A Sayyid can receive neither zakat nor zakat al-fitra from a non-Sayyid (rather he can only receive it from a Sayyid), however if khums or other contributed charity does not suffice for his life, he may receive zakat from a non-Sayyid.[36]

 Khomeini, Tawḍīḥ al-masāʾil, p. 298; See: Khomeini, Taḥrīr al-wasīla (Persian translation), vol. 1, p. 386; Yazdī, Al- ʿUrwat al-wuthqā, vol. 4, p. 136-137.

http://en.wikishia.net/view/Zakat_al-Fitra

Edited by Ashvazdanghe
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...
  • Advanced Member
On 6/21/2020 at 7:17 AM, Syed Ali Mehdi Shah Naqvi said:

Now we will look into the story of Isa Bin Zaid Bin Ali Bin Hussein Bin Ali Bin Abi Talib. ( عيسى بن زيد )

Summary: He was living somewhere with his identity hidden. He married a woman and had a daughter from her but he even hid it from his wife that he was a Syed. When his daughter grew up, ruler  asked him to marry her to his young son and even his wife wanted to do that. But Isa bin zaid prayed to Allah one day, that O Allah, you know that she is a Syed and then his daughter died. And Isa bin zaid said: She was from descendants of Muhammad (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) and son of that ruler wasn't a kuf for her.

It is located in book مقاتل الطالبيين by أبي الفرج الأصفهاني  Page:No: 345 download here: http://shiabooks.net/library.php?id=9383

Who is Isa Bin Zaid ?

1. 1st Reference Al-Mufeed Min Mujam Al Rijal Al-Hadith page 447  المفيد من معجم رجال الحديث - محمد الجواهري - الصفحة ٤٤٧
9177 - 9176 - 9195 - عيسى بن زيد: بن علي بن الحسين بن علي بن أبي طالب (ع) أبو يحيى - أسند عنه - من أصحاب الصادق (ع) في رواية ضعيفة له كلام خشن مع أبي عبد الله (ع) لو صحت يظهر منها خبثه وجرأته على الله وعلى رسوله - مجهول 

Google translation:

 Isa bin Zaid: bin Ali bin Al Hussein bin Ali bin Abi Talib ((صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)) Abu Yahya - attributed to him - from the companions of Al-Sadiq ((صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)) in a weak narration, he has rough words with Abu Abdullah ((صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)), if it is correct, it shows his malice and his daring to God And on His Messenger - anonymous

http://shiaonlinelibrary.com/الكتب/3021_المفيد-من-معجم-رجال-الحديث-محمد-الجواهري/الصفحة_455

2. Mujam Al Rijal Al-Hadith - Ayatullah Khoi - معجم رجال الحديث - السيد الخوئي - ج ١٤ - الصفحة ٢٠٤

 في رواية محمد بن يعقوب، له كلام خشن مع أبي عبد الله عليه السلام، لو صح فإنه يظهر منه خبثه وجرأته على الله وعلى رسوله! ويأتي في ترجمة محمد بن عبد الله بن الحسن، لكن الرواية ضعيفة السند

Google Translation:

In the narration of Muhammad ibn Yaqoub, he has rough words with Abu Abdullah (عليه السلام), peace be upon him. If he is correct, he will show his malice and daring to God and His Messenger! It comes in the translation of Muhammad bin Abdullah bin Al-Hassan, but the narration is weak

http://shiaonlinelibrary.com/الكتب/3005_معجم-رجال-الحديث-السيد-الخوئي-ج-١٤/الصفحة_201
Also Tusi (رضي الله عنه) and Barqi (رضي الله عنه) mentioned him among companions of Imam Jaffer Al-Sadiq (عليه السلام) only and nothing more than that.

Conclusion:

Thus this guy Isa Bin Zaid is Unknown مجهول. In narrations hence this narration has no value.

For Those Who Reject Ilm-Al-Rijal:

I know two groups here who:

1. Reject Ilm-Ur-Rijal.
2. Accept Whole Kutab-e-Arba as reliable.

They might argue that If he is Majhool so what? We don't accept Ilm-Ur-Rijal. Then for those, situation gets even worse.

From above two references, it can be seen than in a weak narration he had some rough words with Imam Jaffer-e-Sadiq (عليه السلام). And this narrations appears in Al-Kafi so you people won't be able to deny it now. Take the reference. Chapter is ما يضل به بين دعوى المحق والمبطل في أمر الإمامة  ""

الكافي - الشيخ الكليني - ج ١ - الصفحة ٣٦٣ at http://shiaonlinelibrary.com/الكتب/1122_الكافي-الشيخ-الكليني-ج-١/الصفحة_411

for Al-kafi (Arabic) in 8 volumes at alfeker.net , Volume 1 page 225 chapter 138

for Urdu readers Usool-e-kafi jild 2 safha 345-346

for English readers Al-Kafi volume-1 at https://www.hubeali.com/online-books/online-english-books/  Book of Divine authority part 7 page 33 Last Paragraph 

here goes hadith:

He (the narrator) said, ‘So Muhammad Bin Abdullah appeared during that and called
the people to his allegiance.
So we were three who pledged allegiance to him and
urged the people to pledge allegiance to him, and neither the Qureysh opposed him,
nor the Helpers, nor the Bedouins. And he consulted Isa Bin Zayd, and he was from
his trustworthy ones
, and he was (a commander) upon his police force. So he
consulted him regarding the sending to face his people. So Isa Bin Zayd said to him,
‘If you call them with an easy calling, they will not answer you, or you should be
harsh upon them. Therefore leave me and them’. So Muhammad said to him, ‘Go to
whoever you intend from them

So he said, ‘Go to their chiefs and their elders, meaning Abu Abdullah Ja’far (عليه السلام) Bin
Muhammad (عليه السلام)
, for if you are harsh upon him (عليه السلام), they would all know that you will
make them pass upon the path which you passed Abu Abdullah (عليه السلام) upon’. So it was
not long before they came with Abu Abdullah (عليه السلام) until they paused him (عليه السلام) in front of
him. So Isa Bin Zayd said to him (عليه السلام), ‘Submit, you (عليه السلام) will be safe’.

(This hadith and this harsh conversation continues and Isa Bin zaid tells Imam Sadiq (عليه السلام) that he will be harsh with him then Muhammad orders Isa to imprison Imam Jaffer e Sadiq (عليه السلام) and isa Bin Zaid says:)

 So Isa Bin Zayd said to him,But, if you were to throw him (عليه السلام) in the prison, and the
prison has been ruined, and there is no lock upon it today. We fear that he (عليه السلام) might
flee from it
’. So Abu Abdullah (عليه السلام) smiled, then said: ‘There is neither a Might nor
Strength except with Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) , the Exalted, the Magnificent! Or do you think you will
be imprisoning me (عليه السلام)?’ He said, ‘Yes, by the One (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) Who Honoured
Muhammad (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) with the Prophet-hood, I will be imprisoning you (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) and will be
intensely harsh upon you (عليه السلام).

So Isa Bin Zayd said, ‘Withhold him A.Sin the hide-out, and that is the house of
Rayta today’. So Abu Abdullah (عليه السلام) said: ‘But, by Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى), I (عليه السلام) shall be saying
(something) and I (عليه السلام) will be ratified’. So Isa Bin Zayd said, ‘If you speak, I shall
break your (عليه السلام) mouth’
. So Abu Abdullah (عليه السلام) said to him: ‘But, by Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى), O bald
one, O blue-eyed one! It is as if I (عليه السلام) see you looking for a hole for yourself to enter
into, and you will not be among the mentioned ones during the meeting (the enemy
during battles), and I (عليه السلام) think that when (someone) claps behind you, you will flee
like the fleeing ostrich. So Muhammad rushed upon it with the rebuke, ‘Withhold
him (عليه السلام), and be severe upon him (عليه السلام), and be harsh upon him (عليه السلام)’

<Long hadith Continues but i end it here>

So the only question thats left is: Can we trust him if we reject Ilm-Al-Rijal? 
I Leave it to people.

And story of such person who is Unknown مجهول.by ilm ur rijal and THE WORST without ilm-ur-rijal is by no means acceptable for both

1. The ones who accept Ilm-ur-Rijal
2. The ones who reject ilm-ur-rijal

Now lets have a look at another narrator of the chain named: Yahya Bin AL-Hussein Bin Zaid bin Ali bin Hussein Bin Ali bin Abi Talib 

image.thumb.png.7f6dfeffb87e71a4a3e2004e8aebc96f.png

 

Ref: Rijal e Tusi Page 346. He was from sect: Waqifi (and this sect was cursed by Imams (عليه السلام) for their Aqaid).
Ref: Rijal e Allamah Hilli page 264

Now is he thiqa? we read in المفيد من معجم رجال الحديث - محمد الجواهري - الصفحة ٦٦٢

13489 - 13484 - 13513 - يحيى بن الحسين بن زيد: بن علي بن الحسين (ع) واقفي - مجهول - من أصحاب الكاظم (ع) -
13489 - 13484 - 13513 - Yahya bin Al Hussein bin Zaid: bin Ali bin Al Hussein (peace be upon him) "Waqifi" - anonymous - from the companions of Al-Kazim ((صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)) -

image.thumb.png.ebdfa95f0a5db3df120ad5eaadbda5f3.png

Allamah Baqir Majlisi (The Great Akhbari) said: Weak in Rijal e Majlisi page 339

So, The riwayah is just attributed to Isa Bin Zaid in the end and it isn't proven to be his riwayah.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

Famous Hadith quoted from Man-Layahzarahu-Al-Faqih no: 4382 is to prove Syeda cannot marry Non-Syed is:

Rasool (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) looked at the children of Ali (عليه السلام) and Jaffer (عليه السلام) and said:

"Our daughters are for our sons and our sons are for our daughters"

 I have had discussion with many people regarding this. When i say that Syeda Zainab (عليه السلام) (Descendant of Rasool (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) and from Bani-Fatimah) married outside Syeds, i:e Abdullah bin Jafar, they bring this hadith and say "Rasool (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) called sons of Jaffer his sons so they were Sadaat".

They use the words "Our sons" and "our daughters" to prove children of Jafer were Syeds and were also descendants of Rasool (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم).

I claim, that here, the word "OUR" is referring not only to Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم), but to Jaffer (عليه السلام) and Ali (عليه السلام) as well. Because if it did refer to Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) only, and Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) called Sons of Jaffer his sons, then when Ayah e Mubahila was revealed and Allah said to prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) say:

Let us bring our sons and you bring your sons,

why didn't Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) take sons of Jaffer (عليه السلام) with him? Why only Hasan and Hussein (عليه السلام) while history tells us that Abdullah Bin Jaffer was elder than both. (Check wiki) So this clearly proves that "OUR" refers not only to prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) but to Jaffer (عليه السلام) and Ali (عليه السلام) as well. And Rasool (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) didn't mean that Sons of Jaffer are his sons and ayah e mubahila is evident on this. Therefore it doesn't prove that Syeda Zainab (عليه السلام) was married to Sadaat. Instead, it proves that Rasool (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) allowed Ali's (عليه السلام) daughters to marry non-Sadaat (Sons of Jaffer (عليه السلام) weren't descendants of Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) and neither were from Bani-Fatimah) by saying "Our daughters are for our sons and our sons are for our daughters." Rather its a permission and Rasool (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) willingly allowed such a marriage.

2. Even if we accept that the sentence "Our daughters are for our sons" means that Syeda can't marry Non-Sadaat, then why shall we stop here, the very next part of hadith says "Our sons are for our daughters".

Then this would mean Syeds also cannot marry any non-syed women but we see Imams did marry outside sadaat even Imam Hussein (عليه السلام) married outside Sadaat. So Either Imams (عليه السلام) opposed Rasool (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)'s hadith (Nauzobillah) or either this interpretation is false.

Since the Imams (عليه السلام) married non-Sadaat women, the correct interpretation would be (in this case) that Its Mustahab for a hashmi to marry hahimi because if it was Wajib, then Imams would never have opposed Rasool (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)'s hadith. (But this case has already been refuted)

3. Some of the people said "sons of Jaffer were Syed because Sadqah/Zakat was haram for them". Thus proving Bibi Zainab (عليه السلام) married Sadaat.

We have no problem with this. Just make sure you would stand by your arguments.

We read in Al-Kafi Chapter of Zakah: Hadith: 1

(It has been narrated) from Abu Abdullah (عليه السلام) having said: ‘A group of people from the Clan of Hashim came over to Rasool-Allah (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم). So they asked him that he should utilise them upon the (collection of the) charities of the livestock, and they said, ‘Can there happen to be for us this portion which Allah has Made it to be for the workers over it, so we are the closes with it’. So Rasool-Allah (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) said: ‘O sons of Abdul Muttalibas! The charity is neither Permissible for me, nor for you all, but I have been Promised the intercession’ Then Abu Abdullah (عليه السلام) said: ‘By Allah has been Promised it. So what is your thinking, O sons of Abdul Muttalib (عليه السلام)! When I grab the ring of the door of the Paradise, do you see measws giving preference to others over you all?

(Syed Hasan Zafar said Sahih Authentic)

from Abu Ja’far A.Sand Abu Abdullah (عليه السلام) both having said: ‘Rasool-Allah s.a.wsaid: ‘The charity is the dirt of the hands of the people, and Allah has Prohibited upon me from it, and from other that which what has been Prohibited; and the charity is not Permissible for the Clan of Abdul Muttalib’

(Syed Hasan Zafar said Hasan (Good))

Now we read:

Ali bin Al Hassan bin Fadhal on the authority of Muhammad bin Abdullah on the authority of Muhammad bin Abi Omair on the authority of Muawiyah bin Ammar on the authority of

Imam Jaffer Bin Muhammad Al-Sadiq (عليه السلام) who said: Rasool (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) married Dhuba the daughter of Zubair Bin Abdul Mutlib ( Syeda - Hashmi since Sadqah is haram for her) to Miqdad Bin Al-Aswad ( His Companion and non hashmi ) and Banu Hashim spoke about it so Rasool (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) replied: "I just wanted the marriage to be done"

Grade: Mosaq (Reliable) see Tehzeeb Al-Ahkam Volume 7 Page 456

Therefore, if you say, that everyone who can't take sadqah / zakah is a syed, then it proves that Sadaat can marry Non-Sadaat and it was Sunnah of Rasool (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) and Rasool (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) willingly did it. Why are we opposing Rasool (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) then?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...
  • Advanced Member

Proving Validity of Marriage of Syeda With Non-Syed from The Book of Allah

Till now, we have seen opponents misquoting Quran or using false interpretations of verses to prove this marriage invalid. In this post, inshaAllah we will prove from a clear cut verse, that marriage of Syeda with Non-Syed is allowed.

Quran 4:23

Prohibited to you [for marriage] are your mothers, your daughters, your sisters, your father's sisters, your mother's sisters, your brother's daughters, your sister's daughters, your [milk] mothers who nursed you, your sisters through nursing, your wives' mothers, and your step-daughters under your guardianship [born] of your wives unto whom you have gone in. But if you have not gone in unto them, there is no sin upon you. And [also prohibited are] the wives of your sons who are from your [own] loins, and that you take [in marriage] two sisters simultaneously, except for what has already occurred. Indeed, Allah is ever Forgiving and Merciful.

Can anyone see Syeda mentioned there? No? Now see what the next Ayah says:

Quran 4:24

And [also prohibited to you are all] married women except those your right hands possess. [This is] the decree of Allah upon you. And lawful to you are [all others] beyond these, [provided] that you seek them [in marriage] with [gifts from] your property, desiring chastity, not unlawful sexual intercourse. So for whatever you enjoy [of marriage] from them, give them their due compensation as an obligation. And there is no blame upon you for what you mutually agree to beyond the obligation. Indeed, Allah is ever Knowing and Wise.

In these Ayahs Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) mentioned all the women that one cannot marry and then said:

[This is] the decree of Allah upon you. And lawful to you are [all others] beyond these.

All other than the mentioned women, can be married according to Quran and Nikah with Syeda also comes under this order. So when Quran has made something Halal, hadith can't be used to refute it.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

@Syed Ali Mehdi Shah Naqvi,

This is not limited to sub-continent.

people all over the world prefer to marry into similar families.

Syed - Syed

Khoja -  Khoja

White - White

Black - Black

Chinese - Chinese

Get over it. Not a big deal.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
6 hours ago, ShiaMan14 said:

@Syed Ali Mehdi Shah Naqvi,

This is not limited to sub-continent.

people all over the world prefer to marry into similar families.

Syed - Syed

Khoja -  Khoja

White - White

Black - Black

Chinese - Chinese

Get over it. Not a big deal.

True. My motive was to refute all their arguments and i think i am pretty much done with it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Moderators
13 hours ago, ShiaMan14 said:

Get over it. Not a big deal.

If it's just a preference, then yes. Once it becomes a reason for parents to reject someone who their children are willing to marry, then it is a direct violation of the instructions of the ma'soomeen (عليه السلام). 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
7 minutes ago, Mahdavist said:

If it's just a preference, then yes. Once it becomes a reason for parents to reject someone who their children are willing to marry, then it is a direct violation of the instructions of the ma'soomeen (عليه السلام). 

yes of course. 

my contention is that this is not limited to Syeds only - much more of a global phenomena.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Moderators
1 hour ago, ShiaMan14 said:

yes of course. 

my contention is that this is not limited to Syeds only - much more of a global phenomena.

True brother, I agree with that. The difference is that some try to portray it as a religious ruling (ie that it's haraam) which is extremely problematic. 

If we're just talking about preference, then I agree that it's similar to the other examples you provided. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

You can see on that site shiamatch that some people write:

Caste: Kazmi Syed

Which is even worse in many ways, I know someone whose father is a Ja'fari sayed and his mother is from one of the later imams, and apparently when they argued the father would say to the mother that he is from a superior imam to her, as dumb and illogical as that sounds this whole caste within a caste is a thing for some people.

You can see parallels with the Hindu cast system in which there exists a hierarchy in the individual castes, except for them it seems to be more depending on the function of the person rather than his lineage.

"There was hierarchy amongst the Brahmin jatis. The one who chanted Vedic lore saw themselves as superior to those who worked as purohits in temples. Those who conducted marriage were seen as superior to those who conducted funerals."

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

Well this doesn't seem to be an issue with people of Subcontinent only.

Check "Eteqadaat e Sadooq" (A shiite Creed) by SHeikh Sadooq, he gave a fatwa that Sadaat are kufv of each other only using hadith "Our daughters are for our sons and our sons are for our daughters".

And Ibn-e-Junaid used hadith of Al-Kafi to issue a very clear fatwa that they can't marry any outsider.

There seems to be a dis agreement among scholars on this matter.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

Great post, brother. I’m from Pakistan too and I’ve gotten myself into trouble so many times over this whole SYED non syed issue. 
 

Forget marriage issue. Just today I saw this guy sharing a video clip where a non syed was literally told to leave the stage because apparently he was being disrespectful towards a syed. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...
  • Advanced Member
On 9/29/2020 at 12:08 PM, Triggered said:

Great post, brother. I’m from Pakistan too and I’ve gotten myself into trouble so many times over this whole SYED non syed issue. 
 

Forget marriage issue. Just today I saw this guy sharing a video clip where a non syed was literally told to leave the stage because apparently he was being disrespectful towards a syed. 

hahah exactly lol

its a big praablam :hahaha:

anyways I openly posted about this on whatsapp and facebook, some people got angry but i'm fine. i don't care if posting teachings of Ahlebait (عليه السلام) makes them angry.

yeah i also saw that. People of Subcontinent are extremists and mostly follow what there forefathers followed.

For Example, when i discussed azaan/iqamah with some so called Akhbaris here, they replied "Are all present day shias wrong and you alone are right?"

Even akhbaris started using Ijma as a proof :hahaha: (Bare rang badalte dekhe hein)

Same goes with 4 daughters of Rasool (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)

The people of subcontinent would do takfeer over issues that aren't even related with Usool Al Deen. (So jahil i mean)

i challenged my cousins over this (Syed non Syed issue) and they couldn't refute me even though they came in a group of 2-3+

These Akhbaris are just like Usoolis. There is no difference at all.

They criticize Usoolis for ijtehaad and some fatwas while they do the same thing, interpretation by their own opinion (like nikah with Syed zadi is haram because wives of prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) are mothers so they are daughters etc... Quran 70:33 word shahadaah means 3 testimonies i:e ashadu anna ali an wali ullah etc)

I mean, they are not Akhbari. They lie

And doing taqleed of their zakirs but never accept it and call taqleed haram. ask them about references for videos of Ali Baqir Naqvi Asif Alvi etc They would never be able to find any and would say go ask them just like usoolis say.

In the end I would say:

waqt acha bhi ayega nasir...

gham na kr zindagi pari hai abhi... 

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...