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

No grounds in Shi'a Islam?

Rate this topic


Guest Wayfaring Problem

Recommended Posts

  • Veteran Member
20 minutes ago, Guest Elite said:

Just because you have been told that Ahlulbait had good relations, they named their children on names of sahaba (which infact has been clarified by imam Ali himself in various hadeeth that he named them as respect for other sahaba, example named son Uthman on Uthman bin Mazun and NOT uthman bin affan)

Ahlulbait made their stance clear that they disliked the munafiq khalifas, in 100s of hadeeths, nahaj al balagha and other books including sunni books, (which I do not want to spoon-feed as you have already grown up. if you claim you love islam, deen, then you shall have atleast an hour a month to research yourself with open mind) I know it is hard to ignore the things that have been mindwashed since childhood, but refer to multiple sources and books, even holy quran has multiple verses against munafiq sahaba and evil wives, just 1 example is - most verses in chapter At Tahrim...

but more than 100s of hadeeth, there are 1000s of counter hadeeth (by the corrupt kings/khalifas/agents) it does not make it a historical fact if written 100s of years after Saqifa. It was all made up by the usurpers, started immediately after the demise of the holy prophet. 

History is written by those in power...

Which unfortunately in case of Islam was the event of Safiqa which changed Islam forever, which is why Imam Mahdi is destined to revive islam as it was during the time of holy prophet. If islam is uncorrupted then why is the need to revive?

 

Regarding the cursing and identifying the munafiqeen and evil ones, it is not wrong at all. Imagine a parent teaches a child about police then they have to teach the child about theives as well, the dangers and who to approach and what to do... If we only show the selective good side of islam then nobody will know what evil personalities munafiqeen the foubtainheads who laid the foundation for transfer of khilafat to known munafiqs like muaviah, yazid did..

 

http://www.shiapen.com/comprehensive/cursing-sahaba-sharii-penalty/incidents-sahaba-cursing-abusing.html

The above comments is not a refutation on immamate? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member

Its funny how the others invent weak new attacks with no logic whatsoever. And so sad that the common people clutch at such straws to hold on.

"You have taken the method of verifying hadith from us!"

Is it such an arcane wisdom that a person should be prudent, trust only the ones who are trustworthy, and verify a news they hear before believing in it? Did the whole humanity take that common sense from you? Or did you think there is rocket science in ilm ur rijal? Our hadith science, btw, has more to it than just ilm ur rijaal, and that one tool is not a standalone deciding factor for us. There is matn or content. There is context. There is the instruction of comparison to Quran.

In the beginning there were 2 kind of Shia, the Shia of Ali and the Shia of Muawiya. We have been with the ahl ul bayt all along. You guys became Jabriyya, Qadriyya, Mutazilli, etc before inventing the Ahl ul Sunnah wa al-Jama'ah (People of the Sunnah (of the Prophet) and the (way of) the Jamaat (of 3 caliphs (to take their innovations too (Prophet alone was not enough for you))). Read some history for your own sake. You read nothing and have gambled and gambling is haram.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Just a small point to add over here:

Only Shias have been the ones who never did any takfir on other sect or group openly. 

While all the Sunni schools go online night and day to attack each other and when they are tired of fighting each other, they unite to attack Shias. These attacks are not just about criticism or just cursing. They do Takfir. So, to be honest this blame of cursing Sahab is extremely weak as it comes from those who curse each other and do takfir for each other.

A striking question and I challenge these 'advocates of Sahaba to answer'?

Wasn't Imam Ali (عليه السلام) a sahabi? Why was he cursed? What is the order for those who cursed one of the greatest companion of the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)? What is the order for those who battled the greates companion? What is the order for those who usurped the rights of the greatest companion?

Let us look at how many sahaba are revered by these advocates:

Muawiya (who was called a rebel and even cursed at one place by Holy Prophet (saw))

Amr al Aas (the rebel)

Hakam (cursed by the Prophet (saw))

Hazrat Aisha (mainstream Shias don't curse her but the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) predicted that the dogs of Hawb will bark on her). She also was in disobedience of Quran at that time.

 

So, these are dear to these advocates but what about Imam Ali (عليه السلام). Was he not a Sahabi?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/26/2021 at 7:08 AM, Cool said:

Well, cursing itself has grounds in Quran. 

إِنَّ الَّذِينَ يَكْتُمُونَ مَا أَنزَلْنَا مِنَ الْبَيِّنَاتِ وَالْهُدَى مِن بَعْدِ مَا بَيَّنَّاهُ لِلنَّاسِ فِي الْكِتَابِ أُولَـئِكَ يَلعَنُهُمُ اللّهُ وَيَلْعَنُهُمُ اللَّاعِنُونَ

2:159 

إِنَّ الَّذِينَ يُؤْذُونَ اللَّهَ وَرَسُولَهُ لَعَنَهُمُ اللَّهُ فِي الدُّنْيَا وَالْآخِرَةِ وَأَعَدَّ لَهُمْ عَذَابًا مُّهِينًا

33:57

It is but a fact that the revered personalities of Sunni brothers you named above, are proved liars. They backed each other in concealing the truth of wilayah, they backed each other in denying the right of Syeda Fatima s.a, hence all of them and their likes become fit for verse 2:159 &  33:57. 

It seems to me that you are comfortable with the Sunni way, who although fond Muawiyah (L) on the wrong side, who although identify him as leader of rebel group which killed Ammar bim Yasir (رضي الله عنه), but still avoid to curse him and place (رضي الله عنه) with his name. 

This is the mixing of haqq & batil. 

وَلاَ تَلْبِسُواْ الْحَقَّ بِالْبَاطِلِ وَتَكْتُمُواْ الْحَقَّ وَأَنتُمْ تَعْلَمُونَ

2:42 

كَيْفَ يَهْدِي اللَّهُ قَوْمًا كَفَرُوا بَعْدَ إِيمَانِهِمْ وَشَهِدُوا أَنَّ الرَّسُولَ حَقٌّ وَجَاءَهُمُ الْبَيِّنَاتُ ۚ وَاللَّهُ لَا يَهْدِي الْقَوْمَ الظَّالِمِينَ
أُولَٰئِكَ جَزَاؤُهُمْ أَنَّ عَلَيْهِمْ لَعْنَةَ اللَّهِ وَالْمَلَائِكَةِ وَالنَّاسِ أَجْمَعِينَ

3:85-87

Concealing wilaya??? Well.....the Quran doesn’t do you much favours either because no verse on wilaya in there too.....unless you come with your own interpretation of verses.

please do show us a clear verse then you have a leg to stand on....... otherwise your interpretation at best is a JOKE.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bismillahi r-Rahman -Rahim,

Al hamdu lillah. This interesting question raises a fundamental issue: what is your understanding of Shia's belief? Like you, I had believed sunni scholars and their rhetoric about the shiah's belief for 20 years. Al hamdu lillah, after investigating the Islamic history, I came to the realisation, that in front of the historical evidence and ahadith narrated in sunni sources, such as Al Bukhari, it is obvious that as Muslims, we are requested to follow the family of the Prophet (saaw) - Ahl al-Bayt - who are the only legitimate successors according to the Prophet (saaw). 

Unfortunately, as certain sunni countries have a political interest in maintaining the status quo, they deliberately ask their scholars to lie regarding issues of successions. So the answer to the question regarding the basis for the Shia's beliefs, can be easily explained in the historical events of the Battle of the Camel, and the Islamic principle of ruling: incredibly, both sunni and shia's aqidah confirms that the ruler should be from the Prophet's family (saaw). Yet, you'll find sunni scholars avoiding such topic not to upset their king paymasters. 

Thirdly, it is understandable that you raise this question, based on the propaganda spread by sunni scholars regarding the shia. For instance, 'Shia prays to grave, shia are mushrikeen.' While making prostration to a grave is clearly forbidden in shia belief. What shia do is to prostrate to Allah in the proximity of lands and soil that are blessed. 

We ask Allah to bring this ummah together, united in His name, and avoid any for of division that derives from the thirst of power and desire for this world. Amin. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are plenty of narrations of Imam 'Ali criticising the Sheikhayn, Muawiya, Amr ibn al-As. You can also find these by Zayd ibn 'Ali who attributed the oppression of Hisham ibn abd al-Malik to the Sheikhayn and even Yahya ibn Zayd. This is a known fact in Shia literature and is what prompted Bani Umayya to fabricate so many traditions in praise of the Sheikhayn to dupe the masses with their propaganda. Yes, a lot of people go overboard unfortunately but it cannot be denied that the sons of Fatima (a) called a spade a spade when they had to. As much as Abu Bakr and Umar have respect as muhajirs they innovated after the death of the prophet (s) by taking over the caliphate. Once the Hashimites were weakened this allowed Bani Umayya to take over - Uthman, Muawiya and Yazid. This was then followed by Banu Abbas who hijacked the cause of the ahl al-Bayt and used the Ghulat to defeat the Zaydis who were the true Shia. Bani Umayya and Bani Abbas used Islam as a tool to enrich themselves and this was all facilitated by Abu Bakr and Umar.

And on the authority of Abu Al-Jarud [who joined the uprising of Imam Zayd against Hisham] that a person said to Zayd ibn ‘Ali:

[Say] Greetings to those (the Sheikhayn) who passed and we will support you.

Zayd said:

Every flag held in Islam for others [than the household and their descendants] is a banner of misguidance.

Al-Kumayt ibn Zayd Al-Asadi (a poet for the household) who said:

I said:

Inform me about the two men (Abu Bakr and ‘Umar).

He (the narrator) said: He took the pillow and folded it unto his chest and said:

By Allah, O Kumeyt, there is no blood spilled unlawfully, nor any wealth taken without right, and not stone turned from another stone except that it would be upon their necks.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
On 4/27/2021 at 12:00 PM, Muslim2010 said:

OP seems to have lost all his grounds for defense of his false claims and he has not appeared so far for last 06 days :grin:

It's not surprising, since it's not possible defend that which has no grounds to begin with :D.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
On 4/27/2021 at 6:18 PM, Guest Shadow said:

Concealing wilaya??? Well.....the Quran doesn’t do you much favours either because no verse on wilaya in there too.....unless you come with your own interpretation of verses.

please do show us a clear verse then you have a leg to stand on....... otherwise your interpretation at best is a JOKE.

5:55 in light with the hadith of ghadeer is the answer.

"Innama Waliyokum ullah wa Rasoolohu  wallathina aamanu"

So Rasool (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم), in ghadeer, clearly introducing "wallathina aamanu" by taking up the hand of Ali (عليه السلام) and by saying "من كنت مولا فهذا على مولا".

Apart from that, in the history books, the giving of charity in ruku was attributed to Ali (عليه السلام) only. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • Advanced Member
Posted (edited)
On 3/30/2021 at 4:41 AM, Guest Readthis said:

The three major sub sects within Sunni islam i.e Barailvism, Deo bandi, Salafism - Ahle Hadith - Wahabissm are all 18th/19th century inventions

You nailed it bro!!! Traditional Ash'ari and Maturidi Sunnism has been relegated to a subordinate status in its own house...Wahhabism, Salafism, Takfirism etc. has completely commandeered normative Sunni Islam...even Hamza Yusuf said (recently) that the world of Sunni Islam is in absolute disarray and called for a critical re-examination and inward reflection

Edited by Eddie Mecca
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
5 hours ago, Eddie Mecca said:

You nailed it bro!!! Traditional Ash'ari and Maturidi Sunnism has been relegated to a subordinate status in its own house...Wahhabism, Salafism, Takfirism etc. has completely commandeered normative Sunni Islam...even Hamza Yusuf said (recently) that the world of Sunni Islam is in absolute disarray and called for a critical re-examination and inward reflection

Akhi, do you remember what lecture Hamza Yusuf said this? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
14 hours ago, MexicanVato said:

Akhi, do you remember what lecture Hamza Yusuf said this

I'll try to find it...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Al-Mas‘udi and Ibn Isḥāq are retrospectively considered to have written with a favorable Shi'i slant...whereas at-Tabari and al-Balādhurī are seen to have narrated events with a Sunni color/tint/tinge...although all aforementioned scholars predate emergence of Sunni/Shi'i crystalized divisions and historical perspectives.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...
  • Advanced Member
On 3/29/2021 at 2:57 PM, Guest Wayfaring Problem said:

Why are the Shi'a not able to ground any of their claims with regards to Islam? As an outsider, it is very odd to see that these people claim to follow people whom are put on such a pedestal, but they are doing the complete opposite of them. An example of this is cursing - this is what is considered innovation, which is reprehensible and the repentance of one who innovates is not accepted (correct me if I'm wrong). Ali ibn Abi Talib, Fatimah, Ibn Abbas, Hassan, Hussein, Ja'far ibn Abi Talib, etc. and none of them cursed the revered Sunni figures of Abu Bakr, Omar, Othman, Aisha, Hafsa, and the likes of them. This is one of many things I have an issue with.

This is very incongruent for me and I cannot really accept this. I've been looking to see if Shi'a Islam is the real deal instead of Sunni Islam, but it just doesn't sit well with me. I'm a person who digs deep into something before I fully commit to it because I couldn't care less as to who is spiteful of my choices, as long as I know it is right and it is what God/Allah wants. However, the problem is that there are many inconsistencies and loopholes in this version of Islam. Things are allowed that were not practiced before or by the Imams of the Shi'a, such as mutah marriages. As far as I've looked, from Muhammad to Hasan al-Askari, none of them practiced mutah. This is an issue for me, because why do something the great Messenger of God didn't do? Or his beloved family which you claim to follow? I see a lot of inconsistencies with Sunni Islam, but it can be explained rationally if one isn't being emotional - which is natural. All people make mistakes even if you think they don't, except in the cases God has a say in of course.

However, my problem is that the Shi'a do not have a foundation with their belief system if one is to look at things objectively. They even get their narration science from the Sunnis, which is a problem considering these are the people who are considered enemies to God. Why take from the enemies of God? I have a lot of problems with the Shi'a version of Islam. I know this place is the wrong place to go to because I know nobody here is a scholar and would give opinions rather than facts because you are unlearned, but I thought I would share my opinion anyway.

It just doesn't make any sense to me. Nothing is connecting, and for me, things must connect. It cannot be any other way. It has to be as.... a domino effect, per say. Something culminative. It cannot be scattered because from what I know and read about the Qur'an, it is a clear book sent down from God Himself. It doesn't make sense to have everything random and have things set to our own affairs. Why would God do that knowing we would still disobey Him while His guidance is present? Is that something logical to assume about our Creator?

 

Before commenting or responding, please do not see this as an attack. I am just stating something that is observable to me through rationality. Thank you.

Research Zaidi I think alot of questions will be answered.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

I don't see how someone looks at the event of Ghadir Khumm and doesn't think that the Prophet Muhammad (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) appointed a successor from his own house. Why would he leave it open for the companions to squabble amongst each other about, knowing the way that people are and that someone would have some sort of ambition to succeed him from outside his own house?

I became a Muslim because I began researching Shia and it made sense to me, much more sense than Sunnism makes because in Sunnism it would appear that they are obsessed with copying the mannerisms and mundane parts of the Prophet's (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) earthly life, overburdening people external to Arabic culture with mundane things that are "Sunnah" rather than exhorting people to imitate the character and the heart of the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) regardless of where on Earth they come from.

I'm not trying to be mean either. I have prayed with the Sunni before at the Masjid they have here in town and they're all relatively nice people albeit a little bit pushy, but I don't like having to deceive them by praying in a way that is strange to me because I'll be attacked for doing it how I learned to do it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
Posted (edited)

That's exactly the problem but at the same time the most ironic and fascinating thing of all: shi'ism is proven to be true according to major and famous sunni literature.

I don't know why, but more than 90% of Sunni sheikhs worldwide will never mention:

-Ghadeer khumm

-Qur'an and Ahlulbayt

-Imam Ali (عليه السلام) clearly being the best of all Sahaba

-Fadak clearly being stolen from Fatima

-The first 2 caliphs and the burning of the house of Fatima

-Fatima dying angry with them

-Ali, Fatima, Hassan and Hussain are mentionned with (عليه السلام), yet they say radiallahu 'anhum

-The corrupt nature of the 3rd caliph

-How 'Aisha fought Imam Ali (عليه السلام)

-Many innovations were created during the period of the first 3 caliphs

And many MANY more, this is just the tip of the iceberg. They will never mention this, despite the fact that it's clearly mentionned in the great Sunni books of Hadith. Instead, you'll hear them say lies, invent excuses and other similar stuff. "It's Qur'an and Sunnah!" "Mawla means friend!" "The caliphs did nothing wrong, you can't question their actions!" "We shouldn't talk about what happened between them, leave it to Allah" "But it's a good bid'ah!". As I said, the majority of them say this, not all of them.

The Guest that started this topic has never even replied, which shows that he didn't do research at all ! Either he's extremely ignorant and needs to spend a good amount of time reading first his own books then ours, or either he's a troll.

Edited by Mohamad Abdel-Hamid
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
3 hours ago, Mohamad Abdel-Hamid said:

"But it's a good bid'ah!". As I said, the majority of them say this, not all of them.

Wow, are there really people who will say that something is a "good bid'ha"? What exactly is the innovation that is "good" in the case of these people?

Granted I'm like the furthest thing from a scholar on Islam and I don't even have a Masjid to go to (the closest Shia masjid is 100 miles north of here) so I don't really know a whole lot, but I know that any sort of innovation is supposed to be wrong and this is my big problem with so-called "progressive Islam".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

It refers to one hadith where 'Umar one day goes to the mosque during a Ramadan night and sees people praying individually, and he orders them to pray in congregation. When they all pray in congregation, he says: "This is a good bid'ah". Hence the origins of salatul Tarawih.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...