Jump to content
In the Name of God بسم الله

Wives of prophet are his ahlul bayt.

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

Guest Taqwa Iman Taslim
8 hours ago, sunnism said:

That's already addressed. The reason is because ali hasan and hussain are also to be included in that verse. That's why. 

I'm going to color code it.

وَقَرْنَ فِي بُيُوتِكُنَّ وَلَا تَبَرَّجْنَ تَبَرُّجَ الْجَاهِلِيَّةِ الْأُولَىٰ ۖ وَأَقِمْنَ الصَّلَاةَ وَآتِينَ الزَّكَاةَ وَأَطِعْنَ اللَّهَ وَرَسُولَهُ ۚ إِنَّمَا يُرِيدُ اللَّهُ لِيُذْهِبَ عَنْكُمُ الرِّجْسَ أَهْلَ الْبَيْتِ وَيُطَهِّرَكُمْ تَطْهِيرًا | Stay in your houses and do not flaunt your finery like the former [days of pagan] ignorance. Maintain the prayer and pay the zakat, and obey Allah and His Apostle. Allah only desires to repel all impurity from you, O People of the Household, and purify you with a thorough purification. | Al-Ahzaab : 33

وَاذْكُرْنَ مَا يُتْلَىٰ فِي بُيُوتِكُنَّ مِنْ آيَاتِ اللَّهِ وَالْحِكْمَةِ ۚ إِنَّ اللَّهَ كَانَ لَطِيفًا خَبِيرًا | And remember what is recited in your homes of the signs of Allah and wisdom. Indeed Allah is all-attentive, all-aware. | Al-Ahzaab : 34

I think if was addressing the wives only, it would be:

Stay in your houses and do not flaunt your finery like the former [days of pagan] ignorance. Maintain the prayer and pay the zakat, and obey Allah and His Apostle. Allah only desires to repel all impurity from you, O Women of the Prophet, and purify you with a thorough purification. And remember what is recited in your homes of the signs of Allah and wisdom. Indeed Allah is all-attentive, all-aware.

 

I think if addressed wives in start, then switched to include Ali (a), Hassan (a), etc.

Stay in your houses and do not flaunt your finery like the former [days of pagan] ignorance. Maintain the prayer and pay the zakat, and obey Allah and His Apostle. Allah only desires to repel all impurity from you, O People of the House, and purify you with a thorough purification. And remember what is recited in your homes of the signs of Allah and wisdom. Indeed Allah is all-attentive, all-aware.

The reason being, is that if other members are included, then they are included because the advise in the first part should also somehow apply to them. The next verse since would be true of them as well, then it would continue plural male.

Aside from this, is the meaning of the verse in itself is exalted and above applying to normal people. The double up on the purity means it's ultra purity.  Furthermore, the "only" does not make sense to say to "all that God desires with this" type meaning, because it would diminish what God desires with the commands and also diminish the status of ultra purity.  The Inama must be limiting something else, I suggest in the first part it limits what God desires to keep away from Ahlulbayt and in the second part it applies to "you" meaning they alone does God wish to purify a purification, meaning, they are purified at a level higher then all others.   This surely has to keep in mind the Prophet (s) and so they are the level of his purity.

The reward also because sustenance of God is emphasized and Akheera, doesn't make sense to emphasize with "only" to not make it more then a desire to purify them. 

8 hours ago, sunnism said:

That is the shia interpretation of that verse. We don't agree with that interpretation. 

Yet isn't this hypocrisy?  The context there is clearly about the Prophet Welayat, and so why make the subject of Ulul-Arham our relatives, and then further more the Awliya some sort of exception to that type meaning? Why not see it flow and keep it on topic? Isn't this what you complaint about in 33:33? Verse 33:6 if you don't cut it off into parts and let it flow, it's clear and gives context to 33:33 later. 

 

8 hours ago, sunnism said:

Why interwoven. Why doesn't the quran explicitely says ali and his 11 sons from his progeny are imams. Surely the imams must be more important than zaid bin haritha. Why is his name explicitely mentioned in the quran while the 12 imams are not. Why did the quran mentioned 12 months but not 12 imams. 

There can many reasons.  I will suggest some things to consider.

(1)

The ending of Nubuwa means leaders won't have scripture to compliment them.  Yet in the past, when scriptures did compliment the successors, the scriptures from the start to the end, where corrupted.  In the past the founders were succeeded by Prophets, and so scripture would continue.

So to safeguard this text without forcing the issue, without forcing people to accept Ahlulbayt (a), left it so that despite no force, the Quran would stay in tact. 

In the past, revelations would get corrupted for a reason.  In ending things with Ahlulbayt (a) and them being the last Ahlulbayt, he wanted it to be done that neither are people forced to accept Ahlulbayt if they don't want to but the Quran would remain in tact because you can corrupt the meaning and take words way out of their place in terms of context.

(2) 

The Quran claims to contain all things in terms of guidance and even be able to make you talk to the dead, travel the earth, and destroy mountains, yet how this unravels, is mysterious.

It can be part of this is that Quran has modes.  What I mean by this, it's seen holistically to cover everything.  If you think politics, it will cover all politics. If you think spiritual ascension, it will cover that subject. If you think why is it against Zina, there's a whole mode for that. Yet Quran never even though it condemns zina so many places you for example, won't find in it explicitly explaining why it's evil.  

The modes of Quran one of them is Welayat of Ali (a) to the Mahdi (a).  It's in fact, one of it's easier to see modes.  You can holistically see it clearly, but you have not play games and pretend words don't mean what they mean. And you have to see meaning in everything God says about succession whether past or present.  Not play games.

This can be useful in that it becomes layered, with other topics, and opens up other subjects.  And when we get use to seeing Quran holistically, and seeing different modes, we begin to open up many doors and Quran renews itself and takes higher shape the deeper we go.

(3)

Even if Quran was to be safeguarded and not corrupted and the issue not forced, it can be in this scenario, a very small number of mankind would have followed the Quran.  It can be that the plan that Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) allows people to play coy and deceive themselves, is easier to cure, then send another revelation and reset the process, in which the Prophets (a) would get rejected time and time again. 

The 23 period of revelation also has to kept in mind with the Quran Ali (a) safeguarded. Today, we can if we have the Quran of Ali (a), put all the dates and timings in a program, and see how Quran was dynamically build and see the explanation of the Seerah of the Nabi (a) and Sunnah, with that.  This will be a healing miracle in itself when Imam Mahdi (a) brings this and how the Quran was dynamically built will be seen, it will link us to how the believers of Mohammad (S) time were slowly built their faith.

This I'm betting will be a miracle. How the Seerah and Sunnah complimented the Quran as it was dynamically built, and we see the explanation, and see how it was built, it will be a healing and guidance.

(4)

People can say why not the Sunnah all in the Quran explicitly too.  But we see details of Salah not included, etc, and this out of a wisdom. God could've easily included, but made the Sunnah compliment the Quran and Quran compliment the Sunnah.

(5)

It's clear enough. It can be clearer, but it's clear enough it in how it designates Ahlulbayt (a) and the number of successors.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member
3 hours ago, sunnism said:

Atleast 26 of them are mentioned. Is one of the imams mentioned in the quran? Forget the names. Does the quran even say that there will be 12 imams in ummah? The fact that such a important principle of religion is absent from th quran really says a lot. 

All these technical discussions about ahadith, gradings, chains of transmission, to finally mand on such a weightless argument.

Allow us to question sunni fundamentals too with that simple approach of yours :

'Err... what about the 4 Rashidun in the Qur'an ?'

'Where is it written that sahabas are blessed ?'

'There is no concept of tabi`in, let alone tabi` at tabi`in' in Qur'an, why do you emphasize them as knowledgeable and superior to us?'

'Wait but you believe in Imam Mahdi too, so where is it in the Qur'an?'

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
1 minute ago, realizm said:

Allow us to question sunni fundamentals too with that simple approach of yours :

'Err... what about the 4 Rashidun in the Qur'an ?'

Lol. Stop comparing apples with oranges. The rashidun were just rightly guided, virtuous successors of the prophet. That's it. While 12 imams are the center your madhab, even the prophet and all other prophets main mission was to preach the wilayah of these 12 individuals. That's how imam centric your madhab is. Your madhab is less about tawhid and more about imamah. Just look at any shi'i tafaseer of the quran. Every other ayah is about imams. 

 

6 minutes ago, realizm said:

Where is it written that sahabas are blessed

Lol. You want to see the virtues of sahabah in the quran. See 48:29, 48:18, 59:8,9, 8:74, 9:100.

The virtues of companions in the quran are as bright as sunlight, while the imamate of 12 individuals... Well I don't need to say it. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member
10 hours ago, sunnism said:

 Is one of the imams mentioned in the quran? 

1. Yes the name of Imam chosen by Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) and not by the people shura has been mentioned in the following verse of quran:

وَإِذِ ابْتَلَىٰ إِبْرَاهِيمَ رَبُّهُ بِكَلِمَاتٍ فَأَتَمَّهُنَّ ۖ قَالَ إِنِّي جَاعِلُكَ لِلنَّاسِ إِمَامًا ۖ قَالَ وَمِن ذُرِّيَّتِي ۖ قَالَ لَا يَنَالُ عَهْدِي الظَّالِمِينَ

And when his Lord tried Ibrahim with certain words, he fulfilled them. He said: Surely I will make you an Imam of men. Ibrahim said: And of my offspring? My covenant does not include the unjust, said He. (2:124)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member
10 hours ago, sunnism said:

Does the quran even say that there will be 12 imams in ummah? The fact that such a important principle of religion is absent from th quran really says a lot. 

Yes based on the verses of quran and explained by hadith of the prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) in shia and sunni sources, the quran does mention the word Imam in its arabic text exactly in 12 verses.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
5 hours ago, Muslim2010 said:

1. Yes the name of Imam chosen by Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) and not by the people shura has been mentioned in the following verse of quran:

وَإِذِ ابْتَلَىٰ إِبْرَاهِيمَ رَبُّهُ بِكَلِمَاتٍ فَأَتَمَّهُنَّ ۖ قَالَ إِنِّي جَاعِلُكَ لِلنَّاسِ إِمَامًا ۖ قَالَ وَمِن ذُرِّيَّتِي ۖ قَالَ لَا يَنَالُ عَهْدِي الظَّالِمِينَ

And when his Lord tried Ibrahim with certain words, he fulfilled them. He said: Surely I will make you an Imam of men. Ibrahim said: And of my offspring? My covenant does not include the unjust, said He. (2:124)

Ya alllah. Is one of the 12 imams mentioned in the quran? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member
7 hours ago, sunnism said:

Is one of the 12 imams mentioned in the quran? 

1. What  is your view / opinion about the quoted verse given below that is mentioning the name of Imam chosen by Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى)? and not by the people?

2. Where is the verse of quran that mentions that it is mandatory that the names of all chosen representatives by Allah including the prophets, imams, leaders for ummah should be mentioned in quran? Please quote that verse with its reference from quran.

wasalam

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Taqwa Iman Taslim

  

On 3/2/2024 at 5:18 AM, sunnism said:

That's already addressed. The reason is because ali hasan and hussain are also to be included in that verse. That's why. 

I'm going to color code it.

وَقَرْنَ فِي بُيُوتِكُنَّ وَلَا تَبَرَّجْنَ تَبَرُّجَ الْجَاهِلِيَّةِ الْأُولَىٰ ۖ وَأَقِمْنَ الصَّلَاةَ وَآتِينَ الزَّكَاةَ وَأَطِعْنَ اللَّهَ وَرَسُولَهُ ۚ إِنَّمَا يُرِيدُ اللَّهُ لِيُذْهِبَ عَنْكُمُ الرِّجْسَ أَهْلَ الْبَيْتِ وَيُطَهِّرَكُمْ تَطْهِيرًا | Stay in your houses and do not flaunt your finery like the former [days of pagan] ignorance. Maintain the prayer and pay the zakat, and obey Allah and His Apostle. Allah only desires to repel all impurity from you, O People of the Household, and purify you with a thorough purification. | Al-Ahzaab : 33

وَاذْكُرْنَ مَا يُتْلَىٰ فِي بُيُوتِكُنَّ مِنْ آيَاتِ اللَّهِ وَالْحِكْمَةِ ۚ إِنَّ اللَّهَ كَانَ لَطِيفًا خَبِيرًا | And remember what is recited in your homes of the signs of Allah and wisdom. Indeed Allah is all-attentive, all-aware. | Al-Ahzaab : 34

I think if was addressing the wives only, it would be:

Stay in your houses and do not flaunt your finery like the former [days of pagan] ignorance. Maintain the prayer and pay the zakat, and obey Allah and His Apostle. Allah only desires to repel all impurity from you, O Women of the Prophet, and purify you with a thorough purification. And remember what is recited in your homes of the signs of Allah and wisdom. Indeed Allah is all-attentive, all-aware.

 

I think if addressed wives in start, then switched to include Ali (a), Hassan (a), etc.

Stay in your houses and do not flaunt your finery like the former [days of pagan] ignorance. Maintain the prayer and pay the zakat, and obey Allah and His Apostle. Allah only desires to repel all impurity from you, O People of the House, and purify you with a thorough purification. And remember what is recited in your homes of the signs of Allah and wisdom. Indeed Allah is all-attentive, all-aware.

The reason being, is that if other members are included, then they are included because the advise in the first part should also somehow apply to them. The next verse since would be true of them as well, then it would continue plural male.

Aside from this, is the meaning of the verse in itself is exalted and above applying to normal people. The double up on the purity means it's ultra purity.  Furthermore, the "only" does not make sense to say to "all that God desires with this" type meaning, because it would diminish what God desires with the commands and also diminish the status of ultra purity.  The Inama must be limiting something else, I suggest in the first part it limits what God desires to keep away from Ahlulbayt and in the second part it applies to "you" meaning they alone does God wish to purify a purification, meaning, they are purified at a level higher then all others.   This surely has to keep in mind the Prophet (s) and so they are the level of his purity.

The reward also because sustenance of God is emphasized and Akheera, doesn't make sense to emphasize with "only" to not make it more then a desire to purify them. 

On 3/2/2024 at 5:18 AM, sunnism said:

That is the shia interpretation of that verse. We don't agree with that interpretation. 

Yet isn't this hypocrisy?  The context there is clearly about the Prophet Welayat, and so why make the subject of Ulul-Arham our relatives, and then further more the Awliya some sort of exception to that type meaning? Why not see it flow and keep it on topic? Isn't this what you complaint about in 33:33? Verse 33:6 if you don't cut it off into parts and let it flow, it's clear and gives context to 33:33 later. 

 

On 3/2/2024 at 5:18 AM, sunnism said:

Why interwoven. Why doesn't the quran explicitely says ali and his 11 sons from his progeny are imams. Surely the imams must be more important than zaid bin haritha. Why is his name explicitely mentioned in the quran while the 12 imams are not. Why did the quran mentioned 12 months but not 12 imams. 

There can many reasons.  I will suggest some things to consider.

(1)

The ending of Nubuwa means leaders won't have scripture to compliment them.  Yet in the past, when scriptures did compliment the successors, the scriptures from the start to the end, where corrupted.  In the past the founders were succeeded by Prophets, and so scripture would continue.

So to safeguard this text without forcing the issue, without forcing people to accept Ahlulbayt (a), left it so that despite no force, the Quran would stay in tact. 

In the past, revelations would get corrupted for a reason.  In ending things with Ahlulbayt (a) and them being the last Ahlulbayt, he wanted it to be done that neither are people forced to accept Ahlulbayt if they don't want to but the Quran would remain in tact because you can corrupt the meaning and take words way out of their place in terms of context.

(2) 

The Quran claims to contain all things in terms of guidance and even be able to make you talk to the dead, travel the earth, and destroy mountains, yet how this unravels, is mysterious.

It can be part of this is that Quran has modes.  What I mean by this, it's seen holistically to cover everything.  If you think politics, it will cover all politics. If you think spiritual ascension, it will cover that subject. If you think why is it against Zina, there's a whole mode for that. Yet Quran never even though it condemns zina so many places you for example, won't find in it explicitly explaining why it's evil.  

The modes of Quran one of them is Welayat of Ali (a) to the Mahdi (a).  It's in fact, one of it's easier to see modes.  You can holistically see it clearly, but you have not play games and pretend words don't mean what they mean. And you have to see meaning in everything God says about succession whether past or present.  Not play games.

This can be useful in that it becomes layered, with other topics, and opens up other subjects.  And when we get use to seeing Quran holistically, and seeing different modes, we begin to open up many doors and Quran renews itself and takes higher shape the deeper we go.

(3)

Even if Quran was to be safeguarded and not corrupted and the issue not forced, it can be in this scenario, a very small number of mankind would have followed the Quran.  It can be that the plan that Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) allows people to play coy and deceive themselves, is easier to cure, then send another revelation and reset the process, in which the Prophets (a) would get rejected time and time again. 

The 23 period of revelation also has to kept in mind with the Quran Ali (a) safeguarded. Today, we can if we have the Quran of Ali (a), put all the dates and timings in a program, and see how Quran was dynamically build and see the explanation of the Seerah of the Nabi (a) and Sunnah, with that.  This will be a healing miracle in itself when Imam Mahdi (a) brings this and how the Quran was dynamically built will be seen, it will link us to how the believers of Mohammad (S) time were slowly built their faith.

This I'm betting will be a miracle. How the Seerah and Sunnah complimented the Quran as it was dynamically built, and we see the explanation, and see how it was built, it will be a healing and guidance.

(4)

People can say why not the Sunnah all in the Quran explicitly too.  But we see details of Salah not included, etc, and this out of a wisdom. God could've easily included, but made the Sunnah compliment the Quran and Quran compliment the Sunnah.

(5)

It's clear enough. It can be clearer, but it's clear enough it in how it designates Ahlulbayt (a) and the number of successors.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
Posted (edited)
39 minutes ago, Muslim2010 said:

What  is your view / opinion about the quoted verse given below that is mentioning the name of Imam chosen by Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى)? and not by the people?

It proves nothing. By that logic we will have to believe that even kuffar are divinely appointed caliph, since they were also made khilaaf by allahallah, quran 27:62

39 minutes ago, Muslim2010 said:

Where is the verse of quran that mentions that it is mandatory that the names of all chosen representatives by Allah including the prophets, imams, leaders for ummah should be mentioned in quran? Please quote that verse with its reference from quran.

Nowhere. That was just to reply that shi'i who was saying that quran is interwoven and taunting the sunnis that dont believe in their imamah. I don't believe that imamah is false just because it isn't mentioned in the quran. There are much more stronger reasons to it. And this questions can be thrown back at you. You shia always ask that where in the quran, it is stated caliph must be chosen by people. We will ask you the same question that you asked. Where in the quran it states that all the jurisprudential issues must be stated in the quran? You will say, well in the quran all of the caliph are chosen by allah even taghut. That is not an argument. Since allah also made kuffar the khulafa in land. And even if we accept you argument, then it doesn't deny that khulafa can also be chosen by people. Your argument would be valid if the quran says khalifa or imam can only be divinely appointed by allah, which it doesn't say anywhere. 

You cannot even prove your fundamentals from the quran like imamah which is the center of your madhab and you are asking us to prove a fiqhi ruling from quran. What a joke

Edited by sunnism
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Taqwa Iman Taslim
18 minutes ago, sunnism said:

It proves nothing. By that logic we will have to believe that even kuffar are divinely appointed caliph, since they were also made khilaaf by allahallah, quran 27:62

Nowhere. That was just to reply that shi'i who was saying that quran is interwoven and taunting the sunnis that dont believe in their imamah. I don't believe that imamah is false just because it isn't mentioned in the quran. There are much more stronger reasons to it. And this questions can be thrown back at you. You shia always ask that where in the quran, it is stated caliph must be chosen by people. We will ask you the same question that you asked. Where in the quran it states that all the jurisprudential issues must be stated in the quran? You will say, well in the quran all of the caliph are chosen by allah even taghut. That is not an argument. Since allah also made kuffar the khulafa in land. And even if we accept you argument, then it doesn't deny that khulafa can also be chosen by people. Your argument would be valid if the quran says khalifa or imam can only be divinely appointed by allah, which it doesn't say anywhere. 

You cannot even prove your fundamentals from the quran like imamah which is the center of your madhab and you are asking us to prove a fiqhi ruling from quran. What a joke

Disbelief has a pattern. Mohammad (s) showed miracles of physical type and the Quranic miracle, but people constantly said "why not a sign regarding him be revealed from his Lord". At first they wanted signs like previous ones (sent ones) were sent with, when shown, they called it sorcery. And then made up their own requirements such as he should bring Angels with him or God should talk to them or that all their forefathers should be brought to life.  This was unreasonable.  The miracles shown were sufficient proofs, and Quran is even a sufficient sign. 

The Quran is clear enough about leadership of Ahlulbayt (a) and even the number of successors - saying why didn't God say this way or that way, is moving the goal posts.  The verses are interwoven, because that is how Quran is, it repeats things from different angles with different subjects and makes a cumulative case.

Of course, building on clear, moves to clearer things. The verse of Tatheer is not really about proving Ahlulbayt (a) although it does, it's more about teaching they are the best of the best, the chosen of all sent ones, and they are of one rank ascending together in blessings from God.  It's meant for a particular type of lover of Ahlulbayt (a) to see their station in Quran. 

However, 33:6, 42:23. 4:59, and 13:7, these are making a clearer case.  Once you get past that, you can find their number too explained in the Quran. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest 12345
1 hour ago, sunnism said:

You cannot even prove your fundamentals from the quran like imamah which is the center of your madhab and you are asking us to prove a fiqhi ruling from quran. What a joke

With all due respect, the same can be said about the Sunni madhabs.

I think a better point to start at is whether or not we can come to an agreement on the necessity of a divinely appointed representative after the Prophet (صَلَّىٰ ٱللَّٰهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ).

So, do you believe that a representative should have been chosen? If so, would they be divinely chosen?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member
5 hours ago, sunnism said:

It proves nothing. By that logic we will have to believe that even kuffar are divinely appointed caliph, since they were also made khilaaf by allahallah, quran 27:62

Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) intends to elevate human beings as khilaaf by His Mercy with responsibilities since Adam (عليه السلام).   Will all human beings accept and adhere to that covenant. Those who go against Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى), their souls are dropped from that status. All kuffar are dropped from that status to even lower than syaitans (as in the case of munafiq)

It is us who has to go back to our own Islamic history,  history of humanity and Qur'an to study who has transgressed and who has adhered and uphold to the convenant.

Ahlulbayt (عليه السلام) has been made pure and protected.  Ali (عليه السلام) was born in Kaaba and assassinated while making sujud.  And Ali (عليه السلام) is among Ahlulbayt (عليه السلام).

How about those who went against Ali (عليه السلام)?

Wallahualam 

Layman.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
Posted (edited)
17 hours ago, Guest 12345 said:

With all due respect, the same can be said about the Sunni madhabs.

I think a better point to start at is whether or not we can come to an agreement on the necessity of a divinely appointed representative after the Prophet (صَلَّىٰ ٱللَّٰهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ).

So, do you believe that a representative should have been chosen? If so, would they be divinely chosen?

It cannot be said about sunni madhab. Khilafah and others are not the center of our sect unlike imamah is in yours. 

 

18 hours ago, Guest Taqwa Iman Taslim said:

The Quran is clear enough about leadership of Ahlulbayt (a) and even the number of successors

Where? And it is only clear for a twelver. If a desert arab will read the quran then he will get a clear idea of tawheed and risalah, nabuwwah, and many other things but he will not a gist of imamah of ahlul bayt. 

 

18 hours ago, Guest Taqwa Iman Taslim said:

The verses are interwoven, because that is how Quran is, it repeats things from different angles with different subjects and makes a cumulative case

How? I don't find the quran interwoven when it comes to tawheed and other concepts. Why it is suddenly interwoven when it comes to imamah? 

18 hours ago, Guest Taqwa Iman Taslim said:

However, 33:6, 42:23. 4:59, and 13:7, these are making a clearer case.  Once you get past that, you can find their number too explained in the Quran

So quran says ahlul bayt are purified(just like people of badr) then in other place ask to love prophet's kinship, then in other place ask to obey who are in authority, that must mean ali and his 11 sons are imams of this ummah. Wow, so clear. So unambiguous. Instead of all this, why not ali is the imam after prophet? 

Stop playing the victim card. The virtues of sahaba are more clear in the quran than this. 

 

 

Edited by sunnism
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators
On 3/2/2024 at 7:10 PM, sunnism said:

The fact that such a important principle of religion is absent from th quran really says a lot. 

For someone who accepts only the Quran and rejects the sunnah, yes possibly, but this manhaj is anyway self contradicting  

As for those who follow the teachings and orders of the Prophet ((صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)), if he leaves behind two weighty things for us to follow then we follow them. We don't say 'no we will only follow what's explicitly stated in the Qur'an'

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
On 3/3/2024 at 12:47 AM, Guest Taqwa Iman Taslim said:

The next verse since would be true of them as well, then it would continue plural male

Not at all. Since the next verse is talking only about the wives. 

 

On 3/3/2024 at 12:47 AM, Guest Taqwa Iman Taslim said:

Aside from this, is the meaning of the verse in itself is exalted and above applying to normal people. The double up on the purity means it's ultra purity.  Furthermore, the "only" does not make sense to say to "all that God desires with this" type meaning, because it would diminish what God desires with the commands and also diminish the status of ultra purity

This type of purity is also attained by people of badr. 

On 3/3/2024 at 12:47 AM, Guest Taqwa Iman Taslim said:

Yet isn't this hypocrisy?  The context there is clearly about the Prophet Welayat, and so why make the subject of Ulul-Arham our relatives, and then further more the Awliya some sort of exception to that type meaning?

It isn't hypocrisy. The blood relatives part is basically abrogating the previous tradition. Before this immigrants used to inherit from the ansar. So the quran is saying that blood relations have more right over each other's than other believers and muhajireen. And why is it hypocrisy. You came up with an interpretation in which no one agrees with you, and which go against the apparent of the verse. Imamate isn't clear in the quran kid. Get over it. 

On 3/3/2024 at 12:47 AM, Guest Taqwa Iman Taslim said:

The ending of Nubuwa means leaders won't have scripture to compliment them.  Yet in the past, when scriptures did compliment the successors, the scriptures from the start to the end, where corrupted.  In the past the founders were succeeded by Prophets, and so scripture would continue.

So to safeguard this text without forcing the issue, without forcing people to accept Ahlulbayt (a), left it so that despite no force, the Quran would stay in tact. 

In the past, revelations would get corrupted for a reason.  In ending things with Ahlulbayt (a) and them being the last Ahlulbayt, he wanted it to be done that neither are people forced to accept Ahlulbayt if they don't want to but the Quran would remain in tact because you can corrupt the meaning and take words way out of their place in terms of context.

This is a stupid reason. Why did quran mentioned the virtues of ahlul bayt then? By your logic quran shouldn't mentioned it because there is a possibility that ummayad may have corrupted it. 

And what you have is just an assumption. My assumption is that quran didn't mentioned the imamah of 12 individuals because their divine imamah was a hoax. 

On 3/3/2024 at 12:47 AM, Guest Taqwa Iman Taslim said:

Even if Quran was to be safeguarded and not corrupted and the issue not forced, it can be in this scenario, a very small number of mankind would have followed the Quran

Not a very good reason. Try again

On 3/3/2024 at 12:47 AM, Guest Taqwa Iman Taslim said:

People can say why not the Sunnah all in the Quran explicitly too.  But we see details of Salah not included, etc, and this out of a wisdom. God could've easily included, but made the Sunnah compliment the Quran and Quran compliment the Sunnah.

Stop comparing apples with oranges. Quran commanded to pray salah, talks about bow, qiyam, sujood, doing sudhu and many more details. This cannot be said about imamah. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
4 minutes ago, sunnism said:

Stop comparing apples with oranges. Quran commanded to pray salah, talks about bow, qiyam, sujood, doing sudhu and many more details.

Plus quran also mentions 3 timings of salah, how to pray when you are at war and many other details.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Taqwa Iman Taslim
2 hours ago, sunnism said:

Where? And it is only clear for a twelver. If a desert arab will read the quran then he will get a clear idea of tawheed and risalah, nabuwwah, and many other things but he will not a gist of imamah of ahlul bayt. 

The arguments in Quran for each of these things are pretty advanced. I doubt a person can get alone from Quran and hadiths without some sort of explanation in books of Irfan or Sufism or Philosophy. Yes, following it blindly is easy, not understanding Tawhid but convincing yourself you believe in it, is easy.  That's what humans do, they deceive themselves. However, how Quran addresses all those issues it does in a holistic manner.  Surah Ikhlas and the flow of it makes sense only if you kept in mind knowledge about Tawhid.  Otherwise, it will seem like just a blind creed.  The arguments for Nubuwa are different then arguments for Resalah.  Most people can't even distinguish between the two, so I doubt a person without deep knowledge, would know the arguments for each just by reading Quran at once. 

Quote

How? I don't find the quran interwoven when it comes to tawheed and other concepts. Why it is suddenly interwoven when it comes to imamah? 

You know when I really discovered this, is day of judgment concept. I thought it would easiest way to convince Bahais that day of judgment is not manifestation of Baha'allah, but really this and that.  I learned, it's a lot harder to prove when a person is stubborn and will twist every verse and not see them all holistically.  Day of judgement for example, is such a thing. You won't find one verse that can't be twisted to Bahai interpretation. 50 000 years, they have interpretation for that, it happens in a moment... time is relative when revelation is revealed, things go quicker. Things like that.  It's a headache to deal with.  The verses about Welayat of Ali (a) needs to be seen holistically. There isn't one that cannot be twisted way out of place and denied, true. But each of them are clear enough and especially when keeping in mind all of them.

Tawhid, you need to keep in mind a lot of things. For example, why would heaven and earth be in a sate of corruption if more then one god. To that, you have to understand the emanation of truth from the absolute source and that without a source of truth, it would be all politics among beings we call gods. There would be no right or wrong. But this not easy to see for most of humanity. It's layered. Part of that truth is that we exist in God's vision and judgment, and without that vision of absolute truth, nothing can have true value but would be an illusion of value. The fact we have value is only possible because God sees us and assigns us that value relative to his.  But how can it be relative to his when he is absolute, well, its in fact, not it's relative to non-existence and existence (him), then comes evil which is negative existence.  None of this is easy to see in one shot. It's in fact very layered through out.

Another is the arguments for hell. It's very layered. Different places address incarnation, other places, why God can't or won't reform all souls (I believe it's the former - ie. can't), but to keep all that in mind, we have to see why wasn't the world a perfect world. Well per Quran, the world was meant to be perfect, Satan was not meant to exist in the sense he is a rebel now, and Adam (a) was not meant to disobey God and being elite it was expected he pass the trial.  We are in back up plan of back up plans.

To understand why there is evil in this world, why the trial, why suffering, its all interwoven. There isn't explicit verses answering these questions.  One mode of Quran is just addressing the atheist argument from hiddenness, saying, why God doesn't reveal himself in a clear way.  The whole of Quran can be almost a mode just for that but more so you have to pay attention to verses about proof, sign, hiddenness, day of judgment type proof, why he has hidden the hour, etc.  Not one place is it explicit.

 

2 hours ago, sunnism said:

 

So quran says ahlul bayt are purified(just like people of badr) then in other place ask to love prophet's kinship, then in other place ask to obey who are in authority, that must mean ali and his 11 sons are imams of this ummah. Wow, so clear. So unambiguous.

The double up in Arabic means ultra form. There are expressions of that in Arabic through out the Quran, for example, "when the earth is shook a shaking", the double up means a shaking like no other shaking, an ultra shaking. 

As for 4:59 it has a flow with verses before including 4:54 which gives it context.  In itself it might be unclear, but keeping in mind the flow it's not.  As for 42:23, there are other verses like 25:57, and many reward verses about past Messengers as well, that show it's an accusation. Mohammad (s) does not ask a reward, it's an accusation of motives if he is a fake Prophet, from wanting to control people, from power, from moral landscaping the culture of his people, from fame, from thrill of mastery over people, from setting up a monarchy in his family, but the Quran says in 25:57 all that you see of that, from point of view he is false, what is that, but taking a path to God as his authority and leadership would be needed for a path to God, and his company on the journey would be needed. The only thing the sorcery keeps people from perceiving all these verses in proper form and diminish them, and the 42:23 starts of with faith and good deeds, and connects it that accusation, and says what is this accusation at the end from point of they are false, but love and recognition of this holy bond these holy souls are to each other and recognition and love for who they are, and whoever does good, God will increase him it's beauty, and God is forgiving appreciative. This all links this holy family to faith and good deeds, and goodness, and the path of spiritual beauty and God appreciates it and will forgive easily people who shed off their hate and attach themselves to them. Surah Yaseen shows from perspective of believers, the sent ones seek no reward though and see them as a means to worship God.  But God and Messengers, would say, I understand from your perspective that I am false, I'm seen with this ulterior motive, but what is that but this and that, for example, it's upon God to establish and no one else. In Surah Saba where gratitude is the main theme and ingratitude is condemned, we find that it says "what reward do I ask of you? For it is for yourselves, indeed my reward is upon God and he is a witness upon all things".

The Quran is a clear book, if you don't play games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Taqwa Iman Taslim
2 hours ago, sunnism said:

Not at all. Since the next verse is talking only about the wives. 

We agree the next verse is only talking to wives. I suggest if they were included in Tatheer verse, then the rest of Ahlulbayt are addressed with them. That verse then would not just apply to wives, but God to make it clear, would continue to address the Ahlulbayt with them and make it apply to rest of Ahlulbayt.

2 hours ago, sunnism said:

This type of purity is also attained by people of badr. 

See the talk of about double purity. You also didn't address what I said about "only". 

Quote

It isn't hypocrisy. The blood relatives part is basically abrogating the previous tradition. Before this immigrants used to inherit from the ansar. So the quran is saying that blood relations have more right over each other's than other believers and muhajireen. And why is it hypocrisy. You came up with an interpretation in which no one agrees with you, and which go against the apparent of the verse. Imamate isn't clear in the quran kid. Get over it. 

Cutting off a verse into three different subjects, when it could be seen to stay on point of the start to finish, and especially with the verses after complimenting that meaning, is distortion. It's playing games with language. Sorry.

Quote

This is a stupid reason. Why did quran mentioned the virtues of ahlul bayt then? By your logic quran shouldn't mentioned it because there is a possibility that ummayad may have corrupted it. 

The Quran mentions the position of Ahlulbayt (a) in clear enough manner, but still in a way, that people can decontextualize verses about them and misinterpret it. As the sorcery from Iblis works to blind people along with the distortion of Gog and Magog through their hidden society in which they always distort revelations, God made it easier to distort meaning and not need to distort the text.  

 

Quote

And what you have is just an assumption. My assumption is that quran didn't mentioned the imamah of 12 individuals because their divine imamah was a hoax. 

I would agree with you if it didn't mention them, it would be a hoax. But to me, it did mention them in a clear enough manner, I'm suggesting why it's not done in the manner where misinterpretation is impossible.

Quote

Not a very good reason. Try again

Why though? Explain, so at least why you don't see it as a good reason.

 

Quote

Stop comparing apples with oranges. Quran commanded to pray salah, talks about bow, qiyam, sujood, doing sudhu and many more details. This cannot be said about imamah. 

Yet the full form of Salah is not there explicitly.  Imammate and it's dimensions are all there, just not the way you want it to be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member
Posted (edited)
23 hours ago, sunnism said:

It proves nothing. By that logic we will have to believe that even kuffar are divinely appointed caliph, since they were also made khilaaf by allahallah, quran 27:62

The name of Imam chosen by Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) and not by the people shura has been mentioned in the following verse of quran:

وَإِذِ ابْتَلَىٰ إِبْرَاهِيمَ رَبُّهُ بِكَلِمَاتٍ فَأَتَمَّهُنَّ ۖ قَالَ إِنِّي جَاعِلُكَ لِلنَّاسِ إِمَامًا ۖ قَالَ وَمِن ذُرِّيَّتِي ۖ قَالَ لَا يَنَالُ عَهْدِي الظَّالِمِينَ

And when his Lord tried Ibrahim with certain words, he fulfilled them. He said: Surely I will make you an Imam of men. Ibrahim said: And of my offspring? My covenant does not include the unjust, said He. (2:124)

 
  • Your understating on the words of the quran is very poor and thus stands as rejected. The verse provide the undeniable evidence of the certainty of divine appointed Imams in the religion. The analysis of the words of quran from above verse mentions in clear words as indicated. above.
  • wasalam
Edited by Muslim2010
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
11 minutes ago, Muslim2010 said:

The name of Imam chosen by Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) and not by the people shura has been mentioned in the following verse of quran:

وَإِذِ ابْتَلَىٰ إِبْرَاهِيمَ رَبُّهُ بِكَلِمَاتٍ فَأَتَمَّهُنَّ ۖ قَالَ إِنِّي جَاعِلُكَ لِلنَّاسِ إِمَامًا ۖ قَالَ وَمِن ذُرِّيَّتِي ۖ قَالَ لَا يَنَالُ عَهْدِي الظَّالِمِينَ

And when his Lord tried Ibrahim with certain words, he fulfilled them. He said: Surely I will make you an Imam of men. Ibrahim said: And of my offspring? My covenant does not include the unjust, said He. (2:124)

 
  • Your understating on the words of the quran is very poor and thus stands as rejected. The verse provide the undeniable evidence of the certainty of divine appointed Imams in the religion. The analysis of the words of quran from above verse mentions in clear words as indicated. above.
  • wasalam

Answer the verse given by me. And your understanding of 'unjust' is laughable. The covenant not reaching to unjust means that it will not reach open sinners not that it will only reach infallible people. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Taqwa Iman Taslim
1 minute ago, sunnism said:

Answer the verse given by me. And your understanding of 'unjust' is laughable. The covenant not reaching to unjust means that it will not reach open sinners not that it will only reach infallible people. 

What type leadership exists that no unjust person has held? The only I can think of is the divinely appointed type from God. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

@sunnism, you've (Sunnis) forced us to talk about them (12 Imams/Ahlul Bayt) so much because (historically) you've talked about them so little...we take a juxtaposition for balancing purposes...you've forced us into this position

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
Posted (edited)

@sunnism, be reasonable...do you admit Sunnism has a subtle, implicit hatred for the Prophet's family? Answer honestly...

Edited by Eddie Mecca
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Basic Members
3 hours ago, sunnism said:

Answer the verse given by me. And your understanding of 'unjust' is laughable. The covenant not reaching to unjust means that it will not reach open sinners not that it will only reach infallible people. 

Salam,

It seems like you're moving the goal post, but, do you have proof that unjust applies to open sinners?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
7 hours ago, Guest Taqwa Iman Taslim said:

Surah Ikhlas and the flow of it makes sense only if you kept in mind knowledge about Tawhid

Not at all. I can read surah ikhlas without thinking anything about tawhid and still get the point that allah is one. You really getting desperate now. 

 

7 hours ago, Guest Taqwa Iman Taslim said:

The arguments for Nubuwa are different then arguments for Resalah.  Most people can't even distinguish between the two, so I doubt a person without deep knowledge, would know the arguments for each just by reading Quran at once. 

An average person doesn't need to know about the difference between the two. If he read the quran then he will get the idea that these people are sent to guide humanity. 

7 hours ago, Guest Taqwa Iman Taslim said:

You know when I really discovered this, is day of judgment concept. I thought it would easiest way to convince Bahais that day of judgment is not manifestation of Baha'allah, but really this and that.  I learned, it's a lot harder to prove when a person is stubborn and will twist every verse and not see them all holistically.  Day of judgement for example, is such a thing. You won't find one verse that can't be twisted to Bahai interpretation. 50 000 years, they have interpretation for that, it happens in a moment... time is relative when revelation is revealed, things go quicker. Things like that.  It's a headache to deal with.  The verses about Welayat of Ali (a) needs to be seen holistically. There isn't one that cannot be twisted way out of place and denied, true. But each of them are clear enough and especially when keeping in mind all of them.

Again you are compairing apples with oranges. The day of judgement is clear in the quran. If a Bedouin read the quran he will know the the day of judgement is real. And if someone comes along and start giving laughable metaphorical interpretation, then that's his problem. The problem with imamah is that is not even clear. The bedouin will not say while reading the quran, 'hmm, these 12 imams must be important figures in islam'. So the interpretation thing doesn't apply here. 

All the things you said afterwards don't deserve a reply. 

7 hours ago, Guest Taqwa Iman Taslim said:

The double up in Arabic means ultra form. There are expressions of that in Arabic through out the Quran, for example, "when the earth is shook a shaking", the double up means a shaking like no other shaking, an ultra shaking

All these are homemade rules. 

 

8 hours ago, Guest Taqwa Iman Taslim said:

As for 4:59 it has a flow with verses before including 4:54 which gives it context.  In itself it might be unclear, but keeping in mind the flow it's not.  As for 42:23, there are other verses like 25:57, and many reward verses about past Messengers as well, that show it's an accusation. Mohammad (s) does not ask a reward, it's an accusation of motives if he is a fake Prophet, from wanting to control people, from power, from moral landscaping the culture of his people, from fame, from thrill of mastery over people, from setting up a monarchy in his family, but the Quran says in 25:57 all that you see of that, from point of view he is false, what is that, but taking a path to God as his authority and leadership would be needed for a path to God, and his company on the journey would be needed. The only thing the sorcery keeps people from perceiving all these verses in proper form and diminish them, and the 42:23 starts of with faith and good deeds, and connects it that accusation, and says what is this accusation at the end from point of they are false, but love and recognition of this holy bond these holy souls are to each other and recognition and love for who they are, and whoever does good, God will increase him it's beauty, and God is forgiving appreciative. This all links this holy family to faith and good deeds, and goodness, and the path of spiritual beauty and God appreciates it and will forgive easily people who shed off their hate and attach themselves to them. Surah Yaseen shows from perspective of believers, the sent ones seek no reward though and see them as a means to worship God.  But God and Messengers, would say, I understand from your perspective that I am false, I'm seen with this ulterior motive, but what is that but this and that, for example, it's upon God to establish and no one else. In Surah Saba where gratitude is the main theme and ingratitude is condemned, we find that it says "what reward do I ask of you? For it is for yourselves, indeed my reward is upon God and he is a witness upon all things".

The Quran is a clear book, if you don't play games

Or it is just that allah is saying that you have to obey ulil amr, and when you disagree over some matters then refer back to quran and sunnah. And prophet is asking Muslims to love his ahlul bayt and do not ask any reward for preaching the religion and all the imamah stuff are just imaginations. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
7 hours ago, Guest Taqwa Iman Taslim said:

We agree the next verse is only talking to wives. I suggest if they were included in Tatheer verse, then the rest of Ahlulbayt are addressed with them. That verse then would not just apply to wives, but God to make it clear, would continue to address the Ahlulbayt with them and make it apply to rest of Ahlulbayt

Or that wives were addressed in the entirety of the verses except for one verse in which ali hasan hussain are also included. You must ask yourself, why didn't allah mentioned this in a seperate verse which is unrelated to the wives to make things clear. Whenever your flimsy arguments get refuted easily only by the use of quran, you all just start crying that no quran is interwoven and other stuff. 

 

8 hours ago, Guest Taqwa Iman Taslim said:

See the talk of about double purity. You also didn't address what I said about "only".

Wow. So allah used 'only' before ahlul bayt but not before people of badr, thus ali and his family are infallible imams of this nation. Very good. 

 

8 hours ago, Guest Taqwa Iman Taslim said:

The Quran mentions the position of Ahlulbayt (a) in clear enough manner, but still in a way, that people can decontextualize verses about them and misinterpret it. As the sorcery from Iblis works to blind people along with the distortion of Gog and Magog through their hidden society in which they always distort revelations,

Allah praised ahlul bayt. No problem. Just like muhajireen and ansar, people of tree and rest of companions. You are clutching at straws now. 

 

8 hours ago, Guest Taqwa Iman Taslim said:

But to me, it did mention them in a clear enough manner, I'm suggesting why it's not done in the manner where misinterpretation is impossible

You should remember your word 'for me'. I can also say it is pretty clear 'for me' allah mentioned the khilafah of abu bakr, umar and uthman very clearly. I don't think that's a hujjah on anybody. 

 

8 hours ago, Guest Taqwa Iman Taslim said:

Yet the full form of Salah is not there explicitly.  Imammate and it's dimensions are all there, just not the way you want it to be.

You should say imamate of previous prophets are there not the imamah of imams of this nation. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
6 hours ago, Eddie Mecca said:

be reasonable...do you admit Sunnism has a subtle, implicit hatred for the Prophet's family? Answer honestly..

Depends upon what you mean by hatred.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member
Posted (edited)

Surah Isra’ – Verse 71

يَوْمَ نَدْعُواْ كُلَّ اُنَاسٍ بإِمَامِهِمْ فَمَنْ اُوتِيَ كِتَابَهُ بِيَمِينِهِ فَاُوْلَئِكَ يَقْرَءُونَ كِتَابَهُمْ وَلاَ يُظْلَمُونَ فَتِيلاً

71. “On the Day We shall call every people with their Imam (leader); then whoever is given his book in his right hand; then these will read their book (joyfully); and they will not be treated unjustly in the least.

Why Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) emphasizes "Imam" here and NOT to state that every people will be raised by their Prophets when receiving their book!

The fact is that at every stage of time, even after the seal of Prophethood, the function of Imam or Imamah will continue.

Perhap Imams must be living or alive among the people at time.

In the time of Prophet Ibrahim (عليه السلام), he is also an Imam.  The same with Prophet Muhammad (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم).

Then what happened after that, who are the living Imams at every generations after the wafat of the Prophet Muhammad (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم).

 Can we agree on the concept of Imam Mahdi (عليه السلام)? Or the concept of Imamah is delusion and not established in Qur'an?

Wallahualam 

Layman.

 

 

Edited by layman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
6 hours ago, tempered_steel said:

Salam,

It seems like you're moving the goal post, but, do you have proof that unjust applies to open sinners?

First read properly. I didn't said unjust means open sinners. Shia use that verse to prove that because the covenant will not reach the unjust, it means it will only reach to infallibles. In their mind unjust equals fallible people. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Basic Members
1 hour ago, sunnism said:

First read properly. I didn't said unjust means open sinners. Shia use that verse to prove that because the covenant will not reach the unjust, it means it will only reach to infallibles. In their mind unjust equals fallible people. 

I will rephrase my question:

Given what you stated below, are you able to provide any proof that unjust only applies to open sinners? (missed the "only" part in my initial post, my apologies).
 

11 hours ago, sunnism said:

Answer the verse given by me. And your understanding of 'unjust' is laughable. The covenant not reaching to unjust means that it will not reach open sinners not that it will only reach infallible people. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
6 hours ago, tempered_steel said:

Given what you stated below, are you able to provide any proof that unjust only applies to open sinners? (missed the "only" part in my initial post, my apologies

My apologies. I meant sinners whether open or closed. Unjust doesn't mean fallibles

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member
22 hours ago, sunnism said:

Answer the verse given by me. And your understanding of 'unjust' is laughable. 

The quoted verse by you does not include the word Imam in its Arabic text so it is not relevant to the discussion.  The laughing is easier than using the head to understand the facts described in the verse as it is difficult for a common man.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member
Posted (edited)
22 hours ago, sunnism said:

The covenant not reaching to unjust means that it will not reach open sinners not that it will only reach infallible people. 

The following verse mentions explanation about the word Zulm.

إِنَّ الشِّرْكَ لَظُلْمٌ عَظِيمٌ

 Shakir: most surely polytheism is a grievous iniquity-(31:13)

Sahih international- . Indeed, association [with him] is great injustice." (31:13)

 وَإِذِ ابْتَلَىٰ إِبْرَاهِيمَ رَبُّهُ بِكَلِمَاتٍ فَأَتَمَّهُنَّ ۖ قَالَ إِنِّي جَاعِلُكَ لِلنَّاسِ إِمَامًا ۖ قَالَ وَمِن ذُرِّيَّتِي ۖ قَالَ لَا يَنَالُ عَهْدِي الظَّالِمِينَ

Thus who has carried out Shirk is a great Zalim. And he has done a grievous iniquity and he cannot be an Imam because the covenant / Ahed of Imamat cannot reach to the one who is Zalim because of doing Shirk (in his life).

wasalam

Edited by Muslim2010
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
31 minutes ago, Muslim2010 said:

The quoted verse by you does not include the word Imam in its Arabic text so it is not relevant to the discussion.  The laughing is easier than using the head to understand the facts described in the verse as it is difficult for a common man.

It still uses the word khulafa. And in your sect khulafa is always chosen by allah. And it isn't difficult to understand for a common man. The 'fact' described by the verse will only be understandable when you do mental gymnastics. 

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...