BBC to post undercover mutah documentary

[iceman]

Stick to the thread. Stop bringing in irrelevant stuff. Have the mods and admins given you a free hand to put on a show. Or do they go to sleep when it comes to people like you few.

[iceman]

You first of all don’t believe in sunnah unless it’s written by liars and deceivers who deceived you into believing in some fairy tale imamate divinity thing!!

You got OWNED with that!

That IS the DIFFERENCE 😜

You couldn’t proof Imamate even if YOUR life depended on it..........you got owned on imamah too, I/we are still waiting for you to produce a clear cut verse on imamate........instead of using a title relating to a major prophet as and twisting it to make belief that it’s about imamah full stop......PROMOTION!!!!😂 that’s the only thing you can produce as evidence.

Better than believing in a man made idea of divine imams that has NO proof in Quran or sunnah..........Something you are having major problems with since the last 1400 years.

1400 years and yet no divine imam EVER ruled according to shiite way of ruling.

It must hurt that no sane people will believe in fairytale divine imams unless you have a screw missing in your head........and ALHAMDULILLAH you are a perfect example of that.

Discussed it and proved it many times over. Now stick to the blooming topic and stop bringing in irrelevant stuff. The mods and admins are going to turn a blind eye so I will have to do their job in telling you. Stick to the thread and topic.

[iceman]

BBC TO POST UNDER COVER MUT'AH DOCUMENTARY. This is the title of the thread. Just stick to this. You want to discuss anything else then start a thread. First the documentary, what are the BBC trying to prove here? That there are a group of people from a particular community who are misusing and abusing the law for their own desire and gain. There are a few bad beans in every packet or tin. The same is that there are bad people in every community or nation, group or sect. Just as there are people from the Sunni community who believe in using means of violence and threatening behaviour just to have their demands met. And because of that they go out and cause terrible offences and are responsible for atrocities. Now what are the attentions of starting this thread on the documtary about the BBC? Just to give the Shia community and it's people and it's faith belief a bad name. To paint a bad picture of the entire community. And to prove that mut'ah is a terrible act. The question is if mut'ah was a terrible act then why is it clearly mentioned in the Qur'an. And why was it practiced during the Prophet's s.a.w time.

[iceman]

Now what are the inttentions of starting this thread on the documtary about the BBC? What kind of attention are certain people on this thread/site looking for? They are just trying to give the Shia community and it's people and it's faith and belief a bad name. They're trying to paint a bad picture of the entire Shia community. And to prove that mut'ah is a terrible act. The question is if mut'ah was a terrible act then why is it clearly mentioned in the Qur'an. And why was it practiced during the Prophet's s.a.w time. And the multi million dollar question still stands. The Prophet s.a.w banned it. OK, WHY? Just by saying it and giving me a reference from a book or any book isn't good enough. Because the authenticity and reliability of these books and what's in them isn't guaranteed 100%.

But still I will hand it to you. Surely the Prophet s.a.w must have mentioned something about banning it. Anything from your books that give a clear understanding and explanation to why it was banned. OK, I'll start off. Is this what you're trying to say and tell through the BBC documentary that certain individuals were misusing and abusing nikah e mut'ah  during the Prophet's s.a.w time that's why the Prophet s.a.w banned it? Are you trying to prove by the BBC documentary that mut'ah is a horrible and terrible act or practice? If that's the case then why is it mentioned in the Qur'an and allowed by Allah to begin with? Wouldn't it be clear if you use your senses and add a bit of logic to it that to misuse or abuse something doesn't make something wrong but it's actually the misuser and the abuser that is wrong.

[iceman]

Here's another documentary by the BBC which you guys have missed.

https://youtu.be/TlvNMlIMWhw

[muslim720]

I was just asking. But since you're an anti shia and a really desperate one then it doesn't matter what I say your desperation will eventually get in the way.

If you stop playing the victim card, maybe your brain will start comprehending my point.

Ok, lets try this again.you said "Why would I hate the Shi'i community?" Ok, give me something positive and constructive you said about the Shia. Anything.

I shared a discussion with another Shi'i brother regarding my positive experiences at Shi'i mosques.  Find it! 

And so are mine.

You cannot substantiate Imamah from any source except your own whims.

The only difference is you believe in the Qur'an OR the Sunnah when it suits you. You jump from one to the other based on your desire. I believe in the Qur'an AND Sunnah. That's the difference.

Says the guy who renounced his own 6th "infallible" Imam (ra) when his judgment, in an authentic Shi'i hadith, sided with that of Khalid ibn Waleed (ra) in the case of Malik bin Nuwayrah.

Imamah has been proven many times over.

From your whims, of course!

Yep. Those who believe in the unfortunate incident in Saqifa and the coincidental and immature decision made there between a handful of people.

Those who believe Saqifa to be an unfortunate incident are stuck in misfortune and will remain in that state in this world and hereafter.  Too bad for them that their own infallible Imams (ra), first and second, accepted leadership based on the guidelines laid down in Saqifa, not as per the whims of their Kufan so-called "followers" who back-stabbed and killed their descendants.

This has got nothing to do with who governs after Muhammad s.a.w. It's a totally separate issue. Choosing and general if one gets killed or dealing matters through consultation etc has got nothing to do with divine authority.

It has everything to do with governance.  The general during a battle is the leader so if it is okay to elect a leader in one instance, it is precedence for such an action in another instance.

Its to do with general matters. Muhammad s.a.w wasn't chosen through consultation and neither by the people. So who governs after Muhammad s.a.w has to be chosen by Allah and introduced by Muhammad s.a.w. That's what we believe in.

The Holy Prophet (saw) was chosen to deliver the message and once it was perfected, there was no need for such Divine Appointment.  Unless you believe in prophethood after the Holy Prophet (saw).

We don't need to add or subtract anything. That's what the Caliphs did.

Imam Ali (ra) and Imam Hassan (ra) maintained what the Caliphs (ra) before them did.  Congratulations for making your own "infallible" Imams (ra) an accomplice in their "crime".

As far as the BBC is concerned we don't take them seriously nor anyone else. Our job is to put facts forward. And to make our position clear regarding false allegations baseless accusations and exaggerated stories based on propaganda concerning us. We've been dealing with this for nearly 1400 years. It doesn't bother us. Whether it's you or the BBC, you can't paint a picture of my community and people on the doings of a handful of people. If someone is abusing the law that's their problem and not the community and faith they belong to. So nice try.

BBC made a documentary on an "act of Sunnah" so highly praised in your madhhab.  Why do you need to clarify your position?  How is it that an "act of Sunnah" is so troublesome for you?

You're beating around the bush. I've made this clear and pointed out your flaw. Already addressed it. Now If you want to keep beating around the bush to hide your embarrassment rather than being a man and owning up to it then that's down to you.

No you have not!  It was your supporting evidence so instead of being a weasel, tell us in what ways are mut'ah and misyaar similar.  After all, that is the claim your evidence made!

Kufans aren't my ancestors. I'm a Syed alhamdulillah. The Ahlul Bayt are my ancestors.

Sure and the sun rises from the West.

I hold on to the book of Allah and the progeny of the Prophet s.a.w. I'm not all over the place like you.

Why didn't you hold on to the Progeny of the Holy Prophet (saw) when Imam Jafar As-Sadiq (ra) deemed those who refuse to pay Zakat kafir and said that they ought to be condemned by capital punishment?

[iceman]

If you stop playing the victim card, maybe your brain will start comprehending my point.


I shared a discussion with another Shi'i brother regarding my positive experiences at Shi'i mosques.  Find it! 


You cannot substantiate Imamah from any source except your own whims.


Says the guy who renounced his own 6th "infallible" Imam (ra) when his judgment, in an authentic Shi'i hadith, sided with that of Khalid ibn Waleed (ra) in the case of Malik bin Nuwayrah.


From your whims, of course!


Those who believe Saqifa to be an unfortunate incident are stuck in misfortune and will remain in that state in this world and hereafter.  Too bad for them that their own infallible Imams (ra), first and second, accepted leadership based on the guidelines laid down in Saqifa, not as per the whims of their Kufan so-called "followers" who back-stabbed and killed their descendants.


It has everything to do with governance.  The general during a battle is the leader so if it is okay to elect a leader in one instance, it is precedence for such an action in another instance.


The Holy Prophet (saw) was chosen to deliver the message and once it was perfected, there was no need for such Divine Appointment.  Unless you believe in prophethood after the Holy Prophet (saw).


Imam Ali (ra) and Imam Hassan (ra) maintained what the Caliphs (ra) before them did.  Congratulations for making your own "infallible" Imams (ra) an accomplice in their "crime".


BBC made a documentary on an "act of Sunnah" so highly praised in your madhhab.  Why do you need to clarify your position?  How is it that an "act of Sunnah" is so troublesome for you?


No you have not!  It was your supporting evidence so instead of being a weasel, tell us in what ways are mut'ah and misyaar similar.  After all, that is the claim your evidence made!


Sure and the sun rises from the West.


Why didn't you hold on to the Progeny of the Holy Prophet (saw) when Imam Jafar As-Sadiq (ra) deemed those who refuse to pay Zakat kafir and said that they ought to be condemned by capital punishment?

"If you stop playing the victim card, maybe your brain will start comprehending my point"

I don't play the victim card. Infact I don't play cards at all. Only pointing out what is true. Your points are based on sarcasm because of the grudge you hold on hatred about my faith and community. I don't take you seriously.

"I shared a discussion with another Shi'i brother regarding my positive experiences at Shi'i mosques.  Find it!"

I don't need to find anything. All I've seen from you is nothing but absolute negativity towards my faith and community. And I ain't surprised. Your experience about Shia mosques are nothing but tales. Why? Because there's no supporting evidence. You can't back them up. They're just words. Experience about mosques. Allow me to put forward in black and white recorded footage of experience regarding a known Sunni mosque and what the Sunni ideology stands for.

https://youtu.be/3WgVa3VRFb4

"You cannot substantiate Imamah from any source except your own whims"

Proved Imamah straight and direct from the Qur'an that Allah alone choses and selects Imams.

"Says the guy who renounced his own 6th "infallible" Imam (ra) when his judgment, in an authentic Shi'i hadith, sided with that of Khalid ibn Waleed (ra) in the case of Malik bin Nuwayrah"

You want something from the Qur'an only then you produce something from the Qur'an only. That's what it was about. You demand then you also deliver.

[Adil]

Here's another documentary by the BBC which you guys have missed.

https://youtu.be/TlvNMlIMWhw

I live in the UK and we didn't "miss" this documentary. It was discussed amongst the community here when it came out and marrying with the intention to divorce just so you can get back with your previous spouse is apparently a major sin. This is in contrast to mutah which is openly accepted in the shia community and seen as a noble act.

[iceman]

Those who believe Saqifa to be an unfortunate incident are stuck in misfortune and will remain in that state in this world and hereafter"

First of all can you prove this from the Qur'an. Just showing you your double stance and standard. Secondly Saqifa was an incident. It wasn't a public gathering or event which was organised were all parties concerned gathered/assembled to choose/select a leader to govern the Muslim Ummah and it's affairs. Only three Muhajirs rushed there to stop from something terrible from happening. They actually didn't go there to stop something terrible from happening but to stop leadership from slipping away from them.

"Too bad for them that their own infallible Imams (ra), first and second, accepted leadership based on the guidelines laid down in Saqifa"

Absolutely wrong and false. This is why am here to stop such malicious lies. To stop people from being fooled by people like you. Prove your claim to me that the first and second, accepted leadership based on the guidelines laid down in Saqifa. Secondly Yazeed Ibne Muawiya was he made Caliph according to those guidelines as well made in Saqifa what ever they are. After all majority of the sahaba along with their offsprings gave allegiance to Yazeed Ibne Muawiya. See what I mean, I can easily catch you out through your own statements. Your faith and belief is all over the place. I know you won't answer directly. Because you can't with such double standards in your faith and belief. You'll only come up with counter arguments or sarcastic comments or irrelevant stuff as you normally do.

"not as per the whims of their Kufan so-called "followers" who back-stabbed and killed their descendants"

You keep yapping on about the Kufans. This is another malicious and filthy lie by your kind just to camouflage or hide the actual perpetrators. The Kufans were put under siege. The governor of Kufa was replaced and Ubaydallah ibn Ziyaad was put in charge by your Caliph Yazeed Ibne Muawiya. Kufa was under lock down and Kufans put under siege. Those who killed Hussain, his family members, his relatives, companions and supporters were companions of the Prophet s.a.w or their offsprings. It was your Islamic Caliphate that ordered the killing. And the killing was done by a battalion of the Muslim army. I know it's painful for you that's why you come up with malicious lies to hide the truth.

"It has everything to do with governance.  The general during a battle is the leader so if it is okay to elect a leader in one instance, it is precedence for such an action in another instance"

There is a clear difference in selecting and choosing people to lead prayers or in what ever sector compared to leadership of the Ummah. We have divine guidance and you believe in Caliphate through and by means of consultation. Lets go by your consultation. Once again what are the principles, the rules and regulations the guidelines on selecting a leader after Muhammad s.a.w by means of consultation. What's the procedure and method. Give me a clean, cut and clear answer then explain to me how it was implemented and conducted in Saqifa. Good luck!

"The Holy Prophet (saw) was chosen to deliver the message and once it was perfected, there was no need for such Divine Appointment.  Unless you believe in prophethood after the Holy Prophet (saw)"

Allow me to correct you "once it was completed and perfected" What happened on that particular day that Allah said "today I have completed for you your religion and full filled my favours upon you". Is divine guidance only prophecy, just prophethood?

"Why didn't you hold on to the Progeny of the Holy Prophet (saw) when Imam Jafar As-Sadiq (ra) deemed those who refuse to pay Zakat kafir and said that they ought to be condemned by capital punishment"

I hold on to the Progeny of the Prophet s.a.w all the time and everytime. I don't have double standards like you. Now either accept that it's not necessary to prove everything from the Qur'an in black and white or prove to me from the Qur'an that Islamic governments have the right to force people to hand over Zakah money to them. And if they don't then they are subject to capital punishment according to Shariah law.

"No you have not!  It was your supporting evidence so instead of being a weasel, tell us in what ways are mut'ah and misyaar similar.  After all, that is the claim your evidence made"

A malicious lie again. I asked something and you commented on it. Then I questioned you and you started jumping up and down over it. Basically you couldn't explain what you said. It's all there in black and white. Don't make a fool of yourself.

[muslim720]

I don't take you seriously.

Then stop engaging me in discussions.

I don't need to find anything. All I've seen from you is nothing but absolute negativity towards my faith and community.

With your eyes closed shut, I cannot show you the sun even if a hundred of them rise in the sky.  So enjoy being an ignorant fool.

Proved Imamah straight and direct from the Qur'an that Allah alone choses and selects Imams.

Are you saying you have demonstrated that which your scholars failed to do since day one?  That makes you superior to them and knowing how foolish you can be, I can only imagine how foolish your scholars are!

You want something from the Qur'an only then you produce something from the Qur'an only.

Fine display of your foolishness.  Zakat is in the Qur'an and rejecting it is like rejecting a part of the Qur'an and therefore the entire Qur'an.  The hadith clarifies what the Qur'an establishes, i.e., Zakat.

In the case of Imamah, neither the Qur'an nor Sunnah establishes it and the fake "Sonnah" transmitted by Kufans - which establishes it - also claims that there aren't 313 men in your midst for the scared one to come out.

First of all can you prove this from the Qur'an. Just showing you your double stance and standard. Secondly Saqifa was an incident. It wasn't a public gathering or event which was organised were all parties concerned gathered/assembled to choose/select a leader to govern the Muslim Ummah and it's affairs. Only three Muhajirs rushed there to stop from something terrible from happening. They actually didn't go there to stop something terrible from happening but to stop leadership from slipping away from them.

All that bark but no bite.  Your first "infallible" Imam (ra) accepted leadership as per the foundations laid down during Saqeefah and he even referenced it as a legitimate methodology in Nahjul Balagha.

Prove your claim to me that the first and second, accepted leadership based on the guidelines laid down in Saqifa.

Are you serious?  How was Imam Ali (ra) named the Fourth Caliph?  Divine Intervention?  Or did the people come after him since he was the most deserved after Uthman (ra)?

Also, as I alluded to earlier, he clearly said, "Verily, the people who payed allegiance to Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthman, have payed allegiance to me based on the same principles as the allegiance to them.  So anyone who was present has no right to go against his pledge of allegience, and anyone who was absent has no right to oppose it.  And verily shura (consultation) is only the right of the Muhajirs and the Ansar.  So if they decide upon a man and declare him their imam, then it is with the pleasure of Allah.  If anyone goes against this decision, then he must be persuaded to follow the rest of the people.  If he persists, then fight with him for leaving that which has been accepted by the believers.  And Allah shall let him wander misguided and not guide him."  (Nahjul Balagha Letter 6)

Go ahead, deny your own first "infallible" Imam (ra), like you rejected your sixth "infallible" Imam (ra), lol.

Those who killed Hussain, his family members, his relatives, companions and supporters were companions of the Prophet s.a.w or their offsprings

The army of 5000 men were Sahaba (ra) and their offspring?  Ya jaahil, who moved the capital to Kufa?  The other Sahaba (ra) or Imam Ali (ra)?  It was Imam Ali (ra) who did so and hence, it was his "supporters" that resided mainly in Kufa.  The same "supporters" whom he admonished in Nahjul Balagha, the same supporters (or cut from the same cloth) who duped Imam Hassan (ra) and later assassinated Imam Hussain (ra).

Once again what are the principles, the rules and regulations the guidelines on selecting a leader after Muhammad s.a.w by means of consultation.

Once again, I quote your own first "infallible" Imam (ra) for you.

"And verily shura (consultation) is only the right of the Muhajirs and the Ansar.  So if they decide upon a man and declare him their imam, then it is with the pleasure of Allah".

I hold on to the Progeny of the Prophet s.a.w all the time and everytime

I have a feeling you will soon oppose Imam Ali (ra) on electing a leader much like you opposed Imam Jafar as-Sadiq (ra) on the punishment for those who refuse to pay Zakat.

Now either accept that it's not necessary to prove everything from the Qur'an in black and white or prove to me from the Qur'an that Islamic governments have the right to force people to hand over Zakah money to them

You clearly do not understand the difference between established beliefs and their clarification in Qur'an and Sunnah AND misguidance which has no root in Qur'an and Sunnah.  Zakat is the former; Imamah is the latter (in case you still don't understand).

A malicious lie again. I asked something and you commented on it. Then I questioned you and you started jumping up and down over it. Basically you couldn't explain what you said. It's all there in black and white. Don't make a fool of yourself.

All this back-n-forth because the dimwit you are, you did not read your own evidence properly. 

[iceman]

Then stop engaging me in discussions.


With your eyes closed shut, I cannot show you the sun even if a hundred of them rise in the sky.  So enjoy being an ignorant fool.


Are you saying you have demonstrated that which your scholars failed to do since day one?  That makes you superior to them and knowing how foolish you can be, I can only imagine how foolish your scholars are!


Fine display of your foolishness.  Zakat is in the Qur'an and rejecting it is like rejecting a part of the Qur'an and therefore the entire Qur'an.  The hadith clarifies what the Qur'an establishes, i.e., Zakat.

In the case of Imamah, neither the Qur'an nor Sunnah establishes it and the fake "Sonnah" transmitted by Kufans - which establishes it - also claims that there aren't 313 men in your midst for the scared one to come out.


All that bark but no bite.  Your first "infallible" Imam (ra) accepted leadership as per the foundations laid down during Saqeefah and he even referenced it as a legitimate methodology in Nahjul Balagha.


Are you serious?  How was Imam Ali (ra) named the Fourth Caliph?  Divine Intervention?  Or did the people come after him since he was the most deserved after Uthman (ra)?

Also, as I alluded to earlier, he clearly said, "Verily, the people who payed allegiance to Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthman, have payed allegiance to me based on the same principles as the allegiance to them. So anyone who was present has no right to go against his pledge of allegience, and anyone who was absent has no right to oppose it.  And verily shura (consultation) is only the right of the Muhajirs and the Ansar.  So if they decide upon a man and declare him their imam, then it is with the pleasure of Allah.  If anyone goes against this decision, then he must be persuaded to follow the rest of the people.  If he persists, then fight with him for leaving that which has been accepted by the believers.  And Allah shall let him wander misguided and not guide him."  (Nahjul Balagha Letter 6)

Go ahead, deny your own first "infallible" Imam (ra), like you rejected your sixth "infallible" Imam (ra), lol.


The army of 5000 men were Sahaba (ra) and their offspring?  Ya jaahil, who moved the capital to Kufa?  The other Sahaba (ra) or Imam Ali (ra)?  It was Imam Ali (ra) who did so and hence, it was his "supporters" that resided mainly in Kufa.  The same "supporters" whom he admonished in Nahjul Balagha, the same supporters (or cut from the same cloth) who duped Imam Hassan (ra) and later assassinated Imam Hussain (ra).


Once again, I quote your own first "infallible" Imam (ra) for you.

"And verily shura (consultation) is only the right of the Muhajirs and the Ansar.  So if they decide upon a man and declare him their imam, then it is with the pleasure of Allah".


I have a feeling you will soon oppose Imam Ali (ra) on electing a leader much like you opposed Imam Jafar as-Sadiq (ra) on the punishment for those who refuse to pay Zakat.


You clearly do not understand the difference between established beliefs and their clarification in Qur'an and Sunnah AND misguidance which has no root in Qur'an and Sunnah.  Zakat is the former; Imamah is the latter (in case you still don't understand).


All this back-n-forth because the dimwit you are, you did not read your own evidence properly.

"Then stop engaging me in discussions"

I'm not engaging you in anything. As long as you talk about my faith, community and people in a wrong and negative way I won't sit and stay silent.

"With your eyes closed shut, I cannot show you the sun even if a hundred of them rise in the sky.  So enjoy being an ignorant fool"

Now that's the talk of an ignorant fool. Can't explain yourself when asked then come out with silly examples and comments. You haven't changed.

"Are you saying you have demonstrated that which your scholars failed to do since day one?  That makes you superior to them and knowing how foolish you can be, I can only imagine how foolish your scholars are"

Now this is the talk of an arrogant individual. Start a thread and discuss what you want. That's the way to do it.

"Fine display of your foolishness.  Zakat is in the Qur'an and rejecting it is like rejecting a part of the Qur'an and therefore the entire Qur'an.  The hadith clarifies what the Qur'an establishes, i.e., Zakat"

Stop being a fool and then hiding behind your foolishness. Prove to me from the Qur'an that if you refuse to pay Zakah or hand in the Zakah money to the ruler of the time then you have committed a serious crime and by Shariah law you face the death penalty. That's what I asked you. I don't know why you're bringing in irrelevant stuff to this thread.

"In the case of Imamah, neither the Qur'an nor Sunnah establishes it"

Imamah is clear in the Qur'an and Sunnah. Your Caliphate isn't based on Qur'an or sunnah.

"and the fake "Sonnah" transmitted by Kufans"

The Kufans were put under siege by your Caliphate. A ruthless individual by the name of Ubaydallah ibn Ziyaad was made governor of Kufa just to terrorise and crush them. Well that's your Caliphate there for you. That's what your Caliphate brought.

"which establishes it - also claims that there aren't 313 men in your midst for the scared one to come out"

Sarcastic comments don't bother me. It just shows your weakness.

"All that bark but no bite.  Your first "infallible" Imam (ra) accepted leadership as per the foundations laid down during Saqeefah and he even referenced it as a legitimate methodology in Nahjul Balagha"

What were the foundations for Caliphate that were laid down in Saqifa. You make claims but can't back them. You say things but can't explain.

"Are you serious?  How was Imam Ali (ra) named the Fourth Caliph?  Divine Intervention?  Or did the people come after him since he was the most deserved after Uthman (ra)?"

You tell me how he was named the 4th Caliph. Care to explain. Why was he the most deserved after Usman. Why not before him.


"Verily, the people who payed allegiance to Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthman, have payed allegiance to me based on the same principles as the allegiance to them"

What are those principles?

"So if they decide upon a man and declare him their imam, then it is with the pleasure of Allah.  If anyone goes against this decision, then he must be persuaded to follow the rest of the people"

So those who went against this decision (opposed the 4th Caliph) were do you put them.

"All this back-n-forth because the dimwit you are, you did not read your own evidence properly"

You're the one being a dimwit going back n forth then bringing in irrelevant stuff. Because you say something then you can't explain it. You make a claim but can't back it. That's all you.

"You clearly do not understand the difference between established beliefs and their clarification in Qur'an and Sunnah AND misguidance which has no root in Qur'an and Sunnah.  Zakat is the former; Imamah is the latter (in case you still don't understand)"

Oh I clearly understand. Be it former or latter or what ever else, you demand then be ready and prepared to deliver. Either use the Qur'an only then discuss by that. Set your principles first then discuss. Don't discuss then Start rearranging principles as you go along

"I have a feeling you will soon oppose Imam Ali (ra) on electing a leader much like you opposed Imam Jafar as-Sadiq (ra) on the punishment for those who refuse to pay Zakat"

Don't go by feelings, go by facts and principles. Prove it from the Quran. Or accept the fact that it's not necessary that everything has to be in and from the Quran and exactly the way you want it.

[iceman]

I live in the UK and we didn't "miss" this documentary. It was discussed amongst the community here when it came out and marrying with the intention to divorce just so you can get back with your previous spouse is apparently a major sin. This is in contrast to mutah which is openly accepted in the shia community and seen as a noble act.

Well you started this thread then why didn't you mention it? 😊 See what I mean, your intentions are absolutely clear. 😊 My job is to expose your I'll intentions and your propagandist behaviour. 😊 That's all you guys are about.

[Adil]

Well you started this thread then why didn't you mention it? 😊 See what I mean, your intentions are absolutely clear. 😊 My job is to expose your I'll intentions and your propagandist behaviour. 😊 That's all you guys are about.

Because it's unrelated to this thread. This thread is specifically about a mutah documentary by the BBC, not about every single muslim related documentary the BBC have ever produced.

My intentions are fairly clear - to destroy shiaism step by step lol. What's to expose, it's not like I hide it.

[muslim720]

I'm not engaging you in anything. As long as you talk about my faith, community and people in a wrong and negative way I won't sit and stay silent.

Am I the only one to see the contradiction in this statement?  So as long as I talk about Shiaism, you will speak up and therefore, engage me.

Now this is the talk of an arrogant individual. Start a thread and discuss what you want. That's the way to do it.

Open a thread to beat a dead horse?  If you, or any Shia, had a Qur'anic verse in favor of Imamah, it would have been made known without the need for a lengthy discussion.  It is the lack of such a verse that compels you to get into verbal gymnastics, therefore, a whole new discussion thread.

Prove to me from the Qur'an that if you refuse to pay Zakah or hand in the Zakah money to the ruler of the time then you have committed a serious crime and by Shariah law you face the death penalty.

Now that you have renounced your 6th "infallible" Imam (ra) - and renouncing one of them is like renouncing them all - why not become a Sunni?  Let's go, bismillah!

Imamah is clear in the Qur'an and Sunnah. Your Caliphate isn't based on Qur'an or sunnah.

If our Caliphate system is not as per the Qur'an and Sunnah, your first and second "infallible" Imams (ra) accepted leadership as per its principles.  Now you have renounced three out of the twelve, lol.

The Kufans were put under siege by your Caliphate. A ruthless individual by the name of Ubaydallah ibn Ziyaad was made governor of Kufa just to terrorise and crush them. Well that's your Caliphate there for you. That's what your Caliphate brought.

What does that have to do with anything?  My point was that Kufans were a treacherous bunch and their entire treachery has been the foundations for your madhhab.

Sarcastic comments don't bother me. It just shows your weakness.

Sorry, we are not the ones to fail to produce 313 men.  If such a remark hurts you, you have clear issues with your own madhhab so as I said before, why not become Sunni?

What were the foundations for Caliphate that were laid down in Saqifa. You make claims but can't back them. You say things but can't explain.

lol, so you had to renounce Nahjul Balagha as well!  Keep it coming!

You tell me how he was named the 4th Caliph. Care to explain. Why was he the most deserved after Usman. Why not before him.

I will let you ponder over these points but will tell you one thing: you could not disprove my point.  Instead your comment is an indirect criticism of Imam Ali (ra).

So those who went against this decision (opposed the 4th Caliph) were do you put them.

That is not my point of contention.  My point was that Imam Ali (ra) upheld what was laid down in Saqeefah and since you blame everything on Saqeefah, you have made your own first "infallible" Imam (ra) a partner in the Saqeefah "crime".

Don't go by feelings, go by facts and principles. Prove it from the Quran. Or accept the fact that it's not necessary that everything has to be in and from the Quran and exactly the way you want it.

Seeing how you have deflected the letter of Imam Ali (ra), I think we can safely say that I go by facts and fact of the matter is that you have distanced yourself from you first, second and sixth "infallible" Imams (ra).

[iceman]

Am I the only one to see the contradiction in this statement?  So as long as I talk about Shiaism, you will speak up and therefore, engage me.


Open a thread to beat a dead horse?  If you, or any Shia, had a Qur'anic verse in favor of Imamah, it would have been made known without the need for a lengthy discussion.  It is the lack of such a verse that compels you to get into verbal gymnastics, therefore, a whole new discussion thread.


Now that you have renounced your 6th "infallible" Imam (ra) - and renouncing one of them is like renouncing them all - why not become a Sunni?  Let's go, bismillah!


If our Caliphate system is not as per the Qur'an and Sunnah, your first and second "infallible" Imams (ra) accepted leadership as per its principles.  Now you have renounced three out of the twelve, lol.


What does that have to do with anything?  My point was that Kufans were a treacherous bunch and their entire treachery has been the foundations for your madhhab.


Sorry, we are not the ones to fail to produce 313 men.  If such a remark hurts you, you have clear issues with your own madhhab so as I said before, why not become Sunni?


lol, so you had to renounce Nahjul Balagha as well!  Keep it coming!


I will let you ponder over these points but will tell you one thing: you could not disprove my point.  Instead your comment is an indirect criticism of Imam Ali (ra).


That is not my point of contention.  My point was that Imam Ali (ra) upheld what was laid down in Saqeefah and since you blame everything on Saqeefah, you have made your own first "infallible" Imam (ra) a partner in the Saqeefah "crime".


Seeing how you have deflected the letter of Imam Ali (ra), I think we can safely say that I go by facts and fact of the matter is that you have distanced yourself from you first, second and sixth "infallible" Imams (ra).

"So as long as I talk about Shiaism"

You talk about Shiaism unjustly and unfairly. You speak with hatred and grudge. You say things which you can't backup and support. And you speak as though your looking for what ever you can find against Shias and make them and their faith look bad. Just as those who always speak negative and bad Islam. But when challenged their stance is the same as yours.

"If you, or any Shia, had a Qur'anic verse in favor of Imamah"

Discussed and proven Imamah clearly from the Qur'an. It seems like you have a memory laps. Or you love to play around. Start a thread and I'll take it up there to refresh your memory and stance once again.

"What does that have to do with anything?  My point was that Kufans were a treacherous bunch and their entire treachery has been the foundations for your madhhab"

Kufans weren't a treacherous bunch and neither does my madhhab depend on them. They were put under siege just like the Palestinians and Kashmiris but by your Caliphate.

"Sorry, we are not the ones to fail to produce 313 men"

You failed the Prophet s.a.w miserably by following those who said and believed that the book of Allah is with us, the book of Allah is sufficient for us 😊

[muslim720]

You talk about Shiaism unjustly and unfairly. You speak with hatred and grudge.

*sad music playing on a tiny violin*

Discussed and proven Imamah clearly from the Qur'an. 

So you claim to have accomplished that which neither your scholars nor your 12th Imam could accomplish.  Quote the verse please and prove your scholars' and 12th Imam's incompetence, lol.                 

Kufans weren't a treacherous bunch and neither does my madhhab depend on them.

Zurara ibn Ayyan, Abu Basir, Hisham ibn Hakam, Hisham bin Salim.....between those four Kufans lie your beliefs and practices.

You failed the Prophet s.a.w miserably by following those who said and believed that the book of Allah is with us, the book of Allah is sufficient for us 😊

And your first "infallible" Imam (ra), who was also present in the room, lifted not a single muscle to intervene and apply corrective course of action, hahaha!

[Mythbuster1]

Stick to the thread. Stop bringing in irrelevant stuff. Have the mods and admins given you a free hand to put on a show. Or do they go to sleep when it comes to people like you few.

Lol crying again, if you can throw in IRRELEVANT stuff so can I.........do stop crying.

[iceman]

*sad music playing on a tiny violin*


So you claim to have accomplished that which neither your scholars nor your 12th Imam could accomplish.  Quote the verse please and prove your scholars' and 12th Imam's incompetence, lol.                 


Zurara ibn Ayyan, Abu Basir, Hisham ibn Hakam, Hisham bin Salim.....between those four Kufans lie your beliefs and practices.


And your first "infallible" Imam (ra), who was also present in the room, lifted not a single muscle to intervene and apply corrective course of action, hahaha!

"sad music playing on a tiny violin"

I thought music was haram according to your bunch 😊

"So you claim to have accomplished that which neither your scholars nor your 12th Imam could accomplish. Quote the verse please and prove your scholars' and 12th Imam's incompetence"

This is what you said in post #73. "If you, or any Shia, had a Qur'anic verse in favor of Imamah"

Your words once again "in favour of Imamah".

Can I prove Imamah from the Qur'an.

"And remember that Abraham was tried by his Lord with certain commands, which he fulfilled: He said: “I will make thee an IMAM to the Nations.” He pleaded: “And also (Imams) from my offspring!” He answered: “But My Promise is not within the reach of evil-doers.”

[iceman]

Muslim 720 says can I prove Imamah from the Qur'an.

Qur'an (2:124).

"And [mention, O Muhammad], when Abraham was tried by his Lord with commands and he fulfilled them. [ Allah ] said, "Indeed, I will make you an IMAM for the people." [Abraham] said, "And of my descendants?" [ Allah ] said, "My covenant does not include the wrongdoers."

Qur'an (32:24).

"And we made of them IMAMS to guide by our command for they were patient, and they were certain of our clear signs”.

Below are the two verses which absolutely and completely destroy Saqifa.

"And your Lord creates and chooses whom He pleases; to choose is not theirs”
(28:68)

“And it behaves not a believing man and a believing woman that they should have any choice in their matter when Allah and His Apostle have decided a matter” (33:36)

[iceman]

*sad music playing on a tiny violin*


So you claim to have accomplished that which neither your scholars nor your 12th Imam could accomplish.  Quote the verse please and prove your scholars' and 12th Imam's incompetence, lol.                 


Zurara ibn Ayyan, Abu Basir, Hisham ibn Hakam, Hisham bin Salim.....between those four Kufans lie your beliefs and practices.


And your first "infallible" Imam (ra), who was also present in the room, lifted not a single muscle to intervene and apply corrective course of action, hahaha!

"And your first "infallible" Imam (ra), who was also present in the room, lifted not a single muscle to intervene and apply corrective course of action, hahaha!"

You can't hide the intentions or save Umar and his clan for their mischief in front of the Prophet s.a.w and how they objected, obstructed and opposed him. Have a laugh at this.

"Zurara ibn Ayyan, Abu Basir, Hisham ibn Hakam, Hisham bin Salim.....between those four Kufans lie your beliefs and practices"

The Kufans were put under siege by the governor of Kufa on orders of your calipha Yazeed Ibne Muawiya. My beliefs are with Hussain, his family, friends, supporters and followers. Yours lie with the Caliphate.