TwelverShia.net Forum
Off Topic Discussion => General Discussion => Topic started by: sid on March 22, 2018, 04:54:45 AM
-
Salam, some people are suggesting i do ruqya, i have also been considering this, but what happens if like the last time i did ruqya, they dont find anything, could this happen? that someone doesnt feel violent symptoms that others do in the first ruqya? or even after a couple of sessions?or does this mean there is nothing that the person has?What has been your ruqya experience.Cuz usually when i search the symptoms for ruqya, i dont feel anything like the symptoms.
-
Salaam alaykum wa rahmatullah sister,
As I said in another topic, my friend did ruqya and there was nothing. While it was a psychological thing for him (gave him peace of mind), I knew he was not affected by any jinns.
Having said that, please answer the following questions:
1. Do you have any friends?
2. Best friends? Any? Ones you can trust your life with?
3. Do you have any hobbies?
4. Do you go out? How often?
5. Do you spend time with your family?
6. Do you sleep through the night or have uninterrupted sleep?
7. How is your energy level?
8. Do you prefer to stay home rather than going out and doing new things?
I am not mocking you or trying to gather information. I want to see how you answer those questions.
-
Salaam alaykum wa rahmatullah sister,
As I said in another topic, my friend did ruqya and there was nothing. While it was a psychological thing for him (gave him peace of mind), I knew he was not affected by any jinns.
Having said that, please answer the following questions:
1. Do you have any friends?
2. Best friends? Any? Ones you can trust your life with?
3. Do you have any hobbies?
4. Do you go out? How often?
5. Do you spend time with your family?
6. Do you sleep through the night or have uninterrupted sleep?
7. How is your energy level?
8. Do you prefer to stay home rather than going out and doing new things?
I am not mocking you or trying to gather information. I want to see how you answer those questions.
no no JazakAllah, i did not think you said this to mock me.
i have friends but not close ones,
I do talk to my sister about my issues
my hobbies are being on the internet
i dont go out except for studies or the gym, i would like to go out of walks like i used to but i get afraid people will judge me.
i try to ,but not much spend time with family
i sleep properly throughout the night
my energy level is fine
no id rather do new things than just stay home.
-
i have friends but not close ones,
Why not? I am the opposite of what most people are like; I only have about 4 to 5 friends and I trust them with everything in my life.
my hobbies are being on the internet
I suggest you find social activities outside the virtual world. I will expound on this later.
i dont go out except for studies or the gym
Gym is a good stress reliever. Stick with it!
i try to ,but not much spend time with family
i sleep properly throughout the night
my energy level is fine
All is well here except try to spend more time socializing with your family even extended family, if they live within the same province as you. If I'm not mistaken, you are in Canada, right?
no id rather do new things than just stay home.
That is a good sign however you also said, "i would like to go out of walks like i used to but i get afraid people will judge me". You cannot say I'd rather do new things outside but then restrict yourself with the conviction that people will judge you. I think you need to improve your social skills. What may appear as people being rude to you could just be their inability to adjust to your poor social skills. And as they are taken back by it, you misinterpret their struggle as them judging you or being rude to you.
I am neither an introvert nor an extrovert - right in the middle - but if someone were to come to me with poor social skills, I'll have a hard time being normal in that conversation. That person may find me to be rude or judgmental but all along, I was just struggling to adjust to him or her. Do you understand?
-
The Jinns that come from black magic are very clever. They try to tolerate pain in one or two sessions. I know a few family friends who went to hijama for one year, and then the shayteen finally started speaking. Then the ruqyah stage began.
-
Salam, some people are suggesting i do ruqya, i have also been considering this, but what happens if like the last time i did ruqya, they dont find anything, could this happen? that someone doesnt feel violent symptoms that others do in the first ruqya? or even after a couple of sessions?or does this mean there is nothing that the person has?What has been your ruqya experience.Cuz usually when i search the symptoms for ruqya, i dont feel anything like the symptoms.
Sister first you need to leave twelver Shiism and then start doing ruqyah and don’t stop doing it.
-
For people living in the UK why is ruqyah such a big business? Why didn’t anyone report the evil lowlife shameless pimp hasanat? After reading what he did to people I say give him the death penalty. Shameless pervert!
-
Sister first you need to leave twelver Shiism and then start doing ruqyah and don’t stop doing it.
What's Twelver Shiism got to do with this. 😊
-
What's Twelver Shiism got to do with this. 😊
I know there are people here who are from UK. I want to know why ruqyah is big business and how did someone like the villainous pervert Hasanat go unnoticed. As someone who is a survivor of abuse this matters a lot to me.
@iceman sorry didn’t realize your reply was for the other sister. 😂
-
I know there are people here who are from UK. I want to know why ruqyah is big business and how did someone like the villainous pervert Hasanat go unnoticed. As someone who is a survivor of abuse this matters a lot to me.
@iceman sorry didn’t realize your reply was for the other sister. 😂
That's ok. Errors, mistakes, mishaps and misunderstanding does happen. Be it us, you or the Companions 😊 We're all human after all. That's what we need to understand and go by. 😊
-
That's ok. Errors, mistakes, mishaps and misunderstanding does happen. Be it us, you or the Companions 😊 We're all human after all. That's what we need to understand and go by. 😊
Yea UNINTENTIONAL ones yes........NOT INTENTIONAL mistakes like you do adding on meanings to words like: “Umar said don’t listen to him”.
We won’t let them LIES go by at all we will HOLD you to that INTENTIONAL mistake, mishap,error.
😂
Pathetic little man!
-
Yea UNINTENTIONAL ones yes........NOT INTENTIONAL mistakes like you do adding on meanings to words like: “Umar said don’t listen to him”.
We won’t let them LIES go by at all we will HOLD you to that INTENTIONAL mistake, mishap,error.
😂
Pathetic little man!
What Umar was saying he was saying with full intention. He knew what the Prophet s.a.w was going to write. That's why he prevented it by objecting and causing a fuss. You carry on coming out with what ever excuse you can find. 😊😊😊
Surah Nur verse 54 "Obey Allah and his Prophet and if you dispute, then on him is what is imposed on him, and on you is what is imposed on you; and if you obey him you are guided aright; and there is no duty on the Prophet save the clear delivery".
Surah Aal-e-Imran verse 32 Say, "Obey Allah and the Prophet, but if they turn back, then verily Allah does not love the disbelievers"
Surah Anfal verse 20: "O ye who believe! Obey Allah and His Messenger, and turn not away from him when ye hear (him speak)."
The Prophet (s) wanted to compose a will
We learn from the traditions that towards the end of his noble life, the Prophet's (s) condition was deteriorating. The majority opinion holds that the Prophet (s) left no will before his death, and made no attempt to do so. However, according to the Qur'an it is absolutely obligatory on all Muslims to leave a will. Allah (swt) says in his Glorious Book:
"It is prescribed for you when death approaches one of you, if he leaves behind any goods that he makes a bequest for Parents and (the nearest kinsmen) in goodness, this is a duty upon the pious" (The Qur'an 2:180)).
We may thus ask the question: Would the Prophet of Allah (s) of all Muslims - the one whose Sunnah we are obliged to follow - disregard an order stipulated in the Holy Qur'an?
The instruction is refused
This is a highly significant event that occurred towards the end of the Prophet's life. The Prophet (s) wanted to write a document, which was so momentous that people would never go astray. Clearly, the Prophet's explicit words "you will never go astray", illustrate the critical nature of the Prophet's command and prove that what the Prophet intended to write related to the matter of delivering the message and religious guidance of the people. It is only logical to accept that at this critical stage when the Prophet (s) was near to the time when he would depart from this world, he took the opportunity to write his will as per the command of Allah in the Qur'an in which he could issue final instructions to the Muslim Ummah. However, one group led by Hadhrath Umar felt that this momentous order of the Prophet should be disregarded, while the other group stated that the Prophet's (s) order should be obeyed.
-
What Umar was saying he was saying with full intention. He knew what the Prophet s.a.w was going to write. That's why he prevented it by objecting and causing a fuss. You carry on coming out with what ever excuse you can find. 😊😊😊
Surah Nur verse 54 "Obey Allah and his Prophet and if you dispute, then on him is what is imposed on him, and on you is what is imposed on you; and if you obey him you are guided aright; and there is no duty on the Prophet save the clear delivery".
Surah Aal-e-Imran verse 32 Say, "Obey Allah and the Prophet, but if they turn back, then verily Allah does not love the disbelievers"
Surah Anfal verse 20: "O ye who believe! Obey Allah and His Messenger, and turn not away from him when ye hear (him speak)."
The Prophet (s) wanted to compose a will
We learn from the traditions that towards the end of his noble life, the Prophet's (s) condition was deteriorating. The majority opinion holds that the Prophet (s) left no will before his death, and made no attempt to do so. However, according to the Qur'an it is absolutely obligatory on all Muslims to leave a will. Allah (swt) says in his Glorious Book:
"It is prescribed for you when death approaches one of you, if he leaves behind any goods that he makes a bequest for Parents and (the nearest kinsmen) in goodness, this is a duty upon the pious" (The Qur'an 2:180)).
We may thus ask the question: Would the Prophet of Allah (s) of all Muslims - the one whose Sunnah we are obliged to follow - disregard an order stipulated in the Holy Qur'an?
The instruction is refused
This is a highly significant event that occurred towards the end of the Prophet's life. The Prophet (s) wanted to write a document, which was so momentous that people would never go astray. Clearly, the Prophet's explicit words "you will never go astray", illustrate the critical nature of the Prophet's command and prove that what the Prophet intended to write related to the matter of delivering the message and religious guidance of the people. It is only logical to accept that at this critical stage when the Prophet (s) was near to the time when he would depart from this world, he took the opportunity to write his will as per the command of Allah in the Qur'an in which he could issue final instructions to the Muslim Ummah. However, one group led by Hadhrath Umar felt that this momentous order of the Prophet should be disregarded, while the other group stated that the Prophet's (s) order should be obeyed.
You are the one making the excuse......”Umar said don’t listen to him” which Umar ra NEVER said or even thought........you added that excuse/lie yourself, you posted that as if it was Umar ra who said it! Now you are saying it was meant to be that! you can’t get away with such fabrications in here mate.
You are a liar and have been caught.
You just HATE a companion because of the false history made up against him and taught in your hussieniyats hence your own personal lies you made up against him which you are finding hard to portray on here.........this ain’t no gullible shia chat where everyone will dance to your tune.😉
-
Just want to say that , I’m working on Pen and Paper article. It should be post on Youpuncturedtheark by next week InshaAllah.
-
What Umar was saying he was saying with full intention. He knew what the Prophet s.a.w was going to write. That's why he prevented it by objecting and causing a fuss. You carry on coming out with what ever excuse you can find. 😊😊😊
How can one say that? If this was about leadership then Abdullah ibn Abbas who said this was a big loss himself left Imam Ali's (as) camp in Basra. So even he concluded that this had nothing to do with Caliphate. As for what Umar does, he is not a Prophet, so he not an example to be followed when he is wrong.
-
I know there are people here who are from UK. I want to know why ruqyah is big business and how did someone like the villainous pervert Hasanat go unnoticed. As someone who is a survivor of abuse this matters a lot to me.
@iceman sorry didn’t realize your reply was for the other sister. 😂
I am not from UK so I don't know what happened. However, Ruqyah is very dangerous field. Raqis sometimes get alone with women start going into sin. Also, you are dealing with species made from fire, so you end up becoming angry like them as well.
-
What's Twelver Shiism got to do with this. 😊
There are some Safavid jinns in the magic world. I believe Naade Ali is used to trigger them.
-
Also, you are dealing with species made from fire, so you end up becoming angry like them as well.
I know a certain someone in here who is possessed by one as he is always angry and lying and deceiving 😂😂😂
-
I am not from UK so I don't know what happened. However, Ruqyah is very dangerous field. Raqis sometimes get alone with women start going into sin. Also, you are dealing with species made from fire, so you end up becoming angry like them as well.
Hasanat the famous Instagram raqi along with his wife were famous for being a “fun” and “pious” couple. His wife was living a double life. She is a model. They stole money from charities and ruqyah patients. Hasanat was always flirting and had several wives. The two wives people know about are most likely involved in stealing as well. He’s a manipulator who grooms vulnerable women. Didn’t do ruqyah properly at all and told someone close to him that he is an atheist.
-
What Umar was saying he was saying with full intention. He knew what the Prophet s.a.w was going to write. That's why he prevented it by objecting and causing a fuss. You carry on coming out with what ever excuse you can find. 😊😊😊
Umar (ra) prevented the Holy Prophet (saw) from writing his will and completing his mission and he also subdued Imam Ali (ra) rendering him incapable to fulfill the request of the Holy Prophet (saw). However, the Shias will vociferously claim that the Holy Prophet (saw) and Imam Ali (ra) were aided by Allah (swt) and braver than Umar (ra). #ShiaLogic
-
However, Ruqyah is very dangerous field. Raqis sometimes get alone with women start going into sin.
Bro, the dangerous part is when the jinn (whatever is possessing the individual) tries to harm you and starts blabbering things to get under your skin, even leak your secrets. Saw this in a Turkish movie on Netflix and a friend's friend said that while he was visiting his folks back home, one of his cousins was possessed so she would spill the beans on everyone's business. This guy would sneak out every time his cousin would go in a possessed fit; perhaps he had too many secrets he did not want revealed in front of his parents, lol.
-
What Umar was saying he was saying with full intention. He knew what the Prophet s.a.w was going to write. That's why he prevented it by objecting and causing a fuss. You carry on coming out with what ever excuse you can find. 😊😊😊
Umar (ra) prevented the Holy Prophet (saw) from writing his will and completing his mission and he also subdued Imam Ali (ra) rendering him incapable to fulfill the request of the Holy Prophet (saw). However, the Shias will vociferously claim that the Holy Prophet (saw) and Imam Ali (ra) were aided by Allah (swt) and braver than Umar (ra). #ShiaLogic
-
I know a certain someone in here who is possessed by one as he is always angry and lying and deceiving 😂😂😂
Yassir Habib said among the Shia there are those who lie so much that the Shaytaan learn how to lie from them.
-
Yassir Habib said among the Shia there are those who lie so much that the Shaytaan learn how to lie from them.
Am sure even the shaitaan would be shy in front of a certain someone who insists on keeping up lies and denying facts 😜
-
Yassir Habib said among the Shia there are those who lie so much that the Shaytaan learn how to lie from them.
Well if that's what Yasir Habib said and believes in then he doesn't have a clue about Shaytan or the Shias. 😊 He doesn't sound like a knowledgeable person at all. And I don't know if he's talking from experience or gossip and rumours. 😊 Gossip and rumours would be more like it 😀
-
Umar (ra) prevented the Holy Prophet (saw) from writing his will and completing his mission and he also subdued Imam Ali (ra) rendering him incapable to fulfill the request of the Holy Prophet (saw). However, the Shias will vociferously claim that the Holy Prophet (saw) and Imam Ali (ra) were aided by Allah (swt) and braver than Umar (ra). #ShiaLogic
You can come up with what ever excuses you like and bring what ever twist and turns you want but certain matters and individuals need to be exposed and brought to the attention of the people and the public. This is exactly what you dont like about us.
-
Bro, the dangerous part is when the jinn (whatever is possessing the individual) tries to harm you and starts blabbering things to get under your skin, even leak your secrets. Saw this in a Turkish movie on Netflix and a friend's friend said that while he was visiting his folks back home, one of his cousins was possessed so she would spill the beans on everyone's business. This guy would sneak out every time his cousin would go in a possessed fit; perhaps he had too many secrets he did not want revealed in front of his parents, lol.
Netflix is not the best place to learn about jinns. They know your secrets because your qareen tells them. Those sent by black magic are usually very powerful.
-
I am not from UK so I don't know what happened. However, Ruqyah is very dangerous field. Raqis sometimes get alone with women start going into sin. Also, you are dealing with species made from fire, so you end up becoming angry like them as well.
Hasanat is an agnostic and according to his wives he forced them to leave Islam as well. He only showed himself as a Muslim for his fake ruqyah business. He only made his victims situation worse.
-
Netflix is not the best place to learn about jinns. They know your secrets because your qareen tells them. Those sent by black magic are usually very powerful.
I did not say Netflix is the best place to learn about anything, let alone jinns. However, the movie I watched confirmed what a friend's friend had experienced - that a possessed person can expose your secrets.
-
I did not say Netflix is the best place to learn about anything, let alone jinns. However, the movie I watched confirmed what a friend's friend had experienced - that a possessed person can expose your secrets.
I know you didn’t say that brother.
A possessed person might know some of your secrets because of the qareen. Keep in mind that jinns are liars so even if they tell one truth they’ll tell a hundred lies with it.
-
You can come up with what ever excuses you like and bring what ever twist and turns you want but certain matters and individuals need to be exposed and brought to the attention of the people and the public.
These are not excuses or twists! These are logical inferences that one must make when adopting Shi'i narrative of an event.
If Umar (ra) prevented the Holy Prophet (saw) from completing his mission, by disallowing him to write his will, why did Imam Ali (ra) choose to remain a spectator (much like when his wife was attacked)?
How is it that a mere fallible man like Umar (ra) could overpower and overwhelm the Seal of Prophets (asws) and an "infallible" Imam (ra) who were both aided and protected by Allah (swt), the latter having control over atoms and the universe?
I can only imagine the mess Shias would create if they start introducing their own fictitious superheroes. They would have superpowers but somehow they would fail to use them when needed the most, lol.
This is exactly what you dont like about us.
No, what I have stated is what I don't like about you. You zoom in to get a pixelated view thereby missing out on the entire picture.
-
I know you didn’t say that brother.
A possessed person might know some of your secrets because of the qareen. Keep in mind that jinns are liars so even if they tell one truth they’ll tell a hundred lies with it.
What they do, how they get all that information, I would rather not find out firsthand, lol!
-
Well if that's what Yasir Habib said and believes in then he doesn't have a clue about Shaytan or the Shias. 😊 He doesn't sound like a knowledgeable person at all. And I don't know if he's talking from experience or gossip and rumours. 😊 Gossip and rumours would be more like it 😀
He actually referenced it from al Kafi.
(https://i.imgur.com/BoFjA47.png)
(https://i.imgur.com/hDPaHfj.png)
(https://i.imgur.com/XmSlOPh.png)
-
These are not excuses or twists! These are logical inferences that one must make when adopting Shi'i narrative of an event.
If Umar (ra) prevented the Holy Prophet (saw) from completing his mission, by disallowing him to write his will, why did Imam Ali (ra) choose to remain a spectator (much like when his wife was attacked)?
How is it that a mere fallible man like Umar (ra) could overpower and overwhelm the Seal of Prophets (asws) and an "infallible" Imam (ra) who were both aided and protected by Allah (swt), the latter having control over atoms and the universe?
I can only imagine the mess Shias would create if they start introducing their own fictitious superheroes. They would have superpowers but somehow they would fail to use them when needed the most, lol.
No, what I have stated is what I don't like about you. You zoom in to get a pixelated view thereby missing out on the entire picture.
"If Umar (ra) prevented the Holy Prophet (saw) from completing his mission, by disallowing him to write his will, why did Imam Ali (ra) choose to remain a spectator (much like when his wife was attacked)"
How did you calculate that he remained a spectator. Islam was in its infancy. The Muslim community was immature. And people became Muslims, during the taking of Mecca, not for the right reasons. Ali along with other companions knew that any disagreement and disturbance would fall in the hands of opportunists waiting to take advantage of any situation that developes. The biggest opportunist (Abu Sufyan) was watching closely.
-
How did you calculate that he remained a spectator.
With logic and textual calculator of evidence. Imam Ali (ra) was present and he did not do anything.
Would you now comment on Shaykh Mufid's blunder who wrote in Kitab al-Irshad that immediately after this incident, the Holy Prophet (saw) sent for Abbas (ra) and Imam Ali (ra). And the Holy Prophet (saw) offered the leadership of the Ummah to Abbas (ra) before Imam Ali (ra). This was after the alleged announcement of Imam Ali's (ra) Wilayah at Ghadeer Khum.
Why would the Prophet (saw) announce Imam Ali's (ra) Wilayah at Ghadeer Khum and then offer it to Abbas (ra)? Again, this report is in Kitab al-Irshad by Shaykh Mufid.
Everyone, step back and make room for Barfeela's dance moves and dodging capabilities.
Islam was in its infancy. The Muslim community was immature.
The message of Islam had been completed. Allah (swt) had completed his favor upon us when the Holy Prophet (saw) fell ill and asked for pen and paper. Try again!
And people became Muslims, during the taking of Mecca, not for the right reasons.
Irrelevant!
Ali along with other companions knew that any disagreement and disturbance would fall in the hands of opportunists waiting to take advantage of any situation that developes.
So you admit and agree that Imam Ali (ra) stood around and did not fulfill the Holy Prophet's (saw) request! That is what I wanted to prove and you have admitted it too. Thank you.
The biggest opportunist (Abu Sufyan) was watching closely.
Okay but the Wilayah was first offered to Abbas (ra) - according to Shaykh Mufid - despite it being promised to Imam Ali (ra) at Ghadeer Khum.
-
With logic and textual calculator of evidence. Imam Ali (ra) was present and he did not do anything.
Would you now comment on Shaykh Mufid's blunder who wrote in Kitab al-Irshad that immediately after this incident, the Holy Prophet (saw) sent for Abbas (ra) and Imam Ali (ra). And the Holy Prophet (saw) offered the leadership of the Ummah to Abbas (ra) before Imam Ali (ra). This was after the alleged announcement of Imam Ali's (ra) Wilayah at Ghadeer Khum.
Why would the Prophet (saw) announce Imam Ali's (ra) Wilayah at Ghadeer Khum and then offer it to Abbas (ra)? Again, this report is in Kitab al-Irshad by Shaykh Mufid.
Everyone, step back and make room for Barfeela's dance moves and dodging capabilities.
The message of Islam had been completed. Allah (swt) had completed his favor upon us when the Holy Prophet (saw) fell ill and asked for pen and paper. Try again!
Irrelevant!
So you admit and agree that Imam Ali (ra) stood around and did not fulfill the Holy Prophet's (saw) request! That is what I wanted to prove and you have admitted it too. Thank you.
Okay but the Wilayah was first offered to Abbas (ra) - according to Shaykh Mufid - despite it being promised to Imam Ali (ra) at Ghadeer Khum.
"With logic and textual calculator of evidence"
Open your mind and start thinking rationally then this calculator will work better and proper.
"Imam Ali (ra) was present and he did not do anything"
He didn't do what you wanted him to do or what you think he should have done. He was an Imam of the people and exactly did what an Imam of the people would do. You don't understand Imamah so you wouldn't have a clue. So it's not that he didn't do anything, he did what was important and necessary as an Imam. If he wasn't an Imam then obviously he would have acted differently. That's the difference. Learn about the status of Imamah and it responbilities.
"Would you now comment on Shaykh Mufid's blunder who wrote in...."
I wouldn't call it blunder. That's his opinion. Learn to respect others and their opinion just as you would want. That's what you're missing.
"Why would the Prophet (saw) announce Imam Ali's (ra) Wilayah at Ghadeer Khum and then offer it to Abbas (ra)? Again, this report is in Kitab al-Irshad by Shaykh Mufid"
We don't accept and agree to that. That is his opinion or a matter which he has recorded in his book but as an opinion of others.
-
With logic and textual calculator of evidence. Imam Ali (ra) was present and he did not do anything.
Would you now comment on Shaykh Mufid's blunder who wrote in Kitab al-Irshad that immediately after this incident, the Holy Prophet (saw) sent for Abbas (ra) and Imam Ali (ra). And the Holy Prophet (saw) offered the leadership of the Ummah to Abbas (ra) before Imam Ali (ra). This was after the alleged announcement of Imam Ali's (ra) Wilayah at Ghadeer Khum.
Why would the Prophet (saw) announce Imam Ali's (ra) Wilayah at Ghadeer Khum and then offer it to Abbas (ra)? Again, this report is in Kitab al-Irshad by Shaykh Mufid.
Everyone, step back and make room for Barfeela's dance moves and dodging capabilities.
The message of Islam had been completed. Allah (swt) had completed his favor upon us when the Holy Prophet (saw) fell ill and asked for pen and paper. Try again!
Irrelevant!
So you admit and agree that Imam Ali (ra) stood around and did not fulfill the Holy Prophet's (saw) request! That is what I wanted to prove and you have admitted it too. Thank you.
Okay but the Wilayah was first offered to Abbas (ra) - according to Shaykh Mufid - despite it being promised to Imam Ali (ra) at Ghadeer Khum.
"The message of Islam had been completed. Allah (swt) had completed his favor upon us"
Bring the verses forward. The complete verses. Actually let me do it for you.
when the Holy Prophet (saw) fell ill and asked for pen and paper. Try again!
-
He didn't do what you wanted him to do or what you think he should have done. He was an Imam of the people and exactly did what an Imam of the people would do. You don't understand Imamah so you wouldn't have a clue. So it's not that he didn't do anything, he did what was important and necessary as an Imam.
What a ridiculously stupid attempt at a failed rebuttal. Not doing anything is failing to fulfill the Holy Prophet's (saw) request. Your own judgment on others (that they disobeyed the Holy Prophet s.a.w.) compels you to make such obscure statements. It is better that you stop accusing Umar (ra) so that you don't have to make failed attempts at explaining away your own "infallible" Imam's (ra) lapse.
If he wasn't an Imam then obviously he would have acted differently. That's the difference. Learn about the status of Imamah and it responbilities.
Shia belief 101 is that the Imam's role is to guide. When Imam Ali (ra) did not bring pen and paper, what guidance was he imparting upon the people? Perhaps he was affirming and upholding Umar's (ra) decision in which case it becomes incumbent upon you to also - like Imam Ali (ra) - side with Umar (ra). An "infallible" Imam adopting the role of a spectator when the Holy Prophet (saw) ordered something is a failed Imam.
And this laughable web of excuses you are weaving! If an "infallible" Imam does not meet the needs of the Holy Prophet (saw) then why have an "infallible" Imam in the first place?
You only have two options, to make it easy for you:
1. Umar (ra) was wrong which makes everyone in the room just as wrong, including Imam Ali (ra).
2. Umar (ra) was concerned about the health of the Holy Prophet (saw) and others present shared this concern which is why Imam Ali (ra) remained motionless and silent.
I wouldn't call it blunder. That's his opinion. Learn to respect others and their opinion just as you would want. That's what you're missing.
The issue is bigger than a scholar having an opinion. We Afghans have a saying: liars have no (or bad) memory. When you are a compulsive liar, you are bound to contradict yourself because it is next to impossible to keep all your claims in order (unless rehearsed thoroughly). Exactly what we see in Shaykh Mufid's case!
We don't accept and agree to that. That is his opinion or a matter which he has recorded in his book but as an opinion of others.
More like, a compulsive liar propagating a lie had a slip of tongue, or slip of pen.
Bring the verses forward. The complete verses. Actually let me do it for you.
Why do you want me to bring the verse which says that the religion has been completed thereby Allah (swt) completing his favor upon us? If you doubt this Islamic injunction then openly say so and accept your status outside the fold of Islam. Otherwise, no need for the verse to be brought forward when it is our aqeedah that Islam is complete.
-
With logic and textual calculator of evidence. Imam Ali (ra) was present and he did not do anything.
Would you now comment on Shaykh Mufid's blunder who wrote in Kitab al-Irshad that immediately after this incident, the Holy Prophet (saw) sent for Abbas (ra) and Imam Ali (ra). And the Holy Prophet (saw) offered the leadership of the Ummah to Abbas (ra) before Imam Ali (ra). This was after the alleged announcement of Imam Ali's (ra) Wilayah at Ghadeer Khum.
Why would the Prophet (saw) announce Imam Ali's (ra) Wilayah at Ghadeer Khum and then offer it to Abbas (ra)? Again, this report is in Kitab al-Irshad by Shaykh Mufid.
Everyone, step back and make room for Barfeela's dance moves and dodging capabilities.
The message of Islam had been completed. Allah (swt) had completed his favor upon us when the Holy Prophet (saw) fell ill and asked for pen and paper. Try again!
Irrelevant!
So you admit and agree that Imam Ali (ra) stood around and did not fulfill the Holy Prophet's (saw) request! That is what I wanted to prove and you have admitted it too. Thank you.
Okay but the Wilayah was first offered to Abbas (ra) - according to Shaykh Mufid - despite it being promised to Imam Ali (ra) at Ghadeer Khum.
"Irrelevant"
Nope. RELEVANT. Just because it doesn't suit you doesn't mean it's irrelevant.
"Okay but the Wilayah was first offered to Abbas (ra) - according to Shaykh Mufid - despite it being promised to Imam Ali (ra) at Ghadeer Khum"
We don't believe that.
"So you admit and agree that Imam Ali (ra) stood around and did not fulfill the Holy Prophet's (saw) request! That is what I wanted to prove and you have admitted it too. Thank you"
Nope. You're just trying to put words in my mouth. And you're trying to force your opinion on me. That's not what I said. Imam Ali did what he had to do by keeping everything in mind and by being farsighted.
-
What a ridiculously stupid attempt at a failed rebuttal. Not doing anything is failing to fulfill the Holy Prophet's (saw) request. Your own judgment on others (that they disobeyed the Holy Prophet s.a.w.) compels you to make such obscure statements. It is better that you stop accusing Umar (ra) so that you don't have to make failed attempts at explaining away your own "infallible" Imam's (ra) lapse.
Shia belief 101 is that the Imam's role is to guide. When Imam Ali (ra) did not bring pen and paper, what guidance was he imparting upon the people? Perhaps he was affirming and upholding Umar's (ra) decision in which case it becomes incumbent upon you to also - like Imam Ali (ra) - side with Umar (ra). An "infallible" Imam adopting the role of a spectator when the Holy Prophet (saw) ordered something is a failed Imam.
And this laughable web of excuses you are weaving! If an "infallible" Imam does not meet the needs of the Holy Prophet (saw) then why have an "infallible" Imam in the first place?
You only have two options, to make it easy for you:
1. Umar (ra) was wrong which makes everyone in the room just as wrong, including Imam Ali (ra).
2. Umar (ra) was concerned about the health of the Holy Prophet (saw) and others present shared this concern which is why Imam Ali (ra) remained motionless and silent.
The issue is bigger than a scholar having an opinion. We Afghans have a saying: liars have no (or bad) memory. When you are a compulsive liar, you are bound to contradict yourself because it is next to impossible to keep all your claims in order (unless rehearsed thoroughly). Exactly what we see in Shaykh Mufid's case!
More like, a compulsive liar propagating a lie had a slip of tongue, or slip of pen.
Why do you want me to bring the verse which says that the religion has been completed thereby Allah (swt) completing his favor upon us? If you doubt this Islamic injunction then openly say so and accept your status outside the fold of Islam. Otherwise, no need for the verse to be brought forward when it is our aqeedah that Islam is complete.
Discuss the matter. Don't argue to force your opinion or to get me to accept and believe what you want.
"What a ridiculously stupid attempt at a failed rebuttal. Not doing anything is failing to fulfill the Holy Prophet's (saw) request"
Nobody said he didn't do anything. He did what he thought was necessary. He acted as an Imam of the people and not as an individual or one of the people. Like I said learn and get to know about Shia Imamah rather then just banging on based on arrogance.
"Your own judgment on others (that they disobeyed the Holy Prophet s.a.w.) compels you to make such obscure statements"
It's not my judgement but an actual fact. The Prophet s.a.w asked for a pen and paper, for who? So he may write something important for those present, why and what for? So they do not DEVIATE or go ASTRAY. If I'm correct these two words are used.
If the book of Allah was SUFFICIENT then why didn't the Prophet s.a.w know that. And what was the need for the Prophet s.a.w to ask for a pen and paper. WHY did the Prophet s.a.w think that despite the Qur'an, his companions would DEVIATE, GO ASTRAY. What did the Prophet s.a.w see and witness for him to ask for pen and paper and give a clear reason for why he was going to write.
"It is better that you stop accusing Umar"
😊 I didn't accuse Umar. He put himself in it by making his intentions clear 😊
"Shia belief 101 is that the Imam's role is to guide. When Imam Ali (ra) did not bring pen and paper, what guidance was he imparting upon the people? Perhaps he was affirming and upholding Umar's (ra) decision in which case it becomes incumbent upon you to also - like Imam Ali (ra) - side with Umar (ra). An "infallible" Imam adopting the role of a spectator when the Holy Prophet (saw) ordered something is a failed Imam"
The pen and paper was asked for a reason. The Prophet s.a.w had seen, noticed and witnessed something. So the ones who were uncomfortable and uneasy, they were the ones who the Prophet s.a.w asked to bring a pen and paper to keep them in line. There was no need for Ali to bring it. If the problem was seen and noticed in Ali or any other then the Prophet s.a.w surely and most certainly would have asked him or them.
Do you get the point.
Those who were uncomfortable and uneasy were the ones who objected. It was a very intelligent and nice move by the Prophet s.a.w for asking pen and paper from those who he seemed were uncomfortable and uneasy. And their reaction and response made it clear when they objected and argued about it. You can continue to protect them by raising excuses. I understand.
Why should Ali bring the pen and paper when he wasn't the one needing assurance. Nor did the Prophet s.a.w see, notice or witness any change in his nature, stance and behaviour. The ones who were showing signs of difference (deviation, going astray) were the ones who were asked. And their objection and argument exposed them and their intentions.
-
"Why do you want me to bring the verse which says that the religion has been completed thereby Allah (swt) completing his favor upon us? If you doubt this Islamic injunction then openly say so and accept your status outside the fold of Islam. Otherwise, no need for the verse to be brought forward when it is our aqeedah that Islam is complete"
If everything was done and dusted and the book of Allah was sufficient then what was the need for pen and paper. And why did the Prophet s.a.w say "so you don't deviate or go astray after me" or what ever the exact words were, what was the need for those serious words?
-
Discuss the matter. Don't argue to force your opinion or to get me to accept and believe what you want.
Doing just that! Maybe you can try to be less stupid.
Nobody said he didn't do anything.
He did not fulfill the Holy Prophet's (saw) request, in other words, he was just as guilty as you make Umar (ra) out to be.
He did what he thought was necessary. He acted as an Imam of the people and not as an individual or one of the people.
If he thought silence and not presenting the pen and paper to be necessary then you, along with millions of Shias, should also adopt the same stance. And maybe like shut up!
Like I said learn and get to know about Shia Imamah rather then just banging on based on arrogance.
I only refute ideas that are forced into the Qur'an; I don't learn about them. Having said that, you claim to follow Imam Ali (ra) but you won't shut up regarding an incident during which he said or did NOTHING!
It's not my judgement but an actual fact. The Prophet s.a.w asked for a pen and paper, for who? So he may write something important for those present, why and what for? So they do not DEVIATE or go ASTRAY. If I'm correct these two words are used.
So what do you think the Holy Prophet (saw) intended to write?
I also hope you know that the Holy Prophet (saw) lived another three days! I am providing context with the intention that you would not make a fool out of yourself but you insist on being an idiot.
If the book of Allah was SUFFICIENT then why didn't the Prophet s.a.w know that. And what was the need for the Prophet s.a.w to ask for a pen and paper. WHY did the Prophet s.a.w think that despite the Qur'an, his companions would DEVIATE, GO ASTRAY. What did the Prophet s.a.w see and witness for him to ask for pen and paper and give a clear reason for why he was going to write.
Those questions are for you to answer. You are the claimant accusing Umar (ra) of disobeying the Holy Prophet (saw) and not allowing him to write something after which we would not "deviate" or "go astray".
Go ahead, tell us!
😊 I didn't accuse Umar. He put himself in it by making his intentions clear 😊
Ignoring your display of faggotry (excessive use of smileys), Imam Ali (ra) put himself in the very same situation by remaining silent. I will let you decide if Imam Ali (ra) was subdued or he actually was siding with Umar (ra). Either way, you lose!
The pen and paper was asked for a reason. The Prophet s.a.w had seen, noticed and witnessed something. So the ones who were uncomfortable and uneasy, they were the ones who the Prophet s.a.w asked to bring a pen and paper to keep them in line. There was no need for Ali to bring it. If the problem was seen and noticed in Ali or any other then the Prophet s.a.w surely and most certainly would have asked him or them.
This is like saying that the warden asked the death row inmate to go purchase lethal injection with which the latter could be put to death.
Wallaahi, I have not met a bigger idiot than you. I think you need to study, or reform your own thoughts on, your core belief which is Imamah.
The Imam (ra) is there to guide but when people (allegedly) choose misguidance, he is not supposed to implement corrective course of action?!?!?! You are an idiot!
Why should Ali bring the pen and paper when he wasn't the one needing assurance.
So the "infallible" Imam (ra) was subdued to allow ignorance and misguidance to flourish? Logic!
The ones who were showing signs of difference (deviation, going astray) were the ones who were asked. And their objection and argument exposed them and their intentions.
So you are saying that the Holy Prophet (saw) requested pen and paper to expose those who were "deviants" and "going astray", naudhubillah? In that case, you need to establish - with unambiguous proof - this intent of the Holy Prophet (saw) and what he wished to write. Until you prove what he wanted to write, everything else is speculation, including what you think the Holy Prophet (saw) would have ordered to be written down.
If everything was done and dusted and the book of Allah was sufficient then what was the need for pen and paper. And why did the Prophet s.a.w say "so you don't deviate or go astray after me" or what ever the exact words were, what was the need for those serious words?
Few days ago, you wanted the punishment for Malik bin Nuwayrah from the Qur'an and now you are holding the phrase "so you don't deviate or go astray" above the Qur'anic injunction that the religion has been completed? I am convinced that the worst munaafiq at the time of the Holy Prophet (saw) would be deemed as an upright and principled Muslim compared to you.
Returning to you point, you are insisting that something extremely important, something that would have prevented us from "deviating" and "going astray", was prevented from being dictated and was not written down. In the absence of this information (which was prevented from being written), it must follow that all Muslims have "deviated" and "gone astray" because it was never written down nor was it conveyed to anyone.
So where is your assurance to salvation because your interpretation can only lead to one conclusion - all Muslims have "deviated" and "gone astray"?
Unless you prove to us that the Holy Prophet (saw) wanted to dictate Imam Ali's (ra) successorship, you are admitting that in the absence of what was intended to be written, you are a deviant and have gone astray. And all Shias suffer the same fate because they share the same view on this narration as you.
-
Doing just that! Maybe you can try to be less stupid.
He did not fulfill the Holy Prophet's (saw) request, in other words, he was just as guilty as you make Umar (ra) out to be.
If he thought silence and not presenting the pen and paper to be necessary then you, along with millions of Shias, should also adopt the same stance. And maybe like shut up!
I only refute ideas that are forced into the Qur'an; I don't learn about them. Having said that, you claim to follow Imam Ali (ra) but you won't shut up regarding an incident during which he said or did NOTHING!
So what do you think the Holy Prophet (saw) intended to write?
I also hope you know that the Holy Prophet (saw) lived another three days! I am providing context with the intention that you would not make a fool out of yourself but you insist on being an idiot.
Those questions are for you to answer. You are the claimant accusing Umar (ra) of disobeying the Holy Prophet (saw) and not allowing him to write something after which we would not "deviate" or "go astray".
Go ahead, tell us!
Ignoring your display of faggotry (excessive use of smileys), Imam Ali (ra) put himself in the very same situation by remaining silent. I will let you decide if Imam Ali (ra) was subdued or he actually was siding with Umar (ra). Either way, you lose!
This is like saying that the warden asked the death row inmate to go purchase lethal injection with which the latter could be put to death.
Wallaahi, I have not met a bigger idiot than you. I think you need to study, or reform your own thoughts on, your core belief which is Imamah.
The Imam (ra) is there to guide but when people (allegedly) choose misguidance, he is not supposed to implement corrective course of action?!?!?! You are an idiot!
So the "infallible" Imam (ra) was subdued to allow ignorance and misguidance to flourish? Logic!
So you are saying that the Holy Prophet (saw) requested pen and paper to expose those who were "deviants" and "going astray", naudhubillah? In that case, you need to establish - with unambiguous proof - this intent of the Holy Prophet (saw) and what he wished to write. Until you prove what he wanted to write, everything else is speculation, including what you think the Holy Prophet (saw) would have ordered to be written down.
Few days ago, you wanted the punishment for Malik bin Nuwayrah from the Qur'an and now you are holding the phrase "so you don't deviate or go astray" above the Qur'anic injunction that the religion has been completed? I am convinced that the worst munaafiq at the time of the Holy Prophet (saw) would be deemed as an upright and principled Muslim compared to you.
Returning to you point, you are insisting that something extremely important, something that would have prevented us from "deviating" and "going astray", was prevented from being dictated and was not written down. In the absence of this information (which was prevented from being written), it must follow that all Muslims have "deviated" and "gone astray" because it was never written down nor was it conveyed to anyone.
So where is your assurance to salvation because your interpretation can only lead to one conclusion - all Muslims have "deviated" and "gone astray"?
Unless you prove to us that the Holy Prophet (saw) wanted to dictate Imam Ali's (ra) successorship, you are admitting that in the absence of what was intended to be written, you are a deviant and have gone astray. And all Shias suffer the same fate because they share the same view on this narration as you.
All you're doing is coming out with insulting remarks and sarcastic statements. If not that then counter arguments and questions. Why don't you answer what is asked and address what is put forward. I'm talking about the pen and paper incident and how and why Umar spoke. No one else responded in objection apart from Umar. Was it not Umar apart from everyone else who spoke in response?.
Or is that an accusation on Umar as well. This is what we're discussing. And you're getting personal by picking on Ali. I'm not getting personal. You can pick on who ever you like. I don't own Ali. For me they're all companions of the Prophet s.a.w. that's exactly how I see them.
-
The Holy Prophet (s) requests that writing materials be brought to him. This is what we read in Sahih al-Bukhari as narrated by Ibn 'Abbas:
"When the time of the death of the Prophet approached while there were some men in the house, and among them was 'Umar Ibn al-Khattab, the Prophet said:
"Come near let me write for you a writing after which you will never go astray."
'Umar said:
"The Prophet is seriously ill, and you have the Qur'an, so Allah's Book is sufficient for us."
The people in the house differed and disputed. Some of them said,
"Come near so that Allah's Apostle may write for you a writing after which you will not go astray,"
while the others said what 'Umar said. When they made much noise and quarreled greatly in front of the Prophet, he said to them,
"Go away and leave me."
Ibn 'Abbas used to say,
"It was a great disaster that their quarrel and noise prevented Allah's Apostle from writing a statement for them".
Sahih al Bukhari Arabic-English Volume 9 hadith number 468 and Volume 7 hadith 573
NOTE THE PROPHET'S WORDS,
"Come near let me write for you a writing after which you will never go astray."
Where else did the Prophet s.a.w use these exact words,
"you will never go astray."
Lets take a look.
"I have left with you something, which if you strictly adhere to, you shall never go astray–The Book of Allah and my progeny.”
Take a look at the exact words used here,
"you shall never go astray"
See the similarity. But Sunni Scholars have considered this hadith weak. Just to confuse things and to divert attention.
-
NOTE THE PROPHET'S WORDS,
"Come near let me write for you a writing after which you will never go astray."
Where else did the Prophet s.a.w use these exact words,
"you will never go astray."
Lets take a look.
"I have left with you something, which if you strictly adhere to, you shall never go astray–The Book of Allah and my progeny.”
Take a look at the exact words used here,
"you shall never go astray"
See the similarity. But Sunni Scholars have considered this hadith weak. Just to confuse things and to divert attention.
"This version has been narrated in Sunan Tirmidhi and is classed as Dhaeef (weak). Even though Imam Tirmidhi included it in his book, he himself did not consider it Sahih (authentic) and referred to it as Ghareeb (i.e. strange in its content and not widely recognized). A similar version of Hadith al-Thaqalayn can be found in Musnad Ahmad, but it too is classed as Dhaeef"
I wonder why when the exact words were used in the pen and paper incident.?
-
Doing just that! Maybe you can try to be less stupid.
He did not fulfill the Holy Prophet's (saw) request, in other words, he was just as guilty as you make Umar (ra) out to be.
If he thought silence and not presenting the pen and paper to be necessary then you, along with millions of Shias, should also adopt the same stance. And maybe like shut up!
I only refute ideas that are forced into the Qur'an; I don't learn about them. Having said that, you claim to follow Imam Ali (ra) but you won't shut up regarding an incident during which he said or did NOTHING!
So what do you think the Holy Prophet (saw) intended to write?
I also hope you know that the Holy Prophet (saw) lived another three days! I am providing context with the intention that you would not make a fool out of yourself but you insist on being an idiot.
Those questions are for you to answer. You are the claimant accusing Umar (ra) of disobeying the Holy Prophet (saw) and not allowing him to write something after which we would not "deviate" or "go astray".
Go ahead, tell us!
Ignoring your display of faggotry (excessive use of smileys), Imam Ali (ra) put himself in the very same situation by remaining silent. I will let you decide if Imam Ali (ra) was subdued or he actually was siding with Umar (ra). Either way, you lose!
This is like saying that the warden asked the death row inmate to go purchase lethal injection with which the latter could be put to death.
Wallaahi, I have not met a bigger idiot than you. I think you need to study, or reform your own thoughts on, your core belief which is Imamah.
The Imam (ra) is there to guide but when people (allegedly) choose misguidance, he is not supposed to implement corrective course of action?!?!?! You are an idiot!
So the "infallible" Imam (ra) was subdued to allow ignorance and misguidance to flourish? Logic!
So you are saying that the Holy Prophet (saw) requested pen and paper to expose those who were "deviants" and "going astray", naudhubillah? In that case, you need to establish - with unambiguous proof - this intent of the Holy Prophet (saw) and what he wished to write. Until you prove what he wanted to write, everything else is speculation, including what you think the Holy Prophet (saw) would have ordered to be written down.
Few days ago, you wanted the punishment for Malik bin Nuwayrah from the Qur'an and now you are holding the phrase "so you don't deviate or go astray" above the Qur'anic injunction that the religion has been completed? I am convinced that the worst munaafiq at the time of the Holy Prophet (saw) would be deemed as an upright and principled Muslim compared to you.
Returning to you point, you are insisting that something extremely important, something that would have prevented us from "deviating" and "going astray", was prevented from being dictated and was not written down. In the absence of this information (which was prevented from being written), it must follow that all Muslims have "deviated" and "gone astray" because it was never written down nor was it conveyed to anyone.
So where is your assurance to salvation because your interpretation can only lead to one conclusion - all Muslims have "deviated" and "gone astray"?
Unless you prove to us that the Holy Prophet (saw) wanted to dictate Imam Ali's (ra) successorship, you are admitting that in the absence of what was intended to be written, you are a deviant and have gone astray. And all Shias suffer the same fate because they share the same view on this narration as you.
"I am convinced that the worst munaafiq at the time of the Holy Prophet (saw) would be deemed as an upright and principled Muslim compared to you"
I don't care the slightest what you think or say about me. Surely you must know that by now. And your absolutely right, according to the Ahle Sunnah the worst munaafiqs at the time of the Holy Prophet (saw) are considered as upright and principled Muslims 😊
-
All you're doing is coming out with insulting remarks and sarcastic statements.
No, I am refuting you and then criticizing you for your stupidity.
If not that then counter arguments and questions.
Not only that, I have exposed your hypocrisy. In the matter of Malik bin Nuwayrah, you disregarded the words of your own "infallible" Imam (ra) - belonging to the category of Second Weighty Thing which is on par with the Qur'an (as per your beliefs) - and demanded Qur'anic proof. However, in this case, you are satisfied with a statement occurring in Sahih Bukhari over what the Qur'an says - that the religion has been completed thereby implying that all that our salvation rests upon has been spelled out.
I'm talking about the pen and paper incident and how and why Umar spoke. No one else responded in objection apart from Umar. Was it not Umar apart from everyone else who spoke in response?.
Umar's (ra) response was not objection but reaction; he reacted to the Holy Prophet (saw) falling unconscious right after he made the request. Even if we agree that it was an objection - for argument's sake - why was the "infallible" Imam (ra) a bystander? And if you repeat that the "infallible" Imam (ra) acted as needed, don't you think that weakens his position and therefore his existence? Why have an "infallible" Imam (ra) who has control over atoms but is too timid to implement corrective course of action?
You will never answer these questions in a logical line flowing from one to the next.
Or is that an accusation on Umar as well. This is what we're discussing. And you're getting personal by picking on Ali.
Picking on Imam Ali (ra)? I am showing you that the one you consider hujjah upheld, or at the very least did not oppose, Umar's (ra) decision. Now is a good time, since its not too late, for you to follow your hujjah on issues like this one, Fadak, naming your children Abu Bakr and Umar, etc!
However, the main point I am trying to establish now is the following: if the Holy Prophet (saw) was prevented from writing something which would prevent us from becoming "deviated" and having "gone astray", it means that we are missing that critical piece of information or prescription. Therefore, we must conclude that Muslims have all "deviated" and "gone astray", including the Shias.
Going a step further, since only Shias hold the belief that the Holy Prophet (saw) was prevented from writing the prescription, the judgment applies only to them. Hence, only the Shias have "deviated" and "gone astray" (since they are the only ones to claim that the prescription to avoid the ills of having "deviated" and "gone astray" was prevented from being written down).
Until you prove (with authentic proof) what the Holy Prophet (saw) wished to dictate for the Sahaba (ra) to write down, we can conclude that the Shias are the only ones to have "deviated" and "gone astray" because only they claim that the prescription was never written down and they cannot authentically establish what that prescription would have said (had it been written down).
-
No, I am refuting you and then criticizing you for your stupidity.
Not only that, I have exposed your hypocrisy. In the matter of Malik bin Nuwayrah, you disregarded the words of your own "infallible" Imam (ra) - belonging to the category of Second Weighty Thing which is on par with the Qur'an (as per your beliefs) - and demanded Qur'anic proof. However, in this case, you are satisfied with a statement occurring in Sahih Bukhari over what the Qur'an says - that the religion has been completed thereby implying that all that our salvation rests upon has been spelled out.
Umar's (ra) response was not objection but reaction; he reacted to the Holy Prophet (saw) falling unconscious right after he made the request. Even if we agree that it was an objection - for argument's sake - why was the "infallible" Imam (ra) a bystander? And if you repeat that the "infallible" Imam (ra) acted as needed, don't you think that weakens his position and therefore his existence? Why have an "infallible" Imam (ra) who has control over atoms but is too timid to implement corrective course of action?
You will never answer these questions in a logical line flowing from one to the next.
Picking on Imam Ali (ra)? I am showing you that the one you consider hujjah upheld, or at the very least did not oppose, Umar's (ra) decision. Now is a good time, since its not too late, for you to follow your hujjah on issues like this one, Fadak, naming your children Abu Bakr and Umar, etc!
However, the main point I am trying to establish now is the following: if the Holy Prophet (saw) was prevented from writing something which would prevent us from becoming "deviated" and having "gone astray", it means that we are missing that critical piece of information or prescription. Therefore, we must conclude that Muslims have all "deviated" and "gone astray", including the Shias.
Going a step further, since only Shias hold the belief that the Holy Prophet (saw) was prevented from writing the prescription, the judgment applies only to them. Hence, only the Shias have "deviated" and "gone astray" (since they are the only ones to claim that the prescription to avoid the ills of having "deviated" and "gone astray" was prevented from being written down).
Until you prove (with authentic proof) what the Holy Prophet (saw) wished to dictate for the Sahaba (ra) to write down, we can conclude that the Shias are the only ones to have "deviated" and "gone astray" because only they claim that the prescription was never written down and they cannot authentically establish what that prescription would have said (had it been written down).
"Until you prove (with authentic proof) what the Holy Prophet (saw) wished to dictate for the Sahaba (ra) to write down, we can conclude that the Shias are the only ones to have "deviated" and "gone astray" because only they claim that the prescription was never written down and they cannot authentically establish what that prescription would have said (had it been written down)"
The proof is right in front of you, the Prophet's s.a.w words on why he wanted pen and paper, "so I may right something that you do not go astray or deviate" What ever it was certainly wouldn't have let the companions go astray or deviate. No need for any twist or turns or gimmicks or games. The companions deviated, went astray. Simple as that.
"Not only that, I have exposed your hypocrisy. In the matter of Malik bin Nuwayrah"
Read your own books, the reports aren't clear regarding the case of Malik. Innocent until proven guilty. And even if he turns out to be guilty then that surely proves companions can turn back on their heels by deviating, going astray, apostasy etc. You lose this case either way. It's your DOUBLE STANDARDS in every matter. You have no principle in place to go by. That is what your faith and belief is all about.
"No, I am refuting you and then criticizing you for your stupidity"
Your only trying to survive in this discussion by twist and turns.
"you disregarded the words of your own infallible Imam"
I'm challenging you to prove a general principle from the Qur'an. That is if you refuse to pay Zakah to the ruler of the time then you're subject to capital punishment by beheading.
"religion has been completed"
How was the religion completed. What made the religion complete. What happened on that particular day that before this day the religion wasn't complete.
"Umar's (ra) response was not objection but reaction; he reacted to the Holy Prophet (saw) falling unconscious right after he made the request."
Excuses. How long are you going to be dishonest with yourself. And what will this dishonesty earn you. 70 virgins in Jannah probably. He clearly objected and caused a fuss over it. That's how determined he was. And his second statement made it clear that he knew what the Prophet s.a.w was going to write. Otherwise he never would have said "we have the book of Allah with us, the book of Allah is sufficient for us". Why did he say this if he didn't know.
"why was the "infallible" Imam (ra) a bystander?"
He wasn't. Look at the facts.
"And if you repeat that the "infallible" Imam (ra) acted as needed, don't you think that weakens his position and therefore his existence?"
Just because Imams don't do what we want and think that they should do or should have done doesn't weaken their position.
"Why have an "infallible" Imam (ra) who has control over atoms but is too timid to implement corrective course of action?"
You believe that violence and threatening behaviour is the corrective course of action. Might and strength and the use it by force is right, that's what you believe in.
"You will never answer these questions in a logical line flowing from one to the next"
I'm doing it and have always done it. The Prophet s.a.w wanted to write something so that the companions do not deviate, go astray. Now the companions didn’t care. They didn't think it was necessary. So why should the Prophet s.a.w care. The doctor wants to right something for you so that you don't fall ill. If you think it's not necessary then why should the doc bother.
"Picking on Imam Ali (ra)? I am showing you that the one you consider hujjah upheld, or at the very least did not oppose, Umar's (ra) decision."
Not only Ali but also others opposed Umar. Some sided with Umar and some opposed. Never the less why is it called a BLACK DAY.
Muslims along with the companions have deviated, gone astray. According to the prophet saw, not me.
-
The proof is right in front of you, the Prophet's s.a.w words on why he wanted pen and paper, "so I may right something that you do not go astray or deviate" What ever it was certainly wouldn't have let the companions go astray or deviate. No need for any twist or turns or gimmicks or games. The companions deviated, went astray. Simple as that.
Ignoring the rest of your filth - usually less is more with people like yourself - I have to conclude (from inference) that Shias have deviated and gone astray. I will re-visit my argument and draw a conclusion all based on what Shias consider to be "facts".
1. The Holy Prophet (saw) wanted to dictate something after which no Muslim would deviate or go astray.
2. This prescription was not written. Allegedly, Umar (ra) prevented the Holy Prophet (saw) from spelling it out.
3. In the absence of this prescription, we must conclude that Muslims have deviated and gone astray thereby failing the mission of the Holy Prophet (saw) but this is a different discussion altogether.
From the above points, we can make this last inference:
1. Only the Shias believe that the prescription which would have saved us from deviating and going astray was not written down.
2. Shias do not have any irrefutable proof which can ascertain what the Holy Prophet (saw) wished to write down. In other words, Shias have no authentic report as to what the prescription would state.
3. Therefore, Shias - as per their own belief (that such a monumental prescription was not written down) - must admit that they are misguided given that they have no authentic evidence to ascertain what the Holy Prophet (saw) wished to dictate.
He wasn't. Look at the facts.
Let me re-visit the facts. Hmmm, let's see! The Prophet (saw) asked for pen and paper. Umar (ra) [allegedly] prevented everyone from bringing pen and paper. Imam Ali (ra) also did not bring pen and paper. That, to me, screams "BYSTANDER"!
-
"Ignoring the rest of your filth"
FILTH is what comes out of you. And your posts are always full of it. FILTH is how you see and view the Shia faith and community. FILTH is your attitude and behaviour towards Shias. That's exactly what FILTH is. You don't have a single post which is free from sarcastic remarks and personal insults. That's what FILTH is.
"I have to conclude (from inference) that Shias have deviated and gone astray"
The Prophet s.a.w didn't say to us that "fetch me a pen and paper so that I may write for you something that you don't deviate, go astray" those he addressed deviated and went astray. So you stick to what you conclude by your opinion. And we stick to what we conclude by what the Prophet s.a.w said. The matters clear and I know it's killing you.
"I will re-visit my argument and draw a conclusion all based on what Shias consider to be "facts".
Why do you go by what Shias consider. Go by facts based on what was said and happened.
1, The Prophet s.a.w asked for a pen and paper. Important question WHY? Well he wasn't well and it was clear that these were his final days. So every person is asked by Allah as well as his Prophet s.a.w to write a WILL. To sort out important matters (property, finance, belongings etc) by writing a WILL.
2, Who did he ask to fetch him a pen and paper? Those present? Or specific people? And what reason did the Prophet s.a.w himself give for demanding pen and paper? "So I may write something for you so that you don't deviate or go astray".
3, Well the book of Allah is with the Muslims. Islam has been completed, Allah has full filled his favours upon the Muslims and he has chosen Islam as there religion (faith and belief). So what was that important something, apart from the book of Allah, so the companions don't deviate?
4, Who was the Prophet s.a.w speaking to? The Muslims? The Ummah? Exactly who? The COMPANIONS, that's who. Well one thing is clear that despite Islam being completed, favours being full filled and the book of Allah being present it was clear that despite all that Muslims could still deviate. And that is the companions above all who were actually the ones being spoken to and addressed.
5, What was the reply? From who? Well the ones Muhammad s.a.w was addressing. Umar apart from anyone else objected. WHY, because according to certain individuals he believed that the Prophet s.a.w shouldn't be burdened with such responsibility especially the state that he is in.
6, What did Umar say? "We have the book of Allah with us, the book of Allah is sufficient for us". He is clearly reminding the others about the book of Allah. Why? Only one thing comes out of this and that is to make it out to the others that there is no need for anything else and we don't need anything else since we have the book. Him saying "the book of Allah is sufficient for us" clearly shows that what the Prophet s.a.w was going to write and offer is undermined.
7, Why did Umar object. Why didn't he remain silent. Because he didn't want to burden the Prophet s.a.w with such a responsebility. Well if that was the case and Umar's intentions then this clearly tells that this was something important and necessary. Otherwise the words responsibility and burden in the state of illness wouldn't have been used.
8, Do people not ask wills to be written and give instructions when they know there time is up. It's a common practice. Infact
-
8, Do people not ask wills to be written and give instructions when they know there time is up. It's a common practice. Infact did Abu Bakr not address the matter of who was going to succeed him when he was ill and his time was up. Why didn't anyone object to Abu Bakr's decision of Umar succeeding him that Abu Bakr shouldn't be burdened with such responsibility in the state of illness.
9, What about Umar himself, when he was attacked and injured and became serious ill by that injury that he decided on who will succeed him by arranging a committee, why didn't Umar remind himself that he shouldn't burden himself with such responsibility when he himself is seriously ill.
10, The matter is crystal clear that the Prophet s.a.w wanted to write something so that the people don't deviate, go astray. This loyal companion should have shown his loyalty by honouring the Prophet s.a.w and not by objecting. And Should not have caused a fuss over the Prophet s.a.w full filling his will or desire.
11, After all this was no ordinary individual but infact it was Prophet Muhammad s.a.w. And Muhammad s.a.w didn't want his Ummah, especially the companions who he was addressing directly at the time, to deviate and go astray after him.
12, Those who defend Umar and those who sided with him so vigorously even knowing the facts are cheating their conscious and for what. I wonder what they're going to be getting out of this. 70 promised virgins in heaven may be 😊
-
3, Well the book of Allah is with the Muslims. Islam has been completed, Allah has full filled his favours upon the Muslims and he has chosen Islam as there religion (faith and belief). So what was that important something, apart from the book of Allah, so the companions don't deviate?
4, Who was the Prophet s.a.w speaking to? The Muslims? The Ummah? Exactly who? The COMPANIONS, that's who. Well one thing is clear that despite Islam being completed, favours being full filled and the book of Allah being present it was clear that despite all that Muslims could still deviate. And that is the companions above all who were actually the ones being spoken to and addressed.
Again, ignoring the rest of your filth, I would like to point out your contradiction in two back-to-back points that should otherwise logically follow. You said, "So what was that important something, apart from the book of Allah, so the companions don't deviate" and then you said, "it was clear that despite all that Muslims could still deviate".
Make up your mind! Was the prescription to prevent the Companions (ra) or all the Muslims from deviating and going astray?
Having said that, I will re-state my main argument after quoting you. You said, "So what was that important something, apart from the book of Allah, so the companions don't deviate?"
It is for you to not only define but also prove what that "important something, apart from the Book of Allah" was without which we can safely assume that Shias have gone astray and are deviants since they (Shias) are the only ones to believe that Umar (ra) prevented a critical piece of our aqeedah from being written down. Either you define what that "important something" was with backing evidence to prove that that's exactly what the Holy Prophet (saw) wished to dictate OR you must admit that you all (Shias) are deviants by the same premises you set forth.
-
Again, ignoring the rest of your filth, I would like to point out your contradiction in two back-to-back points that should otherwise logically follow. You said, "So what was that important something, apart from the book of Allah, so the companions don't deviate" and then you said, "it was clear that despite all that Muslims could still deviate".
Make up your mind! Was the prescription to prevent the Companions (ra) or all the Muslims from deviating and going astray?
Having said that, I will re-state my main argument after quoting you. You said, "So what was that important something, apart from the book of Allah, so the companions don't deviate?"
It is for you to not only define but also prove what that "important something, apart from the Book of Allah" was without which we can safely assume that Shias have gone astray and are deviants since they (Shias) are the only ones to believe that Umar (ra) prevented a critical piece of our aqeedah from being written down. Either you define what that "important something" was with backing evidence to prove that that's exactly what the Holy Prophet (saw) wished to dictate OR you must admit that you all (Shias) are deviants by the same premises you set forth.
"Make up your mind! Was the prescription to prevent the Companions (ra) or all the Muslims from deviating and going astray"
USE YOUR HEAD. This ain't kindergarten. Who was the Prophet s.a.w addressing? Muslims. Which Muslims? Those he was surrounded by. The companions obviously. Unless you want to distinguish between Muslims and companions. Who were the early Muslims or the first Muslims who accepted Muhammad s.a.w for what he was and what he had to offer? Obviously companions. It was the same people Muhammad s.a.w was addressing.
The prescription was for them whom he was addressing. It's not all of the Muslims, every single was or is subject to deviation. Those deviated at the time. And those who side and support those who deviated by defending and protecting them are also subject to deviation. I know what you're trying to do. You're doing your best to find a loophole to divert attention from Umar and those who sided with him. Because he and they are under scrutiny here.
-
USE YOUR HEAD. This ain't kindergarten. Who was the Prophet s.a.w addressing? Muslims. Which Muslims? Those he was surrounded by. The companions obviously.
The prescription was for them whom he was addressing. It's not all of the Muslims, every single was or is subject to deviation.
So the Holy Prophet (saw) was addressing Muslims that were surrounding him. No problem! Watch how your premise backfires.
If the prescription was for those surrounding the Holy Prophet (saw), that means it was also for Imam Ali (ra). Therefor, in the absence of the prescription being written down, you have to now face a bigger humiliation and admit that Imam Ali (ra) also deviated and went astray - naudhubillah thumma naudhubillah!
See how big of an idiot you are! In your quest to malign others, you paint an equally ugly picture of Imam Ali (ra).
-
Again, ignoring the rest of your filth, I would like to point out your contradiction in two back-to-back points that should otherwise logically follow. You said, "So what was that important something, apart from the book of Allah, so the companions don't deviate" and then you said, "it was clear that despite all that Muslims could still deviate".
Make up your mind! Was the prescription to prevent the Companions (ra) or all the Muslims from deviating and going astray?
Having said that, I will re-state my main argument after quoting you. You said, "So what was that important something, apart from the book of Allah, so the companions don't deviate?"
It is for you to not only define but also prove what that "important something, apart from the Book of Allah" was without which we can safely assume that Shias have gone astray and are deviants since they (Shias) are the only ones to believe that Umar (ra) prevented a critical piece of our aqeedah from being written down. Either you define what that "important something" was with backing evidence to prove that that's exactly what the Holy Prophet (saw) wished to dictate OR you must admit that you all (Shias) are deviants by the same premises you set forth.
Again you are trying to twist and turn things around. You're looking for loopholes to try and draw attention away from those who objected and were the cause of an argument. Why don't you stick to the facts and just look at what's said.
What exactly did the Prophet s.a.w say? He asked for a pen and paper. WHY? The Prophet's s.a.w words "so you don't deviate". So the Prophet s.a.w asked for a pen and paper because he wanted to write something for those who were present that they don't deviate. Again the Prophet's s.a.w exact words not mine which are agreed on.
Let leave Umar out of this because mentioning him is what's causing you to be upset and therefore dishonest. Did the Prophet s.a.w write what was needed to be written? The answer is yes or no. And the obvious answer would be no. So without that document those present deviated or were subject to deviation.
Otherwise we are accusing the Prophet of talking meaningless or less important and worthy if we take away the weight and importance from the matter. It's as simple as that. But because Umar objected and told otherwise by saying that "we have the book of Allah with us, the book of Allah is sufficient for us"
and was the cause of argument and fuss, so the whole issue from your side is protecting and defending Umar and his reputation. I believe that we should leave Umar out of this for you to think rational and with an open mind.
-
So the Holy Prophet (saw) was addressing Muslims that were surrounding him. No problem! Watch how your premise backfires.
If the prescription was for those surrounding the Holy Prophet (saw), that means it was also for Imam Ali (ra). Therefor, in the absence of the prescription being written down, you have to now face a bigger humiliation and admit that Imam Ali (ra) also deviated and went astray - naudhubillah thumma naudhubillah!
See how big of an idiot you are! In your quest to malign others, you paint an equally ugly picture of Imam Ali (ra).
"So the Holy Prophet (saw) was addressing Muslims that were surrounding him. No problem!"
Well if you disagree then who was the Prophet s.a.w addressing by asking for a pen and paper and by saying that "that I may write something for you so you do not deviate"?
"If the prescription was for those surrounding the Holy Prophet (saw), that means it was also for Imam Ali (ra)"
Absolutely. And for all the Muslims who were present and surrounding the Prophet s.a.w.
"Therefor, in the absence of the prescription being written down, you have to now face a bigger humiliation and admit that Imam Ali (ra) also deviated and went astray"
This is where you've either got it totally wrong or are trying to technically twist it around to divert attention. A father has nine children. For him they are all the same. He his dying and on his death bed. And he asks for pen and paper so he may write something so his kids don't deviate after him.
Although the book of Allah is present and should be sufficient because inheritance laws and how inheritance should be distributed is there. But still the father wants to write something so his kids don't deviate despite inheritance laws bring clear.
Now if one kid turns around and says that "we shouldn't burden our father with such responsibility especially in the state that he is in, also remember that we have the book of Allah in which inheritance laws are clear, that is sufficient for us or should be sufficient for us".
From here certain kids believe that the father should be given pen and paper and should be allowed to write what he thinks is necessary and important. Others side with the one who thinks we shouldn't.
Then after the death and onwards the kids fall in to disagreement over the inheritance and the matter of difference and disagreement comes between the children and even the grandchildren. Then who has deviated and who hasn't or who has gone astray and who hasn't can be discussed and looked into.
But it would be foolish to say all deviated and went astray.
-
This is where you've either got it totally wrong or are trying to technically twist it around to divert attention.
No, this is where I begin twisting your arm and you are in agony.
A father has nine children. For him they are all the same. He his dying and on his death bed. And he asks for pen and paper so he may write something so his kids don't deviate after him.
I don't care about your hypothetical scenarios. I am twisting your arm on your own premise. If the prescription was for everyone, it includes Imam Ali (ra).
But still the father wants to write something so his kids don't deviate despite inheritance laws bring clear.
Includes Imam Ali (ra)!
Now if one kid turns around and says that "we shouldn't burden our father with such responsibility especially in the state that he is in, also remember that we have the book of Allah in which inheritance laws are clear, that is sufficient for us or should be sufficient for us".
From here certain kids believe that the father should be given pen and paper and should be allowed to write what he thinks is necessary and important. Others side with the one who thinks we shouldn't.
Does not matter who sided with who and what! Imam Ali (ra), as per your own premise, cannot be excluded from the possibility of deviating and going astray in the absence of the prescription (which was not written down).
Then after the death and onwards the kids fall in to disagreement over the inheritance and the matter of difference and disagreement comes between the children and even the grandchildren. Then who has deviated and who hasn't or who has gone astray and who hasn't can be discussed and looked into.
But it would be foolish to say all deviated and went astray.
Cool story! Still does not exclude Imam Ali (ra).
-
You're looking for loopholes to try and draw attention away from those who objected and were the cause of an argument.
I am looking for holes in your argument. The pathetic thing about every Shia belief in opposition to Sunnis is that they actually contradict one or more other Shia beliefs.
What exactly did the Prophet s.a.w say? He asked for a pen and paper. WHY? The Prophet's s.a.w words "so you don't deviate". So the Prophet s.a.w asked for a pen and paper because he wanted to write something for those who were present that they don't deviate.
For those who were present which includes Imam Ali (ra). Try as hard as you want, you cannot shut down the argument that Imam Ali (ra) was prone to deviating and going astray (naudhubillah), if we accept your premise.
Did the Prophet s.a.w write what was needed to be written? The answer is yes or no. And the obvious answer would be no. So without that document those present deviated or were subject to deviation.
Yes, the document was not written so without it, those present could have deviated including Imam Ali (ra).
Otherwise we are accusing the Prophet of talking meaningless or less important and worthy if we take away the weight and importance from the matter.
I agree with you (to dig your hole deeper). The Holy Prophet (saw) was prevented from writing something which would have prevented those present from deviating and going astray. Now tell us how did Imam Ali (ra) - since he was also present - avoid deviation and going astray? After all, Imam Ali (ra), too, was deprived from this knowledge (that would have prevented those present from deviation and going astray).
I believe that we should leave Umar out of this for you to think rational and with an open mind.
Umar (ra) is already out of this discussion. Prove to me that Imam Ali (ra), in the light of your premise and understanding of this hadith, did not deviate and go astray after being kept away from such a crucial prescription.
-
No, this is where I begin twisting your arm and you are in agony.
I don't care about your hypothetical scenarios. I am twisting your arm on your own premise. If the prescription was for everyone, it includes Imam Ali (ra).
Includes Imam Ali (ra)!
Does not matter who sided with who and what! Imam Ali (ra), as per your own premise, cannot be excluded from the possibility of deviating and going astray in the absence of the prescription (which was not written down).
Cool story! Still does not exclude Imam Ali (ra).
"No, this is where I begin twisting your arm and you are in agony"
Keep fantasising. What have you got to lose.
"I don't care about your hypothetical scenarios"
The world doesn't evolve around you.
"I am twisting your arm on your own premise"
Your twisting and turning just to divert attention.
"If the prescription was for everyone, it includes Imam Ali (ra)"
Ok, then you need to prove that Ali deviated and how.
"Cool story"
I know, it's silenced you. But not your arrogance and stubbornness.
-
I am looking for holes in your argument. The pathetic thing about every Shia belief in opposition to Sunnis is that they actually contradict one or more other Shia beliefs.
For those who were present which includes Imam Ali (ra). Try as hard as you want, you cannot shut down the argument that Imam Ali (ra) was prone to deviating and going astray (naudhubillah), if we accept your premise.
Yes, the document was not written so without it, those present could have deviated including Imam Ali (ra).
I agree with you (to dig your hole deeper). The Holy Prophet (saw) was prevented from writing something which would have prevented those present from deviating and going astray. Now tell us how did Imam Ali (ra) - since he was also present - avoid deviation and going astray? After all, Imam Ali (ra), too, was deprived from this knowledge (that would have prevented those present from deviation and going astray).
Umar (ra) is already out of this discussion. Prove to me that Imam Ali (ra), in the light of your premise and understanding of this hadith, did not deviate and go astray after being kept away from such a crucial prescription.
"I am looking for holes in your argument. The pathetic thing about every Shia belief in opposition to Sunnis is that they actually contradict one or more other Shia beliefs"
It doesn't matter what we're discussing or what ever the subject is, certain Sunnis always have double standards in just about everything.
"For those who were present which includes Imam Ali (ra). Try as hard as you want, you cannot shut down the argument that Imam Ali (ra) was prone to deviating and going astray (naudhubillah), if we accept your premise"
Prove to me that Ali went astray and how? You can't even build the courage to admit and say that Umar objected and even opposed the Prophet s.a.w. despite the matter being clear. He raised his voice in the presence of the Prophet s.a.w and was the cause of a loud and noisy argument. He caused division in front of the Prophet s.a.w and in his presence, forget about what he got upto after the demise of the Prophet s.a.w. Have the courage to admit and accept what is wrong and those who have wronged.
"Yes, the document was not written so without it, those present could have deviated"
Not 'could have deviated" but 'did deviate'. The words of the Prophet s.a.w were "so you don't deviate". Not "so you might not deviate". Clear difference pal.
-
It doesn't matter what we're discussing or what ever the subject is, certain Sunnis always have double standards in just about everything.
So you had to put on your "ghungroo" and start dancing around the point, lol!
Prove to me that Ali went astray and how?
I never claimed Imam Ali (ra) went astray; I only made a logical deduction from your claim. It is your claim, and the overall Shi'i belief, that what the Holy Prophet (saw) intended to write down would have prevented those present (or Muslims at large) from deviating and going astray. Keeping your claim in mind, the onus is on you to prove Imam Ali, who was also present there but not made privy to this critical piece of information, did not deviate and go astray.
You can't even build the courage to admit and say that Umar objected and even opposed the Prophet s.a.w. despite the matter being clear. He raised his voice in the presence of the Prophet s.a.w and was the cause of a loud and noisy argument.
I could have sworn a khabeeth asked me to leave Umar (ra) out. Now we are re-visiting Umar (ra) because Barfeela is melting.
Not 'could have deviated" but 'did deviate'. The words of the Prophet s.a.w were "so you don't deviate". Not "so you might not deviate". Clear difference pal.
Exactly! Exactly my point! Since you are certain that they "did deviate", it must logically follow that Imam Ali (ra), too, deviated (naudhubillah). If the prescription was to save everyone and it was not written down, how was Imam Ali (ra) saved from deviating and going astray? He was not; he deviated and went astray (naudhubillah) if we accept your interpretation of the hadith. Prove otherwise or shut up!
-
So you had to put on your "ghungroo" and start dancing around the point, lol!
I never claimed Imam Ali (ra) went astray; I only made a logical deduction from your claim. It is your claim, and the overall Shi'i belief, that what the Holy Prophet (saw) intended to write down would have prevented those present (or Muslims at large) from deviating and going astray. Keeping your claim in mind, the onus is on you to prove Imam Ali, who was also present there but not made privy to this critical piece of information, did not deviate and go astray.
I could have sworn a khabeeth asked me to leave Umar (ra) out. Now we are re-visiting Umar (ra) because Barfeela is melting.
Exactly! Exactly my point! Since you are certain that they "did deviate", it must logically follow that Imam Ali (ra), too, deviated (naudhubillah). If the prescription was to save everyone and it was not written down, how was Imam Ali (ra) saved from deviating and going astray? He was not; he deviated and went astray (naudhubillah) if we accept your interpretation of the hadith. Prove otherwise or shut up!
"So you had to put on your "ghungroo" and start dancing around the point, lol!"
You're very familiar with ghungroo and dancing 😀
"I never claimed Imam Ali (ra) went astray; I only made a logical deduction from your claim"
And I proved your logical deduction wrong by giving you an example which you called 'cool story'.
"It is your claim, and the overall Shi'i belief..."
It is not our claim and doesn't have anything to do with us. Just facts which you're sect ignore because of a huge question mark over Umar and those who side with him. Main and major parts of your belief and faith stand on the basis of defending and protecting certain handful of companions.
"the onus is on you to prove Imam Ali......"
No it isn't. You're just using this as a diversion to move the matter away from Umar who was guilty as charged for objecting and opposing the Prophet s.a.w, getting those present to disregard what the Prophet s.a.w had to offer by getting them to think and focus on the book of Allah, and raising his voice and causing a fuss and division right in front of the Prophet s.a.w.
"I could have sworn a khabeeth asked me to leave Umar (ra) out. Now we are re-visiting Umar (ra) because Barfeela is melting"
No. He just asked you to leave Umar out of it since you are getting all emotional and crazy over Umar's guilty stance. You're finding it hard to accept what Umar did. Just let it go.
So how did Imam Ali deviate? You keep mentioning it but aren't saying how you got to that conclusion. No matter what, you can't save Umar's guilt. And neither can you hide your dishonest personality and conscious 😊
-
You're very familiar with ghungroo and dancing 😀
You have subjected us to many of your mujras so we are very familiar with ghungroo and dancing.
And I proved your logical deduction wrong by giving you an example which you called 'cool story'.
You have not even begun scratching the surface. If the prescription was to prevent those present from deviating and going astray - and this prescription was never written down - then where is your proof that Imam Ali (ra) did not deviate and go astray (in the absence of this prescription)?
For the sake of argument, I agree with your claim only to show you that your claim leaves your own first "infallible" Imam (ra) out to dry.
Main and major parts of your belief and faith stand on the basis of defending and protecting certain handful of companions.
...and here I am defending Imam Ali (ra) by not reading my own meaning into this hadith. Your interpretation of the narration subjects Imam Ali (ra) to the same level of scrutiny and criticism as much as Umar (ra), possibly more if we consider his duties (as per Shi'i belief of Imamah).
No it isn't. You're just using this as a diversion to move the matter away from Umar who was guilty as charged for objecting and opposing the Prophet s.a.w, getting those present to disregard what the Prophet s.a.w had to offer by getting them to think and focus on the book of Allah, and raising his voice and causing a fuss and division right in front of the Prophet s.a.w.
I will concede that Umar (ra) was guilty of everything you say and more if you admit that he was able to overpower and subdue the Holy Prophet (saw) and the first "infallible" Imam (ra). Be a man, for the second time, and admit it just like you admitted that your coward ran. See my signature!
No. He just asked you to leave Umar out of it since you are getting all emotional and crazy over Umar's guilty stance. You're finding it hard to accept what Umar did. Just let it go.
At least you did not contest the fact that you're a khabeeth, lol!
So how did Imam Ali deviate?
Here we go again! I never claimed Imam Ali (ra) deviated. I took your claims to a fair conclusion. If you believe that staying on the path of Islam (and away from deviation and going astray) necessitated the writing down of a will, it is then your duty to prove exceptions to the rule.
-
You have subjected us to many of your mujras so we are very familiar with ghungroo and dancing.
You have not even begun scratching the surface. If the prescription was to prevent those present from deviating and going astray - and this prescription was never written down - then where is your proof that Imam Ali (ra) did not deviate and go astray (in the absence of this prescription)?
For the sake of argument, I agree with your claim only to show you that your claim leaves your own first "infallible" Imam (ra) out to dry.
...and here I am defending Imam Ali (ra) by not reading my own meaning into this hadith. Your interpretation of the narration subjects Imam Ali (ra) to the same level of scrutiny and criticism as much as Umar (ra), possibly more if we consider his duties (as per Shi'i belief of Imamah).
I will concede that Umar (ra) was guilty of everything you say and more if you admit that he was able to overpower and subdue the Holy Prophet (saw) and the first "infallible" Imam (ra). Be a man, for the second time, and admit it just like you admitted that your coward ran. See my signature!
At least you did not contest the fact that you're a khabeeth, lol!
Here we go again! I never claimed Imam Ali (ra) deviated. I took your claims to a fair conclusion. If you believe that staying on the path of Islam (and away from deviation and going astray) necessitated the writing down of a will, it is then your duty to prove exceptions to the rule.
"You have subjected us to many of your mujras so we are very familiar with ghungroo and dancing"
😊 It sounds like you're a regular visitor of the Khota 😀
"You have not even begun scratching the surface. If the prescription was to prevent those present from deviating and going astray - and this prescription was never written down - then where is your proof that Imam Ali (ra) did not deviate and go astray (in the absence of this prescription)"
Why is everything topsy turvy with you. Do you see everything upside down. It's not,
"where is your proof that Imam Ali (ra) did not deviate and go astray"
Infact it is "where is the proof that he did". You are innocent until proven guilty. Not the other way around. The matter is clear and I have presented my case.
"For the sake of argument, I agree with your claim only to show you that your claim leaves your own first "infallible" Imam (ra) out to dry"
No it doesn't. You're only saying this because you don't have an open mind and you can't think rationally. You see this as an attack on Umar. So you in return decide to attack Ali. Don't know what that solves and how it comforts and satisfies you.
"will concede that Umar (ra) was guilty of everything you say"
I don't say anything. Facts clearly tell he's guilty.
-
Why is everything topsy turvy with you. Do you see everything upside down. It's not,
No, I am drawing conclusions from your own premises and claims.
Infact it is "where is the proof that he did".
When you say that a will designed to prevent those present from deviating and going astray was not written down, one cannot help but imagine who actually went astray. And that list includes Imam Ali (ra). So the question is this: when making such claims, how do you defend your own first "infallible" Imam (ra)?
You cannot! As we have seen your helplessness thus far. So it is better you shut up.
No it doesn't. You're only saying this because you don't have an open mind and you can't think rationally.
It is exactly because I have a rational mind that I see a conclusion you cannot account for. You want to make claims but not account for their consequences. If the prescription is missing, everyone present was prone to going astray. What guarantee do you have that Imam Ali (ra) did not deviate and go astray?
Imam Ali (ra) never reclaimed Fadak. Maybe that was his deviance.
Imam Ali (ra) named his children Abu Bakr and Umar. Maybe that was him going astray.
I can make an entire madhhab from the conclusion of your claim but it will be as weak and unsubstantial as your madhhab.
I don't say anything. Facts clearly tell he's guilty.
And fact says everyone present were just as prone to deviating and going astray, including Imam Ali (ra), in the absence of the will.
-
No, I am drawing conclusions from your own premises and claims.
When you say that a will designed to prevent those present from deviating and going astray was not written down, one cannot help but imagine who actually went astray. And that list includes Imam Ali (ra). So the question is this: when making such claims, how do you defend your own first "infallible" Imam (ra)?
You cannot! As we have seen your helplessness thus far. So it is better you shut up.
It is exactly because I have a rational mind that I see a conclusion you cannot account for. You want to make claims but not account for their consequences. If the prescription is missing, everyone present was prone to going astray. What guarantee do you have that Imam Ali (ra) did not deviate and go astray?
Imam Ali (ra) never reclaimed Fadak. Maybe that was his deviance.
Imam Ali (ra) named his children Abu Bakr and Umar. Maybe that was him going astray.
I can make an entire madhhab from the conclusion of your claim but it will be as weak and unsubstantial as your madhhab.
And fact says everyone present were just as prone to deviating and going astray, including Imam Ali (ra), in the absence of the will.
The Prophet s.a.w said, "fetch me a pen and paper that I may write something for you so you don't deviate" are you saying that the Prophet s.a.w was ill so he didn't know what he was talking about mazallah. By dragging Ali into this and moving attention from how Umar reacted and behaved doesn't solve anything. Neither does it help in protecting and saving Umar.
-
The Prophet s.a.w said, "fetch me a pen and paper that I may write something for you so you don't deviate" are you saying that the Prophet s.a.w was ill so he didn't know what he was talking about mazallah. By dragging Ali into this and moving attention from how Umar reacted and behaved doesn't solve anything. Neither does it help in protecting and saving Umar.
By reinventing the wheel, you have made it clear that the Shi'i criticisms and allegations regarding the Hadith of Pen and Paper make Imam Ali (ra) look as bad as Shias make others out to be and Shias have no way to defend their own first "infallible" Imam (ra).
I suggest you revisit your beliefs and claims to make sure you come up with better, air-tight arguments.
-
By reinventing the wheel, you have made it clear that the Shi'i criticisms and allegations regarding the Hadith of Pen and Paper make Imam Ali (ra) look as bad as Shias make others out to be and Shias have no way to defend their own first "infallible" Imam (ra).
I suggest you revisit your beliefs and claims to make sure you come up with better, air-tight arguments.
Umar and those who sided with him are guilty and you know that. By twisting and turning this around here and there isn't going to make facts go away. It is what it is. Reality is reality.
-
Umar and those who sided with him are guilty and you know that. By twisting and turning this around here and there isn't going to make facts go away. It is what it is. Reality is reality.
Well, your first "infallible" Imam (ra) stood by like a spectator and did not apply a single corrective course of action. Maybe he agreed with Umar (ra).
In any case, Umar (ra) being guilty does not explain how Imam Ali (ra) could have been protected from going astray.
I am accepting your claims and premises. I don't know why you have a hard time accounting for the conclusions one can draw from them. Or is it that you prefer to live in ignorance where your claims are the end, with no room for logical conclusions that follow.
-
Common example is quoted from verse 59:7 of the Quran.
"And whatever the Messenger gives you, take it, and whatever he forbids you, leave it. And fear Allah: truly Allah is severe in punishment"
One needs to ask themselves that during the pen and paper incident were the companions (Umar and his clan) willing to take what the Prophet s.a.w was offering or about to offer. Honest and truthful answer NOOOO.
Surah 49,
"You who have faith,” having believed in Allāh and His Messenger, “Do not raise your voices above the voice of the Prophet,” blurting out words thoughtlessly, rather observe due propriety when speaking to him, and do not speak in a voice louder than his, else you will be guilty of violating proper conduct with him.
"and do not speak loudly to him,” in a way that would upset or irritate him, “as you do to one another”. Instead, speak calmly, with deliberation, restraint, solicitude, respect and love, falling silent when he speaks and deferring to him, “lest your actions come to nothing”
devoid of any reward “without your realising it” because you risk upsetting him. If you upset him, Allāh is angered and Allāh would render the deeds of those who anger Him void without their even knowing.
And what exactly did Umar and his clan do when the Prophet s.a.w asked for pen and paper. OOOPS!
-
And what exactly did Umar and his clan do when the Prophet s.a.w asked for pen and paper. OOOPS!
When the demise of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) drew near, there were people in his house, among whom was ‘Umar ibn al-Khattab (Allāh be pleased with him). The Prophet said, “Come, I will write a document for you, after which you will not go astray. Thereupon Umar said, “Indeed, the Messenger of Allāh (peace and blessings be upon him) is deeply afflicted with pain. You have the Qur’an with you; the Book of Allah is sufficient for us.” Those who were present in the house differed: some of them said, “Bring (what the Prophet requested) so that he may write a document for you, after which you will never go astray,” whilst some supported the view of ‘Umar. When they caused a hue and cry in the presence of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), he said, “Go away.”
‘Ubayd Allah said, “Ibn Abbās (Allāh be pleased with him) used to say, ‘A great loss, indeed a great loss, that the Prophet was unable to write a document for them due to their dispute and noise.
The matter is simple and clear. But Umar loyalists will still be dishonest and untruthful with their own conscious and intention let alone others that they will do their best to twist and turn things backwards and forwards, upside down and inside out to desperately defend Umar and his clan by diverting attention.
It is what it is.
-
When a group of companions visited the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.), he (s.a.w.a.) ordered them:
آتُوْنِیْ بِدَوَاتٍ وَ قِرْطَاسٍ اِکْتُبُ لَکُمْ کِتَابًا لَنْ تَضِلُّوْا بَعْدَہ اَبَدًا
"Fetch me a pen and a paper so that I write a will for you so that you are not deviated after me.”
Umar said:
اِنَّ النَّبِیَّ غَلَبَہ الْوَجْعُ وَ عِنْدَکُمْ کِتَابُ اللهِ، حَسْبُنَا کِتَابُ اللهِ۔
“Surely the Prophet is overcome by illness (suggesting that his words should not be taken seriously).The Book of Allah is with you. The Book of Allah is sufficient for us!!!”
(Sahih Bukhari Chapter on Knowledge, v 22, Musnad-e-Ahmad b. Hanbal, Research of Ahmad Muhammad Shakir, trad 2,996, Tabaqaat of Ibn Saad v 2, p 244 Beirut Edition)
In Tabaqaat of Ibn Saad we find another narration which reveals that a person present in the assembly declared:
اِنَّ النَّبِیَّ اللهِ لِیَجْہَرَ
“The Prophet is speaking in delirium.”
(Tabaqaat of Ibn Saad v 2 p 242, Beirut Edition, Sahih Bukhari Chapter on جوائز الوفد from the Book of Jihad v 2 p 120, and the Chapter of Exodus of Jews form the Arabian Peninsula v 2 p 36 has these words
“The person who said this was the one who said that the Book of Allah is sufficient for us.” i.e. Umar
The Confession of Umar in Sunni Books
Umar himself has confessed about this lowly and shameful act. While describing the conditions of Umar, Abul Fazl Ahmad b. Abi Tahir in Taarikh Baghdad and Ibn Abil Hadid in Sharh-o-Nahjil Balaagha v 3 p 97 have documented:
On a particular day, there occurred a lengthy discussion between Umar and Ibn Abbas when Umar said:
“During the illness which led to his demise, Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) wished to put forward his (Imam Ali’s) name but we prevented him from doing so. Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) did not approve of this.”
At that time, some of those present urged:
“Obey the instructions of the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.a.).”
After a heated debate some people intended to bring the pen and paper upon which the Prophet (s.a.w.a.) declared:
اَوْ بَعْدَ مَاذَا؟
“(Of what use is it) after this?”
(Tabaqaat of Ibn Saad v 2 p 242, Beirut Edition)
Even if a pen and paper had been provided as per the Prophet’s (s.a.w.a.) instructions and had he (s.a.w.a.) written a will nominating Imam Ali (a.s.) as his successor, Umar’s calculated remark placed the Prophet’s (s.a.w.a.) nomination under a shadow of uncertainty. To foil the nomination, all that the opponents of Imam Ali (a.s.) and Islam had to do was summon a group of cronies to testify that the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.a.) was speaking in delirium, Allah forbid!!
When voices rose in his presence and events took an ugly turn, the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.a.) exclaimed:
قُوْمُوْا عَنِّیْ، لاَ یَنْبَغِیْ عِنْدَ نَبِیَّ تَنَازَعٌ۔
“Go away from me, it is not appropriate to quarrel in the presence of a Prophet.”
(Taarikh-o-Abi al-Fidaa, v. 1, p. 15)
In Sahih Bukhari in the Chapter on Book of Knowledge v 1 p 22, the Prophet’s (s.a.w.a.) annoyance is recorded with a slight variation:
قَالَ: قُوْمُوْا عَنِّیْ و لاَ یَنْبَغِیْ عِنْدِی التَّنَازَعُ
“Go away from me, it is not appropriate to argue in my presence.”
Any thoughts on the above gentlemen.
-
Three back-to-back-to-back posts of desperation. Not one to defend his "infallible" Imam (ra), lol.
-
Three back-to-back-to-back posts of desperation. Not one to defend his "infallible" Imam (ra), lol.
😊😀😁😂 Who's desperate can be clearly seen. By the way your posts seem to be getting smaller and smaller. 😀 Signs of loosing ground 😅😂
-
😊😀😁😂 Who's desperate can be clearly seen. By the way your posts seem to be getting smaller and smaller. 😀 Signs of loosing ground 😅😂
So it is true that you conflate quantity with quality?! Just when I think you cannot get any more stupid! Learn something new everyday.
As for keeping it precise, it is to get to account for one, JUST ONE, of the many points we raise against your claim.
Here are all the points - in rebuttal to your claims - summarized:
1. If Umar (ra) tried to prevent the will from being written down and open the doors for deviation, why did Imam Ali (ra) choose to be a spectator? I remind you again, the Imam's only task is to guide (according to your madhhab).
2. Why didn't the Holy Prophet (saw) not write the will in the following days at a time when Umar (ra) was not around?
3. Of course this has to do with Wilayah, according to every Shia. Why was there a need to have the will written down when Wilayah was conferred upon Imam Ali (ra) at Ghadeer?
4. Why the dichotomy by Shaykh Mufid?
5. How can Umar (ra), a mere fallible human being, overpower the Seal of the Prophets (saw) and your first "infallible" Imam (ra)?
6. If the prescription to prevent Muslims (those present) from going astray was not written down, how can you prove that Imam Ali (ra) did not fall into deviation (in the absence of such crucial information)? To do this, you have to ascertain what the Holy Prophet (saw) wanted to write down and we can see you don't even want to open your mouth, lol.
-
So it is true that you conflate quantity with quality?! Just when I think you cannot get any more stupid! Learn something new everyday.
As for keeping it precise, it is to get to account for one, JUST ONE, of the many points we raise against your claim.
Here are all the points - in rebuttal to your claims - summarized:
1. If Umar (ra) tried to prevent the will from being written down and open the doors for deviation, why did Imam Ali (ra) choose to be a spectator? I remind you again, the Imam's only task is to guide (according to your madhhab).
2. Why didn't the Holy Prophet (saw) not write the will in the following days at a time when Umar (ra) was not around?
3. Of course this has to do with Wilayah, according to every Shia. Why was there a need to have the will written down when Wilayah was conferred upon Imam Ali (ra) at Ghadeer?
4. Why the dichotomy by Shaykh Mufid?
5. How can Umar (ra), a mere fallible human being, overpower the Seal of the Prophets (saw) and your first "infallible" Imam (ra)?
6. If the prescription to prevent Muslims (those present) from going astray was not written down, how can you prove that Imam Ali (ra) did not fall into deviation (in the absence of such crucial information)? To do this, you have to ascertain what the Holy Prophet (saw) wanted to write down and we can see you don't even want to open your mouth, lol.
"If Umar (ra) tried to prevent the will from being written down and open the doors for deviation, why did Imam Ali (ra) choose to be a spectator? I remind you again, the Imam's only task is to guide (according to your madhhab)"
Not "if Umar did" but "Umar actually did". There is a difference between the two. Lets sort this out first. I said to you before that don't jump on to this, that and the other with ifs and buts or 'lets say' or 'for instance'.
The Prophet s.a.w asked for a pen and paper. WHY? "That I may write something for you so you don't deviate or go astray after me". Simple and straightforward words on the Prophet s.a.w and not mine. Meaning that if this SOMETHING, this DOCUMENT, this PRESCRIPTION ain't written then it is absolutely obvious from the Prophet’s s.a.w words that the people will deviate, go astray.
Time out. Now previous nations of Prophets and Messengers also divided, deviated, went astray. But does this mean that every single individual was the cause of division or should be accused of deviation or going astray. According to your theology YES. But according to Allah NO. According to Allah less believed or remained on the right course and path. But most disbelieved or deviated or went astray.
Now going back to Umar, he objected and opposed. What did he say. Lets have a look again;
"Surely the Prophet is overcome by illness (suggesting that his words should not be taken seriously because of his illness).The Book of Allah is with you. The Book of Allah is sufficient for us!!!”
So was this just one man objecting and opposing to what the Prophet s.a.w had to offer. Lets take a look;
"Those who were present in the house differed: some of them said, “Bring (what the Prophet requested) so that he may write a document for you, after which you will never go astray,” whilst some supported the view of ‘Umar. When they caused a hue and cry in the presence of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), he said, “Go away.”
So this wasn't just about one person or just about a few. It was about many who sided with Umar. And the Prophet s.a.w was offering something based on a document to ones who fell into division over it. And if they or the people to whom the document or divine message is related to, aren't interested or fall into division over it,
which they did then Allah says "there is no compulsions within religion". The Message of Allah through Prophets and Messengers isn't by force but by will. This is not your Caliphate which was forced on the people. And so was the governmental policies like, "hand over the Zakah money to us or you're subject to capital punishment".
-
"why did Imam Ali (ra) choose to be a spectator? I remind you again, the Imam's only task is to guide (according to your madhhab)"
Ali did not choose to be a SPECTATOR. That's your opinion. According to the facts he was with those who insisted that the Prophet s.a.w should be given a pen and paper. And we should accept and take what he's about to offer. But there was push and shove from the other side. You know the rest.
"I remind you again, the Imam's only task is to guide (according to your madhhab)"
Yes, an Imam's job is to guide. Not by force. But by the will of the people. Just like the job of a Prophet and Messenger is to deliver the Message whether the people accept it or not. But not by force. Learn and understand what Imamah and Caliphate from Allah is before jumping up and down.
"Why didn't the Holy Prophet (saw) not write the will in the following days at a time when Umar (ra) was not around?"
Because it was for the people and it was to be done for them. And what better than notifying them and doing it in their presence. They didn't even accept that and objected and opposed it. When others called out that a pen and paper should be given to the Prophet s.a.w then they caused a fuss over it.
Now imagine if this was done in the absence of certain people, what makes you think then they would have happily accepted it. Come on man. Use your head. They would have come up with all sorts of excuses.
"Of course this has to do with Wilayah, according to every Shia. Why was there a need to have the will written down when Wilayah was conferred upon Imam Ali (ra) at Ghadeer?"
Because it was done verbally at Ghadeer. And what is being said now was being said then during the Prophet's s.a.w final days, "well the Prophet s.a.w didn't mean this but he actually meant that, the word Mawla doesn't mean this or the Prophet s.a.w didn't mean this by it but he actually meant that or the Prophet s.a.w meant that by it". This propaganda campaign was on full scale during the Prophet's s.a.w final days.
Why do you think all of a sudden and out of the blue the Prophet s.a.w asked for a pen and paper. What was the need for it when the Qur'an and Sunnah were there, Islam was completed, favours were full filled and Islam was fully and finally chosen. What exactly did the Prophet s.a.w see and notice that he all of a sudden and out of the blue asked for a pen and paper.
-
"Why the dichotomy by Shaykh Mufid?"
Are you telling me that that's exactly the thought and opinion of Shaykh Mufid. What ever a writer/author puts in his book is exactly their thought and opinion, is this your belief. And lets say that it is his opinion then that's his business. Why is that his opinion and what is the reason behind it is his business. And one shouldn't force the opinion of one or some on to others or paint a picture of the entire community just on that.
"How can Umar (ra), a mere fallible human being, overpower the Seal of the Prophets (saw) and your first "infallible" Imam (ra)?"
It wasn't just Umar but others sided with him. So it was a clear division among the people who were present at the time. Something was brewing during the final days of the Prophet s.a.w.
Just as people over powered other Prophets and Messengers in the past and even some were killed by the people. Just as Satan is over powering everyone according to your theology.
"how can you prove that Imam Ali (ra) did not fall into deviation (in the absence of such crucial information)?"
The verse of Tat'heer and the incident of the blanket and the verse and incident of Mubahila are clear proofs of Ali's PURIFICATION and RIGHTEOUSNESS. And if you have any claims of Ali deviating or going astray then lets hear them. That's how we can prove about Ali.
I have answered all your questions and addressed all your points. YOU AND THE OTHERS DON'T!
-
Lets go by the theory of Muslim 720,
'And when it is said to them (the Jews), "Believe in what Allah has sent down," they say, "We believe in what was sent down to us." And they disbelieve in that which came after it, while it is the truth confirming what is with them. Say (O Muhammad Peace be upon him to them): "Why then have you killed the Prophets of Allah aforetime, if you indeed have been believers?" 2:91
"Verily! Those who disbelieve in the Ayat (proofs, evidences, verses, lessons, signs, revelations, etc.) of Allah and kill the Prophets without right, and kill those men who order just dealings, ... announce to them a painful torment" 3:21
According to the theory of Muslim 720 the Jews over powered Allah by killing Prophets. Can you explain yourself or your theory.
Allaah informed us in the Quran that the Jews used to kill the Prophets. Allah Says;
:But is it not that every time a messenger came to you, [O Children of Israel], with what your souls did not desire, you were arrogant? And a party [of messengers] you denied and another party you killed"
[Quran 2:87] Allaah also Says;
"That was because they [repeatedly] disbelieved in the signs of Allah and killed the prophets without right. That was because they disobeyed and were habitually transgressing"
[Quran 2:61]
So Muslim 720, according to your theory the Jews over powered Allah and his Prophets by repeatedly disbelieving in the signs of Allah and by killing Prophets. It's time to explain yourself or flush your theory of people over powering divine guides (Imams).
-
Not "if Umar did" but "Umar actually did". There is a difference between the two. Lets sort this out first. I said to you before that don't jump on to this, that and the other with ifs and buts or 'lets say' or 'for instance'.
Fine, Umar (ra) actually did it, that is, he prevented the will from being dictated. In that case, you must admit that one fallible (Umar) was able to subdue the Seal of the Prophets (saw) and your first "infallible" Imam (ra).
Meaning that if this SOMETHING, this DOCUMENT, this PRESCRIPTION ain't written then it is absolutely obvious from the Prophet’s s.a.w words that the people will deviate, go astray.
Exactly my point! In the absence of this will, prescription or document, how can you guarantee your own salvation? How can you ascertain that even those present, including Imam Ali (ra), did not deviate?
Hint: this post is specifically designed to show you (though I doubt it will register in your head) that if we go by your claims, you are only undoing your own beliefs. Continue reading!
Time out. Now previous nations of Prophets and Messengers also divided, deviated, went astray.
Out of gas? Take your time-out! We are not talking about previous nations; we are talking about those present in the room. You claimed over and over again that this prescription was for them and present among them was Imam Ali (ra).
As for nations of the past deviating, the message was completed with the coming of the Holy Prophet (saw) and the final message was delivered to his Ummah so bringing up nations of the past is like a comparison of apples and oranges
So this wasn't just about one person or just about a few. It was about many who sided with Umar. And the Prophet s.a.w was offering something based on a document to ones who fell into division over it.
The Holy Prophet (saw) had three days after this incident to narrate what he intended to have dictated. He did not! Also, Imam Ali (ra) did not facilitate this request, neither on Thursday nor in the three days thereafter.
According to the theory of Muslim 720 the Jews over powered Allah by killing Prophets. Can you explain yourself or your theory
According to Islamic beliefs, a Prophet (asws) is an infallible being; infallible in delivering the message but prone to all the illnesses and evil that afflicts any man. The Shi'i concept of Imamah, on the other hand, confers absolute infallibility upon certain individuals who are in control of the atoms and universe. When individuals with such alleged superpowers are subdued, one cannot help but use the word "overpower".
Yes, an Imam's job is to guide. Not by force. But by the will of the people.
To guide someone, you must make your message known. In the case of this event, Imam Ali (ra) did not speak a word, let alone move a muscle. Furthermore, I did not know that you consider an Imam's (ra) guidance contingent upon the will of people. If I may recall, you are not a big fan of Saqeefah where it was the will of the believers for Abu Bakr (ra) to become the Caliph.
Where it suits you, it is the will of the people (to explain away your Imam's helplessness or lack of corrective course of action). Otherwise, it is all "Divinely Ordained". Pathetic!
And lets say that it is his opinion then that's his business.
I am willing to accept that this was Shaykh Mufid's opinion, contrary to mainstream Shi'i belief. The problem is not just his opinion; the bigger problem is the need to ascertain the message of the prescription in such a haste that it undoes other core Shi'i beliefs.
It wasn't just Umar but others sided with him. So it was a clear division among the people who were present at the time. Something was brewing during the final days of the Prophet s.a.w.
So was Imam Ali (ra)! He did not oppose Umar's (ra) decision. At best, he was neutral so it is funny to see you, and the rest of Shias, take a stance when your first "infallible" Imam (ra) adopted the role of a spectator.
The verse of Tat'heer and the incident of the blanket and the verse and incident of Mubahila are clear proofs of Ali's PURIFICATION and RIGHTEOUSNESS
The verse of Tat'heer was for the Wives (ra) of the Prophet (saw), the incident of blanket (in reaction to the revelation of verse of Tat'heer) is no proof of infallibility and the incident of Mubahala has no relation to infallibility.
If you still insist on this point, you have to declare the infallibility of the Mothers of Believers (ra) as well.
I have answered all your questions and addressed all your points. YOU AND THE OTHERS DON'T!
You have only given us further insight of what an idiot you are! If you want to conflate that with answering my points, suit yourself!
-
Fine, Umar (ra) actually did it, that is, he prevented the will from being dictated. In that case, you must admit that one fallible (Umar) was able to subdue the Seal of the Prophets (saw) and your first "infallible" Imam (ra).
Exactly my point! In the absence of this will, prescription or document, how can you guarantee your own salvation? How can you ascertain that even those present, including Imam Ali (ra), did not deviate?
Hint: this post is specifically designed to show you (though I doubt it will register in your head) that if we go by your claims, you are only undoing your own beliefs. Continue reading!
Out of gas? Take your time-out! We are not talking about previous nations; we are talking about those present in the room. You claimed over and over again that this prescription was for them and present among them was Imam Ali (ra).
As for nations of the past deviating, the message was completed with the coming of the Holy Prophet (saw) and the final message was delivered to his Ummah so bringing up nations of the past is like a comparison of apples and oranges
The Holy Prophet (saw) had three days after this incident to narrate what he intended to have dictated. He did not! Also, Imam Ali (ra) did not facilitate this request, neither on Thursday nor in the three days thereafter.
According to Islamic beliefs, a Prophet (asws) is an infallible being; infallible in delivering the message but prone to all the illnesses and evil that afflicts any man. The Shi'i concept of Imamah, on the other hand, confers absolute infallibility upon certain individuals who are in control of the atoms and universe. When individuals with such alleged superpowers are subdued, one cannot help but use the word "overpower".
To guide someone, you must make your message known. In the case of this event, Imam Ali (ra) did not speak a word, let alone move a muscle. Furthermore, I did not know that you consider an Imam's (ra) guidance contingent upon the will of people. If I may recall, you are not a big fan of Saqeefah where it was the will of the believers for Abu Bakr (ra) to become the Caliph.
Where it suits you, it is the will of the people (to explain away your Imam's helplessness or lack of corrective course of action). Otherwise, it is all "Divinely Ordained". Pathetic!
I am willing to accept that this was Shaykh Mufid's opinion, contrary to mainstream Shi'i belief. The problem is not just his opinion; the bigger problem is the need to ascertain the message of the prescription in such a haste that it undoes other core Shi'i beliefs.
So was Imam Ali (ra)! He did not oppose Umar's (ra) decision. At best, he was neutral so it is funny to see you, and the rest of Shias, take a stance when your first "infallible" Imam (ra) adopted the role of a spectator.
The verse of Tat'heer was for the Wives (ra) of the Prophet (saw), the incident of blanket (in reaction to the revelation of verse of Tat'heer) is no proof of infallibility and the incident of Mubahala has no relation to infallibility.
If you still insist on this point, you have to declare the infallibility of the Mothers of Believers (ra) as well.
You have only given us further insight of what an idiot you are! If you want to conflate that with answering my points, suit yourself!
"Fine, Umar (ra) actually did it, that is, he prevented the will from being dictated"
It wasn't ONE FALLIBLE UMAR. It wasn't about just one person. Certain people sided with Umar and a division was caused. Enough sided with him to cause two groups. One group suggested and pushed for pen and paper to be given and the Prophet s.a.w should be allowed to fulfill what he thinks is necessary and important. The other group opposed this and suggested otherwise. This turned into an argument then a row where voices were raised. So this isn't something small. Nor did it remain quiet and calm.
"In that case, you must admit that one fallible (Umar) was able to subdue the Seal of the Prophets (saw) and your first "infallible" Imam (ra)"
Based on this theory of yours you must also admit that a simple individual like Iblees has got the better of Allah and all the Prophets. He has been able to lead people astray while Allah is standing and watching him do it. Also the Jews got better of Allah by killing Prophets that came with clear signs to them. I can give you many more examples but this theory of yours is getting ridiculous. You need to move on.
"Exactly my point! In the absence of this will, prescription or document, how can you guarantee your own salvation? How can you ascertain that even those present, including Imam Ali (ra), did not deviate?"
I mentioned to you about Ali. You have the verses of Tat'heer and the incident of the blanket and the verses of Mubahila and the incident of it. If you still doubt about Ali then you are opposing the Qur'an. Ali is purified to the state of pureification and the Qur'an is a witness to this. You still want to use this as a base for cross argument then carry on challenging the Qur'an. There is no match to Ali when we consider the companions.
"We are not talking about previous nations"
You keep banging on that certain individuals got the better of Muhammad s.a.w and our infallible Imams by preventing Muhammad s.a.w from writing a important document. I just mentioned the Jewish nation got the better of Allah and many Prophets by killing them one after the other when they brought clear signs. Just pointing out the serious flaws within your theory.
"The Holy Prophet (saw) had three days after this incident to narrate what he intended to have dictated. He did not! Also, Imam Ali (ra) did not facilitate this request, neither on Thursday nor in the three days thereafter"
Do you think that in the absence of those individuals if anything was written, they would accept and acknowledge it. They didn’t want to know when it was brought up in front of them. And it was for them. When they showed no interest then what was the need for it. They didn’t want to know. When they opposed and challenged it their intentions became clear. Well the Prophet s.a.w already noticed this that's why he ordered for a pen and paper because he knew what was brewing. When he asked for pen and paper to be brought to him pbuh it all came out and clear.
"According to Islamic beliefs, a Prophet (asws) is an infallible being; infallible in delivering the message but prone to all the illnesses and evil that afflicts any man"
-
It wasn't ONE FALLIBLE UMAR. It wasn't about just one person. Certain people sided with Umar and a division was caused.
Give me power over atoms and the universe and I will show you how easily I can subdue "certain people" hell-bent upon injustice even if there are hundreds of thousands them.
Enough sided with him to cause two groups. One group suggested and pushed for pen and paper to be given and the Prophet s.a.w should be allowed to fulfill what he thinks is necessary and important. The other group opposed this and suggested otherwise. This turned into an argument then a row where voices were raised. So this isn't something small. Nor did it remain quiet and calm.
In the midst of all of this, we know that Imam Ali (ra) stayed quiet. Maybe he sided with Umar (ra), maybe he did not! However, we are sure he was a spectator and did not apply any corrective course of action. So it baffles me to see Shias employ "better judgment" than their own first "infallible" Imam (ra).
Based on this theory of yours you must also admit that a simple individual like Iblees has got the better of Allah and all the Prophets.
Iblees has no power over us except when we allow him to get to us through our nafs and he has been given this opportunity till Judgment Day. What you cannot account for is that when (allegedly) Iblees was at play, Imam Ali (ra) - having control over atoms and the universe - did not even find it in himself to utter a word (either in favor of having the will written down or not).
Also the Jews got better of Allah by killing Prophets that came with clear signs to them.
Already explained!
I mentioned to you about Ali. You have the verses of Tat'heer and the incident of the blanket and the verses of Mubahila and the incident of it.
You mentioned them but with no avail. They do not confer any infallibility over anyone.
Ali is purified to the state of pureification and the Qur'an is a witness to this.
How can his purification be testified in the Qur'an when his Imamah cannot be substantiated from the same Qur'an, lol? You have your priorities in disorder.
Do you think that in the absence of those individuals if anything was written, they would accept and acknowledge it.
I am seriously not interested in your extended speculations when you cannot account for your initial ones.
They didn’t want to know when it was brought up in front of them. And it was for them. When they showed no interest then what was the need for it.
Majority of people in Arabia did not want to know Islam when it was brought up to them. It was for them. When they showed no interest, the Holy Prophet (saw) did not give up. He did not say "what is the need for it when they are not showing any interest"!
-
What Umar was saying he was saying with full intention. He knew what the Prophet s.a.w was going to write. That's why he prevented it by objecting and causing a fuss. You carry on coming out with what ever excuse you can find. 😊😊😊
Surah Nur verse 54 "Obey Allah and his Prophet and if you dispute, then on him is what is imposed on him, and on you is what is imposed on you; and if you obey him you are guided aright; and there is no duty on the Prophet save the clear delivery".
Surah Aal-e-Imran verse 32 Say, "Obey Allah and the Prophet, but if they turn back, then verily Allah does not love the disbelievers"
Surah Anfal verse 20: "O ye who believe! Obey Allah and His Messenger, and turn not away from him when ye hear (him speak)."
The Prophet (s) wanted to compose a will
We learn from the traditions that towards the end of his noble life, the Prophet's (s) condition was deteriorating. The majority opinion holds that the Prophet (s) left no will before his death, and made no attempt to do so. However, according to the Qur'an it is absolutely obligatory on all Muslims to leave a will. Allah (swt) says in his Glorious Book:
"It is prescribed for you when death approaches one of you, if he leaves behind any goods that he makes a bequest for Parents and (the nearest kinsmen) in goodness, this is a duty upon the pious" (The Qur'an 2:180)).
We may thus ask the question: Would the Prophet of Allah (s) of all Muslims - the one whose Sunnah we are obliged to follow - disregard an order stipulated in the Holy Qur'an?
The instruction is refused
This is a highly significant event that occurred towards the end of the Prophet's life. The Prophet (s) wanted to write a document, which was so momentous that people would never go astray. Clearly, the Prophet's explicit words "you will never go astray", illustrate the critical nature of the Prophet's command and prove that what the Prophet intended to write related to the matter of delivering the message and religious guidance of the people. It is only logical to accept that at this critical stage when the Prophet (s) was near to the time when he would depart from this world, he took the opportunity to write his will as per the command of Allah in the Qur'an in which he could issue final instructions to the Muslim Ummah. However, one group led by Hadhrath Umar felt that this momentous order of the Prophet should be disregarded, while the other group stated that the Prophet's (s) order should be obeyed.
First of all,what the hell is even wrong with you,why are you bringing an uncessacry discussion into my thread??? Like couldnt you make your own thread for your stuff? This is for ruqua experiences not what youre putting out. Now sincerely get lost!
-
Umar (ra) prevented the Holy Prophet (saw) from writing his will and completing his mission and he also subdued Imam Ali (ra) rendering him incapable to fulfill the request of the Holy Prophet (saw). However, the Shias will vociferously claim that the Holy Prophet (saw) and Imam Ali (ra) were aided by Allah (swt) and braver than Umar (ra). #ShiaLogic
Why the heck are you talking about something else on my forum??cant you start your own thread? Seriously this fof ruqya,tell me something why disrespect my thread like this?? Do you even have any bsic manners? Get lost !!!
-
Salam on this forum,someone recommended me a ruqya place that i thought i had gone to before but i was wrong. Please forgive me. JazakAllah
-
Why the heck are you talking about something else on my forum??cant you start your own thread? Seriously this fof ruqya,tell me something why disrespect my thread like this?? Do you even have any bsic manners? Get lost !!!
Sister, I did not disrespect your thread. Iceman derailed it.
As for your ruqya experience and your other problems in life, I think we all have given you fruitful advice and you keep coming up with things that make it hard for us to treat you any more seriously than a troll.