TwelverShia.net Forum
Sunni Shia Discussion Forum => General Sunni-Shia => Topic started by: MuslimK on January 15, 2015, 11:04:53 PM
-
بسم الله الرحمن الرحیم
New article on YouPuncturedTheArk.wordpress.com
Ghulat of Yesterday are Shia of Today (https://youpuncturedtheark.wordpress.com/2015/01/15/ghulat-of-yesterday-are-moderate-shia-of-today/)
-
Ma sha Allah, can't wait to show this to a Shia I know personnaly.
-
بسم الله الرحمن الرحیم
New article on YouPuncturedTheArk.wordpress.com
Ghulat of Yesterday are Shia of Today (https://youpuncturedtheark.wordpress.com/2015/01/15/ghulat-of-yesterday-are-moderate-shia-of-today/)
Great post akhi, it is so true. Now that mainstream shia of today different to shia of yesteryear, in the future the maybe different to shia of today. That belief keeps on changing like chameleon :D
-
Here is the introduction of your article,
"This article is a response to those Ghulat Shia, who make Takfeer of the beloved companions(Sahaba) of Prophet Muhammad(saw) and his beloved wife(Ahlelbayt), such as Abubakr(as), Umar(as), Uthman(as) and Ayesha(as). Out of ignorance and due misinformation they received, those Ghulat declare these companions of Prophet(saw) and his beloved wife as innovators, disbelievers, and hypocrites.(al-liyaazubillah). Hence the Ghulat abuse, curse, slander and mock, the highly revered personalities of Ahl us-Sunnah".
Question 1, How do you make TAKFEER of the beloved companions??? Give me an example!
Question 2, You mock the highly revered personalities of Ahle Tasheyu then, what do you expect in return???
Question 3, Why do some Sunnis abuse, slander,mock etc the revered personalities of Ahle Tasheyu???
Question 4, What is the reason behind Shias cursing certain Ahle Sunnah revered personalities???
Question 5, Why do you label certain Ahle Sunnah books AUTHENTIC when they have material which mocks certain companions and wives of the Messenger (pbuh)???
-
I'll try to answer as best as I can.
Question 1, How do you make TAKFEER of the beloved companions??? Give me an example! By calling them kafir/apostates, like how in 1974 Pakistan declared takfir on Qadianis.
Question 2&3, You mock the highly revered personalities of Ahle Tasheyu then, what do you expect in return???
Sunnis love and respect all top personalities of shi'ism , like Hazrat Ali, Fatima, Hussain, ect. Figures like Khomeini aren't a central role in Shiism (most afghan shias I've met hate him) and the only time he's ridiculed is with proof (unlike shias who ridicule the khalifs for fun).
Question 4, What is the reason behind Shias cursing certain Ahle Sunnah revered personalities???
You're the shia, you should know ;)
-
Haha
-
I'll try to answer as best as I can.
Question 1, How do you make TAKFEER of the beloved companions??? Give me an example! By calling them kafir/apostates, like how in 1974 Pakistan declared takfir on Qadianis.
Question 2&3, You mock the highly revered personalities of Ahle Tasheyu then, what do you expect in return???
Sunnis love and respect all top personalities of shi'ism , like Hazrat Ali, Fatima, Hussain, ect. Figures like Khomeini aren't a central role in Shiism (most afghan shias I've met hate him) and the only time he's ridiculed is with proof (unlike shias who ridicule the khalifs for fun).
Question 4, What is the reason behind Shias cursing certain Ahle Sunnah revered personalities???
You're the shia, you should know ;)
Why did Pakistan declare takfeer on Qadyanis??? Because they cursed the companions???
-
Why did Pakistan declare takfeer on Qadyanis??? Because they cursed the companions???
No, because they believe in another prophet after Muhammad (asws)
-
Why did Pakistan declare takfeer on Qadyanis??? Because they cursed the companions???
No, because they believe in another prophet after Muhammad (asws)
This is exactly what I wanted to here and this is my point that Takfeer has to do with Nabuwath. Cursing anyone from the companions, for what ever reason what so ever, has got nothing to do with Takfeer.
Now which state has declared Takfeer on Shias??? I asked a question but haven't got a satisfactory answer for my dear audience/viewers. We need an explanation, justification of why and how are Shias Kafir???
-
I'll try to answer as best as I can.
Question 1, How do you make TAKFEER of the beloved companions??? Give me an example! By calling them kafir/apostates, like how in 1974 Pakistan declared takfir on Qadianis.
Question 2&3, You mock the highly revered personalities of Ahle Tasheyu then, what do you expect in return???
Sunnis love and respect all top personalities of shi'ism , like Hazrat Ali, Fatima, Hussain, ect. Figures like Khomeini aren't a central role in Shiism (most afghan shias I've met hate him) and the only time he's ridiculed is with proof (unlike shias who ridicule the khalifs for fun).
Question 4, What is the reason behind Shias cursing certain Ahle Sunnah revered personalities???
You're the shia, you should know ;)
Hazrath Abu Talib (as) is one of the greatest companions of the Prophet (pbuh), now you clearly accuse him of Kufr. You label him as a kafir. This is what I would like to bring to your attention that you are going to say, "well this is our thought, opinion and point of view, we do not believe that he accepted Islam".
Brothers, just as you have a right to your thought, opinion and point of view, so do others. And if you want others to respect who you hold dear then, you know what to do. You speak about Khomenie, it doesn't matter which Ayatullah it is, you need to show and speak with respect then, by all means demand respect, since you are in the position to do so.
I am a Shia so I should know why, brother then let me tell you that slandering, cursing, humiliating, insulting, swearing and anything else you have in that mind of yours, concerning the companions and wives is not in the Shia belief and faith (Aqeedah). This is not part of Shiaism. Actions of certain individuals have got nothing to do with the community they come from.
It's about time you stopped high jacking Shiaism and holding Shias at ransom, over the actions of certain individuals, just like the western media do concerning Islam and the Muslims. And you have skipped my last question. What was the reason for that???
-
This is exactly what I wanted to here and this is my point that Takfeer has to do with Nabuwath. Cursing anyone from the companions, for what ever reason what so ever, has got nothing to do with Takfeer.
It isn't just Nubuwwah that can make someone a kafir. Even merely abandoning prayers can be seen as kufr (as per some narrations). And just because Pakistan has made takfeer on Ahmadi's doesn't mean it's right.
Now which state has declared Takfeer on Shias??? I asked a question but haven't got a satisfactory answer for my dear audience/viewers. We need an explanation, justification of why and how are Shias Kafir???
I'm wondering, why do you think that a government making takfeer holds any weight? Pakistan made takfeer of Ahmadi's. There are some scholars (including the Shia Ayatullah Yaqoobi) that believe Ahmadi's are Muslims. No government has made takfeer of Shias, but some Sunni scholars have.
Why does a government's opinion hold more weight than a scholar's? And which scholars are more important to you?
-
Don't go offtopic Ameen! Yiu ruin every post you post in. Be productive and.go to Hanis thread which he made specially for you.
-
Hazrath Abu Talib (as) is one of the greatest companions of the Prophet (pbuh), now you clearly accuse him of Kufr. You label him as a kafir. This is what I would like to bring to your attention that you are going to say, "well this is our thought, opinion and point of view, we do not believe that he accepted Islam".
Well lets see the reports regarding the faith of Abu Talib from Shia books:
Al-Kafi H 1209, Ch. 111, h 28 Ali ibn Ibrahim has narrated from his father from ibn abu ‘Umayr from Hisham ibn Salim from abu ‘Abd Allah, who has said the following: “Abu ‘Abd Allah(as), has said, ‘The case of abu Talib is like the case of the people of the cave who hid their belief and expressed polytheism. Allah gave them twice as much reward.’”
Al Kafi: H 1214, Ch. 111, h 33 Muhammad ibn Yahya has narrated from Ahmad and ‘Abd Allah sons of Muhammad ibn ‘Isa from their father from ‘Abd Allah ibn al-Mughira from ’Isma‘il ibn abu Ziyad from Abu ‘Abd Allah(as), who has said the following: “Abu ‘Abd Allah(as), has said, ‘Abu Talib acknowledged Islam through the expression of al-Jummal. He formed number sixty-three with his hands.’”
You see the case of Abu Talib's faith is dubious even in your books, He expressed polytheism and acknowledged Islam forming a Number with his hand. Now from an objective perspective the case of such person is dubious to say the least. Therefore, we need some certain proof over this issue. Such as, what property did Ali(ra) inherit from Abu Talib, if he was believer?
This is such an important question that it distinguishes truth with falsehood.
And I would also like to say that, we respect Abu Talib, we don't curse him. Unlike the extremist Shia who curse and abuse the Sahaba of Prophet Muhammad(saw).
-
^ I held the belief that Abu Talib (r.a) never entered Islam formally but that he was a righteous person that would be rewarded and some Shias insulted me over such statement. Some ghulat believe that the entire family and ancestry of the Prophet (s.a.w.a) were Muslim, even and especially before Islam was revealed.
Two questions.
1.) Are there any Shia narrations to support this line of thinking, or is it just from personal opinion?
2.) What is the belief of Ahlul Sunnah in regards to the Prophet's (s.a.w.a) ancestry and, in particular, Abu Talib's (r.a) status?
-
Rasullulah (saw) his parents are mumeen. People use hadith to say that his (saw) parents are in hell but they interpret it wrongly and don't pay attention to it's context.
Abu talib will be in hell, since he didn't accept Islam BUT he was a very good man and he helped Rasullulah (saw) since Abu talib is his (saw ) uncle. Hashimites helped each other because of bloodrelations. Abu jahl would even protect his nephew if someone from a different tribe would want to attack his nephew.
Abu talib was a good man thus he will get the least punishment in hell ( I think rasullulah (saw) made dua for Abu talib).
-
This is exactly what I wanted to here and this is my point that Takfeer has to do with Nabuwath. Cursing anyone from the companions, for what ever reason what so ever, has got nothing to do with Takfeer.
It isn't just Nubuwwah that can make someone a kafir. Even merely abandoning prayers can be seen as kufr (as per some narrations). And just because Pakistan has made takfeer on Ahmadi's doesn't mean it's right.
Now which state has declared Takfeer on Shias??? I asked a question but haven't got a satisfactory answer for my dear audience/viewers. We need an explanation, justification of why and how are Shias Kafir???
I'm wondering, why do you think that a government making takfeer holds any weight? Pakistan made takfeer of Ahmadi's. There are some scholars (including the Shia Ayatullah Yaqoobi) that believe Ahmadi's are Muslims. No government has made takfeer of Shias, but some Sunni scholars have.
Why does a government's opinion hold more weight than a scholar's? And which scholars are more important to you?
Firstly abandoning prayers isn't Kufr but a sin (gunah). It's not what can be seen and said but it's about reality and facts.
Who is a Mushrik or Kafir according to Allah and his Messenger (pbuh) is one thing but according to certain people, group, party, sect or state is another.
We follow the Shariath and certain people follow what they assume when it comes to Kufr and Shirk.
I didn't say that the state of Pakistan has no weight in their decision about Qadyanis. Nor did I say that Ulamah have no weight.
Just certain people or any particular sect, group, party or a handfull of Ulama accusing someone or each other of Shirk and Kufr is weightless and baseless.
Just for the audience/viewers, if you believe in the Shahadathain, call and declare yourself as Muslims then, you are a Muslim. Unless you reject any part of the Shariath.
Rejecting certain narrations or disputing the meanings of particular verses, not having complete faith in certain companions or paricular wives, has got nothing to do with Kufr what so ever.
-
Don't go offtopic Ameen! Yiu ruin every post you post in. Be productive and.go to Hanis thread which he made specially for you.
Don't be silly. I don't go off topic but just reply to what is being said. I am asked questions or matters are put forward to me which are off topic. I just reply and you start jumping. I am not ruining anything but it seems to me you're finding it had to answer and or refute.
-
Dude GO TO HANI'S TOPIC, which he made specially for your questions. And your questions regarding takfeer are being answered there. Please, don't make it hard for humankind.
-
Dude GO TO HANI'S TOPIC, which he made specially for your questions. And your questions regarding takfeer are being answered there. Please, don't make it hard for humankind.
Ikhlaq is not your thing, so I suppose it's a waste of time speaking to you. I don't make it hard for anyone or anything, let alone humans since accusing and abusing is not my thing.
-
I'll try to answer as best as I can.
Question 1, How do you make TAKFEER of the beloved companions??? Give me an example! By calling them kafir/apostates, like how in 1974 Pakistan declared takfir on Qadianis.
Question 2&3, You mock the highly revered personalities of Ahle Tasheyu then, what do you expect in return???
Sunnis love and respect all top personalities of shi'ism , like Hazrat Ali, Fatima, Hussain, ect. Figures like Khomeini aren't a central role in Shiism (most afghan shias I've met hate him) and the only time he's ridiculed is with proof (unlike shias who ridicule the khalifs for fun).
Question 4, What is the reason behind Shias cursing certain Ahle Sunnah revered personalities???
You're the shia, you should know ;)
Hazrath Abu Talib (as) is one of the greatest companions of the Prophet (pbuh), now you clearly accuse him of Kufr. You label him as a kafir. This is what I would like to bring to your attention that you are going to say, "well this is our thought, opinion and point of view, we do not believe that he accepted Islam".
Brothers, just as you have a right to your thought, opinion and point of view, so do others. And if you want others to respect who you hold dear then, you know what to do. You speak about Khomenie, it doesn't matter which Ayatullah it is, you need to show and speak with respect then, by all means demand respect, since you are in the position to do so.
I am a Shia so I should know why, brother then let me tell you that slandering, cursing, humiliating, insulting, swearing and anything else you have in that mind of yours, concerning the companions and wives is not in the Shia belief and faith (Aqeedah). This is not part of Shiaism. Actions of certain individuals have got nothing to do with the community they come from.
It's about time you stopped high jacking Shiaism and holding Shias at ransom, over the actions of certain individuals, just like the western media do concerning Islam and the Muslims. And you have skipped my last question. What was the reason for that???
That's a fair and valid point, Ameem. However, this is one exception badmouthing the companions (RA) and the wives (RA) in anyway shape or form is intolerable because most of the companions (RA) have been praised and commended in the Qur'an. Even Christian Orientalists share our interpretation where as you guys have a yo-yo version. Ayatullah Khameena's bad habits are well documented and speak for themselves. If someone makes a crude remark about your final Imam Mehdi hiding in a cave or a cellar (wherever) then your point applies since he from our point of view is an imaginary character, but dear to your hearts. :)
-
^ I held the belief that Abu Talib (r.a) never entered Islam formally but that he was a righteous person that would be rewarded and some Shias insulted me over such statement. Some ghulat believe that the entire family and ancestry of the Prophet (s.a.w.a) were Muslim, even and especially before Islam was revealed.
Two questions.
1.) Are there any Shia narrations to support this line of thinking, or is it just from personal opinion?
2.) What is the belief of Ahlul Sunnah in regards to the Prophet's (s.a.w.a) ancestry and, in particular, Abu Talib's (r.a) status?
Answer to your first question read brother sword of sunnah's post.
Answer to your second question, why are you playing possum? You know very well we regard Abu Talib a disbeliever, As a matter of fact you even took offence to me calling him a "loser" yet all of a sudden you're also inclined to agree he was a Kafir? Plus if you believe he was not a Muslim then why do you put ra after his name, lol? Something here doesn't quite add up.
Even Yazid is better than Abu Talib. Despite his long list of transgression there is no reports to suggest he was a non-Muslim or died as one. If someone dies with a firm belief in this kalimah then they'repartly successful. If they have certain deeds he didn't repent for or/and Allah did not forgive him then he or she will have do their time in Jahaham for a while before being granted entry into Jannah. However, if they did much good in the dunya, but never testified and firmly believed in the oneness of Allah and Mohammad (SAW) is the final messenger then he/she are forever doomed regardless of all the good they did. They get the reward for that in the dunya not the akirah.
This is the weightless value of this kalimah. :)
-
I really depict Yazeed because he did horrible things but he was still a muslim. I wished Abu talib would be a Muslim but he isn't.
-
I really depict Yazeed because he did horrible things but he was still a muslim. I wished Abu talib would be a Muslim but he isn't.
Abu Bakr (RA) wished the same believe it or not, however it was not in his kismet likewise for Abu Lahab who was the half-uncle of the Prophet (SAW).
-
The reason for him not becoming a Muslim might get understandable for a shiite if he understands the tribal proud of quraysh leaders.
-
Rasullulah (saw) his parents are mumeen. People use hadith to say that his (saw) parents are in hell but they interpret it wrongly and don't pay attention to it's context.Abu talib will be in hell, since he didn't accept Islam BUT he was a very good man and he helped Rasullulah (saw) since Abu talib is his (saw ) uncle.
How can his parents be Mumineen if they died before the revelation occurred? It is easy for a Shia to reconcile that, but how would a Sunni say that his parents are Mumineen when they were long dead before Islam came?
Answer to your first question read brother sword of sunnah's post.
Thanks
Answer to your second question, why are you playing possum?
I'm not. My opinions have changed. This isn't really groundbreaking.
You know very well we regard Abu Talib a disbeliever, As a matter of fact you even took offence to me calling him a "loser" yet all of a sudden you're also inclined to agree he was a Kafir?
I know you regard him as a disbeliever. I asked what his status was. I still don't think he is a "loser". I asked a question. You can either answer it or not. Watch your manners.
Plus if you believe he was not a Muslim then why do you put ra after his name, lol? Something here doesn't quite add up.
(ra) does not mean "this person is a Muslim". It is an abbreviation for Rady Allah Anhu which means "May Allah be pleased with him". I do hope that Allah (s.w.t) is pleased with Abu Talib (r.a) and all good people inshaAllah.
Even Yazid is better than Abu Talib.
AstaghfirAllah. Yazeed is in the lowest hell.
Despite his long list of transgression there is no reports to suggest he was a non-Muslim or died as one.
Many Sunnis that I have talked to have confirmed that Yazeed (l.a) was a munafiq, which is worse than a kafir. He pretended to be a Muslim, but his actions clearly show that he was not.
If someone dies with a firm belief in this kalimah then they'repartly successful.
If someone has a firm belief in the kalimah, then they wouldn't be oppressors. Sure, people sin and that's fine, but they don't become Hitlers or Yazeeds.
If they have certain deeds he didn't repent for or/and Allah did not forgive him then he or she will have do their time in Jahaham for a while before being granted entry into Jannah.
The Qur'an says that hell is eternal.
However, if they did much good in the dunya, but never testified and firmly believed in the oneness of Allah and Mohammad (SAW) is the final messenger then he/she are forever doomed regardless of all the good they did.
This is one of the major problems I have with Sunniism. A Muslim Hitler is considered to be better than a non-Muslim (but still monotheist) Gandhi. (Yeah, yeah. I know Gandhi wasn't a monotheist. Chill. I was giving an example of a person with many, many good deeds.)
This is the weightless value of this kalimah. :)
So simply reciting the kalimah out of utter hypocrisy and then telling people to curse the 4th rightly guided Caliph every Friday and murdering many of the eminent Sahabah will get you to heaven?
[sarcasm]This is wonderful. I can do whatever the hell I want and kill people, drink alcohol, fornicate, etc and I'll still go to Jannah just because I said the kalimah.[/sarcasm]
-
Taha, there are narrations which, suggest that neither of them were believers in monotheism, but there are other weak Hadiths which, say they were brought back to life to recite the kalimah and then put back to rest. Allah knows best, but scholars I've spoken to have advised to remain silent on the matter as the Prophet (SAW) himself would be really emotional on the subject.
I think my mannerism in my last post was just fine. I think I just peddled on a raw nerve?
Abu Talib was a polythiest and Allah has explained elaborately Qur'an how such people are the worse of the crops. Take Ibrahim's (AS) father for example, Allah reprimanded Ibrahim (AS) for doing du'a for him since he didn't just worship idols, but made them himself and then would put them up for auction, ROFL. Yet you're hoping Allah is pleased with Abu Talib? Are you kidding me? If you've changed your mind and are convinced he wasn't a believer then that's a positive thing, but this fundmental fact that is more important for you to ponder on.
Yazid was a tryant and villaint, no doubt. I am not singing his praises, but just mentioned the twat to make a distinction. You're underestimating the value of this kalimah. It works BOTH ways even a non-Muslim who could've been the most noble and honourable of all people for the contribution he/she made would've for humanity, but if they failed to recognise the oneness of Allah and that Mohammad (SAW) is his messenger then they're fate is eternal damnation. Similarly, a believer can be have an array of sins, but if they wholeheartedly believe in the kalimah then they will be rewarded entry to Jannah, but at a cost and condition which, is spending the sufficient amount of time that Allah has decreed in Jahanam. This also shows the justice of Allah that if a Muslim rests on his laurels that he/she knows one way or the other I'll end up in Jannah and doesn't make a sound effort to remedy their bad habits then there will be hell to pay. This is why Allah says clearly in the Qur'an he'll forgive any sin(s) even if those sins equate to the height that from the Eart to the seventh heaven, but he'll never forgive anyone if they die in the state of Kufr, particularly if they worshipped another and/or associated partners with Allah. I'm quietly sure that Shias also believe this is apart of their aqeedah. Correct me if I'm wrong.
Being an oppressor doesn't put someone outside the fold of Islam. If I'm wrong then present your evidence otherwise Yazid was bad guy, but still Muslim. There is a narration in Bukhari that suggests he maybe yet make it to Jannah, but we'll leave that topic for another day. It is ultimately for Allah to settle his affairs.