TwelverShia.net Forum
Sunni Shia Discussion Forum => Ex-Shias => Topic started by: Husayn on January 21, 2015, 11:02:06 AM
-
When somebody is asked a question such as "why did you leave your religion?", I guarantee you that most will have a hard time explaining. Not because they are unsure about why they left it, but because explaining it briefly is a difficult thing. A thousand thoughts start flying through your head, dozens of topics come to mind, and a person is left with many unfinished explanations trailing through their consciousness.
So, I thought a fun thing to do would be to make a thread where I can just ramble on, and put into words all the millions of neurons flying through my brain.
------
Random thoughts #1
One of the biggest reasons I left Shiism is because almost all of the Shii theories have no Qur'anic backing. One of those happens to be the concept of Imamah - 'Ali's succession, 12 Imams, Divinely appointed Imams after Rasul Allah (saw) e.t.c.
I love listening to Qur'an, and I listen to it sometimes for hours on end. Once, quite randomly, I was sitting around listening to a recitation, and it happened to be Surat Hujrat, specifically this verse:
49:15
The believers are only the ones who have believed in Allah and His Messenger and then doubt not but strive with their properties and their lives in the cause of Allah . It is those who are the truthful.
As I was sitting their listening - I thought to myself - "Why no mention of the Imams? Or Ahlul Bait? Or 'Ali??". Why, whenever Allah (swt) says in the Qur'an - "The believers are such and such", does he never mention anything to do with Imamah? Here, Allah (swt) says that "the believers are those who believe in Allah and His Messenger" - so why not just add "And 'Ali", or "And His successor", or "And the Imams" - something, anything at all to do with Imam 'Ali??
Why!?!
I then did a bit of a mental exercise in my head. It went a little something like this:
Let's say I took a completely ignorant, yet highly literate and intelligent person, and gave them a copy of the Qur'an (with no tafsir). I told them - "Read and study this for a year, and then I'll come back and we'll have a discussion".
So, I come back after a year, and I ask a few questions, and these are the answers I expect to get:
Q: Is Allah one or two?
A: One, ofcourse!
Q: Is Muhammad the Messenger of Allah?
A: Yes!
Q: Do you have to pray, fast, give charity, and do Hajj?
A: Uh-huh, obviously!
Q: Is there a Day of Judgement?
A: Derr!!!
Q: Are the Prophet's companions and followers good people?
A: Yes, definitely!
Q: Who is your Imam?
A: Huh?
Q: Isn't Ali an Imam, and successor to the Prophet?
A: I'm not sure what you mean? Wait a sec, can I have another year to study this?
Me: Sure, take 20!
....
20 years later
Q: So, who should succeed the Prophet? Isn't 'Ali the successor? Aren't his descendants the Imams?
A: I think I need another 20 years!
-----
-
Asalamu Alikum Brother,
Going through ur post made me understand one thing
Sometimes even a few words can clear the whole picture provided one believes that Allah is the guide and none else
-
The fact that they keep on fabricating narrations is enough to abandon them altogether,
Sign below reads:
[Imam Jawad (as):
Whoever visits my aunt's grave in Qum will go to heaven.
-Kamil al-Ziyarat-]
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BwHUcpLCYAE1OCN.jpg)
Hurray for tourism!
-
ROFL.
-
wonder if they have shrine for their imam daughters whose name aisha. That would be odd eh to say Ya Aisha :)
-
As much as the 12ers curse Abu Hanifa for Qiyas and istihsan, the irony is their sect's proofs are based on Qiyas and istihsan.
-
wonder if they have shrine for their imam daughters whose name aisha. That would be odd eh to say Ya Aisha :)
On a different forum I saw a Sunni guy say "ya Aisha madad" and a different Sunni was like "brother, you are either a Shia in taqiyyah or you are imitating the Shia kufr. Either way, stop this nonsense."
:D
-
wonder if they have shrine for their imam daughters whose name aisha. That would be odd eh to say Ya Aisha :)
On a different forum I saw a Sunni guy say "ya Aisha madad" and a different Sunni was like "brother, you are either a Shia in taqiyyah or you are imitating the Shia kufr. Either way, stop this nonsense."
:D
How can you tell people who believe in nonsense to stop?? (belief of we always have to have imam, but we don't have to always have imam aka he's not around)
-
When somebody is asked a question such as "why did you leave your religion?", I guarantee you that most will have a hard time explaining. Not because they are unsure about why they left it, but because explaining it briefly is a difficult thing. A thousand thoughts start flying through your head, dozens of topics come to mind, and a person is left with many unfinished explanations trailing through their consciousness.
So, I thought a fun thing to do would be to make a thread where I can just ramble on, and put into words all the millions of neurons flying through my brain.
------
Random thoughts #1
One of the biggest reasons I left Shiism is because almost all of the Shii theories have no Qur'anic backing. One of those happens to be the concept of Imamah - 'Ali's succession, 12 Imams, Divinely appointed Imams after Rasul Allah (saw) e.t.c.
I love listening to Qur'an, and I listen to it sometimes for hours on end. Once, quite randomly, I was sitting around listening to a recitation, and it happened to be Surat Hujrat, specifically this verse:
49:15
The believers are only the ones who have believed in Allah and His Messenger and then doubt not but strive with their properties and their lives in the cause of Allah . It is those who are the truthful.
As I was sitting their listening - I thought to myself - "Why no mention of the Imams? Or Ahlul Bait? Or 'Ali??". Why, whenever Allah (swt) says in the Qur'an - "The believers are such and such", does he never mention anything to do with Imamah? Here, Allah (swt) says that "the believers are those who believe in Allah and His Messenger" - so why not just add "And 'Ali", or "And His successor", or "And the Imams" - something, anything at all to do with Imam 'Ali??
Why!?!
I then did a bit of a mental exercise in my head. It went a little something like this:
Let's say I took a completely ignorant, yet highly literate and intelligent person, and gave them a copy of the Qur'an (with no tafsir). I told them - "Read and study this for a year, and then I'll come back and we'll have a discussion".
So, I come back after a year, and I ask a few questions, and these are the answers I expect to get:
Q: Is Allah one or two?
A: One, ofcourse!
Q: Is Muhammad the Messenger of Allah?
A: Yes!
Q: Do you have to pray, fast, give charity, and do Hajj?
A: Uh-huh, obviously!
Q: Is there a Day of Judgement?
A: Derr!!!
Q: Are the Prophet's companions and followers good people?
A: Yes, definitely!
Q: Who is your Imam?
A: Huh?
Q: Isn't Ali an Imam, and successor to the Prophet?
A: I'm not sure what you mean? Wait a sec, can I have another year to study this?
Me: Sure, take 20!
....
20 years later
Q: So, who should succeed the Prophet? Isn't 'Ali the successor? Aren't his descendants the Imams?
A: I think I need another 20 years!
-----
You don't need another twenty years. When Jesus (as) was arrested and taken infront of everyone (his deciples and followers) and crucified, did Allah mention in the Bible that what will happen infront off your eyes (crucifiction) do not believe in it because it will just be a drama. Jesus (as) will not be crucified but instead a clone will be crucified in front of your eyes and Jesus (as) will be up lifted to safety by his lord and put in to occultation. So do not believe in what is happening right in front of you and do not differ.
-
wonder if they have shrine for their imam daughters whose name aisha. That would be odd eh to say Ya Aisha :)
On a different forum I saw a Sunni guy say "ya Aisha madad" and a different Sunni was like "brother, you are either a Shia in taqiyyah or you are imitating the Shia kufr. Either way, stop this nonsense."
:D
How can you tell people who believe in nonsense to stop?? (belief of we always have to have imam, but we don't have to always have imam aka he's not around)
Well what is nonsense according to you is the belief and act of the other and vice versa. You need to put your thought, opinion and point of view forward with sense and logic based on reality and facts, backed with explanation and through reasoning. If you're going to start off with nonesense then you will end up with nonsense. So the sart should be right and proper. Talk to people, don't shout at them, speak to them, don't scream at them, discuss and don't dictate then the result will be different.
-
Random thought #2:
Is that shirk? Hmmm, it sounds awefully like shirk... But I'm sure he doesn't meant that! He's probablly just doing Tawassul in his mind!
Ever heard of a Latmiyyah? It means poem, I think. Basically, Shias like Latmiyyat, and they are live recordings where they recite poetry for Ahlul Bait.
The person who recites is called a "radood", and a very famous radood is Ja'far ad-Dirazi.
He was one of my favourites, and I especially liked his latmiyyah titled:
كن كموسى ينحني السجن إليك
Be like Musa, the prison will surrender to you!
It is, obviously, about Musa al-Khathim (7th Imam), who was locked in prison and killed.
Link here:
http://www.al-mahdi.org/latmiyyat/j_alderazi/
Anyways, there is a certain section of this latmiyyah that used to get me very confused.
Near the 7th minute the radood basically says the following lines:
يا إمامـي إعطني صبراً وخذ عمري إليـك
إن روحي بين خير الناس رهنًٌ ليــدي
جد عليهـا و اسقها يا سيدي من ما لديــك
Oh my Imam, give me patience and take my soul to yourself!
Verily, my soul is but a trust in the hands of the best of people!
Answer it and water it, my Sayyid, with what your hands possess!
(not the greatest translation)
And, ofcourse, as the radood is saying this, everyone is shouting "Ya 'Ali! Ya 'Ali", and then they all repeat the last line together.
Clip of that section is here:
http://vocaroo.com/i/s0bXAfSx4beB
Now, as a fervent Shii (which I still was), I loved this! The radood's voice, the atmosphere, the emotion, it was true love of Ahlul Bait.
However, deep down, I knew it was shirk, or, if not pure shirk, it was atleast making a mockery of Tawhid.
-
SHIISM is based on emotion and nithibg else. That's why tgey can't see if it kufr / shirk or not.
-
I just found out that the ex-Shia scholar al-Mu'ayyad who became Sunni has in fact reached the rank of Ayatullah at the age of 21 whereas usual Shia scholars reach at 40.
-
I just found out that the ex-Shia scholar al-Mu'ayyad who became Sunni has in fact reached the rank of Ayatullah at the age of 21 whereas usual Shia scholars reach at 40.
So he is more than just another ayatullah then, kind of a wonder kid. No wonder shia are really pissed about it.
-
He studied and taught in Qum for 21 years, poor guy's wife divorced him because she was from a big Shia family.
-
He studied and taught in Qum for 21 years, poor guy's wife divorced him because she was from a big Shia family.
So what is so weird and strange about this??? It happens the other way around as well. There are many examples out there were Sunnis have turned Shias. How does this prove anything????
-
He studied and taught in Qum for 21 years, poor guy's wife divorced him because she was from a big Shia family.
So what is so weird and strange about this??? It happens the other way around as well. There are many examples out there were Sunnis have turned Shias. How does this prove anything????
it just goes to show that even when a former shia is a big gun, we sunni hardly make so much fuss about it. On the other hand, a former sunni nobody would be called a former great alim by shia when in fact he was a nobody.
It all comes down to shia have better PR :)
-
You're talking about Tijani aren't you? Haha.
-
He studied and taught in Qum for 21 years, poor guy's wife divorced him because she was from a big Shia family.
So what is so weird and strange about this??? It happens the other way around as well. There are many examples out there were Sunnis have turned Shias. How does this prove anything????
it just goes to show that even when a former shia is a big gun, we sunni hardly make so much fuss about it. On the other hand, a former sunni nobody would be called a former great alim by shia when in fact he was a nobody.
It all comes down to shia have better PR :)
Some lovely personal opinions you have there gentlemen, based on assumptions (what you assume and think, how you take things). I don't know why you want to turn these opinions in to facts.
-
#3
Infallibility ('isma)
One of the most perplexing beliefs I encountered as a Shii was the issue of 'isma. I swear to God, I have never come across a more contradictory, pointless and outright outlandish theory in my life (except perhaps the Trinity).
Just like the Christians with the Trinity, the Shiis have dozens of definitions and explanations for 'isma.
To this day I still don't know which one is mainstream, or if there is even any consensus regarding it.
Some, such as al-Saduq, say that it is ghuluw (extremism) to believe they were infallible in all aspects (such as never forgetting) whereas some say they are completely and utterly immune from any deficiency, both minor and major.
The amount of debating on this issue is absolutely endless. Shiis will argue for hours on end on this topic. Shiis will even insult other Shiis for holding a certain belief regarding 'isma - for e.g. look at all the attacks against Fadhallah for his opinion (which is similar to al-Saduq's).
Now, as a young Shii, I was perplexed by this issue. Why? Ofcourse - the Qur'an.
And "O Adam, dwell, you and your wife, in Paradise and eat from wherever you will but do not approach this tree, lest you be among the wrongdoers."
But Satan whispered to them to make apparent to them that which was concealed from them of their private parts. He said, "Your Lord did not forbid you this tree except that you become angels or become of the immortal."
So he made them fall, through deception. And when they tasted of the tree, their private parts became apparent to them, and they began to fasten together over themselves from the leaves of Paradise. And their Lord called to them, "Did I not forbid you from that tree and tell you that Satan is to you a clear enemy?"
They said, "Our Lord, we have wronged ourselves, and if You do not forgive us and have mercy upon us, we will surely be among the losers."
Qur'an 7:19-23
It's basic stuff, right? There is nothing complicated about it. You don't need to be wise and learned to understand this.
Adam (a.s.) disobeyed Allah (swt), he sinned, asked for forgiveness, and was forgiven!
Really simple isn't it?
Not for Shiis.
I asked about this verse to a Sheikh once, and I still do not understand the answer that I got.
I nodded my head and thanked him, and tried really hard to believe it - but I just couldn't. It was a ridiculously stupid answer.
It went something like this:
Allah (swt) knew that Adam would eat from the tree, but Allah (swt)'s plan was for him to eat from the tree so he could go to earth, so Adam didn't really disobey Allah (swt) when he ate from the tree, because it was Allah (swt)'s plan all along.
So I asked - didn't Allah (swt) say the following:
وَلَا تَقْرَبَا هَـٰذِهِ الشَّجَرَةَ فَتَكُونَا مِنَ الظَّالِمِينَ
but do not approach this tree, lest you be among the wrongdoers."
And he (the sheikh) said:
It was just a suggestion from Allah. He didn't forbid him, he just suggested that it was better for Adam not to eat from the tree. Infact, Adam didn't commit any sin, he only harmed himself!
So, at this, I just nodded my head and went home a very confused young man.
Tafsir al-Mizan by Tabatabai has the same explanation:
Clearly, the injustice and wrong-doing, mentioned in the verse 2:25, was to bring in its wake the toil of this world - hunger, thirst, nakedness and other discomforts. The injustice or wrong that they had done was against their own selves; it was neither a sin (as this term is used in the shari'ah) nor an injustice against Allah.
It shows that the prohibition was in the nature of an advice pointing out to them what was good for their own comfort; it did not have the force of an ordained law. Adam and his wife did wrong to themselves, because their disregard to that divine advice caused their removal from the Garden.
When a man commits a sin (i.e. an offence, from the shari'ah point of view), he is given a punishment. Then if he repents and his repentance is accepted, the punishment is completely waived off, and he is returned to his previous position as though he had not committed the sin at all. If Adam and his wife were guilty of such a sin, they should have been returned to their place in the Garden soon after their repentance was accepted. But it was not done. It clearly shows that the prohibition did not have the force of an ordained law; it was only an advice. Even so, neglecting it had its natural effect on both of them and they had to come out of the Garden. But this removal, from the Garden was not a punishment for any sin or crime; it was the natural consequence of the wrong they had done against their own selves. (We shall write again on this subject, God willing.)
But didn't they do something that Allah (swt) told them not to do? Isn't this a command? Isn't disobeying it a sin? Ha, what???
Going against an advice does not entail a sin, does not involve rebellion against the adviser. The injustice, mentioned in this story, therefore, means their doing wrong against their own selves, putting themselves in this world's hardship and toil; but it cannot mean the sin committed by a servant against his master.
Again with the "advice" thing. What the heck does this even mean? He said "Don't approach this tree", He didn't say - "You know what, you'd rather not go near the tree, but if you want to, its up to you".
He clearly said - DO NOT GO NEAR THE TREE!!
So many words, just to say, "they didn't sin, Allah didn't forbid them from the tree...". But the questions still remain:
-why did they ask for forgiveness, and;
-why did Allah (swt) forgive them, and;
-what did he forgive them for if it wasn't a sin?
Tabatabai has the following answer:
When a servant repents, that is, returns to Allah, his Lord, and the Lord accepts that repentance, all the effects of the sin are erased, as though he had not committed any sin at all. If the prohibition against eating from the tree had the force of an authoritative command, an ordained law, Adam and his wife should have been returned to their place in the Garden as soon as their repentance was accepted. But they were not. It decisively proves that the prohibition was of advisory nature like telling someone not to put his hand in a fire; if he does not listen to the advice, his hand would certainly burn, and the subsequent apology would not unburn it, even if the apology was accepted. Likewise, Adam and his wife disregarded the advice, and as a result of eating from the tree, had to go out of the Garden and live in the earth a life of trial and hardship. Their repentance could not take them back to the Garden as their coming to the earth was the natural and inevitable result of that action.
The prohibition, in short, was not a law ordained by the Master - like the announcement that the shari'ah would be punished. if it were like such a command, the repentance would have rubbed out the effect of disobedience and they would have been sent back to the Garden straight away.
Oh my God the confusion and twisting of words...
Look - Allah (swt) told Adam don't eat from the tree, he ate it and sinned, he turned to his Lord in forgiveness, his Lord forgave him, and He sent him to the earth for a brief period.
Why can't you just admit this? I think I know why - I'll leave my theory for the end.
--------------
Let's take another Surah. The famous Surah of anti-total-infallibility - Surat 'Abasa.
In this Surah, an event is mentioned in which ibn Umm Maktum (the blind man) came to the Prophet (saw) while he was talking to some people. The Prophet (saw) was talking with some chiefs of Quraish.
Ibn Umm Maktum interrupted the Prophet (saw) - and the Prophet (saw) became annoyed and turned away, and continued talking. Allah (swt) reprimanded the Prophet (saw) for this action and told him that the blind man is better than the ones he was speaking to.
Now, the explanation of Ahlul Sunnah is that the reason the Prophet (saw) got annoyed and ignored him, and continued speaking to the chiefs, was because the Prophet (saw) was desperate to convert these people, because he believed that if these chiefs converted, the rest of the people would follow and be guided.
Allah (swt) infact reversed this, and told the Prophet (saw) that this blind and powerless man was better than them, and he should give him and his like (the poor and downtrodden) more attention that these chiefs.
It was Allah (swt) disciplining the Prophet (saw), and teaching him how to go about spreading Islam.
----------
The Shias say instead - the person who frowned was some other guy, not the Prophet (saw). The verses aren't addressed to the Prophet (saw). It was probablly 'Uthman or Mu'awiyah or someone else from Bani Ummayah. Or, maybe it was even 'Umar.
Now, I could never understand this argument - that it was about someone else.
The verses state:
عَبَسَ وَتَوَلَّىٰ
He frowned and turned away
أَن جَاءَهُ الْأَعْمَىٰ
Because the blind man came unto him.
وَمَا يُدْرِيكَ لَعَلَّهُ يَزَّكَّىٰ
But what would make you perceive, that perhaps he might be purified
Tabatabai says (in what has to be the weakest and lamest attempt at Tafsir):
The apparent import of the verses does not indicate that they were revealed about the Prophet(s). Rather, they purely mention a narrative which does not specify 'the subject of narration'. Instead, there is an apparent indication in the verses that they refer to other than the Prophet(s), for the act of frowning is not among the characteristics of the Prophet(s) vis-a-vis the enemies who differ with him, not to speak of the guided Muslims.
Right - so basically, the verses aren't aimed at the Prophet (saw) at all.
Why?
Because the Prophet (saw) can never even frown!
He also says:
It is reported from Imam al-Sadiq (as) - as has been mentioned in al-Majma' - that these verses were revealed about a man from Banu Umayyah who was in the company of the Prophet(s), when Ibn Umm Maktum arrived. When the man saw him, he regarded him as filthy, gathered himself, frowned at him and turned his face away from him. Consequently, Almighty Allah narrated the incident and reprimanded him for that.
Ofcourse, it just has to be someone from Bani Ummayah.
-----
Now, this is all just ridiculous. The verses are clearly addressing the Prophet (saw). Allah (swt) even re-iterates what he says in the opening verses by saying:
وَأَمَّا مَن جَاءَكَ يَسْعَىٰ
But as for he who came to you striving [for knowledge]
وَهُوَ يَخْشَىٰ
While he fears [ Allah ],
فَأَنتَ عَنْهُ تَلَهَّىٰ
From him you are distracted.
Somehow, according to Tabatabai, these are not addressed at the Prophet (saw).
So I am expected to believe that Ibn Umm Maktum came to someone from Banu Ummayah for knowledge - while the Prophet (saw) was sitting there speaking?
What the hell?
So we degrade the Prophet (saw) just so we can keep him as some type of robot that can't even frown?
I thought then, and still do, that this is just nonsense, and I have some theories about why Shiis say this kind of stuff.
----
My theory is as follows:
1. Rafidis like Hisham bin Hakam came up with the concept of infallibility with regards to 'Ali and his sons and descendants (the early Imams). They didn't develop this concept fully, and so there were some gaps in it. I know that Sheikh al-Saduq (early Shii scholar) believed that Surat 'Abasa was about the Prophet (saw), and that he frowned.
2. Rafidis slowly became more radical as time went on. Being extremists, their beliefs, naturally, became more extreme as time went on.
3. Eventually, they reached the stage where their belief in 'isma became totally whacked, and influential groups arose that said "The Imams were 100% infallible, all the time, in every aspect, they never forgot or made any mistake what so ever).
4. These groups realised that if they hold that opinion, they are degrading the Prophet (saw) and putting the Imams above him (due to Surat 'Abasa).
5. So, they altered the interpretation of Surat 'Abasa to be about someone else.
6. They realised that they then needed to alter a whole bunch of other verses in the Qur'an to fit in with this theory (such as Musa killing the Egyptian, Adam eating from the forbidden tree, Nuh praying for his disbelieving son and so on).
7. We are left with this total mess regarding 'isma in Shiism.
-
I bet you they got all of these lame excuses from their ancestor al-Murtada who wrote a book trying to explain every single verse in a way that no Prophet ever made any mistakes/sins/forgetful acts.
It's a dumb book, you should all read it as it can be used against Shia Haha.
Basically the likes Hisham bin al-Hakam, they got this filthy belief from Mu`tazillah and people of Kalaam and philosophy.
Because they don't care about Qur'an and Sunnah, and because they all hate the guts of the Imams of Hadith, they wanted to oppose them and come up with their own genius theories.
The result is that they robbed the Prophet (saw) of his humanity, you call him a robot, an angel, but not a human... Which makes us feel distant from him, an makes us feel that we can never emulate him since he's not like us, we're detached from his personality, a man we cannot admire because he's incapable of making any error whatsoever without any effort on his part.
-
I bet you they got all of these lame excuses from their ancestor al-Murtada who wrote a book trying to explain every single verse in a way that no Prophet ever made any mistakes/sins/forgetful acts.
It's a dumb book, you should all read it as it can be used against Shia Haha.
Basically the likes Hisham bin al-Hakam, they got this filthy belief from Mu`tazillah and people of Kalaam and philosophy.
Because they don't care about Qur'an and Sunnah, and because they all hate the guts of the Imams of Hadith, they wanted to oppose them and come up with their own genius theories.
The result is that they robbed the Prophet (saw) of his humanity, you call him a robot, an angel, but not a human... Which makes us feel distant from him, an makes us feel that we can never emulate him since he's not like us, we're detached from his personality, a man we cannot admire because he's incapable of making any error whatsoever without any effort on his part.
Honestly some of your posts just make me laugh. Especially this one where there is nothing positive and constructive in it, apart from the bit at the end.
The Quran is infallible because you have,
"Zalikal Kithabo La Raiba Fee" meaning "This is that book where there is no mistake, fault or error of any kind or type in it".
Now such an important book, such an unique book (Quran) was revealed upon someone who was capable of making mistakes, errors and faults.
Such an important task, such an unique task (final revelation) was put on such a person who was capable of getting it wrong.
Another question comes to mind here, "Mustafa" means "the chosen one". Now there are two ways to choose; At random or through standard and quality.
My question to you is how was Muhammad chosen for this task???
-
Gee I dunno, He looked for an infallible human and chose him? There's a lot of these infallible folks running about here and there so He picked one.
-
Gee I dunno, He looked for an infallible human and chose him? There's a lot of these infallible folks running about here and there so He picked one.
A very surprising response you've given me. Come on, you can do better than this. Your post is based on slander, speaking I'll and bad about someone, speaking low and down upon someone. This is not you. If this was from someone else than that is a different matter but you're an intelligent guy, like brother Farid. something like this from you is surprising.
So Allah picked someone from and amongst the people at random to introduce the final revelation, to reveal the infallible message, an infallible book through someone who is capable of getting it wrong??? Mashallah!
Some belief you have here, I must say. But when someone raises questions on how the Quran was assembled, how it was put together, how it was compiled and set up, the accuracy and planning then, you have no doubts here, nothing could go wrong here but when it comes to the Prophet (pbuh) then, he was capable of making mistakes, errors and had faults???
Ok, since the Prophet (pbuh) is fallible, capable of making mistakes, errors and has faults then, the possibility of something going wrong somewhere does exist and is in place??? This is what we think of the Prophet (pbuh) then, would you mind telling me what went wrong and where he went wrong???
When questions are raised about the companions then why do we believe in Takfeer on the Sahaba???? Why do you instantly jump to their defence and start to clear them clean on everything they are accused off??? Ok, not every where and in every place but they must have gone wrong somewhere??? If not fully then partially??? But no, we show them as saints. Why??? We do not believe they were saints but we clear them absolutely clean on everything and in every place.
This is exactly what sainthood is. Being clear and clean on everything and everywhere. Any positive and constructive response??? Conclusion, the Prophet is fallible, he is capable of making mistakes, errors and has faults. The possibility of something going wrong somewhere exists and is in place. Would you mind giving me a list of where he went wrong and how he went wrong???
This is getting interesting!
-
Don't worry, even if the Prophet (saw) makes mistakes, errors and forgets things, Allah will still help him when he is transmitting the book, so that it won't have any mistakes or errors or anything missing.
-
Did he make any mistakes and or errors??? Did he have any faults within him???? If yes, then what were they and how exactly did Allah help him???
-
Prophets are sinless but human
-
Prophets are sinless but human
I don't think you know what is being discussed here. We are talking about mistakes, errors and faults about the last Messenger (pbuh). Do you believe that Muhammad (pbuh) made mistakes and errors, had faults within him???
-
Other Prophets made mistakes (not sins), and their is evidence Hazrat Mohammad (saw) was also the same. He says himself that he is human, and making mistakes is part of being human and makes our Prophet (saw) even more special. If the Prophet was turned into an angel (without ability to error) then that would mean its impossible to emulate him, but since He's a full human being it makes it possible for us to look up to him.
That was my 2 cents, what do you believe Ameen that the Prophet (Saw) was able to error (eg forget) or not?
-
Okay, here's some examples:
Prophet Musa (as) in Surat al-A`raf 150:
{And when Moses returned to his people, angry and grieved, he said, "How wretched is that by which you have replaced me after [my departure]. Were you impatient over the matter of your Lord?" And he threw down the tablets and seized his brother by [the hair of] his head, pulling him toward him. [Aaron] said, "O son of my mother, indeed the people oppressed me and were about to kill me, so let not the enemies rejoice over me and do not place me among the wrongdoing people."}
Which infallible here is correct and which infallible is wrong? The one who lost his temper and beat up his brother without investigating the matter? Or the one who could not control the people and keep them on the path?
Or Surat al-Kahf 73:
{And how can you have patience for what you do not encompass in knowledge?" - [Moses] said, "You will find me, if Allah wills, patient, and I will not disobey you in [any] order." - He [Khidr] said, "Then if you follow me, do not ask me about anything until I make to you about it mention." - So they set out, until when they had embarked on the ship, al-Khidhr tore it open. [Moses] said, "Have you torn it open to drown its people? You have certainly done a grave thing." - [Al-Khidhr] said, "Did I not say that with me you would never be able to have patience?" - [Moses] said, "Do not blame me for what I forgot and do not cover me in my matter with difficulty."}
Why was he impatient although he promised to be patient, and why did he say he forgot?
Did Nuh (as) make a mistake by saying what he said in Hud 47:
{And Noah called to his Lord and said, "My Lord, indeed my son is of my family; and indeed, Your promise is true; and You are the most just of judges!" - He said, "O Noah, indeed he is not of your family; indeed, he is [one whose] work was other than righteous, so ask Me not for that about which you have no knowledge. Indeed, I advise you, lest you be among the ignorant." - [Noah] said, "My Lord, I seek refuge in You from asking that of which I have no knowledge. And unless You forgive me and have mercy upon me, I will be among the losers."}
Seems like a mistake to me.
Or Yunus who left his people after they annoyed him in Al-Anbiya' 97:
{And (mention) Dhu'n-Nun, when he went off in anger and deemed that We had no power over him, but he cried out in the darkness, saying: There is no God save Thee. Be Thou Glorified! Lo! I have been a wrong-doer.}
As for our Prophet (saw), then there are also verses such as:
{O Prophet, why do you prohibit what Allah has made lawful for you, seeking the approval of your wives? And Allah is Forgiving and Merciful.}
{May Allah pardon you, [O Muhammad]; why did you give them permission [to remain behind]? [You should not have] until it was evident to you who were truthful and you knew [who were] the liars.}
Explain these to me and if you're explanation is convincing we move to something else.
-
Most importantly, it is known that humans err, they make mistakes and they forget. This is the general rule, so can I ask where it is that you learned that our master Muhammad (saw) is incapable of any of this? What verse and what Surah says so?
I can also add loads of Shia narrations showing that the Imams are not infallible.
-
The result is that they robbed the Prophet (saw) of his humanity, you call him a robot, an angel, but not a human... Which makes us feel distant from him, an makes us feel that we can never emulate him since he's not like us, we're detached from his personality, a man we cannot admire because he's incapable of making any error whatsoever without any effort on his part.
Indeed bro.
I used to think to myself - why didn't God make me totally infallible and faultless? Isn't it unfair that he programmed certain men to never ever be able to sin or make even the most minor mistake - yet here I am, a normal human being, who is told to emulate them? How is that possible?
What is more praiseworthy:
Rasul Allah (saw) being a normal man who gets tired, can forget, can get annoyed, angry, sad - and yet strive as Allah (swt) has ordered him and taught him, to be the best example?
Or
A robot who is programmed to never ever make even the slightest mistake, whether he wills it or not?
-
Isn't it unfair that he programmed certain men to never ever be able to sin or make even the most minor mistake - yet here I am, a normal human being, who is told to emulate them? How is that possible?
Because they're from Ahlul-Bayt that's why!
: p
-
Okay, here's some examples:
Prophet Musa (as) in Surat al-A`raf 150:
{And when Moses returned to his people, angry and grieved, he said, "How wretched is that by which you have replaced me after [my departure]. Were you impatient over the matter of your Lord?" And he threw down the tablets and seized his brother by [the hair of] his head, pulling him toward him. [Aaron] said, "O son of my mother, indeed the people oppressed me and were about to kill me, so let not the enemies rejoice over me and do not place me among the wrongdoing people."}
Which infallible here is correct and which infallible is wrong? The one who lost his temper and beat up his brother without investigating the matter? Or the one who could not control the people and keep them on the path?
Or Surat al-Kahf 73:
{And how can you have patience for what you do not encompass in knowledge?" - [Moses] said, "You will find me, if Allah wills, patient, and I will not disobey you in [any] order." - He [Khidr] said, "Then if you follow me, do not ask me about anything until I make to you about it mention." - So they set out, until when they had embarked on the ship, al-Khidhr tore it open. [Moses] said, "Have you torn it open to drown its people? You have certainly done a grave thing." - [Al-Khidhr] said, "Did I not say that with me you would never be able to have patience?" - [Moses] said, "Do not blame me for what I forgot and do not cover me in my matter with difficulty."}
Why was he impatient although he promised to be patient, and why did he say he forgot?
Did Nuh (as) make a mistake by saying what he said in Hud 47:
{And Noah called to his Lord and said, "My Lord, indeed my son is of my family; and indeed, Your promise is true; and You are the most just of judges!" - He said, "O Noah, indeed he is not of your family; indeed, he is [one whose] work was other than righteous, so ask Me not for that about which you have no knowledge. Indeed, I advise you, lest you be among the ignorant." - [Noah] said, "My Lord, I seek refuge in You from asking that of which I have no knowledge. And unless You forgive me and have mercy upon me, I will be among the losers."}
Seems like a mistake to me.
Or Yunus who left his people after they annoyed him in Al-Anbiya' 97:
{And (mention) Dhu'n-Nun, when he went off in anger and deemed that We had no power over him, but he cried out in the darkness, saying: There is no God save Thee. Be Thou Glorified! Lo! I have been a wrong-doer.}
As for our Prophet (saw), then there are also verses such as:
{O Prophet, why do you prohibit what Allah has made lawful for you, seeking the approval of your wives? And Allah is Forgiving and Merciful.}
{May Allah pardon you, [O Muhammad]; why did you give them permission [to remain behind]? [You should not have] until it was evident to you who were truthful and you knew [who were] the liars.}
Explain these to me and if you're explanation is convincing we move to something else.
if ameen replied with anything other than explanation to these verses, you should delete it Hani until he does. Unfortunately, i cant see any other way to make someone like him to produce any meaningful response.
-
One thing I noticed when as I was attending shia temple, was how it was easy for them to praise 14 masoom, but harder to praise the prophet (ص). For example, one thing I was taught was how the imam were born as superhumans (eg. imam doing sujda at birth, having full knowledge of Islam at birth, leading salaam janaza at age 4) however our Prophet was a 'regular' human until he received revelation. So it's an indirect way of making the saints higher than the prophet (ص).
-
Other Prophets made mistakes (not sins), and their is evidence Hazrat Mohammad (saw) was also the same. He says himself that he is human, and making mistakes is part of being human and makes our Prophet (saw) even more special. If the Prophet was turned into an angel (without ability to error) then that would mean its impossible to emulate him, but since He's a full human being it makes it possible for us to look up to him.
That was my 2 cents, what do you believe Ameen that the Prophet (Saw) was able to error (eg forget) or not?
Brother you said,
"there is evidence that Muhammad (pbuh) made mistakes and errors, had faults with in him",
Is this tue??? Can you confirm this??? If yes then, I would like to see that evidence please.
Secondly we are humans because we are subject to sin. There is the possibility for us to sin. Well the opition is there for us to sin or not.
If Prophets are humans and you believe that they are a subject to mistakes and errors, having faults with in them because that is what makes you a human but can't sin then, why can't they be a subject to sin??? This is also what makes you a human, so why can't they sin???
Many thanks!
-
I mean you'rer talking about humanity here and using the subject to/of committing mistakes and errors, having faults within you to prove they're (Prophets/Messengers) humanity then, being a subject to sin, having the ability and option to sin also makes you a human and proves your humanity then, why can Prophets and Messengers be a subject to one since they're human but not the other when that has to do with being human as well???
-
One thing I noticed when as I was attending shia temple, was how it was easy for them to praise 14 masoom, but harder to praise the prophet (ص). For example, one thing I was taught was how the imam were born as superhumans (eg. imam doing sujda at birth, having full knowledge of Islam at birth, leading salaam janaza at age 4) however our Prophet was a 'regular' human until he received revelation. So it's an indirect way of making the saints higher than the prophet (ص).
This is not true. I don't know which temple you were at and who taught you but Shias don't have temples, they have mosques and Imambarghas.
So you where at the wrong place.
-
Okay, here's some examples:
Prophet Musa (as) in Surat al-A`raf 150:
{And when Moses returned to his people, angry and grieved, he said, "How wretched is that by which you have replaced me after [my departure]. Were you impatient over the matter of your Lord?" And he threw down the tablets and seized his brother by [the hair of] his head, pulling him toward him. [Aaron] said, "O son of my mother, indeed the people oppressed me and were about to kill me, so let not the enemies rejoice over me and do not place me among the wrongdoing people."}
Which infallible here is correct and which infallible is wrong? The one who lost his temper and beat up his brother without investigating the matter? Or the one who could not control the people and keep them on the path?
Or Surat al-Kahf 73:
{And how can you have patience for what you do not encompass in knowledge?" - [Moses] said, "You will find me, if Allah wills, patient, and I will not disobey you in [any] order." - He [Khidr] said, "Then if you follow me, do not ask me about anything until I make to you about it mention." - So they set out, until when they had embarked on the ship, al-Khidhr tore it open. [Moses] said, "Have you torn it open to drown its people? You have certainly done a grave thing." - [Al-Khidhr] said, "Did I not say that with me you would never be able to have patience?" - [Moses] said, "Do not blame me for what I forgot and do not cover me in my matter with difficulty."}
Why was he impatient although he promised to be patient, and why did he say he forgot?
Did Nuh (as) make a mistake by saying what he said in Hud 47:
{And Noah called to his Lord and said, "My Lord, indeed my son is of my family; and indeed, Your promise is true; and You are the most just of judges!" - He said, "O Noah, indeed he is not of your family; indeed, he is [one whose] work was other than righteous, so ask Me not for that about which you have no knowledge. Indeed, I advise you, lest you be among the ignorant." - [Noah] said, "My Lord, I seek refuge in You from asking that of which I have no knowledge. And unless You forgive me and have mercy upon me, I will be among the losers."}
Seems like a mistake to me.
Or Yunus who left his people after they annoyed him in Al-Anbiya' 97:
{And (mention) Dhu'n-Nun, when he went off in anger and deemed that We had no power over him, but he cried out in the darkness, saying: There is no God save Thee. Be Thou Glorified! Lo! I have been a wrong-doer.}
As for our Prophet (saw), then there are also verses such as:
{O Prophet, why do you prohibit what Allah has made lawful for you, seeking the approval of your wives? And Allah is Forgiving and Merciful.}
{May Allah pardon you, [O Muhammad]; why did you give them permission [to remain behind]? [You should not have] until it was evident to you who were truthful and you knew [who were] the liars.}
Explain these to me and if you're explanation is convincing we move to something else.
if ameen replied with anything other than explanation to these verses, you should delete it Hani until he does. Unfortunately, i cant see any other way to make someone like him to produce any meaningful response.
Hang on a minute, I have asked many questions and have not got a response for most of them. May be you would like to give a meanigful response before asking for one.
Could you give me a list of mistakes and errors that Muhammad (pbuh) made??? Any faults that the man had since he was human according to you??? Well??? Mmmmm???
This is what I asked, so where is this meaningful response??? You're just a bias individual, aren't you?? You're always quick to pick on me but hopeless when it comes to contribution.
-
The result is that they robbed the Prophet (saw) of his humanity, you call him a robot, an angel, but not a human... Which makes us feel distant from him, an makes us feel that we can never emulate him since he's not like us, we're detached from his personality, a man we cannot admire because he's incapable of making any error whatsoever without any effort on his part.
Indeed bro.
I used to think to myself - why didn't God make me totally infallible and faultless? Isn't it unfair that he programmed certain men to never ever be able to sin or make even the most minor mistake - yet here I am, a normal human being, who is told to emulate them? How is that possible?
What is more praiseworthy:
Rasul Allah (saw) being a normal man who gets tired, can forget, can get annoyed, angry, sad - and yet strive as Allah (swt) has ordered him and taught him, to be the best example?
Or
A robot who is programmed to never ever make even the slightest mistake, whether he wills it or not?
You do a lot of thinking bro but I am afraid it is all one sided. Why did Allah just create heaven and not hell and just put everybody in to heaven??? Why didn't Allah do this or why didn't Allah do that. My friend if we start thinking like this then the list is endless.
Allah has clearly said in some matters,
"Inni Aalamo Ma La Talamoon" meaning "I know of that which you do not".
Once again if Muhammad (pbuh) made mistakes and errors then what were they??? And if Muhammad (pbuh) was human like me and you, capable of making errors and mistakes and having faults then, why did Allah chosose him??? Why not me or you??? What was so special about him??? Why couldn't me or you do the job with Allah's help and guidance??? There has to be something different about him, don't you think???
Come on, I am giving you a logical argument.
-
Okay Mr. Ameen don't get angry on us... let's deal with a couple of your nice little questions.
You said:
Any faults that the man had since he was human according to you??? Well??? Mmmmm???
He's not "human according to us", he's human according to Allah and himself, nobody said he wasn't human, if you want to prove he isn't human then that's your job so bring your evidence.
Allah says:
{Say, O [Muhammad], "I am only a human like you to whom it has been revealed that your god is but one God; so take a straight course to Him and seek His forgiveness." And woe to those who associate others with Allah -}
He didn't say "I'm human like you except I'm infallible", he said he's human like us and he only receives revelation, that's the difference, nothing else.
We already quoted two verses for you:
{O Prophet, why do you prohibit what Allah has made lawful for you, seeking the approval of your wives? And Allah is Forgiving and Merciful.}
{May Allah pardon you, [O Muhammad]; why did you give them permission [to remain behind]? [You should not have] until it was evident to you who were truthful and you knew [who were] the liars.}
This is what I asked, so where is this meaningful response??? You're just a bias individual, aren't you?? You're always quick to pick on me but hopeless when it comes to contribution.
I'm sorry :'(
Here's a contribution:
[Rafi' b. Khadij reported that Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) came to Medina and the people had been grafting the trees. He said: What are you doing? They said: We are grafting them, whereupon he said: It may perhaps be good for you if you do not do that, so they abandoned this practice (and the date-palms) began to yield less fruit. They made a mention of it (to the Holy Prophet), whereupon he said: I am a human being, so when I command you about a thing pertaining to religion, do accept it, and when I command you about a thing out of my personal opinion, keep it in mind that I am a human being.]
Sahih Muslim Book: 44, Hadith: 6276.
Which is why scholars say, that Prophets (saw) are protected and guided from big sins. However, they do commit small mistakes and errors, and they never stick to those but they repent and ask Allah for forgiveness.
{[Moses] said, "My Lord, forgive me and my brother and admit us into Your mercy, for You are the most merciful of the merciful."} [7:151]
{[Ibrahim said] Our Lord, forgive me and my parents and the believers the Day the account is established."} [14:41]
{[Nuh said] My Lord, forgive me and my parents and whoever enters my house a believer and the believing men and believing women. And do not increase the wrongdoers except in destruction."} [71:28]
Now some ignorant do say that the Prophets above are asking for forgiveness although they're infallible and never did any mistakes, they say it's because of humbleness which kind of sounds a bit stupid.
This is because Rasul-Allah (saw) said:
لَوْ يُؤَاخِذُنِي اللَّهُ أَنَا وَعِيسَى ابْنَ مَرْيَمَ بِمَا يُعَذِّبُ " . وَأَرَانَا فُضَيْلٌ بِإِصْبَعَيْهِ , " بِهَاتَيْنِ لَعَذَّبَنَا لا يَظْلِمُنَا شَيْئًا
"If Allah were to take me and `Isa ibn Mariyam (as) to task for what we did with these two fingers, he would have punished us without any injustice."
I mean you'rer talking about humanity here and using the subject to/of committing mistakes and errors, having faults within you to prove they're (Prophets/Messengers) humanity then, being a subject to sin, having the ability and option to sin also makes you a human and proves your humanity then, why can Prophets and Messengers be a subject to one since they're human but not the other when that has to do with being human as well???
Scholars say Prophets are not sinners, Allah picks pious righteous men who do not commit the greater sins such as adultery or drinking. For you it seems you have no middle solution, either the Prophet has to be infallible or he has to be a godless sinner. I say, No.
We know a lot of righteous folks who never commit any of the greater sins, sure they will make an unintentional mistake or fall prey to a minor sin but they repent quickly and abandon the act and ask for Allah's forgiveness. Prophets are the cream of the crop, they're the best humanity has to offer, add on top of it that they receive revelation and guidance and so they will have the minimal amount of mistakes but still not infallible since there is no evidence for it, there is evidence against it.
Why did Allah just create heaven and not hell and just put everybody in to heaven??? Why didn't Allah do this or why didn't Allah do that. My friend if we start thinking like this then the list is endless.
Allah has clearly said in some matters,
"Inni Aalamo Ma La Talamoon" meaning "I know of that which you do not".
Once again if Muhammad (pbuh) made mistakes and errors then what were they??? And if Muhammad (pbuh) was human like me and you, capable of making errors and mistakes and having faults then, why did Allah chosose him??? Why not me or you??? What was so special about him??? Why couldn't me or you do the job with Allah's help and guidance??? There has to be something different about him, don't you think???
This is a weak argument. Who told you prophets are infallible in the first place? It's you who are objecting to them not being infallible not us.
How is Muhammad (saw) better than me you ask? The list is long.
-
This is not true. I don't know which temple you were at and who taught you but Shias don't have temples, they have mosques and Imambarghas.
So you where at the wrong place.
Temple is any place of worship, Sunni masjids are technically temples too. The reason I called the Shia place of worship a temple is, because I don't feel that a shia place of worship deserves to be called a masjid.
BTW, what exactly is an imambarga, I've heard of it but I've never been given an exact answer?
-
LOL Imambargha is the exact definition of a temple. A Temple acc. to Islam is a place where OTHER than Allah is worshipped. These heretics even invented a whole PLACE OF WORSHIP next to the Mosque! Where did Allah, his Messenger or his Ahl Al-Bayt endorsed anything called Imambargha (sub-continent term for Husseiniyyah as it's called in Arabic and Farsi)?! How shameless these heretics are.
-
This is not true. I don't know which temple you were at and who taught you but Shias don't have temples, they have mosques and Imambarghas.
So you where at the wrong place.
Temple is any place of worship, Sunni masjids are technically temples too. The reason I called the Shia place of worship a temple is, because I don't feel that a shia place of worship deserves to be called a masjid.
BTW, what exactly is an imambarga, I've heard of it but I've never been given an exact answer?
This is not true. I don't know which temple you were at and who taught you but Shias don't have temples, they have mosques and Imambarghas.
So you where at the wrong place.
Temple is any place of worship, Sunni masjids are technically temples too. The reason I called the Shia place of worship a temple is, because I don't feel that a shia place of worship deserves to be called a masjid.
BTW, what exactly is an imambarga, I've heard of it but I've never been given an exact answer?
A Temple is a Hindu place of worship. A Muslim place of worship is called a Mosque. Sunni Masjids are technically temples too??? I suggest you look in to this and get your facts right. The reason you called Shia place of worship.....because you don't feel..... I suggest and advice you to keep your personal feelings to yourself. Reality and facts don't evolve around your personal feelings. What exactly is an Imam Barghah??? You've heard of it but.... Well you're an ex Shia, you should already know and be aware of????
-
LOL Imambargha is the exact definition of a temple. A Temple acc. to Islam is a place where OTHER than Allah is worshipped. These heretics even invented a whole PLACE OF WORSHIP next to the Mosque! Where did Allah, his Messenger or his Ahl Al-Bayt endorsed anything called Imambargha (sub-continent term for Husseiniyyah as it's called in Arabic and Farsi)?! How shameless these heretics are.
Absolute rubbish and utter nonsense. This is so not true. This is exactly what I call propaganda. What more can I say about such false information. A great way to deceive people about a particular sect. You are right, this is shameless.
-
A Temple is a Hindu place of worship. A Muslim place of worship is called a Mosque. Sunni Masjids are technically temples too??? I suggest you look in to this and get your facts right.
Temple: (noun) an edifice or place dedicated to the service or worship of a deity or deities.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/temple?s=t
I think you should get your facts right ;)
-
A Temple is a Hindu place of worship. A Muslim place of worship is called a Mosque. Sunni Masjids are technically temples too??? I suggest you look in to this and get your facts right.
Temple: (noun) an edifice or place dedicated to the service or worship of a deity or deities.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/temple?s=t
I think you should get your facts right ;)
So what is the definition of mosque and church then??? You have Church, temple and Mosque.
-
A mosque is a place of NO SHIRKZONE. I hope this makes it clear why shii places of worship are called temple.
-
A mosque is a place of NO SHIRKZONE. I hope this makes it clear why shii places of worship are called temple.
A Mosque is called a Masjid. A temple is called a Mandhir, Gurdwara or where Bhudist worship. Please keep your sarcastic, twisted opinions to yourself and stick to reality and facts. The world has had enough of your extremism. Learn to accept and respect others.
If the right version of Islam is with you and your kind then may Allah save us all.
-
LOL Imambargha is the exact definition of a temple. A Temple acc. to Islam is a place where OTHER than Allah is worshipped. These heretics even invented a whole PLACE OF WORSHIP next to the Mosque! Where did Allah, his Messenger or his Ahl Al-Bayt endorsed anything called Imambargha (sub-continent term for Husseiniyyah as it's called in Arabic and Farsi)?! How shameless these heretics are.
Absolute rubbish and utter nonsense. This is so not true. This is exactly what I call propaganda. What more can I say about such false information. A great way to deceive people about a particular sect. You are right, this is shameless.
Ameen my dear friend, so you agree that the heretical 12er Rafidah have introduced a place of worship (in Persian and Arabic we call it Husseiniyyah in Urdu Imam Bargha) NEXT to the Mosque that Allah has mentioned in the Qur'an. So you agree that it is a hideous innovation never sanctified by the Qur'an, Sunnah or the Ahl Al-Bayt? Alhamdulillah that you are starting to see the light.
-
I think these people are starting to realize that ex-Shia are no longer mythical creatures:
http://www.shiachat.com/forum/topic/235028000-shia-scholars-converts-to-sunnis/
-
http://www.shiachat.com/forum/topic/235028000-shia-scholars-converts-to-sunnis/
Look at the arrogance and hypocrisy of the comments, the 12er Imamiyah aren't the madhab of Ahl al-Bayt, but a madhab of kufr and shirk whose fruits are seen in the non-stop kufr of the Nusayri regime, a rotten madhab, which favours the Imams of kufr like Bashar over the imams of Islam like Abu Bakr and Umar, many of the imams of Ahl al-bayt from Ali and onwards opposed the ghulat
-
One of their brilliant posters said:
How many was Shia and How many Was Sunni in 72 Martyr of Karbala ?
By the way again like to remind .. Sunni as word have no Value, it is a Derived meaning, Sunni stand alone have no Value. While Shia is a word.
Firstly:
There was around 3000-4000 "Shias" at Karbala - but they were the ones killing al-Husayn and his defenders, not helping them.
Secondly:
It is not "Sunni" - it is Ahlul Sunnah wal Jama'ah, which has more meaning that this guys small mind can tolerate.
-
Secondly:
It is not "Sunni" - it is Ahlul Sunnah wal Jama'ah, which has more meaning that this guys small mind can tolerate.
Well then "Imami" as a word has no meaning : P