Farid's show analysis

[Al-izz-Ibn-assalam]

Salam alaikom
Brothers and sisters, It seems to me that Farid's show, where he uses my absence from it as a tool to perform his compulsive lying tricks has gone on for a long time.
He doesn't spare any opportunity to use my debate with him many years back to try to gain some credibility,  not because he "won " as "always" claimed but because
But because I was never popular with most Shias in the first place and actually most Shias wanted me to lose the debate more than Farid himself! Why? Because if two main reasons :
1- I believe in sciences of Hadiths as a very important and vital tool to examine the chains of narrators of Hadiths and their strength or weakness (in a nutshell). I never said a perfect tool and I believe it has its flaws, I made it clear that many Hadiths with apparently strong chains(asaneed) are not worth the ink they were written with
But many Shias were very averse to this kind of science (of hadith) because it's most of the time fatal to whatever beliefs they adopted or wish to adopt, especially "Ghulu"
2- Me losing means to them that they can use my "loss" as proof that the Hadiths sciences are futile and counterproductive.

Now Farid admitted that I was seen as fake Shia by "shiachatters" but failed to mention that this view they had about me was before the debate even started and not after it.... I promise you only a handful of shiachatters as he calls them read it! If they did they would have seen few important things: 
1-how incompetent he was on 3 levels:
a-knowledge of Sunni Rijel and diraya and a big example is how he tried to undermined big giant guns in hadith narrations just to defend undefensible narrations of Abu Hurairah
b-knowledge of Shia Rijel and diraya and its differences with the Sunni system which led to him trying to impose the Sunni methods on Shia Rijel and Hadiths where it wasn't applicable
c-logic! He had a  flawed logic but can you blame a Salafi wahhabi for this?! I wouldn't!

2-Anyone who read the debate can see that i struggle greatly(I admit like i admitted before) on one single issue, this was how to conclude the trustworthiness of a narrator using his inclusion or exclusion  from The old famous shia book "Nawadir alhikmah" (i explain: it's the view of most Big Shia scholars that the writer of "Nawadir alhikmah excluded only the weak narrators...!  Now this was the view of big Shia scholars and grand ayatollahs.... Nota view I invented but a view that existed for long centuries)
This led to a lot of confusion on which way to adopt to understand the value of a narrator based his inclusion in or exclusion from Nawadir alhikmah (the book).
So basically this was unchartered territory and I struggled only with this point but I managed to reach a way that proved the trustworthiness of ibrahim in hashim based on his inclusion in the narrators of Nawadir alhikmah....
3-during the debate I was bombarded by abuse from many of HCY members via Pm  and this frustrated me a lot and i wanted to just leave the debate... The times I thought the smoothness of the  debate was curtailed by The nasty private messages was when I was winning arguments. If it was due to feeling of defeat then wouldn't be more reasonable to try to leave while struggling (remember Nawadir alhikmah?!)
But anyways
Salam alaykom

[Shia_student]

Wa Alaikum salaam.

Whatever the case, I think it was a good discussion. I don't think either one of you won, it was a good draw to be fair.

I think, we should call for a round two, on a different topic now.

[Rationalist]

But because I was never popular with most Shias in the first place and actually most Shias wanted me to lose the debate more than Farid himself! Why? Because if two main reasons :
1- I believe in sciences of Hadiths as a very important and vital tool to examine the chains of narrators of Hadiths and their strength or weakness (in a nutshell). I never said a perfect tool and I believe it has its flaws, I made it clear that many Hadiths with apparently strong chains(asaneed) are not worth the ink they were written with
But many Shias were very averse to this kind of science (of hadith) because it's most of the time fatal to whatever beliefs they adopted or wish to adopt, especially "Ghulu"

You lost popularity among the dozeners is because you aren't able to authenticate a ahadith where the Ahlul Bayt did Tabarra against the 3 calipahs, and secondly, you don't accept that Umar killed Fatima. When you dismiss this belief the 12er Shia tend to disown you.

[Farid]

Debate can be found here:

http://islamic-forum.net/index.php?showtopic=14843&page=1

Readers can read and decide who did a poor job.

[Al-izz-Ibn-assalam]

Salam alaikom akhi

At the time I debated the man, Allah's is my witness that I was a twelver and even though a Sunni Ash'ari now I still think ibrahim in hashim is trustworthy of the highest degrees according to Shias... There's Ijmaa among the Shia scholars be it early or late ones upon accepting his narrations without the slightest hesitation.

Farid and his friends need to realise that they cannot impose from Sunni sciences of Hadiths what doesn't apply to Shia's.  Even us the Sunnis we have great problems in finding clear words of tawtheeq about trustworthy narrators, so if we apply some rules strictly then even someone like main narrator of bukhari was not trustworthy  but majhool, I don't want to discuss his name or the reason why he would be considered majhool by the rules Farid want to apply to ibrahimbibn hashim from shia side.
But the main narrator and sole narrator of bukhari was not majhool when we use other rules and his acceptance of the sole reliable narrator of bukhari alone shows his trustworthiness.
The same for in March rahimahullah...
He needs to learn to be fair to his opponents.
As for Abu Hurairah radhiallahu another it's not a secret than some great Sunni scholars especially some early Iraqi scholars and many early hanafis didn't consider him reliable in hadith or fiqh..

I never said he was a liar in the debate but I believe he was not strong and he had many errors radhiallahu anh, still I believe Most of what he conveyed from the prophet(pbuh) was a great job and favor upon all Muslim ummah so his errors are nothing compared to his great service...
I am even contradicting most Ash'aris with this view about  Abu Hurairah errors but I think honesty is important

So yes I am now ash'ari Athari Sunni maliki without (tasawwof) and with love for Ali alaihessalam and his descendants and it's an honor to serve ahlbait(as) and I don't regret it one bit,  actually my love for them never changed or reduced but increased in the right direction I believe. I seek closeness to Allah through them alaihim assalatu Wassalam and I ask Allah to grant me death with a heart filled with the love of Muhammed and his ahlbait (as).

I also love the wives of the prophet and muhajireen and Ansar as did all Ash'aris before me.  I am not qualified to criticise any of them and all my deeds are nothing compared to one hadith Narrated by one of them from the holy prophet...
I will never love muawya and this is again in contradiction with the vast majority of  Ash'aris but many from our scholars had the same view as me...

I don't care much how people see me and this is known to all, if I feel Allah is pleased with me and I hope he is (swt) then I don't she away from speaking my mind

Never doubt that I say what I believe and think without any fear from anyone. Always have been alhamdulilleh.

To the wahhabi Farid and all wahhabis  I say: you claim to follow assalaf assalih but you don't have any Salaf apart from some "hashwyyah" and "Mujassimah" from the ""Ghulat of hanabilah " who had nothing to do with Ahmed (rah) , if you think you can stop being a burden on us the Ash'aris then please bring us bukhari or Muslim or any hadith book that doesn't have the lions of ahl Al sunna Al ash'airah in its transmission (tareeq)... Or admit that you are a burden on us,  without Ash'aris you wouldn't have a single book of hadith!
 

These are my two cents Wassalam

This is all and I won't contribute anymore but thanks for having me....

Ps: it's very tricky using a mobile phone to write this..I had to edit few times

Wassalam

[Ebn Hussein]

c-logic! He had a  flawed logic but can you blame a Salafi wahhabi for this?! I wouldn't!

Don't wanna disturb you two, just a quick comment on that one. Calling Farid's logic flawed and comparing to the average Salafi laymen (many of whom have shallow understandings of many matters) is simply unjust and not fair. I mean, heck, big guns of Rafidichat advise their very own to not debate with Farid because they know how illogical and inferiour the illogical religion of Tashayyu3 is, we have seen it in the the most recent debate on Rafidichat where Farid, with simple logic, literally destroyed the entire foundation of Dozener Tashayyu3.

In any case, happy to know that you left the religion of khurafat and illogical nonsense i.e. Tashayyu3. Welcome to the Forum Walid.

[MuslimK]

Walaikum Salam wr wb,

@ Walid

You are Sunni again? I hope you are not lying this time. Last time after the debate with Farid you claimed you became Sunni then after some time you were back to Shia, if I remember correctly.

[Husayn]

I read that debate without having any prejudice against walid/wasil (whatever he calls himself) and was actually biased against Farid, I concluded the following:

Shia hadith sciences are very confusing and look like they were put together by someone who just copy/pasted Sunni hadith sciences (and did a terrible job at it). They then attempted to tweak it when they realised how bad the Shi'a books of hadith/rijaal are (1000s of anonymous narrators, even the biggest narrator Ibrahim bin Hashim has no clear authentication).

You then tried to use pseudo-authentication (the Nawadir thing) but that just blew up in your face when Farid showed that 'Abdullah ibn 'Umar and Anas bin Malik are included in that book (heh).

You should have conceded at that point.

However, you insisted on continuing, and then demonstrated that Shi'as are hypocrites - you insult Abu Hurayra (ra) for one hadith, but when that same hadith is given with a Shi'a chain your scholars fully accepted it (^^).

[Hani]

Salam,

Why go out of your way to authenticate Ibrahim anyway? I mean as a Shia I can understand why you did, he's well important as he narrates a lot of Shia reports. However truth is, I see the man as a nobody narrating loads of Rafidi reports in Qum, nothing more or less, he shouldn't have even been compared to abu Hurayrah. Abu Hurrayrah is such a famous and renowned Islamic personality that a person can write an entire book on him, the books are filled with texts about his contributions in the time of the Prophet (saw), in the time of the Caliphs and the time of later kings. This is a man who had special status and value in the eyes of the people that loads of famous men sought knowledge from him, he has accompanied the Prophet (saw), fought in wars, governed lands, narrated traditions and was the main character in many historical stories that generations still benefit from to this day, comparing him to some guy who is a "Qummi narrator" was a shame.

[Farid]

So, Waleed, the ex-Shia Ash'ari, compares Ibrahim bin Hashim to Abu Huraira, the narrator of Al-Bukhari, and the main narrator of "March"?

Waleed, your "two cents", as an "Ash'ari", are not welcome.

Inshallah you can post again next week when you decide that Shiasm is truth again.


Edit: User has been banned for attempting to give weight to his beliefs by posing as a Sunni. Ban will be lifted after "returning" to Tashayyu.

[Al Dukhan]

Funny topic, Isnt it walid/wasil ! And you are following "athari" & "ashari" maslaks both ! And even without tawassul, thats good. Whatever your welcome
w/s

[Hadrami]

is this another "shia posing as sunni" old trick?

[Ebn Hussein]

Waleed, your "two cents", as an "Ash'ari", are not welcome.

Inshallah you can post again next week when you decide that Shiasm is truth again.


Edit: User has been banned for attempting to give weight to his beliefs by posing as a Sunni. Ban will be lifted after "returning" to Tashayyu.

That bolded part made the chuckle, اضحک الله سنک یا فرید

In the 6-7 last years or so (yeah, that's how long I know him!) I've seen him change his religion a number of times. It's actually really sad, but I believe this is the curse of Allah if you - as a Tunisian born Muslim like Walid - not just accept that filthy Majoosi religion of Shiism, but also go as far as to defend and argue for it for the sake of proving how knowledgable you are with the one or two things you learnt about hadith sciences. This is clearly Allah's curse, and wallahi as an Ex-Shia myself, all "Sunnis" I've seen who accepted Shiism and stayed Shias where one of the most wicked and perverted individuals (or extremist Zanadiqah) I've ever seen in my life. As for him being an Ash'ari Rambo now, well, that again shows his aggressivness and how he treats the Deen as a battlefield to crush his newly found opponent. I myself am not a Salafi in the modern sense, and in fact disagree with even Shaykh Ibn Abdil-Wahhab on more than one issue, but going as far as claiming that Salafis in general are Zanadiqah while at the same time protecting a Zindiq like Ibrahim Ibn Hashim the unknown Mr. Nobody and attacking Abu Hurayrah whose slippers ave more values than the whole Rafidi religion ... well ... Walid, we only can wish that you be cured from your mental illness.

[Ibn Yahya]

wait so you're Sunni, on a Shi'ah-Sunni Debate forum... but you want to debate Sunnis. I think you have the wrong forum brother.