TwelverShia.net Forum

Sunni Shia Discussion Forum => Imamah-Ghaybah => Topic started by: ZulFiqar on June 30, 2017, 11:34:57 PM

Title: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on June 30, 2017, 11:34:57 PM
بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

Sunnis who believe that Jesus of Nazareth is alive for the past two millenia, but is hidden from us somewhere in the Heavens, believe in a kind of Ghayba akin to the Shi’a?

In any discussion you have with a Shi’i concerning the Ghayba, the irrationality of their belief that the twelfth Imam is living for over a thousand years, if they are sharp they will immediately bring up the example of Jesus of Nazareth. Hence they use it as a precedent and a proof for the concept of Ghayba. I feel this point is important because many Sunnis go to the extent of ridiculing the Shi’ite idea of Ghayba when ironically they themselves happen to believe in the Ghayba of Jesus.

But based on my study of this issue, I don’t find any evidence from Qur’an & Sunna regarding the alleged Ghayba of Jesus, on the contrary, I find it explicitly written that Jesus is deceased.

On my blog I’ve written about the Rafa or ascension of Jesus arguing that it has to be a Rafa of his spirit and not his body.


http://islamsalvationfromhell.blogspot.ca/2017/06/the-ascension-of-jesus-sura-355-4158.html
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 01, 2017, 11:43:10 PM
Check out my response to the argument that the belief that Jesus hasn't died is proven from Sura 4:159

http://islamsalvationfromhell.blogspot.ca/2017/06/as-ive-proven-repeatedly-on-my-blog.html
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: zaid_ibn_ali on July 02, 2017, 02:44:20 AM
The analogy between Isa AS & the shi'i mahdi is not valid as we had the seal of prophets SAW come since Isa AS & also righteous leaders.
Shi'i believe their mahdi to be a seal.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Abu Muhammad on July 02, 2017, 02:45:37 AM
بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

Sunnis who believe that Jesus of Nazareth is alive for the past two millenia, but is hidden from us somewhere in the Heavens, believe in a kind of Ghayba akin to the Shi’a?

In any discussion you have with a Shi’i concerning the Ghayba, the irrationality of their belief that the twelfth Imam is living for over a thousand years, if they are sharp they will immediately bring up the example of Jesus of Nazareth. Hence they use it as a precedent and a proof for the concept of Ghayba. I feel this point is important because many Sunnis go to the extent of ridiculing the Shi’ite idea of Ghayba when ironically they themselves happen to believe in the Ghayba of Jesus.

But based on my study of this issue, I don’t find any evidence from Qur’an & Sunna regarding the alleged Ghayba of Jesus, on the contrary, I find it explicitly written that Jesus is deceased.

On my blog I’ve written about the Rafa or ascension of Jesus arguing that it has to be a Rafa of his spirit and not his body.


http://islamsalvationfromhell.blogspot.ca/2017/06/the-ascension-of-jesus-sura-355-4158.html


Respectfully disagree with you. Those Twelvers are not that sharp as you claimed if they pull out Jesus (as) ghayba's card to justify the ghayba of their 12th imam.

Nobody ridicule the ghayba for the sake of ghayba alone. What we find it perplex is that Twelvers claiming it is imperative for Allah (due to his Lutf) to send an infallible imam to guide human being at all times until qiyamah so that human being won't have any hujjah infront of Him (swt) later. But yet the number 12 is nowhere to be seen. What's the point of Allah sending a guide but yet you are deprieve of the so-called guidance. 

What makes it more ridiculous is that this guy has been missing for more than 1,100 years! And the gullible Twelvers will believe whatever justifications thrown to them no matter how absurd they might sound.

Jesus (as) went to ghayba but nobody claimed he (as) needs to guide people while in ghayba.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Hani on July 02, 2017, 03:52:53 AM
بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم
Sunnis who believe that Jesus of Nazareth is alive for the past two millenia, but is hidden from us somewhere in the Heavens, believe in a kind of Ghayba akin to the Shi’a?

I believe he is dead but will return to earth.

إِذْ قَالَ اللَّـهُ يَا عِيسَىٰ إِنِّي مُتَوَفِّيكَ وَرَافِعُكَ إِلَيَّ

فَلَمَّا تَوَفَّيْتَنِي كُنتَ أَنتَ الرَّقِيبَ عَلَيْهِمْ وَأَنتَ عَلَى كُلِّ شَيْءٍ شَهِيدٌ

The Qur'an clearly states that he is Mutawaffaa, most Ahlul-Sunnah explain it to mean "Taken" but it also means "death". Believing in his current physical life serves no purpose, why does he even need to be alive physically? Our physical bodies don't last and are usually our cause of death, if God raised him then He also put him into physical death, he cannot be counted among the living on this earth. However, he is alive spiritually, similart to martyrs, their pure souls dwell in a peaceful place in the heavens as they await to be admitted in the highest ranks of paradise.

The opinion of his "death" is a minority opinion, reported from Ibn `Abbas and Wahb bin Munabbih.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 02, 2017, 04:41:31 AM


I believe he is dead but will return to earth.




Ok you seem very open minded and sincere. But I'd like you to clarify how is it possible for a deceased person to return to this world
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Hani on July 02, 2017, 05:09:15 AM


I believe he is dead but will return to earth.




Ok you seem very open minded and sincere. But I'd like you to clarify how is it possible for a deceased person to return to this world

{Say, "He will give them life who produced them the first time; and He is, of all creation, Knowing."}
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 02, 2017, 05:27:42 AM

{Say, "He will give them life who produced them the first time; and He is, of all creation, Knowing."}

This Verse is concerning the Resurrection on Yawm al Qiyama. You are talking about a deceased person returning to this Dunya

وَ حَرٰمٌ عَلٰی قَرۡیَۃٍ اَہۡلَکۡنٰہَاۤ اَنَّہُمۡ لَا یَرۡجِعُوۡنَ
It is haram for a township that We destroyed that they should ever return (21:95)
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Hani on July 02, 2017, 07:00:46 AM
`Isa (as) is not a township He destroyed. He sends him back as He sends us on that day, no difference, no need for questions.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 02, 2017, 07:11:15 AM
`Isa (as) is not a township He destroyed. He sends him back as He sends us on that day, no difference, no need for questions.

Please don't mind my questions. I am not trying to argue with you but only trying to find the truth in this matter.

You see you say that Jesus is going to come back to this world after having died. This is exactly the Shi'ite concept of Raj'a, i.e., the return of certain deceased people to this world BEFORE Qiyamah.

I will quote two other passages from the Holy Quran since you say that 21:95 is concerning an entire township, not individual souls.


حَتّٰۤی اِذَا جَآءَ اَحَدَہُمُ الۡمَوۡتُ قَالَ رَبِّ ارۡجِعُوۡنِ۞

لَعَلِّیۡۤ اَعۡمَلُ صَالِحًا فِیۡمَا تَرَکۡتُ کَلَّا ؕ اِنَّہَا کَلِمَۃٌ ہُوَ قَآئِلُہَا ؕ وَ مِنۡ وَّرَآئِہِمۡ بَرۡزَخٌ اِلٰی یَوۡمِ یُبۡعَثُوۡنَ
Until when comes unto one of them Death, he says: “O my Lord, send me back...so that I may perform deeds of piety in that [world] I left behind.” But no! It is simply a word he says. And before them is a barrier until the Day they are raised up. (Surah 23:99-100)


اَللّٰہُ یَتَوَفَّی الۡاَنۡفُسَ حِیۡنَ مَوۡتِہَا وَ الَّتِیۡ لَمۡ تَمُتۡ فِیۡ مَنَامِہَا ۚ فَیُمۡسِکُ الَّتِیۡ قَضٰی عَلَیۡہَا الۡمَوۡتَ وَ یُرۡسِلُ الۡاُخۡرٰۤی اِلٰۤی اَجَلٍ مُّسَمًّی ؕ اِنَّ فِیۡ ذٰلِکَ لَاٰیٰتٍ لِّقَوۡمٍ یَّتَفَکَّرُوۡنَ

Allah takes the souls at the time of their death, and those that die not during their sleep. So He withholds those [souls] upon whom death has been decreed, and sends back the others until a term appointed. Verily, in that are Signs for a people who reflect. (Surah 39:42)

Now these two Verses are proof texts that the souls of the deceased cannot return to this world, because the Barzakh (barrier) has been set up to prevent that until the final Resurrection. Similarly, the second passage states that when Allah takes the soul of someone when death has been decreed for him, He (Allah) withholds the soul from coming back. فَیُمۡسِکُ الَّتِیۡ قَضٰی عَلَیۡہَا الۡمَوۡتَ

Likewise there is a Hadith Qudsi where Allah tells the martyr who wishes to return to this world:

 إِنَّهُ قَدْ سَبَقَ مِنِّي أَنَّهُمْ إِلَيْهَا لَا يُرْجَعُونَ

So how do you answer this point?
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Noor-us-Sunnah on July 02, 2017, 11:33:01 AM

I believe he is dead but will return to earth.

إِذْ قَالَ اللَّـهُ يَا عِيسَىٰ إِنِّي مُتَوَفِّيكَ وَرَافِعُكَ إِلَيَّ

فَلَمَّا تَوَفَّيْتَنِي كُنتَ أَنتَ الرَّقِيبَ عَلَيْهِمْ وَأَنتَ عَلَى كُلِّ شَيْءٍ شَهِيدٌ

The Qur'an clearly states that he is Mutawaffaa, most Ahlul-Sunnah explain it to mean "Taken" but it also means "death". Believing in his current physical life serves no purpose, why does he even need to be alive physically? Our physical bodies don't last and are usually our cause of death, if God raised him then He also put him into physical death, he cannot be counted among the living on this earth. However, he is alive spiritually, similart to martyrs, their pure souls dwell in a peaceful place in the heavens as they await to be admitted in the highest ranks of paradise.

The opinion of his "death" is a minority opinion, reported from Ibn `Abbas and Wahb bin Munabbih.

This is an incorrect belief akhee.

Please go through these links you'll find that the argument of death of Isa(as) is actually weak.

http://www.letmeturnthetables.com/2010/02/jesus-did-not-die-according-to-quran.html

http://www.thecult.info/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=70


One of the earliest books talks about the descend of Isa(as).

    عن الزهري، عن سعيد بن المسيب، أنه سمع أبا هريرة يقول: قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم: «والذي نفسي بيده ليوشكن أن ينزل فيكم ابن مريم حكما عدلا، وإماما مقسطا، يكسر الصليب، ويقتل الخنزير، ويضع الجزية، ويفيض المال حتى لا يقبله أحد»

    (Ma’mar narrates) from Al-Zuhri – Sa’id bin Al-Musayyib that he heard Abu Huraira saying: The Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, said: “By Him in Whose Hands my soul is, (‘Eisa) the Son of Maryam will soon descend amongst you as a just ruler and leader and will break the Cross and kill the pig and abolish Jizya. There will be abundance of money and no-one will accept charity.” [Al-Jami of Ma’mar ibn Rashid as-San’ani (d. 152/769) included in Musannaf ‘Abdul Razzaq, vol.11 pp.399 Hadith 20840]


Akhee Hani you may also read this book in arabic

https://d1.islamhouse.com/data/ar/ih_books/single2/ar_fasl_maqal_in_Raising_Jesus_is_alive.pdf
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 02, 2017, 11:48:43 AM
The arguments put forward by those who say Jesus is alive are extremely weak and easily repudiated. First of all, it is established from Ibn Abbas (R.A)

حَدَّثَنَا حَدَّثَنَا أَبِي ، ثنا أَبُو صَالِحٍ ، حَدَّثَنِي مُعَاوِيَةُ بْنُ صَالِحٍ ، عَنْ عَلِيِّ بْنِ أَبِي طَلْحَةَ ، عَنِ ابْنِ عَبَّاسٍ ، " قَوْلُهُ : إِنِّي مُتَوَفِّيكَ سورة آل عمران آية 55 , يقول : " إِنِّي مُمِيتُكَ "

(Tafsir Ibn Abi Hatim)

So if "Inni Mutawaffeeka" means "Inni Mumeetuka" then it stands to reason that "Falamma Tawaffaytanee" means "Falamma Tamaytanee"

فلما تميتني "When you caused me to die"

And this meaning is established from the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم himself:

فَأَقُولُ كَمَا قَالَ الْعَبْدُ الصَّالِحُ ‏{‏وَكُنْتُ عَلَيْهِمْ شَهِيدًا مَا دُمْتُ فِيهِمْ فَلَمَّا تَوَفَّيْتَنِي كُنْتَ أَنْتَ الرَّقِيبَ عَلَيْهِمْ‏}
 I will say as the pious slave (the Prophet (ﷺ) Jesus) said: And I was a witness over them while I dwelt amongst them. When You caused me to die, You were the Watcher over them and You are a Witness to all things.' (5.117)
(Sahih al-Bukhari)

So on Judgment Day, our Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم will say the exact words of Jesus as quoted in Sura 5:117. If in Sura 5:117 Falamma Tawaffaytanee means Allah raised Jesus to himself in body, then it has to mean the same thing for Prophet Muhammad, i.e., he too was raised to Heaven in his body and didn't die. But the fact that our Prophet died and his body was not raised into Heaven clarifies the meaning of Falamma Tawaffaytanee as Falamma Tamaytanee

See my blog for dozens of proofs that Jesus is dead.
http://islamsalvationfromhell.blogspot.ca/p/death-of-jesus.html
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Noor-us-Sunnah on July 02, 2017, 11:59:40 AM
The arguments put forward by those who say Jesus is alive are extremely weak and easily repudiated. First of all, it is established from Ibn Abbas (R.A)

حَدَّثَنَا حَدَّثَنَا أَبِي ، ثنا أَبُو صَالِحٍ ، حَدَّثَنِي مُعَاوِيَةُ بْنُ صَالِحٍ ، عَنْ عَلِيِّ بْنِ أَبِي طَلْحَةَ ، عَنِ ابْنِ عَبَّاسٍ ، " قَوْلُهُ : إِنِّي مُتَوَفِّيكَ سورة آل عمران آية 55 , يقول : " إِنِّي مُمِيتُكَ "

(Tafsir Ibn Abi Hatim)

So if "Inni Mutawaffeeka" means "Inni Mumeetuka" then it stands to reason that "Falamma Tawaffaytanee" means "Falamma Tamaytanee"

فلما تميتني "When you caused me to die"

And this meaning is established from the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم himself:

فَأَقُولُ كَمَا قَالَ الْعَبْدُ الصَّالِحُ ‏{‏وَكُنْتُ عَلَيْهِمْ شَهِيدًا مَا دُمْتُ فِيهِمْ فَلَمَّا تَوَفَّيْتَنِي كُنْتَ أَنْتَ الرَّقِيبَ عَلَيْهِمْ‏}
 I will say as the pious slave (the Prophet (ﷺ) Jesus) said: And I was a witness over them while I dwelt amongst them. When You caused me to die, You were the Watcher over them and You are a Witness to all things.' (5.117)
(Sahih al-Bukhari)

So on Judgment Day, our Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم will say the exact words of Jesus as quoted in Sura 5:117. If in Sura 5:117 Falamma Tawaffaytanee means Allah raised Jesus to himself in body, then it has to mean the same thing for Prophet Muhammad, i.e., he too was raised to Heaven in his body and didn't die. But the fact that our Prophet died and his body was not raised into Heaven clarifies the meaning of Falamma Tawaffaytanee as Falamma Tamaytanee

See my blog for dozens of proofs that Jesus is dead.
http://islamsalvationfromhell.blogspot.ca/p/death-of-jesus.html

This is the response you will find in one of the link I gave.

Ibn Abbas's (RA) view on Mutawaffeeka:

Now coming to the view of the pious Companion Ibn Abbas, we see that many people often quote a saying of him to confuse the whole case. It is quoted in Sahih Bukhari without any chain,

وَقَالَ ابْنُ عَبَّاسٍ { مُتَوَفِّيكَ } مُمِيتُكَ

Ibn Abbas (RA) said: "Mutawaffeeka is 'I'll cause you to die.'" (Sahih Bukhari 14/149)

The complete narration along with chain is found in Ibn kathir 2/47, Al-Tabari 6/457, Ibn Abi Hatim 3/14 Hadith 3630.

But we ought to consider other narrations of Ibn Abbas (RA) to understand his actual position on this issue. The following one clarifies his stand point;

عن ابن عباس في قوله { إني متوفيك ورافعك } يعني رافعك ثم متوفيك في آخر الزمان

Narrated Az-Zahaak from Ibn Abbas that the verse 'Inni Mutawaffeka wa rafiuka' means: "I will raise you to myself then I'll cause you to die near the End of Times." (Durr Al-Manthur 2/347)

It is enough to show that even according to Ibn Abbas' (RA) view Jesus (PBUH) is alive yet and the verse to him refers only to his death in the End of Times after his descent.

One may say how can the order be changed i.e. how can rafa (raising) precede tawaffa (death as per Ibn Abbas' view) while it is mentioned later according to the make up of the sentence. This is no problem as it’s common in Quran that something mentioned later in the sentence precedes what's mentioned before it. A perfect example is Quran 3:110.

كُنْتُمْ خَيْرَ أُمَّةٍ أُخْرِجَتْ لِلنَّاسِ تَأْمُرُونَ بِالْمَعْرُوفِ وَتَنْهَوْنَ عَنِ الْمُنْكَرِ وَتُؤْمِنُونَ بِاللَّهِ

"You are the best of the nations raised up for (the benefit of) men; you enjoin what is right and forbid the wrong and believe in Allah."

One can see that belief in Allah comes first but its mentioned after the mention of enjoining what is right and forbidding the wrong.

Ibn Abbas (RA) believed in the physical ascension of Prophet Jesus (PBUH). This fact also refutes any notion of attributing Jesus' (PBUH) death to him.

عن ابن عباس قال: لما أراد الله أن يرفع عيسى إلى السماء خرج على أصحابه ...ورفع عيسى من رَوْزَنَة في البيت إلى السماء

Ibn Abbas said, "When Allah intended to raise Jesus (PBUH) to the heavens, he went to his companions,...Jesus (PBUH) ascended to heaven through an opening in the top of the house."
(Ibn Abi Hatim 4/431 Hadith 6266, Ibn Kathir 2/449. Ibn Kathir called it Sahih)

This detail is enough to maintain that even the opinion of Ibn Abbas (RA) in essence goes with the established opinion of other Sahaba and later Muslim generations.

And it'll be nothing less than sham and hypocrisy to take one narration of a person and reject the other for no reason.

http://www.letmeturnthetables.com/2010/02/jesus-did-not-die-according-to-quran.html
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 02, 2017, 12:49:54 PM
I understand the position of Ibn Abbas regarding Taqdim and Ta'khir in this Verse. However, we are not citing Ibn Abbas's overall opinion regarding the issue of life and death of Jesus, but specifically his translation of the word "Mutawaffeeka" as meaning "Mumeetuka", because this same word is used in 5:117 "Falamma Tawaffaytanee", which then has to mean "Falamma Tamaytanee". It is a matter of principle and in order to be consistent that if Tawaffaa as used in 3:55 means death than the same word as used in 5:117 has to mean death also. And an ever stronger evidence than this is the fact that the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) himself quoted 5:117 "Falamma Tawaffaytanee" and explained it by giving his own example that he will say these words on Judgment Day. So not only will Jesus say "Falamma Tawaffaytanee" but even Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم will say "Falamma Tawaffaytanee" (Bukhari)

Unless you want to say that Prophet Muhammad was physically and bodily raised into the sky without experiencing death, you have no choice but to admit that "Falamma Tawaffaytanee" means "When you caused me to die"

In fact, you will never find an example from the Holy Qur'an where

فاعل = الله

مفعول = رجلٌ

فعل = توفّى

except that the meaning is Death

Another strong evidence from the Holy Qur'an

مَّا الْمَسِيحُ ابْنُ مَرْيَمَ إِلَّا رَسُولٌ قَدْ خَلَتْ مِن قَبْلِهِ الرُّسُلُ وَأُمُّهُ صِدِّيقَةٌ ۖ كَانَا يَأْكُلَانِ الطَّعَامَ

"The Messiah son of Mary was a Messenger. All the Messenger died before him. His Mother was a truthful woman. They both used to eat food" (5:75)

Kaana is فعل ماذ
Ya'kulaan is verb in dual form

meaning both Jesus and his mother used to, in the past, eat food, and they no longer do so, because obviously both are dead. Otherwise if you say Jesus is alive, then Mariam has to be alive too. It is inconsistent to say one is alive and the other is deceased when the Holy Quran says they both (in the past) used to eat food.

Then the phrase قد خلت من قبله الرسل "all the Messengers before Jesus died" with Rusul prefixed with Lam at-Tarif (definite article "Al") indicating all the Messengers from before Jesus. Practically, there is no dispute that all the Messengers before Jesus died. But the exact same wording is in 3:144 except it is in relation to Muhammad (SAW): "all the Messengers before Muhammad died". So you have to be consistent between 5:75 and 3:144

It is written: خَلَا فلانٌ : إذَ مات "Khalaa someone....it means he died" (Taj al Urus; v.38 p.11)

So when Khalat is used in conjunction with a human being, omitting a specific place, it means death. And this is common in most languages. For example if I say "John has passed on" omitting the place to where John passed to, then it is assumed that I mean John has died.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 02, 2017, 12:57:29 PM
Another proof that Jesus has died is the Verse of the Holy Qur'an:

وَالَّذِينَ يَدْعُونَ مِن دُونِ اللَّـهِ لَا يَخْلُقُونَ شَيْئًا وَهُمْ يُخْلَقُونَ ﴿٢٠﴾ أَمْوَاتٌ غَيْرُ أَحْيَاءٍ ۖ وَمَا يَشْعُرُونَ أَيَّانَ يُبْعَثُونَ
Those whom they invoke besides Allah have not created anything, but are themselves created. (20) (They are) dead, lifeless, and they know not when they will be raised up. (Sura 16:20-21)

Incidentally, after Allah, Jesus is the person who is most invoked as an object of worship, since Christianity is the most widespread religion in the Earth. And Jesus is included in the category of "Min Dooni Allah" (Sura 5:116). So Allah says those that are invoked besides Him are Amwaat "Dead" Ghayru Ahyaa'in "Lifeless"

Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Noor-us-Sunnah on July 02, 2017, 01:08:32 PM
Ahmadi Claim: Tawafee has Always been used to mean Death in the Qur'an. They usually provide a list of 20 or 21 examples where it is used to mean Death.;

Muslim Response: No, Tawafee never means death, literally. Tawafee means "take completely". Below is a detailed response:

When someone says "I will crush you in basketball", that means that person is going to beat them in the game of basketball. Now, consider if someone said "I am going to crush this can", that carries the literal meaning of "expending energy to reduce volume". Likewise, the meaning of "tawafee" is "take completely, but when Allah takes someone, it generally means they are going to die.

Examples where it does NOT mean death. This forum can't do Unicode, so I'll paste the transliteration. Also, I will rely ONLY on Ahmadi translations of the Qur'an.

------------------------

Surah Zumar, Verse 42 (43)

Allah takes away the souls of men at the time of their death; and of those also that are not yet dead, during their sleep. Then He withholds those against which He has decreed death, and sends back the others till an appointed term. In that, surely, are Signs for a people who reflect.

Transliteration: Allahu yatawaffa al-anfusa heena mawtiha waallatee lam tamut fee manamiha fayumsiku allatee qada AAalayha almawta wayursilu al-okhra ila ajalin musamman inna fee thalika laayatin liqawmin yatafakkaroona

Allahu (Allah does)
yatawaffa (Takes)
al-anfusa (souls)
heena (when)
mawtiha (Her death)
wa (and)
allatee (those/which)
lam (do not)
tamut (was)
fee (in)
manamiha (her sleep)

The word Tawaffa is used to mean "take" here, even according to the Ahmadi translation. If it meant death, then the translation would be:
"Allah is the one who causes the souls to die at the time of their death, and those souls when they sleep"
A) This would create an awkward redundancy (Cause to die at the time of their death? When else do you die?)
B) People don't die when they sleep

This is an example of the same word used once, used in two different ways. This shows that its actual meaning is "take", not "death".

------------------------

Surah Nisaa, Verse 15 (16)

Ahmadi Translation: And such of your women who are guilty of any flagrant impropriety - call to witness four of you against them; and if they bear witness, then confine them to the houses until death overtakes them or Allah opens for them some other way.

Transliteration: Waallatee ya/teena alfahishata min nisa-ikum faistashhidoo AAalayhinna arbaAAatan minkum fa-in shahidoo faamsikoohunna fee albuyooti hatta yatawaffahunna almawtu aw yajAAala Allahu lahunna sabeelan

Quick Arabic grammar lesson: When you have a Dhamma (wideways nine) atop the last letter of a noun, it usually means that the noun is the "Do'er" of the action. In Arabic, its called a Faa'il.

Yatawaffa-hunna are actually two words
Yatawaffa - takes
-hunna - those women
al-Mawtu - The death (notice how its Mawtu, with the Dhamma at the end, meaning its the actor)

So, Death TAKES those women. Had Tawafee meant "death" always, Allah would have placed two words which have the exact same meaning right next to each other: al-Mawtu and Tawafee. This is even how the Ahmadi translation understands it. It wouldn't make sense any other way.

------------------------------------

The root word of Tawafee is Wafaa. How is that used in the Qur'an? Chapter 83, Verse 2 (3)

Ahmadi Translation: Woe unto those who give short measure;
There's a bit of a problem here, cuz the Ahmadis translated the meaning (the gist of it), but not the actual words. I'll use this anyways

Transliteration: Allatheena itha iktaloo AAala alnnasi yastawfoona

The last word is Yastawfoon literally meaning "those who take completely". We can see here that the root word of Tawafee, Wafaa, means "take completely"

--------------------------------
Surah Baqarah, Verse 40 (41)

Ahmadi Translation: O Children of Israel! remember My favours which I bestowed upon you, and fulfil your covenant with Me, I will fulfil My covenant with you, and Me alone should you fear.
Transliteration: Ya banee isra-eela othkuroo niAAmatiya allatee anAAamtu AAalaykum waawfoo biAAahdee oofi biAAahdikum wa-iyyaya fairhabooni

Wa - and
awfoo - Command form of "take". In context, its translated as "fulfill". As in, its a command from Allah to fulfill the covenant.
bi-AAahdee - My covenant
oofi - Take, in context it means "fulfill".
bi-AAahdikum - My covenant with you

We can see here that the root word of Tawafee, Wafaa, also means "take completely".

------------------

Conclusion: The actual meaning of "Tawafee" is not "Death". It's "take completely". Just as the crush example above, it can be translated in context to mean "Death", but that isn't its actual meaning. Interestingly, go back and look at the instances where the Ahmadis claim it means "Death" and replace "Death" with "Take". Sometimes, just based on the structure of the Arabic sentence, it would not even make sense for it to say "Death". The translators translated the "gist of the meaning", not the actual word-for-word translation.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 02, 2017, 01:18:48 PM
I agree that the word Tawafee by itself doesn't mean death, though in many instances it means death Majaazan. But our point is that Tawafee when used in conjunction with human being can mean either death or sleep. It never means taking the entire person in his or her body. There isn't a single example you could point to where Tawafee, when used in conjunction with a human being, means the human being was taken completely in his or her body. Either it will mean death or sleep. So this Verse:

اللَّـهُ يَتَوَفَّى الْأَنفُسَ حِينَ مَوْتِهَا وَالَّتِي لَمْ تَمُتْ فِي مَنَامِهَا ۖ فَيُمْسِكُ الَّتِي قَضَىٰ عَلَيْهَا الْمَوْتَ وَيُرْسِلُ الْأُخْرَىٰ إِلَىٰ أَجَلٍ مُّسَمًّى

ِAllah is the One Who takes [YATAWAFFAA] the Souls during its death and that which dies not during its sleep. So He withholds the one upon which is the decree of death and sends back the other until a term appointed. (39:42)

This Verse establishes the principle that whenever Allah does Tawafee of a human being it can only be one of two things: 1. He takes away the soul permanently causing death, 2. He takes away the soul temporarily causing sleep.

There is no third example of Allah taking away the entire body up into the sky. These are the only two possibilities.

Now if you say that Allah didn't cause Jesus to die, but instead Allah took Jesus in his sleep, it means Allah took Jesus's soul temporarily, while his body is sleeping somewhere in the Earth. That is because during sleep, as is self-evident, Allah only takes the soul while the body remains lying on the bed snoring away. No one says that when you fall asleep Allah takes up the body completely into the sky. So you have no choice but to say that either Allah caused Jesus to die, or He caused Jesus to fall asleep, but the latter would mean Jesus's body is lying somewhere snoring away on the Earth, while his soul has been taken away for two millennia. That itself is absurd. The only rational thing to believe is that Jesus died and Allah took his soul away
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: zaid_ibn_ali on July 02, 2017, 01:22:40 PM
Would it not make more sense to have these discussions on an sunni vs ahmediyya forum?

Not sure if a sunni vs shia forum is the right place.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 02, 2017, 01:24:32 PM
Would it not make more sense to have these discussions on an sunni vs ahmediyya forum?

Not sure if a sunni vs shia forum is the right place.

I am not an Ahmadi, and Ahmadis aren't the only ones who believe in that Jesus is deceased. Many Muslims of various persuasions believe in it. So it is not an issue that is exclusive to Ahmadiyya. And the reason we are discussing it is because it is relevant to the issue of Ghayba if you care to read my OP
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 02, 2017, 01:29:37 PM
Here is another point that is worthy of consideration. That is regarding upon whom the onus is to prove whether Jesus is alive or deceased. As you know, the principle in these matters is that the burden of proof is always on the person who makes an extraordinary claim. The belief that Jesus was raised physically in his body up into the sky, where he has been residing for the last 2000 years, is surely an extraordinary if not supernatural claim. Our belief that Jesus died in his own time just like every other Prophet, being a human being, is by no means an extraordinary or strange claim. So even if there was no explicit evidence in the Qur'an that Jesus has died, it doesn't necessitate that he is alive. For example, there is no explicit mention of that fact that the Prophet Shu'aib died, or the Prophet Alyasa died, and many others. Yet we as Muslims all assume that these Prophets have died because that is the natural course of things. Now despite this being the principle, there are in fact some 30 Verses in the Quran which either explicitly or implicitly prove that Jesus has died, yet strangely enough so many Muslims insist that he is alive.

So going by this principle I appeal to those who believe Jesus is alive to bring a single Verse from the Holy Qur'an which is unambiguous and explicit in proving that Jesus is physically alive in the sky for the past 2000 years.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Abu Muhammad on July 02, 2017, 02:23:01 PM
Would it not make more sense to have these discussions on an sunni vs ahmediyya forum?

Not sure if a sunni vs shia forum is the right place.

I am not an Ahmadi, and Ahmadis aren't the only ones who believe in that Jesus is deceased. Many Muslims of various persuasions believe in it. So it is not an issue that is exclusive to Ahmadiyya. And the reason we are discussing it is because it is relevant to the issue of Ghayba if you care to read my OP

I have to agree with brother zaid_ibn_ali. Sure that you started off the discussion with the issue of ghaybah but later into the discussion, the focus is only on the ghaybah of Jesus (as). How does the ghaybah of Jesus (as) got anything to do with Sunni-Shia polemical discussion? Sounds more like Sunni-Ahmadiyya instead.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Hadrami on July 02, 2017, 02:33:42 PM
Would it not make more sense to have these discussions on an sunni vs ahmediyya forum?

Not sure if a sunni vs shia forum is the right place.

I am not an Ahmadi, and Ahmadis aren't the only ones who believe in that Jesus is deceased. Many Muslims of various persuasions believe in it. So it is not an issue that is exclusive to Ahmadiyya. And the reason we are discussing it is because it is relevant to the issue of Ghayba if you care to read my OP

Oh come on, spare us your taqiyya. Your site bashed almost everyone, but speak very highly of ghulam qadiyani. Here, we're familiar enough with shia taqiyya to smell your non shia taqiyya 😂😂
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Noor-us-Sunnah on July 02, 2017, 03:15:33 PM
Another proof that Jesus has died is the Verse of the Holy Qur'an:

وَالَّذِينَ يَدْعُونَ مِن دُونِ اللَّـهِ لَا يَخْلُقُونَ شَيْئًا وَهُمْ يُخْلَقُونَ ﴿٢٠﴾ أَمْوَاتٌ غَيْرُ أَحْيَاءٍ ۖ وَمَا يَشْعُرُونَ أَيَّانَ يُبْعَثُونَ
Those whom they invoke besides Allah have not created anything, but are themselves created. (20) (They are) dead, lifeless, and they know not when they will be raised up. (Sura 16:20-21)

Incidentally, after Allah, Jesus is the person who is most invoked as an object of worship, since Christianity is the most widespread religion in the Earth. And Jesus is included in the category of "Min Dooni Allah" (Sura 5:116). So Allah says those that are invoked besides Him are Amwaat "Dead" Ghayru Ahyaa'in "Lifeless"


This verse is regarding Idols not Isa(as) for the following reasons:

1. Even Angels and Jinn were worshiped, so as per your logic, they should be dead.

And [mention] the Day when He will gather them all and then say to the angels, "Did these [people] used to worship you?" They will say, "Exalted are You! You, [O Allah ], are our benefactor not them. Rather, they used to worship the jinn; most of them were believers in them.(34:40-41)

But they have attributed to Allah partners - the jinn, while He has created them - and have fabricated for Him sons and daughters. Exalted is He and high above what they describe.(6:100)

2. The next verse after the verse you quoted says that its about people who didn't believe in hereafter.
Your god is one God. But those who do not believe in the Hereafter - their hearts are disapproving, and they are arrogant.(16:22).

These weren't Christians as they believe in hereafter. These were polytheists of Makkah, who believed in idols such as Lat, Manaat, Uzza, etc.

Quran clarifies this issue in another chapter, that the idol worshipers of Makkah are the ones who don't believe in hereafter:

So have you considered al-Lat and al-'Uzza? And Manat, the third - the other one? Is the male for you and for Him the female? That, then, is an unjust division. They are not but [mere] names you have named them - you and your forefathers - for which Allah has sent down no authority. They follow not except assumption and what [their] souls desire, and there has already come to them from their Lord guidance. Or is there for man whatever he wishes? Rather, to Allah belongs the Hereafter and the first [life]. And how many angels there are in the heavens whose intercession will not avail at all except [only] after Allah has permitted [it] to whom He wills and approves. Indeed, those who do not believe in the Hereafter name the angels female names,(53:19-27).

Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Hani on July 02, 2017, 07:16:21 PM
The discussion should not necessarily be regarding what's right/wrong. Point is, this topic is actually open to interpretation, no clear authentic Hadith or verse describe the exact condition of Isa. I'm okay with both positions but my personal one is the one listed above. Your mistake here brothers is that you're trying to settle it and reach an ultimate conclusion, that won't happen due to lack of evidence.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 02, 2017, 09:14:55 PM

This verse is regarding Idols not Isa(as) for the following reasons:

1. Even Angels and Jinn were worshiped, so as per your logic, they should be dead.

And [mention] the Day when He will gather them all and then say to the angels, "Did these [people] used to worship you?" They will say, "Exalted are You! You, [O Allah ], are our benefactor not them. Rather, they used to worship the jinn; most of them were believers in them.(34:40-41)

But they have attributed to Allah partners - the jinn, while He has created them - and have fabricated for Him sons and daughters. Exalted is He and high above what they describe.(6:100)

2. The next verse after the verse you quoted says that its about people who didn't believe in hereafter.
Your god is one God. But those who do not believe in the Hereafter - their hearts are disapproving, and they are arrogant.(16:22).

These weren't Christians as they believe in hereafter. These were polytheists of Makkah, who believed in idols such as Lat, Manaat, Uzza, etc.

Quran clarifies this issue in another chapter, that the idol worshipers of Makkah are the ones who don't believe in hereafter:

So have you considered al-Lat and al-'Uzza? And Manat, the third - the other one? Is the male for you and for Him the female? That, then, is an unjust division. They are not but [mere] names you have named them - you and your forefathers - for which Allah has sent down no authority. They follow not except assumption and what [their] souls desire, and there has already come to them from their Lord guidance. Or is there for man whatever he wishes? Rather, to Allah belongs the Hereafter and the first [life]. And how many angels there are in the heavens whose intercession will not avail at all except [only] after Allah has permitted [it] to whom He wills and approves. Indeed, those who do not believe in the Hereafter name the angels female names,(53:19-27).



The problem is that idols will not be resurrected. This Verse is obviously concerning those humans that are worshiped aside from Allah. The Dhameer for Yub'athoon is "Amwaat" i.e., the objects of worship apart from Allah. Those objects of worship are unaware of when they themselves will be resurrected. Imam Baidawi has explained this in his Tafsir:

وَمَا يَشْعُرُونَ أَيَّانَ يُبْعَثُون ولا يعلمون وقت بعثهم أو بعث عبدتهم
Nor do they know the time when they will be resurrected, or when their worshipers will be resurrected (Tafsir al-Baidawi v.3 p.223)

Idols will not be resurrected.

As for the next verse, there is no indication in it that فَالَّذِينَ لَا يُؤْمِنُونَ بِالْآخِرَةِ are identical to وَالَّذِينَ يَدْعُونَ مِن دُونِ اللَّـهِ overcourse they may overlap. For example, Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists worship dead people yet do not believe in Akhirah. It is not necessary to interpret that Allah is saying everyone who worships those beside Him are deniers of the Akhirah.

In fact you should know that majority of the idols that are worshiped are in fact images and icons that represent dead people. Even the Christians worship Jesus and represent him as an idol graven image. But in this passage (16:20-21) Allah is referring to their objects of worship that are originally human, because they are unaware when they will be resurrected, and inanimate idols are not resurrected.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 02, 2017, 09:40:40 PM
For those who believe that the Wafaah of Jesus was the Wafaah of sleep. As I pointed out earlier, in the Wafaah of sleep the soul is taken by Allah temporarily, while the body remains on the Earth. Some people give the example of As-Haab al-Kahf who were asleep for three centuries. They make an analogy that Jesus is likewise asleep for the past 2 millennia. However, the beloved Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم said:

رَأَيْتَكُمْ لَيْلَتَكُمْ هَذِهِ، فَإِنَّ رَأْسَ مِائَةِ سَنَةٍ مِنْهَا لاَ يَبْقَى مِمَّنْ هُوَ عَلَى ظَهْرِ الأَرْضِ أَحَدٌ
"Do you realize (the importance of) this night?" Nobody present on the surface of the earth tonight will be living after the completion of one hundred years from this night." (Bukhari)

According to the Holy Qur'an, Jesus said that a Messenger named Ahmad will come after his death:

وَمُبَشِّرًا بِرَسُولٍ يَأْتِي مِن بَعْدِي اسْمُهُ أَحْمَدُ
I give glad tidings of a Messenger to come after me, his name is Ahmad (Sura 61:6)

Now this was a prophecy about Prophet Muhammad, whose other name is Ahmad صلى الله عليه وسلم

Jesus said "Min Ba'di" which can only mean after my death. If Jesus was still alive when the Prophet Muhammad was born, he would not have said "after me".

أَمْ كُنتُمْ شُهَدَاءَ إِذْ حَضَرَ يَعْقُوبَ الْمَوْتُ إِذْ قَالَ لِبَنِيهِ مَا تَعْبُدُونَ مِن بَعْدِي
Or were you witnesses when death came to Jacob; when he said to his sons: "Who will you worship after me?" (2:133)

Jacob said who will you worship MIN BA'DI "after me" meaning "After my death"

Likewise the King Solomon prayed:

قَالَ رَبِّ اغْفِرْ لِي وَهَبْ لِي مُلْكًا لَّا يَنبَغِي لِأَحَدٍ مِّن بَعْدِي

He said: "My Lord forgive me and grant me a Kingdom such as shall not be given to anyone after my death" (38:25)

Solomon said no one should be granted such a kingdom MIN BA'DI "after me" meaning "after my death"
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: MuslimK on July 02, 2017, 09:44:24 PM
Respectfully disagree with you. Those Twelvers are not that sharp as you claimed if they pull out Jesus (as) ghayba's card to justify the ghayba of their 12th imam.

Nobody ridicule the ghayba for the sake of ghayba alone. What we find it perplex is that Twelvers claiming it is imperative for Allah (due to his Lutf) to send an infallible imam to guide human being at all times until qiyamah so that human being won't have any hujjah infront of Him (swt) later. But yet the number 12 is nowhere to be seen. What's the point of Allah sending a guide but yet you are deprieve of the so-called guidance. 

What makes it more ridiculous is that this guy has been missing for more than 1,100 years! And the gullible Twelvers will believe whatever justifications thrown to them no matter how absurd they might sound.

Jesus (as) went to ghayba but nobody claimed he (as) needs to guide people while in ghayba.

+1

Exactly!

When Twelvers give the example of Isa (as) and compare it with their 12th Imam then they really don't know their own beliefs.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: MuslimK on July 02, 2017, 09:58:39 PM

I am not an Ahmadi, and Ahmadis aren't the only ones who believe in that Jesus is deceased. Many Muslims of various persuasions believe in it. So it is not an issue that is exclusive to Ahmadiyya. And the reason we are discussing it is because it is relevant to the issue of Ghayba if you care to read my OP

Not an Ahmadi?You wrote this on your blog:

A common but baseless accusation against the Ahmadiyya, or “Qadianis” (followers of Hadrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad) is that they follow a completely different religion than Islam; believing in a different god, a different prophet, a different scripture, and different rites. Of course, nothing could be further from the truth; the Ahmadiyya are a sect of Islam who adhere to the Six Articles of Faith and practice the Five Pillars of Islam. But in an attempt to whip up a frenzy among the mobs of ignorant and illiterate Muslims and to poison their minds against their co-religionists, the Mulla asserts that the “Qadianis” believe that Mirza is god and are thus polytheists and heretics of the worst kind. http://islamsalvationfromhell.blogspot.co.uk/2017/02/deobandi-ashraf-thanwi-no-difference.html
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Hani on July 02, 2017, 11:53:00 PM
That sounds like something an Ahmadi would write.
Shia usually bring up Khadir and Ilyas before ever mentioning Isa.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Hadrami on July 03, 2017, 12:06:58 AM
That sounds like something an Ahmadi would write.
Shia usually bring up Khadir and Ilyas before ever mentioning Isa.

😂😂 wake up Hani, a quick read on his site then you should be able to tell that he is a qadiyani.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 03, 2017, 01:07:59 AM
Not an Ahmadi?You wrote this on your blog:

A common but baseless accusation against the Ahmadiyya, or “Qadianis” (followers of Hadrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad) is that they follow a completely different religion than Islam; believing in a different god, a different prophet, a different scripture, and different rites. Of course, nothing could be further from the truth; the Ahmadiyya are a sect of Islam who adhere to the Six Articles of Faith and practice the Five Pillars of Islam. But in an attempt to whip up a frenzy among the mobs of ignorant and illiterate Muslims and to poison their minds against their co-religionists, the Mulla asserts that the “Qadianis” believe that Mirza is god and are thus polytheists and heretics of the worst kind. http://islamsalvationfromhell.blogspot.co.uk/2017/02/deobandi-ashraf-thanwi-no-difference.html

I'm not an Ahmadi, but I disagree with them being declared as non-Muslims. As i wrote in this quote, they are our fellow co-religionists.

That sounds like something an Ahmadi would write.
Shia usually bring up Khadir and Ilyas before ever mentioning Isa.

Very few Muslims believe that Khidr and Ilias عليهما السلام are alive. And when it comes to Khidr, they say that he was met by such and such shaykh as if he is walking around the Earth unconcealed, so I question if that would qualify as a Ghayba. In any event, vast majority of Sunnis, especially Salafis, only believe in the Ghayba of Jesus so I disagree with you that a Shi'ite would first bring up Khidr and Ilias before mentioning Isa عليهم السلام
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Hani on July 03, 2017, 02:29:20 AM
That sounds like something an Ahmadi would write.
Shia usually bring up Khadir and Ilyas before ever mentioning Isa.

😂😂 wake up Hani, a quick read on his site then you should be able to tell that he is a qadiyani.

May not be, it could be he's an ex Qadiyani or simply influenced by them. I haven't opened his website yet, InshaAllah when time permits.

I add,  the book I translated on continuation of prophethood has large section and quotations from Ghulam's books.

No need to accuse people, just discuss his ideas and present evidence.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Hadrami on July 03, 2017, 04:14:55 AM
No need to accuse people, just discuss his ideas and present evidence.

well this forum is shia sunni forum, any other topic should be discouraged or kept to minimum. He will end up create lots of thread and it will distract the main purpose of why this forum is setup in the first place. If he want to start sunni vs qadiyani/qadiyani influenced discussion theres other forum.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 03, 2017, 04:26:38 AM
No need to accuse people, just discuss his ideas and present evidence.

well this forum is shia sunni forum, any other topic should be discouraged or kept to minimum. He will end up create lots of thread and it will distract the main purpose of why this forum is setup in the first place. If he want to start sunni vs qadiyani/qadiyani influenced discussion theres other forum.

Actually I never initiated any "Qadiyani" or "Qadiyani influenced" discussion. Other users are responsible for directly asking me about Ghulam Ahmad Qadiyani and thus swerving away from the topic. Every discussion that I have initiated is concerning Shi'ism and Shi'ite doctrines, such as Ghayba and Imamah
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 03, 2017, 04:40:19 AM
Now for those who imagine that I started this topic on Ghayba of Jesus to discuss about "Qadiyanism" instead of Shi'ism; in fact, as I made quite clear, this discussion revolves around the Shi'ite concept of Ghayba. I said that the Shi'ites defend their irrational belief in the Ghayba of their 12th Imam by citing the Ghayba of Jesus. Those who are not convinced of this should now look at this article from Shiapen.com

http://www.shiapen.com/comprehensive/mahdi/and-ghaibah-of-isa-similarities.html

which is titled: "Chapter Eleven – The similarities between the Jews mocking the Ghaibah of Isa (as) and the Nawasib mocking the Ghaibah of Mahdi (as)"

Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Hadrami on July 03, 2017, 04:42:32 AM
Now for those who imagine that I started this topic on Ghayba of Jesus to discuss about "Qadiyanism" instead of Shi'ism; in fact, as I made quite clear, this discussion revolves around the Shi'ite concept of Ghayba.

and yet you titled it "challenge to sunnis" buddy 😂😂
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 03, 2017, 04:50:30 AM
Now for those who imagine that I started this topic on Ghayba of Jesus to discuss about "Qadiyanism" instead of Shi'ism; in fact, as I made quite clear, this discussion revolves around the Shi'ite concept of Ghayba.

and yet you titled it "challenge to sunnis" buddy 😂😂

That's the point. Sunnis need to be challenged to re-evaluate their belief in the ghayba of Jesus because that is the doctrine which opens the door for the ghayba of the 12th Imam.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Hadrami on July 03, 2017, 04:54:43 AM
Now for those who imagine that I started this topic on Ghayba of Jesus to discuss about "Qadiyanism" instead of Shi'ism; in fact, as I made quite clear, this discussion revolves around the Shi'ite concept of Ghayba.

and yet you titled it "challenge to sunnis" buddy 😂😂

That's the point. Sunnis need to be challenged to re-evaluate their belief in the ghayba of Jesus because that is the doctrine which opens the door for the ghayba of the 12th Imam.

Dont get me wrong, you can debate shia, because this is the purpose of this forum, but if you want to debate sunni using your qadiyani influenced belief, find another forum. Im sure there is qadiyani vs sunni forum out there. If a christian user comes here to do islam vs christian debate, i'll sayvthe same thing. This is not the forum.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 03, 2017, 04:59:51 AM
My conviction that Jesus of Nazareth is dead is not a "Qadiani influenced belief". This an ancient belief, and there were many great Imams and scholars who believed in the death of Jesus before Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani came along and announced the same thing in the last decade of the 19th century. On this forum, Hani is one of the prominent people who likewise believes that Jesus is deceased based on his research and understanding of the Qur'an al-karim
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Hadrami on July 03, 2017, 07:47:47 AM
My conviction that Jesus of Nazareth is dead is not a "Qadiani influenced belief". This an ancient belief, and there were many great Imams and scholars who believed in the death of Jesus before Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani came along and announced the same thing in the last decade of the 19th century. On this forum, Hani is one of the prominent people who likewise believes that Jesus is deceased based on his research and understanding of the Qur'an al-karim

you dont get my point do you? Doesnt matter what hani or you belief about Isa AS. This is a sunni vs shia forum, not sunni vs sunni or vs christian etc. There are forum for those type of discussion
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 03, 2017, 08:07:41 AM

you dont get my point do you? Doesnt matter what hani or you belief about Isa AS. This is a sunni vs shia forum, not sunni vs sunni or vs christian etc. There are forum for those type of discussion

Sir even though it is my intention to focus on discussing Twelver Shi'ism and related issues, I must point out the the four rules (http://forum.twelvershia.net/forum-rules/forum-rules-and-regulations/) for this forum do not restrict to any specific type of religious discussion. As far as I can discern, this forum is indeed dedicated to discussing Twelver Shi'ism, but there is no disclaimer that it is from specifically a Sunni point of view. In any event, I have always been wary of people who want to restrict the scope of any discussion due to their own intellectual disability.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Hadrami on July 03, 2017, 11:01:53 AM
In any event, I have always been wary of people who want to restrict the scope of any discussion due to their own intellectual disability.[/size][/font]

ouuch 😂 here you are with a qadiyani imamah belief which is a 99% shia imamah.

Tell me my clever friend, who was the imam or good messiah or whatever you want to call that divinely appointed person which teach, guide Prophet shallallahu alayhi wasallam? I'll pretend now that i ask a shia since your belief about imamah is a hacked version of shia imamah. Dont be an intellectual disabled person by not answering that simple question OK?
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 03, 2017, 11:17:13 AM


ouuch 😂 here you are with a qadiyani imamah belief which is a 99% shia imamah.

Tell me my clever friend, who was the imam or good messiah or whatever you want to call that divinely appointed person which teach, guide Prophet shallallahu alayhi wasallam? I'll pretend now that i ask a shia since your belief about imamah is a hacked version of shia imamah. Dont be an intellectual disabled person by not answering that simple question OK?

Your "simple question" has so many grammatical mistakes I honestly don't even know what you are asking. Please rephrase it.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Hadrami on July 03, 2017, 01:06:59 PM


ouuch 😂 here you are with a qadiyani imamah belief which is a 99% shia imamah.

Tell me my clever friend, who was the imam or good messiah or whatever you want to call that divinely appointed person which teach, guide Prophet shallallahu alayhi wasallam? I'll pretend now that i ask a shia since your belief about imamah is a hacked version of shia imamah. Dont be an intellectual disabled person by not answering that simple question OK?

Your "simple question" has so many grammatical mistakes I honestly don't even know what you are asking. Please rephrase it.

The usual grammar diversion :D I quote the question again, "Tell me my clever friend, who was the imam or good messiah or whatever you want to call that divinely appointed person WHO TAUGHT, GUIDED Prophet shallallahu alayhi wasallam?"

Hopefully an intellectual disabled person can understand that. Good grammar enough?
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 03, 2017, 01:14:09 PM


The usual grammar diversion :D I quote the question again, "Tell me my clever friend, who was the imam or good messiah or whatever you want to call that divinely appointed person WHO TAUGHT, GUIDED Prophet shallallahu alayhi wasallam?"

Hopefully an intellectual disabled person can understand that. Good grammar enough?

Your question still doesn't make sense. I have to assume English is your second language. I advise you to work on that grammar.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Abu Muhammad on July 03, 2017, 02:08:10 PM
Now for those who imagine that I started this topic on Ghayba of Jesus to discuss about "Qadiyanism" instead of Shi'ism; in fact, as I made quite clear, this discussion revolves around the Shi'ite concept of Ghayba.

and yet you titled it "challenge to sunnis" buddy 😂😂

That's the point. Sunnis need to be challenged to re-evaluate their belief in the ghayba of Jesus because that is the doctrine which opens the door for the ghayba of the 12th Imam.

Do you think that by disputing the ghayba of Jesus (as) will close the door for the ghayba of the 12th imam either? I don't think so.

There will always be 2 thoughts on this from Sunni side. Jumhur view of ghayba Jesus (as) and minority view of dead Jesus (as).  Whenever we argue with Twelvers on dead Jesus, they will always come back and say the prevalent believe among Sunni is Jesus (as) went to ghayba and not dead. They will accuse us of pick-and-choose whatever view that suit us.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Hadrami on July 03, 2017, 02:15:15 PM


The usual grammar diversion :D I quote the question again, "Tell me my clever friend, who was the imam or good messiah or whatever you want to call that divinely appointed person WHO TAUGHT, GUIDED Prophet shallallahu alayhi wasallam?"

Hopefully an intellectual disabled person can understand that. Good grammar enough?

Your question still doesn't make sense. I have to assume English is your second language. I advise you to work on that grammar.

haha as usual, when an intellectual disabled qadiyani or shia or whatever deviant dimwit cant answer a simple question, theres always a diversion tactic to flee the question 😂😂
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: zaid_ibn_ali on July 03, 2017, 04:07:25 PM


The usual grammar diversion :D I quote the question again, "Tell me my clever friend, who was the imam or good messiah or whatever you want to call that divinely appointed person WHO TAUGHT, GUIDED Prophet shallallahu alayhi wasallam?"

Hopefully an intellectual disabled person can understand that. Good grammar enough?

Your question still doesn't make sense. I have to assume English is your second language. I advise you to work on that grammar.

You seem quite intelligent & articulate. I just don't get why out of all the personalities that existed in history, you say mirza ghulam was a messiah. What did he & his followers contribute to get this accolade?
Is the current head of the ahmadiyya jamaat someone I can or can't live without following?
What does he offer that I can't get from mainstream muslims?
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Noor-us-Sunnah on July 03, 2017, 06:17:52 PM
For those who believe that the Wafaah of Jesus was the Wafaah of sleep. As I pointed out earlier, in the Wafaah of sleep the soul is taken by Allah temporarily, while the body remains on the Earth. Some people give the example of As-Haab al-Kahf who were asleep for three centuries. They make an analogy that Jesus is likewise asleep for the past 2 millennia. However, the beloved Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم said:

رَأَيْتَكُمْ لَيْلَتَكُمْ هَذِهِ، فَإِنَّ رَأْسَ مِائَةِ سَنَةٍ مِنْهَا لاَ يَبْقَى مِمَّنْ هُوَ عَلَى ظَهْرِ الأَرْضِ أَحَدٌ
"Do you realize (the importance of) this night?" Nobody present on the surface of the earth tonight will be living after the completion of one hundred years from this night." (Bukhari).
I won't address the arguments already refuted in the links I gave in previous posts. As for the hadeeth from Bukhari, then we don't believe Isa(as) is on earth. We believe he is in Heaven/Sky.

Ibn Athiya (died in 542 From Hijraa explained in his tafseer “Al Muharrar Al Wajiz”

أجمعت الأمة على ما تضمنه الحديث المتواتر من أن عيسى في السماء حي، وأنه سينزل في آخر الزمان فيقتل الخنزير ويكسر الصليب ويقتل الدجال ويفيض العدل وتظهر به الملة – ملة محمد صلى الله عليه وسلم – ويحج البيت …

All muslim agree to have faith upon the content of hadith mutawatir (from plenty of valid chain of narrations) that Prophet Isa is still alive in heaven/Sky. He will descend at end of time, kill the hogs, break the cross, kill Dajjal, impose justice, and the religion of Muhammad will win over it’s enemies with his lead, and he also perform hajj…” (Al-Muharrar Al-Wajiz, 3:143).

قال ابن كثير رحمه الله في " تفسير ابن كثير " ( 2 / 47 ) : " فإن المسيح عليه السلام لمَّا رفعه الله إلى السماء : تَفَرَّقت أصحابه شيَعًا بعده
Ibn Katheer (may Allah have mercy on him) said in Tafseer Ibn Katheer (2/47): When Allah took the Messiah (peace be upon him) up to heaven/sky, his followers split into sects after he was gone.

So, again the evidence you used turned out to be invalid, because the hadeeth talks about people of earth not Sky/Heaven.

Quote
According to the Holy Qur'an, Jesus said that a Messenger named Ahmad will come after his death:

وَمُبَشِّرًا بِرَسُولٍ يَأْتِي مِن بَعْدِي اسْمُهُ أَحْمَدُ
I give glad tidings of a Messenger to come after me, his name is Ahmad (Sura 61:6)

Now this was a prophecy about Prophet Muhammad, whose other name is Ahmad صلى الله عليه وسلم

Jesus said "Min Ba'di" which can only mean after my death. If Jesus was still alive when the Prophet Muhammad was born, he would not have said "after me".

أَمْ كُنتُمْ شُهَدَاءَ إِذْ حَضَرَ يَعْقُوبَ الْمَوْتُ إِذْ قَالَ لِبَنِيهِ مَا تَعْبُدُونَ مِن بَعْدِي
Or were you witnesses when death came to Jacob; when he said to his sons: "Who will you worship after me?" (2:133)

Jacob said who will you worship MIN BA'DI "after me" meaning "After my death"

Likewise the King Solomon prayed:

قَالَ رَبِّ اغْفِرْ لِي وَهَبْ لِي مُلْكًا لَّا يَنبَغِي لِأَحَدٍ مِّن بَعْدِي

He said: "My Lord forgive me and grant me a Kingdom such as shall not be given to anyone after my death" (38:25)

Solomon said no one should be granted such a kingdom MIN BA'DI "after me" meaning "after my death"[/size]
Again your argument is weak and irrational. You say it ONLY means after his death, but the correct answer is that, it can ALSO mean after my departure.

Like how Ibn Katheer used the word Ba'adah for Isa(as).

" فإن المسيح عليه السلام لمَّا رفعه الله إلى السماء : تَفَرَّقت أصحابه شيَعًا بعده
Ibn Katheer (may Allah have mercy on him) said in Tafseer Ibn Katheer (2/47): When Allah took the Messiah (peace be upon him) up to heaven/sky, his followers split into sects after he was gone.

Also take a note that, Min Ba'di doesn't necessarily apply the condition of death. For example Prophet(Saws) said:

النَّبِيَّ صلى الله عليه وسلم قَالَ لِعَلِيٍّ ‏ "‏ أَنْتَ مِنِّي بِمَنْزِلَةِ هَارُونَ مِنْ مُوسَى إِلاَّ أَنَّهُ لاَ نَبِيَّ بَعْدِي ‏"‏
Narrated Jabir bin 'Abdullah: that the Prophet (ﷺ) said to 'Ali: "You are to me in the position that Harun was to Musa, except that there is no Prophet after me." [Jam'i al-Tirmidhi. Book 49, Hadith 4095; Sahih]

Prophet(saws) compared Ali(ra) to Haroon(as) who was Prophet during time of Musa(as), that is why Prophet(saws) said that there will be no Prophet after him, be it in his lifetime or death. Haroon(as) died during the lifetime of Musa(as), but when Prophet Muhammad(saws) compared him to Ali(ra), he had to end any possibility of doubt regarding finality of Prophethood, be it in his life time or after his death, hence he used the words "AFTER ME" which aren't restricted of death alone.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Noor-us-Sunnah on July 03, 2017, 07:21:18 PM

This verse is regarding Idols not Isa(as) for the following reasons:

1. Even Angels and Jinn were worshiped, so as per your logic, they should be dead.

And [mention] the Day when He will gather them all and then say to the angels, "Did these [people] used to worship you?" They will say, "Exalted are You! You, [O Allah ], are our benefactor not them. Rather, they used to worship the jinn; most of them were believers in them.(34:40-41)

But they have attributed to Allah partners - the jinn, while He has created them - and have fabricated for Him sons and daughters. Exalted is He and high above what they describe.(6:100)

2. The next verse after the verse you quoted says that its about people who didn't believe in hereafter.
Your god is one God. But those who do not believe in the Hereafter - their hearts are disapproving, and they are arrogant.(16:22).

These weren't Christians as they believe in hereafter. These were polytheists of Makkah, who believed in idols such as Lat, Manaat, Uzza, etc.

Quran clarifies this issue in another chapter, that the idol worshipers of Makkah are the ones who don't believe in hereafter:

So have you considered al-Lat and al-'Uzza? And Manat, the third - the other one? Is the male for you and for Him the female? That, then, is an unjust division. They are not but [mere] names you have named them - you and your forefathers - for which Allah has sent down no authority. They follow not except assumption and what [their] souls desire, and there has already come to them from their Lord guidance. Or is there for man whatever he wishes? Rather, to Allah belongs the Hereafter and the first [life]. And how many angels there are in the heavens whose intercession will not avail at all except [only] after Allah has permitted [it] to whom He wills and approves. Indeed, those who do not believe in the Hereafter name the angels female names,(53:19-27).



The problem is that idols will not be resurrected. This Verse is obviously concerning those humans that are worshiped aside from Allah. The Dhameer for Yub'athoon is "Amwaat" i.e., the objects of worship apart from Allah. Those objects of worship are unaware of when they themselves will be resurrected. Imam Baidawi has explained this in his Tafsir:

وَمَا يَشْعُرُونَ أَيَّانَ يُبْعَثُون ولا يعلمون وقت بعثهم أو بعث عبدتهم
Nor do they know the time when they will be resurrected, or when their worshipers will be resurrected (Tafsir al-Baidawi v.3 p.223)

Idols will not be resurrected.

Brother, try to be objective. You lost the essence of my response, and you indulged in the point which was of lesser importance, even though I can quote Tafaseer which says they are idols, but for arguments sake lets skip this.

You said the verse was referring to people who are worshipped alongside Allah NOT idols. But you missed the point I made that there were living things which were worshipped by people, such as Jinn and Angels. So obviously, these get excluded from that verse even though they are worsipped because they are alive. Likewise we say Isa(as) also is excluded from that verse because he is alive, even though he is worshipped. The verse isn't specifically addressing the Christians.


Quote
In fact you should know that majority of the idols that are worshiped are in fact images and icons that represent dead people. Even the Christians worship Jesus and represent him as an idol graven image. But in this passage (16:20-21) Allah is referring to their objects of worship that are originally human, because they are unaware when they will be resurrected, and inanimate idols are not resurrected.

And yes I agree with you on the point that idols that were worshiped by people, represented pious people.

Narrated Ibn `Abbas: All the idols which were worshiped by the people of Noah were worshiped by the Arabs later on. As for the idol Wadd, it was worshiped by the tribe of Kalb at Daumat-al-Jandal; Suwa` was the idol of (the tribe of) Hudhail; Yaghouth was worshiped by (the tribe of) Murad and then by Bani Ghutaif at Al-Jurf near Saba; Ya`uq was the idol of Hamdan, and Nasr was the idol of Himyar, the branch of Dhi-al-Kala`. The names (of the idols) formerly belonged to some PIOUS MEN of the people of Noah, and when they died Satan inspired their people to (prepare and place idols at the places where they used to sit, and to call those idols by their names. The people did so, but the idols were not worshiped till those people (who initiated them) had died and the origin of the idols had become obscure, whereupon people began worshiping them. {Sahih al-Bukhari , volume 6, book 60, Hadith 442}.

Quote
As for the next verse, there is no indication in it that فَالَّذِينَ لَا يُؤْمِنُونَ بِالْآخِرَةِ are identical to وَالَّذِينَ يَدْعُونَ مِن دُونِ اللَّـهِ overcourse they may overlap. For example, Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists worship dead people yet do not believe in Akhirah. It is not necessary to interpret that Allah is saying everyone who worships those beside Him are deniers of the Akhirah.
You seem to have misunderstood my argument. May Allah grant you proper understanding. I never claimed that everyone who worships those beside Allah deny Akhirah, not at all. Nor does the verse which I quoted as supportive evidence for my explanation:{Indeed, those who do not believe in the Hereafter name the angels female names,(53:27)}, this verse doesn't mean that all those who do not believe in the Hereafter, name the angels female names, rather the verse is addressing a specific people. Likewise, What I claimed was that those addressed in that verse didn't believe in Akhirah(i.e polytheists of Makkah) however the Christians are known to believe in Hereafter, hence they are not the ones who were mentioned in this verse nor the one prior to it.

Here is the proof that Christians even though in general they worship Isa(as) but in general they even believe in Hereafter, which again proves that they were not the ones mentioned in the verse you used.

We read in the following hadeeth that Christians during the lifetime of Prophet(Saws) believed in hereafter.
حَدَّثَنَا سُوَيْدُ بْنُ سَعِيدٍ، حَدَّثَنَا يَحْيَى بْنُ سُلَيْمٍ، عَنْ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ بْنِ عُثْمَانَ بْنِ خُثَيْمٍ، عَنْ أَبِي الزُّبَيْرِ، عَنْ جَابِرٍ، قَالَ لَمَّا رَجَعَتْ إِلَى رَسُولِ اللَّهِ ـ صلى الله عليه وسلم ـ مُهَاجِرَةُ الْبَحْرِ قَالَ ‏"‏ أَلاَ تُحَدِّثُونِي بِأَعَاجِيبِ مَا رَأَيْتُمْ بِأَرْضِ الْحَبَشَةِ ‏"‏ ‏.‏ قَالَ فِتْيَةٌ مِنْهُمْ بَلَى يَا رَسُولَ اللَّهِ بَيْنَا نَحْنُ جُلُوسٌ مَرَّتْ بِنَا عَجُوزٌ مِنْ عَجَائِزِ رَهَابِينِهِمْ تَحْمِلُ عَلَى رَأْسِهَا قُلَّةً مِنْ مَاءٍ فَمَرَّتْ بِفَتًى مِنْهُمْ فَجَعَلَ إِحْدَى يَدَيْهِ بَيْنَ كَتِفَيْهَا ثُمَّ دَفَعَهَا فَخَرَّتْ عَلَى رُكْبَتَيْهَا فَانْكَسَرَتْ قُلَّتُهَا فَلَمَّا ارْتَفَعَتِ الْتَفَتَتْ إِلَيْهِ فَقَالَتْ سَوْفَ تَعْلَمُ يَا غُدَرُ إِذَا وَضَعَ اللَّهُ الْكُرْسِيَّ وَجَمَعَ الأَوَّلِينَ وَالآخِرِينَ وَتَكَلَّمَتِ الأَيْدِي وَالأَرْجُلُ بِمَا كَانُوا يَكْسِبُونَ فَسَوْفَ تَعْلَمُ كَيْفَ أَمْرِي وَأَمْرُكَ عِنْدَهُ غَدًا ‏.‏ قَالَ يَقُولُ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ ـ صلى الله عليه وسلم ـ ‏"‏ صَدَقَتْ صَدَقَتْ كَيْفَ يُقَدِّسُ اللَّهُ أُمَّةً لاَ يُؤْخَذُ لِضَعِيفِهِمْ مِنْ شَدِيدِهِمْ ‏"
It was narrated that Jabir said: “When the emigrants who had crossed the sea came back to the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ), he said: ‘Why don’t you tell me of the strange things that you saw in the land of Abyssinia?’ Some young men among them said: ‘Yes, O Messenger of Allah. While we were sitting, one of their elderly nuns came past, carrying a vessel of water on her head. She passed by some of their youth, one of whom placed his hand between her shoulders and pushed her. She fell on her knees and her vessel broke. When she stood up, she turned to him and said: “You will come to know, O traitor, that when Allah sets up the Footstool and gathers the first and the last, and hands and feet speak of what they used to earn, you will come to know your case and my case in His presence soon.’” The Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) said: ‘She spoke the truth, she spoke the truth. How can Allah purify any people (of sin) when they do not support their weak from their strong?’” [Sunan Ibn Majah 4010; Grading:Hasan]

We read in Bible about the Day of Judgement as follows:
For we must all stand before Christ to be judged. We will each receive whatever we deserve for the good or evil we have done in this earthly body. [Corinthians 5:10]
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 03, 2017, 11:30:26 PM
You seem quite intelligent & articulate. I just don't get why out of all the personalities that existed in history, you say mirza ghulam was a messiah. What did he & his followers contribute to get this accolade?
Is the current head of the ahmadiyya jamaat someone I can or can't live without following?
What does he offer that I can't get from mainstream muslims?

Firstly I am praising the work of Ghulam Ahmad Qadiyani specifically in helping to rejuvenate the spirit of Islam at a time when Muslims were at their darkest period. He was the one who ushered in the Islamic revival that lasted until the late 20th century. As for the Ahmadiyya Jamaat at present, I am not praising them or telling anyone to join them, as I myself am not a part of that Jamaat. Yes, maybe at one point in history they were doing great services to Islam in repelling the onslaught of Christian missionaries, writing books in English and other languages disseminating information about Islam while the rest of the Muslim sects were in hibernation mode. But now things have changed and many other sects and movements have risen while the Ahmadiyya Jamaat seems to have lost its original dynamism. So make no mistake, I am not telling anyone to believe in Ghulam Ahmad Qadiyani or join the Ahmadiyya Jamaat. I only consider him a great reformer and offered a beautiful service to Islam in his time when it was greatly needed.

In fact you will see that now other Muslim sects and movements are copying his ideas which he was criticised for in his own time, i.e., that Muslims should not be violent and instead spread Islam through peaceful means, that they should be loyal to the governments they live under, that they should give preference to the study of the Holy Qur'an and not prefer a Hadith over the verdict of the Holy Qur'an, etc. When Ghulam Ahmad was preaching these ideas, in his time the Ulama were severely condemning him as a "British agent", but now that Islam is under so much scrutiny and criticised as being a violent religion with terrorism and all that, the spiritual progeny of those very Ulama are coming out giving fatawa against terrorism, suicide bombing, rebelling against the government, etc. But who was the original person who came out with these ideas when they weren't popular? Give credit to where credit is due.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 03, 2017, 11:47:17 PM
I won't address the arguments already refuted in the links I gave in previous posts. As for the hadeeth from Bukhari, then we don't believe Isa(as) is on earth. We believe he is in Heaven/Sky.

Ibn Athiya (died in 542 From Hijraa explained in his tafseer “Al Muharrar Al Wajiz”

أجمعت الأمة على ما تضمنه الحديث المتواتر من أن عيسى في السماء حي، وأنه سينزل في آخر الزمان فيقتل الخنزير ويكسر الصليب ويقتل الدجال ويفيض العدل وتظهر به الملة – ملة محمد صلى الله عليه وسلم – ويحج البيت …

All muslim agree to have faith upon the content of hadith mutawatir (from plenty of valid chain of narrations) that Prophet Isa is still alive in heaven/Sky. He will descend at end of time, kill the hogs, break the cross, kill Dajjal, impose justice, and the religion of Muhammad will win over it’s enemies with his lead, and he also perform hajj…” (Al-Muharrar Al-Wajiz, 3:143).

There isn't a single Hadith from the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم where he says that Allah raised Jesus up into the sky, and that Jesus is presently alive in the sky with his flesh and blood body. Not a single Hadith. At most you may have some narrations from Companions or Imams, but not a single Marfoo Hadith that Jesus was raised alive in his body to Heaven.

Yes, there are Ahadith about the Nuzul (descent) of Jesus. Firstly, reports about Nuzul of Jesus do not necessarily prove that at present he is living in the sky. Secondly, Nuzul does not always mean coming down from the sky. It also carries the significance of "to facilitate, to grant, to provide":

وَ اَنۡزَلَ لَکُمۡ مِّنَ الۡاَنۡعَامِ ثَمٰنِیَۃَ اَزۡوَاجٍ
And He sent down for you eight pairs of cattle (pair of sheep, goats, camels, and oxen). (39:6)

Even if for the sake of argument we say that there are Ahadith from which we can infer that Jesus will descend from the clouds before Judgment Day, that is logically not a proof that he was (a) raised up into the sky in his physical body and (b) that he is presently alive in the sky with his physical body
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 04, 2017, 01:27:39 AM

Brother, try to be objective. You lost the essence of my response, and you indulged in the point which was of lesser importance, even though I can quote Tafaseer which says they are idols, but for arguments sake lets skip this.

You said the verse was referring to people who are worshipped alongside Allah NOT idols. But you missed the point I made that there were living things which were worshipped by people, such as Jinn and Angels. So obviously, these get excluded from that verse even though they are worsipped because they are alive. Likewise we say Isa(as) also is excluded from that verse because he is alive, even though he is worshipped. The verse isn't specifically addressing the Christians.

Keep in mind that the Verse (16:20) says "and those whom they invoke besides Allah", it is general and cannot be restricted to Asnaam only. If you read Tafsir Ruh al Maani (v.14 p.120) of Allama Alusi, he admits that Jesus is included within "Amwaat".

أموات عموم المجاز ليشمل ما كان له حياة ثم مات كعزير أو سيموت كعيسى والملائكة عليهم الصلاة والسلام

(https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-FGHuQA7b2_o/WVrBYP-4XBI/AAAAAAAACcs/GMLuNMv1_HkPd8by9LXbTXDIVNXNQSaXQCLcBGAs/s1600/1.png)
(https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-jtGpliiCi70/WVrBccUHR_I/AAAAAAAACcw/bBFfoC5WLMk49c-B2EJu51oIXJjPCLRjQCLcBGAs/s1600/Amwat%2Bmetaphorically%2Bincluding%2Bthose%2Balive%2Bthen%2Bdie%2Blike%2BJesus%2Band%2BAngels%2B%2528Ruh%2Bal%2BMaani%2Bv.14%2Bp.120%2529.png)

Now Allama Alusi has said that Jesus and the Angels are metaphorically included in "Amwaat" because death will come to them eventually. However, that is based on his assumption that Jesus is alive, otherwise there is not explicit indication that "Amwaat" means anything other than those that are already dead.

As for your point about the Jinn and Angels, then yes, if there are any Jinn that are worshiped besides Allah then they too are dead. Since we dont know precisely about the world and reality of Jinn, it is futile to speculate which Jinn are worshiped and whether they are still alive or dead. The Verse (16:21) says that those dead objects of worship are unaware of when they shall be raised up, meaning resurrected from their graves. As far as I know, Angels will not be raised up from graves, so this Verse is not concerning them primarily, just like it is not concerning idols since idols are neither buried in graves nor will they be resurrected on Judgment Day. And are the deceased Jinnaat buried in graves? We don't know best not to speculate. But we know for sure that the human objects of worship, including Jesus, are indeed buried in graves and will be resurrected on Judgment Day. Hence, it has to be Jesus in the first place who is meant by "and those whom they invoke besides Allah".



Quote
You seem to have misunderstood my argument. May Allah grant you proper understanding. I never claimed that everyone who worships those beside Allah deny Akhirah, not at all. Nor does the verse which I quoted as supportive evidence for my explanation:{Indeed, those who do not believe in the Hereafter name the angels female names,(53:27)}, this verse doesn't mean that all those who do not believe in the Hereafter, name the angels female names, rather the verse is addressing a specific people. Likewise, What I claimed was that those addressed in that verse didn't believe in Akhirah(i.e polytheists of Makkah) however the Christians are known to believe in Hereafter, hence they are not the ones who were mentioned in this verse nor the one prior to it.

I understood your point perfectly. You are arguing that the polytheists who invoke those besides Allah mentioned in 16:20 are specifically those polytheists who deny the Akhirah. I answered you by saying that is a leap and speculation on your part. You are trying to tie 16:22 with 16:20 but that is a leap. It is never explicitly stated that those who invoke others besides Allah (16:20) are identical to the people who deny the Akhirah. I can give you so many examples from the Holy Quran where Allah is talking about one type of people in 1 Verse and then mentions a completely different people in the subsequent Verse, or even within the same Verse. Hence your argument is weak and based on speculation.

I don't know if you are influenced by the Salafi and Tawhidi fikr, but if you are, you should know that your own Mufassireen quote this passage (16:20-21) as a proof against the grave worshipers who worship deceased Awliya as a proof against them that they too are mushrikeen, not only those who worship Asnaam and awthaan. I can quote to you from many books on this point. Then if this premise is accepted that the passage is referring to human beings including Ambiya and Awliya that are invoked besides Allah, there is no possibility of denying that Jesus is not included.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 04, 2017, 02:46:09 AM
A few more implicit proofs from Qur'an al-Karim that sayyidina Masih عليه السلام is dead:

وَلَقَدْ أَرْسَلْنَا نُوحًا إِلَىٰ قَوْمِهِ فَلَبِثَ فِيهِمْ أَلْفَ سَنَةٍ إِلَّا خَمْسِينَ عَامًا
And We sent Noah to his people, so he remained among them 1000 years less 50 years (29:14)

The age of Noah was 950. Authentic Ahadith describe him as the eldest of the Prophets:

عَنْ أَنَسِ بْنِ مَالِكٍ ، قَالَ : " جَاءَ مَلَكُ الْمَوْتِ إِلَى نُوحٍ عَلَيْهِ السَّلامُ ، فَقَالَ : يَا أَطْوَلَ النَّبِيِّينَ عُمْرًا
Ibn Abi’d-Dunya narrated in az-Zuhd (no. 358) with his isnaad from Anas ibn Maalik (may Allah be pleased with him) that he said: The Angel of Death came to Nooh (peace be upon him) and said: O longest-lived of the Prophets

On Judgment Day, Adam, when asked to intercede, will say to the people:

عَلَيْكُمْ بِنُوحٍ فَإِنَّهُ أَوَّلُ الأَنْبِيَاءِ وَأَكْبَرُهُمْ
Go to Noah, for he is the first of the Prophets and the eldest of them (al-Bazar & al-Tawhid ibn Ibn Khuzayma)

But if Jesus was raised up to heaven, alive in his body, and has not yet died, he would be aged over 2,000 years. And who knows when he will descend back into this Earth. Whenever that happens, he will surely be much older than Noah, at least twice his age!

وَمَن نُّعَمِّرْهُ نُنَكِّسْهُ فِي الْخَلْقِ ۖ أَفَلَا يَعْقِلُونَ
And he whom We grant long life, We reverse him in creation [weakness after creation]. Will they not then understand? (36:68)

The Ahadith about the descent of Jesus that he will come, fight the Dajjal, break the cross, slay the swine, lead the Muslims for 40 years, etc., means he will have to be a man of strength. If someone who is over a 100 years old is reversed in strength to weakness, what about someone who is 2,000 + years old?!

Then Allah says that He is ordering mankind to live on the Earth:

قَالَ فِيهَا تَحْيَوْنَ وَفِيهَا تَمُوتُونَ وَمِنْهَا تُخْرَجُونَ
He said: "Therein shall you live, and therein shall you die, and from it you shall be brought out (resurrected)" (7:25)

But if Jesus, a human being and son of Adam, has been living in the sky for the past 2,000 years, it is a contravention of this Verse where Allah decrees that all mankind is meant to live in and die on the Earth (not the sky).
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Hani on July 04, 2017, 07:29:37 AM
Salam,

I'm happy with the way this conversation is going as people are using evidence and discussing ideas. Again, this won't be settled as so far all evidence can be interpreted in different ways so nobody should bother going out of their way to convince the other party.

Again, the Shia do not rely on `Isa's (as) life to prove their 12th Imam's Ghaybah, they first resort to Ilyas (as) & Khadir (as).

As far as these two prophets, no authentic narration is available. It is all fabrications and nonsense by storytellers. Still, some Sunni scholars throughout history believed it, some still do especially among Sufi circles. These will be quoted no matter what, we simply say they are wrong and they do not represent us, most importantly they lack evidence.

As far as `Isa (as), let's adopt the position of his life for the sake of the argument. First of all, his ascension and story have been mentioned in the Qur'an as opposed to the 12th Imam for whom there is no trace. To believe in something unbelievable we either need to witness it with our own eyes, have clear Qur'anic proof or an authentic prophetic narration.

Secondly, we can argue that `Isa's (as) life is unlike that of the 12th, he was raised to the heavens and had his soul preserved with God until he can be sent down to resume his worldly physical life like the rest of us then die at a normal age; 12th is still living on earth and is immune to death which is unbelievable as it breaks the habit and norms.

Don't also forget the people of the cave who slept for many years then woke up and resumed thier lives. Shia also use this story, denying will serve no purpose here will it?

Overall, just because a precedent is found within the Qur'an does not mean anyone can apply it to himself. Let's say someone comes today and claims he can speak to animals but we're supposed to believe him because there's a Qur'anic precedent? The entire argument is dumb.

The Shia are simply trying to illustrate that their belief in a person who lives for a long time is not foreign since there have been varous precedents. We can argue that `Isa (as) was a prophet, 12th isn't so prove that this applies to non-prophets. As for the sleepers we can argue that they were sleeping, 12th wasn't so prove that a person can be alive, walking and talking for thousands of years etc...

Proving that something is not foreign to Islam is different from proving that something is true or in accordance with Islam's established teachings or creed.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 04, 2017, 08:13:01 AM
Salam,

Again, the Shia do not rely on `Isa's (as) life to prove their 12th Imam's Ghaybah, they first resort to Ilyas (as) & Khadir (as).

وعليكم السلام ورحمة الله وبركاته ومغفرة

If you go back to my earlier reply (http://forum.twelvershia.net/imamah-ghaybah/challenge-to-sunnis-ghayba-of-ibn-mariam/msg16542/#msg16542) on this point, you'll see that I cited an article from Shiapen.com

http://www.shiapen.com/comprehensive/mahdi/and-ghaibah-of-isa-similarities.html

So the Shi'a do argue on the point of Ghayba by citing the occultation of Jesus, not Elias or Khidr. From my own experience in dialoguing with Shi'a, including some of their scholars, they always cite the occultation of Jesus as a precedent for their belief in the Ghayba. I have never heard or seen any of them refer to Prophet Elias or Khidr.

Quote
As far as these two prophets, no authentic narration is available. It is all fabrications and nonsense by storytellers. Still, some Sunni scholars throughout history believed it, some still do especially among Sufi circles. These will be quoted no matter what, we simply say they are wrong and they do not represent us, most importantly they lack evidence.

Mulla Ali Qari said that major and grand Ulama are in the category of the living: Elias and Khidr on the Earth, and Jesus and Idris in the Heavens http://islamsalvationfromhell.blogspot.ca/2015/05/hanafi-aqidah-khidr-iliyas-and-idris-as.html

Now you go on to say that:

Quote
As far as `Isa (as), let's adopt the position of his life for the sake of the argument. First of all, his ascension and story have been mentioned in the Qur'an as opposed to the 12th Imam for whom there is no trace.

But if you say the ascension of Jesus is mentioned in the Qur'an, so is the ascension of Idris (Sura 19:57). This was apparently the basis for why these certain "Sufi circles" believe that Idris is living in Heaven like Jesus. As for Elias, his ascension into Heaven is narrated in the Hebrew Bible. Some mufassireen said that Idris and Elias are the same person.

So if people believe that the physical ascension and life of Jesus in the Heavens has some sort of a basis in the Qur'an, then the same kind of evidence and arguments they employ can be said for Idris too. Anyways, I like to be consistent and believe that all of these Prophets have died and none of them are alive: "And Muhammad is not but a Messenger. All the Messenger before him passed away, if he too dies or is killed will you turn back on your heels? (Sura 3:144)

Quote
Secondly, we can argue that `Isa's (as) life is unlike that of the 12th, he was raised to the heavens and had his soul preserved with God until he can be sent down to resume his worldly physical life like the rest of us then die at a normal age; 12th is still living on earth and is immune to death which is unbelievable as it breaks the habit and norms.

Not to play devil's advocate, but I've heard from the mouths of the Shi'a that although their 12th Imam concealed himself in a cave in Samarra, it doesn't mean he is still there for the Ghaybat al Kubra. I've heard all kinds of bizarre things from them, something about the Bermuda Triangle, and one Shi'ite scholar I know personally said that the 12th Imam is alive in Heaven exactly like Jesus.

Quote
Don't also forget the people of the cave who slept for many years then woke up and resumed thier lives. Shia also use this story, denying will serve no purpose here will it?

The Ashab al Kahf story isn't an example of Ghayba. They did not become "invisible", in fact the Holy Qur'an says that if you were to see them you would become terrified (Sura 18:18). And not to go on a tangent, but its worth studying the story of Ashab al Kahf in depth, there does seem to be some indication to me that their sleeping for 300 years may have been misunderstood and taken too literally. The Qur'an does say that if you saw them you would think they were awake, even though they were sleeping, and it says that do you think they were something strange from Our Signs (rhetorical question). Remember, the Holy Qur'an never explicitly tells us exactly how many Ashab al Kahf there were. It could be this was an entire society that had withdrawn from society into remote caves and they were described as sleeping because they were living in isolation from the rest of the world and not aware of what was going no beyond their cave. I personally have always doubted that the Ashab al Kahf refer to the legend of the 7 sleepers of Ephesus, and think that the context and lesson from this story of Ashab al Kahf matches more with certain introversionist sects of Jews and Christians that withdrew in caves and remote areas, like the Essenes and the Qumran community.

So all I'm trying to say is that we have to re-evaluate some of our traditionalist beliefs, such as Jesus being alive in the sky, when there isn't any unambiguous Verse in the Qur'an, Qati' ath-Thaboot and Qati' ad-Dalalah, which can substantiate such a strange idea. If we insist on believing in something like this, we really don't have the credibility to talk against the Ghayba of the 12th imam.[/size][/font]
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Hani on July 04, 2017, 09:46:39 AM
You didn't comment on the last point of the post. That proving a precedent means absolutely nothing in terms of proving the beleif itself is legitimate or authentic.

If I tell you the Prophet saw said "Mangoes are healthy." And my precedent is that we were told honey is healthy in religious texts. Does this make the above attribution to the Prophet saw is legit and authentic?
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Noor-us-Sunnah on July 05, 2017, 06:15:35 PM
So the Shi'a do argue on the point of Ghayba by citing the occultation of Jesus, not Elias or Khidr. From my own experience in dialoguing with Shi'a, including some of their scholars, they always cite the occultation of Jesus as a precedent for their belief in the Ghayba. I have never heard or seen any of them refer to Prophet Elias or Khidr.
You are right. They do use it. Here is one of their hadeeth.

قال إن الله تبارك و تعالى أدار للقائم منا ثلاثة أدارها في ثلاثة من الرسل ع قدر مولده تقدير مولد موسى ع و قدر غيبته تقدير غيبة عيسى ع و قدر إبطاءه تقدير إبطاء نوح ع و جعل له من بعد ذلك عمر العبد الصالح أعني الخضر ع دليلا على عمره
He (Imaam Al-Saadiq (عليه السلام)) said: “That Allaah (تبارك و تعالى) has made three qualities in our Al-Qaa’im, which is three qualities from the Messengers (عليهم السلام). He foreordained his birth (like) he foreordained the birth of Moosa (عليه السلام). And he foreordained his ghaybah (occultation) like he foreordained the ghaybah of `Eesa (عليه السلام). And he foreordained the deceleration (in age) like he foreordained the deceleration (in age) of NooH (عليه السلام). And he made from after that the lifespan of our righteous servant (`abd al-SaaliH), namely Al-KhiDr (عليه السلام) proof upon his (Al-Qaa’im) lifespan. Al-Sadooq, Kamaal Al-Deen, vol. 2, ch. 33, pg. 352, hadeeth # 51]

This is my answer to this claim:

Let us see what has quran to say about occultation of jesus(as), Quran says: Never did I say to them aught except what You (Allah) did command me to say: Worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord. And I was a witness over them while I dwelt amongst them, but when You took me up, You were the Watcher over them, and You are a Witness to all things.(5:117)

This verse proves that Jesus(as) didn’t even knew what his followers did after him, since he said after his occultation that he wasn’t a witness over his people, which proves that he wasn’t a guide in the sense in which shias label people as guide(though Isa may be a guide from his teachings, same as Muhammad(saw)) , So when Jesus(as) didn’t remain a guide after his occultation then in no way could the hidden Imam of shias be a guide after his occultation.

And if any Shia agrees that their Imam isn't a guide just like Isa(as) wasn't after his ascend. Then their fundamental Aqeedah that, the earth cannot remain without an Hujjah from Allah(Imam) gets destroyed.

Quote
there does seem to be some indication to me that their sleeping for 300 years may have been misunderstood and taken too literally. The Qur'an does say that if you saw them you would think they were awake, even though they were sleeping, and it says that do you think they were something strange from Our Signs (rhetorical question). Remember, the Holy Qur'an never explicitly tells us exactly how many Ashab al Kahf there were. It could be this was an entire society that had withdrawn from society into remote caves and they were described as sleeping because they were living in isolation from the rest of the world and not aware of what was going no beyond their cave. I personally have always doubted that the Ashab al Kahf refer to the legend of the 7 sleepers of Ephesus, and think that the context and lesson from this story of Ashab al Kahf matches more with certain introversionist sects of Jews and Christians that withdrew in caves and remote areas, like the Essenes and the Qumran community.
[/font]
It was Indeed a literal sleep.

وَكَذَلِكَ بَعَثْنَاهُمْ لِيَتَسَاءلُوا بَيْنَهُمْ قَالَ قَائِلٌ مِّنْهُمْ كَمْ لَبِثْتُمْ قَالُوا لَبِثْنَا يَوْمًا أَوْ بَعْضَ يَوْمٍ قَالُوا رَبُّكُمْ أَعْلَمُ بِمَا لَبِثْتُمْ فَابْعَثُوا أَحَدَكُم بِوَرِقِكُمْ هَذِهِ إِلَى الْمَدِينَةِ
And thus did We rouse them that they might question each other. A speaker among them said: How long have you tarried? They said: We have tarried for a day or a part of a day. (Others) said: Your Lord knows best how long you have tarried. Now send one of you with this silver (coin) of yours to the city.....(Quran 18: 19).

This answer could only come from someone who slept literally.

May Allah grant you proper understanding and protect you from this corrupt views you have formed.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 05, 2017, 11:13:19 PM

This is my answer to this claim:

Let us see what has quran to say about occultation of jesus(as), Quran says: Never did I say to them aught except what You (Allah) did command me to say: Worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord. And I was a witness over them while I dwelt amongst them, but when You took me up, You were the Watcher over them, and You are a Witness to all things.(5:117)

This verse proves that Jesus(as) didn’t even knew what his followers did after him, since he said after his occultation that he wasn’t a witness over his people,

Now you have clearly interpreted this Ayah as meaning that Jesus will say to Allah on Judgment Day that I had no knowledge of what my followers did after my "departure" since you interpret فَلَمَّا تَوَفَّيْتَنِي to mean "When you took me away" instead of فلمّا تميتني "When you caused me to die". This is problematic for you since I assume you believe in the Nuzul of the Masih that he himself will descend back into this Earth from the sky. When he does so, he will obvious become acquainted and learn what his followers did in his absence. Judgment Day will proceed all of this, so how does it make sense that Jesus will tell Allah "I have no knowledge of what my people did after my departure", clearly he will acquire that knowledge when he returns.

Quote
It was Indeed a literal sleep.

وَكَذَلِكَ بَعَثْنَاهُمْ لِيَتَسَاءلُوا بَيْنَهُمْ قَالَ قَائِلٌ مِّنْهُمْ كَمْ لَبِثْتُمْ قَالُوا لَبِثْنَا يَوْمًا أَوْ بَعْضَ يَوْمٍ قَالُوا رَبُّكُمْ أَعْلَمُ بِمَا لَبِثْتُمْ فَابْعَثُوا أَحَدَكُم بِوَرِقِكُمْ هَذِهِ إِلَى الْمَدِينَةِ
And thus did We rouse them that they might question each other. A speaker among them said: How long have you tarried? They said: We have tarried for a day or a part of a day. (Others) said: Your Lord knows best how long you have tarried. Now send one of you with this silver (coin) of yours to the city.....(Quran 18: 19).

This answer could only come from someone who slept literally.

May Allah grant you proper understanding and protect you from this corrupt views you have formed.

Well this expression "a day or part of a day" is fascinating because as you know it is used elsewhere in the Qur'an al-Karim. Allah says that on Judgment Day the Mujrimeen will murmur among themselves:

يَتَخَافَتُونَ بَيْنَهُمْ إِن لَّبِثْتُمْ إِلَّا عَشْرًا ﴿١٠٣﴾ نَّحْنُ أَعْلَمُ بِمَا يَقُولُونَ إِذْ يَقُولُ أَمْثَلُهُمْ طَرِيقَةً إِن لَّبِثْتُمْ إِلَّا يَوْمًا
In whispers will they speak to each other (saying): "You stayed not longer than ten (days)." (103) We know very well what they will say, when the best among them in knowledge and wisdom will say: "You stayed no longer than a day!" [Sura 20: 103 - 104: Hilali & Khan Translation]
Here's the explanation of this in Tafsir Ibn Kathir clarifying that they are talking about their duration in the worldly life:

"(You stayed not longer than ten.) meaning in the abode of the worldly life, you only tarried there for a little while. The time was equivalent to ten days or so. Allah, the Exalted, then says, (We know very well what they will say,) This means in their condition of conversing amongst themselves. (when the best among them in knowledge and wisdom will say;) the one with perfect intelligence amongst them, (You stayed no longer than a day!) This is because on the Day of Judgement they will sense the shortness of the worldly life within themselves. For the worldly life, with its repetitious time periods and successive nights, days and hours, is as if it is just one day. For this reason, on the Day of Resurrection the disbelievers will think the worldly life was very short. By this they mean to prevent the establishment of the evidence against them due to the shortness of time that they had"

These Ayaat about the duration of time, and the multidimensional aspect of time, at the very least seem to be from the Mutashabihaat to me. The Mujrimeen will be saying that they were alive in this world for ten days and the intelligent from among them saying it was but 1 day. They are not talking about the passing of time while they were sleeping and hence could not accurately perceive how much time had expired.

But from wisdom I come to know the reason for why 300 years is specifically mentioned in the story of As-Hab al Kahf, for if it really is concerning a group from the early followers of Jesus, then it is a matter of historical record that since the "departure" of Jesus until the time that Christianity was no longer persecuted in the Roman Empire and eventually became the dominant faith there was a period of approximately 3 centuries. Constantine had the Edict of Milan issued in 313 C.E after which Christianity quickly became the dominant religion of the empire. The As-Hab al Kahf "awoke" from their slumber and came out of their isolation after some 3 centuries to discover the world has completely changed and they are no longer being persecuted for their religion.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Hani on July 06, 2017, 01:44:42 AM
Regarding your words

"The Ashab al Kahf story isn't an example of Ghayba. They did not become "invisible", in fact the Holy Qur'an says that if you were to see them you would become terrified (Sura 18:18). "

The Twelvers also say their Mahdi isn't invisible. They say we all see him at Hajj but never recognize him. Many also say he meets regularly with his most trusted Shia.

You said

"This is problematic for you since I assume you believe in the Nuzul of the Masih that he himself will descend back into this Earth from the sky. When he does so, he will obvious become acquainted and learn what his followers did in his absence. Judgment Day will proceed all of this, so how does it make sense that Jesus will tell Allah "I have no knowledge of what my people did after my departure"

No it isn't problematic, this can happen as God Himself knows yet asks.

This all shows that Isa and the seven were inactive in their Ghaybah as opposed to the 12th
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 06, 2017, 02:00:42 AM
Regarding your words

"The Ashab al Kahf story isn't an example of Ghayba. They did not become "invisible", in fact the Holy Qur'an says that if you were to see them you would become terrified (Sura 18:18). "

The Twelvers also say their Mahdi isn't invisible. They say we all see him at Hajj but never recognize him. Many also say he meets regularly with his most trusted Shia.

They are talking about Kushoof and spiritual visions.

Quote
You said

"This is problematic for you since I assume you believe in the Nuzul of the Masih that he himself will descend back into this Earth from the sky. When he does so, he will obvious become acquainted and learn what his followers did in his absence. Judgment Day will proceed all of this, so how does it make sense that Jesus will tell Allah "I have no knowledge of what my people did after my departure"

No it isn't problematic, this can happen as God Himself knows yet asks.

This all shows that Isa and the seven were inactive in their Ghaybah as opposed to the 12th

What I said was in the context of responding to Noor-us-Sunnah, who claimed that according to this Ayah 5:117, it is proven that on Judgment Day Jesus will say he has no knowledge of what happened after his "departure". This interpretation of 5:117 that Jesus has no knowledge of what happened after his "departure" simply can't be reconciled with the doctrine of Nuzul al Masih as held to by the Muslim mainstream (both Ahlus Sunna and Shi'a).

So this is what Noor-us-Sunnah specifically claimed:
Quote from: Noor-us-Sunnah
This verse proves that Jesus(as) didn’t even knew what his followers did after him
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Hani on July 06, 2017, 02:07:37 AM
No they say he's actually physically seen. In fact a ton of their scholars claim to have met him and many Shia claim to have been aided by him when in distress.

As for the Nuzul, Isa's expression could simply mean: "Don't ask me about how they deviated, the moment you took me I had no control over them."

It doesn't necessarily mean he never knew they deviated or how they deviated. It's also possible that Isa actually didn't know How it came to be that they began worshipping him even if he did ask them, this was a matter lost in history and only Allah knows exactly how it came to be.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 06, 2017, 02:40:22 AM
No they say he's actually physically seen. In fact a ton of their scholars claim to have met him and many Shia claim to have been aided by him when in distress.

Yes, because Kashaf includes the vision of seeing someone in a state of wakefulness who is otherwise invisible. Unless they claim that this is the address of the 12th Imam, go and meet him like any other ordinary human being, he is present among us. The whole concept of being Gha'ib (absent) is that it is the opposite of Haadir (present). The Companions of the Cave were present in the cave all along, but no serious Shi'ite will tell you let's go to the 12th Imam he is living in such and such place, let's go meet him, talk to him, etc. So there is an obvious difference between the absence of the 12th Imam according to the Shi'a and the Companions of the Cave having gone into a Cave without becoming invisible.

Quote
As for the Nuzul, Isa's expression could simply mean: "Don't ask me about how they deviated, the moment you took me I had no control over them."

It doesn't necessarily mean he never knew they deviated or how they deviated. It's also possible that Isa actually didn't know How it came to be that they began worshipping him even if he did ask them, this was a matter lost in history and only Allah knows exactly how it came to be.

Again you miss the point that I am responding to the idea of Noor-us-Sunnah. I never said I agree with Noor-us-Sunnah. Your issue is essentially with him, and you should be explaining it to him not me.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Hani on July 06, 2017, 03:11:24 AM
Yes, because Kashaf includes the vision of seeing someone in a state of wakefulness who is otherwise invisible. Unless they claim that this is the address of the 12th Imam, go and meet him like any other ordinary human being, he is present among us. The whole concept of being Gha'ib (absent) is that it is the opposite of Haadir (present). The Companions of the Cave were present in the cave all along, but no serious Shi'ite will tell you let's go to the 12th Imam he is living in such and such place, let's go meet him, talk to him, etc. So there is an obvious difference between the absence of the 12th Imam according to the Shi'a and the Companions of the Cave having gone into a Cave without becoming invisible.

Not sure what we're discussing here, they just say "We see him" nobody said Kashf, he doesn't need a permanent address as he is wandering the earth. Heck many of them even say he has wives and kids, are those Kashf?
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Noor-us-Sunnah on July 06, 2017, 05:35:30 AM
A few more implicit proofs from Qur'an al-Karim that sayyidina Masih عليه السلام is dead:

وَلَقَدْ أَرْسَلْنَا نُوحًا إِلَىٰ قَوْمِهِ فَلَبِثَ فِيهِمْ أَلْفَ سَنَةٍ إِلَّا خَمْسِينَ عَامًا
And We sent Noah to his people, so he remained among them 1000 years less 50 years (29:14)

The age of Noah was 950. Authentic Ahadith describe him as the eldest of the Prophets:

عَنْ أَنَسِ بْنِ مَالِكٍ ، قَالَ : " جَاءَ مَلَكُ الْمَوْتِ إِلَى نُوحٍ عَلَيْهِ السَّلامُ ، فَقَالَ : يَا أَطْوَلَ النَّبِيِّينَ عُمْرًا
Ibn Abi’d-Dunya narrated in az-Zuhd (no. 358) with his isnaad from Anas ibn Maalik (may Allah be pleased with him) that he said: The Angel of Death came to Nooh (peace be upon him) and said: O longest-lived of the Prophets

On Judgment Day, Adam, when asked to intercede, will say to the people:

عَلَيْكُمْ بِنُوحٍ فَإِنَّهُ أَوَّلُ الأَنْبِيَاءِ وَأَكْبَرُهُمْ
Go to Noah, for he is the first of the Prophets and the eldest of them (al-Bazar & al-Tawhid ibn Ibn Khuzayma)

But if Jesus was raised up to heaven, alive in his body, and has not yet died, he would be aged over 2,000 years. And who knows when he will descend back into this Earth. Whenever that happens, he will surely be much older than Noah, at least twice his age!

وَمَن نُّعَمِّرْهُ نُنَكِّسْهُ فِي الْخَلْقِ ۖ أَفَلَا يَعْقِلُونَ
And he whom We grant long life, We reverse him in creation [weakness after creation]. Will they not then understand? (36:68)

The Ahadith about the descent of Jesus that he will come, fight the Dajjal, break the cross, slay the swine, lead the Muslims for 40 years, etc., means he will have to be a man of strength. If someone who is over a 100 years old is reversed in strength to weakness, what about someone who is 2,000 + years old?!


The life of Isa(as) is a matter of Ghayb(unseen), so it's not possible to give a certain response, and yet it wouldn't mean that your claim of Isa(as) growing older is correct. As for this issue we don't have any evidence regarding the state Isa(as) is in, nor do we know about the factors of life in heaven, it could be completely different, the factors of time and the atmosphere, etc, its impact on body could be different. Allah can preserve it in the exact way as it was, at the time he was raised up to heaven. But I will try to answer this Insha Allah.

أَوْ كَالَّذِي مَرَّ عَلَىٰ قَرْيَةٍ وَهِيَ خَاوِيَةٌ عَلَىٰ عُرُوشِهَا قَالَ أَنَّىٰ يُحْيِي هَٰذِهِ اللَّهُ بَعْدَ مَوْتِهَا فَأَمَاتَهُ اللَّهُ مِائَةَ عَامٍ ثُمَّ بَعَثَهُ قَالَ كَمْ لَبِثْتَ قَالَ لَبِثْتُ يَوْمًا أَوْ بَعْضَ يَوْمٍ قَالَ بَل لَّبِثْتَ مِائَةَ عَامٍ فَانظُرْ إِلَىٰ طَعَامِكَ وَشَرَابِكَ لَمْ يَتَسَنَّهْ وَانظُرْ إِلَىٰ حِمَارِكَ وَلِنَجْعَلَكَ آيَةً لِّلنَّاسِ وَانظُرْ إِلَى الْعِظَامِ كَيْفَ نُنشِزُهَا ثُمَّ نَكْسُوهَا لَحْمًا فَلَمَّا تَبَيَّنَ لَهُ قَالَ أَعْلَمُ أَنَّ اللَّهَ عَلَىٰ كُلِّ شَيْءٍ قَدِيرٌ
Or (take) the similitude of one who passed by a hamlet, all in ruins to its roofs. He said: "Oh! how shall Allah bring it (ever) to life, after (this) its death?" but Allah caused him to die for a hundred years, then raised him up (again). He said: "How long didst thou tarry (thus)?" He said: (Perhaps) a day or part of a day." He said: "Nay, thou hast tarried thus a hundred years; but look at thy food and thy drink; they show no signs of age; and look at thy donkey: And that We may make of thee a sign unto the people, Look further at the bones, how We bring them together and clothe them with flesh." When this was shown clearly to him, he said: "I know that Allah hath power over all things." (Quran 2:259).

We see that time factor didn't effect the food and drink of Uzayr(as) in this world, when Allah willed. Hence, Just like the time factor didn't effect the food and drink of Uzair(as), the same way the body of Isa(ra) could remain unaffected in heaven.

Another evidence is from this hadeeth:

CONDITION OF ISA(AS) BEFORE BEING RAISED TO HEAVEN
Notice the physical condition of Isa(as) before being raised up, water/sweat was dropping from his head.

ال ابن أبي حاتم : حدثنا أحمد بن سنان ، حدثنا أبو معاوية ، عن الأعمش ، عن المنهال بن عمرو ، عن سعيد بن جبير ، عن ابن عباس قال : لما أراد الله أن يرفع عيسى إلى السماء ، خرج على أصحابه – وفي البيت اثنا عشر رجلا من الحواريين – يعني : فخرج عليهم من عين في البيت ، ورأسه يقطر ماء
..........
وهذا إسناد صحيح إلى ابن عباس
Ibn Abbas said, “When Allaah decided to raise `Isa to Heaven, `Isa went to his companions – and in the house there were twelve men from his disciples – while drops of water were dripping from his head.....
Imam Ibn Katheer said: And this chain of narration is authentic (Saheeh) from Ibn Abbas.
(This narration can be read in Tafseer ibn Katheer, also in al-Bidayah wal-Nihayah (vol 2, page 85) of Imam Ibn Katheer, as well as in Fath al-Qadeer (vol 1, pg 800) of Imam ash-Shawkani.)

CONDITION OF ISA(AS) AT TIME OF DESCEND FROM HEAVEN

Notice that at the time of his descend too, sweat would be falling from his head.

بَعَثَ اللَّهُ الْمَسِيحَ ابْنَ مَرْيَمَ فَيَنْزِلُ عِنْدَ الْمَنَارَةِ الْبَيْضَاءِ شَرْقِيَّ دِمَشْقَ بَيْنَ مَهْرُودَتَيْنِ وَاضِعًا كَفَّيْهِ عَلَى أَجْنِحَةِ مَلَكَيْنِ إِذَا طَأْطَأَ رَأَسَهُ قَطَرَ وَإِذَا رَفَعَهُ تَحَدَّرَ مِنْهُ جُمَانٌ كَاللُّؤْلُؤِ فَلاَ يَحِلُّ
Allah would send Jesus, son of Mary, and he will descend at the white minaret in the eastern side of Damascus wearing two garments lightly dyed with saffron and placing his hands on the wings of two Angels. When he would lower his head, there would fall beads of perspiration from his head, and when he would raise it up, beads like pearls would scatter from it. (Sahih Muslim 2937 a).

This relation between the condition of Isa(as) at time of ascend and descend implies that He will descend in the same condition in which he ascended.

Also, the time factor of heavens is different in comparison to time factor of this world, its not the same, so it is possible that the age Allah has destined for believers depends on the time the are living through. Like since ISa(As) is in heaven then the time he is there will be calculated as per the time zone of heaven not earth, for example 1000 years could be a day.

And they ask you to hasten on the punishment, and Allah will by no means fail in His promise, and surely a day with your Lord is as a thousand years of what you number. (Quran 22:7)


Quote
Then Allah says that He is ordering mankind to live on the Earth:

قَالَ فِيهَا تَحْيَوْنَ وَفِيهَا تَمُوتُونَ وَمِنْهَا تُخْرَجُونَ
He said: "Therein shall you live, and therein shall you die, and from it you shall be brought out (resurrected)" (7:25)

But if Jesus, a human being and son of Adam, has been living in the sky for the past 2,000 years, it is a contravention of this Verse where Allah decrees that all mankind is meant to live in and die on the Earth (not the sky).[/font][/size]
The order is general but there could be an exception to it for a certain, like even Prophet(saws) for a certain period went to heavens, as per Sunni belief. But the time period of ascending to heavens could differ, for someone it could be short for other it could be lohnger. Anways, as per the verse:
Isa(As) lived on earth for a certain time, We believe that in his second coming he will again live on earth, die on earth and resurrect from earth. Thus abiding by the command of Allah mentioned in Quran.

Narrated Abu Hurayrah: The Prophet (ﷺ) said: There is no prophet between me and him, that is, Jesus (ﷺ). He will descent (to the earth). When you see him, recognise him: a man of medium height, reddish fair, wearing two light yellow garments, looking as if drops were falling down from his head though it will not be wet. He will fight the people for the cause of Islam. He will break the cross, kill swine, and abolish jizyah. Allah will perish all religions except Islam. He will destroy the Antichrist and will live on the earth for forty years and then he will die. The Muslims will pray over him. [Sunan Abi Dawud 4324 Al-Albani said: Sahih]
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 06, 2017, 06:50:58 AM
The life of Isa(as) is a matter of Ghayb(unseen), so it's not possible to give a certain response, and yet it wouldn't mean that your claim of Isa(as) growing older is correct. As for this issue we don't have any evidence regarding the state Isa(as) is in, nor do we know about the factors of life in heaven, it could be completely different, the factors of time and the atmosphere, etc, its impact on body could be different. Allah can preserve it in the exact way as it was, at the time he was raised up to heaven.

This answer is not satisfactory, because your aqida is that sayyidina Eisa عليه السلام was raised up in his Jasad al-Unsari (earthly body). So we have to discuss the reality of the flesh and blood human body. The reality about the factors of life in Heaven, time, atmosphere, etc., are irrelevant. Allah says:

وَمَا جَعَلْنَاهُمْ جَسَدًا لَّا يَأْكُلُونَ الطَّعَامَ وَمَا كَانُوا خَالِدِينَ
And We did not make for them (Messengers) a body that does not require eating food for nourishment, nor were they immortal (Sura 21:8 )

Quite simply, there is no evidence that the human body can survive without nourishment, or that it can be taken to such a place where it will not experience aging and deterioration. Now if you say that Jesus was raised up to Heaven not in this earthen body, but in a Jism al Mithalee, in other words, his soul took on the form of a jism infused with light that is not subject to the restrictions of the earthen body, I would have no objection.

The essence of the problem is your insistence that Jesus was raised alive in Heaven with his Jasad al-Unsari (earthen body) without any explicit proof. It is this aqida which is creating all sorts of problems and raising too many questions and dilemmas.


Quote
But I will try to answer this Insha Allah.

أَوْ كَالَّذِي مَرَّ عَلَىٰ قَرْيَةٍ وَهِيَ خَاوِيَةٌ عَلَىٰ عُرُوشِهَا قَالَ أَنَّىٰ يُحْيِي هَٰذِهِ اللَّهُ بَعْدَ مَوْتِهَا فَأَمَاتَهُ اللَّهُ مِائَةَ عَامٍ ثُمَّ بَعَثَهُ قَالَ كَمْ لَبِثْتَ قَالَ لَبِثْتُ يَوْمًا أَوْ بَعْضَ يَوْمٍ قَالَ بَل لَّبِثْتَ مِائَةَ عَامٍ فَانظُرْ إِلَىٰ طَعَامِكَ وَشَرَابِكَ لَمْ يَتَسَنَّهْ وَانظُرْ إِلَىٰ حِمَارِكَ وَلِنَجْعَلَكَ آيَةً لِّلنَّاسِ وَانظُرْ إِلَى الْعِظَامِ كَيْفَ نُنشِزُهَا ثُمَّ نَكْسُوهَا لَحْمًا فَلَمَّا تَبَيَّنَ لَهُ قَالَ أَعْلَمُ أَنَّ اللَّهَ عَلَىٰ كُلِّ شَيْءٍ قَدِيرٌ
Or (take) the similitude of one who passed by a hamlet, all in ruins to its roofs. He said: "Oh! how shall Allah bring it (ever) to life, after (this) its death?" but Allah caused him to die for a hundred years, then raised him up (again). He said: "How long didst thou tarry (thus)?" He said: (Perhaps) a day or part of a day." He said: "Nay, thou hast tarried thus a hundred years; but look at thy food and thy drink; they show no signs of age; and look at thy donkey: And that We may make of thee a sign unto the people, Look further at the bones, how We bring them together and clothe them with flesh." When this was shown clearly to him, he said: "I know that Allah hath power over all things." (Quran 2:259).

We see that time factor didn't effect the food and drink of Uzayr(as) in this world, when Allah willed. Hence, Just like the time factor didn't effect the food and drink of Uzair(as), the same way the body of Isa(ra) could remain unaffected in heaven.

I highly encourage you to read an article I wrote explaining the reality of Ezekiel's Vision Sura 2:259
http://islamsalvationfromhell.blogspot.ca/2016/08/ezekiels-vision-in-holy-quran.html

So without going on another tangent, in summary I believe that the man mentioned in this Verse (2:259) experienced a vision which from our point of view lasted a day or part of a day, hence why neither his food or drink were spoiled, and why his donkey remained as it was. In fact, I use those very facts as evidence that what he experienced was a vision, in which he was transported to a period of 100 years ahead to witness the coming back to life of the hamlet he had come across. Then when he awoke from his vision he saw that his food and drink was as they were, and also his donkey, but all that he had seen about the hamlet being quickened to life was in a powerful spiritual Vision.


Quote
This relation between the condition of Isa(as) at time of ascend and descend implies that He will descend in the same condition in which he ascended.

That is based off of the saying of a Sahabi and not a Hujjah. But if you insist, I can prove to you that our beloved Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم gave two separate and contrasting physical descriptions of Jesus.

During the Mi'raj, our Prophet saw Jesus and described him as a man of red complexion with curly hair. Then the Prophet had a vision of Jesus circling the Ka'ba, and described him as a dark man with straight hair. So if you insist on your point, based on a similar kind of reasoning, I can insist that the Jesus of Nazareth of 2000 years ago which our Prophet beheld during the Mi'raj is a different Jesus who will descend in the future that the Prophet beheld in his vision circling the Ka'ba.


Quote
Also, the time factor of heavens is different in comparison to time factor of this world, its not the same, so it is possible that the age Allah has destined for believers depends on the time the are living through. Like since ISa(As) is in heaven then the time he is there will be calculated as per the time zone of heaven not earth, for example 1000 years could be a day.

Again we are talking about these factors in relation to the earthen flesh and blood mortal human body. It needs to be first proven that this human body has the capacity to survive being raised up into the Heavens, into dimensions beyond our own. This is the crucial factor that has to be discussed.

Allah says that it is the Angels and the Ruh which ascend to Him in a Day the measure of which is 50,000 years. Obviously the Angels and the Ruh have the capacity for this ascension, but obviously not the human body.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Noor-us-Sunnah on July 06, 2017, 10:56:26 AM
...
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Noor-us-Sunnah on July 06, 2017, 11:05:10 AM
This answer is not satisfactory, because your aqida is that sayyidina Eisa عليه السلام was raised up in his Jasad al-Unsari (earthly body). So we have to discuss the reality of the flesh and blood human body. The reality about the factors of life in Heaven, time, atmosphere, etc., are irrelevant. Allah says:

وَمَا جَعَلْنَاهُمْ جَسَدًا لَّا يَأْكُلُونَ الطَّعَامَ وَمَا كَانُوا خَالِدِينَ
And We did not make for them (Messengers) a body that does not require eating food for nourishment, nor were they immortal (Sura 21:8 )

Quite simply, there is no evidence that the human body can survive without nourishment, or that it can be taken to such a place where it will not experience aging and deterioration. Now if you say that Jesus was raised up to Heaven not in this earthen body, but in a Jism al Mithalee, in other words, his soul took on the form of a jism infused with light that is not subject to the restrictions of the earthen body, I would have no objection.

The essence of the problem is your insistence that Jesus was raised alive in Heaven with his Jasad al-Unsari (earthen body) without any explicit proof. It is this aqida which is creating all sorts of problems and raising too many questions and dilemmas.

I told you before these matters are of unseen, and we have no knowledge about its details. We believe in these things because it was informed by Prophet Muhammad(saws) who received certain knowledge of unseen through Wahi(revelation) from Allah.

Belief in the Unseen is central to the message of the Quran. Allah says: “This is the Book; in it is guidance sure, without doubt, to those who fear Allah; who believe in the Unseen, are steadfast in prayer, and spend out of what We have provided for them.” [Surah al-Baqarah: 2-3]

This verse establishes for us that belief in the Unseen is the basis for certainty of faith. Indeed, all six of the articles of faith are founded upon belief in the Unseen.

This is why Allah mentions belief in the Unseen here as the first characteristic of a believer. We are not supposed to limit our belief to those things that we can apprehend with our senses. We are not supposed to allow our observation of the physical world to blind us to our faith in what is beyond it.

Allah gives us the balance that we are supposed to strike when He tells us: “On the Earth are signs for those of assured Faith, as also in your own selves: Will you not then see? And in heaven is your sustenance, as (also) that which you are promised.” [Sûrah Dhâriyât: 20-22]

In these verses Allah mentions matters of the Unseen with matters that are subject to our empirical scrutiny. The world of the Unseen is the domain of faith. The proof for our faith, however, is in the tangible world, the world wherein we carry out our lives.

We must simply concede that our minds and our faculties are limited, and some things in Allah’s creation have not been subjected to our scrutiny.

Consider the human soul. Though it has a vital connection with the human body, its nature is a complete mystery to us.

Allah says: “They ask you about the soul. Say: the soul is from the affair of my Lord, and of knowledge you have been vouchsafed but little.” [Sûrah al-Isrâ: 85]

The matters of the Unseen that Islam calls upon people of faith to believe – they are all matters which reason cannot ascertain. At the same time, they are not matters that run contrary to the dictates of reason.

Ibn Taymiyah explains this as follows:

    Islam asserts matters that transcend the limits of human reason – matters that the human mind is incapable of resolving on its own. Islam does not assert matters that run contrary to the dictates of reason, things that our rational faculties clearly show us to be impossible or wrong.

    Reason does not deny the existence of the Unseen. To the contrary, reason acknowledges that necessity of the Unseen for human life in this world and for the concerns of the Hereafter.


Quote

So without going on another tangent, in summary I believe that the man mentioned in this Verse (2:259) experienced a vision which from our point of view lasted a day or part of a day, hence why neither his food or drink were spoiled, and why his donkey remained as it was. In fact, I use those very facts as evidence that what he experienced was a vision, in which he was transported to a period of 100 years ahead to witness the coming back to life of the hamlet he had come across. Then when he awoke from his vision he saw that his food and drink was as they were, and also his donkey, but all that he had seen about the hamlet being quickened to life was in a powerful spiritual Vision.[/size][/font]
That's twisting the verse of Quran. Your theory would have been acceptable if in case the Quran wouldn't have said that the person remained for 100 years. In this case the wordings would have been that, the time period for the vision was a very short interval. Since Quran mentions that he remained there for 100 years, when he thought he was there only for a day, this proves that it was practical.


Secondly You asked me to refer your article, In the last I found this conclusion from you:
Quote
These people were perhaps the Israelites during the Babylonian captivity who had been banished from the Holy Land beginning around 597 BCE. It was their nation which had died and was in a state of death. Nevertheless, Allah, out of His grace, restored the nation and caused them to be released from captivity and return to Jerusalem to rebuild the temple in 538 BCE after Cyrus’s proclamation.
So lets compare this with Quranic verse.
 In 597 BCE this nation was destroyed. And this nation was restored in 538 BCE.

So if Ezekiel saw this scene in 597 BCE when it started, then 100 years after it when it was restored would be 497 BCE,  not 538 BCE. So there are clear inconsistencies in your baseless theories. The fact is that you are basing your views on unreliable Christian sources, whose authenticity is rejected if they contradict Muslim sources.

Lets see how Muslim scholars explained, so that readers benefit from it.

Ibn Abi Hatim recorded that `Ali bin Abi Talib said that the Ayah ﴿2:259﴾ meant `Uzayr. Ibn Jarir also reported it, and this explanation was also reported by Ibn Jarir and Ibn Abi Hatim from Ibn `Abbas, Al-Hasan, Qatadah, As-Suddi and Sulayman bin Buraydah.

You wrote in the article:
Quote
Allah also draws attention to his donkey which is also still present and alive.
We read:
(And look at your donkey!), "How Allah brings it back to life while you are watching.''(And thus We have made of you a sign for the people) that Resurrection occurs..

As-Suddi said, " `Uzayr observed the bones of his donkey, which were scattered all around him to his right and left, and Allah sent a wind that collected the bones from all over the area. Allah then brought every bone to its place, until they formed a full donkey made of fleshless bones. Allah then covered these bones with flesh, nerves, veins and skin. Allah sent an angel who blew life in the donkeys' nostrils, and the donkey started to bray by Allah's leave.' [Tafseer Ibn Katheer]


Quote
That is based off of the saying of a Sahabi and not a Hujjah.
It is an hujjah for Ahl us sunnah, I'll deal with this point in detail later inshaAllah.

Quote
But if you insist, I can prove to you that our beloved Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم gave two separate and contrasting physical descriptions of Jesus.

During the Mi'raj, our Prophet saw Jesus and described him as a man of red complexion with curly hair. Then the Prophet had a vision of Jesus circling the Ka'ba, and described him as a dark man with straight hair. So if you insist on your point, based on a similar kind of reasoning, I can insist that the Jesus of Nazareth of 2000 years ago which our Prophet beheld during the Mi'raj is a different Jesus who will descend in the future that the Prophet beheld in his vision circling the Ka'ba.[/size][/font]
Apparently there seem to be two contradictions here;

1) About Complexion

2) About Hair

In the following lines we discuss in detail all the various Ahadith about the issue.

Complexion:

1) As to the complexion, apparently there seems to be a contradiction but there isn’t any. One Hadith of Ibn Umar (RA) above says that the Holy Prophet (PBUH) described Jesus (PBUH) to be of red complexion while other narration from him says he was described to be of wheatish complexion. This apparent contradiction is resolved considering other narrations.

عَنْ سَالِمٍ عَنْ أَبِيهِ قَالَ لَا وَاللَّهِ مَا قَالَ النَّبِيُّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ لِعِيسَى أَحْمَرُ وَلَكِنْ قَالَ بَيْنَمَا أَنَا نَائِمٌ أَطُوفُ بِالْكَعْبَةِ فَإِذَا رَجُلٌ آدَمُ سَبْطُ الشَّعَرِ

Salim reports from his father (i.e. Abdullah bin Umar), he said: “No, By Allah, the Prophet did not say that Jesus was of red complexion but he said, “While I was asleep circumambulating the Ka’ba (in my dream), suddenly I saw a man of brown complexion and lank hair.” (Bukhari, Kitabul Ahadith al-Anbiya, Hadith 3185)

2) Considering the fact that Ibn Umar (RA) himself so emphatically repudiates the idea that Holy Prophet (PBUH) described Jesus (PBUH) to be of red complexion so we have to believe, the narration which attributes to Ibn Umar (RA) the report of Holy Prophet describing Jesus as such is perhaps a mistake by some later narrator. Jesus (PBUH) was not purely of red complexion. Infact this is generally not true for the Semitic people.

3) The rightful description of Jesus (PBUH) is as narrated by Ibn Abbas (RA):

ابْنَ عَبَّاسٍ رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُمَا عَنْ النَّبِيِّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ قَالَ …َرَأَيْتُ عِيسَى رَجُلًا مَرْبُوعًا مَرْبُوعَ الْخَلْقِ إِلَى الْحُمْرَةِ وَالْبَيَاضِ سَبِطَ الرَّأْسِ

Narrated Ibn Abbas: The Prophet said, “On the night of my Ascent to the Heaven, … I saw Jesus, a man of medium height and moderate complexion inclined to the red and white colors and of lank hair.” (Bukhari, Kitabul Bad’ al-Khalq, Hadith 3000)

4) Infact his complexion was neither white as lime nor purely red but something between these two as described in the Hadith above. And the same complexion was sometimes referred to as ‘wheatish’ or ‘wheat-colored.’

Al-Nawawi has written the same in his commentary to the Hadith that speaks of red complexion of Jesus (PBUH):

وَأَنَّهُ اِشْتَبَهَ عَلَى الرَّاوِي فَيَجُوز أَنْ يُتَأَوَّل الْأَحْمَر عَلَى الْأَدَم ، وَلَا يَكُون الْمُرَاد حَقِيقَة الْأُدْمَة وَالْحُمْرَة بَلْ مَا قَارَبَهَا

“And this is confusion on the part of the narrator and perhaps he took red to be wheat-like and it does not mean tan or red but what is near to it.” (Sharah Al-Nawawi on Sahih Muslim 1/302, Kitabul Iman)

5) The fact of the matter is that it’s not easy to describe ones complexion. The same is evident from the fact that Anas (RA) in one narration says Holy Prophet (PBUH) was wheatish in complexion and in another narration says he was not wheat-colored. (Shamail Tirmidhi Hadith 1 & 2. Both authenticated by Albani)

The Hair:

1) As to the hair; straight or curly, we need to have a look at the actual wording of the Hadith that is taken to speak about the curly hair of Jesus (PBUH);

فَأَمَّا عِيسَى فَأَحْمَرُ جَعْدٌ

The usual translation goes as; “Jesus was of red complexion [and] curly hair.”

Here the word جَعْدٌ is taken to mean curly hair but this is not the exclusive meaning of this word. Ibn Athir
writes about it:

مَعْناه… شَدِيد الأسْرِ

i.e. “It means… ‘Of strong built.’” and further gives an example of it from Hadith:

والحديث الآخر [ على ناقة جَعْدَة ] أي مُجْتَمِعة الخَلْق شَدِيدةٍ

“In another Hadīth, ‘On a camel of strong built’ i.e. of rigorously cogent built.” (Nihaya fi Gharib al-Asar 1/767)

Indeed scholars have always taken جَعْدٌ to mean ‘of strong built’ in this context. Hafiz Ibn Hujr mentions that it refers to his physical bearing and not hair. He says;

وَوَصْفه لِجُعُودَةِ فِي جِسْمه لَا شَعْره وَالْمُرَاد بِذَلِكَ اِجْتِمَاعه وَاكْتِنَازه

“And this is about sturdiness in body, not the hair and it refers to its compactness and robustness” (Fath Al-Baari 10/242, kitabul ahadith al-anbiya)

Al-Nawawi has also said the very same. He writes;

الْمُرَاد بِالْجَعْدِ هُنَا جُعُودَة الْجِسْم وَهُوَ اِجْتِمَاعه وَاكْتِنَازه وَلَيْسَ الْمُرَاد جُعُودَة الشَّعْر
.
“Here جَعْدِ means firmness of the body i.e. its compactness and being thickset. And it does not refer to curling of the hair’ (Sharah Al-Nawawi on Sahih Muslim 1/296, Kitabul Iman)

2) So the correct and most suitable translation of the Hadith which is generally taken to refer to the curly hair of Jesus (PBUH) is:

Narrated Ibn Umar: The Prophet said, “I saw Moses, Jesus and Abraham (on the night of my Ascension to the heavens). Jesus was (person) with red complexion, robust body and a broad chest.” (Bukhari, Hadith 3183)

Similar Description of Jesus (PBUH) as seen during Mi’raj and on his descent:

The thing of utmost importance we need to consider here is the fact that when the Holy Prophet (PBUH) told about the features of the Jesus (PBUH) to recognize him on his descent it went directly in line with the description of Jesus (PBUH) found in the Ahadith about Night of Ascension (Mi’raj).

ابْنَ عَبَّاسٍ رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُمَا عَنْ النَّبِيِّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ قَالَ …َرَأَيْتُ عِيسَى رَجُلًا مَرْبُوعًا مَرْبُوعَ الْخَلْقِ إِلَى الْحُمْرَةِ وَالْبَيَاضِ سَبِطَ الرَّأْسِ
Narrated Ibn Abbas: The Prophet said, “On the night of my Ascent to the Heaven … I saw Jesus, a man of medium height and moderate complexion inclined to the red and white colors and of lank hair.” (Bukhari, kitabul bad’ al-khalq , Hadith 3000)

عن أبي هريرة أن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم قال ليس بيني وبينه نبي يعني عيسى وإنه نازل فإذا رأيتموه فاعرفوه رجل مربوع إلى الحمرة والبياض

Narrated Abu Huraira: The Prophet (PBUH) said: There is no prophet between me and him, that is, Jesus (PBUH). He will descend (to the earth). When you see him, recognize him: a man of medium height, complexion inclined to red and white…” (Abu Dawud, Kitabul Malahim, Hadith 4324. Classified as Sahih by Albani)

This proves that the man who is described in the Ahadith to descend from the Heavens near the End of Times will be same Israelite Prophet whom the Holy Prophet (PBUH) met during the Miraculous Night (Mi’raj).
All these details upholds the unanimous Muslim belief that Jesus of Nazareth will indeed descend from the Heavens.

Quote
Again we are talking about these factors in relation to the earthen flesh and blood mortal human body. It needs to be first proven that this human body has the capacity to survive being raised up into the Heavens, into dimensions beyond our own. This is the crucial factor that has to be discussed.

Allah says that it is the Angels and the Ruh which ascend to Him in a Day the measure of which is 50,000 years. Obviously the Angels and the Ruh have the capacity for this ascension, but obviously not the human body.

If you are going to judge a supernatural event with physical laws then obviously you won't be able to grasp it. Which such parameters, Im afraid you will some day rejector of Quran as well. Take example of Ibrahim(as) who was thrown into fire, the natural process is that flesh and skin would burn in fire, but since it was a supernatural event, what happened was contrary to natural law. The fire became cool on Ibrahim(as).
“We said: ‘O fire! Be you coolness and safety for Ibrahim (Abraham)!’ And they wanted to harm him, but We made them the worst losers” [Surah al-Anbiyaa 21:69-70].

May be for you, this as well was the vision of Ibrahim(as).

So again I repeat that we believe in descend of Isa(As) because Prophet(saws) informed us about it, and we are from those who believe in Ghaib and supernatural events.

As for the evidence that Isa(as) would return in a physical body then, the Marfoo hadeeth from Prophet(saws) describes that when Isa(As) would descend, he will be wearing clothes, water would drop from his hair, He would place his hands on the wings of angels, which signifies that it would be for support while descending, and only a physical body would need to do that.

Allah would send Jesus, son of Mary, and he will descend at the white minaret in the eastern side of Damascus wearing two garments lightly dyed with saffron and placing his hands on the wings of two Angels. When he would lower his head, there would fall beads of perspiration from his head, and when he would raise it up, beads like pearls would scatter from it. [ Sahih Muslim 2937 a]
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 06, 2017, 12:18:38 PM
I told you before these matters are of unseen, and we have no knowledge about its details. We believe in these things because it was informed by Prophet Muhammad(saws) who received certain knowledge of unseen through Wahi(revelation) from Allah.

Belief in the Unseen is central to the message of the Quran. Allah says: “This is the Book; in it is guidance sure, without doubt, to those who fear Allah; who believe in the Unseen, are steadfast in prayer, and spend out of what We have provided for them.” [Surah al-Baqarah: 2-3]

This verse establishes for us that belief in the Unseen is the basis for certainty of faith. Indeed, all six of the articles of faith are founded upon belief in the Unseen.

This is why Allah mentions belief in the Unseen here as the first characteristic of a believer. We are not supposed to limit our belief to those things that we can apprehend with our senses. We are not supposed to allow our observation of the physical world to blind us to our faith in what is beyond it.

Allah gives us the balance that we are supposed to strike when He tells us: “On the Earth are signs for those of assured Faith, as also in your own selves: Will you not then see? And in heaven is your sustenance, as (also) that which you are promised.” [Sûrah Dhâriyât: 20-22]

In these verses Allah mentions matters of the Unseen with matters that are subject to our empirical scrutiny. The world of the Unseen is the domain of faith. The proof for our faith, however, is in the tangible world, the world wherein we carry out our lives.

We must simply concede that our minds and our faculties are limited, and some things in Allah’s creation have not been subjected to our scrutiny.

Consider the human soul. Though it has a vital connection with the human body, its nature is a complete mystery to us.

Allah says: “They ask you about the soul. Say: the soul is from the affair of my Lord, and of knowledge you have been vouchsafed but little.” [Sûrah al-Isrâ: 85]

The matters of the Unseen that Islam calls upon people of faith to believe – they are all matters which reason cannot ascertain. At the same time, they are not matters that run contrary to the dictates of reason.

Ibn Taymiyah explains this as follows:

    Islam asserts matters that transcend the limits of human reason – matters that the human mind is incapable of resolving on its own. Islam does not assert matters that run contrary to the dictates of reason, things that our rational faculties clearly show us to be impossible or wrong.

    Reason does not deny the existence of the Unseen. To the contrary, reason acknowledges that necessity of the Unseen for human life in this world and for the concerns of the Hereafter.

You didn't answer why Allah Azza wa Jall says that He did not make bodies for His Messengers that can sustain without food. If Jesus is alive in heaven with his earthen body how is he being sustained without food? This is not disbelief in the unseen, this is the verdict of the Qur'an itself. I am not denying the unseen, or even extraordinary and supernatural things. But anyone who claims something extraordinary or supernatural cannot simply say "we have to believe in the Unseen". Everything we believe from the Unseen has to have a basis in divine Revelation. So it is not only a rational argument, but also a Qur'anic argument that I am making that how can Jesus be alive in his physical body in the Heavens without food or nourishment when the Holy Qur'an says the Jasad (body) of a Prophet, like that of any other Bashar, cannot survive without food.

If you say that Jesus is being provided food and eating in Heaven, then you have contradicted another Verse of the Holy Qur'an:

كَانَا يَأْكُلَانِ الطَّعَامَ
Both Jesus and his mother Mary used to eat food (Sura 5:75)

Examine this Verse carefully. Kaanaa is dual form and past tense. Yaakulaan is likewise in dual form. It means that both Jesus and his mother Mary used to eat food in the past. They do not eat food anymore because both are deceased. but if you say that Jesus is not deceased, you will still have to admit, based on this Ayah, that he doesn't eat food because Kaanaa is for past tense.

And if Jesus doesn't eat food anymore, it means his Jasad can no longer be sustained. So your aqida is not only illogical or irrational, it is clearly against the revelation of the Qur'an. It is against both Revelation and Rationality, all the more reason to reject it.


Quote from: Noor-us-Sunnah
That's twisting the verse of Quran. Your theory would have been acceptable if in case the Quran wouldn't have said that the person remained for 100 years. In this case the wordings would have been that, the time period for the vision was a very short interval. Since Quran mentions that he remained there for 100 years, when he thought he was there only for a day, this proves that it was practical.
Secondly You asked me to refer your article, In the last I found this conclusion from you:
"These people were perhaps the Israelites during the Babylonian captivity who had been banished from the Holy Land beginning around 597 BCE. It was their nation which had died and was in a state of death. Nevertheless, Allah, out of His grace, restored the nation and caused them to be released from captivity and return to Jerusalem to rebuild the temple in 538 BCE after Cyrus’s proclamation."
So lets compare this with Quranic verse.
 In 597 BCE this nation was destroyed. And this nation was restored in 538 BCE.

So if Ezekiel saw this scene in 597 BCE when it started, then 100 years after it when it was restored would be 497 BCE,  not 538 BCE. So there are clear inconsistencies in your baseless theories. The fact is that you are basing your views on unreliable Christian sources, whose authenticity is rejected if they contradict Muslim sources.

You assume that the edict for the restoration of Jerusalem in 538 BCE is exactly the time the town is fully restored and brimming with life. Again this is a false assumption. That was merely the year of the proclamation and the beginning of the process to restore Jerusalem. It would have taken several years for Jerusalem to again be a vibrant and lively city. For example, the Second Temple, the life of the city, wasn't fully restored until 516 BCE. So a 100 years into the future from when Ezekiel came across the town in utter ruin, it was at its restored glory, that was the scene that Allah wanted to show His Prophet. If He showed him the scene of 538 BCE, it would not be showing him Jerusalem fully revived and restored to glory at all.

Quote
You wrote in the article: "Allah also draws attention to his donkey which is also still present and alive."
We read: (And look at your donkey!), "How Allah brings it back to life while you are watching.''(And thus We have made of you a sign for the people) that Resurrection occurs..

As-Suddi said, " `Uzayr observed the bones of his donkey, which were scattered all around him to his right and left, and Allah sent a wind that collected the bones from all over the area. Allah then brought every bone to its place, until they formed a full donkey made of fleshless bones. Allah then covered these bones with flesh, nerves, veins and skin. Allah sent an angel who blew life in the donkeys' nostrils, and the donkey started to bray by Allah's leave.' [Tafseer Ibn Katheer]

There is difference of opinion of the Mufassireen regarding the donkey. The grammatical structure of the Ayah makes it clear that the donkey, like his food and drink, did not change or decay.
وَانظُرْ إِلَىٰ حِمَارِكَ
"And look to your donkey"
The Waw here is al-Waw 'Aatifah, meaning this is the Waw that is a prefixed conjunction. The idea that the donkey had decayed into bones doesn't fit with the grammar of the Verse.


As for what you have said next about the two different descriptions of Jesus, you have copied and pasted verbatim from the article of Waqar Akbar Cheema from thecult.info

I advise you to do your own research and write your own words. Nevertheless, I will in sha Allah answer Cheema's mistakes in my next post.
[/font]
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Abu Muhammad on July 06, 2017, 03:44:57 PM
You didn't answer why Allah Azza wa Jall says that He did not make bodies for His Messengers that can sustain without food. If Jesus is alive in heaven with his earthen body how is he being sustained without food? This is not disbelief in the unseen, this is the verdict of the Qur'an itself. I am not denying the unseen, or even extraordinary and supernatural things. But anyone who claims something extraordinary or supernatural cannot simply say "we have to believe in the Unseen". Everything we believe from the Unseen has to have a basis in divine Revelation. So it is not only a rational argument, but also a Qur'anic argument that I am making that how can Jesus be alive in his physical body in the Heavens without food or nourishment when the Holy Qur'an says the Jasad (body) of a Prophet, like that of any other Bashar, cannot survive without food.

If you say that Jesus is being provided food and eating in Heaven, then you have contradicted another Verse of the Holy Qur'an:

كَانَا يَأْكُلَانِ الطَّعَامَ
Both Jesus and his mother Mary used to eat food (Sura 5:75)

Examine this Verse carefully. Kaanaa is dual form and past tense. Yaakulaan is likewise in dual form. It means that both Jesus and his mother Mary used to eat food in the past. They do not eat food anymore because both are deceased. but if you say that Jesus is not deceased, you will still have to admit, based on this Ayah, that he doesn't eat food because Kaanaa is for past tense.

And if Jesus doesn't eat food anymore, it means his Jasad can no longer be sustained. So your aqida is not only illogical or irrational, it is clearly against the revelation of the Qur'an. It is against both Revelation and Rationality, all the more reason to reject it.

What have you got to say about Ashab Al-Kahf? For sure they didn't grow roots, did they?

Do not say that sleeping is different from awake. Your body still needs sustenance regardless.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Hadrami on July 06, 2017, 04:37:25 PM
You didn't answer why Allah Azza wa Jall says that He did not make bodies for His Messengers that can sustain without food. If Jesus is alive in heaven with his earthen body how is he being sustained without food? This is not disbelief in the unseen, this is the verdict of the Qur'an itself. I am not denying the unseen, or even extraordinary and supernatural things. But anyone who claims something extraordinary or supernatural cannot simply say "we have to believe in the Unseen". Everything we believe from the Unseen has to have a basis in divine Revelation. So it is not only a rational argument, but also a Qur'anic argument that I am making that how can Jesus be alive in his physical body in the Heavens without food or nourishment when the Holy Qur'an says the Jasad (body) of a Prophet, like that of any other Bashar, cannot survive without food.

If you say that Jesus is being provided food and eating in Heaven, then you have contradicted another Verse of the Holy Qur'an:

كَانَا يَأْكُلَانِ الطَّعَامَ
Both Jesus and his mother Mary used to eat food (Sura 5:75)

Examine this Verse carefully. Kaanaa is dual form and past tense. Yaakulaan is likewise in dual form. It means that both Jesus and his mother Mary used to eat food in the past. They do not eat food anymore because both are deceased. but if you say that Jesus is not deceased, you will still have to admit, based on this Ayah, that he doesn't eat food because Kaanaa is for past tense.

And if Jesus doesn't eat food anymore, it means his Jasad can no longer be sustained. So your aqida is not only illogical or irrational, it is clearly against the revelation of the Qur'an. It is against both Revelation and Rationality, all the more reason to reject it.

What have you got to say about Ashab Al-Kahf? For sure they didn't grow roots, did they?

Do not say that sleeping is different from awake. Your body still needs sustenance regardless.

Forget about food & drinks. I doubt there is oxygen in the belly of a whale :D
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 06, 2017, 11:26:11 PM

What have you got to say about Ashab Al-Kahf? For sure they didn't grow roots, did they?

Do not say that sleeping is different from awake. Your body still needs sustenance regardless.

Brother read the entire thread, I already discussed the AsHab al Kahf in 2 previous entries:
http://forum.twelvershia.net/imamah-ghaybah/challenge-to-sunnis-ghayba-of-ibn-mariam/msg16588/#msg16588
http://forum.twelvershia.net/imamah-ghaybah/challenge-to-sunnis-ghayba-of-ibn-mariam/msg16629/#msg16629


Quote from: Hadrami
Forget about food & drinks. I doubt there is oxygen in the belly of a whale :D

It's a good point, but sayyidina Yunus عليه السلام was only in the belly of the whale for a very short period of time where it is possible for a human being to survive even without oxygen. Nevertheless, even when he was vomited out of the whale and came on dry shore he was extremely sick. The fact that he was so sick means what happened was natural, it was not anything supernatural. If it was supernatural then he would not have been extremely sick when he came out of the whale. So he was in the whale's belly for a very short period of time, but even then, being a human being, he obviously became sick and close to dying. He was not there for 2000 years, but you guys believe Jesus is living in the sky without food and nourishment for 2000 years!
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 07, 2017, 12:09:05 AM
Now I am going to respond to the arguments raised by Waqar Akbar Cheema, which Noor-us-Sunnah not only copied and pasted verbatim but failed to acknowledge and credit his source, so as to deceptively make it appear as though these are his own words:

Apparently there seem to be two contradictions here;

1) About Complexion

2) About Hair

In the following lines we discuss in detail all the various Ahadith about the issue.

Complexion:

1) As to the complexion, apparently there seems to be a contradiction but there isn’t any. One Hadith of Ibn Umar (RA) above says that the Holy Prophet (PBUH) described Jesus (PBUH) to be of red complexion while other narration from him says he was described to be of wheatish complexion. This apparent contradiction is resolved considering other narrations.

عَنْ سَالِمٍ عَنْ أَبِيهِ قَالَ لَا وَاللَّهِ مَا قَالَ النَّبِيُّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ لِعِيسَى أَحْمَرُ وَلَكِنْ قَالَ بَيْنَمَا أَنَا نَائِمٌ أَطُوفُ بِالْكَعْبَةِ فَإِذَا رَجُلٌ آدَمُ سَبْطُ الشَّعَرِ

Salim reports from his father (i.e. Abdullah bin Umar), he said: “No, By Allah, the Prophet did not say that Jesus was of red complexion but he said, “While I was asleep circumambulating the Ka’ba (in my dream), suddenly I saw a man of brown complexion and lank hair.” (Bukhari, Kitabul Ahadith al-Anbiya, Hadith 3185)

2) Considering the fact that Ibn Umar (RA) himself so emphatically repudiates the idea that Holy Prophet (PBUH) described Jesus (PBUH) to be of red complexion so we have to believe, the narration which attributes to Ibn Umar (RA) the report of Holy Prophet describing Jesus as such is perhaps a mistake by some later narrator. Jesus (PBUH) was not purely of red complexion. Infact this is generally not true for the Semitic people.

3) The rightful description of Jesus (PBUH) is as narrated by Ibn Abbas (RA):

ابْنَ عَبَّاسٍ رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُمَا عَنْ النَّبِيِّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ قَالَ …َرَأَيْتُ عِيسَى رَجُلًا مَرْبُوعًا مَرْبُوعَ الْخَلْقِ إِلَى الْحُمْرَةِ وَالْبَيَاضِ سَبِطَ الرَّأْسِ

Narrated Ibn Abbas: The Prophet said, “On the night of my Ascent to the Heaven, … I saw Jesus, a man of medium height and moderate complexion inclined to the red and white colors and of lank hair.” (Bukhari, Kitabul Bad’ al-Khalq, Hadith 3000)

4) Infact his complexion was neither white as lime nor purely red but something between these two as described in the Hadith above. And the same complexion was sometimes referred to as ‘wheatish’ or ‘wheat-colored.’

Al-Nawawi has written the same in his commentary to the Hadith that speaks of red complexion of Jesus (PBUH):

وَأَنَّهُ اِشْتَبَهَ عَلَى الرَّاوِي فَيَجُوز أَنْ يُتَأَوَّل الْأَحْمَر عَلَى الْأَدَم ، وَلَا يَكُون الْمُرَاد حَقِيقَة الْأُدْمَة وَالْحُمْرَة بَلْ مَا قَارَبَهَا

“And this is confusion on the part of the narrator and perhaps he took red to be wheat-like and it does not mean tan or red but what is near to it.” (Sharah Al-Nawawi on Sahih Muslim 1/302, Kitabul Iman)

5) The fact of the matter is that it’s not easy to describe ones complexion. The same is evident from the fact that Anas (RA) in one narration says Holy Prophet (PBUH) was wheatish in complexion and in another narration says he was not wheat-colored. (Shamail Tirmidhi Hadith 1 & 2. Both authenticated by Albani)

Waqar Akbar Cheema has presented nothing but circular arguments here. His main point is that the narrator must have made a mistake because Jesus can obviously have only 1 complexion. So he is arguing against the apparent purport of these narrations that the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم described Jesus with 2 opposing physical descriptions by saying it must be a mistake because there can only be 1 description. This is nothing but a circular argument. Even if we take at face value the explanation that Jesus was not of reddish complexion, but somewhere in between the reddish and white complexion, it still doesn't negate the fact that in the Vision of the Ka'ba, the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم described him as being Adam which means dark and brown.

Quote
The Hair:

1) As to the hair; straight or curly, we need to have a look at the actual wording of the Hadith that is taken to speak about the curly hair of Jesus (PBUH);

فَأَمَّا عِيسَى فَأَحْمَرُ جَعْدٌ

The usual translation goes as; “Jesus was of red complexion [and] curly hair.”

Here the word جَعْدٌ is taken to mean curly hair but this is not the exclusive meaning of this word. Ibn Athir
writes about it:

مَعْناه… شَدِيد الأسْرِ

i.e. “It means… ‘Of strong built.’” and further gives an example of it from Hadith:

والحديث الآخر [ على ناقة جَعْدَة ] أي مُجْتَمِعة الخَلْق شَدِيدةٍ

“In another Hadīth, ‘On a camel of strong built’ i.e. of rigorously cogent built.” (Nihaya fi Gharib al-Asar 1/767)

Indeed scholars have always taken جَعْدٌ to mean ‘of strong built’ in this context. Hafiz Ibn Hujr mentions that it refers to his physical bearing and not hair. He says;

وَوَصْفه لِجُعُودَةِ فِي جِسْمه لَا شَعْره وَالْمُرَاد بِذَلِكَ اِجْتِمَاعه وَاكْتِنَازه

“And this is about sturdiness in body, not the hair and it refers to its compactness and robustness” (Fath Al-Baari 10/242, kitabul ahadith al-anbiya)

Al-Nawawi has also said the very same. He writes;

الْمُرَاد بِالْجَعْدِ هُنَا جُعُودَة الْجِسْم وَهُوَ اِجْتِمَاعه وَاكْتِنَازه وَلَيْسَ الْمُرَاد جُعُودَة الشَّعْر
.
“Here جَعْدِ means firmness of the body i.e. its compactness and being thickset. And it does not refer to curling of the hair’ (Sharah Al-Nawawi on Sahih Muslim 1/296, Kitabul Iman)

2) So the correct and most suitable translation of the Hadith which is generally taken to refer to the curly hair of Jesus (PBUH) is:

Narrated Ibn Umar: The Prophet said, “I saw Moses, Jesus and Abraham (on the night of my Ascension to the heavens). Jesus was (person) with red complexion, robust body and a broad chest.” (Bukhari, Hadith 3183)

Similar Description of Jesus (PBUH) as seen during Mi’raj and on his descent:

The thing of utmost importance we need to consider here is the fact that when the Holy Prophet (PBUH) told about the features of the Jesus (PBUH) to recognize him on his descent it went directly in line with the description of Jesus (PBUH) found in the Ahadith about Night of Ascension (Mi’raj).

ابْنَ عَبَّاسٍ رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُمَا عَنْ النَّبِيِّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ قَالَ …َرَأَيْتُ عِيسَى رَجُلًا مَرْبُوعًا مَرْبُوعَ الْخَلْقِ إِلَى الْحُمْرَةِ وَالْبَيَاضِ سَبِطَ الرَّأْسِ
Narrated Ibn Abbas: The Prophet said, “On the night of my Ascent to the Heaven … I saw Jesus, a man of medium height and moderate complexion inclined to the red and white colors and of lank hair.” (Bukhari, kitabul bad’ al-khalq , Hadith 3000)

عن أبي هريرة أن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم قال ليس بيني وبينه نبي يعني عيسى وإنه نازل فإذا رأيتموه فاعرفوه رجل مربوع إلى الحمرة والبياض

Narrated Abu Huraira: The Prophet (PBUH) said: There is no prophet between me and him, that is, Jesus (PBUH). He will descend (to the earth). When you see him, recognize him: a man of medium height, complexion inclined to red and white…” (Abu Dawud, Kitabul Malahim, Hadith 4324. Classified as Sahih by Albani)

This proves that the man who is described in the Ahadith to descend from the Heavens near the End of Times will be same Israelite Prophet whom the Holy Prophet (PBUH) met during the Miraculous Night (Mi’raj).
All these details upholds the unanimous Muslim belief that Jesus of Nazareth will indeed descend from the Heavens.

Cheema's argument is that جعد can also mean robust built. Overlooking the fact that virtually every published English translation of these Ahadith say "curly haired" instead of "robust built" when translating جعد in relation to Jesus. For example, let's examine the English translation of Muhammad Muhsin Khan as published by Darussalam:

(https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-i64fwPN2gPQ/WV6jqi0uOdI/AAAAAAAACd4/0zEWYXJQ0uA6XbEtHaQFooSV_LoWpH96QCLcBGAs/s640/title.png)
(https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-2hpYF03QdyI/WV6jrRhsu-I/AAAAAAAACd8/w6VLyZUFbdcegXTm179vADhmp6Qj3lVFACLcBGAs/s1600/Untitled.png)
(https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-vE60xguuX9c/WV6jsGLI8kI/AAAAAAAACeA/S9Q8_sRvc7k4UnLjbDaBsmr0I_PTgDItgCLcBGAs/s1600/Untitled2.png)

Couple of things to point out here. In the first Hadith about the Mi'raj, both Musa and Eisa عليهما السلام are described by 3 particular features: complexion, hair, and body. When it comes to Musa, his complexion is Adam (brown), his hair is Sabt (straight) and his body is Jaseem (large). When it comes to Eisa, his complexion is Ahmar (red), his hair is Ja'd (curly), and he has a broad chest عريض الصدر. Now according to Waqar Cheema, جعد when applied to Jesus means he is of robust built. If hypothetically that is true, it means this Hadith has not described Eisa's hair at all, despite having described Musa's hair. So that is not only a forced interpretation it is inconsistent with the context and pattern of the Hadith. Secondly, in this Hadith Eisa's body has already been described as عريض الصدر so it would be redundant to understand جعد as describing the body of Eisa and not his hair.
I reproduce the Hadith from Bukhari for your benefit:

عَنِ ابْنِ عَبَّاسٍ ـ رضى الله عنهما ـ قَالَ قَالَ النَّبِيُّ صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏ "‏ رَأَيْتُ عِيسَى وَمُوسَى وَإِبْرَاهِيمَ، فَأَمَّا عِيسَى فَأَحْمَرُ جَعْدٌ عَرِيضُ الصَّدْرِ، وَأَمَّا مُوسَى فَآدَمُ جَسِيمٌ سَبْطٌ كَأَنَّهُ مِنْ رِجَالِ الزُّطِّ
Narrated Ibn `Abbas: The Prophet (ﷺ) said, "I saw Moses, Jesus and Abraham (on the night of my Ascension to the heavens). Jesus was of red complexion, curly hair and a broad chest. Moses was of brown complexion, straight hair and tall stature as if he was from the people of Az-Zutt." (Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith #3438)

Now there are 2 subsequent Hadiths which describe Jesus according to the Prophet's vision of him circling the Ka'ba. It is self-evidently a very different description to the one from the Mi'raj. In that Hadith it is emphasized that Jesus is dark or brown complexion "the best one can see amongst brown color". And his hair is described as lank and long reaching down to his shoulders. Then in the same Hadith Dajjal is described as having curly hair جعد. Virtually every Sharih is agreed that جعد when applied to Dajjal means he has curly hair.

To conclude, Waqar Cheema's response proves how inconsistent he is, and how he is not objective, rather trying to prove his own preconceived bias through circular arguments.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Hadrami on July 07, 2017, 12:42:11 AM
Quote from: Hadrami
Forget about food & drinks. I doubt there is oxygen in the belly of a whale :D

It's a good point, but sayyidina Yunus عليه السلام was only in the belly of the whale for a very short period of time where it is possible for a human being to survive even without oxygen. Nevertheless, even when he was vomited out of the whale and came on dry shore he was extremely sick. The fact that he was so sick means what happened was natural, it was not anything supernatural. If it was supernatural then he would not have been extremely sick when he came out of the whale. So he was in the whale's belly for a very short period of time, but even then, being a human being, he obviously became sick and close to dying. He was not there for 2000 years, but you guys believe Jesus is living in the sky without food and nourishment for 2000 years!

ah all of sudden the poopoo false prophet fan is acting as if its natural & logical for someone to be inside a whale's belly for days and lived :D
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 07, 2017, 12:43:49 AM

ah all of sudden the poopoo false prophet fan is acting as if its natural & logical for someone to be inside a whale's belly for days and lived :D

Who said days? I emphatically said a very short period of time.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Hadrami on July 07, 2017, 12:47:31 AM

ah all of sudden the poopoo false prophet fan is acting as if its natural & logical for someone to be inside a whale's belly for days and lived :D

Who said days? I emphatically said a very short period of time.
i suppose you also gonna say Ibrahim AS was also burnt for a very short period of time to defend your idiotic argument?
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 07, 2017, 12:52:48 AM

i suppose you also gonna say Ibrahim AS was also burnt for a very short period of time to defend your idiotic argument?

It's idiotic to change the topic and give analogies that are immaterial. We are discussing the fact that the Jasad (body) of a Prophet cannot survive without nourishment. We are not talking about Mu'jizaat or Khawariq al Aadat
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Hadrami on July 07, 2017, 01:35:36 AM

i suppose you also gonna say Ibrahim AS was also burnt for a very short period of time to defend your idiotic argument?

It's idiotic to change the topic and give analogies that are immaterial. We are discussing the fact that the Jasad (body) of a Prophet cannot survive without nourishment. We are not talking about Mu'jizaat or Khawariq al Aadat
nah, a poopoo false prophet admirer like you the idiotic one. You are saying its impossible for a flesh & blood not to have food & drink, but now change the course when i show you Yunus AS didnt need oxygen to breath or Ibrahim AS flesh wasnt affected by fire. Keep dreaming about your poopoo flase prophet surely damaged your brain
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: zaid_ibn_ali on July 07, 2017, 01:52:23 AM
@zulfiqar

Seriously you have one hell (excuse the pun😃) of an imagination (thats what your evidences mainly branch out to - your own vivid personal whim filled taweel of everything under the sun).

Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: zaid_ibn_ali on July 07, 2017, 01:55:07 AM
I advise the mods on here to move all threads created by zulfiqar to one qadiani thread.
At the moment there's various threads all of which are pro qadiani filling up the forum & taking away the focus of thr actual forum i.e shia sect.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Abu Muhammad on July 07, 2017, 03:05:56 AM


What have you got to say about Ashab Al-Kahf? For sure they didn't grow roots, did they?

Do not say that sleeping is different from awake. Your body still needs sustenance regardless.

Brother read the entire thread, I already discussed the AsHab al Kahf in 2 previous entries:
http://forum.twelvershia.net/imamah-ghaybah/challenge-to-sunnis-ghayba-of-ibn-mariam/msg16588/#msg16588
http://forum.twelvershia.net/imamah-ghaybah/challenge-to-sunnis-ghayba-of-ibn-mariam/msg16629/#msg16629

I've been following this thread all this while and read your 2 previous posts before. The arguments you brought there were basically just some random thoughts and bizzare interpretation of of the event as well. Even some of them seemed against what were stated in the quran. Here is what you said:

The Ashab al Kahf story isn't an example of Ghayba. They did not become "invisible", in fact the Holy Qur'an says that if you were to see them you would become terrified (Sura 18:18). And not to go on a tangent, but its worth studying the story of Ashab al Kahf in depth, there does seem to be some indication to me that their sleeping for 300 years may have been misunderstood and taken too literally. The Qur'an does say that if you saw them you would think they were awake, even though they were sleeping, and it says that do you think they were something strange from Our Signs (rhetorical question). Remember, the Holy Qur'an never explicitly tells us exactly how many Ashab al Kahf there were. It could be this was an entire society that had withdrawn from society into remote caves and they were described as sleeping because they were living in isolation from the rest of the world and not aware of what was going no beyond their cave. I personally have always doubted that the Ashab al Kahf refer to the legend of the 7 sleepers of Ephesus, and think that the context and lesson from this story of Ashab al Kahf matches more with certain introversionist sects of Jews and Christians that withdrew in caves and remote areas, like the Essenes and the Qumran community.

It was brief too and not surprising since your focus there were mainly on the issue of ghaybah.

Since now the sub-discussion is with regard to human body living without any sustenance for a period beyond normal, how could you substantiate your argument to disapprove the premise that those Ashab Al-Kahfi lived for hundreds of years without any foods and drink.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Hadrami on July 07, 2017, 03:50:23 AM
I advise the mods on here to move all threads created by zulfiqar to one qadiani thread.
At the moment there's various threads all of which are pro qadiani filling up the forum & taking away the focus of thr actual forum i.e shia sect.

not a good idea, this forum is made specifically for sunni vs shia issue not sunni vs poopoo false prophet discussion. Just look at how much time we have wasted replying to him.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 07, 2017, 03:54:46 AM


I've been following this thread all this while and read your 2 previous posts before. The arguments you brought there were basically just some random thoughts and bizzare interpretation of of the event as well. Even some of them seemed against what were stated in the quran. Here is what you said:

It was brief too and not surprising since your focus there were mainly on the issue of ghaybah.

Since now the sub-discussion is with regard to human body living without any sustenance for a period beyond normal, how could you substantiate your argument to disapprove the premise that those Ashab Al-Kahfi lived for hundreds of years without any foods and drink.

The first point to understand is that the number of the AsHab al-Kahf has not been revealed

قُل رَّبِّي أَعْلَمُ بِعِدَّتِهِم مَّا يَعْلَمُهُمْ إِلَّا قَلِيلٌ
Say "My Lord knows best their number, none of them know except a few" (Sura 18:22)

The second point is that AsHab is in plural. If there were a large number of them to say that they lived for hundreds of years, it is not necessarily meaning individually, but rather collectively. In other words, collectively there was a group known as "AsHab al-Kahf" that remained in the cave for 3 centuries.

The third point is that in the story of AsHab al-Kahf as related purely from the Holy Qur'an, it is never explicitly stated that they were asleep [ruqood] for the entire duration. That verse says:

وَتَحْسَبُهُمْ أَيْقَاظًا وَهُمْ رُقُودٌ
You would have imagined them to be awake, but they were asleep (Sura 18:18)

This Verse doesn't say they were asleep for the entire 300 years.

One of the questions I raised was why would we think they are awake when in reality they are sleeping? What is the secret behind this mystery? Ordinarily it is not difficult to determine if someone is awake or sleeping, especially if literal sleep is meant.

Then the Verse goes on to say:

لَوِ اطَّلَعْتَ عَلَيْهِمْ لَوَلَّيْتَ مِنْهُمْ فِرَارًا وَلَمُلِئْتَ مِنْهُمْ رُعْبًا
Had you looked at them, you would certainly have turned back from them in flight, and would certainly have been filled with awe of them.

Why would looking at a group of people that are fast asleep cause such terror in us that if we were to see them we would run for our lives? Here is another mystery that needs to be solved.

The fourth point is that Allah informs us that the story of AsHab al Kahf is nothing strange or unusual:

أَمْ حَسِبْتَ أَنَّ أَصْحَابَ الْكَهْفِ وَالرَّقِيمِ كَانُوا مِنْ آيَاتِنَا عَجَبًا
Do you think that the Companions of the Cave and Raqim were from among our Signs something strange? (Sura 18:9)

This is a rhetorical question, meaning that the Companions of the Cave were not something Ajeeb (strange, unusual, extraordinary).

So the apparent interpretation of this story, that the Companions of the Cave fell asleep for 300 years, definitely qualifies as something strange and unusual.

The fifth point is that Allah says:

فَضَرَبْنَا عَلَىٰ آذَانِهِمْ فِي الْكَهْفِ سِنِينَ عَدَدًا
So We covered their ears in the Cave for a number of years (18:11)

This has been the foundation for the popular belief that the Companions of the Cave were literally asleep for many years. But it is not explicitly clear from this wording that sleep is meant when it is said that Allah covered their ears. This simply means that they were in such a state that they were not hearing what was going on around them. Their ears were sealed. My understanding, take it or leave it, that these Companions of the Cave isolated themselves in the Cave to escape the tribulations of their time (which the Qur'an informs us about), hence, the sealing of their ears means they were isolated and not aware or hearing what was occurring in their society.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Noor-us-Sunnah on July 07, 2017, 11:48:25 AM
You didn't answer why Allah Azza wa Jall says that He did not make bodies for His Messengers that can sustain without food. If Jesus is alive in heaven with his earthen body how is he being sustained without food? This is not disbelief in the unseen, this is the verdict of the Qur'an itself. I am not denying the unseen, or even extraordinary and supernatural things. But anyone who claims something extraordinary or supernatural cannot simply say "we have to believe in the Unseen". Everything we believe from the Unseen has to have a basis in divine Revelation. So it is not only a rational argument, but also a Qur'anic argument that I am making that how can Jesus be alive in his physical body in the Heavens without food or nourishment when the Holy Qur'an says the Jasad (body) of a Prophet, like that of any other Bashar, cannot survive without food.
Brother, the reason I quoted you the quranic verses with examples about believing in the unseen matters and supernatural events, is because in unseen matters or in supernatural events, you cannot question about the howness, the question about the howness itself is nonsensical. It matter of unseen, you have to believe it. If you ask me this question, neither would I deny it, nor affirm it. I say, Allah knows the best. And He is capable of providing nourshiment to His slaves anywhere He wants and anyway HE likes.

Let me demonstrate how foolish your argument.

خَلَقَ الإِنسَانَ مِن نُّطْفَةٍ فَإِذَا هُوَ خَصِيمٌ مُّبِينٌ
“He (Allah) has created man from a sperm-drop; and behold this same (man) becomes an open disputer!” [Quran 16:4]

Now, a person comes in and asks how did this Happen in the case of Isa's(as) birth, Did it happen through a sperm drop, and whose, etc etc. And when rebuked for his foolish question that person says, Hey i don't disbelieve in unseen, but I'm question based on  a quranic verse that Man is created from sperm. In that case, I say such a person is actually doubts in unseen in his heart, May be he doesn't realize it.



Quote
If you say that Jesus is being provided food and eating in Heaven, then you have contradicted another Verse of the Holy Qur'an:

كَانَا يَأْكُلَانِ الطَّعَامَ
Both Jesus and his mother Mary used to eat food (Sura 5:75).
It could be interpreted as earthly food. But for Isa(as) that would be Heavenly food. Or there is another possibility of remaining without food, take example of Uzayr(as) and the Ashaab Kahf whose body remained for many years without any change in them and without food.

But again, I would like to emphasize on the point that the heavenly dimension where Isa(as) is living, there the time hasn't changed much. This I demonstrated through the description of hair of Isa(as) from which water was dropping at the time of his ascend, and when Prophet(saws) him in his dream, as well as when he will descend.



Quote
There is difference of opinion of the Mufassireen regarding the donkey. The grammatical structure of the Ayah makes it clear that the donkey, like his food and drink, did not change or decay.
وَانظُرْ إِلَىٰ حِمَارِكَ
"And look to your donkey"
The Waw here is al-Waw 'Aatifah, meaning this is the Waw that is a prefixed conjunction. The idea that the donkey had decayed into bones doesn't fit with the grammar of the Verse.
Well first I presented the view from Tafseer Ibn KAtheer, since you seem to it when bringing argument against me, hence i did the same in my turn. Anyways, now I present few more Tafseers, who adopted this view, and these guys were excerpts in their field and Quranic Grammer, so let the readers judge whose view they adopt.

1. Or (bethink thee) the like of him who, passing by a township) He says: do you not know about 'Uzayr Ibn Shurahya who passed by the township of Dayr Hiraql (which had fallen into utter ruin, exclaimed: How shall Allah give this township life after its death) How can Allah bring the people of this township back to life after their death? (So Allah made him die) right on the spot (a hundred years, then brought him back to life) at the end of the day. (He) Allah (said: How long hast thou tarried) O 'Uzayr? (He said: I have tarried for a day) and then looked at the sun still in the horizon and said (or part of a day. He) Allah (said: Nay, but thou hast tarried) you were dead (for a hundred years. Just look at thy food) figs and grapes (and drink) juice (which have not rotted! Look at thine ass!) look at the bones of your ass how white they look! (And, that We may make thee a token) a sign (to mankind) regarding the matter of bringing the dead to life, that they will be resurrected in the same state they died in, because 'Uzayr died young and was brought back to life as a young person. It is said that Allah made him a lesson for people, for he died when he was 40 years old and was brought back to life when his son was 120 years old, (look at the bones) the bones of your ass, (how We adjust them and then cover them with flesh!) after this. He then said: We will make grow on it nerves and veins, flesh, skin and hair and put the spirit in it. (And when (the matter) became clear unto him) how Allah gathers the bones, (he said: I know) I had known (that Allah is Able to do all things) of life and death. [Tanwîr al-Miqbâs min Tafsîr Ibn ‘Abbâs]

2. Or did you see such as he Ezra ‘Uzayr who the kāf of ka’lladhī ‘such as he who’ is extra passed by a city namely the Holy House sc. Jerusalem riding on an ass and carrying with him a basket of figs and a cup of juice a city that was fallen down collapsed upon its turrets its roof tops after Nebuchadnezzar had destroyed it; he said ‘How annā means kayfa ‘how’ shall God give life to this now that it is dead?’ challenging the power of the exalted One so God made him die and remain dead for a hundred years then he raised him up brought him back to life to show him how this could be done; He God said ‘How long have you tarried?’ been here?; he said ‘I have tarried a day or part of a day’ because he fell asleep before noon and was made dead and then brought back to life again at sunset and thus he thought it was a day’s sleep; He said ‘Nay; you have tarried a hundred years. Look at your food the figs and drink the cup of juice it has not spoiled despite the length of time the final hā’ of yatasannah ‘to spoil’ is said to belong to the original root s-n-h; but it is also said to be silent in which case the root would be s-n-y; a variant reading omits the final hā’; and look at your ass how it is and he saw that it had died and all that remained were its withered white bones. We did this so that you would know and so that We would make you a sign of the truth of the Resurrection for the people. And look at the bones of the ass how We shall set them up how We shall raise them back to life nunshiruhā or nanshiruhā derived from the two expressions nashara and anshara; a variant reading has nunshizuhā meaning ‘How We shall move it and make it stand’; and then clothe them with flesh’ and when he looked at it he saw that the bones had been reconstituted and clothed with flesh and that the Spirit had been breathed into it making it bray. So when it was made clear to him as a result of witnessing it he said ‘I know a variant reading for a‘lam ‘I know’ has the imperative i‘lam ‘know!’ thus making it a command from God with the knowledge of direct vision that God has power over all things’. [Tafsir al-Jalalayn]
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 07, 2017, 12:31:03 PM

Brother, the reason I quoted you the quranic verses with examples about believing in the unseen matters and supernatural events, is because in unseen matters or in supernatural events, you cannot question about the howness, the question about the howness itself is nonsensical. It matter of unseen, you have to believe it. If you ask me this question, neither would I deny it, nor affirm it. I say, Allah knows the best. And He is capable of providing nourshiment to His slaves anywhere He wants and anyway HE likes.

I am not questioning the howness or modality of something that is unseen, I am disputing your belief to be true that Jesus is alive in the Heavens with his earthen body, because such a belief doesn't have any proof from the Quran. This is like debating a Twelver Shi'ite about the ghayba of the 12th Imam. If he says "Don't question about the howness of the Unseen" your answer to him is "first prove it is a matter of the unseen and not a fabrication"

Quote
Let me demonstrate how foolish your argument.

خَلَقَ الإِنسَانَ مِن نُّطْفَةٍ فَإِذَا هُوَ خَصِيمٌ مُّبِينٌ
“He (Allah) has created man from a sperm-drop; and behold this same (man) becomes an open disputer!” [Quran 16:4]

Now, a person comes in and asks how did this Happen in the case of Isa's(as) birth, Did it happen through a sperm drop, and whose, etc etc. And when rebuked for his foolish question that person says, Hey i don't disbelieve in unseen, but I'm question based on  a quranic verse that Man is created from sperm. In that case, I say such a person is actually doubts in unseen in his heart, May be he doesn't realize it.

Sayyidina Isa عليه السلام being from the progeny of Adam like all of humanity was indeed created from the Nutfah of sayyidina Adam عليه السلام.
The only exception to this is Adam and Eve, but that exception is already implied in the Verse, since the Nutfah that is mentioned there is the Nutfah of sayyidina Adam عليه السلام through which al-Insaan (humanity) was created, including sayyidina Isa عليه السلام.


Quote
It could be interpreted as earthly food. But for Isa(as) that would be Heavenly food. Or there is another possibility of remaining without food

Ta'am means food, especially that which grows from the earth. The Qur'an says that the Jasad (Body) of a Prophet cannot survive without Ta'am (earthly food) see Sura 21:8. So there is no possibility of remaining without food with one's Jasad. Now it is your aqida that Jesus was raised to Heaven with this Jasad. If you said only the Ruh of Jesus was raised to Heaven, then yes, there is the possibility to remain without food, or with "heavenly food". But since your aqida is tied to the raising up of the Jasad, there is no way your belief can escape the being cut apart with the knife of Sura 21:8

Quote
take example of Uzayr(as) and the Ashaab Kahf whose body remained for many years without any change in them and without food.

I've already discussed both of these 2 examples at length.

Quote
But again, I would like to emphasize on the point that the heavenly dimension where Isa(as) is living, there the time hasn't changed much. This I demonstrated through the description of hair of Isa(as) from which water was dropping at the time of his ascend, and when Prophet(saws) him in his dream, as well as when he will descend.

You quoted the Athar of a Sahabi which is not a Hujjah in the Din. Secondly, I proved that there are 2 opposing descriptions of the physical appearance of Jesus, 1 from the vision of him during the Mi'raj, where he is described as being reddish complexion, curly hair, and broad chest, and the other from the vision of him circling the Ka'ba, where he is described as brown, the best kind of brown, with straight lank hair reaching down to his shoulders (Bukhari).

Quote
Well first I presented the view from Tafseer Ibn KAtheer, since you seem to it when bringing argument against me, hence i did the same in my turn. Anyways, now I present few more Tafseers, who adopted this view, and these guys were excerpts in their field and Quranic Grammer, so let the readers judge whose view they adopt.

I mentioned earlier that the Mufassireen have ikhtilaaf in the issue of the donkey. If all of the Mufassireen were in agreement, then your argument would be strong that they were experts in the field of grammar so no need to oppose their agreed upon opinion. But that simply isn't the case. Here I will quote from an even better and older Tafsir than Ibn Kathir, which is the Tafsir of Ibn Jarir:

وقال آخرون: بل جعل الله الروح فـي رأسه وبصره وجسده ميتاً، فرأى حماره قائما كهيئته يوم ربطه وطعامه وشرابه كهيئته يوم حلّ البقعة، ثم قال الله له: انظر إلـى عظام نفسك كيف ننشزها. ذكر من قال ذلك:

حدثنـي مـحمد بن سهل بن عسكر، قال: ثنا إسماعيـل بن عبد الكريم، قال: ثنـي عبد الصمد بن معقل أنه سمع وهب بن منبه يقول: ردّ الله روح الـحياة فـي عين أرمياء وآخر جسده ميت، فنظر إلـى طعامه وشرابه لـم يتسنه، ونظر إلـى حماره واقـفـاً كهيئته يوم ربطه، لـم يطعم ولـم يشرب، ونظر إلـى الرمة فـي عنق الـحمار لـم تتغير جديدة.

حدثت عن الـحسن، قال: سمعت أبـا معاذ، قال: ثنا عبـيد بن سلـيـمان، قال: سمعت الضحاك يقول فـي قوله: { فَأَمَاتَهُ ٱللَّهُ مِاْئَةَ عَامٍ ثُمَّ بَعَثَهُ } فنظر إلـى حماره قائماً قد مكث مائة عام، وإلـى طعامه لـم يتغير قد أتـى علـيه مائة عام. { وَٱنظُرْ إِلَى ٱلعِظَامِ كَيْفَ نُنشِزُهَا ثُمَّ نَكْسُوهَا لَحْمًا } فكان أول شيء أحيا الله منه رأسه، فجعل ينظر إلـى سائر خـلقه يخـلق.

حدثنـي الـمثنى، قال: ثنا إسحاق، قال: ثنا أبو زهير، عن جويبر، عن الضحاك فـي قوله: { فَأَمَاتَهُ ٱللَّهُ مِاْئَةَ عَامٍ ثُمَّ بَعَثَهُ } فنظر إلـى حماره قائماً، وإلـى طعامه وشرابه لـم يتغير، فكان أول شيء خـلق منه رأسه، فجعل ينظر إلـى كل شيء منه يوصل بعضه إلـى بعض. فلـما تبـين له، قال: أعلـم أن الله علـى كل شيء قدير.

http://www.altafsir.com/Tafasir.asp?tMadhNo=0&tTafsirNo=1&tSoraNo=2&tAyahNo=259&tDisplay=yes&Page=14&Size=1&LanguageId=1

حدثنـي يونس، قال: أخبرنا ابن وهب، قال: أخبرنا ابن زيد قال قوله: { وَٱنظُرْ إِلَىٰ طَعَامِكَ وَشَرَابِكَ لَمْ يَتَسَنَّهْ وَٱنظُرْ إِلَىٰ حِمَارِكَ } واقـفـاً علـيك منذ مائة سنة

حدثنـي يونس، قال: أخبرنا ابن وهب، قال: أخبرنـي بكر بن مضر، قال: يزعمون فـي بعض الكتب أن الله أمات أرمياء مائة عام، ثم بعثه، فإذا حماره حيّ قائم علـى ربـاطه

So all of the narrations from the Muhaddithin I have quoted above are affirming the fact that the donkey was standing and remained as it was, it did not die and decay into bones.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: zaid_ibn_ali on July 07, 2017, 01:53:08 PM
What is Isa AS eating right now, did the donkey decay or not...

You make the practioners of kalaam seem normal compared to you!!😂😂
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Abu Muhammad on July 07, 2017, 05:17:39 PM
The challenge was for you to prove the impossibility of Ashab Al-Kahfi to live beyond a normal period of time without any sustenance. But none of your 5 points addresssing that. Instead, you interpreted the event with some unrelated argument.

1st argument:
The first point to understand is that the number of the AsHab al-Kahf has not been revealed

قُل رَّبِّي أَعْلَمُ بِعِدَّتِهِم مَّا يَعْلَمُهُمْ إِلَّا قَلِيلٌ
Say "My Lord knows best their number, none of them know except a few" (Sura 18:22)

How does the their number prove the impossibility of Ashab Al-Kahfi to live beyond a normal period of time without any sustenance?


2nd argument:
The second point is that AsHab is in plural. If there were a large number of them to say that they lived for hundreds of years, it is not necessarily meaning individually, but rather collectively. In other words, collectively there was a group known as "AsHab al-Kahf" that remained in the cave for 3 centuries.

Again, how does the number prove the impossibility of Ashab Al-Kahfi to live beyond a normal period of time without any sustenance?

3rd argument:
The third point is that in the story of AsHab al-Kahf as related purely from the Holy Qur'an, it is never explicitly stated that they were asleep [ruqood] for the entire duration. That verse says:

وَتَحْسَبُهُمْ أَيْقَاظًا وَهُمْ رُقُودٌ
You would have imagined them to be awake, but they were asleep (Sura 18:18)

This Verse doesn't say they were asleep for the entire 300 years.

One of the questions I raised was why would we think they are awake when in reality they are sleeping? What is the secret behind this mystery? Ordinarily it is not difficult to determine if someone is awake or sleeping, especially if literal sleep is meant.

Then the Verse goes on to say:

لَوِ اطَّلَعْتَ عَلَيْهِمْ لَوَلَّيْتَ مِنْهُمْ فِرَارًا وَلَمُلِئْتَ مِنْهُمْ رُعْبًا
Had you looked at them, you would certainly have turned back from them in flight, and would certainly have been filled with awe of them.

Why would looking at a group of people that are fast asleep cause such terror in us that if we were to see them we would run for our lives? Here is another mystery that needs to be solved.

How does that prove the impossibility of Ashab Al-Kahfi to live beyond a normal period of time without any sustenance?

4th argument:
The fourth point is that Allah informs us that the story of AsHab al Kahf is nothing strange or unusual:

أَمْ حَسِبْتَ أَنَّ أَصْحَابَ الْكَهْفِ وَالرَّقِيمِ كَانُوا مِنْ آيَاتِنَا عَجَبًا
Do you think that the Companions of the Cave and Raqim were from among our Signs something strange? (Sura 18:9)

This is a rhetorical question, meaning that the Companions of the Cave were not something Ajeeb (strange, unusual, extraordinary).

So the apparent interpretation of this story, that the Companions of the Cave fell asleep for 300 years, definitely qualifies as something strange and unusual.

Again, how does that prove the impossibility of Ashab Al-Kahfi to live beyond a normal period of time without any sustenance?


5th argument:
The fifth point is that Allah says:

فَضَرَبْنَا عَلَىٰ آذَانِهِمْ فِي الْكَهْفِ سِنِينَ عَدَدًا
So We covered their ears in the Cave for a number of years (18:11)

This has been the foundation for the popular belief that the Companions of the Cave were literally asleep for many years. But it is not explicitly clear from this wording that sleep is meant when it is said that Allah covered their ears. This simply means that they were in such a state that they were not hearing what was going on around them. Their ears were sealed. My understanding, take it or leave it, that these Companions of the Cave isolated themselves in the Cave to escape the tribulations of their time (which the Qur'an informs us about), hence, the sealing of their ears means they were isolated and not aware or hearing what was occurring in their society.

And finally, again, how does that prove the impossibility of Ashab Al-Kahfi to live beyond a normal period of time without any sustenance?


You see. None of your 5 points addresssing the issue raised. Instead, you interpreted the event with some unrelated arguments indeed.

Some notes for you before you reply anything:

1. Those guys were a group of youths. This is proven from the word "fityatun" as addressed by Allah. Hence, it doesn't fit "the entire society" as you previously suggested.

2. Looking at verse 17, it was clearly stated that the rising and setting of the sun observable from the cave. And yet, in verse 19, they were questioning among themselves how long they were in the cave with their guessing were a day or half. If they were not sleeping and been living in the cave for 300 years, this conversation of theirs must have not been arisen.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Noor-us-Sunnah on July 07, 2017, 06:19:23 PM
Waqar Akbar Cheema has presented nothing but circular arguments here. His main point is that the narrator must have made a mistake because Jesus can obviously have only 1 complexion. So he is arguing against the apparent purport of these narrations that the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم described Jesus with 2 opposing physical descriptions by saying it must be a mistake because there can only be 1 description. This is nothing but a circular argument. Even if we take at face value the explanation that Jesus was not of reddish complexion, but somewhere in between the reddish and white complexion, it still doesn't negate the fact that in the Vision of the Ka'ba, the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم described him as being Adam which means dark and brown.

This is what Imam Nawawi was trying to explain whom Waqar Akbar quoted.

Al-Nawawi has written the same in his commentary to the Hadith that speaks of red complexion of Jesus (PBUH):

وَأَنَّهُ اِشْتَبَهَ عَلَى الرَّاوِي فَيَجُوز أَنْ يُتَأَوَّل الْأَحْمَر عَلَى الْأَدَم ، وَلَا يَكُون الْمُرَاد حَقِيقَة الْأُدْمَة وَالْحُمْرَة بَلْ مَا قَارَبَهَا

“And this is confusion on the part of the narrator and perhaps he took red to be wheat-like(Adam) and it does not mean tan or red but what is near to it.” (Sharah Al-Nawawi on Sahih Muslim 1/302, Kitabul Iman).

Some other scholars have also explained these hadeeth.

Al-Qurtubi may Allaah have mercy upon him in his commentary on the Muwatta’,

    “Al-Qurtubi said, "Perhaps the dark complexion turned a brownish color close to red, as was the prevalent color among the Arabs. The two versions of the report can thereby be reconciled."”

As-Saffaareeni may Allaah have mercy upon him said,

    “There is no contradiction between reddish and dark skin because his brownish color could have been unmixed as stated earlier … The term Aadam denotes slight brownness, and having an unmixed complexion does not prevent reddishness. Ibn Hajar said, "This is because many people with dark complexion may have reddish cheeks."” [Lawaami‘ Al-Anwaar]

Taken from
http://www.islamweb.net/emainpage/index.php?page=showfatwa&Option=FatwaId&Id=298744

In my view this was an error from the narrators who narrated, they narrated the narration describing Isa(as) as per the meaning, this is a style of narrating which is accepted. Since the complexion of isa(as) was not a matter of Aqeedah, they were lenient when narrating it. But that doesn't make any impact on the fact which they reported about Aqeedah about the descend of Isa(as).


Quote
Cheema's argument is that جعد can also mean robust built. Overlooking the fact that virtually every published English translation of these Ahadith say "curly haired" instead of "robust built" when translating جعد in relation to Jesus. For example, let's examine the English translation of Muhammad Muhsin Khan as published by Darussalam:
(https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-i64fwPN2gPQ/WV6jqi0uOdI/AAAAAAAACd4/0zEWYXJQ0uA6XbEtHaQFooSV_LoWpH96QCLcBGAs/s640/title.png)
(https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-2hpYF03QdyI/WV6jrRhsu-I/AAAAAAAACd8/w6VLyZUFbdcegXTm179vADhmp6Qj3lVFACLcBGAs/s1600/Untitled.png)
(https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-vE60xguuX9c/WV6jsGLI8kI/AAAAAAAACeA/S9Q8_sRvc7k4UnLjbDaBsmr0I_PTgDItgCLcBGAs/s1600/Untitled2.png)
Here is the translation of the word (جعد) from Abdul Hamid Siddiqui in Sahih Muslim. He translated it well-built.

[ You are not allowed to view attachments ]
Secondly, here is the what Ibn Hajar had to say about this issue.

Ibn Hajar may Allaah have mercy upon him reconciled the two Ahaadeeth saying, “The version of the Hadeeth narrated on the authority of Saalim says that ʻEesa had straight hair. The Hadeeth that preceded it described him as being "compact"; the latter refers to his body and not hair. It means he was stocky and sturdy.” [Fat-h Al-Baari]

Taken from:
http://www.islamweb.net/emainpage/index.php?page=showfatwa&Option=FatwaId&Id=290587

Al-Nawawi has also said the very same. He writes;

الْمُرَاد بِالْجَعْدِ هُنَا جُعُودَة الْجِسْم وَهُوَ اِجْتِمَاعه وَاكْتِنَازه وَلَيْسَ الْمُرَاد جُعُودَة الشَّعْر
.
“Here جَعْدِ means firmness of the body i.e. its compactness and being thickset. And it does not refer to curling of the hair’ (Sharah Al-Nawawi on Sahih Muslim 1/296, Kitabul Iman)

So this actually kills the argument using the word Ja'ad.


Quote
Couple of things to point out here. In the first Hadith about the Mi'raj, both Musa and Eisa عليهما السلام are described by 3 particular features: complexion, hair, and body. When it comes to Musa, his complexion is Adam (brown), his hair is Sabt (straight) and his body is Jaseem (large). When it comes to Eisa, his complexion is Ahmar (red), his hair is Ja'd (curly), and he has a broad chest عريض الصدر. Now according to Waqar Cheema, جعد when applied to Jesus means he is of robust built. If hypothetically that is true, it means this Hadith has not described Eisa's hair at all, despite having described Musa's hair. So that is not only a forced interpretation it is inconsistent with the context and pattern of the Hadith. Secondly, in this Hadith Eisa's body has already been described as عريض الصدر so it would be redundant to understand جعد as describing the body of Eisa and not his hair.
Firstly, Waqar didn't bring that explanation out of thin air, rather this view was referred by Imam Ibn Hajar and Imam Nawawi.

Secondly, this argument is unacademic and childish. If you have knowledge of hadeeth science, you would have known that not every hadeeth contains all details, sometimes, the narrators drop some points, which we find in other reports. This is quite a common knowledge to students knowledge. Let me educate you by giving an example:

حَدَّثَنِي مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ بَشَّارٍ، حَدَّثَنَا غُنْدَرٌ، حَدَّثَنَا شُعْبَةُ، عَنْ قَتَادَةَ، قَالَ سَمِعْتُ أَبَا الْعَالِيَةِ، حَدَّثَنَا ابْنُ عَمِّ، نَبِيِّكُمْ ـ يَعْنِي ابْنَ عَبَّاسٍ ـ عَنِ النَّبِيِّ صلى الله عليه وسلم قَالَ ‏"‏ لاَ يَنْبَغِي لِعَبْدٍ أَنْ يَقُولَ أَنَا خَيْرٌ مِنْ يُونُسَ بْنِ مَتَّى ‏"‏‏.‏ وَنَسَبَهُ إِلَى أَبِيهِ‏.‏ وَذَكَرَ النَّبِيُّ صلى الله عليه وسلم لَيْلَةَ أُسْرِيَ بِهِ فَقَالَ ‏"‏ مُوسَى آدَمُ طُوَالٌ كَأَنَّهُ مِنْ رِجَالِ شَنُوءَةَ ‏"‏‏.‏ وَقَالَ ‏"‏ عِيسَى جَعْدٌ مَرْبُوعٌ ‏"‏‏.‏ وَذَكَرَ مَالِكًا خَازِنَ النَّارِ، وَذَكَرَ الدَّجَّالَ

(Sahih Bukhari, 3395, 3396)

Here you see even the type of Hairs of Musa(as) are not mentioned, so this evidence shatters your unacademic argument.

But I will quote another report where we find the type of hair of Isa(as) when Prophet(Saws) saw him in heaven.

وَحَدَّثَنَا عَبْدُ بْنُ حُمَيْدٍ، أَخْبَرَنَا يُونُسُ بْنُ مُحَمَّدٍ، حَدَّثَنَا شَيْبَانُ بْنُ عَبْدِ الرَّحْمَنِ، عَنْ قَتَادَةَ، عَنْ أَبِي الْعَالِيَةِ، حَدَّثَنَا ابْنُ عَمِّ، نَبِيِّكُمْ صلى الله عليه وسلم ابْنُ عَبَّاسٍ قَالَ قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏ "‏ مَرَرْتُ لَيْلَةَ أُسْرِيَ بِي عَلَى مُوسَى بْنِ عِمْرَانَ - عَلَيْهِ السَّلاَمُ - رَجُلٌ آدَمُ طُوَالٌ جَعْدٌ كَأَنَّهُ مِنْ رِجَالِ شَنُوءَةَ وَرَأَيْتُ عِيسَى ابْنَ مَرْيَمَ مَرْبُوعَ الْخَلْقِ إِلَى الْحُمْرَةِ وَالْبَيَاضِ سَبِطَ الرَّأْسِ ‏"‏ ‏.‏ وَأُرِيَ مَالِكًا خَازِنَ النَّارِ وَالدَّجَّالَ ‏.‏ فِي آيَاتٍ أَرَاهُنَّ اللَّهُ إِيَّاهُ فَلاَ تَكُنْ فِي مِرْيَةٍ مِنْ لِقَائِهِ ‏.‏ قَالَ كَانَ قَتَادَةُ يُفَسِّرُهَا أَنَّ نَبِيَّ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم قَدْ لَقِيَ مُوسَى عَلَيْهِ السَّلاَمُ ‏.‏
 Abu al-'Aliya reported: Ibn Abbas, the son of your Prophet's uncle, told us that the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) had observed: On the night of my night journey I passed by Moses b. 'Imran (peace be upon him), a man light brown in complexion, tall. well-built as if he was one of the men of the Shanu'a, and saw Jesus son of Mary as a medium-statured man with white and red complexion and crisp hair, and I was shown Malik the guardian of Fire, and Dajjal amongst the signs which were shown to me by Allah. He (the narrator) observed: Then do not doubt his (i. e. of the Holy Prophet) meeting with him (Moses). Qatada elucidated it thus: Verily the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ), met Moses (peace be upon him).

So, now the same hair can be found for Isa(as) around Kabah.

حَدَّثَنَا ابْنُ نُمَيْرٍ، حَدَّثَنَا أَبِي، حَدَّثَنَا حَنْظَلَةُ، عَنْ سَالِمٍ، عَنِ ابْنِ عُمَرَ، أَنَّ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم قَالَ ‏ "‏ رَأَيْتُ عِنْدَ الْكَعْبَةِ رَجُلاً آدَمَ سَبِطَ الرَّأْسِ وَاضِعًا يَدَيْهِ عَلَى رَجُلَيْنِ ‏.‏ يَسْكُبُ رَأْسُهُ - أَوْ يَقْطُرُ رَأْسُهُ - فَسَأَلْتُ مَنْ هَذَا فَقَالُوا عِيسَى ابْنُ مَرْيَمَ أَوِ الْمَسِيحُ ابْنُ مَرْيَمَ - لاَ نَدْرِي أَىَّ ذَلِكَ قَالَ - وَرَأَيْتُ وَرَاءَهُ رَجُلاً أَحْمَرَ جَعْدَ الرَّأْسِ أَعْوَرَ الْعَيْنِ الْيُمْنَى أَشْبَهُ مَنْ رَأَيْتُ بِهِ ابْنُ قَطَنٍ فَسَأَلْتُ مَنْ هَذَا فَقَالُوا الْمَسِيحُ الدَّجَّالُ ‏"‏ ‏.‏
(Sahih Muslim 169 c)

Hence your unacademic arguments gets destroyed.



Quote
To conclude, Waqar Cheema's response proves how inconsistent he is, and how he is not objective, rather trying to prove his own preconceived bias through circular arguments.[/size][/font]
The conclusion is that, its your lack of knowledge and lack of objectivity, due to which you aren't able to grasp the issue.

Anyways I would like to repeat for the benefit of readers that, these side details of physical descriptions of Prophets, doesn't make any difference, since they aren't a matter of Aqeedah, but what matters the Aqeedah is his descend. And I will present a hadeeth now, we find that in his descend Isa(as) is described as Reddish, this is the same complexion mentioned when Prophet Muhammad(saws) met Isa(as) in heavens. SO THE ONE WHO PROPHET(SAWS) MET IN HEAVEN IS THE SAME PERSON WHO WILL DESCEND.

حَدَّثَنَا هُدْبَةُ بْنُ خَالِدٍ، حَدَّثَنَا هَمَّامُ بْنُ يَحْيَى، عَنْ قَتَادَةَ، عَنْ عَبْدِ الرَّحْمَنِ بْنِ آدَمَ، عَنْ أَبِي هُرَيْرَةَ، أَنَّ النَّبِيَّ صلى الله عليه وسلم قَالَ ‏ "‏ لَيْسَ بَيْنِي وَبَيْنَهُ نَبِيٌّ - يَعْنِي عِيسَى - وَإِنَّهُ نَازِلٌ فَإِذَا رَأَيْتُمُوهُ فَاعْرِفُوهُ رَجُلٌ مَرْبُوعٌ إِلَى الْحُمْرَةِ وَالْبَيَاضِ بَيْنَ مُمَصَّرَتَيْنِ كَأَنَّ رَأْسَهُ يَقْطُرُ وَإِنْ لَمْ يُصِبْهُ بَلَلٌ فَيُقَاتِلُ النَّاسَ عَلَى الإِسْلاَمِ فَيَدُقُّ الصَّلِيبَ وَيَقْتُلُ الْخِنْزِيرَ وَيَضَعُ الْجِزْيَةَ وَيُهْلِكُ اللَّهُ فِي زَمَانِهِ الْمِلَلَ كُلَّهَا إِلاَّ الإِسْلاَمَ وَيُهْلِكُ الْمَسِيحَ الدَّجَّالَ فَيَمْكُثُ فِي الأَرْضِ أَرْبَعِينَ سَنَةً ثُمَّ يُتَوَفَّى فَيُصَلِّي عَلَيْهِ الْمُسْلِمُونَ
 Narrated Abu Hurayrah: The Prophet (ﷺ) said: There is no prophet between me and him, that is, Jesus (ﷺ). He will descent (to the earth). When you see him, recognise him: a man of medium height, reddish fair, wearing two light yellow garments, looking as if drops were falling down from his head though it will not be wet. He will fight the people for the cause of Islam. He will break the cross, kill swine, and abolish jizyah. Allah will perish all religions except Islam. He will destroy the Antichrist and will live on the earth for forty years and then he will die. The Muslims will pray over him. [Sunan Abi Dawud 4324; Grading : Sahih As per Al-Albani]

Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Noor-us-Sunnah on July 07, 2017, 07:17:03 PM
I am not questioning the howness or modality of something that is unseen, I am disputing your belief to be true that Jesus is alive in the Heavens with his earthen body, because such a belief doesn't have any proof from the Quran. This is like debating a Twelver Shi'ite about the ghayba of the 12th Imam. If he says "Don't question about the howness of the Unseen" your answer to him is "first prove it is a matter of the unseen and not a fabrication"
You are comparing apples with oranges. We mock Shia belief of GHaybah, because they can't prove their birth of their 12th Imam. All they have are dubious reports which raise questions about the birth of their Imam itself. Secondly, we mock them saying that when Isa(as) couldn't be a guide to his after his departure, then how could their Imam be a guide after his departure.


Quote
Sayyidina Isa عليه السلام being from the progeny of Adam like all of humanity was indeed created from the Nutfah of sayyidina Adam عليه السلام.
The only exception to this is Adam and Eve, but that exception is already implied in the Verse, since the Nutfah that is mentioned there is the Nutfah of sayyidina Adam عليه السلام through which al-Insaan (humanity) was created, including sayyidina Isa عليه السلام.
The question was about exact Father of Isa(As).

يَخْرُجُ مِن بَيْنِ الصُّلْبِ وَالتَّرَائِبِ
Coming from between the back and the ribs.(86:7).

Or do you believe that, the biological father of Isa(as) is Adam(as). And he should be called Isa ibn Adam? Like Muhammad(saws) was called Muhammad ibn Abdullah because his biological father was Abdullah.


Quote
If you said only the Ruh of Jesus was raised to Heaven, then yes, there is the possibility to remain without food, or with "heavenly food".
As for the evidence that Isa(as) would return in a physical body then, the Marfoo hadeeth from Prophet(saws) describes that when Isa(As) would descend, he will be wearing clothes, water would drop from his hair, He would place his hands on the wings of angels, which signifies that it would be for support while descending, and only a physical body would need to do that.

Allah would send Jesus, son of Mary, and he will descend at the white minaret in the eastern side of Damascus wearing two garments lightly dyed with saffron and placing his hands on the wings of two Angels. When he would lower his head, there would fall beads of perspiration from his head, and when he would raise it up, beads like pearls would scatter from it. [ Sahih Muslim 2937 a]

So since it is proven that Isa(As) would descend in the form of physical body, wearing clothes, water dropping from his hairs, taking support by placing hands on wings of angels, then its common sense to believe that He was raised to heaven alive(which is supported by Mawqoof Sahih reports). This even backs all those ambiguous evidences which mentions about ascend of Isa(as) used by Sunnis. This shows the strongness of the Aqeedah of Ahlusunnah.

Quote
I've already discussed both of these 2 examples at length.
Nothing seemed to be consistent with the Aqeedah of early generations. Nor rational. Infact the argument of Ashab kahf was ridiculous.


Quote
You quoted the Athar of a Sahabi which is not a Hujjah in the Din.
For Sunnis it is hujjah. Hence we believe in it. Your objection is over ruled.

But do you agree that, the condition of hair of Isa(as) when he saw in his dream is same, as how his hair would be at the time of his descend. BOTH ARE MARFOO HADEETH.

 It is narrated on the authority of Ibn 'Umar that the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) said: I saw near the Ka'bah a man of fair complexion with straight hair, placing his hands on two persons. Water was flowing from his head or it was trickling from his head. I asked: Who is he? They said: He is Jesus son of Mary or al-Masih son of Mary. The narrator) says: I do not remember which word it was. He (the Holy Prophet) said: And I saw behind him a man with red complexion and thick curly hair, blind in the right eye. I saw in him the greatest resemblance with Ibn Qitan I asked: Who is he? They replied: It is al-Masih al-Dajjal. [Sahih Muslim 169 c]

بَعَثَ اللَّهُ الْمَسِيحَ ابْنَ مَرْيَمَ فَيَنْزِلُ عِنْدَ الْمَنَارَةِ الْبَيْضَاءِ شَرْقِيَّ دِمَشْقَ بَيْنَ مَهْرُودَتَيْنِ وَاضِعًا كَفَّيْهِ عَلَى أَجْنِحَةِ مَلَكَيْنِ إِذَا طَأْطَأَ رَأَسَهُ قَطَرَ وَإِذَا رَفَعَهُ تَحَدَّرَ مِنْهُ جُمَانٌ كَاللُّؤْلُؤِ فَلاَ يَحِلُّ
Allah would send Jesus, son of Mary, and he will descend at the white minaret in the eastern side of Damascus wearing two garments lightly dyed with saffron and placing his hands on the wings of two Angels. When he would lower his head, there would fall beads of perspiration from his head, and when he would raise it up, beads like pearls would scatter from it. (Sahih Muslim 2937 a).


Quote
Secondly, I proved that there are 2 opposing descriptions of the physical appearance of Jesus, 1 from the vision of him during the Mi'raj, where he is described as being reddish complexion, curly hair, and broad chest, and the other from the vision of him circling the Ka'ba, where he is described as brown, the best kind of brown, with straight lank hair reaching down to his shoulders (Bukhari).

These unacademic arguments have been answered in my previous post. Alhamdulillah.

Anyways I would like to repeat for the benefit of readers that, these side details of physical descriptions of Prophets, doesn't make any difference, since they aren't a matter of Aqeedah, but what matters the Aqeedah is his descend. And I will present a hadeeth now, we find that in his descend Isa(as) is described as Reddish, this is the same complexion mentioned when Prophet Muhammad(saws) met Isa(as) in heavens. SO THE ONE WHO PROPHET(SAWS) MET IN HEAVEN IS THE SAME PERSON WHO WILL DESCEND.

حَدَّثَنَا هُدْبَةُ بْنُ خَالِدٍ، حَدَّثَنَا هَمَّامُ بْنُ يَحْيَى، عَنْ قَتَادَةَ، عَنْ عَبْدِ الرَّحْمَنِ بْنِ آدَمَ، عَنْ أَبِي هُرَيْرَةَ، أَنَّ النَّبِيَّ صلى الله عليه وسلم قَالَ ‏ "‏ لَيْسَ بَيْنِي وَبَيْنَهُ نَبِيٌّ - يَعْنِي عِيسَى - وَإِنَّهُ نَازِلٌ فَإِذَا رَأَيْتُمُوهُ فَاعْرِفُوهُ رَجُلٌ مَرْبُوعٌ إِلَى الْحُمْرَةِ وَالْبَيَاضِ بَيْنَ مُمَصَّرَتَيْنِ كَأَنَّ رَأْسَهُ يَقْطُرُ وَإِنْ لَمْ يُصِبْهُ بَلَلٌ فَيُقَاتِلُ النَّاسَ عَلَى الإِسْلاَمِ فَيَدُقُّ الصَّلِيبَ وَيَقْتُلُ الْخِنْزِيرَ وَيَضَعُ الْجِزْيَةَ وَيُهْلِكُ اللَّهُ فِي زَمَانِهِ الْمِلَلَ كُلَّهَا إِلاَّ الإِسْلاَمَ وَيُهْلِكُ الْمَسِيحَ الدَّجَّالَ فَيَمْكُثُ فِي الأَرْضِ أَرْبَعِينَ سَنَةً ثُمَّ يُتَوَفَّى فَيُصَلِّي عَلَيْهِ الْمُسْلِمُونَ
 Narrated Abu Hurayrah: The Prophet (ﷺ) said: There is no prophet between me and him, that is, Jesus (ﷺ). He will descent (to the earth). When you see him, recognise him: a man of medium height, reddish fair, wearing two light yellow garments, looking as if drops were falling down from his head though it will not be wet. He will fight the people for the cause of Islam. He will break the cross, kill swine, and abolish jizyah. Allah will perish all religions except Islam. He will destroy the Antichrist and will live on the earth for forty years and then he will die. The Muslims will pray over him. [Sunan Abi Dawud 4324; Grading : Sahih As per Al-Albani]
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: zaid_ibn_ali on July 07, 2017, 07:19:40 PM
@zulfiqar can you provide me with any Quranic ayat or a hadith which mentions there will be any messiahs other than Isa AS & the mahdi?
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Noor-us-Sunnah on July 07, 2017, 10:50:09 PM
That is based off of the saying of a Sahabi and not a Hujjah.
Beliefs of Sahaba are Hujjah for Ahlus-sunnah, except when they are countered by the beliefs taught by Prophet(saws) or Jumhoor Sahaba. As I promised, I'll list out some evidences.

Evidence from Quran to follow Sahaba:

And whoever acts hostilely to the Messenger after that guidance has become manifest to him, and follows other than the way of the believers(Sahaba), We will turn him to that to which he has (himself) turned and make him enter hell; and it is an evil resort.(4:115)

And when it is said to them: Believe as the people(sahaba) believe they say: Shall we believe as the fools believe? Now surely they themselves are the fools, but they do not know.(2:13)

And (as for) the foremost, the first of the Muhajirs and the Ansars, and those who followed them in goodness, Allah is well pleased with them and they are well pleased with Him, and He has prepared for them gardens beneath which rivers flow, to abide in them for ever; that is the mighty achievement.(9:100).

 And they say: Be Jews or Christians, you will be on the right course. Say: Nay! (we follow) the religion of Ibrahim, the Hanif, and he was not one of the polytheists. : Say: We believe in Allah and (in) that which had been revealed to us, and (in) that which was revealed to Ibrahim and Ismail and Ishaq and Yaqoub and the tribes, and (in) that which was given to Musa and Isa, and (in) that which was given to the prophets from their Lord, we do not make any distinction between any of them, and to Him do we submit. If then they believe as you(Sahaba) believe in Him, they are indeed on the right course, and if they turn back, then they are only in great opposition, so Allah will suffice you against them, and He is the Hearing, the Knowing.(2:135-137).

Evidence from Hadeeth:

The Prophet Muhammed (May the Peace and Blessings of Allah be upon him) also said: “Indeed the people of the Book before you split into seventy-two sects. And this nation will split into seventy-three sects, seventy-two are in the Fire and one in Paradise”. And in another narration, “All are in the Fire except one.” It was asked: Who is that one? He replied, “That which I and my Companions are upon” Related by at-Tirmidhi (5/62) and al-Haakim (1/128). It has been authenticated by al-Haafidh al-Iraaqee in Takhreejul-Ihyaa (3/199) and Sheikh Albani authenticated it in Saheeh at-Tirmizi 2641. He said it’s hasan(good).
[ You are not allowed to view attachments ]
Evidence from the sayings of Salaf:


1. Ibn Abbas said to Khawarij in his debate.
أتيتكم من عند صحابة النبي صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم من المهاجرين والأنصار ، لأبلغكم ما يقولون المخبرون بما يقولون فعليهم نزل القرآن ، وهم أعلم بالوحي منكم ،
I came to you from Muhajireen and Ansar, the companions of the Prophet peace be upon him to convey their message to you. They are the people who know what they say (from Quran and sunnah), The Qur`an was revealed in front of them and they know about the (meaning of) Wahyy (Quran) more than you. [al Musradrak al Hakim no. 2656, al Hakim said: It is authentic upon the conditions of Muslim, ad-Dahabi agreed with him]

2.

وقد ذكر سنيد قال حدثنا معتمر عن سلام بن مسكين عن قتادة قال قال ابن مسعود: من كان منكم متأسيا فليتأس بأصحاب رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم فإنهم كانوا أبر هذه الأمة قلوبا، وأعمقها علما، وأقلها تكلفا، وأقومها هديا، وأحسنها حالا، آختارهم الله لصحبة نبيه صلى الله عليه وسلم وإقامة دينه، فاعرفوا لهم فضلهم، واتبعوهم في آثارهم، فإنهم كانوا على الهدى المستقيم.

‘Abd-Allah ibn Mas’ood(ra) said: “Whoever wants to follow an example, let him follow the example of those who have passed away, the Companions of Muhammad (S). They were the best of this ummah, the purest in heart, the DEEPEST in knowledge, the least in sophistication. They were people whom Allah chose to be the Companions of His Prophet (S) and to convey His religion, so imitate their ways and behaviour, for they were following the Straight Path.” [Tafseer Al-Qurtabi and Sharh as-Sunnah of Al-Baghawi]

3. Similarly we read:

1143 – وحدثنا ابن عبد الحميد قال : حدثنا يعقوب بن إبراهيم الدورقي قال : حدثنا حكام بن سلم الرازي ، عن عمرو بن أبي قيس ، عن عبد ربه قال : كنا عند الحسن في مجلس ، فذكر كلاما ، وذكر أصحاب النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم فقال : « أولئك أصحاب محمد كانوا أبر هذه الأمة قلوبا ، وأعمقها علما ، وأقلها تكلفا ، قوم اختارهم الله عز وجل لصحبة نبيه ، وإقامة دينه ، فتشبهوا بأخلاقهم وطرائقهم ، فإنهم كانوا ورب الكعبة على الهدي المستقيم »
Al-Hasan Al-Basri said: Those are the companions of Mohammad, best in the heart, DEEPEST in knowledge, without going out of their way. They were chosen by Allah to accompany his prophet, to stabilize the religion, so follow their manners and ways, for by Allah they were on the straight path.( Al-Sharee’a by Al-Ajurri 1143)

In the first report, Abdullah ibn Masood is telling the Tabaeen, who are the second greatest generation, to follow those who have passed away, that is the companions(sahaba) of Muhammad(saw). Abdullah ibn Masood(ra) was saying this in the time of second best generation(Tabaeen). And he gives some reasons for following the Sahaba, one of which is, “they were DEEPEST in knowledge” – notice here the choice of words, Abdullah Ibn Masood(ra) as well as Hasan Al-Basri(rah) didn’t say, Sahaba had the MOST knowledge, but they said Sahaba had the DEEPEST knowledge; because there were people who came after Sahaba, who might know things which Sahaba may not have known, for example Imam Al-Bukhari knew more ahadeeth than many Sahaba, because he knew of ahadeeth which different Sahaba had, he knew ahadeeth which Umar(ra) had, which Ali(ra) had, which Ibn Abbas(ra) had, which Abu Huraira(ra) had, which Ayesha(ra) had, etc, He was an encyclopaedia of Hadeeth. So Abdullah ibn Masood(ra) and Hasan Al-Basri didn’t say they had the most knowledge, but they said Sahaba had the DEEPEST knowledge.

So even though some of the scholars who came later knew the things which some of the Sahaba didn’t know, however none of the people who came after Sahaba have the depth of knowledge that the Sahaba had, because even though a Sahabi may know only two hundred hadeeth or three hundred hadeeth, but he was there when those ahadeeth were spoken by Prophet Muhammad(saw), He knew the circumstances, He knew why Prophet(saw) said it, He was there, he experienced it first hand, therefore everyone who came after Sahaba is just scratching the surface of knowledge, whereas Sahaba lived that hadeeth, an opportunity that none of the people who came after has, so sahaba had an edge over everyone who came later. This is the reason Abdullah Ibn Masood(ra) advised people to follow the understanding of Sahaba in comparison to those who came after.

4. Imam Ahmed said: "Do not copy your Deen from anyone of these, but whatever comes from the Prophet (sallallaahu `alaihi wa sallam) and his Companions, take it; next are their Successors, where a man has a choice."[ Fulaani (p. 113) & Ibn al-Qayyim in I'laam (2/302)] (Taken from Al-Albani's book prayer of prophet(saws)).

5. Abdur-Rahmaan al-Awzaa’ee 157 AH (May Allah have mercy on him) said:
اصبر نفسك على السنة و قف حيث وقف القوم و قل بما قالوا
و كف عما كفوا عنه, واسلك سبيل سلفك الصالح. فانه يسعك ما وسعهم
“Have patience upon the Sunnah, and stop where the people stopped (the Companions may Allah be pleased with them all) and speak with what they spoke with and hold back from what they held back and travel upon the path of the Salafu’s-Salih, for verily, what sufficed them will suffice you.” [Suyuti, al-Amr bi’l-’Ittibaa wa’n-Nahi ani’l-Ibtidaa].

Similarly, Imaam al-Awzaa’ee – rahimahullaah – said,
Knowledge is what comes from the Companions of Muhammad (sal-Allaahu ‘alayhe wa sallam) and that which does not come from a single one of them is not knowledge.” [Jaami Bayaan al-Ilm (2/36)]

6. Ibn Taymiyya said: "Their creed is the religion of Islam which was sent to the world by Allah through the Prophet (Peace be upon him). But the Prophet (Peace be upon him) said, 'My Ummah will get divided into 73 sects and each one will go to Hell save one and that one is the Jama'at.' Also in one Hadith he said, 'They are those people who will follow this path which I and my Sahaba follow today.' Therefore they have caught hold of Islam unalloyed from every adulteration and these are the people of Ahl as-Sunnah Wa'l Jama'ah. This group includes the truthful, the martyrs and the virtuous; it includes the minarets of guidance, lamps in the darkness and owners of such superiorities and virtues who have been already mentioned. It includes the saints and also those Imams on whose guidance Muslims are unanimous. It is this successful group about which the Prophet (Peace be upon him) has said: 'One group from my Ummah will always remain dominant with truth; the opponents will never be able to harm its members or afflict them up to the Doomsday.'[Aqeedat-il-Wasitiyyah (pg. 154)]

7. Ibn Katheer said:
فأهل الأديان قبلنا اختلفوا فيما بينهم على آراء وملل باطلة ، وكل فرقة منهم تزعم أنهم على شيء ، [ ص: 317 ] وهذه الأمة أيضا اختلفوا فيما بينهم على نحل كلها ضلالة إلا واحدة ، وهم أهل السنة والجماعة ، المتمسكون بكتاب الله وسنة رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم ، وبما كان عليه الصدر الأول من الصحابة والتابعين ، وأئمة المسلمين في قديم الدهر وحديثه ،
The followers of the religions before us had differences of opinions and split into false sects, each group claiming to be following the truth. This Ummah too has split into sects, all of which are misguided apart from one, which is Ahlus-Sunnah Wal-Jama`ah, those who adhere to the Book of Allah and the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allah and what was followed by the first generations, the Companions, their followers, and the Imams of the Muslims of earlier and later times. [Tafsir Ibn Katheer under 30:32]

8. Imam Rabbani Mujaddid Alf Thanni (Radi Allahu anhu)(971AH-1034AH) states in his famous book Maktubaat " The way of Salvation is followance of the Ahl as-Sunnah Wal Jama'ah. May Almighty Allah bestow blessings upon the Ahl as-Sunnah Wal Jama'ah, in their speech, in their actions, laws, for this is the successful group. Besides this, all other groups have become victims of deception. Today, nobody realizes how much these misled groups will be punished, however, on the Day of Judgment this secret will become apparent. Even though at that time this knowledge will be of no benefit to the misled."

"It is compulsory for the wise people to amend their beliefs to be in accordance with the beliefs of the Ahl as-Sunnah Wa Jama'ah because this is the only group which will be saved from the fire of Hell." None of the Sahaba, the Salaf-e-Saliheen or the pious scholars of Islam followed the new ideas or beliefs. They strictly abstained from the groups who followed these deviated ideas and beliefs. Their beliefs and actions opposed these new ideas and beliefs. All the great scholars of Hadith and the great scholars of Fiqh of the four Schools of thought and their followers, all held the belief of the Ahl as-Sunnah Jama'ah. In addition, all the great pious Muslims and the Sufi Saints of the past and present, followed the way of the Ahl as-Sunnat Wal Jama'ah. Their great literary works stand witness to this fact." Also the believes of Ahl as sunnah are present on this website.

9. As-Suyuti in Sawn al Mantaq wal-Kalam, p.32] By clinging to their way, holding on to their beliefs and understanding them as they did, worshipping Allah in His Oneness, upon the Authentic Sunnah of the Messenger in the manner of the Companions one is guaranteed success in this life and security from the Fire in the next life. When questioned by his companions about those who will be saved from the Fire, the Messenger replied, "They are those who are upon what I and my companions are upon." [Reported by Tirmidhi from Amr ibn al-'As - Hadith Hasan] All the great scholars from the earliest to the later times have advised clinging to the way and methodology (manhaj) of the Salaf and adherence to it as it is the only means of deliverance.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 08, 2017, 12:05:36 AM
@zulfiqar can you provide me with any Quranic ayat or a hadith which mentions there will be any messiahs other than Isa AS & the mahdi?

The Dajjal is called "al-Masih" (Messiah)

Sayyidina Isa عليه السلام is called Messiah in the Holy Qur'an. The Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم said that sayyidina Ali رضى الله عنه and sayyidina Abu Dharr al Ghifari رضى الله عنه are resemblance of Jesus.

From a linguistic angle, Masih is anyone who travels on the Earth a lot, or whose eye is "Mamsooh" (as in case of Dajjal) or who is annointed on the head with oil to become King (Mashiach in Hebrew), and many other meanings.

Likewise, al-Mahdi is a title which means "the guided one". The Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم referred to Jesus as "Mahdi" and he referred to his rightly-guided successors (Abi Bakr, Umar, Uthman, Ali, al-Hassan رضى الله عنهم) as "Mahdiyeen"


Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 08, 2017, 12:19:13 AM
The challenge was for you to prove the impossibility of Ashab Al-Kahfi to live beyond a normal period of time without any sustenance. You see. None of your 5 points addresssing the issue raised. Instead, you interpreted the event with some unrelated arguments indeed.

The burden of proof is on you not me to prove that the AsHab al-Kahf lived beyond a normal period of time without sustenance. The principle is that whoever makes a claim of something extraordinary or supernatural must prove their claim. The one who denies something extraordinary or supernatural is not asked to prove his denial. So please present a single verse of the Holy Quran that the AsHab al Kahf, in their individual capacities, survived without food for 3 centuries.

Quote
Some notes for you before you reply anything:

1. Those guys were a group of youths. This is proven from the word "fityatun" as addressed by Allah. Hence, it doesn't fit "the entire society" as you previously suggested.

Not necessarily, they were a society of youths. The Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم likewise described the Khawarij as a nation of young people: قَوْمٌ أَحْدَاثُ الأَسْنَانِ (Sahih Muslim)


Quote
2. Looking at verse 17, it was clearly stated that the rising and setting of the sun observable from the cave. And yet, in verse 19, they were questioning among themselves how long they were in the cave with their guessing were a day or half. If they were not sleeping and been living in the cave for 300 years, this conversation of theirs must have not been arisen.

In the Qur'an time is described in a different way to point to the multidimensional aspect of time. The same Qur'an says that on Judgment Day the disbelievers will say they tarried in this Dunya for ten days, while the more intelligent and perceptible among them will say a single day. (Sura 20:103-104)
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 08, 2017, 12:48:41 AM

You are comparing apples with oranges. We mock Shia belief of GHaybah, because they can't prove their birth of their 12th Imam. All they have are dubious reports which raise questions about the birth of their Imam itself. Secondly, we mock them saying that when Isa(as) couldn't be a guide to his after his departure, then how could their Imam be a guide after his departure.

So the only basis for you mocking the Ghayba is because the Shia can't conclusively prove the birth of the 12th Imam? So if they could believe the 12th Imam was born, and said that he wasn't guiding people during the Ghayba, you would believe in it? There were many other sects who believed in the Ghayba of someone who was a historical person. The Kaysaniya who believed in the Ghayba of Muhammad al Hanafiya on Mt. Radwa, those who believed in the Ghayba of Abd Allah b. Mu'awiya on a mountain somewhere in Isfahan, those who believed in the Ghayba of Imam Nafs al Zakiyya on Mt. Hajir in the Najd, etc. Will you accept those beliefs in the Ghayba because their adherents can prove the birth of their respective Imams who went into occultation?

So I'm not comparing apples and oranges. Just as the Shi'a cannot prove the Ghayba of their Imam, likewise, the mainstream Sunnis cannot prove that sayyidina Eisa عليه السلام ascended into Heaven with his Jasad and has been living there in his Jasad for the past 2 millennia.


Quote
The question was about exact Father of Isa(As).

يَخْرُجُ مِن بَيْنِ الصُّلْبِ وَالتَّرَائِبِ
Coming from between the back and the ribs.(86:7).

Or do you believe that, the biological father of Isa(as) is Adam(as). And he should be called Isa ibn Adam? Like Muhammad(saws) was called Muhammad ibn Abdullah because his biological father was Abdullah.

We are all sons of Adam. Any man can be called "Ibn Adam". Ibn (son) is just the single form of Abnaa, and we are all called Bani Adam in the Holy Qur'an. Jesus is therefore Ibn Adam. It is not necessary that when you say "Ibn Fulan" it means that Fulan is the father married to his mother. We say Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal, but Hanbal was his grandfather not father, and we say Ibn Taymiyya, but his father's name was Abdal Halim not Taymiyya. So when you say Ibn Fulan, Fulan can be the ancestor no matter how far removed in generations.

Quote
As for the evidence that Isa(as) would return in a physical body then, the Marfoo hadeeth from Prophet(saws) describes that when Isa(As) would descend,

The fact that sayyidina Isa(as) will come with a physical body is neither a proof that he was raised up in his physical body, nor is it a proof that at present he has been living in the sky in his Jasad for the past 2 millennia. When someone is sleeping his soul is taken up to Allah (not his body), and when he awakens he awakens in his body here on Earth. The Jasad is never taken up to the Heavens as I proved from Sura 39:42

Quote
So since it is proven that Isa(As) would descend in the form of physical body, wearing clothes, water dropping from his hairs, taking support by placing hands on wings of angels, then its common sense to believe that He was raised to heaven alive(which is supported by Mawqoof Sahih reports). This even backs all those ambiguous evidences which mentions about ascend of Isa(as) used by Sunnis. This shows the strongness of the Aqeedah of Ahlusunnah.

You have to prove that the descent of sayyidina Eisa(AS) in a physical body is proof that he was raised alive to Heaven in his physical body, and remains there as we speak in his physical body. Your aqida is based on speculation and Qiyas. Also, is there any authentic Marfoo Hadith which says sayyidina Eisa(AS) will descend from the sky? I assure you there is no such Hadith in the Sihhah as Sita, Hadith only says he will descend, it never says he will descend from Heaven.

Quote
For Sunnis it is hujjah. Hence we believe in it. Your objection is over ruled.

Where is it written in the books of the principles of Ahlus Sunnati wal Jama'ah that the saying of a single Sahabi constitutes a Hujjah in the Religion?

Quote
Anyways I would like to repeat for the benefit of readers that, these side details of physical descriptions of Prophets, doesn't make any difference, since they aren't a matter of Aqeedah, but what matters the Aqeedah is his descend. And I will present a hadeeth now, we find that in his descend Isa(as) is described as Reddish, this is the same complexion mentioned when Prophet Muhammad(saws) met Isa(as) in heavens. SO THE ONE WHO PROPHET(SAWS) MET IN HEAVEN IS THE SAME PERSON WHO WILL DESCEND.

The Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم met many other Prophets in Heaven, are all of them alive there in their physical bodies too?
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 08, 2017, 01:53:36 AM
Beliefs of Sahaba are Hujjah for Ahlus-sunnah, except when they are countered by the beliefs taught by Prophet(saws) or Jumhoor Sahaba. As I promised, I'll list out some evidences.

Evidence from Quran to follow Sahaba:

And whoever acts hostilely to the Messenger after that guidance has become manifest to him, and follows other than the way of the believers(Sahaba), We will turn him to that to which he has (himself) turned and make him enter hell; and it is an evil resort.(4:115)

And when it is said to them: Believe as the people(sahaba) believe they say: Shall we believe as the fools believe? Now surely they themselves are the fools, but they do not know.(2:13)

And (as for) the foremost, the first of the Muhajirs and the Ansars, and those who followed them in goodness, Allah is well pleased with them and they are well pleased with Him, and He has prepared for them gardens beneath which rivers flow, to abide in them for ever; that is the mighty achievement.(9:100).

 And they say: Be Jews or Christians, you will be on the right course. Say: Nay! (we follow) the religion of Ibrahim, the Hanif, and he was not one of the polytheists. : Say: We believe in Allah and (in) that which had been revealed to us, and (in) that which was revealed to Ibrahim and Ismail and Ishaq and Yaqoub and the tribes, and (in) that which was given to Musa and Isa, and (in) that which was given to the prophets from their Lord, we do not make any distinction between any of them, and to Him do we submit. If then they believe as you(Sahaba) believe in Him, they are indeed on the right course, and if they turn back, then they are only in great opposition, so Allah will suffice you against them, and He is the Hearing, the Knowing.(2:135-137).

Evidence from Hadeeth:

The Prophet Muhammed (May the Peace and Blessings of Allah be upon him) also said: “Indeed the people of the Book before you split into seventy-two sects. And this nation will split into seventy-three sects, seventy-two are in the Fire and one in Paradise”. And in another narration, “All are in the Fire except one.” It was asked: Who is that one? He replied, “That which I and my Companions are upon” Related by at-Tirmidhi (5/62) and al-Haakim (1/128). It has been authenticated by al-Haafidh al-Iraaqee in Takhreejul-Ihyaa (3/199) and Sheikh Albani authenticated it in Saheeh at-Tirmizi 2641. He said it’s hasan(good).
 [ You are not allowed to view attachments ]

Evidence from the sayings of Salaf:


1. Ibn Abbas said to Khawarij in his debate.
أتيتكم من عند صحابة النبي صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم من المهاجرين والأنصار ، لأبلغكم ما يقولون المخبرون بما يقولون فعليهم نزل القرآن ، وهم أعلم بالوحي منكم ،
I came to you from Muhajireen and Ansar, the companions of the Prophet peace be upon him to convey their message to you. They are the people who know what they say (from Quran and sunnah), The Qur`an was revealed in front of them and they know about the (meaning of) Wahyy (Quran) more than you. [al Musradrak al Hakim no. 2656, al Hakim said: It is authentic upon the conditions of Muslim, ad-Dahabi agreed with him]

2.

وقد ذكر سنيد قال حدثنا معتمر عن سلام بن مسكين عن قتادة قال قال ابن مسعود: من كان منكم متأسيا فليتأس بأصحاب رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم فإنهم كانوا أبر هذه الأمة قلوبا، وأعمقها علما، وأقلها تكلفا، وأقومها هديا، وأحسنها حالا، آختارهم الله لصحبة نبيه صلى الله عليه وسلم وإقامة دينه، فاعرفوا لهم فضلهم، واتبعوهم في آثارهم، فإنهم كانوا على الهدى المستقيم.

‘Abd-Allah ibn Mas’ood(ra) said: “Whoever wants to follow an example, let him follow the example of those who have passed away, the Companions of Muhammad (S). They were the best of this ummah, the purest in heart, the DEEPEST in knowledge, the least in sophistication. They were people whom Allah chose to be the Companions of His Prophet (S) and to convey His religion, so imitate their ways and behaviour, for they were following the Straight Path.” [Tafseer Al-Qurtabi and Sharh as-Sunnah of Al-Baghawi]

3. Similarly we read:

1143 – وحدثنا ابن عبد الحميد قال : حدثنا يعقوب بن إبراهيم الدورقي قال : حدثنا حكام بن سلم الرازي ، عن عمرو بن أبي قيس ، عن عبد ربه قال : كنا عند الحسن في مجلس ، فذكر كلاما ، وذكر أصحاب النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم فقال : « أولئك أصحاب محمد كانوا أبر هذه الأمة قلوبا ، وأعمقها علما ، وأقلها تكلفا ، قوم اختارهم الله عز وجل لصحبة نبيه ، وإقامة دينه ، فتشبهوا بأخلاقهم وطرائقهم ، فإنهم كانوا ورب الكعبة على الهدي المستقيم »
Al-Hasan Al-Basri said: Those are the companions of Mohammad, best in the heart, DEEPEST in knowledge, without going out of their way. They were chosen by Allah to accompany his prophet, to stabilize the religion, so follow their manners and ways, for by Allah they were on the straight path.( Al-Sharee’a by Al-Ajurri 1143)

All of the evidences you have quoted establish the necessity of following the Sahaba رضى الله عنهم as a collective. This is also from where we derive the concept of Ijma. But you haven't presented a single evidence from Qur'an and Sunnah which states that the saying of a Sahabi is a Hujjah in the Religion.

But since you insist that the saying of a Sahabi is a Hujjah in the Religion, then I will present to you the views of some of the Sahaba رضى الله عنهم that sayyidina Isa عليه السلام was not raised alive into Heaven in his Jasad:

When the Companion Jarud رضى الله عنه was dispatched to Bahrain to debate with the apostate tribes (Abd al Qais in particular). The reason they had become apostate was because they were bewildered as to how the Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم had died if he was a true Prophet. So they abandoned Islam. Thus Jarud رضى الله عنه put forward to them the examples of sayyidina Musa and sayyidina Eisa عليهم السلام. The apostates bore witness that both of them were Messengers of Allah. Then Jarud said:
وأنا أشهد أن لا إله إلا الله وأن محمدا عبده ورسوله . عاش كما عاشوا ، ومات كما ماتوا
"And I bear witness that there is none worthy of worship except Allah and that Muhammad is His servant and Messenger. He lived as they all lived and he died as they all died."
[/size]

(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-EgzQGcekxBA/Vfw-LV7VraI/AAAAAAAABBk/rkymiRxSlqw/s1600/title.bmp)
[/size][/font]
(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-3zWflqX5RWM/Vfw-Pn-U_3I/AAAAAAAABBs/ZHzsZzVwzvg/s1600/Statement%2Bof%2BJarud%2B%2528r.a%2529%2Bto%2Bapostates%2Bof%2BBahrain%2BProphet%2B%2528as%2529%2Blived%2Bas%2Bthey%2B%2528Moses%2BJesus%2529%2Blived%2Band%2Bdied%2Bas%2Bthey%2Ball%2Bdied%2B%2528Mukhtasar%2BSirat%2Bar%2BRasul%2Bp.%2B293%2529.bmp)

Likewise, we have the statement of sayyidina Hassan al-Mujtaba رضى الله عنه when he gave a sermon at the time of the martyrdom of his honorable father sayyidina Amir ul Mumineen Ali رضى الله عنه. He said:

ولقد قبض في الليلة التي عرج فيها بروح عيسى بن مريم ليلة سبع وعشرين من رمضان
"And he (AliRA) was taken (martyred) in the Night in which the Ruh of Jesus son of Mary ascended, the twenty-seventh of Ramadan."


(https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-e2GHVV_VwM8/WWAMfcBnsWI/AAAAAAAACek/5Cs4_kphHfQcBSUL6DXJF1_ythYvu5WVwCLcBGAs/s640/title.png)
(https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-qpK-IYbyko0/WWAMicF-2CI/AAAAAAAACeo/1hD9pvFOJYcMvesiCGF7-c0k7FwcDdMoACLcBGAs/s1600/Ali%2B%2528r.a.%2529%2Bdied%2Bthe%2Bnight%2BJesus%2B%2528AS%2529%2BSPIRIT%2Bwas%2Braised%2B27th%2BRamadan%2B%2528Tabaqat%2BIbn%2BSaad%2Bv.3%2Bp.37%2529%2BAl%2BAjlah%2Bb.%2BAbdullah%2Bweakened.bmp)
(https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-vJ25Lt1kMlw/WWAMq7GtfTI/AAAAAAAACes/RIeuMq--IdMseH6eBMNIiT3mEFUneYhFACLcBGAs/s1600/title2.png)
(https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-ITXr06KgHoE/WWAMsgXckWI/AAAAAAAACew/8HfJflEcB7AJ5MwteEqk2WkSb7vSMc5TwCLcBGAs/s1600/Sermon%2Bof%2BHasan%2BAllah%2Braised%2BAli%2Bsoul%2Bsame%2Bnight%2BHe%2Braised%2BJesus%2Bsoul.%2BAli%2Bis%2BKhatam%2Bal%2BAwsiya%2B%2528Majma%2Baz%2BZawaid%2Bv.9%2Bp.146%2529.png)

The statement of sayyidina Hasan رضى الله عنه proves that he believed that sayyidina Eisa عليه السلام did not ascend into Heaven with his Jasad, but only with his Ruh.

And we have the statement of sayyidina Umar b. al-Khattab رضى الله عنه at the time when the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم died.

عَنْ عِكْرِمَةَ ، قَالَ : " تُوُفِّيَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ يَوْمَ الِاثْنَيْنِ ، فَحُبِسَ بَقِيَّةَ يَوْمِهِ وَلَيْلَتَهُ وَالْغَدَ حَتَّى دُفِنَ لَيْلَةَ الْأَرْبِعَاءِ ، وَقَالُوا : إِنَّ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ لَمْ يَمُتْ ، وَلَكِنْ عُرِجَ بِرُوحِهِ كَمَا عُرِجَ بِرُوحِ مُوسَى ، فَقَامَ عُمَرُ ، فَقَالَ : إِنَّ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ لَمْ يَمُتْ ، وَلَكِنْ عُرِجَ بِرُوحِهِ كَمَا عُرِجَ بِرُوحِ مُوسَى ، وَاللَّهِ لَا يَمُوتُ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ حَتَّى يَقْطَعَ أَيْدِيَ أَقْوَامٍ وَأَلْسِنَتَهُمْ
Ikrima narrates that Rasul Allah(SAW) died on Monday but was buried on Wednesday. People were saying: "Verily Rasul Allah(SAW) did not die, but his Ruh ascended like the ascension of the Ruh of Musa(AS)." So Umar(RA) stood up and said: "Verily, Rasul Allah(SAW) did not die, but his Ruh ascended like the ascension of the Ruh of Musa(AS). By Allah! Rasul Allah(SAW) will not die until he cuts the hands and tongues of nations." (Darimi Sharif)

This Hadith proves that not only Umar, but some other unnamed companions were saying the same thing. Now why did sayyidina Umar give the example of Musa instead of Eisa. If he believed that Eisa(AS) was alive and not deceased, he would have given that more obvious precedent, rather than mentioning Musa(AS) because everyone is agreed that Musa(AS) died. But the fact that sayyidina Umar(RA) did not give the example of sayyidina Eisa(AS) to prove that likewise the Prophet(SAW) has not died shows that even Umar(RA) knew and believed firmly that sayyidina Eisa(AS) died.

Now according to you the statements of these Sahaba are a Hujjah in the Religion
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 08, 2017, 02:48:59 AM
Now I will present some additional arguments that sayyidina Eisa عليه السلام was not raised up into Heaven in his Jasad:

1. The book Aqidat at Tahawiyya composed by Abu Ja'far al-Tahawi al-Hanafi رحمة الله عليه, considered the most agreed upon exposition of the creed of Ahlus Sunnati wal Jama'ah, does not mention as any one of its points of creed the ascension of sayyidina Eisa عليه السلام into Heaven in his Jasad.

2. The Imam Ibnul Qayyim al-Jawziyya رحمة الله عليه said:

وأما ما يذكر عن المسيح أنه رفع إلى السماء وله ثلاث وثلاثون سنة فهذا لا يعرف له أثر متصل يجب المصير إليه

Translation: “As for what is mentioned regarding the Messiah that he ascended into Heaven at the age of thirty three years, there is no known report that is sound and connected in this regard to which one could turn to.”

Reference: Zaad-ul-Ma'ad; v.1 p.82

Furthermore, in the same book, Imam Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziya explains that apart from the Prophet (peace be upon him), no other person, including the prophets, has ever ascended into Heaven with both body and soul:

ومن سواه لا ينال بذات روحه الصعود إلى السماء إلا بعد الموت والمفارقة ، فالأنبياء إنما استقرت أرواحهم هناك بعد مفارقة الأبدان

Translation: “No one, apart from him (the Prophet Muhammad – peace be upon him) was taken into Heaven except after death and through separation (of soul from body). As for the Prophets, their souls are stationed there (in Heaven) after the separation from their bodies.”

Reference: Zaad al-Ma'ad; v.3 p.36-37

(http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-Zw_DprPjWNI/Vgwb19_RtEI/AAAAAAAABJA/d7fc-kGzcOg/s1600/title.bmp)
(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-4-zZ4HPZDGs/Vgwb-AhEAeI/AAAAAAAABJI/TcJFTJkovxA/s1600/No%2BAthar%2Bknown%2Bthat%2Bis%2Bconnected%2Bwhich%2Bproves%2BJesus%2B%2528A.S%2529%2Bwas%2Braised%2Bup%2Bto%2BHeaven%2Bat%2Bthe%2Bage%2Bof%2B33%2B%2528Zaad%2Bal%2BMaad%2Bv.1%2Bp.82%2529.bmp)
(http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-kvjHpMMG2RY/Vgwb_0YrdRI/AAAAAAAABJQ/SKI6JZDj6u0/s1600/With%2Bexception%2Bof%2BProphet%2B%2528AS%2529%2Bsoul%2Bcannot%2Bgo%2Bto%2BHeaven%2Bexcept%2Bafter%2Bdeath%2Band%2Bseparation%2B%2528from%2Bbody%2529%2Bincluding%2Bprophets%2B%2528Zaad%2Bal%2BMaad%2Bv.3%2Bp.36%25291.bmp)

http://islamsalvationfromhell.blogspot.ca/2015/09/imam-ibn-qayyim-al-jawziya-no-proof.html

3. The Sufi saint Ali b. Uthman al-Hujweri wrote in his book Kashf al-Mahjub that on the night of Mi'raj, the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم met the spirits (not bodies) of Adam, Yusuf, Musa, Harun, Ibrahim and Eisa عليهم السلام

http://islamsalvationfromhell.blogspot.ca/2015/09/sufi-ali-hujweri-prophet-as-met-only.html

I highly encourage all the readers to go through this section of my blog which has dozens of proofs that sayyidina Eisa عليه السلام was not raised into Heaven with his Jasad:

http://islamsalvationfromhell.blogspot.ca/p/death-of-jesus.html
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Abu Muhammad on July 08, 2017, 03:33:57 AM
The burden of proof is on you not me to prove that the AsHab al-Kahf lived beyond a normal period of time without sustenance. The principle is that whoever makes a claim of something extraordinary or supernatural must prove their claim. The one who denies something extraordinary or supernatural is not asked to prove his denial. So please present a single verse of the Holy Quran that the AsHab al Kahf, in their individual capacities, survived without food for 3 centuries.

Oh, in this particular instances, you want us to only rely on Quran and nothing else. But other instance, you support your claim for the usage of word "fityatun" by using Sahih Muslim. Good! You forget that Quran, being the very words of Allah itself, is very sensitive to the choice of words used. Not so much for hadith though.

Nothing impossible for something supernatural or extraordinary to happen. It just goes against hukm 'Aadi and not against hukm 'Aqli. i.e. what happened here is something "abnormal" but never "impossible" to happen according to intelect. As an example of extraordinary event is the event of Ibrahim (as) thrown into blazing fire. He was still alive. Extraodinary but yet not impossible.

In fact, the current standard and established story itself has been accepted throughtout Islamic history that those youth were sleeping for 300 years. No other versions besides the standard one that I know of. That by itself has given the standard story a hugh credibility. Unlike yours, it was just some random thoughts.

For you to claim something else from the standard one, you need to bring compelling evidence to support your claim. Throwing questions and random thoughts here and there and raising doubt about the established story is in no way proving your case.

Having said that, I would love to see your own construction of the story. From your previous posts, the story was vaguely expressed by you. Please write one but it shall be based on the facts presented in surat Al-Kahfi starting from verse 9 until verse 26.

In the Qur'an time is described in a different way to point to the multidimensional aspect of time. The same Qur'an says that on Judgment Day the disbelievers will say they tarried in this Dunya for ten days, while the more intelligent and perceptible among them will say a single day. (Sura 20:103-104)

Granted that "yaum" could also mean "period" but then, how would you explain what kind of "a day or half period" they were talking about?

Please note that if they have been living in the cave for 300 years and according to you, they needed to eat or else they would die, they must have been eating easily tens of thousands of meals if not hundreds of thousands. For them to say a day or half is unthinkable unless they were unconcious throughtout those years.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 08, 2017, 04:06:15 AM
Oh, in this particular instances, you want us to only rely on Quran and nothing else. But other instance, you support your claim for the usage of word "fityatun" by using Sahih Muslim. Good!

You make it appear as though I am denying Ahadith. I made singular mention of the Qur'an al-Karim because the story of AsHab al-Kahf is presented there and not in the Ahadith. There are very few if any Ahadith which speaks about the story of AsHab al-Kahf. Nevertheless, if you can present an authentic Marfoo Hadith relating to AsHab al-Kahf I will definitely take it as a proof.

Quote
Nothing impossible for something supernatural or extraordinary to happen. It just goes against hukm 'Aadi and not against hukm 'Aqli. i.e. what happened here is something "abnormal" but never "impossible" to happen according to intelect. As an example of extraordinary event is the event of Ibrahim (as) thrown into blazing fire. He was still alive. Extraodinary but yet not impossible.

I do not deny in principle the occurrence of Mu'jizaat and Khawaariq al-Aadaat. But I will only believe in reports of such things if they are backed up by the Qur'an, Sunnah or are Mushaahidah. Your belief that sayyidina Eisa عليه السلام was raised up into Heaven in his Badan (physical body) and that he is living in the heavens for the past 2 millennia in his Badan or Jasad without food is undoubtedly something that is not only extraordinary and supernatural but impossible in light of the teachings of the Holy Qur'an (Sura 5:75, Sura 21:8 ). Therefore, it is not merely impossible from a rational perspective but more importantly from a Quranic perspective.

Some Jews believe that Enoch and Elijah went to Heaven without dying and that they will never die and live forever. This is not only a supernatural claim that a human being can live forever that is irrational, but is impossible from the Quranic perspective which teaches that no human being is immortal. كُلُّ نَفْسٍ ذَائِقَةُ الْمَوْتِ

The Barelwi Quburiyya sect believe that the Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم and other deceased people can hear from beyond the grave and can answer the supplication of those who pray to them and grant them what they supplicate for. This belief is not only an example of a superstition that is rationally impossible but also impossible from a Quranic perspective, in fact it is nothing less than Shirk.



Quote
Having said that, I would love to see your own construction of the story. From your previous posts, the story was vaguely expressed by you. Please write one but it shall be based on the facts presented in surat Al-Kahfi starting from verse 9 until verse 26.

I will in sha Allah do so shortly.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 08, 2017, 05:10:25 AM
Regarding the issue of sayyidina Eisa عليه السلام not eating food for the past 2 millennia while being in Heaven with his Jasad:

وَمَا أَرْسَلْنَا قَبْلَكَ مِنَ الْمُرْسَلِينَ إِلَّا إِنَّهُمْ لَيَأْكُلُونَ الطَّعَامَ وَيَمْشُونَ فِي الْأَسْوَاقِ
And We did not send before you (O Prophet) from the Messengers except that they ate food and walked in the markets (Sura 25:20)

The verb Arsalnaa "We sent" is in the past tense. It means that all of the Mursaleen (Messengers) that came before the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم were people who used to eat food and walk in the markets. This includes Eisa bin Mariam عليهما السلام. He and his mother both used to eat food (Sura 5:75).

Now if it is true that Eisa (AS) is alive in Heaven where he neither eats food nor walks through the market, then he has been excluded from the generality of this Verse. And the very objective of revealing this Verse is to prove to the polytheists and disbelievers that Prophet Muhammad is still a Prophet and Messenger despite the fact that you see him eating food and walking casually inside the market. If Jesus is an exception to this, the polytheists and disbelievers would cite his example, or Allah would not say that all the previous Messengers before Prophet Muhammad used to eat food and walk in the market if Jesus is the obvious exception.

Allah says:

وَمَا جَعَلْنَا لِبَشَرٍ مِّن قَبْلِكَ الْخُلْدَ ۖ أَفَإِن مِّتَّ فَهُمُ الْخَالِدُونَ
And nor did We give any human being before you (O Prophet) al-Khuld [long life]. So if you die will they live forever? (Sura 21:34)

The root for the words Khuld and Khaalid خ - ل - د connotes "mountains, rocks; to remain put for a long time, to be forever, to be eternal, eternity, to grow old without showing physical signs of old age."

The word Khaalid means: "one living or remaining forever or for a long time."

Arabic-English Dictionary of Qur'anic Usage, p.275

Hence why the mountains are called الخوالد because they are established and remain for a long, long time (but they are not forever). Allah says in this Verse that no one before the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم was granted an exceedingly long life (al-Khuld) and no one is Khaalidoon.

Noor-us-Sunnah or Abu Muhammad said that despite living in Heaven for the past 2 millennia, Jesus is not aging or showing any signs of growing old. This is exactly the meaning of Khuld and being Khaalid, which Allah has denied as impossible for any human being in the life of this world.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Noor-us-Sunnah on July 08, 2017, 05:38:43 AM
So the only basis for you mocking the Ghayba is because the Shia can't conclusively prove the birth of the 12th Imam? So if they could believe the 12th Imam was born, and said that he wasn't guiding people during the Ghayba, you would believe in it? There were many other sects who believed in the Ghayba of someone who was a historical person. The Kaysaniya who believed in the Ghayba of Muhammad al Hanafiya on Mt. Radwa, those who believed in the Ghayba of Abd Allah b. Mu'awiya on a mountain somewhere in Isfahan, those who believed in the Ghayba of Imam Nafs al Zakiyya on Mt. Hajir in the Najd, etc. Will you accept those beliefs in the Ghayba because their adherents can prove the birth of their respective Imams who went into occultation?
If that would be the case then I would not mock their belief in Ghaybah, but then we'll scrutinize the sources of their belief. And for Ahlus-sunnah to believe in anything like such, then that should be from authoritative Sunni sources. If they would then we will.

Quote
So I'm not comparing apples and oranges. Just as the Shi'a cannot prove the Ghayba of their Imam, likewise, the mainstream Sunnis cannot prove that sayyidina Eisa عليه السلام ascended into Heaven with his Jasad and has been living there in his Jasad for the past 2 millennia.
We have proven this from sources which are Hujjah upon Ahlesunnah. Like Hadeeth of Ibn Abbas(ra) about his ascend and the marfoo hadeeth about his descend which clearly shows that Isa(as) will descend with a physical body, like I explained in previous post.


Quote
We are all sons of Adam. Any man can be called "Ibn Adam". Ibn (son) is just the single form of Abnaa, and we are all called Bani Adam in the Holy Qur'an. Jesus is therefore Ibn Adam. It is not necessary that when you say "Ibn Fulan" it means that Fulan is the father married to his mother. We say Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal, but Hanbal was his grandfather not father, and we say Ibn Taymiyya, but his father's name was Abdal Halim not Taymiyya. So when you say Ibn Fulan, Fulan can be the ancestor no matter how far removed in generations.
I meant whose "Nutfah", the Nutfah decides who is your biological mother and father. Every person is born from the nutfah of their biological mother and father. Ibn Taymiyyah was born was from the nutfah of his biological mother and father- Abdal Haleem, etc. So I asked the question in this sense.


Quote

The fact that sayyidina Isa(as) will come with a physical body is neither a proof that he was raised up in his physical body, nor is it a proof that at present he has been living in the sky in his Jasad for the past 2 millennia. When someone is sleeping his soul is taken up to Allah (not his body), and when he awakens he awakens in his body here on Earth. The Jasad is never taken up to the Heavens as I proved from Sura 39:42
When you have believed that Isa(as) will descend wiith a body, then you are half way done my friend, you just need to use your common sense. Isa(as) could only descend with a body, only if he was raised up by Allah with a body. If his body is on earth, and Isa(as) died as you claim, then his body is in Grave, but we find in Quran that people who are in graves will come out only on the day of Judgement, but since Isa(as) will descend with a body as i proved, this implies that he is not dead nor buried, otherwise this will contradict Quran. The correct and well supported view is tht Isa(a) will was raised up alive.

The day on which they shall come forth from their graves in haste, as if they were hastening on to a goal,Their eyes cast down; disgrace shall overtake them; that is the day which they were threatened with.(70:43-44)

And the trumpet shall be blown, when lo! from their graves they shall hasten on to their Lord.(36:51)


Quote

You have to prove that the descent of sayyidina Eisa(AS) in a physical body is proof that he was raised alive to Heaven in his physical body, and remains there as we speak in his physical body. Your aqida is based on speculation and Qiyas.

This Hadeeth is authentic and its mentioning the news about Ghayb, hence Ibn Abbas(ra) must have received this knews from Prophet(saws), but even if we take this hadeeth as Mawqoof, yet this is not Qiyas, so stop deceiving yourself, by thinking our belief is based on Qiyas. Not at all, its purely based on Athaar. In the below Hadeeth you see that, Isa(as) was raised up to heaven through an opening in the roof of the house, well this shows that it was physical body, that it why it was raised from an opening in the roof. Hence a clear evidence for Sunni belief.

 قال ابن أبي حاتم : حدثنا أحمد بن سنان ، حدثنا أبو معاوية ، عن الأعمش ، عن المنهال بن عمرو ، عن سعيد بن جبير ، عن ابن عباس قال : لما أراد الله أن يرفع عيسى إلى السماء ، خرج على أصحابه – وفي البيت اثنا عشر رجلا من الحواريين – يعني : فخرج عليهم من عين في البيت ، ورأسه يقطر ماء ، فقال : إن منكم من يكفر بي اثنتي عشرة مرة ، بعد أن آمن بي . ثم قال : أيكم يلقى عليه شبهي ، فيقتل مكاني ويكون معي في درجتي ؟ فقام شاب من أحدثهم سنا ، فقال له : اجلس . ثم أعاد عليهم فقام ذلك الشاب ، فقال : اجلس . ثم أعاد عليهم فقام الشاب فقال : أنا . فقال : أنت هو ذاك . فألقي عليه شبه عيسى ورفع عيسى من روزنة في البيت إلى السماء . قال : وجاء الطلب من اليهود فأخذوا الشبه فقتلوه ، ثم صلبوه وكفر به بعضهم اثنتي عشرة مرة ، بعد أن آمن به ، وافترقوا ثلاث فرق ، فقالت طائفة : كان الله فينا ما شاء ثم صعد إلى السماء . وهؤلاء اليعقوبية ، وقالت فرقة : كان فينا ابن الله ما شاء ، ثم رفعه الله إليه . وهؤلاء النسطورية ، وقالت فرقة : كان فينا عبد الله ورسوله ما شاء ، ثم رفعه الله إليه . وهؤلاء المسلمون ، فتظاهرت الكافرتان على المسلمة ، فقتلوها ، فلم يزل الإسلام طامسا حتى بعث الله محمدا صلى الله عليه وسلم .
وهذا إسناد صحيح إلى ابن عباس

Ibn Abbas said, “When Allaah decided to raise `Isa to Heaven, `Isa went to his companions – and in the house there were twelve men from his disciples – while drops of water were dripping from his head. `Isa said to them, “Some of you will disbelieve in me twelve times after having believed in me.” He then asked, “Who among you volunteers that he be made to resemble me and be killed instead of me; he will be with me in my place (in Paradise).” One of the youngest men present volunteered, but `Isa commanded him to sit down. `Isa repeated his statement and the young man again stood up and volunteered, and `Isa again told him to sit down. `Isa repeated the same statement and the young man volunteered. This time, `Isa said, “Then it will be you.” The appearance of `Isa was cast upon that young man, while `Isa, peace be on him, was raised to heaven through an opening in the roof of the house. The Jews came looking for `Isa and arrested the one that appeared as him, killing him by crucifixion. Some of them disbelieved in `Isa twelve times, after they had believed in him. They divided into three groups. One group said, “God was among us and then ascended to heaven”. These are the Jacobites. One group said, “The son of God was among us and then God raised him to Himself”. These are the Nestorians. One group said, “A servant of god and His messenger was among us and then God raised him to Himself”. These are the Muslims. Then the two unbelieving sects prevailed against the Muslims and killed them. Islam remained eradicated until God sent Muhammad, may Allaah’s blessing and peace be upon him.
 
Imam Ibn Katheer adds: And this chain of narration is authentic (Saheeh) from Ibn Abbas.
 
(This narration can also be read in al-Bidayah wal-Nihayah (vol 2, page 85) of Imam Ibn Katheer, as well as in Fath al-Qadeer (vol 1, pg 800) of Imam ash-Shawkani.)

 
Quote
Also, is there any authentic Marfoo Hadith which says sayyidina Eisa(AS) will descend from the sky? I assure you there is no such Hadith in the Sihhah as Sita, Hadith only says he will descend, it never says he will descend from Heaven.
Any Muslim who is blessed with wisdom knows the fact that, Angels descend from heaven. And per Marfoo ahadeeth, Isa(As) will descend keeping hands on the wings of Angels.

The Day the heaven shall be rent asunder with clouds, and angels shall be sent down, descending (in ranks),- (Surah Al-Furqan, 25)

Quote
Where is it written in the books of the principles of Ahlus Sunnati wal Jama'ah that the saying of a single Sahabi constitutes a Hujjah in the Religion?
I have proven my claim from verses of Quran, ahadeeth and Salaf. And like i said in one of my post, I would have preferred a weak hadeeth over the speculative beliefs of some nobody. BUt Alhamdulillah here we have authentic ahadeeth. Btw, the hadeeth of Ibn Abbas(ra) actually ends the ambiguity in the verse of Quran about Isa(as) being raised up. So this is a supplementary proof for the verse of Quran. Our belief gets proven from Quran itself. Masha Allah.


Quote
The Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم met many other Prophets in Heaven, are all of them alive there in their physical bodies too?
No, they are not, that is why we don't have any reports of them being raised alive nor of their descend with physical body.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 08, 2017, 07:42:26 AM

We have proven this from sources which are Hujjah upon Ahlesunnah. Like Hadeeth of Ibn Abbas(ra) about his ascend and the marfoo hadeeth about his descend which clearly shows that Isa(as) will descend with a physical body, like I explained in previous post.

This Hadeeth is authentic and its mentioning the news about Ghayb, hence Ibn Abbas(ra) must have received this knews from Prophet(saws)

If you say that the Athar of a Sahabi is a proof in the Religion, especially if it is concerning something from the Unseen meaning he could not have come up with such a belief except that he acquired it from the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم. Firstly, it is known that the Sahaba narrated many beliefs and doctrines of matters from the unseen due to their being influenced by the Jews and Christians around them. Which is why they, despite being Sahaba, would acquire knowledge from non-Sahaba like Ka'b al-Ahbar رضى الله عنه and others.

This is the same Ibn Abbas رضى الله عنه who said in explaining the Verse: "Allah is the One who created the Seven Heavens and of the Earth a similar (number)"

سَبْعَ أَرْضِينَ ، فِي كُلِّ أَرْضٍ نَبِيٌّ كَنَبِيِّكُمْ ، وَآدَمُ كَآدَمَ ، وَنُوحٌ كَنُوحٍ ، وَإِبْرَاهِيمُ كَإِبْرَاهِيمَ ، وَعِيسَى كَعِيسَى
"In the Seven Earths, in every Earth there is a Nabi like your Nabi, an Adam like your Adam, a Noah like your Noah, an Abraham like your Abraham, and a Jesus like your Jesus."

The question is will any Muslim adapt this belief simply because Ibn Abbas said it and it is something from the matter of the unseen? Are you prepared to believe that there are 6 other Prophet Muhammads like our Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم without any evidence of that from the Quran and Ahadith an Nabawi?


Quote
I meant whose "Nutfah", the Nutfah decides who is your biological mother and father. Every person is born from the nutfah of their biological mother and father. Ibn Taymiyyah was born was from the nutfah of his biological mother and father- Abdal Haleem, etc. So I asked the question in this sense.

First you referred to Nutfah as meaning male sperm, now you are talking about the Nutfah of a biological mother? Did not Eisa عليه السلام have a biological mother?

But the meaning of the Ayah is that Insan is created from the Nutfah of Adam. That is the Nutfah through which all humanity originated including sayyidina Isa عليه السلام

The stories about Jesus ascending through the roof of a house etc. are all fables that come from the Israaeeliyyat. In fact they are self-contradictory, some of them say that a disciple of Jesus was made to appear like Jesus who was crucified in his place, and others say that an enemy of Jesus was made to appear in his image and crucified instead of Jesus. There are all kinds of wild theories. Allah says that all of it is الظَّنِّ (conjecture - Sura 4:157)


Quote
Any Muslim who is blessed with wisdom knows the fact that, Angels descend from heaven. And per Marfoo ahadeeth, Isa(As) will descend keeping hands on the wings of Angels.

Nuzul (descent) does not always mean in the sense of coming down from Heaven. Allah says He sent down 8 pairs of cattle وَأَنزَلَ لَكُم مِّنَ الْأَنْعَامِ ثَمَانِيَةَ أَزْوَاجٍ did these 8 pairs of cattle come down from the sky? Coming with two Angels is not exclusive to Jesus, even our Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم was accompanied by 2 Angels (Gabriel and Michael). Sometimes they were visible to the Sahaba, like during the Battle of Badr:
Sa`d reported that on the Day of Uhud I saw on the right side of Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) and on his left side two persons dressed in white clothes and whom I did not see before nor after that, and they were Gabriel and Michael peace be upon them both (Sahih Muslim)
قَالَ خَرَجَ عَلَيْنَا رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم يَوْمًا فَقَالَ ‏ "‏ إِنِّي رَأَيْتُ فِي الْمَنَامِ كَأَنَّ جِبْرِيلَ عِنْدَ رَأْسِي وَمِيكَائِيلَ عِنْدَ رِجْلَىَّ
The Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم said that he saw in a dream that Gabriel is at his head and Michael is at at his foot (Tirmidhi)
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Abu Muhammad on July 08, 2017, 08:51:48 AM
I am not questioning the howness or modality of something that is unseen, I am disputing your belief to be true that Jesus is alive in the Heavens with his earthen body, because such a belief doesn't have any proof from the Quran.

Really? How about this…

وَقُلْنَا يَا آدَمُ اسْكُنْ أَنْتَ وَزَوْجُكَ الْجَنَّةَ وَكُلَا مِنْهَا رَغَدًا حَيْثُ شِئْتُمَا وَلَا تَقْرَبَا هَٰذِهِ الشَّجَرَةَ فَتَكُونَا مِنَ الظَّالِمِينَ

(Sahih International)
And We said, "O Adam, dwell, you and your wife, in Paradise and eat therefrom in [ease and] abundance from wherever you will. But do not approach this tree, lest you be among the wrongdoers."

-Sura Al-Baqarah, Ayah 35

Were Adam and Hawa living in their ruh in jannah?
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 08, 2017, 09:17:42 AM


Really? How about this…

وَقُلْنَا يَا آدَمُ اسْكُنْ أَنْتَ وَزَوْجُكَ الْجَنَّةَ وَكُلَا مِنْهَا رَغَدًا حَيْثُ شِئْتُمَا وَلَا تَقْرَبَا هَٰذِهِ الشَّجَرَةَ فَتَكُونَا مِنَ الظَّالِمِينَ

(Sahih International)
And We said, "O Adam, dwell, you and your wife, in Paradise and eat therefrom in [ease and] abundance from wherever you will. But do not approach this tree, lest you be among the wrongdoers."

-Sura Al-Baqarah, Ayah 35

Were Adam and Hawa living in their ruh in jannah?

Which Jannah was it? There is ikhtilaaf here too. Even if we suppose it was the Jannah of the Akhirah you have couple of problems which have to be resolved:

1. When someone is in Jannah of Akhira can they be expelled or leave?
وَمَا هُم مِّنْهَا بِمُخْرَجِينَ
Nor will they be expelled from it (Sura 15:48)

2. Has any human being seen the Jannah of Akhira?
فَلَا تَعْلَمُ نَفْسٌ مَّا أُخْفِيَ لَهُم مِّن قُرَّةِ أَعْيُنٍ جَزَاءً بِمَا كَانُوا يَعْمَلُونَ
And no soul knows what has been hidden from them of comfort for eyes as reward for what they used to do (Sura 32:17)
Allah says: ‘I have prepared for My righteous slaves that which no eye has seen, no ear has heard and it has never crossed the mind of man. All of that is reserved, besides which all that you have known is as nothing." (Hadith Qudsi)

3. Can any human being enter the Jannah in his body without tasting death or being resurrected first?

4. If Adam and Hawwa were expelled from the Jannah of Akhirah, is it possible anyone can enter back into it before Qiyamah without tasting death?

5. Is there any tree in the Jannah of Akhira that is forbidden to be approached? ِAllah says that in the Jannah of Akhira the Believers will have access to every kind of fruit وَلَهُمْ فِيهَا مِن كُلِّ الثَّمَرَاتِ (Sura 47:15)

Does it make sense to believe that sayyidina Eisa عليه السلام is right now in the Jannah of Akhira, enjoying its delights, but he is still in his earthly Jasad (body) which is a restricted body. If this earthen body was sufficient to enjoy the delights of Jannah what is the purpose of Qiyama when we are raised up in a different body so we can experience the delights of Jannah?
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Abu Muhammad on July 08, 2017, 09:35:06 AM
Which Jannah was it? There is ikhtilaaf here too. Even if we suppose it was the Jannah of the Akhirah you have couple of problems which have to be resolved:

1. When someone is in Jannah of Akhira can they be expelled or leave?
وَمَا هُم مِّنْهَا بِمُخْرَجِينَ
Nor will they be expelled from it (Sura 15:48)

2. Has any human being seen the Jannah of Akhira?
فَلَا تَعْلَمُ نَفْسٌ مَّا أُخْفِيَ لَهُم مِّن قُرَّةِ أَعْيُنٍ جَزَاءً بِمَا كَانُوا يَعْمَلُونَ
And no soul knows what has been hidden from them of comfort for eyes as reward for what they used to do (Sura 32:17)
Allah says: ‘I have prepared for My righteous slaves that which no eye has seen, no ear has heard and it has never crossed the mind of man. All of that is reserved, besides which all that you have known is as nothing." (Hadith Qudsi)

3. Can any human being enter the Jannah in his body without tasting death or being resurrected first?

4. If Adam and Hawwa were expelled from the Jannah of Akhirah, is it possible anyone can enter back into it before Qiyamah without tasting death?

5. Is there any tree in the Jannah of Akhira that is forbidden to be approached? ِAllah says that in the Jannah of Akhira the Believers will have access to every kind of fruit وَلَهُمْ فِيهَا مِن كُلِّ الثَّمَرَاتِ (Sura 47:15)

Does it make sense to believe that sayyidina Eisa عليه السلام is right now in the Jannah of Akhira, enjoying its delights, but he is still in his earthly Jasad (body) which is a restricted body. If this earthen body was sufficient to enjoy the delights of Jannah what is the purpose of Qiyama when we are raised up in a different body so we can experience the delights of Jannah?

Good. If going by your argument, that means there is a "jannah" that persons with earthly bodies could live and eat without any issues as proven in the case of Adam & Hawa (as).

Could Isa (as) be possibly taken up this kind of "jannah"? If yes, all your previous arguments with regard to earthly bodies living in jannah were void and invalid.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 08, 2017, 09:39:51 AM

Good. If going by your argument, that means there is a "jannah" that persons with earthly bodies could live and eat without any issues as proven in the case of Adam & Hawa (as).

Could Isa (as) be possibly taken up this kind of "jannah"? If yes, all your previous arguments with regard to earthly bodies living in jannah were void and invalid.

This Jannah is not in the Heavens. It was the Jannah that was on this planet.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Abu Muhammad on July 08, 2017, 12:00:14 PM
This Jannah is not in the Heavens. It was the Jannah that was on this planet.

I can pretty much see where you are heading to with that statement.

By the way, being this forum is Sunni/Twelvers polemical discussion, I still cannot see how does your argument about Isa's (as) ghaybah could practically give a "catasthropic" blow to Twelvers argument of their Mahdi's ghaybah, as you claimed. Seriously. They could always, among other arguments, comeback saying there will always be 2 opinions in Sunnis and you cannot, practically speaking, eliminate that. And as I said previously, they could easily accuse us of pick-and-choose what suits us.

You know what, the main thing that you could achieve here is actually challenging the prominent Sunni believe itself with regard to Isa's (as) ghaybah! Not so much on Twelvers!

As for me, ghaybah of Isa (as) or not, it doesn't really have a hugh impact on me, to be honest. It is furu' Al-Aqidah. Moreover, do you think I'll be asked infront of Allah in the akhirah weather I believe in Isa's (as) ghaybah or not?
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: MuslimAnswers on July 08, 2017, 12:42:04 PM
This Jannah is not in the Heavens. It was the Jannah that was on this planet.

I can pretty much see where you are heading to with that statement.

By the way, being this forum is Sunni/Twelvers polemical discussion, I still cannot see how does your argument about Isa's (as) ghaybah could practically give a "catasthropic" blow to Twelvers argument of their Mahdi's ghaybah, as you claimed. Seriously. They could always, among other arguments, comeback saying there will always be 2 opinions in Sunnis and you cannot, practically speaking, eliminate that. And as I said previously, they could easily accuse us of pick-and-choose what suits us.

Whatever else I might think about the polemics being employed, the discussion should probably be moved to another section, as this section of 'Imamah-Ghaybah' is specifically for Sunni vs. Twelver discusions
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 08, 2017, 03:18:21 PM
I readily confess that my primary motivation for speaking about this mas’ala is not to sharpen our intellectual tools in repudiating the doctrines of the Imamiya, though it is icing on the cake. The fact of the matter is that the Imamiya are and always have been an intellectually bankrupt sect. The appeal of that tendency has always been rooted in emotion and disatisfaction or not finding fulfilment in sticking to the clarity and purity of the Sunna. But it is my contention that at this time it is more important to acquaint people with the fikr of Tawhid before calling to the Sunna. The Prophets called to Tawhid al-Ibada as did our master al-Mustafa ﷺ. But when Tawhid was established in the land, then the initial deviations that occurred in the time of his successors and the Salaf were not concerning Tawhid al-Ibada but rather deviations from various aspects of the Sunna. I am speaking here about the deviations of Kharijiyya, Rifd, Nasb, Qadr, Tajahhum, I’tizal, Irjaa, Tajsim and the like which are deviations from the Sunna but not necessarily concerning Tawhid al-Ibada which was firmly established by the Help of Allah and through the agency of His honorable Prophet. So the Muslims of the Straight Path in those times exerted their intellectual efforts in establishing the Sunna and combatting all these deviations, and hence in that atmosphere orthodoxy became synonymous with Ahlus Sunnati wal-Jama’ah. Now the Fikr of Tawhid al-Ibada is dismissed in the hearts of many in this time as an unsophisticated, rural Da’wa. In fact the majority deride it as Wahhabi Da’wa that focuses on condemning folk practices such as veneration of tombs, petitioning the deceased, amuletry, talismanry, palmistry, astrology, etc. Yet in this time not only is this Da’wa desperately needed considering how widespread such idolatrous practices and ideas are, but I consider it the most virtuous effort a Muslim can dedicate himself to with the intention of bringing glory to Allah thus stoking His happiness. Now it is obvious that this doctrine that Jesus of Nazareth ascended into Heaven in his Jasad or corporeal body is like an idol that has penetrated deep into your heart. I intend to smash it to pieces with the bifurcated sword of Muhammad ﷺ. This circulating of the truth of Wafat-al-Masih is merely an extension of the fikr of Tawhid al-Ibada and nothing else. The Prophet ﷺ said: “I was sent to break the idols” (Muslim Sharif). Now this doctrine of Jesus of Nazareth having ascended corporally into Heaven where he has been living for two thousand years bears the stench of the religion of the cross worshipers. Therefore do not consider this as minutiae or merely a theoretical exercise. The objective is to cleanse the minds of the Muslims from the Nicene influence and arm them with powerful weapons to obliterate the illusory dogma of the deification of Christ. Now it is not sufficient to merely condemn as forbidden the folk practices of the ignorant masses concerning their devotion to tombs and supplicating the souls of the departed. It is superior to establish the intellectual proof before which the darkness of Shirk immediately vanishes. The Quran al-Karim has been revealed containing those intellectual proofs through which idolatry is obliterated. When it announces emphatically that the deceased are unable to hear anything, the foundation of the idolatry of calling upon the souls of Prophets and Saints crumbles. Likewise, when it proclaims loudly that Jesus of Nazareth was a mere mortal human being whose soul was snatched away and is hence dead the idolatry of the cross is broken forever.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Noor-us-Sunnah on July 09, 2017, 10:15:25 AM
All of the evidences you have quoted establish the necessity of following the Sahaba رضى الله عنهم as a collective. This is also from where we derive the concept of Ijma. But you haven't presented a single evidence from Qur'an and Sunnah which states that the saying of a Sahabi is a Hujjah in the Religion.
I have proven from Quran, Marfoo hadeeth and sayings of Sahaba and Salaf, that we have believe just like the Sahaba believed. And one authentic hadeeth from a Sahabi about his belief which is not contradicted by any authentic hadeeth is worthy to be believed upon.

Quote
But since you insist that the saying of a Sahabi is a Hujjah in the Religion, then I will present to you the views of some of the Sahaba رضى الله عنهم that sayyidina Isa عليه السلام was not raised alive into Heaven in his Jasad:

When the Companion Jarud رضى الله عنه was dispatched to Bahrain to debate with the apostate tribes (Abd al Qais in particular). The reason they had become apostate was because they were bewildered as to how the Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم had died if he was a true Prophet. So they abandoned Islam. Thus Jarud رضى الله عنه put forward to them the examples of sayyidina Musa and sayyidina Eisa عليهم السلام. The apostates bore witness that both of them were Messengers of Allah. Then Jarud said:
وأنا أشهد أن لا إله إلا الله وأن محمدا عبده ورسوله . عاش كما عاشوا ، ومات كما ماتوا
"And I bear witness that there is none worthy of worship except Allah and that Muhammad is His servant and Messenger. He lived as they all lived and he died as they all died."[/font][/size]

(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-EgzQGcekxBA/Vfw-LV7VraI/AAAAAAAABBk/rkymiRxSlqw/s1600/title.bmp)
[/size][/font]
(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-3zWflqX5RWM/Vfw-Pn-U_3I/AAAAAAAABBs/ZHzsZzVwzvg/s1600/Statement%2Bof%2BJarud%2B%2528r.a%2529%2Bto%2Bapostates%2Bof%2BBahrain%2BProphet%2B%2528as%2529%2Blived%2Bas%2Bthey%2B%2528Moses%2BJesus%2529%2Blived%2Band%2Bdied%2Bas%2Bthey%2Ball%2Bdied%2B%2528Mukhtasar%2BSirat%2Bar%2BRasul%2Bp.%2B293%2529.bmp)
One of the basic criteria to act upon a hadeeth is to check whether it is authentic or not. So let us verify whether it is authentic or not.

I looked up for the chain of this report but I didn't find any Isnad for this report in the quoted book, you can try it yourself:
http://shamela.ws/browse.php/book-31465/page-285

Ibn ‘Uyayna said:“A hadith without any chain of transmission is nothing. Certainly the chains of transmission are a ladder of the texts by which one reaches the texts.” [Related by al-Khatib al-Baghdadi in al-Kifaya fi ‘Ilm ar-Riwaya, p. 393.]

Al-Imam ash-Shafi‘i said: “The one who accepts the knowledge from somebody without the sanad(chain of transmission) is like a person carrying a bundle of wood with a snake in it and he does not know. It may bite him (anytime).”[al-Bayhaqi, al-Madkhal ila as-Sunan al-Kubra, p. 211.]

Abdullah bin Mubarak (d. 181 A.H.) said:
الإسناد عندي من الدين لولا الإسناد لقال من شاء ما شاء وإذا قيل له : من حدثك ؟ بقي
‘Isnaad (chains of narrators) to me are a part of Deen, and if it was not for Isnaad, one would have said whatever hee desired. When it is said (to the one who speaks without Isnaad): Who informed you? He remains silent and bewildered.’ (Khateeb Baghdadi’s Al-Akhlaaq Al-Rawi wa Aadaab A-Sami’ 4/392 Narration 1654)

Hence, this report which you quoted gets rejected.


Quote
Likewise, we have the statement of sayyidina Hassan al-Mujtaba رضى الله عنه when he gave a sermon at the time of the martyrdom of his honorable father sayyidina Amir ul Mumineen Ali رضى الله عنه. He said:

ولقد قبض في الليلة التي عرج فيها بروح عيسى بن مريم ليلة سبع وعشرين من رمضان
"And he (AliRA) was taken (martyred) in the Night in which the Ruh of Jesus son of Mary ascended, the twenty-seventh of Ramadan."

(https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-e2GHVV_VwM8/WWAMfcBnsWI/AAAAAAAACek/5Cs4_kphHfQcBSUL6DXJF1_ythYvu5WVwCLcBGAs/s640/title.png)
(https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-qpK-IYbyko0/WWAMicF-2CI/AAAAAAAACeo/1hD9pvFOJYcMvesiCGF7-c0k7FwcDdMoACLcBGAs/s1600/Ali%2B%2528r.a.%2529%2Bdied%2Bthe%2Bnight%2BJesus%2B%2528AS%2529%2BSPIRIT%2Bwas%2Braised%2B27th%2BRamadan%2B%2528Tabaqat%2BIbn%2BSaad%2Bv.3%2Bp.37%2529%2BAl%2BAjlah%2Bb.%2BAbdullah%2Bweakened.bmp)
(https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-vJ25Lt1kMlw/WWAMq7GtfTI/AAAAAAAACes/RIeuMq--IdMseH6eBMNIiT3mEFUneYhFACLcBGAs/s1600/title2.png)
(https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-ITXr06KgHoE/WWAMsgXckWI/AAAAAAAACew/8HfJflEcB7AJ5MwteEqk2WkSb7vSMc5TwCLcBGAs/s1600/Sermon%2Bof%2BHasan%2BAllah%2Braised%2BAli%2Bsoul%2Bsame%2Bnight%2BHe%2Braised%2BJesus%2Bsoul.%2BAli%2Bis%2BKhatam%2Bal%2BAwsiya%2B%2528Majma%2Baz%2BZawaid%2Bv.9%2Bp.146%2529.png)

The statement of sayyidina Hasan رضى الله عنه proves that he believed that sayyidina Eisa عليه السلام did not ascend into Heaven with his Jasad, but only with his Ruh.
This narration has quite a number of problems:

1- In its chain is the narrator Al-Ajlah bin ‘Abdullah who has been criticized by the scholars. Hafiz Ibn Hajr quotes the opinions of various scholars about him;

Ibn Abi Hatim said: ‘He is not strong. Write his narrations but do not seek evidence with them.’

Nasai said: ‘Weak! He has nothing’

Abu Dawud said: ‘[He is] Weak’

Jozjani said: ‘[He is a] Liar’

(Tehzib Al-Tehzib 1/166 Entry 353)

Infact Ibn Sa’d who quoted this narration termed him extremely weak. After giving his basic bio-data he writes:

وكان ضعيفا جدا

‘And he is extremely weak.’ (Tabaqat Ibn Sa’d 6/350)

Hence the narration is extremely weak even according to the judgment of the author of the book.

2- The narration with this particular wording is unreliable as it contradicts another narration on similar lines reported by trustworthy narrators. We read in Al-Hakim’s collection;

حدثنا الأستاذ أبو الوليد الهيثم بن خلف الدوري ، ثنا سوار بن عبد الله العنبري ، ثنا المعتمر قال : قال أبي : حدثنا الحريث بن مخشي ، أن عليا قتل صبيحة إحدى وعشرين من رمضان ، قال : فسمعت الحسن بن علي يقول ، وهو يخطب وذكر مناقب علي ، فقال : « قتل ليلة أنزل القرآن ، وليلة أسري  بعيسى ، وليلة قبض موسى »

Abu Al-Waleed Al-Haitham narrated from Sawar bin ‘Abdullah Al-Anbari; he said, Mu’tamar narrated to us; he said: ‘My father said’; Harith bin Makhshi narrated: ‘Ali (RA) was murdered the morning of 21st Ramadan. He said; I heard Hassan bin ‘Ali (RA) speaking. He was making an address and talking of the virtues of ‘Ali (RA); he said: ‘He has been killed the night Qur’an was revealed, the night ‘Eisa (AS) was moved and the night Musa (AS) died.’ (Mustadrak Hakim, Hadith 4671. Hakim said it is Sahih).

Now this narration uses the word أسري which means to traverse a path, to make displacement. This certainly refers to his physical  ascension to the heavens. Also note that the contrast of this word to the that used for Musa (AS). Had he died a natural death, there was no reason to use the word with the markedly different implication.

Lest one may ask as to the al-Dhahbi’s comment on this Hadith for we know he declared many of the narrations authenticated by al-Hakim as dubious, and recently we considered one such example, I shall clarify that al-Dhahbi did not comment on this narration. And scholars say that a narration of al-Hakim’s Mustadrak on which al-Dhahbi does not comment is Hasan in status if not criticized by others. (See Shaykh Abdul Fattah Abu Ghoddah’s Qawa’id fi ‘Uloom al-Hadith p. 71, pub. Idara al-Qur’an wa ‘Uloom al-Islamia, Karachi)

Same narration has been quoted by Jalaluddin Suyuti in Durr Manthur 2/348 under Qur’an 3:54-57

Obviously the second narration which has been authenticated by the scholars must be considered and first one stands rejected because of its weak chain and difference with the authentic narration. And the second narration does not give any hint to what Ahmadis suggest. Infact it testifies to the contrary.

3- Interestingly Imam Nasai who termed a key narrator of the narration in question as weak and Imam Hakim and Suyuti who have quoted and authenticated the other narration have all been recognized as Mujaddids by Ahmadis.

Thus no authentic narration supports the Ahmadi contention.

Similar narrations from Shi’a sources:

4- Here are some narrations of the similar import from Shi’a sources;

In Biharul Anwar of Allama Muhammad Baqir al-Majlasi it is reported;

عن حبيب بن عمرو قال : لما توفي أمير المؤمنين عليه السلام قام الحسن عليه السلام خطيبا فقال : أيها الناس في هذه الليلة رفع عيسى بن مريم .

Narrated Habib bin ‘Amr: ‘When the Commander of the Faithful passed away, Hassan stood and spoke. He said, ‘O you people! On this night ‘Eisa ibn Maryam was raised.’ (Biharul Anwar vol.14 p.335)

Another narration says;

عن أبي بصير ، عن أبي عبدالله عليه السلام قال : قال أبوجعفر عليه السلام : لما كانت الليلة التي قتل فيها علي عليه السلام لم يرفع عن وجه الارض حجر إلا وجد تحته دم عبيط حتى طلع الفجر ، وكذلك كانت الليلة التي قتل فيها يوشع بن نون عليه السلام ، و كذلك كانت الليلة التي رفع فيها عيسى بن مريم عليه السلام وكذلك الليلة التي قتل فيها الحسين عليه السلام

Narrated Abi Baseer from Abu Abdullah (A.S.), he said:  Abu Ja‘far (AS) said, “On the night when ‘Alí (AS) was murdered no stone was lifted from the face of the earth unless beneath it was found pure fresh blood, until the first break of dawn. It was the same on the night Yusha‘ ibn Nun (A.S.) was murdered, and it was the same on the night when Eisa ibn Maryam (AS) was raised, and it was the same on the night when Husain (AS) was murdered.” (Biharul Anwar vol.14 p.336)

There are similar reports in Tahdhib al-Ahkam of Abu Ja’far Muhammad bin Hassan al-Tusi and Tafsir Ayyashi.

Conclusion:

All these narrations are infact evidence against Ahmadiyya.

The narration of al-Hakim and the first one from Biharul Anwar clearly use the words ‘Qabadha’ and ‘Tawaffi’ implying death of Musa (AS) and Ali (RA) respectively but not one of them uses any such word for ‘Eisa (AS). This is a categorical proof that ‘Eisa (AS) did not die and the ‘Rafa’ mentioned for him relates to physical ascension and not just exaltation in ranks after death.

Taken from
http://thecult.info/blog/2011/02/03/hadith-alleged-death-of-jesus-12-statement-of-hassan-ra-at-kufa/


Quote
And we have the statement of sayyidina Umar b. al-Khattab رضى الله عنه at the time when the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم died.

عَنْ عِكْرِمَةَ ، قَالَ : " تُوُفِّيَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ يَوْمَ الِاثْنَيْنِ ، فَحُبِسَ بَقِيَّةَ يَوْمِهِ وَلَيْلَتَهُ وَالْغَدَ حَتَّى دُفِنَ لَيْلَةَ الْأَرْبِعَاءِ ، وَقَالُوا : إِنَّ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ لَمْ يَمُتْ ، وَلَكِنْ عُرِجَ بِرُوحِهِ كَمَا عُرِجَ بِرُوحِ مُوسَى ، فَقَامَ عُمَرُ ، فَقَالَ : إِنَّ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ لَمْ يَمُتْ ، وَلَكِنْ عُرِجَ بِرُوحِهِ كَمَا عُرِجَ بِرُوحِ مُوسَى ، وَاللَّهِ لَا يَمُوتُ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ حَتَّى يَقْطَعَ أَيْدِيَ أَقْوَامٍ وَأَلْسِنَتَهُمْ
Ikrima narrates that Rasul Allah(SAW) died on Monday but was buried on Wednesday. People were saying: "Verily Rasul Allah(SAW) did not die, but his Ruh ascended like the ascension of the Ruh of Musa(AS)." So Umar(RA) stood up and said: "Verily, Rasul Allah(SAW) did not die, but his Ruh ascended like the ascension of the Ruh of Musa(AS). By Allah! Rasul Allah(SAW) will not die until he cuts the hands and tongues of nations." (Darimi Sharif)

This Hadith proves that not only Umar, but some other unnamed companions were saying the same thing. Now why did sayyidina Umar give the example of Musa instead of Eisa. If he believed that Eisa(AS) was alive and not deceased, he would have given that more obvious precedent, rather than mentioning Musa(AS) because everyone is agreed that Musa(AS) died. But the fact that sayyidina Umar(RA) did not give the example of sayyidina Eisa(AS) to prove that likewise the Prophet(SAW) has not died shows that even Umar(RA) knew and believed firmly that sayyidina Eisa(AS) died.

Firstly the report you quoted is weak, because it is Mursal. Ikrima Mawla Ibn Abbas is a Taba'i. Secondly it's not an explicit evidence from your side, which can't overrule an explicit Sahih hadeeth from sahabi.

Secondly, your argument gets killed by another narration on this issue:

عن أبي سلمة بن عبد الرحمن قال: اقتحم الناس على النبي، صلى الله عليه وسلم، في بيت عائشة ينظرون إليه فقالوا: كيف يموت وهو شهيد علينا ونحن شهداء على الناس؟ … لا والله ما مات ولكنه رفع كما رفع عيسى بن مريم، صلى الله عليه وسلم

Narrated Abu Salamah bin ‘Abd al-Rahman: The people rushed to the Prophet, may Allah bless him, in the apartment of ‘Aisha to look at him. They said: “How can he die since he is a witness to us and we are witnesses to other people? … No! by Allah! He has not died; but he has been raised as ‘Eisa ibn Maryam was made to ascend.” (Tabaqat al-Kubra 2/271).

The narration at first place proves that not merely ‘Umar but other companions too referred to ascension of ‘Eisa –may Allah bless him and be pleased with them all.

It further proves that at the back of their minds the blessed companions had the idea that ‘Eisa ibn Maryam –may Allah bless him- was alive and has been raised to the heavens and will return.

A query killed:

Lest one say, ‘Eisa’ –may Allah bless him- ascension was not physical because the companions said that while the body of the Holy Prophet –may Allah bless him- was present in front of them, the response is that they said it out of the shock and inability to believe in the death of the Holy Prophet.

We read:

فلم يزل عمر يتكلم ، حتى أزبد شدقاه

“’Umar continued speaking till the edges of his mouth were filled with foam.” (Kanzul ‘Ummal, Hadith 18773)

This was surely due to him being much affected by the tragedy.

Mirza Ghulam Ahmad also said:

“And due to the sorrow he (‘Umar) was like the people who lose senses.” (Tuhfa Ghaznawiya p.55 –R.K. vol.15 p.588)

Moreover, ‘Umar and other companions alluded to ‘Eisa’ –may Allah bless him- ascension to contend against the death of the Holy Prophet –may Allah bless him- which also shows they belief in the life of ‘Eisa –may Allah bless him.

For details refer:
http://thecult.info/blog/2011/07/13/myth-of-ijma%e2%80%99-on-the-alleged-death-of-%e2%80%98eisa-as/



Quote
Now according to you the statements of these Sahaba are a Hujjah in the Religion
[/size][/font]
Please correct yourself. What I meant was about authentic hadeeth, not weak and unreliable reports.


Eisa (AS) did ascend and will descend from the Heavens above; categorical Ahadith

Hadith 1
عن ابن عباس قال: لما أراد الله أن يرفع عيسى إلى السماء خرج على أصحابه …ورفع عيسى من رَوْزَنَة في البيت إلى السماء
Ibn Abbas said, “When Allah intended to raise ‘Eisa to the heavens, he went to his companions … and ‘Eisa ascended to the Heavens through an opening in the top of the house.”
(Ibn Abi Hatim 4/431 Hadith 6266, Ibn Kathir 2/449. Ibn Kathir graded it Sahih)

Hadith 2
عن صفية أم المؤمنين رضي الله عنها أنها كانت إذا زارت بيت المقدس ، وفرغت من الصلاة في المسجد الأقصى صعدت على جبل زيتا فصلت عليه وقالت : هذا الجبل هو الذي رفع منه عيسى عليه السلام إلى السماء
It is narrated from Ummul Momineen Safiya, may Allah be pleased with her, that when she visited Bait Al-Maqdis (i.e. Jerusalem) and finished prayers in Al-Aqsa Mosque she climbed up to Mt. Olives and prayed there as well and said: ‘This is the mountain from where ‘Eisa, may Allah bless him, was raised up to the Heavens.’ (Al-Tasrih bima Tawatar fi Nuzul Al-Masih Hadith 74 cf. Tafsir Fath Al-Aziz Surah 95)

Hadith 3
إن أبا هريرة رضي الله عنه قال : قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم : « كيف أنتم إذا نزل ابن مريم من السماء فيكم
Narrated Abu Huraira, may Allah be pleased with him: Allah’s Messenger, may Allah bless him, said “What will be your condition when the son of Maryam (i.e. ‘Eisa) will descend amongst you from the heavens…?” (Baihaqi’s Asmaa wal Sifaat 2/432 Hadith 855; Shaykh Abdullah bin Muhammad al-Hashidi has classified the narration as Sahih))

Hadith 4
عن أبى هريرة قال سمعت أبا القاسم الصادق المصدوق يقول …ثم ينزل عيسى بن مريم عليه وسلم من السماء فيؤم الناس
Abu Huraira  said: I heard Abul Qasim the Truthful and Trustworthy (i.e. Holy Prophet) say: ‘… then ‘Eisa ibn Maryam, on him be the peace, will descend from the heavens and lead the people.’
(Majma’ Al-Zawaid 7/349. Haithmi said, Bazzar has narrated it and all its narrators are those of the Sahih [i.e. Sahih Bukhari] except Ali bin Munzar and he is also trustworthy)

Hadith 5
قال ابن عباس : قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم : فعند ذلك ينزل أخي عيسى ابن مريم من السماء
Ibn Abbas narrated: the Messenger of Allah, on whom be the blessings of Allah, said: ‘And near it (Bait al-Maqdis) will descend from the Heavens my brother ‘Eisa ibn Maryam.’
(Kanzul Ummal 14/619 Hadith 39726)

Hadith 6
عن ابن عباس { إن تعذبهم فإنهم عبادك } يقول : عبيدك قد استوجبوا العذاب بمقالتهم { وإن تغفر لهم } أي من تركت منهم ومد في عمره حتى أهبط من السماء إلى الأرض يقتل الدجال ، فنزلوا عن مقالتهم ووحدوك
About the verse, ‘If you punish them they are your servants’ Ibn Abbas  said, he [‘Eisa] will say: ‘These slaves of yours have invited your chastisement by what they said [and believed]’. ‘And if you forgive them’ i.e. ‘those whom I left behind me and those who were there when I came down from the Heavens to Earth to kill al-Dajjal and they turned back from what they said [i.e. Trinity] and believed in your Oneness…’
(Durr Manthur 4/27 Under Surah 5 Ayah 118).

Hadith 7
We read in Al-Hakim’s collection;
حدثنا الأستاذ أبو الوليد الهيثم بن خلف الدوري ، ثنا سوار بن عبد الله العنبري ، ثنا المعتمر قال : قال أبي : حدثنا الحريث بن مخشي ، أن عليا قتل صبيحة إحدى وعشرين من رمضان ، قال : فسمعت الحسن بن علي يقول ، وهو يخطب وذكر مناقب علي ، فقال : « قتل ليلة أنزل القرآن ، وليلة أسري  بعيسى ، وليلة قبض موسى »
Abu Al-Waleed Al-Haitham narrated from Sawar bin ‘Abdullah Al-Anbari; he said, Mu’tamar narrated to us; he said: ‘My father said’; Harith bin Makhshi narrated: ‘Ali (RA) was murdered the morning of 21st Ramadan. He said; I heard Hassan bin ‘Ali (RA) speaking. He was making an address and talking of the virtues of ‘Ali (RA); he said: ‘He has been killed the night Qur’an was revealed, the night ‘Eisa (AS) was moved and the night Musa (AS) died.’ (Mustadrak Hakim, Hadith 4671. Hakim said it is Sahih).

Now this narration uses the word أسري which means to traverse a path, to make displacement. This certainly refers to his physical  ascension to the heavens. Also note that the contrast of this word to the that used for Musa (AS). Had he died a natural death, there was no reason to use the word with the markedly different implication.

Hadith 8


عن ابن عباس قال … وإن الله رفعه بجسده، وانه حي الآن، وسيرجع إلى الدنيا فيكون فيها ملكاً، ثم يموت كما يموت الناس
Narrated from Ibn Abbas, he said: “… and verily Allah raised him [Eisa ibn Maryam] with his body while he was alive and he will soon return to this world and will be a ruler therein. Then he will die as other people die.”  (Ibn S’ad’ Tabaqat Al-Kubra 1/53)


Taken from :
http://thecult.info/blog/2011/03/18/eisa-as-did-ascend-and-will-descend-from-the-heavens-above-categorical-ahadith/


Hadith 8

Proof that Isa(as) didn't die.

Al-Tabari and Ibn Abi Hatim quote hadeeth, notice word يأتي (future tense):
“When a delegation of sixty men from (the Christian) people of Najran came to the Holy Prophet, their chief priest discussed with him the status of Jesus and asked him as to who Jesus’ father was. The Holy Prophet said…:
ألستم تعلمون أن ربَّنا حيّ لا يموت، وأنّ عيسى يأتي عليه الفناء؟
“Do you not know that Our Lord (Allah) is ever living but death will come to Jesus?”
(Tafsir Al-Tabari 6/154 Narration. 6544, Ibn Abi Hatim 9/408. Both have brought it under verse 1 of Surah 3)


Therefore the conclusion is that, weak and unrealible reports cannot be taken as hujjah, in comparison to authentic reports from multiple Sahaba.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 09, 2017, 11:32:26 AM
And one authentic hadeeth from a Sahabi about his belief which is not contradicted by any authentic hadeeth is worthy to be believed upon.

You haven't proven that at all, i.e., that the Qawl of a Sahabi is a Hujjah in the Religion, and why you completely overlooked the Athar of Ibn Abbas about the 7 Earths which each Earth having a Prophet like our Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم

Quote
This narration has quite a number of problems:

1- In its chain is the narrator Al-Ajlah bin ‘Abdullah who has been criticized by the scholars. Hafiz Ibn Hajr quotes the opinions of various scholars about him;


As usual you are just copying and pasting what Waqar Akbar Cheema has written polemically without bothering to verify anything. Hafiz Ibn Hajar himself after reviewing all the different views regarding Ajlah b. Abd Allah concluded by declaring him Saduq:

(https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-hnu_slbgwU4/WWHkBI7WMpI/AAAAAAAACgA/R8PZ-I2p4tcaL5PHIWRZr4CLeMFReoa6gCLcBGAs/s640/title2.png)

(https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-3Z-Dcv8N3nI/WWHkDIj1m7I/AAAAAAAACgE/BeEaQnWJa9szeYuXcfirfOAspwGeH1UzgCLcBGAs/s1600/Ajlah%2Bb.%2BAbdallah%2Bb.%2BHujayyah%2Bis%2BSaduq%2B%2528Taqrib%2But%2BTahdhib%2B285%2529%2BIbn%2BHajr%2Bal%2BAsqalani.png)

Here you can read a more detailed analysis of the narrator Ajlah b. Abd Allah b. Hujayyah al Kindi
http://asmaur-rijaal.blogspot.ca/2013/01/ajlah-bin-abdullah-bin-hujayyah-al-kindi.html

The conclusion:


Quote
1-    Shaykh Ahmed Shaakir said: “He is Thiqah, some people have criticized him for no reason”
[Tahqeeq Tafseer at-Tabari: 5/169]

2-    Shaykh Sulemaan bin Abdullah bin Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhaab authenticated his hadeeth and said: “All its narrators are Thiqaat”
[Tayseer al-Azeez al-Hameed fi Sharh Kitaab at-Tawheed: 1/521]

3-    Haafidh Ibn Ahmed bin Ali al-Hukmi (D. 1377) while commenting on a hadeeth, said: “Al-Ajlah…. Is Sadooq Shi’i as said in al-Taqreeb, and the remaining narrators are Thiqaat, narrators of Shaykhayn, therefore the chain is Hasan…”
[A’laam al-Sunnah al-Manshoorah: 1/22]

4-    Shaykh Naasir ud-Deen Albaani declared him Hasan ul-Hadeeth
[Silsilah as-Saheehah: 139]

5-    Husayn Saleem Asam authenticated his hadeeth saying: “Its chain is Hasan”
[Tahqeeq Musnad Abi Ya’la: 2639, 7239]

6-    Shaykh Abdullah bin Deefullah al-Raheeli said: “The conclusion is that he is differed upon, and apparently he is Hasan ul-Hadeeth, and evidence is not taken from him in that which accords his Bid’ah”
[Tahqeeq Man Takallam feehi of Dhahabi: 1/74]

7-    Shaykh Abu Taahir Zubayr Alee Za’ee mentioned him in “Al-Sa’ee al-Mashkoor Feeman Waththaqah ul-Jumhoor (Those who are Thiqah according to the Jumhoor)”
[Tahqeeqi Maqaalaat: P. 349]

So Ajlah b. Abd Allah is accepted in Hadith, making this narration authentic and proving decisively that Imam Hassan رضى الله عنه considered Jesus as having been ascended in his Ruh not his body.


Quote
4- Here are some narrations of the similar import from Shi’a sources;

In Biharul Anwar of Allama Muhammad Baqir al-Majlasi it is reported;

عن حبيب بن عمرو قال : لما توفي أمير المؤمنين عليه السلام قام الحسن عليه السلام خطيبا فقال : أيها الناس في هذه الليلة رفع عيسى بن مريم .

Narrated Habib bin ‘Amr: ‘When the Commander of the Faithful passed away, Hassan stood and spoke. He said, ‘O you people! On this night ‘Eisa ibn Maryam was raised.’ (Biharul Anwar vol.14 p.335)

How strange is it you dismissed the Hadith I quoted as being weak (and it isn't weak as I've proven that Ajlah b. Abd Allah is declared as acceptable in Hadith), and now you are quoting narrations from Mulla Baqir Majlisi and Shi'ite books? How unfair is this?!


Quote
Firstly the report you quoted is weak, because it is Mursal. Ikrima Mawla Ibn Abbas is a Taba'i. Secondly it's not an explicit evidence from your side, which can't overrule an explicit Sahih hadeeth from sahabi.

Secondly, your argument gets killed by another narration on this issue:

عن أبي سلمة بن عبد الرحمن قال: اقتحم الناس على النبي، صلى الله عليه وسلم، في بيت عائشة ينظرون إليه فقالوا: كيف يموت وهو شهيد علينا ونحن شهداء على الناس؟ … لا والله ما مات ولكنه رفع كما رفع عيسى بن مريم، صلى الله عليه وسلم

Narrated Abu Salamah bin ‘Abd al-Rahman: The people rushed to the Prophet, may Allah bless him, in the apartment of ‘Aisha to look at him. They said: “How can he die since he is a witness to us and we are witnesses to other people? … No! by Allah! He has not died; but he has been raised as ‘Eisa ibn Maryam was made to ascend.” (Tabaqat al-Kubra 2/271).

What! You dismiss the narration I bring because it is Mursal despite being authentically established until Ikrima, but then you quote a narration that is truly weak. It contains the matrook narrator Muhammad b. Umar al-Waqidi, he is severely weak.

Quote
The narration at first place proves that not merely ‘Umar but other companions too referred to ascension of ‘Eisa –may Allah bless him and be pleased with them all.

It further proves that at the back of their minds the blessed companions had the idea that ‘Eisa ibn Maryam –may Allah bless him- was alive and has been raised to the heavens and will return.

The Hadith is extremely weak due to the narrator Muhammad b. Umar al-Waqidi. If you keep insisting on it that shows your double standard and dishonesty.


Quote
Hadith 1
عن ابن عباس قال: لما أراد الله أن يرفع عيسى إلى السماء خرج على أصحابه …ورفع عيسى من رَوْزَنَة في البيت إلى السماء
Ibn Abbas said, “When Allah intended to raise ‘Eisa to the heavens, he went to his companions … and ‘Eisa ascended to the Heavens through an opening in the top of the house.”
(Ibn Abi Hatim 4/431 Hadith 6266, Ibn Kathir 2/449. Ibn Kathir graded it Sahih)

Hadith 2
عن صفية أم المؤمنين رضي الله عنها أنها كانت إذا زارت بيت المقدس ، وفرغت من الصلاة في المسجد الأقصى صعدت على جبل زيتا فصلت عليه وقالت : هذا الجبل هو الذي رفع منه عيسى عليه السلام إلى السماء
It is narrated from Ummul Momineen Safiya, may Allah be pleased with her, that when she visited Bait Al-Maqdis (i.e. Jerusalem) and finished prayers in Al-Aqsa Mosque she climbed up to Mt. Olives and prayed there as well and said: ‘This is the mountain from where ‘Eisa, may Allah bless him, was raised up to the Heavens.’ (Al-Tasrih bima Tawatar fi Nuzul Al-Masih Hadith 74 cf. Tafsir Fath Al-Aziz Surah 95)

Don't you realise these above 2 Athar you cited are contradicting each other? Did Eisa عليه السلام ascend to heaven on the Mount of Olives or from the roof of a house?

Quote
Hadith 3
إن أبا هريرة رضي الله عنه قال : قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم : « كيف أنتم إذا نزل ابن مريم من السماء فيكم
Narrated Abu Huraira, may Allah be pleased with him: Allah’s Messenger, may Allah bless him, said “What will be your condition when the son of Maryam (i.e. ‘Eisa) will descend amongst you from the heavens…?” (Baihaqi’s Asmaa wal Sifaat 2/432 Hadith 855; Shaykh Abdullah bin Muhammad al-Hashidi has classified the narration as Sahih))

The narration is Shaadh in its wording, because more authentic narrations such as from Sahihayn don't mention the word "sky".

but even if these narrations about descending from the sky are authentic, it does not necessarily prove that Jesus was raised to the sky in his body, or that at present he is living in the sky in his Jasad without being fed.

In Sha Allah will deal with the rest soon.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 09, 2017, 12:22:43 PM
Proof that Isa(as) didn't die.

Al-Tabari and Ibn Abi Hatim quote hadeeth, notice word يأتي (future tense):
“When a delegation of sixty men from (the Christian) people of Najran came to the Holy Prophet, their chief priest discussed with him the status of Jesus and asked him as to who Jesus’ father was. The Holy Prophet said…:
ألستم تعلمون أن ربَّنا حيّ لا يموت، وأنّ عيسى يأتي عليه الفناء؟
“Do you not know that Our Lord (Allah) is ever living but death will come to Jesus?”
(Tafsir Al-Tabari 6/154 Narration. 6544, Ibn Abi Hatim 9/408. Both have brought it under verse 1 of Surah 3)

Therefore the conclusion is that, weak and unrealible reports cannot be taken as hujjah, in comparison to authentic reports from multiple Sahaba.

How ironic is it that you say weak and unreliable reports are unacceptable, but just before writing those words you have cited a weak and unreliable report? Why are you blind following the article of Waqar Akbar Cheema without verifying the Hadith yourself?

The narration from Ibn Abi Hatim contains Ahmad b. Abdir Rahman and the one from Tabari contains Muthanna b. Ibrahim who is Majhul.

And did you answer the Hadith proving the death of Jesus I quoted from Bukhari?

فَأَقُولُ كَمَا قَالَ الْعَبْدُ الصَّالِحُ ‏{‏وَكُنْتُ عَلَيْهِمْ شَهِيدًا مَا دُمْتُ فِيهِمْ فَلَمَّا تَوَفَّيْتَنِي كُنْتَ أَنْتَ الرَّقِيبَ عَلَيْهِمْ‏}‏
 I will say as the pious slave (the Prophet (ﷺ) Jesus) said: And I was a witness over them while I dwelt amongst them. When You caused me to die [FALAMMA TAWAFFAYTANEE]. You were the Watcher over them and You are a Witness to all things.' (5.117)
(Bukhari Sharif)

Now in the case of Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم you admit that here فلمّا توفّيتني means فلمّا تميتني then the entire Debate is decisively concluded.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 09, 2017, 12:34:03 PM

Hadith 5
قال ابن عباس : قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم : فعند ذلك ينزل أخي عيسى ابن مريم من السماء
Ibn Abbas narrated: the Messenger of Allah, on whom be the blessings of Allah, said: ‘And near it (Bait al-Maqdis) will descend from the Heavens my brother ‘Eisa ibn Maryam.’
(Kanzul Ummal 14/619 Hadith 39726)

What happened to Eisa bin Maryam عليهما السلام descending near the White Minaret in the east of Damascus? Now you are saying he will descend to Bait al Maqdis?
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Abu Muhammad on July 09, 2017, 01:27:31 PM
Quote
Having said that, I would love to see your own construction of the story. From your previous posts, the story was vaguely expressed by you. Please write one but it shall be based on the facts presented in surat Al-Kahfi starting from verse 9 until verse 26.

I will in sha Allah do so shortly.

Still waiting...
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 09, 2017, 01:33:58 PM
Still waiting...

I've written the first part, in sha Allah will complete the second part soon:

As promised I am now going to present my understanding of these Verses. But before I do so, I refer you and others to articles I've already written on the subjects:

Companions of the Cave (https://islamsalvationfromhell.blogspot.ca/2017/07/the-companions-of-cave-sura-1810-16.html)

Dog of the AsHab al-Kahf (http://islamsalvationfromhell.blogspot.ca/2017/01/the-dog-of-companions-of-cave.html)

Background

The first 10 Ayaat of Surat-al-Kahf are specially designated as a defense and guidance against the tribulation of Dajjal. It is incorrect to think that the content of these Ayaat have no particular guidance for the Muslims concerning the Dajjal and it is merely the recitation of them which will act as an antidote to Dajjal. The lesson to be drawn from them is that the fitna of Dajjal will be the excessive beautification of this world toward the end of time acting as a seduction for people to turn away from their Faith and come to the Dajjal. It is in this context that Allah mentions AsHab-al-Kahf as a model to be followed during the Latter Days in order to secure oneself against the Fitna:

9. أَمْ حَسِبْتَ أَنَّ أَصْحَابَ الْكَهْفِ وَالرَّقِيمِ كَانُوا مِنْ آيَاتِنَا عَجَبًا
Or do you think that the Companions of the Cave and Inscription were among Our Signs something strange?

This first Verse where AsHab-al-Kahf are mentioned is the key to unlocking everything for the one who sees with the Noor of his heart and has been submerged in the knowledge of the Quran al-Karim. This first Verse is an important disclaimer to understand the rest of the story, which is that the reader needs to keep in mind that the story of the AsHab-al-Kahf is not something strange or supernatural.

10. إِذْ أَوَى الْفِتْيَةُ إِلَى الْكَهْفِ فَقَالُوا رَبَّنَا آتِنَا مِن لَّدُنكَ رَحْمَةً وَهَيِّئْ لَنَا مِنْ أَمْرِنَا رَشَدًا
When the youths withdrew to the Cave, they said: "Our Lord, grant us from Yourself Mercy and facilitate for us from our affair Guidance."

This is the last of the 10 Verses that are read to safeguard oneself against the Fitna of Dajjal. It gives us the practice of Awaa and Uzla that is, withdrawing from society into a cave (a remote area) and praying to Allah for mercy and guidance. This is the theme of AsHab-al-Kahf, withdrawal and retreating from the society of Jahiliyya and Fitna.

11. فَضَرَبْنَا عَلَىٰ آذَانِهِمْ فِي الْكَهْفِ سِنِينَ عَدَدًا
So We cast upon their ears in the Cave a number of years

Considering the context of what has already preceded, Allah is saying that He protected the ears of the AsHab al Kahf from hearing about the affairs of the Fitna of the society beyond the cave to where they had withdrawn themselves to.

12. ثُمَّ بَعَثْنَاهُمْ لِنَعْلَمَ أَيُّ الْحِزْبَيْنِ أَحْصَىٰ لِمَا لَبِثُوا أَمَدًا
Then We raised them up to make evident as to which of the two parties best calculated the period they remained

13. نَّحْنُ نَقُصُّ عَلَيْكَ نَبَأَهُم بِالْحَقِّ ۚ إِنَّهُمْ فِتْيَةٌ آمَنُوا بِرَبِّهِمْ وَزِدْنَاهُمْ هُدًى
We relate upon you their News with Truth. Verily they were youths who believed in their Lord and We increased them in guidance

The phrase بالحق "with Truth" means that Allah is going to tell us their story with a purpose and real objective, not merely as a story to pass the time like how the storytellers tell wonderful tales for people's amusement.

14. وَرَبَطْنَا عَلَىٰ قُلُوبِهِمْ إِذْ قَامُوا فَقَالُوا رَبُّنَا رَبُّ السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالْأَرْضِ لَن نَّدْعُوَ مِن دُونِهِ إِلَـٰهًا ۖ لَّقَدْ قُلْنَا إِذًا شَطَطًا
And We made firm their hearts when they stood up and said, "Our Lord is the Lord of the heavens and the earth. Never will we invoke besides Him any deity. We would have certainly spoken, then, an excessive transgression.

This Verse reveals the fact that the fitna of the time of AsHab al Kahf which they were fleeing from was that of a Taghout and so they were seeking to secure their Iman in the Oneness of Allah and to escape this Taghout who was ordering and expecting the people to worship him. This is how the story of AsHab al Kahf is relevant to the Fitna of Dajjal, who is the Taghout to come in the near future with a similar Fitna.

15. هَـٰؤُلَاءِ قَوْمُنَا اتَّخَذُوا مِن دُونِهِ آلِهَةً ۖ لَّوْلَا يَأْتُونَ عَلَيْهِم بِسُلْطَانٍ بَيِّنٍ ۖ فَمَنْ أَظْلَمُ مِمَّنِ افْتَرَىٰ عَلَى اللَّـهِ كَذِبًا
These our people have taken besides Him (Allah) gods. These, our people, have taken besides Him deities. Why do they not bring for [worship of] them a clear authority? And who is more unjust than one who invents about Allah a lie?"

This Verse reveals the fact that the people to whom the AsHab al Kahf belonged to were a people devoted to false gods and a false religion, under the pressure of their Taghout ruler.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Noor-us-Sunnah on July 09, 2017, 02:46:16 PM
Now I will present some additional arguments that sayyidina Eisa عليه السلام was not raised up into Heaven in his Jasad:

1. The book Aqidat at Tahawiyya composed by Abu Ja'far al-Tahawi al-Hanafi رحمة الله عليه, considered the most agreed upon exposition of the creed of Ahlus Sunnati wal Jama'ah, does not mention as any one of its points of creed the ascension of sayyidina Eisa عليه السلام into Heaven in his Jasad.

IJMA OF UMMAH was described by a classical scholar about Isa(as) beiing alive in heaven and about his descend.

Ibn Athiya (died in 542 From Hijraa explained in his tafseer “Al Muharrar Al Wajiz”
أجمعت الأمة على ما تضمنه الحديث المتواتر من أن عيسى في السماء حي، وأنه سينزل في آخر الزمان فيقتل الخنزير ويكسر الصليب ويقتل الدجال ويفيض العدل وتظهر به الملة – ملة محمد صلى الله عليه وسلم – ويحج البيت …
(IJMA UMMAH)All muslim agree to have faith upon the content of hadith mutawatir (from plenty of valid chain of narrations) that Prophet Isa is still alive in heaven. He will descend at end of time, kill the hogs, break the cross, kill Dajjal, impose justice, and the religion of Muhammad will win over it’s enemies with his lead, and he also perform hajj…” (Al-Muharrar Al-Wajiz, 3:143)
 

Quote
2. The Imam Ibnul Qayyim al-Jawziyya رحمة الله عليه said:

وأما ما يذكر عن المسيح أنه رفع إلى السماء وله ثلاث وثلاثون سنة فهذا لا يعرف له أثر متصل يجب المصير إليه

Translation: “As for what is mentioned regarding the Messiah that he ascended into Heaven at the age of thirty three years, there is no known report that is sound and connected in this regard to which one could turn to.”

Reference: Zaad-ul-Ma'ad; v.1 p.82
This is an misunderstanding from your part , What Ibn al Qayyim is highlighting (at 1/p.82 – very top of page) is that, in his view, there is a lack of sound hadith which confirm Prophet 'Isa (on him be peace) was 33 years of age at the time he was raised. He isn't questioning the fact that he was indeed raised up to heaven.

This is clear from the preceding line where he mentions that Prophet Muhammad sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam was sent when he was 40 which he calls the "age of perfection" and that it is said Messengers are [only] sent at [or after] this age. He seems to be implying that perhaps Prophet 'Isa (on him be peace) was older than opinions suggest.

courtesy:
https://www.ahlalhdeeth.com/vbe/showpost.php?p=32690&postcount=11


Quote
Furthermore, in the same book, Imam Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziya explains that apart from the Prophet (peace be upon him), no other person, including the prophets, has ever ascended into Heaven with both body and soul:

ومن سواه لا ينال بذات روحه الصعود إلى السماء إلا بعد الموت والمفارقة ، فالأنبياء إنما استقرت أرواحهم هناك بعد مفارقة الأبدان

Translation: “No one, apart from him (the Prophet Muhammad – peace be upon him) was taken into Heaven except after death and through separation (of soul from body). As for the Prophets, their souls are stationed there (in Heaven) after the separation from their bodies.”

Reference: Zaad al-Ma'ad; v.3 p.36-37[/size][/font]
(http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-Zw_DprPjWNI/Vgwb19_RtEI/AAAAAAAABJA/d7fc-kGzcOg/s1600/title.bmp)
(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-4-zZ4HPZDGs/Vgwb-AhEAeI/AAAAAAAABJI/TcJFTJkovxA/s1600/No%2BAthar%2Bknown%2Bthat%2Bis%2Bconnected%2Bwhich%2Bproves%2BJesus%2B%2528A.S%2529%2Bwas%2Braised%2Bup%2Bto%2BHeaven%2Bat%2Bthe%2Bage%2Bof%2B33%2B%2528Zaad%2Bal%2BMaad%2Bv.1%2Bp.82%2529.bmp)
(http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-kvjHpMMG2RY/Vgwb_0YrdRI/AAAAAAAABJQ/SKI6JZDj6u0/s1600/With%2Bexception%2Bof%2BProphet%2B%2528AS%2529%2Bsoul%2Bcannot%2Bgo%2Bto%2BHeaven%2Bexcept%2Bafter%2Bdeath%2Band%2Bseparation%2B%2528from%2Bbody%2529%2Bincluding%2Bprophets%2B%2528Zaad%2Bal%2BMaad%2Bv.3%2Bp.36%25291.bmp)

http://islamsalvationfromhell.blogspot.ca/2015/09/imam-ibn-qayyim-al-jawziya-no-proof.html
This was a general statement made by ibn qayyim, or that he overlooked it in regards to Isa(as), but that means it even includes the special case of Isa(as). This could be understood from the other books  of ibn qayyim where he explicitly mentioned about Isa(as) being alive and his descend from heaven.

We read:

(i).
هذا المسيح بن مريم حي لم يمت وغذاؤه من جنس غذاء الملائكة
Imam Ibn Qayyim said: This Al-Masih ibn Maryam(as) is alive, he didn't die, and his provision is the same provision of Angels. [Al-Tibyan fi aqsam al-Qur'an, page 383]
http://madrasato-mohammed.com/ibnou%20qiem/pg_007_0001.htm

(ii). Imam Ibn Qayyim said:
Muslims are waiting for descend of Isa ibn Maryam(as) from the heaven.....
 .[Ighathatul Lahfan fi Masayid ash-Shaytan, page 1120]
[ You are not allowed to view attachments ]
Hence the explicit statements of  scholar on an issue will be given preference over the general statement.

Quote
3. The Sufi saint Ali b. Uthman al-Hujweri wrote in his book Kashf al-Mahjub that on the night of Mi'raj, the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم met the spirits (not bodies) of Adam, Yusuf, Musa, Harun, Ibrahim and Eisa عليهم السلام

http://islamsalvationfromhell.blogspot.ca/2015/09/sufi-ali-hujweri-prophet-as-met-only.html

Personal views of Sufis when they contradict view of Sahabi, they are rejected.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 09, 2017, 03:12:20 PM
IJMA OF UMMAH was described by a classical scholar about Isa(as) beiing alive in heaven and about his descend.

Ibn Athiya (died in 542 From Hijraa explained in his tafseer “Al Muharrar Al Wajiz”
أجمعت الأمة على ما تضمنه الحديث المتواتر من أن عيسى في السماء حي، وأنه سينزل في آخر الزمان فيقتل الخنزير ويكسر الصليب ويقتل الدجال ويفيض العدل وتظهر به الملة – ملة محمد صلى الله عليه وسلم – ويحج البيت …
(IJMA UMMAH)All muslim agree to have faith upon the content of hadith mutawatir (from plenty of valid chain of narrations) that Prophet Isa is still alive in heaven. He will descend at end of time, kill the hogs, break the cross, kill Dajjal, impose justice, and the religion of Muhammad will win over it’s enemies with his lead, and he also perform hajj…” (Al-Muharrar Al-Wajiz, 3:143)

One person Ibn Atiyya is claiming Ijma and you are taking 1 person's saying as evidence of an Ijma? Do you even know what Ijma is? And you are claiming that all Muslims agree? Really? Billions of Muslims past and present did they all believe that Jesus is alive in Heaven with his body? How many references have I already presented to you of various scholars, let alone ordinary Muslims, who don't believe this. That alone is enough to break your claim of an Ijma. In fact, your claim that there is an Ijma is the weakest argument you have put forward as of yet. I can quote to you the views of scholars like Ibn Hazm al-Zahiri and even Imam Malik that they believe Jesus died.

http://islamsalvationfromhell.blogspot.ca/2015/09/imam-malik-ra-and-death-of-masih_14.html

http://islamsalvationfromhell.blogspot.ca/2015/09/imam-ibn-hazm-ra-and-death-of-jesus_17.html

And if we were to speak of contemporary scholars they are countless in believing that Jesus died. So where is your Ijma? What did Imam Ahmad b. Hanbal رحمه الله say about claiming Ijma?



Quote
This was a general statement made by ibn qayyim, or that he overlooked it in regards to Isa(as), but that means it even includes the special case of Isa(as). This could be understood from the other books  of ibn qayyim where he explicitly mentioned about Isa(as) being alive and his descend from heaven.


Firstly it cannot be a general statement because Ibnul Qayyim makes a specific exception for the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم. If Ibnul Qayyim believed that Jesus ascended into Heaven with his Jasad he would have obviously mentioned him. The fact that he said that sayyidina Muhammad صلى الله عليه سلم is the only exception shows his crystal clear Aqida in this regard.

None of the other quotes you brought from Ibnul Qayyim prove that he believed Jesus is alive in Heaven with his Jasad, which is our point of contention and nothing else.


Quote
Personal views of Sufis when they contradict view of Sahabi, they are rejected.

Still your so called "Ijma" is further broken.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Noor-us-Sunnah on July 09, 2017, 03:15:49 PM
How ironic is it that you say weak and unreliable reports are unacceptable, but just before writing those words you have cited a weak and unreliable report? Why are you blind following the article of Waqar Akbar Cheema without verifying the Hadith yourself?
the reason I'm not bothering to check those reports is because we have already cited an authentic athaar from a sahabi, then other athar would only be used as a supportive proof.
 

Quote
And did you answer the Hadith proving the death of Jesus I quoted from Bukhari?

فَأَقُولُ كَمَا قَالَ الْعَبْدُ الصَّالِحُ ‏{‏وَكُنْتُ عَلَيْهِمْ شَهِيدًا مَا دُمْتُ فِيهِمْ فَلَمَّا تَوَفَّيْتَنِي كُنْتَ أَنْتَ الرَّقِيبَ عَلَيْهِمْ‏}‏
 I will say as the pious slave (the Prophet (ﷺ) Jesus) said: And I was a witness over them while I dwelt amongst them. When You caused me to die [FALAMMA TAWAFFAYTANEE]. You were the Watcher over them and You are a Witness to all things.' (5.117)
(Bukhari Sharif)

Now in the case of Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم you admit that here فلمّا توفّيتني means فلمّا تميتني then the entire Debate is decisively concluded.
[/size][/font]

Below is the complete text of the Hadith and its true explanation.

عَنْ ابْنِ عَبَّاسٍ رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُمَا قَالَ خَطَبَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ فَقَالَ … وَإِنَّهُ يُجَاءُ بِرِجَالٍ مِنْ أُمَّتِي فَيُؤْخَذُ بِهِمْ ذَاتَ الشِّمَالِ فَأَقُولُ يَا رَبِّ أُصَيْحَابِي فَيُقَالُ إِنَّكَ لَا تَدْرِي مَا أَحْدَثُوا بَعْدَكَ فَأَقُولُ كَمَا قَالَ الْعَبْدُ الصَّالِحُ {وَكُنْتُ عَلَيْهِمْ شَهِيدًا مَا دُمْتُ فِيهِمْ فَلَمَّا تَوَفَّيْتَنِي كُنْتَ أَنْتَ الرَّقِيبَ عَلَيْهِمْ وَأَنْتَ عَلَى كُلِّ شَيْءٍ شَهِيدٌ} فَيُقَالُ إِنَّ هَؤُلَاءِ لَمْ يَزَالُوا مُرْتَدِّينَ عَلَى أَعْقَابِهِمْ مُنْذُ فَارَقْتَهُمْ

Ibn Abbas: The Prophet (صلى الله عليه و سلم) delivered a sermon and said, “…Lo! Some men from my followers will be brought and taken towards the left side, whereupon I will say, ‘O Lord, (these are) my companions!’ It will be said, ‘You do not know what new things they introduced (into the religion) after you.’ I will then say as the righteous pious slave, Jesus, said, ‘I was a witness over them while I dwelt among them when Thou didst take me up Thou wast the Watcher over them, and You are the Witness to all things.’ (5: 117) Then it will be said, ‘(O Muhammad) these people never stopped to apostate since you left them.”
(Bukhari, Kitabul Tafsir, Hadith 4259)

Ahmadis argue that as the word تَوَفَّيْتَنِي ‘tawaffaitani‘ with reference to the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه و سلم) means physical death, it must have the same meaning with regards to Prophet Jesus (عليه السلام). But this is simply absurd and here I explain why;

1) When Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه و سلم) said, , ‘I will say just as the pious slave Jesus said..’, clearly he sought a parallel only in the sayings and the not their whole context and implications. This is just as if someone who has been extremely successful in debating various religions and cults on a certain forum, when asked to comment about his achievements, pronounces; ‘I would rather say just as Julius Caesar said, ‘I came, I saw, I conquered.’ Most certainly he does not mean that he actually won a battle against the Army of Pharnaces II of Pontus, or does he?

2) The word كَمَا ‘kama‘ between two phrases does not make them exactly same. For instance, in another Hadith we read;

عن أبي واقد الليثي أن رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم لما خرج إلى حنين مر بشجرة للمشركين يقال لها ذات أنواط يعلقون عليها أسلحتهم فقالوا يا رسول الله اجعل لنا ذات أنواط كما لهم ذات أنواط فقال النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم سبحان الله هذا كما قال قوم موسى اجعل لنا إلها كما لهم آلهة والذي نفسي بيده لتركبن سنة من كان قبلكم

Abu Waqid Laythi reported that when the Prophet (صلى الله عليه و سلم) went out for the Battle of Hunayn, he passed by a tree belonging to the polytheists. It was known as Dhat Anwat. They used to hang down their weapons over it. The companions said, “O Messenger of Allah, make for us a Dhat Anwat as there is for them a Dhat Anwat.” He said, “Glory be to Allah! This is just as what the people of Moses (عليه السلام) said, ‘Make for us a god as there is for them a god.’ By Him who has my soul in His hand, you will perpetrate the practices of the people gone before you.” (Jami’ Tirmidhi, Kitabul Fitan, Hadith 2180. Albani classified it as Sahih)

In this Hadith Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه و سلم) termed the wish of the pious companions to have a tree nominated to hang weapons on, akin to the wish of the people of Moses (عليه السلام) to have pagan deity like a certain people. Obviously the Prophet (صلى الله عليه و سلم) did not mean that both wishes were exactly same rather, it only pointed to the same spirit of following the ways of disbelievers.

In the same way the Hadith in question does not mean that both Jesus and Muhammad, peace be upon them both, experienced same kind of ‘tawaffa’. It rather points out to the fact that both were not present among their people when they deviated.

3) Further, it is NOT necessary that ‘tawaffaitani’ means the same everywhere. According to linguists and scholars e.g. Abu Al-Baqa and Ibn Taymiya ‘tawaffa‘ has various meanings i.e. 1) To take in full, 2) Sleep and 3) Death. And the fact that one word may have different meanings for different subjects is proved from Quran. Infact in Surah Ma’ida’s same passage we read that Jesus (عليه السلام) will say;

فَقَدْ عَلِمْتَهُ تَعْلَمُ مَا فِي نَفْسِي وَلَا أَعْلَمُ مَا فِي نَفْسِكَ
“Thou knowest what is in my heart, Thou I know not what is in Thine [heart].” (Quran 5:116)

Here same word i.e. نَفْسِ ,translated as heart or mind, is used for Allah (سبحانه و تعالى) and Jesus (عليه السلام). Does that mean that نَفْسِ (i.e.heart/mind) of Allah (سبحانه و تعالى) and Jesus (عليه السلام) is exactly of same nature?
[Exactly is our Lord above all what they suggest]

Or as we read in Quran 33:43;

هُوَ الَّذِي يُصَلِّي عَلَيْكُمْ وَمَلَائِكَتُهُ
“He it is who sends salat (His blessings) on you, and his angels too (ask Allah to bless and forgive you)”

Most certainly here صلاة has different meanings with regards to Allah (سبحانه و تعالى) and the angels. Ibn Kathir writes:

والصلاة من الله ثناؤه على العبد عند الملائكة، … وقال غيره: الصلاة من الله: الرحمة … وأما الصلاة من الملائكة، فبمعنى الدعاء للناس والاستغفار
“Allah’s Salah means that He praises His servant before the angels …others said: “Allah’s Salah means mercy.” … Salah from the angels means their supplication and seeking forgiveness for people.” (Ibn Kathir 6/436 under Surah 33 Ayah 43)

Similarly the word ‘tawaffa‘ does not mean exactly same for Jesus (عليه السلام) and Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه و سلم). This goes perfectly in line with the fact that same word can have different meanings in different contexts and concerning different persons.

4) On the Ahmadi lines of the argument a Christian may say that perhaps Prophet Muhammad (صلى الله عليه و سلم) also died through crucifixion like Jesus as the same word is used for both of them. He can only be answered that it is known from other evidences as to how the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه و سلم) died. Similarly from evidences other then this verse we know that ‘tawaffa‘ of Jesus (عليه السلام) was different from that of Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه و سلم).

5) As to the fact that Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه و سلم) has used the past tense, it is because Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه و سلم) will say this on the Day of Judgment and as the saying of Jesus (عليه السلام) has already been told in the Quran so it was in his and the listeners prior knowledge when he uttered these words.

6) The Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه و سلم) will recite this verse as the implication is exactly same i.e. neither Jesus (عليه السلام) was present among his people when they got involved in heresies (Trinity etc) nor was Prophet Muhammad (صلى الله عليه و سلم) present while some from his Ummah deviated and some even if went out of the pale of Islam by believing in false prophets. Both went away from their people before they were lead astray.

Taken from
http://www.letmeturnthetables.com/2010/02/jesus-did-not-die-according-to-hadith.html#tawaffa
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Noor-us-Sunnah on July 09, 2017, 03:28:21 PM
IJMA OF UMMAH was described by a classical scholar about Isa(as) beiing alive in heaven and about his descend.

Ibn Athiya (died in 542 From Hijraa explained in his tafseer “Al Muharrar Al Wajiz”
أجمعت الأمة على ما تضمنه الحديث المتواتر من أن عيسى في السماء حي، وأنه سينزل في آخر الزمان فيقتل الخنزير ويكسر الصليب ويقتل الدجال ويفيض العدل وتظهر به الملة – ملة محمد صلى الله عليه وسلم – ويحج البيت …
(IJMA UMMAH)All muslim agree to have faith upon the content of hadith mutawatir (from plenty of valid chain of narrations) that Prophet Isa is still alive in heaven. He will descend at end of time, kill the hogs, break the cross, kill Dajjal, impose justice, and the religion of Muhammad will win over it’s enemies with his lead, and he also perform hajj…” (Al-Muharrar Al-Wajiz, 3:143)

One person Ibn Atiyya is claiming Ijma and you are taking 1 person's saying as evidence of an Ijma? Do you even know what Ijma is? And you are claiming that all Muslims agree? Really? Billions of Muslims past and present did they all believe that Jesus is alive in Heaven with his body? How many references have I already presented to you of various scholars, let alone ordinary Muslims, who don't believe this. That alone is enough to break your claim of an Ijma. In fact, your claim that there is an Ijma is the weakest argument you have put forward as of yet. I can quote to you the views of scholars like Ibn Hazm al-Zahiri and even Imam Malik that they believe Jesus died.

http://islamsalvationfromhell.blogspot.ca/2015/09/imam-malik-ra-and-death-of-masih_14.html

http://islamsalvationfromhell.blogspot.ca/2015/09/imam-ibn-hazm-ra-and-death-of-jesus_17.html

And if we were to speak of contemporary scholars they are countless in believing that Jesus died. So where is your Ijma? What did Imam Ahmad b. Hanbal رحمه الله say about claiming Ijma?

Yes we do believe. And the scholars you mentioned that broke ijma, then these arguments have been refuted by schlolars in response to Qadiyanis.


Quote
Firstly it cannot be a general statement because Ibnul Qayyim makes a specific exception for the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم. If Ibnul Qayyim believed that Jesus ascended into Heaven with his Jasad he would have obviously mentioned him. The fact that he said that sayyidina Muhammad صلى الله عليه سلم is the only exception shows his crystal clear Aqida in this regard.

None of the other quotes you brought from Ibnul Qayyim prove that he believed Jesus is alive in Heaven with his Jasad, which is our point of contention and nothing else.
My replies are for the benefit of readers and I'm certain they'll get convinced with that. As for what Ibn Qayyim said, then He believes that Isa(as) DIDN'T DIE, HE IS ALIVE AND WILL DESCEND FROM HEAVEN, regardless of whether Ibn Qayyim believes with body or without body. But what is categorically proven that Ibn Qayyim believes Isa(As) didn't die he is alive.

Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: zaid_ibn_ali on July 09, 2017, 03:42:33 PM
The thread is pointless as the original posters point is completely flawed.

1) No muslim doubts the existence of Isa AS. Yet there is no single shred of authentic evidence to the existence of the shia mahdi muhammad ibn hasan al askari.
You can't compare a real figure with a fairytale.

2) No muslim believes Isa AS to be the current Imam of our age since the past 1000 years.



Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Noor-us-Sunnah on July 09, 2017, 03:52:37 PM

Hadith 5
قال ابن عباس : قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم : فعند ذلك ينزل أخي عيسى ابن مريم من السماء
Ibn Abbas narrated: the Messenger of Allah, on whom be the blessings of Allah, said: ‘And near it (Bait al-Maqdis) will descend from the Heavens my brother ‘Eisa ibn Maryam.’
(Kanzul Ummal 14/619 Hadith 39726)

What happened to Eisa bin Maryam عليهما السلام descending near the White Minaret in the east of Damascus? Now you are saying he will descend to Bait al Maqdis?
The brother who translated it mistakenly put the wordings of Bait al Maqdis in the translation. The reports says on Jabal Afeeq, which is in Syria.

قال ابن عباس: قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم: « ((فعند ذلك ينزل أخي عيسى ابن مريم من السماء على جبل أفيق
http://shamela.ws/browse.php/book-8575/page-123
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Noor-us-Sunnah on July 09, 2017, 05:34:23 PM
You haven't proven that at all, i.e., that the Qawl of a Sahabi is a Hujjah in the Religion, and why you completely overlooked the Athar of Ibn Abbas about the 7 Earths which each Earth having a Prophet like our Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم
I mentioned two conditions that first it should be authentic second it shouldn't contradict marfoo hadeeth or Jamhoor sahab's view.

As for the evidence of the Qawl of Sahabi beinng Hujjah, then I'll quote some references out of many from the book, "Hal Qowl as-Sahabah Hujjah fi Deen", by Sheikh Omar Bakri Muhammad.

(i). It  has  been  reported  in  the  book, “Usul  Madhab  Imaam  Ahmed” that :

Ishaaq Bin Ibraheem Bin Haani asked Imaam Ahmed,  “I  asked  Abu  Abdullah,  ‘Which  one  is  more  preferable  to  you,  a hadith  attributed  to  the  Messenger  Muhammad  (saw)  by  a trustworthy  Tabi’  (i.e.  hadith  mursal)  or  a  hadith attributed  to  a Sahabi by a sound chain that the Sahabi said (i.e. hadith mawqouf).’ He said, ‘If the hadith is connected to the Sahabi it is dearer to me. (Usul Madhab Imam Ahmed, pg. 435-436 ) [Hal Qowl as-Sahabah Hujjah fi Deen, page, 58]

(ii). It  is  reported  by  Imaam  Shaafi’i  in  his  book  Kitaab ul-Umm  that  he said,

“Whatever  is  mentioned  in  the  Qur’an  and  the  Sunnah  leaves  no excuse for anyone who hears it but to follow it. If such a matter is not mentioned  within  them  we  (then)  go  to  the  sayings  of  the Companions of the Messenger Muhammad (saw) even (to a single) one from amongst them. We follow the sayings of the four Khulafaah; we imitate them and we do not question for this is dearer to us if we don’t find any sign of disagreement among the four. If they differ, we take whoever is nearest to the Qur’an and Sunnah and who was the first to embrace Islaam. If we do not find it among the Sahabah, we seek the ‘Ilm from those who used to follow the Attba of them i.e. the Tabi’een.  “The ‘Ilm is five levels: (i) Kitaab (Qur’an) and Sunnah which has been confirmed (ii) Ijmaa as-Sahabah about things never mentioned in the Qur’an and the Sunnah (iii) If some of the Sahabah or (even) one  of  them  said  something  and  we  do  not  know  of  anyone  who disagrees with it, then it is ‘Ilm (knowledge about the deen) and we take it (iv) If the companions disagree, we will take the one who is the higher level (i.e. entered Islaam first) (v) The analogy on the Qur’an and the Sunnah. (ash-Shaafi’i, Kitaab ul-Umm, Vol. 7 pg. 265). [Hal Qowl as-Sahabah Hujjah fi Deen, page 55-56]

(iii). It  has  been  reported  from  Imaam  Al-Saymari  in  his  book, “Akhbaar Abu Haneefah wa Ashaabu” that Imaam Abu Haneefah said:

“I will follow the Qur’an (firstly) if I find the evidence and if I am unable to find it in the Qur’an I will take go to the Sunnah of the Messenger Muhammad (saw) which has been transmitted amongst the trustworthy from the trustworthy. If I did not find it in the book or Allah (swt) or in the Sunnah of the Messenger Muhammad (saw) I will take the opinion of any one of them (Sahabah) and leave the opinion of anyone else amongst them. (And) I will not depart from their  sayings  to  anyone  who  followed  after  them.  If  the  matter reached  Ibraheem  and  Al-Shu’bi  al-Hassan,  Ibn  Sireen,  Saeed  Bin Jubayr or Sa’eed Bin Musayyab, I have the right to make Ijtihad in the same way they did. (Saymari, Akhbaar Abu Haneefah wa Ashaabu, pg. 10). [Hal Qowl as-Sahabah Hujjah fi Deen, Page 50-51]

(iv). It has also been reported by Imaam Shaybaani in his book, “Sharh Adab Al-Qadhi” that Imaam Abu Haneefah said, “Whatever  reached  me  that  the  Sahabi  said  I  will  make  Taqleed (following)  for  it,  imitate  it,  and  I  do  not  permit  (doing)  this  for anyone else.(Shaybaani, Sharh Adab Al-Qadhi, Vol. 1 pg. 185-187 ). [Hal Qowl as-Sahabah Hujjah fi Deen, page 51]

https://duaat.files.wordpress.com/2007/07/qawl1.pdf


Quote
As usual you are just copying and pasting what Waqar Akbar Cheema has written polemically without bothering to verify anything. Hafiz Ibn Hajar himself after reviewing all the different views regarding Ajlah b. Abd Allah concluded by declaring him Saduq:[/size][/font]

(https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-hnu_slbgwU4/WWHkBI7WMpI/AAAAAAAACgA/R8PZ-I2p4tcaL5PHIWRZr4CLeMFReoa6gCLcBGAs/s640/title2.png)

(https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-3Z-Dcv8N3nI/WWHkDIj1m7I/AAAAAAAACgE/BeEaQnWJa9szeYuXcfirfOAspwGeH1UzgCLcBGAs/s1600/Ajlah%2Bb.%2BAbdallah%2Bb.%2BHujayyah%2Bis%2BSaduq%2B%2528Taqrib%2But%2BTahdhib%2B285%2529%2BIbn%2BHajr%2Bal%2BAsqalani.png)

Here you can read a more detailed analysis of the narrator Ajlah b. Abd Allah b. Hujayyah al Kindi
http://asmaur-rijaal.blogspot.ca/2013/01/ajlah-bin-abdullah-bin-hujayyah-al-kindi.html

The conclusion:


Quote
1-    Shaykh Ahmed Shaakir said: “He is Thiqah, some people have criticized him for no reason”
[Tahqeeq Tafseer at-Tabari: 5/169]

2-    Shaykh Sulemaan bin Abdullah bin Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhaab authenticated his hadeeth and said: “All its narrators are Thiqaat”
[Tayseer al-Azeez al-Hameed fi Sharh Kitaab at-Tawheed: 1/521]

3-    Haafidh Ibn Ahmed bin Ali al-Hukmi (D. 1377) while commenting on a hadeeth, said: “Al-Ajlah…. Is Sadooq Shi’i as said in al-Taqreeb, and the remaining narrators are Thiqaat, narrators of Shaykhayn, therefore the chain is Hasan…”
[A’laam al-Sunnah al-Manshoorah: 1/22]

4-    Shaykh Naasir ud-Deen Albaani declared him Hasan ul-Hadeeth
[Silsilah as-Saheehah: 139]

5-    Husayn Saleem Asam authenticated his hadeeth saying: “Its chain is Hasan”
[Tahqeeq Musnad Abi Ya’la: 2639, 7239]

6-    Shaykh Abdullah bin Deefullah al-Raheeli said: “The conclusion is that he is differed upon, and apparently he is Hasan ul-Hadeeth, and evidence is not taken from him in that which accords his Bid’ah”
[Tahqeeq Man Takallam feehi of Dhahabi: 1/74]

7-    Shaykh Abu Taahir Zubayr Alee Za’ee mentioned him in “Al-Sa’ee al-Mashkoor Feeman Waththaqah ul-Jumhoor (Those who are Thiqah according to the Jumhoor)”
[Tahqeeqi Maqaalaat: P. 349]
Truly, such an argument is not convincing since these are three very late scholars. And the views of Mutaqaddimeen(early scholars) takes over the view of Muta'khireen(later scholars).

Ironically, when going back to Fath Al-Bari, in the chapter of “باب: أحل لكم الصيد الطيب” we find that al-Hafiz Ibn Hajar weakens Al-Ajlah.

Similarly, Al-Albani mentions that al-Ajlah is one of the reasons that he weakened a Hadith in his book Al-Silsila Al-Dha`eefa #1570.

al-Ajlah was weakened by Al-Qattan, Abu Hatim, Al-Nasa’ee, Al-Jawzajani, Abu Dawud, Ibn Sa’ad, Al-Uqaili, Ibn Hibban, Al-Saji, Ibn Jarud, and Abu Al-Arab. See Ikmal Mughlatay and Ibn Hajar’s Tahtheeb.

Even those that strengthened him didn’t strengthen him completely. For example, Yaqoub bin Sufyan Al-Fasawi, who made tawtheeq of him said that his hadith is soft. Ibn Ma’een, who referred to him as a thiqa, used other wordings like salih and la ba’asa bihi, implying that he isn’t a top tier narrator. Ibn Adi also referred to him as a shi’ee. Regardless, the majority of the scholars have weakened him, as we can see, so his narration is rejected.


SECONDLY, if for arguments sake, if we consider al-Ajlah is Saduq, even then there remains a possibility of a saduq narrator reporting munkar report.

Sadooq, which means someone who was 'aadil but his dhabt is not well established, when he alone narrates a report from some famous Muhaddith, then it is counted among Munkar, in many cases.

Imam al-Dhahabi said:

 الذهبي : وهو ما انفرد الراوي الضعيفُ به. وقد يُعَدُّ مُفْرَدُ الصَّدُوقِ منكَراً.
(Al-Mawqiza fi ilm Mustalah al-hadeeth, by Imam Dhahabi)
http://shamela.ws/browse.php/book-8195/page-21

The matn(text) of this hadeeth is Munkar, since it does contradicts the correctly reported hadeeth:

We read in Al-Hakim’s collection;

حدثنا الأستاذ أبو الوليد الهيثم بن خلف الدوري ، ثنا سوار بن عبد الله العنبري ، ثنا المعتمر قال : قال أبي : حدثنا الحريث بن مخشي ، أن عليا قتل صبيحة إحدى وعشرين من رمضان ، قال : فسمعت الحسن بن علي يقول ، وهو يخطب وذكر مناقب علي ، فقال : « قتل ليلة أنزل القرآن ، وليلة أسري  بعيسى ، وليلة قبض موسى »

Abu Al-Waleed Al-Haitham narrated from Sawar bin ‘Abdullah Al-Anbari; he said, Mu’tamar narrated to us; he said: ‘My father said’; Harith bin Makhshi narrated: ‘Ali (RA) was murdered the morning of 21st Ramadan. He said; I heard Hassan bin ‘Ali (RA) speaking. He was making an address and talking of the virtues of ‘Ali (RA); he said: ‘He has been killed the night Qur’an was revealed, the night ‘Eisa (AS) was moved and the night Musa (AS) died.’ (Mustadrak Hakim, Hadith 4671. Hakim said it is Sahih).

It doesn't mention the odd, wordings which is narrated through the route of al-Ajlah, hence without a shadow of doubt that hadeeth is Munkar(denounced).

Heck, do you even know that a hadeeth can even have authentic chain, but the Matn(text) of it will be faulty.

mam Ibn Katheer said:

” الحكم بالصحة أو الحسن على الإسناد لا يلزم منه الحكم بذلك على المتن ، إذ قد يكون شاذاً أو معللاً “

The fact that the Isnaad(chain) is deemed to be Sahih or Hasan does not necessarily mean that the same applies to the text, because it may be shaadhdh (odd) or mu’allal (faulty). [Ikhtisaar ‘Uloom al-Hadeeth (p. 43).]

And the procedure to check this, is by comparing it with other reports, and this is what Waqar cheema did, he compared it with other reports and when he did that it was apparent that the wordings in the hadeeth of al-Ajlah were odd and hence Munkar, due to the weakness of al-Ajlah.

قال الخطيب البغدادي: "السبيل إلى معرفة علة الحديث أن يجمع بين طرقه، وينظر في اختلاف رواته، ويعتبر بمكانهم في الحفظ، ومنزلتهم في الإتقان والضبط"
ABu Bakr al-Khatib said,"The way to discover the defect of a hadith is to collect the lines of transmission, examine the differences of its transmitters and examine their position in regard to retention and their status in regard to exactitude and precision [Uloom al Hadeeth, page 82]


Quote
How strange is it you dismissed the Hadith I quoted as being weak (and it isn't weak as I've proven that Ajlah b. Abd Allah is declared as acceptable in Hadith), and now you are quoting narrations from Mulla Baqir Majlisi and Shi'ite books? How unfair is this?!
Come out of Imaginations, the hadeeth you used is Munkar , I have proven it by the help of Allah. And quoting a shia hadeeth is not unfair, since it's just a supportive evidence. I have already quoted the hadeeth from Mustadrak al Hakim, which seems didn't go down your throat.


Quote
What! You dismiss the narration I bring because it is Mursal despite being authentically established until Ikrima, but then you quote a narration that is truly weak. It contains the matrook narrator Muhammad b. Umar al-Waqidi, he is severely weak.
As, I said before you are just clutching at straws, the report which you used, which I weakened since Ikrima couldn't be a witness to that event and heard from some unknown narrator, then that hadeeth in itself is any categorical evidence.

Firstly, Sahaba were in a state of shock, it wasn't under normal circumstances. Secondly, they could have used the example of Musa(as) because he had returned in a short time, unlike Isa(as) who would return at the end of time, obviously Sahaba used an example, in which they wouldn't be a long gap for absence of Prophet(saws) among them.

You see all you need is some common sense to discard all your spider's web like arguments.


Quote
Don't you realise these above 2 Athar you cited are contradicting each other? Did Eisa عليه السلام ascend to heaven on the Mount of Olives or from the roof of a house?
If Allah provided you some wisdom, you can use it to reconcile these reports. It's easy.  The house could have been on the mount of olives from where Isa(as) was ascended to heaven.

Quote
Quote
Hadith 3
إن أبا هريرة رضي الله عنه قال : قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم : « كيف أنتم إذا نزل ابن مريم من السماء فيكم
Narrated Abu Huraira, may Allah be pleased with him: Allah’s Messenger, may Allah bless him, said “What will be your condition when the son of Maryam (i.e. ‘Eisa) will descend amongst you from the heavens…?” (Baihaqi’s Asmaa wal Sifaat 2/432 Hadith 855; Shaykh Abdullah bin Muhammad al-Hashidi has classified the narration as Sahih))

The narration is Shaadh in its wording, because more authentic narrations such as from Sahihayn don't mention the word "sky".
It would be considered as ziyadah not shaadh. And it is accepted by scholars of hadeeth. That is why Shaykh Abdullah bin Muhammad al-Hashidi has classified the narration as Sahih. But due to lack of knowledge you make these despo kind of silly arguments.

Quote
but even if these narrations about descending from the sky are authentic, it does not necessarily prove that Jesus was raised to the sky in his body, or that at present he is living in the sky in his Jasad without being fed.
Atleast believe, that Isa(As) will descend from heaven, with body, as I proved it from the hadeeth of Sahih Muslim, showing he will take support by placing his hands on the wings of Angels, wearing clothes, and beads of water will fall from his hair, which clearly proves as a body. Not just soul.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Noor-us-Sunnah on July 09, 2017, 08:20:15 PM
This is the same Ibn Abbas رضى الله عنه who said in explaining the Verse: "Allah is the One who created the Seven Heavens and of the Earth a similar (number)"

سَبْعَ أَرْضِينَ ، فِي كُلِّ أَرْضٍ نَبِيٌّ كَنَبِيِّكُمْ ، وَآدَمُ كَآدَمَ ، وَنُوحٌ كَنُوحٍ ، وَإِبْرَاهِيمُ كَإِبْرَاهِيمَ ، وَعِيسَى كَعِيسَى
"In the Seven Earths, in every Earth there is a Nabi like your Nabi, an Adam like your Adam, a Noah like your Noah, an Abraham like your Abraham, and a Jesus like your Jesus."

The question is will any Muslim adapt this belief simply because Ibn Abbas said it and it is something from the matter of the unseen? Are you prepared to believe that there are 6 other Prophet Muhammads like our Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم without any evidence of that from the Quran and Ahadith an Nabawi?
The hadeeth you quoted is unreliable.

Allama  Al-Mu‘allimi Al-Yamaani said:
ليس سنده صحيحا، لأنه من طريق شريك عن عطاء بن السائب عن أبي الضحى عن ابن عباس، وشريك يخطئ كثيراً ويدلس، وعطاء بن السائب اختلط قبل موته بمدة، وسماع شريك منه بعد الاختلاط
“Its chain of narration is not authentic because it was narrated on the authority of Shareek, from ‘Ataa’ ibn As-Saa’ib, from Abu Adh-Dhuha, from Ibn ‘Abbaas. Shareek is known for making many mistakes in narration as well as Tadlees (narrating a hadeeth that he did not hear directly from his shaykh without mentioning the name of the third party from whom he heard it). Before his death, ‘Ataa’ ibn As-Saa’ib became feeble-minded (in old age) and was labeled a Mukhtalit (confused in his narration due to poor memory), and Shareek heard reports from him after he (‘Ataa’) was labeled a Mukhtalit.” [Al-Anwaar Al-Kaashifah, p. 127]

Quote
Quote
I meant whose "Nutfah", the Nutfah decides who is your biological mother and father. Every person is born from the nutfah of their biological mother and father. Ibn Taymiyyah was born was from the nutfah of his biological mother and father- Abdal Haleem, etc. So I asked the question in this sense.

First you referred to Nutfah as meaning male sperm, now you are talking about the Nutfah of a biological mother? Did not Eisa عليه السلام have a biological mother?

But the meaning of the Ayah is that Insan is created from the Nutfah of Adam. That is the Nutfah through which all humanity originated including sayyidina Isa عليه السلام
I was referring to this verse of Quran when I mentioned mother AND father, not just mother, as you misunderstood asusual.

إِنَّا خَلَقْنَا الْإِنسَانَ مِن نُّطْفَةٍ أَمْشَاجٍ نَّبْتَلِيهِ فَجَعَلْنَاهُ سَمِيعًا بَصِيرًا
“Verily We created Man from a drop of mingled sperm, in order to try him. So We gave him Hearing and Sight.” [76:2]

We read in Tafseer ibn Katheer:

Verily, We have created man from Nutfah Amshaj,) meaning, mixed. The words Mashaj and Mashij mean something that is mixed together.

Ibn `Abbas said concerning Allah's statement, (مِن نُّطْفَةٍ أَمْشَاجٍ)(from Nutfah Amshaj,) "This means the fluid of the man and the fluid of the woman when they meet and mix.'' Then man changes after this from stage to stage, condition to condition and color to color. `Ikrimah, Mujahid, Al-Hasan and Ar-Rabi` bin Anas all made statements similar to this. They said, "Amshaj is the mixing of the man's fluid with the woman's fluid. [Tafseer Ibn Katheer]

So the mention is general, referring to all the people born in the world, it refers to biological father and mother of a person. So stop fooling yourself by beating behind the bush.


Quote
Nuzul (descent) does not always mean in the sense of coming down from Heaven. Allah says He sent down 8 pairs of cattle وَأَنزَلَ لَكُم مِّنَ الْأَنْعَامِ ثَمَانِيَةَ أَزْوَاجٍ did these 8 pairs of cattle come down from the sky? Coming with two Angels is not exclusive to Jesus, even our Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم was accompanied by 2 Angels (Gabriel and Michael). Sometimes they were visible to the Sahaba, like during the Battle of Badr:
Sa`d reported that on the Day of Uhud I saw on the right side of Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) and on his left side two persons dressed in white clothes and whom I did not see before nor after that, and they were Gabriel and Michael peace be upon them both (Sahih Muslim)
قَالَ خَرَجَ عَلَيْنَا رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم يَوْمًا فَقَالَ ‏ "‏ إِنِّي رَأَيْتُ فِي الْمَنَامِ كَأَنَّ جِبْرِيلَ عِنْدَ رَأْسِي وَمِيكَائِيلَ عِنْدَ رِجْلَىَّ
The Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم said that he saw in a dream that Gabriel is at his head and Michael is at at his foot (Tirmidhi)
Firstly, I have provided you SAHIH Marfu reports that Isa(as) will descend from heaven, so there remains no escape door for you. So, now when it is established that Isa(As) will descend from heaven, taking support from he wings of angels by placing his hands on angels, wearing clothes and When he would lower his head, there would fall beads of perspiration from his head, and when he would raise it up, beads like pearls would scatter from it. Then this is without a shadow of doubt, a physical body.

So Alhamdulillah, Hujjah have been established on you, on the day of Judgement you will be certainly question, if you reject this out of arrogance. May Allah guide you. I'm certain that you are gonna bring the argument of Isa(as) being alive with his body in heaven, but atleast believe in what has been proven, that Isa(as) is alive and will descend from heaven with a body.

Atleast believe, that Isa(As) will descend from heaven, with body, as I proved it from the hadeeth of Sahih Muslim, showing he will take support by placing his hands on the wings of Angels, wearing clothes, and beads of water will fall from his hair, which clearly proves as a body. Not just soul.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 10, 2017, 12:47:18 AM

Sheikh Omar Bakri Muhammad

This "Sheikh" has no credibility. Apart from being a contemporary and not an authority, he is in fact a caller to the way of Khawarij and extremely discredited if you know anything about him.

Furthermore, the quotes you bring from these Fuqaha are regarding jurisprudential issues. In the madhhab of Imam Ahmad the saying of a Sahabi is given preference to Qiyas.

As for aqida, when the Ulama say that even a Khabr al Ahad that is Sahih Marfu Hadith cannot be binding then what about the saying of a Sahabi? Khatib al-Baghdadi said:

ولا يقبل خبر الواحد في منافاة حكم العقل وحكم القرآن الثابت المحكم والسنة المعلومة
“A solitary report cannot be accepted if it negates the verdict of the intellect, verdict of the Qur’an, and that of the well-known Sunnah”
Reference: Al-Kifayah fee ‘Ilm al-Riwayah; p. 432

(https://3.bp.blogspot.com/--rSY969P-p8/WDMUPEWYpZI/AAAAAAAAB0E/K1RZWCYIbhgqpWBlotIScIcgvW0Z-836gCLcB/s640/title.png)
(https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-a2ou8bxq-8w/WDMUTnCf6fI/AAAAAAAAB0I/kwmSJ5UZFmAPtSxsS_fiV1v3VIMP2fyOACLcB/s1600/Khabr%2Bal%2BWahid%2Bis%2Bnot%2Baccepted%2Bwhen%2Bcontradicts%2Baql%2Bor%2BQuran%2Bor%2Bthe%2Bknown%2BSunnah%2B%2528Al%2BKifayah%2BKhatib%2BBaghdadi%2529.bmp)

Notice Khatib al Baghdadi said that a Solitary Report cannot even be accepted if it clashes with the intellect. And you are saying it is binding upon the Muslims to accept the saying of a Sahabi that Eisa عليه السلام ascended into Heaven in his Jasad from the Mount of Olives? It is so evident all these sayings are based upon the Israeeliyyat, which are themselves contradictory and hearsay. In fact these Israaeeliyyat are based on Arab misunderstanding of the New Testament. It is from there that this doctrine originates:

So then after the Lord had spoken unto them, he was received up into heaven, and sat on the right hand of God. (Mark 16:19)

And it came to pass, while he blessed them, he was parted from them, and carried up into heaven. (Luke 24:51)

And this became part of the Nicene Creed: "He ascended into heaven and is seated at the right hand of the Father"

So now we see where this belief originates from. It has no basis in Quran and Sunna. In fact, even these verses from the New Testament are not explicit in saying he was raised up in his earthen body.

Next you say I only brought the Tawtheeq of Ajlah b. Abd Allah from contemporary Muhadditheen:


Quote
1-    Imaam Shu’bah has narrated from him, and it is known that Shu’bah only narrates from those who are Thiqah according to him.
[See, Tahdheeb al-Kamaal (2/276); Taareekh al-Islaam (3/812) etc]

Imaam Dhahabi said: “The teachers of Shu’bah are Jayyaad”
[Meezaan: 4504]

Haafidh Ibn Hajar said while explaining his methodology in Tahdheeb that:

“If it has been proven from the conditions of a narrator that he does not narrate except from Thiqah, then I have mentioned the names of all his Shuyookh or most of them (in Tahdheeb), such as Shu’bah, Maalik and others.”
[Tahdheeb at-Tahdheeb: 1/5]

When Imaam Azdi declared Abu Sadaqah Tawbah bin Abdullah to be “La Yuhtajju Bihi”, Imaam Dhahabi said while refuting him: “I say, He is Thiqah, for Shu’bah has narrated from him”
[Meezaan: 3611]

Haafidh Ibn Hajar said about this saying of Imaam Dhahabi that: “I read the writing of Dhahabi (in which he said) he is rather Thiqah for Shu’bah has narrated from him; and the narration of Shu’bah from him is his Tawtheeq”
[Tahdheeb at-Tahdheeb: 5161]

Note: Since there is no Jarh from Imaam Shu’bah on Ajlah as compared to his narration from him, we can conclude that Ajlah is Thiqah according to Imaam Shu’bah.

2-    Imaam Yahya ibn Ma’een said: “He is Thiqah”
[Taareekh Ibn Ma’een, narrated by ad-Dauri: 1276]

He also said: “There is nothing wrong in him”
[Taareekh Ibn Ma’een, narrated by ad-Dauri: 2232]

3-    Imaam Ibn Abi Khaythamah narrated the Tawtheeq of Imaam Ibn Ma’een and did not oppose him.
[Taareekh Ibn Abi Khaythamah: 2/382]

4-    Imaam Ya’qoob bin Sufyaan al-Faarsi said: “He is Thiqah, there is leniency (slight weakness) in his hadeeth”
[Al-Ma’rifat wal Taareekh: 3/104]

Shaykh Abdullah bin Yoosuf al-Jadee’ says that such an expression means, his hadeeth is dropped from the level of Saheeh to the level of Hasan (not Da’eef).
[See, Tahreer Uloom ul-Hadeeth: 1/570]

5-    Imaam Abu al-Hasan al-Ijlee said: “He is Thiqah”
[Thiqaat: 1/57]

6-    Imaam Abu Hafs Ibn Shaaheen mentioned him among the Thiqah narrators
[1/262]

7-    Imaam Abu Awaanah has narrated from him in his Saheeh, which denotes that he is Thiqah according to him
[See, Musnad Abu Awaanah H. 847, 951, 2603]

8-    Imaam Abu Ahmed bin Adee al-Jarjaani said: “I did not find anything Munkar in him, which would cross the limit either in chain or text, and I hope there is nothing wrong in him…. And he is Mustaqeem ul-Hadeeth Sadooq according to me”
[Al-Kaamil: 2/140]

9-    Imaam Tirmidhi authenticated his hadeeth to be “Hasan Saheeh” [H. 1753], and “Hasan Ghareeb”

Note: The Authentication of a Lone narration is the authentication of all its narrators.

10-          Imaam Haakim al-Neesaaboori authenticated his hadeeth saying: “This hadeeth is Saheeh ul-Isnaad”
[Mustadrak al-Haakim: H. 2946, 3002, 4249, 4723]

11-          Imaam Zaya al-Maqdisi authenticated his hadeeth by narrating from him in al-Ahaadeeth al-Mukhtaarah [1226]

12-          Haafidh al-Busayri authenticated his hadeeth saying, “Its chain is Hasan”
[Itthaaf al-Khayrah: 4/49, 5/131]

And once he said about a chain containing Ajlah that: “All its narrators are Thiqaat”
[Itthaaf al-Khayrah: 5/308. 7/40]

13-          Haafidh Noor ud-Deen al-Haythami said: “The Majority has done his Tawtheeq”
[Majma az-Zawaaid: 1/189]

14-          Imaam Dhahabi said: “There is nothing wrong in his narration, and some have declared him Layyin”
[Al-Mughni: 224]

Imaam Dhahabi mentioned him in “Man Takallam Feehi Wahuwa Mawthaq” and said: “He is Shi’i Famous (and) Sudooq”
[13]

15-          Abdur Ra’oof al-Manaawi narrates: “Al-Ajlah al-Kindi is declared Thiqah by the Jamhoor”
[Faydh ul-Qadeer: 4/357]

16-          Zayla’ee al-Hanafi authenticated his hadeeth saying: “Its chain is Saalih”
[Takhreej Ahaadeeth al-Kashaaf: 3/229]
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 10, 2017, 01:16:18 AM
The matn(text) of this hadeeth is Munkar, since it does contradicts the correctly reported hadeeth:

We read in Al-Hakim’s collection;

حدثنا الأستاذ أبو الوليد الهيثم بن خلف الدوري ، ثنا سوار بن عبد الله العنبري ، ثنا المعتمر قال : قال أبي : حدثنا الحريث بن مخشي ، أن عليا قتل صبيحة إحدى وعشرين من رمضان ، قال : فسمعت الحسن بن علي يقول ، وهو يخطب وذكر مناقب علي ، فقال : « قتل ليلة أنزل القرآن ، وليلة أسري  بعيسى ، وليلة قبض موسى »

Abu Al-Waleed Al-Haitham narrated from Sawar bin ‘Abdullah Al-Anbari; he said, Mu’tamar narrated to us; he said: ‘My father said’; Harith bin Makhshi narrated: ‘Ali (RA) was murdered the morning of 21st Ramadan. He said; I heard Hassan bin ‘Ali (RA) speaking. He was making an address and talking of the virtues of ‘Ali (RA); he said: ‘He has been killed the night Qur’an was revealed, the night ‘Eisa (AS) was moved and the night Musa (AS) died.’ (Mustadrak Hakim, Hadith 4671. Hakim said it is Sahih).

You claim this Hadith from al-Hakim is authentic. But once again you failed to verify the chain of narrators. Who is al-Huraith b. Makhshi? He is Majhul, no one authenticated him.

Imam Muqbil رحمه الله brought this out in his checking of the Mustadrak:


(https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-ChzaKRMd3Qs/WWKqTLte6JI/AAAAAAAACgw/pxg9xeJ6qi4JSM_AylGvpT8PHn6LGvAewCLcBGAs/s1600/title.png)

(https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-3naiXAnUAhE/WWKqXOehneI/AAAAAAAACg0/FDxJ8KcZYxEcCdASEJFlgXUGarSfDLQfwCLcBGAs/s1600/Sermon%2Bof%2BHasan%2BNight%2BJesus%2Bwas%2BTaken%2B%25D8%25A3%25D8%25B3%25D8%25B1%25D9%258A%2B%2528Mustadrak%2Bal%2BHakim%2Bp.%2529%2Bal%2BHurayth%2Bb.%2BMakhshi%2Bis%2BMajhul.png)

Furthermore, the mere wording of this weak Hadith does not prove that sayyidina Eisa عليه السلام was raised up to Heaven in his Jasad earthen flesh and blood body. Nor does it contradict the authentic Hadith I brought from Tabaqat al Kabir of Ibn Sa'd where Imam al-Hassan رضى الله عنه says it was the Ruh of Eisa عليه السلام that ascended.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 10, 2017, 01:43:11 AM

The brother who translated it mistakenly put the wordings of Bait al Maqdis in the translation. The reports says on Jabal Afeeq, which is in Syria.

قال ابن عباس: قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم: « ((فعند ذلك ينزل أخي عيسى ابن مريم من السماء على جبل أفيق
http://shamela.ws/browse.php/book-8575/page-123

Incorrect sir. The link you gave from Shamela is not the entire Hadith but only a part of it. Kanz ul Ummal is not the primary source. It is taken from a long narration from the Tarikh Dimashq of Ibn Asakir (from a Hadith which itself is Da'if):

وَيَنْحَازُ الْمُؤْمِنُونَ إِلَى بَيْتِ الْمَقْدِسِ . قَالَ ابْنُ عَبَّاسٍ : قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ : " فَعِنْدَ ذَلِكَ يَنْزِلُ أَخِي عِيسَى ابْنُ مَرْيَمَ مِنَ السَّمَاءِ عَلَى جَبَلِ أَفِيقٍ
So Ibn Abbas clearly said "Bait al Maqdis".

Furthermore, if you say Afiq is in Syria, meaning near the town of Fiq, you still have a problem, because that that Fiq is in the al-Qunaitra governorate in modern day Golan region, in no way can that be construed as the "East of Damascus"


(https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-lkNYkDNctFk/WWKw4v0M_FI/AAAAAAAACg8/acUqc8nwdo40xvXXO3dbMci_JOiN1li7gCLcBGAs/s1600/Untitled.png)

So will Jesus descend with 2 bodies, 1 to East of Damascus and 1 to Mount Afiq in the Golan? Or will he descend from the sky twice, first to the white Minaret in Damascus than to Mount Afiq in the Golan?
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 10, 2017, 02:39:10 AM
Hadith 6
عن ابن عباس { إن تعذبهم فإنهم عبادك } يقول : عبيدك قد استوجبوا العذاب بمقالتهم { وإن تغفر لهم } أي من تركت منهم ومد في عمره حتى أهبط من السماء إلى الأرض يقتل الدجال ، فنزلوا عن مقالتهم ووحدوك
About the verse, ‘If you punish them they are your servants’ Ibn Abbas  said, he [‘Eisa] will say: ‘These slaves of yours have invited your chastisement by what they said [and believed]’. ‘And if you forgive them’ i.e. ‘those whom I left behind me and those who were there when I came down from the Heavens to Earth to kill al-Dajjal and they turned back from what they said [i.e. Trinity] and believed in your Oneness…’
(Durr Manthur 4/27 Under Surah 5 Ayah 118).

A complete Sanad is missing. Imam Suyuti narrated it thus:

So where is the chain between Ibn Abbas and Abul Shaykh al-Isfahani?


وأخرج أبو الشيخ عن ابن عباس { إن تعذبهم فإنهم عبادك } يقول: عبيدك قد استوجبوا العذاب بمقالتهم { وإن تغفر لهم } أي من تركت منهم ومد في عمره حتى أهبط من السماء إلى الأرض يقتل الدجال، فنزلوا عن مقالتهم ووحدوك، وأقروا إنا عبيد { وإن تغفر لهم } حيث رجعوا عن مقالتهم { فإنك أنت العزيز الحكيم }
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 10, 2017, 03:08:29 AM
Quote from: Noor-us-Sunnah
Hadith 2
عن صفية أم المؤمنين رضي الله عنها أنها كانت إذا زارت بيت المقدس ، وفرغت من الصلاة في المسجد الأقصى صعدت على جبل زيتا فصلت عليه وقالت : هذا الجبل هو الذي رفع منه عيسى عليه السلام إلى السماء
It is narrated from Ummul Momineen Safiya, may Allah be pleased with her, that when she visited Bait Al-Maqdis (i.e. Jerusalem) and finished prayers in Al-Aqsa Mosque she climbed up to Mt. Olives and prayed there as well and said: ‘This is the mountain from where ‘Eisa, may Allah bless him, was raised up to the Heavens.’ (Al-Tasrih bima Tawatar fi Nuzul Al-Masih Hadith 74 cf. Tafsir Fath Al-Aziz Surah 95)

Where is the Sanad for this Hadith? By Tafsir Fath al Aziz if you mean Tafsir Azizi of Shah Abdul Aziz Muhaddith Delhawi, he mentioned this narration in his Tafsir for Surat at-Tin but did not bring a sanad for it.

You yourself quoted that Sanad is the weapon of believer and without Sanad we can't be sure of anything!
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 10, 2017, 04:06:10 AM
Hadith 8[/b]

عن ابن عباس قال … وإن الله رفعه بجسده، وانه حي الآن، وسيرجع إلى الدنيا فيكون فيها ملكاً، ثم يموت كما يموت الناس
Narrated from Ibn Abbas, he said: “… and verily Allah raised him [Eisa ibn Maryam] with his body while he was alive and he will soon return to this world and will be a ruler therein. Then he will die as other people die.”  (Ibn S’ad’ Tabaqat Al-Kubra 1/53)
Taken from :
http://thecult.info/blog/2011/03/18/eisa-as-did-ascend-and-will-descend-from-the-heavens-above-categorical-ahadith/


ِAs usual you did not quote the sanad from Tabaqat al Kubra:

أخبرنا هشام بن محمد بن السائب عن أبيه عن أبي صالح عن بن عباس

And as for Muhammad b. Saa'ib al-Kalbi, he is a known fabricator
أما الكلبي : فهو محمد بن السائب الكلبي ، أبو النضر الكوفى المفسر ، وهو وضاع مشهور
قال سفيان : قال لى الكلبي : كل ما حدثتك عن أبي صالح فهو كذب .
وقال أحمد بن زهير: قلت لأحمد بن حنبل: يحل النظر في تفسير الكلبى ؟ قال: لا.
وقال ابن حبان: مذهبه في الدين ووضوح الكذب فيه أظهر من أن يحتاج إلى الإغراق في وصفه ، يروى عن أبي صالح عن ابن عباس التفسير ، وأبو صالح لم ير ابن عباس ، ولا سمع الكلبى من أبي صالح إلا الحرف بعد الحرف ، لا يحل ذكره في الكتب، فكيف الاحتجاج به .
"ميزان الاعتدال" (3 /557-559)

So this was the only narration you brought with explicit mention of Jasad being raised up to Heaven but it is Fabricated
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Farid on July 10, 2017, 05:13:35 AM
Quote
1-    Imaam Shu’bah has narrated from him, and it is known that Shu’bah only narrates from those who are Thiqah according to him.
[See, Tahdheeb al-Kamaal (2/276); Taareekh al-Islaam (3/812) etc]

Imaam Dhahabi said: “The teachers of Shu’bah are Jayyaad”
[Meezaan: 4504]

Haafidh Ibn Hajar said while explaining his methodology in Tahdheeb that:

“If it has been proven from the conditions of a narrator that he does not narrate except from Thiqah, then I have mentioned the names of all his Shuyookh or most of them (in Tahdheeb), such as Shu’bah, Maalik and others.”
[Tahdheeb at-Tahdheeb: 1/5]

When Imaam Azdi declared Abu Sadaqah Tawbah bin Abdullah to be “La Yuhtajju Bihi”, Imaam Dhahabi said while refuting him: “I say, He is Thiqah, for Shu’bah has narrated from him”
[Meezaan: 3611]

Haafidh Ibn Hajar said about this saying of Imaam Dhahabi that: “I read the writing of Dhahabi (in which he said) he is rather Thiqah for Shu’bah has narrated from him; and the narration of Shu’bah from him is his Tawtheeq”
[Tahdheeb at-Tahdheeb: 5161]

Note: Since there is no Jarh from Imaam Shu’bah on Ajlah as compared to his narration from him, we can conclude that Ajlah is Thiqah according to Imaam Shu’bah.

2-    Imaam Yahya ibn Ma’een said: “He is Thiqah”
[Taareekh Ibn Ma’een, narrated by ad-Dauri: 1276]

He also said: “There is nothing wrong in him”
[Taareekh Ibn Ma’een, narrated by ad-Dauri: 2232]

3-    Imaam Ibn Abi Khaythamah narrated the Tawtheeq of Imaam Ibn Ma’een and did not oppose him.
[Taareekh Ibn Abi Khaythamah: 2/382]

4-    Imaam Ya’qoob bin Sufyaan al-Faarsi said: “He is Thiqah, there is leniency (slight weakness) in his hadeeth”
[Al-Ma’rifat wal Taareekh: 3/104]

Shaykh Abdullah bin Yoosuf al-Jadee’ says that such an expression means, his hadeeth is dropped from the level of Saheeh to the level of Hasan (not Da’eef).
[See, Tahreer Uloom ul-Hadeeth: 1/570]

5-    Imaam Abu al-Hasan al-Ijlee said: “He is Thiqah”
[Thiqaat: 1/57]

6-    Imaam Abu Hafs Ibn Shaaheen mentioned him among the Thiqah narrators
[1/262]

7-    Imaam Abu Awaanah has narrated from him in his Saheeh, which denotes that he is Thiqah according to him
[See, Musnad Abu Awaanah H. 847, 951, 2603]

8-    Imaam Abu Ahmed bin Adee al-Jarjaani said: “I did not find anything Munkar in him, which would cross the limit either in chain or text, and I hope there is nothing wrong in him…. And he is Mustaqeem ul-Hadeeth Sadooq according to me”
[Al-Kaamil: 2/140]

9-    Imaam Tirmidhi authenticated his hadeeth to be “Hasan Saheeh” [H. 1753], and “Hasan Ghareeb”

Note: The Authentication of a Lone narration is the authentication of all its narrators.

10-          Imaam Haakim al-Neesaaboori authenticated his hadeeth saying: “This hadeeth is Saheeh ul-Isnaad”
[Mustadrak al-Haakim: H. 2946, 3002, 4249, 4723]

11-          Imaam Zaya al-Maqdisi authenticated his hadeeth by narrating from him in al-Ahaadeeth al-Mukhtaarah [1226]

12-          Haafidh al-Busayri authenticated his hadeeth saying, “Its chain is Hasan”
[Itthaaf al-Khayrah: 4/49, 5/131]

And once he said about a chain containing Ajlah that: “All its narrators are Thiqaat”
[Itthaaf al-Khayrah: 5/308. 7/40]

13-          Haafidh Noor ud-Deen al-Haythami said: “The Majority has done his Tawtheeq”
[Majma az-Zawaaid: 1/189]

14-          Imaam Dhahabi said: “There is nothing wrong in his narration, and some have declared him Layyin”
[Al-Mughni: 224]

Imaam Dhahabi mentioned him in “Man Takallam Feehi Wahuwa Mawthaq” and said: “He is Shi’i Famous (and) Sudooq”
[13]

15-          Abdur Ra’oof al-Manaawi narrates: “Al-Ajlah al-Kindi is declared Thiqah by the Jamhoor”
[Faydh ul-Qadeer: 4/357]

16-          Zayla’ee al-Hanafi authenticated his hadeeth saying: “Its chain is Saalih”
[Takhreej Ahaadeeth al-Kashaaf: 3/229]

I would just like to respond to this here, since it seems like there are some exaggerations in the above that should be pointed out. Firstly, brother Noor has correctly pointed out that numerous early scholars weakened Al-Ajlah.

From the sixteen mentioned in the list above, only ten are early scholars. The rest are not.
Also, I would like to point out that some of these claims of strengthening are not claims at all. For example, Ibn Abi Khaythama quoting Yahya bin Ma'een's tawtheeq, is incorrectly used to point out that Ibn Abi Khaythama is also upon that view. This is inaccurate.
The same can be said about Abu Awana who simply quoted an alternative route to the hadith in Saheeh Muslim. This can barely be used as evidence for the reliability of Al-Ajlah.
Another example of an inaccuracy is what has been attributed to Al-Tirmithi. The narration that he reports is not a sole report, which is why Al-Tirmithi does not refer to it as ghareeb. The tradition can also be found elsewhere with supplementary chains. Instead we find him in Manaqib Ali stating that there is a hadith that was solely narrated by Al-Ajlah, which he refers to as “Hasanun Ghareeb”, instead of Saheeh.
Overall, it seems like most of those that have regarded Al-Ajlah as reliable, did not feel that he was at the level of the thiqaat. This can be seen in the comments of Ya’qoub bin Sufyan, who mentioned that he has some weakness, as well as Ibn Shaheen and Ibn Adi. The same is said about Yahya bin Ma’een in one of his quotes by Al-Duri. The same can be said about Al-Hakim (7037) who says that Al-Ajlah is “not matrook,” instead of saying, “he is thiqa.”
This leaves us with two remaining tawtheeqaat. The first is Shu’ba’s tawtheeq, which isn’t really tawtheeq, but can be used as a qareena of the reliability of Al-Ajlah. The second is that of Al-Ijli, who is infamous for his lenience.
In other words, the most that can be said about him, based on the positive statements, is that he is at the level of a hasan narrator. However, if you place these within the context of those that have weakened him, you would realize that he is closer to weakness than to strength. Add onto that the very specific criticisms that are directed to him by those like Al-Uqaili, who has pointed out his mistakes in hadith by inaccurately reporting names, and this takes precedence over tawtheeqaat as all hadithists know.


Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 10, 2017, 05:28:17 AM
Below is the complete text of the Hadith and its true ex-planation.

عَنْ ابْنِ عَبَّاسٍ رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُمَا قَالَ خَطَبَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ فَقَالَ … وَإِنَّهُ يُجَاءُ بِرِجَالٍ مِنْ أُمَّتِي فَيُؤْخَذُ بِهِمْ ذَاتَ الشِّمَالِ فَأَقُولُ يَا رَبِّ أُصَيْحَابِي فَيُقَالُ إِنَّكَ لَا تَدْرِي مَا أَحْدَثُوا بَعْدَكَ فَأَقُولُ كَمَا قَالَ الْعَبْدُ الصَّالِحُ {وَكُنْتُ عَلَيْهِمْ شَهِيدًا مَا دُمْتُ فِيهِمْ فَلَمَّا تَوَفَّيْتَنِي كُنْتَ أَنْتَ الرَّقِيبَ عَلَيْهِمْ وَأَنْتَ عَلَى كُلِّ شَيْءٍ شَهِيدٌ} فَيُقَالُ إِنَّ هَؤُلَاءِ لَمْ يَزَالُوا مُرْتَدِّينَ عَلَى أَعْقَابِهِمْ مُنْذُ فَارَقْتَهُمْ

Ibn Abbas: The Prophet (صلى الله عليه و سلم) delivered a ser-mon and said, “…Lo! Some men from my followers will be brought and taken towards the left side, whereupon I will say, ‘O Lord, (these are) my companions!’ It will be said, ‘You do not know what new things they introduced (into the religion) after you.’ I will then say as the right-eous pious slave, Jesus, said, ‘I was a witness over them while I dwelt among them when Thou didst take me up Thou wast the Watcher over them, and You are the Wit-ness to all things.’ (5: 117) Then it will be said, ‘(O Mu-hammad) these people never stopped to apostate since you left them.”
(Bukhari, Kitabul Tafsir, Hadith 4259)

Ahmadis argue that as the word تَوَفَّيْتَنِي ‘tawaffaitani‘ with reference to the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه و سلم) means phys-ical death, it must have the same meaning with regards to Prophet Jesus (عليه السلام). But this is simply absurd and here I explain why;

1) When Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه و سلم) said, , ‘I will say just as the pious slave Jesus said..’, clearly he sought a parallel only in the sayings and the not their whole con-text and implications. This is just as if someone who has been extremely successful in debating various religions and cults on a certain forum, when asked to comment about his achievements, pronounces; ‘I would rather say just as Julius Caesar said, ‘I came, I saw, I conquered.’ Most certainly he does not mean that he actually won a battle against the Army of Pharnaces II of Pontus, or does he?

Answer: This analogy is not in your favor because the matter at hand is the meaning of the word Tawaffaitani. In the example you gave of someone winning a debate and quoting the words of Julius Caesar “I came, I saw, I conquered” the meaning of these words remain the same in both instances. The meaning of the verb “conquered” remains the same in both instances, it is only the object and the subject in the sentence which is different. Hence when Jesus says Falamma Tawaffaitanee and when our Prophet ﷺ will say Falamma Tawaffaitanee the meaning of the word is the same in both instances. The only difference is the object (Jesus in the first instance and Muhammad ﷺ in the second). The subject (Allah) remains the same in both instances also.

Quote
2) The word كَمَا ‘kama‘ between two phrases does not make them exactly same. For instance, in another Hadith we read;

عن أبي واقد الليثي أن رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم لما خرج إلى حنين مر بشجرة للمشركين يقال لها ذات أنواط يعلقون عليها أسلحتهم فقالوا يا رسول الله اجعل لنا ذات أنواط كما لهم ذات أنواط فقال النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم سبحان الله هذا كما قال قوم موسى اجعل لنا إلها كما لهم آلهة والذي نفسي بيده لتركبن سنة من كان قبلكم

Abu Waqid Laythi reported that when the Prophet (صلى الله عليه و سلم) went out for the Battle of Hunayn, he passed by a tree belonging to the polytheists. It was known as Dhat Anwat. They used to hang down their weapons over it. The companions said, “O Messenger of Allah, make for us a Dhat Anwat as there is for them a Dhat Anwat.” He said, “Glory be to Allah! This is just as what the people of Moses (عليه السلام) said, ‘Make for us a god as there is for them a god.’ By Him who has my soul in His hand, you will perpetrate the practices of the people gone before you.” (Jami’ Tirmidhi, Kitabul Fitan, Hadith 2180. Alba-ni classified it as Sahih)

In this Hadith Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه و سلم) termed the wish of the pious companions to have a tree nominated to hang weapons on, akin to the wish of the people of Mo-ses (عليه السلام) to have pagan deity like a certain people. Obviously the Prophet (صلى الله عليه و سلم) did not mean that both wishes were exactly same rather, it only pointed to the same spirit of following the ways of disbelievers.

In the same way the Hadith in question does not mean that both Jesus and Muhammad, peace be upon them both, experienced same kind of ‘tawaffa’. It rather points out to the fact that both were not present among their people when they deviated.

Answer: The word كما in the Hadith of Bukhari under discussion clearly refers to the fact that the words “Falamma Tawaffaytanee” are identical from the mouths of Jesus and Prophet Muhammad. The Hadith concerning the Dhat Anwat tree is therefore a bad example because it’s context makes clear that there the usage of Kama is not to compare wording but similarity of the request of Bani Israel and the Sahaba. So in the Hadith of Bukhari, the word Kama is not used to compare the “kind of ‘tawaffa’” but is used to compare the wording coming out of the mouth of both Jesus and Prophet Muhammad.


Quote
3) Further, it is NOT necessary that ‘tawaffaitani’ means the same everywhere. According to linguists and scholars e.g. Abu Al-Baqa and Ibn Taymiya ‘tawaffa‘ has various meanings i.e. 1) To take in full, 2) Sleep and 3) Death.

Answer: This is a circular argument to say that in the case of Jesus ‘tawaffa’ means “to take in full” but in the case of Prophet Muhammad ﷺ is means death. There is no indication of any Tafreeq or discrepancy. The Hadith of Bukhari is a proof that the meaning of Tawaffa is death. As for the meaning of “to take in full” this cannot be if the subject is Allah and the object is a human being. The Holy Qur’an asserts that when Allah is the subject, and human being is the object, the meaning of Tawaffa can only mean either death or sleep (Sura 39:42). And throughout the Holy Qur’an there are a multitude of examples where Allah or the Angels are the subject, human beings are the object, and Tawaffa is the verb. In none of those instances is the meaning “to take in full”.

Quote
And the fact that one word may have different meanings for different subjects is proved from Quran. In-fact in Surah Ma’ida’s same passage we read that Jesus (عليه السلام) will say;

فَقَدْ عَلِمْتَهُ تَعْلَمُ مَا فِي نَفْسِي وَلَا أَعْلَمُ مَا فِي نَفْسِكَ
“Thou knowest what is in my heart, Thou I know not what is in Thine [heart].” (Quran 5:116)

Here same word i.e. نَفْسِ ,translated as heart or mind, is used for Allah (سبحانه و تعالى) and Jesus (عليه السلام). Does that mean that نَفْسِ (i.e.heart/mind) of Allah (سبحانه و تعالى) and Jesus (عليه السلام) is exactly of same nature?

Answer: As said before, the matter at hand is the meaning of the word Tawaffaitanee not the modality of how it occurred in the specific instances of Jesus and Prophet Muhammad ﷺ. The meaning of death is the same for everyone, but the modality of each individual’s death is different. Obviously the death of Jesus was different to the death of Prophet Muhammad in terms of cause, location, age, and numerous other factors. But the meaning of the word Tawaffaitanee as “you caused me to die” is the same in both instances. Similarly, the meaning of the word Nafs is Self (not heart or mind). The meaning of this word when applied to Allah and to Jesus is the same, but its modality is obviously different. John is a man and Bob is a man. Obviously, this doesn’t mean that John and Bob are exactly the same in every way, but it doesn’t negate that the dictionary definition of ‘man’ as applied to both John and Bob is the same.

Quote
Or as we read in Quran 33:43;

هُوَ الَّذِي يُصَلِّي عَلَيْكُمْ وَمَلَائِكَتُهُ
“He it is who sends salat (His blessings) on you, and his angels too (ask Allah to bless and forgive you)”

Most certainly here صلاة has different meanings with regards to Allah (سبحانه و تعالى) and the angels. Ibn Kathir writes:

والصلاة من الله ثناؤه على العبد عند الملائكة، … وقال غيره: الصلاة من الله: الرحمة … وأما الصلاة من الملائكة، فبمعنى الدعاء للناس والاستغفار
“Allah’s Salah means that He praises His servant before the angels …others said: “Allah’s Salah means mercy.” … Salah from the angels means their supplication and seeking forgiveness for people.” (Ibn Kathir 6/436 under Su-rah 33 Ayah 43)

The crucial element missing in this example is the word كما. It is obvious that the meaning of Yusalli when applied to Allah is different than when it is applied to the Angels. It is the absence of the word Kama which strengthens this idea. Had Allah said: Huwa Lladhee Yusallee Alaykum Kamaa Yusallee Alaykum al-Malaa’ikah then your example would hold water for your argument.

Quote
4) On the Ahmadi lines of the argument a Chris-tian may say that perhaps Prophet Muhammad (صلى الله عليه و سلم) also died through crucifixion like Jesus as the same word is used for both of them.

This is not only an extremely weak but absolutely absurd argument. There are so many logical fallacies in it I don’t even know where to begin. When was it proven that Tawaffaitanee means to die by crucifixion specifically? Tawaffaitanee simply means “You caused me to die” without specification of ‘how’. I already clarified that the meaning of the word is the same in both instances, but the modality will obviously be different. The flaw in your argument is based on the fact that you fail to make a distinction between المعنى ‘the meaning’ and كيفية ‘modality’.

If hypothetically a Christian were to make such an argument, he would be falling into the logical fallacy of petitio principii because his proposition (“Prophet Muhammad also died through crucifixion”) is based on an unproven and disputed premise (“Jesus died through crucifixion”).


Quote
5) As to the fact that Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه و سلم) has used the past tense, it is because Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه و سلم) will say this on the Day of Judgment and as the saying of Jesus (عليه السلام) has already been told in the Quran so it was in his and the listeners prior knowledge when he uttered these words.

This argument is completely irrelevant and immaterial to the point.

Quote
6) The Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه و سلم) will recite this verse as the implication is exactly same i.e. neither Jesus (عليه السلام) was present among his people when they got involved in heresies (Trinity etc) nor was Prophet Muhammad (صلى الله عليه و سلم) present while some from his Ummah deviated and some even if went out of the pale of Islam by believing in false prophets. Both went away from their people before they were lead astray.

This is to deny the apparent meaning of the Hadith, which is that the Prophet ﷺ will recite the Verse with the only difference being that he is considering himself the object of the phrase Falamma Tawaffaitanee instead of Jesus.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 10, 2017, 06:00:44 AM
Hadith 1
عن ابن عباس قال: لما أراد الله أن يرفع عيسى إلى السماء خرج على أصحابه …ورفع عيسى من رَوْزَنَة في البيت إلى السماء
Ibn Abbas said, “When Allah intended to raise ‘Eisa to the heavens, he went to his companions … and ‘Eisa ascended to the Heavens through an opening in the top of the house.”
(Ibn Abi Hatim 4/431 Hadith 6266, Ibn Kathir 2/449. Ibn Kathir graded it Sahih)


قال ابن أبي حاتم : حدثنا أحمد بن سنان ، حدثنا أبو معاوية ، عن الأعمش ، عن المنهال بن عمرو ، عن سعيد بن جبير ، عن ابن عباس قال : لما أراد الله أن يرفع عيسى إلى السماء ، خرج على أصحابه


The sanad contains al-'Amash who is Mudallis narrating 'an'an from al-Minhal b. Amru
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 10, 2017, 07:07:56 AM
An authentic Hadith from the Mu'jam al-Kabir of Imam Tabarani
http://islamsalvationfromhell.blogspot.ca/2015/10/authentic-hadith-proves-that-messiah-as.html



حَدَّثَنَا عَلِيُّ بْنُ عَبْدِ الْعَزِيزِ ، ثنا أَبُو نُعَيْمٍ ، ثنا كَامِلُ أَبُو الْعَلاءِ ، قَالَ : سَمِعْتُ حَبِيبَ بْنَ أَبِي ثَابِتٍ ، يُحَدِّثُ ، عَنْ يَحْيَى بْنِ جَعْدَةَ ، عَنْ زَيْدِ بْنِ أَرْقَمَ ، قَالَ : خَرَجْنَا مَعَ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ حَتَّى انْتَهَيْنَا إِلَى غَدِيرِ خُمٍّ أَمَرَ بِدُوحٍ ، فَكُسِحَ فِي يَوْمٍ مَا أَتَى عَلَيْنَا يَوْمٌ كَانَ أَشَدَّ حُرًّا مِنْهُ ، فَحَمِدَ اللَّهَ وَأَثْنَى عَلَيْهِ ، وَقَالَ : " يَا أَيُّهَا النَّاسُ ، إِنَّهُ لَمْ يُبْعَثْ نَبِيٌّ قَطُّ إِلا عَاشَ نِصْفَ مَا عَاشَ الَّذِي كَانَ قَبْلَهُ ، وَإِنِّي أُوشِكُ أَنْ أُدْعَى فَأُجِيبَ ، وَإِنِّي تَارِكٌ فِيكُمْ مَا لَنْ تَضِلُّوا بَعْدَهُ كِتَابَ اللَّهِ " ، ثُمَّ قَامَ وَأَخَذَ بِيَدِ عَلِيٍّ رَضِيَ اللَّهُ تَعَالَى عَنْهُ ، فَقَالَ : " يَا أَيُّهَا النَّاسُ مَنْ أَوْلَى بِكُمْ مِنْ أَنْفُسِكُمْ ؟ " قَالُوا : اللَّهُ وَرَسُولُهُ أَعْلَمُ ، قَالَ : " مَنْ كُنْتُ مَوْلاهُ فَعَلِيٌّ مَوْلاهُ "


"No Prophet is sent except that he lives for half the lifetime of the one who was before him."

The inference here is that Jesus of Nazareth lived for about 120 years, and the Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم who proceeded him lived for about 60 years.


(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-bdAd-wz8Ne8/Vij7KQtqqRI/AAAAAAAABTY/cNrq70gF8gw/s1600/title.bmp)

(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-w7pHNeCH1Zo/Vij7QWxKu3I/AAAAAAAABTg/cll6qlnNNiQ/s1600/There%2Bwas%2Bno%2BProphet%2Bexcept%2Bthat%2Bhe%2Blived%2Bto%2Bhalf%2Bthe%2Bage%2Bof%2Bthe%2BProphet%2Bwho%2Bpreceded%2Bhim%2B%2528Mujam%2Bal%2BKabir%2Bno.4986%2Bv.5%2Bp.172%2529.bmp)

(https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-bN972B2pjtQ/WWL84BLPB-I/AAAAAAAAChM/uvOc3Cw7Wvo3KL_ZwOz3hY1G8OFCcdG1ACLcBGAs/s1600/There%2Bwas%2Bno%2BProphet%2Bexcept%2Bthat%2Bhe%2Blived%2Bto%2Bhalf%2Bthe%2Bage%2Bof%2Bthe%2BProphet%2Bwho%2Bpreceded%2Bhim%2B%2528Mujam%2Bal%2BKabir%2Bno.4971%2Bv.5%2Bp.167%2529.bmp)

And here is a supportive narration:

 أَنَّ جِبْرِيلَ كَانَ يُعَارِضُهُ بِالْقُرْآنِ فِي كُلِّ عَامٍ مَرَّةً ، وَأَنَّهُ عَارَضَنِي بِالْقُرْآنِ الْعَامَ مَرَّتَيْنِ وَأَخْبَرَنِي أَنَّهُ لَمْ يَكُنْ نَبِيٌّ كَانَ بَعْدَهُ نَبِيٌّ إِلا عَاشَ بَعْدَهُ نِصْفَ عُمُرِ الَّذِي كَانَ قَبْلَهُ ، وَأَخْبَرَنِي أَنَّ عِيسَى ابْنَ مَرْيَمَ عَلَيْهِ السَّلامُ عَاشَ عِشْرِينَ وَمِائَةَ سَنَةٍ ، فَلا أَرَانِي إِلا ذَاهِبًا عَلَى رَأْسِ السِّتِّينَ " ,

Angel Gabriel came every years to review the Quran with the Prophet. But he came this year to review it twice, and he said: "No Prophet comes after a Prophet except that he lives for half of his lifetime of the one who came before him." And I was told that Jesus son of Mary peace be upon him lived for 120 years, so I think I will live for 60 years."
(Al-Aahad wal Mathani of Ibn Abi Aasim; Dala'il al-Nubuwwah of Baihaqi)
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Abu Muhammad on July 10, 2017, 04:41:51 PM
I've written the first part, in sha Allah will complete the second part soon:

As promised I am now going to present my understanding of these Verses. But before I do so, I refer you and others to articles I've already written on the subjects:

Companions of the Cave (https://islamsalvationfromhell.blogspot.ca/2017/07/the-companions-of-cave-sura-1810-16.html)

Dog of the AsHab al-Kahf (http://islamsalvationfromhell.blogspot.ca/2017/01/the-dog-of-companions-of-cave.html)

Background

The first 10 Ayaat of Surat-al-Kahf are specially designated as a defense and guidance against the tribulation of Dajjal. It is incorrect to think that the content of these Ayaat have no particular guidance for the Muslims concerning the Dajjal and it is merely the recitation of them which will act as an antidote to Dajjal. The lesson to be drawn from them is that the fitna of Dajjal will be the excessive beautification of this world toward the end of time acting as a seduction for people to turn away from their Faith and come to the Dajjal. It is in this context that Allah mentions AsHab-al-Kahf as a model to be followed during the Latter Days in order to secure oneself against the Fitna:

9. أَمْ حَسِبْتَ أَنَّ أَصْحَابَ الْكَهْفِ وَالرَّقِيمِ كَانُوا مِنْ آيَاتِنَا عَجَبًا
Or do you think that the Companions of the Cave and Inscription were among Our Signs something strange?

This first Verse where AsHab-al-Kahf are mentioned is the key to unlocking everything for the one who sees with the Noor of his heart and has been submerged in the knowledge of the Quran al-Karim. This first Verse is an important disclaimer to understand the rest of the story, which is that the reader needs to keep in mind that the story of the AsHab-al-Kahf is not something strange or supernatural.

10. إِذْ أَوَى الْفِتْيَةُ إِلَى الْكَهْفِ فَقَالُوا رَبَّنَا آتِنَا مِن لَّدُنكَ رَحْمَةً وَهَيِّئْ لَنَا مِنْ أَمْرِنَا رَشَدًا
When the youths withdrew to the Cave, they said: "Our Lord, grant us from Yourself Mercy and facilitate for us from our affair Guidance."

This is the last of the 10 Verses that are read to safeguard oneself against the Fitna of Dajjal. It gives us the practice of Awaa and Uzla that is, withdrawing from society into a cave (a remote area) and praying to Allah for mercy and guidance. This is the theme of AsHab-al-Kahf, withdrawal and retreating from the society of Jahiliyya and Fitna.

11. فَضَرَبْنَا عَلَىٰ آذَانِهِمْ فِي الْكَهْفِ سِنِينَ عَدَدًا
So We cast upon their ears in the Cave a number of years

Considering the context of what has already preceded, Allah is saying that He protected the ears of the AsHab al Kahf from hearing about the affairs of the Fitna of the society beyond the cave to where they had withdrawn themselves to.

12. ثُمَّ بَعَثْنَاهُمْ لِنَعْلَمَ أَيُّ الْحِزْبَيْنِ أَحْصَىٰ لِمَا لَبِثُوا أَمَدًا
Then We raised them up to make evident as to which of the two parties best calculated the period they remained

13. نَّحْنُ نَقُصُّ عَلَيْكَ نَبَأَهُم بِالْحَقِّ ۚ إِنَّهُمْ فِتْيَةٌ آمَنُوا بِرَبِّهِمْ وَزِدْنَاهُمْ هُدًى
We relate upon you their News with Truth. Verily they were youths who believed in their Lord and We increased them in guidance

The phrase بالحق "with Truth" means that Allah is going to tell us their story with a purpose and real objective, not merely as a story to pass the time like how the storytellers tell wonderful tales for people's amusement.

14. وَرَبَطْنَا عَلَىٰ قُلُوبِهِمْ إِذْ قَامُوا فَقَالُوا رَبُّنَا رَبُّ السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالْأَرْضِ لَن نَّدْعُوَ مِن دُونِهِ إِلَـٰهًا ۖ لَّقَدْ قُلْنَا إِذًا شَطَطًا
And We made firm their hearts when they stood up and said, "Our Lord is the Lord of the heavens and the earth. Never will we invoke besides Him any deity. We would have certainly spoken, then, an excessive transgression.

This Verse reveals the fact that the fitna of the time of AsHab al Kahf which they were fleeing from was that of a Taghout and so they were seeking to secure their Iman in the Oneness of Allah and to escape this Taghout who was ordering and expecting the people to worship him. This is how the story of AsHab al Kahf is relevant to the Fitna of Dajjal, who is the Taghout to come in the near future with a similar Fitna.

15. هَـٰؤُلَاءِ قَوْمُنَا اتَّخَذُوا مِن دُونِهِ آلِهَةً ۖ لَّوْلَا يَأْتُونَ عَلَيْهِم بِسُلْطَانٍ بَيِّنٍ ۖ فَمَنْ أَظْلَمُ مِمَّنِ افْتَرَىٰ عَلَى اللَّـهِ كَذِبًا
These our people have taken besides Him (Allah) gods. These, our people, have taken besides Him deities. Why do they not bring for [worship of] them a clear authority? And who is more unjust than one who invents about Allah a lie?"

This Verse reveals the fact that the people to whom the AsHab al Kahf belonged to were a people devoted to false gods and a false religion, under the pressure of their Taghout ruler.

You didn't get it. Since you do not believe that Ashab Al-Kahfi were youths who were still alive after 300 years without any sustenance, I'm expecting you to construct your own story based on your own understanding of facts in verses 9 until 26. I saw tidbits here and there in your posts (e.g. they were a society and not a few guys, living in isolation, bla bla bla) but never a full and coherent story. I didn't expect you to write a tafseer of those verses, to be honest.

Please remember. The key to your story is that it must be based and inline with the facts available in verses 9 until 26.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 10, 2017, 04:53:18 PM
I understand that you want me to summarize my version of this story. However, I will do so after I comment on all the Verses so that it becomes clear to other readers that I am not going against what Quran says.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Noor-us-Sunnah on July 11, 2017, 04:44:38 PM
This analogy is not in your favor because the matter at hand is the meaning of the word Tawaffaitani. In the example you gave of someone winning a debate and quoting the words of Julius Caesar “I came, I saw, I conquered” the meaning of these words remain the same in both instances. The meaning of the verb “conquered” remains the same in both instances, it is only the object and the subject in the sentence which is different. Hence when Jesus says Falamma Tawaffaitanee and when our Prophet ﷺ will say Falamma Tawaffaitanee the meaning of the word is the same in both instances. The only difference is the object (Jesus in the first instance and Muhammad ﷺ in the second). The subject (Allah) remains the same in both instances also.
You have misunderstood the example brother gave whom i quoted. What he is trying to imply is that the meaning of a "verb" could be different, if a scenario changes. When Julius Caesar used the verb, he meant it to be literal, whereas when someone who is successful in debates uses it, then it is metaphorical.

When Prophet(saws) will use the words of Isa(As) will say: "I dwelt among them when Thou didst take me up" it is to imply unawareness and absence in common between Isa(as) and Prophet(saws).

Secondly, death has nothing to do in this case, rather the essence of it is about absence and unawareness from the evil scenes that occurred, that is why Isa(as) DIDN'T say "when I was alive" rather he said when "I dwelt among them"   because when Prophet Muhammad(saws) was alive there occurred certain crimes from Sahaba for which he wasn't aware, because he was not present at that time amongst them, but when he was made aware about it he disassociated himself from it.It doesn't  mean that since he was alive, he would be held responsible for it. So you see the essence here is being presence and absence and unawareness. Like Prophet(saws) would also use the response of Isa(as) to imply his presence, absence and unawareness.

Narrated Salim's father:The Prophet (ﷺ) sent Khalid bin Al-Walid to the tribe of Jadhima and Khalid invited them to Islam but they could not express themselves by saying, "Aslamna (i.e. we have embraced Islam)," but they started saying "Saba'na! Saba'na (i.e. we have come out of one religion to another)." Khalid kept on killing (some of) them and taking (some of) them as captives and gave every one of us his Captive. When there came the day then Khalid ordered that each man (i.e. Muslim soldier) should kill his captive, I said, "By Allah, I will not kill my captive, and none of my companions will kill his captive." When we reached the Prophet, we mentioned to him the whole story. On that, the Prophet (ﷺ) raised both his hands and said twice, "O Allah! I am free from what Khalid has done."[Sahih al-Bukhari 4339].

Moreover, Prophet(saws) would use the verse in the traditional sense, wherein one cannot change the wordings of the speech of KalamAllah, even though his condition is different. Let me give you an example for better understanding:

حَدَّثَنَا قُتَيْبَةُ بْنُ سَعِيدٍ، حَدَّثَنَا لَيْثٌ، ح وَحَدَّثَنَا مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ رُمْحِ بْنِ الْمُهَاجِرِ، أَخْبَرَنَا اللَّيْثُ، عَنْ أَبِي الزُّبَيْرِ، عَنْ سَعِيدِ بْنِ جُبَيْرٍ، وَعَنْ طَاوُسٍ، عَنِ ابْنِ عَبَّاسٍ، أَنَّهُ قَالَ كَانَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم يُعَلِّمُنَا التَّشَهُّدَ كَمَا يُعَلِّمُنَا السُّورَةَ مِنَ الْقُرْآنِ فَكَانَ يَقُولُ ‏ "‏ التَّحِيَّاتُ الْمُبَارَكَاتُ الصَّلَوَاتُ الطَّيِّبَاتُ لِلَّهِ السَّلاَمُ عَلَيْكَ أَيُّهَا النَّبِيُّ وَرَحْمَةُ اللَّهِ وَبَرَكَاتُهُ السَّلاَمُ عَلَيْنَا وَعَلَى عِبَادِ اللَّهِ الصَّالِحِينَ أَشْهَدُ أَنْ لاَ إِلَهَ إِلاَّ اللَّهُ وَأَشْهَدُ أَنَّ مُحَمَّدًا رَسُولُ اللَّهِ ‏"‏ ‏.‏ وَفِي رِوَايَةِ ابْنِ رُمْحٍ كَمَا يُعَلِّمُنَا الْقُرْآنَ ‏.
Ibn `Abbas reported: The Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) used to teach us tashahhud just as he used to teach us a Surah of the Qur'an, and he would say: All services rendered by words, acts of worship, and all good things are due to Allah. Peace be upon you, O Prophet, and Allah's mercy and blessings. Peace be upon us and upon Allah's upright servants. I testify that there is no god but Allah, and I testify that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah. In the narration of Ibn Rumh (the words are): "As he would teach us the Qur'an." [Sahih Muslim 403 a].

In tashahhud,  we say “al-salaamu ‘alayka ayyhu’l-nabiyyu (peace be upon you, O Prophet)”,  even though Prophet(saws) died, and this was also the practise of Majority of Sahaba, we do it in a traditional sense, even though Prophet(saws) died. Likewise Prophet(saws) would use the words of Quran, without changing it in a traditional sense, where in the essence would be unawareness and absence in common between him(saws) and Isa(as).

Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Noor-us-Sunnah on July 11, 2017, 05:44:28 PM
This "Sheikh" has no credibility. Apart from being a contemporary and not an authority, he is in fact a caller to the way of Khawarij and extremely discredited if you know anything about him.

Furthermore, the quotes you bring from these Fuqaha are regarding jurisprudential issues. In the madhhab of Imam Ahmad the saying of a Sahabi is given preference to Qiyas.

As for aqida, when the Ulama say that even a Khabr al Ahad that is Sahih Marfu Hadith cannot be binding then what about the saying of a Sahabi? Khatib al-Baghdadi said:

ولا يقبل خبر الواحد في منافاة حكم العقل وحكم القرآن الثابت المحكم والسنة المعلومة
“A solitary report cannot be accepted if it negates the verdict of the intellect, verdict of the Qur’an, and that of the well-known Sunnah”
Reference: Al-Kifayah fee ‘Ilm al-Riwayah; p. 432[/size][/font]
(https://3.bp.blogspot.com/--rSY969P-p8/WDMUPEWYpZI/AAAAAAAAB0E/K1RZWCYIbhgqpWBlotIScIcgvW0Z-836gCLcB/s640/title.png)
(https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-a2ou8bxq-8w/WDMUTnCf6fI/AAAAAAAAB0I/kwmSJ5UZFmAPtSxsS_fiV1v3VIMP2fyOACLcB/s1600/Khabr%2Bal%2BWahid%2Bis%2Bnot%2Baccepted%2Bwhen%2Bcontradicts%2Baql%2Bor%2BQuran%2Bor%2Bthe%2Bknown%2BSunnah%2B%2528Al%2BKifayah%2BKhatib%2BBaghdadi%2529.bmp)

Notice Khatib al Baghdadi said that a Solitary Report cannot even be accepted if it clashes with the intellect. And you are saying it is binding upon the Muslims to accept the saying of a Sahabi that Eisa عليه السلام ascended into Heaven in his Jasad from the Mount of Olives?

Regardless of his Manhaj, which I'm not aware of, I was quoting the statements from his book which were from classical scholars and there are plenty. And if you aren't aware then you must know that, we have taken ahadeeth from Khawarij, as well as Shias, who were upright, the examples of such can also be found in Sahih Bukhari.

Secondly, as for accepting Ahad reports, then I suggest you to read the book of Shiekh Albani, The Hadith Is Proof Itself in Belief & Laws: Chapter 3 :Ahad Hadiths Must he Accepted in Matters of 'Aqeedah]

Ash-Shafi'i also said: "If anyone is permitted to say that all Muslims, of old an new, have agreed to accept the Ahad Khabar and adhere by it, saying that there is not a Muslim scholar who did not accept of it (Ahad Khabar), I will be that person. However, I say: 'I do not know of any Muslim scholar who disagreed on the matter of accepting the Ahad Khabar'". [The Hadith Is Proof Itself in Belief & Laws by Shaykh Nasir A-Deen Al-Albaanee, page 31]

http://l.b5z.net/i/u/6103974/f/The_Hadith_Is_Proof_Itself_in_Belief___Laws_by_Sheikh_Nasr_Al_Deen_Albani.pdf


Quote
It is so evident all these sayings are based upon the Israeeliyyat, which are themselves contradictory and hearsay. In fact these Israaeeliyyat are based on Arab misunderstanding of the New Testament. It is from there that this doctrine originates:

So then after the Lord had spoken unto them, he was received up into heaven, and sat on the right hand of God. (Mark 16:19)

And it came to pass, while he blessed them, he was parted from them, and carried up into heaven. (Luke 24:51)

And this became part of the Nicene Creed: "He ascended into heaven and is seated at the right hand of the Father"

So now we see where this belief originates from. It has no basis in Quran and Sunna. In fact, even these verses from the New Testament are not explicit in saying he was raised up in his earthen body.
The belief Muslims formed was based on verses of Quran, and Mutawattir Marfoo ahadeeth about descend of Isa(as). As I explained to you in previous verses that people who die will come out from their graves, but Isa(as) was to descend, which in itself is a proof that he didn't die.

In fact, Ibn Hajar said:
فَلَيْسَ بَيْن عِيسَى وَبَيْن نَبِيّنَا صَلَّى اللَّه عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ نَبِيّ غَيْره وَلَيْسَ لَهُ قَبْر
there was no Prophet between Jesus (PBUH) and our Prophet [Muhammad], on whom peace and blessings of Allah and Jesus (PBUH) has no grave. (Fath Al-Baari 2/160, Kitabul Salaah).

Quote
Next you say I only brought the Tawtheeq of Ajlah b. Abd Allah from contemporary Muhadditheen:[/size][/font]
I was well aware, of those Mutaqaddimeen, who gave him tawtheeq, but as per the rule of Jarh wa tadeel, Jarh Mufassar take precedence over Tadeel. Even those that strengthened him didn’t strengthen him completely. For example, Yaqoub bin Sufyan Al-Fasawi, who made tawtheeq of him said that his hadith is soft. Ibn Ma’een, who referred to him as a thiqa, used other wordings like salih and la ba’asa bihi, implying that he isn’t a top tier narrator. Ibn Adi also referred to him as a shi’ee. Regardless, the majority of the classical scholars have weakened him, as I quoted.

Shaikh Muqbil bin Haadee al-Waadi'ee was asked, "When both Jarh and Ta'deel are combined in a person, then which of them is given precedence?"

He replied, "When the Jarh is Mufassar, it is given precedence. However, it is desireable to look at the criticiser (Jaarih), is he one of those that can be relied upon, such as Yahyaa bin Ma'een, Bukhaaree, Ahmad bin Hanbal, Yahyaa al-Qattaan, Abdur-Rahmaan bin Mahdee, Abu Zur'ah and Abu Haatim, so if he is of this type, then it is accepted and it is a Jarh Mufassar. And al-Jarh al-Mufassar is like when someone says, "He errs", "he has errors", "munkar ul-hadeeth", "kadhdhaab", "matrook" All of this is Jarh Mufassar. Similarly, "Da'eef Jiddan". So the likes of this Jarh Mufassar is given precedence over ta'deel." (Ijaabat us-Saa'il Alaa Ahammil-Masaail p.497, Dar ul-Hadeeth, Dammaaj) .

In case of Ajlah, we have example of how he changed or added his own wordings to the text of some other Hadeeths, like in one hadeeth he added the words "Min ba'adi" in Man kuntu Mawla hadeeth, which goes against the hadeeth reported by Thiqaat. Hence undoubtedly the odd narration which you quoted from Hassan(ra) is undoubtedly Munkar.

And since you were keen to declare Ajlah as Sadooq, then I explained that,  Sadooq, which means someone who was 'aadil but his dhabt is not well established, when he alone narrates a report from some famous Muhaddith, then it is counted among Munkar, in many cases.

Imam al-Dhahabi said:

 الذهبي : وهو ما انفرد الراوي الضعيفُ به. وقد يُعَدُّ مُفْرَدُ الصَّدُوقِ منكَراً.
(Al-Mawqiza fi ilm Mustalah al-hadeeth, by Imam Dhahabi) 

Jazak Allah khairan akhee Farid.
Quote
I would just like to respond to this here, since it seems like there are some exaggerations in the above that should be pointed out. Firstly, brother Noor has correctly pointed out that numerous early scholars weakened Al-Ajlah.

From the sixteen mentioned in the list above, only ten are early scholars. The rest are not.
Also, I would like to point out that some of these claims of strengthening are not claims at all. For example, Ibn Abi Khaythama quoting Yahya bin Ma'een's tawtheeq, is incorrectly used to point out that Ibn Abi Khaythama is also upon that view. This is inaccurate.

The same can be said about Abu Awana who simply quoted an alternative route to the hadith in Saheeh Muslim. This can barely be used as evidence for the reliability of Al-Ajlah.

Another example of an inaccuracy is what has been attributed to Al-Tirmithi. The narration that he reports is not a sole report, which is why Al-Tirmithi does not refer to it as ghareeb. The tradition can also be found elsewhere with supplementary chains. Instead we find him in Manaqib Ali stating that there is a hadith that was solely narrated by Al-Ajlah, which he refers to as “Hasanun Ghareeb”, instead of Saheeh.

Overall, it seems like most of those that have regarded Al-Ajlah as reliable, did not feel that he was at the level of the thiqaat. This can be seen in the comments of Ya’qoub bin Sufyan, who mentioned that he has some weakness, as well as Ibn Shaheen and Ibn Adi. The same is said about Yahya bin Ma’een in one of his quotes by Al-Duri. The same can be said about Al-Hakim (7037) who says that Al-Ajlah is “not matrook,” instead of saying, “he is thiqa.”

This leaves us with two remaining tawtheeqaat. The first is Shu’ba’s tawtheeq, which isn’t really tawtheeq, but can be used as a qareena of the reliability of Al-Ajlah. The second is that of Al-Ijli, who is infamous for his lenience.

In other words, the most that can be said about him, based on the positive statements, is that he is at the level of a hasan narrator. However, if you place these within the context of those that have weakened him, you would realize that he is closer to weakness than to strength. Add onto that the very specific criticisms that are directed to him by those like Al-Uqaili, who has pointed out his mistakes in hadith by inaccurately reporting names, and this takes precedence over tawtheeqaat as all hadithists know.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Noor-us-Sunnah on July 11, 2017, 06:45:34 PM
IJMA OF UMMAH was described by a classical scholar about Isa(as) beiing alive in heaven and about his descend.

Ibn Athiya (died in 542 From Hijraa explained in his tafseer “Al Muharrar Al Wajiz”
أجمعت الأمة على ما تضمنه الحديث المتواتر من أن عيسى في السماء حي، وأنه سينزل في آخر الزمان فيقتل الخنزير ويكسر الصليب ويقتل الدجال ويفيض العدل وتظهر به الملة – ملة محمد صلى الله عليه وسلم – ويحج البيت …
(IJMA UMMAH)All muslim agree to have faith upon the content of hadith mutawatir (from plenty of valid chain of narrations) that Prophet Isa is still alive in heaven. He will descend at end of time, kill the hogs, break the cross, kill Dajjal, impose justice, and the religion of Muhammad will win over it’s enemies with his lead, and he also perform hajj…” (Al-Muharrar Al-Wajiz, 3:143)

One person Ibn Atiyya is claiming Ijma and you are taking 1 person's saying as evidence of an Ijma? Do you even know what Ijma is? And you are claiming that all Muslims agree?

(i). Ibn Hajar Asqalani(d. 852 H) said:
وأما رفع عيسى فاتفق أصحاب الأخبار والتفسير على أنه رفع ببدنه حيا وإنما اختلفوا هل مات قبل أن يرفع أو نام فرفع
Regarding the Ascend of Isa(as), there is an agreement between Muhadditeen and Mufassireen that he was raised alive with body. However there is a disagreement that whether before ascend he was given death(for a small time) or he was raised while he was asleep.
(talkheer al Habeer, vol 3, page 214).
http://islamport.com/d/1/krj/1/57/665.html


(ii). Imam Abu al-hassan al-Ashari(d. 324 H) said:
وأجمعت الأمة على أن الله عز وجل رفع عيسى إلى السماء
There is an Ijma al-Ummah that Allah(swt) raised Isa(as) to heaven.
(Al Ibanah fi usool al diyanah, page 222)
[ You are not allowed to view attachments ]

(iii). Imam Ahmed Ibn Taymiyyhah(d 728 H) said, quoted again what Abu al-Hassan al-Ashari said.
[ You are not allowed to view attachments ](Bayan Talbis Jahamiyyah, vol 4, page 457)



You quoted Ali Hujweri.
Quote
Quote
Personal views of Sufis when they contradict view of Sahabi, they are rejected.
still your so called "Ijma" is further broken.
You quoted Ali Hujweri, I don't think he supports your agenda. He seems to be having different views.

Syed Ali Hajveri (commonly referred to as Daata Ganj Bakhsh), the famous saint buried in Lahore wrote the following in his well known treatise;

"It is related in genuine Traditions that Jesus, son of Mary --God bless him!-- was wearing a muraqqa'a (i.e. patched cloak) when he was taken up to heaven."

(Kashf al-Mahjub, Translation by Prof. Renald A. Nicholson, Zia-ul-Quran Publications, Lahore 2001 p.50)

[ You are not allowed to view attachments ]

[ You are not allowed to view attachments ]
So you see, Alli Hujweri believes that Isa(As) was taken up to heaven, he was wearing a patched cloak, which obviously means he was raised with body. Hence for the quote you brought from him about Isa(As) and other Prophet(Saws) meeting with prophet(saws) on Meraj, in the form of souls, doesn't clearly establishes that he believes in death of Isa(As), since we know of he fact that Allah can take away our soul without us being dead. So unless you bring any categorical quote from him, that he believes Isa(as) is dead, until then your claim gets discarded.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 14, 2017, 07:39:17 AM
Regarding the claim of Ijmaa, the great Sunni Islam Ahmad b. Hanbal رحمة الله عليه said:

وقال عبد الله بن أحمد بن حنبل : سمعت أبي يقول : ما يدعي فيه الرجل الإجماع فهو كذب ، من ادعى الإجماع فهو كاذب


and also from Imam ash-Shafi'iee رحمة الله عليه

وقد كذب أحمد من ادعى هذا الإجماع ، ولم يسغ تقديمه على الحديث الثابت ، وكذلك الشافعي أيضا نص في رسالته الجديدة على أن ما لا يعلم فيه بخلاف لا يقال له إجماع ، ولفظه : ما لا يعلم فيه خلاف فليس إجماعا


I'laam al Muwaqi'een (http://library.islamweb.net/newlibrary/display_book.php?idfrom=10&idto=10&bk_no=34&ID=11) of Ibn Qayyim al Jawziyya

Now that I have demonstrated that there isn't a single Marfoo Hadith which explicitly states that sayyidina Eesaa عليه السلام was raised up to Heaven in his Jasad. The Qur'aan al Kareem says Allah raised Eesaa up to Himself (no mention of Heaven or body). The Ahadeeth mention that sayyidina Eesaa عليه السلام will descend to the East of Damascus but there is no mention of him having been raised up to the Heavens in his Jasad. So on what basis is the claim of Ijmaa derived. Such a claim of Ijmaa must be dismissed as a lie according to Imam Ahmad.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 14, 2017, 07:43:07 AM
Concerning the use of Khabr ul Waahid to establish something with certainty, Imam al-Sarakhasi denied this because of the possibility of a mistake by a narrator.

(https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-LWLfUzSZNwU/WWdbmEIWeyI/AAAAAAAACh0/osRTybvK-0YgKyoGnwOW7o7kv7e8NLjjgCLcBGAs/s1600/title.png)

(https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-RKE8Z_d1ZJU/WWdbpD0gXGI/AAAAAAAACh4/egu0BnXa2voER9BK64FswbfLabLPzf65wCLcBGAs/s1600/Khabr%2Bal%2BWalid%2Bdoes%2Bnot%2Bnecessitate%2Bknowledge%2Bof%2Bcertainty%2B%2528Usul%2Bal%2BSarkhsi%2Bp.112%2529.bmp)

(https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-MDi5dyG4k6A/WWdbp_iITrI/AAAAAAAACh8/M-E2aNlWYd4Hw5slYf482WPmjn15SydpgCLcBGAs/s1600/Khabr%2Bal%2BWalid%2Bdoes%2Bnot%2Bnecessitate%2Bknowledge%2Bof%2Bcertainty%2B%2528Usul%2Bal%2BSarkhsi%2Bp.321%2B-%2B333%2529.bmp])
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 14, 2017, 07:51:30 AM

(i). Ibn Hajar Asqalani(d. 852 H) said:
وأما رفع عيسى فاتفق أصحاب الأخبار والتفسير على أنه رفع ببدنه حيا وإنما اختلفوا هل مات قبل أن يرفع أو نام فرفع
Regarding the Ascend of Isa(as), there is an agreement between Muhadditeen and Mufassireen that he was raised alive with body. However there is a disagreement that whether before ascend he was given death(for a small time) or he was raised while he was asleep.
(talkheer al Habeer, vol 3, page 214).
http://islamport.com/d/1/krj/1/57/665.html

This statement is manifestly contradictory. How can there be Ijmaa that Eesaa عليه السلام was raised up to the Heaven in his body when there is disagreement over whether or not he was raised up while in a state of sleep; when the Qur'aan al-Kareem clearly states that sleep is a state in which Allaah takes away the soul (not the body). The body remains behind in the Earth, while the soul is taken. It is the coming out of the soul from the body which makes the body "asleep". So it doesn't make sense to say Eesaa عليه السلام fell asleep while his soul was still in his body as it was being raised up to the Heavens.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 14, 2017, 08:12:45 AM
You have misunderstood the example brother gave whom i quoted. What he is trying to imply is that the meaning of a "verb" could be different, if a scenario changes. When Julius Caesar used the verb, he meant it to be literal, whereas when someone who is successful in debates uses it, then it is metaphorical.

The verb "conquered" is meant in its literal sense in both examples you gave. Keep in mind I am only arguing this point to make you understand. Otherwise I could easily have said that whatever Julius Caesar said was obviously not in English but in Latin; and furthermore, what someone might say isn't a proof when we are talking about something from Qur'aan and Sunnah which is in Arabic and based on Arabic language principles.

Nevertheless, simply taking the example you gave, which is not altogether without flaw in analogizing it with Quraan and Sunnah, it is still a fact that "conquered" as used in both examples is upon its literal meaning "to overcome by force; subdue; to gain, win, or obtain by effort, personal appeal, etc. to gain a victory over; surmount; master; overcome"

This general agreed upon meaning of "conquer" is the same when applied to both someone who conquers by force of arms, and someone who conquers and subdues his opponent in verbal argumentation. In both cases the essential meaning of "conquer" (to subdue, overcome, and gain victory over) remains the same.


Quote
When Prophet(saws) will use the words of Isa(As) will say: "I dwelt among them when Thou didst take me up" it is to imply unawareness and absence in common between Isa(as) and Prophet(saws).

Since you defined Tawaffaa as "take away in full (body and soul)" you are therefore contradicting yourself when saying that this meaning of Tawaffaa can be applied equally to both Eesaa عليه السلام and the Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم.
It is only when we say that Tawaffaa, as applied to human being, means death can it be said that that meaning applies equally to both of them.


Quote
Let me give you an example for better understanding:

حَدَّثَنَا قُتَيْبَةُ بْنُ سَعِيدٍ، حَدَّثَنَا لَيْثٌ، ح وَحَدَّثَنَا مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ رُمْحِ بْنِ الْمُهَاجِرِ، أَخْبَرَنَا اللَّيْثُ، عَنْ أَبِي الزُّبَيْرِ، عَنْ سَعِيدِ بْنِ جُبَيْرٍ، وَعَنْ طَاوُسٍ، عَنِ ابْنِ عَبَّاسٍ، أَنَّهُ قَالَ كَانَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم يُعَلِّمُنَا التَّشَهُّدَ كَمَا يُعَلِّمُنَا السُّورَةَ مِنَ الْقُرْآنِ فَكَانَ يَقُولُ ‏ "‏ التَّحِيَّاتُ الْمُبَارَكَاتُ الصَّلَوَاتُ الطَّيِّبَاتُ لِلَّهِ السَّلاَمُ عَلَيْكَ أَيُّهَا النَّبِيُّ وَرَحْمَةُ اللَّهِ وَبَرَكَاتُهُ السَّلاَمُ عَلَيْنَا وَعَلَى عِبَادِ اللَّهِ الصَّالِحِينَ أَشْهَدُ أَنْ لاَ إِلَهَ إِلاَّ اللَّهُ وَأَشْهَدُ أَنَّ مُحَمَّدًا رَسُولُ اللَّهِ ‏"‏ ‏.‏ وَفِي رِوَايَةِ ابْنِ رُمْحٍ كَمَا يُعَلِّمُنَا الْقُرْآنَ ‏.
Ibn `Abbas reported: The Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) used to teach us tashahhud just as he used to teach us a Surah of the Qur'an, and he would say: All services rendered by words, acts of worship, and all good things are due to Allah. Peace be upon you, O Prophet, and Allah's mercy and blessings. Peace be upon us and upon Allah's upright servants. I testify that there is no god but Allah, and I testify that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah. In the narration of Ibn Rumh (the words are): "As he would teach us the Qur'an." [Sahih Muslim 403 a].

In tashahhud,  we say “al-salaamu ‘alayka ayyhu’l-nabiyyu (peace be upon you, O Prophet)”,  even though Prophet(saws) died, and this was also the practise of Majority of Sahaba, we do it in a traditional sense, even though Prophet(saws) died. Likewise Prophet(saws) would use the words of Quran, without changing it in a traditional sense, where in the essence would be unawareness and absence in common between him(saws) and Isa(as).

This argument is very weak. You are implying that the only reason we say As salaamu alayka ayyuhan Nabiyyu wa Rahmatullaahi wa Barakaatuhu before Tashahhud is because that is how the Prophet taught it while he was alive; otherwise this wording after his death doesn't make sense and the only reason we repeat it is out of "tradition".

But I dispute this premise that addressing someone after death is "meaningless", especially when we know that the Angels convey our greetings to the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم. Why do we recite this when we visit the cemetery:

السَّلامُ عَلَيْكُمْ أَهْلَ الدِّيَارِ مِنَ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ وَالْمُسْلِمِينَ ، وَإِنَّا إِنْ شَاءَ اللهُ بِكُمْ لَلَاحِقُونَ ، نَسْأَلُ اللهَ لَنَا وَلَكُمُ الْعَافِيَةَ
"Peace be upon you people of the abodes from among the believers and Muslims..."

Do we recite this merely out of "tradition" too? Here we are addressing those that are deceased:

السَّلامُ عَلَيْكُمْ يا أَهْلَ القُبُورِ ، يَغْفِرُ اللَّهُ لَنا وَلَكُمْ
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Noor-us-Sunnah on July 14, 2017, 11:53:26 AM
An authentic Hadith from the Mu'jam al-Kabir of Imam Tabarani
http://islamsalvationfromhell.blogspot.ca/2015/10/authentic-hadith-proves-that-messiah-as.html


حَدَّثَنَا عَلِيُّ بْنُ عَبْدِ الْعَزِيزِ ، ثنا أَبُو نُعَيْمٍ ، ثنا كَامِلُ أَبُو الْعَلاءِ ، قَالَ : سَمِعْتُ حَبِيبَ بْنَ أَبِي ثَابِتٍ ، يُحَدِّثُ ، عَنْ يَحْيَى بْنِ جَعْدَةَ ، عَنْ زَيْدِ بْنِ أَرْقَمَ ، قَالَ : خَرَجْنَا مَعَ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ حَتَّى انْتَهَيْنَا إِلَى غَدِيرِ خُمٍّ أَمَرَ بِدُوحٍ ، فَكُسِحَ فِي يَوْمٍ مَا أَتَى عَلَيْنَا يَوْمٌ كَانَ أَشَدَّ حُرًّا مِنْهُ ، فَحَمِدَ اللَّهَ وَأَثْنَى عَلَيْهِ ، وَقَالَ : " يَا أَيُّهَا النَّاسُ ، إِنَّهُ لَمْ يُبْعَثْ نَبِيٌّ قَطُّ إِلا عَاشَ نِصْفَ مَا عَاشَ الَّذِي كَانَ قَبْلَهُ ، وَإِنِّي أُوشِكُ أَنْ أُدْعَى فَأُجِيبَ ، وَإِنِّي تَارِكٌ فِيكُمْ مَا لَنْ تَضِلُّوا بَعْدَهُ كِتَابَ اللَّهِ " ، ثُمَّ قَامَ وَأَخَذَ بِيَدِ عَلِيٍّ رَضِيَ اللَّهُ تَعَالَى عَنْهُ ، فَقَالَ : " يَا أَيُّهَا النَّاسُ مَنْ أَوْلَى بِكُمْ مِنْ أَنْفُسِكُمْ ؟ " قَالُوا : اللَّهُ وَرَسُولُهُ أَعْلَمُ ، قَالَ : " مَنْ كُنْتُ مَوْلاهُ فَعَلِيٌّ مَوْلاهُ "

"No Prophet is sent except that he lives for half the lifetime of the one who was before him."

The inference here is that Jesus of Nazareth lived for about 120 years, and the Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم who proceeded him lived for about 60 years.

(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-bdAd-wz8Ne8/Vij7KQtqqRI/AAAAAAAABTY/cNrq70gF8gw/s1600/title.bmp)

(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-w7pHNeCH1Zo/Vij7QWxKu3I/AAAAAAAABTg/cll6qlnNNiQ/s1600/There%2Bwas%2Bno%2BProphet%2Bexcept%2Bthat%2Bhe%2Blived%2Bto%2Bhalf%2Bthe%2Bage%2Bof%2Bthe%2BProphet%2Bwho%2Bpreceded%2Bhim%2B%2528Mujam%2Bal%2BKabir%2Bno.4986%2Bv.5%2Bp.172%2529.bmp)

(https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-bN972B2pjtQ/WWL84BLPB-I/AAAAAAAAChM/uvOc3Cw7Wvo3KL_ZwOz3hY1G8OFCcdG1ACLcBGAs/s1600/There%2Bwas%2Bno%2BProphet%2Bexcept%2Bthat%2Bhe%2Blived%2Bto%2Bhalf%2Bthe%2Bage%2Bof%2Bthe%2BProphet%2Bwho%2Bpreceded%2Bhim%2B%2528Mujam%2Bal%2BKabir%2Bno.4971%2Bv.5%2Bp.167%2529.bmp)

Al-Albani declared it weak in Silsila al-daeefa #4961.

وأقول : وهو كما قالا ؛ لولا عنعنة حبيب .
على أن كاملا أبا العلاء - وإن كان من رجال مسلم - ؛ ففي حفظه ضعف ، كما أشار إلى ذلك الحافظ بقوله :
"صدوق يخطىء" .

http://islamport.com/d/1/alb/1/25/347.html

[ You are not allowed to view attachments ]
The narrator Habeeb bin Abi Thabit is a Mudallis and he narrates with Anan, also narrator Kamil Abi al-ala'a has some weakness in him.
[ You are not allowed to view attachments ]

Quote
And here is a supportive narration:
 أَنَّ جِبْرِيلَ كَانَ يُعَارِضُهُ بِالْقُرْآنِ فِي كُلِّ عَامٍ مَرَّةً ، وَأَنَّهُ عَارَضَنِي بِالْقُرْآنِ الْعَامَ مَرَّتَيْنِ وَأَخْبَرَنِي أَنَّهُ لَمْ يَكُنْ نَبِيٌّ كَانَ بَعْدَهُ نَبِيٌّ إِلا عَاشَ بَعْدَهُ نِصْفَ عُمُرِ الَّذِي كَانَ قَبْلَهُ ، وَأَخْبَرَنِي أَنَّ عِيسَى ابْنَ مَرْيَمَ عَلَيْهِ السَّلامُ عَاشَ عِشْرِينَ وَمِائَةَ سَنَةٍ ، فَلا أَرَانِي إِلا ذَاهِبًا عَلَى رَأْسِ السِّتِّينَ " ,
Angel Gabriel came every years to review the Quran with the Prophet. But he came this year to review it twice, and he said: "No Prophet comes after a Prophet except that he lives for half of his lifetime of the one who came before him." And I was told that Jesus son of Mary peace be upon him lived for 120 years, so I think I will live for 60 years."
(Al-Aahad wal Mathani of Ibn Abi Aasim; Dala'il al-Nubuwwah of Baihaqi)[/size][/font]

Even this hadeeth was weakened by al-Albani in Silsila a-daeefa #4434 due to weakness of narrator Muhammad bin Abdillah bin Amr bin Uthman.

قلت : وهذا إسناد فيه ضعف ؛ محمد بن عبدالله هذا ؛ قال الذهبي :
"وثقه النسائي ، وقال مرة : ليس بالقوي . وقال البخاري : لا يكاد يتابع في حديثه"
http://islamport.com/d/1/alb/1/25/338.html

[ You are not allowed to view attachments ]
Scholars of Ahlus-sunnah have declared this report weak due to the fact that it comes via weak chains, moreover this part wasn't narrated by the reliable narrators, as the narration about this event was narrated in a lengthy narration present in Sahihayn[Bukhari & Muslim] from Ayesha(ra). Hence it is Munkar.

Moreover, this narration even contradicts other authentic ahadeeth such as we know that, Adam(as) lived for 940 years and the Prophet Nuh(as) who succeed him out lived him, by reaching an age of 950 years.  Likewise Dawood(as) loved for 100 years, so how could someone who succeeded Dawood(as) like more than him? Hence the part of hadeeth you are using to prove age of Isa(as) is Munkar.

Abu Hurairah narrated that the Messenger of Allah said: “When Allah created Adam, He breathed the soul into him, then he sneezed and said: ‘All praise is due to Allah.’ So he praised Allah by His permission. Then His Lord said to him: ‘May Allah have mercy upon you O Adam. Go to those angels – to that gathering of them sitting – so say: “As-Salamu Alaikas-Salamu, Wa Rahmatullah’ Then he returned to his Lord, He said: ‘This is your greeting and the greeting of your children among each other.’ Then Allah said to him – while His Two Hands were closed – ‘Choose which of them you wish.’ He said: ‘I chose the right My Lord and both of the Hands of my Lord are right, blessed.’ Then He extended it, and there was Adam and his offspring in it.’ So he said: ‘What are these O my Lord?’ He said: ‘These are your offspring?’ Each one of them had his age written between his eyes. But among them there was a man who was the most illuminating of them – or among the most illuminated of them. He said: ‘O Lord! Who is this?’ He said: ‘This is your son Dawud, I wrote forty years for him.’ He said: ‘O Lord! Add to his age.’ He said: ‘That is what I have written for him.’ He said: ‘O Lord! Give him sixty of my years.’ He said: ‘So you shall have it.’” He said: “Then, he resided in Paradise as long as Allah willed, then he was cast from it, so Adam was counting for himself.” He said: “So the Angel of death came to him, and Adam said to him: ‘You are hasty, one-thousand years were written for me.’ He said: ‘Of course! But you gave sixty years to your son Dawud.’ So he rejected, and his offspring rejected, and he forgot, and his offspring forgot.” He said: “So ever since that day, what is written and witnessed has been decreed.” [Jami at-Tirmidhi, Book 47, Hadith 3694. Grading: Hasan]

[ You are not allowed to view attachments ]
Moreover, According to the principle of diraya (i.e. rationality) as well, this narration is not acceptable. The narration gives the notion as if every Prophet lives half the age of the Prophet immediately before him. This cannot be true and thus can never be uttered by the Noble and Truthful Prophet(saws). If Jesus(saws) lived for 120 years then John the Baptist (Yahya A.S.) should have lived for 240 years but he lived less then the period Isa(as) remained on Earth. Moreover following this cycle we have to believe that Adam (PBUH) perhaps lived millions of years which is not true, as he lived for 940 years.

Ibn Asaakir after quoting different narrations says:
كذا في هاتين الروايتين والصحيح أن عيسى لم يبلغ هذا العمر
“It’s like that in these two narrations [about 120 and 150 years] and the truth is that Jesus (PBUH) did not reach this age.”
(Tarikh Damishq 47/482).

Hence the hadeeth you used is Munkar.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 14, 2017, 02:15:50 PM
The narrator Habeeb bin Abi Thabit is a Mudallis and he narrates with Anan, also narrator Kamil Abi al-ala'a has some weakness in him.


حَبِيبَ بْنَ أَبِي ثَابِتٍ ، يُحَدِّثُ ، عَنْ يَحْيَى بْنِ جَعْدَةَ

As you can see, in this Hadith, Habeeb b. Abi Thaabit is not narrating an'an:

"Yuhaddithu 'An Yahyaa"

As for Kaamil b. al-Alaa, although Ibn Hajar said he is Saduq who makes mistakes, in the edited corrections (Tahreer Taqreeb ut Tahdheeb of Bashaar Awaad Ma'roof and Shaykh Shu'ayb Arnaut) the narrator Kaamil b. al-Alaa is declared as "Sadooq, Hasan al Hadeeth"


(https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-H8FUUogdwNU/WWinN1JlVSI/AAAAAAAACiU/Orh4XRDpOAckgTRuTGXL6-QNX1-JwZSbwCLcBGAs/s640/title.png)

(https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-M8tJ3tiUOgQ/WWinSXkBQFI/AAAAAAAACiY/TyGKY5l0Kkk0EWHafgFYFJgMkMLb67IuQCLcBGAs/s1600/Editted%2BTaqreeb%2But%2BTahdheeb.%2BKaamil%2Bb.%2Bal%2BAlaa%2Bis%2BSaduq%2BHasan%2Bal%2BHadith%2B%2528v.3%2Bp.191%2529.png)
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Farid on July 14, 2017, 03:24:58 PM
Every beginner in ilm al hadeeth knows that what you have mentioned above is not al tasreeh bil sama'a.

It was a narrator that came after Habeeb that said "yuhadithu" (he narrated).

I don't know if you are purposefully being deceptive again ya "Abdul Qadir Al Salafi" or if you simply lost the ability to understand Arabic sentence structures and hadith basics all of a sudden.

My fuse is short and I will not tolerate deception from those that attempts to promote a dog that falsely claimed to be a prophet.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 14, 2017, 03:55:03 PM
Who is narrating after Habib b. Abi Thabit and saying YuHaddithu?
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 14, 2017, 07:15:10 PM
Another point regarding your claim that there is Ijmaa that sayyidina Eesaa عليه السلام was raised to Heaven in his Jasad. Ijmaa is something that is Muzhir مظهر and not Muthbit مثبت. This means, one cannot derive any ruling of the Shari'a or any creed of Islam from the Ijmaa in its essence في نفسه. Ijmaa only serves to strengthen and manifest a ruling of the Shari'a or creed of Islam which already has a basis in the Qur'aan and Sunnah. Since there isn't a single Ayah or the Quraan nor a single Hadith of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم which explicitly states that sayyidina Eesaa عليه السلام was raised up into Heaven in his Jasad, therefore the claim of Ijmaa is patently false. Such a belief is certainly not established through Qatee ath-Thaboot or Qatee ad-Dalalah.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Noor-us-Sunnah on July 14, 2017, 07:34:58 PM
You have misunderstood the example brother gave whom i quoted. What he is trying to imply is that the meaning of a "verb" could be different, if a scenario changes. When Julius Caesar used the verb, he meant it to be literal, whereas when someone who is successful in debates uses it, then it is metaphorical.

The verb "conquered" is meant in its literal sense in both examples you gave. Keep in mind I am only arguing this point to make you understand. Otherwise I could easily have said that whatever Julius Caesar said was obviously not in English but in Latin; and furthermore, what someone might say isn't a proof when we are talking about something from Qur'aan and Sunnah which is in Arabic and based on Arabic language principles.

Nevertheless, simply taking the example you gave, which is not altogether without flaw in analogizing it with Quraan and Sunnah, it is still a fact that "conquered" as used in both examples is upon its literal meaning "to overcome by force; subdue; to gain, win, or obtain by effort, personal appeal, etc. to gain a victory over; surmount; master; overcome"

This general agreed upon meaning of "conquer" is the same when applied to both someone who conquers by force of arms, and someone who conquers and subdues his opponent in verbal argumentation. In both cases the essential meaning of "conquer" (to subdue, overcome, and gain victory over) remains the same.

You started running in circles brother, and this happens when you act stubbornly and refuse to accept the truth. This is what the brother whom I quoted was trying to explain to you, that the "CONTEXT AND IMPLICATIONS" of the word are not parallel. The different meanings for the word conquer which you brought shows that some implications of conquer are physical/literal, while some are not. I believe the readers are wise enough to understand this simple logic.


Quote
When Prophet(saws) will use the words of Isa(As) will say: "I dwelt among them when Thou didst take me up" it is to imply unawareness and absence in common between Isa(as) and Prophet(saws).

Since you defined Tawaffaa as "take away in full (body and soul)" you are therefore contradicting yourself when saying that this meaning of Tawaffaa can be applied equally to both Eesaa عليه السلام and the Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم.
It is only when we say that Tawaffaa, as applied to human being, means death can it be said that that meaning applies equally to both of them.
This argument  was answer in the initial post, let me re-quote it for the benefit of readers.

It is NOT necessary that ‘tawaffaitani’ means the same everywhere. According to linguists and scholars e.g. Abu Al-Baqa and Ibn Taymiya ‘tawaffa‘ has various meanings i.e. 1) To take in full, 2) Sleep and 3) Death.

I know you disagree, but self made rules or rather theories have no value at all in our view.


This argument is very weak. You are implying that the only reason we say As salaamu alayka ayyuhan Nabiyyu wa Rahmatullaahi wa Barakaatuhu before Tashahhud is because that is how the Prophet taught it while he was alive; otherwise this wording after his death doesn't make sense and the only reason we repeat it is out of "tradition".

But I dispute this premise that addressing someone after death is "meaningless", especially when we know that the Angels convey our greetings to the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم.
The evidence for what I said, comes from the hadeeth of Abdullah ibn Masood(ra) and Abdullah ibn Umar(ra). The hadeeth of Abdullah ibn Masood is quite clear that after the death of Prophet(saws) he changed the wording, it was his ijtihad, but the point which I want to make out of this is that, he knew very well that angels convey our "salaam" to Prophet(saws), but since they knew usage of arabic terms better than you, he chose to change it after death of Prophet(saws), but we don't do it because we recite it in a traditional way, as it was the practice of majority of Sahaba.

حَدَّثَنَا أَبُو نُعَيْمٍ، حَدَّثَنَا سَيْفٌ، قَالَ سَمِعْتُ مُجَاهِدًا، يَقُولُ حَدَّثَنِي عَبْدُ اللَّهِ بْنُ سَخْبَرَةَ أَبُو مَعْمَرٍ، قَالَ سَمِعْتُ ابْنَ مَسْعُودٍ، يَقُولُ عَلَّمَنِي رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم وَكَفِّي بَيْنَ كَفَّيْهِ التَّشَهُّدَ، كَمَا يُعَلِّمُنِي السُّورَةَ مِنَ الْقُرْآنِ التَّحِيَّاتُ لِلَّهِ وَالصَّلَوَاتُ وَالطَّيِّبَاتُ، السَّلاَمُ عَلَيْكَ أَيُّهَا النَّبِيُّ وَرَحْمَةُ اللَّهِ وَبَرَكَاتُهُ، السَّلاَمُ عَلَيْنَا وَعَلَى عِبَادِ اللَّهِ الصَّالِحِينَ، أَشْهَدُ أَنْ لاَ إِلَهَ إِلاَّ اللَّهُ وَأَشْهَدُ أَنَّ مُحَمَّدًا عَبْدُهُ وَرَسُولُهُ‏.‏ وَهْوَ بَيْنَ ظَهْرَانَيْنَا، فَلَمَّا قُبِضَ قُلْنَا السَّلاَمُ‏.‏ يَعْنِي عَلَى النَّبِيِّ صلى الله عليه وسلم‏.
Narrated Ibn Mas`ud: Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) taught me the Tashah-hud as he taught me a Sura from the Qur'an, while my hand was between his hands. (Tashah-hud was) all the best compliments and the prayers and the good things are for Allah. Peace and Allah's Mercy and Blessings be on you, O Prophet! Peace be on us and on the pious slaves of Allah, I testify that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah, and I also testify that Muhammad is Allah's slave and His Apostle. (We used to recite this in the prayer) during the lifetime of the Prophet (ﷺ) , but when he had died, we used to say, "Peace be on the Prophet."[Sahih al-Bukhari #6265]

وَحَدَّثَنِي عَنْ مَالِكٍ، عَنْ نَافِعٍ، أَنَّ عَبْدَ اللَّهِ بْنَ عُمَرَ، كَانَ يَتَشَهَّدُ فَيَقُولُ بِاسْمِ اللَّهِ التَّحِيَّاتُ لِلَّهِ الصَّلَوَاتُ لِلَّهِ الزَّاكِيَاتُ لِلَّهِ السَّلاَمُ عَلَى النَّبِيِّ وَرَحْمَةُ اللَّهِ وَبَرَكَاتُهُ السَّلاَمُ عَلَيْنَا وَعَلَى عِبَادِ اللَّهِ الصَّالِحِينَ شَهِدْتُ أَنْ لاَ إِلَهَ إِلاَّ اللَّهُ شَهِدْتُ أَنَّ مُحَمَّدًا رَسُولُ اللَّهِ ‏.‏ يَقُولُ هَذَا فِي الرَّكْعَتَيْنِ الأُولَيَيْنِ وَيَدْعُو إِذَا قَضَى تَشَهُّدَهُ بِمَا بَدَا لَهُ فَإِذَا جَلَسَ فِي آخِرِ صَلاَتِهِ تَشَهَّدَ كَذَلِكَ أَيْضًا إِلاَّ أَنَّهُ يُقَدِّمُ التَّشَهُّدَ ثُمَّ يَدْعُو بِمَا بَدَا لَهُ فَإِذَا قَضَى تَشَهُّدَهُ وَأَرَادَ أَنْ يُسَلِّمَ قَالَ السَّلاَمُ عَلَى النَّبِيِّ وَرَحْمَةُ اللَّهِ وَبَرَكَاتُهُ ‏.‏ السَّلاَمُ عَلَيْنَا وَعَلَى عِبَادِ اللَّهِ الصَّالِحِينَ السَّلاَمُ عَلَيْكُمْ عَنْ يَمِينِهِ ثُمَّ يَرُدُّ عَلَى الإِمَامِ فَإِنْ سَلَّمَ عَلَيْهِ أَحَدٌ عَنْ يَسَارِهِ رَدَّ عَلَيْهِ
Yahya related to me from Malik from Nafi that Abdullah ibn Umar used to say the tashahhud saying, "In the name of Allah. Greetings belong to Allah. Prayers belong to Allah. Pure actions belong to Allah. Peace be on the Prophet and the mercy of Allah and His blessings. Peace be on us and on the slaves of Allah who are salihun. I testify that there is no god except Allah. I testify that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah." "Bismillah, at-tahiyatu lillah, as-salawatu lillah, az-zakiyatu lillah. As-salamu ala'n-nabiyyi wa rahmatullahi wa barakatuhu. As-salamu alayna wa ala ibadi'llahi's-salihin. Shahidtu an la ilaha illallah. Shahidtu anna Muhammadu'r-rasulu'llah." He used to say this after the first two rakas and he would make supplication with whatever seemed fit to him when the tashahhud was completed. When he sat at the end of the prayer, he did the tashahhud in a similar manner, except that after the tashahhud he made supplication with whatever seemed fit to him. When he had completed the tashahhud and intended to say the taslim, he said, "Peace be on the Prophet and His mercy and blessings. Peace be upon us and on the slaves of Allah who are salihun." "As- salamu ala'n-nabiyyi wa rahmatu'llahi wa barakatuhu. As-salamu alayna wa ala ibadi'llahi'ssalihin ." He then said, "Peace be upon you" to his right, and would return the greeting to the imam, and if anyone said "Peace be upon you" from his left he would return the greeting to him. [Muwatta Malik, Book 3, Hadith 204]

Quote
Why do we recite this when we visit the cemetery:
السَّلامُ عَلَيْكُمْ أَهْلَ الدِّيَارِ مِنَ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ وَالْمُسْلِمِينَ ، وَإِنَّا إِنْ شَاءَ اللهُ بِكُمْ لَلَاحِقُونَ ، نَسْأَلُ اللهَ لَنَا وَلَكُمُ الْعَافِيَةَ
"Peace be upon you people of the abodes from among the believers and Muslims..."
Do we recite this merely out of "tradition" too? Here we are addressing those that are deceased:

السَّلامُ عَلَيْكُمْ يا أَهْلَ القُبُورِ ، يَغْفِرُ اللَّهُ لَنا وَلَكُمْ
This is the hadeeth you are talking about.

حَدَّثَنَا مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ عَبَّادِ بْنِ آدَمَ، حَدَّثَنَا أَبُو أَحْمَدَ، حَدَّثَنَا سُفْيَانُ، عَنْ عَلْقَمَةَ بْنِ مَرْثَدٍ، عَنْ سُلَيْمَانَ بْنِ بُرَيْدَةَ، عَنْ أَبِيهِ، قَالَ كَانَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ ـ صلى الله عليه وسلم ـ يُعَلِّمُهُمْ إِذَا خَرَجُوا إِلَى الْمَقَابِرِ كَانَ قَائِلُهُمْ يَقُولُ السَّلاَمُ عَلَيْكُمْ أَهْلَ الدِّيَارِ مِنَ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ وَالْمُسْلِمِينَ وَإِنَّا إِنْ شَاءَ اللَّهُ بِكُمْ لاَحِقُونَ نَسْأَلُ اللَّهَ لَنَا وَلَكُمُ الْعَافِيَةَ
It was narrated from Sulaiman bin Buraidah that his father said: “The Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) used to teach them, when they went out to the graveyard, to say: As-salamu ‘alaykum ahlad-diyar minal-mu’minina wal- muslimin, wa inna insha’ Allah bikum lahiqun, nas’alul-laha lana wa lakumul-‘afiyah (Peace be upon you, O inhabitants of the abodes, believers and Muslims, and we will join you soon if Allah wills. We ask Allah for well-being for us and for you).’” [Sunan Ibn Majah Book 6, Hadith 1614]

Well this is said, when we are present in graveyard, where the graves of the people are present before us, hence the address is with Khitaab, not with Ghayb. Whereas Prophet(saws) or his grave is Ghayb(absent), but when a person is present at the grave of Prophet(saws) then he has to convey "salaam" with Khitaab.

ابن عمر يقول : السلام عليك يا رسول الله ، السلام عليك يا أبا بكر ، السلام عليك يا أبتِ ، ثم ينصرف . صححه الحافظ ابن حجر
Ibn ‘Umar used to say, “Al-salaamu ‘alayka ya Rasool-Allaah, al-salaam ‘alayka ya Aba Bakr, al-salaamu ‘alayka ya abati (O my father),” then he would go away. This was classed as saheeh by al-Haafiz ibn Hajar.
https://islamqa.info/ar/34561

Notice, that the supplication taught by Prophet(Saws) was to be recited when a person visits a graveyard, it wasn't for the scenario wherein the graves are absent or a person is not near any grave.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Noor-us-Sunnah on July 14, 2017, 07:47:20 PM
Regarding the claim of Ijmaa, the great Sunni Islam Ahmad b. Hanbal رحمة الله عليه said:

وقال عبد الله بن أحمد بن حنبل : سمعت أبي يقول : ما يدعي فيه الرجل الإجماع فهو كذب ، من ادعى الإجماع فهو كاذب


and also from Imam ash-Shafi'iee رحمة الله عليه

وقد كذب أحمد من ادعى هذا الإجماع ، ولم يسغ تقديمه على الحديث الثابت ، وكذلك الشافعي أيضا نص في رسالته الجديدة على أن ما لا يعلم فيه بخلاف لا يقال له إجماع ، ولفظه : ما لا يعلم فيه خلاف فليس إجماعا


I'laam al Muwaqi'een (http://library.islamweb.net/newlibrary/display_book.php?idfrom=10&idto=10&bk_no=34&ID=11) of Ibn Qayyim al Jawziyya

Now that I have demonstrated that there isn't a single Marfoo Hadith which explicitly states that sayyidina Eesaa عليه السلام was raised up to Heaven in his Jasad. The Qur'aan al Kareem says Allah raised Eesaa up to Himself (no mention of Heaven or body). The Ahadeeth mention that sayyidina Eesaa عليه السلام will descend to the East of Damascus but there is no mention of him having been raised up to the Heavens in his Jasad. So on what basis is the claim of Ijmaa derived. Such a claim of Ijmaa must be dismissed as a lie according to Imam Ahmad.

The answer is quite simple, the scholars of Tafseer understood the verse of Quran to mean that Allah(swt) too Isa(as) in full, from which they understood to mean with body, and this was strengthened by supportive evidence such as the fact that, Isa(As) will descend from Heaven, whereas anyone who has died will come out of their graves as the Quran states, where as Marfoo hadeeth states Isa(as) will descend from heaven, this supportive evidence strengthens the understanding of Mufassireen who understood from Quran that Isa(as) was taken up by Allah in full.

So there you go, your weak criticism doesn't give a dent to the Ijma of the Ummah over the fact that Isa(as) is alive and he was raised too heaven.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 14, 2017, 08:13:47 PM
The different meanings for the word conquer which you brought shows that some implications of conquer are physical/literal, while some are not. I believe the readers are wise enough to understand this simple logic.

The meanings I brought from the English dictionary are all the literal and apparent meanings of the word conquer. In other words, "conquer" in its essence does not entail the meaning of conquest of land through force of arms, although that may be its primary usage. Conquer simply means to subdue, overcome, gain victory over. That is the literal and plain meaning of the word.

Quote
It is NOT necessary that ‘tawaffaitani’ means the same everywhere. According to linguists and scholars e.g. Abu Al-Baqa and Ibn Taymiya ‘tawaffa‘ has various meanings i.e. 1) To take in full, 2) Sleep and 3) Death.

When Tawaffa is applied to a human being, which is the object, and the subject is Allah or Angels, then the meaning is always, consistently, death or sleep. There is not a single example of "to take in full" that you can point to, especially when Allah Himself declares that Tawaffa when applied to the human soul only means death or sleep (Sura 39:42)

My challenge to you is can you give me an example from the Quran and Sunnah where Tawaffa, when applied to a human being (the object) means "to take in full"? Alhamdulillah, you will never be able to find such an example.

Then you earlier argued that Ibn Abbas recognised Tawaffa when applied to sayyidina Eesaa عليه السلام as meaning death, but believed his death will occur in the future, and that Rafa will take place before Wafah. So if Ibn Abbas رضى الله عنهما agreed that متوفّيك means مميتك and therefore فلما توفّيتني means فلما تميتني but this Wafah (Death) will occur in the future and has not happened yet, the question arises:

The context of Sura 5:116-117 makes it evident that the Christians began to worship Eesaa and his mother عليهما السلام after the Wafah of Eesaa عليه السلام. Now if this Wafaah will occur, according to Ibn Abbas, in the future and has not as of yet happened a major problem arises, which is that after the Nuzul of Eesaa عليه السلام and after he remains among us for 40 years than dies and is buried, the Christians will once again worship him and his mother as two gods besides Allah! And this contradicts the glad tidings given in the Quraan al Karim that Islam will subdue all other Religions, and this will happen at the hands of Eesaa عليه السلام in whose time all other religions will come to an end, specifically Christianity, since he will break the cross and slay the swine. And why would the Christians again worship Jesus when he comes back specifically to manifest the truth of the Islamic creed that he is not divine but merely a Messenger of Allah?



Quote
The evidence for what I said, comes from the hadeeth of Abdullah ibn Masood(ra) and Abdullah ibn Umar(ra). The hadeeth of Abdullah ibn Masood is quite clear that after the death of Prophet(saws) he changed the wording, it was his ijtihad, but the point which I want to make out of this is that, he knew very well that angels convey our "salaam" to Prophet(saws), but since they knew usage of arabic terms better than you, he chose to change it after death of Prophet(saws), but we don't do it because we recite it in a traditional way, as it was the practice of majority of Sahaba.

The question is do you have any proof that Sayyidina Ibn Mas'ud رضى الله عنه or any other Sahabi recited the Salawat and Salam upon the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم before the Tashahhud in Salat while they were not in his presence in his lifetime? This is the rational basis for rejecting the Ijtehad of Ibn Mas'ud in the first place. You said he knew very well that Angels convey our Salam to him, but that is an assumption on your part.

Quote
Well this is said, when we are present in graveyard, where the graves of the people are present before us, hence the address is with Khitaab, not with Ghayb. Whereas Prophet(saws) or his grave is Ghayb(absent), but when a person is present at the grave of Prophet(saws) then he has to convey "salaam" with Khitaab.
Notice, that the supplication taught by Prophet(Saws) was to be recited when a person visits a graveyard, it wasn't for the scenario wherein the graves are absent or a person is not near any grave.

Now here you have opened a whole other can of worms. You are putting forward an Aqida that I don't accept, i.e., you believe that the deceased are present in their graves. We believe that the deceased are not in this world, including in the cemetery. We further believe that the deceased cannot hear, whether from afar or in proximity of their graves. So when we invoke Salam with Khitaab upon the inmates of the Maqbara when we are inside the Maqbara, it is not because we believe the deceased can hear us since we are in proximity to their bones, rather, it means that the Angels are conveying our Salam to them. Therefore, I dispute your premise that in the Maqbara the deceased is Haadir. The deceased is Ghaa'ib whether in the Maqbara or far away from the Maqbara
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Noor-us-Sunnah on July 14, 2017, 08:32:01 PM
The narrator Habeeb bin Abi Thabit is a Mudallis and he narrates with Anan, also narrator Kamil Abi al-ala'a has some weakness in him.


حَبِيبَ بْنَ أَبِي ثَابِتٍ ، يُحَدِّثُ ، عَنْ يَحْيَى بْنِ جَعْدَةَ

As you can see, in this Hadith, Habeeb b. Abi Thaabit is not narrating an'an:

"Yuhaddithu 'An Yahyaa"

As for Kaamil b. al-Alaa, although Ibn Hajar said he is Saduq who makes mistakes, in the edited corrections (Tahreer Taqreeb ut Tahdheeb of Bashaar Awaad Ma'roof and Shaykh Shu'ayb Arnaut) the narrator Kaamil b. al-Alaa is declared as "Sadooq, Hasan al Hadeeth"


(https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-H8FUUogdwNU/WWinN1JlVSI/AAAAAAAACiU/Orh4XRDpOAckgTRuTGXL6-QNX1-JwZSbwCLcBGAs/s640/title.png)

(https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-M8tJ3tiUOgQ/WWinSXkBQFI/AAAAAAAACiY/TyGKY5l0Kkk0EWHafgFYFJgMkMLb67IuQCLcBGAs/s1600/Editted%2BTaqreeb%2But%2BTahdheeb.%2BKaamil%2Bb.%2Bal%2BAlaa%2Bis%2BSaduq%2BHasan%2Bal%2BHadith%2B%2528v.3%2Bp.191%2529.png)

Let me quote brother Farid, who exposed your Jahl.

Every beginner in ilm al hadeeth knows that what you have mentioned above is not al tasreeh bil sama'a.

It was a narrator that came after Habeeb that said "yuhadithu" (he narrated).


Who is narrating after Habib b. Abi Thabit and saying YuHaddithu?
حَدَّثَنَا عَلِيُّ بْنُ عَبْدِ الْعَزِيزِ ، ثنا أَبُو نُعَيْمٍ ، ثنا كَامِلُ أَبُو الْعَلاءِ ، قَالَ : سَمِعْتُ حَبِيبَ بْنَ أَبِي ثَابِتٍ ، يُحَدِّثُ ، عَنْ يَحْيَى بْنِ جَعْدَةَ

In these cases, it is usually the student of the person.

So, Al-Albani the master of Ilm ul-Hadeeth wasn't sleeping when he pointed out the Tadlees issue of Habeeb, rather it was your ignorance due to which you thought there wasn't tadlees. Hence Al-Albani was right in pointing the tadlees issue, due to which the hadeeth is weak and infact MUNKAR, since I have proven that it contradicts other hadeeth and rationality too.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 14, 2017, 08:33:24 PM
A very important question I am putting forward to any Muslim who believes sayyidina Eesaa عليه السلام was raised up into Heaven in his Jasad or Badan (corporal body):

The Quraan al-Kareem never once mentions that sayyidina Eesaa عليه السلام was raised up into Heaven. Rather, it says Allah raised Eesaa عليه السلام up to Himself بَل رَّفَعَهُ اللَّـهُ إِلَيْهِ (Sura 4:158)

So do you believe that Eesaa عليه السلام was physically raised closer to Allah? Does such a belief not necessitate an existence for Allah that is Jismiyya i.e., corporal and material? And that in order to go to where Allah is, sayyidina Eesaa عليه السلام had to be raised up physically in his body towards the sky? Such a belief also necessitates that Allah exists in a place, because the Verses of Quraan do not say Eesaa was raised to the sky, but that he was raised up to Allah.

My question is particularly addressed to Asharis and other non-Salafi Muslims
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 14, 2017, 09:06:46 PM
In continuation of my preceding entry; I mentioned the idea that sayyidina Eesaa alaihis salaam was raised up to Allah in his corporal body necessitates that Allah's existence is corporal. This is the logical conclusion of such a doctrine. To demonstrate, I am showing the viewers a clip from a debate that took place between Salafi/Ahlul Hadith Professor Nasim Akram Jajah (Arguing for Eesaa alaihis salaam being alive and raised up into Heaven bodily) versus one Noor-ul-Hadi from a group calling themselves "al-Muslimeen" (arguing that Eesaa alaihis salaam is deceased). In his opening remarks, the Salafi professor said:

وہ اپنے جسم کے ساتھ اپنے ذات کے ساتھ عرش عظیم پر ہے

"He (Allah) is upon the Arsh with His Body (Jism), with His Essence (Dhaat)."

Notice that the Professor said these words specifically in the context of trying to prove that sayyidina Eesaa عليه السلام was raised (Rafa) up into the Heavens in his physical body


&feature=youtu.be
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 14, 2017, 11:01:23 PM
Examples from the Quraan al-Karim where Tawaffa, when applied to a human being means death. There isn't a single example where tawaffa means to take in full when applied to a human being:

وَالَّذِينَ يُتَوَفَّوْنَ مِنكُمْ وَيَذَرُونَ أَزْوَاجًا يَتَرَبَّصْنَ بِأَنفُسِهِنَّ أَرْبَعَةَ أَشْهُرٍ وَعَشْرًا
And those who are made to die from among you and leave behind wives; they (widows) should wait for themselves for four months and ten days (Sura 2:234)
*see also Sura 2:240


رَبَّنَا فَاغْفِرْ لَنَا ذُنُوبَنَا وَكَفِّرْ عَنَّا سَيِّئَاتِنَا وَتَوَفَّنَا مَعَ الْأَبْرَارِ
So our Lord, forgive us our sins, and cover from us our misdeeds and cause us to die with the righteous. (Sura 3:193)

إِنَّ الَّذِينَ تَوَفَّاهُمُ الْمَلَائِكَةُ ظَالِمِي أَنفُسِهِمْ قَالُوا فِيمَ كُنتُمْ
Indeed, those whom the Angels take in death while wronging themselves, (the Angels) will say: "In what (condition) were you?" (Sura 4:97)

حَتَّىٰ إِذَا جَاءَ أَحَدَكُمُ الْمَوْتُ تَوَفَّتْهُ رُسُلُنَا
Until when comes unto one of you death, Our Messengers (Angels) take you (Sura 6:61)

حَتَّىٰ إِذَا جَاءَتْهُمْ رُسُلُنَا يَتَوَفَّوْنَهُمْ قَالُوا أَيْنَ مَا كُنتُمْ تَدْعُونَ مِن دُونِ اللَّـهِ
Until when comes to them Our Messengers (Angels) to take them in death, they (Angels) say: "Where are those whom you used to invoke besides Allah?" (Sura 7:37)

رَبَّنَا أَفْرِغْ عَلَيْنَا صَبْرًا وَتَوَفَّنَا مُسْلِمِينَ
"Our Lord pour upon us patience and let us die as Muslims." (Sura 7:126)

وَلَوْ تَرَىٰ إِذْ يَتَوَفَّى الَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا
And if you could see when they (Angels) cause to die those who disbelieve (Sura 8:50)
*see also Sura 16:28


وَإِمَّا نُرِيَنَّكَ بَعْضَ الَّذِي نَعِدُهُمْ أَوْ نَتَوَفَّيَنَّكَ فَإِلَيْنَا مَرْجِعُهُمْ ثُمَّ اللَّـهُ شَهِيدٌ عَلَىٰ مَا يَفْعَلُونَ
And whether We show you some of what We promise them, or We take you in death, to Us is their return; then, [either way], Allah is a witness concerning what they are doing (Sura 10:46)
*see also Sura 13:40, 40:77


وَلَـٰكِنْ أَعْبُدُ اللَّـهَ الَّذِي يَتَوَفَّاكُمْ
But I worship Allah Who causes you to die (Sura 10:104)

تَوَفَّنِي مُسْلِمًا وَأَلْحِقْنِي بِالصَّالِحِينَ
"Cause me to die as a Muslim and join me with the Righteous" (Sura 12:101)

الَّذِينَ تَتَوَفَّاهُمُ الْمَلَائِكَةُ طَيِّبِينَ
The ones whom the Angels take in death (being) good and pure (Sura 16:32)

وَاللَّـهُ خَلَقَكُمْ ثُمَّ يَتَوَفَّاكُمْ
And Allah created you then He will take you in death (Sura 16:70)

وَمِنكُم مَّن يُتَوَفَّىٰ وَمِنكُم
And among you is one who is taken in death (Sura 22:5)

قُلْ يَتَوَفَّاكُم مَّلَكُ الْمَوْتِ
Say: "The Angel of Death will take you" (Sura 32:11)

اللَّـهُ يَتَوَفَّى الْأَنفُسَ حِينَ مَوْتِهَا وَالَّتِي لَمْ تَمُتْ فِي مَنَامِهَا
Allah takes the souls at the time of its death and that which dies not during its sleep (Sura 39:42)

وَمِنكُم مَّن يُتَوَفَّىٰ مِن قَبْلُ
And among you is the one who is taken in death before (Sura 40:67)

فَكَيْفَ إِذَا تَوَفَّتْهُمُ الْمَلَائِكَةُ يَضْرِبُونَ وُجُوهَهُمْ وَأَدْبَارَهُمْ
Then how [will it be] when the Angels take them in death, striking their faces and their backs? (Sura 47:27)

Now let me repeat my earlier challenge. Can those who argue that Tawaffa when applied to sayyidina Eesaa alaihis salaam means "to take in full" find an example of this anywhere in the Quraan or authentic Hadith where:

فاعل = الله
مفعول = انسان
فعل = توفّى

and the meaning is to "take in full"?
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 15, 2017, 12:02:11 AM
One of the proofs presented by those who assert that sayyidina Eesaa alaihis salaam was bodily raised up into Heaven is that something similar happened to the Prophet's companion Amir b. Fuhaira رضى الله عنه who attained martyrdom at the massacre of Bir Ma'una four years after the Hijra. According to a narration in Bukhari sharif:

وَعَنْ أَبِي أُسَامَةَ قَالَ قَالَ هِشَامُ بْنُ عُرْوَةَ فَأَخْبَرَنِي أَبِي قَالَ لَمَّا قُتِلَ الَّذِينَ بِبِئْرِ مَعُونَةَ وَأُسِرَ عَمْرُو بْنُ أُمَيَّةَ الضَّمْرِيُّ قَالَ لَهُ عَامِرُ بْنُ الطُّفَيْلِ مَنْ هَذَا فَأَشَارَ إِلَى قَتِيلٍ، فَقَالَ لَهُ عَمْرُو بْنُ أُمَيَّةَ هَذَا عَامِرُ بْنُ فُهَيْرَةَ‏.‏ فَقَالَ لَقَدْ رَأَيْتُهُ بَعْدَ مَا قُتِلَ رُفِعَ إِلَى السَّمَاءِ حَتَّى إِنِّي لأَنْظُرُ إِلَى السَّمَاءِ بَيْنَهُ وَبَيْنَ الأَرْضِ، ثُمَّ وُضِعَ


Urwa b. az-Zubair said: "When those (Muslims) at Bir Ma'una were martyred and `Amr bin Umaiya Ad- Damri was taken prisoner, 'Amir bin at-Tufail, pointing at a killed person, asked `Amr, "Who is this?" `Amr bin Umaiya said to him, "He is 'Amir bin Fuhaira." 'Amir bin at-Tufail said, "I saw him lifted to the sky after he was killed till I saw the sky between him and the earth, and then he was brought down upon the earth."

But this is a Mursal narration. The person who killed Amir b. Fuhaira, namely, Jabbar b. Salama, converted to Islam because he was so impressed and inspired by the martyrdom of Amir b. Fuhaira, whose last words were "By Allah I have attained success!"

If Amir b. Fuhaira was literally raised up in his body to the sky, his killer would have mentioned that.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 15, 2017, 01:35:50 AM
In his book Saif-e-Chishtiyai, the Pir of Golra, Mehr Ali Shah (1859-1937) attempted to argue that sayyidina Eesaa عليه السلام is living and not deceased, and further that he was raised to Heaven in his body. In this book, Mehr Ali Shah gave the example of how Aamir b. Fuhayra رضى الله عنه was raised into Heaven. I have already shown that such a narration is Mursal from Urwa b. al-Zubayr رحمه الله and therefore not authentically established. But in this same book Mehr Ali Shah claims that two other companions of the Prophet experienced something similar, namely, Alaa b. al-Hadrami and Khubaib b. Adiy رضى الله عنهما

(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-hKbgp3J03sM/Vix0svp4YyI/AAAAAAAABTw/r0EOhB_aTj8/s1600/title.bmp)

(https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-r574wkIvdMU/WWlEsFWbQGI/AAAAAAAACik/lvsrTl6pMj4wCGp_EYL4e49rJJJFpA3tQCLcBGAs/s1600/Story%2Bof%2Bbodily%2Bascension%2Bof%2BAmir%2Bbin%2BFaheerah%2Band%2Bothers%2Binto%2BHeaven%2B%2528Saif%2Be%2BChishtiya%2Bp.105%2529%2Bfind%2Boriginal%2Breferences.png)

My challenge is that the Pir of Golra has asserted this about two Companions without proof, so where is the proof to back up his baseless claim?
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Noor-us-Sunnah on July 16, 2017, 01:29:41 AM
In his book Saif-e-Chishtiyai, the Pir of Golra, Mehr Ali Shah (1859-1937) attempted to argue that sayyidina Eesaa عليه السلام is living and not deceased, and further that he was raised to Heaven in his body. In this book, Mehr Ali Shah gave the example of how Aamir b. Fuhayra رضى الله عنه was raised into Heaven. I have already shown that such a narration is Mursal from Urwa b. al-Zubayr رحمه الله and therefore not authentically established. But in this same book Mehr Ali Shah claims that two other companions of the Prophet experienced something similar, namely, Alaa b. al-Hadrami and Khubaib b. Adiy رضى الله عنهما

(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-hKbgp3J03sM/Vix0svp4YyI/AAAAAAAABTw/r0EOhB_aTj8/s1600/title.bmp)

(https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-r574wkIvdMU/WWlEsFWbQGI/AAAAAAAACik/lvsrTl6pMj4wCGp_EYL4e49rJJJFpA3tQCLcBGAs/s1600/Story%2Bof%2Bbodily%2Bascension%2Bof%2BAmir%2Bbin%2BFaheerah%2Band%2Bothers%2Binto%2BHeaven%2B%2528Saif%2Be%2BChishtiya%2Bp.105%2529%2Bfind%2Boriginal%2Breferences.png)

My challenge is that the Pir of Golra has asserted this about two Companions without proof, so where is the proof to back up his baseless claim?
I agree, an incorrect example was used by the scholar. Similar to how Mirza Ghulam claimed that believing in Isa(as) being alive, necessitates that Musa(as) is also alive. This is an invalid claim because, we have marfu mutawattir hadeeth that Isa(as) will descend from heaven, is there any authentic hadeeth which says Musa(as) will descend from heaven? If no, then the argument raised by Mirza Ghulam was his idiocy.

Mirza Ghulam Ahmad wrote:

"Do you not read in the Quran that Allah has said: فَلاَ تَكُن فِي مِرْيَةٍ مِّن لِّقَآئِهِ (So do not be in doubt over his meeting). And you know that this ayah was revealed regarding Musa (a.s), so it is a CLEAR PROOF that Musa (alayhissalam) is alive. He had a meeting with the Messenger of Allah (Muhammad) ﷺ, and a DEAD PERSON CAN NOT MEET A LIVING PERSON. You cannot find ayat like this regarding Isa (alayhissalam), but yes, we find statements of his death on several occasions. So reflect! Because Allah loves those who reflect.". [Roohani Khazain vol 7 page 221 - 222 ; Hamamt-ul-Bushra page 132 ]
[ You are not allowed to view attachments ][ You are not allowed to view attachments ]
Hamamt-ul-Bushra page 132[ You are not allowed to view attachments ]

Mirza Ghulam Ahmad wrote:

"Isa (a.s) is just another prophet like other prophets, and is a servant of the Shariah of the Prophet (Musa) for whom all the milk (of women) was made Haram untill he reached his Mother's milk. His God spoke to him on The Mount of Sinai and blessed him by making him His dear prophet. And he is the same Musa, the man of God, about whom there is a clear sign in the Quran that HE IS ALIVE IN THE HEAVENS, AND IT IS FARD (OBLIGATORY) ON US THAT WE SHOULD BELIEVE THAT HE IS ALIVE IN THE HEAVENS AND NOT AMONG THE DEAD." [Noor e Haq in Roohani Khazain vol 8 page 68 - 69]
[ You are not allowed to view attachments ][ You are not allowed to view attachments ]
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 16, 2017, 01:36:34 AM
Yes, the Prophets are alive in the Illiyeen with a life that is called Hayaat al Ukhrawi and Hayaat al Barzakhi. The Shuhada too are alive in Jannah. Their souls are riding in green birds and eating from the fruits of Jannah, but this is Hayaat al Ukhrawi and Hayaat al Barzakhi not Hayaat al Dunyawi
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Noor-us-Sunnah on July 16, 2017, 01:46:24 AM
Now let me repeat my earlier challenge. Can those who argue that Tawaffa when applied to sayyidina Eesaa alaihis salaam means "to take in full" find an example of this anywhere in the Quraan or authentic Hadith where:

فاعل = الله
مفعول = انسان
فعل = توفّى

and the meaning is to "take in full"?
Your challenge is nothing but sheer stupidity. The case of Isa(as) was unique in itself. So asking for any other example from Quran or hadeeth is stupidity. Your Challenge is like someone challenges saying that, he doesn't believe that Isa(as) was born without a father, and to prove it one should bring an evidence from Quran or hadeeth where any human was born without the Father(ONLY, i.e should have a mother but not father). So, such challenges are foolishness, nothing else. Just like the birth of Isa(As) was unique which has no other example, like wise the "taking in full" of Isa(as) was unique. Yet, we would refute back the challenger by posing a simple challenge that, if anyone denies that Isa(as) was not "taken in full" by Allah, then they should bring an example from Quran or authentic hadeeth which shows that any human apart from Isa(as) was mentioned, that he/she would descend from the sky. If they cannot meet this challenge, then this in itself would burst their bubble of foolishness of their challenges.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Noor-us-Sunnah on July 16, 2017, 01:53:45 AM
Yes, the Prophets are alive in the Illiyeen with a life that is called Hayaat al Ukhrawi and Hayaat al Barzakhi. The Shuhada too are alive in Jannah. Their souls are riding in green birds and eating from the fruits of Jannah, but this is Hayaat al Ukhrawi and Hayaat al Barzakhi not Hayaat al Dunyawi
Has anyone denied of Barzakhi life,which made Mirza Ghulam say:
AND IT IS FARD (OBLIGATORY) ON US THAT WE SHOULD BELIEVE THAT HE IS ALIVE IN THE HEAVENS AND NOT AMONG THE DEAD."

Apparently, Mirza is making a contrast between Musa(as) and Isa(as), so are you implying that Mirza is rejecting Barzakhi life for Isa(as), but affirms for Musa(as) ?

Indeed Qadiyani stupidity has no limits.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 16, 2017, 01:56:37 AM
Your challenge is nothing but sheer stupidity. The case of Isa(as) was unique in itself. So asking for any other example from Quran or hadeeth is stupidity. Your Challenge is like someone challenges saying that, he doesn't believe that Isa(as) was born without a father, and to prove it one should bring an evidence from Quran or hadeeth where any human was born without the Father(ONLY, i.e should have a mother but not father). So, such challenges are foolishness, nothing else. Just like the birth of Isa(As) was unique which has no other example, like wise the "taking in full" of Isa(as) was unique. Yet, we would refute back the challenger by posing a simple challenge that, if anyone denies that Isa(as) was not "taken in full" by Allah, then they should bring an example from Quran or authentic hadeeth which shows that any human apart from Isa(as) was mentioned, that he/she would descend from the sky. If they cannot meet this challenge, then this in itself would burst their bubble of foolishness of their challenges.

The stupidity is believing that a human being was raised up to the clouds and lives there without nourishment for over 2000 years.

As for your argument that this is something unique to Eesaa عليه السلام you still have to prove that uniqueness. It is the uniqueness of Eesaa alaihis salaam ascending in his body to Heaven that is disputed. To give that example is therefore a circular argument. And furthermore, many Sunni Ulama, in fact most of them, say that there were other Prophets and righteous people who were raised up in their physical bodies to the Heavens, so it is not unique to Eesaa عليه السلام.

So when you admit that every other case of Tawaffaa never means "take in full" when applied to human being, on what basis did you make an exception for Eesaa عليه السلام? By admitting this fact you destroyed your entire foundation.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Noor-us-Sunnah on July 16, 2017, 02:20:02 AM
The stupidity is believing that a human being was raised up to the clouds and lives there without nourishment for over 2000 years.

And when it is said to them: Believe as the people believe, they say: Shall we believe as the fools believe? Now surely they themselves are the fools, but they do not know.(Quran 2:13).

What you call as stupidity is that on which Ummah agreed upon, there is an Ijmah of Ummah. And the true believers believe in the great power of Allah(swt) He is capable of doing what He wants.

 إِنَّ اللّهَ عَلَى كُلِّ شَيْءٍ قَدِيرٌ
...Lo! Allah is Able to do all things(2:148)

Quote
As for your argument that this is something unique to Eesaa عليه السلام you still have to prove that uniqueness. It is the uniqueness of Eesaa alaihis salaam ascending in his body to Heaven that is disputed. To give that example is therefore a circular argument. And furthermore, many Sunni Ulama, in fact most of them, say that there were other Prophets and righteous people who were raised up in their physical bodies to the Heavens, so it is not unique to Eesaa عليه السلام.
The example I gave in my response to support the concept of Isa(as) being taken up by Allah being unique was the fact that Isa(As) would descend from heaven, which is also unique. And it seems this example of uniqueness isn't going down your throat, you seem to be on run, as it destroys the basis of your cult and exposes the imposter Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiyani.

Keep running away from the challenge I have made regarding the uniqueness of Isa(as) , regarding his descend from heaven.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 16, 2017, 02:20:31 AM
Apparently, Mirza is making a contrast between Musa(as) and Isa(as), so are you implying that Mirza is rejecting Barzakhi life for Isa(as), but affirms for Musa(as) ?

Indeed Qadiyani stupidity has no limits.

The contrast is not regarding life or death if you care to read the context of the passage. Rather, Ghulam Ahmad is praising the status of Moosaa عليه السلام by saying that even Eesaa عليه السلام was his follower and bound to obey his Shari'ah, and furthermore that the Qur'aan implies his spiritual life whereas such an implication is not given for every other prophet, especially Eesaa عليه السلام, but this is not a negation of the spiritual life which all other Prophets are granted. But you should know that whereas all Believers are experiencing the delights of Hayaat al Ukhrawi with their souls (not bodies), even this life has levels and degrees, and some are upon higher level and others at a lower level. The Hadith of Mi'raj proves that the spiritual life of Moosaa عليه السلام is greater than that of Eesaa's عليه السلام
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Noor-us-Sunnah on July 16, 2017, 02:32:54 AM
Apparently, Mirza is making a contrast between Musa(as) and Isa(as), so are you implying that Mirza is rejecting Barzakhi life for Isa(as), but affirms for Musa(as) ?

Indeed Qadiyani stupidity has no limits.

The contrast is not regarding life or death if you care to read the context of the passage. Rather, Ghulam Ahmad is praising the status of Moosaa عليه السلام by saying that even Eesaa عليه السلام was his follower and bound to obey his Shari'ah, and furthermore that the Qur'aan implies his spiritual life whereas such an implication is not given for every other prophet, especially Eesaa عليه السلام, but this is not a negation of the spiritual life which all other Prophets are granted. But you should know that whereas all Believers are experiencing the delights of Hayaat al Ukhrawi with their souls (not bodies), even this life has levels and degrees, and some are upon higher level and others at a lower level. The Hadith of Mi'raj proves that the spiritual life of Moosaa عليه السلام is greater than that of Eesaa's عليه السلام
These rubbish excuses are irrelevant. We are discussing what Mirza Ghulam wrote, not what, I should know, because regarding the Barzakhi life of people, even a Muslim kid knows and believes in this. So Ghulam Ahmad wasn't explaining some rocket science, to conclude its obligatory to believe he is alive in heaven. Secondly, he says, "Dead person cannot meet a living person", What kind of dead people he is talking about, when everyone after death has a Barzakhi life.

Mirza Ghulam Ahmad wrote:

"Do you not read in the Quran that Allah has said: فَلاَ تَكُن فِي مِرْيَةٍ مِّن لِّقَآئِهِ (So do not be in doubt over his meeting). And you know that this ayah was revealed regarding Musa (a.s), so it is a CLEAR PROOF that Musa (alayhissalam) is alive. He had a meeting with the Messenger of Allah (Muhammad) ﷺ, and a DEAD PERSON CAN NOT MEET A LIVING PERSON. You cannot find ayat like this regarding Isa (alayhissalam), but yes, we find statements of his death on several occasions. So reflect! Because Allah loves those who reflect.". [Roohani Khazain vol 7 page 221 - 222 ; Hamamt-ul-Bushra page 132 ]

Mirza Ghulam Ahmad wrote:

"Isa (a.s) is just another prophet like other prophets, and is a servant of the Shariah of the Prophet (Musa) for whom all the milk (of women) was made Haram untill he reached his Mother's milk. His God spoke to him on The Mount of Sinai and blessed him by making him His dear prophet. And he is the same Musa, the man of God, about whom there is a clear sign in the Quran that HE IS ALIVE IN THE HEAVENS, AND IT IS FARD (OBLIGATORY) ON US THAT WE SHOULD BELIEVE THAT HE IS ALIVE IN THE HEAVENS AND NOT AMONG THE DEAD." [Noor e Haq in Roohani Khazain vol 8 page 68 - 69]
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 16, 2017, 02:53:35 AM
These rubbish excuses are irrelevant. We are discussing what Mirza Ghulam wrote, not what, I should know, because regarding the Barzakhi life of people, even a Muslim kid knows and believes in this. So Ghulam Ahmad wasn't explaining some rocket science, to conclude its obligatory to believe he is alive in heaven. Secondly, he says, "Dead person cannot meet a living person", What kind of dead people he is talking about, when everyone after death has a Barzakhi life.

Mirza Ghulam Ahmad wrote:

"Do you not read in the Quran that Allah has said: فَلاَ تَكُن فِي مِرْيَةٍ مِّن لِّقَآئِهِ (So do not be in doubt over his meeting). And you know that this ayah was revealed regarding Musa (a.s), so it is a CLEAR PROOF that Musa (alayhissalam) is alive. He had a meeting with the Messenger of Allah (Muhammad) ﷺ, and a DEAD PERSON CAN NOT MEET A LIVING PERSON. You cannot find ayat like this regarding Isa (alayhissalam), but yes, we find statements of his death on several occasions. So reflect! Because Allah loves those who reflect.". [Roohani Khazain vol 7 page 221 - 222 ; Hamamt-ul-Bushra page 132 ]

Mirza Ghulam Ahmad wrote:

"Isa (a.s) is just another prophet like other prophets, and is a servant of the Shariah of the Prophet (Musa) for whom all the milk (of women) was made Haram untill he reached his Mother's milk. His God spoke to him on The Mount of Sinai and blessed him by making him His dear prophet. And he is the same Musa, the man of God, about whom there is a clear sign in the Quran that HE IS ALIVE IN THE HEAVENS, AND IT IS FARD (OBLIGATORY) ON US THAT WE SHOULD BELIEVE THAT HE IS ALIVE IN THE HEAVENS AND NOT AMONG THE DEAD." [Noor e Haq in Roohani Khazain vol 8 page 68 - 69]

You are trying to commit deception by quoting two unrelated passages from two different books in two different contexts together to make your point. I have already explained the quote from Noor-ul-Haq that it is regarding the high level of spiritual life that Moosaa عليه السلام is enjoying in the Sixth Heaven, as is proven from the Hadith of Mi'raj. Even Eesaa عليه السلام is not granted this high spiritual life that was given to sayyidina Moosaa.

As for the passage you quoted from Hamamat-ul-Bushraa, it is polemical and contains an Ilzaami Jawaab to refute people like you who believe Eesaa عليه السلام is alive in this Dunyaa. He is arguing that if you want to use such weak and brittle evidence as your foundation to believe that Eesaa (AS) is alive, then there is even such evidence along the same lines, in fact even more formidable, to prove that Moosaa (AS) is also alive, so why the double standard? If you think he is affirming his own aqeeda that Moosaa (AS) is alive you are sorely mistaken. He is practicing the Sunnah of Ibraaheem of giving a polemical answer to demonstrate the futility of the doctrine of the opposition:


فَلَمَّا رَأَى الشَّمْسَ بَازِغَةً قَالَ هَـٰذَا رَبِّي هَـٰذَا أَكْبَرُ
ٍSo when he saw the sun rising he said: "This is my lord, this is greater!" (Sura 6:78)

So here is my Ilzaami Jawaab to your accusation: If you want me to say that Ghulam Ahmad believed that Moosaa (AS) is alive then first you will have to admit that Ibraheem (AS) believed the Sun is his Lord معاذ الله
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Noor-us-Sunnah on July 16, 2017, 02:56:59 AM
As for the passage you quoted from Hamamat-ul-Bushraa, it is polemical and contains an Ilzaami Jawaab to refute people like you who believe Eesaa عليه السلام is alive in this Dunyaa. He is arguing that if you want to use such weak and brittle evidence as your foundation to believe that Eesaa (AS) is alive, then there is even such evidence along the same lines, in fact even more formidable, to prove that Moosaa (AS) is also alive, so why the double standard? If you think he is affirming his own aqeeda that Moosaa (AS) is alive you are sorely mistaken. He is practicing the Sunnah of Ibraaheem of giving a polemical answer to demonstrate the futility of the doctrine of the opposition:

فَلَمَّا رَأَى الشَّمْسَ بَازِغَةً قَالَ هَـٰذَا رَبِّي هَـٰذَا أَكْبَرُ[/size]
]ٍSo when he saw the sun rising he said: "This is my lord, this is greater!" (Sura 6:78)

So here is my Ilzaami Jawaab to your accusation: If you want me to say that Ghulam Ahmad believed that Moosaa (AS) is alive then first you will have to admit that Ibraheem (AS) believed the Sun is his Lord معاذ الله
Moron, this is what I said, first learn to understand what your opponent is saying. This is what I said, before quoting his books.

I SAID:
Quote
I agree, an incorrect example was used by the scholar. Similar to how Mirza Ghulam claimed that believing in Isa(as) being alive, necessitates that Musa(as) is also alive. This is an invalid claim because, we have marfu mutawattir hadeeth that Isa(as) will descend from heaven, is there any authentic hadeeth which says Musa(as) will descend from heaven? If no, then the argument raised by Mirza Ghulam was his idiocy.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 16, 2017, 03:02:45 AM
Quote from: Noor-us-Sunnah
is there any authentic hadeeth which says Musa(as) will descend from heaven?

Your stupidity knows no limits. You yourself quoted the Ayah:

وَلَقَدْ آتَيْنَا مُوسَى الْكِتَابَ فَلَا تَكُن فِي مِرْيَةٍ مِّن لِّقَائِهِ
And We gave Moses the Book so do not be in doubt concerning his meeting (Sura 32:23)

You wanted a Mutawatir Hadith? What about an Ayat of the Quran? Now what you idiot?
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Noor-us-Sunnah on July 16, 2017, 03:03:20 AM
In continuation of my preceding entry; I mentioned the idea that sayyidina Eesaa alaihis salaam was raised up to Allah in his corporal body necessitates that Allah's existence is corporal. This is the logical conclusion of such a doctrine. To demonstrate, I am showing the viewers a clip from a debate that took place between Salafi/Ahlul Hadith Professor Nasim Akram Jajah (Arguing for Eesaa alaihis salaam being alive and raised up into Heaven bodily) versus one Noor-ul-Hadi from a group calling themselves "al-Muslimeen" (arguing that Eesaa alaihis salaam is deceased). In his opening remarks, the Salafi professor said:

وہ اپنے جسم کے ساتھ اپنے ذات کے ساتھ عرش عظیم پر ہے

"He (Allah) is upon the Arsh with His Body (Jism), with His Essence (Dhaat)."

Notice that the Professor said these words specifically in the context of trying to prove that sayyidina Eesaa عليه السلام was raised (Rafa) up into the Heavens in his physical body


&feature=youtu.be
This Salafi professor is unknown, and his usage of words such as Jism for Allah are wrong in the view of Salafi Imams.

Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymeen may Allaah have mercy upon him said,

"The viewpoint of Ahl As-Sunnah Wa-l-Jamaa‘ah is that Allaah, The Exalted, is High above His creation in His being; His ‘Uluww above His creation is one of His intrinsic eternal divine attributes. Two groups held an opposing view to that of Ahl As-Sunnah in this regard; one group were of the view that Allaah, The Exalted, exists everywhere. Others held that Allaah is not above the world, not below it, not in it, not to the right, not to the left, not separate from the world and not attached to it.... Those who argued that Allaah is not described as being in a certain direction say: describing Allaah as such entails that He consists in a body/mass (jism), and this necessitates assimilating Him to His creation, and therefore, we reject the proposition that Allaah exists in any of the six physical directions. However, we answer the two groups in two steps; first, we invalidate their argument, and second, we prove the opposite of their statement with decisive proof…. You say: affirming the existence of Allaah within the six physical directions entails Tajseem (corporealism, or that He is a jism)! Let us investigate the term "jism" first; what exactly is this jism in your view that causes you to negate the divine attributes because of it? Do you intend by "jism" a physical body that is composed of parts in need of each other, and the jism does not function except with these parts put together? If this is your intended meaning, then we reject it and we say: Allaah is not a jism in this sense, and whoever says: affirming the attribute of ‘Uluww to Allaah entails attributing a jism to Him, then his words are a mere claim and it is sufficient for us to say: not acceptable. However, if you mean by "jism" a being that exists on its own, one that is qualified with what befits it, we also affirm that. And we say that Allaah, exalted is He, has a being, and He is existing on His own, qualified with the attributes of perfection. And this is what every person knows.” [Sharh Al-‘Aqeedah Al-Waasitiyyah]

Ibn Taymiyyah may Allaah have mercy upon him said in his Dar' Ta‘aarudh An-Naql wa-l-‘Aql (Reconciling Reason and Revelation):

 "The discourse on Tamtheel (assimilationism, i.e. claiming total equality between the Creator and the created in all attributes) and Tashbeeh (resemblance, i.e. claiming equality between the Creator and the created in most attributes) and rejecting both in relation to the divine attributes of Allaah is one thing and the discourse on Tajseem (anthropomorphism, i.e. likening Allaah to a body) and rejecting it is something else. As to the first, it was negated by the Quran, Sunnah, and consensus of the Salaf (righteous predecessors) and all scholars. There are lengthy reports about their rejection of the claims of the proponents of Tashbeeh, who say that Allaah has a hand like mine, eyesight like mine and feet like mine. The discourse on whether Allaah is a jism or jawhar (substance) either to negate or affirm it, is a bid‘ah (religious innovation) that has no basis in the Quran and Sunnah and none of the early Muslims and early scholars addressed this issue, neither with negation nor with affirmation. The debate among those who affirm it and those who negate it is partially linguistic and partially signification-related; they are both erroneous in some way. If the debate is with someone who says: He is a "body" or "substance", if such a person says: (but) not like the bodies and substances, the problem lies only in the language. If someone says: He is like the bodies and substances, the discourse with such a person will be according to whatever meaning he explains. If the intended meaning is to assimilate Allaah with His creation, then it is rejected if it entails affirming the attribution of the attributes of created beings to Allaah; this is false. If the intended meaning is that Allaah is a body but not like bodies, and that He is exalted above resemblance to His creation, then the argument with them is about the affirmation or negation of this meaning."

Taken from:
http://www.islamweb.net/emainpage/index.php?page=showfatwa&Option=FatwaId&Id=275167

Shiekh Ibn Othiameen (RahimahuAllah) in Sharh Al-Waasitiyyah he says:

ثانياً: قولكم: إثبات الجهة يستلزم التجسيم! نحن نناقشكم في كلمة الجسم:
ما هذا الجسم الذي تنفرون الناس عن إثبات صفات الله من أجله؟!
أتريدون بالجسم الشيء المكون من أشياء مفتقر بعضها إلى بعض لا يمكن أن يقوم إلى باجتماع هذه الأجزاء؟! فإن أردتم هذا، فنحن لا نقره، ونقول: إن الله ليس بجسم بهذا المعنى، ومن قال: إن إثبات علوه يستلزم هذا الجسم، فقوله مجرد دعوى ويكفينا أن نقول: لا قبول.
أما إن أردتم بالجسم الذات القائمة بنفسها المتصفة بما يليق بها، فنحن نثبت ذلك، ونقول: إن لله تعالى ذاتاً، وهو قائم بنفسه، متصف بصفات الكمال، وهذا هو الذي يعلم به كل إنسان
He says: "They say (AlJahmiyyah, Mu'tazilah, Ashaaiirah..etc) that by affirming that Allah has a jihah, they (the salaf) fall into tajseem. So lets discuss with them the meaning of the word "jism". If you mean a jism that is composed of parts that are in need of one another, that is unable to exist unless they are present, than we do not affirm this meaning. However, If you say that Al-jism is essentially the "thaat" that is independent from need (Alqaa2imm binafsih means Al-mustaghney an ghairih), and that is described by whatever is suitable for it, then yes, we do affirm this!"
---

However, since the word Jism was not used by the Salaf, we should not use it either. This is what Shiekh Ibn Othaimeen says in Sharh Al-Safaareeniyyah:

لكن مع ذلك ما نقول : إن الله جسم ،
حتى وإن أردنا هذا المعنى ،
وذلك لأن لفظ الجسم لم يرد في الكتاب والسنة لا إثباتاً ولا نفياً ،
ولأن إثبات الجسم إن أثبتناه فهو مستلزم للتشبيه على رأي بعض الناس ،
وإن نفيناه فهو مستلزم للتعطيل على رأي آخرين ،
إذن فلا نثبته ولا ننفيه ،
وهذا هو العقيدة السليمة ألا تثبت باللفظ : أن الله جسم أو ليس بجسم ، اسكت !
ما دام الله قد سكت عنه ورسوله سكت عنه والصحابة سكتوا عنه لا تثبت ولا تنفي ،
لكن تؤمن بأن الله ذاتاً موصوفة بالصفات اللائقة بها وإن الله يقبض ويبسط ويأخذ بيمينه الصدقة ويربيها وينـزل ويأتي

Taken from:
http://www.ahlalhdeeth.com/vbe/showpost.php?p=26803&postcount=2

CONCLUSION:

Ahlus Sunnah are against the idea of attributing Allah with a jism (body) and is also against negating one for Allah unconditionally.

Why?

Well, because jism has been defined differently by different groups of people.

According to the Greek philosophers, a body is a composition of hyle and form.

While according to the Asharis, a body is a composition of two different substances or essences.

While linguistically in modern times, a body is mostly used in the scientific sense to refer to the physical structure of a person or animal.

Ahlus Sunnah proactively deny all these understandings of jism for Allah. We affirmatively and non-hesitantly negate them for Allah.

However, body according to the classical Karramite sect, refers to any existent thing which could be pointed to. In that case, Ahlus Sunnah disagree with negating a body for Allah, for Ahlus Sunnah believe that Allah could be pointed to since 'Uluww is affirmed for Allah. "Pointed to" here is in the sense that we could raise our hands in dua to Allah or in the sense that we could say that Allahs above all creation, etc.

So even though the most commonly used forms of "body" are negated for Allah, Ahlus Sunnah are still cautious in this regard and first clarify what is meant by "body" before negating it.

However, Ahlus Sunnah are also against affirming a "body" for Allah, even with the correct meaning intended. This is because it's a bid'ah in both the Shariah and in the Arabic language itself.

Taken from
http://www.ahlalhdeeth.com/vbe/showpost.php?p=113646&postcount=1
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Noor-us-Sunnah on July 16, 2017, 03:11:57 AM
Quote from: Noor-us-Sunnah
is there any authentic hadeeth which says Musa(as) will descend from heaven?

Your stupidity knows no limits. You yourself quoted the Ayah:

وَلَقَدْ آتَيْنَا مُوسَى الْكِتَابَ فَلَا تَكُن فِي مِرْيَةٍ مِّن لِّقَائِهِ
And We gave Moses the Book so do not be in doubt concerning his meeting (Sura 32:23)

You wanted a Mutawatir Hadith? What about an Ayat of the Quran? Now what you idiot?
Moron! I was refuting the argument of the imposter Ghulam Ahmad. He argued that why don't you believe other Prophets being alive, Prophet Muhammad(saws) being alive, and then argues about Musa(as) being alive. Hence for all of his idiocy, I brought the evidence that WHY WE HAVE SINGLED OUT ISA(AS).  And the evidence is the descend of Isa(As) from heaven, etc. So, if Ghulam Ahmad or his doomed followers want us to believe that all Prophets(as) are alive or Musa(as) in specific, then He or his followers must bring evidence that all the Prophets will descend from heaven or Musa(as) will descend from heaven. If Ghulam Ahmad or his followers can't, then know that this argumentation was nothing but idiocy.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 16, 2017, 03:14:14 AM
As usual you keep exposing how stupid you are by copying and pasting answers from other sources. At least have the courtesy of putting it in your own words.

The Salafi professor Naseem Akram Jaja is not unknown, he is representing your Salafi sect in debates and is a graduate from your learning institutions, having the qualifications to be a scholar. Anyone who you don't agree with from your own sect you will say he is unknown, how lame is that?

And the point you failed to respond to is that the belief that Jesus was raised up to Allah in his body necessitates that Allah's existence is corporal, limited, and confined to a direction. You say Jesus was raised to the sky, but the word "sky" is never used in reference to the Rafa (ascension) of Jesus. The Verses say Allah raised Jesus up to Himself. Therefore, whether you agree with Prof. Akram Jaja or not, he was forced to say this in order to justify his belief that Jesus was raised up in his corporal body.

If Jesus was raised up to Allah physically, then it means Allah was not where Jesus was before Jesus was raised? But the Holy Qur'an says:


وَهُوَ مَعَكُمْ أَيْنَ مَا كُنتُمْ
ِِAnd He (Allah) is with you wherever you are (Sura 57:4)

So if Jesus was raised up physically to Allah, it means Allah was not where Jesus was (presumably somewhere in Jerusalem) before he ascended. What is your answer to this point? Please don't copy and paste anymore irrelevant stuff either.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 16, 2017, 03:18:23 AM
Moron! I was refuting the argument of the imposter Ghulam Ahmad. He argued that why don't you believe other Prophets being alive, Prophet Muhammad(saws) being alive, and then argues about Musa(as) being alive. Hence for all of his idiocy, I brought the evidence that WHY WE HAVE SINGLED OUT ISA(AS).  And the evidence is the descend of Isa(As) from heaven, etc. So, if Ghulam Ahmad or his doomed followers want us to believe that all Prophets(as) are alive or Musa(as) in specific, then He or his followers must bring evidence that all the Prophets will descend from heaven or Musa(as) will descend from heaven. If Ghulam Ahmad or his followers can't, then know that this argumentation was nothing but idiocy.

Foolish person, is descent from the sky the only thing to prove someone is alive? The Quraan said don't doubt about meeting Moses, that evidence is much stronger than anything you have from the Quran that Jesus is alive. The Quraan is stronger than any Hadith. There isn't anything explicit from the Quraan to prove that Jesus is alive. You have to depend on Hadith about descent. But if you want to use such weak argument to prove such a major belief, then there is even stronger evidence along the same lines to believe that Moses is still alive, because Allah says don't doubt about meeting him.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Noor-us-Sunnah on July 16, 2017, 05:02:47 AM
As usual you keep exposing how stupid you are by copying and pasting answers from other sources. At least have the courtesy of putting it in your own words.

The Salafi professor Naseem Akram Jaja is not unknown, he is representing your Salafi sect in debates and is a graduate from your learning institutions, having the qualifications to be a scholar. Anyone who you don't agree with from your own sect you will say he is unknown, how lame is that?
His status is nothing in comparison to Salafi Imams I quoted. My answers are for readers, you don't need bother moron. And the Salafi stance was clarified in detail, in my response.

Quote
And the point you failed to respond to is that the belief that Jesus was raised up to Allah in his body necessitates that Allah's existence is corporal, limited, and confined to a direction. You say Jesus was raised to the sky, but the word "sky" is never used in reference to the Rafa (ascension) of Jesus. The Verses say Allah raised Jesus up to Himself. Therefore, whether you agree with Prof. Akram Jaja or not, he was forced to say this in order to justify his belief that Jesus was raised up in his corporal body.
This shows that you are in serious need of taking comprehension understanding classes. Your performance is terrible. The response I posted has the answer to this shubha you raised. And in regards to the question that where is Allah, then here you go.

Prophet Muhammad(saws) said:
أَلاَ تَأْمَنُونِي وَأَنَا أَمِينُ مَنْ فِي السَّمَاءِ يَأْتِينِي خَبَرُ السَّمَاءِ صَبَاحًا وَمَسَاءً
Do you not trust me whereas I am the trustworthy one of He who is above the heaven? The khabar [from] the heaven comes to me morning and evening. [ Sahih al-Bukhari 4351 & Sahih Muslim 1064 b]

حَدَّثَنَا ابْنُ أَبِي عُمَرَ، حَدَّثَنَا سُفْيَانُ، عَنْ عَمْرِو بْنِ دِينَارٍ، عَنْ أَبِي قَابُوسَ، عَنْ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ بْنِ عَمْرٍو، قَالَ قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏ "‏ الرَّاحِمُونَ يَرْحَمُهُمُ الرَّحْمَنُ ارْحَمُوا مَنْ فِي الأَرْضِ يَرْحَمْكُمْ مَنْ فِي السَّمَاءِ الرَّحِمُ شُجْنَةٌ مِنَ الرَّحْمَنِ فَمَنْ وَصَلَهَا وَصَلَهُ اللَّهُ وَمَنْ قَطَعَهَا قَطَعَهُ اللَّهُ ‏"‏ ‏.‏ قَالَ أَبُو عِيسَى هَذَا حَدِيثٌ حَسَنٌ صَحِيحٌ
Abdullah bin 'Amr narrated that the Messenger of Allah said: "The merciful are shown mercy by Ar-Rahman. Be merciful on the earth, and you will be shown mercy from Who is above the heavens. The womb is named after Ar-Rahman, so whoever connects it, Allah connects him, and whoever severs it, Allah severs him."[Jami` at-Tirmidhi 1924; Hasan Sahih]

 Ja'far b Muhammad reported on the authority of his father:
They (the audience) said: We will bear witness that you have conveyed (the message), discharged (the ministry of Prophethood) and given wise (sincere) counsel. He (the narrator) said: He (the Holy Prophet) then raised his forefinger towards the sky and pointing it at the people (said):" O Allah, be witness. 0 Allah, be witness," saying it thrice.(Sahih Muslim English reference: Book 7, Hadith 2803; Sahih Muslim Arabic reference: Book 16, Hadith 3009).

Comment:-Had Allaah (swt) been everywhere, the Prophet (peace be upon him) would not have particularly raised his finger towards the sky.And we Shorten the Hadeeth for the convinence of the readers.

حَدَّثَنَا أَبُو جَعْفَرٍ، مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ الصَّبَّاحِ وَأَبُو بَكْرِ بْنُ أَبِي شَيْبَةَ - وَتَقَارَبَا فِي لَفْظِ الْحَدِيثِ - قَالاَ حَدَّثَنَا إِسْمَاعِيلُ بْنُ إِبْرَاهِيمَ، عَنْ حَجَّاجٍ الصَّوَّافِ، عَنْ يَحْيَى بْنِ أَبِي كَثِيرٍ، عَنْ هِلاَلِ بْنِ أَبِي مَيْمُونَةَ، عَنْ عَطَاءِ بْنِ يَسَارٍ، عَنْ مُعَاوِيَةَ بْنِ الْحَكَمِ السُّلَمِيِّ، قَالَ بَيْنَا أَنَا أُصَلِّي، مَعَ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم إِذْ عَطَسَ رَجُلٌ مِنَ الْقَوْمِ فَقُلْتُ يَرْحَمُكَ اللَّهُ ‏.‏ فَرَمَانِي الْقَوْمُ بِأَبْصَارِهِمْ فَقُلْتُ وَاثُكْلَ أُمِّيَاهْ مَا شَأْنُكُمْ تَنْظُرُونَ إِلَىَّ ‏.‏ فَجَعَلُوا يَضْرِبُونَ بِأَيْدِيهِمْ عَلَى أَفْخَاذِهِمْ فَلَمَّا رَأَيْتُهُمْ يُصَمِّتُونَنِي لَكِنِّي سَكَتُّ فَلَمَّا صَلَّى رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم فَبِأَبِي هُوَ وَأُمِّي مَا رَأَيْتُ مُعَلِّمًا قَبْلَهُ وَلاَ بَعْدَهُ أَحْسَنَ تَعْلِيمًا مِنْهُ فَوَاللَّهِ مَا كَهَرَنِي وَلاَ ضَرَبَنِي وَلاَ شَتَمَنِي قَالَ ‏"‏ إِنَّ هَذِهِ الصَّلاَةَ لاَ يَصْلُحُ فِيهَا شَىْءٌ مِنْ كَلاَمِ النَّاسِ إِنَّمَا هُوَ التَّسْبِيحُ وَالتَّكْبِيرُ وَقِرَاءَةُ الْقُرْآنِ ‏"‏ ‏.‏ أَوْ كَمَا قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم قُلْتُ يَا رَسُولَ اللَّهِ إِنِّي حَدِيثُ عَهْدٍ بِجَاهِلِيَّةٍ وَقَدْ جَاءَ اللَّهُ بِالإِسْلاَمِ وَإِنَّ مِنَّا رِجَالاً يَأْتُونَ الْكُهَّانَ ‏.‏ قَالَ ‏"‏ فَلاَ تَأْتِهِمْ ‏"‏ ‏.‏ قَالَ وَمِنَّا رِجَالٌ يَتَطَيَّرُونَ ‏.‏ قَالَ ‏"‏ ذَاكَ شَىْءٌ يَجِدُونَهُ فِي صُدُورِهِمْ فَلاَ يَصُدَّنَّهُمْ ‏"‏ ‏.‏ قَالَ ابْنُ الصَّبَّاحِ ‏"‏ فَلاَ يَصُدَّنَّكُمْ ‏"‏ ‏.‏ قَالَ قُلْتُ وَمِنَّا رِجَالٌ يَخُطُّونَ ‏.‏ قَالَ ‏"‏ كَانَ نَبِيٌّ مِنَ الأَنْبِيَاءِ يَخُطُّ فَمَنْ وَافَقَ خَطَّهُ فَذَاكَ ‏"‏ ‏.‏ قَالَ وَكَانَتْ لِي جَارِيَةٌ تَرْعَى غَنَمًا لِي قِبَلَ أُحُدٍ وَالْجَوَّانِيَّةِ فَاطَّلَعْتُ ذَاتَ يَوْمٍ فَإِذَا الذِّيبُ قَدْ ذَهَبَ بِشَاةٍ مِنْ غَنَمِهَا وَأَنَا رَجُلٌ مِنْ بَنِي آدَمَ آسَفُ كَمَا يَأْسَفُونَ لَكِنِّي صَكَكْتُهَا صَكَّةً فَأَتَيْتُ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم فَعَظَّمَ ذَلِكَ عَلَىَّ قُلْتُ يَا رَسُولَ اللَّهِ أَفَلاَ أُعْتِقُهَا قَالَ ‏"‏ ائْتِنِي بِهَا ‏"‏ ‏.‏ فَأَتَيْتُهُ بِهَا فَقَالَ لَهَا ‏"‏ أَيْنَ اللَّهُ ‏"‏ ‏.‏ قَالَتْ فِي السَّمَاءِ ‏.‏ قَالَ ‏"‏ مَنْ أَنَا ‏"‏ ‏.‏ قَالَتْ أَنْتَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ ‏.‏ قَالَ ‏"‏ أَعْتِقْهَا فَإِنَّهَا مُؤْمِنَةٌ ‏"‏
 Mu'awiya b. al-Hakam said: I had a maid-servant who tended goats by the side of Uhud and Jawwaniya. One day I happened to pass that way and found that a wolf had carried a goat from her flock. I am after all a man from the posterity of Adam. I felt sorry as they (human beings) feel sorry. So I slapped her. I came to the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) and felt (this act of mine) as something grievous I said: Messenger of Allah, should I not grant her freedom? He (the Holy Prophet) said: Bring her to me. So I brought her to him. He said to her: Where is Allah? She said: He is in the heaven. He said: Who am I? She said: Thou art the Messenger of Allah. He said: Grant her freedom, she is a believing woman.[Sahih Muslim 537 a]


حَدَّثَنِي مَالِكٌ، عَنْ هِلاَلِ بْنِ أُسَامَةَ، عَنْ عَطَاءِ بْنِ يَسَارٍ، عَنْ عُمَرَ بْنِ الْحَكَمِ، أَنَّهُ قَالَ أَتَيْتُ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم فَقُلْتُ يَا رَسُولَ اللَّهِ إِنَّ جَارِيَةً لِي كَانَتْ تَرْعَى غَنَمًا لِي فَجِئْتُهَا وَقَدْ فُقِدَتْ شَاةٌ مِنَ الْغَنَمِ فَسَأَلْتُهَا عَنْهَا فَقَالَتْ أَكَلَهَا الذِّئْبُ فَأَسِفْتُ عَلَيْهَا وَكُنْتُ مِنْ بَنِي آدَمَ فَلَطَمْتُ وَجْهَهَا وَعَلَىَّ رَقَبَةٌ أَفَأُعْتِقُهَا فَقَالَ لَهَا رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏"‏ أَيْنَ اللَّهُ ‏"‏ ‏.‏ فَقَالَتْ فِي السَّمَاءِ ‏.‏ فَقَالَ ‏"‏ مَنْ أَنَا ‏"‏ ‏.‏ فَقَالَتْ أَنْتَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ ‏.‏ فَقَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏"‏ أَعْتِقْهَا ‏"‏ ‏.‏
Malik related to me from Hilal ibn Usama from Ata ibn Yasar that Umar ibn al-Hakam said, "I went to the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, and said, 'Messenger of Allah, a slave girl of mine was tending my sheep. I came to her and one of the sheep was lost. I asked her about it and she said that a wolf had eaten it, so I became angry and I am one of the children of Adam, so I struck her on the face. As it happens, I have to set a slave free, shall I free her?' The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, questioned her, 'Where is Allah?' She said, 'In heaven.' He said, 'Who am I?' She said, 'You are the Messenger of Allah.' The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said, 'Free her.' " [Muwatta Malik , Book 38, Hadith 1473]

Imam al-Shafi`i, who said:
وهكذا سَنَّ رسولُ الله في كل من امتحنه للإيمان
And this is how the Prophet set the standard in everyone he tested for faith:
أخبرنا مالك عن هلال بن أسامة عن عطاء بن يسار عن عُمَر بن الحَكَم قال
Malik reported to us: from Hilah bin Usamah: from Ataa' bin Yasaar: from Umar bin 'l-Hakam who said...
أتَيْتُ رسولَ اللهِ بِجَارِيَةٍ، فَقُلْتُ: ياَ رَسُولَ اللهِ، عَلَيَّ رَقَبَةٌ، أَفَأَعْتِقُهَا؟
فَقَالَ لَهَا رَسُولُ اللهِ: أَيْنَ اللهُ؟ فَقَالَتْ: فِي السَّمَاءِ
فَقَالَ: وَمَنْ أَنَا؟ قَالَتْ: أَنْتَ رَسُولُ اللهِ
قَالَ: فَأَعْتِقْهَا
(Al-Risaalah, Imam al-Shafi'i, بيان فرض الله في كتابه اتباع سنة نبيه)

It is also in Kitab 'l-Aathaar, Riwaayat Muhammad bin 'l-Hasan `An Abi Hanifah (narrating from `Ataa from Abdallah Ibn Rawaahah, pg. 398-9, vol 1, Darussalam edition, Tahqeeq by al-Ma`saraawi in Azhar University) which has the words أين الله in it as well.

I CAN GO ON AND ON WITH MUTAWATTIR AHADEETH WHICH SHOWS ALLAH IS ABOVE THE HEAVEN. FOR BENEFIT OF READERS: I suggest them to refer this link for more proofs:
http://www.systemoflife.com/articles/aqeedah/2000007-where-is-allah#axzz4mx2jnpMB


Quote
If Jesus was raised up to Allah physically, then it means Allah was not where Jesus was before Jesus was raised? But the Holy Qur'an says:[/size][/font]

وَهُوَ مَعَكُمْ أَيْنَ مَا كُنتُمْ[
And He (Allah) is with you wherever you are (Sura 57:4)

So if Jesus was raised up physically to Allah, it means Allah was not where Jesus was (presumably somewhere in Jerusalem) before he ascended. What is your answer to this point? Please don't copy and paste anymore irrelevant stuff either.

The verse you used is in regards to knowledge of Allah, Allah is with us, with his Knowledge. The verse before this one states:
He is the First and the Last, the Ascendant and the Intimate, and He is, of all things, Knowing.(57:3).

Muhammad bin Abdullaah bin al-Hajjaaj informed us, saying: Ahmad bin al-Husayn informed us, saying: Abdullaah bin Ahmad narrated to us, saying: My father said: Surayj bin an-Nu'maan said: Abdullaah bin Naafi' narrated to me: Maalik said: "Allaah is above the heaven, and His knowledge is in every place, nothing escapes it."[Sharh Usool il-I'tiqaad" of al-Laalikaa'ee (no. 673)]]
Taken from:
http://www.abovethethrone.com/arsh/articles/kcnmi-imaam-maalik-bin-anas-d-179h-allaah-is-above-the-heaven-and-his-knowledge-is-in-every-place.cfm

 Yoosuf bin Moosaa al-Qattaan, the Shaykh of Abu Bakr al-Khallaal, said: It was said to Abu Abdullah (Ahmad bin Hanbal): "Allaah is above the seventh heaven, over His Throne, separate and distinct (baa'in) from His creation, and His power and knowledge are in every place?" He said: Yes, He is over His Throne, and nothing escapes His knowledge. [Adh-Dhahabi's "Mukhtasar al-Uluww" (p. 189)]

Taken from:
http://www.abovethethrone.com/arsh/articles/wafmn-imaam-ahmad-bin-hanbal-d-241h-allaah-is-above-the-seventh-heaven-upon-his-throne.cfm

Harb bin Ismaa'eel al-Kirmaanee (d. 280H) said: I said to Ishaaq bin Raahawaih, "His, the Most High's saying, 'There is no secret gathering of three, except that He is the fourth...', how do we speak regarding it? He said: Wherever you may be, He is closer to you than your jugular vein, but He is separate and distinct from His creation (baa'inun min khalqihi). Then he (Ishaaq) mentioned from [Abdullaah] Ibn al-Mubaarak (d. 181H), his saying:He is over His Throne, separate and distinct from His creation (baa'inun min khalqihi). Then he (Ishaaq) said: The most apparent and manifest thing in that regard is His, the Most High's saying: ar-Rahmaan ascended above the Throne (Taha 20:5). [Mukhtasar al-Uluww" of adh-Dhahabee, (p. 191)]
http://www.abovethethrone.com/arsh/articles/xvndn-ishaaq-bin-raahawaih-d-237h-allaah-is-over-his-throne-separate-and-distinct-from-his-creation-baainun-min-khalqihi.cfm

From Saalih bin ad-Darees who said: Abdullaah began beating the head of a relative of his who held the view of Jahm. So I saw him beating him on his head with a sandal whilst saying, "No (I will not stop), (not) until you say Ar-Rahmaan ascended above the Throne, separate and distinct from His creation (ar-Rahmaanu 'alal-arsh istawaa, baa'inun min khalqihi)." [Mukhtasar al-Uluww" of adh-Dhahabee, (p. 172) ]
http://www.abovethethrone.com/arsh/articles/ecqjj-abdullaah-bin-abee-jafar-ar-raazee-d-200h-kept-beating-his-relative-affected-with-the-view-of-jahm.cfm


Al-Haafidh Abu Ja'far bin Muhammad bin Uthmaan bin Muhammad bin Abee Shaybah al-Abasee, the Muhaddith of al-Kufah in his time - and there is some speech made regarding him - he authored a book regarding the Throne, so he said (therein):
They mentioned that the Jahmiyyah say: "There is no veil between Allaah and His creation", and they rejected the Throne, and that Allaah is above it. They said, "He is in every place". So the Scholars explained (the verse), "He is with you..." to mean "His knowledge [is with you]". Then the reports that Allaah created the Throne and rose over it were transmitted through tawaatur [large-scale transmission]. So He is above the Throne, free [of being merged] with any of His creation, separate and distinct (baa'in) from them. ["Mukhtasar al-Uluww" of adh-Dhahabi (p. 220) ]
Taken from
http://www.abovethethrone.com/arsh/articles/igkwh-ibn-abee-shaybah-d-297h-the-jahmites-rejected-that-allaah-is-above-his-throne-separate-from-his-creation.cfm


Quote
So if Jesus was raised up physically to Allah, it means Allah was not where Jesus was (presumably somewhere in Jerusalem) before he ascended. What is your answer to this point? Please don't copy and paste anymore irrelevant stuff either.
Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal stated:
إذا أردت أن تعلم أن الجهمي كاذب على الله حين زعم أن الله في كل مكان ولا يكون في مكان دون مكان فقل أليس الله كان ولا شيء فيقول نعم فقل له حين خلق الشيء خلقه في نفسه أو خارجا من نفسه فإنه يصير إلى ثلاثة أقوال لا بد له من واحد منها إن زعم أن الله خلق الخلق في نفسه كفر حين زعم أن الجن والإنس والشياطين في نفسه
وإن قال خلقهم خارجا من نفسه ثم دخل فيهم كان هذا كفرا أيضا حين زعم أنه دخل في مكان وحش قذر رديء
وإن قال خلقهم خارجا من نفسه ثم لم يدخل فيهم رجع عن قوله أجمع وهو قول أهل السنة
If you wanted to know that the Jahmi is lying upon Allah when he claims that, "Allah is in everyplace and He is not in some place rather than another." Then say, "Didn't Allah exist when there was nothing?" He will say, "Yes." So say to him, "When He created something, did He create it in Himself or outside of His self?" He will lean towards three statements of which he must say one of them. If he says He created them within Himself, then he has committed kufr when he claims that the Jinn and the Humans and the Devils are inside of Him. If he says He created them outside of Himself then he entered into them, then this is kufr as well since he claims that He went into a place....If he says He created them outside of Himself and He doesn't go into it, then he has gone back on his statement completely and this is the statement of Ahl as-Sunnah. ["Ar-Radd `Ala az-Zanaadiqah wa al-Jahmiyyah", page 155-156].

[ You are not allowed to view attachments ][ You are not allowed to view attachments ]
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Noor-us-Sunnah on July 16, 2017, 05:19:57 AM
Moron! I was refuting the argument of the imposter Ghulam Ahmad. He argued that why don't you believe other Prophets being alive, Prophet Muhammad(saws) being alive, and then argues about Musa(as) being alive. Hence for all of his idiocy, I brought the evidence that WHY WE HAVE SINGLED OUT ISA(AS).  And the evidence is the descend of Isa(As) from heaven, etc. So, if Ghulam Ahmad or his doomed followers want us to believe that all Prophets(as) are alive or Musa(as) in specific, then He or his followers must bring evidence that all the Prophets will descend from heaven or Musa(as) will descend from heaven. If Ghulam Ahmad or his followers can't, then know that this argumentation was nothing but idiocy.

Foolish person, is descent from the sky the only thing to prove someone is alive? The Quraan said don't doubt about meeting Moses, that evidence is much stronger than anything you have from the Quran that Jesus is alive. The Quraan is stronger than any Hadith. There isn't anything explicit from the Quraan to prove that Jesus is alive. You have to depend on Hadith about descent. But if you want to use such weak argument to prove such a major belief, then there is even stronger evidence along the same lines to believe that Moses is still alive, because Allah says don't doubt about meeting him.
We haven't established our proof from the hadeeth that Prophet(saws) met Isa(as) in heaven, hence he is alive, So Mirza jumps in and says that Quran talks about Prophet(saws) meeting Musa(As), hence he must be alive too. Meeting with Prophets in no way proves that they were alive, be it mentioned in Quran or Hadeeth (esp in your case since you believe it was a vision). Rather the evidence that Isa(As) is alive, is that Isa(as) will descend from heaven, which is unique to Isa(as). And this is the point from which Qadiyanis seem to run with their tails between their legs.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Noor-us-Sunnah on July 16, 2017, 05:48:03 AM
This is the rational basis for rejecting the Ijtehad of Ibn Mas'ud in the first place. You said he knew very well that Angels convey our Salam to him, but that is an assumption on your part.
You are an over confident Jahil, just like Mirza Ghulam Ahmed. Abdullah ibn Masood(ra) was well aware that angels convey salam to Prophet(saws), since he narrated the hadeeth from Prophet(saws).

أَخْبَرَنَا عَبْدُ الْوَهَّابِ بْنُ عَبْدِ الْحَكَمِ الْوَرَّاقُ، قَالَ حَدَّثَنَا مُعَاذُ بْنُ مُعَاذٍ، عَنْ سُفْيَانَ بْنِ سَعِيدٍ، ح وَأَخْبَرَنَا مَحْمُودُ بْنُ غَيْلاَنَ، قَالَ حَدَّثَنَا وَكِيعٌ، وَعَبْدُ الرَّزَّاقِ، عَنْ سُفْيَانَ، عَنْ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ بْنِ السَّائِبِ، عَنْ زَاذَانَ، عَنْ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ، قَالَ قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏ "‏ إِنَّ لِلَّهِ مَلاَئِكَةً سَيَّاحِينَ فِي الأَرْضِ يُبَلِّغُونِي مِنْ أُمَّتِي السَّلاَمَ ‏"‏
It was narrated that Abdullah(ibn Masood) said: "The Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) said: 'Allah (SWT) has angels who travel around on Earth conveying to me the Salams of my Ummah.'"(Sunan an-Nasa'i 1282; sahih).


[صحيح] وعن ابن مسعود رضي الله عنه عن النبي - صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ - قال:
"إن لله ملائكةً سيَّاحين، يُبلِّغوني عن أمَّتي السلامَ".
رواه النسائي، وابن حبان في "صحيحه"
http://shamela.ws/browse.php/book-179/page-923
Abdullah bin Mas’ood (radiallah anhu) narrates: The Messenger of Allaah (peace be upon him) said: “Allaah has angels who go around on earth, conveying to me the salaam of my ummah.” [ Saheeh al-Targheeb #1664, by Al-Albani]
[ You are not allowed to view attachments ]
As for the rest of your post on this subject, which has several issues in it,  then you need to be school on a lot of these issues, InshaAllah i'll deal with it when i get some free time.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Noor-us-Sunnah on July 16, 2017, 11:46:49 AM

(i). Ibn Hajar Asqalani(d. 852 H) said:
وأما رفع عيسى فاتفق أصحاب الأخبار والتفسير على أنه رفع ببدنه حيا وإنما اختلفوا هل مات قبل أن يرفع أو نام فرفع
Regarding the Ascend of Isa(as), there is an agreement between Muhadditeen and Mufassireen that he was raised alive with body. However there is a disagreement that whether before ascend he was given death(for a small time) or he was raised while he was asleep.
(talkheer al Habeer, vol 3, page 214).
http://islamport.com/d/1/krj/1/57/665.html

This statement is manifestly contradictory. How can there be Ijmaa that Eesaa عليه السلام was raised up to the Heaven in his body when there is disagreement over whether or not he was raised up while in a state of sleep; when the Qur'aan al-Kareem clearly states that sleep is a state in which Allaah takes away the soul (not the body). The body remains behind in the Earth, while the soul is taken. It is the coming out of the soul from the body which makes the body "asleep". So it doesn't make sense to say Eesaa عليه السلام fell asleep while his soul was still in his body as it was being raised up to the Heavens.
The statement is not contradictory but rather, its your mind that is corrupt and incompetent. The body of a person can be transferred even when a person is asleep. And we know that at the time of sleep a person is not considered dead in actual sense, even though his soul is with Allah. Hence, Isa(as) was raised alive with body, and the Mufassireen and Muhadditheen are in agreement over this fact.

إن الله قد أجـــار أمتي من أن تجتمع على ضلالة
Messenger of Allah(saws) said: Allah Almighty has protected my ummah to agree on falsehood." [Silsilah as-Saheehah #1331]
[ You are not allowed to view attachments ][ You are not allowed to view attachments ]
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Noor-us-Sunnah on July 16, 2017, 12:18:09 PM

Hadith 3
إن أبا هريرة رضي الله عنه قال : قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم : « كيف أنتم إذا نزل ابن مريم من السماء فيكم
Narrated Abu Huraira, may Allah be pleased with him: Allah’s Messenger, may Allah bless him, said “What will be your condition when the son of Maryam (i.e. ‘Eisa) will descend amongst you from the heavens…?” (Baihaqi’s Asmaa wal Sifaat 2/432 Hadith 855; Shaykh Abdullah bin Muhammad al-Hashidi has classified the narration as Sahih))

أَخْبَرَنَا أَبُو عَبْدِ اللَّهِ الْحَافِظُ، أنا أَبُو بَكْرِ بْنُ إِسْحَاقَ، أنا أَحْمَدُ بْنُ إِبْرَاهِيمَ، ثنا ابْنُ بُكَيْرٍ، حَدَّثَنِي اللَّيْثُ، عَنْ يُونُسَ، عَنِ ابْنِ شِهَابٍ، عَنْ نَافِعٍ، مَوْلَى أَبِي قَتَادَةَ الْأَنْصَارِيِّ قَالَ: إِنَّ أَبَا هُرَيْرَةَ رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُ قَالَ: قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ: «كَيْفَ أَنْتُمْ إِذَا نَزَلَ ابْنُ مَرْيَمَ مِنَ السَّمَاءِ فِيكُمْ وَإِمَامُكُمْ مِنْكُمْ» . رَوَاهُ الْبُخَارِيُّ فِي الصَّحِيحِ عَنْ يَحْيَى بْنِ بُكَيْرٍ، وَأَخْرَجَهُ مُسْلِمٌ مِنْ وَجْهٍ آخَرَ عَنْ يُونُسَ. وَإِنَّمَا أَرَادَ نُزُولَهُ مِنَ السَّمَاءِ بَعْدَ الرَّفْعِ إِلَيْهِ
(Asma’ wa Sifaat 2/331 Hadith 895. Shaykh Abdullah bin Muhammad al-Hashidi has classified the narration as Sahih


Quote
Hadith 4
عن أبى هريرة قال سمعت أبا القاسم الصادق المصدوق يقول …ثم ينزل عيسى بن مريم عليه وسلم من السماء فيؤم الناس
Abu Huraira  said: I heard Abul Qasim the Truthful and Trustworthy (i.e. Holy Prophet) say: ‘… then ‘Eisa ibn Maryam, on him be the peace, will descend from the heavens and lead the people.’
(Majma’ Al-Zawaid 7/349. Haithmi said, Bazzar has narrated it and all its narrators are those of the Sahih [i.e. Sahih Bukhari] except Ali bin Munzar and he is also trustworthy)

9642- حَدَّثَنا علي بن المنذر , حَدَّثَنا مُحَمَّد بن فضيل , عَنْ عَاصِمِ بْنِ كُلَيْبٍ , عَنْ أَبِيهِ , عَنْ أَبِي هُرَيْرَةَ رَضِيَ اللهُ عَنْهُ , قال: سمعت من أبي القاسم الصادق المصدوق يقول يخرج الأعور الدجال مسيح الضلالة قبل المشرق في زمن اختلاف من الناس وفرقة فيبلغ ما شاء الله أن يبلغ من الأرض في أربعين يوما الله أعلم ما مقدارها؟ فيلقى المؤمنون شدة شديدة، ثم ينزل عيسى بن مريم صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ من السماء فيقوم الناس فإذا رفع رأسه من ركعته قال: سمع الله لمن حمده قتل الله الدجال وظهر المؤمنون فأحلف أَنَّ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ أبا القاسم الصادق المصدوق صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ قال: إنه لحق وأما قريب فكل ما هو آت قريب.
[Musnad al-Bazzar]
http://shamela.ws/browse.php/book-12981/page-9206


12543 - وعن أبي هريرة قال : سمعت أبا القاسم الصادق المصدوق يقول : " يخرج أعور الدجال مسيح الضلالة قبل المشرق في زمن اختلاف من الناس وفرقة ، فيبلغ ما شاء الله أن يبلغ من الأرض في أربعين يوما الله أعلم ما مقدارها ، فيلقى المؤمنون شدة شديدة . ثم ينزل عيسى ابن مريم - صلى الله عليه وسلم - من السماء فيؤم الناس ، فإذا رفع رأسه من ركعته قال : سمع الله لمن حمده ، قتل الله المسيح الدجال وظهر المسلمون " . فأحلف أن رسول الله - صلى الله عليه وسلم - أبا القاسم الصادق المصدوق - صلى الله عليه وسلم - قال : " إنه لحق ، وأما أنه قريب فكل ما هو آت قريب " . رواه البزار ، ورجاله رجال الصحيح غير علي بن المنذر وهو ثقة
[Majma’ Al-Zawaid]
http://library.islamweb.net/NEWLIBRARY/display_book.php?bk_no=87&ID=2499&idfrom=12613&idto=12668&bookid=87&startno=43

Haithmi said, Bazzar has narrated it and all its narrators are those of the Sahih [i.e. Sahih Bukhari] except Ali bin Munzar and he is also trustworthy.

These reports along with the one in Sahih Muslim which states that Isa(as) will descend placing his hands on the wings of angels, prove that without a shadow of doubt Isa(as) will descend from heaven.  If supposedly, Isa(as) died and his body is on earth, then his body is in Grave, but we find in Quran that people who are in graves will come out only on the day of Judgement, but since Isa(as) will descend from heaven, as proven from Marfu hadeeth, this implies that he is not dead nor buried, otherwise this will contradict Quran. The correct and well supported view is tht Isa(a) will was raised up alive.

And the trumpet shall be blown, when lo! from their graves they shall hasten on to their Lord.(36:51)

The day on which they shall come forth from their graves in haste, as if they were hastening on to a goal,Their eyes cast down; disgrace shall overtake them; that is the day which they were threatened with.(70:43-44)
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Noor-us-Sunnah on July 16, 2017, 02:40:41 PM
The essential Aqida of Ahmadiyya movement is the same as Ahlus sunnati wal Jamaah

1. The book Aqidat at Tahawiyya composed by Abu Ja'far al-Tahawi al-Hanafi رحمة الله عليه, considered the most agreed upon exposition of the creed of Ahlus Sunnati wal Jama'ah, does not mention as any one of its points of creed the ascension of sayyidina Eisa عليه السلام into Heaven in his Jasad.

al-Aqeedah al-Tahawiyyah categorically mentions about descent of Isa(as) from heaven, hence the Qadiyanis must believe that Isa(as) would descend from heaven, not that he would take birth.

وَنُؤْمِنُ بِأَشْرَاطِ السَّاعَةِ مِنْ خُرُوجِ الدَّجَّالِ وَنُزُولِ عِيسَى ابْنِ مَرْيَمَ عَلَيْهِ السَّلَامُ مِنَ السَّمَاءِ وَنُؤْمِنُ بِطُلُوعِ الشَّمْسِ مِنْ مَغْرِبِهَا وَخُرُوجِ دَابَّةِ الْأَرْضِ مِنْ مَوْضِعِهَا

We believe in the signs of the Hour such as the appearance of the Dajjal and the descent of Jesus son of Mary from heaven and we believe in the rising of the sun from where it sets and in the emergence of the beast from the earth.[al-Aqeedah al-Tahawiyyah, page 31]
[ You are not allowed to view attachments ]
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 16, 2017, 05:06:20 PM

We haven't established our proof from the hadeeth that Prophet(saws) met Isa(as) in heaven, hence he is alive, So Mirza jumps in and says that Quran talks about Prophet(saws) meeting Musa(As), hence he must be alive too. Meeting with Prophets in no way proves that they were alive, be it mentioned in Quran or Hadeeth (esp in your case since you believe it was a vision). Rather the evidence that Isa(As) is alive, is that Isa(as) will descend from heaven, which is unique to Isa(as). And this is the point from which Qadiyanis seem to run with their tails between their legs.

Ghulam Ahmad said: "A dead person cannot meet a living person", so unless you believe that it was a Vision, you cannot explain how the Quraan talks about the meeting with Moosaa alaihis salaam unless you believe Moosaa alaihis salaam is alive.

Is there anything in the Holy Quraan itself which suggests Eesaa alaihis salaam is alive? On the contrary, there are at least 30 Ayaat which suggest he is deceased, and a handful of them are very explicit on that
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 16, 2017, 05:12:44 PM

The statement is not contradictory but rather, its your mind that is corrupt and incompetent. The body of a person can be transferred even when a person is asleep. And we know that at the time of sleep a person is not considered dead in actual sense, even though his soul is with Allah. Hence, Isa(as) was raised alive with body, and the Mufassireen and Muhadditheen are in agreement over this fact.

إن الله قد أجـــار أمتي من أن تجتمع على ضلالة
Messenger of Allah(saws) said: Allah Almighty has protected my ummah to agree on falsehood." [Silsilah as-Saheehah #1331]
 [ You are not allowed to view attachments ]  [ You are not allowed to view attachments ]

If the body of Eesaa alaihis salaam was transferred while he was asleep, it means his body was raised up to Heaven separately from his soul, because sleep is defined as the state in which the soul is taken away by Allah temporarily. So basically you are saying Allah caused Eesaa alaihis salaam to fall asleep and took out his soul raising it up to Him, then He raised up Eesaa's sleeping body. What is the point of that? It makes no sense at all, but then again, a doctrine based on legend and fable has so many holes in it its absolutely futile to explain it rationally. At least the Christians admit their irrational doctrine of trinity is a "mystery" which cannot be explained or understood by the limited human mind. So they are at least more consistent than you.

As for Ijma, the Hadith you quoted speaks about the entire agreement of the Ummah, not just your brand of Ulama. And the fact that I have quoted different scholars like Imam Malik and Ibn Hazm believing that sayyidina Eesaa alaihis salaam died has already broken your fragile "Ijmaa".

Furthermore, the Ijmaa of the Ummah doesn't mean the Ijmaa of a particular sect or even the Jama'ah, unless you want to argue that all the other 72 sects are excluded from the Ummah and make Takfir of them
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 16, 2017, 05:22:16 PM
If supposedly, Isa(as) died and his body is on earth, then his body is in Grave, but we find in Quran that people who are in graves will come out only on the day of Judgement, but since Isa(as) will descend from heaven, as proven from Marfu hadeeth, this implies that he is not dead nor buried, otherwise this will contradict Quran. The correct and well supported view is tht Isa(a) will was raised up alive.

And the trumpet shall be blown, when lo! from their graves they shall hasten on to their Lord.(36:51)

The day on which they shall come forth from their graves in haste, as if they were hastening on to a goal,Their eyes cast down; disgrace shall overtake them; that is the day which they were threatened with.(70:43-44)

You yourself claimed Eesaa alaihis salaam is unique. For example, his Jasad is being sustained without Ta'am (food) for the past 2 millennia despite the rule in the Quraan that a human Jasad cannot sustain without eating. Then you also believe that the deceased have been raised back to life prematurely before Qiyamah. In fact this is what Mawdudi himself said:

“It is certainly of no avail at this juncture to open the debate as to whether the Holy Christ is dead or exists alive somewhere in the world. Supposing he is dead, God has the power to raise him alive, otherwise also it is not beyond the Divine power of God to keep a man alive somewhere in the cosmos for as long as thousands of years; and to bring the man back to the world at His Will.”

Therefore it is quite inconsistent to say that Eesaa alaihis salam is alive in his body in Heaven just because there are Ahadith about him descending. The Ahadeeth about him descending from Heaven are nowhere to be found in the Sihhah as Sitta, but at most 1 or 2 isolated Ahadeeth from Musnad al Bazaar and Baihaqi's Asmaa was Siffaat. Otherwise there is no mention of this in the Sahihayn, which only speaks of descent. So your belief in descent from sky is resting on not a very strong foundation.

Ibn Arabi believed Eesaa alaihis salaam would descend in a new body  (http://islamsalvationfromhell.blogspot.ca/2014/11/sufi-shaikh-ibn-arabi-says-jesus-will.html)

There was a sect of Muslims (http://islamsalvationfromhell.blogspot.ca/2015/09/ibnul-wardi-section-of-muslims-believe.html) who believed the second coming of Eesaa alaihis salaam refers to the coming of someone who resembles him (centuries before the "Qadiyanis")
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 16, 2017, 05:45:50 PM
I am not at all denying that Allah is above His Throne, above the Heavens, and that He is distinct from His creation. But by saying that Eesaa alaihis salaam was raised up to the sky in his Jasad in order to go to Allah you are questioning the المعيّة "Ma'iyya" or "withness" of Allah.

So as Ibn Taymiyya has explained, the truth is to combine in one's creed both the belief that Allah is above us, His Uluww (highness), and that Allah is with us, His Ma'iyyah. They are two aspects of Allah's existence, His transcendence and His imminence respectively.

The Holy Qur'an teaches us that it is not physical bodies that ascend to Him, but rather the Angels and the Spirit:

تَعْرُجُ الْمَلَائِكَةُ وَالرُّوحُ إِلَيْهِ فِي يَوْمٍ كَانَ مِقْدَارُهُ خَمْسِينَ أَلْفَ سَنَةٍ
The Angels and the Spirit ascend to Him in a Day the measure whereof is fifty thousand years (Sura 70:4)
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Ebn Hussein on July 16, 2017, 05:53:23 PM
Now for those who imagine that I started this topic on Ghayba of Jesus to discuss about "Qadiyanism" instead of Shi'ism; in fact, as I made quite clear, this discussion revolves around the Shi'ite concept of Ghayba.

and yet you titled it "challenge to sunnis" buddy 😂😂

That's the point. Sunnis need to be challenged to re-evaluate their belief in the ghayba of Jesus because that is the doctrine which opens the door for the ghayba of the 12th Imam.

With all due respect, I, as an Ex-Shia, strongly disagree. I always laugh at the fallacy and batil and desperate Qiyas (comparison) of the Shia, how can you even consider it worth to be mentioned?

Shia Ghaybah: An alleged NON-Guiding Imam who does NOTHING and actual Imam is supposed to do and is represent by Iranian "Ayatollahs" who collect money in his name and speak on his behalf (i.e. Shia take their Deen from fallibles). This ridiculous belief has influenced millions of lifes of Shias around the world, they literally worship him, ask him for help and substainance, in fact they believe he is hadhir-nadhir (everywhere with his knowledge like Allah), hence in my county Iran, it is common to see billboards such as:

"Don't make Agha Emam Zaman sad and cry by committing sins."

Their belief in that mythical figure and ghaybah has turned into a whole additional belief system which they call Mahdaviyyat, where they await his reappearance, which includes several hineous rituals including constant wailing (fabricated narrations like "Dua E Nodbeh" which translates to: The Prayer of wailing!) and writing letters to him (similar to Jewish practice):

https://youtu.be/rBdOkjALnoQ

'Isa being raised to Allah: A miracle that is mentioned in the Qur'an and has no influence on Muslim life whatsoever, it's even open to interpretation, not a core issue in Aqidah and no bid3ah or heresy has ever evolved out of that belief, no invoking of Isa, no cultish beliefs about him, nothing, unlike the Ghaybah/Mahdaviyyat nonsense of the Rafidah. 
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Noor-us-Sunnah on July 18, 2017, 07:00:06 AM
Ghulam Ahmad said: "A dead person cannot meet a living person", so unless you believe that it was a Vision, you cannot explain how the Quraan talks about the meeting with Moosaa alaihis salaam unless you believe Moosaa alaihis salaam is alive.
It would be Ruh of Prophets(as), and difference between the claim of Ghulam Ahmad and our belief is that, we believe Allah made it happen. Does Ghulam Ahmad doubt the power of Allah(swt), that He cannot make it happen?  Secondly, Angels can see the Ruh of a person, and they can even meet humans, but Human beings cannot see the angels(in their real form), except when Allah wills, like it happened in the case of Prophet(saws).

إِنَّمَا هُوَ جِبْرِيلُ لَمْ أَرَهُ عَلَى صُورَتِهِ الَّتِي خُلِقَ عَلَيْهَا غَيْرَ هَاتَيْنِ الْمَرَّتَيْنِ رَأَيْتُهُ مُنْهَبِطًا مِنَ السَّمَاءِ سَادًّا عِظَمُ خَلْقِهِ مَا بَيْنَ السَّمَاءِ إِلَى الأَرْضِ
Messenger of Allah (Saws) said describing Jibril(as): Verily he is Gabriel. I have never seen him in his original form in which he was created except on those two occasions (to which these verses refer); I saw him descending from the heaven and filling (the space) from the sky to the earth with the greatness of his bodily structure. [Sahih Muslim 177 a]

If it had been a dream/vision, there would have been nothing great about it and it would not have been regarded as being of such great significance; the disbelievers of Quraysh would not have hastened to disbelieve him.

Shaykh Haafiz al-Hakami said in Ma‘aarij al-Qubool (3/1067):
ولو كان الإسراء والمعراج بروحه في المنام لم تكن معجزة ، ولا كان لتكذيب قريش بها وقولهم : كنا نضرب أكباد الإبل إلى بيت المقدس ، شهرا ذهابا وشهرا إيابا ، ومحمد يزعم أنه أسرى به اللية وأصبح فينا إلى آخر تكذيبهم واستهزاءهم به صلى الله عليه وسلم لو كان ذلك رؤيا مناما لم يستبعدوه ولم يكن لردهم عليه معنى ؛ لأن الإنسان قد يرى في منامه ما هو أبعد من بيت المقدس ولا يكذبه أحد استبعاد لرؤياه ، وإنما قص عليهم رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم مسرى حقيقة يقظة لا مناما فكذبوه واستهزؤوا به استبعاد لذالك واستعظاما له مع نوع مكابرة لقلة علمهم بقدرة الله عز وجل وأن الله يفعل ما يريد ولهذا لما قالوا للصديق وأخبروه الخبر قال : إن كان قال ذلك لقد صدق . قالوا وتصدقه بذلك ؟ قال : نعم إني لأصدقه فيما هو أبعد من ذلك في خبر السماء يأتيه بكرة وعشيا أو كما قال
If the Isra’ and Mi‘raaj had to do with the soul in a dream, Quraysh would not have rejected it and they would not have said, It takes us a month by camel to reach Jerusalem and a month to come back, but Muhammad claims that he was taken there last night and was back here with us this morning…! And they ridiculed him (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him). If that had been a dream, they would not have found it so far-fetched and there would have been no meaning in their rejecting it, because a person may see in his dream things that are farther away than Jerusalem, and no one will disbelieve his dream or find it far-fetched. But the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) told them about a night journey that was real and had happened when he was awake, not in a dream, so they rejected it and ridiculed him, as they found it far-fetched and outrageous, and also out of stubbornness, because they had little knowledge of the might and power of Allah, may He be glorified and exalted, and they did not realise that Allah does whatever He wills. Hence when they told Abu Bakr as-Siddeeq about it, he said: If he said it, then it is true. They said: Do you really believe him? He said: Yes, and I believe him in something even more extraordinary than that, that news from heaven comes to him in the morning or in the afternoon – or words that effect. End quote.


Quote
Answering the Argument that Prophet(saws) couldn't ascend, since he responded to the demands of Mushrikeen that he was just a Man, sent as a Messenger
The way in which this writer discussed the issue and reached his conclusions is astounding, because he referred to one of the many demands that the disbelievers had made, and he gave the impression that the Qur’anic response – “Say (O Muhammad (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him)): ‘Glorified (and Exalted) be my Lord (Allah) above all that evil they (polytheists) associate with Him! Am I anything but a man, sent as a Messenger?’” [al-Isra’ 17:93] – is referring to that particular demand, namely ascending up into the sky, and indicating that it is not possible for the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) to do that. But in fact this Qur’anic response was referring to a number of demands that the mushrikeen made out of stubbornness and going to extremes in rejection and denial. There follow these demands as described in the Qur’an (interpretation of the meaning):

“And they say: ‘We shall not believe in you (O Muhammad (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him)), until you cause a spring to gush forth from the earth for us;

‘Or you have a garden of date-palms and grapes, and cause rivers to gush forth in their midst abundantly;

‘Or you cause the heaven to fall upon us in pieces, as you have pretended, or you bring Allah and the angels before (us) face to face;

‘Or you have a house of adornable materials (like silver and pure gold, etc.), or you ascend up into the sky, and even then we will put no faith in your ascension until you bring down for us a Book that we would read.’ Say (O Muhammad (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him)): ‘Glorified (and Exalted) be my Lord (Allah) above all that evil they (polytheists) associate with Him! Am I anything but a man, sent as a Messenger?”

[al-Isra’ 17:90-93].

Think about these demands that deserve no response except the Qur’anic response: “Say (O Muhammad (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him)): ‘Glorified (and Exalted) be my Lord (Allah) above all that evil they (polytheists) associate with Him! Am I anything but a man, sent as a Messenger?’”

Is it possible for one who is a human being to cause a spring to gush forth from the earth, and rivers, or to cause the heaven to fall down, or to bring Allah (!) and the angels, or to ascend up into the sky and bring from it a Book addressed to every disbeliever?! As it says in the commentary that was narrated from Mujaahid and others. And this is in accordance with the verse in which Allah, may He be exalted, says (interpretation of the meaning):

“Nay, everyone of them desires that he should be given pages spread out (coming from Allah with a writing that Islam is the right religion, and Muhammad (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) has come with the truth from Allah the Lord of the heavens and earth, etc.)”

[al-Muddaththir 74:52].

Undoubtedly these are not characteristics of human beings, nor are they within their capabilities. The statement of the Qur’an that the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) is not able to do that refers to all of these demands together, and not just some of them, because among them are some demands that are ordinarily possible. It is proven that water sprang from between the fingers of the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him), as is narrated in Saheeh al-Bukhaari (3576) and elsewhere, so how about causing springs to gush forth from the earth (i.e., that is not impossible for him either). It is also not impossible that he could have had a garden of date palms… and other demands that they made. But the disbelievers had no real interest in these things; rather their main aim was to go to extremes in stubbornness and obstinacy with the Messenger for the sake of persisting in their transgression.

Taken from:
https://islamqa.info/en/84314


Is there anything in the Holy Quraan itself which suggests Eesaa alaihis salaam is alive? On the contrary, there are at least 30 Ayaat which suggest he is deceased, and a handful of them are very explicit on that
The verse of Quran, talking about the Rafa of Isa(as) is a proof for this, as for the claim that atleast 30 verses suggests that isa(as) is deceased, then this idiotic is claims is like a person claims that there are verses in Quran that shows human beings have both mother and father, Hence Isa(as) cannot be born without a Father, we say to such an idiot that, Isa(as) was an except to the general rule mentioned in the verses he is referring. Same goes in this case too.

Infact, the agreement of Mufassireen(commentators of Quran) as mentioned by Ibn Hajar, that Isa(as) is alive, shows how bogus this Qadiyani claim is.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Noor-us-Sunnah on July 18, 2017, 07:00:37 AM
If the body of Eesaa alaihis salaam was transferred while he was asleep, it means his body was raised up to Heaven separately from his soul, because sleep is defined as the state in which the soul is taken away by Allah temporarily. So basically you are saying Allah caused Eesaa alaihis salaam to fall asleep and took out his soul raising it up to Him, then He raised up Eesaa's sleeping body. What is the point of that?
The point is he was alive. A person who is sleeping isn't considered dead.

Quote
It makes no sense at all, but then again, a doctrine based on legend and fable has so many holes in it its absolutely futile to explain it rationally. At least the Christians admit their irrational doctrine of trinity is a "mystery" which cannot be explained or understood by the limited human mind. So they are at least more consistent than you.
The doctrine is well backed by Quran and the ahadeeth of Prophet(saws) about the descend of Isa(As) from heaven. The return of Isa(as) from heaven is such a point that it exposes the hypocrisy of qadiyanis clearly, like sun in a cloudless day.


As for Ijma, the Hadith you quoted speaks about the entire agreement of the Ummah, not just your brand of Ulama. And the fact that I have quoted different scholars like Imam Malik and Ibn Hazm believing that sayyidina Eesaa alaihis salaam died has already broken your fragile "Ijmaa".
Last time I remember, you were bragging by quoting Ibn Qayyim and Hujweri, but your glass house of deception was shattered. Alhamdulillah. So now you have jumped to some other names, realizing the previous ones who quoted turned out to be against you. So lets see what you have got now, but before that let me quote what Ibn Hajar said about the agreement of scholars.

Ibn Hajar Asqalani(d. 852 H) said:
وأما رفع عيسى فاتفق أصحاب الأخبار والتفسير على أنه رفع ببدنه حيا وإنما اختلفوا هل مات قبل أن يرفع أو نام فرفع
Regarding the Ascend of Isa(as), there is an agreement between Muhadditeen and Mufassireen that he was raised alive with body. However there is a disagreement that whether before ascend he was given death(for a small time) or he was raised while he was asleep.
(talkheer al Habeer, vol 3, page 214).

Ib Hajar presents two views held by the Scholar. (i). Isa(as) was given death for a small time  (ii). raised up while asleep. Now, Lets move on to the two Ulema you mentioned.

1. Ibn Hazm is to be counted among those who believed that Isa(as) was given death for a small time, and given life again as some Tabai'een believed. Ibn Hazm believed that Isa(as) was alive, since he believed that the same Isa(as) who was sent to Bani Israel would descend.

Secondly, Ibn Hazm stated:
وقد صح عن رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم بنقل الكواف التي نقلت نبوته واعلامه وكتابه أنه أخبر أنه لا نبي بعده إلا ما جاءت الأخبار الصحاح من نزول عيسى عليه السلام الذي بعث إلى بني إسرائيل وادعى اليهود قتله وصلبه فوجب الإقرار بهذه الجملة
And its was reported authentically from Prophet(saws) by all these people who reported his Prophethood, his signs and his Book, that he informed, that after him there will no Prophet, but it has been mentioned in authentic narrations that the same Isa(as) will descend who was sent to Bani Israel, and to whom Jews claim to have killed and crucified. And it is obligatory to believe in this statement(about his descend).(Kitab al-fasl fi al-milal wa-al-ahwa' wa-al-nihal, vol 1, page 45)
http://islamport.com/b/4/tareekh/%DF%CA%C8%20%C7%E1%CA%C7%D1%ED%CE/%C7%E1%DD%D5%E1%20%DD%ED%20%C7%E1%E3%E1%E1%20%E6%C7%E1%C3%E5%E6%C7%C1%20%E6%C7%E1%E4%CD%E1/%C7%E1%DD%D5%E1%20%DD%ED%20%C7%E1%E3%E1%E1%20%E6%C7%E1%C3%E5%E6%C7%C1%20%E6%C7%E1%E4%CD%E1%20002.html


2. The attribution to Imam Malik that he believed Isa(as) died is WITHOUT a chain, hence it is rejected, since I have cited the usool that, chain-less reports are nothing and are to be discarded. Infact, in the same book which Qadiyanis quote, we find (again without chain) that Imam Malik believed that Isa(as) would descend in the end times, as Sunnis believe. Hence, even if we consider for sake of argument the chain-less report attributed to Imam Malik that Isa(as) died, then even this case would be considered as the one like Ibn Hazm, who believed that Isa(as) died for a short time and was made alive again, hence he would return by descending from heaven. And I guess Ghulam Ahmad should have taught the Qadiyanis the simple fact that, a dead person doesn't ascends from heaven, only alive person could.

Imam Malik said:During the time when the people would be forming the rows for prayer, suddenly a cloud will cover them and then Isa(as) will descend. [Ikmal-i-Ikmal (Sharh Sahih Muslim), vol 1, page 266].
[ You are not allowed to view attachments ]

The stupidity is believing that a human being was raised up to the clouds and lives there without nourishment for over 2000 years.

As per your standard, Ghulam Ahmed was a stupid too. LOL.

A.R. Dard wrote in his biography of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad:

    “Ahmad (as) reiterated in the Brahin-e-Ahmadiyya, published in 1884, the popular belief that Jesus (as) was alive in the heavens and that he would come again to this world… It was in 1891, when God informed Ahmad (as) that Jesus (as) had died, that he changed his belief in this respect.” (Life Of Ahmad, Page 50 by A.R. Dard).
[ You are not allowed to view attachments ]
Mirza Ghulam Ahmad says,

    “….But as a body of Muslims was firmly of the faith – and I too believed – that Jesus (AS) would descend from heaven… my earlier belief… which I had set down in Brahin-e-Ahmadiyyah… I was (then) convinced by several conclusive verses that Jesus Son of Mary (AS) had indeed died” (The Essence Of Islam, Volume 4, Page 46)
[ You are not allowed to view attachments ]
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Noor-us-Sunnah on July 18, 2017, 07:01:47 AM
You yourself claimed Eesaa alaihis salaam is unique. For example, his Jasad is being sustained without Ta'am (food) for the past 2 millennia despite the rule in the Quraan that a human Jasad cannot sustain without eating. Then you also believe that the deceased have been raised back to life prematurely before Qiyamah.
Yes, I argued that you cannot counter supernatural cases by bringing in the examples of natural cases, like burning of skin is general case, but fire becoming cool for Ibrahim(as) is supernatural case. Or the necessity of mother and father for birth of child is general case, but Isa(as) being born without Father is supernatural case. So a rightly guided Muslim is sincere and accepts supernatural events without questioning it, since human mind is not mature enough to comprehend supernatural events.

Quote
Therefore it is quite inconsistent to say that Eesaa alaihis salam is alive in his body in Heaven just because there are Ahadith about him descending. The Ahadeeth about him descending from Heaven are nowhere to be found in the Sihhah as Sitta, but at most 1 or 2 isolated Ahadeeth from Musnad al Bazaar and Baihaqi's Asmaa was Siffaat. Otherwise there is no mention of this in the Sahihayn, which only speaks of descent. So your belief in descent from sky is resting on not a very strong foundation.
This silly comments shows the level of your knowledge, these arguments raise only from the juhla. A hadeeth being not present in Sahih Sitta means absolutely nothing, an authentic hadeeth is to be accepted in which ever book it may be. Only the people who have evil in their hearts, casts such desperate, fragile and un-academic doubts.

Secondly,  the hadeeth in Sahih Muslim speaks that Isa(as) will descend keeping his hands on the wings of Angels. I challenge you to prove any other human who would descend after his death by keeping hands on wings of angels. And don't make the deceitful foul play of seperating this point of "descend by taking support on the wings of angels", because you would seperate it to make an escape door for you by saying that, descend(nuzool) means creation, like in case of cattle, and Angels support Muslims too. But these are not two different points, it is one point and is to be understood as a whole, that is Isa(as) would descend along with angels and it is impossible for you to prove that a human being would descend after his death by placing hands on wings of angels.
وَمَا نَتَنَزَّلُ إِلَّا بِأَمْرِ رَبِّكَ لَهُ مَا بَيْنَ أَيْدِينَا وَمَا خَلْفَنَا وَمَا بَيْنَ ذَٰلِكَ وَمَا كَانَ رَبُّكَ نَسِيًّا
(The angels say) "We descend not but by command of thy Lord: to Him belongeth what is before us and what is behind us, and what is between: and thy Lord never doth forget,-(19:64).

قُل لَّوْ كَانَ فِي الْأَرْضِ مَلَائِكَةٌ يَمْشُونَ مُطْمَئِنِّينَ لَنَزَّلْنَا عَلَيْهِم مِّنَ السَّمَاءِ مَلَكًا رَّسُولًا
Say: Had there been in the earth angels walking about as settlers, We would certainly have sent down to them from the heaven an angel as a messenger.(17:95).

The Angels descend from heaven, and the Angels have wings[See Quran 35:1], even without the Marfu ahadeeth, stuck in your throat about Isa(as) descending from heaven, we can still prove from the hadeeth of Sahih Muslim, that Isa(As) will descend from heaven. 


Quote
Ibn Arabi believed Eesaa alaihis salaam would descend in a new body  (http://islamsalvationfromhell.blogspot.ca/2014/11/sufi-shaikh-ibn-arabi-says-jesus-will.html)
Keeping aside the fact that a number of high ranking Scholars made Takfeer of Ibn Arabi, because of the contents in his books exposing his dangerous beliefs, which you can see here:
https://gift2sufis.files.wordpress.com/2011/01/takfeer-of-ibn-arabee5.pdf
 
AND HERE

https://gift2sufis.wordpress.com/2011/07/18/takfir-of-ibn-arabi-as-soofi/

I would still, like to say that the Tafsir you are referring to as Tafsir Ibn Arabi, was not written by Ibn Arabi. I will list down some proofs for the benefit of readers:

(i). We read:

"Tafsīr al-Qur'ān al-karīm - often printed as attributed to Ibn al-`Arabi. Also very well-known, though it has repeatedly been published under the name of his master Ibn al-`Arabi (d. 638/1240), is `Abd al-Razzaq's deeply mystical Tafsīr al-Qur'ān al-karīm".
Source:http://hurqalya.ucmerced.edu/node/681

(ii). We read:

Among al-Kashanī’s numerous extant writings, one of the most frequently printed is his Qur’an commentary. However, despite the virtually uncontested ascription of the Ta’wīlāt al-Qur’ān to al-Kashanī, this text has been repeatedly printed by modern publishing houses under the name Tafsīr al-Qur’ān al-Karīm and ascribed to Ibn ‘Arabī himself; as one scholar has suggested, this strategy is probably at least in part a marketing ploy.
https://thicketandthorp.wordpress.com/2012/06/07/the-palm-tree-of-the-soul-the-mystical-philosophical-tafsir-of-abd-al-razzaq-al-kashani/

(iii). Abd al-Razzaq Ta’wilat of the Qur’an. There is diversity of opinions about author of the book. Some people ascribe it to Ibn Arabi (Marifat 2/ 414), but  some  others attribute  the  book  to  Abd  al-Razzaq  Kashani.  In  this  case,  Sheikh  Mohammad  Abdu  states:«allegorical Tafsir,  which  is  attributed  to  Sheikh  Akbar  Muhyi  ad-Din  Ibn  Arabi,  actually  belongs  to,  a  famous esotericist, Kashani. In this Tafsir, there are many attitudes and opinions which are not accepted in religion of Allah as well  as  the  Book»
http://jiscnet.com/journals/jisc/Vol_4_No_1_June_2016/18.pdf

Also for details, refer Histoire et classification de l'oeuvre d'ibn Arabi: étude critique- page 483, point 732 by Osman Yahya" In this book Osman Yahya mentioned scores of books attributed to Ibn ‘Arabi but which were written by anonymous or less well-known scholars.

Quote
There was a sect of Muslims (http://islamsalvationfromhell.blogspot.ca/2015/09/ibnul-wardi-section-of-muslims-believe.html) who believed the second coming of Eesaa alaihis salaam refers to the coming of someone who resembles him (centuries before the "Qadiyanis")[/size][/font]
We never denied the existence of Zanadiqa(heretics) in Ummah, that is why look up to the early generations, that what were their beliefs.

Narrated Abdullah: The Prophet (may peace be upon him) said,”The best people are those living in my generation, and then those who will follow them, and then those who will follow the latter.Then there will come some people who will bear witness before taking oaths, and take oaths before bearing witness.” (Sahih al-Bukhari 3651)

Narrated `Imran bin Husain: “Allah’s Apostle said, ‘The best of my followers are those living in my generation and then those who will follow the latter” Imran added, “I do not remember whether he mentioned two or three generations after his generation, then the Prophet added, ‘There will come after you, people who will bear witness without being asked to do so, and will be treacherous and untrustworthy, and they will vow and never fulfill their vows, and fatness will appear among them.” (Sahih al-Bukhari 3650).
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Noor-us-Sunnah on July 18, 2017, 02:18:33 PM
I am not at all denying that Allah is above His Throne, above the Heavens, and that He is distinct from His creation. But by saying that Eesaa alaihis salaam was raised up to the sky in his Jasad in order to go to Allah you are questioning the المعيّة "Ma'iyya" or "withness" of Allah.

So as Ibn Taymiyya has explained, the truth is to combine in one's creed both the belief that Allah is above us, His Uluww (highness), and that Allah is with us, His Ma'iyyah. They are two aspects of Allah's existence, His transcendence and His imminence respectively.
It's not me who is questioning the Ma'iyyah of Allah, but its your belief that is questioning it. As, I said we believe that Allah is with us, with his knowledge or sometimes with support, not with Dhaat. This is what Ibn Taymiyyah believed and This is what the essence of the test laid out by Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal, whom I quoted from Radd al-Zanadiqah wal Jahamiyyah.

Quote
The Holy Qur'an teaches us that it is not physical bodies that ascend to Him, but rather the Angels and the Spirit:

تَعْرُجُ الْمَلَائِكَةُ وَالرُّوحُ إِلَيْهِ فِي يَوْمٍ كَانَ مِقْدَارُهُ خَمْسِينَ أَلْفَ سَنَةٍ
The Angels and the Spirit ascend to Him in a Day the measure whereof is fifty thousand years (Sura 70:4)[/size]
There is no restriction being mentioned in this verse about the ascend of Angels and the Spirits. And again, we believe that it is Allah who has the power over all things. And it was Allah who raised Isa(as) above heavens or Prophet Muhammad(saws).

Ibn Katheer (may Allah have mercy on him) said in his Tafseer (3/33):
وأيضاً فإنه حمل على البراق ، وهو دابة بيضاء براقة لها لمعان ، وإنما يكون هذا للبدن ، لا للروح لأنها لا تحتاج في حركتها إلى مركب تركب عليه ، والله أعلم
he(Muhammad SAWS) was carried on al-Buraaq, which was a shining white animal; this can only refer to the body, not the soul, because to move the soul there is no need for a mount to carry it. And Allah knows best.

The mention of al-Buraaq can be found in Multiple reports, (i). From Malik bin Sasaa(ra) in Sahih al-Bukhari 3207  (ii). From Hudhaifah bin Al-Yaman(ra) in Jami` at-Tirmidhi, Book 47, Hadith 3440 ; Grading: Sahih. (iii). From Buraidah(ra) in Jami` at-Tirmidhi , Book 47, Hadith 3424; Grading: Hasan. ; (iv). From Anas bin Malik(ra) in Sahih Muslim 162 a.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Noor-us-Sunnah on July 18, 2017, 05:30:57 PM
Now here you have opened a whole other can of worms. You are putting forward an Aqida that I don't accept, i.e., you believe that the deceased are present in their graves. We believe that the deceased are not in this world, including in the cemetery. We further believe that the deceased cannot hear, whether from afar or in proximity of their graves. So when we invoke Salam with Khitaab upon the inmates of the Maqbara when we are inside the Maqbara, it is not because we believe the deceased can hear us since we are in proximity to their bones, rather, it means that the Angels are conveying our Salam to them. Therefore, I dispute your premise that in the Maqbara the deceased is Haadir. The deceased is Ghaa'ib whether in the Maqbara or far away from the Maqbara.

رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم قَالَ ‏ "‏ مَا مِنْ أَحَدٍ يُسَلِّمُ عَلَىَّ إِلاَّ رَدَّ اللَّهُ عَلَىَّ رُوحِي حَتَّى أَرُدَّ عَلَيْهِ السَّلاَمَ
The Prophet (ﷺ) said: No one gives greetings of salaam, except that Allah will restore my soul to me, so that I may reply to him with the greeting of salaam. [Sunan Abi Dawud #2041 ; Grading: Hasan(Albani).
[ You are not allowed to view attachments ]
The chain of this hadeeth was criticized by some scholars, and they tried to weaken it, however their criticism was refuted in detail, along with explanation in this link:
http://ahlul-isnaad.blogspot.co.uk/2012/07/return-of-soul-and-issue-of-hayaat-un.html?m=1

 This hadeeth does not prove at all that the Prophet (peace be upon him) answers every single person who sends salaam, no matter if he says salaam from nearby or from far away, rather this hadeeth is only concerning the one, who sends salaam to him from nearby. Because he (peace be upon him) has himself affirmed regarding the one sending salaam from far away that it is the angels that bring his salaam to him, and the reply to this salaam is also not proven from him. Therefore, it is narrated from Abu Hurayrah himself, who is the narrator of this hadeeth also, that the Messenger of Allaah (peace be upon him) said: “The Messenger of Allaah (peace be upon him) said: “Do not take your houses as graves and do not take my grave as a place of festivity (which you visit repeatedly). Send blessings upon me for your greeting will reach me no matter where you are” [Musnad Ahmed: 2/367, Sunan Abu Dawood: 2041, Chain Hasan]

Moreover, Sayyidunah Abdullah bin Mas’ood (radiallah anhu) narrates: The Messenger of Allaah (peace be upon him) said: “Allaah has angels who go around on earth, conveying to me the salaam of my ummah.” [Narrated by al-Nasaa’ee, 1282; classed as Saheeh by al-Albaani in Saheeh al-Targheeb, 1664]

These ahadeeth explicitly prove that the one who sends salaam from far away does not come under the same ruling as the one who sends salaam from nearby, because there is no mention that he (peace be upon him) would also answer the salaam of one who sends salaam from far away, whereas, the proof is established regarding the one sending salaam from nearby.

Shaikh ul-Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah writes: “The scholars have understood [from this hadeeth] that this salaam [regarding which it is said that Prophet’s soul returns to his body] is only that which is said near the Prophet’s grave, this hadeeth is not a proof for the one [sending salaam] from far away” [Ar-Radd Ala al-Bakri: 1/107]

What is meant by nearby is only the apartment of Aa’ishah (radiallah anha), where he (peace be upon him) is buried. This is why, whenever Sayyidunah Abdullah bin Umar (radiallah anhu) would return from a journey, he would come near the grave of the Prophet (peace be upon him) and say: “Peace be upon you O Messenger of Allaah, peace be upon you O Abu Bakr, Peace be upon you O My Father (Umar)” [Fadhal as-Salaat ala an-Nabi by Qaadhi Ismaa’eel bin Ishaaq (Pg 81-82), Al-Sunan al-Kubra by Bayhaqi (5/245), Chain Saheeh]

This proves that the returning of soul is only related to the person who says Salaam standing right next to the grave, as Allaamah Shanqeeti writes: “All [Scholars] are agreed upon that this [Prophet’s returning of Salaam] is only achieved by one who says salaam to him from close….” [Adhwaa ul-Bayaan: 8/838]

Abu Tayyib Shams ul-Haqq al-Adheemaabaadee (rahimahullah) writes: “The correct opinion is that this hadeeth is concerning the one who visits the [grave of the] Prophet (peace be upon him), as for those who are far away, then the angels convey his salaam to him (and Allaah answers this salaam with 10 blessings).” [Awn al-Ma’bood fi Sharh Sunan Abi Dawood: 6/22]

Abul Hassan Ubaydullah bin Muhammad Rehmaani al-Mubaarakpoori (rahimahullah) writes: “The correct opinion is that what is meant from this hadeeth is the salaam that is said close to the grave of the Prophet (peace be upon him), as is understood by many other Scholars.” [Mir’aat ul-Mafateeh Sharh Mishkaat ul-Masabeeh: 3/263]

The most explicit of all proofs is that Imaam Abu Dawood (rahimahullah) has brought this hadeeth under the chapter heading “Visit of the Grave”(باب زِيَارَةِ الْقُبُورِ).

There are two types of Salaam. One is a salaam that is said from the near which is Salaam Tahiyyah, and whose answer is given by the Prophet (peace be upon him) himself; while the other salaam is that which is said from far away, the answer to which is not given by the Prophet (peace be upon him) himself, rather Allaah sends blessings on that person instead.

Imaam Ibn Abdul Haadi explains both these types in the following words:

والمقصود هنا أن نعرف ما كان عليه السلف من الفرق بين ما أمر الله به من الصلاة والسلام عليه وبين سلام التحية الموجب للرد الذي يشترك فيه كل مؤمن حي وميت ويرد فيه على الكافر....

“The purpose here is that we know the difference between the salaat and salaam ordained by Allaah, and the salaam of Tahiyyah, the answer to which is obligatory, and in this all living and deceased Muslims are alike, and in which we are to answer the salaam of even a Kaafir…”
[Saarim al-Munki: 1/125]

He further said:

وهذا السلام لا يقتضي رداً من المسلم عليه، بل هو بمنزلة دعاء المؤمن للمؤمنين واستغفاره لهم، فيه الأجر والثواب من الله، ليس على المدعو لهم مثل ذلك الدعاء، بخلاف سلام التحية، فإنه مشروع بالنص والإجماع في حق كل مسلم. وعلى المسلم عليه أن يرد السلام ولو كان المسلم عليه كافراً، فإن هذا من العدل الواجب،ولهذا كان النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم يرد على اليهود إذا سلموا بقول ((وعليكم))

“This salaam (salaam Ma’moor) does not demand an answer for the one who said it, rather it is a Du’aa & Istighfaar of a Mu’min for other Mu’mineen, there is reward of Allaah in it. The one for whom this Du’aa is made, it is not necessary for him to return a du’aa similar to it; as compared to Salaam Tahiyyah for verily it is ordained upon every Muslim from the Nass [of Qur’aan-o-Sunnah] and the Ijmaa of Ummah, it is from the right of every Muslim. And for whom Salaam Tahiyyah is said, it is obligatory for him to reply it, even if he [the one who said the salaam] is a Kaafir. This is why when the Jews would salute the Prophet (peace be upon him), he would reply them with ((Alaikum))”
[Saarim al-Munki: 1/118-119]

He further writes:

فالصلاة والسلام عليه صلى الله عليه وسلم في مسجده وسائر المساجد وسائر البقاع مشروع بالكتاب والسنة والإجماع، وأما السلام عليه عند قبره من داخل الحجرة فهذا كان مشروعاً لما كان ممكناً بدخول من يدخل على عائشة....

“Salaat and Salaam upon the Prophet (peace be upon him) in his Mosque, or any other mosque, or any place of the world is ordained (Mashroo’) due to the proof from Kitaab, Sunnah, and Ijmaa. As for the salaam upon him close to his grave after entering the apartment [of Aa’ishah] then it was only mashroo' for the one who could enter into the apartment of Aa’ishah.”
[Saarim al-Munki: 1/119]

Imaam Ibn Abdul Haadi (rahimahullah), he writes:

وليس هذا المعنى المذكور في الحديث، ولا هو ظاهره، بل هو مخالف لظاهره، فإن قوله: ((إلا رد الله علي روحي)) بعد قوله: ((ما من أحد يسلم علي)) يقتضي رد الروح بعد السلام، ولا يقتضي استمرارها في الجسد . وليعلم أن رد الروح إلى البدن وعودها إلى الجسد بعد الموت لا يقتضي استمرارها فيه، ولا يستلزم حياة أخرى قبل يوم النشور نظير الحياة المعهودة، بل إعادة الروح إلى الجسد في البرزخ إعادة برزخية، لا تزيل عن الميت اسم الموت. وقد ثبت في حديث البراء بن عازب الطويل المشهور في عذاب القبر ونعيمه في شأن الميت وحاله أن روحه تعاد إلى جسده، مع العلم بأنها غير مستمرة فيه وأن هذه الإعادة ليس مستلزمة لإثبات حياة مزيلة لاسم الموت، بل هي أنواع حياة برزخية

“This above mentioned meaning [of Hayaat un-Nabi] is not mentioned in this hadeeth, and neither is this the apparent meaning of the hadeeth, rather it is against its apparent meaning, for verily his saying ((except that Allaah will restore my soul to me)) after his saying ((no one gives greetings of salaam…)) demands the return of soul after the salaam, and these words do not demand the presence of soul in the body permanently. It should be known that the return of soul to the body, and its return towards the body after the death does not prove its presence in there permanently, and neither is it a proof of a second life before the day of resurrection, which is like the worldly life. On the contrary, the return of soul in Barzakh is a Barzakhi return, which does not remove the name of death from the deceased. In the lengthy hadeeth of Bara’ bin Aazib (radiallah anhu) ([1]) concerning the punishment and rewards of grave, it is said that the soul of a deceased is returned to his body, whereas, we know that this soul does not remain in the body permanently, and neither is it a proof of a life which would remove the name of death from the deceased, rather it is a type of a Barzakhi life….”
[Saarim al-Munki: 1/222-223]

Therefore this explanation backs my argument, that we address inhabitants with Khitaab, when we are near to it, not from far away. Because from near the grave is salaam of Tahiyyah.

Abu Abdullah AlQurtubi said
قلت: روى البخاري رضي الله عنه؛ حدّثني عبد الله بن محمد سمع رَوْح بن عُبادة قال: حدّثنا سعيد بن أبي عَرُوبة عن قتادة قال: ذَكَر لَنا أنس بن مالك " عن أبي طلحة أن نبيّ الله صلى الله عليه وسلم أمر يوم بدر بأربعة وعشرين رجلاً من صناديد قريش فقُذِفوا في طَوِيٍّ من أطواء بدر خَبيثٍ مُخْبِث، وكان إذا ظهر على قوم أقام بالعَرصة ثلاث ليال، فلما كان ببدر اليومَ الثالث أمر براحلته فشدّ عليها رحلُها ثم مشى وتبعه أصحابُه، قالوا: ما نُرَى ينطلق إلا لبعض حاجته، حتى قام على شفير الرَّكِيِّ، فجعل يناديهم بأسمائهم وأسماء آبائهم يا فلان بن فلان ويا فلان بن فلان أيسركم أنكم أطعتم الله ورسوله؛ فإنا قد وجدنا ما وَعَدنا ربّنا حقًّا فهل وجدتم ما وَعَد رَبُّكم حقًّا؛ قال فقال عمر: يا رسول اللهٰ ما تُكلِّم من أجساد لا أرواح لها؛ فقال النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم: «والذي نفس محمد بيده ما أنتم بأسمع لما أقول منهم» "
قال قتادة: أحياهم الله حتى أسمعهم قوله توبيخاً وتصغيراً ونِقمةً وحسرةً وندماً. خرجه مسلم أيضاً. قال البخاري: حدّثنا عثمان قال حدّثنا عَبْدة عن هشام عن أبيه عن ابن عمر قال: وقف النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم على قلِيب بدر فقال: «هل وجدتم ما وَعَد رَبُّكُمْ حَقًّا» ثم قال: «إنهم الآن ليعلمون أن الذي كنت أقول لهم هو الحق» ثم قرأتْ { إِنَّكَ لاَ تُسْمِعُ ٱلْمَوْتَىٰ } حتى قرأت الآية. وقد عورضت هذه الآية بقصة بدر وبالسلام على القبور، وبما روي في ذلك من أن الأرواح تكون على شفير القبور في أوقات، وبأن الميت يسمع قرع النعال إذا انصرفوا عنه، إلى غير ذلك؛ فلو لم يسمع الميت لم يُسلَّم عليه. وهذا واضح وقد بيّناه في كتاب «التذكرة».

I (Qurtubi) say: It is narrated by Bukhari from Abu Talha: On the day of badr, the Prophet ordered that the corpses of twenty four leaders of Quraish should be thrown into one of the dirty dry wells of badr. (It was a habit of the Prophet that whenever he conquered some people, he used to stay at the battle-field for three nights. So, on the third day of the battle of badr, he ordered that his she-camel be saddled, then he set out, and his companions followed him saying among themselves." "Definitely he (i.e. the Prophet) is proceeding for some great purpose." When he halted at the edge of the well, he addressed the corpses of the Quraish infidels by their names and their fathers' names, "O so-and-so, son of so-and-so and O so-and-so, son of so-and-so! Would it have pleased you if you had obeyed Allah and His Apostle? We have found true what our Lord promised us. Have you too found true what your Lord promised you? "'Umar said, "O Allah's Apostle! You are speaking to bodies that have no souls!" Allah's Apostle said, "By Him in Whose Hand Muhammad's soul is, you do not hear, what I say better than they do."
Qatada said, "Allah brought them to life (again) to let them hear him, to reprimand them and slight them and take revenge over them and caused them to feel remorseful and regretful." This is also mentioned by Muslim, Bukhari said Narrated Ibn 'umar: The Prophet looked at the people of the well and said, "Have you found true what your Lord promised you?" and said "Now they know that what they were told is truth" and recited "You can not make the dead hear" with this verse The narration of Badr and saying salam to the graves, and it is also narrated that the ruh is around the edge of the grave sometimes, and that the dead hears the footsteps of people. If the dead do not hear the salam than there is no point of sending salam to them and this is clear and I have mentioned it in my book alTadhkirah[Tafsir Qurtubi tafsir of verse 80 Surah Naml]

Shaykh Ibn Uthaymeen was asked

السؤال
ابن القيم رحمه الله في كتابه الروح ذكر: أن الميت يعلم بزيارة الزائر في يوم الجمعة، وخص ذلك بيوم الجمعة، وما أدري ما دليله؟ وهل الآثار التي أوردها صحيحة، أم فيها ضعف؟
الجواب
أما الآثار التي أوردها لا أدري عنها، وأما تخصيص ذلك بيوم الجمعة فلا وجه له، فإن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم قال: (زوروا القبور فإنها تذكر الموت) ، وثبت عنه أنه زار البقيع ليلاً كما في حديث عائشة الطويل المشهور، وعلى هذا فتخصيص معرفته للزائر بيوم الجمعة لا وجه له، كذلك روى أصحاب السنن بسندٍ صححه ابن عبد البر وأقره ابن القيم في كتاب الروح، أنه (ما من رجل يسلم على مسلم يعرفه في الدنيا إلا رد الله عليه روحه فرد عليه السلام في أي وقت) .

Question:

Ibn al Qayyim Rahimaullah mentioned in Kitab al Ruh that the dead knows the one who visit him on Friday, Is there any evidence that they recognize specifically on friday? The athaar regarding this issue are authentic or weak?

Answer:

I don't know about the athaar mentioned regarding this. It is baseless to specify friday, as the Prophet peace be upon him said: "visit the graves, for that makes you mindful of death." And it is proven from him that he visited al Baqi at night as mentioned in the famous long hadith of Aisha. There is no point in specifying that on friday the dead may recognize the visitor, as it is mentioned by the People of Sunan with the chain, Authenticated by Ibn Abdul Barr which is accepted by Ibn Al-Qayyim may Allaah have mercy upon him in Kitab al Ruh that (the Prophet peace be upon him said:) "whenever a Muslim passes by the grave of another Muslim whom he used to know and greets him, Allaah The Almighty restores his soul so he can return the greeting." in it (there is evidence of recognizing) any time.
"لقاء الباب المفتوح" (لقاء رقم/9، سؤال رقم/37)
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 18, 2017, 07:55:13 PM
رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم قَالَ ‏ "‏ مَا مِنْ أَحَدٍ يُسَلِّمُ عَلَىَّ إِلاَّ رَدَّ اللَّهُ عَلَىَّ رُوحِي حَتَّى أَرُدَّ عَلَيْهِ السَّلاَمَ
The Prophet (ﷺ) said: No one gives greetings of salaam, except that Allah will restore my soul to me, so that I may reply to him with the greeting of salaam. [Sunan Abi Dawud #2041 ; Grading: Hasan(Albani).
 [ You are not allowed to view attachments ]

The chain of this hadeeth was criticized by some scholars, and they tried to weaken it, however their criticism was refuted in detail, along with explanation in this link:
http://ahlul-isnaad.blogspot.co.uk/2012/07/return-of-soul-and-issue-of-hayaat-un.html?m=1


As usual you are just copying and pasting without knowing anything. The Hadith is weak due to Inqitaa, as Shaykh Zubair Ali Zaee said:

(https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-iv6tITAVvHA/WW4zi6iQU3I/AAAAAAAAClg/ufY7nkc3eXAgC9-tS7HvI4XQne-1qko3wCEwYBhgL/s640/title.png)
(https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-8YiFagcT9aI/WW4zmUw3LjI/AAAAAAAAClk/zBB2t7WHLPs1UNE1MeGm18auzqg-yphIgCEwYBhgL/s1600/Allah%2Breturns%2Bmy%2Bsoul%2Bto%2Bme%2B%2528Abu%2BDawud%2529%2BWeak%2BInqitaa.png)

The article you pasted from says this:

Quote
This hadeeth is Hasan but this chain is Munqati’, because the narrator Yazeed bin Abdullah bin Qusayt, who is Katheer ul-Irsaal, did not hear this hadeeth directly from Abu Hurayrah (radiallah anhu), rather he narrates it from Abu Hurayrah (radiallah anhu) with the reference of another narrator in between, which is present in al-Mu’jam al-Awsat by Tabaraani [3/262 H. 3092 - Source], and its chain is Hasan.

The narrator in between as reported from Mu'jam al-Awsat is Abu Saaleh. However, that Sanad from Mu'jam al Awsat contains the narrator Abd Allah b. Yazeed al-Iskandaraani, who is unknown, as Imam al-Haythami mentioned (Majma al-Zawa'id v.10 p.162):

(https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-vJ25Lt1kMlw/WWAMq7GtfTI/AAAAAAAACes/RIeuMq--IdMseH6eBMNIiT3mEFUneYhFACLcBGAs/s640/title2.png)
(https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-rZtArynKFHE/WW47Yo55-VI/AAAAAAAACl4/qmoocifyIWwBzIKSW2O6JX8Q_6hK467xQCLcBGAs/s1600/Abdullah%2Bb.%2BYazid%2Bal%2BIskandarani%2Bis%2BUnknown%2B%2528Majma%2Baz%2BZawaid%2Bv.10%2Bp.162%2529.png)

And assuming this Hadith is sound (which it isn't), it is still referring to an affair of the Barzakh and not of this Dunyaa. The belief that the Prophet Sallallahu alaihi wasallam can hear directly from his grave is based on an extremely weak Hadith. Only the bones of the deceased are present in their earthen graves. Their souls are not in the earthen graves which is part of this Dunyaa. Their souls are in the Alam al Barzakh that has no relation to this world.

Furthermore, the Hadith, as explained by your article, means whenever people give Salaam to the Prophet near his grave his soul is returned to his body to respond. But as you should know, people are constantly without cessation sending Salam to the Prophet at his grave in Medina, so it means the Prophet's soul is always in his body in his grave. It doesn't make sense to say "my soul is returned" under such conditions since his soul is constantly forced to remain within his body in the grave!
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 18, 2017, 08:03:36 PM

 The way in which this writer discussed the issue and reached his conclusions is astounding, because he referred to one of the many demands that the disbelievers had made, and he gave the impression that the Qur’anic response – “Say (O Muhammad (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him)): ‘Glorified (and Exalted) be my Lord (Allah) above all that evil they (polytheists) associate with Him! Am I anything but a man, sent as a Messenger?’” [al-Isra’ 17:93] – is referring to that particular demand, namely ascending up into the sky, and indicating that it is not possible for the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) to do that. But in fact this Qur’anic response was referring to a number of demands that the mushrikeen made out of stubbornness and going to extremes in rejection and denial.

The particular demand of ascending bodily into the sky and bringing back a Book that can be read is included in a list of demands - all of which are not humanly possible. To say that there were other demands is immaterial to the point that this particular demand was also rejected on the basis that it is not humanly possible, and the Prophet Sallallahu alaihi wasallam is a mortal human being.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 18, 2017, 08:18:06 PM
Ibn Katheer (may Allah have mercy on him) said in his Tafseer (3/33):
وأيضاً فإنه حمل على البراق ، وهو دابة بيضاء براقة لها لمعان ، وإنما يكون هذا للبدن ، لا للروح لأنها لا تحتاج في حركتها إلى مركب تركب عليه ، والله أعلم
he(Muhammad SAWS) was carried on al-Buraaq, which was a shining white animal; this can only refer to the body, not the soul, because to move the soul there is no need for a mount to carry it. And Allah knows best.


This argument of Ibn Katheer is weak because it is already established that at the time of death, the Angels carry the soul up into the Heavens. Hence even the soul requires a "vehicle" to ascend into the Heavens.

Quote

عَنْ أَبِي هُرَيْرَةَ، عَنِ النَّبِيِّ ـ صلى الله عليه وسلم ـ قَالَ ‏:‏ ‏ "‏ الْمَيِّتُ تَحْضُرُهُ الْمَلاَئِكَةُ فَإِذَا كَانَ الرَّجُلُ صَالِحًا قَالُوا ‏:‏ اخْرُجِي أَيَّتُهَا النَّفْسُ الطَّيِّبَةُ كَانَتْ فِي الْجَسَدِ الطَّيِّبِ اخْرُجِي حَمِيدَةً وَأَبْشِرِي بِرَوْحٍ وَرَيْحَانٍ وَرَبٍّ غَيْرِ غَضْبَانَ فَلاَ يَزَالُ يُقَالُ لَهَا ذَلِكَ حَتَّى تَخْرُجَ ثُمَّ يُعْرَجُ بِهَا إِلَى السَّمَاءِ فَيُفْتَحُ لَهَا فَيُقَالُ ‏:‏ مَنْ هَذَا فَيَقُولُونَ ‏:‏ فُلاَنٌ ‏.‏ فَيُقَالُ ‏:‏ مَرْحَبًا بِالنَّفْسِ الطَّيِّبَةِ، كَانَتْ فِي الْجَسَدِ الطَّيِّبِ ادْخُلِي حَمِيدَةً، وَأَبْشِرِي بِرَوْحٍ وَرَيْحَانٍ وَرَبٍّ غَيْرِ غَضْبَانَ ‏.‏ فَلاَ يَزَالُ يُقَالُ لَهَا ذَلِكَ حَتَّى يُنْتَهَى بِهَا إِلَى السَّمَاءِ الَّتِي فِيهَا اللَّهُ عَزَّ وَجَلَّ
It was narrated from Abu Hurairah that the Prophet (ﷺ) said:
“Angels come to the dying person, and if the man was righteous, they say: ‘Come out, O good soul that was in a good body, come out praiseworthy and receive glad tidings of mercy and fragrance and a Lord Who is not angry.’ And this is repeated until it comes out, then it is taken up to heaven, and it is opened for it, and it is asked: ‘Who is this?’ They say: ‘So-and-so.’ It is said: ‘Welcome to the good soul that was in a good body. Enter praiseworthy and receive the glad tidings of mercy and fragrance and a Lord Who is not angry.’ And this is repeated until it is brought to the heaven above which is Allah.” (Sunan Ibn Maja)

Interestingly, it is said about the Prophet Elias that he too ascended into Heaven on a "vehicle":
"And it came to pass, as they still went on, and talked, that, behold, there appeared a chariot of fire, and horses of fire, and parted them both asunder; and Elijah went up by a whirlwind into heaven." (2 Kings 2:11 KJV)

So unless you want to believe that Prophet Elias also ascended into Heaven in his physical earthen body, you have to concede that your point that a soul doesn't ascend into the Heavens with a vehicle is false. And if you believe that Prophet Elias ascended into Heaven physically as some of the Jews and Christians believe, then you have to understand that they believe he is still alive (like Jesus) and never experienced death - something that flatly contravenes the Quraanic teaching. But if you believe Prophet Elias will come back in the future and descend from the sky in his body like Jesus then your earlier claim of the uniqueness of Jesus in this respect is out the window too.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Noor-us-Sunnah on July 18, 2017, 08:32:13 PM
The narrator in between as reported from Mu'jam al-Awsat is Abu Saaleh. However, that Sanad from Mu'jam al Awsat contains the narrator Abd Allah b. Yazeed al-Iskandaraani, who is unknown, as Imam al-Haythami mentioned (Majma al-Zawa'id v.10 p.162).

Your Jahl(ignorance) based arrogance is pathetic. The link I gave you answered this shubha of yours. Let me quote what it stated:

Note: In the chain of Tabaraani, there is a narrator named “Abdullah bin Yazeed al-Askandari”. However, the correct name is “Abdullah bin Yazeed al-Muqri” as affirmed by Shaikh Albaani [Silsilah as-Saheehah: 5/338]. We will not go into its details.
http://ahlul-isnaad.blogspot.co.uk/2012/07/return-of-soul-and-issue-of-hayaat-un.html?m=1

Check it yourself, The narrator is Abdullah bin Yazeed al-Muqri and he is a reliable narrator.

[ You are not allowed to view attachments ]

Quote
And assuming this Hadith is sound (which it isn't), it is still referring to an affair of the Barzakh and not of this Dunyaa. The belief that the Prophet Sallallahu alaihi wasallam can hear directly from his grave is based on an extremely weak Hadith. Only the bones of the deceased are present in their earthen graves. Their souls are not in the earthen graves which is part of this Dunyaa. Their souls are in the Alam al Barzakh that has no relation to this world.

Furthermore, the Hadith, as explained by your article, means whenever people give Salaam to the Prophet near his grave his soul is returned to his body to respond. But as you should know, people are constantly without cessation sending Salam to the Prophet at his grave in Medina, so it means the Prophet's soul is always in his body in his grave. It doesn't make sense to say "my soul is returned" under such conditions since his soul is constantly forced to remain within his body in the grave!
Firstly, The hadeeth is authentic as proven, secondly the argument based on Jahl you are raising has already been destroyed, but it seems out  of fear you didn't mind reading it. But if any inquisitive readers wishes to know the answer, can refer this article, which has dealt with this shubha.
http://ahlul-isnaad.blogspot.co.uk/2012/07/return-of-soul-and-issue-of-hayaat-un.html?m=1



Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 18, 2017, 08:34:10 PM

This silly comments shows the level of your knowledge, these arguments raise only from the juhla. A hadeeth being not present in Sahih Sitta means absolutely nothing, an authentic hadeeth is to be accepted in which ever book it may be. Only the people who have evil in their hearts, casts such desperate, fragile and un-academic doubts.

It's you who keeps on exposing his ignorance by saying that an authentic Hadeeth from any other collection is at the same level as an authentic Hadeeth from Sahihayn or Sihah us Sitta. Yes, it may be authentic, but it is absolute ignorance to say that it is at the same level of authenticity as a Hadeeth from Sahihayn. This is why if you known the principle of Muhadditheen, they will prefer an authentic Hadeeth of Sahihayn over an authentic Hadeeth of another collection if the two Hadeeth are contradictory.

Quote
Secondly,  the hadeeth in Sahih Muslim speaks that Isa(as) will descend keeping his hands on the wings of Angels.

And who are these two Angels? Another Hadeeth clarifies that these two Angels are in the form of two men, on whose two shoulders sayyidina Eesaa alaihis salaam is leaning on for support:

It is narrated on the authority of 'Abdullah b. Umar that the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) said:
I found myself one night near the Ka'bah, and I saw a man with wheat complexion amongst the fair-complexioned men that you ever saw. He had a lock of hair the most beautiful of the locks that you ever saw. He had combed it. Water was trickling out of them. He was leaning on two men, or on the shoulders of two men, and he was circumscribing the Ka'bah. I asked, What is he? It was said: He is al-Masih son of Mary.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Noor-us-Sunnah on July 18, 2017, 08:40:02 PM
The particular demand of ascending bodily into the sky and bringing back a Book that can be read is included in a list of demands - all of which are not humanly possible. To say that there were other demands is immaterial to the point that this particular demand was also rejected on the basis that it is not humanly possible, and the Prophet Sallallahu alaihi wasallam is a mortal human being.[/size][/font]

There follow these demands as described in the Qur’an (interpretation of the meaning):

“And they say: ‘We shall not believe in you (O Muhammad (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him)), until you cause a spring to gush forth from the earth for us;

‘Or you have a garden of date-palms and grapes, and cause rivers to gush forth in their midst abundantly;

‘Or you cause the heaven to fall upon us in pieces, as you have pretended, or you bring Allah and the angels before (us) face to face;

‘Or you have a house of adornable materials (like silver and pure gold, etc.), or you ascend up into the sky, and even then we will put no faith in your ascension until you bring down for us a Book that we would read.’ Say (O Muhammad (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him)): ‘Glorified (and Exalted) be my Lord (Allah) above all that evil they (polytheists) associate with Him! Am I anything but a man, sent as a Messenger?”

[al-Isra’ 17:90-93].

Think about these demands that deserve no response except the Qur’anic response: “Say (O Muhammad (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him)): ‘Glorified (and Exalted) be my Lord (Allah) above all that evil they (polytheists) associate with Him! Am I anything but a man, sent as a Messenger?’”

Is it possible for one who is a human being to cause a spring to gush forth from the earth, and rivers, or to cause the heaven to fall down, or to bring Allah (!) and the angels, or to ascend up into the sky and bring from it a Book addressed to every disbeliever?! As it says in the commentary that was narrated from Mujaahid and others. And this is in accordance with the verse in which Allah, may He be exalted, says (interpretation of the meaning):

“Nay, everyone of them desires that he should be given pages spread out (coming from Allah with a writing that Islam is the right religion, and Muhammad (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) has come with the truth from Allah the Lord of the heavens and earth, etc.)”

[al-Muddaththir 74:52].

Undoubtedly these are not characteristics of human beings, nor are they within their capabilities. The statement of the Qur’an that the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) is not able to do that refers to all of these demands together, and not just some of them, because among them are some demands that are ordinarily possible. It is proven that water sprang from between the fingers of the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him), as is narrated in Saheeh al-Bukhaari (3576) and elsewhere, so how about causing springs to gush forth from the earth (i.e., that is not impossible for him either). It is also not impossible that he could have had a garden of date palms… and other demands that they made. But the disbelievers had no real interest in these things; rather their main aim was to go to extremes in stubbornness and obstinacy with the Messenger for the sake of persisting in their transgression.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 18, 2017, 08:48:55 PM

Note: In the chain of Tabaraani, there is a narrator named “Abdullah bin Yazeed al-Askandari”. However, the correct name is “Abdullah bin Yazeed al-Muqri” as affirmed by Shaikh Albaani [Silsilah as-Saheehah: 5/338].


This idea is not based on any definite fact or certainty, but the opinion of some Ulama, as Shaykh Zubair Ali Zaee stated:

بعض علماء کا خیال ہے کہ الاسکندرانی سے مراد عبد اللہ بن یزید المقری ہیں
"Some Ulama think [Khayaal] that al-Iskandaraani is Abd Allah b. Yazeed al-Muqri"
(Fadaa'il Durood o Salaam p.22)


(https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-nFdto-wX_Pc/WW5IQ86VB6I/AAAAAAAACmI/L4aBvVvNKU4GEkg5yFP8LhQoNfAPe54ZACLcBGAs/s640/title.png)
(https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-Qh9iQY7RYfY/WW5IRggdSDI/AAAAAAAACmM/e49Cs-bxkzQ0n0zWPW4VOxjCbCTZKpxbACLcBGAs/s1600/Untitled.png)

The science of authenticating Ahadeeth requires certainty and definiteness, and cannot be based on assumptions or opinions. This is why Zubair Ali Zaee has declared the Hadeeth weak because the Sanad contains Shubah (Doubt), which is enough to weaken it.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Noor-us-Sunnah on July 18, 2017, 09:05:36 PM
This argument of Ibn Katheer is weak because it is already established that at the time of death, the Angels carry the soul up into the Heavens. Hence even the soul requires a "vehicle" to ascend into the Heavens.
The argument of Ibn Katheer is valid, because it is agreed upon view that, Angels and Spirits can ascend above the heaven, however the hadeeth of Miraj, doesn't say Jibril(as) took spirit of Muhammad(saws), but rather a mount. As for claiming that soul requires a vehicle, and that angels are vehicles, then that is a weak argument. Let me give you an example, Look at this statement. "When the cops arrested a criminal, they took him to the prison". Now just because cops took a criminal to prison, it doesn't mean they became vehicle for that criminal while taking him to prison, and both could have walked to the prison, that is their means of travel was same. So this could be possible in the case of Ruh(spirit) and Angels, both could ascend, but just that Angels take them to a designation. Whereas, in the case of Prophet(saws) it is proven that he(saws) was given a mount, which shows that it was his body that was taken.

Secondly, It seems that you have retracted from the view held by Ghulam Ahmed, that Miraj was a vision, because now you seem to argue that it was in the form of spirit not body. Which then would affirm my criticism on Mirza Ghulam, being stupid, because if it was spirit of Prophet(saws) that ascend to Heaven, then it can meet the spirit of Moosa(as), what's incomprehensible in it, that one must start believing that Moosa(as) is alive? 

Quote
Interestingly, it is said about the Prophet Elias that he too ascended into Heaven on a "vehicle":
"And it came to pass, as they still went on, and talked, that, behold, there appeared a chariot of fire, and horses of fire, and parted them both asunder; and Elijah went up by a whirlwind into heaven." (2 Kings 2:11 KJV)

So unless you want to believe that Prophet Elias also ascended into Heaven in his physical earthen body, you have to concede that your point that a soul doesn't ascend into the Heavens with a vehicle is false. And if you believe that Prophet Elias ascended into Heaven physically as some of the Jews and Christians believe, then you have to understand that they believe he is still alive (like Jesus) and never experienced death - something that flatly contravenes the Quraanic teaching. But if you believe Prophet Elias will come back in the future and descend from the sky in his body like Jesus then your earlier claim of the uniqueness of Jesus in this respect is out the window too.[/size][/font]
Bible isn't hujjah for Muslims. Nor could it be used in discussion. It has things which could be correct and it definitely has things which are wrong and false.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 18, 2017, 09:42:40 PM

Imam Malik said:During the time when the people would be forming the rows for prayer, suddenly a cloud will cover them and then Isa(as) will descend. [Ikmal-i-Ikmal (Sharh Sahih Muslim), vol 1, page 266].

Quote from: Noor-us-Sunnah
Secondly,  the hadeeth in Sahih Muslim speaks that Isa(as) will descend keeping his hands on the wings of Angels.

Mere mention of clouds and wings of Angels doesn't necessarily meant descent from the sky. Only someone blinded by literalism and not understanding religious symbolism will assert this.

In the Quraan al-Kareem, Allah Azza wa Jall makes mention of the descent of al-Manna wal-Salwaa. In explaining the Ayah:


وَظَلَّلْنَا عَلَيْكُمُ الْغَمَامَ وَأَنزَلْنَا عَلَيْكُمُ الْمَنَّ وَالسَّلْوَىٰ
And We shaded you with Clouds and sent down upon you al-Manna was-Salwaa

Wahb b. Munabbih said:
فإن الريح تأتـيكم به، وكانت الريح تأتـيهم بـالسلوى "The wind brought with it to them as-Salwaa" (Tafseer Ibn Jareer)

So obviously, al-Manna was-Salwaa (quails) didn't just drop out of the sky from outer space. Rather, Allah facilitated this provision from the Children of Israel through natural means.


Quote
The argument of Ibn Katheer is valid, because it is agreed upon view that, Angels and Spirits can ascend above the heaven, however the hadeeth of Miraj, doesn't say Jibril(as) took spirit of Muhammad(saws), but rather a mount. As for claiming that soul requires a vehicle, and that angels are vehicles, then that is a weak argument. Let me give you an example, Look at this statement. "When the cops arrested a criminal, they took him to the prison". Now just because cops took a criminal to prison, it doesn't mean they became vehicle for that criminal while taking him to prison, and both could have walked to the prison, that is their means of travel was same. So this could be possible in the case of Ruh(spirit) and Angels, both could ascend, but just that Angels take them to a designation. Whereas, in the case of Prophet(saws) it is proven that he(saws) was given a mount, which shows that it was his body that was taken.

Your analogy about cops arresting a criminal is flawed. The only reason cops accompany a criminal to prison is to ensure that he doesn't escape. What is the need for Angels to accompany the soul to the Heavens if the soul can ascend to the Heavens without them?

And the Ahadeeth make it clear that the Angels aren't just there to accompany the soul through its journey into the Heavens, but to actually take hold of it and carry it up.


Quote
Secondly, It seems that you have retracted from the view held by Ghulam Ahmed, that Miraj was a vision, because now you seem to argue that it was in the form of spirit not body.

A vision that occurs in sleep or midway between sleep and wakefulness is what the soul is shown as it is taken out of the body. Ghulam Ahmad clarified this point on the Mi'raj when he simultaneously affirmed that it was a Kashaf and that the soul of the Prophet Sallallaho alaihi wasallam is given a special body which is different from the earthen body and is able to withstand a journey into the Heavens which the earthen flesh and blood body cannot:

(https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-XsNyaQzYFYg/WW5VFEpiKjI/AAAAAAAACmc/_JTEmDKq_KcjTgzQgileieLpf8Oi014mQCLcBGAs/s640/title.png)
(https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-t3vywSQeEss/WW5VJjLjWuI/AAAAAAAACmg/n4pFtDOzdD09GGaJOGqs1DinVauuj3TEgCLcBGAs/s1600/Miraj%2Bwas%2Ba%2BKashaf.%2BIt%2Bwas%2Bwith%2Ba%2Bdifferent%2Bbody%2B%2528you%2Bcould%2Bsay%2BMisaali%2BJism%2529%2B%2528Fatawa%2BMasih%2BMaud%2Bp.248%2529.bmp)

And this is similar to what Ghulam Ahmad said about the spiritual ascension of Jesus to the Heavens, that it was not with his earthen flesh and blood body, but with a body of light, that is not subject to the restrictions of the flesh and blood body, such as having to eat, drink and answer the call of nature (Izaalah Awhaam Pt. 2, p. 351)

(https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-lNdVd4MjBfk/WW5WdDJMKCI/AAAAAAAACmk/GYuCJAr5bt0XkO_1Z2NSyWbYW69JHi5cACLcBGAs/s1600/Messiah%2Bwas%2Braised%2Bto%2Bheaven%2Bwith%2Ba%2BNoorani%2BJism%2Band%2Bnot%2Bthis%2Bearthly%2Bbody%2Blike%2Bother%2Bpeople%2Bwere%2Braised%2Bup%2B%2528Izalah%2BAuham%2Bpart%2B2%2Bp.351%2529.bmp)
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Noor-us-Sunnah on July 18, 2017, 09:47:12 PM

This silly comments shows the level of your knowledge, these arguments raise only from the juhla. A hadeeth being not present in Sahih Sitta means absolutely nothing, an authentic hadeeth is to be accepted in which ever book it may be. Only the people who have evil in their hearts, casts such desperate, fragile and un-academic doubts.

It's you who keeps on exposing his ignorance by saying that an authentic Hadeeth from any other collection is at the same level as an authentic Hadeeth from Sahihayn or Sihah us Sitta. Yes, it may be authentic, but it is absolute ignorance to say that it is at the same level of authenticity as a Hadeeth from Sahihayn. This is why if you known the principle of Muhadditheen, they will prefer an authentic Hadeeth of Sahihayn over an authentic Hadeeth of another collection if the two Hadeeth are contradictory.
Who told you that hadeeth mentioned in any hadeeth collection apart Sihah Sittah is at the same level? Are you receiving inspirations just like Ghulam Ahmad? LOL. I just mentioned that, an authentic hadeeth even if its not present in Sihah Sitta is to be accepted.

And, Who said this Ziyada is contradictory to Hadeeth of Sahihein? It's just a ziyada , which is accepted.

Shaykh Zubair Ali Zaee stated in [The acceptability of the Ziyaadah of thiqah narrator in hadeeth] :

Example # 3: Yunus bin Yazeed al-Aylee narrated from Ibn Shihaab az-Zuhri from Naafi the slave of Abu Qatadah al-Ansaari from Abu Hurayrha (radiallah anhu) that the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) said:

“How will you be on the day, when Eesa bin Maryam will descend among you, and your Imaam will be from you.” [Saheeh Bukhaari: 3449, Saheeh Muslim: 155]

Ibn Bukayr and Abdullah bin Wahb have narrated it with this meaning from Yunus bin Yazeed al-Aylee. Besides Yunus: Mu’amar, Ukayl bin Khaalid, Awzaa’ee, Ibn Akhi az-Zuhri, and Ibn Abi Dhi’b have also narrated it with the same meaning without the addition of “Min as-Samaa”. [See: My Book, Ilmi Maqalaat: Vol 1 Pg 103]

Imaam Bayhaqi has narrated the same narration from Ahmed bin Ibraaheem from Ibn Bukayr from Yunus bin Yazeed from Ibn Shihaab from Naafi’ from Abu Hurayrha (radiallah anhu) with the following words:

“How will you be on the day, when Eesa bin Maryam descend from the heaven, and your Imaam will be from you.” [al-Asmaa wa Sifaat Pg 535]

Since the narrations of Mudalliseen, in Saheeh Bukhaari, are Sarah bis-Samaa’, therefore this narration of Imaam Zuhri is authentic. The Scholars have presented this narration against Mirzaa’ees and Qaadiyaanis as a Hujjah and have defended this narration, for example see: Muhammadiyah Pocket Book (Pg 589, 590)

So we come to know that the issue be of Aqeedah or A’maal-o-Ahkaam, the ziyaadah of thiqah is acceptable, as long as it’s not against thiqaator awthaq, therefore making adm-e-Dhikr as a Mukhaalifah is incorrect.

Taken from :
http://ahlul-isnaad.blogspot.com/2012/04/acceptability-of-ziyaadah-of-thiqah.html


Quote
And who are these two Angels? Another Hadeeth clarifies that these two Angels are in the form of two men, on whose two shoulders sayyidina Eesaa alaihis salaam is leaning on for support:

It is narrated on the authority of 'Abdullah b. Umar that the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) said:
I found myself one night near the Ka'bah, and I saw a man with wheat complexion amongst the fair-complexioned men that you ever saw. He had a lock of hair the most beautiful of the locks that you ever saw. He had combed it. Water was trickling out of them. He was leaning on two men, or on the shoulders of two men, and he was circumscribing the Ka'bah. I asked, What is he? It was said: He is al-Masih son of Mary.
The Hadeeth you mentioned is talking about a DREAM Prophet(saws) saw, wherein He saw Isa(as) and Dajjal, its NOT DESCRIBING the Nuzool of Isa(as). Because the Hadeeth which describe the Nuzool of Isa(as) mention those would be angels with WINGS.

 'Abdullah reported on the authority of his father 'Umar b. Khattab that he heard from the Messenger of Allah (may peace he upon him) say: I was sleeping when I saw myself making circuit around the Ka'bah, and I saw there a man of fair complexion with straight hair between two men. Water was flowing from his head or water was falling from his head. I said: Who is he? They answered: He is the son of Mary. Then I moved forward and cast a glance and there was a bulky man of red complexion with thick locks of hair on his head, blind of one eye as it his eye was a swollen grape. I asked: Who is he? They said: He is Dajjal. He had close resemblance with Ibn Qatan amongst men. [Sahih Muslim 171]

Here is the hadeeth which describes Nuzool of Isa(as) along with ANGELS HAVING WINGS.

بَعَثَ اللَّهُ الْمَسِيحَ ابْنَ مَرْيَمَ فَيَنْزِلُ عِنْدَ الْمَنَارَةِ الْبَيْضَاءِ شَرْقِيَّ دِمَشْقَ بَيْنَ مَهْرُودَتَيْنِ وَاضِعًا كَفَّيْهِ عَلَى أَجْنِحَةِ مَلَكَيْنِ إِذَا طَأْطَأَ رَأَسَهُ قَطَرَ وَإِذَا رَفَعَهُ تَحَدَّرَ مِنْهُ جُمَانٌ كَاللُّؤْلُؤِ فَلاَ يَحِلُّ
Allah would send Jesus, son of Mary, and he will descend at the white minaret in the eastern side of Damascus wearing two garments lightly dyed with saffron and placing his hands on the wings of two Angels. When he would lower his head, there would fall beads of perspiration from his head, and when he would raise it up, beads like pearls would scatter from it. (Sahih Muslim 2937 a).

Secondly, if you still have any doubt then you can believe that the two men mentioned in the Hadeeth about dream of Prophet(saws) were Angels who took human form, because angels can take human form, but Human is not called an Angel.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 18, 2017, 10:15:25 PM
Secondly, if you still have any doubt then you can believe that the two men mentioned in the Hadeeth about dream of Prophet(saws) were Angels who took human form, because angels can take human form, but Human is not called an Angel.

The Hadeeth says:

يَدَيْهِ عَلَى مَنْكِبَىْ رَجُلَيْنِ
"Placing his hands upon the shoulders of two Men." (Bukhari)

So if you think that by the word "Rajul" is meant human, then again your premise is proven false that Angels are never called "humans":


عَنْ سَعْدٍ، قَالَ رَأَيْتُ عَنْ يَمِينِ، رَسُولِ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم وَعَنْ شِمَالِهِ يَوْمَ أُحُدٍ رَجُلَيْنِ عَلَيْهِمَا ثِيَابُ بَيَاضٍ مَا رَأَيْتُهُمَا قَبْلُ وَلاَ بَعْدُ ‏.‏ يَعْنِي جِبْرِيلَ وَمِيكَائِيلَ عَلَيْهِمَا السَّلاَمُ

Sa'd said he saw two men one to the right and one to the left of Rasul Allah Sallallahu alaihi wasallam on the Day of Uhud, and they were Gabriel and Michael peace be upon them both (Sahih Muslim)

Similarly, in the famous Hadith of Gabriel, the Angel Gabriel is called "a Man":


إِذْ أَتَاهُ رَجُلٌ يَمْشِي
When a Man came to him (Bukhari)

Even the Quraan says this:


وَلَوْ جَعَلْنَاهُ مَلَكًا لَّجَعَلْنَاهُ رَجُلًا وَلَلَبَسْنَا عَلَيْهِم مَّا يَلْبِسُونَ
And had We made him an Angel, We would have made him a Man...(Sura 6:9)
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 18, 2017, 10:46:23 PM

With all due respect, I, as an Ex-Shia, strongly disagree. I always laugh at the fallacy and batil and desperate Qiyas (comparison) of the Shia, how can you even consider it worth to be mentioned?

Shia Ghaybah: An alleged NON-Guiding Imam who does NOTHING and actual Imam is supposed to do and is represent by Iranian "Ayatollahs" who collect money in his name and speak on his behalf (i.e. Shia take their Deen from fallibles). This ridiculous belief has influenced millions of lifes of Shias around the world, they literally worship him, ask him for help and substainance, in fact they believe he is hadhir-nadhir (everywhere with his knowledge like Allah), hence in my county Iran, it is common to see billboards such as:

"Don't make Agha Emam Zaman sad and cry by committing sins."

Their belief in that mythical figure and ghaybah has turned into a whole additional belief system which they call Mahdaviyyat, where they await his reappearance, which includes several hineous rituals including constant wailing (fabricated narrations like "Dua E Nodbeh" which translates to: The Prayer of wailing!) and writing letters to him (similar to Jewish practice):

https://youtu.be/rBdOkjALnoQ

'Isa being raised to Allah: A miracle that is mentioned in the Qur'an and has no influence on Muslim life whatsoever, it's even open to interpretation, not a core issue in Aqidah and no bid3ah or heresy has ever evolved out of that belief, no invoking of Isa, no cultish beliefs about him, nothing, unlike the Ghaybah/Mahdaviyyat nonsense of the Rafidah.

Firstly I'm glad you have acknowledged that the raising of sayyidina Eesaa alaihis salaam to Allah is "open to interpretation". It is true that the Shi'a have exceeded all bounds regarding their invoking of their Imaam Ghaa'ib and other "cultish" beliefs about him. Nevertheless, the point is that in order to deconstruct and demolish the Shi'a doctrine and pull it out by its roots the best way is to attack the very concept of "Ghayba" of a human being; by "Ghayba" they mean his vanishing with his physical body from our presence. As long as Sunnis continue to believe in the Ghayba of sayyidina Eesaa they will always be challenged on this point by the Shi'a.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Noor-us-Sunnah on July 19, 2017, 02:02:32 AM
The Hadeeth says:

يَدَيْهِ عَلَى مَنْكِبَىْ رَجُلَيْنِ
"Placing his hands upon the shoulders of two Men." (Bukhari)

So if you think that by the word "Rajul" is meant human, then again your premise is proven false that Angels are never called "humans":

عَنْ سَعْدٍ، قَالَ رَأَيْتُ عَنْ يَمِينِ، رَسُولِ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم وَعَنْ شِمَالِهِ يَوْمَ أُحُدٍ رَجُلَيْنِ عَلَيْهِمَا ثِيَابُ بَيَاضٍ مَا رَأَيْتُهُمَا قَبْلُ وَلاَ بَعْدُ ‏.‏ يَعْنِي جِبْرِيلَ وَمِيكَائِيلَ عَلَيْهِمَا السَّلاَمُ
Sa'd said he saw two men one to the right and one to the left of Rasul Allah Sallallahu alaihi wasallam on the Day of Uhud, and they were Gabriel and Michael peace be upon them both (Sahih Muslim)

Similarly, in the famous Hadith of Gabriel, the Angel Gabriel is called "a Man":


إِذْ أَتَاهُ رَجُلٌ يَمْشِي
When a Man came to him (Bukhari)

Even the Quraan says this:


وَلَوْ جَعَلْنَاهُ مَلَكًا لَّجَعَلْنَاهُ رَجُلًا وَلَلَبَسْنَا عَلَيْهِم مَّا يَلْبِسُونَ
And had We made him an Angel, We would have made him a Man...(Sura 6:9)
So, when you admit that those would be angels, then what problem, do you have in believing that Isa(as) will descend from heaven, along with angels?
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 19, 2017, 02:12:10 AM

So, when you admit that those would be angels, then what problem, do you have in believing that Isa(as) will descend from heaven, along with angels?

You said that resting his hands on the Wings of Two Angels is proof of literal descent from Heaven to Earth. But I quoted the Hadith about the Vision of Messiah making Tawaaf of the sacred Ka'ba to explain the reality of this. Prophecies are not always literal. A Prophet coming on the Wings of Two Angels is open to interpretation. The Prophet Sallallahu alaihi wasallam told sayyidina Uthmaan Radi Allahu anhu:

يَا عُثْمَانُ إِنَّهُ لَعَلَّ اللَّهَ يُقَمِّصُكَ قَمِيصًا , فَإِنْ أَرَادُوكَ عَلَى خَلْعِهِ فَلَا تَخْلَعْهُ لَهُمْ

O 'Uthman! Indeed Allah may give you a shirt, and if they wish that you take it off, do not take it off for them (Tirmidhi)

Here Qamees symbolises Khilaafa, and was not a literal piece of cloth.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Noor-us-Sunnah on July 19, 2017, 04:34:05 AM

Note: In the chain of Tabaraani, there is a narrator named “Abdullah bin Yazeed al-Askandari”. However, the correct name is “Abdullah bin Yazeed al-Muqri” as affirmed by Shaikh Albaani [Silsilah as-Saheehah: 5/338].


This idea is not based on any definite fact or certainty, but the opinion of some Ulama, as Shaykh Zubair Ali Zaee stated:

بعض علماء کا خیال ہے کہ الاسکندرانی سے مراد عبد اللہ بن یزید المقری ہیں
"Some Ulama think [Khayaal] that al-Iskandaraani is Abd Allah b. Yazeed al-Muqri"
(Fadaa'il Durood o Salaam p.22)


(https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-nFdto-wX_Pc/WW5IQ86VB6I/AAAAAAAACmI/L4aBvVvNKU4GEkg5yFP8LhQoNfAPe54ZACLcBGAs/s640/title.png)
(https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-Qh9iQY7RYfY/WW5IRggdSDI/AAAAAAAACmM/e49Cs-bxkzQ0n0zWPW4VOxjCbCTZKpxbACLcBGAs/s1600/Untitled.png)

The science of authenticating Ahadeeth requires certainty and definiteness, and cannot be based on assumptions or opinions. This is why Zubair Ali Zaee has declared the Hadeeth weak because the Sanad contains Shubah (Doubt), which is enough to weaken it.
The Muhadditeen  are like Jewellers, its their expertise in the field of Asma al-rijaal through which they are able to identify the mistakes of in the names of narrators. And examples for such cases are many. Its quite unlikely that there were two different narrators with the same initial name (Abdullah bin Yazeed) who narrated from Haywat bin Shurayh, the exact same hadeeth. Interestingly, you won't find Abdullah bin Yazeed al-iskandaraani listed as the student of Haywat bin Shurayh. So, it was based on his vast experience that Sheikh al-Albani concluded that “Abdullah bin Yazeed al-Askandari's" correct name is “Abdullah bin Yazeed al-Muqri”. Hence we accept it, and I say this because of the experience I gained regarding how the scholars would know the mistakes in the names of narrators. Moreover, several other scholars attested the authenticity of its chain, some of them were quoted by Albani.

(i). Ibn Hajar said in "Fath" Rijaal Thiqaat(Its men are Trustworthy)

(ii). Al-Hafidh al-Iraaqi in Takhreej al-Ihya said Sana Jayyid(chain is strong).

(iii). Nawawi said in al-Riyadh Isnaad Sahih(chain is authentic).
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 19, 2017, 04:51:58 AM
The Muhadditeen  are like Jewellers, its their expertise in the field of Asma al-rijaal through which they are able to identify the mistakes of in the names of narrators. And examples for such cases are many. Its quite unlikely that there were two different narrators with the same initial name (Abdullah bin Yazeed) who narrated from Haywat bin Shurayh, the exact same hadeeth. Interestingly, you won't find Abdullah bin Yazeed al-iskandaraani listed as the student of Haywat bin Shurayh. So, it was based on his vast experience that Sheikh al-Albani concluded that “Abdullah bin Yazeed al-Askandari's" correct name is “Abdullah bin Yazeed al-Muqri”. Hence we accept it, and I say this because of the experience I gained regarding how the scholars would know the mistakes in the names of narrators. Moreover, several other scholars attested the authenticity of its chain, some of them were quoted by Albani.

(i). Ibn Hajar said in "Fath" Rijaal Thiqaat(Its men are Trustworthy)

(ii). Al-Hafidh al-Iraaqi in Takhreej al-Ihya said Sana Jayyid(chain is strong).

(iii). Nawawi said in al-Riyadh Isnaad Sahih(chain is authentic).


The Hadith does not mean the Prophet's soul is returned to his body in his grave in this Dunya. It is from the affair of al-Barzakh. Albani put it under the heading من حياته صلى الله عليه وسلم في البرزخ
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Noor-us-Sunnah on July 19, 2017, 05:47:09 AM
Mere mention of clouds and wings of Angels doesn't necessarily meant descent from the sky. Only someone blinded by literalism and not understanding religious symbolism will assert this.
This is the view of Ahlusunnah that Isa(as) would descend from heaven, did you forget that quote from Aqeedah Tahawiyyah, which exposed your hypocrisy.

Secondly, it's the Prophetic ahadeeth which says Isa(as) would descend from heaven, hence the statement of scholars will be explained in the light of the Aqeedah of Ahlesunnah, and also the ahadeeth of Prophet(saws).

Imaam Ahmed bin Hanbal said:

من رد حديث رسول الله صلي الله عليه وسلم فهو علي شفاهلكة

“The one who rejects the hadeeth of Allaah’s Apostle(sallahu alaihi wa sallam), is at the edge of destruction”

[Manaaqib Ahmed: P. 182, Chain Hasan; Tabaqaat al-Hanaabilah: 2/15]


Quote
In the Quraan al-Kareem, Allah Azza wa Jall makes mention of the descent of al-Manna wal-Salwaa. In explaining the Ayah:

وَظَلَّلْنَا عَلَيْكُمُ الْغَمَامَ وَأَنزَلْنَا عَلَيْكُمُ الْمَنَّ وَالسَّلْوَىٰ
And We shaded you with Clouds and sent down upon you al-Manna was-Salwaa

Wahb b. Munabbih said: ]فإن الريح تأتـيكم به، وكانت الريح تأتـيهم بـالسلوى]
"The wind brought with it to them as-Salwaa" (Tafseer Ibn Jareer).
عن عكرمة : أما السلوى فطير كطير يكون بالجنة أكبر من العصفور ، أو نحو ذلك
Ikrimah said that the Salwa is a bird in Paradise about the size of a sparrow. (Tafseer ibn Katheer)

Quote
So obviously, al-Manna was-Salwaa (quails) didn't just drop out of the sky from outer space. Rather, Allah facilitated this provision from the Children of Israel through natural means.
Your desperation is pathetic. You are comparing apples with oranges out of desperation, which the readers can notice. The statement of scholars of Ahlus-sunnah will be explained in the light of the Aqeedah of Ahlesunnah[Like Tahawiyyah, etc], and also the ahadeeth of Prophet(saws), which clearly mention that Isa(as) would descend from heaven.


Quote
Your analogy about cops arresting a criminal is flawed. The only reason cops accompany a criminal to prison is to ensure that he doesn't escape. What is the need for Angels to accompany the soul to the Heavens if the soul can ascend to the Heavens without them?

And the Ahadeeth make it clear that the Angels aren't just there to accompany the soul through its journey into the Heavens, but to actually take hold of it and carry it up.
Angels take the Ruh to the destination, A Ruh wouldn't know by its own the destination, the doors of heaven. If you aren't able to grasp the example, then I'll give you another example: "My friend took me to his house" this doesn't mean My friend became my vehicle.


Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Noor-us-Sunnah on July 19, 2017, 05:52:24 AM
The Muhadditeen  are like Jewellers, its their expertise in the field of Asma al-rijaal through which they are able to identify the mistakes of in the names of narrators. And examples for such cases are many. Its quite unlikely that there were two different narrators with the same initial name (Abdullah bin Yazeed) who narrated from Haywat bin Shurayh, the exact same hadeeth. Interestingly, you won't find Abdullah bin Yazeed al-iskandaraani listed as the student of Haywat bin Shurayh. So, it was based on his vast experience that Sheikh al-Albani concluded that “Abdullah bin Yazeed al-Askandari's" correct name is “Abdullah bin Yazeed al-Muqri”. Hence we accept it, and I say this because of the experience I gained regarding how the scholars would know the mistakes in the names of narrators. Moreover, several other scholars attested the authenticity of its chain, some of them were quoted by Albani.

(i). Ibn Hajar said in "Fath" Rijaal Thiqaat(Its men are Trustworthy)

(ii). Al-Hafidh al-Iraaqi in Takhreej al-Ihya said Sana Jayyid(chain is strong).

(iii). Nawawi said in al-Riyadh Isnaad Sahih(chain is authentic).


The Hadith does not mean the Prophet's soul is returned to his body in his grave in this Dunya. It is from the affair of al-Barzakh. Albani put it under the heading من حياته صلى الله عليه وسلم في البرزخ

This is exactly how it was explained in the link I gave, which apparently you didn't care to read. If you did, then there is no point in repeating it. The point was to show you the significance of Salam with Khitaab, near the grave of Prophet(saws). The difference between Salaam Tahiyyah and Salam Ma’moor.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 19, 2017, 06:02:22 AM
This is exactly how it was explained in the link I gave, which apparently you didn't care to read. If you did, then there is no point in repeating it. The point was to show you the significance of Salam with Khitaab, near the grave of Prophet(saws). The difference between Salaam Tahiyyah and Salam Ma’moor.

This Hadith has nothing to do with the grave of the Prophet Sallallahu alaihi wasallam. There is no proof that giving Salam near the grave of the Prophet Sallallahu alaihi wasallam is any different than giving Salam to him from afar. The Angels convey the Salam to him in all instances because he has no awareness of anything from this Dunya; nor can he hear anything from this Dunya; nor is he present in his grave in Medina; rather the grave in Medina only contains his bones. (Sallallahu alaihi wasallam).
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 19, 2017, 06:18:51 AM

Angels take the Ruh to the destination, A Ruh wouldn't know by its own the destination, the doors of heaven. If you aren't able to grasp the example, then I'll give you another example: "My friend took me to his house" this doesn't mean My friend became my vehicle.

Your original point was that the Prophet ﷺ ascended into Heaven in his earthen body, and so he required a mount (al-Buraq). If he ascended in spirit only he would not need a mount or vehicle. Hudaifa b. al-Yaman (Radi Allahu anhu) narrates that both the Prophet and Angel Gabriel were riding upon the back of al-Buraq:

فَمَا زَايَلاَ ظَهْرَ الْبُرَاقِ
(Tirmidhi (https://www.sunnah.com/urn/641660))

Now the question is do the Angels also require al-Buraq in order to ascend into the Heavens?

Furthermore did sayyidina Eesaa alaihis salaam ride on al-Buraq when he ascended into Heaven in his Jasad? You never brought any narration to this effect. You brought weak narration about him ascending to Heaven from the top of a building on the Mount of Olives, but there is no mention of al-Buraq
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 19, 2017, 07:24:51 AM
*Wrong thread
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Noor-us-Sunnah on July 19, 2017, 12:45:05 PM
This Hadith has nothing to do with the grave of the Prophet Sallallahu alaihi wasallam. There is no proof that giving Salam near the grave of the Prophet Sallallahu alaihi wasallam is any different than giving Salam to him from afar. The Angels convey the Salam to him in all instances because he has no awareness of anything from this Dunya; nor can he hear anything from this Dunya; nor is he present in his grave in Medina; rather the grave in Medina only contains his bones. (Sallallahu alaihi wasallam).
I'll quote the scholars and let the readers judge.

Shaikh ul-Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah writes: “The scholars have understood [from this hadeeth] that this salaam [regarding which it is said that Prophet’s soul returns to his body] is only that which is said near the Prophet’s grave, this hadeeth is not a proof for the one [sending salaam] from far away” [Ar-Radd Ala al-Bakri: 1/107]

He further said: “This is the hadeeth upon which the Scholars like Ahmed and Abu Dawood trusted on the issue of saying salaam from near the Prophet’s grave.” [Ar-Radd Ala al-Bakri: 1/107]

Imaam Ibn Abdul Haadi also considers this hadeeth on saying salaam from nearby according to many Scholars. [As-Saarim al-Munki: 1/115]

Allaamah Shanqeeti writes: “All [Scholars] are agreed upon that this [Prophet’s returning of Salaam] is only achieved by one who says salaam to him from close….” [Adhwaa ul-Bayaan: 8/838]

Abu Tayyib Shams ul-Haqq al-Adheemaabaadee (rahimahullah) writes: “The correct opinion is that this hadeeth is concerning the one who visits the [grave of the] Prophet (peace be upon him), as for those who are far away, then the angels convey his salaam to him (and Allaah answers this salaam with 10 blessings).” [Awn al-Ma’bood fi Sharh Sunan Abi Dawood: 6/22]

Abul Hassan Ubaydullah bin Muhammad Rehmaani al-Mubaarakpoori (rahimahullah) writes: “The correct opinion is that what is meant from this hadeeth is the salaam that is said close to the grave of the Prophet (peace be upon him), as is understood by many other Scholars.” [Mir’aat ul-Mafateeh Sharh Mishkaat ul-Masabeeh: 3/263]

When this much is understood then it should also be kept in mind that Salaam Tahiyyah used to be said during the life of the Prophet (peace be upon him) and he (peace be upon him) used to answer it; and it is also said today so its answer is also given by the Prophet (peace be upon him) himself, as is proven from the hadeeth.

This is also made clear that just like Salaam Tahiyyah used to be said from close during the life of the Prophet (peace be upon him), similarly, it would be said to him today also from close. You have already read the action of Ibn Umar (radiallah anhu) that whenever he would come from a Journey, he would say this salaam in the apartment of Aa’ishah from close to the grave. On the contrary, Salaam Ma’moor was used to be said by all the Sahaabah in the prayer wherever they were, so why was there a need to come close to the grave upon returning from the journey? If He (peace be upon him) answered this salaam even from the person far away, then why would Sayyidunah Ibn Umar (radiallah anhu) come close to the grave of the Prophet (peace be upon him)??

There are two types of Salaam. One is a salaam that is said from the near which is Salaam Tahiyyah, and whose answer is given by the Prophet (peace be upon him) himself; while the other salaam is that which is said from far away, the answer to which is not given by the Prophet (peace be upon him) himself, rather Allaah sends blessings on that person instead.

Imaam Ibn Abdul Haadi explains both these types in the following words:

والمقصود هنا أن نعرف ما كان عليه السلف من الفرق بين ما أمر الله به من الصلاة والسلام عليه وبين سلام التحية الموجب للرد الذي يشترك فيه كل مؤمن حي وميت ويرد فيه على الكافر....

“The purpose here is that we know the difference between the salaat and salaam ordained by Allaah, and the salaam of Tahiyyah, the answer to which is obligatory, and in this all living and deceased Muslims are alike, and in which we are to answer the salaam of even a Kaafir…”
[Saarim al-Munki: 1/125]

He further said:

وهذا السلام لا يقتضي رداً من المسلم عليه، بل هو بمنزلة دعاء المؤمن للمؤمنين واستغفاره لهم، فيه الأجر والثواب من الله، ليس على المدعو لهم مثل ذلك الدعاء، بخلاف سلام التحية، فإنه مشروع بالنص والإجماع في حق كل مسلم. وعلى المسلم عليه أن يرد السلام ولو كان المسلم عليه كافراً، فإن هذا من العدل الواجب،ولهذا كان النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم يرد على اليهود إذا سلموا بقول ((وعليكم))

“This salaam (salaam Ma’moor) does not demand an answer for the one who said it, rather it is a Du’aa & Istighfaar of a Mu’min for other Mu’mineen, there is reward of Allaah in it. The one for whom this Du’aa is made, it is not necessary for him to return a du’aa similar to it; as compared to Salaam Tahiyyah for verily it is ordained upon every Muslim from the Nass [of Qur’aan-o-Sunnah] and the Ijmaa of Ummah, it is from the right of every Muslim. And for whom Salaam Tahiyyah is said, it is obligatory for him to reply it, even if he [the one who said the salaam] is a Kaafir. This is why when the Jews would salute the Prophet (peace be upon him), he would reply them with ((Alaikum))”
[Saarim al-Munki: 1/118-119]
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Noor-us-Sunnah on July 19, 2017, 12:52:58 PM
Your original point was that the Prophet ﷺ ascended into Heaven in his earthen body, and so he required a mount (al-Buraq). If he ascended in spirit only he would not need a mount or vehicle. Hudaifa b. al-Yaman (Radi Allahu anhu) narrates that both the Prophet and Angel Gabriel were riding upon the back of al-Buraq:[/size][/font]

فَمَا زَايَلاَ ظَهْرَ الْبُرَاقِ
(Tirmidhi (https://www.sunnah.com/urn/641660))

Now the question is do the Angels also require al-Buraq in order to ascend into the Heavens?
The same way even I can raise a counter question to you, if it was soul of Prophet(saws) and angels can carry souls, then why didn't Jibril(as) carry it?

Secondly, there would be multiple reasons as to why both rode on Buraaq, like it could be a ride faster than the flight of Angels, like how in our world a mount is faster than human speed, and the journey of Miraj was to be completed in a very minute time interval, and for it a mount was necessary. Hence a mount was used by both.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Noor-us-Sunnah on July 19, 2017, 01:04:17 PM
You said that resting his hands on the Wings of Two Angels is proof of literal descent from Heaven to Earth. But I quoted the Hadith about the Vision of Messiah making Tawaaf of the sacred Ka'ba to explain the reality of this. Prophecies are not always literal. A Prophet coming on the Wings of Two Angels is open to interpretation. The Prophet Sallallahu alaihi wasallam told sayyidina Uthmaan Radi Allahu anhu:

يَا عُثْمَانُ إِنَّهُ لَعَلَّ اللَّهَ يُقَمِّصُكَ قَمِيصًا , فَإِنْ أَرَادُوكَ عَلَى خَلْعِهِ فَلَا تَخْلَعْهُ لَهُمْ
O 'Uthman! Indeed Allah may give you a shirt, and if they wish that you take it off, do not take it off for them (Tirmidhi)

Here Qamees symbolises Khilaafa, and was not a literal piece of cloth.
The general rule is that Prophecies were made in a literal sense, however there were few cases in which prophesies were made in a metaphorical manner, because Prophet(saws) didn't want the person to know the literal meaning, at that time.

However, in regards to case of the return of Isa(as), then it will be understood in a literal sense, as it was a matter of Emaan(as)[Scholars brought the hadeeth of Nuzool of Isa(as) in the chapters of Emaan(faith)], and Muslim Ummah needed to prepared for it in a literal sense,  just like arrival of Dajjal would be understood in the literal sense, that is his description and about his arrival and his followers, in the same way the Nuzool of Isa(as) and his description would be understood in the literal sense. Thus, it must be believed that Isa(as) would descend from heaven, along with Angels.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 19, 2017, 07:32:28 PM

The same way even I can raise a counter question to you, if it was soul of Prophet(saws) and angels can carry souls, then why didn't Jibril(as) carry it?

Secondly, there would be multiple reasons as to why both rode on Buraaq, like it could be a ride faster than the flight of Angels, like how in our world a mount is faster than human speed, and the journey of Miraj was to be completed in a very minute time interval, and for it a mount was necessary. Hence a mount was used by both.

Your argument about speed failed to take into account the great speed of the Angels who ascend up to Allah very fast without the need for Buraq. All of these are creations of Noor which can move through the Heavens at high velocity. It is the earthen flesh and blood body which cannot be moved so fast. Our light speed is 186 thousand miles per second. Can an exposed human body travel at such speed into the Heavens where there is no oxygen?

Then you failed to address how sayyidina Eesaa ascended into Heaven in his physical body apparently without mounting the Buraaq. This means you at least believe it is not necessary for a human body to ascend into the Heavens with a vehicle or mount.

The Prophet Sallallahu alaihi wasallam was given the Buraaq to mount upon as a way of honoring him. Otherwise he could have ascended into Heaven on the wings of an Angel. There are reports in the Tafaseer that sayyidina Idrees alaihis salaam ascended into Heaven on the back of the Angel. To summarize, my point is that your argument that Buraaq was sent for because the Prophet ascended in his body is pure speculation and a very weak argument.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 19, 2017, 07:44:27 PM
If you read carefully the narrations about the Mi'raaj and reflect upon them you will understand that it was an ascension of the soul and occurred not in this world but in the Aalam al-Mithaal. Take for instance the fact that the Prophet Sallallahu alaihi wasallam saw an old, decrepit woman decked with jewelry. She was the Dunya, her extreme old age signifying that she is about to die, he jewelry signifying her attempt to allure despite actually being repulsive, etc.

The Prophet Sallallahu alaihi wasallam was presented with a bowl of milk and a bowl of wine. He took the milk signifying his Ummah will be upon the way of the Fitra of Islam; had he taken the wine it would have meant his followers would go astray.

The Prophet Sallallahu alaihi wasallam saw people being punished in Hell despite the fact that from our perspective Judgment Day hasn't occurred yet. All of these and many other factors point to the reality of the Israa and Mi'raaj being a powerful vision that was in the Aalam-al-Mithaal.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 19, 2017, 08:55:13 PM

The general rule is that Prophecies were made in a literal sense, however there were few cases in which prophesies were made in a metaphorical manner, because Prophet(saws) didn't want the person to know the literal meaning, at that time.

However, in regards to case of the return of Isa(as), then it will be understood in a literal sense, as it was a matter of Emaan(as)[Scholars brought the hadeeth of Nuzool of Isa(as) in the chapters of Emaan(faith)], and Muslim Ummah needed to prepared for it in a literal sense,  just like arrival of Dajjal would be understood in the literal sense, that is his description and about his arrival and his followers, in the same way the Nuzool of Isa(as) and his description would be understood in the literal sense. Thus, it must be believed that Isa(as) would descend from heaven, along with Angels.

Regrettably you approach the texts of Islam with rigid and dry literalism and without Hikmah and Firaasah, gifts given to the Believer whose heart is filled with Noor.

Are we to understand that Dajjal will literally come mounted on a massive white donkey the span between its ears being 40 cubits, and travel faster than a cloud driven by the wind? And are we to understand that Gog and Magog will literally throw spears into the sky and they will fall back to the Earth smeared in blood? And are we to understand that sayyidina Eesaa alaihis salaam will literally go hunting to slaughter all the pigs in the world, and he will literally break every single cross and crucifix with his own hands?

It is such literalist thinking devoid of wisdom that makes people like you a laughing stock who believe in fables and fairy tales without understanding the reality. They think the final battles prophesied in the Hadith will literally be fought with swords and spears; having no understanding of apocalyptic language and symbolism.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 20, 2017, 02:17:01 AM

 عَنْ ثَوْبَانَ، قَالَ قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏"‏ إِنَّ اللَّهَ زَوَى لِيَ الأَرْضَ ‏"‏ ‏.‏ أَوْ قَالَ ‏"‏ إِنَّ رَبِّي زَوَى لِيَ الأَرْضَ فَرَأَيْتُ مَشَارِقَهَا وَمَغَارِبَهَا وَإِنَّ مُلْكَ أُمَّتِي سَيَبْلُغُ مَا زُوِيَ لِي مِنْهَا وَأُعْطِيتُ الْكَنْزَيْنِ الأَحْمَرَ وَالأَبْيَضَ


Narrated Thawbān (Radi Allāhu ‘Anhu): The Messenger of Allāh ﷺ as saying: “Allāh, the Exalted, folded for me the Earth”, or he said: “My Lord folded for me the Earth, so much so that I saw its easts and wests (i.e. the extremities). The kingdom of my community will reach as far as the Earth was folded for me. The two treasures, the red and the white (peoples) were bestowed on me.” (Sunan Abi Dawud)

*Now did this too occur literally? Or was it a Kashaf (vision) which the Prophet ﷺ was made to behold?
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 20, 2017, 09:37:41 PM
What greater evidence can there be of the death of Jesus of Nazareth than the discovery of his family tomb and ossuary that actually contained his bones?



Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Abu Muhammad on July 21, 2017, 12:54:27 AM
I understand that you want me to summarize my version of this story. However, I will do so after I comment on all the Verses so that it becomes clear to other readers that I am not going against what Quran says.

I hope you won't forget. It has been quite some time now...
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 21, 2017, 01:02:36 AM
I hope you won't forget. It has been quite some time now...

I believe that Ashāb-al-Kahf as individuals were not asleep continuously for three centuries. Allah alone knows how long they tarried in the cave  (Sūra 18: 26). Likewise, Allah knows best their exact number (Sūra 18: 22). There is no proof from this story that some individuals survived without nourishment of food for three centuries, which was your original point to argue that Jesus of Nazareth can survive in his Jasad in the Heavens for two millennia without food or drink.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 21, 2017, 02:52:13 AM
The Ashāb-al-Kahf were not something unusual, extraordinary or strange from among the Signs of Allāh (Sūra 18: 9). Whatever happened with them was totally within the realm of possibility and nature. They were simply youths who retreated from their society in the cave in order to secure their Religion and remain unpolluted from the Shirk of their day. Allāh struck their ears in the cave for a number of years. It is not clear to me if this means literally putting them to sleep, a sleep-like state, or something else. The Qur’ānic expression Darabnā ‘alā ādhānihim simply means ‘We prevented them from hearing’. The implication is that they remained cut off from the outside world and were wholly unaware of what was happening there. Allāh raised them (Ashāb-al-Kahf) up and then mentions two parties (Sūra 18: 12), but it is not immediately clear who these two parties are.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 21, 2017, 03:17:12 AM
وَتَحْسَبُهُمْ أَيْقَاظًا وَهُمْ رُقُودٌ

And you would have thought them awake while they were asleep (Sūra 18: 18)

The key to unlocking this mystery is the Ayat:


فَلَمْ تَقْتُلُوهُمْ وَلَـٰكِنَّ اللَّـهَ قَتَلَهُمْ ۚ وَمَا رَمَيْتَ إِذْ رَمَيْتَ وَلَـٰكِنَّ اللَّـهَ رَمَىٰ

You killed them not, but Allāh killed them. And you (O My Prophet ﷺ) threw not when you did throw but Allah threw (Sūra 8: 17).

Allāh Most High negates the apparent with something that is the inner reality. Although it was apparent that the Sahāba killed the polytheists during the battle, but Allāh negates that which is apparent and informs us of the inner reality that it was He Himself who killed them. Likewise, it was apparent that the Prophet ﷺ threw the dust in their faces, but Allāh negates this and informs us of the inner reality, which is that it was He Himself Who threw, and not the Prophet ﷺ.

Likewise, in the episode of the Ashāb-al-Kahf, the apparent reality is mentioned first (that if we were to see them we would think they are fully awake and not sleeping), but then we are informed of the inner reality which is that they were in fact asleep. And the inner reality of this sleep is obviously different from the apparent form of sleep; thus it is wrong to analogise this as an example of how a human body can survive for years without nourishment of food and drink in order to substantiate your doubtful ‘aqīda that sayyidina ‘Īsā (‘alayhis-salām) is alive in the Heavens with his corporal body, Jasad, for the past two millennia without eating or drinking.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Noor-us-Sunnah on July 21, 2017, 04:21:12 AM
What greater evidence can there be of the death of Jesus of Nazareth than the discovery of his family tomb and ossuary that actually contained his bones?



This video is unreliable for the following reasons:

REASON 1
Quote
Can the evidence stand up to scrutiny?

The identification of the Talpiot Tomb as the burial site for Jesus' family was made primarily on the basis of the names found on the ossuaries in the tomb: most notably, of course, those of Jesus and Mary.

We can start there. The box that supposedly says "Jesus, son of Joseph" definitely says "son of Joseph," but that first, crucial name is very much in doubt. One scholar suggested that it says Hanun, just to give a sense of how uncertain the reading is.

And the box that supposedly belongs to Mary actually says "Mariam and Mara," which suggests that there were actually two women buried in that single ossuary. It is also a problem that while all the other ossuaries are inscribed in Aramaic, this one is in Greek.

As for the names on the other ossuaries, some of them fit perfectly well into the Jesus story (Joseph, for example, Jesus' younger brother). Others, however, not so much: Matia (Matthew), not a member of Jesus' family according to the Bible, and, more problematically, Yehuda bar Yeshua -- Judas, son of Jesus.

Supporters of the theory regularly point to the remarkably collocation of so many biblical names in a single tomb. But as most every other scholar has pointed out, these were just about the most common names in that period, especially Joseph and Mary.

The evidence from the tomb next door -- the ossuary with the early Christian symbol of Jonah and the fish on it -- is equally hard to swallow.

It seems that the only people who see a fish on that box are those who already thought that Jesus was buried next door; just about everyone else sees an abstract geometric pattern, or perhaps the depiction of a jar.

As for that inscription about God raising someone up, it seems that this was a case of mistaken reading. The Greek most likely says something far less interesting: "Here are bones. I touch them not. Agabus." Agabus would be the name of the deceased, perhaps.

Then there is the James ossuary. The question of the authenticity of the inscription on the box -- the ossuary itself is certainly ancient -- is so fraught that the dealer who owns it was taken to trial for antiquities fraud.

Even if the trial ended without proving claims of forgery, we have no idea where the artifact came from.

What's more, almost every expert in ancient epigraphy has concluded that while the name James seems authentic, the words "brother of Jesus" are patently from a different hand, and most likely a much later, if not modern, addition.

Four problems with the James ossuary story

The newest part of the James ossuary story -- that it might have once been housed in the Talpiot Tomb -- has its own set of issues:

1. It requires that a tomb that has always been thought to have held 10 ossuaries in fact held 11.
2. That this otherwise unknown 11th ossuary happened to be the closest to the entrance to the tomb.
3. That this box closest to the doorway was looted, but all the others left just where they were;
4. That the only box to emerge from the tomb was the James ossuary.

None of this is supported by any evidence.

Finally there is the most recent piece of the puzzle: the soil analysis that seems to link the James ossuary with the Talpiot Tomb.

These lab results have not been published or subject to peer review. And there are reasonable questions to be raised even by non-experts about the process: most notably, only a handful of soil samples were taken, which means that we don't know whether this is a unique relationship or whether many tombs in Jerusalem would show the same correlation.

All of the individual pieces needed to make up the finished puzzle are very much in doubt. It's not clear whether they actually all belong together, or whether they actually produce a meaningful picture when they are combined.

A story that doesn't hold together

The story that is being told about this tomb simply doesn't make much sense.

Even if we were to grant all of this -- that the first generation of Christians buried Jesus and his family and some close followers in these tombs, perhaps secretly for fear of harassment by Jewish authorities -- we would have to believe that the knowledge of this burial spot was lost to early Christians almost immediately.

The idea of the resurrection emerged very early in Christianity -- almost immediately after Jesus' death. This would, in theory, explain the Jonah image (if it were such) on the tomb next door.

But this presents a logical dilemma: We would have a tomb containing Jesus' ossuary -- his bones -- coexisting, temporally and physically, with the belief that his bones shouldn't be in there. And we would have to believe that a year after Jesus died and was supposedly resurrected, his followers went and reburied his decomposed corpse in an ossuary.
What's more, all of the other people from Jesus' family, all those other names on the ossuaries in the Talpiot Tomb, would have been buried there after Jesus, presumably years later.

In other words, early Christians, believing that Jesus was the resurrected son of God, were entering his burial chamber to deposit the bones of his relatives, and no one ever mentioned the place, turned it into a pilgrimage site or marked it for other Jesus followers.

Considering how dangerous the existence of Jesus' burial site -- and bones -- would be for traditional Christian belief, even very early on, we might be surprised that no one, in the years that they must have been returning to the tomb to bury everyone else, didn't think to destroy the best evidence that their central claim was a lie.

The media attention around this story is easy enough to explain: Jesus is hot right now, and this would be a blockbuster if it were true. Unfortunately, the evidence is faulty, and the story doesn't make sense.

Source:
http://edition.cnn.com/2015/04/09/living/jesus-tomb-talpiot-evidence/index.html


REASON 2

It says that there were BONES of Isa(as) in it, however the Islamic belief is that, Earth doesn't consume the body of Prophets, which again proves that this was a fraud attempt by some cunning people. We know from our history the example of Daniyal(as), whose body wasn't consumed by the earth even after centuries.

Ibn Abi Shaybah (7/4) narrated with a saheeh isnaad from Anas that when they conquered Tastar, they found a man whose nose was one cubit long in a coffin, and they used to pray for victory and for rain by virtue of him. Abu Moosa wrote to ‘Umar ibn al-Khattab about that, and ‘Umar wrote back, saying: This man is one of the Prophets; fire does not consume (the bodies of) the Prophets and the earth does not consume (the bodies of) the Prophets. And he wrote instructions saying: You and your companions (meaning the companions of Abu Moosa) should discuss the matter and rebury him in a place that no one knows except you two. He said: So Abu Moosa and I went and reburied him.

Al-Bayhaqi said in Dalaa’il an-Nubuwwah (1/381):

It was narrated from Khaalid ibn Dinaar that Abu’l-‘Aaliyah said: When we conquered Tastar, we found in the treasury of al-Hormuzaan a bier on which was the body of a dead man, and by his head was a scripture of his. We seized the scripture and took it to ‘Umar ibn al-Khattaab (may Allah be pleased with him), and he summoned Ka‘b, who translated it into Arabic. I was the first man among the Arabs to read it, and I read it as I read this Qur’an. I said to Abu’l-‘Aaliyah: What was in it? He said: It was about you, your affairs, your religion, your talk, and what will happen after that. I said: What did you do with the man? He said: We dug thirteen different graves during the day, then at night we buried him and we levelled all the graves, so as to conceal its location from the people, so that they would not exhume him. I said: Why would peple do that? He said: If rain was withheld from them, they would take his bier out and they would receive rain. I said: Who do you think the man was? He said: A man called Daniyal. I said: How long ago do you think he died? He said: Three hundred years ago. I said: Had anything of him changed? He said: No, except a few hairs at the back of his head, for the earth does not consume (the bodies of) the Prophets, and wild animals cannot devour them.

Ibn Katheer (may Allah have mercy on him) said:

This is a saheeh isnaad going back to Abu’l-‘Aaliyah, but if the date of this man’s death was recorded as having been three hundred years earlier, then he cannot have been a Prophet; rather he was a righteous man. That is because there was no Prophet between ‘Eesa ibn Maryam and the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him), according to the text of the hadith narrated by al-Bukhaari, and the period between them was four hundred years, or six hundred, or six hundred and twenty years. Or the date of his death may have been eight hundred years earlier, which is close to the time of Daniyal, if this was the Daniyal who once lived. Or he may have been some other man, either one of the Prophets or one of the righteous. But it is most likely that he was Daniyal, because Daniyal was taken captive by the king of Persia, and remained with him as a prisoner, as we have seen above. It was narrated with a saheeh isnaad going back to Abu’l-‘Aaliyah that the length of his nose was a handspan, and it was narrated with a saheeh isnaad going back to Anas ibn Maalik that the length of his nose was a cubit. Therefore it is possible that this was one of the earlier Prophets, before the period mentioned above. And Allah knows best.
-End quote from al-Bidaayah wa’n-Nihaayah (2/40)-

Source:
https://islamqa.info/en/233815
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Noor-us-Sunnah on July 21, 2017, 04:22:10 AM
Your argument about speed failed to take into account the great speed of the Angels who ascend up to Allah very fast without the need for Buraq. All of these are creations of Noor which can move through the Heavens at high velocity. It is the earthen flesh and blood body which cannot be moved so fast. Our light speed is 186 thousand miles per second. Can an exposed human body travel at such speed into the Heavens where there is no oxygen?
Your questions display your lack of Emaan on the power of Allah, its like someone asking how can human being not get hurt by being burned in fire? So, they would say, its not rational to believe, Ibrahim(as) was put in fire and that fire became cool on him. You see these are supernatural events, which cannot be understood by human mind. But we have to believe in it.

Quote
Then you failed to address how sayyidina Eesaa ascended into Heaven in his physical body apparently without mounting the Buraaq. This means you at least believe it is not necessary for a human body to ascend into the Heavens with a vehicle or mount.
When it is proven that one person can go to heaven with his body, then there shouldn't be any hurdle for you to believe that it happened to someone else as well, even if the howness or details are not mentioned.

Quote
The Prophet Sallallahu alaihi wasallam was given the Buraaq to mount upon as a way of honoring him. Otherwise he could have ascended into Heaven on the wings of an Angel. There are reports in the Tafaseer that sayyidina Idrees alaihis salaam ascended into Heaven on the back of the Angel. To summarize, my point is that your argument that Buraaq was sent for because the Prophet ascended in his body is pure speculation and a very weak argument.
A correction from my part, Ibn Katheer himself, clarified this issue. Even though Ibn Katheer used the argument that Buraaq carrying Prophet(saws) is an evidence that it was with his body:

Ibn Katheer (may Allah have mercy on him) said in his Tafseer (3/33):
وأيضاً فإنه حمل على البراق ، وهو دابة بيضاء براقة لها لمعان ، وإنما يكون هذا للبدن ، لا للروح لأنها لا تحتاج في حركتها إلى مركب تركب عليه ، والله أعلم
he(Muhammad SAWS) was carried on al-Buraaq, which was a shining white animal; this can only refer to the body, not the soul, because to move the soul there is no need for a mount to carry it. And Allah knows best.

But Ibn Katheer also believed that Buraaq didn't take Prophet(saws) to heaven. It was a staircase. That is for "Isra" the means of transport was Buraaq, but for "Mira'aj", it was a staircase. See Seerat-e-Nabvi, vol 1, page 382, by Dr. Mahdi Rizqullah Ahmad.
[ You are not allowed to view attachments ]
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Noor-us-Sunnah on July 21, 2017, 04:23:00 AM
If you read carefully the narrations about the Mi'raaj and reflect upon them you will understand that it was an ascension of the soul and occurred not in this world but in the Aalam al-Mithaal. Take for instance the fact that the Prophet Sallallahu alaihi wasallam saw an old, decrepit woman decked with jewelry. She was the Dunya, her extreme old age signifying that she is about to die, he jewelry signifying her attempt to allure despite actually being repulsive, etc.

The Prophet Sallallahu alaihi wasallam was presented with a bowl of milk and a bowl of wine. He took the milk signifying his Ummah will be upon the way of the Fitra of Islam; had he taken the wine it would have meant his followers would go astray.
I believe that the strongest evidence, that Prophet(saws) went with body and soul on Isra and Mira'aj was the fact that, the disbelievers of Quraysh, found it impossible, and they understood the claim of Prophet(saws) very well and Prophet(saws) have explained them in the best way. And they understood it to mean that Prophet(saws) went physically, that is why they said it was impossible to travel Masjid al-Aqsa in one night, however if Prophet(saws) claimed that it was a vision, then wouldn't have compared and judged in it physical sense. Nor would have some people apostated.

(i). Mustadrak al-Hakim:
أَخْبَرَنِي مُكْرَمُ بْنُ أَحْمَدَ الْقَاضِي، ثنا إِبْرَاهِيمُ بْنُ الْهَيْثَمِ الْبَلَدِيُّ، ثنا مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ كَثِيرٍ الصَّنْعَانِيُّ، ثنا مَعْمَرُ بْنُ رَاشِدٍ، عَنِ الزُّهْرِيِّ، عَنْ عُرْوَةَ، عَنْ عَائِشَةَ رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهَا، قَالَتْ: " لَمَّا أُسْرِيَ بِالنَّبِيِّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَآلِهِ وَسَلَّمَ إِلَى الْمَسْجِدِ الأَقْصَى أَصْبَحَ يَتَحَدَّثُ النَّاسُ بِذَلِكَ، فَارْتَدَّ نَاسٌ فَمَنْ كَانَ آمَنُوا بِهِ وَصَدَّقُوهُ، وَسَمِعُوا بِذَلِكَ إِلَى أَبِي بَكْرٍ رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُ، فَقَالُوا: هَلْ لَكَ إِلَى صَاحِبِكَ يَزْعُمُ أَنَّهُ أُسْرِيَ بِهِ اللَّيْلَةَ إِلَى بَيْتِ الْمَقْدِسِ، قَالَ: أَوَ قَالَ ذَلِكَ؟ قَالُوا: نَعَمْ، قَالَ: لَئِنْ كَانَ قَالَ ذَلِكَ لَقَدْ صَدَقَ، قَالُوا: أَوَ تُصَدِّقُهُ أَنَّهُ ذَهَبَ اللَّيْلَةَ إِلَى بَيْتِ الْمَقْدِسِ وَجَاءَ قَبْلَ أَنْ يُصْبِحَ؟ قَالَ: نَعَمْ، إِنِّي لأَصُدِّقُهُ فِيمَا هُوَ أَبْعَدُ مِنْ ذَلِكَ أُصَدِّقُهُ بِخَبَرِ السَّمَاءِ فِي غُدْوَةٍ أَوْ رَوْحَةٍ، فَلِذَلِكَ سُمَيَّ أَبُو بَكْرٍ الصِّدِّيقَ
[`A’ishah narrated: When the Prophet (saw) was transported (during Isra’) to al-Masjid al-Aqsa, people started to talk about it and some of those who had previously believed him apostated and went to Abu Bakr saying: “Look at your companion, he now claims that he was transported last night to Bayt-ul-Maqdis(Jerusalem).” Abu Bakr said: “Did he say so?” They said: “Yes!” Abu Bakr replied: “If he had said it then he is truthful.” They said: “Do you believe that he went to Bayt-ul-Maqdis this night and returned before morning!?” Abu Bakr said: “Yes, I believe him in what is even further; I believe that he receives the news of the heavens in mornings and evenings.” That is why Abu Bakr is called al-Siddiq.]

You see, they understood the claim of Prophet(saws) in a physical sense, hence they disbelieved that it could occur in a night, but if it was a vision, they wouldn't have raised this argument.

Shaykh Haafiz al-Hakami said in Ma‘aarij al-Qubool (3/1067):
ولو كان الإسراء والمعراج بروحه في المنام لم تكن معجزة ، ولا كان لتكذيب قريش بها وقولهم : كنا نضرب أكباد الإبل إلى بيت المقدس ، شهرا ذهابا وشهرا إيابا ، ومحمد يزعم أنه أسرى به اللية وأصبح فينا إلى آخر تكذيبهم واستهزاءهم به صلى الله عليه وسلم لو كان ذلك رؤيا مناما لم يستبعدوه ولم يكن لردهم عليه معنى ؛ لأن الإنسان قد يرى في منامه ما هو أبعد من بيت المقدس ولا يكذبه أحد استبعاد لرؤياه ، وإنما قص عليهم رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم مسرى حقيقة يقظة لا مناما فكذبوه واستهزؤوا به استبعاد لذالك واستعظاما له مع نوع مكابرة لقلة علمهم بقدرة الله عز وجل وأن الله يفعل ما يريد ولهذا لما قالوا للصديق وأخبروه الخبر قال : إن كان قال ذلك لقد صدق . قالوا وتصدقه بذلك ؟ قال : نعم إني لأصدقه فيما هو أبعد من ذلك في خبر السماء يأتيه بكرة وعشيا أو كما قال
If the Isra’ and Mi‘raaj had to do with the soul in a dream, Quraysh would not have rejected it and they would not have said, It takes us a month by camel to reach Jerusalem and a month to come back, but Muhammad claims that he was taken there last night and was back here with us this morning…! And they ridiculed him (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him). If that had been a dream, they would not have found it so far-fetched and there would have been no meaning in their rejecting it, because a person may see in his dream things that are farther away than Jerusalem, and no one will disbelieve his dream or find it far-fetched. But the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) told them about a night journey that was real and had happened when he was awake, not in a dream, so they rejected it and ridiculed him, as they found it far-fetched and outrageous, and also out of stubbornness, because they had little knowledge of the might and power of Allah, may He be glorified and exalted, and they did not realise that Allah does whatever He wills. Hence when they told Abu Bakr as-Siddeeq about it, he said: If he said it, then it is true. They said: Do you really believe him? He said: Yes, and I believe him in something even more extraordinary than that, that news from heaven comes to him in the morning or in the afternoon – or words that effect.

(ii). Ibn Katheer (may Allah have mercy on him) said in his Tafseer (3/33):
ثم اختلف الناس : هل كان الإسراء ببدنه عليه السلام وروحه ، أو بروحه فقط ؟ على قولين ، فالأكثرون من العلماء على أنه أسري ببدنه وروحه يقظة لا مناماً ، ولا ينكرون أن يكون رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم رأى قبل ذلك مناماً ، ثم رآه بعد يقظة ، لأنه كان عليه السلام لا يرى رؤيا إلا جاءت مثل فلق الصبح ، والدليل على هذا قوله تعالى : ( سُبْحَانَ الَّذِي أَسْرَى بِعَبْدِهِ لَيْلاً مِنَ الْمَسْجِدِ الْحَرَامِ إِلَى الْمَسْجِدِ الْأَقْصَى الَّذِي بَارَكْنَا حَوْلَهُ ) الاسراء/ 1، فالتسبيح إنما يكون عند الأمور العظام ، فلو كان مناماً لم يكن فيه كبير شيء ، ولم يكن مستعظماً ، ولما بادرت كفار قريش إلى تكذبيه ، ولما ارتدت جماعة ممن كان قد أسلم ، وأيضاً فإن العبد عبارة عن مجموع الروح والجسد ، وقال تعالى : ( أَسْرَى بِعَبْدِهِ لَيْلاً ) وقال تعالى : ( وَمَا جَعَلْنَا الرُّؤْيا الَّتِي أَرَيْنَاكَ إِلَّا فِتْنَةً لِلنَّاسِ ) الاسراء /60، قال ابن عباس : هي رؤيا عين أريها رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم ليلة أسري به ، والشجرة الملعونة هي شجرة الزقوم ، رواه البخاري [ 2885 ] ، وقال تعالى :
( مَا زَاغَ الْبَصَرُ وَمَا طَغَى ) النجم/17 ، والبصر من آلات الذات لا الروح .
وأيضاً فإنه حمل على البراق ، وهو دابة بيضاء براقة لها لمعان ، وإنما يكون هذا للبدن ، لا للروح لأنها لا تحتاج في حركتها إلى مركب تركب عليه ، والله أعلم
Then the people differed as to whether the Isra’ involved both body and soul, or only his soul. There are two views; the majority of scholars are of the view that he was taken on the night journey both body and soul, when he was awake, and not in a dream, although they do not reject the idea that the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) may have seen a dream before that, then seen those things after that when he was awake, because he (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) never saw a dream but it came true like the breaking of dawn. The evidence for that is the verse in which Allah, may He be exalted, says (interpretation of the meaning):

“Glorified (and Exalted) be He (Allah) (above all that (evil) they associate with Him),Who took His slave (Muhammad (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him)) for a journey by night from Al-Masjid-al-Haram (at Makkah) to the farthest mosque (in Jerusalem), the neighbourhood whereof We have blessed” [al-Isra’ 17:1].

Tasbeeh [the phrase “Subhaan Allah (Glory be to Allah or Glorified be Allah)] is used in the case of matters of great significance. If it had been a dream, there would have been nothing great about it and it would not have been regarded as being of such great significance; the disbelievers of Quraysh would not have hastened to disbelieve him and a number of those who had previously become Muslim would not have apostatised. Moreover, the word “slave” refers to both soul and body together, and Allah, may He be exalted, said “Who took His slave (Muhammad (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him)) for a journey by night”, and He, may He be exalted, also said (interpretation of the meaning): “And We made not the vision which we showed you but a trial for mankind, and likewise the accursed tree” [al-Isra’ 17:60]. Ibn ‘Abbaas said: This was something that the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) saw with his own eyes on the night in which he was taken on the night journey, and the accursed tree is the tree of az-zaqqoom. Narrated by al-Bukhaari (2885). Allah, may He be exalted, says (interpretation of the meaning): “The sight (of Prophet Muhammad (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him)) turned not aside (right or left), nor it transgressed beyond (the) limit (ordained for it)” [an-Najm 53:17]; sight is one of the physical faculties, not part of the soul.

Moreover, he was carried on al-Buraaq, which was a shining white animal; this can only refer to the body, not the soul, because to move the soul there is no need for a mount to carry it. And Allah knows best.  -End quote-

(iii). Also to add proof that it was physical journey of Prophet(saws), we find a report which states that while his journey to Jerusalam Prophet(saws) saw a caravan of Quraysh, He made a Salam to them, and they heard his voice. In a vision a person cannot make others hears him, it has to be physical. See, Seerat-e-Nabvi, vol 1, page 381, by Dr. Mahdi Rizqullah Ahmad.

[ You are not allowed to view attachments ]

Quote
The Prophet Sallallahu alaihi wasallam saw people being punished in Hell despite the fact that from our perspective Judgment Day hasn't occurred yet. All of these and many other factors point to the reality of the Israa and Mi'raaj being a powerful vision that was in the Aalam-al-Mithaal.[/size][/font]
These events were displayed to Prophet(saws), people being punished in hell didn't happen in real but what he saw was a display of those events, while He was physically present in heaven, just as Masjid al-Aqsa was displayed to Prophet(saws) while he was awake in presence of disbelievers from Quraysh.

Let me quote the Scholarly explanation given to this issue from Islamqa website. We read:
Quote
No one will enter Paradise or Hell until after this reckoning. Some people will have an easy reckoning, and some will have a difficult reckoning. Our Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) will be the first one to enter Paradise in the full and real sense in the Hereafter.

It was narrated from Anas ibn Maalik (may Allaah be pleased with him) that the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “I will come to the gate of Paradise on the Day of Resurrection and will ask for it to be opened. The keeper will say: ‘Who are you?’ I will say, ‘Muhammad.’ He will say: ‘I was commanded not to open it for anyone before you.’” Narrated by Muslim (193). 

Secondly:

With regard to the ahaadeeth in which the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said that he saw someone in Paradise or in Hell, these are of two types:

1 – Either they were dreams, as in the hadeeth of Abu Hurayrah (may Allaah be pleased with him) according to which the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said to Bilaal at the time of Fajr prayer: “O Bilaal, tell me of the best deed you have done in Islam, for I heard the sound of your sandals in front of me in Paradise.”

Al-Haafiz ibn Hajar said in Fath al-Baari (3/35):

Al-Karmaani said: The apparent meaning of the hadeeth is that the hearing mentioned happened in a dream, because no one can enter Paradise except after death. The idea that it happened in a dream is supported by that which is quoted in the first part of (the chapter on) the virtues of ‘Umar from the marfoo’ hadeeth of Jaabir: “I saw myself entering Paradise and I heard footsteps, and it was said: This is Bilaal. And I saw a palace in the courtyard of which there was a girl, and it was said: This is for ‘Umar. …” After this hadeeth is the marfoo’ hadeeth of Abu Hurayrah: “Whilst I was sleeping I saw myself in Paradise, and I saw a woman doing wudoo’ beside a palace, and it was said: This is for ‘Umar. …” So it is known that this happened in a dream. This affirmed the virtue of Bilaal, because the dreams of the Prophets are wahy (Revelation), hence the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) affirmed that for him. End quote.

2 – Or Allaah showed His Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) what would happen in the Hereafter, so that he saw it with his own eyes or in his heart. That includes things that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) saw on the night of the Mi’raaj of things that would happen in Paradise or in Hell. Al-Haafiz al-Nawawi (may Allaah have mercy on him) said in Sharh Muslim (6/207):

al-Qaadi ‘Iyaad said: The scholars said: It may be understood as meaning that he saw it with his own eyes, as Allaah showed it to him and lifted the barrier between him and it, as He showed him al-Masjid al-Aqsa when he described it.

They said: Or it may be understood as meaning that he saw it by way of knowledge and revelation, so he saw it and learned of it in details that he had not known before that.

Al-Qaadi said: The first interpretation is more likely and is closer to the wording of the hadeeth, because it contains things that point to seeing with the eyes, such as his reaching out to take the bunch of grapes, and his stepping back in fear lest the heat of Hell reach him. End quote.
Source:
https://islamqa.info/en/89813
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Noor-us-Sunnah on July 21, 2017, 04:45:33 AM
Regrettably you approach the texts of Islam with rigid and dry literalism and without Hikmah and Firaasah, gifts given to the Believer whose heart is filled with Noor.

Are we to understand that Dajjal will literally come mounted on a massive white donkey the span between its ears being 40 cubits, and travel faster than a cloud driven by the wind?
In principle, the Islamic terminology in religious texts is interpreted according to the literal meaning unless proven otherwise by a contextual or any other evidence. No scholar held that the hadeeth refers to a metaphorical donkey and not an actual one. Therefore, this means that the Dajjaal will be riding a real donkey, as described in the hadeeth, which indicates that it will be distinguished from usual donkeys as is clear from the measurement of its ears, let alone the rest of its body. This is similar to the description of Al-Buraaq that the Prophet, sallallaahu ʻalayhi wa sallam, rode during the night journey of Al-Israa'. The span of its step was described in the hadeeth that reads, "It places its hoof where its range of vision ends." [Al-Bukhari and Muslim]

Indeed, nothing is to be classified as odd or impossible when it comes to the infinite power of Allaah. He says (what means):

- {...Indeed, Allaah is over all things competent.} [Quran 2:20]

- {...But Allaah is not to be caused failure by anything in the heavens or on the earth. Indeed, He is ever Knowing and Competent.} [Quran 35:44]

Taken from:
http://www.islamweb.net/emainpage/index.php?page=showfatwa&Option=FatwaId&Id=314212


Quote
And are we to understand that Gog and Magog will literally throw spears into the sky and they will fall back to the Earth smeared in blood?
Yes, and it would a test from Allah, as mentioned in a hadeeth. Carrying out pillage and murder to their left and right, Yajuj & Majuj will come to mount of Khamr (a mountain in Jerusalem) and say, “We have killed the inhabitants of the Earth, let us now kill the inhabitants of Heaven.” Thus, they will shoot their arrows towards the sky. Allah will return the arrows covered with blood and these fools will think they have killed those in Heaven. It would be a test for them, after which Allah will send punishment on them. We read:

Abu Sa’id al-Khudri said: “I heard the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم say: “Ya’juj and Ma’juj will open the barrier and come out against the people as Allah [ta’ala] said: “from every slope, pouring down.” [Al-Anbiya’: 96] So they will wreak havoc on the earth, and the Muslims will take cover in their cities and fortresses, taking their herds with them. And they [i.e. Ya’juj and Ma’juj] will drink the waters of the earth until one of them will pass by a river, then they will all drink from it until they leave it dry, until one who comes after them will pass that river and say: “There was once water here.” Then, when there is no one from the people remaining except that he has gone to a fortress or a city, one of them will say: “We have finished with the inhabitants of the earth, now only the inhabitants of the heavens are left.” He said: “Then one of them will shake his spear and hurl it into the sky, and it will fall back down again soaked with blood, as a trial and test for them. So while they are like that, Allah will send a worm in their necks like an-naghf, which will eat its way out of their necks, so that they will all fall dead, and no sound will be heard from them. So the Muslims will say: “Is there any man who will risk his life for us to see what this enemy is doing?” He said: “So a man will stand up to do that, seeking Allah’s reward, feeling that he will surely be a dead man. So he will go down and find them all dead, lying on top of each other. So he will call out: “O assembly of Muslims! Receive the good tidings that Allah has sufficed you against your enemy!” So they will come out of their cities and fortresses, and they will let their herds loose. They will find nothing for them to graze upon except their flesh [i.e. of Ya’juj and Ma’juj], but they will be nourished from it just as well as they had ever been nourished from any vegetation.”  (Al-Haakim)
[Source: The Story of Gog & Magog (Yajuj & Majuj) In Islam Religion By Muham Taqra]
 [ You are not allowed to view attachments ]  [ You are not allowed to view attachments ]

Quote
And are we to understand that sayyidina Eesaa alaihis salaam will literally go hunting to slaughter all the pigs in the world, and he will literally break every single cross and crucifix with his own hands?
When a leader commands people, and those under his leadership accomplish that command, that accomplishment gets attributed to him. For, example we say "Umar(ra) destroyed persian empire", However in actual it was the Muslim army which destroyed it. Similarly, people claim that "Yazeed killed Hussain(ra)", even though Yazeed wasn't present in Karbala. Likewise, in regards to Isa(as) killing the swine and breaking the cross, the meaning of this hadeeth is that, since the christians who eat swine and worship cross will become Muslim after the descend of Isa(as) from heaven, then on his command they will kill the pigs which they had for consumption and would break the cross on his command, so since the command is from Isa(as) which his followers would execute, it was attributed to him.


Quote
It is such literalist thinking devoid of wisdom that makes people like you a laughing stock who believe in fables and fairy tales without understanding the reality. They think the final battles prophesied in the Hadith will literally be fought with swords and spears; having no understanding of apocalyptic language and symbolism.
Refer this response:
https://islamqa.info/en/162744
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Noor-us-Sunnah on July 21, 2017, 04:54:47 AM

 عَنْ ثَوْبَانَ، قَالَ قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏"‏ إِنَّ اللَّهَ زَوَى لِيَ الأَرْضَ ‏"‏ ‏.‏ أَوْ قَالَ ‏"‏ إِنَّ رَبِّي زَوَى لِيَ الأَرْضَ فَرَأَيْتُ مَشَارِقَهَا وَمَغَارِبَهَا وَإِنَّ مُلْكَ أُمَّتِي سَيَبْلُغُ مَا زُوِيَ لِي مِنْهَا وَأُعْطِيتُ الْكَنْزَيْنِ الأَحْمَرَ وَالأَبْيَضَ


Narrated Thawbān (Radi Allāhu ‘Anhu): The Messenger of Allāh ﷺ as saying: “Allāh, the Exalted, folded for me the Earth”, or he said: “My Lord folded for me the Earth, so much so that I saw its easts and wests (i.e. the extremities). The kingdom of my community will reach as far as the Earth was folded for me. The two treasures, the red and the white (peoples) were bestowed on me.” (Sunan Abi Dawud)

*Now did this too occur literally? Or was it a Kashaf (vision) which the Prophet ﷺ was made to behold?

These events were displayed to Prophet(saws), while He was physically present in heaven, just as Masjid al-Aqsa was displayed to Prophet(saws) while he was awake in presence of disbelievers from Quraysh.

Refer post#221  for detailed response, as I covered this issue in that post.

As for the the issue of Isra wal Miraaj being literal or visionary, then "Dr. Mahdi Rizqullah Ahmad" in his book "Seerat-e-Nabvi, vol 1, pages 383-388", has discussed this issue in detail, let me post the pages from his book in Urdu for the benefit of readers.

[ You are not allowed to view attachments ][ You are not allowed to view attachments ]

In page 384, The author says that there was a difference among scholars, some scholars held the view that this took place in a dream/vision, but the correct view is the one, which was held by Majority of Salaf-saliheen, Fuqha, Muhadditeen and Mutakallimeen, that the journey occurred with Prophet's(saws) body and soul. And he backed his view by quoting Imam Ibn Hajar Asqalani. Then the author argues that the opposing view was reported from weak chains.
[ You are not allowed to view attachments ]
In page 385, the author continues with weakening the opposing view, and says there was Ijma of Sahaba on it.
[ You are not allowed to view attachments ]
[ You are not allowed to view attachments ][ You are not allowed to view attachments ]
[Seerat-e-Nabvi, vol 1, pages 383-388, by Dr. Mahdi Rizqullah Ahmad.]

Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 21, 2017, 05:08:59 AM
It says that there were BONES of Isa(as) in it, however the Islamic belief is that, Earth doesn't consume the body of Prophets, which again proves that this was a fraud attempt by some cunning people.

I have written about this Mas’ala at length on my blog,
 https://islamsalvationfromhell.blogspot.ca/2016/09/do-bodies-of-prophets-decay-after-death.html

disproving the ‘aqīda, based on a weak Hadīth, that the earth is forbidden from decomposing the bodies of the Prophets peace be upon them. For now, consider two important facts; 1. the earth decomposes the entire body of the son of Adam except for the coccyx (tailbone), from which he will be resurrected, 2. Prophet Joseph put in his Will that long after his death, when the Israelites emigrate to the Holy Land, they should exhume his bones and take them along with them and bury them with his forefathers, whose final resting place is in the Cave of Patriarchs in Hebron.

If it is true that the bodies of the Prophets remain as they are and unlike other human bodies are not decomposed after their death, then all one has to do is open the grave of a Prophet and display it before the whole world! That would be enough to establish the Hujja upon the disbelievers and make Islam triumphant.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 21, 2017, 05:18:41 AM
Your questions display your lack of Emaan on the power of Allah, its like someone asking how can human being not get hurt by being burned in fire? So, they would say, its not rational to believe, Ibrahim(as) was put in fire and that fire became cool on him. You see these are supernatural events, which cannot be understood by human mind. But we have to believe in it.

Allāh didn’t change the nature of the mortal human body by making it immune to the effect of fire. Prophets are human beings and they are harmed by what harms ordinary human beings. Rather, Allāh commanded the fire itself to become cool (Sūra 21: 69). There is no evidence whatsoever that Jesus of Nazareth ascended into Heaven in his earthen body, or that the body was transformed and somehow became immune to the fatal effects of outer space upon it, where there is no oxygen. To assert this is delving into speculation in theological matters of the unseen, which is indisputably forbidden.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 21, 2017, 06:00:58 AM
I believe that the strongest evidence, that Prophet(saws) went with body and soul on Isra and Mira'aj was the fact that, the disbelievers of Quraysh, found it impossible, and they understood the claim of Prophet(saws) very well and Prophet(saws) have explained them in the best way. And they understood it to mean that Prophet(saws) went physically, that is why they said it was impossible to travel Masjid al-Aqsa in one night, however if Prophet(saws) claimed that it was a vision, then wouldn't have compared and judged in it physical sense. Nor would have some people apostated.

You are assuming that the disbelievers understood what the Prophet ﷺ was claiming regarding his Isrā and Mi’rāj “very well”. You will first have to prove this supposition as being correct before proceeding. Pharaoh of Egypt was a disbeliever in the existence of Allāh and likewise found it irrational and inconceivable to believe in the Lord of Moses and Aaron, at least initially. Prophet Moses conveyed to him his Da’wa regarding the existence and immanance of Allāh Most High. But Pharaoh of Egypt still could not understand, and wrongly assumed that a person could meet with Moses’s Lord in Heaven by constructing a tall structure and ascending to the top of it  (Sūra 28: 38). Likewise, the polytheists of Makka ridiculed the Prophet’s claim about having visited Jerusalem and ascended into the Heavens in a single night because they did not understand the spiritual subtleties. In the Hadīth of al-Bukhāri, after narrating the lengthy incident of Mi’rāj, the concluding words of Angel Gabriel to the Prophet ﷺ are: فَاهْبِطْ بِاسْمِ اللَّهِ ‘Descend in the Name of Allāh’, and then it is narrated: وَاسْتَيْقَظَ وَهُوَ فِي مَسْجِدِ الْحَرَامِ ‘He awoke, and he was in the Sacred Mosque’. Notice here that the Prophet ﷺ is having his last meeting with Moses who was stationed in the Sixth Heaven. Now what needed to be acquired from Allāh for this Mi’rāj concerning the five obligatory prayers was done. Instead of continuing to descend back down, presumably on the Burāq, into the Heavens below and then land on Earth, Angel Gabriel simply told the Prophet ﷺ to take the Name of Allāh, and suddenly he awoke and found himself back in the Sacred Mosque. This is sufficient evidence that the Mi’rāj was a spiritual vision and not a physical/bodily journey.

If you insist that the Prophet ﷺ physically travelled to Bayt-al-Maqdis, and that some 124,000 Prophets arrived there in their actual bodies to pray behind him, undoubtedly such an amazing event would have been recorded in the annals of the people of Jerusalem to corroborate such a thing. It’s not everyday that you see 124,000 long deceased Prophets suddenly appear in your town. If such a thing happened in this Dunyā, and it was not an event in the ‘Ālam-al-Mithāl as you are saying, then there definitely should have been some historical report about it from the people of Jerusalem to cross reference. Furthermore, in the Hadīth of Mālik b. Sa’sa’, it is stated that before the Mi’rāj, when the Angels came to the Prophet ﷺ, he was in a state midway between sleep and wakefulness: بَيْنَا أَنَا عِنْدَ الْبَيْتِ بَيْنَ النَّائِمِ وَالْيَقْظَانِ

The Angels took the Prophet, opened his chest, washed his heart with Zamzam water, and then Burāq also came, etc. All of this was happening in the Sacred Mosque, obviously in the presence of the polytheists of Quraysh. So why didn’t they believe in the claim of Isrā and Mi’rāj when the apparent text of the Hadīth implies that it all happened in their presence, at the Sacred Mosque?
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 21, 2017, 06:23:26 AM
Quote from: Noor-us-Sunnah
Tasbeeh [the phrase “Subhaan Allah (Glory be to Allah or Glorified be Allah)] is used in the case of matters of great significance. If it had been a dream, there would have been nothing great about it and it would not have been regarded as being of such great significance; the disbelievers of Quraysh would not have hastened to disbelieve him and a number of those who had previously become Muslim would not have apostatised. Moreover, the word “slave” refers to both soul and body together, and Allah, may He be exalted, said “Who took His slave (Muhammad (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him)) for a journey by night”, and He, may He be exalted, also said (interpretation of the meaning): “And We made not the vision which we showed you but a trial for mankind, and likewise the accursed tree” [al-Isra’ 17:60]. Ibn ‘Abbaas said: This was something that the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) saw with his own eyes on the night in which he was taken on the night journey, and the accursed tree is the tree of az-zaqqoom. Narrated by al-Bukhaari (2885). Allah, may He be exalted, says (interpretation of the meaning): “The sight (of Prophet Muhammad (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him)) turned not aside (right or left), nor it transgressed beyond (the) limit (ordained for it)” [an-Najm 53:17]; sight is one of the physical faculties, not part of the soul.

Regarding this Mi’rāj, Allāh says:

مَا كَذَبَ الْفُؤَادُ مَا رَأَىٰ

The Heart did not lie about what it saw (Sūra 53: 11). So the Mi’rāj was a powerful Vision, or Kashaf, of the Prophet’s heart.

وَمَا جَعَلْنَا الرُّؤْيَا الَّتِي أَرَيْنَاكَ إِلَّا فِتْنَةً لِّلنَّاسِ وَالشَّجَرَةَ الْمَلْعُونَةَ فِي الْقُرْآنِ

And We did not make the Vision which you saw except a trial for the people, and (likewise) the cursed tree (mentioned) in the Qur’ān (Sūra 17: 60). Concerning this Ru’yā ‘Vision’, the eminent Imām al-Hasan al-Basri compared it to the Vision of Abraham where he saw himself sacrificing his son Isaac (Tafsīr Ibn Jarīr). So both Visions were not physical:

(https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-zw_Sg59znG0/WXFz7CrZa5I/AAAAAAAACnc/N3_jnDK-3RseUp1xk-QvQFalquSv5F4kQCLcBGAs/s1600/Miraj%2Bnarration%2Bof%2BHasan%2Bal%2BBasri%2B%2528Tafsir%2BTabari%2529.bmp)

In the first Ayat of Sūrat Bani Isrā’īl, Allāh says He took His servant ﷺ by night. This is like how He says:

وَهُوَ الَّذِي يَتَوَفَّاكُم بِاللَّيْلِ

And He is the One Who takes you at night (Sūra 6: 60). Here the taking of the person at night refers to the taking of the soul during sleep. This is why Allāh made explicit mention of Layl ‘night’ in the Ayat of al-Isrā (Sūra 17: 1) to indicate it as being a vision during sleep.

As for your argument that the word ‘Abd can only apply to both body and soul together, there is no evidence of this from any credible lexicon. Are not the Angels, the Rūh and the Jinn considered as ‘Ibād Allāh?
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 21, 2017, 07:28:40 AM
No scholar held that the hadeeth refers to a metaphorical donkey and not an actual one. Therefore, this means that the Dajjaal will be riding a real donkey, as described in the hadeeth, which indicates that it will be distinguished from usual donkeys as is clear from the measurement of its ears, let alone the rest of its body.

There is no literal donkey that has the span of 40 cubits between the width of its ears. If you had Firāsa and true understanding you would not make a mockery by believing in childlike fables but instead know the true reality of this exceedingly white and extremely large donkey that it is a means of modern transportation:





There are so many prophecies of the Prophet ﷺ which have been fulfilled, but people of you who are spiritually blind cannot see this because you are drowning in literalism like the Pharisaic Jews. People like you think that the saddles that move automatically without a beast, carrying passengers, must be literal and are not a prophecy of cars (even Albāni recognised this as a prophecy about modern vehicles), and the prophecy of a man’s whip speaking to him, sandals speaking, and thigh informing him of what is happening with his family in his absence is all literal and not a clear and awesome prediction regarding modern technology and electronic devices. What can be said about such people except:

Have they not travelled through the land, and have they hearts wherewith to understand and ears wherewith to hear? Verily, it is not the eyes that grow blind, but it is the hearts which are in the breasts that grow blind.  (Sūra 22: 46).
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 21, 2017, 07:44:22 AM
Concerning the Dajjāl’s Donkey, I’ve written a detailed article on my blog:
http://islamsalvationfromhell.blogspot.ca/2017/01/dajjals-donkey_17.html

Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 21, 2017, 08:13:29 AM
Yes, and it would a test from Allah, as mentioned in a hadeeth. Carrying out pillage and murder to their left and right, Yajuj & Majuj will come to mount of Khamr (a mountain in Jerusalem) and say, “We have killed the inhabitants of the Earth, let us now kill the inhabitants of Heaven.” Thus, they will shoot their arrows towards the sky. Allah will return the arrows covered with blood and these fools will think they have killed those in Heaven. It would be a test for them, after which Allah will send punishment on them.

Try to understand apocalyptic and religious symbolism that is contained in prophecies. A Prophet describes events in the future in a language and using terminology the people of his time can comprehend. For example, how would you describe a modern vehicle such as a car to an ancient person? He doesn’t understand the term ‘automobile’. You would describe it as a carriage that moves without a beast of burden, precisely how the Prophet ﷺ described it:
سَيَكُونُ فِي آخِرِ أُمَّتِي رِجَالٌ يَرْكَبُونَ عَلَى السُّرُوجِ كَأَشْبَاهِ الرِّجَالِ يَنْزِلُونَ عَلَى أَبْوَابِ الْمَسْجِدِ
“In the last [part] of my nation there will be men who ride on means that resemble saddles.  They will alight at the doors of the mosques.” (Musnad Ahmad)

So what are these moving vehicles that are like saddles that people will park right at the doors of the mosques? Now if you think that there is literally going to come a giant donkey that is silvery white, having 40 cubits as the span between its ears, flying in the sky carrying the Dajjāl so he can travel as fast as a cloud driven by the wind, what can I say except Innā Lillāhi wa Innā Ilayhi Rāji’ūn? And in some books it is written that this donkey has windows with curtains on its sides, and that there are seats inside its belly which people will sit inside and travel. How much more explicit should the prophecy be before you can understand it? Have you no wisdom?

Now coming back to the spears and arrows of Yā’jūj wa Mā’jūj, how would you describe modern weapons such as anti-aircraft missiles that are fired into the sky to an ancient person? Will you use the term ‘anti-aircraft missle’, or will you describe something he can comprehend, such as a powerful spear that is shot upwards killing those that are in the sky? Now look what the Prophet ﷺ said: “The Muslims will use the bows, arrows and shields of Gog and Magog as firewood, for seven years” (Sunan Ibn Māja). This prophecy in fact originates from Ezekiel 39: 9 – 10 “And they that dwell in the cities of Israel shall go forth, and shall set on fire and burn the weapons, both the shields and the bucklers, the bows and the arrows, and the handstaves, and the spears, and they shall burn them with fire seven years: So that they shall take no wood out of the field, neither cut down any out of the forests; for they shall burn the weapons with fire: and they shall spoil those that spoiled them, and rob those that robbed them, saith the Lord God.”

Now understand the meaning of burning the weapons of Gog and Magog as firewood for seven years. Obviously, these are not ordinary bows, arrows and shields but modern technology being used for fuel. Regrettably, spiritually blind people like you think that these massive wars of the End Times such as Gog and Magog, will literally be fought with swords and spears and on horseback, not understanding that these terms were used as symbols, and nothing can be more obvious than that.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 21, 2017, 11:47:22 AM
Some of the visions or Kushūf of our illustrious Nabi ﷺ have been related as though they transpired in this material realm. While praying Salāt, he ﷺ beheld Janna which was brought so close to him that he thought about plucking a bunch of grapes from it. Likewise, the Hellfire was displayed to him and brought so close that he stepped back for fear of being burnt by its flames, and he saw a woman in it being tormented for her cruelty to a cat (this while he was offering the Salāt and his Sahāba praying behind him). The vision of seeing the Earth flattened and beholding the vastness of his ﷺ Umma from the East to the West has already preceded. It is in the Suhufi Mutahhara that Joseph saw eleven stars, the sun and the moon in a state of prostration to him (Sūra 12: 4) and a companion of Joseph saw himself pressing wine, and the other was carrying bread on his head which birds were eating from (Sūra 12: 36). Both of these are related with omission of the word ‘dream’ or ‘sleep’, though it is universally understood that they were visions and not something from this waking world.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Noor-us-Sunnah on July 22, 2017, 09:41:14 AM
I have written about this Mas’ala at length on my blog,
 https://islamsalvationfromhell.blogspot.ca/2016/09/do-bodies-of-prophets-decay-after-death.html

disproving the ‘aqīda, based on a weak Hadīth, that the earth is forbidden from decomposing the bodies of the Prophets peace be upon them. For now, consider two important facts; 1. the earth decomposes the entire body of the son of Adam except for the coccyx (tailbone), from which he will be resurrected,
I provided you authentic hadeeth where Sahaba encountered a grave of Prophet, and his body wasn't consumed by earth. Just by saying weak, it won't become weak.

As for the hadeeth of tailbone you used, it is a general hadeeth, but in case of Prophets there are exceptions made in some cases against the general ones. Here is an example:

حَدَّثَنَا عُثْمَانُ بْنُ أَبِي شَيْبَةَ، وَإِسْحَاقُ بْنُ إِبْرَاهِيمَ، قَالَ إِسْحَاقُ أَخْبَرَنَا وَقَالَ، عُثْمَانُ حَدَّثَنَا جَرِيرٌ، عَنْ مَنْصُورٍ، عَنْ سَالِمِ بْنِ أَبِي الْجَعْدِ، عَنْ أَبِيهِ، عَنْ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ بْنِ مَسْعُودٍ، قَالَ قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏"‏ مَا مِنْكُمْ مِنْ أَحَدٍ إِلاَّ وَقَدْ وُكِّلَ بِهِ قَرِينُهُ مِنَ الْجِنِّ ‏"‏ ‏.‏ قَالُوا وَإِيَّاكَ يَا رَسُولَ اللَّهِ قَالَ ‏"‏ وَإِيَّاىَ إِلاَّ أَنَّ اللَّهَ أَعَانَنِي عَلَيْهِ فَأَسْلَمَ فَلاَ يَأْمُرُنِي إِلاَّ بِخَيْرٍ
Abd-Allaah ibn Mas’ood said: The Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “There is no one among you but a companion from among the jinn has been assigned to him.” They said, “Even you, O Messenger of Allaah?’ He said, “Even me, but Allaah helped me with him and he became Muslim, so he only enjoins me to do that which is good.” [Sahih Muslim 2814 a]

Here you see, every human has a Jinn assigned to him who invites him to evil, but there is an exception of Prophet(saws). Hence your argument using a General hadeeth falls flat.


Quote
2. Prophet Joseph put in his Will that long after his death, when the Israelites emigrate to the Holy Land, they should exhume his bones and take them along with them and bury them with his forefathers, whose final resting place is in the Cave of Patriarchs in Hebron.
The learned scholars such as Shiekh al-Albani have tried to reconcile these reports, that is, the one which says that earth doesn't consume the body of Prophets, and the one you cited about Yusuf's(as) bones mentioned in hadeeth. The scholars said that, the word "bones" can be used to refer a body, and to back this claim they used the following hadeeth.

حَدَّثَنَا الْحَسَنُ بْنُ عَلِيٍّ، حَدَّثَنَا أَبُو عَاصِمٍ، عَنِ ابْنِ أَبِي رَوَّادٍ، عَنْ نَافِعٍ، عَنِ ابْنِ عُمَرَ، أَنَّ النَّبِيَّ صلى الله عليه وسلم لَمَّا بَدُنَ قَالَ لَهُ تَمِيمٌ الدَّارِيُّ أَلاَ أَتَّخِذُ لَكَ مِنْبَرًا يَا رَسُولَ اللَّهِ يَجْمَعُ - أَوْ يَحْمِلُ - عِظَامَكَ قَالَ ‏ "‏ بَلَى ‏"‏ ‏.‏ فَاتَّخَذَ لَهُ مِنْبَرًا مِرْقَاتَيْنِ
Ibn 'Umar said: When the Prophet (ﷺ) became fat, Tamim al-Dari said to him: Should I make for you pulpit, Messenger of Allah, that will bear the burden of your bones(body) ? He said: Yes. So he made a pulpit consisting of two steps. [Sunan Abi Dawud 1081; Grading Sahih]

Hence it is established that the word "bones" can be used to refer body as well, while the bones cannot be seen.

For detailed explanation of Scholars refer this link:
http://fatwa.islamweb.net/fatwa/index.php?page=showfatwa&Option=FatwaId&Id=333472

Next in your blog you used this hadeeth
Quote
Then al-Abbas (may Allah be pleased with him) stood up and addressed the people with the following words: “Verily, the Messenger of Allah (Sallallahu alaihi wasallam) has died. Indeed he was a mortal human being, and he shall change as mortal human beings change (after death). So people bury your Companion...”
Reference: Sunan al-Darimi; Chapter on the Death of the Prophet
Here is the chain of this report:
أخبرنا سليمان بن حرب ثنا حماد بن زيد عن أيوب عن عكرمة قال : توفي رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم يوم الإثنين

It is Mursal, Ikrimah Mawla ibn Abbas is a Taba'i, He was born a decade after the death of Prophet(saws), hence he cannot be a witness to the event he is reporting directly. Thus, it cannot be used as hujjah.

Secondly, the words are ambiguous, the context in which they were said, could mean the change from state of life to death, Umar(ra) wasn't claiming that Prophet's body wouldn't decompose, rather the context was purely regarding life and death, thus in relation to this, the words about change of state of life to death was mentioned.

Thirdly, I provided clear authentic ahadeeth of what occurred, not what would occur or is hidden, regarding body of a Prophet. Rather the example of Daniyal's(as) body is an explicit evidence which would be given precedence.

Quote
If it is true that the bodies of the Prophets remain as they are and unlike other human bodies are not decomposed after their death, then all one has to do is open the grave of a Prophet and display it before the whole world! That would be enough to establish the Hujja upon the disbelievers and make Islam triumphant.
These are invalid claims, what happened with the sign which Allah(swt) himself mentions in Quran. That is the example of preserving the body of Firawn.

So today We will save you in body that you may be to those who succeed you a sign. And indeed, many among the people, of Our signs, are heedless.(Quran 10:92).

Did all the people start believing in Islam? So keep these claims contrary to Quran and Sunnah to yourself. We know from Quran and Sunnah, that disbelievers witnessed the Miracles of Prophets, yet did bring Emaan on them.

And the fact is that some Christians  wanted to steal the body of Prophet(saws), but weren't able to accomplish their task. You can read about it here:
http://www.islamweb.net/emainpage/index.php?page=showfatwa&Option=FatwaId&Id=92625
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Noor-us-Sunnah on July 22, 2017, 09:44:25 AM
Your questions display your lack of Emaan on the power of Allah, its like someone asking how can human being not get hurt by being burned in fire? So, they would say, its not rational to believe, Ibrahim(as) was put in fire and that fire became cool on him. You see these are supernatural events, which cannot be understood by human mind. But we have to believe in it.

Allāh didn’t change the nature of the mortal human body by making it immune to the effect of fire. Prophets are human beings and they are harmed by what harms ordinary human beings. Rather, Allāh commanded the fire itself to become cool (Sūra 21: 69). There is no evidence whatsoever that Jesus of Nazareth ascended into Heaven in his earthen body, or that the body was transformed and somehow became immune to the fatal effects of outer space upon it, where there is no oxygen. To assert this is delving into speculation in theological matters of the unseen, which is indisputably forbidden.

Allah did change the nature of skin when it is exposed to fire, in the case of Ibrahim(as). And as for Isa(as) being raised to heaven, then the verse of Quran which talks about raising(Rafa) of Isa(as) is in itself an evidence from which Mufassireen deduced ascend of Isa(As), and what compliments this view is the unique prophesy of descend of Isa(as) from heaven during the end times. His Rafa and Nuzool from heaven goes hand in hand, with each other. It like a relation that Quran talks about raising of Isa(as), then Mutawattir head talks about descend of Isa(as). Quite simple to understand for people, whose hearts are not corrupt. And since Allah is the one who did the Rafa and will do the Nuzool of Isa(as), its stupidity to question howness, and displays lack of Emaan. It's similar for someone to question how could Fire become cool on Ibrahim or how could Isa(as) take birth without a father.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Noor-us-Sunnah on July 22, 2017, 07:16:48 PM
You are assuming that the disbelievers understood what the Prophet ﷺ was claiming regarding his Isrā and Mi’rāj “very well”. You will first have to prove this supposition as being correct before proceeding. Pharaoh of Egypt was a disbeliever in the existence of Allāh and likewise found it irrational and inconceivable to believe in the Lord of Moses and Aaron, at least initially. Prophet Moses conveyed to him his Da’wa regarding the existence and immanance of Allāh Most High. But Pharaoh of Egypt still could not understand, and wrongly assumed that a person could meet with Moses’s Lord in Heaven by constructing a tall structure and ascending to the top of it  (Sūra 28: 38).
You are intellectually bankrupt. My point was about Mushrikeen Makkah fully understanding what the claimant is claiming. Not that, they believed in what happened. Like how they understood what the claimant was claiming when Prophet(saws) said that there is "No God Except Allah, and Muhammad(saws) is His messenger", they understood what the claimant claimed, but didn't believe in it.

Likewise the example of Firawn and Moosa(as) you used then Firawn perfectly understood what the claimant claimed, Musa(as) claimed that Allah is in heaven, thus Firawn UNDERSTOOD THIS CLAIM, and hence want to prove it wrong. The point here is did he understood the claim of the claimant or not. In this case he did. The claim of Musa(as) wasn't that No one can reach above heaven where Allah is, so that Firawn tried to belie Musa(as), not at all.

Quote
Likewise, the polytheists of Makka ridiculed the Prophet’s claim about having visited Jerusalem and ascended into the Heavens in a single night because they did not understand the spiritual subtleties.
That's a very weak argument, even Kuffar see dreams, they can see things which would be incomprehensible in reality. Yet, none of them gave it a benefit of doubt that, since its a dream, and even we see dreams then it was just a false dream. But, on the contrary they compared Isra wa Miraj which Prophet(saws) was "supposedly" claiming in the form of dream to physical journey. And if that was the case then Prophet(saws) would have just refuted them back that why are you bringing the argument of time duration taken to travel Jerusalam, while I was sleeping here, and my body was present here. So you see, there is no better and rational explanation to this action of Mushrikeen of Makkah.

Moreover, why would some Muslims also leave Islam, if Prophet(saws) claimed it was dream? There is no rational explanation to this except to believe that, these former Muslims understood the claim of Prophet(saws), that he meant it to be physical journey.

Also, when these people reached Abu Bakr(ra) to inform him about this, he would have just rebuked them saying fools, it was a dream, stop comparing it with physical journey. And don't you see unusual things in dream, and if Muhammad(saws) saw it, then whats the problem.  But, even Abubakr(ra) didn't say so, rather just like Sunnis, he believed in it.


Quote
In the Hadīth of al-Bukhāri, after narrating the lengthy incident of Mi’rāj, the concluding words of Angel Gabriel to the Prophet ﷺ are: فَاهْبِطْ بِاسْمِ اللَّهِ ‘Descend in the Name of Allāh’, and then it is narrated: وَاسْتَيْقَظَ وَهُوَ فِي مَسْجِدِ الْحَرَامِ ‘He awoke, and he was in the Sacred Mosque’. Notice here that the Prophet ﷺ is having his last meeting with Moses who was stationed in the Sixth Heaven. Now what needed to be acquired from Allāh for this Mi’rāj concerning the five obligatory prayers was done. Instead of continuing to descend back down, presumably on the Burāq, into the Heavens below and then land on Earth, Angel Gabriel simply told the Prophet ﷺ to take the Name of Allāh, and suddenly he awoke and found himself back in the Sacred Mosque. This is sufficient evidence that the Mi’rāj was a spiritual vision and not a physical/bodily journey.

Your information about the Sunni belief is incorrect.

Ibn Katheer (may Allah have mercy on him) said in his Tafseer (3/33):
ثم اختلف الناس : هل كان الإسراء ببدنه عليه السلام وروحه ، أو بروحه فقط ؟ على قولين ، فالأكثرون من العلماء على أنه أسري ببدنه وروحه يقظة لا مناماً ، ولا ينكرون أن يكون رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم رأى قبل ذلك مناماً ، ثم رآه بعد يقظة ، لأنه كان عليه السلام لا يرى رؤيا إلا جاءت مثل فلق الصبح
Then the people differed as to whether the Isra’ involved both body and soul, or only his soul. There are two views; the majority of scholars are of the view that he was taken on the night journey both body and soul, when he was awake, and not in a dream, although they do not reject the idea that the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) may have seen a dream before that, then seen those things after that when he was awake, because he (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) never saw a dream but it came true like the breaking of dawn.

As, for the return of Prophet(saws) from his physical Miraj, then we find in reports that"

Prophet said: "Jibril(as) brought me back. While returning they passed by a caravan of Quraysh, whose camel was lost. Prophet made a Salam to them, they said(to each other) this was the voice of Muhammad(saws). And before morning I reached to my people in Makkah. [Dalail Nabuwwah, vol 2, page 355-357, by Bayhaqi, Bayhaqi said, the chain is Sahih]
[ You are not allowed to view attachments ]
Also, note that people heard the voice of Muhammad(saws) while his return, which clearly establishes that it was not a vision, but a reality.


Quote
Furthermore, in the Hadīth of Mālik b. Sa’sa’, it is stated that before the Mi’rāj, when the Angels came to the Prophet ﷺ, he was in a state midway between sleep and wakefulness: بَيْنَا أَنَا عِنْدَ الْبَيْتِ بَيْنَ النَّائِمِ وَالْيَقْظَانِ
There is a mursal report ibn Seerah Ibn Hisham which gives the detail of this account:
 [ You are not allowed to view attachments ]
I was told that al-Hasan said that the apostle said: `While I was sleeping in the Hijr Gabriel came and stirred me with his foot. I sat up but saw nothing and lay down again. He came a second time and stirred me with his foot. I sat up but saw nothing and lay down again. He came to me the third time and stirred me with his foot. I set up and he took hold of my arm and I stood beside him and he brought me out to the door of the mosque and there was a white animal, half mule, half donkey, with wings on its sides with which it propelled its feet, putting down each forefoot at the limit of its sight and he mounted me on it. Then he went out with me keeping close to me. [Seerah Ibn Hisham, vol 2, page 10]


Quote
The Angels took the Prophet, opened his chest, washed his heart with Zamzam water, and then Burāq also came, etc. All of this was happening in the Sacred Mosque, obviously in the presence of the polytheists of Quraysh. So why didn’t they believe in the claim of Isrā and Mi’rāj when the apparent text of the Hadīth implies that it all happened in their presence, at the Sacred Mosque?[/size][/font]
It is your assumption that Mushrikeen were present there or that they were watching Prophet(saws), there is no evidence for it. Moreover, this incident was invisible to the people around, just as Prophet(saws) became invisible to Mushrikeen, when Prophet(saws) came out of his house before he took up hijrah, while the Mushrikeen who came with a plan to assassinate Muhammad(saws) were waiting outside.
{"And We have put a barrier before them, and a barrier behind them, and We have covered them up, so that they cannot see." [Al-Qur'an 36:9]}.

Secondly, as per your claim, if Mushrikeen were noticing that Prophet(saws) was sleeping near Kabah, then they would have said that, we witnessed that he was sleeping infront of us. They wouldn't have brought the point of the time taken to travel Jerusalam.
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Noor-us-Sunnah on July 23, 2017, 02:06:08 AM
Regarding this Mi’rāj, Allāh says:مَا كَذَبَ الْفُؤَادُ مَا رَأَىٰ

The Heart did not lie about what it saw (Sūra 53: 11). So the Mi’rāj was a powerful Vision, or Kashaf, of the Prophet’s heart.
This verse is regarding seeing Allah, while Prophet(saws) was physically present in the heaven.

It is narrated on the authority of Ibn Abbas that the words: " The heart belied not what he saw" (al-Qur'an, 53:11-12) and" Certainly he saw Him in another descent" (al-Qur'an, 53:13) imply that he saw him twice with his heart. [Sahih Muslim 176 b]

حَدَّثَنَا سَعِيدُ بْنُ يَحْيَى بْنِ سَعِيدٍ الأُمَوِيُّ، حَدَّثَنَا أَبِي، حَدَّثَنَا مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ عَمْرٍو، عَنْ أَبِي سَلَمَةَ، عَنِ ابْنِ عَبَّاسٍ، فِي قَوْلِ اللَّهِ ‏(‏ ولَقَدْ رَآهُ نَزْلَةً * أُخْرَى عِنْدَ سِدْرَةِ الْمُنْتَهَى ‏)‏ ‏(‏ فأوْحَى إِلَى عَبْدِهِ مَا أَوْحَى ‏)‏ ‏(‏فكَانَ قَابَ قَوْسَيْنِ أَوْ أَدْنَى ‏)‏ ‏.‏ قَالَ ابْنُ عَبَّاسٍ قَدْ رَآهُ النَّبِيُّ صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏.‏ قَالَ أَبُو عِيسَى هَذَا حَدِيثٌ حَسَنٌ
Narrated Abu Salamah: from Ibn 'Abbas regarding Allah's saying: And indeed he saw him at a second descent. Near Sidrat Al-Muntaha (53:13 & 14). So He revealed to His worshiper whatever he revealed (53:10). And was a distance of two bow lengths or less (53:9). Ibn 'Abbas said: "The Prophet (ﷺ) saw Him."[Jam'i Tirmidhi, Book 47, Hadith 3591 ; Hasan]

Shaykh al-Islam (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: “Chapter: with regard to seeing Allaah, what was proven in al-Saheeh from Ibn ‘Abbaas is that he said: ‘Muhammad saw his Lord with his heart twice, and ‘Aa’ishah denied that he had seen Him. Some people reconciled these two reports by saying that ‘Aa’ishah denied that he saw Him with his eyes and Ibn ‘Abbaas affirmed that he saw Him with his heart. Some versions of the report narrated from Ibn ‘Abbaas refers to seeing without specifying how, and others indicate that it was with the heart. -End-

Infact, the hadeeth of Ayesha(ra) who denied that Prophet(saws) saw Allah, was used as an evidence by scholars to conclude that even Ayesha(ra) believed that Miraj was physical, while awake not in dream. We read

Zurqani said: Infact, a careful study of Ayesha's(ra) words shows that she too was inclined to believe that the ascension was with body and soul. For, she denied that Muhammad(saws) saw his Lord with his eyes. If she had been for the opinion that the Prophet(saws) was in sleep, she wouldn't have had to deny the vision(what she would have said is that, "there is no point in discussing the question of Beatific vision , since, to begin with, he was then sleeping - Translator). [Commentary of Al-Mawahibul-ladunniyah of Qastalani, vol 6, page 4-5 ; Seerat-e-Nabvi, vol 1, page 269, By Ahmad Mahdi Rizqullah]
[ You are not allowed to view attachments ]

Quote
وَمَا جَعَلْنَا الرُّؤْيَا الَّتِي أَرَيْنَاكَ إِلَّا فِتْنَةً لِّلنَّاسِ وَالشَّجَرَةَ الْمَلْعُونَةَ فِي الْقُرْآنِ

And We did not make the Vision which you saw except a trial for the people, and (likewise) the cursed tree (mentioned) in the Qur’ān (Sūra 17: 60). Concerning this Ru’yā ‘Vision’, the eminent Imām al-Hasan al-Basri compared it to the Vision of Abraham where he saw himself sacrificing his son Isaac (Tafsīr Ibn Jarīr). So both Visions were not physical:

Before, showing you the incorrectness of your argument, let me present an authentic hadeeth about this verse:

Narrated Ibn `Abbas: Regarding: 'And We granted the vision (Ascension to the Heaven "Miraj") which We showed you (O Muhammad as an actual eye witness) but as a trial for mankind.' (17.60) It was an actual eyewitness which was shown to Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) during the night he was taken on a journey (through the heavens). And the cursed tree is the tree of Az-Zaqqum (a bitter pungent tree which grows at the bottom of Hell).[Sahih Bukhari, Book 65, Hadith 4716]

Regarding, your claim about the view of Hasan al-Basri, then the quote is actually from Ibn Ishaq not Hasan al-Basri. Let me quote the primary source which is Seerah of Ibn Hisham.

Ya`qub b. `Utba b. al-Mughira b. al-Akhnas told me that Mu`awiya b. Abu Sufyan when he was asked about the apostle's night journey said `It was a true vision from God.' What these two latter said does not contradict what al-Hasan said,that this verse was revealed regarding it, that Allah Himself said, `We made the vision which we showed thee only for a test to men;' nor does it contradict what Allah said in the story of Abraham when he said to his son, `O my son, verily I saw in a dream that I must sacrifice thee,' (Sura 37.10) and he acted accordingly. Thus, as I see it, revelation from Allah comes to the prophets waking or sleeping. [Seerah ibn Hisham]

The words which I highlighted in Red are the words of Ibn Ishaq, and the words in blue are the words of Hasan Basri.
And in the attachment in Urdu, the words which are highlighted are the words of Ibn Ishaq.
 [ You are not allowed to view attachments ]

So if you read the whole context, you will realize that Ibn Ishaq is discussing the two quotes he had just mentioned from Ayesha(ra) and Muawya(ra)[Both of which are weak], you can notice this from the words (قولهما), then he says that, these two opinions doesn't contract what Hasan al-Basri said about the verse being revealed. THEN HE(IBN ISHAQ) presented another evidence which he felt was in line with this, that is the verse of Quran about Ibrahim's(as) dream.  And eventually Ibn Ishaq says that "as I see it, revelation from Allah comes to the prophets waking or sleeping." Therefore, the words on which you are trying to base your argument aren't the words of Hasan al-Basri in the first place.

As for the view of Hasan al-Basri, then we find that he believed it was in wakefulness. We read in Seerah ibn Hisham.

I was told that al-Hasan said that the apostle said: `While I was sleeping in the Hijr Gabriel came and stirred me with his foot. I sat up but saw nothing and lay down again. He came a second time and stirred me with his foot. I sat up but saw nothing and lay down again. He came to me the third time and stirred me with his foot. I set up and he took hold of my arm and I stood beside him and he brought me out to the door of the mosque and there was a white animal, half mule, half donkey, with wings on its sides with which it propelled its feet, putting down each forefoot at the limit of its sight and he mounted me on it. Then he went out with me keeping close to me. [Seerah Ibn Hisham, vol 2, page 10] [ You are not allowed to view attachments ]


As for the two reports Ibn Ishaq is talking about, regarding Ayesha(ra) and Muawiya(ra), then both are weak and unreliable. (i). The one about Ayesha(ra), then it has Majhool narrator and its is Munkar. (ii). And the one about Muawiya(ra), then there is disconnection(Munqata) in the chain, Yaqub bin Utba didn't meet any Sahabi. See below:
 [ You are not allowed to view attachments ]  [ You are not allowed to view attachments ]


Quote
In the first Ayat of Sūrat Bani Isrā’īl, Allāh says He took His servant ﷺ by night. This is like how He says:

وَهُوَ الَّذِي يَتَوَفَّاكُم بِاللَّيْلِ

And He is the One Who takes you at night (Sūra 6: 60). Here the taking of the person at night refers to the taking of the soul during sleep. This is why Allāh made explicit mention of Layl ‘night’ in the Ayat of al-Isrā (Sūra 17: 1) to indicate it as being a vision during sleep.
The mention of Layl "night", is just to signify the time when it occurred. It didn't occur in morning or evening.


Quote
As for your argument that the word ‘Abd can only apply to both body and soul together, there is no evidence of this from any credible lexicon. Are not the Angels, the Rūh and the Jinn considered as ‘Ibād Allāh?
Ibn Abi’l-‘Izz al-Hanafi in Sharh at-Tahhaawiyyah (1/245) ; Ibn Katheer in his Tafseer (3/33).  Mohammad Saadiq Urjun in his book Muhammad RasoolAllah, vol 2, page 342-350. They all argued the same thing that the word "Abd" applies to both body and soul together.  Infact Urjun said that as per the understanding of Arabs and their language, the word "Abd" points towards the combination of body and soul.
[ You are not allowed to view attachments ]
As for saying Angels, Rul al-Ameen(Jibril) and the Jinn as Ibad Allah, then they have bodies too, but created from a different thing, Jinn were created from smokeless fire and the angels are created from Noor(light).
Title: Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
Post by: Noor-us-Sunnah on July 26, 2017, 12:51:52 PM
There is no literal donkey that has the span of 40 cubits between the width of its ears. If you had Firāsa and true understanding you would not make a mockery by believing in childlike fables but instead know the true reality of this exceedingly white and extremely large donkey that it is a means of modern transportation.
So, you want to counter the view of noble scholars from Ahlus-sunnah by quoting a Qadiyani Zindeeq. Ridiculous.

As for the claim that there is no donkey that has the span of 40 cubits between the width of its ears, then the world doesn't even know of an animal such as Buraaq, but it does exist. 

Prophet(saws) said: I was brought al-Buraq Who is an animal white and long, larger than a donkey but smaller than a mule, who would place his hoof a distance equal to the range of vision. I mounted it and came to the Temple (Bait Maqdis in Jerusalem), then tethered it to the ring used by the prophets. [Sahih Muslim 162 a]

Hudhaifah said: 'The Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) was brought a beast with a long back - stretching out like this - one stride of it, is as far as his vision. So, the two of them remained upon the back of Al-Buraq until they saw Paradise and the Fire, and all of what has been prepared for the Hereafter, then they returned back to where they began.'[Tirmidhi, Book 47, Hadith 3440 ; Sahih]

Note: This report also shows that, they returned from where they began, which means they returned to earth. In a dream there is no point to return from where they started, and that would also be meaningless.

Secondly, the world also, doesn't know about a beast which can talk, as al-Jassasa, the spy of Dajjal. But it is mentioned about him in authentic hadeeth, and we take it literally, but not sure if you Qadiyans claim that this was some robot of dajjal.

Tamim Dari(ra) said : We got Into the side-boats and entered this island and here a beast met us with profusely thick hair and because of the thickness of his hair his face could not be distinguished from his back. We said: Woe be to thee, who are you? It said: I am al- Jassasa. We said: What is al-Jassasa? And it said: You go to this very person in the monastery for he is eagerly waiting for you to know about you. So we came to you in hot haste fearing that that might be the Devil.....Prophet(saws) said: this account narrated by Tamim Dari was liked by me for it corroborates the account which I gave to you in regard to him (Dajjal) at Medina and Mecca [Sahih Muslim 2942 a]

We read in Kitaab Sharh us-Sunnah by Al-Barbahaaree (d. 329H) :

Know that the Sunnah is not a matter for analogies or reasoning with examples, and desires are not to be followed in it. Rather, it is just a case of affirming the narrations from Allaah's Messenger (sallallaahualaihi wasallam), without asking how, explaining or saying: 'Why?' or 'How? [Kitaab Sharh us-Sunnah by Al-Barbahaaree, page 70].
http://forum.twelvershia.net/imamah-ghaybah/challenge-to-sunnis-ghayba-of-ibn-mariam/?action=dlattach;attach=1504;image


And as for your criticism to the literal/safe approach towards ahadeeth about prophecies of Prophet(saws) which are to occur yet, and are a matter of unseen then you argue as if you have received some revelation/inspiration about the correct interpretation of it. The best and safe approach towards it, is to accept it without making any taweel, since its a matter of unseen.


I'd like you to explain this Hadith:

قَالَ النَّبِيُّ صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏"‏ وَإِنَّهُ فِي بَحْرِ الشَّامِ أَوْ بَحْرِ الْيَمَنِ لاَ بَلْ مِنْ قِبَلِ الْمَشْرِقِ مَا هُوَ
The Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم said: "He (Dajjal) is in the sea of Sham (Mediterranean) or the Sea of Yemen (Arabian Sea). No, rather he is in the direction of the East." (Abu Dawud sharif)

 فَإِنَّهُ أَعْجَبَنِي حَدِيثُ تَمِيمٍ أَنَّهُ وَافَقَ الَّذِي كُنْتُ أُحَدِّثُكُمْ عَنْهُ وَعَنِ الْمَدِينَةِ وَمَكَّةَ أَلاَ إِنَّهُ فِي بَحْرِ الشَّامِ أَوْ بَحْرِ الْيَمَنِ لاَ بَلْ مِنْ قِبَلِ الْمَشْرِقِ ما هُوَ مِنْ قِبَلِ الْمَشْرِقِ مَا هُوَ مِنْ قِبَلِ الْمَشْرِقِ مَا هُوَ ‏"‏ ‏.‏ وَأَوْمَأَ بِيَدِهِ إِلَى الْمَشْرِقِ
"this account narrated by Tamim Dari was liked by me for it corroborates the account which I gave to you in regard to him (Dajjal) at Medina and Mecca. Behold he (Dajjal) is in the Syrian sea (Mediterranean) or the Yemen sea (Arabian sea). Nay, on the contrary, he is in the east, he is in the east, he is in the east, and he pointed with his hand towards the east. " (Sahih Muslim).

Now look how the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم changed his Aqida several times regarding the Dajjal. First he said he agrees with the story of Tamim al Dari that Dajjal is on an island because it agrees with what he had been saying all along. Then he said Dajjal is in the Mediterranean. Then he changed and said Dajjal is in the Red Sea. Finally, his last view was that Dajjal is in the East.
I found that you raised this argument, in another thread, So I felt like responding to this doubt you raised. The response is that it was a method of speech, since all these views were said in the same sentence, there wasn't a time gap between them. Prophet(saws) used this method of speech to get the attention of people. As for Dajjal being on Island whom Tamim al Dari met, then that Island was most likely in east, as well.


Quote
There are so many prophecies of the Prophet ﷺ which have been fulfilled, but people of you who are spiritually blind cannot see this because you are drowning in literalism like the Pharisaic Jews.
You claim as if, none of the prophesy of Prophet(saws) came true in a literal sense. Let me give you couple of examples:

..."When will the Hour be?' He(SAWS) said: 'The one who is being asked about it does not know more than the one who is asking.' He asked: 'Then what are its signs?' he said...when you see barefoot, naked, destitute shepherds competing in constructing tall buildings.' [Sunan Ibn Majah, Book 1, Hadith 66 ; Sahih]

The Prophet (ﷺ) said, "The Hour will not be established till you fight with the Khudh and the Kirman from among the non-Arabs. They will be of red faces, flat noses and small eyes; their faces will look like flat shields, and their shoes will be of hair."[Sahih al-Bukhari 3590] This prophesy is about the Mongol invasion. Six hundred years or so after the death of the Prophet Muhammad(saws), the Mongols invaded the Muslim lands and massacred millions of people.

Secondly, even if for argument's sake we accept that the prophetic prophecies about the donkey of Dajjal or the weaponry to be used at the time of Yajuj and Majuj, etc are metaphorical, then it would considered that these were things that were variable and were bound to change, and hence they were mentioned by Prophet(saws) to the Sahaabah in terms of what they were familiar with. However, there are things which will remain constant and are not variable, such as the Angels. The belief of Muslims about the Angels is not bound to change, it was the same during the time of Sahaba till date and would be the same till Isa(As) descend from heaven keeping his hands on the wings of Angels. Therefore, the hadeeth of Prophet(saws) which mentions about Isa(as) descending from heaven , keeping his hands on the wings of Angels, is from the category of those prophecies which are to be understood in a literal sense. Giving self (mis)interpretations to these prophecies contrary to the literal meaning, is nothing but heresy.