TwelverShia.net Forum

Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام

0 Members and 4 Guests are viewing this topic.

Ebn Hussein

Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
« Reply #180 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. 
الإمام الشافعي رحمه الله
لم أر أحداً من أهل الأهواء أشهد بالزور من الرافضة! - الخطيب في الكفاية والسوطي.

Imam Al-Shafi3i - may Allah have mercy upon him - said: "I have not seen among the heretics a people more famous for falsehood than the Rafidah." [narrated by Al-Khatib Al-Baghdadi/Al-Kifayah]

Noor-us-Sunnah

Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
« Reply #181 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.

Noor-us-Sunnah

Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
« Reply #182 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 ]

Noor-us-Sunnah

Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
« Reply #183 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
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 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).

Noor-us-Sunnah

Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
« Reply #184 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.
« Last Edit: July 18, 2017, 02:20:29 PM by Noor-us-Sunnah »

Noor-us-Sunnah

Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
« Reply #185 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)

ZulFiqar

Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
« Reply #186 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:




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):




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!
« Last Edit: July 18, 2017, 08:06:39 PM by ZulFiqar »
My Blog
Forbidden_Link

ZulFiqar

Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
« Reply #187 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.
My Blog
Forbidden_Link

ZulFiqar

Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
« Reply #188 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.
My Blog
Forbidden_Link

Noor-us-Sunnah

Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
« Reply #189 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




ZulFiqar

Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
« Reply #190 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.
My Blog
Forbidden_Link

Noor-us-Sunnah

Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
« Reply #191 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.

ZulFiqar

Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
« Reply #192 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)





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.
My Blog
Forbidden_Link

Noor-us-Sunnah

Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
« Reply #193 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.

ZulFiqar

Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
« Reply #194 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:




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)

My Blog
Forbidden_Link

Noor-us-Sunnah

Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
« Reply #195 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.

ZulFiqar

Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
« Reply #196 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)
My Blog
Forbidden_Link

ZulFiqar

Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
« Reply #197 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.
My Blog
Forbidden_Link

Noor-us-Sunnah

Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
« Reply #198 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?

ZulFiqar

Re: Challenge to Sunnis: Ghayba of Ibn Mariam عليهما السلام
« Reply #199 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.
My Blog
Forbidden_Link

 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
10 Replies
8506 Views
Last post April 05, 2016, 05:47:07 AM
by Sohail Khan
16 Replies
2898 Views
Last post April 15, 2016, 06:41:02 PM
by Ibn Yahya
15 Replies
3087 Views
Last post November 23, 2016, 05:05:15 PM
by GreatChineseFall
22 Replies
7792 Views
Last post August 11, 2017, 11:32:54 PM
by Pearl