Imamah: usul al-din or usul al-mathab?

[muslim720]

No, the Fiqh issue which is debated is whether Sunnis are treated as Muslims ot kafirs. A group of our jurists ruled that Sunnis are najis, for example. But there is ijma on kufr of Sunnis.

Good to know!

I think you misunderstood me. I wasn't talking about whether there is a difference of opinion on the kufr of Sunnis, but a difference of opinion on how they are treated. That is the "simple Fiqh issue".

The big issue, which you keep missing, is this, not that you make takfir on us.  If we are kafir, why is our treatment up for debate?  The Qur'an and Sunnah clearly outlines how to deal with non-Muslims, from the People of the Book down to the last disbeliever.  You are forced to make a special case for us because your own belief is absent from the sources you claim to use to "prove" our kufr, lol.

And I don't know why it's a big issue for you if it means takfir, lol, Sunni scholars declare us innovators and some go as far as declare us kafirs, and we're in Jahannam regardless.

....and there is no debate on it.  If you are a Shia without extremist beliefs, you're a Muslim.  If you're a Shia who, for example, believes in tahreef, etc, then you are NOT a Muslim; by the way, a "Sunni" who believes in tahreef is also kafir (just to set the record straight).  No discussions on our end; straight to the verdict.

Of course I have proof you guys praise the killer of Ammar ibn Yassir (ra). Ibn Hazm said he made a mistake and did ijtihaad and sent taradhi on him.

Before we get to Ibn Hazm (rah), a fourth century Andalusian scholar, allow me to highlight the Shia misrepresentation of facts.  Since the Ahlus Sunnah wal Jama'ah follows the Qur'an and offers unambiguous proof for their beliefs, Ibn Taymiyyah (rah) said, "We testify that Ammar is in heaven, and his killer, if he is from the people of radhwan(those that gave the pledge under the tree), is in heaven."  Why did Ibn Taymiyyah (rah) say this?  Because the Qur'an guarantees these men the Pleasure of Allah (swt) and therefore, Jannah.  Unlike you, my brother, we do not put our own logic, desires and convenience ahead of Islam.  Now, the RTS Team lied upon Ibn Taymiyyah (rah) by claiming that he (Ibn Taymiyyah) said, "We swear heaven for Ammar and as for his killers they believe that heaven is for him also".

RTS also quotes Ibn Atheer (rah) and Al-Thahabi (rah) in an attempt to prove that Abu Al-Ghadiya pledged allegiance under the tree.  However, all they did was quote that Abu Al-Ghadiya gave a pledge to the Prophet (saw) which does not prove that Abu Al-Ghadiya pledged under the tree and was from among those for whom verse 18 of Surah Fat'h was revealed.  Many pledged allegiance to the Prophet (saw) during his prophethood but there is no proof that Abu Al-Ghadiya pledged allegiance to the Prophet (saw) under the tree.

The narration that suggests that Abu Al-Ghadiya pledged allegiance to the Prophet (saw) makes it clear that his pledge came on the day of `Aqabah so it is possible that Ibn Hazm (rah) mistakenly took it as the pledge that was given under the tree.  Read more: http://www.twelvershia.net/2013/08/24/response-to-is-allah-swt-pleased-with-the-companions/

I'm not telling you to call those who fought Imam Ali (as) kafirs, but you should call them rebels and renegades. But you can't do that, because of "ijtihada fa akhta". Lol.

You think you are slick but I already blocked your escape route.  We say that Muawiyah was wrong, one hundred percent, in being hasty in the matter of qisas of Uthman (ra).  However, as admitted by you, and here is where your escape route was blocked, if Muawiyah truly sought qisas and fought Imam Ali (ra) for that reason only (and not out of personal hatred towards Imam Ali (ra) as Shias claim), then he was not najis for fighting against Imam Ali (ra).  Unless you claim that you know what is in the hearts and minds of men!  However, the Prophet (saw) clearly referred to the killers of Ammar (ra) as rebels or transgressors and that is what we believe.

Also, my Imams (as) praised them? Please present proof for that. As I already know what to say to that, as it is a Sunni talking point that has even been refuted by intelligent Sunnis.

I said "him", not "them".  Since you place the crime of the murder of Ammar (ra) on Muawiyah, did your Imams (ra) not make peace with Muawiyah?  Did one not give his "Divinely Ordained" leadership to Muawiyah and trusted him with the affairs of the entire ummah?  Were they not receiving stipend, as was their right, from Muawiyah?  Did Imam Ali (ra) not refer to his party as Muslims and that they only differed on the matter of qisas?

Your entire paradigm is based on denial, my brother, and you accuse us of it, lol.

Sorry did I only say if it contradicts the Holy Qur'an? If it contradicts aql or general principles of the madhab, then it can be set aside.

So now we know that you place not just convenience but also aql ahead of the Prophet (saw), and thereby Islam.  What does aql say?  That it was a prostitute who was paid by Qarun to make up an allegation against Musa (asws)?  And when Musa (asws) confronted the prostitute (and asked her to take an oath), she - without any overpowering evidence, action or speech against her from Musa (asws) - retracted her statement, as it says in Hayatul Quloob.  That sounds very believable!  Why did the prostitute accept the deal and then break so easily?  And bear in mind this is the same Children of Israel who saw Jesus (asws) giving life to the dead and still reject him.  Nothing short of seeing Musa (asws) naked would have put their accusations to rest.  And that is what Allah (swt) arranged for without compromising Musa's (asws) modesty.

Unfortunately for you, it is false equivalence to equate death squads with terrorism in the Sunni world. Atleast 67 million Sunnis are sympathetic to ISIS according to a Pew Research Poll. And that's just ISIS.

You are right, it is false equivalence because, as I said, ISIS claimed to have a "fatwa" whereas Shia death squads killed Sunnis as though it is a given thing to do in their paradigm which needs no "fatwa".  ISIS is a group of mercenaries who kill for the one with the highest bid; Shia death squads killed their own neighbors, the same neighbors whose houses they visited, whose food they ate. 

As for your Pew Research, assuming 15% of the 1.7 billion Muslims are Shias, we are left with one billion four hundred forty-five million Sunnis.  Therefore, 67 million/1.45 billion (approx) x 100 = 4.62%.  So, to put things in perspective, 4.62 percent of the Sunni world supports ISIS, if what you shared is true.  However, you did not provide a reference so I had to look it up.

Pew Research published an article with the title, "In nations with significant Muslim populations, much disdain for ISIS".  It exposes your lie significantly.  Read it here:  http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/11/17/in-nations-with-significant-muslim-populations-much-disdain-for-isis/

[Zlatan Ibrahimovic]

Good to know!

The big issue, which you keep missing, is this, not that you make takfir on us.  If we are kafir, why is our treatment up for debate?  The Qur'an and Sunnah clearly outlines how to deal with non-Muslims, from the People of the Book down to the last disbeliever.  You are forced to make a special case for us because your own belief is absent from the sources you claim to use to "prove" our kufr, lol.

....and there is no debate on it.  If you are a Shia without extremist beliefs, you're a Muslim.  If you're a Shia who, for example, believes in tahreef, etc, then you are NOT a Muslim; by the way, a "Sunni" who believes in tahreef is also kafir (just to set the record straight).  No discussions on our end; straight to the verdict.

Before we get to Ibn Hazm (rah), a fourth century Andalusian scholar, allow me to highlight the Shia misrepresentation of facts.  Since the Ahlus Sunnah wal Jama'ah follows the Qur'an and offers unambiguous proof for their beliefs, Ibn Taymiyyah (rah) said, "We testify that Ammar is in heaven, and his killer, if he is from the people of radhwan(those that gave the pledge under the tree), is in heaven."  Why did Ibn Taymiyyah (rah) say this?  Because the Qur'an guarantees these men the Pleasure of Allah (swt) and therefore, Jannah.  Unlike you, my brother, we do not put our own logic, desires and convenience ahead of Islam.  Now, the RTS Team lied upon Ibn Taymiyyah (rah) by claiming that he (Ibn Taymiyyah) said, "We swear heaven for Ammar and as for his killers they believe that heaven is for him also".

RTS also quotes Ibn Atheer (rah) and Al-Thahabi (rah) in an attempt to prove that Abu Al-Ghadiya pledged allegiance under the tree.  However, all they did was quote that Abu Al-Ghadiya gave a pledge to the Prophet (saw) which does not prove that Abu Al-Ghadiya pledged under the tree and was from among those for whom verse 18 of Surah Fat'h was revealed.  Many pledged allegiance to the Prophet (saw) during his prophethood but there is no proof that Abu Al-Ghadiya pledged allegiance to the Prophet (saw) under the tree.

The narration that suggests that Abu Al-Ghadiya pledged allegiance to the Prophet (saw) makes it clear that his pledge came on the day of `Aqabah so it is possible that Ibn Hazm (rah) mistakenly took it as the pledge that was given under the tree.  Read more: http://www.twelvershia.net/2013/08/24/response-to-is-allah-swt-pleased-with-the-companions/

You think you are slick but I already blocked your escape route.  We say that Muawiyah was wrong, one hundred percent, in being hasty in the matter of qisas of Uthman (ra).  However, as admitted by you, and here is where your escape route was blocked, if Muawiyah truly sought qisas and fought Imam Ali (ra) for that reason only (and not out of personal hatred towards Imam Ali (ra) as Shias claim), then he was not najis for fighting against Imam Ali (ra).  Unless you claim that you know what is in the hearts and minds of men!  However, the Prophet (saw) clearly referred to the killers of Ammar (ra) as rebels or transgressors and that is what we believe.

I said "him", not "them".  Since you place the crime of the murder of Ammar (ra) on Muawiyah, did your Imams (ra) not make peace with Muawiyah?  Did one not give his "Divinely Ordained" leadership to Muawiyah and trusted him with the affairs of the entire ummah?  Were they not receiving stipend, as was their right, from Muawiyah?  Did Imam Ali (ra) not refer to his party as Muslims and that they only differed on the matter of qisas?

Your entire paradigm is based on denial, my brother, and you accuse us of it, lol.

So now we know that you place not just convenience but also aql ahead of the Prophet (saw), and thereby Islam.  What does aql say?  That it was a prostitute who was paid by Qarun to make up an allegation against Musa (asws)?  And when Musa (asws) confronted the prostitute (and asked her to take an oath), she - without any overpowering evidence, action or speech against her from Musa (asws) - retracted her statement, as it says in Hayatul Quloob.  That sounds very believable!  Why did the prostitute accept the deal and then break so easily?  And bear in mind this is the same Children of Israel who saw Jesus (asws) giving life to the dead and still reject him.  Nothing short of seeing Musa (asws) naked would have put their accusations to rest.  And that is what Allah (swt) arranged for without compromising Musa's (asws) modesty.

You are right, it is false equivalence because, as I said, ISIS claimed to have a "fatwa" whereas Shia death squads killed Sunnis as though it is a given thing to do in their paradigm which needs no "fatwa".  ISIS is a group of mercenaries who kill for the one with the highest bid; Shia death squads killed their own neighbors, the same neighbors whose houses they visited, whose food they ate. 

As for your Pew Research, assuming 15% of the 1.7 billion Muslims are Shias, we are left with one billion four hundred forty-five million Sunnis.  Therefore, 67 million/1.45 billion (approx) x 100 = 4.62%.  So, to put things in perspective, 4.62 percent of the Sunni world supports ISIS, if what you shared is true.  However, you did not provide a reference so I had to look it up.

Pew Research published an article with the title, "In nations with significant Muslim populations, much disdain for ISIS".  It exposes your lie significantly.  Read it here:  http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/11/17/in-nations-with-significant-muslim-populations-much-disdain-for-isis/

Because the Holy Qur'an tells us how to deal with people who are outwardly kafir. As for the Sunnah, that is where Shi'a scholars have differed. The Sunnah (which includes that of the 12 Imams in out view) is where Shi'i jurists would debate on how the Imams (as) treated Sunnis.

Actually there is a debate on whether Shi'a are kafir or what constitutes as kufr according to Sunnis. Not only on here we see Sunni members discuss amongst themselved whether takfir is warranted, but amongst your scholarship too.

There are some who said our scholars are kafir but the laymen or jahils are Muslim. There are some who argue they're both Muslim. There are those who argue we're all kafir from the get-go, such as Fawzan Al-Fawzan.

The idiots who run this website and wrote that article need to read up on what was the pledge of ridhwaan on.

The pledge of ridhwaan according to Sahih Muslim was a pledge on not to run away in battle.

Furthermore, Al-Albani refuted those who defended Abu'l Ghadiyah and resorted to wordplay, and authenticated the hadith which says the killer of Ammar (ra) is in Hellfire.

On Mu'awiyah, I do not care how noble his intentions are, a rebel is a rebel. And rebels are condemned in Islam. Yet Sunnis claim he is a good person, and resort to wordplay to try to prove this. Also, let's not resort to words like "slick". I have respected you in this discussion, it would be best if you respect me.

Imam Hasan (as) made peace because he was forced to, after he saw that his position on the ground was weak. His companions were betraying him or refusing to fight.

Aql is very important to us and confirmed by our Imams (as) as a source of validation. Therefore, we don't place it ahead of Islam, but rather say it is part of Islam.

I believe the actual issue of Musa (as) being accused of zina hasn't been proven yet.

Also, how did you conclude by saying I lied when I said the truth? You yourself just made the calculation and I don't see where I lied. I didn't say most Sunnis support ISIS, I said 67 million at least which is way too much to say the least.

Sectarian gangs in Iraq do not have anywhere near as much support in our circles. And they also don't have fatwas to resort to, unlike Sunni extremists who have their own Shaykhs.

[muslim720]

Because the Holy Qur'an tells us how to deal with people who are outwardly kafir. As for the Sunnah, that is where Shi'a scholars have differed. The Sunnah (which includes that of the 12 Imams in out view) is where Shi'i jurists would debate on how the Imams (as) treated Sunnis.

Irrespective of what you take as "sunnah", I would like to remind you that the Sunnah to follow is that of the Prophet (saw).

Actually there is a debate on whether Shi'a are kafir or what constitutes as kufr according to Sunnis. Not only on here we see Sunni members discuss amongst themselved whether takfir is warranted, but amongst your scholarship too.

...by placing Shias in various categories, as I mentioned earlier.

There are some who said our scholars are kafir but the laymen or jahils are Muslim. There are some who argue they're both Muslim. There are those who argue we're all kafir from the get-go, such as Fawzan Al-Fawzan.

Surely Fawzan Al-Fawzan is our "Shaykh al-Ta'ifa".

The idiots who run this website and wrote that article need to read up on what was the pledge of ridhwaan on.

Actually, the idiots that lied to you regarding Ibn Hazm (rah) should study more carefully before allowing their mouths to issue checks their behinds can't cash.

The pledge of ridhwaan according to Sahih Muslim was a pledge on not to run away in battle.

And your point is?

Furthermore, Al-Albani refuted those who defended Abu'l Ghadiyah and resorted to wordplay, and authenticated the hadith which says the killer of Ammar (ra) is in Hellfire.

Those?

On Mu'awiyah, I do not care how noble his intentions are, a rebel is a rebel. And rebels are condemned in Islam. Yet Sunnis claim he is a good person, and resort to wordplay to try to prove this. Also, let's not resort to words like "slick". I have respected you in this discussion, it would be best if you respect me.

We say exactly what the Prophet (saw) said about him.  No more, no less.  As a casual boxer, I find the term "slick" not as offensive as you.  A "slick" boxer is a compliment, actually.

Imam Hasan (as) made peace because he was forced to, after he saw that his position on the ground was weak. His companions were betraying him or refusing to fight.

...while his brother (ra) fought with 72 men.  Surely, Imam Hassan (ra) must have had more than 72 companions.  And which brother was right?  The one that made peace or the one that fought?  If you divorce authentic Sunnah from history, you will never find reconciliation in almost anything you follow.

Aql is very important to us and confirmed by our Imams (as) as a source of validation. Therefore, we don't place it ahead of Islam, but rather say it is part of Islam.

I believe the actual issue of Musa (as) being accused of zina hasn't been proven yet.

Well, if I am not mistaken, your Imam (ra) validates the story which is why it is taken as the explanation for the Qur'anic verse (in regards to this matter).

Also, how did you conclude by saying I lied when I said the truth? You yourself just made the calculation and I don't see where I lied. I didn't say most Sunnis support ISIS, I said 67 million at least which is way too much to say the least.

You lied because you pulled numbers out of thin air without a valid reference.  I only made calculations to show you that even if accepted at face value, your numbers mean very little.

Sectarian gangs in Iraq do not have anywhere near as much support in our circles. And they also don't have fatwas to resort to, unlike Sunni extremists who have their own Shaykhs.

If you can claim to have "sectarian gangs" without support, why can't we have rogue Shaykhs that do not have our support?  As I said before and this will be the third time, to wait for a fatwa (even from a nutjob "shaykh") is one thing; to kill your own neighbors without a fatwa is another.  In time, I hope you grasp the seriousness of what I have put in front of you.

[Zlatan Ibrahimovic]

Irrespective of what you take as "sunnah", I would like to remind you that the Sunnah to follow is that of the Prophet (saw).

...by placing Shias in various categories, as I mentioned earlier.

Surely Fawzan Al-Fawzan is our "Shaykh al-Ta'ifa".

Actually, the idiots that lied to you regarding Ibn Hazm (rah) should study more carefully before allowing their mouths to issue checks their behinds can't cash.

And your point is?

Those?

We say exactly what the Prophet (saw) said about him.  No more, no less.  As a casual boxer, I find the term "slick" not as offensive as you.  A "slick" boxer is a compliment, actually.

...while his brother (ra) fought with 72 men.  Surely, Imam Hassan (ra) must have had more than 72 companions.  And which brother was right?  The one that made peace or the one that fought?  If you divorce authentic Sunnah from history, you will never find reconciliation in almost anything you follow.

Well, if I am not mistaken, your Imam (ra) validates the story which is why it is taken as the explanation for the Qur'anic verse (in regards to this matter).

You lied because you pulled numbers out of thin air without a valid reference.  I only made calculations to show you that even if accepted at face value, your numbers mean very little.

If you can claim to have "sectarian gangs" without support, why can't we have rogue Shaykhs that do not have our support?  As I said before and this will be the third time, to wait for a fatwa (even from a nutjob "shaykh") is one thing; to kill your own neighbors without a fatwa is another.  In time, I hope you grasp the seriousness of what I have put in front of you.

We believe the Sunnah is to follow the Prophet (saww) who we believe told us to hold onto his Ahlulbayt (as) as a source of guidance.

We place Sunnis in one category, we differ amongst ourselves on how to deal with them.

Fawzan is not your Shaykh Al-Ta'ifa. I'm just saying Sunnis differed in whether we are innovators, or kafirs, or whether our aalims are kafir but our jahils are not.

The idiots who didn't lie about Ibn Hazm were Sunnis. If you want I can link the website from which I got my info from.

My point is the pledge doesn't make them immune from criticism or exposing their sins.

Yes, Al-Albani replied to his fellow Sunni scholars who defend Abu'l Ghadiyah. Such as Ibn Hazm.

Please don't call me slick. It is best we stay on the discussion and refer to eachother without personal descriptions.

Yazid (la) and his father aren't the same. Yazid was a bigger danger to Islam. Do you disagree with this? And why do you believe Al-Husayn (as) rose up? And was he wrong to rise up?

I'm glad you said I lied. Now it is time to defend myself;

If I remember, I said at least 67 million Sunnis support ISIS, now lets use the Pew Research poll to find out if I'm wrong. Hopefully my maths is correct.

9% of Pakistan are sympathetic ISIS, that is equivalent to 17.3 million supporters of ISIS in Pakistan. Strong start, but put your seatbelt on, the ride has only just started.

14% of Nigeria are sympathetic to ISIS, that is equivalent to.. 26 million? Yes, no? Dang, it looks like we're more than halfway through and it already has exceeded half of my given number. Still a liar? Or changed your opinion? No? Let's continue!

Indonesia, the number is at 4%, and that's the equivalent of 10.4 million people.

Dang.. so far we have 53.7 million supporters. There's a few countries left on that list you know, if you want I can continue the maths lesson but you should decide if I should. Still a liar? We'll see.

Difference between us and you guys, we don't have "rogue" Shaykhs. We have idiots with weapons. And I'm not saying ISIS is true Sunnism, of course it isn't. I'm saying, which a Shi'i "takfiri" isn't the same as the Sunni takfiri.

[muslim720]

We believe the Sunnah is to follow the Prophet (saww) who we believe told us to hold onto his Ahlulbayt (as) as a source of guidance.

Yes, hold onto Ahlul Bayt (ra) for guidance; take this brother but not that one, this son over that one.  Absolutely!

We place Sunnis in one category, we differ amongst ourselves on how to deal with them.

Idiots!  Sorry to say that but I call a spade a spade.  If only you could acknowledge the basis upon which you categorize us (as kafirs) is non-existent would have made your misery a lot lesser, lol.

My point is the pledge doesn't make them immune from criticism or exposing their sins.

Who said the pledge made them infallible?  We do not dissect a verse and label a sub-verse as "Ayat Tatheer" and then rest our entire (albeit shaky) foundation on it.  The pledge guarantees them the pleasure of Allah (swt) and by its extension, Jannah.

Yes, Al-Albani replied to his fellow Sunni scholars who defend Abu'l Ghadiyah. Such as Ibn Hazm.

Thus far, you have Al-Albani (another "Shaykh al-Ta'ifa"), Fawzan al-Fawzan and Ibn Hazm (if we set aside his error in judgment).  One great list; if they narrated something, it would have been the "golden chain", at least per Shia standards of scrutinizing our reports.

Please don't call me slick. It is best we stay on the discussion and refer to eachother without personal descriptions.

You call us kafirs and do not like for me to call you "slick" when I explained to you that it does not carry the sort of negative connotation in my mind that we associate with the word?  Do you prefer Kleenex or do you prefer another brand?

Yazid (la) and his father aren't the same. Yazid was a bigger danger to Islam. Do you disagree with this? And why do you believe Al-Husayn (as) rose up? And was he wrong to rise up?

The entire sect is clear upon the fact that both Imam Hassan (ra) and Imam Hussain (ra) are the Leaders of the Youth of Paradise.  The Prophet (saw) prophesied that one will make peace and the other one will be martyred, therefore, we easily reconcile between one giving up the Caliphate and the other fighting against Yazid (la).  Now you might understand why I said, "If you divorce authentic Sunnah from history, you will never find reconciliation in almost anything you follow".

Going back to Yazid (la), there was a topic initiated on this forum challenging Shias to prove what sorts of crimes (namely, modifications of deen) did Yazid (la) indulge in.  I suggest you prove that to us.  I am not here to defend Yazid (la); I am here to strike a balance so that truth is upheld and falsehood/exaggerations are ousted.

I'm glad you said I lied. Now it is time to defend myself;

You aren't slick so let's see how well you slip them.  Please bear in mind that I brought up the Pew Research and numbers; you just made a claim.  Do not let this get too far from your sight.

If I remember, I said at least 67 million Sunnis support ISIS, now lets use the Pew Research poll to find out if I'm wrong. Hopefully my maths is correct.

Yes, use the Pew Research poll I shared; you're welcome!

9% of Pakistan are sympathetic ISIS, that is equivalent to 17.3 million supporters of ISIS in Pakistan. Strong start, but put your seatbelt on, the ride has only just started.

Seat belt?  Umm sure, Dale Earnhardt Jr.?

14% of Nigeria are sympathetic to ISIS, that is equivalent to.. 26 million? Yes, no? Dang, it looks like we're more than halfway through and it already has exceeded half of my given number. Still a liar? Or changed your opinion? No? Let's continue!

Oh no, I'm cornered!

Indonesia, the number is at 4%, and that's the equivalent of 10.4 million people.

Very good!  You know how to go after the nations with the largest Muslim populations.  However, your wait is almost over; its coming.

Dang.. so far we have 53.7 million supporters. There's a few countries left on that list you know, if you want I can continue the maths lesson but you should decide if I should. Still a liar? We'll see.

You are short by a little over 13 million and you still think you've a point.  Maybe Holocaust exaggerators should consult you.  However, you may have shown some promise in math but have failed elsewhere.  Please read how these studies are conducted.  You will see that in no case have they surveyed more than a 1000 - 1200 individuals; so the percentage (for each country) is an extrapolation of a sample population of about 1000 individuals.

In the case of Pakistan, for example, 1200 individuals were surveyed.  1200 (the entire sample size) out of 193.2 million comes to a healthy 0.00062111801%. 

http://www.pewresearch.org/methodology/international-survey-research/international-methodology/global-attitudes-survey/pakistan/2015

Difference between us and you guys, we don't have "rogue" Shaykhs. We have idiots with weapons. And I'm not saying ISIS is true Sunnism, of course it isn't. I'm saying, which a Shi'i "takfiri" isn't the same as the Sunni takfiri.

So have your shaykhs, too, have attained infallibility?  If an idiot can have a weapon, he may also have some background in religious studies to make himself out to be a "shaykh".  And we will agree that Sunni takfir isn't the same as Shia takfir; we (our legitimate scholars) base it upon Qur'an and Sunnah, yours is a result of your own projections on the Qur'an and Sunnah.

[Abu Muhammad]

@Zlatan

Thanks for your posts. It becomes clearer and clearer by each day.

From now on, whenever a Twelver comes to me and says, "We Twelvers take our Sunni brothers as Muslims", I'll take that as "We Twelvers take our Sunni brothers as Kuffar whom we treat as Muslims".

It just strengthens my understanding of what Twelvers believe towards Sunnis from the very beginning I know Twelverism and will hold onto that. Thank you again.

Any "unity-inclined" Twelvers in this forum have got anything to say? @Ibrahim, anything you'd like to say?

[Zlatan Ibrahimovic]

Yes, hold onto Ahlul Bayt (ra) for guidance; take this brother but not that one, this son over that one.  Absolutely!

Idiots!  Sorry to say that but I call a spade a spade.  If only you could acknowledge the basis upon which you categorize us (as kafirs) is non-existent would have made your misery a lot lesser, lol.

Who said the pledge made them infallible?  We do not dissect a verse and label a sub-verse as "Ayat Tatheer" and then rest our entire (albeit shaky) foundation on it.  The pledge guarantees them the pleasure of Allah (swt) and by its extension, Jannah.

Thus far, you have Al-Albani (another "Shaykh al-Ta'ifa"), Fawzan al-Fawzan and Ibn Hazm (if we set aside his error in judgment).  One great list; if they narrated something, it would have been the "golden chain", at least per Shia standards of scrutinizing our reports.

You call us kafirs and do not like for me to call you "slick" when I explained to you that it does not carry the sort of negative connotation in my mind that we associate with the word?  Do you prefer Kleenex or do you prefer another brand?

The entire sect is clear upon the fact that both Imam Hassan (ra) and Imam Hussain (ra) are the Leaders of the Youth of Paradise.  The Prophet (saw) prophesied that one will make peace and the other one will be martyred, therefore, we easily reconcile between one giving up the Caliphate and the other fighting against Yazid (la).  Now you might understand why I said, "If you divorce authentic Sunnah from history, you will never find reconciliation in almost anything you follow".

Going back to Yazid (la), there was a topic initiated on this forum challenging Shias to prove what sorts of crimes (namely, modifications of deen) did Yazid (la) indulge in.  I suggest you prove that to us.  I am not here to defend Yazid (la); I am here to strike a balance so that truth is upheld and falsehood/exaggerations are ousted.

You aren't slick so let's see how well you slip them.  Please bear in mind that I brought up the Pew Research and numbers; you just made a claim.  Do not let this get too far from your sight.

Yes, use the Pew Research poll I shared; you're welcome!

Seat belt?  Umm sure, Dale Earnhardt Jr.?

Oh no, I'm cornered!

Very good!  You know how to go after the nations with the largest Muslim populations.  However, your wait is almost over; its coming.

You are short by a little over 13 million and you still think you've a point.  Maybe Holocaust exaggerators should consult you.  However, you may have shown some promise in math but have failed elsewhere.  Please read how these studies are conducted.  You will see that in no case have they surveyed more than a 1000 - 1200 individuals; so the percentage (for each country) is an extrapolation of a sample population of about 1000 individuals.

In the case of Pakistan, for example, 1200 individuals were surveyed.  1200 (the entire sample size) out of 193.2 million comes to a healthy 0.00062111801%. 

http://www.pewresearch.org/methodology/international-survey-research/international-methodology/global-attitudes-survey/pakistan/2015

So have your shaykhs, too, have attained infallibility?  If an idiot can have a weapon, he may also have some background in religious studies to make himself out to be a "shaykh".  And we will agree that Sunni takfir isn't the same as Shia takfir; we (our legitimate scholars) base it upon Qur'an and Sunnah, yours is a result of your own projections on the Qur'an and Sunnah.

Absolutely. We only take from a select among of individuals in the Prophet's (saww) progeny.

I have a question; why do some Sunni scholars say our scholars are kafir but our jahils are Muslim? And is that calling a spade a spade?

I say most of them broke the pledge, since they pledged to not flee. Majority of them fleed.

I don't understand your point on Al-Abani, Fawzan and Ibn Hazm. Please elaborate.

Just don't describe me at all. Whether it is a compliment or not. That's just my request, it would be kind of you to accept it.

Before we continue on Imam Al-Husayn (as), may I ask why you think he rebelled against Yazid (la)? Just so that I understand your position more. Thanks.

I am short by 13 million, but we have a few countries left. I really don't want to have to continue on the maths, but if you insist I will continue. I did not do this to "corner" you, that isn't a passion of mine, all I want for you is to remove your accusation that I'm a liar. Also, I don't believe in the holocaust.

I recognise how polls are done. Are you suggesting we ignore them? Because I don't understand your point here. Please elaborate.

Our takfir does not say Sunni blood is halal. Your takfiris say the same about us. That's my point.

[Zlatan Ibrahimovic]

@Zlatan

Thanks for your posts. It becomes clearer and clearer by each day.

From now on, whenever a Twelver comes to me and says, "We Twelvers take our Sunni brothers as Muslims", I'll take that as "We Twelvers take our Sunni brothers as Kuffar whom we treat as Muslims".

It just strengthens my understanding of what Twelvers believe towards Sunnis from the very beginning I know Twelverism and will hold onto that. Thank you again.

Any "unity-inclined" Twelvers in this forum have got anything to say? @Ibrahim, anything you'd like to say?

Your welcome and thank you for bringing this topic up. Believing Sunnis are kafir does not necessarily mean unity is wrong, we see that many nations are united despite their populations following different faiths.

We have common goals for the bettering of the Ummah (Palestine for example), and that's what unity is about. Unity in aqeeda is a no-no but unity on political goals and economic goals and community togetherness (visiting each other, attendibg each other funerals etc...) is not an issue to us, in fact that's the best option.

[muslim720]

Absolutely. We only take from a select among of individuals in the Prophet's (saww) progeny.

Cut-paste method, invented nearly 14 centuries ago, lol.  Dissect even the family of the Prophet (saw).

I have a question; why do some Sunni scholars say our scholars are kafir but our jahils are Muslim? And is that calling a spade a spade?

While your scholars have busied themselves with our treatment, our scholars have given the masses of Shia the benefit of doubt, for example, by not declaring them guilty of tahreef as was the belief held by the likes of Al-Kulayni, Al-Kashani, Al-Amili, Majlisi and Al-Tabrisi (5 out of the 7 main foundational Shia scholars); for more, watch the latest Sunni Defense video and listen to brother Hani's analysis. 

Our scholars have ruled the masses to be innocent due to their (the masses') ignorance (when it comes to certain disturbing creedal matters) and the fact that they do not deny any of our six articles of faith.

I say most of them broke the pledge, since they pledged to not flee. Majority of them fleed.

Majority of them fled?  Seriously, you - as said to you before - should be the last one to speak about fleeing.  With no intention to mock anyone, the world cannot remain without an Imam, as per your belief.  Yet we have been waiting for over 1000 years now.

I don't understand your point on Al-Abani, Fawzan and Ibn Hazm. Please elaborate.

There is no need because the smart ones understand when given hints.

Just don't describe me at all. Whether it is a compliment or not. That's just my request, it would be kind of you to accept it.

Wow, okay!

Before we continue on Imam Al-Husayn (as), may I ask why you think he rebelled against Yazid (la)? Just so that I understand your position more. Thanks.

My faith is independent of what happened at Karbala whereas it is one of the foundational, if not the most foundational, incident(s) of your faith.  Therefore, it is for you to speculate over it, from as many angles as you wish, to give your faith multi-faceted legitimacy.  As for us, the Qur'an and Sunnah are sufficient.

I am short by 13 million, but we have a few countries left. I really don't want to have to continue on the maths, but if you insist I will continue. I did not do this to "corner" you, that isn't a passion of mine, all I want for you is to remove your accusation that I'm a liar. Also, I don't believe in the holocaust.

You are a liar; when you quoted 67 million, you hadn't done any math.  Even now, you are saying that you will "continue on the maths".  So then how did you arrive at that number?  Where is your proof that gave you that exact number (67 million)?

I recognise how polls are done. Are you suggesting we ignore them? Because I don't understand your point here. Please elaborate.

I suggest you take poll results with a grain of salt.

Our takfir does not say Sunni blood is halal. Your takfiris say the same about us. That's my point.

Has this turned into, "Whose Takfir Is It Anyway?"

We have common goals for the bettering of the Ummah (Palestine for example), and that's what unity is about.

What ummah are you talking about, after having made takfir on us?  Qadianis are not part of the ummah.  Do you get it now or need further elaboration?

[Zlatan Ibrahimovic]

Cut-paste method, invented nearly 14 centuries ago, lol.  Dissect even the family of the Prophet (saw).

While your scholars have busied themselves with our treatment, our scholars have given the masses of Shia the benefit of doubt, for example, by not declaring them guilty of tahreef as was the belief held by the likes of Al-Kulayni, Al-Kashani, Al-Amili, Majlisi and Al-Tabrisi (5 out of the 7 main foundational Shia scholars); for more, watch the latest Sunni Defense video and listen to brother Hani's analysis. 

Our scholars have ruled the masses to be innocent due to their (the masses') ignorance (when it comes to certain disturbing creedal matters) and the fact that they do not deny any of our six articles of faith.

Majority of them fled?  Seriously, you - as said to you before - should be the last one to speak about fleeing.  With no intention to mock anyone, the world cannot remain without an Imam, as per your belief.  Yet we have been waiting for over 1000 years now.

There is no need because the smart ones understand when given hints.

Wow, okay!

My faith is independent of what happened at Karbala whereas it is one of the foundational, if not the most foundational, incident(s) of your faith.  Therefore, it is for you to speculate over it, from as many angles as you wish, to give your faith multi-faceted legitimacy.  As for us, the Qur'an and Sunnah are sufficient.

You are a liar; when you quoted 67 million, you hadn't done any math.  Even now, you are saying that you will "continue on the maths".  So then how did you arrive at that number?  Where is your proof that gave you that exact number (67 million)?

I suggest you take poll results with a grain of salt.

Has this turned into, "Whose Takfir Is It Anyway?"

What ummah are you talking about, after having made takfir on us?  Qadianis are not part of the ummah.  Do you get it now or need further elaboration?

We take from the chosen ones amongst the Prophet's family.

Even for scholars who don't believe in tahreef they were ruled as kafirs to many Sunni scholars. So why are the masses given the benefit of the doubt? What is it that our scholars believe which we are excused from?

The Imam (as) has not started his battle so that he could "flee". These guys fled mid-battle.

I don't really like hints in discussions. I like bold and clear.

Imam Al-Husayn (as) was not the same as Imam Al-Hasan (as), as Al-Husayn (as) was promised bay'ah by the Kufans. He was bertrayed. I didn't ask you if Karbala was fundamental to your faith, I just want your opinion on it.

Man, I gave you the benefit of the doubt when I did my calculations. Yet you still insist I'm a liar. Dang. No choice but to continue.

So we were at 53.7 million. Let's continue in Turkey. 8% of Turkey is.. 6.3 million. We're at 60 million already. Now Malaysia, 3.4 million favourable to ISIS.  That's 63.4 million. Senegal, 1.6 million are favourable to ISIS. Getting real close to that magic number, that's 65 million right there. Burkina Faso, we get 1.4 million who are favourable. That's 66.4 million. Put your glasses on, cause the magic number is about to shine on your face. Jordan, we have 282000 people who are favourable. Whoa, looks like the number is at 66.68 million people who are favourable. Dang, maybe I was short and I really am I liar jokes we can still get to the finish line. Thanks to the Palestinian territories, we are now at 66.95 million Sunnis that are favourable to ISIS. Oh no... I'm all out of countries, but it doesn't matter, cause I left  the Zionist entity last. Since you like hints, I'll let you figure out why. I'll also make you do the last calculation if you want. But with that, we cross over the the magic number. And I didn't even add the thousands in my first calculations, we would have passed the finish line earlier had I did. The truth is I got the number 67 from an article or a post online, I just decided to have a little fun with this

Still a liar? :p

So take the poll results with a grain of salt? What is the point in polling them?

The same scholars who do takfir on you tell us to go to your funerals and pray with you.

[Mythbuster1]

The Imam (as) has not started his battle so that he could "flee”.These guys fled mid-battle.

Dang......how old are you?

The imam hasn’t or couldnt start a battle full stop yet he FLED without one?🤔

Comparing that guy to people who DID fight and then flee (according to shias) is a wrong comparison on many levels.

Try better next time.

[Zlatan Ibrahimovic]

Dang......how old are you?

The imam hasn’t or couldnt start a battle full stop yet he FLED without one?🤔

Comparing that guy to people who DID fight and then flee (according to shias) is a wrong comparison on many levels.

Try better next time.

Lol. Guess you haven't read laws in Islamic warfare. Fleeing is a sin unless there is a good reason to flee.

The Imam (as) doesn't have an army, he hasn't fled. He is hidden and is waiting for the time to rise.

[muslim720]

We take from the chosen ones amongst the Prophet's family.

Chosen by who?  And why are they chosen when the religion has been perfected and is completely silent on this matter?  The questions are glaring at you and you don't even have Ray-Bans.

Even for scholars who don't believe in tahreef they were ruled as kafirs to many Sunni scholars. So why are the masses given the benefit of the doubt? What is it that our scholars believe which we are excused from?

Then these scholars may have believed in something other than tahreef which put them outside the fold of Islam.  What it is that these scholars believed in (which deemed them kafir) is for you to find out (so that you do not follow their kufr); it is not for me to answer.

The Imam (as) has not started his battle so that he could "flee". These guys fled mid-battle.

At least "these guys" showed up to the battle.  The Imam has not even showed up.  I can understand showing up and then fleeing but not showing up?!  Come on!

I don't really like hints in discussions. I like bold and clear.

No doubt!

Imam Al-Husayn (as) was not the same as Imam Al-Hasan (as), as Al-Husayn (as) was promised bay'ah by the Kufans. He was bertrayed. I didn't ask you if Karbala was fundamental to your faith, I just want your opinion on it.

While you acknowledge that Imam Hussain (ra) was betrayed, I had a Shia imam deny such a thing.  He pinned it on Ibn Taymiyyah (rah) who, according to the Shia imam, was the source of this lie.  As for my opinion, Hassanain (may Allah's peace be upon them, their parents and maternal grandfather) were right; they were both superior to Muawiyah, his son and even Abu Sufyan.  It is also my opinion (along with certain scholars') that Imam Hassan (ra) was the Fifth Rightly Guided Caliph.

Man, I gave you the benefit of the doubt when I did my calculations. Yet you still insist I'm a liar. Dang. No choice but to continue.

The truth is I got the number 67 from an article or a post online, I just decided to have a little fun with this

Wow, so you used an online post, possibly an article (though I'm sure you'd have shared it if it was one), to malign a large number of Sunnis and associate them with a group we, for the most part, consider kafir!

Still a liar? :p

Worse than that bro, now that you've admitted that you quoted a post and decided to "have a little fun" with it.  Khabeeth, for one and many more words come to mind to describe you but I do not look forward to your tantrums so I will not go further.

So take the poll results with a grain of salt? What is the point in polling them?

Maybe for you to "have fun" with because 1200, for example, is not an accurate representation of a country with over 193 million Muslims (Pakistan).

The same scholars who do takfir on you tell us to go to your funerals and pray with you.

Wallaahi, I respect your scholars.  I respect Ayatollah Khamenei and Ayatollah Sistani; I have tremendous respect for Imam Khomeini (rah) despite what people say about him, or the other two.  Until I see proof with my own eyes and hear it with my own ears, I will continue to respect them (and others).  However, as for those who make takfir on me and then ask you to attend my funeral and pray for me can kiss my behind.  I would get in trouble otherwise I'd have said it very explicitly, without any hints since you like "bold and clear".

Just in case you're taken back by my comment, I will never follow a Sunni scholar who makes takfir on you but also urges me to attend your funeral and pray for you.

[Zlatan Ibrahimovic]

Chosen by who?  And why are they chosen when the religion has been perfected and is completely silent on this matter?  The questions are glaring at you and you don't even have Ray-Bans.

Then these scholars may have believed in something other than tahreef which put them outside the fold of Islam.  What it is that these scholars believed in (which deemed them kafir) is for you to find out (so that you do not follow their kufr); it is not for me to answer.

At least "these guys" showed up to the battle.  The Imam has not even showed up.  I can understand showing up and then fleeing but not showing up?!  Come on!

No doubt!

While you acknowledge that Imam Hussain (ra) was betrayed, I had a Shia imam deny such a thing.  He pinned it on Ibn Taymiyyah (rah) who, according to the Shia imam, was the source of this lie.  As for my opinion, Hassanain (may Allah's peace be upon them, their parents and maternal grandfather) were right; they were both superior to Muawiyah, his son and even Abu Sufyan.  It is also my opinion (along with certain scholars') that Imam Hassan (ra) was the Fifth Rightly Guided Caliph.

Wow, so you used an online post, possibly an article (though I'm sure you'd have shared it if it was one), to malign a large number of Sunnis and associate them with a group we, for the most part, consider kafir!

Worse than that bro, now that you've admitted that you quoted a post and decided to "have a little fun" with it.  Khabeeth, for one and many more words come to mind to describe you but I do not look forward to your tantrums so I will not go further.

Maybe for you to "have fun" with because 1200, for example, is not an accurate representation of a country with over 193 million Muslims (Pakistan).

Wallaahi, I respect your scholars.  I respect Ayatollah Khamenei and Ayatollah Sistani; I have tremendous respect for Imam Khomeini (rah) despite what people say about him, or the other two.  Until I see proof with my own eyes and hear it with my own ears, I will continue to respect them (and others).  However, as for those who make takfir on me and then ask you to attend my funeral and pray for me can kiss my behind.  I would get in trouble otherwise I'd have said it very explicitly, without any hints since you like "bold and clear".

Just in case you're taken back by my comment, I will never follow a Sunni scholar who makes takfir on you but also urges me to attend your funeral and pray for you.

The religion was perfected on the same day the wilayah of Ali (as) was announced. That's what we believe. It was the last faridha.

Me to find out? What is this we are doing, hints and clues? How can this be a discussion when we can't even be transparent with each other? It would have been better for you to just say you don't know why.

Also, what is the difference between what I believe about Sunnis and those who say our scholars are kafir but our jahils are Muslim? As I believe the jahils amongst Sunnis if they are qasir, then they don't deserve punishment. And this is not me who said it, this is Al-Khoei. I would like your opinion on this.

The Imam (as) will rise when the conditions are fulfilled. As you know there are conditions for waging war in Islam, you don't go in to the battle knowing you will lose.

Of course I acknowledge they bertrayed him. Because that's what history says. If Al-Hasan (as) is superior to Mu'awiyah, why did he want his khilafa? And why did he give the rulership to his accursed son, when he was meant to give it to Al-Husayn (as)?

I did the calculations on my own and it turns out the number 67 was correct. So why are you angry? Focus on the number, not who provided it. It's correct and that's that.

I'm a khabeeth now? Lol. Very respectful. But you know, Pew Research is one of the most reliable and accurate on these issues. I'll take their methods over yours, thanks.

I don't know why you're bothered on takfir, when it is largely related to whether you're going to Hell or not. You can easily believe someone is going to Hell yet be friends with them

[muslim720]

The religion was perfected on the same day the wilayah of Ali (as) was announced. That's what we believe. It was the last faridha.

It has became apparent that you are arguing for the sake of argument.  However, it has been fun for me so why stop, right?  Speaking of the religion being "perfected on the same day the wilayah of Ali (as) was announced", the sad thing is that Imam Ali (ra) never referred to the announcing of his "wilayah" or present it as a proof.  Not once!

Me to find out? What is this we are doing, hints and clues? How can this be a discussion when we can't even be transparent with each other? It would have been better for you to just say you don't know why.

To know something, I must be concerned with it.  In the case of why takfir was made on certain scholars of yours, I am not even concerned.  However, as I said, if I were you, I'd be concerned so that I don't follow their kufr.

Also, what is the difference between what I believe about Sunnis and those who say our scholars are kafir but our jahils are Muslim? As I believe the jahils amongst Sunnis if they are qasir, then they don't deserve punishment. And this is not me who said it, this is Al-Khoei. I would like your opinion on this.

You cannot use the "jahil" card because you claim Imamah to be in the Qur'an, the same book we, too, take as the Word of Allah (swt).  So the minute a Sunni has picked up and opened a Qur'an without acknowledging Imamah (for the obvious fact that it does not exist in the Qur'an), he or she becomes kafir, as per what you shared from your scholars.

The Imam (as) will rise when the conditions are fulfilled. As you know there are conditions for waging war in Islam, you don't go in to the battle knowing you will lose.

The purpose of an Imam, as per your madhhab, is not to wage wars only.  He is a leader and he is obliged to lead from the front in every matter of life.  Having said that, I wish to congratulate you on condemning Imam Hussain (ra) who Shias say fought against Yazid with all the odds stacked against him.  If only you heeded my advice to stick to the authentic Sunnah; you would have avoided this latest pitfall.

Of course I acknowledge they bertrayed him. Because that's what history says. If Al-Hasan (as) is superior to Mu'awiyah, why did he want his khilafa? And why did he give the rulership to his accursed son, when he was meant to give it to Al-Husayn (as)?

If you want my opinion on this, as much as I consider Imam Hassan (ra) to be the Fifth Rightly-Guided Caliph, I am against power held within a family.  In other words, just because I support Imam Hassan (ra) over Muawiyah does not mean that I would have hoped for Imam Hassan (ra) to have ruled and then pass the power to his own brother (after himself).  This is me upholding what Imam Hussain (ra) fought for.  Imam Hussain (ra) revolted against Yazid to prevent Caliphate from turning into a familial business, handed down from father to son or brother to brother.  In fact, among many logical reasons, I reject Imamah on this very basis.  How can Shias support Imam Hussain (ra) fighting against such a corrupt system of power management and delegation but then ascribe the same corruption to Imam Hussain (ra), his father (ra), his brother (ra) and his descendants (ra)?

I did the calculations on my own and it turns out the number 67 was correct. So why are you angry? Focus on the number, not who provided it. It's correct and that's that.

lol, congratulations, you can do math!

I'm a khabeeth now? Lol. Very respectful. But you know, Pew Research is one of the most reliable and accurate on these issues. I'll take their methods over yours, thanks.

I have been extremely respectful towards you.  I have only judged you on your own admission.

I don't know why you're bothered on takfir, when it is largely related to whether you're going to Hell or not. You can easily believe someone is going to Hell yet be friends with them

What I find funny is the fact that you cannot even prove our kufr from Qur'an and authentic Sunnah, lol.  And your scholars (those who hold such a belief) are trying to come to an agreement on how to engage with us.  Pathetic

[Mythbuster1]

Lol. Guess you haven't read laws in Islamic warfare. Fleeing is a sin unless there is a good reason to flee.

The Imam (as) doesn't have an army, he hasn't fled. He is hidden and is waiting for the time to rise.

Lol I guess the Shias broke the law on Islamic warfare when they sided with kuffar against the Muslims.....DAAAAANG!!
Fleeing without entering the battlefield for NO REASON but fear for ones own life? A tad bit selfish, no? Cowardly? Scared? Try sitting down with a cuppa and ponder over it!
A man fleeing compared to a divine being fleeing......ponder over it.

Ready to rise? He already showed his face and then fled.......what is he gonna rise for now? So he can flee again?

That’s logic ^^^

[Zlatan Ibrahimovic]

It has became apparent that you are arguing for the sake of argument.  However, it has been fun for me so why stop, right?  Speaking of the religion being "perfected on the same day the wilayah of Ali (as) was announced", the sad thing is that Imam Ali (ra) never referred to the announcing of his "wilayah" or present it as a proof.  Not once!

To know something, I must be concerned with it.  In the case of why takfir was made on certain scholars of yours, I am not even concerned.  However, as I said, if I were you, I'd be concerned so that I don't follow their kufr.

You cannot use the "jahil" card because you claim Imamah to be in the Qur'an, the same book we, too, take as the Word of Allah (swt).  So the minute a Sunni has picked up and opened a Qur'an without acknowledging Imamah (for the obvious fact that it does not exist in the Qur'an), he or she becomes kafir, as per what you shared from your scholars.

The purpose of an Imam, as per your madhhab, is not to wage wars only.  He is a leader and he is obliged to lead from the front in every matter of life.  Having said that, I wish to congratulate you on condemning Imam Hussain (ra) who Shias say fought against Yazid with all the odds stacked against him.  If only you heeded my advice to stick to the authentic Sunnah; you would have avoided this latest pitfall.

If you want my opinion on this, as much as I consider Imam Hassan (ra) to be the Fifth Rightly-Guided Caliph, I am against power held within a family.  In other words, just because I support Imam Hassan (ra) over Muawiyah does not mean that I would have hoped for Imam Hassan (ra) to have ruled and then pass the power to his own brother (after himself).  This is me upholding what Imam Hussain (ra) fought for.  Imam Hussain (ra) revolted against Yazid to prevent Caliphate from turning into a familial business, handed down from father to son or brother to brother.  In fact, among many logical reasons, I reject Imamah on this very basis.  How can Shias support Imam Hussain (ra) fighting against such a corrupt system of power management and delegation but then ascribe the same corruption to Imam Hussain (ra), his father (ra), his brother (ra) and his descendants (ra)?

lol, congratulations, you can do math!

I have been extremely respectful towards you.  I have only judged you on your own admission.

What I find funny is the fact that you cannot even prove our kufr from Qur'an and authentic Sunnah, lol.  And your scholars (those who hold such a belief) are trying to come to an agreement on how to engage with us.  Pathetic

There is proof in both the Holy Qur'an and the authentic Sunnah. Imam Ali (as) did say so, read Khutba Al-Shaqshaqiya.

It wasn't on certain scholars of mine. Pay attention. It's a blanket takfir on any Shi'i who is a scholar. Yet both the scholars and jahils believe the same thing.

Of course the jahil card works, because it hasn't been proven to most Sunnis it is in the Qur'an and Sunnah. If a Shi'i proves it to them, and they reject out of stubborness, then they are completely kafir now. I believe I said this 2 pages ago.

The Mahdi (as) will wage wars, unlike his predecessors. That's why he needs support. And we believe that with enough support even Imam Ali (as) would have taken down the illegitimate governments of the Saqifa usurpers. Imam Al-Husayn (as) was bertrayed.

The reason Al-Hassan (as) wanted Al-Husayn (as) to be ruler is not cause he is his brother. This isn't nepotism. I'm sure you agree Al-Husayn (as) was much more worthy than that najis khanzeer aka Yazid (la). And Al-Husayn (as) revolted to do nahi an al munkar.

Thanks for saying I'm good at maths appreciated

Authentic sunnah is not what is in Bukhari, you'll find the authentic sunnah in our books.

[Mythbuster1]

Authentic sunnah is not what is in Bukhari, you'll find the authentic sunnah in our books.

That is one funny answer Lol authentic Sunna like TAHREEF? In your books?

Great sunnah for hypocrites.

[muslim720]

There is proof in both the Holy Qur'an and the authentic Sunnah. Imam Ali (as) did say so, read Khutba Al-Shaqshaqiya.

Nahjul Balagha, with all due respect, is like an anonymous witness whose testimony is inadmissible in court because Al-Radhi provides not a single chain for what is between its' two covers.  However, due to the popularity of Khutbah Al-Shaqshaqiya, scholars have further examined the sermon, including the chains attributed to it, and have declared it inauthentic.

http://nahjul-balagha.net/shaqshaqiya-grading/

It wasn't on certain scholars of mine. Pay attention. It's a blanket takfir on any Shi'i who is a scholar. Yet both the scholars and jahils believe the same thing.

Is yours not blanket takfir as well?

Of course the jahil card works, because it hasn't been proven to most Sunnis it is in the Qur'an and Sunnah. If a Shi'i proves it to them, and they reject out of stubborness, then they are completely kafir now. I believe I said this 2 pages ago.

That is the point!  A Shia does not have to prove Imamah to a Sunni; it should be something a Sunni understands just as he or she learns the Oneness of Allah (swt), Prophethood, Angels, Day of Judgment, Divine Decree and Holy Scriptures.  Two pages ago you you said whatever but don't let this ignorance linger on for another two pages.  We do not oppose Imamah out of stubbornness; we just don't see it in the Qur'an and Sunnah.

The Mahdi (as) will wage wars, unlike his predecessors. That's why he needs support. And we believe that with enough support even Imam Ali (as) would have taken down the illegitimate governments of the Saqifa usurpers.

Were the Muslims not outnumbered during the early battles at the time of the Prophet (saw)?  Did they wait for enough support?  Also, the same Caliphate which endowed Abu Bakr (ra), Umar (ra) and Uthman (ra) all the power, the same power which - according to you - debilitated Imam Ali's (ra) "mission", was later given to Imam Ali (ra) and he was still waiting for "enough support"?  With your logic, the entire universe could have been at Imam Ali's (ra) command and he would have still waited for "enough support".  Oh wait, he had power over all the atoms.....ummmm, moving on!

The reason Al-Hassan (as) wanted Al-Husayn (as) to be ruler is not cause he is his brother. This isn't nepotism. I'm sure you agree Al-Husayn (as) was much more worthy than that najis khanzeer aka Yazid (la). And Al-Husayn (as) revolted to do nahi an al munkar.

I believe Imam Hussain (ra) fought Yazid to end nepotism whereas you believe in a form of nepotism called, "Imamah".  And yes, many Shia mosques say Imam Hussain (ra) revolted to do "nahi an al munkar".  Please show us which Islamic principles did Yazid, that najis khanzeer, violate or change.

Thanks for saying I'm good at maths appreciated

Bro, if you wanted compliments, wallaahi, I'd have decorated your profile with compliments.  Just drop the idiocy

Authentic sunnah is not what is in Bukhari, you'll find the authentic sunnah in our books.

As per your own standards, Al-Kafi (which has more narrations than Sahih Bukhari and Sahih Muslim combined) is two-thirds unauthentic.  Brother Farid, may Allah (swt) reward him, did a research and found out that Al-Kafi is only 14.86% comprised of Prophetic narrations.  Taking out the repeats, etc, it contains only a handful of authentic Prophetic narrations; that number comes out to be less than 2% of the entire volume.

https://gift2shias.com/2013/03/24/prophets-saws-narrations-in-al-kafi/

So what is this "authentic Sunnah" that you speak of?

[iceman]

As the brothers have said, it really makes no major difference if Sunnis are going to rot in hell in the end.

Well that shouldn't really bother you because according to the Prophet his Ummah will eventually divide into 73 different factions and only one will be heavenly and all the rest will be hell bound. Vast majority of the Muslims will go to hell or may be you can clarify the Hadith more better. Give it a shot.