Sunni Scholar Believe In Shia's Mahdi (as) too

[shiaali]

There are many sunni scholars who confirm Mahdi (as) is Imam Hasan Al-Askari (as) son. For example the great Sunni scholar al-'Arabi.

واعلموا أنه لابد من خروج المهدي (عليه السلام) لكن لا يخرج حتى تمتلئ الأرض جوراً وظلماً فيملؤها قسطاً وعدلاً ولو لم يكن من الدنيا إلا يوم واحد طوّل الله تعالى ذلك اليوم حتى يلي ذلك الخليفة وهو من عترة رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم من ولد فاطمة رضي الله عنها، جده الحسين بن علي بن أبي طالب ووالده حسن العسكري ابن الإمام علي النقي ـ بالنون ـ ابن محمد التقي ـ بالتاء ـ ابن الإمام علي الرضا ابن الإمام موسى الكاظم ابن الإمام جعفر الصادق ابن الإمام محمد الباقر ابن الإمام زين العابدين علي بن الإمام الحسين ابن الإمام علي بن أبي طالب رضي الله عنه

Sh Muhyiddin Ibn al-'Arabi, al-Futuhat al-Makkiyah, chapter 366, quoted by Abdul-Wahab al-Sha'rani, in Yawaqit wa Jawahir vol 2 and also Sh Mahdi Faqih al-Imani mentioned this in Al-Mahdi 'inda Ahl al-Sunnah, Vol 1, page 410.

[Ibn Yahya]

There are many sunni scholars who confirm Mahdi (as) is Imam Hasan Al-Askari (as) son. For example the great Sunni scholar al-'Arabi.

واعلموا أنه لابد من خروج المهدي (عليه السلام) لكن لا يخرج حتى تمتلئ الأرض جوراً وظلماً فيملؤها قسطاً وعدلاً ولو لم يكن من الدنيا إلا يوم واحد طوّل الله تعالى ذلك اليوم حتى يلي ذلك الخليفة وهو من عترة رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم من ولد فاطمة رضي الله عنها، جده الحسين بن علي بن أبي طالب ووالده حسن العسكري ابن الإمام علي النقي ـ بالنون ـ ابن محمد التقي ـ بالتاء ـ ابن الإمام علي الرضا ابن الإمام موسى الكاظم ابن الإمام جعفر الصادق ابن الإمام محمد الباقر ابن الإمام زين العابدين علي بن الإمام الحسين ابن الإمام علي بن أبي طالب رضي الله عنه

Sh Muhyiddin Ibn al-'Arabi, al-Futuhat al-Makkiyah, chapter 366, quoted by Abdul-Wahab al-Sha'rani, in Yawaqit wa Jawahir vol 2 and also Sh Mahdi Faqih al-Imani mentioned this in Al-Mahdi 'inda Ahl al-Sunnah, Vol 1, page 410.

"great Sunni scholar". Ibn al-'Arabi was not a "great Sunni scholar". He was an extremist Sufi who came up with Wahdat al-Wujud

 ‘Aqidah Ibn ‘Arabi wa Hayatuhu by Taqiy al-Deen al-Faasi, p. 21-23)

(The author) mentioned the response of some of the scholars:

 Al-Qaadi Badr al-Deen ibn Jamaa’ah said:

The passages quoted, and other similar parts of this book, are bid’ah and misguidance, evil and ignorance. The religiously-committed Muslim would not pay any heed to them or bother to read the book to find out more.

 Khateeb al-Qal’ah Shaykh Shams al-Deen Muhammad ibn Yoosuf al-Jazari al-Shaafa’i said:

 Praise be to Allaah. His comment about Adam being called insaan is anthropomorphism [likening Allaah to His creation] and is a lie and falsehood. His belief that the idol-worship of the people of Nooh was valid is kufr. Anyone who says such a thing cannot be approved of. His comment that ‘Al-Haqq which is transcendent is the physical creation which you can see’ is false and contradictory, and it is also kufr. His comment that the people of Hood had reached a true state of closeness (to Allaah) is a lie against Allaah, and by saying this, he has rejected what Allaah said about them. His remark that they were no longer remote and that Hell became a blessing and a joy for them is a lie and a rejection of everything that was revealed to the Prophets; the truth of the matter is what Allaah said about that, that they (the people of Hood) will abide in the torment forever.

Ibid, 21-23)

Shaykh al-Islam ibn Taymiyyah said:

When the faqeeh Abu Muhammad ibn ‘Abd al-Salaam came to Cairo and they asked him about Ibn al-‘Arabi, he said:

He is a vile and evil shaykh who says that the world is eternal and does not see anything haram in any sexual relationship.

Ibid, p. 25

Ibn Hajar said:

Some confusing words of Ibn ‘Arabi were mentioned to our master Shaykh al-Islam Siraaj al-Deen al-Balqeeni, and he was asked about Ibn ‘Arabi. Our Shaykh al-Balqeeni said: he is a kafir.

Ibid, p. 39

Ibn Khaldoon said:

 Among these Sufis are: Ibn ‘Arabi, Ibn Saba’een, Ibn Barrajaan and their followers who follow their path and their religion. They have many books in circulation that are filled with blatant kufr and repugnant bid’ahs, trying to interpret clear texts in very far-fetched and repugnant ways, such that the reader is astounded that anyone could attribute such things to Islam.

Ibid, p. 41

You can find many more Fatawa on him here http://islamqa.info/en/7691

[Hani]

A lot of Shia sects don't believe in your 12th Imam. Try to convince them before you jump to ignorant folks or Sufi philosophers who aren't reliable sources of religion.

I think the man held some odd beliefs, things like the level of saint is higher than that of a prophet and whatnot... I wouldn't go near these folks much.

[Al Dukhan]

Sorry @OP i dont think so. Maybe they were doing taqiyyah with shias to save themselves from tyrant kings like safavids !

[Ebn Hussein]

According to one of the highest authorities of Shiism, such as Ayatullat Sadiq Shirazi, Ibn Arabi was not a NASIBI kafir pantheist. Since when do Nasibi pantheists believe in Mahdi?

(if you don't know the language of your Shia religion i.e. Farsi then learn it or ask any Shia Mullah).

Bring us Sahih hadith, we are not human worshippers and blind followers of men, we follow the Qur'an and Sahih Sunnah and acc. to our and even your sources Imam Al-'Askari had no son, he was invented by four thieves who claimed to be in contact with him to collect the Khums (money) of your dumb forefathers, just like the descendants of the four deputies do today in the name of Marja'iyyah.

 He doesn't count, maybe you luckier next time.

[shiaali]

A lot of Shia sects don't believe in your 12th Imam. Try to convince them before you jump to ignorant folks or Sufi philosophers who aren't reliable sources of religion.

you should mind your own business, you can't deny that he was admired by many sunni scholars and yet he believed Imam Hasan AS has a son. Call it an ijma since it's not just shia, but sunni scholar also believed he has a son. If you say your own scholar was ignorant, why can't we also say other shia sects who didn't believe in our Mahdi were ignorant?

[Hani]

So if he's admired by a some philosophers and saints and Sufis that makes everything he says binding? Who said they admired him for this point specifically? Maybe they admired him for other points and disagreed with him on this point. Do you know what he's even introduced as? He was an Andalusian Sufi mystic, poet, and philosopher. He wasn't even born until the 6th century so there's no way he'd know if al-`Askari had a son or not.

Secondly, I said many Shia sects don't agree with you on that and you dismissed it rather quickly, in fact out of all Shiite sects your sect is the only one who believes in this 12th man, all the rest from Waqifah to Nawoosiyyah to Zaydiyyah to Isma`eeliyah etc... they all don't share your story. You can't dismiss this as they're Shia who equally claim to be loyal followers of Ahlul-Bayt, meaning their opinion is more important than some late philosopher. More importantly the birth of your 12th Imam is nothing but a claim, anyone can make similar claims, and several top ranking scholars, such as al-Tabari who lived in the time of al-`Askari denied he had any children.

It's up to your intelligence if you wish to believe in a useless man whom your sect claims to be some divine leader, whether you believe in him or not nothing will change as the non-existent cannot benefit or harm anybody and history testifies to this.

[Hadrami]

who is this some sunni scholars/philosopher/saint/sufi? Sahih hadith clearly said Muhammad bin Abdillah not bin Hasan.

[Ebn Hussein]

A heretic pantheist Nasibi (!)  is now Hujjah for the Rafidah or it shall be a Hujjah for us at least. How low can they get, unbelievable. We are Muslims, neither Allah nor our Messenger told us to believe neither in Al-'Askari (rahimahullah) nor his non-existing basement Imam of a son. Smell the Turb ... I mean coffee and free yourself from this crazy religion that has to quote Nasibi pantheists to prove itself to the opponent.

[Ibn Yahya]

A lot of Shia sects don't believe in your 12th Imam. Try to convince them before you jump to ignorant folks or Sufi philosophers who aren't reliable sources of religion.

you should mind your own business, you can't deny that he was admired by many sunni scholars and yet he believed Imam Hasan AS has a son. Call it an ijma since it's not just shia, but sunni scholar also believed he has a son. If you say your own scholar was ignorant, why can't we also say other shia sects who didn't believe in our Mahdi were ignorant?

you gave the opinion of an Extremist Sufi who a great number of scholars of Ahl as-Sunnah had invoked Takfir upon. And that's a proof upon us? There's no proof that your Imam even exists, I mean come one you still can't decide who exactly his mothers was? Really? And the witness to his birth is Majhul? And don't act like the Shi'ah never fabricated things about their Imams, most of the Shi'ah of Musa al-Kadhim became Waqifis believing that Musa ibn Ja'far had gone into Ghaybah lol and you have to call them liars lol.

[Siamak]

According to one of the highest authorities of Shiism, such as Ayatullat Sadiq Shirazi, Ibn Arabi was not a NASIBI kafir pantheist. Since when do Nasibi pantheists believe in Mahdi?

(if you don't know the language of your Shia religion i.e. Farsi then learn it or ask any Shia Mullah).

Bring us Sahih hadith, we are not human worshippers and blind followers of men, we follow the Qur'an and Sahih Sunnah and acc. to our and even your sources Imam Al-'Askari had no son, he was invented by four thieves who claimed to be in contact with him to collect the Khums (money) of your dumb forefathers, just like the descendants of the four deputies do today in the name of Marja'iyyah.

 He doesn't count, maybe you luckier next time.

ibn arabi is nasibi according yaser al khabis web site
http://www.alqatrah.net/en/question/index.php?id=135
ibn arabi wasnt shia he was sufi

[Sheikh]

 


Ibn 'Arabi, eh?  I remember the good 'ol days when Rawafid had some self-respect.  I guess everything changed since, what, 1979?

[Al Dukhan]

ibn arabi is nasibi according yaser al khabis web site
http://www.alqatrah.net/en/question/index.php?id=135
ibn arabi wasnt shia he was sufi
[/quote]
whatever move aside ibn arabi, for shias who believes in 12 series link, for them even other shia sects are too nasibis ! Nothing surprising what you have said about and your shaikh said in a link you posted, if you have been left with any sense !
M|s

[Rationalist]

Mansur al Hallaj said he was a representative. However, the 12er Shia of the time called him a liar. So again this is cherry picking on the 12er Shia part.