TwelverShia.net Forum
Sunni Shia Discussion Forum => Imamah-Ghaybah => Topic started by: Furkan on January 15, 2015, 12:51:59 AM
-
Assalamu alaykum.
Is there an article where the sunn version of Ali (ra) is compared to the shia version of Ali ( far is he from the shia!) ?
If not, then I think this is a good opportunity to show which version of Ali (ra) suits the brave Ali (ra) more. The readers will decide for themselves which Ali is the real mawla.
Your opinions about this?
-
we'll try to make a quick one.. inshallah
-
The Shia Ali is the greatest man to have ever lived. He is the eternal Haydar, master of all creation and believers, the second of the Nourain, the living and breathing and speaking Qur'an, the most noble lion of Lady Fatimah (asws), and the personification of the Noor of Allah.
The Sunni Ali is some pathetic kid that's always trailing behind the Shaykhain.
-
The Shia 'Ali used to let his wife answer the door when a man knocked. He also stood by and watched her get beaten up.
The Sunni 'Ali would have killed on the spot any man that tried that.
-
The Shia Ali is the greatest man to have ever lived. He is the eternal Haydar, master of all creation and believers, the second of the Nourain, the living and breathing and speaking Qur'an, the most noble lion of Lady Fatimah (asws), and the personification of the Noor of Allah.
The Sunni Ali is some pathetic kid that's always trailing behind the Shaykhain.
Taha WUT :o please clarify
-
And dude, are you saying Ali is God? And ehat about Muhammad (saw) is he lower ranked then Ali (ra) ?
La hawla wa la quwatta illa billah
-
The Shia 'Ali used to let his wife answer the door when a man knocked. He also stood by and watched her get beaten up.
The Sunni 'Ali would have killed on the spot any man that tried that.
Husayn, youre talking to a dreamer. Let him dream. Im 1/100000000000000000+ of the real/ahlussunnah Ali RA when it comes to courage & bravery, but id rather die than being shia version of Ali.
-
comparing shia ali and sunni ali is same as comparing christian Isa (a.s) and muslim hazrat Isa (a.s).
christian perceived him as a son of god while Muslim says he's messenger of god.
messenger is slave and servant of god...... while son of god a.k.a god is the absolute authority.
same is the case here shia ali is demi god while sunni ali was companion of muhammad (pbuh).
the difference between two is that shia ali and christian Isa (son of god) only exist in fairy tales while muslim isa(a.s) and muslim( shia are not muslim) ali actually walk the face of the earth.
-
The Shia Ali is the greatest man to have ever lived. He is the eternal Haydar, master of all creation and believers, the second of the Nourain, the living and breathing and speaking Qur'an, the most noble lion of Lady Fatimah (asws), and the personification of the Noor of Allah.
The Sunni Ali is some pathetic kid that's always trailing behind the Shaykhain.
Ouch Shirkiness :o
How about I give you my Skype address and we discuss this in full detail?
-
The Shia Ali is the greatest man to have ever lived. He is the eternal Haydar, master of all creation and believers, the second of the Nourain, the living and breathing and speaking Qur'an, the most noble lion of Lady Fatimah (asws), and the personification of the Noor of Allah.
The Sunni Ali is some pathetic kid that's always trailing behind the Shaykhain.
Ya Rafidi, it's actually the opposite, even titles like ASSADULLAH AL-GHALIB (the lion of Allah ...) have been given to Ali by the Ahl Al-Sunnah. Muslim Ali was a brave man, never did Taqiyyah, named his (TWO) sons Omar etc., gave his daughter to Omar (not out fear for his hand being cut off as Kulayni the kafir reported!), openly called Abu Bakr and Omar the best of this Ummah (no taqiyyah, he was a real man), washed his feet for wudhu (no taqiyyah, he was a real man and scared of nobody), never said 'Aliyan waliyullah in the adhan, never ordered anyone to hold annual self-flagellation ceremonies for ANYONE etc. whereas your Majoosi Persian Ali is drawn like a Persian homosexual:
AND he was the personal poodle of Omar, now that's what I call a loser who is INDEED trailing behind the Shaykhayn:
http://gift2shias.com/2012/12/26/omars-poodle-ali-ibn-abi-talib-its-a-rafidhis-world/
Peace be upn Abu Turab, Ali Ibn Abi Talib who is as free of the Rafidah Mushriks as Jesus (peace be upon him) is of the Christ-worshiping Mushriks.
-
Taha WUT :o please clarify
Which part would you like clarified, akhi?
And dude, are you saying Ali is God? And ehat about Muhammad (saw) is he lower ranked then Ali (ra) ?La hawla wa la quwatta illa billah
No, of course not. Neither of those statements are in line with my beliefs. The Prophets and Imams (pbut) are like a perfect mirror in that they reflect the noor and attributes of God. There is no incarnation (a'udhibillah). And no, `Ali is not ranked higher than Muhammad (sawa). Muhammad (sawa) is the greater of the two noorain and `Ali is the lesser of the two.
Ouch Shirkiness :o How about I give you my Skype address and we discuss this in full detail?
Where's the shirk, bro?
I'd love to discuss on Skype inshaAllah but I still need to wait a while until I can get my own computer inshaAllah. The group that is holding my funds seems intent on hanging on as long as possible. InshaAllah soon.
-
Differences can be found under these areas:
1) Taqiyyah
2) Muta
3) Tabarra
4) Rajah
5) Ilm al Jafr, Jamia, Mushaf Fatima
6) Divine Appointment Vs how Imam Ali became the Calipah
7) Imam Ali accepting bayah from non-Shias
8 ) How Imam Hassan become the next Calipah ?
9) Believing that Fatima (sa) was killed by Umar
10) Abi Bakr and Umar seen at the same level as Abi Sufyan and Muawiyah
11) Did Monafiqeen exist in the Meccan period of Islam ?
12) Interpretation of Ghadir ? Why weren't merits like dawah al Ashira and Ghadir used by Imam Ali (as) to remind the Sahaba on the issue of Calipahate.
13) Interpretation of Khutab Shaqshaqiya. When Imam Ali (as) said the son of Abi Qudhafa knew my position, was this divine appointment or merits of Imam Ali (as) ?
14) Since Abi Bakr and Umar didn't kill anyone in the battles they supposedly fled according to the 12ers. Then what about companions like Abu Dharr, Miqdad, Salman, Ammar bin Yassir. They didn't kill anyone in the battles ?
15) Why would Imam Ali (as) tell Muawiyah the companions used to run away in battles ? If he did then Muawiyah use this information to turn the tables on Imam Ali (as)?
16) Who are the Shia of Ali among the companions other then the 4 ?
17) Status of Abdullah ibn Abbas
-
No, of course not. Neither of those statements are in line with my beliefs. The Prophets and Imams (pbut) are like a perfect mirror in that they reflect the noor and attributes of God. There is no incarnation (a'udhibillah). And no, `Ali is not ranked higher than Muhammad (sawa). Muhammad (sawa) is the greater of the two noorain and `Ali is the lesser of the two.
Just expanding from my original post.
There is no creation that reflects the noor and attirbute of Allah. As the Qur'an states "there is nothing like Allah" to the nearest meaning. That's a statement a Christian would make.
"[He is] Creator of the heavens and the earth. He has made for you from yourselves, mates, and among the cattle, mates; He multiplies you thereby. There is nothing like unto Him, and He is the Hearing, the Seeing."
Qur'an: Surah Ash-Shruaa
The Prophets are the best of creation as the Qur'an also confirms not your Imams.
And We gave to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob - all [of them] We guided. And Noah, We guided before; and among his descendants, David and Solomon and Job and Joseph and Moses and Aaron. Thus do We reward the doers of good. And Zechariah and John and Jesus and Elias - and all were of the righteous. And Ishmael and Elisha and Jonah and Lot - and all [of them] We preferred over the worlds.
Qur'an: Suarah Al-Anam
-
According to shia, Ali (ra) married his daughter to Umar because he feared his hands would be cut, like ebn.Hussein said above.
How can one think this is true? Only a fool would believe this excuse.
According to shia, Ali didnt even take his sword to defend his divinely chosen position.
According to shia, Ali didn't protect Fatima. And the excuse is " Ali was ordered to be patient". Oh common, where is justice gone, damn. And would Ali really let Fatima be hurt and after that do NOTHING. Some Shia say Ali fought Umar after the broken rib event, then I wonder why Ali didn't fight back when he was forced to give baya to Abu Bakr ( according to Shia) ?
You can find many different Shia versions of this so called.brokken rib event, and to believe any of them is so foolish.
-
There is no creation that reflects the noor and attirbute of Allah. As the Qur'an states "there is nothing like Allah" to the nearest meaning. That's a statement a Christian would make.
"[He is] Creator of the heavens and the earth. He has made for you from yourselves, mates, and among the cattle, mates; He multiplies you thereby. There is nothing like unto Him, and He is the Hearing, the Seeing."
Qur'an: Surah Ash-Shruaa
So how do you reconcile all of the hadeeths that state the the Prophet (sawa) was the face of God? It's obviously metaphorical, but Hanbali's take it seriously.
The Prophets are the best of creation as the Qur'an also confirms not your Imams.
And We gave to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob - all [of them] We guided. And Noah, We guided before; and among his descendants, David and Solomon and Job and Joseph and Moses and Aaron. Thus do We reward the doers of good. And Zechariah and John and Jesus and Elias - and all were of the righteous. And Ishmael and Elisha and Jonah and Lot - and all [of them] We preferred over the worlds.
Qur'an: Suarah Al-Anam
Imams are better than Prophets as per the Qur'an. Ibrahim was a mere Prophet and became an Imam, not the other way around. Why would he go from a high status to a lower one? Rather, his status was raised up to the status of an Imam.
-
There is no creation that reflects the noor and attirbute of Allah. As the Qur'an states "there is nothing like Allah" to the nearest meaning. That's a statement a Christian would make.
"[He is] Creator of the heavens and the earth. He has made for you from yourselves, mates, and among the cattle, mates; He multiplies you thereby. There is nothing like unto Him, and He is the Hearing, the Seeing."
Qur'an: Surah Ash-Shruaa
So how do you reconcile all of the hadeeths that state the the Prophet (sawa) was the face of God? It's obviously metaphorical, but Hanbali's take it seriously.
The Prophets are the best of creation as the Qur'an also confirms not your Imams.
And We gave to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob - all [of them] We guided. And Noah, We guided before; and among his descendants, David and Solomon and Job and Joseph and Moses and Aaron. Thus do We reward the doers of good. And Zechariah and John and Jesus and Elias - and all were of the righteous. And Ishmael and Elisha and Jonah and Lot - and all [of them] We preferred over the worlds.
Qur'an: Suarah Al-Anam
Imams are better than Prophets as per the Qur'an. Ibrahim was a mere Prophet and became an Imam, not the other way around. Why would he go from a high status to a lower one? Rather, his status was raised up to the status of an Imam.
Like hell they are.
Ibrahim (AS) was a Khalil too, and there are only two Allah has declared as his Khalils. They are Mohammed (SAW) and Ibrahim (AS). If I'm not mistaken this means the highest level of reverence.
Your Imams are not even mentioned in the Qur'an funnily enough, and Ibrahim (AS) was a Prophet and made a leader for mankind. Two distinct stations there. Even the senior companions are superioir than most of the Imams. :D
-
Like hell they are.
So you don't believe what the Qur'an has to say?
Ibrahim (AS) was a Khalil too, and there are only two Allah has declared as his Khalils. They are Mohammed (SAW) and Ibrahim (AS). If I'm not mistaken this means the highest level of reverence.
Are you going to say that Khalil is worse than Prophet? Or that "senior companions" are better than a Khalil?
Your Imams are not even mentioned in the Qur'an funnily enough, and Ibrahim (AS) was a Prophet and made a leader for mankind. Two distinct stations there.
Imam `Ali is mentioned in the Qur'an. I posted the quotes somewhere on this forum.
Even the senior companions are superioir than most of the Imams. :D
A'udhubillah min an-Nasb.
-
Imams are better than Prophets as per the Qur'an. Ibrahim was a mere Prophet and became an Imam, not the other way around. Why would he go from a high status to a lower one? Rather, his status was raised up to the status of an Imam.
The above already proves your jahl of the Arabic language and the context of the verse. But ven if we go by your Rafidi logic, then this makes Ibrahim superior than all your Imams, since Ibrahim was a Prophet+Imam (later on) while your so called Imams were Imams only.
As for Nasb. A3udhubillah min al-Rafd, since it is Allah who says:
Quran (4:95) - "Not equal are those believers who sit (at home) and receive no hurt, and those who strive and fight in the cause of Allah with their goods and their persons. Allah hath granted a grade higher to those who strive and fight with their goods and persons than to those who sit (at home). Unto all (in Faith) Hath Allah promised good: But those who strive and fight Hath He distinguished above those who sit (at home) by a special reward,-"
This Ayah is even makes it more clear:
Not equal among you are those who spent before the conquest [of Makkah] and fought [and those who did so after it]. Those are greater in degree than they who spent afterwards and fought. But to all Allah has promised the best [reward]. And Allah , with what you do, is Acquainted. (57:10)
And if this Ayah was revealed about the Rafidah Imams then they would repeat it day in night to us, yet ..
And (as for) the foremost, the first of the Muhajirs and the Ansars, and those who followed them in goodness, Allah is well pleased with them and they are well pleased with Him, and He has prepared for them gardens beneath which rivers flow, to abide in them for ever; that is the mighty achievement.(9:100)
It's revealed about the Sahaba! I.e. ALL Muslims, be it the Ahl Al-Bayt or non-Ahl Al-Bayt, Imam Al-Shafi'i, Imam Al-Sadiq ALL of them as per Qur'an have to follow the Sahaba the FOREMOST of the Muhajirin and Ansar (and not a handful as the Takrifi Rafidah sect claims) in GOOD (i.e. obviously not their mistakes, nobody is infallible except the Prophets).
Who are Al-Baqir and Al-Sadiq, Al-Shafi'i, Imam Ahmad etc. compared to those whom acc. to the Qur'an we have to follow in GOOD (Sahaba), the very ones whom ranks we can NEVER reach, neither me, you nor Baqir, Sadiq or Taqi or Naqi (عليهم السلام), for they came after them, after they (Sahaba) made the Hijra, Jihad etc.
But since you openly believe that the Qur'an is distorted (not Ma3sum) but your "Imams" are Ma3sum (infallible), then we can not expect you to care about the Qur'an and Allah's words, can we?
-
@Taha, oh, indeed, I do believe what the Qur'an says, but I don't share your interpretation. That's also strange coming from someone who firmly believes the Qur'an has been meddled with.
Allah has made a declerative statement saying how his Prophets (AS) are the best of creation, but no sign or reference of your Imams? Allah hase made the distinction between the two divine positions of Nabi and Rasool very clearly, but Shias suggest there is a third and more superior position Imamat. It's really quite baffling how Shias have to justify this from the Qur'an by toying with different veses and stringing to justify their beliefs where as our Aqeedah has presented to us by Allah in his holy book clear as water.
That verse you refer to is nothing more than praise for the bravery of Ibrahim (AS) after he was willing to surrender to any call from Allah whether it made sense to him or not. This is sort of submission had to be highlighted in a special way for future generations to take and draw inspiration from which, is why Allah referred to him as an Imam for people to come to aspire to. It wasn't an advent of some new divinely position.
The fact Ibrahim (AS) has been crowned as the one of the two Khalils is a testimony and by extension to the greatness of this man. Allah has gone further to include him in the Elite 5 of Ulul Azmi - the greatest Prophets of Allah.
All 3 points are interwined to show us as an Umamah that practices of this man are the ideal embodiment of how to perfect our Iman. This is why Allah (SWT) has instructed Mohammad (SAW) to follow in his foosteps to the nearest meaning.
-
My dear brother Ebn Hussein, what a brilliant master piece. Lets take a look at some of your points. You said,
Who are Al Baqir, Al Sadiq etc compared to the companions when they came after",
Excuse me??? They came after, so they are less worthy. And the companions became before, so they are more worthy??? Is this the best you can do??? Before and after is your criteria upon who you judge as more or less worthy/better??? You sound like the Christians and Jews, that Muhammad (pbuh) came after and the others came before, so.....etc. Do you see the mirror???
If the companions were better then why don't you take Sunnah directly from them??? Or why haven't you taken Sunnah directly from them??? Why wait for Aaimah e Arbaa to come along???? What was the belief of your kind before Aaimah e Arbaa???
Those who are part of the two incidents, the Mubahila and the Blanket and to whom the two verses apply (Tatheer and Mubahila) are far better and worthy than anyone put together. These verses were specific and are absolutely clear to whom they apply and to whom they don't. There is no disagreement here but the verses you have put forward are in general. A Sahabi is who spends all his life on the Prophet's (pbuh) sayings, not all the Prophet's (pbuh) life.
Why was the Ummah neglected from Hadiths straight after the Prophet's (pbuh) death??? Why wait till Bukhari and Muslim turn up and you have narrations through long chains, which raise suspicion and doubt about their authenticity??? What did the first Khalif do about gathering and safe keeping narrations??? This would have been first hand experience, so what happened that the Ummah had to wait a long time for Bukhari and Muslim???
-
My dear brother Ebn Hussein, what a brilliant master piece. Lets take a look at some of your points. You said,
Who are Al Baqir, Al Sadiq etc compared to the companions when they came after",
Excuse me??? They came after, so they are less worthy. And the companions became before, so they are more worthy??? Is this the best you can do??? Before and after is your criteria upon who you judge as more or less worthy/better??? You sound like the Christians and Jews, that Muhammad (pbuh) came after and the others came before, so.....etc. Do you see the mirror???
If the companions were better then why don't you take Sunnah directly from them??? Or why haven't you taken Sunnah directly from them??? Why wait for Aaimah e Arbaa to come along???? What was the belief of your kind before Aaimah e Arbaa???
Those who are part of the two incidents, the Mubahila and the Blanket and to whom the two verses apply (Tatheer and Mubahila) are far better and worthy than anyone put together. These verses were specific and are absolutely clear to whom they apply and to whom they don't. There is no disagreement here but the verses you have put forward are in general. A Sahabi is who spends all his life on the Prophet's (pbuh) sayings, not all the Prophet's (pbuh) life.
Why was the Ummah neglected from Hadiths straight after the Prophet's (pbuh) death??? Why wait till Bukhari and Muslim turn up and you have narrations through long chains, which raise suspicion and doubt about their authenticity??? What did the first Khalif do about gathering and safe keeping narrations??? This would have been first hand experience, so what happened that the Ummah had to wait a long time for Bukhari and Muslim???
Yes, more worthy because they his disciples were with the Prophet (SAW) for their whole life, and Allah has praised the contribution of the companions (RA) countless times in the Qur'an where as your Imams came later, so don't compare. People who came after and prospered in their deen was thanks to the efforts the Prophet (SAW) and his students (RA) made to preserve this deen for future generations including the progeny of the Prophet (SAW). Brother Ebn Hussein isn't just picking and choosing he's using the book of Allah to support his claim. Show me a verse that supports your claim that the progeny of Ali (RA) are superir to the colleagues he grew up, learned and faught with, and I'll re-consider my thoughts.
We take most Sunnah directly from the Prophet (SAW) not the companions (RA), duh. Pull out Bukhari or Muslim, and you'll find the companions (RA) are narrating from the their teacher, geddit? That's least for what we can say about Shias since you barely have any narrations going back from the Prophet (SAW). Oh, wait, I forgot? That's because his great, great and GREAT grand children weren't alive when he (SAW) was, right? So, how could they? Having said that we take Sunnah from Ali, Abbas (RA), ibn Abbas (RA), wives and other members of the Ahlul Bhayt (RA) who present at the time of the Prophet (SAW).
The verse relating to the events of Mubahila doesn't in anyway confirm why those 5 (RA) would be superior to the rest of the companions (RA). It was only them who were chosen because Zainab (RA), the last daughter of the Prophet (SAW) passed away before this incident otherwise you can betcha' your money she probably would've been there too and, Ali (RA) probably would've had to be excluded since he's a ghair-mehram to her.
Something to ponder. ;D
-
My dear brother Ebn Hussein, what a brilliant master piece. Lets take a look at some of your points. You said,
Who are Al Baqir, Al Sadiq etc compared to the companions when they came after",
Excuse me??? They came after, so they are less worthy. And the companions became before, so they are more worthy??? Is this the best you can do??? Before and after is your criteria upon who you judge as more or less worthy/better???
That's not what I came with or made up, that's what Allah says in his Qur'an:
Not equal among you are those who spent before the conquest [of Makkah] and fought [and those who did so after it]. Those are greater in degree than they who spent afterwards and fought. But to all Allah has promised the best [reward]. And Allah , with what you do, is Acquainted. (57:10)
The criteria is also be giving, so stop being an ostrich.
-
Why was the Ummah neglected from Hadiths straight after the Prophet's (pbuh) death??? Why wait till Bukhari and Muslim turn up and you have narrations through long chains, which raise suspicion and doubt about their authenticity??? What did the first Khalif do about gathering and safe keeping narrations??? This would have been first hand experience, so what happened that the Ummah had to wait a long time for Bukhari and Muslim???
^To illustrate to you all the stupidity of his claim, let me rephrase it:
Why wait till Kulayni the Zindiq and his ilk turn up and you have narrations through long chains to the Imams (up to Ali Ibn Abi Talib!), which raise suspicion and doubt about their authenticity??? What did the first Imam do about gathering and safe keeping narrations??? Where is his book of narration? Why didn't a SINGLE of the Imams write a book? Why didn't Allah safeguard one of their books, written by them? This would have been first hand experience, so what happened that the Ummah had to wait a long time for Al-Kafi?
What an amateur he is ...
-
And imam malik.had already muwatta.
Hadiths were already circulating. How.can Imam Abu hanifa and his teachers or students come to a fiqh conclusion otherwise?
-
My dear brother Ebn Hussein, what a brilliant master piece. Lets take a look at some of your points. You said,
Who are Al Baqir, Al Sadiq etc compared to the companions when they came after",
Excuse me??? They came after, so they are less worthy. And the companions became before, so they are more worthy??? Is this the best you can do??? Before and after is your criteria upon who you judge as more or less worthy/better??? You sound like the Christians and Jews, that Muhammad (pbuh) came after and the others came before, so.....etc. Do you see the mirror???
If the companions were better then why don't you take Sunnah directly from them??? Or why haven't you taken Sunnah directly from them??? Why wait for Aaimah e Arbaa to come along???? What was the belief of your kind before Aaimah e Arbaa???
Those who are part of the two incidents, the Mubahila and the Blanket and to whom the two verses apply (Tatheer and Mubahila) are far better and worthy than anyone put together. These verses were specific and are absolutely clear to whom they apply and to whom they don't. There is no disagreement here but the verses you have put forward are in general. A Sahabi is who spends all his life on the Prophet's (pbuh) sayings, not all the Prophet's (pbuh) life.
Why was the Ummah neglected from Hadiths straight after the Prophet's (pbuh) death??? Why wait till Bukhari and Muslim turn up and you have narrations through long chains, which raise suspicion and doubt about their authenticity??? What did the first Khalif do about gathering and safe keeping narrations??? This would have been first hand experience, so what happened that the Ummah had to wait a long time for Bukhari and Muslim???
Yes, more worthy because they his disciples were with the Prophet (SAW) for their whole life, and Allah has praised the contribution of the companions (RA) countless times in the Qur'an where as your Imams came later, so don't compare. People who came after and prospered in their deen was thanks to the efforts the Prophet (SAW) and his students (RA) made to preserve this deen for future generations including the progeny of the Prophet (SAW). Brother Ebn Hussein isn't just picking and choosing he's using the book of Allah to support his claim. Show me a verse that supports your claim that the progeny of Ali (RA) are superir to the colleagues he grew up, learned and faught with, and I'll re-consider my thoughts.
We take most Sunnah directly from the Prophet (SAW) not the companions (RA), duh. Pull out Bukhari or Muslim, and you'll find the companions (RA) are narrating from the their teacher, geddit? That's least for what we can say about Shias since you barely have any narrations going back from the Prophet (SAW). Oh, wait, I forgot? That's because his great, great and GREAT grand children weren't alive when he (SAW) was, right? So, how could they? Having said that we take Sunnah from Ali, Abbas (RA), ibn Abbas (RA), wives and other members of the Ahlul Bhayt (RA) who present at the time of the Prophet (SAW).
The verse relating to the events of Mubahila doesn't in anyway confirm why those 5 (RA) would be superior to the rest of the companions (RA). It was only them who were chosen because Zainab (RA), the last daughter of the Prophet (SAW) passed away before this incident otherwise you can betcha' your money she probably would've been there too and, Ali (RA) probably would've had to be excluded since he's a ghair-mehram to her.
Something to ponder. ;D
You take most of the Sunnah from the Prophet (pbuh)??? What about the rest??? Why not take all the Sunnah from the Prophet (pbuh)??? You call yourself either Sunni Hanfi, Maliki, Shafi or Hambali and you claim to take the Sunnah from the Prophet (pbuh)??? Who are you kidding??? Who are you fooling???
Allah has praised countless times??? My friend Allah has spoken about those who died, who perished during battle in the name of Allah and for the sake of the Messenger (pbuh) and Islam. You can only guarantee Janah for those who are gone because they are no longer a subject to right and wrong and good and bad.
Allah is not speaking about those who are present, when he says "Sabeqoon al Awaloon", here Allah is speaking about those who have given their lives, lost their lives for Allah. Not about those who are still around and are fallible and still are a subject to good and bad and right and wrong.
Allah is not speaking about those who abandoned the Prophet (pbuh), left him stranded and fled for their lives from the battle field. These were half hearted Muslims, with half hearted Eemaan. Go do some research, do some home work before jumping up and down. These companions are fallible (ghair e Masoom).
As long as your alive, companion or not, wife or not, you are a subject to good and bad and right and wrong. You speak like the Christians who believe that God took Jesus's (as) life for our sins. So we are all granted heaven. This is how you sound about the companions who are still alive and very much a subject to everything.
-
Why was it left to people like Bukhari and Muslim to come along and gather narrations leading to Hadiths??? Hadiths, such an important part of Islam, such an important heritage for the Muslims but the first Khalif didn't bother??? Why??? Did Hazrath Aisha (ra) narrate that once she saw her father burn 500 hadiths??? Why??? Is this true??? Shall we look it up???
You speak a lot about Tehreef e Quran, did Hazrath Aisha (ra) narrate that once certain verses were written on some material (paper etc) and was left under the pillow, we were all busy and a goat just walked in making its way around from one place to the other and got in to the bed room, started mouthing the pillow and bed sheets, the goat got hold of that material and ate it before anyone could stop the goat. Therefore those verses are no longer with us.
Is this narration true??? Shall we look it up??? There is hell of a lot in your so called authentic books where, Mr Rushdie got all his material from. If this is what you want to play at then it's down to you.
-
My dear brother Ebn Hussein, what a brilliant master piece. Lets take a look at some of your points. You said,
Who are Al Baqir, Al Sadiq etc compared to the companions when they came after",
Excuse me??? They came after, so they are less worthy. And the companions became before, so they are more worthy??? Is this the best you can do??? Before and after is your criteria upon who you judge as more or less worthy/better???
That's not what I came with or made up, that's what Allah says in his Qur'an:
Not equal among you are those who spent before the conquest [of Makkah] and fought [and those who did so after it]. Those are greater in degree than they who spent afterwards and fought. But to all Allah has promised the best [reward]. And Allah , with what you do, is Acquainted. (57:10)
The criteria is also be giving, so stop being an ostrich.
Those who fought before the conquest of Mecca are divided in to three categories,
1, Those who fought and perished.
2, Those who fought and succeeded.
3, Those who fought and fled.
So which is Allah talking about??? These companions you so eagerly speak and make a fuss about, were around well after the conquest of Mecca. So they are not equal to the ones who fought and perished before the conquest of Mecca. Is this what you're trying to tell me??? You need to get your facts right. You need to sort yourself out.
-
Listen Mr. Riddler, it's the Qur'an, does it hurt? Allah says it clearly:
Not equal among you are those who spent before the conquest [of Makkah] and fought [and those who did so after it]. Those are greater in degree than they who spent afterwards and fought. But to all Allah has promised the best [reward]. And Allah , with what you do, is Acquainted. (57:10)
Allah is talking about the great Sahaba who are superior than ALL your Imams (except Ali who is part of the Ayah). I know you wanna exclude some from the verse, but that's not the point, point is that SOME Sahaba are DEFINATELY superior to your Imams and that alone destroys your whole religion (since you believe ALL your Imams are superior to ALL Sahaba).
So Allah is only talking about the 2) you mentioned. Alright? Still it destroys your religion since those Sahaba are superior to your Naqi, Taqi, Sadiq and the likes of Shafi'i, Ahmad, Malik etc.
-
Why was the Ummah neglected from Hadiths straight after the Prophet's (pbuh) death??? Why wait till Bukhari and Muslim turn up and you have narrations through long chains, which raise suspicion and doubt about their authenticity??? What did the first Khalif do about gathering and safe keeping narrations??? This would have been first hand experience, so what happened that the Ummah had to wait a long time for Bukhari and Muslim???
^To illustrate to you all the stupidity of his claim, let me rephrase it:
Why wait till Kulayni the Zindiq and his ilk turn up and you have narrations through long chains to the Imams (up to Ali Ibn Abi Talib!), which raise suspicion and doubt about their authenticity??? What did the first Imam do about gathering and safe keeping narrations??? Where is his book of narration? Why didn't a SINGLE of the Imams write a book? Why didn't Allah safeguard one of their books, written by them? This would have been first hand experience, so what happened that the Ummah had to wait a long time for Al-Kafi?
What an amateur he is ...
Have you completely forgotten??? How were the Imams treated??? They were either in captivity or under house arrest. Their family, relatives, friends, followers, supporters were tortured and killed. People were told and forced to stay away from them. The first Imam faced rebellion and rebellious challenges from day one. Since when were they given a chance??? The second on wards were slaughtered and killed cause the Ummah just didn't care or were too afraid of the Muslim tyrants.
-
So what, Imam Ahmad was treated worse than Imam al-Sadiq, read it up (Imam Ahmad was almost whipped to deaht why al-Sadiq taught freely in the Mosque of the Prophet), how come he (Imam Ahmad) could compiled a book of hadith and none of your Imams (who are apparently guided and supported by Allah and surrounded by Angels) couldn't? None of them could bless us with a single book, we had to wait HUNDREDS of years after the demise of the Prophet (SAWS) till a Zindiq like Kafir compiles a book?
Is this what you're trying to tell me??? You need to get your facts right. You need to sort yourself out.
-
My dear brother Ebn Hussein, what a brilliant master piece. Lets take a look at some of your points. You said,
Who are Al Baqir, Al Sadiq etc compared to the companions when they came after",
Excuse me??? They came after, so they are less worthy. And the companions became before, so they are more worthy??? Is this the best you can do??? Before and after is your criteria upon who you judge as more or less worthy/better??? You sound like the Christians and Jews, that Muhammad (pbuh) came after and the others came before, so.....etc. Do you see the mirror???
If the companions were better then why don't you take Sunnah directly from them??? Or why haven't you taken Sunnah directly from them??? Why wait for Aaimah e Arbaa to come along???? What was the belief of your kind before Aaimah e Arbaa???
Those who are part of the two incidents, the Mubahila and the Blanket and to whom the two verses apply (Tatheer and Mubahila) are far better and worthy than anyone put together. These verses were specific and are absolutely clear to whom they apply and to whom they don't. There is no disagreement here but the verses you have put forward are in general. A Sahabi is who spends all his life on the Prophet's (pbuh) sayings, not all the Prophet's (pbuh) life.
Why was the Ummah neglected from Hadiths straight after the Prophet's (pbuh) death??? Why wait till Bukhari and Muslim turn up and you have narrations through long chains, which raise suspicion and doubt about their authenticity??? What did the first Khalif do about gathering and safe keeping narrations??? This would have been first hand experience, so what happened that the Ummah had to wait a long time for Bukhari and Muslim???
Yes, more worthy because they his disciples were with the Prophet (SAW) for their whole life, and Allah has praised the contribution of the companions (RA) countless times in the Qur'an where as your Imams came later, so don't compare. People who came after and prospered in their deen was thanks to the efforts the Prophet (SAW) and his students (RA) made to preserve this deen for future generations including the progeny of the Prophet (SAW). Brother Ebn Hussein isn't just picking and choosing he's using the book of Allah to support his claim. Show me a verse that supports your claim that the progeny of Ali (RA) are superir to the colleagues he grew up, learned and faught with, and I'll re-consider my thoughts.
We take most Sunnah directly from the Prophet (SAW) not the companions (RA), duh. Pull out Bukhari or Muslim, and you'll find the companions (RA) are narrating from the their teacher, geddit? That's least for what we can say about Shias since you barely have any narrations going back from the Prophet (SAW). Oh, wait, I forgot? That's because his great, great and GREAT grand children weren't alive when he (SAW) was, right? So, how could they? Having said that we take Sunnah from Ali, Abbas (RA), ibn Abbas (RA), wives and other members of the Ahlul Bhayt (RA) who present at the time of the Prophet (SAW).
The verse relating to the events of Mubahila doesn't in anyway confirm why those 5 (RA) would be superior to the rest of the companions (RA). It was only them who were chosen because Zainab (RA), the last daughter of the Prophet (SAW) passed away before this incident otherwise you can betcha' your money she probably would've been there too and, Ali (RA) probably would've had to be excluded since he's a ghair-mehram to her.
Something to ponder. ;D
You take most of the Sunnah from the Prophet (pbuh)??? What about the rest??? Why not take all the Sunnah from the Prophet (pbuh)??? You call yourself either Sunni Hanfi, Maliki, Shafi or Hambali and you claim to take the Sunnah from the Prophet (pbuh)??? Who are you kidding??? Who are you fooling???
Allah has praised countless times??? My friend Allah has spoken about those who died, who perished during battle in the name of Allah and for the sake of the Messenger (pbuh) and Islam. You can only guarantee Janah for those who are gone because they are no longer a subject to right and wrong and good and bad.
Allah is not speaking about those who are present, when he says "Sabeqoon al Awaloon", here Allah is speaking about those who have given their lives, lost their lives for Allah. Not about those who are still around and are fallible and still are a subject to good and bad and right and wrong.
Allah is not speaking about those who abandoned the Prophet (pbuh), left him stranded and fled for their lives from the battle field. These were half hearted Muslims, with half hearted Eemaan. Go do some research, do some home work before jumping up and down. These companions are fallible (ghair e Masoom).
As long as your alive, companion or not, wife or not, you are a subject to good and bad and right and wrong. You speak like the Christians who believe that God took Jesus's (as) life for our sins. So we are all granted heaven. This is how you sound about the companions who are still alive and very much a subject to everything.
My dear brother Ebn Hussein, what a brilliant master piece. Lets take a look at some of your points. You said,
Who are Al Baqir, Al Sadiq etc compared to the companions when they came after",
Excuse me??? They came after, so they are less worthy. And the companions became before, so they are more worthy??? Is this the best you can do??? Before and after is your criteria upon who you judge as more or less worthy/better???
That's not what I came with or made up, that's what Allah says in his Qur'an:
Not equal among you are those who spent before the conquest [of Makkah] and fought [and those who did so after it]. Those are greater in degree than they who spent afterwards and fought. But to all Allah has promised the best [reward]. And Allah , with what you do, is Acquainted. (57:10)
The criteria is also be giving, so stop being an ostrich.
Those who fought before the conquest of Mecca are divided in to three categories,
1, Those who fought and perished.
2, Those who fought and succeeded.
3, Those who fought and fled.
So which is Allah talking about??? These companions you so eagerly speak and make a fuss about, were around well after the conquest of Mecca. So they are not equal to the ones who fought and perished before the conquest of Mecca. Is this what you're trying to tell me??? You need to get your facts right. You need to sort yourself out.
Bravo bravo. This post also stretches your silliness (for the lack of a better word) beyond the realms of sanity.
First you shoot yourself in the foot by claiming we take Sunnah directly from the companions not realising (unless you're just being ignorant), and then after clarifying that they were the carriers of the Sunnah you go onto suggest we take it from those four Imams? I think brother Husayn confirmed this nicely in another thread that each one of them simply represents how the Sunnah can be derived, but the source still goes back to the Prophet (SAW) with the first person started the chain being a companion or someone who knew/saw/met him (SAW) to be technically correct. Notice, how that can be any of your Imams with the exception of the first three.
So, following any of the 4 still means you are upon the Sunnah, but your chain of Islam has come via certain scholars. Such differences even exist in Rafidhism. So, I'll throw the ball back in your court. Al-Kufri for example many of the narrations are not directly from the Prophet (SAW), but Ali ibn Abi Talib (RA)? Am, I right? We can accept that in principle since also we take/accept take narrations from Ali (RA), but solely because he was with the Prophet (SAW) during his lifetime. So, what beef do you have us taking the Sunnah narrated by others who also knew the Prophet (SAW)?
Kindly make an effort to keep your bakwaas fixed on the point and not fly off radar.
Second, regarding the status of the companions. Again lLet's not fly off course because we're not discussing whether they're all heavily personalities, but why those who did live and die with Iman surpass all of Ali's (RA) progeny.
Ebn Hussein's comments on that verse is clear, so I won't bother commenting on that further. However, it's funny how you're also just mentioning those verses that reprimanded the companions, but totally turn a blind to those where Allah collectively praises them in the present tense? Shall, we go through each verse one by one and work out how many times they were praised vs the number of times some of them reprimanded then come to the conclusion whether Allah was pleased with all of them or not? You're forgetting how Allah was pleased with them and vice versa when they made hijrah and when they were under the tree? Ring any bells?
We have never denounced and dismissed the notion that Sahabas (RA) never erred. Of course they did as they were also human beings. There are many examples or narrations we can put forward to confirm as we don't overlook nothing unlike you guys. There's the incident where Ka'ab ibn Malik and two other companions (RA) were reprimanded and punished for not taking part in the Battle of Tabouk, Abu Dar (RA) calling Bilal (RA) the son of a black women, Nauman bn Amar i who used to get drunk much of the time and used to be flogged, and oh, let's not forget how Ali (RA) proposed for the daughter of an ignoramus dude namely Abu Jahal that upset the Prophet (SAW) when he found out. What on EARTH was he (RA) thinking? Ironically because of that desire it resulting the Prophet (SAW) uttering that statement to the nearest meaning "Fatima is apart of me, whoever upsets her has upset me, and whoever upsets me has upset Allah", and the list goes on. So, they were not infallible nor did I ever claim that. Only (not your Imams) the Prophets (AS) were infallible. Having said that Allah has promised all those who lived and died with Imam Jannah in the Qur'an, and even previewed what's in store for them up there - gardens with rivers flowing beneath? Dayam. It's like when you make it to your hotel, and the check out they preview your suite in the Pent House at the top. :D
So, you're right we're all subject to judgement whilst we are alive, and these people have been judged by the Lord of the universe and by their mentor (SAW). All you gotta' do is flip over the pages of the Qur'an and read it for yourself. Are you gonna' disagree and argue with these adjudicators?
-
Lol the fatima-anger hadith. Shias use this against us aalways wile it was against ameer ul mumineen Ali ra
-
Lol the fatima-anger hadith. Shias use this against us aalways wile it was against ameer ul mumineen Ali ra
Exactly. They don't realise this narration unlike many other exposes their stupidity in all of areas. Especially how they were not infallible at all. It gets better the narration in Bukhari is narrated by Ali's (RA) grandson, which also throws the concept of taqiyah out the window. An Imam of Allah narrating an incident that's going to cripple the very fabric of their foundation? Heh! ;D
-
Why was it left to people like Bukhari and Muslim to come along and gather narrations leading to Hadiths??? Hadiths, such an important part of Islam, such an important heritage for the Muslims but the first Khalif didn't bother??? Why??? Did Hazrath Aisha (ra) narrate that once she saw her father burn 500 hadiths??? Why??? Is this true??? Shall we look it up???
You speak a lot about Tehreef e Quran, did Hazrath Aisha (ra) narrate that once certain verses were written on some material (paper etc) and was left under the pillow, we were all busy and a goat just walked in making its way around from one place to the other and got in to the bed room, started mouthing the pillow and bed sheets, the goat got hold of that material and ate it before anyone could stop the goat. Therefore those verses are no longer with us.
Is this narration true??? Shall we look it up??? There is hell of a lot in your so called authentic books where, Mr Rushdie got all his material from. If this is what you want to play at then it's down to you.
Sure. Start a separate thread on each of those, and we'll more than happy to put your confused mind at rest. :) You also seem to be overlooking one fundamental point here, but I'll mention it in my next post since it's more fitting.
-
Why was the Ummah neglected from Hadiths straight after the Prophet's (pbuh) death??? Why wait till Bukhari and Muslim turn up and you have narrations through long chains, which raise suspicion and doubt about their authenticity??? What did the first Khalif do about gathering and safe keeping narrations??? This would have been first hand experience, so what happened that the Ummah had to wait a long time for Bukhari and Muslim???
^To illustrate to you all the stupidity of his claim, let me rephrase it:
Why wait till Kulayni the Zindiq and his ilk turn up and you have narrations through long chains to the Imams (up to Ali Ibn Abi Talib!), which raise suspicion and doubt about their authenticity??? What did the first Imam do about gathering and safe keeping narrations??? Where is his book of narration? Why didn't a SINGLE of the Imams write a book? Why didn't Allah safeguard one of their books, written by them? This would have been first hand experience, so what happened that the Ummah had to wait a long time for Al-Kafi?
What an amateur he is ...
Have you completely forgotten??? How were the Imams treated??? They were either in captivity or under house arrest. Their family, relatives, friends, followers, supporters were tortured and killed. People were told and forced to stay away from them. The first Imam faced rebellion and rebellious challenges from day one. Since when were they given a chance??? The second on wards were slaughtered and killed cause the Ummah just didn't care or were too afraid of the Muslim tyrants.
Just to extend on brother Ebn Hussein's point. Have you forgotten what the companions (RA) went through for almost 14 years in Makkah at the hands of the Qur'aish? Have you forgotten or not aware of the trials and tribulations they faced after the passing of the Prophet (SAW)?
That sure as hell didn't stop them from compiling the entire Qur'an did it? Yet your Imams never wrote or put any sort of framework together did they? Yet they were able to seek divine guidance from Jibreel (AS)? The Prophets (AS) went through hard yards, but Allah has made mention of the books given to them and that they preached successfully. The work of four Imams reached us, but nothing from your Imams. Yes, we have narrations that's been cascaded from them to us as narrators, but nothing along the lines they were in or supposed to be in some commanding role over the Muslims. :o Or perhaps that was never supposed to the case and instead cascaded how the future generations of the people of Khufah hounded them like hyenas and attributing to kufr to them.
So, we can conclude 2 things here:
- The companions did compile something even though it wasn't Hadiths, but something more important, the book of Allah
- Your Imams are in gratitude (like we all are) to the companions for the deen reaching them
The two points mingled together just rips the spectrum of retardation of your religion wide open. It refutes your point how the companions were the deliverers of the Sunnah meaning we as Ahlus Sunnah wal Jamaah take from the Prophet (SAW), and they as a result justified why Allah is indeed pleased with them all (RA).
Isn't that a kick in the lugknuts?
-
Ameen, my sincere advise. First read the articles on twelvershia.net
Once done, i am sure you will have a different look on things. And then come back on the forum and ask questions you have.
I am saying this because you are getting confused about many basic things and you wildly throw incidents at us, which are so simple and also refuted.
-
Listen Mr. Riddler, it's the Qur'an, does it hurt? Allah says it clearly:
Not equal among you are those who spent before the conquest [of Makkah] and fought [and those who did so after it]. Those are greater in degree than they who spent afterwards and fought. But to all Allah has promised the best [reward]. And Allah , with what you do, is Acquainted. (57:10)
Allah is talking about the great Sahaba who are superior than ALL your Imams (except Ali who is part of the Ayah). I know you wanna exclude some from the verse, but that's not the point, point is that SOME Sahaba are DEFINATELY superior to your Imams and that alone destroys your whole religion (since you believe ALL your Imams are superior to ALL Sahaba).
So Allah is only talking about the 2) you mentioned. Alright? Still it destroys your religion since those Sahaba are superior to your Naqi, Taqi, Sadiq and the likes of Shafi'i, Ahmad, Malik etc.
I'm not including or excluding anybody. You're just trying to use a general verse to show certain individuals superior and infallible that Jannah is a must for them when, they still had to live the rest of their lives and therefore are a subject to good and bad also right and wrong. Some funny ideology you have going here.
As far as destroying is concerned then let me tell you and give you sum advise, when you have the intention and are eager to destroy someone then you self destruct. We have no intentions in destroying anyone or anything because this is Allah's job and I suggest that you stop associating yourself to Allah by such ridiculous remarks and behaviour.
-
My dear brother Imam Ali, I will leave all the rest of your post since there is something important that you have brought to my attention. My dear brother do you believe that Muhammad (pbuh) was infallible (Masoom)??? What is the Ahle Sunnah Wal Jama'ah Aqeedah on this???
-
My dear brother do you believe that Muhammad (pbuh) was infallible (Masoom) ??? What is the Ahle Sunnah Wal Jama'ah Aqeedah on this???
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WiM6zZG-Lm0 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WiM6zZG-Lm0)
-
Yes masoom so sinless but still human which can causse forgetfulness. Even in al kafi there are narrations to support this if I recall it right.
-
The infallibility of the Prophets (all prophets) :
Praise be to Allaah.
The Prophets are the best of mankind, and the most noble of creation before Allaah. Allaah chose them to convey the call of Laa ilaaha ill-Allaah to mankind, and Allaah has made them the intermediaries between Him and His creation in conveying His Laws. They were commanded to convey the message from Allaah, as He says (interpretation of the meaning):
“They are those whom We gave the Book, Al‑Hukm (understanding of the religious laws), and Prophethood. But if these disbelieve therein (the Book, Al‑Hukm and Prophethood), then, indeed We have entrusted it to a people (such as the Companions of Prophet Muhammad) who are not disbelievers therein”
[al-An’aam 6:89]
The Prophets’ task was to convey the message from Allaah even though they were human, hence the issue of infallibility may be examined from two angles:
1 – Infallibility in conveying the message
2 – Infallibility from human error
Firstly: With regard to the first issue, the Prophets were infallible in conveying the message from Allaah. They did not conceal anything that Allaah had revealed to them, and they did not add anything from themselves. Allaah said to His Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) (interpretation of the meaning):
“O Messenger (Muhammad)! Proclaim (the Message) which has been sent down to you from your Lord. And if you do not, then you have not conveyed His Message. Allaah will protect you from mankind”
[al-Maa'idah 5:67]
“And if he (Muhammad) had forged a false saying concerning Us (Allaah),
We surely would have seized him by his right hand (or with power and might),
And then We certainly would have cut off his life artery (aorta),
And none of you could have withheld Us from (punishing) him”
[al-Haaqqah 69:44-47]
And Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):
“And he (Muhammad) withholds not a knowledge of the Unseen”
[al-Takweer 81:24]
Shaykh ‘Abd al-Rahmaan ibn Sa’di (may Allaah have mercy on him) said in his commentary on this verse: He is not stingy with that which Allaah has revealed to him, concealing some of it. Rather he (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) the most trustworthy of the inhabitants of heaven and the people of earth, the one who conveys the message of his Lord, the faithful conveyor (of the message). He does not withhold any part of it, from rich or poor, from ruler or subject, from male or female, from city-dweller or Bedouin. Hence Allaah sent him to an illiterate and ignorant nation, and he (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) did not die until they had become knowledgeable scholars, steeped in knowledge…
End quote.
So with regard to conveying the religion of his Lord, the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) did not make any mistakes at all, whether major or minor, rather he was infallible and under the constant protection of Allaah.
Shaykh ‘Abd al-‘Azeez ibn Baaz (may Allaah have mercy on him) said in Fataawa Ibn Baaz, 6/371:
All the Muslims are unanimously agreed that the Prophets (peace be upon them) – especially Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) – are infallible and protected from error in that which they conveyed from Allaah. Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):
“By the star when it goes down (or vanishes).
Your companion (Muhammad) has neither gone astray nor has erred.
Nor does he speak of (his own) desire.
It is only a Revelation revealed.
He has been taught (this Qur’aan) by one mighty in power [Jibreel (Gabriel)]”
[al-Najm 53:1-5]
Our Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) is infallible in all that he conveyed from Allaah, in word and deed and in what he approved of. There is no dispute on this point among the scholars.
End quote.
The ummah is agreed that the Messengers are infallible in their conveying the message. They did not forget anything that Allaah revealed to them, except for things that were abrogated. And Allaah guaranteed His Messenger (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) that he would remember it and would not forget it, except for that which Allaah wanted him to forget, and He guaranteed to remember the whole Qur’aan in his heart. Allaah said (interpretation of the meaning):
“We shall make you to recite (the Qur’aan), so you (O Muhammad) shall not forget (it)”
[al-A’la 87:7]
“It is for Us to collect it and to give you (O Muhammad) the ability to recite it (the Qur’aan).
And when We have recited it to you [O Muhammad through Jibreel (Gabriel)], then follow its (the Qur’aan’s) recitation”
[al-Qiyaamah 75:17-18]
Shaykh al-Islam [Ibn Taymiyah] said in Majmoo’ al-Fataawa, 18/7]:
The verses which point to the Prophethood of the Prophets indicate that they are infallible with regard to the message that they convey from Allaah, so what they convey from their Lord can only be true. This is the meaning of Prophethood and this implies [?] that Allaah tells [the Prophet] of the unseen and he tells the people of the unseen. So the Messenger is commanded to call people and to convey the message to them.
End quote.
Secondly: With regard to the Prophets as people, they may make mistakes. This may be discussed as follows:
1 –They do not commit major sins
With regard to major sins, the Prophets do not commit major sins at all, and they are protected from such major sins both before their missions began or afterwards.
Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allaah have mercy on him) said in Majmoo’ al-Fataawa, 4/319:
The view that the Prophets are infallible and protected against committing major sins, as opposed to minor sins, is the view of the majority of Muslim scholars and of all groups. It is also the view of the scholars of tafseer and hadeeth and fuqaha’. Indeed, nothing has been narrated from any of the salaf, imams, Sahaabah, Taabi’een and those who followed them except that which is in accordance with this view.
End quote.
2 – Matters that have nothing to do with conveying the message and the revelation.
With regard to minor sins, these may be committed by them, or by some of them. Hence the majority of scholars are of the view that they are not infallible when it comes to minor sins. But if they committed such actions they were not left to persist therein, rather Allaah pointed that out to them and they hastened to repent therefrom.
The evidence that they might commit minor sins and that they were not left to persist therein is the verses in which Allaah says of Adam (interpretation of the meaning):
“Thus did Adam disobey his Lord, so he went astray.
Then his Lord chose him, and turned to him with forgiveness, and gave him guidance”
[Ta-Ha 20:121-122]
This indicates that Adam committed sin, but he was not left to persist therein, and he repented to Allaah from that.
And Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):
“He said: ‘This is of Shaytaan’s (Satan’s) doing, verily, he is a plain misleading enemy.’
He said: ‘My Lord! Verily, I have wronged myself, so forgive me.’ Then He forgave him. Verily, He is the Oft‑Forgiving, the Most Merciful”
[al-Qasas 28:15-16]
So Moosa (peace be upon him) confessed his sin and sought forgiveness from Allaah after he killed the Egyptian, and Allaah forgave him his sin.
And Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):
“and he [Dawood] sought forgiveness of his Lord, and he fell down prostrate and turned (to Allaah) in repentance.
So We forgave him that, and verily, for him is a near access to Us, and a good place of (final) return (Paradise)”
[Saad 38:23-24]
Dawood’s sin was hastening to pass judgement before hearing the case of the second disputant.
And our Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) was rebuked by his Lord for several things that are mentioned in the Qur’aan, such as the following (interpretation of the meaning):
“O Prophet! Why do you forbid (for yourself) that which Allaah has allowed to you, seeking to please your wives? And Allaah is Oft‑Forgiving, Most Merciful”
[al-Tahreem 66:1]
This refers to the well-known story with some of his wives.
Allaah also rebuked His Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) concerning the prisoners of war at Badr:
Muslim narrated in his Saheeh (4588) that Ibn ‘Abbaas said: When the prisoners were taken captive, the Messenger of Allaah (S) (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said to Abu Bakr and ‘Umar (may Allaah be pleased with them): “What do you think about these prisoners?” Abu Bakr said: “O Prophet of Allaah, they are our cousins and kinsmen. I think that we should accept a ransom from them which will give us some support against the kuffaar, and perhaps Allaah will guide them to Islam.” The Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “What do you think, O Ibn al-Khattaab?” He said: “I say, no, by Allaah, O Messenger of Allaah. I do not agree with Abu Bakr. I think that you should hand them over to us so that we may strike their necks (execute them). Hand over ‘Aqeel to ‘Ali so that he may strike his neck, and hand over So and so – a relative of ‘Umar – to me, for these are the leaders and veterans of kufr.” The Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) liked what Abu Bakr said and he did not like what I [‘Umar] said. The next day I came and found the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) and Abu Bakr weeping. I said: “O Messenger of Allaah, tell me, what has made you and your companion weep? If there is a reason to weep, I will weep with you, and there is no reason, I will pretend to weep in sympathy with you because you are weeping.” The Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “I am weeping because I was shown the torture to which they were subjected. It was brought as close to me as this tree” – a tree which was near the Prophet of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) – then Allaah revealed the words (interpretation of the meaning):
“It is not for a Prophet that he should have prisoners of war (and free them with ransom) until he had made a great slaughter (among his enemies) in the land. You desire the good of this world (i.e. the money of ransom for freeing the captives), but Allaah desires (for you) the Hereafter. And Allaah is All-Mighty, All-Wise.
Were it not a previous ordainment from Allaah, a severe torment would have touched you for what you took.
So enjoy what you have gotten of booty in war, lawful and good”
[al-Anfaal 8:67-69]
So Allaah permitted booty to them.
From this hadeeth it is clear that when the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) chose to ransom the prisoners, this was a decision that he made by ijtihaad after consulting his companions, and he had no revelation from Allaah concerning that.
The words of Allaah (interpretation of the meaning):
“(The Prophet) frowned and turned away.
Because there came to him the blind man (i.e. ‘Abdullaah bin Umm Maktoom, who came to the Prophet while he was preaching to one or some of the Quraysh chiefs)”
[‘Abasa 80:1-2]
This is the famous story of the great companion ‘Abd-Allaah ibn Umm Maktoom and the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), when Allaah rebuked him.
Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah said in Majmoo’ al-Fataawa, 4/320:
What has been narrated from the majority of scholars is that they (the Prophets) are not infallible with regard to minor sins, but they are not left to persist therein. They do not say that this does not happen under any circumstances. The first group from whom it was narrated that they are infallible in all cases, and who say that the most, are the Raafidis (Shi’ah), who say that they are infallible and protected even against forgetfulness and misunderstanding.
End quote.
Some people think this is too much to suggest that Prophets may commit sin, and misinterpret some of the texts of the Qur’aan and Sunnah which indicate that. Two specious arguments lead them to do that:
(i) – The fact that Allaah has commanded us to follow the Messengers and take them as our example. The command to follow them is taken as meaning that everything they did is an example for us to follow, and that every action and belief of theirs is an act of worship. If we suggest that that the Messenger (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) committed a sin, there will be a dilemma, because that implies that we are commanded to imitate this sin which was committed by the Prophet because we are commanded to follow his example, but at the same time we should no agree with it or do it, because it is a sin.
This argument is valid and is appropriate if the sin is hidden and not obvious in such a way that it could be confused with acts of obedience. But Allaah has explained to His Messengers where they went wrong and enabled them to repent without delay.
(ii) – Sins contradict perfection and are a shortcoming. This is true if they are not accompanied by repentance, for repentance brings forgiveness of sin, and does not contradict perfection or bring blame upon a person. Rather in many cases a person may be better after repenting than he was before he fell into sin. It is well known that no Prophet committed sin but he hastened to repent and seek forgiveness. The Prophets did not persist in sin or delay repentance, for Allaah protected them from that, and after repenting they became more perfect than they were before.
3 – Unintentional mistakes with regard to some worldly matters
With regard to mistakes in some worldly matters, it is permissible for them to make such mistakes although their reason is sound and their insight is strong. This happened to several of the Prophets including our Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him). This happened with regard to various spheres of life such as medicine, agriculture, etc.
Muslim narrated in his Saheeh (6127) that Raafi’ ibn Khadeej said: The Prophet of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) came to Madeenah and found them pollinating the palm trees. He said: “What are you doing?” They said: “We always do this.” He said: “Perhaps if you do not do it, that will be better.” So they did not do it, and the harvest failed. They told him about that and he said: “I am only human. If I tell you to do something with regard to your religion, then do it, but if I tell you to do something based on my own opinion, then I am only human.” Hence it is known that the Prophets are infallible and protected from error with regard to the Revelation, so we should beware of those who cast aspersions upon the Messenger’s conveying of the Message and his laws, and say that it is his own personal opinion. The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) could never do such a thing. Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):
“Nor does he speak of (his own) desire.
It is only a Revelation revealed”
[al-Najm 53:3-4]
The Standing Committee was asked: Do the Prophets and Messengers make mistakes?
They replied:
Yes, they make mistakes but Allaah does not let them persist in their mistakes, rather he points out their mistakes to them as a mercy to them and their nations, and He forgives them for their mistakes, and accepts their repentance by His Grace and Mercy, for Allaah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful, as will be clear to anyone who studies the verses of the Qur’aan which speak of that.
Fataawa al-Lajnah al-Daa’imah, 3/194
And Allaah knows best.
-
My dear brother Imam Ali, I will leave all the rest of your post since there is something important that you have brought to my attention. My dear brother do you believe that Muhammad (pbuh) was infallible (Masoom)??? What is the Ahle Sunnah Wal Jama'ah Aqeedah on this???
Sounds good.
I believe the follow up posts address your enquiry.