Toyib's book on ibn Saba'

[Hani]

Instead of writing a book on Tahreef which we can enjoy refuting, Toyib instead wasted his time with a book on Ibn Saba'.


Here:
http://www.shiachat.com/forum/topic/235024342-abd-allah-ibn-saba-myth-exploded-new-book/

[RationalDeen]

Who is Toyib  ? Also if Ibn Saba is a Myth why is he mentioned in Rijal Kashi  ?

[HughSlaman]

Can't we get Toyib here to debate tahreef?

Some of the ShiaChatters seem to think he is the best thing since the invention of sliced bread Ghadir Khumm.

[Hani]

We were actually joking about this book on whatsapp, what a poor choice of topic since there's already really solid books written to prove the reality of ibn Saba'.

[Farid]

I've skimmed the beginning and it seems that the book is more about the character of Ibn Saba'a more than whether he existed or not.

It is like someone here writing a book called: The Myth of Ali bin Abi Talib, but not to disprove his existence, but rather, the existence of the character invented by the Shi'ee mind.

I do appreciate that the price of the book is available for free. It implies that Toyib is doing it for wajh Al-Hussain.

[Farid]

Skimmed through more. It seems like his methodology is just to attack the Sunni opinion of Ibn Saba'a by weakening all the narrations.

He does not address the authentic Shia narrations. In other words, he expects us to reject the existence of the man, while believing that it is binding upon Shias to accept his existence and his kufur.

[Hani]

I just read the section on Raj`ah, it is complete garbage to say the least, he shouldn't have wrote it.

[Moin]

Don't worry in few months he will be "the author of dozens of books". No one can stop them if they don't have any rules and guidelines against lie and treachery. Thats just an easy way to earn money.

[Kalaam]

Toyib is fond of writing. Don't discourage him. He might come up with something interesting at the end.

[Hani]

I refuted a part of this book and Farid already refuted the rest I assume.




Initially we wanted to refute it in 3-4 pages, but we decided to be more thorough and completely decimate it, so it's gonna be bigger...


Wait for it InshaAllah,

[Farid]

The main content of the book has been completely refuted so far. Now, the focus is mainly upon providing additional evidence to back up our claims. Inshallah the refutation will be done before the end of the week.

[Ebn Hussein]

Congratulation to all truth seekers, the refutation of the  modern day ibn Al-Sauda' (that's what the first Shia fallible called the Black Yemeni Jew of Yemen) Toyib has been released, and again there is no doubt that the Twelver Shia religion has it roots in the teachings of a Jew:

http://twelvershia.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/Abdullah-bin-Saba-the-man.pdf

Here a shorter article refuting another Rafidi apologist:

http://gift2shias.com/2013/04/23/ibn-saba-the-jew-the-spiritual-father-of-the-rafidha-an-unquestionable-truth/

[Hani]

It seems the Rafidhi wrote some comments on our book which can be found here:
http://www.shiachat.com/forum/topic/235025447-attempts-of-refutation-the-book-about-ibn-saba/


InshaAllah we'll address Matumbo's comments and criticisms soon if necessary (cause we never read it yet).


However, it seems that throughout his piece he keeps repeating "The two Salafis Farid and Hani", my first correction would be that I NEVER WROTE THE BOOK, we don't know where he gt the idea that two people wrote the book, the author is only one person.


Correction number two, is that I'm not a "Salafi", I'm a Shafi`i and even I'm not sure whether Farid identifies himself as a "Salafi".


Olongo's claims will be addressed shortly InshaAllah, I doubt it deserves a book, a small article on our website will be sufficient.

[Hani]

We're going through the Nigerian's refutation or "comments", the conclusion so far (sadly) that what he wrote is so terrible and so painful, that we may not even grace it with a refutation.


Aside from claiming that things were "illogical" he provides no real arguments, he did ask for a scan though which Farid can provide InshaAllah.


How can the Shia be praising these comments on SC is beyond me.

[Ebn Hussein]

Ibn Al-Sauda' hadhaz-zaman messed it up big time, he was better off writing nothing, he made it worst. May Allah reward you Farid (the Jahil Toyyib doesn't even know that Farid wrote the refutation alone ...) and I am sure even Toyyib's fellow Shia brothers know (even if they don't admit) that their friend is embarassing himself and clutching at straws.

[Ebn Hussein]

I'd like to remind the respective reader and truth-searchers as an Ex-Shia myself about an important point:



As you can see they simply deny that they ACTUALLY believe in the divinity of Ali (RA) due to the 'official' stance of their Madhab. The thing is the official stance is worth nothing since it is based on Taqiyyah, to a certain extent some beliefs are even hidden to Shia laymen, this is common in all Batini religions (like Nusayris, Imamis, Batini Sufis etc.). As a matter of fact Rafidah Imamites to this very day (some more and some less hidden) actually preach the divinity of ALL 12 Imams and not just Ali this is the WAQI3AH (reality) of their Madhab, and I don't mean what some nobodies preach and practice but rather what they preach from the pulpits of dump holes of shirk and zandaqah such as Karbala (Jewish Kabbala), Najaf, Qom the Mal3oonah etc. So the advice here is: Don't be distracted by theoretical claims, rather OBSERVE atthe REALITY of a religion, and in the case of Imamite Shi'ism. Look at their religious practices and teachings (and not 'official stances' on websites and some Shia-Sunni gatherings) that our thought by their known scholars, and then you will find out that without a shadow of a doubt the Twelver Rafidi religion is has been influenced by core beliefs of a black Jewish Yemeni (and to a lesser degree influenced by Majoosism i.e. after the Safavids):

[Farid]

I've read Toyyib's comments. I don't have much to say other than: Read his book, then read the refutation, then read his comments, THEN re-read the refutation. I don't believe that he has brought anything that is worth responding to.

However, there are a couple of things that I would like to point out. He said:

I was unable to locate any such report throughout the said book. Apparently, they need to furnish us with the alleged athar from that source, especially its Arabic text. Until then, their claim is a fallacy, a result of their “dishonesty” or “incompetency” – to quote their terms.

His inability to find a quote from the provided source displays incompetence. See here for a PDF of the book (p. 177): http://ia600502.us.archive.org/22/items/waq60886/03_60888.pdf

Also, on page 6 and 7 he makes this silly point that the Saba'ees that were condemned were actually the members of a tribe. He said:

The bottom-line is: what Farid and Hani have quoted about Sabāīs and Sabāiyyah could well have been about members of the tribe of Sabā!

Readers that review the refutation that has been uploaded on our site will see that this is a desperate point.

I'm sure that Toyyib is already aware that readers that fall under both sects will not bother reading the counter arguments of the opponents. It is a sad thing. I am certain that Shias will not find his responses satisfying if they are sincere enough to go through the whole book.

I am, as always, open to any questions about the book, so feel free to ask or share thoughts and comments.

[Hani]

Our friend, Brother Ali b said: "Farid's standards are usually strict when it comes to Shia and he always asks for Sihhah"


He is implying, that you went out of your way to authenticate the reports, and if those reports happened to have been in the favor of the Shia, you would have weakened them, is this true and are they really fragile Asaneed? OR are they legitimate and authentic and weakening them is incorrect?

[Farid]

This is a general statement. He should provide a specific example.