TwelverShia.net Forum

Recent Posts

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 10
11
General Sunni-Shia / Re: Mutah fatwas pdf
« Last post by Soccer on April 09, 2020, 05:04:18 PM »
They know the score. Their aim and purpose is just to paint a picture about the Shia community and its belief on it. That's their prime concern just about in every matter. They want to tell about the Shia belief and faith but in their words and they want to show a picture by their painting.

What these people don't understand is that Islam, Shiism, Sunnism, Wahabism/Salafism, etc, is all undefined.

They mean sort of something but at the same sort of nothing. 

We fight over what to attribute the label whether from insider or outsider perspective, it's not a reality, and is undefined.

Islam like all other religions are false.  Mohammad (s) is a true Messenger of God and the Quran is a direct revelation from God to Gabriel (a) to Mohammad (s) but Islam is a false religion.

Islam doesn't mean what it meant during Mohammad (s) time, and Mohammad (s) was neither Shiite or Sunni, despite the creed of twelve Navigating successors a firmly established truth in both the Quran and Sunnah.

These titles don't apply to Abraham (a) or Moses (a) or Mohamad (s). Mohammad (s) was not a Muslim, but it's true he submitted to God fully and was upright.

Till people understand titles have become meaningless in this age as titles became meaningless in the past, and most of those claiming it falsely representing it,  then we can't unite and move forward.

There is Islam as is, and submission to God as it's meant to be, and the difference between these two today, is the difference between sky and earth, night and day.

12
Sahabah-AhlulBayt / Re: Verse of cave , destroying an objection.
« Last post by Soccer on April 09, 2020, 03:51:00 PM »
Well i hahve only two questions
1. Same words and same expression has been used for all companions of Prophet (s.a.w) participating in badr

Surat No 8 : Ayat No 11

اِذۡ یُغَشِّیۡکُمُ النُّعَاسَ اَمَنَۃً مِّنۡہُ وَ یُنَزِّلُ عَلَیۡکُمۡ مِّنَ السَّمَآءِ مَآءً  لِّیُطَہِّرَکُمۡ بِہٖ وَ یُذۡہِبَ عَنۡکُمۡ رِجۡزَ الشَّیۡطٰنِ وَ لِیَرۡبِطَ عَلٰی قُلُوۡبِکُمۡ وَ یُثَبِّتَ بِہِ  الۡاَقۡدَامَ ﴿ؕ۱۱﴾

 [Remember] when He overwhelmed you with drowsiness [giving] security from Him and sent down upon you from the sky, rain by which to purify you and remove from you the evil [suggestions] of Satan and to make steadfast your hearts and plant firmly thereby your feet.
So do you agree that all conclusions you establish for all of those who you think33:33 applies also apply to all in Badr?

The intention of God sending water/tranquility from the sky was to establish them firmly and purify them, but the context, is that it works to keep them steadfast, not as a guarantee.

The talk of chosen households is different though.  The Quran in different places mentions that God attributes purity to who he pleases and commands people not to do so themselves.

It's not that believers cannot become pure, it's that they are not allowed to claim it. The exception is those who God attributes purity to.

Ayat Tatheer is about who God through the Quran wishes to attribute purity to.  When Zakariya (a) prays for a pure offspring, the meaning of pure here is a person made pure in the eyes of the people and is guaranteed to be without unclean blemish through out his life.   Yahya (a) is purified in the eyes of the people and is without blemish.

A believer can become in a pure state, what they can't have is purity attributed to them by reputation of people.

The Quran praises some believers that organized the issue of accepting Mohammad (s) and his followers in Yathrib (later to become Madina) but said that God didn't make who did that known.  And in fact, were it not for these people, Mecca would've been destroyed by God per Quran.

There is no doubt believers are praised in Quran. But Suratal Auli-Imran advises them to hold on to the rope of God and not turn on their backs in a tone that shows it's possible for them to do so.

The theme of chosen households in Quran, has it, that members of these chosen houses - are such that they are guaranteed safety and God knows they will not deviate from the path and any slips a Prophet every did in the past, God knew beforehand if they did slip they would return and never turn on their backs.

Ayat Tatheer is not a verse in isolation but has many verses about the chosen households in the past and that of Mohammad's (s).

The purification mentioned in the verse you are alluding to is them embracing the word of Taqwa, and it's to make them steadfast in hopes they do remain upon the path.

While the verses about chosen households are all in context, of manifesting and attributing purity by God to certain souls while no one can attribute purity to anyone really, but God.

13
Sahabah-AhlulBayt / Re: This is for Shia who deny Takfeer of Sahabah
« Last post by iceman on April 06, 2020, 10:43:23 AM »
The reason is from a mainstream historical point of view he is correct. What he needs to do is address the hadith of which allows hatred against the Sahaba to a takfiri level or where one believe those hadith and becomes certain that they will go to hellfire. I remember listening to Nakshawani who said it is Imam Baqer (as) who opened up a about the a lot topics, and started telling people the real views of the Imams. To me this sounds like the Imams before him due to large public not being Rafidi, could not express their views. So can't the 12er SHia say what Imam Ali did was all because he didn't 100% Shia support?Allama Jawada Naqvi is correct from a historical point of view. Khomeini  view here is backed by hadith from in the 12er Shia books. So, its such hadith which the 12er Shia scholars need to address. However, the problem is they won't survive too long if they went in that direction. Likewise, the same case applies for Sunni scholars who would criticize Saqifa, or would openly condemn Muawiyah and his camp. Its a difficult route which they would not survive too long.

"The reason is from a mainstream historical point of view he is correct. What he needs to do is address the hadith of which allows hatred against the Sahaba to a takfiri level or where one believe those hadith and becomes certain that they will go to hellfire"

We believe in Ijtihad while the 12th Imam is in occultation. Ijtihad means that we follow a living Mujtahid in our matters and affairs. That is to go by their ruling in the form of Fatwas.

Ayatollah Khamenei issued a decree wherein he prohibited insult towards Aisha, the wife of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh), and any of the figures and symbols celebrated by Sunni brethren.

The Leader of the Islamic Revolution said, in response to a question on religious matters, “Insulting figures and symbols celebrated by Sunni brethren, including the wife of the Prophet of Islam [Aisha] is prohibited. This includes the wives of all prophets, particularly the master of all prophets Muhammad (May God’s greetings be upon him and his household).

Fatwa (Islamic ruling) declares that insulting the Mother of the Faithful Aisha is forbidden

In response to a question, where he was asked to comment on insult and use of offensive words against the wife of the Prophet (pbuh) Aisha, Ayatollah Khamenei issued the decree (fatwa) against insulting Aisha. The question was posed by a group of Shia scholars and intellectuals of Al-Ahsa region in Saudi Arabia.

The question was brought up after a supposed Shia clergyman, who fled to Britain as a refugee, launched a Television channel with the help of the British government; he used his channel to insult Aisha, the Prophet’s wife: the clergyman falsely described his act as Shia belief.

This is not the only case wherein Ayatollah Khamenei has called insulting Aisha and other Sunni sanctities as haram (religiously forbidden). Western arrogant powers pay their mercenaries to insult the Mother of the Faithful, Aisha

In a meeting with Shia and Sunni clergy in Kermanshah on October 12, 2011, His Eminence Ayatollah Khamenei said:

"Preparation in the outer world is another aspect: The devils that attack us will not always attack with the same strategies. The modern day fiends who attack you through internet, satellite channels and highly advanced tools of communication have modern things to articulate with; their hardware and software have been modernized. They create fallacies. They create ideological problems. They give rise to intellectual confusion. They promote despair. They foment discord. I have received reports that petro-dollars are being spent, currently, on certain projects to fuel discord.

Often these reports are not made available to the public. On the one hand, they are spending huge amounts of money in order to establish anti-Shia groups among Sunni Muslims in certain Islamic countries. On the other hand, they pay certain so-called Shia preachers to insult and level allegations against the Mother of the Faithful, Aisha, in the name of Shia Islam: these are their methods. As Shia or Sunni Muslims, what do you do when you are faced with these methods? Ultimately, we must not be deceived by what they do: discord among us is the greatest blessing for them.”

Insulting the Prophet's wives equals to insulting the Prophet (pbuh)

In a meeting with agents of Sadaf Kowsar Conference, held this year as a tribute to Hazrat Khadija, Ayatollah Khamenei said:

"Disrespecting the pure wives of the Prophet (pbuh) should be avoided. The Prophet’s (pbuh) wives are all respectable; anyone who insults any of them has insulted the Prophet. I resolutely declare this offensive. The commander of the Faithful, Imam Ali (pbuh) treated her eminence Aisha in such a respectful manner. He treated a woman, who had come to fight against him, with the utmost respect because she was the Prophet’s wife; otherwise the Commander of the Faithful (as) would not stand on a ceremony with anyone: hence, no such disrespect should ever occur"


"I remember listening to Nakshawani who said it is Imam Baqer (as) who opened up a about the a lot topics, and started telling people the real views of the Imams. To me this sounds like the Imams before him due to large public not being Rafidi, could not express their views. So can't the 12er SHia say what Imam Ali did was all because he didn't 100% Shia support?"

You have a lot in history where how the Ahle Baith, their members and supporters were treated by those who got into authority and gained power. And by what method they got into authority and the how they gained power. In other words what method and strategy they used to control people and have and get their way. Saqifa is where such politics started and generated from. I'm not criticising or condemning Saqifa. Nor do I hold any grudge or hate against any Sahabi or members who were at Saqifa. I just believe that it wasn't according to Qur'an and Sunnah.

But if you look at it from a worldly view nor was the selection of a successor to Muhammad s.a.w conducted properly and fairly. If this did happen that there was a period of mourning then there was a public gathering in Saqifa based on an event announced on selecting a successor  to Muhammad s.a.w or the important personalities and known figures gathered together in masjid e Nabawi where a successor to Muhammad s.a.w was chosen through and by means of consulting (shura) then that would be understandable and acceptable.

But if this did happen due you think the Shaykhain would have got their way? And if they did or lets say Abu Bakr was selected unanimously as the successor to Muhammad s.a.w then no one could lift a finger or even say a word to challenge this. The intentions of Umar objecting to Muhammad s.a.w being given pen and paper for writing an important document to which the Sahaba wouldn't go astray after that is clear. And I completely understand why certain people are hell-bent in protecting him by trying to justify his action by twisting and turning the matter around.

The matter is clear by the words of the Prophet s.a.w himself that "fetch me a pen and paper so that I may write something for you so you don't go astray after me". It's simple and so easy to understand that the document wasn't written so the Sahaba went astray. Why wasn't the document written? Because Umar thought it wasn't that necessary and important. Why did Umar think so? By saying and reminding the others that "you have the book of Allah with you, the book of Allah is sufficient for us".

Some believed that the Prophet s.a.w should be given pen and paper and others sided with Umar that he shouldn't. The matter is clear just as most matters are clear as black and white. But it is understandable that we have Shaykhain loyalists who will create confusion by asking questions just to cast doubt.
14
Sahabah-AhlulBayt / Re: Which Sahaaba are the ones of which the Shi'a approve?
« Last post by iceman on April 05, 2020, 01:22:52 AM »
Lets get one thing straight. I don't think Abi Bakr was right. Anyone has the right to refuse the Caliphate of Abi Bakr. This includes Fatima,  Sa'd ibn Ubadah and Malik and Muslims like you and me.  As for a trial I don't think it would work. Here is the reason why.

Malik refused to accept Abi Bakr's Calipah. Then Khalid come forward and say look he did taqiyyah so I killed him.
So please tell me how a trial would solve the issue in the first place?

Ok, Malik refused to accept Abu Bakr's Caliphate. Then how and where does the taqiyyah bit come in then. If he's openly refused to accept Abu Bakr's Caliphate then how is this taqqiyah. Secondly Khalid accused Malik of taqiyyah regarding God knows what and Khalid killed him based on assumption, then that makes Khalid a murderer. And Abu Bakr was too afraid to bring him to account and punish him. Why? Let me answer it for you. Khalid was an influential figure with alot of weight and manpower. He was a heavyweight with alot of influence and support. That would be a challenge for Abu Bakr and a threat to his chair of Caliphate. It was all about politics and governance after Muhammad's s.a.w death. It was about Caliphate and keeping your position safe.
15
😂😂😂😂

You really have to explain your assumptions don’t you😂

This is my point you cannot provide a clear verse instead you are assuming and adding your own theory, 1400 years and only shiites still get it IF you add it in.

Great sense and logic ustaad dimwit, the authority is the divine imams, there you go nothing to it just add your imagination and use the authority for divine imams 😂😂😂😂😂

You have NOTHING else ustaad apart from this!

Great logic by a great ustaad😂👍

Lol. Lol again. Childish post and childish behaviour.  What's the matter, can't discuss 😊 I know you can't 😊
16
The stuff needs a verification though
Guess what it is a Shia website post
http://realtashayyu.blogspot.com/2012/10/the-ideal-wives.html?m=0
17
General Sunni-Shia / Re: Lineage of Abdul Qadir Jilani
« Last post by Soccer on March 23, 2020, 06:22:56 PM »
Attributing purity to people is God's task not the people's.   God attributes purity and declares pure who he pleases.

Three verses in this regard. One in Suratal Najm telling people not to attribute purity to who they wish and thereby reject Mohammad's (s) out of ignorance of the people they attribute purity to who they believed represented their gods.

Another, is in Suratal Nisa, it says people of the book scholars put themselves on certain level of purity by which they had the right to talk about God's guidance to the degree they can be referred to see if Mohammad (s) is true or if what he says about the Torah or Gospels is true and forbid it in context of authority they claimed in this regard, which was religious authority.

The other, is, concerning Zina and spreading rumors, it says in fact, if God pleased he wouldn't have attributed purity to anyone and thereby Mohammad (s) would not even be known and they would still be thinking Zina is okay and be entrenched in it so what right do they have to spread gossip about and speak about it as if they are above it.

God manifested Mohammad (s) as pure, his family, and no one else, so don't go spreading gossip and talking trash about people when you don't know who is pure and who isn't except that God's compassion for humans and grace to them, is such that he manifests his chosen ones as pure so people can unite on them and hold on to them.

And what is meant by pure, is being chosen by God to represent the religion,  this is proven by paraphrasing Zakariya's (a) prayer in short forms and in more detail forms, and they interpret one another, and so a Tayeb one is one God has chosen and purified in the eyes of people and proven beyond doubt to be pure to the people.

And God says elsewhere pertaining to paganist chaotic leadership "bring your book if you are truthful"  and said "Do they have a clear authority? So let them bring their book if they are truthful."

The Quran is the book that confirms Ahlulbayt purity and the "le" in Ayat Tatheer means the chapter and Quran over all is meant only to make the uncleanness off Ahlulbayt as well aside from that, to make them a single purification that no one else is seen to have.

It's for God to attribute purity to who he pleases.  Of course, when humans die, Allah (swt) through his chosen ones and common sense, we see them as good.

But to them on this guiding guidance role where their opinion is to be sought after and valued without proof but they are to be rather trusted, is the purity level forbidden.

We all can err and no one knows anyone to be authority pertaining to guidance except those who God manifests as completely pure in their understanding of his revelations and their intention to worship and serve God.



18
General Sunni-Shia / Re: The finality of prophethood article, what is Shia reaction?
« Last post by Soccer on March 23, 2020, 06:10:11 PM »
Tahir,  all I ask is before you respond, to read the last three Surahs of Quran before you do. What I've said has a cure from most of what has plagued the minds and hearts of the umma for so long.

19
General Sunni-Shia / Re: Did the regime finally allow a sunni mosque in tehran?
« Last post by iceman on March 15, 2020, 04:48:12 AM »
Good joke, Rafidi. You Rafidah have innovated even a place of worship beside the mosque i.e. Husayniyyahs (self-flagellation/mourning temples). Imagine Ahlus-Sunnah would be as extreme as the Rafidah and let's say due to excessive love for Omar b. al-Khattab and his tragic martyrdom would invent religious 'Omariyyah' centres where they throughout the year invoke Omar and mourn him!

Yes, there are not Sunni or Shia mosques, there are Muslims mosques and Rafidi Shia temples. Of course as Iranian Sunnis we require our own places of worship. Tehran (all Shia cities in Iran for that matter) is the only capital in the Islamic (and even kafir world) where only three Adhans are said! We say five, we gather for 5 prayers, we wash our feet, we don't pray behind Mushrik Shia clerics.

Simple.

PS: Shias all around the world, even in Arabic countries build distinctive Shia temples, then comes did ice clown man and claims that there is no difference. If so, stop building any temples and only pray in our mosques.

"Good joke, Rafidi. You Rafidah have innovated even a place of worship beside the mosque i.e. Husayniyyahs (self-flagellation/mourning temples)"

How is a place of worship being innovated. How is this innovation and in what way. And how is this wrong Islamically. All I'm getting from you is accusations based on what you assume. Bring the Qur'an into it and show me. Try and back up your claims with reason and evidence. You're just jumping up and down with words.

"Imagine Ahlus-Sunnah would be as extreme as the Rafidah and let's say due to excessive love for Omar b. al-Khattab and his tragic martyrdom would invent religious 'Omariyyah' centres where they throughout the year invoke Omar and mourn him"

And why would that be wrong to if you wanted to do it. We certainly would be victimising or harassing you. Bring some evidence and talk some sense to why mourning is wrong. And how would it be innovation.

"Yes, there are not Sunni or Shia mosques, there are Muslims mosques and Rafidi Shia temples"

So you admit the mosques belong to Allah and they are for Muslims to worship Allah. So what's this nonsense about having a Sunni mosque then. Mosques are mosques so quit using them to create sectarian division. There are no shia temples. It's just your hatred talking that is making you see incorrectly.

"Of course as Iranian Sunnis we require our own places of worship"

You mean you want your own temples? 😊 Then just say so that you want to move away from mosques and worship and have your own temples to promote your hate filled propaganda and ideology. The Iranian government won't allow that. And they shouldn't allow places of worship to be used as propaganda outlets and for political means. Mosques are mosques and that's how they should stay. It shouldn't be 'this is a Shia mosque and that is a Sunni mosque' and tomorrow others that differ would start demanding their mosques causing more sectarian division. Shouldn't happen and shouldn't be allowed. Other countries should follow example.

"where only three Adhans are said! We say five, we gather for 5 prayers, we wash our feet, we don't pray behind Mushrik Shia clerics"

From the Qur'an prove to me five different and separate prayers. Five prayers but five different and separate times. Don't be afraid. So far you're all talk. You haven't given me anything. Nor have you backed anything up. Prove to me from the Qur'an about washing your feet. And no one asked you to pray behind Muslim Shia clerics. The mosques are big enough for you to hold your own Jama'ah if you're that concerned in dividing yourself. We have no objection or see no harm in praying behind our Sunni Muslim clerics. See the difference.

"Shias all around the world, even in Arabic countries build distinctive Shia temples"

You're repeating yourself like a parrot. You got nothing left in you.
20
Imamah-Ghaybah / Re: The Pillar of Confusion: Shia Imamah
« Last post by Soccer on March 12, 2020, 11:47:57 PM »
By the way God favors humanity with guidance through those who his favor is regarding to (1:7). If people hate those who his favor is with regards to so much they deny God's guidance and favor through them, it's not the fault of God and it's the people's fault instead and as Moses' says if all humans choose to be ungrateful to God, then God doesn't need them and the Surah contextualizes that he will eventually destroy them if they continue their oppressive ways.

The way Mahdi is in the Quran is neither just as good news nor just a warning, but many possible prophecies, and which one will take place is to be determined in real time, and we hope he will be a mercy for the whole world but I won't hold my breathe for them to be all believers. Our track record is ugly and we never as a whole generation of humans changed our ways with God's favor and his rope and his Messengers. This is the sad reality of history.

The Messengers were suppose to be accepted. Mohammad (s) was meant to come to a world accepting him. Bani-Israel Prophets were trying to prepare the world for him.

But Keep fighting God's light and say you don't need his chosen ones, see where it will lead you, and for those who pray for God's guidance, there is always a guide and miracles are still available.

Those who hate his guidance so much they deny the designated family of the reminder despite the clarifications of the signs after the dark sorcery trying to extinguish that light, their hearts are hard, and that's the nature of the cursed tree who's branches are as if heads of devils and which fights the tree that has been declared pure by God and only God attributes purity to who he wants, no permission is allowed for the people to do so.
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 10