TwelverShia.net Forum

Need some help. Verse 5:55 and Shia argument

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Hani

Re: Need some help.
« Reply #20 on: February 24, 2015, 07:15:44 PM »
I remind the brothers, NEVER give long replies to Shia arguments (unless in really specific situations).

Rafidah are like tape recorders, they'll either copy/paste a huge argument from somewhere, or write it down from random Shubuhat they memorized. You show the strength of your argument by attacking ONE section of the opponent's argument and thus the rest all collapses on its own.
عَلامَةُ أَهْلِ الْبِدَعِ الْوَقِيعَةُ فِي أَهْلِ الأَثَرِ. وَعَلامَةُ الْجَهْمِيَّةِ أَنْ يُسَمُّوا أَهْلَ السُّنَّةِ مُشَبِّهَةً. وَعَلامَةُ الْقَدَرِيَّةِ أَنْ يُسَمُّوا أَهْلَ السُّنَّةِ مُجَبِّرَةً. وَعَلامَةُ الزَّنَادِقَةِ أَنْ يُسَمُّوا أَهْلَ الأَثَرِ حَشْوِيَّةً

Religion = simple & clear

Furkan

Re: Need some help.
« Reply #21 on: February 24, 2015, 07:26:24 PM »
You nailed it.
Before Qazî Mihemed, President of the first kurdish Republic Mahabad was hanged the iranian judge asked:

“last words?”

Qazî: “I thank Allah: even in death he put my shoes above your heads”

Ameen

Re: Need some help.
« Reply #22 on: February 24, 2015, 09:49:16 PM »
I remind the brothers, NEVER give long replies to Shia arguments (unless in really specific situations).

Rafidah are like tape recorders, they'll either copy/paste a huge argument from somewhere, or write it down from random Shubuhat they memorized. You show the strength of your argument by attacking ONE section of the opponent's argument and thus the rest all collapses on its own.

I haven't seen anyone or anything collapse till yet, apart from you locking up threads and making excuses for it that, I failed to provide this or that discussion isn't academic anymore. But I agree on this statement of yours on the basis of, one has a right to dream be it me or you.

 


Ameen

Re: Need some help.
« Reply #23 on: February 24, 2015, 09:50:56 PM »
You nailed it.

Well ofcourse. He most definitely needs cheering up. Keep it up!

Ameen

Re: Need some help.
« Reply #24 on: February 24, 2015, 09:58:20 PM »
Hazrat Ali gave his bayah the next day and renewed it after six months.

Shiites say that Ali didn't had enough manpower to fight against Abu Bakr. The funny thing is, when you tell them that the rebels such as malik ibn nuwayra became murtads because they refused to pay zakah, the shiites will tell you " No no no, malik was a sahabi who supported Ali over Abu Bakr, he wasn't a murtad"



Hani you might add this to your great topic of "Religion of excuses" ?



He gave baya and renewed it after 6 months??? LOL! What was the need for renewing it??? When exactly did the others renew theirs??? LOL!

For heavens sake, put something forward that makes sense or at least think and ponder over it before putting it forward.

There are many funny stories related to and told by many just like you have. The bottom line is Hazrath Ali (as) never put himself forward and above the welfare of Islam and never threatened the benefit and peace of the Muslims.

Going to war with Hazrath Abu Bakar (ra) was easy and a piece of cake but the consequences for Islam and especially the Muslims were severe and catastrophic.

Hazrath Malik bin Nuwayra (ra) was a companion of the Prophet (pbuh) and here we have people calling him murtad because of his difference with the first Khalif.

Tell me how does one become murtad by not paying zaka'ath??? Or refusing to pay??? How does one become murtad by not praying???

Where is the evidence that Hazrath Malik ibne Nuwayra (ra) refused to pay Zaka'ath??? This is your side of the story and only one side of the argument.















[I REMIND YOU TO NOT GO OFF TOPIC] your beloved moderator.

Where did I go off topic??? Was it the baya of Hazrath Ali to the first Khalif or the incident of Malik ibne Nuwayrah??? LOL. Come on, don't take the anger out on me when you're feeling the heat. I responded to what is being discussed.


 Come on, i







Hani

Re: Need some help.
« Reply #25 on: February 24, 2015, 10:22:17 PM »

I haven't seen anyone or anything collapse till yet, apart from you locking up threads and making excuses for it that, I failed to provide this or that discussion isn't academic anymore. But I agree on this statement of yours on the basis of, one has a right to dream be it me or you.

 



You can't see it because you're unqualified to see it, we never expect people of your level to see anything, you're still raw, and need a lot of time to mature.

Quote
Where did I go off topic??? Was it the baya of Hazrath Ali to the first Khalif or the incident of Malik ibne Nuwayrah??? LOL. Come on, don't take the anger out on me when you're feeling the heat. I responded to what is being discussed.

Was this thread opened to discuss WHEN `Ali gave Bay`ah? From the OP it doesn't seem like it so stick to the topic.
عَلامَةُ أَهْلِ الْبِدَعِ الْوَقِيعَةُ فِي أَهْلِ الأَثَرِ. وَعَلامَةُ الْجَهْمِيَّةِ أَنْ يُسَمُّوا أَهْلَ السُّنَّةِ مُشَبِّهَةً. وَعَلامَةُ الْقَدَرِيَّةِ أَنْ يُسَمُّوا أَهْلَ السُّنَّةِ مُجَبِّرَةً. وَعَلامَةُ الزَّنَادِقَةِ أَنْ يُسَمُّوا أَهْلَ الأَثَرِ حَشْوِيَّةً

Religion = simple & clear

Ameen

Re: Need some help.
« Reply #26 on: February 25, 2015, 03:54:51 PM »
Thank you very much. I also think very highly of you as well. The feelings mutual. That makes to of us now.

Take a look at what Furkan said. He mentioned Ali (as) giving baya and renewing it after 6 months. If Ali's (as) baya is not discussed then why not mention it to Furkan rather than waiting for my post???

I will tell you why, I don't go off topic but only reply to what is being or has been said. When you or yourkind get stuck and feel like you can't answer then, you use such tactics like, I've gone off





Furkan

Re: Need some help.
« Reply #27 on: February 25, 2015, 04:06:53 PM »
If muting me makes you (Ameen) stop going offtopic and asking rhetoric questions, wallahi Hani do so please.
Before Qazî Mihemed, President of the first kurdish Republic Mahabad was hanged the iranian judge asked:

“last words?”

Qazî: “I thank Allah: even in death he put my shoes above your heads”

Ameen

Re: Need some help.
« Reply #28 on: February 25, 2015, 04:26:06 PM »
If muting me makes you (Ameen) stop going offtopic and asking rhetoric questions, wallahi Hani do so please.

I only ask questions related to what you say with in your posts. When you can't answer you use such techniques and tactics like, stop asking rhetoric questions, you're going off topic, I am going to lock this thread because of so and so excuse etc.

You gentlemen behave like boxers who start to get in to trouble ina round and then either cling on to the ropes or their opponent just to save them selves from further battering or getting knocked out.

Go on, I dare you, answer my questions or believe in your double standards. This is what I want to expose. If you are genuine then prove it. Stop trying to fool the people.







Hani

Re: Need some help.
« Reply #29 on: February 25, 2015, 06:58:08 PM »
What do you want answered? Renewing the Bay`ah?

I do not know if you know this, but there is a concept of "renewing" your Bay`ah in Islam so I'm surprised you think this is weird.

For instance in Tareekh al-Islam by al-Dhahabi it says:

 وصبيحة قتله جدد الجند البيعة للأمين

[In the morning of the day he was murdered, al-Ameen's soldiers renewed their Bay`ah to him.]

Even in the Prophet's (saw) life, the people renewed their Bay`ah to him and this was "Bay`at-ul-Ridhwan".

Anyway, aside from all this... Let's get back to the topic, what happened was the following (So you may understand why he had to renew his Bay`ah):

-After the Prophet (saw) passed away, majority of Mouhajiroun sided with Abu Bakr, majority of Ansar wanted to choose a leader from themselves, and banu Hashim gathered in Fatimah's house when they heard about Saqifah.
-After Saqifah the Mouhajiroun and the Ansar almost unanimously sided with Abu Bakr and began giving him allegiance. Banu Hashim became angry because they thought they had a right to it and they were not even consulted on top of that.
-Abu Bakr begins taking the general Bay`ah at the Prophet's (saw) mosque and Banu Hashim boycott it so Abu Bakr asks for Zubayr and `Ali. The people notice that `Ali and Zubayr are not in attendance nor did they give Bay`ah.
-It is said that `Umar visited Fatimah's house as they were looking for `Ali and Zubayr and he told her to not allow them to stay at her house should they return otherwise there will be conflict.
-Apparently they returned to Fatimah's house and gathered in it once more and it does not seem they they listened to Fatimah's advice when she told them to go and give the Bay`ah. It is said that al-Zubayr drew his sword and promised to never put it down until they receive the Bay`ah, it is also said that they took away his sword and broke it then accompanied him to Abu Bakr.
-`Ali and al-Zubayr go to Abu Bakr and they discuss the matter and Abu Bakr tells them that what they did can result in division and hatred among the Muslims so they accept his leadership and grant him an oath of allegiance asking him to not reproach them for this mistake. They both explain to him that they were simply angry because they were not consulted even though they had a right to it, and that Abu Bakr is worthy of this position. The Muslims did not witness this Bay`ah from `Ali as it was not in public.
-The next day `Abbas and Fatimah go to Abu Bakr asking for the lands belonging to the Prophet (saw), Abu Bakr tells them that they belong to all the people and are not a possession of Banu Hashim since the Prophet (saw) leave no inheritance. Fatimah gets upset but they accept Abu Bakr's judgement.
-Fatimah falls ill and `Ali disappears for a while to take care of her. It is said that Banu Hashim have still not given a Bay`ah at this point. The people think that `Ali is still boycotting Abu Bakr's Caliphate and they begin to give him looks as if reproaching him.
-After Fatimah passes away, `Ali calls on Abu Bakr to discuss the matter with him and clear the misunderstanding, he also insists that `Umar should not come as he feared `Umar's harshness.
-`Ali explains himself to Abu Bakr and tells him that he was not jealous and that Abu Bakr is surely worthy of leadership  but they only did what they did for several reasons. Abu Bakr explains his position to `Ali and tells him of his deep love and respect for the Prophet's (saw) family and explains that he only used the lands as the Prophet (saw) used them, they have a very friendly conversation and `Ali tells Abu Bakr that he shall give him a public Bay`ah in the mosque in the time of `Isha' prayer on that night.
-Abu Bakr stands on the pulpit and praises `Ali and explains to the people why `Ali had not attended the Bay`ah with the rest of them and he excuses him for it. `Ali then also stands and explains to the people his position and excuses for doing what he did. The people accept from `Ali what he said and everything goes back to the way it was.
-Banu Hashim all go and give Abu Bakr the Bay`ah after `Ali.


These events happened in that order which I mentioned above according what I deem as historically accurate and based on my reading of the popular history books. Everything else such as the broken rib story, the tying `Ali up story, the witnesses story, the burning of `Ali's house story, and all those spices Shia use to distort history are all fabrications that have no basis only mentioned in very unreliable dubious story books without legitimate chains.
« Last Edit: February 25, 2015, 07:00:53 PM by Hani »
عَلامَةُ أَهْلِ الْبِدَعِ الْوَقِيعَةُ فِي أَهْلِ الأَثَرِ. وَعَلامَةُ الْجَهْمِيَّةِ أَنْ يُسَمُّوا أَهْلَ السُّنَّةِ مُشَبِّهَةً. وَعَلامَةُ الْقَدَرِيَّةِ أَنْ يُسَمُّوا أَهْلَ السُّنَّةِ مُجَبِّرَةً. وَعَلامَةُ الزَّنَادِقَةِ أَنْ يُسَمُّوا أَهْلَ الأَثَرِ حَشْوِيَّةً

Religion = simple & clear

Ameen

Re: Need some help.
« Reply #30 on: February 25, 2015, 08:12:50 PM »
Like I said brother, I didn't go off topic but only responed to what was being said. I have read your post and will Insha'allah reply to it when I finish work.

You have put one side of the argument forward and I can easily say to you that this is fabricated and false as you have mentioned about the other side of the argument.

But I am not going to do that infact I will only respond to what you have said and put the points out that alarm me about your version of events.






Hani

Re: Need some help.
« Reply #31 on: February 25, 2015, 08:38:26 PM »
This is my historical reading based on all the evidence I encountered so far, so obviously I won't believe in anything else's authenticity.

The books are there, you can have any historical reading you wish. What matters most is not that you believe in a certain version of a historical period. What matters is the most is HOW you reached your conclusion and what scientific laws/rules did you apply and follow so that you may NOT be accused by your opponents that you simply pick and choose what suits your desires.

Keep this in mind when you formulate your own historical view on any period.
عَلامَةُ أَهْلِ الْبِدَعِ الْوَقِيعَةُ فِي أَهْلِ الأَثَرِ. وَعَلامَةُ الْجَهْمِيَّةِ أَنْ يُسَمُّوا أَهْلَ السُّنَّةِ مُشَبِّهَةً. وَعَلامَةُ الْقَدَرِيَّةِ أَنْ يُسَمُّوا أَهْلَ السُّنَّةِ مُجَبِّرَةً. وَعَلامَةُ الزَّنَادِقَةِ أَنْ يُسَمُّوا أَهْلَ الأَثَرِ حَشْوِيَّةً

Religion = simple & clear

Ameen

Re: Need some help. Verse 5:55 and Shia argument
« Reply #32 on: February 26, 2015, 04:08:50 PM »
This is my historical reading based on all the evidence I encountered so far, so obviously I won't believe in anything else's authenticity.

The books are there, you can have any historical reading you wish. What matters most is not that you believe in a certain version of a historical period. What matters is the most is HOW you reached your conclusion and what scientific laws/rules did you apply and follow so that you may NOT be accused by your opponents that you simply pick and choose what suits your desires.

Keep this in mind when you formulate your own historical view on any period.

Ok brother, thank you very much for your advice. Most appreciated.

How did you reach your conclusion and what scientific laws and rules did you apply??? And why would you not believe in the authenticity of anything else??? Why reach a conclusion and then just lock the door and throw the key away and then still want to discuss the matter and try to convince the other, when you have put a stop to the other side of the argument to begin with???

Hani

Re: Need some help. Verse 5:55 and Shia argument
« Reply #33 on: February 26, 2015, 08:09:45 PM »
Well brother that ain't very simple and I don't know if I can explain it in detail.


My methodology is as follows... READ


What do I mean by "read"? A lot of people go on blogs and websites and read random historical articles, for instance here's an article on Saqifah in which several researchers and narrations were quoted:
http://www.al-islam.org/restatement-history-islam-and-muslims-sayyid-ali-ashgar-razwy/critique-saqifa


This however my friend, is NOT reading. This is someone else doing the reading for you, quoting to you his own conclusion and expecting you to take it exactly as it is. This doesn't just apply to articles online but also contemporary books written by people who recently died, maybe a 100 years ago or so at least. Often times I read history books written by some contemporary scholar and I don't fully agree with a lot of what they say as it opposes my reading and research. When someone like Yasir Qadi offers a lecture on Karbala' and says "Mu`awiyah did this for this or that reason" I don't necessarily agree BECAUSE I READ and based on that reading I believe Mu`awiyah did the thing for a different purpose.


In other words, reading requires you to go back to the traditional classical historical sources yourself, the main history books that the nation relied on. When it comes to these sources, it is crucial to take into consideration a couple of matters, the earliness of the source and the earlier the better, the reliability of the author and his popularity and value, and the sources this historian relies on to present the historical material.


For example, we compare three historical sources:


"Al-Kamil fil-Tareekh" by ibn al-Atheer who died in 630AH, which is considered a bit late, this greatly reduces the value of the book when it comes to researching sensitive historical topics, the author is a renowned and reliable scholar but his book does not site its sources and chains, which is why when reading its contents I take them into consideration and benefit from them but cannot base my views on them except for what can be backed by sources from earlier books.


"Ansab-ul-Ashraf" by ِAhmad bin Yahya al-Baladhuri who died in 279AH which is very early, al-Dhahabi writes that he was writer, a historian, a poet. He is not known as a reliable scholar nor has anyone praised his Hadith, and even though he included chains in his book yet these to me cannot be accepted as authentic but are all historical stories that I take into consideration, if they agree with what is authentic or back it up I accept them as additional evidence, if not then I cannot build my historical view based on their content.


"Kitab al-Mihan" by abu al-`Arab al-Tamimi who is a Hafidh and a venerable Muhaddith, he died in 333AH which is not as early as Baladhuri but still very early, in his book he narrates with chains some of which are authentic and some are not. I would prefer this book the most out of the three.


So the above is simply an example and we can sum it up by saying, the you must always refer to the original resources and not take someone else's conclusions as fact. The researcher of history must have certain criteria as to what resources he must rely on, in this case keep in mind the earliness and popularity of the source, the reliability of the author and the availability and authenticity of the book's sources and chains.


Now when you do that and you wish to begin your reading, let's say you open Tareekh-ul-Tabari, the first thing you will notice is that each event is in its chapter and under each chapter are many narrations, some of these reports will be accurate, some will be partially accurate and others will be completely fabricated stories.


How do we figure out what actually happened then?


The first criteria is to draw a bold guideline, you do this by collecting the established historical facts that are authentic and popular. Anything which contradicts them is obviously an error and everything that agrees with them or backs them up can be accepted.


Unlike religious narrations, the historical narrations were not regarded as being so important that the scholars would go out of their way to find authentic chains for them, most historians exercise leniency in how they deal with such reports, this is why it is not very common to find solid authentic chains, you usually need to settle for acceptable chains most of the time.


For example, let's say we have a popular authentic report that says Abu Bakr sent three commanders to fight against the false-prophet Musaylamah and they defeated him.


Then you have two other narrations that are weak, and these two narrations actually announce the names of the commanders of of those three armies that Abu Bakr sent. We can simply accept these reports as they do not conflict or oppose the established authentic narration above, rather they back it up and provide more detail.


On the other hand if we find a weak narration that says that Abu Bakr only sent two commanders, then this is rejected as a historical error since it opposes the three narrations above, one of which is popular and authentic in chain.


Also another method of known what is accurate is simply to apply common sense and logic, for instance in the Shia book "Sulaym bin Qays" it says in one narration that Muhammad bin Abu Bakr was giving his father Abu Bakr advice while on his deathbed. We do not need to look into the chain of this report to know it is a lie, since it is established historically that Muhammad was around 2-3 years old when his father Abu Bakr died, so logically he can't have been giving him advice at that age.


Another way to know what is accurate and what isn't, is to dismiss what opposes what is known about a certain character. For example if we have a report in a history book that says "`Ali escaped with his life in Siffeen as he feared death." We know without checking this narration's chain that it is a lie because what is popularly known about `Ali in many other narrations and events both during the life of the Prophet (saw) and his own reign, that he was a strong warrior and he was very courageous, he'd never run away out of fear. Thus, these types of reports that oppose the Seerah of a certain person can easily be dismissed as historical errors.


At the end of the day though, the most important way is to analyse and authenticate the chain of a historical report. This is because many people could have lied in these past 1,400 years and if we do not have reliable narrators we cannot accept the report and this means the researcher needs to be familiar with historical chains, he must know the narrators and study their condition especially those who narrate a lot in history books such as Ibn `Uqdah al-Zaydi, Sayf ibn `Umar al-Tamimi, Muhammad bin `Umar al-Waqidi and many others. For example this is a study on the condition of a famous narrator in history called Ibn Lahee`ah:
http://forum.twelvershia.net/hadith-rijal/the-acceptable-hadeeth-of-ibn-laheeyah/


One last thing I'll mention, is that historical reports are not like religious ones, in that when it comes to religious narrations if the chain is authentic you have to accept the entire text. On the other hand weak historical reports might have some parts that are accurate and other parts that are inaccurate, which means the historian who is narrating the story might narrate some aspects that are true and others which are not based on the information that reached him. When you read you'll find such reports and the well trained researcher will know how to dissect each historical report and differentiate between what is acceptable and what isn't.


^ Those are all some rough guidelines, when you dive into history and Hadith you'll know what we mean with practice.
عَلامَةُ أَهْلِ الْبِدَعِ الْوَقِيعَةُ فِي أَهْلِ الأَثَرِ. وَعَلامَةُ الْجَهْمِيَّةِ أَنْ يُسَمُّوا أَهْلَ السُّنَّةِ مُشَبِّهَةً. وَعَلامَةُ الْقَدَرِيَّةِ أَنْ يُسَمُّوا أَهْلَ السُّنَّةِ مُجَبِّرَةً. وَعَلامَةُ الزَّنَادِقَةِ أَنْ يُسَمُّوا أَهْلَ الأَثَرِ حَشْوِيَّةً

Religion = simple & clear

 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
21 Replies
3516 Views
Last post June 13, 2016, 12:07:29 PM
by scusemyenglish
31 Replies
8405 Views
Last post July 30, 2015, 05:28:19 AM
by Aba AbdAllah
0 Replies
1145 Views
Last post April 30, 2015, 08:33:01 PM
by MuslimK
3 Replies
5189 Views
Last post June 16, 2016, 09:32:26 PM
by Muslim ar Rusi