TwelverShia.net Forum

Sunni Shia Discussion Forum => Sahabah-AhlulBayt => Topic started by: muslim720 on March 18, 2018, 06:37:26 AM

Title: Material for a New Sunni Defense Video
Post by: muslim720 on March 18, 2018, 06:37:26 AM
Salaam alaykum wa rahmatullah,

Going through certain videos, I came across this video in which an ex-Sunni "scholar" explains why he became a Shia.  He starts by posing the question, "Who are the Khulafaa Rashideen" and continues by saying that "their minds have been blocked".  You know, the usual allegation, Sunni scholars hold us as mental hostages.  Anyways, he further objects to the phrase "Khulafaa Rashideen" and the concept by saying that "firstly the Prophet (saw) never mentioned this, nor did the Qur'an, nor any explicit text".  In other words, Sunnis coined the phrase after things got really bad.  When did things got bad?  During Muawiyah's rule!  How original!  Always Muawiyah; he coined the phrase "Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jama'ah" and to distinguish his "horrible" rule from the upright years of the first four, the Sunnis came up with "Khulafaa Rashideen" as a term and concept.  Again, always Muawiyah and always the face-saving Sunnis.

Well, how about this: "One day, Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) delivered a very effective speech, as a result, eyes shed tears and hearts became softened.  A man said: 'O Prophet of Allah!  It sounds as if this is a farewell speech, so advise us.'  He (ﷺ) said, 'I admonish you to fear Allah, and to listen and obey even if a black slave has been appointed as your leader.  For whoever among you lives after me will see much discord.  So hold fast to my Sunnah and the Sunnah of the Rightly-Guided Caliphs who will come after me.  Adhere to them and hold fast to them.  Beware of Bid'ah (in religion) because every Bid'ah is a misguidance.' " (Sunan Abu Dawud; At-Tirmidhi)

The Prophet (saw) also said, "The Khilafah in my Ummah after me will be for thirty years.  Then there will be kingship after that." (At-Tirmidhi; Sunan Abu Dawud; Musnad Ahmad)

Through those two narrations, we find out that the Prophet (saw) mentioned a special group known as "Khulafaa Rashideen" and he (saw) set their ruling period to 30 years, hence, we call the first four "Khulafaa Rashideen" because they came after the Prophet (saw) and ruled for almost exactly 30 years.  So the Prophet (saw) mentioned this and we have clear text for it.  I am not a Sunni scholar, far from it, not even an Arab speaker, but I learned this by spending a few years on the internet.  How come this ex-Sunni "scholar" not know this?

Anyways, can we make a video countering this video? 

&index=16
Title: Re: Material for a New Sunni Defense Video
Post by: Rationalist on March 18, 2018, 05:23:05 PM
We need to focus on Mutawatir hadith when dealing with other sects. Otherwise, its going to be a circular debate. If 12 imams concept is so important, why didn't any of the imams tell the entire ummah they were 12 appointed imams. This is where they can't answer. Trying to convince a 12er Shia or any Shia sect about the concept of Khulufa Rashid is not going to work.
Title: Re: Material for a New Sunni Defense Video
Post by: muslim720 on March 18, 2018, 05:53:53 PM
I am not trying to convince them of anything except that this man is not an ex-Sunni "scholar".  No Sunni scholar, current or former, would say regarding the phrase "Khulafaa Rashideen" that "firstly the Prophet (saw) never mentioned this, nor did the Qur'an, nor any explicit text" because we see that the Prophet (saw) mentioned it (by mentioning the term in one hadith and giving the criteria in another) and there is explicit text for it.  And such a conman is given airtime on Ahlul Bayt TV whereas a novice like me, having spent a couple of years on this forum, was able to catch his lie.
Title: Re: Material for a New Sunni Defense Video
Post by: MuslimAnswers on March 19, 2018, 05:32:08 AM
I agree that to focus on Khulafaa ar-Rashideen is not particularly important in this context, since the claim from the opponent is about a supposed pillar of the religion - it seriously does not matter even if we did accept the First 3 Khulafaa were lacking, the onus is on them and their Infallibles to fix the issue, not on us -we will even concede we are the enemy, OK now their Infallibles have to establish justice, perfect guidance and what not... it is really irrelevant if the enemies are us Sunnis or the enemies are Christians or Jews or Atheists, etc. it is the Infallible Imam who must establish all these things they talk about even in the presence of all of us who disbelieve in them and wish to undermine them.

(Anyway, it is somewhat like a scientific theory, one can criticize Theory A, but that is not enough- the Theory B has to be robust and fully comprehensive and include Theory A and go beyond it, and the 12ers have totally failed in this regard).
Title: Re: Material for a New Sunni Defense Video
Post by: iceman on March 19, 2018, 01:07:29 PM
We need to focus on Mutawatir hadith when dealing with other sects. Otherwise, its going to be a circular debate. If 12 imams concept is so important, why didn't any of the imams tell the entire ummah they were 12 appointed imams. This is where they can't answer. Trying to convince a 12er Shia or any Shia sect about the concept of Khulufa Rashid is not going to work.

To clear your misconception never mind about the 12 imams even the Prophet (pbuh) himself made it clear. It all boils down to what we consider as strong and therefore acceptable and weak therefore rejectable but Why?
Title: Re: Material for a New Sunni Defense Video
Post by: Rationalist on March 19, 2018, 04:53:27 PM
To clear your misconception never mind about the 12 imams even the Prophet (pbuh) himself made it clear. It all boils down to what we consider as strong and therefore acceptable and weak therefore rejectable but Why?

No there is no such thing as 12 imams. This was a hadith  fasely attributed to the Prophet (pbuh).
Title: Re: Material for a New Sunni Defense Video
Post by: iceman on March 20, 2018, 09:11:18 AM
No there is no such thing as 12 imams. This was a hadith  fasely attributed to the Prophet (pbuh).

I have an open mind unlike others. Point taken, what makes you think it was falsely attributed? How did you reach to this conclusion and why?
Title: Re: Material for a New Sunni Defense Video
Post by: Rationalist on March 20, 2018, 09:52:05 AM
The reason is even in your own books the Imams supposedly told a selected few they are the 12. However, the Imams never made this knowledge public. Even for dawah the Imams never referred to the 12 Calipahs hadith when they were around Sunnis.
Title: Re: Material for a New Sunni Defense Video
Post by: iceman on March 20, 2018, 09:52:30 AM
I agree that to focus on Khulafaa ar-Rashideen is not particularly important in this context, since the claim from the opponent is about a supposed pillar of the religion - it seriously does not matter even if we did accept the First 3 Khulafaa were lacking, the onus is on them and their Infallibles to fix the issue, not on us -we will even concede we are the enemy, OK now their Infallibles have to establish justice, perfect guidance and what not... it is really irrelevant if the enemies are us Sunnis or the enemies are Christians or Jews or Atheists, etc. it is the Infallible Imam who must establish all these things they talk about even in the presence of all of us who disbelieve in them and wish to undermine them.

(Anyway, it is somewhat like a scientific theory, one can criticize Theory A, but that is not enough- the Theory B has to be robust and fully comprehensive and include Theory A and go beyond it, and the 12ers have totally failed in this regard).

I strongly disagree. The burden of responsibility doesn't lie with us. The problem is not with us or to find a solution. Each and every one of us is responsible for ourselves and it is our duty alone to look at and within ourselves.
Title: Re: Material for a New Sunni Defense Video
Post by: iceman on March 20, 2018, 11:47:17 AM
The matter is very simple and straightforward. Allah is our God as well as yours, we believe in Muhammad (pbuh) as our Messenger and so do you, Islam is our religion and yours, Qur'an is our book and yours too and the Kabaa is our Qiblah as well as yours.

So what's the difference? Where is the disagreement? It's after the Messenger  (pbuh). And you have two things after the Messenger (pbuh), 1. Caliphate or 2. Imamah. You have your conscious and we have ours. We will be questioned about ourselves and not about each other.

Every one of us is born and raised with a mindset. That's how we're brought up. It's our duty to open up our mind and to see and view things with a broader understanding but with a clear conscious . Or to continue to see and view things according to and based on our mindset.

THE DECISION IS OURS ALONE!
Title: Re: Material for a New Sunni Defense Video
Post by: iceman on March 20, 2018, 11:56:51 AM
The concept of Imamah according to my opinion is based on Qur'an and Sunnah. There are clear signs and indications about Imamah within. But the concept of Caliphate only depends on the fact that the Qur'an and Sunnah are SILENT on the matter of succession to Muhammad  (pbuh). See the difference.

Caliphate is only justified when you believe in and accept that the Qur'an and Sunnah are completely and absolutely SILENT on such an IMPORTANT matter and that is the succession to Muhammad  (pbuh) and who will lead and deal with affairs of the Ummah after the Messenger (pbuh).

You have first in line in authority and command (ALLAH), you have second in line in authority and command (MESSENGER), the question we need to ask ourselves is 'is there someone third in line in authority and command or not' YES or NO. That's all we need to ask ourselves.
Title: Re: Material for a New Sunni Defense Video
Post by: Rationalist on March 20, 2018, 12:23:47 PM
. It's our duty to open up our mind and to see and view things with a broader understanding but with a clear conscious . Or to continue to see and view things according to and based on our mindset.

THE DECISION IS OURS ALONE!

How do we open up our minds to the concept of children becoming Imams? In your books a child imam answered 33,000 questions in one  sitting. Then another one dissappered and still did not appear till today. Yet you have to pay khumms in his absence. In your books Imam Jafar's Kunyah is Abu Abdullah yet he disowned Abdullah for declaring the Imamate.How can I open my mind to this?
Title: Re: Material for a New Sunni Defense Video
Post by: iceman on March 20, 2018, 12:32:05 PM
How do we open up our minds to the concept of children becoming Imams? In your books a child imam answered 33,000 questions in one  sitting. Then another one dissappered and still did not appear till today. Yet you have to pay khumms in his absence. In your books Imam Jafar's Kunyah is Abu Abdullah yet he disowned Abdullah for declaring the Imamate.How can I open my mind to this?

Open up your mind by widening it. Ask yourselves the most important and relevant questions which I have put forward and you haven't bothered to touch. Your talking based on a mindset on what your told to believe.
Title: Re: Material for a New Sunni Defense Video
Post by: Rationalist on March 20, 2018, 03:00:07 PM
Open up your mind by widening it. Ask yourselves the most important and relevant questions which I have put forward and you haven't bothered to touch. Your talking based on a mindset on what your told to believe.
Your questions don't help me understand the concept of 12 imams. They instead open my mind to agreeing Saqifa was wrong and has nothing to do with Islam. However just because saqifa was wrong, it doesn't automatically mean there are 12 Imams.

Title: Re: Material for a New Sunni Defense Video
Post by: iceman on March 20, 2018, 03:41:48 PM
Your questions don't help me understand the concept of 12 imams. They instead open my mind to agreeing Saqifa was wrong and has nothing to do with Islam. However just because saqifa was wrong, it doesn't automatically mean there are 12 Imams.

Absolutely. Lets leave the concept of 12 Imams and Saqifa (Imamah and Caliphate) out of it for a minute. Because if we talk about these then we are talking with a mindset to begin with and one can never move forward and onwards and come to a positive and satisfactory conclusion.
Title: Re: Material for a New Sunni Defense Video
Post by: MuslimAnswers on March 20, 2018, 03:50:26 PM
I strongly disagree. The burden of responsibility doesn't lie with us. The problem is not with us or to find a solution. Each and every one of us is responsible for ourselves and it is our duty alone to look at and within ourselves.

I did not understand what was the relationship with my post, since I exactly said that yes, we will concede, we Sunnis are the enemies of the Infallibles and of their alleged duties of full guidance and leadership - it is then up to the Infallibles then to outmaneuver us Sunnis, something they have been totally unable to do Imam after Imam for more than a millennium. As far as I see it, this is in fact one of the huge negative points against the supposed 12 Infallibles and leaves much to be desired in terms of their competence, let alone infallibility.
Title: Re: Material for a New Sunni Defense Video
Post by: iceman on March 20, 2018, 03:53:03 PM
Lets open up our mind and consider ourselves neither Shia nor Sunni but just Muslims. Lets ask ourself this,

It's obvious that we as Muslims believe in the following five that I have mentioned,

ALLAH is our God, MUHAMMED is our Messenger, ISLAM is our religion, QUR'AN is our book and the KABAA is our Qiblah.

This is who and what we are. The problem is not about or with in or related to this but after and beyond this.

Lets take this one step at a time. I'm working at the moment.
Title: Re: Material for a New Sunni Defense Video
Post by: Khaled on March 20, 2018, 04:25:46 PM
The problem is not about or with in or related to this but after and beyond this.

We agree, that is YOUR problem with the rest of the Muslim Ummah.  The rest of the Ummah, ولله الحمد, doesn't have this problem.  It's unfortunately only the 12er Shi'is that, as a madhhab, make takfeer of the rest of the Ummah despite the fact that we have the same Allah, same Qur'an, same Qiblah.

Very good point
Title: Re: Material for a New Sunni Defense Video
Post by: Khaled on March 20, 2018, 04:32:24 PM
So what's the difference? Where is the disagreement? It's after the Messenger  (pbuh). And you have two things after the Messenger (pbuh), 1. Caliphate or 2. Imamah. You have your conscious and we have ours. We will be questioned about ourselves and not about each other.

Disagree, the difference is whether there is Imamah or not.  You denying all the Khulafa' in the world doesn't make you a kafir in my eye, but me denying even one Imam (even if I believe in all the other ones) make me a kafir in your eyes.  Therefore, you are, as usual, comparing apples with oranges.

Quote
Every one of us is born and raised with a mindset. That's how we're brought up. It's our duty to open up our mind and to see and view things with a broader understanding but with a clear conscious . Or to continue to see and view things according to and based on our mindset.

If you were really honest with this rant, you would've admitted that the article you quoted in the other thread was referencing anti-Shi'i books to prove that certain narrations "exist in Sunni sources."  The fact that you didn't bat an eye at that shows that you are not here to have any discussions or open your mind, rather, its' to derail threads because you see what you were "born and raised" with is built on a house of cards.
Title: Re: Material for a New Sunni Defense Video
Post by: Khaled on March 20, 2018, 04:43:36 PM
The concept of Imamah according to my opinion is based on Qur'an and Sunnah. There are clear signs and indications about Imamah within. But the concept of Caliphate only depends on the fact that the Qur'an and Sunnah are SILENT on the matter of succession to Muhammad  (pbuh). See the difference.

But the Islamic principle is "البينة على المدعي واليمين على من أنكر", its upon you to prove a positive, I don't have to do anything except deny it.  It's like someone saying "I believe there are clear signs and indications about pantheism in the Qur'an, but the concept of denying is based solely on the fact that the Qur'an and Sunnah are SILENT on the matter of pantheism, see the difference?"

Quote
Caliphate is only justified when you believe in and accept that the Qur'an and Sunnah are completely and absolutely SILENT on such an IMPORTANT matter and that is the succession to Muhammad  (pbuh) and who will lead and deal with affairs of the Ummah after the Messenger (pbuh).

You claim it is silent, we claim Allah says "وأمرهم شورى بينهم", unfortunately as usual, you are unfamiliar with what non-12ers believe, and are basing solely on what you hear at your majalis.  Unlike us, we base our understanding of 12erism from 12er sources; more proof that you aren't as open minded as you claim you are.

Quote
You have first in line in authority and command (ALLAH), you have second in line in authority and command (MESSENGER), the question we need to ask ourselves is 'is there someone third in line in authority and command or not' YES or NO. That's all we need to ask ourselves.

Why do we need to ask ourselves that?  My only two infallible sources are Allah and His Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم.

What we need to ask yourselves is the following:

1) If Imamah is so important, why is it only mentioned (according to you) in indication in the Qur'an?  Since there are no clear verses (unless you found a new one), and you admit that we believe the Qur'an is silent on this, then wouldn't it make sense for us to reject the 12er concept of Imamah considering there are no clear verses mentioning it, and the Qur'an warns us about following ambigious verses?
2) If following a specific Imam was so important, how come the Qur'an doesn't mention even one name?  Especially since it is obvious there will be divisions over such an issue.

I was going to do a whole list here, but knowing that you won't answer any thing, I'm just going to stop now
Title: Re: Material for a New Sunni Defense Video
Post by: iceman on March 20, 2018, 08:09:31 PM
We agree, that is YOUR problem with the rest of the Muslim Ummah.  The rest of the Ummah, ولله الحمد, doesn't have this problem.  It's unfortunately only the 12er Shi'is that, as a madhhab, make takfeer of the rest of the Ummah despite the fact that we have the same Allah, same Qur'an, same Qiblah.

Very good point

You definitely are still stuck with a mindset. We don't have a problem with the rest of the Ummah. Please don't try to derail what is being discussed.
Title: Re: Material for a New Sunni Defense Video
Post by: Khaled on March 20, 2018, 10:15:48 PM
You definitely are still stuck with a mindset. We don't have a problem with the rest of the Ummah. Please don't try to derail what is being discussed.

You don't have a problem with the rest of the Ummah and I am the one derailing what is being discussed, yet here is you saying...

The problem is not about or with in or related to this but after and beyond this.

Unfortunately, it is you that is "definitely still stuck with a mindset."  You are unable to accept any understanding other than your own, and that's why, whenever someone isn't convinced by you, your only option is to accuse them of being close minded and "hating Shi'as."
Title: Re: Material for a New Sunni Defense Video
Post by: iceman on March 21, 2018, 09:29:59 AM
You don't have a problem with the rest of the Ummah and I am the one derailing what is being discussed, yet here is you saying...

Unfortunately, it is you that is "definitely still stuck with a mindset."  You are unable to accept any understanding other than your own, and that's why, whenever someone isn't convinced by you, your only option is to accuse them of being close minded and "hating Shi'as."

This is what I said in post #14;

"Absolutely. Lets leave the concept of 12 Imams and Saqifa (Imamah and Caliphate) out of it for a minute. Because if we talk about these then we are talking with a mindset to begin with and one can never move forward and onwards and come to a positive and satisfactory conclusion."

And this is what I said in post #16;

"Lets open up our mind and consider ourselves neither Shia nor Sunni but just Muslims. Lets ask ourself this,

It's obvious that we as Muslims believe in the following five that I have mentioned,

ALLAH is our God, MUHAMMED is our Messenger, ISLAM is our religion, QUR'AN is our book and the KABAA is our Qiblah.

This is who and what we are. The problem is not about or with in or related to this but after and beyond this."

Why do you want to continuously play blind games? Open up your eyes, stop accusing and start discussing by moving on and forward.
Title: Re: Material for a New Sunni Defense Video
Post by: Mythbuster1 on March 21, 2018, 11:30:15 AM
Ok 5 things we all follow.......so why call yourself a shia? Is shia of Ali mentioned in Quran?

Sunna is mentioned hence we are Sunnis which means followers of the way/path of prophet saw:

[The believers are] those who follow the Messenger, the unlettered Prophet, whom they find written down with them in the Torah and the Gospel, commanding them to do right and forbidding them to do wrong, making good things lawful for them and bad things forbidden for them, relieving them of their heavy loads and the chains that were around them. Those who believe in him, honor and help him, and follow the Light that has been sent down with him are successful. (Surat al-A`raf: 157)

The First 4  khalifas were successful Alhamdulillah. They followed His sunna subhanallah. Islam became a success it spread far and wide, for the khalifas followed the light that had been sent down with Him saw, and here we are 1400 years later following the same light.



The split came from people who wanted to become shia, hence the ayah in the Quran of avoiding splitting into Shias, shias follow that which is not in the Quran ie Imamate so they split from the majority.

Honestly it’s that simple.
Title: Re: Material for a New Sunni Defense Video
Post by: iceman on March 21, 2018, 11:54:39 AM
Ok 5 things we all follow.......so why call yourself a shia? Is shia of Ali mentioned in Quran?

Sunna is mentioned hence we are Sunnis which means followers of the way/path of prophet saw:

[The believers are] those who follow the Messenger, the unlettered Prophet, whom they find written down with them in the Torah and the Gospel, commanding them to do right and forbidding them to do wrong, making good things lawful for them and bad things forbidden for them, relieving them of their heavy loads and the chains that were around them. Those who believe in him, honor and help him, and follow the Light that has been sent down with him are successful. (Surat al-A`raf: 157)

The First 4  khalifas were successful Alhamdulillah. They followed His sunna subhanallah. Islam became a success it spread far and wide, for the khalifas followed the light that had been sent down with Him saw, and here we are 1400 years later following the same light.



The split came from people who wanted to become shia, hence the ayah in the Quran of avoiding splitting into Shias, shias follow that which is not in the Quran ie Imamate so they split from the majority.

Honestly it’s that simple.

It is that simple but unfortunately you've got the wrong end of the stick that's why it's turned hard and difficult. I'll tell you why.
Title: Re: Material for a New Sunni Defense Video
Post by: iceman on March 21, 2018, 12:32:02 PM
I was trying to start a general discussion but you gents have brought in the mindset again along with the mind games. Gentlemen I can only serve you one by one so one by one and one step at a time. Who's first?
Title: Re: Material for a New Sunni Defense Video
Post by: iceman on March 22, 2018, 07:00:55 AM
Ok 5 things we all follow.......so why call yourself a shia? Is shia of Ali mentioned in Quran?

Sunna is mentioned hence we are Sunnis which means followers of the way/path of prophet saw:

[The believers are] those who follow the Messenger, the unlettered Prophet, whom they find written down with them in the Torah and the Gospel, commanding them to do right and forbidding them to do wrong, making good things lawful for them and bad things forbidden for them, relieving them of their heavy loads and the chains that were around them. Those who believe in him, honor and help him, and follow the Light that has been sent down with him are successful. (Surat al-A`raf: 157)

The First 4  khalifas were successful Alhamdulillah. They followed His sunna subhanallah. Islam became a success it spread far and wide, for the khalifas followed the light that had been sent down with Him saw, and here we are 1400 years later following the same light.



The split came from people who wanted to become shia, hence the ayah in the Quran of avoiding splitting into Shias, shias follow that which is not in the Quran ie Imamate so they split from the majority.

Honestly it’s that simple.

Ok, lets start off with you. .You said;
"so why call yourself a shia?"
What is wrong with calling yourself a Shia? Is there or are there any restrictions on this? Is one not suppose to call themselves Shia?

Note: Shia means follower, supporter, associate, friend.

References, In the Qur'an Allah mentioned that Abraham was a Shia. Allah also mentioned who's Shia he was, Allah also mentions an incident during the time of Moses, where two people had an argument over their differences and fell into dispute. One turned out to be an enemy of Moses and the other turned out to be his Shia.

Will continue this.
Title: Re: Material for a New Sunni Defense Video
Post by: iceman on March 22, 2018, 07:49:59 AM
The Qur'an was fully revealed and later on the Messenger (pbuh) passed away. More Shias emerged and as time went by more surfaced.we had companions(members of the Ummah) who disagreed with the decision made in Saqifa and refused to swear allegiance to Abu Baker. They were known as Shia e Ali.

Later on more Shias emerged as time went by fore example Shia e Usman, Shia e Ali, Shia e  Moavia, Shia e Hussain, Shia e Yazeed etc. History and historical incidents and events are there as facts to prove this.
Title: Re: Material for a New Sunni Defense Video
Post by: iceman on March 22, 2018, 10:27:34 AM
Your next question;

" Is shia of Ali mentioned in Quran?"

If it was mentioned in the Qur'an as you have phrased and expect it (in black and white) then we wouldn't be having this discussion and there wouldn't be a divide based on such.

Is every single thing in the Qur'an right from the beginning till the end, every tiny detail? What we do have in the Qur'an is the principles, rules and regulations.The Prophet's (pbuh) duty is to define, show, point out etc.
Title: Re: Material for a New Sunni Defense Video
Post by: Mythbuster1 on March 22, 2018, 12:36:55 PM
Ok, lets start off with you. .You said;
"so why call yourself a shia?"
What is wrong with calling yourself a Shia? Is there or are there any restrictions on this? Is one not suppose to call themselves Shia?

Note: Shia means follower, supporter, associate, friend.

References, In the Qur'an Allah mentioned that Abraham was a Shia. Allah also mentioned who's Shia he was, Allah also mentions an incident during the time of Moses, where two people had an argument over their differences and fell into dispute. One turned out to be an enemy of Moses and the other turned out to be his Shia.

Will continue this.

Lol your going round in circles,as previously posted by Muslim 720 Quran mentions Shias:

“As for those who divide their religion and break up into sects (Shias), you have no part in them in the least: their affair is with Allah: He will in the end tell them the truth of all that they did.”
(6:159)

Previous prophets as had THEIR followers hence they were shia/followers, yet I can’t recall our prophet saw saying you are my shia to Muslims as in shia of Ali ra as in the word shia you defend after His passing in hadith or quran,why not?

Don’t give me Ghadeer or unambiguous verses from the Quran.....or unauthentic evidences.

Shia is a loose word and can be connected to good and evil, You are using it as good and using examples of prophets as (Because there is NOTHING else in the Quran to defend you) where as it can be used for bad also.

So again I ask WHY call yourself shia of Ali ra when there is no mention of such in the Quran? Yet you are jumping up and down about saqifa.

That’s what you should answer, does Quran mention Shias as in you twelvers shia and not Shias of OTHER prophets.......is that understandable?

Title: Re: Material for a New Sunni Defense Video
Post by: Mythbuster1 on March 22, 2018, 12:40:30 PM
The Qur'an was fully revealed and later on the Messenger (pbuh) passed away. More Shias emerged and as time went by more surfaced.we had companions(members of the Ummah) who disagreed with the decision made in Saqifa and refused to swear allegiance to Abu Baker. They were known as Shia e Ali.

Later on more Shias emerged as time went by fore example Shia e Usman, Shia e Ali, Shia e  Moavia, Shia e Hussain, Shia e Yazeed etc. History and historical incidents and events are there as facts to prove this.

Yes the shiane Ali’s, Uthman s, Mu’awiyas husseins etc were ALL MUSLIMS FIRST AND FOREMOST, they were political and not religious Shias, so please stop with your engraved secterian mindset......we can see through what weak defence you put up.
Title: Re: Material for a New Sunni Defense Video
Post by: Mythbuster1 on March 22, 2018, 01:07:13 PM
Your next question;

" Is shia of Ali mentioned in Quran?"

If it was mentioned in the Qur'an as you have phrased and expect it (in black and white) then we wouldn't be having this discussion and there wouldn't be a divide based on such.

Is every single thing in the Qur'an right from the beginning till the end, every tiny detail? What we do have in the Qur'an is the principles, rules and regulations.The Prophet's (pbuh) duty is to define, show, point out etc.

So where is the principle of Shias in Quran? Rule? Regulation? Yet the prophet saw never mentioned such Shias.

The main PRINCIPLES are in the Quran the FUNDAMENTALS are CLEAR my friend and then the prophet saw guided us on them.

Again as CLEAR as day there is no shia mentioned in Quran just like on Imamate v saqifa where saqifa is mentioned and Imamate is nowhere to be seen.
Title: Re: Material for a New Sunni Defense Video
Post by: muslim720 on March 26, 2018, 12:12:41 PM
Can we please make the video to refute Ahlul Bayt TV's fake "ex-Sunni scholar"?  I noticed my comment posted under the video has been deleted, lol.
Title: Re: Material for a New Sunni Defense Video
Post by: MuslimK on March 26, 2018, 10:46:44 PM
^ Good Idea.
Title: Re: Material for a New Sunni Defense Video
Post by: muslim720 on March 26, 2018, 10:52:14 PM
^ Good Idea.

Alhamdulilah, finally someone agrees with me, lol.
Title: Re: Material for a New Sunni Defense Video
Post by: iceman on March 29, 2018, 07:10:30 PM
Lol your going round in circles,as previously posted by Muslim 720 Quran mentions Shias:

“As for those who divide their religion and break up into sects (Shias), you have no part in them in the least: their affair is with Allah: He will in the end tell them the truth of all that they did.”
(6:159)

Previous prophets as had THEIR followers hence they were shia/followers, yet I can’t recall our prophet saw saying you are my shia to Muslims as in shia of Ali ra as in the word shia you defend after His passing in hadith or quran,why not?

Don’t give me Ghadeer or unambiguous verses from the Quran.....or unauthentic evidences.

Shia is a loose word and can be connected to good and evil, You are using it as good and using examples of prophets as (Because there is NOTHING else in the Quran to defend you) where as it can be used for bad also.

So again I ask WHY call yourself shia of Ali ra when there is no mention of such in the Quran? Yet you are jumping up and down about saqifa.

That’s what you should answer, does Quran mention Shias as in you twelvers shia and not Shias of OTHER prophets.......is that understandable?

This verse has been mentioned a few times and no one has responded to what I asked on it. Why have you added the word SHIA in brackets? This is an addition by your kind. Which word from the verse clearly means and tells SHIA? It only means 'and break up into sects'. That's all it means.

The answer to your next bit, the Qur'an mentions the incident that took place during the time and generation of Moses, where a two individuals were in conflict and one was a Shia of Moses and the other was an enemy (disbeliever) of Moses. Do you know the incident? I'm sure you do. The Qur'an mentions about the Shia of Moses or Moses had Shias,

Note the Qur'an mentions. What about the book of Allah that was revealed on Moses? Does that book mention that Moses had Shias? According to your theory it should be in the book of Moses about his Shias. If you believe that the Qur'an should clearly mention the Shia of Muhammad  (pbuh) or Ali then,

surely according to your theory the book of Moses should mention the Shia of Moses. Also you want proof from the Qur'an or the Qur'an should absolutely and clearly in black and white according to your desire mention Imamah then surely according to your theory it would be and should be more appropriate and reasonable for the book of Allah, THE BIBLE, to mention the occultation of Jesus.

Why doesn't the BIBLE clearly and exactly mention that Jesus wasn't crucified? Or does it? The Bible is the book of Allah and which is connected to Jesus not the Qur'an, so according to your theory the Bible should clearly and exactly mention that Jesus wasn't crucified. Why does the Bible not mention this?

You want the Qur'an to mention this, that and the other but why doesn't the book of Moses mention that Moses had Shias. And why doesn't the book of Jesus mention that Jesus wasn't crucified? Or do they. Do ponder over your theory!
Title: Re: Material for a New Sunni Defense Video
Post by: iceman on March 29, 2018, 07:29:51 PM
Lol your going round in circles,as previously posted by Muslim 720 Quran mentions Shias:

“As for those who divide their religion and break up into sects (Shias), you have no part in them in the least: their affair is with Allah: He will in the end tell them the truth of all that they did.”
(6:159)

Previous prophets as had THEIR followers hence they were shia/followers, yet I can’t recall our prophet saw saying you are my shia to Muslims as in shia of Ali ra as in the word shia you defend after His passing in hadith or quran,why not?

Don’t give me Ghadeer or unambiguous verses from the Quran.....or unauthentic evidences.

Shia is a loose word and can be connected to good and evil, You are using it as good and using examples of prophets as (Because there is NOTHING else in the Quran to defend you) where as it can be used for bad also.

So again I ask WHY call yourself shia of Ali ra when there is no mention of such in the Quran? Yet you are jumping up and down about saqifa.

That’s what you should answer, does Quran mention Shias as in you twelvers shia and not Shias of OTHER prophets.......is that understandable?

You further say,

"Don’t give me Ghadeer or unambiguous verses from the Quran.....or unauthentic evidences."

I won't give you Ghadeer because I know it stings badly and gives your kind shock waves.

"Or unambiguous verses from the Quran"

Man verses are verse and the Qur'an is serious. But if you see and speak so loose about it then that's down to you.

You further say,

"Shia is a loose word and can be connected to good and evil"

That's the point I made In one of my early posts.

"You are using it as good and using examples of prophets"

And ma brother you are doing exactly the same thing and that is using it as evil and labelling us with it. So practice what you preech.

"Because there is NOTHING else in the Quran to defend you"

There is plenty in the Qur'an that justifies us and our belief. But there's not much you can do with the arrogant and ignorant. It's not about us and shouldn't be about us but that's what your kind are obsessed about it guess. It should be about the truth but you're too busy and engaged with us.
 
"where as it can be used for bad also."

Ok, show me in/from the Qur'an?
Title: Re: Material for a New Sunni Defense Video
Post by: muslim720 on March 30, 2018, 12:32:28 PM
This verse has been mentioned a few times and no one has responded to what I asked on it. Why have you added the word SHIA in brackets? This is an addition by your kind. Which word from the verse clearly means and tells SHIA? It only means 'and break up into sects'. That's all it means.

I will give you the benefit of doubt and clarify this verse for you, one more time.

'Inna Al-Ladhīna Farraqū Dīnahum Wa Kānū Shiya`āan Lasta Minhum Fī Shay'in ۚ 'Innamā 'Amruhum 'Ilá Allāhi Thumma Yunabbi'uhum Bimā Kānū Yaf`alūna

"Verily, those who divide their religion and break up into sects, you (O Muhammad SAW) have no concern in them in the least.  Their affair is only with Allāh, Who then will tell them what they used to do."  (Surah Al-An'am 6:159)

The word "Shia" was added in the bracket to show you the Arabic word which occurs in the verse for sect.  The name of the Prophet (saw) is in the bracket to show that Allah (swt) was directing this message to him.  So this verse says that the Prophet (saw) has nothing to do with anyone who breaks the religion and divides into sects, calling themselves Shia.  Hence, there is no addition; the word "shia" occurs in the verse and since the Prophet (saw) is being addressed, his name is in parentheses.

Now, we can analyze what I have already broken down for you.

- Did a group of Muslims break off from the main body of Muslims?  YES!
- Did they adopt the term "Shia" in an ideological or creedal (not just political) sense to distinguish themselves from mainstream Muslims?  YES!
- Did they come up with their own way of doing things quite different than the rest of the Muslims?  YES!
- Do they still adhere to the label of "Shia" despite the Qur'anic warning?  YES!

Therefore, Allah (swt) will tell them what they used to do.
Title: Re: Material for a New Sunni Defense Video
Post by: iceman on March 30, 2018, 05:02:21 PM
I will give you the benefit of doubt and clarify this verse for you, one more time.

'Inna Al-Ladhīna Farraqū Dīnahum Wa Kānū Shiya`āan Lasta Minhum Fī Shay'in ۚ 'Innamā 'Amruhum 'Ilá Allāhi Thumma Yunabbi'uhum Bimā Kānū Yaf`alūna

"Verily, those who divide their religion and break up into sects, you (O Muhammad SAW) have no concern in them in the least.  Their affair is only with Allāh, Who then will tell them what they used to do."  (Surah Al-An'am 6:159)

The word "Shia" was added in the bracket to show you the Arabic word which occurs in the verse for sect.  The name of the Prophet (saw) is in the bracket to show that Allah (swt) was directing this message to him.  So this verse says that the Prophet (saw) has nothing to do with anyone who breaks the religion and divides into sects, calling themselves Shia.  Hence, there is no addition; the word "shia" occurs in the verse and since the Prophet (saw) is being addressed, his name is in parentheses.

Now, we can analyze what I have already broken down for you.

- Did a group of Muslims break off from the main body of Muslims?  YES!
- Did they adopt the term "Shia" in an ideological or creedal (not just political) sense to distinguish themselves from mainstream Muslims?  YES!
- Did they come up with their own way of doing things quite different than the rest of the Muslims?  YES!
- Do they still adhere to the label of "Shia" despite the Qur'anic warning?  YES!

Therefore, Allah (swt) will tell them what they used to do.

So there is no word in the verse that means and speaks about the Shia sect. The bit  "wa kanu sheya'an" means "and become sects". It's got nothing to do with any one or particular sect.

Notice the word "sheya'an" which is plural and means "sects". You're only giving it your own flavour and taste.

You don't need to add Muhammad (pbuh) in brackets to show that Allah is speaking to him. It's common basic sense that Allah is speaking to him. A fool would even know this.

"Did a group of Muslims break off from the main body of Muslims?  YES!"

Absolutely, I agree. They ended up in Saqifa while the main body of Muslims were mourning the Prophet (pbuh) and were busy with his funeral arrangements.

"Did they adopt the term "Shia" in an ideological or creedal (not just political) sense to distinguish themselves from mainstream Muslims?  YES!"

I absolutely agree but they didn't adopt the term SHIA but in fact they adopt the term HANAFI and labelled and called themselves separate. You had further breaks after that and separate labelling such as MALIKI,  SHAFA'EE and HANBALI.

"Did they come up with their own way of doing things quite different than the rest of the Muslims?  YES!"

I absolutely agree. Four completely different schools of thought and four completely different ways of doing things.

"Do they still adhere to the label of "Shia" despite the Qur'anic warning?  YES!"

I absolutely disagree. The Qur'an doesn't mention or speak about the term SHIA in a loose way. In fact it speaks about and gives good examples of SHIA.

And still if you want to keep your eyes shut and keep repeating "well I can't see anything" then good luck to you.
Title: Re: Material for a New Sunni Defense Video
Post by: muslim720 on April 01, 2018, 12:08:05 AM
So there is no word in the verse that means and speaks about the Shia sect. The bit  "wa kanu sheya'an" means "and become sects". It's got nothing to do with any one or particular sect.

It has everything to do with those who break the religion into sects, like yourself.

Quote
Notice the word "sheya'an" which is plural and means "sects". You're only giving it your own flavour and taste.

You happen to be one of the many splinter groups.  I would put forth the same argument to them except your blunder is too hard to cover up.  You have split the religion and adopted the term "Shia" as your identity.

Quote
You don't need to add Muhammad (pbuh) in brackets to show that Allah is speaking to him. It's common basic sense that Allah is speaking to him. A fool would even know this.

Now would the fool acknowledge that the Prophet (saw) has nothing to do with his sectarian ways, as per the Qur'an?

Quote
Absolutely, I agree. They ended up in Saqifa while the main body of Muslims were mourning the Prophet (pbuh) and were busy with his funeral arrangements.

Your hasty response, which you thought would get you somewhere except it will bring embarrassment upon you, has had you define being at Saqifah as breaking off from the main body of Muslims.  What you did not realize is that the main body of Muslims were already at Saqifah so if anything, they went to join them.  As for those who were busy with the burial of the Prophet (saw), they were his family members and it was their duty to perform the final rites.  Not to forget that the same people who went to Saqifah prayed janazah upon the Prophet (saw) and those who stayed behind (to perform the final rites) pledged allegiance to them and remained with them.

Quote
I absolutely agree but they didn't adopt the term SHIA but in fact they adopt the term HANAFI and labelled and called themselves separate. You had further breaks after that and separate labelling such as MALIKI,  SHAFA'EE and HANBALI.

If you do not know the difference between aqeedah and fiqh, I suggest you spend more time learning than visiting this forum.  A Shafi'i, Hanafi, Maliki and Hanbali differ upon fiqhi matters.  Can you say the same regarding Zaidis or Ismailis?

Quote
I absolutely agree. Four completely different schools of thought and four completely different ways of doing things.

All four schools and different ways of doing things backed up by Qur'an and Sunnah.  Can you substantiate your most fundamental belief, Imamah, from the Qur'an and Sunnah? 

Quote
I absolutely disagree. The Qur'an doesn't mention or speak about the term SHIA in a loose way. In fact it speaks about and gives good examples of SHIA.

Except when it comes to breaking into sects and factions.

Quote
And still if you want to keep your eyes shut and keep repeating "well I can't see anything" then good luck to you.

Coming from you, it made me laugh out loud.  The Qur'an condemns those who split into sects and call themselves "Shia", and you cannot see it, lol.

"Of those who split up their religion, and became sects (Shia), [i.e. they invented new things in the religion (Bid'ah), and followed their vain desires], each sect rejoicing in that which is with it." (Ar-Rum 30:32)
Title: Re: Material for a New Sunni Defense Video
Post by: iceman on April 07, 2018, 11:33:13 PM
It has everything to do with those who break the religion into sects, like yourself.

You happen to be one of the many splinter groups.  I would put forth the same argument to them except your blunder is too hard to cover up.  You have split the religion and adopted the term "Shia" as your identity.

Now would the fool acknowledge that the Prophet (saw) has nothing to do with his sectarian ways, as per the Qur'an?

Your hasty response, which you thought would get you somewhere except it will bring embarrassment upon you, has had you define being at Saqifah as breaking off from the main body of Muslims.  What you did not realize is that the main body of Muslims were already at Saqifah so if anything, they went to join them.  As for those who were busy with the burial of the Prophet (saw), they were his family members and it was their duty to perform the final rites.  Not to forget that the same people who went to Saqifah prayed janazah upon the Prophet (saw) and those who stayed behind (to perform the final rites) pledged allegiance to them and remained with them.

If you do not know the difference between aqeedah and fiqh, I suggest you spend more time learning than visiting this forum.  A Shafi'i, Hanafi, Maliki and Hanbali differ upon fiqhi matters.  Can you say the same regarding Zaidis or Ismailis?

All four schools and different ways of doing things backed up by Qur'an and Sunnah.  Can you substantiate your most fundamental belief, Imamah, from the Qur'an and Sunnah? 

Except when it comes to breaking into sects and factions.

Coming from you, it made me laugh out loud.  The Qur'an condemns those who split into sects and call themselves "Shia", and you cannot see it, lol.

"Of those who split up their religion, and became sects (Shia), [i.e. they invented new things in the religion (Bid'ah), and followed their vain desires], each sect rejoicing in that which is with it." (Ar-Rum 30:32)

"It has everything to do with those who break the religion into sects, like yourself."

And yourself since it is a general statement not specific. You still didn't answer my question, which word accordingly and exactly means and mentions the word SHIA from the verse? Stop ducking and diving.

"You happen to be one of the many splinter groups"

And so do you. Would you like me to provide you with the list again? You are Ahle Sunah Wal Jama'ah meaning different sects and groups assembled and put together under one banner. Stop kidding yourself.

"You have split the religion and adopted the term "Shia" as your identity."

No, Saqifa caused the split and division and this went further and deeper because of Caliphate. Allah and His Messenger  (pbuh) only give good examples of Shias and good tidings about them. WAKE UP.

"Now would the fool acknowledge that the Prophet (saw) has nothing to do with his sectarian ways, as per the Qur'an?"

Take a look at your posts and arrogance and you'll find you're being foolish. Ahle Sunah Wal Jama'ah is full of different sects and groups put under one banner and the Prophet (pbuh) has got nothing to do with such sectarian rife.

The main body of Muslims were mourning the Prophet (pbuh) and busy with his funeral arrangements. Just a handful were at Saqifah. Read history without arrogance.

Lets see how well you do with just this then I will address your other commitments and points.
Title: Re: Material for a New Sunni Defense Video
Post by: muslim720 on April 09, 2018, 03:49:25 PM
And yourself since it is a general statement not specific.

It is quite specific because the verse speaks about breaking up the religion, which the Shias have done (by branching off from the mainstream Islam), and even adopting the label "Shia".

Quote
You still didn't answer my question, which word accordingly and exactly means and mentions the word SHIA from the verse? Stop ducking and diving.

Are you serious or are you blind?  The verse clearly condemns those who split into sects and the word it uses for sect is "Shia", a term you proudly use to identify yourself.

Quote
And so do you. Would you like me to provide you with the list again?

Providing the list is a smokescreen.  What you need to prove is how any of those groups differ from each other on the most fundamental issues of aqaaid.  At least you can agree with me on one thing; although our minor differences, aren't we all united against Shias (when it comes to refuting them)?  Why is that?  It is so because we fundamentally agree on the same concepts whereas the Shias differ from us (on those fundamental creedal issues).

Quote
You are Ahle Sunah Wal Jama'ah meaning different sects and groups assembled and put together under one banner. Stop kidding yourself.

Yes, different groups of fiqh united under one banner all of whom agree on the same core principles of belief.  If we differed on belief, we would have had no issues including the Shias as a fifth school.

Quote
No, Saqifa caused the split and division and this went further and deeper because of Caliphate. Allah and His Messenger  (pbuh) only give good examples of Shias and good tidings about them. WAKE UP.

Caps lock won't help you!  Saqifa is where Muslims united upon a leader and the division you speak of came during the time of Imam Ali (ra), as attested by Imam Khomeini.  In my personal opinion, Saqifa is a litmus test; those who accept it have accepted the unity of Muslims.  Those who oppose it show their own severe misguidance.

Quote
Take a look at your posts and arrogance and you'll find you're being foolish. Ahle Sunah Wal Jama'ah is full of different sects and groups put under one banner and the Prophet (pbuh) has got nothing to do with such sectarian rife.

...all under one banner, the banner of Sunnah of the Prophet (saw) and assembly of Sahaba (ra) - which also include Ahlul Bayt (ra) because they too were Sahaba (ra) - and Muslims.  Our creedal beliefs, on the core issues, are the same.  Can you say the same about yourself and the Zaidis or Ismailis?

Quote
The main body of Muslims were mourning the Prophet (pbuh) and busy with his funeral arrangements. Just a handful were at Saqifah. Read history without arrogance.

No matter which way you cut it, call it deep division or whatever, the two bodies (at Saqifa and those arranging for the funeral) came together and remained in unity at the time of Abu Bakr (ra) and Umar (ra).  Then, when Imam Hassan (ra) handed the Caliphate to Muawiya, Muslims united again and all differences were set aside.  All of these points, as I said regarding Saqifa, are litmus tests.  The ones who buried the hatchet and moved on were Muslims; the misguided Muslims latched on to these events and built their creedal foundations around them.  And that is why the verse from the Qur'an is condemnation for brothers like yourself so in your own words, "wake up".

Quote
Lets see how well you do with just this then I will address your other commitments and points.

If idiocy could be measured on a scale, you'd tip it to the max.  Without ever answering a single point satisfactorily, you bring up nonsense to give the impression as though you have said something substantial.  Then, you summarize your garbage by saying, "lets see how well you do with just this" as if you possess this higher level of knowledge and you are only giving us a glimpse of it.  Answer all my points!  In fact, you have not offered anything worthy to my rebuttal of your copy-paste from Al-Islam.org and ShiaPen.  It must hurt to see an average forum member destroy posts by your "online intellectuals" at Al-Islam.org and ShiaPen, lol.
Title: Re: Material for a New Sunni Defense Video
Post by: iceman on April 12, 2018, 05:13:22 PM
It is quite specific because the verse speaks about breaking up the religion, which the Shias have done (by branching off from the mainstream Islam), and even adopting the label "Shia".

Are you serious or are you blind?  The verse clearly condemns those who split into sects and the word it uses for sect is "Shia", a term you proudly use to identify yourself.

Providing the list is a smokescreen.  What you need to prove is how any of those groups differ from each other on the most fundamental issues of aqaaid.  At least you can agree with me on one thing; although our minor differences, aren't we all united against Shias (when it comes to refuting them)?  Why is that?  It is so because we fundamentally agree on the same concepts whereas the Shias differ from us (on those fundamental creedal issues).

Yes, different groups of fiqh united under one banner all of whom agree on the same core principles of belief.  If we differed on belief, we would have had no issues including the Shias as a fifth school.

Caps lock won't help you!  Saqifa is where Muslims united upon a leader and the division you speak of came during the time of Imam Ali (ra), as attested by Imam Khomeini.  In my personal opinion, Saqifa is a litmus test; those who accept it have accepted the unity of Muslims.  Those who oppose it show their own severe misguidance.

...all under one banner, the banner of Sunnah of the Prophet (saw) and assembly of Sahaba (ra) - which also include Ahlul Bayt (ra) because they too were Sahaba (ra) - and Muslims.  Our creedal beliefs, on the core issues, are the same.  Can you say the same about yourself and the Zaidis or Ismailis?

No matter which way you cut it, call it deep division or whatever, the two bodies (at Saqifa and those arranging for the funeral) came together and remained in unity at the time of Abu Bakr (ra) and Umar (ra).  Then, when Imam Hassan (ra) handed the Caliphate to Muawiya, Muslims united again and all differences were set aside.  All of these points, as I said regarding Saqifa, are litmus tests.  The ones who buried the hatchet and moved on were Muslims; the misguided Muslims latched on to these events and built their creedal foundations around them.  And that is why the verse from the Qur'an is condemnation for brothers like yourself so in your own words, "wake up".

If idiocy could be measured on a scale, you'd tip it to the max.  Without ever answering a single point satisfactorily, you bring up nonsense to give the impression as though you have said something substantial.  Then, you summarize your garbage by saying, "lets see how well you do with just this" as if you possess this higher level of knowledge and you are only giving us a glimpse of it.  Answer all my points!  In fact, you have not offered anything worthy to my rebuttal of your copy-paste from Al-Islam.org and ShiaPen.  It must hurt to see an average forum member destroy posts by your "online intellectuals" at Al-Islam.org and ShiaPen, lol.


We're going around in circles here. Which word from the verse means 'shia'? You don't want to answer this. It just means 'and those who break up into sects' it doesn't say or mean anywhere that they will be called or named or they will call and name themselves SHIA. It's just a general statement that applies to all and anyone.

You need to stop giving it your own flavour and taste. Because you're not backing it up at all. Ahle Sunah Wal Jama'ah means and represents different sects and groups. Constant denial and putting up a confrontational stance based on arrogance and ignorance doesn't wash reality and facts away.

"Are you serious or are you blind?  The verse clearly condemns those who split into sects and the word it uses for sect is "Shia", a term you proudly use to identify yourself."

Once again for crying out loud which word from the verse means and speaks about those who break up into sects will call themselves SHIA. Where in the verse is this limited to SHIA and all the rest are completely off the hook. For heavens sake put up a logical and reasonable argument.

You have differences and you accept that but you choose to see and call them MINOR. But when it comes to us out comes the magnifying glass. So you're the judge, the jury and the executioner as well.
Title: Re: Material for a New Sunni Defense Video
Post by: iceman on April 12, 2018, 05:28:20 PM
Saqifa was not where Muslims united to choose a leader. This is an absolute lie on behalf of those who know and are aware of Saqifa and a misconception on behalf of those who aren't. Some of the heads of the Ansar gathered in Saqifa to pick/select/choose, which ever word suits you, quote 'their own leader' WHY? This clearly tells you something started to go terribly wrong during the final days of the Prophet (pbuh).
Title: Re: Material for a New Sunni Defense Video
Post by: iceman on April 13, 2018, 09:16:50 AM
It is quite specific because the verse speaks about breaking up the religion, which the Shias have done (by branching off from the mainstream Islam), and even adopting the label "Shia".

Are you serious or are you blind?  The verse clearly condemns those who split into sects and the word it uses for sect is "Shia", a term you proudly use to identify yourself.
 the list is a smokescreen.  What you need to prove is how any of those groups differ from each other on the most fundamental issues of aqaaid.  At least you can agree with me on one thing; although our minor differences, aren't we all united against Shias (when it comes to refuting them)?  Why is that?  It is so because we fundamentally agree on the same concepts whereas the Shias differ from us (on those fundamental creedal issues).

Yes, different groups of fiqh united under one banner all of whom agree on the same core principles of belief.  If we differed on belief, we would have had no issues including the Shias as a fifth school.

Caps lock won't help you!  Saqifa is where Muslims united upon a leader and the division you speak of came during the time of Imam Ali (ra), as attested by Imam Khomeini.  In my personal opinion, Saqifa is a litmus test; those who accept it have accepted the unity of Muslims.  Those who oppose it show their own severe misguidance.

...all under one banner, the banner of Sunnah of the Prophet (saw) and assembly of Sahaba (ra) - which also include Ahlul Bayt (ra) because they too were Sahaba (ra) - and Muslims.  Our creedal beliefs, on the core issues, are the same.  Can you say the same about yourself and the Zaidis or Ismailis?

No matter which way you cut it, call it deep division or whatever, the two bodies (at Saqifa and those arranging for the funeral) came together and remained in unity at the time of Abu Bakr (ra) and Umar (ra).  Then, when Imam Hassan (ra) handed the Caliphate to Muawiya, Muslims united again and all differences were set aside.  All of these points, as I said regarding Saqifa, are litmus tests.  The ones who buried the hatchet and moved on were Muslims; the misguided Muslims latched on to these events and built their creedal foundations around them.  And that is why the verse from the Qur'an is condemnation for brothers like yourself so in your own words, "wake up".

If idiocy could be measured on a scale, you'd tip it to the max.  Without ever answering a single point satisfactorily, you bring up nonsense to give the impression as though you have said something substantial.  Then, you summarize your garbage by saying, "lets see how well you do with just this" as if you possess this higher level of knowledge and you are only giving us a glimpse of it.  Answer all my points!  In fact, you have not offered anything worthy to my rebuttal of your copy-paste from Al-Islam.org and ShiaPen.  It must hurt to see an average forum member destroy posts by your "online intellectuals" at Al-Islam.org and ShiaPen, lol.

There is no smoke screen, it's all in your head. The verse under discussion is a general statement and speaks about all those who break away and become sects. It doesn't exclude anyone or there are no exceptions based on category.

Fundamental issues on Aqaaid or issues concerning Fiqh, you are giving the verse your own meaning and explanation. Differences are differences and if you break away into sects or form separate groups then be it for what ever reason be it fundamental or what ever, Aqaaid or Fiqh or anything else the verse speaks about you and all.

Like I said the verse doesn't categorise or exclude anyone. There are no exceptions or ifs and buts.
Title: Re: Material for a New Sunni Defense Video
Post by: muslim720 on April 13, 2018, 01:43:25 PM
We're going around in circles here.

Thanks to you, my brother, who employs a circular logic.

Quote
Which word from the verse means 'shia'? You don't want to answer this.

For the last time, the Arabic word used in the verse for "sects" is "Shiya".

Quote
It's just a general statement that applies to all and anyone.

It is quite specific when you look at it from a self-fulfilling prophecy aspect.  When we see that there is a group that has broken from the main body of Muslims and adopted the title of "Shia" for themselves, this verse becomes explicitly applicable to them in the most specific way.

Quote
Once again for crying out loud

Not Muharram yet!

Quote
You have differences and you accept that but you choose to see and call them MINOR.

Differences in fiqh are minor; differences in aqeedah are not!  The reason why Prophets (asws) of the old are considered Muslims is because although they may have had different practices or rituals, they held the same core beliefs as Muslims of today.
Title: Re: Material for a New Sunni Defense Video
Post by: iceman on April 14, 2018, 08:15:53 AM
Thanks to you, my brother, who employs a circular logic.

For the last time, the Arabic word used in the verse for "sects" is "Shiya".

It is quite specific when you look at it from a self-fulfilling prophecy aspect.  When we see that there is a group that has broken from the main body of Muslims and adopted the title of "Shia" for themselves, this verse becomes explicitly applicable to them in the most specific way.

Not Muharram yet!

Differences in fiqh are minor; differences in aqeedah are not!  The reason why Prophets (asws) of the old are considered Muslims is because although they may have had different practices or rituals, they held the same core beliefs as Muslims of today.

"For the last time, the Arabic word used in the verse for "sects" is "Shiya"."

Absolutely. My point. 'Wa kanu sheya'an' means 'and become sects. It doesn't say, mean or speak about any particular or specific sect or group. The verse is also not limited to a specific group of sects and the others are exempt. Here 'sheya'an' means 'sect', it doesn't mean 'Shia'.
Title: Re: Material for a New Sunni Defense Video
Post by: iceman on April 14, 2018, 09:00:54 AM
"Not Muharram yet!"

CHILDISH. For heavens sake grow up. This ain't kindergarten.

"Differences in fiqh are minor; differences in aqeedah are not!  The reason why Prophets (asws) of the old are considered Muslims is because although they may have had different practices or rituals, they held the same core beliefs as Muslims of today."

"Differences in fiqh are minor;"

That's your opinion and nothing more. Who are you, I or anyone else to decide what is major or minor. Who are we to categorise or put limitations. Speak with logic and reason and make some sense.

"they may have had different practices or rituals" THEY MAY HAVE HAD? I suggest you do some homework first and get your facts right then proceed.

"is quite specific when you look at it from a self-fulfilling prophecy aspect.  When we see that there is a group that has broken from the main body of Muslims and adopted the title of "Shia" for themselves, this verse becomes explicitly applicable to them in the most specific way."

The main body of Muslims were busy with the Prophet's (pbuh) funeral processions. Those who broke away were in Saqifa. Go and do some homework and you'll find out what happened after that.

"adopted the title of "Shia" for themselves, this verse becomes explicitly applicable to them in the most specific way."

There is nothing wrong with adopting the title SHIA. The Qur'an has given good examples of Shias and the Qur'an hasn't spoken about Shias in the manner you specify. You're twisting the word from the verse under discussion to your advantage.
Title: Re: Material for a New Sunni Defense Video
Post by: muslim720 on April 14, 2018, 06:12:11 PM
That's your opinion and nothing more. Who are you, I or anyone else to decide what is major or minor. Who are we to categorise or put limitations. Speak with logic and reason and make some sense.

It is not my opinion; I am allowed to follow any of the four schools you try to misrepresent as "sects".

Quote
"they may have had different practices or rituals" THEY MAY HAVE HAD? I suggest you do some homework first and get your facts right then proceed.

That is all you can do!  Lecture people like you know what you are talking about, lol.

Quote
The main body of Muslims were busy with the Prophet's (pbuh) funeral processions. Those who broke away were in Saqifa. Go and do some homework and you'll find out what happened after that.

You keep talking about homework whereas I can bet I am more educated than you and can read, write and speak more languages than you.  As for your point regarding the funeral of the Prophet (saw), I have already answered it once.

Quote
There is nothing wrong with adopting the title SHIA.

When you break into sects and apply that label to yourself, you fulfill Qur'an 6:159 and you disassociate yourself from the Prophet (saw) and bring Allah's (swt) condemnation upon yourself.
Title: Re: Material for a New Sunni Defense Video
Post by: iceman on April 15, 2018, 06:31:49 AM
"It is not my opinion; I am allowed to follow any of the four schools you try to misrepresent as "sects".


Question:

What is the ruling on following one of the four madhhabs in all cases and situations?

The Committee replied:

Praise be to Allaah, and blessings and peace be upon His Messenger and his family and companions.

Firstly: the four madhhabs are named after the four imams – Imam Abu Haneefah, Imam Maalik, Imam al-Shaafa’i and Imam Ahmad.

Secondly: These imams learned fiqh (jurisprudence) from the Qur’aan and Sunnah, and they are mujtahideen in this regard. The mujtahid either gets it right, in which case he will have two rewards, the reward for his ijtihaad and the reward for getting it right, or he will get it wrong, in which case he will be rewarded for his ijtihaad and will be forgiven for his mistake.

Thirdly: the one who is able to derive rulings from the Qur’aan and Sunnah should take from them like those who came before him; it is not right for him to follow blindly (taqleed) when he is believes that the truth lies elsewhere. Rather he should follow that which he believes is the truth. It is permissible for him to follow in matters in which he is unable to come to a conclusion based on the Qur’aan and Sunnah and he needs guidelines concerning a particular issue.

Fourthly:  Whoever does not have the ability to derive rulings himself is permitted to follow one whom he feels comfortable following. If he is not comfortable following him then he should ask until he finds someone with whom he is comfortable. 

Fifthly:  From the above it is clear that we should not follow their opinions in all situations and at all times, because they may make mistakes, but we may follow their views that are sound and are based on the evidence.
Title: Re: Material for a New Sunni Defense Video
Post by: iceman on April 15, 2018, 09:37:57 AM
The Hanafi school of thought - was the earliest of the 4 mentioned, attributed to a student of a sahabah/companion of the Prophet s.a.a.s. However, it was founded in Iraq (intellectual capital of Islamic world) which was criticised by those living in Madinah (city of the Prophet Muhammad s.a.a.s) as having different practises than the more learned ones in Madinah (those in Madinah claimed to follow traditions of the prophet s.a.a.s practised by thousands narrating from thousands (mutawattir) - rather than following a single/aHad hadith narrated from one person attributed to the prophet s.a.a.s ).

The Maliki school of thought - is the second earliest of the 4. this was the formalised the practises and interpretations of the learned ones living in Madinah (city of prophet Muhammad s.a.a.s). It draws it sources from widely accepted and practised sunnah of Madinah as a whole, which were shaped by the Prophet s.a.a.s and the sahabah whom lived amongst him (including the first caliphs like Omar r.a. and Ali r.a, etc).

The Shafi school of thought - this school comes next, and attempts to resolve issues regarding differences in Islamic practises. So the imam collected all the hadith and attempted to categorise them into authentic, strong, weak, etc. Discarding all the weak hadith and keeping the rest: this made up the foundations of this school. (however it was criticised by the other 2 since discarding weak hadith and ignoring sayings of the sahabah - loses valuable information about the details of certain practises).

Non-the-less, this school prompted later scholars, like Bukhari, and some of his students - to do the same thing. Collect as many hadith as possible. then categorise them as authentic, strong, weak, fabricated. However, Bukhari was renowned for his insight and memory and succeeded in collecting a far wider collection of hadith. Some even say that his saheeh collection was taken as his own school of thought.

Hanbali school of thought - this school was by a contemporary of Bukhari, imam Ahmad. He was well renowned for his knowledge of hadith. his school of thought was founded on both authentic, strong and weak hadith (in contrast to some others, which did not accept weak hadith).

However, he was criticised by other well known scholars, like imam al-Tabari (renowned for works like Tabari’s history and Tabari’s Tafsir - more renowned than the infamous tafsir ibn kathir). Tabari stated that Ahmad ibn Hanbal was excellent in his field as a traditionalist (collector of hadith) -yet not very good at being a judge (fiqh) since many held the view that the religion was not as simple as following the Quran and Hadith, but required intricate knowledge and wisdom to know how to apply the two and deal with contradictory hadith, etc.

He went on to found his own Jariri school of thought that, like so many others, eventually became extinct (one can assume though - based on his works mentioned above - that it drew upon a more wide range of sources being less concerned about authenticity - hence drawing criticism from Hanbali school - apparently labelling him as an innovator! Tabari's approach was conciliatory and moderate, seeking harmonious agreement between conflicting opinions).

Salafi - this is the most modern movement (they dont call it a school of thought however) and it is said to be based upon the authentic hadith collected by Bukhari and a few of his students as well as others - which together make up the 6 authentic books of Sunnah (bukhari, ibn majah, etc). The majority of their scholars also do not follow weak hadith (only authentic and strong) - thus holding the same criticisms as other schools who sought to do the same.
Title: Re: Material for a New Sunni Defense Video
Post by: muslim720 on April 15, 2018, 09:11:19 PM
Secondly: These imams learned fiqh (jurisprudence) from the Qur’aan and Sunnah, and they are mujtahideen in this regard.

Thank you!  All along, I kept reminding you of the difference between "fiqh" and "aqeedah" and you just proved my point.  The rest of your post is an elaboration of this point (that these are schools of fiqh, not aqeedah).  Our differences, when I say you created your own sect, is rooted in aqeedah.
Title: Re: Material for a New Sunni Defense Video
Post by: iceman on April 16, 2018, 10:33:57 PM
Thank you!  All along, I kept reminding you of the difference between "fiqh" and "aqeedah" and you just proved my point.  The rest of your post is an elaboration of this point (that these are schools of fiqh, not aqeedah).  Our differences, when I say you created your own sect, is rooted in aqeedah.

You just scroll through the entire post and pick something to save your skin and away you go. Bravo man, well done.
Title: Re: Material for a New Sunni Defense Video
Post by: muslim720 on April 17, 2018, 12:49:26 AM
You just scroll through the entire post and pick something to save your skin and away you go. Bravo man, well done.

Actually, there is no need to continue reading an article or book when the introduction or preface clarifies the issue.  If you had that much sense, you may not have quoted from Al-Sawa'iq Al-Muhriqah.  Oh wait, you just copy-pasted that.  Never mind!
Title: Re: Material for a New Sunni Defense Video
Post by: iceman on April 17, 2018, 12:47:17 PM
Actually, there is no need to continue reading an article or book when the introduction or preface clarifies the issue.  If you had that much sense, you may not have quoted from Al-Sawa'iq Al-Muhriqah.  Oh wait, you just copy-pasted that.  Never mind!

Oh I have that much sense but the question is do you have this much sense to stop repeating and yapping on and discuss the matter or give it a rest.

You don't even believe in and follow Al Kulayni, Al  Sadooq or Al  Majlasi be it Kafi  or what ever but you do quote from it. And Sunni Scholars and your authentic books which are labelled authentic by you,

when we quote something from them or there your response is "yes we do believe his is a Sunni Scholar but we don't accept this or yes we do consider this book authentic but we don't accept that.

Be it quote, link provided or COPY AND PASTE, it's material to be accepted or refuted. Don't be so afraid and so scared of COPY AND PASTE because it's materialike and someone else's work but it's put forward because you wouldn't say or do it any better.

This saves time just as links as links are provided. You don't jump up and down when it comes to links but why are you so scared stiff when it comes to COPY AND PASTE. You're actually afraid of the material. You can't refute it by discussing it. That's the problem and that's what's worrying you.
Title: Re: Material for a New Sunni Defense Video
Post by: muslim720 on April 17, 2018, 01:19:28 PM
Oh I have that much sense but the question is do you have this much sense to stop repeating and yapping on and discuss the matter or give it a rest.

Wait a second my half-wit brother!  What is there to discuss?  Is this a new Shia debate tactic that when you are caught making a blunder of this magnitude that instead of apologizing you request a discussion?  Just so that you know, you were exposed.  I am appalled to see that you want to "discuss the matter".  This is like a person getting caught shoplifting and then telling the police, "well, let us discuss the matter".  No, you present your defense or you bear the consequences and the consequence for you is utter ridicule which you shamelessly try to avert.

Quote
You don't even believe in and follow Al Kulayni, Al  Sadooq or Al  Majlasi be it Kafi  or what ever but you do quote from it. And Sunni Scholars and your authentic books which are labelled authentic by you,

Online Shia debaters are terrible at comparisons.  You did not quote a Sunni book of hadith; you quoted a Sunni text written with the sole purpose of refuting Shiaism to support Shiaism.  It would be like me quoting "Peshawar Nights" or "Then I was Guided" to make a point in favor of Sunni Islam.  It would be like a Jew quoting "Mein Kampf" to promote Judaism or Jewish Heritage in Europe.  I can dumb this down even more for you if need be.  Just ask!

Quote
when we quote something from them or there your response is "yes we do believe his is a Sunni Scholar but we don't accept this or yes we do consider this book authentic but we don't accept that.

Whatever the heck that sentence was supposed to mean!

Quote
Be it quote, link provided or COPY AND PASTE, it's material to be accepted or refuted. Don't be so afraid and so scared of COPY AND PASTE because it's materialike and someone else's work but it's put forward because you wouldn't say or do it any better.

Another mindless sentence without any structure or meaning.

Quote
This saves time just as links as links are provided. You don't jump up and down when it comes to links but why are you so scared stiff when it comes to COPY AND PASTE. You're actually afraid of the material. You can't refute it by discussing it. That's the problem and that's what's worrying you.

Wow, zero shame!  If you read my refutation, you were caught lying on multiple levels.  Instead of issuing an apology, you're still pushing forward with your nonsense.  Maybe this saying will summarize your shamelessness if you understand Urdu: choree upar se seena zoree!
Title: Re: Material for a New Sunni Defense Video
Post by: Khaled on April 17, 2018, 05:47:03 PM
Honestly, reading Amin's replies is just depressing.  I can't tell if he's so ignorant that he doesn't realize he quoted from an anti-Shi'i book to prove the authenticity of a report, or if it really doesn't matter to him and all he cares about is aiding his sect.

I will try one more time to explain this to you so you can understand; it would be like someone quoting a hadeeth quoted by the TwelverShia.net team in an article refuting the Shi'a, and then saying, "oh look, I found this hadeeth in a Sunni source."  It's the most preposterous thing I've ever read
Title: Re: Material for a New Sunni Defense Video
Post by: iceman on April 17, 2018, 09:03:22 PM
Honestly, reading Amin's replies is just depressing.  I can't tell if he's so ignorant that he doesn't realize he quoted from an anti-Shi'i book to prove the authenticity of a report, or if it really doesn't matter to him and all he cares about is aiding his sect.

I will try one more time to explain this to you so you can understand; it would be like someone quoting a hadeeth quoted by the TwelverShia.net team in an article refuting the Shi'a, and then saying, "oh look, I found this hadeeth in a Sunni source."  It's the most preposterous thing I've ever read

Lets see if I can get through to you because I seem to have problems getting through to him (Muslim 720).

Would you mind putting the evidence forward by breaking it down and explaining it to me rather than accusing me of something than giving me funny and silly examples and trying to make me guess, when you can easily put the actual thing forward. Is this too much to ask for or is it too much for you?
Title: Re: Material for a New Sunni Defense Video
Post by: iceman on April 17, 2018, 09:21:34 PM
Wait a second my half-wit brother!  What is there to discuss?  Is this a new Shia debate tactic that when you are caught making a blunder of this magnitude that instead of apologizing you request a discussion?  Just so that you know, you were exposed.  I am appalled to see that you want to "discuss the matter".  This is like a person getting caught shoplifting and then telling the police, "well, let us discuss the matter".  No, you present your defense or you bear the consequences and the consequence for you is utter ridicule which you shamelessly try to avert.

Online Shia debaters are terrible at comparisons.  You did not quote a Sunni book of hadith; you quoted a Sunni text written with the sole purpose of refuting Shiaism to support Shiaism.  It would be like me quoting "Peshawar Nights" or "Then I was Guided" to make a point in favor of Sunni Islam.  It would be like a Jew quoting "Mein Kampf" to promote Judaism or Jewish Heritage in Europe.  I can dumb this down even more for you if need be.  Just ask!

Whatever the heck that sentence was supposed to mean!

Another mindless sentence without any structure or meaning.

Wow, zero shame!  If you read my refutation, you were caught lying on multiple levels.  Instead of issuing an apology, you're still pushing forward with your nonsense.  Maybe this saying will summarize your shamelessness if you understand Urdu: choree upar se seena zoree!

BLUNDER, ok WHAT BLUNDER? Get it WHAT BLUNDER? You've accused me of BLUNDER but you don't want to explain it, HOW and IN WHAT WAY.

Again CAUGHT MAKING A BLUNDER, you've accused me of something which you've mentioned but you don't want to explain it. How and in what way. I've asked you to discuss it, what I mean by this is you've accused of this bit you don't want to put the evidence forward.

You've accuse me of something and you've just mentioned it and that is it. You're repeating it like a parrot who's completely lost it but you don't want to explain it by how and in what way.

Being accused of a crime is one thing and then mentioning the crime is another. I say that is fine and this is what you've done. Now I'm asking you to explain and prove the crime that you believe I've committed and you're going awol over it.

As far as the rest of your crap based on funny and silly examples is concerned, I say save the examples and bring and put the actual thing forward. Discuss it with me by explaining the actual thing and not by explaining it through ridiculous examples.

Yes I do understand Urdu, CHOREE? Bhai choree ka ilzam lagaya hai tho ab sabath be tho karo. Ilzam laga kar idar udar kyu bagh rehai ho.
Title: Re: Material for a New Sunni Defense Video
Post by: iceman on April 17, 2018, 09:57:26 PM
"This is like a person getting caught shoplifting and then telling the police, "well, let us discuss the matter".  No, you present your defense or you bear the consequences and the consequence for you is utter ridicule which you shamelessly try to avert."

It looks like you've got to learn a lot about law. Lets DISCUSS  your example which you are so afraid to do and that is DISCUSS.

If a person gets caught shop lifting then that doesn't mean the police's job is done and it's down to the person caught. NO.The job of the police has just begun. They need to start preparing the case for the CPS, the CROWN PROSECUTION SERVICE.

It seems to me that you really need to know and learn a lot. You aren't the police and I haven't been caught but repeatedly like a parrot been accused of a crime which has been mentioned but not proven.You need to start explaining yourself or start preparing the case. Otherwise you've got ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to stand on.
Title: Re: Material for a New Sunni Defense Video
Post by: Khaled on April 17, 2018, 11:41:33 PM
*double post*
Title: Re: Material for a New Sunni Defense Video
Post by: Khaled on April 17, 2018, 11:43:30 PM
Lets see if I can get through to you because I seem to have problems getting through to him (Muslim 720).

Would you mind putting the evidence forward by breaking it down and explaining it to me rather than accusing me of something than giving me funny and silly examples and trying to make me guess, when you can easily put the actual thing forward. Is this too much to ask for or is it too much for you?

I don't mind at all, but I have a feeling you'll just ignore it... If you ask me to explain your blunder, then please have the decency to respond.

In http://forum.twelvershia.net/imamah-ghaybah/imamah-usul-al-din-or-usul-al-mathab/msg22030/#msg22030 (http://forum.twelvershia.net/imamah-ghaybah/imamah-usul-al-din-or-usul-al-mathab/msg22030/#msg22030), you copied and pasted a narration which said:

Quote
يَا عَلِيُّ أَبْشِرْ، فَإِنَّكَ وَأَصْحَابُكَ وَشِيعَتُكَ فِي الْجَنَّةِ

Now notice the list of sources:
Quote
1. Fadha’il al-Sahaba, by Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v2, p655

The chain says
Quote
قَالَ أَبُو مُكْرَمٍ عُقْبَةُ: وَكَانَ مِنَ الشِّيعَةِ

Not only is he classified as "maqbool" meaning his narrations can't be taken in isolation, the chain itself tells us that he was a Shi'i; hence, a Shi'i quoting a report saying "The Shi'i will be victorious."  Circular reasoning at its 12er finest.  Not to mention the rest of the chain is filled with problems; Abu Jahhaf is also Shi'i, and his saying "قال أبو مكرم" gives an implication that the chain is disconnected, Suwar bin Mus'ab is agreed upon his weakness, and Younus bin Bukair, while Sadooq, is known to make mistakes.  That's five quick problems with the chains that you can try to resolve.  Unfortunately, I know the 12er Hadeeth Shi'a science is not based on the authenticity of the chain, but rather, based on what you guys think will coincide with your theology.

Quote
2. Hilyatul Awliyaa, by Abu Nu’aym, v4, p329

Can't find it, if you can help me locate this I'd appreciate it.  My copy has a report about Imam Ali عليه السلام flogging someone.

Quote
3. Tarikh, by al-Khateeb al-Baghdadi, v12, p289

والله I couldn't have asked for anything more rediculous than this quote.  Look at what the report says!!:

Quote
أَنْتَ وَأَصْحَابُكَ فِي الْجَنَّةِ، أَنْتَ وَشِيعَتُكَ فِي الْجَنَّةِ، إِلا أَنَّ مِمَّنْ يُحِبُّكَ قَوْمًا يُضْفَزُونَ الإِسْلامَ بِأَلْسِنَتِهِمْ يَقْرَءُونَ الْقُرْآنَ لا يُجَاوِزْ تَرَاقِيَهُمْ، لَهُمْ نَبَزٌ يُسَمَّوْنَ الرَّافِضَةَ، فَإِذَا لَقِيتَهُمْ، فَجَاهِدْهُمْ فَإِنَّهُمْ مُشْرِكُونَ "، قَالَ: قُلْتُ: يَا رَسُولَ اللَّهِ، مَا عَلامَةُ ذَلِكَ فِيهِمْ؟ قَالَ: " يَتْرُكُونَ الْجُمُعَةَ وَالْجَمَاعَةَ، وَيَطْعَنُونَ فِي السَّلَفِ الأَوَّلِ

Honestly, this is significantly worse than the 7th quote!  If you can read Arabic you'd recognize the report says, "You and your companions are in heaven, you and your Shi'a are in heaven.  Except a group who (don't know the translation) Islam with their tongues, they read the Qur'an and it doesn't go past their throat, they have a distinction and are known as the Rafida.  If you meet them, fight them for their are Mushrisks!"  I said (i.e. Ali عليه السلام), "What is their sign?"  He said (i.e. the Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم), "They leave off the Jumu'ah and the Jama'ah, and they abuse the early generations."

While this report spectacularly backfired in your face, note that I do NOT authenticate this report as it is an obvious fabrication.  The fact that you just pick and chose PARTS of any fabrication you find just shows how desperate you are to aid your sect.  The true sign of a sectarian.

For the record, this report is found in other books of history like Tareek Dimashq as well.

Quote
4. al-Awsat, by al-Tabarani

Al-Awsat for the record, is a book written for reports that the author only found one teacher to narrated the chain from.  Although for the record, I also did not find this report here, if you can provide a page number (I'm obviously being facetious since I know you can't do that) I'd appreciate it.  I'm guessing the people you copied and pasted from relied on the following...

Quote
5. Majma’ al-Zawa’id, by al-Haythami, v10, pp 21-22

A tertiary source for the record as he quotes various reports from al-Awsat in praise of Ali عليه السلام with similar wording to the hadeeth you are quoting, WEAKENING every single one.

Quote
6. al-Darqunti, who said this tradition has been transmitted via numerous authorities.

Where, in which book?  If he said it has been narrated via numerous authorities, did he actually authenticate any of them?

Quote
7. al-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar Haythami , Ch. 11, section 1, p247

This book's full title is الصواعق المحرقة على أهل الرفض والضلال والزندقة "The Burning Lightning Bolts for the People of Rafd, Misguidance and Heresy."  LOL, I wonder why the people you copied and pasted that from didn't want to quote the full title.  He quotes the tradition four times, each time refuting the Shi'as for using it and calling it weak.  The fact that those you copied and pasted that from were so shameless in quoting this just shows what level of sincerity the people that wrote it had.  It's literally like someone quoting my post right now and going, "look, this hadeeth is in a Sunni source."

What a depressing, depressing post...
Title: Re: Material for a New Sunni Defense Video
Post by: muslim720 on April 18, 2018, 12:07:47 PM
BLUNDER, ok WHAT BLUNDER? Get it WHAT BLUNDER? You've accused me of BLUNDER but you don't want to explain it, HOW and IN WHAT WAY.

How many different ways can I explain it to you?  I have already explained it in English; I can do the same in Dari, Pashto, Urdu, Hindi and maybe Punjabi.

Let us start fresh.  Did you quote from Al-Sawa'iq Al-Muhriqah by ibn Hajar Al-Haytami (rah) to prove a point in favor of Shiaism?  Yes or no?

Quote
Again CAUGHT MAKING A BLUNDER, you've accused me of something which you've mentioned but you don't want to explain it. How and in what way. I've asked you to discuss it, what I mean by this is you've accused of this bit you don't want to put the evidence forward.

Did you quote from Al-Sawa'iq Al-Muhriqah to substantiate one or more Shia beliefs?  I will dumb this down as much as you want so that someday you realize that you were arguing not to learn but just to argue.

Quote
You've accuse me of something and you've just mentioned it and that is it. You're repeating it like a parrot who's completely lost it but you don't want to explain it by how and in what way.

In order to prove the correctness of Shiaism, did you copy-paste an article which quoted Al-Sawa'iq Al-Muhriqah by Al-Haytami (rah)?  Yes or no?

Quote
Being accused of a crime is one thing and then mentioning the crime is another. I say that is fine and this is what you've done. Now I'm asking you to explain and prove the crime that you believe I've committed and you're going awol over it.

In an attempt to prove your point (to supplement your beliefs), did you quote an article which quoted Al-Sawa'iq Al-Muhriqah?  Yes or no?

Quote
As far as the rest of your crap based on funny and silly examples is concerned, I say save the examples and bring and put the actual thing forward. Discuss it with me by explaining the actual thing and not by explaining it through ridiculous examples.

Here is the start of the discussion.  Did you or did you not quote an article which cites Al-Sawa'iq Al-Muhriqah to substantiate one or more Shi'i beliefs?

Quote
Yes I do understand Urdu, CHOREE? Bhai choree ka ilzam lagaya hai tho ab sabath be tho karo. Ilzam laga kar idar udar kyu bagh rehai ho.

Bhaagna to aap logo ki fitrat mein hai!  Main phir se apna sawaal dohrata hoo, kyuki aapka dimaag ghaas charne gaya hai.  Apni aqaaid ko saabit karne ke liye, kya aapne Al-Sawa'iq Al-Muhriqah se hawaala pesh kiya ya nahi?  Haa yaa naa?

Quote
It looks like you've got to learn a lot about law. Lets DISCUSS  your example which you are so afraid to do and that is DISCUSS.

I am discussing with you and starting anew, leaving all my "crap based on funny and silly examples" aside.  Did you, in hopes to prove Shiaism true, quote from Al-Sawa'iq Al-Muhriqah?  Yes or no?

Quote
If a person gets caught shop lifting then that doesn't mean the police's job is done and it's down to the person caught. NO.The job of the police has just begun. They need to start preparing the case for the CPS, the CROWN PROSECUTION SERVICE.

Awesome!  So let us prepare a case for or against you.  Did you try to prove one or more Shi'i beliefs by quoting Al-Sawa'iq Al-Muhriqah?  Yes or no?

Quote
It seems to me that you really need to know and learn a lot. You aren't the police and I haven't been caught but repeatedly like a parrot been accused of a crime which has been mentioned but not proven.You need to start explaining yourself or start preparing the case. Otherwise you've got ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to stand on.

Case has been initiated; did you quote from Al-Sawa'iq Al-Muhriqah to validate one or more Shi'i beliefs?  Yes or no?
Title: Re: Material for a New Sunni Defense Video
Post by: Khaled on April 18, 2018, 04:48:36 PM
Case has been initiated; did you quote from Al-Sawa'iq Al-Muhriqah to validate one or more Shi'i beliefs?  Yes or no?

The quote from Tarikh al-Baghadad is just as bad if not even worse
Title: Re: Material for a New Sunni Defense Video
Post by: iceman on April 18, 2018, 05:43:50 PM
I just don't understand what the hell took you so long. You could have done this in the first instant and place, without all the drama and who haa. Why does it take a few knocks on the head and really good kick in to get certain people going. That's ok, I'll pat myself on the back for eventually getting you to come around.
Title: Re: Material for a New Sunni Defense Video
Post by: muslim720 on April 18, 2018, 06:18:16 PM
The quote from Tarikh al-Baghadad is just as bad if not even worse

I don't know Arabic nor do I have the book so I exposed him on what I could research and it was enough to establish that Iceman, along with those who wrote that article, are extremely ignorant.

Iceman also presented the following reference: "Yanabi al-Mawaddah, by al-Qundoozi al-Hanafi, p62".  Al-Qundoozi Al-Hanafi is not Sunni.

And another lie: "Sunni reference: Rabi al-Abrar, by al-Zamakhshari".  Al-Zamakhshari was a Mu'tazili, not Sunni.

How about this reference: "al-Tabarani, on the authority of Imam ‘Ali"....that is not even a reference!  Furthermore, the two were not contemporaries so Al-Tabarani could not have heard it from Imam Ali (ra) without a chain (and we have been given no chain, no book name to look up the chain, nothing).

Similar reference: "al-Hafidh Jamaluddin al-Dharandi, on the authority of Ibn Abbas"

Here is another reference: "al-Tabarani, as quoted in:"  Al-Tabarani, as quoted in WHAT, WHICH BOOK?  The reference reads as follows, "al-Tabarani, as quoted in:"  SubhanAllah!

We are not done; here is another reference: "Ibn Abi Hatam, as mentioned in:"  Reference ends with no book name, nothing.

More references:
"Ibn al-Najjar, on the authority of Ibn Abbas"....how is this a reference?

"Abu Nu’aym and Ibn Asakir, on the authority of Abu Layla"....no book name, nothing!
Title: Re: Material for a New Sunni Defense Video
Post by: muslim720 on April 18, 2018, 06:22:15 PM
I just don't understand what the hell took you so long.

Better late than never!  Now don't go into hiding; answer my points and also Khaled's, please!
Title: Re: Material for a New Sunni Defense Video
Post by: iceman on April 18, 2018, 06:29:57 PM
Better late than never!  Now don't go into hiding; answer my points and also Khaled's, please!

I've never been into hiding and I've never ran from anything and you know that. It's not in my nature.
Title: Re: Material for a New Sunni Defense Video
Post by: muslim720 on April 18, 2018, 06:56:28 PM
I've never been into hiding and I've never ran from anything and you know that. It's not in my nature.

Maybe you can put your money where your mouth is; address our points!
Title: Re: Material for a New Sunni Defense Video
Post by: Khaled on April 18, 2018, 07:14:15 PM
I just don't understand what the hell took you so long. You could have done this in the first instant and place, without all the drama and who haa. Why does it take a few knocks on the head and really good kick in to get certain people going. That's ok, I'll pat myself on the back for eventually getting you to come around.

The reason it took so long is because it actually took me a long time to write that post; its basically me wasting my time while you choose to ignore everything I said, like usual.

But now that you have read that, do you not see the problem with your post?  Or are you still buckling down?
Title: Re: Material for a New Sunni Defense Video
Post by: iceman on April 18, 2018, 08:24:15 PM
Maybe you can put your money where your mouth is; address our points!

I've always done that and everything is here on this site in black and white. You just don't want to open your eyes because you're too afraid to see your own ignorance.
Title: Re: Material for a New Sunni Defense Video
Post by: iceman on April 18, 2018, 08:27:15 PM
The reason it took so long is because it actually took me a long time to write that post; its basically me wasting my time while you choose to ignore everything I said, like usual.

But now that you have read that, do you not see the problem with your post?  Or are you still buckling down?

Thank God you two aren't police officers otherwise you would be leaving everything to the accused. Some officers you two would make.
Title: Re: Material for a New Sunni Defense Video
Post by: Khaled on April 18, 2018, 09:34:01 PM
Thank God you two aren't police officers otherwise you would be leaving everything to the accused. Some officers you two would make.

What a truly insincere person...
Title: Re: Material for a New Sunni Defense Video
Post by: iceman on April 18, 2018, 10:05:47 PM
What a truly insincere person...

Just talking facts.
Title: Re: Material for a New Sunni Defense Video
Post by: Khaled on April 18, 2018, 10:24:27 PM
Just talking facts.

Facts you quoted from al-Sawa'iq al-Muhriqah lol?  You are truly an embarrassment
Title: Re: Material for a New Sunni Defense Video
Post by: iceman on April 18, 2018, 10:47:50 PM
Facts you quoted from al-Sawa'iq al-Muhriqah lol?  You are truly an embarrassment

Is that the only reference you've seen?

"You are truly an embarrassment"

Here comes the air and wind again.
Title: Re: Material for a New Sunni Defense Video
Post by: iceman on April 18, 2018, 11:08:20 PM
Facts you quoted from al-Sawa'iq al-Muhriqah lol?  You are truly an embarrassment

This is what Muslim 720 says in post #53,

:If you had that much sense, you may not have quoted from Al-Sawa'iq Al-Muhriqah.  Oh wait, you just copy-pasted that"

And this is Muslim 720 from post #62,

"Case has been initiated; did you quote from Al-Sawa'iq Al-Muhriqah to validate one or more Shi'i beliefs?  Yes or no?"

Look what he says first,

"you may not have quoted from Al-Sawa'iq Al-Muhriqah."

Look what he says next,

"Oh wait, you just copy-pasted that"

And look what comes next,

"did you quote from Al-Sawa'iq Al-Muhriqah to validate one or more Shi'i beliefs?  Yes or no?"

He's all over the place, isn't he.

And here is the start and very beginning of my case in defence.

Was it my quote? Or was it copy and paste? Did I put the material forward as my work and was it from me? Or did I put someone else's work forward and asked your opinion on it?

This is what I put at the end of the post,

"'IT'S NOT ACTUALLY THE COPY AND PASTE THAT YOU'RE HESITANT AND AFRAID OF BUT ACTUALLY THE MATERIAL ITSELF. DO TELL ME HOW YOU FOUND THE RESPONSE AND PLEASE DO REFUTE IT IF YOU WISH TO. THAT IS YOUR RIGHT AND THAT IS WHAT BRINGS ABOUT A HEALTHY DISCUSSION."

It was a lengthy post with a lot of references but you didn't comment on them but found only one or two to comment on because it benefited your desire and you thought it gave you the edge.
Title: Re: Material for a New Sunni Defense Video
Post by: Khaled on April 18, 2018, 11:31:11 PM
*snip*
It was a lengthy post with a lot of references but you didn't comment on them but found only one or two to comment on because it benefited your desire and you thought it gave you the edge.

Our problem with that article was that the author quoted a narration from al-Sawa'iq al-Muhriqah to prove that it was in a "Sunni source."  You, being completely ignorant, were unaware and you quoted it saying "I couldn't have said it more accurately" (LOL).  I went through EVERY SINGLE reference the author made to that hadeeth and showed that only a brain dead sectarian could possibly take that seriously.

You are embarrassing dude
Title: Re: Material for a New Sunni Defense Video
Post by: iceman on April 18, 2018, 11:32:29 PM
Be it work or news, if it's from you and your the source then you are accountable and have to give an explanation. But if it's not from you and you've just put it forward or passed it on and expect it to be challenged/refuted then are you accountable and explainable when you aren't the source and reason?

This is the beginning of my case in defence. Thank God you two aren't police officers or lawyers/solicitors because you'd be an absolute embarrassment to the force or the law profession.
Title: Re: Material for a New Sunni Defense Video
Post by: Khaled on April 18, 2018, 11:46:56 PM
Be it work or news, if it's from you and your the source then you are accountable and have to give an explanation. But if it's not from you and you've just put it forward or passed it on and expect it to be challenged/refuted then are you accountable and explainable when you aren't the source and reason?

This is the beginning of my case in defence. Thank God you two aren't police officers or lawyers/solicitors because you'd be an absolute embarrassment to the force or the law profession.

So I didn't give an explanation?  Are you serious?  ;D

I honestly am feeling so embarrassed for you right now, just admit you quoted a hadeeth from an anti-Shi'a work without knowing it and move on.  We already know you don't know the basics of Islam; so I don't expect you to know a work like al-Sawaa'iq al-Muhriqah.  However, the people you blindly copied and pasted from should be ashamed of themselves
Title: Re: Material for a New Sunni Defense Video
Post by: iceman on April 19, 2018, 12:59:00 AM
So I didn't give an explanation?  Are you serious?  ;D

I honestly am feeling so embarrassed for you right now, just admit you quoted a hadeeth from an anti-Shi'a work without knowing it and move on.  We already know you don't know the basics of Islam; so I don't expect you to know a work like al-Sawaa'iq al-Muhriqah.  However, the people you blindly copied and pasted from should be ashamed of themselves

You don't have to feel embarrassed for me just have a little dignity and respect for yourself before speaking about others. Did I quote or did I copy and paste? Make up your mind first. Regardless of what you think of me I'm definitely giving you a run for your money.

You said, "you quoted a hadeeth from an anti-Shi'a work" then you say, "the people you blindly copied and pasted from" make up your mind, quote or copy and paste?
Title: Re: Material for a New Sunni Defense Video
Post by: muslim720 on April 19, 2018, 04:05:14 PM
This is what Muslim 720 says in post #53,

:If you had that much sense, you may not have quoted from Al-Sawa'iq Al-Muhriqah.  Oh wait, you just copy-pasted that"

And this is Muslim 720 from post #62,

"Case has been initiated; did you quote from Al-Sawa'iq Al-Muhriqah to validate one or more Shi'i beliefs?  Yes or no?"

Look what he says first,

"you may not have quoted from Al-Sawa'iq Al-Muhriqah."

Look what he says next,

"Oh wait, you just copy-pasted that"

And look what comes next,

"did you quote from Al-Sawa'iq Al-Muhriqah to validate one or more Shi'i beliefs?  Yes or no?"

He's all over the place, isn't he.

I am trying every single way to get you to (first) acknowledge that you copy-pasted an article (in other words, quoted an article) which referenced Al-Sawa'iq Al-Muhriqah to substantiate Shiaism.  You are too afraid to take responsibility of your action, let alone issue an apology for your huge blunder.
Title: Re: Material for a New Sunni Defense Video
Post by: iceman on April 19, 2018, 04:48:24 PM
I am trying every single way to get you to (first) acknowledge that you copy-pasted an article (in other words, quoted an article) which referenced Al-Sawa'iq Al-Muhriqah to substantiate Shiaism.  You are too afraid to take responsibility of your action, let alone issue an apology for your huge blunder.

Come on, I'm sure you can do better than that. Give it a try. Read your own posts, one thing contradicts the other. You're all over the place. Sort yourself out and think before you say and speak.
Title: Re: Material for a New Sunni Defense Video
Post by: muslim720 on April 19, 2018, 05:10:51 PM
Come on, I'm sure you can do better than that. Give it a try. Read your own posts, one thing contradicts the other. You're all over the place. Sort yourself out and think before you say and speak.

I promise I will get to my "contradictions".  Can you now man up to address what Khaled and I have pointed out?
Title: Re: Material for a New Sunni Defense Video
Post by: Khaled on April 19, 2018, 07:27:32 PM
You don't have to feel embarrassed for me just have a little dignity and respect for yourself before speaking about others. Did I quote or did I copy and paste? Make up your mind first. Regardless of what you think of me I'm definitely giving you a run for your money.

You said, "you quoted a hadeeth from an anti-Shi'a work" then you say, "the people you blindly copied and pasted from" make up your mind, quote or copy and paste?

Come on, I'm sure you can do better than that. Give it a try. Read your own posts, one thing contradicts the other. You're all over the place. Sort yourself out and think before you say and speak.  ;)
Title: Re: Material for a New Sunni Defense Video
Post by: iceman on April 19, 2018, 08:27:26 PM
Come on, I'm sure you can do better than that. Give it a try. Read your own posts, one thing contradicts the other. You're all over the place. Sort yourself out and think before you say and speak.  ;)

It's nice to know that I'm worthy of being copied.
Title: Re: Material for a New Sunni Defense Video
Post by: Khaled on April 19, 2018, 08:34:02 PM
It's nice to know that I'm worthy of being copied.

 ;D So, you're going to continue hiding in occultation from my post, huh?
Title: Re: Material for a New Sunni Defense Video
Post by: iceman on April 21, 2018, 09:29:07 PM
;D So, you're going to continue hiding in occultation from my post, huh?

You really need to do something about that ignorance of yours. You don't hide or continue to hide in occultation, you are put into occultation on the orders and command of Allah. Go and learn the meaning of occultation and what  the Islamic ruling is concerning it. Your posts are very easy to refute.
Title: Re: Material for a New Sunni Defense Video
Post by: Abdul Samad on April 27, 2018, 11:33:07 AM
Your meaning of occultation contradicts the actual meaning of occultation go and learn yourself first.
Title: Re: Material for a New Sunni Defense Video
Post by: iceman on April 27, 2018, 01:33:32 PM
Your meaning of occultation contradicts the actual meaning of occultation go and learn yourself first.

Why don't you point it out to me by putting it forward.