well not only hazrat ali had his son name after shabah also
hadrat hasan .hdrat zainulabidin had thier children name after shabah…no logic behind ur statement…fact is hadrat ali and others loved sahabah …(hadrat umer r.a etc) and u dont…give it a thought.
QUOTE]
Brother dont beat around the bushes … you said a person won’t name his son on the name of his enemy… But it didnt turn out to be true…
since Umar Ibne Abduwad was a very well known enemy of Islam.
Now twisiting your logic that a perosn would name only when he love someone… doesnt prove anything… its making assumptions too prove nothing man nothing… lame excuses doesnt justify anything. If i name by son bihari… now would it mean i am impressed with your dumb and personality heck NO
by Imam Zain-ul-Abedin… which son’s name are you talking about
any details man… I hope you are not talking about Imam Mohammad Baqar … caz its not bakr… pronounced totally different.
and also… whats the name of Hazrat Ali’s daughter that married Umar???
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by bao bihari: *
plz prove that ublieve quran which we all read is complete according to shia believe…
[QUOTE]
Brother if you would have bothered to read the site www.al-islam.org you won’t have asked such a dumb question. Read the ayat of Quran
“Today I have perfected your religion and completed my favour upon you, and I was satisfied that Islam be your religion.” (Qur’an 5:3)
Quran itself testifies our religon to be perfect, So there is no way Quran is incomplete…
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by bao bihari: *
u cant find ur own hadith book?
[QUOTE]
Bro i dont livin in States… nor I am a scholar to have all these sounces in my hands… but you know wat bro… based on these dumb logic you have been cooking that dont mean anything i dont even thing its worth it… Earlier you accused us for forcination based on some info you learnt from anti shia propoganda sites… and you still dont have answer on as to what did we forcinated… I dont trust your sources man… You not worth to waste my time to analyze your dumb and crazy logic… which history itself disproves.
That's what the web site said? Are you reading the same article as everyone else?
I'll repeat my earlier question:
Abdur-Rahman bin Abdul Qari said: "I went out in the company of 'Umar ibn al-Khattab one night in Ramadhan to the mosque and found the people praying in different groups. A man praying alone or a man praying with a group praying behind him..." (Bukhari)
[/QUOTE]
Brother ignoring the latter part of hadith doesnt justify anything... Lemme give you the whole hadith again
'Abdur Rahman bin 'Abd ul-Qariy said, "I went out in the company of 'Umar bin Al-Khattab one night in Ramadan to the mosque and found the people praying in different groups. A man praying alone or a man praying with a little group behind him. So, 'Umar said, 'In my opinion I would better collect these (people) under the leadership of one Qari (Reciter) (i.e. let them pray in congregation!)'. So, he made up his mind to congregate them behind Ubai bin Ka'b. Then on another night I went again in his company and the people were praying behind their reciter. On that, 'Umar remarked, 'What an excellent Bid'a (i.e. innovation in religion) this is; but the prayer which they do not perform, but sleep at its time is better than the one they are offering.' He meant the prayer in the last part of the night. (In those days) people used to pray in the early part of the night."
What is the bidat here Umar is talking about... ?????? and as to whatever the bidat it is... does he have a right to introduce bidat's????
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Iqbal1089: *
Is this the same web site that calls a mutah wife a "rented woman"?
Iqbal
[/QUOTE]
Brother there is a lot of things in the website.. can you please show me as to excatly where did you learn that on the website before you accuse....
I have asked you sunni brohter's agian and again...but haven't got any answerers and i would repeat the same question hoping you might have an answer for it... If performing muttah is nauzubillah prostitution... then why is there a clause of divorce... what would you call a person... who would marry a girl and after one night he gives her a divorce and pay her Haq Mehar????
Nauzubillah if one thinks he is smart enough to judge the practices allowed by Prophet Mohammad P.B.U.H. in different terms ... what would you call a people gathering in Mecca and making circles of four walls???? What does that imply
Brohter if its a teaching of God, He knows whats the best....
and as to why did he introduce it.
Sholay bahi... you still didnt answer my question... what would Prophet Mohammad P.B.U.H. implied by calling so many people back and gathering them and making a pulpit and then make them give their alligance to Hazrat Ali
read the context of the ayats and incident man of the website www.al-islam.org
Brother ignoring the latter part of hadith doesnt justify anything...
[/quote]
Don't worry, we will get to the end of the hadith in good time. The beginning of the hadith, however, would seem to be a more appropriate place to start. So perhaps you might like to have another go at explaining the first part of the hadith in light of your argument that the Prophet (s) stopped tarawih altogether. If the Prophet (s) stopped tarawih, what were all these people up to in the mosque BEFORE 'Umar (r) united them behind a single reciter?
[quote] Brother there is a lot of things in the website.. can you please show me as to excatly where did you learn that on the website before you accuse....
[/quote]
If you actually bothered to read what other people write in their replies you would have noticed that i've already mentioned this on page 10 of this thread (during a reply to you). It is found in the very same article we were discussing earlier regarding the prohibition or otherwise of virgins contracting mutah. I gave the relevant section heading from that article.
well not only hazrat ali had his son name after shabah also
hadrat hasan .hdrat zainulabidin had thier children name after shabah…no logic behind ur statement…fact is hadrat ali and others loved sahabah …(hadrat umer r.a etc) and u dont…give it a thought.
QUOTE]
Brother dont beat around the bushes … you said a person won’t name his son on the name of his enemy… But it didnt turn out to be true…
since Umar Ibne Abduwad was a very well known enemy of Islam.
Now twisiting your logic that a perosn would name only when he love someone… doesnt prove anything… its making assumptions too prove nothing man nothing… lame excuses doesnt justify anything. If i name by son bihari… now would it mean i am impressed with your dumb and personality heck NO
by Imam Zain-ul-Abedin… which son’s name are you talking about
any details man… I hope you are not talking about Imam Mohammad Baqar … caz its not bakr… pronounced totally different.
and also… whats the name of Hazrat Ali’s daughter that married Umar???
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by bao bihari: *
plz prove that ublieve quran which we all read is complete according to shia believe…
[QUOTE]
Brother if you would have bothered to read the site www.al-islam.org you won’t have asked such a dumb question. Read the ayat of Quran
“Today I have perfected your religion and completed my favour upon you, and I was satisfied that Islam be your religion.” (Qur’an 5:3)
Quran itself testifies our religon to be perfect, So there is no way Quran is incomplete…
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by bao bihari: *
u cant find ur own hadith book?
assalam olaikum
1-i did not wanted to answrer that dumb logic of urs…that was a name he(umar )had even before islam…
my qustion remains intact if naming a person is no problem why not u name ur children after sahabah r.a …ok if name is no problem why not name yazeed …whats wrong with this name no one in the world has this name (muslims ofcourse)…
2-ur second point is about hadrat zainulabidin…okz
a-hadrat ali r.a mariied his daughter um-e-kulsoom with hadrat umer r.a (tazkiratul aaimma…there is a separate chapter in ur hadith book about this nikah …bab fil tazweej um e kulsoom…plz i cannot translate the words used there for hadrat sahabah…see it for ur self…for e.g translate the word "zalik faraj ghasbnahho"astaghfirrullah)
b-hadrat zainulabiden son name was umer he was also called as abu bakr (bihar ul anwar vol 2 pg3…tazkirathul aaimma pg 96)
3—about quran…
i have given some refrences do check these refrences out…i can open a new thread to prove that ur quran is different then ours…if u want to other wise these refrences r enough to prove that…if u dont have thee books i have …i m dead sure that i am right…
4---- about taqiyyah and katmaan…
will provide these refrences tommorow dont have time tommorow…
Without realizing it, you’ve already answered the question.
Here is an excerpt from the Shia site that you solely rely on:
Oath of Allegiance
After his speech, the Messenger of Allah [s] asked everybody to give the oath of allegiance to 'Ali [a] and congratulate him. Among those who did so was 'Umar b. al-Khattab, who said:
“Well done Ibn Abi Talib! Today you became the Leader (mawla) of all believing men and women.”
Number of People in Ghadir Khumm
Allah ordered His Prophet [s] to inform the people of this designation at a time of crowded populous so that all could become the narrators of the tradition, while they exceeded a hundred thousand.
Narrated by Zayd b. Arqam: Abu al-Tufayl said: “I heard it from the Messenger of Allah [s], and there was no one (there) except that he saw him with his eyes and heard him with his ears.”
The reason why the Prophet gave the Sermon was because it was an order by ALLAH SWT. The Prophet PBUH knew his time was near. It was not an order to grant succession. It was an order to bear witness that the Prophet PBUH had done the job that he was sent for! Delivering the Message. The Qur’aan testifies to this.
Don’t you think it is ironic that all 70,000+ believers after giving alleigance as you state, turned heel as soon as the Prophet PBUH died.
This indicates that all the believers were Hypocrites including Ali RA as he went along with giving bayat three times before his Caliphate and also the Prophet PBUh failed in his mission to deliver the Message and be a mercy and light to all mankind, because they all became Hypocrites.
Please take time out and decide for yourself the logic of history before following blindly a site which you believe to be your peer.
I know you always ask for links and references and so forth for everything we state. If I was to produce and ardent anti shia site and books confirming our postion, with convincing arguments. Would you accept?
I doubt it.
Therefore please take heed and at least grasp the nature of the Arabic language prior to debating the Ghadeer issue, as this is the only straw you have left to confirm your position.
Sholay bahi I am sorry to say … but it seems like you have no idea what are you talking about… damm bro you are too confused of a person… Didnt you yourself said that you all believe in Ghadeer too… and when i asked for alligance part… you could come with the lasmes arguement possible…l the part you posted …lets see what it says
Among those who did so was 'Umar b. al-Khattab, who said:
“Well done Ibn Abi Talib! Today you became the Leader (mawla) of all believing men and women.”
Ok what is Umar congratulating him for… why were people giving alligance to Hazrat Ali and not Prophet… Yeah thats what it implies Prophet knew his time was near and thats why he declared Hazrat Ali as the Maula…(i guess so people dont ignore is his funeral services and elect their own khaleefa and start divinding themselves, and people like Yazeed dont come in power) and he also gave the hadith
“It seems the time approached when I shall be called away (by Allah) and I shall answer that call. I am leaving for you two precious things and if you adhere to them both, you will never go astray after me. They are the Book of Allah and my Progeny, that is my Ahlul Bayt. The two shall never separate from each other until they come to me by the Pool (of Paradise).”
and i guess if you look at the context of history… the hadith stands for itself… its the Ahlul Bayt that has been defending Islam at different instances… one great example can be seen in the battle of Karbala, where Imam Hussain sacrificed his family but didnt give his alligance to Karbala…
and brother i didnt say" all 70,000+ believers after giving alleigance as you state, turned heel as soon as the Prophet PBUH died".. But some sure did… Khilafat was more important to them then the funeral services of Prophet Mohammad… you want to talk about numbers … you know how many people were in the army of Imam Hussain at Karbela.. there were 72 altogether including Imam’s family and his companions… whereas Yazeed army was in large numbers… what kinda muslims were they who gave there alligence to Yazeed… and wanted Imam Hussain to give too… how ironic is that… and yeah i guess i justified my Part on why did Hazrat Ali gave his alligance… and since you have an answer you ignored it…Lemme give you the site again.. .read it
Muslims have a tradition of giving kafan and burrying … but what kinda muslims were those.. who burried their companions but left bodies of family of Prophet and their companions lying on the sand… It was Islamic Khilafat… i am sure those out numbered people in his army were also muslims… who have right to elect their own khaleefa right??? the same way you claim Umar was elected.
assalam olaikum
1-i did not wanted to answrer that dumb logic of urs..........that was a name he(umar )had even before islam..............
my qustion remains intact if naming a person is no problem why not u name ur children after sahabah r.a ..............................ok if name is no problem why not name yazeed ........whats wrong with this name no one in the world has this name (muslims ofcourse).......
2-ur second point is about hadrat zainulabidin......okz
a-hadrat ali r.a mariied his daughter um-e-kulsoom with hadrat umer r.a (tazkiratul aaimma..................there is a separate chapter in ur hadith book about this nikah ...bab fil tazweej um e kulsoom..............plz i cannot translate the words used there for hadrat sahabah......see it for ur self........for e.g translate the word "zalik faraj ghasbnahho"astaghfirrullah)
b-hadrat zainulabiden son name was umer he was also called as abu bakr (bihar ul anwar vol 2 pg3.......tazkirathul aaimma pg 96)
3---about quran.......
i have given some refrences do check these refrences out.........i can open a new thread to prove that ur quran is different then ours....if u want to other wise these refrences r enough to prove that..........if u dont have thee books i have .............i m dead sure that i am right.......
4---- about taqiyyah and katmaan........
will provide these refrences tommorow dont have time tommorow...
[/QUOTE]
Babu Bahi ... rahi nah woh dum teri soh teri... If people don't want to name their sons yazeed or Umar its their choice... there is no law written in the book if you hate someone you won't name your son... its a damm name .... stop cooking lame logics that dont mean anything.
Babu Bahi nazubillah are you trying to say like christians have different version of bible .. .we muslims too... brother thats what makes Quran most authentic... if you doubt on authenticity of Quran go and read a Quran from shia website and then on sunni website.. same 30 paras.. same number of surah's and same number of ayats... infact read it from any part of the world and it will be the same....if you are using some hadith it must be weak...noting like that preached by our Imam's either... how can you just make such an accusation on islam... i dont trust your sources man... its some anti shia propoganda you are reading which is just accusationss beause once you read Quran or compare .. its all same and will be the same till the day of Judgement..... anywayzz any feedback on accusations of forcination?
Don't worry, we will get to the end of the hadith in good time. The beginning of the hadith, however, would seem to be a more appropriate place to start. So perhaps you might like to have another go at explaining the first part of the hadith in light of your argument that the Prophet (s) stopped tarawih altogether. If the Prophet (s) stopped tarawih, what were all these people up to in the mosque BEFORE 'Umar (r) united them behind a single reciter?
If you actually bothered to read what other people write in their replies you would have noticed that i've already mentioned this on page 10 of this thread (during a reply to you). It is found in the very same article we were discussing earlier regarding the prohibition or otherwise of virgins contracting mutah. I gave the relevant section heading from that article.
Iqbal
[/QUOTE]
Iqbal... ok fine if you wanna say the people were praying taraweeh...can you still justify the innovation Umar is talking about... Lemme give you another hadith... I can provide you the source to it....
It was taken from a place where this hadith is used to justify there should be 20 rakats in taraweeh and the hadith they use shows its Umar who ordered 20 rakats and not Prophet Mohammad P.B.U.H.
Theevidence which proves that Umar (radiallahu anhu) ordered the practise of 20 rak'ahshas been recorded by Shaykh Ali al-Muttaqi al-Hindi[10] in the largest collection ofHadith available today: Kanz al-Ummal fi Sunan al-aqwal wal Af'al[11], as follows from Ubayy ibn Ka'b(radiallahu anhu):
"Umar (radiallahu anhu) ordered him (Ubayy) to leadthe people in prayer at night in Ramadan, because the people fast during theday and can not recite (the Qur'an) well, therefore it is better that youshould recite (the Qur'an) during the night. I (Ubayy) asked: "O commanderof the believers, this thing was not done before." He said: "I know,but it is a good practise", and so (Ubayy) led (the Companion's) for 20 rak'ahs."
There are so many pages in the forum man i am sorry i cant memorize each and every post or conversation... why dont you show me exactly where did you get it from... ... Wonder why did you ignore my earlier question
Lemme state it again
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Insaniyat: *
I have asked you sunni brohter's agian and again...but haven't got any answerers and i would repeat the same question hoping you might have an answer for it... If performing muttah is nauzubillah prostitution... then why is there a clause of divorce... what would you call a person... who would marry a girl and after one night he gives her a divorce and pay her Haq Mehar????
Nauzubillah if one thinks he is smart enough to judge the practices allowed by Prophet Mohammad P.B.U.H. in different terms ... what would you call a people gathering in Mecca and making circles of four walls???? What does that imply
Ok, looking at Insaniyat's last response, it seems maybe I wasn't very clear earlier, when I said, just put the closing comments, and not carry on the discussion.
If you guys wanna talk about taraweeh, feel free to open a new thread. Just keep it devoid of any name-calling.
If you have some unfinished business about mut'ah which was the topic of this thread, again, start a new thread, and keep it focussed on that topic.
This thread is now closed. I hope we all learned something from here. I certainly did.
