Are Sunni Muslim??

Society Religion & Philosophy
141

Loser talks loser listens loser argues loser replies, loser calls loser names, loser..loser loser....

all of us have too much time in hands calling each other names kafirs and what not. None dare to call anyone MUSLIM cos none of us are. RIGHT are those who agree that these factions are only created POLITICALY...shias agree that mohammad made ALI heir to the throne(that is political deviation, from islam), so what? get over it, you cant change history damnit. So ALI was betrayed noone killed him for the throne he got his trun after three GOOD CALIPHS.

BUT THERE are no more KHALIFAS or their CALIPHATES. THEY are all destroyed by your popoular christain KINGS and queens and popes.
THERE is only WESTERN WORLD we have inherited from GORA SAHIB. WALYATI BABOOS. nothing is left anymore but that.

Sunni, shia, ismaili, deobandi, hanfi, bokhari, nehari, kababi , sharabi...all these sects and other sects are hell bound hell raisers.

None will go to heaven, bad news is just waiting out there after their deaths. If there is A GOD
he has closed his eyes in DISGUST for all the muslims who believe in SECT and stuff.

SECTS are for losers.

CAll your self a MUSLIM after practicing quran in arabic, and comprehending it in arabic and living it practically.

Not by some bull crap INTERPRETATIONS of some dudes in BFE aeons ago and writing books on it. SECT is pure RAPE of ISLAM

SECT is *******IZING ISLAM.

LOSERS wake up smell TEA or COFFEE and stop getting HIGH on name callings and sect bashing.

cogito ergo sum... "I think therefore I am..." & "I am therefore I think"

142

[quote]
Originally posted by a1shah:
**Brother Degas,

I suggest you ask your scholar as to whether the present Qur'an is in the correct order.

It is universally accepted that the qur'an in its current form has new verses (Medinite) that come before older verses (Meccan).

**
[/quote]

Does this sequence make some type of problem or controvercy ?? If Quranis complete in the eyes of all muslims then whats the prob ? Please give some credit to Hazrat Usman for putting it together... If after Hazrat Ali didnt had any prob with the sequence who has?

143

Hang on a second? Is it just me or has this discussion suddenly turned into a whose-Quran-has-been-altered mudfest?

I always that that the Arabic wording content of the Quran as followed by the Shia Muslims is identical to the Arabic wording content of the Quran as followed by Sunni Muslims.

The only difference that I have read about is a difference in ordering, and also that (and could one of the Shia brothers/sisters please tell me if I'm right/wrong on this) the Quran as followed by the Shia Muslims contains 112 chapters, as in 2 instances 2 chapters from the Quran of the Sunnis are merged, as they are chapters not separated by "Bismillah".

144

Brother, I think that you have over-simplified here. Just as my prayer would be nullified if I were to say the name of Umar (ra) during namaaz, it would also be nullified if I were to say the name of Fatima (ra). The prayer is nullified simply by saying out loud anything that were were not instructed to say by the Prophet (SAWS). What we were instructed to do was pray to Allah to bless the Prophet(SAWS) and his family, something which were are happy to do as we love the Prophet and his family. We also love all of the Sahaba, though it is not obligatory on us to pray for them.

Brother, these two instances are examples of abrogation of Quranic verses during the lifetime of the Prophet (SAWS). Sunni scholars have established that such abrogation can take 3 forms. Either the verse and its meaning can both be abrogated, and rendered no longer required, with Allah thus removing it from the Quran. This is what happened with the nursing verse. The relevant hadith from Muslim which I found was:

'A’isha (Allah be pleased with her) reported that it had been revealed in the Holy Qur’an that ten clear sucklings make the marriage unlawful, then it was abrogated (and substituted) by five sucklings and Allah’s apostle (may peace be upon him) died and it was before that time (found) in the Holy Qur’an (and recited by the Muslims). [34 Muslim, II, No. 3421.]

Thus before the revelation of the Quran was completed, the Prophet (SAWS) was instructed to no longer have this ruling in the Quran. Instead, the legislation was kept alive in the Hadith.

The next example of abrogation is where a legal ruling is abrogated without the verse itself being removed. Hence whereas originally Muslims were told not to approach prayers when drunk, a later revelation instituted an outright ban on alcohol.

The final type of abrogation is where a verse is abrogated, but its legal ruling continues. An example of this is the verse of stoning mentioned by Umar (ra). Whilst the verse was originally revealed, it was later abrogated. By the time of the death of the Prophet (SAWS), the verse was no longer considered to be a part of the Quran by the Muslims. However, it’s legal ruling that adulterers should be stoned remained valid.

Thus the claims by many Shia Muslim jurists that Sunni-followed hadiths imply that the Quaran is incomplete are merely the results of a misunderstanding. What Aisha (ra) and Umar (ra) refererred to were verses that were originally revealed, but which Allah did not deem necessary in the final revelation of the Quran.

145

[quote]
Originally posted by mAd_ScIeNtIsT:
**Treads gingerly into a sectarian mud-slinging contest

The thing that makes me uncomfortable about this statement is that it implies that the God who you and I both, being Muslims, worship, and who we both believe to be Ar-Rahman (The Most Compassionate), Al-'Adl (The Just), Al-Wadud (The Loving One), Al-Barr (The Benign) and Ar-Ra'uf (The Most Kind), would choose to use a 7 year old girl as a pawn to make a point.

[This message has been edited by mAd_ScIeNtIsT (edited June 01, 2001).]**
[/quote]

Good point!!

146

[quote]
Originally posted by mAd_ScIeNtIsT:
**Treads gingerly into a sectarian mud-slinging contest

The thing that makes me uncomfortable about this statement is that it implies that the God who you and I both, being Muslims, worship, and who we both believe to be Ar-Rahman (The Most Compassionate), Al-'Adl (The Just), Al-Wadud (The Loving One), Al-Barr (The Benign) and Ar-Ra'uf (The Most Kind), would choose to use a 7 year old girl as a pawn to make a point.

[This message has been edited by mAd_ScIeNtIsT (edited June 01, 2001).]**
[/quote]

GOOD point!!!!

147

[quote]
Originally posted by mAd_ScIeNtIsT:
** Brother, these two instances are examples of abrogation of Quranic verses during the lifetime of the Prophet (SAWS). Sunni scholars have established that such abrogation can take 3 forms. Either the verse and its meaning can both be abrogated, and rendered no longer required, with Allah thus removing it from the Quran. This is what happened with the nursing verse. The relevant hadith from Muslim which I found was:

'A'isha (Allah be pleased with her) reported that it had been revealed in the Holy Qur'an that ten clear sucklings make the marriage unlawful, then it was abrogated (and substituted) by five sucklings and Allah's apostle (may peace be upon him) died and it was before that time (found) in the Holy Qur'an (and recited by the Muslims). [34 Muslim, II, No. 3421.]

Thus before the revelation of the Quran was completed, the Prophet (SAWS) was instructed to no longer have this ruling in the Quran. Instead, the legislation was kept alive in the Hadith.

The next example of abrogation is where a legal ruling is abrogated without the verse itself being removed. Hence whereas originally Muslims were told not to approach prayers when drunk, a later revelation instituted an outright ban on alcohol.

The final type of abrogation is where a verse is abrogated, but its legal ruling continues. An example of this is the verse of stoning mentioned by Umar (ra). Whilst the verse was originally revealed, it was later abrogated. By the time of the death of the Prophet (SAWS), the verse was no longer considered to be a part of the Quran by the Muslims. However, it's legal ruling that adulterers should be stoned remained valid.

Thus the claims by many Shia Muslim jurists that Sunni-followed hadiths imply that the Quaran is incomplete are merely the results of a misunderstanding. What Aisha (ra) and Umar (ra) refererred to were verses that were originally revealed, but which Allah did not deem necessary in the final revelation of the Quran. **
[/quote]

Brother,

Let's make it simple. If you send blessings on the prophet (pbuh) and his family, your namaz is completed.

If you send blessings on his companions / sahabahs in the namaz, your namaz becomes void.

Bottomline, there is no comparison between the status of the ahl-bait (as) and ordinary sahabahs.

Hope this satisfies.

As for abrogation of verses, it is an Islamic ruling that when any verse is abrogated, the abrogating verse must be present that directs the old verse to be abrograted.

If, as you say, sunni scholars have agreed to method #1, then it brings out many critical issue.

For one, why was the nursing verse abrograted ? Since there is no other verse abrogating it, what proof is there that it was abrograted ?

Secondly, look at what Umar is saying. He is worried that people will forget about this Islamic ritual - since its not in the Qur'an.
More importantly, it is not a verse, but a whole chapter that is missing ! Why would something so important be abrogated if it was to set the standard of an Islamic ritual ?

Why have other sahabahs not mentioned any of these verses, or the fact that it ever existed ?

And if, based on your theory, such rulings could be derived from hadiths only without it being in the qur'an, then you will be following something from which there is no ruling in the qur'an.

It is for this reason that the following has been established:

1) The prophet (pbuh) received many revelations, but not all of these revelations were made part of the qur'an - EVER.

2) If they were made part of the qur'an and then abrogated, the abrogating verse must be present.

And Umar is claiming a whole chapter is missing.

ws

148

Mad Scientist,

Read what Aisha says (the last line):

WHAT AISHA SAYS:

Muslim also reported in the book of nursing ( al-Ridha ), v10
pages 29 (Arabic), that Aisha said the following :
There was in what was revealed in the Quran that ten ( 10 ) times
of nursing known with certainty makes the nursing woman a mother
of the nursed child. This number of nursing would make the woman
'Haram' to the child. Then this verse was replaced by ' five ( 5 )
known nursing ' to make the woman forbidden to the child. The
Prophet died while these words were recorded and read in the Quran.

The prophet (pbuh) had DIED and the verse was STILL in the QUR'an.

Are you telling me that the verse was abrogated after the prophet (pbuh) died since its nowhere to be found now ?

Please comment.

149

Dear Brother,
Obviously all abrogations occured during the lifetime of the Prophet (SAWS), as otherwise any attempt at abrogation would be a form of bida.

When I tried to find the Hadith you quoted above, the version which I found at http://www.youngmuslims.ca/online_library/books/ulum_al_quran/Ch5S3s6.htm was somewhat differently phrased. It stated as follows.

'A’isha (Allah be pleased with her) reported that it had been revealed in the Holy Qur’an that ten clear sucklings make the marriage unlawful, then it was abrogated (and substituted) by five sucklings and Allah’s apostle (may peace be upon him) died and it was before that time (found) in the Holy Qur’an (and recited by the Muslims). [34 Muslim, II, No. 3421.]

This translation of the Hadith simply implies that at some point during the period of time before the Prophet’s death the verse was part of the Quran. This translation would not exclude the possibility of the verse being abrogated prior to the Prophet’s (SAWS) death; Aisha (ra) appears to merely draw attention to the verse having once been a part of the Quran.

150

PLZ TELL ME...

KISSEE KU KALmA ATA HAY......?

YA SHIA, SUNNI-KALMA ALLAG ALLAG BATOO.

IF KALLMA IS ONE WHY YOU PEOPLE ARE FIGHTING.IS THERE ANY SENCE IN IT..YOU CANT CONVINCE ANY ONE BECAUSE THERE IS NOTHING TO BE CONVINCED..TS JUST LIKE A FATHER WHO HAS 4 SON`S AND YOU ASK HIM WHICH ONE OF THEM HE LOVES MORE.

DON`T YOU PEOPLE ARE PROUD TO BE MUSLIM OR YOU ARE MORE PROUD OF CALLING YOUR SELVES SUNNI OR SHIA INSTED OF MUSLIM.

151

[quote]
Originally posted by juMurA:
DON`T YOU PEOPLE ARE PROUD TO BE MUSLIM OR YOU ARE MORE PROUD OF CALLING YOUR SELVES SUNNI OR SHIA INSTED OF MUSLIM.
[/quote]

I am proud to be a Muslim, just as I am proud to call people like a1shah Muslim. Both Sunnis and Shias are Muslims; this was made clear by the 1959 fatwa issued by Sheikh Mahmood Shaltoot of Al-Azhar University.

What I am trying to do on this forum is to simply discuss the differences in viewpoints with my brothers. It is no secret that there is a lot of misunderstanding between Sunnis and Shias regarding each others' views. Such misunderstandings only lead to further distrust.

I believe that talking out the matters will clear the air and remove many suspicions. Already I have learnt that much of what I had heard about Shias was false, and I like to think that they have learned much of Sunnis.

If we do not discuss the difference in our views, they will only simmer and build up to further troubles.

152

Guys its time to leave our differences behind and fight with the enemies of Islam.

If Islam goes, then neither shia, nor sunni stay. So grow out of the diffrences please.

Sunni/Shia BHAI BHAI
Kab Khatam hogi yeh larai!

153

[quote]
Originally posted by a1shah:
** Brother,
Let's make it simple. If you send blessings on the prophet (pbuh) and his family, your namaz is completed.
If you send blessings on his companions / sahabahs in the namaz, your namaz becomes void.

Bottomline, there is no comparison between the status of the ahl-bait (as) and ordinary sahabahs.**
[/quote]

Brother,

I believe that there is a minor difference between the Sunni definition of the the Prophet's Family and yours. I believe that when I pray for Allah to bless the Prophet's family, I am not just limiting the blessing to Ali (ra), Fatima (ra) and their descendants. I believe that I am referring to all 11 of the Prophet's wives and all of his children. Thus I do not believe that my blessing are purely limited to the Ahle-Bait (unless my definition of the Ahle-Bait is incorrect: please could you correct me if I have made a mistake in this regard)

[quote]
Originally posted by a1shah:
** As for abrogation of verses, it is an Islamic ruling that when any verse is abrogated, the abrogating verse must be present that directs the old verse to be abrograted.

If, as you say, sunni scholars have agreed to method #1, then it brings out many critical issue.

For one, why was the nursing verse abrograted ? Since there is no other verse abrogating it, what proof is there that it was abrograted ?**
[/quote]

Okay, I'm going to tread very lightly on this matter, as the science of abrogations is very complex and I am no expert on the matter.
Why was the nursing verse abrogated? - I am not going to try and question what I view as God's decision on the matter. As far as I am concerned, Allah knows best.
Since there is no other verse abrogating it, what proof is there that it was abrograted ? This is one of those very unfortunate issues where it is difficult to get Sunni Muslims and Shia Muslims to agree. As a Sunni, I am willing to take Aisha's (ra) word as sufficient evidence that the verse originally existed and was abrogated, whereas a Shia would be unwilling to accept her word on the matter. I fear that there is nothing I can say on the matter that would be acceptable from both a Sunni and Shia perspective. This whole matter essentially boils down to the difference in opinion on Aisha (ra).

[quote]
Originally posted by a1shah:
** Secondly, look at what Umar is saying. He is worried that people will forget about this Islamic ritual - since its not in the Qur'an.
More importantly, it is not a verse, but a whole chapter that is missing ! Why would something so important be abrogated if it was to set the standard of an Islamic ritual ?

Why have other sahabahs not mentioned any of these verses, or the fact that it ever existed ?

**
[/quote]

Obviously I cannot see into his mind, I feel that Umar (ra) feared that people would cease stoning adulterers as people would look for excuses not carry out the act, and he feared that the verses abrogation would lead to people saying that as stoning of adulterers as not in the Quran it should not be carried out.

As far as I can make, in the Hadith he only referse to a verse being abrogated, not an entire chapter. It is incorrect to say that no other Sahaba has mentioned this abrogation - what is more accurate is that no other Sahaba has been reliably recorded as mentioning the abrogation.

Why have other sahabahs not mentioned any of these verses, or the fact that it ever existed ?

[quote]
Originally posted by a1shah:
** And if, based on your theory, such rulings could be derived from hadiths only without it being in the qur'an, then you will be following something from which there is no ruling in the qur'an.**
[/quote]

The problem with your following this line of approach is that many Sunni jurists would come back and argue that the Shia concept of Imamat is not in the Quran, and thus say that Shias follow something for which there is no ruling in the Quran. Obviously, Shia Muslims can point to certain ayats as evidence, but Sunnis interpret these verses differently.

Thus saying that because something is not in the Quran it should not be followed is a weak approach in this matter.

Wassalaam

[This message has been edited by mAd_ScIeNtIsT (edited June 02, 2001).]

154

Brother MadScientist,

Thank you for your kind words. We are first and foremost muslims who believe in the oneness of Allah (swt), the seal of prophethood of our beloved rasul (pbuh), in the completeness of the qur’an, in Angels, and in resurrection in the hereafter.

For your perusal, please read the hadith below, where Aisha describes who the ahl-bait are. These pure souls are the ones whom Allah (swt) has purified and removed all blemish.

Please find the following link to Sahih Muslim for the hadith below: http://www.witness-pioneer.org/vil/hadeeth/muslim/031_smt.html#009_b31
Chapter 9 : THEE MERITS OF THE FAMILY OF THE PROPHET (MAY PEACE BE UPON HIM)

Book 31, Number 5955:
'A’isha reported that Allah’s Apostle (may peace be upon him) went out one norning wearing a striped cloak of the black camel’s hair that there came Hasan b. 'Ali. He wrapped him under it, then came Husain and he wrapped him under it along with the other one (Hasan). Then came Fatima and he took her under it, then came 'Ali and he also took him under it and then said: Allah only desires to take away any uncleanliness from you, O people of the household, and purify you (thorough purifying).

Though many of the holy prophet’s (pbuh) wives were virtuous, they are not included as part of the ahl-bait. This has also been confirmed by Umm Salma, one of the most virtuous wives of the holy apostle (pbuh).

As far as abrogation is concerned, I am not convinced with your arguments put forth.

As for the issue of imamat, there are many instances where Allah (swt) has instructed us to follow his chosen wali. As such, the message at Ghadir Khum declaring Imam Ali (as) as the Master of all believers is in line with the verdicts of the qur’an.

Nevertheless, if you feel comfortable with verdicts from your school of thought, that should suffice.

It is hoped from this topic, we realize the the Jafaria school of thought that adheres to the principles of Allah (swt) and his holy apostle (pbuh) as taught to us by the holy ahl-bait are not what the wahabis portray as part of their zealous propaganda.

May Allah’s (swt) blessings be upon the the holy prophet (pbuh) and his pure progeny.

ws

155

You guys are still fighting?.......How are you going to grab Kashmir if you can't even claim Karachi?

156

Informan,

Nobody is fighting. As we increase our communication and reduce the differences between brothers, the Islamic ummah will become stronger.

Then you better watch out for kashmir.

157

I’m with you 100% on that, brother

http://www3.pak.org/gupshup/smilies/smile.gif

158

Brothers....before you call anybody Munafiq think carefully...caz
It is Makrooh to call even a non-muslim kafir to create any anarchy.
Now think about Sahabas.....if we sacrifice whole family in the love of Prophet(Salla Allah ho Alaihe Wasallam)still that can't be equal to a single drop of blood of Hadrat Abu Bakr, Hadrat Umar or Hadrat Usman(Radi Allah an hum) bleeded in a war shoulder to shoulder with Prophet(Salla Allah ho alaihe wasallam)against Makkan Kafirs.
First Sign of Munafiq in the light of Quran and Hadit is
They don't pray 5 times a day
then so many other signs
So, brothers think about your Fathers, mothers, brothers and siters, sons and daughters......how many of them take care of their Namaz(just Namaz, forget about no Zakat,Roza, back biting,lying,etc etc)
So Shia brothers curse them first, call them big Munafiqs, hate them as much as you can, insult them as they are even worser than Munafiq(Nahuzubillah min Zalik) Sahabas who never did anything like that and then come to these great Sahabas, then we Sunnis wouldn't argue with you.
I repeat again Shia belief
Its not HUBB-E_Ali(Love for Ahl-e-Bait)
Its based on Bughaz-e-Muawia(Hate for Sahabas)
While Islam is based on love and not hate
Which religion these Shias are talking about.

159

[quote]
Originally posted by wasir:
**
I repeat again Shia belief
Its not HUBB-E_Ali(Love for Ahl-e-Bait)
Its based on Bughaz-e-Muawia(Hate for Sahabas)
While Islam is based on love and not hate
Which religion these Shias are talking about.

**
[/quote]

Shiasm is based on LOVE OF PROPHET and HIS AHL-e-BAYT (as) as ordered by Allah in Quran. Loving someone atumatocally entitles you to hate the enemies of the beloved one.

160

(HH)

http://www3.pak.org/gupshup/smilies/smile.gif

Jahan be raho,

Khush raho.