The Original Shia

Re: The Original Shia

I dont need to induldge in the same behavior as you vermins. I wanted to prove a point which I did. Mamooli is overzealous and not partial. I wanted to show that to CR and Ehsan and I am sure they will see it. You little pithoos, I did not even bother to read the rest of the crap you regurgitate. I have argued with some of you before and you always ran away at the end. At the moment I am not in the mood of listening to your childish behavior and how all companions except Ali (r.a) and his family were evils etc etc so I will leave you guys on your own.

Zer01, I have told you before refrain from calling me your Son. I will ask you nicley again, dont repeat it.

Re: The Original Shia

texan dude have you forgotten the last shlocking you took from me. Do you want to go again? Open up any topic and I will teach you the real Islam, not something you learn at a Majlis where you guys learn about fairy tales that no one can prove.

Re: The Original Shia

pithoos, vermins, fairy tales and verbal threats, whilst lecturing on impartiality and behaviour, are we sure we're not getting too emotional here? :-D

Kaleemi, u have a problem with me, take it to feedback. I cud really careless. i dont remember getting emotional in this thread, but last i heard, it wasnae a big crime either.

And, of course am not impartial in my views dammit, a mod doesn't have to be. its only required when moderating. gosh, what age am i talking to here?

Re: The Original Shia

yeah to the believers indeed. But have you ever heard a person who doubted the Prphethood of Mohammed (s) at the treaty of Hudabiya? These are the famous words of that person in your history books: I never doubted Him (s) before as I doubted him today. Was such a person a believer? Go check your history books and find out who that person (The Nobel Sahabi) was.

Secondly why you people forget ayahs like following when you defend the wrong doings of companions of Prophet? Are they above Prophet (s) )

Allah says in Quran:

**“O you who believe! Do not raise your voices above the voice of Prophet … lest your deeds become null while you do not perceive.” (Quran 49:2).
**
Allah also says:

**“Nor does he (prophet) speak out of his desire. (What he says) is nothing but revelation that is revealed.” (Quran 53:3-4).
**
He, Exalted, also syas:

“Whatever apostle tells you accept it, and from whatever he forbids you, keep back.” (Quran 59:7).

He, Exalted He is, also says:

**But no by thy Lord! They can have no Faith until they make thee judge in ALL disputes between them and find in their souls no resistance against thy decisions but accept them with the fullest conviction. (Quran 4:65)
**
So when such a prophet, three days before his death, wished to write a document of his will to save the Muslims from going astray, he was accused of talking no sense (paranoid)!

Re: The Original Shia

*Guys Please stay on topic. *

Kaleem- please forward your reservations and suggestion to admins. thanks.

Re: The Original Shia

Both sunni and shia sects are as bad and jahil as each other.

i don't believe in either and just consider the Quran as the first source of truth, and Hadith as the secondry source.
But the hadith of both sunni and shia may have been fabricated over the years, and it is certainly not be blindly followed.

And i don't believe in either the Khalifa or Imamat. That is politics and power struggles between different groups of sahaba at that time. Nothing islamic about it

Re: The Original Shia

^ I totally agree with you.

In order to be a muslim, you will do well by following the Quran. I've said time and time again, if you just DO THAT alone, that's a lifetime of effort to implement Quranic values in your own life.

Which, by the looks of it, most people here don't have...

Just a few points - with all the cut-and-paste, I really did not have the patience to read all the arguments. Just a word of advice - if you read something from some other article, just summarize the main points in your own words, and link us to the actual article. It makes my BP go up seeing all this cut and paste.

Points:

  1. I do not think any human is infallible - the Prophet, Ali (R), and his successors included. Here's why: The Quran mentions numerous times over and over again that the human reader does not know all. That God is all-knowing. How is that not familiar to you shias who say that the Imams are infallible, and ACTUALLY believe it?

IMHO, I meet a lot of shias who don't know the first thing about this infallible issue. ABCD's maybe, I dunno.

  1. The hadith that Shia's believe in - that for whoever the RAsul is a leader, then Ali is also a leader...

I still don't think that's justification for Ali (R) INHERITING leadership.

Why?

If God wanted leadership over muslims (Caliphate) to be an inherited leadership (like a monarchy, basically), then why did the Prophet have no blood-related SON that lived past infanthood? And also, the Quran makes it a big point that an adopted son is not the same thing as a real son. So even if the Rasul thought of Ali (R) as kind of like his son, you still could not use the argument of inheritance, because Ali (R) was actually not a male heir to the Rasul in the first place. Therefore, the idea that only Ali (R)'s blood-related sons are the only possible leaders, a Shia principle, just doesn't make any sense.

You see, the chain would look like this:

Rasul ---> no blood-related son ---> Ali (R) ---> blood-related son ---> blood-related son and so on and so forth.

Plus, I'm sure that the Prophet had high regard for Ali (R). Compared to the leaders we have today, all 4 caliphs were good in comparison. IN COMPARISON. All 4 of 'em made mistakes. Aisha made mistakes. They ALL made mistakes. And I think that's the spirit behind sunnis - we acknowledge that no human is infallible, otherwise the Quran probably would have mentioned something so extraordinary and so necessary for muslims to know, especially since it involved the leadership of muslims.

What the Prophet most likely meant was that regard Ali (R) as your leader - in other words, if you need to ask advice or need help, or if Ali (R) is commanding you in an army, or if you need some service of some kind, etc, then you can go to Ali (R). He, along with the other Sahabah, served roles as community leaders alongside the Rasul. Of course, they were reporting to the Rasul, since the Rasul was the primary leader. But the sahabah, especially Ali, all had leadership capabilities.

  1. The claim that Aisha was in error for even waging a war.

For that I can say its just such a cheap shot to use the Quranic ayah that one guppy posted to go against her. I bet the hadith that says women should not lead also probably came from someone on the early Shia camp side.

If women should be sitting at home ALL DAY and doing no work in the community, then why was Aisha active in the community, as well as many other females, DURING THE PROPHET'S LIFE?

Why did the Prophet do camel racing with his own wife? Why didn't the Prophet admonish Khadija to leave her job? She did that of her own accord and that was her decision. Aisha was a major teacher. She was active in society and spreading talim about the religion. Hafsa (r) was entrusted with keeping the first compiled copy of the Quran.

Why were women working in the battle fields during jihaad times in support roles (nursing, etc?) under the guidance of the Prophet?

Notice the second clause in the ayah you quote. It asks women not to go around flamboyantly in the community, essentially. For example, a lady who walks out of the house with a mini skirt off to smoke some cigars and do some drugs with her friends would qualify in that category. A female going off to work and doing her work honestly and at the service of her community would not fall under that category. Always look at the context of things, please.

These women were respected as MEMBERS of the community, not just property that sat at home and didn't do anything except cook.

So, I would say that Aisha knew where she went wrong in that war. And it wasn't the fact that she fought a war, that she was wrong in. It was the idea that maybe she had fought for the wrong reasons.

BIG difference between the two.

Re: The Original Shia

So the Shias say that it was God will to make Sayyedna Ali as a first Khalifa. I know theur other views also. Some of them say that God took the form of Sayyedna Ali (Nauz-u-Billah) thats why it was his right at all.

Here are their main concepts whom I came to know.
1). Sayyedna Ali was the right person to get the Khilafat.
2). Imamat and Khilafat is the right of Masoomeen.
3). It is God's will to make Sayyedna Ali calipk, so no one can disobey it.
4) The other Caliphs were the most wicked persons, ignorants at all.
5) God took form of Sayyedna Ali (Nauz-u-Billah).
6). All the Imams are born from the leg, yes the they are not born in a normal way.

I will come back with more.....

Re: The Original Shia

Can someone please clarify the reliability of this hadith or any like it, regarding Ali:

"I swear by the Lord Who sent me with the message of truth, I delayed the matter only in order to make you my brother. You are to me as Harun was to Musa, excepting only that there shall be no prophet after me. You are my heir and my brother. "

regards,

bob

Re: The Original Shia

OMG

(1) Yes Hazrat Ali(as) was the only rightful successor of the Prophet(as). Otherwise hz Ali(as) wasnt dumb that he kept on asking for his right.

(2) Yes Khalifat can only be the right of Masoomen.

(3) Yes Hz Ali(as) was appointed by God through our holy prophet(pbuh)

(4) The other caliphs were wrong and unjustly took the right of Ali(as). As for Mavia and Yazid the drunkard yes they were wicked.

(5) Allah incarnated himself as Ali(as)? The curse of Allah be upon those who believe this and spread such lies.

(6) What? born from leg? They were humans not supernatural beings.

Re: The Original Shia

That bibi Ayesha was wrong in waging war against hz Ali(as) is also accepted by sunnis. But the sunnis add she fought that war with good intentions. Waging war against the Khalifa of your time is what? tell me. Doesnt the Holy Koran says " Obey Allah, obey the Prophet and those in authority amoungst you"? Now going against the order of Koran is what?

Re: The Original Shia

PyariCgudia

[QUOTE]
So, I would say that Aisha knew where she went wrong in that war. And it wasn't the fact that she fought a war, that she was wrong in. It was the idea that maybe she had fought for the wrong reasons.
[/QUOTE]

No, the reason behind and the act of war were both wrong. Cant bibi Ayesha be wrong?

Re: The Original Shia

,

Sayyedna Mohammed said because of that, well I am not sure about that Hadith but I will try to give a logical reason of it, Because Sayyedna Ali was his Cousin and Cousins are like brothers. he also helped him during His preaching. Not like son of Sayyedna Noah who was against his own Father. Thats why Sayyedna Mohammed appreciated him.

The second part, why he declared him as his Heir. The reason is the rest of Prophet’s decendents could not last long. All died in his life. Also the grandsons and granddaughters died. Only the Sayyedah Fatima lived and her decendents lived through Prophet’s life. So He loved them so much and said such a things only to show love. But it does not meant that He was setting them as Rulers.

I read the history of so many kings, sufis and Khalifas. I came to know that to rule and control the nation is not an easy task. Good Sufis and noble persons cannot do this task sometimes. So it is not an issue that who might be the first ruler. This issue is raised by Shias to creat disturbence only. If you see the eras of other Caliphs, you will find that they were good organisers and administators. All of them did superb job in his rule.

Like Sayyedna Abu-bakr fought against the False Prophets, deniers of Zaqqat. He gave Quran the form of book. It was not an easy task.
Sayyedna Umer made Army system. He also paid Judges. He captured the remote areas. The list is too long I am ending it here.
Sayyedna Usman made the Navy. He putted dots (Nuktay) on Quran. and many more…
The era of rule of Sayyedna Ali was ful of tention, because of Shias who created that tention. He was busy to solve inner issues, Fitnay, Fassaad, Larayi Jhaggary, so he couldnot do much for development of country. It was not his fualt after all. They were Shias who disturbed the whole Islamic State. And distracted His attention form development amd management of State. Allah should punish them hard who created tentions among Muslims. Amen

Re: The Original Shia

So your ignorance continues here as well. Let me clearly introduce to you the actual meaning of Shia of Ali [as] so that in future you may think twice before errupting what Naasbi mullahs feed you people.

It is in praise of the Shi’a of Ali that Allah (swt) sent down the following revelation:

“Those who believe and do righteous deeds are the best of the creatures. Their reward from their Lord shall be everlasting gardens, below which flow rivers, they will abide there forever. Well pleased is God with them and they are well pleased with Him” (Quran 98:7)”.

*** Muhammad bin Ali narrates in Tafsir ibne Jarir, Volume 33 page 146 (Cairo edition) that the Prophet (saww) said “The best of creations are you Ali and your Shi’as”.***


Jalaladin Suyuti, (849 - 911 AH) is one of the highest ranking Sunni scholars of all times. In his commentary of this verse, he records through 3 Isnaad (chains) of narrators that the Prophet (saww) told his companions that the verse referred to Ali and his Shia. Hadhrath Ali narrates in Tafsir Durre Mansur, Volume 6 page 379 edition) “Have you not heard this verse***“Their reward from their Lord shall be everlasting gardens, below which flow rivers, they will abide there forever”? This verse refers to you and your Shi’a, I promise you that I will meet you at the Fountain of Kawthur”.***
The 3 Sahaba who narrated this Hadeeth are (1) Ali (as) himself (2) Jabir bin Abdullah Ansari (ra) (3) Abdullah ibne Abbas (ra).

Certainly, Allah shud punish all those who had audacity to go infront of Ali [as] in in battle field, no matter how so called respected people they were as excuses for sins are not in Islam rather its in christianity! Also those from whom Sayeda Fatima Zahra [as] died angry and went from this world in the same state.

Re: The Original Shia

[quote]
“Those who believe and do righteous deeds are the best of the creatures. Their reward from their Lord shall be everlasting gardens, below which flow rivers, they will abide there forever. Well pleased is God with them and they are well pleased with Him” (Quran 98:7)”.
[/quote]

So where it is mentioned that the Only believers and Right Doers are Shias?
The Ayah is for every believer. So dont change its meanings. Allah will not forgive any person who change the Ayah or its meanings.

Re: The Original Shia

Is is your innate habit to be ridiculous or you are just doing it here ??? Didnt you see the other text which is in simple words called “tafseer” i mentioned along with that verse or u just closed your eyes there and just picked this verse to pass a comment on your opponent ?

Re: The Original Shia

Originally Posted by bob_chasm
Can someone please clarify the reliability of this hadith or any like it, regarding Ali:

"I swear by the Lord Who sent me with the message of truth, I delayed the matter only in order to make you my brother. You are to me as Harun was to Musa, excepting only that there shall be no prophet after me. You are my heir and my brother. "

Thanks OMG. By the way, I am more interested in the part which compares Ali to p Harun (Aaron) and reliability of such ahadith. For example, I found these on the net:

Sahih Bukhari, Book 59, Military Expeditions led by the Prophet (peace be upon him) (Al-Maghaazi), Volume 5, Number 700 "Narrated Sad: Allah’s Apostle set out for Tabuk. appointing 'Ali as his deputy (in Medina). 'Ali said, ‘Do you want to leave me with the children and women?’ The Prophet said, ‘Will you not be pleased that you will be to me like Aaron to Moses? But there will be no prophet after me.’

Translation of Sahih Bukhari, Book 57, Companions of the Prophet, Volume 5, Number 56:"Narrated Ubaida: Ali said (to the people of 'Iraq), “Judge as you used to judge, for I hate differences (and I do my best ) till the people unite as one group, or I die as my companions have died.” And narrated Sad that the Prophet said to 'Ali, 'Will you not be pleased from this that you are to me like Aaron was to Moses?’”

Translation of Sahih Muslim, Book 31, The Book Pertaining to the Merits of the Companions (Allah Be Pleased With Them) of the Holy Prophet (May Peace Be Upon Him) (Kitab Al-Fada’il Al-Sahabah), Number 5914 “Sa’d b. Abi Waqqas reported that Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) left 'Ali b. Abi Talib behind him (as he proceeded) to the expedition of Tabuk, whereupon he ('Ali) said: Allah’s Messenger, are you leaving me behind amongst women 4nd
children? Thereupon he (the Holy Prophet) said: Aren’t you satisfied with being unto me what Aaron was unto Moses but with this exception that there would be no prophet after me.”

Translation of Sahih Muslim, Book 31, The Book Pertaining to the Merits of the Companions (Allah Be Pleased With Them) of the Holy Prophet (May Peace Be Upon Him) (Kitab Al-Fada’il Al-Sahabah), Number 5916"Sa’d reported Allah’s Apostle (may peace be upon him) as saying to 'Ali: Aren’t you satisfied with being unto me what Aaron was unto Moses?"

How reliable are they?

regards,

bob

Re: The Original Shia

That bibi Ayesha was wrong in waging war against hz Ali(as) is also accepted by sunnis. But the sunnis add she fought that war with good intentions. Waging war against the Khalifa of your time is what? tell me. Doesnt the Holy Koran says " Obey Allah, obey the Prophet and those in authority amoungst you"? Now going against the order of Koran is what?

The Quran also talks about fighting against zulm and wrong-doings.

:)

Again, I do think she had the best of intentions. But then again, lust for power seized all of them in some way or another, probably even Ali (R).

Another point guys: A lot of the hadith you see - you first must realize that you need to be doubtful of the authenticity of them, because what sunnis are saying is authentic is contradicting what shia's are saying is authentic. Put yourself in a position of doubt first, and then reason yourself out of it. Chances are you'll arrive at the correct answer. Or do what I do - suspend judgement. How does it affect your life today if Ali (R) was the first caliph or not? In the end, he did become a caliph!

Second point - Please keep in mind that what you read in hadith a lot of times is just poetic sayings - that is, they're not to be taken literally.

For example, if I say Bibi so - and - so is so good, she is the mother of all muslims. It doesn't mean she literally gave birth to every muslim. It just means she's very religious.

Likewise if the Prophet said that Ali (R) is the best of creations, he probably did not mean it literallly. It was most likely just to say "Ali is really awesome".

If we were to take the hadith literally, they would so contradict the Quran even further than they already do.

Re: The Original Shia

Brother Mamooli In response to me you quoted part of my post highlighting some parts.

The parts you have highlighted clearly show that your imams were well aware of Mr. Abdullah Ibn Saba; they discussed about him and they cursed him too.

This is a proof enough that Mr. Abdullah ibn Saba did exist; otherwise there would be no need for your imams to talk about him and curse him! I am sure your imams had better things tot do than to sit around and cuss & discuss some non entity!

Now that is the fault of your scholars of keeping you guys in the dark.

Now, there is a similar case with Qadiyanis: Muslims (Sunnis and Shii’s) keep telling them that they are the creation of the British and that Mirza Qadiyani has said the same.

Qadiyanis use the similar line as used by you above: I have made minor but necessary adjustments.

“The fact is, most Qadiyanis have never heard of this story being the creation of the British], which is surprising considering they are ‘suppose’ to be thier founding fathers. The funny thing is, Muslims seem to know alot more about this ‘story, whereas to us [Qadiyanis], this story is more of a invented story.”

Arguement sounds quite similar, ain’t it?

If, to you Abdullah ibn Saba is non entity why the need of your imams to discuss and curse him?

Abban bin Othman said: I heard Abu Abdullah [as] saying: ‘May Allah curse Abdallah bin Saba’, he claimed a divineship for Amirul-Mu’mineen (Ali) [as].

Enlighten me from where did the Alawis, Nusairis and other Shii’ ghulaat sects got the idea of the Divinity of Ali[ra], if not from Mr. Ibn Saba?!

Brother Kaleem you should not get upset with brother Mamooli, I think he has the right to defend his faith and being a Moderator shouldn’t deny him that right.

Re: The Original Shia

Zainiest

You may very well be correct that Abdullah bin Saba did exist. There is a possiblity. Whether Abd Allah b.Saba to whom the history of the "ghulat" which means exaggeration is traced, was a real personalty or not, the name "As-Sabaiya" is often used to describe the ghulat in Kufa who believed in the supernatural character of hz Ali(as).

But apart from Saba there were several other exaggerators as well, whom Imam Baqir and Imam Jafar Sadiq(as) used to curse. But exaggeration by some does not mean that the sect in this case Shia Islam is wrong.