Year 12s: what will be the first way you research your future options? >>

Questions about shia-ism

Scroll to see replies

Remember, in a conflict with immense complexity and deceit and bloodshed, propaganda on all sides, misrepresentation, miscounts, lies, can eminate. Each side bigging up the atrocity of the other, and politically motivated groups , especially western governments with a vested interest in seeing the topple of Assad, not for the pious muslimeen, but to one-up Iran, to strengthen Israel, and install a puppet government, also play a part in these narratives.

Do you really believe Hillary Clinton, John Mcain, and Benjamin Nethanyahu care about the syrian people?

Reply 181

username883747

Original post by Tawheed

What do you mean by unreservedly condemn?

What do you mean condemn when you ask be about Ahrar?

I'll address the rest of your post tommorow inshAllah.

Hezbollah, went in to defend their borders, and to fight against groups like al nusra, ahrar, jaysh al islam et al, and had they not intervened, there would be terrorism infiltrating lebanon, as well as a possible and potential fall of Assad.

The excuses you make about Hezbollat could easily be made about Ahrar. You've stated they came in to Syria to support a terrorist i.e. Bashar

Had Assad fallen, it would have marked an absolute disaster.

It would have marked progress. The next step would be getting rid of ISIS.

In Libiya, i opposed britian going in to rush the libiyan government with air-strikes. It left a power vacuum, libiya is a diasaster, and that is nothing compared to what syria would be if Assad fell.

By all means use the "Gaddafi was a tyrant who brought stability" argument, I believe there is some validity to it. But the "Syria would be worse" argument is terrible, Libya today is in a better state than in the midst of the uprising against Gaddafi.

Assad must go, but in democratic means.

Have you heard the slogan of his friends? "Assad or we Burn the Country"

Eastern Goutha , does that not sound familiar brother? That's right where chemical weapons slaughtered hundreds of syrians[

Yes I'm well aware of the situation.

and the same period of time the whole world warned Assad if he used chemical weapons, they would attack him.

Why? They don't stop Barrel bombs killing hundreds every month, why would they care about a different kind of weapon?

Ofcourse, it can't be Alloush and co staging a weapons attack can it?

This is the same Jaysh al-Islam whos head mufti called JaN khawaarij yes?

Just to add, eastern goutha and the suburbs of damuscus are very ferocious points of fighting. Jaysh regularly throw shells and rockets that kill civilians. And it's where Assad is. Not to be undermined.

Again. What's your point "Jaysh al-Islam kills innocents too!". Did i ever deny that?

Ahrar, Al Nusra, Daesh, and Jaysh are among the strongest forces. If you put Jaysh to the side, ahrar are in the top 3 according to standford university.

I'd say most effective forces.

Al Nusra, you once said, were the best armed and supported,

Armed? No. Supported by the people? Now no, look at the protests in Ma'arat al-Nouman. Then yes. I said the most effective.

(edited 7 years ago)

Reply 182

username883747

Original post by Tawheed

I'm well aware of this.

Do you really believe Putin, and Bashar, care about the Syrian people?

Reply 183

h333

Original post by Tawheed

This isn't about putting down the wives. Umm Salama r.a, for example, is a noble woman, among the best of the wives and most obidient. But not even she is referred to the ahlulbayt a.s purified in verse 33:33.

If you can find me a hadith , an authentic one, where Rasullah s.a.w recites the afforementioned verse for any of his wives, i will reflect and get back to you. InshAllah.

I again stress dear sister, the Quran contains ayah that may have been revealed at totally different times, and each ayah must be referred to with tafseer/hadith to find the proper context and time of revelation.

Original post by mil88

It's fine, when I was reading near the end of the page, it said how the beliefs were 'stupid, illogical and biased'/

That's fair enough if you wish to stand firm. After all, it's your decision. But can I ask, do you reject the hadith from tirmidhi regarding Umm Salama not being part of ahlulbayt?

Thanks brother/sister.

The hadith does not state that Umm Salama is not part of the ahlul bayt. I think one should understand the context as to when and why it happened. I believe her to be included as the rest of the prophet's s.a.w wives part of the ahlul bayt.

Narration 1:

al-Tirmidhi records:
حدثنا قتيبة حدثنا محمد بن سليمان الأصبهاني عن يحيى بن عبيد عن عطاء بن أبي رباح عن عمر بن أبي سلمة ربيب النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم قال لما نزلت هذه الآية على النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم { إنما يريد الله ليذهب عنكم الرجس أهل البيت ويطهركم تطهيرا } في بيت أم سلمة فدعا فاطمة وحسنا وحسينا فجللهم بكساء وعلي خلف ظهره فجللهم بكساء ثم قال اللهم هؤلاء أهل بيتي فأذهب عنهم الرجس وطهرهم تطهيرا قالت أم سلمة وأنا معهم يا نبي الله قال أنت على مكانك وأنت على خير

Narrated Umar ibn Abi Salamah who was brought up by the Prophet, peace be upon him: When the verse, Allah only desires to keep away from you all blemishes (al-rijz), O Ahl al-Bayt, and to purify you absolutely (Qur’an 33:33), was revealed to the Prophet at the home of Umm Salamah he called Fatima, al-Hasan, and al-Husayn and covered them with a cloak. Ali was behind him, the Prophet also covered him under the same cloak and then said, “O Allah! these are my Ahl al-Bayt, so keep away from them all blemishes (al-rijz) and purify them absolutely.” Umm Salamah said, “Am I one of them, O Allah’s Apostle?” He replied, “You have your separate place. But, you are unto a good ending.”
al-Jami’ al-Sahih Sunan al-Tirmidhi (Beirut, Lebanon: Dar al-Ihya al-Turath al-Arabi) [annotators: Ahmad Muhammad Shakir and others] vol. 5, p. 351, Number 3205
Shaykh al-Albani says:
صحيح
Sahih

According to this narration the verse of tatheer was revealed before prophet(Saw) made the supplication for Hz ali(ra), fatima(ra), hassan(ra) and hussain(ra) under the cloak. If we keep this in mind, then it is illogical for the Prophet(saw) to make supplication for the Ahle kisa to be purified AFTER the verse was revealed, because the verse states that Allah had ALREADY intended to purify Ahlebayt. It would only make sense when we say that 33:33 is for the wives since he(saw) tells his wife, “Inti ala khair.” The Prophet(saw) knew that this verse was originally revealed about the wives and he is the one who placed the verses 33:33 in context with the other verses in Surat al Ahzab, So he knew that she was already purified that’s why he told her to not worry since she is already on goodness, but He now wanted Allah to purify Ali(ra) And Fatima(ra), hz hassan(ra) and hz hussain(ra) whom he loved and considered from his ahlul-bayt, So he invited them under the cloak and made Dua for all of them so that Allah may purify them also.

Regarding this narration where hz umm salama(ra) was asked not to enter, then this falls under the narration of the hadith according to the meaning: Al-riwaya bil ma’ana. Without even filtering out the weak from the authentic in those narrations, we can assume that they all mean the same thing, which is that Um Salama(ra) was always from Ahlul Bayt(that 33:33 refers to the wives) and that she is not in need of the dua’a of the Prophet(saw) while the other four are in need of it.

Reply 184

Tawheed

Original post by Ibn Fulaan

I'm well aware of this.

Do you really believe Putin, and Bashar, care about the Syrian people?

Putin does not want to see a western puppet government, and the imbalance towards America, because it has it's own vested interest. But tbh, you're not getting a puppet government with the likes of ahrar and al nusra in the helm. Russia has ties to syria, and does not want to see it dissolve into chaos in addition to that. It has economic interests, as well as geopolitical interests.

If Bashar did care, he would not have brutally cracked down on peaceful protest, and would have years and years before this, allowed a democratic proces and instilled reform.

Granted though, this is bigger than Bashar, his family and a large contingent of people also pull the strings.

(edited 7 years ago)

Reply 185

QE2

Original post by queen-bee

Hey guys,I've always always always wanted to know the difference between Shia Islam and Sunni Islam? Why are the always fights between the two groups

It all boils down to who succeeded Muhammad after his death.
People will always fight over issues of power if there is a perceived difference, especially if god favours one side (or usually both!)

Reply 186

Sciatic

How should I show my love for the Ahlul Bayt in my daily life?

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 187

QE2

Original post by queen-bee

But do both groups share the same beliefs regarding Islam?

Essentially. It's a bit like Catholics and Protestants. They both have the same origins and core belief, but differ on certain details of how those beliefs should be expressed.

Reply 188

username2097061

Original post by h333

Then surely if she wasn't needed for the dua, but still part of ahlulbayt then why didn't the Prophet make the dua, and then ask her to come in when he said these are my ahlulbayt?

I personally don't see how she can be part of Ahlulbayt when the hadith you even showed says :

Umm Salamah said, “Am I one of them, O Allah’s Apostle?” He replied, “You have your separate place.

If she was part of the ahlulbayt, then surely the Prophet would have said yes to this question?

Another issue arises at Mubahillah, if this was a one off, then why didn't the Prophet take any of his wives when the Quran says : Bring your women, but he only bought the same very 5: Ali, Hassan, Hussain, Fatima and himself, and made the claim of ahlulbayt?

But I guess, you are indeed entitled to your opinion on this issue.

Reply 189

QE2

Original post by Kraixo

I do not interpret those verses nor do I have the right to do so, I take them at face value

But didn't you know that this is not permitted. Every verse has to be read in its context, and interpreted with classical understanding of how Muhammad and his companions viewed each issue.
If you take the Quran at face value and without interpretation, you will be getting completely the wrong message.

(edited 7 years ago)

Reply 190

QE2

Original post by yasminkattan

It is a husband/father's duty to guide his wife/daughter and ensure she is following her religion. Hijab is compulsory in Islam.

So not all women who wear it are wearing it through choice. They are being instructed to wear it by husbands and fathers.
Thought so.

(edited 7 years ago)

Reply 191

Tawheed

Original post by QE2

Sunni's and shia's do share the same one holy book, catholics and protestants differ on their holy books.

Sunni's and shia's are also much much closer to each other than catholics and protestants.

Reply 192

Tawheed

Original post by QE2

But didn't you know that this is not permitted. Every verse has to be read in its context, and interpreted with classical understanding of how Muhammad and his companions viewed each verse.
If you take the Quran at face value and without interpretation, you will be getting completely the wrong message.

He means the unclear verses regarding the attributes of Allah swt, should not be speculated on. He does not mean any old verse. And in his belief, the sahaba took the verses of the attributes at face value and did not speculate.

Reply 193

QE2

Original post by IdeasForLife

I am stubborn in my stance. I don't believe in unity when there's possibly fundamental differences.

So, you'd rather perpetuate the sectarian bloodbath than agree to accept theological differences.

How far are you prepared to take this position?

Reply 194

QE2

Original post by IdeasForLife

There is no unity on major misguidance. To give a few examples on which types of people this includes: people who reject parts of Islam,

We all know that you believe that everything permitted in the Quran and sunnah is still permitted, but it is unusual for you to actually admit it, because we all know exactly what this implies.
Don't we?

Reply 195

QE2

Original post by IdeasForLife

What are you? Qadiani yourself? Or a non-Muslim who desperately wants the qadiani religion to be accepted in Islam ?

Why are you so desperate that the Ahmadiyya are not accepted as Muslims?
They believe everything that you do, the Five Pillars and the Six Articles, so why is it so important to you that they be persecuted?

I think most people who are not anti-Ahmadiyya simply want the persecution to stop.
I mean, who wouldn't?

Reply 196

QE2

Original post by IdeasForLife

Yes. Different name for them.

In the same way that Mohammedans is a different name for Muslims, I guess.
So you will have no objection to being called a Mohammedan.

Reply 197

QE2

Original post by Tawheed

Sunni's and shia's do share the same one holy book, catholics and protestants differ on their holy books.

Sunni's and shia's are also much much closer to each other than catholics and protestants.

I didn't mention holy books. I said
"It's a bit like Catholics and Protestants. They both have the same origins and core belief, but differ on certain details of how those beliefs should be expressed."
Which covers your objections.

And while we are here, without wishing to sound pedantic, could you pleeease stop saying "Sunni's" and "Shia's". There is no apostrophe in the plural.
It really is offending my sensibilities.
Thanks.

Reply 198

QE2