• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Official Islamic Thread

CHYME

Banned
What's so hard to understand?

Here's a brief synopsis (from http://www.islamfortoday.com/shia.htm):

History
Ali is the central figure at the origin of the Shia / Sunni split which occurred in the decades immediately following the death of the Prophet in 632. Sunnis regard Ali as the fourth and last of the "rightly guided caliphs" (successors to Mohammed (pbuh) as leader of the Muslims) following on from Abu Bakr 632-634, Umar 634-644 and Uthman 644-656. Shias feel that Ali should have been the first caliph and that the caliphate should pass down only to direct descendants of Mohammed (pbuh) via Ali and Fatima, They often refer to themselves as ahl al bayt or "people of the house" [of the prophet].

When Uthman was murdered while at prayer, Ali finally succeeded to the caliphate. Ali was, however, opposed by Aisha, wife of the Prophet (pbuh) and daughter of Abu Bakr, who accused him of being lax in bringing Uthman's killers to justice. After Ali's army defeated Aisha's forces at the Battle of the Camel in 656, she apologized to Ali and was allowed to return to her home in Madinah where she withdrew from public life.

However, Ali was not able to overcome the forces of Mu'awiya Ummayad, Uthman's cousin and governor of Damascus, who also refused to recognize him until Uthman's killers had been apprehended. At the Battle of Suffin Mu'awiya's soldiers stuck verses of the Quran onto the ends of their spears with the result that Ali's pious supporters refused to fight them. Ali was forced to seek a compromise with Mu'awiya, but this so shocked some of his die-hard supporters who regarded it as a betrayal that he was struck down by one of his own men in 661.

Mu'awiya declared himself caliph. Ali's elder son Hassan accepted a pension in return for not pursuing his claim to the caliphate. He died within a year, allegedly poisoned. Ali's younger son Hussein agreed to put his claim to the caliphate on hold until Mu'awiya's death. However, when Mu'awiya finally died in 680, his son Yazid usurped the caliphate. Hussein led an army against Yazid but, hopelessly outnumbered, he and his men were slaughtered at the Battle of Karbala (in modern day Iraq). Hussein's infant son, Ali, survived so the line continued. Yazid formed the hereditary Ummayad dynasty. The division between the Shia and what came to be known as the Sunni was set.

An opportunity for Muslim unity arose in the 750's CE. In 750 except for a few who managed to flee to Spain, almost the entire Ummayad aristocracy was wiped out following the Battle of Zab in Egypt in a revolt led by Abu Al Abbass al-Saffah and aided by considerable Shia support. It was envisaged that the Shia spiritual leader Jafar As-Siddiq, great-grandson of Hussein be installed as Caliph. But when Abbass died in 754, this arrangement had not yet been finalised and Abbas' son Al Mansur murdered Jafar, seized the caliphate for himself and founded the Baghdad-based Abbassid dynasty which prevailed until the sack of Baghdad by the Mongols in 1258.
 

pewye

Banned
what I don't understand is why they changed the prayers from 5 to 3, when God clearly said that it was 5 times a day.

And I don't understand is why they are still bitter about the fact that Ali wasn't the first caliphah.

Abu Bakr, Uthman and Omar were the closest friends to Prophet Mohammad. Abu Bakr was unanimously chosen as the first caliphah, and Ali eventually became a Cliphah.

A cliphah is chosen because he is the best person that can rule over the muslims. Being a decsendant of Mohammad =/= best fit. It is possible that a descendant of prophet Mohammad might be the best fit, but I don't think that is always the case.

But it is worth noting that The Mahdi will be a descendant from prophet Mohammad.
 

Chrono

Banned
pewye said:
what I don't understand is why they changed the prayers from 5 to 3, when God clearly said that it was 5 times a day.

And I don't understand is why they are still bitter about the fact that Ali wasn't the first caliphah.

Abu Bakr, Uthman and Omar were the closest friends to Prophet Mohammad. Abu Bakr was unanimously chosen as the first caliphah, and Ali eventually became a Cliphah.

A cliphah is chosen because he is the best person that can rule over the muslims. Being a decsendant of Mohammad =/= best fit. It is possible that a descendant of prophet Mohammad might be the best fit, but I don't think that is always the case.

But it is worth noting that The Mahdi will be a descendant from prophet Mohammad.

I used to be a Shia and the argument goes like this: Mohammad DID CHOOSE Ali as his successor. How the fuck does the founder of an empire and a religion that ruled that part of the world just leave and hope his followers sort things out? I've seen old hadith texts with specific hadiths on this and new editions from saudi arabia with them edited out.

Also, Ali was the closest person to Mohammad. He was raised by him for fuck's sake. He married his daughter. There are so many other things too. I'm an atheist but fuck I remember reading all the details on this sunni vs. shia debate and it was laughable how weak the sunni side was. I don't even remember most of it now or even care but just thought I'd get it out of my system.
 

Hadji

Banned
Chrono said:
Also, Ali was the closest person to Mohammad. He was raised by him for fuck's sake. He married his daughter. There are so many other things too. I'm an atheist but fuck I remember reading all the details on this sunni vs. shia debate and it was laughable how weak the sunni side was. I don't even remember most of it now or even care but just thought I'd get it out of my system.

Ah, so you agree that Othman (raa) is closer because he married TWO of the Prophet's (pbuh) daughters? ^__^

Fatwa (ruling) of Shaikh Mahmood Shaltoot

Head Office of al-Azhar University:

IN THE NAME OF ALLAH, THE BENEFICENT, THE MERCIFUL Text of the Verdict (Fatwa) Issued by His Excellency Shaikh al-Akbar Mahmood Shaltoot, Head of the al-Azhar University, on Permissibility of Following "al-Shia al-Imamiyyah" School of Thought

His Excellency was asked:

Some believe that, for a Muslim to have religiously correct worship and dealing, it is necessary to follow one of the four known schools of thought, whereas, "al-Shia al-Imamiyyah" school of thought is not one of them nor "al-Shia al-Zaidiyyah." Do your Excellency agree with this opinion, and prohibit following "al-Shia al-Imamiyyah al-Ithna Ashariyyah" school of thought, for example?

His Excellency replied:

1) Islam does not require a Muslim to follow a particular Madh'hab (school of thought). Rather, we say: every Muslim has the right to follow one of the schools of thought which has been correctly narrated and its verdicts have been compiled in its books. And, everyone who is following such Madhahib [schools of thought] can transfer to another school, and there shall be no crime on him for doing so.

2) The Ja'fari school of thought, which is also known as "al-Shia al- Imamiyyah al-Ithna Ashariyyah" (i.e., The Twelver Imami Shi'ites) is a school of thought that is religiously correct to follow in worship as are other Sunni schools of thought. Muslims must know this, and ought to refrain from unjust prejudice to any particular school of thought, since the religion of Allah and His Divine Law (Shari'ah) was never restricted to a particular school of thought. Their jurists (Mujtahidoon) are accepted by Almighty Allah, and it is permissible to the "non-Mujtahid" to follow them and to accord with their teaching whether in worship (Ibadaat) or transactions (Mu'amilaat).

Signed, Mahmood Shaltoot.

The above Fatwa was announced on July 6, 1959 from the Head of al-Azhar University, and was subsequently published in many publications in the Middle East which include, but are not limited to:

al-Sha'ab newspaper (Egypt), issue of July 7, 1959. al-Kifah newspaper (Lebanon), issue of July 8, 1959.

So, why quote something that was written in 1959? Why would I care about Mahmood Shaltoot's opinion anyway? In fact, this is the first time I've heard of his name. Plus, I can provide you with many statements from Sunni scholars that say the exact opposite.
 

laserbeam

Banned
Hadji said:
Ah, so you agree that Othman (raa) is closer because he married TWO of the Prophet's (pbuh) daughters? ^__^



So, why quote something that was written in 1959? Why would I care about Mahmood Shaltoot's opinion anyway? In fact, this is the first time I've heard of his name. Plus, I can provide you with many statements from Sunni scholars that say the exact opposite.


You bring up something.

Islamic law from Allah states a man may have no more then 4 wives. In the fact Mohammad had 16 wives isn't that in fact a Grave violation of the law of Allah?
 

Atrus

Gold Member
effzee said:
Well of course no matter what measure you take humanity is humanity and crime will exist everywhere.

What i never seem to understand is your insistence on trying to prove to Muslims that God does not exist. I mean we all know your athiest and thus disagree with all religion. This thread was not created to PROVE the existence of God. It is to answer some questions people might have about Islam.

Oh well it was bound to happen. I am just shocked it took you so long to get in here this time.

My post did not mention God once nor was it used to dispute the existence of God so... I'm not sure what you were reading.
 

pewye

Banned
laserbeam said:
You bring up something.

Islamic law from Allah states a man may have no more then 4 wives. In the fact Mohammad had 16 wives isn't that in fact a Grave violation of the law of Allah?

Prophet Mohammad never had more than four wives at a time. (that is the rule)
 

Chrono

Banned
Hadji said:
Ah, so you agree that Othman (raa) is closer because he married TWO of the Prophet's (pbuh) daughters? ^__^

How about you read about Ali's life? Nobody associated with Mohammad compared to him in anything. For fuck's sake slaughtered one (or the?) most powerful warriors on the arab peninsula during a siege with just one strike, AS A TEENAGER. The were under siege and that warrior, I forgot his name and many details of this, jumped over it with his horse and started shouting for a challenger. NOBODY volunteered, except ali, then mohmmad said no. It happened several times (I think 3? This stuff can't be that historically accurate anyway :p) until he let him fight and Ali fucking owned him. Such badassery was only surpassed by his son hussein, in karbala.

And this hasn't been brought up but I think it's worth mentioning - most hate for the shia is because of iran and arab prejudice against persians. I'm not going into detail about this, and yeah there are a lot of arab shia, but anybody from that region would know.

Khalid-S said:
Very helpful thread Warrior.. thanks.

I have a question to our Shi'a friends. Can you tell us more about "Day of Ashura".

Thanks in advance :).

That's really cheap, linking to that google image search.

How about you tell us about how Saudi Arabia, your country, practices Islam? I don't think I need to even cite examples here. There's plenty of ammo for both shia's and non-muslims.

Edit: You know I don't remember this perfectly but I think you did the same thing before, ask something about ashura and link to a google image search... it was a thread on ramadan maybe, I'm not sure...
 

Karakand

Member
effzee said:
Around the time of the Danish cartoons controversy I held a meeting with our general Muslim body to discuss some of the events going on around the world. I could not understand why in the world ppl were protesting, rioting, burning, and killing because of the cartoons...BUT...not a single protest/riot was held in similar fashion against the civil war in Iraq or sectarian violence in Pakistan.
Good for you. I don't remember the totality of my campus's MSA's response was to that but I don't remember hearing anything similar.

Hadji said:
Gah. You know what I mean. <__<

It's the rapists fault first and foremost.
It is only the rapists fault.
 

Hadji

Banned
Chrono said:
How about you read about Ali's life? Nobody associated with Mohammad compared to him in anything. For fuck's sake slaughtered one (or the?) most powerful warriors on the arab peninsula during a siege with just one strike, AS A TEENAGER. The were under siege and that warrior, I forgot his name and many details of this, jumped over it with his horse and started shouting for a challenger. NOBODY volunteered, except ali, then mohmmad said no. It happened several times (I think 3? This stuff can't be that historically accurate anyway :p) until he let him fight and Ali fucking owned him. Such badassery was only surpassed by his son hussein, in karbala.

So his "badassery" prove the Shi'te faith to be the correct one?

Honestly, I'm not really surprised that you ended up as an atheist.
 

Chrono

Banned
Hadji said:
So his "badassery" prove the Shi'te faith to be the correct one?

Honestly, I'm not really surprised that you ended up as an atheist.

Me being an atheist has nothing to do with shia/sunni differences, if anything being a shia made it more difficult, but keep telling yourself that.
 

Kapsama

Member
laserbeam said:
Non Jews and Non Christians were given two options. Die or Convert.
No, no, no, no. Forced conversions are very rare events in the history of Islam. Conversions were almost always voluntary. Many African tribal leaders for example accepted Islam rather than Christianity or another religion for that matter because Islam allowed them to have multiple wives. Indonesia, another example, was influenced by Arabic and other Islamic traders and merchants. Yet another example are the Turks who voluntarily converted when they came to the Middle East. Bosnians converted because they were outcasts among their neighbors and had suffered discrimination and persecution as "followers" of bogomilism. The examples are endless, claiming that Islam was accepted through forced conversion shows a high degree of ignorance.

~Devil Trigger~ said:
Oh Democracy, when will you have a definitive....definition...

turkishGeneral.jpg
Too bad Islam forbids having another God but Allah, because otherwise I would set up a shrine and pray to Buyukanit and the mighty institution he serves in the fight against Islamic backwardism and Western Imperialism.
 

laserbeam

Banned
pewye said:
Prophet Mohammad never had more than four wives at a time. (that is the rule)

I appreciate your answer just trying to find out different answers.

The Hadith Sahih Bukhari has a reference to him going around and having sexual relations with between 9 to 11 of his wives in a single day.

Narrated Qatada:

Anas bin Malik said, "The Prophet used to visit all his wives in a round, during the day and night and they were eleven in number." I asked Anas, "Had the Prophet the strength for it?" Anas replied, "We used to say that the Prophet was given the strength of thirty (men)." And Sa'id said on the authority of Qatada that Anas had told him about nine wives only (not eleven).


Hmm it would appear upon further research. Upon marrying his 5th concurrent wife He said he received a revelation saying he could marry freely without limit.
 

Hadji

Banned
Khalid-S said:
Very helpful thread Warrior.. thanks.

I have a question to our Shi'a friends. Can you tell us more about "Day of Ashura".

Thanks in advance :).

Nice pics. The pure amount of "badassery" there clearly justifies their views.

Kapsama, I also wanted to add that Indonesia is the most populated country with Muslims in the world, and there hasn't been an army that was sent there.
 

Chrono

Banned
Hadji said:
Nice pics. The pure amount of "badassery" there clearly justifies their views.

The irony here is that I can post pics of women in burkhas, walking behind men, and you'd either support that or come up with your own true islam #09080906. And if I had pictures of things like stonings and lashings it'd be more interesting.

And if you want to know about shia views, start by reading a book. There are so many. Clinging to a comment by an atheist who used to be a shia only highlights how weak and insecure your position is.
 

Hadji

Banned
Chrono said:
The irony here is that I can post pics of women in burkhas, walking behind men, and you'd either support that or come up with your own true islam #09080906. And if I had pictures of things like stonings and lashings it'd be more interesting.

Stonings and lashings are Islamically accepted punishments. These are actions that are practiced by both Sunnis and Shi'ites. However, the pics of people beating themselves up senselessly, and cutting themselves, and cutting up their children, is an absurd practice and is not tolerated by Islam.
 

Chrono

Banned
Hadji said:
Stonings and lashings are Islamically accepted punishments. These are actions that are practiced by both Sunnis and Shi'ites. However, the pics of people beating themselves up senselessly, and cutting themselves, and cutting up their children, is an absurd practice and is not tolerated by Islam.

Which has been outlawed by shia imams.

Sounds... familiar. " a crazy few acting against what islam really teaches"... you hear that in every fucking terrorism thread.

Oh and I'm not a muslim, so stoning and lashing people for having sex or a beer are as acceptable to me as hijacking an airplane and flying it into a building to murder thousands of innocents.
 

Chrono

Banned
Hadji said:
*sighs*

Quotes from various Shi'ite imams taken from "Ayatollah" Shirazi's website:

http://www.shirazi.org.uk/tatbir fatawa1423.htm

Thoughts?

Interesting. I went to a lot of ashura 'rallies' or whatever you want to call them when I was a kid, and I've never seen anyone hurt themselves. What people did was hit their chests with their right hand, and not strongly either, it was like a clap. It was done all in unison at the mosque as the imam went on about the events of karbala after some retarded speech. I've heard that some people in iran hurt themselves but the ayatollahs banned that practice. How those particular imams fit in all that I have no idea, this is where you should ask an actual shia who's up to date with what's going on in that world. :p
 

AmMortal

Banned
John Bombo said:
The problem in many Muslim countries is that none of them truly follow Islam teaching.

Islam is all about mercy and modesty. But look at the leaders in these countries! They live in luxurious palace and some are among the world richest guys in the world. How did they earn all this money? And at the same time, their people live in total misery. They enforce strict laws, depriving most men and women of their rights.

And how do they achieve such an amazing things? They say it's god laws.

Last time I checked(in the Qur'an), i didn't read women weren't allowed to ride a bicycle, drive a car, have a job. It didn't say that a woman can't choose her husband. It do not say that a woman has to be more covered than Dark Vador. They are no such things as honor killings, female circumcision (hopefully it isn't done in most countries).

And the most incredible achievement is how they can shut up political opponents, journalists or anyone who thinks a little differently. Some are thrown in jails. Others disappear or are killed. Hey, they don't even try to make their fake elections (if there are elections) look real.

So don't be shocked if people in terrible situations take the extremists way. They don't have any other choice. The guys who fought for freedom and democracy are either in jails or killed.


Exactly what I have been saying, those guys would be the opposite of what the Prophet would do if he was here, all though he ruled the whole of the middle-east, he slept on the floor and never ever ate froma table but rather on the floor. His back was full of scars of the harsh floor construct.


B T W

What the hell happened to this thread:lol

I just woke up and found pics of women and poeple arguing lol
 

Adamrogo

Banned
The only good that came out of this thread is that I know who to add to my ignore list. :lol

Religion turns people crazy.
 

AmMortal

Banned
Armitage said:
Warrior300 I asked you this in another thread but you kind of pussy footed around it: do you think the koran is inerrant? As in, the literal truth?

I never heard this before but, I would say yeah it is the truth word of word in the pure Arabic it was revealed in.
 

Gig

One man's junk is another man's treasure
Something a little still a little unclear to me, a women has the right to not wear the head scarf, but if she doesn't can she still go to heaven?
 

AmMortal

Banned
Guled said:
Warrior300, please stop posting and making Muslims look bad

I do apologize, it wasn't me you see, I leave my account on "remember me" and so family members just come in & post.

Why the hell would I jeopordize the Islamic Thread?

I understand that there are troll and I ignore them usually.
 

AmMortal

Banned
Gig said:
Something a little still a little unclear to me, a women has the right to not wear the head scarf, but if she doesn't can she still go to heaven?



Yes.

Only Allah decides who gets in,

Praying 5 times a day and charity is more important then any scarf.
 

AmMortal

Banned
Adamrogo said:
The only good that came out of this thread is that I know who to add to my ignore list. :lol

Religion turns people crazy.

Seeing as this thread has and is full of sensible and quite logic arguments, I would reconsider if I were you.
 

Adamrogo

Banned
Warrior300 said:
I do apologize, it wasn't me you see, I lave my account on remember me and so family members just come in post.

Why the hell would I jeopordize the Islamic Thread?

I understand that there are troll and I ignore them usually.

Joke account?
:lol
 

Chrono

Banned
Warrior300 said:
Saw once a friend of mines dad beating himself senseless in the head, in the bathroom.

awkwaaard.

You know I didn't want to reply to this but I can't go to sleep without writing this post.

I'm not sure what the hell you were doing in a bathroom with your friend's dad in the first place, but what you described makes no sense. So I'm assuming it was ashura, and your friend's dad wasn't in a mosque or with a bunch of other shia's or listening to an audio recording of an ashura sermon or anything like that... he was in the bathroom... beating himself? He didn't do it as part of ashura, or was he taking ashura to the bathroom? Seriously I wouldn't be surprised if you made that up completely.

Warrior300 said:
Exactly what I have been saying, those guys would be the opposite of what the Prophet would do if he was here, all though he ruled the whole of the middle-east, he slept on the floor and never ever ate froma table but rather on the floor. His back was full of scars of the harsh floor construct.

Nothing special. Khomeini lived like that, and probably many if not all of the shia ayatollahs. It's how the shia imams lived too and I think it's one point where shias say they contrast with the sunni caliphates.
 

AmMortal

Banned
Hadji said:
*sighs*

Quotes from various Shi'ite imams taken from "Ayatollah" Shirazi's website:

http://www.shirazi.org.uk/tatbir fatawa1423.htm

Thoughts?

I Quite wholeheartedly agree, although that Shiite people are good and just as nice as Muslim ahlul bayt Sunni the concept of Shia is based on lies about the companions and beloved wife of the Prophet and our mother.

They curse at them, I will now show you how the man who founded shia consecpt which itself means sect.

Here we have Usool al- Kafi that is a collection narrations and traditions attributed to the Shiite Imams, Ahlul Bayt and the Prophet. Al-Kafi is the MOST reliable Shia Book, as the reliable Shia Scholars said and declared . Its author is Thiqat al-Islam Muhamad Ibn Yaqoob AlKulayni (A VERY reliable Shia Scholar, died in 328 H



XAMPLES of the CONTENTS of AL-KAFI:

[1] The Imams have knowledge of All that was given to the angels and the prophets. ( Al-Kafi vol.1 p.255 )

[2] The Imams know when they will die, and they only die by their choice. ( Al-Kafi vol.1 p.258 )

[3] The Imams have knowledge of the past and future; and nothing is hidden from them. ( Al-Kafi vol.1 p.260 )


[4] "Bad'ah" ALLAH tells a lie. (Al Kafi, Vol. No.1, Page No. 148. A Shia doctrine.)

[5] We are the eyes of the God in his creature and the final authority in all human beings. (Al Kafi, Vol. No. 1, Page No. 145)

[6] The Hujjat (Ultimate proof) of God can not be established without Imam. (Al Kafi, Vol. No. 1, Page No. 177)

COMMENT: No doubt that these words are clear Kufr (Disbelief) and Shirk (Polytheism), because the knowledge of the unseen is only for Allah alone .. These words with no doubt countradict what Allah said in Surah Luqmaan "Verily, Allah With Him (Alone) is the knowledge of the Hour, He sends down the rain, and knows that which is in the wombs. No person knows what he will earn tomorrow, and no person knows in what land he will die. Verily, Allah is All-Knower, All-Aware (of things)" [Quran 31:34]

[7] "Obedience to `Ali is true humility and disobedience to him is disbelief in Allah" (Al-Kafi vol.10 p.54)

[8] "Whoever sets up another Imam besides `Ali and delays `Ali's caliphate is a polytheist" (Al-Kafi vol.10 p.55)

[9] Sahabah (R.H) became infidel by denying the divine right (Wilayat) of Hazrat Ali. First three caliph and other Sahabas became infidel by denying the divine right of (Wilayat) of Hazrat Ali. (Al Kafi, Page No. 420)

COMMENT: These words declare Sahabahs all AhlSunnah as kufaar (Disbelievers) and Mushrikeen (Polytheists), because we -AhlSunnah- do not believe in the Shia Imamate of `Ali (which is believing that `Ali is Infallible,..etc ) also We -AhlSunnah- believe that Abubakr (r) is the first caliphate, Omar (r) the second and Othman (r) the third, thus, We delay `Ali's caliphate to be the 4th after Abubakr, Omar and Othman, thus, Shia declare in their most reliable book that AhlSunnah are Kufaar and Mushrikeen !!!

[10] Imam posses more attribute than a Prophet posses. (Al-Kafi, Vol. No. 1, Page No. 388)

[11] All Imams are equal in rank and status to Prophet Muhammad (s.a.w.s). (Al Kafi, Vol. No. 1, Page No. 270)

[12] The false verse "And We made `Ali your in-law" has been added to Surah Al-InShirah . ( Al-Kafi p.289 )

[13] Alkileeni reported that Jabir asked AbuJa`far p.b.u.h : "Why `Ali ibn Aby Talib was named Amir-ul-Mumineen?" AbuJa`far replied: "Allah named him so, and He revealed in His Book " And (remember) when your Lord brought forth from the Children of Adam, from their loins, their seed and made them testify as to themselves (saying): Am I not your Lord, Muhammad my messenger and `Ali Amir-ul-Mumineen ?..." (Al-Kafi vol.1 p.412)

COMMENT: We all know that "Muhammad my messenger and `Ali Amir-ul-Mumineen" is not part of the Quranic verse [Quran 7:172], but as you just read, AlKileeni narrated in his book Al-Kafi that the Infallible Imam -according to Shia- (AbuJa`far) said that the verse [Quran 7:172] was revealed by Allah with "Muhammad my messenger and `Ali Amir-ul-Mumineen", This is a serious claim by Shia that the Quran was changed and corrupted !!! This is a serious "Tahreef" of the Holy Quran... and please continue reading:

[14] "Abu Baseer reported that he said to Imam Ja'far, "O Abu Abdullah (Imam Ja'far as-Sadiq) What is Mus-haf Fatimah?" He replied "It is a Qur'an containing three times what is found in your copy of the Qur'an; yet by Allah, it does not contain even a single letter from your Qur'an. (Al-Kafi vol.1 p.457)

[15] No one possess complete knowledge of Holy Qur'an except Imams. (Al Kafi, Vol. No. 1, Page No. 228)

[16] Imam knows his hour of death and his death is in his control.



All those are of extreme kufr( disbelieve) I 'm sure that if Shias read into their matter they wouldn't be the same.


The man that founded Shia's used to be jewish and so you will find many references to dajjal as the 12 imam, I can give those references if I'm asked for them.
 

Chrono

Banned
Warrior300 said:
The man that founded Shia's used to be jewish and so you will find many references to dajjal as the 12 imam, I can give those references if I'm asked for them.

:lol :lol :lol

Keep posting dude, you're teaching a lot of ignorant westerners about 'true' islam. More than you think.
 

AmMortal

Banned
Chrono said:
You know I didn't want to reply to this but I can't go to sleep without writing this post.

I'm not sure what the hell you were doing in a bathroom with your friend's dad in the first place, but what you described makes no sense. So I'm assuming it was ashura, and your friend's dad wasn't in a mosque or with a bunch of other shia's or listening to an audio recording of an ashura sermon or anything like that... he was in the bathroom... beating himself? He didn't do it as part of ashura, or was he taking ashura to the bathroom? Seriously I wouldn't be surprised if you made that up completely.



Nothing special. Khomeini lived like that, and probably many if not all of the shia ayatollahs. It's how the shia imams lived too and I think it's one point where shias say they contrast with the sunni caliphates.


uhm. I'll asnwer this its was my bro who psoted that.

I'll explain what he saw

A friend of his ( not himself as far as I know) was at home with another friend of him, playing playstation 2 games lol. So he had to got to the bathroom and take a leak.

He saw his friend's father doing it and blood was everywhere, he was SHOCKED. There was no proper mosque there, so he had to do it at his own house.
 

AmMortal

Banned
Chrono said:
You know I didn't want to reply to this but I can't go to sleep without writing this post.

I'm not sure what the hell you were doing in a bathroom with your friend's dad in the first place, but what you described makes no sense. So I'm assuming it was ashura, and your friend's dad wasn't in a mosque or with a bunch of other shia's or listening to an audio recording of an ashura sermon or anything like that... he was in the bathroom... beating himself? He didn't do it as part of ashura, or was he taking ashura to the bathroom? Seriously I wouldn't be surprised if you made that up completely.



Nothing special. Khomeini lived like that, and probably many if not all of the shia ayatollahs. It's how the shia imams lived too and I think it's one point where shias say they contrast with the sunni caliphates.


See how, they take the Prophet as an example yet they curse his wifes and companions. Hypocrisy, Islam isn;t about claiming to be the infallible only Allah and the Qur'an and His Prophets are.

The reason why the prophet didn't have any sons is because of this very fact. Shia's would delight in it and would take everyone of them as a prophet while only Allah decides who is prophet .
 

Hadji

Banned
laserbeam said:
You bring up something.

Islamic law from Allah states a man may have no more then 4 wives. In the fact Mohammad had 16 wives isn't that in fact a Grave violation of the law of Allah?

I don't know where you got the number sixteen from, but yes, he did have more than four wives at one time.

Basically, there are some special laws applied to the Prophet (pbuh) that aren't applied to the rest of Muslims. One of them was that he could marry more than four wives. Personally, I wouldn't be able to handle more than one. I'm assuming it wasn't a picnic.

Similarly, there are other laws that he had to follow including a mandatory "night" prayer. I could be wrong, but I believe it was mandatory for him to fast on all Mondays and Thurdays. This isn't the case with all Muslims.

Also, most of the women he married were from different tribes and those marriages created peace between the warring tribes of the Arabian Peninsula.

I understand where you are coming from, but to me, this sounds as weak of an argument as a Jew saying, "But-but-but--- Jesus worked on the SABBATH!"
 

FightyF

Banned
funkmastergeneral said:
I cut myself once while slicing some cucumbers. Is that forbidden?

If repeated cutting of cucumbers was dangerous to your health. Do you see the logic behind it? Anything can be dangerous, but you wouldn't classify it as a dangerous act if the probability of a negative outcome is low.

Amir0x said:
I have to agree with WickedAngel on this, Warrior300. Your initial argument was fine; trying to prove that they're forced to be this way by posting google picture searches is a really poor argument.

I can in my searches find Islamic and Arabic pornographic videos, or Arabic or Islamic females in slutty clothing, but you would not dare say it is sanctioned.

The west is FREE, and with freedom comes the ability to dress however you want, whether you approve or not. Some guys like it, some guys don't. Some females like it, some females don't. There is no way you can generalize billions of people as you are.

You are doing your thread poor service by continuing that line of fight.

I called it! :)

lopaz said:
edit- also, remember that story recently about the woman in Saudi (I think) who was raped, and nearly got flogged for being out with another man whilst the men who did it got more lenient punishments?

They didn't get more lenient punishments, they were sentenced to death.

I find it odd that you were offended when people asked you to do more research and learn more about the religion, yet you decided to stick around for this sort of stuff...

Atrus said:
Rape is about power and control, not sex. If people wanted sex, there are plenty of outlets such as prostitutes or through the exploitation of quick marriages/divorces. Furthermore, statistics show that rapes are carried in majority by a close relation of the woman such as family members, boyfriends, husbands or friends rather than complete strangers.

The significant factor behind rape cases are intent and relationship to the victim, and the clothes they wear aren't a factor in who gets raped. Even a full out Burqa does nothing to stop rape cases in Afghanistan where gender apartheid makes widowed women easy targets.

Second, the amount of freedom and persecution in the environment will factor into rape statistics. Countries which have the Hudood Ordinance or similar laws, co-factored with global statistics of honor killings seem to relate closely with how many women would admit to being raped at all. Who the hell would risk death to claim rape?

Thirdly, the idea that all women have to cover up because some small minority of men are vermin is incompetent logic. Even more moronic is the insinuation that men are just rapists waiting for a reason to rape. This does not demonstrably apply to men, so the only applicable outlook to such a suggestion is that they are speaking of only Muslim men, and if so, that would make them inferior to men elsewhere. I doubt Muslim men would like to support such insinuations, at least those educated enough to renounce such ideas from the outset.

I agree that a hijab or burqa is not an auto-matic "rape deterrent". But you must realize that Islamic teachings doesn't say it is either. It's something that you seem to be implying when that isn't the case.

The role of the hijab is for women to be modest with their God-given beauty. Secondly (if you were to look at the same Quranic verses that speak about it), it is for others to respect her as a modest person.

Rape is a problem that males are responsible for. It has to do with his view of women in general, and his mindset.

Muslim men are commanded to lower their gaze, and upon seeing someone in a hijab, respect her space. The hijab was commanded not just to be worn by women, but respected and recognized by men.

By the way, Muslim men are commanded to dress modestly as well. We have to be covered above the navel and below the knees. I've also heard that we shouldn't wear tight clothing as well, but I don't know if that is based on scripture or if that is an interpreted suggestion based on the principle of modesty.

Chrono said:
I used to be a Shia...

Are you serious? I thought you used to be Jewish? For the longest time...I even remember responding to you a long time ago with a Shalom...
Mind = blown.

Gig said:
Something a little still a little unclear to me, a women has the right to not wear the head scarf, but if she doesn't can she still go to heaven?

On the Day of Judgement, God judges each individual based on their actions and good thoughts (bad thoughts are ignored, and good thoughts are rewarded as good deeds), and these are put on a scale to see whether or not one outweighs the other. Performing ritual, or obeying God's commandments are considered righteous acts. Disobeying God's commandments are considered sinful acts.

The head scarf is an act of modesty, but it doesn't define it. A woman can be completely modest without a scarf. And so if one is acting immodestly, only then would they be committing sin and thus adding weight to that scale. So wearing one or not has no bearing on whether someone enters heaven or not.

One well known Hadith (saying/action of the Prophet Muhammed) was when he told of a prostitute of the Bani Israel (Children of Israel) who gave water to a dog dying of thirst, and that she was forgiven by God for that action. So even if someone had an "immodest" life...that doesn't even discount them from entering Heaven, from an Islamic perspective. (To Muslims: this doesn't mean you can do whatever you feel, but rather demonstrates how God loves acts of mercy. She could have easily lived an immoral life and died before getting a chance to perform that act of kindness, and so it can't be used as a justification to lead an immoral life.)
 

-viper-

Banned
Warrior300 said:
The man that founded Shia's used to be jewish and so you will find many references to dajjal as the 12 imam, I can give those references if I'm asked for them.
I'm asking, and I want to hear.
 

AmMortal

Banned
For those who don't know Dajjal is the Anti-Christ. The word means Deceiver .

Read through the whole thing don't jump through it. And ask me questions already answered here.

-viper- said:
I'm asking, and I want to hear.

1)Mahdi of the Rafdhis will rule according to the Laws of David and the family of David:
Al-Kulyani reports in his work al-Kafi, volume no.1, p.397-398:
a)Narrated Ali ibn Ibraheem -from his father-from ibn Abi Umair-from Mansour-from Fadhl al Aour-from Abi Ubaidah who reported: “During the times of Imam Jaffar[as] we used to go around like herds without a caretaker. We met with Salim ibn Abi Hafs who asked me: ”Oh Abu Ubaidullah, who is your Imam?” I replied:” My Imams are from the household of the prophet”. He then stated: “You have perished and so have I for both of us have heared Abu Jafar[as] saying: “One who dies without recognizing his Imam, he dies a death of Jahiliyyah.” Then I affirmed what he said. It was before that three or somewhat close to it(time span) when I entered upon Abu Abdullah[as] and God granted me knowledge. Then I said to Abu Abdullah[as]: “Salim said such and such.” He replied: “Oh Abu Obaidah nobody here will die until he is succeeded by some one who does the same thing as his, and adopts the similar manners of his predecessor, and calls to the same thing as his predecessor did. Oh Abu Ubaidah, it was permitted that whatever was given to David was also provided for Sulaiman.” Then he added: “Oh Abu Ubaidah when the Qaem of the household of the prophet appears, he will rule according to rule of David and Solomon.”

b)Muhammad ibn Yahya-Ahmad ibn Muhammad-Muhammad ibn Sinaan-Abaan who reported: “I heard Abu Abdullah[as] saying: “The world will not fade away unless a person from us appears who will rule according to the rule of the family of David and he will not ask his house. He will give every one his right.

c)Ahmad--Ahmad ibn Muhammad--Ibn Mahboob--Hisham ibn Salim--Ammar as Saabati who reported: “I asked Abu Abdullah[as] : “On what will you rule if you are made the rulers.” He replied: “By the rule of Allah and the rule of David. And if we are confronted by a situation which we cannot solve, Gabriel( Ruh al Quds) will reveal it to us.”

d)Muhammad ibn Ahmad--Muhammad ibn Khalid--Nazr ibn Suwaid--Yahya al Halabi--Imran ibn Oueiyn--Jaeed al Hamdani--Ali ibn al-Hussein[as] said: “I asked him by which law will you rule?” He said: “By the rule of David, and if there is something which we are unaware of, Gabriel(Ruh al Quds) will reveal it to us.”
e)Ahmad ibn Mahran[ra]--Muhammad ibn Ali--Ibn Mahboob--Hishaam bin Salim--Ammar as Saabati reported: I asked Imam Abu Abdullah[as] :“What is the status of the Aimmah.” He replied : “It is similar to the status of Dhul Qarnain, Ushegh, and Asef the companion of prophet Sulaiman.” Then I asked: “By what will you rule?” He replied: “By the rule of God, by the rule of David, and by the rule of the Prophet Muhammad[saw] and by the revealation of Gabriel.

2)Mahdi Al-Muntazar will speak in Hebrew:
Reported to us Ahmad ibn Muhammad ibn Saeed al Uqdah who said: Narrated to us Ali ibn al-Hasan at-Taymali who said: narrated to us al-Hasan and Muhammad the sons of Ali ibnu Yusuf, from Sa’daan ibnu Muslim, from rajaal, from alMufadhaal ibn Umar who said:
Abu Abdullah[as] reported: “When the Imam Mahdi calls out, he will supplicate to God in Hebrew.”[ Shiite source: Al-Ghaybaa of an Numani, p.326]

3)The Jews will be the followers of Imam Mahdi:
Sheikh alMufeed has reported in his Al-Irshaad from alMufadhaal ibnu Umar that Imam Abu Abdullah[as] has reported: “There will appear along with Imam Mahdi in Kufa, 27 people from the tribe of Moses, and seven from the people of the cave, and Yushegh ibn Nun, and Sulaiman, and Abu Dujjana al-Ansari, and Miqdad, and Malik Usthur who all be his(imam Mahdi’s helpers).”[ Al-Irshaad of al-mufeed at Tusi p.402]

And with this we summarize that the Mahdi of the Shiites:

---Will rule according to the system of the family of David, and by a new Quran that is unavailable in our hands. And if someone asks where is the Laws of David, he will find the answer to be the Talmud without any doubt. And for this reason the Mahdi of the Rafidhis will take an oath on a new book as it is stated by an-Nu’mani in his work al-Ghayba, p.107: “Abu Jafar[as] said: “ By God, as if I am seeing him between the Rukn and Maqaam taking an oath of allegiance with a new order, with a new book, and a new leadership from the heavens.”

---His language will be Hebrew

---His followers will be of the Jews, for he is the king of the Jews and he himself is the Dajjal or the Jewish Anti Christ about whom the Prophet has described.
More strong Proofs that show Mahdi of the Shiites is the Jewish Dajjal:

---When the Dajjal appears the Diaspora of the Jews will flock and gather in Jewish holy city of Jerusalem. Similarly when the Mahdi of the Shiites appear , all the Shiites any where will flock to him and gather in the Shiite holy city of Kufa.

---When the Dajjal appears the dead Jews will be resurrected from their graves by him and they would join the ranks of the Dajjal. Similarly when the Mahdi of the Rafidhis appears he will resurrect the dead of the Shiites and they would join his ranks.

---When the Dajjal appears he will resurrect the enemies of the Jews and will punish them. When the Mahdi of the Shiites appear he will resurrect the prophet’s companions and will punish them.

---The Dajjal will place on trial every one who oppressed the Jews. The Mahdi of the Shiites will place on trial every one who oppressed the Shiites.

---The Dajjal will kill 1/3 of the world population. Likewise the Mahdi of the Shiites will kill 1/3 of the world population.

---During the time of the Jewish Dajjal the earth will be filled with bounties for the Jews, the mountains will turn into milk and honey for the Jews. When the Mahdi of the Rafidhis appear a river of milk and a river of water will burst for the Shiites.

And the points that prove the association of Mahdi with the Jews is:
a)When the Mahdi appears he will call out to God in Hebrew.
b)He will rule by the system of the family of David.

Here are the evidences:

---It has been reported in Bihaarul Anwar that one of the Muwali of Abul Hassan[as] stated: I asked Abul Hassan about the verse : “Ayna ma takunu Ya’ti bikumullahu Jamee’aan”. He said: “This is verse is pointing out to our Qaem when he appears, God will gather our Shiites from different corners of the world.”

---Al-Amaali has reported from Abu Abdullah[as] that he was asked for how long will the Qaem rule? He replied : “Seven years who days will be stretched.....during this period God will raise the flesh and bodies of the believers(Shiites) from the graves.” almufadhaal ibnu Umar has reported: “we were discussing about Qaem, and whoever dies he is awaited by our fellows. Abu Abdullah[as] has said to us: “When he (Qaem) appears a believer will be approached in his grave and will be told: oh so and so, your fellow (the Qaem) has appeared, if you wish to join his ranks then do so, and if you wish you can remain in the mercy of your lord(in other words you can remain in your grave).”

---Al-Majlisi has reported from Abu Abdullah[as] who stated: “do you know with whom will the Qaem start with?” the answer was negative. Then he replied: “He will dig out the two culprits(Abu Bakr and Umar) burn their bodies and then let the wind to blow their ashes.

---Al-Mufeed reports from Abu Abdullah[as] that he said: “When the Qaem of the household of the Prophet appears he will grab hold of 500 members of the Quraish and will chop their necks off. He will do the same procedure with another 500. this action will be repeated 7 times.

---al-Majlisi has stated a narration reported from Jaffar ibn Muhammad who reported from his father who heard from his grandfather that : “when the Mahdi appears in Makkah and intends to go to Kufa, an announcer will call out: “That none of you should carry with himself food or drink and should carry only the stone of Moses...when they place the front side of the stone on the ground, it will let go an ever flowing river of milk and water, which will quench the thirst and hunger.

---Al-Ihsaaii has reported that Abu Abdullah[as] said : “The matter will not happen(victory of Qaem) until a third of the people are gone.” He was asked: “when a third of humanity is gone then what will be left?” Abu Abdullah[as] answered: “Arent you pleased that the remainder are you?”

Authentic Ahadith of the Prophet about the Dajjal

---The Prophet(saw) said that the Dajjal will descend in Marqand .......then Allah will grant the Muslims victory on him who will kill him and his SHIA in so much that when the Jew hides behind a tree or a stone, then the tree and the stone will say to the Muslim that there is a Jew behind me come and kill him,(Musnad Imam Ahmad #5099)

the question arises here: Why didnt the prophet not say “Itib’aa” or followers instead of “SHIA” or partisans? they were actually called rawafids in the past but now they are called Shiites, and the Prophet doesnt speak of his own!

---The Prophet(saw) said, “To every Ummah there is a magian and the magian of this ummah are those who reject the Qadr or predestination. If anyone amongst them dies donot attend their funeral, and if anyone amongst them becomes sick don’t visit them AND THEY ARE SHIATUL DAJJAL OR PARTISANS OF THE DAJJAL and it is the right of God to join them with the Dajjal(Sunan Abi Dawoud #4072)
So the Shiites are the magians of this ummah and their Iranian nation. Khomeini has clearly stated that he rejected predestination( Tahreer al-Waseela vol.1, p.79)
---the Prophet(saw) has stated : “The Dajjal will be followed by 70,000 Jews of Isfahan, having on themselves persian shawls.”[Sahih Muslim #5227]
Question: What makes the Dajjal to go to Isfahan as it is a Shiite land and why is the involvement of the Jews in a Shiite city? Is this a coincidence?

We all know the that the Shiites say that may God hasten the coming of their locked Qaem and we all know that the one who is locked and made hidden is the Dajjal as reported in the narration of Tamim ad-Darri in Sahih Bukhari,so there is no place for the Shiites to err.
 

AmMortal

Banned
Hadji said:
I don't know where you got the number sixteen from, but yes, he did have more than four wives at one time.

Basically, there are some special laws applied to the Prophet (pbuh) that aren't applied to the rest of Muslims. One of them was that he could marry more than four wives. Personally, I wouldn't be able to handle more than one. I'm assuming it wasn't a picnic.

Similarly, there are other laws that he had to follow including a mandatory "night" prayer. I could be wrong, but I believe it was mandatory for him to fast on all Mondays and Thurdays. This isn't the case with all Muslims.

Also, most of the women he married were from different tribes and those marriages created peace between the warring tribes of the Arabian Peninsula.

I understand where you are coming from, but to me, this sounds as weak of an argument as a Jew saying, "But-but-but--- Jesus worked on the SABBATH!"

Also most if not all except for two were widows, so he married them to make sure they got treated well. Arabia was hash on women with no husbands. He never divorced one of them, i also heard that he couldn't marry any woman as a substitution i.e Divorce them. So when he married it had to be for ever, in that aspect we are allowed to have more wives then him
 

Inanna

Not pure anymore!
FightyF said:
........ The fact is that sexism is a cancer in the Islamic World that has to be weeded out. Making comparisons when this sexism exists...doesn't make sense to me.

Well, I dunno much about Islam, but what I do know is that sexism does exist in the west/developed countries as well. The only difference is that women do not put up with it and fight back. As opposed to women in under-developed countries, who are taught to obey men and accept the fact that they are the inferior gender and men superior.
 

AmMortal

Banned
ilanna said:
Well, I dunno much about Islam, but what I do know is that sexism does exist in the west/developed countries as well. The only difference is that women do not put up with it and fight back. As opposed to women in under-developed countries, who are taught to obey men and accept the fact that they are the inferior gender and men superior.


Unfortunatley this is true in everyword.

Please understand though that it's not Islam that's the cause, its the opposite of what's going on.

I have explained it in the OP and a few times else in this thread, have a look around and you will see it and understand what I mean. ^_^
 

Inanna

Not pure anymore!
I'm not saying that it is because of Islam. I was just telling the guy who was accusing under-developed-countries or Islam of being sexist. Trust me, I know my fair share of sexist *English* chauvinistic bastards! Men always tend to think they're superior when they really aren't :p but that's a debate for another thread.. Which I won't make, don't worry :lol
 
Top Bottom