Deviation:
• To differ with others in belief and thought.
• Deviating from what is considered acceptable.
• To depart from, differ with, digress.
• Generally meaning an inferior quality of behaviour.
Examples:
Types of sexual deviants; pornographers, swingers, rapists, child molesters.
Types of social deviants, remaining single all one’s life, to think that stealing is acceptable.
Apostasy:
• From the Greek word meaning defection or revolt from.
• To be away and apart from.
• Usually used to refer to someone who has renounced their former ideas and becomes a critic of one’s former belief.
Apostasy is not questioning ones faith and seeking to understand it more.
Apostasy is not missing prayers or non payment of Zakat.
Apostasy is not speaking to someone who is deemed to be an apostate.
Apostasy comes about due to lack of faith and loss of faith.
Misconception’s concerning apostasy.
It is often said that Shias have apostate from Islam, but how can you be an apostate to something you still adhere to and consider Islam? When did the apostasy take place before they were born by another group of people?
It is often said that anyone who leaves Islam should be killed this is also a false notion and needs to be looked at and studied again, because the answer is wrong.
There are different types of apostates and each one is dealt with differently. It is not a blanket ruling for all types.
Types of Apostasy:
1. In belief, to accept another form of religion and leave the one you used to accept.
2. In action, to attack physically the Quran by throwing it in the bin or burning it.
3. In utterance, like to write books, articles and speak lectures against Islam, in a very mocking and abusing manner. This is the stance of someone that uses their tongue to attack verbally Islam and its holy personalities. This person has declared war against Allah, His Prophet and revelations.
So it is clear that there exist a difference between someone who leaves Islam due to confusion or lack of faith and someone who has no faith at all and attacks the former religion in every way possible. Highlighting an issue is different to lying about and deliberately misrepresenting something. If you look at some of the people that attack Islam it is as if they care not for truth or justice in the wider meaning of the word. If they see you as ignorant then you are fit to be mocked and ridiculed and even imprisoned, tortured and killed.
Islam says in more than one place ‘there is no compulsion in religion’ you can choose what you wish as your way of life, but in the long run it will harm you and in the short run you also will be effected spiritually.
It also says ‘to you your way and to me my way’ and not ‘if you don’t like my way I will have to kill you on the spot’. This is not and should not be the mentality of a Muslim.
Did you know that in the lifetime of the Prophet Muhammad there were cases of hypocrisy and apostasy and the Prophet ( ص )did not have them killed!
Inshallah time permitting I will continue this topic at a later date.
Wal hamdulilah.
Peace.
Wednesday, 3 March 2010
Friday, 29 January 2010
Christians and Jews......the real deal!
Christians and Jews.....Peace.
THE FACTS;
1) Muslims are not all on a mission to destroy and kill you, don’t believe the hype! This is more propaganda from mischief makers. As for people like Usama bin La Deen, people like this do not represent balanced, upright and decent Muslims. There is no legal or legitimate Jihad against you. What is happening is that desperate people are rushing into acts of violence and extremism that even Muslims do not tolerate or condone. The problem is that the same way you have a hard time with these so called militants, so do we. Don’t think it is any easier for us to deal with them, they have their own agenda. But do not think that it is so called Muslims doing these acts, we are well aware of the mischief of some non Muslims too such as mercenaries and secret armies.
2) As for Muslims being anti Semites.........the Prophet Muhammad (s) was a Semite! Arabs and Jews are a Semitic people. So to say that Muslims are anti Semitic is to say that Muslims are anti Arab and anti Muhammad (s).
We are not against all Jews we are against Zionism, two different things. You even have Jews who are against Zionism, are they anti Semitic too? Jews and Muslims have lived together, and still live together, peacefully in some areas for ages. It is not the people that we are against it is the policies of apartheid and the dehumanisation of people in their own land.
As for Jews currently being a 'chosen people' 'the best people' etc ......what a load of tosh. Have you seen what is going on in the world? I feel sorry for some of my Christian brothers and sisters whose mouths are closed to the injustices of some people calling themselves Jews. And what is even funnier is that a lot of people calling themselves Jews these days are not even religious. They don’t even believe in God, for them Jewishness is just a culture and a birthright. So some Christians are supporting Secular Jews........???
3) Ahmadinijad did not say he wishes to see the destruction of the Jews this is an anti Islamic statement. What he said was the removal of that regime of Zionism that is causing these problems in that region. He did not call for the wiping of Israel off the map in the sense of blowing it up. See link
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4mScWWtRfGQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=akWdJh7auVA
4) Stop interpreting verses of the Quran nilly willy. The Quranic verses were revealed at certain times and events in history. Some of them are limited and restricted others are general. Some of them are specific to certain people others are meant for all people whether Muslim or non Muslim. The Quran is a revelation from Allah it is not something that backward Arabs of that time could of come up with, and by the way not all Arabs are backward, not even then. Take some time to find out the truth.
And stop saying that Allah is a moon God this just shows how ignorant and determined you are to spread more falsehood and take advantage of people’s ignorance of Islam and the Quran. In Surah Fusilat 41: 37. Allah says 'do not prostrate (worship) the Sun nor the Moon. Why? Because these are created things just like Jesus was a creation of Allah.
We Pray for the Christians and Jews and may we understand eachother a little better everyday. Amen.
THE FACTS;
1) Muslims are not all on a mission to destroy and kill you, don’t believe the hype! This is more propaganda from mischief makers. As for people like Usama bin La Deen, people like this do not represent balanced, upright and decent Muslims. There is no legal or legitimate Jihad against you. What is happening is that desperate people are rushing into acts of violence and extremism that even Muslims do not tolerate or condone. The problem is that the same way you have a hard time with these so called militants, so do we. Don’t think it is any easier for us to deal with them, they have their own agenda. But do not think that it is so called Muslims doing these acts, we are well aware of the mischief of some non Muslims too such as mercenaries and secret armies.
2) As for Muslims being anti Semites.........the Prophet Muhammad (s) was a Semite! Arabs and Jews are a Semitic people. So to say that Muslims are anti Semitic is to say that Muslims are anti Arab and anti Muhammad (s).
We are not against all Jews we are against Zionism, two different things. You even have Jews who are against Zionism, are they anti Semitic too? Jews and Muslims have lived together, and still live together, peacefully in some areas for ages. It is not the people that we are against it is the policies of apartheid and the dehumanisation of people in their own land.
As for Jews currently being a 'chosen people' 'the best people' etc ......what a load of tosh. Have you seen what is going on in the world? I feel sorry for some of my Christian brothers and sisters whose mouths are closed to the injustices of some people calling themselves Jews. And what is even funnier is that a lot of people calling themselves Jews these days are not even religious. They don’t even believe in God, for them Jewishness is just a culture and a birthright. So some Christians are supporting Secular Jews........???
3) Ahmadinijad did not say he wishes to see the destruction of the Jews this is an anti Islamic statement. What he said was the removal of that regime of Zionism that is causing these problems in that region. He did not call for the wiping of Israel off the map in the sense of blowing it up. See link
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4mScWWtRfGQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=akWdJh7auVA
4) Stop interpreting verses of the Quran nilly willy. The Quranic verses were revealed at certain times and events in history. Some of them are limited and restricted others are general. Some of them are specific to certain people others are meant for all people whether Muslim or non Muslim. The Quran is a revelation from Allah it is not something that backward Arabs of that time could of come up with, and by the way not all Arabs are backward, not even then. Take some time to find out the truth.
And stop saying that Allah is a moon God this just shows how ignorant and determined you are to spread more falsehood and take advantage of people’s ignorance of Islam and the Quran. In Surah Fusilat 41: 37. Allah says 'do not prostrate (worship) the Sun nor the Moon. Why? Because these are created things just like Jesus was a creation of Allah.
We Pray for the Christians and Jews and may we understand eachother a little better everyday. Amen.
Full of Hate........calm down.
Some people have too much hate they need to relax and chill out. When you speak to some people it is as if they only have one mode of communicating with you and that is angrily.........why? There is no need.
God gave us the faculty of speech so that we can communicate. He gave us a tongue, teeth and a mouth not for swearing, lying and shouting our heads off like mad people. But to smile, talk over issues and say good words, and for guidance.
And then you find another set of people so full of hatred they joke about other people's religions mock, ridicule and work mischief.
It makes you ask the question; are there any balanced, just and sensible people left in the world? Of course there, are I am not pessimistic, life is full of beautiful people and refreshing people who the heart attaches itself to. They listen well, they think hard, they investigate and search for the truth and they try to be balanced and not hood winked into thinking the way of propaganda machines.
To all the lovers of truth and peace we are all brothers and sisters from one male and female, Adam and Eve. Let us learn to communicate and understand each other better, for the sake of humanity. Amen.
God gave us the faculty of speech so that we can communicate. He gave us a tongue, teeth and a mouth not for swearing, lying and shouting our heads off like mad people. But to smile, talk over issues and say good words, and for guidance.
And then you find another set of people so full of hatred they joke about other people's religions mock, ridicule and work mischief.
It makes you ask the question; are there any balanced, just and sensible people left in the world? Of course there, are I am not pessimistic, life is full of beautiful people and refreshing people who the heart attaches itself to. They listen well, they think hard, they investigate and search for the truth and they try to be balanced and not hood winked into thinking the way of propaganda machines.
To all the lovers of truth and peace we are all brothers and sisters from one male and female, Adam and Eve. Let us learn to communicate and understand each other better, for the sake of humanity. Amen.
Wednesday, 27 January 2010
Bashing Tool # 2; Shia and the Sahaba.
Bashing Tool # 2; Shia and the Sahaba.
For those of you who have not seen the video on you tube about this subject, the link is at the top of the blog.
Sahaba=companions plural.
Sahabi=companion singular.
Here we shall not be cursing or abusing anyone but only mentioning what is available for all to see in the books of the Muslims. So this is no secret, only most people do not hear it because the mention of it is drowned out by the mention of only that which puts the Sahaba in a good light always, and anything that is other than that is turned away from. But why turn away from things that have been placed in the books of Muslims for Muslims to read? Especially as it is not Shia books but Sunni ones, And only the Shia write things against the Sahaba right?..............wrong!
This is for those people who are not allowed to read Shia books due to what they have been told, so here it is from your own books the reason why Shia do not praise all Sahaba.
If we do not read all that is available then how do we get a balanced idea and picture of a particular Sahabi’s lifestyle or the Sahaba in general?
And unless we look at each individual’s lifestyle how do we know the ones who were prone to withhold information or make up sayings and attribute them to the Prophet or attribute them to other Sahaba? Don’t tell me there were no hypocrites at the time of the Prophet and after his death, even the Quran says there were.
Many have heard the statement, repeated parrot fashion, that the Shia hate or curse or abuse the Sahaba. This is a false statement. If they had said the Shia dislike some of the Sahaba and love others then this would be closer to the truth, or if it was said the Shia prefer some Sahaba to others then this also would be true. It may also be true that some Shia also abuse or go beyond what is acceptable and use swearing and un Islamic references for some Sahaba but this is wrong and is an extreme. But as for cursing then this is something else and needs explaining, because cursing and abusing are two different things.
It is true unlike some of our Sunni brothers, who put all the Sahaba on a pedestal and praise them, The Shia do not. Some and not all Sunni’s will say ‘We hate anyone who hates them or does not speak well of them, and we only speak well of them. Love of them is a part of Islam, part of belief and part of excellent behavior, while hatred of them is unbelief, hypocrisy and rebellion’. The Shia do not have this type of blanket praise for over 100,000 individuals and nor do they agree that it is a matter like Tawheed and Nubuwat etc which are the main concepts in Islam which make one a Muslim without having to mentioning any Sahabi.
Why is that you may ask?
Because from the Shia point of view a Sahaba just means companion, but not every companion is necessarily a good companion it just means a companion, and no distinction has been given as to whether the companion is good or not yet. (See Quranic references at the end).
Sahaba are not all on one level of faith, justice, truth, knowledge or bravery and neither should they all be treated as if they were. There are great stories about some of them but that is not all.
And because the Sahaba, for some, seem to have become the new yardstick and some people go out of their way to force this idea down your throat, and if you do not accept it then it is they who will curse you your parents and abuse you and get all un Islamic, and even to the point of violence and murder in the name of “loving the Sahaba and Islam”. But this type of threats and behaviour is what is creating more unity between Shia and Sunna because no one should be forced by these types of threats, Islam is not spread like this.
Some people may say that the Shia are misguided because they do not stick to hadiths of the Prophet about the Sahaba like ‘my Sahaba are like the stars if you accept any of their sayings you will be guided’. We question whether the Prophet even said this and also say it does not make sense.
But let us see what others have said about such hadiths;
Mawdhoo` (Fabricated). Ibn `Abdul-Barr reports it in mu`allaq (suspended, i.e. an incomplete chain of narrators at the collector's end) form and Ibn Hazm reports it from him; the complete chain was provided by `Abd ibn Humaid in al-Muntakhab min al-Musnad (86/1):
This Hamzah is Ibn Abi Hamzah; Daaraqutni said about him, "Matrook (abandoned)"; Ibn `Adi said, "His narrations are mostly fabricated"; Ibn Hibbaan said, "He would be alone in narrating things which are fabricated from reliable narrators, to such an extent that it is as if he did so deliberately - it is not permissible to narrate from him"; Dhahabi quoted some of his fabricated ahaadeeth in al-Meezaan, this being one of them.
Therefore, it is absurd that the Messenger of Allah (sallallaahu alaihi wa aalihi wa sallam) would command us to follow every view expressed by the Companions, for there were among them those who permitted something while others prohibited it: if the above were the case, then trading in intoxicants would be permissible if one followed Samurah ibn Jundub; it would also be permissible for someone fasting to eat snow if one followed Abu Talhah, but it was prohibited by others. So Sahaba had different views and their different ways of doing things, when they did not know what the Prophet would do, and even when they had a hadith from the Prophet there would still be differences, that is one of the reasons why we have different schools of Jurisprudence.
As well as the hadith ‘my companions are like the stars whichever of them you are guided by you will surely be guided’.
There are at least three narrations comparing the Companions with the stars in the sky:
This is a weak (da`îf) hadith narrated: - from Ibn `Umar by `Abd ibn Humayd in his Musnad as stated by al-Suyuti in Manahil al-Safa (p. 193 #1027) and Ibn `Adi in al-Kamil; al-Suyuti indicated it was weak in his Jami` al-Saghir (#4603).
- from Anas by al-Bazzar who said of `Abd ibn Humayd's narration: "It is condemned (munkar) and unsound" as cited by Ibn Hajar in Talkhis al-Habir (4:190-191 #2098).
For more details on the hadith see link.
http://www.livingislam.org/compst_e.html
There are a number of other people responsible for forging hadiths like Sayf ibn Umar. There is an ijma (unanimous opinion) amongst the Ahle-Sunnah that the narrator Sayf Ibn Umar was a cursed person who narrated all types of lies. They have written all types of negative remarks about him that include Kadhab (liar) and untrustworthy and his traditions have no value and they all are weak. For example Imam of Salafis Al-Albaani declared him a liar (Silsila Sahiha, v3 p184).
It makes you ask the question why would people forge hadith about the Sahaba?
Also amongst those that did Hijrah was one Sahabi who ended up with the nic name Muhajir Umm Qays, or "The Emigrator for Umm Qays." His intention was for that which he emigrated for.
The Sahabi that became Muslim for a woman; Zaid ibn Khalid Ar Rahman also known as Abu Talha Al Ansari for example became Muslim for a woman, he ended up marrying Umm Sulaym (see sunan nisai Al Bani says it is Saheeh).
The Prophet is also reported to have said ‘do not sab (abuse) the Sahaba’. In the first instance he was talking to the Sahaba themselves who did this act. There are many references like these below but for the sake of space I will refer to only a few. I have omitted people’s names because some people will not want to accept it no matter the source, but the names can be found if people read the references.
• like the story of one Sahabi who abused his family and swore an oath not to eat the food and then ate the food afterwards because he said his oath was from satan. Bukhari, book 10 the book of prayers, hadith # 576. Or see link below.
http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/crcc/engagement/resources/texts/muslim/hadith/bukhari/010.sbt.html
• Sunni reference: History of Tabari, English version, events of year 51 AH, Execution of Hujr Ibn Adi, v18, pp 122-123 Sahabi cursing Sahabi.
• Further References:
1) ibn Taymiyah Minhaj us Sunnah, vol 3, page 178
2) Fatawa Ibn Taymiyyah, page 408, vol. 3
3) Fatawa Ibn Taymiyyah, page 437, vol 4
• Al bidaya wa Al nihaya, Ibn Kathir, vol. 8, page 259
• Not only did some, not all, Sahabi curse and abuse others they even went to war with each other and slaughtered the living daylights out of each other. It was not a pretend sword fight people actually died, but no we are not supposed to talk about these things are we?
• Which Sahaba murdered another Sahabi Malik ibn Nuwayrah?
• Read what a Sunni scholar Maulana Abul-A'ala Maududiin his Khilafat-O-Mulookiyat printed in 2000 says about the Sahaba, these type of comments are slowly being erased out of sight due to publishers only wanting people to have a set way of thinking. Try to get the original copy if you can, controversial parts are being deleted, and not just in this book but it is systematic.
He says ‘Secondly these people were not fit for the positions of leadership because although they had brought Eemaan but they had not been able to benefit (fully) from the companionship and training of Rasul-ullah (Sallaho Alaihe Wassallam) to the extent that their hearts and minds had not yet fully transformed (in an Islamic way)’. Maulana Abul-A'ala Maududiin his Khilafat-O-Mulookiyat, 2000 edition.
And this is the link on the subject to sunniforum.com where the people he is talking about can be seen.
http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/showthread.php?40048-Maulana-Maududi-(RA)-How-does-your-Eemaan-feel-after-reading-this
• As for those that say well the ayat (verse) of Ridhwan, the verse of Allah being pleased with the Sahaba, then we say this verse was not revealed about all the Sahaba but the fact is that under the tree there were no more than 1400 Sahaba out of over 100,000. And the ayat was a conditional one and does not mean that after this they are no longer subject to the temptations of life and that this was their instant ticket to paradise, it just states that Allah was pleased with them giving bayat (allegiance) under the tree at that moment not forever and ever amen, unless they kept to that which they were supposed to, which some of them did. Also the third Khalifa was not there under the tree when the bayat was being given by others. We ask the question of those who were under the tree that day where there any responsible for the death of Ammar ibn Yaser? Or any responsible for the death of Uthman?
So which is the more balanced view? You decide but let us hear what Allah also has to say in the Quran.
Allah says in the Quran;
“And the Ashaab اصحاب companions of the left hand (those given their book of deeds in their left hand or put on the left side, which is a bad sign) what is the state of the companions of the left hand?...... In fierce hot boiling water.........” Surah Waqia 56:41.
As well as the term Sahabi being used for two kufar (disbelievers) in the prison with Prophet Yusuf 12:39.
So even in the Quran the term companion does not always have a positive meaning.
Along with that we add the hadith of the Prophet found in Bukhari;
“Some of my companions will be taken towards the left side and I will say my companions, my companions” it will be said “they had been renegades (someone who deserts the cause) after you left them”
And again;
The Prophet said (while referring to a future event), “While I will be standing a group of my followers will be brought close to me and I will recognise them, then an angel intervened between me and them and said ‘come along to them’ I asked “to where” it will be said to the fire.....”
Reference: The book of the stories of the Prophet, hadeeth # 1406, page 662. See also the book of softening of hearts, hadeeth # 2135. Summarised Bukhari Arabic-English, Muhammad Muhsin Khan, Published by Dar Us Salam 1994 print.
And in the online version of Bukhari;
Volume 8, Book 76, Number 533.
http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/crcc/engagement/resources/texts/muslim/hadith/bukhari/076.sbt.html
Last word the Shia do not dislike or hate all companions but there are some, because of actions and words, that we do not look up to and nor do we praise them. But the Sahaba of Badr and the battles cannot be looked at in the same way and we love them.
This was only written due to the false accusation heaped upon the Shia of hating all Sahaba. Not all Shia are the same and nor do they hate all Sahaba. It is a false charge and it is an ongoing charge, and nothing but a bashing tool used to raise emotions and get peoples backs up. If someone raises the topic of the Quran someone else asks ‘and what about the Shia and Sahaba’? If someone wants to hear about the Shia view on economics and politics another person says ‘what about the Shia and Sahaba’? Parrot fashion like an illness. The Sahaba, without some people realising, have attained Prophet like status, and untouchables. Allah says in the Quran ‘do not go to extremes in your religion’, whether you be Christian or Muslim.
For those of you who have not seen the video on you tube about this subject, the link is at the top of the blog.
Sahaba=companions plural.
Sahabi=companion singular.
Here we shall not be cursing or abusing anyone but only mentioning what is available for all to see in the books of the Muslims. So this is no secret, only most people do not hear it because the mention of it is drowned out by the mention of only that which puts the Sahaba in a good light always, and anything that is other than that is turned away from. But why turn away from things that have been placed in the books of Muslims for Muslims to read? Especially as it is not Shia books but Sunni ones, And only the Shia write things against the Sahaba right?..............wrong!
This is for those people who are not allowed to read Shia books due to what they have been told, so here it is from your own books the reason why Shia do not praise all Sahaba.
If we do not read all that is available then how do we get a balanced idea and picture of a particular Sahabi’s lifestyle or the Sahaba in general?
And unless we look at each individual’s lifestyle how do we know the ones who were prone to withhold information or make up sayings and attribute them to the Prophet or attribute them to other Sahaba? Don’t tell me there were no hypocrites at the time of the Prophet and after his death, even the Quran says there were.
Many have heard the statement, repeated parrot fashion, that the Shia hate or curse or abuse the Sahaba. This is a false statement. If they had said the Shia dislike some of the Sahaba and love others then this would be closer to the truth, or if it was said the Shia prefer some Sahaba to others then this also would be true. It may also be true that some Shia also abuse or go beyond what is acceptable and use swearing and un Islamic references for some Sahaba but this is wrong and is an extreme. But as for cursing then this is something else and needs explaining, because cursing and abusing are two different things.
It is true unlike some of our Sunni brothers, who put all the Sahaba on a pedestal and praise them, The Shia do not. Some and not all Sunni’s will say ‘We hate anyone who hates them or does not speak well of them, and we only speak well of them. Love of them is a part of Islam, part of belief and part of excellent behavior, while hatred of them is unbelief, hypocrisy and rebellion’. The Shia do not have this type of blanket praise for over 100,000 individuals and nor do they agree that it is a matter like Tawheed and Nubuwat etc which are the main concepts in Islam which make one a Muslim without having to mentioning any Sahabi.
Why is that you may ask?
Because from the Shia point of view a Sahaba just means companion, but not every companion is necessarily a good companion it just means a companion, and no distinction has been given as to whether the companion is good or not yet. (See Quranic references at the end).
Sahaba are not all on one level of faith, justice, truth, knowledge or bravery and neither should they all be treated as if they were. There are great stories about some of them but that is not all.
And because the Sahaba, for some, seem to have become the new yardstick and some people go out of their way to force this idea down your throat, and if you do not accept it then it is they who will curse you your parents and abuse you and get all un Islamic, and even to the point of violence and murder in the name of “loving the Sahaba and Islam”. But this type of threats and behaviour is what is creating more unity between Shia and Sunna because no one should be forced by these types of threats, Islam is not spread like this.
Some people may say that the Shia are misguided because they do not stick to hadiths of the Prophet about the Sahaba like ‘my Sahaba are like the stars if you accept any of their sayings you will be guided’. We question whether the Prophet even said this and also say it does not make sense.
But let us see what others have said about such hadiths;
Mawdhoo` (Fabricated). Ibn `Abdul-Barr reports it in mu`allaq (suspended, i.e. an incomplete chain of narrators at the collector's end) form and Ibn Hazm reports it from him; the complete chain was provided by `Abd ibn Humaid in al-Muntakhab min al-Musnad (86/1):
This Hamzah is Ibn Abi Hamzah; Daaraqutni said about him, "Matrook (abandoned)"; Ibn `Adi said, "His narrations are mostly fabricated"; Ibn Hibbaan said, "He would be alone in narrating things which are fabricated from reliable narrators, to such an extent that it is as if he did so deliberately - it is not permissible to narrate from him"; Dhahabi quoted some of his fabricated ahaadeeth in al-Meezaan, this being one of them.
Therefore, it is absurd that the Messenger of Allah (sallallaahu alaihi wa aalihi wa sallam) would command us to follow every view expressed by the Companions, for there were among them those who permitted something while others prohibited it: if the above were the case, then trading in intoxicants would be permissible if one followed Samurah ibn Jundub; it would also be permissible for someone fasting to eat snow if one followed Abu Talhah, but it was prohibited by others. So Sahaba had different views and their different ways of doing things, when they did not know what the Prophet would do, and even when they had a hadith from the Prophet there would still be differences, that is one of the reasons why we have different schools of Jurisprudence.
As well as the hadith ‘my companions are like the stars whichever of them you are guided by you will surely be guided’.
There are at least three narrations comparing the Companions with the stars in the sky:
This is a weak (da`îf) hadith narrated: - from Ibn `Umar by `Abd ibn Humayd in his Musnad as stated by al-Suyuti in Manahil al-Safa (p. 193 #1027) and Ibn `Adi in al-Kamil; al-Suyuti indicated it was weak in his Jami` al-Saghir (#4603).
- from Anas by al-Bazzar who said of `Abd ibn Humayd's narration: "It is condemned (munkar) and unsound" as cited by Ibn Hajar in Talkhis al-Habir (4:190-191 #2098).
For more details on the hadith see link.
http://www.livingislam.org/compst_e.html
There are a number of other people responsible for forging hadiths like Sayf ibn Umar. There is an ijma (unanimous opinion) amongst the Ahle-Sunnah that the narrator Sayf Ibn Umar was a cursed person who narrated all types of lies. They have written all types of negative remarks about him that include Kadhab (liar) and untrustworthy and his traditions have no value and they all are weak. For example Imam of Salafis Al-Albaani declared him a liar (Silsila Sahiha, v3 p184).
It makes you ask the question why would people forge hadith about the Sahaba?
Also amongst those that did Hijrah was one Sahabi who ended up with the nic name Muhajir Umm Qays, or "The Emigrator for Umm Qays." His intention was for that which he emigrated for.
The Sahabi that became Muslim for a woman; Zaid ibn Khalid Ar Rahman also known as Abu Talha Al Ansari for example became Muslim for a woman, he ended up marrying Umm Sulaym (see sunan nisai Al Bani says it is Saheeh).
The Prophet is also reported to have said ‘do not sab (abuse) the Sahaba’. In the first instance he was talking to the Sahaba themselves who did this act. There are many references like these below but for the sake of space I will refer to only a few. I have omitted people’s names because some people will not want to accept it no matter the source, but the names can be found if people read the references.
• like the story of one Sahabi who abused his family and swore an oath not to eat the food and then ate the food afterwards because he said his oath was from satan. Bukhari, book 10 the book of prayers, hadith # 576. Or see link below.
http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/crcc/engagement/resources/texts/muslim/hadith/bukhari/010.sbt.html
• Sunni reference: History of Tabari, English version, events of year 51 AH, Execution of Hujr Ibn Adi, v18, pp 122-123 Sahabi cursing Sahabi.
• Further References:
1) ibn Taymiyah Minhaj us Sunnah, vol 3, page 178
2) Fatawa Ibn Taymiyyah, page 408, vol. 3
3) Fatawa Ibn Taymiyyah, page 437, vol 4
• Al bidaya wa Al nihaya, Ibn Kathir, vol. 8, page 259
• Not only did some, not all, Sahabi curse and abuse others they even went to war with each other and slaughtered the living daylights out of each other. It was not a pretend sword fight people actually died, but no we are not supposed to talk about these things are we?
• Which Sahaba murdered another Sahabi Malik ibn Nuwayrah?
• Read what a Sunni scholar Maulana Abul-A'ala Maududiin his Khilafat-O-Mulookiyat printed in 2000 says about the Sahaba, these type of comments are slowly being erased out of sight due to publishers only wanting people to have a set way of thinking. Try to get the original copy if you can, controversial parts are being deleted, and not just in this book but it is systematic.
He says ‘Secondly these people were not fit for the positions of leadership because although they had brought Eemaan but they had not been able to benefit (fully) from the companionship and training of Rasul-ullah (Sallaho Alaihe Wassallam) to the extent that their hearts and minds had not yet fully transformed (in an Islamic way)’. Maulana Abul-A'ala Maududiin his Khilafat-O-Mulookiyat, 2000 edition.
And this is the link on the subject to sunniforum.com where the people he is talking about can be seen.
http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/showthread.php?40048-Maulana-Maududi-(RA)-How-does-your-Eemaan-feel-after-reading-this
• As for those that say well the ayat (verse) of Ridhwan, the verse of Allah being pleased with the Sahaba, then we say this verse was not revealed about all the Sahaba but the fact is that under the tree there were no more than 1400 Sahaba out of over 100,000. And the ayat was a conditional one and does not mean that after this they are no longer subject to the temptations of life and that this was their instant ticket to paradise, it just states that Allah was pleased with them giving bayat (allegiance) under the tree at that moment not forever and ever amen, unless they kept to that which they were supposed to, which some of them did. Also the third Khalifa was not there under the tree when the bayat was being given by others. We ask the question of those who were under the tree that day where there any responsible for the death of Ammar ibn Yaser? Or any responsible for the death of Uthman?
So which is the more balanced view? You decide but let us hear what Allah also has to say in the Quran.
Allah says in the Quran;
“And the Ashaab اصحاب companions of the left hand (those given their book of deeds in their left hand or put on the left side, which is a bad sign) what is the state of the companions of the left hand?...... In fierce hot boiling water.........” Surah Waqia 56:41.
As well as the term Sahabi being used for two kufar (disbelievers) in the prison with Prophet Yusuf 12:39.
So even in the Quran the term companion does not always have a positive meaning.
Along with that we add the hadith of the Prophet found in Bukhari;
“Some of my companions will be taken towards the left side and I will say my companions, my companions” it will be said “they had been renegades (someone who deserts the cause) after you left them”
And again;
The Prophet said (while referring to a future event), “While I will be standing a group of my followers will be brought close to me and I will recognise them, then an angel intervened between me and them and said ‘come along to them’ I asked “to where” it will be said to the fire.....”
Reference: The book of the stories of the Prophet, hadeeth # 1406, page 662. See also the book of softening of hearts, hadeeth # 2135. Summarised Bukhari Arabic-English, Muhammad Muhsin Khan, Published by Dar Us Salam 1994 print.
And in the online version of Bukhari;
Volume 8, Book 76, Number 533.
http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/crcc/engagement/resources/texts/muslim/hadith/bukhari/076.sbt.html
Last word the Shia do not dislike or hate all companions but there are some, because of actions and words, that we do not look up to and nor do we praise them. But the Sahaba of Badr and the battles cannot be looked at in the same way and we love them.
This was only written due to the false accusation heaped upon the Shia of hating all Sahaba. Not all Shia are the same and nor do they hate all Sahaba. It is a false charge and it is an ongoing charge, and nothing but a bashing tool used to raise emotions and get peoples backs up. If someone raises the topic of the Quran someone else asks ‘and what about the Shia and Sahaba’? If someone wants to hear about the Shia view on economics and politics another person says ‘what about the Shia and Sahaba’? Parrot fashion like an illness. The Sahaba, without some people realising, have attained Prophet like status, and untouchables. Allah says in the Quran ‘do not go to extremes in your religion’, whether you be Christian or Muslim.
Who are Muslims?
Who are Muslims?
A Muslim is one who is meant to follow what Allah asks and what Allah has revealed.
The requests of Allah are varied and are of different levels, spread throughout the Quran and the lifestyle of the Prophet Muhammad, and those that followed him in all that he advised us to follow him in. These are there to make all people who believe in the existence of a God become better believers but also more humane and constructive members of the world community.
The levels are;
1) Must do (Wajib/Fardh).
2) Better to do (Mustahab).
3) Don't do (Haram).
4) Disliked/better not to do (Makruh).
5) It is up to you (Mubah).
Some of the problems with Muslims come when they change the categorisations whether deliberately, mischievously or accidentally. As for those that change the categorisations deliberately and mischievously then it goes against the grain of being a follower of what Allah has revealed and how the Prophet showed us how to live. Therefore can such a person truly be called a Muslim? No, especially if that person’s basis for changing up the categorisations is baseless and purely of their own thinking with little or no reference to or understanding of the Quran the Sunna and Tafseers.
For example homosexuality; it is well known that in Islam acts of homosexuality are not allowed, whether between males or between females. Now if a Muslim admits that they are homosexual and are proud of it or finds nothing wrong with it or encourages it then this is classed as a big sin and fisq (corruption). This act takes away from them being a Muslim and if this act is compounded with other acts such as not praying or drinking booze then the person is on very dodgy ground, if they are left with any ground to stand on.
As for the Muslim who admits they have homosexual tendencies but they are not proud of it, but like most bad habits they try to give it up but slip back into it but keep trying throughout their life to rid themselves of it, then this person’s situation is different. They are still Muslim but of a lesser degree because one thing with sin is that they cover the heart and make it blind to further and increased continued guidance from Allah.
Yes there are degrees to being Muslim, not all Muslims are the same. Anyone can become a Muslim just by uttering the declaration of faith and it would take less than a minute to become a Muslim. But the question is will this Muslim go on to follow what Allah has revealed or will they be a lazy Muslim or a Muslim of convenience or a hypocritical Muslim or a Muslim just by name or Muslims for money getting paid to give Muslims a bad name.
In Islam Allah has allocated titles to the different types of Muslims based on what they do, and the increased belief and guidance that they receive. The least title is Muslim but it goes on to increase to being Mumin a believer because not every Muslim is considered a Mumin, but every Mumin is a Muslim, but a Muslim of better quality.
For example you have people today who call themselves Jews but they are secular non religious Jews. Amongst some Muslims you also find people who have gone astray and call themselves secular Muslims (Muslims without Allah). This statement makes no sense at all, but this is what adds to people’s confusion when it comes to the question of who are Muslims.
It does not stop there because even amongst Mumineen (believers) there are degrees of Imaan (faith). We have spoken about the topic of Sunni and Shia Muslims, but just to make clarify the title of Mumin (believer) we shall elaborate a little further.
A Shia is a Muslim and a Sunni is a Muslim but they may refer to each other as not being full believers. Both believe in Allah and the Prophet Muhammad as the last Prophet and the Quran as being revealed from Allah as complete with nothing missing. But one will say that the others Imaan (belief) is to a point, like the Sunni will say Shia are not true believers because they do not accept Abu Bakr as their Khalifa, who some of the early Muslims chose as Khlaifa.
The Shia would say that the Sunni are Muslims and believers up to the point where they do not accept the Imams (leaders of the household (Ahlul Bayt) that the Prophet advised us to cling to. And without this level of Imaan and Islam it is difficult to go on to other levels of Imaan and Ihsaan (perfection of faith).
So those who have not been poisoned or blinded with the mentality of Takfeer (calling Muslims non Muslims) would say both groups are Muslim but one is more of a believer than the other and this is where the dispute is being exploited and needless violence has occurred due to this point, which most have not understood. And other issues are being used as scapegoats to hide the real and main difference from where all other differences emanate.
It has been said before but I will say it again here that the idea that all Salafis are right and all Shia are wrong is a gross misunderstanding of the justice of Allah. The categorisation for right and wrong is not Shia or Salafi but how Muslim you are according to the categorisations used by Allah. No one group can be placed in hell jut because of a title like Shia or Sunni, but each individual is judged fairly by Allah. We should not put ourselves as the gatekeepers of hell entering into it who we see fit and saving who we see fit, it is not our job. This mentality which is to be found amongst some Christians too is not helping anybody, none should claim salvation until salvation has actually taken place. Confidence in salvation is one thing but the actuality and the reality of it happening is something else, so those that want to jump the gun it is up to them but let the rest of us should try to explain to them and not follow this mentality.
The levels of being a Muslim, and each level has its levels. All are considered Muslim but some Muslims are clearly not like others;
1) Muhsin the highest level of being a Muslim. This status is usually the preserve of Messengers, Prophets, Imams and Awliya of Allah.
2) Mumin ranges from low levels of Imaan (belief) to the highest levels which take you to a higher level of being a believing Muslim that of being a Muhsin, which is a rarity these days but not impossible.
3) Muslim ranges from just taking your Shahada (declaration of faith) and making little or no attempt to be a better citizen in the society where you live, but instead you wish death to your neighbour or you continue being unjust to yourself by drinking booze or taking drugs and sleeping around with sexual partners outside of wedlock or causing trouble. At the other end there are Muslims who keep away from these things and try to understand their Deen (religion/ way of life) a bit better every day. These are they; depending on what they read and who they listen to, go on to be better Muslims and not the type of Muslims who try to blow up planes etc.
Welcome to Islam and may you have a fruitful, constructive, positive and peaceful journey, and may we all enter the paradise by the grace of Allah,whether Muslim Sunni or Muslim Shia, Insahallah.
Peace.
A Muslim is one who is meant to follow what Allah asks and what Allah has revealed.
The requests of Allah are varied and are of different levels, spread throughout the Quran and the lifestyle of the Prophet Muhammad, and those that followed him in all that he advised us to follow him in. These are there to make all people who believe in the existence of a God become better believers but also more humane and constructive members of the world community.
The levels are;
1) Must do (Wajib/Fardh).
2) Better to do (Mustahab).
3) Don't do (Haram).
4) Disliked/better not to do (Makruh).
5) It is up to you (Mubah).
Some of the problems with Muslims come when they change the categorisations whether deliberately, mischievously or accidentally. As for those that change the categorisations deliberately and mischievously then it goes against the grain of being a follower of what Allah has revealed and how the Prophet showed us how to live. Therefore can such a person truly be called a Muslim? No, especially if that person’s basis for changing up the categorisations is baseless and purely of their own thinking with little or no reference to or understanding of the Quran the Sunna and Tafseers.
For example homosexuality; it is well known that in Islam acts of homosexuality are not allowed, whether between males or between females. Now if a Muslim admits that they are homosexual and are proud of it or finds nothing wrong with it or encourages it then this is classed as a big sin and fisq (corruption). This act takes away from them being a Muslim and if this act is compounded with other acts such as not praying or drinking booze then the person is on very dodgy ground, if they are left with any ground to stand on.
As for the Muslim who admits they have homosexual tendencies but they are not proud of it, but like most bad habits they try to give it up but slip back into it but keep trying throughout their life to rid themselves of it, then this person’s situation is different. They are still Muslim but of a lesser degree because one thing with sin is that they cover the heart and make it blind to further and increased continued guidance from Allah.
Yes there are degrees to being Muslim, not all Muslims are the same. Anyone can become a Muslim just by uttering the declaration of faith and it would take less than a minute to become a Muslim. But the question is will this Muslim go on to follow what Allah has revealed or will they be a lazy Muslim or a Muslim of convenience or a hypocritical Muslim or a Muslim just by name or Muslims for money getting paid to give Muslims a bad name.
In Islam Allah has allocated titles to the different types of Muslims based on what they do, and the increased belief and guidance that they receive. The least title is Muslim but it goes on to increase to being Mumin a believer because not every Muslim is considered a Mumin, but every Mumin is a Muslim, but a Muslim of better quality.
For example you have people today who call themselves Jews but they are secular non religious Jews. Amongst some Muslims you also find people who have gone astray and call themselves secular Muslims (Muslims without Allah). This statement makes no sense at all, but this is what adds to people’s confusion when it comes to the question of who are Muslims.
It does not stop there because even amongst Mumineen (believers) there are degrees of Imaan (faith). We have spoken about the topic of Sunni and Shia Muslims, but just to make clarify the title of Mumin (believer) we shall elaborate a little further.
A Shia is a Muslim and a Sunni is a Muslim but they may refer to each other as not being full believers. Both believe in Allah and the Prophet Muhammad as the last Prophet and the Quran as being revealed from Allah as complete with nothing missing. But one will say that the others Imaan (belief) is to a point, like the Sunni will say Shia are not true believers because they do not accept Abu Bakr as their Khalifa, who some of the early Muslims chose as Khlaifa.
The Shia would say that the Sunni are Muslims and believers up to the point where they do not accept the Imams (leaders of the household (Ahlul Bayt) that the Prophet advised us to cling to. And without this level of Imaan and Islam it is difficult to go on to other levels of Imaan and Ihsaan (perfection of faith).
So those who have not been poisoned or blinded with the mentality of Takfeer (calling Muslims non Muslims) would say both groups are Muslim but one is more of a believer than the other and this is where the dispute is being exploited and needless violence has occurred due to this point, which most have not understood. And other issues are being used as scapegoats to hide the real and main difference from where all other differences emanate.
It has been said before but I will say it again here that the idea that all Salafis are right and all Shia are wrong is a gross misunderstanding of the justice of Allah. The categorisation for right and wrong is not Shia or Salafi but how Muslim you are according to the categorisations used by Allah. No one group can be placed in hell jut because of a title like Shia or Sunni, but each individual is judged fairly by Allah. We should not put ourselves as the gatekeepers of hell entering into it who we see fit and saving who we see fit, it is not our job. This mentality which is to be found amongst some Christians too is not helping anybody, none should claim salvation until salvation has actually taken place. Confidence in salvation is one thing but the actuality and the reality of it happening is something else, so those that want to jump the gun it is up to them but let the rest of us should try to explain to them and not follow this mentality.
The levels of being a Muslim, and each level has its levels. All are considered Muslim but some Muslims are clearly not like others;
1) Muhsin the highest level of being a Muslim. This status is usually the preserve of Messengers, Prophets, Imams and Awliya of Allah.
2) Mumin ranges from low levels of Imaan (belief) to the highest levels which take you to a higher level of being a believing Muslim that of being a Muhsin, which is a rarity these days but not impossible.
3) Muslim ranges from just taking your Shahada (declaration of faith) and making little or no attempt to be a better citizen in the society where you live, but instead you wish death to your neighbour or you continue being unjust to yourself by drinking booze or taking drugs and sleeping around with sexual partners outside of wedlock or causing trouble. At the other end there are Muslims who keep away from these things and try to understand their Deen (religion/ way of life) a bit better every day. These are they; depending on what they read and who they listen to, go on to be better Muslims and not the type of Muslims who try to blow up planes etc.
Welcome to Islam and may you have a fruitful, constructive, positive and peaceful journey, and may we all enter the paradise by the grace of Allah,whether Muslim Sunni or Muslim Shia, Insahallah.
Peace.
Tuesday, 19 January 2010
What the scholars say............
What the scholars say.........
Allah The Almighty says in The Holy Quran: ”O you who believe, obey Allah and obey the messenger, and those charged with authority among you. If you differ in anything among yourselves refer it back to Allah and His Messenger if you believe in Allah and the Last Day: that is best, and most suitable for the final determination.” Surah 4:59.
There are differing interpretations of ulul amr (those of authority among you) amongst mufasireen (scholars of Tafseer) and this is not the time to go into its tafseer, please refer to the various tafseer books for more information. Some have said it includes even oppressive non Muslim rulers and hypocritical leaders (which a lot of Muslims do not accept) while others say it means the scholars and others still say it means the Imams of Ahlul Bayt. In any case if the tafseer that says it is the scholars is taken, then we ask the question.............
Which scholars exactly?
That is the question because Muslims follow different scholars, but Allah is saying obey the ulul amr. It is a misnomer to use the term Muslim scholars to refer to all of Ahlul Sunnah scholars, as if they were all one in agreement, especially when it comes to the issue of whether Shias are Muslim or not or even Jihad. There are varying opinions and it is not a unanimous agreement amongst them.
Even amongst Ahlul Sunnah there are varying opinions on many topics of jurisprudence, it is quite incorrect therefore to assume that they are all united on matters of law and fatwa’s issued.
• Some “scholars” have issued fatwa against the Shia because they have found that in Shia books there are some hadiths that sound un-Islamic. Now the scholarly thing to do would be to ask the Shia especially the scholars what they say about those hadiths. Because maybe there is the possibility that the hadith is considered weak or fabricated by the Shia scholars themselves.
• It is very unscholarly to accuse all Shia of believing in certain hadiths that they themselves may consider fabricated or weak.
• It is very unscholarly to tell Muslims not to unite with the Shia because they have “un-Islamic” concepts. But rather the scholarly thing to do would be to approach the Shia whether a regular Shia or a scholar and ask them about the hadith or practice over which there is difference. If they consider the statement false or weak and admit that they do not go along with that hadith or practice then the matter should be left alone. But if “scholars” are going to insist, despite having being told that not all Shia accept those hadiths, based upon whatever evidence, then what kind of scholar is that?
• As we can see some “scholars” are against unity for whatever reason. But often it can be seen that these reasons are not substantial enough because they are too general and not really strong enough due to insufficient research on their part to establish the true nature of certain hadiths or practices.
• Shia scholars also have different opinions on issues, just like Sunni scholars, it is natural to differ.
• Shia scholars also have a system of verifying the strength or falsity of hadiths.
• Shia scholars also may agree with part of what is in a book and reject another part of it, because for them the only thing that is 100% is the Quran, everything else is subject to a second a opinion and if need be rejected.
• Shia scholars are unanimous that there is no book of hadiths that is Saheeh (authentic) from cover to cover, so why do other “scholars” insist that just because something is from Shia sources it is accepted as Saheeh by all Shia?
• Shia scholars accept even the correct hadiths from amongst the books of the generality of Muslims, but do not accept every hadith in anyone’s book whether sunni, salafi or Shia. They have their own system of verification and ijtihad.
• The science of hadith is one that Shia scholars have been dealing with for over a thousand years and are still dealing with today. Everyone knows or has heard about the science of realtors’/narrators of hadith and it is for this reason and others why the job is so painstakingly long and intricate. For some outsider to come along and say ‘oh look what I found in Shia books’ and then to go broadcasting it around the world without proper verification from the Shias themselves, is not only misrepresenting Shias it is immature and at worst it is mischievous.
• If Sahaba, even with the best of memories, can get things wrong then what of the rest of us who did not even see or hear the voice of the Prophet?
• If scholars before us differed then what of us today are we better than all of them?
• These, nowadays, “scholars” who seem to be itching to issue fatwa’s of Takfeer against Muslims is quite a strange phenomenon. Muslims need to tread carefully in these times, and not bow to the pressures of some “scholars” who wish us to submit to them. We submit to Allah only and we reserve the right to exercise our intelligence and to read as Allah tells us many a time in the Holy Quran.
• People are clutching at straws when they condemn a whole group of Muslims to hell based upon a bunch of hadiths or practices that are not accepted by the majority.
• Scholars can get carried away with their own selves at times, we do err and even scholars have to go back and review decisions they have previously made. But part of the traits of a good scholar is patience, deep thinking, honesty and not being worldly. If a scholar is tainted it could bring about destruction for those that follow him and he could become an Imam for those that are going to hell fire, even if in this life they refer to themselves as the saved sect.
• The word of the scholar is not above the word of Allah and His Prophet, nor is the word of a Sahabi or member of Ahlul Bayt above the word of Allah and His Prophet.
Allah The Almighty says in The Holy Quran: ”O you who believe, obey Allah and obey the messenger, and those charged with authority among you. If you differ in anything among yourselves refer it back to Allah and His Messenger if you believe in Allah and the Last Day: that is best, and most suitable for the final determination.” Surah 4:59.
There are differing interpretations of ulul amr (those of authority among you) amongst mufasireen (scholars of Tafseer) and this is not the time to go into its tafseer, please refer to the various tafseer books for more information. Some have said it includes even oppressive non Muslim rulers and hypocritical leaders (which a lot of Muslims do not accept) while others say it means the scholars and others still say it means the Imams of Ahlul Bayt. In any case if the tafseer that says it is the scholars is taken, then we ask the question.............
Which scholars exactly?
That is the question because Muslims follow different scholars, but Allah is saying obey the ulul amr. It is a misnomer to use the term Muslim scholars to refer to all of Ahlul Sunnah scholars, as if they were all one in agreement, especially when it comes to the issue of whether Shias are Muslim or not or even Jihad. There are varying opinions and it is not a unanimous agreement amongst them.
Even amongst Ahlul Sunnah there are varying opinions on many topics of jurisprudence, it is quite incorrect therefore to assume that they are all united on matters of law and fatwa’s issued.
• Some “scholars” have issued fatwa against the Shia because they have found that in Shia books there are some hadiths that sound un-Islamic. Now the scholarly thing to do would be to ask the Shia especially the scholars what they say about those hadiths. Because maybe there is the possibility that the hadith is considered weak or fabricated by the Shia scholars themselves.
• It is very unscholarly to accuse all Shia of believing in certain hadiths that they themselves may consider fabricated or weak.
• It is very unscholarly to tell Muslims not to unite with the Shia because they have “un-Islamic” concepts. But rather the scholarly thing to do would be to approach the Shia whether a regular Shia or a scholar and ask them about the hadith or practice over which there is difference. If they consider the statement false or weak and admit that they do not go along with that hadith or practice then the matter should be left alone. But if “scholars” are going to insist, despite having being told that not all Shia accept those hadiths, based upon whatever evidence, then what kind of scholar is that?
• As we can see some “scholars” are against unity for whatever reason. But often it can be seen that these reasons are not substantial enough because they are too general and not really strong enough due to insufficient research on their part to establish the true nature of certain hadiths or practices.
• Shia scholars also have different opinions on issues, just like Sunni scholars, it is natural to differ.
• Shia scholars also have a system of verifying the strength or falsity of hadiths.
• Shia scholars also may agree with part of what is in a book and reject another part of it, because for them the only thing that is 100% is the Quran, everything else is subject to a second a opinion and if need be rejected.
• Shia scholars are unanimous that there is no book of hadiths that is Saheeh (authentic) from cover to cover, so why do other “scholars” insist that just because something is from Shia sources it is accepted as Saheeh by all Shia?
• Shia scholars accept even the correct hadiths from amongst the books of the generality of Muslims, but do not accept every hadith in anyone’s book whether sunni, salafi or Shia. They have their own system of verification and ijtihad.
• The science of hadith is one that Shia scholars have been dealing with for over a thousand years and are still dealing with today. Everyone knows or has heard about the science of realtors’/narrators of hadith and it is for this reason and others why the job is so painstakingly long and intricate. For some outsider to come along and say ‘oh look what I found in Shia books’ and then to go broadcasting it around the world without proper verification from the Shias themselves, is not only misrepresenting Shias it is immature and at worst it is mischievous.
• If Sahaba, even with the best of memories, can get things wrong then what of the rest of us who did not even see or hear the voice of the Prophet?
• If scholars before us differed then what of us today are we better than all of them?
• These, nowadays, “scholars” who seem to be itching to issue fatwa’s of Takfeer against Muslims is quite a strange phenomenon. Muslims need to tread carefully in these times, and not bow to the pressures of some “scholars” who wish us to submit to them. We submit to Allah only and we reserve the right to exercise our intelligence and to read as Allah tells us many a time in the Holy Quran.
• People are clutching at straws when they condemn a whole group of Muslims to hell based upon a bunch of hadiths or practices that are not accepted by the majority.
• Scholars can get carried away with their own selves at times, we do err and even scholars have to go back and review decisions they have previously made. But part of the traits of a good scholar is patience, deep thinking, honesty and not being worldly. If a scholar is tainted it could bring about destruction for those that follow him and he could become an Imam for those that are going to hell fire, even if in this life they refer to themselves as the saved sect.
• The word of the scholar is not above the word of Allah and His Prophet, nor is the word of a Sahabi or member of Ahlul Bayt above the word of Allah and His Prophet.
Monday, 18 January 2010
Bashing Tool #1: Ibn Saba.........who?
This person whether a factual character or a fictional one is of the tactics that some people use to bash the Muslim Shias.
The accusers say for example things like ‘Ibn Saba is to the Shia like Paul was to Christianity’.
This is why they call Shias Sabaee, meaning the followers of ibn Saba but let us make a few things clear to those who are new to this and those who are not so new to this.
1. Christians hold Paul a central and highly important figure in Christianity, after all he is a writer in the Bible and Christians take direct instructions from him. But if Shia are like the Christians then where is the same treatment of the Shia towards ibn Saba, where is the veneration and the recognition? Truth is this similitude is not suitable to be cast onto Shias.
2. If at all there were people who called themselves Shia and followed ibn Saba, in the past, then it is right to call those Shia Sabaees, and not all Shias. But that would lead to another discussion as to what types of Shia existed at that time? Were there only one type of Shia and what does the term Shia actually mean? Does it apply only to Shias as we know them today?
3. Where are the numerous hadiths that the Shia have taken from Ibn Saba? Where are the numerous hadiths that any of the scholars, old or new, have received from ibn Saba? Paul wrote so much for Christianity but not one hadeeth from ibn Saba, even a weak one? What is becoming apparent is the weakness of this charge against Shias as a whole.
4. If Shia are Sabaees why do they not call themselves Sabaees should they not feel proud that this person gave them the idea to follow Ali, if it was ibn Sabas idea? In fact Shias say that the instruction to follow Ali after the Prophet is a Quranic and Prophetic idea, and not the idea of some nakirah.
5. But let us suppose for a moment that ibn Saba said follow Ali after the Prophet’s death, should the Shia detach themselves from this idea just because this person also happened to repeat what the Prophet said in this matter? No, but if ibn Saba said follow Ali because Ali is a god or because Ali should of received the revelation or any other type of madness and blasphemy like this then the Shia stop there and leave that sort of falsehood to those who are duped by it.
6. The Prophet said in his farewell sermon there will be no new religion after me, but the people that call Shias Sabaees say that Shia are outside the fold of Islam and in fact they go as far as to say that Shia are a new religion. If Shia are outside the fold of Islam then they are not Muslims and nor are they a sect of Islam which would mean that they are a completely new religion after Islam, this is the logic of the accusers. But what they say goes against what the Prophet said that there would be no new religion. So make up your minds oh you confused people.
7. Ibn Saba does not have cult following amongst the Shia.
8. So the question remains are Shias a new religion or a cult or a sect of the Ummah? If they are a sect of the Ummah then we have to be careful to establish the facts about Shias as a group and Shias as individuals. People often talk about the saved sect, perhaps some of the Shia that are being accused of this or that are from that saved sect. Shias are not like Qadianis/Ahmadis who actually name themselves after the person who they follow and the place that their leader sprung from. Shias do not give any importance and no significance to ibn Saba nor is ibn Saba held in high esteem amongst the Shia, if he is even mentioned it is just for the sake of removing the oft propagated lies about Shia.
9. Where is the grave of this person ibn Saba? Shias, they say, are famous for visiting graves why do they not visit the grave of their ibn Saba? No real answers just conjecture and weak accusations.
10. So how do they try to make this ibn Saba accusation stick, easy it does not stick but they continue to regurgitate this stuff until people believe them. Islam has a natural appeal to the seeker of truth and some people see that reflected in the Madhab/school of Ahlul Bayt, who the Shia try to follow, as all Muslims try to follow, because the Sunnah of the Prophet was practised by the household of the Prophet. Now is this idea of following the Prophets household an innovation of ibn Saba? Anyone who suggests this has thumb sucked the word bida/innovation until they cannot even differentiate between Islamic and non Islamic. Muslims follow the Sahaba because they think that following the Sahaba is following the Prophet and likewise those that put Ahlul Bayt first over all others after the Prophet.
The accusers say for example things like ‘Ibn Saba is to the Shia like Paul was to Christianity’.
This is why they call Shias Sabaee, meaning the followers of ibn Saba but let us make a few things clear to those who are new to this and those who are not so new to this.
1. Christians hold Paul a central and highly important figure in Christianity, after all he is a writer in the Bible and Christians take direct instructions from him. But if Shia are like the Christians then where is the same treatment of the Shia towards ibn Saba, where is the veneration and the recognition? Truth is this similitude is not suitable to be cast onto Shias.
2. If at all there were people who called themselves Shia and followed ibn Saba, in the past, then it is right to call those Shia Sabaees, and not all Shias. But that would lead to another discussion as to what types of Shia existed at that time? Were there only one type of Shia and what does the term Shia actually mean? Does it apply only to Shias as we know them today?
3. Where are the numerous hadiths that the Shia have taken from Ibn Saba? Where are the numerous hadiths that any of the scholars, old or new, have received from ibn Saba? Paul wrote so much for Christianity but not one hadeeth from ibn Saba, even a weak one? What is becoming apparent is the weakness of this charge against Shias as a whole.
4. If Shia are Sabaees why do they not call themselves Sabaees should they not feel proud that this person gave them the idea to follow Ali, if it was ibn Sabas idea? In fact Shias say that the instruction to follow Ali after the Prophet is a Quranic and Prophetic idea, and not the idea of some nakirah.
5. But let us suppose for a moment that ibn Saba said follow Ali after the Prophet’s death, should the Shia detach themselves from this idea just because this person also happened to repeat what the Prophet said in this matter? No, but if ibn Saba said follow Ali because Ali is a god or because Ali should of received the revelation or any other type of madness and blasphemy like this then the Shia stop there and leave that sort of falsehood to those who are duped by it.
6. The Prophet said in his farewell sermon there will be no new religion after me, but the people that call Shias Sabaees say that Shia are outside the fold of Islam and in fact they go as far as to say that Shia are a new religion. If Shia are outside the fold of Islam then they are not Muslims and nor are they a sect of Islam which would mean that they are a completely new religion after Islam, this is the logic of the accusers. But what they say goes against what the Prophet said that there would be no new religion. So make up your minds oh you confused people.
7. Ibn Saba does not have cult following amongst the Shia.
8. So the question remains are Shias a new religion or a cult or a sect of the Ummah? If they are a sect of the Ummah then we have to be careful to establish the facts about Shias as a group and Shias as individuals. People often talk about the saved sect, perhaps some of the Shia that are being accused of this or that are from that saved sect. Shias are not like Qadianis/Ahmadis who actually name themselves after the person who they follow and the place that their leader sprung from. Shias do not give any importance and no significance to ibn Saba nor is ibn Saba held in high esteem amongst the Shia, if he is even mentioned it is just for the sake of removing the oft propagated lies about Shia.
9. Where is the grave of this person ibn Saba? Shias, they say, are famous for visiting graves why do they not visit the grave of their ibn Saba? No real answers just conjecture and weak accusations.
10. So how do they try to make this ibn Saba accusation stick, easy it does not stick but they continue to regurgitate this stuff until people believe them. Islam has a natural appeal to the seeker of truth and some people see that reflected in the Madhab/school of Ahlul Bayt, who the Shia try to follow, as all Muslims try to follow, because the Sunnah of the Prophet was practised by the household of the Prophet. Now is this idea of following the Prophets household an innovation of ibn Saba? Anyone who suggests this has thumb sucked the word bida/innovation until they cannot even differentiate between Islamic and non Islamic. Muslims follow the Sahaba because they think that following the Sahaba is following the Prophet and likewise those that put Ahlul Bayt first over all others after the Prophet.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
