Aareonakakanfo:


Whenever the salaf were asked "Where is Allah" they reply "Allah is on his throne above the seventh heavens. Ar rahman alal arshi stawa

HAkorehdeh:
I doubt if you even read the thread from the beginning. It's been treated already!

Aareonakakanfo:




Bros its a question and i only replied. any problem with that?

HAkorehdeh:
which of the two groups do you then support?

Aareonakakanfo:



The first group are the only correct group and that's the general consensus of the scholars. Also regarding the second group, Ibn taymiyah has made that easy for us. Allah is everywhere by his knowledge,he does not unite with his creation

Aareonakakanfo:


Whenever the salaf were asked "Where is Allah" they reply "Allah is on his throne above the seventh heavens. Ar rahman alal arshi stawa

AlBaqir:


Ma sha Allah. What we say is that you cannot interpret those verses literally. That verse is among the "mutashabihat (ambigous) verses". Allah however gave other verses known as "muhkamat (clear verses)", and made these clear ones as the FOUNDATION OF QURAN upon which the ambiguous ones should be interpreted. {surah al-Imran: 7}

Allah cannot be confined to a Chair or Throne for He is As-Samad - He depend NOT on anything. And having a place to sit literally signify He has a body, shape and structure. Allah is beyond what we ascribe unto Him: "Subhana Rabbika Rabil izati ama yasifun..." {Quran says}.

Interestingly when your shuyukh are ask about the following verse esp. the bold part, they reason it cannot be interpreted literally:

Do you not see that Allah knows whatever is in the heavens and whatever is in the earth? Nowhere is there a secret counsel between three persons but He is the fourth of them, nor (between) five but He is the sixth of them, nor less than that nor more but He is with them wheresoever they are ; then He will inform them of what they did on the day of resurrection: surely Allah is Cognizant of all things. {surah mujadalah:,7}

Why were they flexible in this ayah but RIGID in the other? Ulterior motives or double-standard?

babylolaroy:

al baqir....Allah rose over a throne.kilo awkward ninu iyen. He attributed face and hands to himself, kilo bad ninu iyen. much as yu may apply logic to interpret quran, you cant twist all the words and arrive at the conclusion that literal interpretations are not befitting

babylolaroy:

al baqir....Allah rose over a throne.kilo awkward ninu iyen. He attributed face and hands to himself, kilo bad ninu iyen. much as yu may apply logic to interpret quran, you cant twist all the words and arrive at the conclusion that literal interpretations are not befitting

Aareonakakanfo:




I'm not a mufassir plus its a sensitive topic so i'll leave it there but what i'm telling you is that as long as there was hardly any salaf who diagreed with Allah's being on his throne above the seventh heaven, then the case is closed. We do not know more than the salaf

Aareonakakanfo:



The first group are the only correct group and that's the general consensus of the scholars. Also regarding the second group, Ibn taymiyah has made that easy for us. Allah is everywhere by his knowledge,he does not unite with his creation

AlBaqir:



I think the problem here is that you haven't study countless of Sunni top Ulama who refuted Ibn Taymiyyah on his theories that Allah's hand, face, leg and body are literal and that He sits on the throne literally; and that He moves from one place to the other.

Among the great Sunni Ulama that refuted Ibn Taymiyyah were:

1. Sheikh Taqi al-Din Subki (d. 735) in his "ar-Rasael al-Subkiyya ala Ibn Taymiyyah"

2. Imam Ibn Hajar al-Haythami in his "al-Fatawa al-hadithiya" p. 116, p. 203.

3. Abu Hayyan al-Andalusi in his "an-Nahr al-Maad"

4. Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani in his "Fath al-Barr" vol. 13, p. 410; vol. 12, p. 202 {kitab at-Tawhid}

5. Sheik Muhammad Ouwayss from al-Ahzar in his book "Ibn Taymiyyah laysa salafiyyan"

There are many other Sunni Ulama of Ibn Taymiyyah contemporary. These scholars did not only refuted him, but also gave formal legal opinion (fatawa) that Ibn Taymiyyah was misguided and misguiding in tenets of faith and warned people from accepting his theories.
{English/Arabic Traditional Sunni Manual of Shariah. Reliance of the Traveller ('Umdat al-Salik): A classical manual of sacred law" by Ahmad Ibn al-Naqib al-Misri (d. 769). Publish by Sunni Books, 1991, 1993}

The Hanafi Scholar Muhammad Zahid al-Kawthari writes:

Whoever thinks that all the scholars of his (Taymiyyah) time joined in a single conspiracy against him from personal envy should rather impugn their own intelligence and understanding, after studying the repugnance of his deviations in beliefs and works, for which he was asked to repent time after time and moved from prison to prison until he passed on to what he'd sent ahead."

Ibn Taymiyyah was never sent to prison by any tyrant ruler of his time rather the fatawa of the Sunni scholars of his time end him in prison.

Aareonakakanfo:




[b]Everything you put up above have been treated by the scholars of sunnah and it will be too long for me to post it here.Ibn baz has treated that,ibn uthaymeen has treated that.I'd try recommending some books for you when i have the chance to.He never said these things, they were all cooked up by his enemies just to defame his character. He was such a genius and some of his peers couldn't help but envy him. One of the staunchest critics of ibn taymiyah was sa'id ramadan al buti.The one who hated shaykh al-albani He said

"And we are amazed when we see the extremists declaring Ibn Taymiyyah, may Allah have mercy upon him, of being an unbeliever. And also at them saying that he was one who held Allah to be a body (mujassid), and I have studied long and hard as to where I could find a statement or a word from Ibn Taymiyyah that he wrote or said which would indicate his holding Allah to be a body as was quoted from him by As-Subki and others [This is a clear indication from Al-Buti of the injustice done against Ibn Taymiyyah by the likes of As-Subki and others], and I have not found anything from him like this. All I found was him saying in his legal rulings, 'Indeed Allah has a Hand as He said, and has risen over the Throne as He said, and He has an Eye as He said.' "

And he adds to this, "I referred to the last work written by Abu'l-Hasan al-Ash'ari, 'Al-Ibanah', and I found him saying exactly what Ibn Taymiyyah said [on the issue of the Names and Attributes of Allah]." ['Nadwa Ittjahat al-Fiqr al-Islami' (pp. 264-265) of Al-Buti]

i can't remember the name of the scholar who refuted ibn hajar al haythami but i'd try getting his name.Even in Nigeria, we once treated all the accusations agianst ibn taymiyah by his enemies and we realized they were all cooked up.[/b]

AlBaqir:


You see Albaqir is very sensitive to letters. You are the one that keep on talking about "salaf salaf salaf" as if all of them agree unanimously on the literal interpretation of the verses in discussion; and you made mention of Ibn Taymiyyah as if he was an authority over every Muslims. I simply need to interject that there are various Sunni Ulama that countered him not to mention of Shi'i Ulama of his time. Should you choose to follow his theories, that's fine but y'all problem is imposing these theories on the neck of others and even declare whoever have a contrast opinion as kafir.

On this very thread, we explore. Not dogmatically adhere to what scholar say.

Aareonakakanfo:




You said i keep talking about salaf. Who else do you expect us to rely on other than those who lived with the prophet and those who studied from the companions.You? speaking of ibn taymiyah, i mentioned ibn taymiyah specifically because he's the the most famous scholar associated with this topic and he was the one who wrote the most books regarding it. Speaking of the sunni ulama who countered him, i already told you the accusations have been treated by the scholars. As regards the shi'i, you expect me to take seriously people who curse the companions aside the ones from Ali's family? and Sir i never said anyone is a kafir here ooo.

Lastly speaking of the bolded. We're not scholars so its upon us to rely on the general concensus of the scholars.

AlBaqir:

Anyhow on Shahaba-cursing, justice is done here while false taught and thought are put to dust:
https://www.nairaland.com/1903995/religious-authority-sistani-condemns-cursing
We don't need to derail please. Thanks sir.

MrOlai:


Big lie! Taqiya!

Shia rain curses on the first three Caliphs Abubakr, Umar and Uthman (R.A) on their ziyarat-ul- ashura every year!

This is one of the reasons why muslim world descends on them!

AlBaqir:


Prophet never ask you to follow anything other than "the Book of Allah and his offspring, the Ahl al-bayt". His blessed statement is crystal clear :"so long you adhere to it, you will NEVER go astray...both (Quran and Ahl al-bayt) will not separate from each other till they meet me at the pool"

There is no guarantee that whatever salad you follow will not deviate from the Quran even within a second. Following them is at your own peril. Kindly read the legacy of the Prophet here:
https://www.nairaland.com/1470614/how-authentic-hadith-leave-amongst


Much have been said about Sunni-Shii issue here:
https://www.nairaland.com/2195624/deen-show-whats-difference-between


You guys love exaggerations a lot. First, the usual slogan is "the Rafidi used to curse the Sahaba". Now additional phrase is being added "except those one of Ali's family". Were Salman al-Farsi, Miqdad al-Aswad, Abu Saeed al-khudri, Abu Ayyub al-Ansari, Muhammad ibn Abu bakar, Bilal, Abu dhar al-Giffari and many other usually praised by the Shia part of Ali's family?

Anyhow on Shahaba-cursing, justice is done here while false taught and thought are put to dust:
https://www.nairaland.com/1903995/religious-authority-sistani-condemns-cursing

We don't need to derail please. Thanks sir.

AlBaqir:
If the whole ayah (verses) of the glorious Quran which "describe Allah" is collapse in just one sentence, this is the sentence in the Quran:

[size=28pt]لَيۡسَ كَمِثۡلِهِۦ شَيۡءٞۖ [/size] [size=28pt]nothing like a likeness of Him; [/size]{Surah Shura, ch. 42: 11}

This, is enough to put literalism of Allah's hand, face, leg, finger, body, chair, throne etc to rest.

MrOlai:

Big lie! Taqiya!
Shia rain curses on the first three Caliphs Abubakr, Umar and Uthman (R.A) on their ziyarat-ul- ashura every year!

Aareonakakanfo:


The prophet said you shouldn't follow anything other than the book of Allah. but the question is should you follow the book of Allah according to your own knowledge/interpretations?No. you should practise islam the same way those around him practised it.Is there anyone who understands the book of Allah other than the pious predecessors?No. i think the main issue here is the word salaf which i guess you're not comfortable with.

Aareonakakanfo:


The pious predecessors were never infaliable and as such when better evidences are presented which negates theirs, then we oppose it and you haven't shown me the better evidences

Aareonakakanfo:


There's no need to discuss this.The shi'a are not on the right path

Aareonakakanfo:


Ibn mubarak once warned al fudayl ibn ayyad. that he should never report ahadith from a certain amr bin thabit not to be confused with the comapnion because he use to curse the salaf and al fudayl asked him who are those who curse the salaf and he replied by saying "The shi'a". It should also be known that the pious predecessors including the 6 collectors never took ahahdith from them.[/color][/b]

Aareonakakanfo:


]I actually made a mistake Astagfirullah.i meant except those who were loyal to ali. and you got it wrong the Shi'a are of numerous factions. and they curse all the names you mentioned above except those who were loyal to Ali][/b]

Aareonakakanfo:

Just a random question are you shi"ee?

AlBaqir:




Really this is the exact Sahih saying of the Prophet " I have left behind over you that which if you hold fast to it you will never go astray: the Book of Allāh – one end of which is in His Hand and the other in your hands – AND my Ahl al-Bayt"

This hadith is Mutawattir. And it is of various sigha. Most of the sigha is highlighted in the link you ignore to read. And the publicized hadith which says "I have left Quran and my sunnah" is exposed to be blatant lie in the thread as stated by Sunni Ulama.

I really love that question of yours "Is there anyone who understand the Book of Allah other than the pious predecessors?" Who are those pious predecessors? All of them or some of them? Hadith Thaqalain which you ignore its link is specific when prophet says: ...both (the Quran and the ahl al-bayt) shall not separated till they meet me at the pool"


And the answer is not far fetched in the Quran also. Allah says:
Most surely it is an honored Quran, In a book that is protected, None shall touch it save the purified ones {surah waqiah: 77-79}

The very literal meaning of this ayah as believed by many mufassir is that "none shall TOUCH it save the purified ones" refer to one who perform Ablution or Ghusl. But going deep, especially when one sees how Allah begins from verse 75 with Swearing upon swearing; and the fact that many touches Quran today without ablution; some even desecrated it. The meaning of "touch" as explain by other mufassir is "interpret".

So Allah introduces the "purified ones" in this ayah:
Allah only desires to keep away the uncleanliness from you, O Ahl al-Bayt! and to purify you a (thorough) purifying {surah ahzab:33}

So I believe while other and every individuals ponder upon the Quran as instructed by Allah, those who have the truest meaning to it are the Ahl al-Bayt.




What else do you want?



Your Lord says: "...surely your Lord best knows those who go astray from His path; and He knows best those who follow the right path{surah Nahl:125}

So who da hell are you to say some are not on the right way?




Here is Sheik Nasir deen al-Albani:

If someone says: “The narrator of this corroborative ḥadīth (i.e. that of Ajlaḥ) was a Shi’ī, and also in the chain of the main ḥadīth, there is another Shi’ī, and he is Ja’far b. Sulaymān. Does this not justify attack on the ḥadīth and constitute a fault in it?” So, I answer: “Not at all, because the requirements in the transmission of ḥadīth are ONLY truthfulness and sound memory. As for the madhhab (of the narrator), that is between him and his Lord, and He is sufficient for him.

{ Abū ‘Abd al-Raḥmān Muḥammad Nāṣir al-Dīn b. al-Ḥajj Nūḥ b. Tajātī b. Ādam al-Ashqūdrī al-Albānī, Silsilah al-Aḥādīth al-Ṣaḥīḥah wa Shayhun min Fiqhihāh wa Fawāidihāh (Riyadh: Maktabah al-Ma’ārif li al-Nashr wa al-Tawzī’; 1st edition, 1415 H), vol. 5, p. 262, # 2223}





Its not about the condemnation that matters, The doctrines is what matters and the fact that the religious authority condemns it doesn't mean its not part of the core shi'a doctrines



Anyway if you refuse to read the linked thread, and rigidly want to adhere to your belief on this, I simply cannot force you.

Aareonakakanfo:




Please i'm busy right now. i'll respond to you when i'm free

AlBaqir:


Just to add to the initial comment of Sheik Nasir deen al-Albani, in order to clear your myth and pseudo-information that none of your 6 most "authentic sahih" recorded any hadith from the shi'a.

Imam al-Dhahabi (d. 748) writes:

The minor bid'ah: Like extreme Shi'ism, or like moderate Shi'ism, for this was widespread among the Tabi'in and their followers, despite their devotion, piety and truthfulness. If the ahadith of these people were rejected, part of the teachings of the Prophet would be lost, and that would be a clear evil...
{Mizan al-I'tidal fi Naqd al-Rijal, vol. 1, p. 5-6, #2 (Beirut: 1st edition; 1382H)}

Imam al-Bukhari alone in his Sahih reported hundreds of ahadith from hundreds of Rafidi, Shii.

Please be my guest to contest this!

@Empiree what do you expect from these brothers. They love derailing a lot.

Aareonakakanfo:

Ooooh i see so you're even Shi'ee.Allaahu musta'aan.Why am i even wasting my time sef no wonder you were getting insultive because you couldn't refute me.Goodbye Sir

Aareonakakanfo:




Ooooh i see so you're even Shi'ee.Allaahu musta'aan.Why am i even wasting my time sef no wonder you were getting insultive because you couldn't refute me.Goodbye Sir