https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fwk9lrOoF7M

is "friendship" and "love" only allowed between muslims in relation to verse 5:55?

Sunnis interprete the word "wali" in verse 5:5 to mean "friend" or "loved one".the verse says : your wali is "only" Allah and his messenger,and those who believe, who pray and offer zakat while they bow".if Sunnis claim that the word "wali" means "friend",instead of "master" as claimed by the Shia,and some Sunnis also claim (the third wali in) verse 5:55 refers to "all muslims",then based on the two Sunni claims,there is a contradiction in the Quran as the following verses reveal (and there is no contradiction in the Quran :

6:7 It may be that Allah will grant love (and friendship) between you and those whom ye (now) hold as enemies. For Allah has power (over all things); And Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.

6:8 Allah does not forbid you respecting those who have not made war against you on account of (your) religion, and have not driven you forth from your homes, that you show them kindness and deal with them justly; surely Allah loves the doers of justice.

60:9 Allah only forbids you respecting those who made war upon you on account of (your) religion, and drove you forth from your homes and backed up (others) in your expulsion, that you make friends with them, and whoever makes friends with them, these are the unjust.

As evident above,non-muslims who have not waged war on or driven us from our homes can be our "friends".so therefore the claim in verse 5:55,that the word "wali" means "friend" is not true,because not only those stated in verse 5:55 can be our "friends" ;even non-muslims can be.

Also,the claim that verse 5:55 ( "those who believe and pray and give zakat while they bow" ) can refer to the generality of muslims is not true,when we take in perspective of the word "only" in verse 5:5, and that even non-muslims can be our friends;and interpreting the word "wali" in verse 5:55 to mean "master" or holder of authority,would imply that every muslim is the "master" f another,which is not the case.so if we are to resort to only the Quran and allow the Quran to explain itself,then we see that "wali" in verse 5:55 cannot be interpreted as "friend",nor can verse 5:55 ( "those who believe,pray,and give zakat while they bow" ) refer to all believers.

I challenge any sunni,who says verse 5:55 isn't about Imam Ali (as) and who denies Imam Ali's (as) imamate, to disprove the above."Wali" in verse 5:5 cannot mean "friend" because even non-muslims can be our "friends".and the third "wali" listed in verse 5:55 cannot be all muslims because not every muslim is a "master" of another muslim.when we take into consideration the hadith on Imam Ali (as) giving his ring as charity while bowing in prayer,we see also that "wali" cannot just mean "friend" in reference to Imam Ali (as)-but "master"-because not "only" Allah,the messenger (sa) and Imam Ali (as) can be our "friends" but every muslim is another's friend,and even there can be non-muslims as our "friends".

Imagine verse 5:55 was revealed in honor of Umar (Allah forbid) to be our "master" after Allah and the Prophet (s)? Sunnis would have hanged that verse around their necks till Qiyamah!

polemical/replies to sunni disputations on verse 5:55:

Verse of Wilayah (5:55) :

http://en.shiapen.com/comprehensive/verse-wilayah/meaning-wilayah.html

BetaThings:

That statement in red colour is ABSOLUTE falsehood
Even Ibn Kathir which is available on the net does not say it refers to Ali. So where is the unanimity?

Rafidi :
polemical/replies to sunni disputations on verse 5:55:

Verse of Wilayah (5:55) :

http://en.shiapen.com/comprehensive/verse-wilayah/meaning-wilayah.html

Betathing claims that Ibn Katheer,student of nasibi in chief Ibn Taymiyyah,did not say verse 5:55 refers to Imam Ali (as).I don't know where Betathing read that or how he figured that out.another deliberate lie? in the link presented by Rafidi,it is pointed out that Ibn Katheer recorded the hadith that verse 5:55 was revealed in honor of Imam Ali (as).Ibn Katheer alone recorded the hadith through 9 different chains of narration. he faulted three due to the character of a narrator in each of the three narrations he faulted,and had no objection to the remaining 6 chains of narration on verse 5:55,that that verse was revealed in honor of Imam Ali (as).

Sunni hadith scholar in 'Manaqib Ibn Maghazili' records the narration linking verse 5:55 to Imam Ali (as),in 5 different chains of narration leading to Ibn Abbass (ra),Imam Ali (as) himself (as) and Imam Muhammad al-Baqer (as).

Sunni scholar Allamah Khuwarzami al-Hanafi (484-568 H) has recorded the testimonies of Ibn Abbas and Yahya bin Abdullah bin Umar bin Ali bin Abi Talib that the verse was revealed in favour of Ali bin Abi Talib (as) in 2 different chains of narration.

Sunni scholar Allamah Ibrahim bin Muhammad Al-Juwayni al-Hamaweh (644 – 722 H) has recorded the testimonies of companions Ibn Abbas, Bara bin Azeb, Abu Dhar Ghafari amd Ammar Yasir that the verse was revealed in favour of Ali bin Abi Talib (as) in 5 different chains of narration.

Sunni scholar Allamah Haskani al-Hanafi (d. 480 H) has recorded the testimonies of companions Ibn Abbas, Anas bin Malik, Jabir bin Abdullah, Al-Miqdad bin al-Aswad, Abu Dhar and of the Tabayeen such as Abdullah bin Muhammad bin al-Hanafya, Muhammad bin al-Hanafia, Atta bin Saaib and Ibn Juraij in different ways that the verse was revealed in favour of Ali bin Abi Talib (as) in 22 different chains of narration!!! two of the chains are graded "sahih"!

Sunni scholar al-Wahidi al-Nisaboori,Asbab al-Nuzul cited 1 chain of narration.

In Takhrij al-Athar, by Sunni scholar al-Zailai,there is 1 chain of narration.

In Tarikh Dimashq by Sunni scholar Ibn Asakir,1 chain of narration

In Marifat Uloom al-Hadith by Sunni Imam al-Hakim al Nisaburi,1 chain of narration.

In Al-Muj’am al-Kabir by Sunni Imam Tabarani,1 chain of narration

In Marifat al-Sahaba by Sunni Allamah, Abu Naeem al-Asbahani,1 chain of narration.

Ibn Arabi,al-Aloosi,and al-Tabari among other Sunni scholars have all recorded in their works that verse 5:55 was revealed in honor of Amirul-Mu'mineen Imam Ali Ibn Abi Talib (as).a total of 10 sahabi (companions of Prophet Muhammad s.a. ) and a total of 21 tabi'een (followers of sahaba) and tabi'een followers have narrated that verse 5:55 was revealed in honor of Imam Ali (as).this makes the hadith "mutawatir".

LagosShia:
Betathing claims that Ibn Katheer,student of nasibi in chief Ibn Taymiyyah,did not say verse 5:55 refers to Imam Ali (as).I don't know where Betathing read that or how he figured that out.another deliberate lie?

Rafidi provided a link from another site. You want me to go that and ignore what ibn Kathir himself said himself
I provided the specific link to Ibn Kathir's book of Tafsir directly yet you wonder "how he figured that out"

BetaThings:
http://www.qtafsir.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=766&Itemid=60
(and they bow down,) some people thought that they give the Zakah while bowing down. If this were the case, then paying the Zakah while bowing would be the best form of giving Zakah. No scholar from whom religious rulings are taken says this, as much as we know.

LagosShia:
in the link presented by Rafidi,it is pointed out that Ibn Katheer recorded the hadith that verse 5:55 was revealed in honor of Imam Ali (as).Ibn Katheer alone recorded the hadith through 9 different chains of narration. he faulted three due to the character of a narrator in each of the three narrations he faulted,and had no objection to the remaining 6 chains of narration on verse 5:55,that that verse was revealed in honor of Imam Ali (as).

Lies. Ibn Kathir's tafsir is available online for all to see. No taqqiya
BTW Your brother claimed unanimity (by Sunni and Shias, present and past) in terms of acceptance that the verse talks about Ali. I said no, it is not unanimous
You now brought a list of people you claim are classical Sunnis who accept the verse as relating to Ali (RA)
Even if 1b classical sunnis accept, 1 person refusing nullifies that notion of unanimity
And the fact that those are classical scholars negates the notion of past and present unanimity
Please be brave enough to admit when your brother is wrong
The narrations you quote are weak by the way.

LagosShia:
nasibi in chief Ibn Taymiyyah

BTW one of the reasons you guy hate Shaykul Islam Ibn Taymiyyah is because he figured you out correctly

According to him,

[quote author]
1. I have not seen a people who give greater testimony in falsehood than the Raafidah
2. Shias say "our religion is taqqiya (deception) and they say with their mouth other than what is in their heart
3. Ali (RA) supplicated against the Shias "Oh Allah, I have made them weary, tired, and they have made me weary and tired so replace them for me with those who are better than them, and replace me for them with one who is worse than me"
[/quote]

We know that the term Raafidah (Rejecters) was given to a faction of Shias by another Shia (Zaid) when they rejected his (Zaid's) supplication for mercy for Abu Bakr and Umar

LagosShia:
in the link presented by Rafidi,it is pointed out that Ibn Katheer recorded the hadith that verse 5:55 was revealed in honor of Imam Ali (as)

This the commentary from the link by Rafidi. Whether or not you agree with him, Ibn Kathir disagrees with the notion that the verse refers to Ali (RA)
Shias take from people when he says what they like and they denounce and abuse him if he says what they dislike

This is how they (Shiapen folks) "figured it out"

Ibn Katheer was the faithful student of Ibn Taymeeya, and like him had a bigoted view of Maula ‘Ali (as). It is hence little surprise that he would reject the notion that this verse descended in honour of Maula ‘Ali (as).

The Shia's clai is refuted here
for those who seek knowledge, please endeavour to follow the argument
BTW, I have not seen anyone following this tradition that Shias say Allah commended and rewarded in that verse by asking people in salat for zakat. They wait till the end of salat. Don't the rich want their good deeds multiplied?



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=viWYujAMjH0

BetaThings:

Rafidi provided a link from another site. You want me to go that and ignore what ibn Kathir himself said himself
I provided the specific link to Ibn Kathir's book of Tafsir directly yet you wonder "how he figured that out"

Are you just trying to be annoying,silly or you're just displaying what you're ?

The link you gave is not to Ibn Kathir's complete tafsir,with recording of hadiths relating to asbabul-nuzul.

This is an abridged version of Ibn Kathir's Tafsir.it is "quick tafsir".in other words,they took the opinion of ibn kathir in few lines,and left out the details.

Bring a full version of ibn kathir's tafsir,and go to volume two,page 71.its easy.if you have a hard copy,scan it.

Lies. Ibn Kathir's tafsir is available online for all to see. No taqqiya
BTW Your brother claimed unanimity (by Sunni and Shias, present and past) in terms of acceptance that the verse talks about Ali. I said no, it is not unanimous
You now brought a list of people you claim are classical Sunnis who accept the verse as relating to Ali (RA)
Even if 1b classical sunnis accept, 1 person refusing nullifies that notion of unanimity
And the fact that those are classical scholars negates the notion of past and present unanimity
Please be brave enough to admit when your brother is wrong
The narrations you quote are weak by the way.

Get volume 2 page 71 of ibn kathir's tafsir.the hadith is there.ibn kathir recorded it through 9 chains.he faulted three,and placed no objection on the other 6.

BTW one of the reasons you guy hate Shaykul Islam Ibn Taymiyyah is because he figured you out correctly

You're basically scavenging any nonsense from any dull wahhabi (like usthman al-khamis in the video) to cling on to your hate.Imam Ali (as) said: "know the truth,and you will know those who follow it".in other words,it is not by names and personality,you identify the truth.

Ibn taymiyyah and every salafist/wahhabi will reject (naturally) anything about the truth on Imam Ali (as) and the Ahlul-Bayt (as),in order to respond to the Shia (who they love to hate).that is not how the truth is attained.not by names.ibn taymiyyah was a nasibi because of his writings,actions and words;not because his name is ibn taymiyyah.the event of ghadir khumm,verse 5:55,verse 33:33,the event of "warn thy near kindered",hadith al-manzila,hadith al-thaqalain,hadith of "Ali is the wali of ever believer "after me",hadith of 12 Imams,hadith on fadak,hadith of "Hassan and Hussain are two imams",and command for the Prophet (sa) to appoint a successor in Surat al-Sharh,are all either rejected or twisted/misinterpreted to ensure Sunnis generally hold on to the "uprightness" of abu bakr and umar.you have built your religion on "hero worship".no amount of proof,evidence and fact can convince you.you're not after reaching the truth as your motive or objection,but after protecting the image of some figures you adore,in total disregard for proofs and reason.

Its a choice you make.I can't change you if you don't will.

According to him,

We know that the term Raafidah (Rejecters) was given to a faction of Shias by another Shia (Zaid) when they rejected his (Zaid's) supplication for mercy for Abu Bakr and Umar

Here goes the dishonesty.first you have brought the incidence of Zaid Ibn Ali (as) into this thread.secondly,there was no supplication of Zaid (as) for abu bakr and umar.

What happened was Zaid (as) wanted to raise an army to fight the ummayyads (the people revered by wahhabis/salafists) to avenge the blood of Imam Hussain (as).some people sough that he curses abu bakr and umar.Zaid (as) refused to do that openly and at that moment,because that would divide his army,and it will also give the ummayyads propaganda right and "justification" to eliminate Zaid (as).so Zaid (as) as any wise military strategist would refuse to do so.this is the propaganda Sunnis to this day are rejoicing about.we are "rafidi" (rejecters) because we reject the rule of tyrants.

This the commentary from the link by Rafidi. Whether or not you agree with him, Ibn Kathir disagrees with the notion that the verse refers to Ali (RA)
Shias take from people when he says what they like and they denounce and abuse him if he says what they dislike

Ibn kathir can understand the verse as he chooses to.it doesn't mean I will agree with it,and it doesn't mean his opinion is right.in his tafsir nonetheless,he has recorded the hadith relating verse 5:55 to Imam Ali (as) in 9 chains.

This is how they (Shiapen folks) "figured it out"

Oh please! Trying to "belittle" others doesn't help your situation: stubborn nasibi!

BetaThings: The Shia's clai is refuted here
for those who seek knowledge, please endeavour to follow the argument
BTW, I have not seen anyone following this tradition that Shias say Allah commended and rewarded in that verse by asking people in salat for zakat. They wait till the end of salat. Don't the rich want their good deeds multiplied?



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=viWYujAMjH0

Usthman al-khamis is very silly and annoying.the lie is written all over his face when he was clutching at straws and biting his tongue to make up his speculative arguments.I will briefly refute him and in the process give a summary of points:

1. It is self-evident in verse 5:55 (without the use of any hadith) that an incidence is referenced in that verse.

2.The word "wali" in verse 5:55 cannot refer to all believers to one another as "friends" as Sunnis generally claim,since the verse starts with "only".non-believers as well can be our "friends" if they have not driven us from our homes or waged war on us.taking the word "wali" in the context of "friend" or considering the phrase "those who believe and pray,and give zakat while they bow",to refer to all believers renders a contradiction in the Quran.not only believers can be our friends as per other verses,while verse 5:55 used the word "only" to list three figures that believers should look up to.

3. As per point #2,the verses on Ubadah Ibn Samet and not taking unbelievers (at war with muslims) as "friends" preceeding verse 55 are not related to verse 5:55.

4. The hadith relating verse 5:55 to Imam Ali (as) is mutawatir (successively reported by a large number of the earliest muslims,among whom are 10 companions).a mutawatir hadith doesn't need an acceptable chain of reporters (in the event one of the reporters is faulted).

5. By the available records,there are two chains of reporters for this hadith,considered "sahih" (authetic).by Sunni account,a mutawatir hadith with faulty chains of reporters is "hasan" (good).

6. Usthman al-Khamis is speculating with ridiculous ideas: like poor people are "ashame" to beg for alms,and should be offered alms in their houses. also about concentration in prayer which is already dealt with in this thread.

7. While praying,a Sunni prayer leader or prayer imam can walk or move,and likewise others praying and it doesn't annull the prayer.

8. The prayer Imam Ali (as) was offering was optional,so helping the desperate poor man takes precedence in line with Surat al-Dhahr: "and the needy do not turn away".

9. Zakat in addition of its being an islamic term,have a linguistic meaning.so its optional to give zakat (alms) anytime.Imam Ali (as) giving his ring instead of opening his wallet (as the clown in the video did),shows he didn't have money to offer but instead selflessly gave an asset to help the poor.

10.A faulty chain doesn't render a hadith to be "fabricated".

11. Nasibi wahhabis/salafis negate,relegate and find dissatisfaction in everything good for Imam Ali (as) and the Ahlul-Bayt (as),which the Shia abide by.its a natural and not suprising reaction.you can't expect Hitler to agree with the Jews!

12. Mixing up unrelated issues from verses on Dawud (as) and Maryam (as) that have their respective and unrelated meanings, have nothing to do with verse 5:55 which starts with "innama"/"only" (restriction) and carries a specific order to all believers on three figures.the word "while they bow" describes in the verse a specific action carried out by someone in the past tense,and not like the general command to Maryam (as) to "bow with those who bow".quite different.the wording for the verse on Dawud (as) is also quite different in wording and meaning.

15. The silly and desperate denials in the video are disgusting and well grounded in hatred and frustration.

"The Wilayat of Imam Ali : The Succession of Imam Ali By Allah[swt] & Prophet for Believers" - by Sayyid Ammar Nakhshawani



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q7apJmSFB9c


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XedT-b38u_U


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ZUtrq6UdHo


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-3KnCn1QS54


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l5r5pQHzmNM


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rv_CKwYy9tw


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YGk8Zh3DLIE

LagosShia:
Usthman al-khamis is very silly and annoying.the lie is written all over his face when he was clutching at straws and biting his tongue to make up his speculative arguments.I will briefly refute him and in the process give a summary of points:

To start with, I will insha Allah soon post a video by Khamis where he exonerated Hussain (RAH) (yes he did) of the accusation that he sought to wage war against Yazeed. So stop assuming that people do not try to look at facts objectively. It is ok for you to condemn Sunnis wholesale and take from Shias in a wholesale fashion. But that is not my style. Arguments must make sense for me to believe it

BTW Anyone belonging to this group should not be talking about lies. His scholars are CLEARLY enmeshed in it
4 scholars, same question, 4 answers. Amy Allah give us guidance


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ai0kd2dYsf0

LagosShia:
6. Usthman al-Khamis is speculating with ridiculous ideas: like poor people are "ashame" to beg for alms,and should be offered alms in their houses. also about concentration in prayer which is already dealt with in this thread.

It is not speculation. Some people typically Masakin have needs but they would not ask. That is a category from the eight for whom zakat is intended. Begging is discouraged in Islam. If people are poor and they are discouraged from begging, who do we give zakat to? We still identify them and give discreetly

We know that giving to people "with the right hand such that the left hand does not know' is a beloved procedure such that anyone who does that will be among the people in the shade on the day that there will be no shade

BTW My comment here has nothing to do with the action of Ali (RAH). I am not in a position to judge him and would not dare because the Prophet (SAW) forbids judging his companions.
My comment has to with the preferred etiquette of giving. In that regard Khamis is right about it being preferred to give at home

LagosShia:
7. While praying,a Sunni prayer leader or prayer imam can walk or move,and likewise others praying and it doesn't annull the prayer.

8. The prayer Imam Ali (as) was offering was optional,so helping the desperate poor man takes precedence in line with Surat al-Dhahr: "and the needy do not turn away".

People move during salat for matters typically related to the salat eg making room for somebody who voids his salah and needs to go and renew it or when two people are praying side by side and a third joins, the imam can move forward to stand alone so that the te remaining two stand side by side as mamun

Yes one can move for non salat-related matters if it is urgent and likely to disrupt the concentration on the salat if not attended to on time eg carrying a baby that is about to endanger himself. Giving alm does not fall in that category

Whether the salat is optional or compulsory, the rule of khushoo is crucial. One has to make the prostration of forgiveness if a mistake is made in an optional prayer. The Prophet (SAW) always concentrated absolutely in optional prayers.

Please can you tell us anyone that gives zakat in ruku in emulation of "this practice blessed by Allah"

LagosShia:
11. Nasibi wahhabis/salafis negate,relegate and find dissatisfaction in everything good for Imam Ali (as) and the Ahlul-Bayt (as),which the Shia abide by.

Sunnis (whether you call them Whhabis/Salafis does not matter - you hated them (and still do) in equal fashion even before Shayk Mohammad ibn AbdulWahhab - may Allah have mercy on him - was born) have very high regard for Ali (RAH). We know him as a very knowledgeable and intelligent faqih. There is an hadith of Umar (RAH) wanting to flog a man for the second time for accusing people of Zina. Sunnis have no problem in reporting that Ali (RAH) correctly and insightfully pointed out to Umar (RAH) that if the man was flogged again, then his testimony would have to be accepted. I cannot imagine any Shia book reporting this if the reverse had happened

Denying the divine attributes Shias attribute to Ali (RAH) (similar to the way Christians attribute divine attributes to Jesus) does not mean Sunnis negate the good attributes of Ali (RAH). We just treat Ali (RAH) like a human being (although an exalted one) which he was.

We are just following the injuction in the Qur'an (5 : 2) to support ourselves in good and NOT to support ourselves in sin and transgression

LagosShia:
which the Shia abide by.

Shias abide by their falsehood. See the video. Since Sunnis don't support lies told by Shias, they are accused of hating and denying attributes.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gsv7YNjhNB8

LagosShia:
its a natural and not suprising reaction.you can't expect Hitler to agree with the Jews!

Hitler and Jews? What was that? What did Hitler do wrong?
Has the leader of your model state - Ahmadinajad - not always maintained that Hitler did not kill jews?
Or has the story changed again?

BTW - Shias massacred and burnt sunnis in Homs while the Syrian army did nothing. Did you think it would take an war-situation army (that has been using aircraft to fight) hours to get to a place that was 35km from their base? Even the smoke from the burning would have been visible

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-21291714
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-21095192

BetaThings:

To start with, I will insha Allah soon post a video by Khamis where he exonerated Hussain (RAH) (yes he did) of the accusation that he sought to wage war against Yazeed. So stop assuming that people do not try to look at facts objectively. It is ok for you to condemn Sunnis wholesale and take from Shias in a wholesale fashion. But that is not my style. Arguments must make sense for me to believe it

That is good! More of that insha'Allah and you will be in the path of the Thaqalain: Quran and Ahlul-Bayt (as).

In your post you said Usthman al-Khamis exonerated Imam Hussein (as).but the chief mufti of saudi arabia,condemned Imam Hussein (as) and said he was "misguided" and that yazid was a "legitimate" ruler.now regarding the video you posted by some clowns about the claim of "1 question,4 different answers from 4 different Shia scholars",aren't Usthman al-khamis and the mufti of saudi arabia who are both wahhabi/salafist and ofcourse sunnis,contradicting themselves? Who do you follow and why? Who's wrong? Usthman al-khamis who is a junior cleric that you're cheering for,or the grand mufti of the wahhabi kingdom of saudi arabia,who is a direct descendant of your beloved Sheikh Ibn Abdul-Wahab (founder of wahhabism) ? Here is the video the mufti made the remark,so you really see why we Shia refer to these people as "nasibis" :


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=98bK3V7JNfY

BTW Anyone belonging to this group should not be talking about lies. His scholars are CLEARLY enmeshed in it
4 scholars, same question, 4 answers. Amy Allah give us guidance


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ai0kd2dYsf0

First the people (wahhabis) who made the video are clearly bias.noting how they reconciled the statement of the last sunni scholar that said the reason iblis refused to prostrate was "ignorance 'slash' arrogance".he repeated that twice!but the makers of the video decided to pick "arrogance" only to reconcile his statement with the statements of the others.

Secondly,I can bring statements of sunni scholars who outrightly contradict themselves,instead of cherry-picking explanations/analysis/details given on a particular topic as the wahhabis did against the shia scholars in the video.and just a hint,sunnis have four schools of thought.and all four differ on many things.who is right : Ahmad Ibn Hanbal (hanbalis),Imam Malik (malikis),Imam Shafi (shafi'is) or Abu Hanifa (hanafis) ? So I can say based on the video you presented that three quarters of Sunnis are "followers of devils and their desires".and truly this is the opinion of the minority sunnis who follow the wahhabi/salafist ideology against mainstream sunnis who don't.that is why in saudi arabia,no other sunni school of thought is tolerated other than the Hanbalia of ahmad ibn hanbal,that the wahhabis follow.thankful to Allah (swt),in Shia Islam,the Ja'fari school of jurisprudence is our only school of thought.

Thirdly people who make such videos are clowns.when the word "wilayah" is mentioned by a shia scholar,they translated it into english (in the video) by putting within brackets : "belief in 12 gods besides Allah".is that not an outright lie? Would you be brave enough to commit a sin and accuse me personally as a Shia that the Twelve holy Imams of the Ahlul-Bayt (as) are "12 gods" to me? Also "ayatollah" is spelled as "ayatollat".are these really the "muslims" you wish to be like?

Finally as for the details/analysis given by the Shia scholars,there is no contradiction.their details can be reconciled.we all know in the Quran that iblees refused to prostrate out of arrogance.as to why he saw himself better than Adam (as) to feel arrogant,is a question involving details and what can be found in hadiths.however the details of the answers given are on the premise that iblees hated the Ahlul-Bayt (as) because Adam (as) was created from Nur (light) of Prophet Muhammad (sa) and Imam Ali (as).it is a known hadith (even in sunni books) that the Prophet (s) said his nur and that of Imam Ali (as) was the first created,and from it the rest of humanity was made by Allah (swt).

I'm not supposed to be drifting into all these redherrings,but I'm doing so as service to Allah (swt),that my effort might help you.otherwise all these are not related to the topic on verse 5:55;at least not directly related.you're bringing all these redherrings (mostly propaganda, lies,arguments on perception of what is right to you) to tell us that even though you have seen that the Shia are right on verse 5:55,the Shia are on the "wrong path".that is the idea I get behind your effort to desperately bring all these off topics into this conversation,like the propaganda video on the Shia scholars.but anyway as I said,if being generous with my time would be of benefit to you,I'd do my best for your sake.

It is not speculation. Some people typically Masakin have needs but they would not ask. That is a category from the eight for whom zakat is intended. Begging is discouraged in Islam. If people are poor and they are discouraged from begging, who do we give zakat to? We still identify them and give discreetly

We know that giving to people "with the right hand such that the left hand does not know' is a beloved procedure such that anyone who does that will be among the people in the shade on the day that there will be no shade

BTW My comment here has nothing to do with the action of Ali (RAH). I am not in a position to judge him and would not dare because the Prophet (SAW) forbids judging his companions.
My comment has to with the preferred etiquette of giving. In that regard Khamis is right about it being preferred to give at home

So what is wrong if a desperate poor man breaks silence and beg for alms? Do sunnis have a radar to spot poor people? Begging is discouraged when taken up as an occupation,like we see able-bodied northerns who hang "deaf and dumb" signs on their neck,do.

People move during salat for matters typically related to the salat eg making room for somebody who voids his salah and needs to go and renew it or when two people are praying side by side and a third joins, the imam can move forward to stand alone so that the te remaining two stand side by side as mamun

Yes one can move for non salat-related matters if it is urgent and likely to disrupt the concentration on the salat if not attended to on time eg carrying a baby that is about to endanger himself. Giving alm does not fall in that category

Whether the salat is optional or compulsory, the rule of khushoo is crucial. One has to make the prostration of forgiveness if a mistake is made in an optional prayer. The Prophet (SAW) always concentrated absolutely in optional prayers.

So the bottomline is when it is urgent or expedient movement be made during salat,it can be done without nullifying the prayer.

Thanks for the clarification.you can see that all these tasteless arguments are brought up to clutch at straws.nothing more.

Please can you tell us anyone that gives zakat in ruku in emulation of "this practice blessed by Allah"

I cannot tell you because I'm not all knowing and I've not come across anyone.but undoubtedly if a similar scenario arises,it can be emulated.

However if you're seeking just to emulate the act,like to ask a poor man to approach when you're praying so you can give him zakat like Imam Ali (as) did,then you're ridiculous.there's sincerity behind Imam Ali's (as) action,and that is the sunnah we should emulate in this act.he feels with the poor even though he wasn't rich!

Sunnis (whether you call them Whhabis/Salafis does not matter - you hated them (and still do) in equal fashion even before Shayk Mohammad ibn AbdulWahhab - may Allah have mercy on him - was born) have very high regard for Ali (RAH). We know him as a very knowledgeable and intelligent faqih. There is an hadith of Umar (RAH) wanting to flog a man for the second time for accusing people of Zina. Sunnis have no problem in reporting that Ali (RAH) correctly and insightfully pointed out to Umar (RAH) that if the man was flogged again, then his testimony would have to be accepted. I cannot imagine any Shia book reporting this if the reverse had happened

Not worthy of a reply.the truth isn't charity.if a man is knowledgeable,we say so and look up to him.but we don't shower accolades on someone simply because his name is umar;like claiming or rather lying that the Prophet (sa) said "had there being a prophet after him,it would have been umar",and narrating how shaitan is scared of umar but not of the Prophet (sa)! This is ghuluw!

Denying the divine attributes Shias attribute to Ali (RAH) (similar to the way Christians attribute divine attributes to Jesus) does not mean Sunnis negate the good attributes of Ali (RAH). We just treat Ali (RAH) like a human being (although an exalted one) which he was.

You're not only annoying but dishonestly so.

What are these "divine attributes" you speak of? The greatest divine attribute anyone can attribute to a human being is the power to give life or create.that is the attribute Allah Himself gifted to Jesus (as) as stated in the Quran.your dishonesty comes in when you added in brackets: "similar to the way christians attribute divine attributes to Jesus".how is that? Does any Shia believe Imam Ali (as) is a "god" like Christians believe Jesus (as) is? No! So what are you saying? You're lying!

We are just following injuction in the Qur'an (5 : 2) to support ourselves in good and NOT to support ourselves in sin and transgression


Shias abide by their falsehood. See the video. Since Sunnis don't support lies told by Shias, they are accused of hating and denying attributes.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gsv7YNjhNB8

Not worthy of a reply.

I don't find what the ayatollah is saying suprising at all.there is "our Lady of Fatima" and everyone knows "Fatima" is the name of the Prophet's daughter (as).how did it get into christianity? Ofcourse from portugal.in trinadad and tobago,they mark ashura and have rendered the names of Imam Hassan (as) into "Hasa" and Imam Hussein (as) into "Husa",and they have given ashura a different meaning.this happened after Shia indians migrated to the carribbean and their descendants lost touch with their religion.as for san jose,I'm not sure of the history or connection.but it is disgusting how wahhabis who seek to demote and dishonor the Ahlul-Bayt (as) try to be smart and deny everything!

Hitler and Jews? What was that? What did Hitler do wrong?
Has the leader of your model state - Ahmadinajad - not always maintained that Hitler did not kill jews?
Or has the story changed again?

Another lie.holocaust denial or saying not 6 million jews were killed,but far less,doesn't mean ahmadinejad said hitler didn't kill jews.and ahmadinejad is a politician.he can say what he likes and I don't care.I was only giving an example with hitler hating jews, before you tried to exploit it by bringing in ahmadinejad.you're desperate and looking for any argument,even those not related to verse 5:55 to argue and attack the Shia.my message to you: if your greatest scholars of hatred are too small intellectually,then you're nothing!you're wasting my time.I offered to help you out of goodwill.but you being dishonest and trying to exploit statements and take them out of context doesn't portray someone as after truth.you know nothing about Shia Islam,if you still are repeating lies about divine attributes, and others.

BTW - Shias massacred and burnt sunnis in Homs while the Syrian army did nothing. Did you think it would take an war-situation army (that has been using aircraft to fight) hours to get to a place that was 35km from their base? Even the smoke from the burning would have been visible

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-21291714
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-21095192

One more lie!

Please don't be embarassed,but did you read the bbc links you posted?

Al-nusra front (linked to alqaeda) is a Sunni salafist/wahhabi terrorist group fighting with the rebels against the government of assad.according to the reports,they killed those sunnis, for aiding the government.I can show you a video ,where these terrorists after burning a Shia Hussainiyyah,threatened to kill Sunnis who would give food supplies to neighboring shia villages that are pro-assad.

Bottomline,I did not read the statement that "shia massacre and burnt sunnis in homs".where did that come from?can you quote the statement from the bbc? Pro-rebel activists/propagandists accuse the alawite shabbiha (militants) of carrying out the killings.but again where did you read the Shia did it or are even accused of doing it?

Your desperation is ridiculous.bring more redherrings,off-topics,propaganda,lies,jokes,and hatred.

Zhul-fiqar:
Imagine verse 5:55 was revealed in honor of Umar (Allah forbid) to be our "master" after Allah and the Prophet (s)? Sunnis would have hanged that verse around their necks till Qiyamah!

are you being predictive here or suspecious of the Sunnis. May most High God in his mercy forgive us and guide us aright. right is evident from wrong and whoever does either of the two does it for his own soul.

What the Quran taught is to be Muslims and not sunni ar shia, and Muslims aught to come together and reason. Sincerity in reasonong together is very important and whoever is deceitful does such to his own soul.

Going by deeds, actions and believes, I am not Shia and i also cannot claim to be sunni. I am and i pray to remain a Muslim Sincere to the Message of the Quran and teaching of the Prophet. May God make it easy, grant us his mercy and understanding. Most importantly, make it easy for us to put foward good deeds that will be beneficial for us on the Great day.

can you please explain this verse - Qur’an 18:83-86—And they ask you about Dhul-Qarnain. Say: “I shall recite to you something of his story.” Verily, We established him in the earth, and We gave him the means of everything. So he followed a way. Until, when he reached the setting place of the sun, he found it setting in a spring of black muddy (or hot) water. And he found near it a people?.

While we know we have Hadiths that cannot be trusted and i believe that Shaitan in his schemes would have mixed these hadiths up such that we cannot separate all authentic hadiths from the false ones. It leaves us with 2 things: Our judgement, without bias, with sincererity and truthfulness- We are created with the power to diffrentiate wright from Wrong - its a great tool. also, we have the Quran- The message given to Muhammed (saw). even the Quran has to be interpreted with sincererity and it matters what way you understand it. (sometimes, Quranic explanation is idiomatic and such cases should always be obvious)

What do we know about solat but that it is a ritual right, a responsibility. Pray as if you are in front of your Lord, as if he sees you. We know of a sohaba, the story that when he was praying, a substance that pierced into his feet was removed and he did not know it- Praying with full concentration. This is expected of a muslim when you are in front of your Lord.

The message of the Quran was evident in the live of the Prophet. The prophet lived the Quran lets forget about who brought this Hadith, it is fundamental in a muslims belief to know this except to say that the Prophet would have lied or is an Hypocrate (may God forgive us and Bless the Prophet) so i have a Question here - Should a muslim think that the prophet Muhammed will advise someone to perform another act while praying - to shift attention from prayer in the course of praying?

consider that any action in the Quran that is not conditioned is permisible for muslims to do. but the Quran will not contradict itself nor will the prophet contradict the Quran - so the easiest way to validate an Hadith is to check the Quran (as shaitan is at liberty to mess up with the Hadith as its just another history book like the Bible- God in his mercy to guide man has promised to protect the Quran from such)

With all being read, Qur’an 18:83-86 above shows us that idomatic expressions are used in the Quran so i ask a Question, what should be a muslims opinion (sincere in thought and judgement) about Quran 5:55?
Could most High God have given us a reason to give alma while praying as this action is not conditioned based on some claims, or could it have been a verse that teaches moral expectations of a muslims and what to look for in people to be appointed as leaders?

Zhul-fiqar:
@tbaba

What does the below verse means to you,and what does the highlighted part means?

Quran 5:55-the Verse of Wilayah

"Only Allah is your Wali and His Messenger and those who believe and keep up prayers and pay the poor-rate while they bow".

Note: "Wali" is the singular of "awliyaa".it can mean friend,protector,guardian and MASTER.

i sincerely think it says"...pay the poor rate while they humble themselves(with humility)" it is similar to the verse that teaches about giving with the right hand while the left hand does not know of it.

May most high God in his mercy guide us aright, grant us understanding of his message and grant us his mercy

ghazzal:

are you being predictive here or suspecious of the Sunnis. May most High God in his mercy forgive us and guide us aright. right is evident from wrong and whoever does either of the two does it for his own soul.

What the Quran taught is to be Muslims and not sunni ar shia, and Muslims aught to come together and reason. Sincerity in reasonong together is very important and whoever is deceitful does such to his own soul.

Going by deeds, actions and believes, I am not Shia and i also cannot claim to be sunni. I am and i pray to remain a Muslim Sincere to the Message of the Quran and teaching of the Prophet. May God make it easy, grant us his mercy and understanding. Most importantly, make it easy for us to put foward good deeds that will be beneficial for us on the Great day.

can you please explain this verse - Qur’an 18:83-86—And they ask you about Dhul-Qarnain. Say: “I shall recite to you something of his story.” Verily, We established him in the earth, and We gave him the means of everything. So he followed a way. Until, when he reached the setting place of the sun, he found it setting in a spring of black muddy (or hot) water. And he found near it a people?.

While we know we have Hadiths that cannot be trusted and i believe that Shaitan in his schemes would have mixed these hadiths up such that we cannot separate all authentic hadiths from the false ones. It leaves us with 2 things: Our judgement, without bias, with sincererity and truthfulness- We are created with the power to diffrentiate wright from Wrong - its a great tool. also, we have the Quran- The message given to Muhammed (saw). even the Quran has to be interpreted with sincererity and it matters what way you understand it. (sometimes, Quranic explanation is idiomatic and such cases should always be obvious)

What do we know about solat but that it is a ritual right, a responsibility. Pray as if you are in front of your Lord, as if he sees you. We know of a sohaba, the story that when he was praying, a substance that pierced into his feet was removed and he did not know it- Praying with full concentration. This is expected of a muslim when you are in front of your Lord.

The message of the Quran was evident in the live of the Prophet. The prophet lived the Quran lets forget about who brought this Hadith, it is fundamental in a muslims belief to know this except to say that the Prophet would have lied or is an Hypocrate (may God forgive us and Bless the Prophet) so i have a Question here - Should a muslim think that the prophet Muhammed will advise someone to perform another act while praying - to shift attention from prayer in the course of praying?

consider that any action in the Quran that is not conditioned is permisible for muslims to do. but the Quran will not contradict itself nor will the prophet contradict the Quran - so the easiest way to validate an Hadith is to check the Quran (as shaitan is at liberty to mess up with the Hadith as its just another history book like the Bible- God in his mercy to guide man has promised to protect the Quran from such)

With all being read, Qur’an 18:83-86 above shows us that idomatic expressions are used in the Quran so i ask a Question, what should be a muslims opinion (sincere in thought and judgement) about Quran 5:55?
Could most High God have given us a reason to give alma while praying as this action is not conditioned based on some claims, or could it have been a verse that teaches moral expectations of a muslims and what to look for in people to be appointed as leaders?



i sincerely think it says"...pay the poor rate while they humble themselves(with humility)" it is similar to the verse that teaches about giving with the right hand while the left hand does not know of it.

May most high God in his mercy guide us aright, grant us understanding of his message and grant us his mercy

"Have you not consider those who turned the blessing of Allah into disbelief and led their people into the abode of loss" (Holy Quran 14:28)

islam isn't about what anyone thinks,but about what it actually is and what's based on evidence and reason.whether you substitute (play with words) "prostration" with "humility",the key word is still "while".the conjunction is not "and".if it would have been "pay the poor charity and they 'humble' themselves",then you'd have a point.not even twisting the verse by changing the word "prostrate" with "humble themselves" to hide the direct action of how we "humble ourselves" in prayer can help your case.

You can assist yourself and review this:

https://www.nairaland.com/1001212/why-it-bidah-forbidden-sinful

MY Brother,

Zhul-fiqar:

"Have you not consider those who turned the blessing of Allah into disbelief and led their people into the abode of loss" (Holy Quran 14:28)

are you saying that it is Allahs favour on us to give alms while we pray? I wont think so. may God guide us.

Zhul-fiqar:


islam isn't about what anyone thinks,but about what it actually is and what's based on evidence and reason.

yes. reason. i believe reason is a product of thought, it must be concieved first. What are the available evidence and what does the prophet teach/ Quran - no evidence should supercede these i believe you know that.

Zhul-fiqar:

whether you substitute (play with words) "prostration" with "humility",the key word is still "while".the conjunction is not "and".if it would have been "pay the poor charity and they 'humble' themselves",then you'd have a point.not even twisting the verse by changing the word "prostrate" with "humble themselves" to hide the direct action of how we "humble ourselves" in prayer can help your case.

clarify please, is the word "postrate" or "bow" in the Hadith, did Ali(ra) have his head and nose on the floor or was he in ruku position? or how do we define postrate/bow- bow is actually a better word for ra`kiu`n? this was described earlier in this tread- and tell me how he fits into your explanation of those "who give alms while they bow"
i believe the use of "while" is a better option than "and". Humility is best when you give and not after. (e.g you give alms while smiling and not give alms and/then smile) who needs the smile after?(God forgive me
may God in his mercy guide us to the right path-amin

ghazzal: MY Brother,

are you saying that it is Allahs favour on us to give alms while we pray? I wont think so. may God guide us.

yes. reason. i believe reason is a product of thought, it must be concieved first. What are the available evidence and what does the prophet teach/ Quran - no evidence should supercede these i believe you know that.


clarify please, is the word "postrate" or "bow" in the Hadith, did Ali(ra) have his head and nose on the floor or was he in ruku position? or how do we define postrate/bow- bow is actually a better word for ra`kiu`n? this was described earlier in this tread- and tell me how he fits into your explanation of those "who give alms while they bow"
i believe the use of "while" is a better option than "and". Humility is best when you give and not after. (e.g you give alms while smiling and not give alms and/then smile) who needs the smile after?(God forgive me
may God in his mercy guide us to the right path-amin

It was in Rukoo (bowing down on the knees).but regardless,replacing "bow" with "humble themselves",instead of the direct action, which is "bowing", to show humility,doesn't make any difference as I earlier explained.

Using "while" or "and" is not a matter of choice of word,especially when it is arabic words involved,and the usage of the particular word in the verse that is only correctly reflected with "while" instead of "and",sends the message of an action carried out.the verse says "wa hoom rakioon" (while they're bowing down),not "wa hoom yarkaoon" (and they bow) to generalize that muslims bow in humility or something they do generally.in english such play with words can go unnoticed,but not in arabic where every word and its usage carries an action or message.

Zhul-fiqar:
Certainly your Master is ...

"Certainly your Master is Allah and His Messenger and those who believe who eshtablish prayer and give charity while they bow.And who ever takes Allah and His Messenger and those who believe as a guardian, so surely the party of Allah will be victorious".(Quran 5:55-56)

It is unanimous that the verse descended about Imam Ali (AS) when he gave
away in charity his ring while he was in a state of kneeling in his prayer....

...When he reached this verse he recorded this in his Tafsir al-Kabir on the
authority of Abu Dhar al-Ghifari, who said:

[i]"Both of my ears may turn deaf and both of my eyes may become blind if I speak a lie. I heard the Messenger of Allah, Allah's blessings and peace be upon him and his posterity, saying, "Ali is the guide of the righteous and the slayer of the infidels. he who has helped him is victorious and he who has abandoned him is forsaken." One day I said my prayers in the company of the Prophet. A beggar came to the mosque and begged for alms, but nobody gave him anything. Ali was in a state of kneeling in the prayer. He pointed out his ring to the beggar, who appraoched him and removed the ring from his finger.

This is from your first post. is kneeling down a state of "bowing down"? i am convinced something is wrong with that interpretation it is just very clear.

also

Zhul-fiqar:

..."If you inquire how this plural word is applicable to Ali, may Allah be gracious to him, who is an individual, I shall say that though this verse is about Ali, an individual, the plural form is used in order to presuade others to act similarly and to give alms as readily as Ali did. There is also an implied instruction that the faithful should keep themselves always on the look out for occasions of acts of sympathy, benevolence and charity to the poor and the needy, and readily do the needful without waiting till the completion of even so important a duty as saying a prayer".

please answer me, does the avove mean i can give alms while praying? remember that the ways of your Lorrd will never change!

May God in his mercy guide us with the light of the Quran

ghazzal:

This is from your first post. is kneeling down a state of "bowing down"? i am convinced something is wrong with that interpretation it is just very clear.

It was a mistake if I used the word "prostrate".I must have mistakenly translated Rukoo (bowing on your knees/kneeling) as "prostration"/sujood (forehead on the ground).the verse has to do with rukoo and not sujood.

also

please answer me, does the avove mean i can give alms while praying? remember that the ways of your Lorrd will never change!

May God in his mercy guide us with the light of the Quran

The verse does not order you to give alms while you pray as a direct order.the verse orders you on the question of imamate/leadership/wilayah/mastership and who you must obey as an order from above.however,in the event the scenario upon which the verse was revealed repeats itself with you,then you can out of a sincere action offer alms while praying.

Zhul-fiqar:

It was a mistake if I used the word "prostrate".I must have mistakenly translated Rukoo (bowing on your knees/kneeling) as "prostration"/sujood (forehead on the ground).the verse has to do with rukoo and not sujood..

the verse is rukoo but the hadith says Ali(ra) was kneeling down. that is a major difference.

Zhul-fiqar:

The verse does not order you to give alms while you pray as a direct order.the verse orders you on the question of imamate/leadership/wilayah/mastership and who you must obey as an order from above.however,in the event the scenario upon which the verse was revealed repeats itself with you,then you can out of a sincere action offer alms while praying.

can i also becon to the begger at the door so i can give alms since no one has given him anything? If you are praying, how will you even know a begger was not given anything, i dont thing you will be monitoring a begger while praying o!

MAy GOD GUIDE US ARIGHT My BROTHER

ghazzal:
the verse is rukoo but the hadith says Ali(ra) was kneeling down. that is a major difference.

Rukoo=kneeling down

can i also becon to the begger at the door so i can give alms since no one has given him anything? If you are praying, how will you even know a begger was not given anything, i dont thing you will be monitoring a begger while praying o!

MAy GOD GUIDE US ARIGHT My BROTHER

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wdVWzjeiqAw

if peoples defination hv to define ur faith nd u refuse to thjnk objectively, whose problem?

i will tell a 3 year old tat u guys said; rukoo= bow = kneel down. prefarably that u say bow nd kneel down re same...... it is really confusing and illogical

ghazzal: if peoples defination hv to define ur faith nd u refuse to thjnk objectively, whose problem?

i will tell a 3 year old tat u guys said; rukoo= bow = kneel down. prefarably that u say bow nd kneel down re same...... it is really confusing and illogical

brother,there is nothing confusing.he has said as it is,that rukoo is "kneeling down",and that he made a mistake by typing "prostration" (bowing down).

the verse has to do with rukoo,not sujud.what's confusing and illogical?

LagosShia:

brother,there is nothing confusing.he has said as it is,that rukoo is "kneeling down",and that he made a mistake by typing "prostration" (bowing down).

the verse has to do with rukoo,not sujud.what's confusing and illogical?

in my post, i did not mention postration. It is between BOW and KNEEL DOWN

But when i rukoo during prayer, i dont kneel down? at least that i know! during rukoo, every Muslim Bow (not kneel down). This makes it confusing.

@ lagosshia, Please tell me in a word the meaning of rukoo - is it TO BOW or TO KNEEL DOWN. then relate it to the Hadit above.

ghazzal:
in my post, i did not mention postration. It is between BOW and KNEEL DOWN

"Postration" is out of it when translating "rukoo".prostration is sujood.Regardless of the english translation of "rukoo",I believe we muslims know what is rukoo and how to do it.firstly,I hope you know verse 5:55 is related to rukoo and not sujud.let us know we are not talking here about the verse itself,but translation from arabic to english of "rukoo".let's get that clear.

But when i rukoo during prayer, i dont kneel down? at least that i know! during rukoo, every Muslim Bow (not kneel down). This makes it confusing.

@ lagosshia, Please tell me in a word the meaning of rukoo - is it TO BOW or TO KNEEL DOWN. then relate it to the Hadit above.

To be honest,I don't know any english word that do justice in translation of the arabic word "rukoo".its related to a position you bow and place your hands on the knees.some translate it as "bow",and others "kneel".but the question is how to bow or kneel when doing rukoo.as muslim we know.but the english translations don't do justice to the arabic word.even "genuflection" isn't good enough."Genuflection" refers to going down on one knee.may be the word "rukoo" should be adopted into the english language,since it has to do with a unique way muslims carry out the act of "rukoo".we know very well that translation into english of many arabic words is not done in a way to convey the exact meaning.

Everyone will make paradise except those who refuse! may most high GOD in his mercy guide and guard us aright.

ghazzal: Everyone will make paradise except those who refuse! may most high GOD in his mercy guide and guard us aright.

Ameen!

a nice depiction below based on verse 5:55.

this should help "ghazzal".