tbaba1234: 1. "I am the city of knowledge and Ali is its gate".

weak hadith by most scholars, highest rating is hasan. Even at that, the meaning is sound. Ali was among the knowledgeable Shahaba. If Ali was at the gates, Abubakr and Umar were probably in the city. Also,old cities had four gates. Nothing here raises Ali's praise to the insane level that you guys have raised it to.

"I am the city of knowledge and Ali is its gate".the Prophet (sa) never said this city has many gates.that is your speculation/imagination.he said "Ali is its gate",meaning there is "one gate".

tbaba1234: ^ I can provide a far longer list that consider it daeef (weak)... Like i said, even if you take the middle ground and say it is hasan, the meaning is sound, you guys need to put the brakes on because you overthink everything that has to do with Ali. This is the kind of extremism that unfortunately has infected you guys.

As usual, You have made no point.

so we have prominent Sunni scholars of hadith like al-Tabari and Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani (who are highly regarded even by salafists among sunnis) declaring the hadith as "sahih" and "hasan",and you come here to tell us that you have a "longer list" of those who deem it "weak" (like ofcourse Ibn Taymiyyah does),then isn't this evidence that you Sunnis are confused?

how can you decide which view to hold on to? and you tell me this is a "saved/guided" sect?

You are still missing the point...

I have waited enough time on this thread. You and i know that we can never agree on these things, I would just keep exposing the weakness of your beliefs and you would never agree. So it is a waste of time.

tbaba1234: Yahya Bin Ma'een
Source: al Jarh wat-Ta'deel 6/99
Su'alat ibn Junayd #185
Tareekh Baghdad 11/205
Ahmad Bin Hanbal
Source: Tareekh Baghdad 11/49
Ibn Hibban
Source: al Majruheen 2/136
Ibn 'Adi
Source: al Kamel fi ad-Du'afa 1/311 & 316
Al-Darqutni
Source: Ta'liqat 'ala al Majruheen 179
Ibn Al-Qaisarani
Source: Dhakhirat al Huffadh 5/2578 - Tadhkirat al Huffadh #136
Ibn Al-Arabi al Maliki
Source: Ahkam al Quran 3/86
Ibn A'sakir
Source: Tareekh Dimashq 45\321
Ibn Al-Jawzi
Source: Al Mawdu'at 2/112-116
Al-Nawawi
Source: Tahdheeb al Asma' wal-Lughat 1/348
Al-Mizzi
Source: Tahdheeb al Kamal 11/462
Al Dhahabi
Source: Mizan al-I'tidal 1/415 - 1/110

Shaykh Albani judged the Hadith in “Jamiu sagir” (#3247) as “fabricated.”

Shaykh Dhahabi judged the Hadith as “fabricated” in “Talkhees al-maudua” (1/115/#256).


There are more:

dhahabi,Albani,Ibn Jawzi and others are similar to who? Ibn Taymiyyah!!!

perhaps you should state the dates these salafists scholars were born and died,compared to the ones who have graded the hadith as "sahih" and "hasan".

abeg,go rest.you're using confusion and the contradiction between Sunni scholars (prominent one VS salafist ones) to convince us you're on the "right path".shiooooooooooooooorrrrrrrrrrrrr!!!

tbaba1234: You are still missing the point...

I have waited enough time on this thread. You and i know that we can never agree on these things, I would just keep exposing the weakest of your beliefs and you would never agree. So it is a waste of time.

my dear,i beg you in the name of Allah (swt) to remain in this thread.you fail to see the point too.it is not about I convincing you or you convincing me.

it is about others seeing what we are discussing and they make their judgement.

this thread is for "deols".you are here to convince her,not me.i am here to convince her why she should become a Shia.im not after convincing you.just do us help with your presence and give us your own side of the story.

you can make "weak" anything you like.and I will spend my time to make it strong per Sunni standards.

please,in the name of Allah I beg you not to abandon this thread.please stay.

^ Anyone who wants more detailed information about the shia can send me a mail (tbaba1234@yahoo.com)

This discussion is a waste of time, it can last for months with no resolution.

LagosShia:



all we are saying is this:

"Allah have kept away from you the impurity [of sin], O people of the [Prophet Muhammad's] household (Ahlul-Bayt), and have purify you with [extensive] purification".(33:33).

and this:


"the status of Ali to me (Prophet Muhammad) is the status of Haroon to Musa;only that there will be no prophet after me".(find out in Sura Taha,what was Haroon (as) to Musa (as),and apply it to Imam Ali (as) and the Prophet (sa) )

and this:

"I am the city of knowledge and Ali is its gate".

and this:

"I am leaving behind the Two Weighty Things (Thaqalain).they are the Quran and my progeny,my Ahlul-bayt.if you hold on to both of them,you will never go astray".


the family of Ibrahim (as) is not superior to the family of Muhammad (sa),who is the chief of the prophets.those Imams from the purified and select progeny of Muhammad (sa) were given knowledge by Allah (swt) and they are inheritors of the knowledge of the Prophet Muhammad (sa).they are chosen to lead and guide,but they are not prophets.

whatever pole you want to use,try and shorten it so you can understand (not what I or the Shia say) but what you read in the Quran and the hadiths of the Prophet (sa) you accept.reading the Quran from Fatiha to Nass without understanding what you're reading is of no use.you read what you don't understand,or you understand what you don't implement,would render you "Summon,Bukmon,Umyon,Fa Hoom La Yubsiroon",as it is put in the holy Quran.

Surely your explanation does not explain these;

"The Imams possess all the knowledge granted to angels, prophets and messengers" (Al-Kulaini, Al-kaafi, p.255.)


"The Imams have knowledge of whatever occurred in the past and whatever will happen in the future, and nothing is concealed from them" (Ibid, p. 260.)

Including the hour?

tbaba1234:
3.
Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 5, Book 59, Number 700:

Allah’s Apostle set out for (the Battle of) Tabuk, appointing Ali as his deputy (in Medina). Ali said, “Do you want to leave me with the children and women?” The Prophet said, “Will you not be pleased that you will be to me like Haroon to Musa? But there will be no prophet after me.”

Subhanallah,so Hadith al-Manzilah is even in your mighty "Sahih Bukhari".Alhamdulillah.

so I guess here there is no question the hadith is "weak".or does Ibn Taymiyyah have his view that weakens this too?

This Hadith is not evidence for the Caliphate of Ali after the death of the Prophet because the comparison made was between Ali and Prophet Haroon. It is well-known that Prophet Haroon died before Prophet Musa, and thus was never his successor after him. The successor of Prophet Musa was Prophet Yusha (Joshua) and therefore if the Prophet had wanted to imply successorship, then surely he would have likened Ali to Prophet Yusha. Infact this is evidence against the shia.

if I am to go by your logic,then I can say that in fact the mistake,error or fault is from the Prophet (sa) for not making the similitude between Imam Ali (as) and Prophet Yusha (as).you know why? because Imam Ali (as) unlike Prophet Haroon (as) did not die before his own "musa".so didn't the Prophet (sa) and Allah (swt) know Imam Ali (as) would be unlike Haroon (as) who died before Musa (as),and Imam Ali (as) would live after the death of Prophet Muhammad (sa)? astaghfirullah!!!

you see,my dear friend,the truth is like pregnancy you cannot hide it.

the fact that Haroon (as) died before Musa (as),does not mean Haroon (as) was not the chosen successor of Prophet Musa (as).had Haroon (as) lived after Prophet Musa (as),who do you think would be given preference by Prophet Musa (as) and by Allah (swt),Prophet Haroon or Prophet Yusha (as)? ofcourse Haroon (as)!!!

it is not like the Prophet Muhammad (sa) didn't know Imam Ali (as) would live after him.he made the comparison between Imam Ali (as) to Haroon (as) and not to Yusha (as) because Haroon (as) was the first choice by Musa (as).if Prophet Muhammad (sa) would have made the comparison with Imam Ali (as) to Yusha (as),salafists like yourself would still come out to point out that the first choice of successor was Haroon and not Yusha (as).so then,you will claim that therefore Imam Ali (as) was not the first choice of successor of the Prophet Muhammad (sa)!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

let us see what the holy Quran has to say about the relationship between Haroon (as) and Musa (as),which should be applied between Imam Ali (as) and the Prophet Muhammad (sa) as per hadith al-manzilah:

Holy Quran 20:25-32
(Moses) said:: "O my Lord! expand me my breast; Ease my task for me; And remove the impediment from my speech; So they may understand what I say; And give me a vizier (Minister) from my family; Aaron my brother; Add to my strength through him; And make him share my task..."

Holy Quran 7:142
"And We made an appointment with Moses for thirty nights and perfected them by [the addition of] ten; so the term of his Lord was completed as forty nights. And Moses said to his brother Aaron, "Take my place among my people, do right [by them], and do not follow the way of the corrupters."

whenever Prophet Muhammad would liken anyone to a Prophet, he would make sure to clarify that this is only a comparison and does not mean there will be any Prophet after him.

He also said of Umar:

Sayyiduna Uqbah bin Amir (may Allah be pleased with him) narrates that the Holy Prophet, may Allah send greetings and salutations on him, said:

If there were to be a prophet after me, indeed he would be Umar, son of Khattab. [Sunan Tirmidhi, Hadith 3686]

However you do not see anyone praising Umar the way you people over praise Ali. You do not see anyone arguing that Umar should be the successor.

you mean the Prophet (sa) would issue "empty words" to make Umar "happy"? astaghfirullah!!! "he speaks not of his desires but revelations revealed".

the hadith that Umar would have been a prophet after the Prophet (sa) had there been,is an empty praise of fabrication.obviously whoever fabricated this hadith wanted people to regard Umar in the level of a prophet.i wont even dwell on this more than it deserves.people can further research on this ridiculous hadith.we are talking here about Umar,who on several occasions questioned the authority of the Prophet (sa),dragged his clothes,insulted him and according to some Sunni narrations,he is one of the "twelve hypocrites" who wanted to assinate the Prophet (sa),and the Prophet (sa) revealed their names to Hudhaifa,

seguun:
Surely your explanation does not explain these;

"The Imams possess all the knowledge granted to angels, prophets and messengers" (Al-Kulaini, Al-kaafi, p.255.)


"The Imams have knowledge of whatever occurred in the past and whatever will happen in the future, and nothing is concealed from them" (Ibid, p. 260.)

Including the hour?

I am not in the position to answer that question,and I can only reply with "Allah knows best".but as per the holy Quran,not even the Prophet Muhammad (sa),whose superiority to the 12 holy Imams of his household,we do acknowledge and carry on our heads,was informed by Allah (swt).

tbaba is just trying to detract and drift from the point by spotting what he wants you to consider as a magic trick against "Shia beliefs".We are simply here to prove the belief of the imamate right,which the shia hold and sunnis reject.we have thus established that all muslims must follow the Thaqalain because they were chosen by Allah and the Prophet (sa) to lead and guide muslims.they were the most knowledgeable in their times.whatever privilege the Shia record these Imams possessed,it is by the will,power and permission of Allah (swt).its that simple.

tbaba1234: ^ Anyone who wants more detailed information about the shia can send me a mail (tbaba1234@yahoo.com)

This discussion is a waste of time, it can last for months with no resolution.

haba,my friend.its not like that.im a shia and I am present here.why do you want to go behind my back to spread rumors about us? that's not fair.

lets do it here!

shialagos2:

haba,my friend.its not like that.im a shia and I am present here.why do you want to go behind my back to spread rumors about us? that's not fair.

lets do it here!

I have been nice enough. Maybe Betathings will take over when he see this thread.

Don't worry, whatever information, i give out will be reliable.

shialagos2:

I am not in the position to answer that question,and I can only reply with "Allah knows best".but as per the holy Quran,not even the Prophet Muhammad (sa),whose superiority to the 12 holy Imams of his household,we do acknowledge and carry on our heads,was informed by Allah (swt).

tbaba is just trying to detract and drift from the point by spotting what he wants you to consider as a magic trick against "Shia beliefs".We are simply here to prove the belief of the imamate right,which the shia hold and sunnis reject.we have thus established that all muslims must follow the Thaqalain because they were chosen by Allah and the Prophet (sa) to lead and guide muslims.they were the most knowledgeable in their times.whatever privilege the Shia record these Imams possessed,it is by the will,power and permission of Allah (swt).its that simple.

I'm actually surprise with the bolded because I believe you know this is explicit in the quran.
"Lo! Allah! With Him is knowledge of the Hour...Chapter (31) sūrat luq'mān.

Also all the abrahamic religions (judaism,christianity and islam) agree on this.

seguun:
I'm actually surprise with the bolded because I believe you know this is explicit in the quran.
"Lo! Allah! With Him is knowledge of the Hour...Chapter (31) sūrat luq'mān.

Also all the abrahamic religions(judaism,christianity and islam) agree on this.

and you didn't see this statement I made? :

"but as per the holy Quran,not even the Prophet Muhammad (sa),whose superiority to the 12 holy Imams of his household,we do acknowledge and carry on our heads,was informed by Allah (swt)".

do not learn "cherry-picking".its not good.

tbaba1234:

I have been nice enough. Maybe Betathings will take over when he see this thread.

Don't worry, whatever information, i give out will be reliable.

lol...I dey beg you in the name of Allah.

you're here to convince "deols".

id rather have you than BetaThing,he goes in circles and hes boring.

I need his oga.

shialagos2:

lol...I dey beg you in the name of Allah.

you're here to convince "deols".

id rather have you than BetaThing,he goes in circles and hes boring.

I need his oga.

Sadly I am here to bore you to whatever

It us strange that you classify virtually all the sunni ahadeeth that your position as sahih and label those that don't as fabricated

tbaba1234: 4. I have left with you something, which if you strictly adhere to, you shall never go astray–The Book of Allah and my progeny.”

This version has been narrated in Sunan Tirmidhi and is classed as Dhaeef (weak). Even though Imam Tirmidhi included it in his book, he himself did not consider it Sahih (authentic) and referred to it as Ghareeb (i.e. strange in its content and not widely recognized).

This version of the Hadith does not have any valid chains of transmission. Some of the narrators of this version of Hadith al-Thaqalayn were openly known to be Shia, such as Ali ibn al-Munzir al-Koofiy, Mohammed ibn Fudhayl, and Atiyyah Al Awfi.

A narrator is rejected if the content of the narrative is peculiar to a particular deviant school of thought if it is narrated by a deviant who ascribes to such a school of thought (Al-Kifaayah fi `ilm al-Riwaayah).

QED.

facts about hadith al-thaqalain (hadith of the two weighty things):

-Sheikh Albani (a salafist scholar of hadith) regarded it as "sahih"!!!

-both Muslim (in his Sahih) and al­'Imam al-Hafiz Abu `Abd Allah al­Hakim al­Naysaburi in his Mustadrak narrated "sahih" versions.

-it takes 10 companions to narrate a hadith for it to be regarded as "mutawatir",which puts the hadith beyond any doubt of scrutiny.more than 30 companions have narrated hadith al-thaqalain.

this is what al-hakim al-naysaburi has to say on two of four "sahih" narrations of the hadith:

- (Al­Hakim says: ) Narrated to us Abu al­Husayn Muhammad ibn Ahmad ibn Tamim al­Hanzali in Baghdad, from Abu Qallabah `Abd al­Malik ibn Muhammad al­Raqqashi, from Yahya ibn Hammad; also narrated to me Abu Bakr Muhammad ibn Balawayh and Abu Bakr Ahmad ibn Ja`far al­Bazzaz, both of them from `Abd Allah ibn Ahmad ibn Hanbal, from his father, from Yahya ibn Hammad; and also narrated to us Abu Nasr Ahmad ibn Suhayl, the faqih of Bukhara, from Salih ibn Muhammad, the hafiz of Baghdad, from Khalaf ibn Salim al­Makhrami, from Yahya ibn Hammad; and Yahya ibn Hammad narrated from Abu `Uwwanah from Sulayman al­'A`mash, from Habib ibn Abi Thabit, from Abu al­Tufayl, from Zayd ibn Arqam, may God be pleased with him, who said: "The Messenger of Allah , may God's peace and benedictions be upon him and his progeny, while returning from his last hajj (hijjat al­wada') came down at Ghadir Khumm and ordered (us) towards the big trees, and (the ground) underneath them was swept.

"Then he said, 'I am about to answer the call (of death). Verily, I have left behind two precious things amongst you, one of which is greater than the other. The Book of Allah , the Exalted, and my `itrah (kindred). So watch out how you treat these two after me, for verily they will not separate from each other until they come back to me by the side of the Pond.' Then he said 'Verily, Allah , the Almighty and the Glorious, is my master (mawla) and I am the master of every believer (mu'min).' Then he took `Ali, may God be pleased with him, by the hand and said, 'This (`Ali) is the master of whomever I am his master. O God, love whoever loves him and be the enemy of his enemy.'"

(Al­Hakim adds: ) "This hadith is sahih in accordance with the conditions of sihhah laid down by the Shaykhayn (al­Bukhari and Muslim), although they have not recorded it in its full length."


-(Al­Hakim says: ) Narrated to us Abu Bakr Muhammad ibn al­Husayn ibn Muslim, the faqih of Ray, from Muhammad ibn Ayyub, from Yahya ibn al-Mughirah al­Sa`di, from Jarir ibn `Abd al­Hamid, from al­Hasan ibn `Abd Allah al­Nakha`i, from Muslim ibn Subayh, from Zayd ibn Arqam, may God be pleased with him, who said: "The Messenger of Allah , may Allah's peace and benedictions be upon him and his progeny, said, 'Verily, I leave behind two precious things amongst you: the Book of Allah and my ahl al­bayt. Verily, the two will never separate until they come back to me by the side of the Pond.'"


(Al­Hakim says: ) This hadith is sahih al­'isnad according to the conditions laid down by the Shaykhayn (al­Bukhari and Muslim), though they did not record it. (al­Hakim, op. cit., vol. iii, p. 148)


please refer to the below for more evidence from Sunni scholars:

shiite: In the Name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful

At Ghadir Khumm, the Holy Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) declared his final will to his entire Ummah. This will is binding upon the entire Ummah, including the Sahabah, till eternity. It gives direction to the Ummah after him.

Sayyid Hasan al-Saqqaf has stated in his Sahih Sifat Salat al-Nabi 29:
[size=14pt]
ففي سنن الترمذي : 5/663 برقم : 3788 قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله : إني تارك فيكم ما إن تمسكتم به لن تضلوا بعدي أحدهما أعظم من الآخر ، كتاب الله حبل ممدود من السماء إلى الأرض وعترتي أهل بيتي ، ولن يفترقا حتى يردا عليّ الحوض فانظروا كيف تخلفوني فيهما
[/size]
And in Sunan al-Tirmidhi 5/663 No. 3788, it is narrated that the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him and his family) said: I am leaving among you that which if you hold onto you will never go astray after me. One of them is greater than the other. It is the Book of Allah, a rope stretching from the heaven to the earth. The other is my itrah, my Ahl al-Bayt. The two will never be separated until they reach me at the Pond. Watch closely how you treat them both after me.

Sayyid al-Saqqaf states:

وهو صحيح
And it is sahih.

Shaykh Nasir al-Din al-Albani, in his Sahih Sunan al-Tirmidhi 3/542 No. 3786 also records:
[size=14pt]
: إني تارك فيكم ما إن تمسكتم به لن تضلوا بعدي أحدهما أعظم من الآخر كتاب الله حبل ممدود من السماء إلى الأرض وعترتي أهل بيتي ولن يتفرقا حتى يردا علي الحوض فانظروا كيف تخلفوني فيهما
[/size]
I am leaving among you that which if you hold firmly onto you will never go astray after me. One of them is greater than the other, and it is the Book of Allah, a rope reaching from the heaven to the earth and the other is my Itrah, my Ahl al-Bayt. The two will never separate until they meet me at the Pond (of Kawthar). Watch how you treat them after me.

Al-Albani says:

[size=14pt]صحيح[/size]

It is sahih.

There is also a separate hadith that seems to explain the one above:

[size=14pt]إني تارك فيكم خليفتين ، كتاب الله حبل ممدود ما بين السماء والأرض وعترتي أهل بيتي ، وأنهما لن يفترقا حتى يردا عليّ الحوض
[/size]
I am leaving among you two successors: the Book of Allah, a rope reaching from the heaven to the earth and my Itrah, my Ahl al-Bayt. The two will never separate until they meet me at the Pond.
Sahih Jami' al-Saghir 1/842 No. 2457

Al-Albani once again says:

[size=14pt]صحيح[/size]

It is sahih.

In spite that this hadith is very clear about the fact that:

1. Both the Qur'an and the Ahl al-Bayt (as) are to be followed after the Holy Prophet (peace be upon him and his family)
2. As long as the Qur'an exists, there is an Imam from the Ahl al-Bayt (as) to be its companion, both of whom MUST be followed together

Sunnis nonetheless claim that the hadith only commands us to love the Ahl al-Bayt (as) and NOT to follow them!!!

Source: http://wilayat.net/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=408:hadith-thaqalayn-at-arafat-and-at-ghadir&catid=64:featured-articles&Itemid=54

Looking at your posts, one would be fooled into thinking that you represent a sect that is peaceful and truthful

I only need to point to your inconsistencies

LagosShia:

3.) Ibn Qayyim Al-Jawziyya:
Narrated Abdullah Abdulmalik ibn Maysara from Al-Nazzal ibn Sabra who said: 'Hudhaifa swore by Allah (swt) to Uthman that he hasn’t said things that we heard him say. So we said to him: O Aba Abdullah, We heard you swearing by Allah (swt) to Uthman that you haven’t said some things even though we heard you saying those things?!' Whereupon he replied: 'I spare parts of my religion with other parts of it, because of the fear to loose it completely'.Source: A’laam Al-Mo’waqihin. Vol. 5, Pg. # 119.

So Ibn Qayyim is not a baby and follower of Ibn Taymiyaah when you need him

But he is a baby and follower of ibn Taymiyyah when you don't need him!

Rafidi :


dhahabi,Albani,Ibn Jawzi and others are similar to who? Ibn Taymiyyah!!!

perhaps you should state the dates these salafists scholars were born and died,compared to the ones who have graded the hadith as "sahih" and "hasan".

abeg,go rest.you're using confusion and the contradiction between Sunni scholars (prominent one VS salafist ones) to convince us you're on the "right path".shiooooooooooooooorrrrrrrrrrrrr!!!

LagosShia:
Please do make threads.the most ridiculous claim utterly built on deception and to incite sectarian emotions of Sunnis is that Sunnis don't have a mosque in the capital,Tehran.but in areas of Sistan and Balouchistan where the Sunnis form a majority,even the Shia do not have mosque led by a Shia prayer leader.a mosque is for all muslims.

So sunnis who take time off work to go to the mosque are forced to pray nawafil behind Shias Imams
When will they pray the obligatory prayer - when they get home in the evening?
And they will do this everyday?

LagosShia:

I can pray behind any Sunni prayer imam (salafi or not),but I consider the prayer as nafilah (supplementary),and repeat the wajib (obligatory) on my own.

BetaThings: Looking at your posts, one would be fooled into thinking that you represent a sect that is peaceful and truthful

I only need to point to your inconsistencies



So Ibn Qayyim is not a baby and follower of Ibn Taymiyaah when you need him

But he is a baby and follower of ibn Taymiyyah when you don't need him!

Ibn Qayyim studied under Ibn Taymiyyah.the same line of thinking.that is the point.so if Ibn Taymiyyah weakens the "hadith of the city of knowledge",his student would do likewise.this has to do with grading.tbaba presented Ibn Qayyim to back up Ibn Taymiyyah's view.it does not hold because more prominent scholars have confirmed the authenticity of that hadith.

the other hadith I quoted,was recorded by Ibn Qayyim.it has nothing to do with grading.no inconsistency.if you're too slow to think,please let your master continue in the thread.we are not interested in baby thinkers.look at the inconsistencies of your sunni scholars.obviously the likes of ibn taymiyyah has their agenda,an Umayyad one.

shialagos2:

and you didn't see this statement I made? :

"but as per the holy Quran,not even the Prophet Muhammad (sa),whose superiority to the 12 holy Imams of his household,we do acknowledge and carry on our heads,was informed by Allah (swt)".

do not learn "cherry-picking".its not good.

Yes I saw the statement... and that is why I will still be surprised because you acknowlegded the quran is right about Allah alone having the klnowlegde of the hour. At the same time instead of you to admit the shia over praise their imams, you said you are not in the position to answer the question. Will you then believe if you hear from the shia's "oga at the top" he possesses the knowledge(of the hour)?.

BetaThings:

Sadly I am here to bore you to whatever

It us strange that you classify virtually all the sunni ahadeeth that your position as sahih and label those that don't as fabricated

what is really strange is when you have prominent sunni scholars differing on a single hadith's authenticity.that is a shame.

as for me,i am shia.i take what supports my views in your books.and they are abundant there,and prominent sunni scholars declare those hadiths authentic,while the bias ones differ.that is strange.if i don't accept contradictory sunni hadiths which praises Umar,its not strange coming from a shia like myself.the evidence supporting my views in your books are much,and your scholars accept them as authentic.

muslims examine the bible,and bring out what supports islam.that becomes a slap for christinaity,just like it is a slap for sunnis when our proofs are in your books.you cant expect a muslim to accept John 3:16.do you?what is strange is the confusion that ensues when prominent scholars differ on a single hadith.one side supports its authenticity and prove the shia right,while the other side plays around to finger the hadith and deny its authenticity,.shame!

BetaThings:

So sunnis who take time off work to go to the mosque are forced to pray nawafil behind Shias Imams
When will they pray the obligatory prayer - when they get home in the evening?
And they will do this everyday?

lol

please tbaba come carry your pikin from here.you see what I was saying? petty arguments based on speculation.

if you don't want to pray behind a shia imam,you can feel free to wait 5 minutes after he is done with the main congregational prayer.then you can do your prayer with one sunni leading.in "sunni mosques",after the main congregational prayer,those who come after it is done,still do it in congregation.

ive not heard of a sunni who was beaten in Tehran for preferring to pray behind a sunni imam.in Saudi Arabia is where the Wahhabis literally flog people in medina for standing by the Prophet's (sa) grave,in the masjid an-nabawi.

and here we go,betathing is dragging on petty arguments.sorry but you wont be replied and you wont succeed here to derail the thread,and get many replies that will finally make you arrive nowhere.

if your boss (tbaba) doesn't want to continue,get another thread.this thread belongs to deols.i engaged tbaba because he is salafist,and he can hold mature discussions,to clarify our respective views and stances relating to the thread.this thread is not for argument.i wont reply to you again.

SALAM!

seguun:
Yes I saw the statement... and that is why I will still be surprised because you acknowlegded the quran is right about Allah alone having the klnowlegde of the hour. At the same time instead of you to admit the shia over praise their imams, you said you are not in the position to answer the question. Will you then believe if you hear from the shia's "oga at the top" he possesses the knowledge(of the hour)?.

this is the hadith you questioned if based on it the Imams have the knowledge of the hour:

"The Imams have knowledge of whatever occurred in the past and whatever will happen in the future, and nothing is concealed from them" (Ibid, p. 260.)


-does the hadith say the Imams have knowledge including of the knowledge of the hour?

to us,the Quran takes precedence.so if the Quran says no one knows something,and a hadith says someone knows things of the past and future,it means that someone knows the past and future with the exception of what the Quran rules out.so the Imams are granted knowledge of the past,and future things on earth that are not prohibited by Allah (swt).if it is prohibited,then it can not be part of "whatever happened in the past and whatever will happen in the future".to the Shia,the Quran is the rule,and the hadiths the details.

satisfied? or you too want to play around?

Goodnight!!!

Rafidi :


Ibn Qayyim studied under Ibn Taymiyyah.the same line of thinking.that is the point.so if Ibn Taymiyyah weakens the "hadith of the city of knowledge",his student would do likewise.this has to do with grading.tbaba presented Ibn Qayyim to back up Ibn Taymiyyah's view.it does not hold because more prominent scholars have confirmed the authenticity of that hadith.

the other hadith I quoted,was recorded by Ibn Qayyim.it has nothing to do with grading.no inconsistency.if you're too slow to think,please let your master continue in the thread.we are not interested in baby thinkers.look at the inconsistencies of your sunni scholars.obviously the likes of ibn taymiyyah has their agenda,an Umayyad one.

Hahahaahaha
Twisting and wriggling! Trained propagandist!!

Alhamdulillah-great thread!

shialagos2:
what is really strange is when you have prominent sunni scholars differing on a single hadith's authenticity.that is a shame.

What is baffling and stranger and stranger is that some of your guys declare that the Qur'an is incomplete
Yet some say it is
This strikes at the heart of Islam - Sunni or Shia and the non-muslims love it. No thanks to you

shialagos2:
as for me,i am shia.i take what supports my views in your books.and they are abundant there,and prominent sunni scholars declare those hadiths authentic,while the bias ones differ.that is strange.if i don't accept contradictory sunni hadiths which praises Umar,its not strange coming from a shia like myself.the evidence supporting my views in your books are much,and your scholars accept them as authentic.

If Shias can disagree, why not sunnis

shialagos2:
muslims examine the bible,and bring out what supports islam.that becomes a slap for christinaity,just like it is a slap for sunnis when our proofs are in your books.you cant expect a muslim to accept John 3:16.do you?what is strange is the confusion that ensues when prominent scholars differ on a single hadith.one side supports its authenticity and prove the shia right,while the other side plays around to finger the hadith and deny its authenticity,.shame!

Shias are not right on the big things
For instance when you denounce Umar (RA) based on what he did during the time of the Prophet (SAW), has it occurred to you that you are indirectly saying the Prophet (PBUH) did not discipline him enough or could not do so?

shialagos2:
please tbaba come carry your pikin from here.you see what I was saying? petty arguments based on speculation.

It is clear we will not agree on historical matters. This thread has once again demonstrated it
So I look for what we can prove. If I can demonstrate that Shias of today are giving false account of what is happening now, I expect Shias of tomorrow to lie about what is happening today just like you Shias of today are lying about the past

My point is to establish that you cannot be trusted to speak the truth and I am satisfied that you cannot

shialagos2:
if you don't want to pray behind a shia imam,you can feel free to wait 5 minutes after he is done with the main congregational prayer.then you can do your prayer with one sunni leading.in "sunni mosques",after the main congregational prayer,those who come after it is done,still do it in congregation.

ive not heard of a sunni who was beaten in Tehran for preferring to pray behind a sunni imam.in Saudi Arabia is where the Wahhabis literally flog people in medina for standing by the Prophet's (sa) grave,in the masjid an-nabawi.

Even if I was beaten blue and black and I report it, you will deny it. Don't bother
I once told you that the first suicide bombing in Beirut was done by Hezbollah with the permission of Iran and gave you the name of the person who confirmed, yet you continue to deny

shialagos2:
and here we go,betathing is dragging on petty arguments.sorry but you wont be replied and you wont succeed here to derail the thread,and get many replies that will finally make you arrive nowhere.

if your boss (tbaba) doesn't want to continue,get another thread.this thread belongs to deols.i engaged tbaba because he is salafist,and he can hold mature discussions,to clarify our respective views and stances relating to the thread.this thread is not for argument.i wont reply to you again.

Mature as in not being as abusive as you are?
Thanks anyway. I don't have the time too

shialagos2:
SALAM!

Wa alaykum salaam

OMG!

I still have questions and wont be dettered by all of these. I havent been able to read all the comments. Will be back In sha Allah.

But,

I havent heard of the salafiyya position on sufism

And

3.@LagosShia, if the hadith was changed by sunnis to include the jama'a, how did the shia come about ahlul bayt as who d prophet was referring to?

LAZAREY: @LagosShia, tbaba, vedaxcool, zhul fiqar, deols, I appreciate you all. Please I want a clarification on this issue from LagosShia. From one of your response on the Sahabas, you mentioned that during last days of the Holy Prophet, S.A.W. The prophet asked for a pen and paper, probably to write down somethings, may be the name of next Khalifah after him, and Umar, R.A. prevented the Prophet from writing anything. My question is this, can the Prophet write? Because I learnt the Holy Prophet S.A.W. Can neither read nor write. I,ll appreciate comprehensive and clear explanation on this issue. Also @LagosShia, Please send your mail add to me at Bolajisark@yahoo.co.uk, for other issues, I Want to learn from. Thanks all.

Salam my brother, this could be true and could be false-may God in his mercy guide us aright. But it has nothing to do with the message of the Prophet (SAW). so i think it is better to ignore it.
evry story of the prophets way of life(sunnah) must end when he died and the Quran was complete- that is the message to muslims. allowing what happened after the prophets life determine what you do could be dangerous. mark the word "could". Stay away from what you do not know and do not need. Mind your owbn business.

THE SUPPOSED BUSINESS OF EVERY MUSLIM SHOULD BE THE QURAN and THE SUNNAH of the Prophet (till his death). Whatever you take after the prophets death should be at your own discretion, judgement between good and bad. and Refer all Hadiths to the Quran for autenticity.

Salam

Subhanallah! may Allah guide us aright and increase our knowledge.

LagosShia:
"Allah have kept away from you the impurity [of sin], O people of the [Prophet Muhammad's] household (Ahlul-Bayt), and have purify you with [extensive] purification".(33:33).

Who ever read the above should go and read the verse himself. The Quran is clear and easy to understand. Give the verse to 10 nominal muslims and they will tell you it is refering to the Prophets wives-c`mon. i think the interpretation of this verse and 5:55 by the shia is no same(one is indirect meaning and the other is direct)

LagosShia:
"the status of Ali to me (Prophet Muhammad) is the status of Haroon to Musa;only that there will be no prophet after me".(find out in Sura Taha,what was Haroon (as) to Musa (as),and apply it to Imam Ali (as) and the Prophet (sa)

please what happened to Harun after Musa died? i actually do not know and with the above post, we can understand better relating such to Alli(RA)

LagosShia:
the family of Ibrahim (as) is not superior to the family of Muhammad (sa),who is the chief of the prophets....

subhanallah! this is what i dislike most, did you forget the Muhammed (saw) was also a progeny of Ibrahim(as), father of faith? May God guide us aright. Prophet Ibrahim prayed for his progeny while Prophet Muhammed(SAW) prayed for his Ummah. I think you should appreciate that. We love our Leaders in Islam and we pray for them but they have nothin to add or subtract from the Complete religion that Muhammed was brought to seal-Islam.
When i joined NL, i sincerely know nothin about Shia, and i still think i know very few things about them but the interpretation of the 2 verses-Q33:33 and Q-5:55 says a lot about the group. I can only pray that God in his mercy guide us aright.

deols: OMG!

I still have questions and wont be dettered by all of these. I havent been able to read all the comments. Will be back In sha Allah.

please read each and every post as from the post you last saw.

But,

I havent heard of the salafiyya position on sufism

And

3.@LagosShia, if the hadith was changed by sunnis to include the jama'a, how did the shia come about ahlul bayt as who d prophet was referring to?

I don't really get your question.

but I think you're referring to hadith al-thaqalain,which says we should hold on to the Quran and Ahlul-Bayt (as),and the other fake version which Sunnis have forged to say "Quran and Sunnah".the fact of the matter is both are found in Sunni hadith books.the one that says "Quran and Ahlul-Bayt" is narrated by both Sunnis and Shia,and it is considered "sahih" by both al-hakim al-naysaburi and Sheikh Albani (the Sheikh of the Salafiyyah).

moreover,we see that if we are to follow the "Quran and Sunnah",there is another hadith which says "take my sunnah and the sunnah of the rightly guided successors".the latter can be interpreted in light of the hadith of 12 successors which is found in Sahih Muslim,to clarify which "Sunnah" we are to follow.the sunnah of the Prophet (sa) was not recorded by the Prophet (sa) but is now found in hadiths,so we have to follow the sunnah/hadiths approved by the "rightly guided successors" who are the 12 Imams of the Ahlul-Bayt (as).as I earlier demonstrated and explained,the companions were not one uniform body.they differed and contradicted themselves,and even fought and killed themselves.so if Sunnis are saying that "follow the Quran and Sunnah",even in that way,we cannot know from who to take the Prophet's (sa) sunnah from among the sahaba,that is if for argument sake we take the hadith as true.in the light of "follow my sunnah and the sunnah of the rightly guided successors" and the hadith in Sahih muslim that "my successors are 12",we can clearly deduce that we must follow and take the sunnah of the Prophet (sa) from the 12 Imams of the Ahlul-Bayt (as).so even if we are to accept both the one which says "Quran and Sunnah",and the authentic one which says "Quran and Ahlul-Bayt",in light of other hadiths,the orders can be reconciled without giving any benefit to the Sunni position/sect.but in reality the version that says "Quran and Sunnah" is baseless,the hadith doesn't even have a correct chain of narrators!!! (watch the video below for the proofs by prominent scholars who deny it).

if you were referring to the hadith in tirmidhi which says "the ummah shall be divided into 72 or 73 sects and only one would be the saved sect",that hadith is correct and accepted by both Shia and Sunnis.however two clauses have been inserted into that hadith-"and that is the jamaa’ah" and “(Those who follow) that which I and my companions follow.” these clauses are not found in the earlier versions of the hadith, and is not extant in any of the primary and authoritative references of the Ahl as-Sunnah.so obviously these clauses were added at a certain time to suit the bias of Sunnis who believe they are the "saved/guided" sect.

PLEASE WATCH THE BELOW ON HADITH AL-THAQALAIN AND THE SUNNI DECEPTION


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

deols: 2. I used to know of the name ahli sunnah wal jama'a but these days, I see many people calling themselves salafis.

Did the need to further differentiate the sunnis just arise or my nija peeps are just getting into salafism? I used to think d definition of ahlisunnah included following d footsteps of d salafs

now let me briefly deal with the subject of wahhabism or salafism.

as to the term "wahhabism",the salafists see it as derogatory.but to others,it is not because the term truly describe who they are: followers of Ibn Abdul-Wahab.

salafism/wahhabism as a group is a new creation that was engineered by political forces,especially British colonialism in the Arabian peninsula,to uplift their al-Saud puppets.

in the earlier days before the 19th century,salafism or being a salafi,is ideological and based on certain views that some Sunni held.these were the likes of Ibn Taymiyyah and his students,Ibn Kathir and Ibn Qayyim,and some may include al-Dhahabi.Ibn Taymiyyah was the "mufti of the ruler".and you know what the Prophet (sa) said.the Prophet (sa) has expressed that when you see the scholars of the ummah at the doorstep of the places of the rulers,the ummah is in trouble.these are scholars who sell the deen to the rulers.Ibn Taymiyyah in particular is views by the Shia as a Nasibi (a person who hated Imam Ali and the Ahlul-Bayt) following or to please the foosteps of the Ummayyads.

salafism as from the time of Ibn Taymiyyah in the 13th century was not manifested as a group nor as a movement or institution till the coming of Ibn Abdul-Wahab,the father of wahhabism and therefore salafism.

the beliefs or ideologies that make wahhabism/salafism different are the following:

1.) the belief in TAJSEEM or giving Allah (swt) body parts.they believe Allah (swt) have hands,feet,face,and body.He can move and sit,just as humans do.and in the middle of the night Allah (swt) moves into the lowest heaven and prayers can be heard.they believe in Qiyama we can see Allah (swt) contrary to the the Quran which says: "eyes cannot grasp Him".

2.) Takfir:
they label anyone who opposes them a "kafir" and by labeling you a "kaffir" or a "mushrik",that means you are qualified to be killed,as the next point would show.

3.) Violence and Terrorism.

the terror and violence that Banu Ummayyah stood for,as a legacy of the jahiliyyah period brought into the muslim ummah,is evident in the salafist/Wahhabi school of thought.for instance Ibn Taymiyyah and does the present mufti of Saudi Arabia (a descendant of Ibn Abdul-Wahab) have positive views of Yazeed,and condemn Imam Hussain (as),grandson of the Prophet (sa),who was beheaded by yazid,an ummayyad ruler.

someone like Ibn Taymiyyah was doing the biding of the ummayyads or the rulers.in a muslim land where the people believe the government should follow the religious laws,the wicked rulers need religious cover to justify their acts.and this can easily come through the scholars who sell their soul to the devil.and that is one reason many corrupt governments view the Shia scholars as "dangerous".Shia scholars do not get employed as "muftis" (those who issue fatwa) by any government.the Shia scholars get their salaries from the believers in the form of khums and are therefore not financially dependent on any government salary or grant.this is why Ayatollah Khomeini in Iran was able to represent the aspirations of the masses in Iran and successfully led a revolution that do away with the more than 2000 year old monarchy!

when we look at Ibn Abdul-Wahab,the same story similar to Ibn Taymiyyah can be found.the al-Saud needed religious cover to start their monarchy.and the al-Saud were allies of the British colonialists who wanted to impose their al-saud puppets in a unified Arabia and get the ottoman turks out.so Ibn Abdul-Wahab was the one the al-saud used.and ofcourse by using him and his rigid and extremist interpretations of Islam,anyone who opposed the al-saud was deemed a mushrik and can be killed!!! with the emergence of wahhabism/salafism as a political movement in Arabia in the 19th century,this further deepened the wedge between Sunnis and Shia.wahhabism/salafism claims to follow the "Quran and sunnah" just as Sunnis say they do (the Shia too say they do,but the sunnahs are obviously different).so the Wahhabis/salafists were able to gain Sunni cover without many realizing that they are working on their own agenda,which deems even Sunnis who do not agree with the views of Ibn Taymiyyah and Ibn Abdul-Wahab as true Muslims.in one of their books,they state that a way to identify a true Muslim monotheist is by his love for Ibn Taymiyyah.if you hate Ibn Taymiyyah,to the Wahhabi it means you're either a mushrik or close to shirk.Ibn Taymiyyah is their yardstick for tawheed!!!

with the emergence of the al-saud as a force that defeated the other warring tribes in Arabia,wahhabism/salafism with ibn Abdul-wahab came to dominate.the descendants of Ibn Abdul-Wahab are made the "muftis of the kingdom",and the family of Ibn Abdul-Wahab (aal-al-sheikh,or the family of the sheikh) became seen as the "leading family of knowledge".subhannallah! they reject the Family of Muhammad (sa),and embrace the family and descendants of Ibn Abdul-Wahab.with the emergence of the al-saud and the religious cover given to them,the holy city of Karbala was ransacked and its treasures looted and thousands were killed.they ransacked Karbala twice.the grave of Imam Hussain (as) was destroyed,and this is exactly what the Ummayyads have previously done.to cover the deed of Yazid and erase the memory of Imam Hussain (as),the grave was destroyed and they made the area a farmland,and they ploughed on the grave.in this way no one would remember where Imam Hussain (as) is buried!!! similarly,the Wahhabis/salafists are most opposed to the commemoration of the martyrdom of Imam Hussain (as) on Ashura.you can connect the dots!

Ibn Abdul-Wahab justified the monarchy of the al-saud.and Islamically monarchy have no basis in Islam and the Quran speaks out against monarchs.the al-saud and his descendants became the political rulers in Arabia,and ibn Abdul-wahab and his descendants the spiritual rulers.these are the rulers of Makkah and Medina.ironically,per mainstream Sunni standards, Ibn Abdul-Wahab was opposed by his brother and father.in fact his brother wrote a book to refute the claims of Ibn Abdul-Wahab and his heretical views.when it comes to the issue of visiting graves (which is a sunnah of the Prophet),the Wahhabis/salafists consider that as "grave worship" and "shirk".if you visit Medina,you see the grave of the Prophet (sa) is chained and no one is allowed to get close.and if you stand for too long from a distance looking at the grave,you might be unlucky to either get arrested by the Saudi police or get lashed with a whip.and if these Wahhabis can,they would have as well destroyed the grave of the Prophet (sa),just as they did with Jannatul-Baqi and Jannatul-Muallah graveyards-wiping out Islamic history and heritage-to further their parochial view of eliminating what they wrongly see as "shirk".in fact it is to further their political control over heart and minds.during Sunni rule of Makkah and Medina,before the al-saud and Wahhabi phenomenon,both Jannatul-Baqi and Jannatul Muallah were present and visited even by Sunnis.

the Wahhabis/salafists find it easy to encroach into the main Sunni body and influence unsuspecting Sunnis,and also spread the takfir and terror teachings to recruit Sunnis (eg. al-Qaeda,boko haram),because they present themselves as Sunnis who really want to follow Islam "as it was followed in the first 3 generations".then the control of Makkah and Medinah,the spiritual home of Islam,gives them undue advantage.ofcourse,there is the money factor.saudi Arabia has oil,which is found in the oil-rich predominantly Shia eastern province.alot of money is used to print books and spread their ideology.this money is also used either by the government of Saudi Arabia (which is led by western Christian puppet kings) to fuel wars between Sunnis and Shia as we see in Syria.in Syria Saudi Arabia is exporting Wahhabi militants from Pakistan,chechnya,somalia and elsewhere to fight in Syria against whom they consider as Shia (i.e. the Syria president is alawite,an offshoot sect of shia islam).they send alqaeda terrorists to fight in Syria,with a nod of approval from the west,to destabilize the assad regime opposed to Israel and friendly to iran,while they forget that Palestine is illegally occupied and under Israeli occupation.these Wahhabi puppets would rather use their money to cause fighting between muslims than to help the ummah to drive out occupation from Palestine.

in Pakistan,the takfiri Wahhabi groups that have killed thousands of Shia are funded with the petro-dollars.in Iraq where you hear about explosions targeting shia muslims and their market and worship places,the same Wahhabi terrorists carry out these attacks.in Nigeria,boko haram with the same ideology is targeting Christians.ironically,these groups kill Christians and shia muslims.they also attack western interests,as the extremist groups fall under different leaderships.but sometimes,their interests merge with western interests.in Afghanistan,the USA used bin laden to fight the soviet union.and now in Syria,the Wahhabi terrorists are used to fight for western interests.

wahhabism/salafism is a threat to humanity.the violence and terror of this group have made every non-muslim think bad about islam and muslims.

in my next post,i will quote the violent teachings of ibn Abdul-wahab and ibn taymiyyah and show how they contradict the holy Quran.

let us see if it is true that wahhabi/salafi doctrines by the founder(s) do not propagate killing innocent people based on their beliefs contrary to the Quranic verse which says "there shall be no compulsion in religion" (2:256) and "And say: The truth is from your Lord, so let him who please believe, and let him who please disbelieve (Holy Quran 18:29)

i will start by giving you examples from the works of Ibn Taymiyyah:

First Ibn Taimiyah’s Fatwa - Those that reject Allah (swt)’s sitting on a throne should be executed

Ibn Taimiyah cascades the following teachings in his esteemed book Majmo’a al-Fatawa, Volume 5, page 391:
"Imam Aba Bakr Muhammad bin Ishaq bin Khuzaima said: ‘Whoever does not admit that Allah is sitting on a throne above the seventh sky, is a Kafir and his blood must be shed. He must be made to repent. Otherwise his neck must be struck and thrown into the garbage.’'


Second Ibn Taimiyah Fatwa - Those that reject that Allah (swt) will be seen in the next world should be executed

We read in Majmo’a al-Fatawa, Volume 6 page 500:
"Aba Abdillah said: ‘Whoever claims that Allah cannot be seen (by eye sight) in the hereafter, is a Kafir and has rejected Quran and replied Allah (sw). He must be made to repent. Otherwise he should be killed".

Third Ibn Taimiyah Fatwa - Those that recite Niya loudly during Salat should be executed

Majmo’a al-Fatawa, Volume 22 page 236:
"To recite the intention (niya) loudly is not permissible according to the Muslim scholars, nor did the Prophet (s), Caliphs or Sahaba, Salaf or Imams perform it. Whoever claims it is Wajib, he must be taught the law and then to repent from that opinion. If he insists on it then he must be killed".


Fourth Ibn Taimiyah Fatwa – You can kill or enslave your opponents

We read in Al-Seyasa al-Shari'a by ibn Taimiyah, page 159:
"Therefore the "Shari'a" ("divine law" ) made the killing of the disbelievers obligatory, but didn’t make obligatory the killing of those who are captured during fights or other than fights such as falling from a ship or getting lost or kidnapped. Thus, the imam decided that the best option is to be killed or enslaved".

Fifth Ibn Taimiyah Fatwa – Those that don’t believe that Allah (swt) physically spoke to Musa (as) and Jibril (as) should be executed

Majmo’a al-Fatawa, Volume 12 page 502:
Sheikh al-Islam, may Allah's mercy be upon him was asked:
"A man says that Allah didn’t talk to Musa by Himself but He created a voice from the tree’s side and Musa (as) heard from the tree not from Allah and also Allah didn’t talk to Gabriel by the Quran, but he (Gabriel) took it from the Guarded Tablet. Is he right or not?

He answered:
Praise to Allah, he is not right, nay, he is misguided and a liar according to the agreement of Salaf and the Imams. Nay he is a Kafir and must repent or otherwise be killed".

Sixth Ibn Taimiyah Fatwa – Those that believe that a traveler can perform the complete Salat should be executed

Majmo’a al-Fatawa, Volume 22 page 31:
"Who ever said that the traveler has to pray four raka, hence he is as the one who say that the traveler has to fast in Ramadhan, both of these (opinions) are misguidance, and contrary to the ijma of Muslims, the one who say it must to repent, if he doesn’t he must be killed".

Seventh Ibn Taimiyah Fatwa – Those that believe that Qur’an is created should be executed

"Nay it is known from the Salaf Imams that Takfir be issued against anyone that says that Quran is created he must repent or otherwise be killed".

Eighth Ibn Taimiyah Fatwa – Those that believe in adherence to a particular Imam should be executed

“Anyone who believes that the people have to follow one particular Imam amongst those Imams not the others, must made to repent otherwise be killed”

Nineth Ibn Taimiyah actually killed those who disagreed with him

"We read in Al-Uqood al-Duria by Ibn Abdulhadi al-Maqdisi, Volume 1 page 197:
Sheikh Taqi al-Deen may Allah be pleased with him marched to Kerwanin in the beginning of Dulhujja in year 704 H and in his company was the prince Qaraqush.

Prince Jamal al-Deen al-Afram the deputy of the kingdom marched with the rest of soldiers of Damascus in the month of Muharam, in the year 705 H to invade them and exterminate them, and before he marched, there were some troops which had marched before him.

Thursday in 17th of Dulhujja, the deputy and soldiers arrived at Damascus after Allah granted them victory over the error party of Rafidah, Nusairia and those who held false beliefs. And Allah exterminated them from that lands, praise to Allah the Lord of worlds".


And say: The truth is from your Lord, so let him who please believe, and let him who please disbelieve (Holy Quran 18:29)

There is no compulsion in religion; truly the right way has become clearly distinct from error; (Holy Quran 2:256)

Contrary to this, ibn Taimiyah authored a single volume book "al-Sarem al-Maslool" comprising of 438 pages wherein he used:

-The word (kill) 978 times

-The word 'kafir' 56 times

-The word 'tourture' 48 times

-The word 'murtad' (apostate) 34 times

-The words 'his blood must be shed' 14 times

-The word 'behead' 8 times

-The word 'war' 7 times

@ LagosShia thanks very much I appreciate you. I,ll send a mail on Saturday for further clarification. Also @ghazzal thank you for the advice, I appreciate you as well. Insha Allah, we shall be granted Al-janaa. Ma- Sallam.