₦airaland Forum

Shaikh Empi.ree, wallah those people who are in this category as the pastor above, if you dig deeper, you will most likely find the following:
1. No strong Islamic foundation. Without this, everything else crumbles.
2. A case of parroting those around. My shaikh said, my Imam said, etc
3. There is no tafakkur concerning their lives, their hearts, the Quran they read - if any at all, what they are told/fed, etc.
4. Mechanical understanding of the Quran. Non-inquisitive nature as to what they read and why they read it.
5. Little to zero research on deen.

Very true. Christianity was a later development.
SIH will not accord you any importance. I have seen the arrogance ooze in his speeches and relations with other people.
He recently said that no one can go any higher that where he has in his eschatological scholarship!

Is he going to say that he is not aware of Allah's vehemence against trinity in the Quran?
Thank God, the trinity ayahs are clear even for the lay man to understand and don't require Ta'wil.
He desperately wants his views to fit but that's not how Allah operates.
Surah At-Takwir Q81:29 Allah says: "You shall not will except as Allah wills......"

Empiree:
I have just got time to watch the video. Pretty much not new from what he has been saying in recent years. I asked him a question about solitary Hadith. The Hadith is very known so I won't quote it but I will paraphrase it. The Hadith says the Jews and the Christians took the graves of their prophets as places of worship. Question is, who was the Prophet of Nassara?. I threw this question to sheikh over 2 years ago but he never replied to this specific question.


That is because it doesn't serve his agenda.


Speaking of tashreek, Sheikh said if Ibn Abass(ra) could recite the Ayah La alam then we can not fault him. My observation is, it is character of Sheikh to reject or doubt solitary Hadith. So why now sheikh accepted this solitary Hadith over entire ummah?. As we all know, Quran was reviewed with Nabi Muhammad few times before his demise. So, is Sheikh telling us that only Ibn Abass was right in the exact pronunciation and the rest were wrong?. He also contradicted himself when he said it was the later ummah that applied tashkeel wrongly on la ilm instead la alam. If that's the case, why was tashkeels not the problem for the entire ummah in the time of Sahaba?. Why only verse 61 singled out?.

I was also rather shocked to see him in support of a lone hadith because of how he would strongly oppose and bypass it in the past.
He mentions Ibn Abass constantly in order to drown out the recitation of the the others; as if they never exisited and when the wager became too great, he began by saying - just as you mentioned - that it was "perhaps mistakenly placed in there, and then he became enboldened and subsequently began to say that dajjal and shaitain added it in there, thereby strongly insinuating that Allah failed in the preservation of the Quran as He had promised. Astahfirullah! The Rasul S.A.W. failed in capturing the infiltration by dajjal and shaitan and the entire ummah failed in spotting them all these years until he, SIH came along!

The stakes are too high for him now and I sense a desperation for him to be right in his predictions, hence that verse enables him support his agenda.

This was done years ago. I used to see some muslims and even translated QUR'AN placed Ibrahim in parentheses. I had to correct them.




I knew commented about this issue with him years ago. I told him that he's not doing what he condemned Harun Yahya of over 15 years ago. The video should be on YouTube still. He accused Harun Yahya of promoting fraternal relationship btw Islam and CHRISTIANITY as one religion and warned his students to be cautious of him. That because of Harun Yahya's approach, western world promoted him as Islamic scholar. He's now doing the same.

Empiree:
Absolutely you are right.



one clear example that Christians were never in Medina was a seerah. It is also famous Hadith. It was in the masjid where Nabi Muhammad, his companions and Nassara were in the masjid. They were having what I called meeting. Then it was time of salat for Nassara. It was in the afternoon which means they wanted to offer their zuhr Salah. So they wanted to step out of masjid to go to their own masjid. Nabi Muhammad told them to pray inside masjid right there and they did. Question is, if Nassara prayed salat in the afternoon, which Salat Christians prayed then and now?. This is one of the evidences that Christianity/Christians were never in Medina.



I told him this too. It was a long message I sent him on YouTube. His reply to this was, "Orthodox Christianity doesn't believe in Trinity and that they believe Father is greater than son. And since father is greater than son, they have affirmed superiority of Allah. So by definition of Islam, they are Muslims in the sight of Allāh. This is exactly how he put it. I wasted no time. I googled Orthodox Christianity on Trinity. It shows they believe in Trinity. I sent him my findings but he never replied till now. This was over 2 years now.

What he says is not in alignment with what Allah says in the Quran.
Allah displayed their belief and utterance in the trinity at various instances in the Quran, so much so that He has established that he will ask Nabi Isa A.S. on the day of reckoning if he was the one that ordered them to say 3 instead of 1 and also if he ordered them to worship he and his mother? Surah Al Maida Q5:116-118
Then how does SIH come up with such weak logic about father being greater? Is he more aware of their psyche than Allah?

Is he talking about the same people who say he - Nabi Isa is the son of Allah/ Allah himself these days (Astagfirullah) ? Surah Al-Ikhlas Q112:1-4
Or that they say that his mother is the mother and some insinuate further that she is the wife of Allah.
Surah Al-Anam - Q6:101.

The truth is plain and clear for all to see. He will not reply you as it doesn't fit his plans.

Empiree:
I have requested for short lecture on the verse explained by Sheikh Mubarak. Hopefully I get it soon.

AlBaqir:
@movado19

The "waaw (and)" is no doubt "waaw al-atf (conjunctive waaw); and the pronoun "HU" goes back to Jesus. The siyak (context) of the verse and the syntax rules within it makes it evident even though some claim that the pronoun "HU (he or it)" refers to the Qur'an.

However, the muraad (meaning) of the verse is what is important and not necessarily the pronoun.


Thanks a lot Shaykh AlBaqir.
In trying to understand your explanation, I had to go back a few verses (from verse 57) and read the subject as nabi Isa A.S. all the way to that verse 61, hence the use of the waw al-'atf to show an affinity between what was being discussed prior to verse 61 and the content of verse 61.

Is this correct in your view?

Jazakallah khair.

Empiree:
check this out. Not sure. I'm still searching

https://www.facebook.com/100066690938924/videos/659556152003454/


Modified

https://www.facebook.com/100066690938924/videos/1163124934486796/


movado19

Empiree:
walaikun salaam,

I saw rebuttal by Sheikh Hassan who in recent time has been criticizing Sheikh Imran Hussein. He called him kafir on this issue you raised for his utterances. I was once hardcore fan of Sheikh Imran Hussein but as years go by I find myself rejecting/disagreeing with him especially from the way he understands Sura Al-Imran verse 55 which he repeated by proxy in this video you posted.

One thing I like about him is that he always said that no one should agree or accept his view unless and until we are convinced he's right.

I am now of the opinion that Ayah 61 sura zhukhruf refers to knowledge of the Hour i:e Allah, Quran not Jesus. It doesn't indicate return of Isa (as). It is true that tashkeels were not revealed with Quran. But this doesn't change the pronunciation and the meaning. All I can say for now is that sheikh Imran Hussein should be careful not to be carried away because of his so called "love and affection" for the Orthodox Christians.

The Ayah he quoted in Al-Imran 55, I have argued with him on this Ayah 3 times but unfortunately he refused to reply properly. His interpretation is that the Ayah is talking about Christians who "follow" Jesus. Christians were never followers of Jesus. What Qur'an mentions is "Nassara". Nassara doesn't mean Christians. Christians existed in the time of Nabi Muhammad SAW but they were never in Medina contrary to popular opinion that Christians were in Medina. They were in Rome at the time.

So sheikh is saying that Ayah 55 means Orthodox Christianity will triumph and rule the world over western Christianity and Muslims. This is gross error.. Muslims have been praying Salat for over 1400 years. If keferi will triumph and rule over Muslims till Qiyyama, why are we still praying Salat then?. Why don't we just be Orthodox Christians instead of wasting our time 5 times a day, fast in Ramadan, go to Hajj etc. Allah is just.

So sura Al-Imran 55 is referring to the people that lived at the time of Jesus. Jesus true followers were superior to those who disbelieved in him. And besides, both Qur'an and Bible confirm that Jesus was sent only to his own people. This is why I begin to doubt those aHadith that speak about his second coming. They contradict Quran and they contradict themselves.

I used to translate Q43:61 as appearance of Jesus is the Sign of the Hour. I now put this view side. Allah himself took Jesus soul and he's dead... Not coming back

Alhajiemeritus:
Salam Alaykum Warahmatullah Sir. Your last statement is the stance of Mudeer Markaz, but some scholars attacked him for it.

movado19:
Salam Alaikum to Everyone.

I have a few questions for @ Shaikh Empiree and to others who are into the study of Islamic Eschatology;

1. What is your view/take on the statement made by Shaikh Imran Hosein about Surah Zukhruf Q43:61; regarding the Tashkeel - Diacritics (kasra) INSTEAD of (fatha), so La'alamun and NOT La'ilmun, according to him?

Empiree:
I remembered his name now. I had to pull it from my library. I am talking about a salafi scholar who rejected return of Nabi Isa (as)

Cc
movado19
Alhajiemeritus

Empiree:
This is the pastor I was talking about, pastor Shonibare who claimed to be Muslim and his son converted him to Christianity. He briefly narrated his conversion in this video in a debate with Ustaz Jamiu Adegunwa decades ago from 10mins

https://www.facebook.com/www.risalatulhaqdawah.org/videos/3198872247098251/

So as you rightly said, he was "musulumi olobeyo". He cited Ayah in sura Al-Imran 55 which Sheikh Imran Hussein now emphasized today.

In this YouTube video below this woman tries to defend Sheikh Imran Hussein on alleged verse in surah Zhukhruf


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z0tO2QiUPCk

movado19:
His mind should have asked the following questions:
- who were the blasphemers and how did they blaspheme?
- what accusations did they levy against ISA (A.S.) that Allah himself will clear up?
Surah Al-Maeda Q05:116-119 had/has the answers in readiness had he contemplated and researched for the correct explanation.

Having reached the above answer, the pastor could then have known who the accusers/blasphemers are and what they said.
He would have known that they were not the party who followed ISA (A.S.), then his next question should/could have been:

- what set the followers of ISA (A.S.) apart from the accusers/blasphemers that Allah promised to make them superior to those who reject faith?
This he would have found had he researched what ISA (A.S.) preached to his people regarding faith and belief in Allah...

Instead, the pastor jumped and concluded that what it meant was those who follow christ as today's christians do!
He most probably had christians around him who had been pressuring him to convert and since he could not substantiate his faith as a Muslim, it became a case of whoever can prove his/her case wins, hence his belief in what his son put forward....

I'll say it again, the Quran is not a story book or medieval trivia that one opens in order to while away time or gain some form of amusement.
It requires full engagement of the mind, heart and soul, with the intention to be guided to the absolute - NOT relative - Truth!

The lady as well as others are busy trying to explain what SIH means by what he said, but the Shaykh in his talks keeps saying what he's always said and he maintains that he's 100 percent right.
I wish that they's stop this apologist way of tackling things and realize that others can see, hear and think!
They are now trying to argue in favour of SIH by saying that Ibn Abbass (R.A.) was NO ORDINARY COMPANION!
While that is true, are they then insinuating that the other companions could not hold a candle to him in any way?
The fact remains that Ibn Abbass recited in one of the approved ways but it was not popular and by concensus, the most popular recital became the defacto.
This doesn't stop anyone from reciting in the other approved ways but to denounce one as an infiltration of dajjal /satan is on another level entirely!

Empiree:
In most cases these pastors lie a lot based on my experiences with Christians. They usually say stuff like this to create doubt in the heart of Muslims to weaken them. Allah Alam if he was saying the truth about his conversion because of the Ayah. As you can see video of pastor Shonibare it is somewhat old. It was around 1999/2000. But what's funny is that, anytime they come up with frivolous stories like that they help to do more research. Almost every time I or other Muslim comparators debate Christians, they will most likely bring the verse to challenge us. They are trained in their Bible studies to use the ayah. If you read their 1994 manifesto it says it all. Even few year ago, maybe 2015, same Jamiu Adegunwa had debate with another at RCCG in Lagos. The Evangelist brought up the verse. They are trained to use the verse.


Na'am!!!

ALL of them would always go for the ayas that are most likey to cause schism!
That's how one came and said to me that he would PROVE to me that RasulAllah (S.A.W.) bowed to the superiority, might and power of ISA (A.S.)!!
I said to him: In this Quran?! Please, show it to me and IF you do, then I will become a christian as you have always wanted!
I brought the Quran forward and asked him to SHOW me where the bowing took place.
He then began to dribble with words - while refusing to engage with the Quran
I asked him to tell me the chapter and verse so I can HELP him view it in the Quran.
He then started telling me that he is seasoned because he went to a Theologic school...
I told him congrats on that but I NEED you to SHOW me where this bowing to prophet ISA (A.S.) superiority, might, and power is!
When he felt cornered, he called on another christian brother of his - for reinforcement - and after he told that one of how STUBBORN I was, that one began to say that my issue could be a strong case of possession

Anyway, yes, that's how they are. They'll pinpoint verses that may seen ambigous in order to flaw those who aren't prepared.



This is why I reject Sh. Imran on this. His interpretation of Sura Al-Imran 55 aligns with the pastor. Hence, the reason I rejected it. No Muslims interpreted it that way. Even the basic understanding is that the Ayah still refers to Muslims because Jesus himself was. The Ayah is not complicated at all. Why would a whole Sheikh insists the Ayah is speaking about Christians while ignored other verses that counter them?.

SIH wants to favour the Chrisitans at all cost and the end game is for Muslims to SUBMIT to be RULED by them!
He has said this but I don't think that people are really listening to what he's saying.


exactly... It is one thing to recite the verse the way he wants to fit his narrative. It is another thing entirely to claimed shaytan and Dajjal corrupted and smuggled kesro in the verse astagfurllah... This is kufr statement but I won't call him kafir. How could shaytan and Dajjal corrupted the verse because of tashreek just to satisfy his ego when Allāh had declared

Truly, calling him a Kafir is a bit too much in my view, but what he has done and still doing is a clear pointer in that direction!
There's a level of recklessness in his speech that is becoming alarmingly dangerous and I pray that Allah blesses and guides his heart aright, Amin.

He has mentioned that the BOOK which ASIF got the knowledge from is NOT the Quran or any other divine book, but it was a book on THERMODYNAMICS!!!!
How he arrived at this conclusion is a mystery which he isn't willing to share.
Any further questions directed at him to explain will cause series of explos!ons from him!



"And We did not send before you any messenger or prophet except that when he spoke [or recited], Satan threw into it [some misunderstanding]. But Allah abolishes that which Satan throws in; then Allah makes precise His verses. And Allah is Knowing and Wise."

"That is] so He may make what Satan throws in [i.e., asserts] a trial for those within whose hearts is disease1 and those hard of heart. And indeed, the wrongdoers are in extreme dissension. Q22:52


Indeed, the Quran is such that it will excavate that which is deeply buried in the heart of man!
One needs to constantly seek refuge in Allah.



Sh. Imran needs to be very careful because his words were very heavy. When I challenged him that the way he interpreted the Ayah may lead Muslims astray.. He can care less. He said Quran is the truth unless I want to disobey Quran.


Hmm, so you are the one likely to disobey the Quran while he follows it to the T ?!
Yes, Quran is the truth and he, SIH is not the custodian of its Truth, neither does he have a monopoly to its meanings.
I think that where his shine is in:
- the methodology of studying the Quran as well as Quran and the moon, even though he could't help himself by interjecting his THOUGHTS into events here and there.
- history, geopolitics, finance.


As for the science of the letters and Quran, he needs to chill and admit to himself that it's not his forte!
The more he engages in this matter, the more his gaps become more evident.
Nothing wrong in not knowing, but be humble enough to say: this is not my specialty.
How can the whole ummah be blind to what dajjal/satan "did" for over 1400 years and he is the ONLY one who "caught" it ?!
He may have what is known as a SUPERHERO COMPLEX.

Na'am!!!

ALL of them would always go for the ayas that are most likey to cause schism!
That's how one came and said to me that he would PROVE to me that RasulAllah (S.A.W.) bowed to the superiority, might and power of ISA (A.S.)!!
I said to him: In this Quran?! Please, show it to me and IF you do, then I will become a christian as you have always wanted!
I brought the Quran forward and asked him to SHOW me where the bowing took place.
He then began to dribble with words - while refusing to engage with the Quran cheesy cheesy
I asked him to tell me the chapter and verse so I can HELP him view it in the Quran.
He then started telling me that he is seasoned because he went to a Theologic school...
I told him congrats on that but I NEED you to SHOW me where this bowing to prophet ISA (A.S.) superiority, might, and power is!
When he felt cornered, he called on another christian brother of his - for reinforcement - and after he told that one of how STUBBORN I was, that one began to say that my issue could be a strong case of possession grin

Anyway, yes, that's how they are. They'll pinpoint verses that may seen ambigous in order to flaw those who aren't prepared.

SIH wants to favour the Chrisitans at all cost and the end game is for Muslims to SUBMIT to be RULED by them!
He has said this but I don't think that people are really listening to what he's saying.

Truly, calling him a Kafir is a bit too much in my view, but what he has done and still doing is a clear pointer in that direction!
There's a level of recklessness in his speech that is becoming alarmingly dangerous and I pray that Allah blesses and guides his heart aright, Amin.

He has mentioned that the BOOK which ASIF got the knowledge from is NOT the Quran or any other divine book, but it was a book on THERMODYNAMICS!!!! shocked
How he arrived at this conclusion is a mystery which he isn't willing to share.
Any further questions directed at him to explain will cause series of explos!ons from him!

Empiree:
I am believer in ilm falfasa but she. Imran had taken his philosophy to another level

movado19:
Can one blame those prior scholars who were vehemently against it?
I recently read on what Shaikh Ibn Al Arabi had to say about some of them...
It can be a slippery slope, as we see with SIH and others.

Hkana:
What's Ilm falfasa?


I've long stopped taking SIH seriously so I couldn't really be bothered by anything new he says.

Hkana:
Thanks for that.

My interest started waning when I watched a lecture where he brought "an orthodox Christian" to come address Muslims. At the time, I was already vexed by the too many glowing compliments he was paying the orthodox Christians.

Hkana:
Thanks for that.

My interest started waning when I watched a lecture where he brought "an orthodox Christian" to come address Muslims. At the time, I was already vexed by the too many glowing compliments he was paying the orthodox Christians.

Empiree:
This lecture was yesterday. See comments

movado19:
INNA LILLAHI WA INNA ILAIHI RAJI'UN

Do you see the mess SIH is creating?

That they are now bold enough to say that they are "teaching" Muslims" about the Quran, and they should consult SIH's books if in doubt?
One said s/he is teaching the Muslims about the Quran and Eschatology!
I don't know whether to cry or laugh at this level of buffoonery!

A people who have lost their compass (holy books) are the ones to teach Muslims about Islam and the Quran?!

Any Muslim who is not feeling concerned by this sad state of events most definitely has his/her Iman out the window.

This is what pains me about SIH's followers...they are quick to be apologetic about what he says and none of them is bold enough to challenge him!

My Question now is:
How is it that someone who initially seemed "grounded" in the deen can/could derial so far away?
SURAH FATIHA Q01:05-07

Truly, Allah raises in degrees whom He wills and debases whom He wills! SURAH AL-IMRAN Q03:26

May Allah guide us all with the light of Knowledge and never render us blind in this world or the next, Amin.

Empiree:

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

movado19:
He says:
They have come to the conclusion that the tashkeel which “perhaps may” be a part of the punctuation…that they are a part of the Quran which was revealed by Allah, and so protected by Allah. This is FALSE!
This is not only false, this is sinful because the tashkeel were not a part of the Quran when it was revealed.
Those who have added to the Quran “tashkeel” will have to answer to Allah on judgement day as this is a monstrous sin!

He extolled Abdallah Ibn Abbass as if the other Sahabis didn’t know what they were doing.
So why doesn’t he in this vein, demand that he will read only Ibn Abasses copy of the Quran?
Was there any objection from Ibn Abbass when the Quran was being put in a codex form?
He claims that there are no copies of the Quran with Ibn Abasses recital and something mysterious is at work here, crying out for help.
Well! I guess he will help Allah since the promise to safeguard the Quran was never upheld!
What is this man spewing?
He needs an answer from those “with a capacity to think”. This is a challenge to the whole Muslim ummah from SIH.

He says: “There is a contradiction in the Quran”.


He keeps on repeating the word scholarship as if it is superior to Allah's knowledge.

Honestly, the devastation this man has caused won't be appreciated now.
He has given the kiss of death to those Muslims whose Iman was already zero to none.
Some will only take what he has said WITHOUT ever doing their own research.
He has afforded others the impetus to question verses that don't fulfil their nafs's requirements.

I'm wondering how one can successfully argue that a human being who is "alive "and "moving" did not come with a "soul"?
He and his cohorts should replace the above with the alphabets and see if what they are spewing still makes sense or not.

movado19:
He says:
They have come to the conclusion that the tashkeel which “perhaps may” be a part of the punctuation…that they are a part of the Quran which was revealed by Allah, and so protected by Allah. This is FALSE!
This is not only false, this is sinful because the tashkeel were not a part of the Quran when it was revealed.
Those who have added to the Quran “tashkeel” will have to answer to Allah on judgement day as this is a monstrous sin!

He extolled Abdallah Ibn Abbass as if the other Sahabis didn’t know what they were doing.
So why doesn’t he in this vein, demand that he will read only Ibn Abasses copy of the Quran?
Was there any objection from Ibn Abbass when the Quran was being put in a codex form?
He claims that there are no copies of the Quran with Ibn Abasses recital and something mysterious is at work here, crying out for help.
Well! I guess he will help Allah since the promise to safeguard the Quran was never upheld!
What is this man spewing?
He needs an answer from those “with a capacity to think”. This is a challenge to the whole Muslim ummah from SIH.

He says: “There is a contradiction in the Quran”.


He keeps on repeating the word scholarship as if it is superior to Allah's knowledge.

Honestly, the devastation this man has caused won't be appreciated now.
He has given the kiss of death to those Muslims whose Iman was already zero to none.
Some will only take what he has said WITHOUT ever doing their own research.
He has afforded others the impetus to question verses that don't fulfil their nafs's requirements.

I'm wondering how one can successfully argue that a human being who is "alive "and "moving" did not come with a "soul"?
He and his cohorts should replace the above with the alphabets and see if what they are spewing still makes sense or not.

Empiree:
I still reject his idea on this. Question he needs to answer is why did he single out only Ibn Abass out of thousands of other Sahaba?. It is very easy to counter his baseless argument by using his own logic.

For example, he taught me that Qur'an sits in judgement over Hadith. Quran is now telling him la ilm but he goes to solitary Hadith which says la alam in order to counter Quran. This is the very same thing he condemns others for.

The tashkeels are essentially part of QUR'AN in the sense of pronounciations. This has never changed. It was revealed like that. I like to get sheikh understand this which I believe he does. But the Arabs don't need tashkeels to read and understand Arabic Qur'an just like we don't need "ami ohun" to read Yoruba texts to understand it.

But Sh. Imran's argument is that tashkeels were later addition. Yes true. Later addition in the sense that the marks were added for the benefits of non-arabs but this doesn't change the pronunciation. So why is Sheikh fixated on this specific Ayah?. Soon he will tell us there are other tashkeel errors in the QUR'AN where they don't suit him which he already hinted.

However, I have to agree with him for saying if the correct pronunciation is "la ilm" then translation is wrong to say "Jesus is the knowledge" because other verse of Quran say knowledge of the Hour is only with Allāh. Therefore, Jesus could not have been in the context of the verse contrary to popular opinion. So mainstream Muslims would have to reject return of Jesus if they want to effectively counter sh. Imran because sheikh Imran accused them of smuggling and imposing another verse on Sura Zhukhruf 61 to prove return of Isa (as) which makes the Ayah mutashabiat. But he said the Ayah is Muhammad.

If you read my comments on YouTube I tackled him on this. It is for this reason Shuyukh at Al-Azari university rejected return of Isa. You noticed he made reference to them. Forget about all those related Hadith. They need to be investigated. It doesn't seem initial narrator of the Hadith accepted Islam in the lifetime of the prophet but after. That's suspicious.