₦airaland Forum

Rilwayne001:
Definitely 2. Lol

indeed. ..if he can't afford a new watch, definitely he can't afford 1 & 3

Do The Crime Do The Time

Who Is The Poorest. OR Ikan ko ju Kan?

lanrexlan:
Have you ever made any contribution that is meaningful on this thread?!

Zero he made. He and mrolai only know how to copy paste without meaningful contributions. This only puts me off. That's why i was never interested in Mut'h topics until this one. DOnt know why i am so much interested in thread. This thread made me aware of the details of mut'ah due to my approach to kick out unnecessary rants like mrolai. He left bcus he had nothing to offer academically, but to post pics and download nonsense from net

brixton:
Very correct, I don’t see how people try to correlate Islam and Christianity. In Islam they only give alms and food to the poor. There’s nothing like tithing in Islam to the best of my knowledge( correct me if I’m wrong). Freeze is asking you people to support your argument with Bible verses but they only comeback with insults.

Please show us where the first set of pastors (disciples) collected offering and tithe in the Bible, and they come back to insult us more. Let’s come back to today’s world, can you show us Bill Gate, Carlos Slim or Jeff Bezos’s pastors? Use your common sense don turn to insults and abuses.

Their mentors are in the USA

One of the Pastors said "I am not gonna be going to the heaven to be broke when i get there

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

You may first need to figure out if he is a revert. He might just be improving and he might know his qirat status as well. You need the best of hikma in approaching him should you want to. I will say do so instead of 'enduring'.

Remember there is hadith which says about struggling with qira. Those who struggle to read get DOUBLE THE REWARD!


Those who struggle with reciting the Qur’an they will receive double the reward of a minimum of 1400 good deeds for each letter:
Aa’ishah (RA), relates that the Prophet (sallAllahu ‘alaihi wa sallam) said:


Verily the one who recites the Qur’an beautifully, smoothly, and precisely, he will be in the company of the noble and obedient angels. And as for the one who recites with difficulty, stammering or stumbling through its verses, then he will have TWICE that reward.” [Al-Bukhari and Muslim]


This hadith proves that people who are not well versed in the Arabic language or have other difficulties in reciting the Quran, get even a higher reward for reciting the Quran in Arabic for their extra effort. So they should never feel down about not being able to recite as well for they will be given double the reward.


Besides, let's go to the 'ruling' aspect. This is Q&A with similar situation as yours. Questioner asked:

Assalaamu alaykum I live in a city where this is only one masjid. I live close to the masjid so I can attend all my prayers in the masjid. However, to me it feels like the imam of our masjid makes a mistake in the recitation of al-fatiha that alters the meaning. He interchanges the "small" ha with "big" Ha when reciting ehdina assiraat al mustaqeem. Am I correct to assume it changes the meaning and hence I cannot pray behind this imam? Sometimes I feel like he is reciting it correctly but sometimes I think he is wrong. I myself am not an expert in tajweed so I sometimes doubt myself. I'm sure he will not listen to me. But, I still dropped a hint so as to not offend him but nothing changed. What should I do with my prayers? Repeat each time after I pray with him in jama'ah. What about Friday prayer? It's a big fitnah, unfortunately. Prayers like zuhr and asr are difficult to repeat because I have to go back to work. Some people in the masjid follow an opinion that the mistake of the imam in al-fatiha doesn't nullify the prayers behind him who can recite better than him. Is that true? Is it true? The imam might follow this opinion as well but I don't know. Am I allowed to follow this opinion? To be afflicted with fitnah in such a basic matter is a great difficulty. Please pray to Allah to make a way out.

Answer

All perfect praise be to Allaah, The Lord of the Worlds. I testify that there is none worthy of worship except Allaah, and that Muhammad sallallaahu `alayhi wa sallam ( may Allaah exalt his mention ) is His slave and Messenger.

Changing the Ha (ه) to Ha (ح) in the words of Allaah { اهدنا الصراط المستقيم } which means {Guide us to the straight path} [Quran 1:6] is considered a mistake that alters the meaning so, the prayer is not valid when reciting in the above manner.

The commentary of Ash-Shirbeeni, from the Shaafi‘i School, reads: "What is meant by altering the meaning is rendering the original meaning as meaningless or changing it to another meaning." [End of quote]



If this is the case, then the situation of the Imaam is one of the following two:



1. He is unable to correct the mistake because he is a non-Arab, or there is no one who can teach him. In this case, his prayer for himself (alone) is valid, and the jurists stated that the prayer of a person who recites Al-Faatihah while altering the meaning is valid if he is unable to learn correct recitation due to the absence of a teacher or due to time constraint, while he is willing to learn, as stated in Al-Fawaakih Ad-Dawaani by An-Nafraawi from the Maaliki School.

Read more from the source http://www.islamweb.net/emainpage/index.php?page=showfatwa&Option=FatwaId&Id=271183


My take on this is, APPROACH POLITELY

This masjid here i frequent. Please watch this 30min khutba today. This is Imam is actually doing malud without knowing it. I said this bcus this masjid is Ahlusunnah of salafi manhaj who oppose Milad nabi on the basis of "neither prophet celebrate his birth nor sahaba, nor tabi'in or tabi'in tabi'n" celebrated mawlud. But one thing comes to mind, this khutba is actually, indirectly Milad un-Nabi that some object to.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tvjM-LiLu00

And you need to read the two comments left on this video. Is his counter argument convincing?

^ I don't understand how you think, buddy.

Kaytixy:
Albaqir and empir.ee are the same thing. Don't let the former present himself as he is taking a middle stand. He will only end up deceiving himself.

Excuse me?


But you all disappeared without making reasonable contributions since this thread turned into serious academic issue.

spyder880:
Depends on which type of door you are fitting on the house. You first fix;

Doors, if the doors are China, Turkish or Nigerian welded metal doors. So you can do your tiles to match the already fixed door gap and get the desired gap underneath.

Tiles, if it's local wooden doors. You can always adjust the height of local wooden doors to match the clearance you want with the floor and keep the gap as little as possible.

Thanks a million. Appreciate it

Didn't see my mentions at all. Something is wrong.


Anyways, taking to account the face value of your evidence, without any doubt, it is nothing but PROSTITUTION. First all, I'm not here or in position to analyze the evidence provided.


Second, quran came to REGULATE number of women a man should marry, unlike pre Islam or previous prophets where they married as many women as possible. So the idea that you can "marry" as many of them in mutah is rubbish. Even number of slave girls are restricted to 4.


However, my position stands. It is not necessarily as shia practice mutah. I like to stick to the definition. It was clear that even nabi (saw) allowed mutah, there was time limit which means by definition of mutah itself, it purpose was to serve temporary solution to something.


What I am saying is, forget about how or what shia do today. Forget about whether muta was banned or not. If you concluded that mutah is zina, did nabi (saw) order sahaba to commit zina by temporarily marrying those women until khaybar was over?. This is where i was telling you to be careful not to say it is zina by its definition.


Shia might corrupt the meaning and essence. That's semi-irrelevant. Also during the course of effectuating mutah by sahaba (ra) did each of them marry as many women as they possibly could? . I don't think so. If that is the case, the rule is broken if the evidence you put up there is true, bcuz the man said you can may as many as possible. This is quite the opposite.


We need to be careful of choice of word. I will continue to refrain from saying mutah is zina bcus it has implications. Maybe you don't see the implications. I do. I think I have made my position clear that I am not in support of it.



However, I'm still looking for critical evidence how nisai 24 was revealed in connection with mutah. Both sects have corruption in them. If you, sino, succeeded in defeating mutah, albaqir will succeed in defeating sunni of sex slave. All these are nonsense.


For me, I can easily dismiss everything including story of khaybar and mutah connection bcuz, I am absolutely not obligated. I begin to suspect khaybar itself was fraud. Text can be easily corrupted bcuz Allah did not promise to protect any books except Quran. Again, comparison btw mutah (by its definition) with pork, wine etc doesn't make sense. It is dangerous thing to say unless you ready to defend yourself on Qiyamah. Or unless you can provide evidence of prevalence of mutah pre Islam. That would validate the ban after khaybar.


I rather stick to the idea of mulikat-yamin. I had thought it is what shia called mutah until albaqir rebuked that. Even with mulikat-yamin, sunni said that it is no longer exist either in today world, which closes the door to finding solution to sexual perversion.

twinskenny:
Door

thank you

spyder880:
.

Oga, please help out here. Which installation comes first; doors or tiles?

i honestly dont know how you passed through primary school

alBHAGDADI:
Moses was the way to the promise land, not to God. That was his assignment.

Who gave Moses the tasked he accomplished?, who owns the promised Land?. Is it not God?. Why are you deceiving yourself when it is written blue/black in your bible that he received instructions and revelation from God?.

The moment he saw them to the promise land he left them. If he was the way to God, he would have remained with them like Jesus who was, died and resurrected and is still with Christians today.

WHat's funny is that, the Israelites both Moses and Jesus(p) were sent to believe Moses ONLY not even Jesus....which means they don't recognize him till today. Since Christianity is not even official religion in Israel defeats your nonsense argument. You never heard Jewish rabbis and Netanyahu say "the God of our fathers Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and Moses?. YOu will never hear them mention Jesus.

We'll, I don't expect someone that believes the account of a book written 700years after a book it is trying to disregard.

I forgot that you are dull

Since you can't show me where Moses made such claims, then show me where Elijah, Jeremiah, Isaiah, Daniel etc all claimed to be the way to God.

The same way you cant show us where Jesus said "I am the savior". Lo Ba Tan

parisbookaddict:
I did not just "indirectly conform" Germany is conceding to Islam. Whatever that means.
I have previously and clearly stated that Muslims are taking over Germany. Crime rate has gone up, rape has gone up and attacks on Jewish people. Same thing is happening in Sweden.its a pity.

Yeye woman. "crime rate has gone up". How's that muslims problem?. Crimes fluctuate in every country on the planet. Before muslims in Germany, the biggest crime is germany itself (its involvement in ww2). Has there been any crime greater than that?

plainbibletruth:
So,Jesus was right in saying that he was primarily to Israel. Yet his message was for all the world.

This statement of yours defeated everything else you had to say. The Message of prophet Muhammad was and has always been PRIMARILY and INTENDED for the world.

WORLD according to Quran and hadith is not just mankind. WORLD (al-lamin) means that P. Muhammad was sent to Mankind, Jinn Kind, Living and nonliving things. Grass, trees, animals even birds. They all RECOGNIZED prophet MUhammad. That's what Quran means by prophet muhammad(s) being sent to the world.

alBHAGDADI:
Where did Moses or Abraham claim to be the way to God?

Show us

Very simple. In the time of Moses, who was the leader of Israelite and led them through from Pharaoh, was there another way to God or savior at that time besides Moses?


In the time of Abraham, was there another way to God besides the "father of faith", Abraham?.

plainbibletruth:
NOTHING in that verse says it is restricted to time.

If u are smart enough you would see that Matthew 15:24 is that restriction. But you if disagree, it amounts to CONTRADICTION. Either way is lose lose situation for you.

See other sayings of Jesus:

“For God so [greatly] loved and dearly prized the world, that He [even] gave His [One and] only begotten Son, so that whoever believes and trusts in Him [as Savior] shall not perish, but have eternal life.
JOHN 3:16 AMP

Again WORLD mentioned in the verse is ONLY understood in the context of The Nation Of Israel. If you disagree, it means there is corruption in your Bible btw this verse and Matthew 15:24. Choose one.

Once more Jesus addressed the crowd. He said, “ I am the Light of the world. He who follows Me will not walk in the darkness, but will have the Light of life.”
JOHN 8:12 AMP

Did you notice 'the world' in these two verses?
Jesus was sent to ALL THE WORLD but Islam's prophet wanted to claim that for himself and twisted things.

Onus is on you to solve your puzzle. You either admit distortion or agree with "world" mentioned in this english version means the nation of israel. Anything apart from this is gross distortion.

ConcernedRusian:
Islam can't survive in the modern era,

How do you define "modern era" or "modern world". Fact is, when we talk about modern world, usually refers to or started with European. So by modern world,

Early modern European history is usually seen to span from the start of the 15th century, through the Age of Reason and the Age of Enlightenment in the 17th and 18th centuries, until the beginning of the Industrial Revolution in the late 18th century.

Here we are in 21st century and islam never cease to exist. In 2006, a guy was on national news in modern world and he said, "in 10 years islam will cease to exist".

It is over 10yrs now, he is still alive like a deadman bcuz God shut his mouth while islam exist. So when exactly is "MODERN WORLD"?. Isn't GOD who brought modern era itself?.

In 15 century, anti-islamic figures said the same that islam could not survive modern era. In 16 century they said the same thing until 21st century while islam is going strong. And you still talk about modern era. See your life?. Maybe you need to see Amish people, they live their seclusive way of life. They are christian and they won't even agree with you.

From horse's mouth


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_6CDeSd1B_g

interesting


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Dzf_XE3zH8

plainbibletruth:
The truth:
Jesus said to him, “ I am the [only] Way [to God] and the [real] Truth and the [real] Life; no one comes to the Father but through Me.
JOHN 14:6

This verse you quoted is restricted to time BECAUSE when Abraham, Moses, David, Solomon, Enoch, Lot and countless of others [peace be upon them] were life, they were the [only] Way [to God] and the [real] Truth and the [real] Life; no one comes to the Father but through them in their respective times.

They are no more and their books are not eternal for the entire mankind but for their people. Now we are in the TIME of MUHAMMAD the MESSENGER and the PROPHET of GOD, whose message is ETERNAL(Islam) with FINAL TESTAMENT (Qur'an).


Q21:107

And We have sent you (O Muhammad SAW) not but as a mercy for the 'Alamin (mankind, jinns and all that exists).



But for Jesus ONLY sent to Israelites as reported in Matthew 15:24

Then Jesus said to the woman, "I was sent only to help God's lost sheep--the people of Israel."

plainbibletruth:

you know that's the truth. ...so why are you showing me your EWEDU infested brown teeth?

plainbibletruth:
To the puny brains of Moslem guys here, quoting back a quran passage amounts to an answer.

but when they explained to you, you said (unsatisfactorily) that they interpreted and reinterpreted quran. Now you taking about they quoted the verse again. What do you want?. You see now that your are dull?

Abu Bakr ibn al-`Arabi writes in Sharh Sahih Tirmidhi, Book 45 (da`awat), Ch. 4:


If it is said that the times have become so corrupt that there is nothing better than isolating oneself, we say: one isolates oneself from people in one's actions, while he keeps mixing with them with his physical body, however, if he cannot succeed, then at that time he isolates himself from them physically but without entering into monasticism (ya`taziluhum bi badanihi wa la yadkhulu fi al-rahbaniyya) which is condemned and rejected by the Sunna.

Proofs of Khalwa (spiritual retreats or seclusion). Some Muslims argue there is nothing Khalwa in islam. Sme go as far as declaring it bid'ah.



Narrated Abu Sa'id Al-Khudri: A bedouin came to the Prophet and said, "O Allah's Apostle! Who is the best of mankind?" The Prophet said, "A man who strives for Allah's Cause with his life and property, and also a man who lives (all alone) in a mountain path among the mountain paths to worship his Lord and save the people from his evil."


(English Bukhari, Volume 8, Book 76, Number 501) [Arabic: Ja'a a`rabiyyun ila al-nabi
faqala ya rasulallahi ayyu khayru al-nas? qala rajulun jahidun bi nafsihi wa malih...]




Dhikr in isolation or seclusion (khalwa) is corroborated by the hadith in Bukhari: "Seven people will be shaded by Allah..." The seventh is: "A person who remembers Allah in seclusion (dhakara Allaha khaaliyan) and his eyes get flooded with tears."




Abu Sa`id al-Khudri said: I heard the Prophet say: "There will come a time upon the people when the best property of a Muslim man will be his sheep which he will take to the tops of mountains and to the places of rainfall to run away with his Religion far from trials.


(English Bukhari, Volume 8, Book 76, Number 502) [Arabic: ya'ti `ala al-nasi zamanun khayru mali al-rajuli al-muslim...]




Ali Ibn Talib once implored the Prophet (SAW), "O Messenger of Allah, point me to the shortest of paths to Allah, the easiest on his servants and the best in the sight of Allah." The Prophet replied, "O Ali, persist in the remembrance of Allah in spiritual retreat (khalwa)." Ali then asked "Does this excellent merit of remembrance depend on its being practiced by all human beings?" To this he replied, "O Ali, the Final Hour will not arrive so long as someone on the face of the Earth is saying "La ilaha illallah."




In Tirmidhi: `A'isha relates: "In the beginnings of Allah's Messenger's Prophethood, at the time Allah desired to bestow honor upon him and mercy upon His servants through him, he would not have any vision except it came to pass as surely as the sun rises. He continued like this for as long as Allah wished. Most beloved to him was seclusion (al-khalwa) and there was nothing he loved more than to be alone in seclusion." Tirmidhi narrates it and said: hasan sahih gharib. Bukhari and Muslim narrate something very similar through different chains and the word khala' is used instead of khalwa.

Kaytixy:
Pls stop all this Saudi this Saudi that. If Saudi decides to practice something does that make that things generally or acceptable in Islam emp.iree? We are not told to follow Saudi but Allah and the prophet saw. So forget all this your statement about Saudi practicing this and that. Have you heard the grand mufti of Saudi saying it's halal to practice what is haram. If Saudi government decides to practice what suits them how can you attribute that to Islam. Nawa ooo

then stop your finger pointing. You are equally guilty. Don't you see your shuyukh fingerprints approved misyar?. Why're you distancing yourself from your shuyukh now?

plainbibletruth:
You guys speak from both sides of the mouth.

You lack honesty. Maybe you're following the path of "the best of deceivers".

This is what you said sometime back:


Now instead of making us ‘get the picture’ and giving us ‘clear view of what the verse is talking about’ you are asking us to read 3 to 4 preceding verses. The 3 to 4 preceding verses have NOTHING to do with the verse in question. Don’t try to confuse matters. No air has been cleared.

Tell us; are you able to answer the question or not?

would have wasted my time if i didnt know you before

parisbookaddict:
Nope.
Finland isn't germany

At least Germany is powerful economically and politically than finland. Once muslims take over Germany, by default, finland is nothing but stooge

Thank God you indirectly confirmed Germany is gradually conceding to islam

Kaytixy:
I'm following this thread step by step from the start my brother. I don't have anything to argue with albaqir wallah. I have read enough. Albaqir is Shia, he has his own quran, hadith and all of that. Sino has done a good job and may Allah reward him abundantly and all of those who have contributed to this thread with sincerity with the exclusion of albaqir. I will never pray or say anything good to albaqir as long as he continues to insult the companions of the prophet saw. Until he repents, he remains a KAAFIR. The best I can do for him is pray for guidance for him and us too.

you are still mesmerized by Shia this, shia that. If you truly followed and understood the thread, you should see already that it is irrelevant calling shia or albaqir kufar.



Evidences abound in sunni books which shia use against sunni of some corruptions. For as long as those texts are there, you are screwed. You are saying shia have their own Quran based on a twist. Sunni are as well guilty as them on rajam issue. Have said that many times.


Sino,

Now you see why it is useless and irrelevant to keep pounding on shia about mutah when evidences show some sahaba continued to practice mutah after the prophet (saw). Albaqir cited evidences of muawiya and others did mutah. These are sunnis. This is why it is sometimes not a good idea to defend all the sahaba hook line and sinker against Shia knowing too well they have their holes.



My point all along is the same; both Shia and sunni are guilty of many things together. It won't be easy for you, mrolai and other sunnis to condemn mutah nikah of shia while there exist historical evidences that some sahaba continued to practice muta
AFTER the demise of the prophet (s). Whether they are right or wrong is another subject. This is why I don't argue with shia on subject that i know sunnis are guilty of.



So from now, it doesn't make sense for mrolai to keep embarrassing himself by condemning nikah mutah if arab sunni also practice misyar, and historical practice of mutah by sahaba after it was banned. That's my target all along.



I know what I believe in terms of men and women relationship, marriage etc. If some of my posts here suggest I'm pro-mutah, it is only for academic and educational purposes which I have achieved. I don't believe in neither mutah nor misyar. Sura Nisai 24 was never about mutah as taught growing up as a child. Never understood the ayah that way. I could have supported it if the verse is clear about muta, but what they tried to deduce(muta) from the ayah doesn't make sense to me. Hence, my reason for rejection.



But I'm never gonna bring it up as an argument against shia when i know for sure they will come up with sunni text to back up their claims. I have read more elsewhere online while following this thread and I see no way you can successfully break shi'a's back unless you stick to Quran only on this issue and disregard all pro-mutah ahadith.



Quran comes first and it is the criteria to determine who is right or wrong. And don't even think for a second that albaqir himself does muta. He doesnt. He is simply defending the text since our sunni brothers are fond of asking for dalil. So he gives them.



Here is the thing, if you follow a famous hadith which says to follow the sunnah and sunnah of sahaba, by that logical standard, shia have the right to claim mutah is sunnah. Middle path is the way to go. I have long understood both major Islamic sects are different sides of the same coin.



If shia are guilty of nikah mutah as zina. Section of Sunni are guilty of misyar another form of zina. It is even funny that the region(Arab - Saudi especially) that critidizes shia are the ones practicing misyar. Yet they have scholars that many brothers here revered so much. Saudi govt could not have approved misyar without their scholars of Islam. So what's the point of condemning shia?. Matter of fact, their muta is more plausible than misyar. Aren't they fulfilling hadith which says zina will be called by other name? .



Far as I am concern, sura nisai 24 has nothing to do with mutah unless anymore can prove to me by using mutawatir hadith that it was about mut'ah. Note that there are amongst the sunni (not contemporary ones) who believe the ayah was revealed about muta and they came up with their evidences but I am not convinced.



However, I will continue to distance myself from saying muta is zina. If it was not considered zina by definition in the time of nabi regardless of whether before or after the ban, it remains muta. To give it another definition of zina is to speak ill of the prophet. You can see why I'm adamant.


Albaqir however doesn't want me to bring misyar into this. Bringing up misyar into this put sunni brothers in check. Thats what i need him to understand. I remember you (sino) said women's rights is zero in mut'ah marriage. It is the same here https://islamqa.info/en/82390 . Sheikh Bin Baz approved of it but it seems sheikh Albani tag it haram.



Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymeen (may Allaah have mercy on him) used to say that it was permissible, then he stopped saying that because of the negative effects, as it was poorly applied by some wrongdoers. That if Misyaar marriage fulfils the conditions of a valid marriage, namely the proposal and acceptance, the consent of the wali and witnesses or announcement of the marriage, then it is a valid marriage contract, and it is good for some categories of men and women whose circumstances call for this type of marriage.


Pay attention to underline, albaqir said the same. He is not concerned about transgressors which this sheikh vouched too. @bold, mut'ah also meets this conditions. So you are the same.