₦airaland Forum

AlBaqir:
Brother, I got your point and the link I gave you treated your question among others. However, Sheik ibn Taymiyyah believed Allah is a "body" with hands, face, legs haqiqi (real). And he believed He can move from one place to another, and it was reported that he demonstrated the bogus hadith of Abu Hurairah which says Allah used to come down to the first heavens in later part of night; Ibn Taymiyyah demonstrated that saying "like this"; he then moved from the minbar to the floor. You need to read his Majmu'a Fatawa, amongst many other books authored by him.

He also believe in some other weird things. Allamah al-Albani in his Silsilah Sahiha vol. 1, pg.220, for example writes:

"Ibn Taymiyyah, may Allah's mercy be upon him had long statement in answering the philosophers and tried to prove to them that Genus is eternal, and during that he produced statements that the mind cannot understand and the hearts cannot accept...Verily his statement is not acceptable, nay it should be rejected according to hadith, and we wish that Ibn Taymiyyah did not indulge himself in that topic."

# Sunni Alim, Sayyid Hassan al-Saqqaf wrote a lot about Ibn Taymiyyah's heresy. Sunni Aimmah of old, people like Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, Ibn Hajar al-Makki, al-Subkhi, Al-Nabahani among others have written books to counter and expose Ibn Taymiyyah. While various Muslims countries like Egypt, Syria, Jordan etc have banned his books, only the countries headed by Wahabist continue to publish his books.

Perfection belongs to Allah alone.
What you have stated only emphasizes the sincerity of the scholars of sunnah and how they shunned dogmatism.

We give scholars excuses for their mistakes especially if they didn't find anyone to explain to them during their lifetime. Only a deviant will overlook a thousand virtues for just a single error.

Even Allah will not hold people accountable for things that they did out of Ignorance especially when they didn't have access to explanation.

Surah Al-Isra, Verse 15:
مَّنِ اهْتَدَىٰ فَإِنَّمَا يَهْتَدِي لِنَفْسِهِ وَمَن ضَلَّ فَإِنَّمَا يَضِلُّ عَلَيْهَا وَلَا تَزِرُ وَازِرَةٌ وِزْرَ أُخْرَىٰ وَمَا كُنَّا مُعَذِّبِينَ حَتَّىٰ نَبْعَثَ رَسُولًا

Whoever goes right, then he goes right only for the benefit of his ownself. And whoever goes astray, then he goes astray to his own loss. No one laden with burdens can bear another's burden. And We never punish until We have sent a Messenger (to give warning)
(English - Mohsin Khan)

via iQuran

So tell me if anyone explained these matters to him during his lifetime before you can hold him ransom for it.

This kind of excuse that we give Ibn Taymiyyah is the Same excuse Ibn Taymiyyah gave Imam Ibn Hazm Al-Andalusiyy for his Dhohiriyy ideology.

Even those that you are quoting too have their faults which are known but people will be excused for their errors if;

# They have many other virtues that overwhelm their error

# If they didn't find anyone to explain the matte to them before their death.
These two conditions are derived from the hadith of Hatib when he tried to leaked some of the Prophet's to the disbelievers of the Quraysh clan.

However we do not follow them in their mistakes, rather we clarify it to the people and that doesn't mean we have tarnished their reputation in anyway because perfection belongs to Allah alone.


As for your statement that Ibn Taymiyyah described how Allah descends, then this is a big lie, in three ways;

# Ibn Taymiyyah was in prison when Ibn Battuta -the great and famous traveler who narrated the incidence- entered Damascus. As the scholars of history researched.

#Ibn Battuta is known to narrate strange events that are contradictory to the intellect.

# Ibn Taymiyyah's words in his books are indisputably against such creed and this is manifest in his students like Ibn Katheer, Ibn Qoyyim, Imam Dhahabiyy etc and those who were influenced by his teachings such Ibn AbdulWahhaab, Ibn Uthymeen, Imam Albany etc.

Surah Al-Baqara, Verse 143:
وَكَذَٰلِكَ جَعَلْنَاكُمْ أُمَّةً وَسَطًا لِّتَكُونُوا شُهَدَاءَ عَلَى النَّاسِ وَيَكُونَ الرَّسُولُ عَلَيْكُمْ شَهِيدًا وَمَا جَعَلْنَا الْقِبْلَةَ الَّتِي كُنتَ عَلَيْهَا إِلَّا لِنَعْلَمَ مَن يَتَّبِعُ الرَّسُولَ مِمَّن يَنقَلِبُ عَلَىٰ عَقِبَيْهِ وَإِن كَانَتْ لَكَبِيرَةً إِلَّا عَلَى الَّذِينَ هَدَى اللَّهُ وَمَا كَانَ اللَّهُ لِيُضِيعَ إِيمَانَكُمْ إِنَّ اللَّهَ بِالنَّاسِ لَرَءُوفٌ رَّحِيمٌ

Thus, have We made of you an Ummat justly balanced, that ye might be witnesses over the nations, and the Messenger a witness over yourselves; and We appointed the Qibla to which thou wast used, only to test those who followed the Messenger from those who would turn on their heels (From the Faith). Indeed it was (A change) momentous, except to those guided by Allah. And never would Allah Make your faith of no effect. For Allah is to all people Most surely full of kindness, Most Merciful.
(English - Yusuf Ali)

via iQuran

www.nairaland.com/3057330/between-two-extremes-sheikh-solih#44843885


Surah Al-Baqara, Verse 143:
وَكَذَٰلِكَ جَعَلْنَاكُمْ أُمَّةً وَسَطًا لِّتَكُونُوا شُهَدَاءَ عَلَى النَّاسِ وَيَكُونَ الرَّسُولُ عَلَيْكُمْ شَهِيدًا وَمَا جَعَلْنَا الْقِبْلَةَ الَّتِي كُنتَ عَلَيْهَا إِلَّا لِنَعْلَمَ مَن يَتَّبِعُ الرَّسُولَ مِمَّن يَنقَلِبُ عَلَىٰ عَقِبَيْهِ وَإِن كَانَتْ لَكَبِيرَةً إِلَّا عَلَى الَّذِينَ هَدَى اللَّهُ وَمَا كَانَ اللَّهُ لِيُضِيعَ إِيمَانَكُمْ إِنَّ اللَّهَ بِالنَّاسِ لَرَءُوفٌ رَّحِيمٌ

Thus, have We made of you an Ummat (nation) justly balanced, that ye might be witnesses over the nations, and the Messenger a witness over yourselves; and We appointed the Qibla to which thou wast used, only to test those who followed the Messenger from those who would turn on their heels (From the Faith). Indeed it was (A change) momentous, except to those guided by Allah. And never would Allah Make your faith of no effect. For Allah is to all people Most surely full of kindness, Most Merciful.
(English - Yusuf Ali)

via iQuran

AlBaqir:
[s]Boy! You have this foul languages and boastful attitudes upon ignorance. And such is usually influenced by intolerance and fanaticism. Where is your "good manners, good exhortations and sound argument" as regard to Quranic instructions on dialogue? Interestingly some of your brothers in faith have cautioned you yet you are unrepentant.

Then I wonder:

# What exactly of my "religion" you have ever attempted not to mention of your fanciful "exposition"?

# What exactly is "retreating from one feeble line of defense to another"?

On this thread, we dialogue on Imamah. You submitted your arguments in favor of your Khulafau. In that regard I challenged you with Hadith Khalifatain. You pull some stunt to weaken the hadith but you failed and at the end submitted the hadith is Hasan. Seeing the danger, [size=16]you weirdly and "nasibily" [/size] concluded that "Khalifas" in that hadith does not mean Caliph who succeed a person as against your initial definition of "Khalifah, Imam", of someone or something that replace a person. This alone exposed your desperation, and I have no help for you there.

Furthermore, I present to you Hadith Salat. Here we explore from the glorious Quran the salat and barakat upon Nabi Ibrahim and his offspring. Preference over mankind, Imamah over mankind, Authority and wisdom were among many salat and barakat which Allah gave to Nabi Ibrahim and his offspring. These exact the same are what Muhammad and his offspring were blessed with.
Again, [size=16]the nasibism in you [/size] made you weirdly and recklessly spew unimaginable comment: That "Abu Bakr and Umar, and all Qurayshi clans" were also part of it.

Here I helped you increase the font size of Hadith as-Salat and asked you if your candidates were ever part of Ahli Muhammad (Muhammad's progeny)?!

While you dodged the thunderbolt, I gave you Hadith wilayah. Just a peep of it. All you can result to is foul languages, fanciful boasting of "winner oh oh winner"!

[/s]

Read

Arisheloaded:
AMEEN. Jazakallah Khayran Akhee. BARAKALAHUFIHI.

Aameen wa iyyaak

Women's Wearing Tight / Fitted Cloths!!!
?

All praises & thanks are be to ALLAH (سبحانه وتعالى). The Lord of the Aa'lameen.
,

Wearing tight clothes that show off a woman’s charms and that may cause temptation is haraam, because the Prophet صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ said:

“There are two types of the people of Hell whom I have not seen: men with whips like the tails of cattle with which they strike the people i.e., by way of wrongdoing and oppression and women who are clothed yet naked, astray and leading others astray.” (Muslim)

The phrase “clothed yet naked” has been interpreted as meaning that they wear short clothes that do not cover the awrah that should be covered, or as meaning that they wear thin clothes that do not prevent people from seeing the woman’s skin, or as meaning that they wear tight/fitted clothes which prevent others from seeing (the skin) but which show off the woman’s charms.

Based on this, it is not permissible for a woman to wear these tight clothes except in front of the one in front of whom she is permitted to show her awrah, namely the husband, for there is no awrah between husband and wife.

ALLAH (سبحانه وتعالى) says:

“Except from their wives or (the slaves) that their right hands possess, for then, they are free from blame”
[al-Mu’minoon, 23:6]

And A’isha رَضِي اللَّهُ عَنْها said:

[size=16]“The Prophet صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ and I used to do ghusl (from janaabah) from the same vessel, taking turns to dip our hands in it.”
[/size]
[agreed upon]

So there is no awrah between a man and his wife, but between a woman and her mahrams she is obliged to cover her awrah. It is not permissible to wear tight clothes in front of mahrams or other women, if they are very tight and show off the woman’s charms.

Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymeen (may ALLAH (سبحانه وتعالى) have mercy on him).
[Fataawa Nisa’iyyah, p. 44]

And ALLAH (سبحانه وتعالى) knows best.

May ALLAH (سبحانه وتعالى) protect us from any fithna & make us understand sahih deen which leads to jannah.

Allah Humma Aameen.

Today’s Beautiful Hadith is about Preaching
 
Narrated Anas bin Malik RA: The Prophet (peace be upon him) said, "Facilitate things to people (concerning religious matters), and do not make it hard for them and give them good tidings and do not make them run away (from Islam). (Bukhari - Vol. 1, Book 3, Hadith 69)

Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah said:

If a person slanders them in a way that does not impugn their good character or religious commitment, such as describing one of them as being stingy or cowardly or lacking in knowledge or not being an ascetic and so on, then he deserves to be rebuked and disciplined, but we do not rule him to be a kaafir because of that. This is how the words of those who were not regarded as kaafirs by the scholars are to be understood.

If a person curses them and slanders them in general terms, this is an area of scholarly dispute, depending on whether this cursing is motivated by mere feelings or religious doctrines. If a person goes beyond that and claims that they apostatized after the death of the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), apart from a small group of no more than ten or so individuals, or that most of them rebelled and did evil, then there is no doubt that such a person is a kaafir, because he has denied what is stated in more than one place in the Qur’aan, that Allaah was pleased with them and praised them. Indeed whoever doubts that such a person is a kaafir is himself a kaafir, because this implies that those who transmitted the Qur’aan and Sunnah were kaafirs or evildoers and that the best of this ummah which is described in the verse “You are the best of peoples ever raised up for mankind” [Aal ‘Imraan 3:110 – interpretation of the meaning] – the first generation – were mostly kaafirs and hypocrites. It implies that this ummah is the worst of nations, and that the first generations of this ummah are the most evil. No doubt this is blatant kufr, the evidence for which is quite clear.

Hence you will find that most of those who proclaim such views will sooner or later be shown to be heretics. Heretics usually conceal their views, but Allaah has punished some of them to make an example of them, and there are many reports that they were turned into pigs in life and in death. The scholars have compiled such reports, such as al-Haafiz al-Saalih Abu ‘Abd-Allaah Muhammad ibn ‘Abd al-Waahid al-Maqdisi, in his book al-Nahi ‘an Sabb al-Ashaab in which he narrated the punishments that befell such heretics.

In conclusion, there are some groups of those who slander the Sahaabah concerning who them is no doubt that they are kaafirs, others who cannot be judged to be kaafirs, and others concerning whom there is some doubt regarding that.

Al-Saarim al-Maslool ‘ala Shaatim al-Rasool , p. 590-591.

Shaykh Saalih al-Fawzaan said:

The way of Ahl al-Sunnah wa’l-Jamaa’ah is to love the family (ahl al-bayt) of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him).
The Naasibis love the Sahaabah but hate the family of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), hence they were called Naasibis because they set themselves up (nasb) as enemies of the family of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him).

The Raafidis are the opposite: they love the Prophet’s family (ahl al-bayt) – or so they claim, but they hate the Sahaabah, whom they curse, denounce as kaafirs and criticize.

Whoever hates the Sahaabah hates Islam, because they are the bearers of Islam and the followers of the Chosen Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him). So whoever hates them hates Islam, and this indicates that there is no faith in the hearts of such people and that they do not love Islam.

This is an important basic principle which the Muslims should understand, namely loving and respecting the Sahaabah, because that is part of faith. Hating them or hating one of them is kufr and hypocrisy, because loving them is part of loving the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) and hating them is part of hating the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him).

Sharh al-‘Aqeedah al-Waasitiyyah.

https://islamqa.info/en/45563

AlBaqir:
Am sorry man, Albaqir doesn't engage in win or lose dialogue. I can see all you can ever think of is "I cant or will not be defeated". This kind of attitude blocks person's insight and thereafter you become a fanatic. How many things you have either denied or not ready to accept correction in several course of our dialogue?! Whoever is influenced and driving by such is an ignorant fool.

"Words such as losers, winners and other such western and materialistic words and expressions should not be used. If we enter the arena for the sake of God and for carrying out our responsibilities, then wining and losing are meaningless" {Ayatullah sayyid Ali Khamenei (r.a)}

"We should adopt a truth-based outlook towards all matters, not a biased, lustful and business-like one. We should look at all matters with a vision of supporting the Truth. THIS IS HOW OUR HEARTS GET CLOSE TO GOD"
{Sayyid Ali Khamenei}

NB: If I ever dialogue with you or anybody else, it is not primarily because of that very person. Always remember the spectators (viewers) are much more than the two debaters.

WA Salam.

Such a horrible interpretation!

If not because of my fear that some innocent people might fall into your misguidance, I wouldn't even give thrash you post a second thought.

I have always stated my goal, and it is your repentance.

I exposed the weakness of your religion and told you how you retreated from one feeble line of defense to another. Instead of you to admit the falsehood of your path, you just pull another stunt of arrogance.

This is not the first time you are pulling such stunts.

The earlier you repent the better for you. That's my final advice for you.

Then your quote from Ali Khameni, why don't you reference it? you don't want to mention your shia books do that more of your misguidances won't be exposed!

AlBaqir:
THE TRUE WALI OF THE PROPHET

Imam Ibn 'Asim (d. 287H) records:

Husayn b. Ali and Ahmad b. Uthman - Muhammad b. Khalid b. Athmah - Musa b. Ya'qub - al-Muhajir b. Mismar - Aishah bint Sa'd - her father:

"I heard the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him, saying on the day of al-Juhfah while holding the hand of Ali, and he delivered a sermon, and thanked Allah and praised Him, and then said: "O Mankind! I AM YOUR WALI'. They replied, "You have said the truth, O Messenger of Allah." Then he held the hand of Ali, may Allah be pleased with him, and raised it up, and said, "THIS (ALI) IS MY WALI, AND THE ONE TO DISCHARGE ON MY BEHALF"

Allamah al -Albani says: It is Sahih (authentic) because it has shawahid.

Ref: {Kitab al-Sunnah (al-Maktab al-Islami; 1st edition, 1410 H)[annotator: Muhammad Nasir al-Din al-Albani], vol.2, p.565,#1189}.

NB: There are lots of hadith of this genre. It is however a waste of time posting them since you are even dishonest to previous ahadith.

# Unfortunately, what do we have after the demise of the Prophet? Abu Bakr and Umar claimed what never belonged to them.

Imam Muslim records Umar ibn al-khattab saying:

"When the Messenger of Allāh, peace be upon him, died, Abū Bakr said: “I am the WALI of the Messenger of Allāh, peace be upon him.”.... So both of you ('Alī and 'Abbās) thought him (i.e. Abū Bakr) to be a liar, sinful, A TRAITOR and dishonest. And Allāh knows that he was really truthful, pious, rightly-guided and a follower of the truth. Abū Bakr died and I became the WALI of the Messenger of Allāh, peace be upon him, and the walī of Abū Bakr. So both of you thought me to be a liar, sinful, A TRAITOR and dishonest."

Ref: {Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim (Beirut: Dār Iḥyā al-Turāth al-'Arabī), vol. 3, p. 1376, #1757}.

You have raised two points today and I thrashed them. And you -consciously or unconsciously - accepted defeat.
That is why you are fleeing to another hadith to distort.

I'll attend to you tomorrow, in shaa Allah

Undoubtedly it is a sign of great misfortune and misguidance if a person’s faith is based on slandering the companions of the best of mankind (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) or arguing about the disputes that arose among them, instead of occupying himself with doing that which will benefit him in both his worldly and spiritual affairs.

No one should have any reason to slander or hate or bear grudges against the companions of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him). Their virtues are many, for they are the ones who supported Islam and spread the faith; they are the ones who fought the mushrikeen; they are the ones who transmitted the Qur’aan, Sunnah and rulings. They sacrificed themselves, their blood and their wealth for the sake of Allaah. Allaah chose them to be the companions of His Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), so no one slanders them or hates them except a hypocrite whose does not love Islam or believe in it.

It was narrated that al-Bara’ (may Allaah be pleased with him) said: I heard the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) say: “The Ansaar: no one loves them but a believer and no one hates them but a hypocrite. Whoever loves them, Allaah will love him, and whoever hates them, Allaah will hate him.”
Narrated by al-Bukhaari, 3672; Muslim, 75.

If a man who hates the Ansaar cannot be a believer and that makes him a hypocrite, then how about one who hates the Ansaar and Muhaajireen and those who followed them in truth, and slanders them, curses them and denounces them and those who love them as kaafirs – as the Raafidis do? Undoubtedly they deserve more to be regarded as kaafirs and hypocrites, and of not being believers.

Al-Tahhaawi said, discussing the beliefs of Ahl al-Sunnah wa’l-Jamaa’ah:

We love the companions of the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) and we do not neglect to love any one of them, nor do we disavow any one of them. We hate those who hate them and who criticize them, and we only mention them in good terms. Loving them is part of religious commitment, faith and ihsaan, and hating them is kufr, hypocrisy and wrongdoing.

https://islamqa.info/en/45563

PICKING AND CHOOSING OPINIONS THAT SUIT ONES DESIRES

Shaykh Saalih Al-Fawzaan, when asked if a woman can unveil her face because of the difference of opinion on this matter, replied:
“No one uses the difference of opinion amongst the scholars as a
justification except for the people of desires who love to follow their
whims.

As for the one who fears Allaah, he does not use the differences of opinion as an excuse.
Differences of opinions exist amongst the scholars. In fact, there is
almost no issue from among the issues of fiqh, except that there can be found a difference of opinion amongst the scholars in it.

This is why Allaah has commanded us to refer back to the Book and the Sunnah.

“And if you differ in anything, then refer it back to Allaah and the
Messenger if you truly believe in Allaah and the last day. ” [4:59]

So differences of opinion exist.
However, it is not permissible for us to (only) accept the opinion that confirms to our desires and aspirations, whilst rejecting the one that is supported by the evidences just because it contradicts our desires. This is not permissible.

So what is required is to take the opinion that is in conformity with the evidence from the Book and the Sunnah with regard to the Hijaab as well as everything else.”

The shaykh then went on to confirm the obligation of a woman veiling her face.
[Ta’ammulaat Fee Awaakhir Suratil Ahzaab, 49-51]
Taken from “Four Essays On The Obligation Of Veiling” p.4

AlBaqir:
So, you mean Salat Ibrahimiyyah that All sahabah including Abu Bakr and Umar did is for Abu Bakr and Umar also, along with all the Quraysh clan?! You mean Abu Bakr and Umar were also choosed above mankind?! You mean Allah made them Imam over mankind?! You mean Allah gave them hikmah and authority?!

I can clearly see your desperation. Please do not pull such stunt again. Prophet emphatically introduced his Ahl al-Bayt to be Ali, Hassan, Hussein and Fatima with their offspring. I do not know how Abu Bakr and Umar suddenly came from Ahli Muhammad. Wonder shall never end.
I have given you hadith sahih in Sahih al-Bukhari from Ibn Abbas under the Tafsir of ayah 33-34 of surah Aal Imran.

In fact none of your Shuyukh of old or present has ever make such a reckless argument.



Ma sha Allah. That's why He says the Imamah is His covenant and it will never reach the transgressors. Apart from the fact that none of them were from the progeny (itrah) of Muhammad, I will remind you that your candidates were Mushrikun for years before and after Islam until they both submit (one early and the other one later). Besides, Umar b. al-Khattab confessed he DOUBTED the Nubuwah of Muhammad at Hudaybiyah, and severally he never stop running away from Battlefields.

You are seriously showing signs of desperation because you have no tangible point again, so you just jump from one argument to another. May Allah guide you.

Do you find it hard to believe that they are part of the family of Ibrahim? please see your books of history, biography and lineages!

Didn't Allah make them Imam?! He made them khalifah of the Prophet alyhissolaat wassalaam after his demise! And the believers followed them and are still following them! So stop the hating. So if you say they are wrongdoers then you are either accusing Allah of ignorance or mistake by making them Imam.


As for other members of Quraysh clan, if they are righteous then they will also have a share in it. Don't you see that Allah's messenger alyhissolaat wassalaam said that the khalifah belongs to Quraysh.

And I didn't say that they are from Prophet Muhammad alyhissolaat wassalaam progeny, I said they are from Ibrahim's progeny. so don't muddle up the issue.

Then, as I explained to you earlier today, that the fact that a person has a virtue doesn't mean that another person can't have the same virtue or perhaps greater virtue.

The fact that Ibrahim was made an imam doesn't mean that another person can't be imam! Prophet Nooh, he came before Ibrahim, is he not an Imam?! So what's your point?

And even people who are not prophets but are simply righteous slaves of Allah can be Imam. Ponder on the following verse;

Allah described the slaves of Rahman thus;

Surah Al-Furqan, Verse 74:
وَالَّذِينَ يَقُولُونَ رَبَّنَا هَبْ لَنَا مِنْ أَزْوَاجِنَا وَذُرِّيَّاتِنَا قُرَّةَ أَعْيُنٍ وَاجْعَلْنَا لِلْمُتَّقِينَ إِمَامًا

And those who say: "Our Lord! Bestow on us from our wives and our offspring who will be the comfort of our eyes, and make us leaders for the Muttaqun" (pious - see V. 2:2 and the footnote of V. 3:164)."
(English - Mohsin Khan)

via iQuran

So being imam is not restricted to Ibrahim and his progeny alone.

So, Allah promised to make Ibrahim an Imam, but he asked Allah to make take imam from his progeny also. So how does that restrict the imam to Ibrahim and his progeny?

lexiconkabir:
he is a Quran only muslim, disbelieve in the authentic sayings of Muhammad s.a.w using some wierd argument, forget him! prettymina, for your own good, dont follow any of the rubbish he posted, its clear misguidance, beware of him!

JazaakumuLLaahu khayraa.

AlBaqir:
[size=15pt]Hadith as-Salat[/size]

Imam al-Bukhari (d. 256 H) documents:

Abd al-Raḥman b. Abī Laylī: Ka’b b. ‘Ujrah met me and said, “Shall I not give you a present I got from the Prophet, peace be upon him?” I said, “Yes, give it to me.” He said, “We asked the Messenger of Allāh, peace be upon him, and said, ‘O Messenger of Allāh! What is the manner of the ṣalāt upon you, Ahl al-Bayt, for Allāh has taught us how to send salām you (Ahl al-Bayt)?’

He replied, ‘Say: O Allāh! Send ṣalāt upon Muḥammad and upon the family of Muḥammad, in exactly the same manner as You sent ṣalāt upon Ibrāhīm and upon the family of Ibrāhīm. You are the Most Praiseworthy, the Most Glorious. O Allāh! Bless Muḥammad and the family of Muḥammad, in exactly the same manner as You blessed Ibrāhīm and the family of Ibrāhīm. You are the Most Praiseworthy, the Most Glorious.’”

Ref: al-Jāmi’ al-Ṣaḥīḥ al-Mukhtaṣar (Beirut: Dār Ibn Kathīr; 3rd edition, 1407 H) [annotator: Dr. Muṣṭafā Dīb al-Baghā], vol. 3, p. 1233, # 3190

NB: This hadith is Mutawattir no doubt.

Interestingly both Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman and all the Sahabah engaged in this salawat sherif.

HOW DOES ALLAH BLESSED NABI IBRAHIM AND HIS AHL AL-BAYT THAT THE EXACT SAME BLESSINGS IS FOR MUHAMMAD AND HIS AHL AL-BAYT?!

1. Preference over mankind
"Verily, Allāh chose Ādam, Nūḥ, the family of Ibrāhīm and the family of Imrān above the worlds. (They are) offspring, one of the other, and Allāh is the All-Hearing, All-Knowing. {Aal-Imran: 33-34}

Concerning an offspring of Nabi Ibrahim, Allah says:

"And indeed, We gave the offspring of Isrāīl the Book, and authority and prophethood, and We provided them with good things, AND WE MADE THEM SUPERIOR ABOVE THE WORLDS.{Quran 45:16}

Imam al-Bukhari documents the Tafsir of this ayat Sherif:

"Verily, Allāh chose Ādam, Nūḥ, the family of Ibrāhīm and the family of Imrān above the worlds ... Allāh provides sustenance to whom He wills, without limit.} Ibn ‘Abbās said: “{and the family of Imrān} They are the believers from the family of Ibrāhīm, the family of ‘Imrān, the family of Yāsīn AND THE FAMILY OF MUḤAMMAD, peace be upon him. He (Allāh) says: {Verily, the most entitled to Ibrāhīm are those who followed him} They are the believers."

Ref: al-Jāmi’ al-Ṣaḥīḥ al-Mukhtaṣar (Beirut: Dār Ibn Kathīr; 3rd edition, 1407 H) [annotator: Dr. Muṣṭafā Dīb al-Baghā], vol. 3, p. 1263

So, Mr Newnas how can Abu Bakr and Umar ever be the leader of Ahli Muhammad when Allah has prefer and choose them above mankind?

2. Imam of mankind

"And when Ibrāhīm was tried by his Lord with some statements, and he fulfilled them, He said, "I will appoint you an Imām OF MANKIND.” He (Ibrāhīm) asked, “And of my offspring?” He (Allāh) replied, “My Covenant shall not reach the wrongdoers {al-Baqarah: 124}


Imam Ibn Kathir (d. 774 H) writes:

"Allāh the Most High says: {And when Ibrāhīm was tried by his Lord with some statements, and he fulfilled them, He said, “I will appoint you an Imām of mankind.” He (Ibrāhīm) asked, “And of my offspring?” He (Allāh) replied, “My Covenant shall not reach the wrong-doers.”} When he fulfilled the huge obligations which his Lord commanded him with, he appointed him the Imām of mankind, whom they must follow, and whose guidance they must copy. He requested Allāh that this Imāmah be connected with his lineage, and be uninterrupted within his offspring, and be perpetual forever among his offspring. So, what he asked WAS GRANTED, and he was granted full authority of Imāmah, and the wrong-doers were excluded from its reach, and it was made exclusive to the righteous scholars among his offspring."

Ref: Abū al-Fidā Ismā’īl b. Kathīr, Qiṣaṣ al-Anbiyā (Dār al-Kutub al-Ḥadīthah; 1st edition, 1388 H) [annotator: Muṣṭafā ‘Abd al-Wāḥid], vol. 1, p. 232; al-Bidāyah wa al-Nihāyah (Dār Iḥyā al-Turāth al-‘Arabī; 1st edition, 1408 H) [annotator: ‘Alī Shīrī], vol. 1, p. 191

Mr Newnas, was Abu Bakr and Umar part of Muhammad's offspring, Ahl al-Bayt to qualify for the same Imamah granted to Ibrahim and his offspring?

3. al-Hikmah and authority

"We have granted the Book and the Ḥikmah to the family of Ibrāhīm, and We gave them a great kingdom{surah an-Nasa: 54}

"They are those whom We gave the Book, the authority, and prophethood" ({Quran 6:89}

Don't you know that Abu Bakr and Umar from Quraysh clan? And Quraysh clan are from the progeny of Ismail the son of Ibrahim (Allah's khaleel) alyhimassalam.

So they also have a share in those virtues.

And besides, Allah gives his authority to whom he wills.

Muhammad Balogun posted;

The story of Shaykh Muhammad Ayyoub, rahimahullahu ta'aala, the great reciter of the Book of the Lord of the worlds and former Imam of the Mosque of the best of creations of the Lord of the worlds, reminds me of two incidents.

1. When Saalih, the freed slave of Abu Hudhaifah, became the Imam of the companions, Umar said, 'Indeed, Allaah raises some people with His Words (i.e. Quran) and debase others with it.

2. When Imam Az-Zuhree met the caliph AbdulMalik, the latter asked him about those in charge of religious leadership in various regions and they were all freed slaves. Ataa ibn Abee Rabah, the eminent scholar of Makkah, was a freed black slave.

Imam Muhammad Ayyoub was the son of a poor migrant from Burma.
May Allaah overlook his mistakes, magnify his good deeds and grant him Paradise, the home of His eternal bliss.

usermane:
Here are a few important points in response to your questions;


1. Tahajjud is not salat. The verses of the Qur'an never described it with the word "salat". Hence, the requirement of Salat like Ablution do not govern it. Basically, it just involve waking at night to prostrate and invoke God.


2. You can do tahajjud without even getting out of your bed. Everything else like doing Ablution before Tahajjud and performing it preferably in the latter third of the night are baseless claims or hearsays. You can check all the Quranic verses that deals with Tahhajud for confirmation-- Qur'an 17:17, 28:26, 73:6, 26.


3. Menstruation doesn't render women impure for any ritual in Islam. Sure menses, may be physical impurity, but so is a mucus from the nose. That you have mucus running from your nose is no ground to exempt yourself from salat. Is it? This is why you wont find any verse in Quran exempting menstruating women from any act worship, salat, fast or reading the Quran.

Of course, those who disagree with me will cite Hadith on the prophet prohibiting menstruating women from acts of worship. Please, check the link below for a few evidences on the earthly and spurious nature of Hadith books. I really don't have time to go into that matter again.

Ten Hadith Against Hadith Books




I was hesitant about posting this because of my history here. Islam for Muslim section is no place for my type and that won't change. In other forums, you are shown respect if you are a heterodox Muslim who come in and offers his ideas and knowledge on Islam.

But in Islam for Muslim section, this respect only comes if you are a mainstream Muslim with orthodox view. Someone like me, an heterodox Muslim is not considered worthy of speaking here. That is why I said in an earlier post that I do not consider this section any more than a joke.

Please explain an heterodox Muslim.

AlBaqir:
So your criticism is on Sharik b. Abd Allah al-Nakha'i. Once he is exonerated, the hadith become authentic.

[size=15pt]ABOUT SHARIK b. ABD ALLAH AL-NAKHA'I[/size],

# Imām al-Mizzī (d. 742 H) submits:

"Al-Bukhārī uses him as a witness in al-Jāmi’ (i.e. Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī), and narrates from him under the Chapter “Raising both Hands in Ṣalāt” and others. Muslim too narrates from him in mutāba’āt (supporting narrations), and others rely upon him as a ḥujjah".

Ref: Jamāl al-Dīn Abū al-Ḥajjāj Yūsuf al-Mizzī, Tahdhīb al-Kamāl fī Asmā al-Rijāl (Beirut: Muasassat al-Risālah; 2nd edition, 1413 H), vol. 12, p. 475, # 2736

# Imām al-Dhahabī (d. 748 H) makes a similar statement about him:

"I (al-Dhahabī) say: Al-Bukhārī uses him as a witness, and Muslim narrates from him in mutāba’āt. Al-Nasāī and others rely upon him as a ḥujjah."

Ref: Shams al-Dīn Muḥammad b. Aḥmad b. ‘Uthmān al-Dhahabī, Tārīkh al-Islām wa Wafiyāt al-Mashāhīr wa al-A’lām (Beirut: Dār al-Kitāb al-‘Arabī; 1st edition, 1407 H) [annotator: Dr. ‘Umar ‘Abd al-Salām Tadmurī], vol. 11, p. 169

So, the overwhelming majority of classical Sunnī ḥadīth scientists considered him a ḥujjah in his own right. Meanwhile, Imām al-Ḥākim (d. 403 H) has a completely different view of Imām Muslim’s (d. 261 H) treatment of Sharīk. For instance, he states about a riwāyah:

"It has a shāhid (witness), which is upon the standard of Muslim, for he (Muslim) has relied upon Sharīk b. ‘Abd Allāh al-Nakha’ī as a ḥujjah."

Ref: Abū ‘Abd Allāh Muḥammad b. ‘Abd Allāh al-Ḥākim al-Naysābūrī, al-Mustadrak ‘alā al-Ṣaḥīḥayn (Beirut: Dār al-Kutub al-’Ilmiyyah; 1st edition, 1411 H) [annotator: Muṣtafā ‘Abd al-Qādir ‘Aṭā], vol. 1, p. 65, # 45

He repeats elsewhere:

"(Imām) Muslim has relied upon Sharīk b. ‘Abd Allāh as a ḥujjah, and he is to be relied upon as a ḥujjah."

Ref: ^Ibid, vol. 1, p. 193, # 377

And, again:

"It is gharīb ṣaḥīḥ, for Muslim has relied upon Sharīk b. ‘Abd Allāh has a ḥujjah.".93

Ref:^ Ibid, vol. 1, p. 539, # 1412

In simpler terms, the aḥādīth of Sharīk are ṣaḥīḥ upon the standard of Imām Muslim, according to al-Ḥākim! Al-Ḥāfiẓ, on his part, gives us some additional information about Sharīk, which may explain the reluctance of al-Bukhārī (d. 256 H) - and possibly Imām Muslim too - concerning his reports:

"Sharīk b. ‘Abd Allāh al-Nakha’ī al-Kūfī al-Qādī, (resided) first at Wāsiṭ and then Kūfah, Abū ‘Abd Allāh: Ṣadūq (very truthful), made a lot of mistakes. His memory deteriorated since he became the judge in Kūfah. He was just, excellent, a great worshipper of Allāh, and he was severe against the people of bid’ah."

Ref: Aḥmad b. ‘Alī b. Ḥajar al-‘Asqalānī, Taqrīb al-Tahdhīb (Beirut: Dār al-Maktabah al-‘Ilmiyyah; 2nd edition, 1415 H) [annotator: Muṣtafā ‘Abd al-Qādir ‘Aṭā], vol. 1, p. 417, # 2795

He developed a memory problem when he became the judge of Kūfah. Before this period, he was a completely accurate narrator. However, Imām Ibn ‘Adī (d. 365 H) makes an important observation about him in this regard, which must be taken into consideration:

"The overwhelming majority of his aḥādīth are ṣaḥīḥ and accurate (from his shuyūkh). As for the repugnancy in his aḥādīth, that occurred only due to his poor memory"
Ref: Abū Aḥmad ‘Abd Allāh b. ‘Adī al-Jirjānī, al-Kāmil fī Ḍu’afā al-Rijāl (Dār al-Fikr li al-Ṭabā’at wa al-Nashr wa al-Tawzī’; 3rd edition, 1409 H), vol. 4, p. 22, # 888/8

This puts things into their proper perspective. Despite his memory problems, most of his aḥādīth are still ṣaḥīḥ and accurate. So, when it is said that he made “a lot” of mistakes, this was relative. His many mistakes affected only a small minority of his aḥādīth. To get a clearer picture, this is what Imām al-‘Ijlī (d. 261 H) states:

"Sharīk b. ‘Abd Allāh al-Nakha’ī, the judge, Kūfī: Thiqah (trustworthy), and he was ḥasan al-ḥadīth (i.e. his aḥādīth are ḥasan). The one who narrated most from him was Isḥāq b. Yūsuf al-Azraq al-Wāsiṭī. He heard 9000 (nine thousand) aḥādīth from him."

Ref: Abū al-Ḥasan Aḥmad b. ‘Abd Allāh b. Ṣāliḥ al-‘Ijlī al-Kūfī, Ma’rifat al-Thiqāt (Madīnah: Maktabah al-Dār; 1st edition, 1405 H), vol. 1, p. 453, # 727

Apparently, Sharīk was indeed a very prolific narrator. He narrated 9000 aḥādīth to Isḥāq alone! How many more then did he transmit to others? Obviously, there were more! Meanwhile, let us assume – for the sake of argument - that Sharīk narrated only those 9000 throughout his lifetime. So, in what percentage of them did he make mistakes due to his poor memory? Imām Ibn ‘Adī records the answer:

‘Umar b. Sinān narrated to us that he heard Ibrāhīm b. Sa’d al-Jawharī saying: “Sharīk made mistakes in 400 (four hundred) aḥādīth.”
Ref: Abū Aḥmad ‘Abd Allāh b. ‘Adī al-Jirjānī, al-Kāmil fī Ḍu’afā al-Rijāl (Dār al-Fikr li al-Ṭabā’at wa al-Nashr wa al-Tawzī’; 3rd edition, 1409 H), vol. 4, p. 8, # 888/8

In other words, Sharīk made mistakes – due to his poor memory - in 4 out of every 90 aḥādīth; and he authentically and accurately transmitted 86 out of every 90 aḥādīth from his shuyūkh. For Allāh’s sake, is this enough to call for his head and abandon all his aḥādīth as some from the Ahl al-Sunnah have done? What are all these bloated statements about him then?

This revelation obviously lays the exaggerations and the exaggerated positions concerning him to rest. His case was not as serious as some make it out to be. No wonder, most of the classical Sunnī ḥadīth collectors relied upon him as a ḥujjah in their books. Imām al-Dhahabī too concludes about him:

"I (al-Dhahabī) say: Sharīk was ḥasan al-ḥadīth (i.e. his aḥādīth are ḥasan). He was an Imām, a jurist, a prolific ḥadīth narrator. He was not as precise as Ḥammād b. Zayd. Al-Bukhārī has used him as a witness, Muslim has narrated mutāba’at reports from him, and Yaḥyā b. Ma’īn declared him thiqah (trustworthy) ... His aḥādīth are in the ḥasan categories"

Ref: Muḥammad b. Aḥmad b. ‘Uthmān al-Dhahabī, Tadhkirat al-Ḥuffāz (Beirut: Dār al-Kutub al-‘Ilmiyyah; 1st edition, 1419 H) [annotator: Zakariyyāh ‘Umayrāt], vol. 1, p. 170

# Imām al-‘Ijlī has a similar submission:

"Sharīk b. ‘Abd Allāh al-Nakha’ī, the judge, Kūfī: Thiqah (trustworthy), and he was ḥasan al-ḥadīth (i.e. his aḥādīth are ḥasan)."

Ref: Abū al-Ḥasan Aḥmad b. ‘Abd Allāh b. Ṣāliḥ al-‘Ijlī al-Kūfī, Ma’rifat al-Thiqāt (Madīnah: Maktabah al-Dār; 1st edition, 1405 H), vol. 1, p. 453, # 727

# Imām al-Haythamī (d. 807 H) also says

"It is entirely recorded by Aḥmad, and the narrators of the two reports are narrators of the Ṣaḥīḥ, except Sharīk b. ‘Abd Allāh al-Nakha’ī who is ḥasan al-ḥadīth (i.e. his aḥādīth are ḥasan)."

Ref: Nūr al-Dīn ‘Alī b. Abī Bakr al-Haythamī, Majma’ al-Zawāid (Beirut: Dār al-Fikr; 1412 H), vol. 9, p. 164, # 14712

So, Sharīk was a thiqah (trustworthy) narrator who made many mistakes in 4 out of every 90 of his aḥādīth. He was taken as a ḥujjah by most of the classical Sunnī ḥadīth collectors, including possibly Imām Muslim. However, due to his errors, his aḥādīth are only of the ḥasan grading, according to some top Sunnī ḥadīth scientists. In our humble view, making mistakes in 4 out of every 90 aḥādīth is not enough to degrade his aḥādīth from the level of ṣaḥīḥ reports or to reject them altogether as some Sunnīs do!




Underlined statement VS bolded statement. What a contradiction. It only expose your thought against copy-pasted statement.
Hey yah! I can see the deep ignorance. Do you only honour and respect Quran but do not follow it? You want to "respect and honour" the Ahl al-bayt only but not ready to follow them.

Imam al-Mubarakfuri (d. 1282 H) quotes this under his commentary of hadith Thaqalain (second version of Hadith Khalifatain):

"Al-Qari said: 'The meaning of holding fast to them is to adhere to their love, to protect their honor, to follow their narrations, and to rely upon their opinions. This does not negate the taking of the Sunnah from other than them, due to his statement, peace be upon him, "My Sahabah are like the stars. Whichever of them you follow, you will be rightly guided" and due to His statement, Exalted be He: "Ask the people of al-Dhikr if you do not know." {[Tuhfat al-Ahwazi bi Sharh Jami al-Tirmidhi (Beirut: Dar al-kutub al-Illmiyyah; 1st edition, 1410 H), vol.10, p.196]}

Al-Qari apparently admits that Hadith Thaqalain commands the Ummah to follow the offspring of the Prophet after him. His argument however is that we should also follow the sahabah in addition to the Ahl al-bayt. There are two fatal problems with his submission:

# The hadith he is relying upon is unreliable. It is graded Mawdoo (fabricated) by al-Albani {[Silsilah al-Ahadith al-Da'ifah wa al-Mawdu'ah wa Atharihah al-Sayyiah fi al-Ummah (Riyadh: Dar al-Ma'arif; 1st edition, 1412 H), vol.1, p.144, #58]}

# Hadith Thaqalain (and hadith Khalifatain) addressed all mankind and that naturally included all the Sahabah.

Al-Mubarakfuri continues:

"Ibn al-Malik said: Adherence to the Book of Allah is to follow whatever is in it - and that is to follow the orders of Allah and desist from His prohibitions. The meaning of adherence to the offspring (of the Prophet) is to love them, and to seek guidance through their guidance and their way of life." Sayyid Jamal al-Din added, 'if it does not contradict the religion.'" [Ref:^ see previous ref for al-Mubarakfuri]}.

* Ibn al-Malik too concedes that the offspring of Muhammad must be followed, under Hadith Thaqalain. He makes no attempts to explain it away or fix artificial conditions. But, Sayyid Jamal al-Din moves a step forward: he could only follow the Ahl al-Bayt if their guidance or way of life did not contradict the religion! This weird opinion of Sayyid Jamal al-Din directly contradicts the explicit text of the riwayah:

"O mankind! I have left behind over you that which if you hold fast to it you will NEVER go astray: the Book of Allah and my offspring, my Ahl al-Bayt."

You will "never" go astray while following the Ahl al-Bayt. That is a clear guarantee from Allah and His Messenger.

..........................................


So both ahadith Thaqalain and Khalifatain (which are mutawatir anyway) destroyed the whatever hadith of Abu bakr this, Umar that. Observe, I have not at all post ahadith in support of Imam Ali ibn Abi Talib (alayhi Salam)'s Khilafah after the demise of the Prophet.

Enough of the gymnastics abeg!!!

You shot yourself in the foot. If only you would calm down and ponder on what you have posted, it's only an emphasis of my post.

Then the virtues of one person doesn't nullify the virtues of another person. The fact that Allah took Ibrahim -alyhissalam - as a khaleel (closest level of friendship) doesn't negate that the Prophet Muhammad alyhissolaat wassalaam is also a khaleel!

It is only a deviant that will change independent events to mutually exclusive events and vice versa just to suite his desires.

Then no one is infallible except Allah, even the Messenger alyhissolaat wassalaam erred. So everyone's commandment and obedience is still secondary to the Quran and sunnah.

The matter of Sharik is simple, he is religiously upright but has poor memory and muddled narrations up since he accepted the post of judge.

The case of people like this is clear to the student of hadith, you don't need the gymnastics you are doing!

# If we are able to prove that he reported the narration before he muddled, then we accept it.

# If we are sure that he reported it after muddling or we are uncertain about when he reported it, then we do not accept it unless we find someone else who is equal to him in memory or stronger then his report is strengthened to the level of Hasan lighayrihi.
This is only applicable if the fault in the reporter is his memory but if his fault is his religious uprightness then he remains weak.

This strengthening of narrators with another similar narrator is what is called mutaba'ah, i'tibaar, shaahid etc in the science of hadith.

But all the reports you quoted return to Sharik and have no other report to strengthen them.

Then hadith of someone like Sharik can't exceed the level of Hasan in fact it is Hasan lighayrihi not bithaatihi.

Secondly; The narrations of Abu Bakr and Umar are clear-cut authentic, the peak of authenticity, compiled by Bukharee and Muslim. And the Last verse of Surah fath and other similar verses on the virtues of the companions are a shaahid to those authentic narrations.

Then, Sheikh Mubarakpuri didn't interpret the narrations to mean caliphate or kingship rather he gave it the same meaning I gave it.
This type of virtue is not peculiar to the ahlul bayt rather several other companions have more explicit statements, didn't you see the report I quoted from mujma zawaaid of imam haythamiyy;

Be guided by those after me; Abu Bakr and Umar.

Clear and direct, and the other hadiths that you tried to sweep under the carpet!



Then ponder oh AlBaqir (may Allah soften your heart to repentance) the messenger said that those who have right to this khilafah are the Quraysh. Can't you see that the narrations that mentioned that the khilafah belongs to Quraysh are clear that it is not only the Prophet Muhammad's alyhissolaat wassalaam direct progeny that will be khalifah rather it is the clan of Quraysh.


Your last statement that one hadith destroyed some other, this is a ugly, deviant and weak statement. It's weakness is in two ways;

first; hadith don't destroy verses of the Quran or other hadiths, they are all from Allah the most Wise.

second; the hadith you are interpolating is just a single narration, that it's authenticity is much doubted but those ones of Abu Bakr and Umar are indisputably authentic and more in numbers. And you know the implication of this if you ever spent some time with the science of hadith.

bismiLLaah wa solatu wa salam Alaa rosooliLLaah

Your response is in three phases

Firstly, the hadiths are weak with this wording because they all evolve round Sharik who is weak in memory,

He is Sharik bn AbdiLLaah the judge.
Muhammad bn Yahya Al Qattaan reported from his father said; I saw some muddling in Sharik's reports.

AbdulJabbaar bn Muhammad said; I saI'd to Yahya bn Sa'eed; some people think Sharik only muddled reports in his last days (i.e old age). He (Yahya) replied; "he was always a muddler.
AbduLLah bn Mubaarak said; The hadiths of Sharik are nothing.

Aljurjaaniyy said; (Sharik is) poor in memory, muddled up reports.

Ibrahim bn Sa'eed alJawhariyy said; Sharik erred in four hundred reports.
(reference; meezanul i'tidaal volume 2 page 270)
Ibn Hajar summarize's it all in his taqreeb; sodooq(trustworthy) mukhti (errs). (taqreeb number; 2802)
So Sharik is religiously upright but has poor memory. (may Allah have mercy on him pardon me and him).
So why did Imam Albany authenticate it?
It's stated in your post; "because it has witnesses". But it's only the first part that has witness not the second part.
The Quran asks us to follow Allah and his messenger alyhissolaat wassalaam, and adds the scholars in some places, it adds the companions in other places.
So, the second part is weak.

Secondly;
Even if we accept that the hadith is authentic, it is not an evidence that khilafah, belongs to the ahl bayt only.
The text of the hadith points to that;
Now ponder; two khalifahs, The Quran and my progeny.

The meaning of khalifah here can't be caliphate because the Quran can't be a caliph or explain to me how Quran becomes king and wears crown or things like that.
So the meaning of khalifah hear is that we honour them and respect them. Because khalifah is a word that is used for whoever or whatever you leave behind after departing, not necessarily a ruler (see mu'jamul waseet pg 275 under root word kha lam and fa).

Thirdly,
You grab firmly a narration that is barely reliable and disregard several other clear-cut authentic narrations that mentioned the virtues of Abu Bakr and Umar .

Examples;

Follow those after me; Abu Bakr and Umar (tirmidhi; 3663) (Soheehah; 1233)
....but Allah and His messenger (alyhissolaat wassalaam) and the believers reject (anyone) except Abu Bakr. (Soheeh Muslim; Book of virtues of companions, chapter of virtues of Abu Bakr)

Lastly but definitely not the least;

The messenger of Allah alyhissolaat wassalaam said;
indeed the first of your religion is prophethood and mercy, then khalifah and mercy, then it will be kingship and oppression. (haythamiyy in alMujma' 5/189) Imam Suyooti said in tarikhul khulafa (published by darul ghaddil jadeed) pg 23 (hadith Hasan)

Definitely the first part mentioned here is the leadership of the Prophet Muhammad alyhissolaat wassalaam.
Then hadith is one of the signs of the Prophet's genuine prophethood. alyhissolaat wassalaam

The second part of isla-group it anyway you like- includes the khilafah of Abu Bakr and Umar.
so they are bona-fide khalifah and the Messenger alyhissolaat wassalaam described them as merciful.

Now tell me why the Messenger didn't order Ali to the Solah while on his death bed..

Kaff23:
so now I get it shia is another religion on is own.. which means shia is not Islamic so far d word conversion is in it.. well we can't call d Shia Muslims bcox they didn't believe in kalimatu sha ha da.. which is La illa ha illa lahu Muhammadu rosulullahi (s.a.w).. so who so ever didn't believe in this word was not a Muslim.. what a waste

They say the shahada out but have beliefs and deeds that clearly nullify these two basis of eeman eg grave worship.

AlBaqir:
^You talk too much. Hadith Khalifatain is before you. What is your submission? Hadith Wilayah and Hadith Khalifah are on their way in sha Allah. Lets see how you fair on Hadith Khalifatain.

bismiLLaah wa solatu wa salam Alaa rosooliLLaah

Your response is in three phases.

Firstly, the hadiths are weak with this wording because they all evolve round Sharik who is weak in memory,

He is Sharik bn AbdiLLaah the judge.

Muhammad bn Yahya Al Qattaan reported from his father said; I saw some muddling in Sharik's reports.

AbdulJabbaar bn Muhammad said; I saI'd to Yahya bn Sa'eed; some people think Sharik only muddled reports in his last days (i.e old age). He (Yahya) replied; "he was always a muddler.

AbduLLah bn Mubaarak said; The hadiths of Sharik are nothing.
Aljurjaaniyy said; (Sharik is) poor in memory, muddled up reports.
Ibrahim bn Sa'eed alJawhariyy said; Sharik erred in four hundred reports.
(reference; meezanul i'tidaal volume 2 page 270)

Ibn Hajar summarize's it all in his taqreeb; sodooq(trustworthy) mukhti (errs). (taqreeb number; 2802)
So Sharik is religiously upright but has poor memory. (may Allah have mercy on him pardon me and him).

So why did Imam Albany authenticate it?
It's stated in your post; "because it has witnesses". But it's only the first part that has witness not the second part.
The Quran asks us to follow Allah and his messenger alyhissolaat wassalaam, and adds the scholars in some places, it adds the companions in other places.

So, the second part is weak.

Secondly;
Even if we accept that the hadith is authentic, it is not an evidence that khilafah, belongs to the ahl bayt only.
The text of the hadith points to that;
Now ponder; two khalifahs, The Quran and my progeny.

The meaning of khalifah here can't be caliphate because the Quran can't be a caliph or explain to me how Quran becomes king and wears crown or things like that.

So the meaning of khalifah hear is that we honour them and respect them. Because khalifah is a word that is used for whoever or whatever you leave behind after departing, not necessarily a ruler (see mu'jamul waseet pg 275 under root word kha lam and fa).

Thirdly,
You grab firmly a narration that is barely reliable and disregard several other clear-cut authentic narrations that mentioned the virtues of Abu Bakr and Umar .

Examples;
Follow those after me; Abu Bakr and Umar (tirmidhi; 3663) (Soheehah; 1233)

....but Allah and His messenger (alyhissolaat wassalaam) and the believers reject (anyone) except Abu Bakr. (Soheeh Muslim; Book of virtues of companions, chapter of virtues of Abu Bakr)

Lastly but definitely not the least;

The messenger of Allah alyhissolaat wassalaam said;

indeed the first of your religion is prophethood and mercy, then khalifah and mercy, then it will be kingship and oppression. (haythamiyy in alMujma' 5/189) Imam Suyooti said in tarikhul khulafa (published by darul ghaddil jadeed) pg 23 (hadith Hasan)

Definitely the first part mentioned here is the leadership of the Prophet Muhammad alyhissolaat wassalaam.

Then hadith is one of the signs of the Prophet's genuine prophethood. alyhissolaat wassalaam


The second part -group it anyway you like- includes the khilafah of Abu Bakr and Umar.
so they are bona-fide khalifah and the Messenger alyhissolaat wassalaam described them as merciful.

Now tell me why the Messenger didn't order Ali to the Solah..

ﻣُّﺤَﻤَّﺪٌ ﺭَّﺳُﻮﻝُ ﭐﻟﻠَّﻪِ ۚ ﻭَﭐﻟَّﺬِﻳﻦَ ﻣَﻌَﻪُۥٓ ﺃَﺷِﺪَّﺁﺀُ ﻋَﻠَﻰ ﭐﻟْﻜُﻔَّﺎﺭِ ﺭُﺣَﻤَﺂﺀُ ﺑَﻴْﻨَﻬُﻢْ ۖ ﺗَﺮَﻯٰﻬُﻢْ ﺭُﻛَّﻌًﺎ ﺳُﺠَّﺪًﺍ ﻳَﺒْﺘَﻐُﻮﻥَ ﻓَﻀْﻠًﺎ ﻣِّﻦَ ﭐﻟﻠَّﻪِ ﻭَﺭِﺿْﻮَٰﻧًﺎ ۖ ﺳِﻴﻤَﺎﻫُﻢْ ﻓِﻰ ﻭُﺟُﻮﻫِﻬِﻢ ﻣِّﻦْ ﺃَﺛَﺮِ ﭐﻟﺴُّﺠُﻮﺩِ ۚ ﺫَٰﻟِﻚَ ﻣَﺜَﻠُﻬُﻢْ ﻓِﻰ ﭐﻟﺘَّﻮْﺭَﻯٰﺔِ ۚ ﻭَﻣَﺜَﻠُﻬُﻢْ ﻓِﻰ ﭐﻟْﺈِﻧﺠِﻴﻞِ ﻛَﺰَﺭْﻉٍ ﺃَﺧْﺮَﺝَ ﺷَﻄْـَٔﻪُۥ ﻓَـَٔﺎﺯَﺭَﻩُۥ ﻓَﭑﺳْﺘَﻐْﻠَﻆَ ﻓَﭑﺳْﺘَﻮَﻯٰ ﻋَﻠَﻰٰ ﺳُﻮﻗِﻪِۦ ﻳُﻌْﺠِﺐُ ﭐﻟﺰُّﺭَّﺍﻉَ ﻟِﻴَﻐِﻴﻆَ ﺑِﻬِﻢُ ﭐﻟْﻜُﻔَّﺎﺭَ ۗ ﻭَﻋَﺪَ ﭐﻟﻠَّﻪُ ﭐﻟَّﺬِﻳﻦَ ﺀَﺍﻣَﻨُﻮﺍ۟ ﻭَﻋَﻤِﻠُﻮﺍ۟ ﭐﻟﺼَّٰﻠِﺤَٰﺖِ ﻣِﻨْﻬُﻢ ﻣَّﻐْﻔِﺮَﺓً ﻭَﺃَﺟْﺮًﺍ ﻋَﻈِﻴﻤًۢﺎ

Muhammad (SAW) is the Messenger of Allah, and those who are with him are severe against disbelievers, and merciful among themselves. You see them bowing and falling down prostrate (in prayer), seeking Bounty from Allah and (His) Good Pleasure. The mark of them (i.e. of their Faith) is on their faces (foreheads) from the traces of (their) prostration (during prayers). This is their description in the Taurat (Torah). But their description in the Injeel (Gospel) is like a (sown) seed which sends forth its shoot, then makes it strong, it then becomes thick, and it stands straight on its stem, delighting the sowers that He may enrage the disbelievers with them. Allah has promised those among them who believe (i.e. all those who follow Islamic Monotheism, the religion of Prophet Muhammad SAW till the Day of Resurrection) and do righteous good deeds, forgiveness and a mighty reward (i.e. Paradise).
48:29

Ibn Katheer mentioned that;

Imam Malik used the verse as evidence that the shia are disbelievers, because of the part of the verse that says;

" ....He may enrage the disbelievers with them.."
tafseer ibn Katheer 7/362

Imam Qurtubiyy said;
Malik has done well in his statement and was right in his interpretation... (tafseer Qurtubiyy 16/297)

Ibn Hazm also said;
As for the claim of the rafidhah that the Quran was changed, then they are not muslims, rather it is a sect that was innovated 25 years after the prophet's death alyhissolaat wassalaam (Al fisal fil milal wa nihal 2/65)

https://islamqa.info/ar/113676

source
https://islamqa.info/en/170266

Praise be to Allaah.

Saying “Yarhamuk Allah (may Allah have mercy on you)” to a person who sneezes, if he says “Al hamdu Lillah (praise be to Allah),” is a communal obligation, in the sense that if one person says it, the obligation is waived for the others. If no one among those who hear him says it, then all have sinned, because of the report narrated by Abu Hurayrah (may Allah be pleased with him) who said: The Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) said: “There are five things that the Muslim must do for his brother: returning the greeting of salaam, saying ‘Yarhamuk Allah’ to one who sneezes…”

Narrated by Muslim (4022)

Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allah have mercy on him) said: Our companions and others differed concerning visiting one who is sick, saying “Yarhamuk Allah” to one who sneezes and initiating the greeting of salaam. What the texts indicate is that these things are waajib (obligatory), and it is said that it is a communal obligation.
End quote from al-Fataawa al-Kubra , 1/443

Secondly:
If a person sneezes more than three times, you should not say “Yarhamuk Allah” to him; rather you should pray for well-being for him, because of what is narrated in al-Muwatta’ (1521) from ‘Abdullah ibn Abi Bakr from his father, that the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) said: “If he sneezes, say ‘Yarhamuk Allah’ to him; then if he sneezes, say ‘Yarhamuk Allah’ to him; then if he sneezes, say ‘Yarhamuk Allah’ to him; then if he sneezes, say: ‘You have a cold.” ‘Abdullah said: I do not know whether that is after the third or fourth time.
And it was narrated that Salamah ibn al-Akwa‘ (may Allah be pleased with him) said: The Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) said: “The one who sneezes may be told Yarhamuk-Allaah three times; if he sneezes more than that, he has a cold.” Narrated by Ibn Maajah (3704); classed as saheeh by al-Albaani in Saheeh Sunan Ibn Maajah .

An-Nawawi (may Allah have mercy on him) said: If a person sneezes several times in a row, the Sunnah is to say “Yarhamuk Allah” each time until he reaches three. We narrated in
Saheeh Muslim, Sunan Abi Dawood and at-Tirmidhi from Salamah ibn al-Akwa‘ (may Allah be pleased with him) that he heard the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) say, when a man sneezed in his presence, “Yarhamuk Allah.” Then he sneezed again, and the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) said: “The man has a cold.” This wording is the report narrated by Muslim.

As for the report narrated by Abu Dawood and at-Tirmidhi, they said: A man sneezed in the presence of the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) whilst I [the narrator] was watching, and the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) said: “Yarhamuk Allah.” Then the man sneezed a second or third time and the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) said: “Yarhamuk Allah, this is a man who has a cold.”
At-Tirmidhi said: A saheeh hasan hadeeth. End quote from Kitaab al-Adhkaar, 1/273

Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymeen (may Allah have mercy on him) was asked: Is it obligatory to say “Yarhamuk Allah” to one who sneezes once, and if he sneezes three times to repeat that three times or more?
He replied: If he sneezes three times and you say “Yarhamuk Allah” each time, then after the third sneeze you should say to him: “ ‘Aafaaka Allah (may Allah grant you well-being); because that is a cold, so say: May Allah grant you well-being; you have a cold. All you have to say is: May Allah grant you well-being, and you may add: You have a cold.
End quote from Liqa’ al-Baab al-Maftooh , no. 127
And Allah knows best.

lexiconkabir:
whats the proof for this?

it's in the hadith of Jabir as compiled by Bukharee;

when any of you decides on a matter then he should observe two rakah...

the verb hamma (translated as decide) is only used when you have you have decided and will to go ahead.

AlBaqir:
A very faulty and desperate interpretation. The text is extra clear. The pronoun goes back to the Creator. Kindly read my reply on that to her. And you can imagine the "programming". She surrender her submission because Ibn Taymiyyah himself believe the pronoun goes back to Allah and not Adam. In Salafiyyah, you are not allow to think or submit on your own. You must submit based on what salaf says. Allah says: We have revealed this Quran in plain Arabic so that you may understand(surah Yusuf:2), "And indeed, We have made the Qur’an easy for direction and guidance, but is there anyone who will take advice? {surah Qamar: 17 etc.

In Shi'i theology, anything reported or documented by anybody, attributed to the holy Prophet or his Household that contradict Quran in anyway is definitely not from him (peace be upon him and his household). That is the first criteria in Shi'i ilm hadith, before you can ever think of any other thing. There are lots of ahadith in Shi'i documents from the Prophet and the Aimmah on that. You don't say one hadith is sahih because its Sanad (chain) is okay and start twisting it while its matn (content) is absurd and against Quran and Aql.

Very beneficial, but the hatred of the companions rodiyaLLaahu anhum directly contradicts the Quran. So, what's your excuse?

Restricting the source of your shareeah to only the household, that doesn't contradict the Quran too, Abi?!

accusing Allah of ignorance, that doesn't contradict the Quran?!

Saying the texts of the Quran has been distorted, that doesn't contradict the Quran too?!

Grave worshipping, that also doesn't contradict the Quran?!

mtcheew

prettymina:
Jazakumlah khairan
Noted,well understood

Aameen wa iyyaak.

I also forgot to say that istikhaarah is to be done after you have made a choice not when you are still confused.

So you make a choice then do istikhaarah before acting on it.

prettymina:
Salamualaykun waramathullah wabarakathu




Pls,is there a special tahajjud prayer for some1 seeking guidance in choosing a spouse?


Can tahajjud prayer be offered any day of the week?

Can a female on her period observe tahajjud prayer?

Very easy;

first ensure that you have a good relationship with Allah in that way you would have also made yourself a righteous Muslimah that a righteous Muslim would desire to make a wife.
Second; ensure that your primary condition of selection is the piety and understanding of Islam. every other thing are secondary.

third; get a copy of the book citadel of the believer and check the prayer for seeking Allah's counsel (istikhaarah). Memorize it if possible.

fourth; select a spouse that you believe to befit you in your religious and worldly affairs.
Fifth; Do istikhaarah for your choice. If it is good for you Allah will make it possible, otherwise Allah will turn it away from you.

notes;

the istikhaarah prayer is to be said after two supererogatory rakah of nafilah.

it is encouraged to do it at times when prayer are more likely to be answered like last third of the night, between adhan and iqaamah etc.

One should believe that Allah knows best and thus sees the evil in what seems perfect to us.

for more information visit;

https://islamqa.info/en/2217

Allah knows best.

agoro2u:
sallam alaikum
pls is there any tahjud prayer for some1 trying to conceive? i will like yes to share any wit me.

Repentance to Allah and seeking forgiveness from your sins.
Ponder on the statement of Nooh to his deviant people;

Surah Nooh, Verse 10-12


"I said (to them): 'Ask forgiveness from your Lord; Verily, He is Oft-Forgiving; 'He will send rain to you in abundance; 'And give you increase in wealth and children, and bestow on you gardens and bestow on you rivers."
(English - Mohsin Khan)
via iQuran

Empiree:
I go against those Shia who do that. I understand gravity of insulting sahabas. You should know that not all Shia do that. So it's unfair to castigate all. Another reason is, it's no longer Shia issue. Some salafi brothers today talking trash about Umar(ra),calling him names. So it is no longer Shia thing. Besides, some of the Shia Ulama have been warning against cursing Sahaba. I dont think it is proper thing to curse even though they disagree with the first three Imams. They should at least see them as muslims and treat them as such. I am not aware of any shia here calling any of the sahaba kafir.

It suffices as evil for a person to speak of a companion with foul language such as dotard and even calling the wives of the prophet deviants and calling Abu Bakr and Umar innovators.

If he adds curses to it then he only increases in misfortune over misfortune.

There is no salafi brother that will do what you have said, except a shia in salafi clothing.