Rafidi's Posts
Nairaland Forum / Rafidi's Profile / Rafidi's Posts
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (of 19 pages)
 Politics / Re: Shiites Must Obey Constituted Authority - Kano State Governor by Rafidi: 4:52pm On Nov 19, 2016 |
Stalwert: Vedaxcool is gone mad!  Rationalizing and justifying oppression and finding excuses. Kwantinue a b o k i! |
| Politics / Re: Shiites Must Obey Constituted Authority - Kano State Governor by Rafidi: 3:03pm On Nov 19, 2016 |
[b]“If they do not get permission, then the police will not allow them to continue the procession that they do.” The question: Are the Shia ignoring government permit for their religious procession because they are lawless? Or is it becaus if they apply for permission the government of the day would disregard freedom of religion enshrined in the constitution and deny them such permit for sectarian reasons and prejudice? If the governor is sincere and is truly after earning the respect of Nigerian citizens for the law of the land and the government of the day, he should first give an unambiguous assurance that the government respects freedom of religion and permit will be given if they seek it for their procession. It is the responsibility of government to make the Shia Muslims feel their rights are respected and to have a sense of belonging to Nigeria. The government should make assurances that the law should be respected and also the law will respect the rights of people. It should not be a case of either using the law to deny them their right to freedom of religion or if they insist on exercising their right then force would be used against them in the name of the law. Both parties should respect the law. The law is meant to protect the right of citizens and not to impose on them to deny them their right.the law is not a trap to deny citizens their rights. The governor and govt. need to give assurance that their right will be respected if they seek permit for their procession and it will be given. The government would have succeeded in bringing these people under the umbrella of the Nigerian state. Shia Muslims hold processions even in important cities as London and New York. They are given permit and the police guard their processions.why is the case different in Nigeria which is democratic and secular? What role do Wahhabi clerics and their intolerance to Muslims of other interpretations or versions play in all of this? You can't wake up and say you don't want a particular group of people or their religion. There is no success in trying to determine or impose on people what they believe or how they choose to worship. Controlling what people believe in is impossible.tolerance is key.[/b] |
| Politics / Re: ICC Invites Malami Over Shi'ites/Army Clash by Rafidi: 11:39am On Nov 16, 2016 |
DropShot: Under GEJ, when three sons of Zakzaky were shot and 30 followers, GEJ carried phone and apologized to Zakzaky. Zakzaky rejected the apology and asked for justice. El Rufai went online to cheer that Zakzaky rejected Jonathan's apology. Under PMB, Shiites get killed in their hundreds on the roads and their blood swamp the streets and both PMB, and the army and the IGP come out on media to justify massacre and bloodshed for whatever reasons that do not justify killings. The difference is very clear. It was PMB as head of state who first detained Zakzaky in the 1980s. Only northern military rulers (PMB, IBB and Abacha) who are Sunni Muslims have seen the Shia Muslims as threat for sectarian reasons and possible foreign influence. Under Obasanjo, Yaradua and even GEJ, there was no sectarian tension in the north and the Shia carried out their religious practices hitch free. 40 Likes 3 Shares |
| Politics / ICC Invites AGF Over Zaria Massacre As Protesting Shi’ites Storm NHRC by Rafidi: 11:22am On Nov 16, 2016 |
ICC invites AGF over Zaria massacre as protesting Shi’ites storm NHRC By Adelanwa Bamgboye | Publish Date: Nov 15 2016 6:08PM The international Criminal Court of Justice (ICC) has invited the Attorney General of the Federation (AGF) and Minister of Justice , Alhaji Abubakar Malami SAN to come and explain why those culpable should not be punished over last year’s Zaria clash between the military and Shi’ ites members. Based on the invitation, the AGF is expected to jet out to the ICC later today and explain the part played by the military during the clash. This is coming on the heels of the members of the Islamic Movement in Nigeria otherwise known as the Shi’ites who yesterday took their protest to the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) Head Quarters saying that not fewer than one hundred innocent citizens killed in Kano on Monday. The protesting Shi’ites members alleged that on Mondayin Kano, well armed police men in about one hundred trucks after tear gassing thousands of peaceful Shi’ites members’ who were discharging their religious duty- the annual Arbaeen symbolic trek, opened fire on them. They called on the NHRC to inform President Muhammadu Buhari that its members are citizens of Nigeria that deserve to be protected from all kind of harm from enemies of peace and humanity. ”We equally urge the NHRC to remind Governor of Kano State not to turn the recently peaceful atmosphere enjoyed in the state into a place where innocent lives are being shed for the interest of blood thirsty devils”., said Sihi Ahemd from the Academic Forum of the Islamic Movement in Nigeria (AFIMN). According to him, the police authorities should hand over the bodies of brothers and sisters they killed in cold blood to their family members for proper burial while all those involved in the ungodly act should be brought to book. The Shi’ites also called on the federal government to release their leader Shaikh Ibraheem Zakzaky, his wife and others immediately and unconditionally. Lambert Opara, who received the protesting Shi’ites on behalf of the NHRC boss, Prof. Bem Amgwe urged the protesters to maintain peace, adding that the government was looking into the matter. Source: http://www.dailytrust.com.ng/news/general/icc-invites-agf-over-zaria-massacre-as-protesting-shi-ites-storm-nhrc/171826.html#USIxxKfs1iO8zPvO.99 CC: Seun Lalasticlala |
| Islam for Muslims / Re: `Umar Bin Al-khattab (ra): Just & God-fearing Ruler Or Oppressor & Dictator? by Rafidi: 5:09pm On Nov 08, 2016 |
You can all guess who is responsible for the below: 1.) attempted assassination of the Prophet Muhammad (s) during the expedition of Tabuk after their supposed conversion to Islam 2.) The Event of Pen and Paper referred to as "Black Thursday" 3.) Refusing to Join the expedition led by Usama Ibn Zaid as ordered by the Prophet (s) 4.) Forbidding Mut'ah Marriage 5.) Implementing the Bid'ah of Taraweeh 6.) Implementing the Bid'ah of arms folding during prayers 7.) Changing the Adhan and adding the clause "as-solatu khairun minan nawm" for fajr prayer and removing the clause "hayya ala khairil a'mal" for the adhan of all the obligatory prayers 8.) The one who said the Prophet Muhammad (s) was delirious (talking nonense)- astaghfirullah al-azeem wa atubu ilaihi 9.) Attacking the house of Lady Fatima Zahra (as), daughter of Prophet Muhammad (s) 10.) chief orchestrator of the coup at Saqifa Banu Saeda who threatened violence in support of his imposed candidate |
| Islam for Muslims / Re: Don’t Blame ‘wahhabism’ For Terrorism by Rafidi: 1:06am On Oct 29, 2016 |
BeansAndBread: This is all hypocrisy. The problem isn't the means of fighting but the target that matters and the purpose. That is why JIHAD and terrorism are worlds apart. If you like jump from the sky to fight or dive into the pacific. What makes it jihad (using force for self defense only) and not terror is if it is in self defense, if it's targets are combatants who are oppressive and if the killed is a wrongdoer who killed you. Not kill based on people's beliefs. There is no takfiri killing in Islam. It makes no sense for Wahhabi clerics to condemn what you call "suicide bombings" and condone takfiri killings. It lacks essence. The difference islamically between "suicide bombing" and "martyrdom operation" based on the verdict of both Sunni and Shia scholars is the target and purpose, and not the means of fighting. I've not for once heard of Wahhabi clerics condemning suicide bombings targeting innocent Iraqi Shia civilians. I've not heard of Wahhabi clerics calling for Shia-Sunni unity, when they know well these are the two wings of Islam. Without either, the religion cannot fly! They only rush to condemn what you call "suicide bombing" in its entirety and particularly in Palestine against occupation forces because poor palestinian Sunnis use this means to resist Israeli occupation. When Israel is the target, they rush to condemn it. They have problem with Muslims defending their lives, properties and land-because of the porous and desperate means used-but have no problem with takfiri killings targeting innocent Muslims for their beliefs and religious practices. Jihad is self defense and not terrorism regardless of the means used for self defense. |
| Islam for Muslims / Re: Don’t Blame ‘wahhabism’ For Terrorism by Rafidi: 11:20pm On Oct 28, 2016 |
BeansAndBread: stop lying Mr. BetaThing. a Shia will NEVER attack or fight back against ANYONE because of the person's belief. whether you call Wahhabi terrorists in Syria "civilians" or whether you call naturalized Bahraini police officers "innocent Sunnis" or whether you call resistance to israeli occupation and "martyrdom operations"-which Palestinians Sunnis are also well known for- "suicide bombing" that is your problem. the bottom-line for using force in the Holy Quran is spelled out clearly: "Permission [to fight] has been given to those who are being fought, because they were wronged. And indeed, Allah is competent to give them victory. [They are] those who have been evicted from their homes without right - only because they say, "Our Lord is Allah." And were it not that Allah checks the people, some by means of others, there would have been demolished monasteries, churches, synagogues, and mosques in which the name of Allah is much mentioned. And Allah will surely support those who support Him. Indeed, Allah is Powerful and Exalted in Might." (22:39-40) Allah (swt) did not give Muslims and the Prophet (s) the right to fight to convert people, or based on TAKFIRISM or because others commit "shirk" or because you do not like what they believe or how they practice. the use of force in Islam is for self defense only. the Shia are not pacifist and neither is the Holy Quran. do not mix up self-defense, or even collateral damage when innocent people perish unintentionally- as civilians from all communities are suffering in Syria- with TAKFIRI killings. and for your info, the army of Bashar al-Assad is majority Sunni soldiers. are Sunni soldiers killing Sunnis because they are Sunnis? you must be a joker! once more, stop lying. even if you worship an idol, you should feel ashamed of yourself and the belief you adhere to that makes you keep repeating the same lies over and over in every thread. any ideology or belief that makes you to intentionally and un-repentantly lie in this manner should make you reflect and reconsider even if you do not fear Allah, because there is no sign you fear Allah. you want Muslims to give cover to Wahhabi Takfiri killings. the answer, from both Shia and Sunnis, is a unanimous and unambiguous capital NO! Islam is a religion of peace and the world is getting to know as the days pass that the terrorism that so called Muslims perpetrated is WAHHABISM and NOT ISLAM! 4 Likes |
| Islam for Muslims / Re: Don’t Blame ‘wahhabism’ For Terrorism by Rafidi: 1:29pm On Oct 28, 2016 |
[b]in Islam, self defense is the only time the use of force is justified. Whether Shia, Sunni Sufi or mainstream (only) Sunnis will testify to it. Wahhabism aka Salafism is the only ideology under the banner of Islam that believes in TAKFIRI killings. What is takfiri killings? Wahhabis pass verdicts of disbelief against all other Muslims and hold that shedding their blood is permissible. The same goes to their treatment of non-Muslims. They call you a kaffir or an unbeliever, and to them that merits your blood being shed. This backward and bloodthirsty ideology has nothing to offer good to humanity or Islam. It is not Islam. Even if they hold custody of Makkah and medina for 5000 years, with such ideology of blood, Wahhabism will never and can never be Islam. That is the reason you have a group like Boko haram has no cause and no mission other than those it perceives as its enemies and those different from them and who hold different beliefs. They aimlessly kill people with different beliefs. Worse, anyone they disagree with can easily be labeled a disbeliever even if that person is Sunni! Wahhabism has put a stain on Islam. That is why even when Muslims have a legitimate cause to fight for and defend, people view Muslims with suspicion and scorn. They easily discredit Muslims as violent people. Now Muslims cannot legitimately fight to defend themselves even when they are right to do so. All the terrorist groups on earth follow the Wahhabi aka Salafist ideology. All of them with no exception. Any group that is not Salafist and is called a terrorist group, know that that group is being victimized. Many would try to paint hezbollah (they are Shia) as a terrorist group because Israel and America say so. Hezbollah has a national cause in Lebanon. Their mission is to drive out Israeli occupation from Lebanese land. Hezbollah don't go about killing people based on takfirism or based on their beliefs. No Muslim group does that except those under Salafism. That is the definition of terrorism.[/b] 3 Likes 1 Share |
| Politics / "El-Rufai Guilty Of Murder:We Still Will Not Get Violent,but Remain Patient-IMN" by Rafidi: 9:26pm On Oct 14, 2016 |
Gov El-Rufai is Guilty of Murder: We Still Will Not Get Violent, But Remain Patient – IMN Africa By NewsRescue October 14, 2016 KDSG Is Culpable Of Inciting And Executing Cleansing Of IMN Members Kaduna state government yesterday 13/10/16 was reported to have issued a warning to residents in Kaduna and other towns not to take laws into their hands on any individual or group, in reference to the attacks, arson and destruction of properties of members of the Islamic Movement in Nigeria that occurred days earlier. Clearly, this is nothing but an afterthought. What happened in the wake of our peaceful Ashura mourning procession was a carefully planned plot, meticulously executed with all machinery of government.  The government had all along tried to give their brutal clampdown on Islamic Movement in Nigeria (IMN) members a semblance of an altercation between IMN and the masses. Kaduna state governor, Nasiru ElRufai alluded to this right from the outset of the attacks in December, 2015 in his infamous state-wide broadcast. His utterances and body language since then left no one in doubt his disdain for IMN members. Using all the tools of governance at his disposal, in private and openly, often in total disregard to reason, sanity or law, he exhibited extreme hate for IMN. As a fore-runner to the latest brutality, he issued an executive order banning us from exercising our rights to practice our religion with a threat to jail anyone who does up to seven years in his jail. For daring to mention that his order is in clear violation of all known sane laws of the land and beyond, he ordered the arrest and prosecution of Ibrahim Musa, the President of the Media Forum. How then can El-Rufai now shed crocodile tears having incited violence on a people through his hate posture and actions against such people? They read the body language of the government in their favour and acted based on that, and with full support of all the instruments of governance over which he presides. We have it on record how certain individuals and hate preachers took to the media and the podium respectively calling on the masses to join the government of El-Rufai in what they termed an “all-out war on Shia.” The government and El-Rufai has neither refuted that nor call the perpetrators to order or better still arrest and punish the culprits, since they are well known and the actions were done in broad daylight. Simply put, El-Rufai is very much culpable. We wish to remind the public that incitement to murder a vulnerable population can be so subtle. People read body languages, take cues, pick up signals and act accordingly. Other governors have quickly taken cue from him. Plateau state has taken cue and similarly banned activities of IMN, attacked and torched lives and properties in the same fashion as El-Rufai. Kano, Katsina and Sokoto states are gearing up to follow in their footprints. Unguarded utterances of political and traditional rulers, military and other security commanders as well as other hate preachers are on record and will be invaluable in due course at The Hague.  Soldiers stand by and supervise terror on Shia Muslims Let them be reminded that cases abound where leaders are held responsible through acts of commission or omission for crimes against humanity. Post-election violence of 2001 is still being looked at by the Criminal Court. Similarly, the Kenyan election violence case has been taken to the ICC, where those in authority are being tried because of the way they instigated the violence that led to the death of innocent people. Ethnic cleansing of Bosnian Muslims and the Rwandan examples are still fresh in our minds. The World is watching how he has been reckless in speech and actions leading to the deaths of hundreds of people, then he goes secretly burying in mass graves. Finally, we will like to assure the public that after all this intimidation we will not be blackmailed into the path of violence. Sheikh Zakzaky has been known to be an advocate of peaceful coexistence between people of diverse viewpoints. We will not deviate from that path even though he is currently in illegal detention for the past ten months. We call on the relevant authorities to as a matter of urgency to release our incarcerated leader, Sheikh Ibraheem Zakzaky and those in detention with him. This, we believe will be a major step in doing justice to the victims of Zaria massacre of December 2015. SIGNED BY IBRAHIM MUSA PRESIDENT MEDIA FORUM OF IMN 0805 078 6093 (Text only) Source: http://newsrescue.com/gov-el-rufai-guilty-murder-still-will-not-get-violent-remain-patient-imn/#ixzz4N5qQ5Q9e |
| Islam for Muslims / Re: Status Of Abu Bakr(r.a) And Umar(r.a) With Rasullullah(s.a.w) by Rafidi: 1:10pm On Aug 16, 2016 |
lexiconkabir: "[For such is the state of the disbelievers], until, when death comes to one of them, he says, "My Lord, send me back".That I might do righteousness in that which I left behind." No! It is only a word he is saying; and behind them is a barrier until the Day they are resurrected. (Holy Quran 23:99-100) 1. I do not believe in Tahreef. Tahreef is in your Sunni Hadith books. And we-Shia Imamiyyah al-Ja'fariyyah al-Ithna Ashariyyah- do not believe in it as a matter of truth, concensus and doctrine. 2. Do not drift from the topic. The thread is not about tahreef. If you have nothing truthful to speak, then shut up! You know the truth has been revealed and falsehood exposed, so you try to label me falsely to scare others like yourself who suffer from the veil of falsehood by accusing me of tahreef. 3. You and I as Muslims quote the Bible when addressing Christians and without doubt we both believe the Bible has undergone tahreef (distortions). Does that make you a hypocrite? Well yea you are hypocrite going by the above logic of yours. SALAM! |
| Islam for Muslims / Re: Status Of Abu Bakr(r.a) And Umar(r.a) With Rasullullah(s.a.w) by Rafidi: 11:49am On Aug 16, 2016 |
lexiconkabir: "And the servants of the Beneficent Allah are they who walk on the earth in humbleness, and when the ignorant address them, they say: Peace." (Holy Quran 25:63) |
| Islam for Muslims / Re: Status Of Abu Bakr(r.a) And Umar(r.a) With Rasullullah(s.a.w) by Rafidi: 10:31am On Aug 16, 2016 |
Why is the grouping "Abu Bakr and Umar"? Why wasn't it "Umar and Talha" for example? During the expedition of Usama, Abu Bakr and Umar refused to leave Medina and disobeyed the Prophet (s). During the failed assassination attempt on the life of the Prophet in Aqabah, it was Abu Bakr and Umar. During the massacre and rape of Bani Yerbo of Yemen and the killing of a sahabi (Malik Ibn Nuweira) in the first Takfiri raid it was Abu Bakr and umar. During the confiscation of Fadak, it was Abu Bakr and umar. During Saqifah Banu Saeda, it was Abu Bakr and umar. What is the secret? Can't you read between the lines? You can quote all the fake concoction of historical tales and whitewashing and it will not avail you or them anything. You need to know that when Imam Ali (as) was so called fourth caliph in Kufa, the generality of Muslims who followed him and fought for him as fourth caliph were referred to as his "shia". It was a political tag exclusively and not necessarily doctrinal.just like usthman also had his own "shia" (partisans). I'm referring to Ibn Taymiyyah's mental ma$turbation. The saying of Imam Ali Ibn Hussein, Zaynul Abideen (as) may be true. But can't you see with common sense that Taqiyyah is written all over it? It's not a direct answer. As for the Ibn Hanafiyyah's (ra) testimony, outright "fakery"!!! |
| Islam for Muslims / Re: Agege For Show. Innaa Lillaahi Wa Innaa Ilayhi Rooji'oon by Rafidi: 4:54pm On Aug 09, 2016 |
Empiree: please do not expect i would have to read all your many posts to find a reply to my post. are you a celebrity? i quoted your post and gave a reply. i expect nothing less of that courtesy. otherwise, it means you have no answer or you are simply not interested. either ways, thanks. |
| Islam for Muslims / Re: Agege For Show. Innaa Lillaahi Wa Innaa Ilayhi Rooji'oon by Rafidi: 3:06pm On Aug 09, 2016 |
Rafidi: |
| Islam for Muslims / Re: Agege For Show. Innaa Lillaahi Wa Innaa Ilayhi Rooji'oon by Rafidi: 9:47am On Aug 08, 2016 |
Empiree: Brother, our claim of infallible 12 Imams from the progeny and Ahlul-Bayt of Prophet Muhammad (s) cannot be on par with Sunnis believing in the infallibility of books of hadiths conveyed, compiled and composed by fallible men. It was the Prophet (s) himself who equated the Quran and his Ahlul-Bayt in Hadith al-Thaqalayn. We did not make that equation. Thus if you believe in the perfection of the Quran, then we must believe also that Allah (swt) perfected the selected/chosen ones of the Ahlul-Bayt to guide us by the Quran. It is common knowledge, even to Sunnis who would superficially deny the superiority of the Ahlul-Bayt, that without contributions of the Imams, particularly Imam Sadeq and Imam Hussein (as), Islamic knowledge would have been lost. Imam Sadeq (as) tutored the imams of the four Sunni schools of thought and Imam Hussein (as) sacrificed himself, his blood, his baby, his family and companions to say NO to Yazeed who was a faajir, kaafir, munafiq, etc. and who wanted to destroy Islam from inside. Second, in the verse of purification in the Quran (33:33), Allah states that He has purified the Ahlul-Bayt and kept sin away from them. If that isn't infallibility then what is infallibility? Forget about those who insist this verse includes the wives. It doesn't because the actions of Aisha alone in the Battle of Jamal and disregarding the Prophet's advice and the Quran's instruction that she shouldn't leave her house is more than enough to make the point she wasn't sinless or infallible and the verse cannot include her as part of those Allah has kept sim away from; that is even if we are to turn a blind eye on Surat Tahreem which states that her heart swayed from faith. For the fact that the Prophet (s) in Hadith al-Thaqalain states that the Quran and the Ahlul bayt will never separate till the Day of Judgment is a further indication in our belief that the Imamate of the Ahlul bayt will never end in this world. In another Sahih Hadith we are told by the Prophet that the earth will never be left with a hujjah (proof/prophet/messenger/holy imam chosen by Allah to guide mankind). Also for the fact there is another Hadith in Sahih Muslim among others that the successors of the Prophet Muhammad (s) are 12 in number, we have no doubt that the 12th Imam is still alive. Anyone who doubts this is doubting the truthfulness of the holy Prophet himself and Islam in its entirety. So please do not equate the 12 holy Imams of the Ahlul-Bayt (as) with fallible Hadith books of and by fallible men when the Prophet (s) had equated them with the book of Allah (the Quran) which is perfect and free from errors. In fact, this little explanation is enough to clarify the truth of Islam entirely in the heart of any seeker of truth. |
| Islam for Muslims / Re: Hadith Of The 73 Sects In Light Of The Holy Qur’an by Rafidi: 9:14pm On Aug 07, 2016 |
sino: Very poor imaginations....  |
| Islam for Muslims / Re: Lets Learn About The Life Of Abu Bakr As-siddiq(r.a) - Briefly. by Rafidi: 11:36pm On Jul 21, 2016 |
Learn ALL the hidden truths kept away from you about Abu Bakr in the below dedicated website to Abu Bakr and find out who he really was and the things he did that are concealed: [size=16pt]http://abubakr.org/[/size] 1 Like |
| Islam for Muslims / Re: Seeking A Muslim Solution To Islamist Terrorism by Rafidi: 8:24pm On Jul 17, 2016 |
Empiree: this angry man is an ex Sunni. i do not really blame him for his confusion. if you guys cannot come to the reality to see the problem of Wahhabism, you guys may as well apostatize and seek atheism. if you cannot separate Wahhabi Takfiri terror from the Islam you follow, then you are accepting their terrorism as part of Islam. you just cannot blame it all on the West or its invasion of Muslim countries for the Takfiri terrorism going on. the West did exploit the Wahhabi ideology to carry out its dirty work, like we are witnessing in Syria. Wahhabi terrorists from across the world flooded Syria on sectarian premise against Shia and the Alawite Shia sub-sect. in afghanistan too, wahhabis were used to fight the soviet union in the 80s in the peak of the cold war. if you justify the attacks of Wahhabi terrorists in western countries as reaction for the West bombing Muslim countries, then how do you justify the attacks by Wahhabi terrorists against fellow Muslims, in particular Shia and Sufi Sunnis? you have to come to realization that the Sunnism of Wahhabis is based on Takfiri killings and excommunicating everyone who disagree with them, and they even excommunicate themselves and kill each other over silly differences (amongst themselves). the idea that you can label another Muslim and declare him a kafir (takfir) and then you have the right to kill him is not Islamic. there is no compulsion in religion is what the Quran tells us. likewise the idea you can kill a kafir because of what he believes is not Islamic. wahhabism is based on the teachings of ibn taymiyyah,and his heir ibn abdul-wahab. terrorism is not justified. two wrongs do not make a right. i doubt the Prophet (s) will permit Muslims to indiscriminately kill westerners because their countries bomb Muslim countries. the indiscriminate killings of civilians is not Islamic. the Prophet (s) forbade killing non-combatants. faith based killings are not islamic either. so the video trying to refute this confused man is also not providing the right answers and making a wrong excuse. Saudi Wahhabism has caused a lot of problems. however, the West will only see it as a threat when it threatens their peace, and not when wahhabis kill Muslims. 2 Likes |
| Islam for Muslims / Re: Fatima Was Angered by Rafidi: 7:58pm On Jul 17, 2016 |
continuation: another reason Imam Ali (as) did not use force to restore Fadak aside from avoiding fitnah: Shaykh Seduq in Ilal-ul-Sharai, Volume 1 page 155 so that the points we have explained become clearer: Al-Hasan ibn Ali ibn Fadhal narrated from Abul-Hasan (Ali ibn Musa Al-Ridha) [a]: I asked him about Amir-ul-Momineen, why he did not seek to return Fadak when he ruled the people, and he replied: “Because we the Ahlul Bayt do not take our rights from those who have wronged us, except Him (Allah). And we are the Awliya of the Momineen, we rule for them and take (and return) their rights from those that wronged them, and we do not take it for ourselves.” The words of the Imam (as) make it clear that they rule for the benefit of the common man, when it comes to their personal usurped rights, they do not take them back themselves rather their expectation is that the usurpers and their adherents express remorse for the sin of usurping the right of Ahl’ul bayt (as) and accordingly restore that right to them. THREE SUNNI CALIPHS GAVE FADAK BACK TO THE DESCENDANTS OF FATIMA (as) AND ANNULLED ABU BAKR'S TESTIMONY THAT PROPHETS DO NOT LEAVE INHERITANCE: three Sunni umayyad caliphs VOLUNTARILY gave Fadak back to Imam Muhammad al-Baqir (as) and Imam Ja'far al-Sadeq (as). Umar Ibn Abdul Aziz, Mamun and Mu’tadid-three Sunni Khalifas who rejected Abu Bakr’s decision in the Fadak dispute.- restored Fadak to the descendants of Sayyida Fatima (as). If Fadak was not their legal right then why did these Khalifas offer this rich land to them? Why did these descendants accept the land if it was not their legal right? |
| Islam for Muslims / Re: Seeking A Muslim Solution To Islamist Terrorism by Rafidi: 7:44pm On Jul 17, 2016 |
Empiree: why is this not irrelevant? is he Shia? why is this Sunni threatening Sunni-Wahhabi Saudi?  |
| Islam for Muslims / Re: Fatima Was Angered by Rafidi: 7:42pm On Jul 17, 2016 |
Farmerforlife: so much respect for the grandson of the Prophet (s). was the mother of Imam Ali (as) persian? was Sayyida Fatima (as) persian? silly claim.
let us assume that the saying "anyone who hurts Fatima has hurt me (i.e. the Prophet) " was first said in respect to Imam Ali (as). does that mean that if Abu Bakr hurts Sayyida Fatima (as), this same saying of "anyone of hurts her has hurt the Prophet" cannot be applied to him because it was FIRST said in respect to Imam Ali (as)? another question: another to the hadith, people were spreading the rumor that Imam Ali (as) wanted to marry the daughter of Abu Jahl. let us assume again that truly this was not a rumor but rather indeed Imam Ali (as) wanted to marry the daughter of Abu Jahl. is it forbidden for Imam Ali (as) to marry more than one wife? yet another question: based on the hadith, it is said that people spread the gist. then when Sayyida Fatima (as) expressed sadness, the Prophet (s) protested on the grounds that Imam Ali (as) could not marry that woman on the basis that she was daughter of the enemy of Allah, Abu Jahl. had she been the daughter of someone else, could Imam Ali (as) have married her? afterwards, did Imam Ali (as) ever marry a woman while Sayyida Fatima (as) was alive? if not, then why, if truly Imam Ali (as) had any intention to take another wife? Sayyida Fatima (as) said she heard from the people. no mention that she heard from her husband! she complained to the Prophet (s). after the Prophet (s) allegedly expressed disapproval, did Imam Ali (as) continue with the allegedly marriage plan? no. it is said that he gave up the idea. so can Sayyida Fatima (as) still be angry with him? no! did she die in a state of anger with her husband? no! it was her husband who scretly buried her at night so Abu Bakr and Umar would not attend as per her will. it was her husband who gave her the ritual bath of the dead. i really do not understand, how, even if the above rumor/story is true, relates to the fact that Sayyida Fatima (as) was angry with Abu Bakr and she died in a state of anger. i also do not understand, how, even if the above rumor/story is true, the saying that "anyone who angers her has angered Allah and his a messenger" cannot be applied to Abu Bakr. so what if it was first said in relation to Imam Ali (as)? does it absolve Abu Bakr? in the same narration you want to use to equate anger on Abu Bakr and the purported "anger" on Imam Ali (as), we are told Imam Ali (as) gave up the idea of the purported marriage. but she died in a state of anger with Abu Bakr. look at the shameful fabrications attributing lies to the Prophet's (s) by your predecessors, just so that you can absolve your idols of their atrocities. and yet, you want us to believe you respect,honor, and love the Ahlul-Bayt (as)?
we also love the Sahabah. and there are sahabas you also disrespect: Malik Ibn Nuweira, Hujr Ibn Adi, Mukhtar al-Thaqafi (ra). there are hadiths in which the Prophet (s) denounced some of his sahaba who will change after him in Sahih Bukhari. and he said those sahaba would be taken into the hell fire and away from the Pond of Kawthar. the Prophet (s) would protest that his sahaba have been taken away and he would be told that he does not know what they innovated after him. clearly, it is evident that even with the title of sahaba, some will go into hell fire. why do you ignore that? the report is in your sahih bukhari. in the Quran, the companions who are from Makkah and Medinah (check 9:100-102) are called hypocrites. who are the hypocrites in Surat al-Munafiqoon. was there no a companion who left Islam and became a christian? so what do you say about him? what is your definition of companion? or your title of companion is selective based on those you have awarded tickets to paradise?
so she was making a false claim? is that what you are saying about the "Sayyidatun Nisa Al Alameen"? subhanallah! The spiritual inheritors of prophets – This included their successors and the learned Ulema (scholars) since they inherit the knowledge of prophets NOT Dinars and Dirhams [i.e. material possessions] - Prophets do not leave Dinars and Dirham for this category of heirs /inheritors. The biological inheritors of prophets – That obviously includes the biological offspring of Prophets that inherit all Dinars and Dirham [i.e. material possessions] and we have cited one such example of this category of heir/inheritor herein above. -Ulema are not the actual son of Prophets -Prophets are not their actual fathers -Knowledge is not an actual possession that can be distributed.
oh yeah...you mean Aisha? the daughter of the same Abu Bakr, right? hahaha...ridiculous! you really expect her to say anything different from her father? unfortunately, the other wives did not have their fathers become caliph. so Aisha's father was the caliph who usurped power.
look at how one wife (Aisha) has turned into "wives". Aisha knew about this hadith but the Prophet's (s0 daughter did not. and you really believe that? we are not the ones pushing. the Prophet's (s) daughter went to the Prophet's (s) mosque in Medina to confront Abu Bakr. read the Sermon of Fatima (as) to Abu Bakr. read her words and know who was lying. what is the punishment for taking the inheritance of another person in the Quran? find out, and seek repentance! he took her inheritance; he usurped her husband's position, and by doing that disregarded Allah's appointment of Imam Ali (as) and disobeyed the Prophet's (s) command/declaration at Ghadir Khumm and on other occasions that Ali (as) is the "master of every believer AFTER me". he also sent Umar and a gang to attack her house and threaten to set fire to it. we are not the ones who say she died in anger at him nor are we the ones who say she did not speak to him for six months till her death. it is your sahih bukhari that says that.
fabrications to white wash the image of the irredeemable. Imam Ali (as) did not reverse fadak, did not stop taraweeh, did not force people to practice mutah etc. and so? does that mean your heroes are not guilty? and why did he not change those things? he wanted to stop taraweeh and people were screaming the name of Umar! his caliphate was opposed by both Aisha and Muawiya who waged war against him in the Battle of Jamal and the Battle of Siffeen, respectively. they needed any propaganda to incite people against him and create more FITNAH. if he does they will revolt and accuse him of changing the sunnah of the shaykhain (abu bakr and umar). they were follow shaykhain as if they were their prophet and not Muhammad (s). the reason why Imam Ali (as) refused the caliphate after Umar was that he refused to endorse the sunnah of the shaykhain. he insisted he will only follow the Sunnha of the Prophet (s). had abu bakr and umar followed the Prophet's (s) Sunnah and their words and deeds were not innovations, they wont have insisted he endorse their sunnah. and for your info, the proceeds from Fadak were only given to the children of Fatima (as) by Umar Ibn Abdul-Azeez. so your claim is false. not taking back Fadak at that particular time, Imam Ali (as) was merely adhering to the Sunnah of Rasulullah (s) We read in Sahih al Bukhari, Book of Knowledge Volume 1, Book 3, Number 128: Narrated Aswad: Ibn Az-Zubair said to me, “Ayesha used to tell you secretly a number of things. What did she tell you about the Ka’ba?” I replied, “She told me that once the Prophet said, ‘O ‘Ayesha! Had not your people been still close to the pre-Islamic period of ignorance (infidelity)! I would have dismantled the Ka’ba and would have made two doors in it; one for entrance and the other for exit.” Later on Ibn Az-Zubair did the same. the position of Imam Ali (as) on Fadak: Sahih Muslim Book 019, Number 4349 that Umar acknowledged the following to Imam ‘Ali (as): Umar’s Words: When the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) passed away, Abu Bakr said:” I am the successor of the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him).” Both of you came to demand your shares from the property (left behind by the Messenger of Allah). (Referring to Hadhrat ‘Abbas), he said: You demanded your share from the property of your nephew, and he (referring to ‘Ali) demanded a share on behalf of his wife from the property of her father. Abu Bakr (Allah be pleased with him) said: The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) had said:” We do not have any heirs; what we leave behind is (to be given in) charity.” So both of you thought him to be a liar, sinful, treacherous and dishonest. |
| Islam for Muslims / Re: He Left Islam Because Of This Ayah (verse) by Rafidi: 12:59pm On Jun 27, 2016 |
Newnas: you're still presenting what is without reference and no valid source. i was the one who exposed you in that thread. you are still bringing it up. dont you have some shame? or is the topic too hot for you? or you are just simply dumb and block headed? something does not have a source and no reference. you still make the baseless claim and back it up with your write up that is also baseless. what sort of dumbness is this? if you want to make claims, at least present a valid source. let me give you TWO examples below. when you open the link and you view the stated sources, these are sources you can find available in tangible (not imaginary) books and online too. when you read the claims backed up with the references, you see quality and truth in the writing. is that too much to ask for? "Examples of Sunni (im)morality" : http://www.shiapen.com/comprehensive/mutah/sunni-morality.html "Nasibi propaganda relating to sexual ethics" : http://www.shiapen.com/comprehensive/mutah/nasibi-propaganda-of-sexual-ethics.html |
| Islam for Muslims / Re: He Left Islam Because Of This Ayah (verse) by Rafidi: 12:36pm On Jun 26, 2016 |
Newnas: I use to think you talk either for the sake of knowledge or out of ignorance. You also make unfounded lies. Please tell us in which Shia book we are told to lend our wives and who has lend you his wife? It's Ramadan! Fear Allah. You'd be held accountable by Allah for spreading falsehood and lies against others. You hate us and you have funny ideas, fine. But not to the extent of fabricating lies or making imaginative stories. |
| Islam for Muslims / Re: Terrorism Of Salafism VS Islamic Rules Of Engagement by Rafidi: 6:19pm On Jun 17, 2016 |
Newnas: Utter nonsense.
Tell us what they call themselves. Are they Shia? Are they Sufi Sunnis? What are they? What we are sure of is two: 1. They call themselves Jama'ati Ahlus Sunnah Lid Da'wati Wal Jihad (Sunnis for Propagation and Jihad). 2. They pledged allegiance to ISIS. The ISIS ideology is that of Ibn Taymiyyah and Ibn Abdul Wahab. ISIS is unashamedly Wahhabi aka Salafist. They kill both Shia and Sufi Sunnis. So Boko cannot be anything but followers of Salafiyyah and its Takfiri ideology.
This false claim will take us deep into political discussion. Saudi is a sponsor of terrorism in the Middle East. ISIS and Wahhabi Takfiri terror groups that kill Shia, Christians, Yazidis etc in the Middle East are either Saudi Wahhabi inspired or Saudi funded. It is Saudi suicide bombers that are killing our Shia brothers in their homes and mosques in Iraq because they are falsely, like you just did, called "grave worshippers". Indeed this is the terror monotheism the Saudis are spreading in Iraq, Syria and Yemen, while your Sunni Palestinian brothers are killed by the Zionists and only Shia powers help them. That is to show you the Saudis and Wahhabis are nothing good to Muslims, Shia or Sunni. They only further Zionist and western interests because they are purely servants. This is enough evidence: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QHLqaSZPe98
AlBaqir will handle you on that and try to slacken the screws on your coconut head. 2 Likes |
| Islam for Muslims / Re: Terrorism Of Salafism VS Islamic Rules Of Engagement by Rafidi: 5:58pm On Jun 17, 2016 |
Rilwayne001: May Allah bless you. He wants us to treat the messenger and not the message because of hatred. What a pity! Character assassination and false claims in the month of Ramadan do not reveal you are truthful but a Salafist aka Wahhabi hater. 3 Likes |
| Politics / Re: 10 Fantastically Corrupt Lies On The Zaria Massacre by Rafidi: 11:41am On May 22, 2016 |
DanGombe1: Mountain of Fire blocks Buratai's convoy, army reacts Nkem Ikeke 3 months ago – The movement of the Chief of Army Staff, Tukur Buratai was halted for some minutes – Buratai met a barricade mounted by a Christian organisation – Instead of engaging in a confrontation, Burati found an alternative The Chief of Army Staff (COAS), Lt Gen Tukur Buratai was reportedly blocked for some minutes in Abuja on Sunday, February 14. According to a report on News Rescue, Buratai and his convoy were driving along Obafemi Awolowo way, Abuja at about 9.15am when they met a barricade. The barricade was said to have been mounted by the Mountain of Fire church. The convoy did not let the barricade deter them as they allegedly took a diversion and went on with their journey without any confrontation with the Christians. However, the Nigerian Army has dismissed the report, describing it as a figment of the imagination of the persons behind the brazen lies, Daily Post reports. In a statement by Colonel Sani Kukasheka Usman, the acting director army public relations, he said “the Nigerian Army has noted with dismay the campaign of calumny embarked by some individuals obviously sponsored by some faceless unscrupulous elements in the social media. “For the avoidance of doubt, the Chief of Army Staff has not stepped out of military environment from Friday, 12th February till this morning, Monday 15th February 2016, let alone having such imaginary blockade.” According to the army, the publisher was determined to cause a religious crisis in the country. The army has asked News Rescue to refute the story and tender an unreserved apology to the public and the Chief of Army Staff in 5 national dailies latest by tomorrow morning or face legal actions. Meanwhile, News Rescue has said it stands by its story and is ready for any legal action. “Our information is 100% correct. We can provide the army chief’s precise itinerary. Buratai should know that he is being watched by people he knows and things he does not know,” the online media said. Recall that some time in December, Buratai’s convoy was blocked and prevented from passing by some members of the Shi’ite Islamic Movement of Nigeria, in Kaduna state. This did not end well as soldiers opened fire, killing hundreds of the Shiites. In its defense, the soldiers accused Shi’ite members of blocking the road and attempting to assassinate Buratai. The sect on the other hand accused the army of killing at least one thousand of its members and evacuating their bodies to unknown destinations. The bloody clash quickly sparked controversy across the country. There were protests by the sect in different states and some foreign countries. Human rights lawyer, Femi Falana called for the prosecution of Buratai and soldiers involved in the attack on the Shi’ite movement and their leader, Ibrahim El-Zakzaky. Read more: https://www.naij.com/731422-mountain-fire-blocked-coas-buratais-convoy-sunday-abuja.html |
| Politics / Zakzaky's Last Surviving Son Muhammad Gets Married by Rafidi: 11:31am On May 22, 2016 |
Zakzaky's Last Surviving Son Muhammad Gets Married: Dad And Mom Still Detained Without Charge By NewsRescue May 22, 2016  IMN The Eldest Son of the Leader of the Islamic Movement in Nigeria, Muhammad Ibraheem Zakzaky, married Maimuna Ali on Saturday the 21st of May 2016. The marriage took place at the family house of the bride in Kankia Local Government Area, Katsina state and was attended by large number of people from far and near.  Several other Nigerians like Mrs Zeenat Zakzaky and her husband have been held without charge or trial for over three months  (Zakzaky) Loaded in a wheel barrow Wedding Bliss The Leader of the Islamic Movement in Nigeria Sheikh Ibraheem Zakzaky has nine children, 7 male and 2 females. However, six of the 7 male children were killed by the Nigerian Army. In The latest attack on Sheikh Zakzaky and his followers by Nigeria Army 3 of his children were killed amongs about 1000 people. While the other 3 were killed in July 2014 while conducting International Quds day by the same Nigeria army too.     http://www.newsrescue.com/zakzaky-last-surviving-son-muhammad-gets-married-dad-and-mom-still-detained-without-charge/#axzz49LLhTEqZ |
| Politics / Re: The Yoruba Family Of Zakzaky's Detained Wife Call On Yoruba Leaders To Intervene by Rafidi: 7:36pm On May 15, 2016 |
medpren: where did you read that |
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (of 19 pages)
(Go Up)
| Sections: politics (1) business autos (1) jobs (1) career education (1) romance computers phones travel sports fashion health religion celebs tv-movies music-radio literature webmasters programming techmarket Links: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) Nairaland - Copyright © 2005 - 2024 Oluwaseun Osewa. All rights reserved. See How To Advertise. 230 |