uplawal:

Amin,welldone,but personally i dnt buy their beating of themselves and inflicting bloody wound though

inflicting body wounds has being discouraged even by our scholars with heavy fatwas.but the unlearned and emotional ones do it.

as for beating the chest,that does not inflict harm nor does it have any consequence.its a symbolic move to remind us of the chest of Imam Hussain that was targetted with arrows and the horses of the enemies that were let lose to trample over his holy body and even the cain that yazeed used to abuse the (cut) head of the imam.it is highly symbolic and has become a trademark of ashura even before those that started cutting themselves.so the chest beating which does not inflict any harm is a ceremonial display of devotion to Imam Hussain and in remembrance of his sufferings.

Let me give a few evidence supporting the fact that beating oneself (not inflicting injury) is permissible and supported.i will give just a few examples from different sources.there are many more but I will contain myself with just 7 points(point #7 is from the bible for our christian friends):


1,)Surah Nisa 004.148:

YUSUFALI: Allah loveth not that evil should be noised abroad in public speech, except where injustice hath been done; for Allah is He who heareth and knoweth all things.

This verse makes it clear that the public's relaying of injustice is permissible. Relaying the suffering of a victim is permissible.

2.) Imam Ja’far Ibn Muhammad as-Sadeq,the 6th Imam from the progeny of the Prophet (as) allowed the mourning of Imam Husayn (as)

We read a tradition from Wasail ai Shi'a as quoted in Jahaur aur Kalaam Volume 4 page 370:

"Imam Jafar said 'the daughters of Fatima would slap their faces and shriek. It is permissible to beat yourself and shriek for a pure soul such as Husayn"

3.)As narrated by al Tabari in History Volume 9 page 183 (English translation by Ismail Poonawala):

Abbas narrates:

"I heard Ayesha saying "The Messenger of God died on my bosom during my turn, I did not wrong anyone in regard to him. It was because of my ignorance and youthfulness that the Messenger of God died while he was in my lap. Then I laid his head on a pillow and got up beating my chest and slapping my face along with the women".

4.) We read in Tareekh Kamil Volume 3 page 89:

"When Uthman was killed his killers intended to sever his head. His wives Naila and Umm'ul Baneen lay over him screamed and began to beat their faces"

5.)a.)Tareekh Baghdad, Volume 4 page 422

b.)Hayaat al Haywaan, page 101


قال وسمعت الوركاني يقول يوم مات احمد بن حنبل وقع الماتم والنوح في أربعة أصناف من الناس المسلمين واليهود والنصارى والمجوس

'He (Abu Bakr al-Makki) said: 'I heard al-Warkani saying: 'The day on which Ahmad bin Hanbal died, in it 'Matam' (i.e. beating oneself) and lamentation took place among four types of people, the Muslims, the Jews, the Christians and the Zoroastrians''.

6.) We read in Tauhfa Ithna Ashari page 523 published in Karachi:

"When Ayesha was defeated and Ali saw the corpses on the ground he began to beat his thighs"

Point no.7 is for our christina friends who are clowns and would want to mock us:

7.) Examples of self-beating in the Bible

The Bible, Isaiah 22:12 - shows that this type of mourning was ordained by God

"On that Day the Lords called for weeping and beating the bosom, shaving the head and putting on sack cloth"

"You are now at ease, be anxious; tremble, you who have no cares. Strip yourselves bare; put a cloth round your waists and beat yourselves"
The Bible, Isaiah 32:11

"Howl, Heshbon, for Ai is despoiled. Cry aloud you villages round Rabbath Ammon, put on sack cloth and beat your bosom and score your body with gashes"
The Bible, Jeremiah 49:3

"The crowd that had assembled for the spectacle, when they saw what had happened went home beating their bosoms"
The Bible, Luke 23:48

@LagasShia: As I listened to the adhan of the shia, I found it different from the adhan I am used to. Please you explain the reason for the differences?

I remember reading how adhan came about in Islam. Umar bin Khattab and another sahaba (RA) had the same dream the same night, which they related to the messenger (AS) as the formulation of a call to gather muslim was been sort. Just like evrything else the legislation of salah was made in the lifetime of the messenger (AS), including the one praying behind him saying "wa mu Rabbana wal kal Hamd", just like Bilal Rabah (RA) additing "asSalatuh Khairun minal Naumm" for salatul fajr/subh adhan.

The adhan formulated under the messenger was not what I heard the shia Muhadhin call. Why a new adhan is what I'm asking? Is matter of salah at least not completed in the presence of the messenger (AS)?

Sweetnecta:

@LagasShia: As I listened to the adhan of the shia, I found it different from the adhan I am used to. Please you explain the reason for the differences?

I remember reading how adhan came about in Islam. Umar bin Khattab and another sahaba (RA) had the same dream the same night, which they related to the messenger (AS) as the formulation of a call to gather muslim was been sort. Just like evrything else the legislation of salah was made in the lifetime of the messenger (AS), including the one praying behind him saying "wa mu Rabbana wal kal Hamd", just like Bilal Rabah (RA) additing "asSalatuh Khairun minal Naumm" for salatul fajr/subh adhan.

The adhan formulated under the messenger was not what I heard the shia Muhadhin call. Why a new adhan is what I'm asking? Is matter of salah at least not completed in the presence of the messenger (AS)?

Dear Sweetnecta,

it is unfair to assert that it is the shia way of adhan that is new and changed.for someone investigating for the first time this issue,you should hold both arguments and examine them to be fair and to arrive at the truth.first of all let me tell you that the shia and the sunni adhan is basically the same.the takbir and the two shahada forms the foundation of the adhan.where we differ is in the number of times the repetition of a particular clause is done,the presence of “HAYYA ALA KHAYRIL AMAL” and the clause of “Aliyun waliyullah”.

As for the number of times we repeat the takbir or the shahada,we believe the shahada and takbir the shia adhan has not changed.it has remained the same.it is the sunni adhan that has been shortened.as for the clause “hayya ala khayril amal” (i.e. come to the best of worship),this was there in the adhan again until Umar removed it.why did he remove it?because during his jihad campaigns he wanted to make people believe that jihad was more important than salat.that is wrong.we can see from the times of the Prophet and even during the battle of siffeen that Imam Ali fought against muawiya and even in the battle of karbala,that salat is very important.the Prophet and Imam Ali and Imam Hussain would pray even on the battle field when it is time for salat.nothing will stop them from salat.when the clause “hayya ala kharil amal” was expunged,Umar added “as-salat khayrun minal nawm” in the morning prayer,meaning “prayer is better than sleeping”.to us as to the Prophet salat is better than doing anything.

I am happy you yourself have cited that the clause “as-salatu khayrun minan nawm” (“salat is better than sleeping”) was added in sunni adhan.in like manner and in a justifiable way and with accordance to the shariah,the clause “aliyun waliyyulllah” was added.the clause in the sunni adhan “as-salatu khayrun minan nawm” is a bid’a (innovation) and it is haram because it was added in order to replace something that was there during the Prophet’s time “hayya ala kharil amal” (“come to the best deed”).that was done in order to play a fast game and therefore it is haram.salat is not only better than sleep.salat is better than every other act of worship for a muslim.it is the best act of worship that is compulsory.it is better than jihad.

You can read more in details here:

http://www.answering-ansar.org/fiqh/kalima_adhan/en/chap1.php

Aliyun Waliyallah too is innovation right?what i dnt understand is,Allah said all prophets proclaimed THERES NO god but ALLAH,Why should we add the prophet's name or Ali to the call of Worship of Allah,i believe we should testify to Allah alone when it has to do with worship and not testifying to other people when worship matters,we can testify to the Prophet ordinarily and not during worship,because hes not the prophet adhan is called but Allah and the same goes to during the tashahhud.salatu Ibrahim too should be done after teslim,and not during salat,cos i believe nobodys name should be mention except Allah during worship

uplawal:

i believe nobodys name should be mention except Allah during worship

Allah [/b]and [b]His angels send blessings on the Prophet. O ye who believe! you also should invoke blessings on him and salute him with the salutation of peace.
Quran[33:56]

Uplawal stop drawing your own conclusions. Its dangerous.

And the same Allah says we should not call on any name during worship except his name,and pls dnt tell me salat on the prophet can only be done in salat to Allah,salat to Allah should only be for Allah and nobodys name should be mentioned,i send salat on the prophet outside the salah,does that mean am not sending salah on him?

Allah loves the Prophet (saw) and it is mandatory for the believers to love what Allah loves. Sending salutations to the Prophet(saw) is not worshiping him. Sending Salutation means to ask Allah to bless him.

It is We Who created you and gave you shape; then We bade the angels bow down to Adam, and they bowed down; not so Iblis; He refused to be of those who bow down.
[Quran 7.11]

Allah asked everyone to bow down to Adam(as), it does not mean to worship Adam(as) Allah ordered it as to respect Adam(as).

Hmmmm,right,why should it be on salat and not on after salat,and mind you most people that have seen and heard prayed told me,salat ibrahim is done after salat and not during salat,i love the prophet too,and my question is why is his name in the adhan,is not Allah we are praying too?even the Prophet said in the Quran that hes free from what they associate with Allah,Obviously its the muslims cos they add his name to Allah when they make allegiance to Allah

Also,we can conclude that prostration to elders in yoruba culture is not a sign of worship but respect as well

Sister we do all these based on Allahs command. So there must be some logic behind it. Maybe we dont ve enough knowledge to understand it.
May Allah bless you, me and everyone with Knowledge so we can follow the right path.
Ameen.

P.s Allah didnt command to prostrate to Prophet Muhammad(saw) he said to send him salutation. It was commanded to the angels to prostrate to Adam(as) that too not the humans. There is a huge difference.

@uplawal Hey sis i ve to go out now.

Assalaamu alaikum warahmatullahi wabarakatuhu.

uplawal:

Aliyun Waliyallah too is innovation right?what i dnt understand is,Allah said all prophets proclaimed THERES NO god but ALLAH,Why should we add the prophet's name or Ali to the call of Worship of Allah,i believe we should testify to Allah alone when it has to do with worship and not testifying to other people when worship matters,we can testify to the Prophet ordinarily and not during worship,because hes not the prophet adhan is called but Allah and the same goes to during the tashahhud.salatu Ibrahim too should be done after teslim,and not during salat,cos i believe nobodys name should be mention except Allah during worship

it depends on your understanding of "innovation".if you mean "bid'ah",then the phrase by itself is not a bid'ah.for something to be described as a bid'ah it must be an act of haram in the shariah.for example like i earlier explained the phrase "as-salatu kharun minan-nawm" (prayer is better than sleeping) is a bid'ah and haram because the intention behind that phrase and that phrase replacing another phrase is not right.you and i dont have the right to shorten or remove anything from the adhan.when Umar removed "hayya ala khayril amal" it was to send a false message that salat is not more important than jihad and urge people to fight.then that phrase "as-salatu khayrun minan-nawm" was added.salat is not only better than sleeping.salat is the best of deeds and that was the phrase removed i.e. "hayya ala khayril amal".


as for the phrase "aliyyun waliyullah”,that is not bid’ah.it is not haram.for example we also testify in heaven and hell.we testify in the other prophets.we testify in qiyamah.likewise we also testify that “Ali is the friend/supporter/protector of/from Allah”.this the Quran itself testifies to it.the Quran says:”verily your wali is Allah and His Messenger and those who give zakat while they do rukoo”.the only person who gave zakat while doing rukoo as agreed by both sunni and shia tafseer is Ali Ibn Abi Talib.the wilayat of Ali was established therefore in the Quran and it is immediately mentioned after that of Allah and His messenger.and no other human has that honor.when we also speak of wilayat,it is not just ordinary friendship.the word entails loyalty and obedience.when the wilayat of someone is established by Allah you must not go above that person.you must obey him and trust him and support him.therefore the wilayat of Ali is only next to the wilayat of Allah and His Messenger.if you must obey Allah and His messenger then you must do the same for Ali.if you must love Allah and His messneger and not fight them ,you must do the same for Ali.

Therefore the phrase itself is not a bid’ah.rather it was added to the adhan for a justified cause.lets assume that a group of muslims start maligning the angels and cursing Jibreel (as).it will be justified to add  a clause  (from the Quran and accepted in the shariah) to the adhan that we love Jibreel.it was in the days of Muawiya that the cursing of Ali was an obligation.the Shia to differeniate themselves from the enemies of Allah and the enemies of Ali,that clause was inserted saying "Ali is the wali of Allah" as the Quranic verse testifies.the clause itself is not a wajib (obligatory) to be mentioned in adhan but it is not also a bid’ah or haram.its just a matter of practice and time and the love of Ali that have made that clause to be repeated into our time.but not saying it in adhan is acceptable.nontheless,the verse or testifying that Ali is the wali of Allah must always be present in our hearts just the way we believe Jibreel is an angel of Allah and the Quran is the word of Allah.we dont say those two shahada in adhan or salat (and there are many more testimonies of what Islam teaches us to believe in) but those other testimonies of faith are always in our heart,mind and head.

As for the shahadatain (two articles of faith),it is obligatory that you say the two shahada in salat :ash-hadu an-lailaha illallah wa ash-hadu anna Muhammadan abduhu wa rasuluh”.those two shahada is a discriminating factor between kufr and iman.for example,we shia do not believe that sunnis are kaffer because you believe in the prophethood of Muhammad.even if you don’t believe in the wilayat of Ali,we still consider you as muslim but only that your iman is not complete without the wilayat of Ali.but for the christians even if they don’t believe in trinity and believe in One God,anyone who rejects that Muhammad is the last messenger of Allah is a kaffer.that is also the problem with the ahmadiyya sect (an off-shoot from sunni islam) who believe Muhammad is a prophet but they don’t believe he was the last and they believe in another one after Muhammad (sa).they are also regarded as kuffar!!!so the shahadatain is compulsory in salat because it is a discriminator between kufr and iman.saying it in salat does not mean you are worshiping Muhammad because the first shahada “ash-hadu an-lailaha illalllah” has already made that crystal clear.also we send salam upon us and to the righeteous servants in the salat “as-salamu alaina wa ala ibadallah as-saliheen”.the foremost of the “righteous servants of Allah are the 12 imams and the other prophets”.that does not mean we worship ourselves or worship any human being.far from it.we are not to decide what we want to accept or what we want to reject.the deen is complete and established.there is sunni and shia.its your choice to decide which way to follow.the ways are out there for you to decide which to follow.if you want to decide what to follow aside from the established ways,then you have decided to follow and obey yourself.

[size=16pt]HOLY QURAN 5:55[/size]

Your Wali (friend/protector/supporter) can be only Allah; and His messenger and those who believe, who establish worship and pay the poordue, while they bow down (in prayer). (55) And whoso taketh Allah and His messenger and those who believe for friend (will know that), lo! the party of Allah, they are the victorious.


إِنَّمَا وَلِيُّكُمُ ٱللَّهُ وَرَسُولُهُ ۥ وَٱلَّذِينَ ءَامَنُواْ ٱلَّذِينَ يُقِيمُونَ ٱلصَّلَوٰةَ وَيُؤۡتُونَ ٱلزَّكَوٰةَ وَهُمۡ رَٲكِعُونَ (٥٥) وَمَن يَتَوَلَّ ٱللَّهَ وَرَسُولَهُ ۥ وَٱلَّذِينَ ءَامَنُواْ فَإِنَّ حِزۡبَ ٱللَّهِ هُمُ ٱلۡغَـٰلِبُونَ

The Dimensions of Wilayat


TUESDAY, 03 AUGUST 2010 11:09 ASAD RAZA


"Above whomever I have authority, this Ali also has authority"


Wilayat is the most important issue after Prophethood for Muslims. The righteous Wilaya is the sine qua non for a true Islamic state. A lot of problems which Muslims face owe their origin to disregard for the righteous, just successors of the Prophet (peace be upon him and his progeny).

Martyr Ayatollah Murtadha Mutahhari explains Wilaya in the following manner: "The words, 'Wala, Walayat, Wilayat, Waly, Mawla, Awla' and the like have been derived from the same root, viz. Waly. The various forms of this root-word and its derivatives are the most oft-recurring words in the Holy Qur'an. The original meaning of this root-word as mentioned by Raghib in his lexicon 'Mufradatul Qur'an' is one thing taking place by the side of another in such a way that there is no distance between them i.e. if two things are placed side by side in such a manner that there is no other thing between them the root-word 'Waly' is used… this root-word is naturally used for nearness and proximity also, both physical and figurative. And again for this very reason it has been used in the sense of friendship, love, patronage, guardianship, control etc., because all these conceptions involve some sort of contact and proximity." (Master and Mastership)

Particularly in an Islamic context, Wilaya is the faculty of legal and moral authority, which enables a person in whom this authority is vested to exact obedience to fulfill the moral vision of Islamic revelation. The Islamic concept of Wilaya implies religious and political authorities are one and the same. Accordingly in the Qur'anic context of the divine guidance for humanity, the Prophet's role should be considered as the head of state and the founder of a religious order. The sense in which the Holy Qur'an speaks about the Wilaya of the Prophet is essentially the whole of human life, and not just a limited segment of it.

In his famous book The Master and Mastership, Ayatollah Mutahhari has presented four dimensions of Wilaya:

[b]1) Wala of Love (Wila-e-Muhabbat): [/b]All Muslims are obliged to love and respect the Ahlul Bayt (peace be upon them). The Holy Qur'an says "Say: I ask you no reward for my preaching save love and affection toward my progeny." (42:23) Ayatollah Mutahhari explains: "This love is a prelude to all kinds of Wala prescribed by Islam. It binds the people to the Holy Family and gives us an opportunity to benefit from their teachings, practices and precepts."

Imam Shafi'i says in his famous verses: "Let everybody know that if the love of Muhammad's descendants means to be a Rafidi, I am a Rafidi." Imam Shafi'i also says, "O Ahlul Bayt! Allah has made it obligatory in the Qur'an to love you. It is a matter of pride for you that without invoking blessing on you, prayer is not valid." He also says, "After having seen that the people have chosen different ways which have led them to the Ocean of deviation and ignorance, I have, in the name of Allah, embarked the ship which may lead me to safety. The Ahlul Bayt of the Holy Prophet are that very ship. We have been ordered to hold fast the rope of Allah, and that rope is their love."

[b]2) Wala of Imamat (Wila-e-Imamat): [/b]Ayatollah Mutahhari says, "Wala of Imamat signifies religious authority, i.e. a position which makes the Imam a model for others who have to follow him and take instructions from him. Such a position automatically implies the infallibility of the Imam. It is the same position about which the Holy Qur'an, while referring to the Holy Prophet, says:

'The Messenger of Allah is certainly a good example for those of you who have hope in Allah and believe in the Last Day and remember Allah very often.' (33:21)

'Say: If you love Allah, then follow me, Allah will love you and forgive you your faults, and Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.' (3:31)
This Wala reflects the power and authority of the Ahlul Bayt in guiding their followers in spiritual matters. According to a very famous hadith, the Holy Prophet has said, 'I am leaving behind among you two authorities: the Book of Allah and my Ahlul Bayt. They shall not be separated from each other 'til they arrive at the Fountain of Kawthar. If you go ahead of them or fall short of expectations, you shall be misled. Do not try to teach them, for they know better than you.'

That kind of religious leadership, which makes every word and action of the leader authoritative, is called Imamat. It is a sort of Wilayat in the sense that it implies a sort of control over the affairs of the people. This kind of Wala when used with reference to an Imam means religious authority and the right of leadership, and when used with reference to the Muslims, means the acknowledgement of this right."

3) Wala of Leadership (Wila-e-Zi'amat): This kind of Wala is concerned with the right of social and political leadership. According to Ayatollah Mutahhari: "Indeed a society must have a leader. The person qualified to take charge of the social affairs of the Muslims and to control their destinies is called Walyy-u Amr al-Muslimeen (Administrator of affairs of the Muslims). During his lifetime, Muhammad, the Prophet of Islam, held this position, which was granted to him by Allah. Following his death, it was attained by the Ahlul Bayt. There exists undeniable evidence to prove this fact. Besides the Hadith of Ghadeer, several verses of the Holy Qur'an point out this kind of Wala."

"O you who believe! Obey Allah and obey the Messenger and those in authority from among you; then if you quarrel about anything, refer it to Allah and the Messenger, if you believe in Allah and the last day; this is better and very good in the end." (4:59)

"The Prophet has more authority over the believers than that which they have over their selves." (33:06)

The Holy Prophet was the Imam, the religious leader and the law-giver. Whatever he said or did was authoritative. The Qur'an says: "If the Messenger orders you to do something, obey it, and if he forbids something abstain from it." (59:07)

His decisions with regard to any internal disputes and any lawsuits were binding and valid. Allah says in the Holy Qur'an to the Prophet: "I swear by your Lord, they will not be true believers until they make you judge of what is in dispute between them and find in themselves no dislike of that which you decide, and submit with full submission." (4:65)

The Prophet held political and social Wilayat. In addition to preaching and explaining the commands of Allah and arbitrating disputes among the Muslims, he also managed their social and political affairs. He was the Administrator of affairs of the Muslims, as shown in the following verse: "Obey Allah, His Messenger and those of you who are in charge of your affairs." (4:59)

This position of the Holy Prophet out of the three preceding positions – of Imam, religious leader, and law-giver – constitutes the basis of the question of Caliphate, and his successor has the same rights and status.

4) Wala of Control (Wila-e-Tasarruf): This dimension reflects universal power in which the Prophet and his Ahlul Bayt have been vested, by the grace of Almighty Allah. This is the highest stage of the Wilayat of Ahlul Bayt. Imamat and Wilayat in this sense signify the same position, though from different points of view.

This is an authority that makes it possible for the Wali to exercise his power over everything that exists. The authority and control of the Ahlul Bayt is vertical with respect to that of Allah. In the words of Ayatollah Imam Ruhollah Khomeini: "It is a vicegerency pertaining to the whole of creation, by virtue of which all the atoms in the universe humble themselves before the holder of authority." (Islamic Government: Governance of the Jurist)

the above article is courtesy:

http://islamicinsights.com/religion/religion/the-dimensions-of-wilayat.html

Interesting how nobody really understands what Allah wants

hymen:

Interesting how nobody really understands what Allah wants

That is not true. there are loads of people and scholars who understand. The fact the some people have chosen to keep silent on this shia/sunni thread is not that they are ignorant. Me personally i have studied the shia doctrine and i am sunni, i understand that debating this doctrine here would serve no purpose and has no objective rather than disunity, sowing of discord and more misunderstanding.

I have called lagoshia twice to let us discuss on what we both agree upon but he has never replied or commented to my two postings to him. Analyse the 2 threads on this issue and tell me as a neutral if there is any progress than chaos. We cannot solve the differences that have existed for 1300 years here on NL. Only if we both leave to rest the chaotic (fitna) historical events that never happened before our eyes and concentrate more on our salvation as stated by Allah - Shahdah then the five pillars of islam,then we would move foward. This doctrine, we sunni and shia both share. Of what use is it for us to discuss the shortcommings of some companions while we forget our own selves? These people are long dead and they will be judged by the most High himself.

Of what use is analysing who the favorite wife of the prophet PBUH was? And so many other issues.

Hymen we understand what Allah wants and he expressed it in the quran and it is

", We have created Jinn and men for nothing except to worship me "Q51 v 56

To worship Allah we need to knowo some things which is knowledge. The 5 pillars of islaam is the foundation upon which eeman is built. This is my humble call!!



And God knows best.

hymen:

Interesting how nobody really understands what Allah wants

you're a miscreant.are you sure nobody knows?the problem is not that nobody knows.the problem is we have differences on the same issues.each side has its own mentality.

it is far better than your miserable case in christianity.each two denominations have totally different doctrines and teachings.you dont know what to follow.

Lagosboy:

That is not true. there are loads of people and scholars who understand. The fact the some people have chosen to keep silent on this shia/sunni thread is not that they are ignorant. Me personally i have studied the shia doctrine and i am sunni, i understand that debating this doctrine here would serve no purpose and has no objective rather than disunity, sowing of discord and more misunderstanding.

I have called lagoshia twice to let us discuss on what we both agree upon but he has never replied or commented to my two postings to him. Analyse the 2 threads on this issue and tell me as a neutral if there is any progress than chaos. We cannot solve the differences that have existed for 1300 years here on NL. Only if we both leave to rest the chaotic (fitna) historical events that never happened before our eyes and concentrate more on our salvation as stated by Allah - Shahdah then the five pillars of islam,then we would move foward. This doctrine, we sunni and shia both share. Of what use is it for us to discuss the shortcommings of some companions while we forget our own selves? These people are long dead and they will be judged by the most High himself.

Of what use is analysing who the favorite wife of the prophet PBUH was? And so many other issues.

Hymen we understand what Allah wants and he expressed it in the quran and it is

", We have created Jinn and men for nothing except to worship me "Q51 v 56

To worship Allah we need to knowo some things which is knowledge. The 5 pillars of islaam is the foundation upon which eeman is built. This is my humble call!!



And God knows best.

There is no discord in  discussion as far as it is done peacefully and with the intention of drawing close.and with thanks to Allah at least two people on this forum are beginning to reason with the shia teachings and be understanding.it is people like “sweetnecta” and “abu zola” with their insufficient knowledge that want to sow discord.after we’ve understood the concept of muta and how it existed and can exist under special circumstances,”sweetnecta” started to do copy/paste job.if I start to analyse what she has posted shred by shred,I know he cannot defend what he posted.therefore I can only help others to help themselves by visiting the answering-ansar.org site to know the truth about shia beliefs and practices including a guide on muta and a refutation of people who are ashamed of their beliefs and deny muta as the sunnis do and throw baseless accusations against us.if the Prophet allowed it,then no one has the right to ban it.we only have to understand how it can work and under what conditions and in what situation.

Discussing on what we agree on is like clapping for onself.i discuss what we believe when the need arise.you can see my posts and threads.i have had a thread on Tawhid and another on Duas.

The issue of discussing the past has alot to do with the present.see for example issues like muta and even wudu that we differ from each other because of the split and the destructive role those sahaba played.dont forget the beheading of our Prophet’s grandson.we can never forget that.just turning a blind eye either is of no use and help.if you think that we need not to discuss the past which still affects us,and we should not,you want to simply make our discussions seem trivial and useless.that is not true.those who don’t learn from the past will repeat the mistakes of the past in their future.until we accept the role those sahaba played and we identify where they were wrong to fix our problems,we cannot move forward.let us read and understand.let us stop copy/paste work that we cant defend.let us solve our problems in a civil and respectable manner.why should we be shy from the reality and the truth?we got all it takes to pride ourselves as the complete and perfect religion.the truth is there.we need to grab it.islam can only be complete and succeed when we return to where Allah wanted us to be:that is,following the leadership of the Ahlul-Bayt,starting with Imam Ali as our first guide after the Prophet.

May Allah guide us all and give us the humility to see the truth and the courage to admit and accept it with honesty!

Lagosboy:

That is not true. there are loads of people and scholars who understand. The fact the some people have chosen to keep silent on this shia/sunni thread is not that they are ignorant. Me personally i have studied the shia doctrine and i am sunni, i understand that debating this doctrine here would serve no purpose and has no objective rather than disunity, sowing of discord and more misunderstanding.

I have called lagoshia twice to let us discuss on what we both agree upon but he has never replied or commented to my two postings to him. Analyse the 2 threads on this issue and tell me as a neutral if there is any progress than chaos. We cannot solve the differences that have existed for 1300 years here on NL. Only if we both leave to rest the chaotic (fitna) historical events that never happened before our eyes and concentrate more on our salvation as stated by Allah - Shahdah then the five pillars of islam,then we would move foward. This doctrine, we sunni and shia both share. Of what use is it for us to discuss the shortcommings of some companions while we forget our own selves? These people are long dead and they will be judged by the most High himself.

Of what use is analysing who the favorite wife of the prophet PBUH was? And so many other issues.

Hymen we understand what Allah wants and he expressed it in the quran and it is

", We have created Jinn and men for nothing except to worship me "Q51 v 56

To worship Allah we need to knowo some things which is knowledge. The 5 pillars of islaam is the foundation upon which eeman is built. This is my humble call!!



And God knows best.

Yes you are right indeed. Lets concentrate more on our own deeds and actions.

"Nor defame one another, "
(49:11)


And obey Allah and His Messenger, and do not dispute (with one another) lest you lose courage and your strength depart, and be patient. Surely, Allah is with those who are As-Sabirin (the patient ones, etc.)
(9:46)

And those who disbelieve are allies to one another, (and) if you (Muslims of the whole world collectively) do not do so (i.e. become allies, as one united block), there will be Fitnah (wars, battles, polytheism, etc.) and oppression on earth, and a great mischief and corruption (appearance of polytheism).
(9:73)

Let everyone who believe in "La ilaha illallah muhammad-your-rasoolullah" join our hands in unity. Allah (swt) has made it very clear in the Qur'an what will happen otherwise.

Allah knows best.

LagosShia:

There is no discord in discussion as far as it is done peacefully and with the intention of drawing close.and with thanks to Allah at least two people on this forum are beginning to reason with the shia teachings and be understanding.it is people like “sweetnecta” and “abu zola” with their insufficient knowledge that want to sow discord.after we’ve understood the concept of muta and how it existed and can exist under special circumstances,”sweetnecta” started to do copy/paste job.if I start to analyse what she has posted shred by shred,I know he cannot defend what he posted.therefore I can only help others to help themselves by visiting the answering-ansar.org site to know the truth about shia beliefs and practices including a guide on muta and a refutation of people who are ashamed of their beliefs and deny muta as the sunnis do and throw baseless accusations against us.if the Prophet allowed it,then no one has the right to ban it.we only have to understand how it can work and under what conditions and in what situation.

Discussing on what we agree on is like clapping for onself.i discuss what we believe when the need arise.you can see my posts and threads.i have had a thread on Tawhid and another on Duas.

The issue of discussing the past has alot to do with the present.see for example issues like muta and even wudu that we differ from each other because of the split and the destructive role those sahaba played.dont forget the beheading of our Prophet’s grandson.we can never forget that.just turning a blind eye either is of no use and help.if you think that we need not to discuss the past which still affects us,and we should not,you want to simply make our discussions seem trivial and useless.that is not true.those who don’t learn from the past will repeat the mistakes of the past in their future.until we accept the role those sahaba played and we identify where they were wrong to fix our problems,we cannot move forward.let us read and understand.let us stop copy/paste work that we cant defend.let us solve our problems in a civil and respectable manner.why should we be shy from the reality and the truth?we got all it takes to pride ourselves as the complete and perfect religion.the truth is there.we need to grab it.islam can only be complete and succeed when we return to where Allah wanted us to be:that is,following the leadership of the Ahlul-Bayt,starting with Imam Ali as our first guide after the Prophet.

May Allah guide us all and give us the humility to see the truth and the courage to admit and accept it with honesty!

Brother i am not aginst discussion , i have it all the time. I have lots of shia friends here in the UK. My sheikhs engage with shia scholars in discussions. One of my sheikh has an 18 volume book analysing the history of islam between fath makkah till Caliph Umar ibn Abdul Azeez which entails detail analysis of the various historical events we talk about. From Yazid whom we ackknowledge was not a muslim/could not have been to various issues. I did study these issues but my point is not trivialise history or relagte these events to the background.

My point is of priortization of issues and knowing where to to discuss these issues. These difference, arguements and counter arguements have been existing for 1300 years and Lagosshia would not be the first or the last to explain. Nairaland IMO is not the best place for shia - sunni discourse. Our goal is to develop ourselves as muslim and bring non muslims to islam. Debating the faults of sahabas would only confuse folks rather than help them understand islaam. We active muslims on this section of NL are very few brother, let us put things into proper perspective.

There is no way discord would not surface when we discuss some issues and recent postings have shown that. No sunni will be happy when Aisha RA is been insulted or her father Abu bakr RA likewise you as a shia would never be happy if some calls you a kafir for being a shia. I am more of a centrist when it comes to matters of faith. In islamic fiqh sunni and shia are more of less the same and by the way i like the jafari madhhab a lot. The 5 rulies of classification you hughlighted are same in the sunni madhahibs except the hanafi who has 7 and brother anything that is not in the first level of classification - Wajeeb i do not like to argue, debate or discuss it if it would lead discord or confusion especially here on NL except when absolute neccessary. This is my message to you the shahadatain and the pillars of islam is wajeeb on both of us which is the reason i called you to let us discuss.

Let us discuss issues of spirituality which i know is soo wide in shia doctrine like it is in sunni, these issues will directly benefit us a great deal. Pls i would appreciate if you could drop an email and we could discuss further outside NL

And God knows best

History cannever be fogoten or set aside as trival issues,if not attended to will ofcourse repeat itself,thats why there are different boards for various thread,so you choose whichever one you feel youre comfortable,but as for those silly act those sahabas did after the Prophet was no more cannever be erased,

infact,am begining to feel unhappy about the whole situation,how can people who claim to love the Prophet change the Adhan,kill Ali and the Prophets grandson Hussein,and deprived Fatima her inheritance right that Allah has permitted her.

uplawal:

History cannever be fogoten or set aside as trival issues,if not attended to will ofcourse repeat itself,thats why there are different boards for various thread,so you choose whichever one you feel youre comfortable,but as for those silly act those sahabas did after the Prophet was no more cannever be erased,

infact,am begining to feel unhappy about the whole situation,how can people who claim to love the Prophet change the Adhan,kill Ali and the Prophets grandson Hussein,and deprived Fatima her inheritance right that Allah has permitted her.

Sister please calm down and thread softly, issues of faith are not taken the way you are doing. We all love you here on NL and i remember one of your first posts during your transition to islam, alihamdulilah you are now a muslim to God be the glory. Knowledge is power and light which caan only be acquired through patience, hardwork, humility and openness of mind.

Calling the act of the sahabas silly here because of what you read here is very disturbing to me. You talked of killing Ali KW while forgeting Umar, Uthman RA were also killed. Hamzah was killed Hussein was and Hassan was killed as well. Abdullah ibn Zubeir was not only killed but hung on crucifx over the kaábah.

I dont want to be dragged into these issues and my silence on this thread is not due to ignorance of history neither is it due to lack of knowledge but may Allah grant us all the wisdom to discuss faith issues.

I never said history is trivial please re read my posts and i am student of tareekh al islam. History could be discussed and analysed but what we forget is that the main difference between shias and sunni is the interpretion of history which never happened before our eyes. I challenege anyone to prove me otherwise.

Sister there are loads of things you need to learn about islaam before you begin to insult the acts of sahabas. I love shias and i consider the positions of shias on many issues as reaction to the persecution they suffered. With love and focusing on what we agree upon our differences will fizzle out as long as we are both sincere to Allah.

I again plead with you to drop me a mail as i am really disturbed about your positions on many issues ranging from hadith to other things. I would like to understand your position before i could pass my opinion on your positions.

May Allah bless us all

And God knows best

Lagosboy:

Calling the act of the sahabas silly here because of what you read here is very disturbing to me. You talked of killing Ali KW while forgeting Umar, Uthman RA were also killed. Hamzah was killed Hussein was and Hassan was killed as well. Abdullah ibn Zubeir was not only killed but hung on crucifx over the kaábah.

Brother,i was considering your previously post and invitation to dialogue with me privately and that is why i have not yet replied.but when i read the above,it really discouraged me.how can you cover up for the killing of the Prophet's family? you are still playing with the truth and hiding the facts of history.while Umar,Usthman,and Hamzah (as),were killed by non-muslim kuffar,the Prophet's family including Ali,Hassan and Hussein were killed by those who claimed to be muslims after the Prophet's demise.it is those hyporcrites among the sahaba you cherish and try to cover for that killed the Prophet's family.they testified that Muhammad is the messenger of Allah with their mouths and used their hands to butcher his family.a family which the Quran orders us we must love.

and for your information Hamzah (may the peace of Allah be upon him) was killed by (order of) the mother of Muawiya and grandmother of Yazeed,who is responsible for Imam Hussain's beheading.she literally ate the kidney of Hamzah raw in vengence and tribalism and jahiliyya.it was again her grandson who killed Imam Hussain and her son who murdered both Imam Ali and Imam Hassan.these are the banu umayya for you.the father of muawiya,abu sufyan was the staunchest enemy of islam and the Prophet from the begininng of da'wah in Mecca.he accepted islam out of shame because he was defeated and belittled.these are the same hypocrites you people pronounce love for and defend.

as for the case of abdullah ibn zubair,he was killed by the same banu umayya after he rose up against their rule after the beaheading of Imam Hussain (as).

so when you are trying to make it look "all is well" and try to group those who were killed,it is only fair and just for you to know who killed them and when they were killed.it is a fact in history that the ummah of Muhammad killed the family of Muhammad.ofcourse those are the hypocrites in the ummah.but the question is why should we defend them as sunnis like doing?would you protect their pride and anger the Prophet?didnt they kill his righteous family members?

LagosShia:

Brother,i was considering your previously post and invitation to dialogue with me privately and that is why i have not yet replied.but when i read the above,it really discouraged me.how can you cover up for the killing of the Prophet's family? you are still playing with the truth and hiding the facts of history.while Umar,Usthman,and Hamzah (as),were killed by non-muslim kuffar,the Prophet's family including Ali,Hassan and Hussein were killed by those who claimed to be muslims after the Prophet's demise.it is those hyporcrites among the sahaba you cherish and try to cover for that killed the Prophet's family.they testified that Muhammad is the messenger of Allah with their mouths and used their hands to butcher his family.a family which the Quran orders us we must love.

and for your information Hamzah (may the peace of Allah be upon him) was killed by (order of) the mother of Muawiya and grandmother of Yazeed,who is responsible for Imam Hussain's beheading.she literally ate the kidney of Hamzah raw in vengence and tribalism and jahiliyya.it was again her grandson who killed Imam Hussain and her son who murdered both Imam Ali and Imam Hassan.these are the banu umayya for you.the father of muawiya,abu sufyan was the staunchest enemy of islam and the Prophet from the begininng of da'wah in Mecca.he accepted islam out of shame because he was defeated and belittled.these are the same hypocrites you people pronounce love for and defend.

as for the case of abdullah ibn zubair,he was killed by the same banu umayya after he rose up against their rule after the beaheading of Imam Hussain (as).

so when you are trying to make it look "all is well" and try to group those who were killed,it is only fair and just for you to know who killed them and when they were killed.it is a fact in history that the ummah of Muhammad killed the family of Muhammad.ofcourse those are the hypocrites in the ummah.but the question is why should we defend them as sunnis like doing?would you protect their pride and anger the Prophet?didnt they kill his righteous family members?

My dear brother how would i try to cover up the killing of my Prophets PBUH grandson, you read in my post when i said we dont even consider Yazeed as a muslim, i was acknowledging the killing of Abdullah ibn Zubeir. What i was trying to say was that apart from Imam Hussein there were other killings as well and yes by bani Ummayah led by Yazeed. For you to understand some of my mindset, I believe Muwaiya was wrong to have given the caliph to Yazeed which was going against the agreement he had. Yazeed as was reported was not even a muslim/serious muslim

Try to re read my posts and understand it. No sunni would tell you he loves those who killed hussein never ever!! The fact of not discussing does not translate to covering up as the whole texts of islamic history is full of these incidents. So the question of covering up does not arise at all brother. To whose gain is covering up and for what benefit brother. Please lets open our minds and drop suspicions of one another, i would look foward to further discussion with you privately.

I wish you Allahs blessings

Brother i still call you to let us dialogue privately with all humility.

@Lagosboy,pls dnt lie,the sunni's dnt wanna talk about it,since the history would tell on the sahabas that are involve in the acts,av read lots of books on the ways of the prophet compiled by sunni's,they never include any account from the Prophet's household,except maybe two or three,infact very few,all they write is one sahaba said this or heard the prophet did or said this,but not many accounts from the household.

And,if the shia talks about it,they become sad and rage,and they can even kill,there are so many sahih hadiths that support them killing anyone that disagree with them,its there,why would they be killing the shia in saudi like chicken if not because of that,go and read the whole RIYADH-US-SALEHEEN,and FIQU-SUNNAH,many more,they dnt discuss about the household of the prophet at all

@Lagosboy,what about when Abubakar ordered Umar to burn down Fatima's house,is that to be praised as well,tell me?

and where did Allah or the prophet says Fatimo cannot inherit her late dad?and Aisha who was even supposed to be at her side was running around the place with her dad preventing the poor lady fatimo from inheriting her the prophet who of course is her dad,how can they give it as SADAKA when the child is still alive?

Lagosboy:

My dear brother how would i try to cover up the killing of my Prophets PBUH grandson, you read in my post when i said we dont even consider Yazeed as a muslim, i was acknowledging the killing of Abdullah ibn Zubeir. What i was trying to say was that apart from Imam Hussein there were other killings as well and yes by bani Ummayah led by Yazeed. For you to understand some of my mindset, I believe Muwaiya was wrong to have given the caliph to Yazeed which was going against the agreement he had. Yazeed as was reported was not even a muslim/serious muslim

Try to re read my posts and understand it. No sunni would tell you he loves those who killed hussein never ever!! The fact of not discussing does not translate to covering up as the whole texts of islamic history is full of these incidents. So the question of covering up does not arise at all brother. To whose gain is covering up and for what benefit brother. Please lets open our minds and drop suspicions of one another, i would look foward to further discussion with you privately.

I wish you Allahs blessings

Brother i still call you to let us dialogue privately with all humility.

yes you are trying to make the many massacres against the household simple because others too were killed.i have explained it to you that there is a big difference when Hamzah was killed and when Hussain was killed.Hamzah was killed standing on the battle-field as a willing warrior in the days of the Prophet fighting for islam against the pagans of Quraysh in one of many battles.Hussain was besieged by a so called muslim caliph because he used his right not to pay allegiance to tyranny and enforce the oppression and legitimize the un-islamic yazeed.he was besieged with his family members and close companions and killed while thirsty and betrayed by the ummah who did not rescue him.

Both Umar and Usthman were killed by non-muslims because of their bad policies and discrimination against non-arab muslims,rightly or wrongly.both Imam Ali and Imam Hassan were killed again by a so called muslim caliph.they were both backstabbed.Muawiya paid Imam Ali’s servant to strike the Imam with a sword on the head in the holy month of Ramadan and while the Imam was doing sujood in the mosque of Kufa (during fajr prayer).

Imam Hassan was poisoned by his wife whom Muawiya bribed and promised her to make his un-godly son Yazeed to marry her.Imam Hassan was killed and Aisha prevented his body from being buried beside his grandfather,the holy Prophet.during his funeral procession,Muawiya’s men were raining arrows on the mourners.the same thing happen today when shia are mourning Imam Hussain and remembering karbala with street processions.the lovers of Muawiya in pakistan and elsewhere blow themselves up with explosives killing the shia mourners during Ashura.both Aisha and Muawiya are loved by sunnis.are the sunnis not following their footsteps of persecuting the Ahlul-Bayt and now their followers?

The tragedy of the Ahlul-Bayt is so sad and ugly that if we muslims turn a blind eye and try to make their calamity look ordinary and simple,Allah will not forgive us.infact Allah will consider us among their enemies if we don’t support their cause and uphold their memory by exposing the truth.

The calamities that started from the denial of Imam Ali’s right to succession to the denial of Sayyida Fatima of her inheritance to the assault of Umar on the house of Sayyida Fatima to the battle of jamal to the battle of siffeen to the matyrdom of Imam Ali and then Imam Hassan,only culminated when Imam Hussain was beheaded and the women of the Prophets household and children were taking in chains as captives while the head of Hussain was lifted on a spear.the tragedy of karbala was the clash between good and evil.this would have happened from day 1 when Imam Ali was denied his right to succession.if the Imam would have insisted harshly or even used force what happened to Imam Hussain in Karbala would have happened to Imam Ali in Medina.instead of yazeed,umar would have done that.and had that happened then,people would not have known the truth of the story.they will simply think it was a power tussle.we saw how the abuse against the Ahlul-Bayt continued for so long with impunity until Karbala.

It did not end in Karbala.the grandson of Imam Hussain,Zaid Ibn Ali was also matyred and his body hanged on a tree for years.finally he was burnt and his ashes scattered into the Eupherates river so that he will not have a tomb like his grandfather that will attract homage and reverence by lovers and supporters (as Imam Hussain,Zaid's grandfather, has in the holy city of Karbala in Iraq).all of our Imams that followed from the children of Hussain in the Household of the Prophet Muhammad were matyred.all the 12 imams and other members of the Prophet's household were unjustly killed or poisoned by so called muslims who were no more than hypocrites that held a grudge against the Prophet and so they wanted to destroy Islam.the Ahlul-Bayt stood firm to protect the deen and they paid the price with their blood and sacrificed their lives in the way of Allah.do you want us to take the abuse and killings of the Ahlul-Bayt as a simple or minor incidents like any other?or do you want us to compare their ordeal to the warrior on the battle-field?the Ahlul-Bayt were victims of tyranny and despots and oppression.let us be real,open our sleeping hearts and wake up!!!

[Quote]« #147 on: Today at 10:17:39 AM »

Quote from: Lagosboy on Today at 09:40:27 AM
That is not true. there are loads of people and scholars who understand. The fact the some people have chosen to keep silent on this shia/sunni thread is not that they are ignorant. Me personally i have studied the shia doctrine and i am sunni, i understand that debating this doctrine here would serve no purpose and has no objective rather than disunity, sowing of discord and more misunderstanding.

I have called lagoshia twice to let us discuss on what we both agree upon but he has never replied or commented to my two postings to him. Analyse the 2 threads on this issue and tell me as a neutral if there is any progress than chaos. We cannot solve the differences that have existed for 1300 years here on NL. Only if we both leave to rest the chaotic (fitna) historical events that never happened before our eyes and concentrate more on our salvation as stated by Allah - Shahdah then the five pillars of islam,then we would move foward. This doctrine, we sunni and shia both share. Of what use is it for us to discuss the shortcommings of some companions while we forget our own selves? These people are long dead and they will be judged by the most High himself.

Of what use is analysing who the favorite wife of the prophet PBUH was? And so many other issues.

Hymen we understand what Allah wants and he expressed it in the quran and it is

", We have created Jinn and men for nothing except to worship me "Q51 v 56

To worship Allah we need to knowo some things which is knowledge. The 5 pillars of islaam is the foundation upon which eeman is built. This is my humble call!!



And God knows best.


There is no discord in discussion as far as it is done peacefully and with the intention of drawing close.[b]and with thanks to Allah at least two people on this forum are beginning to reason with the shia teachings and be understanding.it is people like “sweetnecta” and “abu zola” with their insufficient knowledge that want to sow discord.[/b]after we’ve understood the concept of muta and how it existed and can exist under special circumstances,”sweetnecta” started to do copy/paste job.if I start to analyse what she has posted shred by shred,I know he cannot defend what he posted.therefore I can only help others to help themselves by visiting the answering-ansar.org site to know the truth about shia beliefs and practices including a guide on muta and a refutation of people who are ashamed of their beliefs and deny muta as the sunnis do and throw baseless accusations against us.if the Prophet allowed it,then no one has the right to ban it.we only have to understand how it can work and under what conditions and in what situation.

Discussing on what we agree on is like clapping for onself.i discuss what we believe when the need arise.you can see my posts and threads.i have had a thread on Tawhid and another on Duas.

The issue of discussing the past has alot to do with the present.see for example issues like muta and even wudu that we differ from each other because of the split and the destructive role those sahaba played.dont forget the beheading of our Prophet’s grandson.we can never forget that.just turning a blind eye either is of no use and help.if you think that we need not to discuss the past which still affects us,and we should not,you want to simply make our discussions seem trivial and useless.that is not true.those who don’t learn from the past will repeat the mistakes of the past in their future.until we accept the role those sahaba played and we identify where they were wrong to fix our problems,we cannot move forward.let us read and understand.let us stop copy/paste work that we cant defend.let us solve our problems in a civil and respectable manner.why should we be shy from the reality and the truth?we got all it takes to pride ourselves as the complete and perfect religion.the truth is there.we need to grab it.islam can only be complete and succeed when we return to where Allah wanted us to be:that is,following the leadership of the Ahlul-Bayt,starting with Imam Ali as our first guide after the Prophet.

May Allah guide us all and give us the humility to see the truth and the courage to admit and accept it with honesty![/Quote]Of the bold, I am grateful that my knowledge is insufficient, because if it has been "sufficient" it may be overboard, leading to arrogance and ending up in hellfire. I like my life as simple as it is; a mere muslim, not sunni and not shia. I will follow those who follow Muhammad (AS), since he was the prophet and no one after him was. I will take the best of meaning of what I hear since my Lord has impacted wisdom in me.

My brother, I am closer to the grave than yours. I have no time to be experimenting. I do not do zina and i stay away from all that will annoy Allah. I pray to Him Alone seeking His Mercy in all my affairs. I do not call on Muhammad for anything, though I follow him, as best as I can. May Allah forgive all muslims and forgive me for not having the much knowledge. I am trying my best. Allah is Enough for me.

@LagosShia: Do you accept Muta? If you do, then there must be people who want Muta in the community that you belong. If I were a person of Muta, I woud have asked you to introduce me to someone dear to you. If you are a true Shia, why against flogging of the body that the shia do in Ashura? Why are shia scholars now saying that it should not be done according to you, while all the generations for over 1000 years have done it? Can you your loved females who are virgins for Muta? I think that talking the talk and not walking the walk is not what I expect from you.

Sweetnecta:

@LagosShia: Do you accept Muta? If you do, then there must be people who want Muta in the community that you belong. If I were a person of Muta, I woud have asked you to introduce me to someone dear to you. If you are a true Shia, why against flogging of the body that the shia do in Ashura? Why are shia scholars now saying that it should not be done according to you, while all the generations for over 1000 years have done it? Can you your loved females who are virgins for Muta? I think that talking the talk and not walking the walk is not what I expect from you.

its not an issue of whether i accept it or not.i am simply of the right stance as my beliefs state that muta is not haram and was not banned by the Prophet.infact the Quran permitted it in surat an-Nisa verse 24.its like asking me if i support polygamy.personally i would not like to have a step-mother nor would i want to have more than one wife.nontheless,polygamy is not haram.there are circumstances that may call for it.it is bad for us to use our personal feelings and taste and dislikes to judge what is haram and what is halal.Allah has done that.what is halal is what can be of benefit to us.what is haram is what harms us.in the case of both muta and polygamy,it depends on how they are applied.when applied well with good intention and reasons they are halal.we dont have to do that use ourselves as the yardstick to decide halal and haram.i have stated before that mutah can be mubah (not recommended but halal) and makrooh (disliked but halal) but it cannot be haram because like polygamy it has being allowed in the Quran.if i had a relative who needs muta and it suits her condtion,i would not stop her.ofcourse i would want a responsible man for her who at least can give her a marriage agreement for like a year or more.also note that not everything halal under the shariah that a muslim must observe.for example,there are so many halal food which you and i have not tasted before.


i really dont understand what you mean that "i am not a true shia".so by "true shia" you believe it is only those who cut themselves and inflict wounds on their body during Ashura that are "true".if that is true,then why not you start doing that?

i have explained this in another post (not sure if its in the other shia thread) that our scholars themselves have issued fatwas condemning this act.we can beat our chest and cry because that does not harm or inflict injury on us.but using knives and swords to cut ourselves is haram.our scholars have said that.there are also those who support it.this is a philosophical issue.i have explained it elsewhere.but generally it is being discouraged.it has not being the practice since 1000 years.it started in the 17th century if am not mistaken with the date.what has being for over a thousand years is the commemoration of Ashura itself as an umbrella which marks the matyrdom of Imam Hussain.how you decide to remember him has generally being gathering together and narrating the battle of karbala and doing supplication and reading Quran.those who start to cut themselves and justify it by saying mourning for Imam Hussain and feeling sad is permitted so they can cut themselves is their own thinking.however that is not just encouraged.if our scholars are against that,then are you saying those scholars are not "true shia"?

being a shia has to do with imamate and the wilayat of the Ahlul-Bayt starting with Imam Ali (as).

the below (my) post partly addressed to "Lagosboy" did not appear in the thread because of "spamboot",so i decided to quote it:

LagosShia:

yes you are trying to make the many massacres against the household simple because others too were killed.i have explained it to you that there is a big difference when Hamzah was killed and when Hussain was killed.Hamzah was killed standing on the battle-field as a willing warrior in the days of the Prophet fighting for islam against the pagans of Quraysh in one of many battles.Hussain was besieged by a so called muslim caliph because he used his right not to pay allegiance to tyranny and enforce the oppression and legitimize the un-islamic yazeed.he was besieged with his family members and close companions and killed while thirsty and betrayed by the ummah who did not rescue him.

Both Umar and Usthman were killed by non-muslims because of their bad policies and discrimination against non-arab muslims,rightly or wrongly.both Imam Ali and Imam Hassan were killed again by a so called muslim caliph.they were both backstabbed.Muawiya paid Imam Ali’s servant to strike the Imam with a sword on the head in the holy month of Ramadan and while the Imam was doing sujood in the mosque of Kufa (during fajr prayer).

Imam Hassan was poisoned by his wife whom Muawiya bribed and promised her to make his un-godly son Yazeed to marry her.Imam Hassan was killed and Aisha prevented his body from being buried beside his grandfather,the holy Prophet.during his funeral procession,Muawiya’s men were raining arrows on the mourners.the same thing happen today when shia are mourning Imam Hussain and remembering karbala with street processions.the lovers of Muawiya in pakistan and elsewhere blow themselves up with explosives killing the shia mourners during Ashura.both Aisha and Muawiya are loved by sunnis.are the sunnis not following their footsteps of persecuting the Ahlul-Bayt and now their followers?

The tragedy of the Ahlul-Bayt is so sad and ugly that if we muslims turn a blind eye and try to make their calamity look ordinary and simple,Allah will not forgive us.infact Allah will consider us among their enemies if we don’t support their cause and uphold their memory by exposing the truth.

The calamities that started from the denial of Imam Ali’s right to succession to the denial of Sayyida Fatima of her inheritance to the assault of Umar on the house of Sayyida Fatima to the battle of jamal to the battle of siffeen to the matyrdom of Imam Ali and then Imam Hassan,only culminated when Imam Hussain was beheaded and the women of the Prophets household and children were taking in chains as captives while the head of Hussain was lifted on a spear.the tragedy of karbala was the clash between good and evil.this would have happened from day 1 when Imam Ali was denied his right to succession.if the Imam would have insisted harshly or even used force what happened to Imam Hussain in Karbala would have happened to Imam Ali in Medina.instead of yazeed,umar would have done that.and had that happened then,people would not have known the truth of the story.they will simply think it was a power tussle.we saw how the abuse against the Ahlul-Bayt continued for so long with impunity until Karbala.

It did not end in Karbala.the grandson of Imam Hussain,Zaid Ibn Ali was also matyred and his body hanged on a tree for years.finally he was burnt and his ashes scattered into the Eupherates river so that he will not have a tomb like his grandfather that will attract homage and reverence by lovers and supporters (as Imam Hussain,Zaid's grandfather, has in the holy city of Karbala in Iraq).all of our Imams that followed from the children of Hussain in the Household of the Prophet Muhammad were matyred.all the 12 imams and other members of the Prophet's household were unjustly killed or poisoned by so called muslims who were no more than hypocrites that held a grudge against the Prophet and so they wanted to destroy Islam.the Ahlul-Bayt stood firm to protect the deen and they paid the price with their blood and sacrificed their lives in the way of Allah.do you want us to take the abuse and killings of the Ahlul-Bayt as a simple or minor incidents like any other?or do you want us to compare their ordeal to the warrior on the battle-field?the Ahlul-Bayt were victims of tyranny and despots and oppression.let us be real,open our sleeping hearts and wake up!!!