i dont think it really makes any differnce or it does not really matter.it still conveys the same intention of greeting.i just feel "alaykom" or "alaikom" is closer to the arabic pronunciation than "aleikum".

alaykum seems to be the pakistani pronounciation as well.

LagosShia:

"Vedaxcool",it has being really long since i decided to ignore your posts.but since you sound a bit more calm and trying to reason thanks to the words of aid by "isale",i want to pose only 3 issues to you,and i want you to sincerely answer them if you truly believe in Islam as the true religion of Almighty God who made you:

like I cared!

LagosShia:

1.) in your rightful state of mind,do you really think anyone on earth who is educated would believe it when a Nigerian says that "i'm muslim" and he says "i'm neither sunni or shia"?how can one claim to "only be muslim" when he is practicing one version of islam rather than the other?

Yes!

LagosShia:

2.) you said that:
as a person who has read about the conflicts of the companions among themselves and what happened at saqifa banu saeda and how they killed themselves in battles,do you agree that many of them their actions were not innocent and go contrary to the teachings of Islam and the examples of Islam the Prophet Muhammad (sa) set and taught them?would you live in denial of historical facts in order to portray "total success" or would you accept the facts and live with the truth? if previous companions of prophets can go astray and Muhammad (sa) himself saw that coming for his own companions,then why do you have to turn a blind eye to what happened?why portray all of them as angels?the shia version may look like "failure".but in essence it is total success when we believers admit and face the reality.the Quran itself does not hold the Prophet (sa) accountable for the belief or lack of it or actions of people or his contemporaries:

16:82 But if they turn away from you, (O Prophet remember that) your only duty is a clear delivery of the Message (entrusted to you).

6:107 Yet if God had so willed, they would not have ascribed Divinity to aught besides him; hence, We have not made you their keeper, nor are you (of your own choice) a guardian over them.

17:53, 54 And tell my servants that they should speak in a most kindly manner (unto those who do not share their beliefs). Verily, Satan is always ready to stir up discord between men; for verily; Satan is mans foe ,  Hence, We have not sent you (Unto men O Prophet) with power to determine their Faith.

88:21, 22; also see 24:54 And so, (O Prophet!) exhort them your task is only to exhort; you cannot compel them to believe.

[size=14pt]

Really Sunnis regard the companions of the prophet pbuh as angels, you see, shiasm is a case against Islam, whether you like it or not, to claim that a majority of the men who started the journey of Islam with the Prophet pbuh immediately apostatized after his death will simply mean he could not even convince the people around him, that Allah made a grave error referring to his wife Aisha r.a as Mother of the believer only for her to show the worst character accrd. to shias again immediately after the prophet pbuh died! auzobillah, what sort of failure would one label the religion! I Islam we are told to give our brothers a 100 excuses but we find the shias passing judgement over incidents that one would have to dissect the hearts of people to clearly understand. the same shias would claim the companions altered teh glorious book al Qur'an to cover their tracks, yet their infallible imam essentially failed to prevent the alteration, this is cardinal shia beliefs, where some go a far as claiming the Qur'an contain over 7000 verses that the companions not only succeeded in reducing the verses of the Qur'an but where also able to erase those verses from the memory of all muslims alive then, you! be sincere enough to tell me isn't this a great case against Islam?  for shias to back their theology, they will need to fault so many aspect of Islam to "prove" their case. To say because the companions disagreed amongst themselves meant they are evil and devilish is hardly tangible in any rational circle, Jesus disciples showed the level of their faith when he was with them not after he had left, yet we discovered that the Bulk of people surrounding the prophet pbuh according to the shias were able to deceive the Prodphet pbuh and then succeded in  altering messages  in the Qur'an, innovated and literally made the majority of Muslim go astray, we then ask Jesus real disciples with the little information we have never started moving words from their places . The issue of Saqifa should be clear if you are willing to understand the context, the ansars believed they had greater rights in leading the Muslims, just as other Banu"s" within the Ummah belived they had greater rights in ruling, meaning there was clear concensus amongst the various groups that the Prophet pbuh never appointed any one to lead after him, or else again you are willing to say the level of hyporisy was so high that nearly everyone overlooked the Prophet's order, again it will be hard rationally to say the Prophet had no inkling that his companions would betray him auzobillah, yet Jesus was able to know to a certain extent that his companions would not be true to their words. Again I reaffrim that holding unto the shia view will actually indicate failure of multiple proportions. If the very first community that was suppose to bring Islam to future generations were majorly hypocrites then the bulk of the information they passed accross will have little or no grounds to be trusted, to which again we kow the shias indict the Qur'an as being incomplete auzobillah your admission a success? Far from that your "admission" hinges on so may if, perharps and probably to be taken anywhere close to admission, an "admission" that relies more on conjecture is indeed far from an admission! such admission will make the "infalliable" Imam almost like a front roll spectator who literally watch as Islam was decapitated and did close to nothing in salvaging the matter! [/size]

LagosShia:

3.) regarding the issue of mut'ah marriage.in sunni hadith books,the most respected books,you find hadiths where it was said that umar forbade mut'ah marriage.you also find hadiths where mut'ah was permitted by the Prophet (sa).and ofcourse you have hadiths which say that the Prophet (sa) forbade mut'ah marriage and we shia believe that is not true and those hadiths are fabricated as they even contradict themselves.those are 3 reports saying the Prophet (sa) himself disallowed it later on.but the many reports point that umar did and it was permitted by the Prophet (sa) himself.

my questions on mut'ah:

how do you feel as a sunni when you refer to mut'ah marriage as "pros.titution" and indecent and later on read that the Prophet (sa) permitted it in his lifetime,even if he later forbade it? please dont use alcohol as an analogy.the Prophet (sa) met people drinking and the revelation gradually forbade alcohol by first condemning it before the outright ban.he never encouraged it at all or permitted it as he permitted mut'ah.but the Prophet (sa) did not meet people performing mut'ah and even if he did he encouraged it.how do you feel that your Prophet (sa) encourage what you the believer regard as "pros.titution"?

and finally what do you tell yourself regarding the hadiths in the most respected sunni books that tell us that mut'ah was performed in the days of the Prophet (sa) and also tell us that it was umar that banned it?how does your mind settle these issues fairly?

i want your sincere answers and i will not bother you to argue or debate.i see no need to do that with you if you are truthful to yourself and you try to be reasonable and not insulting me and others as "reply".

[size=14pt]Mutah is hardly distinguishable from Prostitution or ashewo since you r Yoruba. It is not in your position to tell Al Sunnah that hadith that label Mutah as illegal as being farbricated. Mutah precludes Islam, and just like Alchohol it was banned in phases.

    The Shorter Encyclopedia of Islam

The Shorter Encyclopedia of Islam also states that Mutah was a common practice among Arab travelers and goes back to the fourth century:

    “When a stranger came to a village and had no place to stay, he would marry a woman for a short time so that she would be his partner in bed and take care of his property.”

the fact that Imam jafar stated that divorve shakes the throne of Allah should be enough reason why the shias should aviod it or may be because again their hadiths says if one practive mutah 4 times he reaches the level of teh holy prophet pbuh! i

Umar r.a vigorously enforce the ban[/size]

LagosShia, and Vedaxcool,
So you are both Yoruba, are you?  Can you give an age range (not a specific age) only if you care to.  Like. . . under or over 25, college age, 30-40, middle-aged, etc.

In the middle of reading Vedaxcool's replies.

P.S. There's no weird reason for asking about age. I was just curious about the maturity level of the people with whom I'm discussing. No offense, okay.

isale_gan2:

LagosShia, and Vedaxcool,
So you are both Yoruba, are you? Can you give an age range (not a specific age) only if you care to. Like. . . under or over 25, college age, 30-40, middle-aged, etc.

In the middle of reading Vedaxcool's replies.

P.S. There's no weird reason for asking about age. I was just curious about the maturity level of the people with whom I'm discussing. No offense, okay.

i can simply say i am above 25.and i am yoruba but more exposed to living abroad and away from home since childhood.

isale_gan2:

LagosShia, and Vedaxcool,
So you are both Yoruba, are you?  Can you give an age range (not a specific age) only if you care to.  Like. . . under or over 25, college age, 30-40, middle-aged, etc.

In the middle of reading Vedaxcool's replies.

P.S. There's no weird reason for asking about age. I was just curious about the maturity level of the people with whom I'm discussing. No offense, okay.

Not Yoruba and between 25 - 30! i remember a statement a pastor once made; It is not about being old enough for a task or undertaking but being prepared enough, by the way do you associate maturity with being Yoruba too? just kidding

LagosShia:

i can simply say i am above 25.and i am yoruba but more exposed to living abroad and away from home since childhood.

All right.  Very good.  Thank you, broda. 

vedaxcool:

Not Yoruba and between 25 - 30! i remember a statement a pastor once made; It is not about being old enough for a task or undertaking but being prepared enough, by the way do you associate maturity with being Yoruba too? just kidding 

Ah!  sorry.  You're right.  Age doesn't always signify maturity.  One of the wisest most mature person I
know is conservatively 25 years more mature than his numerical age. 

I just meant, sometimes you want to know if the person with whom you're talking had similar experiences to you.

I also wanted to find similarities between you two, and amongst all three of us.

No, I don't think Yorubas have any kind of patent on maturity. lol.  You not being Yoruba only makes you more interesting, no worries.  You Naija then?  Never mind. 

Who's the pastor you were listening to?  Was that during your Christian days? 

I am glad we had this talk.  I hope we can all learn from each other. . . especially me.  You two are very knowledgeable and determined, even though I suspect one or both may be [i]slightly [/i]younger than me.  You see, Vedaxcool, I am not above listening to the young 'uns. 

Salaam.

isale_gan2:

All right. Very good. Thank you, broda.
Salaam.

welcome! wa alaikum assalam.