I highly recommend reading 10 Reasons Why You Should Not Trust Shia Hadith Sources And The Mohseni Dilemma
@syedammarzaidi2044
2 ай бұрын
Surah 33:33 says ……Allah subhanahuta’ala intends to keep the impurity away from Ahlulbayt. Check the Hadith of Ummahatul Momineen stating who Ahlulbayt are. Another verse in Quran states Say O Prophet pbuh that I don’t ask anything but the love of my kinship (Ahlulbayt family of the prophet). It’s irony 5 times a day you send blessings on Muhammad and the family of Muhammad pbuh in Salaah and yet reject the Hadith from family of the Muhammad pbuh. Shame recollect and reconcile and repent. Quran and Ahlulbayt will never separate until they meet at Pond of Kausar another Hadith called Hadith e THAQALAYN. A wise and thoughtful person will realize the truth. If you reject the signs of Allah see what Quran says. By the way out of 73 only 1 sect. Too many Muslims aren’t going to Heaven. May Allah guide all the Muslim Ummah Ameen. I highly recommend read Quran and try to remove Ahlulbayt from it. I dare you to
@IbnKahwaji
2 ай бұрын
Comment on the beginning the shia claim against quran preservation isnt an issue of majority/minority view but rather the position of their classical scholars who formed the foundation for the shia theology and overall positions they hold. We dont care what the laypeople think, but rather what their books say. Here’s a list of their scholars that claimed corruption in the scripture: Alkulaini, al ayashi, furat, mirza alkhouri, almajlisi, alqummi, ni’matullah aljazairi, hashim and yusuf al bahrani, altabrasi, alkhumeni. Those are the ones I came across
@amadeusakreveusmusic3356
2 ай бұрын
Now name the sunni hadiths and scholars that claim the same
@IbnKahwaji
2 ай бұрын
@@amadeusakreveusmusic3356 sunni scholars claiming the text is changed?
@ziadyasser341
2 ай бұрын
@@amadeusakreveusmusic3356 lol, no Sunni scholars believe that their book is corrupted, if they did, why would they believe in Islam ?
@Angelo-Rules
2 ай бұрын
@@ziadyasser341*It is a disappointment that the mathhab that has prided itself on championing the thaqalain, have failed to uphold the greater of the two; the book of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). As well as the minor thiql (as Sunnis have more narrations from Ahlulbayt).* Where is the Mushaf which the Imams narrate and transmit from each other? Where is the chain of: Al-‘Askari from the way of Al-Hadi from Al- Jawad from Al-Ridaa form Al-Kazim from Al-Sadiq from Al-Baqir from Zayn Al-‘Abideen from Al-Husien (the grandson of the Prophet) or Al-Hasan (the grandson of the Prophet) from Ali [May Allah be pleased with them all]? *Did the students of these Imams narrate everything from them except the Quran?* *If the Companions were Apostates, especially the famous ones from among them, and they were the ones that transmitted the Quran: How can a Shi’ah trust the narration of those who he believe are Apostates? This Quran that is between our hands today, is from the narration of those companions of the Prophet [May Blessings of Allah and Peace be upon him and his household].* The difference between Sunni and Shia is that our scholars unanimously agree that the Quran is not distorted you can use as many weak hadith as you want. *You won't hear any ridiculous scholars and personalities of Sunni Islam mouthing off these ridiculous things like Shias do despite the Shias being only 10% and Sunnis being majority. You'd think since there are more Sunnis you'd find more ridiculous claims like this coming from Sunnis but it is opposite.* For that reason you will find that *the scholars of Ahl Al-Sunnah are strict in this matter, and say that whoever says that the Quran is Muharaf is a Kaffir.* and they clearly declare such a thing based on what Allah the Exalted said: {Indeed, it is We who sent down the Qur'an and indeed, We will be its guardian}Hijr 15:9 Any sunni who believes that a part of Qur'an has been lost due to goats eating it or men changing it, is a kafir. There is no difference of opinion on this in sunni Islam. No buts no ifs. Your misunderstanding does not change our stance. Aisha (ra) did not believe in tahreef. Stop putting your own view on the hadith. You are just seeing what you want to see. It wouldn't have mattered if goats ate it because people memorise the Qur'an. What you're basically going to find is that this will likely lead into the topic of abrogation and abrogation was completed whilst the Prophet (pbuh) was alive. Islamqa covers this very well. Shias might attempt to steal the chains in the Sunni books and attribute them to themselves, which is pathetic and shows the weakness of their way. The fact that the Imami Shia went out of their way and try and steal a popular Sunni chain from our own books, shows that they have nothing to offer, it shows that their books do not contain a chain of transmission to the Qur’an, it *shows that they did not give proper care to the most important weighty thing, so how then can they claim that religion is only taken from the infallible when they can’t attribute their holy book to their own infallible?* `Asim bin abi al-Nujoud, Hafs bin Sulayman and Hamzah al-Zayyat are all great Imams of Ahlul-Sunnah, the Twelvers cannot prove that they were Rafidhi imami Shia neither through their books or ours. If they were to prove that they were Shia, the Shia of the time were Sunni in their worship, and even if they try their best to prove that they were Rafidhah, then even the Imamiyyah at the time had different sects all of them enemies who make Takfeer on each-other. How the Twelver Shia reached the conclusion that these two men are Imami Rafidhah is beyond me, there is absolutely no indication of this. By consensus`Asim and Hafs are two great Imams of Qira’at. The weakness attributed to Hafs is in regards to his skills as narrator, and the accusation of him being a liar is a baseless exaggeration. And if true still doesn’t strengthen Shia’s view. The rules for the authentication of a narrator in a Hadithi chain are different than the rules for the authentication of a Qur’ani recitation. Hundreds of narrations from their infallibles prove that the followers of Ibn Saba claim distortion. *and the statement that the chains of transmission of these narrations are weak cannot be accepted for reasons such as:* First: The Shiites do not consider the chains of transmission and their lim il rijjal (hadeeth sciences) is very inconsistent Second: The narrations of distortion are abundant (mutawatir) according to them, and if this were the case, their chain of transmission should not be of concern Third: There are Shiite scholars who authenticated the chains of narrations of Hadiths regarding distortion Fourth: Whoever rejects the many narrations about distortion, which amount to nearly two thousand narrations, is obligated to reject the narrations of the Imamate and the narrations of the rajah, the bidaa, and the infallibility, because as their their scholar, Yusuf Al-Bahrani, said: If these narrations aren’t accepted (i.e. the narrations of distortion), despite their abundance and spread, it would be possible to reject to the other narrations related to the religion, since the principles are one, as are the chains, narrators, sheikhs, and transmission. M. Baqir al-Majlisi also said that Shia narrations that speak of the corruption and distortion of the very text of the Qur’an area at the same level as narrations that support the Shia belief in Imamah. There are over 1000 [Shia] Hadiths confirming speaking of the corruption of the Qur’an. If the Hadiths of Tahrif in Shia books are rejected by sensible Shias, then they are no longer in any position to object why their entire collections of Hadiths should be rejected from A-Z as the same “liars” who attributed the “lie” of the distortion of the Qur’an to the Ahl al-Bayt, narrated also others “lies and exaggerations” [Imamah, Wilayah, ‘Ismah, Ghuluw etc.]. The narrations of distortion that the Shiites have are narrated from the twelve imams who believe in their infallibility, while all those who narrate the absence of distortion from him are the scholars, not the imams. They do not narrate from the imams, and not a single narration says that there is no distortion. Rather, they transmit two thousand narrations from the imams that say there is distortion, and those from whom they quote that there is no distortion are scholars who can aren’t infallible. As for the infallible ones, they quoted from them the statement of distortion, so the Shiites are required to take the words of the infallible ones and not the words of others. Nimat Allah Al-Jazairi said: The narrations that indicate distortion exceed two thousand hadiths. Then he said: He did not come across a single hadith that said otherwise. Yusuf Al-Bahrani said: However, there is no opposition to this narration, as I know, other than a mere claim that is devoid of evidence and does not go beyond mere gossip. All shias should either follow their infallibles or leave this evil religion. here is a list of references of Shia scholars: Fihrist of shia scholars and their believe in tahrif of Quran
@ziadyasser341
2 ай бұрын
@@Angelo-Rules bro, are you responding to me? I am not Shia
@zk9961
2 ай бұрын
Was waiting for this!
@Haroun-tc4hb
Ай бұрын
La Illaha Illallah Muhammadan Rushuallah
@iymonbekati
2 ай бұрын
Thank you so much ❤
@M.G.1989
2 ай бұрын
_- Āyatu l-Kursiyy/ der 'Thronvers':_ _{اللهُ لاَ إِلَهَ إِلاَّ هُوَ الْحَيُّ الْقَيُّومُ لاَ تَأْخُذُهُ سِنَةٌ وَلاَ نَوْمٌ لَّهُ مَا فِي السَّمَاوَاتِ وَمَا فِي الأَرْضِ مَن ذَا الَّذِي يَشْفَعُ عِنْدَهُ إِلاَّ بِإِذْنِهِ يَعْلَمُ مَا بَيْنَ أَيْدِيهِمْ وَمَا خَلْفَهُمْ وَلاَ يُحِيطُونَ بِشَىْءٍ مِّنْ عِلْمِهِ إِلاَّ بِمَا شَاء وَسِعَ كُرْسِيُّهُ السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالأَرْضَ وَلاَ يَؤُودُهُ حِفْظُهُمَا وَهُوَ الْعَلِيُّ الْعَظِيمُ}_ _Allāhu lā ilāha illa Huwa-l-hayyu-l-qayyūm. Lā ta´chudhuhu sinatun wa lā nawm, lahu mā fī s-samāwāti wa mā fī-l-ard. Man dha-lladhi iashfa´u ´indahu illa bi-idhnihi. Ya´lamu mā bayna aydīhim wa mā khalfahum. Wa lā iuhitūna bi-shay´in min ´ilmihi illa bi-mā shā´. Wasi´a kursiyyuhu s-samāwāti wa-l-ard, wa lā ia´ūduhu hifzuhumā, wa Huwa-l-´aliyyu-l-´athīm._ _"Ich suche Zuflucht bei Allah vor dem verfluchten Satan. Allah - es gibt keinen Gott außer Ihm, dem Lebendigen und Beständigen. Ihn überkommt weder Schlummer noch Schlaf. Ihm gehört, was in den Himmeln und was auf der Erde ist. Wer ist es denn, der bei Ihm Fürsprache einlegen könnte - außer mit Seiner Erlaubnis? Er weiß, was vor ihnen und was hinter ihnen liegt, sie aber umfassen nichts von Seinem Wissen - außer, was Er will. Sein Thronschemel umfasst die Himmel und die Erde, & ihre Behütung beschwert Ihn nicht. Er ist der Erhabene und Allgewaltige." - Sūrah al-Baqara 2:255_
@AZ-1003
2 ай бұрын
that intro sounds like blaring music on top of a sufi chant
@hahdgdgherfhx
2 ай бұрын
Good to see Fareed!
@yourfriends
2 ай бұрын
Throughout history, various Muslim schools (asides from the Twelver school) have claimed to be the inheritors of Ahlulbait’s legacy (thru their alleged students). Most classical Shi’ite schools, however, have perished, and only a few remain today. The few surviving schools, nevertheless, all claim to be representative of the teachings of the Prophet’s household. These sects all make mutually exclusive claims regarding the identity of the Imams, their nature and other religious affairs. Nevertheless, the existence of these schools gives rise to a serious problem that casts doubt on the authority of Twelver hadith collections. When debating Sunnis, Twelver polemicists often argue for the superiority of their hadith sources on the basis that their collections are transmitted through students of Ahlulbait and not students of the prophet. Such appeals stem from the Shi’ite presupposition that the students of the Prophet’s family members are superior interpreters and transmitters of Islam than the students of the prophet. Nevertheless, this claim may ironically end up undermining the reliability of Twelver hadith sources. Why is that the case? The problem faced by the Twelver sect is the fact that the Zaidi school also is a claimant to Ahlulbait’s legacy. Zaidis similarly possess their own hadith collections that consist of reports ascribed to the alleged students of Ahlulbait. These collections, however, present a vastly different religious narrative than that of the Twelver sect. Since the beliefs of both schools are mutually exclusive in multiple regards, there are only 3 possibilities behind this phenomenon: The Zaidi school is representative of Ahlulbait’s teachings. The Twelver school is representative of Ahlulbait’s teachings. None of them are representative of Ahlulbait’s teachings. The observer is thus able to observe how arbitrary many of these claims to Ahlulbait truly are, especially when one takes into account the tens of other extinct schools that made the exact same claim. *Asides from weightless appeals to authority, the Twelver polemicist, in reality, has no actual reason to dismiss Zaidi hadith sources.* When inviting Sunnis to accept Twelver hadith sources, Twelver polemicists will often cite hadiths on the virtues of ‘Ali and Ahlulbait, such as Hadith Al-Thaqalayn and Hadith Al-Kisaa’. The ultimate aim of such appeals is to substantiate the validity of the Twelver hadith corpus, which is allegedly based on transmission from students of Ahlulbait. These appeals don’t actually substantiate the reliability of Twelver sources. This reality becomes apparent when a Twelver makes these appeals with a Zaidi. The Zaidi, unlike the Sunni, already believes in the Imamah of ‘Ali and his superiority to all companions of the Prophet. He also believes in the superiority of Ahlulbait. Thus, the usual Twelver appeal to substantiate the authority of Twelver sources is absolutely worthless in this context. The Zaidi can, in fact, redirect all of these appeals back to the Twelvers and argue for the authority of Zaidi hadith collections. *Zaidi sources may actually prove to be more reliable claimants to the legacy of Ahlulbait than Twelver Sources, especially since some of these collections were authored by Sayyids*
@pjjham7768
2 ай бұрын
Why am i zoning out when akhi.Farid is speaking
@timeread3099
2 ай бұрын
Why i can mever be shia. With us there is the book (Mushaf) of Fatima, What do they know what Mushaf of Fatima is? He said, **“Mushaf of Fatima is three times bigger than your Quran** al-Kāfī-volume 1 Book 4, chapter 40
@Angelo-Rules
2 ай бұрын
*It is a disappointment that the mathhab that has prided itself on championing the thaqalain, have failed to uphold the greater of the two; the book of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). As well as the minor thiql (as Sunnis have more narrations from Ahlulbayt).* Where is the Mushaf which the Imams narrate and transmit from each other? Where is the chain of: Al-‘Askari from the way of Al-Hadi from Al- Jawad from Al-Ridaa form Al-Kazim from Al-Sadiq from Al-Baqir from Zayn Al-‘Abideen from Al-Husien (the grandson of the Prophet) or Al-Hasan (the grandson of the Prophet) from Ali [May Allah be pleased with them all]? *Did the students of these Imams narrate everything from them except the Quran?* *If the Companions were Apostates, especially the famous ones from among them, and they were the ones that transmitted the Quran: How can a Shi’ah trust the narration of those who he believe are Apostates? This Quran that is between our hands today, is from the narration of those companions of the Prophet [May Blessings of Allah and Peace be upon him and his household].* The difference between Sunni and Shia is that our scholars unanimously agree that the Quran is not distorted you can use as many weak hadith as you want. *You won't hear any ridiculous scholars and personalities of Sunni Islam mouthing off these ridiculous things like Shias do despite the Shias being only 10% and Sunnis being majority. You'd think since there are more Sunnis you'd find more ridiculous claims like this coming from Sunnis but it is opposite.* For that reason you will find that *the scholars of Ahl Al-Sunnah are strict in this matter, and say that whoever says that the Quran is Muharaf is a Kaffir.* and they clearly declare such a thing based on what Allah the Exalted said: {Indeed, it is We who sent down the Qur'an and indeed, We will be its guardian}Hijr 15:9 Any sunni who believes that a part of Qur'an has been lost due to goats eating it or men changing it, is a kafir. There is no difference of opinion on this in sunni Islam. No buts no ifs. Your misunderstanding does not change our stance. Aisha (ra) did not believe in tahreef. Stop putting your own view on the hadith. You are just seeing what you want to see. It wouldn't have mattered if goats ate it because people memorise the Qur'an. What you're basically going to find is that this will likely lead into the topic of abrogation and abrogation was completed whilst the Prophet (pbuh) was alive. Islamqa covers this very well. Shias might attempt to steal the chains in the Sunni books and attribute them to themselves, which is pathetic and shows the weakness of their way. The fact that the Imami Shia went out of their way and try and steal a popular Sunni chain from our own books, shows that they have nothing to offer, it shows that their books do not contain a chain of transmission to the Qur’an, it *shows that they did not give proper care to the most important weighty thing, so how then can they claim that religion is only taken from the infallible when they can’t attribute their holy book to their own infallible?* `Asim bin abi al-Nujoud, Hafs bin Sulayman and Hamzah al-Zayyat are all great Imams of Ahlul-Sunnah, the Twelvers cannot prove that they were Rafidhi imami Shia neither through their books or ours. If they were to prove that they were Shia, the Shia of the time were Sunni in their worship, and even if they try their best to prove that they were Rafidhah, then even the Imamiyyah at the time had different sects all of them enemies who make Takfeer on each-other. How the Twelver Shia reached the conclusion that these two men are Imami Rafidhah is beyond me, there is absolutely no indication of this. By consensus`Asim and Hafs are two great Imams of Qira’at. The weakness attributed to Hafs is in regards to his skills as narrator, and the accusation of him being a liar is a baseless exaggeration. And if true still doesn’t strengthen Shia’s view. The rules for the authentication of a narrator in a Hadithi chain are different than the rules for the authentication of a Qur’ani recitation. Hundreds of narrations from their infallibles prove that the followers of Ibn Saba claim distortion. *and the statement that the chains of transmission of these narrations are weak cannot be accepted for reasons such as:* First: The Shiites do not consider the chains of transmission and their lim il rijjal (hadeeth sciences) is very inconsistent Second: The narrations of distortion are abundant (mutawatir) according to them, and if this were the case, their chain of transmission should not be of concern Third: There are Shiite scholars who authenticated the chains of narrations of Hadiths regarding distortion Fourth: Whoever rejects the many narrations about distortion, which amount to nearly two thousand narrations, is obligated to reject the narrations of the Imamate and the narrations of the rajah, the bidaa, and the infallibility, because as their their scholar, Yusuf Al-Bahrani, said: If these narrations aren’t accepted (i.e. the narrations of distortion), despite their abundance and spread, it would be possible to reject to the other narrations related to the religion, since the principles are one, as are the chains, narrators, sheikhs, and transmission. M. Baqir al-Majlisi also said that Shia narrations that speak of the corruption and distortion of the very text of the Qur’an area at the same level as narrations that support the Shia belief in Imamah. There are over 1000 [Shia] Hadiths confirming speaking of the corruption of the Qur’an. If the Hadiths of Tahrif in Shia books are rejected by sensible Shias, then they are no longer in any position to object why their entire collections of Hadiths should be rejected from A-Z as the same “liars” who attributed the “lie” of the distortion of the Qur’an to the Ahl al-Bayt, narrated also others “lies and exaggerations” [Imamah, Wilayah, ‘Ismah, Ghuluw etc.]. The narrations of distortion that the Shiites have are narrated from the twelve imams who believe in their infallibility, while all those who narrate the absence of distortion from him are the scholars, not the imams. They do not narrate from the imams, and not a single narration says that there is no distortion. Rather, they transmit two thousand narrations from the imams that say there is distortion, and those from whom they quote that there is no distortion are scholars who can aren’t infallible. As for the infallible ones, they quoted from them the statement of distortion, so the Shiites are required to take the words of the infallible ones and not the words of others. Nimat Allah Al-Jazairi said: The narrations that indicate distortion exceed two thousand hadiths. Then he said: He did not come across a single hadith that said otherwise. Yusuf Al-Bahrani said: However, there is no opposition to this narration, as I know, other than a mere claim that is devoid of evidence and does not go beyond mere gossip. All shias should either follow their infallibles or leave this evil religion. here is a list of references of Shia scholars: Fihrist of shia scholars and their believe in tahrif of Quran
@cirylgane7920
2 ай бұрын
Evil religion?Lol at least google that at first 3 "Caliphs" time,saving and writing hadith was forbidden+ canceled
@Angelo-Rules
2 ай бұрын
@@cirylgane7920 this myth has been debunked in Twelvershia nt
@Angelo-Rules
2 ай бұрын
@@cirylgane7920 also you haven't defended your religion one bit. This is just whataboutism
@cirylgane7920
2 ай бұрын
@@Angelo-Rules Myth?U ok bruh
@Angelo-Rules
2 ай бұрын
@@cirylgane7920as I said go read the article on TwelverShia (Sunna discourse) It seems you have nothing to offer, so you decided to run away to a different topic
@Angelo-Rules
2 ай бұрын
I would like to highlight that those narrations aren't actually from the imams themselves but rather the alleged students/companions of the imams Sunnis have more narrations from Ahlulbayt than shias. And in these narrations, Ahlulbayt are pretty much saying sunni stuff I would recommend reading Ali, Al-Baqir and Al-Sadiq AUTHENTICALLY Praise ‘Umar bin Al-Khattab And Narrations from Ahl-AlBayt present in the main books of Ahlesunnah And Was Bukhari a Nasibi?
@mdamin2190
2 ай бұрын
Salam from Bangladesh 🇧🇩 ❤
@pjjham7768
2 ай бұрын
I am so glad I was tuning into this channel bc I got to know what is going on in Bangladesh with the quotes astaghfirullah. In Islam it is about equality. May Allah SWT help every one in the ummah overcome injustices by the powers that be Ameen
@yaznhanfi9090
2 ай бұрын
Yet that Shia doesnt feel bad for the death of Othman
@truthadvocatesanonymous7511
2 ай бұрын
Why should they feel bad?
@Angelo-Rules
2 ай бұрын
@@truthadvocatesanonymous7511cos Ahlulbayt felt bad Read Part 7: Nature of Relationship between Ahlebayt(ra) and Uthman(ra)
@truthadvocatesanonymous7511
2 ай бұрын
@@Angelo-Rules Not true
@Angelo-Rules
2 ай бұрын
@@truthadvocatesanonymous7511refer to the article
@timeread3099
2 ай бұрын
Because they're munafiq
@ibrahimk9874
2 ай бұрын
Nice
@dannyman005
2 ай бұрын
haha at 55m -- rumzi got to the correct answer but farid being farid...naa naa no noo l0l0l
@MuhammadE796
2 ай бұрын
Was sadly late due to parents
@abdullahassaffah
2 ай бұрын
Do not say sadly parents are more important
@docholiday708
2 ай бұрын
Missed it
@clearskybluewaters
2 ай бұрын
yea idk why we only learned the ABC lol if we stop repeating the ABC maybe we couldve learned something more butt he conversation with Noct was beneficial
@Angelo-Rules
2 ай бұрын
You can read 10 Reasons Why You Should Not Trust Shia Hadith Sources
@dannyman005
2 ай бұрын
Sunni hadith is made up of chinese whispers,,,,Shias hadith were mostly written down..WAY superior than sunnis narrations who only have around 5k sahih narration. What a joke there is no comparison, that's why you guys have so many sub sects.
@Angelo-Rules
2 ай бұрын
Your own scholars disagree with you Shias have far more sects and each sect with their own corpus of hadith at least Sunnis have one corpus 😂
@Angelo-Rules
2 ай бұрын
Twelver hadith collections are regularly claimed to be authoritative under the premise that they represent Ahlulbait’s understanding and interpretation of Islam (thru the students/companions of Ahlulbayt). That claim, however, is challenged with the presence of Zaidi hadith collections, which similarly claim to inherit the legacy of Ahulbait (their students). The Twelver, in reality, has no objective reason to dismiss Zaidi hadith sources. In fact, there are several indicators that may allow one to argue that Zaidi hadith collections are generally more reliable than Twelver hadith collections. Either way, “The Zaidi Dilemma” is a problem that is yet to be solved by Twelver polemicists. This dilemma, along with a plethora of other arguments and observations, further demonstrates the defective nature of the Twelver hadith corpus (see, Mohseni Dilemma). It is unfortunate that some "Muslims" will still hold onto these problematic sources after being made aware of their defective nature. They have no knowledge therein. They follow nothing but conjecture; and conjecture avails nothing against the Truth. [Quran 53:28] And Allah is the best of witnesses.
@dannyman005
2 ай бұрын
@Angelo-Rules right, maturidi , ashaari, maaliki,, shafi, hanifa, brailvii, deobandi,, wahabi,,salafi,,mubtadi...and on and on....and the reason is cuz of chinese whispers based narrations...only 5k sahih...
@Angelo-Rules
2 ай бұрын
@@dannyman005 Hanafi, Hanbali, Maliki and Shafii are like maraji You guys have at least a 100 of maraji. We have 4 and they don't takfir one another while your maraji do. Mubtadi is not a sect you made that up 🤣 Wahabi and Salafi are the same thing You clearly have 0 knowledge on Sunnis Now tell me about Shirazis, batris, waqifis, bohras, aghakhanis, Usoolis , Akhbaris, Shaykhis, Alawites, Tafahis 😂 When Akhbaris would hold Usooli books they would use a cloth for they are more filthy than pigs and the blood of their scholars is halal (AlShafi 43) 😂 Alkhoei said that praying behind those who belong to the Shaykhi sect is forbidden (minyat alsail)
@Angelo-Rules
2 ай бұрын
@@dannyman005 *It is a disappointment that the mathhab that has prided itself on championing the thaqalain, have failed to uphold the greater of the two; the book of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). As well as the minor thiql (as Sunnis have more narrations from Ahlulbayt).* Where is the Mushaf which the Imams narrate and transmit from each other? Where is the chain of: Al-‘Askari from the way of Al-Hadi from Al- Jawad from Al-Ridaa form Al-Kazim from Al-Sadiq from Al-Baqir from Zayn Al-‘Abideen from Al-Husien (the grandson of the Prophet) or Al-Hasan (the grandson of the Prophet) from Ali [May Allah be pleased with them all]? *Did the students of these Imams narrate everything from them except the Quran?* *If the Companions were Apostates, especially the famous ones from among them, and they were the ones that transmitted the Quran: How can a Shi’ah trust the narration of those who he believe are Apostates? This Quran that is between our hands today, is from the narration of those companions of the Prophet [May Blessings of Allah and Peace be upon him and his household].* The difference between Sunni and Shia is that our scholars unanimously agree that the Quran is not distorted you can use as many weak hadith as you want. *You won't hear any ridiculous scholars and personalities of Sunni Islam mouthing off these ridiculous things like Shias do despite the Shias being only 10% and Sunnis being majority. You'd think since there are more Sunnis you'd find more ridiculous claims like this coming from Sunnis but it is opposite.* For that reason you will find that *the scholars of Ahl Al-Sunnah are strict in this matter, and say that whoever says that the Quran is Muharaf is a Kaffir.* and they clearly declare such a thing based on what Allah the Exalted said: {Indeed, it is We who sent down the Qur'an and indeed, We will be its guardian}Hijr 15:9 Any sunni who believes that a part of Qur'an has been lost due to goats eating it or men changing it, is a kafir. There is no difference of opinion on this in sunni Islam. No buts no ifs. Your misunderstanding does not change our stance. Aisha (ra) did not believe in tahreef. Stop putting your own view on the hadith. You are just seeing what you want to see. It wouldn't have mattered if goats ate it because people memorise the Qur'an. What you're basically going to find is that this will likely lead into the topic of abrogation and abrogation was completed whilst the Prophet (pbuh) was alive. Islamqa covers this very well. Shias might attempt to steal the chains in the Sunni books and attribute them to themselves, which is pathetic and shows the weakness of their way. The fact that the Imami Shia went out of their way and try and steal a popular Sunni chain from our own books, shows that they have nothing to offer, it shows that their books do not contain a chain of transmission to the Qur’an, it *shows that they did not give proper care to the most important weighty thing, so how then can they claim that religion is only taken from the infallible when they can’t attribute their holy book to their own infallible?* `Asim bin abi al-Nujoud, Hafs bin Sulayman and Hamzah al-Zayyat are all great Imams of Ahlul-Sunnah, the Twelvers cannot prove that they were Rafidhi imami Shia neither through their books or ours. If they were to prove that they were Shia, the Shia of the time were Sunni in their worship, and even if they try their best to prove that they were Rafidhah, then even the Imamiyyah at the time had different sects all of them enemies who make Takfeer on each-other. How the Twelver Shia reached the conclusion that these two men are Imami Rafidhah is beyond me, there is absolutely no indication of this. By consensus`Asim and Hafs are two great Imams of Qira’at. The weakness attributed to Hafs is in regards to his skills as narrator, and the accusation of him being a liar is a baseless exaggeration. And if true still doesn’t strengthen Shia’s view. The rules for the authentication of a narrator in a Hadithi chain are different than the rules for the authentication of a Qur’ani recitation. Hundreds of narrations from their infallibles prove that the followers of Ibn Saba claim distortion. *and the statement that the chains of transmission of these narrations are weak cannot be accepted for reasons such as:* First: The Shiites do not consider the chains of transmission and their lim il rijjal (hadeeth sciences) is very inconsistent Second: The narrations of distortion are abundant (mutawatir) according to them, and if this were the case, their chain of transmission should not be of concern Third: There are Shiite scholars who authenticated the chains of narrations of Hadiths regarding distortion Fourth: Whoever rejects the many narrations about distortion, which amount to nearly two thousand narrations, is obligated to reject the narrations of the Imamate and the narrations of the rajah, the bidaa, and the infallibility, because as their their scholar, Yusuf Al-Bahrani, said: If these narrations aren’t accepted (i.e. the narrations of distortion), despite their abundance and spread, it would be possible to reject to the other narrations related to the religion, since the principles are one, as are the chains, narrators, sheikhs, and transmission. M. Baqir al-Majlisi also said that Shia narrations that speak of the corruption and distortion of the very text of the Qur’an area at the same level as narrations that support the Shia belief in Imamah. There are over 1000 [Shia] Hadiths confirming speaking of the corruption of the Qur’an. If the Hadiths of Tahrif in Shia books are rejected by sensible Shias, then they are no longer in any position to object why their entire collections of Hadiths should be rejected from A-Z as the same “liars” who attributed the “lie” of the distortion of the Qur’an to the Ahl al-Bayt, narrated also others “lies and exaggerations” [Imamah, Wilayah, ‘Ismah, Ghuluw etc.]. The narrations of distortion that the Shiites have are narrated from the twelve imams who believe in their infallibility, while all those who narrate the absence of distortion from him are the scholars, not the imams. They do not narrate from the imams, and not a single narration says that there is no distortion. Rather, they transmit two thousand narrations from the imams that say there is distortion, and those from whom they quote that there is no distortion are scholars who can aren’t infallible. As for the infallible ones, they quoted from them the statement of distortion, so the Shiites are required to take the words of the infallible ones and not the words of others. Nimat Allah Al-Jazairi said: The narrations that indicate distortion exceed two thousand hadiths. Then he said: He did not come across a single hadith that said otherwise. Yusuf Al-Bahrani said: However, there is no opposition to this narration, as I know, other than a mere claim that is devoid of evidence and does not go beyond mere gossip. All shias should either follow their infallibles or leave this evil religion. here is a list of references of Shia scholars: Fihrist of shia scholars and their believe in tahrif of Quran
@KnowledgeWalaTheWarner193
2 ай бұрын
❤❤❤ ! We r with Palestine 🇵🇸❤️🇮🇳! #Freepalestine ! From river to the sea Palestine will be free inshaAllah
Пікірлер: 107