What is the basis of your doctrine of God’s visibility, the Qur’an or Hadeeth? If it is the Qur’an, then provide us with the verse and justify the contradiction as God’s words are devoid of any contradiction. If it is hadeeth, then present it in relation to the Qur’an.
1. Hadeeth. There is a verse that alludes to the vision, but does not literally express it.
2. We’ll provide the hadeeth,
The Messenger of Allah salallahu alaihi wa sallam said
“Indeed you will see your Lord like you see the full moon”
reported by Ibnul-Khuzaimah in Kitaabu-Tawheed [1:407-411], al-Bukharee [#554], Muslim [#183], Abu Dawud [#4729]
This hadeeth and one similar to it about the “sight” relates to an ayaa where Allah says in the Qur’an
“Some faces that Day, will be bright.”
( سورة عبس , Abasa, Chapter #80, Verse #38)
The meaning is quite simple in correlation to the hadeeth. That is on that day (the Day of Judgment), some faces, (that means not everyone, but only some people) will be bright (i.e. illuminated. Their faces will only be illuminated due to those faces having sight of their Lord.)
This fact is correlated by another hadeeth by the Messenger of Allah as related by Muslim in the hadeeth #181 where the prophet alaihi salatu salaam said
“When the people of paradise enter paradise, Allah, the Mighty and Majestic, will say; ‘Do you wish for anything extra that I may give you?’, and they will say ‘Have You (Allah) not brightened our faces? Have You not entered us into paradise and saved us from the fire?’, So He will remove the screen and they will not have been given anything more beloved to them, than looking at their Lord, the Mighty and Majestic”
Despite the fact that you do not regard the companions as infallible and accept the notion of them committing sins, you consider it wrong to criticise them due to the respect you afford them. You regard their holiness to be in keeping evil off them, which proves the fact that, for the honour of a respectable and dignified personality it is necessary that he is kept away from sins and treated as immune from defects. This concept is infallibility in all but name. Then what objection do you have in considering the holy prophet as infallible when you consider it a sin to call his companions as sinners and reject the infallibility of the holy prophet himself?
1. They are not infallible
2. We consider it wrong to criticize them because Allah Himself made obsolete any criticism of them when He said “radhiyallahu anhum wa radhu’an”. By default of human logic and reasoning, and taking into consideration the majestic and supreme decision of Allah, if Allah is pleased of anyone or group, then who has the audacity to make a remark that is in the spirit of other than Allah being pleased with them.
3. it is also a command from the prophet alaihi salatu salaam himself that when the companions are mentioned (their actions) then our creed and attitude is one of silence, for anyone that is not of the companions, if they came with a mount the size of uhud in gold in the aid of Islam, it will not compare to a single handful of what they have done in the service of Islam
Our creed concerning the companions is manifestly in congruency with the command of Allah as He says
“And those who came after them say: “Our Lord! Forgive us and our brethren who have preceded us in Faith, and put not in our hearts any hatred against those who have believed. Our Lord! You are indeed full of kindness, Most Merciful.
( سورة الحشر , Al-Hashr, Chapter #59, Verse #10)
As the messenger of Allah says in the hadeeth collected by at-Tabaraanee and authenticated by al-Albaanee
“when my companions are mentioned, then withhold”
Meaning do not allow the tongues to reign loose as they do with others who are not the companions.
It is the ijm’aa of the Muslims that it is from the perfection of faith to withhold from speaking ill of them and from the requisites of faith of having good thought of them. The ijmaa of the Muslims also considers as heretics a view that is opposite of this opinion and a destruction of the religion itself, and those who destroy the religion, are none other than munafiqeen.
Furthermore, this basic doctrine of respect has no correlation with infallibility because infallibility is the doctrine entailing the notion that a person or people are “immune” from error. We do not accompany our respect, support, and praise of the companions with this notion. Making them synonymous is another addition to your collection of apples and oranges phenomenon.
To you it is not God that nominates people for the post of Imamah or Khilafah but it is based on the choice of human beings that is why the doctrine of Imamah does not form part of your Islamic doctrine. When Khilafah does not have a religious place to you at all, but you regard it as something outside of the Deen then why do you constantly engage in debates with the Shi’a on this? Is this not a contradiction? Why do you not confine political issues to politics only?
1. To us, it is God who nominates who will fulfill the post of khalifa and tajdid. It is just that we have no share or say in that nomination. We are a people who do not know the unseen and anyone who believes they have the foresight and knowledge about who Allah appointed as a khalifa is a kaafir and a mushrik.
However it is us who Allah has given the right to appoint who befits the post due to the saying of Allah
“Verily! Allah commands that you should render back the trusts to those, to whom they are due; and that when you judge between men, you judge with justice. Verily, how excellent is the teaching which He (Allah) gives you! Truly, Allah is Ever AllHearer, AllSeer.”
( سورة النساء , An-Nisa, Chapter #4, Verse #58)
Also to correlate that ayaah with another
“If you fear a breach between them twain (the man and his wife), appoint (two) arbitrators, one from his family and the other from hers; if they both wish for peace, Allah will cause their reconciliation. Indeed Allah is Ever All Knower, Well Acquainted with all things. “
( سورة النساء , An-Nisa, Chapter #4, Verse #35)
Appointment of khalifa is based on the agreement of the people of adh-Dhikr and their appointment is guided by Allah.
2. The khilafa is an important issue for us and is related to our deen
3. We debate the shia in the modality that you go about the issue of khilaafa. Particularly your doctrine that your Imaams are of greater and higher status than the prophets.
If Khilafah or Imamah is a matter of religion then as per the Qur’an, the Sunnah of God does not change. Therefore, beginning with Adam (as) through to the prophet Isa (as), name any prophet after whom one of his companions had been chosen as his vicegerent without gap, depriving the members of that prophet’s household of the same right.
1. With that same logic, provide with us any shred of evidence where rightful vicegerency was confined to the family of that prophet. Sulaymen cannot be counted considering it is Allah who chose Him and likewise the sons of Ibraheem cannot be used because Ibraheem made du’a which essentially quarantined prophethood to his lineage, and Since Allah answers the du’a of the righteous, He fulfilled it.
2. The sunnah of Allah does not change. The ahkaam and the implementation of Allah does change
3. This knowledge is unknown to us and was not revealed and since the principle with us is that Allah has only revealed the knowledge which concerns his slaves, then the knowledge of how the vicegerency after the prophets was conducted is of no use to our benefit and in our worship.
4. fourthly, khilafa, Imaamah is based on two modes or prerequisites
a. dedication to the sunnah of each messenger and his compliance with that sunnah to the utmost degree
b. qualification to fulfill the role
imaamah and khilafa is not based on tribal affiliation, which is why the ulema of Islam understand that when the prophet has narrated that “this affair (meaning the khilafa) should remain with the Quraish, it was understood that this is so based on these two conditions above, and not one of mere tribal affiliation or familial ties. I’m not qualified to run Microsoft because my father just so happens to be so, rather I must be trained and dedicated to the cause of Microsoft just like any other cause.
If none of the prophets preceding the holy prophet had a vicegerent who wasn’t from his near of kin then why was the Sunnah of Allah (swt) changed in relation to Rasulullah (s)? Refer us to the verse and a hadith of commentary to prove such a change?
1. There was never a change to begin with. And your supposition to this change is based on a deception that I see with absolute clarity. You are trying to corner us into accepting the premise that with the messenger of Allah, it is his family that was Islamically appointed by Allah to handle the affairs of khilaafa, which is an unfounded delusion that you are trying to trick us into by the modality of this question and how it was asked.
2. Secondly, this matter is not connected with the sunnah of Allah but to the ahkaam of Allah. It is not a core principle of the religion to make mention of the modality of khilafa as it was never mentioned on explicit terms of Allah or His messenger. And given that this is a jurisprudential matter, then such matters are and have always been subject to change as other jurisprudential matters related to the rulings of Allah
The slogans “Naara Takbeer Allahu Akbar, Naara Risaalat Ya Rasoolullah and Naara Hayderi Ya Ali” have been in practice for centuries but just recently you have introduced a new one “Naara Khilafat Haq Chaar Yaar” which signifies that only those four personalities have the right over the post of Khilafat. Mulla Ali Qari in Sharh Fiqh Akbar, Page 176, considers Yazeed Bin Muawiyah as the sixth Khalifah of the holy prophet. What about the rest of khalifahs of Khilafah? Did the holy prophet not state that there will be twelve khalifahs? Mention their names.
Please see our article “Imamate; The perfection of Deen”
1. yeah, as many centuries as your heretic madhaab has been in existence.
2. Who cares about these slogans
3. There is no mention of the messenger of Allah about 12 imaams or any other amount of imaams
Our mothers and sisters will proclaim their God is Allah, their apostle the holy Prophet and their Maula, Ali (as) but none of them would dare proclaim ‘Our Four Rightful Men’ out of modesty considering it as an abuse. Then tell us, is this slogan for men only or for both men and women?
Note: The original slogan in Urdu, uses the work “Yaar”, which can also be used as “very close friends”. In India & Pakistan, therefore women hesitate to use this slogan.
This is irrelevant to anything Islamic. there is nothing mentioned about proclaiming anything beyond the two sources with any form of title whether it be Ali only or the four caliphs and this is the first time a major portion of the Islamic world has even heard of this issue. If an average Muslim were asked this question in the street of Jakarta or Cairo, it is most probable that they would have no idea what is being discussed and hence have no reply.
It is reported in the traditions that a sword was brought for Ali (as) from heaven, angels came down to earth to assist Hadhrath Fatima (as) in revolving the grinding stones (chakki) in cookery, Ridhwan had appeared in the form of a tailor and brought clothes for Imam Hassan (as) and Imam Hussain (as), could you please refer to any hadeeth wherein even one sock is reported to have been revealed for Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman and their like.
1. Bring forth this tradition as I’m unaware of this. There is none, it is a fabrication of the cult raafidha.
2. Even if this report had any merit, a sword being brought to Ali does not constitute “wahi” or anything revealed.
3. in spite of that, consider something even more worthy than this strange tradition
Allah says in speaking about the prophet and his most confided comrade, Abu Bakr, the following
If you help him (Muhammad SAW) not (it does not matter), for Allah did indeed help him when the disbelievers drove him out, the second of two, when they (Muhammad SAW and abu bakr) were in the cave, and he (SAW) said to his companion (abu bakr): “Be not sad (or afraid), surely Allah is with us.” Then Allah sent down His Sakeenah (calmness, tranquillity, peace, etc.) upon him, and strengthened him with forces (angels) which you saw not, and made the word of those who disbelieved the lowermost, while it was the Word of Allah that became the uppermost, and Allah is All-Mighty, All-Wise.
( سورة التوبة , At-Taubah, Chapter #9, Verse #40)
What is your position regarding the faith of Hadhrath Fatima (sa)?
Like the position of every other blessed companion of the messenger of Allah except in a level higher for she is from the noble lineage of the Messenger of Allah.
If she was a Mu’menah then is it permissible to obey her or not? When every companion is Adil ( Just ), is following one of them a way of salvation?
1. It is permissible and binding to obey any mumen, and not just to a handful of mumineen to the exclusion of the rest.
2. Allah also says
“O you who believe! Obey Allah and Obey the messenger (Muhammad SAW), and those of you (Muslims) who are in authority.” ( سورة النساء , An-Nisa, Chapter #4, Verse #59)
3. Every companion is adil and following one of them is a way to salvation of course it comes after the conglomeration of following the comprehensive nature of their collective way such that the actions or sayings of one does not override the proofs and ijmaa of the majority.