IMAM-I-AZAM PRAISED BY SHIAT SCHOLARS

[Hannahh]

http://www.al-islam.org/gallery/kids/Books/companion5/

This companion was mightier than many of the others. Do you know him Chuck? And if you do not know him, why do you not know about him?

It is the case that many say this, that and the other thing about the first three. In fact, none of them accepted Islam the way Abu Dhar did (pbuh).

He is one of my heroes. My husband calls me "Abu Dhar" because I've always been this way.

[Hannahh]

Furthermore, I have no idea why Hasan would post something that proves our point and not his own. The moral of this story of his is that a person should do something for the love of the prophet and Allah, not their own gain.

So why did they wrest the Kaliphate from it's rightful owner, the one designated by both the prophet and Allah as the rightful owner? And how can anyone here insist that is a small thing? I assure you, IT WAS NOT any smaller than Adam and Huwa taking bad advice in the Garden by listening to the Shaitan and their own "whims". And why is a consensus (in terms of the Kaliphate) only THREE companions and not one like Abu Dhar (pbuh) or several other well known Companions? Why didn't they nominate Abu Dhar as a "Caliph" as well? Abu Dhar is avoided completely by the Sunnis in their teachings and promulgation of "hadith" sciences and that is because what Abu Dhar was remembered for wasn't obeyance to their Caliphate but obeyance to the prophet and to Allah.

In the end though, what you should know is that the Imamate was never taken from the Ahlul Bayt (as once again, Hasan has brilliantly pointed out) and the Sunnis derive much of their practice from us. The only thing they "took" was the material office of Kaliphate. Much of what is put forth in the Nahjul Balagha states this openly i.e. that they can never have what they supposedly thought they took.

One of the reasons "they" i.e. Shi'i bashers, bash us is due to the prayer schedule. I truly fail to see why they do this other than jealousy. They have no reason to do this as they are welcome to combine prayers as the prophet combined them. The idea that one "delays" the prayer needs to be addressed because one of the reasons they pray the asr late is due to the heat of the sun in the midday. And it doesn't really matter when you pray as long as you pray within the proscribed times which are as I have shown you in the picture. When a person prays it is incumbent on them to make intention to pray and to specify which prayer is being offered i..e. fijr, asr, zhur, etc. There is no sin in praying them EARLY but there is a sin in praying them LATE. There is no sin in separating them either. The chances though for missing the asr and the i'sha however are much greater because they occur in times that a person normally finds themself sleepy. And if the Shi'i were interested in avoiding "numerous" events of prayer, then why don't they just combine ALL FIVE? You need to ask yourself this so that you can dispel whatever you've been told about this sin called "combining prayers".

It is the intention to pray early that matters. For instance, if I choose to pray the zhur and asr together to avoid missing the asr or having to "make it up late", then I am intentionally doing something so that I avoid the greater sin i.e. missing it completely.

[Hannahh]

That is the fallacy of Appeal to Authority. Doesn't prove anything. For example, probably I've travelled to more muslims countries, but that is irrelevant. Doesn't prove anything.

I just want to point this out to you. The appeal to authority is to Allah, not to me. If a person has a problem with such an appeal as the one I am making then the appeal isn't to me, it is to the Quran, to Allah, and to the prophet (SAW) because that is where I am deriving ALL of this directly.

It is the main defense ALL muslims have for being followers of something that to most of the world looks pretty drastic. Like the issue of Israel for instance. I personally didn't say those things about them, Allah said them.

My statement to you may not be however, something that makes you feel great. I am saying that I read many of your posts and questions and can see that you don't understand YET, what you will most likely understand eventually. You are a beginner. It says nothing about your faith. It has to do with your ability to handle this particular argument and the complexities of it. Yikes. And now you are going to be upset with me.

The fact is, it is not a good thing for a muslim to allow another muslim to remain in ignorance. That necessarily means that someone more knowledgable about things has to correct you and/or guide you. I am trying in that respect and I am also trying to moderate Aladdin's "pressure" on you or anyone else. You have no idea how frustrating it is for people to pose questions that aren't really questions but attacks. It isn't easy to keep one's patience in check with that sort of thing going on. It takes a great deal of effort.

[lumumba_s]

Sunnis combine prayers only when they have missed them but in that, they are actually praying the asr and the a'sha prayers later than recommended in the Sunna of the prophet

Huh? Why do I learn a new fiqh ruling everytime you or aladdin attempt to explain the Sunni position? What have you come to understand the Sunni position about combining prayers to be?

[Hannahh]

Do you combine prayers Lumumba? It is my understanding that 'as a rule' Sunnis do not combine them unless they have to do it because they missed one.

You are the Sunni, not me. Correct me then.

I'm the Shi'i and I know our premises. I am not an expert in yours.

[Hannahh]

[12.11] They said: O our father! what reason have you that you do not trust in us with respect to Yusuf? And most surely we are his sincere well-wishers

So Chuck, you go ahead and read the twelfth sura and maybe you can advise us on the nature of an allegory. Because that is all I can do for anyone like you who demands Quranic proof for something.

You can read. You can understand with your faith. You are no different from anyone in that matter regardless of what their personal POV is and what it is dependent on from good advise, to direct advice to advice that is politically motivated.

And to tell you the truth, I have certitude and have nothing to gain from you or what you believe or anyone else for that matter. I am also not personally obligated as "respondent superior" for the truth.

[The_Other_Admin]

Aladdin is gone but I'll make few things clear.

You can't even bring the five times salat from the Holy Quran, and you have claimed that you could.

I didn't claim I could bring five times salat from the Holy Quran. My understanding was that 5 prayers are mentioned in Quran which i pointed out in post, if they are not then I stand corrected. Seems like 3 are mentioned: morning, sunset, and night.

However, my main point was ignored again and again that salat is one of the most important tenet for muslims for all sects. It is clearly commanded in Quran. Even if the specific details are not mentioned a person has to establish it and to do so a person would look into the sunnah to establish it to the best understanding. So details can be differ from person to person and I'm not arguing that they should be exactly the same for all. If Allah wanted the same for all, then he would have given specific method in Quran.

Now back to the main point: salat is clearly commanded in Quran. If it wasn't then it would have been a different ball of wax.

Remember to the Sunnis the salat is the second pillar of Islam. To the Sunni the five times salat, it is their deen, iman and so forth. And, for your deen and iman you can't even bring from the Holy Quran the five times salat. Where as, you have made the claim earlier that Holy Quran is complete when it comes to deen and iman.

Well, shi'i also pray 5 times, except they combine two times. In any case, let me set the record straight, it doesn't matter what sunni tradition say if salat wasn't commanded in the Quran then I wouldn't have seen it as important or compulsory.

[The_Other_Admin]

Salam sister Hannah,
I can't answer to everything you say, your posts are too big and I don't have time to answer your questions point to point. I'll answer what I see important, if you think I missed something important you can ask it specifically... but please keep it to the point.

I just want to point this out to you. The appeal to authority is to Allah, not to me.

It wasn't appeal to the authority to Allah, it was appeal to the authority to your credentials.

This is what you said:

That is why you open topics to ask questions about it and I do not. My understanding is greater on that level due to the time I have been a muslim, lived in Muslim countries, read their newspapers which digress on religious topics and practiced nursing with them which necessarily involves a significant amount of understanding of traditions, Quran, the washing of dead bodies (which I have done Chuck), managing the death process in their populations, counciled peolpe regarding genetic issues using their own thinking and beliefs, attended medical symposiums to learn more about Islamic medical ethics...I guess you think I am just a good guesser in the many topics in which I offer my opinions. Hmm.

So. Chuck. What are your credentials again?

Your taking one of my main question as I believe shi'i commit shirk. However, I didn't say any such thing. I've studied from shia imam and I've been to shia imambargahs I know what shia believe. There were somethings that I found peculiar, but it is not what you are alluding to.

My question is coming from christians using the same line of argument to support their beliefs when I questioned some of their main tenets. Things like you are too naive, received by shaitan, don't love Jesus (p), don't love God, other people are more experienced for these things like christian priest in my neighbourhood, etc...

So Christian priest and some other people had more credentials that means I should believe in Trinity? Now don't make a tangent of shirk here, it is not about shirk, at that time I didn't believe Trinity is shirk anyways. I simply saw that Jesus (p) never commanded to believe in Trinity and God never reveled it to Jews so I don't see any point believing in it. Thats what I told them I don't see Jesus (p) teaching it in Bible and from one pov it maybe going against first commandment if it is not true, then they came up with some vague and allegorical answers. Thats the main reason I don't like allegorical interpretation, and I see Quran warn against it too as it can lead in the wrong direction.

Spending time with the Jews was interesting too. I'll come to that later; I've to go for prayers.

[Hannahh]

It wasn't appeal to the authority to Allah, it was appeal to the authority to your credentials.

No it wasn't. It was evidence that hopefully demonstrates to you where I've been and what I've seen and more importantly, my knowledge of the links from both reading and observing Arabs in a context of sectarianism. I also am well versed in the news. What I am not well versed in is Ibn Khaldun and Ghazali or any number of any type of muslim "philosophers". I have explained thoroughly to a couple of people what the Nahghul actually is and what it isn't in terms of one person's claim that it is in oral history. I backed it up with actual data and was not answered. None of our questions ever really are you know and that is because people are either unwilling or unable to answer them.

Now you have morning, noon, sunset, and night prayers, though 002.238 doesn't mention time, but it mentions middle prayer. Either there are 3 prayers then both shia and sunni are wrong or there are 5 prayers but 4 are mentioned by times and 1 is only referred as middle. In any case, I don't see your point. Salah is clearly mentioned in Quran, whatever a time or/and number a person chooses they have to establish it according to Quran. It is clearly commanded.

I've lived with Sunnis and prayed and eaten with them. As I have with Shi'i. I've been a refugee thrice who fled from Israeli/US backed terrorism against specifically the Shi'i and once terrorism of a purely Sunni Al Qaeda origin and my neighbor was beheaded by Sunnis (I fled Riyadh because I felt as an American my family might be the target of sectarian and/or nationalistic fervor).
I've examined the issues thoroughly and yes, you did insist that you can prove salat is in the Quran "as such" and the fact is, it isn't. Not really. Otherwise the "sunna" wouldn't be as important as it is to everyone but that is because it is about two groups and a core claim, it is a matter of digression between people who actually know what it is supposed to represent in relationship to that core claim. I provided for you a detailed explanation (that picture of shared times) and explained to you exactly the rationale of "early" praying and "late" praying as opposed to separating them out (splitting hairs that are not actually IN the Quran) into five dailies. There is a very clear rationale and the Shi'i can pray them separately if they want. Those are merely sociological issues with political underpinnings which you clearly do not completely understand at this point in time regardless of how many countries you have traveled to. I would though like to know what the extent of your travels were but not to prove anything...just to know you better.


And I was suggesting that you help me out and tell me what your credentials are. Most around here are rather secretive about "who they are" and "how they got that way" when I am an open book (hopefully).

I try to explain to others so that they will understand what I am saying and why and they can judge for themselves if I "picked up" my Shi'ism (or anything else) from my marriage to a Shi'i. Because that is usually the assumption.

And when you get another poster who is as insulting as Lumumba has been (to my intelligence and to my gender) and said: "Woman" shut up....then it serves to reason that there are others here who discriminate against me in this regard because I am either a woman or because I am a Shi'i and maybe even because I am originally an American.

I also happen to be an intellectual person who is willing to demonstrate not only my credentials but my rationale.

I realize you don't find it insulting but I find it insulting to compare anything I do and/or believe to "what Christians do". It is not only insensitive but it is categorically untrue. I think I've been very able to help others explain what our relationship "ought" to be towards other sects of Islam (Christianity and Judaism the two largest examples of extra Islamic sects). I hardly think a person who knows that rationale would be a person who confuses some aspect of the pagan/polytheistic code of Christianity with that of the Shi'i. Perhaps you did that out of ignorance and not spite but all the same, you need to be told that up front so that you don't make that assumption again and I don't make the assumption that you mean to do it.

I will add however that prior to understanding the complex relationships between the battles of Siffin, the Camel and Kerbala, I also thought the Shi'i had those qualities. That is because I was ignorant not because they do.

Your case is no different in that point Chuck. You don't understand the topic thoroughly. Hopefully in the future you will have a better understanding because I have risked my own well being to explain it to you as some people on this board are not very kind to a person like me who is brutally honest. And you have asked questions of your own free will. I didn't ask you to ask these things and in fact, I cautioned anyone to not ask them if they do not want to know what the answers are.

And btw, I have no idea where you got the impression that you accused the Shi'i of "shirk". As far as I know, the word hasn't been used once in this thread or the others that have been revolving around sectarian strifes (by you). I actually don't think you know enough about this issue to even accuse one side or the other of it but it does show that somewhere along the line, someone has mentioned to you that they believe the Shi'i are "shirkers". I assure you it wasn't me and I consider all people who declare themselves "muslims" to be truthful in that. It isn't up to me to declare takfir or shirk or anything else on anyone who believes they have been guided to the right place in their faith and by using both their faith and reason to arrive there.

Would you mind showing me where I accused you of such a thing? I consider you somewhat innocent in all of this to be honest.

Spending time with the Jews was interesting too.

I haven't spent much time with them but I have been a direct recipient of their oppression.

[Hannahh]

And my apologies Chuck for my "long or big" posts. I edit alot because I like to be very clear and do not like typos. But if you cannot read my posts then it shows that you are unaware of the complexities of this argument. Because I am probably the worst person to go to to discuss the "sunna" of the Ahlul Bayt and if you can't understand me then you are going to be hard pressed to understand an Aladdin or a BOY-NICE. Aladdin has been banned because of the so called reason that he was abusive to other posters (even though those posters were equally abusive to him). Clearly (and I did know about it) he understands the answers to his questions before he asks YOU (or anyone else) about them i.e. where it concerns the "sunna" of the Ahlul Bayt versus what most Sunnis promote as their own unique branch of practice. He is also of the opinion that the hadith were "cooked" and to be honest, he did a pretty good job of convincing me of that and I was actually neutral in that regard prior to his arguments that the primary Sunni hadiths are "demeaning" in many ways. I will in the future take them with a much heavier dose of salt than I used to.

When you insisted that prayer times can be defined from the Quran you did exactly what he expected of you. That is what the Socratic method is all about. He wanted you to arrive at your own answers but sometimes he wasn't very good at the Socratic method. Not his fault really because (like me) he knows this is a Sunni oriented website and expected resistance which in turn made him behave in confrontational ways. Well. I think it is not really legitimate to say a website is "open minded" when in fact it states openly that it has the right to question whether or not Shi'i are "kafir" (as well as "Ahmedis"). It is right there in black and white you know. What I find particularly disturbing about the comments section of this website is that the owners chose Shi'i representatives that were confrontational and did not provide anything but a question/answer that leads one to think that their questions are of that nature only. The thing they chose to use is a letter from a person who declares that the operators of this site are "Wahabites". Well, I know not all Sunnis are "Wahabi" and in fact, I know alot about the Wahhabi tribe AND sect. Two completely different things you know and you will find Wahhabi tribal members who are alot less provocative than the media might lead a person to believe and they can be all sorts of things from Salafi to Hanafi to maybe even a few "in the closet" Shi'i.

You aren't a Shi'i and studying with a Shi'i Imam won't make you one(it isn't like some branches of Sufism). Emulation isn't a process by which someone borrows an opinion on anything other than modern practices not addressed in the Sunna (like smoking, abortion, sex change). Emulation is a lot more complex than following a Sufi "tariq". The only thing that will make anyone a "Shi'i" (who is not one by default) is understanding exactly what the question of sects is and ALL Shi'i are unified in that basic premise (unlike the Sunni whose basic premise is ?). That is why I try to make it very clear my choice in the matter. I am of the opinion that not everyone is capable of understanding this question and therefore do not wish to "corrupt" anyone's view in that matter because I do know (and this website confirms) that many Sunnis believe the Ahlul Bayt to be a corruption of the knowledge, Quran, sunna, etc etc etc. You don't have to go very far to find that happening and if you'll notice, Ihsan has mentioned to Hasan in another thread that he "might as well be a Shi'i" because he somehow has conferred an evil intention on Hasan for seeing things in a different light than him (Ihsan).

Shi'ism itself is a sect in which there is a lot more freedom (in my opinion) to make individual choices Chuck. Haha...maybe there are even Shi'i who choose to use one of the Sunni madhabs for their guidance. Not freedom from the Sunna (as the Ahlul Bayt has Sunna that is well defined) but freedom from the misguidance of ANYONE be they Shi'i or Sunni. Lumumba gave an example of a Yemeni guy who has done so. I suppose he thought that meant that the Shi'i are somehow wrong and the Yemeni guy is proof of that...well no. The Shi'i are just very open minded when it comes to disagreement as it pertains to a number of issues including the hadith, the sunna, and extraneous cultural issues like the promulgation of the oral history of Kerbala via the practice of matam (which is not incumbent on anyone as a Shi'i...it was a means of preserving history during times when the Shi'i were suffering the actual oppressions of the Islamic rulers). I think some people who do not understand the role of Ashura/Kerbala have somehow confused it with the actual practice of Islam. I can do my own ijtihad and to be honest, I think everyone should do what everyone is capable of noting that "ijtihad" is simply another way of saying "critical thinking". Lumumba tried to point out that we have similar practices as if this was some indication of the veracity of the core claim. The core claim is what it is, it is a true or false and not a multiple choice question. It has very little to do with practice issues other than to say: Which came first, the chicken or the egg? If a person answers true, then naturally, that "sunna" has more validity. If they answer the other way then the sunna of the other group will be their guide. I personally am just trying to pray as best I can and do not worry so much about it. I know that Allah will accept my prayers if they are backed by my honest intentions and think that when people get too caught up in that sort of thing they risk "paganizing" Islam to the point of externalizing it into a series of "gesture only" rituals.

Now, if you asked me what any person on this board "was" or "wasn't"...I couldn't tell you as I don't make those value judgements on others who do not openly admit to having chosen a "sect" under which to operate. I do call athiests "kafir" because they are and they admit it. I do call myself a Shi'i because I openly admit it and know EXPLICITLY why I made that choice (and you are free to do so, to call me one in a pleasant way). As for anyone else...I have little idea of what they are because very few people here are willing to make that absolutely clear. Maybe because this website is so vague in it's operational code and maybe because they don't know what they are. I've no idea really.

All I can say is I know what I am and am not apologetic for that orientation because I know exactly why I chose it over something else.

[vinod]

May Allah shower peace on you, Hannah.

[lumumba_s]

Wow, now I'm sexist too? When did that happen?

[Hannahh]

When you used the word "woman" to me.

You have no right to do that as I am not your woman nor am I of a different status to you as a "woman" in any context. The only person who has that right over me is my husband.

Now. Don't do the "usual" and claim that you didn't do that and to "show you". The last time you asked me to show you your own statements you ended up dragging the military strategy of Hezbollah into it when it wasn't discussed.

If you would like to discuss the military strategy of Hezbollah, I can discuss that with you but I kind of doubt you know what their military strategy actually is because you seem to think they didn't deserve a victory and somehow caused the Lebanese to suffer for their actions which were directly related to the horrendous oppression of the Palestinian people AND the Lebanese. As opposed to blaming it on the real culprit and that would be the Zionists and the USA.

You have absolutely no right to behave like that and in the end, it is an example of bias based on envy.

[lumumba_s]

As salamu `alaykum,

Sunnis combine prayers only when they have missed them but in that, they are actually praying the asr and the a'sha prayers later than recommended in the Sunna of the prophet

Do you combine prayers Lumumba? It is my understanding that 'as a rule' Sunnis do not combine them unless they have to do it because they missed one.

You are the Sunni, not me. Correct me then. I'm the Shi'i and I know our premises. I am not an expert in yours.

If you are not an expert in ours, then please do not accuse us of doing something against what is recommended in the Sunnah.

As far as the times of the prayers go, the chart that you posted is the same as the Sunnis, except for the identification of specific time and shared time. Perhaps it is just the translation, but it the specific is waqt al-ikhtiyar (time of preference) and shared is the waqt al-darur (time of "necessity"). According to that chart, the time for `asr and dhuhr is only shared when `asr comes in, so I find it strange that you accuse the Sunnis of praying late when the very diagram that you offered does to support what you are saying. And even then, the way the chart was constructed is the Maliki position, which is based on the `amal of the people of Medina. For the other schools, I do not believe dhuhr and `asr are shared, and that is only in `asr's time.

In the Sunni understanding, you can only pray during the daruri time without being sinful for specific reasons, and it is not valid for someone to pray `asr or `isha in dhuhr and maghrib's time, unless they are traveling or the latter, when it is raining heavy, or other specific situations that aren't necessary to detail. Missing the prayer has absolutely nothing to do with it. When a prayer is missed, it isn't legally joined, but prayed when the person remembers. If that happens to be when another prayer is due, it is just a coincidence.

Oh, and I see why you think I was insulting your gender now. My reference to you as "woman" is a cultural misunderstanding. It is a playful term of endearment that no one who knows me would ever take as a sexist comment. It is like a grown woman addressing a grown man as, "Boy...." I playfully refer to my co-workers as "woman" when they start get to on my nerves, just like they refer to me as n*gga and neither of us has ever gotten offedned.

As far as the proofs, many of them are based upon `amal, as I said, and the clarification of the Companions. Since you do not accept some of them as authoritative, I will spare you of referring to them.

However, in Sahih Muslim, hadith such as the following exist:

Abdullah b. 'Amr reported the Apostle (may peace be upon him) saying: The time of the noon prayer (lasts) as long as it is not afternoon, and the time of the afternoon prayer (lasts) as long as the sun does not turn pale and the time of the evening prayer (lasts) as long as the spreading appearance of the redness above the horizon after sunset does not sink down, and the, time of the night prayer (lasts) by midnight and the time of the morning prayer (lasts) as long as the sun dots not rise.

Abdullah b. 'Amr reported: The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) said: The time of the noon prayer is when the sun passes the meridian and a man's shadow is the same (length) as his height, (and it lasts) as long as the time for the afternoon prayer has not come; the time for the afternoon prayer is as long as the sun has not become pale; the time of the evening prayer is as long as the twilight has not ended; the time of the night prayer is up to the middle of the average night and the time of the morning prayer is from the appearance of dawn, as long as the sun has not risen; but when the sun rises, refrain from prayer for it rises between the horns of the devil.

Joining the prayers for the Sunnis is a rukhsa that is only taken when the situations that allow it exist. And the time which we pray are based upon definite.

There is another type of joining in which one prays dhuhr during the end of its time, such that when one is finished, `asr's time is in and the same with maghrib and `isha. That sort of joining can be done without reason. And this is a brief explanation of some of the hadith in question and why the vast majority of Sunni scholars do not allow for the prayers to be joined without reason.

[lumumba_s]

If you would like to discuss the military strategy of Hezbollah, I can discuss that with you but I kind of doubt you know what their military strategy actually is because you seem to think they didn't deserve a victory and somehow caused the Lebanese to suffer for their actions which were directly related to the horrendous oppression of the Palestinian people AND the Lebanese. As opposed to blaming it on the real culprit and that would be the Zionists and the USA.

You have absolutely no right to behave like that and in the end, it is an example of bias based on envy.

You make too many assumptions and anyone who has read my posts about jihad knows why I am not fond some of the of the military strategies of Hezbollah or Hamas, forget al-Qaeda and new and "improved" Taliban. There are specific rules of warfare which have been documented in the books of fiqh by the Sunnis and which are agreed upon, and unfortunately, many of the war tactics that groups, Shi'i or Sunni, which can only be described as terrorism, have become known for using goes against those rules.

This is the fatwa that sums up the Sunni position about the modern tactics of warfare and why I said what I said about Hezbollah's tactics - which actually perplexes me since you stated that al-Qaeda is the ones who were firing the rockets. Something which I have never heard until a week ago, and I do not friends who are Palestinian or who live in the region and know first hand, like you, what is going on there.