I never said Shias are not Muslims

[Saleem Khan]

What right and authority do I have to declare Shias as disbelievers?

BUT IMAM SHAFI
BUT IMAM ABU HANIFA
BUT IMAM MALIK
BUT IMAM AHMED
BUT IMAM BHUKARI
BUT IMAM ABDUL QADIR JILANI

The great scholars of Islam
These great scholars who sacrificed for the deen of Allah
They said it! They said Shias are NOT MUSLIMS!
They declared Shias to disbelievers!

Sadly we find today people who barely know the basics of Islam, and that have contributed less than nothing to Islam thinking they know more than the Imams of the Ahlul Sunnah and calling Shias "Muslims" based on nonsense and rubbish they got from Google and Youtube.

Yes we respect the right of Shia to practice their religion, but it has NOTHING to with Islam and should never ever be confused with Islam.

Like we get Hinduism, Bhudism, Judasm, similarly is Shiasm a different religion that has absolutely nothing to do with Islam

***************************
1) Imam Ash-Shafi'i:

On one occasion Imam Shafi'i said concerning the Shia, "I have not seen among the heretics a people more famous for falsehood than the Raafidi* Shia." and on another occasion he said; "Narrate knowledge from everyone you meet except for the raafidi* Shia, because they invent ahadith and adopt them as part of their religion." (Minhaj as-Sunnah an-Nabawiyyah)
*****************************
2) Imam Abu Hanifah:

It is reported that often Imam Abu Hanifah used to repeat the following statement about the raafidi Shia; "Whoever doubts whether they are disbelievers has himself committed disbelief."

***************************
3) Imam Malik: Once when asked about the raafidi Shia, Imam Malik said:

"Do not speak to them or narrate from them, for surely they are liars." During one of Imam Malik's classes, it was mentioned that the raafidi Shia curse the sahaba. Imam Malik recited the verse, "Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah and those with him are harsh with the disbelievers and gentle among themselves. So that the disbelievers may become enraged with them." (48:29)

He then said, "Whoever becomes enraged when the sahaba are mentioned is the one about whom the verse speaks." (Tafseer al-Qurtubi)

************************
4) Abu Zur'ah ar-Razi:

He said of the raafidi Shia doctrine of cursing the sahaba, "If you see someone degrade any of the companions of the ProphetSAWS know that he is a disbeliever. Because the ProphetSAWS was real, what he brought was the truth and all of it was conveyed to us by way of the sahaba. What those disbelievers wish to do is cast doubt on the reliability of our narrators in order to invalidate the Qur'an and Sunnah. Thus the disbelievers are the ones most deserving of defamation."

*************************
5) Ibn Hazm al-Andalusi:

During the period of Muslim rule in Spain, Imam Abu Muhammad ibn Hazm would often debate with the Catholic priests about their religious texts.

He brought before them evidence of textual distortions in the Bible and the loss of the original manuscripts. When they replied by pointing out the Shia claims that the Qur'an has been distorted and altered, Ibn Hazm informed them that Shia claims were not valid evidence because the shia were not themselves muslims.

**************************
6) Imam Al-Alusi:

He declared the raafidi Shia disbelievers because of their defamation of the sahaba. His position was based on the rulings of Imam Malik and other scholars. In response to their claim to be followers of the Ahl al-Bayt (the Prophet'sSAWS family) Al-Alusi said, "No, they are really followers of the devils and the Ahl al-Bayt are innocent of them."

***************************
7) Imam Abdul Qadir al-Jilani said:

“In brief, mathab of rafidah become similar to mathab of jews. To love rafidah and shias is equal to loving jews”
Ghunyat al-talibeen page 134, chapter on misguided sects

****************************

8) Imam Bukhari declared:

“I don’t see any difference between praying Salah behind a Jahmi or a (Shia) Rafidhi and a Christian or a Jew. They (Jahmis/Rafidhis) are not to be greeted, nor are they to be visited, nor are they to be married, nor is their testimony to be accepted, nor are their sacrifices to be eaten.” (Khalq Af’aalul-’Ibaad, p.14)

[Linkdeutscher]

Where is Imam Ahmad?

[MuslimInshallah]

Assalaamu alaikum,

I found the following, that I thought might be interesting to consider:

THE AMMAN MESSAGE

SUMMARY

Frequently Asked Questions Tell a Friend '[T]he best resource for those who wish to travel along the straight path in their words and their actions, and in their spiritual and religious life'. — The Grand Shaykh of the Azhar, Shaykh Mohammed Sayyid Tantawi (may God have mercy on him), 2006. The Amman Message started as a detailed statement released the eve of the 27th of Ramadan 1425 AH / 9th November 2004 CE by H.M. King Abdullah II bin Al-Hussein in Amman, Jordan. It sought to declare what Islam is and what it is not, and what actions represent it and what actions do not. Its goal was to clarify to the modern world the true nature of Islam and the nature of true Islam. In order to give this statement more religious authority, H.M. King Abdullah II then sent the following three questions to 24 of the most senior religious scholars from all around the world representing all the branches and schools of Islam: (1) Who is a Muslim? (2) Is it permissible to declare someone an apostate (takfir)? (3) Who has the right to undertake issuing fatwas (legal rulings)? Based on the fatwas provided by these great scholars (who included the Shaykh Al-Azhar; Ayatollah Sistani and Sheikh Qaradawi), in July 2005 CE, H.M. King Abdullah II convened an international Islamic conference of 200 of the world's leading Islamic scholars 'Ulama) from 50 countries. In Amman, the scholars unanimously issued a ruling on three fundamental issues (which became known as the 'Three Points of the Amman Message'): They specifically recognized the validity of all 8 Mathhabs (legal schools) of Sunni, Shi'a and Ibadhi Islam; of traditional Islamic Theology (Ash'arism); of Islamic Mysticism (Sufism), and of true Salafi thought, and came to a precise definition of who is a Muslim. Based upon this definition they forbade takfir (declarations of apostasy) between Muslims. Based upon the Mathahib they set forth the subjective and objective preconditions for the issuing of fatwas, thereby exposing ignorant and illegitimate edicts in the name of Islam. These Three Points were then unanimously adopted by the Islamic World's political and temporal leaderships at the Organization of the Islamic Conference summit at Mecca in December 2005. And over a period of one year from July 2005 to July 2006, the Three Points were also unanimously adopted by six other international Islamic scholarly assemblies, culminating with the International Islamic Fiqh Academy of Jeddah, in July 2006. In total, over 500 leading Muslim scholars worldwide—as can be seen on this website [click here to see the entire list]—unanimously endorsed the Amman Message and its Three Points. This amounts to a historical, universal and unanimous religious and political consensus (ijma') of the Ummah (nation) of Islam in our day, and a consolidation of traditional, orthodox Islam. The significance of this is: (1) that it is the first time in over a thousand years that the Ummah has formally and specifically come to such a pluralistic mutual inter-recognition; and (2) that such a recognition is religiously legally binding on Muslims since the Prophet (may peace and blessings be upon him) said: My Ummah will not agree upon an error (Ibn Majah, Sunan, Kitab al-Fitan, Hadith no.4085). This is good news not only for Muslims, for whom it provides a basis for unity and a solution to infighting, but also for non-Muslims. For the safeguarding of the legal methodologies of Islam (the Mathahib) necessarily means inherently preserving traditional Islam's internal 'checks and balances'. It thus assures balanced Islamic solutions for essential issues like human rights; women's rights; freedom of religion; legitimate jihad; good citizenship of Muslims in non-Muslim countries, and just and democratic government. It also exposes the illegitimate opinions of radical fundamentalists and terrorists from the point of view of true Islam. As George Yeo, the Foreign Minister of Singapore, declared in the 60th Session of the U.N. General Assembly (about the Amman Message): "Without this clarification, the war against terrorism would be much harder to fight." Finally, whilst this by the Grace of God is a historical achievement, it will clearly remain only principial unless it is put into practice everywhere. For this reason, H.M. King Abdullah II is now seeking to implement it, God willing, through various pragmatic measures, including (1) inter-Islamic treaties; (2) national and international legislation using the Three Points of the Amman Message to define Islam and forbid takfir; (3) the use of publishing and the multi-media in all their aspects to spread the Amman Message; (4) instituting the teaching of the Amman Message in school curricula and university courses worldwide; and (5) making it part of the training of mosque Imams and making it included in their sermons. God says in the Holy Qur'an says: There is no good in much of their secret conferences save (in) whosoever enjoineth charity and fairness and peace-making among the people and whoso doeth that, seeking the good pleasure of God, We shall bestow on him a vast reward. (Al-Nisa, 4:114).

http://ammanmessage.com

[Zafran]

salaam

doesn't this go against forum Rules. Sectarianism is a no no on this forum.

Forum Guidelines say

13. No sectarian issues allowed. We are promoting the unity of Islam. Allah (Exalted is He) said in Surah Al-An'âm, verse 159:

Verily, those who divide their religion and break up into sects (all kinds of religious sects), you (O Muhammad -- Peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) have no concern in them in the least. Their affair is only with Allâh, Who then will tell them what they used to do.

Come on Mods keep with the rules. "Scholar" or no scholar. Rules are rules.

Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up

[azc]

Plz give the source from where you have copied it

[Saleem Khan]

@Zafran

Sectarian issues are only considered when the opposition is still within the fold of islam. For example would you consider qadiyaanis a sect of islam. Therefore if a group's beliefs take them out of the fold of islam, how can we uphold sectarian unity. They're not even part of the Muslims.

Sectarian unity refers to the groups that are still Muslims for e.g brelwis, deobandis, bidatis, salafis, madkhalis, wahabis, tablighis etc. These sects have their differences however still consider one another within the fold of Islam. The shias (ithna ashari) are not Muslims because their beliefs contradict the core of Islamic beliefs.

Also brother before you use a verse please check what the mufassireen (exegetes) say regarding it. That verse you quoted (6:159) is actually mansookh bi ayatis sayf (abrogated by the verse of the sword)
Tafseer jalalain.

[sister herb]

salaam

doesn't this go against forum Rules. Sectarianism is a no no on this forum.

Forum Guidelines say



Come on Mods keep with the rules. "Scholar" or no scholar. Rules are rules.

But if we see Shias as something else than part of Islam it then seems to be an another religion. Therefore it´s not any kind of sect issue, but we are talking about other religion - like if we talk about Christianity or Judaism.

[Zafran]

@Zafran

Sectarian issues are only considered when the opposition is still within the fold of islam. For example would you consider qadiyaanis a sect of islam. Therefore if a group's beliefs take them out of the fold of islam, how can we uphold sectarian unity. They're not even part of the Muslims.

Sectarian unity refers to the groups that are still Muslims for e.g brelwis, deobandis, bidatis, salafis, madkhalis, wahabis, tablighis etc. These sects have their differences however still consider one another within the fold of Islam. The shias (ithna ashari) are not Muslims because their beliefs contradict the core of Islamic beliefs.

Also brother before you use a verse please check what the mufassireen (exegetes) say regarding it. That verse you quoted (6:159) is actually mansookh bi ayatis sayf (abrogated by the verse of the sword)
Tafseer jalalain.

salaam

according to Al Azhar University they wrote the Amman messege where they pretty much told everyone what groups are part of Islam even with the disagreements.

http://www.ammanmessage.com/

[Zafran]

But if we see Shias as something else than part of Islam it then seems to be an another religion. Therefore it´s not any kind of sect issue, but we are talking about other religion - like if we talk about Christianity or Judaism.

salaam

Its not what we see them as its opinion if many scholars throughout the Muslim world. See previous post - over 200 thinkers, Ulema and many other personalities have signed the Amman messege. This includes salafis, Asharis, Deobandis, shia zaidis and Ithana Ashari and others.

peace.

[Saleem Khan]

@Zafran

These rulings are given by institutes (azhar etc.) That are under major political influence.

If Saudi were to accept that shias are non muslims they'll have to exile a large amount of their population.

A ruling cannot be accepted unless the mufti researches the topic in depth. I can't see any research in the above links. The best research I have seen on this topic is the research of a pakistani scholar.....Shaykh Zia Ur Rahman Farooqi. The book is called 'tareekh dastawayz' in English 'Historical record'. He was assassinated by the shias for this research. Till today no one can answer this research. Each problematic opinion of the shias he took their books and scanned the pages so no one can accuse him of misquoting.

Getting a hard copy is difficult but pdfs should be available.

If you take khomanis books no mufti in their right mind would accept that this person is a Muslim.

[Futuwwa]

Sectarian issues are only considered when the opposition is still within the fold of islam. For example would you consider qadiyaanis a sect of islam. Therefore if a group's beliefs take them out of the fold of islam, how can we uphold sectarian unity. They're not even part of the Muslims.

Sectarian unity refers to the groups that are still Muslims for e.g brelwis, deobandis, bidatis, salafis, madkhalis, wahabis, tablighis etc. These sects have their differences however still consider one another within the fold of Islam. The shias (ithna ashari) are not Muslims because their beliefs contradict the core of Islamic beliefs.

That's a circular argument.

[Saleem Khan]

@Futuwwa

Sorry can you clarify that.

[Saleem Khan]

Shaykh Qardhawi was known for his mild attitude to shias he tried to unite with them. Later he regretted his actions. He said his proves there can ne no unity between sunnis (Muslims) and Shias.

[Saleem Khan]

The issues is based on whether they are Muslims or not.....once we establish they aren't. Then they fall under the category of zindeeqs.

The only way to establish that is to see their own books. I have personally studied them......and I can say with one hundred percent conviction the are not Muslim.

I may seem harsh on this issue but its only the truth.

[Futuwwa]

You are arguing that Shia are not Muslims, yet you must assume that premise to be true in the first place not to be guilty of sectarianism. When an argument is made in such a way that the conclusion needs to be assumed as a premise in order for the argument to work, that's a circular argument, and the argumentation fallacious.

[Saleem Khan]

@Futuwwa

I think your saying that I am assuming Shias are kafir before trying to prove it. So it's a "circular argument". I don't know why your saying that though. (Most) Shias are kafir based on the evidence of their kufr not due to an assumption.

[Zafran]

@Zafran

These rulings are given by institutes (azhar etc.) That are under major political influence.

If Saudi were to accept that shias are non muslims they'll have to exile a large amount of their population.

A ruling cannot be accepted unless the mufti researches the topic in depth. I can't see any research in the above links. The best research I have seen on this topic is the research of a pakistani scholar.....Shaykh Zia Ur Rahman Farooqi. The book is called 'tareekh dastawayz' in English 'Historical record'. He was assassinated by the shias for this research. Till today no one can answer this research. Each problematic opinion of the shias he took their books and scanned the pages so no one can accuse him of misquoting.

Getting a hard copy is difficult but pdfs should be available.

If you take khomanis books no mufti in their right mind would accept that this person is a Muslim.

There over 200 people from different school of thoughts from Sunnis to shia. Not just Al Azhar University. Although for Ashari sunni theology they are still a central organisation. The deoband in India are another good example as well. Salafi scholars/thinkers as well have signed the Amman Message.

The sunni shia issue is a 1400 year issue and I dont think any book has or will solve the problem. However seeing how much bloodshed tafkiri behavior has led to of fellow Muslims this route only leads to fitna.

So my humble call to the mods will be to shut this thread down.

[AabiruSabeel]

:salam:

(Most) Shias are kafir based on the evidence of their kufr not due to an assumption.

Perhaps it might be better to clarify that not all Shias are the same, as brother Muhammad said in another thread:

We should be cautious about saying that all Shi'a are kuffaar. You can find some fatwas online where scholars divide the Shi'a according to what their beliefs are, because not all of them are the same. There are those about whom it is certain that they negate the principles of Islam, and those who do not negate any principles of Islam but are mistaken in some aspects.

[azc]

All shias aren't kafir.http://darulifta-deoband.org/showuse...&all=en&id=127

[azc]

OP,I don't think the source of this post is authentic, as the name of Hz imam bukhari :rh: is in the list it's not possible, because imam bukhari :rh: accepted the ahadith from several shias narrators

[Saleem Khan]

Perhaps it might be better to clarify that not all Shias are the same, as brother Muhammad said in another thread:

Regarding shias, the majority of shias nowadays are the group ithnaa ashari (12 imams). They and the alawis are the worst. There is no doubt in their kufr.

The rest of the shias have a certain belief that a wali (non prophet) can be ma'sum and can gain a status higher than the prophets. This belief takes a person out of the fold of Islam.

Alawis are the worst...they worship Ali R.d.....president of syria is one of these.

The only group among them that is not out of the fold of Islam is the zaydi group.They are only in Yemen and very small compared to the other groups.

The ithnaa ashari group has wiped out most of the other groups.

[Saleem Khan]

Shia Hadiths and the Significance of the Inconsistencies Therein

An excellent article which analyses the Shia claim to following the Sunnah heritage of the Ahl al-Bayt.

Translated from an Arabic article of Shaykh Taha Karaan (South Africa)

https://www.dropbox.com/s/hf64id3ji1...diths.pdf?dl=0

[Saleem Khan]

OP,I don't think the source of this post is authentic, as the name of Hz imam bukhari :rh: is in the list it's not possible, because imam bukhari :rh: accepted the ahadith from several shias narrators

People try to use narrators of bukhari to shias are muslims. This is the most baseless argument. When imam bukhari narrated from shias, it was those narrators that were inclined to certain opinions of the shias. For instance, Ali is better than uthman or the worst would be Ali is better than Abu Bakr and Umar. The books of asmaa war rijaal (books that classify narrators) would say regarding such a narrator فيه تشيع meaning he had some shism in him. Even though he respected Abu bakr umar and uthman.

Therefore to say imam bukhari narrated from such narrators that have the same beliefs as the shias of today, is highest level of stupidity. Shias nowadays don't even consider the sahabah to be muslims. (Again read thier books) Those narrators had very high level of respect for sahabah.

Find one 'shia' narrator in bukhari that had doubt in the imaan of umar and abu bakr. (May Allah be pleased with them)

Another point.

Regarding those shias that practiced taqiyya, the muhaditheen rejected thier narrations لان دينهم كذب

They would say 'their religion is lies'

Taqiyya is something which all shias practice nowadays.

[azc]

@Saleem Khan --So in your opinion shias of the age of Hz muhaddisin were ''good shias''. It means they were good ''Muslims'' in contrast with modern age shias???O.k. Plz see the status and ''characteristics'' of Abbad bin Yaqub, and tell me how a ''good MUSLIM'' he was.Thanks

[MuslimInshallah]

Shaykh Qardhawi was known for his mild attitude to shias he tried to unite with them. Later he regretted his actions. He said his proves there can ne no unity between sunnis (Muslims) and Shias.

Assalaamu alaikum Saleem,


(smile) Do you mean Sheikh Yusuf Al-Qaradawi? (twinkle) Because you know... he is one of the signatories of the Amman Message. Furthermore, I have read quite a few of his publications over the years, and he has been consistent on this point.

So I think perhaps your information on Al-Qaradawi's position is incorrect. (mildly) If you have evidence to the contrary, I would of course, read it with interest.


May Allah, the Knowing, Help us seek knowledge... for His Sake.

[Zafran]

Taqiyya is something which all shias practice nowadays.

You sound like an islamaphobe - they always say Muslims practice Taqiyaa. Second if you have a problem with the shia you should go and talk to them as this forum is a Sunni forum - so its irrational telling us "shia are not muslims" as non of them are here to defend your accusations or probably will not even be allowed to on this forum.

[Futuwwa]

We keep squabbling about how to wave our hands during prayer while the kuffar are conspiring to cut our hands off.
-Ayatollah Khomeini

[MuslimInshallah]

Assalaamu alaikum Najimuddin,


(smile) Thank you for your post. I appreciate the effort you put into it.

(sigh) To be honest though, I felt grief when I read it. I know Yusuf Al-Qaradawi from the books and pamphlets he wrote, that I had the pleasure to read. (smile) And truly, they were a joy. I remember being a young mother and avidly reading while nursing my little ones. It was the only time I got to relax from the stresses of caring for young children: a drowsy baby and a book that opened doors in my heart and mind. (smile) I was so impressed by him, that I tried to model myself on his approach. He was a teacher to me. (smile) Though I have never met him, and he does not know that I exist.

(mildly) So the idea that Sheikh Al-Qaradawi could have so changed his position and style was deeply painful. The person that I knew strove to build bridges. Was polite. Humble. Careful. Wanted to open doors of discussion and understanding. Wanted to help the ordinary person to gain deeper understandings of Islam. (smile) A lot of good and positive things.

So I read the links you gave above, Najimuddin. And I researched on the internet. And the plethora of information was temporarily overwhelming.

(smile) But I decided to focus on the essentials. A lot of what is on the internet is noise and distortion. (pensively) So after reading and reflecting, I do not think that the Sheikh's signing of the Amman Message was realpolitik. I think it was the extension of his deeply and long-held beliefs.

I can understand that he feels upset and betrayed by certain Shia. I suspect he feels this way about certain Sunnis, too. (mildly) But I do not see him saying that Shia are non-Muslims. Only that he feels the need to distance from certain people.

(smile) You know, I used to know a Shia family years ago (before both they and we moved away). And they were decent people. I was curious about their beliefs, so I asked them to lend me some books on their beliefs. The lady gave me a stack of children's books that enunciated their core beliefs, and that she had used to educate her own children. These were very interesting. At the core, the Shia believe in God. In His Unicity. They believe that the Prophet Muhammed (SAWS) was His Prophet. They believe that the Qur'an is His Word. And these are core Muslim beliefs. However, they also believe that a series of leaders after the Prophet (SAWS), whom they call the Infallibles, were Guided by God, and that therefore, whatever they pronounced was True. And this I had an issue with. I do not believe this.

(smile) However, Sunnis can have disagreements, too. (mildly) Indeed, I have read that there was a time when people following different Schools of Islamic Law tended to consider one another as non-Muslims. That nowadays the majority of Sunni Muslims are respecting one another's differences is, I believe, a good thing. The less we fight about differences in interpretation, and the more we focus on behaving well and building just societies, the better, in my opinion.

(smile) So what is Al-Qaradawi saying about the Shia? From what I can tell, he feels unease about the intentions of certain Shia leaders and the groups they lead. He (very rightly, in my opinion) condemns the terrible excesses by the régime in Syria, and those Shia groups that are backing this régime. But he does not exclude the Shia, as a group, from the fold of Believers.

(smile) I read an Islamic proverb many years ago. It said something to the effect that we should treat other people as if they could be the people of Paradise. And that we should look to ourselves as not sure of being of the people of Paradise. And this seems to me very wise advice. Because if we do this, it seems to me, then we will likely behave much more humbly and correctly.

Not one of us knows the outcome of the Day of Judgment. Not one of us has the Complete Truth, only our fallible human interpretations. And we will be Judged on how we ourselves have behaved.

(smile) Allah, Glory to Him, the High, has Promised to Tell us about that which we have differed. So why not wait till then to find out all the answers? (smile) And why not focus our time and energies into doing what is good and Pleasing to Him while we can in this brief life? Into being concerned that we ourselves are not being the best that we can be?


May God, the Merciful and Compassionate, Forgive us for our many mistakes.

[ajr]

Salaam,

This seems like deja vu...

Why is it that when one points out truth, people on this forum run to mods and say ''Against the rules of the forum''? You people should start asking the question ''Who do i fear, man or Allah?''...Stop being apologetic and be hardcore. Allah does not need us, we need Him!

Al-Wala wal Bara(love what Allah loves, hate what Allah hates)

Practise that!!!...

[MuslimInshallah]

Wa alaikum assalaam Najimuddin,


(smile) I'm not quite sure what is meant by "belief systems".

But I do know what I believe to be true. And I also know that I may be honestly mistaken. And that I try to live my life walking the best Path that I can. What others believe and try is their own Path.

(smile) I have read that there have been great and knowledgeable scholars who have been reluctant to issue fatawa, for fear of pronouncing wrongly. And that there is a tradition among Islamic scholars to acknowledge that their opponents might be correct, and they themselves incorrect, and that only Allah truly Knows. And this humility (when sincere) has touched me. I admire it.

(smile) I find that it is all too easy to get caught up in one's own truths, and to start feeling the silky tendrils of self-satisfaction. And I believe this to be a very subtle ploy of Shaitan. So I prefer to try to keep an open mind to everyone around me. For while I might have a chunk of Truth, others may have contributions. That I can learn from, though not always directly.

(smile) I read a children's story many years ago, that I have read variations of over the years. Some say it is Sufi in origin, and others claim otherwise. But whatever the reality, it is a powerful story. Here it is:

Once upon a time, there were a group of mice, and they went to discover what an elephant was like. Now this elephant was in a dark room, and the mice could not see it. But they could feel it. One mouse explored the elephant's leg. And another, it's tail. A third explored it's ears, and another, it's trunk. Then the mice left the room and discussed the matter together. The first one said: an elephant is like a tree! But the second said: no, no, it is like a rope! The third one rolled it's eyes in disbelief and squeaked: what are you saying? Of course, it is like a fan! And the last mouse cried: A fan?! No, no, it is like a snake!

All the mice had an element of the whole, but none had more than a part. So who was right?

(smile) I have stated that I do not believe in Infallible Imams. Nor do I believe that God is divisible. (smile) And I have quite a few other core beliefs, that I believe are consonant with core Sunni beliefs. But I also believe that the other person I face has something to teach me. That Allah has not introduced this person into my life for no reason. That through this person, I am being given the opportunity for learning another small part of Truth. (smile) And through me, the other person has an opportunity, too.

(seriously) And it does not matter whether that person is an atheist or a Jew or a Hindu or an animist, or whatever. There is something there, precious, to learn. Allah Created us in our diversity for a reason. And I honour that. I also believe that only God can decide our fate in the Next Life, and only He can Inform us of what is True and Correct.

This thread started as an expression of the OP's personal belief that the Shia (as a whole) are not Muslims, that he put into the mouths of some recognized scholars. It is my personal belief that he is perhaps doing an injustice to people calling themselves Shia, and also to himself. I have also shown that there are recognized scholars who disagree with him.

(smile) But I do acknowledge that I might be wrong. Perhaps Saleem is right. Perhaps all Shia are not Muslims in Allah's eyes. (seriously) But I would caution that this is a serious thing to say, and one that I would not dare to say.

And I would offer that, whatever the Ultimate Truth on this question, if we believe that we are accountable for how we treat others, all others, keeping an open, loving heart for the understandings of others is a good way to help us avoid becoming smug and perhaps treating others wrongly. (sigh) Because it is a human tendency to treat those they consider as outside "their" group, in less-than-good ways. (sad) And even terrible ways.

Considering the amount of strife in the world, including amongst Muslims (or those who believe themselves to be Muslims, though others may not), I feel that throwing out blanket statements, like this one about Shias not being Muslims, does not help. Indeed, I think that it can help fuel conflicts. (mildly) Given that conflicts tend to cause an awful lot of wrongdoing and suffering on all sides... I believe that it is Pleasing to Allah, that we try to avoid conflicts as much as possible.

(smile) I hope this clarifies my position.


May Allah, the Holy, Guide us and have Mercy on us.

[Samiun]

:sl:

Assalamualaikum accroding to Sheikh Hamza Yusuf when the scholars were young(not sure if they are the ones mentioned, Rahimahullah) they made a few statements which they later pull back. Labelling people as 'Kafirs' is dangerous..

[MuslimInshallah]

Wa alaikum assalaam wa rahmatullahi wa barakaatuhu Najimuddin,


(smile) When we love something greatly, we can feel large swings in emotions if we are concerned that what we love is not treated properly, or is under some sort of threat. (smile) I honour your love of Allah (SWT), His Prophet (SAWS) and His Beautiful Book.

And I am touched by your humility and sincerity. Truly, they adorn you. May God Make me a garden for such, too.


May Allah, the One Who Turns to us again and again with Forgiveness, Help us all to turn, again and again, to Him in repentance.

[Amat Allah]

We do not care what others say about whatever sects

shia, sunnah, blue jinni or whatever

in short: Whoever curses the sahabah {may allah be pleased with them}and the wives of rasoolullah {peace and blessings of allah be upon him} accusing them with disbelief, put anyone in allah's place any how and worships allah in a way other than what allah and his messenger {peace and blessings of allah be upon him} taught us is not a muslim. so, stop the argument cause you will get nowhere and all what you will post farther is so and so said & so and so stated.

[anatolian]

How easy we are to call each other out of Islam..What will you gain if Shi'is are all out of Islam?

[anatolian]

But if we see Shias as something else than part of Islam it then seems to be an another religion. Therefore it´s not any kind of sect issue, but we are talking about other religion - like if we talk about Christianity or Judaism.

Salam sister herb. It is really interesting to me that you as a muslim living in nonmuslim society are also that easy to call millions of a group non-muslim who call themselves muslim..

[The-Deist]

Salam sister herb. It is really interesting to me that you as a muslim living in nonmuslim society are also that easy to call millions of a group non-muslim who call themselves muslim..

She didn't call them non muslim.

[sister herb]

Salam sister herb. It is really interesting to me that you as a muslim living in nonmuslim society are also that easy to call millions of a group non-muslim who call themselves muslim..

I don´t see its my problem if non-Muslims call themselves as Muslims. Anyways, I can´t make them stop calling themselves what ever they like to call.

[anatolian]

I don´t see its my problem if non-Muslims call themselves as Muslims. Anyways, I can´t make them stop calling themselves what ever they like to call.

Salam sister. It might be your problem if they are not kafir in the eye of Allah.
In the hadith Ibn Umar related that the Holy Prophet said: If a Muslim calls another kafir, then if he is a kafir let it be so; otherwise, he [the caller] is himself a kafir.'' (Abu Dawud, Book of Sunna, edition published by Quran Mahal, Karachi, vol. iii, p. 484)

[sister herb]

She didn't call them non muslim.

That´s true. I wrote like "If we see...".

Note the word if.

I didn´t write that we see but if we etc.

[WinterVein]

jazakallahu khairan.:sl::Mosque::amin:

[Scimitar]

Before you start making takfir on people - have you checked your own household?

Scimi