I never said Shias are not Muslims

Saleem Khan

Saleem Khan

Student of Knowledge
Messages
111
Reaction score
11
Gender
Male
Religion
Islam
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)
 
Assalaamu alaikum,

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

basmallah.gif
THE AMMAN MESSAGE

SUMMARY

[TABLE="class: contentpaneopen, width: 492"]
[TR]
[TD="colspan: 2"][TABLE="width: 100%"]
[TR]
[TD]Frequently Asked Questions[/TD]
[TD]
Tell a Friend​
[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
'[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'):


  1. 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.
  2. Based upon this definition they forbade takfir (declarations of apostasy) between Muslims.
  3. 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).


​
[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

http://ammanmessage.com
 
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.
Click to expand...

Come on Mods keep with the rules. "Scholar" or no scholar. Rules are rules.
 
Last edited:
@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.
 
Zafran said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
Saleem Khan said:
@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.
Click to expand...

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/
 
sister herb said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
[MENTION=20217]Zafran[/MENTION]

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.
 
Saleem Khan said:
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.
Click to expand...

That's a circular argument.
 
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.
 
Last edited:
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.
 
Last edited:
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.
 
[MENTION=31766]Futuwwa[/MENTION]

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.
 
Saleem Khan said:
[MENTION=20217]Zafran[/MENTION]

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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
Last edited:
:salam:

Saleem Khan said:
(Most) Shias are kafir based on the evidence of their kufr not due to an assumption.
Click to expand...

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

Similar Threads

Back
Top