After a deep study of Tazkia-e-nafs by Amin Ahsan Islahi and Burhan by Javed Aḥmad Ghamidi I am clear about tassawuf. But just want to know the exact nature of the karāmāt because if people get benefit from them then is it not good? What is the difference in the sufi karāmāt and spiritual experiences of yogi meditation?
We have heard about many karāmāt (miracles) of the walīs and sufis but I am not sure about the authenticity of these things. I have never seen any such thing that could have helped the believers a lot. For example it would be a great karāmat today if someone forces unity among Muslims and does something to remove the evils and even the enemies. I don't believe that such a karāmat would ever occur. What…
I would like what are the commonalities between Shiaism and sunnism. The best it can be said is Shias are 'Muhids" but not Muslims. If we wish to increase the number of Muslims the it is a political issue and not religious one?
We may of course make up our own criteria for who is and who is not Muslim. Most of the times, this practically ends with considering all who agree with us Muslims and all who disagree with us non-Muslims.
However if we decide to go with the criteria that God has mentioned in verse 9:11, then the criteria will be as follows:
- Not to be Mushrik and repenting from it
- Establishing daily prayers in the life
When Hazrat Fatimah demanded her right to the Garden of Fidk her claim was denied by the authorities on the force of the following concoction: “We, the Prophets, neither inheret nor are we inherited.”
The first two verses mention the fact that some of the Prophets inherited and were inherited. The last three verses mention the rules governing the inheritance issues. Hazrat Fatimah said: O son of Abū Qahafah (Abū Bakr), where does the Qur’an say that you inherit the property left over by your father and I am deprived of what my father left? Please comment to this issue sent to me by a Shi‘i brother.
I would like to answer your question from three perspectives, from a broader view to a more technical view:
My question is about the shia imams. I want to ask that Shia Imams lived for quite long time. I mean a few hundred years among Muslims. They were from the Prophet Muhammad’s family. Why they allowed the shias to build their tombs and Imam Bargahs and call them divine and so on? Why didnt they stop them from becoming a party? The family of the Prophet (sws) was there when the Abbasi and Ummayads were fighting and killing each other. Why didn’t they stop them?
The tombs and Burqas were made much later after the Shia Imams. It seems like most of these were made at the time of Safavids in Iran that is just about 5 centuries ago.
The perception of divinity is something that according to the Shia narrations the Imams themselves denied and attributed the belief to Ghulat (those who exaggerated). There are even narrations where the Shia Imams are cursing those who attribute the claims of divinity…
I have Shia freinds and they say they are syeds. The rest of the people are their ummah. The others should pay them respect as on the Day of Judgement they will be questioned. Many sufis and saints were Shia like as in Golra Sharif and Bari Sarkar and so on. So clarify the issue and oblige. If these saints were shias did they teach Shiism?
I can assure you that what you mentioned is not the belief of any learned Shia or Shia scholar. You can ask the same question from any learned Shia scholar and they will tell you that these are just imaginations resulted from lack of understanding of Shia and exaggeration.
The Prophet (pbuh) even warnd Fatima (ra-ha) to make sure she was doing well as a servant of God, since her relationship with the Prophet (pbuh) could…
An argument proposed by the proponents of following the imāms is that they (the imams) took all of that (the religious knowledge) from the students of the companions (tabi’in) who received their instruction from the companions themselves, who received their instructions from the Lawgiver himself, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, divinely protected from every mistake, who bore witness that the first three generations of Muslims would be ones of virtue and righteousness. Also, these Imams were from the best of the generations and thus are considered by the consensus to have reached human perfection. So, how can one say that following any one of these imams is not the right way?
I am afraid it is not true. The imams do not profess that they are merely reporting the ijtihad done by the Prophet (sws) transmitted to them. If in a particular case we find the matter as such then it becomes subject to the analysis of historian who will find out whether the matter has been truly ascribed to the Prophet (sws) or not. We all know that the imams do their own ijtihad based…
Thank you very much for taking out time and helping me with your detailed and satisfactory reply. Thank you very much for assuming my follow-up question and answering that too.
1.Do you mean that those Ahadith that are narrated by Imam Jafar Sadiq are sahih provided they are neither against the Quran nor defaming any of the Companions?
2.How and why Banu-Umayyah stopped people from narrating from Imam Jafar Sadiq and Imam Baqir? At this time I have a very soft and positive corner for Banu-Umayyah. I am not very much impressed by or attracted towards Banu-Abbas. So, please, help correct my line of reasoning if I am wrong.
3.At the time of the Prophet PBUH, Banu-Hashim was governing all kinds of political issues. How and why they were sidelined and Banu-Umayyah and then Banu-Abbas took the reign?
1- Any Hadith may be considered technically Sahih, if it fulfills the requirement of Rijaal evaluation (reliability of narrators) and Diraya evaluation (the content being inline with the Qur'an and known facts). However please note that when the source of the statement is not the prophet (pbuh) and is for instance Imam Sadiq, then even if the statement is considered technically Sahih, it only reveals the opinion of the individual (e.g. Imam Sadiq) and not…
I am suuni Muslim but have lots of syed shia friends. I have noticed the shia scholars curse and taunt sunnis and their beliefs for one hour and in the end of ten minutes of mujlis they weep over hussain’s (rta) shahadat. I want to ask what is the problem with shia scholars why they provoke shia Muslims to hate sunnis as we all know they do this very systematically. It is on there agenda to build a wall between sunnis and shias. We sunnis do listen to shias but shias do not listen to us at all. They fight and get worst. Why no one stop these so called shia scholars? Why they do this? What is the purpose behind it?
We first need to appreciate a general principle that is normally true for any ideological community. When a group, ideologically separates itself from the majority, the survival of that group is conditioned on its continuous negation and opposition to the majority.
I give you some examples:
- Jehovah Witnesses are among the minority of Christians when compared to the mainstream Christians. You will find that one of their main campaigns is in rejecting the specific beliefs of…
We see across so many Muslims living in this world but most of them are either obeying only some of the teachings of Islam and some of them are in confliction with each other. What is the solution to make them aware of real teachings of Islam and how would we represent the Islamic views?
We believe that it is the duty of the Muslim scholars to analyze the reasons why people fail to follow the religious teachings and what are the causes of sectarian conflicts. The scholars are obliged to present the religion in pure form and not to encourage sectarianism. Regretfully many scholars do the opposite. Their preaching is not based on the Qur'an but on the foundational principles of the school of thought they represent. We have…
I am a Pakistani student currently perusing my Engineering in Italy. During the last decade out nation has been introduced to a new term "Moderate Islam". I want to know if as a Muslim, we are so confident about the brilliance and comprehensive nature of Islam as a religion, why do we have to look for such terms as "moderate" to save our face? Is it because the real "brilliant Islam" never existed in us and we have been following something else. And now that this "something else" is looking bad, we want to amend it thinking that we are amending Islam? If you agree with the idea that we have been following "something else", don't you think we are a nation as lost as other ummahs like Jews and christens. These ummahs got lost because they lost their books, we got lost because we lost the sense to comprehend our book even though the book is still the same. Please note that when I say "WE", I mean in both context the Muslims of INDO-PAK and Muslims in general.
Yes indeed your observation seems correct. We Muslims are like a nation who has lost its soul. Terms such a "moderate Islam" or "fundamental Islam" or "radical Islam" all seem to be misnomers and reflect how much such labels bring us far away from the Islam found in the original sources of Islam. We do not need such labels as long as we have the book of God and the sunnah of the prophet (sws)…
I would to know if it is possible for me to pray like my would be husband who follows another religious denomination. We are trying to find a way to practise our religion in the same way, especially for our future children. Our main differences in praying are:
In the shia beleif, doing these three things is not permitted. This would invalidate their prayer. Thus, my question is: As a sunni, is it permissible to me not to do them?
Thank you for the email. We believe that since these practices are not obligatory part of the prayer they can be left. However, I do not understand why you would comply with the forms of prayers that they follow? If he has the right to offer prayer the way his fiqh school tells him why cannot you follow your understanding? This indicates to the problems that lie in intersect and interfaith marriages.
Mr Ghamidi has different opinions on various matters like music and beard. I follow his views because of his sound arguments. However, a question comes in my mind that I am rejecting majority opinion for one person's opinions Is it logical? Please clarify.
We believe that after the Prophet (sws) no individual or group is immune to error. The views of the scholars is accepted or rejected on the basis of arguments from the basic sources of the religion. We may abandon a viewpoint for another sounder one. This decision should of course be based on knowledge and not bias.
I wanted to know your views on different (legal) schools of through. Which school of Islam is on right path?
The sources of Islam, the Qur'an and the Sunnah, have been left for us in absolutely authentic form. Different scholars in the history of Islam have tried to understand the religion and present their understating. They do not differ over the basic sources, beliefs and practices. The differences occur in explanatory issues. They are academic rather than religious. Therefore, all of them are on the right path. It is not the question of truth and…
1. Some scholars say that taqleed is very important because the Holy Qur’an says: “If you don’t know ask the people of knowledge.” Can you cite the reference and its implication?
2. What is the exact definition of sahih hadith? Do only Sahih Muslim and Sahih Bukhari qualify to be called sahih? Are there any other books of hadith which are also called sahih?
Regarding the issue of taqleed, the Quranic verse under question has been interpreted out of context. A simple reference to the context will show that it refers to the People of the Book and has no bearing on the issue of taqleed.
The word sahih in Sahih Bukhari or Sahih Muslim is a term and does not refer to the Urdu meaning of something being correct. It refers to those ahadith which conform to 5 standards:…
I find it troublesome that we do not call the Shias the unbelievers but on the other hand why do we exclude the 5th Imam Jafar?
By the definition of the Qur'an (9:11) as long as a group of people consider themselves Muslims, believe in God and his last Messenger and pray and pay Zakah like the rest of the Muslims then they are Muslims. This definitely includes Imami Shia Muslims.
I wonder how would Sunnis and Shia's get along in an Islamic government, especially when comes to selecting a leader? I am sure that there is no clear answer but I would like to read your insight on the matter. What do you think will ultimately happen? Will one side concede to the other or will they learn to live in peace? Might they end up fighting to the death? How serious is this issue? I am not all together clear on the matter.
I will confine myself to explaining the basic teachings of Islam on the issue. I would request you to try to apply it on different situations yourself. People adhering to different religions and sects have been and are getting along with each other in many countries. Shias and Sunnis should follow the example set by the companions of the Prophet (sws) after his death. Different groups were expecting the office to go to them. Aside…
Ahmadiyat is rapidly spreading all over the world. Is it not a proof of its being a true religion?
If we judge the truth on worldly success then what should we say about the prophets who were rejected and only a small number of people followed them. Success in this mortal world comes from different sources. Many Muslims are indulged in various polytheistic activities and consider themselves the most dominant party of the world. Is this enough proof of their righteousness? The Christians are still the majority of the world and are also enjoying…
Can you explain what led to the forming of four sects in sunnis following the four Imams and how do these differ among each other.
In the beginning we see that some of the Companions of the Prophet (sws) were more learned and had more insight into the religious texts than others. They distinguished themselves in the art of understanding and interpreting the sources texts. These people settled in different parts of the empire during the time of the period of the rightly guided Caliphs. People were attracted to them and asked them questions regarding their understanding of the religious…
Some people claim that Imam Zain al-Abideen has been weeping (blood from eyes) for forty years. I wanted to learn whether it is correct.
This is not a question that is directly related to religion. In any case, weeping blood is usually an expression that indicates extreme sadness and it does not mean weeping blood literally. In fact, there is no known association between being sad and weeping blood. If a person cries blood this is due to a physical illness rather than being sad.
The story of Karbala is of course a very sad and heart breaking story.…
My question is why there are only four khalifas and not a fifth one? Furthermore I would like to ask how I can best explain to an Ahmadi about the true religion.
That the rightly guided caliphs are only four is a judgment of the believers. They think that only four of them followed the Prophet (sws) in the truest way. If someone today follows the Prophet (sws) in that sense he too would be considered khalifa e rashid. Many people hold that Umar b Abdul Aziz, an Umayyad caliph, was also also a rashid khalifah.