Skip to main content

Posts

SHIA IMAMIYYA ITHNA ASHARI AND THEIR BELIEF

This is the real Shia group, which believes in the twelve Imams after the Holy Prophet. The other factions have nothing in common with our group; they have only assumed the name Shia. BELIEF IN ALLAH AND THE PROPHETS The Shia Imamiyya group believes in the Ever-Existing Almighty Allah. He is One, in the sense of the absolute oneness of His essential existence. He is One, with none comparable to Him. He is the Creator of everything in existence. There is no match or equal to Him in any respect. The holy prophets and messengers were sent to tell the people about Allah, how to worship Him, and how to know Him. All of the prophets preached and guided the people according to the tenets set forth by the five major prophets: Noah, Abraham, Moses, Jesus, and last of all, the Holy Prophet Muhammad, whose religion shall last until the Day of Judgement. BELIEF IN CHASTISEMENT, REWARD, HELL,PARADISE, AND DAY OF JUDGEMENT Allah Almighty has fixed recompense for our deeds, to be given to us in P

The Infidelity of Yazid

Among the facts proving Yazid's infidelity are his own poetic couplets. For instance, he writes: "If drinking (wine) is prohibited in the religion of Muhammad, let it be so; I will accept Christianity." "It is this world alone for us. There is no other world. We should not be deprived of the pleasures of this world." These couplets appear in the collection of his poetical works, and Abu'l-Faraj Bin Jauzi has recorded them in his Radd Ala'l-Muta'asibu'l-Anid. Again he says: "One who frightens us with the story of doomsday, let him do so. These are false things which deprive us of all the pleasures of sound and music." Sibt Ibn Jauzi writes in his Tadhkira, page 148, that when the descendants of the Prophet were brought as captives to Syria, Yazid was sitting in the second story of his palace. He recited the two following couplets: "When the camel litters carrying prisoners appeared, a crow cawed (a bad omen in Arabia). I said:

Who was Muawiya bin Abu Sufyan

The story of Ashura and the great sacrifice made by Imam Hussain (a.s.) to save the religion of Islam was a classic tale of good versus evil. Imam Hussain (a.s) lost the battle but definitely won the war. The evil in these events was personified by Yazid ibn Muawiya (may Allah curse him), a man who was simply a despicable human, let alone a so-called Muslim. His reign as "caliph" was short but painful. In his first year of rule he commanded his forces to kill the grandson of the Holy Prophet, along with his family and friends and in the second year he attacked the Holy Kaa'ba and set fire to it. He was a power-hungry, selfish and arrogant man but tracing through history, he was not the real brains behind the attempt to destroy Islam, the real brains was his father - Muawiya ibn Abu Sufyan. Of the trio of the founding Umayyad fathers, Abu Sufyan, Muawiya and Yazid, Muawiya is the most significant, the most influential and most cunning. Sunnis lay a lot of credit on Mua

Imam Husain(a.s) Concept of Religion and Leadership

The Message of the Prophet of Islam passed into the hands of the worldly Umayyads within thirty years of his death. After the death of 'Ali in 40/661, Mu'awiya b. Abi Sufyan appropriated the office of the leadership of the community for himself through the use of force and deceit and ruled the Muslims for twenty years. On Mu'awiya's death, his son Yazid assumed the role of the leadership of the Muslims as the caliph in accordance with the former's unprecedented testament. Yazid's anti-Islamic behaviour and openly irreligious practices were well known throughout the Muslim world and earned for him contempt and disfavour, especially among those who cared for Islamic religio-ethical values. An embodiment of all sorts of vice, tyranny, injustice, oppression and despotic rule, Yazid wanted Husayn to pay him homage as the leader of the Muslim community and submit himself to his authority. That was the crucial point in Islamic history when the meaning of religion had

Nasibi support for Yazeed

Let us see how the Salaf Imam's treated Yazeed in their writing's. Let us begin with Imam of Ahl'ul Sunnah Abdul Hamid Ibn Ghazzali.  Ibn Khallikan records one of his fatwas in reply to the following question: "Q. What opinion should one hold of an individual that curses Yazeed, deems him a fasiq and encourages others to curse him? Did Yazeed intend to kill Hussain [r] or were his actions aimed at defending himself? Can we say (rahmathullah) after saying his name or is silence the best approach to adopt? 'A. 'It is not allowed to curse a Muslim at all and whosoever does so is himself cursed; and how can the curse of a Muslim be ever allowed when prohibitions in this matter are clear cut. Yazeed's being a Muslim and his non-participation in killing Hadhrat Hussain (Radhiallaahu Ánhu) nor his being pleased with this are all established from authentic narration's. When his involvement in the murder of Hadhrat Hussain (Radhiallaahu Ánhu) is not proven, i

Clarification of the Misconceptions About Azadari (Mourning)

A contemporary scholar Mr Abdul Ghaffar in the daily 'Hindustan' dated 21 June 1993 has raised certain objections about the 'Welcome to Mourning' (Istiqbale Aza). Perhaps his one-sided study might have plunged him into misunderstandings. Hence it became imperative for us to clarify his misgivings. The summary of his objections, based on five premises, which are as follows: Certainly the assassination of Hussain will kindle fire in the hearts of the believers until eternity, which will never extinguish. It is a tradition from the Holy Prophet (S) ?  What is the proof of its authenticity ? The mourning of Prophets (A) before Imam Hussain (A) is a meaningless thing. The survival and resilience of Islam is based on its cardinal principles of Namaz, Roza, Hajj etc. Islam thrives on it and not on mourning of Imam Hussain (A). Mourning and self-flagellation for Imam Hussain (A) is forbidden. Mourning and establishing such gatherings does not have any relevance to the re

The Aims and Objectives of Imam Hussain's Stand

What was the course of Imam Hussain's (A) revolution? What reasons prompted him to initiate such a great and unmatched upspring? Did he intended to overthrow the Yazid regime? Did he wish to end the Umayyid dynasty? These and such other questions keep cropping in the mind and everyone wants to know the satisfactory replies, specially the mourner of Imam Hussain (A) are more eager in this regard. When Imam Hussain (A) was preparing to leave on his longest journey, he bid adieu to the grave of his grandfather, the Holy Prophet (S.AW). Then he wrote a legacy addressing his brother Mohammed Bin Hanafiyyah in which he explained the aims and objectives of his uprising. We are quoting an extract from the same legacy hereunder.  He wrote thus: "And surely the aim of my stand is not inspired by vain exultation and it is also not for the quest of kingdom, Neither it is to cause dissension and corruption nor it is to wrong anybody unjustly." These sentences of Imam Hussain (A) ar

Why Shia do Matam and self flaggellation?

Mourning rituals and self harm as found in the Qur'an We read in Surah Nisa 004.148 YUSUFALI: Allah loveth not that evil should be noised abroad in public speech, except where injustice hath been done; for Allah is He who heareth and knoweth all things. We read in Tafseer Ibn Katheer Volume 2 page 20 Surah Nisa, under the commentary of this verse: "Ali bin Abi Talib(a.s) said that Ibn Abbas commented on the Ayah and said, “Allah does not like that the evil should be uttered in public, He does not like that any one should invoke Him against anyone else, unless one is wronged. In this case, Allah allows one to invoke Him against whoever wronged him. Hence Allah's statement Allah loveth not that evil should be noised abroad in public speech, except where injustice hath been done'" Shia Muslim mourning Imam Hussain This verse makes it clear that the public relaying of injustice is permissible. Relaying the suffering of a victim is permissible. The tra

The Hanafi Fiqh deems Yazeed to be the Sixth Khalifa of Rasulullah (s)

As Shi'a we believe that our 12 Imams were Rasulullah (s)'s legitimate successors, appointed by Allah (swt). We deem Imam Hussain (as) to be the third in the chain.  As part of the proof from Sunni traditions we cite hadith such as this: "The Islamic religion will continue, until the hour has been established, or you have been ruled over by 12 Caliphs, all of them being from Quraish" Sahih Muslim, hadith number 4483, English translation by Abdul Hamid SiddiquiSharh Fiqh Akbar by Mulla 'Ali Qari is the Hanafi Book of aqaid. On the very first page it is stated that the book sets out the aqeedah of Ahl'ul Sunnah wa al Jamaah. So there is no room for the Nasibi to make the excuse that this is JUST a viewpoint. Everything set out in this book is the aqeedah of Hanafi Sunni Muslims. Mulla Ali Qari sets out who the 12 khalifas are: Abu Bakr Umar Uthman Ali Mu'awiya Yazeed Abdul Malik bin Marwan Walid bin Abdul Malik bin Marwan Sulayman bin Abdul Malik bin Ma

Did the tragedy of Karbala highlight the Shi'a / Sunni schism?

The difference between the two concepts of Imamate. Those that deemed the station of Imamate to be man appointed and than it was based on ijma. This school of thought developed into what is today Ahl'ul Sunnah. Those that deemed the station to be based on the appointment of Allah (swt) and his Prophet (s) a school today deemed Shi'a Ithna Ashari. On the one side we head the Imam of the people [ie. The Imam of Ahl'ul Sunnah] and on the other side was the Imam appointed by Allah (swt) - the Imam of the Shi'a. As Shi'a we reject the claim that Yazeed was a legitimate khalifa, rather we make it clear that a fasiq can not occupy the position of Khalifa of Rasulullah (s). Hence we believe that the duty was to support Imam Hussain (as) as we deem him to be the legitimate Khalifa of Rasulullah (s).  This automatically places us at logger heads with Ahl'ul Sunnah who believe that: 1)Appointment of the Khalifa is the based on the ijm'a of the public. 2) Once bayy

Who are the adherents of the Nasibi killers of Imam Hussain (as)?

It is quite logical that those that deemed Yazid to be the rightful khalifa were the same individuals that killed Imam Hussain (as). We the Shi’a distance ourselves from Yazid and his supporters. So Ansar.Org, kindly tell us, do you? Do the Ahl’ul Sunnah and Nasibi express hatred towards those that supported Yazid and killed Imam Hussain (as)? Unfortunately this is not the case. Nasibi claiming to adhere to the Sunni faith have written, praised and defended Yazid as a pious man. We have Pakistani Hanafi scholar Mahmood Abadi who wrote "Khilafat Muawiya aur Yazid”- wherein he praised Yazid, deeming the method of ruling used by Umar and Yazid to be the same. Had the matter stopped there then no doubt that would be proof in itself, but what Ansar.Org are hiding from their followers is the fact that their Salaf Imams took ahadith from those that killed Imam Hussain (as). Proof of guilt lies with ‘association’ those with blood on their hands will have no shame / guilt in taking had