Muslims—Will the Qa'im OVERTURN Islam?

All research or scholarship questions
Baha'i Warrior
Posts: 753
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 10:07 am
Location: U.S.A.

Muslims—Will the Qa'im OVERTURN Islam?

Postby Baha'i Warrior » Thu Feb 01, 2007 2:09 am

I was looking through some of Imam Ali's sermons. This is related to a discussion I was having with our Muslim friend Abbas. Here is the Commander of the Faithful, Imam Ali ibn Abi Talib, telling Muslims that there will come a time when their religion will be "capsized," or overturned; that is, according to the dictionary, invalidated, destroyed, or reversed. Imam Ali, in His 102nd sermon, states:

    There would be a time wherein only a sleeping (inactive) believer would be safe (such that) if he is present he is not recognised but if he is absent he is not sought after. These are the lamps of guidance and banners of night journeys. They do not spread calumnies nor divulge secrets, nor slander. They are those for whom Allah would open the doors of His mercy and keeps off from them the hardships of His chastisement.

    O' people ! a time will come to you when Islam would be capsized as a pot is capsized with all its contents. O' people, Allah has protected you from that He might be hard on you but He has not spared you from being put on trial. Allah the Sublimest of all speakers has said:

    Verily in this are signs and We do only try (the people). (Qur'an, 23:30)


    Source: http://www.al-islam.org/nahjul/102.htm.


First, this hadith, I submit, is prophesying the Baha'is when it talks about those who "do not spread calumnies nor divulge secrets, nor slander." The Baha'is are, among many things, renowned for their honesty, and slander is forbidden in the Kitab-i-Aqdas. Indeed, much slander was directed toward the Baha'is (for example, in Iran) by Muslims, and still is—yet the Baha'is do not retaliate and do the same, because God has changed them. The Baha'is are the ones talked about in the first paragraph (above).

What will happen in the future to Islam according to Imam Ali? "Islam would be capsized as a pot is capsized with all its contents." Imam Ali is telling us what is already obvious to the unbiased reader of the holy Qur'an, because Muslims (as with anyone) are no better than their forefathers with regards to repeating the mistake of not recognizing and rejecting God's Apostle. Why would God not make His future plans obvious to Muslims? Again, all one has to do is read the Qur'an and not read everything so literally, because behind the holy verses are hidden meanings meant for those who God will "open the doors of His mercy." Imam Ali, echoing what is already said in the holy Qur'an, asserts that God has not made is easy for Muslims (or anyone else for that matter) to recognize His Manifestation: "He has not spared you from being put on trial."

I have produced in other posts hadith from both Shi'a and Sunni sources showing with absolute clarity that there will indeed be another Revelation, with it God's Manifestation and the Laws He reveals. I hope the Muslim friends visiting this forum might reflect on their own hadith, and on the stories from the Qur'an, where God always tests His servants and never stops testing them! God does not make it easy; if He is offering us eternal happiness, it's going to take some work on our part—much as we'd like to think that we are right and don't need to change.

Baha'i Warrior
Posts: 753
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 10:07 am
Location: U.S.A.

Postby Baha'i Warrior » Fri Feb 02, 2007 1:56 am

Dear Richard:

Thanks for you input. It's always appreciated.

The main reason I made this post was because many Muslims think their hadith says that the Qa'im will merely re-establish Islam—that is, return it to its previous glory, etc. (Many Christians also fall victim to similar myths concerning Christ's glorious return.) However, that line of thinking goes counter to clear hadith from both prominent Shi'a and Sunni sources, where it is stated that the Qa'im will create His own Religion, will have new Laws and abrogate Muslim ones, and will Himself be the Manifestation of God on earth. [By the way, based on these hadith, someone (for example our seeker friend Abbas) who is investigating the Bab's claim of being the Qa'im can note that all of these Mahdist cults of Islam do not make the claim to be the authors of a new Revelation, or to be Manifestations of God. So they can be automatically disregarded by the seeker since their claim runs counter to the hadith. This is just being practical.]

Everyone loves his own religion. If he is a Christian, he's going to want Jesus coming down on clouds, fighting a big war with Satan and saving all the Christians (which doesn't make sense with a more "advanced" concept of God). The Muslims want a Qa'im who will kill a whole bunch of people and return Islam to the glory it once had, make everyone Muslims, and restore sharia, among many things. But the unbiased Muslim will note that his hadith in fact state the exact opposite! The Qa'im will "capsize" or overturn Islam, He will reveal new Laws—which are different than that of the sharia—and His station will be that of God's Manifestation (as foretold in the Qur'an and hadith). Think about it, why would there be so much opposition to the Qa'im? Because the Qa'im will outwardly appear to be an infidel to most, strictly on account of clergy or mullahs telling Muslims that which is exactly the opposite of the truth, and more generally a lack of education and a natural desire to oppose. This opposition is not unique to any one religion though, as all of the past religions have fantasies regarding how they think their religion will be restored, which include miraculous events that are to occur. Says Baha'u'llah, regarding such narrow-minded behavior and tendencies of thinking seen in most human beings:

    "Consequently, such behavior can be attributed to naught save the petty-mindedness of such souls as tread the valley of arrogance and pride, are lost in the wilds of remoteness, walk in the ways of their idle fancy, and follow the dictates of the leaders of their faith. Their chief concern is mere opposition; their sole desire is to ignore the truth. Unto every discerning observer it is evident and manifest that had these people in the days of each of the Manifestations of the Sun of Truth sanctified their eyes, their ears, and their hearts from whatever they had seen, heard, and felt, they surely would not have been deprived of beholding the beauty of God, nor strayed far from the habitations of glory. But having weighed the testimony of God by the standard of their own knowledge, gleaned from the teachings of the leaders of their faith, and found it at variance with their limited understanding, they arose to perpetrate such unseemly acts...."

    (Source: http://www.bahai-library.com/writings/bahaullah/gwb/013.html)


Let him who wants to find the truth empty himself of all preconceived notions, which undoubtably will lead him astray, and with an open heart investigate the Baha'i Faith, and read Baha'u'llah's Writings, which come from the same Allah who spoke to mankind through the holy Qur'an.

richard wrote:It seems that the Baha'i teachings have some important spiritual qualities that are either lacking from the Koran, or from the way the Koran seems sometimes misinterpreted, but this is a problem for all religious texts, or the writings of prophets or other Manifested writings.


That is an astute observation. The Qur'an was the Word of God speaking to men living many hundreds of years ago. The Writings of Baha'u'llah contain the Words of God for today. God didn't stop talking to us upon the completion of the Qur'an. It was not His last Book. It was not His last discourse to man. Man is always growing. He is maturing, but since he will never reach the level of God in such wise, he continually needs new Teachings—Teachings which he would have not understood in his prepubescent years, Words which would have consequently been wasted on him.

Let us, in combination, use our ability for logic which God granted us, our free Will, and his Word, and with an unbiased mind come to a conclusion ourselves. This conclusion should be independent of what our families tell us, of what the clergy tell us, or anyone else. The only thing that matters is God's infallible Word—we needn't substitute other sources for His Words.

richard wrote:Indeed, Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism, Islam, and all world religions have been misinterpreted, corrupted, and found spiritually wanting to some degree.


Right again Richard. Each religion has its day, and then it loses the grandeur it once had. At this point God has new plans for mankind. He has new Teachings for his children. But his children, rebellious and stubborn, hold on to their fixed ways and resist the change. At this time, God's confirmations are with his New Faith, which contains His New Message. The evidences of this are clear. God is above all the opposition; indeed, regarding God's actions, Baha'u'llah asserts: "He doeth whatsoever He willeth and ordereth whatsoever He desireth." God is not goint to say, "Well they didn't accept my Messenger (like always), so maybe I should try again some other time when they are more agreeable to My Words..."

richard wrote:And, the reality is, even the Baha'i Faith will have its ups and downs as all religions have had, and will continue to have.


As pointed out, when in the future God decides it is time for a new Revelation, the Baha'i Faith will not be immune to the deterioration process described above. The Baha'i Faith is not any more special in this regard. Baha'u'llah makes it clear to us that God's Faith is evolving. For once in the history of mankind, this Truth has been stated by the Manifestation of God in the clearest of terms; there is no ambiguity.

Thanks again for sharing your thoughts, Richard.

choogue
Posts: 0
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 4:54 am

Postby choogue » Fri Feb 02, 2007 8:16 am

First, this hadith, I submit, is prophesying the Baha'is when it talks about those who "do not spread calumnies nor divulge secrets, nor slander." The Baha'is are, among many things, renowned for their honesty, and slander is forbidden in the Kitab-i-Aqdas.


BW, you really need to stop making these assumptions. Muslims do not spread calumnies nor divulge secrets, nor slander. Bahais do not spread calumnies nor divulge secrets, nor slander. But there are Muslims AND Bahais they do divulge secrets, that do spread calumnies, that do slander.
That is your own assumption that Bahais are renowned for this.
Just as slander is forbidden in the Kitab-i-Aqdas, you should know very well it is also forbidden in the Quran.

Indeed, much slander was directed toward the Baha'is (for example, in Iran) by Muslims, and still is—yet the Baha'is do not retaliate and do the same, because God has changed them.


Maybe the Bahais do not do the same in Iran due to fear. Im sure the Christians, Zoroastrians, and the Jews would also not slander the Muslims since they all amount to 2% of the population.
This does not mean there are no Bahais that do not slander, nor does it mean there are no Bahais that are not corrupt. Thinking otherwise is pure ignorance. Everyone is their own individual.

The Baha'is are the ones talked about in the first paragraph (above).


Another assumption. What proof indicates the Bahais are the ones talked about? It could mean anyone. It could mean the Shia, sunni, Ahmadiyya, etc. Or it could simply mean a believer who is inactive (as shown above).
But, anyone can change anything to suit themselves. That is a wide assumption to say its the Bahais. I wonder if the Ahmadiyya use the same argument?

There is a Hadith by Imam Sadiq (a.s) where he says: "If possible lead such a life that people do not recognize you." This is so because fame is an avoidable evil and salvation lies in remaining unknown. So it is obvious what is meant by:

There would be a time wherein only a sleeping (inactive) believer would be safe (such that) if he is present he is not recognised but if he is absent he is not sought after. These are the lamps of guidance and banners of night journeys. They do not spread calumnies nor divulge secrets, nor slander. They are those for whom Allah would open the doors of His mercy and keeps off from them the hardships of His chastisement.


What will happen in the future to Islam according to Imam Ali? "Islam would be capsized as a pot is capsized with all its contents." Imam Ali is telling us what is already obvious to the unbiased reader of the holy Qur'an, because Muslims (as with anyone) are no better than their forefathers with regards to repeating the mistake of not recognizing and rejecting God's Apostle.


Another assumption. You have again interpreted this to suit yourelf. What makes you believe Imam Ali(a.s) is telling us that "Muslims (as with anyone) are no better than their forefathers with regards to repeating the mistake of not recognizing and rejecting God's Apostle."

This is an assumption.

I could also make an assumption. I could say that Imam Ali(a.s) meant that Islam will become capsized, just as it is today. Islam being portrayed in a bad image. The Wahabis are "capsizing" Islam while the ones who avoid fame (the Shia) are the ones who are the inactive believers. The ones who Allah(swt) will "open the doors of His mercy and keeps off from them the hardships of His chastisement."

Anyone can make a claim to suit themselves.

Again, all one has to do is read the Qur'an and not read everything so literally,


Just like you are referring to this Hadith to make a claim, you should also use the Hadith which explains the Quran. We dont choose which verses in the Quran to make literal. The Prophet Muhammad(a.s) and the Ahlulbayt(a.s) have already explained it to us.

Imam Ali, echoing what is already said in the holy Qur'an, asserts that God has not made is easy for Muslims (or anyone else for that matter) to recognize His Manifestation: "He has not spared you from being put on trial."


Yes, he has not spared us from being put on trial. I agree on that statement because it is obvious. However, where you combine "it is not easy for anyone to recognise the Manifestation" from this statement is beyond me. Again, an assumption. And once again, i can make my own assumption.

"He has not spared you from being put on trial." Meaning that Islam being displayed as a "terrorist" religion is a test for the Muslims. Allah(swt) is testing the Muslims even when Islam is being "capsized", that is, being portrayed as evil, whether their faith will continue to be strong. Whether they will continue to have faith in God no matter how bad the Wahabis are destroying the image of Islam.

I have produced in other posts hadith from both Shi'a and Sunni sources showing with absolute clarity that there will indeed be another Revelation, with it God's Manifestation and the Laws He reveals.


Once again, an assumption. Your assuming that you have showed source with absolute clarity, yet if we analyse your sources, it proves otherwise.

1. You have provided Sunni sources which both the Shia and the Bahais obviously dismiss due to its falsehood. Hadith dismissed.

2. You have provided a so called Shia sourced named "Avalim" which no Muslim, whether Shia or Sunni, have heard about it. It just so happens that this Hadith can only be located on Bahai websites. Hadith dismissed.

3. You provide your own interpretation of the above Hadith, claiming it talks about the Bahais and a coming Manifestation. An assumption. I have also made assumptions on the meaning of the Hadith. Nowhere does it mention about a coming Manifestation, another revelation, or other laws. Therefore, Hadith dismissed.

From memory and viewing other posts, there is no Authentic Hadith which you have provided which indicates anything you have claimed. So by stating "with absolute clarity", is an assumption.

All you are indicating is that Bahais pick and choose certain Hadith to use. If you accept this Hadith, why dont you accept other Hadith from the Prophet Muhammad(a.s)? Are only some Hadith used whenever it may suit you, and others are thrown out that contradict you? This is where its confusing and illogical. Either use all the Authentic Shia Hadith or not any.

Shia do not use part of Sunni Hadith and reject other pages from the same one.

As i said, if you dont accept all the Authentic Shia Hadith, therefore you must reject all of them. Not pick and choose as you wish.

I hope the Muslim friends visiting this forum might reflect on their own hadith, and on the stories from the Qur'an, where God always tests His servants and never stops testing them!


Yes, Muslims are aware that Allah(swt) always tests His Servants. And the Muslims are also aware that the Hadith does not mention of a coming Manifestation, nor does it indicate anywhere in reference to Bahais. Allah(swt) tests us all, including Bahais, Ahmadiyya, etc

God does not make it easy; if He is offering us eternal happiness, it's going to take some work on our part—much as we'd like to think that we are right and don't need to change.


True. Allah(swt) does not make it easy.

Just as you mention that "we'd like to think that we are right and dont need to change", Allah(swt) also tests His Servants where they think they need to change when they were right.

It goes both ways. Only Allah(swt) knows.

Regards
Abbas

choogue
Posts: 0
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 4:54 am

Postby choogue » Fri Feb 02, 2007 8:22 am

Richard,

You have made some interesting claims, one where you stated that Islam has been corrupted. Could you please expand on this?

Also, you mention that the Quran has been misinterpreted. Just to clarify, are you saying that the Prophet Muhammad(a.s) and the Ahlulbayt(a.s) were unsure of the Qurans interpretation?

Regards
Abbas

Baha'i Warrior
Posts: 753
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 10:07 am
Location: U.S.A.

Postby Baha'i Warrior » Fri Feb 02, 2007 11:31 am

Abbas,

I don't know why I'm the only one who is interpreting hadith to "suit" myself as you say. Don't you think there's a small possibility that you are also doing the same?

No, Baha'is do not dismiss Sunni sources. Wherever God speaks, we listen. This post was also meant for our Sunni friends, who outnumber you quite a bit being 85% of the Muslim population. Therefore, hadith not "dismissed."

Also, hadith not "dismissed" for the one I posted. Its meaning is obvious, and it's up there for other Muslims to see as well. They can read your response and see for themselves if they think you are right, or if you are saying things to "suit your own needs."

You provide your interpretation of the above hadith and for you it is not to "suit" yourself somehow. You say:

Abbas wrote:"He has not spared you from being put on trial." Meaning that Islam being displayed as a "terrorist" religion is a test for the Muslims. Allah(swt) is testing the Muslims even when Islam is being "capsized", that is, being portrayed as evil, whether their faith will continue to be strong. Whether they will continue to have faith in God no matter how bad the Wahabis are destroying the image of Islam."


Part of the deterioration process is for Islam to be viewed not as the glorious religion it was once, but as the opposite.

You end by saying:

"It goes both ways. Only Allah(swt) knows."

God's Messengers don't tell us things to entertain themselves. If it is said, then we are able to comprehend its meaning (by opening our spiritual ears).

Irish
Posts: 57
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2006 6:43 am

3awaalim

Postby Irish » Fri Feb 02, 2007 1:33 pm

the name of the book from which Baha'u'lllah quotes is the "3awaalim". "Avalim/Awalim" is just a transliteration. The letters used in spelling it are 3ayn, waw, alif, laam, miim.

The "3awaalim" referred to Baha'u'llah is probably the "Awalimu al-Ulum Wa Al-Maarif". This is definitely a well known collection of Shia hadith. If you don't believe me, look at the website of Dar ul-Hadith. They have a list of 185 sources for Shia Hadith, which are accepted by Shia hadith scholars. No 181 is the Awalim. It was compiled by Sheikh Abu Allah al-Bahrani in the 12th Century. It consists of 100 volumes.

http://www.hadith.net/english/index.htm

Baha'i Warrior
Posts: 753
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 10:07 am
Location: U.S.A.

Postby Baha'i Warrior » Fri Feb 02, 2007 10:38 pm

Abbas:

Just a follow-up to my last post. I have presented to you many more hadith that you claim I offered. For example, this clear hadith that I cited from Imam Ali's "Sermon of the Gulf" (http://bahai-library.com/file.php5?file=imamali_khutbih_tutunjiyyih&language=) very, very, very, very, very clearly tells us to EXPECT a new REVELATION:

"Anticipate ye the Revelation of Him Who conversed with Moses from the Burning Bush on Sinai."

Imam Ali (as with the other infallible Imams) could not have been any clearer, and He makes countless references to a future revelation—and they are not obscure or hidden. You just have to look for them while you read His writings, otherwise their meanings will be lost on the reader. I guess the only way Imam Ali could have been any more clearer was if He said, "Hey, man, there will be another religion called the Baha'i Faith, so look out...man." Indeed, science would have progressed a lot faster if the Prophets just gave us all the laws and equations, and didn't let man discover these physical truths himself.

AFTER we get past this, then maybe we can discuss some proofs that the Baha'i Faith is this Revelation that's being referred to in the Qur'an/hadith.

Baha'i Warrior
Posts: 753
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 10:07 am
Location: U.S.A.

Postby Baha'i Warrior » Sat Feb 03, 2007 1:07 am

richard wrote:Even if there were a totally perfect religion in all respects, which there is not, no imperfect mortal human being could comprehend that total perfection, let alone conform their living, being, speech, and doing to that perfection.


What would make you think that God's religion for man for a certain Day and Age wouldn't be perfect? If what you merely mean by the word is that nothing is perfect compared to God, then I agree. But if that's not the case, what do you exactly mean by "perfect"? Isn't God's Word perfect? Well, His Word was the foundation of His religion, and it being founded on His Word would make the religion perfect—the religion in its pure and unadulterated form, that is. Surely close to, at, and after God's new Revelation, His old religion(s) will have many problematic members giving the creed a bad image, and what was once a flourishing and noble religion has been transformed into something low. But the single Religion founded by the Prophet in its pure form is always perfect, since it is directly from God.

richard wrote:Regardless of what name any religion gives to God, there is Only One God of All persons, places, and things in His Universe of universes.


I remind you that most of the world religions are not man's creation—they are God's creation. Of course, they have deviated away from their original form (see above), especially as time progressed and "updated" Messages were sent.

richard wrote:And further He is the Only Absolute and Totally Perfect Person in Existence. We can never expect to be as Perfect as our God. We can, with sincere hearts, minds, and souls become more and more in tune with his will, but even when we become partially perfect our "perfection" will always be relative to His Absolute Perfection. None of us will ever replace our One & Only Perfect God.


How does one "become more and more in tune with his will" if one does not have the proper guidance that will point him to what God's Will really is? Religion, Richard, was founded by God's Prophet, contains God's Word, and is a vessel through which His Will is to be discharged. If you think that sounds doctrinaire, dogmatic, dictatorial—whatever—then all you need to do is look at how the Message of Christ was spread to the majority of the world, and you will see that such an declaration is not absurd or opinionated.

richard wrote:Well Abbas, as i said above, Only our One & Only God is Absolutely Perfect, and even His higher Manifestations are not as perfect as He IS.


That is true, but we have to listen to, obey, and follow His Manifestations, since they are the only way that we will get to know our Creator. The Creator God speaks through Them. The Prophet's Words are perfect since they are God's Words.

richard wrote:There have been, and still are, many Exalted Manifested Messengers of God and they all bring truths of God but they are not God, nor even Absolutely Perfect as God. GOD IS THE GOD OF ALL, ALWAYS HAS BEEN AND ALWWAYS WILL BE. Indeed, as has been well said, there is no other God than the One & Only God of All, regardless of what any men may call Him.


I think this point is obvious to us all, and even Muslims look at Muhammad as an Agent through which God speaks to us.

richard wrote:Only God is fully aware of His Own Perfection and Can Perfectly Interpret That Perfection. It may be difficult for men to know they will BE FOREVER LESSOR THAN THEIR GOD, BUT SUCH IS THE FACT AND TRUTH Of OUR STATUS AND OUR HUMILITY TO, AND WORSHIP OF HIM WILL ALWAYS BE APPROPRIATE FOR US...


I don't think anyone here will disagree with that logic.

'Abdu'l-Baha sums it up quite perfectly on p. 40 of Foundations of World Unity:

    The greatest bounties of God in this phenomenal world are His Manifestations. This is the greatest postulate. These Manifestations are the Suns of Reality. For it is through the Manifestation that the reality becomes known and established for man. History proves to us that apart from the influence of the Manifestations, man sinks back into his animal condition, using even his intellectual power to subserve an animal purpose. Therefore there is no cessation whatsoever in the future for the appearance of the Manifestation of God, because God is infinite and His purpose cannot be limited in any way. If we ever dare to limit and circumscribe God's purpose within any bounds, then of necessity we have dared to set limitations to the omnipotence of God. The created has dared to define his Creator!

    Consequently, the perfect man ever beholds the rays of the Sun of Truth. The perfect man ever awaits and expects the coming of the effulgence of God, he ever ponders over the methods and purposes of God, knowing that of certainty the realities of the Divine are not finite, the Divine names and attributes are not finite. God's graces and bounties are without limit, and the coming of the Manifestations of God are not circumscribed by time.

choogue
Posts: 0
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 4:54 am

Postby choogue » Sat Feb 03, 2007 5:46 am

I don't know why I'm the only one who is interpreting hadith to "suit" myself as you say. Don't you think there's a small possibility that you are also doing the same?


What did i say? If you re-read my previous post, i said: "Again, an assumption. And once again, i can make my own assumption." Then i stated what i assumed it means, proving to you that anyone can make their own interpretations/assumptions!

No, Baha'is do not dismiss Sunni sources. Wherever God speaks, we listen. This post was also meant for our Sunni friends, who outnumber you quite a bit being 85% of the Muslim population. Therefore, hadith not "dismissed."


So Bahai's dont dismiss Sunni sources?? Thats quite a contradiction! Especially since Sunni's do not believe in the twelve Imams(a.s). So since you do not dismiss the Sunni sources, that means you dont believe in the twelve Imams(a.s), do not believe the Prophet was infallible, do not believe that the Imams were infallibe and the rightly guided, etc? But then the Bahai belief is opposite to this claim. Therefore the Bahais will obviously need to dismiss the Sunni Hadiths otherwise is poses a great contradiction. Unless ofcourse its all about picking and choosing, that is, when the Sunni Hadith agree with the claim, you use it and when the Shia Hadith doesnt, you ignore it.

You need to make up your mind. Do you believe in the Shia school of thought about the 12 Imams, or the Sunni school of thought which is only the 4 caliphates? You cant choose both, otherwise its picking and choosing what best suits your claims.

You then say this post is for the Sunni friends who outnumber the Shia, therefore Hadith not dismissed. What kind of claim is that? Since when does numbers mean anything? You, as a Bahai, should know that claim is nonsense, otherwise any Muslim can dismiss the Bahai faith due to numbers.

Therefore the conclusion is simple. Choose which school of thought you follow. The Sunni hadith, or the Shia Hadith? If it is the Shia Hadith, then the Hadith provided is automatically dismissed. No questions asked.

Also, hadith not "dismissed" for the one I posted. Its meaning is obvious, and it's up there for other Muslims to see as well. They can read your response and see for themselves if they think you are right, or if you are saying things to "suit your own needs."


Yes, the Hadith provided is dismissed due to a wild assumption. As explained "You provide your own interpretation of the above Hadith, claiming it talks about the Bahais and a coming Manifestation. An assumption. I have also made assumptions on the meaning of the Hadith. Nowhere does it mention about a coming Manifestation, another revelation, or other laws."

As you said, others can read the responses and determine where is mentions a new manifestation, another revelation, other laws or it is talking about the Bahais. You have made a wild assumption, and i explained that anyone can make these assumptions and therefore provided my own.

You provide your interpretation of the above hadith and for you it is not to "suit" yourself somehow.


Its funny how you add your own thoughts on my statements. As explained, i am merely making an "assumption" to explain to you that anyone can interpret it to suit themselves. Anyone reading this can easily come to this conclusion, since i balatantly stated this! Somehow how you miss it. You therefore say that i interpret the Hadith and for me, it is not to suit myself. Where did i say that it is not to suit myself? I am actually showing the opposite to what you have stated. As explained, just as how you made your own assumptions, i made mine to prove anyone can!

You end by saying:

"It goes both ways. Only Allah(swt) knows."

God's Messengers don't tell us things to entertain themselves. If it is said, then we are able to comprehend its meaning (by opening our spiritual ears).


You continue to claim spiritual ears, eyes, etc however spirituallity is different to each individual. What you believe is spirituallity totally differs to the Muslim view and vice versa. I am in total agreement when you say that God's Messengers dont tell us things to entertain themselves. I agree. What i am saying though is: we'd like to think that we are right and dont need to change", Allah(swt) also tests His Servants where they think they need to change when they were right.

Regards
Abbas

choogue
Posts: 0
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 4:54 am

Postby choogue » Sat Feb 03, 2007 5:48 am

Irish,

the name of the book from which Baha'u'lllah quotes is the "3awaalim". "Avalim/Awalim" is just a transliteration. The letters used in spelling it are 3ayn, waw, alif, laam, miim.

The "3awaalim" referred to Baha'u'llah is probably the "Awalimu al-Ulum Wa Al-Maarif". This is definitely a well known collection of Shia hadith. If you don't believe me, look at the website of Dar ul-Hadith. They have a list of 185 sources for Shia Hadith, which are accepted by Shia hadith scholars. No 181 is the Awalim. It was compiled by Sheikh Abu Allah al-Bahrani in the 12th Century. It consists of 100 volumes.

http://www.hadith.net/english/index.htm


Thats correct, probably. However anyone can see that if it is the book he is referring to then a simple reference stating - "Awalimu al-Ulum Wa Al-Maarif" - would have been great, but he simply stated "Awalim". No indication that it is the same book at all. If its the same Hadith, im sure Bahaullah would have mentioned the actual name of the book and not just shorten it.

No 181 is the Awalim


No, number 181 is Awalimu al-Ulum Wa al-Maarif. Different titles of Hadith.

Maybe you can provide where Bahaullah has stated who the author of this Hadith is? This would help to get past this issue.

Regards
Abbas

choogue
Posts: 0
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 4:54 am

Postby choogue » Sat Feb 03, 2007 5:58 am

Just a follow-up to my last post. I have presented to you many more hadith that you claim I offered. For example, this clear hadith that I cited from Imam Ali's "Sermon of the Gulf" (http://bahai-library.com/file.php5?file ... &language=) very, very, very, very, very clearly tells us to EXPECT a new REVELATION:


First of all, you really need to stop exaggerating this claim. You have so far produced:

1. Avalim - A Hadith which does not exist except in Bahai sources. X

2. A Sunni Hadith. X

3. A Shia Hadith based on your own assumptions. Explained above. X

4. Now this Hadith - The Sermon of the Gulf. Also from a Bahai source. X

Please note. When providing an "Authentic" Hadith, please provide it from a Muslim Shia source! Providing me "Hadith" from a Bahai source is totally irrelevant. Its like me providing you the following Sunni Hadith from a Muslim source:

O People, no prophet or apostle will come after me, and no new faith will be born.

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/prophet/lastsermon.html

As you have stated, Bahai's do not dimiss Sunni Hadith. What about this one?

Anyway, as i am trying to show, please do not provide a Bahai source. I am a Shia Muslim, therefore require only a Shia Muslim Source.

Now in regards to the "Sermon of the Gulf". Another clear indication that this is only a Bahai source is the translator: Khazeh Fananapazir.

Who is he? This link would explain:

http://fananapazir.tk/

Although this could be an "Authentic" Hadith, it lacks credibility since it is only located on Bahai websites and the translator is a Bahai. Therefore he would obviously be biased in his translation.

Another interesting point is that the "Sermon of the Gulf" is not located on the site which Irish has provided - http://www.hadith.net/english/index.htm - The site provided contains the Shia Hadith. If this is Authentic Hadith, one would automatically assume it would be part of this site.........

Now, i have still not been provided with an Authentic Shia Hadith and by you stating you have provided "many", is quite an exaggeration!

I guess the only way Imam Ali could have been any more clearer was if He said, "Hey, man, there will be another religion called the Baha'i Faith, so look out...man."


No. If Imam Ali(a.s) and the Prophet Muhammad(a.s) wanted to tell us that there will be another faith after Islam, they would have hinted it and NOT mention things like: Muhammad is the last of the Prophets and Messengers or something like: The Quran is the final revelation, or even: Islam has been perfected.

You claim what you show is very, very, very, very, clear. However, when the Prophet in the Hadith states that He is the final prophet and messenger, all of a sudden to you, this would be unclear or symbolic . Or i guess you would dismiss it? Either way, what is clear to the Muslims would obviously be unclear to Bahai.

Anyway, before jumping to conclusions and stating that you have showed many Hadith to verify your claim, please provide me ONE Authentic Shia Hadith from a Muslim source.

Regards
Abbas

choogue
Posts: 0
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 4:54 am

Postby choogue » Sat Feb 03, 2007 6:00 am

By the way, my responses will be delayed over the next couple of weeks, so please bear with me. Ill be heading to a place where the internet is limited, but dont worry, i will eventually respond.

Regards
Abbas

Baha'i Warrior
Posts: 753
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 10:07 am
Location: U.S.A.

Postby Baha'i Warrior » Sat Feb 03, 2007 12:07 pm

Abbas,

What you bring up about the "Sermon of the Gulf" translation is a red herring. Take this example: which translation would you prefer? An accurate one done by an atheist, or an inaccurate one by a Shi'a? I'd go with the one by the atheist, as I would not like to be misled by the Shi'a. Therefore, you have not invalidated my argument any, and what Imam Ali says is what Imam Ali says, no matter who the translator. If you don't like that translation because you don't like the person who translated it, then go find another, but my proof still stands: Imam Ali says there will be another Revelation, pure and simple.

About the Sunni hadith: you are talking to me from a Shi'a perspective, now you can learn the Baha'i persective. As a Baha'i, I do not need to choose between Shi'a or Sunni hadith. As a Baha'i, I believe in both, and there is nothing wrong with that. The Sunni and Shi'a splits occured later, and the Sunni have the hadith for Muhammad. The Shi'a have relatively little direct hadith from Muhammad. Shi'as can believe in sound Sunni hadith, and Baha'is do.

So my argument still stands, Imam Ali says in the two sources I gave you that there will be ANOTHER REVELATION. He also probably says it in other places to, but I don't need to find them since I already have two perfectly good sources already.

Irish
Posts: 57
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2006 6:43 am

Postby Irish » Sat Feb 03, 2007 12:56 pm

It is true, that Baha'u'llah does not mention who is the author (or rather the collector) of the collection of hadith called 3awaalim. He wasn't writing a phD thesis. He could have given the reference, I'm sure, but didn't need to, because the person he was writing to would have known about the book.

Let me quote from the Iqan:
In the “Aválim,” an authoritative and well-known book, it is recorded: “A Youth from Baní-Háshim shall be made manifest, Who will reveal a new Book and promulgate a new law;” then follow these words: “Most of His enemies will be the divines.” In another passage, it is related of Sádiq, son of Muhammad, that he spoke the following: “There shall appear a Youth from Baní-Háshim, Who will bid the people plight fealty unto Him. His Book will be a new Book, unto which He shall summon the people to pledge their faith. Stern is His Revelation unto the Arab. If ye hear about Him, hasten unto Him"

Baha'u'llah say "dar 3awaalim ke az ketab mashhuure" which is translated as "in the Avalim, an authoritative and well-known book". This obviously is not the whole title, because 3awaalim simply means, in Arabic "worlds", or in Persian it means "the worlds". "Awalimu al-Ulum Wa Al-Maarif" is a collection of hadith. It's Arabic title means "Worlds of Sciences". Sheikh Abu Allah al-Bahrani collected these hadith. The Dar ul-Hadith centre says the Sheikh lived in the 12th century of Islam and that the author was a contemporary of Al-Majlisi. So I guess the Sheikh must have lived in the early 1700's.

Baha'i Warrior
Posts: 753
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 10:07 am
Location: U.S.A.

Postby Baha'i Warrior » Sat Feb 03, 2007 2:35 pm

abbas wrote:Anyway, before jumping to conclusions and stating that you have showed many Hadith to verify your claim, please provide me [b]ONE Authentic Shia Hadith from a Muslim source.


I have already provided the hadith. I maintain that they are good enough, and there is no reason for me to find more hadith. I suggest you reflect on the ones already posted, and read Baha'u'llah's Books with an open-mind—that is, clear your mind of anything that will impede you from recognizing God's Words through Baha'u'llah's Writings.

abbas wrote:
I guess the only way Imam Ali could have been any more clearer was if He said, "Hey, man, there will be another religion called the Baha'i Faith, so look out...man."


No. If Imam Ali(a.s) and the Prophet Muhammad(a.s) wanted to tell us that there will be another faith after Islam, they would have hinted it and NOT mention things like: Muhammad is the last of the Prophets and Messengers or something like: The Quran is the final revelation, or even: Islam has been perfected.


Unless you consider the Baha'i interpretation, then you are left with a contradiction. Imam Ali says clearly that there will be another Revelation. Case closed. (You may deny the proof I present for your own purposes, but everyone else on this forum can see for himself what Imam Ali is saying.) True, Muhammad does say He is the seal of the Prophets (and in a hadith He claims to be the seal of the Prophets and Messengers). Baha'u'llah agrees with that, and even though I am being redundant I will say this once more: Baha'u'llah Himself addresses Muhammad as the seal of the prophets and Messengers, so you have to take into account the Baha'i explanation. Muhammad is the seal of the prophets and messengers of the PROPHETIC CYCLE, and not of new cycles. He is also not the seal of the MANIFESTATIONS OF GOD, as the Qur'an clearly alludes to the Day of Judgement where God will be presented to man VIA his MANIFESTATION. In the Sunni hadith I showed you, Muhammad clearly says this (again, I believe in both Sunni and Shi'a hadith), and there are Shi'a hadith that say the same which I have also posted. But I am only repeating what I have already stated before.

abbas wrote:You claim what you show is very, very, very, very, clear. However, when the Prophet in the Hadith states that He is the final prophet and messenger, all of a sudden to you, this would be unclear or symbolic . Or i guess you would dismiss it? Either way, what is clear to the Muslims would obviously be unclear to Bahai.


Of course, what is clear to us is unclear to many Muslims. With hadith saying that Muslims will reject and kill the Qa'im, what do you expect? If Muslims agreed with the Qa'im, then surely they would have seen His truth and not instead called the True One and "infidel."

I will say this: At least you, Abbas, are seeking out the Baha'i Faith, and that is commended, since your hadith say that even if you are PRAYING and someone says he's the Qa'im, you should STOP your prayer and go and see what if he claims is true. Imam Ali was killed because He didn't stop His prayer—that's how important prayer is! But see how much more important it is to SEEK OUT the person who claims to be the Qa'im, and if in your opinion he is the real Qa'im, then to follow him (and anyone else He appoints). You definitely are ten times more open-minded than your Shi'a brethren, but I enourage you to still keep an open mind and do away with anything (ideas, suggestions, etc.) that will impede you from finding the truth. According to the hadith, when the Qa'im appears only a handful of Muslims will recognize the Him—so I hope that you are one of those few Muslims who will recognize the Qa'im in this Day—the Day of Judgement.

Zazaban
Posts: 249
Joined: Sun Jun 18, 2006 9:16 pm
Location: Canada

Postby Zazaban » Sat Feb 03, 2007 6:15 pm

Baha'i Warrior wrote:"Hey, man, there will be another religion called the Baha'i Faith, so look out...man."

That is one of the funniest things ever :lol:
Justice and equity are twin Guardians that watch over men. From them are revealed such blessed and perspicuous words as are the cause of the well-being of the world and the protection of the nations.
~ Bahá'u'lláh

Baha'i Warrior
Posts: 753
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 10:07 am
Location: U.S.A.

Postby Baha'i Warrior » Sat Feb 03, 2007 8:52 pm

Zazaban wrote:
Baha'i Warrior wrote:"Hey, man, there will be another religion called the Baha'i Faith, so look out...man."

That is one of the funniest things ever :lol:


:badgrin:

Baha'i Warrior
Posts: 753
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 10:07 am
Location: U.S.A.

Re: Muslims—Will the Qa'im OVERTURN Islam?

Postby Baha'i Warrior » Mon Feb 05, 2007 12:10 am

golha wrote:Dear BH,
Please clarify WHO or WHAT is another Relevation and WHY?


Hi Golha,

I don't exactly get your question. Are you asking what I mean by "Revelation"? By revelation in this context is meant religion. And as to why there will be another Revelation, the answer becomes obvious when one understands the Baha'i concept of "progressive revelation." According to this Baha'i concept, God continually sends mankind Prophets/Messengers every so often to guide him back on the right path after he has deviated from it. Religion has to be "refreshed" every once in a while, and humanity needs new Teachings unique to the present age. Spiritual teachings given thousands of years ago were relevant for those times—and many of them still are—but as his capacity is increased, man needs newer and more "advanced" spiritual teachings in conjunction with the old teachings, which in every Dispensation are reaffirmed with new light thrown on them.

In truth, the greatest challenge for mankind is always to recognize God's new Messenger whenever He is sent. People (from whatever creed) become so attached to their old religion and old ways, that they want to hold onto them as long as they can until their conceived fantasy Day of Judgement occurs. But God's chosen Messengers always come from very humble backgrounds, and this is one way in which God puts humans to the test—that is, He tests whether humans will take into consideration only the Prophet's undistinguished background, or look at the spiritual proofs and teachings that He has to offer (the thing that matters). Will humans open their eyes to the ways in which God works in fulfilling prophesies (which are for the most part actualized symbolically)? Those unaware of this process are indeed kept back like their forefathers, and repeat their same mistakes—oblivious that they are doing so.

The reason God tests us in such ways is no different than the reason for the administration of a difficult exam. If one doesn't study, one will fail or get a low mark. His testers aren't going to come up to him and give him his degree upon his failing his exam. Just like the physical tests, "spiritual tests" are a good thing, and they shouldn't be looked upon as evil. They are to meant to seperate the ones who reject God, for example by stubbornly clinging to their old ways, from the ones that heed His Message from wherever it may arrive, and follow without doubt or uncertainty.

choogue
Posts: 0
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 4:54 am

Postby choogue » Mon Feb 05, 2007 4:09 am

What you bring up about the "Sermon of the Gulf" translation is a red herring. Take this example: which translation would you prefer? An accurate one done by an atheist, or an inaccurate one by a Shi'a? I'd go with the one by the atheist, as I would not like to be misled by the Shi'a. Therefore, you have not invalidated my argument any, and what Imam Ali says is what Imam Ali says, no matter who the translator. If you don't like that translation because you don't like the person who translated it, then go find another, but my proof still stands: Imam Ali says there will be another Revelation, pure and simple.


What kind of example is that??? Let me ask you, which one would you prefer? An accurate one done by an atheist or an inaccurate one done by a Bahai? What kind of example is that? Your already stating which one is the inaccurate. You say: "I'd go with the one by the atheist, as I would not like to be misled by the Shi'a." Well isnt it obvious the Shia will go with their accurate translation rather than a Bahai, so they wont be misled? Its an obvious scenario!

You again missed the point. Not only is the translation by a Bahai (which would obviously be biased) but the other important point is AGAIN it cannot be found anywhere besides a Bahai source!!

You have not provided any proof whatsoever! What a wild assumption! Look at the facts. You have provided me Hadiths which are found only on Bahai sites and you then claim thats proof?
If i start another religion saying Bahaullah predicted a prophet in 150years time and the only place where you are able to locate the sources which i get my claim is from my own site, would you believe it??
Anyone is able to see how weak your arguments and so called "proofs" are.

I have already explained to you that i am a SHIA Muslim which i obviously require proofs from a Shia Muslim source. These irrelevant "proofs" are meaningless.

About the Sunni hadith: you are talking to me from a Shi'a perspective, now you can learn the Baha'i persective. As a Baha'i, I do not need to choose between Shi'a or Sunni hadith. As a Baha'i, I believe in both, and there is nothing wrong with that. The Sunni and Shi'a splits occured later, and the Sunni have the hadith for Muhammad. The Shi'a have relatively little direct hadith from Muhammad. Shi'as can believe in sound Sunni hadith, and Baha'is do.


How can you believe in both? So do you believe that the Prophet Muhammad informed the Ummah that Abu Bakr was the successor?? Ofcourse not otherwise it contradicts your beliefs in the 12 Imams.

You again make a claim " The Shi'a have relatively little direct hadith from Muhammad". Where do you get your facts from?? Just simply more assumptions?

So all we are seeing is that you simply pick and choose what to believe in either the Sunni or the Shia Hadith. When something suits your belief, you would use it whether or not the Hadith is authentic. What contradictions!!

So my argument still stands, Imam Ali says in the two sources I gave you that there will be ANOTHER REVELATION. He also probably says it in other places to, but I don't need to find them since I already have two perfectly good sources already.


Prove they are perfectly good sources. Once again we see that you make a wild claim that they are perfectly good sources even though these Hadiths only exist within the Bahai libraries.

So, my impression is this: The Bahais are unable to provide an Authentic Hadith from a Shia source, however the evidence provided, only through the Bahai source, is sufficient. Is this what you are trying to say to me??

Abbas

choogue
Posts: 0
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 4:54 am

Postby choogue » Mon Feb 05, 2007 4:14 am

have already provided the hadith. I maintain that they are good enough, and there is no reason for me to find more hadith. I suggest you reflect on the ones already posted, and read Baha'u'llah's Books with an open-mind—that is, clear your mind of anything that will impede you from recognizing God's Words through Baha'u'llah's Writings.


What proof do you have that they are good enough? I could understand if you say "its from a Shia source", but obviously you are unable to make this claim since you have only located them in the Bahai sources. You can make an "assumption" however thats as good as your going to get. An assumption.

I have reflected on the ones already posted and we get the following:

- Two Hadith that cannot be located through Muslim sources however are somehow found through Bahai sources and are classified as authentic. :-?

- A Sunni Hadith :eek:

- The one and only Shia Hadith you provide that does not mention anything about a new religion, a prophet/messenger, bahai, etc.
:roll:

So what am i reflecting on? Hadith that doesnt exist, Hadith that is unathentic and Hadith that doesnt mention anything about a new religion. So yes, i have reflected on this but my logic requires facts with relevant sources.

I dont know how else to say this but here i go. The following message is from Bahaullah: "I am not a manifestation of God. I am not a Prophet. I am not a Messenger. There is no religion after Islam." Now, we both know that this is not really a message from Bahaullah, however if i say that this is mentioned in one of Bahaullah's books called "The Truth" (which is non-existent to the Bahais), but the only source is on my Muslim site, are you going to believe it?? Would you not ask me to provide you a Bahai source?? Now if you agree that i should provide a Bahai source, than you should also agree that you need to provide me a source which is from a Muslim Shia. Not a Bahai. A Muslim Shia.

If you cannot see how logical this is, there is obviously no other way to explain it!

Unless you consider the Baha'i interpretation, then you are left with a contradiction.


Ummmm....no. It is when you consider the Bahai interpretation that the contradiction exists.

Imam Ali says clearly that there will be another Revelation. Case closed.


Cased closed without appropriate evidence? Without evidence pointing to a Shia source? How easy it would be to imprison the innocent if your logic is placed in society and laws. No fingerprints, no DNA, no witnesses? Doesnt matter, he's guilty because that guy said he was! :roll:

(You may deny the proof I present for your own purposes, but everyone else on this forum can see for himself what Imam Ali is saying.)


And everyone else on this forum can see for themselves that you still havent provided evidence from a Shia Muslim source.

True, Muhammad does say He is the seal of the Prophets (and in a hadith He claims to be the seal of the Prophets and Messengers). Baha'u'llah agrees with that, and even though I am being redundant I will say this once more: Baha'u'llah Himself addresses Muhammad as the seal of the prophets and Messengers, so you have to take into account the Baha'i explanation.


Umm.....from memory, i believe the last time we had this discussion you were stating that the Prophet Muhammad(a.s) was the seal of the Prophets but NOT the Messengers, while i was trying to explain to you that a Messenger is always a Prophet, whilst a Prophet isnt always a Messenger. Now it seems that you have changed your mind and Bahaullah now says that the Prophet Muhammad IS the seal of the Prophets AND Messengers!

Muhammad is the seal of the prophets and messengers of the PROPHETIC CYCLE, and not of new cycles. He is also not the seal of the MANIFESTATIONS OF GOD, as the Qur'an clearly alludes to the Day of Judgement where God will be presented to man VIA his MANIFESTATION.


Ok this is new. :eek: So the Prophet Muhammad was the seal of the Prophets and Messengers of this Prophetic Cycle and not of the new cycle? So what is this new cycle?
Ok, now the Prophet Muhammad was NOT the seal of the Manifestations of God?? So during and before Muhammads(a.s) time, Manifestations of God existed?

So, going by your logic, Muhammad(a.s) was a "manifestation of God". This is interesting. Allah(swt) describes Muhammad(a.s) as a Prophet, A Messenger, A warner, etc in the Quran. He also explains that the Prophet Muhammad(a.s) is just a man. What i am interested in is, where in the Quran does Allah ever refer to the Prophet Muhammad(a.s) as a "Manifestation of God"??

In the Sunni hadith I showed you, Muhammad clearly says this (again, I believe in both Sunni and Shi'a hadith), and there are Shi'a hadith that say the same which I have also posted. But I am only repeating what I have already stated before.


Yes i am aware that somehow you believe in the Sunni AND Shia Hadith. Its quite a contradiction. Its amazing why the Shia and Sunni dont believe in each others Hadith. Your logic implies there would be no contradiction when believing in the two, but for anyone else the contradiction is quite clear. Hmmm....who killed Imam Husayn(a.s)? It differs from the Shia and Sunni Hadith, but somehow, someway, you would be able to agree on both of them no matter how different they are. Amazing i tell you! ;-)

Yes. You are repeating what you have already told me. Believe in the Hadith which does not contain a Shia source but only a Bahai source. Sorry, but i cannot read from a Hadith which is not Authentic.

Of course, what is clear to us is unclear to many Muslims. With hadith saying that Muslims will reject and kill the Qa'im, what do you expect? If Muslims agreed with the Qa'im, then surely they would have seen His truth and not instead called the True One and "infidel."


Oh ok. So you believe in the Hadith that the Muslims will kill and reject the Qa'im. Is this another "picking and choosing" game? Because the first question that strikes me is why do you not believe in the Hadith that the Prophet Muhammad(a.s) explained the symbolic and literal verses of the Quran? Is that when you would say the Hadith is not accepted?

Oh wait. The Muslims will kill and reject the Qa'im. Hmmm....can i "assume" this is symbolic? So many times you have interpreted the Quran and Hadith symbolic and literal when it best suited you and denied what the Hadith say. Am i able to do it with this Hadith now? When the Hadith mentions that The Mahdi will reappear and bring Peace and Justice to this world during his lifetime, will it be interpreted as symbolic to you?

One thing you seem to forget is that the Bahai faith is not the only religion that has claimed the Mahdi has returned. This is why the Prophet Muhammad(a.s) warned us that: In my Ummah, 30 liars will be born. Each will claim Prophethood and claim to be a Prophet, even though I am the last Prophet and there shall be no Prophet after me.
The Prophet Muhammad(a.s) taught us the prophecies that the Imam Mahdi(a.s) and Prophet Isa(a.s) will fulfill so we are able to differentiate between the liars and The Truth.

You definitely are ten times more open-minded than your Shi'a brethren, but I enourage you to still keep an open mind and do away with anything (ideas, suggestions, etc.) that will impede you from finding the truth. According to the hadith, when the Qa'im appears only a handful of Muslims will recognize the Him—so I hope that you are one of those few Muslims who will recognize the Qa'im in this Day—the Day of Judgement.


Trust me, i now know many Shia brothers and sisters who are looking into this claim of the Mahdi and other claims of the Mahdi. You would be surprised how many Shia's actually research about these.

Regards
Abbas

Baha'i Warrior
Posts: 753
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 10:07 am
Location: U.S.A.

Postby Baha'i Warrior » Mon Feb 05, 2007 11:41 am

abbas wrote:So, my impression is this: The Bahais are unable to provide an Authentic Hadith from a Shia source, however the evidence provided, only through the Bahai source, is sufficient. Is this what you are trying to say to me??


We are done here Abbas. The discussion has become fruitless, as anyone with insight reading these exchanges can see. You are trying to find flaws with every single hadith I show you because they challenge your beliefs, and you apparently cannot handle that. Of course, if I showed you hadith that you agree with and back up your position, then you would not have raised one objection whatsoever.

In your other posts, you also say false things like I don't know the distinction between Prophets and Messengers (when I in fact raised the issue of their distinction). It would be a waste of everyone's time if I continued on this road which isn't going anywhere. I think you have more than enough to decide on Abbas. Good luck.

Baha'i Warrior
Posts: 753
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 10:07 am
Location: U.S.A.

Postby Baha'i Warrior » Mon Feb 05, 2007 10:12 pm

Golha:

I believe the Qa'im was the Bab because of the reasons already stated and because I hear the Voice of God in His Words. The Bab fulfills the prophesies contained in the Muslim and Christian scriptures and those of other faiths as well. Humans in general don't like change and possess a deep (and sometimes incurable) affection for opposition, but once a person passes this barrier, he finds the Truth. The opposition to the Baha'i Faith witnessed on this forum is no different than that witnessed at the dawn of every new Dispensation, such as Islam and Christianity. In fact, in Islam the religion had to be spread mostly by the sword, so...

Zazaban
Posts: 249
Joined: Sun Jun 18, 2006 9:16 pm
Location: Canada

Postby Zazaban » Tue Feb 06, 2007 12:01 am

I have been watching this disscussion, and some of the exchanges have been bordering on attacks. Not really sure what to call it really. Please try to be respectful of people's belief systems, however they justify it. Accusing somebody of picking and chosing does not strike me as respectful. Bt that's just me.
Justice and equity are twin Guardians that watch over men. From them are revealed such blessed and perspicuous words as are the cause of the well-being of the world and the protection of the nations.

~ Bahá'u'lláh

Baha'i Warrior
Posts: 753
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 10:07 am
Location: U.S.A.

Postby Baha'i Warrior » Tue Feb 06, 2007 2:17 am

Zazaban wrote:I have been watching this disscussion, and some of the exchanges have been bordering on attacks. Not really sure what to call it really. Please try to be respectful of people's belief systems, however they justify it. Accusing somebody of picking and chosing does not strike me as respectful. Bt that's just me.


Right Zazaban. I think it's my fault for continuing a discussion that after a few exchanges was obviously not going anywhere. I'm not against debates, I'm just against these kinds of ones, but that's all I want to say about this issue.

Richard, you say:

Indeed, BW, you too show such resistance, and that is fine, we all need time to decide for ourselves without being pressured by others...


What is this "resistance" you are talking about? If you mean I am resisting looking at God and religion the way you do, then you are more than correct. I reject the idea of subordinating at all the noble status of true religion, and of denying the evident fact that God sends Messengers to us in order that we heed their Message (and follow their holy Command). Indeed, if I didn't want to be "constrained" by God's Laws and wanted instead to live life however I wanted to—while still professing a belief in God and thinking I'd be "saved" because of it—then that'd be a very attractive alternative to religion, and I'd jump for it. I could reject religion (and give all the cliched reasons, i.e. people kill in the name of religion), feel good, "love" God, and life would be much more easy...or would it? Is that what God wants? I don't think so. Call that "resistant," but resistance isn't necessarily always a bad thing. If it were, then our bodies would not produce antibodies to resist infection.

You also say:

Surely “Truth” Cannot Be Forced and Remain Truth, and I hope you will consider some thoughts on this most important spiritual matter of truth and goodness in the new topic of that title, but please don’t feel any pressure from me to do so.


Yes, this is what the Baha'i Faith teaches. Don't know exactly how it's relevant. I didn't give the example of Islam spreading through violence to encourge violence, Richard, in case I gave you the wrong impression. Indeed, the Baha'is are the most peaceful world religion. The Baha'i Faith is the only world religion whose members haven't and don't kill in the name of their religion. This fact is as plain as day; it is indeed the most peaceful religion—not my bias, just look it up.

Baha'i Warrior
Posts: 753
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 10:07 am
Location: U.S.A.

Postby Baha'i Warrior » Wed Feb 07, 2007 12:20 am

golha wrote:Dear BW,
I asked you to tell me where(in which of His books and writings) the Bab claimed to be the Qa'im, but you just suggest "your" belief and interpretation.I am not going to believe in you.So, again I insist you to quote the exact writings of the Bab that show His claim to be the Qa'im.
Thank you.
golha


    O PEOPLES of the earth! By the righteousness of God, this Book hath, through the potency of the sovereign Truth, pervaded the earth and the heaven with the mighty Word of God concerning Him Who is the supreme Testimony, the Expected Qá'im, and verily God hath knowledge of all things. This divinely-inspired Book hath firmly established His Proof for all those who are in the East and in the West, hence beware lest ye utter aught but the truth regarding God, for I swear by your Lord that this supreme Proof of Mine beareth witness unto all things...

    (Source: Selections from the Writings of the Báb, pp. 59–60)

    Consider with due attention, for the path is very strait, even while it is more spacious than the heavens and the earth and what is between them. For instance, if all those who were expecting the fulfilment of the promise of Jesus had been assured of the manifestation of Muhammad, the Apostle of God, not one would have turned aside from the sayings of Jesus. So likewise in the Revelation of the Point of the Bayán, if all should be assured that this is that same Promised Mihdi [One Who is guided] whom the Apostle of God foretold, not one of the believers in the Qur'án would turn aside from the sayings of the Apostle of God. So likewise in the Revelation of Him Whom God shall make manifest, behold the same thing; for should all be assured that He is that same `He Whom God shall make manifest' whom the Point of the Bayán hath foretold, not one would turn aside.

    (pp. 110–11)

    He Who hath revealed the Qur'án unto Muhammad, the Apostle of God, ordaining in the Faith of Islam that which was pleasing unto Him, hath likewise revealed the Bayán, in the manner ye have been promised, unto Him Who is your Qá'im, your Guide, your Mihdi, your Lord, Him Whom ye acclaim as the manifestation of God's most excellent titles. Verily the equivalent of that which God revealed unto Muhammad during twenty-three years, hath been revealed unto Me within the space of two days and two nights. However, as ordained by God, no distinction is to be drawn between the two. He, in truth, hath power over all things.

    (p. 139)

    THE divine Revelation associated with the advent of Him Who is your promised Mihdi hath proved far more wondrous than the Revelation wherewith Muhammad, the Apostle of God, was invested. Would that ye might ponder.

    (p. 146)

choogue
Posts: 0
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 4:54 am

Postby choogue » Wed Feb 07, 2007 1:54 am

You are trying to find flaws with every single hadith I show you because they challenge your beliefs, and you apparently cannot handle that.


No BW. Im not trying to find flaws, you are providing me with flawed information.

All i have simply asked is for you to provide ONE Shia Hadith from a Muslim source but you cant. You continue claiming that the Hadith provided is enough, however i have given you an appropriate reason why it is not. The Hadith is non-existent with the Muslims. You claim it is a "well known" Shia Hadith. If it is well known it should be very easy to find, but as anyone can see, the source is only from the Bahai sites. It lacks credibility yet you seem to deny it.

Everyone here should know the Shaykhi sect. The sect came from Shia Islam and Babism basically developed from Shaykhism. They are our "covenant breakers" and the Hadith you provide come from them. This is not Shia Islam. We do not classify them as Shia Muslims. They ignored the teachings of the Prophet Muhammad(a.s) and developed their own Hadith. As Moojan Momen wrote: "It was the Shaykhi teachings which paved the way for the Bab and it is doubtful if the Bab would have attracted so many adherents if it had not been for Shaykhi doctrines."

Anyway my point. The so called "SHIA HADITH" you provided "Sermon of the Gulf" also known as "khutbih tutunjiyyih" was authored by Hafez Rajab Barsi who is a famous Shaykhi.

So as you can see, there is no Shia Hadith that you have provided. A Shaykhi and Sunni Hadith is irrelevant. So BW, this is why you or no other Bahai can trace this Hadith in the Shia Books. It doesnt exist.

So "every single Hadith" you have showed is "covenant breaker" material. I can handle anything that is thrown at me. But you throw at me Hadith which is non-Muslim and obviously fabricated.

You can easily prove me and the readers wrong by simply showing me a non-Bahai and a non-covenant breaker Hadith which reflects what you claim. But you "apparently cannot handle that"

Of course, if I showed you hadith that you agree with and back up your position, then you would not have raised one objection whatsoever.


No. I ONLY want authentic Hadith. Even if you show me Hadith that prove the faith wrong, i still expect a Hadith that comes from a Shia Muslim site. Simple. :smile:

I think you have more than enough to decide on Abbas. Good luck.


Yep. More than enough fabricated Hadith. ;-) But hey if you deny that it is fabricated, it would be very easy to find it from a Shia source. :lol:

It would be a waste of everyone's time if I continued on this road which isn't going anywhere.,


Cant agree with you more. If you cant provide an authentic source, it is pointless. Thanks for trying anyway. :D

Regards
Abbas

choogue
Posts: 0
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 4:54 am

Postby choogue » Wed Feb 07, 2007 1:58 am

I have been watching this disscussion, and some of the exchanges have been bordering on attacks. Not really sure what to call it really. Please try to be respectful of people's belief systems, however they justify it. Accusing somebody of picking and chosing does not strike me as respectful. Bt that's just me.


Accusing someone of picking and choosing is fine if there are facts to prove this accusation. For example, picking and choosing from one school of thought and denying the rest of the Hadith from that same school of thought! :roll:

If thats not picking and choosing, then what is?

But anyway, like you said, its just you. ;-)

BW, you say:
In fact, in Islam the religion had to be spread mostly by the sword, so...


Care to provide some facts or just making assumptions based on heresay again? Isnt that what the pope said?

Here is a non-biased documentary created by non-muslims which proves otherwise:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wyNeULY4E1I Part 1

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iwj_AdF0iUk&mode=related&search= Part 2

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ALqvgHqH0iY&mode=related&search= Part 3

There is no compulsion in Islam, therefore it was not spread by the sword. :roll:

BW, you also say:

The opposition to the Baha'i Faith witnessed on this forum is no different than that witnessed at the dawn of every new Dispensation, such as Islam and Christianity.


And it is no different to the opposition of the other "Mahdi religions".

Opposition to a new faith is no indication whatsoever that it is the Truth. (just incase thats what your implying). It wouldnt surprise me if the other "Mahdi religions" state this.
We all know the reason why i am currently opposed........and for the readers that do not know, read the posts - Im waiting for an Authentic Shia Hadith ;-)

Regards
Abbas

Baha'i Warrior
Posts: 753
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 10:07 am
Location: U.S.A.

Postby Baha'i Warrior » Wed Feb 07, 2007 2:49 am

abbas wrote:All i have simply asked is for you to provide ONE Shia Hadith from a Muslim source but you cant.


That's your opinion. (See paragraph number five.)

abbas wrote:You continue claiming that the Hadith provided is enough, however i have given you an appropriate reason why it is not.


Again, according to you.

abbas wrote:The Hadith is non-existent with the Muslims. You claim it is a "well known" Shia Hadith. If it is well known it should be very easy to find, but as anyone can see, the source is only from the Bahai sites. It lacks credibility yet you seem to deny it.


The sermons of Imam Ali are easy to find, especially on the net, as are the other hadith I have shown you. If you don't agree, great.

abbas wrote:Everyone here should know the Shaykhi sect. The sect came from Shia Islam and Babism basically developed from Shaykhism. They are our "covenant breakers" and the Hadith you provide come from them. This is not Shia Islam. We do not classify them as Shia Muslims. They ignored the teachings of the Prophet Muhammad(a.s) and developed their own Hadith. As Moojan Momen wrote: "It was the Shaykhi teachings which paved the way for the Bab and it is doubtful if the Bab would have attracted so many adherents if it had not been for Shaykhi doctrines."


Okay, then continue being a Shi'a. But now you know about the Baha'i Faith, and the Baha'i claim. And whatever you decide is between you and God. God has led you here, and you can only look at this situation in one way: He is testing you to see if you are a "strong" Muslim. Of course, your idea and my idea of a "strong" Muslim obviously differ.

abbas wrote:Anyway my point. The so called "SHIA HADITH" you provided "Sermon of the Gulf" also known as "khutbih tutunjiyyih" was authored by Hafez Rajab Barsi who is a famous Shaykhi.


You are mistaken, Abbas. Shaykh Ahmad founded Shaykhism in the early 19th century. Rajab Bursi, on the other hand, died in 1411 (source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rajab_Bursi. Thus it'd be kind of hard for Bursi to be a Shaykhi, and famous at that. ;-)

I quote from Wikipedia:

    Rajab al-Hafiz al-Bursi (d 1411) an Arab Shi'ite theologian and mystic.

    Rajab al-Hafiz al-Bursi was born in contemporary Iraq, near Hilla, and moved to the Iranian province of Khurasan to escape accusations of heresy. Some sources indicate that he might have been murdered by the Timurids during the Shia persecutions.

    His main work is the Mashariq al-anwar al-yaqin fi asrar amir al-muminin (The Orients of the Lights of Certainty concerning the Arcana of the Commander of the Faithful), a work of High Imamology commenting on the apocryphal theopathic sayings attributed to Ali - viz. the Sermon Between the Two Gulfs (khutba tantanjiyya) and the Sermon of the Elucidation (khutbatu'l-bayan) - from the metaphysical perspective of the school of Ibn Arabi.

abbas wrote:So as you can see, there is no Shia Hadith that you have provided. A Shaykhi and Sunni Hadith is irrelevant. So BW, this is why you or no other Bahai can trace this Hadith in the Shia Books. It doesnt exist.


So you see, I did provide perfectly good Shi'a hadith, you're just trying to deny them, even by giving false information!

abbas wrote:So "every single Hadith" you have showed is "covenant breaker" material. I can handle anything that is thrown at me. But you throw at me Hadith which is non-Muslim and obviously fabricated.


lol, so every hadith I have shown you is written by Shaykh Ahmad's followers (or even better, maybe "agents of Israel"). Abbas: I'd be careful not to call His Holiness Muhammad and Imam Ali, the Commander of the Faithful, covenant breakers...I don't believe they are!

abbas wrote:You can easily prove me and the readers wrong by simply showing me a non-Bahai and a non-covenant breaker Hadith which reflects what you claim. But you "apparently cannot handle that"


I have already "proven you wrong" in this post, but that wasn't my intention. (Of course I felt an obligation to defend Muhammad and His Guardian.) States Baha'u'llah:

"O SON OF DUST! Verily I say unto thee: Of all men the most negligent is he that disputeth idly and seeketh to advance himself over his brother. Say, O brethren! Let deeds, not words, be your adorning."

abbas wrote:Yep. More than enough fabricated Hadith. ;-) But hey if you deny that it is fabricated, it would be very easy to find it from a Shia source. :lol:


Don't be too confident there, Abbas. I think it has already been clearly established who has been "fabricating" things here.

abbas wrote:
It would be a waste of everyone's time if I continued on this road which isn't going anywhere.,


Cant agree with you more. If you cant provide an authentic source, it is pointless. Thanks for trying anyway. :D


Well, even though I am not fond of your style, I still hope that God will guide you on the right path, or guide you wherever you want to go. It always adds flavor to the forum, I think, to have a Baha'i/Muslim debate. 8-)

Take care and good luck,

BW

P.S.

You say:

There is no compulsion in Islam, therefore it was not spread by the sword. :roll:


Hmm...

    623 - Battle of Waddan 623 - Battle of Safwan 623 - Battle of Dul-Ashir 624 - Muhammad and converts begin raids on caravans to fund the movement. 624 - Zakat becomes mandatory 624 - Battle of Badr
    624 - Battle of Bani Salim 624 - Battle of Eid-ul-Fitr and Zakat-ul-Fitr
    624 - Battle of Bani Qainuqa 624 - Battle of Sawiq 624 - Battle of Ghatfan
    624 - Battle of Bahran 625 - Battle of Uhud. 70 Muslims are killed.
    625 - Battle of Humra-ul-Asad 625 - Battle of Banu Nudair 625 - Battle of Dhatur-Riqa 626 - Battle of Badru-Ukhra 626 - Battle of Dumatul-Jandal
    626 - Battle of Banu Mustalaq Nikah 627 - Battle of the Trench 627 - Battle of Ahzab 627 - Battle of Bani Quraiza 627 - Battle of Bani Lahyan
    627 - Battle of Ghaiba 627 - Battle of Khaibar 628 - Muhammad signs treaty with Quraish. 630 - Muhammad conquers Mecca. 630 - Battle of Hunsin. 630 - Battle of Tabuk 632 - Muhammad dies. 632 - Abu-Bakr, Muhammads father-in-law, along with Umar, begin a military move to enforce Islam in Arabia. 633 - Battle at Oman 633 - Battle at Hadramaut.
    633 - Battle of Kazima 633 - Battle of Walaja 633 - Battle of Ulleis
    633 - Battle of Anbar 634 - Battle of Basra, 634 - Battle of Damascus
    634 - Battle of Ajnadin. 634 - Death of Hadrat Abu Bakr. Hadrat Umar Farooq becomes the Caliph. 634 - Battle of Namaraq 634 - Battle of Saqatia. 635 - Battle of Bridge. 635 - Battle of Buwaib. 635 - Conquest of Damascus. 635 - Battle of Fahl. 636 - Battle of Yermuk. 636 - Battle of Qadsiyia. 636 - Conquest of Madain. 637 - Battle of Jalula.
    638 - Battle of Yarmouk. 638 - The Muslims defeat the Romans and enter Jerusalem. 638 - Conquest of Jazirah. 639 - Conquest of Khuizistan and movement into Egypt. 641 - Battle of Nihawand 642 - Battle of Ray in Persia 643 - Conquest of Azarbaijan 644 - Conquest of Fars
    644 - Conquest of Kharan. 644 - Umar is murdered. Othman becomes the Caliph. 647 - Conquest of the island of Cypress 644 - Uman dies and is succeeded by Caliph Uthman. 648 - Campaign against the Byzantines.
    651 - Naval battle against the Byzantines. 654 - Islam spreads into North Africa 656 - Uthman is murdered. Ali become Caliph. 658 - Battle of Nahrawan. 659 - Conquest of Egypt 661 - Ali is murdered. 662 - Egypt falls to Islam rule. 666 - Sicily is attacked by Muslims 677 - Siege of Constantinople 687 - Battle of Kufa 691 - Battle of Deir ul Jaliq 700 - Sufism takes root as a sect of Islam 700 - Military campaigns in North Africa 702 - Battle of Deir ul Jamira 711 - Muslims invade Gibraltar 711 - Conquest of Spain 713 - Conquest of Multan 716 - Invasion of Constantinople 732 - Battle of Tours in France. 740 - Battle of the Nobles.
    741 - Battle of Bagdoura in North Africa 744 - Battle of Ain al Jurr. 746 - Battle of Rupar Thutha 748 - Battle of Rayy. 749 - Battle of lsfahan
    749 - Battle of Nihawand 750 - Battle of Zab 772 - Battle of Janbi in North Africa 777 - Battle of Saragossa in Spain

choogue
Posts: 0
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 4:54 am

Postby choogue » Wed Feb 07, 2007 4:03 am

That's your opinion. (See paragraph number five.)


I said one SHIA Hadith. (See below)

Again, according to you.


According to anyone who requires proof from a SHIA source.

The sermons of Imam Ali are easy to find, especially on the net, as are the other hadith I have shown you. If you don't agree, great.


I know the sermons of Imam Ali are easy to find! Very easy actually. However, for some "unknown" reason, the Sermon of the Gulf is VERY HARD to find! I have searched and i cant find it except via Bahai sources. Now, since you claim it is EASY to find, please provide the link from a Shia website.

Okay, then continue being a Shi'a. But now you know about the Baha'i Faith, and the Baha'i claim. And whatever you decide is between you and God. God has led you here, and you can only look at this situation in one way: He is testing you to see if you are a "strong" Muslim. Of course, your idea and my idea of a "strong" Muslim obviously differ.


Thats right. He is testing me to see if im a strong Muslim. No argument there. ;-)

You are mistaken, Abbas. Shaykh Ahmad founded Shaykhism in the early 19th century. Rajab Bursi, on the other hand, died in 1411 (source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rajab_Bursi. Thus it'd be kind of hard for Bursi to be a Shaykhi, and famous at that.


So let me see. Juan Cole calls himself a Bahai, yet the UHJ have classed him as a covenant breaker, which im sure you would agree to that. So is he a Bahai? Is Rajab Bursi a Shia? Im sure Covenant Breakers still call themselves Bahai, just like im sure Rajab Bursi and the Shaykhi school of though classed themselves as Shia.

Now, look at what you quoted from Wiki:

His main work is the Mashariq al-anwar al-yaqin fi asrar amir al-muminin (The Orients of the Lights of Certainty concerning the Arcana of the Commander of the Faithful), a work of High Imamology commenting on the apocryphal theopathic sayings attributed to Ali - viz. the Sermon Between the Two Gulfs (khutba tantanjiyya) and the Sermon of the Elucidation (khutbatu'l-bayan) - from the metaphysical perspective of the school of Ibn Arabi.


Notice how he follows the perspective of the "school of Ibn Arabi".
Who is Ibn Arabi and the Shaykhi sect?? They are "mystical shias". They are all part of the Sufi's. They claim to be Shia, just how Bahai's who dont believe in the UHJ claim to be Bahai, just how Bahai's who dont believe in Shoghi claim to be Bahai, etc

Do a search on Ibn Arabi and you will see he was a Sufi. Rajab Bursi followed the school of thought of Ibn Arabi. Rajab is therefore not a Shia but a mystic sufi, a Shaykhi who claims to be a Shia.

These "mystical shia" are our "covenant breakers". They do not follow the Authentic Shia Hadith. They have made up their own because they had a dream

Ibn Arabi: http://www.answers.com/topic/ibn-al-arabi-muhyi-ad-din-muhammad-bin-ali-al-hatimi-at-tai

So you provide me Hadith from this guy and you call it Shia Hadith?? :roll:

So you see, I did provide perfectly good Shi'a hadith, you're just trying to deny them, even by giving false information!


So as you can see, this is not a Shia Hadith and certainly not a perfect one! :lol:

False information?? You typed Rajab Bursi in google and selected the first link which was from Wikipedia of all places!! :lol: I never provide false information. Its funny how you quickly searched Rajab Bursi but for some reason you wont search to find the fabricated hadith to prove to me once and for all that it is a "WELL KNOWN" Shia Hadith!

lol, so every hadith I have shown you is written by Shaykh Ahmad's followers (or even better, maybe "agents of Israel"). Abbas: I'd be careful not to call His Holiness Muhammad and Imam Ali, the Commander of the Faithful, covenant breakers...I don't believe they are!


WHOA!! Lets once again examine your Hadith:
One sunni Hadith. :roll: Two Fabricated hadith which cannot be located on Muslim Shia websites which you have confirmed by not being able to locate them except via Bahai sites. :roll: One Shia Hadith which didnt mention anything about a new revelation, new laws, new prophet, etc. :roll:

Hmmm.....this is your so called proof??
This is VERY, VERY easy to prove that the Hadith provided are WELL KNOWN Shia Hadith. Please provide me a link to a Muslim Shia Website which contains this Hadith. If they are WELL KNOWN, you should have no problem finding them.

But as i have shown, the author of these "well known" Hadiths follows the mystic sufi's which was started by Ibn Arabi. These beliefs then started to become known to the Shaykhi.

I have already "proven you wrong" in this post, but that wasn't my intention. (Of course I felt an obligation to defend Muhammad and His Guardian.)


:lol: How have you "proven me wrong"???? Im still waiting for ONE shia hadith from a SHIA source. Not a Sufi, mystics, etc. As i said, that should be simple since you claim they are "well known" Shia Hadith.

Don't be too confident there, Abbas. I think it has already been clearly established who has been "fabricating" things here.


Sure has! ;-) Im glad you finally understand that these mystics - Sufi, Shaykhi - are not Muslim Shia. Just as how you understand the covenant breakers are not Bahai. 8-)

Well, even though I am not fond of your style, I still hope that God will guide you on the right path, or guide you wherever you want to go. It always adds flavor to the forum, I think, to have a Baha'i/Muslim debate


Oh yeh! Couldnt agree more. A Muslim/Bahai debate always adds flavour.

Regards
Abbas

choogue
Posts: 0
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 4:54 am

Postby choogue » Wed Feb 07, 2007 4:09 am

Hmm...


623 - Battle of Waddan 623 - Battle of Safwan 623 - Battle of Dul-Ashir 624 - Muhammad and converts begin raids on caravans to fund the movement. 624 - Zakat becomes mandatory 624 - Battle of Badr
624 - Battle of Bani Salim 624 - Battle of Eid-ul-Fitr and Zakat-ul-Fitr
624 - Battle of Bani Qainuqa 624 - Battle of Sawiq 624 - Battle of Ghatfan
624 - Battle of Bahran 625 - Battle of Uhud. 70 Muslims are killed.
625 - Battle of Humra-ul-Asad 625 - Battle of Banu Nudair 625 - Battle of Dhatur-Riqa 626 - Battle of Badru-Ukhra 626 - Battle of Dumatul-Jandal
626 - Battle of Banu Mustalaq Nikah 627 - Battle of the Trench 627 - Battle of Ahzab 627 - Battle of Bani Quraiza 627 - Battle of Bani Lahyan
627 - Battle of Ghaiba 627 - Battle of Khaibar 628 - Muhammad signs treaty with Quraish. 630 - Muhammad conquers Mecca. 630 - Battle of Hunsin. 630 - Battle of Tabuk 632 - Muhammad dies. 632 - Abu-Bakr, Muhammads father-in-law, along with Umar, begin a military move to enforce Islam in Arabia. 633 - Battle at Oman 633 - Battle at Hadramaut.
633 - Battle of Kazima 633 - Battle of Walaja 633 - Battle of Ulleis
633 - Battle of Anbar 634 - Battle of Basra, 634 - Battle of Damascus
634 - Battle of Ajnadin. 634 - Death of Hadrat Abu Bakr. Hadrat Umar Farooq becomes the Caliph. 634 - Battle of Namaraq 634 - Battle of Saqatia. 635 - Battle of Bridge. 635 - Battle of Buwaib. 635 - Conquest of Damascus. 635 - Battle of Fahl. 636 - Battle of Yermuk. 636 - Battle of Qadsiyia. 636 - Conquest of Madain. 637 - Battle of Jalula.
638 - Battle of Yarmouk. 638 - The Muslims defeat the Romans and enter Jerusalem. 638 - Conquest of Jazirah. 639 - Conquest of Khuizistan and movement into Egypt. 641 - Battle of Nihawand 642 - Battle of Ray in Persia 643 - Conquest of Azarbaijan 644 - Conquest of Fars
644 - Conquest of Kharan. 644 - Umar is murdered. Othman becomes the Caliph. 647 - Conquest of the island of Cypress 644 - Uman dies and is succeeded by Caliph Uthman. 648 - Campaign against the Byzantines.
651 - Naval battle against the Byzantines. 654 - Islam spreads into North Africa 656 - Uthman is murdered. Ali become Caliph. 658 - Battle of Nahrawan. 659 - Conquest of Egypt 661 - Ali is murdered. 662 - Egypt falls to Islam rule. 666 - Sicily is attacked by Muslims 677 - Siege of Constantinople 687 - Battle of Kufa 691 - Battle of Deir ul Jaliq 700 - Sufism takes root as a sect of Islam 700 - Military campaigns in North Africa 702 - Battle of Deir ul Jamira 711 - Muslims invade Gibraltar 711 - Conquest of Spain 713 - Conquest of Multan 716 - Invasion of Constantinople 732 - Battle of Tours in France. 740 - Battle of the Nobles.
741 - Battle of Bagdoura in North Africa 744 - Battle of Ain al Jurr. 746 - Battle of Rupar Thutha 748 - Battle of Rayy. 749 - Battle of lsfahan
749 - Battle of Nihawand 750 - Battle of Zab 772 - Battle of Janbi in North Africa 777 - Battle of Saragossa in Spain



HAHAHHAHAHA!!......So i guess you totally ignored an unbiased view(documentary provided) and decided to find something that was biased??? :lol:

Would you like me to also find a biased view about Bahaullah?? ;-)

Please, its obvious what your doing! Give me a bit more credit than that. haha 8-)

Again, we see how you have the time to search for an anti-islamic view BUT for some reason, you havent the time to search for the "AUTHENTIC" Shia Hadith which you claim is "WELL KNOWN".

Regards
Abbas

choogue
Posts: 0
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 4:54 am

Postby choogue » Wed Feb 07, 2007 4:35 am

Oh by the way. An interesting link from the Bahai library:

http://bahai-library.com/index.php5?file=lawson_quran_commentary_bab.html&chapter=2

As mentioned, some of the immediate influences on the Bab come from the Shaykhí synthesis of several different types of Islamicate theosophical expression. There were possibly other factors which contributed to the representations found in this tafsír, after all Shíráz has been a major centre of Sufi activity for centuries. In addition, the Shaykhí school derived a good deal of its symbology and terminology from the great masters Ibn Sina, Suhrawardi, Ibn `Arabí and Mullá Sadrá. Shaykhism also shows traces of less well-known figures such as Ibn Abí Jumhur and Rajab Bursí. Elements of Ismá`ilí thought will also be identified.

So i guess the Shaykhis used Rajab Bursi's ideas, who followed Ibn Arabi who was a mystic sufi. hmmm.....authentic Shia Hadith? i think not. ;-)

From Allamah Majlisi: "I do not rely upon those traditions which are reported only through him in his books as his books contain such items which are falsely narrated.

Shaykh Hurre Amili has reported in his book Wasaelush Shiah that, "The books of Rajab Bursi contain items which are beyond the limits and on many occasions it is seen that he is prone to exaggeration."

Allamah Majlisi and Shaykh Hurre Amili are reliable narrators of Shia traditions (their authenticity is beyond question) who have condemned Rajab and do not consider him to be reliable.

Also, Rajab's Khutbah appears only in his book and in no other reliable Shiah books. So Shiahs do not accept this Khutbah.

Rajab's hadith are not authentic. "Case closed".

Abbas

Zazaban
Posts: 249
Joined: Sun Jun 18, 2006 9:16 pm
Location: Canada

Postby Zazaban » Wed Feb 07, 2007 3:21 pm

Okay, this is not a place for accusing people of fabricating anything or getting into arguments about who is what. I also don't think an article critical to Baha'u'llah would be taken very well either. I am locking this untill further notice.
Justice and equity are twin Guardians that watch over men. From them are revealed such blessed and perspicuous words as are the cause of the well-being of the world and the protection of the nations.

~ Bahá'u'lláh

Jonah
Site Admin
Posts: 412
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2003 1:25 pm
Location: St Catharines, Ontario (near Niagara Falls)
Contact:

Postby Jonah » Wed Feb 07, 2007 5:47 pm

Juan Cole calls himself a Bahai, yet the UHJ have classed him as a covenant breaker

For the record, Juan Cole was not declared a Covenant Breaker. He withdrew from the Baha'i Faith voluntarily. If anyone doubts this, I suggest they write to the US NSA to inquire.

Thanks for locking this thread, Zazaban, I agree with your decision.

-Jonah


Return to “Discussion”