/lit/ - Literature

>>19831568
This verse is also something *we* are saying because this is a chapter of imploring Allah سبحانه وتعالى and when you implore someone of grandeur you start by praising and recognizing them appropriately (a model to take for other supplications to Allah) and this opening recognition continues here . We beseech Allah, invoking His Mercy. In English while the term the Almighty is common for God, in the Quran He is often called the All-Merciful.

36:11
>Thou only warnest him who follows the Remembrance and who fears the All-merciful in the Unseen; so give him the good tidings of forgiveness and a generous wage.

36:23
>What, shall I take, apart from Him, gods whose intercession, if the All-merciful desires affliction for me, shall not avail me anything, and who will never deliver me?

Translation by Arberry

Allah’s mercy is allencompassing like His power and knowledge and in fact the link between Allah and His creation is His Mercy, this if the factor that makes the butterfly flap his wings and the rain drop fall.

Hello, brother. Is he takfirable?

>>19831568
Where can I find a legitimate physical English version of this book?

>>19831682
Most mosques have Sahih International translations they will give you for free, though not as elegant as Arberry it’s nice and clear. I’d avoid the Clear Quran translation though

>>19831568
>deep meaning
subjective

>>19831568
>to listening to music
music is prohibited within Islam ???
I was indeed trying to cut almost every single piece of media that I could see corruption in it.
Including the internet, this place and many others.

>>19831830
No, not at all. If you care to look in the thread you will see the understanding is based on exegesis given by the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم himself and Allah عز وجل as well as the linguistics

>>19831833
Under most circumstances it is. There is some leniency for celebrating religious holidays, weddings and after battlefield victories. Sung poetry is mostly allowed as well

>>19831836
>exegesis given by the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم himself and Allah عز وجل as well as the linguistics
And do you claim that is objectively deep?

>>19831968
Yes especially for so few words. Did you read the explanation of 1:1? Do you know of any such few words with as much real meaning?

I shit on the Koran. I use it to wipe my asshole.

>>19833040
I think that’s something people trying to get the attention of shayatin for deals do

>>19831833
I really need to start doing this fully, I converted last July and am still learning. I'm still listening to music I used to listen to, watching movies etc., true spiritual discipline is purging corruption entirely.

>>19835079
Listen to lectures more, I posted a ton on the discord. They will help wean you from music

القارعه ما القارعه جدتي مصارعه
>>19834967
Go drink some camel piss or eat your imam's shit and cut your back open.
Muslims are the most pathetic religious people.

why did you blow up palmyra?

is there any islamic scholar/philosopher for me as a noob?

I cum in muslimah pusi repeatedly as a kuffar

>>19835519
I like Shaykh Hamza Yusuf. I'm reading his "Purification of the Heart" right now, picrel is an excerpt from the book. His interpretation and elaboration are simple enough for me to understand. Some anon also recommended me Abdal Hakim Murad, though i haven't read his works yet. Thread OP, how do you think about these two scholars?

>>19835519
Nawawi’s 40 Hadiths are a good intro to belief and his gardens of the righteous to practice

>>19835652
Dislike both, AHM loves the Tanzimat and HY works for the UAE and is a disciple of Bin Bayyah who works for the House of Saud

>>19835695
>40 hadiths
>Garden of the righteous
are there any specific english translations that you recommend?

>>19835758
Haven’t seen anything objectionable in translation. Mostly different commentary. Riyad as-Saliheen is also sometimes left untranslated as a title and other times garden of the virtuous

>>19835758
alright, thanks. Jazakallahu khairan

>>19835803
meant for >>19835794

>>19835652
>>19835695
thanks, i'll check them out. do i have to read study quran as well?

>>19835803
Waiyaak

>>19835951
No, I’d read a classical tafsir if you want one, the Study Quran exists only to harmonize Americanism and Islam and isn’t taken seriously outside America

>>19835519
I put together a little list for you to get going

Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Abd Al-Wahhab’s biography of the Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم
https://darpdfs.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/Abridged-Biography-of-Prophet-Muhammad-Imam-Muhammad-bin-Abdul-Wahhab-compressed.pdf

His brief explanation of beliefs in Islam
https://qaryah.files.wordpress.com/2011/11/class_3usool.pdf

Series of lectures in the second text, good course, cannot recommend it enough

https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLLkKw0MVQkUNdHM8d9DNlO7NCat_2ZEOf

Lectures on the lives of the Prophets, the life of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم , and the afterlife and eschatology
https://www.kalamullah.com/anwar-alawlaki.html

Basic practice from Ibn Qudanah
https://www.kalamullah.com/umdah-al-fiqh.html
http://www.kalamullah.com/minhaj-al-qasidin.html

>>19837779
And for mystical interests, Ibn al-Qayyim’s Inner Dimensions of the Prayer and Ranks of the Divine Seekers
https://www.kalamullah.com/inner-dimensions-of-prayer.html

https://www.kalamullah.com/madarij-al-salikin.html

>>19837779
Why do you choose Muhammad Ibn Abd Al-Wahhab's biography out of them all?

>>19838209
Mostly because he’s the best writer among them, but also because he’s among the most circumspect with his sources, and relates it as religiously very relevant instead of just a bunch of stories

>>19835519
>>19837779
This anon is pushing wahhabi ideology on the unsuspecting newcomer. I wouldn't trust such an ideological approach as your first study of Islam. I would recommend "Islam: Religion, History, and Civilization", and "Muhammad: Man of God" by Seyyed Hossein Nasr.

>>19838692
He's pushing wahhabi ideology while you're pushing perennialist ideology. Both you guys are kinda on the fringes.

>>19838692
This is sadly true. I appreciate OP's efforts and dedication but he should reconsider his position on the Wahabis and see what they did to Saudi Arabi and the whole region.
OP, if you know Arabic please check out this playlist.
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLUr-ykJksZUiENBsSK-LD2bsxjWtCFt7D

>>19839431
Arabia*

>>19831833
>music is prohibited within Islam
It's debatable between imams

>>19839403
I'm not really a perennialist. I think those two books are just great as scholarly introductions. You would be hard-pressed to find anythingi in them that counts as "perennialist ideology".

>>19831839
so if the admins made a song automatically start playing when you visited 4chan (as they have done in the past on at least certain boards) you would stop trying to shill here? or are you determined to post no matter what even though it's so obviously opposed to being the devouted mulsim you larp as?
what if they made a muhammad caricature circulate as one of the pics at the top of the page? would this board then be freed from your sorry proselytizing?

>>19835079
LMAO the absolute state of larpers.
kill yourself freak.

>>19839646
What's your religion?

Ibn Arabi, what a genius. May Allah be pleased with him.

If anyone is curious about these hateful comments in this thread, they all seem to be made by one poster who also posted in these threads:
>>19833006
>>19829425
It's probably that zoroastrian buddhist larper.

>>19839681
no one who's actually religious would ever post on 4chan.

>>19831568
brazzah no... just no. this is wrong. haram. brazzah you need to study quran and hadith more.
https://torontodawah.com/the-ruling-on-sending-the-heart-emoji-lajnah-permanent-committee-for-scholarly-research-and-ifta/
>It is not allowed to use the heart symbol or heart emoji because it a symbol that imitates the people of wickedness. The Permanent Committee has mentioned this ruling here.

>They also mention in the fatwa that it is not allowed to use it to signify love for Allah. So it should be avoided.

>Although the question is regarding using the symbol for the Prophet (ﷺ), the Lajnah mention in the fatwa:

>“This action also involves imitation of Fasiqs (people flagrantly violating Islamic law) who use such symbols to display their prohibited love and adoration of others, totally ignoring the ruling of the purified Shari`ah (Islamic law) on this point”

>So using this symbol in general involves the imitation of the people of Fisq, who are not allowed to be imitated in Islam as comes in the Hadith:

>He who imitates any people (in their actions) is considered to be one of them
>[Saheeh Sunan Abi Dawood no. 1514]

>“Whoever imitates the disbelievers himself, for example in terms of clothes, or other than it or the Fasiqs (الْفُسَّاقِ) or wicked ones or the righteous, pious ones. “Then he is considered one of them”: that is in sin or good as al-Qaari said. al-‘Alqami said: that is whoever imitates the righteous will be honored like they are honored, whoever imitates the the Fasiqs will not be honored…” [Awn al-Ma’bood (11/51)]

>When the Fasiqs use this symbol, they do not use the symbol with the name of the Prophet (ﷺ). Nonetheless, since they use this symbol to display their prohibited love, it is not befitting to use this symbol by Muslims even for permissible love [i.e. such as the love of the Prophet (ﷺ) or otherwise].

brazzah this is bad. is there any way to still delete the thread or pic? could you apply to the 4chan mods to try to get the thread taken down?

>>19838692
what do you think about pic related?

>>19839904
Haven't read this one, but I really liked the biography from Nasr.

>>19839710
i wouldn't worry much. Usually i just ignore these kind of people because it's just not worth my time. If they think these replies made me seethe, they aren't. It's just speak their volume

>>19839431
The condition of the region is due to Saudi alliance with Britain and later America, nothing to do with MoAW who died long before and actually forbade alliance with Christians. I don’t know a single critic of MiAW who has ever read him, I have read both MiAW and Nasr and one can avoid of a lot of the boogeyman foolishness by doing the same. The only serious controversy about MiAW’s writings is his stance about praying to graves being shirk

>>19837779
Brother, why don't you just recommend the great classical works instead of these?

>>19839856
You'd be surprised

>>19839431
He just wants to have the most edgy and transgressive position. He also thinks Isis are actual muslims.

>>19840104
Classical era most people didn’t have personal libraries. They learned most of this from teachers. Hence classical books on seerah were mostly lengthy and academic. Ibn Kathir’s from example will quote page after page of the same Hadith in all its variations in different chains (and then it turns out its apocryphal and only quoted for academic purposes). But I posted the lectures that breaks down Ibn Kathir’s history and seerah. Other than those and the beliefs primer (which is only a few pages) everything I posted *is* classical

>>19840320
Fair enough, I have no issue with Ibn Abdul Wahhab, each and every person of this ummah has been directly or indirectly effected by his doctrine. the tradition of the veneration of saints and ziarah are mostly gone in my country except from tariqas, it is a tradition we will never return to.

>>19839636
Do you smell what the rock is cooking

Can Islam prove itself as the truth? I mean without shitting on other religions namely Christianity and Judaism.

Muslims in my country insist the Qur'an is perfect even when scientific errors have been found. I found this very confusing because they double down and say that the contradicting science is scientifically incorrect and the Qur'an isnt.

>>19840407
Based

>>19840441
Disappointing

>>19840407
Science is a self-correcting discipline and not the absolute truth. Its credibility is based upon the information and evidence available SO FAR. When new evidence suggests that old beliefs are false, the said beliefs are replaced by new beliefs.

>>19840407
which country and scientific errors if i may ask?

>>19840407
>scientific errors
what a weak argument, absolutely David Wood tier

>>19840512
>quran is never wrong, in no possible way
>(science contradicts quran)
>quran is never wrong, in no possible way!!!!!!

This was my experience with Belgian muslims

>>19840512
>absolutely David Wood tier
Why do you mention the man who causes Muslims great discomfort?

>>19840407
Ultimately all religions are axiomatic and based on faith. For Muslims, the Quran *is* a source of truth. For them, it is self-evidently true. As the anon above pointed out, scientific theories are not absolute truths; quantum theory and relativity contradict each other. Should we do a reductio ad absurdum here and conclude the whole of modern physics is false? Evidently not, since these theories have sufficient explanatory power and that is what we want from a science. But to criticize the Quran based on a science which is built on a major contradiction is a laughable business. For Muslims, the Quran itself is the source of truth, it is the truth itself. Even if my own eyes were to tell me one thing, and the Quran another, I would still side with the Quran. Because God's word is infallible but my senses are not.

>>19840662
>quantum theory and relativity contradict each other

This sounds like pseud talk. Can you explain this point earnestly or are you just mimicking what some dawah figure on the 'chube said?

>>19840714
I learned this long ago in my philosophy of science class. I won't be able to discuss it in detail, but from what I remember the gist of it is this: on the one hand special relativity requires the principle of locality, and from this principle Bell's theorem follows. But on the other hand quantum theory contradicts Bell's theorem, and therefore the two theories are contradictory. It is a very well known thing, so if you do a little research you can easily find orthodox physicists explain it in more and better detail for you.

>>19840407
what scientific errors?

>>19840565
He doesn’t. He’s just someone Muslims looking for clout and views engage with at this point. Like a villain from the 1960’s Batman show for us

>>19840662
Quran argues for itself

>>19841049
Okay but why is he wrong?

>>19840749
>quantum mechanics was first integrated with special theory of relativity by Dirac in 1928 just 3 years after quantum mechanics was discovered. Dirac produced an equation that describes the behavior of a quantum particle (electron). In this equation the space and time enter on the same footing - equation is first order in all 4 coordinates. One startling by product of this equation was the prediction of antimatter. It also gave the correct explanation for the electron's spin. Dirac's equation treats an electron as a particle with only a finite number of degrees of freedom.

>in the 1940s Dirac's equation was incorporated into the relativistic quantum field theory known as quantum electrodynamics (QED) independently by Feynman, Schwinger and Tomonaga. This is the theory that describes the behavior of electrons and photons and their interactions with each other in terms of relativistic quantum fields that have infinite degrees of freedom. QED allowed extremely precise calculation of anomalous magnetic dipole moment of an electron. This calculated value matches the experimentally measured value to an astonishing precision of 12 decimal places!

Pseud

>>19839899
>Toronto Dawah
>Qur'aan & Sunnah From the path of Salaf
yeah uhh I'm thinking feds

>>19840565
>great discomfort
https://youtu.be/4_Hdld7l6Uc

>>19841482
>source: Sanjay Sood from Quora
>https://www.quora.com/Does-quantum-mechanics-contradict-the-theory-of-relativity
Anon don't ridicule yourself. Again, I'm no physicist, but it is the consensus these theories are incompatible. Here is what a NASA researcher says on a Stanford's webpage:
>Quantum mechanics is incompatible with general relativity because in quantum field theory, forces act locally through the exchange of well-defined quanta.
He briefly explains why in the link:
https://einstein.stanford.edu/content/relativity/a11758.html

>>19841632
>"forgets" that it's a physicist saying so
Nevertheless if your premise were true your conclusion would still be false. I don't know why you're still arguing that point.

You have an almighty being giving you guidance, supposedly, and yet your inbreeding rates have not been addressed by him. Inbreeding is unhealthy.

>>19841967
I don't think you understand the argument nor the premises. I have provided you with a link that supports my premise, and my conclusion is sound. You have given no criticism.

Nothing wrong with 'inbreeding.' It's nowhere near as 'unhealthy' as almost all components of a western lifestyle. If I had a female cousin who was a pious believer, I would have proposed to her instantly. As it happens all my cousins are male so no such luck.

>>19842004
>Nothing wrong with 'inbreeding.' It's nowhere near as 'unhealthy' as almost all components of a western lifestyle. If I had a female cousin who was a pious believer, I would have proposed to her instantly. As it happens all my cousins are male so no such luck.

Why do you desperately want to compare with "Western lifestyle" to make it look good? That sounds like desperation to me.

>argument/premises
name them.

>>19841967
>>19842011
why you always moving the goalpost? first you pointed about scientific errors, He gives you argument with credible sources, then you talk about inbreeding, he answered, and now you talk something about western lifestyle, just what do you want to accomplish?

>>19842041
I hereby inform you that a discussion can progress naturally.

>>19840407
it's been 9 hours and i still don't know what scientific errors you're talking about

>>19842139
Do you deny there are any?

Israeli here,
muslims are very bad at everything. They will stick to debating which animal asshole is halal while the rest of the world improves their societies. When there are no more goats I hope they will do it too.

>>19835695
sorry for asking this question, but why you dislike someone working for House of Saud?

>>19831833
The best explanation I've heard is that music in itself is neither halal nor haram but the message of the music, or rather what's contained within the music, is what makes it halal or haram or still neither (in between).
I read this explanation in al kashf ul mahjoob. (Kashf al-Mahjub
Book by ʿAlī Ibn-ʿUṯmān Huǧwīrī).
The sheik said it's incorrect to say that music is outright halal or outright haram

>>19842146
He's asking what they are. If you know them, show them

>>19842213
Wife: 1/8 = 3/24,
Daughters: 2/3 = 16/24,
Father: 1/6 = 4/24,
Mother: 1/6 = 4/24,
Total = 27/24=1.125

>>19842210
In my country (Indonesia), music isn't haram as long as it doesn't contains illicit contents such as hate messages. In ramadhan and Ied-Al-Fitr, we're celebrating by playing islamic music in TV stations. In some mosques, especially in rural area, we have tradition to recite shalawat by singing after adzan, before iqamah.

AFAIK they're still debatable among ulamas. In Quran itself, contains no direct references to music. Wallahu A'lam Bishawab

>>19842237
You'll have to explain whatever this is and provide sources, otherwise you sound like a crazy person yelling at the sun for shining

>>19842253
Don't play ignorant.

>>19842242
Yes, that fits with my understanding also.
There's hadith where Prophet Muhammad (saas) says to avoid things in which there is doubt. I'll see if I can find it.
Anyway, music is not something that we need to get caught up and fighting about. If someone doesn't want to hear music at all he won't be forced to it, likewise if someone wants to listen to music he won't be denied it.

On the authority Abi Ab’dillahi al-Nu’man ibn Basheer (ra) who said: I heard the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) say: “That which is lawful is clear and that which is unlawful is clear and between the two of them are doubtful [or ambiguous] matters about which not many people are knowledgeable. Thus, he who avoids these doubtful matters certainly clears himself in regard to his religion and his honor. But he who falls into the doubtful matters falls into that which is unlawful like the shepherd who pastures around a sanctuary, all but grazing therein. Verily every king has a sanctuary and Allah’s sanctuary is His prohibition. In the body there is a morsel of flesh which, if it be sound, all the body is sound and which, if it be diseased, all the body is diseased. This part of the body is the heart”.
[Related by al-Bukhari and Muslim]

>>19842261
I'm not playing. I know that you are referring to inheritance, what I want you to do is explain it and show where you've sourced your information.
That's on you, please take your time.

>>19842283
>I know that you are referring to inheritance
ta-dah

>>19842291
Yeah, you're on the literature board and it's expected that you will be capable of providing explanations and sources, otherwise like I already said you just seem like a crazy person yelling at the sun for shining.
If you want to convince me that there's a an issue with the inheritance laws then you will need to do better, show where you obtained the information and explain what it means.

THE CHRISTIAN RELIGION DIDN'T COME FROM JESUS, BECAUSE IN THE BIBLE JESUS NEVER SAY THE WORD CHRISTIAN.

>>19842326
Where did this drawing of your prophet come from?

>>19842326
>>19842348
https://youtu.be/sLkGSV9WDMA

>>19842359
What exactly in the Qur'an does this mediocre pop song address?

>>19842280
>music is not something that we need to get caught up and fighting about. If someone doesn't want to hear music at all he won't be forced to it, likewise if someone wants to listen to music he won't be denied it.

pretty much agree

>>19842323
>like I already said you just seem like a crazy person
Lel, do you know which thread you're in?

can anyone explain why muslims go to western countries and demand they become islamic

>>19842409
guys??

>>19842409
>>19842619
listen to the brazzah>>19841499
it's all america and israel. because of them we muslims have to live in europe.

>>19842687
muslims are scum

>>19842323
So are you going to address >>19842237 or not?

>>19842004
>Nothing wrong with 'inbreeding.'
What about alcohol? Is that okay too now?

>>19842765
What about alcohol? Alcohol isn't prohibited

Read this

https://press.princeton.edu/books/hardcover/9780691147567/the-long-divergence

>>19842237
This has been answered in hadith from early Islam. You aren't uncovering new grounds. Sometimes the sum of the shares of the inheritors is less than the actual amount, and sometimes it is more. In the former case the deficient amount is subtracted from each inheritor according to their share. In the latter case the excess amount is redistributed to each inheritor according to their share. Do a little research before posting these so you don't end up looking uninformed.

>>19842814
>no you can't reject usury!!! what do you mean you don't want to spend all your life slaving for your corporate masters!!!

the sight of a salafi revolts me

>>19842953
is salafism somehow related to wahhabism? i always confused between each other

>>19842814
seems a good read, but i thought the cause of Arabia's decline is because of internal conflict between tribes and royal house after the era of Rashidun caliphates, no?

>>19842878
seems like he just googled and posting whatever comes up from quora

Ex-muslim here, consider the bible and how it makes sense. Contrast that with the Koran

>>19842878
Post the hadith. I know you're angry. But post it.

>>19843200
Why doesn't the Qur'an make sense?

>>19842878
You are an unapologetic brainlet. What you are saying makes no sense and it's the typical squirming behavior one would expect from a frustrated ideologue.

>>19842409
No answer to this.
Honestly, muslims invoke a visceral feeling of disgust in me. The sanctimony enmeshed in the low IQ, violent lifestyle is a recipe for angry neighbors. I just wish they would stay in their own countries and be degenerates there, but they seem to suddenly love the west a lot when they can ask for gibs.

I want to start learning Arabic, is it better to start with Classical, MSA or the spoken dialect of the Arabs in my area?
I want to be able to understand and speak with Arabs, but also understand media and literature.

>>19842409
They believe Islam is the truth and they want everyone to accept it.
Muslim immigrants are used as a tool by the globalist powers who destabilize Muslims countries to cause more chaos in Western countries and bring them down.

>>19843521
Classical and MSA are pretty much the same. News media and literature will be in MSA, but nobody speaks MSA in daily speech

>>19843574
But the muslims in this thread seem capable of reasoning. Why don't they see that?

the Quran is very clearly negative of sodomy. but what about lesbian sex?

I've encountered that ibn Taymiyyah gave a fatwa on takfirin mongols (if it's ever reasonable that sounded like a reasonable time desu, although I really don't know if it is). This fatwa, so it is said, has then been used by people to takfir whoever they want to kill much later. The thing is though that he gave a fatwa later in life which was very strongly against takfir in general, and in which he quoted two hadiths from Bukhari in which the Prophet, saws, says that "A muslim is someone who prays like us, with our qibla, and who eats halal, and he is upon protection from God and the Prophet." and "If one muslim calls another a kafir, then one of them is a kafir."

what's your take on ibn Taymiyyah, takfir and violence OP?

>>19843982
ibn Taymiyyah further pointed out that no one ever kalled the Kharijites kufar, and that they were fought as criminals.

https://ballandalus.wordpress.com/2015/06/23/ibn-taymiyya-d-1328-and-the-question-of-takfir-excommunication/

>>19843366
It makes perfect sense. If you have trouble understanding it, that might say something about yourself.
>>19843316
This hadith goes in depth and explains it perfectly. I hit the primary sources to find it for you. I hope you're grateful.

Muhammad ibn ’Isma‘il has narrated from al-Fadl ibn Shadhan from Muhammad ibn Yahya from Ali ibn ‘Abd Allah from Ya‘qub ibn Ibrahim ibn Sa‘d who has said that narrated to me my father from Muhammad ibn Ishaq who has said that narrated to me al- Zuhriy from ‘Ubayd Allah ibn ‘Utbah who has narrated the following: “I sat with ibn al- ‘Abbas that a mention of ordained shares of inheritance was made and ibn al- ‘Abbas said, ‘Allah is free of all defects, the most great. Do you think that one who enumerates the number of the grains of sand in a sand valley has designated half and half and one-third? The two halves take away the legacy then where is the room for the one-third?’ Zufar ibn ’Aws al-Basriy said, ‘O ibn al- ‘Abbas, who was the first one who caused excess or deficiency in the ordained shares? He said, ‘It was ‘Umar ibn al-Khattab when several ordained shares were before him which he gave certain amount to certain people and he said, “I do not know which one of you is first and which one is last according to Allah and I do not find anything bigger to distribute this asset among you in shares.” So he deducted from each of those with ordained shares to offset for the deficiency. I swear by Allah had he placed first whom Allah had placed first and placed last whom Allah had placed last, then no deficiency would take place in the ordained shares.’ Zufar ibn ’Aws then said to him, ‘What has He placed first and what has He placed last?’ He said, ‘Every ordained share that Allah, most Majestic, most Glorious, has not brought down from its being an ordained share except to another ordained share is what Allah has placed first. What Allah has placed last are such shares that when being moved from its status has no replacement except whatever is left, thus it is what Allah has placed last. The ordained shares that He has placed first are one-half, which is the share of a husband. When something is added to it then it is reduced to one-fourth and thereafter it is not removed to some other position. The share of a wife is one-fourth but when it is removed, it becomes one-eighth and then it remains without change.

(1/2)

>>19843316

The share of a mother is one-third and when it is reduced, it becomes one-sixth and it then remains unchanged and these are the ordained shares that Allah, most Majestic, most Glorious, has placed first. Of the shares, that Allah has placed last is the share of two daughters and sisters, which are one-half and two-thirds. However, when they are removed from these positions they are not placed in another position with the remaining of the legacy. Thus, they are that which Allah has placed last. When the ones that are placed first and those, who are placed last come together, the ones that are placed first are given priority. A complete right is given to the beneficiary; then if anything left is given to those whose shares Allah has placed last. If nothing remains then there is nothing for him.’ Zufar ibn ’Aws then said to him (ibn Abbas), ‘What stopped you from giving this advice to ‘Umar?’ He (ibn Abbass) said, ‘It is his fearsomeness. ’ Al-Zuhriy has said, ‘By Allah, had he (ibn Abbas) presented it before a just Imam, who based his command on justice and piety, who would approve it, (the idea of ibn Abbas) then it would pass (in practical form among people) because no two people have disputed over the knowledge of ibn al-‘ Abbas.’”

(2/2)

>>19835695
>Bin Bayyah who works for the House of Saud
proof?

>>19831682
When reading for the first time taking sura revelation order into account might make sense.
The drawback is you don't keep track of how much you're read since you're jumping around in the book pages...
ut you actually get what came first or last in return.
https://www.missionislam.com/quran/revealationorder.htm
.. which is important for Abrogation .

>>19843712
I can only speak for myself. I was invited by a top western university to study here. I've decided to go back to my country once I'm done with my studies. Don't get me wrong, in material terms and career prospects the west would benefit me a lot more if I stayed, but in social, cultural, and spiritual terms the west is disastrous.

>>19844204
what country are you from and how would you characterize the difference spiritually?

>>19844242
I'm Iranian. Sadly in the recent years Iran has been getting more and more westernized as western powers seem determined to propagandize Iranians whatever the cost (there are hundreds of free Persian satellite tv channels funded by western organizations that do nothing but broadcast neolib propaganda day and night). There are many religious cities that aren't yet liberalized though. Ideally I would move to one of those areas. The difference in those places is stark: people are inwardly and outwardly pious, there is little to no decadent activity, and religious and spiritual mindset is the dominant framework in those places.

>>19844347
as a westerner that is very fascinating. this doesn't really surprise me though
>(there are hundreds of free Persian satellite tv channels funded by western organizations that do nothing but broadcast neolib propaganda day and night
but I really wish westerners knew this. although desu they'd probably think it was good in a form of not quite self aware White Mans Burden. Speaking as an ignorant outsider: what is your take on current iranian shi'ism in a historical context? Is it a reasonable/sound way to maintain the heritage? Maybe this is controversial, but it would be very interesting to hear from an Iranian. Most iranians you meet in my country are children of those who had to flee, so you really only get one take.

>>19844372
>what is your take on current iranian shi'ism in a historical context?
Do you mean the theocracy or the religion itself? The religion itself I believe is the purest form of Islam and all other forms are adulterated imitations of it. Also it isn't really "Iranian" as there are Arab countries such as Iraq and Bahrain with many Shias. The theocracy is a complex question though. I can't deny they have made some serious mistakes but I console myself with the thought that at least they didn't bow down to the corrupting force of which we are all aware.

>>19844504
>The theocracy is a complex question though.
this is the question yea, of the sort of chain-of-custody of the religion.. I'm looking for that 1/73 if you know what I mean. looking at least, as far as I understand how to.

>>19843366
ISLAM CANNOT BE WRONG
QURAN CANNOT BE WRONG

What is the best English translation of the Quran? Can you provide a link?

>>19843574
>globalist powers who destabilize Muslims countries to cause more chaos in Western countries and bring them down.
bunch of muslims come from countries who are not destabilized. they're just shit because they're populated with the low iq inbred followers of a subhuman desert cult.
and why are muslim countries so uniquely vulnerable to this destabilization? at what point do you admit that there's something wrong with the islamic world itself.

>>19845031
https://tanzil.net/
It's a personal preference, I like the Arberry translation

>>19844204
>>19844347
>he says while posting on 4chan
the ironing, the absolute ironing.

>>19845053
Al-Kafirun
بِسْمِ اللَّهِ الرَّحْمَٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ
Say: 'O unbelievers, (1) I serve not what you serve (2) and you are not serving what I serve, (3) nor am I serving what you have served, (4) neither are you serving what I serve (5) To you your religion, and to me my religion!' (6)

>>19844869
>I'm looking for that 1/73 if you know what I mean
I'm afraid I don't know what that means. I don't agree with the absolute guardianship of the jurist though if that's what you mean.
>>19845079
I don't really browse any other 4chan board except /lit/. This board, with all its problems, is the best place on the internet that I've found for discussions on philosophy and literature. I only visit the threads that are related to my interests.

>>19845111
>corrupting western influence is a huge problem when it involves women or parties (things I'm mad about not having access to)
>it's alright when it comes to visiting infidel websites full of obscenity, profanity and mockery of islam

>>19842409
>demand they become islamic
There's no compulsion in religion. This means that it is against the religion to demand someone convert to Islam, there's no controversy around this particular topic.

>>19845149
I believe rational argumentation in good faith goes a long way. The Prophets and the Imams also engaged disbelievers in argumentation. As for those who curse and mock, they only do so to their own detriment. I ignore them.

>>19845218
>The Prophets and the Imams also engaged disbelievers in argumentation
you're not them.

everybody knows what the islamic ruling on 4chan and visiting it would be. you're just a massive hypocrite.

>>19845311
I'm not them but I strive to follow their example. The scholar I follow as my source of emulation has not made a ruling on 4chan so I see no issue in this regard.

>>19845270
You don't want to admit that Muslims do not engage in proselytising, although that is what was claimed, so now you're going to dump all this other stuff into this thread. Stuff which is not on-topic itt or on this board.
Why don't you refer to the OP, and if you don't like the thread topic if you're so triggered and if you simply can't handle some anons on the literature board discussing a book then I think you need to take an internet break, it will be better for you.

>>19845409
everyone can see that this thread is nothing but proselytizing.
I think the lies and mental gymnastics of browncels appear especially pathetic because they're mentally retarded from inbreeding. they lack the ability to construct something that seems even slightly believable.
>>19845346
who is he? does he have an online presence?

>>19841467
He’s generally just dishonest

>>19842187
https://peopleoftawhid.org/state-employees/

>>19842409
Mostly it’s second generation but also western governments tolerate that whereas if you are vocal about demanding that in most Muslim countries (some exceptions like Malaysia and Pakistan) the state will put you in the can

>>19843003
Salafi is a contemporary term for ahl al-hadith. Muhammad Ibn Abd Al-Wahhab was a leading proponent of spreading it throughout the Arabian peninsula although it existed and continues to independently in Pakistan and Afghanistan and India

>>19843521
Fusha is the best to start with, only difference between classical and modern variants is vocabulary really

>>19843982
Ibn Taymiyyah was not of the murji’ah and anyone who thinks he is is quite wrong, the murji’ah are heretics That also sounds like a bs quote as eating haram food is not kufr according to Ibn Taymiyyah.

He issued the fatwa against the Mongols for trying to abolished Shariah and this based on the Quran which says the Jews ceased to be Muslims when they stopped ruling by Mosaic law in favor of their own preferences

>Surely We sent down the Torah, wherein is guidance and light; thereby the Prophets who had surrendered themselves gave judgment for those of Jewry, as did the masters and the rabbis, following such portion of God's Book as they were given to keep and were witnesses to. So fear not men, but fear you Me; and sell not My signs for a little price. Whoso judges not according to what God has sent down - they are the unbelievers.
5:44, Arberry translation. Whoever does not judge by meaning takes another law over and against Shariah. The Mongols gutted the Shariah and established their own laws. This made them unbelievers despite claims to be servants of God, same as with the Jews

>>19844000
In the predominant position the khawarij are NOT considered kuffar and this was the position of Ali رضي الله عنه who was murdered by them. However a minority of Muslims in his time differed and that is still a position in the Hanbali school although minority one which is the basis that some say ISIS are kuffar والله عالم

>>19844040
He is on the state fatwa council in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia and a major lecturer at the royal university of Jeddah . He also is the head of the UAE fatwa council. He recently came out in support of Arabs making peace with Israel and recognizing it

>>19845031
Sahih International or Arberry, one is the best technical translation, the other the most faithful to form

>>19845311
This is 4channel

>>19845504
epic

>>19831568
OP, i assume you know alredy that by making this continuous thread, you're basically inviting bunch of /pol/cels invading your thread, right? why you keep insisting?

>>19845504
kek, based

>>19845543
>implying /pol/ isn’t unconsciously envious of Islam

>>19844021
>>19844018
>copeposting

>>19845556
All you need to consider its wisdom is Uncle Sam gets 0.0%

>>19845451
Wtf that guy looks so inbred it scares me. Is this instinctual?

>>19845111
1/73 is a famous hadith. apparently it's contested
It was narrated from Mu’aawiyah ibn Abi Sufyaan (may Allaah be pleased with him) that he said: The Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) stood among us and said: “Those who came before you of the people of the Book split into seventy-two sects, and this ummah will split into seventy-three: seventy-two in Hell and one in Paradise, and that is the jamaa’ah (main body of Muslims).”
I didn't know this was from Muawiya. They claim on the site that there are more isnaads (major salafi-site) but I haven't found any after some cursory googling, except one which was deemed da'if by Zubair `Aliza'i, a pakistani salafi.
I've heard that it is recorded in Tabaris history that Muawiya did actually command that Ali be denegrated in every khutba, ra. I have not read it myself. This is also contested, apparently, but with this in mind, personally I have my doubts about this Muawiya guy. God knows best, but I imagine you will take none of this seriously now. I didn't know it was either weak or from him. They claim there are more isnaads, maybe there are. Either way, that's the famous 73: 73 sects, one will avoid hell (though it is common afaik to believe that the other 72 will transition through hell rather than stay eternally).

God knows best.

>>19845564
Yeah very wise, wollah

>>19845543
lol at leftists defending salafis.
>>19845555
subhumans attracted to subhuman ideologies.

>>19845582
Implying your discourse is somehow superior to /pol/?

>>19845451
1. Proselytizing implies bringing undue pressure to bear upon someone to change his Faith, which if someone with basic reading comprehension following this thread, he didn't do this.
2. You keep bringing out off topic things to cope which indicates that muslims are living rent free inside your head

I feel bad for europeans for having to share the same air with these subhumans

>>19845575
Tabari’s history is full of extremely weak and fabricated narrations as he wrote it for scholars. In fact he even narrates totally contradicting stories. It’s intended as a resource, laymen back then could not afford that many volumes of handwritten books

>>19845603
Their imprisoned their last hope against the Anglo twice on little islands so they’re stuck now

>>19845499
>That also sounds like a bs quote as eating haram food is not kufr according to Ibn Taymiyyah.
it is not, unless this whole site is fake which I obviously can't judge. It's mainly a translation of a later fatwa from ibn Taymiyyah.
https://ballandalus.wordpress.com/2015/06/23/ibn-taymiyya-d-1328-and-the-question-of-takfir-excommunication/
the hadith is real though, I've double-checked.
they emphasize in the text that a scholars position can change throughout his life.

yea that's about what I found regarding the mongols. the interesting question is how the fatwa is used now, if at all, as I have heard claimed.
>He is on the state fatwa council in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia and a major lecturer at the royal university of Jeddah . He also is the head of the UAE fatwa council. He recently came out in support of Arabs making peace with Israel and recognizing it
interesting, thank you.

this is from the fatwa
>It is a supreme principle that the lives of the Muslims and their wealth and their honor are prohibited from being transgressed upon by other Muslims. The Prophet (peace be upon him) said during the Farewell Pilgrimage: “Verily your lives, your wealth, and your honor are sacred and prohibited to be transgressed upon (by each other), in the same manner as this day, this city, and this month is sacred to you” (Sahih Bukhari). The Prophet also said: “Every Muslim is forbidden to any other Muslim [from being harmed or attacked], with regard to his life, his wealth, and his honor.” (Sahih Muslim). Moreover, the Prophet (peace be upon him) asserted that “whomsoever prays our prayer, accepts our direction of prayer, and eats from our permissible food, is indeed a Muslim and has the protection of God and His Prophet.” (Sahih Bukhari). In another hadith, the Prophet said: “If the Muslims engage each other with their swords in battle, then both the killer and the killed shall be in Hellfire,” at which point he was asked “O Prophet of God, this makes sense with regard to the killer, but what was the fault of the killed?” To which the Prophet responded: “His intention was to kill his companion [i.e. fellow Muslim].” (Sahih Bukhari). He added: “Do not regress after I am gone to a state of disbelief where each of you strikes the neck of the other with your swords!” (Sahih Bukhari). He also said: “If a Muslim declares his brother to be a disbeliever, then verily the accusation is true of one of them.” All these narrations can be found within the canonical collections of hadith…
so should be ibn Taymiyyahs words.

>>19845611
alright, I hear you.

>>19845600
>implies bringing undue pressure to bear upon someone to change his Faith
lol
>You keep bringing out off topic things
this thread is off-topic.

>>19845622
What do you mean? Also aren't you a convert who was obsessed with orthodox Christianity before?

>>19845603
Muslims have been continuously living in Europe since at least 711 (c.e), earlier still if you want to count the Caucasus.

>>19845637
What point does that prove?

>>19845643
>fitizen
post hand with timestamp

>>19845626
Yes I thought you were quoting him in the context of that Hadith it means especially not eating food sacrifices to false gods which is a little different

The fatwa was mainly used by Sayyid Qutb and later by Usama bin Laden on the house of Saud for legalizing usury and allying with Jews and Christian’s against Muslims (which is also apostasy according to an ijma reported by Ibn Hazm based on 5:51

Theee is nothing in that fatwa contradicting his earlier ones. You are mistakenly taking it to be an endorsement of the murji’ah. The Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم narrated several things that are apostasy and they are also mostly in the Quran. It just means we always give the benefit of the doubt and don’t make takfir on sin like the khawarij

>>19845451
He is the Supreme Leader of Iran, the Grand Ayatollah Sayyed Ali Khamenei.
>>19845575
Muawiyyah لعنة الله عليه has some crazy narrations. Have you read the ones where he claims the Prophet and Ali (peace and greetings of God upon them) were pederasts? May God curse him for eternity. He did in fact start a tradition of cursing Ali and his family, and anyone who did not curse he ordered to be beheaded. Anyway, our Imams have taught that Sunnis can also enter into jannah on the conditions that they are pious and do not hate the family of the Prophet. Some anon asked for narrations about this a few days ago so I have them ready. These from al-Kafi so they are considered generally sound:
https://thaqalayn.net/hadith/1/2/19/10
https://thaqalayn.net/hadith/2/1/171/1
https://thaqalayn.net/hadith/3/3/93/1
https://thaqalayn.net/hadith/8/1/453/453

>>19845643
Gross

>>19845653
It doesn't have to prove any point. I just thought that anon might like to know how long there's been an Islamic presence in Europe, for his benefit and further knowledge.
Over 1300 years is a long time

>>19845637
provide source

>>19845662
how do you look upon the possibility of a person leaving Islam without this being a cause for violence?

OP how do you think about something like an idea that a spiritual tradition should be transmitted personally/orally? I don't know what the support is for this in the textual tradition, but it clearly abounds as an idea, and you could argue it shows in how hadith are supposed to be transmitted

>tfw want wife
>tfw remember "there is the akhira"
>unironically calmed
damn it feels good to be a gangsta

>>19845673
The Umayyad invasion of the Iberian peninsula. It's a well known historical event.

>>19845555
checked, those digits don't lie

>>19845671
>I just thought that anon might like to know how long there's been an Islamic presence in Europe, for his benefit and further knowledge.
I don't think that poster is particularly ignorant for stating how vile muslims are. Them having lived in europe for 13 centuries yet being in the shadow of europeans intelectually and socially just shows how backwards they are, nothing more.

>>19845666
>Have you read the ones where he claims the Prophet and Ali (peace and greetings of God upon them) were pederasts?
I hav enot. I'd dig into it but it's getting late desu

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wahhabi_sack_of_Karbala
ibn Abd al Wahhab was dead at this time, but the leader of the saudis at the time was his most, most intimate protége in every sense. I don't think it is credible to separate the two in terms of political thought/religious views.

>>19845643
If you want to shag muslim women, what you need to do is assume the ideal of the 50's American man as perceived by society. The manners, confidence, and directness won't go unnoticed. Their men being incels leaves an imprint on them and even the hijabis feel attracted to western men (been groped by them on the subway many times). A reason they won't admit it openly is that their men act very jealous and insecure, so if you act like the opposite of that you're advertising yourself as a better man. What you should understand though is that if they have any male siblings, you're going to have to show her you can be discrete and keep your liaisons a big secret. This is very important because they are more scared of the consequences.

Generally I would just comment on an interest of theirs that makes them stand out. They're often book worms, so when you get to discuss literature with them, you're in. Other hobbies work too as long as you have something you're both passionate about. Don't straight up hit on them, it's going to scare them off. Some will be much more receptive of lewdness than others, but as a general rule what you want to do is gradually get to know her and test the waters as you would with a prude woman. You'd be surprised how many of them are repressed and really want to be fucked.

Logistically you'll need a pretext for her to be in a private space with you. A dorm or flat works best, just invite her after a few "friendship dates" (you cannot openly say you want to haram her). Show that you're interested and the rest will follow (will explain what "the rest" means to the autists if needed).

>>19845668
They're more self conscious than western women so they'll be silky smooth all around their bodies.

>>19845747
I also typed this on two hours of sleep so forgive me for the horrible syntax. What will attract a white girl will attract a muslima, generally. Lifting and reading is a big plus.

I really just want to depopulate the entirety of the middle east

>>19845740
anyone can provide book which can redpill me about Karbala?

>>19845690
browncels get mad when you say islam is a subhuman religion for sex starved incels, but then they also make posts like this.

>>19845770
except israel and turkey.

>>19845788
Browncels get mad when you do anything, anon.

>>19845778
Brutal stuff happened in Karbala. This is a book by a classical Shia scholar. The chapter on Husayn (a.s.) goes into what happened in depth. Only read if/when you are in the right state of mind because as I said it's awful.
https://www.shia-maktab.info/index.php/en/library/books/english?format=raw&task=download&fid=93

>>19845807
Especially Isreal actually. I don't really have anything against Turks however

>>19831568
OP, what do you think about western media's projections of islam nowadays compared decades ago, mainly after 9/11? sorry if I'm off topic

>>19845827
They are both being outbred by religious voting cattle. Israel has the ultraorthodox and Turkey has 75IQ isloomers.

>>19845788
agreed, israel should be depopulated

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s5PtKVc21t8

>>19845849
meant for>>19845827

>>19845849
They're better than any muslim nation. You just don't like to see what you could have become if you didn't focus on war (which you suck at, too).

>>19845822
any prerequisite reads before i go to this one?

>>19845827
turks are cool, though. Israel, in other hand, pretty much agree. Nothing good comes from that place. Leeching and parasiting American taxpayers money for years, degenerating society with their globohomo agenda, disgusting

>>19845875
Not really. The book narrates the lives of Shia Imams based on Shi'i sources. If you read from the beginning, he starts with Ali and also gives you many of the arguments Shias use to prove Ali's successorship of the Prophet.

>>19845875
That is, if you have some basic knowledge about Islam and the life of Muhammad--peace be upon him and his blessed family. If you're a complete beginner then tell me to recommend some introductory books.

>>19845981
>degenerating society with their globohomo agenda
how is Israel doing that?

>>19844021
why do you need a hadith to make up for a math error?

>>19846012
It's not an error. As I said, there are clear guidelines on how to handle excesses and deficiencies.

>>19846030
If it's clear why does it need a hadith to "explain"?

>>19846042
The Quran commands to interpret its verses by using hadith.

>>19846057
Okay, but why is it still a math error? Again your hadith doesn't make any sense.

>>19846057
This problem is not limited to the scenario that he mentioned. Rather there are many other similar scenarios. The scholars call this type of issue ‘awl. What it means according to the scholars of inheritance is a case where the sum of the prescribed shares is greater than the inheritance.

The way to resolve this kind of issue is to reduce the share of each of the heirs proportionately in each case of ‘awl. This is what is fair, so that no one heir will bear the entire shortfall whilst others lose nothing [that is, they will all be affected equally].

https://islamqa.info/en/answers/131556/objection-from-an-atheist-to-the-awl-process-in-cases-of-inheritance

>>19846064
It's not a math error. There are many, many possible scenarios of how many and what type of inheritors a person might have. There are some special cases that by using Quran's way of dividing the inheritance some fraction of deficiency or excess remains. The hadith tells how to handle those special cases.

>>19846091
You can keep repeating that, but at this point it'll do you no good. You're going against the scholars by pretending there is no issue. I'll copypaste a reddit post:

Example 1:
A deceased man leaves behind a wife, two daughters, a mother and father. The wife receives ⅛. The two daughters share ⅔. The mother and father each get ⅙. Per the Quran’s math, the total combined is 1 ⅛. Oops.

(The comparative Sunni and Shia adjustments can be found at “Al-Awl,” al-islam.org)

Example 2:
A deceased woman leaves behind a husband and two sisters. The husband receives ½ and the sisters share ⅔. Per the Quran’s math, the total is 1 ⅙. Oops.

(The comparative Sunni and Shia adjustments can be found in Shabaz Ahmad Cheema, Shia and Sunni Laws of Inheritance: A Comparative Analysis, 77-78) (1)

For fun, go to the Sunni Islamic Inheritance Calculator (2) and type those two scenarios in. You will receive the message: “Total shares have exceeded 100%. Shares need to be reduced proportionally,” and the website does so through a process called awl. The problem is that nowhere does the Quran or Muhammad say to “reduce proportionally.” It is simply a method developed by humans to fix the mathematical error.

(1) https://www.bzu.edu.pk/PJIR/vol10/eng%206%20Shahbaz%20Cheema%2004-11-13.pdf#page=9
(2) http://inheritance.ilmsummit.org/projects/inheritance/home.aspx

Now please tell me what your credentials are so I can know who to believe, scholars or....... you?

>>19846111
I don't think you understand what you copy pasted. Read carefully:
>(The comparative Sunni and Shia adjustments can be found at “Al-Awl,” al-islam.org)
Once there is an excess fraction (eg in example one there is 1/8 excess) you apply al-Awl. As you can see, your own text mentions Awl. Awl is the process by which you adjust the excess. The hadith describes this process. You're clearly trying to make sense of something you have no understanding of. I suggest you reserve your criticisms for when you understand what's going on.

>>19846111
>The problem is that nowhere does the Quran or Muhammad say to “reduce proportionally.” It is simply a method developed by humans to fix the mathematical error.
This is false. We have narrations for how to reduce proportionally. A chapter of al-Kafi is dedicated to those narrations.

>>19846153
>Once there is an excess fraction
You are almost there: where do these excess fractions come from?

>>19846160
Isn't al-Kafi a shia book?

>>19846166
A special case of dividing the inheritance according to the way described by the Quran. When that happens, you reduce it according to the way described in hadith.
>>19846171
Yes. I am a Shia and I'm most familiar with Shia tradition of hadith. Sunnis probably have it in their books too.

>>19846177
I remain unconvinced, but it's fine.
Why shia islam over sunnism though? What is your idea about sunnis, generally?

>>19845740
Then we can agree what the Safavids did to Sunnis and Christians is indicative of Twelverism? Of course taken together what the Safavids and Wahhabis have done is nothing compared to the Ottoman record

>>19845666
One can acknowledge Muawiyya (who was driven out of a desire to ensure justice for Uthman’s killers) as sound Hadiths are clear on without introducing fabricated nonsense about him being Voldemort

>>19846217
That is, Sahih Hadiths assert he was wrong to fight Ali and this was predicted by the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم . Shia political affinity of course makes it necessary to say he was literally Hitler. We don’t categorize him as one of the rightly guided khilafah

>>19846187
Muhammad--peace be upon him and his family--taught us many things about how to govern our lives. From the daily life to our family life to social life to our spiritual life--all are governed by his teachings. It is inconceivable that, when he covered so much, he wouldn't declare who will be his successor to be the spiritual leader of Muslims. Sunnis claim he didn't specify anyone, so a council was formed after his death and Abu Bakr was chosen. But this is false. During his last Hajj he gave a sermon and declared Ali ibn Abu Talib is his successor. Abu Bakr even made oath of allegiance to him. This is the 'historical' reason. But you can examine the religions structurally to see in comparison the fundamentalist focus of Sunnism and its unsatisfying exotericism, Shi'ism is a grand interweaving of esoteric spirituality and exoteric law. Shi'ism is more metaphysically oriented in comparison to Sunnism. In fact Sufism is a divergent tradition of the spiritual teachings of Shia Imams, and Sufis themselves admit this by tracing their traditions to the first six Imams. No matter whether you examine it historically, theologically, or spiritually, all evidence suggest Twelver Shi'ism is the pure form of Islam, and other sects have been tarnished by political and personal motivations of some rulers. It also needs to be said historically Shias were the ones who didn't forbid art and philosophy and in fact pursued them with great interest. While philosophy in the Greek sense fell out of favor after al-Ghazali's denounciation of it, Shias continued to study and build upon it and have built a rich tradition of philosophy which continues to the present day.

>>19846254
This is nonsense, he made Abu Bakr رضي الله عنه imam and Ali gave HIM an oath of allegiance, Shia actually agree

>>19846254
Twelverism was popularized by the Safavids, an Arabian sufi sect that established it in Iran by genocide of Sunnis

>>19846217
>who was driven out of a desire to ensure justice for Uthman’s killers
Lol. Why would he want to revenge Uthman by fighting Ali? The same holds for Aisha. You want to avenge Uthman? Then go kill Uthman's killers. Why fight Ali? This is such a silly excuse.

>>19846271
According to whom? Abu Bakr? Or his daughter? The sermon of Ghadir is so mutawatir thar Sunnis can't reject it. He makes it clear Ali is his successor. He literally repeats it three times.

>>19846290
Uthman’s killers were partisans of Ali and they demanded they be brought to justice. Ali said he would but they had to give him bayah first or else he couldn’t be expected to exercise the authority necessary. At this point people behind the killing attacked A’isha’s army leading to the skirmish known as the battle of the camel, fearing in negotiations they would be put to death. This was resolved quick enough but Mu’awiyah still didn’t trust Ali to deliver justice and began a civil war. It was ended by arbitration between him and Ali. Uthman’s killers, dissatisfied, killed Ali

>>19846279
Safavids were an extremist Sufi-turned-Shia sect. The Imams taught us to leave politics behind and focus on purifying ourselves spirituality, and they taught us to live and cooperate with Sunnis peacefully. They would admonish a disciple if he went to proselytize to Sunnis. What the extremist Safavids did goes against the teachings of the Twelve Imams.

>>19846304
The rebellion against Uthman was literally led Muhammad ibn Abi Bakr, the son of your caliph, and it was urged by the letters of Aisha who accused Uthman of nepotism and encouraged Ibn Abu Bakr to rebel. Ali had no problem with doing a trial but at the time he was in the middle of the war with Talha and Zubayr, who broke their allegiance with Ali after Aisha's encouragement. He said he would avenge Uthman after the war. But the power hungry people used it as an excuse to attack him when his reign was unstable because of the wars.

>>19846315
Hmm, so you would say most Twelvers are critical of the Safavids, or rather see them as heroic?

>>19846485
This is fabricated nonsense

>>19846534
>This is fabricated nonsense
Says who?

>>19846603
Says open Sahih Hadiths that her and Muawiyya were upset over Uthman’s death because he was their kin (and therefore her father’s). That’s the whole basis of the war. Your source is some esoteric chain that is considered apocryphal by 99% of Muslim scholars

>>19846534
Most Shias probably appreciate their good actions such as funding Shi'ite scholarly sites, but also condemn other acts such as the forceful conversion. It needs to be said, Shah Ismail before losing to Ottomans had claimed he was infallible and in fact that he was the incarnation of the Twelfth Imam. These extremist beliefs are completely condemned.
>This is fabricated nonsense
It is not. Look up Muhammad ibn Abi Bakr to see how he rebelled against Uthman and his correspondence with Aisha. Also, the claim that Aisha and Muawiyah rebelled against Ali to avenge Uthman is bunk due to these several reasons: First, Talhah and Zubayr were in Medina when Uthman was besieged, but they did nothing to save him. Second, when the news about Uthman's death reached Aisha, she did not show any opposition. Third, after the death of Ali, Muawiyyah completely forgot about avenging Uthman and let Muhammad ibn Abi Bakr and the other rebels get away with it. These all prove "avenging Uthman" was a mere pretext. These people cared about nothing but power. I suggest looking into these events if you truly care about the truth of the matter.

>>19846621
Lol your source is Aisha and Muawiyyah themselves. It's literally asking the culprits if they are the culprits.

>>19846622
His correspondence? No letters are actually preserved from them except in scraps. Our source for them is their verbatim memorization being passed down, they’re generally very short in significant contrast with fabricated ones which are long and absurdly embellished and lacking the contemporary usage or style

>>19846629
Oof except whenever Ali narrates something in the favor of someone you don’t like you say it’s taqiyyah so this is a bad faith argument and no they’re not the only or even primary sources, there are a wealth of sources among the sahaba

>>19846691
I don't think Aisha's actual letters are preserved, but the fact that he had a correspondence with Ibn Abu Bakr to encourage the rebellion is well recorded.

Ali has approved of Aisha's and Muawiyah's rebellion? Lol.

>>19846713
>he had a correspondence
she*

>>19846153
>So the result of the algorithm given in the Quran is flawed.

The algorithm should give shares that sum to 1. In some scenarios, its shares sum to greater than 1. This is a flawed algorithm. The Quran is the word of God as delivered to Mohammad verbatim. We can only conclude that God messed up.

>>19847913
The hadith (which you haven't read) offer an explanation for this which is perfectly sound. The explanation wouldn't have made sense if the Qur'an was wrong.

what's the deal with the Brotherhood?

>>19845662
>You are mistakenly taking it to be an endorsement of the murji’ah.
I don't think I ever mentioned any murji'ah, I was just asking an open question. What ibn Taymiyyah says in the text is the following
>It is not permitted to excommunicate another Muslim as a result of a sin or sins they may have committed, or for legitimate differences of opinion on issues about which Muslims (ahl al-qibla) disagree.
I don't know what that's called. again:
https://ballandalus.wordpress.com/2015/06/23/ibn-taymiyya-d-1328-and-the-question-of-takfir-excommunication/
and again: it is possible that his positions evolved, so that earlier writings of his don't reflect his final positions.

>>19846233
he is categorized as rightly guided sahaba though, isn't he?

>>19846622
>Third, after the death of Ali, Muawiyyah completely forgot about avenging Uthman and let Muhammad ibn Abi Bakr and the other rebels get away with it.
big if true

>>19848279
cursory wikipedia-readings give that ibn Abi Bakr was killed by men loyal to Muawiya shortly after the death of Uthman, ra.

>>19846233
>Sahih Hadiths assert he was wrong to fight Ali and this was predicted by the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم
can you source this?

wikipedia gives the following claim without a source
>Both the efforts of Ali to save Uthman and the leading roles of Aisha and Talha in inciting Muslims against Uthman are well-cited.

>itt you will watch two "islam is flawless" n*ggas argue ceaselessly

>>19846254
>While philosophy in the Greek sense fell out of favor after al-Ghazali's denounciation of it, Shias continued to study and build upon it and have built a rich tradition of philosophy which continues to the present day.
why is this a good thing? would saying so not sort of imply that the teachings of the Prophet, saws, are not enough? One encounters a hadith to effect that knowledge is the lost treasure of the mu'min, and wherever he finds it there he may take it; but what is "knowledge"? Why have a last religion if you can mix things in at your own judgement?

>>19847913
If you think you're on something why did Islamic scholars who busied themselves with Islamic law never say that this is a flawed algorithm? In my eyes they know this topic better than you.

>>19831568
I'm getting real tired of this blatant ideological astroturfing, can we just make /polg/ for people to circlejerk about their beliefsystems?

>>19848469
It's a book, anon.

>>19848486
I'd be fine with bible- and quran generals if you people were actually interested in treating them like literature.
(interesting sidenote: my spellchecker tells me I should capitalize quran, but makes no such suggestion for bible)

>>19848501
OP made this thread in good faith and is demonstrably willing to discuss the meaning of the Qur'an. The issue and solution as I see it is not with the existence of the thread rather with the lack of strong moderation on this board.

>>19848294
oh shit my bad
>Madelung (1997, pp. 107, 118, 119). Abbas (2021, pp. 122, 123, 125, 135). Hazleton (2009, pp. 87, 89, 93, 95, 102, 103). Bodley (1946, pp. 349, 350). Jafri (1979, pp. 62, 64). Rogerson (2006, p. 289). Tabatabai (1977, pp. 52, 53). Poonawala (1982). Veccia Vaglieri (2021). Veccia Vaglieri (2021b)

>>19848583
mods have always been useless, the problem with modern /lit/ is that the people who actually want to talk about literature have become an absolute minority, meaning that 90% of the board is the eternal tourists entertaining each other with low-effort off-topic threads, while we can barely generate enough interest to maintain a Shakespeare reading group. At this point it's no wonder the retard think that this is their board, and nothing can be done to push them out.
I'd attach the evolution of a fandom comic but I can't seem to find it.

>>19848279
>>19848285
My bad. Ibn Abu Bakr is the notable exception among the rebels as he was the governor of Egypt. Muawiyah ordered him to surrender Egypt but he refused to stand down, so Muawiyah ordered to kill the son of Abu Bakr and the adopted son of Ali. The other rebels and assassins of Uthman were let go. This is further evidence "avenging Uthman" was a pretext to conceal his political motives.

>>19848447
Two words are repeated numerous times in the Qur'an: Wisdom (hikmah), and intellection or reasoning (ta'aqul). The Quran repeatedly commands us to do ta'aqul regarding the signs of God. It talks of hikmah as God's gift to his select servants. In reality philosophy is nothing separate from this. It is the use of aql (intellect) to attain wisdom. Shia philosophers also use Quran and hadith as one of their sources of knowledge in their arguments.

>>19848023
??? They're literally trying to bullshit themselves out of a math error

>>19846000
By killing brown kids
Also what is a better world having blue hair and fucking your bro or raping goats and little girls

>>19848869
it seems to me that people will say all and everything is this sign or that from God. this seems like it could end up in heresy very, very fast.
case in point I know muslims who think that the Qur'anic "nur" is equivalent to the modern day physical concept of "energy", therefore conclude that "everything is "energy"" and start going after 19th century pseudoscience and try to amend Islam with ideas of "energy" from, for instance, daoism, since it is all "nur". So they read the ayas in nature, they think, and end up in pseudo-occultism instead of just reading Qur'an. And they figure they are being Qur'anic in doing so.

the other thing is the question of non-sacred philosophy in general, the contingency of worldly knowledge as opposed to revelation. God is not "al Haqq", definite article, for nothing. I'm sure even a succesful ma'arif among the greeks will recognize the difference.

>>19848818
can you give an example?
what is the shia view of Abu Bakr btw? if it is negative, how do you treat the cave?

>>19831833
Modern day music which revolves around lust, greed, etc is haram. Listening to say classical music isn't

>>19849128
What's with all the muslims listening to nigger gangster rap

>>19849210
language of empowerment and pain. feel weak and sad, identify with marginalized minority.

>>19849218
Marginalized by whom?

My copy says:

3 Most Gracious, Most Merciful;

What's the difference? I mean, what word in arabic is being used for the first name mentioned in this verse?

>>19849288
https://wahiduddin.net/words/99_pages/rahman_1.htm
https://wahiduddin.net/words/99_pages/rahim_2.htm

reading some of the ol' shi'ite tradition of ahadith to 'Ali, ra. it's uh... it's some good shit, if you will excuse the expression.

>>19850148
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WX7bNiLofIA

>>19848023
An explanation is a paraphrase, nothing new is added. The hadith adds an ammendment to the algorithm in the Quran. It doesn't matter that the error is fixed, it matters that an error exists in the first place.

>>19850479
There is no error though. Do you want me explain again? Just read >>19842878
>>19844018
>>19844021

>>19849019
I believe Shi'ism addresses your concern adequately. On the one hand, we know that, despite what some groups might say, a fully literal interpretation of the Qur'an is untenable; there are a lot of reasons for this, chief among them being that the Quran itself says so (Quran 3:7). On the other hand, as you say if anyone was allowed to speculate as he wished it would easily lead to heretical beliefs. Shi'i doctrine solves this by noting that: the verses of the Quran have both a literal exoteric meaning (az-Zahir) as well as higher esoteric meanings (al-Batin) that are not accessible to normal people. It needs immense emphasis that only a person who God has given direct knowledge of the Quran understands its esoteric meanings firsthand. Such a person first of all is our blessed Prophet--peace upon he and and his noble family--and after him, only Infallible Imams chosen by God Himself to lead His Ummah. No other man could know the true knowledge. This marks one of the main roles of the Imam in Shi'ism as the maintainer of the Quran. There could never be disagreement on the interpretation of the Quran because the Imam and the Quran are inseparable (we have hadith from the Prophet saying so). If one disregards the Imam only to interpret the Quran as one wishes (as Sunnis have done so) mistakes are inevitable. Shia philosophers never speculate on these things. The Qur'an and hadith always retain their primacy in their philosophy and any philosophical argument moves within the bounds of their teachings. In this way, philosophy doesn't speculate against the Quran and hadith, but it helps us better understand them.

>>19849029
The Shi'ite book I'm using as my source doesn't mention the names but gives me this citation. I don't have access to the book but you can check it out if you do.
>Tarikh al-Ya’qubi, vol.ll, p.152
The said book, as I just realized, mentions another interesting fact about Muawiyyah:
>When Uthman was surrounded by those who had rebelled he wrote to Mu’awiyah asking for help. Mu’awiyah prepared an army of twelve thousand men and sent them toward Medina. But he asked them to camp around Damascus and came to Uthman himselftu report on the readiness ofthe army. Uthman said, "You have made your army stop on purpose so that I will be killed. Then you will make the spilling of my blood an excuse to revolt yourself" Ya’qubi vol.ll, p.152; Muruj al-dhahab, vol.lll, p.25; Tabari, vol.lll, p.403
>Abu Bakr
Shias don't deny that during the lifetime of the Prophet Abu Bakr contributed a lot to Islam (like other companions). The issue for which he is harshly criticized is what he did right after the Prophet's death, breaking his oath of allegiance to Ali and declaring himself the caliph through a council which Ali was not even invited to. This is no small thing: it created the greatest schism in Islam. Note that the issue isn't merely political. The Imam in Shi'i teachings is the link between God and man. Thereby by severing this link for himself and for the majority of Muslims, he created the greatest catastrophe in Islam. I don't think he even knew the full weight of his error. It's certainly a notable thing to accompany the Prophet in his departure from Mecca to Medina, but this should be compared to the great sacrifice that Ali was willing to make during the same night. As you know, when the Prophet was informed of the assassination plot in that night, Ali became his double and slept in his place so he could depart without being noticed. The Meccans who wanted to assassinate the Prophet almost killed Ali before they realized it's him in the Prophet's place.
>>19850148
You'll never see narrations like this in Bukhari and Muslim.
https://www.al-islam.org/shiite-anthology-sayyid-muhammad-husayn-tabatabai

>>19851376
>When Uthman was surrounded by those who had rebelled he wrote to Mu’awiyah asking for help. Mu’awiyah prepared an army of twelve thousand men and sent them toward Medina. But he asked them to camp around Damascus and came to Uthman himselftu report on the readiness ofthe army. Uthman said, "You have made your army stop on purpose so that I will be killed. Then you will make the spilling of my blood an excuse to revolt yourself" Ya’qubi vol.ll, p.152; Muruj al-dhahab, vol.lll, p.25; Tabari, vol.lll, p.403
who would be the reporting witness of such an exchange?

>>19851376
>through a council which Ali was not even invited to
this is ofcourse remarkable.
but it really begets the question: why would the Prophet, saws, be close to a man, if this man either knowingly tried to destroy Islam moments after his death, or didn't even understand the most basic fundaments of the religion (if he didn't understand the imamate)?

>>19851454
Maybe one of Uthman's people? I don't have access to Ya'qubi's work. Regardless, that Uthman did ask for help and that Muawiyah said he would send help is recorded in historical sources. This much is written in the Tabari citation.
https://lib.eshia.ir/22009/3/402
And yet, we know that Muawiyah's army never 'arrived'.

>>19851479
I think the 'closeness' is widely exaggerated in Sunni sources. Sure he was friendly to them but not much friendlier than he was to other companions. I really don't think Abu Bakr knew how bad his action really was though.

>>19848287
Sorry, the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم said this to Zubayr رضي الله عنه but it amounts to the same. According to Sunnis Ali رضي الله عنه reminded him of this which is is why he withdrew from the war

>>19848254
That’s just the normal position. Ibn Taymiyyah only made takfir on things which there was ijma on among the salaf if over an opinion. However getting rid of Shariah is not permissible by any difference of opinion, even if I don’t know if some say it’s not kufr. Takfir over something everyone condemns but only some say is apostasy (for example leaving prayer) isn’t takfir over a difference of opinion.

>>19848261
If he weren’t considered a Muslim we would not call him a Sahabi as munafiqs are not called Sahaba

>>19849288
On means appox “mercifulest” and the other merciful but the definite prefix means superlative and so they means utterly merciful and utmost merciful by consequence. Gracious a workable translation as the word for mercy means generous and loving and magnanimous and not just forgiving

>>19851376
There is no sound narration of him giving bayah to Ali. We do know and Shia agree that Ali gave him bayah

>>19851479
The council was held immediately following the Prophet’s صلى الله عليه وسلم death because it was an emergency and there was concern about how to address tribes already fracturing into independent fiefdoms. Ali رضي الله عنه didn’t come because he wasn’t an elder and also because he was given the task of cleaning the Prophet’s صلى الله عليه وسلم body and preparing him for his burial

>>19851606
>There is no sound narration of him giving bayah to Ali.
There is. He did it after the Ghadir sermon.
>We do know and Shia agree that Ali gave him bayah
Lol.
>>19851636
This is what makes it despicable. These people were scheming for power all the while Ali was busy with burying the Prophet. Ali didn't come because no one informed him. Ironically, Abu Sufyan was the one who first told him about the council after the fact.

>>19851666
No, there isn’t

In fact Shia do agree and say he did it to avert fitna. They also agree he praised Abu Bakr but say it was taqiyyah

The whole Muslim state was sliding in civil war that would eventually erupt into the Ridda Wars, holding an immediate council was not “le schemeing” it was an extremely pressing matter that could not be put on hold, battles and sieges were already underway and new imposters prophets announcing themselves

Ali knew very well because he was there when the prophet died and the council of elders and tribal leaders was almost immediately convened. And he took on the obligation of preparing the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم for his funeral. If the council were all his enemies as you suggest they sure wouldn’t care if he was there or not

Why does the Quran condone having sex with children and animals but not having sex with the same gender

>>19851702
The Prophet's successor was explicitly announced in Ghadir. There was no reason for a 'council' at all. The only reason to make a secret council is what people usually do secretly.

Ali as well as the earliest Shias did not accept the saqifa council right away. He did it sometime after Lady Fatima's (a.s.) death to avoid Fitna. If he did really accept Abu Bakr why didn't he make bay'ah with him right away after saqifa?

>>19851702
>it was an extremely pressing matter that could not be put on hold
not even for the time it took to clean the body?

I don't have wudu and have really gone to bed but can someone actually check what the Qur'an says about muslims splintering into sects? it seems very forgotten in all of this.

>>19851745
90% of Muslims (if we are counting Shia as Muslims) including linguistic experts of the scholars don’t consider that anything like establishing Ali as a successor and in fact Abu Bakr was explicitly made imam. The only people who see it as that are mostly a whacky sect that cut themselves and pray to Ali (not just for intercession but because they think he has power over the universe) and condone prostitution (er, excuse me, I mean professional temporary wives) and whose clergy widely permits sec changes

Your Iraqi Hadiths frankly are not valid sources on Ali.

When a khalifah is given bayah it’s mostly by tribal elders and leaders, not every single person. Umar was only given it by those residing in Mecca. When Ali was appoint as advisor to Abu Bakr and a judge he gave bayah

>>19851836
>don’t consider that anything like establishing Ali as a successor
what do you think it established him as?

>>19851866
a super swell guy
this is a joke btw

>>19851836
>90% of Muslims (if we are counting Shia as Muslims) including linguistic experts of the scholars don’t consider that anything like establishing Ali as a successor
The meaning of the word is clear. He emphasized by saying it for three times.
>a whacky sect that cut themselves
A practice condemned by the scholars that some ignorant people do.
>not just for intercession but because they think he has power over the universe
False. We pray for intercession as the Quran recommends it.
>prostitution
Sunni slander. After termination of a marriage (permanent or temporary) the woman must wait three lunar months as the Quran commands (65:1)
>When a khalifah is given bayah it’s mostly by tribal elders and leaders, not every single person.
Yazid killed Husayn (a.s.) because he refused to make bay'ah with him. Your beloved caliphs were shaking in fear until Ali made bay'ah with Abu Bakr after his wife died.

You've gotten so desperate that you're outright slandering, huh?

>>19851866
Mawla comes from ولي, someone very close, and means protector or friend or ally in Quranic usage, with Wali meaning guardian. It can be used to mean heir however in this context that would make zero sense since the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم would have to be saying if I am your heir he is your heir

>>19851962
if there was really no conflict regarding the succession, wouldn't Ali have stamped out his "party" in his lifetime?

>>19851962
>protector
this seems like it would work actually

>>19851947
Some ignorant people? They do it in big gatherings in Iran and Iraq on Ashura and many scholars praised it

Not false at all, it’s istigatha and affirmed in Shia doctrine Ali controls the universe. It will be embarrassing if I have to quote your scholars

Prostitution with paternity required to be known is still prostitution

Sunnis love Husayn and hate Yazid so I’m unsure where you’re going with this. The only difference of opinion within Sunnism is if it is permissible to pray Yazid be damned

>>19851991
They killed him

>>19852001
No Sunni would dispute it but it’s not a title for a ruler or leader (unlike wali), rather a very close friend or ally or patron

>>19851962
Wali means both friend--to God--and guardian--to the the creation--but Mawla (the word Prophet used) means lord and master. No amount of Sunni mental gymnastic will change that fact. Why would he gather a large crowd and make a whole speech in his last hajj to say three times, "Ali is my friend!!" It makes no sense. Also this verse was revealed just as he gave the sermon:

"O Messenger! Convey that which has been sent down unto thee from thy Lord, and if thou dost not, thou wilt not have conveyed His message. And God will protect thee from mankind. Surely God guides not disbelieving people." (5:67)

>>19852028
>just as
just before*

>>19852024
>They killed him
this would hav ebeen a lot later, you know what I mean. why would that go on? you're dodging the quesiton, he could have ended this very early

>>19851991
And do note what kind of persons this party consisted of: Abbass ibn Abdul Muttalib and his sons, Salman al-Farsi, Abu Dhar, Miqdad, etc. All were highly pious and loved and praised by the Prophet.

>>19852028
>Why would he gather a large crowd and make a whole speech in his last hajj to say three times, "Ali is my friend!!"
this is the critical question>>19851962
what was the point?

>>19852008
I'm not going to bother with you. You follow Abdul Wahhab, I'll follow Imam al-Mahdi and his father and forefathers.

>>19852028
Mawla does not primarily mean lord or master in classical Arabic. It actually did come to be used that way because it replaced the practice of referring to the owner of a slave as Rabb—Lord or Master—because Rabb was reserved for Allah. So the owner of a slave was referred to as his Mawla. That is a second’s definition of the word which is used precisely because it *doesn’t* mean lord and certainty the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم would not apply it to himself or Ali to mean owners of the Ummah.

>>19852050
It doesn’t just mean friend in the casual English sense, it means someone who extremely close and dear and important and you stick by them in extreme loyalty

Anyway I'm logging off. If anyone wants a good overview of Shia Islam, I recommend this book.
http://faculty.umsu.ac.ir/DownloadHandler.ashx?pID=33&sectionID=71&file=Shia-in-Islam+-+Copy.pdf&SectionType=DownloadList&FileID=26

>>19852113
so muslims are instructed to have extreme loyalty to Ali, and Ali accepted that his party went on, and this in no way indicates a conflict?

>>19852122
Shia of today have zero to do with those who supported Ali against Muawiyya except maybe some crackpots among them (and they originally included the khawarij as well) Shia today are goody revisionists

>>19852137
this doesn't answer the question man- AGAIN

>>19852137
>t. someone who genuinely supports Muawiyyah

>>19852143
Your question is a bit ridiculous because Ali didn’t ever have a conflict with Abu Bakr or Umar or Uthman. He had one with Muawiyya

>>19852149
I think Ali’s side was the right one

>>19852113
alright, last question: what stature did the Prophet, saws, mean to give Ali by saying this? what was to be his place in the umma? why was this worth doing? for him, particularly? why is he singled out?

>>19852233
All did quite a bit, anyone who studies Seerah can find he was the finest warrior of the Muslims and repeatedly given the banner. He also was the only son in law of the prophet (Umar and Abu Bakr were also but their wives died) who passed on his bloodline, we know how precious the prophet’s صلى الله عليه وسلم grand children were to him and the status accorded Ahlul Bayt. We also know that Ali was one of the rashidun which the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم said accept their sunnah. And that he was one of the ten promised paradise and most were singled out in special and significant ways

>>19842409
There are two types of Muslims. The first one are the Muslims who integrated in Western nations (in nations such as the US) and there are those who fail to do so (ie every single Muslim immigrant in Europe)

>>19852209
>I think Ali's side was the right one
Incredibly based

Fresh bread
>>19852687
>>19852687
>>19852687