Quran Club

[ΟΥΤΙΣ No.19791951]

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم والحمدلله وأشهد أن لا إله إلا الله وحده لا شريك له وأشهد أن محمدا عبده ورسوله صلى الله عليه وسلم

A series of threads explain it the entire Quran verse by verse إن شاء الله تعالى


Last thread
>>19750281

Discord
https://discord.gg/ysvruzyY2E

This week’s verse
>الحمد لله رب العلمين
Alhamdulilahi Rabil ‘Alameen
The Praise to Lord of the Worlds

>الحمد Al-Hamd
So Hamd (حمد) means “praise”. Muhammad means the praises one for example and Ahmad means someone who praises (the h in these words is ح by the way, which is like blowing on your glasses, it’s not the guttural خ h that right wingers use when mispronouncing Ahmad). In the older sense this was also verbal gratitude. Shukr (شكر). Some linguists say Hamd comes from praising someone for a quality whereas shukr comes from praising them for an action, so to praise a quality you compliment but to praise a favor you return it or try to otherwise show appreciation. You may have noticed the word here has the definite prefix al, الحمد. That is because when something is definite in Arabic it can also make it definitive. This if you say someone is honest and praise it that’s Hamd but if you praise someone for ALL their qualities that would be Al-Hamd. And we only do that with Allah عز وجل. We don’t for example praise the Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم for his quality of mortality, rather we praise him for select qualities, not every single quality.

Now, why Alhamdu (الحمدُ) instead of Alhamda (الحمدَ)? That is, why is this nominative declension rather than accusative? Because that would indicate an unstated subject giving the praise, a third party.

>لله lilahi
Why this form instead of الله (Allah)? In Arabic two definite prefixes don’t follow, example Medinat an-Nabi (City of the Prophet) is not called Al-Medinat an-Nabi. In almost all cases, the definite prefix is dropped from the first word, but if we did that here we would lose the particular significance of attaching it to Hamd.

Continued in posts below

[ΟΥΤΙΣ No.19791954]

>>19791951
Now when we talk about Allah, this name precedes others (etymology explained in the last thread). So we say Allah is The Almighty, not The Almighty is Allah. So we are praising every quality and name of Allah. So why is Allah starting His book by praising Allah? The earlier chapters included the word قل (say) at the beginning, which we recite verbatim but is a command for us to say. The first word revealed of the Quran is اقرأ
(96:1) which means read or recite (reading was aloud back then so the term for read was recite), a command. The command is implicit in every chapter, we are commanded to recite after Allah.

We use this term anytime to say thank God or Hallelujah. Even in hardship if someone asks how we are we are to say Alhamdulilah because it is gratitude as well as patience in hardship which a major theme in Quran

>رب
Rabb means Lord roughly. It means proprietor in a generally exclusive sense. You might have joint owners or proprietors but Rabb generally refers to a sole proprietor. It suggests someone who manages and cares for something as well, not just possesses it. Its a term used just as appropriately for the owner of a slave as for the owner of a garden. It also means someone who sets something right and puts it in order. If can be used as I mentioned for men in some contexts but should never be used to refer to the office of ruler since this is a convention from jahiliyyah (literally “ignorance” referring to the Arab era before Islam) according to Tabari. Tawheed ar-Rububiyya (Tawheed of Lordship) is considered just as in Islam as Tawheed al-uloohiyyah (from ilah, see last thread). Sayyid Qutb says about this verse, “Acknowledging God’s absolute Lordship makes all the difference between clarity and confusion in regard to God’s oneness.” Qutb would later refer to modernism as jahiliyyah because he believed modernity was among other things defined by religious ascription of Lordship to the state, for just as the pagan Arabs believed in one creator but accepted multiple lords, so had the people of modernity allowed the state to take the place of God’s lordship even if they still had Tawheed al-Uluhiyyah

>العلمين
‘Alameen is the plural form of ‘Alam which itself is innately plural but can still be pluralized, like water(s). ‘Alam means signs as in phenomena (in Heidegger’s sense which he distinguished from Kant’s although the Greeks used the term in both ways). It also said to mean worlds (again in Heidegger’s sense, the Christian idea of the world is closer to the term dunya دنيا).

The Rabb in this verse can be recited in any declension according to Qurtubi although it is conventional to use genitive since that establishes this verse and the following two as a single sentence. If nominative then it begins a new sentence and the verse is pronounced “Alhamdulilah. Rabbul ‘Alameen” instead of Alhamdulilahi Rabbil ‘Alameen.”

[Anonymous No.19791988]

[Anonymous No.19791993]

[Anonymous No.19792001]

[Anonymous No.19792016]

>>19791988
>>19791993
>>19792001
These have been dealt with, answered, refuted, rebuked, and debunked many times in previous threads. Check the archives.

Furthermore this is the literature board, which is for literature, and these posts are if in good faith better suited for the humanities board, and if in bad faith merely trolling and ought to be dealt with by the moderation either way.

[ΟΥΤΙΣ No.19792017]

>>19791988
>>19791993

I made a thread before with like a five or six long post OP going through that stuff and a sequel one, you’re probably familiar with it, or do you want me to dig it up for you on the archives?

[Anonymous No.19792022]

I am friends with a muslimah. Yesterday she was telling me about her pooping her pants as a child. What did she mean by this?

[Anonymous No.19792026]

>>19792017
If he is aware, he wants you to waste your time dealing with him.
Ignore them, I'll deal with them if I'm here I'd rather you don't get distracted.

[Anonymous No.19792056]

I'm looking to order a nice looking Arabic edition of the Qur'an, one which also has those marks that help with where to do waqf in recitation. Any recommendations?

[Anonymous No.19792064]

>>19792017
You should have its link at hand ready to reply to him anytime he starts to spam these pictures.

[Anonymous No.19792073]

>>19791988
>>19791993
>>19792001
this is probably bait but i fully agree
islam is a religion for one who wants to sell his free will, for a man too dumb to actually git gud and find God within
not that there's something wrong with that. some people are just born this way.

[ΟΥΤΙΣ No.19792086]

>>19792056
Every single mushaf I have ever seen has those except very old ones I only see photos of

>>19792064
I did for a long time but it seemed after the a dozen times he didn’t read it or care

[Anonymous No.19792098]

>>19791951
>that right wingers use
stopped reading there, stick your sandnigger religion up your ass faggot

[Anonymous No.19792102]

>>19792022
I'm not joking or trying to derail the thread. I literally had this conversation with my muslimah friend. I thought muslim women were supposed to be these prim and proper feminine figures and here she's talking about pooping her pants as a child to a non-mahram.

Is this what muslim women are like?

[Anonymous No.19792106]

>>19792086
>Every single mushaf I have ever seen has those except very old ones I only see photos of
I know, but I've seen two kinds of them. One of them has more signs than the other so it's more helpful in longer verses. I don't know its name but I'm looking for the one that has more.
>>19792086
>I did for a long time but it seemed after the a dozen times he didn’t read it or care
Yeah it seems he doesn't care to have an actual debate. But posting the link nevertheless would help the lurkers who might read his pics.

[Anonymous No.19792118]

>>19792064
No, the spam should be removed by the mods and the spammer banned from posting. Very simple.
The fact of the matter is that the spam is intended to waste time and derail the thread. There is absolutely no reason why this thread should not be on this board it is absolutely on topic and OP makes an effort to make a good thread, the least we can expect is for it not to be targeted by these off-topic, flaming derailing trolls who are not engaging nor seemingly willing to engage with the actual thread topic, which as stated is on-topic and an effort post OP.

[Anonymous No.19792125]

>>19791951
what do you think about the ottoman empire, the last caliphate?

[ΟΥΤΙΣ No.19792128]

>>19792106
Tajweed Quran is loaded with not only markings but coloring of letters for correct pronunciation

I’m having trouble with warosu right now but إن شاء الله I’ll post it in a few hours

[SAGE No.19792129]

>UHM MODS CAN YOU BAN THIS GUY BREAKING MY ECHO CHAMBER

[Anonymous No.19792137]

>>19792118
At this point the "mods" (i.e., trannyjannies) only remove posts they don't like. I've seen perfectly on topic threads immediately removed but blatant spams kept untouched. Very disappointed in them, but I suppose they do it for free so there's that.

[ΟΥΤΙΣ No.19792147]

>>19792125
Mixed feelings, obviously better than what we have now but also overly romanticized for their late stage, they essentially degenerated from an Islamic state into a poorer version of westerner states except for Muslims but the advantage was it helped keep us unified regardless. Now we’re divided and under some of the worst rulers in history

[ΟΥΤΙΣ No.19792154]

>>19792147
Our history, anyway. But that’s more of a /his/ topic

[Anonymous No.19792160]

>>19791954
What is the difference between Alameen and Dunya? Do either correspond to a strictly materialist world?

[ΟΥΤΙΣ No.19792181]

>>19792160
One means appearance as in something announcing itself visually or by other signs making its presence known. A two-fold meaning here because the ‘Alameen are the signs Allah makes Himself known with. The opening of this prayer is an epistemological postulate as elaborated later, just as Descartes premises the self the Quran premises God (and gives more explanations and arguments throughout). Instead of starting with the sovereign subject we start with the sovereign Lord based on His making His presence evident. In the worlds sense it means like my world or your world or the world of men or the world of jinn and so forth. The world of sports , the world of philosophy, the world of reading etc. Dunya means worldly concerns like material gain, not necessarily as in matter but the “affairs of the world” and what it values so to speak

[Anonymous No.19792216]

>>19792147
>Were all Ottoman Sultans Sufi Muslims?
>The term “Sufi Muslim” is meaningless in an Ottoman context; it only acquires sense in the post-Ottoman era, when forms of explicitly “non-Sufi” Islam, which in Ottoman times would have been far outside orthodoxy, launch concerted and public (as well as well-funded) attacks on these institutions. Probably the best way to convey this is my own surprise - as a Christian of the former Ott. emp., and hence outside post-19th c. Islamic cultural discourse - to discover that the Bektashi Sufis are now “Shias” in modern discourse. If the religious order of the janissaries, bound to the Ottoman state from its inception under Osman I, is now “Shia”, then we can consider the Ott. emp. “Shia” by extension: a leap in logic partly justified by historical ignorance, and partly by the child-like enthusiasm some people show in laying around charges of heresy. In any case, the following narrative - Osman’s dream - was probably the most popular used by the Ottomans in describing the birth of their empire; supposedly happening when Osman was sleeping in the house of one Shaykh Edebali, a figure associated with Hajji Bektash, to beg the hand of his daughter in marriage. On his awakening, the shaykh interpreted the “moon” as his daughter, giving birth to a dynasty by Osman, and blessed their union. The political translation of this goes, the Ottoman state was foundedby seeking the patronage- marital and political -of Sufi leaders. The expansion of the Ottomans and the dervishes who led their troops was synonymous, and formed the material basis of their rule in the Balkans; every Ottoman sultan (much like many other Islamic rulers of their time) sought the “tutelage” of a Sufi as his personal spiritual coach. None of this was distinguished from some other, non-Sufi form of Islam as far as these people knew. To try and impose the distinction is hopeless, and if done thoroughly will make words lose their meanings.
Do you agree with this response?

[ΟΥΤΙΣ No.19792235]

>>19792216
The Ottomans and Safavids were archenemies and in fact Muslim tribes that didn’t like the Ottomans for political reasons often declared themselves Shia just to align with the Safavids (and not necessarily even knowing or caring about doctrinal disputes). The Safavids meanwhile massacred Sunnis and monks for being unbelievers, the Ottomans eventually declared Shia unbelievers as well (but were not harsh on them if they paid up). Sufism is a spectrum and so is Shiasm (less so today). In short this response makes no sense to me

[Anonymous No.19792236]

>>19792160
I would also add to OP's reply my understanding that Dunya means the material world (along with worldly concerns), contrasted with Akhira, the Hereafter. And 'Alameen means every world God has created (as the anon pointed out, it is plural), so it includes both the material world and the Hereafter. It is interesting to point out the singular 'Aalam comes from the root verb "علم", to know; so 'Aalam means "that by the way of which one reaches knowledge", or as the OP accurately pointed out, corresponds with the Greek sense of phainomenon.

[ΟΥΤΙΣ No.19792252]

>>19792236
Dunya includes entities and things we would not necessarily consider material such as jinn. Islam is not dualist in the Christian sense imo.

[Anonymous No.19792285]

>>19792252
Yes that's interesting. But if jinns are made of fire, are they not included in the material? From what I've seen in hadiths, jinns can sometimes appear in material world as material entities. And there are there are verses such as 67:5 in the Qur'an where it said Allah sends heavenly bodies (in the astronomical sense) upon jinns.

[ΟΥΤΙΣ No.19792316]

>>19792285
Mala’ika are made from light. Jinn are the original inhabitants of Jannah which is where their name comes from. The distinction between material and non material just isn’t as firm in Islam as Christianity, souls have a place and remain in a grave, that’s a pretty material quality. Angels travel a certain speed and have dimensions

[Anonymous No.19792325]

>>19792316
You would be right to say that, but I guess I never thought of jinns as included in the dunya. Is there an evidence for this?

[Anonymous No.19792327]

>>19792285
Did pre-Islam and early Islam thinkers use the Greek division of elements and Aristotles Physics? In that case a Jinn would have an continuous physical existence.

[Anonymous No.19792340]

>>19792327
Early and pre-Islam Arabs did not have access to Greek texts until an Abbasid caliph ordered them to be translated so he could have access to alchemy and get richer. I would highly doubt it is influenced by Greek thought.

[Anonymous No.19792351]

Why is this cult obsessed with pork?

[Anonymous No.19792361]

>>19792235
Well, the point of this response is that the ottomans (including their founder and thier other sultans) would be considered sufis under today's labeling. Basically historical islam IS sufism/tasawwuf, unless we are revisionists and imagine that the early generations were something different from the ottomans (this would be contradicted by many hadiths but ofc, the salafis would tell us that they are "weak"!)

[Anonymous No.19792362]

>>19791951
there are thousands of verses. what is the purpose of this? you're not going to still posting these threads 5 years from now.
stop with this cringe larp and go to muhammad forums dot com or wherever you people are. you won't win any converts on 4chan lmao.

[ΟΥΤΙΣ No.19792392]

>>19792325
Dunya is defined as interests apart from Deen (47:36) the purpose of which is to test us (67:2). Jinn reproduce, die and can go to heaven and hell and just like us can be religious or frivolous.

>>19792361
I don’t know what you mean by historical Islam, Sufism is an extremely old thing of course and it has gone through many changes and branches. Saying Islam is synonymous with it is a bit ridiculous, Sufism means particular orders which most Muslims don’t belong to

[Anonymous No.19792395]

>>19792216
Do keep in mind the distinction between Sufis and Shias get fuzzy at times, as Sufis believe in the spiritual wilayah of several Shi'i Imams but reject Shi'i jurisprudence in favor of the Sunni one; also that the so called "Sufi metaphysics" which you can find in people like Ibn Arabi and Rumi corresponds heavily with early Shi'i texts. There is evidence in the research of the 20th century French Islamologist Henry Corbin that early Sufism "descended" from Shi'ism, as a way of retaining Shi'i spirituality but integrating with the Sunni majority. Furthermore consider that the line between Shi'ism and Sunnism could be so thin that the pre-political Safavids were a Sunni Sufi order that after a few generations ended up Twelver Shia.

[Anonymous No.19792442]

>>19792395
Sufi is not a sect, sufism is a kind of catch-all descriptor for esotericism and aestheticism within Islam.
That's why it doesn't make sense to, for example, enquire whether one is a sufi or a sunni or a shia or whatever, there are sufis who are sunni and there are sufis who are shia (and other kinds of sects besides shia).
As to the difference between the shia and the sunni there are some shia whose jurisprudence is practically (if not totally) the same as the hanafi madhab.
I seen a paper once which outlined the sufi order family tree, lineages of sheik to student to sheik and I remember there were 3 from Ali(ra) and 1 from Abu Bakr(ra), I don't recall what the paper was called though but that's possibly something related to what you're saying about the history of sufism.

[ΟΥΤΙΣ No.19792461]

>>19792395
There is nothing fuzzy about it. Shia consider multiple wives of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم as basically whores and witches and his companions as apostates. This is definitely not something Sunni sufis accept

[Anonymous No.19792484]

>>19792442
The point is, the "esotericism" of early Islam is only found in Shi'i hadith texts. Early Shi'ism prior to the occultation was basically an exclusive esoteric initiatory group. In fact the kind of "worldly" Shi'ism (I should specify, I mean Twelver) that you see today was unheard of prior to the Safavid rule, and only came to existence when the Safavids forced what used to be an exclusive esoteric group upon the majority Sunni majority of Persia, resulting in an "exoteric" Twelverism. The Sufi group you talk about is known as Naqshbandi, which is a notable exception. All the other traditional orders start with the lineage of the first six Shi'i Imams.

[Anonymous No.19792496]

>>19792461
Yes, as I said, early Sufism was a sort of movement to integrate Shi'i spirituality with Sunnism, so they they took away all of the elements of Shi'ism incompatible with Sunnism--such as the cursing--took on Sunni jurisprudence, but retained the esoteric spirituality. By the way, the cursing of Aisha and Hafsa, while historically common, is now very rare among orthodox Twelver Shias. They do curse Muawiyah and Yazid though.

[Anonymous No.19792509]

>>19792395
I wouldn't trust Henry Corbin.
>>19792392
>Saying Islam is synonymous with it is a bit ridiculous, Sufism means particular orders which most Muslims don’t belong to
Most muslims today yes but in the past, things were different. In west african countries (the least westernized muslim countries alive), the majority of muslims belong to a turuq, there is almost no village which doesn't have one. You see, this is the problem, western converts/westernized muslims(all revisionists included) want to teach others how to be muslims, while instead they need to be teached, by those who still have lineage.

[ΟΥΤΙΣ No.19792511]

>>19792484
I don’t know what you mean by esoteric, if you mean secret interpretations that are, in all honesty, pretty lame and not very interesting, then I don’t know. If you mean spiritual experiences, purification and that sort of thing, this is nothing to do with Shiasm which originated as a political faction that didn’t like Uthman رضي الله عنه (ironically the same source of the khawarij who ultimately killed him)

[Anonymous No.19792515]

>>19792509
>I wouldn't trust Henry Corbin.
Why? I find his work very compelling.

[ΟΥΤΙΣ No.19792519]

>>19792496
I see Shia on twitter curse the mothers of the believers all the time. They don’t have big public displays of it in the age of mass media because it’s a public relations disaster but we all know what they actually believe and how taqiyyah works

[Anonymous No.19792522]

literally the bible 2. great book.

[ΟΥΤΙΣ No.19792524]

>>19792509
Yeah and those are extremely different orders from classical Sufism, they’re more like the Islamic version of holy rollers

[Anonymous No.19792565]

>>19792511
The term is notably hard to define. Suffice to say one of the Shi'i Imams has the epithet of the Imam of az-Zahir and al-Batin, the Imam of the outside and the inside.
>>19792519
I link you the ruling of the two most prominent Twelver Shia marjas, which prohibit the cursing. These two include the overwhelming majority of Twelvers.
https://web.archive.org/web/20160615231302/http://english.khamenei.ir/news/3905/Ayatollah-Khamenei-s-fatwa-Insulting-the-Mother-of-the-Faithful
https://www.iraqinews.com/baghdad-politics/religious-authority-sistani-condemns-cursing-prophet-mohammed-s-companions/
As for Twitter Shias, they either follow an obscure scholar or do not follow one at all. The point is, they are an insignificant minority. Coming from a Shia family from a Shia country, I have never seen in public or private the someone curse the wives of the Prophet or the Rashidun caliphs. The people who do that are looked down upon as extremists.

[Anonymous No.19792589]

>>19792515
because he is an orientalist who tries to put everything under the group which he likes
>>19792524
ok mr. "let me teach you what your religion ackchyually says"

[Anonymous No.19792605]

>>19792589
>because he is an orientalist who tries to put everything under the group which he likes
This isn't a good criticism imo. He is far more than an orientalist, given his initial training as a philosopher and Heidegger scholar, and his work is better described as "phenomenology of religion", so he is far more than your average orientalist. From what I've takes great care in the rigor of his arguments.

[Anonymous No.19792617]

>>19792605
>philosopher and Heidegger scholar
stopped reading right there

[Anonymous No.19792624]

>>19792617
With this attitude you would do well to stop reading altogether (if you haven't already).

[ΟΥΤΙΣ No.19792631]

>>19792565
Yeah a lot of people have claimed that title imo such claimants have about as much legitimacy as the self-proclaimed caliphate of ISIS

Khamanei did this largely for political reasons, Khomenei and long established precedent says the opposite

[Anonymous No.19792668]

>>19792631
But do note that this Imam is Muhammad al-Baqir ibn Ali ibn Husayn (the martyr) and was esteemed very highly by Abu Hanifa.

As I said, the practice has historical precedent (sadly), but is mostly disowned now. Sistani has no political status and is the greatest Shia marja currently.

[ΟΥΤΙΣ No.19792691]

>>19792668
Yeah but I don’t know if that narration is authentic

A bit difficult to take turnarounds seriously when the doctrine of taqiyyah is even used to nullify Hadiths from Ali رضي الله عنه

[Anonymous No.19792714]

>>19792691
The important point is that the practice of cursing is not a teaching of the Imams. To be clear, from the earliest Shia texts figures like Abu Sufyan, Muawiya and Yazid are cursed, but I have never seen the cursing of Rashidun or the wives of the Prophet in a narration of the Imams. During the last century Shia scholars have done a lot to denounce innovations and revive largely forgotten but authentic practices.

[ΟΥΤΙΣ No.19792724]

>>19792714
I’ve seen much worse things than cursing them in such narrations

[Anonymous No.19792735]

>>19792724
I don't know what you mean by "worse". If you mean describing the conflicts they had with the family of the Prophet, evidently the Shi'i narrative is different from the Sunni. Otherwise you should check whether the narration is regarded as authentic or not.

[ΟΥΤΙΣ No.19792753]

>>19792735
Shia usool al-hadith is tremendously subjective because it accepts the principle that Hadiths narrated from liars can be accepted even without corroboration because of the premise that liars are not incapable of telling the truth. Furthermore Hadiths which are authentic and conflict with Shia doctrine can be written off as taqiyyah

[Anonymous No.19792773]

>>19792753
You probably remember we had this debate months ago. You are referring to a quotation from Khomeini, which says narrations from unreliable narrators could be reliable IFF they are proven true by a Quranic verse or a narration from a reliable narrator. I don't see any problem with that.

[ΟΥΤΙΣ No.19792804]

>>19792773
I don’t recall that conversation and I wasn’t referring to him.

[Anonymous No.19792807]

>>19792340
pre-islamic arabs did actually have acess to ancient greek philosophy, the most notable pre-islamic arab philosopher would iamblichus

[Anonymous No.19792817]

>>19792804
Very well. What are you referring to?

[Anonymous No.19792824]

>>19792807
damascius and nemesius as well

[ΟΥΤΙΣ No.19792858]

>>19792817
> We shall learn in the coming lessons that sometimes a Hadith is weak as far the chain of the narrators are concerned, yet the scholars accept its content. On the other hand, there may be an authentic Hadith as far as the chain of its narrators is concerned. Yet the scholars do not rely on it. For if a narrator is weak it does not mean he would never tell the truth. Similarly, it could be that a Hadith is truly narrated from one of the Imams (a.s.), yet the Imam did not have a real intention in expressing it such as the Ahadith of Taqiyyah.

https://www.al-islam.org/sciences-hadith-mansour-leghaei/meeting-5-causes-weak-ahadith-books-shia
> A Maqbool Hadith is the one that the scholars considered it acceptable and acted upon it whether it is a Sahih or Hasan or even a weak Hadith.

[Anonymous No.19792862]

>>19792807
These people were not representative of the Arabs. Iamblichus studied under a Syrian Orthodox Christian, Anatolius of Laodicea. Some Syrian Christian scholars knew Greek, and when the translation process started it was through their translation of Greek work into Syrian which then was translated into Arabic. Before then, Greek texts were not translated into Arabic and Arabs did not have access to them (save for the minority of Syrian Christians).

[Anonymous No.19792872]

>>19792858
Yes this is the quotation you sent me during that conversation (for some reason I misremembered it being from Khomeini). The answer is all the same: >>19792773
>narrations from unreliable narrators could be reliable IFF they are proven true by a Quranic verse or a narration from a reliable narrator. I don't see any problem with that.

[ΟΥΤΙΣ No.19792877]

>>19792872
No, heh, nothing about that. It just says they’re true if the mullah find them so

[Anonymous No.19792890]

>>19792877
In this introductory paragraph he only says that (with the purpose of introducing them). If you read through the book where he actually discusses Maqbul narrations, you will see what he means.

[ΟΥΤΙΣ No.19792931]

>>19792890
But! the second part I quoted isn’t from the introduction, it’s from the part where he discusses Maqbul narrations. You see, I already read that section. You’re bluffing, blowing smoke. You know he doesn’t suggest anything like they have to be corroborated by ayat of Quran or authentic Hadiths

[Anonymous No.19792936]

>>19792931
Relax anon. It isn't discussed in the booklet you sent me. I just found an English source for you that discusses it.
As the booklet you sent says:
>The most famous Maqbool Hadith is the one narrated by Omar Ibn Al-Hanzalah.
Maqbool narrations are exceedingly rare and an especial case. Here is the description on the basis of which Ibn al-Hanzalah's narration is accepted:
>Muhammad Taqi al-Majlisi writes that the hadith has been transmitted from 'Umar b. Hanzala through different chains from Dawud b. al-Husayn-who is a Waqifi but reliable transmitter of hadiths- there is no comment on 'Umar b. Hanzala's reliability or unreliability, but al-Shahid al-Thani considered him as reliable. The jurisprudents have accepted the hadith because of the correctness of its contents in comparison with other hadiths. It seems that they take its contents to be semantically, although not verbally, mutawatir. Moreover, the hadith has been transmitted through three chains from Safwan b. Yahya, one of the People of Consensus, and all Shiite jurisprudents accept hadiths transmitted by the People of Consensus.
https://en.wikishia.net/view/Maqbulat_%27Umar_b._Hanzala

As I said, the accepted it by cross referencing its content with accepted ahadith, and the fact that reliable people confirmed Ibn Hanzalah.

[ΟΥΤΙΣ No.19792962]

>>19792936
How does any of this have anything to do with corroboration? All these chains lead back to him?

[Anonymous No.19792987]

>>19792962
Yeah, Ibn al-Hanzalah is the first narrator, and the issue is he isn't mentioned in any Rijal work. This is apparently the only narration from him. The scholars have accepted his narration on two basis:
1. They have cross-referenced its content with other narrations.
2. Some of the extremely reliable companions of later Imams (known as People of Consensus) have confirmed the narration by narrating it.
So even though he is "unknown" in Rijal works, his narration is considered Maqbool

[ΟΥΤΙΣ No.19793008]

>>19792987
He’s a literal who, you have no idea if he ever even saw Jafar let alone was imparted with crucial information by him yet this hadith is used a major reference in Shia doctrine. The book also says this principle can be applied to known liars. Corroborating “contents” by that you don’t mean other people heard this, you mean aspects of the doctrine in it can be found in one form or another in Shia doctrine

[Anonymous No.19793029]

>>19793008
It says the hadith is semantically accepted, not verbally, because other ahadith confirmed it. Unfortunately I don't have access to the book it cites, so I can't see what other hadiths were compared to it. But the second basis stands. I understand in Sunni hadith science if companions of the Prophet confirm something it is considered reliable, yes? So here we have close companions of Imams confirm it, which is an analogous process.

[ΟΥΤΙΣ No.19793068]

>>19793029
No. Rather if the meaning is sound but the Hadith is mursal it is quoted as basically opinion (because the meaning being sound obviously depends on the scholar’s idea this meaning is corroborated which is dangerously subjective—a Hadith about frowning at a pair of shoes could be used to say a Hadith saying shows are cursed is solid). A school who agrees with the meaning of the Hadith will quote it as part of his opinion not as a proof

[ΟΥΤΙΣ No.19793074]

>>19793068
Shoes* are cursed

[Anonymous No.19793084]

>>19793068
Let us say Umar Khattab narrates a narration from some unknown person, but he seems to believe in his narration. How would Sunnis rate this narration? Since this is exactly the second basis I mentioned. Another point you should consider is Ijma. I understand that if Sunni scholars have consensus on something it is considered true, right? We Shias don't believe this, but nevertheless there is Ijma between Shia scholars here so you guys should believe it (kek).

[ΟΥΤΙΣ No.19793095]

>>19793084
It would be acceptable as mursal, not as authoritative. And we’re not even talking about a sahabi

[ΟΥΤΙΣ No.19793102]

>>19793084
And ijma in Sunnism means unanimous. It’s basically impossible to obtain now and refers mostly to a consensus of the Sahaba

[Anonymous No.19793116]

>>19793095
Well then, on this point Shi'i Usul differs with yours. But I hope to have shown it isn't as arbitrary as "whatever the mullahs like". There is a scholarly process behind it.
>And we’re not even talking about a sahabi
Umar isn't a Sahabi?
>>19793102
This is not what I have read. I have read at any time during history if Sunni scholars are in agreement on something then it is true according to Sunnism, supposedly based on a hadith from the Prophet which says something like, "there will never be a time when all of my Ummah are misguided on something."

[ΟΥΤΙΣ No.19793132]

>>19793116
Yes he is but your guy isn’t

That’s technically true but the standard is unanimity which is almost nonexistent unless already established because there’s no way to measure or prove it even. That’s why when we use ijma as a proof it’s almost always based on the Sahaba

[Anonymous No.19793160]

>>19793132
>Yes he is but your guy isn’t
Yes but Sahabi of Imams have confirmed him by narrating his narration. As I said, it is an analogous thing to that Umar hypothetical I said above.
>That’s technically true but the standard is unanimity which is almost nonexistent unless already established because there’s no way to measure or prove it even. That’s why when we use ijma as a proof it’s almost always based on the Sahaba
Do you mean the agreement should be extended to the past scholars? If all currently living Sunni scholars end up in agreement on something which prior scholars as well as Sahabis have said nothing about, then wouldn't it be a case of Ijma for Sunnism?

[ΟΥΤΙΣ No.19793170]

>>19793160
That’s interesting, you consider the imams equal to the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم ?

It would be but it’s extremely unlikely and basically unprovable and some consider ijma requiring laity not just scholars plus what constitutes Sunni is disputed

[Anonymous No.19793320]

>>19793170
>That’s interesting, you consider the imams equal to the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم ?
Not equal, but not too far away from him either. I have to explain to you some important concepts in Shi'i theology here (which are, Wilayah and Imamah). You must understand Prophecy and Imamat are not exclusive of each other. Prophecy means, as I'm sure you would agree, receiving revelations. Imams do not receive revelations, but what gives authority to an Imam is his spiritual authority--his Wilayah. So Imams have authority because of their Wilayah. But a Prophet could also have Wilayah and therefore be an Imam in addition to being a Prophet, and conversely a Prophet could also lack Wilayah and only be a messenger without authority. This is shown by a verse from the Qur'an, 2:124:

'And [remember] when his Lord tried Abraham with [certain] words, and he fulfilled them. He said, “I am making you an imam for mankind.” He said, “And of my progeny?” He said, “My covenant does not include the wrongdoers.”'

So God tests Ibrahim and only then makes him an Imam--a spiritual leader--even though he was before that still a Prophet. It is crucial that the word Arabic word "Imam" is used verbatim in this verse. Now regarding your question, Prophet Muhammad--peace be upon him and his blessed family--was both a Nabi and a Wali (like other Ulul Azm Prophets). He both received words as revelations and had spiritual authority given to him by God. The difference between him and the Twelve Imams is that the Imams do not receive revelation but they share his Wilayah.

An important thing to be noted his the Prophet's word on the Event of Ghadir (mutawatir in both in Shi'i and Sunni sources):
مَنْ کُنْتُ مَولاهُ فَهذا عَلِی مَولاهُ
"Whoever I am his Mawla, then this Ali is his Mawla."
As you know, Mawla means the person who has Wilayah. Thereby he is understood as announcing Ali's authority.

[Anonymous No.19793484]

>>19793320
>مَنْ کُنْتُ مَولاهُ فَهذا عَلِی مَولاهُ
What's the evidence that this is referring to spiritual authority and not just temporal authority?

[ΟΥΤΙΣ No.19793716]

>>19793320
The Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم left Abu Bakr رضي الله عنه in charge of prayer when he could no longer do it. The person who leads the prayer is called the imam. Although really trying to split the offices like Christians is needlessly complicated and has no basis in the sunnah or the Quran, Allah sent prophets to be obeyed, period.

I’m familiar with Shia political thought, Khomenei said he is a higher authority than the Quran which no doubt you would probably say is wrong but not kufr. This is such an outrageous thing to say but the problem is no one cares, however if he said his authority is greater than Ali’s رضي الله عنه you would doubtless take huge offense. With that in mind I’m unsure why you came into this thread on Quran looking to start something sectarian and basically ignoring the Quran. No, actually I do.

Let’s discuss your linguistic point: there is absolutely zero basis in Quran waas-Sunnah to limit imamship to spiritual authority or leadership and in fact we find that this is in direct conflict with Quran waas-Sunnah. Ibrahim عليه السلام like any prophets could be sent only to one people or to all mankind. Very few prophets were ultimately dispatched to all humanity but he was one.

Does anyone inherit the office of a prophet? No and the Quran stresses that the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم has no son (33:40). That is silly, who inherited the authority from Jesus and passed it down to Muhammad? No one. The closest we have is the scholars who are called the heirs of the prophet in the sense they inherit the knowledge he left but not in the sense they can receive and dictate unilaterally like he did

[Anonymous No.19793738]

Can one of you tell me where this is from?

>kızılderililer, fazla yürüdükleri zaman, hemen bir ağaç bulur, altında oturur ve beklemeye başlarlardı. onlara neyi bekledikleri sorulduğunda şöyle cevap verirlerdi ; bedenimiz hızlandı, ruhumuz geride kaldı, ruhlarımızı bekliyoruz.." burası benim ağacım

at least please use your turkish skills to help me find where this is from.

[ΟΥΤΙΣ No.19793998]

>>19793738
Sorry I don’t know any Turkish

[Anonymous No.19794034]

>>19791951
How did you know I just started the quran today

Also verse 62 of The Cow BTFOs every infidel killer

[ΟΥΤΙΣ No.19794060]

>>19794034
That verse refers to non infidels.

[Anonymous No.19794074]

I'm a Christian (19y), should I get into Islam ? It it justified reading the books ? Also, do you consider a sin to visit this website ? I think Its better to leave..

[ΟΥΤΙΣ No.19794080]

>>19794074
I don’t consider this board worse than public in the west. Many of the other words are definitely sinful to visit though

There are good lectures for getting into Islam on the discord

[Anonymous No.19794429]

>>19793484
There is a whole chapter about it in al-Kafi, but for the purpose of demonstration I will use Sunni sources below.
>>19793716
>Who inherited the authority from Jesus and passed it down to Muhammad?
The earth will never be without a divine leader. Starting from Adam, the first Prophet and the first Imam, down to the Seal of the Prophets Muhammad and lastly his Progeny and the last Imam al-Mahdi. According to the teachings of our Imams every Ulul Azm Prophet has Imams, including Jesus. While I do not wish to concern myself with the lurking Christians, the case with one Prophet, Moses, is clear: his Imam was Aaron, or Harun. The comparison of Moses and Aaron with Muhammad and Ali is remarkable: Moses leaves Aaron in charge of the Jews as he sets out to Mount Sinai as God ordered. As soon as he leaves, the Jews disregard the order of Moses, disregard Aaron completely, and start worshiping the golden calf. What happens after Muhammad leaves? In fact, a narration of the Prophet mutawatir in both Sunni and Shi'i hadith, Muhammad says to Ali (1):
أنتَ مِنّی بِمَنزلةِ هارونَ مِنْ مُوسی، اِلّاأنـّه لانَبیّ بَعدی.
"You are to me as Aaron was to Moses, except that there is no prophet after me."

>Does anyone inherit the office of a prophet?
According to Sunni hadith, yes. In one of the six sunni sahihs--Al-Sunan al-Sughra--the famous narration of Thaqalayn is relatedin this way (2):
کأنی قد دعیت فاجبت، انی قد ترکت فیکم الثقلین احدهما اکبر من الآخر، کتاب الله و عترتی اهل بیتی، فانظروا کیف تخلفونی فیهما، فانهما لن یفترقا حتی یردا علی الحوض
"It is as if I have been called and I answered [my time of death is near]. Indeed I have left among you the two weighty things [Thaqalayn] among you, one of which is greater than the other, the Book of God and my family, my household (Ahl al-Bayt). So look after how you will behave with them after me, indeed they will never separate from each other until they enter my presence by the pond [in the paradise]."
(the Shi'i narration is slightly different: it does not say one is greater than the other).

Along with the Qur'an he leaves us his Household, his Ahl al-Bayt, who are inseparable from the Qur'an. Who is this Ahl al-Bayt? In a moment of honesty, Aisha answers in Sahih Muslim (3):
"One day, the Prophet (s) came, with a kisa' (cloak), woven from black wool, on his shoulder. First, al-Hasan (a) came and the Prophet (s) covered him with the kisa', then al-Husayn (a) came, he covered him with the kisa', then Fatima (a) came and went under the Kisa', and then Ali (a) came and the Prophet (s) covered him with the others with the kisa' and said: "Indeed Allah desires to repel all impurity from only you, O Ahl al-Bayt, and purify you with a thorough purification."
The above narration refers to the revelation of 33:33.


(1/2)

[Anonymous No.19794430]

So the Ahl al-Bayt consists of Ali, Fatima, Hasan and Husayn--the purified ones. Let us have one last hadith, mutawatir in Shi'i sources (4):
إِنَّمَا مَثَلُ أَهْلِ بَیتِی فِیکُمْ کَمَثَلِ سَفِینَةِ نُوحٍ، مَنْ دَخَلَهَا نَجَی، وَ مَنْ تَخَلَّفَ عَنْهَا غَرِقَ
"The likeness of my Ahl al-Bayt among you is like the Ark of Noah, whoever entered it was saved, and whoever stayed behind was drowned."

Indeed, the earth has never been and will never be without a divine Leader, chosen by Allah, who is His light to Guide, who is His Proof upon his creation, His Hands with which He acts, and His Face B which He presents.
"All that is upon it passes away. And there remains the Face of thy Lord, Possessed of Majesty and Bounty." (55:26-27)
Let this be enough for this occassion, for I have other obligations to attend to.
Assalamu alaikum wa rahmatullahi wa barakatuh

(1) ابن عبدالبر، الاستیعاب فی معرفة الاصحاب، ۱۴۱۲ق، ج۳، ص۱۰۹۷
(2) نسائی، السنن الکبری، ۱۴۱۱ق، ج۵، ص۴۵
(3) مسلم، صحیح مسلم، ۱۴۲۳ق، ج۱۵، ص۱۹۰
(4) شیخ طوسی، الأمالی، ۱۴۱۴ق، ص۶۳۳

(2/2)

[Anonymous No.19794446]

So the Ahl al-Bayt consists of Ali, Fatima, Hasan and Husayn--the purified ones. Let us have one last hadith, mutawatir in Shi'i sources (4):
إِنَّمَا مَثَلُ أَهْلِ بَیتِی فِیکُمْ کَمَثَلِ سَفِینَةِ نُوحٍ، مَنْ دَخَلَهَا نَجَی، وَ مَنْ تَخَلَّفَ عَنْهَا غَرِقَ
"The likeness of my Ahl al-Bayt among you is like the Ark of Noah, whoever entered it was saved, and whoever stayed behind was drowned."

Indeed, the earth has never been and will never be without a divine Leader, chosen by Allah, who is His light to Guide, who is His Proof upon his creation, His Hands with which He acts, and His Face by which He presents.
"All that is upon it passes away. And there remains the Face of thy Lord, Possessed of Majesty and Bounty." (55:26-27)
Let this be enough for this occassion, for I have other obligations to attend to.
Assalamu alaikum wa rahmatullahi wa barakatuh

(1) ابن عبدالبر، الاستیعاب فی معرفة الاصحاب، ۱۴۱۲ق، ج۳، ص۱۰۹۷
(2) نسائی، السنن الکبری، ۱۴۱۱ق، ج۵، ص۴۵
(3) مسلم، صحیح مسلم، ۱۴۲۳ق، ج۱۵، ص۱۹۰
(4) شیخ طوسی، الأمالی، ۱۴۱۴ق، ص۶۳۳

(2/2)

[ΟΥΤΙΣ No.19795119]

‘Isa bin Maryam علته السلام is an extremely important person in the Quran (unlike ‘Ali رضي الله عنه ) and sidestepping it supposedly because you plead fear of offending Christians and then trying to take a potshot at A’isha رضي الله عنها who is beloved by Sunnis tells me all I need to know about you. Indeed the whole thing comes down like a house of cards because who is the imam of today? Oh he’s been hibernating for hundreds of years (and probably never existed—prior to this complete silence on his part, Shia clerics would say he’s hiding but still demand money to secretly take to this man no one has ever seen )? This would defeat the whole point.

There are not “six Sunni sahihs”. Bukhari and Muslim are referred to as “the two sahihs”. There are two, not six. There are six large popular collections of Hadiths but those besides Bukhari and Muslim all contain weak Hadiths. The version given in Sahih Muslim is that the Quran is left as a guidance and a light and that Ahlul Bayt are to be shown the dignity of a charge upon us, this is indeed one reason why we are so protective of the mothers of the believers against slander of them.

Aaron عليه السلام was a close support to Musa عليه السلام but that doesn’t indicate a relationship similar to Dawood and Sulayman which is actually what you’re suggesting. The Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم left Abu Bakr رضي الله عنه in charge of leading prayers, not Ali رضي الله عنه . Instead of taking what is clear and using that to settle the ambiguous you ignore what is clear and seek ambiguous interpretation and the Quran warns about such people in 3:7. We also know Ali رضي الله عنه praised Abu Bakr and was his personal advisor which you write off as taqiyyah.

If A’isha رضي الله عنها were dishonest there is no way she would suddenly lapse into honesty for no benefit. This a clearly example of your method of grading hadiths, you say the source is wretched liar but then use them as a primary because you say they “lapsed into honesty”. Does that make any sense? Your whole methodology makes no sense. It is not permissible in Shariah for a liar to give testimony. The explanation here is you pick and choose narrations to suit your sect. You dismiss Aisha as a liar but say she lapses into truth when you want to accept a narration from her, and you uphold Ali as perfectly honest but then label his words taqiyyah when you want to reject a narration from him

[Anonymous No.19795125]

>>19795119
>There are six large popular collections of Hadiths but those besides Bukhari and Muslim all contain weak Hadiths.
According to? You?

[ΟΥΤΙΣ No.19795165]

>>19795125
No, according to usool al-hadith on account of some have chains with questionable narrators (Ibn Luhi’a for example was a prolific narrator of Hadiths and astute scholar but in his age he became a bit forgetful and would misremember some things and so we cannot use chains passing through him) That doesn’t mean they aren’t mostly reliable just that they are not considered almost perfect like Bukhari and Muslim because they are not quite as rigorous in background checks of the people in the chains

[Anonymous No.19795193]

This thread is based and Muhammad pilled. Thanks Quran bro.

[Anonymous No.19795416]

OP, how long have you been Muslim? Salamu Alaykum. Have you studied under any shuyookh? You seem to be very grounded at least in the basic sciences of this religion.

[ΟΥΤΙΣ No.19795419]

>>19795416
I’ve been a Muslim since late 2019 by the Christian calendar

I have studied under an Alim

[ΟΥΤΙΣ No.19795426]

Wa alaykumu as-salam warahmatullahi wabarakatahu

[Anonymous No.19795460]

why does your prophet fuck children

[ΟΥΤΙΣ No.19795480]

>>19795460
Child marriage was normal until public education became widespread

[Anonymous No.19795499]

>>19793738
Ask this blogger, he will surely know
http://blog.milliyet.com.tr/duygular-ve-bedenimiz/Blog/?BlogNo=606314

[Anonymous No.19795547]

>>19795419
Was it difficult to get in touch with an Alim who could teach you Arabic? Or an Alim at all?

[ΟΥΤΙΣ No.19795698]

>>19795547
Nope was just extraordinarily blessed that one was locally available as there are precious few in America

[Anonymous No.19796081]

>>19792862
>Some Syrian Christian scholars knew Greek, and when the translation process started it was through their translation of Greek work into Syrian which then was translated into Arabic.
no doubt over that, my point is that when the syriacs had translated classical greek works, they've rapidly reached the arabs in Palmyra, emesa etc as many of them were fluent in syriac

[Anonymous No.19796111]

>>19791951
Brothers, is there anything more cringe that alt lite/IDW types complaining about Islam's lack of feminism and LGBTQIAP2+?

May God bless you all today

[Anonymous No.19796121]

>>19795480
based. let's just say my lifestyle puts me in contact with lots of teenage girls and it is absolute criminal that we can't marry them

instead they get used up by Tyronejamalvious and make PowerPoints until they're 35 then decide they want one retarded kid

[Anonymous No.19796127]

Best English scholarly translation of the Quran?

[Anonymous No.19796151]

>>19796127
The Study Qur'an. OP will seethe at the commentary but the translation is top tier.

[Anonymous No.19796160]

>muhammad
pedophile plagiarist btfo by hume
>Let us attend to his narration, and we shall soon find, that he bestows praise on such instances of treachery, cruelty, revenge and bigotry, as are utterly incompatible with civilized society. No steady rule of right seems there to be attended to; and every action is blamed or praised, so far as only it is beneficial or hurtful to the true believers.

[Anonymous No.19796197]

>>19796160
>Let us attend to his narration, and we shall soon find, that he bestows praise on such instances of treachery, cruelty, revenge and bigotry, as are utterly incompatible with civilized society.

[ΟΥΤΙΣ No.19796401]

>>19796160
A lot of seething for a guy who said right and wrong are just feelings

[Anonymous No.19796454]

>>19796401

[Anonymous No.19797825]

bump