Sunnism versus cults and sects



Download 0.58 Mb.
Page4/12
Date conversion04.02.2017
Size0.58 Mb.
1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   ...   12

It is related in "Shifa Sharif of Imam Qazi Ayaz on page 362 and 363,

  • If anyone utters such a statement that declares the entire Ummah to be deviated, is surely a kaafir”

  • It is in Sahih Bukhari on page 893 and in Sahih Muslim on page 57, narrated from Abu Zarr RaĎīyAllāhu ánhu that the Holy Prophet śallAllāhu álayhi wa sallam said,“Whosoever claims someone to be filled with kufr or considers him to be the enemy of Allah and if this is not true then this remark of his returns to him”.




    • Hazrat Abdul Ghani Nablusi Rahmatullah alayhi writes in his Hadiqatun Nadiyya Sharah Tariqa Muhammadiya, Egypt Publication 1276 A.H, in Volume 2, on page 156,“Similarly, to label someone a Mushrik or something similar to it and if the recipient was not a Mushrik in the first place then the one who said it will become Mushrik”.




    • Whoever denies something from the necessities of faith, has definitely disbelieved, and whoever doubts in his disbelief and his punishment has indeed disbelieved”. (Fatawa Bazzaziyya and Durr ul Mukhtar)



    • It is said in Shifa, Khayriyya, Durar wal Ghurar, and Bazzaziyyah, “All Muslims unanimously agreed upon the ruling that one who insults the Messenger is a kafir, a disbeliever, and one who doubts he is a disbeliever has also disbelieved".

    • This is explicit kufr, in Fatawa Alamgiri, volume 2, pg. 258, it says: "If anybody mentions an attribute of Allah that is not in accordance to His Glory (like researching ghayb in this case) or if someone brought one's attention to a thought that will most likely lead to envision Allah's attributes to be partial, defective or in ignorance; then such a person is Kaafir", (Fatawa Hindiya, Nuraani Kutub khana, Peshawar, Vol.2, pg 257).

    • In Bahaarur Raaiq it is mentioned in volume 5 on pg. 129, in Bazaair volume 3 on pg. 323 and in Jaami' al Fasooleen in volume 2 on page 298, "If anyone utters something that is against the Majesty of Allah, has become a kaafir", (Jaamiul Fasooleen, Al-Fasl Thaani Islamic Kutub khana, Banauri town, Karachi, Vol. 2, pg 298).


    The Main Signs of the Schismatic and Deviant Groups
    The sign of the deviant sects is that they differ with Ahlus Sunnah in regards to their rejection of the Sunni authorities on knowledge of belief, jurisprudence/law and spirituality.
    The Two Main Schisms from Early Times: The Kharijites and Shiites
    Kharijite and Wahhabite groups reject the Sunni caliph’s authority because they deny he must be from Quraysh. Also by declaring major sins as Kufr, they easily start rebellion against any caliph on the basis that he is a disbeliever, therefore they are the last people to be concerned with establishing a caliphate. Historically, they were the group instrumental to the destruction of the caliphate, and any examples of them ‘implementing Sharia’ through violence, false jihad and establishing an Islamic state is nothing more than facilitation of Israeli foreign policy in the Middle East and betrayal of Islam.

    This is because Israel wants to create the perception to the rest of the world that it is surrounded by bloodthirsty Arabs for which reason it needs to violently expand so that it can live in peace.

    When the Salafis call for the overthrow of a certain leader or starting a revolution, or establishing an Islamic State, every move they make is fulfilment of a Satanic agenda, and is equivalent to the crime of highway robbery, fornication, or manslaughter. They are the people furthest away from fulfilling the purpose of Islam.

    -They reject the authority of the elite jurists (Mujtahids) in matter of law and claim ijtihad for each of their followers. Directly inferring laws from Quran and Hadith without accepting the great research of the master jurists is their key distinguishable trait. Even still, the verdicts they come up with are usually completely incoherent and irrational.

    -They also reject the third authority which is that of following the Sufi orders in spiritual matters and they reject the hierarchy of saints. Spiritual benefit would come to them even if they just made intention or held the Sufi masters in respect, they would not even need to be attached to any particular order.

    -However, due to their lack of vision, they consider the hierarchy of saints to be a form of oppression, unaware of the fact that for over a millennium, human beings have been gaining elevation and power from considering themselves to operate underneath a hierarchy of highly evolved spiritual masters.



    -Now we have already highlighted at the beginning of this document that the basis of Sunni Islam is spirituality, but the Wahhabi group, as well as their Shiite counterparts, see spirituality as an afterthought, and this is shown in their rejection of Sufism. More details on this would be given in a deeper study, if requested.
    Shiism:
    POSITION OF THE CLASSICAL SCHOLARS

    And in Radd ul Muhtar, commentary of Durr ul Mukhtar, the commentary of Tanwir ul Absir by Allamah ibn Abideen in Kitabun Nikah, he says that if the Rafidhi is the one who definitely/strongly believes in the divinity of Ali, or that Jibril made a mistake in delivering the revelation to the Holy Messenger alayhis salam, or if he denies the companionship of Abu Bakr as Siddiq, or if he insults Sayyidah Aisha or curses any of the companions or insults them then he is a disbeliever because of his denial of things known by necessity of faith. Whoever raises the rank of Imam Ali over all the companions then he is an innovator only and not a disbeliever. In Ibn Abideen‟s book: „Tanbih al Wulat wal Hukkam ala Ahkam Shatimu Khayrul Anam Aw Ahadu Ashabihi al Fahham alaihi wa alaihim us salaatu was salam‟, he quotes Mulla Ali Qari in his risala as saying, “Whoever curses any one of the Companions then is a fasiq and mubtadi by consensus, except if he believes cursing them is permissible, or they try to decrease the divine rewards on the Companions, as do many of the Shia, or if he believes in the kufr of the Sahaba then indeed he is a kafir by consensus”. (this applies to all Shia today who pray for decrease of reward upon the Companions, curse them, considering it as recommended and praiseworthy, and who believe that the Companions apostate. All of them are disbelievers). Ibn Abideen also quotes Fatawa al Bazzaziyya in which it is explained that it is wajib to call the Shia as kuffar for the following beliefs: in the return of the dead to life in this world at the end of times, and in the belief of tanasukh, or transmigration of the soul, that the soul of an individual can pass into a new body and repeat life, similar to reincarnation, or the belief in the Spirit of God passing through the 11/12 Imams, and that the Imams are deities, inheriting the soul of Ali, who was a deity, and their idea that the duty of hisba (commanding the good and forbidding the evil) is postponed until the emergence of an Imam who speaks the truth, or in their belief that Jibril made a mistake in delivering the revelation.


    EXTRA RESEARCH:

    SHIISM: Identified as a cult within Islam, reflecting the 'Divine Kingship' cult paradigm, relating to the original cult of Mithras, a.k.a. Sun Worship, similar to that which has been translated into Christianity.

    INTRODUCTORY STATEMENTS:

    Three main pathways to apostasy:

    1. Denial of something known as necessity of faith.

    2. Insulting God or Prophet in some way/

    3. Declaring entire nation to be disbelievers.
    We need to list those elements about which most argumentation takes place/around which conflict can arise, or which can be used as fuel for sectarian conflict/killing, as is being done in Pakistan, and then, we do some psychological/philosophical analysis, then offer a solution which aims to satisfy all right thinking parties, and will help to clear the battlefield where hypocrites have hidden it and where devils have magnified it. This is the general agenda between real Islam and all other thought groups, and helps ease the burden of those people who feel that they need to prove the truth of Islam to others of different thought but are not able to, and prevents unprofessional missionary work by over-eager people of Islamic faith who just end up looking desperate, it provides a stable and constant presentation of all potentially controversial ideological points, which people can refer to in order to find out the Islamic opinion when they are interested, and so that those who are confused by these debates can see the answer clearly and put the issues behind them. It allows for the Islamic nation to concentrate on their own progress without feeling that their ideology is under threat, as often it may seem they have to, and provides a final word to all those who have any type of interest in these matters to any manner of degree.

    Points of Shiite Belief and Practice which have become a point of contention (i.e. in the same rank as the Muslim dispute with Christianity on Trinity, or the Jewish dispute with both Islam and Christianity on the validity of the prophecy of both Jesus and Muhammad):

    1.       Incomplete Quran:

    In the commentary of musallam ath thubut, p.617: “I have seen in majma ul bayan, a Shia tafsir, that some of them believed that the Quran was more than that which is in the present Quran. Whoever utters this statement is a disbeliever because of his refusal of the fundamentals of religion.”




    “The Holy Qur’an is incomplete” [31]

    “The original Quran is with the 12th Imam” [32]

    “The Sahaba are hidden conspirators against the Quran, they removed the passages that mentioned the virtues of Imam Ali. Imam Ali also showed the original Quran to the Sahaba but they rejected it” [33]

    Some say that Hazrat Uthmaan or companions or Ahlussunah scholars, have omitted some chapters of the Holy Qur’an. Some say “they have changed some words”. Some say “though this practice of omitting and changing of the Quran is not definitely proven, but it is certainly doubtful”.



    https://ssl.gstatic.com/ui/v1/icons/mail/images/cleardot.gif
    Is the major division apart from Wahhabis also whom reject the three authorities in knowledge.
    In contrast to the Wahhabi group who regard authority to be for anyone and reject the caliph having to be from Quraysh, the Shia have a belief that authority is restricted only to eleven individuals whom they have chosen themselves as the sole inheritors of all three authorities claiming that they are divinely selected. This belief was not always held by them, and was only canonised after the death of Imam Hasan Al Askari.

    In jurisprudence they do not follow the verdicts of the researchers of the four law schools, considering them all obsolete, but they follow what Shia scholars have decided constitutes the prophetic sunnah, based on fabricated hadith.

    They deny the sources of Islamic law, which are the companions and their students, since they believe them all to have apostatised after the passing of the Prophet.

    In spiritual matters they also deny the Sunni Sufi authorities in knowledge. The main Sufi masters (initiators of chains of spiritual teachers) are from the lineage of the Imams of the Prophetic family. Shiites claim to follow that lineage, if they accepted the teachings of the main Sufi authorities, this would be problematic and it would require them to re-enter the folds of orthodoxy.

    The Sufi authorities from the Prophetic household all believed in the true tenets of faith, as per the Sunni theological authorities, in fact they were all authorities in that field themselves. Shiites do not desire to adopt Sunni beliefs, so many of them deny that the authorities in question actually belong to the prophetic family, such as Imam Ali al Hujwiri, or Shaykh Abdul Qadir al Jilani. Like the Mutazilites they do not accept the possibility of wilayat, kashf and karamat (sainthood, gnosis, and miraculous actions) for other than the prophets, or in their case, the Imams they themselves have chosen and regard as infallible.

    They are naturally deeper in hatred for those Syed spiritual authorities who wrote tracts and epistles refuting Shiite beliefs.

    Anyone who goes outside the four legal schools in matters of jurisprudence is a person of deviance; the reason for their abandonment of the adherence to the Sunni authorities in legal knowledge is so to allow their own interpretation in matters of law. This is convenient for those who wish to legalise things which are prohibited, such as drinking alcohol, or fornication/adultery.

    Some of their main beliefs include:


    1. The apostasy of the entire Islamic nation:

    This is by implication of the verdict that whoever disbelievers in the ‘Imamate’ of one of the Imams is a disbeliever, but most people accept the Imams as righteous leaders in knowledge, but simply reject the Shiites very specific cult attitudes towards them.

    Who disbelieves in Imamate is kaafir. "The consensus of all Twelver Shia is that whoever denies the Imamah of any Imam, and denies the allegiance imposed by Allah Ta'ala for him (the Imam), then he's a Kafir deviant, deserving eternal Hell."(Bihaar al-Anwaar: Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi, vol.23, p.390, from Aqeedat al-Imamah: Dr. Ali As-Saloos, p.29)".

    Understanding Shiism as just another cult makes the role of the Imam easy to understand. Cults consider themselves as deserving of salvation by default and by merit of the supernatural qualities of their Imam, this is a natural human psychological response to fear or inner weakness. The same thing happened famously with Prophet Jesus, the cult was named Christianity. Cults take away the need for all the moral striving and genuine sincerity needed by members of orthodoxy, deification of their leaders allows them to do this. This is why the divinity of the Imamate is so important in Shiism.

    By implication of this fundamental tenet of Shiite belief recorded by one of their foremost authorities, Mulla Baqir Majlisi, the majority of Shiites are disbelievers according to the verdicts of the classical Sunni authorities, unless they of course unanimously reject this fundamental tenet of Shiite dogma as well as the veracity of the scholar who recorded it.

    It is hardly likely that such a rejection would take place since the belief in Imamate is the central pillar of the Shiite community, without which the structure of their cult would collapse.


    1. Superiority of Imams to Prophets:

    The Sunni authorities were aware of the beliefs of many of the Shiites that their Imams were superior to the Prophets. This was highlighted as an aspect of cult philosophy, and thus the verdict was given, on pg. 365 of ash shifa:

    We surely declare those extremist rawafid as disbelievers who say that Imams are superior to Prophets”.



    1. Denial of matters known as Necessities of Faith:

    The belief of the apostasy and illegitimate leadership of the early caliphs was similarly a key aspect of Shiite thought, and so Sunni heresiographers were able to highlight key statements of dogma by Shiite thinkers as integral to the structure of the cult.

    One of these was related to Caliph Abu Bakr, in relation to 1) The legitimacy of his leadership and 2) The truth of his association with the Prophet. Many Shiites both negate the legitimacy of Abu Bakr’s reign as caliph, and also the sincerity of his alliance with the final Messenger. This is the basis of the Shiite propaganda used to substantiate the narrative that Imamate belongs to the Alid Household, and that salvation and redemption can come from satanic rituals, such as cutting oneself and ones family during Muharram, known as matam, or cursing the companions of the Prophet, including the early caliphs.

    More verdicts recorded in radd ur rifda by Imam Ahmed Rida Khan describe the jurists’ position on this group:

    From durr al mukhtar, p.64: “If someone denies any of the necessities of the religion, then he is a disbeliever. For instance, to say that Almighty Allah is like a physical body, or to refuse the companionship of Hadrat Siddiq”.

    It is stated in Tahtawi’s commentary of Durr al Mukhtar, vol.1. p.244, “similarly, the refusal of his caliphate is also disbelief”.

    It is stated in fath ul qadir, the commentary of al Hidaya, published in Egypt, vol.1. p.248, “Amongst the rawafid, if there is someone who says that Hadrat Ali is superior to the three caliphs, you can tell he is a cultist. And if he refuses the Caliphate of Hadrat Abu Bakr as Siddiq and Hadrat Umar, then he is a straight disbeliever.”

    In al Wajiz of Imam al Kardari, vol.3. pg. 318, “the refuter of the caliphate of Hadrat Abu Bakr is a disbeliever. This is the correct verdict. And the refuter of the caliphate of Hadrat Umar Faruq is also a disbeliever. This is the most correct judgement.”

    From the commentary of an Niqayah, there is a citation from Fatawa Zaheeriyah: “the refuter of the Imamate of Abu Bakr is a disbeliever, according to some theologians he is only a deviant. The correct verdict is that he is a disbeliever. Similarly, according to the most correct verdict, the refuter of the caliphate of Umar is also a disbeliever.”



    1. Morally Weak and Satanic practices: Swearing at the early caliphs

    It is known from the practice and books of the Shiites to this day, that they continue the practice of cursing the early caliphs. This is considered as disbelief, the one who practices it is thus a disbeliever.

    It is stated in Uqud ad Durruyyah, pg.92-93: “the rawafid are disbelievers on several accounts. One of them is the refusal of the caliphate of the Shaykhayn (the Two Elders). Whoever is attributed to any of the above mentioned dogmatic tenets is a disbeliever.”




    1. Apostatisation of Leading Other Companions:

    From fatawa bazzaziyya: “to declare that all rawafid, nawasib, and khawarij are disbelievers is obligatory because they all declare Uthman, Talha, Zubayr and Aisha as disbelievers.”



    1. Incomplete Quran:

    In the commentary of musallam ath thubut, p.617: “I have seen in majma ul bayan, a Shia tafsir, that some of them believed that the Quran was more than that which is in the present Quran. Whoever utters this statement is a disbeliever because of his refusal of the fundamentals of religion.”

    All of the above verdicts were cited by Ahmed Rida Khan in his detailed epistle, ‘radd ur rifda’ (Rejection of the Rejectors).

    Mufti Ebu’s Suud in his Fatawa and Allama Muhammad Aminuddin Shami in his Tanqih ul Hamidiyya, pg.93 state: “the scholars of all ages and times have agreed unanimously on this that one who doubts the disbelief of these rawafid is himself a disbeliever.”


    HADITH ISSUES:
    ON HADITH

    “The reason that Sunni books do not have hadith propagating the divine Imamate and its aspects are due to the fact that their predecessors never turned to the Ahl’ul bayt rather they intentionally narrated things from those who opposed their view of divinely bestowed Caliphate…” [23


    That Abu Hurayra was a false narrator, who fabricated many hadiths in order to hide 'the true message of islam', leads to a general notion that hadith were never supposed to be part of the corpus of Islam, that they should be ignored. etc.
    That the hadith collectors were at the payroll of different people and who compiled hadith just to please certain parties, rather than transmit 'true islam'. The hadith collectors are also found guilty of removing information on the Imams and the virtues of Ali.
    This is the general narrative, to which sometimes convincing proof is adduced, however the mere task of compiling research to refute this narrative is sheer futility for the right minded individual, as these discussions are circular and lead nowhere. The least an individual can conclude from assessing these arguments is that the narrative of Shiism is largely based on propaganda for a pseudo prophetic cult movement.
    Historical Narrative of Shiism:
    1. Passing of prophet: AB and U stole caliphate.
    2. Abu Bakr transmitted caliphate hereditarily, setting up Yazid.
    3. Uthman was elected by stepping over Ali due to semantics "I will uphold/I will try".
    Uthman was corrupt, deserved to be killed, but Ali tried to save.
    4. As soon as Ali became caliph, A,T +Z tried to take it away, Battle of Jamal depicted as insurrection towards new caliph, Battle of Siffin= Muawiya/Damascenes insurrection towards Caliph, Uthman's death used as pretense.
    5.Ali Assasinated, al Hasan's ascension. At this time, it is depicted that Muawiya was scheming for control.
    6. Al Hasan's abdication is considered to be as a result of Muawiya scheming rather than Shiite mischief, as was the real case.
    7. Muawiya reigned 30 yrs, considered as Umayyad victory against Alids in race war.
    8. Muawiya elected his own son Yazid as caliph, depicted as deliberate despotism/nepotism, projected back towards Uthman, i.e. general Umayyad practice versus Alid nobility.
    9. Yazid's government + Battle of Karbala.
    10. Entire period of history of 11/12 Imams depicted as a) one in which the Imams were sidelined from society having no impact and b) when intelelctually weak Sunnis usurped/hijacked narrative of Islam, creating inauthentic/rigid/literalist hermeneutic devoid of guidance of Imams of prophetic bloodline.
    11. Occultation of Imam denotes end of Shiite narrative, all propaganda relating to this period. After this, Shiism existed secluded, small pseudo-caliphate, e.g. Fatimids/Ismailis, Buyids, then Safavids. Shiites also were active trying to influence court of Mughal Emperor Jahangir.
    All of this period of history builds up into the Shiite propaganda base, also, later instances of injustice they faced are added to the sacred canon of anti Shiite oppression, similar to Judaism.

    https://ssl.gstatic.com/ui/v1/icons/mail/images/cleardot.gif

    CALIPHATE:


    As is argued with Salafite/Wahhabist groups, nobody can argue about the Caliphate, neither Shiites nor Wahhabis, as both of them have a hand in destabilising Islamic leadership by their ideology and activities. Salafites cannot now demand caliphate since they helped the British dismantle it through the proxy Wahhabi revolt, and have not yet turned to Sunnism.
    Equally, the Shiites cannot complain that the Imams were oppressed throughout history due to conspiracy, and that allegiance to the prevalent caliph could not have been possible. There were many caliphs who upheld the post of governance, fufilled their duties, perhaps they were an arm and a leg missing of the Alid bloodline but still performed a key function, and in now way can be seen as usurpers/criminals as Shiite ideology insinuates. Even if the conspiracy to avoid giving caliphate to twelve Imams from the prophetic bloodline were true, its importance has diminished since the establishment of Khomeini's state, since Shiite scholars considered Jihad and Caliphate to be nullified except for when the Mahdi emerged from occultation, thus the establishment of the Islamic Republic indicates the Shiites building a state for themselves without an Imam, which undermines the entire basis of the actual political philosophy of Shiism, i.e. one Imam divinely appointed who is infallible, under whose guardianship or wilaya the state shall operate. Now this accolade has been shifted down a degree to validate itself through the wilayat al faqih, the Guardianship of the Jurist, and this is just a contradiction of the original force behind all Shiite activity, revolts, killings, sectarian social activity, propaganda, etc, etc, is now being shown as largely an unnecessary endeavour.

    The Prophetic family, undertook the role of imparters of sacred knowledge and spiritual guidance throughout Islamic history, Shah Abdal Aziz Dehlavi himself mentions in tuhfa ithna ashariyya the debt that Islamic scholarship has to the early Husayni Imams, by mentioning specifically the statement of Imam al Azam Abu Hanifah's famous statement, "Were it not for two years, Nu'man would  have perished". This great Imam of hadith, i.e. Shah Abdul Aziz continues to say, "what is intended by 'two years' here is the years in which the Imam kept company to gain knowledge from the Imam Ja'far as Sadiq, radiallahu anhu. More than one person has narrated that he  took knowledge and tariqa (spiritual path) from this Imam, as well as from his honourable father, Imam Muhammad al Baqir, and also from his uncle, Imam Zayd Ibn Ali ash Shaheed, radiallahu anhum... and it is enough for this chapter to say that most of the spiritual paths (taraiq) reach us by the Ahlul Bayt, and nobody would try to deny this matter, except for he who attempts to deny the difference between the dead and the alive" (Shah Abdul Aziz, mukhtasar tuhfa ithna ashariyya, p.24). There is much significance in this short passage as to the respect and honour given by the elite ulema to the early Imams from the Prophetic family, and it serves as a refutation to those obstinate enemies of the Prophetic household who seek to seperate the Muslims from their true legacy, by affirming that not only did Imam Abu Hanifa take religious knowledge and sciences from these Imams, but also Shah Abdul Aziz mentioned the word tariqa, indicating that  he considered their spiritual station so high that he accepted the Imam as Sadiq as his spiritual master for two years. This in turn serves as refutation to those who dismiss authentictasawwuf as a manifestation of gnosticism and kabbalah in Islam, and in turn accomplish the Dajjalic goal of turning Islam into a one-eyed faith, incapable of spiritually deciphering the reality of the world today, indeed, the institution of tariqatraces its roots to the most highly regarded individuals in Islamic history.

  • 1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   ...   12


    The database is protected by copyright ©dentisty.org 2016
    send message

        Main page