Should shaukat the shia have his account frozen?

[Samira]

Shaukat the Shia is still spreading his fitnah and deception. Who would like to see his account removed?

[Abuz Zubair]

Shaukat,

Are you really a Shia? If so, then which subsect do you belong to?

Anyone can see the way you are being treated on these forums, however, my concern is to confirm whether is there any truth in what people accuse you of, and if so, are you happy with your status?

Briefly, can you answer the following simple questions?

1) Are you an Imami Shia (which includes, Ja'fari, Ithna 'Ashari)
2) Do you believe that Usul al-Kafi is a reliable Islamic source?
3) Do you believe that Quran that we have has been changed and tampered with by Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthman (and hence called Mushaf Uthmani?)
4) Do you believe that the companions of the Prophet SallAllahu 'Alaihi wa-sallam apostasized, rebelled and betrayed Islam by appointing Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthman as the Khulafa?
5) Do you believe in going to graves and asking the dead saints for help?
6) Do you believe that the Shia Imams have the knowledge of the unseen, they know when they are going to die, how and they choose when to die?
7) Do you believe in Mut'ah practices? And if so, would you practice it yourself, and allow someone to practice it with a female member of your family?
8 ) Do you believe in self-mutilation as practised in the Shia world?


I would be grateful if you could answer these either questions.

[Abu Yusuf]

Asalaamu alaikum wa rahmatullah

Br. Abuz Zubair forgot to ask him whether he believes in Tuqiya (deception - which is a fundemental tenet of the Shi'ite doctrine)?

[Al-Hajeji]

.......

[Sayf]

............

[gag order]

i want to hang dr. khan

that shitelover who was quick to expose himself as one, just read all his posts, he replies just in time to back up shaukat, maybe he is shaukat!

shaukats failure to answer br. abuz zubairs questions is for all to see.

shaukat once again you have made a poor case in your defence of jewish orientalism and shiaism, you are nothing but a thouroughly defeated miserable kaafir!

:lol: :lol: :lol:

[Samira]

Look look look:

Did your 'Ameer' go to Afghanistan to fight the Russians or professor Rabbani - or he was only giving 'fatwas' to cashh-in from the Saudis?

You Wahabis are the 'Fifth column' among the Muslim Ummah.


'Shaukat' 'is' 'the' 'only' 'person' 'on' 'this' 'board' 'who' 'makes' 'excessive'
'use' 'of' 'quotation' 'marks'

You know, the this is not the first shia I've seen who posts under different names to defend themselves. It was the same on iccislam.org, when a shia made FOUR posts under a different name when I exposed the dalaalah and fitnah of their belief, and best of all, all posts were within 5 minutes of each other! Hmm... four different shias all online within 5 minutes posting on the same thread! Is this (going under different user names) part of your shia religion too?

Anyway, I think the results of the poll speak for themselves. Maybe now you'll take the hint?

[gag order]

i figured early on that dr. khan must be shaukats rear end! :lol:
the rear end tries to give the mouth (shaukat) some credibility :lol:
which is going to be difficult because shaukat opens his mouth to take out the foot already in there only to put the other one in. you see when he wrote the topic "oops i stepped on a secterian toe" just reinforces this. and yes the dr. does use qoutation marks just like shaukat - well spotted sis! we can expect shaukat to blow from both ends both verbal and actual diarrhea

[Al-Hajeji]

.......

[gag order]

shaukat is a queer just like rest of his shias. you know what else they been kissing? the shite cleric was just out of order with the full-on kiss!

the last time they did this was when they helped the mongols invade iraaq in 1258ad must have been a gay old time for them!

may be the fighting in around najaf is really about american soldiers trying to fight off interest from shite men!

[Samira]

So, coming back to VOTE; does my vote counts?

No, Shaukat, it doesn't.

[gag order]

:lol:

[Samira]

LOL! 9 want you to go, not even one wants you to stay, so shaukat khan, I ask you, why are you still here?

[gag order]

i think we may need to freeze more than just his account, his brain or whats left of it should be frozen until such time a cure could be found for intellectual epilepsy.

[gag order]

did you know that people in other forums call him a kaafir and want him to leave as well? when i found that out it was a belly laugh and a half!

[Samira]

LOL! how many other forums does he go to? You got the links? It should be fun seeing him getting bashed heh heh

[gag order]

the funny thing is shaukat admitted it him/herself, so you see shitey opens his mouth to take out the foot thats already in there only to put the other one in.

[ibn abbas]

shaukat, u rafidhite, u cant have a normal conversation, always getting emotional and intellectually destroyed.

kick out that rawaTHICK from the forums.

[gag order]

lets kick out dr khan as well :lol:

[Zeynab]

Salaam Alaikum dear brothers and sisters ... please don't get so divided over sectarianism. It's forbidden in the Qur'aan and Sunnah. If anyone posts provocative messages to spread 'fitnah,' I suppose it's best to ignore them rather than getting into heated arguments for that only deepens the division in our community.

Allah-o-Alim, Allah knows best.

[gag order]

read also "give a shia enough rope and he will hang himself"

[gag order]

read also "give a shia enough rope and he will hang himself"

[Samira]

shaukat was an idiot, he associated himself with Allah and made homosexual comments to the males on this board. He himself was trying to cause trouble, so it was only fair his account was deleted.

[gag order]

he said he was superior to allah twice in jest and he said he was equal to allah twice - glory be to allah, high is he above those who ascribe divinity to other than allah. and he said he was quite happy bieng called a kafir - we "all" obliged him. only the modernists remained silent - i'll come back to this issue in a second.

what brought out his inner beliefs? though he was a shia what really led to his intellectual demise was not just his shia beliefs but mostly his MODERNIST liberal view of what islam is. he would often sound like a WHITE LIBERALIST JEW JOURNALIST and unfortunaetly so do many many muslims,

like shiaism orientalism aka modernism has settled deep within our midst. just as the deviant muta'zillah borrowed heavily from the concepts of greek mushrikin so to the modernists again burrowing concepts from the greek mushrikin such democracy.

shaukat would resort to modernist rhetoric when his shia beliefs came under fire and this is precisley the moment when he had his outbursts of shirk.

[Samira]

Gag order, can I just ask what madhhab you belong to, or do you consider following a madhhab to be shirk, as some so-called muslims do?

[Zeynab]

shaukat was an idiot, he associated himself with Allah and made homosexual comments to the males on this board. He himself was trying to cause trouble, so it was only fair his account was deleted.

Yes siser .. I agree with you totally. If such people are booted out, it's good riddance.

[gag order]

following a madhab or mujtahid imam in issues that are unclear is a necessity whoever says it is shirk is a fool!

however

anyone who blindfollows an imam saying he is always right about everything all the time then that is committing "shirk at ta'a"

imam abu hanifah once said "when a hadith is found to be sahih then that is my madhhab" i think it is more orderly and correct to stick to your madhab until you come across an a daleel cosidered to be more authentic then that of your madhab and i think this is the best way for us.

at the end of the day we must remain united in aqeeda but respect each other for differing in areas that differences are allowed in. such as does bleeding break wudu or not?

this is why we need shaykhs who are well versed in comparitive fiqh they can tell us if a majority concensus exists on a multitude of issues that are not known by necessity.

interestingly all 4 madhabs are united until we arrive at a point when ijtihad is made. this is acceptable but what is not acceptable is differing in aqeeeda and by that i mean allowing theology of the later generations to affect us.

[>mqs18<]

As-salaam wa alaikum wa Rahmatullah.

id like to remind my brothers and sisters that although the Raafidah are known to be deeply devaint and the scholars who debase the Shahabas, claim that the Qur'an was tampered with, etc kuffarm the scholars have said that the general masses of the 'shia' are ignorant- so not to be branded as kuffar, and there is a sect which is still considered in the folds of islam.

the truth is that the US govt was hoping for the raafidah and ahlus-sunnah in iraq to start a civil war, which they did not do.. so they are spinning all sorts of rumours. some 'clerics' are blatantly aiding the kuffar no one denies that.

but i dont think anyone should remove this person. i havnt read anything from this person, but even if it out of line then we should put forward the hujja.. as those on the haqq will never faulter insha'Allah ameen.

[>mqs18<]

following a madhab or mujtahid imam in issues that are unclear is a necessity whoever says it is shirk is a fool!


obviously the person described above would have to be a fool, because if you do not follow a madhab or mujtahid in issues of ijtihad then who else can u take from? LOL!

but another extreme is those who say that it is encumbent upon you to follow a madhab, as the only justfied sources to take 'taqlid' from is the Book of Allahu ta'la and the authentic narrations of Muhammad sallahu alaihe wa sallam.
the four imams themselves said that their madhab was an authentic hadith. insha'Allahu ta'la ill post up some relevant articles soon.

was-salaam wa alaikum wa rahmatullah

[Samira]

obviously the person described above would have to be a fool, because if you do not follow a madhab or mujtahid in issues of ijtihad then who else can u take from?

Well I personally have come across people, usually calling themselves 'salafis', who say such things as: we have no problem with people who follow madhhabs, we respect the four imams.
In direct contrast to that they will then say such things as imam abu hanifah got such and such wrong. (or rather 'imaam aboo haneefah'). Or: this madhhab and this madhhab are wrong in such and such issues of fiqh. So now they are presuming to have more knowledge of fiqh than the imams!

When asked why they dont follow any particular school, they say: we dont follow any madhhab, we only follow Quran and sunnah.
This from people who have no understanding of the Arabic language. They act like mujtahids, deriving their own rulings, from a translation (where a lot of meaning could be lost) with little or no knowledge of the situation in which the ayat/hadith were revealed/stated. And on top of that, one of them said: Imaam Maalik only prayed with his arms by his side cos of an injury. If they would only THINK about this for a minute.. do they really think that a layman could discover something that not a single maliki scholar has noticed? and in such an important area of islam? The salaf of madina prayed with their arms by their sides, and that is why we pray so. :roll:

Anyhoo
but i dont think anyone should remove this person. i havnt read anything from this person, but even if it out of line then we should put forward the hujja.. as those on the haqq will never faulter insha'Allah ameen.
Thats cos his account was removed (both of them) and all his posts consequently deleted. If you could have seen the diarrhoea (as gag orger called it) that came from his mouth... akhi, would you like to be called 'darling' and 'sweetheart' by a man? Towards the end he did this in about 80% of his posts! His sole purpose, so it would seem, was to cause at much fitnah as possible.

[>mqs18<]

As-salaam wa alaikum wa Rahmatullah

in response to the shia guy.. if anyone does intend to cause fitan on the boards then i think it is best to deny them the right of using it. But if there are others in future who are not arrogant, then i would advise to tolerate them and argue with them in the best manners from the Qur'an and sunnah. this would show the truth and repel all the falsehood.

as for the other things you said:

about the issue of madhabs and people saying so-and-so imam was wrong in this issue- people who follow (mu'taib) the madhab of a scholar also say this. as it is know amongst the Ahlus-Sunnah that only the Prophet Salallahu alaihe wa sallam that is free from mistakes. so when someone says this it is not that they are judging for themselves but they are taking the opinion of another shaikh. like the example of bleeding breaking the wadoo- there are ahadith of the sahabah radi'Allahu Aynum who prayed even though they were bleeding from wounds, and the famous hadith of Ali radi'Allahu Aynhu.
the scholars have always had differences of opinions in issues of fiqh, and even their students sometimes differ from them, and this is accepted as even the sahabah would sometimes differ. the issue is that they ALL take what's from the Qu'an and Sunnah. And what is most closest to the Qur'an and Sunnah should be the opinion withheld.

And it is not compulsory on anyone to follow a madhab. and if someone says they do not follow a madhab that does not mean that they do their own ijtihad, but only that they do ittibah of scholars of Ahlul hadith.

what everyone is sure on is to say that following the madhabs are completely wrong, or that one must blidnly follow their imam (blameworthy taqlid) or that following a madhab is encumbent- for if they say this we must ask which madhab the Prophet salallahu alaihe wa sallam followed.
islam is the moderate path.. and we must always be aware of falling into extremism in anything.

Was-salaam wa alaikum wa Rahmatullah!

[gag order]

this is a lesson for us all:

the taliban and alqaida

seamless intergration of all four madhabs into one body with one purpose

[Zeynab]

this is a lesson for us all:

the taliban and alqaida

seamless intergration of all four madhabs into one body with one purpose


Mashallah .. I agree totally. I pray to Allah (Subhan Wa'Tala) that the entire Ummah embraces this concept one day .. Ameen.

[>mqs18<]

this is a lesson for us all:

the taliban and alqaida

seamless intergration of all four madhabs into one body with one purpose

as-salaam wa alaikum

sorry i did not quite understand what u meant by that?? what would be the one purpose?

if what i think u are saying that the four madhabs (and mainly the followers of madhabs bcz it is usually the followers who have made the segregations in the ummah as they had limited understanding of the deen. the scholars differed from each other but they still loved each other for the sake of Allahu ta'la and never held distaste for one another, may allahu ta'la protect and reward them ameen.) put aside their differences in fiqh issues and unite together to what it right anf wrong, then i also agree and this is the right way bcz the muslim ummah's strength is its unity.

[Zeynab]

[quote=gag order]this is a lesson for us all:

the taliban and alqaida

seamless intergration of all four madhabs into one body with one purpose
---------------------------------------------

as-salaam wa alaikum

sorry i did not quite understand what u meant by that?? what would be the one purpose?

=============

The above post by "gag order" is a very wise one and is self explanatory. It simply means to do away with all divisions, titles and labels because Islam has only one madhab, that is, Muslim. If people have varying personal opinions on certain issues (which is natural), it should be kept at a personal or individual level and viewed by each other with tolerance & understanding. No one blames the imams. They were people with great wisdom and knowledge about Islam who wanted to keep the Ummah together. Divisions were created gradually over the period of time by the different followers of different imams. And the advise is to such people that there is absolutely no room for divisions in Islam, be it into madhabs or sects. In this regard, please refer to the following Verses of the Glorious Qur'aan:

Lo! As for those who sunder their religion and become schismatics, no concern at all hast thou with them. Their case will go to Allah, who then will tell them what they used to do. (Glorious Qur’aan 6:159) - Surah Al-An’am.

And hold fast, all of you together, to the cable of Allah, and do not separate ….. (Glorious Qur’aan 3:103) – Surah Al-Imran.

[Samira]

there is absolutely no room for divisions in Islam, be it into madhabs or sects

madhhabs are merely reflecting a difference of opinion in fiqh. this is not a division, i would not say that such and such madhhab is wrong, only mine is right, cos thats just ignorance. the salaf also had differences of opinion, so what? whats the big deal? so i do my salat a bit different to you. who cares? all 4 are based on quran and sunnah, and to say that differing in matters of fiqh is misguidance, that means that the salaf were also misguided (na'udhubillah). those who view madhhabs other than their own as being wrong are merely displaying ignorance, and rather than labelling them as being divided into sects (as some salafis do) why not just politely point out their mistake? (if there was no room for madhhabs in the taliban, sister, then i'll tell you that taliban were mostly, if not entirely, strictly hanafi.) All four madhhabs are united as one ummah. to say that they are separate divisions would make you the one guilty of trying to cause divisions. thats all. no offence.

[Zeynab]

there is absolutely no room for divisions in Islam, be it into madhabs or sects

{madhhabs are merely reflecting a difference of opinion in fiqh. this is not a division, i would not say that such and such madhhab is wrong, only mine is right, cos thats just ignorance. the salaf also had differences of opinion, so what? whats the big deal? so i do my salat a bit different to you. who cares? all 4 are based on quran and sunnah, and to say that differing in matters of fiqh is misguidance, that means that the salaf were also misguided (na'udhubillah). those who view madhhabs other than their own as being wrong are merely displaying ignorance, and rather than labelling them as being divided into sects (as some salafis do) why not just politely point out their mistake? (if there was no room for madhhabs in the taliban, sister, then i'll tell you that taliban were mostly, if not entirely, strictly hanafi.) All four madhhabs are united as one ummah.}

I know what you mean, and I agree with your point of view. As a Muslimah, I find nothing more heartening to hear than the statement that "all four madhabs are united as one Ummah." But unfortunately lots of people within today's Ummah do not see it that way. The explanation for this is simple. Hate & opposition is a lot more inherent to human nature and love & unity. Therefore such titles and labels are only an invitation for disagreements and arguments (much of it we've already seen on this board), an 'invitation' where many Muslim communities far & wide have jumped into. Hence, one needs to be extremely careful to avoid such risks. Most important of all, the Glorious Qur'aan itself has been loud and clear on this issue, and that should be enough for anyone who really cares to be a Muslim.
-------
Lo! As for those who sunder their religion and become schismatics, no concern at all hast thou with them. Their case will go to Allah, who then will tell them what they used to do. (Glorious Qur’aan 6:159) - Surah Al-An’am.

And hold fast, all of you together, to the cable of Allah, and do not separate ….. (Glorious Qur’aan 3:103) – Surah Al-Imran.
--------

{to say that they are separate divisions would make you the one guilty of trying to cause divisions. thats all. no offence.}

With all due respect, this sounds personal, harsh and outrageous .. almost obnoxious. Indeed it's offensive !! May Allah forgive you for such unsupportive allegations.

In short, I stand firm by my opinion expressed in my previous post. I'm done with this topic.

Allah knows best. Allah Bless.

[gag order]

taliban and alqaida, hanafi and hanbali, though they differ in areas of ijtihad they are still united in one purpose at least they understand that differing in ijtihad is allowed and theres no point in striking each others necks in halal issues ie ijtihad

in a hanbali book by ibn qudamah it says that you dont need a caliph to fight jihad the hanafi taliban believe this but that does not mean they have now become hanbali?

in shafi book by imam shafi it says you can attack the worst enemy first even if he is further away then your closer enemies alqaida believe this but that does not mean they are now shafi?

i dont think that taliban ruled afghanistan on hanafi fiqh alone when they do majlis shura and ask alqaida for advice they are sure to get a hanbali orientated response!

imam abu hanifah put it in a nutshell when he said; "when a hadith is found to be sahih then that is my madhab"

[Zeynab]

Quote:

imam abu hanifah put it in a nutshell when he said; "when a hadith is found to be sahih then that is my madhab"

Unquote.


I completely agree with above quote by 'gag order.'