Questions about Ismailism from a Sunni

[shiraz.virani]

sister znanPURRwalla want more proofs ?

http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/ ... /soth.html

oh wait, you want more ??

http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/ ... yem1a.html

http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/ ... yem1b.html

only if you would have used your pea sized brain in doing some research, you wouldn't have come up with such lame ideas

http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/ ... e328a.html

http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/ ... ngana.html

http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/ ... uwait.html

http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/ ... l4313.html


oh well , as usual you gonna call me by the names like you always do....so do your thing !!

god bless
salam

yaa ali madad

[znanwalla]

Viru,

beyond the "heading" or the sub headings, one cannot read anything in the links you have provided - at least I have not been able to see anything except blank windows...plus it was "composed" in 2008....many,many centuries after the Prophet's death ...and then someone tries to download onto the internet....and that too based on sectarian agenda....was the quran revealed to the internet? No ! so what have you proved? nothing? haven't I said that there are existing many variant codices despite efforts to destroy all past codices? Yes I did say that !....

And have you heard about a recent discovery of some very old manuscripts which for whatever reason are being suppressed now and not allowed to surface publicly...just think why?

I have tried all the links...nothing of any great interest - does not alter any facts as they exist....keep on trying with your acting pal...I do not greet someone like you....nor do I send them any greetings of peace to the enemies of the Imam....until you concede positively and respectfully about our beloved Imam....I do not play ball !

[shiraz.virani]

Viru,

beyond the "heading" or the sub headings, one cannot read anything in the links you have provided - at least I have not been able to see anything except blank windows...plus it was "composed" in 2008....many,many centuries after the Prophet's death ...and then someone tries to download onto the internet....and that too based on sectarian agenda....was the quran revealed to the internet? No ! so what have you proved? nothing? haven't I said that there are existing many variant codices despite efforts to destroy all past codices? Yes I did say that !....

how about ginans ?? are you going to say the samething about our holy ginans ??

and i think you have to download a software or something to see the actual image , it might be that you are using old version or so...

well i would disagree with you , because so far all you been doing is showing all the fabricated hadiths and name them IMAM [as] words ! ...well iam not stopping you from that, but as a muslimaa atleast have some respect for the holy quran

do not degrade quran just to show your fabrication....and when you dont trust quran[h.uthman's] period....why show us 5-6 verses from quran that uses the term imam....is it fair ??

if at all there was any fabrication they wouldnt have put those 5-6 verses that shows HOLY IMAMAT all well !!!!!!!!!

why you say stuff when you dont have any idea about ???

And have you heard about a recent discovery of some very old manuscripts which for whatever reason are being suppressed now and not allowed to surface publicly...just think why?

and here iam showing you the manuscripts dated as early as 1st century of hijra

sister lemme tell you once again i have no issues of you giving hadiths but as i said last time do not try to degrade quran , if you have an opinion share it but do not hurt the sentiments of others who believe "quran and itrat"

I have tried all the links...nothing of any great interest - does not alter any facts as they exist....keep on trying with your acting pal...I do not greet someone like you....nor do I send them any greetings of peace to the enemies of the Imam....until you concede positively and respectfully about our beloved Imam....I do not play ball !

well iam ordered by my allah[swt] to even greet my enemy so here iam signing off saying

salam
yaa ali madad

[arshad1988]

I hope that other members on this forum will give their input so we can get this clarified for everybody including myself.Pardesi

2:219 ...They ask thee how much they are to spend; Say: "What is beyond your needs." Thus doth God Make clear to you His Signs: In order that ye may consider-

Hope that helps.

[znanwalla]

Basra is a big city and the main port of Iraq. It is situated at the mouth of river Euphrates.

There, in a big mosque, about 700 AD, people used to assemble to discuss various subjects on Islamic rules and laws. A famous learned priest/clergyman by name Amr Bin Ubeid was once preaching on the subject of Imamate (An Islamic term referring to "leadership" of Imams who followed Prophet Muhammad (saw) in leadership of Islam, according to Shi'a belief).

He was surrounded by a big crowd of people who were asking various questions on the subject.

Suddenly, a young and intelligent student of Imam Jafar al-Sadiq (AS) by name of Hesham, entered the gathering and sat down in the first row. He addressed the priest saying that he was a stranger and would like to ask some questions.

On getting the permission to do so, he asked the following:
Hesham: First, Sir! May I please know if you have eyes?

Amr: Young Boy! Is this a question to ask?

Hesham: Whatever it may be, this is my question to which I shall appreciate your answer.

Amr: All right! You are at liberty to ask, even though it is a foolish question.

Hesham: As I have already asked, Sir, may I please know if you have eyes?

Amr: Yes, I have.

Hesham: For what use are they?
Amr: With eyes, I can see faces of people and color of various things.

Hesham: And you have a nose also?
Amr: Yes. I do have one.

Hesham: What is its function?
Amr: I smell the scent and odor by it.

Hesham: And do you have a mouth?
Amr: Yes I do have.

Hesham: For what use is it?
Amr: I can talk to people or taste food and drink with it.

Hesham: Do you have ears?
Amr: Yes, I have two ears.

Hesham: What is their function?
Amr: I can hear voices by them.

Hesham: And do you have a mind?
Amr: Almighty has bestowed me with that also.

Hesham: What is its use?

Amr: With that I am able to distinguish things whatever is felt by the other senses like hands, eyes, ears, nose, tongue etc. In case of a difference, I am able to solve with its help. In case of a doubt, I can dispel with it and be sure.

Hesham: So, does it mean that despite being sound and healthy, all these organs cannot function independently without the help of the mind.
Amr: No, No! None of the organs can function independently without the help of the mind.

Hesham: Why is it so? After all, the organs are perfect and strong enough to differentiate between things?

Amr: Young Boy! When any organ has some doubt about a thing, which it smells, sees or tastes, it brings the matter to the mind and it is the mind, which confirms the truth and removes the doubt.

Hesham: So, from what you have said, do you want me to understand that God Almighty has created and designed the mind to guide the organs and remove doubts?

Amr: Yes! It is so.

Hesham: So the mind is a necessity, otherwise the organs could not work independently.

Amr: Yes.

Hesham: Please Sir! Proclaim your opinion with fairness and justice on this point also.

If the Almighty has not left the organs of man's body without the guidance of the mind, how is it possible that Almighty God could leave millions of His creatures without an IMAM to guide and solve their problems arising out of doubts and conflicts? Should not our common sense accept this fact?

On hearing this logic argument, and having no answer to give, Amr Bin Ubeid kept silent and went into deep thinking.

I do not find anything wrong in showing you from the texts available in the market, that even these texts speak openly and abundantly about Imamat...

"(Remember) the day (hereafter) when We will summon every people with their Imam (leader-witness) then, whosoever is given his book in his right hand, these shall read their books and they shall not be dealt with (even) a shred unjustly" (17:71).

So show me who will be your witness? which Imam? and so without the Imam by your side you may not even have the quran in your "right hand" and if this happens then how will ye be treated ? how much clear can Allah be?

Ibn Arabi quotes the Prophet as saying in Tafsir al-Koran al-Karim (1:30) that,

"Every man shall be brought together on the day of judgment with what he loves. If a man loves a stone, he shall be gathered together with it."

Naturally, one who loves Imam, he will be with the Imam in last day.

Thus, the rightful Imams will be witness of their faithful followers and the unjust will will wave their flags like maherally and his "followers".

One should therefore hold fast to the rightful Imams for the benefit of his soul, because those who are unjust will not be able to intercede for their followers’ actions and infact they have disappeard also as lies never last for long.

The Koran says: "None shall have the power of intercession, but such who has received permission (or promise) from (God), the Most Glorious" (19:87)

And also: "And those whom they call upon besides Him have no authority for intercession, except he who bears witness of the truth and they (people) know (that)" (43:86).

The Imam is the mazhar (epiphany) of God on earth as the electric bulb is a device of manifestation of electricity, which itself is invisible. ...so now tell me who is the beneficient one who sits on the throne?

The bulb plays the same role as the body of the Imam.

Thus, the Imam is held to be the manifestation of the divine light, which is ever-present in the world.

The Imam is the Proof of God (Hujjat Allah) to mankind and the Sign of God (Ayat Allah) on earth.

Ali bin Abu Talib is reported to have said: "God has no greater sign than me" (Bihar al-Anwar, 23:206).

The Imam is the successor of the Prophet and the Vicar of God on earth.

Obedience to him is obligatory. Imam Jafar Sadik said:

"We are the ones to whom God has made obedience obligatory. The people will not prosper unless they recognized us and the people will not be excused if they are ignorant to us. He who has recognized us is a believer and he who has denied us is an unbeliever, and he who has neither recognized nor denied us is in error unless he returns to the right guidance which God has made obligatory for him. And if he dies in a state of error, God will do with him what He wishes" (al-Kafi, 1:187).

The ever-presence of an Imam is imperative. The Koranic verse,

“If you should quarrel about anything, refer it to God and the Messenger” (4:59), necessitates the presence of an Imam physically after the Prophet, so that the believers may refer to him what they have quarrelled about. Shaikh al-Mufid (d. 413/1022) writes in Awa’il al-maqalat (Tabriz, 1951, p. 35) that,

“The Imams take the place of the prophets in enforcing judgments, seeing to the execution of the legal penalties, safeguarding the law and educating mankind.”

In addition, the Koran says, “And if when they had done injustice to themselves, they had but come to you and asked God’s forgiveness, and the Prophet had (also) asked forgiveness for them. Surely, they would have found God Forgiving, Merciful.” (4:64).

It indicates that when God commanded the people to have recourse to the Prophet for the forgiveness of their sins and ask for forgiveness through him, does this not establish the necessity of this means and should it not be living and present in the world for ever?..It does !

[znanwalla]

In May, 1842, Garcin de Tassy published the text and translation of an "unknown chapter of the Qur'án" in the Journal Asiatique.[65] It was called the "Sura of the Two Lights" (súrat an-núrayn), the two lights being Muhammad and 'Alí.....


Most scholars who have commentated on this text have found its origins somewhat mysterious....The next year, Kazem-Beg published a revised translation of the same sura in the same journal, adding vocalization and dividing it into verses.

St. Clair Tisdall, traveling in India in 1912, came across a manuscript of the Qur'án that appeared to be about two or three hundred years old.

In this manuscript he discovered a previously-unknown sura that was not part of any official editions of the book, as well as a few verses which were unique to this copy of the text.

This seven-verse sura was called the "Sura of Divine Friendship" (súrat al-waláya).

Tisdall immediately published a translation of this surah, along with the small assortment of the other "new" verses, in The Moslem World in 1913.

This article appears to have been only the third work published in English treating the possibility of additions to the Qur'án. Garcin de Tassy "tends to believe in their authenticity

It would be quite tempting to see these two suras as related to the Shí'í agenda of criticizing the 'Uthmánic Qur'án and, indeed, the majority of research on these two suras has focused on exactly this issue.

In 1936 Jeffrey published an article in the Rivista degli Studi Orientali, "The Qur'án Readings of Zaid b. 'Alí," which for the first time treated the relation between Shí'ism and the variants of the Qur'án

Some scholars have rather blithely written them off as works of the Shí'a...the Shí'a charge malicious omission by the editors [of the 'Uthmánic redaction] of individual verses and even of complete suras supporting their doctrine...

Von Grunebaum offers no explanation of why he mentions Shí'ism and these two suras in the same breath and he does not comes back to the issue.

The second article which draws this connection is that of Bar-Asher who, while discussing Shí'í texts, mentions "...a manuscript of the Qur'án discovered in the beginning of the 20th century [i.e., Tisdall's] ...in which, besides the Shí'í alternative versions to some of the Qur'ánic verses, two apocryphal Súras were also included."

have you read these suras? I have and I do not intend to post them for the sake of good order....

[znanwalla]

Naat...
Ya Ali Mushkil Kusha
- Urdu-Ghazal, MP3, 11.6M ...Sabri Bros


HADEETH MINNIYYAT ABOUT IMAM ALI IN SAHEEH BUKHARI

(Arabic: Minni - from me, of me)
Hadhrat Ali bin Abi Talib Al-Qarashi Al-Hashimi's kunniyat is Abul Hasan,
the Prophet has said about him: "You are of me and I am of you."

  Umar
has said that the Prophet was pleased with him at the time of his death.

It is a simple statement from the Prophet of Islam about Imam Ali (may
Allah's peace and our salams be unto them both).

What could be simpler than this? - Ali is from me and I am from Ali.

Usually an elder would say that about his children or grandchildren - they
are mine. But, the other way round? It is very unusual.

Of course, this formula of MINNI (from me, of me) has been used in the
Qur'an, for example:

My Lord! Surely they have led many men astray; then whoever follows me, he is surely of me, and whoever disobeys me, Thou surely art Forgiving, Merciful. (Q.14:36)

Here, in this prayer of prophet Ibraheem, the term 'of me' simply means 'of my Ummah,' or, 'of my following,' etc....

On the face of it, Ali was raised by the Prophet himself as a son, he was a
brother and a son-in-law.

Let us now look at another Qur'anic term here.

Muhammad is the apostle of Allah, and those with him (ma'ahum) are firm of heart against the unbelievers, compassionate among themselves; you will see them bowing down, prostrating themselves, seeking grace from Allah and pleasure:....................... (Q.48:29)

It is quite clear that the Prophet wanted to say something more than ma'ahum in his statement about Imam Ali.

The Prophet used the term 'Ummo Abiha' (the mother of her father) for Fatima Zahra, which, once again, expresses that two way MINNIYYAT. The Prophet also seems to have said about Husayn - Husaynun Minni wa ana min al-Husayn.

Then that expression about Imam Ali is explicitly repeated by the Prophet at the time when the first 37 verses of Sura Tawba are revealed.

This was just before Hajj. The Prophet made Abu Bakr the Ameer al-Hajj that year and gave him those verses of the Qur'an to be read out to the people in Makkah.

He then dispatched Ali post haste to take the verses from Abu Bakr and read them out himself.

Abu Bakr was disappointed. With tears in his eyes, he
inquired about that change in the command.

The Prophet explained to him that
it was Allah's command that the verses be read out either by he (the
Prophet) himself or by one of him (MINNI). So that attribute of MINNIYYAT was re-confirmed for Imam Ali.

It is also quite clear that this attribute was not associated with any other companion or relative.

We can see, by putting the Qur'anic verses and the statement of the Prophet together that the Muslim community consists of three kinds of people:

1.People who have achieved the two-way minniyyat (the Ahl al-Bayt),

2.People who have achieved the status of ma'ahum (the faithful, devoted
companions), and,

3. All other Muslims.

Why have we separated the people in group 3 from those in group 2? The
answer is simple.

The Arabic term ma'ahum implies the continuity of companionship. Those who would disobey the Prophet from time to time, those who would run away from the battlefield once in a while, even though they would return afterwards, and those whom the holy Qur'an accuses of raising their voices over that of the Prophet, cannot be included in the group identified as ma'ahum. Therefore, we have to have a group of 'all other Muslims.'

Let us come back to the point at hand - the concept of the two-way
minniyyat. We can understand the concept of Ali being 'of the Prophet' or,
'from the Prophet,' because of one or all of the three reasons:

1. The Prophet and Ali are the grandchildren of the same glorious person,

2. Imam Ali was raised as Prophet's own son and then got married to his
daughter,

3. Imam Ali was a true and devoted follower of the Prophet.

What does the phrase '... and I am from him' mean?

The only logical answer to this question is that Imam Ali had made so many sacrifices in the path of Islam, he had given the mission everything he had, he had not cared about his own safety and security when it came to protecting the mission and the person of the Prophet that if he wasn't
there, there was no one else to provide those essential services.

And, therefore, his being and existence had become indispensable for Islam's survival. It is this fact that the Prophet has acknowledged in this hadeeth.

[From_Alamut]

There is an interested movie about Our Beloved Kudavan Mowla
`A L I`(Peace be upon him and his progeny) on Youtube......

The theme of this movie is on knowledge and wisdom of Ahlulbayt.

"This movie demonstrates the great knowledge and humility that Imam Ali ibn Abi Taleb had during dialogue with the Christian monks that arrived to Medina. He tackled each and every question that was posed against him. This movie takes place in a city called Yathrib according to the monks and Medina according to the Muslims. As when you soon watch this movie you will notice and realize the bravery and peak of eloquence within the wisdom of Imam Ali."

The movies dialog is in Arabic and at the same time it has an English translation..

The name of movie is Al-Rehaban

Part One
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8KfTxWD6ygg

Part Two
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CosIQuA6 ... re=related

Part Three
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z-mnkSfC ... re=related

Part Four (Last Part)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xJN1Ll28 ... re=related

[znanwalla]

Any idea how one can obtain a copy of our constitution? please let me know if anyone knows or has information...where can I obtain a copy from? is it possible to download this from the net?

[shiraz.virani]

znanwalla said:

Any idea how one can obtain a copy of our constitution? please let me know if anyone knows or has information...where can I obtain a copy from? is it possible to download this from the net?

well if you're talking about ismaili constitution i guess we have it here on this site or else just go to google and search for ismaili constitution


salam

yaa ali madad

[shiraz.virani]

for dearest sister znanpurwalla :

Question No. 1: Why did 'Uthman feel the need to destroy other copies of the Qur'an, unless they contained variants?

Response No. 1: 'Uthman ibn 'Affan was elected as the third Caliph by a Council called the Shura. As the elected leader of the Muslim Ummah (Brotherhood), it was his privilege and prerogative to appoint a Commission to collect all the available verses of the Qur'an from the 'Ummah and undertake the task of preparing a definitive compiled copy of the Qur'an. The Commission established a criteria for this specific purpose. When this Commission, headed by Zayd ibn Thabit - a reputable scribe and personal secretary to the Prophet, came up with a finally compiled copy of the Qur'an, it was approved by 'Uthman for circulation. The Caliph also supervised that the faithful copies of it were made and circulated to various provinces and Islamic countries. Having accomplished that, the next obvious question before him was; how to preserve this canonized text from being tainted at a later date? There were thousands of collected verses from which this final canonized copy was prepared. The majority of this collected verses met the criteria established by the Commission and there were a few that did not. They all were now superfluous. One of the criteria established by the Commission was that any verse that did not have the collaboration from another source, should be rejected. To keep such rejected verses within circulation would be to defeat the ultimate aim and purpose of this
and it's efforts. Hence, 'Uthman felt the need to destroy these superfluous copies of the verses and preserve the approved text from being tainted. A true Believer would say, within these Revelations, Allah had undertaken to preserve His Final Scripture. The third Caliph was just an instrument of Allah to do what Allah had intended to do.

Lo! those who disbelieve in the Reminder when it cometh unto them (are guilty), for lo! it is an unassailable Scripture. Falsehood cannot come at it from before it or behind it. (It is) a revelation from the Wise, the Owner of Praise. (Glorious Qur'an 41:41/42)

Uthman needs to be complimented by every upright scholar for his wise decision. More than ever so, by the Christian scholars, after having seen what has come to pass and is happening even today with the unceasing publications and circulation of their re-revised and newly rerevised Versions of the biblical texts.

There is no evidence to show that the appointed Commission had disapproved or rejected the verses that DID MEET the established criteria. Nor, there is evidence to show that the Commission DID belong or adhere to a particular SECT of Islam and was biased in preparing the final copy. The history records that the Prophet (pbuh) died in 632 and twelve years later, 'Uthman was elected Caliph in 644. It was after 'Uthman's death, there arose differences within the 'Ummah. The divisions and the Religious Sects within Islam came into being after his death and not before. The critic's remark "unless they contained variants" is a speculative guess. Unfortunately, the Critic fails to see and appreciate the obvious and essential need for such an action. Hence, this rebuttal.

Question No. 2: Why did Ibn Ma'sud refuse to hand over his copy
for destruction?

Response No. 2: The appropriate question should have been; Why did Ibn Ma'sud initially refuse to hand over his copy for destruction?
A brief bio-data of this early companion of the Prophet (s.a.s.) would help us to understand the entire situation. His name was Abdullah. He was son of Ma'sud. During his childhood he was also called "ibn Umm Abd" (the son of the mother of a slave). At an early age he joined the Prophet in his mission and stayed very close to him. He received the training in the household of the Prophet and had learnt the Qirat of the Qur'an (the accepted method of the recitation of the Qur'an) from the Prophet himself. He was a leading reputable Qari (reciter of the Qur'an) and used to recite loudly and clearly. Ibn Ma'sud was recommended by the Prophet to those who wished to learn the Qirat . He was very knowledgeable on the Shariah and followed the Sunnah of the Prophet closely. When he was sent to Kufa in Iraq, the people of Kufa highly respected him. They not only used to learn from ibn Ma'sud the verses of the Qur'an but also used to consult him on the subject.

In Jam' Al-Qu'ran chapter 3 under the sub-heading:
IBN MAS'UD'S REACTION TO UTHMAN'S DECREE, the opening paragraph reads:

When Uthman sent out the order that all codices of the Qur'an other than the codex of Zaid ibn Thabit should be destroyed, Abdullah ibn Mas'ud refused to hand over his copy. Desai openly speaks of "Hadhrat Ibn Mas'ud's initial refusal to hand over the compilation" (The Quraan Unimpeachable, p.44)


Here is the reason for this initial or early reaction. Abdullah Ibn Mas'ud had with him a personal copy of the Qur'an (Musaf) which was his precious personal possession. We also learn from the said chapter-3 that Ibn Ma'sud had made some notes on his copy. It is quite understandable that any religious teacher or missionary would develop a kind of sentiment for his personal copy of the Divine Scripture which he has been using over a period of time and more so, if there were his personal notes on that copy. Such early reactions are but normal under the most normal circumstances. The Critic questions the issue of "personal notes" on the ground that no documentary evidence has been provided. The critic had better ask himself a question; "Does my own personal copy of the Holy Bible, which I have been using over a period of time, has any personal notes or underlined text?" It is inconceivable that any Bible scholar/teacher would have a copy of his personal Bible without his/her personal notes.


having said @ above i would like to show you some more pictures of holy quran which date as early as 1st century


http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/ ... M1572.html

http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/ ... l4313.html

http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/ ... ayyad.html



from 2nd century :

http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/ ... rg202.html

http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/ ... em23d.html



the very famous BLUE QURAN :

http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/ ... /blue.html



well i can go on and on and on but as sister znanwalla has a firm belief on man-made hadiths i cant do much about it

my job is to defend my faith, and the holy quran is a part[essence] of not only me but all muslims....be it shia/sunni etc etc because it not only talks about creation but also IMAMAT


When Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him received the Noble Quran's Revelations in a 10-years span, he had everything documented on paper and saved with his close disciples and immediate family. He also had the entire Noble Quran memorized along with many of his followers. The Noble Quran during the times of our beloved Prophet peace be upon him was carefully preserved and protected from man's corruption. It was documented on paper and it was entirely memorized by many.

When Uthman, the third Caliph in Islam, compiled the Noble Quran, he did not determine the numerical order of the Noble Chapters and the Noble Verses. The entire Noble Quran as I said was already documented and memorized. Chapters from the Noble Quran were recited by our Prophet peace be upon him at least 5 times a day during the Muslims' five-daily prayers. Also, the Noble Quran was all recited during the month of Ramadan, as it is still done today. There are other daily and weekly religious occasions, festivals and holidays where the Noble Quran back then and still today was recited either partially or wholly. The Muslims who perfected the memorization of the Noble Quran back then continuously refreshed their memories through teaching others: Muslims and non-Muslims about Islam.

So, it is beyond the shadow of the doubt that the numbering and the order of the Noble Chapters and Verses was already determined by our Prophet peace be upon him through the inspiration and guidance of Allah Almighty, and not by anyone else.

Historically, almost every Muslim scholar had the entire Noble Quran memorized by heart. If you live among Muslims or know well how the Muslims deal with the Noble Quran, then you would know that tampering with the Noble Quran is impossible among the Muslims. If someone recites the Noble Quran to the public (in the Mosque for instance) and makes a mistake, then he would find many who would correct him because they would have the entire Noble Quran memorized by heart.

The memorization of the entire Noble Quran is something sacred in Islam. It helped the Noble Quran remain error-free from man's false documentation. Today in the Middle East they have programs and rewards for those who have the entire Noble Quran memorized. I once saw on TV a biography about a 4-years old little boy in Iran who had the entire Noble Quran memorized! He received a big reward and was enlisted in the "gifted kids" program.

We must know that according to Islam Allah Almighty Himself is protecting the Noble Quran until the Day of Judgment from man's corruption: "We [Allah] have, without doubt, sent down the Message [The Noble Quran]; and We will assuredly Guard it (from corruption). (The Noble Quran, 15:9)"


rest is upto my brothers and sisters

salam [peace]

yaa ali madad

[znanwalla]

Virani,

This is what I had said...."Following the Prophet's death, though, the community became engaged in wars in which many of the reciters were killed, and it became apparent to the rulers that parts of the Qur'án were in danger of being lost. ..so some of the folks became desperate...they had already rejected the actual quran Hazrat Ali brought to them...so now they were in a dilemma....just the way you are today... Abú Bakr had a written text compiled to ensure that the Qur'án, heretofore only preserved orally, would still be preserved even should all of its memorizers die....he failed to do a complete job...it is reported that a goat even ate some of the parchments of his copy....Lo ! "

To which you responded earlier on as under:(check your own posting on the previous page)


Compiling Quran during the era of Abu Bakr al-Siddiq: Zayd Ibn Thabit gathered the Quran in one book. He was charged to do this by Abu Bakr al-Siddiq, according to an advice from Umar Ibn Al-Khattab. Its resource was the parts written by the Revelation scribes; so he gathered all of it in one book, the Holy Quran.

Compiling Quran during the era of Uthman Ibn Affan: In his reign, the Quran was written from the main copy gathered during the era of Abu Bakr al-Siddiq. It was kept at the residence of Hafsah Bint Umar, (one of the Prophet's wives). He charged the following scribes to do it:

Zayd Ibn Thabit.
Abdullah Ibn Al-Zubair.
Said Ibn Al-`As.
Abdul-Rahman Ibn Al-Harith Ibn Hisham.

The purpose of this compilation was thus inspired by the recognition that a collection was needed by them but unauthorized by the Prophet SAW.


Now you saying to us...."Response No. 1:

'Uthman ibn 'Affan was elected as the third Caliph by a Council called the Shura. As the elected leader of the Muslim Ummah (Brotherhood), it was his privilege and prerogative to appoint a Commission to collect all the available verses of the Qur'an from the 'Ummah and undertake the task of preparing a definitive compiled copy of the Qur'an. The Commission established a criteria for this specific purpose. When this Commission, headed by Zayd ibn Thabit - a reputable scribe and personal secretary to the Prophet, came up with a finally compiled copy of the Qur'an, it was approved by 'Uthman for circulation...."

So are you not contradicting yourself?

The first contradiction is that earlier on you claimed that during Caliph Uthman's reign the quran was merely "copied" - now you have changed your story by saying it was his prerogative to prepare a definitive "compiled copy" - so are you now suggesting that what was done previously during caliph Aboo Bakr's reign wasn't?

The second contradiction is that you mentioned four scribes and now you have reduced the nube to just one....

The third vital point and which you have conceded to is that all this was done without the authority of the Holy Prophet....now you are trying to justify this as being a prerogative....prerogative to do what? create a like thereof? and that too without the authority of the Prophet?

History bears testimony to the fact that during the reign of 'Uthmán, it became evident to the community that there were an uncomfortable number of variations in the memorized texts, and so 'Uthmán began the process of compiling a single, authoritative version.

Virani, who were the scribes? the same guys !

A canonical text was produced under his direction, and he ordered that all other, noncanonical, texts be burned.

This codification did not completely preclude any future variations, however, for his was a consonantal text only.

Its purpose was merely to preserve the skeleton of the text for the sake of preventing any future textual corruption, not to record the living Qur'án as such.

Partly for this reason, and largely because the science of Arabic orthography was still primitive, variations remained possible. The skeletal 'Uthmánic text either contained limited vowel markings or none at all, and the shapes of several consonants were similar, both of which allowed for a great variety of differences in meaning.[61]

Though these differences were usually minor, a few changes could have great ramifications. For example, depending on tone, the word for "exalted Alí," could be taken either to be a simple adjective, or to refer to a divine endorsement of the caliphate of 'Alí!

From all of these variations, a limited number were selected and canonized in the tenth century.[62]

The final stage in the process of codifying the Qur'án came in the twentieth century when "an Egyptian Royal Committee of experts" issued one definitive, fully vocalized reading of the text in 1924.[63]

Although the Egyptian edition is now the predominant one, the other variant readings are still acknowledged to be equally canonical

[znanwalla]

Virani, you are saying..."When Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him received the Noble Quran's Revelations in a 10-years span, he had everything documented on paper and saved with his close disciples and immediate family. He also had the entire Noble Quran memorized along with many of his followers. The Noble Quran during the times of our beloved Prophet peace be upon him was carefully preserved and protected from man's corruption. It was documented on paper and it was entirely memorized by many. ..."

First of all Naboowat was not just a span of 10 years.....secondly

The Qur’an was unquestionably revealed at the exalted prophet’s heart as a one time down-load during a night of Ramadhan in 610 CE.

From then on, it was conveyed to people in stages on Divine Command. So, there is no human touch involved in its arrangement at all....so where was it revealed? and where was it protected? in the exalted heart of the Prophet under the command of "Iqra" ! Lets try and prove this from the Qur’an itself.

Please see the evidence:


ONE: Notice God calling the Qur’an a Book right in the beginning (2:2), ...

2:2 This is a Book whereof there is absolutely no doubt concerning its authority and authenticity. And it leaves no doubts lingering in a seeking mind…. So the BOOK was existing as early as Sura 2 ....

Thus your theory is false !

The entire Qur’an was revealed (down-loaded onto the Prophet’s heart) in a Blessed Night in the month of Ramadhan, 610 CE, and then conveyed to mankind in stages over a period of 23 years.

Your span of 10 years is again false !

The scribes you refer to could not compile the later texts in its correct chronological order, to say the least.

TWO: 44:3 We have revealed it on a Blessed Night. ....makes no mention of any stages and "night" is singular...right?

THREE: 2:185 The month of Ramadhan has been chosen for this collective training (Saum) since this is the month in which the Qur’an was revealed …it is not talking of parts, portions or suras...Quran ! means in its entirity ! I do not see any "plurality".

FOUR: Surah 97…….. Al-Qadr … (The Majesty)
[Author’s Note] This is the 97th Surah of the Qur’an. The Night of Majesty is when the entire Qur’an was revealed through Gabriel on the exalted Prophet's heart in the month of Ramadhan in the year 610 CE.


97:1 Indeed, We have revealed it in the Night of Majesty. 97:2 Ah, what will enlighten you what it is, the Night of Majesty! 97:3 The Night of Majesty is better than a thousand months. [A day of
enlightenment is better than a life-time of ignorance]

Now Experience this : Wrong translations make the Qur’an appear disjointed, without flow and thus difficult to understand. ...so was this then the prerogative you are boasting about?

[znanwalla]

You are saying:..."So, it is beyond the shadow of the doubt that the numbering and the order of the Noble Chapters and Verses was already determined by our Prophet peace be upon him through the inspiration and guidance of Allah Almighty, and not by anyone else. ..."

so then tell us ...if Allah perfected Islam as long ago as the 5th Sura then what was the need for HIM to send 109 additional suras.."?

If your text says one can marry 1,2, 3 or 4 wives and that too conditionally if a person can do justice to them all....why did the Prophet SAW marry 12 wives? the Prophet would never go against the quran - so did the scribes make an error here?

Why are all the longer suras in the front and all the shorter ones at the end? is this how quran was revealed? and so what are you trying to convince us?

[pardesi]

shiraz.virani,

I am glad you have returned. But before you get into another fully blown debate I believe there are some serious questions raised earlier by Znanwalla that you must answer. Questions like your beliefs that I for one believe you are covering under the garb of being an Ismaili. It is quite obvious from your previous posts that your beliefs are not in sync with the Ismaili thought.

You mentioned in one of your previous posts that you are from Houston Sugarland JK. I lived there for few years and know people who know all and sundry. I asked people about you, people who would know you if you attended Sugarland JK. You didn't pan out.

In your posts you do mention about Imam leading us to believe that you follow the Ismaili Imam. Do you? Or are you referring to some other Imam. Could you describe in clear words who is your Imam that you follow?

In your debates with Znanwalla you have accused him/her of copy pasting from the internet and have challenged to come up with his/her own material to debate. Your very last post here where you have tried to answer two questions is a complete copy/past of work from an anti-ismaili website giving more weight to what Znanwalla has always said
about you. Everyone uses references from internet or books but it is proper to mention the source while using someone else's material. Meherally's website is not even the last place I would fetch arguments from to debate another Ismaili. You bringing arguments from there speaks volume about who you really are. Please prove me wrong.

I think it is high time you come clean and let everyone know who you are and what your beliefs are and what is your purpose here on this website. Non-Ismailis are always welcomed on this site but I have always said that if they are upfront about their beliefs and purpose it will create an even playing field and the debates will be more to the point and interesting. I have watched debates on TV, internet and in person and this is how it is done. The participants are required to introduce themselves and not hide their identity or give incorrect information so that their arguments are understood in proper perspective.

[pardesi]

Response No. 1: 'Uthman ibn 'Affan was elected as the third Caliph by a Council called the Shura. As the elected leader of the Muslim Ummah (Brotherhood), it was his privilege and prerogative to appoint a Commission to collect all the available verses of the Qur'an from the 'Ummah and undertake the task of preparing a definitive compiled copy of the Qur'an....

Caliph Umar, without any authority from Quran or sunnah of the Prophet, in his will had appointed a party of six to nominate his successor. They offered it to Ali if, and only if, Ali would follow both the sunnah of the prophet and the sunnah of Abu Bakr and Umar. Ali refused, saying he will only follow Quran and the teachings of the Messenger of Allah. Caliphate was then offered to Uthman who agreed to follow the sunnah of the previous two caliphs and hence appointed Caliph.

Just so everyone knows that Uthman was not elected, rather appointed by the Shura.

When Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him received the Noble Quran's Revelations in a 10-years span, he had everything documented on paper and saved with his close disciples and immediate family.

Huh? 10 years? You've got to be kidding me. So what happened to the verses that were sent over other 13 years?

[znanwalla]

At his death Caliph Aboo Bakr nominated Umar as his successor to the Caliphate...so it was a "nomination" within themselves - not an election based on consensus of the majority of the umma.

Umar on his death appointed a board of six members to select his successor - this board consisted of Abdul Rehman Ibn Oaf; Sa'as Ibne Abi Waqquas; Oosman Ibne Aaafan; Talha Ibne Abdullah; Zubair Ibne Awan and Ali Ibne Abi Talib.

The terms of reference were:

a) if they unanimously select a person he becomes the caliph
b) if there is no unanimity then that person will be caliph for whom Abdul Rehman Ibne Oaf and his party vote.
c) if any five of them agree on one man and the sixth disagrees, then the dissenter should be killed.d) if any four of them agree on one man and two disagree, then the two should be killed.
e)if there is equal division then the casting vote would be that of Abdullah Ibne Umar (his own son); Abdul Rehman Ibne Oaf ( a cousin of Uthman) had already declared that he wasn't standing as a candidate.


Please refer to Kitabul Imamuth wo siasuth (270AH) - page 26 and history of Ibne Khuladoon - second part - pages 134 - 136)

What was the result? opinions were equally divided in favour of Ali and Uthman...so then Abdul Rehman Ibne Oaaf asks Ali whether , if elected, he will act according to the "rulings of the two previous Caliphs" (apart from acting as per the quran and the sunnah)?...Ali replied:

" So far as the Quran and the orders and traditions of the Prophet SAW are concerned, I agree to abide by them and follow them sincerely and faithully but so far as the rulings and decisions of the previous two Caliphs are concerned, if they are according to the Holy Book and the traditions of the Prophet, who can dare refuse then? but if they are NOT and are infact against these orders of God and HIS Prophet, who can dare ACCEPT or even follow them...I refuse to bind myself with those rulings and decisions. I shall act according to my knowledge and my discretion..."

So then Abdul Rehman asks the same question to Uthman...Uthman agrees not only to act according to the quran/sunnah but also to implicitely follow the rulings and decisions of the previous two caliphs and so Abdul rehman declares Uthman as the caliph....(refer tabari - Vol 5 - pages 35 - 38 vol 16 page 590)(Ibne khaladoon page 134 - 136 and Abdul Fida - page 34 and Rozath us Safa - vol 2 - page 98).

Uthman thus wasn't elected by the people but selected by his comrades....if he had promised to abide implicitely by the rulings of the previous two caliphs then he reneged as (a) he changed the quran and ordered all previous copies destroyed and (b) appointed all his relatives in high positions in the administration and his selection proved ruinous for Islam, in the end...

Uthman fell under the influence of his clan...he was guided entirely by his son in law Marwan who had infact once been expelled by the Prophet for breach of trust...

Uthman infact displaced some of the lieutenants employed by Umar and appointed instead incompetent and useless members of his own family and even Ali pleaded several times with Uthman but Uthman was under the influence of his evil genius Marwan and paid no heed to the counsel of Ali or the governors - at least twice Ali was asked to intercede between Uthman and the Umma.....please read the book written by Justice Syed Ameer "a short history of the saracen - page 46 and Nahjul Balagha...it is all there in black and white.....

[shiraz.virani]

brother pardesi said :

shiraz.virani,

I am glad you have returned. But before you get into another fully blown debate I believe there are some serious questions raised earlier by Znanwalla that you must answer. Questions like your beliefs that I for one believe you are covering under the garb of being an Ismaili. It is quite obvious from your previous posts that your beliefs are not in sync with the Ismaili thought.

brother Pardesi, iam

shia = PARTY
imami = who believes in imamat
ismaili = who believe that imamat was handed over to imam ismail[as] after the demise of our holy imam jafer-as-sadiq[as]
muslim = One who submits to allah[swt] [ONE ALLAH]

You mentioned in one of your previous posts that you are from Houston Sugarland JK. I lived there for few years and know people who know all and sundry. I asked people about you, people who would know you if you attended Sugarland JK. You didn't pan out.

you can ask volunteer muhammad hemani or Dr amirali punjani and so on ...... brother, there is nothing to hide in it !

In your posts you do mention about Imam leading us to believe that you follow the Ismaili Imam. Do you? Or are you referring to some other Imam. Could you describe in clear words who is your Imam that you follow?

Of course !! its the 49th living imam shah karim al-hussaini...who often talks about holy quran

In your debates with Znanwalla you have accused him/her of copy pasting from the internet and have challenged to come up with his/her own material to debate. Your very last post here where you have tried to answer two questions is a complete copy/past of work from an anti-ismaili website giving more weight to what Znanwalla has always said
about you. Everyone uses references from internet or books but it is proper to mention the source while using someone else's material. Meherally's website is not even the last place I would fetch arguments from to debate another Ismaili. You bringing arguments from there speaks volume about who you really are. Please prove me wrong.

i think you have seriouly mis-quoted me! what i meant was, repeating the same hadiths[manmade] again and again will not make me believe that its a fact......just like a criminal will plea for mercy but at the end he/she is punished...in the same way i asked znanwalla not to copy/paste same hadiths again and again...now this shows the limited knowledge a person has !

I think it is high time you come clean and let everyone know who you are and what your beliefs are and what is your purpose here on this website. Non-Ismailis are always welcomed on this site but I have always said that if they are upfront about their beliefs and purpose it will create an even playing field and the debates will be more to the point and interesting. I have watched debates on TV, internet and in person and this is how it is done. The participants are required to introduce themselves and not hide their identity or give incorrect information so that their arguments are understood in proper perspective.

my purpose is to defend holy quran, that is my top most priority....and if somebody tells me that quran is incomplete well think again !

so far my questions remained un-answered, wussup with that ??

so you saying that if iam an ismaili , i shouldnt ask a question, right ? and even if i do...i should favour the junk of some person who dont even know that the quran which he/she is shouting about is there PRESENT in each and every jamatkhana !!!

since you look more educated brother lemme ask you this,

1] if quran is incomplete, then how come we have that same uthmanic quran in our jamatkhana ?

2] if quran is incomplete or chronological then how come we recite our dua from the very same quran ??? and how come even the surah and aayat matches to that of uthmanic brand as some ismaili brothers and sisters call it ???

3] if quran is incomplete then how come we recite eid namaz from the same quranic verses ,again with same exact aayat and surah ?

4] if quran is incomplete then how come our holy imam uses soooo many references from the same quran ??


brother if somebody has doubts he/she is free to ask or share it.....but when i ask something people like znanwalla get aggrevated thinking iam not an ismaili or iam here to start a fight......KINDLY PLEASE SHOW ME WHEN OR WHERE I CURSED MY IMAMS[AS] /RASOOL[SAW] OR ALLAH[SWT]

kindly please show me where i called ZNANPURWALLA or anybody else an infidel [ which she has used against me sooooooooooo many times ]....please tell me when did i said that my beliefs represent shia ismaili or sunni views ?


all i asked was respect for holy quran.....and look what you have made out of that

NO ISMAILI
INFIDEL
NO RESPECT FOR IMAM and so on and so forth

[shiraz.virani]

sister znanwalla said :

At his death Caliph Aboo Bakr nominated Umar as his successor to the Caliphate...so it was a "nomination" within themselves - not an election based on consensus of the majority of the umma.

Umar on his death appointed a board of six members to select his successor - this board consisted of Abdul Rehman Ibn Oaf; Sa'as Ibne Abi Waqquas; Oosman Ibne Aaafan; Talha Ibne Abdullah; Zubair Ibne Awan and Ali Ibne Abi Talib.

The terms of reference were:

a) if they unanimously select a person he becomes the caliph
b) if there is no unanimity then that person will be caliph for whom Abdul Rehman Ibne Oaf and his party vote.
c) if any five of them agree on one man and the sixth disagrees, then the dissenter should be killed.d) if any four of them agree on one man and two disagree, then the two should be killed.
e)if there is equal division then the casting vote would be that of Abdullah Ibne Umar (his own son); Abdul Rehman Ibne Oaf ( a cousin of Uthman) had already declared that he wasn't standing as a candidate.


Please refer to Kitabul Imamuth wo siasuth (270AH) - page 26 and history of Ibne Khuladoon - second part - pages 134 - 136)

What was the result? opinions were equally divided in favour of Ali and Uthman...so then Abdul Rehman Ibne Oaaf asks Ali whether , if elected, he will act according to the "rulings of the two previous Caliphs" (apart from acting as per the quran and the sunnah)?...Ali replied:

" So far as the Quran and the orders and traditions of the Prophet SAW are concerned, I agree to abide by them and follow them sincerely and faithully but so far as the rulings and decisions of the previous two Caliphs are concerned, if they are according to the Holy Book and the traditions of the Prophet, who can dare refuse then? but if they are NOT and are infact against these orders of God and HIS Prophet, who can dare ACCEPT or even follow them...I refuse to bind myself with those rulings and decisions. I shall act according to my knowledge and my discretion..."

So then Abdul Rehman asks the same question to Uthman...Uthman agrees not only to act according to the quran/sunnah but also to implicitely follow the rulings and decisions of the previous two caliphs and so Abdul rehman declares Uthman as the caliph....(refer tabari - Vol 5 - pages 35 - 38 vol 16 page 590)(Ibne khaladoon page 134 - 136 and Abdul Fida - page 34 and Rozath us Safa - vol 2 - page 9.

Uthman thus wasn't elected by the people but selected by his comrades....if he had promised to abide implicitely by the rulings of the previous two caliphs then he reneged as (a) he changed the quran and ordered all previous copies destroyed and (b) appointed all his relatives in high positions in the administration and his selection proved ruinous for Islam, in the end...

Uthman fell under the influence of his clan...he was guided entirely by his son in law Marwan who had infact once been expelled by the Prophet for breach of trust...

Uthman infact displaced some of the lieutenants employed by Umar and appointed instead incompetent and useless members of his own family and even Ali pleaded several times with Uthman but Uthman was under the influence of his evil genius Marwan and paid no heed to the counsel of Ali or the governors - at least twice Ali was asked to intercede between Uthman and the Umma.....please read the book written by Justice Syed Ameer "a short history of the saracen - page 46 and Nahjul Balagha...it is all there in black and white.....

RELIGION OF MY ANCESTORS ......by sultan muhammad shah[as]

To certain extent I have found that the following verse of the Koran, so long as it is understood in a purely nonphysical sense, has given assistance and understanding to myself and other Muslims. However, I must warn all who read it not to allow their material critical outlook to break in with literal, verbal explanations of something that is symbolic and allegorical. I appeal to every reader, whether Muslim or not, to accept the spirit of this verse in its entirety :

Allah is the light of the heavens and the earth; His light is as a niche in which is a lamp, and the lamp is in a glass, the glass is as though it were a glittering star; it is lit from a blessed tree, an Olive neither of east nor of the west, the oil of which would well-nigh give light though no fire touched it,-light upon light;-Allah guides to His light whom He pleases; and Allah strikes out parables for men; and Allah all things doth know.

(CHAPTER XXIV "Light," 35)


@ above is the extracted from the memoirs of our 48th holy imam.....our holy imam mentioned an aayat from the holy quran = 24:35, now lets see whether the above verse matches uthmanic quran[as znanwalla claims to be]

Allahu nooru alssamawati waalardi mathalu noorihi kamishkatin feeha misbahun almisbahu fee zujajatin alzzujajatu kaannaha kawkabun durriyyun yooqadu min shajaratin mubarakatin zaytoonatin la sharqiyyatin wala gharbiyyatin yakadu zaytuha yudeeo walaw lam tamsashu narun noorun AAala noorin yahdee Allahu linoorihi man yashao wayadribu Allahu alamthala lilnnasi waAllahu bikulli shayin AAaleemun


24:35 (Picktall) Allah is the Light of the heavens and the earth. The similitude of His light is as a niche wherein is a lamp. The lamp is in a glass. The glass is as it were a shining star. (This lamp is) kindled from a blessed tree, an olive neither of the East nor of the West, whose oil would almost glow forth (of itself) though no fire touched it. Light upon light, Allah guideth unto His light whom He will. And Allah speaketh to mankind in allegories, for Allah is knower of all things

how many more times you want me to prove you wrong znanwalla ????

@ above example shows not only that quran which is used by shia imami ismaili muslims is the same quran used by over 1 billion muslims brothers and sisters but also....the chronological myth as znanwalla claimed .....if the order in which quran was revealed is/was chronological then i guess the quran of ismailis would have different surah and aayat number....but @ above gives us the crystal clear explanation that imam[as] has the same !

if we read furthur , imam sultan muhammad shah[as] says :

Fortunately the Koran has itself made this task easy, for it contains a number of verses which declare that Allah speaks to man in allegory and parable. Thus the Koran leaves the door open for all kinds of possibilities of interpretation so that no one interpreter can accuse another of being non-Muslim. A felicitous effect of this fundamental principle of Islam that the Koran is constantly open to allegorical interpretation has been that our Holy Book has been able to guide and illuminate the thought of believers, century after century, in accordance with the conditions and limitations of intellectual appreciation imposed by external influences in the world. It leads also to a greater charity among Muslims, for since there can be no cut-and-dried interpretation, all schools of thought can unite in the prayer that the Almighty in His infinite mercy may forgive any mistaken interpretation of the Faith whose cause is ignorance or misunderstanding.

imam sultan muhammad shah[as] says :

Let us then study the duties of man, as the great majority interpret them, according to the verses of the Koran and the Traditions of the Prophet. First of all, the relations of man to God: there are no priests and no monks. There is no confession of sins, except directly to God.

again in his memoirs , imam[as] says :

Just as the events of Easter Week become part of Christianity and the hope of men, so the death-bed scene of our Holy Prophet, so well authenticated by evidence, took place in the presence of his two cousins, Ali and Ibn-Abbas, his wives, and above all, his future great successor, the Caliph Omar, then one of his leading companions. All this evidence is exactly the same. The last words of the Prophet were "Companionship on High."


all our holy imams[as] had respect for the 1st 3 caliphs....and look at you

he[as] furthur adds :

Our Holy Koran so often refers to the fact that we are surrounded by so many God-given gifts which we should understand and profit from. Alas, we Muslims, who should have been the first to realize it, have become the last.

[pardesi]

since you look more educated brother lemme ask you this,

1] if quran is incomplete, then how come we have that same uthmanic quran in our jamatkhana ?

The authenticity and incompleteness are two different matters which
should not be confused with each other. I believe there is no corruption of words in Quran but research points to incompleteness and the problem with the arrangement of ayahs. In so many places in Quran there are verses that have nothing to do with the subject (surah) where they have been inserted. The order in which the verses were recited by the Prophet or in his time may not be exactly what we have today in the Quran. Quran was written on parchments or skins or rocks or whatever was available and how do you keep all that in order? Few had the Quran memorized and most of them died in a battle which made it a proirity to collect the verses in a Book form out of fear of losing the Quran forever. So it is possible that the chronological order was messed up when they tried to assemble it all. Was it not a committee of four or five who came up with Quran in a book form in the time of Abu Bakr? That committee did not include the foremost authority on Quranic verses, Ali ibn Abi Talib who had collected all the verses in order of its revelation and purpose and with interpretation which was outrightly rejected by Abu Bakr and Umar. Why was he not consulted? Makes you wonder.

2] if quran is incomplete or chronological then how come we recite our dua from the very same quran ??? and how come even the surah and aayat matches to that of uthmanic brand as some ismaili brothers and sisters call it ???

Again you are confusing authenticity with completeness. The Shias argue over missing verses, some argue about its chronological order which has made a lot of verses out of context thus giving it a different or alternative interpretation. The verses are the same but not in correct order and that is our argument.

3] if quran is incomplete then how come we recite eid namaz from the same quranic verses ,again with same exact aayat and surah ?

Again your argument revolves around the same misconception. How many verses of Quran are in the Dua? and how many surahs they belong to? Is it not possible that the Imam picked few of the right surahs and verses to incorporate in our Dua?

4] if quran is incomplete then how come our holy imam uses soooo many references from the same quran ??

In one of your previous posts, a couple of months ago, and I don't know which topic or thread it was in, I remember you said that our Imam uses the same few ayahs again and again in his speeches implying or giving the impression that he knows not much. Now you are saying "sooooo many references". Your purpose I still question.

Everyone respects the Quran in a book form that we have today. No one would dare disrespect the verses that are holy - the physical book is not but since it contains the holy verses we show respect to the book. Our problem is that the "book" was put together by unauthorized people and people do make mistakes. It is very much possible that those 4 or 5 people made few mistakes and we all know that they did make mistakes when they left out a couple of ayahs in the initial version which were later found and inserted in Uthman's time. We also have history telling us that some people had verses that they used to recite but were not found in the final copy of the Quran.

This is a never ending argument. Lets agree to disagree and move on.

[haroon_adel]

since you look more educated brother lemme ask you this,

1] if quran is incomplete, then how come we have that same uthmanic quran in our jamatkhana ?

The authenticity and incompleteness are two different matters which
should not be confused with each other. I believe there is no corruption of words in Quran but research points to incompleteness and the problem with the arrangement of ayahs. In so many places in Quran there are verses that have nothing to do with the subject (surah) where they have been inserted. The order in which the verses were recited by the Prophet or in his time may not be exactly what we have today in the Quran. Quran was written on parchments or skins or rocks or whatever was available and how do you keep all that in order? Few had the Quran memorized and most of them died in a battle which made it a proirity to collect the verses in a Book form out of fear of losing the Quran forever. So it is possible that the chronological order was messed up when they tried to assemble it all. Was it not a committee of four or five who came up with Quran in a book form in the time of Abu Bakr? That committee did not include the foremost authority on Quranic verses, Ali ibn Abi Talib who had collected all the verses in order of its revelation and purpose and with interpretation which was outrightly rejected by Abu Bakr and Umar. Why was he not consulted? Makes you wonder.

2] if quran is incomplete or chronological then how come we recite our dua from the very same quran ??? and how come even the surah and aayat matches to that of uthmanic brand as some ismaili brothers and sisters call it ???

Again you are confusing authenticity with completeness. The Shias argue over missing verses, some argue about its chronological order which has made a lot of verses out of context thus giving it a different or alternative interpretation. The verses are the same but not in correct order and that is our argument.

3] if quran is incomplete then how come we recite eid namaz from the same quranic verses ,again with same exact aayat and surah ?

Again your argument revolves around the same misconception. How many verses of Quran are in the Dua? and how many surahs they belong to? Is it not possible that the Imam picked few of the right surahs and verses to incorporate in our Dua?

4] if quran is incomplete then how come our holy imam uses soooo many references from the same quran ??

In one of your previous posts, a couple of months ago, and I don't know which topic or thread it was in, I remember you said that our Imam uses the same few ayahs again and again in his speeches implying or giving the impression that he knows not much. Now you are saying "sooooo many references". Your purpose I still question.

Everyone respects the Quran in a book form that we have today. No one would dare disrespect the verses that are holy - the physical book is not but since it contains the holy verses we show respect to the book. Our problem is that the "book" was put together by unauthorized people and people do make mistakes. It is very much possible that those 4 or 5 people made few mistakes and we all know that they did make mistakes when they left out a couple of ayahs in the initial version which were later found and inserted in Uthman's time. We also have history telling us that some people had verses that they used to recite but were not found in the final copy of the Quran.

This is a never ending argument. Lets agree to disagree and move on.

Very well said!

But let's not forget the original question of the poster.

- Who started this thread and what s/he had asked, and look--now--where it ended up. "Someone2" might be reading this post and laughing his A off. Why do we (Ismailis) have to argue to this point, while we know that there are other people (non-Ismailis) who comes here at these forums and read these threads and find out that 2 Ismailis are on to each other to this point.

As Pardesi said, Let's just agree to disagree and move on.

[shiraz.virani]

Quote:
since you look more educated brother lemme ask you this,

1] if quran is incomplete, then how come we have that same uthmanic quran in our jamatkhana ?


The authenticity and incompleteness are two different matters which
should not be confused with each other. I believe there is no corruption of words in Quran but research points to incompleteness and the problem with the arrangement of ayahs. In so many places in Quran there are verses that have nothing to do with the subject (surah) where they have been inserted. The order in which the verses were recited by the Prophet or in his time may not be exactly what we have today in the Quran. Quran was written on parchments or skins or rocks or whatever was available and how do you keep all that in order? Few had the Quran memorized and most of them died in a battle which made it a proirity to collect the verses in a Book form out of fear of losing the Quran forever. So it is possible that the chronological order was messed up when they tried to assemble it all. Was it not a committee of four or five who came up with Quran in a book form in the time of Abu Bakr? That committee did not include the foremost authority on Quranic verses, Ali ibn Abi Talib who had collected all the verses in order of its revelation and purpose and with interpretation which was outrightly rejected by Abu Bakr and Umar. Why was he not consulted? Makes you wonder.

why nobody asked IMAM ALI[as] is out of question brother because our imam[as] had compiled the whole quran already as mentioned in hadiths....and sister znanwalla said that all the imams[as] have that special quran ....and this is what i disagreed upon ! if imam ali[as] had any special quran then i dont think he would have not shared it with his own shia's ?....well iam not fighting but there are always 2 sides of the coin !

infact i read in one of the hadiths and insha allah ill try to find and post it....it says that imam ali[as] used to keep a part of holy quranic verses [written] in his sword dhulfikar....well i dunno whether this is true or not but its just that i wanted to share this with you.

Quote:
2] if quran is incomplete or chronological then how come we recite our dua from the very same quran ??? and how come even the surah and aayat matches to that of uthmanic brand as some ismaili brothers and sisters call it ???


Again you are confusing authenticity with completeness. The Shias argue over missing verses, some argue about its chronological order which has made a lot of verses out of context thus giving it a different or alternative interpretation. The verses are the same but not in correct order and that is our argument.

First of, thank you for showing respect for quran e paak... unlike znanwalla who thinks quran is not complete then that raises some doubt on that particular persons belief

Quote:
3] if quran is incomplete then how come we recite eid namaz from the same quranic verses ,again with same exact aayat and surah ?


Again your argument revolves around the same misconception. How many verses of Quran are in the Dua? and how many surahs they belong to? Is it not possible that the Imam picked few of the right surahs and verses to incorporate in our Dua?

you're not getting my point brother, what i was trying to tell znanwalla is if imam have picked few of the right suras then how come we have the same surah and verse number as that of uthmanic quran ??? they are 7 or more surahs in our holy dua.....the soul purpose of those 7 particular surahs is that it speaks about "ulil-amr" or in other words "IMAMAT".

Quote:
4] if quran is incomplete then how come our holy imam uses soooo many references from the same quran ??


In one of your previous posts, a couple of months ago, and I don't know which topic or thread it was in, I remember you said that our Imam uses the same few ayahs again and again in his speeches implying or giving the impression that he knows not much. Now you are saying "sooooo many references". Your purpose I still question.

Everyone respects the Quran in a book form that we have today. No one would dare disrespect the verses that are holy - the physical book is not but since it contains the holy verses we show respect to the book. Our problem is that the "book" was put together by unauthorized people and people do make mistakes. It is very much possible that those 4 or 5 people made few mistakes and we all know that they did make mistakes when they left out a couple of ayahs in the initial version which were later found and inserted in Uthman's time. We also have history telling us that some people had verses that they used to recite but were not found in the final copy of the Quran.

This is a never ending argument. Lets agree to disagree and move on.

brother i dunno where i have written it but i will still agree with what you said and i showed you the references given not just by the 49th imam alone....khair, but dont forget that imam e zaman guides us through the very same quran as he has always emphasised his role as an interpretor of the holy book and not the AUTHOR himself.

I once again thank you for showing ADHAB towards quran e paak.

salam[peace]
yaa ali madad

[znanwalla]

Virani,

by calling a "like thereof" as quran of God as "revealed' does not make the transformation that you so desperately seek or desire....

Usually someone who has no Imam of the time would try and do this for they are lost on the High Seas and "Imam" maherally either can't help them for they are destined to be drowned by the deluge as per the hadith of the Prophet.....

You are unduly contesting the mutawatir ahadith of the Holy Prophet SAW which all Sh'ias accept (except Imam Maherally of the pagans)....

You are rejecting the "tafsirs" of the Imams of the Ahl al Bayt like Imam Jafar as Sadiq and Imam Baqir's....

You are trying to convince us what the pagans of the medieval times follow and so you are liberty to follow conjectures and half truths.....as a rule Ismailis do not follow or believe what you believe and we never will !

The word of Allah and HIS Prophet are not meant for scums for Allah guides unto HIS Noor whomsoever HE Wills....I have said before bring any narration or text into the presence of the Imam from the pure progeny of the Prophet and it becomes complete only in their presence for they are the "Muttahroon" ! The Inheritors ! the Guardians ! The masters of Thaqalyn ! and so (a) haven't actually seen the BOOK in JKs across the board except in some areas where one may do this as an act of dissimulation which Allah allows humankind....


You haven't explained why (a) all the longer suras are in the front and why all the shorter ones are at the end? was the quran revealed in this sequence?

(b) if Allah had perfected Islam as early as the 5th Sura then why did HE have to send 109 additional suras? or did HE not get this right the first time as the Khoja Asnasheris claim and have consequently introduced the concept of "Bada"?

(c) if your text says 1,2,3 or 4 women a person can marry, why did the Prophet marry some 12 wives? did he go against the quran he himself brought? I doubt ! so is the text wrong then?...

So answer these questions first !

Do you not know what a "like thereof" means ? it simply means that there will exist many similarities - does this then mean it is the actual or entire quran as revealed ? No !

SAY: Though mankind and the JINN should assemble to produce the like thereof of this quran, they could NOT produce the like thereof, even if they were to help one another..."

Now this ayah is for you and your cohorts and ancestors of maherally who tried to create variant and interpolated variations and then have no shame to say it is the quran of God....

[znanwalla]

In actuality the Sh'ia scholars concur that Imam Ali was not only a close companion of the Prophet through out the mission but he used to record what the Prophet SAW revealed and infact the Prophet did certain things to Hazrat Ali....

Now the 'special features" of this book which remained with his family, after his martyrdoom have been described by the Imams of the ahl al bayt....

So are these Imams not telling us the truth?...this scroll of Ali was written by the hand of Ali Ibn Abi Taleb at the dictation of the Prophet of Islam and everything which the people need is described therein......and the majority of the Sh'ias conform that this book was handed down from generation to generation but in the family of Imam Ali only and there are frequent references to what I am saying here in the sayings of Imam Baqir and Imam Sadiq and some of these Imams close companions have seen certain portions and even today some of the ahadith which all Sh'ias accept, originate from there....

Please go and read "Wasa'il al Sh'ia" ! and your argument that had Ali written his scroll, then he would surely have given this to the people, is true...he did offer it in the market place but your ancestors were corrupt and said they are happy with Umar's book which they had called the Book of God and which you are reading now upside down and barking at me...so when your ancestors refused to accept the Book of God - the Quran ! Ali said you will not see this again until the end....oh ! btw...I am not buying your fairy tale about being an Ismaili...you were, once upon a time...not anymore.....you are merely fooling people with this gift of your gab....

[znanwalla]

"...In one of your previous posts, a couple of months ago, and I don't know which topic or thread it was in, I remember you said that our Imam uses the same few ayahs again and again in his speeches implying or giving the impression that he knows not much. Now you are saying "sooooo many references". Your purpose I still question...."

Bingo ! and he has said this over and over on Youtube also where the guys "battered" him until he did not know if he was coming or going...here is hiding under the guidelines of this forum which restrains folks....he has argued that the Imam does not know quran...he only needs to read, first and foremost the various speeches....and then understand what he does not know himself....he is used to hearing quran only in the poetry form just like they chant at the madrasses swinging from one end to the other like juke boxes but not knowing what they are actually reciting...this is his state....

Allah says.." SAY: were the Sea to be Ink for the words of MY Lord, verily the Sea would be used up before the words of My Lord were Exhausted, even if WE were to bring the LIKE THEREOF to HELP..." (Sura al Kahf)

"And WE have sent a (new) Light and a Perscipous Book" !

So Allah concurs what I have been saying to Virani - No Imam of ahl al Bayt ! No Quran ! all other argument irrelevant and immaterial and worthless !

[znanwalla]

Wrong translations make the Texts of the Qur’an appear disjointed, without flow and thus difficult to understand.

The actual Qur’an in its original form and language flows smoothly from A to Z. You will not find a hint of human touch in its arrangement.

THE MAKKAH DIALECT - Reflect on the following verses in your Texts:


44:58 (O Prophet) We have made this Qur’an easy in your tongue, in order that they may take it to heart. ..now see what your narrators want you to take to your heart and live peacefully thereafter...

69:40 This is the revealed Word in the dialect of a noble Messenger.

81:19 This is the revealed Word in the dialect of a noble Messenger.



Now the dilemma of the ‘authorities’ --------- just one example:


Many of our ‘great scholars’ have been translating INNAHU LAQAULU
RASOOLIN KAREEM in 69:40 and 81:19 as,

“This Qur’an is utterance (talk) of a noble angel.” (Fateh Muhammad Jallandhary)


“This is certainly the word (descended) upon an honourable messenger.”
(Muhammad Ali, Urdu)

“This is the saying (speech) of a respected angel. (Ashraf Ali Thanwil)


“Verily this is the word of a most honourable Messenger.” (Yousuf Ali).


“This is in truth the word of an honoured messenger.” (Pickthall).


“This is the utterance of an honorable messenger.” (Rashad Khalifa).


“Behold, this (divine writ) is indeed the [inspired] word of a noble messenger.” (Muhammad Asad).


“This Qur’an is the utterance (narration) of God, the noble angel, and the exalted Messenger.” (Mirza Bashiruddin Mahmood)

“Verily, this is the statement of a respected message-bearer.” (Maududi).


“This (Qur’an) is the saying of a high angel.” (Shah Abdul Qadir)

Similar errors and confusions have been created by the ancient ‘authorities’. Wow!

So Virani is the "quran" you boast about the word of an angel and NOT the Word of God!

Or, is it the word of Messenger Muhammad (S) and NOT of Allah ? That is what the enemies of the Prophet used to claim...now look at what your texts also say? and yet you recite it as the word of God? so what are you arguing with me for? Allah's book is Perspicous meaning flawless and perfect in all respect....your texts are NOT !!!!

Did you see the fundamental flaw ?...now can the blind and the seeing be equal?

Why do many of them translate Rasool as angel here?...because they did not wish to revert to the original tongue of Revelation, the Quraish dialect of the 14 centuries old Makkah for various reasons, a daunting task being just one of them....but more importantly, they blindly follow the trails left by the Criminal of Islam ‘Imam’ Tabari, the first (’canonized’) exponent of the Qur’an although he was a Zoroastrian-Persian who lived 300 years after the exalted prophet (d. 310 AH).

That was the time when the Persian-Zoroastrian concepts held sway in the ‘Islamic’ Empire.

These ‘authorities’ conveniently contradict countless verses that clearly state, “The Qur’an is the Word of God”, and thus, knowingly or unknowingly, they attempt to demolish the very foundation, the Divine Revelation, of the Glorious Book....and so what are you promoting to us? texts which in reality actually demolish the truth about the revelation itself....how naive?


The above single example shows you the ensuing chaos and it can give you an idea how misguided and misguiding, unfortunately, our Qur’an translators and translations have been.

[shiraz.virani]

Virani,

by calling a "like thereof" as quran of God as "revealed' does not make the transformation that you so desperately seek or desire....

Usually someone who has no Imam of the time would try and do this for they are lost on the High Seas and "Imam" maherally either can't help them for they are destined to be drowned by the deluge as per the hadith of the Prophet.....

You are unduly contesting the mutawatir ahadith of the Holy Prophet SAW which all Sh'ias accept (except Imam Maherally of the pagans)....

You are rejecting the "tafsirs" of the Imams of the Ahl al Bayt like Imam Jafar as Sadiq and Imam Baqir's....

You are trying to convince us what the pagans of the medieval times follow and so you are liberty to follow conjectures and half truths.....as a rule Ismailis do not follow or believe what you believe and we never will !

we??? who's we ?
iam not contesting against anything....its you who is contesting against the holy quran from which you pray dua/eid namaz.....even janazah[ziyarat kriya]

The word of Allah and HIS Prophet are not meant for scums for Allah guides unto HIS Noor whomsoever HE Wills....I have said before bring any narration or text into the presence of the Imam from the pure progeny of the Prophet and it becomes complete only in their presence for they are the "Muttahroon" ! The Inheritors ! the Guardians ! The masters of Thaqalyn ! and so (a) haven't actually seen the BOOK in JKs across the board except in some areas where one may do this as an act of dissimulation which Allah allows humankind....

let allah[swt] alone decide who is guided and who is not ....or in your words, who is a scum and who isnt .

so you mean to say you dont have holy quran e paak in your jamatkhana ? If yes, please kindly tell us which jk you go to...i would like to talk to the chairman of your tariqah board personally[;)]

You haven't explained why (a) all the longer suras are in the front and why all the shorter ones are at the end? was the quran revealed in this sequence?

so far you havent explained me why we have the same uthmanic quran in our jamatkhana ???

you have explained me why we recite our holy dua using the same uthmanic verses as per your belief ?

you havent explained me why we recite, eid namaz ,ziyarat dua which is again extracted from the same uthmanic quran .

NOTHING has been proved but yet you come here with arrogance and say, i have abused imam e zaman....some man made hadiths about imam jaffer as sadiq[as] etc etc....how sad !!!

(c) if your text says 1,2,3 or 4 women a person can marry, why did the Prophet marry some 12 wives? did he go against the quran he himself brought? I doubt ! so is the text wrong then?...

So answer these questions first !

you call yourself educated ???? i really doubt it !

The fact that only Prophet Muhammad (saw) is accused of polygamy is rather surprising, since this is a privilege enjoyed by prophets before him. Their wives and concubines came in great numbers, too! The Torah, the Bible, and the Qur’an tell of some of them; the rest are not mentioned so we don’t know, but among the ones who were polygamous we can count Prophets Ibrahim (Abraham), Ya`qub (Jacob), Dawud (David), and Sulayman (Solomon). The Scriptures talk of polygamy as a “favor” bestowed upon them from the Lord.

First Kings 11:1-3 indicates that King Solomon had 700 hundred wives and 300 hundred concubines! In sealing treaties in ancient days, it was customary for a lesser king to give his daughter in marriage to the greater king. Every time a new treaty was sealed, Solomon ended up with yet another wife. These wives were considered “tokens of friendship” and “sealed” the relationship between the two kings. (Reasoning from the Scriptures on 1 Kings)

Scripture indicates that David also acquired wives and concubines, David’s blessings, including his wives, were given to him as a result of God’s favor (2 Sam. 5:12-13; 12:8; D & C 132:39). Scriptural records say that the Lord did command some of his ancient saints to practice plural marriage. Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob—among others conformed to this ennobling and exalting principle; the whole history of ancient Israel was one in which plurality of wives was a divinely accepted and approved order of matrimony. Those who entered this order at the Lord’s command, and who kept the laws and conditions appertaining to it, have gained for themselves eternal exaltation in the highest heaven of the celestial world. (Mormon Doctrine of Plural Marriage p. 578)

From the above accounts, we can clearly see that Prophets—including Rasool[saw]—were allowed to be more polygamous than their followers, not just for carnal reasons, but for political and religious reasons pertaining to their call. Consequently, it is groundless to wonder why Muslims can’t marry 12 wives like their prophet, just as it is groundless to wonder why Jews and Christians can’t marry 700 like theirs! Islam didn’t invent polygamy; Islam only made polygamy more humane, instituting equal rights for all wives. And even so, Muslim women are not forced to accept this and may put a condition against it in their marriage contract.

now as always the problem with people like you is ,you are tooo lazy to read the whole verse in first place !!!

Marry women of your choice, two, or three, or four; but if ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly (with them), then only one.} (An-Nisaa’ 3:3)

read again what the verse say !!!!

Polygamy in Islam is not recommended; it is only permitted under certain guidelines. Permission to practice polygamy is not associated with mere satisfaction of passion. It is, rather, associated with compassion toward widows and orphans and thats what rasool[saw] did !

Before the Qur’an was revealed, there was no upper limit for polygamy, and many men had more than four wives. Islam put an upper limit of four wives, permitting a man to marry more than once, only on the condition that he deal justly with all of them. Yet the same verse points out:

4:129 (Picktall) Ye will not be able to deal equally between (your) wives, however much ye wish (to do so): But turn not altogether away (from one), leaving her as in suspense. If ye do good and keep from evil, lo! Allah is ever Forgiving, Merciful.

Therefore sister polygamy is not a rule but an exception, why ??

The exception is made for many reasons, but let’s note only one here, addressing your concern that rasool (saw) “had intercourse outside of wedlock.”

In Western society, it is common for a man to have mistresses or multiple extra-marital affairs. Women in this case are degraded to mere sex objects with absolutely no rights; they’re usually on the losing end of such liaisons. The same society, however, cannot accept a man having more than one wife so that women can retain their lawful rights and lead an honorable, dignified, and respectable life.

If every adult American man married only one woman, there would still be more than 25 million women in the United States who would not be able to get husbands, at least considering that—according to latest statistics—10 percent of the American population is gay! That’s close to 30 million people!

Thus the only option for a woman who cannot find a husband is either to marry a married man or to become “public property.”

Islam gives women the honorable position by permitting the first option and disallowing the second. At least one of the reasons Islam has permitted limited polygamy is to protect the modesty of women!

In Islam, problems are supposed to be faced and solved—not ignored! So, rather than requiring hypocritical compliance, Islam provides legitimate and clean solutions to the problems of individuals and societies. There is no doubt that the second wife legally married and treated kindly is better off than a mistress without any legal rights. Through practical example, Prophet Muhammad (saw) as the guide of Muslims has set the applicable rules for this aspect of human relations in order not to leave anything for speculation.

My rasool [saw] is all wise sister [;)]

Stages of the Prophet’s (peace and blessings be upon him) Married Life

First, let’s remember that Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him) led a life supported only by the bare minimum of necessities. His wives were not idly wasting away the hours in a luxurious harem but led a life of labor and sacrifice, while he was mostly busy away from home overseeing his numerous duties as a Prophet. Further, most of his marriages occurred at an age when lust is not a major factor in any man’s life:

1. He remained single until age 25.
2. From age 25 to 50 he was faithful to only one wife, Khadijah, who bore all his children except one. She was 15 years older than him, with children from two previous marriages. She was his greatest ally when he received the Call at age 40 until she died when he was 50 years old. He remained in love with her until he died and often talked of his life with her with great nostalgia.
3. Between ages 50 and 52 he remained unmarried and mourning his late beloved wife. He lived alone with his daughters.
4. Between ages 53 and 60 he married all his other wives for many noble reasons detailed below. It’s unimaginable for a man to suddenly turn lustful at this age, especially as he was constantly traveling, with bloodthirsty enemies on his heels.
5. At age 60, Allah revealed to him verse preventing him from marrying any more until he died, which was at age 63. The Qur’an says what means:

It is not lawful for you (to marry other) women after this, nor to change them for other wives. (Al-Ahzab 33:52)

We can categorize all his marriages under two aspects of his personality:

- Muhammad the man who needed a loving wife, children, and a stable home, so he married Khadijah and remained with only her for 20 years until she died.
- [/b]Muhammad the Prophet[/b] who married the other wives for reasons pertaining to his duty to deliver the Message to the world. Those particular women were carefully selected, not just haphazardly “acquired” for carnal reasons, as suggested. Here are some of the reasons for which Muhammad married:

1. To pass on Islam to the next generations as a practical legacy
Prophet Muhammad[saw] is the only prophet without any privacy, and with a meticulously preserved tradition in speech and actions in all minute details of his public and private life. Preserved in the sharp minds of his wives and his Companions, those narrations comprise the “daily life manual” for Muslims to follow until the end of time. The fact that Islam was spread on the shoulders of women and preserved in their hearts is a great honor to the females of this Ummah. The books of authentic Hadith attribute more than 3,000 narrations and Prophetic traditions to his wives alone.

2. To cement the relations of the budding nation in a tribal society, it was customary to seal treaties through marrying into tribes. Muhammad’s closest Companions later became the four caliphs who led Islam at the critical stage after his death. Two of them were the fathers of his wives `A’ishah (daughter of Abu Bakr) and Hafsa (daughter of `Umar); the other two married his daughters (`Uthman married Ruqayyah and Zaynab in succession, and `Ali married Fatimah).

3. To teach Muslims compassion with women , He taught them to be compassionate not just to the young and beautiful maidens, but more so to the weak and destitute widows, divorcees, orphans, and elderly women. Islam teaches that women are to be respected, protected, and cared for by their men folk. They’re not to be cast out to face a harsh life alone while able men around them just pity them and do nothing to help, or worse, use their weakness to take them as mistresses!

4. To offer a practical role model to Muslims until the end of time
Although many believing women often approached Muhammad[saw] offering him themselves in marriage, he politely turned down their offers. Most of his wives after the death of Khadijah were old, devoid of beauty, and previously married, except `A’ishah, who was the only young virgin. He married from other nations and religions; some were the daughters of his worst enemies, and his marriage to one woman won all her people into Islam. Regardless of his neutral feelings towards many of them, he was a model example of equal justice and kindness to them all, and he would never discriminate among them.

Prophet Muhammad (saw) married 12 wives in his life. When he died he had 9 wives. They have a very special status in the hearts of Muslims as the “Mothers of the Believers,” as the Qur’an instructs, and they are the source of a great amount of wisdom which they learned while living close to such a great man.

this was not an answer sister, infact it was a tight slap on that already messed up face of yours....hope you learn to respect my beloved rasool[saw] from now on !



[/b][/quote]

[znanwalla]

Quran e Paak ? are you in a state of delusion Virani ? you call your interpolations and variant man made concoctions quran e paak? How can any muslim follow such bidats and fabrications that you talk about?....so tell us which text do you call so felicitously the quran e paak? the one written and produced in Saudi Arabia? or India ? or Tehran? or Pakistan? I think the one approved by the Tora Bora cavemen will suit you better....they will pay you more to promote their Islam...

we??? who's we ?
"...I am not contesting against anything....its you who is contesting against the holy quran from which you pray dua/eid namaz.....even janazah[ziyarat kriya]..."

Really? are you not trying to equate a "like thereof"as being the Book of Allah ! I do not contest against the Book of Allah which is perspicous ! I have no obligation to follow the variant and interpolated texts of the hypocrites who sold their faith for a pittance ...

"One of the manifestations of their rejecting the Book (of Allah behind their backs) (see Quran 2:101) is that they have fixed its words. but they have altered the limits (of its command) (harrafu hududah). They they do not observe(what) it (says)....Ignorant people delight in the preservation of its narration, but the knowledgeable people deplore their ignoring to observe (what) it (says)."....so says the Ahl al Bayt!

[znanwalla]

"..Marry women of your choice, two, or three, or four; but if ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly (with them), then only one.} (An-Nisaa’ 3:3) .."

So then what you are saying is that the Prophet was allowed to go against the very quran he brought...is that what you are saying by trying to justify what the pastprophets may have done or not done - did the past prophets also bring the same quran? if not then stick to the argument and don't deviate...we are being specific here....if the Nabi brought a clear message that you cannot marry more than 4 wives conditionally, what the Nabi did, was not in conformity with the text itself you are waving....now logically he would never contradict the quran...so the safe assumption is that the words have been fixed....

Sometimes hypocrites like you don't even realize that they are hypocrites.

They are so convincing to other people that they even convince themselves they are believers, whereas their behavior shows quite the opposite.

They always find ways to justify their sinful actions and convince themselves that they are good believers.

Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) describes the attributes of a
hypocrite like you in faith in a very concise way.

The Prophet once said
that the signs of a hypocrite are three: Whenever he speaks, he
lies; whenever he promises, he breaks it; and if he is entrusted
with something, he betrays the trust (Al-Bukhari).

[znanwalla]

"...Prophet Muhammad (saw) married 12 wives in his life. When he died he had 9 wives. They have a very special status in the hearts of Muslims as the “Mothers of the Believers,” as the Qur’an instructs, and they are the source of a great amount of wisdom which they learned while living close to such a great man..."

So are all the wives considered as "mothers" ? have you read the ayah where Allah reprimands two of his wives and issues a threat? do you know which two wives were reprimanded by Allah? do you want their names?

PICKTHAL: When the Prophet confided a fact unto one of his wives and when she afterward divulged it and Allah apprised him thereof, he made known (to her) part thereof and passed over part. And when he told it her she said: Who hath told thee? He said: The Knower, the Aware hath told me.

066.004
YUSUFALI: If ye two turn in repentance to Him, your hearts are indeed so inclined; But if ye back up each other against him, truly Allah is his Protector, and Gabriel, and (every) righteous one among those who believe,- and furthermore, the angels - will back (him) up.

066.005
YUSUFALI: It may be, if he divorced you (all), that Allah will give him in exchange consorts better than you,- who submit (their wills), who believe, who are devout, who turn to Allah in repentance, who worship (in humility), who travel (for Faith) and fast,- previously married or virgins.

What does Allah say here?