[ / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / abdl / asmr / fur / htg / hypno / kpop / vore / x ]

/islam/ - 8ch Masjid

Certainly the promise of Allah is true. Let not then this present life deceive you.

Catalog

Name
Email
Subject
Comment *
File
* = required field[▶ Show post options & limits]
Confused? See the FAQ.
Embed
(replaces files and can be used instead)
Options
Password (For file and post deletion.)

Allowed file types:jpg, jpeg, gif, png, webm, mp4, pdf
Max filesize is 12 MB.
Max image dimensions are 10000 x 10000.
You may upload 3 per post.


"Allah is but one God. To Him belongs whatever is in the heavens and whatever is on the earth. And sufficient is Allah as Disposer of affairs." [4:171]

File: 1465477209753.jpg (97.68 KB, 387x600, 129:200, 387px-Unknown_Artist_Imam_….jpg)

f19f59 No.12771

Ask a Shi'a anything or if you're Shi'a yourself, ask an American convert anything

serious ?'s only please

f19f59 No.12785

Why did you convert to shiism instead of becoming a Sunni Muslim?


f19f59 No.12786

File: 1465506942078.png (854.09 KB, 900x675, 4:3, ya_ali_by_striver27-d395c6….png)

>>12785

Allah guides those who He will.

I didn't choose the Shi'a Ali, Shi'a chose me. :)


f19f59 No.12788

>>12786

What's it like knowing Iranian Shia commit major shirk (see anti majos) also do you cut and beat yourself on The day of arafah? Like other Shia seem to do ? Not sure why they do. Why do Shia beat on themselves ?


f19f59 No.12790

Just a curiosity: What sort of Shi'a are you? Twelver?

Obviously you're welcome here regardless, I'm just wondering.


f19f59 No.12792

>>12790

Not welcome on /Islamicstate/


f19f59 No.12793

>>12785

One reason was that I was always very much into Sufism when I first got interested in Islam.

But while I was fascinated with the lives and aphorisms of Sufi saints & sages, and by that time I had started calling myself a Muslim, I didn't have very much knowledge on Islamic history and doctrine. I remember calling myself "Sunni" or just said "I'm not Sunni or Shi'a, I'm just Muslim" and my interest in hip hop music and culture probably had a lot to do with it to.

In Sufism, Imam Ali (صلى الله عليه و سلم) of course plays a big role as the link between all the major Sufi orders and the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه و سلم) in the line of succession of sheikhs and masters. Eventually I decided that if I was seriously interested in Sufism and Islam, I should try to learn more about Ali (as) , but the Sunni sources I found felt lacking. I think it was when I read some of Sharif Razi's "Nahjul Balagha" that I was "struck" in a similar fashion to how I had been "struck" first reading the Qu'ran

I think the reasons I eventually settled for Shi'a Islam over Sunni Islam is on the one hand, I was much more satisfied with its view on things like free will, the nature of the prophets, and the political, religious and cosmic significance of the Imam and its philosophy of history and redemptive suffering, not to mention the strong emphasis on the intercession of holy men & women between lowly me and the great God, which while somewhat present in Sufism, was at the very heart of the Shi'a faith. I also found it's own mystical/philosophical tradition, much of which included commentary on the teachings of famous Sufis like Suhrawardi or Rumi and the teachings of famous philosophers like Ibn Sina, to be very rich.

Also, I grew up Christian, but was raised in a mixed Protestant/Catholic household while at the same time having an interest in Eastern & folk religions. Shi'ism to me has always felt like it has best reconciled these conflicting intellectual tendencies much better through its unique theology and culture of piety.

>>12790

Twelver.


f19f59 No.12795

>>12793

That's pretty cool, brother. Thank you for the story.

I appreciate it.


f19f59 No.12798

>>12792

>not welcome on /islamicstate/

really??????? why are you protecting them????


f19f59 No.12799

Did you know that Rāfida have many innovations which they have introduced? How do you feel following the dīn of those who sacked Meccā, and destroyed many Māsjids to introduce these innovations?

Allah سبحانه و تعالى says in Sūrah Al-Mu'mīnun Āyah 217

وَمَن يَدْعُ مَعَ اللَّهِ إِلَٰهًا آخَرَ لَا بُرْهَانَ لَهُ بِهِ فَإِنَّمَا حِسَابُهُ عِندَ رَبِّهِ ۚ إِنَّهُ لَا يُفْلِحُ الْكَافِرُونَ

And as such when you say "يا علي" or "يا حسين" when making du'ā you are commiting shirk, how do you answer to this?


f19f59 No.12800

>>12798

Well he runs the board now I think.

>>12799

The religion of the rafidah is weak as in there is no evidence in Quran and sunnah for it. That's why they say their 12th imam has the real deal or at least hidden ayat.


f19f59 No.12802

>>12800

i know he does and i dont understand why


f19f59 No.12803

>>12802

Why not? It could become something interesting in the future.


f19f59 No.12804

File: 1465522944956.jpg (281.18 KB, 640x1136, 40:71, 1464978128156.jpg)

>>12803

your kidding right?


f19f59 No.12807

>>12804

Yeah as a place to discuss news and events, that have to do with that situation. Since this board isn't really meant for that.


f19f59 No.12808

>>12807

that board was made for propaganda you do know this right


f19f59 No.12809

>>12808

Doesn't mean the brother who obtained ownership will use it as propaganda.


f19f59 No.12810

I'm not going to let this thread become a Shi'a abuse thread. If you have genuine questions, ask. If you just want to troll, then leave this board.


f19f59 No.12812

>>12810

I don't think you can expect zero attacks against shiism but at least let it happen if it remains civil.


f19f59 No.12815

>>12812

If, and only if, it remains civil.

I will not tolerate people attacking my Shi'a brothers, though I am Ibadi.


f19f59 No.12821

File: 1465527256101.jpg (13.54 KB, 255x191, 255:191, 1441361657349-1.jpg)


f19f59 No.12822

>>12788

>major shirk (see anti majos)

I don't know what anti majos is, can you be more specific?

>do you cut and beat yourself on The day of arafah?

Nope. :x

>>12790

Yes, I too am a Twelver.


f19f59 No.12824

>>12822

I'm curious to your answers to my post >>12799


f19f59 No.12843

How can you explain your small numbers in all eras. How can the Prophet have been visited by Jibril thousands of times if he was surrounded by greedy and power hungry friends? Isn't foresight a fundemental component of prophethood?

If you believe in the appearance of the mehdi centuries ago, how can you explain one of Allahs most powerful soldier hiding for so long? Much less achieving far less than those who supposedly stole Ali R.A birth right?

As great as monarchy sounds, there is no basis for believing many of the positions Shia take, you have to assume a grand conspiracy that doesn't fit the last messenger who is supposed to clear away all of the previous lies and myths.

The assumption has to be that he and the message he received are protected from corruption, and that only interpretations and the ambitions of men can twist it in their minds.

It's the Prophet and not Ali that was promised, protected from sin and murder, we don't willingly try to ignore Ali but if you invite someone to Islam you tell them of the character of the messenger first and foremost.

If I could guess the reason you chose Shiaism it would be your lack of skepticism, you freely add to doctrine without worrying about corrupting the original message which is what Sunni branch is based on. If you have foundation that is based on Imams and lineage, intercession and conspiracy you don't have anything to stand on. The Prophet and the Qur'an being incorruptable is the best foundation we have, if it turns out that without getting behind this millenia old Mehdi leads to our extinction what changes from our eventual extinction besides the dates?

Lastly is it not convenient how due to bad planning or prediction of the last days you've gone through the first 11 Imams pretty quickly? And through the destructions of muslim empires and countries there was never opportunity, whereas we never claimed he appeared and see today just how ridiculous claiming the end is near a thousand years ago was. The global push for LGBT rights, the decline of relgion on global scale etc. is very recent, yet people with no foresight or knowledge claimed the times were so bad that they made up a Mehdi who hasn't published anything won anything or guided anyone.

Please consider simple and "boring" life of service to your relatives and Allah instead of delving in to the


f19f59 No.12844

>>12799

>How do you feel following the dīn of those who sacked Meccā, and destroyed many Māsjids to introduce these innovations?

I assume you are referring to the Qarmatian attack of 930 CE. The Qarmatians were a fringe group of Ismaili Shi'a, who are regarded as having mostly deviated even by most Ismailis. The Twelver Imamis regarded them mostly as heretics based on the rulings of the Twelver Imams and those who did not ultimately submit to the authority of the Ismaili Fatimids were regarded by the Fatimid establishment as heretics as well. And from what I understand, their attacking of Mecca also was more motivated by their belief that the apocalypse foretold by the Prophet was coming and that a new millenial age was nigh, not by any particular antipathy towards the Holy House itself.


f19f59 No.12845

>>12843

These aren't questions. This is a lecture on why not to be Shi'a.

If you have actual questions, ask. Otherwise, don't bother. Shi'a are welcome on this board and don't really deserve such harassment.


f19f59 No.12848

>>12822

https://youtu.be/O5hgqhNd3x8

This cleric . Hard to become a rightful thread to ask you things without abusing you. I know I'd say. Something if a shia showed up in the masjid I w as praying at. So what about you're prayer clay stones, how do you clean them?


f19f59 No.12849

>>12845

Druze are also welcome on the board doesn't mean much.

I mean how can you believe these imams of yours have knowledge of the unseen like knowing when they will die or also go on to insult the sahaba, how are these things justified?


f19f59 No.12850

>>12849

I don't know. Use the IDs. I'm not Shi'a.

But those aren't questions. It's like if I say, "I love ice cream, ask me anything." and you say, "How can you love ice cream when frozen yogurt is proven better?"

The Shi'a on this board don't need to justify their Islam to you.


f19f59 No.12852

>>12850

My bad mixing up ids, but it would be better for them to explain why they're following something which contradicts Quran and Sunnah.


f19f59 No.12854

>>12852

Except they're not contradicting anything, they're following a different interpretation.

Tell me, which school is the proper one then? Most schools claim they're the only true interpretation and they're all equally right and wrong. Which is yours that gives you the wisdom and piety to be the "one true school" of Islam? Hanafi? Hanbali? Zahiri?


f19f59 No.12855

>>12852

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loaded_question

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complex_question

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

When you ask such a question "why do you do things that contradict the Qur'an and Sunnah" you presuppose:

A. That the things have already been proven to "contradict" the Qur'an or Sunnah and have been proven so well enough that it is not necessary for you to present evidence and can assume that the one asked equally accepts this as fact as well despite evidence to the contrary.

&

B. That the individual to whom you are asking the question is consciously going against the Qur'an or Sunnah without consideration for the possibility that the individual sincerely believes what they do is perfectly in line with these two things and not completely different set of motivations from what motivates your habits and informs your beliefs.

As a question, it also betrays your true intentions, which probably are not to sincerely inquire about others' habits and beliefs for the purpose of educating yourself. This does not exactly encourage others to respond positively to your inquiries because it seems as though you are either setting out only to tear down or mock for your own amusement whatever they say without even feigning to give them any benefit of doubt. When you ask such a question, one can safely assume that you will reject whatever is said and so are perfectly justified in ignoring you. If that is not your intention, then you have asked an unnecessary question which has forced the one asked to first explain that their intention is not Y before they can explain why they do X.


f19f59 No.12859

>>12854

They're simply a different interpretation eh? So all of that imam worship, mutah, calling on intercessors "ya Zainab" "ya Hussein", insulting the wives of the prophet (صلى الله عليه و سلم) and insulting the Sahaba is just another "interpretation". The only Shia that didn't do that in recent history were the Zaydis but they've become Iranianized.

The one true path is that of the Ahlus Sunnah, so Shafi, Hanbali etc. All fit under that


f19f59 No.12860

>>12859

Except there are Qur'an evidences for the establishment of Imams.

Anyway, if you have questions, ask. Otherwise, you have no real business being in the thread. Just hide it and move on.


f19f59 No.12875

>>12859

>imam worship

Some sunni tariqa have this problem, I don't think it's inherent in shia doctrine

>intercession

From my experience some sunni do ask intercession, through rasulullah or 4 rashidun caliph.

Not OP btw.


f19f59 No.12876

>>12771

How do Shi'a authenticate their hadith?


f19f59 No.12879

>>12875

These things are wrong when anyone does it. However without a doubt calling on intercession plays a big role in shi'i doctrine, while it's definitely not a practice to be held by the ahlus Sunnah.


f19f59 No.12882

File: 1465761382236.jpg (478.44 KB, 900x1305, 20:29, moharam_by_shia_ali-d4iawm….jpg)

>>12876

Much of the same way Sunnis do, just different authorities. I have never really seen much difference, except that reason (aql) plays a bigger role for Shi'a ulama. Some scholars might grade a hadith differently if they feel that it's content goes against reason, in which case even the narrators trustworthiness might be brought into further question if they are seen as narrating things that contradict reason. But how each alim understands what goes against reason often depends on how they exercise ijtihad. For example, narrations who have maybe one or two narrators who are known ghulat (extremists who try to raise the Imams too highly) are graded lower, though not necessarily rejected unless the chain features no other kinds of narrators, because the ghulat were generally prone to exaggeration. Likewise, narrations whose narrators are known taqsiri (those who try to lower the station of the Imams too low) may also be suspect. This of course depends on the subject of the hadith, the presence of taqsiri/ghulat narrators is usually more of an issue when theological matters are involved. If something exists only in the Sunni collections, we also do not generally accept it, unless it conforms to reason or if enough parallel sayings of sufficient authenticity can be found in the Shi'a hadith corpus.

One major difference though I suppose is that the role the Ahlul Bayt play is very important. If something is said by one of the Imams, but there is no parallel saying we can find that can be attributed to the Prophet, if that hadith of the Imam is sahih, than the rule is that the statement of the Imam should be regarded as if the Prophet said it himself, in accordance with the principles of the Imam's purity from sin/error (ismah) and the explicit designation of the Imams by the Prophet (صلى الله عليه و سلم) as his representatives. It is not a problem usually if something cannot be traced to the Prophet directly as long as it can be authentically traced to a legitimate Imam, who himself speaks on behalf of the Prophet.


f19f59 No.12883

>>12882

That's rather interesting. We Ibadi rely a lot on common sense when authenticating hadith. But, then, we also accept way fewer hadith than both Sunni and Shi'a.


f19f59 No.12884

>>12879

>while it's definitely not a practice to be held by the ahlus Sunnah.

I have never met a single orthodox Sunni who would not agree with at least the Prophet being an intercessor. Most Sunni scholars have recommended seeking the Prophet's intercession at his shrine in Medina. Even ibn Taymiyyah agreed with this. The problem for the Sunnis has only been two:

1. Addressing the intercessor directly

2. Seeking the intercession of others who are not the Prophet, either dead or alive.

But when Sufism and other folk Islamic practices dominated most of the Sunni world, people from peasants and nomads to ulama and sultans/emirs patronized the shrines of saints and ulama as places to seek the entombed one's intercession or invoked both the Prophet and other holy Islamic figures as intercessors, especially throughout most of the Ottoman period. The shrines of the Ahlul Bayt in places like Iraq, Syria and Egypt have been attended by Sunnis and local Sufis for generations and also many of the donors to these shrines upkeep have included Sunni kings and ulama.


f19f59 No.12885

File: 1465764827284-0.jpg (93.27 KB, 400x400, 1:1, ayatollah sistani.jpg)

File: 1465764827288-1.jpg (68.22 KB, 400x567, 400:567, young ali shariati.jpg)

>>12883

The only drawback to the issue of reason is the question of who has the authority to utilize reason when interpreting hadith. Generally speaking, it is accepted that the use of independent reasoning (ijtihad) is the reserved territory of the mujtahid scholars who have received permission from another higher ranking mujtahid to interpret hadith using their own reason, the scholar meeting at least the minimum standards of clerical education, with the highest rank being the marja-i-taqlid (source of emulation).

In recent years, the issue has been brought up more than before of just how much exclusive right over the use of ijtihad the ulama have. Some have taken radical positions that everyone has equal right to use ijtihad (this is usually by Shi'a of a more communist or anarchist political leaning, particularly those who follow some of the teachings of the late Dr. Ali Shariati) and some have taken a position that no one can use ijtihad (this is the position of the Akhbari sect).

The majority of Twelver Shi'a follow the Usuli school in the view that there is need for qualified mujtahids who reserve a certain right to use ijitihad that most Shi'a believers are not allowed to exercise due to their limited training. There is still the question though of what right the laity have to exercise independence from the established clerical schools because the laity still has to exercise independent reasoning when it comes to choosing which mujtahids they feel are best to follow, since as a general rule, following a mujtahid is supposed to be voluntary. Also, due to modern inventions like the printing press, the internet, and other things, both formal education and self-education have spread to such a degree that it's more difficult to know just who is more qualified.


f19f59 No.12898

>>12879

Tawassul is still contentious issue, i suggest you look what practised by sunnis outside salafism beforevsaying it's wrong. AFAIK those who practised it claim they do it according to recommendation from ulama.


f19f59 No.13592

File: 1467071477434.jpg (77.03 KB, 800x855, 160:171, 800px-Sayyid_haydar_mir_ha….jpg)

>>12795

You're welcome by the way. The issue of Sufism is a controversial one in Shi'a circles, but not so much because many Shi'a ulama of the Ithna Ashari and Ismaili branches don't agree with many Sufi premises. It's more political than anything else.

For myself, I follow the view of men like Sayyid Haydar Amuli in regarding Sufism and Shi'ism as in essence the same thing.


f19f59 No.13604

>>12771

Ismailis and Hossein Nasr-type Twelvers are the Shi'a that I really respect.

Is support for Khomeini and hardline doctrine really that prevalent among the average Shi'a Muslim?

And what do you think of Iran's reformists?


f19f59 No.13640

Can one follow a Marja that is no longer alive?


f19f59 No.13642

File: 1467079289231-0.jpg (66.71 KB, 410x412, 205:206, fath ali shah qajar_painti….jpg)

File: 1467079289231-1.jpg (30.61 KB, 420x274, 210:137, Hassan i Sabbah & nasir al….jpg)

File: 1467079289231-2.jpg (26.61 KB, 300x455, 60:91, What did you just say abou….jpg)

>>13604

>Ismailis and Hossein Nasr-type Twelvers are the Shi'a that I really respect.

I like Dr. Hossein Nasr a lot and his lectures and books have often brought me a great sense of peace when I have had doubts about my decision to convert. My only criticism of him would be some of his perennialism is a little too strong at times for my taste.

>Is support for Khomeini and hardline doctrine really that prevalent among the average Shi'a Muslim?

Well, most Shi'a did not follow Khomeini nor do most Shi'a follow the current Supreme Leader of Iran as their religious model (marja-i-taqlid). Generally, Shi'a believe there is supposed to be a certain separation between the ulama and the secular administration of government because in the absence of the Imam (صلى الله عليه و سلم), no one can assume the degree of absolute authority that he's allowed to as the Imam. Khomeini's particular interpretation of wilayat al-faqih (rule of the jurist) has always been controversial because it basically suggests that in the absence of the Imam, a single jurisprudent can assume a certain degree of the imam's absolute authority as his representative.

I would say the majority of Shi'a still believe in some form of the classical political formula articulated by historic Shi'a scholars of the Qajar and Safavid periods such as Aqa Sayyid Jafar ibn Abu Ishaq Kashfi, in that matters are to be divided into the realms of the pen and the sword, with the pen occupied by the ulama and the issues of the sword occupied by the rulers, and only the Imam can assume equal supreme authority in both, so ulama must respect the rights of the rulers and the rulers must respect the rights of the ulama and work together without assuming too much of each other's exclusive authority.

>And what do you think of Iran's reformists?

While I do think the current ideological underpinnings of the Iranian government need reform or to be critically examined, I don't think the majority of Iran's reformists offer any viable solution as they are still partaking in the same flawed "theology" of modernism. Ultimately, what they want is simply to make Iran a country that follows Western models and make Islam conform to Western ideological schools. In that sense, I would agree wholeheartedly with Dr Nasr that many of these liberal Islamic reform movements in places like Iran are just another side of the same coin as the conservative fundamentalists they oppose and that only a resurgence of classic Islamic & Shi'a political theory and sociology rooted can answer the challenges the Shi'a world faces, not trying to search the Qur'an for evidence of the ideas of Marx, Locke, Proudhon or Rousseau.

For me personally, I think this would mean a return to as well as improving upon the social political models set by the Safavid, Buyid and Qajar dynasties as well as the Indian Nawabs and other quasi-"anarchist" Shi'a models like the Assassins of Alamut, coupled with a careful adoption of the various elements of modernity so as to avoid outright primitivism.


f19f59 No.13643

>>13640

Provided that a current living marja permits it.


f19f59 No.13662

>>13642

Huh. You're alright, brother.

>My only criticism of him would be some of his perennialism is a little too strong at times for my taste.

Yeah. I more disagree with him on his views on evolution personally. But everything else he's very wise about.

>I would say the majority of Shi'a still believe in some form of the classical political formula articulated by historic Shi'a scholars of the Qajar and Safavid periods

Really? Interesting. From what I saw on Shiachat and youtube videos from marja, it seems as though Khomeinism is still very popular among Twelver Shi'a. It would be nice if the classical medieval Ithnaashari doctrine was more adhered to.

>For me personally, I think this would mean a return to as well as improving upon the social political models set by the Safavid, Buyid and Qajar dynasties as well as the Indian Nawabs and other quasi-"anarchist" Shi'a models like the Assassins of Alamut, coupled with a careful adoption of the various elements of modernity so as to avoid outright primitivism.

Now that would be interesting. what elements of modernity do you think should be kept?

I myself am extremely conflicted about modernism. On one hand I see that there is a beautiful vision of spiritual fulfillment, moral virtue and simple, efficient living that can only come from a complete return to tradition against modernity.

Then again, I realize we're faced with issues we have never seen before in history. And working with modernity to save civilization from materialism can work as well. As modernists like Iqbal have pointed out, the degeneration of society into materialism can be solved by a religiously based form of modernism that can have humanity advance into higher rationalism while still being submitted and realized spiritually.

It's very frustrating to try and figure out. Especially when both views are tested by Fundamentalists and liberals in the Ummah constantly.


f19f59 No.13686

File: 1467097020022.jpg (35.47 KB, 306x400, 153:200, ali & sons by ismail jalay….jpg)

>>13662

>Really? Interesting. From what I saw on Shiachat and youtube videos from marja, it seems as though Khomeinism is still very popular among Twelver Shi'a.

There are very good reasons for that. Unlike the Sunnis, Iran is the ONLY Shi'a majority state that is relatively stable. Also, Khomeini's success was not so much because he appealed to growing fundamentalism, but because he managed to appeal to a broad spectrum of political views in the Shi'a Iranian community. He appealed to traditionalists, modernists, fundamentalists, nationalists and left-wing university students in various measures and appeared to offer the most authentically Islamic response to ideological challenges to Islam that didn't feel like the absorption of Islam into just another Western "-ism". While many Shi'a do not agree with his ideas, many still nonetheless hold some respect for his seemingly saving Iran from a fate of becoming more thoroughly Westernized state, politically & ideologically. Plus, many Shi'a still depend on Iranian networks of support.

My own view is that some of Khomeini's political thought has merit in as much at it attempts to present a uniquely Islamic ideological framework for government, but i think much of what he sought would have been better achieved by a return to traditional forms of government and his opting to create a republic just demonstrates that he himself was still under the influence of the modernist tide coming from the West at the time.

>Now that would be interesting. what elements of modernity do you think should be kept?

I think that once we manage to shake off the linear progressive view of history that is so much a part of ideological modernism, we will ultimately become more free to pick and choose what we desire from the different aspects of modernity as they suit our own more individualized visions for our own futures. Under the progressive mindset, we are slaves to the constantly changing technological and ideological framework of society, forced always to leave what we're comfortable with because we are under this pressure to constantly remain modern and "up to date" which seems endless and leaves those who cannot keep up in a state of despair or worse. When this is gone, what I think you'll begin to see is probably a more eclectic mashup of the old and new according to individual whims where the term "modernity" itself gradually begins to lose any and all meaning. This of course will also give way to traditional aristocratic and/or spontaneous forms of social organization built around the sacred individual as opposed to oppressively rational forms of social organization which worship collective conformity, so necessary to the imposition of "progress" on the unwilling.


f19f59 No.13711

>>12771

I think the Bektashis are interesting. I love Hajj Bektash Veli and the songs they sing. And also the way they interpret the hadiths.


f19f59 No.13712

>>12771

Are the Bektashis considered Shi'a by most other Shi'a?


f19f59 No.13723

File: 1467139749171-0.jpg (97.98 KB, 600x398, 300:199, baba arshi rip.jpg)

File: 1467139749172-1.jpg (36.42 KB, 275x367, 275:367, Islamic_religious_building….JPG)

>>13711

>>13712

Yes and no. Historically, the order had two branches, an explicitly Shi'a branch that was normally associated with the Qizilbash tribes who supported the Safavid dynasty, and a Sunni branch (at least superficially) which was supported by the Janissaries in the Ottoman Empire. Since the Janissaries were disbanded, the Bektashis have experienced persecution under various regimes.

The official position of the Bektashi (if you read through their website) is that they pretty much believe that Ali was the rightful successor (khalifa) to the Prophet, and generally speaking hold many of the same spiritual beliefs and doctrines of pretty much all mainstream Shi'a and many of the mystically oriented ulama. The problem is that they are not beholden to the mainstream ulama and tend to follow their own interpretation of the shariah that many restrictive Shi'a outside the order might be uncomfortable with. As a result, many Bektashi may refer to themselves as Shi'a only in a loose, spiritual sense, or they may say that Bektashism is separate from the Sunni-Shi'a divide. There are many Shi'a who see them as lost brothers in faith, but sometimes have an attitude that they need to set the Bektashi back on the "right path" of the shariah, and this I think is the main obstacle between ourselves and the Bektashi that prevents us from acting one united Shi'a faith.


f19f59 No.14085


f19f59 No.14104

>>12771

Slightly confused about the Clerical Structure of Ithnaashari Shi'a Islam. I thought I figured it out but apparently not.

Do you have to follow an Ayatollah/Marja? Or can you follow the teachings of any Learned Syed like Hossein Nasr instead?

Is Hassan Rouhani an Ayatollah? If so, why isn't he on the list of Marja on Wikipedia?

What are the types of clerics basically? Thanks.


f19f59 No.14129

File: 1467438683601-0.jpg (33.99 KB, 650x366, 325:183, ayatollah-Khamenei.jpg)

File: 1467438683601-1.jpg (34.98 KB, 420x350, 6:5, montazari.jpg)

>>14104

>Do you have to follow an Ayatollah/Marja?

YES. For the vast majority of all Shi'a who follow the Usuli school, it is absolutely obligatory to seek out the most learned of the marja and follow him

However, a Shi'a may follow more than one marja if either his primary marja allows it, if more than one marja is equally the most knowledgeable among all the mujtahids, or if it is recognized that the different maraji possess their own individual fields of expertise that require the layperson or muqallid to consult different experts for each of the different matters that pertain to his predicament. The marja himself may also recommend consulting another marja or mujtahid if he is unable to answer an issue.

There is a small minority of Akbaris, mostly concentrated in some parts of Iraq & Bahrain who do not recognize the authority of any of the maraji at all, but this is because they reject any all independent reasoning/ijtihad and are more solely scripture based.

>Or can you follow the teachings of any Learned Syed like Hossein Nasr instead?

Nasr is not a qualified scholar of law, rather he is an intellectual who is well educated in Islamic history and philosophy.

>Is Hassan Rouhani an Ayatollah?

I'm pretty sure he isnt

>If so, why isn't he on the list of Marja on Wikipedia?

Simple, because he's not a marja.

>What are the types of clerics basically?

On the lowest ends of the spectrum are the khutaba (preachers) and those authorized as sheikhs or mullahs. These are people who have completed a certain amount of time in seminary and are authorized to teach Islam and/or manage the masjids and husayniyas, however they don't have any authority to issue legal rulings and are not mujtahids (those allowed to use ijtihad in legal matters). Among some communities, the ranks of khutaba may be filled by local dervishes, poets or school teachers and such who are simply recognized by the community for their intellectual or moral prowess. The term "mullah" used to just refer to a kind of sheikh, but many Iranian diaspora and critics of the Iranian government use it as a derogatory term for all the Shi'a clergy regardless of rank. When one has reached the rank of sheikh, one is allowed to wear a turban (sayids wear black, non-sayids wear white, though I've read that they used to wear blue years ago)

You then have those who are mujtahids, having received a certificate of ijtihad from a recognized hawza. Among the mujtahids, the rank of "ayatollah" is often given to one who has received authorization not only to follow his own independent reasoning in legal matters, but also has been given authorization to issue legal rulings for others. Once one is a mujtahid, one is no longer obligated to follow a marja, but may choose to follow a marja if he pleases. A marja is an ayatollah of esteemed rank who has developed a sizable following and is recognized by a sufficient number of other mujtahids as among the most knowledgable of mujtahids. A marja can simply emerge by enough laypeople and other ayatollahs themselves simply choosing to follow him that his claim to be a marja-i-taqlid (source of emulation) is relatively uncontested or he can be declared as a qualified marja-i-taqlid by another reputable marja. Following a marja of course, only pertains to matters of the shariah and not to Usul al-Din (Principles of Faith) which not even the marja may go against. Also, the title of "Ayatollah" in reference to a high ranking mujtahid is somewhat recent and has only been around for about 100 or so years, so just because one is not calling himself an "ayatollah" doesn't mean he doesn't still possess the qualifications of one. The term "Hujjat al-Islam" is sometimes used for mujtahids who are almost ayatollahs but not quite.

There is also the ranks of sheikha and mujtahideh, which refer to female sheikhs and female mujtahids. There is a lot of debate on whether a mujtahideh can become marja-i-taqlid. Some say yes, some say no. Most say no.


f19f59 No.14132

>>14129

>There is a small minority of Akbaris, mostly concentrated in some parts of Iraq & Bahrain who do not recognize the authority of any of the maraji at all, but this is because they reject any all independent reasoning/ijtihad and are more solely scripture based.

I've seen the Akhbaris claim that they are the older sect, and that most 12er Shi'a were Akhbari prior to some point during the Safavid (or was it Qajar? I don't remember) period.

I have no idea how legit these claims are.


f19f59 No.14135

>>14132

I personally think that's a misunderstanding

It's more accurate to say that one can find both Akbari and Usuli opinions among all the early Shi'a figures, sometimes within the thoughts of the same individuals depending on certain issues.

It may be that some early Shi'a scholars had views that betray a more akbari-like persuasion, but the formalization of the Akbari and Usuli positions would not occur until roughly around 17th-19th centuries and so it's innaccurate to say either side was the "predominant" one following the Occultation of the Imam. Both sides are essentially looking back in time to try to figure which position the Imams would most approve of and both can find equal precedent in the examples of early sheikhs following the Occultation for their views. And even if the predominant position following the Imam's Occultation was one which favored a more strictly scripture and hadith based attitude, the early post-Occultation Shi'a figures like Shaykh as-Saduq, Shaykh al-Mufid, Shaykh Tusi, and others are NOT generally regarded as infallible and free of error and so their opinions may be questioned by any qualified expert. Shaykh as-Saduq for instance did not believe the Imams were totally infallible like most Shi'a do today, who have come to an overwhelming consensus on this issue.

Also, often times, Usuli & Akbari positions have often crossed on certain issues, with some Akbaris being more strongly Usuli in their general views than others and vice versa. It is for these reasons that many Usulis have managed to put aside old tensions and consider Akbaris a legitimate Shi'a school alongside the Usuli & Shaykhi branches.


f19f59 No.15525

shiare are kuffar because they believe that the quran is incomplete and will be finished by imam mahdi, and that the imams themselves are better than prophets


f19f59 No.16169

>>15525

That's not a question.


f19f59 No.16174

Isn't converting to Shi'ism basically choosing the losing side of a 1300 year old leadership conflict?


f19f59 No.16185

>>16174

If you believe the theology, you believe the theology. If you just pick the winning side because it's all just a game to you, you don't believe in anything, and you're going to have trouble, at the end of your earthly journey.


f19f59 No.16839

>>12788

>thinking Khominei allowed Tatbir

Lol, Khominei and Khaminei actively fight Tatbir during Ashura, they opt for donating blood instead. The whole Tatbir is a Shia meme anyway.

>>12771

I'm a Muslim (Quranist), recent convert, but I got great admiration for Imam Hussayn.


f19f59 No.16840

>>16174

>choosing the winning side

You should choose for truth and liberation, never yield back from the truth.

"Better to die on your feet than to live on your knees" -Imam Hussayn (pbuh)


f19f59 No.16857

>>16840

I pretty that's an mexican revolutionary warlord quote brother.


f19f59 No.16860

>>16857

Pretty sure*

Damn


f19f59 No.16961

>>16857

>>16860

"Never trust quotes without sources on the internet."

-Albert Einstein


f19f59 No.17052

what do you think of alevism in general?


f19f59 No.17463

>>17052

It depends. Alevism is difficult to categorize because really the term "Alevi" as a term for a distinct group of people with distinct belief system is fairly new. Really, for most of their history, Alevis were generally a kind of Sufi tariqa within the normative Ottoman Sunni establishment, with the term "Alevi" being taken in its literal form of "following 'Ali" and used almost synonymously with Bektashism and/or the Sufi path in general. The term "Qizilbash" used by the Ottoman establishment only for those Shi'a or Sufi groups believed to be more loyal to the Safavid establishment or followers of the "rafidi" doctrines. Few Alevi today even consider themselves Qizilbash though and there are too many Alevi in Turkey for them all to be Qizilbash anyway.

I think Alevism is really just a collection of spiritual beliefs drawn from a mixture of Shi'i and Sufi sources mixed with some folk customs from both Islamic and pre-Islamic cultures of Anatolia. Ultimately, I think their survival will depend on joining one of the main branches. This of course is not anything new as the Bektashis were closely tied to the Ottoman establishment for many centuries and were at least outwardly Sunni. And also most larger Alevi villages in Ottoman territory until recently had Sunni khojas whose job was to instruct people in the tenets of the sharia. Other Alevis of course want Alevism to be distinct from both Sunni Islam and Shi'a Islam and some minorities want it distinct from Islam altogether. I think these efforts will naturally end in failure.

But just as I find it regrettable that many Alevis are reluctant to consider themselves part of the Shi'a for fear of losing their distinct identity, so too I find it regrettable that many of the Shi'a more attached to its modern Iranian manifestations encourage this as while they are willing to see Alevis as lost brothers of a sort, they can adopt a condescending attitude where rather than being more open to the folk or Sufi elements of Alevism (some of which can still be found in various parts of Iran among certain tribal elements), reject them and seek to assimilate Alevis into the Shi'a fold by eroding these formal dimensions and making them conform to some uniform kind of Shi'ite puritanism that sets itself against many eclectic folk interpretations of Shi'ite mysticism.


f19f59 No.17541

Since the sensitive board owner deleted my post, I'll repeat it.

>>12815

> I am Ibadi

That explains why you are so super insecure and defensive all the time.


f19f59 No.17542

>>17541

It was deleted for a reason. If you have nothing of value to add to this board, then you're free to leave at any time. Considering this is the absolutely only post you have ever made on this board, I suspect you're little more than a troll who will whine when your bait isn't taken.

Furthermore, your assessment is literally wrong.


f19f59 No.17543

>>17542

Own your [foul language] if you're going to follow deviance. Being deviant and insecure? Lol, almost an oxymoron.


f19f59 No.17544

>>17543

>deviance

What?

>insecure

What?

You have one post to back up your claim. One only.


f19f59 No.17548

>>17544

loool, why do you talk like you have a social disorder. "One only". yeah that's really going to put me under pressure.

Ibadis –→ descendant from Kharijites


f19f59 No.17551

>>17548

It has absolutely nothing to do with the thread. Are you incapable of having an actual conversation?

Also, if you knew anything about Ibadi, you'd know that they broke away from Kharijites and have nothing to do with them. It would be like claiming Shi'a are descendant from Sunni and, thus, are just like Sunni.

You had your post, now if you have nothing to add to the actual topic at hand, move on.


f19f59 No.17556

>>17551

>having nothing to do with them

XD XD

Direct descendants but yeah they have nothing at all to do with them loooool


f19f59 No.17558

>>17556

>not an argument


f19f59 No.17563

>>17558

>not a muslim

(We don't do that here.)

196f80 No.21441

>>12875

Yeah Wahhabis don't do that, hence I am one.


cf8ee9 No.21447

YouTube embed. Click thumbnail to play.

Why do Shia curse Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman radiaAlahu anhum?

Why do they curse the wives of the Prophet saw?




[Return][Go to top][Catalog][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[]
[ / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / abdl / asmr / fur / htg / hypno / kpop / vore / x ]