Q & A
Tasneem Institute’s Question and Answer page is your go-to resource for clear, concise, thoughtful answers to pressing questions about Islam. Whether you’re exploring complex theological concepts or seeking practical guidance on everyday matters, our team of scholars provides insights rooted in the Quran, the teachings of Ahlul Bayt, and Shia jurisprudence. Submit your questions and get the clarity you need to navigate your faith journey with confidence.
Beliefs
A man said in the presence of Imam Jafar al-Sadiq (a.s), a great grandson of the Prophet Muhammad (s) and the 6th holy Imam within Shia Islam:
“Allahu Akbar (God is Greater).”
The holy Imam said: “Do you know what He is greater than?!”
The man said: “He is greater than everything.”
The Imam said: “Then you limited him (as you compared Him with everything).”
He said: “So what should I say?!”
The Imam explained: “Allahu Akbar means: God is greater than being described.”
Reference: (al-Kafi vol 1. P.117)
Answered by: Sheikh Mansour Leghaei
Originally posted by www.askthesheikh.com
Here is a brief reply for those whose heart is open to truth:
1. All Messengers of Allah including those who invite to their call are ‘callers to Allah’ (See: Surahs 33:46, 46:31-32) and all humans throughout the history are expected to positively answer their call. The Almighty Allah in the Qur’an states: “O you who believe! Answer the call of Allah and His Messenger when he calls you…” (8:24)
According to his analogy the Holy Prophet (s) died 1400 years ago and he is in Barzakh, so “what would answering his call mean today”?! Or may be only the people of the Prophet’s time had to answer his call and not us?!
2. ‘Labbayk’ means ‘Here I am, at your service’. All scholars are unanimous that saying ‘Labbayk’ to a human whose obedience is Islamically allowed is permissible and often obligatory. Imam Bukhari has opened a chapter in his ‘Sahih’ named: “the chapter of saying Labbayk and Sa’dayk” under which he narrated a Hadith from Mu’adh saying: I was with the Prophet (s) who said to me: یا معاذ O You Mu’adh! I said: Labbayk O Messenger of Allah Wa Sa’dayk. (Sahih Bukhari, Book3, Hadith 128)
Ibn Battal in his commentary on the above Hadith states: the meaning of Labbayk is ‘I am standing at your service’… and Sa’dayk means ‘I am honoured for this service’. Imam Nawawi also says: It is Mustahab to say ‘Labbayk’ in reply to someone who is calling you.
3. According to the person’s argument the Holy Prophet (s) should not have called out to Mu’adh (یا معاذ) because it would be shirk to use “the Arabic letter یا to other than God”!!
4. Al-Hamdolellah that person accepts that al-Husayn (peace be upon him) was martyred. The Almighty Allah (swt) in the Qur’an clearly states: “And say not of those who are killed in the Way of Allah ‘they are dead’. Nay they are alive but you perceive not.” (Surah 2, Ayah 154)
5. He said “Shia intended with this call to Al-Husayn رضي الله عنه that he do with them what Allah does with His servants of forgiveness and entering Paradise and being saved from the fire, etc…”.
If he means Shia believe al-Husayn will forgive them and admit them into Paradise independent of Allah, this is a big accusation to the Shia. But if he means al-Husayn is a true leader whom Allah has ordered to follow and has promised his followers that they will be admitted into Paradise, yes for sure that’s what the Shia believe. The Almighty Allah states with regards to true leaders like al-Husayn (peace be upon him), that ‘We made them leaders, guiding by Our Command.’ (Surah 21, Ayah 73). I am aware that this Ayah is firstly about the Messengers of God but surely it includes their true successors like al-Husayn (peace be upon him) as well.
6. When Shia say ‘Labbayk Ya Husayn’ they only mean ‘Labbayk to the path of al-Husayn’ which is the true path of Islam, they mean Labbayk to support his cause which was ‘standing against all tyrants’, as he quoted from his holy grandfather: “O you people! Whoever lives at the time of a tyrant ruler who treats the Haram of Allah as Halal, who breaches the covenant of Allah, who acts contrary to the tradition of the Messenger of Allah and deals with the slaves of God sinfully, but he does not stand against him verbally or in action, Allah has promised to associate him with that tyrant in the hereafter (in hell).” (Tabari, vol. 4 p. 304)
In conclusion:
By Labbayk Ya Husayn today, the Shia mean to stand against all oppressors such as the oppressive Saudi regime which has killed thousands of innocent Yemeni Muslim civilians. By Labbayk Ya Husayn today, the Shia mean to stand against the treacherous Emirati rulers who establish full diplomatic and trade relations with the Zionists who have occupied Muslim lands, and the list goes on!
Answered by Sheikh Mansour Legahei
Originally posted by www.askthesheikh.com
For the sake of brevity, I will cite the most important reason for this practice and that is that Imam Hussain’s martyrdom is part of the prophetic legacy (Sunnah). God, in many Quranic verses, has commanded Muslims to follow the example of the Prophet. For instance in one verse God Almighty says:
“Certainly you have in the Messenger of God an excellent exemplar for him who hopes in God and the last day and remembers God much.” Quran 33:21
Al-Hakim al-Nisapouri (d. 405 AH) in his most famous Hadith collection known as Al-Mustadrak `alâ al-Sahîhayn (“Supplement for What is Missing From al-Bukhârî and Muslim”) reports:
“Ummul Fadhl, the daughter of al-Harith said that she entered on the Messenger of God and she said: “O Messenger of God, I saw a strange dream last night. He said: And what is it? She said: It was difficult. He said: And what is it? She said: I saw, as if, a piece of your body was severed and was put in my lap! The Messenger of God said: You saw something good- Fatima will give birth, God willing, a boy so he will be in your lap. Then Fatima gave birth to Hussain (and he was in my lap – just as the Messenger of God said. So I entered one day on the Messenger of God and put him in his lap, but I noticed that the eyes of the Messenger of God pouring tears! So I said: O Prophet of God, my parents are your ransom, what is wrong? He said: Gabriel came to me and informed me that my nation will kill this son of mine.”
Source: al-Mustadrak al-Sahih, al-Hafidh al-Hakim al-Nisapouri, v. 3, p. 176, (al-Hakim said: “This is an authentic hadith (Sahih) on the conditions of Bukhari and Muslim but they did not print it”)
From this narration, we understand that the Prophet wept for Hussain nearly 50 years before his martyrdom! If the Prophet wept for him before his tragic martyrdom, don’t blame us for weeping for him after his heart wrenching martyrdom.
Why do we cry for Imam Hussain you ask?
Put simply, we cry for Hussain because the Prophet (s) did.
Answered by: Shaykh Azhar Nasser
All our jurists became Mujtahids when they were teaching, not when they were studying! So, congratulations, teaching is double learning.
In short:
1. God speaks our language so that we understand Him, thus the Qur’an is revealed in a human language i.e. Arabic.
2. As such the Qur’an maintains the Arabic grammatical rules, inasmuch as when you speak English you must follow its grammatical rules, otherwise you will not be understood correctly.
3. One of the grammatical rules in the Arabic language is: Arabs use a feminine pronoun only for feminine names, whether real or figurative. An example of a real feminine noun is ‘Fatemah’, and an example of a figurative on is ‘the Sun’, which in Arabic is a figurative noun. For all other nouns, whether masculine (including figurative like ‘the Moon’) or not (like objects, or anything, or any other beings) they use masculine pronouns. For example, in Ayah 216 of Surah al-Baqarah: کُتب علیکم القتال و هو کره لکم
The pronoun ‘Ho-wa’ (he) refers to ‘al-Qital’ (fighting) although ‘fighting’ is neither feminine nor masculine. Similarly, Angels are referred to by masculine pronouns although they are gender-free.
4. Therefore, grammatically ‘Allah’ is also referred to by a masculine pronoun, although He the Almighty is beyond any gender, rather, He is the Creator of all genders.
Answered by: Sheikh Mansour Leghaei
Originally posted by www.askthesheikh.com
The famous Prophetic narrations of ’12 Caliphs’ or ’12 Emirs’ are mentioned in many books of Hadith including Sahih Bukhari and Sahih Muslim:
يَكُونُ اثْنَا عَشَرَ أَمِيرًا – فَقَالَ كَلِمَةً لَمْ أَسْمَعْهَا فَقَالَ أَبِى إِنَّهُ قَالَ – كُلُّهُمْ مِنْ قُرَيْشٍ.
Jaber Ibn Samorah said I went to the Prophet (P) and I heard him saying: “There will be 12 Emirs”- then the Prophet (P) said something that I did not hear so I asked my father about it and he said, the Prophet (P) added: “they are all from Qoraysh.” (Bukhari, Hadith No. 7222).
عَنْ جَابِرِ بْنِ سَمُرَةَ قَالَ دَخَلْتُ مَعَ أَبِي عَلَى النَّبِيِّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ ، فَسَمِعْتُهُ يَقُول: إِنَّ هَذَا الْأَمْرَ لَا يَنْقَضِي حَتَّى يَمْضِيَ فِيهِمْ اثْنَا عَشَرَ خَلِيفَةً . قَالَ : ثُمَّ تَكَلَّمَ بِكَلَامٍ خَفِيَ عَلَيَّ . قَالَ : فَقُلْتُ لِأَبِي : مَا قَالَ ؟ قَالَ : كُلُّهُمْ مِنْ قُرَيْشٍ.
Jaber Ibn Samorah said I went to the Prophet (P) and I heard him saying: “Indeed this matter will not be completed until there will be 12 Caliphs amongst them.” He then added something softly that I did not hear, so I asked my father about it who said: The Prophet (P) said: “They are all from Qoraysh.” (Muslim, Hadith No. 1821, Book of leadership).
The above narration has been one of the most mysterious narrations for Sunni scholars. Al-Nawawi; the most famous interpreter of Sahih Muslim, who while quoting from many scholars regarding the meaning of the abovementioned Hadith, quotes from al-Qadi A’yadh who suggested:
و يحتمل أن يكون المراد مستحقي الخلافة العادلين ، وقد مضى منهم من عُلم ، ولا بد مِن تمام هذا العدد قبل قيام الساعة
“And it is possible that it is meant for those just people who deserve the Caliphate, and some of them who are known have already passed and the rest must come before the Resurrection Day.” (Sharh Muslim vol.12 p.202)
Ibn Kathir; the famous Sunni Imam of Hadith and historian says:
ومعنى هذا الحديث البشارة بوجود اثني عشر خليفة صالحًا ، يقيم الحق ويعدل فيهم ، ولا يلزم من هذا تواليهم وتتابع أيامهم ، بل قد وجد منهم أربعة على نَسَق ، وهم الخلفاء الأربعة: أبو بكر ، وعمر ، وعثمان ، وعلي ، رضي الله عنهم ، ومنهم عمر بن عبد العزيز بلا شك عند الأئمة ، وبعض بني العباس. ولا تقوم الساعة حتى تكون ولايتهم لا محالة ، والظاهر أن منهم المهدي المبشر به في الأحاديث الواردة بذكره
“This Hadith is a glad tiding that there will be 12 righteous Caliphs (after the holy Prophet), who will establish truth and justice. However, it does not necessarily mean they should lead one after the other! Thus among them it could be undoubtedly Omar Ibn Abdul-Aziz, and some of the Abbasid kings! (In any event), the Resurrection Day will not happen until they (the 12 Caliphs) undoubtedly rule. And apparently al-Mahdi; whose glad tiding has been mentioned in many narrations is one of them!” (Tafsir Ibn Katheer, vol.3, p.65).
Ibn Hajar; the author of Fathul-Bari, whose book is celebrated as one of the best interpretations of Sahih Bukhari, while quoting from al-Mohallab says:
لم ألق أحدا يقطع في هذا الحديث يعني بشيء معين
“I have not met anyone who could be certain about the meaning of this Hadith!” (Fathul-Bari, vol. 13, p.211)
Similarly, Ibn Jouzi; the renowned Hanbali scholar confesses:
هذا الحديث قد أطلت البحث عنه، وتطلّبت مظانّه، وسألت عنه، فما رأيت أحدا وقع على المقصود به
“I have researched for long to understand this Hadith and referred to many references and made much enquiries about it, yet I did not meet anyone who could understand it.” (Kashful-Majhool, vol.1 p.449)
Likewise, Ibn Taymiyya says:
ومنهم من قال: لا أفهم معناه كأبي بكر بن العربي
“Among them (scholars) are those like Abi-Bakr Bin Arabi who said: “I do not understand the meaning of the Hadith!” (Menhaju-Sunna, vol. 8 p.173)
Are Bani Umayyad from the tribe of Qoraysh?
In an attempt to complete the number 12, many of the Sunni scholars insist on including some of the Umayyad kings.
This argument is very futile for many reasons:
1. The Umayyad kings were more than twenty!
2. The Caliphs of the holy Prophet (P) have to be the most pious and righteous Muslims. Would they regard the cursed Yazid as one of the Caliphs of the holy Prophet?! Would Marwan Ibn Hakam, who was explicitly cursed by the Prophet (P), be another caliph of the Messenger of Allah?!
3. The holy Prophet (P) foretold that his twelve Caliphs are from the tribe of Quraysh. Although it is famously taken for granted that the Umayyad are from the tribe of Quraysh, the fact is otherwise:
– Bukhari narrated that when the holy Prophet (P) was distributing the share of the ‘Near of the kin’ he refused to give any share to the children of Abd-Shams (Umayyad), as well as the children of Noufil. He only distributed them amongst the children of Hashim and Mottalib. When Uthman Ibn Affan (known as the 3rd caliph, and who was from Umayyad family) and Jobair Ibn Mot’em (who was from Bani Noufil) complained, the holy Prophet (P) said: “Only the Children of Hashim and the Children of Mottalib are one family.” (Bukhari, vol. 5, p.79).
– Umayya; the grandfather of the Umayyads, was an adopted child of Abd-Sham, not a biological child. Imam Ali (a.s), in one of his letters to Mo’awiyah with reference to this fact writes:
و أما قولک انا بنوعبدمناف، فکذلک نحن ولکن
لیس أمیۀ کهاشم، ولا حرب کعبدالمطلب و لا ابوسفیان کأبی طالب و لا المهاجر کالطلیق، و لا الصریح کاللصی
“And as to what you said that you are from the children of Abd Manaf, then so are we. However, Umayyah is not like Hashim (in virtue and biological relation), and nor is Harb like Abdul-Mottalib, neither is Abu-Sofyan like Abu-Talib. Also, the one who willingly migrated (in)to Islam is not the same as the one who was freed, just as the one who is biologically related is not the same as the one who is adopted.” (Nahjul-Balagha, Letter No.17)
When Imam Ali (a.s) heard that his opponents claimed the caliphate with the excuse that they are from Quraysh he said: “How strange! They referred to the tree but ignored its fruit!” (Bani-Hashim is a branch of Quraysh.)
The Twelve Caliphs or Emirs are the Twelve Imams of Ahlul-Bayt (a.s)
There is no sect in Islam other than us, the Twelvers (Shi’a), who by the Grace of God believe in twelve leaders after the holy Prophet (P), all of whom are from his Noble Family. Thus, the Prophetic Hadith that the renowned Sunni scholars could not make any meaning of, is so well understood, even by our children.
The 12 Imams are:
1. Imam Ali
2. Imam Hasan
3. Imam Husain
4. Imam Ali Ibn Husain al-Sajjad
5. Imam Muhammad Ibn Ali al-Baqir
6. Imam Ja’far Ibn Muhammad al-Sadiq
7. Imam Musa Ibn Ja’far al-Kadhem
8. Imam Ali Ibn Musa al-Reda
9. Imam Muhammad Ibn Ali al-Jawad
10. Imam Ali Ibn Muhammad al-Hadi
11. Imam Hasan Ibn Ali al-Askari
12. The promised Imam Muhammad Ibn Hassan al-Mahdi
Peace be upon them all.
Note how the holy Prophet (P) in his famous Hadith of Thaqalayn has referred to his noble family as one of the two types of Caliphs he has left behind:
Zaid Ibn Thabit narrated from the Messenger of Allah (P): “Surely, I leave behind two Caliphs for you: the Book of Allah, a linked rope between heaven and earth, and my noble family, and truly these two will not be separated until they return to me at the Pool (of Kawthar).” (Kanzul-Ummal, vol. 1, p.44).
Answered by: Sheikh Mansour Leghaei
Originally posted by www.askthesheikh.com
The punishment of the Hereafter is eternal only for those who were stubborn against the Truth.
Such people remained stubborn their entire lives, despite being given countless chances to repent and submit to the Truth. In fact, they have reached a stage, where, as the Qur’an says below, even if they were returned to life after having tasted the fire of Hell, they would still go back to the same sins they used to commit.
“If you could but see when they will be held over the (Hell) Fire! They will say: “Would that we were but sent back (to the world)! Then we would not deny the Ayat of our Lord, and we would be of the believers! Nay, it has become manifest to them what they had been concealing before. But if they were returned (to the world), they would certainly revert to that which they were forbidden. And indeed they are liars.” (6:27-8)
Their punishment is eternal because, given the chance, they would have done evil eternally. Imam Sadiq (a.s) was asked the same question and he replied:
“Surely, people of Hell are eternally in Hell because their intention was if they lived in this world eternally they would disobey God eternally, likewise people of Paradise will be eternally in Paradise becasue their intention was if they lived in this world eternally they would worship God eternally.” (al-Kaafi, vol.2 p.85)
Their punishment is severe because of the magnitude of their transgressions. These people have denied the greatest and most obvious of Truths, and the only way they can do this is by having killed their conscience. A person who has killed their own conscience has usually also committed atrocious acts against his fellow beings, and if they had been given opportunity, their atrocities would have continued to forever get worse.
Allah (SWT) does not punish for all our sins. Rather, he punishes only for a small minority of them. In fact, the Qur’an says that if we were punished for all our sins, no creature would be left on earth to live. This is despite the fact that each sin, no matter how small, is a sin against the Creator who gave us every blessing imaginable. This makes every sin absolutely dire and deserving of indescribable punishment. Yet Allah (SWT) gives us respite upon respite, until a person may unfortunately shows that their heart is completely veiled and harsh, and instead of taking heed during their respite, continues to commit greater and greater crimes, thereby becoming deserving of hell.
An extract from Dua (supplication of) Abu Hamza to demonstrate the graveness of sin against Allah (SWT): ”
“(My Lord, I am The beseecher that You have given to,
The sinner that You have concealed,
I am the guilty that You have excused,
The worthless that You have made valuable,
The helpless, whom You have aided,
and I am the exile that You have given refuge.
My Lord, I am the one who has not felt ashamed before You in private,
and was not observant of You in public,
I am the committer of the grave and cunning transgressions,
I am the one who showed daring against his Master,
I am the one who disobeyed the Powerful in the heavens,
I am the one who gave bribes in order to commit acts of disobedience against the Exalted (Lord)
I am the one that, when informed of sinful acts, went hurrying towards them,
I am the one to whom You gave respite, but I did not desist,
The one whose sins You concealed, but he did not show any shame,
The one who committed so many acts of disobedience that he has violated (all terms),
and I am the one whose status fell in Your eyes, but he did not care,
By Your Forbearance, You have given me respite.”
Answered by: Dr Ali Alsamail
Certified by: Sheikh Mansour Leghaei
Originally posted by www.askthesheikh.com
This question can be approached from two different angles. The first angle is to ask if Muhammad (s) was truly a prophet and not an imposter.
This question could be asked about every prophet. How do we know that Jesus was a Prophet and not an imposter? And the same could be asked about Moses and others. We know that there have been many people during history who have wrongly claimed prophecy. Couldn’t Muhammad, Jesus or Moses have been one of them?
The answer for all three would be the same; the content of their teachings supported by miracles they performed, and reinforced by their character before and after their mission, convinced not only their companions, but billions of other people after them that they were truthful in their claims. Their message was from God because godly people could connect to it and realised its truth from the depth of their hearts. The hearts of the believers recognised their message and confirmed it.
The second approach is to look at the Quran itself. The greatest miracle of Prophet Muhammad is said to be the Quran. Why is that so, and why is it so compelling in its content and style that no man has ever been able to bring anything like it?
The following points are convincing evidence that the Quran is a heavenly book and is not written by man:
1) The content of the Quran testifies that it cannot be written by human capacity. Its spiritual appeal, its theological rationality, its cosmological description, the way it describes God, its prophecies – all of which came true, its historical accounts, and the amount of knowledge it provides about previous Scriptures are all outside human capacity.
2) The style of its literature was so miraculous that it could not be denied by anyone. Although the Arabia of that time was not an advanced civilization, but they boasted about their poetry and the style of their literature which was hardly found in any other language. Despite that, when the Quran was revealed it mesmerised the greatest poets and literatures of that time. In fact, the Quran challenged them that if they were in doubt about the divine origin of the Quran, they should provide one chapter like it. This challenge is still in place and is yet to be answered.
3) All these were provided by a man who had not read any book before, and until the end of his life could not compose even one line of poetry. The Quran coming from such a person is like asking someone who has never been to any school or university to design a spaceship with all its physical, meteorological, metallurgical, electrical, and electronic details.
4) Unlike the Old and New Testaments, which were written over a considerable period of time, the Quran was memorised and written during the lifetime of the Prophet Muhammad (s) and was provided as a written document to all Muslim territories shortly after him. Several manuscripts of the Quran have been discovered recently which are carbon dated back to the time of the Prophet or his Companions, which are identical with what Muslims read today as the Quran. This is another fulfilment of a Quranic statement which says: “It is We who sent down this Reminder and We will preserve it.” (The Holy Quran: 15:9)
Answered by: Sheikh Mohammad Saeed Bahmanpour
Originally posted by www.askthesheikh.com
The people who narrated the actions and words of the Prophet (pbuh) to us were his companions (ashab). Some of these were people who had met the Prophet only a few times or who did not have much interaction with the Prophet and they are called companions in a general sense. Others lived with the Prophet (pbuh) on an everyday basis and they were his companions in a specific sense.
When it comes to the companions, Sunnis and Shia have different beliefs.
The Sunnis believe that all companions were pious and that their word should be trusted and they should be followed. They have a false narration that says: ‘my companions are like stars, whichever of them you follow, you will be guided’. They also rely on the following Ayah:
وَالسَّابِقُونَ الأَوَّلُونَ مِنَ الْمُهَاجِرِينَ وَالأَنصَارِ وَالَّذِينَ اتَّبَعُوهُم بِإِحْسَانٍ رَّضِيَ اللّهُ عَنْهُمْ وَرَضُواْ عَنْهُ وَأَعَدَّ لَهُمْ جَنَّاتٍ تَجْرِي تَحْتَهَا الأَنْهَارُ خَالِدِينَ فِيهَا أَبَدًا ذَلِكَ الْفَوْزُ الْعَظِيمُ
“And (as for) the foremost, from among the Muhajirs and the Ansars, and those who followed them in goodness, Allah is well pleased with them and they are well pleased with Him, and He has prepared for them gardens beneath which rivers flow, to abide in them for ever; that is the mighty achievement.” (9:100)
They argue that if the Qur’an praises the companions, how can we blame or criticise any of them?
We answer by saying that we criticise some of the companions and praise others. This is because this is also what the Qur’an does. The Qur’an says ‘from among the Muhajirs and the Ansars’ not all of them. This is why it uses the word ‘min’. It is praising those of them that were pious and who did good deeds. However, those who did not do good deeds and who were not pious are criticised by the Qur’an like anyone else would be. It does not make sense that they should not be criticised for doing the wrong thing just because they lived with the Prophet- this is a form of prejudice and has no logical basis.
We too praise the companions, as Imam Sajjad does in his Sahifatul Kamila, but only those of them who do good deeds and are faithful.
Answered by: Dr Ali Alsamail
Certified by: Sheikh Mansour Leghaei
Originally posted by www.askthesheikh.com
1. The abundant merits of visiting the holy grave of Imam Husain (as) is promised in numerous words of the Imams of AhlulBayt (as). One of the best and the most authentic primary sources on the merits of visiting the holy graves of AhlulBayt (as) is the book of ‘Kaamelu-Ziyaraat’ written by ‘Ibn Qulawayh’ who was one of the main students of Sheikh Al-Kulayni and the teacher of Sheikh Al-Mufid. The author has compiled over 500 narrations on the merits of visiting the holy grave of Imam Husain (as). The followings are only a few examples:
1.1: Mo’awiyah Ibn Wahb (a very prominent narrator) narrated from Imam Sadiq (as):
“Do not abandon the ziyarat (visitation) of al-Husain (as). Do you not like to be among those for whom the angels pray?!” (Kamelu-Ziyaraat, P. 119)
1.2: Mo’awiyah Ibn Wahb also said:
“I entered the house of Imam Sadiq (as) and I found the Imam on his prayer mat. I waited until he finished his salat (prayer). Then I heard the Imam saying in his supplication: “O Allah!… forgive me and my brethren and the visitors of the grave of my father al-Husain; those who spend their wealth and return (to his grave) in person (frequently)…” (Ibid, p.117)
1.3: Imam Sadiq (as) said:
“Verily, Fatima; the daughter of Muhammad (P) attends the visitors of her son al-Husain (as) and seeks God’s forgiveness for their sins.” (Ibid, P. 118)
1.4: Visiting the holy grave of Imam Husain (as) is equally recommended for both men and women. Um Saeed al-Ahmasiyah; a very learned female companion of Imam Sadiq (as) narrated:
“Imam Sadiq (as) said to me: O Um Saeed! Do you visit the grave of al-Husain (a.s)? I said: Yes. She further added: Imam then said to me: “Do visit him, for surely his visitation is a covenant on men and women.” (Ibid, P.122)
2. Significance of walking to holy sites in Islam:
Walking towards the holy sites is a much recommended rite in Islam. It is a gesture of humbleness and homage. Walking to the mosque (Wasaelu-Shi’a, vol.5, p.201), going on foot for Eid Prayers (Ibid, Vo.16, p.152), walking to Haj and hence one of the virtues of AhlulBayt (as) was their frequent pilgrimage to Haj on foot, also walking for stoning the Jamaraat in Haj, and even going on foot to visit a believer (Thawabul-A’mal, p.32) are examples of its significance.
3. Significance of walking to visit the holy grave of Imam Husain (as) in particular:
Ibn Qulawaih has dedicated chapter 49 of his book to the merits of visiting Imam Husain (as) on foot. In one of its narrations it is quoted from Imam Sadiq (as):
“Whoever leaves his house aiming at visiting the grave of al-Husain Ibn Ali (as) if he is on foot, Allah will write for him for every footstep a good deed and will erase an evil (for him) until he reaches the al-Haer (the vicinity of the grave)…” (Ibn Qulawaih, P. 132)
Unfortunately the speaker has mistakenly assumed that the walk is supposed to start from the Euphrates! As you can see from the above narration one may start walking from his home if possible, for the longer walk the more rewarding. The recommendation of walking from the Euphrates which is in the vicinity of today’s city of Karbala is about walking barefooted, not just walking. Here is the text of the Hadith in Arabic:
فَإِذَا أَتَيْتَ الْفُرَاتَ فَاغْتَسِلْ وَ عَلِّقْ نَعْلَيْكَ وَ امْشِ حَافِياً وَ امْشِ مَشْيَ الْعَبْدِ الذَّلِيل.. (کامل الزیارات، ص 133)
“Then when you reached the Euphrates River perform your Ghusl (of Ziarat), hang your shoes around your neck, walk barefooted and walk like a very humble slave…” (Ibn Qulawaih, p. 133)
4. Walking on Arbaeen is a pure Islamic tradition NOT an innovation:
Walking to the holy grave on the 40th of Imam Husain (as) is a well-established Sunna and one of the signs of being a true follower of Ahlul-Bayt (as).
4.1: Sh. Al-Mufid (4th century A.H) narrated from Imam al-Askari (as):
“The signs of a believer are five: praying 51 Rak’at daily, Ziarat Arbaeen, wearing a ring on the right hand, prostration on soil, and pronouncing the Bismillah loudly.” (Al-Mazar, P. 53)
‘The believer’ in the above narration is an expression for ‘a Shi’a’, and thus the above five mentioned practices are mainly observed by the Shi’a.
4.2: Safwan; one of the trustworthy companions of Imam Sadiq (as) narrated a ‘visitation’ from Imam Sadiq (a.s) for visiting Imam Husain (as) on his 40th. (Mesbahul-Mutohajjid, vol. 2, p.788)
4.3: Jaber Ibn Abdillah al-Ansari; who was a prominent companion of the holy Prophet (P), along with Atiyyah al-Oufi, who was also a prominent companion of Imam Ali (as) are the first main visitors of the holy grave of Imam Husain (as) on Arbaeen. At the time of the tragedy of Karbala, Jaber who had an impair vision due to aging was residing in Medina. Upon hearing the martyrdom of Imam Husain (as) he made a trip all the way to Kufa. Attiyah narrates the story: “I left Kufa with Jaber on foot heading to Karbala to visit the holy grave of Imam Husain (as). (Besharatul-Mustafa, p. 74). Note that today Kufa is part of the holy city of Najaf, from which the main walk begins. We believe the choice of Jaber to visit the holy grave on the 40th was not accidental.
Therefore, walking on Arbaeen to visit the holy grave of Imam Husain (as) is:
a) a strong recommendation of Imam Sadiq (a.s),
b) a sign of a true believer according to Imam al-Askari (a.s),
c) is practiced by prominent companions of the holy Prophet (P) and Imam Ali (as),
d) and practiced by many Shi’a scholars throughout history when possible. Then how can one dare calling it an innovation and compare it with ‘Salat-al- Tarawih’ which its innovation is unanimously accepted?! In fact, Ziyarat Arbaeen is not an innovation even according to the Sunni principles, for it has been practiced by one of the companions of the holy Prophet (P); i.e. Jaber Ibn Abdillah. Perhaps that is why every year we witness more participation in this heavenly procession by Muslims of different denominations.
5. Ziarat Arbaeen is NOT supposed to be a private practice.
Unlike the false assumption of the speaker, a glance at the numerous narrations of AhlulBayt (as) certainly suggests that the visitation of Imam Husain (as) has to be publicized and globalized. I wonder how can a Muslim speaker echo the voice of secularism which calls ‘religion a private affair and should be kept that way’?!! It will not be surprising for such mentality to call the global Muslim pilgrimage to Haj another innovation and suggest that ‘it’s supposed to be a private practice to do it in your own good time’. Then Friday and daily congregational Prayers have to be also private practices! Muslim ladies also should not be allowed to practice their Islamic dress code, for ‘religion is supposed to be a private affair’. And the list goes on!
I heard from one of the Iraqi brothers: “During the reign of Saddam we had to keep the Arbaeen walk hidden and private, otherwise we could be put in prison or executed!” I cannot fathom how a Muslim speaker promotes ‘Saddam’s policy’?!!
6. Ziarat Arbaeen has NOT shackled us, it has liberated and united us.
Unlike the blasphemous claim of the speaker who claims Arbaeen walk is ‘an innovation which has shackled us’, the Shi’a history proves otherwise. Nay, even Gandhi said: “I learned from Husain how to be wronged and be a winner, I learned from Husain how to attain victory while being oppressed.”
I sincerely invite the speaker for the next Arbaeen procession to witness how Muslims of different denominations along with Zoroastrians, Sabians and others walk on this heavenly worshipping act hand in hand. Instead of making such unprofessional and derogatory comments please do join ‘the world’s largest and peaceful annual pilgrimage’ and witness for yourself a utopia where its citizens are the most generous, the most caring, the most sacrificing, and yes the most loving people for our dear al-Husain (as). And finally I humbly appeal to such speakers to follow the wise recommendation of Imam Sadiq (a.s) where he says:
“Remain quiet on matters unclear to you, for it is better than indulging in utter destruction.” (al-Kafi, vol. 1 p. 68)
Answered by: Sheikh Mansour Leghaei
Originally posted by www.askthesheikh.com
You can present your thoughts in some of the following methods:
1. To prove to him the necessity of having a messenger from God, in the following way:
The Creator must be All-Perfect because He is Absolute and free of limitations. One aspect of His Perfection is that He is All-Merciful and Wise. His Mercy would lead Him to make himself known to his creatures because for them to know Him would be the greatest pleasure they could attain.
His Wisdom would also cause Him to make Himself known because this would give purpose to His creation becuase without knowledge of Him their existence would be all-material and therefore ultimately purposeless and in vain. So, its necessary for Him to introduce Himself and His expectations from us in two ways:
a. an inner voice which is a common sense from within us to achknoweldge that there is a Creator and that this world could not have come out of the blue, and that there must be an aim and a purpose from this creation. This inner voice makes man a deist but man’s search for truth demands for more details knowledge.
b. Thus the Merciful God appointed certain humans, i.e. prophets, who are infallible from any sin or major mistakes, who were the most truthful and trustworthy people of their time, to reveal to them as much as truth as they could take and to share them with their fellow humans.
2. There have been many divine prophets throughout history. They all claimed to be the Messengers of God. The essence of the messages they shared with mankind is the same. They all acknowledged each other. They have coupled their claims with miracles; e.g. reviving a dead back to live, splitting the Nile into two, enabling people to hear the glorification of God from pebbles, etc. all by the Leave of God. They did not call to themselves, instead they always called to the worship of one unique God. Their message is compatible with our inner voice. We have not received any message from God (whom we know and believe in His existence) that denounces them. Therefore, if we believe in God we must also believe in His message and messengers.
Answered by: Sheikh Mansour Leghaei
Originally posted by www.askthesheikh.com
Shi’a theologians following the teachings of Ahlul-Bayt (a.s) reject both the dogma of absolute determinism as well as absolute free will. They believe in a matter in between. That means man has a free will in the matter of his actions although his free will is by divine decree. Because God is the ultimate and independent cause of all causes it is correct to relate all that exists to God (monotheism in acts). Similarly, because God has granted man free will in his actions, it is also correct to relate the actions of man to his own choice. For instance, God states in the Quran that He is Sustainer of all that is in the earth (11:6) and at the same time holds man responsible for the sustanence of his family (2:233).
Imam Sadiq (a.s) said: “Whatever that you could blame man for it, is his action and whatever you could not blame him for it, is the act of God. God blames man for drinking alcohol, committing adultery etc. Thus, these are the acts of man. However, God does not blame man why he is sick or why his skin colour is black or fair. Thus, these are the acts of God.” [Beharul-Anwaar vol.5 p.58].
The Imam was also asked about the meaning of ‘a matter in between’. His reply was: “The example of it is, if you see a man committing a sin and you advise him to refrain from it, yet he does not pay any heed to your advice. Surely, just because he didn’t listen to you, it cannot be said that you forced him to sin.” [Ibid, p.83]
Imam Hadi (a.s) quoting from Imam Sadiq (a.s) said: “People with regards to ‘destiny’ are of three categories: The first is the one who assumes that Allah has given full authority to him. This (person) has weakened God in His kingdom, thus, he is perished. The second is the one who assumes that God has forced people to sin and He has held them responsible over things that they have no power over. This (person) is unfair to God in His judgment, thus he is perished. The third is the one who assumes God has held people responsible for what they do and does not hold them responsible for what they have no power over. Then when he does something good, he praises God and when he does something evil, he seeks God’s forgiveness. This (person) is a mature Muslim.”
A Muslim should also believe that the decree of God on the matters that are beyond one’s choice, is always eventually beneficial for a believer. The Prophet of Islam (P) once so smiled that his blessed molar teeth were shown. The Messenger of God was asked for his smile. He replied: “I wonder about the affairs of a Muslim that there is no divine decree about him but eventually it will be to his benefit.”
Answered by: Sheikh Mansour Leghaei
Originally posted by www.askthesheikh.com
Premise 1: All Muslims agree that the Holy Quran is very explicit and clear that the time will come when a universal and just Islamic state will be established, in which those who have been oppressed will lead the world. (Surah al-Anbi’a, Ayah 105)
Premise 2: It is narrated by Shi’a and Sunni narrators that:
a. The day of judgment will not come until a man from the offspring of the Prophet rises to spread peace and justice in the world. (Mosnad Ahmad 3:36 , H. 10920)
b. Whoever dies not knowing the Imam of his time has died the death of Ignorance (Kofr). (Muslim 3:239, H 1851)
c. Hadith al-Thaqalayn in which the Prophet (P) says: the Book of Allah and his Ahlul-Bayt (P) will never be separated until they join him at the Pool of Kouthar. (Mostadrak al-Hakim 3:10)
d. 12 Imams: The Prophet foretold that the Kholafa (successors after him) shall be 12 Imams, and that are all from Qoraysh. (Muslim 3:220, H. 1821). This hadith can only apply to the 12 Imams of Ahlul-Bayt (a.s). Also, there is no doubt that Imam Askari (a.s) was martyred and died. (More info. about the narrations regarding 12 Imams after the Holy Prophet)
Conclusion: if Imam Mahdi is not born yet, then: there will be a separation between the Quran and Ahlul-bayt (a.s) (violating premise 2/c), the Imams won’t be 12 (violation of premise 2/d.) and all contemporary Muslims die the death of Jahiliyah because there is no Imam of their time for them to know him (violation of premise 2/b).
Answered by: Sheikh Mansour Leghaei
Originally posted by www.askthesheikh.com
The dogma of subjective or relative truth as opposed to objective or absolute truth is full of contradictions, and hence is nothing more than a fallacious argument as I will explain:
1. If truth is essentially subjective and relative then this proposition ‘truth is a subjective thing’ is not necessarily true, which means it may be false. Thus, it is self-defeating.
2. We ask those who claim “truth is a subjective thing that everyone arrives at in their own capacity as individuals..”, is this an absolute statement, or it may or may not be true? If it is an absolute statement then there is an absolute truth which is against your claim. But if your statement is also relatively true then you may well be telling me a lie!
3. How did you come to the conclusion that truth is subjective and relative? If all propositions are subjective, then yours must be included too! Thus, you are unconsciously acknowledging the absolute truth.
4. Logically the best a holder of ‘subjective truth’ may claim is to say ‘I am agnostic’ (I have no knowledge of the truth). The Holy Qur’an refers such ignorant people to ‘those who know’: “Ask those who know if you do not know.” (Surah 16, Ayah 43).
5. If ‘truth is available for all’, then both atheists and theists must be true. This claim contradicts the most basic human foundation of knowledge, i.e. the Law of Non-contradiction, which simply means ‘A is not non-A. Here, an atheist believes God does not exist, whereas a theist believes God does exist. To claim that truth is available to both of them contradicts the Law of Non-contradiction.
6. Similarly if ‘truth is available for all’, then both Christians who believe Jesus is Son of God, and Muslims who believe Jesus is not son of God must be true. Likewise, Christians who believe Jesus was crucified, and Muslims who believe he was not crucified must be both true! And the list goes on. This is a clear violation of the Law of Non-contradiction.
7. If ‘truth is available to all’, then all the criminals such as ISIS must be true too. They have reached the truth in their own capacity!! Similarly, it should have been available to both the holy Prophet of Islam (s), and the pagans of Quraysh, both Imam Ali (a.s.) and his opponents must have arrived to it, both Imam Husain (a.s.) and the perpetrators of Karbala must have arrived at truth in their own capacities too!
8. If ‘truth is available to all’ then why did God bother to dispatch all the Prophets and Messengers, and why did He create hell and heaven and the Day of Judgment in the first place?!
9. Finally, Avicenna proposed a great test to examine the validity of ‘subjective truth’. Send him on the top of a high cliff, and if he believes he can fly he should be able to fly, since truth is subject to his belief! But if he falls instead of flying then the argument is over!
10. As for the claim that ‘the Qur’an only makes a distinction between friends of God and His enemies’, is there any application or real examples for these titles?! The Almighty God introduces Himself as ‘The Only Truth’: “That is because Allah is the Only Truth, and what they (polytheists) invoke besides Him, is falsehood.” (Surah 22, Ayah 62). Out testimony of Faith first denounces any deity and then proclaims Allah as the one and only deity worthy of worship: “La Elaha Ellallah”. According to ‘subjective truth’ the divine division of ‘truth and falsehood’ must be absurd!
11. If ‘God does not care if you are a Muslim, Christian, Jew or Sabian’, then why did He reveal: “Surely, they have disbelieved who say: God is the Messiah, son of Mary… Surely disbelievers are those who said: God is the third of the three…” (Surah 5, Ayah 72, 73).
12. If ‘God does not care if you are a Muslim, Christian…” then why did He order his noble Messenger to take his noblest family members to attend the event of al-Mubahalah (two parties standing off and invoking God’s curse upon the false party)?! (Surah 3, Ayah 61). Couldn’t He just reveal to His Messenger: “I don’t care how you believe in Me, or perhaps don’t believe in Me. I love you all”?!
13. Is it not bizarre to claim that God cares “only about belief in Allah, the Hereafter, and righteous good deeds, and belief in the Prophets, and in particular the Seal of the Prophets is unnecessary”! This is not less than denying the Message and the Messenger! Unless you believe in the Prophet of Islam (s), the Holy Qur’an will not be a divine revelation for you. Now I know why it is recommended to recite the following Ayah after every prayer: “The Messenger (Muhammad) believes in what has been sent down to him from his Lord, and (so do) the believers. Each one believes in Allah, His Angels, His Books, and His Messengers, (they say): We make no distinction between one another of His Messengers – and they say: We hear and we obey. We seek Your forgiveness, our Lord and to You is the return of all.” (Surah 2, Ayah 285).
14. As for his word: “, I have never personally believed that the Shi’a are the truth.” Well, please compare this with what the holy Prophet (s) has said to Imam Ali (a.s.): “You are with the Truth, and the Truth is with you.” (Ibn Asaker, vol. 20 p. 361). Imam Hadi (a.s.) also says in his visitation for Imam Ali (a.s.): “O Commander of the Faithful! I bear witness that whoever doubts you has never believed in the Trusted Messenger (i.e. Muhammad), and whoever leaves you to choose another (as his leader) has indeed diverted the true religion that the Lord of the worlds has chosen for us.” (al-Mazar, p.66).
15. And finally, if:
· The Prophets (s) were pluralists then none of them would have suffered or been tortured to death. They would have coexisted happily with all the pagans of their times!
· The holy Prophet of Islam (s) was a pluralist, then he would not have opposed the pagans and Hamza, the noble uncle of the Prophet (s) and many other Muslims, would have not been killed.
· The holy Prophet (s) was a pluralist then he would not have sent letters of invitation to the then world leaders, and Ja’far – ‘the owner of Two Wings’ – would have not been killed by the Romans…
· Imam Sadiq (a.s.) was a pluralist he would not have opposed Abu-Hanifa for applying analogy in the matter of jurisprudence.
· Imam Ridha (a.s.) was a pluralist he would have not debated the leaders of all religions in the court of Ma’moon, and the list goes on!
May the Almighty Allah keep us all on the Right Path, the path of those whom He has blessed, not those who earned the divine chastisement nor of those who went astray. “O Lord! We believe in what You have revealed and we follow the Messenger (Muhammad), so write us down with those who bear witness. Our Lord! Make not our hearts to deviate after You have guided us aright.
Answered by: Sheikh Mansour Leghaei
Originally posted by www.askthesheikh.com
The Shia Muslims believe that all the prophets were ma’sum, sinless and infallible; they could commit no sin— neither a major sin nor a minor sin; neither intentionally nor inadvertently; and this applies to them from the beginning to the end of their lives.
This is the belief of the Shí’a Ithna-‘Ashariyyah. Below are three quotations from the Shia scholars of early days to the present century that shows the consistency of this belief among the Shias.
Shaykh Abu Ja’far as-Saduq, a scholar born during the Minor Occultation (ghaybat sughra) of the Present Imam and died in 381 AH, says: “Our belief concerning the prophets, apostles, Imams and angels is that they are infallible (ma’sum), purified from all defilement (danas), and that they do not commit any sin, whether it be minor or major…He who denies infallibility to them in any matter appertaining to their status is ignorant of them. Our belief concerning them is that they are infallible and possess the attributes of perfection, completeness and knowledge, from the beginning to the end of their careers…”
‘Allamah Ibn Mutahhar al-Hilli (d. 728 AH) writes the following on prophecy: “He is immune to sin from the first of his life to the last of it.”
Shaykh Muhammad Rida al-Mudhaffar, a famous Shia scholar of the first half of this century, writes: “We believe that all the prophets are infallible…Infallibility means purity from all sins, both major and minor ones, and from mistakes and forgetfulness.”
Answered by: Sayyid Muhammad Rizvi
Supplication or dua is not merely a means for the human being to gain material blessings from God. Supplication has a much more broad connotation in the Islamic tradition and is not restricted to a request-based dua. In fact, traditions indicate that dua is the “essence of worship”. Indeed, what a person gains from the very act of speaking to God outweighs any material blessing that can be acquired through dua. Put simply, being in communication with the Creator is an integral part of our spiritual growth in the same way that plants need sunlight to grow and flourish.
Furthermore, God, in His infinite mercy, distributes countless blessings to His servants without them having to ask. This is one of the implications of the divine name “Al-Rahman.” He gives to those who believe in Him as well as to those who deny Him. However, there are certain blessings that are contingent upon dua. Meaning, there are particular favours God will grant only if His servant asks Him and beseeches Him. This is usually the case with spiritual gifts as indicated by the following tradition from Imam al-Baqir (a):
أن عند الله عزوجل ، منزلة لا تنال إلا بمسألة
“Indeed with God there is a degree [of faith] that cannot be attained except by asking…” (al-Kafi, v. 2, p. 466)
Answered by Shaykh Azhar Nasser
The word literally means “O God”. The vocative يا known as حرف النداء has been omitted to highlight than nothing comes before God. The letter م is attached to the end of the word to indicate the presence of on omitted letter at the beginning of the word.
The word اللهم is typically translated as “O God” or “O Allah” but it’s actually an expression whereby you’re invoking Allah by all of His names and attributes that are known and unknown to you.
God has 99 formal names that are known to us but His essence is beyond our comprehension. Thus, as His servants, we call upon Him by His known names and also by the attributes that have been veiled from us.
Answered by: Shaykh Azhar Nasser
Shaykh al-Tusi (d. 460 AH) speaks about Ziyarat al-Arba’een in his book Misbah al-Mutahajjid, page 787:
“And on the twentieth day of (Safar), it was the day of return of the women of our master Abi Abdilah Al-Husayn ibn Ali bin Abi Talib, peace be upon them both, from al-Sham (Levant) to the city of the Rasul Allah, may God’s prayers and peace be upon him and his family.
And it is the day on which it was reported that Jabir ibn Abdillah ibn Haram al-Ansari, the companion of the Messenger of God, came from Madina to Karbala to visit the tomb of Abi Abdullah, peace be upon him, and he was the first person to visit it. And it is desirable to do ziyara of him (Imam Husayn) during this day, and it is what is known as Ziyarat al-Arba’een.”
Al-Qurtubi (d. 671 AH), the famous Andalusian Sunni mufasir and theologian says in his book al-Tadhkira (http://www.islamport.com/w/akh/Web/2811/242.htm):
“The Imamiyya say that the head (of Husayn) was returned to the body in Karbala after 40 days from the killing. And it is a known day for them, they call Ziyara in it – Ziyarat al-Arba’een.”
Answered by: John Andaluso
Reviewed by: Shaykh Azhar Nasser