Shia Crescent.Com » Debates

How to Invite People to Islam

bfoali — Tue, 23 Aug 2011 05:31:47 +0000

[016:125] Invite (all) to the Way of thy Lord with wisdom and beautiful preaching; and argue with them in ways that are best and most gracious: for thy Lord knoweth best, who have strayed from His Path, and who receive guidance.

An exchange on Surah 80 of the Holy Quran

bfoali — Thu, 18 Aug 2011 23:45:05 +0000

A few days ago I was having a discussion with a friend of mine on Surah 80 of the Holy Quran. This friend was a Sunni, and, as anyone familiar with Sunni and Shia debates over the years rightly knows, his interpretation of that verse vastly differs from that of the Shia madhab. But rather than focusing on the surah itself, and subsequently trying to prove whose version of events lay closer to the truth, I want to focus on a very interesting exchange that happened between the brother and me.

Before moving on with the discussion, let me quickly post the relevant verses; they read:

[080:001] He frowned and turned his face away,

[080:002] Because a blind man came to him (and interrupted him).

[080:003] You don’t really know! Perhaps he would (shed his disbelief, and) grow in faith.

[080:004] He might heed (the warning); perhaps the reminder would benefit him.

[080:005] (Instead), the one who displays indifference,

[080:006] You attend to.

(Yusuf Ali’s translation for the first verse appears like this: ‘’(The Prophet) frowned and turned away[.]’’

Now according to Sunni tradition this verse was revealed about the Prophet of Islam. In opposition to such views is what our hadiths say, primarily, that this verse wasn’t revealed about the Prophet, but rather, about someone else. When I stated this point my friend wanted to know who I thought this verse is specifically referring to. From the traditions we have, which aren’t many, I couldn’t recall if there was a specific person for who this verse was revealed about, but I only remembered that it was for one of the Prophets companions, and not about the Prophet himself. After I mentioned this my friend burst out in anger. He began to ostracise me, saying how typical it was for Shias to always insult the Prophets companions and so forth. So I asked him, why is it insulting if I attribute this to the Prophets companions? He replied because it shows the companion(s) in a bad light, and Shias always try to insult the sahaba(s) by showing them in a bad light.

His anger resided in this fact: that by arguing that this verse was revealed about the sahabas that we, the Shia, are insulting them. How dare we do such a thing? Why is it so typical of us to insult the Prophets companions? And on he went.

Rather than focusing on his claims, I want to ask him this: does he not realize what an incredibly insulting thing he said? If attributing this event to the sahabas is insulting, is it not then doubly insulting to attribute this to God’s Prophet? If one should get angry about this story being revealed about one of his idols, should not a person be irate when it is accepted as a fact about his Prophet?

If it is insulting to a sahabaha, then it is doubly insulting to the Prophet of Islam, yet, my friend has no problem in believing it (or, rather, has no choice but to accept it).

A second point worth highlighting is what this exchange revealed. It revealed one of the glairing differences between our madhab and his. More specifically, it revealed how we view our Prophet and his character, and how his sect does. Whereas we refuse to accept such stories like this toward the Prophet, he has no problem in doing so, and will even debate with many to prove that it in fact was revealed about the Prophet.

I most likely will write an article dealing with the actual issue at hand—who is God reprimanding in the verse—but I will do that later on.

Defending the Imam of our time (revised)

bfoali — Tue, 01 Feb 2011 23:32:25 +0000

If one is to take a look at the many sites which critique the Jafarri School of Thought, one sees a common article plastered somewhere on the site. The article usually has the same title, always the same content, and many times no credit is given to the original writer of the article.

The article’s main thesis is simple: the twelfth Imam of the Shia is in fact the prophesized dajal, and therefore the Shia are on the wrong, and waiting for the man who will bring them their ultimate loss. At first look the article seems difficult to respond to, but on further notice, like all lies, the article proves to be nothing more than an unlettered diatribe, full of misquotes, partial quotes, and made up quotes.

For today’s rebuttal I will use the website titled Millatibraheem.wordpress.com as the platform for rebuttal, but keep in mind that this article can be used against the other numerous sites which proudly display this article.

Their article can be found here (Millatibraheem’s Article), another site which uses the same article can be located here

Side Note

I will be calling the author of the article that I am refuting with the nickname MBA

Millatibraheem.wordpress.com States:

The “Qaem” or Imam Mahdi of the Shi’a will rule according to the Laws of David and the family of David, according to the Shi’a Hadith in Al-Kafi, the most reliable of the four books of Shi’a Hadith. All of the following Shi’a Hadith come from the same section in Al-Kafi reported by Al-Kulyani, located in Al-Kafi (Volume No.1, p.387-398): Narrated Ali ibn Ibraheem -from his father-from ibn Abi Umair-from Mansour-from Fadhl al Aour-from Abi Ubaidah who reported:

“When the Qaem of the household of the Prophet appears, he will rule according to rule of David and Solomon.”

Muhammad ibn Yahya-Ahmad ibn Muhammad-Muhammad ibn Sinaan-Abaan who reported: “I heard Abu Abdullah[as] saying: ‘The world will not fade away unless a person from us appears who will rule according to the rule of the family of David’”

Ahmad–Ahmad ibn Muhammad–Ibn Mahboob–Hisham ibn Salim–Ammar as Saabati who reported: “I asked Abu Abdullah [as] : ‘On what will you rule if you are made the rulers.’ He replied: ‘By the rule of God and the rule of David. And if we are confronted by a situation which we cannot solve, Gabriel (Ruh al Quds) will reveal it to us.’”

Muhammad ibn Ahmad–Muhammad ibn Khalid–Nazr ibn Suwaid–Yahya al Halabi–Imran ibn Oueiyn–Jaeed al Hamdani–Ali ibn al-Hussein [as] said: “I asked him by which law will you rule?” He said: “By the rule of David, and if there is something which we are unaware of, Gabriel (Ruh al Quds) will reveal it to us.”

Ahmad ibn Mahran [ra]–Muhammad ibn Ali–Ibn Mahboob–Hishaam bin Salim–Ammar as Saabati reported: “I asked Imam Abu Abdullah [as]: ’By what will you rule?’ He replied: ‘By the rule of God, and by the rule of David.’”

Our Response:

Deception # 1 exposed

The author of the article fails to even provide a proper reference for his claim. No chapter title, not even a chapter number. Simply this: Al- Kafi (Volume No.1, p. 387-398). (You will see how important the chapter title is soon).

So let us go to the actual hadith chapter, and also see the title of it (the two things he failed to show anyone), and show you the significance of his actions.

Here is the title name and the chapter number:

Kitab Al-Kafi: Chapter 99

When the Imams will Rise with Divine Authority They will Judge among People as David And his People had done in that they will not Ask any Witness to Testify (May the peace and Blessings of Allah be up on them)

______

So as we can see, by simple looking at the chapter title, Imam Mahdi (as) will not rule with the law of David, but he will rule like David- meaning he won’t ask any witness to testify.

Let us now cite a few hadiths which can be found under chapter 99 to see how the author of the other blog deliberately played around with the hadiths he posted:

H 1035, Ch. 99, h 2

Muhammad ibn Yahya has narrated from Ahmad ibn Muhammad from Muhammad ibn Sinan From Aban from abu ‘Abdallah (a.s.) who has said the following. “The world will not end before the rise of a man from us who would judge among people the way the family of David had been judging them. He will not ask any witness to testify.

Ch. 99, B 4, H 3

Imam Jafar as-Sadiq (p) was asked: How do you pronounce judgment in the cases brought to you?

The Imam (p): By the order of God, just like Prophet Dawood (David) (p) used to do. Whenever we come across any problem which is beyond our understanding, we are inspired through the Holy Spirit (a form of revelation by God).

____

We can now see why the author of the other blog did not cite the true source, because if he did his entire argument would be exposed for the lie that it is. We kindly ask MBA to be more honest next time.

In conclusion, Imam Mahdi (as) will rule like David in the sense that he will not ask any witness to testify.

Side note from the author

Simply reading an online, or book version, of the hadith would have easily shown the truth of the matter.

Millatibraheem.wordpress.com States:

According to the Shi’a, the Jews will also be the followers of Imam Mahdi: Sheikh al-Mufeed has reported in his Al-Irshaad from al=Mufadhaal ibnu Umar that Imam Abu Abdullah [as] has reported: “There will appear along with Imam Mahdi…people from the tribe of Moses.” [Al-Irshaad of al-mufeed at Tusi p.402]

According to Shi’a Hadith in Al-Kafi, the Hidden Imam learns from a book called al-Jafr, which contains the knowledge from the Israelites: The Imams (a.s.) remained silent for a while and then said, “With us there is al-Jafr (the parchment). What do they know what al-Jafr is?” I then asked, “What is al-Jafr (the parchment or a container)?” The Imams (a.s.) said, “It is a container made of skin that contains the knowledge of the prophets and the executors of their wills and the knowledge of the scholars in the past from the Israelites.” [Al-Kafi, Hadith 635, Ch. 40, h 1]

Our Response:

Deception # 2 exposed

Unfortunately for MBA I actually own a copy of Kitab Al-Irshad, and I know for a fact that there is no such thing as ‘’Al-irshad of al-Mufeed at Tusi.’’ Sheikh Al-Mufeed was a teacher of Sheikh Tusi which is the only connection between the two, but as far as a book goes there is no such thing. So in summary MBA basically made up a reference.

Sadly the lies do not stop there. MBA, as we shall soon see, purposefully deleted and added words to their Kitab al-Irshad reference in order to deceive their audience.

They quote Kitab Al-Irshad as stating the following:

“There will appear along with Imam Mahdi…people from the tribe of Moses.” [Al-Irshaad of al-mufeed at Tusi p.402] (MBA)

That is what the MBA article says, but allow us to see what the actual reference says.

Here is what the actual reference says:

‘’There will come with the Qa’im, peace be on him, from the outskirts of Kufa, twenty-seven men. Fifteen of the people of Moses, who shed their blood for the truth and remained true to it, seven people from the cave, Joshua, Salman, Abu Dujana al-Ansari, al-Miqdad and Malik al-Ashtar. They will act as helpers (ansar) and judges in his presence.’’ (Kitab Al-Irshad of Shaykh al-Mufid page 554)

___

As we can demonstrably see MBA has clearly distorted the text, and left out the most important aspect of their reference.

In conclusion MBA first creates a reference, but then go on to delete the words to convince the audience of there lies. Why did MBA feel it necessary to purposefully delete the main part of the hadith? Why did their deception continue with the addition of the word Jew which never existed in the text?

The hadith is clear that those who will be with the Mahdi will be the ones who shed blood their blood for the truth and remained true to it, and they are from the tribe of Musa (as).

Millatibraheem.wordpress.com States:

Hebrew

Furthermore, the 12th Imam will speak in Hebrew:

Reported to us Ahmad ibn Muhammad ibn Saeed al Uqdah who said: Narrated to us Ali ibn al-Hasan at-Taymali who said: narrated to us al-Hasan and Muhammad the sons of Ali ibnu Yusuf, from Sa’daan ibnu Muslim, from rajaal, from al-Mufadhaal ibn Umar who said: Abu Abdullah [as] reported: “When the Imam Mahdi calls out, he will supplicate to God in Hebrew.” [Al-Ghaybaa of an Numani, p.326]

Our Response:

First and foremost this is not even an argument, just because the Imam can speak various languages this makes him the prophesized dajal?

But let us say that the above is true, and that if the Imam does speak Hebrew he is the Dajjal, the mentioned hadith is weak and cannot even be trusted. The chain of narration is weakened for two reasons: number one being that Al-Mufdal bin Omar is in the chain of narration and he is known to be weak (Rijal Najashi pg 416) and secondly there are two unknown narrators Ali Bin Al Hussein Altimli and Rajjal (which means man).

Deception # 3 exposed:

For arguments sake let us say that the Imam will supplicate in Hebrew why does MBA need to lie to their audience? MBA is quoted as saying the following

‘’ Furthermore, the 12th Imam will speak in Hebrew’’

But the reference he gives only says that he will supplicate in Hebrew.

Special thanks are due to Jonbdab_Azdi for providing me with references and information in respect to the Isnad. May Allah (Sawt) bless him for his deeds

____

Millatibraheem.wordpress.com States:

According to Shi’a Hadith in Al-Kafi, the Hidden Imam learns from a book called al-Jafr, which contains the knowledge from the Israelites:

The Imams (a.s.) remained silent for a while and then said, “With us there is al-Jafr (the parchment). What do they know what al-Jafr is?” I then asked, “What is al-Jafr (the parchment or a container) ?” The Imams (a.s.) said, “It is a container made of skin that contains the knowledge of the prophets and the executors of their wills and the knowledge of the scholars in the past from the Israelites.” [al-Kafi, Hadith 635, Ch. 40, h 1]

Our Response:

Deception # 4 exposed:

MBA claims that Imam Mahdi (as) learns from a book which contains knowledge of the Israelites. What he fails to say is that al-Jafr contains the Injil, which is the book of Isa (as), the original Torah of Musa, (as) and the Psalm of David (as). So according to MBA’s logic is the Imam now a Christian Dajjal since al-Jafr contains the gospel of Isa (as)?

As we all know the Torah and the Gospel were all books of God, and the books that the Imam contains are not the corrupted books but are the original ones. Let us cite some hadith on this topic:

Kitab al-Kafi Hadith 637 Ch. 40, H 3

A number of our people have narrated from Ahmad ibn Muhammad from Ali ibn al-Hakam from al-Husayn ibn abu ‘Ala’who has said that he heard abu ‘Abdallah (a.s.) say the following. “With me is the white Jafr.” The narrator has said that he asked the Imams (a.s.) “What is in it?” The Imams (a.s.) said, “In it there is the psalm of David, the Torah of Moses, The Gospel of Jesus, the Books of Abraham, the laws that explain the lawful and unlawful.

Kitab al-Kafi Hadith number 637 Ch.40, H 5

Muhammad ibn Yahya has narrated from Ahmad ibn Muhammad from ibn Mahbub from ibn Ri’ab from abu ‘Ubaydah who has said that the people from our group asked abu ‘Abdallah (a. s.) about Jafr and the Imam (a.s.) said the following. “It is the skin of a bull which is full of knowledge.“

_

In hopes of proving their case MBA fails to tell the readers that the knowledge in al-Jafr is not only of the scholars of the Israelites, but is also the knowledge of the book of Isa (as) and Musa (as) and David (as).

________________________________________________________________

Editing the conclusion found on MBA

As we have conclusively proven millatibraheem.wordpress did nothing more than purposefully lie and distort the information that they produced to their readers.

Let us cite their conclusion and then cite our own conclusion in the same format:

Millatibraheems conclusion

1. He will rule according to the system of the family of David, using the Talmud.

2. His language will be Hebrew.

3. His followers will be of the Jews and Israelites, for he is the king of the Jews.

4. The Hidden Imam learns from the Talmud which is contained in the “Jafr.”

ShiaCrescent.com conclusion

1. Imam Mahdi (as) will rule in the same method as David (as) in the sense that he will not ask any witness to testify

2. The hadith used is weak and cannot be trusted, but even so the report does not say that he will speak in Hebrew, but rather he will supplicate in Hebrew. Even if the hadith were to be trusted the argument is an incredibly weak one.

3. When Imam Mahdi (as) returns, the followers of Musa (as) (fifteen in total) who accompany him will be the ones who remained close to the truth and died for it.

4. Al-Jafr contains the Psalm of David (as) the Injil of Isa (as) and the Torah of Musa (as) which are all books of God. The books are the original books from God before their corruption. I do not know of a single Muslim who would not want to have these sources alongside the Quran.

Conclusion

MBA’s graphic art states the following ‘’ …Truth has come and falsehood has vanished’’ after reading this article can we really have that quote associated with MBA’s blog?

As-Sallamu-Alaykom

Discussion on Hadith Manzila

bfoali — Thu, 20 Jan 2011 03:24:42 +0000

Insha Allah this week I will post the references to his points in a separate post. The other parts can be found by clicking on the video.

Taqiyya as viewed by the Quran and Sunnah

bfoali — Sun, 26 Jul 2009 01:06:45 +0000

As-Sallamu-Alaykom to all of our readers,

In today’s article we will examine the issue of Taqiyya with three main objectives:

We will first learn about Taqiyya (when is it applicable, what is the definition etc), secondly we will seek to prove its legitimacy from the Holy Quran, and finally examine the issue from the perspective of Sunni Muslim’s most authentic book, and see if Taqiyya has ever been performed throughout Islamic history.



Learning about Taqiyya

The (Islamic) definition of Taqiyya is

“To save life, honour. Or property (either one’s own or of other believers) by hiding one’s belief or religion”.

(Shah `Abdu ‘l-`Aziz Dehlawi, Tuhfa-e-Ithna-’ashariyah, ch. 1, p. 368)

Important Note

A very important note that we should not forget is that Taqiyya is only applicable if your life is in danger, or if you are threatened with physical or mental injury. It is only applicable during certain times. ( Kitab al-Hidaya, Chapter Five)

Learning about Taqiyya: Examining some rules that apply to Taqiyya

“Taqiyya is allowed in matters related to manifestation of friendship or enmity; and it is also allowed in matters connected to professing (their) religion. But it is certainly not allowed in matters which affect other persons, like murder, fornication, usurpation of property, perjury, slander of married women or informing the unbelievers about the weak points in the Muslims’ defence.

“The Qur’anic verse apparently shows that taqiyah is allowed with dominant unbelievers. But according to the madhhab of Imam Shafi’i (May Allah be pleased with him) if the condition between (various sects of) the Muslims resembles the condition between the Muslims and the polytheists, then taqiyah (from the Muslims too) is allowed for the protection of one’s life.

“Taqiyya is allowed for protection of life. The question is whether it is allowed for the protection of property; possibly that too may be allowed, because the Prophet (saw) has said: `The sanctity of a‑Muslim’s property is like the sanctity of his blood’; and also he (saw) has said: `Whoever is killed in defence of his property, is a martyr’; and also because man greatly needs his property; if water is sold at exorbitant price, wudhu‘ does not remain wajib and one may pray with tayammum to avoid that small loss of property; so why should not this principle be applied here? And Allah knows better.

“Mujahid has said that this rule (of taqiyah) was valid in the beginning of Islam, because of the weakness of the believers; but now that the Islamic government has got power and strength, it is not valid. But `Awfi has narrated from al‑Hasan (al‑Basri) that he said: `Taqiyah is allowed to the Muslims upto the day of resurrection.’ And this opinion is more acceptable because it is wajib to keep off all types of harm from one’s self as much as possible.”

(Ar‑Razi, Tafsir Mafatihu ‘l ghayb, Beirut, 3rd ed., vol. 7, p. 13)

Learning about Taqiyya: When Taqiyya is not allowed

There are certain circumstances which when take place disallow the practice of Taqiyya. The book written by Syed Saeed Akhtar Rizvi entitled ‘’Taqiyah’’ will be the answer to the above statement in regards to when Taqiyya is not allowed.

‘’Taqiyya is based on the principle of opting for the lesser evil. Telling a lie is not as big a sin as destroying a life. Therefore, lie is preferable to putting oneself in danger of life.

Now, if safety of one’s own life depends upon putting another believer’s life in danger, then, by the same reasoning, Taqiyya is not allowed, because one believer is going to die in any case. So, it is better for you to die than to cause the death of another believer.

By the same reasoning, if there is a likelihood that one’s Taqiyya may destroy the belief of other believers, then Taqiyya is forbidden to such a person’’. (Page 13 pdf version)

The topic of when Taqiyya is not allowed is spoken about further in the Tafsir of Ar-Razi:

‘’(while commenting on Taqiyya)…it is certainly not allowed in matters which affect other persons, like murder, fornication, usurpation of property, perjury, slander of married women or informing the unbelievers about the weak points in the Muslims’ defence.’’

(Ar‑Razi, Tafsir Mafatihu ‘l ghayb, Beirut, 3rd ed., vol. 7, p. 13)

Proving Taqiyya from the Holy Qur’an

We have now gotten a better understanding of what Taqiyya is now let us see the legitimacy of it from the Holy Qur’an.

Side Note

I will only be using one verse today due to the fact that the one verse is sufficient in itself, but in case anyone would like to know of the other verse please feel free to ask

Surah Sixteen (16) verse Hundred and Six (106) states:

‘’Any one who, after accepting faith in God, utters Unbelief,- except under compulsion, his heart remaining firm in Faith - but such as open their breast to Unbelief, on them is Wrath from God, and theirs will be a dreadful Penalty.’’ (16:106)

Let us see what Ibn Kathirs Tafsir Says:

… (Except one who was forced while his heart is at peace with the faith) This is an exception in the case of one who utters statements of disbelief and verbally agrees with the Mushrikin because he is forced to do so by the beatings and abuse to which he is subjected, but his heart refuses to accept what he is saying, and he is, in reality, at peace with his faith in Allah and His Messenger. The scholars agreed that if a person is forced into disbelief, it is permissible for him to either go along with them in the interests of self-preservation…’’

(http://www.qtafsir.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2933&Itemid=71)

Not only does this Tafsir prove Taqiyya from the Qur’an but Ibn Kathir goes a step further when he states ‘’ The scholars agreed that if a person is forced into disbelief, it is permissible for him to either go along with them in the interests of self-preservation…’’ So not only is Ibn Kathir in agreement but he even states that scholars (plural) agree with him.

To prove Taqiyya from the Sahih Books of Sunni Muslims

Now we have proven the legitimacy of Taqiyya from the Qur’an and we have seen the comments of the scholars of Sunni Islam, now let us examine Taqiyya from the Sahih Books of Sunni Muslims

Side Note:

There are many hadith I can post, but I will only post one for now, because I believe it is sufficient enough, but if you would like anymore feel free to ask.

Sahih Bukhari: Volume 9, Book 83, Number 5:

Narrated Al-Miqdad bin ‘Amr Al-Kindi:

…The Prophet also said to Al-Miqdad, “If a faithful believer conceals his faith (Islam) from the disbelievers, and then when he declares his Islam, you kill him, (you will be sinful). Remember that you were also concealing your faith (Islam) at Mecca before.”

This Hadith is quite interesting with the reason being that had Al-Miqdad not practiced Taqiyya he would have been killed by the Pagan’s of Mecca which proves that at times the necessity of performing Taqiyya is of utmost importance.

Nonetheless by the grace of Allah (sawt) we have proven Taqiyya from Sunni Muslims own Sahih Book.

Conclusion

As we can clearly see Taqiyya originates from the Holy Qur’an and the verses dealing with Taqiyya and the opinion of the scholars are conclusive and thorough.

The Sahih Books of Sunni Muslims affirm what we say to a point where if anyone says otherwise the only conclusions that can be made of such a person is he is ignorant.

Even though Taqiyya is a practice which has its basis in the teachings of Islam, we must not forget that only in certain circumstances and situations can taqiyya be performed

As-Sallamu-Alaykom

Rebuttal to Osama Abdullah’s article on Surah 33:33 (Revised)

bfoali — Thu, 23 Jul 2009 13:26:26 +0000

As-Sallamu-Alaykom,

Before we examine the article that was written on ‘’Answering- Christianity.com’’ I would first like to give my sincere gratitude to Osama Abdullah. When I doubted my faith a few years ago, it was his site that gave strength to my faith. It was his site that proved to me that the religion that I was contemplating converting to was nothing more than a man made lie. It was only a year ago that I was emailing him with my articles hoping he would give them a positive review, and it was only a year ago that I filled his inbox with questions about Islam, and Christianity. He has, and will always, be a hero of mine when it comes to the world of apologetics and I pray that he continues on the way of Allah (sawt) and his mission to defend Islam, and debunk the onslaught of Christian missionaries never ends.

Before we get into the actual article, here is the link to the article written by Osama Abdullah (Click Here)

A Side Note from the Author

The issue of who is being spoken about in Surah 33:33 is one of the most highly debated issues when people first enter the world of Sunni and Shia dialogue, so I hope that everyone who does read this article writes down the information that they find in this article because I promise you that you will discuss this very topic one day.

Osama Abdullah States: While Commentating on Surah 33:30-34

Now to the ordinary reader, there seems to be no problem in the Noble Verses above. But unfortunately, the Shias consider Noble Verse 33:33 to be the greatest Noble Verse to them, because they misuse it and misinterpret it to support their blasphemies and idol-worship of Ali and the rest of Ahlul-Bayt.It is claimed or believed that Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, declared that him, Ali, Fatima (his daughter), Hasan and Hussein were the ones who got purified by Allah Almighty and that the “People of the House of the Prophet” (Ahlul-Bayt) are only limited to those individuals, and therefore, after Prophet Muhammad died, Ali should’ve been the very next Islamic Caliph. The Shias exclude all of Prophet Muhammad’s wives from Noble Verse 33:33.

Our Response

Let us deal with the issue as to whether we worship the Ahlul-bayt at a later time, for now let us deal with Osama’s belief that we are wrong in believing that Surah 33:33 ONLY refers to Imam Ali (as) Imam Hassan (as) Imam Hussein (as) and Fatima Al-Zahara (as). Osama states that we are wrong in excluding all of wives of the Prophet Muhammad (Pbuh&hf) from verse 33 (33:33) and we do this only to justify our beliefs that Imam Ali (as) should have been the successor of the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh&hf). With this said it is extremely interesting to see that our beliefs are shared by none other than one of the Prophets Wives.

Book 031, Number 5955 :

Aisha reported

That Allah’s Apostle (May peace be upon him) went out one morning wearing a striped cloak of the black camel’s hair that there came Hassan b. ‘Ali. He wrapped him under it, then came Husain and he wrapped him under it along with the other one (Hassan). Then came Fatima and he took her under it, then came ‘Ali and he also took him under it and then said: Allah only desires to take away any uncleanliness from you, O people of the household, and purify you (thorough purifying)

(http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/crcc/engagement/resources/texts/muslim/hadith/muslim/031.smt.html Chapter 9: THEE MERITS OF THE FAMILY OF THE PROPHET (MAY PEACE BE UPON HIM)

This Hadith from Sahih Muslim is enough to debunk Osama Abdullah’s entire article in regards to Surah 33:33. It is quite ironic to see that Aisha is the one who reports this Hadith. Aisha as we all know is one of the Prophets Wives, but she has no problem in telling us who is being referred to in Surah 33:33, yet Osama Abdullah holds us down in disgust for leaving the Prophets Wives out of later part verse 33 (33:33)

A Side Note from the Author

I personally do not consider Surah 33:33 to be the greatest chapter or verse in the entire Qur’an, and I am sure many of the Shia Muslims are in agreement with this, but only God Almighty Knows best so I am not here to speak on the behalf of others but for me personally, to just address the statement made by Osama Abdullah in his article I do not consider Surah 33:33 to be the greatest or the best verse in the Holy Qur’an.

Osama Abdullah States:

To me, Noble verses 33:30-34 clearly include Prophet Muhammad’s wives. They are speaking about Prophet Muhammad’s wives, the Prophet himself, his daughter Fatimah and her family (Ali, Hasan and Hussein). If we look at the first word in Noble Verse 33:34, which comes after 33:33, we would see “Wa uthkurun”, which is a feminine plural to “uthkur”. In Arabic male plurals can be for either males only or a mix of males and females. But the female plurals are only specific and limited to females and not to anything else. So what this means is that Noble Verse 33:33 was talking about Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, his wives, his daughter and her family, since the plural, “aankum” (“from you” in Arabic) in Noble Verse 33:33, is not a feminine one. So we know for sure that there are at least one male and at least two females in this group. Of course, the plural could also be for males only, but since both Sunnis and Shias agree that there is at least one female, then the possibility of females is there.

Our Response:

Before we take a look at the points made by Osama Abdullah in regards to verse 34 (33:34) let us examine the verse before that, so the readers may get a better understanding of our beliefs in regards to Surah 33:33. I am quite happy that Osama Abdullah appeals to the Arabic language here to help his argument because we here at Shiacrescent.com will also appeal to the Arabic language and prove to our readers exactly who is being spoken about in verse 33 (33:33).

Let us examine the transliteration of this verse

Transliteration of 33:33
Wa qarna fi buyootikuna wa la tabrejena tabaruja al-jahilliyat al-aola wa aqimena al-salat wa atiyena al-zakat wa ati’na Allah wa rasoolih. Inama yareedu Allah liyuthiba ‘ankum al rijs ahlel beiti wa yutahirakum tatheera

So let us examine the beginning of verse 33 (33:33). When the wives are being spoken about in verse 33 (33:33) the grammatical tenses for a female is being used (qarNA, buyootikuNA). When we examine the later part of the verse (the part referring to the Ahlul-Bait) we see a change in grammar we see masculine grammatical tenses being used (Example: AnkUM).

Whenever people are shown these changes within the verse they usually question the change of topics within one verse and question how this is possible. For those that use this argument we kindly tell them that many times in the Qur’an we see Allah (sawt) covering more than one topics within a verse (Please see: 12:29, 5:3). I am pretty sure that Osama will agree with me that this is indeed one of the miracles of the Holy Qur’an in where we see Allah (sawt) covering a variety of topics within one verse.

In summary we see that in the beginning of Surah 33:33 the Qur’an uses female grammatical tenses when speaking about the wives of the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh), and when Allah (sawt) is referring to the Ahlul-Bait in the Qur’an we see him using Masculine grammatical tenses. With this in mind it is quite ironic to see that the most SAHIH book in Sunni text confirms what we say on this topic. Lets us cite the Sahih Muslim Hadith once again, to put the nail in the coffin on this argument.

Narrated Aisha:

One day the Prophet (pbuh) came out afternoon wearing a black cloak (upper garment or gown; long coat), then al-Hasan Ibn Ali came and the Prophet accommodated him under the cloak, then al-Husain came and entered the cloak, then Fatimah came and the Prophet entered her under the cloak, then Ali came and the Prophet entered him to the cloak as well. Then the Prophet recited: “Verily Allah intends to keep off from you every kind of uncleanness O’ People of the House (Ahlul-Bayt), and purify you a perfect purification (the last sentence of Verse 33:33).”

(http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/crcc/engagement/resources/texts/muslim/hadith/muslim/031.smt.html Chapter 9: THEE MERITS OF THE FAMILY OF THE PROPHET (MAY PEACE BE UPON HIM)

So from the above response we see that Osama Abdullah’s entire argument crumbles. We need not even address his claims on verse 34 (33:34), because it is now clear that the wives of the Prophet are not the ones that are being addressed in the later part of verse 33 (33:33) and this is affirmed by the grammar and by the Sahih Muslim Hadith.

Osama Abdullah States:

Now whether or not Ahlul-Bayt in Noble Verse 33:33 included the Prophet’s wives, Ali (the Prophet’s cousin), Fatimah (the Prophet’s daughter), and/or Hasan and Hussein (Ali’s and Fatimah’s two sons) is really irrelevant, because in the following Noble Verses we will clearly see that all of the true Believers are also purified in the same exact manner as Ahlul-Bayt were purified. So there is nothing GODly or super-special about Ahlul-Bayt and it is absolutely wrong to seek them in prayers as intermediaries between the person and GOD Almighty.

“Except for those who repent, mend (their lives) hold fast to God, and purify their religion as in God’s sight: if so they will be (numbered) with the believers. And soon will God grant to the believers a reward of immense value. (The Noble Quran, 4:146)“

Take alms out of their wealth, so that thou mayest cleanse them and purify them thereby. And pray for them; thy prayer indeed is a source of tranquility for them. And ALLAH is All-Knowing. (The Noble Quran, 9:103)“

“Gardens of Eternity, beneath which streams flow; they will abide therein for ever. And that is the recompense of those who keep themselves pure. (The Noble Quran, 20:76)“

“O ye who believe! Follow not the footsteps of Satan, and whoso follows the footsteps of satan should know that he, surely, enjoins indecency and manifest evil. And but for the grace of ALLAH and HIS mercy upon you, not one of you would ever be pure; but ALLAH purifies whom HE pleases. And ALLAH is All-Hearing, All-Knowing. (The Noble Quran, 24:21)“

As the reader clearly sees, especially those who read Arabic, the purification that the “People of the House of the Prophet” (Ahlul Bayt) received, is also given to the believers in the Noble Quran. All of the Noble Words that Allah Almighty used in Noble Verse 33:33 in reference to purifying Ahlul-Bayt were also used for the Believers as I clearly demonstrated above.

Our Response:

Before we examine the verses that Osama Abdullah uses in his attempt to minimize the event of the cloak let us take one more look at verse 33 (33:33):

[033:033]And stay in your houses and do not display your finery like the displaying of the ignorance of yore; and keep up prayer, and pay the poor-rate, and obey Allah and His Apostle. Allah only desires to keep away the uncleanness from you, O people of the House! and to purify you a (thorough) purifying. (Shakir)

We have proven who this verse is referring to now let us examine what is taking place and once we examine that we will than see if the verses Osama brought can compare in any way, shape, or form.

Important note

The above translation (Shakir) is how the verse should be translated. Unfortunately many of the popular translation mistranslate one of the most important parts of the verse let us examine this very quickly.

Here is the transliteration of the verse, and here I will highlight the words which were mistranslated (by many of the popular translator such as Yusuf Ali) so you may get a better understanding of the verse.

033:033] Waqarna fee buyootikunna wala tabarrajna tabarruja aljahiliyyati al-oola waaqimna alssalata waateena alzzakata waatiAAna Allaha warasoolahu innama yureedu Allahu liyuthhiba AAankumu alrrijsa ahla albayti wayutahhirakum tatheeran.

So the word liyuthhiba should be translated as: To keep away. Than the word AAnkum is used here not Minkum

With this said the proper translation should say: Allah (sawt) desires to keep sin away from you. Rather than saying (as most translation say) to purify you FROM SIN.

In addition the word AAankumu is being used here not Minkum, so Keep sins away from you, rather than purifying the sins from you.

Now we have that out of the way let us compare and contrast the verses that Osama brought in his article in an attempt to undermine the event of the cloak.

The first verse he posted which uses the word purify is from Surah 4:146.

Let us read the verse before verse146 (4:146) so we can get a better understanding of the context

[004:145] The Hypocrites will be in the lowest depths of the Fire: no helper wilt thou find for them;-

[004:146] Except for those who repent, mend (their lives) hold fast to God, and purify their religion as in God’s sight: if so they will be (numbered) with the believers. And soon will God grant to the believers a reward of immense value.

The verse before speaks of how the disbelievers will be thrown in the lowest depths of hell and they will have no protectors. Then this Holy verse came down and here is what is says after verse 145 (4:145):

‘’Except for those who repent, mend (their lives) hold fast to God, and purify their religion as in God’s sight:’’

To even use this verse to minimize the amazing event that took place in the later part of 33:33 is very ridiculous and for many reasons this verse is NOT speaking of someone being purified thoroughly but Allah (sawt), but it is speaking of someone who will be in the company of the believers and this is HOW he can achieve this by doing this step and that step etc. This verse is NOT saying that Allah (sawt) will keep sin away from those who repent. Also when it says to purify your religion how can one purify his religion? Well removing any Bidah’s any Shirk and any false beliefs are a start and if I read Ibn Kathirs Tafsir correctly ‘’replacing showing off with sincerity’’ is another way to purify the religion

(http://www.qtafsir.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=590&Itemid=59).

One only has to wonder how Osama can even begin to compare 4:146 to 33:33.

The second verse Osama brings is Surah 9:103 which states            ‘

’Take alms out of their wealth, so that thou mayest cleanse them and purify them thereby. And pray for them; thy prayer indeed is a source of tranquility for them. And ALLAH is All-Knowing. (The Noble Quran, 9:103)“

Let us read the verse before this so we can get a better understanding of this verse.

[009:102] Others (there are who) have acknowledged their wrong-doings: they have mixed an act that was good with another that was evil. Perhaps God will turn unto them (in Mercy): for God is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.

[009:103] Of their goods, take alms, that so thou mightest purify and sanctify them; and pray on their behalf. Verily thy prayers are a source of security for them: And God is One Who heareth and knoweth

Once again Osama does the ridiculous action of comparing verse 103 of Surah 9 with Surah 33:33. What is the verse saying? The verse is speaking of how there are some people who do well, but then they go and do bad and evil. So take from them Alms (money, food etc) so that they can be purified from the sins that they committed. How is the forgiveness of Allah (sawt) attained? Through self-purification by doing the deed of admitting the sins they committed and paying Alms in the hopes of having Allah (sawt) forgive them.

If we go to Ibn Kathirs Tafsir on this verse we see that he is in total agreement with us ‘’ This Ayah encourages reverting to repentance and giving charity, for each of these actions erases, deletes and eradicate sins.’’

http://www.qtafsir.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1593&Itemid=64

For someone to compare Surah 9:103 with Surah 33:33 is rather shocking and a sign of someone truly trying to minimize the event of the cloak. I also want to state once more as I already have. This verse is not speaking of how Allah (Sawt) will purify them thoroughly and this verse surely is not speaking of how Allah (Sawt) will keep sin and evil deeds away from these individuals.



Conclusion

Alhamdulillah we have refuted everything Osama Abdullah has said in his article. We proved that this verse is speaking about Imam Ali (as), Fatima (as), Imam Hassan (as), and Imam Hussein (as). We have also proven that no other verse (the ones Osama used) can be compared to this verse for two primary reasons with the first reason being that none of the verses Osama brought speak of how Allah (sawt) will keep sin away from the believers, and secondly none of the verses Osama brought speak of how the believers will be purified thoroughly by Allah (sawt).

In Osama Abdullah’s conclusion he claims that the Shia Muslims hold Imam Ali (as) as a deity. We all know that this is not true and I hope he apologizes for those remarks and all the other ones where he attributes shirk to the Shia’s

As-Sallamu-Alaykom

Ayatollah Modarresi vs. Top Wahhabi Cleric

bfoali — Wed, 22 Jul 2009 08:57:13 +0000

As-Sallamu-Alaykom to all of our readers
This is a video I found on YouTube where Ayatollah Modarresi addresses the claims of a Wahhabi Cleric (the clip of the cleric comes in at 56 seconds) who says that giving allegiance to Yazid (La) was obligatory on Imam Hussein (as).>

The word Shi’ah as mentioned in the Holy Quran

bfoali — Tue, 14 Jul 2009 11:17:53 +0000

As-Sallamu-Alaykom dear brothers and sisters,

For today’s rebuttal we will examine the article written by discoveringislam.org in where they try to argue that the word Shia as mentioned within the Holy Qur’an has a mainly negative meaning and to be associated with the word is to be associated with rebellion and division. We will take a look at the verses and at the commentaries in order to get a better understanding of how the word has been used and see how compelling their argument really is.

Our next step after we do the above will be to expose the terrible mess that DiscoveringIslam.org have put themselves in; when they argue that being associated with the word Shia is a curse and finally expose their deceptive tactics.

Now let us examine the article that discoveringislam.org wrote on this very issue:

“As for those who divide their religion and break up into sects (Shiites), you have no part in them in the least: their affair is with Allah: He will in the end tell them the truth of all that they did.” (6:159)

In this verse, God warns us not to divide ourselves into Shiites and declare people who do so as people who don’t belong to the prophet Muhammad (p).

“Say: “He has power to send calamities on you, from above and below, or to cover you with confusion in party strife (make you Shiites), giving you a taste of mutual vengeance – each from the other.” See how We explain the Signs by various (symbols); that they may understand.” (6:65)

In this verse, God warns us that he can let us become Shiites as a great punishment to us.

“Turn you in repentance to Him, and fear Him: establish regular prayers, and be not you among those who join gods with Allah, those who splite up their religion, and become (mere) Sects (Shiites), each party rejoicing in that which is with itself!” (30:31-32)

In this verse, God associates the word Shiites with polytheist pagans who join gods with Allah!

“Then shall We certainly drag out from every sect (Shiites) all those who were worst in obstinate rebellion against (Allah) Most Gracious.” (Qur’an Mariam:69)

In this verse, God associates the word Shiites with those who are worst in obstinate rebellion against Him.

“Truly Pharaoh elated himself in the land and broke up its people into sections (Shiites), depressing a small group among them: their sons he slew, but he kept alive their females: for he was indeed a maker of mischief.” (28:4)

As far as Pharaoh is concerned, he proclaimed himself to be god. He divided his people into groups and parties so that he will be able to rule them easily. Each group is called Shi’ah.

Our Response:

Shia-Crescent.com

Before we expose the deception of Diorg (DiscoveringIslam.org) let us take a look at the verses that Diorg have presented:

“As for those who divide their religion and break up into sects (Shiites), you have no part in them in the least: their affair is with Allah: He will in the end tell them the truth of all that they did.” (6:159)

In the famous Tafsir of Ibn Kathir we get a better understanding of who this verse was revealed about.

”Mujahid, Qatadah, Ad-Dahhak and As-Suddi said that this Ayah was revealed about the Jews and Christians. Al-`Awfi said that Ibn `Abbas commented, (Verily, those who divide their religion and break up into sects…) “Before Muhammad was sent, the Jews and Christians disputed and divided into sects. When Muhammad was sent, Allah revealed to him…It is apparent that this Ayah refers to all those who defy the religion of Allah, or revert from it. (Ibn Kathir’s Tafseer)”

So as we can see this verse was revealed about the Jews and Christians, not about a group of Muslims, and this verse was also revealed about those who defy the religion of Allah (sawt) or revert from it.

The next verse Diorg uses is Surah Six verse Sixty-Five which states:

“Say: “He has power to send calamities on you, from above and below, or to cover you with confusion in party strife (make you Shiites), giving you a taste of mutual vengeance – each from the other.” See how we explain the Signs by various (symbols); that they may understand.” (6:65)

This verse (and for arguments sake let us say that this is referring to the Muslims) is speaking of ways Allah (sawt) can punish us, and one way he could do that is to cause strife within a party and thus create animosity between a group of believers. This is not done by the people alone, but it is a direct action done by God Almighty to punish those who are defying God Almighty.

“Turn you in repentance to Him, and fear Him: establish regular prayers, and be not you among those who join gods with Allah, those who split up their religion, and become (mere) Sects (Shiites), each party rejoicing in that which is with itself!” (30:31-32)

This verse here is telling the Muslims to not split up the religion of God Almighty and become mere sects, in the beginning of the verse it tells us to not join partners with God Almighty so it is quite obvious that this verse is warning us about leaving the religion of Allah (Sawt).

It is quite interesting to note that when we examine the scholars of certain schools of thought we see that it is the other way around when it comes to who is really splitting the religion of Islam.

‘’Ibn Taymiyyah said about the Rafidhah, “They are more evil than most of the people of desires, and they are more deserving of being killed than the Khawarij.” (Majmoo’ul-Fataawaa 28/482)’’

“It is not permissible to pray behind any of the mushrikeen, including those who seek the help of anyone other than Allaah and seek support from him, because seeking help through anyone other then Allaah, such as the dead, idols, the jinn, etc. is shirk, the association of others with Allaah, glorified be He.” Fataawa al-Shaykh Ibn Baaz (vol. 2, p. 396) (When speaking about the Shia)”

The last two verses are:

“Then shall we certainly drag out from every sect (Shiites) all those who were worst in obstinate rebellion against (Allah) Most Gracious.” (19: 69)

“Truly Pharaoh elated himself in the land and broke up its people into sections (Shiites), depressing a small group among them: their sons he slew, but he kept alive their females: for he was indeed a maker of mischief.” (28:4)

Surah 19:69 is quite self explanatory, and Surah 28:4 which speaks about the sections (Shiites) was done by Pharaoh himself rather than the individuals.

So as we can see whenever the word splitting up or dividing into sects is used in the context of non-Muslims we see that the Arabic word that is being used is Shia.

Deception of Diorg exposed:

Two verses where the word Shia has been used have been deliberately left out by the author of the other article. These two verses once presented will completely destroy the argument made by Diorg which is that to be associated with the word Shia is a curse. Let us examine the other two verses where the word Shia has been used.

The word Shia has been attributed to our Prophet Ibrahim (as)

037:083] Verily among those who followed his Way was Abraham

37:83 æÇä ãä ÔíÚÊå áÇÈÑÇåíã

037:083] Wa-inna min sheeAAatihi la-ibraheema
So as we can see Prophet Ibrahim (as) was labelled a Shia by Allah (sawt) in Surah 37:83

Now for Surah 28:15

028:015] And he entered the city at a time when its people were not watching: and he found there two men fighting, – one of his own religion, and the other, of his foes. Now the man of his own religion appealed to him against his foe, and Moses struck him with his fist and made an end of him. He said: “This is a work of Evil (Satan): for he is an enemy that manifestly misleads!”

028:015] Wadakhala almadeenata AAala heeni ghaflatin min ahliha fawajada feeha rajulayni yaqtatilani hatha min sheeAAatihi wahatha min AAaduwwihi faistaghathahu allathee min sheeAAatihi

So as we can see a follower of the Prophet Musa (as) was also labelled a Shia.

So from the above verses we can see that Prophet Ibrahim (as) was labelled a Shia (a follower of Noah (as) according to many Tafsir’s) and a follower of Prophet Musa (as) was also labelled a Shia. In Ibn Kathirs Tafsir on Surah 37:83 Ibn Kathir states:

”(And verily, among those who followed his ways was Ibrahim.) Means, he was one of the followers of his religion. Mujahid said, “He was following his path and his way.”(Tafsir Ibn Kathir)

Diorg claims that being associated with the word Shia is a curse, but in order for that statement to be true than Diorg must also call the Prophet Ibrahim (as) and a follower of the Prophet Musa (as) cursed, which I guarantee you, Diorg will never do.

In the beginning of the article I promised that we would shine a light on the terrible mess that Diorg has put themselves in.

Diorg not only leaves out two verses which contain the word Shia which proves there deceptiveness, but they also have left themselves in a tricky predicament. In order for Diorg to be consistent they have to attribute obstinate rebellion, shirk, and sectarianism to Prophet Ibrahim (As) and to a follower of Prophet Musa (as).

Their entire article is based on the fact that the word Shia has been used specifically for those in obstinate rebellion, and for those who cause division in the religion of Islam, now are they willing to be consistent and attribute such claims to the Prophet Ibrahim (as)?

I will leave the rest for Diorg to decide

Conclusion

The irrelevancy of the argument is quite obvious, but for those who actually attempt to use this as an argument, we hope that they present all the verses, unlike Diorg. We also hope that anyone who uses this argument is consistent and if they attempt to use these verses against Shia Muslims, than they must be willing to say the exact same thing about the Prophet Ibrahim (as) in order to stay consistent.

As we have already stated the argument within itself is quite ridiculous, but for those who truly seek knowledge, the Islamic Terminology for the word Shia can be found in the following reference.

“The Shi’a of any person is he who will help him and follow him, the plural of Shia or Ashi’a. The word is generally used for more than one it can be used for masculine and feminine tens In this day and age it has become exclusively associated with those who love ‘Ali and his household, although it has become their specific name, the literal meaning of Shi’a is Sect”.al Munjhad page 423, Shi’ah (This reference was given to me by my friend Deen-Al-Islam, May God Almighty Bless his deed)

Rebuttal to T.I.T.S

MoMahdi — Sun, 21 Sep 2008 05:46:53 +0000

This is in response to the flier challenge made by the Nasibis (Kharijites) to Shia Muslims. You have the nerve to run your mouth about Shia’s when your terrorist sect is so full of holes and dirty teachings. I suggest you pick up a book and read.

Sahih Bukhari: Volume:1 Book:6 Hadith:298- Narrated ‘Aisha: The Prophet and I used to take a bath from a single pot while we were Junub. During the menses, he used to order me to put on an Izar (dress worn below the waist) and used to fondle me. While in Itikaf, he used to bring his head near me and I would wash it while I used to be in my periods (menses). Astagfar’Allah!!!
Your first argument presented is the issue concerning infallibility of the Imams(as). What you simpletons don’t realize is that we are not saying that they are like Allah(swt)(astagfar’Allah!) rather that when Allah(swt) chooses a covenant on earth, he makes them infallible so his proof on earth is flawless. So you imply Prophets are not mistake and sin free, as well? Even if I were to accept Prophets don’t commit sin, but make mistakes– I challenge you to produce evidence that Prophet Isa(as) ever made a mistake. I can’t say Prophet Muhammad(sawaw) because you already have disgraced him plenty astagfar’Allah. Yet Prophet Muhammad(sawas) is better than all the Prophets, but Isa(as) never made a mistake. Really?
Sahih Bukahri: Volume: 2 Book: 22 Number: 321- Narrated Abu Huraira: The Prophet offered one of the evening prayers (the sub-narrator Muhammad said, “I think that it was most probably the ‘Asr prayer”) and he finished it after offering two Rakat only. He then stood near a price of wood in front of the Mosque and put his hand over it. Abu Bakr and ‘Umar were amongst those who were present, but they dared not talk to him about that (because of excessive respect for him), and those who were in a hurry went out. They said, “Has the prayer been reduced?” A man who was called DhulYadain by the Prophet said (to the Prophet), “Has the prayer been reduced or have you forgotten?” He said, “Neither have I forgotten, nor has the prayer been reduced.” He said, “Certainly you have forgotten.” So the Prophet offered two more Rakat and performed Tashm and then said Takbir and performed a prostration of Sahu like his ordinary prostration or a bit longer and then raised his head and said Takbir and then put his head down and performed a prostration like his ordinary prostration or a bit longer, and then raised his head and said Takbir.
So, first, the Prophet lies/denies the event; and then admits he was wrong and is corrected by a regular man. When, Allah(swt), says all his words he speaks comes from Me. Quran: 53:3-4- Nor does he speak out of desire. It is naught but revelation that is revealed. So Allah(swt) told him to reveal how to do Sahu (two prostrations) for mistakes of Salah, by he himself making a mistake? Wow, you truly are idiots. Astagfar’Allah. When Quran tells you the Prophet is a human like you and I, it’s stating the fact that he is only a man and man is not intended to be worshipped– he has to pray to Allah(swt) just like us. He is no different in this than any other man when it comes to Allah(swt). Iblis has no power over Allah(swt) servants; he can’t cause them to make mistakes or to fall into sin. For a man to make mistakes when he claims to be from God is illogical, that’s why Allah(swt) says in the Quran about his servants being untouchable(infallible).
Quran: Surah: Al-Hijr(15) Verse: 42- Surely. as regards My servants, you have no authority ,over them except those who follow you of the deviators.
Quran: Surah: Sad(38) Verse:82-83- He said: Then by Thy Might I will surely make them live an evil life, all, Except Thy servants from among them, the purified ones.
Quran: Surah: Aal- Imran(3) Verse:159- Thus it is due to mercy from Allah that you deal with them gently, and had you been rough, hard hearted, they would certainly have dispersed from around you; pardon them therefore and ask pardon for them, and take counsel with them in the affair; so when you have decided, then place your trust in Allah; surely Allah loves those who trust. (which completely destroys your notion that is was the Prophet that frowned in Surah Abasa (80)).
When does Iblis(la) attack you the most??? During Salah!! But yet the Prophet can be put under magic. What thinkers you all are.
Sahih Bukahri Volume 4, Book 53, Number 400: Narrated Aisha: Once the Prophet was bewitched so that he began to imagine that he had done a thing which in fact he had not done.
Oh, and Allah(swt) made a covenant with Imama. Quran: 2:124.
Your next weak charge is in regards to the Imam’s having knowledge of the unseen, future and past, and that they knew how they were going to die. As if that is something that they know on their own, not that Allah(swt) has revealed to them, correct? As if Allah(swt) didn’t know and allow you to write your original flier as He has allowed us to refute it with ease, right now. I know that it’s hard to understand with your feeble, machine-link minds– but try to keep up. They only know about the unseen from revelation by Allah(swt). You try to use a Quranic verse that claims only Allah(swt) knows that “Hour.”( Quran 31:34). Let me inform you about that verse, because it’s clear that you must carry your Quran more than read it. That verse is talking about the Day of Judgment, NOT our passing into the Hereafter. Wow what enlightened thinkers you all are! Yes, the Imam’s were made aware of their deaths: they knew how, where, and when they would face death; BUT the moment of death (referring to precise second) when their souls would completely transcend the body, NO!!! That is the separation Allah(swt) kept for Himself– to show His Authority. There are many verses in the Quran you could have used that say only Allah (swt) has the knowledge of the unseen. He tells us this over and over, because truly no one does UNLESS He reveals it to them. Allah(swt) guides the Prophets and Imam’s in all things; that is how they know what they know. It is not something new for Allah(swt) to lead them and give them knowledge of the unseen. How did the Prophet Muhammad(sawas) know about what had happened before him??? It was revealed.
Quran: Surah:3 Verse:44- This is part of the tidings of the things unseen, which We reveal unto thee (O Apostle!) by inspiration: Thou wast not with them when they cast lots with arrows, as to which of them should be charged with the care of Mary: Nor wast thou with them when they disputed (the point).
The next verse clearly states that the knowledge of the unseen was given to the Prophet Muhammad(sawaw). Why? Because he is Allah’s(swt) proof!!
Quran: Surah:3 Verse: 179- God will not leave the believers in the state in which ye are now, until He separates what is evil from what is good nor will He disclose to you the secrets of the Unseen. But He chooses of His Apostles (For the purpose) whom He pleases. So believe in God. And His apostles: And if ye believe and do right, ye have a reward without measure.
Allah(swt) says that no one knows about the unseen realm EXCEPT to who he reveals it to.
Quran: Surah:72 Verse:26- None knows God’s unseen realm except those whom He chooses from among His messengers.
So they know the unseen because it is revealed to them. And if your polluted brain can’t accept that Allah(swt) would reveal to them because they’re not Prophets then I suggest you read the Quran when Allah(swt) revealed to the bee the process in which to make Honey. Quran: 16:68 The word is “Wahi”(revelation of inspiration) this is the same way revelation would come to the Prophets. In fact this word is used again, Quran: 99:5 when Allah(swt) gave “awha” to the world; or when Allah(swt) said “awhaytu” to the disciples of Isa(as) to believe in Him.          Quran: 5:111. How about when Allah(swt) said “awhayna” about the mother of Musa(as) to suckle him and cast him into the river. Quran: 28:7. Just because you receive wahi from Allah(swt) does not make you a Prophet, but in fact is applicable to any knowledge or action which is not obtained by observation or experience.
You also say that we are mushrikeens, that we give Allah(swt) an equal because we say: “Ya Muhammad or Ya Ali”. I wrote an article completely refuting this weak assertion. So I won’t waste my time refuting this. Go read it. (Is there Intercession in Islam?)
Try to understand when we call on them we are not calling on them as a means of worshipping them. Here is a question for you that is connected to this: When the Angels did Sajood to Adam were they worshipping him?? NO, of course not because in Islam there are two types of Sajood: one is worship which is for Allah(swt) alone, and the other is obedience. So in the same fashion we are showing obedience to the creation Allah(swt) used to reach us. You people really have a hard time understanding that not everything is meant in a literal sense. When you see things like, the eye of God or the face of God it’s not literal– it metaphorical. Why? Because they are representatives of God in all fashion. They are the face of God that by when you see them you know God exists because everything they do is in the name of Allah(swt). Quran makes it clear: Quran: 3:7 there are things that are in the Quran that are literal and metaphorical. But you Mushrikeens take everything literal. You have the nerve to say we do Shirk when you are the ones that give Allah(swt) human attributes! You say you will see Allah(swt) with your own eyes!!! You know how tall Allah(swt) is…… Astagfar’Allah!                       This is Tawheed??!!!
Sahih Bukhari: Volume:9 Book:93 Hadith:532s-We said, “O Allah’s Apostle! Shall we see our Lord on the Day of Resurrection?” He said, “Do you have any difficulty in seeing the sun and the moon when the sky is clear?” We said, “No.” He said, “So you will have no difficulty in seeing your Lord on that Day as you have no difficulty in seeing the sun and the moon (in a clear sky)………He will say, ‘I am your Lord,’ and they will say, ‘You are not our Lord.’ And none will speak: to Him then but the Prophets, and then it will be said to them, ‘Do you know any sign by which you can recognize Him?’ They will say. ‘The Shin,’ and so Allah will then uncover His Shin.
Sahih Bukhari: Volume:9 Book:93 Hadith:510- Narrated ‘Abdullah: A Jew came to the Prophet and said, “O Muhammad! Allah will hold the heavens on a Finger, and the mountains on a Finger, and the trees on a Finger, and all the creation on a Finger, and then He will say, ‘I am the King.’ ” On that Allah’s Apostle smiled till his premolar teeth became visible, and then recited:– ‘No just estimate have they made of Allah such as due to him….(39.67) ‘Abdullah added: Allah’s Apostle smiled (at the Jew’s statement) expressing his wonder and believe in what was said.
Sahih Bukhari: Volume: 8 Book: 78 Number: 654- Narrated Anas bin Malik: The Prophet said, “The Hell Fire will keep on saying: ‘Are there anymore (people to come)?’ Till the Lord of Power and Honor will put His Foot over it and then it will say, ‘Qat! Qat! (sufficient! sufficient!) by Your Power and Honor. And its various sides will come close to each other (i.e., it will contract). “
You run your mouths and say we are influenced by Jewish sources– you make me laugh, how about this for influence??:
Sahih Muslim: Book:40 Hadith:352- Abu Huraira reported Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: Allah, the Exalted and Glorious, created Adam in His own image with His length of sixty cubits, and as He created him He told him to greet that group, and that was a party of angels sitting there, and listen to the response that they give him, for it would form his greeting and that of his offspring. He then went away and said: Peace be upon you! They (the angels) said: May there be peace upon you and the Mercy of Allah, and they made an addition of” Mercy of Allah”. So he who would get into Paradise would get in the form of Adarn, his length being sixty cubits, then the people who followed him continued to diminish in size up to this day.
Why does that sound familiar, hmmm? Ohhh I know– the BIBLE.
Genesis: Chapter:1 Verse:27- So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them.
You attack us again by stating a weak and unaccepted hadith claiming Allah(swt) changes his mind because He knew after it was made aware to Him, implying He made a mistake. You once again bring nonsensical rhetoric saying we were influenced by Judaism. Let’s see a Sahih Hadith from the Sunni books where Musa(as) knew better then Allah(swt), and Allah(swt) changed his mind three times because he was corrected by Musa!
Sahih Bukhari: Volume:1 Book:8 hadith:345- Narrated Abu Dhar- ……..Then he took my hand and ascended with me to the nearest heaven, when I reached the nearest heaven, Gabriel said to the gatekeeper of the heaven, ‘Open (the gate)………… Then Allah enjoined fifty prayers on my followers when I returned with this order of Allah, I passed by Moses who asked me, ‘What has Allah enjoined on your followers?’ I replied, ‘He has enjoined fifty prayers on them.‘ Moses said, ‘Go back to your Lord (and appeal for reduction) for your followers will not be able to bear it.’ (So I went back to Allah and requested for reduction) and He reduced it to half. When I passed by Moses again and informed him about it, he said, ‘Go back to your Lord as your followers will not be able to bear it.’ So I returned to Allah and requested for further reduction and half of it was reduced. I again passed by Moses and he said to me: ‘Return to your Lord, for your. followers will not be able to bear it. So I returned to Allah and He said, ‘These are five prayers and they are all (equal to) fifty (in reward) for My Word does not change.’ I returned to Moses and he told me to go back once again. I replied, ‘Now I feel shy of asking my Lord again. Then Gabriel took me till we ” reached Sidrat-il-Muntaha (Lote tree of; the utmost boundry) which was shrouded in colors, indescribable. Then I was admitted into Paradise where I found small (tents or) walls (made) of pearls and its earth was of musk.”
The truth is, your whole sect has been compromised by Judaism and Christianity. Your master Mawyia(la) used to pay anybody to bring him hadith. His cabinet members were full of Jews and Christians. So was your other master Yazid’s(la) cabinet. Like father, like son. How does a Muslim allow Jews and Christians to be advisers for an Islamic Umma??? In fact, the whole Sunni sect, all of it, comes from your four Madhabs. Guess where ALL four studied; under our sixth Imam, Imam Jafar as-Sadiq(as).
The difference between us is that we know that some hadith are fake– so we don’t accept them. The hadith you posted about Allah(swt) changing his mind and not knowing is not accepted hadith astagfar’Allah. Unlike you we filter hadith. I wrote about it in an article explaining how there is only one Quran. Go read it. When you bring me a hadith that goes against Quran, logic, has a weak sanad (link in narrations), no narrators, or even has a mediocre link but even one is weak– WE DON’T ACCEPT THEM. Unlike you, who accept them ALL. Bukhari and Muslim are second Quran’s to you mushriks. I dare you to say anything about your not accepting of those hadith, because remember… it’s called “Sahih”. Your scholars have said these books are 100% Sahih. The only reason we keep these fake hadith is to keep the authenticity of the book preserved; because of antiquity purpose. Prophet Muhammad(sawaw) said: “When you are presented with a hadith examine it first through Quran– if you can’t prove it through Quran then you throw it into the wind”.
As for Ashura and hitting yourself read the article I wrote about it. Don’t waste our time. Do you know who Awis Al-Qarni is?
You truly are Kafirs, Khums is in the Quran. Quran:8-41- And know that out of all the booty that ye may acquire , a fifth share is assigned to God,- and to the Apostle, and to near relatives, orphans, the needy, and the wayfarer,- if ye do believe in God and in the revelation We sent down to Our servant on the Day of Testing,- the Day of the meeting of the two forces. For God hath power over all things.
But what you hypocrites do is, you limit the verse by putting in prentices (spoils of war) so you give the indication that this is only meant for war. You truly are Zionists. But in actuality it refers to all things. The word “Ghanayam” means the property, movable and immovable, surrendered by the enemy in any battle and every profit obtained by trade and labor, or from mines, or from sea or by means mentioned in the books of fiqh, payment of khums is obligatory, because of the rules of grammar the word ghanimat applies to all these things.
Well-known commentators like Razi and Qartabi admit that the real meaning of ghanimat does not justify its restriction to the spoils of war only. See Tafsir Razi vol. 15, p.164 and Tafsir Qartabi vol. 4, p. 2840. Tafsir al Manar also say the same. So according to this verse it’s saying out of every profit, from wherever it comes, including the spoils of wars, khums has to be paid, because both ma (a relative pronoun-mawsulah) and Shay’in are of a general nature and carry no restrictions. Wa A`lamū ‘Annamā Ghanimtum Min Shay’in.Fa’anna Lillāhi Khumusahu Wa Lilrrasūli Wa Lidhī Al-Qurbá Wa Al-Yatāmá Wa Al-Masākīni Wa Abni As-Sabīli ‘In Kuntum ‘Āmantum Billāhi Wa Mā ‘Anzalnā `Alá `Abdinā Yawma Al-Furqāni Yawma At-Taqá Al-Jam`āni Wa Allāhu `Alá Kulli Shay’in Qadīrun.
You hypocrites say that Allah(swt) has withdrew his mercy from us because we combine Salah. I wrote an article about that, too. Go read it and get embarrassed. Maybe you will learn something.
You nasibis then say that Mut’aa is haram. Let me destroy your assertion now once and for all. I know it’s hard since you have clearly never read the Quran and your Sunni hadith. Click Mut’aa
Finally, may Allah(swt) curse you, you write that the Imam’s hated and disowned their close companions. You truly are deaf, dumb and blind, I suggest you pick up a book and read the history of Islam, and read how Ahlul Bayt(as) were oppressed by your masters– the Bani Ummayd and the Abbasid empire. The companions of the Imams were true followers of Ahlul Bayt. BUT it was kept in SECRET. Why you ask– for the protection of the companion’s lives!!! Some of their companions were cabinet members of the kalifas or were somehow involved with them politically. This was done so they could bring followers to Ahlul Bayt in secret. In order for them to serve the Imam’s the best they could, they would not show any affiliation with them. But when people like you, (snitches), got word that people like Zurarah ibn Ayan(ra) or Abu Baseer al-Muradee(ra) might be under the leaderships of the Imams, they would run and tell the corrupt kalifa. So the companions were confronted with death, and so, they were allowed to use Taqiyya and say “no”. When the Imam’s were asked about these people, they made it appear as they were bad people. The Imam’s were not “lying”, you idiot’s, they were using Taqyyia on behalf of the companion– so their lives would be spared!! Not to save their own life, but others. If you would have read more on the reference you posted you would have saw the explanation of why the Imam’s said things like this; but you don’t want truth, all you want is lies and to make fitnah. May Allah(swt) curse you with your masters. You Kafirs leave stuff out about the killing of Imam Musa al-Kazim. The truth is Haroun Ar Rasheed(la) killed the Imam. You open your filthy mouth and say Hisham ibn al Hakam(ra) had a hand in killing of Imam Musa al-Kazim because you posted references when he was a follower of Jahm ibn Safvan, one of the leaders of the Mo’atazalah sect and also one of the followers of the Jahamiyah sect. Why don’t you continue to read, and you will see how he came to Ahlul Bayt after his meetings with Imam Jaffar as-Sadiq. This chapter (the first meeting) is quoted from the book – Rejal Kashi, .Tanghih al-Maghal by Mamghani; “Usul Kafi” vol.2. Pg. 13: all 500 problems and questions belonged to theological complications. Why didn’t you post about what Imam Ali al-Rida(as), the son of Imam Musa al-Kazim(as) said about him when he died. “A great pillar of defense for Wilayah and Imamate has vanquished”. Ghahramanan e Islam, Heroes of Islam by. Mr. Ali Akbar Tashaiod, vol.2. You mean to tell me Imam Ali al-Rida(as) didn’t know that he helped kill his father? Or even that he knew but still praised him?
The reason why you down play him and make lies about him is because of the debate he had with Abdullah ibn Yazid Abazi, the chief of the Kharajites, which was set up by Haroun Ar Rasheed(la). Where he embarrassed him thoroughly. Even more so than this response has embarrassed your “charges”.
This is another reason why the Imam’s have to have the knowledge of the unseen. In order to protect their followers, they needed to know what was coming before it did, and a beautiful example is from Sheikh Mufid(ra). He writes about Imam Musa al-Kazim(as) and his companion Ali bin Yaqen(ra). This beautiful story, worthy of its own entry, will be posted later this week. This entire refutation article can be understood and put into perspective fully by the example of this one hadith.
Peace be upon those who deserve it.

Is Mut’aa- temporary marriage forbidden?

MoMahdi — Sat, 20 Sep 2008 08:04:59 +0000

With popular demand on the explanation of Mut’aa, I present to you: “Is Mut’aa forbidden”?
Quran: Surah: Nisa(4) Verse:24- And all married women are forbidden save those whom your right hand possess. (This is) Allah’s written ordinance for you. Except for these, allowed to you are all women; that you seek them in exchange for wealth to marry, not for debauchery. As to those whom you have married for a fixed time (Mut’aa), give them there agreed dowries; and there is no sin for you in what you mutually agree together after what has been settled. Verily, Allah is all-Knowing, Wise.
Let me break down the verse for you and show you the Qareena(indicators) that you so strongly desire:

The verse in Arabic reads- Wa Al-Muhsanatu Mina An-Nisā’ ‘Illā Mā Malakat ‘Aymānukum Kitāba Allāhi `Alaykum Wa ‘Uĥilla Lakum Mā Warā’a Dhālikum ‘An Tabtaghū Bi’amwālikum Muĥşinīna Ghayra Musāfiĥīna Famastamta-tum bihi Minhunna Fa’ātūhunna ‘Ujūrahunna Farīđatan Wa Lā Junāĥa `Alaykum Fīmā Tarāđaytum Bihi Min Ba`di Al-Farīđati ‘Inna Allāha Kāna `Alīmāan Ĥakīmāan.
The word Muhsanat means well-guarded or protected. They are married women (free and slave), minors and insane females. “Save those whom your right hands own” signifies “such married women as shall come in your possession as prisoners of war”. Such women, when not taken back on payment of ransom or through negotiation, are lawful as wives, even though their previous marriage has not been formally dissolved, provided the infidel woman becomes a Muslim.
Now, Famastamta-tum bihi is the Qareena that provides for Mut’aa marriage. (It is translated to “when you have enjoyment with her”) It has been made lawful by the Quran and the Holy Prophet, therefore, it cannot be unlawful by anyone unless, Allah(swt) makes it unlawful in the Quran. Because nothing can make a Quranic verse null unless it is from the Quran. I challenge you to produce a single verse in the Quran that banned Mut’aa. If you dare bring me a verse I will refute it. I already know the verse you may try to bring. A non scholar, Sunni of course, tried to bring a verse that had nothing to with the subject; but because it sounded relevant, he used it. I bring this up because you are the same kind of people; you have never read the Quran or even hadith, all you do is go to hate sites and hear someone say something and it becomes dogma for you. My suggestion would be not to humiliate yourself by doing that, maybe you won’t. I will give you a hint (33:52). The only thing you are good for is bringing random verses without even knowing what they mean, what they are referring to, and presenting them as your proof. So what proof do you produce? You present us with hadith that says Mut’aa was banned by the Holy Prophet. Your favorite one’s are narrated by Imam Ali(as). Three examples:
Sahih Bukhari: Volume: 5 Book: 59 Number: 527- Narrated ‘Ali bin Abi Talib: On the day of Khaybar, Allah’s Apostle forbade the Mut’a (temporary marriage) and the eating of donkey-meat.
Sahih Bukhari: Volume:5 Book:62 Number:50- Narrated ‘Ali: I said to Ibn ‘Abbas, “During the battle of Khaibar the Prophet forbade (Nikah) Al-Mut’a and the eating of donkey’s meat.”
Sahih Bukhari: Volume:7 Book:67 Number:432- Narrated ‘Ali: Allah’s Apostle prohibited Al-Mut’a marriage and the eating of donkey’s meat in the year of the Khaibar battle
First off, hadith does not cancel Quran, like I said– if a hadith contradicts Quran you don’t accept it. But let me refute it in a different manner. There are about 117 hadith (Bukhari) referring to the day of Khaybar. In all, they narrate three (3) things that were banned: Mut’aa, donkey meat and garlic. Mut’aa is mentioned only seven(7) times. I already posted three hadith that say’s Mut’aa was banned on the day of khaybar.
Sahih Bukhari: Volume: 5 Book: 59 Number: 526-Narrated Ibn Umar: On the day of Khaiber, Allah’s Apostle forbade the eating of garlic and the meat of donkeys.
Sahih Bukhari: Volume:67 Book:67 Number:429- Narrated Jabir bin ‘Abdullah: On the Day of the battle of Khaibar, Allah’s Apostle made donkey’s meat unlawful and allowed the eating of horse flesh. (Also Volume: 7 Book: 67 Number: 433)
So then how come you still eat garlic? You say that the Prophet banned Mut’aa during the day of Khaybar; he also banned garlic and donkey meat. How come Ahlul Sunna still eat garlic??? It’s simple: because it was only banned for that one day. But let’s look at this from another angle, because you will produce me fake hadith from Sahih Bukhari and Sahih Muslim where Imam Ali(as) says it’s banned forever. examples:
Sahih Bukhari: Volume:7 Book:62 Number:52- Narrated Jabir bin ‘Abdullah and Salama bin Al-Akwa’: While we were in an army, Allah’s Apostle came to us and said, “You have been allowed to do the Mut’a (marriage), so do it.” Salama bin Al-Akwa’ said: Allah’s Apostle’s said, “If a man and a woman agree (to marry temporarily), their marriage should last for three nights, and if they like to continue, they can do so; and if they want to separate, they can do so.” I do not know whether that was only for us or for all the people in general. Abu Abdullah (Al-Bukhari) said: ‘Ali made it clear that the Prophet said, “The Mut’a marriage has been cancelled (made unlawful).”
Sahih Muslim: Book: 008 Number: 3266- Ali (Allah be pleased with him) heard that Ibn Abbas (Allah be pleased with them) gave some relaxation in connection with the contracting of temporary marriage, whereupon he said: Don’t be hasty (in your religious verdict), Ibn ‘Abbas, for Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) on the Day of Khaibar prohibited for ever the doing of it-And eating of the flesh of domestic asses.
Sahih Muslim: Book: 008 Number: 3262- Sabra al-Juhanni reported on the authority of his father: Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) prohibited the contracting of temporary marriage and said: Behold, it is forbidden from this very day of yours to the Day of Resurrection, and he who has given something (as a dower) should not take it back.
Although some people differed:
Sahih Bukhari: Volume:7 Book:62 Number:52- Narrated Abu Jamra: I heard Ibn Abbas (giving a verdict) when he was asked about the Mut’a with the women, and he permitted it (Nikah-al-Mut’a). On that a freed slave of his said to him, “That is only when it is very badly needed and women are scarce.” On that, Ibn ‘Abbas said, “Yes.”
The first question is, so what happened to the garlic? It’s funny how garlic is no longer brought up. Yes you have hadith that mentions “don’t come to the mosque when you eat it”, it says “wait till the odor dies”. There is even hadith where someone is asked a question about eating garlic. He asked, “is it forbidden?” The man replies NO. (example: Sahih Muslim: book:23 hadith:5097). But never mind that now, let’s get back to the subject at hand. If Mut’aa was banned by the Prophet(sawaw) then by your standards Abu Bakr and Omar are Kafirs. Why? Because hadith narrates that they allowed Mut’aa during their times as Kalifa, but was later banned by Omar:
Sahih Muslim: Book: 008 Number: 3248- Ibn Uraij reported: ‘Ati’ reported that jibir b. Abdullah came to perform ‘Umra, and we came to his abode, and the people asked him about different things, and then they made a mention of temporary marriage, whereupon he said: Yes, we had been benefiting ourselves by this temporary marriage during the lifetime of the Holy Prophet (may peace be upon him) and during the time of Abu Bakr and Umar.
Sahih Muslim: Book: 008 Number: 3249- Jabir b. ‘Abdullah reported: We contracted temporary marriage giving a handful of (tales or flour as a dower during the lifetime of Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) and durnig the time of Abu Bakr until ‘Umar forbade it in the case of ‘Amr b. Huraith.
Sahih Muslim: Book: 008 Number: 3250: Abu Nadra reported: While I was in the company of Jabir b. Abdullah, a person came to him and said that Ibn ‘Abbas and Ibn Zubair differed on the two types of Mut’as (Tamattu’ of Hajj 1846 and Tamattu’ with women), whereupon Jabir said: We used to do these two during the lifetime of Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him). Umar then forbade us to do them, and so we did not revert to them.
So now, if I accept that the Prophet(sawaw) banned Mut’aa then Abu Bakr and Omar are kafirs for allowing it to have been done during their reigns; because no man has the right to make anything halal after it has been made haram by Allah(swt) and the Prophet(sawaw). But if it was made haram by Omar, then he has no right to make anything haram which Allah(swt) and the Prophet(sawaw) has made halal. So which one is it????? Either way, your hadith contradict each other, and shows proof Abu Bakr and Omar were kafirs (or just Omar) on the subject of Mut’aa.

So in conclusion Mut’aa is not haram and is allowed in Islam, of course when the conditions are meet. Salaamu alaykum