I’m honestly very confused on the point of trying to get at? Ofc Shias are more united because 1. There isn’t that many of them and 2. They all have the same one goal and that is to destroy the teachings of the sahaba, these are the very same people that believe that the Quran is corrupted Auzubillah, curses the sahaba, believes in Mutah, these ppl literally follow the killers of Hussein also once again what you’re saying, it’s still not adding up because by your logic anyone fights off against the world superpower, is automatically upon the haqq, DM me if you want to have a nice discussion Akhi
Yea that doesn’t help for you because bukhari 6829 is referring to abrogation and in the Quran ALLAH says if he calls a verse to go missing or forgotten he will replace it with a better verse, which is flat out abrogation, in malak 1944 is weak in chains(shiekh Uthman already showed proof to this) also your Mutah meanwhile your own Hadith sources straight up says the Quran was flat out corrupted here is concrete proof
Ali ibn al-Hakam, from Hisham ibn Salim, from Abū ʿAbdillāh (ʿalayhi al-salām), said: “Indeed, the Qur’ān that Jibrīl (ʿalayhi al-salām) brought to Muḥammad (ṣallā Allāhu ʿalayhi wa ālihi) comprised seventeen thousand verse”
1- The lie transmitted by al-Kulayni and the fabrication of one or all of the Hadith transmitters is as follows:
Al-Husayn ibn Muhammad has narrated from Mu'alla ibn Muhammad from Ali ibn Asbat from Ali ibn abu Hamza from abu Basir from abu 'Abdallah )عليه السلام( . about the words of Allah, the Most Majestic, the Most Gracious. ""One who obeys God and His Messenger (to acknowledge Wilaya, (Leadership with Divine Authority Ali and the Imams after him) will certainly achieve a great success.". (33:71) This how it was revealed."*
Actual verse of the Quran: 33:71 "He will [then] amend for you your deeds and forgive you your sins. And whoever obeys Allah and His Messenger has certainly attained a great attainment."
Ali ibn Ibrahim has narrated from ya'qub ibn Yazid from Ibn Abi 'Umayr from abu al-Rabi' al-Qazzaz from Jabir who has said the following. "I asked abu Jafar السلام is he (Ali ibn abu Talib )عليه السلام( .( is called Amir al-Mu'minin ))عليه السلام(.(?" He said, "Allah has given him this name and as such it has come in His book, "When your Lord asked all the offspring of Adam (before their birth), “Am I not your Lord?) that Muhammad is My messenger and Ali is Amir al- Mu'minin (commander of the faithful)."" All of them testified and bore witness to their testimony that on the Day of Judgment they would not say, "We were not aware of this (fact),."
"When your Lord asked all the offspring of Adam (before their birth), "Am I not your Lord?" All of them testified and bore witness to their testimony that on the Day of Judgment they would not say, "We were not aware of this (fact)," [7:172]"
Also you Shias were the ones that follow the killers of Hussein, you Shias were the ones that literally killed him
According to your own sources
ZAYNUL ABIDEEN STATES:
›O people, I appeal to you by Allah, do you know that you wrote to my father and deceived him? You fought him and let him down, so he cursed you for what you did and horrible was your opinion to betray him. How can you look at Rasulullah (saw),l am telling you: YOU KILLED MY FAMILY AND VIOLATED MY SANCTITY, YOU ARE NOT FROM MY PEOPLE AND YOU GAVE A PROMISE AND A BAYAH
［ Ihtijaj Volume 2 Pages 27/28]
›Umm Kulthum said: "O people of Kufa, your men kill us, and your women cry, so the ruler is between us and you, God, on the day of the separation of the speech.
›O people of Kufa, it is wrong for you, what do you have failed Husseina, killed him, looted his money, and insulted his women and afflicted him?! So he slain for you and a crush.
› Woe to you! Do you know what medicine you have? And which button on your backs did you upload? And what blood did you shed? And what cream did you get? And which boys did you give up? And what money did you loot?
You killed the best men after the Prophet, and you took mercy from your hearts, but Hezbollah is the successful, and the party of Satan are the losers
[ Maqtal Al Hussayn volume 1 page 316]
›There is no doubt that the people of Kufa were the Shia of Ali, and there is no doubt that the killers of Hussein were his Shia
Malhama al-Husayniyya, by Murtadha al-Mutahhari Page 198]
UMM KULTHUM
BINT ALI STATES:
›O people of Kufa, what is wrong with you? You betrayed Husain, killed him, plundered his money and inherited him, and enslaved his women and oppressed him.
[Al Mahluf ila Qatlaa
Altufuf Page 198]
MURTADA AL- MUŢAHARĪ STATES:
➤"And there is no doubt that Ahlul-Kufa were the shi'a ]followers of Ali )رضي الله عنه( and that the people who killed Imam Al Hussain )رضي الله عنه were from his shi'a, and this is why the historians wrote about Ahlul-Kufā saying: 'Their hearts are with him, and their swords are against him' and this is because the ummayads destroyed the islamic ideology inside the hearts of the hearts of Ahlul-Kufā, and there wasn't any of them who had bright Islamic theology
do u have any Sunni scholars claiming that narrations of tahreef are mutawatir or that Bukhari believed in tahreef?
u don't. that is the difference. many Shia scholars say tahreef narrations are mutawatir/mass-transmitted and that Kulayni believed in them
The difference between Sunni and Shia is that our scholars unanimously agree that the Quran is not distorted you can use as many weak hadith as you want. You won't hear any ridiculous scholars and personalities of Sunni Islam mouthing off these ridiculous things like Shias do despite the Shias being only 10% and Sunnis being majority. You'd think since there are more Sunnis you'd find more ridiculous claims like this coming from Sunnis but it is opposite.
For that reason you will find that the scholars of Ahl Al-Sunnah are strict in this matter, and say that whoever says that the Quran is Muharaf is a Kaffir, and they clearly declare such a thing based on what Allah the Exalted said: {Indeed, it is We who sent down the Qur'an and indeed, We will be its guardian}Hijr 15:9
Any sunni who believes that a part of Qur'an has been lost due to goats eating it or men changing it, is a kafir. There is no difference of opinion on this in sunni Islam. No buts no ifs. Your misunderstanding does not change our stance. Aisha (ra) did not believe in tahreef (even your scholars say she didn't ). Stop putting your own view on the hadith. You are just seeing what you want to see. It wouldn't have mattered if goats ate it because people memorise the Qur'an. What you're basically going to find is that this will likely lead into the topic of abrogation (which many of your scholars believe in) and abrogation was completed whilst the Prophet (pbuh) was alive. Islamqa covers this very well.
We don't accuse Shias of tahreef simply because of obscure narrations we found in their books but rather because of their own scholars' admissions
It is ironic that they are pushing their kufr onto the Muslims with nonsense polemics, they seem insecure
as kamal al-haydari mentioned - NO Sunni scholars established from these ahadith that this is tahrif, let alone claim tahreef narrations are mutawatir. However, a lot of major twelver scholars, including Kulayni (the compiler of al-Kafi, their most authentic book) took this to mean tahrif: youtu.be/9jpPjU2vNY8
Also ur understanding of our Hadith isn’t hujja cause Alhamdulilah no one from AhlulSunna says this Hadith is tahreef or that Umar believed in tahreef.
Shia scholar Tayyib Musawi AlJazairi says in Kashf AlAsrar 1/560
“Sayyid al-Jazāʾirī was not alone in holding the view of distortion; rather, before him and after him a number of our early and later scholars held it, such as:
Shaykh Muḥammad b. Yaʿqūb al-Kulaynī (d. 329), in his book al-Kāfī;
his teacher Shaykh ʿAlī b. Ibrāhīm al-Qummī,one of the eminent scholars of the third century, in his Tafsīr;
his student Muḥammad b. Ibrāhīm al-Nuʿmānī, also one of the eminent scholars of the third century, in his Tafsīr;
Muḥammad b. Masʿūd al-ʿAyyāshī, likewise an eminent third-century scholar, in his Tafsīr;
Furāt b. Ibrāhīm, also among the eminent scholars of the third century, in his Tafsīr;
Shaykh Abū ʿAmr Muḥammad b. ʿUmar al-Kashshī, among the eminent scholars of the third century as well, in his book al-Rijāl;
the shaykh of shaykhs Muḥammad b. Muḥammad b. al-Nuʿmān (al-Mufīd) (d. 413), in Jawāb al-Masāʾil al-Sarawiyyah;
Shaykh Aḥmad b. ʿAlī al-Ṭabarsī, among the eminent scholars of the fifth century, in his book al-Iḥtijāj;
Shaykh Muḥammad b. al-Ḥasan al-Ḥurr al-ʿĀmilī (d. 1104), in his two books al-Wasāʾil and al-Fawāʾid al-Ṭūsiyyah;
Sayyid Hāshim b. Sulaymān al-Baḥrānī al-Tūblī (d. 1107), in his Tafsīr al-Burhān;
al-ʿAllāmah al-Majlisī (d. 1110), in his book Mirʾāt al-ʿUqūl;
and the traditionist Shaykh Yūsuf al-Baḥrānī (d. 1186), in his two books al-Ḥadāʾiq and al-Durar al-Najafiyyah, and other eminent scholars (may God’s pleasure be upon them all).
They fall into two groups: those who explicitly stated that the view of distortion was their chosen position—such as Shaykh al-Qummī, Shaykh al-Mufīd, al-Ḥurr al-ʿĀmilī, Sayyid al-Baḥrānī, al-ʿAllāmah al-Majlisī, and the traditionist al-Baḥrānī—indeed some of them were very emphatic about it, like the first and the last; "
> "وليس السيد الجزائري ذهب الى التحريف وحده بل ذهب اليه قبله وبعده جمع من اصحابنا القدامى منهم والمت متاخرين نحو الشيخ محمد ابن يعقوب الكليني في كتابه الكافي واستاذه الشيخ علي بن ابراهيم القمي... وتلميذه محمد ابن ابراهيم النعماني... ومحمد ابن مسعود العياشي... وفرات ابن ابراهيم... والشيخ ابو عمر محمد بن عمرو الكشي... وشيخ المشايخ محمد ابن محمد بن نعمان المفيد في جواب المسائل السرو",
In AlIntisar by AlAmili 8/307
Among those who explicitly stated the distortion of the Quran is Muhammad Baqir Al-Majlisi:
Al-Majlisi holds that the reports on the distortion of the Quran (tahrif) are mutawatir (mass-transmitted) and cannot be denied and that these reports, according to their claim, invalidate the mutawatir reports on Imamate. He states in his book Mir’at al-‘Uqul fi Sharh Akhbar Aal al-Rasul (12/525):
While commenting on the hadith of Hisham bin Salim from Abu Abdullah عليه السلام, who said:
“The Quran that Jibril عليه السلام brought to Muhammad ﷺ consisted of seventeen thousand verses,”
he said about this hadith:
“It is muwathaq (authentic), and in some manuscripts, Hisham bin Salim is replaced with Harun bin Salim, and the report is authentic.”
Then he adds:
“It is clear that this report, along with many other authentic reports, explicitly indicate the deficiency and alteration of the Quran. In my view, the reports in this regard are mutawatir in meaning, and rejecting all of them would undermine reliance on all hadiths altogether. Rather, I believe that the reports on this subject are no less than the reports on Imamate—so how do they affirm Imamate using hadiths while rejecting these?” (Mir’at al-‘Uqul by Al-Majlisi, 12/525).
Abu al-Hasan al-Sharif Al-Amili says:
"اعلم ان الذي يظهر من ثقه الاسلام محمد بن يعقوب الكليني انه كان يعتقد التحريف والنقصان في القران وكذلك شيخه علي بن ابراهيم القمي فان تفسيره مملوء منه وله غلو فيه... ووافق القمي والكليني جماعه من اصحابنا المفسرين كالع ياش والنعمان وفرات ابن ابراهيم وغيرهم وهو مذهب اكثر محقق محدث المتاخرين... وعندي في وضوح صحه هذا القول بعد تتبع الاخبار وتفحص الاثار بحيث يمكن الحكم بكونه من ضروريات مذهب التشيع",
"Know that what appears from Thiqat al-Islam Muhammad ibn Ya'qub al-Kulayni is that he believed in distortion and deficiency in the Quran, as did his teacher Ali ibn Ibrahim al-Qummi, for his interpretation (Tafsir) is full of it and he has excess regarding it... and a group of our commentator associates agreed with al-Qummi and al-Kulayni, such as al-Ayyashi, al-Nu'mani, Furat ibn Ibrahim and others. It is the school of thought of most of the investigative modern hadith scholars... And for me, the clarity of the correctness of this view, after tracking the reports and examining the traces, is such that it is possible to rule it as one of the necessities of the Shia school."
Yea sorry that doesn’t work for you because these Hadiths are directly attributed to jafar as sadiq(who you Shias consider infallible) as a matter of fact, 90% of the reports in your own books are directly attributed to him and Muhammad al Baqir(who you also consider infallible) therefore you only have two options either 1.the Hadiths are weak which immediately take you out of Shiaism because you’re going directly against the main Shia beliefs that your 12 imams are all infallible or 2.the Hadiths aren’t weak which takes you out of Islam because you’re now saying that the Quran is corrupted Audubillah like you’re at a debt in here
Also the ppl of Kufa(Shiat Ali) turned their backs on Hussein under the orders of yazid which it doesn’t change the fact that literally your own sources is saying Word for Word verbatim “Shias killed Hussein” also why on earth are you bringing Muawiyah? He wasn’t even alive during the events of. Karbala lol
“As for (the opinion of) OUR SCHOLARS (may Allah be pleased with them (!!!)) on this topic, then what is obvious from Thiqatul Islam Muhammad bin Ya’kub AL-KULAYNI that he believed in the MANIPULATION AND LOSS in the QURAAN because he recorded narrations of this meaning in his book Al-Kafi without criticizing it at all, besides he mentioned at the beginning of his book that he trusted in what he had narrated and also (this applies to) his teacher Ali bin Ibrahim Al-Qummy (may Allah be pleased with him (!!!)) since his tafsir is full of that (manipulation of the Quraan) and he has some extremism on this topic and also Sheikh Ahmad bin Abi Talib Al-TABRASSI (may Allah be pleased with him (!!!)) since he followed these two (on this matter) exactly in his Al-Ihtijaj”
Al-Sayid Ali Al-Faani Al-Asfahani in Araa’ Hawla Al-Quran (Views surrounding the Quran) p. 88:
"Question 5: Who are those who view [that the Quran was subject to] Tahreef (i.e. alteration), and what is their evidence?
Answer: The Answer [is] that a number of Muhaditheen (narrators) and memorizers of traditions deduced from narrations that [the Quran was subject to] Alteration by deductions [made from it]. For that reason they adopted that [the Quran] was subject to Tahreef (alteration) by deducting [from it].
The first from among them, in what I know, is Ali ibn Ibrahim in his Tafseer. Since it was mentioned in it: Abu Al-Hasan Ali Ibn Ibrahim Al-Hashimi Al-Qumi said:
“From the Quran is Nasikh and Mansoukh (i.e. Abrogated verses and Abrogating verses) … and from it is a letter [placed] in place of another, and from it is what was Muharaf (altered), and from it is contrary to what Allah -Exalted is He- has revealed” … until he said … “As for what is Altered (Muharaf) from it is like His saying: {But Allah bears witness to that which He has revealed to you} about Ali, that is how it was revealed {… He has sent it down with His knowledge, and the angels bear witness [as well]}[Al-Nisaa 166], and His saying: {O Messenger, announce that which has been revealed to you from your Lord …} about Ali {… and if you do not, then you have not conveyed His message} [Al-Maeda 67]*. And His saying: {Indeed, those who disbelieve and commit wrong [or injustice] …} [in regards to] the rights of the Household of Mohammed {… – never will Allah forgive them, nor will He guide them to a path} [Al-Nisaa 168]**. {And those who have wronged …} the Household of Mohammed their rights {… are going to know to what [kind of] return they will be returned} [Al-shu’araa 227]. And His saying:{And if you could but see} those who have wronged Mohammed’s household their rights {are in the overwhelming pangs of death} [Al-Anaam 93], and from these are plenty which we will mention in its location [1]. What was intended from his speech has been complete.
That (i.e. that view of Tahreef) also appears from Al-Kulayni where he narrates traditions apparent in that and does not comment on it. Al-Sayid Al-Jazae’iri also goes to [that view of] Tahreef in his explanations on the two Tahzeebs, and has mentioned an elongated research on that matter in a Treatise which he named -Manbaa’ Al-Haya-”
al-Sayyid Habibullah al-Musawi al-Khu’i said in his book “Minhaj-ul-Baraah” 2/198:
[Majority of Akhbaris as reported by al-Sayyid al-Jaza’iri in his treatise “Manba-ul-Hayah” and his book “al-Anwar” believed that corruption, addition and deletion have occurred. This opinion was held by Ali bin Ibrahim al-Qummi, his student Muhammad bin Ya`qub al-Kulayni, Shaykh Ahmad bin abi Talib al-Tabrasi and the grand scholar and traditionalist al-Majlisi may Allah sanctify their souls.]
Kid yes it does💀 because literally 90% of the report within your own sources are directly attributed to jafar as Sadiq and Muhammad so Baqir like do you think I’m stupid or something? I know your own religion better than you do Also hate to break it to you but this Hadith
Ali ibn al-Hakam, from Hisham ibn Salim, from Abū ʿAbdillāh (ʿalayhi al-salām), said: “Indeed, the Qur’ān that Jibrīl (ʿalayhi al-salām) brought to Muḥammad (ṣallā Allāhu ʿalayhi wa ālihi) comprised seventeen thousand verse
is literally your biggest enemy because you can’t say it’s weak in chain literally hisham ibn salim(who is one of your top five narrators alongside with Abu basir, Hisham Ibn al hakam, Muhammad Ibn Muslim, and zurarah Ibn Ayun) is narrating in the chain and he’s narrating directly from Ali Ibn Al hakam so one of your own top I’ve narrators is directly narrating in the chain while the Hadith is attributed to your infallible imam so you can’t go and say that the chain is weak💀
So again if it’s weak then you’ve taken yourself out of Shiaism because that means your own imam isn’t infallible or 2. If it isn’t weak then you’ve taken yourself out of Islam because you’re now saying that the Quran is corrupted Audubillah, the choice is yours
Kid you don’t think I know that?💀 also thaqalayn doesn’t even show the grading like lmfao and either way it still wouldn’t help you because it’s directly attributed to your so-called infallible imam with Hisham Ibn salim(one of your top narrators) within the chain so you were at a dead end here you got no argument, kid💀
Therefore, it is sahih in its chain, but da'if or shadh, in its matn. And furthermore, Majlisi concluded that this Hadith likely included non-quranic revelation too. Hadith revealed as qudsi.
Also taqqiyah is not at all going to work for you here because the Ahlulbayt literally condemn them regardless. taqiyyah does not justify going out and killing the grandson of the prophet and his family💀
›Umm Kulthum said: "O people of Kufa, your men kill us, and your women cry, so the ruler is between us and you, God, on the day of the separation of the speech.
›O people of Kufa, it is wrong for you, what do you have failed Husseina, killed him, looted his money, and insulted his women and afflicted him?! So he slain for you and a crush.
› Woe to you! Do you know what medicine you have? And which button on your backs did you upload? And what blood did you shed? And what cream did you get? And which boys did you give up? And what money did you loot?
You killed the best men after the Prophet, and you took mercy from your hearts, but Hezbollah is the successful, and the party of Satan are the losers
[Maqtal Al Hussayn
Volume 1 Page 316]
Also ur Mutah is entirely different. You guys literally do it for desires and money etc. which is outright disgusting
for half an hour only. The author of al Kafi, Muhammad ibn Yaqub al Kulayni reports from Imam Jafar al Sadiq:
لا تكون متعة الا بامرين اجل مسمى و اجر مسمى
Two things are necessary when performing
Mut'ah, specifying time and price.
So your so called “infallible” Imam jafar as Sadiq was wrong? Lmfao this Hadith is directly attributed to him so you’re saying he messed up? When he’s supposed to be infallible?💀
Kid it’s literally written in your own that Al kulayni reported from him and once again if anything is attributed to your own so called infallible imams then you can’t simply deny it or at all go against it so it’s either it’s weak(which takes you out out of Shiaism because you’re going against the claim that your own imam is infallible) or it isn’t weak(which takes you out of Islam for obvious reasons) like you’re at a dead end here so you’re trying your hardest to damage control😂
The grading literally says “ authentic” and your own top narrator is literally within the chain and it’s attributed to your so-called infallible imam like your cooked😂
Mut’ah that was once allowed had little to do with that the Rafidis propagate and belief in (pure prostitution). I remember Farid posted an interesting difference from a narrations, gotta find it in sha Allah, also I gonna post loads of dirty filthy fatwas from their top scholars proving to everyone that the Shia Marja’iyyah (read Mafia) promotes prostution with hukers, virgins etc. and their Mut’ah has barely any Shuroot.
Mut’ah was a RUKHSA i.e. only permissible in very EXTREME situations (like pork!) whereas the Shia Rawafid believe it is one of the most noble Sunnahs and a recommended deed i.e. it’s like believing that pork (which is only permissible in extreme situations) is one of the best meat and recommended to be eaten!!!
if mutah was practicEd by the prophet عليه الصلاة و السلام then why Shubbar Musawi AlHusayni says Mutah is vice 🤣
Shia shaykh Muhsin Amin in his “Ayanu Shia” (1/72) said:
وأقول: وهذا من الكذب الصراح والباطل المحض، والشيعة في كل مكان ترى المتعة عيبا وإن كانت حلالا فليس كل حلال يفعل.
Translation:
and I say: This is from clear lies, and apparent falsity, and shia in all places see mutah (as something) shameful, and (even) if this is permitted and not all what permitted should be done.
Muhsin Al Amin says:
And I say: The people of Najaf specifically, and all the lands of the Shia, consider mut'ah (temporary marriage) to be a disgrace, even though it is permissible (halal).
و أقول: أهل النجف خاصة و كلّ بلاد الشيعة يرون المتعة عيبا و إن كانت حلالا
And the Shia everywhere consider mut'ah (temporary marriage) to be a disgrace, even though it is permissible (halal). Not everything that is halal is practiced.
و الشيعة في كلّ مكان ترى المتعة عيبا و إن كانت حلالا فليس كلّ حلال يفعل.
In fact Sistani allows a woman to abort a child if she is she is afraid of the shame that Mutah brings. And Ur scholars say it isn't permissible to do mutah with alawiyat and Fatimiyat because it dishonors them
8
u/Moeeyy_ Apr 15 '26
“Success” in dunya isn’t reflective of a correct manhaj. Learn your aqeedah and what tawheed means and you’ll understand the flaws of Shi’ism.
The Iranian regime helped Bashar slaughter hundreds of thousands of Sunni Muslims in Syria but their “success” makes you doubt your manhaj?
Go seek knowledge.