post

Wilayah al-Takwini according to Shia

Question 302: Would anyone explain about Wilayah al-Takwini according to Shia? I am sunni and recently heard about it. I am so confused. Prior hearing about it i was seriously considering to convert to Shia Islam. I will be grateful if anyone explain it to me.  W. Salam.

Answer 302: Wilayah is an Arabic word derived from the word (ولی). In Arabic Wilayah means the coming of something right after another, without any space existing in between them. This calls for the closeness and nearness of these two to each other. Read More

post

Offering congregational prayers behind a Sunni Imam

Question 237: Salam, wanna ask if I am praying behind a Sunni imam then do i need to recite all in my own words or its same like as behind a Shia imam, any other difference?

Answer 237: Congregational Prayers is one of the most important recommended acts, and it is one of the greatest Islamic rites. Great emphasis has been laid on it in the narrations. It is recommended that obligatory prayers, especially the daily prayers, are performed in congregation, and more emphasis has been laid on congregational prayers for Fajr, Maghrib and Isha, and also for those who live in the neighborhood of a mosque, and are able to hear its Adhan.[1] Read More

post

Shia consider Abu Bakr and Umar as Kafirs?

Question 214: To clear misconception by way of academic proof from the School of Ahlulbayt (as): Do the Shia not respect the four Khalifah, except Imam Ali (as)?

Answer 214: First of all, although the Shia has some criticism towards the khalifahs, they don’t see them as kafirs; the same way they don’t consider any of the other Sahabah as kafirs. In dealing with the khalifahs, the Shia follow the footsteps of the imams, especially Imam Ali (as), in how they would deal with them, not anyone else, because the Shia consider themselves the followers of their infallible imams. Read More

post

Definition of Bid’ah in Islam

Question 273: Salam, My question is what is the definition of Fitna especially in modern world. Is there anything called Bidat e Hasana? What is the definition of Bid’ah in Islam?

Answer 273: Bid’ah literally means something new, as the Quran describes Allah (swt) as the originator of the heavens and the earth (بَدِيعُ السَّمَوتِ وَالاَرضِ)[1] (badi’ meaning originator and bid’ah are words of the same root) and in Islamic terms, means to relate to religion what isn’t part of religion.

There are two points regarding the description of bid’ah:

1- Bid’ah is a type of bringing about change in religion by adding or omitting something from it. Therefore, any type of change and newness that has nothing to do with religion and is considered something normal isn’t bid’ah. For instance, if a nation chooses a certain day as a day of celebration and joy, not with the intention of relating such matter to religion and saying that religion has asked for such a thing, it isn’t considered bid’ah, although it needs to be analyzed from other points of view to make sure that it isn’t haram for any other reasons (but it isn’t bid’ah).

One can conclude from this that many of the developments and innovations that take place in arts, sports, industry etc. have nothing to do with bid’ah and the only thing that needs to be determined about them is if they are halal or not, nothing more.

2- What is meant by something being new and of no previous record in Islam is for it to not have any accordance with any Islamic laws and in no way fit under any of its guidelines or not be considered an application and instance of an Islamic assertion or doctrine.[2]

In other words, if one says that a certain act is haram or wajib or mustahabb or makrooh, while nothing in religion can be found to justify and explain what relationship this act has with religion, it is bid’ah, or else it isn’t. According to this explanation, many of the doubts and questions that might come up on bid’ah for many can easily be solved and answered. For instance, a great deal of Muslims all over the world celebrate the birthday of the holy Prophet (pbuh) while some consider this act as bid’ah! But according to what we said, bid’ah doesn’t apply here because even if we assume that such an act hasn’t been encouraged (although we might be able to say it has been) by Islam, yet it fits under another category that we are sure that Islam has indeed encouraged and is one of the clear principles of our religion, which is the showing of love and affection to the Prophet (pbuh) and his household (as).

None of the different Islamic sects have ever doubted that bid’ah is extremely forbidden and haram. Naraqi, one of the great Shia scholars says: “There is a consensus by all Muslim nations that bid’ah is haram and its being haram is a clear Islamic principle.”[3] The biggest reason for bid’ah being haram are the many hadiths that can be claimed that they reach the level of tawatur (when a hadith has been narrated so much by many different narrators, in a way that one becomes sure that all of the narrators can’t be mistaken or lying and that the tradition is authentic) that both Shias and Sunnis have narrated saying: “Adding something to religion that has no previous record in religion is bid’ah and all bid’ah is misguidance and all misguidance is in the Hellfire.”[4]

Although all Islamic sects see bid’ah as haram, but since its essence isn’t completely clear, sometimes some groups and individuals have gone too far in confronting it and have accused other Muslims of being kafirs while such accusations are incorrect.

A certain group consider any form of worship that wasn’t practiced during the time of the Prophet (pbuh) or the khalifas as bid’ah and haram, and believe that one should stay away from these acts. For instance, a famous Hanbali scholar had announced theology haram and called it the root and cause of all bid’ahs and misguidance.[5] He writes that any inner knowledge that people claim they have that can’t be found in the Quran and tradition is bid’ah and no one has the right to act according to it and invite others to it. He calls upon all Muslims to return to the old religion that was in practice during the time of the first three khalifahs.[6]

These radical beliefs were strengthened in the theories of Ibn Teymiyyah and after him, by Muhammad ibn Abdil-Wahhab and ended in many Muslims being seen as innovators in religion and even mushriks (polygamists). Suleiman ibn Sahman al-Najdi, the grandson of Muhammad ibn Abdil-Wahhab, speaks of the common bid’ahs of the Muslims saying: “The four altars that are built in the mosques for each of the four Islamic sects (Hanafi, Hanbali, Shafe’i and Maleki), reciting the Quran with a high voice, sending blessings on the Prophet (pbuh) (salawat), reciting supplications and doxologies after the adhan and on the night of Friday, the nights of Ramadhan, the night of Eidul-Fitr and Eidul-Adha, gathering for birthdays and deaths of great religious individuals and singing songs on birthdays with a specific tone, mixing poems with sending blessings on the Prophet (pbuh) and Quranic recitation and reciting them after Tarawih prayers, holding dhikr beads for saying dhikr, raising one’s voice while saying the dhikr of لا اله الا الله during taking the dead for burial and while splashing water on their graves after burial, wearing long sufi like clothes, hanging swords and flags in Huseiniyyahs and other places where gatherings are held, beating on tambourines and other musical instruments that make the same sounds such as trumpets, repeating the great name of Allah and His other names etc. are all bid’ah.[7] These fanatical beliefs have caused the killing and massacre of Muslims all over the world.

In response to these extremist beliefs, we say that if we are to look at the laws of Islam like this, then we can no longer accept any change in Muslim lives. We would all have to pray using the same clothes worn during the advent of Islam, think of the same things that they would think of, and pay respect to our dead the same that they would. It is clear that this type of being religious is accepted by no Islamic scholar. All scholars, including Shia scholars have been against these overindulgences and have criticized them in their books.

Because of this, Shia scholars and some Sunni scholars, have divided bid’ah into two groups; haram and halal bid’ah. The author of Jawahir says that some scholars like Muhaqqiq and Sheikh Tusi say that bid’ah is of two types; haram and halal.[8] Shafe’I has been quoted saying that bid’ah is of two types; desirable and undesirable. Bid’ah that is in accordance with Islamic tradition is desirable, while bid’ah which against it is undesirable.[9]

The great Allamah Majlisi says: “In Islamic law, bid’ah refers to something innovated in religion after the demise of the Prophet (pbuh) (that one considers as a part of religion) and there is no general or specific law or principle that applies to it.”[10] Naraqi, also a great Shia scholar, accepts this viewpoint saying: “Bid’ah means for someone other than the Shari’ (the true legislator of Islamic law, being Allah) to falsely claim that something is part of religion without any religious proof or evidence. But if a certain act that hasn’t been specifically “legislated” by religion is done by someone not in way that shows that it is part of religion, it is no longer forbidden because of being bid’ah, although it might be haram because of another reason (but it surely isn’t bid’ah).[11] Shatebi, a Sunni faqih (fiqh expert), has the same viewpoint and says: “Bid’ah is a way in religion that has been added and has no base in Islamic law. But on the outside, it looks like it is part of Islamic law and is mistaken with it.”[12] Therefore, if a Muslim practices something new that isn’t part of religion without relating it to religion, and without doing it with the intention that it is part of religion, it is permissible.

[1] . Surah Baqarah, verse 117.

[2] . With the help of Manshure Aqa’ed of Ayatullah Subhani, pp. 219 and on.

[3] . Awa’idul-Ayyam, pp. 319, quoted by Dr. Yaqub Ali Burji in the weblog of religions and sects.

[4] . Biharul-Anwar, vol. 2, pg. 126. “کل محدثة بدعة و کل بدعة ضلالة و کل ضلالة في النار”.

[5] . Tabaqatul-Hanabilah, vol. 2, pp. 19,27, 34, 37 according to the site of The Islamic Encyclopedia.

[6] . Tabaqatul-Hanabilah, vol. 2, pg. 35, according to the quote of Dr. Yaqub Ali Burji in the weblog of religions and sects.

[7] . Majmu’atul-Tafsir of Ibn Teymiyyah, pg. 340, quoted by ibid.

[8] . Jawahirul-Kalam, vol. 11, pg. 300, quoted by ibid.

[9] . Fathul-Bari fi Sharh Sahihul-Bukhari, vol. 17, pg. 10, quoted by ibid.

[10] . Biharul-Anwar, vol. 74, pg. 202: “و البدعة في الشرع ماحدث بعد الرسول ]بماانه من الدين[ و لم يکن فيه نص علي الخصوص و لايکون داخلاً في بعض العمومات”.

[11] . Awa’idul-Ayyam,pg. 110, quoted by Dr. Yaqub Ali Burji in the weblog of religions and sects.

[12] . Al’I’tisam, Library of Maktabatul-Riyadh al-Hadithah, vol. 1, pg. 127 quoted by ibid.

post

Abu Hanifah Nuʿmān ibn Thābit ibn Zūṭā according to Shia

Question 098: What is the Shia, or specifically Ithna Ashari, view on Abu Hanifa?

Answer 098: Nuʿmān ibn Thābit ibn Zūṭā ibn Marzubān, also known as Imam Abū Ḥanīfah was the founder of the Sunni Hanafi school of fiqh (Islamic jurisprudence). He is also considered a renowned Islamic scholar and personality by Zaydi Shia Muslims.

Abu Hanifah lived during the time of changing power from Bani Umayah to Bani Abbas and that’s why he perceived the two systems. The Umayyad and Abbasian persistently requested him to cooperate with them, but he refused cooperation with both, rather he was known as an opponent of their system. Due to his cooperation with the Alawiyan and because he loved the Ahlul Bayt (pbuth), he was imprisoned by Manssor Abbasi and finally killed in the jail by poison.

His devotion and love for the Ahlul bayt (pbuth) was more than a Shia lover. He had the same approaches in regards to Imamat and Islamic system as the Zaidyah approach. This means, while accepting the Rashidun Caliphate (al- Khulafā’ ar-Rāshidūn), he believed that Imam Ali (as) was prior to Uthman and believe in the Caliphate of Imam Hasan (as) after the Imam (as). He also believed that after Imam Hasan (as) the Caliphate belonged to Imam Ali’ (as) children.

He believed that the Imam must be selected through free election between Imam Ali’ (as) children. He didn’t believe in appointing the Imam by the text expressly stated by the Holy Prophet (pbuh).

Abu Hanifah didn’t accept the justice of the Sahabah (companions) entirely. In one hand, he tried to restrain exaggerators from cursing Rashidun Caliphate (al- Khulafā’ ar-Rāshidūn) and on the other hand, he suggested they have a moderate method, instead. In general, he wanted the Shiite and Sunni to modify their approaches concerning Caliphates, Ahlul Bayt (pbuth) and some other religious issues.

Due to the weak text and chain of transmission of those narrations that have been mentioned in some Shia and Sunni sources concerning the strained relationship between Abu Hanifah and Imams Baqir and Sadiq’ (pbuth) we cannot accept them. It seems these argument have been manipulated by some of the followers of the Imamiya and Hanafi sects. They have prejudicially bolded the scientific arguments between the Imams (pbuth) and Abu Hanifah and expressed it in an untrue way.

Thus, the approaches of contemporary Shia has been obtained by such manipulated stories, especially the Hanafiyan of Ahlul Sunna and Jimaat’ approach have been influenced by Bukhari’s method and approach mentioned in his Sahih.

In the end, his efforts of making compromise between Shia and Sunni proved the opposite of this case. This kind of effort exasperated those Hadithic Sunnis and then it caused a negative approach among the Shia society.

For further information in this regards, please refer to the following:

References: Khatib Baqdadi, History of Baqdad, Vol. 13, Pg. 330; Ibn Bazazi, Manaqib Abi Hanifah, Vol. 2, Pgs. 121-316 and 399; The Great Islamic encyclopedia, Vol. 5, Chapter “Abu Hanifah”, Pg. 381; Dahabi, Mizan al-Itedal, Vol. 2, Pg. 18; Yaqout Baghdadi, Mojam al-Odaba, Vol. 5, Pg. 242; Ibn Hajar Asqalani, Tahdib al-Tahdib, Vol. 3, Pg. 343; Ibid, Lisan al-Mizan, Vol. 6, Pg. 249; Rasool Jaafariyan, history of Shiite in Iran, Vol. 1, Pgs, 28-29; Muhammad Hussain Solaiman Alami Hayeri, encyclopedia, Vol. 8, Pg. 9; Abu Bakarr, Khilal, Al-Sunnah, Vol. 1, Pgs. 394-395; Dahabi, Mizan al-Itedal, Vol. 3, Pg. 352; Nashi Akbar, Masael al-Imamah, Pg. 66; Rasool Jafariyan, Ibid, Pg. 22; Rijal alKashi, Vol. 2, Pgs. 426-433; Bihar al-Anwar, Vol. 10, Pg. 74, Taghi al-Din Abdul Jaqader Hanafi, Tabaghat al-Suniyat Fi Tarajem al-Hanafiyah, Vol. 1, Pg. 139; Sheikh Mufid, al-Ikhtisas, Pg. 203; Ibid, al-Irshad, Pg. 160; Ibid, al-Amali, Pg. 73, Muvafaq Mekki, Manaqib Abi Hanifah, Vol. 2, Pg. 18;http://www.hawzah.net/…/جایگا

post

Miss Sunni Imam in Ruku in congregational Prayer

Question 270: assalam alaykum. when a shia is in a sunni jamaat prayer And lifts his hands for Qonoot in the second rakaat as they go for rokoo is it still considered as a jamaat prayer?

Answer 270: If you know that if you complete qunut, you will not be able to join the Imam in his Ruku, yet you purposely recite qunut, and miss the Imam in Ruku, your congregational prayer will be void, and should act accordingly to the rules of Furada prayers.

Otherwise, if you are sure that if you recite qunut you will not miss the Imam in Ruku, but when you recite qunut and miss the Imam in Ruku, your congregational prayer is in order.

As you know it is Mustahab that qunut be recited in all obligatory and Mustahab prayers before the Ruku of the second Rak’at. So, if you don’t recite it there would be no problem in it and your prayers would be in order.[1]

For further information in this regards, please refer to the following answer:

Index: Number of things which invalidate the prayer, answer 547.

Index: Qualification of an Imam of congregational prayers, answer 021.

Index: The differences and similarities between Shia and Sunni, answer 187.

Index: Offering prayer behind a Sunni Imam, answer 237.

(https://www.facebook.com/groups/AskShia/permalink/612343082250336/

[1] . The official website of the office of Sayyid Sistani (ha), obligatory acts relating to Namaz, issues 1452&1453;  Tawzih al-Masael of maraja’, Vol. 1, issues 1117-1121.

post

A Shia woman cannot marry a Sunni man?

Question 612: Salam, I am a sunni Muslim and married too, I am in love with one girl she is Ahle Tashi, can you tell me what is the process of doing Muta? Please keep in mind she doesn’t have father or any other Wali over here, she is alone living with her mother and sister. Please guide me.

Answer 612: Islam has introduced temporary and permanent marriage as the legitimate ways of fulfilling one’s needs and desires. Temporary marriage refers to the marriage of a man and woman who have no barriers for doing so.  It takes place with the consent of both sides of the contract and a specified dowry and timeframe. According to Islam, the validity of temporary marriage is contingent upon certain criteria being met, namely getting the father’s (and in the case of not having a father, the paternal grandfather’s) consent if the girl is a virgin.  If the girl isn’t a virgin and has lost her virginity through legitimate marriage, her father’s consent is no longer a condition, but if it has been lost as a result of shubhah intercourse (mistaken/confused/accidental intercourse) or illegitimate intercourse (adultery), it is a preferred precaution to get the father’s consent[1] (although it still isn’t mandatory).  Also, if a girl wants to get married (temporarily or permanently) and neither has a father nor a paternal grandfather, there will no longer be any need for permission from anyone else (regardless of whether she is a virgin or not).[2]

Nevertheless, the marriage of a virgin girl who hasn’t reached rushd (the stage in which one can distinguish between good and bad and can tell what is to his/her benefit) without the permission of her father is void.”[3]

Ayatollah Sistani (ha) says: If a woman is over thirty years of age, and still virgin, and she is not independent, it is obligatory on her to seek the permission of her guardian for marriage. Rather, even if she is independent, she must seek his consent, as a matter of compulsory precaution.[4]

As for the marriage of Shia men with Sunni women, there are different viewpoints on the issue in fiqh; the famous verdict being that it is permissible,[5] especially when there are chances of the guidance of the woman to Shiism and the Ahlul-Bayt’s school of thought.

The viewpoints of Shia scholars regarding the marriage of Shias with Sunnis are as follows:

Ayatollah Fazel Lankarani (ra): The marriage of a Muslim woman with a Non-Muslim man is batil (void), the marriage of a Shia woman with a Sunni man is makruh, the marriage of a Muslim man with a Non-Muslim woman is also void unless the marriage is a temporary one (mutah), and the marriage of a Shia man with a Sunni woman is okay.

Ayatollah Bahjat (ra): Temporary marriage with the People of the Book (Ahlul-Kitab) is correct and as an obligatory precaution it isn’t permissible to perform the marriage contract of a Shia girl or woman and Sunni man.

Ayatollah Sistani (ha): Getting married to the People of the Book isn’t permissible as an obligatory precaution.  On the other hand, it is okay to get married with Sunnis if there isn’t any fear of going astray and losing Shia beliefs as a result.

Ayatollah Makarem Shirazi (ha): It isn’t permissible for a Muslim to get married to a Non-Muslim, while it is okay for Shia men to get married to Sunni women, but taken into consideration that there are chances of going astray for Shia women getting married to Sunni men, such a marriage isn’t permissible.

Note: Marriage between Shias and some “Muslim” sects such as: The Ghulat, The Nasebis and The Khawarij, who falsely claim themselves Muslim, but in reality are Kafirs, isn’t permissible.

For further information in this regards, please refer to the following answer:

Index: Permanent or Temporary marriage of a married man without the permission of his wife, answer 565.

Index: Rules regarding temporary or permanent marriage with people of the book, answer 080.

Index: Premarital relation with non-Mahram is impermissible, answer 082.

Index: Looking at non-Mahram Body for Marriage, answer 611.

Index: A Shia Muslim woman cannot marry a non-Muslim man, answer 342.

Index: Essential Requirements of a Successful Marriage in Islam, answer 515.

Index: A Muslim Woman Cannot Marry a Non-Muslim Man, answer 576.

[1] Tawdihul-Masa’ele Maraje’, vol. 2, pg. 459, issue 2377.

[2] Tawdihul-Masa’ele Maraje’, vol. 2, pg. 387, issue 2376.

[3] Question 1483 (website: 1530).

[4] . The official website of Sayyid Sistani (ha), Q&A: Permanent Marriage.

[5] Naser Makarem Shirazi (kharej fiqh lessons on nikah [marriage], academic year 1381-1382 on his official website); Seyyid Sadiq Rohani, Fiqhul-Sadeq, vol. 21, pg. 469, from the software of this book from the institute of Al-Imam Al-Rohani.

post

Shia answers: Al-Kafi is an authentic book

Question 290: Asslamo alakaum. Is Kafi an authentic book? I get confused, im still trying to learn about Islam, then there comes a shia who says that “this book is not very authentic but it’s powerful though”!? I seriously want to know whether books that I touch are going to guide me to the right path, I already read 1 volume of this book.

Answer 290: The Shia school is very rich in terms of reliable hadith collections thanks to the ahadith of the Holy Prophet (s) and his pure progeny. The infallible Imams, peace be upon them, are the closest people to the Holy Prophet (s) in terms of position and time. They are inerrant and infallible and there are profuse narrations quoted from them in Shia’s hadith books.
Some of Shia’s major hadith collections that are considered to be reliable are the following: Read More

post

Shia View of the Mutazilah and Wasil ibn Ata

Question 095: What is the Shia view of the Mutazila and Wasil ibn Ata?

Answer 095: Mutazila were an intellectual group interested in mental issues. They have been trying to collect between religion and intellect. They have stipulated some principles by which everyone who acts based on these doctrines is counted as Mutazilah. As a result, every member of this group has believed in such principles.

The basic and salient points of their school of thoughts are as follows:

– Tawhid, (absence of plurality and attributes).

– ‘adl (Justice), (God is just and that He does not oppress His creatures).

– Divine retribution (al-wa’d wa al-wa’id), (God has determined a reward for the obedient and a punishment for the disobedient).

– Manzilah bayna al-manzilatayn (a position between the two positions). This means that a fasiq (i.e. one who commits one of the “greater sins,” such as a wine imbiber, adulterer, or a liar etc.) is neither a believer (mu’min) nor an infidel (kafir); fisq is an intermediary state between both belief and infidelity.

– al-‘amr bil ma’ruf wa al-nahy ‘an al-munkar (bid to do what is right and forbid what is wrong).

The opinion of the Mu’tazilah about this Islamic duty is firstly, that the Shari’ah is not the exclusive means of identifying the ma’ruf and the munkar; human reason can, at least partially, independently identify the various kinds of ma’ruf and munkar.

Since they follow their intellectual arguments, they have had different opinions with each other. The differentiating between their beliefs caused establishing some different groups that two important divisions of them are as follows:

  1. The Basrah school of thought: Basra is a place where the Mutazilah had been established since the second Hejira century.[1] We can also call the establisher of this school as the establisher of the Mutazilah. The foremost among the Mu’tazilah, who established Mu’tazilism (al-‘i’tizal) as a school of thought is Wasil ibn ‘Ata’.
  2. The Baqdad school of thought: The school of Baqdad had been established near the end of second Hejira century. This school was established by Boshr ibn Motamed. He had been taught al-I’tizal byhis two teachers, Boshr ibn Saeed and Abu Usman Zafarani.[2]

Generally, it is said that those Mutazilah, who belong to the school of Baqdad, were mostly inclined to Shia than the Basrah School, however most of both groups were Sunni.[3]

Some Baqdadian scholars like Jafar bin Harb, Jafar bing Mobsher and Eskafi have struggled to change the belief of Mutazilah as their own belief. They have believed in such belief that Ali (a.s) was superior to the Caliphs but Talha and Zobair were not so.[4]

They have also had faith that Ali (a.s) was the most virtuous person and superior to the Caliphs after the Holy Prophet (pbuh), however Abul-Hudhayl was one of the Basrah Mutazilah who believed in equality between Ali (a.s) and Abu Bakir.[5]

The Doctrine of Divine Justice in which Shia and Mutazilah have different opinions with each other:

It is evident that none of the Islamic sects denied justice as one of the Divine Attributes. No one has ever claimed that God is not just. The difference between the Mu’tazilah and their opponents is about the interpretation of Justice. The Asha’irah interpret it in such away that it is equivalent, in the view of the Mu’tazilah, to a denial of the Attribute of Justice. Otherwise, the Asha’irah are not at all willing to be considered the opponents of justice.

The Mu’tazilah believe that some acts are essentially ‘just’ and some intrinsically ‘unjust.’ For instance, rewarding the obedient and punishing the sinners is justice; and that God is Just. E.g., He rewards the obedient and punishes the sinners, and it is impossible for Him to act otherwise. Rewarding the sinners and punishing the obedient is essentially and intrinsically unjust, and it is impossible for God to do such a thing.

Similarly, compelling His creatures to commit sin, or creating them without any power of free will, then creating the sinful acts at their hands, and then punishing them on account of those sins. This is injustice, an ugly thing for God to do. It is unjustifiable and ungodly. The Asha’irah believe that no act is intrinsically or essentially just or unjust.

Justice is essentially whatever God does. If supposedly, God were to punish the obedient and reward the sinners, it would be as just. Similarly, if God creates His creatures without any will, power or freedom of action, then if He causes them to commit sins and then punishes them for that – it is not essential injustice.

For the same reason that the Mu’tazilah emphasize justice, they deny al-tawhid al-‘af’ali (It means that all beings, or rather all acts [even human acts] exist by the Will of God, and are in some way willed by His sacred Essence). They say that al-tawhid al-‘af’ali implies that God, not the human beings, is the maker of human deeds.

Also, thereby, the Mu’tazilah believe in human freedom, free will and are its staunch defenders, contrary to the Asha’irah who deny human freedom and free will.

Shia believe that there is no contradiction between the will of human and Tawhid Afali, because, the will of the human is at the length of the will of Allah (SWT) not at the width instead. Human beings are unable to reach his own will without the will of Allah (SWT).

In the Shi’ite faith the principle of Divine Justice is considered one of the five essential doctrines.

Conclusion: Both Shia and Mutazilah Schools of thought, have agreement in many religious tenets. They have different opinions about Justice, Imamat, (some of Mutazilah scholars believe that Imam Ali (a.s) is superior to the Caliphs and appointed by Allah (SWT), the Almighty, but some of them believe Abu Bakir is equal with Him rather superior to Him!) and other opinions that some of them have already been explained.

That’s why we Shia aren’t able to accept all their beliefs, not to reject.[6]

For further information in this regards, please refer to the following answer:

Index: The differences and similarities between Shia and Sunni, answer 187.

[1] . Farmaniyan, Mahdi, Feraq Tasannun, Pg.311.

[2] . Fayoumi, Muhammad Ibrahim, al-Mutazilah Takvin al-Aqlal_Arabi, Pg. 338.

[3] . Ibid, Pg. 135.

[4] . Al-Mutazilah Takvin al-Aqlal-Arabi, Pg. 350.

[5] . Ibid, 339.

[6] . For further information: refer to the Book of Buhuth fi al-Milal wal-Nihal, by Ayatollah Sobhani.

post

Wilayat e-Takwini in Sunni traditions

Question 351: Salam Maulana, Can wilayat e takwini be explained by sunni hadith’s?

Answer 351: Wilayah Takwini means guardianship over all things in this world and to have control over them and to be able to render change in them in any way; such power primarily belongs only to Allah (swt), but can also be attributed to the prophets and infallible imams (pbuth) and complete individuals secondarily.[1]

The word Takwin is derived from “Kawn” meaning “Be” or “Being”. Considering the Saying of Allah is the Act of Him not His Words, Voice and the like, in the Holy Quran the meaning of Takwin is: “Wonderful Originator of the heavens and the earth And when He decrees an affair, He only says to it: Be, so there it is”[2] Read More