94 replies to this topic

[Haydar Husayn]

I thought the Sunnis who say Ali was the fourth greatest companion would be interested in knowing that Uthman, who presumably they think knew the Prophet quite well considered az-Zubair to be greater than Ali .


Sahih Bukhari Volume 5, Book 57, Number 63:

Narrated Marwan bin Al-Hakam:

'Uthman bin 'Affan was afflicted with severe nose-bleeding in the year when such illness was prevelant and that prevented him from performing Hajj, and (because of it) he made his will. A man from Quraish came to him and said, "Appoint your successor." 'Uthman asked, "Did the people name him? (i.e. the successor) the man said, "Yes." Uthman asked, "Who is that?" The man remained silent. Another man came to 'Uthman and I think it was Al-Harith. He also said, "Appoint your successor." 'Uthman asked, "Did the people name him?" The man replied "Yes." 'Uthman said, "Who is that?" The man remained silent. 'Uthman said, "Perhaps they have mentioned Az-Zubair?" The man said, "Yes." 'Uthman said, "By Him in Whose Hands my life is, he is the best of them as I know, and the dearest of them to Allah's Apostle ."


I would ask the Sunnis here how realistic they really think this opinion is.

[Propaganda_of_the_Deed]

I think the real question you should be asking Sunnis is how realistic is the opinion that Abu Bakr was greater than Ali, as their sahih hadiths also state this.

Narrated Amr bin Al-Aas (radhiallahu anhu): "The Prophet of Allah (sallallahu alaihe wa-sallam) deputed me to lead the army of Dat as-Salasil. I came to him and said: "Who is the most beloved person to you?' He said: "Aa'isha" I asked "Amongst men?" He said: "Her father (Abu Bakr)..." [Saheeh Al-Bukharee v.5, no.14]

Edited by Propaganda_of_the_Deed, 19 February 2012 - 02:56 PM.

[Haydar Husayn]

Propaganda_of_the_Deed, on 19 February 2012 - 02:55 PM, said:

I think the real question you should be asking Sunnis is how realistic is the opinion that Abu Bakr was greater than Ali, as their sahih hadiths also state this.

Narrated Amr bin Al-Aas (radhiallahu anhu): "The Prophet of Allah (sallallahu alaihe wa-sallam) deputed me to lead the army of Dat as-Salasil. I came to him and said: "Who is the most beloved person to you?' He said: "Aa'isha" I asked "Amongst men?" He said: "Her father (Abu Bakr)..." [Saheeh Al-Bukharee v.5, no.14]

Well, I think to most Sunnis this is quite plausible, so there isn't much point asking them that. However, I would assume that most Sunnis would raise an eyebrow at the idea that Zubair was dearer to the Prophet than Ali . Maybe once they start asking themselves questions about a narration like that, then they will re-evaluate the ones about Abu Bakr, Umar, and Uthman.

I know the typical response is "it was just an opinion of Uthman, so it doesn't mean much". But then you have ask yourself how Uthman could possibly have thought this, and what motives he might have had for saying something so obviously absurd.

[Rasul]

There was a time when Ali was not even 'Righteous Khalifa' for Sunnis...

[Hozin]

Haydar Husayn, on 19 February 2012 - 03:02 PM, said:

Well, I think to most Sunnis this is quite plausible, so there isn't much point asking them that. However, I would assume that most Sunnis would raise an eyebrow at the idea that Zubair was dearer to the Prophet than Ali . Maybe once they start asking themselves questions about a narration like that, then they will re-evaluate the ones about Abu Bakr, Umar, and Uthman.

I know the typical response is "it was just an opinion of Uthman, so it doesn't mean much". But then you have ask yourself how Uthman could possibly have thought this, and what motives he might have had for saying something so obviously absurd.

when we start going delving into people's thoughts and assuming things out of harmless statements we open ourselves to a world of trouble...If this hadeeth is saheeh, then we assume the best of Uthman and say that it was an opinion from his closeness to Az Zubair, who was in fact very dear to the Prophet Sul Allaahu 'alaihi wa Sallam...Sunnis ask questions like these of you guys all the time and we never get any satisfactory answers...like why didnt Ali fight Abu Bakr for Khilafah or Umar or Uthmaan, why didnt he defend fatimah when she asked for her property, what was he "thinking" when he spared 'Aishah at Jamal? why would he send Al Hassan and AL Hussein to defend Uthman...things like that...so it would be much more sapient to focus on more concrete subjects...and we Sunnis are willing to concede to issues where Sahaabah made mistakes, because we dont believe in the problematic concept of infallibility which makes history much harder to reconcile...we just assume the best of them because Allaah praised them many times in the Quran, and Rasool Allaah Sul Allaahu 'alaihi wa Sallam died while they were holding the banner of Islam and was pleased with them..

Propaganda_of_the_Deed, on 19 February 2012 - 02:55 PM, said:

I think the real question you should be asking Sunnis is how realistic is the opinion that Abu Bakr was greater than Ali, as their sahih hadiths also state this.

Narrated Amr bin Al-Aas (radhiallahu anhu): "The Prophet of Allah (sallallahu alaihe wa-sallam) deputed me to lead the army of Dat as-Salasil. I came to him and said: "Who is the most beloved person to you?' He said: "Aa'isha" I asked "Amongst men?" He said: "Her father (Abu Bakr)..." [Saheeh Al-Bukharee v.5, no.14]

That pokeball thing with Bush is hillarious hahahahahahahahahaha

[pyaro]

Salaam Alaykum,
Hozin ask 1 question at a time please. And reply to the OP properly and not twist it with your questions that are not relevant to the OP.
And yes the Quran praised only some companions whilst admonished others

Edited by pyaro, 19 February 2012 - 06:02 PM.

[Haydar Husayn]

Hozin, on 19 February 2012 - 05:57 PM, said:

when we start going delving into people's thoughts and assuming things out of harmless statements we open ourselves to a world of trouble...If this hadeeth is saheeh, then we assume the best of Uthman and say that it was an opinion from his closeness to Az Zubair, who was in fact very dear to the Prophet Sul Allaahu 'alaihi wa Sallam...

So Uthman said that Zubair was dearer to the Prophet just because he was close to Zubair? This makes sense to you?

And you seriously think there was any comparison between Ali and Zubair with regards to who was closer to the Prophet ?

Quote

Sunnis ask questions like these of you guys all the time and we never get any satisfactory answers...like why didnt Ali fight Abu Bakr for Khilafah or Umar or Uthmaan, why didnt he defend fatimah when she asked for her property, what was he "thinking" when he spared 'Aishah at Jamal? why would he send Al Hassan and AL Hussein to defend Uthman...things like that...so it would be much more sapient to focus on more concrete subjects...and we Sunnis are willing to concede to issues where Sahaabah made mistakes, because we dont believe in the problematic concept of infallibility which makes history much harder to reconcile...we just assume the best of them because Allaah praised them many times in the Quran, and Rasool Allaah Sul Allaahu 'alaihi wa Sallam died while they were holding the banner of Islam and was pleased with them..

This has nothing to do with the topic.

[Hozin]

pyaro, on 19 February 2012 - 06:00 PM, said:

Salaam Alaykum,
Hozin ask 1 question at a time please. And reply to the OP properly and not twist it with your questions that are not relevant to the OP.
And yes the Quran praised only some companions whilst admonished others

I answered his question directly...and with all due respect, i can phrase my answers in any way I choose..I dont see you guys correcting Shi'is when they say stuff like "uthman's beard is pubic hair" when the topic is something else...and I wasnt asking him those questions...I dont really want or expect him to answer them, I was just giving an example...and no, youre wrong...Allaah praised everyone who gave the Prophet Sul Allaahu 'alaihi wa Sallam bay'ah and if not, the majority of them, he praised Ka'b ibn Maalik in Surat at Tawbah, Abu Bakr, the Muhajireen and the Ansaar...to say it was only a few is simply untrue

Haydar Husayn, on 19 February 2012 - 06:05 PM, said:

So Uthman said that Zubair was dearer to the Prophet just because he was close to Zubair? This makes sense to you?

And you seriously think there was any comparison between Ali and Zubair with regards to who was closer to the Prophet ?



This has nothing to do with the topic.

Im not saying there's a comparison, it is only when you start emotionalizing issues that you cant read posts correctly...it was something Uthman said because he had a reason for it, not out of conspiracy which you are implying, but out of reverence for Az Zubair who was a great Sahabi...thats all...and how does it have nothing to do with the topic? you are asking sunnis to go into the brain of Uthman for his intentions behind a harmless statement, so I asked you to be consistent...and then I stressed even if Uthman said it on purpose, it was a mistake and doesnt smudge his character one bit...how in the world is that out of topic?

[pyaro]

He did not ever praise ALL muhajireen or ALL ansar!
If so post the Quranic verse.

And your answer is not an intellectual one. Especially when you say things like "we assume the best of Uthman" or "we assume the best of them(sahabas)".
Have you ever thought of perhaps NOT ASSUMING but rather thinking for yourself?

[Hozin]

pyaro, on 19 February 2012 - 06:11 PM, said:

He did not ever praise ALL muhajireen or ALL ansar!
If so post the Quranic verse.

And your answer is not an intellectual one. Especially when you say things like "we assume the best of Uthman" or "we assume the best of them(sahabas)".
Have you ever thought of perhaps NOT ASSUMING but rather thinking for yourself?

"wal sabiqoona al awaloona min al MUHAJIREENA WAL ANSAR waladheenat-taba'oohum bi i7saanin RADHI ALLAAHU 'anhum..." do you need more? ok then, I wont assume...I'll take everything at face value...Ali gave bay'ah to Abu bakr so that means he believed in his leadership, I will not assume that he did it out of taqqiyyah...can we agree to that too?

[Haydar Husayn]

Hozin, on 19 February 2012 - 06:09 PM, said:

Im not saying there's a comparison, it is only when you start emotionalizing issues that you cant read posts correctly...

With respect, you are the one who comes into threads with a bad attitude. I'm not emotionalising issues at all.

Quote

it was something Uthman said because he had a reason for it, not out of conspiracy which you are implying, but out of reverence for Az Zubair who was a great Sahabi...thats all...and how does it have nothing to do with the topic? you are asking sunnis to go into the brain of Uthman for his intentions behind a harmless statement, so I asked you to be consistent...and then I stressed even if Uthman said it on purpose, it was a mistake and doesnt smudge his character one bit...how in the world is that out of topic?

I honestly try to see things from a Sunni point of view when I can, but I'm realy struggling here. Uthman was close to Zubair and had great respect for him, ok. But clearly it was impossible for him to have really thought Zubair was dearer to the Prophet than Ali . So why say something he knew to be untrue? Your explanation doesn't really make sense. You can't make something up about the Prophet just because you like someone.

If you want to say he made a 'mistake', then fine, but why give this absurd alternative option?

[pyaro]

Here is the Arabic for the Verse you mentioned:

وَٱلسَّـٰبِقُونَ ٱلۡأَوَّلُونَ مِنَ ٱلۡمُهَـٰجِرِينَ وَٱلۡأَنصَارِ وَٱلَّذِينَ ٱتَّبَعُوهُم بِإِحۡسَـٰنٍ۬ رَّضِىَ ٱللَّهُ عَنۡہُمۡ وَرَضُواْ عَنۡهُ وَأَعَدَّ لَهُمۡ جَنَّـٰتٍ۬ تَجۡرِى تَحۡتَهَا ٱلۡأَنۡهَـٰرُ خَـٰلِدِينَ فِيہَآ أَبَدً۬ا‌ۚ ذَٲلِكَ ٱلۡفَوۡزُ ٱلۡعَظِيمُ

Have you ever asked yourself why did Allah  (s.w.t) use the word مِنَ?
مِنَ means "from"or "of" It does NOT mean everyone.

And this therefore tells us that not ALL of the muhajireen and ansar Allah (s.w.t) is pleased with. But rather there are some amongst them who HE is pleased with.

Edited by pyaro, 19 February 2012 - 06:23 PM.

[Qambar Ali]

"when we start going delving into people's thoughts and assuming things out of harmless statements we open ourselves to a world of trouble...If this hadeeth is saheeh, then we assume the best of Uthman and say that it was an opinion from his closeness to Az Zubair, who was in fact very dear to the Prophet Sul Allaahu 'alaihi wa Sallam...Sunnis ask questions like these of you guys all the time and we never get any satisfactory answers...like why didnt Ali fight Abu Bakr for Khilafah or Umar or Uthmaan, why didnt he defend fatimah when she asked for her property, what was he "thinking" when he spared 'Aishah at Jamal? why would he send Al Hassan and AL Hussein to defend Uthman...things like that...so it would be much more sapient to focus on more concrete subjects...and we Sunnis are willing to concede to issues where Sahaabah made mistakes, because we dont believe in the problematic concept of infallibility which makes history much harder to reconcile...we just assume the best of them because Allaah praised them many times in the Quran, and Rasool Allaah Sul Allaahu 'alaihi wa Sallam died while they were holding the banner of Islam and was pleased with them.."

Imam Ali did not want to fight with Abu Bakr and Umar because he did not have enough support from the Muslims due to their tribal alliances. And even if he did fight, which he could have done given his extraordinary fighting prowess, what would the Nasibis have said??? Oh Ali fought solely to gain the Caliphate and was power hungry. Imam Ali did not fight because his legacy will remain until the end of time, a legacy which shows his unimaginable patience and hunger for unity, unlike Abu Bake and Umar (may Allah remove his mercy from them) who had to bash people into submission i.e. the dissenting ansari at Saqifah, or Abu Bakr who unleashed the murderous war criminal Khalid ibn Walid to massacre the tribe of Malik ibn Nuwayra. Note Khalid even raped Malik's wife on the same night that he killed him.

Similarly with Fadak Imam Ali and Fatima al Zahra gave Abu Bake the opportunity to do the right thing but if he refused then he has wronged himself. What do you expect Imam Ali to do??? Go around decapitating people who go against him??? No that is the way of other munafiqs and kafirs like Muawiyah and his son Yazid. Imam Ali followed the Sunna to the letter and followed the example of the Prophet Muhammad who was always forgiving and striving for peace. This is Islam.

As for Aisha he spared her because he had mercy on her and did not want her death (if she was executed) to be used as a tool to oppress the women of Ahlul Bayt. Sheikh Yasser al Habib (may Allah lengthen his life) gives a good discussion on this.

When we look back at the Imam's conduct and behaviour we as Muslims and even non-Muslims do so with pride but when the Khalifa sect look back at their so called rightly guided Caliphs they have to do mental gymnastics to justify the barbarity of their beloved Sahaba. The Khalifa sect have kept a lid on the criticism of the Sahaba through violence and suppression but Inshallah the Shia will elevate the Prophet and the Ahlul Bayt to the pinnacle of humanity because their lives and deeds compel us to do so. May Allah raise the knowledge of the Ahlul Bayt and may he expose the extreme cruelty of their oppressors.

[Hozin]

pyaro, on 19 February 2012 - 06:22 PM, said:

Here is the Arabic for the Verse you mentioned:

وَٱلسَّـٰبِقُونَ ٱلۡأَوَّلُونَ مِنَ ٱلۡمُهَـٰجِرِينَ وَٱلۡأَنصَارِ وَٱلَّذِينَ ٱتَّبَعُوهُم بِإِحۡسَـٰنٍ۬ رَّضِىَ ٱللَّهُ عَنۡہُمۡ وَرَضُواْ عَنۡهُ وَأَعَدَّ لَهُمۡ جَنَّـٰتٍ۬ تَجۡرِى تَحۡتَهَا ٱلۡأَنۡهَـٰرُ خَـٰلِدِينَ فِيہَآ أَبَدً۬ا‌ۚ ذَٲلِكَ ٱلۡفَوۡزُ ٱلۡعَظِيمُ

Have you ever asked yourself why did Allah  (s.w.t) use the word مِنَ?
مِنَ means "from"or "of" It does NOT mean everyone.

And this therefore tells us that not ALL of the muhajireen and ansar Allah (s.w.t) is pleased with. But rather there are some amongst them who HE is pleased with.

do you even know the rules of the arabic language? when someone says "radheetu 3anil tulaab min fasl 'uloomul a7yaa'" it means "I am pleased with the children from the class of Biology" which could mean ALL OF THEM or most of them...you are quoting the 'arabi and giving a translation without even understanding the language...its a common mistake...and also, let's say, for argument's sake, that I agree with you...there were thousands of muhajireen and ansar, can you tell me how many of them ALlaah was pleased with according to your interpretation? and who were they?

Qambar Ali, on 19 February 2012 - 07:31 PM, said:

"when we start going delving into people's thoughts and assuming things out of harmless statements we open ourselves to a world of trouble...If this hadeeth is saheeh, then we assume the best of Uthman and say that it was an opinion from his closeness to Az Zubair, who was in fact very dear to the Prophet Sul Allaahu 'alaihi wa Sallam...Sunnis ask questions like these of you guys all the time and we never get any satisfactory answers...like why didnt Ali fight Abu Bakr for Khilafah or Umar or Uthmaan, why didnt he defend fatimah when she asked for her property, what was he "thinking" when he spared 'Aishah at Jamal? why would he send Al Hassan and AL Hussein to defend Uthman...things like that...so it would be much more sapient to focus on more concrete subjects...and we Sunnis are willing to concede to issues where Sahaabah made mistakes, because we dont believe in the problematic concept of infallibility which makes history much harder to reconcile...we just assume the best of them because Allaah praised them many times in the Quran, and Rasool Allaah Sul Allaahu 'alaihi wa Sallam died while they were holding the banner of Islam and was pleased with them.."

Imam Ali did not want to fight with Abu Bakr and Umar because he did not have enough support from the Muslims due to their tribal alliances. And even if he did fight, which he could have done given his extraordinary fighting prowess, what would the Nasibis have said??? Oh Ali fought solely to gain the Caliphate and was power hungry. Imam Ali did not fight because his legacy will remain until the end of time, a legacy which shows his unimaginable patience and hunger for unity, unlike Abu Bake and Umar (may Allah remove his mercy from them) who had to bash people into submission i.e. the dissenting ansari at Saqifah, or Abu Bakr who unleashed the murderous war criminal Khalid ibn Walid to massacre the tribe of Malik ibn Nuwayra. Note Khalid even raped Malik's wife on the same night that he killed him.

Similarly with Fadak Imam Ali and Fatima al Zahra gave Abu Bake the opportunity to do the right thing but if he refused then he has wronged himself. What do you expect Imam Ali to do??? Go around decapitating people who go against him??? No that is the way of other munafiqs and kafirs like Muawiyah and his son Yazid. Imam Ali followed the Sunna to the letter and followed the example of the Prophet Muhammad who was always forgiving and striving for peace. This is Islam.

As for Aisha he spared her because he had mercy on her and did not want her death (if she was executed) to be used as a tool to oppress the women of Ahlul Bayt. Sheikh Yasser al Habib (may Allah lengthen his life) gives a good discussion on this.

When we look back at the Imam's conduct and behaviour we as Muslims and even non-Muslims do so with pride but when the Khalifa sect look back at their so called rightly guided Caliphs they have to do mental gymnastics to justify the barbarity of their beloved Sahaba. The Khalifa sect have kept a lid on the criticism of the Sahaba through violence and suppression but Inshallah the Shia will elevate the Prophet and the Ahlul Bayt to the pinnacle of humanity because their lives and deeds compel us to do so. May Allah raise the knowledge of the Ahlul Bayt and may he expose the extreme cruelty of their oppressors.

like I said before, I dont want to diverge the subject...I wasnt asking Haydar (whom I respect much more than many other shi'ah on this site) to answer my questions...any answer you could give either doesnt make sense with reality, or Ali's character, he was not some scared chicken nor is it possible that every single one of the thousands of people present at ghadeer would apostate and not even offer a peep of resilience to either Abu Bakr's election or Ali's rejection..what would the nasibis have said? lol..how do you know what we wouldve said?? we love Ali radhi ALlaahu 'anhu...We wouldve said the same about him in regards to any conflict two of the best companions went through...ALLAAHU A'LAM and MAY ALLAAH BE PLEASED WITH BOTH OF THEM...and maybe even some "nasibis" would start scratching their heads thinking "hey maybe the Prophet Sul ALlaahu 'alaihi wa Sallam really did elect ALi at ghadeer to be his successor"...and you said yasser al habeeb gives a good discussion on Aishah? lol  that made me laugh seriously...but there are profusions of threads about these subjects, I will not comment any further about an issue I raised merely as an example...

Haydar Husayn, on 19 February 2012 - 06:19 PM, said:

With respect, you are the one who comes into threads with a bad attitude. I'm not emotionalising issues at all.


I honestly try to see things from a Sunni point of view when I can, but I'm realy struggling here. Uthman was close to Zubair and had great respect for him, ok. But clearly it was impossible for him to have really thought Zubair was dearer to the Prophet than Ali . So why say something he knew to be untrue? Your explanation doesn't really make sense. You can't make something up about the Prophet just because you like someone.

If you want to say he made a 'mistake', then fine, but why give this absurd alternative option?

what bad attitude? Im constantly being bombarded with negative epithets so I apologize maybe it was just a slip on my part..but I dont know what youre referring to exactly...secondly, what I meant by emotionalizing is trying to find fault with something so obviously innocuous...Az Zubair was an exalted sahabi, Uthman revered him, and thought highly of him...what were his intentions, I dont know? but I know the kind of man Uthman was, what he contributed to islam, his station with Rasool ALlaah Sul ALlaahu 'alaihi wa Sallam and assume the best of him...how he saw companions is different than how we see them...I would even be ok with a sahabi saying Ibn 'abbas was closer to Rasool Allaah than Abu Bakr...because I know they can make mistakes, but with good intentions and it is a harmless statement that others would not agree with...and this is proven because after Uthman, people gave bay'ah to ALi and Az Zubair did not even try to "get on the ballot"

[pyaro]

Of course we do not know how many and who of those Muhajireen and Ansar referred to in the verse. But HE certainly did not reveal that verse for everyone.
And the word "min" in that verse denotes that not everyone is in receipt of that verse save some amongst the Muhajireen and Ansar.

Also there were people let me remind you who hated Imam Ali from amongst the companions and the Ansar!
I am sure you know that about the companions whom you revere you so much.
How do you explain that?

[Hozin]

pyaro, on 20 February 2012 - 02:33 AM, said:

Of course we do not know how many and who of those Muhajireen and Ansar referred to in the verse. But HE certainly did not reveal that verse for everyone.
And the word "min" in that verse denotes that not everyone is in receipt of that verse save some amongst the Muhajireen and Ansar.

Also there were people let me remind you who hated Imam Ali from amongst the companions and the Ansar!
I am sure you know that about the companions whom you revere you so much.
How do you explain that?

hmm..so you cant answer my question and want to pose more questions...Im not going to entertain that fallacy...At least give me an estimate...out of the thousands of muhajireen and ansar, how many apostated...and I already explained that the verse meant all or the majority.

[pyaro]

If GOD had given an estimate I would have quoted you one. But HE clearly didn't.
And I very well answered your question about the Sahaba and HE being pleased with them all. And the answer was the very verse you quoted which actually negates that ALL of them are in paradise e.t.c

Furthermore, I mentioned about some of the Sahabas hatred to Imam Ali (a.s) and amongst them were the Ansars!
In addition to this, Saheeh al Bukhari is very EXPLICIT that SOME sahabas wil become apostates and some will commit innovations in the religion after the Prophet (saw).
Yet you for some reason turn a blind eye to all of that!

[pyaro]

And to add the evidence of the above statement least you accuse me of lying:

MIhaj Sunna Volume 7 page 137 by ibn Taymiyya
æ áã íßä ßÐáß Úáí ÝÇä ßËíÑÇ ãä ÇáÕÍÇÈÉ æ ÇáÊÇÈÚíä ßÇäæÇ íÈÛÖæäå æ íÓÈæäå æ íÞÇÊáæäå

And here is the narration from Juz'u Ali ibn Muhammad al-Himyari, 1st Edition (1418AH) Printed in Saudi Arabia Riyadh
ÍÏËäÇ Úáí¡ ÍÏËäÇ åÇÑæä Èä ÅÓÍÇÞ¡ ÍÏËäÇ ÓÝíÇä Èä Úííä¡ Úä ÇáÒåÑí¡ Úä íÒíÏ Èä ÎÕíÝÉ¡ Úä ÈÓÑ Èä ÓÚíÏ¡ Úä ÃÈí ÓÚíÏ ÇáÎÏÑí ÞÇá: ãÇ ßäÇ äÚÑÝ ÇáãäÇÝÞíä Úáì ÚåÏ ÑÓæá Çááå Õáì
Çááå Úáíå æÂáå ÅáÇ ÈÈÛÖ Úáí

This narration is very explicit in that there were people amongst the ANSARS who hated Imam Ali . And of course ibn Taymiyya confirms this in his book.

And what is it just the Ansars? Nope! Bibi A'isha is an example who did not like Imam Ali and you can watch the video on the thread entitled "Bibi A'isha's stance to Imam Ali ".
And I am sure you have watched that video. Where does it place Bibi A'isha? Where does it place the Ansars?

And let us not forget the Hadeeths from Al Bukhari and Muslim about some companions doing Bid'at in the religion after the Prophet (saw) and whilst some apostatized.
If you cannot remember these Hadeeth I shall be more than happy to post them for you.

Edited by pyaro, 20 February 2012 - 11:05 AM.

[Hozin]

pyaro, on 20 February 2012 - 07:59 AM, said:

If GOD had given an estimate I would have quoted you one. But HE clearly didn't.
And I very well answered your question about the Sahaba and HE being pleased with them all. And the answer was the very verse you quoted which actually negates that ALL of them are in paradise e.t.c

Furthermore, I mentioned about some of the Sahabas hatred to Imam Ali (a.s) and amongst them were the Ansars!
In addition to this, Saheeh al Bukhari is very EXPLICIT that SOME sahabas wil become apostates and some will commit innovations in the religion after the Prophet (saw).
Yet you for some reason turn a blind eye to all of that!

I agree with everything you said...but now let us just look at the hypocrisy...first you say it is bad for me to assume, and now you are assuming that most companions were apostates! lol...Im asking you, you are the one who claimed that the verse only applies to a small number of companions...now please tell me an ESTIMATE, Im not asking you for some speicific dead on number, just out of the thousands upon thousands, how many? 100? 1000? 10? 1? 5? how many do you think? because if you dont know, and it is a known fact that none of the companions were imamies anyway, how can God be pleased with them? tsk tsk...why are you trying to diverge the subject with this talk of Aishah RA? anyway, if you cant answer my question then I'm not going to respond anymore...I waste too much time with these fanatical shi'ah anyway...if you want to believe that almost all the companions and muhajireen and ansar became apostates after the Prophet Sul Allaahu 'alaihi wa Sallam then youre free to entertain any conspiracy theory in your mind...

Hozin, on 20 February 2012 - 03:32 PM, said:

I agree with everything you said...but now let us just look at the hypocrisy...first you say it is bad for me to assume, and now you are assuming that most companions were apostates! lol...Im asking you, you are the one who claimed that the verse only applies to a small number of companions...now please tell me an ESTIMATE, Im not asking you for some speicific dead on number, just out of the thousands upon thousands, how many? 100? 1000? 10? 1? 5? how many do you think? because if you dont know, and it is a known fact that none of the companions were imamies anyway, how can God be pleased with them? tsk tsk...why are you trying to diverge the subject with this talk of Aishah RA? anyway, if you cant answer my question then I'm not going to respond anymore...I waste too much time with these fanatical shi'ah anyway...if you want to believe that almost all the companions and muhajireen and ansar became apostates after the Prophet Sul Allaahu 'alaihi wa Sallam then youre free to entertain any conspiracy theory in your mind...

and I already quoted to you how you misunderstood the arabic of the ayah but you are just sticking to your lack of knowledge and not admitting it...the verse could mean all or most...that's it! if most of them were hypocrits then Allaah would not address them in totality like that...like he said about the people who didnt go to Tabuk "al THALATHAT AL LADHEENA Khulifoo"...there were many people who stayed behind but ALlaah mentioned the EXACT number of those whom he forgave! because they were small in number...when He SWT mentions a whole group then it is most of them or ALL of them...the quran is very clear in every matter

[pyaro]

Quote

first you say it is bad for me to assume, and now you are assuming that most companions were apostates!

If you can quote a single place where I said MOST companions apostatised I will admit being a hypocrite.

Quote

you are the one who claimed that the verse only applies to a small number of companions

I never said a small number. ONce again please quote me saying that.
I said "And the word "min" in that verse denotes that not everyone is in receipt of that verse save some amongst the Muhajireen and Ansar"

The rest of your post deserves no response because it lacks intellectuall rigour

[Hozin]

pyaro, on 20 February 2012 - 03:45 PM, said:

If you can quote a single place where I said MOST companions apostatised I will admit being a hypocrite.



I never said a small number. ONce again please quote me saying that.
I said "And the word "min" in that verse denotes that not everyone is in receipt of that verse save some amongst the Muhajireen and Ansar"

The rest of your post deserves no response because it lacks intellectuall rigour

intellectual rigour? lol..i dont like being a spelling natzi but it's rigor not rigour...and im not even sure you used it in the right context...now on to your post...hmm so you DONT think most of the companions apostatized? thats great...that means most of them wereseriously I'm glad to see that from you...maybe we can reach a common conclusion now... and I know exactly what you said about the "min"..and I will repeat it once again, you are misunderstanding the arabic and i've demonstrated that about three times...how much longer are you going to persist in this? the "min" in the ayah can only mean most or all...because it is talking about whole groups of people...like me saying "I love the muslims from Yemen"! only a fool would translate it as," I love a couple of muslims from Yemen"...what it means is all or most...and can you stop the equivocation and just spit it out? are most Muhajireen and Ansar apostates or are most of them in the Pleasure of ALlaah?

[pyaro]

Oh  common! The word "min" in that verse does NOT denote ALL of the Muhajireen and Ansar.
It means from them or of them.
I shall let Arabic speakers decide their take on this. Your take is absolutely wrong.

This is the verse again:
وَٱلسَّـٰبِقُونَ ٱلۡأَوَّلُونَ مِنَ ٱلۡمُهَـٰجِرِينَ وَٱلۡأَنصَارِ
Why did HE ever have to use Min? Why didn't HE just say وَٱلسَّـٰبِقُونَ ٱلۡأَوَّلُونَ ٱلۡمُهَـٰجِرِينَ وَٱلۡأَنصَارِ
Every word has a meaning in the Quran.
And in the context of this verse the word "min" means from or of the Muhajireen and Ansar... Not ALL of it

Here is another example in the Quran:

وَمِنَ ٱلۡأَعۡرَابِ مَن يَتَّخِذُ مَا يُنفِقُ   
Yusuf ALi: Some of the desert Arabs Look upon their payments ....

Reminds me of مِنَ ٱلۡمُهَـٰجِرِينَ وَٱلۡأَنصَارِ
The context is very clear. We can let the people judge it for themselves.

[Hozin]

pyaro, on 20 February 2012 - 04:53 PM, said:

Oh  common! The word "min" in that verse does NOT denote ALL of the Muhajireen and Ansar.
It means from them or of them.
I shall let Arabic speakers decide their take on this. Your take is absolutely wrong.

This is the verse again:
وَٱلسَّـٰبِقُونَ ٱلۡأَوَّلُونَ مِنَ ٱلۡمُهَـٰجِرِينَ وَٱلۡأَنصَارِ
Why did HE ever have to use Min? Why didn't HE just say وَٱلسَّـٰبِقُونَ ٱلۡأَوَّلُونَ ٱلۡمُهَـٰجِرِينَ وَٱلۡأَنصَارِ
Every word has a meaning in the Quran.
And in the context of this verse the word "min" means from or of the Muhajireen and Ansar... Not ALL of it

Here is another example in the Quran:

وَمِنَ ٱلۡأَعۡرَابِ مَن يَتَّخِذُ مَا يُنفِقُ   
Yusuf ALi: Some of the desert Arabs Look upon their payments ....

Reminds me of مِنَ ٱلۡمُهَـٰجِرِينَ وَٱلۡأَنصَارِ
The context is very clear. We can let the people judge it for themselves.

that's the best thing you've said all day...let the arabic speakers decide for themselves...or rather, those who have knowledge of the arabic language because you could be an arabic speaker and not have a clue about it (you are exhibit a) and "oh come on" is not a good way to begin a reply...especially when it is not based in evidence...lol..."min al a'raab" is in no way similar to "min al muhajireen" do you know why? because the verse begins with "wal SABIQOON AL AWALOONA min al muhajireena wal ansaar.."! there is even more emphasis and praise before the "min"! do you get it now?...why did he have to use "min"? because Allaah knows that from His creation are people who actually know the arabic language and would not just have a superficial translation be the basis of their interpretation! lol that's why...and I said it could mean ALL or MOST! now it seems you are trying to put words on my keyboard..and still no answer to my question about approximately how many of the Muhajireen and ansaar and those that followed them is Allaah pleased with..thank you for dodging it consistently

[Abu Muslim]

As Salamu Alaykum, I am curious as to who "them" is referring to in this hadith? Possibly, to those who "appointed" az-Zubair(ra) as the successor of Uthman(ra)?
Adding on, the hadith after that is: Narrated Marwan bin Al-Hakam "While I was with 'Uthman, a man came to him and said, "Appoint your successor." 'Uthman said, "Has such successor been named?" He replied, "Yes, Az-Zubair." 'Uthman said, thrice, "By Allah! Indeed you know that he is the best of you."Bukhari :: Book 5 :: Volume 57 :: Hadith 64.. It is possible that he is attesting to the superiority of az-Zubair to those that wanted az-Zubair to be his successor.

Edited by Abu Muslim, 20 February 2012 - 10:54 PM.

[Righteous]

<p>

Abu Muslim, on 20 February 2012 - 10:53 PM, said:

<br />
As Salamu Alaykum, I am curious as to who &quot;them&quot; is referring to in this hadith? Possibly, to those who &quot;appointed&quot; az-Zubair(ra) as the successor of Uthman(ra)?<br />
Adding on, the hadith after that is: <strong>Narrated Marwan bin Al-Hakam </strong><em>&quot;While I was with 'Uthman, a man came to him and said, &quot;Appoint your successor.&quot; 'Uthman said, &quot;Has such successor been named?&quot; He replied, &quot;Yes, Az-Zubair.&quot; 'Uthman said, thrice, &quot;By Allah! Indeed you know that he is the <strong>best of you</strong>.&quot;</em>Bukhari :: Book 5 :: Volume 57 :: Hadith 64.. It is possible that he is attesting to the superiority of az-Zubair to those that wanted az-Zubair to be his successor.<br />

</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
Interesting narrator......isn't this the same dude who was kicked out along with his father by the Prophet himself?

They were brought back by Uthman and awarded critical positions and wealth from baitul maal. So much for Righteous guidance of this caliph

Now brother Hozin can you explain the verse in this context that Uthman was loved by Allah because/despite he violated Prophet's commands since he is from awaloon?

Edited by Righteous, 20 February 2012 - 11:15 PM.