29 replies to this topic

[La fata illa Ali]

I was talking to my borderline shia workmate and he was complaining about how iran was absolutely destroyed by the invading arab armies. I said well at least Ali wasnt part of it so it showed the shia stance that the 'expansion' was a biddah but he said he was sure as heck that Imam Hassan and Imam Hussain were part of the invading armies.


Is this true? Were Hasanain part of these battles???

His claim was that in  a book written by a persian author called something baihaqqi... is a famous history book that documents these events.

Edited by La fata illa Ali, 27 February 2012 - 12:21 PM.

[md. ammar ali]

i dont know whether the imams were in that army or not

but even if they were in the army what is wrong about that?

im sure they never commited any attrocities
so that must be fine



the people who commited several attrocities; like kalid ibn walid are to be blamed

[La fata illa Ali]

varun loves ahlulbayt, on 27 February 2012 - 12:32 PM, said:

i dont know whether the imams were in that army or not

but even if they were in the army what is wrong about that?

im sure they never commited any attrocities
so that must be fine



the people who commited several attrocities; like kalid ibn walid are to be blamed

Oh im sure they didnt commit any attrocities...but thats not the issue, simply that if imam Ali is agianst the expansion (which is my understanding) then why would he send representatives from himself to go and fight??? I can understand if Islam is being attacked then u must defend but this was not defensive rather it was offensive.


Also were any of the good companions who supported Imam Ali part of these battles???

Edited by La fata illa Ali, 27 February 2012 - 12:56 PM.

[La fata illa Ali]

i would really like to know about this.

Please someone with knowledge reply

[Haydar Husayn]

Invading Persia was the best thing Umar ever did if you ask me.

[lalala123]

Haydar Husayn, on 27 February 2012 - 08:11 PM, said:

Invading Persia was the best thing Umar ever did if you ask me.

Umar did good stuff??

[Haydar Husayn]

lalala123, on 27 February 2012 - 08:12 PM, said:

Umar did good stuff??

Yeah, conquering the majoos. That's about it I think.

[lalala123]

Haydar Husayn, on 27 February 2012 - 08:14 PM, said:

Yeah, conquering the majoos. That's about it I think.

Wrong.  He also did the world a favour and died.

[Haydar Husayn]

lalala123, on 27 February 2012 - 08:15 PM, said:

Wrong.  He also did the world a favour and died.

He got killed actually, but that Abu Lulu guy. He was probably unhappy about what Umar did to his people.

Anyway, what was so great about him dying? He was going to hell anyway, so it would have been better for him to stay alive longer in order to have more to be punished for. And his death allowed Uthman and his cursed family to come into power, which didn't do much good either.

[lalala123]

Haydar Husayn, on 27 February 2012 - 08:19 PM, said:

He got killed actually, but that Abu Lulu guy. He was probably unhappy about what Umar did to his people.

Anyway, what was so great about him dying? He was going to hell anyway, so it would have been better for him to stay alive longer in order to have more to be punished for. And his death allowed Uthman and his cursed family to come into power, which didn't do much good either.

My name's Haydar Husayn and I know everything....

[Haydar Husayn]

lalala123, on 27 February 2012 - 08:23 PM, said:

My name's Haydar Husayn and I know everything....

My name's lalala123 and i know nothing...

[lalala123]

Haydar Husayn, on 27 February 2012 - 08:29 PM, said:

My name's lalala123 and i know nothing...

[macisaac]

I haven't seen evidence the Imam was against the conquest of Persia.  Rather we find in Nahj al-Balagha him giving `Umar advice on how best to conduct it. (see sermon 146)

[baradar_jackson]

lalala123, on 27 February 2012 - 08:23 PM, said:

My name's Haydar Husayn and I know everything....

LOLOLOLOL

Spot-on impression

Sounds just like HH

Edited by baradar_jackson, 27 February 2012 - 08:38 PM.

[Haydar Husayn]

baradar_jackson, on 27 February 2012 - 08:38 PM, said:

LOLOLOLOL

Spot-on impression

Sounds just like HH

I don't know about that, but I've always felt you did a spot-on impression of a clown.

[Nima]

macisaac, on 27 February 2012 - 08:36 PM, said:

I haven't seen evidence the Imam was against the conquest of Persia.  Rather we find in Nahj al-Balagha him giving `Umar advice on how best to conduct it. (see sermon 146)

What was the main reason for  Umar to attack  Persia? Because to protect  Islam or get as much power as possible?Was Persia a danger to the Muslims?

Do anyone know?

I have always interpreted the Sermon 146 that Imam Ali tried to some extent to protect Umar. The advise of Imam Ali prevented  Umar to  join the attack against Persia, and likely   prevent his death. Or is it just me who have interpreted it wrong?

Edited by Nima, 27 February 2012 - 09:38 PM.

[titumir]

Nima, on 27 February 2012 - 09:16 PM, said:

What was the main reason for  Umar to attack  Persia? Because to protect  Islam or get as much power as possible?Was Persia a danger to the Muslims?

Do anyone know?

I have always interpreted the Sermon 146 that Imam Ali tried to some extent to protect Umar. The advise of Imam Ali prevented  Umar to  join the attack against Persia, and likely   prevent his death. Or is it just me who have interpreted it wrong?

Well, what was the reason for Persia to invade all of its neighbours, all the way upto Greece? Same reason as Umar probably. Lust for glory of conquest.

Oh, and Imam Ali probably advised him not to go because Umar would mess up the battle and cause the Muslims to lose, no doubt, so better to keep away the idiot from the battle lines.

Edited by titumir, 27 February 2012 - 10:26 PM.

[Al-Mufeed]

macisaac, on 27 February 2012 - 08:36 PM, said:

I haven't seen evidence the Imam was against the conquest of Persia.  Rather we find in Nahj al-Balagha him giving `Umar advice on how best to conduct it. (see sermon 146)

Backed by Shia Sources?

Allot of Nahjul Balagha is from Sunni sources.

[La fata illa Ali]

okay fine and dandy


BUT


my initial question has yet to be addressed...is there any evidence to suggest that hasanain were in these armies????



Haydar Husayn and lalalalalalalala plz go flirt somewhere else....

[Shiabro]

"is there any evidence to suggest that hasanain were in these armies????"

If you go according to some sources then they at least were there, even if maybe not in the army, because they afterwards married the daughters(2 sisters) of the king of persia, who were captives.
you know, a lot of history, especially Islamic history, is lost or unknown, especially that about Imam Hassan and Imam Hussains era. Omar was very clever and turned a lot into his favor. Persia at that time was fire worshippers with some Christians and Jews, according to some sources. So it's a wonder how Omar made them Muslims, while he himself did know nothing about Islam. I think, this must have been Imam Ali(a) who was farsighted and he knew well that even if not immediately but one day Persia would become Shia and the source of his pride, hopefully.
Omar is also well-known for being a racist. He hated everyone except for arabs, that's why the Prohet(s) reproached him for that. And as we all know racism/nationalism/tribalism is one of the worst kind of sins in Islam, loving and worshipping other than God.

Edited by Shiabro, 28 February 2012 - 03:56 AM.

[phoenix]

La fata illa Ali, on 27 February 2012 - 12:14 PM, said:

Were Hasanain part of these battles???

You may want to go through this:

http://tinyurl.com/6tzsghg

[La fata illa Ali]

wow....


okay so they were part of those armies...


I dont know what to say...

[Tajik-Warrior]

Shiabro, on 28 February 2012 - 03:26 AM, said:

"is there any evidence to suggest that hasanain were in these armies????"

If you go according to some sources then they at least were there, even if maybe not in the army, because they afterwards married the daughters(2 sisters) of the king of persia, who were captives.
you know, a lot of history, especially Islamic history, is lost or unknown, especially that about Imam Hassan and Imam Hussains era. Omar was very clever and turned a lot into his favor. Persia at that time was fire worshippers with some Christians and Jews, according to some sources. So it's a wonder how Omar made them Muslims, while he himself did know nothing about Islam. I think, this must have been Imam Ali(a) who was farsighted and he knew well that even if not immediately but one day Persia would become Shia and the source of his pride, hopefully.
Omar is also well-known for being a racist. He hated everyone except for arabs, that's why the Prohet(s) reproached him for that. And as we all know racism/nationalism/tribalism is one of the worst kind of sins in Islam, loving and worshipping other than God.

They were Zoroastrians not fire-worshippers. Zoroastrians are people of the book and they believe in Allah

[Tajik-Warrior]

I believe the ahle-bayt did not participate in the invasion. The Tajik/Persian people love Imam Ali and his Ahle-bayt for being supportive of them and this is why even the Sunni Tajiks in Afghanistan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan revere him as their pir. The historical city of Balkh (modern-day Mazar-e Shariff) is regarded as Imam Ali's shrine to most Tajik Sunnis and according to Allama Seyyed Isma'il Balkhi, The Sunnis of Northern Afghanistan are more Shia than the Shiites of Lebonan.

[pepsi]

Haydar Husayn, on 27 February 2012 - 08:49 PM, said:

I don't know about that, but I've always felt you did a spot-on impression of a clown.

tsk tsk, where is your ahklaaq oh great HH??