Jump to content
laiba

Why Do We Sunnis Hate Imam Ali?

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

^

Sunnis in general don't hate Imam Ali (as), it's just that they have a weird relation with him. They love both him and his enemies who rebelled against him and injustly accused him of covering the killers of Uthman.

reason being that most supporters of ALi hated Uthman and many wanted him dead although its debated who actually "pulled the trigger", and sunnis in general ignore the issue of uprising against uthman as this would incriminate many sahaba some pro-Ali like Ansar and Ammar and some anti-Ali like Talha and Amr b A'as

Interestingly sunnis dont really discredit Tabaeen for their opposition to Uthman either, Ashtar Al nakhai is still a respected narrater in sunni ahadith.

So we can flip the argument and say sunnis have also accomadated many sahaba and tabaeen who were very hostile to uthman.Those same people who were public enemy # 1 in times of ASWJ of ummayyads

Edited by Panzerwaffe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes but also its true that sunni compromise position has compensated for that over the subsequent centuries by having a heavier tilt towards the Alids esp since the earlier Imams like ABu Hanifa and Malik were political shias ( although not ideological ones as 12ers would like to believe) So please give the sunnis credit for distancing themselves from the tyrants ( atleast theoratically) atleast their earlier Imams

ASWJ of the times of ummayyads is NOT THE SAME beliefs as ASWJ of today I hope the 12er imami friends understand that,the most glaring difference wrt our discussion is a very favorable view of Alids and particulary suportive of all the decisions of ALi in his caliphate althougth they shy away from open criticism of his opponents ( as some of them included very famous sahaba) and generally avoid going in the details.Its a politically correct sunday school version of events.


Salaam.

Sorry but I cannot even give them credit for that because they praise the oppressors of Ahlul Bayt. Even if you ignore the first 3, the fact that they praise Muawiya despite the fact that he had Imam Ali(as) Assassinated and Imam Hassan(as) poisoned is enough for me to realise that they havent, in fact, distanced themselves from the tyrants. Some even go to the extent of praising Yazid who was an open Kaffir who murdered the grandson of RasoolAllah(sawa), Imam Hussain(as). The same grandson that rasoolAllah(s) spoke about and said: "Hussain is from me and I am from Hussain, Allah loves the one who loves Hussain. He also said the same thing about Imam Hassan(as). Tell me what kind of love is this? Where you turn a blind eye to murderers of the ones you love and go as far as praising them?

The only thing I give sunni's credit for is the fact that in their salah they still say "Allahumma Salli ala Muhammad, Wa ala aali Muhammad..." etc. At the end of their Salah. This may sound harsh but its the reality of the situation, unfortunately.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

are you saying that Malik al-Ashtar is a sunni narrator of hadith as well?

indeed he is in the chains of 3 sahih muslim hadith

he is a mukhadram rather than a tabi'i

he's a narrator in this narration and is third in the chain ie ibn Masud --> Abdur Rahman ibn Yazid - al Ashtar:

Abu Ahwas reported: We were in the house of Abu Musa along with some of the companions of 'Abdullah and they were looking at the Holy Book. 'Abdullah stood up, whereupon Abu Mas'ud said: I do not know whether Allah's Messenger, (may peace be upon him) has left after him one having a better knowledge (of Islam) than the man who is standing. Abu Musa said: If you say this, that is correct, because he had been present when we had been absent and he was permitted when we were detained.

I came across this instruction from Ameer Muawiya (ra) to Mughaira to prohibit narrating hadith from the Shia of Ali, so i want to see how true this is.

Salaam,

What narration is that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What narration is that?

That was an instruction from Hz Muawiya (ra) to Mughaira. Muawiya ordered for the collection of Ahadith and a request was specifically made to Hz Ayesha (ra) to write down the hadith and send to him. However he was given strict instruction to shun from the supporters of Ali (as) and to listen to the supporters of Uthman (ra).

I am surprised to hear that there is a sunni narration from Hz Malik Al-Ashtar (ra) considering views against him. It is strange that very little hadith were narrated from Hz Ammar ibn Yassir (ra). So we can say that later ASWJ scholars made some realignment, compromise to fit Ameer ul Mumineen (as) and his companions into the frame-work of Sahaba orientated Islam.

Yes, there are not many ahadith narrated by the companions of Ameer (as) in shi'i 12er sources. One friend asked whether Hz Abu Zar (ra) was a shi'i or sunni? i have read Al-Yaqoobi, where Hz Abu Zar openly declares that Janab Ameer (as) is a wasi and also in Al-Masoodi, Hz Muhammad ibn Abi Bakr (ra) mentioned the same thing. I presume there are not many sahih hadith narrated by Hz Abu Zar (ra) in shi'i sources?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^Salam

Bro can you please give a source of this mughira's narration ?

If I'm not mistaken even Kumail b ziyad gets an entry in Isabah of ibn Hajar, ibn Hibban and Bukhari's biography dictionary with a trustworthy grading , not sure how many hadith he narrated

In a secondary source

It is strange that very little hadith were narrated from Hz Ammar ibn Yassir (ra)

several major sahaba narrate very few ahadith , even abu bakr and abu dujana both highly revered companions narrate very few

Ibn Masud and Ibn Abbas were other sources of several pro-Alid or atleast pro-banu hashim ahadith

Here is an extensive entry on Maitham Tammar from sunni Imam Ibn Hajar Asqalanai in Isaba , where he is counted as a sahabi

( hopefully an arab speaking bro/sis could translate it for the benefit of us all)

ميثم التمار الأسدينزل الكوفة وله بها ذرية ذكره المؤيد بن النعمان الرافضي في مناقب علي رضي الله عنه وقال كان ميثم التمار عبدا لامرأة من بني أسد فاشتراه علي منها وأعتقه وقال له ما اسمك قال سالم قال أخبرني رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم أن اسمك الذي سماك به أبواك في العجم ميثم قال صدق الله ورسوله وأمير المؤمنين والله إنه لاسمي قال فارجع إلى اسمك الذي سماك به رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم ودع سالما فرجع ميثم واكتنى بأبي سالم فقال علي ذات يوم إنك تؤخذ بعدي فتصلب وتطعن بحربة فإذا جاء اليوم الثالث ابتدر منخراك وفوك دما فتخضب لحيتك وتصلب على باب عمرو بن حريث عاشر عشرة وأنت أقصرهم خشبة وأقربهم من المطهرة وامض حتى أريك النخلة التي تصلب على دذعها فأراه إياها وكان ميثم يأتيها فيصلي عندها ويقول بوركت من نخلة لك خلقت ولي غذيت فلم يزل يتعاهدها حتى قطعت ثم كان يلقى عمرو بن حريث فيقول له إني مجاورك فأحسن جواري فيقول له عمرو أتريد أن تشتري دار بن مسعود أو دار بن حكيم وهو لا يعلم ما يريد ثم حج في السنة التي قتل فيها فدخل غلام أم سلمة أم المؤمنين فقالت له من أنت قال أنا ميثم فقالت والله لربما سمعت من رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم يذكرك ويوصي بك عليا فسألها عن الحسين فقالت هو في حائط له فقال أخبريه أني قد أحببت السلام عليه فلم أجده ونحن ملتقون عند رب العرش إن شاء الله تعالى فدعت أم سلمة بطيب فطيبت به لحيته فقالت له أما إنها ستخضب بدم فقدم الكوفة فأخذه عبيد الله بن زياد فأدخل عليه فقال له هذا كان آثر الناس عند علي قال ويحكم هذا الأعجمي فقيل له نعم فقال له أين ربك قال بالمرصاد للظلمة وأنت منهم قال إنك على أعجميتك لتبلغ الذي تريد أخبرني ما الذي أخبرك صاحبك أني فاعل بك قال أخبرني أنك تصلبني عاشر عشرة وأنا أقصرهم خشبة وأقربهم من المطهرة قال لنخالفنه قال كيف تخالفه والله ما أخبرني إلا عن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم عن جبرائيل عن الله ولقد عرفت الموضع الذي أصلب فيه وأني أول خلق الله ألجم في الإسلام فحبسه وحبس معه المختار بن عبيد فقال ميثم للمختار إنك ستفلت وتخرج ثائرا بدم الحسين فتقتل هذا الذي يريد أن يقتلك فلما أراد عبيد الله أن يقتل المختار وصل بريد من يزيد يأمره بتخلية سبيله فخلاه وأمر بميثم أن يصلب فلما رفع على الخشبة عند باب عمرو بن حريث قال عمرو قد كان والله يقول لي إني مجاورك فجعل ميثم يحدث بفضائل بني هاشم فقيل لابن زياد قد فضحكم هذا العبد قال ألجموه فكان أول من ألجم في الإسلام فلما كان اليوم الثالث من صلبه طعن بالحربة فكبر ثم انبعث في آخر النهار فمه وأنفه دما وكان ذلك قبل مقدم

حسين العراق بعشرة أيام قلت ويأتي له حديث عن علي في ترجمة أبي طالب بن عبد المطلب في الكنى وتقدم لميثم هذا ذكر في ترجمة ميثم آخر في القسم الأول منه فليراجع منه

Look like they really hate Imam Ali (as)

post-81403-0-11939200-1364336791_thumb.j

post-81403-0-43441400-1364336821_thumb.j

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/5/5c/Metallica_-_Kill_%27Em_All_cover.jpg

Edited by Panzerwaffe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I came across this instruction from Ameer Muawiya (ra) to Mughaira to prohibit narrating hadith from the Shia of Ali, so i want to see how true this is.

Ameer Muawiyah...? Ameer? :huh:

He started the cursing of Ali (as) on the Pulpits, he also fought against him and his son. He was ruthless and power hungry fitna mongerer, yet he is still your 'Ameer'? Wow... SubhanAllah, when you are forbidden to use your Aql and blindly accept that all the Sahaba were righteous human beings this is the end result.

Perhaps he did that so the truth was suppressed. You know, that's what blood thirsty tyrants do. Oppress people and the truth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bro can you please give a source of this mughira's narration ?

Walaikum Salam Bro,

Yes, i will give you later it is in one of my books.

several major sahaba narrate very few ahadith , even abu bakr and abu dujana both highly revered companions narrate very few

Both Hz Abu Bakr (ra) & Hz Abu Dujana (ra) are among the early Ashab and both died before the collection of ahadith can take place also considering the fact Sheikhyn Kiramyn banned/disliked narrating hadith. The odd twist to this is that Hz Ammar ibn Yassir (ra) is a contemporary of Hz Abu Bakr (ra) in the rank of seniority. Hz Ammar (ra) lived very long until atleast the battle of Siffin.

He has vast knowledge and the fact that censorship played a major part in losing the knowledge that we would otherwise gained from him. His son was mentioned in one of the shi'i narrations regarding the merits of Syeda Zahra (as).

Here is an extensive entry on Maitham Tammar from sunni Imam Ibn Hajar Asqalanai in Isaba , where he is counted as a sahabi

I am glad to see narrations from him although from a secondary source. Mashallah, he is also a sahabi. Hz Maitham Tammar (ra) every shi'i should take pride in him.

It proves that ASWJ has no grudges against Janab Ameer (as) or his supporters.

He started the cursing of Ali (as) on the Pulpits, he also fought against him and his son. He was ruthless and power hungry fitna mongerer, yet he is still your 'Ameer'? Wow... SubhanAllah, when you are forbidden to use your Aql and blindly accept that all the Sahaba were righteous human beings this is the end result.

Brother, we did what was necessary to at least salvage what is left of the traditions from our Prophet (saw), knowledge has been scattered all-over, you will find knowledgeable people in both sides either Uthmani or Allawi so we wanted to consolidate knowledge, sufficient to hold the pillars of Islam. We have forsaken political consideration that you have mentioned for the greater good of Islam. Our whole setup is non-political. We only dismiss individuals with aqeeda problem. As far as Ameer Muawiya (ra), you cannot show us one incident which will reflect his corrupted aqida, no matter how much blood he has spilled his aqeeda is still intact.

As for you who call me to use aql, i can prove to you that your school has not been using aql for the past 1200 years. If you have aql please solve this problem:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
His son was mentioned in one of the shi'i narrations regarding the merits of Syeda Zahra (as).

which son ? Muhmmad b ammar ?

he is mentioned in Tabari as a supporter of abdullah b zubbair who was flogged by Amr b Zubair

Hz Maitham Tammar (ra) every shi'i should take pride in him.

It proves that ASWJ has no grudges against Janab Ameer (as) or his supporters.

every sunni should be too right ?

companions of Ali are stalwarts of sunni ahadith there is no question of a grudge here, very few companions of ALi like Asbagh b nutaba are treated as weak by sunni ahadith scholars ( more on him and views on him will be appreciated ) he might be one of those who exaggeratted Ali's merits.Its right that sunnis are cautious of people who project ALi as a superhero but what is inexplicable why are men like muaiwyah Amr b a'as Habib b maslama and other people who revolted against the khalifah of their time caused so much fitna and derailed the political side of Islam get off on a technicality of not having corrupted aqaidh.COme on bro, I get it that shia have corrupted aqaidh atleast per sunnis but what about those who disrupted the state of Islam for personal gains ? are they no better than hypocrites ?

Edited by Panzerwaffe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hz Ammar (ra) lived very long until atleast the battle of Siffin.

Yes thats true, many more narrations come from hudhayfa friend of Ammar.Other early companions who lived long also have few narrations like Ka'b b Amr ( last Badri to die) and Talha b Ubaidullah etc

I guess the companions with the best students narrated the most even if they were young sahabis or late converts, that explains likes of Abu Huraisrh, ibn Abbas , abu Saed khudri narrating so many ahadith even though they spent less time with the Prophet than earlier Sahaba

Maybe Umar and AbuBakr prohibited telling of hadith to prevent the corrupted practices of newly converts from entering into Islam, afterall both the shaykhs strove so hard to maintian the cohesion of the empire.Another reason could be to prevent hero worship from starting in islam as you know both Abubakr/umar did not promote their tribes or family members while both later ummayyads and hashimites did.Even the rise of Aisha is more in the post-shaykhain period not before that.

Brother, we did what was necessary to at least salvage what is left of the traditions from our Prophet (saw), knowledge has been scattered all-over, you will find knowledgeable people in both sides either Uthmani or Allawi so we wanted to consolidate knowledge, sufficient to hold the pillars of Islam

I do agree with that, esp since this pertains to beliefs and aqaids which could not be influenced by political orientation.However I dont see how the persoanlities who were corrupt and spread fitna can be treated with respect ( even though one may not automatically reject their hadith)

Edited by Panzerwaffe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
which son ? Muhmmad b ammar ?

he is mentioned in Tabari as a supporter of abdullah b zubbair who was flogged by Amr b Zubair

I cant recall his name but he narrated a hadith and it is found in Bihar Al-Anwar.

Even the rise of Aisha is more in the post-shaykhain period not before that.

That is accurate. Hz Ayesha (ra) gained prestige and influence from her position as Ummul Mumineen & daughter of the first caliph. She used her clout to raise an army of thousands of men in Basra before the battle of Jamal.

.COme on bro, I get it that shia have corrupted aqaidh atleast per sunnis but what about those who disrupted the state of Islam for personal gains ? are they no better than hypocrites ?

We did justice with the character such as Ameer Muawiya (ra) by not including him amongst the Khulafa Al- Rashideen. I believe we all consider hypocrite as a person who do not believe in Islam but pretend to be one eg Abdullah ibn Ubayy and even then our Prophet (saw) tolerated him despite the fierce Quranic condemnation.

On the issue of hadith, we do not take political inclination as a factor, i must admit there are drawbacks such as the hadith narrated by Amr bin Aas that the most beloved of the Prophet (saw) are Hz Abu Bakr (ra) & Hz Ayesha (ra), coming from Amr bin Aas i do not think you cant expect him to say Syedna Ali (as). So there is definitely a margin of error (<5%) but by far it is the most efficient method.

It is an honest effort to consolidate knowledge from all sections of the community and all factions. So the Islam you get is balanced and cohesive.

every sunni should be too right ?

Yes but Sunnis are not well informed regarding him and further more he was a special companion of Hz Ali (as) and was martyred for his sake. That is the reason i believe shias should take pride in him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On the issue of hadith, we do not take political inclination as a factor, i must admit there are drawbacks such as the hadith narrated by Amr bin Aas that the most beloved of the Prophet (saw) are Hz Abu Bakr (ra) & Hz Ayesha (ra), coming from Amr bin Aas i do not think you cant expect him to say Syedna Ali (as). So there is definitely a margin of error (<5%) but by far it is the most efficient method.

I agree and obviously imami shia hadith has its own shortcomings, Amr b A'as was hardly a supporter of Abu Bakr either considering he had the chameleon like personality.He is like Marwan an astute politician a great survivor and utterly unscrupulous.Interestingly however he is also a narrater of hadith that ammar will be killed by rebels ! likely when both Amr and Ammar were making common cause against Uthman in Egypt

Also there are many pro-Ali ahadith too which are narrated by sahaba /tabaeen who were supporters of ALi so I guess they hangs a big question mark over them as well.

It is an honest effort to consolidate knowledge from all sections of the community and all factions. So the Islam you get is balanced and cohesive.

It really is overall I'm very impressed with the impartiality of sunni biographers.

Edited by Panzerwaffe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bro,

Also there are many pro-Ali ahadith too which are narrated by sahaba /tabaeen who were supporters of ALi so I guess they hangs a big question mark over them as well.

Nothing surprising, the pro-Alid ahadith were included to stem out the Nawasib sentiments left by the Uthmani predecessors particularly in Sham. Those hadith are mostly found in Sahih Tarmizi (mostly are graded weak) and i am sure you must be aware of Khasais Ali by Imam Nasai. Ibn Taimiya expressed his dissatisfaction with the inclusion of many pro-Alid ahadith.

The scholars of ASWJ were acutely aware that Hz Ali (as) was on Haq.

Bro can you please give a source of this mughira's narration ?

It is found in Tabari.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Look like they really hate Imam Ali (as)

post-81403-0-11939200-1364336791_thumb.j

post-81403-0-43441400-1364336821_thumb.j

Do you believe these images are genuine? You are not even sure about the place. A Sunni would never do anything like that.

How desperate you are. Instead of answering properly you put these fake pictures.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you believe these images are genuine? You are not even sure about the place. A Sunni would never do anything like that.

How desperate you are. Instead of answering properly you put these fake pictures.

They are not fake, Sunnis have indeed - hidden animosity toward Ahl al-Bayt (as) (Not all of you of course)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
They are not fake, Sunnis have indeed - hidden animosity toward Ahl al-Bayt (as) (Not all of you of course)

This is not true Brother, our Brother here Panzer Waffe has dismissed this argument. The basis is simple, we are system orientated rather than hero worship. We tend to look at Islam as a whole without looking into any particular individual for perfection other than our Holy Messenger (saw). We have this hierarchy of Four Pious Companions followed by other Companions. If you refer hidden animosity to Ibn Taimiyya that is absolutely true. The rest of the ASWJ honestly included many-many merits of the Ahle Bayt out love and affection without thinking that opponents may weaponize it against us.

No hidden animosity but the most important narrations do come from parties apposed to Ameer ul Mumineen (as) eg Abu Huraira (ra), Hz Ayesha (ra) & to a certain extent Ibn Umar (ra) that is why our scholars cant take a partisan stand against certain individuals as it will result in the lost of knowledge.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Ebn Tie me yeah... ;) before we can discuss let me ask you a question...and from your answer we will understand what position you hold in Islam...ive been reading forums normally no one reads what you say but you getting replies =]

Sahih Muslim : 020

Narrated Jabir bin Samura: I heard Muhammad saying, "The (Islamic) religion will continue until the Hour (day of resurrection), having twelve Caliphs for you, all of them will be from Quraysh."

Who are the 12?...a bit off topic but it will help me understand your stance... because when u say things like "we are system oriented"...which I think is such an ambiguous statement which hardly anyone understands like...how can you be system oriented... a "system" is something with functionality...hmmm care to explain?

u can orient yourself on jurisprudence but system oriented where did u get that from...like ive seen many people try to act smart but BY Allah that was one of the funniest one's ive HURD

You also said rather than "hero worship" ... hmm a very big and once again ambiguous statement which has no backing... THE SHIA ONLY WORSHIP Allah...

lol What the HELL is "we are system orientated rather than hero worship"<--- TOPIC FOR QUOTE OF THE DAY IF ANYONE IS BOTHERED!

but BY Allah we are dieing to know so please tell us how:

1. ONE CAN BECOME MORE "system oriented" (looooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooool)

2. & how people "hero worship"

3. in your fiqh who are the 12 successors

were not going to argue about 12 or imam's or anything i just want to see your list, so we can see if you revere those who oppose Ali to answer the the main topic

=]

Edited by IgnoranceDiffers4rmLogic

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ hadith of 12 is a quraish superority hadith a number of which are in both shia and sunni sources.This has been discussed in depth many times before.

Both shia and sunni extol and glorify certain persoanlities but imami shias definately go to an extreme in this, but sunnis are not blame free either in this respect.

What bro Eben e team yeah is saying that the strength of a narrater is independent of his/her political orientation, as long as his aqaidh are not corrupted.However in this respect shia leaning narraters are at a disadvantage as they have a greater tendency towards Ghulu than nawasib narraters.However there are many shia leaning narraters in sunni ahadith chains.

No hidden animosity but the most important narrations do come from parties apposed to Ameer ul Mumineen (as) eg Abu Huraira (ra), Hz Ayesha (ra) & to a certain extent Ibn Umar (ra) that is why our scholars cant take a partisan stand against certain individuals as it will result in the lost of knowledge

Very true and jazakallh for being big hearted enough to say that

Ibn Abbas, Jabir b abdullah and abu saaed khudri balance it to a certain extent , and i believe ibn umar is genuinely neutral narrater.

Ibn Taimiya

expressed his dissatisfaction with the inclusion of many pro-Alid ahadith

I think he was a very intelligent man he just was very opinionated and wasted his time in munazara like religious debates.His hatred of imami shias probably led him to take a very harsh view of Ali and his supporters which is sad.I found Ibn Kathir's Al Bidayah a more balanced work, what do you think bro ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

walaikum salam Bro,

Thanks for your explanation. ASWJ reconciled conflicts amongst various factions.

^ hadith of 12 is a quraish superority hadith a number of which are in both shia and sunni sources

Yes the 12 amirs hadith is reported as you rightly pointed out in Saheh Bukhari. You can ask Macissac for his input in this matter, the biggest doubt he has is that why didnt the waqifi companions of Imam Kathim (as) believe in the continuity of the Imama to complete the 12, the narration regarding the names are fabrications.

I found Ibn Kathir's Al Bidayah a more balanced work, what do you think bro ?

I have read certain parts of it especially on Karbala, it is currently the most favored work. I was told that it is a summarised version of Tabari which i have read extensively.

The only source on karbala, banu saqifa, shura, jamal & siffeen are from Abu Mikhnaf. I believe you have read that the stoppage of water to Imam Al-Husayn (as) is an act of revenge for Hz Uthman (ra). So the work is balanced and fair although his sheikh is ibn taimiyya

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

walaikum salam Bro,

Thanks for your explanation. ASWJ reconciled conflicts amongst various factions.

Yes the 12 amirs hadith is reported as you rightly pointed out in Saheh Bukhari. You can ask Macissac for his input in this matter, the biggest doubt he has is that why didnt the waqifi companions of Imam Kathim (as) believe in the continuity of the Imama to complete the 12, the narration regarding the names are fabrications.

I have read certain parts of it especially on Karbala, it is currently the most favored work. I was told that it is a summarised version of Tabari which i have read extensively.

The only source on karbala, banu saqifa, shura, jamal & siffeen are from Abu Mikhnaf. I believe you have read that the stoppage of water to Imam Al-Husayn (as) is an act of revenge for Hz Uthman (ra). So the work is balanced and fair although his sheikh is ibn taimiyya

Salam

Bro sources of saqifa is more diverse I think, Zubair b Bakkar wrote a book on it too plus there is Tareekh Madina Munawwara as well.

Tabari takes Jamal almost all from Sayf b Umar tamimi and ignores other versions

About Siffin and Karbala undoutably no work of history is complete without abu mikhanaf and ibn kalbis ( who were best placed to record these events since ancestors of both fought in siffin/jamal for Ali ) The works of mikhnaf and kalbis although anti-syrian and pro-iraiqi are hardly pro-imami shias as they predate these tendencies by decades.Also ibn Kalbis ancestors also back the rising of abdur rehman b Ashath b qays who was a iraqi nationalist and NOT a imami shia

And yes stopping water to hussain, killing of talha by marwan, sacking of medina after harrah were all apparently in retaliation against murder of uthman

Edited by Panzerwaffe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I love it how Sunnis they say "they love Ahlulbayt" but then then praise those that killed them and mistreated them.

Besides Abu Bakr, Omar, and Othman, which they highly praise, they also praise Mawyiah and I have also heard many of them praising Yazid.

Then they come and say they love Ahlulbayt?

I thought about this a long time ago and I figured it out. Sunnis are tribal! The word "Sunni" itself disribes that how they are trying to stick to "Sunnah" of their fathers and tribes. That is why they all pray differently.

Have you noticed them in prayer and how they cross their hands?

I have been along Sunnis way too long, been to their Masjids and have had them as friends and I say that to their face, they are not deciving Allah (swt), and messenger (pbuh) and Ahlulbayt (as) buy their casual love of Ahlulbayt.

Love means following, being committed too, being friends of those who love you and being fierst enemies of those who hate you. To cry at your death and be happy for your birth. I only see us Shias doing this!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×