Jump to content

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

39 minutes ago, SunniBrother said:

outplay? No. But the question is. What it would happen to the ummah if the ansar at saqifa elected a 'khalifa' without Omar and Abu Bakr intervention? They couldn't take Ali (r.a) there because the family were busy with the funeral. The rest of the ummah was mourning. So again, what would happen if they elected a khalifa without Omar and Abu Bakr intervention? Can you imagine the bigger disaster or not?

What was Omar's opinion about it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Faruk said:

What was Omar's opinion about it?

How many times Abu Bakr (r.a) said he wanted to hang this position on the neck of Omar (r.a) because he hated it that it had fallen everything on his shoulder?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, SunniBrother said:

How many times Abu Bakr (r.a) said he wanted to hang this position on the neck of Omar (r.a) because he hated it that it had fallen everything on his shoulder?

I did not ask for the opinion of Abu Bakr bro'.

 

Edited by Faruk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Faruk said:

I did not ask about the opinion of Abu  Bakr bro'.

"I have been given authority over you. And I am NOT the best among you. If I am wrong, correct me, if I am right support me." - Abu Bakr (r.a)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, SunniBrother said:

"I have been given authority over you. And I am NOT the best among you. If I am wrong, correct me, if I am right support me." - Abu Bakr (r.a)

I asked you what was the opinion of Omar.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Faruk said:

I did not ask about the opinion of Abu  Bakr bro'.

Oh Omar (r.a) hated that Abu Bakr (r.a) ended up putting on his neck the caliphate. Haha. Who washed the body of Abu Bakr (r.a)?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, SunniBrother said:

Oh Omar (r.a) hated that Abu Bakr (r.a) ended up putting on his neck the caliphate. Haha. Who washed the body of Abu Bakr (r.a)?

What was his opinion about Saqifah?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, SunniBrother said:

That it would have been a disaster if it weren't intervened.

Source?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let me help you out.

You are actually claiming the opposite of what Omar said. He said that this decision was made without consulting all muslims but that Allah saved us from its evil.

' (O people!) I have been informed that a speaker amongst you says, 'By Allah, if `Umar should die, I will give the pledge of allegiance to such-and-such person.' One should not deceive oneself by saying that the pledge of allegiance given to Abu Bakr was given suddenly and it was successful. No doubt, it was like that, but Allah saved (the people) from its evil, and there is none among you who has the qualities of Abu Bakr. Remember that whoever gives the pledge of allegiance to anybody among you without consulting the other Muslims, neither that person, nor the person to whom the pledge of allegiance was given, are to be supported, lest they both should be killed.

https://sunnah.com/bukhari/86/57

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The above mentioned actually implicates that an internal war could have taken place because not all muslims were consulted. That is exactly the reason why Imam Ali withheld the pledge of allegiance for six months only after the death of Bibi Fatima a.s.

Edited by Faruk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Faruk said:

Let me help you out.

You are actually claiming the opposite of what Omar said. He said that this decision was made without consulting all muslims but that Allah saved us from its evil.

' (O people!) I have been informed that a speaker amongst you says, 'By Allah, if `Umar should die, I will give the pledge of allegiance to such-and-such person.' One should not deceive oneself by saying that the pledge of allegiance given to Abu Bakr was given suddenly and it was successful. No doubt, it was like that, but Allah saved (the people) from its evil, and there is none among you who has the qualities of Abu Bakr. Remember that whoever gives the pledge of allegiance to anybody among you without consulting the other Muslims, neither that person, nor the person to whom the pledge of allegiance was given, are to be supported, lest they both should be killed.

https://sunnah.com/bukhari/86/57

Omar may have said that but Abu Bakr said the opposite that I mentioned above.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, SunniBrother said:

Omar may have said that but Abu Bakr said the opposite that I mentioned above.

That's not my problem. It's your source.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Panzerwaffe said:

9 lakh ? 900,000?

Where does this come from ?

By comparison both Alis and muawiyah army is less than 300 k  at the time of siffin

Even Genghis Khan didn't have that many 

 

There are many different narrations from 30k to 9L. Take the smallest number and it is still more than 72. Talking about Karbala not siffien. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Sirius_Bright said:

There are many different narrations from 30k to 9L. Take the smallest number and it is still more than 72. Talking about Karbala not siffien. 

Probably it was 4000. Why take so big army when they knew that Imam Al Husain (as) have only few companions with him?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Dhulfikar said:

Probably it was 4000. Why take so big army when they knew that Imam Al Husain (as) have only few companions with him?

Yes Umar b Saad came with 4000

And a local kufan militia probably 4 000 

Probably 12 000 highest 

But numbers are irrelevant the important thing is that people actually defected from the army of yazid to the side after a imam...thats a pretty remarkable event in military political history 

Ibn Kathir says 40 kufans defected altogether and were martyred with Imam

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Sirius_Bright said:

There are many different narrations from 30k to 9L. Take the smallest number and it is still more than 72. Talking about Karbala not siffien. 

Bro can you imagine the logistics of feeding an army of 900,000?

That's why I gave you the comparison of Siffin a battle that was planned for months ahead of time even then an army of no more than 100,000 to 300000 could be maintained at a given time

It is only with the Advent of Railways and mechanization can armies upward of 100,000 can be maintained in the field

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Dhulfikar said:

Probably it was 4000. Why take so big army when they knew that Imam Al Husain (as) have only few companions with him?

17 hours ago, Panzerwaffe said:

Yes Umar b Saad came with 4000

And a local kufan militia probably 4 000 

Probably 12 000 highest 

But numbers are irrelevant the important thing is that people actually defected from the army of yazid to the side after a imam...thats a pretty remarkable event in military political history 

Ibn Kathir says 40 kufans defected altogether and were martyred with Imam

17 hours ago, Panzerwaffe said:

Bro can you imagine the logistics of feeding an army of 900,000?

That's why I gave you the comparison of Siffin a battle that was planned for months ahead of time even then an army of no more than 100,000 to 300000 could be maintained at a given time

It is only with the Advent of Railways and mechanization can armies upward of 100,000 can be maintained in the field

I have heard about 9L army from the side of yazid and ibne ziyad combined. This number is very common in the subcontinent. However, I haven't seen narrations regarding the hugeness of army to justify it. 

The point here was baatil had more people on their side which go against 'majority are always right' thing. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Sirius_Bright said:

I have heard about 9L army from the side of yazid and ibne ziyad combined. This number is very common in the subcontinent. However, I haven't seen narrations regarding the hugeness of army to justify it. 

The point here was baatil had more people on their side which go against 'majority are always right' thing. 

I believe majority was on the right side but remained passive and kept silent. Just as today.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Panzerwaffe said:

Bro can you imagine the logistics of feeding an army of 900,000?

That's why I gave you the comparison of Siffin a battle that was planned for months ahead of time even then an army of no more than 100,000 to 300000 could be maintained at a given time

It is only with the Advent of Railways and mechanization can armies upward of 100,000 can be maintained in the field

Do not neglect the conquests iof Nader Shah. In some battles were at least armies of 300.000 soldiers involved.

Edited by Faruk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/9/2017 at 8:12 AM, SunniBrother said:

outplay? No. But the question is. What it would happen to the ummah if the ansar at saqifa elected a 'khalifa' without Omar and Abu Bakr intervention? They couldn't take Ali (r.a) there because the family were busy with the funeral. The rest of the ummah was mourning. So again, what would happen if they elected a khalifa without Omar and Abu Bakr intervention? Can you imagine the bigger disaster or not?

i think they will gladly return the caliphate to its rightful owner, once the burial of the prophet is over.

what the ansar feared most was the revenge, if quraish managed take over the caliphate from imam ali as.

by holding the saqifah, the ansars were tricked into the whole plot to keep away the caliphate from imam ali as.

this is what i conclude from the readings that i've done. ask no proof from me though. imo, it's better for you to do ur own unbias research.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On Thursday, September 07, 2017 at 2:47 PM, baqar said:

The claim has no logical basis.

There is no reason why the majority should always be right.

Quite often, the majority is wrong.

For example, there are more Chrstians in the world than Muslims.

That makes Christians right and Muslims wrong. 

As I said, the argument has no logical base.

What if many sunnis convert to shias. And shia's become majority. Does then shias become wrong and Sunnis be correct. 

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


  • Recent Posts on ShiaChat!

    • Specifically porn is destructive in future marital relations. I honestly feel ashamed how some people believe in these false stereotypes found in the porn industry, where both men and women have exaggerated features that have little to do with normality. They believe in these stereotypes and then expect them in their partners, to the point they even dare to bring the subject in public. And I prefer to stop it here because it is embarassing.
    • Condolences on the shahadat of Imam Hassan Mujtaba AS. Imam Hasan (a.s.) said: Translation I wonder about those who think about their body’s food, but do not think about their soul’s food. They keep undesirable food away from their belly, but fill up their heart with destructive subjects.1 Brief Description Our people are usually quite careful with their food and do not start eating unless they know what it is. They avoid anything that looks doubtful and some go to great lengths to ensure that the body receives good, clean, healthy diet. Yet, when it comes to the food for the soul, these same individuals will throw caution to the winds. With eyes closed, unaware of the reality, they would have no hesitation in pouring down any mental food into their soul. They harm their souls by accepting without question the speeches of unsuitable friends, misleading press reports and suspicious or poisonous propagation, and this is very surprising. 1. Safinat’ul-Bihar 84, article of taste. Bihar Al-Anwar, vol 1, page 218.  https://www.al-islam.org/pt/node/30305
    • Abu Hurayra [PDF only] https://www.hilmi.eu/islam/books/books/AbuHurayrah2.pdf
    • Salam! Is it possible for a Muslim to receive a burial ground after his/her death either in Najaf or in Wadi al Salam someone not a citizen of Iraq? Many Thanks. John
×