Jump to content
Mishael

How is Khalid ibn Al Walid viewed by Shias?

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

I've heard some Shias talking bad about him in the past, I mean I for one don't like him since he killed Malik ibn Nuwayrah without taking him to be judged properly because he lusted after his wife and after he killed him he married his wife. Also he committed mass atrocities in history he killed thousands Persians in a single day aswell so... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[EDIT] Even the Arab tribe which I am said to be from was forcibly converted by Khalid ibn Al Walid when a lot of Christian Arab tribes came together to make a last stand against the Rashidun in the fortress of Dumat Al Jandal, Khalid massacred them once he won. Khalid also ordered the Persians to be beheaded and to let their blood flow down the river which is known today as the river of blood because it was turned red by the blood of the Persians he had killed, this took place at the time of Abu Bakrs reign at the battle of Ullais.

Edited by ShiaChat Mod
Insult removed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Gaius I. Caesar said:

We view him rather poorly, he did some messed up things. Basically, what ISIS is doing now.

Didn't Ali also do bad things aswell I read a Hadith where he burned people alive though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But yeah I read about Malik ibn Nuwayrah there was no evidence that he apostatized from Islam and even if he did they would usually take him to be judged by the Islamic court not murder him directly and marry his wife on the spot.

Edited by Mishael

Share this post


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

But I generally think that the Rashidun khalifa wouldn't have expanded if he wasn't its general.

are u a christian really how do u know about khalid ibn waleed LA he was murderer why are you taking Imam Ali As name with his name Imam Ali AS is succsessor of Prophet Muhammad Saww and khaleed ibn waleed LA is nothing he only converted to Islam for his safety and only tried to damage the name of Islam but Imam Hussain AS saved Islam in Karbala 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Najamsethi484 said:

are u a christian really how do u know about khalid ibn waleed LA he was murderer why are you taking Imam Ali As name with his name Imam Ali AS is succsessor of Prophet Muhammad Saww and khaleed ibn waleed LA is nothing he only converted to Islam for his safety and only tried to damage the name of Islam but Imam Hussain AS saved Islam in Karbala 

Well I still read Islamic history even though I don't consider myself Muslim. Khalid ibn Walids first real battle which earned him a name was Uhud in which he routed the Muslims.

Share this post


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

Well I still read Islamic history even though I don't consider myself Muslim. Khalid ibn Walids first real battle which earned him a name was Uhud in which he routed the Muslims.

he was not brave he used to attack from behind and was only terrorist type of a person he even rapes a women i heard he never converted to Islam by his heart just by words he was murderer rapist extremist type of a person he couldnt defeat the Muslims by bravery only coward type of person

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Response to Khalid bin Walid: Portrait of a War Criminal

http://www.*************/2014/02/26/response-to-khalid-bin-walid-portrait-of-a-war-criminal/

February 26, 2014 ************* Hadith 6

The following is a refutation to the ShiaPen article entitled: Response to Khalid bin Walid: Portrait of a War Criminal, which can be found here.

Readers need to be aware that the ShiaPen article is actually a refutation to an earlier article written by the Ansar.org team.

It is known, by all the Muslim laymen, let alone the scholars of Islam, that Khalid bin Al-Waleed was a primary cause in the victory of the Muslims upon the Romans in the battle of Mu’tah. The name Khalid bin Al-Waleed is also synonymous with the title the “Sword of Allah”. ShiaPen do not even attempt to provide any refutation to the fact that the Prophet (salalahu alaihi wa salam) gave this title to Khalid. Ignoring this aspect of his biography is perhaps the best they can do after all.

Khalid Bin Walid

https://www.al-islam.org/misbah-uz-zulam-roots-karbala-tragedy-sayyid-imdad-imam/khalid-bin-walid

He had not earned any fame before the Battle of Uhud, but when he fought against the Muslims in Uhud, he came to be known as a ferocious warrior of Arabs. In the Battle of Uhud, he was so severe that he came to fight the Holy Prophet (S) with Abu Sufyan. In that battle, he took some Meccans and infidels and went atop the Uhud mountain. The Prophet appointed fifty archers to stop their onslaught, under the leadership of Abdullah bin Jubair. They were instructed not to leave their position under any circumstances.

The infidels were defeated and began to flee when the Muslims attacked them on the plains. The Muslims army began to collect the booty from the fleeing infidels. The archers also left their position for the booty. Seeing an opening, Khalid attacked the Muslims from that same mountain pass and in a few moments, the Muslims were almost routed.

 

 

Edited by ShiaChat Mod
[Mod Note: Excessively large fonts (size 16-72) or extremely small fonts (size 8-10) may be reduced or increased to a standard size (12-14) by a Moderator.]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, Mishael said:

Didn't Ali also do bad things aswell I read a Hadith where he burned people alive though.

Yes, according to the Sahih Sittah but we reject the hadith based on the fact that Ali (as) couldn't have done it because he retired from the public at this time period.

Quote

After these revolutions, Ali spent most of his time at home where he occupied himself with the task of collecting the verses of Qur’an, and in arranging them in their chronological order. He was thus demonstrating that his duty was to serve Islam regardless of the extraneous circumstances. He often quoted, before his friends, the tradition of the Prophet that the members of his family and Qur’an were his “legacy” to the Muslim umma, and that both of them were inseparable from each other.

No one among the companions was better qualified than Ali to collect the verses of Qur’an. He was one of the few companions of the Prophet who knew Qur’an by heart. Incidentally, Umar bin al-Khattab had spent fourteen years trying to memorize the second chapter of Qur’an (Al-Baqarah), but was unable.

Collecting all the scattered verses of Qur’an in the same order in which they were revealed, was a job that could be done by someone especially tutored by Muhammad Mustafa himself. Such a person was Ali. He had spent more time with him than anyone else. He had literally grown up with Qur’an. He himself said that there was not a verse in Qur’an about which he did not know when it was revealed, where it was revealed, and why it was revealed. He had the knowledge of the time, the place and the occasion of the revelation of every single verse of Qur’an.

Ali completed the self-imposed task. But unfortunately for Islam, the party in power, in line with its policy, did not want to give recognition to his work. Nothing was more unwelcome to it than to acknowledge Ali's services to Islam. It did not, therefore, “accept” his collection of the verses of Qur’an.

In the days immediately following the death of the Apostle, many people came to see Ali, and some of them counseled him to seize by force what was his by right. Among these people there were a few sincere friends, and also there were many unscrupulous opportunists. They all offered him their support. The latter, of course, offered their support for ulterior reasons. They hoped to kindle war in Islam and to profit by the infighting of the Muslims.

Immediately after the death of the Prophet, his uncle, Abbas ibn Abdul Muttalib, called on Ali, and said: “Hold out your hand, and I will give you my pledge of allegiance. This gesture of mine will have a great psychological effect upon the Muslims. They would say that the uncle of the Prophet has given his pledge of loyalty to Ali; we too, therefore, should give him our pledge.”

Abbas, of course, was one of the few sincere friends. In another category of Ali's “well-wishers” was Abu Sufyan, the leader of the Banu Umayya, the life-long antagonist of Muhammad, and the symbol of the pagan opposition to and hatred of Islam.

In the events following the death of the Prophet, he perceived his opportunity to subvert Islam, and he seized it. He came to Ali and said: “It is outrageous to see men of the humblest clans of Quraysh usurping your right, and capturing the government which is yours. All you have to do to take it from them, is to give me the signal, and I shall fill the streets of Medina with infantry and cavalry, ready to die at your command.”

What mortal could have resisted this offer? And what did Ali have to lose now anyway? What he could lose, he had lost. But then who in the Muslim umma loved Islam more than he did? He never allowed temptation or provocation to make him do anything that would militate against the broader interests of Islam and the Muslims. Islam was still a highly fragile achievement quite capable of being aborted and corrupted by forces inside and outside Medina but in Ali it had a protector who did not let it happen.

If Ali was “the best judge in Islam,” he was also the best judge of men. His reply to Abu Sufyan, framed as a question, was characteristic. “Since when you have become a well-wisher of Islam?” asked Ali. It was only a rhetorical question, and with it he spurned Abu Sufyan's offer with the contempt that it deserved, and squelched him.

With this answer, Ali demonstrated once again that he and he alone was the true guardian of Islam. In this fateful moment, he forswore his own interests and ambitions but he saved Islam from shipwreck.

It was a truly critical time in the history of nascent Islam. Rebellions against the government of Abu Bakr were breaking out all over the country. If Ali had accepted the offers of his uncle, Abbas ibn Abdul Muttalib, and of Abu Sufyan, he might have succeeded in capturing the government of Medina. But his success would have come only at a cost, to Islam, of a civil war in Medina which was the core of the Muslim state and society. War in Medina at this juncture might have brought the career of Islam to an abrupt end.

Ali passed this test as he had passed many others in life. He did not yield to temptation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also Khalid was not undefeated as many people think he was defeated in muta and was one of the first people to turn tail and run when he saw that the Byzantines and Christian Arabs couldn't be defeated. Also maybe if not for Khalid's terrorism my family might have still been Christian.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 by Imam Ali (AS)!

http://pressshia.com/47083/شایعه-سوزاندن-مسلمانان-مسیحی-شده-توسط/

translated by google translate

Rumor: burning Muslim Christians by Imam Ali (AS)!

Rumor text

"According to the report of Rawat al-Safa, the martyrs killed Muslims who were Christians in a pit and burned.The leaders of Islam are allowed to burn people by the name of Allah "

 

Rumor response

1. Contrary to the claims of contemporary publishers, they have not been Christian, but "Ghali", according to the stories that were the basis of doubt.

2) Ghali means sweeping people who are considered to be above the truth and to the extent of God for the infallible Imams (AS)!

3. Not only is there not a valid document on the presence of the Ghulayān during the time of Imam Ali (as), but contrary to Imam's approach to critique and enlightenment of deviant thoughts, there is no reference to such a flow from him!

4. The fake and false claim of the burning of Ghalilan by Imam Ali (as) is proved for various reasons, due to the lack of a proper document, confusion and anxiety in the text, the discrepancy between the statements and the unconscientiousness of its content!

5. This story has also emerged on the fringe of the tale of Abdullah ibn Saba, which is another reason to quash it

 

Edited by Ashvazdanghe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Has a person came to Imam Ali (as) and confessed to sodomy and was punished by fire, but because no Shi'i was in the fire, was it saved from the fire?
question
Please explain about the document and the contents of this narration that one day, Imam Ali (AS) judged in Dar al-Qaza, at the same time, a man of Shiites, called Safwan bin Akkol, raised himself and said: "My mum is your Shiites, but I am a slave and I want a purified sin. To be And Imam Ali (AS) wanted to burn him and threw himself into the fire but did not burn? How is it that according to this narration, the Shiites do not burn in fire, while we see a lot of Shiites burned in the fire? Seyyed Morteza narrated in Ayoun miracles, referring to Ammar ibn Yasir: One day, Imam Ali (as), Ali (as), judged in Dar al-Qaeda, while a man from Shi'ites called Safwan Ben-Akhlul was raised and said: "My mum is your Shiites But I'm guilty of it and I want to get rid of sin. Imam said: Tell me of your greatest sin. He said: "The biggest concern is with children." Imam Ali (AS) said to him: choose one of these three items to be cleaned up, a hit with Zulfiqar to you, or a wall to look down on, or burn you upside down? These three things are the punishment of someone who has done this. So he said: O my master!What is the hardest of them? Imam said: The hardest is to put you alive with fire and hands in fire. Then he said: do the same. Then the Prophet said to me: O Ammar! Go thousands of people to burn this person tomorrow. Then he said to me: "Go on in Kufa and say," Kufa people come out of your houses and see how Ali burns a man from his Shiites in the fire. " Ammar says: From Kufa they said: Shiites and friends of Amir al-Momenin (AS) do not burn in fire, because fire is forbidden to them. How can your Shiite Ali burn in fire? The next day, when Amir Al-Momenin Ali (as) in the middle of the city poured the straw on the man and gave him a fire, he said: "Take it and burn yourself, if you are not Shiites, do not burn in fire, and if you are nothing but Ash will not remain for you.Ammar says that the man burnt himself in front of the Kufa eyes and the straw burned and flamed the flames. When the fire was extinguished, the man was wearing white clothes and even had no fire. Became Then Amir al-Momenin (pbuh) said: "Indeed, I am the divider of paradise and fire, because when it comes to resurrection, I say to fire: this is yours, so he falls and this is mine. Therefore, according to the will of my Lord, I divide all between fire and paradise I will do.(مدینة المعادز - p. 37 - Miracle 70)
Concise answer
Amir al-Mu'minin Ali (AS) had many judgments, some of them with strong and weak documents - or even without documents - in historical and narrative sources.One of these judgments is quoted from Ammar ibn Yasser: 
One day, their high judgment was judged by Dar al-Qazah, while a man called Safwan Ben Akhtar stood up and said: "I am your Shiites, but I have sinned and I want to cleanse me in this world, so that I will not have a sin in the hereafter!" Imam (AS) said: "Tell me of your greatest sins." Said: The biggest guilty of sodomy was with children. Imam (AS) told him: "Choose one of these three punishments to clear it; blow with Zulfikar [execution] to ruin the wall by seeing or burning in the fire. These are the rewards of someone who has done this. " Safwan said: my lord! I burn in the fire to save the fire of the hereafter. 
Imam said: "O Ammar! Go for a thousand reeds to burn this person tomorrow. " And he said to him: "Go do what you must take or pay." He went on to command the Imam, divide his property among his children, and everyone who had a right to him gave it to him, then in the Hijra Ali (as), who is in the house of Noah, the eastern part of the Kufa Mosque, the night Beatoute In the morning, when the Imam called the prayer, he said to Ammar: "Call in Kufa so that the people will leave the houses and see how the Imam of men will execute God's command." 
Some say: How Ali (AS) wants to burn one of his Shiites and friends, he now wants to burn this person to fire, and this will invalidate his imamate. (Some sources say that Kufa people said: Do they not say that Shi'a Ali (PBUH) and their martyrs do not burn in fire, this man is Ali (AS) Shiite; his fire burns and the Imamate Ali (as) is invalid Gets) [1] This entry was listened to by Imam. The Imam took that person and poured a thousand branches on him and gave him flint and sulfur, and said: "Do you want to know what you are looking for?" And Takser Azamak, "Fire yourself with these, if you are Shiites and friends and you know me, you will not burn in the fire, and if you are opponents and losers, fire will destroy your flesh and your bones breaks". The person burned the fire and burned the branches, but he stayed beneath the flames, and even the fire did not affect the white shirt he was wearing, and smoke did not blacken it. Imam (as) said: "Those who deviated from the direct path of God lied and went to the wrong place and became misled." Then he said: "The Shiites are our trust, and I am the divider of heaven and hell." [2] 
The following points should be noted about this narrative: 
1. This narrative has a weak and lurid document, and the first book on access quoted from it belongs to the fifth century. 
2. The content of this narrative also has issues that make it difficult to accept. For example, in the sodomy four witnesses must be present, or he himself has four times confessed to sodomy, and confession less than four times, is not accepted, and instead of the punishment. [3] However, the appearance of the above narrative is that the person only confesses once and the Imam determines the limit for him, although the Prophet of Islam (PBUH) and the Imams (AS) in the implementation of the Shari'a, the use of ordinary ways and natural ways It was a proof of religious matters, and it was not so much that they wanted to use their ignorant science in these kinds of issues. 
3. Supposing, if we accept the above narrative, it should be said that some of the cereals - which at that time were also in Kufa - pretended that the Shiites Ali (AS) would not even burn in this world even in this world, and those who had the Shiite principle They wanted not to be suspicious of the mistaken beliefs of the people of Shi'a and Qur'mat Amir al-Mu'minin (AS) by abusing this false belief, but the Imam wanted to make it clear to the people that God had the power to prevent the burning of the Shiites in the fire of the world. But this did not mean that the law of nature in the burning fire would never be applied to any Shi'i, because this is contrary to that Of that actually happens and we see many Shiites in wars, accidents, fires and the burning of dead or damaged.
 

[1] . Ibn Abdul Wahab, Hussein ibn Abdul Wahab, Ayoun al-Māžzat, p. 30, Qom, Mābbād al-Dawari, first edition, Beita.
[2] . Ibn Shazan Qomi, Abolfazl Shazan ibn Jibrail, Al-Fadael, pp. 74-75, Qom, Reza Publishing, Second Edition, 1363; with a slight difference between Reza Tabari: Amoli Sughir, Muhammad ibn Jarir ibn Rustam, Neodar al-Muzat Fi Manaqeb al-'Ahmad al-Goda'ah, peace be upon him, the researcher, the reformer, the Asadi, the Bassem Muhammad, p. 120, Qum, our reason, first edition, 1427 AD.
[3] . Majlesi, Mohammad Baqir, Ayat, Qesas and Diat, Researcher, Ali Fadhil, p. 61 and p. 20, Qom, Institute of Nayshar al-A'ar al-Issamyyah, First edition, Beata.

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!

    • Let's ask Mr. Science/Ms. Nature . At what age you have designed their physical bodies to start getting attracted to each other for procreation?
    • At one of these meeting, is it possible to ask, listen beloved friends, I have a question. This verse in the quran, النَّبِيُّ أَوْلَىٰ بِالْمُؤْمِنِينَ مِنْ أَنْفُسِهِمْ ۖ  [Shakir 33:6] The Prophet has a greater claim on the faithful than they have on themselves, 
      [Pickthal 33:6] The Prophet is closer to the believers than their selves,
      [Yusufali 33:6] The Prophet is closer to the Believers than their own selves, What is your understanding, since we are gathered here for a Unity meeting, lets really unite and learn from each other. Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him and his progeny) used it, as a question at Ghadir Khum and asked  "Then the Messenger of Allah continued: "Do I not have more right over the believers than what they have over themselves?"   People cried and answered: "Yes, O' Messenger of God." "For whoever I am his Leader (mawla), 'Ali is his Leader (mawla)." No Muslim disagrees till this point?  So, this should be a easy thing for you, only thing you are asking,  in which capacity do you see the Prophet Muhammad( peace be upon him and his progeny) as Mawla?  What is your understanding of " Greater Right " or as per the verse 33:6 "greater claim on the faithful than they have on themselves, " You are only reciting the Qur'an and asking for their valued opinion and understanding.  Why would this not be possible? 
    • بسمه تعالى السلام عليكم What’s the علة of praying with a louder voice during Fajr, Maghrib and Isha, and a lower during Thuhr and Asr?
    • Alaikas Salaam brother,  Namaz means Salaat.  You can list all the words you didn't understood InshaAllah we'll reply. 
    • specifically, primary/high school, do you think males and females should be schooled separately ?
×