Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'Uthman'.



More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • Religion Forums
    • General Islamic Discussion
    • Shia/Sunni Dialogue
    • Christianity/Judaism Dialogue
    • Atheism/Other Religions
    • Other Shia Sects
    • Jurisprudence/Laws
  • Other Forums
    • Politics/Current Events
    • Social/Family/Personal
    • Science/Health/Economics
    • Education/Careers
    • Off-Topic
    • Poetry and Art
    • Travel/Local Community
    • Guest Forum
  • Language Specific
    • Arabic / العَرَبِية
    • Farsi / فارسی
    • Urdu / اُردُو‎
    • Other languages [French / français, Spanish / español, Chinese / 汉语, Hindi / हिन्दी, etc.. ]
  • Site Support
    • Site Support/Feedback
    • Site FAQs
  • The Hadith Club's Topics
  • Food Club's Topics
  • Sports Club's Topics
  • Reverts to Islam's Topics
  • Travel Club's Topics
  • Mental Health/Psych Club's Topics
  • Arts, Crafts, DIY Club's Topics
  • The Premier League Club's Topics
  • Quit Smoking's Topics

Blogs

There are no results to display.

There are no results to display.


Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


Facebook


Website URL


Yahoo


Skype


Location


Religion


Mood


Favorite Subjects

Found 20 results

  1. Read the Reddit comments to understand what the thread was about, since the post has since been deleted. ....................................................................................... I'm so tired of the utterly nonsensical and VERY COMMON Sunni notion of 'I am happy to seek unity with Shias as long as they don't curse/insult/abuse any Sahaba, and especially NOT Aisha, Abu Bakr, Omar, Uthman. Firstly, any Shia claim regarding the sahabi that happens to go against the Sunni narrative is considered insulting. Secondly, and more importantly, is that the same notion is true for Shias... You are insulting the Ahlul Bayt by not accepting them as divinely appointed leaders of Allah, and infallible individuals, and perfect preservers of the religion of Islam, and a high means of seeking closeness to Allah (intercession). Not only are you insulting revered Shia figures by not following them, you are commiting MAJOR shirk by giving a false attribute to Allah, by saying that Allah has not always appointed an infallible leader on this Earth, and that there currently isn't an infallible leader. Furthermore, the real kicker is that plenty of revered Shia figures, such as Abu Talib (رضي الله عنه), are considered kuffar by Sunnis. Is this not insulting? So, how can we Shias unite with Sunnis based on their own fallacious logic? Shias are the minority, and Sunnis are the majority. It makes Sunnis think that they are Orthodox and that they have to unite with Heterodox for political and humanitarian reasons, and that Shias must make [ridiculous] compromises. Shias are far more receptive to the unity message, because we actually understand Sunni Islam, and can see the commonalities. We understand that we can't make Sunnis compromise on their beliefs. Simply by being the minority within Islam, by nature we Shias already understand Sunni beliefs, whereas Sunnis have a basic strawman understanding of Shia beliefs... which is natural, considering that they are the majority. Anyways, the point of my post is the following: Let's compile a list of revered Shia figures that are not given their proper status by Sunnis, according to Shia Islam... with an explanation given. ...This is to show that we Shias and Sunnis can unite, but we cannot unite upon revered figures and imamah. ...This will also serve as a way of showing Sunnis that this argument of theirs makes no sense. Another important question we may ask is "What about commonly revered figures like Imam Ali (عليه السلام) who is given different status in both sects? Can we unite upon Imam Ali (عليه السلام)?" ...a common Sunni criticism of political unity is that "Ali ibn Abi Talib (رضي الله عنه) is given an improper status in Shia religion because they call upon him... tawassul (intercession) of the 'dead' is Shirk! So there is absolutely no room for unity since we can't even agree on the status of the sahabi" [yes, I am aware that the Imams (عليه السلام) are still alive, but Sunnis don't believe this...] I would love to hear your thoughts. Wassalam. JazakAllah Khair. Fi sabilillah.
  2. ذهبت ولم تلبس منها بشيء The prophet when the body of Uthman passed by: “You have gone without involving yourself in any of it (the Dunya)” A Monastic Life? Uthman loved to worship Allah, this reached such an extent that he decided to lead a monastic lifestyle and disengage himself from all the fleeting things of this world including conjugal relations. The prophet intervened to explain to him why that would be against the Sunna. - Abi Abdillah عليه السلام said: The wife of Uthman b. Madh`un came to the prophet صلى الله عليه وآله and said: O messenger of Allah, Uthman b. Madh`un fasts in the day time and spends the whole night standing in worship, so the messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وآله came out whilst angry and carrying his slippers [in his hands] until he reached Uthman and found him praying. When Uthman saw that it was the messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وآله he cut-off his prayer. He [the prophet] said to him: O Uthman, Allah the Exalted did not send me with monasticism rather he sent me with a simple and lenient Hanifiyya. I fast and pray but also interact with my wives, so whoever loves my character should follow my Sunna, and marriage is part of my Sunna. - Sa`ib b. Abi al-Waqqas said: When the affair of Uthman b. Madh`un - who was one of those who abandoned women - occurred, the messenger of Allahصلى الله عليه وآله sent for him and said: O Uthman, I have not been ordered to lead a monastic life, do you seek something else apart from my Sunna? He said: No, O messenger of Allah. He [the prophet] said: part of my Sunna is to pray and then sleep, I sometimes fast and at other times eat, I marry and divorce, so whoever seeks something apart from my Sunna then he is not from me. O Uthman, your wife has a right over you, and your own body has a right over you. Sa`d said: by Allah, there was a group of Muslim men who were ready and willing to castrate themselves and become celibate if the messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وآله had allowed Uthman to continue in what he had done. - Uthman b. Madh`un said: O messenger of Allah - I desire to to become celibate, the prophet said: wait Uthman, the celibacy of my Umma is fasting and prayers. Uthman said: I desire to lead a wandering life [like some monks], the prophet said: wait Uthman, the wandering life of my Umma is to remain in the Masjid and wait for the next Salat after the last one finishes. Uthman said: I desire not to eat meat [to become a vegetarian], the prophet said: wait Uthman, for I myself do eat meat and enjoy it, if I could have it every day I would, and if I were to ask Allah for that He would give it to me. Uthman said: O prophet of Allah, may my father and mother be sacrificed for you - I desire not to use perfume ever, the prophet said: wait Uthman, for I do use perfume and I like fragrance, and it is my Sunna and the Sunna of the prophets before me. The Prophet’s Grief Uthman participated in the battle of Badr in the year 2 AH and went on to die soon after, becoming the first Muhajir to die in Madina and the first to be buried in Baqi. The prophet grieved at his death. - Aisha said: I saw the messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم kissing the dead of body of Uthman b. Madh`un until I saw his tears flowing. - Abi Abdillah عليه السلام said: the messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه kissed Uthman b. Madh`un after his death. How do you Know? There is an interesting exchange which happened between the prophet and a woman after Uthman's death. - Abi Abdillah عليه السلام said: the prophet صلى الله عليه وآله heard a woman saying after the death of Uthman b. Madh`un: glad tidings of paradise to you O Abu al-Sa`ib [i.e. Uthman]! so the prophet said to her: and how do you know [that he is in paradise]? it is enough for you to say: he used to love Allah Mighty and Majestic and His prophet … The prophet rebuked the woman to teach us to avoid complacency and a false sense of security. A Gravestone The prophet did not leave the grave of Uthman without marking it so that he can recognize its location and come visit him. - Ali b. Abi Talib عليه السلام said: when Uthman b. Madh`un died, the messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وآله kissed him, and when he had buried him he sprinkled water on top of the soil of the grave and stretched out a piece of cloth over the grave. He [Uthman] was the first person over whose grave the prophet stretched out a cloth. The prophet went on to level the soil of the grave, then he called for a stone, it was said: O messenger of Allah - what will you do with it? he said: I will mark his grave by it so that I can bury my relations near him, then he placed the stone near the head of the grave. - al-Muttalib said: when Uthman b. Madh`un died, his body was taken out in a procession and was buried. Then the prophet صلى الله عليه وآله ordered a man to bring him a stone, but the man was not able to carry it, so the messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وآله stood himself, went towards it and rolled up his sleeves - [al-Mutallib said: the one who reported this to me about the messenger of Allah said: it is as though I can still see the whitness of his forearms when he rolled up his sleeves] - then he carried it and placed it at the head and said: I mark with it the grave of my brother so that I can bury next to it those who die of my family. What a great status Uthman must have had for the prophet to want to bury his family members next to him. Note also that the prophet called him ‘his brother’, some have explained this by noting that Uthman was the foster-brother of the prophet because they both suckled from the same woman. It is also possible that he used this as a term of endearment with an eye to his elevated kinship in Islam. Righteous Predecessor The prophet did indeed go ahead with his wish to bury his relations near the grave of Uthman. First when his daughter Ruqayya died and then when Ibrahim his son passed away. He also uses the enigmatic term سلف الصالح which has been rendered here as righteous predecessor but which can also mean righteous ancestor. Perhaps it the latter which is meant keeping in mind that if Uthman was the foster-brother of the prophet then his children would be related to him in some manner. - One of the two [al-Baqir or al-Sadiq] عليه السلام said: when Ruqayya the daughter of the messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وآلهdied, the messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وآله said: meet up with our righteous predecessors Uthman b. Madh`un and his fellows … - Ibn Abbas said: when Uthman b. Madh`un died a woman said: congratulations to you O Ibn Madh`un for you have entered paradise! So the messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وآله looked at her angrily and said: what made you know? for by Allah I am the messenger of Allah but do no know what is going to be done with me, she said: O messenger of Allah he was your warrior and companion. This conversation weighed heavy on the minds of the companions of the messenger of Allah because of what he had said about Uthman while he [Uthman] was the best of them. It went on like this until when Ruqayya the daughter of the messenger of Allah died and he [the prophet] said: meet up with our goodly predecessor Uthman b. Madh`un [i.e. this is when they knew that Uthman must have had a good destination]. The women cried [when Ruqayya died] so Umar began hitting them with a whip, the prophet said to Umar: let them cry! but beware of the screeching of the Shaytan. Then the messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وآله said: whatever issues from the heart [grief] and the eyes [tears] then it is from Allah and it is a form of mercy, whetever issues from the hand [like beating oneself] and the tongue [like words of despair] then it is from Shaytan. The messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وآله stood at the edge of the grave while Fatima was at his side crying, so the prophet صلى الله عليه وآله began to wipe away the tears of her eyes with the side of his clothes in sympathy for her. - Aba Abdillah عليه السلام said: … when Ibrahim the son of the messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وآله died the eyes of the messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وآله overflowed with tears and he said: the eyes tear-up and the heart grieves but we do not say that which may anger our Lord, we sure are saddened because of you O Ibrahim. Then the prophet صلى الله عليه وآله saw a disparity in his grave so he levelled it out with his hand and said: when one of you does any work then he should do it well, then he said: meet up with you righteous ancestor Uthman b. Madh`un … Ali Remembers a Brother Recall that the prophet is said to have said “I will mark with it the grave of my brother …” referring to Uthman as his brother. He also buried both his blood relations Ruqayya and Ibrahim near this brother of his and said at the time “meet up with our righteous Salaf …” where Salaf can mean ancestor. A pattern emerges when we note that Ali, who is himself well-known as being the brother of the prophet, also referred to Uthman as a brother. - Abu al-Faraj said: Uthman b. Ali about whom it is narrated from Ali that he said: I name him with the name of my brother Uthman b. Madh`un. This Uthman b. Ali went on to sacrifice his life to defend Aba Abdillah al-Husayn عليه السلام in Karbala. It comes as no surprise then that one of the candidates for the anonymous ‘brother’ Ali speaks of in his famous words has been taken refer to Uthman b. Madh`un. - Ali عليه السلام said: In the past I had one I considered a brother in the way of Allah, he became prestigious in my eyes because of how lowly he considered the world to be in his eyes, the needs of the stomach did not have sway over him, he did not long for what he did not get; if he got a thing he would not ask for more; most of his time was spent in silence, but if he spoke he silenced the other speakers and quenched the thirst of questioners, he was weak and considered weak, but at the time of seriousness he was like the lion of the forest or the serpent of the valley, he would not put forth an argument unless it was decisive. He would not reproach anyone in an excusable matter unless he had heard the excuse, he would not speak of any ailment except after its disappearance, he would do what he says, and would not say what he would not do, even if he could be excelled in speaking, he could not be excelled in silence; he was more eager to listen than to speak, if two things confronted him he would see which was more akin to the longing of the heart and would then oppose it [do the other]. Betake yourself to these and implement them and try to compete with each other in them. even if you cannot do it fully then know that acquiring a part is better than giving up the whole. What Could Have Been It is not a stretch to say that had Uthman been alive at the time of the Fitna (sedition) after the death of the messenger of Allah - when the Umma betrayed his testament for the Ahl al-Bayt - he would have sided with Ali in the events to come. One circumstantial evidence for this is that when the prophet paired together one Muhajir with an Ansar in the so-called Ukhuwwa, he paired Uthman b. Madh`un with Abu al-Haytham Malik b. Tahiyyan. We know that this pairing was not random, but a bond which the prophet made using his special insight. He would gather two men who were closest to each other and had an affinity even in their spiritual states. Abu al-Haytham went on die fighting on the side of Ali at Siffin.
  3. Sincere Questions for our Shi’a brethren 1. Imamat for Imamiya Ithna Ashari Shi’as is considered as Usul e Deen and in maqam and position it is considered greater than Nabuwwah or atleast equal to Nabuwwah. We would like to ask you that how has this Usul e Deen not stated in Quran al Kerim. Allah Almighty time and again tells us to Believe in Allah and the Ambiyaa in Kutub wa Suhuf e Ambiyaa a.s, in Maa’d in Jannah in Jahannam in Meezan in Malak and many other important matters. But no where in the whole Quran al Kerim are we commanded or told to Believe in Imams or the understanding of “Imamat” is not in line with Quranic dawah. How can an Usul e Deen be established when it finds no mention in the Quran al Kerim? 2. Imam ‘Ali a.s did not consider the rebels of Shaam as Kuffar for they did not believe in the Imamah/Khilafah of Amirul Momineen and also those who did not accept Imamah of Imam al Hasan a.s were not unbelievers. So does a disbelief in any Usul e Deen imply Kufr and if not then please give us your definition of what “Usul e Deen “ is. 3. In Nahjul Balagha we do not find any support for the Shi’a concept of Imamah raher on contrary maters of Imamah wal Khilafah were considered as per consensus of Muhajireen wal Ansaar and at many places Imam ‘Ali himself stated that people have no option but to have an Amir be it good or bad. A sincere study of Nahjul Balagha will prove that the understanding of Imamah which was later developed by Shi’a was not the Manhaj and belief of Salaf e Saliheen and is a later innovation. 4. Is Khilafah of Imam ‘Ali a.s mansoos MinAllah if yes then how can Imam be ready for arbitration to chose a Caliph whereas this mansab is from Allah Almighty and not men. This amal of Imam Ali and also of Imam Hasan a.s proves that Khilafah is not Mansoos MinAllah in the sense the shi’a believe it btu rather as per the agreed upon choice of the best of Muslims of their time and that decision is condiered Mansoos MinAllah. 5. We would like to ask the Shi’a that whether the Promise of Allah Almighty in Surah Nur to give Khilafah and then peace and security to the Muslims , whether this promised has been fulfilled or we wait for time of Imam al Mahdi a.s for this to be fulfilled. In Nahjul Balagha the advises and words of Imam ‘Ali a.s to Hazrat ‘Umar r.a is a shining proof that Imam referred to a promise from Allah in terms of victories of Muslims over Kaiser wal Kisra. And referred to Khalifa as string for the beads. And many others words of wisdom from ‘Amir a.s are shining proof that Salaf e Saliheen understood Khilafat e Rashida r.a as fulfilling this promise of Allah for khilafah to Muslims . 6. Tahrif e Quran: The shi’a state that it is foundational belief of Shi’a Imamiya that there is not a Tahrif of a single Alif or a letter and it is present with us as it was before pure and in original form. Shaykh Saduq, Shaykh Tusi, Sharif Murtaza, Ayatullah Khoei and others are all unianimous on it. We have to give them the credit of trying to educate the Juhalaa among the Shi’a but we ask the Shi’a that do they consider those who believe in Tahrif of Quran al Kerim as Muslims anymore or Kuffar. However it is saddening that the shi’a do not do so as Al-Majlisi, Tabrisi, Qummi and Al-Mufid and others believe in Tahrif e Quran and yet the shia still looka t these scholars as leaders of guidance. Clearly this is a sign of their dishonest and hypocritical stand! Any sane and sincere looker can see through this fallacy and deception. I really believe that because of the stance of Shi’a towards Quran al Kerim they have produced very very scarce and few Huffaz and even they cannot meet the caliber of the Huffaz from Ahle Sunnah Wal Jamaah. The urge and great love for Tilawah and organizing the study of Quran al kerim and to do Hifz is found in Ahle Sunnah and not in shi’a and the reason is centuries of their Aqaaed of Tahrif e Quran and doubts over its being in original form and also in their notion that it is not present in the Tartib ‘Ali a.s had compiled. But now in Iran a lot of people are arising from this deception the late Ayatullah Tabatabai felt this big gap and hence produced a Tafsir known as Tafsir al Mizan. 7. Sahaba: In Quran al kerim, Nahjul Balagha, Sahifah e Sjaadiya if we look at the understanding of Sahaba then only way of Ahle Sunnah wal Jamaah is in line with Quran al Kerim and Nahjul Balagha and Sahifah e Imam Ali bin al Hussain. The fact that their praise in mentioned in Quran al Kerim and authentic ahadith is enough a proof for the Fazilat e Sahaba e Kiraam. The Shi’a never attack the companions of Imams and it seems from their ways that they honor ‘Ali a.s more than Rasoolallah saws as they do not realise the branches are not like the root. And the Adab and love of Rasoolallah Saws would have demanded from them to keep their tongues shut in matters of Sahaba e Kiraam and realized that they had believed and occumpanied Nabi e Akhiruzamaan saws and fought for Islam and laid their lives and wealth for the cause of Islam and spread the Word of Tawhid across the world. This is the reason that we find less love for Quran al Kerim, Implementing Sunnah and Jihad in the Shi’a as Sahaba e Kiraam are the real Pioneers in them and this Deen spread through them. This is why very few books on Seerah and few Naat khaawn were found among the Shi’a. This is why their hearts do not Brim with Zikr e Mustafa (Saws) like you find with Ahle Sunnah. Their support of Yahud wal Nasara and despising Jihad and how Allah Almighty has always strengthened Borders of Islam through followers of Sahaba e Kiraam and Ahle Sunnah wal Jamaah is another shining proof of the Shia being on misguidance. We will only focus on Usul. I fail to understand how can the reports of Holy Prophet Saws be relied upon unless we do not remove the shi’a way of thinking. In terms of Ilm e Rijaal and science of Hadith Shi’a cannot match the hardwork and knowledge base of Ahle Sunnah wal Jamaah. The foundation of Shia thought process is very weak but that of Ahle Sunnah is like steel so on what should one base his/her Aqaaed. Taqqiyah, Rajat and Badaa all these aqaaed are indeed not in line with understanding of the Quran al Kerim by the Salaf e Saliheen and hence are later innovations of the Shi’a. We seek sincere answers of the Shi’a to these questions of ours and ask them that is not their line of thinking actually trying to paint a very negative picture of First Muslims and What hope does his generation or many others have in a revolution and change and Tazkiyaa wa Tasfiyaa if he Greatest of all Teachers Nabi e Akhiruzamaan Saws could not bring such a change only handful of Muslims remained true to their belief and then their belief of Imamat and Taqqiyah . I believe these are genuine questions every shia should ponder over and Allah has power over all things and He alone is Al-Hadi
  4. Brother @Megatron, I think we are derailing the "Four Daughters" thread so starting this new topic:
  5. Salaam, Although I'm not a die-hard fan of Yasser Al-Habib, and I know many of you don't like him, he is a good debater and raises excellent points. Here in this video, a salafi sheikh, first swears to one of the killers of Uthman Ibn Afwan, then he apologizes and praises the killer, and Yasser Al Habib responses to that. It's hilarious and phenomenal. I wonder what reply does sunnis has to this video.
  6. Assalam O Alaikum all shia brothers/sisters. This post is dedicated to @Tawheed313 @skamran110 @BornShia @shiaman14 @yam_110 Lets forget about the reason why Imams had named their children as Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthman. Whatever may be the reason behind this, its not important. Because its an established fact that Imams actually did that. The most important thing is that being the true lover and follower of Ahlebait you should also name your children as Abu Bakr, umar and Uthman. And I think there is no any big deal in it for a true lover of Ahlebait. Instead of feeling any embarrasment, You should proudly tell your relatives and friends that I have given my son such name out of my love for Ahlebait, as if Ahlebait can give their children these names (Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman & other) then why can't we shias, being their followers. Trust me this will increase your love for Ahlebait more. On the other hand followers of Ahlul Sunnah following the footsteps of Ahlebait not only are giving their children names like Muhammad, Ali, Fatima, Hassan, Hussain, Abbas, Ammar, Abu zar, Miqdad, Salman, but also they name their children as Abu Bakr, Umar, uthman, as well as Ayesha, Hafsa, Talha, Zubair, Anas, Khalid etc. ALHAMDULILLAH. Ahlul Sunnah is far ahead of you in this regard. Not only, We have accepted the fact but also applied to ourselves. WATCH THESE VIDEOS and refresh your knowledge and Imaan. Follow Ahlebait practically and name your children as they did.
  7. As-Salam 'Alaikum, Shaykh Ibn Baz, one of the supreme Wahhabi scholars, was asked about two rak'ahs which some Sunnis perform after what they call "the first adhan." Then, the Shaykh replied: لا أعلم في الأدلة الشرعية ما يدل على استحباب هاتين الركعتين؛ لأن الأذان المذكور إنما أحدثه عثمان بن عفان رضي الله عنه في خلافته لما كثر الناس في المدينة ، أراد بذلك تنبيههم على أن اليوم يوم الجمعة ، وتبعه الصحابة في ذلك ، ومنهم علي رضي الله عنه واستقر بذلك كونه سنة؛ لقول النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم: عليكم بسنتي وسنة الخلفاء الراشدين المهديين فتمسكوا بها وعضوا عليها بالنواجذ "I do not know in the Shari'i evidences anything that proves that these two rak'ahs are mustahab (recommended), because the said adhan, 'UTHMAN B. 'AFFAN, MAY ALLAAH BE PLEASED WITH HIM, INNOVATED IT during his caliphate, when the population of al-Madinah became large. He intended through it to remind the people of the Day of Jum'ah. And the Sahabah followed him in it, among them 'Ali, may Allah be pleased with him. And through that, its status as a Sunnah is confirmed, due to the statement of the Prophet, peace be upon him: 'Follow my Sunnah and the Sunnah of the rightly guided, divinely guided successors. Adhere to it, and stick tenaciously to it.'" http://madrasato-mohammed.com/fatawaa_lajna_wa_imameen_02/pg_002_0853.htm Let's get this straight: 1. 'Uthman "innovated" it. So, it is only an innovation in the religion, a bid'ah. 2. 'Ali allegedly followed this bid'ah, along with some other Sahabah. 3. Somehow, because it was 'Uthman who founded that bid'ah, and it was followed by 'Ali, then it became a Sunnah. That logic, ehn?
  8. We Shia, have two sources of guidance that our fiqh is based upon:- #1- The Quran - They Quran supersedes EVERYONE and EVERYTHING regardless of whomever it is, simply because its Word of Allah himself and no one can supersede Allah's word. #2- AhleBayt - Prophet Muhammad being the highest authority in hierarchy of AhleBayt by far, for being chosen the last and final Messenger, and then the Imams of his house hold. If any of the imams has been attributed to have said something that contradicts the Quran and/or Prophet Muhammad, that hadith is to be rejected and considered false since Imams will not go against the laws of the Quran or Nabi. Similarly If Nabi is attributed to have said something that contradicts Quran, in that case that hadith is to be considered false and rejected, since - its our belief is that - Nabi would never go against the Quran. Only Quran can not be abrogated by anyone or anything. The case of Umm Ayesha according to Quran and AhleBayt: #1 - The Quran: Allah knew about all the events are to take place in future, he knew Imam Ali and Umm Ayesha are going to go to war with each other in which Imam Ali is going to be on Haq, He knew that Umm Ayesha is going to declare war on Imam Ali due to Caliphs Othman's killing and everything else, he knew what the future is going to bring because he is the creator of that future,and still he commands us "The Prophet is closer to the Believers than their own selves, and his wives are their mothers." (Quran 33:6) - hence Umm Ayesha. #2- AhleBayt : Imam Ali in Nahjul Balagha Sermon #155 clearly mentions "As regards a certain woman, she is in the grip of womanly views, and malice is boiling in her bosom like the furnace of the blacksmith. If she were called upon to deal with others as she is dealing with me she would not have done it. (As for me), even hereafter she will be allowed her original respect, while the reckoning (of her misdeeds) is an obligation on Allah". Source: Nahjul Balagha - Sermon #155 (About the malice by Ayesha and warning the People of Basra about what to occur) In Conclusion: Our Imam, Imam Ali is clearly commanding us that Umm Ayesha is full of hated towards him and mentions that if it was someone else besides Imam Ali himself, she would not act the way she did but then he commands us that she should be given the ORIGINAL RESPECT - which implies treat her like there was not war or hatred among us. Further more he leaves her case to God for his to take care of it. Based on these two, In conclude, we have to show respect towards Umm Ayesha and am interested in your comments on it? Any comments?
  9. I was reading something and I came across this: "The first epoch of 450 years began in 638 when Caliph Umar accepted the surrender of Jerusalem and was surprised when informed that there were no Jews in the city. Over the previous century the Byzantine emperors, in collusion with the local Christians, had forced the Jews to convert. Those who did not were expelled from Jerusalem and banned from praying at the sacred Temple Wall. Jews often came surreptitiously to the neighbouring hills overlooking the sacred site to pray and gaze at the Temple wall. To rectify this injustice, Hazrat Umar encouraged 70 Jewish families to resettle in their ancestral homes, and cleared a space for them around the Temple Wall. He then personally wrote a document, clearly defining the rights of the minorities (dhimmis) in conquered lands. This edict called Ehed Umaria is today enshrined in the Mosque of Umar in the Christian Quarter of Jerusalem. To commemorate the magnanimity of the Caliph, a large area in the Jewish Quarter of Jerusalem is named Umar Ibn Khattab Square" I have heard about the evil actions and characteristics of the 3 Caliphs, my Sunni brothers, please accept that they were not infallible. This thread is not about arguing, I am merely surprised that I have heard so little about the good actions of the 3 Caliphs. After reading the above I immediately felt I should ask my Shia and Sunni brothers about the good qualities and actions of Abo Bakr, Omer, and Usman. While I understand that praising Sunni figures might mislead naive Shias, I think we should see the good and the bad that came from the 3 Caliphs. So far I have heard a lot of bad things and a little good things about the 3 Caliphs. This thread is about only the goodness of the 3 Caliphs, so please don't speak of negative things. I really want some learned Shia brothers to tell me what goodness the 3 Caliphs had because the repetition of hearing about Fadak etc can make some ignorant people like myself see the 3 Caliphs as pure evil. So I just want some goodness please, the material you post, please state whether it is accepted by Shia Ulema or not. please do keep posts short and snappy as the Prophet did because I like most people skim read through long posts.
  10. Objection 6: If rivalry existed, why Ali (a) named his sons Umar, Abu Bakr and Uthman? Pattern of Objection Shia claim that the first and second Caliphs attacked the house of Fatima ® whereas we know that Ali (a) named some of his issues after the Caliphs. This shows that the Caliphs are exonerated from these allegations. Does anyone name his children on his enemies? Logical reply A. Absence of restricting the name to a particular person Names are never related to any particular person. In the same way, names like Umar, Abu Bakr and Uthman were not limited to these persons and numerous other people were also named as such. That is why names like Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthman were common names and numerous persons during the time of the Prophet were known by these names. Thus, overlooking the replies that follow, it cannot be said that selection of these names was due to attachment and friendly relations between His Eminence and the Caliphs, because it is possible that His Eminence had attachment with other people having the same names. VISIT OPPRESSIONS UPON JANABE ZAHRA (SA) FOR MORE B. Naming as Abu Bakr Especially with regard to naming one of the sons of Amirul Momineen (a) on the name of Abu Bakr; if it was as some have claimed, Abu Bakr was an agnomen (Kunniyat) and not a name, His Eminence should have named his son after one of the real names of Abu Bakr: That is Abdul Kaaba, Ateeq, Abdullah or his other names (with attention to differences, which exist with regard to his names) and he would not chosen his Kunniyat. Another point is that: What attention to the fact that Abu Bakr is a Kunniyat and not a name, and Kunniyat is chosen by a person himself according to the circumstances of his life and it is not selected by the father of that person. From this aspect, if we say that Amirul Momineen (a) named one of his sons as Abu Bakr it would be a false and baseless statement. Finally: According to a report the real name of this son, whose Kunniyat was Abu Bakr, was Abdullah and he was martyred at Kerbala aged twenty-five years. Since his real name was Abdullah and from the aspect that he had a son named Bakr they referred to him as Abu Bakr. Abul Faraj Isfahani writes: Abdullah bin Ali was twenty-five years of age when he was martyred in Kerbala.[1] On the basis of this, the birth of Abdullah occurred during the early period of the Caliphate of His Eminence, Ali (a) and the Imam during that period severely condemned the Caliphs preceding him. This is another proof of the absence of relation between these names with that, which is publicized by the objection makers. C. Naming as Umar With regard to naming of a son of Amirul Momineen (a) as Umar: 1- Firstly: One of the habits of Umar was that he used to change the names of people. Thus, according to historians, he changed the names of many people. Balazari has written in Ansabul Ashraf: Umar bin Khattab named the son of Ali after himself.[2] In the same way, Dhahabi has written in Seer Alaamun Nubla: A son was born to Ali (a) during the period of Umar bin Khattab and the latter named the child after his own name.[3] For further emphasis, I would present the example of three other persons, whose names were changed by Umar: A- Ibrahim bin Harith Abdur Rahman bin Harith was named by his father as Ibrahim, whose name Umar changed to Abdur Rahman.[4] B- Ajda Abi Masruq Umar bin Khattab changed the name of Ajda bin Malik to Abdur Rahman.[5] C- Thalaba bin Saad The name of Mualla was Thalaba; Umar changed it to Mualla.[6] 2- Supposing we don’t accept the previous statement as was also mentioned in the beginning, can it be said that this naming was due to the attachment of Amirul Momineen (a) to Umar bin Khattab and only his name was Umar? Ibne Hajar has mentioned in Isabah, ‘Chapter of those named as Umar’, twenty-one persons among companions of the Prophet who were named as Umar.[7] How and according to which evidence was this naming due to the attachment to Umar bin Khattab? [1] Maqatilut Talibiyyin, Vol. 1, Pg. 22, Abul Faraj Ali bin Husain Isfahani (d. 356). [2] Ansabul Ashraf, Vol. 1, Pg. 297, Ahmad bin Yahya bin Jabir Balazari (d. 279 A.H.). [3] Seer Aalamun Nubla, Vol. 4, Pg. 134, Shamsuddin Muhammad bin Ahmad bin Uthman bin Qaimaz Dhahabi, Abu Abdullah, (d. 748), Mausisatur Risala, Beirut, 1413, Ninth edition, Edited: Shuaib Arnaut, Muhammad Naeem Arqasusi. [4] Al-Isabah fee Tamizus Sahaba, Vol. 5, Pg. 29, Ahmad bin Ali bin Hajar Abul Fazl Asqalani Shafei, Edited: Ali Muhammad Bajawi, Darul Jeel – Beirut, First edition, 1412 – 1992. [5] Al-Isabah fee Tamizus Sahaba, Vol. 1, Pg. 186, No. 425, Ahmad bin Ali bin Hajar Abul Fazl Asqalani Shafei, Edited: Ali Muhammad Bajawi, Darul Jeel – Beirut, First edition, 1412 – 1992. [6] Al-Ansab, Vol. 1, Pg. 250, Abul Manzar Salma bin Muslim bin Ibrahim Sahari Autabi (d. 511 A.H.) [7] Al-Isabah fee Tamizus Sahaba, Vol. 4, Pg. 587-597, Ahmad bin Ali bin Hajar Abul Fazl Asqalani Shafei (d. 854), Edited: Ali Muhammad Bajawi, Darul Jeel – Beirut, First edition, 1412 – 1992.
  11. Salaamu 'Alaykum, During my stay in Najaf al-Ashraf I was given the honor to reside with many 'Ulema and tulaba of the Hawza. One day a wakeel of Hafiz Bashir al-Najafi (HA) and Sayyid Sadiq Shirazi (HA) came to visit me (even though I don't deserve any visitation) and they started discussing with me in regards to Islamic history. For the 'Ulema, it is a source of interest to hear the point of view of American Shi'a Muslims. Moving on we discussed the Battle of Jamal and Ayesha's wrongdoings, when I out of habit said something inappropriate about az-Zubayr. I somewhat cursed him, due to my ignorance. Almost immediately the wakeel rebuked me with an IMMENSELY ANGRY tone that az-Zubayr, although originally on the wrong side, asked Amir al-Mo'mineen for forgiveness and left the battlefield. He, az-Zubayr, was ashamed of his wrong doing thus he attempted to return home to Madina. During his trip back an assassin from the camp of Ayesha deceived him and killed him whilst he was in prayer, thus az-Zubayr died a martyr. When Ameer al-Mo'mineen (A) received the news of this he wept significantly and made much Du'a for his forgiveness. After hearing this narrative from the wakeel I have been troubled by this very much so and I would like to know why do we, Shi'a, not give az-Zubayr similar treatment to Hur ibn Yazid? A general of an army in the midst of an eminent war realizes his mistake, and asks for forgiveness from the Ahlul-Bayt (S), and later is killed on this basis should be honored, but he is not. I look at myself as one who has been blessed with much study in history but even with all what I studied I never had a good impression of az-Zubayr. How can this be? And when I take the name of az-Zubayr in front of our Shi'a brothers, even learned ones, they tend to ridicule him. Why is this so? -Agha Shabbir Abbas
  12. Ali didnt know/understand that he was appointed by the Prophet s.a.w at Ghadeer khum as the successor, but the Shias do. May be the Shias are smarter than Ali :P Sahih Bukhari Vol. 8, Book 74, Hadith 282: Narrated by Ibn Abbas: `Ali bin Abi Talib came out of the house of the Prophet () during his fatal ailment. The people asked (`Ali), "O Abu Hasan! How is the health of Allah's Messenger () this morning?" `Ali said, "This morning he is better, with the grace of Allah." Al-`Abbas held `Ali by the hand and said, "Don't you see him (about to die)? By Allah, within three days you will be the slave of the stick (i.e., under the command of another ruler). By Allah, I think that Allah's Messenger () will die from his present ailment, for I know the signs of death on the faces of the offspring of `Abdul Muttalib. So let us go to Allah's Messenger () to ask him who will take over the Caliphate. If the authority is given to us, we will know it, and if it is given to somebody else we will request him to recommend us to him. " `Ali said, "By Allah! If we ask Allah's Messenger () for the rulership and he refuses, then the people will never give it to us. Besides, I will never ask Allah's Messenger for it." With regards to the hadith prophesying the coming of the 12 Caliphs from the Quraish, it is a PROOF that the 12 Imams of the shias are not what the Prophet meant in his Prophecy because only 2 of the 12 imams became Caliphs, and one of them Al Hassan r.a. gave the Caliphate to Muawiyah r.a. So I think that the Shias here are not reading history properly.
  13. According to the Ahlul Sunnah, these will all be in Janah: 1)Imam Ali (as) , 2)Abu Bakr, 3)Umar, 4)Uthman, 5)Talhah, 6) Zubair. I know there's more but I just want to focus on these. Ok, so... The second and third cause the death of the first's wife. Also, the fourth and fifth tried to kill the first. Oh, I almost forgot, the second, third and fourth on that list stole the Khilafah from the first... but, all of them will be together in Janah. Could anyone from Ahlul Sunnah explain this?! And if any Shi'a would like to add to this they would be very welcome. ws
  14. (salam) I haven't posted in this section for a long time due to the same old topics being re-cycled over and over, it got useless; a discussion of ego's. I want to ask all those that believe the first 3 to be superior to Imam Ali (as) a few simple questions. Where are the scholarly works of the 3? if there aren't any why not? Surely if they are so elevated then they must have some books of there own. If not where are their many beautiful sermons/sayings? We all know that Imam Ali's (as) sermons and sayings are compiled; Nahjul Balagha. Please keep it on topic and useful. I just want to hear opinions/theories, without bias if possible. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I just saw this thread - http://www.shiachat....-it-understood/ My bad, it is in essence the same question.
  15. Someone recently mentioned how ahl sunnah wal jammah denied the caliphate of imam (ra). Of course this is not true, I thought about writing a long response detailing what ahl sunnah beliefs with regards to imam Ali (ra) and the rest of ahl bayt (as). But realized I would have to go into what we believed and did not believe. Debates etc etc. I just didn't want to go through all that, maybe another time and I've been pretty busy so instead I'm going to post some informative videos which details the ahl sunnah position on some important personalities in Islamic history. I'm starting off with sayyiduna Ali (ra). The lecture is not long and is very good. I believe those who take the time will benefit from it.
  16. (bismillah) (salam) As you know the claim is that the first three caliphs (Abu Bakr,Umar,Uthman) had more knowledge than Ameer al mumeneen Ali Ibn Abi Talib (as). Therefore we must follow them for they know the sunnah the best, whoever this video shows that only Ali Ibn Abi Talib (as) knew the sunnah and not the first three caliphs.
  17. I was doing quick research on the path that Ahlu Sunnah sect took to gather their hadiths amid the plethora of hadiths that were narrated by Ahlulbayt. It is well accepted that Hadith documentation and teaching was forbidden in the times of the 3 Khulafa. A closer look though shows that this forbiddance was not absolute. The history shows a number of companions who went against this law, taught hadiths to other Muslims and confronted the authority with it. Shia school usually focuses on the Ahlulbayt contribution and role in those hard times and usually ignores the rest of the companions. A great number of Shia scholars reasoned this ban to be directed against Ahlulbayt specifically. Ibn Um Abd or Ibn Masoud is an intersting hadith narrator, he is not usually associated with the Shia of Imam Ali, but in the same time he had narrated many hadiths about Ahlulbayt. Some Shia scholars concluded from this that the 3 banned the hadith to cover their defeciency in knowledge. Ibn Masoud was the sixth Muslim man, he was among the earlist men who recited Quran loudly in Mekkah and was one of those who attended Bay'atulRidhwan. He was forced to saty in Madinah during Umar time by a direct order from Umar. Umar forced many Sahabah to stop spreading the hadith of prophet, some were leashed, some were imprisoned and others were exiled. Among them was Ibn Masoud who was forced to stay in Madinah. It is also important to note that during Abu Bakr rule and Umar rule, there were a number of Muslims who wrote hadiths despite the ban. These incidents appear discreatly in history books while mentioning the ban of hadith documentation. Some narrations will mention the burning of hadith books that were written during Umar time which tells that people did not stop writing the hadiths. Ibn Masoud is thought to be one amongst those who did not stop documenting the hadith. It is also important to note that we some narrations mention that Ibn Masoud himself destroyed a book of hadith that was speaking specifically about the merits of Ahlulbayt. Acouple of other narrations mention that Ibn Masoud had rarely narrated something from the prophet and when he dide he shivered and sweat. It is worth telling as well that by the time Uthman was the Khalifah, total hadith ban policy proved to be ineffective, Uthman and the Umayad rulers allowed certain set of hadiths to be taught to people most of which were hadiths related to fiqh that Umar had approved. I wonder if any Sunni here will have the gut to tell me how Ibn Masoud died? It was during Uthamn time .....Uthman did not like Ibn Masoud, he beat him ... Ibn Masoud passed away later.
  18. (bismillah) (salam) I am writing this post with the intention of preserving the truth, so that none of my brothers and sisters are fooled by con-artists trying to deceive unknowing people. I humbly plead my brothers and sisters to read the following so that they become aware of the falsehood of others and protect themselves from falling into their traps. I am posting this in response to Ibn al-Hashimi’s article about the names of Imam Ali (as) sons in which he supposedly refutes answering-ansar.org (may Allah be pleased with their efforts) article about Imam Ali’s children’s’ names. These are Ibn al-Hashimi’s works which are so vastly used by our Sunni brothers; http://www.schiiten....habah/sons.html http://www.schiiten....als/rayat1.html Ibn al-Hashimi quotes: 1. “We kindly ask Rayat to display more honesty when he furthers arguments; if he knows that four of them were named that, then there is no reason to state two and then base his entire article upon that false fact. 2. “In other words, this statement made by Rayat: […] is quite patently false! This so-called “crucial point” is nothing but a bold-faced lie.” 3. “Subhan-Allah the Shia only fool themselves!” 4. “Yet, this is a blatant and manifest lie!” The hypocrisy of these statements will soon be revealed. I suggest that you read his articles about the Imams’ (a.s) naming their children, and keep in mind that he is lying through his teeth. He uses two Shi’ite sources and he states them: “[…] is recorded by the classical Shia scholar, Shaikh Mufid, in “Kitāb Al-Irshād”, pp. 268-269, where these three sons of Ali are listed as numbers 12, 6 and 10 respectively. Also when he says, “[…] let us look at the list of Imam Hasan’s children, as found in Shaykh Mufid’s book (Kitab al-Irshad, pp.289-290).” He goes on stating each of the pages until the 11th Imam before he states the there was no 12th Imam. According to Kitāb Al-Irshād, pp. 268-269 (first part of this book can be found here and on the last page accounts for the children of Imam Ali: http://www.scribd.co...itab-Al-Irshad), which this author constantly loves to refer to, never stated that the Commander of the Faithful (A.S) had 18 sons! Yet, he seems to be calling out the Shi’a for lying? “Yet, this is a blatant and manifest lie!” This man so often accuses of the Shi’a of lying, while his hypocrisy is quite visible. Let’s see exactly what Kitāb Al-Irshād says on pg. 268-269: Chapter VIII THE CHILDREN OF THE COMMANDER OF THE FAITHFUL (This is) an account of their children of the Commander of the faithful, peace be on him, their number and names, and a selection of reports about them. The Commander of the faithful, peace be upon him, had twenty-seven children, male and female: 1. Al-Hasan 2. Al-Husayn 3. Zaynab the elder 4. Zaynab the younger, who was given the kunya Umm Kulthūm Their mother was Fātima the blessed, mistress of the women of the worlds, daughter of the master of those sent by God and the seal of the Prophets, the Prophet Muhammad. 5. Muhammad, who was given the kunya of Abū al-Qāsim. His mother was Khawla, daughter of Ja’far b. Qays al Hanafī. 6. ‘Umar 7. Ruqayya They were twins. Their mother was Umm Habīb, daughter of Rabī’a. 8. Al-‘Abbās 9. Ja’far 10. ‘Uthmān 11. ‘Abd Allāh The (last four) were martyrs with their brother al-Husayn on the plain of Karbalā’. Their mother was Umm al-Banīn, daughter of Hizām b. Khālid b. Dārim. 12. Muhammad, the younger, who was given the kunya of Abū Bakr. 13. Ubayd Allāh. Both of these were martyrs with their brother al-Husayn on that plain. Their mother Layla, daughter of Mas’ūd al-Dārimī. 14. Yahyā. His mother was Asmā, daughter of Umm Sa’īd, daughter of ‘Umays al-Khat’amī, may God be pleased with her. 15. Umm al-Hasan 16. Ramla The mother of these two was Umm Sa’īd, daughter or ‘Urwa b. Mas’ūd al-Thaqafī. 17. Nafīsa 18. Zaynab, the youngest. 19. Ruqayya, the younger. 20. Umm Hāni’ 21. Umm al-Kirām 22. Jumāna, who was given the kunya Umm Ja’far. 23. Umāna 24. Umm Salama 25. Maymūna 26. Khadīja 27. Fātima These, the blessings of God be on them, had different mothers. Among the Shi’a, there are those who mention (another) Fātima, the blessing of God be on her, who was born after the Prophet. They say that the Apostle of God named her while he was carrying Muhsin. According to this group there were twenty-eight children of the Commander of the faithful, the blessing and peace of God be on him. God knows and judges best. [END] Comments: where exactly did Ibn al-Hashimi get his sources? He seems to have listed the list he provided was from Kitāb Al-Irshād. “Yet, this is a blatant and manifest lie!” The depths of falsehood that the Wahhabi (not Sunni) scholars will put forth to overcome their Shi’a opponents by lying? Where did he get 2 ‘Uthmans from, 2 ‘Umars from, and 1 Abu Bakr from? Did the Prophet (s.a.w.w) ever lie to convert people into Islam (na’uzobillah)? How could this man follow the ‘sunnah of the Prophet?’ Is ibn al-Hashimi part the Ahle-Sunnah. A Sunni can say that the Imam names one of his sons Abu Bakr in which I will respond to as incorrect! Kunya means “nickname” or “epithet” (http://www.islamic-dictionary.com/index.php?word=kunya) which may or may not be a name that is given from a parent! Kitāb Al-Irshād states that Imam Ali’s thirteenth son was named Muhammad, whose kunya was Abu Bakr. A nickname/epithet is given when people notice a quality about him/her and label the person with a name that suits him accordingly. On what basis do Sunnis (because not only Ibn al-Hashimi claims this) claim that Imam Ali’s thirteenth son, Muhammad, was named Abu Bakr? How does this prove the merit of Abdullah Ibn Abi Quhafa? Now, before I move onto the other Imams, I want to address another thought that first came into my mind when I caught Ibn al-Hashimi’s deceitful methods. I know it may not sound scholarly, but you guys will have to bear with me. Here is a thought that will be followed by a few questions that you might think redundant but I think it’s crucial; Imam Ali’s (as) mother’s name was Fatima bint Asad (s), the Prophet (S.A.W.W) named his (one and only) daughter after Imam Ali’s mother (most likely). We see that Imam Ali named his last daughter Fatima; 1. What proof is there that Imam Ali named her Fatima after Imam Ali’s wife or mother? 2. Imam Ali named 3 of his daughters Zaynab, the Prophet (saww) had two wives with the names of Zaynab (Zaynab bint Khuzayma & Zaynab bint Jahsh), which one of Imam Ali’s daughter’s was named after which wife? 3. Imam Hassan named 2 of his daughters Fatima, how do you know that he didn’t name them after his father’s mother (Fatima Bint Asad), or his own mother (Fatima Bint Muhammad), or his youngest sister (Fatima Bint Ali)? 4. Imam Hassan (A.S) had a daughter named Umm Salama, as did Imam Ali (A.S), how do you know that Imam Hassan (as) didn’t name his daughter after his sister as opposed to the Prophet’s wife? 5. Imam Hassan (A.S) named one of his sons ‘Umar ibn al-Hasan, as did Imam Ali , how do you know that Imam Hassan didn’t name one of his sons after his own brother as opposed to ‘Umar ibn Al-Khattāb, or all of the other ‘Umars during the Prophet’s era? This applies to so many of the Imams’ children! Since I am an average Shi’a, I cannot give scholarly explanations as to why we see so many ‘Umar’s or Uthmān’s. But, I could go on and on until the 11th Imam. Even the Imam that named one of his daughters ‘Aisha, how does that prove the merit of ‘Aisha bint Abi Bakr? How do one know that those Imams didn’t name those daughters after an ‘Aisha of his own time? How do you know that the Imam didn’t name their daughters ‘Aisha for the same reason that Abdullah ibn Abi-Quhafa named his daughter ‘Aisha? The more I think about this argument of the Sunnis, the more I am compelled to feel that the Sunnis don’t have any more serious arguments that could be proven from each others’ books. An Account of the Number and Names of the Children of al- Hasan b. ‘Alī, Peace be on them, and an Extract from the Reports about them. Al-Hasan b. ‘Alī, Peace be on him, had fifteen children, both male and female: 1. Zayd b. al-Hasan and his two sisters: 2. Umm al-Hasan 3. Umm al-Husayn Their mother was Umm Bashīr daughter of Abū Mas’ūd ‘Uqba b. ‘Amr b. Tha’laba al-Khazrajī. 4. al-Hasan b. al-Hasan His mother was Khawla daughter of Manzūr al-Fazārī. 5. ‘Umar b. al-Hasan and his two brothers 6. Al-Qāsim 7. ‘Abd Allāh Their mother was a slave-wife (umm walad) 8. Abd al-Rahmān b. al-Hasan His mother was a slave-wife (umm walad) 9. Al-Husayn b. al-Hasan, who was nicknamed the one with the broken tooth (al-athram) and his brother: 10. Talha b. al-Hasan and their sister: 11. Fātima daughter of al-Hasan Their mother was Umm Ishā daughter of Talha b ‘Ubayd Allāh al-Taymī. 12. Umm ‘Abd Allāh 13. Fātima 14. Umm Salama 15. Ruqayya These were daughters of al-Hasan, peace be on him, by various mothers. Now, once again we see the popular and common name ‘Umar appear. I will repeat the same question that I stated earlier, Imam Ali also had a son named ‘Umar, how can one like Ibn al-Hashimi claim that Imam Hassannamed his son ‘Umar after ‘Umar al-Khattāb when he could’ve named him after his brother. Again, Sunnis have no proof that the he named his son after ‘Umar al-Khattāb. Let’s move on to Imam Hussain’s (as) children. Here is where Ibn al-Hashimi’s lies reached its peak and infuriated me. Ibn al-Hashimi stated pg. 379 of Kitāb Al-Irshād is where Shaykh al-Mufid listed the names of Imam Hussain’ssons. In the same list where Ibn al-Hashimi states names of Imam Hussain’s children, he stated Abu Bakr and ‘Uthmān on page 372. “Yet, this is a blatant and manifest lie!” This is what is really written on page 372 of Kitāb Al-Irshād. The Names of the Members of the House who were Killed with al-Husayn in the Plain of Karbalā There were seventeen souls, in addition to al-Husayn b. ‘Alī, peace be on them both: 1. Al-‘Abbās. 2. ‘Abd Allāh. 3. Ja’far. 4. ‘Uthmān. (These were all) sons of the Commander of the faithful, peace be on them, and their mother was Umm al-Banīn. 5. ‘Abd Allāh. 6. Abū Bakr. (Both of these were) sons of the Commander of the faithful, peace be on them and their mother Laylā, daughter of Mas’ūd al-Thaqafī. 7. ‘Alī. 8. ‘Abd Allāh. (These were) two sons of al-Husayn b. ‘Alī, peace be on them both. 9. Al-Qāsim. 10. Abū Bakr. 11. ‘Abd Allāh. (These were) sons of al-Hasan b. Alī, peace be on them. 12. Muhammad. 13. ‘Awn. (They were) two sons of ‘Abd Allāh b. Ja’far b. Abī Talib, may God be pleased with them all. 14. ‘Abd Allāh. 15. Ja’far. 16. ‘Abd al-Rahmān. (They were) sons of ‘Aqīl b. Abī Talib, may God be pleased with them. 17. Muhammad. (He was) the son of Abū Sa’īd b. ‘Aqīl b. Abī Talib Now we see that these were the martyrs of Karbalā, not (all) the sons of Imam Hussain! The Abu Bakr that Ibn al-Hashimi stated was the kunya given to Imam Ali’s (A.S) son (if you recall). The devious Ibn al-Hashimi portrays that both Abu Bakr and ‘Uthmān were the sons of Imam Hussain (A.S)! Surely he has embarrassed his Sunni followers who have also used this same article! If he didn’t, he made a Shi’a the victim of his falsehood. I only pray for those Shi’a who actually believe his rubbish. Now let’s take a look at what Shaykh al-Mufīd really wrote for the names of the children of Imam Hussain (A.S). The Children of al-Husayn b. ‘Alī, Peace be on them Al-Husayn, peace be on him, had six children: 1. ‘Alī b. al-Husayn al-Akbar (the elder). His kunya was Abū Muhammad and his mother was Shāhzanān, daughter of Choesroe Yazdigard. 2. ‘Alī b. al-Husayn al-Asghar (the younger). He was killed with his father on the banks (of the Euphrates) as has already been mentioned earlier. His mother was Laylā daughter of Abū Murra b. ‘Urwa b. Mas’ūd al-Thaqafī. 3. Ja’far b. al-Husayn, peace be on him. He had no survivors. His mother was a women of (the tribe of) Qudā’a and he died during the lifetime of al-Husayn. 4. ‘Abd Allāh b. al-Husayn. He was killed while still a baby child with his father. An arrow came, while he was in his father’s arms, and killed him. Mention of that has already come earlier so. 5. Sukayna, daughter of Husayn, peace be on him. Her mother was Rabāb, daughter of Imru’ al-Qays b. ‘Adī of Kalb of Ma’d. she was also a mother of ‘Abd Allāh b. al-Husayn, peace be on him. 6. Fātima, daughter of al-Husayn, peace be on him. Her mother was Umm Ishāq, daughter of Talha b. ‘Ubayd Allāh of Taym. Where does Ibn al- Hashimi see an ‘Uthmān as one of his six children? Where do he see Abu Bakr as one of his six children? One might notice that on page 372 Shayk Mufīd stated that Abu Bakr was the name of one of Imam Hassan’s (as) son. But if you refer back to the original list of Imam Hassan’s sons, there was no Abu Bakr. Neither was there an Abu Bakr listed in Ibn al-Hashimi’s list for Imam Hassan’s son. So I’m guessing that Sheikh Mufid made a mistake as he is not infallible, and if one of Imam Hassan’s sons had the slightest chance of being named Abu Bakr, Ibn al-Hashimi would surely include it in his (self created) list. You also see an Abu Bakr as Imam Ali’s (A.S) son, which you can refer back to was the kunya of Muhammad b. Ali.! In conclusion, Imam Hussain (as) did not name any of his children Abu Bakr, ‘Uthmān, or ‘Umar as the cunning Ibn al-Hashimi claims is listed in Kitāb Al-Irshād. Now we reach the fourth Imam – Imam Ali Zayn Al-Abidīn (as). Again we see errors in Ibn al-Hashimi’s list which is only more proof that he is a liar. He only listed ten children of this Imam whereas Kitāb Al-Irshād has listed fifteen children. If a Sunni says that Ibn al-Hashimi was only listing males, than that is also incorrect because he only listed one Muhammad while Kitāb Al-Irshād states more. An Account of the Children of ‘Alī b. al-Husayn, Peace be on them. Fifteen chldren were born to ‘Alī b. al-Husayn, peace be on them. 1. Muhammad. His kunya was Abū Ja’far al-Bāqir and his mother was Umm ‘Abd Allāh, the daughter of al-Hasan b. ‘Alī b. Abī Tālib, peace be on him. 2. ‘Abd Allāh. 3. Al-Hasan. 4. Al-Husayn. Their mother was a slave wife (umm walad) 5. Zayd. 6. ‘Umar. (Both were born) from a slave-wife. 7. Al-Husayn the younger (al-asghar). 8. ‘Abd al-Rahmān. 9. Sulaymān. 10. ‘Alī. He was the youngest of the children of ‘Alī b. al-Husayn, peace be on them. 11. Khadīja. The mother of both of these was a slave-wife. 12. Muhammad the younger. His mother was a slave-wife. 13. Fātima. 14. ‘Aliyya. 15. Umm Kulthūm. Their mother was a slave-wife. We see another ‘Umar here, again I can ask the questions; 1. How do you know that he didn’t name this child after ‘Umar b. Ali? 2. How do you know that he didn’t name this child after ‘Umar b. Hassan? 3. How do you know that he didn’t name this child after ‘Umar b. Abdul Aziz who put a stop to the cursing of Imam Ali (a.s)? I won’t go over this again and again whenever we see another ‘Umar or ‘Uthman as a name because I have already explained the probability of it them being named him after the second and third caliphs. Anybody can claim that it was after another ‘Umar or ‘Uthman because we already know that these two were popular names amongst the Sahabas of the Prophet (s.a.w.w). You also can’t tell me that the Imams named any of their children Abu Bakr, because they didn’t! Whenever you see these names, apply the same questions. Imam Muhammad ibn ‘Ali Al-Baqir’s (as) and Imam Ja’far As-Sādiq (as) lists (that Ibn al-Hashimi provided) was amazingly on par with Shaykh Mufid this time so I won’t write down what Shaykh Mufid wrote in his book. 18 of Musa al-Khādhim’s (as) children were female. Is Ibn al-Hashimi seriously claiming that because Imam Musa al-Khādhim named one of his daughters ‘Aisha out of 18 female children, it is sufficient enough proof that he named here after ‘Aisha bint Abi Bakr. Once again, if one actually thinks about this argument, you find it to be even more foolish as you go along. On the same note, we see that Ibn al-Hashimi has listed an Abu Bakr as one of Imam Musa al-Khādhim’s sons. If you check his list carefully, you see that he has referred to another book. Unfortunately, Allah (s.w.t) only blessed me with the pleasure of reading Shaikh Mufid's book, so I don't have this one. He seems to be finding Shi’a books that differ from one another, and as soon as he finds something useful for him, he states it! For the entire list of Imam al-Khādhim’s (A.S) he was only using Kitāb Al-Irshād, but now he changes books. Since I don’t have this book, am I supposed to believe him? Based on our previous knowledge on Ibn al-Hashimi, we can make an educational guess that he is, once again, lying! I am given the right to accuse him of lying because he has already been caught many times! There hasn’t been a single time where both parties agreed on the naming of Abu Bakr as one of the children, why should I believe him now? Now we see another ‘Aisha as one of Imam Hasan al-Askari’s (A.S) daughter’s name. You should already have the same questions that I keep repeating, going on in your head by now. This concludes for what I have to say to you, now I will move on to answering your arguments by breaking it down. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ If I any of my brothers or sisters find any part of this article offensive in any way, I apologize for it, as I am inexperienced. May Allah (s.w.t) guide everybody. I hope this helps! (wasalam)
  19. Salaam alaikum, can anyone Outline a list of crimes committed by uthman? Thanks in advance
  20. Salaam Alaikum I'm looking for information on who killed Uthman Ibn Affan, any help would be greatly appreciated! :)
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...