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
Sign in to follow this  
Abdullah al Hanafi

Hazrat Ali Named His Sons After The Three Caliphs

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

Ali ibn Abi Talib Named His Sons after the Three Caliphs [includes a rebuttal of Answering-Ansar]

If Ali’s wife was killed by Umar, and if he himself was persecuted by Abu Bakr and Uthman, then why in the world did Ali name three of his sons after the Three Caliphs? It is a historical fact that Ali named three of his own children as Abu Bakr, Umar, and Uthman.

This fact is recorded by the classical Shia scholar, Shaikh Mufid, in “Kitab al-Irshad”, pp. 268-269, where these three sons of Ali are listed as numbers 12, 6 and 10 respectively.

Al-Shia.com excerpts this book and it is viewable here:

http://al-shia.com/html/ara/books/ershad-1/a10.html

http://rafed.net/books/hadith/ershad-1/index.html

Therefore, this is not a matter of debate, since Al-Shia.com itself documents how three of Ali’s sons were named Abu Bakr, Umar, and Uthman.

No one, not even the most magnanimous of people, names his son after his enemies who were responsible for the death of his wife and unborn child. That is why one simply cannot find a Shia today named Abu Bakr, Umar or Uthman.

This fact categorically rejects the Shia paradigm which is based upon the false idea that Ali disapproved of Abu Bakr, Umar, and Uthman. In fact, not only were they not enemies, but rather they were Sahabah (companions) and friends to each other, so much so that Ali honored them by naming his children after them. This shatters the very basis of Shi’ism which is centered around the supposed oppression of the Ahlel Bayt at the hands of the Sahabah.

Rebuttal of Answering-Ansar’s Article “Names of Imam Ali’s sons”

The first thing that should jump out at the reader is that Answering-Ansar could not deny that Ali named his sons Abu Bakr, Umar, and Uthman. Instead, Answering-Ansar had to explain away this phenomenon by claiming that Ali did indeed name three of his sons with these names, but that it had nothing to do with his love for the Three Caliphs.

Answering-Ansar claims that Abu Bakr, Umar, and Uthman were common names like Tom, Richard or Harry today. Therefore, reasons Answering-Ansar, it is not surprising that Ali named his sons with these names.

My response to this is simple: if three men named Tom, Richard or Harry came to my house and killed my wife and unborn child, then I don’t think I would ever name my kids Tom, Richard or Harry. Whether or not that these are common names, the fact that these three individuals did what they did would be enough for me to stay away from these three names. Regardless of the fact that these are common names, there is no chance that a man today would name his children Tom, Richard or Harry after the murderers of his wife/child who had the same exact names. Likewise, the Shia accuse Abu Bakr, Umar, and Uthman of oppressing his family, killing his wife and unborn child; it is therefore highly unlikely that Ali would then name his children after them. Why would a person name one of his sons after the man who killed another one of his sons?

Furthermore, if Ali named one of his sons after one of the Three Caliphs, then perhaps we could claim coincidence. But rather, Ali named three of his children after the Three Caliphs. Think about it: if Tom, Richard or Harry came into my home and killed my wife/child, do you think I would then name my children after all three of these individuals? Fine, if one of my children was named Tom, then we could claim coincidence. But suddenly when it becomes Tom, Richard, and Harry, it just seems like too big a coincidence.

Ali had eighteen sons, and there are hundreds of names to choose from. Why in the world would he pick three names after the three people he hated and who oppressed his family? Answering-Ansar is asking us to accept a very big coincidence. The Shia faith is based around the oppression of the first Three Caliphs and yet here we see that Ali named his sons after them.

Answering-Ansar would have us believe that it is just one big coincidence that Ali named his sons after Abu Bakr, Umar, and Uthman. They say again and again that these are very common names and so it is not a big coincidence at all. We remind these Shia that Ali named two of his sons Umar and two of his sons Uthman. Surely, this is not random chance, but rather we see that Ali named his sons after prominent Islamic figures, as many Muslims do today. Maybe one Umar could be a chance, but Ali named two of his sons Umar, and another two he named Uthman, and another one he named Abu Bakr!

Let us look at the naming scheme chosen by Ali for his sons:

1. Muhammad ibn al-Hanafia

2. Muhammad al-Asghar

3. Muhammad il-Awsat

4. Abbas “abul-fazil”

5. Abbas al-Asghar

6. Jafar al-Akbar

7. Jafar al-Assghar

8. Abdullah il-Asghar

9. Abdullah il-Akbar

10. Abdullah “Abi Ali”

11. Uthman al-Asghar

12. Uthman al-Akbar

13. Umar al-Akbar

14. Umar al-Asghar.

15. Abu Bakr ibn Ali

16. Al-Hasan

17. Al-Hussain

18. Awn

Is it all coincidence that Ali named the majority of his sons with duplicate names, with names of family and companions? Fourteen of the eighteen sons are named in either duplicate or triplicate. This was not random! It would be an astronomical coincidence. If Ali’s naming scheme was random, why can we not find other common names of Arabia? Like Obaid, Zuhayr, Zubayr, Sufyan, Bilal, Amr, Yasir, Miqdad, Abu Dhar, Faris, Abdul-Rahman, Abdul, and any other of the hundreds of names…

Ali named three of his sons after the Prophet Muhammad. Muhammad is a common name, and is in fact, the most common name amongst the Muslims. Would it be justified then for someone to claim that perhaps it was another Muhammad after whom Ali was naming his sons after? It is altogether too obvious that Ali named his sons after the Prophet and nobody else.

Looking at the names of Ali’s sons, we find that all of the names are those of Hashimites or prominent Sahabah (Companions). For example, there is the name Abbas which was the name of the Prophet’s uncle, and then there is Jafar the name of Ali’s brother, and the name Abdullah which is the name of the Prophet’s son. And then we have the name Abu Bakr, two Umars, and two Uthmans. This is surely not a random naming pattern, but rather it is very deliberate indeed.

Let us look at how astronomical the coincidence is that the Shia are asking us to accept. Ali had eighteen sons. Naming one son, randomly, with the name of someone he hates has a likelihood of happening 1/18 times, or a 5.6% chance. Mathematically speaking, we see that the chance that five of his sons would have the name of someone Ali hates is virtually nil.

(1/18)x(1/18)x(1/18)x(1/18)x(1/18) = 1/1,889,568 = <0.000001%

There is less than one percent of a one percent chance that the naming of his sons was random. If the Shia are still not convinced and would like to live in the fantasy world that this is just a coincidence, then there is nothing any rational person can do to convince them.

When we hear the name Abu Bakr, do we stop and ask “which one?” When we hear Umar, do we stop and ask “which one?” When we hear Uthman, do we stop and ask “which one?” When we look into Shia books and read about how supposedly Ali was oppressed by Abu Bakr, Umar, and Uthman, do we then question which people we are talking about? Suddenly, when Ali named five of his sons after the Three Caliphs, then it doesn’t refer to that Abu Bakr, that Umar, or that Uthman! This is the double standard of the Shia, and the myopic way in which he views history, oblivious to facts and reality.

Answering-Ansar then makes the feeble argument that Ali named his sons in a different order (i.e. not in the order of the Three Caliphs). But this argument is impotent because Ali had these children before the completion of the first three Caliphates. Therefore, there was no “order” of Caliphs as of yet. Furthermore, Ali was friends with these three individuals and there is no necessity that he name his children in the order of their rank, since most people do not even know how many children they plan to have! How many Shia parents name their eldest son as Hasan and a younger one as Ali? Does anyone stop them and say “oh, that’s out of order” since Ali was the first Imam whereas Hasan was the second? Surely this is nonsense!

To completely negate this rather creative (yet insignificant) argument, we shall provide an example very dear to the Shia: we call the reader’s attention to the seventh Imam of the Shia, Imam Musa al-Kadhim, who named his elder son with the name of the sixth Imam of the Shia and named his younger son with the name of the second Imam of the Shia! Is this not “out of order” according to Answering-Ansar’s argument? We give points to Answering-Ansar for their creativity, but in reality it shows how the Shia propagandist will further any argument to score a point regardless of if it is based in evidences or not.

In any case, the coincidence is too large, since Ali named three of his children after all three of the Three Caliphs. We think the reader will appreciate the weakness of Answering-Ansar’s claims, and this fact–namely that Ali named his sons Abu Bakr, Umar, and Uthman–shows that the Shia paradigm cannot possibly be a true one and rather it is based on Shia myths and fabrications. The Four Rightly Guided Caliphs were good friends and Sahabah (Companions) to each other. Indeed, Ali was the vizier and top aid of the Three Caliphs during their respective Caliphates. It is up to the reader to either accept the less than 1% chance that it was a coincidence that Ali named his sons with the names of the men who supposedly killed his wife and unborn child, or to accept the more rational conclusion that Ali was on good terms with them and named his sons after them.

Written By: Ibn al-Hashimi

www.http://www.*****************.com

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest *~Mrs Power~*

WHy dont you read the 'link' that bro redman gave..

Imam Ali prolly didnt name his sons after them!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In fact, Imam Ali (Úáíå ÇáÓáÇã) did indeed name his son Uthman in honour of someone;

“I name this child Uthman after my brother Uthman Ibn Ma’dhoon (ÑÖí Çááå Úäå)” Bihar Al-Anwar Volume 45 Page 38, Maqatil Al-Talibeyeen Page 55

if you read his site you would notice his point

also many iranians even today call their kids Omar after omar khayam the poet, it is just an arabic name and many people used it from any sects

but actually im not knowledgeable on the topic there is probably a strong argument by shiite scholars

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

STOP BRINGING OLD ARGUMENTS OUR BROTHERS AT ANSWERIN ANSAR HAVE ALREADY REFUTED THIS MATTER SEE FOR UR SELF

The names of Imam Ali[as]'s sons

In this article we have set out to refute the false claim made by Ansar.org's star pupil Afriki in his article on the marriage of Umme Kalthum (as), wherein he tried to present the romantic image of love / affection between Imam 'Ali and the Khalifas. Afriki was able to use his supernatural psychic abilities to inform his readers that such was Imam 'Ali (as)'s love for these personalities that he named his sons in their memory.

Ansar.org states:

However, let us take this version of history that weaves itself around the core element of persecution, and its concomitant of mutual hatred between 'Ali ibn Abi Talib and the rest of the Sahabah, and let us compare it with some other facts, the historic authenticity of which is accepted by both Ahl as-Sunnah and Shi'ah. For example, the fact that 'Ali ibn Abi Talib himself names three of his sons Abu Bakr, 'Umar and 'Uthman. (See al-Shaykh al-Mufid, Kitab al-Irshad, pp. 268-269, where these three sons of 'Ali are listed as numbers 12, 6 and 10 respectively.) No one, not even the most magnanimous of people, names his son after his enemies who were responsible for the death of his wife. That is why one simply cannot find a Shi'i today named Abu Bakr, 'Umar or 'Uthman.

This is one of the greatest evidences that these Nasibi love to flash in our faces as 'proof' that Imam 'Ali (as) loved the three khalifas. If we examine the lives of the Arabs we see that the names Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthman were common names, it was not exclusively reserved to a specific Arab tribe, so we would urge our opponents to at least examine in depth before arriving at a conclusion. The fact is these names were common amongst the prominent Arab tribes, and amongst those with these names were Kaafir's, Muslims and munafiqs and hence these are not names that in any way point to the superiority of the three Khalifas.

Incidentally, Ali (as) had 12 sons, thus the author is mistaken in trying to give the impression that he had 3 whom he named after the 3 khalifas.

Famous Arabs that were called Abu Bakr

In Ahl'ul Sunnah's authority work Al Isaba Volume four "Dhikr 'Abu Bakr" Ibn Barr states:

The first was Abu Bakr bin Quhafa, the second Abu Bakr bin Shuab Laisy and the third was Abu Bakr Nafee bin al Harith Saqfi.

In the Risala Taseemee'thul Isma page 4 we read that the grandson of Prophet Ilyas (as) was called Abu Bakr.

If our opponents are still not convinced then we shall cite Sibt Ibn Jauzi al Hanafi's "Tadhkirathul Khawwas, under the Chapter "Dhikr Abu Bakr" who provides a complete list of those individuals that were called Abu Bakr along with the tribe that they belonged to:

Abu Bakr bin Abdur Rahman Mukhdhoomee

Abu Bakr bin Hamam al Hameeree

Abu Bakr bin Muhammad bin Muslim Qurshee

Abu Bakr bin Abi Maleeka al Timeemee

Abu Bakr bin Sireen

Abu Bakr bin Marwan ibn Muhammad al Thathree

Abu Bakr Younis bin Bakeer al Shaybanee

Abu Bakr al Bahili

Abu Bakr al Sakhthayanai

Famous Arabs called Umar

We are quoting from Ahl'ul Sunnah's leading work Asadul Ghaybah Volume 4 under the letter "Ayn" that provides a list of men from those tribes that had the name Umar:

Umar al Aslama

Umar al Jamai

Umar bin Hakim Salma

Umar bin Salim Khuzamee

Umar bin Suraqa Qurshee

Umar bin Sa'd al Numaree

Umar bin Sa'd Salma

Umar bin Sufyan Qurshee

Umar bin Abi Salma Qurshee

Umar bin Amr Salmi

Umar bin Abdullah

Umar bin Ikrima

Umar bin Umar Laysee

Umar bin Ameer Ansari

Umar bin Auf Nakhai

Umar bin Ghazia

Umar bin La Haqq

Umar bin Malik bin Ukba

Umar bin Malik Ansari

Umar bin Mu'awiya Ghazree

Umar bin Yazeed al Khaza'ee

Umar Yamani

Famous Arabs that were called Uthman

We are again quoting from Asadul Ghaybah Volume 3 under the letter "Ayn" that provides a list of 19 people with tribal ancestry that were called Uthman:

Uthman bin Arqam

Utman bin Adhrak

Uthman bin Haneef

Uthman bin Rabia

Uthman bin Shumaas

Uthman bin Abi Talha

Uthman bin Abu'l Aas

Uthman bin Amr

Uthman bin Abd al Rahman

Uthman bin Abd' Ghanam

Uthman bin Ubaydullah

Uthman bin Affan

Uthman bin Uthman Thaqfee

Uthman bin Umar Ansari

Uthman bin Umar

Uthman bin Qays

Uthman bin Muhammad

Uthman bin Fadhoown

Uthman bin Ma'dh

We have proven from the books of Ahl'ul Sunnah that the names Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthman were common amongst the Arab tribes; these were the names of the sons of various parents. Perhaps Afriki could try and use some honesty for once in his life, and answer this:

'What revelation did you receive that led you to conclude that Imam 'Ali (as) had named his sons after Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthman due to his love of the three khalifas'?

We should point out that in our Shi'a text Munthee'ala Mahal Volume 1 under the Chapter "Shahadth" - we read the testimony of Imam 'Ali (as) that he named one of his sons Uthman because on the day he was born he (as) stated:

"I shall name this child after my brother Uthman bin Nat'eoon".

This is why the name Uthman was kept by Imam 'Ali (as) it does not prove Uthman bin Affan's merit, not even in the slightest.

With regards to Imam 'Ali (as)'s son Umar, we should point out that one of Imam 'Ali (as) close Sahaba was Umar the son of Umm'ul momineen Salma (ra). Umar was brought up by Rasulullah (s) and he fought alongside Imam 'Ali (as) at Jamal, and was in fact one of his commanders during that battle. During his reign Imam 'Ali (as) appointed him as Governor over Bahrain and Faris. To prove our point we suggest our opponents consult Asada al Ghaybah Volume 4 page 134 under the letter "Ayn". We assert that Imam 'Ali (as) named his son Umar after this great faithful commander. We are fully aware that the Nasibi will advance some Sunni text claiming that Imam 'Ali (as) named his son Umar after the second khalifa - but an Ahl'ul Sunnah work can not be advanced as evidence to convince us.

When as we have proved these names were common amongst the Arabs there exist no grounds for Afriki to conclude that Imam 'Ali (as) named his sons after the three khalifas. When these names were common amongst the tribes how can it be concluded that this Umar was named after this Umar?

When a name becomes common in a society then it is common sense that it is not on account of love a specific individual. Zayd for example was a common name amongst the Arabs, but there is no basis to claim that people were named this after a specific Zayd. Similarly the names Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthman were very common Arab names, when the forefathers of the three khalifas were also called Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthman could Afriki explain on account of the love for which individuals were their names kept?

There is no proof from the Qur'an or hadith that naming a child can only be based on account of love for a specific individual. If Imam 'Ali (as)'s naming his sons Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthman was due to his love for the three Khalifa's then by the same token then Rasulullah (s) must have hated Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthman, since he (s) did not name a single son after these three personalities. If these three were indeed his most beloved companions why did he not name a single son after them?

If keeping a name is proof of love of another person then we should point out that amongst our Ahl'ul Sunnah friends' names such as Abdur Rahman, Ubaydullah and Ghulam Ahmad are very common. Abdur Rahman Makhdoomee was the killer of Imam 'Ali (as), Ubaydullah bin Ziyad was one of the killers of Imam Husayn (as) and Ghulam Ahmad was a deviant who falsely proclaimed himself to be a Prophet. So with these facts in mind we ask our Ahl ul Sunnah brothers:

Do you love Abdur Rahman killer of Imam 'Ali (as)?

Do you love Ubaydullah killer of Imam Husayn (as)?

Do you love the false Prophet Ghulam Ahmad?

If you do not love these individuals then why do you keep these names? From here we can see that there is no harm in keeping names, even if the same names were those of kaafirs, munafiqs etc. To keep such names does not constitute love of a particular kaafir / munafiq / Nasibi either.

We read in Ahl'ul Sunnah's classical work Tadheeb al Tadheeb page 11 there is list of 118 Salaf elders called Yazeed. If names are based on love of another individual, can we concluded that these esteemed figures were all named after Yazeed ibn Mu'awiya killer of Imam Husayn (as)? Do these Ahl'ul Sunnah Salaf love Yazeed? Ibn Qutaybah in al Maarif cites Abdullah bin Abi bin Salul as a hypocrite and yet Abdullah is a very common name amongst Ahl'ul Sunnah, has this name been kept by them on account of their love for this hypocrite?

In fact historically there were two famous personalities with the name of Abdullah.

1. Abdullah bin Salul (a hypocrite)

2. Abdullah ibn Saba (one of the most popular personalities among Ahle Sunnah)

There are lot of Abdullahs among Ahl'ul Sunnah. Does this really mean they are named in love and respect of these 2 personalities??

There are another 2 famous personalities from Iran.

1. Khusro Parwaiz

2. Abu Lulu Ferooz (The killer of Umar)

In Pakistan, among Ahl'ul Sunnah, Parwaiz is a very common name. And there are a lot of people with the name of "Ferooz" in Pakistan (in fact, the biggest Urdu books publishing house in Pakistan has the name of "Ferooz Sons Ltd.")

Would it be fair to say that these Ahl'ul Sunnah people got these names in Respect and Love of these 2 personalities?

We read in Muruj ud Dhahab under the Chapter "Wafaath Abu Bakr" that on his death bed one of Abu Bakr's regrets was that he did not kill Asheesh bin Qays. This clearly alludes to the fact that Abu Bakr deemed this individual to be a hypocrite and that it was permissible to shed his blood. We should point out that the grandfather of Imam of Ahl'ul Sunnah Ibn Majah (author of Sunan Ibn Maja) was called Asheesh was he named so, on account of his parents love for the hypocrite Asheesh bin Qays? We should also point out that one of the Kaafir Arab Kings was called Numan, Imam Abu Hanifa's name was also Numan, was he named this due to his parents love of this kaafir king?

One of Yazeed's general's was called Muslim bin Aqba who led the troops at Harra who slaughtered the Sahaba and their sons (who had broken their allegiance to Yazeed) and raped their women. Ahl'ul Sunnah's leading Imam of hadith is Muslim author of Sahih Muslim, was he named as such due to his parents love for Muslim, Yazeed's Nasibi commander?

As we have proven, a name means nothing, and it certainly does not constitute love for a specific person, if it does then we should point out�

Rasulullah (s) named one of his sons Uzza

If the claim is that Imam 'Ali (as) named his sons after these three then Hanafi scholar Shibli Numani in Seerathun Nabi Volume 1 page 191 quotes Imam Bukhari's "Tareekh al Sagheer" that Rasulullah (s) named one of his sons Abdul Uzza:

That is interesting as Uzza was the name of a false God, as pointed out by Allah (swt) in Surah Najm verses 19-22 (taken from Abdullah Yusuf 'Ali's transliteration):

"Have ye seen Lat. and 'Uzza, And another, the third (goddess), Manat?.....These are nothing but names which ye have devised,- ye and your fathers,- for which Allah has sent down no authority(whatever). They follow nothing but conjecture and what their own souls desire!- Even though there has already come to them Guidance from their Lord!"

So whom was this Uzza that Rasulullah (s) called his son Uzza on? Was it based on an idol (astaghfirullah)? If Ahl'ul Sunnah are going to say Rasul(s) didn't name his son because he loved an idol, we will also say Imam 'Ali (as) didn't name his sons Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthman on account of his love for the three khalifas.

Nasibi Afriki had posed this little brainteaser:

Ansar.org states:

No one, not even the most magnanimous of people, names his son after his enemies who were responsible for the death of his wife. That is why one simply cannot find a Shi'i today named Abu Bakr, 'Umar or 'Uthman.

Our reply is simple. During the old times the names Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthman were common place amongst the Arabs. Similarly the name 'Ali was also common place amongst the Arabs. Asadul Ghaybah cited thirteen people who were called Ali. By the time of the Nasibi Banu Ummayya regime it became an offence to keep the name 'Ali. In Ahl'ul Sunnah's authority work Tahdheeb Volume 7 page 319 under the chapter "Dhikr 'Ali bin Rahba" we read that:

"During the Banu Umayyad reign when information was received that a child had been named 'Ali, he would be killed".

Individuals named 'Ali, Hasan, Husayn were labelled as Shi'a and were persecuted, even killed. Such was the hatred vented by the State, that no Banu Ummayya soldier was named 'Ali, Hasan or Husayn, neither did the descendants of Abu Bakr, Umar or Uthman keep these names. The oppression of Banu Ummayya in effect forced the Shi'a to bear enmity towards 'Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthman.

In summary, Ali (as) had 12 sons - some had very common names - like Ibrahim, Umar, Uthman, Abu Bakr. The latter 3 names are very common names amongst the Arabs like Tom, Richard or Harry amongst the Christians, and were common in pre-Islamic times also. To suggest therefore that because a man with 12 sons has a couple with the same names as his putative friends, and that he therefore called them after them, when these are very common names, is ridiculous - many men have friends called Tom, Richard and Harry, and many will have sons also by that name, but very few of these sons will have been named after their fathers' friends. I mean there could have been a case if a man's friends are called Engelbert, Darwin and Zebediah, and these are also the names of even some of his sons, but the names Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthman were like Tom, Richard and Harry, and these names had no such religious connotations in those early days� it was much later on that they came to be associated with Sunni Islam. Further, we have shown that Ali (as) actually named those sons of his with these names after other individuals and that the name "Abu Bakr" was not the name of the 1st khalifa by which he was addressed but an epithet added some years later - the oldest sources always refer to him as Ibn Abi Quhafa (Son of Abi Quhafa).

Further, the order of the sons should chronologically follow the order of the Khalifas, in Sunni superiority from Abu Bakr to Uthman, but it doesn't, it's random. What a pathetic argument from the Nasibis, it defies all laws of probability, and what a delight to be able to shut their smug little mouths up with it�please refer to the arrogance and pride with which Afrki makes his opening comments on this issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Salaam

These sunnis have an abu bakr fixation.

And some are totally illiterate. If you read old manuscript facsimiles you will see that abu bakr (as in the sunni's no. 1 khalifa) NEVER went by the name 'abu bakr' (which means father of 'bakr') in his life. If you doubt, then what was his son's name? He never had a son called Bakr. The first sunni caliph was in his lifetime always called Ibn Abu Quhafa (son of the father of quhafa) and his name was not abu bakr.

So where does the name abu bakr come from when used for the first sunni calpih? 'Abu Bakr' was in fact an epithet given to him many years later. Abu Bakr was a very common epithet or nickname in arabia where caravans driven by camels were the main trade. Abu Bakr in fact means son of (abu) a young camel (bakr) ie it seems to have been used to denote a 'junior' person or someone associated with something fresh, new and young. Only after Islam took off in many countries did sunni caliph no.1 become called 'abu bakr' , apparently as he was regarded by subsequent generaytions as the father of their new religion as the first sunni caliph (as in father of a young camel - patriarch of a new era/ legacy/seat/journey/ride/camel/caravan/chapter).

The old works like ibn qutabya's all speak of people of the time addressing him like 'What have you done Ibn Abi Quhafa?" , there is no mention in quotations of the people of the time of him being known as 'abu bakr' - that epithet starts to be used to refer to him many years after his death.

This highlights the lack of depth in the knowledge of these sunnis who would have us believe that the name abu bakr was that of their first caliph - it never was in his lifetime. So if Imam Ali (as) gave one of his young sons this nickname, it could not have been because he was naming him after the first sunni caliph, as the first sunni caliph was never referred to as abu bakr till many generations later.

As for the names Mohammad ( (pbuh) and Ali (as), no one was ever called by these names in history before the illustrious personalities who first bore them were named thus. Is this not a remarkable fact?

OPEN CHALLENGE :angel:excl:

I challenge the sunnis to produce evidence for even one man called Mohammad (saws) or Ali (as) before the Holy Prophet ( (pbuh) and first Shia Imam were given these names. See how special Imam Ali (as) is compared to abu bakr, omar, and uthman!

Ya Ali Madad

Edited by husainshahid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So where does the name abu bakr come from when used for the first sunni calpih? 'Abu Bakr' was in fact an epithet given to him many years later. Abu Bakr was a very common epithet or nickname in arabia where caravans driven by camels were the main trade. Abu Bakr in fact means son of (abu) a young camel (bakr) ie it seems to have been used to denote a 'junior' person or someone associated with something fresh, new and young. Only after Islam took off in many countries did sunni caliph no.1 become called 'abu bakr' , apparently as he was regarded by subsequent generaytions as the father of their new religion as the first sunni caliph (as in father of a young camel - patriarch of a new era/ legacy/seat/journey/ride/camel/caravan/chapter).

IIRC

He was called Abu Bakr later on because Bakr refers to virgin, and according to the Sunnite claim that Aishah was a virgin when she got married to the Prophet, this was meant to be some kind of praise for her father.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ali(as) was above assabiyat[racism]. So, you shouldn't be surprised if he would name his sons like that, not that it has anythning to do with the usurpers. After all he was the one who gave a glass of milk to his killer Ibne Muljim while he was on death bed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
OPEN CHALLENGE :angel:excl:

I challenge the sunnis to produce evidence for even one man called Mohammad (saws) or Ali (as) before the Holy Prophet ( (pbuh) and first Shia Imam were given these names. See how special Imam Ali (as) is compared to abu bakr, omar, and uthman!

Ya Ali Madad

I think no sunni says this too. ( I am a shia myself)

and include HASAN and HUSSAIN in hte list too. :) these two names were first used for our imams. and noone used them before like Muhammad and Ali.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

lets just say hypothetically that there are 1000 people in russia named Stalin before josef stalin......and after the dictator there are almost none named that....

why? becoz he was infamous....

now lets rewind to 1400 years back.......the first three Caliphs Abu Bakr Umar and Uthman...their names were known throughout the islamic empire....and if a person named his son Abu Bakr then it would obviously be assumed it was after him...and so on.....

Yazid was a common name before the sixth "caliph" but very few were named after him and his death

lets say i am an american.....and i have a son...and lets say bush is a very common name but if i name him people will assume that i support him and therefore i dont name my son bush.....

why would ali name his sons the same name as those of the ones who "killed their step-mom and burnt her house and stole the kalifhate"?

Is it all coincidence that Ali named the majority of his sons with duplicate names, with names of family and companions? Fourteen of the eighteen sons are named in either duplicate or triplicate. This was not random! It would be an astronomical coincidence. If Ali’s naming scheme was random, why can we not find other common names of Arabia? Like Obaid, Zuhayr, Zubayr, Sufyan, Bilal, Amr, Yasir, Miqdad, Abu Dhar, Faris, Abdul-Rahman, Abdul, and any other of the hundreds of names…

Ali named three of his sons after the Prophet Muhammad. Muhammad is a common name, and is in fact, the most common name amongst the Muslims. Would it be justified then for someone to claim that perhaps it was another Muhammad after whom Ali was naming his sons after? It is altogether too obvious that Ali named his sons after the Prophet and nobody else.

Looking at the names of Ali’s sons, we find that all of the names are those of Hashimites or prominent Sahabah (Companions). For example, there is the name Abbas which was the name of the Prophet’s uncle, and then there is Jafar the name of Ali’s brother, and the name Abdullah which is the name of the Prophet’s son. And then we have the name Abu Bakr, two Umars, and two Uthmans. This is surely not a random naming pattern, but rather it is very deliberate indeed.

Let us look at how astronomical the coincidence is that the Shia are asking us to accept. Ali had eighteen sons. Naming one son, randomly, with the name of someone he hates has a likelihood of happening 1/18 times, or a 5.6% chance. Mathematically speaking, we see that the chance that five of his sons would have the name of someone Ali hates is virtually nil.

(1/18)x(1/18)x(1/18)x(1/18)x(1/18) = 1/1,889,568 = <0.000001%

There is less than one percent of a one percent chance that the naming of his sons was random

When we hear the name Abu Bakr, do we stop and ask “which one?” When we hear Umar, do we stop and ask “which one?” When we hear Uthman, do we stop and ask “which one?” When we look into Shia books and read about how supposedly Ali was oppressed by Abu Bakr, Umar, and Uthman, do we then question which people we are talking about? Suddenly, when Ali named five of his sons after the Three Caliphs, then it doesn’t refer to that Abu Bakr, that Umar, or that Uthman!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i odnt think it was random...ali loved the first three.....if he hated the first three why would he name his sons the same name...... why not abu dhar and salman? if a person named abu bakr killed my wife and burnt my house I would NEVER name my son Abu Bakr

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
lets just say hypothetically that there are 1000 people in russia named Stalin before josef stalin......and after the dictator there are almost none named that....

why? becoz he was infamous....

now lets rewind to 1400 years back.......the first three Caliphs Abu Bakr Umar and Uthman...their names were known throughout the islamic empire....and if a person named his son Abu Bakr then it would obviously be assumed it was after him...and so on.....

Your assumptions cannot be used as a proof for anything therefore your argument is based on nothing but thin air.

Yazid was a common name before the sixth "caliph" but very few were named after him and his death

More assumptions there were many famous islamic (shia and sunni) figures named yazid.

Yazid bin Maghfal Ja'fi (ra) Shaheed of Karbala, companion of Imam Ali(as) and one of the most pious tabi'een.

Yazid bin Ziad bin Mohasir-e-Kandi-Behdile Abush-Sha'sa (ra) Shaheed of Karbala, Companion of Imam Hussain (as).

One of the most famous historians at Tabari full name was: Abu Jafar Muhammad ibn Jarir ibn Yazid ibn Kathir al-Tabari (838-923).

Abu Yazid al-Bistami, a very famous sunni sufi naqshbandi scholar.

'Umar ibn Yazid. A famous SHIA muhadith.

Al-Azdi, Abu Zakariyya yazid (d. 334/945) Historian, Tarikh al Mawsil,

Imam Abu Abdullah Muhammad B Yazid Ibn-e-Majah Al-Qazwini (d. 275/889), Sunni Imam, sunan of Ibn Majah

Hajiz bin Yazid Deputy of Imam Mahdi(as) as confirmed from Sheikh Mufid (ra) who transmitted from Hasan bin Abdul Hamid

Is it all coincidence that Ali named the majority of his sons with duplicate names, with names of family and companions? Fourteen of the eighteen sons are named in either duplicate or triplicate. This was not random! It would be an astronomical coincidence. If Ali’s naming scheme was random, why can we not find other common names of Arabia? Like Obaid, Zuhayr, Zubayr, Sufyan, Bilal, Amr, Yasir, Miqdad, Abu Dhar, Faris, Abdul-Rahman, Abdul, and any other of the hundreds of names…

Ali named three of his sons after the Prophet Muhammad. Muhammad is a common name, and is in fact, the most common name amongst the Muslims. Would it be justified then for someone to claim that perhaps it was another Muhammad after whom Ali was naming his sons after? It is altogether too obvious that Ali named his sons after the Prophet and nobody else.

Looking at the names of Ali’s sons, we find that all of the names are those of Hashimites or prominent Sahabah (Companions). For example, there is the name Abbas which was the name of the Prophet’s uncle, and then there is Jafar the name of Ali’s brother, and the name Abdullah which is the name of the Prophet’s son. And then we have the name Abu Bakr, two Umars, and two Uthmans. This is surely not a random naming pattern, but rather it is very deliberate indeed.

Let us look at how astronomical the coincidence is that the Shia are asking us to accept. Ali had eighteen sons. Naming one son, randomly, with the name of someone he hates has a likelihood of happening 1/18 times, or a 5.6% chance. Mathematically speaking, we see that the chance that five of his sons would have the name of someone Ali hates is virtually nil.

(1/18)x(1/18)x(1/18)x(1/18)x(1/18) = 1/1,889,568 = <0.000001%

There is less than one percent of a one percent chance that the naming of his sons was random

When we hear the name Abu Bakr, do we stop and ask “which one?” When we hear Umar, do we stop and ask “which one?” When we hear Uthman, do we stop and ask “which one?” When we look into Shia books and read about how supposedly Ali was oppressed by Abu Bakr, Umar, and Uthman, do we then question which people we are talking about? Suddenly, when Ali named five of his sons after the Three Caliphs, then it doesn’t refer to that Abu Bakr, that Umar, or that Uthman!

All this nonsense has been answered in the previous post if you read it thoroughly, the reason behind Imam Ali(as) naming his sons Umar and Uthman had nothing to do with the Khulapha.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He already answered ur statement about Umar, Abu Bakr and Uthman being common names, Before you even asked it.

But also think of this, a popular arab name of the time would of been Lahab, However would any Muslim dare name their child Lahab? so that they would become Abu Lahab? why would you want to resemble an enemy of Islam? Or if a man named Jacob killed your wife, would you name your son Jacob? even if it was a popular name? seriously, Ali R.a was smarter than this. The sahaba loved eachother! were best friends! brothers!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
seriously, Ali R.a was smarter than this. The sahaba loved eachother! were best friends! brothers!

Lol, what a load of abosolute [Edited Out], a child with an iota of Islamic hisory would refute your nonsense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
i odnt think it was random...ali loved the first three.....if he hated the first three why would he name his sons the same name...... why not abu dhar and salman? if a person named abu bakr killed my wife and burnt my house I would NEVER name my son Abu Bakr

Simple fact is that Imam Ali (as) did not commit any haraam and maybe had a personal liking for these names because if you do not understand the culture of Arabia then you will not understand what the names mean and what is the reason for naming the sons that. How can a name in itself be bad

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We can put an end to this nonsensical argument once and for all if any Sunni brings evidence from a Shia source or even their source that says Imam Ali (as) named his 3 sons those names because of the first 3 khulapha. No assumptions or hearsay, if you are speaking the truth then bring your evidence.

Edited by Abu Ammar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Sunni radicals here are making use of a number of other basic logical errors.

That a son was named Umar and one Uthman, and maybe one named Abu Bakr does not imply they were named after one particular Abu Bakr, Umar, and Uthman. You're just making assumptions.

It does not, however, follow from this that the naming of Ali's children was "random." No one names their children randomly. However, as has been indicated above in a couple of brothers' posts, it is indicated that these children were named after people with these names, just not the particular individuals you like to idolize.

Another piece of faulty reasoning is the argument, "well, if I were him, I would never give one of my children the same name as someone who wronged me."

Well, you're not him. Get over it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ali was a human.......and no human would name their child the SAME NAME ( i am not saying after..if u noticed )as the murderer if his beloved wife.....certainly the most popular umars and uthman during their times were THE umar and uthman (ra).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Imam Ali had one son named Omar - he did not have a son named Abu Bakr (the son in question is called Mohammed al-Asghar) and the most reliable opinion is the son Uthman's name is actually Aun (martyred at Karbala; son of Ummul Baneen)

So there was only Omar Ibn Ali, who the brothers have said was named after Omar Ibn Um Salama

Sunnis are arrogant enough to believe their Omar was the only famous and significant Omar of the time, when in fact there were other famous Omars.

There is also the theory Imam Ali did it to reconcile the ummah

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ali was a human.......and no human would name their child the SAME NAME ( i am not saying after..if u noticed )as the murderer if his beloved wife.....certainly the most popular umars and uthman during their times were THE umar and uthman (ra).

I don't think you're in a position to speak for all humans. Again, the premise is baseless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Salaam,

one of the most evil tyrants in our lifetime has been Saddam Hussein! This has not stopped us as Moslems naming our sons Hussein. Why? Because he is not the only Hussein - we can refer to.

There are even men out there bearing the name Muhammad who commit all sorts of bad acts. But there are others who are pious and good.

Does this mean that the Shia population in Iraq who were persecuted by Saddam Hussein and whose family members were killed by him, stopped naming their sons Hussein? I doubt it.

It is difficult for us to judge from a current viewpoint, because it is true that most shias do not use the names Abu Bakr, Omar and Usman, so they have become known as 'sunni names', but in the times of Imam Ali (a.s.) these names would have been commonplace, which means that there will have been connections with these names to so many good and pious people. Imam Ali may not have even thought the 3 caliphah themselves important enough to negate the goodness in these names. It is only from our viewpoint today that we find it 'odd' he used these names.

Allah hafez

Fatimeh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
lets just say hypothetically that there are 1000 people in russia named Stalin before josef stalin......and after the dictator there are almost none named that....

why? becoz he was infamous....

now lets rewind to 1400 years back.......the first three Caliphs Abu Bakr Umar and Uthman...their names were known throughout the islamic empire....and if a person named his son Abu Bakr then it would obviously be assumed it was after him...and so on.....

Yazid was a common name before the sixth "caliph" but very few were named after him and his death

lets say i am an american.....and i have a son...and lets say bush is a very common name but if i name him people will assume that i support him and therefore i dont name my son bush.....

why would ali name his sons the same name as those of the ones who "killed their step-mom and burnt her house and stole the kalifhate"?

Is it all coincidence that Ali named the majority of his sons with duplicate names, with names of family and companions? Fourteen of the eighteen sons are named in either duplicate or triplicate. This was not random! It would be an astronomical coincidence. If Ali’s naming scheme was random, why can we not find other common names of Arabia? Like Obaid, Zuhayr, Zubayr, Sufyan, Bilal, Amr, Yasir, Miqdad, Abu Dhar, Faris, Abdul-Rahman, Abdul, and any other of the hundreds of names…

Ali named three of his sons after the Prophet Muhammad. Muhammad is a common name, and is in fact, the most common name amongst the Muslims. Would it be justified then for someone to claim that perhaps it was another Muhammad after whom Ali was naming his sons after? It is altogether too obvious that Ali named his sons after the Prophet and nobody else.

Looking at the names of Ali’s sons, we find that all of the names are those of Hashimites or prominent Sahabah (Companions). For example, there is the name Abbas which was the name of the Prophet’s uncle, and then there is Jafar the name of Ali’s brother, and the name Abdullah which is the name of the Prophet’s son. And then we have the name Abu Bakr, two Umars, and two Uthmans. This is surely not a random naming pattern, but rather it is very deliberate indeed.

Let us look at how astronomical the coincidence is that the Shia are asking us to accept. Ali had eighteen sons. Naming one son, randomly, with the name of someone he hates has a likelihood of happening 1/18 times, or a 5.6% chance. Mathematically speaking, we see that the chance that five of his sons would have the name of someone Ali hates is virtually nil.

(1/18)x(1/18)x(1/18)x(1/18)x(1/18) = 1/1,889,568 = <0.000001%

There is less than one percent of a one percent chance that the naming of his sons was random

When we hear the name Abu Bakr, do we stop and ask “which one?” When we hear Umar, do we stop and ask “which one?” When we hear Uthman, do we stop and ask “which one?” When we look into Shia books and read about how supposedly Ali was oppressed by Abu Bakr, Umar, and Uthman, do we then question which people we are talking about? Suddenly, when Ali named five of his sons after the Three Caliphs, then it doesn’t refer to that Abu Bakr, that Umar, or that Uthman!

Salaam Alaykum

Respectfully, you have missed the point. The sunni caliph / companion nowadays called Abu bakr was not till many generations after his own lifestyle given that name.

You have said Imam Ali (as) named one of his sons Abu Bakr. I don't dispute that. But your subsequent logic is flawed (and that of sunni muslims in general) - this faulty reasoning being that Imam Ali (as) was naming his son after the first sunni caliph.

This is as the first sunni caliph was not called Abu Bakr.

This name was given to him generations after the first generation of muslims.

So Imam Ali (as) could not in naming one of his sons Abu Bakr be naming him after the first sunni caliph since the latter was not known as Abu Bakr when Imam Ali's son was born. The first sunni caliph / companion was known as Ibn Abi Quhafa.

You need to provide evidence to refute this major point. Reading primary sources like the ad verbatim monologues/dialogues of how the alleged companions referred to each other recorded in Ibn Qutayba's work and other ancient books you will see the ancient sources abstain from referring in ad verbatim monologues to the first sunni caliph as Abu Bakr. Even the Sahih of Bukhari strongly tends to use the epithet Ibn Abi Quhafa in the supposed monologues it records as opposed to what the author (Bukhari) has interjected in his own manner of writing. He is also not known as Abu bakr in any letters he wrote or any letters written to him. We can conclude his name was not Abu Bakr. This name used in reference to the first sunni calpih starts to appear generations after the tabiyeen. It may conclusively be said the first caliph / companion was not called Abu bakr and the sunni argument that Imam Ali (as) named one of his sons after him hence sounds implausible.

Your use of statistics is also misleading - allow me to explain using this simple example from Common Sense. Out of 18 sons that Imam Ali (as) had, two (not three - Abu Bakr is eliminated above) had names which were the same as two kings from a rival political party called Omar and Uthman. Now if a Democrat-supporter in America has 18 sons and one happens to be called George and another Ron it sounds pretty unlikely he has named them after Republican Presidents George Bush and Ronald Reagan (it might be a different matter if he had two sons one called George and the other Ronald). Point made.

Wa Salaam

Edited by husainshahid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ali ibn Abi Talib Named His Sons after the Three Caliphs [includes a rebuttal of Answering-Ansar]

If Ali’s wife was killed by Umar, and if he himself was persecuted by Abu Bakr and Uthman, then why in the world did Ali name three of his sons after the Three Caliphs? It is a historical fact that Ali named three of his own children as Abu Bakr, Umar, and Uthman.

This fact is recorded by the classical Shia scholar, Shaikh Mufid, in “Kitab al-Irshad”, pp. 268-269, where these three sons of Ali are listed as numbers 12, 6 and 10 respectively.

Al-Shia.com excerpts this book and it is viewable here:

http://al-shia.com/html/ara/books/ershad-1/a10.html

http://rafed.net/books/hadith/ershad-1/index.html

Therefore, this is not a matter of debate, since Al-Shia.com itself documents how three of Ali’s sons were named Abu Bakr, Umar, and Uthman.

No one, not even the most magnanimous of people, names his son after his enemies who were responsible for the death of his wife and unborn child. That is why one simply cannot find a Shia today named Abu Bakr, Umar or Uthman.

This fact categorically rejects the Shia paradigm which is based upon the false idea that Ali disapproved of Abu Bakr, Umar, and Uthman. In fact, not only were they not enemies, but rather they were Sahabah (companions) and friends to each other, so much so that Ali honored them by naming his children after them. This shatters the very basis of Shi’ism which is centered around the supposed oppression of the Ahlel Bayt at the hands of the Sahabah.

Rebuttal of Answering-Ansar’s Article “Names of Imam Ali’s sons”

The first thing that should jump out at the reader is that Answering-Ansar could not deny that Ali named his sons Abu Bakr, Umar, and Uthman. Instead, Answering-Ansar had to explain away this phenomenon by claiming that Ali did indeed name three of his sons with these names, but that it had nothing to do with his love for the Three Caliphs.

Answering-Ansar claims that Abu Bakr, Umar, and Uthman were common names like Tom, Richard or Harry today. Therefore, reasons Answering-Ansar, it is not surprising that Ali named his sons with these names.

My response to this is simple: if three men named Tom, Richard or Harry came to my house and killed my wife and unborn child, then I don’t think I would ever name my kids Tom, Richard or Harry. Whether or not that these are common names, the fact that these three individuals did what they did would be enough for me to stay away from these three names. Regardless of the fact that these are common names, there is no chance that a man today would name his children Tom, Richard or Harry after the murderers of his wife/child who had the same exact names. Likewise, the Shia accuse Abu Bakr, Umar, and Uthman of oppressing his family, killing his wife and unborn child; it is therefore highly unlikely that Ali would then name his children after them. Why would a person name one of his sons after the man who killed another one of his sons?

Furthermore, if Ali named one of his sons after one of the Three Caliphs, then perhaps we could claim coincidence. But rather, Ali named three of his children after the Three Caliphs. Think about it: if Tom, Richard or Harry came into my home and killed my wife/child, do you think I would then name my children after all three of these individuals? Fine, if one of my children was named Tom, then we could claim coincidence. But suddenly when it becomes Tom, Richard, and Harry, it just seems like too big a coincidence.

Ali had eighteen sons, and there are hundreds of names to choose from. Why in the world would he pick three names after the three people he hated and who oppressed his family? Answering-Ansar is asking us to accept a very big coincidence. The Shia faith is based around the oppression of the first Three Caliphs and yet here we see that Ali named his sons after them.

Answering-Ansar would have us believe that it is just one big coincidence that Ali named his sons after Abu Bakr, Umar, and Uthman. They say again and again that these are very common names and so it is not a big coincidence at all. We remind these Shia that Ali named two of his sons Umar and two of his sons Uthman. Surely, this is not random chance, but rather we see that Ali named his sons after prominent Islamic figures, as many Muslims do today. Maybe one Umar could be a chance, but Ali named two of his sons Umar, and another two he named Uthman, and another one he named Abu Bakr!

Let us look at the naming scheme chosen by Ali for his sons:

1. Muhammad ibn al-Hanafia

2. Muhammad al-Asghar

3. Muhammad il-Awsat

4. Abbas “abul-fazil”

5. Abbas al-Asghar

6. Jafar al-Akbar

7. Jafar al-Assghar

8. Abdullah il-Asghar

9. Abdullah il-Akbar

10. Abdullah “Abi Ali”

11. Uthman al-Asghar

12. Uthman al-Akbar

13. Umar al-Akbar

14. Umar al-Asghar.

15. Abu Bakr ibn Ali

16. Al-Hasan

17. Al-Hussain

18. Awn

Is it all coincidence that Ali named the majority of his sons with duplicate names, with names of family and companions? Fourteen of the eighteen sons are named in either duplicate or triplicate. This was not random! It would be an astronomical coincidence. If Ali’s naming scheme was random, why can we not find other common names of Arabia? Like Obaid, Zuhayr, Zubayr, Sufyan, Bilal, Amr, Yasir, Miqdad, Abu Dhar, Faris, Abdul-Rahman, Abdul, and any other of the hundreds of names…

Ali named three of his sons after the Prophet Muhammad. Muhammad is a common name, and is in fact, the most common name amongst the Muslims. Would it be justified then for someone to claim that perhaps it was another Muhammad after whom Ali was naming his sons after? It is altogether too obvious that Ali named his sons after the Prophet and nobody else.

Looking at the names of Ali’s sons, we find that all of the names are those of Hashimites or prominent Sahabah (Companions). For example, there is the name Abbas which was the name of the Prophet’s uncle, and then there is Jafar the name of Ali’s brother, and the name Abdullah which is the name of the Prophet’s son. And then we have the name Abu Bakr, two Umars, and two Uthmans. This is surely not a random naming pattern, but rather it is very deliberate indeed.

Let us look at how astronomical the coincidence is that the Shia are asking us to accept. Ali had eighteen sons. Naming one son, randomly, with the name of someone he hates has a likelihood of happening 1/18 times, or a 5.6% chance. Mathematically speaking, we see that the chance that five of his sons would have the name of someone Ali hates is virtually nil.

(1/18)x(1/18)x(1/18)x(1/18)x(1/18) = 1/1,889,568 = <0.000001%

There is less than one percent of a one percent chance that the naming of his sons was random. If the Shia are still not convinced and would like to live in the fantasy world that this is just a coincidence, then there is nothing any rational person can do to convince them.

When we hear the name Abu Bakr, do we stop and ask “which one?” When we hear Umar, do we stop and ask “which one?” When we hear Uthman, do we stop and ask “which one?” When we look into Shia books and read about how supposedly Ali was oppressed by Abu Bakr, Umar, and Uthman, do we then question which people we are talking about? Suddenly, when Ali named five of his sons after the Three Caliphs, then it doesn’t refer to that Abu Bakr, that Umar, or that Uthman! This is the double standard of the Shia, and the myopic way in which he views history, oblivious to facts and reality.

Answering-Ansar then makes the feeble argument that Ali named his sons in a different order (i.e. not in the order of the Three Caliphs). But this argument is impotent because Ali had these children before the completion of the first three Caliphates. Therefore, there was no “order” of Caliphs as of yet. Furthermore, Ali was friends with these three individuals and there is no necessity that he name his children in the order of their rank, since most people do not even know how many children they plan to have! How many Shia parents name their eldest son as Hasan and a younger one as Ali? Does anyone stop them and say “oh, that’s out of order” since Ali was the first Imam whereas Hasan was the second? Surely this is nonsense!

To completely negate this rather creative (yet insignificant) argument, we shall provide an example very dear to the Shia: we call the reader’s attention to the seventh Imam of the Shia, Imam Musa al-Kadhim, who named his elder son with the name of the sixth Imam of the Shia and named his younger son with the name of the second Imam of the Shia! Is this not “out of order” according to Answering-Ansar’s argument? We give points to Answering-Ansar for their creativity, but in reality it shows how the Shia propagandist will further any argument to score a point regardless of if it is based in evidences or not.

In any case, the coincidence is too large, since Ali named three of his children after all three of the Three Caliphs. We think the reader will appreciate the weakness of Answering-Ansar’s claims, and this fact–namely that Ali named his sons Abu Bakr, Umar, and Uthman–shows that the Shia paradigm cannot possibly be a true one and rather it is based on Shia myths and fabrications. The Four Rightly Guided Caliphs were good friends and Sahabah (Companions) to each other. Indeed, Ali was the vizier and top aid of the Three Caliphs during their respective Caliphates. It is up to the reader to either accept the less than 1% chance that it was a coincidence that Ali named his sons with the names of the men who supposedly killed his wife and unborn child, or to accept the more rational conclusion that Ali was on good terms with them and named his sons after them.

Written By: Ibn al-Hashimi

www.http://www.*****************.com

assalamu alaikum

Imam Ali (as) did name some of his kids those names but they were named after different people with the same names.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Salam brothers and sisters

I am a muslim, i am not Shia and i am not Sunni i am just a muslim and a muslim could never even think about harming Ahla-Bait. There must some one else behind. My brother and sisters there are people out there to divide us so be united and be careful.

God bless you all and pray for me and please do not comment on my words. This is totally what i believe and nothing to do with anyone.

Your brother is Islam.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sahih Muslim, Volume 5, Book 58, Number 244:

Narrated Abu Said Al-Khudri:

…Allah’s Messenger added, “No doubt, I am indebted to Abu Bakr more than to anybody else regarding both his companionship and his wealth. And if I had to take a Khaleel (friend) from my followers, I would certainly have taken Abu Bakr, but the fraternity of Islam is sufficient. Let no door of the Mosque remain open, except the door of Abu Bakr.”

lets talk about your signature first before i refute you. If what you quote is true, can you please tell me why didnt the prophet (SAW) do that and take him as a brother. At every given opportunity like hijrat, he made Abu Bakr and Umar brothers and took Ali to be his brother.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

assalamu alaikum

Imam Ali (as) did name some of his kids those names but they were named after different people with the same names.

Letter 14 from Nahjul Balagha: Ali (ra) writes to his troops before the Battle of Siffeen -

"During the days of the Holy Prophet (peace of Allah be upon him and his descendants) we had strict orders not to touch, molest or insult women though they were unbelievers.

Even in pre-Islamic days it was the custom that if a man struck a woman even with a stick or a stone, the revenge had to be taken by his sons and descendants."

It was the custom of the Arabs to have immense emotion over the honour of their women & wars would break out between the tribes over violation of the rights of their womenfolk... Albeit not from the sunnah but an example of the immense jealousy & protectionist attitude of the Arabs in contemporary times is that in some bedouin cultures when a bride is brought to the groom upon horseback, the horse is then slaughtered to signify that from this day none but the groom will relish the 'touch of his bride'.

The Prophet (saw) continued this tradition by ordering the believers to guard their women & maintain their honour through hijab & segregation:

Why is it that we find from shi'i source books that when the rights and honour of Fatima (ra) were supposedly violated (by her house being burnt down, her unborn child being killed) Ali (ra) did not practice what he preached by protecting and avenging the gross violation of her rights???

Rather would anyone with a sound mind name his off spring after the very culprits that violated the sacred life & honour of his wife??

Neither do we find any instance of Fatima's (ra) descendants avenging her sacred blood!!

Edited by Vilayatul Faqih

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Letter 14 from Nahjul Balagha: Ali (ra) writes to his troops before the Battle of Siffeen -

"During the days of the Holy Prophet (peace of Allah be upon him and his descendants) we had strict orders not to touch, molest or insult women though they were unbelievers.

Even in pre-Islamic days it was the custom that if a man struck a woman even with a stick or a stone, the revenge had to be taken by his sons and descendants."

It was the custom of the Arabs to have immense emotion over the honour of their women & wars would break out between the tribes over violation of the rights of their womenfolk... Albeit not from the sunnah but an example of the immense jealousy & protectionist attitude of the Arabs in contemporary times is that in some bedouin cultures when a bride is brought to the groom upon horseback, the horse is then slaughtered to signify that from this day none but the groom will relish the 'touch of his bride'.

The Prophet (saw) continued this tradition by ordering the believers to guard their women & maintain their honour through hijab & segregation:

Why is it that we find from shi'i source books that when the rights and honour of Fatima (ra) were supposedly violated (by her house being burnt down, her unborn child being killed) Ali (ra) did not practice what he preached by protecting and avenging the gross violation of her rights???

Rather would anyone with a sound mind name his off spring after the very culprits that violated the sacred life & honour of his wife??

Neither do we find any instance of Fatima's (ra) descendants avenging her sacred blood!!

Please mention one incident where Ali (as) raised his sword for his personal reason or one incidence of personal revenge. Ali (as) always fought to defend Islam and the Prophet (SAWAW). We will take it from there.

PS my previous post is still unanswered

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please mention one incident where Ali (as) raised his sword for his personal reason or one incidence of personal revenge. Ali (as) always fought to defend Islam and the Prophet (SAWAW). We will take it from there.

PS my previous post is still unanswered

what things u consider as personal!!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please mention one incident where Ali (as) raised his sword for his personal reason or one incidence of personal revenge. Ali (as) always fought to defend Islam and the Prophet (SAWAW). We will take it from there.

PS my previous post is still unanswered

Its definitely not a personal reason if he ra raised his sword against those who allegedly violated the rights & honour of Fatima ra. Ali ra, being one of the most brave muslim would fight whoever did this imaginary crime as a proof of his love towards Rasulullah SAAW not as a personal grudge. Didnt shia imamiah followers always quote "whoever hurts Fatima also hurt me (Rasulullah SAAW)"? (which by the way was directed to Ali's intention to remarry) - and thats also a proof that every human, even Ali ra could make Fatima ra angry :) But does that also make Ali ra a kaafir like Abu Bakr ra as you have claimed?

What kind of logical reasoning you guys are using?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In fact, Imam Ali (Úáíå ÇáÓáÇã) did indeed name his son Uthman in honour of someone;

“I name this child Uthman after my brother Uthman Ibn Ma’dhoon (ÑÖí Çááå Úäå)” Bihar Al-Anwar Volume 45 Page 38, Maqatil Al-Talibeyeen Page 55

if you read his site you would notice his point

also many iranians even today call their kids Omar after omar khayam the poet, it is just an arabic name and many people used it from any sects

but actually im not knowledgeable on the topic there is probably a strong argument by shiite scholars

Can you also please provide in honour of who that he named his sons Omar & Abu Bakr? Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...